Recent Movies
‏إظهار الرسائل ذات التسميات IACC Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research. إظهار كافة الرسائل
‏إظهار الرسائل ذات التسميات IACC Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research. إظهار كافة الرسائل

IACC Autism Research Plan: Dr. Steven Novella Throws a Tantrum

Steven Novella MD, author of the NEUROLOGICA blog, doesn't like the recent IACC Statement on Autism Research and is throwing a tantrum. In IACC Statement on Autism Research Dr. Novella objects to the inclusion of research into possible links between vaccines and autism. Specifically he objects to language, approved unanimously by the IACC, that:

"calls for studies to determine if there are sub-populations that are more susceptible to environmental exposures such as immune challenges related to naturally occurring infections, vaccines or underlying immune problems."

In Dr. Novella's view this statement represents:

"the infiltration into the autism community of anti-vaccinationists – who have an agenda other than researching autism. In fact, the anti-vaccine movement has been unfortunately successful in branding themselves as autism activists and experts. This decision by the IACC represents the fruits of that infiltration – a distortion of funding for autism research to suit their anti-vaccine agenda. In fact, two members of the IACC – Lyn Redwood and Lee Grossman, were added specifically to represent the anti-vaccine movement in the (probably misguided) hope of placating that group."

It looks, at first reading, as though Dr. Novella has become, in the oft used words of his fellow "science" blogger Dr. David H. Gorski, aka Orac, a conspiracy theorist. Rather than do a full Orac on Dr. Novella though I think it is probably too early to tell just from his initial reaction. It is probably fairer to say, at this time, that Dr. Novella simply did not get what he wanted ... the exclusion of any reference to vaccines in the IACC strategic research plan, and his response is much like what any child who does not get his way might do ... he is lashing out ... he is throwing a tantrum.

Like many people who do not like the result or outcome of a process Dr. Novella is now furious and screams that the process itself was flawed from the outset. The inclusion of ... ugh... public representatives on the IACC is reprehensible to the good Doctor. After all Doctors should never have to listen to their patients right? No longer content to question the ability of public representatives to think about science Dr. Novella now feels that he has the expertise to determine who is, and who is not, a legitimate member of the "autism community".

Apparently it is no solace to Dr. Novella that Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of the American Red Cross and the NIH, has articulated the premise that the existing vaccine autism studies were not specific enough and did not examine the possible impact of vaccines on vulnerable population subsets. Apparently it is no solace to Dr. Novella that Dr. Healy, as well as former CDC director Dr. Julie Gerberding and neurologist Dr. Jon Poling have all stated that autism research should included further vaccine autism research.

Dr. Novella may be on the road to becoming what Dr. Gorski might call a conspiracy theorist but for now only one thing is certain ... the good Doctor does not like the result and he is screaming foul ... after the fact .

The Doctor is throwing a tantrum.




Bookmark and Share

Autism Rate Now 1 in 100 but Nothing is Clear for Dr. Tom Insel

"It is not clear more children are affected rather than just changes in our ability to detect,"

Dr. Tom Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health, LA Times, October 5, 2009

What is not clear is whether Dr. Tom Insel has informed the media that funding of the autism research that might "clear up" some of his confusion has been denied for the most part over the last 10 years and that he has played a significant part in ensuring that some of the possible factors or causes, such as vaccines, are not properly researched.

The man who is "not clear" over the reality of autism increases has played a key role in ensuring that any possible vaccine autism causal connection is not properly studied and has done nothing to reverse the grossly disproportionate funding of genetic autism research over environmental autism research. Environmental autism research might disclose causal factors or triggers of autism and might indicate, even to Dr. Tom Insel, that the increase is real and why it is happening.

What is not clear is why Dr. Tom Insel is director of the US National Institute of Mental Health and Chair of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee. Not clear at all.




Bookmark and Share

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.



Bookmark and Share

Vaccine-Autism War: Discover Does Disingenuous

In its June online edition Discover does anything but discover, opting instead for disingenuous, when it asks Why Does the Vaccine/Autism Controversy Live On? There is is little need to read the entire article. The title question is immediate answered in the sub-title Research has soundly disproved the alleged connection, yet fears about vaccines continue to be a major risk to public health.

The article correctly points out the health and safety benefits that vaccines have brought to the general public as a whole. It even, to its credit, acknowledges that vulnerable subsets of the general population might have contracted autism from vaccines:

Kirby says—and even some vaccine defenders agree—that some small subgroup of children might have a particular vulnerability to vaccines and yet be missed by epidemiological studies. But the two sides disagree as to the possible size of that group. “If one or two or three children every year are getting autism from vaccines, you would never pick that up,” Offit says.

