Autism Rising, Environmental Causes of Autism Disorders, and the Top Autism Interview of the 2000-2009 Decade

The autism interview of the decade, from the perspective of this father of a severely autistic 14 year old boy seeking real answers and future directions concerning my sons Autistic Disorder,  is the David Kirby interview with Dr. Tom Insel in December 2009. There are many contentious debates in discussions of autism disorders including the debate over whether the startling increases in rates of autism diagnoses over the past decade from 1 in 1000 to 1 in 500 to 1 in 110 reflects a real increase in autism or whether they are attributable entirely to the diagnostic  manual changes in the early 1990's combined with increased awareness and the alleged existence of autism services motivating parents to seek autism diagnoses.  Tied directly to this issue is the question of whether autism is caused entirely by genetic factors or whether environmental factors are also involved.

David Kirby's recent interview with Dr. Tom Insel, head of the IACC, and not known to be a celebrity actress, an anti-vaxxer or an hysterical, rage filled parent of a child with an autism disorder,  sheds much light on these issues. I encourage everyone, including reporters and journalists with Mainstream Media outlets and anti autism cure Neurodiversity ideologues like Obama disability nominee Ari Ne'eman, to read the transcript of the Kirby interview with Dr. Insel in its entirety.  Some important points made by Dr. Insel in that interview:

"So how much of the doubling or - in this case tenfold increase over a decade - how much of it is related to change in diagnosis, how much to ascertainment? It looks like about 24 percent of the California increase can be attributed to something like a change in diagnosis criteria. They are beginning to use multiple diagnoses. So that children before, who were listed simply as mentally retarded rather than autism - but they had both - are now logged in with both. But that really caps out at around 24 percent. There’s probably another piece of this, which globally could be attributed to ascertainment. But that caps out at around 16 percent, or something like that. And when you put all of that together, you are still well below explaining 50 percent of the increase.

So what does that mean? It means that, as far as I can tell, the burden of proof is upon anybody who feels that there is NOT a real increase here in the number of kids affected." 

...

This tells you that, you really have to take this very seriously. From everything they are looking at, this is not something that can be explained away by methodology, by diagnosis. Some piece of it can, but the whole thing can’t.

...

 Yes. I don’t think anybody is arguing that it is 100-percent genetic. I mean, I think that there are just a lot of questions that this raises. And I don’t think in those terms, exactly, that it’s either genetic or it’s environmental. From my perspective, it’s almost always going to be both. And the only question is: How do you nail down this interaction, how do you go after it?

...

There is no question that there has got to be an environmental component here. The problem for us has been trying to find the right way to get our hands around it, and to identify what that is most likely related to." 

The acknowledgements by Dr. Insel, head of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee, (1) that autism is really increasing and (2) that there is an environmental component to that increase are huge developments in our attempts to understand autism disorders and what is causing them. The assumption for over a decade has been that autism is 100% genetic and that none of the autism increase is real.  Funding of autism research has reflected those twin assumptions.  Now is the time to face autism reality, to start researching and understanding the interaction of genetic and environmental factors that cause and contribute to autism disorders. With the knowledge gained from understanding what causes autism disorders we will be much better able to identify treatments and cures to help those afflicted by these serious disorders.

David Kirby's December 2009 interview with IACC Director Tom Insel easily ranks as the top autism interview of the 2000-2009 decade ... in the opinion of this humble father of a son severely affected by Autistic Disorder. 

Read more »

Denials Do Not Explain Autism Epidemic, Environmental Factors Must Be Researched

If any disease or disorder saw startling increases from 1 in 500 to 1 in 110  in just over a decade it would be taken seriously. Unless of course the disorder in question is autism where a significant number of professionals  are joined by Neurodiversity ideologues in denying  the existence of an autism epidemic. The deniers hold religiously to their beliefs without an explanation for much of the startling increase in autism diagnoses.

The autism epidemic deniers rely heavily on the 1994 change in autism diagnostic criteria and definitions, diagnostic substitution, increased autism awareness and other ascertainment factors. While there is no dispute that these factors play substantial roles in accounting for the upswing in autism diagnoses they only account for approximately 50% of the increase in autism diagnoses, leaving 50% of the increase unexplained. Given the startling rise in autism diagnoses 50% of that increase represents in itself a startling increase. Yet the deniers blithely assure the world that there is no real increase in autism diagnoses.

