On the last day of the Science Blogs Book Club discussion about Dr. Paul A. Offit’s recently published Autism’s False Prophets: Bad Science, Risky Medicine, and the Search for a Cure, I’ll start by quoting the last paragraph of the book:

The science is largely complete. Ten epidemiological studies have shown MMR vaccine doesn’t cause autism; six have shown thimerosal doesn’t cause autism; three have shown thimerosal doesn’t cause subtle neurological problems; a growing body of evidence now points to the genes that are linked to autism; and despite the removal of thimerosal from vaccines in 2001, the number of children with autism continues to rise. Now it’s up to certain parent advocacy groups, through their public relations firms, lawyers, and celebrity spokespersons, to convince the public that all of these studies are wrong—and to convince them that the doctors who proffer their vast array of alternative medicines are the only ones who really care. (p. 247)

Now that’s a laying down of the gauntlet. Those “certain parent advocacy groups” and their accompanying band of PR firms, lawyers, celebrity spokespersons, and the doctors who “proffer their vast array of alternative medicines” have their work cut out for them, if they mean to thoughtfully contest the claims of the numerous studies Dr. Offit cites.

But the problem is—-based on how the antivaccinationists have responded to the evidence so far—-they’re not going to respond to the science with science. Instead, expect full-page ads (like this one) in which there’s talk of not being “anti-vaccine” but “pro-vaccine-safety.” Expect a lot more moving of the goalposts as autism gets rebranded: So the link between thimerosal in vaccines and autism does not seem “so strong”—then it must be something else, like aluminum. In other words, don’t expect an actual discussion of the studies Dr. Offit cites but succinct slogans with just enough punch (”autism is treatable,” “green our vaccines”), criticisms of “conflicts of interest,” cries of the limitations of the data.

Science is not, perhaps, of any real concern to the antivaccinationists. More and more, it seems that antivaccination belief is something akin to a religious conviction or at least to some kind of faith that is not looking to science or scientific studies for validation. The evidence will mount, children will continue to be diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders at a rate much much higher than in the past, but someone will still be pointing to a shot or something in the environment as a “possible cause” of autism—-because what’s driving those “certain parent advocacy groups” is something more like……faith? belief? a sense that taking a stand on vaccines and autism is the rallying point for (as a commenter wrote) a sense of “community and identity.” Because, knowing (or thinking that you know) that some particular thing was behind your child becoming autistic, is often seen as the first step in knowing how to help a child.

Or that’s what is thought—-and that’s why parents have tried a dizzying array of treatments, and especially alternative treatments, to “treat” their child’s autism.

Read the rest of this post… | Read the comments on this post…