Cited by 101Vaccine Coverage and HesitancyMisinformation and Its ImpactsAutism Spectrum Disorder Research

Vaccination as a cause of autism—myths and controversies

Open access
Davidson, Michael·2017·Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience

Abstract

Despite significant progress in the study of the epidemiology and genetics of autism, the etiology and patho-physiology of this condition is far from being elucidated and no curative treatment currently exists. Although solid scientific research continues, in an attempt to find explanations and solutions, a number of nonscientific and pure myths about autism have emerged. Myths that vaccines or mercury are associated with autism have been amplified by misguided scientists; frustrated, but effective parent groups; and politicians. Preventing the protection provided by vaccination or administration of mercury-chelating agents may cause real damage to autistic individuals and to innocent bystanders who as a result may be exposed to resurgent diseases that had already been "extinguished. " That such myths flourish is a consequence of the authority of scientific evidence obtained by scientific methodology losing ground to alternative truths and alternative science. This article presents a narrative of the origin of the myths around autism.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.31887/dcns.2017.19.4/mdavidson

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [2]Offit P. Autism's False Prophets: Bad Science, Risky Medicine, and the Search for a Cure. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. 2010
  2. [9]Institute of Medicine; Stratton K, Ford A, Rusch E, Clayton EW, eds. Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality. Washington DC: The National Academics Press. 2012 24624471

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davidson, M.
Affiliations
University of Nicosia (CY)
Corresponding author
Davidson, Michael
Venue
Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience
Published
2017-12-31
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
403-407
ISSN
  • 1294-8322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1958-5969
OpenAlex
W2906826669
Cited by
101
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2
FWCI
2.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, autism-vaccine controversy, mercury, thimerosal, autism etiology, myth, alternative science, anti-vaccine movement, re-emerging infectious diseases
MeSH terms
Autistic Disorder, Humans, Vaccination

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review