What's Fueling the Vaccine/Autism Connection National Debate?

Many times controversies arise in the scientific community which, quite frankly, could have easily been avoided or, at the very least, much better handled. In fact, it can sometimes be said that some controversies are fueled or fanned by the same people who later put on a "full-court press" attack against them. This appears to be the case with the vaccine/autism connection national debate.

This controversy is being made worse by the mainstream media, the pharmaceutical industry and by government agencies. Rather than answering questions and properly handling complaints, these groups have resorted to what can only be called childish, irresponsible, unprofessional and unscientific tactics.

What could possibly be the reason for taking such an approach?

First of all, vaccines don't need anyone to come to their defense, from a scientific perspective. Their use helped to bring humanity out of the death-from-communicable-diseases era (before the 1900s); they were also responsible for greatly reducing the incidence of or totally eradicating (as in the case of smallpox) many communicable diseases.

Why then, do so many people (including some great scientists/doctors) now question the safety and efficacy of vaccines?

The list is rather long but, rather than delving into what brought on the problem, maybe we can go over some of the reasons the debate is actually being fueled by the same people (government agencies, the pharmaceutical industry and the mainstream media) now engaged in a nasty campaign to suppress anyone voicing objections/opposition to vaccines.

Here are 10 things unnecessarily adding fuel to the national debate:

1. The fact that no scientific/medical source can at this point say with 100% certainty that vaccines do not bring about autism (or many of the other serious complications in question). At best, what is being said is that a connection between autism and vaccines is unlikely or that most of the studies conducted to date do not show a correlation. While this may sound reassuring to some people, it doesn't exactly erase all fears in parents and scientists who keep seeing the autism epidemic get worse every year. Why are they crazy for suspecting everything (including vaccines) until we know for sure what is causing the epidemic?
2. The fact that there are simply too many conflicts of interest involved in the debate and with the agencies and personnel in charge of vaccines. Vaccines are multi-billion dollar profitable products. How can anyone say that this cannot possibly be playing a role in the national debate? Mandating vaccines, for example, would greatly increase profits from vaccines; allowing some people to opt out, by the same token, would greatly negatively affect those same profit margins. Also, some people think that the too-cozy relationship of the FDA and CDC with the pharmaceutical industry is affecting many of their decisions--perhaps more so than scientific wisdom or considerations?
3. The fact that no clinical study (which are often cited as the best way to identify disease/suspected source correlations) has yet used unvaccinated subjects as "controls." Some scientists opine that only such a study can conclusively prove whether vaccines are connected to autism. Also, many of the studies conducted so far use very few subjects or not long enough a time table to be statistically significant enough--or so some critics posit.