Vaccine Autism War Is Declared Over: Autism Is 100% Genetic, Vaccine Concerned Parents Are Fanatics

Dr. Henry Miller, physician and molecular biologist, a fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, and Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, president of the American Council on Science and Health, have ended the vaccine autism wars. 

Without providing any fancy explanations, or any  substantial explanation at all, these learned figures have declared in Unlocking the Genetic Secrets of Autism  that autism is 100% genetic and parents who resist this knowledge are fanatics particularly those who believe vaccines may play a role in causing vaccines. There ain't much science or logic in the declaration to confuse fanatic parents. The war is over. Autism is genetic. Let the parades begin:

Intense and even fanatical resistance to vaccination against childhood diseases is itself a significant public health problem. Opponents have blamed vaccines for everything from allergies and diabetes to cancer and autism. A recent study of abnormalities in the DNA of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) should finally put to rest the claims of some activists, mainly parents of affected children, that vaccines cause these conditions.

Read more »

Autism Blame From Refrigerator Moms to Stressed Out Moms and Dads

That deep well of autism knowledge, the New York Post, shouts the retro headline in tabloid size letters:  The parental stress behind autism.   Where once cold and distant mothers were blamed for causing their child's autism disorder now the blame is laid at the feet of both parents, stressed out moms and dads.  What would Bernard Rimland say? 

"Parents stressed out from hectic lives and neglected or volatile marriages are putting their kids' health at risk, too. Parental stress may be a major factor in many childhood problems, including even autism and asthma.

That's the conclusion of more than 20 separate studies, including several articles by the National Scientific Council for the Developing Child, a Harvard-based group of researchers from top universities: "The realization that stresses experienced by parents and other caregivers can affect a child's developing brain architecture and chemistry in a way that makes some children more susceptible to stress-related disorders later in life is startling news to most people."

Thank heavens they did the research and now all further autism causation research can be shut down and money saved.  It WAS those darn, evil parents of autistic children all along.  That 'll teach them for asking questions about autism and vaccine safety. 

Serves them right.

Read more »

Offit Offensive Has Failed, Vaccine-Autism War Continues, Child Vaccine Refusals Increase in U.S.

Breaking News Update:


I had just posted this comment when I read the CP Breaking News update Parents with more education less likely to let their daughters get HPV shots featuring extensive commentary by Field Marshal Paul Offit the man with great vaccine credibility ... with the main stream media ... not so much ... maybe none at all ...  with parents, including apparently better educated parents.  Personally I think including Paul Offit in an article about vaccine safety is counter productive if parents are the audience that authorities are trying to convince. The article despite the education levels of the parents, blames the internet for leading these parents to question public health authorities pronouncements on vaccine safety.  As always the possibility that parental concerns might be legitimate is not referenced in the article.  The Offit Offensive ... the insanity ... continues.

 
The latest news from the Vaccine-Autism front is summarized succcinctly in the CBC headline Child vaccine refusals increase in U.S. The article reports on the study by Philip Smith and his colleagues of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta which found that "between 2003 and 2008, the percentage of parents who refused or delayed vaccination doses "increased significantly from 22 per cent to 39 per cent."  Authorities will scratch their heads over this information, will wonder how they can get through to those stupid, ignorant, hysterical and ill informed parents who do not accept their dictates about what is best for their children.  They will continue to follow the same insane strategy of trying to convince parents, while insulting them,  that all vaccines, and all vaccine ingredients are always safe no matter how many times they are given and no matter what contrary information they might stumble  upon.  

What the authorities will not do, can not do, is acknowledge that they have not always been forthright in addressing public concerns and that they have ignored credible health professionals who in fact do have questions about the state of the "science" on vaccine safety particularly as it pertains to autism. 

If anyone from American or Canadian public health offices reads this blog commentary and decides that what I  say in this comment is typical "anti-vaxxer" nonsense they should know that I have two sons all of whom have received all of the recommended vaccine shots. I have never attributed my youngest son's severe autistic disorder to vaccination although I do have an open mind on the issue now.  I do not  believe the rhetoric of the failed, and insane, strategy of public health authorities and mainstream media giants who simply dismiss parents, health professionals and researchers who question whether "science" has actually determined for all time that all vaccines are always effective and safe.  The strategy has failed and yet the strategy continues to be relied on by the same authorities and media giants hoping for a different result.

On January 24 2009 in Einstein's Reply to Paul Offit I questioned the rationality of public health authorities and professionals who keep following the same failed strategy to convince parents to vaccinate their children and expecting to see different results.  I set out two quotes as an introduction to that comment:

"These outbreaks have not, apparently, been sobering. If anything, the number of parents choosing to delay or withhold or separate vaccines is increasing. So what will it take?

Paul Offit

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein"

It is now 16 months later and Paul Offit and company keep doing the same thing over and over and over again and keep expecting to see different results. The insanity has not ended and there are no signs that it will. There are no signs that  public health officials or the mainstream media will abandon the Offit strategy which has been an utter failure.  The increases in vaccine refusals are clear indicators that it is insane to keep following the Offit strategy and expecting a different result.

Insulting Jenny McCarthy and other parents fighting for their children will not work.  Let me repeat that one since it is quite simple yet difficult for Offit and company to grasp: insulting Jenny McCarthy and other parents fighting for their children will not work.

Ignoring health professionals and researchers  like Dr. Bernadine Healy  and pharmaceutical official Dr. Julie Gerberding, both of whom have previously stated that a study comparing autism rates of existing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations could and should be done will not work. Ignoring a clinical and academic neurologist and parent like Dr. Jon Poling who has called for more environmentally focused autism research, including more vaccine oriented autism research will not work. Ignoring a researcher like Dr. Irva Hertz-Picciotto who says that the studies allegedly disproving a thimerosal autism connection are flawed and that stronger sceince is needed on the issue.

Playing politics by appointing those like Ari Ne'eman who oppose curing  autism to the IACC will not work.  Allowing an Alison Singer, nominated to the IACC by Autism Speaks, to  abandon that organization's mandate by voting against an historically crucial recommendation for the comparative autism vaccine study before jumping ship to join Paul Offit at the Autism Science Foundation, will not work. 

Parents know that the "science" on vaccines and autism is not as solid as portrayed by the Offit media armies. They know that research of vaccine and other potential environmental triggers of autism has been discouraged since the 1990's.  They know that public health authorities like the IACC have pushed the flawed thimerosal autism studies while refusing to  conduct the comparative studies recommended by Gerberding and Healy and while refusing the Hertz-Picciotto and Poling recommendations for stronger scientific research on thimerosal and other vaccine autism issues.

I am a parent who vaccinates my children but still has questions about vaccines.  I acknowledge the important role that vaccines have played in public health and disease prevention in children.  But there is a resource which is even more important in protecting and promoting the health of children and that resource is parents. It is that resource which has been subjected to unrelenting attack by the Offit armies as part of a failed and insane strategy to convince parents to vaccinate their children. 

It is long past time for the Offit armies, including the new Autism Science Foundation, mainstream media like the NYT, the Chicago Tribune, the Globe and Mail and PBS and internet foot soldiers like the blogging sites listed on the Autism Science Foundation web site to leave the field.  It is time for health authorities and researchers who understand that parents are the number one resource in child health promotion to work with parents and address their concerns instead of dismissing them. 

Will my small voice be heard and have any impact? Highly, highly unlikely.  The odds are good that a year from now, two years from now, vaccine refusals will have increased again in the US and the Offit armies will still be in the field attacking the number one child health resource ... their parents ... and hoping to see a different result.

Read more »

Coincidence Says CDC When Young Athlete Suffers Guillain-Barre Syndrome After H1N1 Shot

MSNBC reports that a 14 year old high school athlete in Virginia is struggling to walk after coming down with Guillain-Barré Syndrome within 18 hours after receiving an H1N1 flu shot:

Jordan McFarland, a high school athlete from Alexandria, Va., left Inova Fairfax Hospital for Children Tuesday night in a wheelchair nearly a week after developing severe headaches, muscle spasms and weakness in his legs following a swine flu shot. He will likely need the assistance of a walker for four to six weeks, plus extensive physical therapy.

CDC spokesperson Dr. Claudia J. Vellozzi, deputy director for immunization safety provided a response heard often in possible vaccine autism cases, the usual it's all just a coincidence:

“We know that GBS and other illnesses occur routinely in the U.S.,” Vellozzi said, noting that 80 to 120 cases are diagnosed each week in the general population.

“There are events that follow vaccination. That’s what they are, they happened to follow vaccination.

Coincidence. Yeah, sure.

autism

Read more »

End the Vaccine-Autism War Now: Do The Comparative Study and Quit Demeaning the Parents Who Actually Care for Autistic Children

The vaccine-autism war has continued unabated, primarily because of the actions of Dr. Paul Offit, Dr. Thomas Insel and the IACC. It will continue until a credible observational study comparing autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations is done.

The IACC ventured near a possible end to the war when it contemplated doing an observational study comparing autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Instead, under Dr. Insel's direction, it engaged in procedural shenanigans to take the option off the table, aggravating hostility and suspicion amongst those who observed the onset of autism symptoms in their children after vaccination.

Dr. Insel added to the mess by informing Senator Harkin's committee that such a study could not be done. Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of the NIH, and Dr. Julie Gerberding, formerly of the CDC, have both stated that the observational autism study could and should be done. Dr. Duane Alexander has also stated that such a study could be done.

Dr. Paul Offit signaled that it was OK for the media to heap scorn on vaccine concerned parents when he painted himself as a martyr and began a crusade to silence any criticism or questioning of vaccines. Now mainstream media and bloggers, including alleged science bloggers , routinely demean and admonish the people who are actually helping autistic children ... their parents. In doing so they are hurting those same autistic children and elevating hostilities in the vaccine-autism war.

It is parents, not Dr. Paul Offit, who actually do the day to day caring for autistic children and who represent their children's interests. In telling these parents to sit down and shut up, in mocking these parents, the "vaccines above all else crowd" are in fact signaling their contempt for the role of the family, the role of parents, in caring for and raising children.


The IACC can continue to sit by and hope that the current Offit inspired media offensive against parents of autistic children who question whether vaccines caused or triggered their child's autism will silence those parents. It is a false and futile hope. Not because these parents are inherently stubborn but because they require more than condescension , flawed, conflicted, statistical massages, and trite cliches (correlation does not imply causation) before they will be persuaded.

If the IACC wants to end the vaccine-autism war it will recommend funding to do the comparative study called for by Dr. Healy and Dr. Gerberding and have it done by credible, conflict free, research authorities. The more the IACC resists calls for such a study the more it will appear it has something to hide. If it wants the vaccine-autism war to continue it will refuse to conduct the study.

It's that simple.

autism

Read more »

Old Standby "Confusing Cause and Coincidence" Excuse Trotted Out in Advance of Adverse Events Following Swine Flu Vaccinations

"Confusing cause and coincidence" has been used by scientists for decades to explain away the onset of autism disorders in otherwise healthy children following vaccinations. The same people do not, however, bother to conduct credible studies to actually rule out a causal relationship in such cases.