The view that 50% of the increase in autism diagnoses is unexplained by diagnostic change, substitution and ascertainment factors  can not be pinned on  a celebrity actress or holistic doctor frowned upon by the "scientific community". Doctors Novella and Gorski and Neurodiversity ideologue Kev Leitch can not use "scientific" terms like "woo" and "quack" to dismiss  the opinions of Dr. Thomas Insel, director of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee, who  has stated in an interview with journalist David Kirby that 50% of the autism diagnoses increases reported in the California study is unexplained by  diagnostic change and ascertainment factors:

"It looks like about 24 percent of the California increase can be attributed to something like a change in diagnosis criteria. They are beginning to use multiple diagnoses. So that children before, who were listed simply as mentally retarded rather than autism - but they had both - are now logged in with both. But that really caps out at around 24 percent. There’s probably another piece of this, which globally could be attributed to ascertainment. But that caps out at around 16 percent, or something like that. And when you put all of that together, you are still well below explaining 50 percent of the increase.

So what does that mean? It means that, as far as I can tell, the burden of proof is upon anybody who feels that there is NOT a real increase here in the number of kids affected. Because all of the evidence we have up until now says that, well there are what we could call – I wouldn’t call them ‘trivial’ factors – but they are factors that are not related to incidence, but would be simply related to prevalence, like ascertainment. But they don’t really explain away this huge increase.

This tells you that, you really have to take this very seriously. From everything they are looking at, this is not something that can be explained away by methodology, by diagnosis. Some piece of it can, but the whole thing can’t.""      [Bold highlighting added. HLD]

Having rejected the diagnostic and ascertainment factors as complete explanations for the increases in autism diagnoses Dr. Insel then went on to reject the theoretical basis of autism epidemic denial, the assumption that autism disorders result entirely from genetic factors and the fervent belief that environmental factors do not play a role in causing autism disorders:

"I don’t think anybody is arguing that it is 100-percent genetic. I mean, I think that there are just a lot of questions that this raises. And I don’t think in those terms, exactly, that it’s either genetic or it’s environmental. From my perspective, it’s almost always going to be both. And the only question is: How do you nail down this interaction, how do you go after it?

....

There is no question that there has got to be an environmental component here. The problem for us has been trying to find the right way to get our hands around it, and to identify what that is most likely related to  ...     in the last few months, or maybe year, we’ve begun to develop the tools that will allow us to get at this. And these tools are from this whole emerging field of epigenetics, or epigenomics.   And in this case you are not looking at genetic sequence - which is what we’ve been doing for the last decade - but you’re looking at how the DNA is bound up with all kinds of proteins. That is largely affected by experience, or by environment. Some of it is probably hardwired, but a lot of it has to do with exposures, particularly early in development but even, as we are learning, even after birth

So what we are really excited about here, I think, is to be able to use these new tools. And what has only happened in the last month or two is the first whole genome epigenetics effort, where we have been able to say, ‘We can map this entire aspect of genomic biology, and it tells us what someone’s exposure history might have been.’ It shows you effectively, or we are hoping it will show us, where the scars might be from early exposures."

The near 100% focus on genetic based autism research over the last decade, referenced by Dr. Insel, was identified by Terersa Binstock in 1999.  That focus has resulted in little research of the environmental factors involved in causing autism disorders.  The failure to study possible environmental factors in causing autism has allowed autism epidemic deniers to claim that there is no evidence of environmental factors in causing autism, that autism is entirely genetic and that there is therefore no autism epidemic since a purely genetic disorder would not show dramatic increases in such a short period of time.

Given the recent CDC data, and given the emerging scientific view reflected in IACC Director Insel's statements in the Kirby interview it appears time is now running out for the autism epidemic deniers. 

autism

Read more »

Autism Insanity: The It's Gotta Be Genetic Model of Autism

"It's crazy that in this debate, we're still debating whether autism numbers are actually going up or not, which is insanity to me. It's people desperately clinging to this belief that autism is genetic, that it's always been with us at this rate, that we're just better at counting it, better at diagnosing it."

David Kirby, 'Evidence of Harm' revisited, Part 2, The Bloomington Alternative, January 10, 2010

Kirby has hit the nail on the head with this remark from his interview with Steven Higgs at the Bloomington Alternative. Teresa Binstock identified the "It's gotta be genetic" mindset of understanding autism and funding autism research over a decade ago and little has changed since then.  The failure to challenge an entrenched almost cult like belief that autism is genetic, it just has to be genetic, has cost another generation years of potentially productive autism research and possible treatments and cures. The same "autism is genetic" cult followers, having held back environmentally focused autism research,  then point to the absence of scientific study results identifying environmental factors in causing autism as proof that autism is genetic. Sounds like insanity to me.

autism

Read more »

IACC Head Says No Question Environment Is a Component of Autism

David Kirby's recent interview with Dr. Thomas Insel of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee is quite possibly the autism interview of the decade, one that will be referenced in future histories of autism.

Kirby interviewed Dr. Insel after the release of new CDC data showing yet another stunning increase in autism rates to 1 in 110. In Dr. Insel on Rising ASD Numbers: “No Question” About Environmental Factors  Kirby quotes a very candid Dr. Insel  about the role of environmental factors in causing autism:

"there is no question that there has got to be an environmental component here."

That statement is a huge development in in the history of autism research. It marks the official  end of the "it's gotta be genetic" mindset of autism research identified 10 years ago by Teresa Binstock.

autism

Read more »

Vaccine-Autism War : Will Vaccine Safety Make A Comeback?

The Offit Offensive branding parents concerned about vaccine safety issues as kooks, dangerous to the public health, and suppressing democratic discussion of vaccine safety issues by attributing disease increases to parents expressing such concerns has been been unrelenting since the release of the vaccine patent holder's book False Prophets. David Kirby, one of those vilified by Offit for raising vaccine safety concerns, reports in the Huffington Post that the highly influential National Vaccine Advisory Committee has this past week made a number of vaccine safety research recommendations including two that focus on possible vaccine-autism connections. The Offit Offensive may finally meet an opponent it can not dismiss with demeaning insults and unproven allegations. The Offit Offensive may encounter open minded, credible study of vaccine safety issues.

One recommendation is for an "observational study comparing vaccinated, unvaccinated, and "alternatively vaccinated" groups of children for a number of immunological and neurological disorders -- including autism." A second panel recommendation that could include vaccine autism issues was that "Consideration should be given to broad biomedical research including laboratory studies, and animal studies."

Kirby also reports that the NVAC recommendations are subject to external review by an agency such as the IOM, the Institutes of Medicine. Unfortunately this could result in the implementation of recommendations being unduly delayed or scuttled completely. It was the same IOM that issued a 2004 report which expressly discouraged further research of vaccine autism issues.

Kirby attributes the NVAC recommendations to a number of sources without singling out the names of specific individuals. Personally I believe that three people deserve special credit for the vaccine safety issues being taken seriously. Jenny McCarthy, mocked and vilified, at times cruelly, for her campaign for vaccine safety acted as a lightning rod for media attention to the issues. Whether positive or negative the comments about Ms. McCarthy have kept the issue in the realm of public discussion. To the same effect David Kirby himself has been a powerful voice offering the skills and ability of a professional journalist to document the issue fully for public consumption. Neither Ms. McCarthy nor Mr. Kirby have buckled under to the immense pressure exerted by Dr. Offit and the medical establishment.

Ultimately though I believe that it is the input of Dr. Bernadine Healy that has had the most influence in arriving at the NVAC (and IACC) recommendations for further vaccine autism safety and general vaccine safety research. As the former head of the NIH Dr. Healy could not be dismissed as a crackpot. Her presentation of the need for further vaccine autism research was clear, cogent and compelling. She risked disenfranchisement from the medical and research establishments by pointing out the need for vaccine safety research. Her specific recommendations are clearly identifiable in the two NVAC recommendations above as well as her focus on vulnerable population subsets and the inadequacy of the epidemiological studies in examining the possible impact of vaccines on such groups.

The mainstream media is still enrolled in the Offit Offensive dismissing any need for vaccine safety research and dismissing as kooks anyone who suggests that there should be discussion and research of vaccine safety issues generally or vaccine autism issues specifically. The IACC strategic research plan and now the NVAC recommendations are powerful counter forces to the Offit offensive. Hopefully they will carry the day.

There should be no illusions though. The attempt to prevent research of vaccine autism safety issues is not over. The vaccine autism war is not over. The IOM, if it conducts an external review will be mindful, if not bound, by its own 2004 report discouraging the type of research recommended by the NVAC.

Look too for vaccine patent holder Dr. Paul Offit to step up his media tours demeaning those who dare ask questions of vaccine safety. Dr. Offit will once again don his "regular guy" flannel shirts and grandfatherly sweaters for interviews by adoring mainstream media. And Neurodiversity bloggers will be counted on to echo his demeaning characterizations of concerned parents around the world wide web.

If the IOM does do a replay of its 2004 strategy of discouraging serious research of vaccine safety issues it will be making a very big mistake. It is time to end the vaccine-autism war. Let the research be done, let the concerns be address and if those concerns are upheld or new ones found, let the vaccines and vaccine programs be adjusted accordingly.

autism

Read more »

Vaccine-Autism War: Dr. Jon Poling Demolishes Credibility of Vaccine Patent Holder Dr. Paul Offit's Vaccine Safety Claims

"Fortunately, the ‘better diagnosis’ myth has been soundly debunked. In the 2009 issue of Epidemiology, two authors analyzed 1990 through 2006 California Department of Developmental Services and U.S. Census data documenting an astronomical 700 to 800 percent rise in the disorder.

These scientists concluded that only a smaller percentage of this staggering rise can be explained by means other than a true increase.

Because purely genetic diseases do not rise precipitously, the corollary to a true autism increase is clear — genes only load the gun and it is the environment that pulls the trigger. Autism is best redefined as an environmental disease with genetic susceptibilities."

Dr. John Poling, Atlanta Journal Constitution, March 13, 2009

Every cause needs its champions.

One such champion for the cause of parents seeking answers about their children's autism disorders and the growing autism epidemic is Dr. Jon Poling a neurologist and assistant professor at the Medical College of Georgia whose daughter, Hannah Poling, has been a successful petitioner in the US National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. That case in itself stands in defiance of the vaccine propaganda campaign, led by vaccine patent holder Dr. Paul Offit, which has decreed falsely that science has decided conclusively that vaccines are safe, play no role in autism and that parents who observed autistic onset in their children after vaccinations are hysterical and deluded.

Now on Friday March 13, 2009 Dr. Jon Poling has stood up and delivered a serious blow to the credibility of vaccine patent holder Dr. Offit and others who have gone to war against concerned parents with autistic children. In a guest editorial column in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Blinders won’t reduce autism, Dr. Poling calls into question Dr. Offit's autism expertise, or lack thereof, his lack of scientific objectivity and his smear campaign against parents of autistic children who have witnessed their children develop autism after vaccinations.

Blinders won't reduce autism should be must reading for anyone involved with, or interested in, the vaccine-autism war. It should actually be ordered as mandatory reading by editors at such media outlets as the New York Times, Globe and Mail and the CBC which have decreed an ened to further inquiry on the vaccine-autism connection or promoted mindlessly the pro-vaccine campaign of vaccine patent holder Dr. Paul Offit.

With strong voices like Dr. Jon Poling, Dr. Bernadine Healy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and David Kirby the truth might yet be known about the environmental causes of autism, including any possible vaccine factors that might be involved in triggering autism in some children. They will have to continue the fight for knowledge against those, like vaccine patent holder Paul Offit, and journalist Andre Picard, who scream imperiously that further inquiry must cease. Let us hope they prevail.

autism

Read more »

A Canadian Autism Dad Says Thank You To The IACC

My friend Jonathan Mitchell, author of the Autism's Gadfly, blog, challenges the right of non-Americans to make demands of the IACC which has released The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research - January 26, 2009.

I agree with Jonathan that Canadians, British and other non-Americans have no right to demand anything from American tax payer funded institutions. The IACC plan, after all, is distributing American tax dollars. At the same time we enjoy freedom of speech in our countries as well and the world wide web makes all of our opinions available for consumption. American agencies such as the IACC may choose to review our opinions , or not , as they determine appropriate. But we have the right in our countries to express our opinions, albeit we should all do so with proper respect for , and in the context of, jurisdictional issues such as those raised by Jonathan.