Despite that acknowledgement the Discover article, while focusing on Kirby, Robert F. Kennedy and Jenny McCarthy makes no mention of Dr. Healy, Dr. Gerberding ( who also said more studies of unvaccinated children should be done to explore the autism issue) , Dr. Duane Alexander an NIH agency head who has said more studies could be done, or Dr. Jon Poling, a neurologist and father of an autistic child who was successful in obtaining a settlement for his daughters vaccine induced autism, a condition hidden under euphemisms in official statements.

In discussing the vaccine court decisions it is telling that the settlements arising out of vaccine induced autism claims are not mentioned in the article. The names Poling and Banks, in particular are no where to be seen. The article mentions the Times of London allegations against Dr. Wakefield mentioning that he denies the allegations but not mentioning that he has published a detailed response online and is fighting the allegations in professional proceedings that have gone on for so long. Nor doe the Discover article mention that the role of the Times of London and journalist Brian Deer are now under scrutiny.

The Discover article mentions the IOM without mentioning, as was pointed out by Dr. Bernadine Healy, that the IOM in its 2004 report on vaccine safety, expressly discouraged the type of research that could have provided more reliable conclusions about vaccines and autism. While repeating ad nauseum the standard defences of vaccines Discover asks why the vaccine autism controversy continues?

The IACC appears to have at least acknowledged that the way to rebuild trust is to do the research that Dr. Healy, Dr. Gerberding and Dr. Alexandre have all stated or acknowledged could and should be done. It has called for some vaccine autism research in its strategic plan for Autism Spectrum Disorders Research:

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.


Discover's attacks on Jenny McCarthy, promoting vaccine defenders from Offit to Peet as heroic and demonizing parents who continue to ask questions, is simply more of the same insanity described by Einstein - repeating the same action over and over again and getting the same result but hoping for a different result the next time.

Discover does disingenuous and does a disservice to the public and all sides involved in this very serious debate with this article.

Discover should discover candor and sincerity and follow the lead of the IACC, Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Julie Gerberding and Dr. Duane Alexandre.

Discover should let the research be done without further acrimony inducing rhetoric.




Bookmark and Share

Vaccine-Autism War: CBC Dirties Itself, Advocates Censorship of Vaccine and Autism Discussions

There was a day when I looked to the CBC as the shining example of what modern journalism should entail. That day is gone, long gone. Now the CBC has dirtied itself with an incompetent, one sided presentation of the vaccine autism debate and an express call for censorship of public health debates, specifically the vaccine-autism debate.

Autism, the raison d' être for this blog site, was once covered very well by the CBC as witnessed by David Suzuki's outstanding 1996 Nature of Things feature on autism, The Child Who Couldn't Play:

1996

The Child Who Couldn't Play (Autism) - a program that closely investigated autism and explored some avenues for treatment for young children with this condition. The program generated a substantial amount of interest from viewers - especially from parents of autistic children, eager for more information and relieved that the subject of autism was entering the public forum.

Now it offers repeated promotion of the "autism is beautiful ideology" in appearances by Dr. Laurent Mottron and Michelle Dawson and other persons with very high functioning autism and Aspergers on Quirks and Quarks and Positively Autistic. I have yet to see a recent CBC feature on the severely autistic children like my son, or those who injure themselves or reside in institutional care.

The CBC has sunk to an all time journalism low though with its express , and one sided advocacy, of censorship of the vaccine autism debates in Linking vaccines, autism tantamount to crying 'fire' where there isn't one, an article written by Stephen Strauss, whose"bio" somewhat oddly claims that "he still remains smitten by the enduring wisdom of the motto of Austrian writer Karl Kraus. Say what is." In "linking vaccines" Mr Strauss most definitely did NOT "say what is". Quite the contrary:

"In the interest of public health, and medical truth, and the emotional well-being of autism sufferers everywhere, the legal system should declare that promoting the vaccine/autism hypothesis is the modern equivalent of falsely crying "fire" in a crowded theatre.
"

Mr. Strauss argues that alleging a vaccine autism link is analogous to yelling fire in a crowded theater, an image often used to demonstrate one of the limits to free speech, uttering knowingly false statements which are reasonably foreseeable to result in harm to others. Mr. Strauss's example is misguided. The vaccine autism debate does not involve knowingly false statements. Far from it the issues involved are more complex and very much debatable.

