Archive | Vaccines RSS feed for this section

Rendering unto

9 Jun

I’ve taken a deliberate and purposeful step away from everything autism related (online anyway) this last week and to be perfectly frank, its been a breath of fresh air. I’ve done some hard thinking and some hard talking/listening to family and friends and tried very hard to firstly compartmentalise what exactly I found so upsetting and offensive about the events of last weekend.

First, I was dismayed to find someone I considered an ally calling me names. It doesn’t matter under what guise it was – literary allusion or not – if you call people names they’re never going to find it easy to talk _with_ you.

I still haven’t been able to resolve the sheer mindless immaturity of this act and so I simply won’t try and rationalise it any more. It happened, it can’t be undone.

Secondly, I was even more dismayed – and deeply hurt – to hear someone I considered an ally accusing me personally and people I like of doing ‘things’. These things were never quantified and were never illustrated. I (we) were just supposed to accept they had happened.

I don’t operate like that. I do plenty of accusing on this blog. But I _back it up_ – and if I can’t back it up then I retract it. That’s how the world works. Nobody – under any circumstances – should be free to accuse anyone else of anything unless they can provide some evidence. Without that, we descend into anarchy.

Even more hurtful was to hear friends of the accuser wandering from blog to blog essentially saying ‘So? So you were accused of something – what’s the big deal?’ The big deal is integrity, respect, truthfulness. These things matter. Or at least, they matter to me.

A sideshoot of that issue was the same people saying ‘yeah, but underneath all the bluster, he has a point’. I cannot possibly convey to you how unbelievably frustrating it is to try and explain time after time that the underlying point – nothing about us without us – was never in question. Nobody thought otherwise. I was asking for the _specific examples_ of the allegations made against me and the Hub membership at large. Hijacking, usurping agendas, taking over.

This _is_ a big deal. To me, as someone who has spent the last 3 years invested in listening to autistic people regarding the autistic experience and trying to _support_ the agenda in one of the only ways I know how – technically – to hear that dismissed – _without any foundation whatsoever_ was like a kick in the teeth. That it should come from people that I deeply respected and who’s opinions I valued was the worst thing of all.

Thirdly, the vaccine connection. If anybody truly thinks that the vaccine/autism bullshit is anything other than the most important issue facing autism and autistic people right now then they need to pull their heads out the sand.

Right now, this week, a trial will begin that will effectively determine whether vaccines can legally cause autism. The outcome can potentially change the way the whole world views autism. The quacks lose and we can scale back a bit and move focus elsewhere. The quacks win….well, what happens then? Who knows, because as far as autism goes, all bets will be off.

Are you autistic? You’ll be considered first and foremost vaccine-injured. If you refuse treatment – what then? Will your ‘diversity’ be respected? Or will you be the new schizophrenics? Condemned to be held down and chelated much as schizophrenics were once held down and given ECT. Will you still be eligible for the help you get? Housing? Social? Monetary benefits…do you think you’ll still get them?

How about those autistic people who work? Think you’ll still have your employment rights? Would you be a ‘better’ employee for the company as autistic or chelated?

Are you the parent of an autistic child? Children who’s parents refuse treatment can be legally forced to surrender their paternal rights so doctors can apply that treatment. At the moment chelation for autism is seen as quackery. If this legal case goes through – who knows?

This happening right now.

Which brings me on to the concept of leadership. If autistic people alone want to not only lead and set the agenda but also decide what is acceptable for others to blog/talk about then they need to be exceptional leaders.

Leaders inspire, support their ‘troops’ and lead by example. They take responsibility. I haven’t seen much of that from certain autistic people of late. Indeed, when a leader is short sighted enough to think that its OK to ignore the vaccine issue then we are all – leaders and followers – in trouble.

If ever the autistic community needed leadership and vision in the face of a real, tangible threat then it is right now. This week.

I wish I could share with this (so far imaginary) leadership the emails I have received from parents this last week. If I could then I would tell my leaders that a good sized portion of their troops were now disillusioned and feel like they have been sold a bill of goods regarding neurodiversity. I feel a bit like that myself. Here is a quote from a parent (I was given permission to use this) who also happens to be ‘ND’:

All our voices are important. Even that of those who are less tolerant, as long as they can back up their thoughts and feelings with solid foundations, not walls that only bounce back reverberations of the original thought. I am afraid that some of our fellow ND associates have completely forgotten what the D stands for, and that truly bothers me.

It bothers me too. As someone else who is not NT but not autistic (e.g. – neurodiverse) I also think there are some people in the autism community who have forgotten that autism is a subset of neurodiversity, not its definition. They also seem to think that – as my email correspondent points out – ‘diversity’ = ‘autism only’. The people who originally taught me about awareness, disability rights etc continue to teach me but this time the lessons are not so pleasant and smack more of exclusion and not belonging to a ‘boys club’ than they do of diversity.

I got into this originally due to my daughter and that remains the overriding reason I participate. The idea of neurodiversity – that people with _a variety_ of differences – appealed to me instantly and still does. I don’t want to lead that community but I do want to participate – have my say – on how its agenda is set. I urge every parent of every autistic child, physically ND or not, to have their say too. I would temper that with reminding you that neurodiversity does not equate to autism and that as far as autism goes, you should have your say but never exclude autistic people – and be prepared for the weight of opinion to go against yours.

The saddest thing about all this is that I never thought that reminder was necessary based on our collective behaviour. The trap I fell into – until shown the nature of the trap by my big sister – is that not all autistic people do not want to hear your voices. The majority appreciate that you have something to add but they also know that they are (to borrow Kassiane’s phrase) QbE – Qualified by Experience – and that experience carries a large amount of weight.

In my next post I want to talk more about neurodiversity and how it encompasses – as oppose to ‘is defined by’ – autism. I’ll try and talk some more about my own ND neurology and why I am uneasy about how that neurology is viewed by some in the autistic community.

Autism Omnibus crashing?

30 May

Another few points of interest in the Autism Omnibus proceedings.

Firstly and perhaps most significantly is the defining of the Omnibus proceedings as being at ‘crisis point’ by the Special Masters overseeing the case:

Petitioners were supposed to provide (by their own suggestion) test cases that would show, in the first instance, how MMR and thiomersal working in combination would cause autism. Special Masters agreed to this arrangement and dictated that three cases would be needed. So far, only one out of the 4,700 cases in the Omnibus can be found.

At (the) first status conference in December 20 2006, when the PSC (Petitioners – the parents) first proposed moving to a test case format, Special Master Hastings advised the PSC attorneys that for a ‘test case’ approach to be effective, the PSC would need to offer additional cases, rather than a single test case, for trial. Since that time, the PSC has stated that it will select two such cases, and has represented that it is working diligently on selecting the two cases. At the status conference held on Jan 25 2007, the PSC was orally instructed to designate such cases within 30 days (i.e. by Feb 24 2007). The PSC did not do so. At the status conference held on Feb 28 2007 the PSC representative stated that the teo cases would be designated within seven to ten days. That did not happen. After further discussion, we extended the deadline for designation until March 30 2007. that date, too, passed without any designation. At the status conference held on April 2 2007, the PSC attorney stated that the two cases would be designated on April 6 2007 but no designation was made by that date either We then extended the deadline to March 30, then again May 10, but, still no additional test cases have been designated.

So, out of the 4,700 cases filed under the Omnibus, apparently only one can show a theory about how MMR and thiomersal, acting in unison can cause autism. Which is weird considering that its a ‘fact’ amongst adherents of the vaccine hypothesis.

And how about that one case – Cedillo – what does that show?

…without going into detail, we note that the facts of that one ‘test’ case are fairly unusual and do not appear to be representative of the majority of the cases in the OAP (Omnibus Autism Proceedings).

Good grief. Could it be that, from the 4,700 cases in the Omnibus that there are _no cases_ representative of a general theory of how MMR and thiomersal working together cause autism? Back to the Special Masters – the emphasis in this passage is theirs, not mine.:

We want to stress that we believe we are at a _crisis point_ in the efforts to move the autism cases towards decision. The Office of Special Masters has adopted the approach toward these cases originally suggested by _petitioners’_ counsel and we have patiently waited almost _five years_ to give that approach a chance to succeed…..Either something must change or we will be required to go to a new approach.

And then the bombshell:

In the event that petitioners do not promptly come forward with additional test cases to allow us to pursue the ‘test case’ approach described above for handling the autism cases, it appears that the ‘omnibus approach’ to the autism cases may have to be declared a failure.

That is some pretty direct language. You’ve had five years, it says, we’ve done everything your way. Now shape up or ship out.

Things got worse for petitioners. For years they had been claiming that they couldn’t move forward without certain data (VSD data) being made available to them. It would seem that the Special Masters have seen this for the delaying tactic it clearly is as they have denied this motion.

They have denied it because they (rightly) claim that it is unnecessary and involved a lot of irrelevant data. They also note that petitioners should be able to make a case out of what they have and that petitioners failed to provide a good reason why this data was needed. Special Masters noted:

Finally we note that the PSC itself states that ‘the petitioners could very well establish general and individual causation in these Omnibus claims _without epidemiological evidence_ ‘

That’s what bragging gets you I guess.

Update: Daubert Ruling

The Special Masters also ruled on the applicability of Daubert in the Omnibus cases. Before we discuss that, lets have a brief refresher as to what it is.

Daubert is a legal precedent in the US that essentially makes the presiding judge the arbiter of good science. They _must_ under Daubert apply a very high standard of science. It speaks volumes that Martha Herbert, Boyd Haley, Mark Geier have all fallen foul of Daubert in the recent past. Under Daubert, Haley and Geier’s science was adjudged to be of such low quality that they never even testified – they were barred from doing so.

OK, so. Respondents asked the Special Masters to ensure that Daubert standards were applied to the causation issues in the Omnibus hearings. They even asked that four ‘expert’ witnesses be excluded under Daubert which was a legitimate thing to do.

If the Special Master had agreed with that request than that would have been game over for the whole Omnibus hearing. No expert witnesses = no causation = no case.

What the Special Master has actually done is not quite that, but Plaintiffs should be very concerned. The Special Masters have agreed that Daubert standards should play an extensive role:

I agree with respondent that the principle that scientific evidence must be evaluated for reliability, set forth in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals….does have application to Vaccine Act cases.

That is big news. Plaintiffs need to realise that their science is going need to be of the utmost quality. However, the Special masters have decided that this proceeding is procedurally different enough that a small wrinkle should be introduced. This is a non-jury trial. In a jury trial, Daubert can be used (as I mentioned above) to exclude poor quality expert witnesses. This could also happen in a non-jury trial but the Special master has elected to not go that way. What they have decided to do is:

I conclude that the best procedure is to hear the testimony of the expert witnesses in question….I can then evaluate the reliability of the expert testimony in question [in the context of Daubert] and determine what weight it should be accorded, if any.

So, Daubert will apply, but instead of being used to exclude the possibility of juries hearing poor quality expert witnesses, as this is a non-jury trial, Daubert will be applied directly to the proffered testimony of the expert witnesses.

Whichever way you cut it, this is not good for Petitioners. They were staunchly opposed to the Daubert standard being applied at all as they knew it would mean that scientific standards of proof would apply. Standards that Boyd Haley and Mark Geier have already failed to meet in previous thiomersal/autism cases.

Geiers, Jim Adams – oh and some science

22 May

As I alluded to in my last post, there’s been a glut of publications regarding autism and thiomersal/mercury of late.

First (as they reached me) was Jim Adams latest nothing paper. Do’C has the full story but the salient points to take home about this study is that:

There’s plenty of other silliness in this paper, including citations of Geier and Geier, and a tiny sample size that produced data that I think most people would look at and ask, “so what?”. But the bottom line is this – is the authors’ conclusion supported by the data?….Neither mercury body burden nor excretion was demonstrated to be related to mercury levels in teeth, autistic children were not demonstrated to be “poor mercury excretors”, and high usage of oral antibiotics was not demonstrated to impair mercury excretion in humans.

An interesting side note – this paper was published in a journal that recently published the latest Geier twaddle. Seems like the editor likes a bit of woo. As Do’C uncovered from the editor of this journal:

“According to the literature there is a relationship between vaccines and autism.”

Which is weird as numerous literature reviews have shown the exact opposite. Either the editor is a very credulous sort or…well, no, he’s just a bloody idiot.

Now we turn to a study called ‘Lack of association between Rh status, Rh immune globulin in pregnancy and autism‘.

This study looked at:

whether mothers of children with autism are more likely to be Rh negative (Rh-) or to have received RhIg preserved with thimerosal, which is 49.6% ethyl mercury

So – do kids with autism come from a population who’s mothers had received RhIg? Thats what this study asked. The answer was:

Rh- status is no higher in mothers of children with autism than in the general population, exposure to antepartum RhIg, preserved with thimerosal is no higher for children with autism and pregnancies are no more likely to be Rh incompatible. This was also true for autism subgroups defined by behavioral phenotype, gender, IQ, regressive onset, head circumference, dysmorphology, birth status, essential, or complex phenotype

Of course, this answer didn’t suit SafeMinds Mark Blaxill. He released his usual pontificating crapola:

The study was funded by Johnson & Johnson, the largest manufacturer of RhIg products and the defendant in several lawsuits alleging a link between autism and mercury in RhIg. In an earlier 2005 poster presentation, the study authors acknowledged that the research was “supported by Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research,” but the University of Missouri press release omits mention of this conflict of interest.

Last I heard Marky, scientists don’t write press releases. Marketing depts do. As you yourself admit, when the poster version of this paper was presented, the *authors* (as oppose to the marketing dept) *did* acknowledge their funding. So, whats your point? That Missouri University Marketing dept. screwed up? Talk about a strawman.

And lets top beating around the bush here. If defendants in lawsuits can’t fund science, then why is it OK for prosecutors to fund science? If you want to go down the ‘conflict of interest’ route than that means Geier, Adams and a whole host of others who have already profited to the tune of several thousand pounds and who stand to profit even more should be equally discounted.

The press release headline falsely claims that the “Study Finds No Link Between Autism and Thimerosal in Vaccines.” The study is about Rh immune globulin, and immune globulins are not vaccines. “The headline deceives the public,” noted Mark Blaxill, director of SafeMinds. “It says an autism-mercury in vaccines link has been disproved when the research did not do so.”

Once again Marky – try and assimilate the difference between a press release and the actual paper. The paper’s abstract doesn’t mention the word vaccine until the very last sentence – and then only to point out thiomersal is also in vaccines. None of Blaxill’s point address _science_ at all. They try and make a strawman out of a press release. A press release the scientists who wrote this _paper_ no doubt had no control over whatsoever.

Blaxill then goes on to say that SafeMinds found numerous errors with the poster presentation but neglects to state what they were. Guess we should just trust them.

And if we want further verification of the non-link between the Rhogam issue then we should look no further than ‘Rh and ABO Maternal-Fetal Incompatibility and Risk of Autism‘ published in 2006 (Zandi et al) which states:

Moreover, some have speculated that RhD immune globulin injections may itself increase autism risk due to increased prenatal
exposure to thimerosal [Blaxill et al., 2004], an ethyl mercury containing vaccine preservative used in some formulations. The current findings do not support the hypothesis that the risk of autism is increased due to existing potential complications of maternal-fetal incompatibility with or without prophylaxis, nor do they appear to be consistent with the suggestion that the use of prophylaxis itself may increase risk.

Of course, SafeMinds don’t mention this as it clearly demonstrates the quackery that Blaxill wallows in.

And by the by, isn’t it incredible that for a group of people who are now claiming it never was _just_ about the thiomersal (See Brad Handley’s amazing feat of flip-flopping for details) they are certainly clinging on like grim death to that fallacy?

And hey – what about all those ‘other things’ (usually in vaccines) that ’cause autism’? Well, another recent study looked at just how well the practice of provoking reactions using a chelator (DMSA in this case) actually worked. ‘24-hour provoked urine excretion test for heavy metals in children with autism and typically developing controls, a pilot study.‘ looked at:

…Seventeen children with autism and five typically developing children were enrolled in a pilot study to test for chelatable body burden of Arsenic (As), Cadmium (Cd), Lead (Pb), and Mercury (Hg)

And the results?

Fifteen autistic children and four typically developing children completed the study. Three autistic subjects excreted one metal in greater quantity during the provoked excretion than baseline. Two of these were very close to the limit of detection. In the third case, the provoked excretion of mercury was between the upper limit of normal and lower limit of the potentially toxic reference range.

In other words – none of the kids, autistic or otherwise had clear progression into the toxic range of body burden of any metal. Three autistic kids had slightly higher results when DMSA was used to provoke than when it wasn’t. However, again, none was high enough to get into the toxic range. And as for the third autistic child, the team did one more thing:

Fish was removed from this child’s diet for greater than one month, and the provoked excretion test repeated. The repeat excretion of mercury was within the normal range.

Hilarious. The conclusion:

In the absence a proven novel mode of heavy metal toxicity, the proportion of autistic participants in this study whose DMSA provoked excretion results demonstrate an excess chelatable body burden of As, Cd, Pb, or Hg is zero.

Zero. None. Nada. Zip. Bugger all.

Lets hope that this pilot study is expanded upon and replicated.

And talking of chelation studies, Diva has some hot gossip regarding the fate of the NIMH chealtion study:

Dr. Swedo was running a chelation study at the NIMH until recently. The word, coming from a reliable source, is that the study has been shut down. This is good news, because it was a horrible study with horrible ethical problems and no legitimate scientific underpinnings. The study still appears on the clinicaltrials.gov page, but the link to the NIMH page is dead. So maybe the study rests in peace, too.

Last, but far from least, a fascinating theoretical study called ‘The Autism Epidemic: Fact or Artifact?’ has looked at the epidemic wankfest:

Using a prediction analysis, we calculate how broadening diagnostic criteria, younger age at diagnosis, and improved efficiency of case ascertainment could produce temporal trends in the incidence and prevalence of AD.

and what did they come up with?

Time trend studies report an increase as large as 11.0-fold over a 13-year period for AD. Conservative changes in the three methodological factors produced increases in the frequency of AD ranging from 2.1- to 28.8-fold

Interesting stuff. Hardly conclusive, but certainly food for thought. I can’t help but note that it comes from researchers at Columbia University. I wonder what that other CU employee Mady ‘they chewed through my skull’ Horning thinks about this study?

DAN! Doctors – The ‘other’ list

12 May

The eagle eyed amongst you will have noticed a new main menu entry at the top of this page between ‘wiki’ and ‘contact’ called DAN! Doctors.

This page contains a (worryingly long) list of some of the people with the loose honorific of ‘DAN! Doctor’ who are on the official ARI list. However, unlike the ARI list, this list will tell you the ‘other’ side of the happy-clappy hero’s of DAN! It contains notes on prosecutions, license suspensions, criminal acts and current investigations.

I can take absolutely no credit for the compilation of this list. It was handed to me by someone who wishes to remain anonymous.

This is a static page at the moment. In the near future, this page will move to its own domain and website and be driven by a database backend as it grows (as I’m sadly sure it will) however I wanted to get this up as quickly as possible.

The bottom line is that over 10% of DAN! docs (that have been looked at so far) have been in trouble. Trouble ranges from killing a patient, to paedophilia, to gross negligence to tax evasion. If you know a parent considering a DAN! doctor then make sure they read this list first. At the very least, even if they do decide to go ahead, they can avoid the bad guys.

Generation Rescue II – This Time It’s Vague

3 May

As already blogged by Steve and Orac, Generation Rescue have undergone a change in both website and message.

Up until this week and for the last two years, Brad Handley – GR Head Honcho has promoted a message quite unequivocal:

“Autism is treatable. It’s reversible. It’s nothing more than mercury poisoning,” said JB Handley, founder of Generation Rescue.

In fact, giving a reason for the redesign of the site on Orac’s blog, Brad said:

From my perspective, our website and its message have always been broader than “its ONLY mercury”…

Huh. Weird. Maybe its just me but I detect a teensy-weensy inconsistency between those two statements. Lets switch to the video!!:

And for the non-video-blessed amongst us, what Brad said was:

We immediately realised…and I think this is something that is a big surprise to people….um, that autism is a misdiagnosis for mercury poisoning.

Riiight. So let me see if I can summarise the position. When there is no science to have an informed debate about mercury, and when there’s lots of scary sounding stuff like ‘the Amish aren’t vaccinated and have no autism’ or ‘CDDS proves the epidemic’ floating around then the situation is:

“Autism is treatable. It’s reversible. It’s nothing more than mercury poisoning”.

Now that there’s no science to establish a causative link between mercury and autism, plenty of epidemiology to refute it and now that the first piece of science on the Amish has shown that actually they do vaccinate and that the penny has finally dropped, even for David Kirby, regarding CDDS’ inability to support the epidemic, what is the Generation Rescue position now? Lets see shall we?:

Our children are experiencing epidemics of ADD/ADHD, Asperger’s, PDD-NOS, and Autism. We believe these neurological disorders (“NDs”) are environmental illnesses caused by an overload of heavy metals, live viruses, and bacteria.

Wow. So we’re now no longer talking about just autism. We’re now talking about ‘neurological disorders’, including ADD/ADHD which is not even classed as being on the spectrum. That is quite some turnabout.

And look at this! Now, we’re talking about a _combination_ of causative agents: heavy metals (not just mercury any more), live viruses and bacteria.

Incredible. Makes you feel almost sorry for poor old mercury don’t it? Last week it was the Terror of the High Seas. Now it doesn’t even make it as a distinct causative agent.

The ‘live viruses’ is in there to placate the Wakefield Worshipers who think the MMR also (or in combination with mercury) caused autism. The ‘bacteria’ mention is I’m guessing a nod to the Martha Herbert theory of mold causing autism – a theory that was described thusly last time Martha took it to court:

Dr. Herbert’s publications indicate that she is an outspoken advocate of increased attention to the possibility of environmental influences. Even she, however, despite that acknowledged perspective, speaks in her published work of possibilities and potentialities, rather than of the ‘reasonable degree of medical certainty’ to which she offers to testify under oath in this case. Neither Dr. Herbert’s publications, nor any others cited, identify mold exposure as even a suspected, still less a known or proven, trigger of autism

Going back to MMR and taking a brief side journey for a minute, here’s the latest update from the Autism Omnibus proceedings. When last we left it, Petitioners had put forward one family as a ‘test case’ to see if the whole Omnibus proceeding had enough merit to proceed. There were supposed to be three. Awhile ago, the court told Petitioners to hurry up and identify the other two. They couldn’t. Respondents replied with:

The Court ordered the PSC to find two cases (similar enough to the first) to present the same basic theory of causation…..the essence of its (PSC’s) response is that it does not know of any case presenting the same causation issues as are implicated in Cedillo.

Ouch. How long has this been dragging on? Five years or something? And out of the 4,700 cases in the Omnibus no other case can be found to match the first one put forward. The only people who must be enjoying this are the lawyers.

Anyway, back to Generation Rescue.

Of particular note is the much vaunted, never seen ‘California-Oregon Unvaccinated Children Survey’ of described thusly by GR:

no studies have ever been done to compare neurological disorder (“ND”) rates of unvaccinated children to vaccinated children. We commissioned a national market research firm to survey more than 17,000 children in California and Oregon.

National market research firm eh? How very scientific. Researching popular chewing gum, researching autism causation. Yep, they’re the same. Souds very much like a a ‘convenience sample’ where people are called up. Here’s a friend of Brad’s describing what a convenience sample is and is not:

So. Not data according to David Kirby. Bummer.

Generation Rescue have also revamped their ‘Testimonials’ section. This is the section I looked at I August of last year and reached a (very) rough figure of a 5% success rate for the kids talked about on the GR site where ‘success’ is losing the diagnosis:

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%.

Now, Generation Rescue have 76 ‘success stories’ (except they’re not called that any more, now they’re ‘testimonials’). Of that number, 6 claim full recovery with total loss of diagnosis. That’s a percentage of 7.8%. A heady leap of over 2%. Woo-hoo.

I was drawn to some of the newer testimonials, particularly the 6 year old ones as Meg only recently turned 7. One of them, about a girl called Liz was fascinating.

Our daughter Liz was diagnosed with low functioning autism at age three. We blamed the DTP vaccine which she had a bad reaction to. She would have very long lasting meltdowns, she would smear faeces, she would exhibit self injurious behaviour, she did not talk at all, she avoided eye contact and her only activity was that involving toys that spun. She walked on her tip toes and the doctor said she had a low IQ (below 70). We were told by mainstream medicine that she was ‘unreachable’.

Today Liz is six and after following biomedical interventions (and some other things) Liz will talk – on Christmas morning this year I went to wake her up and she said ‘good morning’ to me. She no longer smears faeces and is 99% toilet trained, she can write notes to people and knows all the letters of the alphabet and can count up to 40 unprompted. She can use a computer mouse unaided and has numerous favourite websites. The self injurious behaviour is vastly lessened, as are the meltdowns. Her eye contact is now perfect and overall her sensory issues seem 99% under control. She can drink out of a normal cup and use a knife, fork and spoon to eat whilst sitting at the table.

In so many ways, this is a different child.

Why was I drawn to this little girl so much?

Because it’s Megan’s story. I assumed a false name – Mr Clarence House – and emailed it to the Generation Rescue site. ‘Clarence’ received an email saying it was going to be on the new site which I was very happy about.

All of it is true except the name. The biomedical treatments I was talking about were multi vitamins, fish oil and a steroid inhlaer for her asthma. The ‘other things’ were love, acceptance, patience and education.

Why do this? To prove a point. You can make anyone’s story fit your own beliefs if you twist it hard enough.

Don’t worry, if it disappears I took a loving screenshot.

Brad Handley has tried to shift his goalposts as his first guess wasn’t working out. As evidenced above, he has latched on to items that are equally silly. As evidenced above he is incapable of seeing autism. He only sees mercury. As evidenced above, improvement is not limited – or even related to – detoxification of heavy metals.

Oh David, David, David….

26 Apr

David Kirby has been chewing away at the edge of the CDDS data since it became apparent that he’d screwed up and actually set himself (and the thiomersal hypothesis) an actual measurable target (eek!). I can’t believe there isn’t anyone in the autism community who doesn’t know about the CDDS’ data and its role from Saviour of the thiomersal hypothesis to Villan of the thiomersal hypothesis. But just in case, here’s a potted history. For (lots) more search my site for ‘cdds’ and you’ll get lots more background reading.

1) Kirby writes EoH and is spoon-fed the Rollens line that we’re in the midst of an autism epidemic and that the CDDS data proves this by going up and up and up.
2) Thiomersal is removed from its preservative role in vaccines and by Feb 2002 there is an estimated 1.9% of vaccines left containing thiomersal.
3) Geier paper indicating that CDDS data is going down following removal of thiomersal
4) Kirby crows about this, refers to CDDS data as ‘the gold standard’ of autism data
5) Transpires Geier dip is a load of bollocks – CDDS data still going up
6) Kirby says (paraphrasing) – if CDDS data not falling by 2007 its a sever blow to the thiomersal hypothesis.
7) 2007 – Happy New year
8) CDDS data still climbing
9) First quarter for 2007 in – CDDS data still climbing
10) CDDS data abandoned by Kirby/Rollens et al in favour of educational data in the hopes _this_ data will show them what they want it to
11) No one really talks about CDDS data anymore

Quite early along this line several skeptical bloggers including myself, Do’C, Interverbal, Joseph and Autism Diva all said over and over again: ‘Yeah, hi, no actually you can’t use CDDS data to prove or disprove either the autism epidemic or the role of thiomersal. Here’s the disclaimers on the CDDS website that explains why not.’

Which brings us to yesterday and a post to the Yahoo EoH group from one D.Kirby reading:

This is interesting. Calif Dept of Health Services will be presenting DDS data at IMFAR

They will report that the number of 3-5 year old cases was still rising as of Sept 2006 – thus no evidence for a major role for thimerosal in ASD was found.

But, the abstract makes a very interesting point. It says that: “Limitations of the DDS database and lack of individual exposure data prevent conclusions, based on these data, about thimerosal as a cause or modifier of autism in a specific subgroup or child.

(Emphases are mine)

I read this to mean that one cannot apply the California data to prove that a specific group or child (ie one with a genetic predisposition) was NOT harmed by thimerosal. Also, there is no way to know for sure exactly how much mercury individual children were exposed to during the period in question.

Please, someone explain to me why I am wrong, and that includes any lurkers out there who believe that the California numbers mean it is time to close the thimerosal books once and for all.

I am being serious. I really thought these numbers were probably the death knell of this hypothesis, and they may still be. But it seems that the State of California would have us interpret these numbers with a bit more caution.

The abstract is below. ALL comments welcome, and that includes skeptics. Thanks. DK

No dude, you’re not wrong. Know why? *This is exactly what we’ve been telling you for the last two/three years*

Nobody has ever claimed that the CDDS data can disprove the epidemic or the thiomersal hypothesis. What we _said_ was that you couldn’t use it to _prove_ it either.

What CDDS will be presenting is exactly what they say – that CDDS can be used to demonstrate no correlation between autism and thiomersal for a select group of individuals. That doesn’t mean thiomersal _didn’t_ cause autism or that it _did_. It means CDDS can’t show causation one way or the other. I’m so glad that’s finally filtered through.

Bear in mind the ramifications of this Mr Kirby. CDDS data cannot be used to prop up the epidemic hypothesis any more. I think you can finally see that. I hope we can expect to see you publicly putting people right on that. Maybe a post on your HuffPo blog?

And let me tell you what _really_ worries me about all this Mr Kirby. Firstly, you swallowed this whole debacle hook line and sinker. The Mercury mums and dads sold it to you and you just believed them. Aren’t you supposed to be an investigative reporter? Where was the investigation? Secondly, you and others have been using this non-connection as the _sole epidemiology_ to prop up the thiomersal and epidemic hypothesis. Now that the penny’s finally dropped where does that leave you?

I’ll close by asking you a favour Mr Kirby. You were spoonfed this idea and swallowed it whole without thought. Now you’ve guessed you were wrong. You’re being spoonfed clinical papers that are equally bad. You seem to be swallowing them whole. Please. Please go and talk to actual, real scientists about them.

More

Dad of Cameron‘s take on this.
Diva’s take on this.

Autism amongst the Amish

22 Apr

Don’t Stand So Close To Me

I recently had an email conversation with someone who is married to a lapsed Mennonite and who’s secretary is a lapsed Amish. As this was too good an opportunity to miss I asked xyr about autism amongst the Amish and vaccinations.

I was interested in Dan Olmsted’s idea that he and his sources waltz around Amish communities, grabbing people and asking ‘got any autism in the family’? and calling this reporting. When we talked about this xyr answer was fascinating:

As for tracking autistics, forget about it. Families are not likely going to seek diagnosis unless there are seizures or some other acute issue. Imagine driving up to a bunch of Amish farms and asking, “Are any of your kids autistic?” I would guess they probably haven’t ever heard of the word.

As xe explains it, the Amish are deeply religious people. Xe has first hand experience of this and explained to me how it would be virtually impossible given these beliefs and on such a short aquaintance for Olmsted – or his sources -to get ‘close’ to the Amish as a population:

The entire Amish religion is based on shunning the outside, secular world, these are the biblical tenants they live by:

Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers. (II Corinthians 6:14)

Come out from among them and be ye separate, saith the Lord. (II Corinthians 6:17)

And be ye not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. (Romans 12:2)

The Amish only make accommodations when necessary. So, they have a phone in the barn to call the vet and the dairy plant. They accept rides in automobiles and trucks but don’t drive. They may shop for essentials but they aren’t going to chat you up.

And as I said before, I doubt seriously that they would seek a diagnosis for autism unless there was some acute comorbidity like seizures. They would likely know that their child was different but that was god’s will.

and as for vaccination:

The Amish are not anti-vaccine. Some Amish kids go to public school and must be vaccinated. My brother-in-law was raised Amish until about age 10 and he’s got the small pox scar to prove the point.

The basic gist is that the Amish are leery of non-Amish/Mennonite (whom they refer to as ‘the English’ (!!) apparently) but if a matter is medical and may cause threats to health than they are not stupid and seek out Western medicine.

Based on this, I really have doubts that Olmsted ever did more than stablish himself as a ‘nosey English’. I really have trouble believing that such a reserved, separate people would open up to either him or his water cooler salesman source about their personal, private medical matters.

No Autism Amongst The Amish

Its a long standing (and oft repeated) belief amongst the autism/antivaccine believers that there is no autism, or vastly reduced incidence of autism, amongst the Amish. This belief is repeated by all and sundry:

…thousands of Amish, almost all of whom do not vaccinate their children and do not seem to suffer much autism.

Dan Olmsted.

This finding of no significant level of “autism”….has also been observed in the unvaccinated children of the Amish

Dr Paul King, CoMed, closed access Yahoo List.

….the Amish community who do not participate in Western medicine, including the practice of vaccinations, have demonstrated their rates of autism are substantially lower.

Lisa Ackerman, TACA (Talk about Curing Autism) Executive Director, closed access Yahoo List.

Why has there never been autism in the Amish community? They dont vaccinate!

Poster ‘Jan’ to closed access Yahoo List.

I challenge anyone to go into any Amish community in this country and find autistic children. You won’t find them. Yet, our schools are being over run with autistic children. Why? The Amish do not vaccinate.

Poster ‘Paul Troutt’ to closed access Yahoo List

HE [friend of the poster] HAS NEVER SEEN AN AUTISTIC AMISH CHILD OR ADULT…. Why? THE[y] DO NOT IMMUNIZE….EVER.

Poster ‘Amethyst Mueller’ to closed access Yahoo List.

And so it seems clear right? All these people are saying the same thing. We could go into any Amish community and find very, very low or zero autism. And to what do these people attribute the non-existent autism? Vaccines (or the lack thereof) of course!

What would happen if we removed one of these factors from the equation?

The Old-Order Amish have low rates of vaccination and are at increased risk for vaccine-preventable diseases. A written survey was mailed to all Amish households in the largest Amish community in Illinois inquiring about their vaccination status and
that of their children.

Source.

Well, well. How very interesting. Finally some _science_ , as oppose to journalism, that examines whether the oft-reported belief that the Amish don’t vaccinate is true. What did these guys find?

Responses were received by 225 (60%) of the 374 Amish households in the community with children aged <15 years. An additional 120 responses were received by households without children. A total of 189 (84%) households with children reported
that all of their children had received vaccinations; 28 (12%) reported that some of their children had received vaccinations; and
8 (4%) reported that none of their children had received vaccinations.

84% of Amish households reported all their kids had received vaccinations. Only 4% reported that none of their kids had received vaccinations.

Among all respondents who knew their own vaccination status, 281/313 (90%) reported that they had received vaccinations
as children

Wow. Amazing how the two to three ‘toxic train wrecks’ from amongst these adults could not only have been missed (vaccine induced autism being unmissable as we all know) but also managed to fill in a survey.

So – we can say that the assumption that the Amish do not vaccinate is in severe doubt. When 90% of Amish adults in a survey state they received vaccinations and when 84% state all their kids have been vaccinated to what do we attribute the fact that according to Dan Olmsted, Dr Paul King, Lisa Ackerman and various posters on Yahoo groups there is little to no autism amongst the Amish?

Lisa Sykes and Paul King: CoMed with a silent ‘y’

17 Apr

One of the more extreme quackery groups formed post-EoH is CoMed (the ‘y’ is silent) which is run by the Rev Lisa Sykes and Dr Paul King recently emailed a large group of people with a PDF Press Release that tried to make the case that autistic children were proven to be clinically mercury poisoned.

How did they reach this earth shattering conclusion? By stating that two papers and one methodology backed them up. Have a read of the document – its a fascinating example of how the militia attempt to ‘spin’ the reality of the situation and try to make things sounds like a given. Note the silent switch about halfway through from talking about ‘mercury’ in general to talking about ‘vaccines’ in particular.

Anyway, Sykes and King were good enough to note only post this press release on EoH but also to tell the group exactly who they had emailed – a motely crew, ranging from fellow whacko’s like David Ayoub to Governer Arnie “I’ll be back” Schwarzenegger, plus a host of journalists, lawyers etc.

So, I thought I’d better put these poor people straight and consequently sent them a letter. This is what I sent them:

Dear Madams and Sirs,

Firstly, please accept my apologies for the unsolicited email. I hope it is not intrusive.

I wanted to write to you as you were the recipients of a recent email/PDF press release from the group ComEd regarding their belief that ‘Autistic Children Clinically Proven Mercury Poisoning’. I wanted to offer an alternative to this erroneous belief. I will cite any references I make and I promise to keep this brief.

The ComEd press release uses two studies[1,2] and a technique as the ‘mainstay’ of its certainty that autistic children are clinically proven to be mercury poisoned.

The Geier paper [1] is an attempted replication of the Nataf paper [2] and suffers from its same substantial drawbacks.

Issue one: The role of precoproporphyrin.

Nataf et al claim that the presence of elevated precoproporphyrin is a specific indicator of mercury toxicity. They do this on the basis of three studies produced by one author[3,4,5]. When these studies are read properly, if we ask the question “Does exposure to heavy metals cause a relative elevation for certain porphyrin compounds in urine?” the answer would appear to be “Yes.” However, If we ask the question “Is the presence of certain urinary porphyrin compounds a specific indicator of heavy metal toxicity?” the answer would have to be “No”[6]

The Woods papers are interesting but far from conclusive enough for the Nataf and consequently Geier papers to reply on.

Issue two: Creatinine and the subsequent UPPA technique

In their press release ComEd claim that the UPPA (urinary porphyrin profile analysis) technique is a ‘highly accurate’ method of determining toxicity. Indeed, it is the method used by the Nataf and Geier papers. In this method, the urine of children is collected and analysed for the presence of porphyrin’s. If they are elevated then QED: the children must be metal poisoned.

Except its not as simple as that. The content, volume and dilution of urine varies considerably from patient to patient. The way around this issue is to measure a secondary constant element from the urine and compare the amount of porphyrins found against the amount of this compound and express the result as a ratio. This is what Nataf, Geier and the UPPA technique does. It utilises creatinine – a constant in urine – to provide a baseline figure and thus get an accurate percentage of porphyrins.

This is a standard way of measuring compounds in urine. The only issue is found when the population in question (autistic children in this case) are known to have significantly low levels of creatinine. Obviously, this would skew the results considerably and present a false reading of elevated porphyrins.

Is there recorded instances of low creatinine in autistic kids? It seems that there might be.

“Spot urinary creatinine excretion in pervasive developmental disorders” published in Pediatrics International[7], reports low creatinine levels in PDD:

a significant decrease in urinary creatinine concentration was found in the PDD group compared to controls using a Mann–Whitney two-tailed ranks test.

Of course, this just one study. Its a good start but thats it. But maybe its interesting that the group of maverick DAN! doctors (of whom one is treating Rev Sykes of ComEd’s autistic son I believe) also find low creatinine in autistic kids[8]:

“”Creatinine is often found to be marginal in the urine of autistics, and low creatinine can skew urine analyte results to high levels. So, also take note of creatinine levels if the laboratory results include ratioing to creatinine.””

I engaged in an email exchange with Professor Richard Lathe, secondary author of the Nataf paper[2] regarding the study his group had published and I questioned him at length regarding this creatinine issue. He 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.

However, neither of these observations were reported in the published paper. Lathe described it as ‘pointless’ to publish all data. I disagreed with him citing the uncertainty over creatinine levels and he conceded:

The long and short of it is that the response of CRT to different levels of heavy metal toxicity has not been studied adequately.

Which is a troubling statement considering that his paper required CRT to be well understood and to be functioning as described in order for the science in the paper to be accurate.

Lathe also conceded that other key parts of his paper (and consequently the UPPA method) were in doubt and relied on science that had been refuted and thrown out of court when attempted to be used in private prosecution[9]

The UPPA method has been in use for some time amongst adherents to the theory that mercury poisoning (notably from vaccines) causes autism. I have found numerous emails to a private access Yahoo Group called ‘chelating2kids’ which details peoples experiences with this method. Here are just three.:

1: “A fellow listmate had her son tested twice– once over the summer which showed he had no elevated metals, and one this fall that showed he did indeed have elevated metal levels. She has sent an email to the lab asking about the differing results and has not received a response. I believe she is still trying to contact them”

2: “FWIW, my neighbor’s dad happens to be a porphyrin specialist here in Boston (believe it or not– how many of those are there??). He reviewed lots of info for me– Nataf’s paper, my son’s results that showed very elevated metals across the board– and said he would have rejected the paper for publication had he been asked to review it. He said that fecal, not urine, should be used to measure the porphyrin levels. I sent an email to the lab inquiring about this and also received no response”

3: “I just received the results of the French porphyrin test for myself and my 7 year old NT [NeuroTypical – i.e. non autistic] daughter, and the results also show severe lead and mercury toxicity. My daughters numbers are worse than my ASD son!”

In closing, I would suggest that any assurances that mercury poisoning as a causative agent of autism are even likely, let alone ‘clinically proven’ should be taken with a very large grain of salt. I would also suggest that Rev Sykes role as an anti-vaccine activist and vaccine/autism litigant[10] are taken into account when considering the validity and motives of this press release.

Thanks for listening. My motive for writing this email is that, as parent to a severely autistic seven year old girl, I am sick to death of hearing bad science and media-driven misrepresentations attempt to coerce from autistic people what they truly need – decent, peer reviewed science which lead to good educational interventions for all autistic people. Thanks again.

References

[1]PubMed
[2]PubMed
[3]PubMed
[4]PubMed
[5]PubMed
[6]NotMercury
[7]Ingenta
[8]Google Cache of DAN! site
[9]Me
[10]Neurodiversity.com

I’ve had a number of fascinating responses, but my far and away favourite response was:

thank you for your email it has made it easier to apply you to my junk filter even though the junk file is far to good for the likes of you sir.

Which I received from one David Ayoub MD. The same man I publicly challenged to a web based debate less than two weeks ago on a third party letters page and who backed down.

Update: 18th April 2007

Dr King of CoMed produced a response to my rebuttal. You can read that here. and I couldn’t resist one more frolic through the CoMedy logic,as you can read here.

Autism, Chelation and Quackery

15 Apr

Mercury Mum, Christine Heeren recently posted a video of her son receiving IV chelation on YouTube.

UPDATE: Shortly after this blog post went live, the YouTube video disappeared. Luckily I had already grabbed a copy which you can view here:

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-5984127405622843714&hl=en-GB

Its a disturbing video on many levels. Heeren’s son has been undergoing chelation for seven months now and is still clearly totally autistic. During this video he is apparently writing ‘bus numbers’ down. The blog that Ms Heeren keeps (link on YouTube page) also makes it clear that her son still stims and he displays many common outward signs of autism (the scrunching up of the eyes at the start of the video reminds me of something my daughter does very much).

Heeren is subjecting her son to the Buttar protocol which should give anyone the stone cold heebie jeebies in and of itself. One patient of Buttar’s said that:

I find that Dr. Buttar talks a lot but produces little evidence.

And another said:

All the information about Dr. Buttar is still on this site but I no longer am one of his patients and I do not recommend him to any one for any reason. If you go to him for treatment BEWARE, BEWARE and read Roger Mason’s books first and go to QuackWatch.org first!

However, maybe we should take some kind of solace from the fact that Heeren’s doctor is not actually Buttar himself, only trained by Buttar. Maybe he’s a good doctor.

Heeren’s doctor is Muneer ImamMuneer Imam a shy, kind looking man wouldn’t you agree?

Well, he may well be.

In Jan 1993, the New York Office of Professional Conduct charged Muneer Imam:

…with gross negligence, gross incompetence, negligence on more than one occasion and failure to maintain adequate records.

The Hearing Committee sustained the charges of negligence on more than one occasion, incompetence on more than one occasion and failure to maintain adequate records. The Hearing Committee found Imam guilty of careless practice, lack of attention to detail and failure to appreciate the severity of patient illness

The incidents have included at least one death of a patient under the care of Imam.

The Hearing Committee (incredibly in my view) said he could probably be rehabilitated and laid out a plan of rehabilitation.

This all took place under Imam’s work at an ER. Imam no longer does ER work. I asked a medical friend about why that might be and xyr response was:

Since he no longer seems to do ER work, I imagine he settled a med mal claim for deceased patient A, and his insurer refused to write coverage for ER work and no hospital would cover him

Is this really someone any parent would want to trust with the kids life? A doctor found to be incompetent, negligent and who doesn’t pay attention to detail?

This inability to pay attention to details certainly seems to be playing out on Heeren’s video. Here is Imam’s nurse (a Vietnam vet called Nick) fitting the IV for a course of chelation.

No sterile

When I showed this to my medical friend xyr response was horrified:

WTF is this alleged nurse doing starting an IV without gloves??? What happened to sterile technique? Have they lost their minds?

and

What is this alleged nurse doing using that frigging tiny gauge needle???

It seems that the chelation protocol Buttar uses specifies a 22 gauge butterfly needle, not the tiny one seen in the video. There are good reasons why:

…..because this is the easiest to use for employees with no medical training who call themselves “chelation technicians.” The tiny needle also serves to prevent patients from killing themselves by increasing the drip rate when they’re sick of sitting around for hours. Increasing the drip through a 22 gauge butterfly needle should (in theory) burst the vein before delivering Endrate at a lethal rate. Clever stuff.

While almost everyone can start an IV with this tiny needle, it’s dangerous to use for chelation because if patients get into trouble you want a large bore needle inserted in case you need to administer drugs and fluids for treatment or god forbid, resuscitation. Starting a second IV with an appropriate size needle in a patient in circulatory collapse from shock is difficult and sometimes impossible. The daunting prospect of starting an IV in the jugular makes sane physicians do everything to avoid being in this position.

Administering a bolus of calcium gluconate to counteract hypocalcemia through this tiny needle can result in a swollen hand (when the IV infiltrates) attached to a dead patient.

So – Nick the Nurse also has incompetence issues.

At one point in this video I thought I had gone mad. Did my ears deceive me or did I really hear Nick the Nurse describe how they also chelated with vinegar and garlic? I rewound the video. Yep, he said it alright. Vinegar and Garlic. I could say ‘wow’ or ‘holy crap’ to express my incredulity after hearing that but really, no words do it justice. They are chelating this poor lad with Garlic and vinegar.

And why? What for? First test

Here is Heeren’s son’s first ever lab report (click the image to get a bigger one).

Let’s remember that these lab reports are all part of the quack culture and I suspect are frequently exaggerated to get the parent to use more of their treatments. If even these results are exaggerated then I’m dumbfounded. Everything except Aluminium and Lead are within normal ranges. And even those two are just barely in the elevated range.

It is on this basis that Heeren decided to start chelating her son using a doctor described as medically negligent and incompetent under the tender care of a ‘nurse’ who doesn’t know the protocol he is supposed to be using and who is actively putting this boy (and presumably others) in potential danger.

Oh and don’t forget the garlic and vinegar. Thanks Rashid, thanks Muneer, thanks Nick.

Katie Wright’s big day

6 Apr

Yesterday three big things happened to Katie Wright. Firstly, she joined the board of Directors of SafeMinds. Secondly she joined the board of directors of the National Autism Association. Thirdly, she appeared on the US Oprah Winfrey show.

The elusive Ginger blogged the NAA and SafeMinds news which was announced just before/during/after (depending on your timezone) the Oprah show.

The Opera show itself was a mixed bag apparently. There was a lot of self pity at the start:

“he’s not there, I don’t know where he is but he’s not there”

Oprah: A mystery affecting millions of families

“A bad day is a bad day and a good day is a bad day waiting to happen”

Please. Spare me. Not there?

However, a lot of people have also said there were some great moments:

I like the way the show ended with every single parent talking about the gifts their autistic children have given them! “He has made me more spiritual,” “He has made me look outside of myself,” “He takes people just as they are.” “He has given me someone to love way beyond what I ever thought possible.” Amen.

Sue also noted that no autistic adults were on the show and none were interviewed. That’s ridiculous.

However, part way through the show was the Katie Wright Experience. Apparently what happened was that Oprah asked a Doc on the show about vaccines and he repeated the scientific consensus – which is that vaccines have been refuted as a cause. Which is true. The show cut to a break. When it came back on, viewers were greeted by a visibly pink and flustered Katie Wright and then the host of the show told the audience that …..in fact I’ll quote from someone (who I won’t name so don’t ask) who was watching the show carefully:

To me it all seemed quite sane, except for Katie’s little blurt. A pediatrician of south Asian descent whose name I didn’t catch was periodically consulted from the dais by la Oprah, and gave what sounded like reasonable advice. At one point Oprah asked about causes–she didn’t use the word epidemic but said ‘what the cdc calls a health threat–and the pede gave a general response, genetics, possibly some environmental thing, and then Oprah said, “what about vaccines?” the pediatrician responded, “that’s controversial.” and oprah said, ‘well yeah, and?” or words to that effect. The pediatrician said the vaccine theory had been pretty well refuted. That was that, but after the next break, Katie Hildebrand, who was sitting next to Oprah, must have been chewing her ear off because la O told her to say her piece which she did in the usual incoherent shrieking way, “vaccines are not cleared of being responsible, children are given 37 different vaccines, my child has all kinds of immune problems, there’s an epidemic that keeps growing” etc. Oprah said, “there i can see you needed to get that off your chest, you don’t want to go home with that all bottled up. After all, you’re a mom.” the studio crowd applauded though they did not hoot or yell anything specific that i could detect on my tv screen.

Following that, Oprah apparently told the audience that this is what _Katie_ personally believed and it wasn’t supported by any CDC evidence.

Here’s _my_ summation of Katie Wright’s life at the moment.

Katie campaigned to get a Generation Rescue member on the board of Autism Speaks. Here’s how Brad Handley reported that event in a rant:

Kevin Barry, our former President, was hired by Autism Speaks. On his first day of employment, Mark Roithmayr informed Kevin that he was only there “as a favor to Katie” [ the mother of Bob and Suzanne Wright’s autistic grandson]

Katie has spoken of Brad and Kevin Barry as her mentors. Here’s Brad’s mention of Katie Wright:

I just want to share how damn proud I am of this family. Remember, there is no Christian Wright, his name is Christian Hildebrand.

Katie’s decision to be more public about her point of view is not some impulsive move. For almost two years now, quietly but firmly, she has lobbied her parents on the growing morass that Autism Speaks was becoming. By choosing to listen more to the “experts” than their own daughter, Katie’s parents selaed their own fate.

Two years. After which the Wright’s continue to listen to science, not Brad’s people.

Katie Wright has come to believe, after a long association with Brad Handley, that vaccines caused her sons autism. Katie had the king Rescue Angel himself hovering over her for the last two years. Has anyone ever told Katie that Brad is often wrong and never admits it even when its clearly demonstrated? I guess not.

Kim Stagliano (autism blogger – big on pooh) said:

This is a very big day when the SS Minnow overtakes the Titanic.

Really? _Really_ ?

From all I’ve read and seen, all that’s apparent is that the newest mercury mum on the block got appointed to two antivaccine groups and that made a bit of a fool of herself on television. The only difference is that this mercury mum happens to have parents who own and run an autism organisation that she’s just cut her ties from.

What I actually feel the Wrights are guilty of is: Listening to dinosaurs with degrees instead of their daughter, Deirdre Imus, and others speaking the truth, myself included.

In Brad’s world there is no greater sin than not listening to him. Maybe they did listen to you Brad and thought you were wrong.

So, after Katie Wright’s big day – the day the SS Minnow overtook the Titanic – what’s changed?

The world saw a visibly unstable mercury mum on TV being thrown a bone to rant about her pet theory for a few minutes and then the show carried on.

…and thats that. No scientific facts changed yesterday. Katie Wright confirmed herself as a woo-meister. All that means is people will be even less likely to listen to her than they were before. Autism Speaks must be breathing a sigh of relief she’s jumped ship.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →