Comments on: Cedillos, Hazlehursts, Snyders

By: Dr. Jay Gordon: Will you please stop claiming you’re not an antivaccinationist? « Skepfeeds-The Best Skeptical blogs of the day

Fri, 20 Feb 2009 18:06:29 +0000

[...] reaction to the recent decision in the Autism Omnibus, in which the special masters roundly and utterly rejected the arguments of the plaintiffs in the first three test cases (more about that on Monday, unless something more current demands my attention by then). I’m [...]

By: David N. Andrews M. Ed. (Distinction)

David N. Andrews M. Ed. (Distinction) — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 11:03:07 +0000

hiya alyric…

“I think this is the saddest day. Those poor parents so horribly misled and then it all comes out.”

I agree entirely. This was not what they hoped for and this was not what their ‘experts’ essentially said they’d get for them. Whilst I welcome the verdict on causation, I don’t relish the disappointment and disillusionment that the three families are likely feeling just now; and I cannot see how ‘experts’ could ethically take them through this route to what they have now for their troubles: nothing.

“Their experts were so pitiful they never had a chance.”

Exactly. This is why the science actually is important: that’s how we find relatively incontrovertible evidence of things like causation and efficacy, and mechanisms by which these things work.

“There should be no celebrating this just but painful decision. What choice did the special masters have?”

I’m glad that one pain in the arse is going to be pissed off: he’s going to give some seriously good schadenfreude in the next few weeks because he’s too stupid to ralise that it’s over! But, for the families in the Omnibus proceedings, I am incredibly sad that their teams let them down by pushing them this far. The SMs had to weigh up the evidence and – indeed – what choice did they have but to find that vaccines did not cause autism.

As for the court paying the families’ expenses, I have no issue with the expense being paid; I just think that the responsibility rests with the legal and medical professionals who misled the families. Without that misleading advice, I don’t think that the families would have gone this far on such flimsy evidence as the legal teams and medical ‘experts’ were going to provide.

By: _Arthur

_Arthur — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 03:20:38 +0000

Deadalus, in this case, the very practitioners that “treated” their kids (often with experimental treatments or for heretofore-unknown illnesses) were also the expert witnesses for the Petitioners.

By: daedalus2u

daedalus2u — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:25:42 +0000

If the masters think that the plaintifs have “been misled by physicians who are guilty, in my view, of gross medical misjudgment.” What does that say about the legal representation the plaintifs have gotten? To choose experts “guilty” of “gross medical misjudgment”, is to have chosen unwisely. Does that rise to the level of legal malpractice? I hope the plaintifs are given the oportunity to find out.

By: _Arthur

_Arthur — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 00:39:58 +0000

The parents were misled both medically and legally.

By: Samantha

Samantha — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:49:59 +0000

Alyric, thanks for sharing your compassion. It’s a good reminder for me of how to respond.

By: alyric

alyric — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:31:21 +0000

I think this is the saddest day. Those poor parents so horribly misled and then it all comes out. Their experts were so pitiful they never had a chance. There should be no celebrating this just but painful decision. What choice did the special masters have ?

By: _Arthur

_Arthur — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:16:33 +0000

Timelord, the Cedillos were doubly misled by their lawyers.
As I understand how the VICP works, if your kid shows a high fever shortly after a vaccine, and has subsequent injury, it is straightforward to obtain compensation. This being a known “Table” possible (rare) side-effect. You don’t have to establish positive causality.

Instead, the lawyers decided to swing for the moon, and to claim that the vaccine(s) caused both her autism and her Cronhs disease. They had very poor, unreliable, scientific evidence.

By: Sullivan

Sullivan — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:46:58 +0000

TimeLord,

Look here for the decisions

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/node/5026

By: Leila

Leila — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 22:09:12 +0000

The parents are still being misled, and defeat on this court won’t be enough to open their eyes. Just go over to Age of Autism to see how all the organizations, from Safe Minds to Autism Speaks, are questioning the court’s verdict.