Finally a Danish study without Poul Thorsen! As he is no longer among the authors of the study it is probably the first Danish vaccine study that can be taken seriously, thanks to Mr Thorsen's non-participation (who bought a house in Atlanta,a Harley-Davidson and few other things with grant money from CDC and there is a suspicion that he has manipulated the results of studies).
However, like the Jain study (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2275444), this new study focuses primarily on MMR vaccination, which is a shame. Focusing on once vaccine in a heavily vaccinated population kinda proves nothing. They also captured data on vaccination with pentavalent vaccine, which is great, but unfortunately it seems that it is completely useless ...
As usual a control group of completely unvaccinated probably is not included because the study states that "We evaluated the association between MMR and autism in children with no DTaP -IPV / Hib vaccinations in the first year of life; we found no support for an association in this vaccine-naive subpopulation "- so the "no DTaP-IPV / HiB" field in the tables probably means "no DTaP-IPV / HiB in first year of life"(haha, sneaky!).
I view positively that they included other covariants (eg parents' age, etc.), but again, unfortunately, the covariant combination is missing and there are no groups with more variables (shame).
As with the Jain study, there is a "healthy user bias": the authors did not take into account the possibility that parents of children showing signs of ASD do not start / stop vaccinating the MMR and fall automatically into the "unvaxx" group. At least the authors mention this in the discussion.
And as usual: epidemiological studies are NOT a good tool for verifying the safety of a product (or to disprove possible causality), this is the job of clinical trials (unfortunately, vaccines' safety clinical trials are very very bad pseudoscince with no placebos).
This is definitely a free speech/democracy issue.
Why nobody discusses the facts instead:
- no vaccine was/is ever tested against inert placebo in clinical trial. How the hell can we let manufacturers get away with this?
- majority of (media) cited epidemiological studies around safety are just (very) bad
- so as a result we have here following situation: people claiming to be injured (also killed) by untested and massively deployed product (that also saves lives, yes) and we have no data to calculate the benefit/risk ratio. Instead we just vilify them.
I can understand how/why (majority of) scientific community maintains the old reductionist paradigm. But how this can stay out of scope of investigative media is beyond me.
(edit: formatting/grammar)
http://icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/whitepapers/ICAN Reply - December 31%2C 2018.pdf
(mind the spaces in the url)