Archive | Advocacy RSS feed for this section

Bye bye Aspergers?

4 Nov

The recent article in the New York Times concerning the possibility of the ‘vanishing’ of Aspergers Syndrome from the next version of the DSM (due in 2012) only asks two people (Temple Grandin and Ari Ne’eman) for their opinions. Nothing wrong with that as such but I’d like to hear what the AS community at large thinks.

Temple thinks that the AS community is too large and too vocal to simply disappear but I think she’s missing the point somewhat. The point is (in my opinion) neatly encapsulated by Ari. He points out that AS isn’t disappearing, its simply formally becoming ‘part’ of autism. Something the vast majority of the autism and autistic community have always known it is. To answer Temple directly, the AS community isn’t disappearing, its just finally taking its rightful place alongside the others in the autism community.

NB: this post first erroneously stated Temple Grandin had an AS diagnosis. This is now corrected.

It’s time to stop the intimidation tactics towards the IACC

21 Oct

The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) is group of government employees and autism community stakeholders who are chartered with coordinating research activities within the U.S. government’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The official charter is:

The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (Committee) shall coordinate all efforts within the Department of Health and Human Services concerning autism spectrum disorder to combat autism through research, screening, intervention and education. The Committee’s primary mission is to facilitate the efficient and effective exchange of information on autism activities among the member agencies, and to coordinate autism-related programs and initiatives. The Committee will serve as a forum and assist in increasing public understanding of the member agencies’ activities, programs, policies, and research, and in bringing important matters of interest forward for discussion.

The IACC predates the Combating Autism Act (CAA), but has taken on the role of coodination and strategic planning for the CAA.

This is no small effort. We are talking about a group that helps to set the goals for about $100M in research funding a year. The U.S. government’s research efforts into autism are the largest in the world. The research portfolio covers causation through supports for autistic adults.

I don’t think I will surprise anyone when I say that the autism communities, like any communities, have many different ideas of what focus should be placed on autism research. I would also expect little argument that the loudest voice in that discussion comes from the groups promoting the notion that vaccines caused an autism epidemic. Most of these groups are sponsors of the Age of Autism blog.

These groups lobbied hard to get vaccine research included in the Combating Autism Act. The failed. They did manage to get some senators to mention vaccines in the “colloquy“. These were statements made by senators when the Act was passed. Basically, these are speeches, not law. These statements were also not very strong. Consider this statement by Senator Enzi:

However, I want to be clear that, for the purposes of biomedical research, no research avenue should be eliminated, including biomedical research examining potential links between vaccines, vaccine components, and autism spectrum disorder. Thus, I hope that the National Institutes of Health will consider broad research avenues into this critical area, within the Autism Centers of Excellence as well as the Centers of Excellence for Environmental Health and Autism. No stone should remain unturned in trying to learn more about this baffling disorder, especially given how little we know.

The strongest argument that can be made is that three senators made a nonbinding statement that the National Institutes of Health should “consider” research on vaccines.

The Combating Autism Act was signed over three years ago. Since that time it has become even more clear that vaccines are not a primary cause of autism. The two major theories that the MMR vaccine or that Thimerosal cause autism have been shown to have very little scientific basis. Both were discussed at length in the Autism Omnibus Proceedings. The MMR causation theory has already been rejected as “not even close” and upheld by three separate appellate judges. The thimerosal theory has not been decided as yet, but the science was no better than that used for MMR. I expect that the Thimerosal theory will suffer the same fate as the MMR theory.

The number of people applying to the “vaccine court” for compensation for autism peaked six years ago. 2,437 families petitioned the Court for hearings alleging autism as a vaccine injury in 2003. In 2008 that number shrank to 253. The vaccines-cause-autism theory is clearly losing ground even within the autism community.

That doesn’t mean that the vaccines-cause-autism organizations are giving up. Quite the opposite. They are ratcheting up the pressure, focusing on individuals.

I actually find it hard to consider the vaccine/autism groups to be separate entities. These groups are SafeMinds, Talk About Curing Autism (TACA), the Autism Research Institute (ARI), Generation Rescue, and The National Autism Association (NAA). They do vary in their approaches to some topics. For example, TACA and Generation Rescue put more resources into direct contact with families than, say, SafeMinds. But, when it comes to lobbying about vaccines, they are pretty much a single organization, sharing a significant amount of key personnel.

These organizations are represented on the IACC by Lyn Redwood of SafeMinds. The grassroots activist efforts of the organizations is coordinated through their blog, the Age of Autism. It is a particularly clever and effective construct: the advocacy organizations can claim to be separate from the particularly nasty rhetoric of their own blog. As a separate entity, the finances of the Age of Autism blog will not be made public.

That all said, the Age of Autism should be considered the voice of these organizations and the actions coordinated on that blog are the actions of its parent organizations.

I can understand why groups such as SafeMinds or Generation Rescue would want to be able to claim some distance from the Age of Autism (AoA). AoA is used to coordinate serious intimidation efforts.

The recent departure of Dr. Story Landis from the IACC was engineered by AoA. They found notes made during an IACC meeting and planned a surprise attack to coincide with an IACC meeting. As an ironic twist, AoA got someone sympathetic to their cause to resign the IACC.

AoA has also targeted IACC member Yvette M. Janvier, M.D., twisting her words “the idea that autistic kids are sick offends me!” into “I am offended by sick autistic kids”.

AoA launched an attack on IACC coordinator Joyce Chung. This coincided with a week long IACC meeting to iron out the Strategic Plan. Her “crime”? She is married to Richard Grinker, author of Unstrange Minds. Dr. Grinker is public in his belief that there has not been an epidemic of vaccine-induced autism, a belief held by the vast majority of the autism research community. What does Dr. Chung have to say publicly on the subject? Nothing as far as I can see. What actions did she take that warranted an attack? None.

The good people at AoA have attempted legal intimidation as well. They got a Congressional Oversight Committee to investigate the IACC. When that didn’t pan out, they sought “legal advice” on alleged FACA violations. No word on what, if anything, became of that effort either. The Age of Autism isn’t shy about touting their attacks. It would seem safe to assume this one failed.

AoA has recently set their sights on the IACC’s chair, Dr. Tom Insel. I am sure this came as no surprise to Dr. Insel. Earlier this year he called for a re-vote on a proposal to add a vaccine study to the IACC’s Strategic Plan, and later made public statements in a congressional hearing that there wasn’t enough data to warrant a vaccine-autism study.

Other than being bold enough to discuss the view held by the vast majority of autism researchers, what is Dr. Insel’s greatest crime? His brother invented a vaccine. Yes, Dr. Richard Insel helped develop a vaccine for Haemophilus influenza B (Hib). This vaccine has been quite effective in reducing Hib infections. But, any contact with vaccine research or company is considered a fatal conflict of interest to the bloggers at the Age of Autism.

I’m sure that there is more going on behind the scenes.

If this were all to the story, it would be sad but uninteresting. Unfortunately, there is fallout from all of this intimidation. I already know that good researchers have avoided autism as a subject in order to avoid the groups represented by the Age of Autism. I suspect that good people are avoiding participating in the IACC meetings as well. But, the most direct fallout is that the IACC members are unable to speak their minds on the subject of vaccines. Beyond vaccines, they have to live in fear of any possible infraction of the rules or any statement that could be misinterpreted will be used against them. A prime example was given above where “the idea that autistic kids are sick offends me!” was warped into “I am offended by sick autistic kids”.

If this were some minor, make-work bureaucratic committee with no real impact I wouldn’t care. But this is the group that sets the plan for the largest autism research in the world. Not only is this sort of intimidation a crime in general, it is hurting my kid’s chances at a better life.

It is time for the intimidation to stop. The Age of Autism bloggers should learn a lesson from their recent, childish attack. Acting out without thinking can hurt even them. This event is being noticed. Both the journals Nature and Science have blog posts about this recent debacle. The Simons Foundation interviewed the director of the NIH on the subject.

I’ll say it again: it is time for the intimidation to stop.

Federal judge stops IHSS cuts in California

20 Oct

California is facing severe budget shortfalls. High on the chopping block for cost-cutting are services to the disabled.

One form of support is IHSS (In Home Supportive Services).

The IHSS Program will help pay for services provided to you so that you can remain safely in your own home. To be eligible, you must be over 65 years of age, or disabled, or blind. Disabled children are also eligible for IHSS. IHSS is considered an alternative to out-of-home care, such as nursing homes or board and care facilities.

Here is an update from CDCAN, the California Disability Community Action Network.

OAKLAND, CALIF (CDCAN) [Updated 10/19/09 12:10 PM (Pacific Time)- Federal District Court Judge Claudia Wilken in Oakland blocked the state from implementing cuts to eligibility and services under the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program,
granting a preliminary injunction requested by attorneys representing persons who receive In-Home Supportive Services, saying from the bench that substantial harm, damage and injury which would result if the cuts went forward.

The judge’s order represented a sweeping major victory for advocates for persons with Disabilities, mental health needs, the blind, low income seniors, their families, IHSS Workers and advocacy groups.

The judge’s order blocks the State from implementing major cuts to eligibility based on a person’s “functional index score” and reductions in domestic and related services based on a person’s “functional index rankings”.

Judge Wilken said that the State’s use of the “functional index rankings” and “functional index scores” were clearly not based on need, that essential services could be withdrawn arbitrarily, and that “people could lose something irreplaceable – the ability to remain safely in their homes.”

The judge issued her injunction that stopped the cuts from going forward as scheduled Because she believed that the plaintiffs – the persons with disabilities and others who filed the lawsuit were likely to win in a the trial that the cuts to services under IHSS using the “functional index score” and “functional index rankings” as the basis to make cuts to eligibility and domestic and related services violated federal law. The judge denied a request (motion) from the State to “stay” (delay effect date of her injunction) until her ruling can be appealed (“staying” her injunction would have allowed the cuts to go forward until the case could be heard in the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals)

The judge issued her ruling from the bench from a two hour hearing this morning.

More details later today.

In other words–the cuts to IHSS are on hold during the state’s appeal. The alternative, make the cuts while the state appeals, would have surely meant that some people would have lost their ability to stay “in home”.

Don’t Write Me Off

13 Oct

This is the slogan of the latest campaign from the National Autistic Society. It launched today at a reception in Parliament where over100 MPs heard NAS Council member Thomas Madar talk about his experience as an autistic adult and saw the latest campaign video.

The campaign addresses the lack of support adults with autism face when looking for a job or trying to access benefits. New NAS research has revealed that, of the adults with autism we surveyed:

· One third are currently without a job or access to benefits

· Over half have spent time with neither a job nor access to benefits, some for over ten years

· Just 15% have a full-time job

· 79% of those on Incapacity Benefit want to work

· 82% who have applied for benefits say that they needed support to apply.

As with previous campaigns these statistics will be brought to life with the personal stories of adults and parents directly affected by these issues. For news, resources and to take part in the campaign visit the campaign website

Tags: , ,

Facilitated Communication – where does a neurodiverse skeptic stand?

6 Oct

An article in yesterdays Longmont Times raised (for me anyway) the issue of Facilitated Communication.

This is an issue that is, in its own way, just as divisive as the vaccine issue amongst sections of the autism community and science. You see, some autistic and autism advocates believe passionately in the efficacy of FC whilst science largely rejects FC:

Current position statements of certain professional and/or advocacy organizations do not support the use of Facilitated Communication due to their objections that it lacks scientific validity or reliability. These organizations include the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Association for Behavior Analysis International (ABAI), American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and the American Association on Mental Retardation. ABAI calls FC a “discredited technique” and warns that “its use is unwarranted and unethical.”

The Association for Science in Autism Treatment reviewed the research and position statements and concluded that the messages typed on the communication device were controlled by the facilitator, not the individual with autism, and FC did not improve their language skills. Therefore, FC was reported to be an “inappropriate intervention” for individuals with autism spectrum disorders

The section of the autism community that accepts FC as a valid technique is largely the neurodiversity movement in who’s ranks I place myself. But is this making me a hypocrite? I place such firm emphasis on science when it comes to vaccines I can do no less in other areas. But on the other hand voices I trust implicitly within the neurodiversity movement speak out in favour of FC. Amanda Baggs, Kathleen Seidel and (I think) Michelle Dawson to name but three. * [correction: Michelle is not an FC supporter] *

So what do I do? Should I be making a call for more studies (sounds familiar!) or dismissing the voices of autistic people I trust on the issue or dismissing established science?

Or is there another option? What are your thoughts on FC? A decent debate would be useful for lots of people I think.

Massachusetts General Hospital to add program on autistic adults

23 Aug

Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) has received a $29 million grant to expand its pediatric autism program to a program that also gives comprehensive care to adults.

From the Boston Globe:

The hospital plans to announce Tuesday that it will receive $29 million, the fourth- largest gift in its history, from Nancy Lurie Marks and her family foundation in Wellesley, in part to add a major adult component to its pediatric autism program. The money will also allow the hospital to expand its services for children with autism, who now wait up to a year for an appointment, conduct extensive research, advocate for patients, and train physicians.

The Nancy Lurie Marks foundation describes itself as:

The primary mission of the Nancy Lurie Marks (NLM) Family Foundation is to help people with autism lead fulfilling and rewarding lives. The Foundation is committed to understanding autism from a scientific perspective, increasing opportunities and services available to the autism community and educating the public about autism.

The foundation was established in 1977.

This is a great step forward. As the story notes, autistics often stay with their pediatricians well into adulthood for lack of better options.

The Boston Globe quoted Peter Bell of Autism Speaks:

Bell said that while he knows of two autism clinics in the United States that treat adults, nothing “comes close to the kind of plan Mass. General is looking at. This is tremendously exciting, and I hope others will follow.’’

I agree. This is tremendously exciting and I hope others will follow.

Autism “is treated as a childhood disorder but it’s lifelong,’’ said Clarence Schutt, director of the Wellesley foundation, which is a leading funder of autism research and whose grant to Mass. General is its largest ever.

IACC comment time: No more procrastinating!

21 Aug

If you are like me you have put off submitting comments to the IACC.

If you are like me you need a reminder.

If you are like me you are in danger of missing the deadline.

Any thoughts about autism research? Let them know. Let them know if you think they are doing a good job or a bad job. Let them know if you think they should put more or less effort into any area.

Let them know here.

You don’t have to answer all the questions. You don’t even really have to stick to their format (if you hit “continue a few times, you get to an they even have an “other information” question).

I was going to try to write this without referencing groups that have opinions I disagree with. However, here is a comment from the Age of Autism blog on the IACC:

Answering their questions made me ill. The idea that their research intiatives include “where do I turn for help” and “what does the future hold”. What a ridiculous drain and distraction from important things such as treatment and prevention.

“What the future holds” is the category for adults with autism. Only 5% of research funding goes towards such research.

Even if the research funding wasn’t that small:

If you feel, like I do, that research into areas such as services for autistic adolescents and adults are important. If you feel that there is room for anything beyond just “treatment and prevention”. If you don’t want your opinion dismissed as “..a ridiculous drain and distraction from important things…”, the time to be heard is now.


It only takes a minute.

Working together to advance respect for autistics

17 Aug

It was over before I knew it had happened. And it ended well.

Joe over at the Club 166 blog spotted a billboard that was, well, rather reminiscent of the “Ransom Notes” campaign billboards that caused a great stir in the autism communities. It appears that Joe spotted this billboard in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania:

York ASA Billboard

York ASA Billboard

Well, Joe blogged it as Could We Have A Little Originality, Please. That was Friday. He then sent the following letter on Sunday.

Dear Sirs/Madams:

As the father of a child on the autism spectrum, I am writing to express concern about the York, PA ASA chapter’s billboard campaign that associates autism with being kidnapped. I happened to notice one of your billboards while taking a vacation in Pennsylvania. This campaign is reminiscent of the 2007 Ransom Notes campaign that was undertaken (and subsequently removed) by the NYU Child Study Center in New York City.

Comparing people with autism to those who are kidnapped is not only factually wrong (my son hasn’t been kidnapped, he’s right here in front of me), but is demeaning and offensive to those who are autistic. Rather than “creating awareness”, I can only see the logical end result of such an ad campaign be one of creating fear, misunderstanding, and disrespect towards those who are autistic.

In Medieval folklore the image of a changeling was used to describe children with then misunderstood medical disorders or developmental disabilities. Fairies or trolls were thought to have kidnapped the “normal child” and left the changeling in its place. One would think that in the 21st century we could get past such folklore, and deal with reality.

Putting up ads that show such disrespect towards autistics will certainly not result in greater acceptance and integration in either the school environment or the community. As an organization that ostensibly has been set up to serve the needs of the autistic community, I urge you to immediately remove the ads. Furthermore, I strongly encourage you to consult with autistic self advocates before formulating future ad campaigns.

Thank you for your time, and I hope to hear from you soon.

Sincerely,

And this led to a “Quick Resolution“.

Along the way, Joe had help from abfh, including her “end of week stupid roundup” post.

Also, ASAN got involved. Here is Ari Ne’eman’s letter discussing what happened:

Hello,

Only a few hours after our letter and thanks to the hard work of bloggers like Joe at Club 166, Abfh, Cracked Mirror in Shalott and others who wrote in and called about the billboard campaign, ASA-York has agreed to pull the billboards. This is a sign of the importance of working together as a community to address issues like this. A year and a half ago, it took the combined strength of 21 disability organizations from across the country to have our voices be heard on a billboard campaign not dissimilar to this one. Today, our community’s reputation for action and ethics has grown to the point where we can bring about change much more rapidly. This should serve as a reminder of the importance of a strong, united Autistic community with a clear moral vision of a better future for Autistic people. Small victories like this remind us of what we can accomplish by working as one community on issues of every kind and size. Thank you to everyone who took action and in particular to the members of the blogosphere who first rallied the community around this. I encourage people to write to ASA-York’s President Amy Wallace at Amy Wallace amywallace3@gmail.com to express your appreciation for their swift action to remove unethical advertising and to encourage them to work with the Autistic community in the future.

Regards,
Ari Ne’eman
President
The Autistic Self Advocacy Network
http://www.autisticadvocacy.org
info@autisticadvocacy.org
732.763.5530

I’m glad to see this advocacy effort pay off so amicably and so quickly.

Joint Letter from Self-Advocacy Organizations to Secretary Sebelius

20 Jul

There has been a lot of online discussion about how Health Care reform will affect the autism communities. This has included a number or recent posts on this blog.

Much of the discussion here and elsewhere has focused on children and, especially, on ABA. There is a lot more to autism and a lot more to health care than just these subjects. Case in point, the letter below.

A number of self-advocacy groups have sent a joint letter to the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (Secretary Kathleen Sebelius). One of these groups is ASAN, the Autsitic Self-Advocacy Network.

(Edit) This is an effort to bring in issues from the Community Choice Act, which includes much that the CLASS act has left out. ASAN has an action alert on this. Please, take the time to sign the online petition.

This is something we all should be getting behind.

July 10, 2009 VIA Facsimile & E-Mail

The Honorable Kathleen Sebelius

Secretary

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

200 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20201

Dear Secretary Sebelius:

Thank you for your leadership this week in bringing the issue of Long Term Services and Supports back into the health care reform discussion by expressing support for including the Community Living Attendant Services and Supports (CLASS) Act in the health care reform legislation currently making its way through the Congress. As leaders of grassroots disability organizations, we write to request a meeting so that we can open up a line of communication with you and your team as health care reform takes center stage.

The disability community has advocated that reforming Long Term Services and Supports (LTSS) is a critical component of any health care reform initiative. As you know, adequate home and community services are not only preferred by seniors and people with disabilities, but also save money by avoiding serious secondary medical conditions, unnecessary trips to the emergency room, hospital stays and doctor visits. With your letter supporting inclusion of the CLASS Act, the administration has taken a first step in addressing this critical issue.

Although the CLASS Act would expand resources available to individuals and families to purchase LTSS to enable them to remain in their own homes in the community, this legislation does not:

* eliminate the institutional bias in the Medicaid program which forces Americans with disabilities and older Americans into nursing facilities and other institutions;

* meet the needs of seniors and people with disabilities who are already in nursing facilities or other institutions or who are at immediate risk of being forced into such a setting;
* address the needs of seniors and people with disabilities who will require LTSS but won’t qualify for the proposed benefit because they are not working;
* address the needs of persons who acquire disabilities earlier in life and won’t qualify because they cannot secure employment;

* provide any actual assistance for five years after it is enacted because people must contribute for five years before they can receive any benefit; or

* meet the needs of persons with significant disabilities who would require more assistance that would be provided under this benefit.

That’s why we need the Community Choice Act (S683/HR1670).

The Community Choice Act (CCA) would eliminate the institutional bias in Medicaid and give a real option for seniors and people with disabilities who want to live in the community with LTSS. It would address the needs of individuals who are at risk of institutional placement and give people who are already in such settings an opportunity to return to community living. CCA would provide immediate relief to Americans who are struggling with this issue, whether they were born with a disability, acquired one later in life, or are helping a family member. CCA provides a safety net for people with the most significant disabilities and allows people with incomes above the Medicaid level to buy into this program. Ultimately, the Community Choice Act brings federal LTSS policy in line with the Supreme Court’s Olmstead v. L.C. decision, giving every American with a disability the right to live in the most integrated setting.

We are writing to urge that the administration express its public support for including the Community Choice Act in the Affordable Health Choices Act. As a Presidential candidate and as a United States Senator, President Obama has expressed his support for and cosponsored the Community Choice Act. This legislation has a broad base of support within the aging and disability communities. In fact, over 80 national aging and disability organizations have endorsed this legislation.

We look forward to working with you to end the institutional bias so that every American is given a real choice in how and where they receive long term services and supports. We respectfully request a meeting with you this month to discuss how we can work together to accomplish our mutual goals.

Sincerely,

Bruce E. Darling

Organizer, ADAPT

Andrew J. Imparato

President and CEO, American Association of People with Disabilities

Ari Ne’eman

President, The Autistic Self Advocacy Network

Brenda Battat

Executive Director, Hearing Loss Association of America

Nancy J. Bloch

Chief Executive Officer, National Association of the Deaf

Kelly Buckland

Executive Director, National Council on Independent Living

Daniel B. Fisher, MD, PhD

Steering Committee Member, National Coalition of

Mental Health Consumer Survivor Organizations

Chester Finn,

President, Self Advocates Becoming Empowered

cc: Henry Claypool, Director, Office on Disability

Eric London resigns from Autism Speaks

7 Jul

Dr. Eric London has resigned from Autism Speaks. I read his resignation letter a while back, but I held off blogging it until I could confirm it was legitimate. This letter is taken from the Autism Science Foundation blog.

After three years of great hopes for Autism Speaks being the optimal vehicle to advance autism science and treatment, I regretfully and sadly must announce my dissociation from this organization, including resignation from the Scientific Affairs Committee.

Despite the very excellent work that Autism Speaks has done in the area of awareness and legal advocacy, there are many differences which I have with the organization, mostly concerning the direction and prioritization of the science program. There have been numerous decisions made which I believe have adversely impacted autism research and none of those decisions were made upon the advice of the Scientific Affairs Committee. The processes with which science decisions have been made have been contrary to my hopes and expectations when the NAAR-AS merger was effectuated.

If this were the only issue, I might have continued to try to work from within the organization to influence science policy and direction. However, the pivotal issue compelling my decision is the position which Autism Speaks is taking concerning vaccinations. The arguments which Dr. Dawson and others assert– that the parents need even further assurances and there might be rare cases of “biologically plausible” vaccine involvement –are misleading and disingenuous. Through its website and other communications, Autism Speaks has been influential and contributory in encouraging parents’ doubts. By preferentially investing and advocating for the use of limited financial resources on the “biological plausibility” argument, the organization is adversely impacting the advancement of autism research.

Recent reports have documented significant outbreaks of measles and other infectious diseases which could have been controlled and even eradicated. The lowering of the vaccination rate has already led to deaths. If Autism Speaks’ misguided stance continues, there will be more deaths and potentially the loss of herd immunity which would result in serious outbreaks of otherwise preventable disease. I further fear that if and when herd immunity is lost, there may be a societal backlash against the autism community.

In my role as an Autism Speaks Scientific Affairs Committee member, I would be lending credibility to an organization whose scientific agenda and positions I can no longer ethically support. Please accept my resignation, effective immediately. If anyone would like to discuss this with me further, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely, Eric London MD

This is pretty harsh criticism of Autism Speaks, which has touted itself as a science-based organization taking direction from the research community. Instead, it appears that decisions are being made in direct opposition to their own Science Affairs Committee.

You may recall that when the IACC’s Strategic Plan was released, Autism Speaks pulled support (whatever that means) based on the lack of research into vaccines. No comment from Autism Speaks on lifespan issues, therapies or any other topic. Just vaccines.

The big question is whether Autism Speaks is just another Vaccines-Cause-Autism organization but hiding under a cloak of science. If so, they should let the donors know so they can take their money elsewhere.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →