This year, the Autism Omnibus hearing in the USA will examine the idea that MMR causes autism. They will do this by taking one of the plus 4,500 cases and looking at it as a ‘test case’. The case in question is the Cedillo family, mother Theresa (just a coincidence), father Michael and daughter Michelle.
The document above by the way establishes that they want the evidence they accumulate to be open to the other families but that they do not want the identities or the evidence of their expert witnesses to be made available online. I wonder why. If I may be so egotistical, it could have something to do with the fact that several bloggers have trounced both the data and the experts and they don’t want this happening any more.
Anyway. What do we know about the Cedillo’s?
We know that Michelle’s bioposies were examined by Professor O’Leary, one time colleague of Andrew Wakefield who went on to have his own results seriously questioned and who went to say:
Professor John O’Leary, who did the tests for solicitors representing the families of autistic children, said his scientific findings “did not support the MMR/autism hypothesisâ€.
We also know that Michelle was seen by Arthur Krigsman, who, despite claiming to replicate Wakefield’s discredited Lancet paper has had no papers on autism, or vaccines published at all. What he has had however, are numerous close calls with licensing bodies – in one instance he had to resign in order to escape official investigations into his conduct.
And what do the Cedillo’s believe has happened to Michelle?
We just found out the left hind foot bones in Michelle’s foot are deformed. Instead of being one on top of the other, they are growing side by side. Michelle is on pain meds nearly around the clock. She limps and walks with a side to side gait instead of forward like normal. This was caused by the Crohn’s associated arthritis (confirmed independely by 2 orthopedic spec and a ped rheumatologist AND Dr. Krigsman and Dr. Wakefield), which was caused by the Crohn’s disease caused by the vaccine strain measles RNA found in her bowel tissue from the MMR. Michelle gets periodic ocular inflammation – also from the Crohn’s disease. This gives her headaches.
Its terrible that such a young girl is in so much discomfort. But looking past that and concentrating solely on the science, we see that the Cedillo’s believe that Michelle contracted Crohn’s disease brought on by the measles element of the MMR.
So – Crohn’s _and_ autism? Searching VAERS, I find only seven cases that refer to ‘crohn’ and had the MMR vaccine. That’s pretty rare.
Even those who might be expected to support the MMR/autism hypothesis don’t. In an email to the Autism Biomedical Group on March 08, 2004, Vice President of SafeMinds Mark Blaxill stated:
epidemiological evidence (albeit from studies that have not carefully considered interaction issues), have not supported the broader proposition that “MMR causes autism.”
I will be very curious to see exactly who their experts are and what their evidence will be. If it really is, as I suspect, Andrew Wakefield, then they won’t be able to choose a worse time to invoke his ‘expertise’. Wakefield’s hearing at the GMC starts at about the same time.
Here’s a beginners guide to the MMR/autism hypothesis and what Wakefield claims to have found. The hypothesis states that the MMR vaccine, being a live vaccine, leaves bits of live Measles virus in the gut. Wakefield claimed to have found it there. This goes on to trigger autism.
No part of this hypothesis has ever been replicated and published in a decent journal. Wakefields closest colleague – Krigsman – has been unable to find a publisher for his ‘replication’ which indicates the quality of _his_ science. As reported above John O’Leary claimed to have replicated Wakefield’s work but it turned out there was a good chance his data was contaminated and he later stated none of his work showed a connection. Various epidemiological studies have also failed to find any link (as Mark Blaxill admits).
We also have two clinical science papers that demonstrate convincingly that Wakefield did indeed make a substantial error. One Paediatricsin Pediatrics was very damning:
The real-time assays based on previously published primers gave rise to a large number of positive reactions in both autism spectrum disorder and control samples.
Translation: We replicated Krigsman/Wakefield etc to their end point and there were lots of measles virus just like they said.
Almost all of the positive reactions in these assays were eliminated by evaluation of melting curves and amplicon band size.
Translation: We did the science properly just like they didn’t. When we did most, but not all of the positive reactions disappeared.
The amplicons for the remaining positive reactions were cloned and sequenced. No sample from either autism spectrum disorder or control groups was found to contain nucleic acids from any measles virus gene.
Translation: When we looked at the rest of the very small number of positives we had left we found no measles virus in any of them.
In the nested polymerase chain reaction and inhouse assays, none of the samples yielded positive results. Furthermore, there was no difference in anti-measles antibody titers between the autism and control groups
Translation: We double checked our methods and tools and there were now _no_ positive reactions at all. Further more, just for clarity – there were none in our non autistic people _or our autistic people_.
It’s going to be very, very difficult for the Cedillo’s to overcome this.
Now, closer to home (for me anyway), there are a couple of new papers that discuss what impact the MMR really _did_ have on people. Here’s some real evidence of harm.
In “Tracking mothers’ attitudes to MMR immunisation 1996–2006“, we hear the alarming statistic of how much damage Wakefield et al did to the UK MMR program:
The proportion of parents believing MMRto be a greater risk than the diseases it protects against has fallen from 24% in 2002 to 14% in 2006. The proportion of ‘hard-core rejectors’ of MMR vaccine remains stable at 6%. There has been a gradual and sustained increase in the proportion of parents across all social groups saying MMR was completely safe/slight risk rising from 60% in 2002 to a current level of 74%. There now appears to be a sustained move away from fears over MMR safety and belief in the unfounded link to autism towards a more positive perception of the vaccine.
It a relief that the authors believe there is a sustained move back towards a more rational state of mind regarding MMR but its incredible that 24% of people ever believed that MMR was more risky than the diseases it protected against.
Its no surprise then, that in the years 1997/98 – 2004/05, MMR uptake dropped by a massive 10%. Of interest, when comparing that _fall_ in MMR uptake is the epidemic rhetoric that claims autism is sweeping the UK too. Both things can’t be true. If MMR causes autism then however one paints the stats, there should’ve been a 10% fall in autism.
One group of people truly have suffered through this period. They have been the front line recipients of the bad science of Wakefield et al: parents of autistic kids.
In the new paper, “MMR: marginalised, misrepresented and rejected? Autism: a focus group study“, investigators interviewed parents of autistic kids:
Of the parents whose children received the MMR vaccine, many felt guilty that they may have caused or contributed to their child’s autism. Some parents felt frustrated by health professionals’ lack of understanding of the negative impact the MMR controversy has had on them. Some parents were anxious about subsequent MMR decision-making for their children.
This is the legacy of Andrew Wakefield. Parents who are guilt ridden and unsure who to turn to. The study conclusions state:
The controversy has had a negative impact on some parents of children with autism. This has implications for health professionals, who need to be particularly aware of the issues these parents face in future MMR decision-making for their affected child and younger siblings.
These focus group discussions produced moving and often emotional accounts of parents trying to come to terms with their child’s diagnosis of autism against a backdrop of widespread public speculation about the role of the MMR vaccine in the aetiology of autism.
As Jim Sinclair states in his essay ‘Don’t Mourn For Us’:
Some amount of grief is natural as parents adjust to the fact that an event and a relationship they’ve been looking forward to isn’t going to materialize. But this grief over a fantasized normal child needs to be separated from the parents’ perceptions of the child they do have: the autistic child who needs the support of adult caretakers and who can form very meaningful relationships with those caretakers if given the opportunity.
The parents in these focus groups (and remember these people were interviewed when the MMR conspiracy theory was still well underway) never had a chance to move past the natural adjustment period and on to acceptance. When the media and ‘scientists’ continue to express certainty despite having absolutely no evidence that MMR causes autism its hard to get past the guilt. I know. That’s how I felt as well.
Parents often spoke angrily about how the MMR controversy had impacted on their lives. Even parents who stated that their
child’s autism was entirely genetic in origin felt affected by the uncertainty about the causes of autism which were heightened
by the controversy. For example, one mother who thought her son had been born with autism nonetheless found the speculation surrounding MMR upsetting, and stated that: … it makes you feel pretty damn rotten. I feel as if at the time I did the best for my boy… I wouldn’t have put my child through anything that I think would harm him. (G1: P3)
Thanks again Andy.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Hi Kev
I sent to you an e-mail about this post. Please let me know if you received it.
Thanks
Thanks for putting this together, Kev. It sure doesn’t seem like the Omnibus litigants stand a chance if they think they are going to show that the measles virus can cause autism.
Now I have to go see if I can figure out how Crohn’s disease can cause the bones of the feet to be malformed. I knew a man who had multiple surgeries for Crohn’s, each time they took out a chunk of his intestines. Finally he died of liver failure or something, I’m not sure how that was related to the Crohn’s disease, but his personality was really normal and he was really nice, and had lots of friends. His feet were fine… I guess he didn’t have arthritis from Crohn’s disease….
Thank you for your intelligent, diligent work in the realm of autism. I am the mom of four sons, 3 by the gift of adoption and living with special needs…two of them on the autism spectrum. I spend my days homeschooling my three youngest, and enjoying them as beautiful individuals. My mind is more than busy in this capacity, and I appreciate people such as yourself who get to the guts of matters and keep so many of us updated.
Thanks you.
Many in medicine and research often forget/take advantage of the fact that their title alone gives them a lot of credibility among the general public.
When a PhD or MD comes out with a fringe idea we really don’t know if s/he is right, or lying and trying to make a buck, or honest and wrong, or just craving attention.
With MMR and Wakefield, the first option has been ruled out.
Nice post, Kev.
Having spent much of the last three years investigating the MMR scare, there’s so much I could say in response to Kev’s interesting post. In fact, if anyone has any particular questions about the issue, by all means ask. There’s hardly an aspect I don’t have a file on.
From my perspective, I’ve never really been that fascinated with the potential for measles outbreaks. We know from a previous vaccine scare – over DTP – that a serious fall in levels of protection (pertussis dropped to about one third), results in disease outbreaks, followed by media scares, which drive the levels back up again. With DTP, a bunch of children died, coughing their brains out, and others today, as adults, languish with permanent brain damage. But in the great scheme of things…
The appalling victimisation of the parents in the MMR-autism thing, however, is, to me, utterly unforgivable. I say this, not as a parent, but as someone who has been on the receiving end of the most shocking, festering, hatreds, stirred up to pollute the lives of people who have it bad enough as it is.
I’m in the strange position of having seen Wakefield’s crucial raw data, and while I’m not allowed to give it to you chapter and verse, I can tell you that there is NO BASIS WHATSOEVER for his claims. Crudely put, THERE WAS NO CASE SERIES as described in the Lancet, in February 1998. There WERE children with ASDs, they were almost all litigants, and they did have constipation, but that’s about as far as you could reliably push that data.
Everything else follows from that. As for the measles stuff. Je-sus. I have an eyewitness report which states that when eventually they did a controlled study – as they were obliged to do for the litigation – they found the same apparent evidence of measles virus in both the developmentally disorderd children AND in the controls. Sources also reveal that even Wakefield’s own children came up positive.
So, do you know what they did? They figured that the reason why controls were positive was because falling vaccination levels meant there was more wild measles around. Wakefield recalled that one of his children had suffered some kind of snuffly cold, and concluded that this was probably subclinical measles.
True afficianados will note that, despite claiming in papers to have found very substantial quantities of measles RNA, no viral sequences have ever been released – which is highly unusual. Such sequences could truly demonstrate where, if anywhere, the viruses came from. But, no, we ain’t gonna see ’em.
It could all be hugely funny, I suppose. Here, have a larf over this:
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/andyhouse.htm
But I don’t think it’s funny when so many parents caught up in the Wakefield thing are so obviously failing even to begin to come to terms with the shock and grief they plainly feel over their children, much less find the energy and support they need move on.
Hello Brian,
What can you tell us about Wakefield’s work prior to looking for measles in autistic children. Wasn’t he already intersted in the virus and a potential role in some other GI disorder?
Hi notmercury,
Slow day for me, so I checked in again…
Yes, Wakefield’s original theory was that the cause of Crohn’s disease was measles virus. I sometimes joke that if the book he was reading had listed rubella under “G” for German measles, he would have stopped there and concluded that this was the culprit.
In fact, his original interest in autistic children was nothing to do with their autism, but because he figured he could investigate them for Crohn’s disease. It was only after he found that they didn’t have Crohn’s that he moved on to the impressive-sounding “lymphoid nodular hyperplasia”, which (although he didn’t say this) is ferociously common, and usually benign, in all kinds of kids, often for no obvious reason.
Here’s what he saw. It looks bloody horrible:
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/ileal-hyperplasia.htm
However, his own colleagues (and the man himself) found that measles virus doesn’t cause Crohn’s disease (which makes me wonder about the Cedillo case). I can’t make a page to suit all purposes, but here is a reference to the initial virological work:
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/chadwick-bruce.htm
And here is a reference to epidemiological stuff:
http://briandeer.com/mmr/big-story.htm
When I did my TV investigation of Wakefield, we went to an international conference on the cause of inflammatory bowel disease (Crohn’s and ulcerative colitis). When we asked about measles virus, everybody laughed. In fact, NOBODY, apart from Wakefield and possibly some of his business associates, appears to think MV causes Crohn’s.
Ms Clark,
It is low NO that causes the bones to be deformed and osteoporosis. A major determininant of bone mineralization is NO produced when bones are subjected to strain. Reduce the basal NO level and to produce the same NO signal requires more strain, the bones must have greater deformability.
Low NO is what causes liver failure due to insufficient ATP and insufficient mitochondria biogenesis. One of the things that goes is the capacity for gluconeogenesis, so the body invokes cachexia, turning muscle into alanine which the liver can turn into glucose with minimum metabolic effort. Then to get rid of the lactate (which the liver doesn’t have the capacity to handle), the body makes fat, first depot fat, then visceral fat, then ectopic fat.
I think that Crohns disease is also due to insufficient NO, but I am not precise about the mechanism. It might be the effect of insufficient mitochondria, or it might be inhibition of the lysosome via oxidative stress inhibition of the V1H-ATPase which acidifies it.
Low NO can cause failure of just about any organ. Which organ fails first and by what mechanism under conditions of low NO is an idiosyncratic detail.
_”However, his own colleagues (and the man himself) found that measles virus doesn’t cause Crohn’s disease (which makes me wonder about the Cedillo case).”_
Yes, that’s very odd. Is there an actual quote from Wakers saying MV doesn’t cause Crohn’s?
They have 4,500 cases in the Autism Omnibus proceeding and THIS is the one they want to use as a test case?
I’d suggest the “leadership” for the Omnibus litigants was on a healthy dose of crack, but I’m not sure taking crack would explain that rather bizarre choice.
Please be sensible, you are doing more harm than good by covering up the fact that vaccinations in babies can be dangerous, have you nay idea how many they have now ? 25 by the time they are 4 months old, & 7 in one day !!! ridiculous, how are babies supposed to develop an immune system to begin with, I think you are getting hand outs from the drug companies by spouting such rubbish. Look at the facts, look at our kids, talk to parents, think why bio medical intervention works, because we are treating autism internally & the kids get better, but you are so entrenched in your own fame you won’t even acknowledge this.
Any evidence whatsoever to back up any of your points Larissa?
Larissa’s post was so spectacular in its insipidness that I deserves a sentence-by-sentence breakdown.
Please be sensible, you are doing more harm than good by covering up the fact that vaccinations in babies can be dangerous
Show me the post where Kevin Leitch said vaccines don’t pose any risks.
Still waiting.
Yep, figured as much. I love it when a post starts out with such a blatantly lame straw man.
have you nay idea how many they have now ? 25 by the time they are 4 months old, & 7 in one day
A child isn’t being vaccinated for 25 different diseases. Nor are they getting 25 different shots. And with combination vaccines, they aren’t getting seven different shots in one day. It’s a blatant distortion of the reality of childhood vaccination.
Larissa also doesn’t mention that back in the old days (when vaccines were less pure) that kids were exposed to greater numbers of antigens and perhaps more variable doses of adjuvants like thimerosal. But of course, when you’re trying your best to convince people not to vaccinate then such lies and omissions are acceptable.
how are babies supposed to develop an immune system to begin with
Larissa, if a child didn’t have an immune system when they were born they would die.
I think you are getting hand outs from the drug companies by spouting such rubbish.
And I think you are either working for a mercury-autism group or work for an alternative medical provider. I can’t prove that statement anymore than you can prove Kev’s a drug company rep, so I’d suggesting stopping while you’re considerably behind.
Look at the facts, look at our kids, talk to parents, think why bio medical intervention works
I have thought about why biomedical intervention might work, and in most cases I’m torn between confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance. Look them up if you don’t understand what they are.
because we are treating autism internally & the kids get better, but you are so entrenched in your own fame you won’t even acknowledge this.
I would gladly acknowledge the idea that a particular biomedical treatment helps kids with autism if there was a scientific study illustrating such. I’m sure, however, that you are not the least bit concerned with the fact your quack doctor heroes haven’t provided one reputable study showing that using a particular treatment protocol helps kids with autism.
So, heres my first post and its to second the notion that parents are suffering needlessly by worrying that vaccination made their children autistic.
i was recently at a rather biomedically oriented conference and was struck by the suffering of one poor mother, who wholeheartedly believed her child was autistic from his 2month shots, not from his infant meningitis and the resultant brain surgery. she was needlessly beating herself up over her decison to vaccinate. it was horrible.
nothing could convince her otherwise
Wow. The ($5 million) house that greed driven terrorism built.
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/andyhouse.htm
But I thought all his little bits of cash went into building a non-profit organization to help the widdle autistic kids.
That’s a really spectacularly sick abuse of parents and public health. Maybe someone can scope Andykins and look around really good for his conscience.
Wow! Look at that house! And he is supposed to have been donating his ill-gotten gains to a non-profit. Well, maybe he’s also independently wealthy! But he sure tries hard to give an impression of poverty. Look at this quote:
“LONDON, UK: It is 7am and Dr Andrew Wakefield has come off the phone to his wife, Carmel. But while she is in the living room of their comfortable south London family home, he is in the tiny kitchen of his apartment thousands of miles away in Austin, Texas.
For the past four years it has been like this, ever since Dr Wakefield sought exile in the United States after being forced out of his job at London’s Royal Free Hospital. His crime? Suggesting that there might be a link between the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccination and autism and bowel disease in certain children.”
A “comfortable south London home”. A “tiny apartment in Austin Texas.” All that and a mansion too!
You so obviously do not have a child with autism, who is responding to bio med treatment, you obviously have not had the pain of a child in such pain, who stops talking & then is able to talk again, look at you, make lots of friends, cope with different settings, not get night sweats any more, able to look people in the eye, perform in a nursery concert & sing into a microphone. I did not respond as I am a Mum & that is my job. I am very busy. There is plenty of evidence – you looser, you are too wrapped up in your own self importance to admit that the autism epidemic could be linked to some children suffering form an over load of toxins & preservatives packed in there vaccinations. Look it up your self!
Is that a poorly grammared “there is nothing reputable on this subject so I’ll try to get the smart kids to do my homework for me”, Larissa?
Larissa is no doubt a pissed off anti-vaccine litigant. “There is science, I tell you! I just don’t have the time to discuss it with you because I’m busy saving kids!”
I am also a mum who has had a lot of mental stress over vaccinations. I KNOW they didn’t cause my son’s autism. There’s no proof anywhere. Not to mention my son was autistic before he even had his first shot (and no thimerisol in Canada now). I nearly had an anxiety attack this week when I took my son for his MMR booster. But I did it and it caused no change in him at all.
Also, to larissa, I DO have a child with autism who has learned to communicate, socialize with friends, feel comfortable with changes, learned to look people in the eye and performed at nursery school. I am so happy with his progress. Wasn’t from biomed though. It was because he’s grown up and matured. Speech therapy and lots of “put him in the environment and help him cope” therapy helped too of course.
You so obviously do not have a child with autism, who is responding to bio med treatment
And you know this how?
you obviously have not had the pain of a child in such pain, who stops talking & then is able to talk again, look at you, make lots of friends, cope with different settings, not get night sweats any more, able to look people in the eye, perform in a nursery concert & sing into a microphone
You obviously didn’t answer my question – how do you know that these things would NOT have happened without biomedical treatment? The answer is that you don’t. You have nothing more than your anecdote, your post ergo propter hoc fallacy, to fall back on.
What if I told you that there were tons of kids out there that went through that exact same cycle – except they didn’t use a single biomedical treatment?
What if I told you that I was one of them?
Would that make a difference?
I did not respond as I am a Mum & that is my job. I am very busy. There is plenty of evidence – you looser
I don’t know what a “looser” is, but I assume it can’t be good.
you are too wrapped up in your own self importance to admit that the autism epidemic could be linked to some children suffering form an over load of toxins & preservatives packed in there vaccinations. Look it up your self!
The key words? “could be linked”
Yes, Larissa, the “autism epidemic”, if one exists, could be linked to vaccines. But do you have any evidence that it IS linked to vaccines? That last I checked, all of the available epidemiology says that thimerosal in vaccines or the MMR do NOT play a role in autism.
I prefer to deal in realities, Larissa, and the reality is that there is no reason to believe autism is related to “toxic vaccines” and there is no reason to believe that most of the biomedical treatments touted to cure autism do a lick of anything.
To Larissa,
I have had the opportunity to see two young lads develop “regressive” autism (lose language between 16 and 24 months of age) and then come back to make friends, speak (although one stutters) and succeed in a mainstream classroom without assistance.
Are these two lads the poster children of some biomedical treatment? No. Their parents were too poor or too “ignorant” (a perfect example of when ignorance is bliss) to do anything but send them to school.
That’s the problem with anecdotes – everybody has one. Data, on the other hand, is still a rare and valuable commodity in the land of “biomedical” treatment of autism.
Until some “biomedical” treatment for autism does generate some data showing that it works, it is the right, nay the responsibility of all people to question, doubt and probe their claims.
If “biomedical” treatments are to be accorded a privileged status, to be above and beyond scrutiny, then the stage is set for disaster.
If the “biomedical” practitioners are afraid of questions – even hostile ones – then you should ask “What are they afraid of?”. If you are afraid to scrutinize “biomedical” treatments, then you should ask yourself that question.
If “biomedical” autism therapies are really working, then there should be nothing that could shake your confidence. If they’re really working, even a massive government conspiracy couldn’t keep them hidden.
So, ask yourself, “Why am I so afraid of a few people ‘blogging about their doubt and skepticism?” The answer might be illuminating.
Prometheus
I note that Wakefield has been invited to deliver a keynote at the 2007 Autism Society of America (ASA) annual conference in Phoenix, Arizona, in July. Just about the time that the UK General Medical Council will be commencing a disciplinary hearing regarding his fitness to practice medicine in that country.
I am a board member of the Massachusetts chapter of the ASA, and I am appalled. I fail to see how this speaking invitation can reflect well upon ASA.
Most chapter-level board members, like myself, are generally not involved in the decision-making regarding national conference program content. We have a conference program committee at the national level that makes those decisions. For the most part, in the years that I have been an ASA member, and a chapter board member, I’ve seen fit to trust the basic soundness of that process.
This invitation, though, really seems misguided, in terms of its forward effect upon ASA itself, if for no other reason.
OK, so back to the MMR causation angle and the Cedillo family. Crohns in young children causes growth problems, arthritis and eye problems and developmental delays… so could this girl just have Crohns disease and maybe Crohns plus autism.
We know how good the measles virus tests are that the “biomedical” geniuses like Wakefield and Bradstreet have used, so we can be fairly certain that the girl has no measles in her intestines no matter what some “expert” might be claiming.
I can’t see a judge looking at a definition of Crohns and saying this girl was made autistic by measles, the simple answer would be, she has Crohns and developmental delays because of that.
The measles angle looks like an obvious boondoggle, to me.
So what’s poor ol’ Andy Wakefield gonna buy with the profits from the sale of his little palace in Kew? I keep thinking he and the Missus are going for a cattle ranch in Argentina next.
[audio src="http://www.bbsradio.com/temp/Sound_Health_TAPED_4-1-07.mp3" /]
David Kirby and a paranoic psychotic ex-doctor on the same radio program, about which Holly B____ wrote on EoHarm Yahoo! group:
“Sorry, I meant to say, “in my opinion she is a total wacko nutcase” (btw, we have her antics on videotape from the Orlando conference in 1999 where she shoved Bernie rimland off the podium!)”
Kirby’s response on EoHarm seemed to be that he agreed that Carley was “a total wacko nutcase”.
Hey Phil,
I didn’t realize that Wakers was invited to the ASA meeting. This will certainly have been controversial at a high level in the organisation, but I guess there’s a litigant in every room these days.
Maybe this means he won’t be attending his GMC hearing, or maybe he’ll be using such “prior arrangements” to delay it, or possibly he’ll just fly back and forth (business class, I’d expect).
From the evidence I’ve seen, I would be amazed if he didn’t lose his license to practice medicine (although it’s a fascinating fact that Wakers has never had a patient in his legal care in his entire life). However, the GMC works under medical legislation which has an extraordinary loophole built into it. While proceedings are expected to be conducted to the criminal standard of proof (unlike disciplinary hearings in any other walk of life), the law prohibits the GMC from requiring the accused doctor to produce documents. It can require anybody else to produce documents, but not the doctor. Other investigators working to the criminal standard of proof would just come round your gaffe, kick the door in, if necessary, and haul everything away.
Thus, the GMC has found it very hard to get access to pivotal material, central to what Wakers did. Also they’ve had a problem in that, because he was employed by lawyers to attack the vaccine, the lawyers can claim (and indeed have claimed) legal privilege for key paperwork. I think the GMC’s people will get round these problems, but the task has been mammoth. If Wakers gets off, which I doubt, this will be the reason.
Now, how else could the ASA judge whether or not Wakers is a suitable “keynote speaker”? I’d suggest looking at his libel action against Channel 4, The Sunday Times, and – particularly – against myself personally. To provide documents and other background to my journalism, my website publishes a vast amount of stuff on this guy, for which I am personally, and without limit, liable. If what I’ve said about Wakers is substantially untrue and irresponsibly executed, I would be – and indeed was – at risk of losing everything. I would lose my home, my savings, my professional reputation (and hence my ability to earn a living). Everything. He would have wiped me out.
At one point, his lawyers were sending motorbikes to my home bearing cost estimates for preliminary court hearings running to tens of thousands of pounds. It’s an unnerving experience, I can tell you. But at every hearing, first a master (administrative judge), then a High Court judge, practically threw their arms round me to protect what I’ve been trying to do. It was actually very moving to be on the receiving end of the rule of law. And indeed Wakefield discontinued. His lawyers were scurrying to court to abandon his claim against C4, even as I was reading the medical records of his research subjects.
Maybe the ASA should take a look at the cheque [yeah, I know I’ve blanked the “millions” box]:
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/wakefield-cheque.htm
Moreover, although his lawyers spread the story about how he discontinued his libel actions in order to concentrate on his GMC hearing, in fact The Sunday Times action was already stayed by consent, to be reactivated only AFTER his GMC.
In any event, if the GMC hearing stays on track, the charges against Wakers will be published in early June – in time for the Omnibus hearing. So, while it will be many weeks before a result is known, at least it will be clear what case is to be laid out against him.
Very well done Mr Deer. I very much congradulate you. I particularly liked the comment from a doctor who wrote in saying that you had probably saved more lives than he would in his entire career.
Mr. Deer,
I am so happy that Wakers had to cough up some cash and pay you for your having been aggravated by him for a few years now.
Autism Society of American is just despicable in my opinion. I don’t care what kind of good they claim to be doing, or what kind of good they might actually be doing, they are participating in harming humans including the vulnerable ones they are supposed to be helping.
ASA was founded by Bernie Rimland, though, I guess this is what we should expect from them.
ASA needs to make it clear that they KNOW there hasn’t been an autism epidemic, because Lee Grossman does KNOW there hasn’t been one, and he knows that his use of epidemic rhetoric is damaging to the interests of autistic adults. He and I discussed this very subject. He just doesn’t really care if autistic adults are hurt by what he’s doing, he wants the money from corporate donors and others to care for the interests of perpetuating ASA.
I don’t think ASA really cares about the damage that Wakers has done. So long as they keep them donations flowing in.
Like mumkeepingsane, getting vaccines for my kids makes me very nervous these days. That fact makes me a little ashamed, since I consider myself educated and pretty skeptical. But I suck it up and get them done.
We had an experience this weekend that made me really examine my fears. Our 11 month old got a severe case of rotavirus and had to be hospitalized for dehydration. It was just horrible looking at him with his sunken eyes and extreme lethargy. The vaccine may not have protected him, but I wish we could have given it a shot (no pun intended).
Currently there is a Mumps outbreak in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
This is exactly like the polio outbreak in Africa because some clerics declared that the vaccine was designed to sterilize Muslim girls.
It shows that people are the same all over the world. There are those who will lie and exploit people’s fears everywhere.
Larissa, it is no secret that vaccinations in children can be dangerous. That is why, under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act, causation is presumed if certain adverse effects occur within a specified time after a vaccination. If you look at the vaccine table you will see the adverse events that are presumed to be caused by the vaccines. You can see that the government admits that vaccines can result in injury and even death. Nobody is hiding that.
However, autism is not presumed to be caused by any vaccine, and that is why the autism litigants have to prove actual causation. Since the claimants are hiding their expert reports, it is hard to evaluate their chance of success. I infer from their refusal to put their reports in the public record that they don’t have a high level of confidence.
So, I’m guessing the experts can’t refer to unpublished claims as “evidence.” And I’m guessing we’ve seen everything that their experts have published, since it’s not possible to “publish” something in secret…
So what’s the big secret? If they found a way to add 3 Geier papers and a Wakefield and mix in a Bradstreet spinal tap… and they, voila like found a provable cause of autism, wouldn’t they be morally obligated to share it with people? I mean, especially if part of their “voila” is that they have a cure. If they have a cure and it’s all nice and proven… then why aren’t they sharing it with the parents who want a cure?
I guess we’ll all have to wait until June to see what they think they have. I expect that we’ll get a giggle out of how skimpy it is.
Wakefield, of course, was big on possible “complete cures” for autism.
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/cure-autism.htm
And this ethics application is a killer. If you read the last letter, the argument went that they didn’t need a placebo group because a psychiatrist would be able to distinguish placebo effects!
http://briandeer.com/wakefield/placebo-effect.htm
You have to remember that Our Andy, as I like to think of him, is one smart guy. In the space of just 12 months – between June 1996 (when a bid for money was made to the Legal Aid Board) and June 1997 (when the first autism series application was filed) – he held himself out to have:
(a) learnt of a very serious, but previously unreported, neurological syndrome in children;
(b) identified its symptoms and signs;
(c) discovered its cause;
(d) invented a means of preventing it by vaccination/immunisation;
(e) devised products for its relief and/or complete cure.
Are we worthy that such giants walk among us? Answers, on a postcard please, addressed to Mark and David Geier.
If they had a “cure”, they would of course publish it, and receive their ticket to Stockholm. They don’t have a “cure”, and they know it.
They are attempting the legal strategy that led to the bankruptcy of Dow Corning from the silicone nonsense. Zero real evidence, just lots of woo. But the legal profession learned a lot from the silicone litigation. It isn’t enough to be right, you have to play the public opinion game too.
The burden of proof is on them, to prove that vaccines or mercury causes ASDs.
When I first heard about the mumps outbreak, it was being tied to the UK’s drop in vaccine rates and world travel bringing those unvaccinated UK folks here. That was a CBC radio report.
Mr Deer, actually, the placebo effect is mediated by NO produced by the brain.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15874901&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum
Which is why the placebo effect is particularly strong on disorders associated with low NO. Raising NO by any method, even via placebo is actually therapeutic.
Huh? Are you suggesting that mental state has nothing to do with physical health?
It has been demonstrated a number of times that increased NO is a consequence of the relaxation response.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16369463&query_hl=6&itool=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15694242&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16772250&query_hl=8&itool=pubmed_docsum
While Stefano does cite his own work, he also cites others. Since Stefano is by far the leader in the field of the importance of basal NO, that is not a surprise.
A “hypothesis” as you call it, is all that any explanation of any relationship observed in “science” is.
Do you have an objection to the paper that is not an ad hominim attack on the authors? An objection that is data or science based perhaps? It is well known that the placebo effect is very real, every study of every non-placebo has to account for it. Is it a surprise that there are mental activities that will invoke the placebo effect? Not to me.
If mental activities do invoke the placebo effect, does that make them somehow unacceptable to study or to attempt to understand?
I subscribe to the Stephen J. Gould definition of “fact”.
In science, fact can only mean confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent. I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.
–Stephen Jay Gould
The “mercury causes autism” idea is not a hypothesis because it is inconsistent with much that is well known. What about the “placebo effect is due to neuronally generated NO” hypothesis is inconsistent with anything that is well known? Nothing so far as I am aware of.
I know enough about NO phsyiology (having studied it intensely for the past 6 years) to understand that to reject the “placebo effect is due to neuronally generated NO” hypothesis would be perverse. If you know something about NO phsyiology that I don’t know, I would be glad to learn it. If you have a better explanation for the placebo effect, I would be happy to adopt it instead.
The proponants of the “mercury causes autism” idea are not “dressing up a hypothesis as fact”. They are rejecting reality for their delusional idea.
No one should adopt the “placebo effect is due to neuronally generated NO” hypothesis until they understand it well enough that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent. The same goes for every hypothesis. If you adopt as “fact” hypotheses that you do not understand, you are not doing science, you are playing “follow the leader”.
Daedalus. Why this is important right now, god only knows, but I’m sure you are now misstating your own hypothesis. It seems to me that to say that the “placebo effect is due to neuronally generated NO” is a bit like saying the male erection is due to PDE5. Or, indeed, for that matter, NO!
In any event, I think we all agree that randomised blind trials are the gold standard. Thus, practitioners selling parents secretin may once have merely been wrong. Now, thanks to shedloads of such trials, including the patent owner’s, any practitioner selling secretin is a shameless quack, who should be dragged out of their hole and held up for public contempt. It’s a great question for DAN practitioners. “Can my child have secretin doctor?”
Mr Deer, I think we are in agreement (sort of). Yes, saying neuronally generated NO is responsible for the placebo effect is like saying that NO is responsible for erections (PD5E actually shortens them by destroying cGMP, which is why inhibiting PD5E pharmocologically prolongs them). Release of NO is but one step among many in these very complex physiological processes.
You are absolutely correct that randomized blind trials against placebo are the gold standard of efficacy, and that secretin is no better than placebo. I completely agree that those who would sell placebos as treatment are quacks and should be dealt with severely.
I brought up the placebo effect being mediated through NO to offer an explanation to you as to why the placebo effect is so strong in ASDs, and why the notion that one could distinguish a “placebo” effect from a “pharmacological” effect by psychiatrists is completely preposterous. If the underlying disorder results from low basal NO, any source of NO, be that from placebo, from love and affection, from diet, from meditation, from humming, from exercise, or (my favorite method) from my bacteria will improve that low NO caused disorder.
It is my hypothesis that ASDs themselves are a stress response in utero brought about by low NO, so as to invoke the ASD phenotype, as characterized by individuals with Asperger’s. The Asperger phenotype is the stereotypical tool using “nerd”. Precisely the type of humans that are most adept at tool manufacture and use. Precisely the type of humans that must have been selected for during evolution for humans to have evolved such prolific tool making and using capacities.
At my blog on April 1, 2007 I give some background on basal NO.
http://daedalus2u.blogspot.com/2007/04/background-and-summary-no-and-asds.html
I will send you my write up on my hypothesis of how low NO leads to ASDs.
“It seems to me that to say that the “placebo effect is due to neuronally generated NO†is a bit like saying the male erection is due to PDE5.”
Are you saying it’s all in the head?
Ms. Clark, the claimants are willing to make their expert reports public at the hearing, but not before — they say, to protect the experts from “possible harassment and outside distractions.” I think they want to avoid any analysis by the likes of Autism Diva and Kathleen Seidel before the hearing.
Daedalus2u, your bacteria — no, I don’t even want to go there.
Clone3g, not that head.
Larissa, your child is still on the Spectrum. They are there permanently. Whatever you did merely decreased a sensory overload – and nothing else.
Kev, do you know exactly when and where the Autism Omnibus case is being heard? I’m very interested in it – especially the outcome.
Daedalus, we’ve had discussions before over the validity of some of the hypotheses of NO you’ve mentioned. Back then you admitted experts on NO would have problems understanding them.
They seem to run into similiar problems as behaviourism: behaviourists often claim only a behaviourist understands enough about it to make any valid criticism, it’s utter nonsense but where Autism is concerned they’ve fallen back on it time and time again.
With NO it seems that no one actually can question any hypothesis unless they are experts. This struck my mind just now when I read “If you know something about NO phsyiology that I don’t know, I would be glad to learn it” as if not providing something about NO that you didn’t know would make a challenge invalid.
In fact, is there anything that NO doesn’t have it’s mitts in? I suppose that if nearly everything is made of atoms, I could as a molecular physicist for his opinion about *anything* made of atoms, but how useful would it be?
Lucus, I didn’t see your earlier comment to me until today.
I am not sure how to respond to your comment. I consider myself to be very open to new data in the NO field, very open to new ways of understanding it and new ways of applying it.
As far as I know, everything in my low NO hypothesis of ASDs is completely consistent with everything that is known about NO and physiology and ASDS.
I don’t know how to deal with things other than with facts and logic. So far, everything I know does support the low NO hypothesis of ASDs. If I found something that didn’t, I would modify the hypothesis, or even abandon it, but not until.
New development in the omnibus action. The defendants (unsurprisingly) are taking issue with the plaintiffs’ apparent reluctance to find two more test cases from their nearly 5,000 clients.
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/OSM/AutismDocket.htm
My perspective is to say you’d be amazed by how rare it is that the specific facts of any case of alleged vaccine injury can be made to stand up. They just come apart in your hands.
Part of the issue, I think, is that autistic kids are among the most documented clients of health care systems. Their records are often just bulging with observations, questions to parents, test results of every imaginable kind.
So when the parents come along years later and say – ah yes, it was the vaccine – the documents have already recorded, say, unusual behaviour prior to the shots or whatever.
I was just looking at a showpiece UK MMR claimant’s case. Reported by Wakefield as within two weeks of MMR.
Two weeks? Do I hear three to five months?
I suspect the US lawyers are finding things much the same.
Daedalus, I have no doubt you will abandon or alter your hypothesis as soon as contradictory evidence proves it can’t be true.
What I’m asking is, can it be proven untrue? That is where I have an issue with your NO. It’s like medi-chloreans; is there anything they CAN’T do? Anything that they are not involved with and have no effect on whatsoever?
Everything material is made of atoms, so an expert on atoms should be an expert on nearly everything as long as it’s made of atoms right? I’m sure an atomic scientist has a lot of raw knowledge about them, but there is a point where something becomes so all-encompassing and complicated that it isn’t revealing much at all.
I was starting to reply, and it got kind of big. I will put my response on my blog, so as not to use up Kev’s bandwidth.