Most notably, despite support for an observational study comparing autism rates amongst existing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations from credible sources such as Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Julie Gerberding and Dr. Jon Poling, the IACC, under Dr. Thomas Insel, has engaged in procedural shenanigans and given questionable testimony to Senator Harkin's committee to prevent such a study from being done.

Now, the "confusing cause and coincidence" excuse is being trotted out to explain possible adverse events following H1N1 (Swine Flu) vaccinations BEFORE THEY EVEN OCCUR.

The Telegraph (UK) article People will die after swine flu vaccine - but it's just coincidence, Six people in Britain can be expected to die suddenly after having the swine flu vaccine but it will just be coincidence, researchers have said references a recently published article in the Lancet and contains prophetic gems of wisdom offered by super intelligent researchers to us, the lowly unwashed, who have such difficulty distinguishing between cause and coincidence.

Prof David Spiegelhalter, Winton Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk, University of Cambridge and Co-Director of Straight Statistics, said: "What a fine paper. If millions of people are vaccinated then just by chance we can expect bad things to happen to some of them, whether it's a diagnosis of autism or a miscarriage.

"By being ready with the expected numbers of chance cases, perhaps we can avoid overreaction to sad, but coincidental, events. And why don't we ever see a headline 'Man wins lottery after flu jab'?"

Professor Robert Dingwall, University of Nottingham, said: "The difference between cause and coincidence is difficult enough for specialists to grasp, let alone the wider public.

"However, this paper is very important in spelling out the fact that just because two events happen at the same time, they are not necessarily related. There is a background rate of death, disease and accidents that happen all the time regardless of what medical interventions are going on."

Perhaps Professor Spiegelhalter can explain why we never see headlines like Vaccine Researchers Make Fortunes Successfully Predict Winning Lottery Numbers. And perhaps Professor Dingwall can someday come to believe that we, the great unwashed, drooling, ignorant public do in fact understand the difference between cause and coincidence and that we have heard that argument before in connection with vaccines and autism.

If the learned professor can get his head around that one perhaps he can convince the other members of his club that research confirming or refuting their prophecies would be appreciated by those of us in the Ignorance R Us Club.

Based on prior history of the IACC refusal to conduct credible studies of possible vaccine autism connections I have my own prediction to make: no credible follow up studies to determine actual causes of deaths and other adverse events following Swine Flu vaccinations, including autism onset, will be done by the members of the We Are Smarter Than The Dumb Public Club.

autism

Read more »

Autism and Vaccine Safety in the Swine Flu Era: Does Calling Something A Myth Make It So?

According to many mainstream media sources here in Canada the H1N1 Swine Flu is perfectly safe and effective and .... oh yes ... any possible connection between vaccines and autism has been disproved. These sources usually provide little or nothing to back up their sweeping claims other than to rely on, and refer their readers to, the web sites of public health authorities. "Journalists" in the mainstream media routinely dismiss anything published by a blogger as lacking credibility. These alleged journalists also routinely describe any position on vaccines and autism, or any statement that questions the safety of efficacy of the H1N1 vaccine, as a myth. In most cases the alleged journalists provide no reference to any study to back up their characterization of serious issues as myths held by cranks and hysterical parents. Obviously calling something a myth does not make it so but, in the current Swine Flu Era, name calling is routinely substituted for serious commentary. All in the interest of promoting public safety of course.

One childish example of the simplistic, vaccine cheer leading that passes for public health journalism in the Swine Flu Era is the opinion piece Separating myth from fact in debate about flu vaccine by Craig McInnes. You will not find any information casting doubt on vacine safety or efficacy in Mr. McInnes opinion piece. There is no mention of the four people in Sweden who died after receiving the H1N1 vaccine. Promoting intelligent thought and discussion about vaccines is not the objective of the McInnes opinion piece. No, the sole objective is to convince people that they must get the H1N1 vaccine. To help achieve that end any questions or concerns surrounding the safety or efficacy of vaccines generally MUST, be described, as arising from myths generated by ... ugh ... bloggers.

Mr. McInnes begins his opining with a bit of mockery:

So did you hear? You can protect yourself from swine flu by putting bowls of cut-up onions in every room of your house.

No really, it's true, I read it on the Internet, on the same website that had the skinny on the giant albino alligators that live in New York city sewers, a scandal that the government has tried to suppress for years.

And there it is. With that McInnes opens by relegating anyone whose views do not conform to those of public health authorities to the whackjob heap. (Except, presumably, those German authorities concerned about adjuvants in the H1N1 vaccine who are not mentioned in the McInnes opinion). Since this is an autism blog here is what Mr. McInnes has to say about vaccines and autism:

Myth: Thimerosal, which is used as a preservative in flu vaccines, contains mercury, a dangerous poison, and causes autism.•

Fact: The amount of mercury in a dose of H1N1 vaccine is less than you would get from a can of tuna and the version with the adjuvant requires only one-tenth that much.

The relationship between thimerosal and autism has been widely studied and no causal link has been found.

Mr. McInnes is not the first to use the tuna fish argument without mentioning that in fact cautions have been expressed by health authorities about tuna fish consumption for that very reason. Nor does he seem aware that digesting a tuna fish does not involve the same bodily processes as injecting a mercury preservative directly into the body of a pregnant woman or young child, thus bypassing some of the defensive processes involved with food consumption.

