CDC Website Updates Autism Vaccine Disclaimer

CDC Removes Claim: ‘Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism’ from official CDC website.

The CDC’s webpage on vaccine safety and autism has been updated to reflect that the longstanding claim “vaccines do not cause autism” is not evidence-based.

Meaning, Vaccines could cause autism, but studies are still currently going.

This change was made under the Data Quality Act (DQA), which requires federal agencies to ensure disseminated information is accurate, objective, and supported by evidence.

The page notes that scientific studies have not definitively ruled out the possibility that certain infant vaccines could contribute to the development of autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

While the header “Vaccines do not cause Autism” remains due to an agreement with a U.S. Senate committee, the content emphasizes that historical assertions were partly aimed at reducing vaccine hesitancy, and HHS is now conducting a comprehensive assessment of autism causes, including potential biologic mechanisms and vaccine links, with future updates expected based on new findings.

The page discusses the rise in autism prevalence since the 1980s, which correlates with expanded childhood vaccination schedules—from about 5 doses in 1986 to over 20 by age one in recent years—including vaccines like DTaP, HepB, Hib, IPV, PCV, rotavirus, and influenza. Many parents of children with autism (about half in surveys) believe vaccines played a role, often pointing to those given in the first six months or the MMR vaccine around age one. The content highlights that autism is likely multifactorial, but no studies conclusively prove that routine infant vaccines (such as DTaP, HepB, Hib, IPV, and PCV) do not cause autism.

Reviews by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) in 1991 and 2012, along with HHS Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) reports in 2014 and 2021, found inadequate evidence to accept or reject causal relationships for these vaccines, with some studies discounted due to methodological issues like reliance on passive reporting systems without unvaccinated controls.

For the MMR vaccine specifically, prior IOM and AHRQ reviews concluded no association based on observational studies, but the page critiques many of these (including a prominent 2002 Danish study) for limitations such as retrospective design, failure to address vulnerable subgroups, differences in vaccination schedules compared to the U.S., and lack of focus on timing or adjuvants.

No studies are cited as definitively proving MMR does not contribute in all contexts.

The page also addresses vaccine ingredients like aluminum adjuvants (present in DTaP and others, absent in MMR), noting cumulative exposure levels by 18 months and statistical correlations with autism rises in some analyses—though correlation does not prove causation.

The new CDC vaccine page references studies suggesting potential links to other conditions (e.g., asthma or neurodevelopmental issues) that warrant further investigation.

Overall, the CDC stresses the need for additional high-quality research into mechanisms like aluminum exposure, mitochondrial disorders, and neuroinflammation, with HHS funding and supporting such efforts to better inform future guidance.

How the 1986 Vaccine Law Changed Vaccine Injury Claims Forever

H.R. 5546, mentioned in the new CDC page above, introduced on September 18, 1986, by Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA) in the 99th Congress, is titled the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

It amends the Public Health Service Act to establish a National Vaccine Program within the Department of Health and Human Services. This program directs federal vaccine research and development, ensures the production and procurement of safe and effective vaccines, oversees their distribution and use, and coordinates related governmental and nongovernmental activities. It also creates advisory committees, authorizes appropriations through fiscal year 1991, and includes measures to promote safer vaccines, require recordkeeping and reporting by manufacturers and providers, and mandate the development of vaccine information materials for distribution.

The bill’s core provision establishes the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program as a no-fault alternative to traditional lawsuits for specified vaccine-related injuries or deaths in children. It sets up a compensation mechanism funded by a trust fund, with a Vaccine Injury Table listing presumed causally linked conditions, petition processes handled by special masters in U.S. district courts, caps on certain damages (e.g., $250,000 for pain and suffering), and an advisory commission to guide implementation and table revisions. It limits manufacturer liability for unavoidable side effects while allowing civil actions in cases of fraud or negligence, requires safety studies on specific vaccines, and promotes overall improvements in childhood immunization programs to balance vaccine supply stability with injury redress. The bill passed the House amended on October 14, 1986, but did not advance in the Senate in this form (a related version became law later that year as part of Public Law 99-660).

1986 Vaccine Act: Protecting Kids or Shielding Companies?

In 1986, the U.S. government passed a law called the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act because too many lawsuits frightened vaccine companies away from making shots for kids, and vaccines needed to stay available to prevent diseases.

The law created a special program that helped families if a child suffered serious injury or death from a vaccine — it worked as a no-fault system where families did not need to prove the company made a mistake to receive money for medical bills, lost future earnings, or pain.

Families filed claims in a special court, and if the injury matched a list of known possible side effects (called the Vaccine Injury Table) within certain time limits, they received compensation from a fund supported by taxes on vaccines.

This system protected vaccine makers from most large lawsuits, so they continued producing safe vaccines without going out of business. The law also required doctors and companies to report any bad reactions after shots, so experts tracked safety and improved vaccines over time.

Overall, the act balanced the goal of protecting children from serious diseases with fairness toward the rare families who experienced vaccine injuries.

Source