This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Medicine C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Autism C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all aspects of autism and autistic culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutismWikipedia:WikiProject AutismTemplate:WikiProject AutismAutism articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The following was added:

On January 9, 2019, Full Measure, hosted by investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson, alleged that the U.S. government concealed the expert opinion of one of their own expert witnesses in a 2007 hearing in the federal vaccine court. In a sworn affidavit, Dr Andrew Zimmerman stated that he believes that narrow circumstances might exist in which the combination of pre-existing mitochondrial dysfunction and vaccination could trigger autism spectrum disorder, and when he told this to government attorneys he was dismissed as an expert witness. His opinion is based on personal anecdotal evidence with his own patients and not based upon any scientific research data.^[1][2]

I reverted because it is atrociously sourced. First, Attkisson is a known antivaxer, so anything she says about vaccines is, at best, motivated reasoning, if not outright conspiracist bullshit. Second, the Snopes source is not the main Snopes database of debunked claims, so the fact that Attkisson's claims are false is in quite small writing down at the bottom. Third, YouTube links to antivax propaganda that is shown to be false by the only thing close to a reliable source offered by the person adding the content? Seriously?

The comments date to 2007, before Wakefield's fraudulent paper was retracted. It predates the large number of studies since that retraction which show no association, causal or otherwise, between vaccines and autism. This fails WP:UNDUE/WP:FRINGE (and of course WP:MEDRS). Guy (Help!) 00:05, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Go read Wakefield’s paper. I bet you never have. It is far from a critique of all vaccines and it is FAR from the sum total of vaccine data we have now. There are HUNDREDS of studies in peer reviewed journals that critique aspects of our current vaccine schedule. CMTBard (talk) 14:31, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the first paragraph there is this sentence:

Vaccinologist Peter Hotez researched the growth of the false claim and concluded that its spread originated with Andrew Wakefield's fraudulent 1998 paper - only earlier paper in the peer reviewed literature, a single case study, rejected any causal link.

I'm not sure what the stuff after the dash means. It makes little sense grammatically and I'm not sure if it's asserting there was only 1 paper (a case study) published prior to Wakefield's work, or something else entirely. I'm going to remove it for now but if someone can parse it and re-write it that'd be neat.

The IoM study cited by the CDC on their page does not rule out autism caused by vaccines. It says that we still can’t determine one way or the other. CMTBard (talk) 14:30, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's a mountain of research showing no link. Guy (Help!) 22:28, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn’t take into account this currently accepted and often-quoted massive study the National Academy of Medicine (formerly IoM) did, which is currently cited by the CDC on its pages relating to the topic. That study itself DID find causation between Dtap and autism, it also did find causation between MMR & encephalitis (which often is an aspect of autism). It also was dogmatic that many of the larger questions regarding vaccines as a whole and autism CANNOT BE DETERMINED yet. CMTBard (talk) 13:33, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My references and quotes were taken directly from this recent study by the IoM and were in no way unreliable sources, “fringe science” nor were they biased. Please return them as your current page does not correctly represent current research. CMTBard (talk) 13:36, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• • My sources were the SAME SOURCE used under the heading “MMR and autism”— the same study you yourself quote to say that there is no causal link between MMR & autism— that same study concluded there IS a causal link between Dtap and autism. That same study concluded that they could neither reject nor establish causation for the vast majority of adverse effects and all vaccines.

It’s the same study— you are insisting on only quoting the one part that supports your personal view, not presenting the entire body of evidence available, which says, mostly “we don’t know the causation relationship for most vaccines and autusm” but also says “we did find causal link between Dtap as autism” and “we did find causal link between MMR and factors which may later lead to autism, such as encephalitis”. CMTBard (talk) 13:46, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your quote minig of a single source doesn't change the scientific consensus that vaccines don't cause autism. Guy (Help!) 14:22, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a question of consensus, it's accurately stating what the most recent National Study said about some vaccines actually possibly causing autism. This article is incomplete without that. It's not quote mining-- that was taken from the actual conclusions of the same study quoted in this very article. YOU are the one quote-mining, not me. A major study from an unbiased, private research center released this information -- you are gladly quoting one part ("no causal link between MMR and autism") but leaving out an equally relevant part of their conclusions ("yes causal link between DTap and autism"). You can't definitively state that "there is no link between vaccines and autism" when the most recent comprehensive study-- accepted by our own CDC-- says that there IS a potential link between at least one of the vaccines on our schedule, and autism. CMTBard (talk) 03:26, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And actually, to truly be verifiable, we need to state the overarching conclusion of that study: it was not "no causal link between vaccines and autism"-- it was "overall, we cannot reject nor verify a causal link between vaccines and autism"-- in other words, "WE DONT KNOW IF THERE IS A LINK". Sure, they ruled out one causal link: MMR and autism. But they affirmed another one: DTaP and autism. And they also affirmed multiple other adverse events related to autism, as I mentioned above. This is not a cut and dry issue, and to present it as such is false, and NOT verifiable. CMTBard (talk) 03:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]