Three separate autism-related studies published within the past six weeks have given pro-vaccine groups, pharmaceutical companies and government officials a major PR victory in the tug-of-war battle between their side and anti-vaccine lobbyists, which include many parents of children with autism. Adding to the frenzy and confusion has been the false depiction by many media outlets of total vindication for vaccines and pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Misleading headlines such as "Thimerosal Vaccine Proved Safe" and "Vaccine not linked to autism" have swept across newswires at a near-hysteric rate, giving the false impression that the autism-vaccine controversy has finally been laid to rest once and for all.

The attention these study results received was in stark contrast to a recently published article from the Journal of Child Neurology entitled, "Blood Levels of Mercury Are Related to Diagnosis of Autism: A Reanalysis of an Important Data Set." The report received little media fanfare when it was released several months ago, even though researchers from the University of Northern Iowa reanalyzed data from a previous study and concluded that a "significant relation does exist between the blood levels of mercury and diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorder."

Then there was the ABC pilot episode of "Eli Stone," which depicted a jury awarding $5.2 million to a mother who believed her son's autism was caused by a vaccine. Despite intense pressure to cancel the program, ABC refused and the show was subsequently watched by nearly 15 million viewers.

What preceded and followed ABC's choice to air the episode was a massive campaign to neutralize public perceptions that a connection between vaccinations and autism exists.

Included in this information blitz was the release of the pro-vaccine study results. The timing of their release was neither accidental nor coincidental.

Nearly 5,000 families have brought a case before a special vaccine court and are currently attempting to demonstrate the correlation between vaccines and autism. A ruling in favor of these families would have massive implications for pharmaceutical companies, the US government and the medical community at-large.

Also widely overlooked were the sources of these studies.

One study exonerating Thimerosal as a culprit in autism was funded by the National Institutes of Health, a government-run agency that would be deeply affected if the mercury-laced preservative were to be implicated in the rise of autism. Additionally, it was reported that researchers involved in the study had been paid in the past for consulting with vaccine manufacturers.

Adding to bias concerns, another study involving the Archives of General Psychiatry disproving the mercury-autism link has been questioned by some because of the publication's apparent financial ties to vaccine manufacturers.

It is time for some objectivity to enter the autism-vaccine debate. More studies are needed involving researchers and sponsors who don't have a vested interest in the outcome of the results. Until that happens, reports that purportedly exonerate the role of vaccines in autism should be greeted with a healthy dose of skepticism and cynicism.

Those analyzing and reviewing the data, including the mainstream media, should not be so quick to jump to such sweeping conclusions until all the facts and conflicts of interest are uncovered and disclosed.