More Doctors 'Fire' Vaccine Refusers

[Renew Deal]

Pediatricians fed up with parents who refuse to vaccinate their children out of concern it can cause autism or other problems increasingly are "firing" such families from their practices, raising questions about a doctor's responsibility to these patients.

Medical associations don't recommend such patient bans, but the practice appears to be growing, according to vaccine researchers.

In a study of Connecticut pediatricians published last year, some 30% of 133 doctors said they had asked a family to leave their practice for vaccine refusal, and a recent survey of 909 Midwestern pediatricians found that 21% reported discharging families for the same reason.

By comparison, in 2001 and 2006 about 6% of physicians said they "routinely" stopped working with families due to parents' continued vaccine refusal and 16% "sometimes" dismissed them, according to surveys conducted then by the American Academy of Pediatrics.
<snip>

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203315804577209230884246636.html

[MicaelS]

1. I bet this get's the Anti-vaxxers in a tizzy

I agree with these doctors, good for them.

[proverbialwisdom]

25. Please broaden your reading.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/02/the-trouble-with-the-anti-anti-vaccine-movement-how-they-hijack-the-issue-distort-the-facts-and-tota.html#comments

The Trouble with the ANTI “Anti-Vaccine” Movement: How They Hijack the Issue; Distort the Facts; and Totally Miss the Point

By Julie Obradovic


1. They believe there is an anti-vaccine movement.

This may surprise a lot of people, but there actually isn't an "anti-vaccine movement”. Although there are definitely people who believe no vaccine is a good vaccine, the controversy has never been solely about whether or not vaccines are good or bad; it's been about whether or not they are being used responsibly and have been properly investigated for their role in chronic health conditions.

The more appropriate term to describe people raising this important question would be consumer safety advocates, seeking informed consent, more research, product liability, and policy reform.

Only a few possibilities exist to explain why those who insist on using the "anti-vaccine" label anyway continue to do so: they erroneously assume anyone who questions a product's safety is automatically against it; they believe vaccines already are being used as responsibly as they possibly can be and have been properly investigated; or they choose to use a red herring label like "anti-vaccine" to manipulate people.

2. Anyone who disagrees with them is an idiot.

If the first line of attack doesn't work it will almost always be followed by an insult. Not only are people who disagree portrayed as dangerous lunatics who want to see the world explode in infectious disease, supposedly they are also "flat-earthers" who can't accept the world is round. Certain journalists have gone so far as to suggest it's no wonder their children have problems.

Such commentary is breathtaking in its insensitivity, entirely unnecessary, and most troublesome once again, not true. Even the CDC has recognized for years, most recently in a study on Hepatitis B uptake, that the most common demographic of a person who questions vaccine safety or refuses them is a highly educated mother with a master's degree.

When faced with this unpleasant fact, anti “anti-vaxxers” are left with little place to go. Some have started calling these parents “superstitious”, “defenders of pseudo-science”, or “conspiracy theorist” instead.

More at link. (11 points, 81 comments)

Julie Obradovic is a Contributing Editor to Age of Autism.
Posted by Age of Autism at February 08, 2012 at 5:44 AM in Julie Obradovic

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2012/01/admitting-that-vaccine-injured-children.html

January 31, 2012

Admitting That Vaccine Injured Children Are Acceptable Losses

by Ginger Taylor

I have actually found something new on the internet. In seven years of blogging, I have never seen someone actually be honest about their belief that vaccine injured children are "acceptable losses." I am a little bit stunned...

Then along comes Rick Jones at CFO magazine to say what we all know to be fact, in an article entitled, "The Value of Life: Why an ethically complicated calculation can help determine the value of your company’s risk reduction programs." That vaccine injured children are acceptable losses.

"The lives saved and dollar benefits from vaccines are hard to calculate, but it’s safe to say that these and other immunizations have greatly improved the quantity and quality of life for millions of people -- at the tragic, yet accepted cost of a few. "

More at link.

[ceile]

26. So when my kid gets sick

because of another parent's neglect I should "broaden my reading?"

[proverbialwisdom]

30. Fear mongering. 'Tho there will be cognitive dissonance, here's a better frame for asking questions.

Compare and contrast.

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2010/07/cdc-vaccine-recommendations-in.html

July 16, 2010

CDC Vaccine Recommendations in Childhood Hits 70.. count 'um... 70 Doses:

Ding! Ding! Ding! America wins a prize!!!

CDC wants your child to have 70 vaccines by the time they are 18 years old!

70!

...50 of those are before the age of 6, and 37 of those are before the age of 18 months.
(more at link)

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2010/08/1983-23-doses-of-vaccine-2010-70-doses.html

August 9, 2010

In 1983, twenty-three doses of vaccine from birth to 18:

[img][/img]

(more at link)

http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/07/researcher-asks-are-36-doses-of-vaccine-by-2-too-much-too-little-or-just-right-.html#more

Researcher Asks: Are 36 Doses of Vaccine by 2 Too Much, Too Little, or Just Right?

July 11, 2011|By Margaret Dunkle

Managing Editor's note: This is from The Baltimore Sun ( http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-07-11/news/bs-ed-vaccines-illness-20110711_1_doses-childhood-vaccines-mmr ). Researcher asks: Are 36 doses of vaccine by age 2 too much, too little, or just right?

The topics of vaccines and vaccine safety spark emotional outbursts at scientific meetings and family dinner tables alike. But many of these debates are remarkably fact-free. Surprisingly few people — not just concerned parents but also doctors, policymakers and even immunization experts — can answer this seemingly simple question: How many immunizations does the federal government recommend for every child during the first two years of life? The answer is important because most states, including Maryland, faithfully follow the recommendations of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, codifying CDC guidelines into requirements for children to enroll in school, kindergarten, preschool and child care.

A new Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health study reports that the higher the proportion of infants and toddlers receiving recommended vaccines, the higher the state's rate of children diagnosed with autism or speech-language problems just a few years later. This analysis is sure to rekindle the debate about vaccine safety.

For that conversation to produce useful results, we must start by defining terms. A "dose of vaccine" refers to each vaccine or antigen given to increase immunity against one specific disease. For chicken pox, a child receives one dose of vaccine through one shot. By contrast, an "immunization event" refers to each separate administration of a vaccine or bundle of vaccines — through a shot, orally, or nasally. The MMR shot for mumps, measles and rubella involves three doses of vaccine but is one immunization event. The critical number is how many doses of vaccine a child receives. Why? If a vaccine is strong enough to confer immunity against a disease, it is important enough to count separately.

Clear definitions, analysis of CDC's "General Recommendations on Immunization," and confirmation by Dr. Andrew Kroger, lead author of the definitive report on these recommendations, produce the answer to the not-so-simple-after-all question posed above. In all, the federal government recommends 36 doses of vaccine, addressing 14 different diseases, for every U.S. child under age 2. An on-schedule child will receive a dose of vaccine for hepatitis B at birth, eight doses of various vaccines at 2 months, seven additional doses at 4 months, and four to seven more doses at 6 months. Infants and toddlers receive these vaccine doses through 26 separate immunization events — mostly shots. If a child misses vaccinations because of illness or scheduling problems, following CDC's catch-up schedule usually results in extra doses at a later date. The federally recommended doses of vaccine for every child during the first two years of life are: three doses each for hepatitis B, polio, flu, and HIB (12 doses in all); two doses each for hepatitis A and rotavirus; four doses for pneumococcal infections; one dose for chicken pox; three doses through the combination MMR vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella; and 12 doses through four separate administrations of the combination DTaP vaccine for diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough). Some infants and toddlers receive still more doses of vaccine — if they switch to pediatricians who use different "combined" vaccines, if they are at high risk for certain diseases, if lost or incomplete records lead to duplicate immunizations, and depending on the time of year they were born (for flu shots) or the brand of vaccine used.

While testing is routine for individual vaccines as they are licensed, research on the both short- and long-term effects of multiple doses of vaccine administered to very young children during the critical birth-to-2 developmental window is sparse to nonexistent.

In addition to the number of doses, vaccine ingredients can be problematic, especially for susceptible subgroups. First are adjuvants, substances added to boost effectiveness and allow smaller doses of vaccine antigen to be used. The most common adjuvant is aluminum, which is found in vaccines for hepatitis and diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus. Second are preservatives — such as thimerosal, which is 49.6 percent mercury. Thimerosal is still contained in many flu shots, although it was, except for trace amounts, removed from other child vaccines a decade ago. Many child vaccines (including those for diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus, HIB, and hepatitis) contain formaldehyde, which was just added to the government's list of known human carcinogens. Third are ingredients to which some people have severe allergies: stabilizers such as gelatin, and eggs or other proteins that are used to prepare vaccines for flu, MMR, and other immunizations.

The ongoing debate about vaccines and their safety needs to incorporate these basic facts as our country seeks to answer the critical Goldilocks question: Too many? Too few? Or just right?

Margaret Dunkle is senior research scientist at the Department of Health Policy at George Washington University and director of the Early Identification and Intervention Collaborative for Los Angeles County. She also has a family member who is vaccine-injured. Her email is [e-mail] .


COMMENT: Steven Salzberg has an article http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2011/07/17/the-baltimore-sun-sinks-deep-into-anti-vaccination-quicksand/ in Forbes slamming the Baltimore Sun for publishing Dunkle's piece. It seems that we don't dare speculate that there might be safety concerns involved with the vaccine schedule. We don't dare ask questions.
Posted by: Anne McElroy Dachel | July 18, 2011 at 12:52 PM

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/04/dr-bernadine-healy-on-vaccine-schedule-and-safety.html

Dr. Bernadine Healy on AAP, Paul Offit, Vaccine Schedule and Safety
April 14, 2009

Here's an excerpt from Dr. Bernadine Healy's blog at US News.

Full post HERE: http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/heart-to-heart/2009/04/14/the-vaccines-autism-war-dtente-needed

Dr. Healy cites Generation Rescue http://www.generationrescue.org / and WHO comparing vaccination rates in the US versus abroad.

"...pediatricians might do families a great service if they could work with them to loosen up the schedules to accommodate reasonable concerns and allow more choice. Some already do—say, by spacing out shots that are normally given in one visit, particularly those that contain live viruses like measles, mumps, and chicken pox and tend to deliver strong immune reactions. Or delaying hepatitis B until school age, at least. The goal is to get all kids appropriately vaccinated, but the pace for that might vary.

Finally, are certain groups of people especially susceptible to side effects from vaccines, and can we identify them? Youngsters like Hannah Poling, for example, who has an underlying mitochondrial disorder and developed a sudden and dramatic case of regressive autism after receiving nine immunizations, later determined to be the precipitating factor. Other children may have a genetic predisposition to autism, a pre-existing neurological condition worsened by vaccines, or an immune system that is sent into overdrive by too many vaccines, and thus they might deserve special care...

...Paul Offit, an infectious-disease expert from the University of Pennsylvania who has been a frequent spokesman and adviser on vaccine policy (and by his admission has become wealthy by developing the now mandated rotavirus vaccine), has said on more than one occasion that the infant's immune system can handle 10,000 vaccines. If that's where we're going—and it has been estimated that there are more than 100 new vaccines in the pipeline—the national investment in vaccine safety had better get on steroids fast."

More here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=222x109287#109287

[ceile]

34. Age of Austism is your source?

And I'm fear mongering...riiight...

[proverbialwisdom]

60. Proudly. Observe the meticulous investigative journalism on display here, including video.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/12/paul-offit-lies-about-jake-crosby-tara-palmore-throws-him-out-nih-covers-it-up.html

December 27, 2011

Paul Offit Lies About Jake Crosby; Tara Palmore Throws Him Out and NIH Covers it Up

By Jake Crosby

...It all began when I found out online that Paul Offit would be speaking at the NIH, part of the “Clinical Center Grand Rounds – Great Teachers Series,” sponsored by Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. The title of Dr. Offit’s lecture was “Communicating Vaccine Safety Science to the Public.” He’s also author of the now infamous claim that an infant can safely take 10,000 vaccines at once. So I took the metro out to the NIH in Bethesda, Maryland, just as I did for the talk given by Fiona Godlee. As I took my seat, I saw Paul Offit in person for the first time.

Dr. Palmore – associate director of the Infectious Diseases Training Program for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease - gave a grand introduction to Dr. Offit and described how he has bravely taken on the “anti-vaccine movement” (even though most vaccine safety advocates are not against all vaccines). She called him a “Rock star in the pediatrics and infectious diseases communities.” He’s more like Ronald McDonald for the vaccine industry. She also introduced his son who was with him and looked college-age.

Despite the estimated $10 million Paul Offit earned ( http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/12/counting-offits-millions-more-on-how-mercks-rotateq-vaccine-made-paul-offit-wealthy.html )from RotaTeq vaccine sales and despite his Merck-sponsored chair at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, his lecture began with his incredible claim that he has no relevant financial disclosures. He even received a congressional reprimand ( http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/05/dr-paul-offit-q.html )for taking part in voting on vaccine policies for which he is conflicted.

