The CBS Evening News (2/12, story 4, 1:15, Couric) reported, "Some parents believe there is a connection between autism in their children and the combination vaccine for measles, mumps, and rubella. But, a special court ruled" Thursday "in three separate cases there is no evidence to support such a link."

NBC Nightly News (2/12, story 8, 1:55, Williams) reported, "The ruling is a huge legal blow to thousands of families with autistic children." In Thursday's rulings, "a federal court said the parents failed to show that vaccinations played any role at all in causing autism. The author of one of the rulings said he had deep sympathy for the parents, but said they were misled by doctors guilty of gross medical misjudgment."

The Wall Street Journal (2/13, A3, Johnson) reports that the US Court of Federal Claims in Washington "ruled...that routine childhood immunizations aren't linked to autism, handing down a landmark decision in the controversy over whether vaccines can cause the neuro-developmental disorder." In doing so, the court "denied damages to three families who alleged that vaccinations led to their children's diseases. Some 5,000 families are seeking damages from a federal program to compensate patients harmed by vaccines, and the three cases the court ruled on Thursday were considered tests for how the others will be handled." The defendant in the three cases, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), "hailed the rulings," saying in a statement. "Hopefully, the determination by the Special Masters will help reassure parents that vaccines do not cause autism." The lead case is Cedillo v. HHS, 98-916, US Court of Federal Claims (pdf).

"Both sides in the debate have been awaiting decisions in these test cases since hearings began in 2007," the New York Times (2/13, A16, McNeil) explains. In each of the three cases, which were "decided by a judge called a special master, the court found that the families had not shown that their children's autism was brought on by substances in the vaccines -- either the measles virus in the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, or its combination with thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative that was used in most childhood vaccines until 2001." In arriving at their decision, the three judges "considered 5,000 pages of testimony from experts and 939 medical articles." Meanwhile, "lawyers for the plaintiffs have indicated they will appeal."

On its front page, the Washington Post (2/13, A1, Vedantam) adds, "The ruling closes one chapter in a long feud that has pitted families with autistic children against the bulk of the scientific establishment. Those who believe passionately that routine childhood shots are to blame for the rising toll of autism feel they are locked in a David-and-Goliath struggle against vaccine manufacturers, corrupt scientists, federal agencies, and the mainstream media. It remains to be seen whether yesterday's ruling will end the controversy -- or be seen as just more evidence of what some call a conspiracy."

According to the Chicago Tribune (2/13, Huppke), Thursday's ruling that "there is no evidence of a link between autism and childhood vaccines may sound definitive, but in the emotionally charged world of autism, it's unlikely to change many minds."

The AP

Bloomberg News (2/13, O'Reilly) explains that the families "who claim their children's autism was caused by thimerosal" are "seeking compensation from the fund established by Congress in 1996 to shield drug companies, such as Sanofi-Aventis and Novartis AG, from lawsuits over vaccines the US
government requires for children. The money comes from a 75-cent tax on each dose." Bloomberg News also notes that "autism is an umbrella term covering several developmental and communication disorders that affect as many as six of every 1,000 children born in North America."

The Los Angeles Times (2/13, Chong), the Washington Times (2/13, Hudson), and CNN (2/13) also cover the story.

NYTimes: Verdicts suggest fear of autism "never a valid reason to forego vaccinations." The New York Times (2/13, A30) editorializes that "the vast majority of parents ought to accept the" court's "verdicts as persuasive evidence that no child need forgo vaccinations against dangerous diseases out of fear that the vaccines might cause autism." While "many parents had contended that the" MMR "vaccine alone could cause autism...this round of decisions also demolished that theory as well. The court must still rule on test cases contending that thimerosal-containing vaccines alone could have caused autism, a theory that medical authorities have long dismissed as contrary to the evidence." In any case, "thimerosal has been removed from most vaccines for children, allowing fearful parents to dodge it." The Times concludes that Thursday's verdicts "suggest that fear of autism was never a valid reason to forego vaccinations that can protect children from illness and even death."