Autism and vaccine safety: Courtroom controversy, exam room reassurance

Physicians should be poised to help parents maintain confidence in this public health accomplishment in preventive medicine.

Editorial. Aug. 27, 2007.

Action in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in Washington, D.C., has grabbed headlines this summer as claims of an alleged link between childhood vaccines and autism pass beyond the boundaries of science into the legal realm.

The court is being asked to determine if such an association exists.

Science already says it does not. But if the court finds differently, families of autistic children would be eligible for compensation under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, a program created by Congress and funded by a tax on administered vaccines.

As these court proceedings continue, media attention likely will cause doctors to hear more questions from parents about whether immunizations are really the culprits. Physicians can play a critically important role in separating fact from fiction and in reassuring patients that vaccination is a wise choice.

Public health organizations, including the American Medical Association, have expressed strong concerns that the plaintiffs' position could undermine the public's confidence in vaccine safety.

Vaccines are ranked among history's top public health achievements. But medical and health experts worry that a finding for the plaintiffs would lead more parents to decide not to vaccinate their children, thereby contributing to an environment in which childhood illness and death rates rise.

That's why so many eyes are focused on the first test case, Cedillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, which began in mid-June and is being heard by Special Master George Hastings Jr.