Another look at the Danish study of the MMR vaccine and autism

The famous Danish study comparing the vaccination and autism rates of Danish children born between 1991 with 1998, has been in the news again lately. The reason is that one of the key witnesses for the defense of the MMR vaccine has gone missing along with approximately 10 million DKK (2 mill USD) of other people's money.

This morning, I took a closer look at both the study and Ulf Brånell's analysis of it. Brånell's conclusion starts out soundly enough:

"All the sources of error identified in the study distort it in the same direction: obscuring the role of the MMR vaccine and exonerating it from any suspicion that it may cause autism. This strongly indicates deliberate fraud".

I can follow him all the way here. The study authors have designed their study so that it counts vaccinated children too young to be diagnosed with autism, as non-autistic. What kind of proof is that? To me, it's proof of either stupidity or dishonesty. Brånell points to four other sources of error as well, all leaning the same way.

Brånell doesn't stop there, however. Here's how his conclusion continues, in a crescendo of improbables:

"The reason is not hard to guess. Most of the authors of the report are medical doctors and it is safe to assume that they are - or have been - ardent pro-vaccinators. By now they should be well aware of the many scientific studies of the injuries caused by vaccines. They will know that there is now an autism epidemic, that only the vaccinated are affected and that autism always occurs after vaccination and not before. In other words the authors of this report are people with blood on their hands, who fear the retribution of parents, whose children they have killed, mutilated and rendered autistic. People who are prepared to kill and injure helpless children for money will hardly hesitate to lie and cheat if it will keep them out of jail and enable them to avoid paying compensation to their victims. This report is a desperate and despicable attempt by child abusers to remove the noose that is tightening around their necks. Their report (and this one) belongs in the hands of the prosecutor."


What's going on here?

I believe that the study authors and Ulf Brånell are unwittingly illustrating the same principle, which is that we find what we're looking for, and we don't find the evidence that points the other way. The sad thing is that this process ends up with both sides "preaching to the choir". It drives a wedge between the parties, right at the point where they ought to have been looking for common ground.

If I were to assign a prize for intellectual integrity here, it would still go to Ulf Brånell. At last, he's honest enough to admit that he's guessing and making assumptions based on thin evidence.

The weaknesses of the study are so glaring, that it's hard to understand why anyone ever took it seriously. The conclusion alone should be enough to give it away, when the authors claim to have found "strong evidence against the hypothesis that MMR vaccination causes autism". Really? All that I can see is that they've failed to find evidence for the hypothesis, through a study that looks tailormade for the purpose of not finding it. (Read Brånell's analysis for a full overview of the five most serious weaknesses in the study design)

It's interesting, and also a bit gratifying to see that one of the study authors has now gone missing. 10 mill DKK sounds like a low price to pay for getting such people out of the way.


:-j