Medical professionals end autism-vaccine link

 By the time my son was born, five years had past since the study possibly linking vaccines to autism was published. Autism was the media's childhood disease darling, just like OCD had been when I was in high school, and ADHD was for a while. Now food allergies seem to get that honor. 

But with five years to cause panic among new parents, I was well aware they had linked the two. It was confusing to have to make a decision about vaccinations, knowing the diseases they prevent are debilitating and life threatening, but the one they could cause was debilitating as well. 

Last week, the original publisher of the study retracted the study, siting many, many subsequent studies showing no link. 

That ends the medical debate on the issue, but will it end it in the hearts of parents? My husband and I decided to vaccinate our kids — we found the risk of autism less than the risk of the other childhood diseases vaccines protected them against. But as more and more families decided to put off vaccines, the pack protection for their children became less effective. One child without protection against mumps can be protected by the children that won't get the disease, but that number drops as more children weren't vaccinated.

My mother-in-law is very, very against vaccines. She regularly gives me grief for my decision, even seven years later. I have been bombarded by what scientists and law enforcement would call "circumstantial evidence." I know she believes in her heart vaccines are dangerous. And I agree with her that we don't exactly know everything that we are doing to are children — has anyone heard the new BPA concerns? — but I do believe the original report linking autism to vaccines was a good thing in the end.

Now we know, for sure, there is no link. A lot of money and time has been spent to prove the safety of the procedure, much more than would have been spent otherwise.