American health and research authorities have generally, in my opinion, made valuable contributions to the lives of autistic children and adults in Canada. I am pleased that the IACC has adopted a strategic plan which makes this positive influence likely to continue. In my humble opinion the plan might even enhance the positive role of American researchers and public health authorities in the lives of autistic children and adults in Canada and other countries. The world's knowledge of autism itself, of its causes and possible treatments and cures, will likely be substantially increased with the realization of this strategic plan.

The plan covers a lot of ground, it is balanced and comprehensive in its scope. It is respectful of diverse perspectives and suggests an accommodation of those perspectives in effective autism research initiatives. On an initial reading of the IACC plan there are a number of points that jump out at me. There is too much to canvass in this post. Everyone should read the plan themselves and review it.

I will make several comments about the various elements of the plan in subsequent posts but first and foremost I am impressed by the focus on attempting to find causes and cures for autism disorders, to help improve the lives of autistic persons and their families.

Overall I am very pleased with the research emphasis on possible environmental factors in causing or triggering autism disorders:

What do we need?

Although most scientists believe that risk factors for ASD are both genetic and environmental, there is considerable debate about whether potential environmental causes, genetic precursors, or interactions between genes and environmental factors should be the highest priority for research aimed at identifying the causes of ASD. To date, few studies have ruled in or ruled out specific environmental factors. While there are reports of associations of ASD with exposure to medications or toxicants prenatally, and to infections after birth, it is still not known whether any specific factor is necessary or sufficient to cause ASD. Similar to other disease areas, advancing research on the potential role of environmental factors requires resources and the attraction of scientific expertise. Bringing this to bear on autism will help focus the environmental factors to study, as well as the best approach for staging studies to examine environmental factors, interaction between factors, and between individual susceptibility and various environmental factors.

For example, some researchers believe that it is important to study a large number of exposures, or classes of exposure, that are known to affect brain development. Others support more tightly focused studies of one exposure or a limited number of exposures, with greatest biologic plausibility for interacting with known or suspected biologic or genetic ASD risk factors. In addition, it is also important to design studies that assess environmental exposure during the most relevant exposure windows: pregnancy and early development. In doing this research, it will be important for the field to develop sound standards for identifying and claiming that environmental factors contribute to ASD, as it would be for genetics.

To address public concerns regarding a possible vaccine/ASD link, it will be important over the next year for the IACC to engage the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) in mutually informative dialogues. The NVAC is a Federal advisory committee chartered to advise and make recommendations regarding the National Vaccine Program. Communication between the IACC and NVAC will permit each group to be informed by the expertise of the other, enhance coordination and foster more effective use of research resources on topics of mutual interest. Examples of such topics include: studies of the possible role of vaccines, vaccine components, and multiple vaccine administration in ASD causation and severity through a variety of approaches; and assessing the feasibility and design of an epidemiological study to determine whether health outcomes, including ASD, differ among populations with vaccinated, unvaccinated, and alternatively vaccinated groups.


Aspirational Goal: Causes of ASD will be Discovered that Inform Prognosis and Treatments and Lead to Prevention/Preemption of the Challenges and Disabilities Of ASD

Research Opportunities

* Genomic variations in ASD and the symptom profiles associated with these variations.

* Environmental influences in ASD and the symptom profiles associated with these influences.

* Family studies of the broader autism phenotype that can inform and define the heritability of ASD.

* Studies in simplex families that inform and define de novo gene differences and the role of the environment in inducing these differences.

* Standardized methods for collecting and storing biospecimen resources from well-characterized people with ASD as well as a comparison group for use in biologic, environmental and genetic studies of ASD.

* Case-control studies of unique subpopulations of people with ASD that identify novel risk factors.

* Monitor the scientific literature regarding possible associations of vaccines and other environmental factors (e.g., ultrasound, pesticides, pollutants) with ASD to identify emerging opportunities for research and indicated studies.

* Environmental and biological risk factors during pre- and early post-natal development in "at risk" samples.

* Cross-disciplinary collaborative efforts to identify and analyze biological mechanisms that underlie the interplay of genetic and environmental factors relevant to the risk and development of ASD, including co-occurring conditions.

* Convene ASD researchers on a regular basis to develop strategies and approaches for understanding gene - environment interactions.

* Exposure assessment -- efficient and accurate measures of key exposures for use in population and clinic based studies and standards for sample collection, storage, and analysis of biological materials.

Short-Term Objectives

* Initiate studies on at least five environmental factors identified in the recommendations from the 2007 IOM report "Autism and the Environment: Challenges and Opportunities for Research" as potential causes of ASD by 2010. IACC Recommended Budget: $23,600,000 over 2 years.

* Coordinate and implement the inclusion of approximately 20,000 subjects for genome-wide association studies, as well as a sample of 1,200 for sequencing studies to examine more than 50 candidate genes by 2011. IACC Recommended Budget: $43,700,000 over 4 years.

* Within the highest priority categories of exposures for ASD, identify and standardize at least three measures for identifying markers of environmental exposure in biospecimens by 2011. IACC Recommended Budget: $3,500,000 over 3 years.

* Initiate efforts to expand existing large case-control and other studies to enhance capabilities for targeted gene - environment research by 2011. IACC Recommended Budget: $27,800,000 over 5 years.

* Enhance existing case-control studies to enroll broad ethnically diverse populations affected by ASD by 2011. IACC Recommended Budget: $3,300,000 over 5 years.

Long-Term Objectives

* Determine the effect of at least five environmental factors on the risk for subtypes of ASD in the pre- and early postnatal period of development by 2015. IACC Recommended Budget: $25,100,000 over 7 years.

* Conduct a multi-site study of the subsequent pregnancies of 1,000 women with a child with ASD to assess the impact of environmental factors in a period most relevant to the progression of ASD by 2014. IACC Recommended Budget: $11,100,000 over 5 years.

* Identify genetic risk factors in at least 50% of people with ASD by 2014. IACC Recommended Budget: $33,900,000 over 6 years.

* Support ancillary studies within one or more large-scale, population-based surveillance and epidemiological studies, including U.S. populations, to collect nested, case-control data on environmental factors during preconception, and during prenatal and early postnatal development, as well as genetic data, that could be pooled (as needed), to analyze targets for potential gene/environment interactions by 2015. IACC Recommended Budget: $44,400,000 over 5 years.

The environmental focus of the strategic plan includes possible vaccine-autism connections. As one who is undecided on the vaccine-autism connections I believe this is a positive step forward. Anyone wishing to explore this issue in should read David Kirby's essay on the Huffington Post US Health Officials Back Study Idea on Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated Children - Will Media Take Note?. The IACC strategic plan expressly states that it will consult with the National Vaccine Advisory Committee whose recommendations are reviewed by Mr Kirby in his article.


Ten years after Teresa Binstock complained about the "it's gotta be genetic" model of officially funded autism research and the impairment of our knowledge of autism causes, and possible treatments that results from that model, it appears that the IACC is moving toward a balanced genetic-environmental paradigm of autism research. The genetic-environmental paradigm embraced fully by the IACC bodes well for our future understanding of, and ability to treat, autism disorders. The Autism Knowledge Revolution is poised to pick up steam.

For this balanced, comprehensive strategic plan this Canadian father of a 13 year old year old with autistic disorder makes no demands but says thank you to the IACC and our American friends.

autism

Read more »

Vaccine-Autism War: The Empire Strikes Back

Whatever one's views about autism, vaccines and alleged government-"pharma" conspiracies it is clear that the recent IACC vote and surrounding events evidence an orchestrated, if panic stricken, attempt by the empire to quell dissent, to quash a simmering rebellion against official vaccine policies and prevent public inquiry into a possible vaccine-autism connection.

The clandestine IACC vote (the vote was not on the agenda and public members had no prior notice) reversed its own decision of the previous month authorizing vaccine-autism studies. In the earlier vote, as reported by David Kirby on the Huffington Post on January 5, 2009:

"In fact, two vaccine-autism studies have been approved by the IACC, which has proposed spending $16 million to:

1) "Study the effect of vaccines, vaccine components, and multiple vaccine administration in autism causation and severity through a variety of approaches, including cell and animal studies, and understand whether and how certain subpopulations in humans may be more susceptible to adverse effects of vaccines by 2011. Proposed costs: $6,000,000

2) Determine the feasibility and design an epidemiological study to determine if the health outcomes, including ASD, among various populations with vaccinated, unvaccinated, and alternatively vaccinated groups by 2011. Proposed costs: $10,000,000

Additionally, under "Research Opportunities," the panel also endorsed this objective:

"Monitor the scientific literature regarding possible associations of vaccines and other environmental factors (e.g., ultrasound, pesticides, pollutants) with ASD to identify emerging opportunities for research and indicated studies."

For proponents of vaccine-autism research, this is a resounding victory. It covers much of what these advocates have been supporting for a number of years. It is also sure to enrage those who are opposed to such research."

Kirby's words were prophetic. On January 13, 2009 the New York Times published a one-sided promotion of Dr. Paul Offit's book Autism’s False Prophets, a pro-vaccine critique of those who argue that vaccines trigger autism disorders. The article portrays Dr. Offit as a pediatrician, ... a mild, funny and somewhat rumpled 57-year-old who carrys on a heroic struggle to protect children around the world despite anger, even death threats, from irrational parents. He is "a lightning rod, a figure who goes charging into the fray.”

Selective quoting is used to present anti-vaccine parents as parasites who should be disregarded by reporters in the same fashion as holocaust deniers, AIDS deniers and those claiming that the moon landing was faked. No reference is made to the position of Dr. Bernadine Healy (former NIH and American Red Cross head) that more research of a possible autism-vaccine connection should be conducted. (Fighting the Vaccine-Autism War, Leading Dr.: Vaccines-Autism Worth Study).

Still on January 13, 2009, the Age of Autism, a rebel stronghold in the vaccine-autism war, sensing something is amiss, questions the NYT puff piece on Offit and the timing of the article:

Do you have any idea how hard it is to get the NYT to mention your book? Let alone a book that came out over five months ago. Why the mollycoddling of Dr. Offit and his book? Why now?


Then, on the evening of January 13, 2009, a public representative on the IACC, Alison Singer, resigns from Autism Speaks "based on her intention to vote on certain Strategic Plan vaccine safety matters in a way that diverged from Autism Speaks' position on this issue." The timing of her resignation suggests that she knew the vote to reverse the IACC December decision to fund vaccine-autism research would be scheduled and would not allow for any media or internet examination of her resignation prior to the vote.

On January 14, 2009 the IACC votes to reverse its decision of a few weeks earlier:

to approve objectives relating to vaccine safety research as part of its deliberations for the Strategic Plan for Autism Research. The decision to debate removing these objectives was not posted on the meeting's agenda, nor were the public members given any forewarning that this section of the plan – which was resolved at the previous IACC meeting in December -- would be revisited. [ Autism Speaks Press Notice]

On January 16, 2009 Newsweek.com publishes an interview with Alison Singer in which Ms Singer declares in respect of a vaccine autism connection that "This Question Has Been Asked And Answered’. She states that dozens of studies have exonerated vaccines as a cause of autism. The dissidents who assert a vaccine autism connection are portrayed as a small number of people with very loud voices. As with the NYT and Dr. Offit, neither Ms Singer nor Newsweek make any reference to the critique of the epidemiological studies by Dr. Bernadine Healy or her view that more research of the vaccine-autism question is needed. Dr. Healy's comments about the limits of epidemiological studies or the continued presence of thimerosal in vaccines are not mentioned.

On January 20, 2009 President-Elect Barack Obama will be sworn in as President of the United States. The mainstream media which co-operated with the empire's campaign to quash dissidence on the vaccine-autism issue will be busy with that historic occasion. There will be little time, space or attention for a bunch of looney, irrational, anti-science parents led by an actress.

The empire has struck back. Will that end the matter? In the Lucas movies it did not. In the very real vaccine-autism war it is difficult to see how those who believe in, suspect, or have an open mind on the vaccine-autism issue will be persuaded by this orchestrated series of events.

autism

Read more »

The CDC and the Autism Research Paradigm Shift

David Kirby has published, at the Age of Autism, a letter from an official in the Office of CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding in which it is stated that:

While it is important to understand if autism is affecting any group of children disproportionately, it is also important to keep in mind that there are likely multiple causes of the autism spectrum of disorders. Most scientists agree that today's research will show that a person's genetic profile may make them more or less susceptible to ASDs as a result of any number of factors such as infections, the physical environment, chemical exposures, or psychosocial components.

