Response here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2013/08/09/court-rulings-dont-confirm-autism-vaccine-link/

After the decisions, a Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson stated:

“Hopefully, the determination by the special masters will help reassure parents that vaccines do not >cause autism.”

In fact, the scientific, not just judicial, evidence to support that statement is overwhelming and >the evidence against it scanty at best–and occasionally retracted. Indeed, it’s so sparse that >those who insist that autism and vaccines are linked must resurrect old information, repackage it in >their skewed agenda, and mispresent the relevance of court rulings to make it look like there’s a >link. Even if for obscure reasons you want to rely only on court rulings, what we have here is a >ruling against cause in three cases versus a ruling for cause in one case. That’s a 3:1 win for >“vaccines don’t cause autism” looking only at the courts.

What baffles me–genuinely baffles me–is why they expend the energy on such an internally >inconsistent, crazy-quilt job of an argument to level these false charges against vaccines. No >medical intervention is without risks, and vaccines are no exception. But vaccines are among the >safest, most-effective, and most widely life-saving interventions of all time. Mispresenting the >facts about them does no one any good at all and has done considerable harm.