Mr. McInnes also appears to be unaware that a non blogger named Dr. Bernadine Healy, a former NIH head, has several times stated the need for more research on vaccine autism issues using as one reason the fact that the mercury based preservative thimerosal crosses the placenta. It has been indicated that Thimerosal will be contained in vaccines given to pregnant women in some Canadian jurisdictions, including here in New Brunswick.

Mr. McInnes, to his credit, does not go so far as to say that a thimerosal link has been disproved. He simply declares that no causal link has been found. With that though he ignores the anecdotal evidence of thousands of parents who saw their children regress after receipt of vaccines. He also fails to mention that the few, not many, studies that did not find a causal link have been criticized for their methodological weaknesses. One, the Madsen, Danish study of 2003 did not purport to offer itself as anything other than a call for MORE research. That study found that autism rates continued to rise after removal of thimerosal. The authors of the study pointed out, however, that the period studied overlapped a significant event - diagnostic definition changes in the DSM and ICD which added substantially to the numbers of persons receiving autism diagnoses.

In opining that no causal link has been found between thimerosal and autism Mr. McInnes also appears to be unaware that serious attempts to investigate such a connection have been expressly thwarted by the IOM review of 2004 and by the IACC which used procedural shenanigans to quash its own proposal to conduct an observational study comparing autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. Such as study has been called for by Dr. Healy and by Dr. Julie Gerberding until recently a head of the CDC. Dr. Jon Poling has also called for more vaccine autism research. Mr. McInnes may be unaware that Dr. Poling is not a blogger. He is a neurologist whose daughter was the plaintiff in a vaccine case settled in her favor by the US government which acknowledged that her "autism like symptoms" may have been caused when her existing mitochondrial disorder was aggravated by vaccination.

Craig McInnes alleges that what he calls myths being spread contribute to increased illness and deaths from Swine Flu by persuading people not to get vaccinated. He does not refer to any studies which show that Swine Flu vaccine has been shown to protect against the Swine Flu. A few months ago we were warned by public health authorities that Swine Flu mutates rapidly. Now we are asked to believe that vaccine has been developed which has been demonstrated to be effective in preventing the flu even though it may have mutated into a different form? In fact he provides no reference to any studies which indicate that seasonal flu vaccines are effective in preventing other flus which, apparently, are in a process of continual mutation.

Apart from the lack of proven efficacy for H1N1 vaccines Mr. McInnes provided no proof that Canadians choosing not to get vaccinated do so because of internet bloggers. The fact is that mainstream media outlets have published survey results indicating that many front line health care workers including nurses and some doctors did not intend to get vaccinated for H1N1. And there is no proof at all that Canadians generally are not going to get vaccinated. News reports in recent days have shown line-ups with thousands of people waiting for hours for vaccines often without getting them.

Hopefully the learned Mr. McInnes will not also blame the internet or bloggers for the failure to ensure adequate vaccine supplies for those who want them or for the failure to provide sufficient organization to deliver them.

We do not need any more myths, including those generated by mainstream journalists like Craig McInnes.

autism

Read more »

Autism Research Funding: It's Still Gotta Be Genetic

Even the IACC has acknowledged in its public statements that the emerging view of autism causation is that autism likely results from the interaction of genetic, biological and environmental factors. Although there have been calls for more funding of environmental based autism research of late the "it's gotta be genetic" paradigm identified by Teresa Binstock in 1999 still appears to be holding sway over funding of autism research.

As reported in the LA Times yesterday $4.5 million from the US government stimulus funding will go toward one study by researchers at Harvard University and Children's Hospital Boston involving the sequencing of genomes of at least 85 people diagnosed with autism "in a bid to tease out the genetic basis for some cases of the neuropsychiatric disorder". As long as autism research funding is restricted to genetic focused research only the genetic bases of autism will be found. Possible environmental causes and triggers of autism will remain unknown or unconfirmed.

Information concerning the development of autism by children living in close proximity to power plants and steel mills, the role of toxic plastic materials and other potential environmental causes and triggers of autism will never be determined with any degree of certainty if funding continues to be directed towards genetic based autism research by as much as 20 to 1 compared to environmental based autism research. And of course, if funding for an observational study comparing autism rates in existing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations is not provided an informed understanding of the possible role of vaccines in causing or triggering autism will not emerge. The Offit extremists will continue to maintain that there is no evidence to support a vaccine-autism connection and the vaccine- autism war will continue.

Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Jon Poling, Dr. Irva Hertz-Picciotto, and others who have called for more environmentally focused research of autism causes, do not appear to be heard by those who call the shots.

The more things change the more they remain the same.

autism

Read more »

Autism and Vaccines - Excellent Commentary at Biology in Action

On the Biology in Action site Rebecca Baker, a biology student, offers an excellent commentary on vaccines and autism "Vaccines and Autism: Many Hypotheses, But No Correlation Found" making a point with which I am in complete agreement - there is a need for more research on the issue.

On one side the commentary is a bit shallow focusing on Jenny McCarthy but not mentioning Dr. Bernadine Healy or the Poling and Banks cases ( as the mainstream media also does). BUT in exploring the other side of the debate the blog author does not give Dr. Paul Offit the free ride he gets from the mainstream media and from "autism is beautiful", Offit worshipping blogs like Left Brain/Right Brain:

Based on the radically different studies on the topic, I think that this debate has just begun. More research must be done in order to come to a definite conclusion. While reading the article I found, I had several questions. Whenever Dr. Offit was discussing one of the hypotheses, he stated that he analyzed several studies that refuted the idea. He never specified which studies he looked at. It seemed as though he did not provide enough evidence to support his findings. Also, if some children show severe reactions to the vaccines, is it not possible some kids are allergic to the vaccinations, as I am to penicillin? Because I am not convinced by both sides of the argument, more research must be conducted.

The vaccine-autism debate could use more balanced, common sense commentary like that by Ms Baker at Biology in Action.

autism

Read more »

Why the Big Pharma, Pro-Vaccine Cult is Losing the Vaccine-Autism War

Why prove to a man he is wrong? Is that going to make him like you? Why not let him save face? He didn't ask for your opinion. He didn't want it. Why argue with him? You can't win an argument, because if you lose, you lose it; and if you win it, you lose it. Why? You will feel fine. But what about him? You have made him feel inferior, you hurt his pride, insult his intelligence, his judgment, and his self-respect, and he'll resent your triumph. That will make him strike back, but it will never make him want to change his mind. "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

Dale Carnegie, How to Win Friends and Influence People

If you support vaccine programs as important public health tools then you are probably insulted, and not persuaded at all, by the title of this blog comment. If anything you will have dug in your heels in opposition to anything further that I might have to say. I doubt that Dale Carnegie would try to persuade people with opposing views to change their mind by insulting them.

Yet, that is exactly what is done every day by media editorial writers, bloggers and even health care professionals who dismiss parents concerned about vaccines being injected into their own children as hysterical. Anyone who asks questions about vaccine safety is branded as a nut, a hysterical parent, ignorant and ill informed, a conspiracy theorist etc. Is it any wonder that parents are not persuaded by such obvious attempts to marginalize them, to dismiss them and their concerns, to insult them?

Directly related to the use of insults to marginalize parents is the disregard for parents direct observation of what is happening to their children. Science, to this layperson anyway, must rely on actual observation as a basis for its method. No one has more direct, prolonged opportunity to observe their children then the parents who live with and care for those children. Yes, other issues arise because of the intensity of that emotional connection but the fact remains that it is parents, not Paul Offit, who actually observes their children, see them progressing and enjoying the milestones typically involved in infant development. It is parents who witness their children regress into autism disorders after vaccination that are in the best position to assess what has happened to their child.

The parents observations are, contrary to some statements that there is no evidence of vaccine autism links, exactly that. This direct observation does constitute evidence, albeit anecdotal evidence, that vaccines caused or contributed to their children's' autism disorder. Dismissing these observations as coincidence is not persuasive unless YOU can prove that it is a coincidence.

There have been a number of epidemiological studies done which are used to argue that science has conclusively disproved a vaccine autism link. Yet those studies have been subjected to what appears to be valid criticisms. The Danish study is perhaps the most notorious example. It compared autism rates before and after thimerosal was removed from vaccines in Denmark, Yet the study itself points out that the comparisons were questionable because of the different groups examined in the different time frames. The Danish study looked at autism rates in the period from 1972-2000. As everyone knows who argues against a real increase in autism rates, the diagnostic criteria for autism changed in the early 90's making it difficult to draw firm conclusions from that study. Perhaps equally as negative about the Danish study is that it was conducted after serious prodding by American health authorities who wanted to dispel a vaccine autism connection.

The epidemiological studies are observational. They do not test an hypothesis in a controlled experiment. No observational studies of vaccinated and unvaccinated populations have been conducted despite existing unvaccinated populations and despite calls for such a study from parents and professionals concerned about possible vaccine autism connections. Dr. Insel did not persuade any persons with vaccine and autism concerns that vaccines are not connected to autism when he appeared before Senator Harkin's committee and declared that an observational study comparing autism rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations could not be done. His statement was directly contrary to those of Dr. Bernadine Healy (former NIH head), Dr. Julie Gerberding (former CDC director) and Dr. Duane Alexander, a member of the IACC to the effect that such a study COULD be done. Dr. Healy and Dr. Gerberding have both said that such a study SHOULD be done. When public health authorities refuse to undertake credible research to examine the vaccine autism issue and yet state to the media that the matter is closed, that science has determined the issue conclusively and for all time, their credibility is undermined, their ability to convince concerned parents is weakened.

Dr. Healy, in calling for more research on vaccine autism issues, has pointed out that the epidemiological studies are not specific enough to address vulnerable population subgroups. The Poling case is a perfect example of the validity of that criticism. Not all people are constructed the same. The effect of a vaccine on one person may not be the effect of a vaccine on another. In the Poling case autism resulted from the impact on the child's mitochondrial disorder. Dr. Healy has called for a variety of studies to examine further the vaccine autism issue. Yet her name rarely appears in media summaries of the issue which prefer to paint the issue as Jenny McCarthy against the scientists.

If public health authorities want to restore public trust in vaccines they should do the research that Dr. Healy has called for. They should conduct the observational study comparing existing unvaccinated and vaccinated populations and stop pretending that it can not be done. They should stop pretending that science has conclusively decided the issue when too many people know that not to be true and refuse to be bullied and intimidated. Public health authorities should not be afraid to do more homework to ensure that the chemical and biological concoctions they are insisting people inject into their children are safe in all instances.