(more at link)

Posted by Age of Autism at December 27, 2011 at 5:47 AM in Jake Crosby

Jake Crosby has Asperger Syndrome and is a contributing editor to Age of Autism. He is a 2011 graduate of Brandeis University with a BA in both History and Health: Science, Society and Policy. He currently attends The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services where he is studying for an MPH in epidemiology.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/01/the-hell-with-balance-paul-offit-throws-out-jake-crosby-argues-with-nyu-research-scholar-mary-holland-at-yale.html

January 20, 2012

“The hell with balance!” - Paul Offit Throws Out Jake Crosby, Argues with NYU Research Scholar Mary Holland at Yale

By Jake Crosby

Millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit lied about me again. Unlike at NIH, where Tara Palmore had me removed after I asked Paul Offit a question during Q&A, at Yale, Dr. Offit himself demanded I leave after he repeated his lie that I am a “stalker.” Fortunately, Vaccine Epidemic co-editor Mary Holland (NYU School of Law) was also in the audience – and defended me after I left.

On January 13, 2012, Offit gave the Beaumont Lecture at Yale’s Sterling Hall of Medicine, sponsored by the Beaumont Medical Club. The title of his talk was “Hard Knocks: Communicating Science to the Public.” It contained many of the same talking points as his recent NIH “Clinical Grand Rounds – Great Teacher Lecture” titled “Communicating Vaccine Safety Science to the Public.”

(more at link)

Posted by Age of Autism at January 20, 2012 at 5:45 AM by Jake Crosby.

MORE:

http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=jake+crosby&domains=ageofautism.com&sitesearch=ageofautism.com&btnG=+Google+Search+

Google search: jake crosby site:ageofautism.com

http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/05/a-review-of-compensated-cases-of-vaccine-induced-brain-injury.html

A Review of Compensated Cases of Vaccine-Induced Brain Injury
Pace Environmental Law Review, vol. 28, no. 2, 2011
Mary Holland, Louis Conte, Robert Krakow and Lisa Colin

Available in full * at http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol28/iss2/6

And that's just two of the AoA's many distinguished contributors.

[proverbialwisdom]

110. "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you..." Then?

Last edited Fri May 11, 2012, 07:04 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/05/penn-prof-paul-offit-to-gw-grad-student-get-the-fck-out-of-here-piece-of-sht.html

Posted by Age of Autism at May 05, 2012 at 5:46 AM

Penn Prof. Paul Offit to GW Grad Student: “Get the f*ck out of here! Piece of sh*t!”
By Jake Crosby

That's what millionaire vaccine industrialist Paul Offit said to me following a talk he gave at the University of Pennsylvania, where he is the Maurice R. Hilleman Professor of Vaccinology, endowed by Merck. But that was not the only abusive thing he said to me. He also called me stupid, lied that I don't have Asperger Syndrome and labeled me with a new diagnosis after again calling me a stalker.

Offit's talk was part of Penn's Microbiology Seminar Series sponsored by PENN Infectious Diseases. It was titled “Rotavirus Vaccines: From Bench to Bedside.” Throughout the lecture, he talked about the different rotavirus vaccines: RotaTeq, Rotarix and RotaShield – the vaccine pulled for causing intussusception, which is a potentially fatal condition in which the intestine turns inside-out. He even discussed how he was going to lobby to bring back RotaShield in 2000, but that it was already too late and he blamed the harm to RotaShield's reputation on the ensuing controversy over mercury in vaccines. Offit also admitted that his own vaccine, RotaTeq, can cause intussusception.

I was especially surprised to hear him reveal an insight about pharmaceutical executives putting money before health:

“You never say at a pharmaceutical conference, 'it's the right thing to do.'”

At the conclusion of his talk came the Q/A session.

MORE AT LINK.

Jake Crosby has Asperger Syndrome and is a contributing editor to Age of Autism. Jake is a 2011 graduate of Brandeis University with a BA in both History and Health: Science, Society and Policy. He currently attends The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services where he is studying for an MPH in epidemiology.

Time will tell.

[proverbialwisdom]

122. MUST SEE: Full Wakefield lecture plus Q&A (1:43:10) @ Brandeis University introduced by Jake Crosby.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield's Lecture at Brandeis University (1:43:10)
2011-04-13

[Zalatix]

71. Neutral POV here, why are you just outright dismissing ageofautism?

Is there a proven credibility issue with them that I'm missing here?

[jeff47]

88. They are starting from the POV that autism is caused by vaccines or other 'bad things'

around us, and run all their "science" from there. They haven't proven that first step. In fact, their previous conclusions for what causes autism have been debunked, and they've just moved on to new causes. Or not, some of them still hype mercury in vaccines. They keep failing to prove that first step, and go on to 'study' the effects of their new (or old) cause.

So, what do I think is causing the 'explosion' in autism diagnoses? The massive number of conditions that are now considered autism.

It used to be your child had to be profoundly disabled to be diagnosed as autistic. Now? Being a "geek" is enough. Heck, being shy is enough for some researchers. As a result, the number of cases is indeed exploding. AoA ignores the vast increase in the number of conditions that are considered autism, and acts as if the criteria has been the same for the last 50 years.

[Zalatix]

94. Ah hah, much thanks for the info.

My opinion on the issue is that older, proven vaccines are trustworthy, but new ones I take a wait and see attitude. Really, it's a gamble... if the vaccine causes problems, is it better or worse than the problems it's trying to cure?

[jeff47]

98. The vaccine doesn't get approved if that 'gamble' isn't proven to be a good bet. (nt)

[proverbialwisdom]

96. They, they, they? Actually, it could be any of us. For you, some HEARTBREAKING ESSENTIAL READING.

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2008/03/julie-gerberding-admits-on-cnn-that.html

March 31, 2008
Julie Gerberding Admits on CNN that Vaccines can Trigger Autism (CNN VIDEO)

This weekend Julie Gerberding, the head of the CDC, appeared on Dr. Sanjay Gupta's show, House Call, and explained that vaccines can trigger autism in a vulnerable subset of children. This is the claim that parents like me have been making since at least the 80's, and have been dismissed and even mocked for making it.

But no one in the main stream media seems to have noticed. Not even CNN. Not even Dr. Gupta who was sitting right in front of her.

Video updated 4/2/08

&feature=player_embedded

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2011/04/most-dangerous-question-in-public.html

April 7, 2011
The Most Dangerous Question in Public Health: "What can you tell me about vaccine encephalopathy?"

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2011/04/im-are-from-government-and-i-am-here-to.html

April 6, 2011
"I'm from the government and I'm here to help"

...The state of Maine is considering, get this shocker, passing a law to prevent forced vaccination.

End of the world... I know.

So yesterday I hopped up to the state house when I heard that they were having debate on this bill. Turned out they were also considering a bill to, horror of all horrors... compel doctors to tell patients what is in a vaccine before administering it to them. I can almost hear the bodies dropping dead left and right as the pleague sweeps the nation because people know what is in a vaccine.

<...>

Fortunately I had a chance to testify and crammed as many facts into my three minutes as I could. Telling them, no vaccines are not "safe", they are legally and factually "Unavoidably Unsafe" that they (may) kill and maim some which is why we have a VICP to begin with. Telling them that I would be producing 48 studies showing that vaccines can cause autism. And finally telling them how upsetting it was to hear a medical professional/elected official testify to the fact that MMR contained mercury when in fact the MMR and mercury have nothing to do with each other, and that the woman in question had not even ready the study on which she was testifying.

Following the hearing, I caught the representative in the lobby and asked her a simple question, "What can you tell me about vaccine encephalopathy?" I was trying to figure out if anyone had ever educated her on the fact that HHS has ruled and openly stated that vaccine encephalopathy causes autism. She did not respond well, at one point actually aggressively questioning me, "I have a masters degree from Yale! Where is your degree from?!" She has since apologized. At the end of the exchange she said she would read whatever research I sent to her, but insisted that none of it should be from junk sources. She would only accept university studies, peer-reviewed journal articles, federal public health emanations and the like. Although she was not so friendly about it, I thought "Great! I didn't even ask her if she would read anything and she just volunteered!"

So this morning I sent her a letter with my list of 48 studies. (Research list here: http://adventuresinautism.com/StudiesforGraham.doc )

Representative Graham,

As per our conversation yesterday following your testimony, I am forwarding you a list of the research that supports the supposition that vaccines can cause autism, as well as the federal government's own admission that vaccines can cause autism. The documents I am sending you are a part of the written testimony that I am submitting to the HHS committee.

As you can see, when you have been advising your patients that vaccination could not be responsible for their developmental delays and disabilities or autism, you have been offering them false information. I have been working very hard at the federal level, along with many other vaccine safety advocates, to get public health officials to inform those involved in vaccine administration and the care of children and to put this information in the hands of professionals like yourself so that they can understand the true known risks of vaccination. Unfortunately, as the hearings yesterday have demonstrated, they have failed to do so.

I am hoping that you will review the information I am attaching, and be spurred to investigate them and how they fit into the vaccine injury picture and the current autism epidemic.

I am also hoping you will hold your professional associations and public health authorities accountable for not informing you of this research and allowing you to give false testimony to patients and the State of Maine.

I also wanted to call your attention to the US Department of Health and Human Resources, Health Resources Services Administration, Vaccine Injury Compensation Program's table of compensated vaccine injuries which I will also be including in my written testimony.

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/table.htm

You will note that HRSA recognizes and compensates vaccine deaths as well as an array of neurological and autoimmune conditions known to be caused by vaccines. You will also note that both MMR and DTaP are known to cause vaccine encephalopathy (brain damage). If you check the symptoms of this encephalopathy (scroll down to the middle of the page) in children 18 months and older, you will find that they include:

1. Loss of eye contact
2. Not responsive to normal speech
3. Don't seem to recognize familiar people

This is a description of a child regressing into autism. This is an accurate description of my child following his DTaP vaccine. However for displaying these symptoms following the shot, he was diagnosed with "autism" and never even evaluated for "vaccine encephalopathy," despite my continued insistence to my pediatrician that I believed his vaccines were involved. He insisted that the AAP assured him that vaccines were not involved in autism causation. Later when I learned about the HRSA description of this vaccine injury, I forwarded it to my pediatrician with a letter asking if he knew about this vaccine reaction and if this is what could have happened to my son. He has never responded to my queries. It was past the 3 year statute of limitations placed on vaccine injury, and I can now never file for compensation for my son's likely vaccine induced brain damage that was called "autism" by his doctors.

(You will also note that seizures are often a feature of vaccine encephalopathy, and about a third of those diagnosed with "autism" also have seizures.)

Following the publication of the Hannah Poling case in 2008 in which HRSA compensated a child for her DTaP/MMR induced encephalopathy that caused her autism, and CBS News investigation that showed that VICP has been paying autism cases since at least 1991, HRSA was forced to admit that yes, vaccine encephalopathy causes autism. This was their official statement on the case to a reporter's inquiry. (emphasis added)

From: Bowman, David (HRSA)
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 5:22 PM
To: xxxx
Subject: HRSA Statement

David,

In response to your most recent inquiry, HRSA has the following
statement:

The government has never compensated, nor has it ever been ordered to
compensate, any case based on a determination that autism was actually
caused by vaccines. We have compensated cases in which children
exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease.

Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array
of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures.

Some children who have been compensated for vaccine injuries may have
shown signs of autism before the decision to compensate, or may
ultimately end up with autism or autistic symptoms, but
we do not track
cases on this basis.

Regards,

David Bowman
Office of Communications
Health Resources and Services Administration
301-xxx-xxxx

Note that HRSA freely admits that they don't even track how often vaccines cause autism, after admitting that HRSA knows that they do cause autism. This is dereliction of duty. HHS owes this information to the public.

Further, in correcting you on the fact that mercury has never been included in the MMR, as the MMR vaccine is a live virus vaccine and mercury kills all living things it comes into contact with rendering the vaccine useless, I have had to do what parents who have been studying vaccine injuries have had to do with medical professionals far too often. Explain to those presenting themselves as experts on vaccination, what the basics of vaccine/autism causation theory are. It is heartbreaking to find out how many doctors don't even know what the issues involved are.

This is a colleague of mine, Rebecca Estepp of San Diego, having to explain on Fox News to Dr. Marc Seigel, their medical expert, that the MMR has never contained mercury.

It should not be that parents like Ms. Estepp and myself have to educate medical professionals on their own professed field of expertise.

I understand, as you stated to me, that you do not like "self-proclaimed experts," but I hope you can see why parents have had to become self-informed on vaccine injury. Because the medical profession is ignoring the evidence of widespread vaccine damage that they are causing by closing their eyes and repeating talking points, and because families carry the burden of injury while public health and Pharma remains both untouchable and unaccountable because of the unjust 1986 childhood vaccine injury law.

I hope that you will do as I have done and do your own independent research into vaccine injury for the sake of children in Maine.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the information I have given you, and would be happy to make myself available to you for questions, to point you toward further resources or to sit down with you to discuss the information further.

Sincerely,
Ginger Taylor, M.S.
Maine Coalition for Vaccine Choice
Adventures In Autism

Research list here: http://adventuresinautism.com/StudiesforGraham.doc

.

[jeff47]

99. Volume of material is not the same as 'correct' material.

More to the point, videotape is no substitute for peer-reviewed research.

So are we now at the point where there's a massive conspiracy to stifle research proving your position?

[proverbialwisdom]

101. Explosive CNN interview with former CDC Chief Gerberding, 48 relevant peer-reviewed journal article

links (PDF) available above, courtesy of Ginger Taylor's website, which I read (not write), to address your earlier post (#88). I see her as a massively heroic, tenacious, intelligent person motivated by parental love and deserving of a Pulitzer, not mockery or scorn.

Try reading her work.

In my observation, dialogue does not intimidate her or any of the AoA contributors - THEY WELCOME DIALOGUE. What quickly becomes clear is that challenging her/AoA contributors on the basis of 'the facts' fails, hence all the futile distortion.

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2009/05/sun-rises-first-in-maine-or-maine-way.html

May 14, 2009
The Sun Rises First in Maine Or Maine, The Way Things Ought To Be

On Tuesday, May 12th in Augusta Maine, the Maine Center for Disease Control & Prevention, Department of Health & Human Services, the American Academy of Pediatrics - Maine Chapter, the Maine Medical Association, the Maine Osteopathic Association, the Maine Emergency Medical Services, the Autism Society of Maine, the Downeast Association of Physician Assistants, national figures in autism research, causation and treatment, state developmental pediatricians, state DAN physicians, biomed parents, non biomed parents, and autism treatment and therapy providers of all kinds met to do something that has never been done before in this country.

Listen to one another.

Maine has always been one of the most progressive and no nonsense states in the US, and they proved it again this week by casting aside the fear of what might happen if we talk openly about even the most difficult of all the autism issues to forge new ground and dare to initiate new partnerships in serving people with autism.

THIS is the conference I have been waiting for.

THIS is what should have been happening all along...

I don't have time to find the exact quote, paraphrasing:

"And if everyone smoked, those who developed lung cancer would do so because of genetic susceptibility, too," said Dr. Martha Herbert, (leaving unspoken 'is that really the best approach to either lung cancer or autism'?)

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2009/07/maine-cdc-autism-conference-genes-and.html

VIDEO: Maine CDC Autism Conference: Genes and Environment, Developmental and Chronic: An Inclusive Approach to Autism Science by Martha Herbert, MD, PhD

Maine CDC Autism Conference 2009
Genes and Environment, Developmental and Chronic: An Inclusive Approach to Autism Science, followed by Q&A

Martha Herbert, MD, PhD
Pediatric Neurologist
Massachusetts General Hospital
Harvard Medical School

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/video/18567384/index.html

Martha Herbert MD PhD, "It frustrates me that we are not focusing a massive quantity of energy like a Manhattan Project type of energy on what is going on in an entire generation." Herbert, a child neurologist at Mass General Hospital, says nothing in her training prepared her for the number of kids coming in with autism, ADD, ADHD and other developmental disorders..." (part 1, minute 5:54)

Excerpt from ABC's Chronicle: Toxic Kids (4 parts)
What is making American children sick? Cancer rates are climbing. Cases of autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and asthma are through the roof. Is the answer all around us " in the food our kids eat, the air they breathe, and the clothes they wear?" Tonight, Chronicle investigates a provocative thesis about the American lifestyle and its effects on children's health

[Taverner]

44. Age of Autism = woo woo

Know THAT!

[jeff47]

51. Btw, this post is why we call anti-vax people idiots.

Your entire point is "there are 70 vaccines scheduled!!!!!!1!11eleven!!"

And?

Do you have any idea how many diseases you are exposed to daily? Well, if you're shocked by 70 vaccines, you don't. Touch a doorknob in a public place. Congratulations, over 100 diseases.

Meanwhile, you want to risk my child's life because 70 seems like a big number to you.

[cleanhippie]

37. There is no "anti anti-vaccine movement." There are those that accept real science

and those that don't. Those that do get vaccinated. Those that don't (in context of this conversation) are anti-vaxxers and are in serious denial of reality and put the entire population at risk.


Considering the "sources" to provided to "broaden your reading", you seem to fall into the latter category.

[mzteris]

48. don't know where they got their facts

but yes, there IS a "anti-vax MOVEMENT".

It's big and it's spreading - though not as rapidly as it was- thanks to education. It's very big amongst the fundamentalists - and said to say - the fundamentalist homeschoolers (which is how I know of it). It's also very big amongst a lot of the anti-thesis of the fundamentalists - the granola types - you know the ones who mistakenly believe that Sally Fallon and Mercola walk on water.

[XemaSab]

40. I'm not concerned for myself

I'm concerned for people too young to be vaccinated and people who are too immunocompromised to be vaccinated.

Groups which you seem to have no concern for.

[yup its me]

42. Dude, save it. I am totally 100% anti-vax

Most kids today show signs of autism spectrum. Adults are getting these dis-eases like fibromyalgia that are hard to pinpoint (I do believe it's an auto-immune thing, but possibly also other reasons).

Giving babies all those shots alarms me greatly.

[TheWraith]

43. Clearly you are. You're also totally, completely wrong.

"Most kids today show signs of autism spectrum."

No, they don't. That's sort of like saying that there's no link between human activity and climate change. It's simply, factually, false, but some people are going to believe it no matter how insane it is, because they have no understanding of the science involved.

[Kellerfeller]

58. Technically, the poster is correct

The Spectrum goes from "NONE" to "SEVERE"

And most kids are on the "NONE" end of the spectrum.

Granted, a lot of parents "self-diagnose" their kid because he is shy, doesn't listen, etc.

[jeff47]

59. Doesn't help when the 'pros' keep adding more and more things to "Autism"

And then act shocked when there's more diagnoses of "Autism".

[Taverner]

45. Huh??!?!?!?!?!?! "Most kids today show signs of autism spectrum"

No. They. Don't.

Now a case can be made for high levels of mercury in the public water supply (well documented)

But vaccines have so little mercury in them, you're at greater risk breathing than you are with a vaccine

[jeff47]

53. Actually, vaccines for children in the US have 0 mercury in them, since 2000.

They switched preservatives for vaccines delivered in the US to children because anti-vaxxers were making such noise. Vaccines sent to third-world environments still use mercury-based preservative, because that keeps the vaccine from going bad without refrigeration.

You'll note the kids vaccinated in the 3rd world with those evil mercury-laden vaccines aren't showing increased rates of autism. Nor has the autism diagnosis rate gone down in the US despite removing mercury from childhood vaccines.

Now, if someone had the slightest inclination towards science, they might realize this proves anti-vaxxers were wrong about mercury in vaccines. But anti-vaxxers don't have any inclination towards science.

[proverbialwisdom]

63. FYI, I recently read differently.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/01/president-obama-i-will-not-back-down-from-protecting-our-kids-from-mercury-poisoning.html

On President Obama's State of the Union: We applaud EPA efforts to protect kids from mercury poisoning in the air, the water and food sources , but please don't neglect pharmaceutical applications like the flu vaccine. Mandated mercury doesn't seem to fit the "protection" theme, Mr. President.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM123694.pdf

From FDA.gov: Fluvirin: For active immunization of persons 4 years of age and older against influenza disease caused by influenza virus subtypes A and type B contained in the vaccine. The 0.5-mL prefilled syringe presentation is formulated without preservative. However, thimerosal, a mercury derivative used during manufacturing, is removed by subsequent purification steps to a trace amount (≤ 1 mcg mercury per 0.5-mL dose). The 5-mL multidose vial formulation contains thimerosal, a mercury derivative, added as a preservative. Each 0.5-mL dose from the multidose vial contains 25 mcg mercury.

Posted by Age of Autism at January 28, 2012 at 5:45 AM

http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/08/marie-mccormicks-iom-remarks-leave-a-bitter-taste.html

Marie McCormick’s IOM Remarks Leave A Bitter Taste

By Jake Crosby

Why does Marie McCormick – former chair of the panel that produced the botched IOM report claiming vaccines do not cause autism – currently serve as co-chair of the “Vaccine Safety Working Group” of the National Vaccine Advisory Council? Her past remarks should disqualify her from serving on any committees concerned with vaccine regulation as illustrated by the following examples retrieved from the leaked transcripts ( http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/media/6.4.pdf ) of the January 12, 2001 closed session of the Immunization Safety Review Committee of the National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine at the National Academies Building in Washington DC.

<...>

Those are unedited quotes of Dr. Marie McCormick from meetings of the Immunization Safety Review Committee on vaccines and autism - the committee that would eventually come to a formal “rejection of causation” in 2004, which effectively quashed federal funding of vaccine-related autism research. McCormick chaired that committee.

<...>

I inquired how Marie McCormick could possibly be expected to serve on the committee in good faith given her past statements. As it turned out, members of the public cannot even ask questions – only make comments.

Immediately after I finished what I was saying, a committee member tersely stated “No questions!”

The phone operator reiterated the rule, “Sir, no questions!” (I suppose because questions would require answers.)

(more at link)

Posted by Age of Autism at August 04, 2011 at 5:46 AM in Jake Crosby

Seen this peer reviewed journal article?

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/01/aofa-science-summary-mechanisms-of-aluminum-adjuvant-toxicity-and-autoimmunity-in-pediatric-populati.html

AofA Science Summary: Mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity and autoimmunity in pediatric populations

http://lup.sagepub.com/content/21/2/223

BTW, I'm certain each of your narrow points could be corroborated or refuted by journal citations provided by AoA contributors, if you were so inclined to participate there.

[TheWraith]

67. Yes, well, you read a website that is totally full of shit.

Seriously, "Age of Autism" is a crank site, no better than climate change denial.

[jeff47]

80. You should probably go back and re-read my post for the key word you missed.

Vaccines for children haven't had mercury since 2000. Your first link agrees with this statement. They desperately try not to, but the facts sprinkled into the post do agree.

Your second article is utterly irrelevant. And demonstrates just how fringe the web site is. Dr. McCormick doesn't agree with the web site's authors, so she's immediately wrong and untrustworthy. There's no science involved. Because science backs Dr. McCormick.

Your third link is about aluminum. This demonstrates why it is pointless for anyone with the slightest education in science to participate in the AoA web site. You guys can't even keep your metals straight.

You and AoA insist childhood vaccines with mercury cause autism. How come the very same vaccine doesn't cause autism when it's transported to Africa? And just to give you a head start, Africa has more heavy metal pollution than the US or Europe, so you don't need to claim it's caused by pollution in the US and Europe.

[proverbialwisdom]

107. From comments to: http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/05/autism-community-congress-is-listening.html#

1) Rep. Dan Burton, Chair of Gov Reform Committee comments... and video of an child with autism in full meltdown.
2) MUST SEE: Comments by Dr. Andrew Wakefield on IOM actions (starts ~3:00).

Feb 9, 2004 IOM Hearing excerpts, including Dr. Marie McCormick.

http://www.uninformedconsent.org/press_releases_2004.html

Mike Murphy KCMO 710 Talk Radio - WHY DID THE IOM REPORT STUN SCIENTISTS AND PARENTS?
June 16, 2004 - 9AM CST - 11AM CST
UNINFORMED CONSENT, Kansas City - Mike will be talking with UnInformed Consent’s executive producer and investigative journalist, Christy Diemond who was in attendance at the infamous IOM review meeting. The talk line is: [phone].
Full Release: http://www.uninformedconsent.org/Press_release_2005_06.html
View IOM Video

MEMBERS OF CONGRESS/ SCIENTISTS CONDEMN IOM MERCURY VS AUTISM REPORT
Thursday, June 3, 2004 12:00AM
In a heated and continuing controversy, united members of Congress flanked by scientists who presented evidence to the National Institute of Medicine denounced the IOM’s recent report as heavily biased and based on flawed research.
Full Release: http://www.uninformedconsent.org/Press_release_2004_11.html

NAVAL INSTITUTE FOR DENTAL AND BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH RECEIVES EPA AWARD FOR REMOVING DENTAL MERCURY FROM WASTEWATER
Thursday, June 3, 2004 12:00AM UNINFORMED CONSENT, WASHINGTON, DC
The Naval Institute for Dental and Wastewater Research was recognized this month by the US Environmental Protection Agency for its efforts to remove mercury from dental wastewater. According to Waste News, the Institute holds two US patents for dental wastewater treatment and is working on an application for a third invention to separate amalgam from dental wastewater says Capt. James C. Ragain Jr., the institute’s commanding officer.”
Full Release

INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE REPORT STUNS SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY AND PARENTS
Thursday, May 20, 2004 6:00PM
UNINFORMED CONSENT, WASHINGTON, DC
In the face of angry parents, shocked scientists and a scathing congressional report from a 3-year investigation stating otherwise, Chairperson Dr. Marie McCormick issued the latest report from the Institute of Medicine’s Immunization Safety Review Committee (ISRC) from a daylong hearing held February 9, 2004. The report as stated by IOM Committee Chair, Marie McCormick, “The overwhelming evidence from several well-designed studies indicates that childhood vaccines are not associated with autism.”
Full Release: http://www.uninformedconsent.org/Press_release_2005_03.html
Click here to go direct to complete US National Academy of Sciences IOM Committee hearing coverage, video, abstracts and stats/polls of each expert: (Complete coverage On US National Academy of Sciences IOM Committee Hearing)

IOWA FIRST TO BAN MERCURY FROM CHILDHOOD VACCINES
May 17, 2004
UNINFORMED CONSENT, WASHINGTON, DC
In the first of what promises to be a domino effect of like bans, Governor Thomas J. Vilsack of Iowa set national precedence Friday by signing into law a bill to ban the use of the notorious neurotoxin, Thimerosal (ethyl mercury) still used in childhood vaccines.
Full Release

CDC Coauthors Defend Peer Reviewed Autism Study Amid Allegations of Misleading Public
April 7, 2004
UNINFORMED CONSENT, WASHINGTON, DC
The current version of the “Verstraeten Study”, a study that the CDC claims says has no link between autism and mercury in vaccines, has been embroiled in a continual flow of criticism since its publication in November 2003 issue of peer reviewed Pediatrics.
Full Release: http://www.uninformedconsent.org/Press_release_2004_07.html

Lead Author of CDC Autism Study Denies Claims Mercury Containing Vaccines Are Safe
April 6, 2004
UNINFORMED CONSENT, WASHINGTON, DC
The lead author, Thomas Verstraeten, MD, of the hotly debated CDC study known as the Verstraeten Study published in the November issue of Pediatrics, adamantly defends himself saying, “the article does not state that we found evidence against an association.” (Between mercury in vaccines and autism).
Full Release: http://www.uninformedconsent.org/Press_release_2004_06.html

More.

[jeff47]

108. If you're going to resurrect a thread from February, you should respond to the post. (nt)

[proverbialwisdom]

109. I'm not qualified, however, watch the IOM video to WITNESS the physicians/scientists who are.

Dr. McCormick doesn't agree with the web site's authors, so she's immediately wrong and untrustworthy. There's no science involved. Because science backs Dr. McCormick.

Time will tell. The 2004 IOM review meeting video and related press releases are from a link I found yesterday in the comments to an article I read yesterday: http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/05/autism-community-congress-is-listening.html#
I regard the material as worthwhile; it's ok if you don't.

[jeff47]

111. No, they're not qualified.

Because they are either lying, or so uninformed that they don't know Africa's autism rate has not jumped with wide available of the same vaccines they claim causes autism in the US....which are no longer available in the US yet the autism rate continues to "rise".

[proverbialwisdom]

112. "Fifteen well-respected and tenured researchers & scientists testified at the invitation of the IOM.

The IOM vetted these individuals since their expert testimony was provided at the invitation of the IOM. Uwarranted attacks tend to backfire over time, eg. http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/03/read-the-full-uk-court-decision-in-john-walker-smith-mmr-autism-appeal.html .


Skip the video's amalgam intro. It should have been edited out, IMO.

URL:

Fifteen well-respected and tenured researchers and scientists testified at the invitation of the IOM.

Nine were adamant there has been a major and disastrous event with thimerisal and other contaminants in vaccines and is associated with many diseases and the autism epidemic.

Four were non committal while the remaining two stated they couldn't find any connection though it was quite apparent, even to the inexperienced observer, that the original numbers in the studies of the latter 2 had been manipulated to show no connection.

In addition, those latter six all had spectacular conflicts of interests, some disclosed - some hidden by the presenter and discovered later.

[jeff47]

113. Having credentials does not mean you are correct, or qualified

See: Dr. Wakefield.

[proverbialwisdom]

116. Please DO SEE Wakefield's presentation (38:44 min): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ei0QSvKdgw

You are likely to reverse your judgement if you do.

Uploaded by VaccineSafetyConf on Jan 9, 2012

Andrew Wakefield, MB, BS, FRCS, FRCPath

[jeff47]

118. So I should change my view based on a documented liar?

I'd sooner believe there were WMDs in Iraq by watching W's speeches.

[proverbialwisdom]

119. Nonsense, as you'd find if you watched THE ENTIRE ASTONISHING VIDEO in post #117.

I did today, actually, and I'm completely comfortable with the clear explanations provided. In particular, during the Q&A pounding, the demonstrated patience, demeanor and lack of defensiveness is mighty powerful to witness. STRONGLY RECOMMENDED.

[jeff47]

120. Yes, to survive as a liar, you have to have an excellent demeanor

Which makes for great videos.

Unfortunately, he's spent the last two decades lying about vaccines so as to create a market for his vaccine. Which has now been well documented.

[proverbialwisdom]

121. You are misinformed, as time will tell; he's been vetted by the highest stakeholders, autismparents.

Last edited Tue May 29, 2012, 10:11 AM - Edit history (1)

The original publication date of this essay was my first introduction to Dr. Wakefield and Age of Autism, by the slip of a mouse on a link from a page on GMOs.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/01/from-the-roman-to-the-wakefield-inquisition.html

From the Roman to the Wakefield Inquisition

By Mark Blaxill
Reposted January 27, 2010
First ran on 12/31/08.

As the year draws to a close, all of us at the Age of Autism are very pleased to honor Dr. Andrew Wakefield. As we’ve reported here many times during the past year, Dr. Wakefield has been the subject of a remarkable and unprecedented campaign to discredit his work and character, most notably in a show trial that is still underway in London, in hearings of the General Medical Council. In the face of extraordinary attempts to silence him, Wakefield has stood up to these attacks with grace and determination and has continued his research and clinical work on behalf of children and families suffering from autism. That makes him our first Age of Autism Galileo Award recipient.

Like many of our awards this year, this wasn’t a difficult decision. In fact, this may be one of those unusual cases where the recipient of an award in some ways outshines its namesake. To understand why that might be so, you need to understand a bit more about why we chose to name the award after the Italian scientist Galileo, what he represents to the history of science and how his experience compares with Wakefield’s.

Galileo Galilei was born in Pisa, Italy in 1564. And while he was a physicist and mathematician of some note, Galileo was as much a practical mechanic as he was a grand theorist; indeed it was his tinkering with convex and concave lenses that gave him the tools to leave his lasting mark on the world. As a skilled inventor of early working telescopes, he did not design the world’s first telescope, but he was the first to make them powerful enough for scientific use. In fact, the word telescope (derived from the Greek roots skopein, “to see”, and tele for “far”) was coined in 1611 to describe one of Galileo’s first instruments. For the accomplishments that flowed from his pioneering work, he has been described by many as The Father of Modern Physics; Albert Einstein even went so far as to name him The Father of Modern Science.

But Galileo is celebrated today not as much for his engineering talent as for the suffering he endured in support of an unpopular scientific theory. Because it was Galileo’s work with telescopes in the early 17th century that lent critical support to the theory of heliocentrism, the idea that the earth revolved around the sun and not the other way around. As with his telescope technology, Galileo was not the first to propose the heliocentric theory: that distinction belongs to Nicolai Copernicus. Yet Copernicus, a Polish mathematician, was well aware of the personal risk of disseminating his ideas and delayed their publication for many years. Copernicus’ major work, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, was published only shortly before his death at age 70 in 1543.

Galileo, by contrast, was an aggressive advocate for the truth as he saw it. He used his telescope to provide clear visual evidence that the sun occupied the center of the solar system. He then published his evidence fearlessly in the prime of his life, starting while in his 40s. And although for a while he obtained the approval of the Vatican to publish some of his work, he was eventually forced to spend most his later life defending himself and his findings. For as the significance of his observations for the prevailing Catholic orthodoxy became increasingly clear, Galileo was derided as a heretic, denounced publicly and finally given an ultimatum: renounce your theory or else. In 1633, he was put on trial by the "Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Universal Inquisition", known today as the Roman Inquisition, and convicted of heresy. Barely escaping prison, Galileo spent the rest of his life under house arrest, where he died nearly ten years later.

The many parallels between the Roman Inquisition and the Wakefield Inquisition are uncanny. Like Galileo, Wakefield came to autism both as a practical man and a scientist; his initial involvement in autism was simply in response to a group of parents who approached him as a specialist in pediatric gastroenterology. They told him, “Our children are not defective, they are sick” and Wakefield listened. Also like Galileo, Wakefield didn’t originate the idea that vaccines might play a role in autism, but has become the most prominent developer of the idea. As Galileo’s telescopes allowed him to discover the moons of Jupiter, so did Wakefield’s use of new ways of seeing, in this case an endoscope to see into a child’s intestines, allow him to discover a distinctive gut pathology in autism. He named what he saw autistic enterocolitis, and it was a finding that quite literally turned the brain-centric view of autism upside down. But this was no ordinary finding, for Wakefield’s specific challenge to the orthodox view of autism science made him a target for the medical establishment. He published his first major work in the prestigious journal The Lancet, where the editor Richard Horton had full awareness of its controversial potential. But when the controversy turned too hot to handle, Horton lost his nerve and in a perfidious betrayal that history should remember (see John Stone’s wonderful essay on Horton (HERE http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/12/smoke-and-mirrors-dr-richard-horton-and-the-wakefield-affair.html ), Horton turned on Wakefield.

Thanks to Horton’s perfidy, and again like Galileo, Wakefield now finds himself on trial for his license to practice medicine in front of the General Medical Council (GMC). And although the GMC might defend the validity of its allegations, it is plain to all who have followed the case closely that the trumped up charges hold little merit. Still, the outcome of the proceedings lies in considerable doubt, for Wakefield has not been subjected to these months of review on the basis of any actual medical misconduct (not surprisingly, no parent with whom he worked supports the GMC’s case). Quite clearly, and again like Galileo in the face of the Roman Inquisition, the offense for which Wakefield is really on trial is heresy. And whenever an Inquisition has begun to confront the conflicts between religious orthodoxy and inconvenient evidence, one can never predict how the High Inquisitors will render their judgment. The only thing we can predict is that a process like the Wakefield Inquisition is always more concerned with appearances than justice.

Wakefield’s heresy comes at a particularly difficult time for the medical profession that has placed him on trial. The twin pillars of its quest for the causes of human disease, germs and genes, have failed for years to explain the scourge of chronic disease: a scourge that has replaced infectious disease as the main public health problem of the developed world. In the face of a simmering disquiet over what has become an increasingly embarrassing scientific failure, it has become ever more important to the profession’s high priests to distract attention from the crumbling bulwarks of their belief system and take action to defend the tools and targets of those pillars: the germ theory of disease that was medicine’s greatest contribution to human civilization and provided its two principle tools, vaccines and antibiotics; and the genetic model of human disease that has been medicine’s great hope to succeed germ theory and the precious disease targets such as autism that it hopes to explain. Seen in this context, Wakefield’s heresies have been unusually threatening because they operate on both fronts: they compete with the genetic explanations of autism with a causal model that threatens to tarnish the heroic triumphs of germ theory.

So like Galileo’s compelling work in support of heliocentrism, Wakefield’s dual challenge to vaccine development and autism science has evoked a strong response from the highest levels of authority. In Wakefield’s case, his prosecutors have determined not only that he must be shown to be wrong, he must also be punished. That means his work on autism (as well as others doing supportive work) must be stopped while he must also be stripped of his credentials as a member of the medical profession. The modern punishment for heresy may not include death, but it can be exile and excommunication.

Casting the treatment of Wakefield as a religious response is the only way to make sense of the behavior of the medical establishment over the last several years. If it were not so serious, its escalating absurdity would begin to resemble farce. One example is the latest defense of the ever-expanding childhood immunization program. Instead of embracing the importance of improving vaccine safety, the program’s defenders have now declared that the temple of the sacred program must never be defiled, and certainly must not be subjected to conventional safety research. So the obvious research project of comparing the total health outcomes in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals has been rejected not merely as too expensive, now it simply must not be done. In the Orwellian logic of the CDC, such studies in humans would be “prospectively unethical” and “retrospectively impossible.”

Let’s be frank here. This is an epistemological obscenity: It’s not just that we don’t know some very basic things about the safety of the sacred program, we also cannot know and should not seek to know. This stance should offend even the most skeptical scientists. Still, the farce continues.

In the meantime, there remains a body of published evidence that must be dealt with. And for this, since the retraction of every published study is well-nigh impossible (some of Wakefield’s less courageous co-authors famously “retracted the interpretation” of the Lancet paper, but they couldn’t retract the evidence) there is only one answer left. Nullify the source of the heresy itself. Practically speaking, when establishment voices can no longer claim the absence of causal evidence, the fallback position must be that there is “no credible evidence” linking vaccines and autism. Removing credibility from the evidence requires that the high priests get personal: they must mount a systematic attack on the personal reputations and integrity of scientists who pursue and publish heretical lines of investigation.

And this is why, decades after Stalin and Mao, we now have the travesty of a 21st century show trial in London, the Wakefield Inquisition. It’s also why the passionate call on a U.K. parents' web-site, Cry Shame, is so deeply correct.

I wouldn’t in any way diminish the importance of Galileo, but in an interesting way, Wakefield’s steadfastness in the face of adversity outshines the man in whose name we honor him. For, although Galileo finally agreed to recant his support for heliocentrism, Wakefield has never buckled under the pressure. Instead he has stuck to his guns and continued to fight for families with autism. Supported by private funding, his research work has continued (stay tuned for some more blockbuster results next year). And along with the terrific medical team at Thoughtful House, courageous doctors like Arthur Krigsman, Bryan Jepson and Doreen Granpeesheh, he also continues his clinical practice.

In the meantime, the heresy trial staggers onward towards its uncertain conclusion; the GMC’s verdict may well come shortly in the New Year. But our judgment at the Age of Autism is clear. Andy Wakefield represents the very best of the scientific tradition. He has persevered in the face of obstacles that would have stopped lesser men in their tracks. He has published continuously and fearlessly. He has pushed important research projects forward despite countless attempts to declare the work irrelevant, the issues “settled.” He has dealt with opposing evidence with the professional spirit of a scientist while also following the advice of Karl Popper that “he who gives up his theory too easily in the face of apparent refutations will never discover the possibilities inherent in his theory.” Along the way, he has unfailingly represented the issues in autism and the best principles of the scientific method with dignity and restraint. Most important of all, he has refused to be intimidated.

For all this and more, we would like to honor Dr. Andrew Wakefield with our first Galileo Award. And like so many others in our community, I feel proud to call him my friend. Let’s be sure to stand behind him in the uncertain times ahead.

Mark Blaxill is Editor at Large for Age of Autism.

[jeff47]

123. Nope.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield#MMR_controversy

[proverbialwisdom]

124. We do agree with Michelangelo's quote, "Trifles make perfection, and perfection is no trifle."

If you care to hear each of the charges in your link answered with clarity, simply watch the Brandeis lecture video (or, more time consuming, read CALLOUS DISREGARD).

I do know how I've learned, that is, acquired massive specialized expertise mastering subjects affecting me personally as a consequence of negative life experiences, so I appreciate, respect and defer to the collective judgement of the AoA parents and others who continue to trust and support Wakefield. Their vetting is competent and matters.

As he impressively states in his careful and precise presentation, the research is ongoing, results are forthcoming, and his personal saga is not the issue.

[jeff47]

125. So...you believe him because he lies effectively.

Good to know.

Now, there's this bridge over here. I'm willing to sell it to you. And there's all these other people who claim I'm on the up-and-up. They all vouch for me, so you clearly should buy it.

Wakefield faked his results. Massively. Irrefutably. He made shit up so that people would pay him money for his vaccine.

[proverbialwisdom]

117. Also recommended: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67U0_SUt5NM

Dr. Andrew Wakefield's Lecture at Brandeis University (1:43:10)
2011-04-13

[quakerboy]

73. I think you'd be hard pressed to prove even that

My father tells me stories of how, as kids, they used to get liquid mercury and rub it over pennies to make them shiny like dimes.

With that in mind, I find it hard to believe that PPM in water, much less the mercury that isn't even in vaccines anymore is causing a new autism epidemic. If it were mercury, I would expect the rates to have gone down.

Of course, I may be prejudiced because every person I have known in real life who worried about mercury was decidedly anti-scientific and self pitying, determined to blame every one of life's woes no matter how large or small, on someone else.

[Taverner]

84. Oh I am not sure there is a link, but still it is not good to have mercury in your water

And that's been established - we have a ton of superfund sites around here due to all the chemical companies that were here in the 60s

[reACTIONary]

102. I am definitly on your side in this discussion, but, just to keep to the facts...

... elemental, liquid Hg, which is what makes pennies shinny, is not really very toxic. It is compounds of Hg that are poisonous and poise an environmental hazard. And Hg vapor which can arise in industrial or scientific uses.

I used to play with Hg from broken thermometers. Its a fun, weird substance. I wonder if you can still buy a Hg thermometer.

[quakerboy]

103. I wasnt aware of that

A quick google search says that the vapor is dangerous, and it happens to emit from the liquid with great frequency unless something is done to prevent it.

But I take your point. It is certain compounds that are far and away more dangerous.


Seeing as you can apparently buy the following:
http://www.amazon.com/Liquid-Mercury/dp/B0050RB0NE/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1329618822&sr=8-3
It seems almost certain that you can still buy a mercury thermometer.

[jmowreader]

72. You might want to look at the autism spectrum a little closer...

Because of the way it's written, all one needs to be to fall into the "autism spectrum" is introverted.

[pnwmom]

115. Do you include people with concerns about individual vaccines

or individual vaccine-related health issues as "anti-vaxxers"?

[limpyhobbler]

2. My Dad's doctor told him to get a colonoscopy (screening) or find another doctor.

I think that's out of line.

[provis99]

4. so if your dad doesn't get the screening, then gets sick,

will he then sue the doctor for dereliction of practise? I bet he will. No wonder the doctor canned him.

[limpyhobbler]

5. Do you think doctors should kick out people who decline a colonoscopy?

[provis99]

6. it's a private business. they can refuse any customer they want.

as long as it's not on the basis of discrimination.

[limpyhobbler]

11. But you think people should be kicked out if they don't have a colonscopy. That's different.

I understand they have the right to do it. Do you understand the difference between what people have a right to do, and what they should do?

[quakerboy]

74. Do you think that a DR should have to waste time

on someone who refuses treatment?

Its hard. I understand what you are saying. I have declined to use some things proscribed. When I had a tooth pulled and they provided a painkiller, I didnt use it as I didnt have pain. Right now, I dont have medical. But even if I did visit a DR, I would skip several tests that they would want to do, as there is no point. I can't afford to do anything about them other than what I already am, so there's no point in officially having a pre-existing condition that I cannot afford to treat. I would hate to be dropped from service on some other, easily treated issue because of that declining

But I can also empathize with a DR. I imagine they want to make a difference, keep people healthy, etc. But if they have a patient who is declining to do the necessary things for their health, I can see where they might want to clear that slot for a patient who would let them do their job.

[limpyhobbler]

79. This is off topic. The thread is supposed to be about vaccinations.

I wish me and this thread had never met.

I did not know there was some political issue surrounding vaccinations.

I posted early in the life of this thread, without understanding what it was about, and accidentally interjected a personal story into the middle of a political debate.

[quakerboy]

95. I thought you raised a good point

I am sorry that you are sorry, if that makes sense. I know the vaccination issue raises passions on both sides, and I know how alarming it can be to jump into the middle of a hot discussion you didn't know was hot.

Still, I thought you raised a good point. As I said, I can see both sides of it. And I don't think you need to feel bad about your participation in the thread.

I lean toward letting the Dr's do what they feel is right on this one. However, I do personally have some reservations, a bit of dissonance.

On the reasoning I presented for Dr's, it would be seem equally valid for an insurance company to refuse to further work with someone who was denying treatment. Almost more so, because someone refusing a colonoscopy, a vaccine, whatever, has the potential to cost them big money down the line. Money/resources which could not then be used for other patients who had done everything they could to maintain health. But I guarantee I would be pissed if an insurance company canceled policies based on not taking a medical procedure or if they demanded the right to kick people off. In part because they are not medical professionals, and yet they restrict and recommend what services we do get.

[Zoeisright]

7. According to medical ethics, patients can legally and ethically refuse any treatment or

procedure doctors recommend. Of course, doctors can also terminate relationships with patients who won't work with them, as long as they give them notice and help them find another physician.

I know - I wrote a book about it.

[tavalon]

16. Zoe is, in fact, quite right

[limpyhobbler]

9. Do you think my dad is the suing type?

[jeff47]

50. Your dad not getting a colonoscopy won't kill me or my family.

Your kid not getting a vaccine can kill me or my family.

[LibertyLover]

82. I am not an 'anti-vaxer' by any means and in fact have had

a number of the odder vaccinations over the years because of traveling - things like plague and yellow fever (and if you have the typhoid and the para-typhoid vaccinations together you are probably going to be sick either with the first or the third shot - for some reason the 2nd one doesn't make you ill). I have had my 9 year old daughter vaccinated more or less on schedule. Some things were a bit delayed because her first 16 months were spent in a Chinese orphanage. And I keep my dogs' vaccination schedules up to date. But I have a question which relates to your comment that 'your kid not getting a vaccine can kill me or my family'. That's the one thing I honestly don't understand - if you and your family have had their vaccinations aren't you, and they, protected? How does an unvaccinated person pose a threat? I personally am going to vaccinate myself and my family so that an unvaccinated individual does not cause us problems, which I thought was the purpose of vaccinations.

[jeff47]

87. I'm not saying you are

I'm saying the colonoscopy is a different issue, because it's not a public health issue.

if you and your family have had their vaccinations aren't you, and they, protected?

My kid's too young for the majority of her vaccinations. Thus, she could catch a disease that would be fatal to her.

Whooping cough is a good example. The vaccine can't be given before the child is 2 years old. It is frequently fatal or permanently debilitating in children as young as my daughter is and it's "going around" where I live due to anti-vaxxers.

Herd immunity would have given her excellent protection until she was old enough for the vaccine herself. However, that was broken by the anti-vaxxers. To protect her, my wife and I have been vaccinated (we were as children, but it requires booster shots). While we can't directly give her whooping cough, we could be exposed to it and carry it home. Or she could be exposed when we go out of the house.

[KitSileya]

93. The point is with those who, for different reasons, cannot get vaccinated.

For example, my brother had such a violent allergic reaction to his first vaccine, they didn't dare give him any others. Hence why it was so important that I get my shots. His immune system doesn't work right, so while I might not get sick enough to die should I get many of the diseases we now have vaccines for, he might.

The more people are vaccinated, the fewer will be infected, and the fewer 'patient zeros' we will have. Thus, the chance for unvaccinated people are better the more people are vaccinated. When you get a movement like the anti-vaxers, you get many kids in the same place without vaccines. These places are like ticking timebombs - we've gotten rid of very, very few diseases, so there's always a chance you might be exposed to one or more of them.

[1620rock]

3. I don't.

[saras]

8. Doctors should no more "dismiss" patients for declining a recommendation than shoe salespeople...

If what is wrong with you isn't on the top ten list of common ailments, and you don't live in a city with a good university hospital, you will HAVE to shop among multiple doctors, building a sensible program for yourself out of incomplete, contradictory, biased advice. As long as we have a system that focuses on 'efficiency' rather than understanding each individual patient, this will be true. If a doctor can't handle that, they aren't really emotionally equipped to be a doctor. If they want to be an authority figure, they need to join a religion and become a minister.

[mzteris]

49. problem is - those unvaccinated kids

will come into the office more because they're sick more. And may infect the child who is not ABLE to be vaccinated for medical reasons.

They will spread more disease due to their unvaccinated state. The doctor has every right to protect his OTHER patients from the wilful spreading of disease.

[LeftishBrit]

55. The problem is, though, once again, where does it end?

Patients who live in dirty houses, or in overcrowded conditions, or who spend a lot of time in crowded places are more likely to catch diseases which could spread. This could be used as an excuse to prefer rich patients (who on the whole live in cleaner and less crowded environments) to poor people, or to 'fire' people for their chosen lifestyles.

If a particular vaccination is legally compulsory, then a doctor should have a right to refuse patients who don't comply with the law; but I don't think doctors should be making the law unilaterally.

100% pro-vaccination here by the way- I suspect my disagreement results from living in a country with a fundamentally different view of healthcare: that everyone is entitled to healthcare.

[Sgent]

10. Vaccine's are somewhat of a special case

Since even the best vaccines only work 90-95% of the time, heard immunity is still a big deal.

If I were physician, I wouldn't want a child with measles exposed to all of my patients -- which could include those with weakened immune systems, higher susptibility, etc.

If I can't safely have you in my waiting room, I can't safely have you as a patient.

[bhikkhu]

12. That's what I would think too

...its easy to overstate the case, but the average human lifespan was about the same 40 years or so for all of recorded history, and was about the same in prehistory, largely due to endemic infectious diseases. Childhood mortality was similarly bad, for the same reasons. The primary factor that has turned that around, the main benefactor we can thank for our health and long lives, is vaccination (and antibiotics, of course).

If I were a doctor, I'd give patients a hard time who smoked and drank and ate too much, but if someone refused to vaccinate their kids, I'd probably draw the line there. "Stupid is as stupid does", and that's a rotten thing for a parent to do to a kid.

[Sgent]

13. Just wanted to point out

that the biggest gains in life expectancy are considered to be vaccination and public sewage / water systems. Antibiotics are much lower than those two.

[Missy Vixen]

36. Oh, really?

>If I were a doctor, I'd give patients a hard time who smoked and drank and ate too much<

My doctor admits to struggling with his weight as well. It's one of the reasons I stay in his practice. He's more interested in finding answers than lecturing and browbeating.

Regarding the topic at hand, I can't have another diptheria/tetanus shot due to a significant reaction to the last one. We get all other recommended vaccinations.

[XemaSab]

41. Word

Furthermore, I wouldn't want to go to a doctor who had (for example) a measles patient sitting in his waiting room.

Thanks, but I'd like to avoid getting that action.

[cleanhippie]

14. No worries, there are plenty of Homeopathic doctors for these families.

They can take homeopathic vaccines. They work just as well.

[Confusious]

15. I hope that's sarcasm. nt

[boppers]

75. Do those doctors accept homepathic paper money as payment?

Rub a dollar bill against a piece of generic printer paper, viola, twice the money, because the paper "remembers"!

[mainer]

17. That's punishing the child for the parents' idiocy

the kid is the innocent victim. I understand why the docs would do it, but it might leave some poor kids without any healthcare.

[jeff47]

18. Well, those parents are trying to kill my kid.

She's too young for a whooping cough vaccine. Whopping cough can easily kill her.

Back when I was a child, this wasn't an issue because herd immunity protected those too young for the vaccine. That isn't the case anymore, thanks to anti-vax nutjobs.

They shouldn't get to murder other people's kids because a former playmate is wrong about biology without any repercussions. Having difficulty finding a doctor is a much, much smaller price than I think should be charged.

[cleanhippie]

19. The parents are already punishing their child for their own idiocy.

[alcibiades_mystery]

31. The kid is a fucking biological weapon due to the parent's idiocy

I don't want them in the waiting room with my children, period. These nutsos can go home school and beat sand for all I care. They're a fucking menace.

[MissB]

61. Best reply in the whole thread

with a nod to zoeisright, of course.

[Codeine]

64. Holy shit that's a spot-on post.

[Posteritatis]

78. Then maybe the parents should stop being idiots. Problem solved. (nt)

[hifiguy]

20. Attorneys can "fire" clients

for failure to cooperate, being abusive and other, similar, reasons.

I can't imagine why doctors should have to put up with patients who consistently refuse their professional advice.

I am dx'd on the spectrum (Asperger's) and IMO the anti-vaxers are as crazy as a shithouse mouse.

[AngryAmish]

21. My baby docs did this - and I approve

[Aerows]

22. It makes sense

If you have a bunch of children in the waiting room that haven't been vaccinated, and they are in there sick, they could infect other kids with weakened immune systems or other non-vaccinated children with a deadly, but preventable disease.

This anti-vaccine position is ridiculous. Do we really want to go back to the days when children die or are permanently disabled from childhood diseases that could have been prevented?

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. Good

I wouldn't want my children sharing a waiting room with an unvaccinated child.

[stevenleser]

33. Exactly. I dont want my kid getting one of the serious diseases because of someone else's paranoia.

No thanks.

[mainer]

24. I know some pediatricians have special days for non-vax kids

so the two populations don't mix.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. Freedom of conscience is a two-way street

And that's a good thing.

This will be good for delivering a powerful message to the Michelle Bachmann wannabe minions.

[MNBrewer]

28. Should provide a market for non-vac doctors, then.

If you're unwilling to follow the expert advice from the professional that you've hired, then maybe you need a new professional. If I were a doctor, I would ask that those parents find a pediatrician who is more in line with their preferences for their child's health care.

[Taverner]

47. My worry is that this will push the anti-vaxers further into woo-woo crap

Soon, they won't see doctors at all, unless they're certified in homeopathy and chakra readings...

[jeff47]

54. Then Darwin will take care of the problem. (nt)

[Odin2005]

29. I agree with the docs, no use trying to reason with woo-woos.

[stevenleser]

32. There are a lot of dermatologists that will refuse to see people with obvious suntans

the point being if you are going to intentionally destroy your skin that way, anything they could try to do for you is pointless.

[Denver Donkeys]

35. My pediatrician was actually among the first to do this.

I think it is the right move.

Although I do have a cousin that was affected very badly on one of the vaccinations. She is disabled as a result, unable to take care of herself (she is about 8), but she is one of the very few that have had bad reactions to vaccinations, but truth is, it works.

My son is currently up to date on his vaccinations and is due for a booster in two weeks.

[Taverner]

46. On one hand this is good - anti-vax nuts would be hard to talk to

On the other hand, this will just push the anti-vax nuts into more woo-woo nonsense, like homeopathy and other pseudoscience

[JCMach1]

69. Most jumped that shark long back...

If homeopathy were only the worst of it!

[LeftishBrit]

52. While I think that the anti-vaccine movement is dangerous and repulsive...

I also think that doctors should not 'fire' patients for refusing any medical treatment and especially not children for the choices of their parents. Otherwise, where does it end? Doctors could 'fire' patients for refusing a medication, or a medical test, or for an unhealthy habit such as smoking, etc.

Healthcare is a right, not something that one should need to earn by 'good behaviour'.

If doctors are worried about being sued for bad outcomes, they can ask the patient to sign a statement that they were the ones who refused the treatment.

I think doctors should strongly encourage patients to get their kids vaccinated, but 'firing' the patients will mean that the children are still further deprived of care, or that their parents will take them to quacks.

I have read the statements that a doctor's practice is a 'private business'. Perhaps this is really my whole point: it shouldn't be!

[jeff47]

56. Let's say you're an anti-vaxxer.

And so you didn't vaccinate your child against whooping cough. Your 8-year-old develops a really bad cough, so you take him to the doctor.

Meanwhile, my 6-month-old happens to have a routine checkup that day. Your 8-year-old is squeezed in just before my 6-month old.

The first vaccination against whooping cough is at 2 years, so my 6-month-old is completely unprotected. Whooping cough is also quite deadly to 6-month-olds.

Why should that anti-vaxxer get to kill my child because they don't understand basic biology?

The reason anti-vaxxers should be 'fired' by their doctor is because they are harming every other patent in that practice. If there isn't an issue like an allergy to the vaccine, they are actively hurting every other person that goes through that waiting room. You wouldn't stand for it if they were hitting the other patients with a bat, would you? Then why stand for it when they're using a biological weapon?

[mainer]

89. This is my concern. The child is a victim, and may not be able to get healthcare.

There should be some way to keep delivering care to the children of idiots. I think pediatricians should find a way to bring those kids in on special clinic days, or through a separate waiting room.

I understand the fears of other parents, exposing their children. But no one wants a child to go without health care. Even GOP kids.

[Ms. Toad]

57. Rude dismissal of people with legitimate concerns about vaccines

anytime the subject of vaccination comes up should not be tolerated on a board which is dedicated to discussion. I'm probably going to be sorry, again, since every time I try to engage in a rational discussion on this subject I get called one or both of: "anti-science whack job" or "shill for big Pharma."

I am neither. I have a degree in science, a portion of my work is drafting scientific documents in consultation with other scientists and engineers, I have taught science, I diagnosed my daughter's rare and life threatening auto-immune disorder (later confirmed by the physician who was sure nothing serious was wrong), and have earned a measure of respect in the support community for my daughter's illness translating jargon used in medical articles into lay language so the material is more accessible to the community. I am not ignorant about science.

My daughter has had most of her vaccinations (e.g. DPT, Polio, Measles, HPV, hepatitis A & B), but not others (e.g. pneumonia, HiB, chicken pox, rotovirus, and (most years) the flu). We make an individual decision about each vaccination, balancing risk against benefit.

According to the Institute of Medicine, the health arm of the National Academy of Sciences, "There are reasonable theories for how vaccines could" "increase the risk for immune dysfunction. Specifically, the . . .risk for infections, the autoimmune disease type 1 diabetes, and allergic disorders."

A 2003 study (the source of the quotes above) ruled out a causal relationship between immunizations and type I diabetes. "The epidemiological evidence regarding risk for allergic disease, particularly asthma, was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship." In other words, in 2003, the last time this body seems to have formally reviewed the concern, the jury was still out.

A quick (10 minute) search of the National Institute of Health tells me that as of 2011, at least, the jury is still out - but that more and more causal relationships are being identified autoimmune disorders and vaccinations:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22203433, (noting a knowledge void in relationship between autoimmunity and vaccines (among other things))
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21905502 (Hep A and autoimmune – autoantibodies developed; longer term studies needed to determine if autoimmune diseases develop)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21431896 (MS and vaccinations - neutral to beneficial correlation with certain vaccines)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21327453 (Case study of vaccine caused Still’s disease - second documented case)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21189364 (Two cases of Autoimmune hemolytic anemia following influenza vaccine - determined to "probably" be a causal relationship)

As the mother of a child with two auto-immune disorders I don't know if there is a causal relationship. No one yet knows the disease mechanism for either. I do know that I am concerned, that respected scientists acknowledge that there are reasonable theories supporting a causal relationship, that some causal relationships have been documented, and that respected scientists have not ruled out more general causal relationships between vaccines and autoimmune disorders.

So how about we tone down the rhetoric and have a real discussion without all the name calling.

Yes, most children should receive most or all of the recommended vaccinations, because most children are not at risk for autoimmune disorders. My guess is that ultimately we will discover a genetic predisposition + exposure to a trigger (which may well be a vaccine). That seems to be the pattern with the autoimmune disorders we are able to pin down more clearly.

Certainly the presumption should be that children will be vaccinated against diseases which will cause serious harm to themselves or others (DPT, rubella, polio). I have some concerns about a few vaccines which are required for school admission in most states - against infections which are only a risk in infancy, in particular settings (e.g. Roto Virus, HiB - two my daughter did not have because she was never in child care, and the risk of the illnesses to elementary age children is minimal). Parents who have (or have other children with) autoimmune disorders should probably do some serious thinking with their doctor about which vaccinations are necessary to protect them or others around them, and how/when those vaccinations should be administered.

And I think there needs to be some focused epidemiological and, potentially, GWAS studies done so we can better identify which children might particularly be at risk for harm if they just blindly follow the standard vaccination schedule.

[jeff47]

62. No.

I will not unilaterally disarm against Republicans.

I will not unilaterally disarm against anti-vax morons.

The fact that you've done research means you aren't in the latter category.

What's missing from your post is we on the 'pro-vax' side are well aware that there are potential harmful side-effects from vaccines. But so many vaccines are given that we know that the rate of side effects is lower than the rate of harm from the vaccinated disease. For example, your daughter's autoimmune disease is rare. Yes, it really, really sucks to find yourself in the 'rare' category. It sucks more to be permanently harmed from a preventable disease. And since that's much, much more likely, vaccinate.

Doesn't mean we stop research into those side effects, but it does mean we shouldn't wait for study on a 1-in-100,000,000 complication when it protects from a 1-100,000 deadly disease.

I will stop calling them morons when they stop trying to kill my child due to 'concerns' that have been proven to be false (see: mercury).

[Ms. Toad]

65. This not a Republican forum

there are many intelligent people who believe that we need to take a more nuanced look at vaccinations,

and there are not two exclusive camps.

Using language like "anti-vax morons," alleging that anyone who is not "pro-vax" is trying to kill your child, and attributing motivations they have not been asserted (like autism and mercury poisoning) does not move us any closer to finding solutions that will provide the maximum protection with the least potential for harm. It is not appropriate to continue to sacrifice children like my daughter just to maintain the fiction that there are only two possible positions.

And - as to societal cost - in the last 2 weeks, I have spent ~ $6000 on her medical care (two routine doctor's visits, labwork, and medication). She will ultimately need a transplant (half a million $ in the year it occurs - and costly anti-rejection drugs for the rest of her life, and the disease recurs in approximately 20% post transplant, requiring a second or third transplant). One of the promising treatments to avoid or delay a transplant costs $127,000 a year (on top of the approximately $20,000 it costs every year just for medication and cancer screening when nothing else goes wrong). And, she will probably acquire one of the 4 cancers her disease combination puts her at risk for - at the moment her risk for one of them is 25% - it will be 50% by the time she turns 30. Her first autoimmune disease manifested itself shortly after her MMR vaccination. We will probably never know if there was anything more than a correlation. But how many children like my daughter does it take before just the financial burden of not using a more refined approach to vaccine associated risks makes it worth it to stop heading our heads in the sand so we can feel superior to those "anti-vax morons."

Things which can be done relatively quickly is to soft out situations in which certain children can skip vaccination without harm - I have suggested two: HiB and RV for children who are not in a child care setting. There is virtually no reason to require those two vaccinations for admission to school if a child has not yet had them - yet, if my daughter had entered school one year later she would have been required to have the HiB vaccine just to satisfy a schedule which was not appropriate for her (since she was never in child care).

Eliminate mandatory vaccination for conditions which are relatively harmless (and which do not create a risk for others).

Develop some criteria for identifying children for whom the standard vaccination schedule might be riskier than average. Start with a detailed family history for both vaccine reactions and autoimmune disorders - and then use an individualized assessment as to what vaccination schedule might be appropriate.

...but, as to the mercury, since you bring it up, there are still vaccinations given to children under 6 which contain mercury. The influenza vaccine (even for children under 6) contains the most, but there is also a trace amount in one brand of the DTP vaccine, and larger amounts in the following which are given to children age 7 and up: DTP, DT, Tt, HepA/B, Meningococcal. That is not a significant concern I have, but it is important to be honest about the facts.

[jeff47]

85. Specifically what "nuanced" solution are you trying to create?

Your solution involves not vaccinating children.

Basic statistics demonstrate that in an otherwise healthy child, there is greater risk from the diseases we vaccinate for than from side effects to the vaccine.

In addition, herd immunity is the reason we require vaccinations, so that we can protect those that are not "otherwise healthy" and can't be vaccinated. Your solution breaks herd immunity when the risk level of the vaccine has been demonstrated to be much, much lower than the risk level of the disease.

But how many children like my daughter does it take before just the financial burden of not using a more refined approach to vaccine associated risks makes it worth it to stop heading our heads in the sand so we can feel superior to those "anti-vax morons."

About 100,000/year. That's how many more are saved from complications to measles, mumps and rubella from the MMR vaccine. And that's assuming the MMR vaccine caused your daughter's illness. Ironically, I happen to have caught rubella when I was too young for the vaccine of the day. It nearly killed me, or so my mother says. I was far too young to remember. That is far more likely than the adverse side effects your daughter is experiencing, which as you note may or may not be due to the vaccine.

HiB and RV for children who are not in a child care setting

Because herd immunity isn't an important factor in disease prevention?

Eliminate mandatory vaccination for conditions which are relatively harmless

We already do. The least dangerous disease we vaccinate against is chickenpox. Before vaccination, about 1 in 40,000 cases of chickenpox were fatal. That's several orders of magnitude higher than the proven adverse reaction rate to the vaccine.

And while I understand you have excellent reasons to be concerned about autoimmune disorders, there isn't proof that those are caused by vaccines. Until we've demonstrated a causal connection, it doesn't make sense to change the vaccination schedule for the general population. If there is some known risk factor, of course it makes sense to do something different for that child. Which is what we already do.

As for mercury, read your own link. The only ones with any significant mercury are the multi-injection flu shots. How many times did you go get a bunch of flu shots, and not 1 flu shot? The others use mercury during manufacture, and it's removed before packaging. Mercury is undetectable in those vaccines, which is why they are listed as having "less than" a tiny amount. To claim they're full of mercury is like claiming I'm full of uranium.

[Ms. Toad]

90. As to mercury -

I was countering a factual inaccuracy, because it troubles me when people ignore facts that are bothersome in order to shut down discussion. I did not claim the vaccinations are full of mercury, and mercury is not a particular concern for me.

The assertion was made that childhood vaccinations do not contain mercury. That is false. There are two vaccinations which are given to children under 6 which contain mercury - the flu vaccine and one of the DTP vaccines. There is at least one additional one given to children over 7 which contains mercury. The specific amounts are listed in the charts at the link I provided.

By the way, you are misunderstanding what multi-injection means. (And if you, or anyone else reading this, have a concern about mercury, it might be important for you to understand what it means so you can make informed decisions for yourself or your children.) Multi-injection merely means a vial of vaccine which is used for multiple injections. When a vial is not single dose, a preservative is required to keep the remaining doses safe until they are needed for other patients, once the seal is broken. The most common preservative is Thimersol - which contains mercury. It isn't that the child is given a bunch of flu shots, it is that the vial is used for multiple injections (for more than one child). The child is given one shot from the multi-injection vial, and that shot contains a measurable amount of mercury (more than the trace, and more than is otherwise allowed for vaccinations for children of any age).

As to the nuanced approach, read paragraph 2 of this post.

You might also want to check the links which I have provided in my original post, and the one I just linked to. A pattern has been identified in which some autoimmune diseases are caused by vaccines (although it is a little misleading to say "caused" because the growing body of research indicates the cause for most autoimmune disorders is a combination of things - typically a genetic predisposition and an environmental trigger.)

As a big picture, what I am suggesting is that we stop mandating every new vaccine which comes along for every child. At some point the risk of the illness (to the individual or community) is less than the risk to individuals who may be predisposed to autoimmune disorders. Autoimmune disorders are a growing and extremely costly problem, both to the individual and to society as a whole.

In addition, for serious illnesses, we should only mandate vaccination at appropriate times and for appropriate populations. Not every disease is equally risky to all people throughout their lifetime, and herd immunity is not a universal need for all diseases. HiB and RV are only real risks for young children in childcare settings. There is no medical (or herd immunity) reason to mandate HiB or RV for entry to elementary school. These two diseases are not ones for which herd immunity is useful - unlike rubella, for example. They are transmitted and risky nearly exclusively within the child care setting between very young children. Entry to kindergarten just happens to be the time it is most convenient to impose sanctions for those not otherwise playing by the rules. At that point (entry to elementary school), the risk of creating additional autoimmune disorders outweighs the medical benefits of those two immunizations. If it is important to vaccinate for those two conditions for young children in child care settings, then figure out how to police that at the appropriate time and for the appropriate children. My daughter did not have those two vaccines because she was never in a child care setting - and fortunately squeaked through before they were mandated for kindergarten entry.

Finally, prior to the first vaccination, require a thorough history for each child including identifying any relatives with autoimmune disorders, or any personal history of autoimmune disorders or abnormal immune responses. When genetic screening becomes available, use the knowledge we are rapidly gaining from GWAS to identify children at risk for autoimmune disorders. For children with identified risks, individually consider the relative risks of the illness being vaccinated against and the autoimmune disorders the child is at risk for. For example, certain autoimmune disorders seem to be more frequently correlated or caused (two different things) by vaccinations - if there is a history of those conditions (or a pattern which matches the GWAS identified patterns for those conditions) apply a higher disease risk bar before vaccinating for that particular disease.

[jeff47]

97. If you want to be utterly pedantic, you should be correct yourself.

There are two vaccinations which are given to children under 6 which contain mercury - the flu vaccine and one of the DTP vaccines.

Wrong. There are variations of those two vaccines which may contain mercury. Those variations are not necessarily used.

For example, I'm not aware of any place in the US that still uses multi-shot versions of the flu vaccine. Since the needle's disposable anyway, there is little benefit to not just using a single-use shot. So everyone I'm aware of just uses the single-dose shot.

As to my confusion, there are indeed flu vaccinations that require multiple injections - they're used exceptionally rarely when there's a problem with the 'normal' immunization.

As for your papers, the problem is I can also find papers that refute yours, at least in terms of vaccination being the cause. There is likely a much more complex issue at work. But even when we add in the cases you seek to prevent, we still end up with fewer people getting injured by the vaccination then the disease. Yes, it really sucks to be on the losing side of that equation, but we should set up the rules to minimize who loses.

It's better to have 40,000 people suffer an autoimmune disease than 400,000 die or be permanently disabled by the disease.

There is no medical (or herd immunity) reason to mandate HiB or RV for entry to elementary school

Elementary school students don't have any younger siblings? Never play with any younger kids? Daycare centers don't offer "after school" care?

the risk of creating additional autoimmune disorders outweighs the medical benefits of those two immunizations

Considering the link between vaccinations an autoimmune diseases has not been proven at this time, you can not make this statement and be correct.

Finally, prior to the first vaccination, require a thorough history for each child including identifying any relatives with autoimmune disorders, or any personal history of autoimmune disorders or abnormal immune responses

This is already commonly done. Before the child is born, the parents are interviewed about their family history for a wide variety of diseases, including autoimmune diseases. And then children receive their first vaccinations at birth.

And as I've said over and over and over and over again, when you can prove that a particular vaccination causes a problem for a particular child, then don't give the child that vaccination and have them rely on herd immunity. The key here is proven. We have to have an absolute minimum of people not getting the vaccination in order to protect them from the disease. Creating exceptions because there might possibly be a link isn't a good idea, because that endangers people we know can not take the shot (allergy, etc).

[Ms. Toad]

100. I was very clear in my initial post about mercury in vaccines

and which ones included mercury. Feel free to check. I did not go back and dot all of the I's and cross all of the T's when I repeated the information I previously provided.

You are still misunderstanding the information about the influenza vaccine - it is very common misunderstanding. You are likely not even aware when your physician is using a multiple dose vial, because the choice of single dose/multiple dose vials has nothing to do with a particular patient. The physician acquires the flu vaccine in one of two forms: individualized doses (generally pre-filled syringes) & multiple dose vials. What the physician receives often depends on what is available, and the single dose (preservative free) variety is often in short supply (e.g. http://www.joplinglobe.com/carthage_jasper_county/x546216556/State-department-grants-exemption-for-flu-vaccine/print ).

If you don't make a specific request (or patronize a practice which has a policy of only using preservative free vaccines) by and large what you receive is from a multi-dose vial - and you will never know it. The last two years, all that has been made available through my work place, for example, is from a multi-dose vial. If you got a flu shot this year and saved the disclosure document, the chances are probably around 90% that you will find a disclosure on it that it contains thimersol (the only year I can find rates for indicated 90% of all flu vaccines contained thimersol; the CDC describes thimersol-free serum as "available in limited supply.&quot

Here is an explanation, since you don't seem inclined to believe mine: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/thimerosal.htm Here's the chart for which ones contain thimersol: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/vaccines.htm. (4th column from the left) You will notice 4 versions which are labeled as multi-dose vials, which are intended to be used for children some as young as 6 months, mostly adminstered in a single dose. Each of these contains around 25 micrograms of mercury per dose, which is more than a trace, and more than is allowed in other vaccinations for children under 6. There is an additional single dose vial (pre-filled syringe), which contains a trace amount, which is approved for children 4 or older.

But back to the general discussion, our rules do not have to be biased toward vaccinating everyone for everything for which there is a vaccination available - which is the only counter position being promoted to counter the people who do not believe in vaccinations at all. We need to be smart about it and develop more sophisticated guidelines both for vaccinations in general - and for identifying people particularly at risk. Although good pediatricians and family doctors do take a thorough family history, that information is not routinely being used to guide vaccination strategies, in part because there is a legally mandated schedule which is followed by rote and no good guidance between the polar opposite positions.

As to minimizing losses - I suspect you may not be aware of the increasing number and incidence of autoimmune diseases, and the high costs associated with them. IBD is a disease that is increasingly correlated to immunizations (I provided links in another post - both H1N1 and Hep B (the only two I specifically reviewed) have a statistically significant correlation with manifestation of IBD). It is also one I can reasonably estimate the costs of. From age 4 (my daughter's diagnosis) through age 80 - assuming no out-of-the-norm expenses (and assuming I could write a check today, for all of her IBD-related lifetime care) it would require roughly $700,000. She has not required any of the step 2 drugs (considerably more expensive), she has developed few of the extra-GI complications associated with IBD, and has only been hospitalized about 5 times for it (my calculations allow for another 5 by the time she hits 80). That does not count any loss of productivity, that does not count the cost of her companion (also autoimmune) disorder. It is not just individuals on the losing side of the balance, the high cost of treating people with autoimmune disorders which could be avoided, will ultimately be borne by all of us - since there are very few people who can absorb $9000 worth of medical expenses each and every year (on average, for a mild form of this disease).

Is there absolute proof?- not yet, but that is the direction research is trending. You are correct, it is likely a complex combination of factors which create autoimmune disorders - but we are beginning to sort it out, and one of those factors increasingly looks like artificially mucking with the immune system (specifically the adjuvants added to the vaccines to provoke a stronger response -See the link to an article on ASIA I provided in another post, for example). But waiting until there is absolute proof before we start being smarter about it makes just as much sense as waiting for absolute proof before we started warning people about the risks associated with smoking, or regulating exposure to second hand smoke.

As for HiB, it is primarily a threat to children under age 3 (or so) and ease of transmission is highly many-children-in-a-small-space-who-cannot-control-their-own-hygiene-dependent. That is why general herd immunity does not create the same benefits that it does, for example, for rubella - which is highly contagious in all age groups, a direct threat to people of all ages, and a particular threat to pregnant women. The benefit of general herd immunity for HiB is far lower because the infection does not pose a risk beyond preschool, is not highly contagious, and does not pose a significant health risk to a vulnerable population that might be protected indirectly by herd immunity.

That makes the balance different in thinking about mandatory vaccinations. Yes - any child (without other contraindications to vaccination) who is going to be in a child care setting should be subject to mandatory vaccination for HiB. That is not the time at which mandatory vaccinations are enforced, however. They are enforced on entering school, and there is no medical justification for requiring this particular vaccination if the child has reached that age without having been vaccinated.

Vaccinating appropriately does not have to be an all or nothing decision - there is a middle ground, which should not be ignored merely in order to draw a sharp line between intelligent administration of vaccinations and the people who really are nuts about avoiding all vaccinations.

[JCMach1]

68. Because the discussion is based on pseudo-science of the first order

By your definition we should have the same sorts conversation about global warming.

[Ms. Toad]

70. Did you look at the medical research articles I provided?

In case you aren't familiar with it, PubMed is the online research tool for the National Institute of Health, US National Library of Medicine. It includes "more than 21 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books."

I don't remember the exact search I ran, but it included the word vaccine or vaccination and autoimmune. I picked the first four articles that had abstracts that were relatively readable by laypeople and discussed (pro or con) a link between vaccinations and autoimmune disorders. One indicated an information void about the relationship between vaccinations and autoimmune disorders, two found causation or probably causation, and a third found a beneficial correlation.

What I provided you was not off the wall minority opinion, but one facet of the growing knowledge base about disease theory for autoimmune disorders - that there is often a connection between manifestation of the disease and an environmental trigger - such as a vaccination which, by design, triggers an immune response.

So what exactly is that you find pseudoscientific about current research trends?

[JCMach1]

77. But what you don't post is all the studies to the contrary...

Research is about replication.

And yes, I qualify as a full-on vaccination NAZI as not vaccinating over time increases risks in society at large.

I will give you just a couple of examples. I was vaccinated for mumps (MMR), but when I was 18, I caught the mumps because some unvaccinated idiot was spreading it around.

Chickenpox is another case where I have personal experience. I grew up in the pre-chickenpox vaccine era. Somehow, I managed not to catch it. I go exposed to it my first year of teaching HS at the age of 22 and was nearly killed by it (it is much more sever if you get it later in life). Also, knowing I had it so bad, I jumped on the vaccine for my kids as soon as it was available. If it was available a decade earlier, it would have saved my near death experience. I am not exaggerating. I went from 200lbs. of lean, fit flesh to 155lbs. in a 2 week period. I had bumps over about 99% of my body. The only exception was my mucus membranes. The worst part was I came close to liver failure when I developed jaundice and my liver was struggling because of the infection.

[Ms. Toad]

86. You might want to read what I actually wrote, rather than what you assume I wrote.

I posted the articles according to the criteria I gave, and did not exclude articles which included a contrary argument. Feel free to check. The 2003 article I linked to rejects a link between type 1 diabetes and vaccinations, which I noted. I also noted one condition (MS) in which certain vaccinations appeared to be beneficial. I would appreciate not being accused of ignoring contrary research when my post itself included a range of research on this issue - and I hope you will stop turning a blind eye to research which suggests that there are individuals (or groups of individuals) for whom vaccinations pose more risk than some of the conditions being vaccinated against.

There is a vast difference between rejecting all mandatory vaccinations (or rejecting all vaccinations) and calling for more research and a more nuanced approach to vaccinations: (1) requiring vaccinations for most people for the most serious conditions,(2) limiting vaccinations for age/situation sensitive conditions (Like HiB and RV) to the appropriate ages and situations (rather than requiring them for entry to school, merely because that is a convenient time to catch people, even thought the disease risk is nearly zero at that age), and (3) leaving more vaccinations for less serious conditions to the discretion of the parents in consultation with their physicians), and (4) developing process for identifying people who may be at more risk for developing an adverse reaction and developing individualized vaccination plans for those individuals

As to the personal stories you shared, with respect to MMR, did you have the booster that is required roughly 10 years after the initial series? - and, perhaps, that "unvaccinated idiot" might have been someone else like you - for whom the vaccination did not provide complete immunity or who didn't bother to have the boosters. Some vaccines (including MMR and tetanus) are known to require boosters because the initial immunity doesn't last (and based on the timing in your chicken pox story, I'm pretty sure they knew this about MMR at the time you contracted mumps).

Chicken pox, and the vaccination, is a challenging question for anyone who is unpredictably on/off steroids (part and parcel of an autoimmune disease) because the combination of chicken pox or the vaccination with steroids is bad news. Fortunately, my daughter contracted chicken pox on her own, had an extremely mild case, and years later has immunity (which - as you know from your experience with the MMR vaccine - is not always the case with vaccination created immunity). At the time she contracted chicken pox, we had not yet made a final decision as to whether to have her immunized. As with vaccinations, most people don't have the kind of bad extreme experience with chicken pox that you had, but some do. For someone with an autoimmune disorder (and my daughter probably had two at that point, although only one had been diagnosed), there is a different balance between the risks of a normally annoying but not devastating illness, the unpredictability of timing of the need for steroids, and an abnormal immune response.

Your rare experience with chicken pox is no more devastating that the rare experiences of individuals whose autoimmune diseases were caused by vaccinations. As I have noted, we will never know whether the MMR vaccination was the environmental trigger for my daughter's illness (although research* is trending** toward finding IBD as particularly susceptible to being caused as part of the ASIA pattern). Her two autoimmune diseases are companion diseases - and her second one (triggered by the first) will ultimately require a liver transplant - a worse outcome than your experience with chicken pox, but related to the same organ. We shouldn't be throwing people away on either end of the spectrum - and the current mandates are not a good balance for those with a genetic predisposition to autoimmune disorders.

*(50% of patients developing autoimmune disorder following Hepatitis B vaccination, who had characteristics fitting the ASIA (autoimmune (autoinflammatory) syndrome induced by adjuvant) pattern, developed GI autoimmune disorders)

**(Relative risks were significantly increased for Bell's palsy, paraesthesia, and inflammatory bowel disease after H1N1 vaccination, predominantly in the early phase of the vaccination campaign)

[boppers]

76. Lots of problems.

Solution: Vaccinate everybody.

Some people will die and suffer. Many, many, more will suffer as long as vaccination is voluntary, rather than compulsory. Sure, keep working to find less and less side effects, but "there might be side effects" is a useless argument, with no solution being offered.

[Ms. Toad]

92. Mandatory v. Voluntary are not the only options.

Frankly, believing everything is black and white is a problem I expect to encounter more in conservatives than liberals and progressives.

Not all illnesses carry the same risk, impact the same populations, universally throughout lifetimes.
There are increasingly means to identify people with a higher average risk for development of an autoimmune disorder.

"Our" solution: impose a monolithic mandatory vaccination schedule including virtually all available vaccines. We're smarter than that, and I am really tired of liberals and progressives being unable to think between the two camps to find a solution that serves the needs of the growing population at risk for autoimmune disorders.

And, FWIW, I have repeatedly offered solutions. Do a search, and you will probably turn up some from 2-4 years ago - as well as in this thread.

[JCMach1]

66. I would do it if I were a doctor... such complete idiocy amounts

to child endangerment.

[NeedleCast]

81. Good - Having unvacinated children in their office is a health threat

In today's litigious society, it's the smart thing to do.

[truebrit71]

83. Good for them, those idiots put the rest of us at risk...

...

[PhoenixAbove]

91. K&R

Unless you have a known allergy to an ingredient in a vaccination, you should be vaccinating your kids. There is no reason to be putting other children in danger over junk science.

[proverbialwisdom]

104. FYI. Clumsy, but embedding links causes the text to vanish.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/02/feb-16-18-the-american.html

February 23, 2012
American Association for Advancement on Science Circa 2012?
By Anne Dachel

Feb. 16-18, the American Association for the Advancement of Science ( http://www.aaas.org/ ) held their annual meeting in Vancouver, Canada. It got a tiny bit of coverage ( http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120220/Symposium-discusses-links-between-genetic-epigenetic-and-environmental-influences-on-autism.aspx ) but nothing from the mainstream press in the U.S.

The Irish Times had this story ( http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0221/1224312116516.html ) about what was said there.

What I'm puzzled by is the complete lack of anything substantial to talk about when it comes to autism. The Irish Times reported,

AUTISM: Researchers around the world continue to struggle with the complexity of autism. They now believe that genetic factors and brain changes triggered by man-made chemicals in the environment are equally to blame for the development of autism in young children.

Seriously? Researchers NOW believe "man-made chemicals" cause autism?

<...>

Is this really supposed to be cutting edge science?

In 2009, Dr. Thomas Insel, head of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee by Congress to deal with autism, spoke at MIT here ( http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/756 ). I wrote about it here ( http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/06/iacc-head-dr-tom-insel-talks-about-autism-at-mitdec-2009.html#more ).

More at link.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/06/iacc-head-dr-tom-insel-talks-about-autism-at-mitdec-2009.html#more

IACC Head Dr. Tom Insel Talks about Autism at MIT - Dec 2009
By Anne Dachel

Dr. Thomas Insel, chair of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) and director of the National Institute of Mental Health can be found on several Internet sites talking about autism. Over the last few months, he's been to places like the National Institutes of Health and the Mass. Institute of Technology lecturing on the disorder plaguing one percent of U.S. children.

In Dec 2009, he spoke at MIT (below). This was four months after he testified on autism before U.S. Senator Tom Harkin's subcommittee last Aug. In Aug, Insel still wasn't sure if there are really more kids with autism, but by Dec, he was convinced--the increase is real.

Personally, if I were in Insel's position, I'd be really worried. One percent of children are autistic. One in every 70 boys is autistic. Insel acknowledges that something in the environment is responsible for this global explosion in a neuro-developmental disorder and he readily admits he has no clue what is behind this.

More at link.

http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/756

[img][/img]

Autism: What Do We Know? What Do We Need?
Thomas Insel
December 2, 2009

VIDEO Running Time: 1:15:16

About the Lecture: “I’ll give you the 30,000 foot view of autism.”

Remarking that autism today, in terms of interest and funding, is like cancer was 20 years ago, Dr. Thomas Insel provides the latest medical and scientific views on this complex developmental brain disorder. The formal definition of autism includes three main components: deficits in social behavior, abnormal language, and repetitive or restricted (motor) behaviors (hand flapping, for instance). But it can also include a host of other associated features like seizures, mental retardation, GI disorders, dysmorphic appearance, and regression.

Insel compares talking about autism as a single disorder to talking about epilepsy or fever or chest pain as a single disorder. Discussions must include understanding details at many levels—genetic, environmental, cellular, behavioral, systems. While researchers may now increasingly refer to autisms (plural) or think of the disorder along a spectrum, these categories may cause more problems in getting to the underlying biology of the disorder. Current research suggests that autism is a developmental brain disorder, specifically a disorder of synapses.

With the completion of the human genome sequence (2003), the human common variation sequence (2005), the identification of structural variations (2007), and the epigenome mapping for environment effects (2009), researchers are now able to go far deeper into the details of genetic influence. Scientists are not searching for a diagnostic marker, rather they are looking at autism’s pathophysiology—how to use genetics to understand the biology of the illness. A group of cells called “mirror neurons” appear to have the potential to help better understand the theory of the mind and may be important in explaining imitation and understanding other’s experiences. Supported by the underlying genetic information, the study of cell biology will be better able to determine which cells are affected and when, thus providing ways to create interventions.

But genetics can explain only a portion of autism’s presence. Another area of study that is increasingly getting attention is microbiomics, the study of microbes that have entire ecological systems inhabiting our bodies, internally (as part of our genes) and externally (face, ears, mouth). There are also significant environmental factors that may also contribute—of 80 thousand toxicants in the world, 201 are considered potential neuron-toxicants, and of those, only 5 have been studied with any rigor.

Technological developments in neuroimaging, which can provide information from deep within the brain, have not yet provided a “smoking gun.” Though no regional changes or lesions have been found in the autistic brain, imaging feedback clearly has the potential for showing important connectivity within the brain and how different brain areas are activated.

After noting the diverse paths that science is pursuing in search of explanations for autism, Insel concludes that “we need much more than we currently know.” He emphasizes that the immediate needs include bio-markers for early detection, pre-emptive interventions, and personalized treatments.

[proverbialwisdom]

105. Related thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101617208

Bill Moyers/Michael Winship: The Risk of Contagion Nation

March 1, 2012

[proverbialwisdom]

106. Barbara Loe Fisher: The Battle to Defend Non-Medical Vaccine Exemptions Is Worth Fighting

http://www.nvic.org/PDFs/IOM/NVIC-BLF-IOM-Stmt-2-2012.aspx

Barbara Loe Fisher
Co-founder & President National Vaccine Information Center

Statement – Public Perspective
Institute of Medicine

Assessment of Studies of Health Outcomes Related to the Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule

February 9, 2012

Pew Charitable Trusts, Washington, D.C.

...The electronic communications revolution has made more information accessible to more people than any other generation. Educated health care consumers are empowering themselves with information about pharmaceutical products, including vaccines. (24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31) They are asking doctors questions about the scientific evidence that supports government recommendations that pregnant women be vaccinated with influenza and pertussis vaccine (32) and that children get 69 doses of 16 vaccines from day of birth to age 18, (33) which is three times as many vaccinations as children got 30 years ago. (34)

These questions are being asked because, as the numbers of American children experiencing acute infectious diseases has significantly decreased in the past half century due to mandatory use of multiple vaccines, the numbers of children suffering with chronic disease and disability has dramatically increased. Today, 1 child in 6 is developmentally delayed; (35) 1 in 9 has asthma; (36) 1 in 10 is diagnosed with ADHD; (37) 1 in 110 develops autism; (38 39) and 1 in 450 becomes diabetic. (40) Millions more have life threatening food and environmental allergies; (41) seizures, (42) mood and behavior disorders; (43) inflammatory bowel disease; (44) juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (45) and other kinds of autoimmune and neurological problems marked by chronic inflammation in the body.

The United States ranked 12th in infant mortality among all nations in 1960 and now ranks number 30. In America, 6 in 1,000 babies die before their first birthday (46) and most of them receive twice as many vaccinations by age one as babies in European countries with much lower infant mortality rates. (47) The rate of diagnosable mental, behavioral or emotional disorders is twice as high among those aged 18 to 25 (29.9%) as among those over age 50 (14.3%). (48) U.S. life expectancy rates are lower than many other developed nations. (49)

Environmental co-factors, such as vitamin deficient, processed foods; chemical contamination of soil, water, air and household products; overuse or misuse of prescription drugs; too little exercise and sleep; and too much stress could be playing a role in the premature deaths and health deterioration of infants, children and young adults. However, the significant change in vaccine schedules during the past half century, which has altered the way infants and children immunologically experience their environment, (50 51) cannot be left off the table when it comes to investigating the unexplained child chronic disease and disability epidemic, an epidemic that is bankrupting families, (52) the health care system (53) and public schools, which can’t build special education classrooms and train special ed teachers fast enough. (54)

More at link.

Above link from,

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/03/the-battle-to-defend-non-medical-vaccine-exemptions-is-worth-fighting.html#more

The Battle to Defend Non-Medical Vaccine Exemptions Is Worth Fighting

March 05, 2012

By Barbara Loe Fisher

...Individuals most at risk for being harmed by "no exceptions" vaccine laws are those, who are already vaccine injured, and those with genetic and biological vulnerabilities (identified and not yet identified), which increase vaccine risks for them. Without a robust knowledge base regarding health outcome differences between the vaccinated and unvaccinated, it is more difficult to make a solid evidence-based (rather than an ethical or constitutionally based) argument in state legislatures about the need to preserve non-medical exemptions. On Feb. 9, 2012, I gave a referenced presentation (above) about the importance of acknowledging biodiversity in vaccine policies and laws at an Institute of Medicine meeting, where a new IOM committee began to examine the feasibility of conducting a study to assess health outcomes of children, who are vaccinated according to the federal schedule and those, who do not adhere to that schedule.

More at link.

[proverbialwisdom]

114. FORBES: Revised Recommendations for Vaccines Are Being Phased In, CDC Report Says.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gerganakoleva/2012/05/11/revised-recommendations-for-vaccines-are-being-phased-in-cdc-report-says/

Revised Recommendations for Vaccines Are Being Phased In, CDC Report Says

5/11/2012 @ 5:01PM |2,312 views

112 comments
 
Can vaccines be more useful for some people than for others?

Until now, most physicians have recommended immunizations for all infants and children, as well as for adults at various ages who may have missed shots.  But new guidelines that take into account the strength of scientific evidence and individual health to determine whether specific vaccines should be recommended or simply optional for patients are being used in medicine for the first time, a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says.

The recommendations are based on a framework for evaluating science used by more than 60 major organizations, including the American College of Physicians and the World Health Organization, and will each fall in one of two categories, reflective of evidence that a vaccine is essential to good health. Category A recommendations will include vaccinations considered necessary for all people of a certain age or those who are at an increased risk for contracting a vaccine-preventable disease. Category B recommendations  will provide guidance to physicians in the context of individual cases where patients with varying health conditions may or may not benefit from a vaccine.

More.

The new rules are modeled after an existing system for evaluating scientific evidence, called Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE), in which the evidence backing each intervention is ranked according to type and quality. The recommendation categories are based on those rankings. For example, randomized controlled trials, considered the gold standard in generating scientific evidence, are ranked highest and warrant instructions to doctors that a vaccine “should” be administered, whereas clinical experience without consistent results is used for suggesting that a vaccine “may” benefit patients.

The move toward standardizing recommendations is expected to improve transparency, consistency, and communication in the health care setting and between physicians and their patients.

The news update was published this week in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.


Gergana Koleva, Contributor
I write about the intersection of consumer fraud, bioethics and health