It is not clear from Mr. Kirby's article who the official in the office of Dr. Gerberding was that sent the email or whether that official's view represents the official view of the CDC. But it seems consistent with the autism research paradigm shift proposed by the University of Minnesota:

Autism research is poised for another paradigm shift, from an irreversible condition to a treatable disease. In the revolutionary paradigm, autism is not a rare disorder with a constant rate but frequent condition with a rising incidence. It is a combination of environmental influence and genetic vulnerabilities. It is both preventable and treatable, not by any one method but by a combination of behavioral and biomedical approaches. Autistic kids are not defective, they are sick but otherwise normal kids, and thus, recoverable.

Creating a premier center for effective treatment of autism is not as simple as adding a new wing on a hospital, purchasing the latest medical technology or creating another diagnostic center.

What is needed is a revolutionary clinical effort premised on the paradigm that autism may well be a treatable and preventable disease.

The Autism Knowledge Revolution has been marked by dramatic advances in our understanding of the structural and genetic bases of autism. The autism research paradigm shift, a shift toward investigation of the interaction of genetic susceptibility and environmental triggers may well speed the pace of that knowledge revolution.

Reactionary bloggers at the Autism Hub and Neurodiversity ideological movements will not be happy with the autism research paradigm shift but the maturing of scientific inquiry into autism, the movement past official defensiveness, may someday result in more effective treatment and cures. And those are autism realities that will be happily embraced by most parents of autistic children.

autism

Read more »

Autism and Censorship

I do not subscribe to the vaccine/thimerosal causes autism theory. It is necessary to state that at the outset because of the often heated, sometimes irrational nature of internet discussions of autism issues.

There exists a group of people, often called "neurodiversity" comprised of some high functioning autistic persons, some parents and professionals who share their view, who tend to promote a view of autism as a non-medical disability, a socially created disability which, from their perspective is simply different wiring of the brain. In the neurodiversity belief system autism is just a different way of thinking which, by their self identification with historical geniuses, can even be seen as superior to neurotypical thought. Positive views of autism are promoted. Negative realities of autism are suppressed. And now, in the American Academy of Pediatrics, the neurodiversity movement has a powerful new ally as it seeks to censor a work of fiction - the Eli Stone television series episode which apparently suggests a link between vaccines and autism.

The neurodiversity group is so rigid in its perspective that its adherents react with intense hostility to any negative portrayal of autism disorders such as that shown in the Autism Every Day video or the Ransom Notes campaign. The AED video presented the realities of autism from the perspective of caring parents. The Ransom Notes campaign was an attempt to create public awareness of some of the harsher realities of disabilities includig autism. While they have not been able to silence Autism Speaks, or the parents who created the Autism Every Day video, it is not for want of trying. And the "autism is beautiful" movement was a prime player in the successful effort to censor the Ransom Notes campaign, a campaign which was designed to focus attention on the harsher realities of various disabilities including autism disorders. Even Ph.D's, academics, presumably committed to the free exchange of ideas, bragged on the internet that they were doing "happy dances" over their success in shutting down the Ransom Notes campaign.

The Eli Stone episode is, on the surface, objectionable to the neurodiversity autism censors because it portrays a link between vaccines and autism. The episode features a family attorney who wins a court decision in which he successfully argues that a mercury-containing flu vaccine caused autism in a child. This alleged causal link enjoys little support in the medical and scientific communities and the AAP is presumably acting with good intentions when it seeks to censor the episode in question. But the same can not be said of the neurodiversity censors.

To be sure their criticisms of the vaccine autism link are consistent with accepted medical and scientific opinion but they want the episode and such discussion censored for another reason. They are offended by a medical model of autism disability. To them autism is a disability only because society imposes conditions on autistic persons which make it a disability. Even discussion of potential environmental bases for autism, anything other than a purely genetic model, is met with intense hostility by neurodiversity bloggers.

I have never been a fan of David Kirby, or his promotion of the vaccine causes autism theories. But I would not want to silence his voice, his opinion on this or any other subject. And I believe he has a point when he expresses alarm about the attempt to censor a television series episode in Scarier Than Fiction: Pediatricians Try To Censor ABC.

Autism Disorder is a medical disorder. Censorship is a severe social disorder which poses a threat to the health of a democratic society.

autism

Read more »