The National Autism Association has a campaign afoot to raise awareness with the catch-phrase “how much longer”.
As in these quotes from their campaign:
“FDA, HOW MUCH LONGER WILL YOU APPROVE VACCINES THAT AREN’T NEARLY AS SAFE AS THEY COULD BE?”
Or
“HOW MUCH LONGER, NIH, before you adequately fund environmental research?”
I have a question:
How much longer, NAA, before you act like a reasonable member of the autism communities? (substitute Generation Rescue or SafeMinds for NAA, they are all basically the same group).
The NAA quote about NIH shows a lot about the NAA’s intent. “Adequately fund environmental research”. A lot of money is going to environmental research for autism causation at NIH. A lot. But, until it includes vaccine-causation, no amount is going to be considered “adequate” to the NAA.
NIH and most of the medical community doesn’t think that there is a good reason to do vaccine-causation research. But that isn’t the reason why groups like NIH don’t fund research. Let’s face it, NIH have an entire center devoted to spending on money that most of the medical community considers a waste.
The NAA would like to place the blame on everyone. Everyone else, that is. It’s a vast conspiracy, funded by Pharma dollars, with everyone afraid to admit the truth about the damage they caused. Do I have that right, NAA?
The real problem, NAA/Safe-Minds/Generation Rescue, is that you are your own worst enemy.
Ask yourselves a very simple question: if NIH is willing to spend money on projects with little hope of success, if NIH is willing to spend money on questions where the general expectation is that the answer will be no (remember that chelation study?), if they are willing to do that, why not spend money on a vaccine-causation project?
To answer that, you have to ask, what is the cost of a vaccine-causation project?
The real cost isn’t calculated in dollars. The real cost in is the damage to public health that such a study would bring. Yes, funding a do-vaccines-cause-autism project would hurt public health.
How can I say that? Because you guys at NAA (and sister orgs) would use the fact that NIH has funded such a project to attack vaccines. The entire time from the approval of the funds to the time the study results were published, you would be claiming “See, the government thinks vaccines are causing the autism epidemic”. What happens when the project is done? If the research doesn’t agree with your position, you will reject it. That is your clear track record.
Besides, what quality independent researcher would take on such a project? Anyone able to do such a study is is likely smart enough to realize that he/she would be hounded for the rest of his/her life if he/she doesn’t publish results that agree with your preset expectations.
You guys are stuck in the past. A past where you could say “vaccines caused an autism epidemic” and people listened. It’s time to listen to the people who support you. Really listen. Listen and realize that just because someone is supporting you doesn’t mean that he/she supports everything you say. Case in point: Dr. Bernadine Healy. Does she say there has been an epidemic of vaccine-induced autism? Does she say the epidemiology is junk? No. She says there may be small groups. Groups too small to be detected in the epidemiology that’s been done. That’s really, really small, by the way.
Get it? Even your supporters say you haven’t proven anything and that at most you represent a small fraction of the autistic population. You’ve been able to “wag the dog” for a long time, but that time is over. It’s time to realize that at most you would be a small part of the autism communities. It’s time to realize that the autism communities are part of a larger disability community.
If this seems too complicated, here are a few simple steps you can take to rebuild your credibility:
1) admit that thimerosal did not cause an “autism epidemic”
2) admit that MMR did not cause an “autism epidemic”
3) stop discounting all science that disagrees with you.
4) stop smearing people who disagree with you.
5) stop creating misleading faux research.
6) stop trying to discredit fine American institutions.
7) stop denying the existence of a large number of adult autistics.
Oh there’s more. A lot more.
As I said above, NIH is willing to fund research that constituents want even when it is very likely to be fruitless. But you have made it expensive to perform from a public health perspective and won’t accept any answer except the one you want.
How much longer until you get vaccine-autism research? You tell us. You are the ones in the way. Your “how much longer” campaign probably just set you back at least a year.
You probably see this as harsh. In reality it is probably the best advice you have been given all day.
Left Brain Right Brain 
http://counteringageofautism.blogspot.com/2009/09/naas-got-plan-smear-offit-day-before.html
And how interesting that these folks are the one behind the press release of lies regarding Paul Offit yesterday.
Have you looked at their letters to Obama, etc? They make AoA look almost reasonable in comparison. Almost.
KWombles–
NAA put out a press release (probably paid to do it). Reuters ran it and Kim Stagiano wrote it up as “Reuters Reports”. She says she wasn’t intentionally misleading people, but I think this shoes how excited they were to sling some mud.
The figure for how much Dr. Offit received from CHOP is clearly wrong. They deny the fact that Dr. Offit shared the royalty payment with his two co-inventors. It is easily confirmed that the other two inventors were CHOP faculty. It is also easily confirmed that the payout scheme that Mark Blaxill and Dan Olmsted used was not in effect for Dr. Offit’s patent. I’ve also confirmed this.
At this point, every time anyone quotes Blaxill and Olmsted’s misrepresentation, those two gentlemen have the responsibility to try to correct the mistake.
If they were interested in accuracy over smear, they would do that.
How much longer, Misters Olmsted and Blaxill?
Q?? Does that mean you’re giving your child the H1N1 flu vaccine that’s full of the same adjuvant they used during the Gulf War in the Anthrax vaccine…. and all those men have come home with Gulf War syndrome?? http://www.thespec.com/Opinions/LettertotheEditor/article/629548
Just because your favourite Dr’s say it’s safe, doesn’t mean it is. Peer reviewed journalling IMO is a joke at best. If you don’t play the correct political cards you don’t get in the journal’s. From “the world is coming to an end”, “sticking autistic children in closets all day is good to train them and keeps them segregated so we can ignore them”, to “vaccines are wonderful”, to “autism is only caused by genetics”. Where’s the other POV and why are they not considered valid???
Do I think vaccine’s caused my children’s autism “no”. But, since we are all different… that doesn’t mean someone elses child wasn’t made ill from them. We won’t be getting the H1N1 vaccine.
First off, farmwifetwo, my husband fought in the first gulf war.
Second, seriously, on the peer reviewed journals? Really? Gods.
Third, didn’t say he was my favorite doctor, although I do find I have a serious aversion for people who lie, distort or otherwise mutiliate facts. (favorite doctor is Doctor House, of course, grumpy,dreamy and troubled all while being brilliant, right? — I kid) Which is what has happened regarding Dr. Offit.
Fourth, good for you. Don’t get the vaccine. Whatever floats your boat. What the hell does the H1N1 vaccine have to do with NAA lying or with Offit or with autism?
Fifth, if you’d read me at all instead of continually going half-cocked into things, you’d see that I absolutely agree that vaccine injury occurs and should be taken seriously.
Lastly, let me ask, since I have almost never not seen a bitchy post from you, do you ever let go of the anger and have an actual conversation with someone else (unless they are on the same anger wavelength)?
@Farmwifetwo: First, most information regarding the H1N1 vaccine in the US says that it, like all of the flu vaccines in the US, will not contain squaline. Second, you are aware, aren’t you, that squaline is commonly used in flu vaccines in Europe and they don’t seem to have a large incidence of Gulf War Syndrome. Strange, isn’t it? But no one is saying you have to get the vaccine. As long as you stay home if you are sick.
Will I get the vaccine? I’m undecided, because I have a history of bad reactions to any injection (vaccine, antibiotic, whatever). I have gotten the flu vaccine in the past and if I can combine all the vaccines I’m due for into 1 visit with my PCP I’ll probably get it.
@Kim: Hi! I’ll be honest and say there are times FW2 isn’t bitchy, but they are few and far between, at least in the comments I have read from her.
Dawn, KWombles–
feel free to discuss the H1N1 vaccine with Farmwife2. I’ll just take a moment to note that this was a great example of a troll comment. Nice sidetrack into something completely unrelated to the post.
I’ve been avoiding swine flu because it has nothing to do with autism. But Farmwife has demonstrated that the misinformation campaign is working. She seems to have bought it.
Sullivan,
🙂 On the H1N1, it just lets you know who people are reading. I get being discriminating in one’s health care decisions; I don’t get letting woo sites like AoA or the like be the folks to provide that information.
Way too many conclusively proved times of them outright lying to think they’re getting it right. But, I suppose even a stopped clock is right twice a day, right?
On the Offit affair, I’ve posted to my blog this week two separate emails from Dr. Offit explaining his financial reimbursements for the rotavirus vaccine. The one today is in direct rebuttal to the NAA press release.
I assume that NAA rolled with the press release yesterday to build up for today’s How Much Longer day.
I got lots of how much longer questions, but they don’t go at all along the NAA or AOA lines.
Dawn,
Okay, I’ll believe you that FW2 is not unremittingly bitchy. Plus, I have my bitchy moments as well. 🙂
I don’t think we should be so hard on the Farmwife2 for going off-topic. Like so many anti-vaxers, she just has a one-track mind, and figures “If we’re talking about autism, we must be talking about vaccines.” False attribution and all that, but the girl can’t help it, and Must decry vaccines at every opportunity. I think she should take her mind off her problems, maybe attend a class on “How Not to be a shrew”, or else be on the lookout for Farmwife number 3.
Hey, Clay, not the off-topic itself; we all like to do that! More the content of the off-topic. I may perhaps have read a wee spot too much of the woo this week, so that seeing it first thing this morning in conjuction to this particular blog (and with FW2’s tendency to jump down people’s throats regardless of their actual content) perturbed me more than it would have had there been some pause between the woo and more coffee in my system. 🙂 Perhaps I had a slight bitchy moment myself. Maybe. Possibly.
Of course, I’d just spent the night before and some of this early morning wading through the NAA crap. Who wouldn’t be bitchy?
I almost threw up in my mouth reading this blog.
Let me get this straight…You trash people calling for more research into any links between vaccines and autism claiming that, “Funding a do-vaccines-cause-autism project would hurt public health.”
So…research into finding out if the 30-plus vaccines given to young children cause brain disorders or other side effects would hurt public health…WOW…glad you are putting children first.
Then you go on some jag about what people who are calling for research like this would say about these studies, even though they haven’t even happened yet.
Okay…so do you own a crystal ball? If so, could you let me know what the Lotto numbers are tomorrow.
Then you go on to say how anyone who would attempt these studies would be “hounded” for the rest of their lives if the results of these studies, which haven’t been done yet, don’t meet the expectations of those calling for these studies.
I’m SO GLAD you are protecting the future feelings of any researchers who do studies of vaccines. The last thing I want to do is hurt the feelings of any scientist, doctor or researcher. They are a very sensitive lot and don’t like anyone to question them.
In fact, thanks to this post, I now think we should stop all research into every medicine or drug because there is a chance the researcher could turn up a bad result and then risk getting his or her feelings hurt by people who don’t like what was shown.
Absolutely not. Perhaps you can swallow your vomit and read for comprehension?
The research would not have any such effect on public health. The activities of groups like NAA would. They (and their sister orgs) have shown themselves to be willing to misrepresent facts in order to promote the “epidemic of vaccine induced autism”.
Have you ever spoken to a researcher who had FBI protection? I have. And I’m not talking about Dr. Offit. Have you ever talked to good researchers who decided to stay away from Autism because of groups like NAA and Generation Rescue and the rest? I have.
The statements I made are valid.
I have a serious question–did you really completely misunderstand the post?
David M,
Nah, the thrwoing up in the mouth thing, wasn’t that the ND bloggers when Hyman posted his recycled article over at Huff? That’s what AoA’s managing editor said, anyway.
Point. You. Nowhere close to it. That happen often? NAA’s antics don’t help anyone. Neither do GenRes or AoA. Oh, it perhaps lines the coffers over at those places, but the autistic individuals who might benefit from research into effective treatment modalities to lessen those symptoms causing them distress, does it help them? Nope. Are these organizations working towards fostering acceptance and appreciation of diversity, and specifically of inclusion of the disabled and differently abled? Hell no.
So, go ahead, engage in a little regurgitation. I’m pretty sure there is a sizable proportion of the autistic community (to include the autistic individuals and their nt or not-so-nt family members) who watch each day as folks like you do what you can to make their lives a little less better. I’m betting their indigestion grows a little with each stunt like NAA’s. Kudos.
KWombles:
CARD might suggest that he chew gum.
No, I didn’t make that up:
“Center for Autism and Related Disorders’ Research Study Finds Chewing Gum an Effective Treatment for Children with Autism”
It’s a study about a kid who was doing something akin to regurgitating. So, they taught him/her to chew gum.
I think that “vaccine blamers” exemplify what I call the “crazy chihuahua” problem, which goes like this: Any of the other dogs could beat a crazy chihuahua if they wanted to. But, the chihuahua is small and fast enough to chew an opponent’s ear off first. So, the other dogs either give the crazy chihuahua what it wants, or stay out of its way.
Incidentally, I propose the following as the most proactive strategy: systematically DESTROY ApotheCure, Lee Silsby, ACAM and DAN. And while we’re at it, demand the prosecution of the Geiers for child abuse for all the children they injected with Lupron. A century of jail time should stop those two from killing anyone, if they haven’t already.
David N. Brown,
I will point out the problems I see with groups as I see the problems occur, but I will not work to “destroy” them. I don’t think that is a strategy or even an image that is helpful.
Groups like NAA work to destroy others–case in point their recent smear efforts against Dr. Offit. This post is all about how that sort of work is counter productive.
The one thing NAA and AoA haven’t done is kill or cripple people. “Biomedical” organizations have and will continue to do so. As I see it, their “destruction” as functional organizations is the only solution. That is what regulators and law enforcement should be doing already, and are trying to do in the case of ApotheCure.