March 5, 2008

The Attack on Big Mac

Across the blogesphere this week John McCain has been attacked for making the comment, "It’s indisputable that autism is on the rise among children. The question is, What’s causing it? And we go back and forth, and there’s strong evidence that indicates that it’s got to do with a preservative in vaccines." (David Kirby could not have been more right when he told McCain to watch out for incoming).

Political blogs that have never touched on the vaccine/autism issue have used words like 'lunatic' and 'crackpot' in discussing now Republican Nominee for President John McCain. Even conservative bloggers who support him for president are being critical.

And the truly bizarre thing about these attacks is that they have all sprung from this account by Jake Tapper which includes, right at the top, a mention of the bombshell news that the US Government has just conceded the first vaccine/autism case to come to a conclusion in the Federal Vaccine Court.

These attacks either make no mention of the case, or give it a cursory mention, as Tapper did, and then pretend it was never said. They then move on to make their arguments predicated on the now legally false claim that 'There Is No Link Between Vaccines And Autism'.

Yesterday I submitted some version of the following comment on at least 4 different blog posts that were attacking McCain:

I want to call everyone's attention back to the question that actually elicited this response from John McCain in the first place.

In that meeting in Texas, another autism mom who believes as I do asked him about the revelation last week that The US Government, in the Federal Vaccine Court, had finally come to a decision on the FIRST vaccine/autism case, that that decision was...

...and I am gonna bold the hell out of this because this is very, very important...


There are 4,900 autism/vaccine cases in the pipeline, and in case #1 the verdict has just gone to the family that alleged that vaccines made their child autistic.

In other words, at the current time, 100% of all the vaccine/autism cases tried in the Federal Court finds a causal link between vaccines and autism.

And apparently the family whose burden it was to prove that their child's autism was triggered by her vaccines had such a good case, that the Department of Justice, which is fighting like hell in the two other cases currently under way, decided it was not even worth trying to fight.

...And yet these attacks on John McCain are are reporting the forgone conclusion that there is no link?

Respectfully, could it be that John McCain is actually paying closer attention to the issue than they are?

So that everyone may investigate this for themselves, here is the info to get started (from another piece I wrote):

In November the US Government conceded that a little girl's autism was brought on by her vaccines and she will be paid out of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund. Her case was one of the first three test cases chosen to put the vaccine/autism theory under the microscope at the Vaccine Omnibus Hearings. This is only the first of 4,900 cases before the Federal vaccine court to get a decision.

The case was supposed to go to trial this coming May, but was instead settled and subsequently sealed by the court, who claimed that it was for the protection of the child's privacy. Except that the family has waved their right to privacy and apparently wants the fact of the case and the ruling known.

Journalist David Kirby obtained the court documents and published them last week. The family of the girl is planning a press conference this week in Atlanta some time.

No major US news outlets have run the story on the bombshell court ruling, and in fact in the past week several 'experts' have been in the news repeating the now legally false claim that there is no link between vaccines and autism. ABC News looked at doing a story on the government court concession, it but then didn't.

Despite the fact that the both the blogesphere and the autism community are going crazy with the story... the only mainstream news outlet to report thus far has been the Sunday Herald in Scotland.

So what we have here is the government and the medical community publicly telling parents that vaccines have no relationship to autism while privately admitting the link and paying damages to a family for vaccine induced autism. And apparently hoping that no one will notice.

Which in this case is actually kind of working.. because blogs like this and the ones mentioned above, actually quote that the case went to the vaccine/autism plaintiff, and then ignore it and slap McCain?

It is just bizarre to me!

Why does your blog post say something to the effect of, "WTF!? The government admitted that a vaccine caused autism in one of the test cases to test the theory that vaccines cause autism? And they are voluntarily paying damages? Why do they keep telling us that here is no link then? What the hell is going on?!"

All of the blogs had moderated comments, except for one. None of the blogs with moderated comments posted it.

It is as if I were watching "Cloverfield" and all the news reports that we see interspersed through out the film when the main characters run by a TV were stories about how things were exploding and buildings were falling down and thousands were dead all over town, but made no mention that all this was happening because there was a 20 story monster stomping through Mid-Town. Because everyone knows there is no such thing as monsters, so even when one appears right before our eyes, best just to ignore it really. But do go on to report the impact of the monster, because that is dramatic stuff.

I reiterate... WTF?

It is not just as if they missed the big story here, it as if they are FIGHTING to ignore the big story. Political bloggers across the country are collectively sticking their fingers in their ears and singing the, "La La La... I'm Not Listening" song.

So my next question is this... how many of the Vaccine Court cases have to go in favor of the petitioners until main stream American media and the political blogesphere begins to give the link between autism and vaccines serious consideration? Not even believe that it is conclusive fact, but just merely worthy enough of consideration to stop mocking people who discuss the matter publicly?

One definitive court case, an actual legal precedent, is apparently not enough. If either of other two of the three test cases currently under way in the Vaccine Omnibus Hearings, the ones that were chosen to represent many of the 4,900 cases that are in the pipeline, go to the plaintiffs, is that enough to make everyone sit up and pay attention?

Or will the media actually be able to keep their fingers in there ears if all 4,900 cases end with the verdict that gets these kids paid for their children's regression into autism due to vaccines?

UPDATE: Cudos to The New Scientist for getting to the heart of the matter, and giving the Government Concession the weight it deserved! Although they are wrong in their statement that, "decades of research have failed to find any link between vaccines and autism", they are asking the very important question...

If there is no link, then why pay Hanna?

They seem earnestly confused by the move and one pediatrician interviewed said he was 'stunned'.

Read my thank you/challenge to them and go encourage them to demand that HHS return their call and get the government to explain there contradictory stances.


hoonew said...

Ginger, here's what I posted on an unmoderated (apparently) blog:

McCain is right. There is plenty of evidence that mercury is especially dangerous to babies and small children, and a non-biased review of the science (try PubMed) will show this. Why do journalists make ridiculous sweeping statements about vaccine mercury metabolizing quickly and leaving the body? Pharma-sponsored junk science can be found to support any position. Meanwhile, the National Academy of Science says 1 in 6 women have dangerous levels of mercury in their blood, the CDC says pregnant women should limit our consumption of tuna due to mercury, and the EPA limit of mercury from ALL sources is 0.1 mcg/kg/day which means a typical flu shot puts even adults way over the limit. Which influenza shot do you want for your children, Mr. Levin?

Jeffrey Dach MD said...

The Most Bitter Debate

There is no greater rancor in medicine than the autism-vaccine debate, and this debate has reached the federal vaccine court where 5000 autistic kids and their families are requesting compensation for vaccine injury.

In California it is a illegal to inject newborns with the mercury containing vaccines (such as the thimerisol Hep-B Shot), and it should be made a crime in all other states as well.

Hepatitis B is transmitted with IV drug abuse, or via sexual transmission, both of which are somewhat impossible for newborns. It is much safer to wait until the child is 3 years old to give the shot.

Hopefully, the injection of mercury into newborns will soon become a relic of the ancient past, taking its rightful place in the museum along with bloodletting and leeches. Until then, there is much work to be done to remove mercury from our vaccinations. As a nation, we can’t afford not to.

Read more at:
Autism and Mercury Vaccines by Jeffrey Dach MD

Jeffrey Dach MD
4700 Sheridan Suite T
Hollywood Fl 33021
my web site