Some very credible scientists and health authorities have indicated that the question of vaccines as possible causes or contributors to autism is an open question. Dr. Bernadine Healy, the former NIH and American Red Cross head, has twice stated that the question remains open, that the epidemiological studies relied on in support of vaccine safety are not particular enough to determine the impact of vaccines on more vulnerable population subsets. She has called for more studies to be done.

Dr. Julie Gerberding recent CDC director has also stated in connection with the vaccine autism debate that more studies COULD and SHOULD be done on the issue. A person of such high authority and credibility does not call for more studies to be done just for the hell of it. Dr. Gerberding has, amongst other things, pointed out that studies should look at autism rates in unvaccinated populations.

Perhaps Mr Strauss and the CBC are also unaware of the information found by CBS which, unlike the CBC and Mr. Strauss, actually examined some of the evidence on the "other" side of the vaccine debate and included in its reporting an interview with Dr. Healy in which she stated clearly her views that the vaccine autism connection is still an open question. CBS has also investigated and found more than a 1000 cases that have been settled before going to a decision. When cases are settled in favor of the plaintiff they accomplish the defendant government's goal of limiting their availability for use as legal precedents - or in public discussion of the issues involved.

As recently as last month an award was made to a child, Baily Banks, based on a 2007 vaccine court decision in which the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff's claim that the MMR vaccine caused brain injury resulting in autism in the plaintiff child. If Mr Strauss, or his "research assistants", if he has any, happen across this humble blog, the link to the Banks decision can be found at 2007 Banks v HHS.

The CBC and Mr. Strauss might also consider reading The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research - January 26, 2009. In that document the IACC states, somewhat curiously if the issue of a vaccine autism connection has in fact been conclusively decided, that:

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.

One further suggestion to inform the next rant by Mr Strauss or the CBC on possible vaccine autism connections. They should review the public information available on the Poling case ,one of the settlements which found that vaccines aggravated a girl's mitochondrial disorder resulting in "autism like symptoms", one of the weasel expressions used in place of "autism" in settlements. In addition Mr. Strauss should read the editorial by Dr. Jon Poling, the child's father, in yesterday's Atlanta Journal Constitution:

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.

We should be investing our research dollars into discovering environmental factors that we can change, not more poorly targeted genetic studies that offer no hope of early intervention. Pesticides, mercury, aluminum, several drugs, dietary factors, infectious agents and yes — vaccines — are all in the research agenda.


Before Mr. Strauss and CBC dismiss Dr. Poling contemptuously as another hysterical, misguided parent, they should be informed that he is also a neurologist and an assistant professor at the Medical College of Georgia. And the CBC's omniscient smearers of concerned parents should also remember that the government backed down in the case of Dr. Poling's daughter and settled.

In the interest of public health, and medical truth, and the emotional well-being of parents fighting to help their autistic children, and in the further interest of their own journalistic credibility, the CBC should withdraw the call for censorship made on its site and cease publishing such incendiary columns by ill informed, lightweight dilettantes like Mr Stephen Strauss.




Bookmark and Share

NARA - Neurodiversity's Autism Research Agenda

I am impressed by The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research - January 26, 2009. It is balanced and comprehensive with a clear focus on actually helping autistic persons and their families. There are of course competing perspectives on any important topic. Following is what I assume, based on past readings, the Neurodiversity movement might offer for an autism spectrum disorders research agenda:


1. Conduct research to demonstrate that high functioning autistic persons, and persons with Asperger's, have a different, in many cases superior, intelligence.

2. Conduct research to demonstrate that the cognitive deficits which afflict some persons with autistic disorder are unrelated to their autistic conditions. The mental retartdation and cognitive deficits shown by some with autistic disorders should not be associated with autism disorders but described as separate disorders.

3. Conduct research to prove that all of history's scientific, artistic, literary and philosophical geniuses were in fact autistic.

4. Conduct no research of possible environmental causes or triggers of autism. Autism is just a natural variation. It is a waste of time to conduct research of possible environmental causes of autism.

5. Conduct no research of the genetic bases of autism. If genetic markers of autism are found "autistics" could be the target of a genocidal eugenics campaign by evil Neurotypicals.

6. Conduct no research of possible treatments or cures of autism disorders. After all autism disorders are not really medical disorders at all. It is abuse, and a violation of their human rights, to treat or cure persons with autism spectrum disorders.




Bookmark and Share

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.




Bookmark and Share

Labels

أحدث المواضيع

 
Support : Creating Website | Johny Template | Mas Template
Copyright © 2013. Entries General - All Rights Reserved
Template Created by Creating Website Published by Mas Template
Proudly powered by Blogger