If public health authorities want to restore public trust in vaccines and convince us all that vaccines do not cause or contribute to autism they should stop condescending. They should start treating parents like what they are in this matter ... the front line researchers whose observations are invariably the first stage in recognizing and understanding autism disorders in their children. They should start treating those parents with the respect they deserve. Their failure to do so to date has been the biggest reason why they are failing to convince some parents that vaccines are safe. It is the biggest reason the public health authorities are losing the battle to restore public confidence in the safety of vaccines. If you don't believe me, check with Dale Carnegie. He left us with some notes on the subject.

autism

Read more »

Offit and Insel Fear Real Vaccine Autism Research

I am a neutral in the vaccine autism war. I have NOT concluded that vaccines or their ingredients cause, or trigger, autism but I do believe that the claim that science has conclusively proved that there is no vaccine autism connection does not hold water. I am also increasingly puzzled by, and concerned by, the opposition of the IACC and persons like IACC head Dr. Tom Insel and vaccine inventor and consequent multimillionaire Dr. Paul Offit, to conducting an observational study comparing autism rates between vaccinated and existing non vaccinated population groups.

The criticisms of the studies cited in support of the position that a vaccine autism link has been conclusively disproved by science have been covered elsewhere in detail and are well known. The most obvious example is the Danish study, conducted after prodding by US health authorities, which examined autism rates from 1972 to 2000 with the diagnostic and social changes that took place over that time period, including the addition of different population groups to the Danish database during different years. The study authors themselves stated that the study did not prove a negative vaccine autism relationship.

The most serious flaw in the position that science has disproved any possible vaccine autism connection is that NO studies have compared autism rates between vaccinated and non vaccinated population groups. What is most surprising is that people like Dr. Paul Offit and Dr. Tom Insel, especially Dr. Insel, oppose such a study. Given their opposition to such a study, and the lack of a persuasive rationale for their opposition, it is difficult not to conclude that the good Doctors Offit and Insel are afraid of what such a study might show.

Dr. Bernadine Healy, former NIH head, has stated that the epidemiological studies relied upon by authorities to argue against a possible vaccine autism connection are not specific enough to address the effects of vaccines on vulnerable population subsets. She has also argued that an observational study comparing autism rates amongst vaccinated and existing non vaccinated groups COULD and SHOULD be done. Dr. Julie Gerberding, until recently the CDC head, also has stated that the observational comparative study could and should be done. Even Dr. Duane Alexander of the recalcitrant IACC has stated that the observational comparative study could be done.

Teresa Binstock noted in 1999 that funding was available for autism research only if the research proposal examined genetic bases of autism, the "its gotta be genetic " model. In 2004 the IOM expressly discouraged funding of vaccine autism research. Today parents and professionals, as predicted by Binstock, are vilified in the mainstream media (and by attention seeking bloggers like Orac) for even discussing the possibility of a vaccine autism connection. Dr. Paul Offit has been waging an increasingly emotional campaign for several years as a result of which parents are marginalized and dissident professionals are branded as dangerous. Dr. Insel's IACC engaged in agenda and procedural games to reverse its own decision to examine vaccine autism research and the good Dr. Insel testified somewhat bizarrely in front of Senator Harkin's committee that an observational comparative study could not be done.

Substantial sums of money have been poured into genetic based autism research over more than 10 years based on the "its gotta be genetic" funding mindset identified by Teresa Binstock, with no hope of finding cause or cure from such research. It seems very weak to suggest that some of that funding could not be diverted to funding an observational comparative study of vaccinated and non vaccinated groups.

The only reasonable conclusion left to be drawn is that Dr. Tom Insel, Dr. Paul Offit, and other public health authorities who refuse to consider funding of an observational comparative study, are afraid of what the results of such a study might show - that non vaccinated groups have significantly lower autism rates than vaccinated groups.

autism

Read more »

A Dose of Controversy Breezes Over Most Autism Vaccine Issues But Was Fair to Wakefield

I was actually pleased with the Matt Lauer/NBC coverage of the Wakefield/Deer and MMR/Vaccine Issues in A Dose of Controversy. I thought he was fair to Dr. Wakefield, giving him an opportunity to address allegations made against him. The program didn't go after Brian Deer for some of the allegations against him. While the program did give Paul Offit a free run to say what he wanted about vaccines and autism I thought he, of all people involved in the program, looked the most emotional and overwrought.

The coverage of vaccine-autism issues was light and glossed over many important issues including the "science disproving vaccine autism causal connections". The show did give Dr. Healy a brief spot to point out what is my main concern with the vaccine autism war - the obvious attempt to stifle scientific inquiry on vaccine autism issues that has been going on expressly since the IOM 2004 Report and the insufficiency of the scientific investigation to date of these issues. I don't know if Dr. Healy's sensible observations will make any impact on important audiences like IACC members but you never know.

A major criticism is the continuation of the characterization of parents as desperate, hysterical, dangerous, ignorant and unable to understand the issues or the science. It is a belief genuinely held by figures like Dr. Paul Offit and Dr. Thomas Insel and it is a belief which prevents them from being able to make their case persuasively to parents.

These criticisms aside I was pleased that NBC tried to air both sides of the Wakefield/Deer MMR war instead of following recent trends and simply giving a one sided account based totally on the medical establishment position.

autism

Read more »

Vaccine-Autism War Will Never End Unless Comparative Autism Research Is Done

The performance by Dr. Thomas Insel before US Senator Harkin's Senate committee recently did nothing to end the vaccine-autism war. The head of the IACC took absolute, black and white positions on the key issues which mark the vaccine-autism war. His performance has been critiqued by Katie Wright at Age of Autism. What I found most startling was Dr. Insel's assertion that a comparative study of vaccinated and unvaccinated populations could not be done for ethical reasons.

That is obviously true with respect to experimental studies but observational studies of existing unvaccinated and vaccinated populations could be done and autism rates compared. Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Julie Gerberding and Dr. Duane Alexander have all said that such studies could be done. It is time to fund the comparative study and help bring the vaccine-autism war to an end.

The argument is made though that it would be difficult to conduct such a study because of the logistics involved as well as challenges presented by the lack of controls present in such a study. Personally I don't believe that such a study would actually be that difficult. It is essentially a survey method not substantially different than the epidemiological studies involving completely vaccinated populations relied upon by Dr Insel and others in their at times emotional assertions that a vaccine autism link has been disproved.

Even if it would be difficult to conduct an observational study comparing autism rates amongst existing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations ... so what? Dr. Paul Offit and the mainstream media have been involved in an unrelenting campaign to end the vaccine autism war, by marginalizing, browbeating and intimidating concerned parents into vaccinating their children. The bullying method has not worked. There is still suspicion, given the anecdotal evidence, which is still evidence whether any one wishes to admit it or not, of many parents who testify that their children regressed into autism after being vaccinated.

To say that such anecdotal evidence does not prove causation is fine but observational, anecdotal evidence is still evidence even if it is not conclusive evidence. The real issue is that public health authorities have not proved to the satisfaction of concerned parents that the numbers of children showing regression into autism after vaccinations is in fact just a coincidence. Many concerned parents, and some reputable health care professionals have called for the observational studies comparing autism rates between unvaccinated and vaccinated populations to be done.

If Dr. Insel and the IACC do not fund an observational, comparative study of unvaccinated and vaccinated populations they will fail to persuade those who do not subscribe to their religious like faith in the safety of vaccines. Their continued opposition to conducting such a study will itself create more suspicion around the possible role of vaccines in causing autism disorders. If Dr. Insel and the IACC do not fund such a study they will fail to persuade the very people they are seeking to persuade.

It is time to study, without pharmaceutical industry ties, the autism rates amongst existing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. If this is not done there will be no end to the vaccine-autism war and Dr. Insel and others on the IACC can accept their fair share of blame for that result ... for the continued reluctance of some parents to vaccinate their children.

autism

Read more »

Vaccine-Autism War: Will Beating Up Jenny and Oprah End the War?

From Newsweek to Discover online to the self appointed protectors of science who contend that any questioning of the safety of injecting substances containing mercury, aluminum and biological agents directly into the blood of young children on dozens of occasions constitutes "woo" the Offit Offensive has rolled out with a vengeance lashing out at Jenny McCarthy and Oprah Winfrey for the attention they bring to parents' concerns about vaccine safety. Will these vicious personal attacks convince those parents who have seen their children regress into autism after vaccination? I doubt it. I doubt it very much.

If the self styled anti-woo brigade really wants to persuade parents that their concerns about multiple injections of potentially toxic chemicals and biological agents into their children's bloodstream is risk free they should change course. Stop repeating the same failed tactics over and over and over again. Do the comparison study of vaccinated and unvaccinated populations that credible health authorities like Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Julie Gerberding, Dr. Duane Alexander and neurologist, university professor, "autism dad" and successful vaccine autism litigant, Dr. Jon Poling have all said could and should be done.

Dr. Paul Offit and others should stop the silly name calling. You will change no minds with such foolishness. Stop playing in the "woo" and do the credible studies to change minds. If you want to stem the tide of concern over vaccine safety do the research that will convince people of vaccine safety .... or start accepting your own responsibility for continued public suspicion over the safety of vaccines.

autism

Read more »

Autism, Vaccines and Public Trust: AMA Votes to Continue Sit Down and Shut Up Approach

The AMA has rejected a proposal by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law that asked the AMA Council on Science and Public Health to review the most recent research on vaccines and autism.

In rejecting any further review the AMA is essentially telling people like Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Julie Gerberding and Dr. Jon Poling that their critiques of the epidemiological study limitations or the desirability of conducting comparative studies of vaccinated and un-vaccinated groups are invalid or unworthy of consideration. In citing the three recent vaccine court decisions rejecting any vaccine-autism link the AMA makes no mention of cases like Banks and Poling where the government settled vaccine autism injury claims in favor of the plaintiffs. In rejecting any further review of a possible vaccine autism link the AMA has shown that it does not have a clue about how to restore public trust in vaccine programs.

The full resolution considered by the AMA proposed that:

• the AMA reaffirm its support for universal vaccination,
• asked the AMA Council on Science and Public Health to review the most recent research on vaccines and autism, and
• urged the association to continue to support research into the etiology and treatment of autism.

The AMA rejected only the second element of the three part resolution. How it would continue support for research into the etiology and treatment of autism while preordaining that the etiology can not include consideration of the possible role of vaccines is beyond me. The AMA is apparently saying that "we don't know the causes of autism but we do know that the causes do not include any of the biological or chemical ingredients injected into your child's bloodstream." Not a very convincing position. Of course I am just a dumb, ignorant parent of a child with autism.

In addition to dismissing the concerns raised by some health care professionals and researchers the AMA is essentially telling the many parents concerned about possible vaccine autism connections that they should sit down, shut up and do as they are told by "the doctors".

The AMA is apparently unaware that the sit down and shut up approach to restoring public confidence in vaccine safety has not worked.

In continuing this approach the AMA has shown it lacks understanding of how to restore public confidence in vaccine safety.

In continuing this approach the AMA is ensuring the continuation of the vaccine-autism war.

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: National Post Junk Journalism Continues With Jenny McCarthy Attacks

Jenny McCarthy is an easy target.

For that reason the lazy, ill informed "journalists" at the National Post continue to attack Ms McCarthy in yet another doomed to fail attempt to quash public discussion of vaccine autism concerns. Meanwhile they continue to omit any reference to respected medical and research authorities like Dr. Bernadine Healey, Dr. Julie Gerberding, Dr. Duane Alexandre all of who have said that more research could and should be done on the issue. The junk journalists at the NP ignore Dr. Jon Poling a neurologist and father of an autistic child who brought a vaccine based autism claim to successful conclusion on behalf of his daughter when the government settled.

The NP despite having its attention brought to the Poling and Banks cases again omits any reference to these two cases in which it is known that the government settled vaccine autism claims. The NP omitted any reference to the IACC decision to include vaccine autism research in its strategic autism research planning. The NP omitted any reference to the criticisms of the epidemiological studies which are used to trumpet the position that the science has "decided" that vaccines do not cause or contribute to autism onset. The NP has omitted any reference to the well founded view that such studies do not examine the impact on vulnerable population subsets and possible connections to autism among such groups of children. The NP has omitted any reference to the fact that public health authorities have long discouraged the kinds of research that might disclose any vaccine autism connection.

In all fairness to the National Post Junk Journalists the issues listed above might be above their pay grade. Better for them to refrain from doing any real, hard journalism or any real, hard thinking.

Far better, and easier, to simply malign Jenny McCarthy. Of course those who actually know something about the subject and who want their concerns addressed will not be persuaded by such cheap, cowardly excuses for journalism

autism

Read more »

Vaccine-Autism War: National Post Ripped Over Junk Journalism

Vaccines have saved the lives, and continue to save the lives, of many children.

To my knowledge no one doubts that fact. No one doubts that vaccine programs serve the public interest. Many people, however, want to be informed about the negative aspects of vaccines. Contrary to what many in the media believe there are serious, legitimate questions that remain about the possible role of vaccines and vaccine ingredients in relation to autism. Many parents of autistic children refuse to shut up and be silent. They refuse to be told that they can not discuss vaccine safety issues in public. They refuse to be told that vaccine programs are sacred cows which must not be questioned.

There is a need for more research to be done on vaccine safety issues generally and in relation specifically to autism. Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Julie Gerberding, Dr. Duane Alexandre and neurologist and autism dad Dr. Jon Poling, he who successfully reached a settlement on behalf of his autistic daughter in a vaccine damage claim, have all called for more research to be done on possible vaccine autism connections. Sounds reasonable but many "journalists" have climbed aboard the "speak no evil", "ask no questions", "shut up and be a good little mommy or daddy" train of thought which dictates that it is wrong to discuss or research these issues. Such efforts to suppress free discussion by parents seeking to protect their children are counter-productive. The failure of such a strategy was recognized by the IACC, the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee when its recently released strategic plan included vaccine autism research; if only to restore public confidence in vaccine programs.

Media outlets though continue to talk as though no legitimate questions have been asked. They offer completely one sided pictures of the legitimate vaccine autism issues. One recent example is the National Post article Junk science has a new cover girl in which the National Post attacks any and all who presume to ask questions about vaccine safety and autism. The NP article focuses on Jenny McCarthy and Oprah Winfrey and is blatantly one sided. Autism blogger Lea Schizas at Shaking the System, a blog she co-authors with Litsa Kamateros, has critiqued the NP's "journalism" in her aptly named comment Junk Journalism Once Again. Lea has written a letter to the National Post which I reprint here with her permission:

How like a newspaper to give a one-sided account and not bother to contact the biomedical specialists who are doctors and get their input. Has the newspaper business become so afraid to counter the billion dollar pharmaceutical industry and give a thorough investigation?

Allow me the opportunity to dissect Mr. Allen’s article with my own input:

A parent is a parent is a parent. As doctors themselves state we are the ones who best know our children. So whether Jenny was once associated with Playboy is not the issue but only a glamorous put down by this journalist. Jenny is not the only one who noticed a change in her child but thousands, and I state thousands because there were 4900 cases pending in the US last year all waiting to have their chance to say how vaccines had injured their children.

Also, I didn’t read the part where Jenny states she is pro-vaccine but wanting the medical profession to change the vaccine schedule for the children who might hide a disorder/dysfunction that makes them susceptible to multi-vaccines. Missing, too, was the fact that in the 80s US children received 10-12 vaccines by the age of 6 and now up to 36. Are you telling me that these compounded vaccines do not have the possibility of harming a toddler, ones who might have a mitochondrial dysfunction?

Where, also, is mention of the Hannah Poling or Bailey Banks cases where they were conceded in the courts that vaccines DID cause these children’s autism? How many cases of vaccine-injured children do we need to show that some children cannot handle the accumulated toxins needled into them? The medical professionals need to devise a test to try and evaluate a child’s susceptibility before their vaccines begin. And please get it right that no one disputes that vaccines have helped and will continue to help. But a better or delayed schedule should be considered. Children are now given at day one of birth the Hepatitis Vaccine, an age where any hidden health issues might not have surfaced yet.

And your mention of Humphrey Bogart, Louis Armstrong, and Elvis Presley advocating for vaccines gives no credence to an issue that back then had no clue about autism as much as there is now.

Research continues in various levels from genetic to environmental factors. And if you’re going to bash Jenny McCarthy, then why not mention Robert Kennedy as well with his own backing and autism advocacy about a meeting behind closed doors of top specialists and organizations where whispers of the possibility of vaccines harming children were spoken.

For this reason my title to Mr. Allen’s article is Junk Journalism Once Again.

Lea Schizas

In addition to the blog Shaking the System Lea Schizas and Litsa Kamateros publish on their web site The Autism Epidemic.

autism

Read more »