A film/documentary will be released in Spring 2007 about the link (ahem) between mercury and autism. After viewing the trailer I thought that possibly an examination of same of the claims made and scare-tactics used might be in order. I kept a tally of the more obvious logical fallacies as the trailer progressed.
Archive | MMR RSS feed for this section
A little perspective
18 SepParental beliefs about autism.
A study published this year looked at parental beliefs regarding the;
etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of autism spectrum disorders.
It found some interesting stuff that not only turned a spotlight on the beliefs of parents but also gave a little perspective to the ‘thiomersal/vaccine’ believers and the prominence (or otherwise) of their role in the wider community. It was also interesting to me as just over a year ago, I reported on a study that looked at the type of treatments parents used in connection with their autistic kids.
In that survey, detoxification (including chelation) was the least used treatment coming in bottom across groups of treatment and groups of autism ‘severity’ (as judged by the researchers). I was interested to see how things had changed after a year or so.
In this survey, 26% of parents believed there was a specific cause or contribution to their child’s autism. 45% answered ‘maybe’. That’s a frustrating example of a poor question. ‘Cause’ and ‘contribution’ are two very different things. It would’ve been better if the research team had separated those options. But that’s what we have.
In terms of those causes, vaccines and genetic predisposition stand almost neck and neck at 29% and 26% respectively. Other options included mother and/or child environmental insult, pregnancy complication, antibiotic taken by child, other medication and prem birth. Me? I’m with the 29% who obviously answered ‘I don’t know’. I’m not aware of anyone who thinks autism is strictly and only genetic and as we know the people who believe autism is strictly and solely vaccines are kooks like the John Best’s of this world. As far as I can see, the twin studies quite clearly demonstrate that genes _and_ environment play a part. Anyone who believes its definitely one or the other needs to clear their head and think again.
87% of parents reported having used a CAM (complimentary/alternative medicine) based therapy with the average number of treatments tried being 6.
This is the most interesting (to me) part of the survey. It’s like a look at the Spectrum of Biomed and based upon it I’m going to start classifying biomed based beliefs where Bio(Dtx) – which refers to the detox parents – is the most severe form of biomed and Bio(Diet) -which refers to parents who stop with GFCF etc – is the least severe. I really suggest you download this whole file and read the table on page 6.
First up we have the Bio(Diet). This is simply stuff like GFCF or other restricted diets. I can’t see what the issue with this is at all. I also can’t see how its an autism treatment particularly. Most kids would probably benefit from a reduction in carbs or sugars. My daughter has Aspartame banned from her diet. Not because we believe there’s a Illuminati plot to control the world via sweeteners but because it gives her headaches and makes her go hyper. I’m not keen on it myself.
However, we need to be clear – the efficacy of these diets is not in question (to me). What _is_ questionable is calling it an _autism_ treatment.
After that we have what I’m going to categorise Bio(supps). This is edging very slightly into woo territory now. Some of the stuff is probably useless but also non-dangerous (extra Zinc, Folic Acid etc). It may improve health, but does it ‘improve’ autism? I don’t see how. Also, the option ‘megadose vitamins’ is in this category and that treatment has been known to hospitalise autistic kids on at least one occasion.
After _that_ we get into genuine woo in a big way. This is Bio(Dtx) and encompasses the detox options like chelation as well as things like AIT and Homoeopathy as well as things I’d consider ‘nice’ but not ‘treatment’ such as music and dance therapy and swimming with dolphins.
Lastly, there are the Bio(meds) people. These are the people who use Neuroleptics and anti-depressants. Not sure we can call this woo as such but its definitely questionable as to merit.
Across those four groupings, the Bio(Dtx) crowd were in shortest supply. This was very reassuring to me. It gave me some perspective about how well represented this particular group were in the wider autism (not autistic) community.
They’re small. Things haven’t noticeably changed in a year. They still make up the smallest percentage of Biomed parents (chelation users stand at 13%, less than AIT users). Its a much smaller group than last years survey (77 vs 500) but last year chelation users stood at just under 8%. They’ve progressed by 5% in a year if we discount the influence of a such smaller population.
Because I tackle these people head on, there’s sometimes a tendency to think of them as having more influence than they actually do and them being in greater numbers than they actually are. Studies like this offer some perspective as to the real size of these organisations populations.
That is _not_ to say we in the more sceptical community should ignore them – not at all, they are dangerous zealots with a penchant for absolutism which must be constantly countered – but maybe we should remember that their influence is not as great as they like to think it is.
This paper also has some interesting things to say about the role of physicians in diagnosing autism. This is beyond my remit but I would like to see Orac or NHS Blog Doc taking them on. Especially the parts suggesting doctors should accommodate altie therapies.
Biomed Is A Spectrum
29 AugEvery so often someone attempts to misrepresent my statements and/or thoughts/blog posts etc. Why? Because it suits their agenda to do so I guess.
One of the usual misrepresentations is my opinion on biomed. As an example, a commenter on YouTube recently told me that I was against treating autism in any way, shape or form which was news to me. When I asked this commenter to point to any proclamation of mine to back that up, he fell strangely silent.
There are people ‘out there’ to whom life truly is black and white. Autism is mercury poisoning (or for the real hardcore – thiomersal). Autism is hellish. Kev Leitch is anti Biomed.
Obviously, none of those things are true but people believe it. Go figure.
So Biomed. Am I against it? No. Am I against what some people might think of as Biomed? Yes.
I’m not against biomed as a concept. If I did I’d be a rather large hypocrite. My daughter takes vitamin supplements (Vitamin C), she also take Omega-3 fish oil. She also uses a steroid inhaler as she’s asthmatic. If she’s having trouble sleeping over a period of nights we may use melatonin. Does that make me a biomed parent? I’d guess it does to some people. I’m quite happy to be thought of as a biomed parent, just as I am a neurodiversity parent. Whatever.
Here’s the thing. Vitamin C supplements, Omega-3 oil, steroid inhalers and melatonin won’t ever ‘cure’ autism. She has those things because we feel, as her parents that she needs them. Amazingly, I give supplements to my non-autistic kids too. Because we feel they need them. Not because we’re treating them for something.
There’s a disturbing amount of people however that _do_ see these things as treatments for autism. The idea is bizarre. How exactly does a steroid inhaler ‘cure’ autism? These are the people that I find troubling. I am against what these people try to claim. I’m sure some of it helps some _comorbidities_ associated with autism, but I am equally sure it won’t ever cure autism. Do I have an issue with that? Yes and no. There’s nothing wrong with anyone trying to help their kids to not be ill. However, it saddens and troubles me to see autism medicalised and touted as something that can be cured with minerals, HBOT, chelation and the other extreme therapies. I’m sorry but that stuff is bullshit. The people who peddle it are, at beast, wrong and at worst, trying to rip people off.
Here’s a prime example of the worrying state of biomed:
My son is 10 months old. He had oxygen deprivation at birth and his SPECT scan shows mild hypoperfusion in the left temporal lobe, a little less in the right temporal lobe, frontal lobes and in the cerebellum. The scan report however only says mild hypoperfusion in the left temporal lobe. I have read that hypoperfusion in the temporal lobes is a hallmark of autistic children. At this stage no one knows how my baby is going to develop, but I don’t want to take any chances. he’s already delayed in speech, imitation and playing social games.
Yes, you read that right. 10 months old. And his mum is concerned because a 10 month old is apparently speech delayed. Don’t know about you but I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry when I read that. For extra chills down your spine read the rest of the responses. No one – *no one* – questions why a 10 month old needs HBOT. or, even more pertinently, _what’s odd about a 10 month old not talking_ ?
This is the sort of stuff that scares the crap out of me.
On the other hand, for some people, biomed is nothing more than a GFCF diet. Didn’t work for us but what the hell – can’t do much harm either.
So biomed is a spectrum too. However, there’s a distinct line that gets crossed as well. For some people, biomed fits their preconceived agenda of all doctors being evil. These people are dangerous. Anyone who sees life in absolutes is dangerous. Life is not that simple or clear cut. Such people are usually deeply unhappy about some aspect of their lives and need to fabricate an enemy or a conspiracy to rail against. Instead of seeing the reality of human screw-ups they see a paranoid fuelled plan to stop them or hurt them or both on a personal level. The tragedy is how often they drag their kids along with them. It’s really worrying to me how much the mercury militia crowd have moved down that path. It’s one thing to suspect thiomersal might play a role in autism and quite another to ‘know’ it and refuse to accept, or even _read_ anything to the contrary, and yet that’s where they’re headed as a group.
Someday I’m going to blog about the Combating Autism Act in the US. Its fascinating to an outsider to see the evolution of this bill and reactions to it from the mercury crowd. It needs a really in depth examination but suffice it to say (for now) that the mercury militia aren’t happy as the CAA disregards specific vaccine language. That’s how much tunnel vision exists in the mercury militia at the moment – nothing to do with vaccines? Not interested.
Amazing how even autism can become a single issue subject to some isn’t it?
So – biomed – its neither good nor bad. There are things wrapped up in it that seem to be good and things that make no sense and are very worrying. Same goes for biomed people.
Please also see Zilari’s recent post on the subject.
Professor Richard Lathe. Brain, Autism and Environment Part I: Strange Bedfellows
22 AugRichard Lathe, ex Edinburgh University and currently of Pieta Research has recently published a new book on Autism Brain and Environment.
The book build on his recent study – discussed here – that attempted to show a link between Porphyrin excretion in urine and ASD.
It transpired that there were notable question marks over the means of expression and design of that study and Professor Lathe was generous enough with his time to participate in a respectful exchange of views via email to discuss these question marks and also to widen the discussion out to his new book.
As regards the paper, I had two main issues with it. Firstly, I was curious as to the role of established DAN! zealot Ms. Lorene Amet. Secondly – and this is peripheral to Ms Amet’s participation – how did the study account for the question mark over low creatinine being noted by several people, including DAN! doctors such as Ms Amet.
I’ll quote now from our email correspondance. I asked Lathe how Amet had come to be involved in the study and why she had not mentioned the DAN! accepted potential of low creatinine given that the study would be utilising it as a constant to express ratios against.
Ms Amet was not a primary contributor to the paper and none of us, as far as I am aware, discussed creatinine with her. I personally have no connection with DAN et al. Her independent association with biomedical remediation was after the porphyrin results were out (first draft of the Nataf paper in the last quarter of 2004). To my mind, it is unreasonable and distracting to critique the data on what authors do after the analysis. Perhaps you should leave this aside.
Which is fair enough. However, to suggest she didn’t know is not likely and to suggest that the study was unalterable is interesting. At the very least this should have been mentioned and addressed – if only to discount it. It is a very large question mark over the results.
When I pressed Lathe further on Amet’s involvement, he had this to say:
Re Dr. Amet, her participation was difficult and her role in the study marginal. I have no further comment to make.
It seemed a nerve had been touched. Earlier in our conversation I had alluded to Ms Amet’s role as Editor along with Boyd Haley and Andrew Wakefield of the non peer reviewed journal Medical Veritas to which Lathe had opined:
May I add my informal view that Medical Veritas is a load of quasi-scientific mumbo jumbo, and detracts from attempts to address the real issues.
An opinion I’m in complete agreement with. I had also referred to Amet as Lathe’s partner, by which I meant writing partner. However, I got the following reply:
Sorry, the lady is not my partner, my wife has that chore.
To which I apologised, clarified I had meant writing partner and moved on.
Now I’m as curious as the next person and something here wasn’t ringing true at all. A poke around revealed that they had (at least at one time) been an item:
Lloyd Allanson was diagnosed with autism last year His drawings have been selected for exhibition by his mother Lorene Amet and her partner Richard Lathe.
So what? I hear you ask. All this is evidence of is a bad break up that Lathe doesn’t want to talk about. Not my business or yours, right? True enough but at the same time its more than a little misleading to describe her slide into biomed as ‘independant’ when it clearly was not. It made me question everything that Lathe told me from that point on.
Back to the creatinine. In reference to the lowered creatinine potential of autistic kids, Lathe said:
1.There was no significant decline in urinary CRT levels in any of the autism groups, though there was a non-significant trend to a reduced level.
2. Reduced CRT, and increased porphyrin, both appear to be markers of environmental toxicity.
Neither of which is discussed in the paper at all and which Lathe went on to say was ‘pointless’ to publish. I disagreed. I think it was a) dishonest to distance the paper from Amet when its clear there was both a professional and personal connection. Lorene Amet discusses the paper at length in the minutes of the May 2005 Action Against Autism (now Autism Treatment Trust) and knew quite a lot about it. I would not describe her knowledge as ‘marginal’. Hence I have strong reservations about what Professor Lathe judges to be significant and what is not. It seems to me that this matter could easily be settled by publication of *all* data. However, to his credit, Lathe admitted that:
The long and short of it is that the response of CRT to different levels of heavy metal toxicity has not been studied adequately.
Also not studied adequately is a key concept the paper (and subsequently the book – to be addressed in a later post) rely heavily on. Lathe made a point regarding excretion of metals:
We have not looked at the metals themselves because (a) the body burden of heavy metals does not parallel excretion (b) there is a possible deficit in heavy metal mobilization.
(a) is interesting but (b) is fascinating. This ‘possible deficit’ becomes a key concept of the book and the seasoned warriors amongst us (of both sides) will recognise that Lathe is talking about the Holmes et al paper. Lathe started off by lauding it greatly. However, when I pointed out the shortcomings of the paper:
This study has been criticized, among other reasons, because its findings have not been duplicated and are not consistent with two other studies that used better methods. (See Def. Reply Brief, Document #102, Expert Report of Susan E. Folstein, Ex. 2 at 4 (“Thus, the study by Holmes is highly suspect – it used a peculiar sample, a suspect laboratory (IOM 2004) and uncertain methods of statistical analysis, and it offered a highly idiosyncratic interpretation of data.”).)
In a case-control study, the mean hair-mercury level was significantly lower in a group of 94 children with autism (0.47 ppm) than in a group of 45 matched controls (3.6 ppm), leading the authors to speculate that enhanced mercury retention plays a role in the etiology of autism (Holmes, Blaxill, & Haley, 2003). The mean hair-mercury level in the control children was much higher than would be expected, however, as the geometric mean in 1- to 5-year-old U.S. children is 0.12 ppm (McDowell et al., 2004). This suggests that the control samples in this study might have been contaminated.
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol. 6 No.3 p. 83
…which confirm the blog posts of Prometheus and DoC
and to which Lathe responded:
The same hair samples analysed by Holmes were reanalysed by a different technique and the result confirmed (Hu et al.)
which was a paper I hadn’t read so I went ahead and did read it and was surprised that Lathe was relying on this paper. The study listed three participants and the way the hair samples were collected were in contradiction with a statement from Mark Blaxill (which i cannot find) that specified baby’s _first_ haircuts _must_ be used. I summed it up thusly:
a) it is important that they are first baby haircuts – in which case Hu is irrelevant, or b) it isn’t important – in which case the bulk of the evidence shows that there is something wrong with the Holmes data.
Lathe’s answer was:
I agree with your caveats. One must hope that someone will independently confirm or refute the Holmes study.
This is not a minor point. A large part of both the paper and (even more so) the book need the Holmes papers findings to be right. It was at this point that I started to suspect that the book might contain equally glaring reliances and errors. This suspicion was confirmed when I read Mike’s thorough examination of chapter four of Lathe’s book. Chapter Four is the base from which the book expounds its theory. Mike kicked that base away comprehensively.
But there are other areas of Lathe’s theory that need addressing. In Part II, I’ll be doing that.
Recovery Stories And A Dash Of Reality
13 AugEvery now and again someone (usually Brad Handley) says that I’m wrong because they have recovery stories to prove they’re right. That the mercury poisoning that caused their child’s autism has been reversed.
My constant response has been ‘Really? Where are they? If any child recovered from autism it would be international front page news’. Nobody has ever replied to that question.
Generation Rescue
So I decided to go looking. As it’s Brad who usually bandies this assertion about I thought I’d start with the Generation Rescue site under the heading ‘success stories’. There are fifty-nine (59) ‘success stories’ on there in total which sounds pretty impressive until you actually read them.
Out of these 59 success stories, just 3 describe their child as having been reclassified as no longer meeting a diagnosis of ASD. That’s a ‘recovery’ rate of 5%. Interestingly, one of these cases states they did not use chelation at all. That puts the Generation Rescue chelation success rate at a little over 3%.
General Stories
NB: It should be noted I may be duplicating stories here. The GR site says it has gathered stories from around the web which _may_ include these other stories.
But maybe we need a bigger group of stories – not from Generation Rescue in other words – to try and get a bit of accuracy.
Let’s look at the ‘roll call of recovered kids on Autismnet and see what we can glean from it.
There are twenty three (23) kids listed in the table. There are four children who’s parents say they have lost their diagnosis. This is a 17% recovery percentage. Fascinatingly, only one of those kids (4%) used anything other than ABA. As far as _biomedical_ interventions go, that’s worse than the GR site.
Lastly, we’ll look at Dana’s view which also lists recovery stories. There are a lot of stories on this site but a careful look only reveals sixteen (16) that discuss kids on the spectrum – some discuss non-autism stories so were discounted. Towards the bottom of the page there are a number of duplicates (especially the videos and Scott Shoemakers son’s story is told twice) or kids I recognised from other pages. In the videos I watched, nobody really discussed diagnosis at all so I discounted those.
Of the 16 stories, one (1) says their child has lost their diagnosis to biomedical/non-ABA therapies. That’s a ‘success’ rate of 6%.
If we total all these stories up we get a total of ninety-eight (98) ‘success stories’ wherein a total of five (5) claim total recovery and their kids lose their diagnosis. That’s a recovery rate of 5.1%.
Other Methods?
By contrast, one ABA clinic reports a ‘success’ rate of over 50% whilst the original Lovass (1987) paper claimed a success rate of 47%. Even a more realistic and stringent look at Lovass’ (Smith et al 2000) revealed a success rate of over 13%.
The ‘recovery from mercury poisoning’ hypothesis ain’t doing so well in comparison.
Other methods that claim a good ‘recovery rate’ are AIT (from Bernard Rimland no less) and Son-Rise.
Then of course there are the uncounted kids who simply ‘recover’. In the introduction to his book Autism, Brain and Environment, Richard Lathe mentions three case studies of marked progression in kids. What’s notable about them is that their progress can be attributed simply time and the maturation process.
I further have no doubt that if I described my daughters typical day she would easily fit onto all of the ‘recovery/success’ stories’ web pages discussed. She wouldn’t be described as losing her diagnosis by any means but she easily meets or exceeds the progress made and attributed to chelation etc. Again, she’s simply growing and maturing.
Bottom line: a ‘recovery’ stat of 5% is meaningless in terms of indicating the ‘success’ of a theory. Turn it on its head and this means that its 95% unsuccessful.
There are no figures (or at least none I could unearth) that relate what percentage of autistic kids simply move off the spectrum without any fanfare – who just happen to be not autistic anymore – if anybody _does_ have some, I’d like to hear them. But here are a few interesting quotes from a variety of sources:
Mysterious spontaneous recovery. It hasn’t happened often, but *it has happened often enough for the phenomenon to be worth noting*: over the past 25 years I have received a handful of letters from parents which read something like this: “Please remove our address from your files. Our child has continued to improve so greatly—we don’t know why—that now he is no longer considered autistic.
It may be because of spontaneous recovery from whatever constituted their autism. I do remember meeting some older children and teenagers over the years who “used to be autistic”.
This page states that:
Studies have shown that about 2% of the children will recover anyway, “spontaneous recovery” is the term used in these cases
But it fails to cite which studies claim this figure. However, its clear that:
a) Spontaneous recovery does happen
b) This possibility is not ruled out of the various ‘recovery/success’ stories.
Dr David Ayoub – Hidden Agenda and Stone Cold Certainty
1 AugIn a world seemingly obsessed with celebrities and the status of famous people, each cadre of existence have their own celebs – even autism research has its own budding superstar league. The top ten elites probably command good money from conference fee’s and parental recommendations from the big forums on the Yahoo Group lists so it can pay to get to be an Autism Superstar.
Just outside the elites are the triers – the ones who never seem to reach the giddy heights of a Wakefield or a Rimland. For these guys, cracking the top ten can mean an endless round of strident press releases, foaming at the mouth invective and slightly less fashionable talking shops.
One of the newer ‘triers’ is Dr David Ayoub. He’s (fairly) new to the scene but already he’s caused a stir with a typically brash ‘triers’ entrance to the market.
David Ayoub – Autism Specialist
I first remember hearing the name David Ayoub on the website of Erik’s FAIR Autism Media where Ayoub is listed as the Medical Director. One would suppose that the Medical Director of an autism organisation that believes thiomersal causes autism would be an expert in either autism or maybe toxicology. In actual fact, Ayoub is neither. He’s a Radiologist.
David Ayoub, MD, is a radiologist at the Memorial Medical Center in Springfield, Illinois
So what does Radiology have to do with autism? Well, nothing.
What medical skills could Ayoub, as a trained Radiologist, bring to the field of autism? None.
No matter, maybe Ayoub has published some good science about autism or mercury?
Well, no – Ayoub MD, has (count ’em) five entries on PubMed, none of which touch on either autism or mercury. His last paper (on digital imaging) was published in 1997.
Whilst the irony of having a trained radiologist on the board of directors of an organisation that seems to think radiology is not necessary to diagnose Precocious Puberty is at least marginally amusing, what’s more amusing is the Ayoub Wikipedia entry. It’s written in breathlessly idolising fashion – headings are entitled ‘Track and field phenom’, ‘Science Prodigy’ and ‘Vaccine education crusader’. This is the online CV of a real ‘trier’, I think you’ll agree. Only a ‘Science Prodigy’ like Dr Ayoub could become Medical Director and ‘Vaccine education crusader’ at an organisation that specialises in subjects he knows nothing, medically speaking, about.
David Ayoub – Definitely Maybe
Perhaps Ayoub’s most famous contribution to the autism = thiomersal debate is his vanity piece written by Evelyn Pringle. Entitled David Ayoub – Thimerosal Definite Cause Of Autism, this article seemed to say a lot but actually said nothing at all beyond the title. Let’s not beat around the bush here. Just like Brad Handley, David Ayoub is stating that thiomersal _definitely_ causes autism. Pretty strong words. Let’s take a look beyond the title of the article though and see what the man himself says to back that up.
Well, the short answer is (of course) nothing. The longer answer starts off with:
I can state that the certainty of the science supporting mercury as a major cause of autism is probably more overpowering than the science behind any other disease process that I studied dating back to medical school.
This is the same science, formulated by the same scientists, that was recently rejected by a court Daubert hearing don’t forget. And not rejected by some legal trickery, but rejected as it was crap.
But David Ayoub, the ‘Science Prodigy’ can state that the same science is ‘certain’ and is ‘more overpowering than the science behind any other disease process’ that Ayoub has studied since medical school.
Possibly a good time to remind ourselves that David Ayoub is a radiologist with five papers to his name, none of which concern disease process, let alone autism or toxicology. I think its safe to assume that the last time Ayoub studied disease process was actually in medical school. I also think it’s safe to assume that Ayoub’s ‘certainty’ might very well be all the evidence the more credulous amongst us might need but I’m far from impressed at Ayoub’s experience, qualifications and bombastic pomposity.
But Ayoub isn’t done yet. The ‘Science Prodigy’ has more stone cold certainties to lay on us:
A growing number of experimental, epidemiological and biochemical research, has unequivocally shown that mercury is directly linked to the development of autism spectrum disorders
They have? Maybe someone could point these out to me? I seem to have missed them. Somewhere along the line I think our ‘Vaccine education crusader’ has concentrated more on the crusading than the research.
I really don’t see the need for more research to prove causality.
Well, of course he doesn’t – did he ever? The whole of the mercury militia have never been overly concerned with trifling matters like research to back up their beliefs. That’s why all the accumulated science to date was thrown out of court and will, barring fresh evidence, continue to be thrown out of court.
Next up in Evelyn’s little thumb nail sketch:
Ayoub is the Director of the Prairie Collaborative for Immunization, an organization that is self-funded, which aids organizations, journalists, and legislators obtain accurate information to assist their work.
Obtain accurate information eh? I really, really doubt that.
So, let’s go see what the Prairie Collaborative thinks is accurate information. Well, under the heading ‘Science’ we have ‘papers’ from Bradstreet, Bernard, Holmes and LOTS from (you guessed it) Geiers. Even Ken Stoller pops up, bless his HBOT heart. So this dross is the ‘accurate information’ that ‘unequivocally’ shows that ‘mercury is directly linked to the development of autism spectrum disorders’. It’s a roll call of the scientists and science that the recent RhoGAM hearings threw out as being rubbish.
He also links to the 2005 DAN Consensus paper – you know the one – it begins with:
This monograph is not intended as medical advice. Its intention is solely informational and educational. Please consult a qualified medical or health professional if you wish to pursue the ideas presented.
Nothing fills you with confidence as much as a strongly worded, legally enforceable medical disclaimer eh?
Recently, David Ayoub has been on a media frenzy. Flushed with the promise of cracking the elite top ten, he’s been commenting on news sites and to reporters left right and centre.
David Ayoub – Darling of the Press
After the killing of Katie McCarron, David Ayoub was revealed as a confidant of Karen McCarron, Katie’s killer.
Dr David Ayoub said he met with Karen McCarron shortly after her daughter was diagnosed with autism.
“She was very dedicated to trying to get treatment for her daughter,” Ayoub said. “I’ve met with a lot of parents who are dealing with autistic children, and she was one of the most loving mothers. This is a story that’s been played over and over again. Homicide, suicide. The families just don’t have the support”
David Ayoub was very vocal on how much of a tragedy this was for poor ‘loving mothers’ like Karen McCarron. Oddly, he had no words of compassion for Katie herself, Katie’s sister, Katie’s Dad, Katie’s Grandparents, Katie’s Uncle and Aunts, her friends or her teachers all of whom had to live with David Ayoub’s barely concealed plea for services.
As a side note, I see today that Karen McCarron’s lawyers are considering an insanity plea. I strongly urge those representing Katie to contact David Ayoub as, based on the above quote, he can easily testify to Karen McCarron’s loving and dedicated nature. That should be enough to establish she was far from insane. I’m sure as a ‘Science Prodigy’ his opinion will carry much weight.
As recently as last month, David Ayoub was again demonstrating his ‘Science Prodigy’ status in a news blog in answer to a Doctor who doesn’t believe the MMR/thiomersal hypothesis. Displaying his keen sense of ethics and science, Ayoub began with:
Dr Ehmke’s comments about parents concerned with vaccine safety is an insult to anyone with any knowledge of the science surrounding this debate. His letter was filled with misinformation, errors and just plain foolish dribble.
Well, no actually Dr Ayoub. What’s actually insulting is your own rabid insistence in the face of no actual _evidence_ , let alone proof, that thiomersal or MMR cause autism.
Ayoub then pointed out Ehmke’s sole error:
MMR vaccine never contained thimerosal. This blunder set the tone for the rest of his letter.
Interesting. Possibly no one told Boyd Haley or Liz Birt this little fact.
I have been working with Boyd Haley since September 2000 who testified at the recent Congressional hearing. Your source is incorrect. I have Boyd’s testing results and there is mercury in MMR. He did not find as much as what was in Hib, Hep B and DTaP. However, IT IS THERE.
I guess we can await Dr Ayoub’s denouncement of Boyd Haley as a foolish dribbler with interest. Other gems from that piece include:
The epidemiological studies refuting the claim of a link to vaccine mercury have all been refuted as flawed studies.
There are at least 4 published papers that demonstrated autistic children have a lower, genetically determined ability to eliminate mercury due to lower levels of glutathione
There are hundreds of physicians breaking rank with their own organizations such as the AMA and AAP and admitting that mercury in vaccines was indeed a major cause of a variety of developmental disorders
I would discourage parents from having too much trust in what their pediatrician will tell them
Basically, its a (poorly formatted) rant based on nothing more that our resident ‘Science Prodigy’s’ belief in his pet hypothesis. There’s no actual science in there at all.But what turns a respectable radiologist, just beginning a career in his field and a career as a published scientist in his field into a what we see – an absolutist who’s stone cold certainty based on no decent science has led him to his current position as Medical Director of two organisations widely regarded as anti-vaccine in agenda?
David Ayoub – A Hidden Agenda?
On the 3rd of January of this year David Ayoub was a guest on Radio Liberty. Radio Liberty is an online radio station that specialises in talkshows about fringe conspiracy theories. Other interview subjects that month included John De Jacomo who gave a talk on:
The prophetic significance of world events today. People are looking for peace; will this usher in globalism – or pave the way for the reign of the anti-Christ?
And Caryl Matrisciana who addressed the burning issue:
The Chronicles of Narnia movie is being touted as a great Christian movie. Is there a possibility that the New Age is being dressed in Christian clothing?
Fascinating, relevant and deeply scientific questions, I think you’ll agree.
So what was our ‘Science Prodigy’, Dr David Ayoub there to discuss?
Linking mercury in vaccines to global population control.
Unfortunately, I can’t find an mp3 of this interview anywhere but believe me, I would _love_ to hear David Ayoub’s thoughts as a ”Vaccine education crusader’ on how vaccines are used to control the global population. Maybe he could upload this interview to the Prairie Collaborative site in order to aid ‘organizations, journalists, and legislators obtain accurate information’ about how vaccines are used to control the global population.
Now, being an avid fan of nutty conspiracy theories I thought I’d check out Erik’s others friend’s (John Scudamore) website (whale.to) to see what I could find about the global population control theory.
Well, its not good news I’m afraid. Apparently, the global population are Targets of the Illuminati and the Committee of 300. They’ll get us like so:
Unemployables in the US, in the wake of industrial destruction, will either become opium-heroin and/or cocaine addicts, or become statistics in the elimination of the “excess population” process we know of today as Global 2000.
To cause, by means of limited wars in the advanced countries, by means of starvation and diseases in the Third World countries, the death of three billion people by the year 2050, people they call “useless eaters”. The Committee of 300 (Illuminati) commissioned Cyrus Vance to write a paper on this subject of how to bring about such genocide. The paper was produced under the title “Global 2000 Report” and was accepted and approved for action by former President James Earl Carter, and Edwin Muskie, then Secretary of States, for and on behalf of the US Government. Under the terms of the Global 2000 Report, the population of the US is to be reduced by 100 million by the year of 2050
Not good. But it seems that as long as I _don’t_ go to America and I _do_ have a job, I’ll be safe from the Illuminati! Hurrah!!
Evidently, Dr David ‘Science Prodigy’ Ayoub believes that vaccines are yet another weapon in the vast, nefarious arsenal that the Illuminati can bring to bear on us. Eeeek!
What Happened to Dr David Ayoub?
At some point, David Ayoub clearly stepped off the mainstream science path and started his journey into conspiracy theory driven belief. That’s fine as far as it goes. He can believe whatever the hell he likes.
What’s not fine though is how his attempts to see through his global population control anti-vaccine agenda have latched onto autism. He deals in unverified absolutes and needs to be thought of in the context of what he really is – an antivaccinationist with a disturbing set of political beliefs.
Jennifer unearthed a truly disturbing presentation from David Ayoub regarding his population control conspiracy theory. It’s an ‘interesting’ read!
Stalling For Time, Mainstream Death, Underground Immortality
21 JulA few days ago I posted about how bad a time the autism = mercury poisoning via thiomersal/vaccines believers were having of late. There was the Fombonne study which revealed yet more lack of correlation between vaccines and autism, then there was the first legal try-out of the quality of the science and the scientific experts accumulated to demonstrate the relationship between thiomersal and autism which was dismissed due to the terrible quality of both. This was followed by the state of Hawaii refusing to ban thiomersal as there was no scientifically sound reason to do it and just as a nasty kick in the teeth, the latest quarterly reports of autism cases in California reported that there was still no drop in the figures despite the long term removal of thiomersal from mainstream vaccines.
Possibly then its no coincidence that on the 18th July, the Petitioners in the Autism/Vaccine Omnibus court cases filed a request to delay the deadline for submitting their case for general causation. The deadline (which has already been adjusted for petitioners several times before) was the end of 2006. Petitioners now want it extended to June 2007. They say this is to ensure the expert academics don’t have to curtail their teaching duties and also (because its in the summer holidays) allow families to attend.
Well, that’s one opinion. My personal opinion is that the RhoGAM case was a pretty large wake-up call and people suddenly realised that the ‘expert’ witnesses were _far_ from expert and that the body of science was shoddy in the extreme.
The petitioners also make some amusing requests regarding how this case is followed. Firstly, they want the court to allow for all 5000 families to attend in a central location such as Houston or Chicago. Maybe a resident of one of these cities can suggest a legal arena with a 5000 seat capacity?
They also suggest that the whole thing is played out via live web casts for those unable to attend in person. Strikes me that these requests are simply there to provide argument and thus stall for more time. In short, petitioners legal team are actively trying to turn this into a media circus, not a trial.
Most tellingly of all, petitioners want to _limit_ the amount of time each expert can be cross examined for. I wonder why. Well, no, I don’t. If I had Haley or the Geier’s in my corner I’d want to limit the amount of time they can speak too.
I feel sorry for the Special Master here. If he lets them have the extra time then he knows he’s setting a precedent. These petitioners have had ample time to prepare their case. If he refuses the request then he’ll be savaged and no doubt be painted as a Big Pharma Shill.
So is this the rag tag end of the thiomersal hypothesis? Yes and no. In scientific terms there’s still no evidence whatsoever to indicate a causative link between thiomersal/MMR/vaccines and autism. This aspect never really got off the ground at all. When we turn to epidemiology (is there a positive numerical correlation between thiomersal and autism?) then what we hear, as Holmes once famously explained to Watson, is the sound of no dogs barking.
Every quarter for the past two or three years, Rick Rollens has compiled the quarterly data from the CDDS without fail. David Kirby describes it as ‘the gold standard’ of numbers relating to autism. Every quarter, as caseload (as defiend by Rollens) grew it was trumpeted as proof that the thiomersal in vaccines caused an increase in autism…..except for the first time I can remember, Rollens has not compiled these stats this quarter. Kirby has not announced them on the Huffington Post blog. Schafer has not mentioned them in the SAR. No dogs bark this quarter. Why? Because thiomersal use is almost gone in vaccines and yet still the autism numbers rise.
Lenny Schafer recently said:
Myself and other autism activists believe there is enough evidence to support a causative relationship between mercury and autism in a court of law, in front of a jury, where standards of evidence are different than that of the narrow focus of scientific findings. And if you can convince a jury, you can convince the public.
He’s, of course, wrong as the recent RhoGAM hearing indicates. The standard of determination for scientific hypothesis’ is still, and always will be, science. I’ll close this first part of this post with a quote from one of my favourite poets – Yeats.
_Turning and turning in the widening gyre_
_The falcon cannot hear the falconer;_
_Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;_
_Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,_
_The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere_
_The ceremony of innocence is drowned;_
_The best lack all conviction, while the worst_
_Are full of passionate intensity._
*~Second Coming.*
I’ve long been fascinated by conspiracy theories. How they grow, how they operate etc. The autism/vaccine hypothesis has mutated into a conspiracy theory now as it fulfils many – if not all – of the sociological and psychological requirements to be deemed as such.
When conspiracy theories combine logical fallacies with lack of evidence, the result is a world view known as conspiracism. Conspiracism is a world view that sees major historic events and trends as the result of secret conspiracies. Academic interest in conspiracy theories and conspiracism has identified a set of familiar structural features by which membership of the genre may be established, and has presented a range of hypotheses on the basis of studying the genre. Among the leading scholars of conspiracism are: Hofstadter, Popper, Barkun, Goldberg, Pipes, Fenster, Mintz, Sagan, Johnson, and Posner, from whom the following list is synthesized.
Let’s work through some of ‘diagnostic criteria’ for conspiracies:
- Initiated on the basis of limited, partial or circumstantial evidence; – TRUE Began after FDA asked for review of mercury in ’97..
- Addresses an event or process that has broad historical or emotional impact. – TRUE ‘Poisoning’ children is a highly emotive subject. Appeals to emotion are constantly made.
- Reduces morally complex social phenomena to simple, immoral actions – TRUE Instead of seeing institutions as error-capable they are painted as evil
- Personifies complex social phenomena as powerful individual conspirators; – TRUE Continued belief that those ‘in power’ at the CDC/FDA/AAP ‘know’ whats going on
- Allots superhuman talents or resources to conspirators;
- Key steps in argument rely on inductive, not deductive reasoning;
- Appeals to ‘common sense’ – TRUE Lacking science, the fallback position is common sense.
- Exhibits well-established logical and methodological fallacies; – TRUE One word – Geier.
- Is produced and circulated by ‘outsiders’, often anonymous, and generally lacking peer review – TRUE Not sure about anonymous outsiders but definitely lacks peer review
- Is upheld by persons with demonstrably false conceptions of relevant science; – TRUE Geier, Kirbys, Olmsted, Handley, Bernard, Schafer….etc etc etc
- Enjoys zero credibility in expert communities; – TRUE
- Rebuttals provided by experts are ignored or accommodated through elaborate new twists in the narrative;
- The conspiracy is claimed to involve just about anybody; – TRUE FDA/CDC/me/George Bush/Every doctor on the planet
- The conspiracy centers on the “usual suspects”; – TRUE Big organisations. CDC etc.
So we can see that the autism/thiomersal/vaccine hypothesis more than qualifies as a conspiracy theory. The believers also fit the descriptions perfectly. Many autism/vaccines believers also believe in other related conspiracy theories. As an example, Kathleen recently posted another in her ongoing fascinating series of posts on the Geier’s where they were interviewed on radio. The host said:
Why are these things going on? Well, if you’d like to know why they’re going on, you need to get my talk on planned population reduction… And ladies and gentlemen, I hate to say this, but there really are people who want to hurt children… And if you doubt that, you need to get my book, Brotherhood of Darkness… Our government is poisoning us.
There really are people like Judy (sic) Gerberding and others at the CDC, who know exactly what they are doing, and they are evil. I’ve been to the CDC, I’ve met many of these people when I was back there, and of course, not the same people, I’m sure those people have gone on and probably been richly rewarded working for the drug companies or working elsewhere now, very prosperous after doing all the harm… We’re up against organized evil. We’re in a battle for the souls of men, and the survival of Christian civilization.
This is a vocalisation of the ‘human farming’ conspiracy theory. The host believes that:
some of our leaders have dedicated their lives to destroying our nation (US)
<source .
I have also heard conspiracy theories that state that (somehow) the 11/9 WTC attacks are (somehow) part of the autism/vaccine theory and that autism is a ‘disease’ constructed with the sole purpose of selling more pills.
Evidence of Harm also has a new member – John Scudamore of whale.to who’s site is a haven for conspiracy theories such as The Illuminati, Depopulation control, Big Brother, Black Ops. Charmingly, John has an entire section devoted to rubbishing medical charities:
the purpose of cancer research is not to find a cure for cancer but to perpetuate the cancer industry consisting mostly of research and chemotherapy
Another supporter of the theory (and in particular Generation Rescue) is David Icke who once declared himself as the Son of God and who believes that we are controlled by all powerful lizards.
It’s almost a necessity that the thiomersal/autism hypothesis becomes a conspiracy theory – it ensures its life beyond the point when the rest of the world has moved on (and we are very close to that point now) and gives people a reason to explain what they perceive as the bad in their life. Maybe these people are more to be pitied than argued with but their conspiracy theories affect my kids life directly. They still need challenging lest they sink into the same murky excuses for genocide that the recent re-painting of the holocaust as an event that never occurred occurs here too.
Bad Week For Thiomersal/Autism Hypothesis
15 JulIt’s really not been such a good week or so to believe the thiomersal/autism hypothesis.
Firstly, there was the latest Canadian study that concluded:
The prevalence of pervasive developmental disorder in Montreal was high, increasing in recent birth cohorts as found in most countries. Factors accounting for the increase include a broadening of diagnostic concepts and criteria, increased awareness and, therefore, better identification of children with pervasive developmental disorders in communities and epidemiologic surveys, and improved access to services. The findings ruled out an association between pervasive developmental disorder
and either high levels of ethylmercury exposure comparable with those experienced in the United States in the 1990s or 1- or 2-dose measles-mumps-rubella vaccinations.
Next up was the legal and scientific smackdown which examined the scientific credentials of both the body of evidence amassed thus far in support of the thiomersal/autism connection _and_ two of its leading expert – Boyd Haley and Mark Geier:
The court…finds that Dr. Haley’s report does not state an expert opinion that thimerosal causes autism, rather just that he has a theory about how such a thing could happen. At best, he expressed “strong belief” that the cause of “neurodevelopmental disorders in infants” is exposure to an organic-mercury compound such as thimerosal……the disconnected literature he presents does not add up to the opinion and conclusion that Dr. Geier is offering. Accordingly, the Court finds that Dr. Geier’s literature review, in this instance, does not meet the Daubert standard of being both derived by the scientific method and relevant to the “task at hand…..the Court notes that Dr. Geier is not a pediatrician or a pediatric neurologist. In fact, testimony was presented to the Court that Dr. Geier was not even successful in sitting for his Medical Board examination in the specific field of pediatric genetics….the Court finds that Dr. Geier was not specifically qualified to perform a differential diagnosis of a pediatric neurological disorder, and, that he did not properly perform the differential diagnosis
Thirdly, despite a long drawn out letter writing campaign featuring other named expert witness Richard Deth, Hawaii decided to veto a bill banning thimerosal containing vaccines because:
This bill is objectionable because it restricts the use of FDA-approved vaccines for no scientifically sound reason…….This bill ignores the body of current scientific evidence on thimerosal-containing vaccines.
Bad enough, but just to really kick the thiomersal/autism hypothesis in the teeth, CDDS released their quarterly autism figures. Joseph looked at the figures and sure enough – they’re still rising. Let’s recall that David Kirby has said that:
If the total number of 3-5 year olds in the California DDS system has not declined by 2007, that would deal a severe blow to the autism-thimerosal hypothesis. He [Kirby] also conceded that total cases among 3-5 year olds, not changes in the rate of increase is the right measure
Guess what? We’re two quarters away from 2007. The total number of 3 – 5 year olds in the CDDS has _not_ declined.
3 – 5 cohort caseload over the last 16 quarters as compiled by Dad of Cameron.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Recent Comments