Archive | Vaccines RSS feed for this section

Interverbal On California, Bart On Deth

16 Jan

I’m privileged to be visited on this blog by a number of people far, far cleverer than me who can take very careful examinations of provided materials and highlight the problems with them.

Bartholomew Cubbins has taken the time to provide video reviews of (so far) two of the key papers underpinning the autism/thiomersal hypothesis – Burbacher et al and Waly et al. They are very accessible, even to non-scientists, and because they’re video, you can pause to look up new words as you need to.

Interverbal is a blog run by Jonathan Semetko. Jonathan conducts reviews of statements and theories that apply to autism. His latest post touches on the use of California DDS numbers as used by several people to justify the existence of an autism epidemic.

As I’ve discussed previously, whats important in these numbers is intakes of 3 – 5 yo. This is because these are/will be cases post-thiomersal e,g after the vast majority of thiomersal has been removed from vaccines. This point was conceded by David Kirby in an email to blogger Citizen Cain when he admitted:

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 also conceded that total cases among 3-5 year olds, not changes in the rate of increase is the right measure.

NB: The date of 2007 is contentious, there seems to be some validity to the claim that Kirby stated that 2005 was the year to watch, not 2007. I hope to clarify this once and for all fairly soon. Rick Rollens has definitely claimed 2005 was the year to watch.

Last week, California DDS published their quarterly figures and as usual people strove to extract meaning from them. Ginger at Adventures In Autism produced a graph showing that the rate of increase was decreasing.

Unfortunately, the data Ginger used to plot her graphs included _all_ age groups, not just 3 – 5 year olds. As we’ve seen, this cohort is the only one that can indicate whether the post-thiomersal generation numbers are decreasing or not. Thiomersal has been very substantially reduced for this age group so a change should be clear.

However, just as Citizen Cain blogged last year in July, Jonathan shows that the rate for this cohort is still increasing.

So now advocates of the thiomersal/autism hypothesis are in a quandary. Their source data is plainly inaccurate, a point admitted by Kirby. If we are therefore to conclude that (as many in the autism/thiomersal camp claim) that the reduction in thiomersal is causing a drop in numbers then they have to abandon the ‘safety net’ position of the remaining thiomersal in flu vaccines being responsible for a maintenance or even increase in autism cases. The reverse, of course, is also true – those who claim that flu in thiomersal means more autistics will be ‘created’ cannot claim that these figures indicate a drop.

Of course, the probability that neither of these cases are true is the ‘best fit’ – autism cases are still rising and these figures only show a reflection on cases that are known to California DSS and cannot reflect one way or the other the state of prevalence in that state.

Chelation Death: The Coroner Speaks (subtitled: Look Before You Leap)

6 Jan

A few months ago, Abubakar Tariq Nadama, a 5 year old autistic boy died at the office of Dr Roy Kerry after undergoing IV EDTA chelation therapy. I wrote about it extensively at the time, as did Autism Diva and Orac.

Today, the coroners report has come in:

In layman’s terms, the administration of ethylene diamine tetra-acetate, commonly known as chelation, resulted in a lack of oxygen to the brain as well as irreversible heart damage, said Allegheny County Deputy Coroner Ed Strimlan.

We determined there’s a direct correlation between the EDTA and the lack of oxygen to the brain and the heart muscle damage. It’s a total package, based on the autopsy, the histology [tissue sampling] and the toxicology [blood sampling],” Mr. Strimlan said.

Source.

At the time, anti-vaxxers, anti-thiomersalers and pro-chelators said we should wait for the results of the report before issuing judgment. However, they failed to extend that same criteria to Dr Rashid Buttar who decided to include EDTA in his new treatment protocol. Dr Buttar is frequently described as a hero amongst the anti-vac’s, anti-thiomersal and pro-chelators and yet they seem strangely reluctant to comment on the efficacy and/or safety of his new protocol. I have repeatedly asked commenter’s to this site the following question:

Given that we don’t know the exact role that IV EDTA played in young Tariq’s death, on what level is it a good idea for Rashid Buttar to start using it in a new protocol?

I have never received an answer to this question. The question has been shirked by at least four separate comments on approximately 6 separate occasions.

Now, of course, we _do_ know that EDTA has ‘a direct correlation’ to the lack of oxygen and heart muscle damage that poor Tariq sustained and which killed him. And still no one is prepared to stand up from the pro-chelationist side and state they think Buttar is being (once again) dangerously irresponsible. He (Buttar) has a reputation as a forceful man – a bit like a bull in a china shop. As we know from recent experience from another man with a similar reputation – such people seldom stop to look before they leap. So convinced they are in their own ‘rightness’ they they plough ahead without pause or consideration.

Now we know for sure that Chelation did play a role in a young boys death – a boy who’s dead _solely because he was autistic_ – I invite commenter’s from an anti-vax, anti-thiomersal, pro-chelation perspective to call for investigations into Dr Roy Kerry under who’s treatment Tariq died and to call for Rashid Buttar to exercise more care.

Speaking of ‘more care’ and ‘looking before one leaps’, yet another anti-thiomersal activist, Dan Olmsted, recently wrote a column lauding Gold salts as a potential chelator of mercury. It seemed he was inundated with emails from scientists expressing grave concern. So much so that he wrote an obviously unplanned and somewhat panicky reaction piece which included the line:

Clearly, given the serious risks, figuring this out is a job best left to the experts.

What a stunning piece of ‘shutting the barn door after horse has bolted’ syndrome. You’re absolutely right Mr Olmsted, this _is_ a case best left to experts. And yet you didn’t let that stop you in any of your previous pieces. Lets hope that no one read your first piece without reading your second one. Lets hope they didn’t go out and pump their kids full of Gold salts and lets hope that no one gets hurt.

Roy Kerry, Rashid Buttar, Dan Olmsted – next time , look before you leap.

A Fertile Breeding Ground

11 Dec

I’ve said a few times on here and a few times on other blogs that it is dangerous and irresponsible to maintain an absolutist position on just about anything to do with autism. I can’t remember who said it but whenever I see someone claiming to know for sure what causes autism or what the best course of treatment for autism is I recall a quote that goes something like this:

Follow the man seeking answers, flee from the man who says he knows them all.

However, on occasions I have been known to break this self-imposed belief. This is such an occasion.

Skeptico is a blogger that has commented a few times on various aspects of the thiomersal/mmr/autism ‘connection – notably a thorough debunking of the RFK Salon.com piece earlier this year.

Skeptico mailed me today to draw my attention to a comment made on his site to the effect that the wearing of a tinfoil hat designed to prevent alien abduction can successfully treat autism.

As of Dec. 2005 a hat with velostat worn by autistic children has improved their performance markedly. Michael Menkin is seeking more autistic children in the Seattle, Washington area to try the hat. Some of the autistic children who improved after wearing the hat with velostat for over three months are not related to UFOs or any alien phenomenon.

The researhc of Michael Menkin into alien abductions, with interview of several people with encounter experiences, was featured on KINGTV Evening News Program on November 16, 2005.

This is the sort of shit that one has to wade through to find decent research about autism. Is it on a par with the whole thiomersal/mercury thing? Well yes and no.

No because I can at least see a theoretical connection even if I don’t believe that theory and yes because its another example of a theory driven by anecdotal, unverified, untested belief.

Up until Skeptico mailed me this story, my favourite other crackpot theory was the idea that plastic cups cause autism. Again, this is the sort of mindless crap that detracts from valid science, strips autistic people of the dignity they deserve and only extends ignorance.

Notable in the plastic cup story is the role of one Dr. Stephanie Cave, one of the darlings of the thiomersal/autism connection and listed on page one of the Generation Rescue Hall of Fame. She lent support to a theory that claimed:

…that a toddler became seriously ill and, eventually, “began to exhibit autistic behavior,” after drinking from a plastic spill-proof cup made by Playtex. [Dallas-lawyer Brian R. Arnold ] claims the spill-proof cup was designed in a defective manner that allowed bacteria and mold to build in the cup. Alleging the bacteria caused the child’s condition, Arnold accused Playtex of negligence in distributing a defective cup and demanded $11 million in damages.

Cave claimed that the bacteria and mold caused Dysbiosis, a medical term used pretty much exclusively by the alternative health movement.

She was abetted by William Shaw who owns a laboratory famed amongst thiomersal = autism believers as providing accurate tests for elevated mercury. Shaw said that:

…the child had elevated levels of yeast by-products, indicating a “yeast/fungal overgrowth of the gastrointestinal tract.” Dr. Shaw says such yeast infections cause autism.

Unfortunately for Shaw, it seems that the bacteria found on the plastic cup was not the same sort found on the child in question. Good to know that these labs that so many people claim are accurate obviously double check their work.

Autism is a fertile breeding ground for such hocus-pocus and rubbish because it defies current understanding. That we let this sort of thing grow unchecked is dangerous for the health of children (one wonders if this child went on to be chelated based on such a pack of ineptitude and assumption), dangerous for those of us who wish to find a bit of respect for the state of being autistic and ultimately dangerous to us as a society that we are so willing to let such people treat our children.

This is why we need proper, peer reviewed science performed by those who are proponents of theories and treatments that currently have no efficacy or safety studies. If we continue down this road then treatments like the wearing of a tin foil hat used to prevent autism and alien abduction and causes like a plastic cup will become the norm and our children will truly become lost – not in autism but in the real hell of a frenzied knee-jerk search to treat the increasingly bizarre and to forget about what our _children_ who happen to be autistic need more than anything else. I hope you already know the answer to that. If you don’t then I suggest you step away from the quasi-science.

Everything Must Change

5 Dec

It must be true – Quincy Jones never lies after all.

Change comes to us all – for some of us it means radically rethinking what we once believed to be true and for some of us it might mean rethinking something that has brought us fame and adulation.

For those that don’t know him Citizen Cain is a blogger who challenged David Kirby’s interpretation of the numbers as they related to a rise/fall in the rate of autism. Kirby claimed that the rate was falling. Citizen Cain showed him why and where he was wrong.

And for the first time, Kirby responded.

Understandably, Kirby doesn’t seem interested in mucking around in the data with me too extensively, or in answering my detailed questions. But in an e-mail, he did address the key point, and concede 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 also conceded that total cases among 3-5 year olds, not changes in the rate of increase is the right measure.

I suggest at this point you go and read the rest of Citizen Cain’s post from which I quote above. The links to the associated posts where he discusses his email correspondence with David Kirby are on that page too.

But lets reiterate. Kirby is not only admitting that if the _total cases_ of autism doesn’t fall then the jig is up, he’s also admitting that up until now his interpretation (and the source for that interpretation – one Rick Rollens) is wrong. Why? Because as he admits after Citizen Cain showed him his errors, whats important is the _total cases_ *not* changes in the rate.

After I read Citizen Cains latest post, I had a little niggle at the back of my head – something Kirby had said this year. So I checked my references and there it was. In an interview with the New York Times, Kirby said:

Because autism is usually diagnosed sometime between a child’s third and fourth birthdays and thimerosal was largely removed from childhood vaccines in 2001, the incidence of autism should fall this year.

*This* year. Not 2007. Why has Kirby added on 2 years to his interview? This interview with the NYT was conducted before Kirby’s admittance that it was the total case amount that was important not the rate change but thats the only real difference in the two statements. Now maybe I’m missing something but what are the extra two years for?

As far as I can see, when one takes the admittance Kirby issued to Citizen Cain and applies the same criteria to it then it should be the end of *this year* that we should see changes. Big changes.

Everything must change. We have 26 days before we know whether that change is something that I and a lot of others have to address or whether its something David Kirby and his followers have to address.

A Means To An End

28 Nov

And so, the latest fire-storm in the autism blogosphere continues to rage. If you’re unaware of the story I’ll offer a brief recap (as unbiased as I can make it) before trying to offer up some commentary.

Briefly, JB Handley of Generation Rescue bought the domains supportvaccination.com, oracknows.com and autismdiva.com. Why? I don’t really know. On a practical level they can’t be doing him much good at all so one is left to consider the possibility that he did it as either a joke or to be spiteful. I sincerely hope that the team who is working on his search engine marketing hasn’t recommended that he does stuff like this as if they are then they’re moving him into the realms of what is termed as ‘black hat SEO’ – this refers to doing lots of bad stuff that is against acceptable internet policy to get a good rank on a search engine results page. The penalties for this can be severe if search engines catch you at it and include blacklisting the sites in question and terminating any associated AdWords accounts. From what I know of JB he loves to push the envelope a bit so I wouldn’t be surprised if he is doing this. He is playing with more fire than I think he knows about though.

Anyway, the unsurprising upshot of this is that most people on ‘his’ side of the debate think that a) his methods are questionable but seeing as he’s promoting such an important message the ends justify the means or b) that its downright hilarious. People on ‘my’ side of the debate (please note by using the phrase ‘my side’ I’m not assuming ownership of it) think that a) its all very childish and a bit sad or b) that what he’s doing is tantamount to willfully misleading people.

What are the definite results of JB’s actions? Well, he’s polarised two sides that were beginning to listen to each other a little better. He’s created a new battlefront where none existed before and he’s upset people.

Lets look at JB’s sides claims that even though his methods are questionable that its OK as the message he’s relating is so important the end justifies the means.

First, that is a very dangerous argument to apply to anything. If we call ourselves a society that has a moral base then ‘the ends justify the means’ is at best, ambiguous as a reason.

Secondly, lets look closely at what JB’s message actually is to see if it is indeed justifiable to use methods such as these. Lots of people, particularly JB’s supporters either don’t know or seem intent on ignoring JB’s message. It is this: autism is mercury poisoning. Not _may be_ , not _in some cases_ , not _might be triggered by_ but simply *is*. Now and forever. This is an absolutist position and its the main thing about Generation Rescue that I believe it is imperative to challenge. Why? Because autism is *not* only mercury poisoning. The vast majority of the information on the GR site revolves around the idea that thiomersal in vaccines causes autism. Lets leave the debate as to the scientific validity of that belief to one side for now. I’m quite happy to entertain the possibility that he may well be right. I’m equally happy with the science that as of this time, states that he is not. For my argument – its irrelevant. The fact is that even if JB is right and thiomersal does cause autism _it is not the *sole* cause of autism_.

Big deal say people – why does that matter? It matters because if that viewpoint comes to be accepted fact then the standard treatment for autism will become chelation. And seeing as it is a verifiable scientific fact that autism existed _long_ before thiomersal was ever used this would mean that there were a very large number of autistic children undergoing chelation totally unnecessarily. Question: Is it stupid or clever to subject children to unnecessary medical procedures?

The irony of this message is that it is a standard complaint of the mercury = autism belief system that they couldn’t get their Doctors to look beyond their narrow treatment options. This is _exactly_ what will happen should mainstream medicine ever accept the GR viewpoint that autism is mercury poisoning to the exclusion of everything else.

Let me reiterate once more – I have no issue with any group that calls for more investigation into the use of thiomersal in vaccines and that I’m glad that it is no longer in vaccines. I also fully accept that there are occasions that vaccines have damaged children. I also fully accept that mercury is a known neuro-toxin. What I do not want however, is for my daughters treatment to be a) enforced and b) an unnecessary and dangerous procedure when there is no basis for such absolutism.

So I ask you again Dear Reader – is JB’s absolutist message so good that it justifies his actions? Lets not forget that his actions also include name-calling (JB referred to friends of mine as ‘trailer dwelling coo-coo’s’ and me personally as a ‘wanker’ – a phrase for the non Brit-slang understanding amongst you that means that JB believes I masturbate to excess – roughly equitable to ‘jerkoff’ in US parlance I believe). This is as well as buying up domains that belong to sites that disagree with him.

Many claim that JB has apologised (although I fail to see where he apologised to me) and thus should be forgiven. I agree and disagree with that. I agree that for the debate to progress we all need to forgive and move on. However, this is not a one-off circumstance for JB. This is his MO. At some point, we have to stop making allowances and start holding people to account.

That said, up until this incident, I believed JB’s latest apology was sincere. I still hope it was.

People have also referred to JB’s behaviour as a bull-in-a-china-shop and expressed admiration for his go-get-em approach. I can’t see how such an approach is particularly admirable. Bulls loose in china shops breaking everything indiscriminately and certainly I feel less sure of the shaky common ground that had just started to be secured between the two sides. Lets also not forget _my_ message: that autism is not solely thiomersal poisoning and that bulls loose in _that_ particular china shop run the risk of doing very great damage to the delicate objects inside it.

Now lets move on to the point about upset. People from JB’s side of the debate cannot seem to understand why this action has upset Camille so much. As she is very much smarter than me she doesn’t need me to speak for her but I do wish to add my opinion as to why whats happened might cause her distress.

As a blogger who comments particularly on the science behind the debate she stands or falls on the accuracy of that science. If anyone was misled into thinking she endorsed the GR view then that person may well have further doubts about her validity. I hesitate to speculate as to whether or not that might be one of the reasons JB did it of course.

Secondly, there is an issue here of implicit control. An ugly image is called to my mind of a rich businessman laughing uncontrollably at the image of a less affluent woman as he dangles her on puppet strings. Fanciful? Yes. Exaggerated? No doubt. Based in some element of truth? I’m afraid I think it is.

Thirdly, again, lets look at the GR message and think about why those who are autistic particularly might not want to be associated with it. They believe GR is wrong. Further though, they see GR reducing who they are to a set of mercury related symptoms. Lets not forget that GR believe that autism is *only* mercury poisoning.

Once upon a time (in fact less than 40 years ago) psychologists ‘knew’ that homosexuality was *only* an illness that could be ‘cured’. How do you think that – at the time – that made gay people feel? Imagine a blogging community of parents desperate cure their gay adolescents (who ‘know’ that their children are just ill) – would gay adults be horribly offended and fight back? Or would they sit on their hands and do nothing?

For us parents, the outcome of this debate is very important – our kids depend upon it. For those people who are autistic, the outcome of this debate is absolutely crucial. Their continued survival depends upon it. I ask you once more: in an area of such vital importance, is the method really unimportant when the method denigrates so much? Is it something to be brushed aside as we smile indulgently at its instigator when its tantamount to an attempt to control a debate that affects peoples very right to exist?

Is this message so right that such a total lack of respect for a differing view is at best readily embraced and at worst tolerated in the way we would tolerate a favourite but slightly spoiled child?

Andrew Wakefield: Beginning To Regret Libel Case?

6 Nov

There’s new legal paperwork up at Brian Deer’s personal site. It reveals some very interesting facts about two things: First that Andrew Wakefield is instructing his legal team to use his Libel action against Brain Deer as a ‘gagging order’ and secondly that Andrew Wakefield is obviously getting extremely nervous about the effect his GMC hearing will have on his Libel case.

There are three separate actions involving Andrew Wakefield and Brian Deer. One is between Wakefield and the Sunday Times, the other between Wakefield and Brain Deer personally (in respect of his website) and a third one (the one under discussion here) between Wakefield and Channel 4/Twenty twenty Productions.

The ruling judge in this case first said that it was certain that the outcome of just one of these actions would determine the outcome of the others as all three rest on the exact same subject matter. [edit – not sure I got that exactly right – if anyone reads it and comes to a different conclusion, please let me know]

Andrew Wakefield has applied for a ‘stay’ in this case (the C4/2020 one). This means he essentially wants to put this action ‘on hold’. He wants to do this because he claims that the GMC case has seniority over this one. Justice Eady remained distinctly unimpressed with this argument:

In the light of this timescale, it is impossible to envisage the trial of these libel proceedings taking place before the Michaelmas term of 2007. Much of the evidence relating to the issue of justification relates to the mid-90s and a delay of that kind would be plainly undesirable. It would, moreover, involve a gap of three years between the broadcast in question and the trial. That is beyond what is normally regarded as acceptable in the modern climate for the span of a libel action between publication and trial – even in a complicated case…

In British law it is part of the case to consider that a Libel action should be acted on as hastily as possible as the defendant may have good need to clear their name – people like Brian Deer for example who, as an investigative journalist, needs to be trusted to be employable.

So why would Wakefield wish to grant a stay to after the GMC hearing? Because he wants to ‘test the water’ with the GMC action which at most can strip him of his license – a minor inconvenience for one who’s already making a living in Texas – whereas a libel action can strip him of a hell of a lot more. I’m guessing that when things go bad for him and the GMC strip him of his license that all other actions will be quietly dropped.

However, even though he has asking for a stay of this particular action Andrew Wakefield is not above using it as a weapon to browbeat people:

These factors loom even larger in the present case in the light of certain conduct on the Claimant’s part which Miss Page has prayed in aid. It is her case that *the Claimant is seeking to take full advantage of the fact that he has issued libel proceedings while avoiding any detailed public scrutiny of the underlying merits*. In other words, she argues, he is seeking to adopt a strategy comparable to that generally characterised by the phrase “a gagging writ”. It is necessary to consider these allegations in a little further detail.

A few of you may remember that Wakefield took part in their original Power of Parents rally in the US during which he read an extract of a statement in which a small British paper (the Cambridge Evening News) backed down from a report it had made about Wakefield. Obviously the American parents lapped it up to riotous applause. However, what had _actually_ happened is that Wakefield had instructed his legal team to threaten the Cambridge Evening News with an action like that he had over the Sunday Times:

“You should be aware that proceedings in defamation have already been commenced against The Sunday Times in respect of the article published by Mr Brian Deer on 22nd February 2004. Your article has gone even further than the allegation in The Sunday Times which are currently being litigated and allege impropriety on the part of Mr Wakefield to receive money from lawyers to achieve a predetermined outcome.”

Justice Eady took exception to this:

In my view that paragraph was misleading. Mr Browne (Wakefield’s QC) argues that, even if the circumstances had been set out more fully and accurately, it would have made no difference to the outcome. The editor would still have acknowledged that he had got his facts wrong. That may be, but the important point at the moment is that the editor was given a misleading impression. Because of the stay, to which I have referred, the allegations in The Sunday Times were certainly not “currently being litigated”. They were stayed pending the outcome of serious allegations of professional misconduct against the Claimant, to which no reference was made. It thus appears that the Claimant wishes to use the existence of the libel proceedings for public relations purposes, and to deter other critics, while at the same time isolating himself from the “downside” of such litigation, in having to answer a substantial defence of justification.

And there’s more: Dr Evan Harris MP had criticised Wakefield on a radio programme. He also got a letter:

“[Mr Andrew Wakefield] has asked us to inform you that defamation proceedings have been instituted against Mr Brian Deer and The Sunday Times newspaper in relation to articles that have been appeared [sic] and statements that have been made by them which are defamatory of [him]………..Mr Wakefield has drawn our attention to a number of statements made by you in connection with Mr Wakefield and the question of MMR both in newspapers and in BBC broadcast programme……Given … the fact of litigation having been instituted in defamation and the existence of the General Medical Council inquiry we hope you will agree that further comment on Mr Wakefield’s conduct by you or anyone else should be limited until the outcome of those proceedings has been determined. This will avoid Mr Wakefield having to consider further legal proceedings at the present time”.

Justice Eady took a grave view of this too:

I regard that as a threat that libel proceedings will be issued against Dr Harris unless he “limits” any further comment – not in itself objectionable. On the other hand, the threat is backed up by reference to litigation against The Sunday Times and Mr Deer which, by the date of the letter, had already been stayed. The implication is that for rather vague “sub judice” reasons it would not be appropriate to comment until the proceedings have been determined. At that stage none of the libel actions was “active” within the meaning of the schedule to the Contempt of Court Act 1981 and there was accordingly no reason why Dr Harris should not comment further, if he wished to do so, subject always to the constraints of defamation. Again, one sees the same pattern. The Claimant wishes to use the proceedings for tactical or public relations advantage without revealing that they have been put on the back burner.

And, incredibly, Wakefield also instructed his team to go after the Dept. of Health:

“…In the circumstances Mr Wakefield is concerned and surprised to note that your official website on behalf of the Department of Health offers links not only to Mr Deer’s own website, but also the Channel 4 website on the programme. It seems extraordinary to us and wholly wrong that the Government’s official organ should direct website visitors to another site which not only records partisan and hotly disputed opinions on the subject but is also the subject of defamation proceedings. You will appreciate our grave concern that this fact appears to suggest that Government offers this subject matter official weight and authority.”

This letter is intended to provide formal written warning that the links provided to these two websites are allowing the dissemination of defamatory material. Since this is so you are now invited to withdraw the Department of Health link to these two websites forthwith given that this is an inappropriate use of Governmental weight and authority in such a controversial area”.

Just as a side note I find it incredible that anyone should try and go after a website which links to Brian Deer’s. For their further legal presumption I’d like to present a list of sites that link to Brian Deer’s. I await your issue of a writ against Wikipedia and Google with interest.

Anyway, back to Justice Eady:

I am quite satisfied, therefore, that the Claimant wished to extract whatever advantage he could from the existence of the proceedings while not wishing to progress them or to give the Defendants an opportunity of meeting the claims. It seems to me that these are inconsistent positions to adopt. This conduct is a powerful factor to be weighed in the exercise of the court’s discretion in circumstances which are clearly unique.

And indeed so powerful that Justice Eady ruled that:

I have come to the conclusion, bearing all these considerations in mind, that the interests of the administration of justice require that the Channel 4 proceedings should not be stayed pending the outcome of the GMC proceedings. I appreciate that there will be an increased workload for the Claimant’s advisers, but I do not have any reason to suppose that the firm is incapable of absorbing that extra burden. It is, after all, their client who chose to issue these proceedings and to use them, as I have described above, as a weapon in his attempts to close down discussion and debate over an important public issue. (I note that separate teams of counsel are instructed for the GMC proceedings and the defamation claims.)

So far as the website proceedings are concerned, I see no advantage in those continuing in parallel. There is a significant overlap. I am persuaded that this overlap is so significant, in relation to the defamation proceedings (unlike the GMC disciplinary process), that the outcome of the Channel 4 proceedings is likely to be in practical terms determinative of the others. Mr Deer acts in person in the website proceedings, and a very considerable burden would be placed upon his shoulders if he had to progress that litigation in parallel to the other action, in which he has the advantage of legal representation. Indeed, it may well be that there is a whiff of tactics in the Claimant’s change of stance, whereby he wished to have the website proceedings continue – but only provided there was no stay of the Channel 4 litigation. This is borne out by the suggestion that, before the Claimant should serve his reply, Mr Deer should be obliged to serve a defence in the website proceedings. That proposal has all the hallmarks of a tactical ploy to put Mr Deer at a disadvantage. It would have the effect of isolating him. I am not prepared to go along with that.

Its not looking good for Andrew Wakefield. He’s now been exposed as a bully who likes to threaten with what he has no intention of pursuing. He’s also looking like he’s beginning to realise that he has no chance of escaping the GMC hearings unscathed. Hopefully all those who like to bandy around legal action as a threat will see that a hot head often gets regretted when the facts are examined.

Autism, Respect and the Mercury Militia

25 Oct

What was a disagreement about the causes of autism is widening into a war. This isn’t a war between parents and scientists. Its a war between one set of parents and a group comprised of other parents, scientists and autistics themselves. Its a war between flexibility and acceptance on one side and a rigid determination to ‘cure’ on the other.

To cure what? Good question. Some believe that autism and its attendant comorbidities are interchangeable. That constipation and a different way of looking at things are the same thing. That dyspraxia and a lack of imaginative ability are the same thing. Others believe that the two things are quite separate. That the comorbidities that are attendant with autism in _some_ people cannot be used to define autism. That the condition of being autistic bequeaths gifts as well as troubles (and it does bequeath troubles, lets not pretend it doesn’t) and that keeping the troubles is a small price to pay for keeping the gifts.

There are lots of questions that arise from these ideas of course but lets further examine the stance of the opposition to these two camps. For those that see autism as a medical as well as developmental issue there seems to be a residual pool of dislike, verging into outright hatred for those that don’t. They think that their opposition are abandoning kids to their horrible autistic fate. For them there are no shades of grey – its either black or white. These people also seek to play down and even attempt to rewrite official diagnostic criteria to downplay the ‘higher’ end of the spectrum.

Mr Lietch (sic) thinks it is in the child’s best interest to do absolutely nothing to ameliorate this condition [the writers son] . And, he and his associates knock parents for trying to help our children

John Best Jr

This condition. Autism, one assumes. The question to which I repeatedly put to John Best was what constituted autism? Best constantly (and still does) fails to appreciate the distinction:

…You claim head banging and feces smearing are not autism. Is this supposed to obscure the issue? These are not normal and are very much a part of autism….

John Best Jr

Up until now all we have is debate – its a debate that takes no prisoners to be sure, but its a debate nonetheless. However, things invariably take a turn for the worse:

Your neurodiverse pals who sneeringly refer to people who try to help children as “curebies”

Sounds diabolical doesn’t it? Us sneeringly cruel ‘neurodiverse’ (sic) want to stop people helping children. Something of bizarre belief seeing as quite a lot of people who consider themselves aligned with the notion of respecting autism are parents themselves. But wait! We forget that…

Anyone who is not chelating to get rid of the mercury is guilty of child abuse. Every doctor who is not telling their patients to chelate is guilty of malpractice….. Any parent who listens to the doctors tell them that there is no known cause or cure for autism is too damn stupid to have kids.

John Best Jr

Except of course the truth is somewhat different. The truth is (as I have repeatedly said) that respecting autism is not the same thing as respecting someone gastric issues. If your child smears faeces then find out why and intervene. If your child bangs their head on the wall, buy them a scrum cap, figure out why and intervene. If your child has gastric issues, find out what they are and intervene. *If your child is mercury poisoned then get a proper doctor to chelate them*. But don’t fool yourself that by removing someones need to bang their head against a wall you are removing their autism as you are not and cannot. that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t do it. It does mean you need to have realistic expectations. It does mean you need to be prepared to look at your child at the beginning, during and end of the process of treatment you have for them and say ‘I would love you no matter what’. You need to understand that because someone can’t speak doesn’t mean they can’t hear and to hear who they are described as ‘rotting in an abyss’ or ‘worse than hell’ or ‘diseased’ is going to do that child no good at all.

Frequently those if us who believe in acceptance are told by those that don’t that we are ignoring childrens needs:

And, Kev, have you done research on the trailer-dwelling coo-coos you now are affiliated with? You keep harping on the symptom profile of autism. Look, mate, our kids ALL share the same physical symptoms. I had twin autistic boys over to my house this weekend. They are six. They’ve never been treated. They can’t talk, much less function, they require 24 hour care. They have all the same physical issues my son HAD, which have since resolved. In your coo-coo world these parents would do nothing. Shameful and idiotic.

JB Handley

I have to admit to not being too sure what ‘coo-coo’ means but I’m assuming its not good. As ever though, the point is missed – no-one, repeat *no-one* is saying parents shouldn’t intervene where kids can’t talk or can’t function and I challenge JB Handley (or anyone else) to find any statement where I have advocated that belief. Its increasingly hysterical fear-mongering because its rapidly dawning on these people that they are looking increasingly fundamentalist and fringe.

You might note I’ve quoted extensively from JB Handley and John Best Jr here. I do so because they are both strongly affiliated with Generation Rescue, the group that apparently gives parents the knowledge to make an informed choice. Yeah. Knowledge like:

There is no evidence to suggest that autism is genetic. No autism gene has ever been found and the search will be endless – how can you have a gene for a mythical condition? Autism is mercury poisoning

Generation Rescue.

So, John Best Jr and JB Handley are all about promoting choice and informed decisions. So much so that they launch into full on attack mode and misrepresent people’s beliefs. Sometimes the attacks get very, very personal indeed:

Muslim terrorists who fly planes into tall buildings have a different set of beliefs than others. Your neurodiverse pals who sneeringly refer to people who try to help children as “curebies” and go to extreme measures in attempts to discredit those people are in the same class.

John Best Jr

John Best associating the World Trade Center attack with my belief that acceptance and flexibility is best. I couldn’t quite believe he’d actually said that so I asked for clarification:

You spout your nonsense in much the same way that terrorists shout for Allah before they blow things up with bombs strapped to themselves. That agenda is more than a little bit wacky to most people who are thinking straight.

John Best Jr

Yup, he meant it all right. Don’t forget, John Best Jr is a ‘Rescue Angel’ – one who is charged by Generation Rescue with informing parents about mercury and chelation. He is a spokesman for Generation Rescue.

The populace of Generation Rescue have a particular dislike of Kathleen Seidel. They see her as the ‘spokesperson’ of ‘the neurodiverse’ probably because of the domain. In a very disturbing attack, Best again mistakes autism with comorbidity, goes after Kathleen and at the same time confirms that for him, ‘better dead than autistic’ is certainly true:

..So they miss out on curing their children and the kids wind up spending their lives in institutions. In effect, they never enjoy one second of the lives they could have had if only the mercury had been removed from their brains. Ms Seidel might as well have put a bullet in those kids so they would not have suffered. Does that sound about right, Kevin?

John Best Jr

One wonders – is ‘better dead than autistic’ a policy decision of Generation Rescue?

John Best, that (typical?) fine, upstanding member of Generation Rescue also has views on the failings of the diagnostic criteria for autism:

Your adult Asperger’s friends would have been called by a different name when I was young and nobody was aware of the effects of the mercury they’ve been shooting into us since the 1930’s. They would have been called nerds.

John Best Jr.

Nice.

Best is, of course, attempting to paint all within the ‘neurodiverse’ (sic) movement as AS. Of course, his theory founders on the fact that it is not. But still, I wonder – is insulting autistics another policy of Generation Rescue?

I don’t believe for a moment that everyone in the Biomed community thinks like Best, or Handley come to that, which makes it a pity that so very many in the Biomed community see that our thoughts as a threat to them – so much of a threat that even an appalling loss of life such as the World Trade Center attacks is not above being denigrated in an attempt to demonise people such as I.

I’ve said it before and I say it again now. The Biomed community needs to take a long hard look at itself and who its most vocal proponents are. Do you honestly believe that your cause is well served by referring to others as akin to bombers? Or child abusers? or nerds?

Is this something you really think will attract people to your way of thinking?

Is this a position from which you think is substantial enough to build from?

Are these words which you feel serve you well, personally?

Autism: A Novel Form Of Mercury Poisoning

14 Oct

Many in the Neurodiversity and Biomed communities are aware of this paper. It forms one of the lynchpins of the Biomed communities belief system – that autism and mercury poisoning are the same.

I’ve long been confused by this belief. Its plainly wrong and I’m amazed so many seemingly intelligent people believe it. I’ve posted about it numerous times both on here and in the comments of others blogs and the answers from its proponents when I question it veer from outright hostility to laughter at my supposed naivety in not being able to see ‘it’.

Its quite obvious to me that the symptoms of mercury poisoning tally very loosely with some comorbidities of autism but that as these things _are_ comorbidities, they cannot be used to diagnose autism and that therefore the two things cannot possibly by the same thing.

Just for your own information, here are the clinical symptoms of mercury poisoning and here is the diagnostic criteria for autism. But don’t just read the links I provide, go find some of your own.

After you’ve read around a bit you’ll probably conclude as I did: The idea that the two tally is ridiculous. However, Kathleen made me aware of a commentary piece in Pediatrics that backs up my position. I didn’t even know it existed until now so ‘thanks’ to Kathleen for posting its details.

Here’s a few quotes from the commentary – the full piece is available from the link I provided.

In mercury poisoning, the characteristic motor findings are ataxia and dysarthria. These signs, along with tremor, muscle pains, and weakness, are noted on relatively high-dose exposure, acute or chronic. In 3 Romanian children accidentally exposed to ethyl mercury in a fungicide, these same symptoms were prominent. The outcome of fetal methyl mercury poisoning in severe form also included spasticity. In contrast, in autism, the only common motor manifestations are repetitive behaviors (stereotypies) such as flapping, circling, or rocking. Persons with Asperger syndrome may be clumsy, and hypotonia has been noted in some infants with autism; the frequency of clumsiness and hypotonia in autism spectrum disorders is not established. *No other motor findings are common in autism*, and indeed *the presence of ataxia or dysarthria in a child whose behavior has autistic features should lead to careful medical evaluation for an alternative or additional diagnosis*.

Other signs that may appear in children with chronic mercury toxicity, such as hypertension skin eruption and thrombocytopenia are seldom seen in autism.

When severe mercury poisoning occurs in prenatal life or early infancy, head size tends to be small and microcephaly is common. Prenatal exposure to other neurotoxins—lead, alcohol, and polychlorinated biphenyls, for example—also predispose to decreased head size. In contrast, in autism increasing evidence indicates that head size and, as measured by volumetric magnetic resonance imaging, brain size tends to be larger than population norms.

At sufficient dose mercury is indeed a neurotoxin, but *the typical clinical signs of mercurism are not similar to the typical clinical signs of autism*.

Mercury poisoning and autism both affect the central nervous system but the specific sites of involvement in brain and the brain cell types affected are different in the two disorders as evidenced clinically and by neuropathology.

Nonspecific symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and irrational fears may occur both in mercury poisoning and in children with autism, but overall the clinical picture of mercurism—from any known form, dose, duration, or age of exposure—does not mimic that of autism.

What Am I Missing?

13 Oct

JB Handley, golden boy of Generation Rescue recently spoke to another newspaper. I thought the reporter did a very good job of showing both sides of the issue (Kirby, Olmsted take note).

I did however, have to read the article a few times until it sunk in. These were the passages that confused me.

Jamie’s moods progress fluidly from joy to concentration to panic. He has full run of his parents’ sprawling home, a hypoallergenic realm with wool carpets, insulation made from blue jeans and HEPA filters to clean the air.

One afternoon this summer, Jamie dragged his father by the finger to a mattress in the middle of the basement floor and, holding onto both of his hands, began jumping up and down, lofting higher and higher with each leap. The game was an autistic obsession. The blond boy sprang up again and again, never tiring, his face frozen in an expression of total joy.

Jamie eventually moved from the mattress to his train set, another obsession, and later to the table, where he covered reams of paper with spiraling circles, using his teeth to uncap each pen in the box until all the lids and pens lay on the floor where he cast them aside. All the while, he didn’t speak a word.

Three months later, Jamie had learned to point at things he wanted and to wave goodbye. He still screamed shrilly, ran back and forth, and didn’t speak in front of a reporter. His parents have augmented the biomedical regimen with other treatments—speech and occupational therapy and applied behavioral analysis, an intensive program that teaches autistic children to mimic “normal” behaviors, like waving goodbye.

So what am I confused about? Well, Jamie sounds exactly like my child. She does all the things Jamie is listed as doing above. In fact, in terms of her progress, she sounds ‘further along’ than Jamie. She has a few words now and the beginnings of a sentence or two although of course, like Jamie she has setbacks and meltdowns.

In fact the only appreciable difference between them as far as I can tell is that JB and Lisa chelate Jamie and we don’t chelate our daughter.

As I say, I’m totally confused. I thought chelation was supposed to ‘cure’ or ‘reverse’ autism? I was expecting to read about a Son-Rise style reversal where Jamie is verbal, engages constantly with the reporter etc. What I’m reading here is the normal progression of an autistic child. Now, granted I don’t know the exact program that Jamie is on but I know he must’ve been on it for a few months now. I’m also aware that he’s on TD DMPS. Read into that what you will.

I don’t mind admitting I’m a bit shocked by this. I was curious as to what a ‘recovered’ autistic child would be like and now it seems I have my answer – they’re just like an autistic child but without the sometimes painful comorbidities. If the Handley’s have removed those painful comorbidities then they’re to be congratulated. I am, however, at a loss to explain their statement that:

evidence that their cure is working can be seen in Jamie’s behavior

Cure for what? Mercury poisoning? Possibly. Autism? I really don’t think so. I didn’t before but I’m even less convinced after reading this.

Where Are All The Adult Autistics?

5 Oct

Anyone remember David Kirby?

Citizen Cain who had a dialogue going with Kirby for awhile probably does. Unfortunately, since CC showed Kirby how wrong he was Kirby’s gone very very quiet on that front.

One of the big – if not the biggest – dependencies that the whole autism = thiomersal poisoning rests on is the existence of the so-called ‘autism epidemic’. Without the ‘epidemic’ there is no rise in prevalence and without a rise in prevalence there is no mystery surrounding the causes of autism. In fact, if there’s no epidemic then this refutes the idea that thiomersal causes autism as the amount of thiomersal (before its removal) in vaccines rose sharply. Without a corresponding ‘epidemic’ the whole shebang is dead in the water.

One of the key points then become the existence of adults on the spectrum. If they exist in large numbers then there can be no real rise in prevalence and hence no epidemic. As David Kirby himself said:

When it comes to autism, here is one of the key questions we should be asking: if autism…..has always been prevalent at the same constant rate, then where are the 1-in-166 autistic 25-year-olds (those born in 1980)? Where are the 1-in-166 autistic 55-year-olds? Why can’t we find them?

David Kirby

Firstly, lets note that the 1 in 166 figure is in hot dispute and based on the California DDS numbers which California themselves say are not reliable for tracking autism prevalence (see Citizen Cain link above).

The big problem with answering Kirby’s question is that these people are not tracked and recorded accurately – or at all in some places. However, thats not the point. Kirby is saying they don’t exist in high enough numbers. Whilst its impossible to prove or disprove that exact point its easy to demonstrate that there are a _lot_ of adult autistics.

A 2004 audit on ASD in Scotland tried to present on overall report on the ‘state of ASD knowledge’ in Scotland. Most striking to me as I read the report was the comments that each local authority/NHS partnership had regarding an answer to the following question:

Research tells us that prevalence rates of autistic spectrum disorder represent an underestimate. To what extent do you consider the numbers above to be an accurate reflection of all those who live in your area?

Argyll & Bute Council
It is believed that the figures represent a significant under-representation of those with ASD in Argyll and Bute. This was thought to be due to a historical under-diagnosis and the absence of clearly defined referral pathways and multi-agency assessment processes for adults.

East Renfrewshire Council, NHS A&C and Greater Glasgow NHS
…as a result of changing patterns of diagnosis over recent years there are likely to be substantial numbers of adults with ASD who are not known to services and are not diagnosed as having ASDs.

AYRSHIRE AND ARRAN
It is apparent that information collection and collation for adults is almost non existent.

DUMFRIES AND GALLOWAY
There is little doubt that this number is far short of the actual number of adults in Dumfries & Galloway with ASD.

GRAMPIAN
There is low diagnosis for longstanding clients, whom workers are aware have autism as well as a learning disability.

HIGHLAND
It is believed that these figures comprise a significant underestimate due to the lack of a diagnostic process particularly for adults. It is believed that the figures for younger children are accurate due to the development of diagnostic tools for children are accurate due to the development of diagnostic tools for children and the establishment of multi-disciplinary partnerships which include education.

LANARKSHIRE
The estimated numbers provided for the pre-school and primary school ages are thought to be a reasonably accurate reflection of the true picture. However the estimated number of secondary school children is less accurate and the estimated number of adults with ASD is likely to be a considerable underestimate of the true prevalence.

ORKNEY
Figures for children are an accurate representation of needs. One or two children may yet be diagnosed. Figures for adults are under estimated as diagnosis has not been made and access to specialists is variable.

Perth & Kinross Council
Figures for adults reflect the national findings that the numbers known to services/diagnosed represent a significant underestimate of those individuals likely to be affected. For example day centre managers locally consider a number of people to be on the spectrum who have had no formal diagnosis.

Pretty interesting stuff I think you’ll agree. This means that about 45% of the areas questioned said that the prevalence for adults was grossly underestimated, badly reported and that a lot of these adults exist without diagnosis.

A secondary question also of note asked:

What changes are there in demand in the last 5 years? Are there increased numbers? If so, what do you attribute this to?

Just about every area reported an increase and all areas attributed to either, reclassification of some people (especially adults) from Learning Difficulties to ASD, increased awareness of ASD generally and in medical circles and improved diagnosis. Perhaps the most amusing answer came from whomever compiled the reports for Shetland who said:

Demand for diagnosis, therapy, respite and alternative treatments. Any increase in numbers is attributed to jungle/grape vine, internet, parent support group and media.

Maybe David Kirby should pack the second revised draft of Evidence of Harm into his Sporran and come and find some decent research. That would make a nice change for him.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →