Archive | IACC RSS feed for this section

Recovery Act Funds Support Strategic Goals for Autism Research

9 Nov

The National Institutes of Health were given a large amount of money as a part of the economic stimulus package.

I just got the email below from the NIH autism listserve and thought some people reading here would be interested:

_____________________________
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) awarded more than 50 autism research grants, totaling more than $65 million, which will be supported with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) funds. These grants are the result of the largest funding opportunity for research on autism spectrum disorders (ASD) to date, announced in March 2009.

Awards were based on the quality of the proposed study and how well it addressed short-term research objectives detailed in the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee’s (IACC’s) Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research.

“These studies currently hold the best promise of revealing what causes autism, how it might be prevented, what treatments are effective, and how service needs change across the lifespan-questions noted in the IACC strategic plan as critically important to improving the lives of people with ASD and their families. The Recovery Act funding makes it possible to do the type of innovative research necessary to find these answers more quickly,” said Thomas R. Insel, M.D., director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), part of NIH, and IACC chair.

Examples of awarded studies include:

· Catherine Lord, Ph.D., of the University of Michigan, and Somer Bishop, Ph.D., of the Children’s Hospital Medical Center in Cincinnati, will lead a two-site study to adapt the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised-the current gold standard for diagnosing autism-into a brief parent interview that can be done over the telephone. This new tool will help reduce research screening costs and help researchers to quickly identify potential participants for ASD studies.

· David Amaral, Ph.D., Sally Rogers, Ph.D., and Judy Van de Water, Ph.D., all of the University of California Davis, aim to expand on a previous pilot program to identify different subtypes of autism based on behavioral, biochemical, and brain imaging markers. This research may help improve future efforts to study, diagnose, and treat children based on their subtype of autism.

· Joseph Buxbaum, Ph.D., of Mount Sinai School of Medicine; Richard Gibbs, Ph.D., of Baylor College of Medicine; Gerard Schellenberg, Ph.D., of the University of Pennsylvania; James Sutcliffe, Ph.D., of Vanderbilt University; and Mark Daly, Ph.D., of the Broad Institute at MIT; will lead a collaborative network of research labs and centers using cutting-edge technologies to discover specific genes underlying autism. Their research will provide insight into the biology of autism and expose genes and pathways that constitute high priority targets for the development of novel treatments.

· Sally Rogers, Ph.D., and Laurie Vismara, Ph.D., both of the University of California Davis, aim to develop and test a parent-delivered preventive intervention for infants 6-11 months old who are at high risk of developing ASD because they have an older sibling with the disorder. The intervention will focus on reducing atypical behaviors and developmental delays to help lessen or prevent the disabling symptoms associated with ASD.

· Olga Solomon, Ph.D., of the University of Southern California, will lead a study on how race, gender, socio-economic status, family culture, and communication during clinical encounters affect the health care experiences of African American children with ASD in an urban setting. Such research may help reduce the existing disparities in ASD diagnosis and service delivery for this and possibly other underserved populations.

· Ruth Carper, Ph.D., of the University of California San Diego, seeks to fill a gap in scientific understanding of the effects of ASD in later life. By exploring age-related changes in cognition and possible protective factors, as well as the changing service needs and quality of life concerns among adults and older people with ASD, this project may reveal targets for intervention and inform public policy.

· Rob McConnell, M.D., of the University of Southern California, and colleagues will explore possible links between traffic-related air pollution and ASD risk. They will also examine genes that help process pollutants in the body among children with and without autism to determine how these genes may affect ASD risk.

· Steven Camarata, Ph.D., and Mark Thomas Wallace, Ph.D., both of Vanderbilt University, will evaluate the effects of “sensory integration treatment” on communication and social skills in children with ASD. Based on desensitization techniques, this widely used but little studied treatment is believed to help reduce children’s resistance to outside stimuli and improve the integration of sensory information.

In addition to the contributions of direct findings from these studies, much of the data will also be available to other researchers through the National Database for Autism Research (NDAR). As a tool for the autism research community to exchange research related information, this use of NDAR is likely to advance the understanding of ASD heterogeneity to a far greater degree and at a more rapid pace than would be possible through any single project.

The grants will be administered by the five NIH Institutes that currently fund autism research: the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD), the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), with NIMH taking the lead on this effort and providing more than half of the total funds. This effort is included in the $5 billion in grant awards for biomedical research supported through the Recovery Act during FY 2009, as announced by President Obama during his visit to NIH on September 30, 2009.

IACC to hold extra conference call on risk factors and prevention tomorrow

3 Nov

This notice just in from the IACC email list:

At the request of members of the IACC, the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) Scientific Workshop Panel 3 will be holding a conference call tomorrow from 12:00 – 1:00 PM ET, Wednesday, November 4, 2009 to discuss the updating of Question 3 of the 2009 IACC Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research.

The agenda for the conference call will include a discussion of recommendations for line edit changes for Question 3 of the IACC Strategic Plan – “When Should I Be Concerned?” which addresses ASD risk factors and prevention. The draft line edits will be discussed at the November 10, 2009 meeting of the IACC full committee.

This phone call will be open to the public via conference call lines. Members of the public who call-in will be able to listen, but will not be heard.

To access the conference call dial:

USA/Canada Phone Number: 1-888-455-2920
Access code: 1050786

The latest information about the call can be found at: http://iacc.hhs.gov/events/2009/iacc-scientific-workshop-conference-call-cont.shtml.

You received this announcement because you attended a previous meeting of the IACC or joined the IACC mailing list. We apologize for duplicate notices. For more information on this meeting, or the IACC, please visit http://iacc.hhs.gov/

The IACC also can now be found on Twitter (www.twitter.com/IACC_Autism).

Please note: Schedule subject to change.

Age of Autism: misquotes Story Landis…jumps to unsupported conclusion

2 Nov

When the Age of Autism reported on a note written by Story Landis, they added a word that dramatically colored what was said. I am left wondering why would AoA make such an clearly detectable misquote? Read on and you will see what I mean.

Take a look at the piece titled “Dr. Story Landis: Autism not a multi-symptom disease but a money making scheme?“. That whole “money making scheme” part is what got people riled up. But is it really supported by what was said?

Here’s a little screenshot of the Age of Autism blog post, if you don’t want to click through to their site:

Segment of post about Story Landis

Segment of post about Story Landis

I know this seems redundant, but here is what they quote Dr. Landis as saying:

“I wonder if Lyn Redwood is pushing autism as a multi-symptom disorder in order to feed into vaccine injury awards.”

Emphasis added by me.

Why add emphasis, you might ask? Because “awards” is not in what Dr. Landis wrote in that first line. Go ahead and check. Here’s the note, as downloaded from the of the Age of Autism blog.

“I wonder if Lyn Redwood is pushing autism as multisystem disorder to feed into vaccine injury?

It is the second line that mentions awards:

Would be a good justification for looking at vaccine injured kids who have gotten awards.

The insertion isn’t a simple mistake–it is made twice in the same blog post. Here is the second place the mistake was made:

How could Landis imply that families are “trying to make” autism into a total body disease in order “to feed into vaccine injury awards.”

Neither section in the “quotes” is accurate. “Trying to make” isn’t in what Dr. Landis wrote, and, as we have just seen, “feed into vaccine injury awards” isn’t either.

Without the word “awards” added the meaning that the Age of Autism blog post tries to convey, heck, the title of the blog post–that Dr. Landis was speculating that this was a “money making scheme”–is unsupported.

Let’s dive into this a bit deeper. David Kirby, blogger at the Age of Autism and at the Huffington post did a very strange thing. In his piece he gets the correct quote from the note, doesn’t mention the mistake made at the age of autism, but still pushes the Age of Autism interpretation:

To many parents, it seemed that Dr. Landis suspected Redwood of “pushing” the study of these multisystem problems merely to boost the number of autism cases filed in vaccine court (the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program), and to increase their chances for victory. Judging by the comments on Age of Autism, those parents were profoundly offended by the implications of that interpretation.

I’m curious as to how Mr. Kirby came to the conclusion that Dr. Landis’ note was “merely to boost the number of autism cases filed in vaccine court” and “to increase their chances for victory”. Dr. Landis didn’t mention the court, the chances of victory…or even “awards” in the context that would support Mr. Kirby’s interpretation.

I’d be curious as to whether Mr. Kirby pointed out the mistakes to the Age of Autism blogger in question.

A casual observer might find it odd how Mr. Kirby corrected the quote and yet persisted in pushing (yes, I’ll use the term pushing) the interpretation based on the misquote. The same casual observer would find it especially odd, since Mr. Kirby was the one to publicly disclose Dr. Landis’ explanation of her comment:

The other part of my note addressed the fact that it is important for autism researchers to study the children who have been most profoundly affected by their response to vaccines. That in no way mitigates my sincere apology to the families who interpreted my note to be uncaring and disrespectful.

“The other part of my note” being “Would be a good justification for looking at vaccine injured kids who have gotten awards.”

If you can look at the quote fresh, consider this interpretation–the first sentence, “I wonder if Lyn Redwood is pushing autism as multisystem disorder to feed into vaccine injury?” is discussing the if autism as a multisystem disorder would feed into the *idea* of autism as a vaccine injury. The assertion that her comment referred to vaccine injury “awards” is at best speculation and, at worst, a pretty clear misquote. I could speculate on the motives of the Age of Autism blogger, but haven’t we just seen how dangerous it is to speculate on motives with little information?

note: I made some small edits for clarity shortly after publishing this.

IACC meeting November 10

29 Oct

The following is an announcement from the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC)

The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) will be holding a Full Committee Meeting on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 from 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM ET at the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, in Rockville, MD.

The agenda for the meeting will include a discussion of recommendations for the annual update of the IACC Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research.

The meeting will be open to the public and pre-registration is recommended. Seating will be limited to the room capacity and seats will be available on a first come, first served basis, with expedited check-in for those who are pre-registered. Online pre-registration will be available. Please visit the IACC website for pre-registration information: http://www.iacc.hhs.gov/events/2009/full-committee-mtg-announcement-November10.shtml.

The meeting will be remotely accessible by videocast and conference call.

To access the conference call dial:

USA/Canada Phone Number: 888-577-8995
Access code: 1991506

Members of the public who participate using the conference call phone number will be able to listen to the meeting, but will not be heard.

The latest information about the meeting, including videocast information and online registration can be found at: http://iacc.hhs.gov/events/.

You received this announcement because you attended a previous meeting of the IACC or joined the IACC mailing list. We apologize for duplicate notices. For more information on this meeting, or the IACC, please visit http://iacc.hhs.gov/

The IACC also can now be found on Twitter (www.twitter.com/IACC_Autism).

Please note: Schedule subject to change.

You can call in for whatever amount of time you have available. Get the information firsthand.

The war on Tom Insel and the IACC

23 Oct

Tom Insel is director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) but he is better known to readers of this blog as the chair of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee. If you read other autism blogs, he’s probably very well known to you, as he has been the target of a concerted attack from the vaccines-cause-autism groups for a few months now. They even got the publicist, David Kirby, to take their battle to the public in a CBS interview.

Let me take a moment to make a side point. The vaccines-cause-autism groups (SafeMinds, Generation Rescue, the National Autism Association, Talk About Curing Autism (TACA)…I’m probably missing one or two), are basically a single consortium as evidenced by their single blog and their shared membership. I don’t see the need to treat them as separate entities. I really don’t see that they should be given multiple representations on the IACC.

I’ve been watching the IACC pretty closely for some time. I’ve also been watching the vaccines-cause-autism consortium. I’ve been watching the consortium build pressure against Dr. Insel.

One thing I’ve noticed: this level of pressure directed at Dr. Insel wasn’t always the case. Less than a year ago, Dr. Insel was not their target.

Take a look at one of the classic pieces of IACC intimidation: a piece called “Grinkers Stinker“. This is dated January, 2008. It was timed to coincide with a 4-day workshop that was the kick-off for the Strategic Plan process.

“Grinker’s Stinker” was a piece about the Dr. Joyce Chung, the former IACC coordinator. She is the wife of Prof. Roy Richard Grinker, anthropologist and author of the book Unstrange Minds. Dr. Grinker has publicly stated that he accepts the scientific consensus that vaccines did not cause an epidemic of autism. Dr. Chung has made no public statements (at least that I can find), but the lack of actual information about her or her opinions didn’t stop a blog post decrying her position on the IACC. From the blog post:

Does Joyce Chung agree with her husband? Did they ask her this question before she took the job?

Oddly, the last comment to that blog piece, by Generation Rescue’s “DC Liason” Kelli Ann Davis, starts with the question, “Can I suggest that we try and put an end to all the mudslinging?”

History has proven that, no, the Age of Autism can’t put an end to the mudslinging. Unfortunate, that.

Take a look at the blog post. There is no mention of Dr. Insel. No one decrying his “lack of leadership”, no one claiming “collusion” or “malfeasance”. None of the mudslinging terms currently used against members of the IACC, especially Dr. Insel. In fact, the first mention of Dr. Insel is in the comment by Ms. Davis. In her comment Ms. Davis suggests that Dr. Insel will be watching out for conflicts of interest.

Times certainly have changed. The Age of Autism likes to demonize those it disagrees with, and Dr. Insel certainly has been a recent target.

What happened?

Dr. Insel (a) had the IACC reconsider an initiative to call for a vaccine-autism study to be included in the Strategic Plan and (b) spoke before a congressional hearing about why vaccine/autism studies are not a high priority.

Not surprising to many of the readers here, I am sure, the vaccines-cause-autism consortium have a single issue (vaccines). As long as Dr. Insel’s position on vaccine/autism research, there was hope for the consortium and they left him alone. Once his current opinion formed and was public, he was public enemy number one. Yes, Dr. Paul Offit (vaccinologist and outspoken critic of the notion that vaccines cause autism) has been superseded.

Recently, Dan Olmsted (owner of the Age of Autism website) called for Dr. Insel to resign. Again, it boils down to the single issue: vaccines.

So, here we are. The vaccines-cause-autism consortium has declared war on Tom Insel for opposing their single-item agenda. If you think “war” is too strong a word, take it up with Mr. Olmsted. In referring to the recent incident where notes from an IACC member were made public:

…notes dropped on the floor (see the notes here) at the IACC, recovered by friendly forces and reported on our blog…

Yes, the Age of Autism people are “friendly forces”.

Here’s my perspective on Dr. Insel, for whatever it may be worth. He is the chair of the IACC. In my opinion, his role is to run the meetings and manage the staff. He should be getting good people in to serve on the IACC and the subcommittees and good people to consult on the topics that are discussed. Basically, his role is that of a facilitator–get good people together with the tools they need to do their job. He needs to be knowledgeable enough on the subject (autism) to do this.

You know what? Given the fact that his full time job is director of the NIMH, he’s actually done a pretty good job.

Is there room for improvement? Heck yeah. How about putting a greater emphasis on research into the needs of autistic adults? The majority of autistics are adults. And yet only 5% of the funding is being applied to this critical area.

But, of course, the squeaky wheels (the vaccines-cause-autism consortium in this case) get the grease. The squeaky wheels have been calling for research into environmental causes of autism. Tens of millions of dollars are being focused on this. Why are the squeaky wheels unhappy? Because the squeaky wheels didn’t really mean “environmental causes”. That was only a code word for vaccines.

This level of tension is not just sad. It is detrimental to the progress of the IACC. There are a lot of autistics, parents, professionals and organizations who are interested in working with the IACC. Why spend any more effort on the groups that have declared war?

(note, I made a number of changes in this piece shortly after publishing it)

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.

The myth that the IACC doesn’t support environmental causation research

21 Oct

Say a lie often enough and people will believe you. That is the strategy over at the Age of Autism blog, and for the organizations that sponsor it.

One of their favorite lies is the idea that the IACC (Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee) doesn’t support research into environmental causes of autism.

We are lucky that the IACC has published their research portfolio, showing not only the budgeted amounts, but the amounts committed so far. Below is page 11 from this document, for “Question 3. What Caused This to Happen and Can This Be Prevented?”

Question 3. What Caused This to Happen and Can This Be Prevented?
3.1 Initiate studies on at least five environmental factors identified in the recommendations from the 2007 IOM report “Autism and the Environment: Challenges and Opportunities for Research” as potential causes of ASD by 2010. IACC Recommended Budget: $23,600,000 over 2 years. 2008 research funding $7,600,673

3.2 Coordinate and implement the inclusion of approximately 20,000 subjects for genome-wide association studies, as well as a sample of 1,200 for sequencing studies to examine more than 50 candidate genes by 2011. IACC Recommended Budget: $43,700,000 over 4 years. 2008 research funding $4,065,392

3.3 Within the highest priority categories of exposures for ASD, identify and standardize at least three measures for identifying markers of environmental exposure in biospecimens by 2011. IACC Recommended Budget: $3,500,000 over 3 years. 2008 research funding $713,227

3.4 Initiate efforts to expand existing large case-control and other studies to enhance capabilities for targeted gene – environment research by 2011. IACC Recommended Budget: $27,800,000 over 5 years. 2008 research funding $4,603,867

3.5 Enhance existing case-control studies to enroll broad ethnically diverse populations affected by ASD by 2011. IACC Recommended Budget: $3,300,000 over 5 years. 2008 research funding $184,628

3.6 Determine the effect of at least five environmental factors on the risk for subtypes of ASD in the pre- and early postnatal period of development by 2015. IACC Recommended Budget: $25,100,000 over 7 years. 2008 research funding $1,803,628

3.7 Conduct a multi-site study of the subsequent pregnancies of 1,000 women with a child with ASD to assess the impact of environmental factors in a period most relevant to the progression of ASD by 2014. IACC Recommended Budget: $11,100,000 over 5 years. 2008 research funding $2,742,999

3.8 Identify genetic risk factors in at least 50% of people with ASD by 2014. IACC Recommended Budget: $33,900,000 over 6 years. 2008 research funding $36,966,711

3.9 Support ancillary studies within one or more large-scale, population-based surveillance and epidemiological studies, including U.S. populations, to collect nested, case-control data on environmental factors during preconception, and during prenatal and early postnatal development, as well as genetic data, that could be pooled (as needed), to analyze targets for potential gene/environment interactions by 2015. IACC Recommended Budget: $44,400,000 over 5 years. 2008 research funding $17,297,788

Adding those topics funding environmental causation and gene-environment causation, I get a budget of $135,500,000 for six topics.

Summing the gene only projects (3.2 and 3.8) I get $77,600,000, for two projects.

Yes, about 60% of the causation budget is on environment and gene-environment mechanisms.

Why isn’t the Age of Autism blog writing about this? Why aren’t Generation Rescue, SafeMinds, the National Autism Association…all of the “environmental causation” organizations happy with this level of funding?

Why isn’t Lyn Redwood, IACC member and SafeMinds co-founder claiming a huge victory? How about Mark Blaixill, who is on an IACC subcommittee, and is also a member of SafeMinds? Why isn’t he discussing this?

The reason is obvious, to me at least. There isn’t a specific project calling for research into vaccines.

Guess what, there isn’t anything ruling out vaccine research either.

If the vaccines-cause-autism groups want to call for transparency in the process, why don’t they practice it? Why are they hiding information from the autism community? Do they actually care about environmental causation aside from vaccines? It doesn’t seem like it to this observer.

NIH director on the lack of trust within the autism community

20 Oct

This video is taken from the Simons Foundation blog. The Simons Foundation was able to get NIH Director Francis Collins to make a statement about the resignation of Story Landis from theIACC .

I am impatient for answers. If there were any good evidence that vaccines were causal in autism, I’d be pushing for research on that subject.

As Dr. Collins notes, we should not assume that there is “just one path” that will get us to the truth. I would assert that it is precisely the vaccine/autism organizations who can’t leave behind their one path. We need to move forward, not spin our wheels in the same place that hasn’t proven fruitful for the past 10 years. It’s time to move beyond vaccines.

http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=7156587&server=vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=0&show_portrait=0&color=6854a1&fullscreen=1

Dr. Landis resigns from IACC: Vaccine-autism lobby shot themselves in the foot

19 Oct

Here’s a big “oops” moment for the good people at the Age of Autism blog and the organizations it represents.

They may have forced the resignation of someone sympathetic to their cause.

Here’s the back story. Dr. Story Landis is one of the government’s representatives on the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC). She wrote some notes during a past meeting. After the meeting, someone found the notes and passed them to a blogger at the Age of Autism, who published one of them with a scathing blog post calling for her resignation.

Dr. Landis has resigned.

Note that the blog post was timed to coincide with last week’s IACC meeting. Also note that no one appears to have contacted Dr. Landis prior to posting the blog piece. For that matter, no one appears to have contacted her prior to her resignation.

Here’s what the note read:

I wonder if Lyn Redwood is pushing autism as multisystem disorder to feed into vaccine injury?

Would be a good justification for looking at vaccine injured kids who have gotten awards.

Mr. Kirby has blogged the incident. He includes an email he received from Dr. Landis, quoted below:

I can understand people’s reaction seeing just the note that I wrote during the recent IACC scientific workshop. I felt it important to apologize immediately to the autism community, which I did at yesterday’s IACC, subcommittee meeting. Let me repeat my apology for the record: “I have seen some thoughts that I jotted down during the recent IACC meeting posted on Katie Wright’s blog. I am very sorry that my personal reflections during the meeting have been taken out of context and have been interpreted by the community in ways that I would never intend. As a responsible and committed member of the IACC I am sorry for the upset that it has caused and the concerns that it has raised.”

The other part of my note addressed the fact that it is important for autism researchers to study the children who have been most profoundly affected by their response to vaccines. That in no way mitigates my sincere apology to the families who interpreted my note to be uncaring and disrespectful.

Repeated for emphasis: “The other part of my note addressed the fact that it is important for autism researchers to study the children who have been most profoundly affected by their response to vaccines. ”

If things are as they appear, the Age of Autism bloggers may have just gotten someone sympathetic to their goals to resign from the IACC.

Mr. Kirby’s comment about this explanation set of an irony meter:

A lot of people I have spoken with were also surprised by the statement, given the general hostility toward vaccine research they have encountered at the IACC.

Hostility? When it comes to the IACC there is a lot of hostility, I will grant that. But it flows from certain autism groups and the Age of Autism blog in particular towards the IACC. Mr. Kirby has joined his fellow Age of Autism bloggers in the intense hostility shown towards the IACC and its chair, Dr. Thomas Insel. Watch the recent interview that Mr. Kirby did with Sharyl Attkisson if you would like to confirm this.

I realize that many people are upset that the IACC is not funding vaccine research (even though I am not one of them). But, “hostility”? No. The IACC and Dr. Insel have remained respectful on the subject.

Let’s recap many of the mistakes made in this story

1) Dr. Landis should have been more careful with her private questions and not left the notes behind

2) Whoever did the “dumpster dive” embarrassed the autism community. I’m sure it would have been considered justified if they hadn’t screwed up and forced the resignation of someone sympathetic to their cause. But that leads us to:

3) The Age of Autism decided that a surprise attack was more important that gathering all the facts and published the blog piece without comment from Dr. Landis.

4) Bloggers, including myself, didn’t step forward to defend Dr. Landis’ right to pose reasonable questions.

5) Dr. Landis didn’t defend her own right to pose reasonable questions.

6) Dr. Landis resigned. Yes, I consider that a mistake.

7) Apparently Dr. Insel accepted her resignation. I consider that a mistake as well.

Let’s take a look again at the question Dr. Landis posed that caused such a stir: “I wonder if Lyn Redwood is pushing autism as multisystem disorder to feed into vaccine injury?”

Why is this such an outlandish question? Ms. Redwood represents SafeMinds, an organization which promotes the idea that vaccines caused an epidemic of autism. In their web page on Ms. Redwood’s activities on the IACC, SafeMinds made it extremely clear that autism as vaccine injury was the number one priority for the meeting where Dr. Landis wrote her note. It was perfectly reasonable for Dr. Landis to wonder how the idea of multi-system disorder ties into the idea of autism as vaccine injury. It could have been phrased better. Better yet, it could have been phrased better and posed as a question directly to Lyn Redwood. Unfortunately, the very same hostility that the bloggers Lyn Redwood’s organization sponsors make that nearly impossible. The same politicization of any statement about vaccines and autism that her organziation and Mr. Kirby, their publicist, make it nearly impossible to have that discussion.

Yes, there were people who thought the Age of Autism blog post was a good idea. Many probably still do. The same people are likely writing this post off as gloating at their mistake. This isn’t gloating. This is disgust. This is anger that a bunch of people have ratcheted up the hostility towards the IACC to a level that impedes discussion and progress, and then have the gall to blame the IACC for the hostility.

The fact that you guys shot yourselves in the foot in the process only serves to prove my point.

Listen in to IACC conference calls

12 Sep

The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee is preparing for a two day session to discuss their Strategic Plan for autism research.

That workshop will be held on September 30 and October 1.

Before that meeting the workshop panels will hold conference calls. You can listen in. See the note below.

The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) will be holding a Scientific Workshop to discuss the updating of the 2009 IACC Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research on September 30, 2009 and Thursday October 1, 2009 at the Bethesda North Marriott Hotel and Conference Center in Bethesda, MD. Information about the 2009 IACC Scientific Workshop, including the workshop agenda and logistical information can be found at the Scientific Workshop Announcement Page on the IACC Website.

In preparation for the workshop, each of the five workshop panels will be holding pre-workshop planning conference calls from September 14, 2009 to September 25, 2009. These phone calls will be open to the public via conference call lines. Members of the public who call-in will be able to listen, but will not be heard.

The pre-workshop planning conference call schedule and call-in numbers for the public are posted on the following web page: http://iacc.hhs.gov/events/2009/iacc-scientific-workshop-conference-call-sept30-oct1.shtml. If there are any changes to the call schedule, they will be listed on that page as soon as they are available.

The IACC can now be found on Twitter (www.twitter.com/IACC_Autism).

The Contact Person for this meeting is:
Ms. Lina Perez
Office of Autism Research Coordination
National Institute of Mental Health, NIH
6001 Executive Boulevard, NSC
Room 8200
Rockville, MD 20852
Phone: 301-443-6040
IACCPublicInquiries@mail.nih.gov

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →