Four parents of autistic children sue Philadelphia School District

23 Jun

Four parents of autistic children sue Philadelphia School District is a story in the Philadelphia Inquirer. The story discusses how the families are filing suit to stop a policy in the district of moving children to different schools at the end of the 3rd and 5th grades:

Four parents have filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of their autistic children, alleging that the Philadelphia School District is illegally moving the children from school to school based solely on their disability.

At issue is the district’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy, which mandates that students with autism move to another school at the end of third and fifth grades. Non-autistic students do not have to move.

Aside from the policy which forces autistic kids to change schools multiple times, I find this interesting from another perspective: the class-action lawsuit. In general, it is difficult to sue districts in class-actions. Instead, complaints typically are filed on a student-by-student basis.

True to their name, Disability Scoop has already posted on this story (Parents Cry Foul Over Special Education Transfers)

On Accommodation

22 Jun

I had the good fortune to meet John Robison at IMFAR. I told him then, and I still believe it, that we agree more than we disagree. This is especially true of some very important subjects. With that experience behind me, I have been been more likely to read his pieces when the titles pop up in my searches. He has a recent piece up on accommodation, posted to his own blog and has cross posted it to the Autism Speaks blog as well. I found that I couldn’t put the piece out of my mind but I couldn’t manage a short enough response to post to either blog. So I took his piece as a springboard to discuss my own views on accommodation, especially as it pertains to non autistics and how it has changed over the years.

Here’s a quote from Mr. Robison:

In my last post, I talked briefly about Asperger people who fail to get jobs for whatever reason, and then allege discrimination. Some neurodiversity voices ask for an end to that discrimination, and for greater acceptance.

I have asked for greater acceptance myself. I think that is a noble goal, but not one we will see attained anytime soon. When I look at how I was treated in childhood, how my 21-year old son grew up, and what I see today I see some change but not much. It leads me to wonder how much acceptance and accommodation we might reasonably expect.

I think I see things differently. In specific, I see that a great deal of accommodation has been gained over the years. This leads me to believe that more accommodation, especially for the disabled, is possible in my lifetime.

When I compare myself and my life to that of my father and mother I see huge changes in accommodation in a relatively short time period. In the 1950’s when my parents first started their family, a married woman, even without kids, was unlikely to be working. If she was working and she announced that she was pregnant, probably the first thing she would hear is, “when is your last day” or “will you help train your replacement?” The thought of keeping a job was not to be expected.

Part of the reason for this was simple: if a child was sick and had to leave school, or had to stay home (and that happens to all children), someone had to pick up the kid and stay with him/her. No way that would be the father. No way his work would accommodate him. Now many workplaces do, and this allows mothers to work.

Many companies didn’t have maternity leave in my parents’ day. Paternity leave? Forget it. Paternity leave is a fairly recent accommodation. A good example of how accommodations are still being added to our lives.

My mother loved to tell the story of the maternity floor on the hospital where she had her first baby. Women were moved there after giving birth and no men were allowed. She told of one of the hospital executives showing up at the maternity floor and being stopped by a nurse. Today maternity rooms include chairs that change into beds so fathers can stay with the mother and child. That is an accommodation.

IEP meetings, evaluations, placement visits…all these are familiar terms to parents of autistic children. This year was a big one for me, with many visits, evaluations and multiple IEP meetings. This coincided with one of the biggest deadlines in my career at work. I am incredibly grateful that my management took the position: get the job done and take the time off you need for the IEP. That’s a huge accommodation. No way my father’s management would have approved of that.

The workplace has continually added accommodations. But I think we often don’t see them as accommodations when they are granted for those without disabilities. In other words, I’ve benefitted greatly from the accommodations which have come out in the past generation. Why can’t I expect more accommodations for the disabled in the next generation?

Like Mr. Robison, I want to be acting. Part of that effort is directed at what I hope makes a better life for my child. Those accommodations may not be in the workplace, but that makes them no less important.

Mr. Robison has much good to say. In the end, we live in today, not the future. We have to work within the restrictions we face now. But, let’s not mistake fighting for a better future with mere complaining about the present. As a wise man once said, the best way to predict the future is to invent it.

Parental Perspectives of Communication about Sexuality in Families of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders.

21 Jun

This is a small study, a very small study. Parental Perspectives of Communication about Sexuality in Families of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Interviews were held with 18 parents of autistic children. At the same time, I think papers like this keep an important dialogue moving forward. It’s tough for parents*at least this parent) to consider the future sexuality of their children. Well, there is of course the fears, in this case the fears of victimization.

Here is the abstract

Abstract

To explore the content of communication about sexuality between parents and children with autism spectrum disorders, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 parents of children ages 6-13. Content analysis and ethnographic summary were used to interpret the data. Findings suggest that parent’s perceptions of a child’s behaviors and comprehension are associated with the likelihood that communication occurs. However, parents recognize the risks their children experience, with the greatest fears being sexual victimization and misperceptions related to the intent of their child’s behaviors. This study provides information on the nature of communication about sexuality in families of children with autism spectrum disorders and can help tailor interventions aimed at assisting parents to communicate sexuality information effectively.

It strikes me as this is one of those times when bringing in the information autistic adults might offer would benefit those of us parents.

Donald Triplett – Autism’s Patient Zero part 2

20 Jun

A while back, Kev wrote about an article in the Atlantic, Autism’s First Child. The story is about Donald T (Donald Triplett) who was the first child described by Leo Kanner in his first paper on autism.

I don’t recall at the time seeing this video the Atlantic produced on the story. I watched it and enjoyed it, especially the parts discussing how Mr. Triplett’s community supports him:

http://c.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f9?isVid=1

IMFAR Tech Demo Awards

20 Jun

Here is a video by Alex Plank of WrongPlanet.net and his crew from the IMFAR 2011 Tech Demo. Alex splices in footage of the awardees discussing their tech inventions.

Autism Science Foundation interview: Christie Buchovecky

18 Jun

Christie Buchovecky is a pre-doctoral research at Baylor College of Medicine. Her research project, Identifying Genetic Modifiers of Rett Syndrome in the Mouse, is supported by the Autism Science Foundation. Here is a video interview of Ms. Buchovecky from IMFAR 2011. It is very interesting to hear about Rett syndrome and the learning that has happened into the genetic link and the potential for treatment.

One thing I like about the ASF is their focus on funding new researchers, pre-doctoral and post-doctoral. It strikes me as highly important to pull new people into the field.

The White House Blog: Meeting the Needs of People with Autism

17 Jun

Below is a post from the White House blog by Kathleen Sebelius. It dates from April 25, but I thought it worth presenting here. Given that this from a government website, I feel OK copying it in whole here.

Helping every American with autism achieve their full potential is one of this administration’s top priorities. At the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, we continue to strive to meet the complex needs of all people with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) and their families. While there is no cure, early intervention is critical and can greatly improve a child’s development.

Perhaps the biggest step we’ve taken to support those affected by autism and their families happened over a year ago, with the signing of the Affordable Care Act. Now, new insurance plans are required to cover autism screening and developmental assessments for children at no cost to parents. Insurers will also no longer be allowed to deny children coverage for a pre-existing condition such as ASD or to set arbitrary lifetime or annual limits on benefits.

Also, thanks to the new law, young adults are allowed to stay on their family health insurance until they turn 26. For a young adult with autism spectrum disorder and their family, that means peace of mind. It means more flexibility, more options, and more opportunity to reach their full potential.

Ultimately, there is more support for Americans with autism than ever before. This means more promise of new breakthroughs that will help us understand autism even better. But in order to continue meeting the needs of people with autism, the Combating Autism Act must be fully reauthorized. We still have a long way to go. Working collaboratively with important partners, the Affordable Care Act and the Combating Autism Act will allow us to continue important research and develop and refine vital treatments.

There are still many unknowns. However, one thing is certain. We will continue to work harder than ever to find solutions and provide support to individuals with ASD and their families. Together, we can help reduce disparities and allow everyone to actualize their greatest potential.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/all/modules/swftools/shared/flash_media_player/player5x2.swf

Mark Geier: My therapy is unconventional, but it works

17 Jun

Dr. Mark Geier is appealing the suspension of his medical license. The license suspension order includes (as summarized by Kathleen Seidel at Neurodiversity.com):

• In six out of nine of these cases, the board determined that the children were misdiagnosed with precocious puberty. Children were diagnosed with precocious puberty without the benefit of a physical examination; some were too old to qualify for the diagnosis.

• Medical records and medical necessity letters prepared by Dr. and Mr. Geier indicated that children were diagnosed not only with precocious puberty, but also with pituitary dysfunction, insomnia, aggression, mitochondrial disorder, metabolic dysfunction, and “heavy metal toxicity” when neither test results nor parent reports suggested anything of the sort.

• In one case, the only record of the diagnosis of precocious puberty was a code number entered onto a standing order for lab tests. In another, no note was made in the medical records of the date the child began treatment with Lupron. Yet another patient’s file contained no indication that Dr. Geier reviewed any of the results of the numerous, burdensome diagnostic tests he had ordered.

• The order describes claims submitted to at least one insurance company for a psychiatric interview and “prolonged evaluation and management” services that were never rendered.

• The order further describes an occasion when David Geier, who is not licensed to practice medicine, conducted a medical evaluation and diagnostic tests, made diagnoses, and recommended treatments for an autistic boy in Dr. Geier’s absence.

• Additionally, the Board determined that Dr. Geier misrepresented his qualifications as a geneticist, and misrepresented the ability of his Institutional Review Board to conduct oversight of his research.

Dr. Geier has taken his case to the public in an opinion piece in the Baltimore Sun: Autism doctor: My therapy is unconventional, but it works. He certainly has the right to present his case to the Sun, and while I would not have published the letter were I editor, the Sun is within its rights to host the letter. I am within my rights to comment on the letter, and I took that opportunity in the comments as you will see (complete with typos) if you follow the link.

Dr. Geeir opens with a simple statment “If there’s a single statement that everyone who works in the field of autism can agree on, it’s that there is so much that we still don’t know.” This is incomplete: there is much we do know. We know that the theories Dr. Geier has proposed are wrong. We know that the rise in autism is not due to mercury. Certain tests should be performed before a child is diagnosed with precocious puberty. Tests which the charges indicate Dr. Geier failed to do on many occasions. We know that treatment for precocious puberty should stop at an age when puberty is expected. Dr. Geier is charged with initiating and/or continuing treatment in children too old to be diagnosed with precocious puberty.

Dr. Geier has published many papers in the literature, this is true. These papers have been widely criticized by researchers. Not because the ideas are unconventional, but because the ideas are ill founded and the experimental methods are poor. Dr. Geier has been described as “intellectually dishonest” for his work as an expert witness. The Institute of Medicine has referred to Dr. Geier’s papers as suffering from “serious methodological flaws and their analytic methods were nontransparent, making their results uninterpretable”

There is much we do not know. On thing we do know: we deserve better than Mark Geier

Perhaps it is the frustration of having read the recent article by the Geiers in the new “autism science digest”. Perhaps it is the fact that I listened to a podcast interview with the Geiers in preparing my recent response to the article. Perhaps it is just the years of reading bad science and waiting for someone to act against these people, but my patience is worn rather thin, as you will see in the comments.

AutismOne throws their support behind the Geiers in “Autism Science Digest”

16 Jun

When news came out about the legal troubles Mark and David Geier are facing, there was some hope expressed that maybe, just maybe, some of the groups that have supported the father/son team would take the chance to distance themselves. The Generation Rescue/Autism One conference was at that time still in the future, and the Geiers were scheduled to speak. Dr. Mark Geier had his license suspended for the “therapy” he was planning to tout at AutismOne, and that David Geier was facing the charge of practicing medicine without a license.

As we have seen, the optimism was ill founded. The Geiers presented their talk at AutismOne. And, as it turns out, AutismOne had already in-press their new magazine, the “Autism Science Digest”, which included an article by the Geiers. Someone forwarded it to me and it is frankly painful to read.

It is a nice glossy advertisement for the Geiers and their testosterone/autism theory. I don’t throw that out lightly. It is pseudo-science generated to promote an idea. and idea which really doesn’t stand up to real science.

For example, they present the article like a science study, complete with references. It makes it seem as though what they say is backed up by legitimate science. But citations do not make a study. Especially when they are misused.

It is difficult to describe the Geier hypothesis. This is for two reasons. First, it is hard to accept that they actually believe their own work, it is so bad. Second, it has morphed dramatically over the few years of its existence.

Let me explain. When they first proposed their idea that testosterone was somehow important, they claimed that testosterone was binding mercury in the brain, rendering it difficult to remove through chelation. If you listen to Lisa Sykes talk about the Geiers (the Rev. Sykes being a major spokesperson for the Geiers over the years), she tells how David Geier told her, “We figured something new out…..we think we can get rid of the mercury by lowering the testosterone”.

By the way, the Rev. Sykes mentions that she tested her child for testosterone. The range was 0 to 25 and her kid was “at the top of the range”. Not above it. At the top. As in, high but within normal.

If you listen to the Geiers speak now (and, again, I find this painful to do), they are still pushing the idea that mercury is the main causation factor in autism. But, here’s the shift with Lupron, they are downplaying the idea that is part of a chelation protocol. It’s all about reducing testosterone.

Is anyone surprised that if you change the testosterone levels in a person you will see changes in behavior? Does this have anything to do with autism? Does it have anything to do with mercury?

The Geier article relies heavily on the work of Dr. Simon Baron-Cohen’s group. They cite Dr. Baron-Cohen’s group 5 times in their article. It makes the article look legitimate. The first paragraph states, “In fact, ASD’s have even been described as the result of an “extreme male brain” by psychologist Dr. Simon Baron-Cohen”.

At this point, it is worth recalling what Dr. Baron-Cohen had to say about the work the Geiers are doing:

Simon Baron-Cohen, a professor of developmental psychopathology at the University of Cambridge in England and director of the Autism Research Center in Cambridge, said it is irresponsible to treat autistic children with Lupron.

“The idea of using it with vulnerable children with autism, who do not have a life-threatening disease and pose no danger to anyone, without a careful trial to determine the unwanted side effects or indeed any benefits, fills me with horror,” he said.

Some how “fills me with horror” was not included in the Geier article.

Dr. Baron-Cohen’s theories include the idea that fetal testosterone levels affect the development of the brain. This is a prenatal process. The Geier notion is that autistics have high testosterone levels (even though they have documented cases of children they treated who do not have high levels). It is intellectually (and otherwise) very dishonest to claim that the work of Dr. Baron-Cohen in any way supports the Geier’s application of the drug Lupron to autistic children.

It isn’t just Dr. Baron-Cohen’s work that is misused to sell this therapy. The Geier’s write, “”Also, some investigators have found that leuprolide acetate administration resulted in improvements in cognition” ( Bryan et al. , 2010)”

Here is the abstract for Bryan, et al.:

Down-regulation of serum gonadotropins is as effective as estrogen replacement at improving menopause-associated cognitive deficits.
Bryan KJ, Mudd JC, Richardson SL, Chang J, Lee HG, Zhu X, Smith MA, Casadesus G.
Source

Department of Neurosciences, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Abstract

Declining levels of estrogen in women result in increases in gonadotropins such as luteinizing hormone (LH) through loss of feedback inhibition. LH, like estrogen, is modulated by hormone replacement therapy. However, the role of post-menopausal gonadotropin increases on cognition has not been evaluated. Here, we demonstrate that the down-regulation of ovariectomy-driven LH elevations using the gonadotropin releasing hormone super-analogue, leuprolide acetate, improves cognitive function in the Morris water maze and Y-maze tests in the absence of E2. Furthermore, our data suggest that these effects are independent of the modulation of estrogen receptors alpha and beta, or activation of CYP19 and StAR, associated with the production of endogenous E2. Importantly, pathways associated with improved cognition such as CaMKII and GluR1-Ser831 are up-regulated by leuprolide treatment but not by chronic long-term E2 replacement suggesting independent cognition-modulating properties. Our findings suggest that down-regulation of gonadotropins is as effective as E2 in modulating cognition but likely acts through different molecular mechanisms. These findings provide a potential novel protective strategy to treat menopause/age-related cognitive decline and/or prevent the development of AD.

The short version: the authors removed the ovaries from mice, putting them into a menopause state. They found that these mice decline cognitively, but that they can treat this with a leuprolide acetate (a drug similar to lupron).

Yes, somehow the animal model for autism to the Geiers are post-menopausal mice.

This study has nothing to do with improving cognition in children, or autistic children in particular. Don’t take my word for it. I contacted one of the researchers who wrote the paper:

Well… The principle of gonadotropins working on cognition in menopausal women or patients with AD has nothing to do with autism nor with improving cognition via the depletion of gonadal steroids such as testosterone or estrogen. For example, we know that when women that are in reproductive age (and men to a lesser extend) are given leuprolide their cognition is impaired, indicating that gonadal steroids are important for cognition. However, we have shown that after menopause, gonadal steroids can be by-passed by downregulating gonadotropins to improve cognition.

If you want the message in a single sentence:

The beneficial effects of leuprolide on cognition in ovariectomized (menopausal) female mice has nothing to do with the treatment of autism in children.

Another study the Geiers cite: “Increased marble-burying behavior in ethanol-withdrawal state: Modulation by gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist”

No, I am not kidding. It is a study about alcoholic mice burying marbles. Here’s the abstract:

A characteristic behavior in alcohol abstinence state indicates the possibility of obsessive–compulsive behavior in alcoholics. Ethanol is known to reduce hypothalamic synthesis, release, and mRNA expression of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) that modulates serotonergic, dopaminergic, and glutamatergic systems, which experience adaptive changes on chronic exposure to ethanol. Such changes are also evident in obsessive–compulsive disorder. Therefore, it was proposed to investigate the effect of ethanol-withdrawal on marble-burying behavior in mice, particularly because it simulates some aspects of obsessive–compulsive behavior; further, the influence of GnRH agonist was studied on the same. Ethanol-withdrawal state was induced after its chronic administration, and marble-burying behavior was observed at 0, 6, 24, 48, and 96 h interval. Further, the influence of leuprolide—a GnRH agonist (50–600 ?g/kg, s.c.) or fluoxetine (5–30 mg/kg, i.p.) was investigated on ethanol-withdrawal-induced changes in marble-burying behavior. The results indicated that ethanol-withdrawal led to a gradual increase in marble-burying behavior upto 48 h with peak at 24 h interval. Administration of leuprolide (100–600 ?g/kg, s.c.), 30 min prior to 24 h interval, dose dependently reduced ethanol-withdrawal-induced increase in marble-burying behavior, and this effect was comparable to that of fluoxetine (15 and 30 mg/kg, i.p.). Further, twice daily administration of leuprolide (50 ?g/kg, s.c), concomitant with ethanol, prevented the gradual increase in marble-burying behavior after ethanol-withdrawal and this effect was comparable to fluoxetine (5 mg/kg, i.p.). In conclusion, ethanol-withdrawal on chronic administration increases marble-burying behavior in mice; its development and expression is attenuated by leuprolide.

The researchers gave mice alcohol over a long period. When they made the mice stop, cold turkey, they exhibited behaviors such as burying marbles. While the mice are going through the first stages of withdrawl, the researchers gave them a lupron like drug and found that the mice didn’t bury marbles as much.

Once again, who finds this to be a valid animal model for autism? Is your child an alcoholic, marble-burying mouse?

But you don’t see this if you just read the article. What you read is, “similarly, other investigators have used an anti-androgen medication called leuprolide acetate, which reduces the production of male hormones, in the treatment of anxiety, hyperexcitability, depression, impaired social interaction, and obsessive compulsive behaviors in laboratory animal species”.

The Geiers have obviously felt the need to respond to the criticism that they are using a drug used for chemical castration. They write

Finally, the administration of anti-androgen medications to individuals diagnosed with an ASD is not intended to deprive the individual of their sexuality nor to alter their normal developmental trajectory, but rather to regularize a process that was proceeding in an abnormal fashion and producing adverse effects and, thereby, improve the health of the patient and reduce the clinical symptoms associated with abnormally elevated androgen levels.

Here is an example patient from the patent application the Geiers submitted (US20070254314A1: Methods of treating autism and autism spectrum disorders):

Laboratory analyses did not reveal elevated levels of mercury or elevated levels of at least one androgen. Specifically, undetectable levels of mercury were present in Child D’s urine and minimal levels of mercury were in Child D’s blood (1.5 ?g/L, reference range=0.0-14.9 ?g/L). Additionally, analyses of Child D’s blood androgen metabolites revealed a serum testosterone=153 ng/dL (age- and sex-adjusted LabCorp reference range=0-350 ng/dL) and serum/plasma DHEA=291 ng/dL (age- and sex-adjusted LabCorp reference range=183-383 ng/dL) within their respective reference ranges.
After extensive discussions with his parents concerning the risks, benefits, and alternative treatments available, a decision was made to place Child D on a course of LUPRON® therapy.

Yes, Child D has testosterone well within the normal level. And, yet, the child was treated with Lupron. How, exactly, does this fit with improving “…the health of the patient and reduce the clinical symptoms associated with abnormally elevated androgen levels”?

Also, in the Autism Science Digest article itself, the authors note:

The child underwent antiandrogen therapy until the age of 13, when he entered puberty at an age typical of his sibling

Age 13 is within the normal range to start puberty. So is 9. Why did they delay this child 4 years? As of age 9, the child was not in central precocious puberty.

The Geiers make this comment in their recent article:

Two months prior to his 9th birthday, he was given a test dose of leuprolide acetate. After administration, he went outside and began to swing on a tire swing using his feet to push – a neurotypical behavior never seen before.

Dramatic, isn’t it? First shot, and the kid goes outside and uses the swing for the first time. This caught my eye, because they mention swinging in their patent. In the patent they note, “Within a few days of the second shot of LUPRON DEPOT®, Child X learned to swing by himself using leg timing for propulsion”

I’m betting that this is the same kid. If so, did the kid get his first shot and go outside and start swinging, or did he go a few days after his second shot?

One issue the Geiers (and others) have faced is inflation of credentials. David Geier, for example, listed himself as a “diagnostician” to get on the Maryland Autism Commission. The Autism Science Digest article is no different. Mr. Geier gives as his credentials that he “Has been a research scientist at the National Institutes of Health in the laboratory of Biochemical Genetics.”

Take a moment, if you will, and think what that statement means to you, ” research scientist at the National Institutes of Health in the laboratory of Biochemical Genetics”. I ask you to do this before we see what his job really was.

We can read Mr. Geier’s resume here, which lists his experience including:

I. T. R. A. Summer Fellow Appointment at The National Institutes of Mental Health (under Laboratory Chief [Redacted] of The Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics)
Projects:
(1) Protein Gel and Phage Research

That was in the summer of 1998. That’s the summer before he entered college, if I read the rest of his resume correctly. At this point I have to do something I rarely do, point out my own credentials. I’ve been a summer intern. I’ve been a research scientist. I’ve been a research scientist supervising summer interns. While I find the work of my summer interns has been valuable and of high quality, they weren’t “research scientists” in the way that is clearly implied in the article. Sure, it would have taken more space to write, “He was an intern the summer of his freshman year at the NIH”, but it would have made his position much more clear.

Dr. Mark Geier lists as part of his credentials, “His extensive research has resulted in him being invited to address the Institute of Medicine at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences on six occasions.” I find it remarkable that he uses this to build credibility, given the fact that the IOM clearly was not impressed by his work.

Let’s look at what the Institutes of Medicine had to say about the Geiers’ research:

The first was an ecological study (Geier and Geier, 2004a) that reported a potential positive correlation between the number of doses of measles-containing vaccine and the cases of autism reported to the special education system in the 1980s. The second was a study of passive reporting data by the same authors (Geier and Geier, 2003c) that reported a positive correlation between autism reports in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) and estimated administered doses of MMR. However, these two studies are characterized by serious methodological flaws and their analytic methods were nontransparent, making their results uninterpretable, and therefore noncontributory with respect to causality (see text for full discussion).

It isn’t news that the Geiers are poor scientists. It isn’t news that the Geiers have been called out for their ethical lapses multiple times over the years. It is fairly recent news that the Geiers have actually faced charges. And, yet, AutismOne and Generation Rescue continue to support this team by inviting them to speak at conferences and giving them space in their magazines to promote the same bad medicine that has cost Dr. Geier his license.

Dr. Geier has lost his license to practice medicine. To which I can only say, what took so long? What do they have to do to lose the support of the alternative medical community?

Online Release of 2009 IACC Portfolio Analysis Report

16 Jun

Below is the latest email announcement from the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC). This is the committee which sets out the strategic plan for autism research funding in the United States. The IACC has published the latest portfolio analysis of autism research. Also, members of the IACC participated in the IMFAR (International Meeting for Autism Research) conference. This includes Tom Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the chair of the IACC.

On behalf of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC), The Office of Autism Research Coordination (OARC) is pleased to announce that the 2009 IACC Autism Spectrum Disorder Portfolio Analysis Report is now posted online on the IACC website. This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the 2009 autism spectrum disorder (ASD) research portfolios of U.S. Federal agencies and private organizations as well as an overview of progress being made in implementation of the IACC Strategic Plan for Autism Spectrum Disorder Research. In the near future, the IACC/OARC will be releasing a comprehensive listing of the individual projects related to each question and objective of the Strategic Plan containing detailed descriptive and funding information.

In addition to the 2009 Portfolio Analysis Report, please see the two latest articles about recent activities of the IACC:

· 2011 International Meeting For Autism Research Features Opening Address from IACC Chairman Insel and Contributions from IACC Members

– Click here for Dr. Insel’s slides from IMFAR, which contain information about NIH’s implementation of the IACC Strategic Plan

· IACC Members Participate in White House Autism Awareness Month Conference

– Links to video footage from the meeting, Secretary Sebelius’ speech and President Obama’s April proclamation can be found at the end of the article

The IACC and OARC greatly appreciate the contributions of each agency and organization that participated in the development of the 2009 IACC ASD Portfolio Analysis Report. Thank you!

Sincerely,

The Office of Autism Research Coordination

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →