July 29, 2013

Dr. Koren Boggs Does Not Want To Talk About Her Idiotic Statements

So here is the story...

Thalia Michelle and Rainna Moran were promoting the Thinking Mom's Revolution book, and went on a local New Orleans station to discuss on a show called The 504 with Melanie Hebert.  They also had a local ABA therapist, PhD Koren Boggs.  Boggs did not like their vaccine stance, it got heated, so Ms. Hebert had Boggs and TMR back on the following night to debate the issue.  Kim Spencer was up for TMR this time, and wiped the floor with Boggs, who actually even repeated the "thimerosal in the MMR" cluelessness.

So I got mad, wrote this piece, and made this video, which ran last week on the TMR blog:
Dr. Koran Boggs Is An Idiot
by Ginger Taylor

It's harsh... I know... but I can't take this crap any more.  She should know better.

It has been NINE YEARS for me since my son regressed after DTaP, Hep B and three other shots, while I have to hear the lie that, "there is no association between vaccines and autism," repeated over and over and over and over...  That made me nuts back when there were less than ten research papers that showed a link, and now I know of 70!

Including one that showed that our own federal government has paid at least 83 autism cases from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, while also pretending that vaccines could not possibly cause autism. 

I just can't stand the deceit any more. 

So when I saw Kim's debate with Dr. Koran Boggs, I got so angry I had to stop half way through and take a long break just so I didn't have a neurological event.

Then I just needed to rant:


You can see why the seasoned Pharma/Public Health talking heads never agree to be in a debate with any of us.  They can't get away with the usual BS talking points.  ;)

So the list of research is growing steadily, as more people see it and sent me studies that I have missed, so these links will be updated regularly.  You can view it on my blog, on Facebook to share there, or in a Word doc.  Please spread them around any time you hear the lie that "the vaccine/autism causation theory has been debunked because is based on one retracted British study and the opinion of a playboy model and that there is not one study that supports the theory that vaccines cause autism."

In fact, share them right now.  Then share this video.

And here is the information on Bill Posey bill's to force the vaxxed/unvaxxed study that CDC still won't do after thirty plus years.  Call your congressman and ask him to be a co-sponsor.  Do it.  And then share it too.

Now on the Japan study... she is referring to Honda's study, "No effect of MMR withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study."  If you read the abstract, which I have linked to, it gives the impression that this is a study that compares kids who got the MMR to unvaccinated children, to see if there was a difference in autism rates: 

"The MMR vaccination rate in the city of Yokohama declined significantly in the birth cohorts of years 1988 through 1992, and not a single vaccination was administered in 1993 or thereafter."

However, when you read the actual study itself, you find that the study was done when Japan (which using the MMR with the Urabe strain Mumps vaccine) realized that it was causing meningitis, and yanked the vaccine.  They replaced it with the single dose version of the Measles vaccine, the Mumps vaccine and the Rubella vaccine: 

"However, due to a high frequency of reports of aseptic meningitis, a suspected side effect of the mumps vaccine (Urabe strain), the program was terminated in April 1993. Subsequently, only monovalent vaccines were administered. Following a reform of the Immunization Law in 1994, measles and rubella vaccinations were each specified for children between the ages of 12 and 90 months (the measles vaccine was recommended between 12 and 24 months of age and the rubella vaccine between 12 and 36 months). The mumps vaccination was voluntary and aimed at children one year of age or older who had not contracted mumps. It was also stipulated that an interval of at least four weeks separate administration of vaccinations."

So this not a vaxxed v. unvaxxed study, this is a vaxxed v. vaxxed slightly differently study. The way this study is done, it actually asks the question, "is the MMR that Japan was using the SOLE cause of autism."  And not one person in the debate thought the MMR was the only cause of autism at the time.  In 2005 when the study was published, David Kirby had just written Evidence of Harm, parents were trying to find Hg free vaccines and as we know... Thimerosal was never in the MMR.

If anything is to be gained at all from this study, it is evidence that splitting up the MMR vaccine into individual shots may not be of any help in avoiding an autism regression. 

And we can see that from her poor understanding of the Honda study, Dr. Boggs either ONLY read the abstract, and made some assumptions, or someone just told her that this was a vaxxed/unvaxxed study and she didn't bother to check for herself.  (Likely the same person who told her that there is no research that supports the vaccine/autism causation theory.)

And here is CDC's MMWR on the chelation deaths.  1 boy with autism.  1 girl with lead poisoning, both accidently given Na2EDTA instead of the appropriate drug for them, CaEDTA, with which they had both been treated successfully prior to the drug mix up.  A third woman died, believed to be using the same version of EDTA, and all three deaths were associated with hypocalcemia (basically the Na2EDTA pulled all the calcium out of their blood.)  In talking with docs, it is my understanding that Calcium EDTA is now becoming the standard drug for chelating both adults and children.  We chelated our own son with IV CaEDTA with wonderful results and no side effects.

So, to Dr. Boggs... Kim said you were wrong, and as we see here, you were wrong.  No Thimerosal in the MMR, vaxxed/unvaxxed autism research does not exist per CDC's own testimony under oath only 8 months ago, and we have presented here 70 research papers that show not just one, but MANY links between vaccines and autism.


We await your formal letter retracting your false claims, and I believe it would be most appropriate for you to send the letter to Ms. Hebert so it may be read on her show, "The 504," where you disseminated your errant information in the first place.

Because it is all about the science... and the children... right?

That same day I wrote to Boggs, and copied her director at Children's Hospital of New Orleans and the reporter who aired the stories:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Your 504 debate appearance
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 13:39:47 -0400
From: Ginger Taylor 
To: Koren Boggs 
CC: Kim Spencer, Jodi Kamps , Melanie Hebert


Dear Dr. Boggs,

I am the mother of a child who regressed into autism following his 18 month vaccines and now work in vaccine safety advocacy nearly full time.  I hold a Masters of Science from Johns Hopkins in mental health, and I am currently providing research for the House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform for their upcoming hearings into the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (the second in this past year their series on vaccine safety, autism, and associated disorders.)

As some one who has been looking at the vaccine/autism issue for almost a decade, while working to heal my son, it was extremely upsetting to me to hear you repeating falsehoods on your appearance on The 504. 

I was moved to make a video addressing you directly and taking apart your claims.  It is now posted, along with a letter and links disproving your statements, on the Thinking Mom's Revolution web site. 
http://thinkingmomsrevolution.com/when-doctors-lie-oh-hell-no/  It is harsh and direct (deservedly, I believe), and I am hoping that it will humble you to the point that you examine yourself and your claims, and that you will do the right thing and retract your statements that:

1.  There was mercury in the MMR.  (You have confused two different autism causation theories)
2.  That there is vaccinated v. unvaccinated autism research.  (Note the video of the CDC being forced under oath eight months ago to admit there is none.)
3.  There is no research supporting vaccine autism causation, and the entire theory is based on one study published fifteen years ago.  (70 Studies that show a link.)

I await your reply to my video and demand for a formal retraction.  Kim Spencer was right, and you do a disservice to your credibility, to Ms. Spencer, and to all those affected by autism, by letting your errant pronouncements stand.

--

Ginger Taylor, MS
Adventures In Autism
Facebook
Twitter
Vaccine Epidemic
818-402-9672

Aaaaaaaaaaaaannd.... no response.

92 comments:

Artie Christou said...

1. Hepatitis B Vaccination of Male Neonates and Autism (original Taylor number = 42)

Correct citation: Gallager CM, Goodman MS, Hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and autism diagnosis, NHIS 1997-2002. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2010;73:(24):1665-77.

Very weak study with numerous flaws. Debunked at:
http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2009/09/17/another-weak-study-proves-vaccines-cause-autism/

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/09/16/autism-causation-and-the-hepatitis-b-vaccine-no-link/

http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2013/05/mind-institute-no-difference-in.html

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/1-hepatitis-b-vaccination-of-male-neonates-and-autism-diagnosis-nhis-1997-2002-2010.html


2. Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism? (Original Taylor number = 53)

Correct citation: Tomljenovic L, Shaw CA. Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism? J Inorg Biochem. 2011 Nov;105(11):1489-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2011.08.008. Epub 2011 Aug 23.

Fatally flawed “study” – junk science. Debunked at:

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2013/07/10/comment-on-do-aluminum-vaccine-adjuvants-contribute-to-the-rising-prevalence-of-autism/

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/12/08/and-global-warming-is-caused-by-the-decr/


3. Infection, vaccines and other environmental triggers of autoimmunity (Not in original Taylor list)

Correct citation: Molina V, Shoenfeld Y. Infection, vaccines and other environmental triggers of autoimmunity. Autoimmunity. 2005 May;38(3):235-45.

Nothing to do with autism; also seems to be a discursive paper rather than a “research study”.


4. A Positive Association found between Autism Prevalence and Childhood Vaccination uptake across the U.S. Population (Original Taylor number = 51)

Correct citation: Delong G., A positive association found between autism prevalence and childhood vaccination uptake across the U.S. population. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2011;74(14):903-16. doi: 10.1080/15287394.2011.573736.

Junk “science” debunked here, for starters

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/07/08/a-positive-association-found-between-autism-prevalence-and-childhood-vaccination-uptake-across-the-u-s-population-2/

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/06/11/speech-impairment-and-autism-inseparable/

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2012/03/07/conflicts-of-interest-in-vaccine-safety-research/

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/06/08/more-bad-science-in-the-service-of-the-discredited-idea/


5. B-Lymphocytes from a Population of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Their Unaffected Siblings Exhibit Hypersensitivity to Thimerosal (Not in Taylor’s original list.)

Correct citation: Sharpe MA, Taylor LG, Baskin DS B-Lymphocytes from a Population of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Their Unaffected Siblings Exhibit Hypersensitivity to Thimerosal J Toxicol. 2013;2013:801517. doi: 10.1155/2013/801517. Epub 2013 Jun 9.

In vitro study, thimerosal (no longer used in U.S. childhood vaccines except for some influenza vaccines), concentrations higher than formerly found in vaccines. Only 11 families studied.


6. Abnormal measles-mumps-rubella antibodies and CNS autoimmunity in children with autism. (Not in Taylor’s original list.)

Correct citation: Singh VK, Lin SX, Newell E, Nelson C. Abnormal measles-mumps-rubella antibodies and CNS autoimmunity in children with autism. J Biomed Sci. 2002 Jul-Aug;9(4):359-64.J Biomed Sci. 2002 Jul-Aug;9(4):359-64.

Singh’s work has not been replicated. Multiple studies in multiple countries with tens of thousands of subjects have repeatedly failed to find an association between measles vaccine and autism.

http://www.immunizationinfo.org/issues/iom-reports/measles-mumps-rubella-vaccine-and-autism

http://www.immunizationinfo.org/science/no-evidence-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism

Artie Christou said...

7. Serological association of measles virus and human herpesvirus-6 with brain autoantibodies in autism. (Not in Taylor’s original list.)

Correct citation Singh VK, Lin SX, Yang VC. Serological association of measles virus and human herpesvirus-6 with brain autoantibodies in autism. Clin Immunol Immunopathol. 1998 Oct;89(1):105-8.

Note that this paper is from 1998. Singh’s work has not been replicated. Multiple studies in multiple countries with tens of thousands of subjects have repeatedly failed to find an association between measles vaccine and autism.

http://www.immunizationinfo.org/issues/iom-reports/measles-mumps-rubella-vaccine-and-autism

http://www.immunizationinfo.org/science/no-evidence-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism


8. Metabolic biomarkers of increased oxidative stress and impaired methylation capacity in children with autism (Original Taylor number = 1)

Correct citation: James SJ, Cutler P, Melnyk S, Jernigan S, Janak L, Gaylor DW, Neubrander JA. Metabolic biomarkers of increased oxidative stress and impaired methylation capacity in children with autism. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Dec;80(6):1611-7.

Nothing to do with vaccines.


9. Porphyrinuria in childhood autistic disorder: Implications for environmental toxicity (original Taylor number = 2)

Correct citation: Nataf R, Skorupka C, Amet L, Lam A, Springbett A, Lathe R. Porphyrinuria in childhood autistic disorder: implications for environmental toxicity. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2006 Jul 15;214(2):99-108. Epub 2006 Jun 16.
Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 2006

“Extremely haphazard science”

Discussion
http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/2porphyrinuria-in-childhood-autistic-disorder-implications-for-environmental-toxicity-2006.html

Also has nothing to do with vaccines.

10. Uncoupling of ATP-mediated Calcium Signaling and Dysregulated IL-6 Secretion in Dendritic Cells by Nanomolar Thimerosal (Original Taylor number = 4)

Correct citation: Goth SR, Chu RA, Gregg JP, Cherednichenko G, Pessah IN. Uncoupling of ATP-mediated calcium signaling and dysregulated interleukin-6 secretion in dendritic cells by nanomolar thimerosal. Environ Health Perspect. 2006 Jul;114(7):1083-91.

In-vitro study of mouse cells exposed to trace (nano) amounts of thimerosal.

Discussion

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/4-uncoupling-of-atp-mediated-calcium-signaling-and-dysregulated-interleukin-6-secretion-in-dendritic.html

Never-replicated

11. Comparison of Blood and Brain Mercury Levels in Infant Monkeys Exposed to Methylmercury or Vaccines Containing Thimerosal (Original Taylor number = 6)

Correct citation: Burbacher TM, Shen DD, Liberato N, Grant KS, Cernichiari E, Clarkson T. Comparison of blood and brain mercury levels in infant monkeys exposed to methylmercury or vaccines containing thimerosal. Environ Health Perspect. 2005 Aug;113(8):1015-21.

Discusses methylmercury, not ethylmercury, the latter of which is thimerosal (which is no longer used in childhood vaccines in the U.S. other than the flu vaccine). Widely debunked.

http://bartholomewcubbins.blogspot.com/2007/01/bc-on-autism-revisiting-burbacher-2005.html

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/6-comparison-of-blood-and-brain-mercury-levels-in-infant-monkeys-exposed-to-methylmercury-or-vaccine.html

Artie Christou said...

12. Increases in the number of reactive glia in the visual cortex of Macaca fascicularis following subclinical long-term methyl mercury exposure. (Original Taylor number = 7 )

Correct citation: Charleston JS, Bolender RP, Mottet NK, Body RL, Vahter ME, Burbacher TM. Increases in the number of reactive glia in the visual cortex of Macaca fascicularis following subclinical long-term methyl mercury exposure. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1994 Dec;129(2):196-206.

Discusses a form of mercury, methyl mercury, NEVER used in vaccines.

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/7-increases-in-the-number-of-reactive-glia-in-the-visual-cortex-of-macaca-fascicularis-following-sub.html
The monkeys were exposed to very high doses (50 micrograms Hg/kg body wt/day) every day for months.

There is no research linking increased reactive glia in the visual cortex to autism.

13. Neuroglial Activation and Neuroinflammation in the Brain of Patients with Autism (Original Taylor number = 8)

Correct citation: Vargas DL, Nascimbene C, Krishnan C, Zimmerman AW, Pardo CA, Neuroglial activation and neuroinflammation in the brain of patients with autism. Ann Neurol. 2005 Jan;57(1):67-81.

The lead author wrote,

We were concerned that the study would raise a lot of controversy and be misused,” Pardo said. “We were right.”

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2009/11/23/autism-treatment-science-hijacked-to-support-alternative-therapies/

More analysis

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/8-neuroglial-activation-and-neuroinflammation-in-the-brain-of-patients-with-autism-2005-.html

Also, nothing to do with vaccines.

14. Autism: A Brain Disorder, or A Disorder That Affects the Brain? (Original Taylor number = 9)

Correct citation: Herbert MR, Autism: A Brain Disorder, or A Disorder That Affects the Brain? Clinical Neuropsychiatry 2005 2:(6) 354-379

This is a long opinion piece, draped in sciencey-sounding language. Does this paper "demonstrate that vaccines can cause autism"? No. This paper is merely Herbert's notions about causation.

15. Activation of Methionine Synthase by Insulin-like Growth Factor-1 and Dopamine: a Target for Neurodevelopmental Toxins and Thimerosal (Original Taylor number = 10 )

Correct citation : Waly M, Olteanu H, Banerjee R, Choi SW, Mason JB, Parker BS, Sukumar S, Shim S, Sharma A, Benzecry JM, Power-Charnitsky VA, Deth RC, Activation of methionine synthase by insulin-like growth factor-1 and dopamine: a target for neurodevelopmental toxins and thimerosal. Mol Psychiatry. 2004 Apr;9(4):358-70.

The 2010 Dwyer decision:

[Deth's] own research, most of which was unpublished, unduplicated, or mentioned for the first time during the Theory 2 general causation hearing, was poorly performed and scientifically implausible. Based on in vitro effects of mercury on “neuronal cells,” he claimed that mercury had the same effects on human brain cells.

Discussion in depth:

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/10-activation-of-methionine-synthase-by-insulin-like-growth-factor-1-and-dopamine-a-target-for-neuro.html


16. Validation of the Phenomenon of Autistic Regression Using Home Videotapes (original Taylor number = 11)

Correct citation: Werner E, Dawson G. Validation of the phenomenon of autistic regression using home videotapes. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005 Aug;62(8):889-95.

The phenomenon of regression in autism is well-known, and in no way validates the idea that vaccines are causal in autism.

Discussion:

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/11-validation-of-the-phenomenon-of-autistic-regression-using-home-videotapes-2005-.html

A later Bearman paper characterizes six developmental trajectories in autism

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22473372

Artie Christou said...

17. Blood Levels of Mercury Are Related to Diagnosis of Autism: A Reanalysis of an Important Data Set (original Taylor number = 12)

Correct citation: Desoto MC, Hitlan RT. Blood levels of mercury are related to diagnosis of autism: a reanalysis of an important data set. J Child Neurol. 2007 Nov;22(11):1308-11.

The infamous Desoto & Hitlan paper. This was subject to a great deal of critical commentary among scientifically and statistically expert autism parents and other interested observers, for example:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/07/16/epiwonk-reanalyzes-the-dataset-desoto-an/
http://epiwonk.com/?p=112

Summary of the demolition:

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/12-blood-levels-of-mercury-are-related-to-diagnosis-of-autism-a-reanalysis-of-an-important-data-set-.html

More later at

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/08/03/prof-desoto-discusses-mercury-and-autism/


18. Empirical Data Confirm Autism Symptoms Related to Aluminum and Acetaminophen Exposure (Not in Taylor’s original list.)

Correct citation: Seneff S, Davidson RM, Liu J, Empirical Data Confirm Autism Symptoms Related to Aluminum and Acetaminophen Exposure Entropy 2012, 14(11), 2227-2253; doi:10.3390/e14112227

This shoddy and incompetent paper was discussed at length at:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/11/20/dumpster-diving-in-the-vaers-database-again/


19. Developmental Regression and Mitochondrial Dysfunction in a Child With Autism (Original Taylor number = 13 )
Correct citation: Poling JS, Frye RE, Shoffner J, Zimmerman AW. Developmental regression and mitochondrial dysfunction in a child with autism. J Child Neurol. 2006 Feb;21(2):170-2.

The scandalous Poling paper:

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/13-developmental-regression-and-mitochondrial-dysfunction-in-a-child-with-autism-2006-.html

With "Developmental Regression and Mitochondrial Dysfunction in a Child with Autism", Dr. Jon Poling takes his place with Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Dr. Mark Geier and Laura Hewitson, Ph.D. in the ranks of researchers who have concealed relevant legal and financial interests in studies purporting to confirm a causal relationship between vaccines and autism.

In short: Dr. Poling behaved in an appalling manner. There is no question that Hannah Poling has a mitochondrial disorder; in such cases neurological symptoms often develop after 12 months and before 24 months. The "autistic like" symptoms demonstrated by Hannah Poling were part of a global encephalopathy caused by a mitochondrial enzyme deficit.

Does this case or this paper "demonstrate that vaccines can cause autism"? No.

20. Oxidative Stress in Autism: Elevated Cerebellar 3-nitrotyrosine Levels (original Taylor Number = 14)

Correct Citation: Sajdel-Sulkowska, E.M., B. Lipinski, H. Windom, T. Audhya and W. McGinnis, 2008. Oxidative Stress in Autism: Elevated Cerebellar 3-nitrotyrosine Levels. Am. J. Biochem. Biotechnol., 73-84. DOI : 10.3844/ajbbsp.2008.73.84

This study has nothing to do with vaccines.

[needs additional attention]

21. Large Brains in Autism: The Challenge of Pervasive Abnormality (original Taylor number = 15)

Correct citation: Herbert MR. Large brains in autism: the challenge of pervasive abnormality. Neuroscientist. 2005 Oct;11(5):417-40.
http://masslawyersweekly.com/fulltext-opinions/2006/08/21/macgregor-et-al-v-annette-born-et-al/

“Clearly, Dr. Herbert’s method is not generally accepted in the scientific community. Dr. Herbert’s theory of environmental triggers of autism may some day prove true. It has not yet.”

This paper has nothing to do with vaccines.

Artie Christou said...

22. Evidence of Toxicity, Oxidative Stress, and Neuronal Insult in Autism (original Taylor number = 16)

Correct citation: Kern JK, Jones AM. Evidence of toxicity, oxidative stress, and neuronal insult in autism. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2006 Nov-Dec;9(6):485-99.

Does this paper "demonstrate that vaccines can cause autism"? No, this is a review paper rather that a randomized, controlled study of vaccines in autism.

Kern is a co-author on 31 papers. It is worrying that of those, two are positive studies on secretin and 14 have one or both Geiers as co-authors, including two from 2012 and one from 2011. In 2012, she was employed by the Geier chemical-castration-for-autism chain.

23. Oxidative Stress in Autism (Original Taylor number = 17)

Correct citation: Chauhan A, Chauhan V. Oxidative stress in autism. Pathophysiology. 2006 Aug;13(3):171-81. Epub 2006 Jun 12.
This is a review article, summarizing the research to date on oxidative stress in autism and some implications for therapies. The conclusion:

Preliminary results of some of clinical trials have suggested improved behavior in individuals with autism who receive antioxidant therapy.

Does this paper "demonstrate that vaccines can cause autism"? No.

24. Thimerosal Neurotoxicity is Associated with Glutathione Depletion: Protection with Glutathione Precursors (original Taylor number = 18)

Correct citation: James SJ, Slikker W 3rd, Melnyk S, New E, Pogribna M, Jernigan S. Thimerosal neurotoxicity is associated with glutathione depletion: protection with glutathione precursors. Neurotoxicology. 2005 Jan;26(1):1-8.

Another in-vitro study with a concentration of thimerosal (no longer used in childhood vaccines in the U.S., with the exception of some flu vaccines) much higher than in vaccines.

[needs additional attention]

25. Aluminum adjuvant linked to gulf war illness induces motor neuron death in mice (Original Taylor number = 19)

Correct citation: Petrik MS, Wong MC, Tabata RC, Garry RF, Shaw CA. Aluminum adjuvant linked to Gulf War illness induces motor neuron death in mice. Neuromolecular Med. 2007;9(1):83-100.
Mice model, not a human study.

[needs additional attention]


26. Enrichment of Elevated Plasma F2t-Isoprostane Levels in Individuals with Autism Who Are Stratified by Presence of Gastrointestinal Dysfunction (Not in Taylor’s original list)

PLoS ONE 8(7): e68444.

Gorrindo P, Lane CJ, Lee EB, McLaughlin B, Levitt P (July 3, 2013)
This study has nothing to do with vaccines.
[needs additional attention]
27. Environmental mercury release, special education rates, and autism disorder: an ecological study of Texas (Original Taylor number = 20)

Correct citation: Palmer RF, Blanchard S, Stein Z, Mandell D, Miller C. Environmental mercury release, special education rates, and autism disorder: an ecological study of Texas. Health Place. 2006 Jun;12(2):203-9.
“Dr. Palmer’s 2006 study, which was so full of holes that even antivaccinationists had a hard time defending it,”

This study has nothing to do with vaccines.

Artie Christou said...

28. Reduced levels of mercury in first baby haircuts of autistic children (Not in original Taylor list)

Correct citation: Holmes AS, Blaxill MF, Haley BE. Reduced levels of mercury in first baby haircuts of autistic children. Int J Toxicol. 2003 Jul-Aug;22(4):277-85.

The fatally flawed baby-hair study.

The first flaw in the study is the authors' acceptance of the idea of "excretion into the hair". It doesn't happen. Blood mercury does not equal hair mercury.

The second flaw is the data collection methods (the hair used in the study )

The third flaw is that the study found that the autistic children had lower hair mercury levels than the neurotypical controls. Rather than accepting that data, the authors went on to spin "tooth fairy tales" to explain why that might be so (the idea that autistic children had impaired mercury excretion). The fourth flaw in the study involves the hair analyzed: the samples had been in storage under unknown conditions for a median of five and a half years.

Do I really need to go on why Holmes et al. is a broken reed? I don't think so. It was, when published, a footling study. Anyone citing it, reveals their lack of in serious science writing. Holmes et al. 2003 isn't even a weak reed -- it's an over-cooked noodle.

But wait: One more thing you should know: Holmes et al. 2003 authors' affiliations are given as Safeminds. Safeminds is an acronym for Sensible Action For Ending Mercury Induced Neurological Disorders. Do you think the authors had an ideological point to make?

Discussion

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2011/09/that-baby-hair-study-from-2003.html

This study has nothing to do with vaccines.

29. A Case Series of Children with Apparent Mercury Toxic Encephalopathies Manifesting with Clinical Symptoms of Regressive Autistic Disorder (Original Taylor number = 22)

Correct Citation: Geier DA, Geier MR., A case series of children with apparent mercury toxic encephalopathies manifesting with clinical symptoms of regressive autistic disorders. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2007 May 15;70(10):837-51.

How anyone could cite the deeply discredited Geier family (father and son) is beyond me.

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2006/06/20/mark-geier-and-david-geier-carry-on-misrepresenting/

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2006/10/10/mark-geier-david-geier-and-the-vsd/

That’s just this paper. Others from the father-son team garnered even more scathing criticism.

30. The Changing Prevalence of Autism In California (Not in Taylor’s Original list)

Correct Citation: Blaxill MF, Baskin DS, Spitzer WO Commentary on on Croen et al. (2002), The Changing Prevalence of Autism in California, J Autism Dev Disord. 2003 April;33(2):223-226

This is merely a commentary on a previously published article. Not peer reviewed and expresses the authors’ own rather biased beliefs.

31. Mitochondrial Energy-Deficient Endophenotype in Autism (Original Taylor number = 46)

Correct citation Gargus JJ, Imtias F Am J Biochem Biotechn 2008 4 (2): 198-207.

Vaccines not mentioned in the article. Discussion of possible rare subtype(s) of autism with genetic mutations causing mitochondrial deficiencies.

Note: this and other papers in this issue were published in a special issue of the American Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, supported by Autism Speaks.

http://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/american-journal-biochemistry-and-biotechnology

Artie Christou said...

32. Bridging from Cells to Cognition in Autism Pathophysiology: Biological
Pathways to Defective Brain Function and Plasticity (Original Taylor number = 26)

Anderson MP, Hooker BS, Herbert MR, 2008 Bridging from Cells to Cognition in Autism Pathophysiology: Biological Pathways to Defective Brain Function and Plasticity. Am J Biochem Biotechn 2008 4 (2): 167-176.. DOI: 10.3844/ajbbsp.2008.167.176

Speculative article on the possible non-genetic causation mechanisms for autism. Vaccines, vaccination, immunization not mentioned in the article.

Note: this and other papers in this issue were published in a special issue of the American Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, supported by Autism Speaks.

http://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/american-journal-biochemistry-and-biotechnology

33. Heavy-Metal Toxicity—With Emphasis on Mercury (Original Taylor Number = 27)

Correct citation: Neustadt J, Pieczenik, S 2007 Heavy-Metal Toxicity – With Emphasis on Mercury (Research Review) 2007 IMJC 6(2) 26-32 (https://stevepieczenik.com/pdf/Heavy%20Metals%20Article.pdf accessed 7/27/13)

This is an article from a fringe journal for naturopaths. The article is alarmist about amalgam fillings as a risk of mercury toxicity, but nowhere mentions vaccines.

34. Evidence of Mitochondrial Dysfunction in Autism and Implications for Treatment (Original Taylor Number = 28)

Correct citation:, Rossignol, DA, Bradstreet JJ 2008. Evidence of Mitochondrial Dysfunction in Autism and Implications for Treatment Am J Biochem Biotechn 2008 4 (2): 208-217.
This study has nothing to do with vaccines.

[needs additional attention]
Note: this and other papers in this issue were published in a special issue of the American Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, supported by Autism Speaks.

http://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/american-journal-biochemistry-and-biotechnology

35. Proximity to point sources of environmental mercury release as a predictor of autism prevalence (Original Taylor number = 29)

Correct citation: Palmer RF, Blanchard S, Wood R. Proximity to point sources of environmental mercury release as a predictor of autism prevalence. Health Place. 2009 Mar;15(1):18-24. Epub 2008 Feb 12.

A deeply flawed paper.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/05/01/wait-its-not-mercury-in-vaccines-its-mer/

“If [Palmer] has an obvious source of bias, it may well explain much; if he does not I’m left with the less satisfying conclusion that he is just not a very good scientist at all. I also have to wonder about the quality of the peer review of this particular journal. After all, if I, who am not an epidemiologist, can spot the glaring flaws in this study, why couldn’t the peer reviewers?”

36. Epidemiology of autism spectrum disorder in Portugal: prevalence, clinical characterization, and medical conditions (Original Taylor number = 30)

Correct citation: Oliveira G, Ataíde A, Marques C, Miguel TS, Coutinho AM, Mota-Vieira L, Gonçalves E, Lopes NM, Rodrigues V, Carmona da Mota H, Vicente AM. Epidemiology of autism spectrum disorder in Portugal: prevalence, clinical characterization, and medical conditions. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2007 Oct;49(10):726-33.

I was puzzled as to why this was included, but the survey found "A diversity of associated medical conditions was documented in 20%, with an unexpectedly high rate of mitochondrial respiratory chain disorders." Poling and others have used this finding to claim that "up to 20% of children with autism have mitochondrial disorders".

37. Thimerosal induces neuronal cell apoptosis by causing cytochrome c and apoptosis-inducing factor release from mitochondria. (Original Taylor number = 31)

Correct citation: Yel L, Brown LE, Su K, Gollapudi S, Gupta S. Thimerosal induces neuronal cell apoptosis by causing cytochrome c and apoptosis-inducing factor release from mitochondria. Int J Mol Med. 2005 Dec;16(6):971-7.

Another in-vitro study.

[needs additional attention]

Artie Christou said...

38. Mitochondrial mediated thimerosal-induced apoptosis in a human neuroblastoma cell line (SK-N-SH). (Original Taylor number = 32)

Correct citation: Humphrey ML, Cole MP, Pendergrass JC, Kiningham KK. Mitochondrial mediated thimerosal-induced apoptosis in a human neuroblastoma cell line (SK-N-SH).Neurotoxicology. 2005 Jun;26(3):407-16.

In-vitro study.
[needs additional attention]

39. Possible Immunological Disorders in Autism: Concomitant Autoimmunity and Immune Tolerance (Original Taylor number = 33)

Correct citation: Kawashti MI, Amin OR, Rowehy NG. Possible immunological disorders in autism: concomitant autoimmunity and immune tolerance. Egypt J Immunol. 2006;13(1):99-104.

Study does not mention vaccines. Study has not been replicated.

[needs additional attention]

40. Pediatric Vaccines Influence Primate Behavior, and Amygdala Growth and Opioid Ligand Binding Friday, May 16, 2008: IMFAR (Original Taylor number = 32)
This was one of three poster presentations at the 2008 meeting of the International Meeting for Autism Research (IMFAR) by Hewiston and others (including Wakefield) on a set of primates (macaque monkeys, species unknown). The “monkey mess” is summarized here

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/05/this-is-going-around-new-study-baby-monkeys-develop-autism-after-routine-cdc-vaccinations.html

Others write about Hewitson’s research peccadillos here (a non-exhaustive list):

http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/terrible-anti-vaccine-study-terrible-reporting/

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/07/16/too-much-vaccineautism-monkey-business-f/

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/monkey-business-in-autism-research/


41. Thimerosal exposure in infants and neurodevelopmental disorders: An assessment of computerized medical records in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. (Original Taylor number =35)

Correct citation: Young HA, Geier DA, Geier MR. Thimerosal exposure in infants and neurodevelopmental disorders: an assessment of computerized medical records in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. J Neurol Sci. 2008 Aug 15;271(1-2):110-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2008.04.002. Epub 2008 May 15.

This paper has to be one of the most thoroughly scrutinized (and debunked) of all the papers that claim a connection between vaccines and autism.

http://epiwonk.com/?p=55

http://epiwonk.com/?p=57

http://epiwonk.com/?p=59

http://bmartinmd.com/2008/05/irb-approval-of-geier-autism-s.html

http://bmartinmd.com/2008/05/ive-been-sucked-into-the-thime.html

http://bmartinmd.com/2008/05/young-geier-autism-study-1.html

http://bmartinmd.com/2008/05/young-geier-autism-study-2.html

http://bmartinmd.com/2008/05/young-geier-autism-study-3.html

http://bmartinmd.com/2008/05/young-geier-autism-study-4.html

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2006/10/10/mark-geier-david-geier-and-the-vsd/

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/why-the-latest-geier-geier-paper-is-not-evidence-that-mercury-in-vaccines-causes-autism/


42. Glutathione, oxidative stress and neurodegeneration (Original Taylor number = 32)

Correct citation: Schulz JB, Lindenau J, Seyfried J, Dichgans J. Glutathione, oxidative stress and neurodegeneration. Eur J Biochem. 2000 Aug;267(16):4904-11.

This study does not discuss vaccination or autism.

Artie Christou said...

43. Hepatitis B triple series vaccine and developmental disability in US children aged 1-9 years (Original Taylor number = 37)

Correct citation: Gallagher C, Goodman M 2008. Toxicol Environ Chem 2008 90(5):997-1008. DOI:10.1080/02772240701806501
A later study found that children with ASD had a lower uptake of HepB.

https://imfar.confex.com/imfar/2013/webprogram/Paper12796.html

http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2013/05/mind-institute-no-difference-in.html

44. Induction of metallothionein in mouse cerebellum and cerebrum with low-dose thimerosal injection. (Original Taylor number = 38)

Correct citation: Minami T, Miyata E, Sakamoto Y, Yamazaki H, Ichida S. Induction of metallothionein in mouse cerebellum and cerebrum with low-dose thimerosal injection. Cell Biol Toxicol. 2010 Apr;26(2):143-52. doi: 10.1007/s10565-009-9124-z. Epub 2009 Apr 9.

Studies in mice using a carrier medium. Does not prove that autism is caused by vaccination, with or without thimerosal.

45. Mercury induces inflammatory mediator release from human mast cells (Original Taylor number = 39)

Correct citation: Kempuraj D, Asadi S, Zhang B, Manola A, Hogan J, Peterson E, Theoharides TC. Mercury induces inflammatory mediator release from human mast cells. J Neuroinflammation. 2010 Mar 11;7:20. doi: 10.1186/1742-2094-7-20.

In-vitro study of mercuric chloride (HgCl2) , not ethyl mercury or thimerosal. Does not “show vaccines cause autism”.

46. Influence of pediatric vaccines on amygdala growth and opioid ligand binding in rhesus macaque infants: A pilot study (Original Taylor

Correct citation: Hewitson L, Lopresti BJ, Stott C, Mason NS, Tomko J. Influence of pediatric vaccines on amygdala growth and opioid ligand binding in rhesus macaque infants: A pilot study. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars). 2010;70(2):147-64.

Another of the infamous, ever evolving Hewitson macaque papers.

Debunked at

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/07/16/too-much-vaccineautism-monkey-business-f/


http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/07/16/the-genie-is-out-of-the-bottle-vaccines-cause-autism/

“This paper is generating quite a bit of interest in places like the Age of Autism blog. Unfortunately for them, this paper is not the genie getting out of the bottle. Just another low quality paper. Just another 16 monkeys giving their lives for nothing.”

For a complete history of the Hewitson macaque study and its various papers and authors, see:
http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/05/this-is-going-around-new-study-baby-monkeys-develop-autism-after-routine-cdc-vaccinations.html

Note: This issue of Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis (ANE) focused upon autism. Not just autism, but autism causation with papers on vaccines, acetaminophen and, of course, mercury. The idea for this focus edition came from Professor Dorota Majewska who holds the EU Marie Curie Chair at the Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology in Warsaw, Poland. The authors for this focus issue are largely the same as those from a conference Prof. Majewska organized in 2008, Autism and Vaccinations.

47. Cultured lymphocytes from autistic children and non-autistic siblings up-regulate heat shock protein RNA in response to thimerosal challenge. (Original Taylor number = 41)

Correct citation: Walker SJ, Segal J, Aschner M. Cultured lymphocytes from autistic children and non-autistic siblings up-regulate heat shock protein RNA in response to thimerosal challenge. Neurotoxicology. 2006 Sep;27(5):685-92. Epub 2006 Jun 16.

An in-vitro cell study, thimerosal (no longer used in U.S. childhood vaccines except for some influenza vaccines), using concentrations higher than formerly found in vaccines.

Artie Christou said...

48. Neonatal administration of a vaccine preservative, thimerosal, produces lasting impairment of nociception and apparent activation of opioid system in rats. (Original Taylor number = 59)
Olczak M, Duszczyk M, Mierzejewski P, Majewska MD. 2009 Neonatal administration of a vaccine preservative, thimerosal, produces lasting impairment of nociception and apparent activation of opioid system in rats. Brain Res. 2009 Dec 8;1301:143-51. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.09.003. Epub 2009 Sep 9.

Rat study, thimerosal (no longer used in U.S. childhood vaccines except for some influenza vaccines), concentrations higher than formerly found in vaccines.

Note: lead researcher M Dorota Majewska seems to have specialized in rat studies that show thimerosal damage.

49. Sorting out the spinning of autism: heavy metals and the question of incidence (Original Taylor number = 44)

Correct citation: Desoto MC, Hitlan RT. Sorting out the spinning of autism: heavy metals and the question of incidence. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars). 2010;70(2):165-76.

Debunked at

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2010/08/03/prof-desoto-discusses-mercury-and-autism/

Note: This issue of Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis (ANE) focused upon autism. Not just autism, but autism causation with papers on vaccines, acetaminophen and, of course, mercury. The idea for this focus edition came from Professor Dorota Majewska who holds the EU Marie Curie Chair at the Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology in Warsaw, Poland. The authors for this focus issue are largely the same as those from a conference Prof. Majewska organized in 2008, Autism and Vaccinations.

50. Urinary Porphyrin Excretion in Neurotypical and Autistic Children (Original Taylor number = 45)

Correct citation: Woods JS, Armel SE, Fulton DI, Allen J, Wessels K, Simmonds PL, Granpeesheh D, Mumper E, Bradstreet JJ, Echeverria D, Heyer NJ, Rooney JP. 2010 Urinary porphyrin excretion in neurotypical and autistic children. Environ Health Perspect. 2010 Oct;118(10):1450-7. doi: 10.1289/ehp.0901713. Epub 2010 Jun 24.

It is an article of belief in some circles that urinary porphyrin excretion abnormalities is a biomarker for autism. However, the foundations of that belief rest upon studies performed by the disgraced and discredited Geier family (father and son).

The above article does not mention vaccines.

51. Mitochondrial dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis (Original Taylor number = 46)

Rossignol DA, Frye RE Mitochondrial dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis Molecular Psychiatry (2012) 17, 290–314; doi:10.1038/mp.2010.136; published online 25 January 2011

Review article, not study. This paper has nothing to do with vaccines. [needs additional attention]

52. Sensitization effect of thimerosal is mediated in vitro via reactive oxygen species and calcium signaling. (Original Taylor number = 47)

Correct Citation: Migdal C, Foggia L, Tailhardat M, Courtellemont P, Haftek M, Serres M. Sensitization effect of thimerosal is mediated in vitro via reactive oxygen species and calcium signaling. Toxicology. 2010 Jul-Aug;274(1-3):1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.tox.2010.04.016. Epub 2010 May 10.

In vitro study, thimerosal (no longer used in U.S. childhood vaccines except for some influenza vaccines), concentrations higher than formerly found in vaccines.

53. What's going on? The question of time trends in autism. (Not in Taylor’s original list.)
Correct citation: Blaxill MF. What's going on? The question of time trends in autism. Public Health Rep. 2004 Nov-Dec;119(6):536-51.

Review of survey literature available in years prior to 2004. Outdated and superceded by many more reliable publications.

Artie Christou said...

54. Vaccines and Autism . (Not in Taylor’s original list.)

Correct citation, Rimland B, McGinnis W, Vaccines and Autism, Laboratory medicine, september 2002 9: 33 708-717

Downloaded from http://labmed.ascpjournals.org/content/33/9/708.full.pdfAutism Research Institute, San Diego, CA 7/27/2013

Laboratory Medicine, the journal for laboratory professionals. 11-year-old discursive article discussing the authors’ belief that something about the MMR vaccine and thimerosal is causal in autism. Later studies found no autism connection with either factor.

55. Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes—A review (Original Taylor number = 50)
Correct citation: Ratajczak HV. Theoretical aspects of autism: causes--a review. J Immunotoxicol. 2011 Jan-Mar;8(1):68-79.

This is one of the more risible papers in the list.

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/02/11/sloppy-science-a-perfect-example-of-how-the-anti-vaccine-crowd-will-listen-to-anything/

“The rest of the paper is a rogues gallery of debunked and fringe science. Helen Ratajczak cites the Geier’s numerous times, DeSoto and Hitlan, Nataf and Rossignol to name but a few. This isn’t a paper so much as an advert for the sort of poor science that was examined in the Autism Omnibus proceedings and roundly rejected by the Special Masters. For goodness sake, she even cites David Ayoub of the Black Helicopter infamy.”

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/anti-vaccine-propaganda-from-sharyl-attkisson-of-cbs-news-2/

"How on earth did this get through peer review? Obviously, the peer reviewers of Dr. Ratajczak’s article were either completely ignorant of the background science (and therefore unqualified) or asleep at the switch."

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2012/07/3-theoretical-aspects-of-autism-causes-a-review-2011.html


56. Ancestry of pink disease (infantile acrodynia) identified as a risk factor for autism spectrum disorders. (Not in Taylor’s original list.)

Correct citation: Shandley K, Austin DW. Ancestry of pink disease (infantile acrodynia) identified as a risk factor for autism spectrum disorders. J Toxicol Environ Health A. 2011;74(18):1185-94. doi: 10.1080/15287394.2011.590097.

Debunked at

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/07/30/ancestry-of-pink-disease-infantile-acrodynia-identified-as-a-risk-factor-for-autism-spectrum-disorders/

This is, at best, a very strange paper. Consider these questions:

1) Why aren’t they reporting a high autism prevalence in the people who had very high mercury exposures and who showed signs of pink disease? If there is a genetic susceptibility, why isn’t it seen in those with the greatest exposures?

2) Why isn’t there a report of high autism prevalence in the children, just the grandchildren? My guess is that the response from some will be that the grandchildren received higher doses of mercury in vaccines than did their parents. Which again would beg the question of where is the high rate of autism in those exposed to the teething powders, especially those who developed pink disease.

The conclusions of this paper have some major logical hurdles to overcome, to say the least. And this is even before the methods are addressed. For example, this all hinges on reports by the grandparents. Not on an actual prevalence measure of the descendants.

57. Lasting neuropathological changes in rat brain after intermittent neonatal administration of thimerosal. (Original Taylor number = 54)

Correct citation: Olczak M, Duszczyk M, Mierzejewski P, Wierzba-Bobrowicz T, Majewska MD. Lasting neuropathological changes in rat brain after intermittent neonatal administration of thimerosal. Folia Neuropathol. 2010;48(4):258-69.

Rat study, thimerosal (no longer used in U.S. childhood vaccines except for some influenza vaccines), concentrations higher than formerly found in vaccines.
Note: lead researcher M Dorota Majewska seems to have specialized in rat studies that show thimerosal damage.

Artie Christou said...

58. Persistent behavioral impairments and alterations of brain dopamine system after early postnatal administration of thimerosal in rats. (Not in Taylor’s original list.)

Correct citation: Olczak M, Duszczyk M, Mierzejewski P, Meyza K, Majewska MD. Persistent behavioral impairments and alterations of brain dopamine system after early postnatal administration of thimerosal in rats. Behav Brain Res. 2011 Sep 30;223(1):107-18. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2011.04.026. Epub 2011 Apr 28.

Note: lead researcher M Dorota Majewska seems to have specialized in rat studies that show thimerosal damage.

59. Risk Factors for Autistic Regression: Results of an Ambispective Cohort Study. (Original Taylor number = 56)

Correct citation: Zhang Y, Xu Q, Liu J, Li SC, Xu X. Risk factors for autistic regression: results of an ambispective cohort study. J Child Neurol. 2012 Aug;27(8):975-81. doi: 10.1177/0883073811430163. Epub 2012 Jan 30.

Cohort study on 170 Chinese children. Study does not mention vaccines.

60. Adverse events following 12 and 18 month vaccinations: a population-based, self-controlled case series analysis. (Original Taylor number = 57.)

Correct citation: Wilson K, Hawken S, Kwong JC, Deeks S, Crowcroft NS, Van Walraven C, Potter BK, Chakraborty P, Keelan J, Pluscauskas M, Manuel D. Adverse events following 12 and 18 month vaccinations: a population-based, self-controlled case series analysis. PLoS One. 2011;6(12):e27897. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027897. Epub 2011 Dec 12.

Study of adverse events after vaccines, but nothing to do with autism. “..one excess event for every 730 children vaccinated. The primary reason for increased events was statistically significant elevations in emergency room visits following all vaccinations. There were non-significant increases in hospital admissions. There were an additional 20 febrile seizures for every 100,000 vaccinated at 12 months.”

61. Administration of thimerosal to infant rats increases overflow of glutamate and aspartate in the prefrontal cortex: protective role of dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate. (Original Taylor number = 58)

Correct citation: Duszczyk-Budhathoki M, Olczak M, Lehner M, Majewska MD. Administration of thimerosal to infant rats increases overflow of glutamate and aspartate in the prefrontal cortex: protective role of dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate. Neurochem Res. 2012 Feb;37(2):436-47. doi: 10.1007/s11064-011-0630-z. Epub 2011 Oct 21.

Rat study, thimerosal (no longer used in U.S. childhood vaccines except for some influenza vaccines), concentrations higher than formerly found in vaccines.

Note: lead researcher M Dorota Majewska seems to have specialized in rat studies that show thimerosal damage.

62. Neonatal Administration of Thimerosal Causes Persistent Changes in Mu Opioid Receptors in the Rat Brain

Correct citation: Olczak M, Duszczyk M, Mierzejewski P, Bobrowicz T, Majewska MD. Neonatal administration of thimerosal causes persistent changes in mu opioid receptors in the rat brain. Neurochem Res. 2010 Nov;35(11):1840-7. doi: 10.1007/s11064-010-0250-z. Epub 2010 Aug 28.

Rat study, thimerosal (no longer used in U.S. childhood vaccines except for some influenza vaccines), concentrations higher than formerly found in vaccines.

Note: lead researcher M Dorota Majewska seems to have specialized in rat studies that show thimerosal damage.

Artie Christou said...

63. Unanswered Questions: A Review of Compensated Cases of Vaccine-Induced Brain Injury (Not on Taylor’s original list)

Correct citation: Holland M, Conte L, Krakow R, Colin L, . Unanswered Questions: A Review of Compensated Cases of Vaccine-Induced Brain Injury. Pace Environmental Law Review, vol. 28, no. 2, 2011

This was a very poor-quality review in a student-run law journal, with substantial ethical and methodological flaws.

Debunked here:

http://www.wired.com/geekmom/2011/05/is-the-vaccine-injury-compensation-program-covering-up-an-autism-vaccine-link/

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/when-you-cant-win-on-science-invoke-the-law-2/

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/05/11/pace-study-confirms-autism-prevalence/


http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/05/20/study-by-nyu-and-pace-another-failure-in-obtaining-ethical-approval/

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2011/05/10/student-mags-and-altered-press-releases/

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/05/24/anti-vaccine-warriors-vs-research-ethics/

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/05/11/another-swing-for-the-fences-and-a-miss/


64. Integrating experimental (in vitro and in vivo) neurotoxicity studies of low-dose thimerosal relevant to vaccines.

Correct citation: Dórea JG. Integrating experimental (in vitro and in vivo) neurotoxicity studies of low-dose thimerosal relevant to vaccines. Neurochem Res. 2011 Jun;36(6):927-38. doi: 10.1007/s11064-011-0427-0. Epub 2011 Feb 25.

In vitro study, with a small inclusion of a rat study.

65. Hepatitis B vaccine induces apoptotic death in Hepa1-6 cells (Original Taylor number = 55)

Correct citation: Hamza H, Cao J, Li X, Li C, Zhu M, Zhao S. Hepatitis B vaccine induces apoptotic death in Hepa1-6 cells. Apoptosis. 2012 May;17(5):516-27. doi: 10.1007/s10495-011-0690-1.

An in-vitro study of how mouse (murine) cells derived from a cancerous tumor react to being bathed in Hepatitis B vaccine. No mention of autism. No relevance to autism.


66. Maternal thimerosal exposure results in aberrant cerebellar oxidative stress, thyroid hormone metabolism, and motor behavior in rat pups; sex- and strain-dependent effects. (Not in Taylor’s original list)

Correct citation: Sulkowski ZL, Chen T, Midha S, Zavacki AM, Sajdel-Sulkowska EM. Maternal thimerosal exposure results in aberrant cerebellar oxidative stress, thyroid hormone metabolism, and motor behavior in rat pups; sex- and strain-dependent effects. Cerebellum. 2012 Jun;11(2):575-86. doi: 10.1007/s12311-011-0319-5.

Rat study looking at thimerosal, which is no longer used in childhood vaccines in the U.S. (with the exception of some influenza vaccines).

[needs additional attention]

67. The rise in autism and the role of age at diagnosis.

Correct citation: Hertz-Picciotto I, Delwiche L. The rise in autism and the role of age at diagnosis. Epidemiology. 2009 Jan;20(1):84-90. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181902d15.

“Autism incidence in California shows no sign yet of plateauing. Younger ages at diagnosis, differential migration, changes in diagnostic criteria, and inclusion of milder cases do not fully explain the observed increases.”

Evidently, according to Taylor, that means that vaccine must account for the observed increases, while disregarding significant changes in demographic data, such as maternal and paternal age at first childbirth.

It is curious that Taylor does not include the other 18 papers on autism in which Hertz-Picciotto has been a contributing author

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=((Hertz-Picciotto%20I%5BAuthor%5D)%20AND%20(%222009%2F1%2F1%22%5BDate%20-%20Publication%5D%20%3A%20%223000%22%5BDate%20-%20Publication%5D))%20AND%20autism%5BMeSH%20Major%20Topic%5D

Artie Christou said...

68. Slow CCL2-dependent translocation of biopersistent particles from muscle to brain (Not in Taylor’s previous list)

Correct citation: Khan Z, Combadière C, Authier FJ, Itier V, Lux F, Exley C, Mahrouf-Yorgov M, Decrouy X, Moretto P, Tillement O, Gherardi RK, Cadusseau J. Slow CCL2-dependent translocation of biopersistent particles from muscle to brain. BMC Med. 2013 Apr 4;11:99. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-99.

This paper assumes that ‘Shoenfeld syndrome” or "Autoimmune (Auto-inflammatory) Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants” (ASIA) is a real thing. It has not yet been verified.

I have asked the Science Based Medicine folk to address

[needs additional attention]

69. Thimerosal and autism? A plausible hypothesis that should not be dismissed. (Not in Taylor’s previous list)

Correct citation: Blaxill MF, Redwood L, Bernard S. Thimerosal and autism? A plausible hypothesis that should not be dismissed. Med Hypotheses. 2004;62(5):788-94.

The concerns about thimerosal have been addressed with epidemiological studies, and dismissed. The concerns about thimerosal have been given a thorough airing in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program legal hearings (Autism Omnibus) and have been found to be baseless.

70. Autism Spectrum Disorders in Relation to Distribution of Hazardous Air Pollutants in the SF Bay Area (Not in Taylor’s previous list)
Correct citation: Windham GC, Zhang L, Gunier R, Croen LA, Grether JK. Autism spectrum disorders in relation to distribution of hazardous air pollutants in the san francisco bay area. Environ Health Perspect. 2006 Sep;114(9):1438-44.

This study does not address vaccines.

[needs additional attention]
T
71. Inflammatory Responses to Trivalent Influenza Virus Vaccine Among Pregnant Women (Not in Taylor’s previous list.)

Correct citation: Christian LM, Iams JD, Porter K, Glaser R. Inflammatory responses to trivalent influenza virus vaccine among pregnant women. Vaccine. 2011 Nov 8;29(48):8982-7. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.09.039. Epub 2011 Sep 22.

Two subsequent studies, listed below, have confirmed the safety of trivalent influenza virus vaccines for pregnant women and the children whose mothers were vaccinated during pregnancy.

Nordin JD, Kharbanda EO, Benitez GV, Nichol K, Lipkind H, Naleway A, Lee GM, Hambidge S, Shi W, Olsen A. Maternal safety of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in pregnant women. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Mar;121(3):519-25. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182831b83.

Conlin AM, Bukowinski AT, Sevick CJ, DeScisciolo C, Crum-Cianflone NF. Safety of the pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine among pregnant U.S. military women and their newborns. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Mar;121(3):511-8. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318280d64e.

72. Elevated maternal C-reactive protein and autism in a national birth cohort. (Not in Taylor’s prveious list.)

Correct citation: Brown AS, Sourander A, Hinkka-Yli-Salomäki S, McKeague IW, Sundvall J, Surcel HM. Elevated maternal C-reactive protein and autism in a national birth cohort. Mol Psychiatry. 2013 Jan 22. doi: 10.1038/mp.2012.197. [Epub ahead of print]

This study does not address vaccines.

[needs additional attention]

Artie Christou said...

Two more studies than your claimed number, but most of them have been proven wrong by the previous content.

So - please provide further evidence that you are correct because at present it is clear that you are not based in the studies you rely upon. Studies that are wrong, junk and so forth.

Ginger Taylor said...

Artie... your comments are fascinating to me. No... that is too mild a reaction...

They are actually a benchmark to me. They represent a polar shift in all that I have experienced up to now in my work on autism and vaccine safety.

Here's why...

So for almost a decade, since my son regressed following vaccination, and since he began his vast improvements when treated biomedically for the conditions believe to be vaccine and environmentally induced, it has been an uphill battle to get real discussion on what is happening in these children.

In those early years though, we were at a loss, because the medical establishment was rolling out crap papers on vaccine safety, that didn't really make sense, and because we were a bunch of broke, nobodies with no sleep, just trying to heal our kids and get to the truth about what was happening, all we could do was blog about it. We had no access to The Walled City of Maine Stream Med. So that is what I did. Like here: http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2005/08/heres-why-disdain.html

Come to find out now that they were paying slime balls like Thorsen to gin them up, passing emails around on how to get rid of the links they were finding with statistical BS, and quietly admitting to congress that their research was useless... I was pretty naive at the time. No more.

I started out, as soon as I was investigating this, trying to have conversations on it with David Gorski, because, I honestly thought... "well, here is a doctor who is so completely convinced that vaccines are not at play, and the stuff that I see working for my son is not only ineffective, but could be harmful... so I should probably talk to him to check myself to make sure I am not missing something." So I did. And found him to be a monumentally immature guy who had no real interest in helping our kids. So after like four years of trying to engage in good faith conversations with him, and other bloggers you reference here, I wrote a few pieces on how I was done with people who play in bad faith, and just moved onto the actual work. They had shown their true colors.

Plus, I would email privately with Gorski and he would say one thing to me, and then blog the opposite about me. So I have experienced first hand that the guy is just a liar.

Then a year or so after I signed off with the bullies, found out that Gorski was actually with holding that he was developing a drug for Sanofi the whole time, the company whose vaccine gave my baby brain damage. Felt pretty stupid that I had wasted more than ten minutes talking to that jerk. Wish I could sue him to get back all the time I wasted talking to him. That pretty much set me free from him and his team.

But back before then, the paradigm was this... They claimed "science" high ground, and we could not gain access to science world, so all we could do was blog.

Ginger Taylor said...

And with your comments on this post, which I feel like turning into its own blog post, you have shown me that the tide has fully turned.

Because I have posted A BODY OF PUBLISHED EVIDENCE that (to those who actually want to understand the relationship) shows that vaccines are linked to autism. And your best efforts in discrediting the list of peer reviewed journal articles... IS TO RESPOND WITH BLOG POSTS!!! (and repeating the word "debunked" a lot.)

I am kinda stunned actually. I kept scrolling and thinking... "well where is another journal article that critiques one of these, or a note that one of the articles has been retracted... or... surely he must have at least one... OMG! All he is doing is citing The Bully Squad!"

Again... such a turning point for me!

And here is the kicker about the whole thing... DAVID 'ORAC' GORSKI IS A FRIGGING MD! He is published on breast cancer matters! He could publish all his critiques, if any of them were worth a damn, but he doesn't! He puts them on a horribly unprofessional and nasty blog!

These are the people who are towing the pharma line... they should be able to get things published... and even if their names are mud in real medical circles where people care about their reputations... they should be able to ghost write or something. But mainstream med is not even publishing that!!

ALL YOU HAVE TO THROW AT ME IS BLOG POSTS!

Wow... I cannot tell you how happy your response has made me!

So... here is the thing... If you have any peer reviewed, journal criticism of the papers I have published. Please feel free to post them here.

But please understand... I could not give a crap what Orac, and Deitz and Left Brain/Right Brain eco chamber garbage is. Gorski's name is going to go down in the annals of autism history somewhere below Bettelheim and Gerberding. These people are just awful and have behaved so badly... they could not care less what the vaccine program is doing to our kids. These are not respectable or responsible people. If they had anything to contribute to the earnest discussion, then it would be easy for them to get published properly.

But they have chosen to remain in their echo chamber where they can say what they want. They don't have to be right, they just have to be loud and insulting and demeaning, and that is what their readers go there for. For confirmation bias and feelings of superiority. Our understanding of the research has real world consequences for our children. And they are getting better based on what we know from the body of knowledge that is partially contained in the research listed above.

And all your comments on "not about vaccines" or whatever... all I can say is there are none so blind as those who will not see.

Ginger Taylor said...

I hope you can see how weak your response is. Pharma has trillions to throw at this, and they are still loosing. Because scientists are getting bolder and bolder, and less and less afraid of taking apart the party line.

But this is huge for me... because for many years all I was told by The Bully Squad was "poop on your and your piddly blogs... we have published science on our side!" And now the worm has turned.

No one in the real world cares what Orac thinks on these matters. He can blog all the garbage he wants. He is now irrelevant to the real conversation about real children and real illness.

But if these bloggers have convinced you that vaccines have no relationship to autism, then by all means, you are welcome to your opinion and to make your parenting choices based on your own understanding.

But the point of this article was to counter Dr. Boggs' claims, including the one where she says there is no research that backs a vaccine/autism link.

You, by your own admission, actually agree with me that the research does exist... just that you know a bunch of bloggers that don't like the research, and you claim that "MOST of them have been proven wrong."

So we agree that Boggs was wrong in claiming there is no research supports the vaccine/autism link. We merely disagree on the quality of the research.

But you kind of have an uphill battle in that there are dozens of studies that you need to get retracted here before you can agree with Dr. Boggs, even excluding the ones that you claim that you don't understand how they are relevant to the vaccine/autism link.

Thanks for agreeing with me that the research exists, that there is no peer reviewed "debunking" of the research, just bloggers who don't like it.

And thanks for making my day.

Artie Christou said...

So I made your day did I? You're more screwed up than I thought you were.

I gave you a mass of evidence to show you were wrong, and all you could do was nit pick it and attack the credible contributors. You only put down Orac because you don't agree with him. That's okay, but it doesn't make you right. Instead of attacking him personally, how about addressing his points on his blog instead? Directly and with evidence. If you can. The same applies to the Left Brain Right Brain blog, which involves people in the same position as you - a parent bringing up a child with Autism. Enough of the personal attacks. Let's see counter evidence on the science, not the emotions or the money.

And let's see you create the link that doesn't exist in the studies that are noted as not relevant at all to the point you are trying to make.

Go ahead, make my day(TM).

Ginger Taylor said...

Artie... I don't think you are clear on where I am coming from.

Again... I spent several YEARS trying to have earnest dialogue with David Gorski. Publicly and privately. The guy is in his fifties, and has the maturity of a fifteen year old. In my considerable experience, he is not someone to be trusted. I finished banging my head against that wall in 2009. Why in the world would I take him seriously when I know that he lied about personal, private conversations with me?

He is a bad faith player, hid his relationship to pharma, and his blog is a mess. He is dishonorable and irresponsible and takes glee in the death and hardship of those he does not like.'

Why do you find him credible? Never mind... don't care..

'Cause I am not going back to Crazy Town and wasting another minute on that guy.

If you want to know where I am on this... read this: http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2009/09/chris-mooney-sheril-kirshenbaum-lori.html

And this: http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2011/06/canary-party-done-with-bad-faith.html

And again... you gave me NO PUBLISHED EVIDENCE to review. You gave me bloggers. When any of their work gets published in a peer reviewed journal, with some kind of serious reputation to uphold, please let me know and I am happy to review.

And again... to me it is really amusing that I am being told that bloggers should be trusted over peer reviewed research. Do I have to explain why again?

In your opinion, should this debate be settled in the courts or in the medical journals or in the blogesphere?

And Artie... I don't know you, and might be a really nice person who truly believes that there is nothing to this, so I don't want to be harsh to you... but what you are asking me to do is about as reasonable as returning to an old boyfriend who beat the shit out of me and my son.

Gorski is, in my opinion and experience, a terrible person.

Please search my name on Gorski's site and see how little he thinks of me.

From the bottom of my heart... I do not care what Gorski and his friends think any more. They do not bat an eye when our children die, they don't help, they are not kind, they are not reasonable, they are science deniers who scream the word "SCIENCE!" really loud.

I

DON'T

CARE

WHAT

THEY

THINK

ANYMORE.


Got it?

Artie Christou said...

You should care, because unlike you they actually understand the science of vaccines. As long as you don't, you'll never get through. They know you don't, so of course they ignore you and so forth. They know that the mayor of "Crazy Town" as you put it - is you. They see you as crazy, because you refuse to provide credible science.

The links I provided are scientific explanations as to why the paper you rely on are wrong. It doesn't matter that they are published - they are wrong. You can't accept this because you simply don't trust the speakers, whether it be Orac or whoever else. That's a failure in research by YOU. Not them. YOU. If you had any idea about proper research you would take in what they say instead of getting emotional about it and deciding that you are right and they are wrong - and play the old "lalalalala I can't hear you" with your fingers in your ears! That makes YOU the child!

So it's perfectly simple. You threatened to do a new entry here about the evidence I provided. I suggest that you do so, and instead of attacking the messenger as you have been doing (if you have the intestinal fortitude) attack the science instead. Come on, show us your research skills and show us where they are scientifically wrong. I dare you!

Ginger Taylor said...

Artie, the life my son has lead shows me that the papers I rely on are right.

Clearly we are at an impasse. Again... spent years trying to dialog with them. It is not possible.

Again... feel free to stop by if any critiques of he work listed are actually published and let me know.

So thank you for your visit. Gonna go work on vaccine accountability and healing kids from vaccine injury now.

Artie Christou said...

Impasse? You're the one who's not listening to reason. Autism is not vaccine injury, never has been and never will be. You have not proven otherwise and I have shown your folly as has Orac and the others. No wonder they don't want to listen to you, because you won't accept that you just may be wrong.

The reports you rely on have been shown to be wrong. If you can't accept that, then you are at odds with reality and that makes you a dangerous person to the most important person in your life. Your son. You don't really know what Autism is and you don't want to know.

Failure. On all levels.

Miss Ware said...

Ginger, the links to blog posts are the links to where the scientific explanations of why the papers are irrelevant are. As you have 70 papers worth to analyse, it can't possibly all be done in your comment thread - each paper needs to be addressed in several paragraphs. The comments above are just a summary of the relevance of each paper to any link between vaccines and autism. Some of the papers have flawed science in them. Some of them are not peer-reviewed science but speculation. Some of the papers on your list are not about vaccines, so are irrelevant. Some of the papers are not about autism, so are irrelevant. Some of the papers are about chemicals that have never been in vaccines (like methyl mercury) so are irrelevant. Some of the papers are about vaccine components, but at dosages that far exceed that which would ever be given in a vaccine schedule, so are irrelevant.

If you want to do an actual review of the science that relates vaccines and autism, you need to clear your list of articles that are irrelevant for the reasons given above....and add ALL papers that have been about vaccines and autism. Then you might start to get a better picture of what the scientific consensus on the issue really is.

It seems you dislike Gorski for a variety of reasons, one of which is who he has worked for. Not entirely sure who you expect to pay for scientists to conduct research and develop medicines and vaccines if not a pharmaceutical company. Your local public library? A pharmaceutical charity?

Miss Ware said...

Let's take, for example, just one of the papers on your list, number 12 (according to Artie).

12. Increases in the number of reactive glia in the visual cortex of Macaca fascicularis following subclinical long-term methyl mercury exposure. (Original Taylor number = 7 )

Correct citation: Charleston JS, Bolender RP, Mottet NK, Body RL, Vahter ME, Burbacher TM. Increases in the number of reactive glia in the visual cortex of Macaca fascicularis following subclinical long-term methyl mercury exposure. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1994 Dec;129(2):196-206.

a) It's about methyl mercury, a compound that has never been in vaccines.
b) The doses given were high, and daily, which in no way imitates a vaccination schedule where doses are low and intermittent.
c) This paper is about an increase in reactive glia in the visual cortex in macaques, not autism in humans.

Perhaps you could justify why this paper is on your list at all, as it appears to be about neither vaccines nor autism, let alone a causative link between the two.

Gambolputty said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gambolputty said...

It's fascinating that all of these alleged "debunkings" are from blog-sites that have no scientific merit. None of these "debunkings" are from scientists versed in the actual science and all are from biased blog writers who have little to no scientific credentials.

Perhaps if these were debunked in actual scientific journals from credentialed scientists who actually know what they are talking about (not biased hacks like Liz Ditz, Matt Carey and David Gorski), I would take it halfway seriously.

But, until I see those, then I will laughingly point out that you are doing the exact same thing you accuse these parents of doing; not understanding how science works.

Artie Christou said...

David Gorski IS a scientist just by the by, Gambolputty. Anyway, how about you show us in wholly scientific terms how they are wrong instead of doing what Ginger is doing and argue emotives. Miss Ware has the idea.

Gambolputty said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gambolputty said...

No, Mr Gorski is a medical doctor, an assistant professor. And a poor one at that. He's also an intolerant bigot who only wishes that he was a scientist, and who pretends to be an expert in a field he has no training in.

Where are his published papers on autism? Virology? Are his rebuttals in any top-tier journals? Have they been peer reviewed?

No? Then it's safe to say that we can dismiss these alleged "debunkings" as the drivel they are. Thanks.

Artie Christou said...

David Gorski is an experienced doctor who knows bunk when he sees it and he called it correctly. Your emotive comments bear no weight to the matter at hand.

Where are your credentials? What experience do you have? Do you have the qualifications to question the scientific accuracy of his comments?

No? Then it's safe to say that we can dismiss YOUR comments as the drivel they are. Thank you.

Gambolputty said...

That's the beauty of the internet; I could be anyone. I could be a very prominent scientist working within a highly specialized field, and you wouldn't know it because I choose to remain anonymous.

And, you avoided the issue. Gorski is a quack, plain and simple. He has no expertise in the fields of vaccination or autism, and yet he feels that he's qualified to present himself as an expert. So, if his rebuttals are calling out the alleged "bunk" as you call it, then why aren't they published? Why aren't they peer-reviewed? Why does he feel that his verbal diarrhea is anything near what real science is when he squirts it out on his hate-site.

He's a hack, he's an idiot, and he's a hypocrite. He mocks and ridicules parents of children who may have been injured by vaccinations for doing the exact same thing that he does; not understanding the science. And I can tell you this with absolute certainty; real scientists, those with expertise in the fields that he pretends to be an expert in, think he's a joke. He's a laughing stock.

I don't need to have credentials to question anything Gorski spews. When he gets the balls to publish his crap in a peer-reviewed journal instead of on some 3rd rate blog, then I'll post my thoughts. Until then, he's publishing drivel. And so are the people who are "debunking" all of these studies on vaccination. I guess that includes you.

A southern colloquialism that I've grown quite fond of says;

"Shit or get off the pot"

Artie Christou said...

I thought as much. All you can do is personally attack David Gorski without scientific foundation. You claim you don't need credentials. You do. He knows what he is talking about, and you can't prove it scientifically. You're a pathetic coward. It's easy to attack personally isn't it? That's the hallmark of a bully.

Grow up.

And take your own advice. Shit, or get off the pot. Show your credentials - or get out of the lab.

Gambolputty said...

Why should I show my credentials? So people like you and David Gorski can stalk me? I prefer to remain anonymous because I happen to enjoy my privacy. I'd prefer that Gorski and his lickspittles not stalk and harass me like they've done to certain other individuals, bullying them and following them around the internet, sending them threatening emails, etc. THAT is something a bully and a coward does.

And, just as I thought, none of these rebuttals are peer-reviewed or published in any medical or scientific journals. So, that means that each of these rebuttals is about as worthless as the opinions of people like you and David Gorski.

If you can't produce legitimate rebuttals, then why should I bother to spend my time dealing with hypocritical science poseurs like yourself and Gorski? Why should I give any of your vapid mumblings any form of legitimacy if you can't be bothered to go about rebutting these studies the proper way?

So, where are those studies that you or Gorski has produced? How many studies on vaccines and autism have you and Gorski written?

I won't hold my breath.

Artie Christou said...

Why should you show your credentials? Because you are supporting reports that have been shown to be not credible by a qualified medical doctor (David Gorski). You don't have to reveal your real name to show your credentials.

Your allegations of criminal activity against him require evidence. Prove that he did those things. His rebuttals and the other rebuttals don't have to be peer reviewed or published in any journal, because the science fails in the reports you say are right. He showed this easily.

Have you written any papers on vaccines and Autism? I thought not.

Debate about the science and show us that the reports you rely upon are right, and that the rebuttals are wrong. Show us scientifically, and leave the personalities out of it. If you are capable that is.

Gambolputty said...

I have both an MD and a PhD, and I'll leave it at that.

As to criminal activity, I have no proof. However, I do have some evidence that Gorski's sycophants have a tendency towards stalkerish behaviours; Jake Crosby, and Jenny McCarthy (who has told me personally about her death threats), and John Poling. As a result, I prefer my anonymity.

And yes, rebuttals to scientific papers should be published and reviewed in journals. It is a common practice that adds legitimacy to the rebuttal. These rebuttals are posted on third rate blog sites by individuals who have no expertise in the fields in question (which, ironically, is what they accuse parents like Ginger Taylor of). These blogs are filled with personal attacks and profanity. So, again, why should I respond to them?

So, again I ask, where are the peer reviewed studies performed by David Gorski on vaccines or autism? Show those to me, and we'll talk.

And, how do you know I haven't written a study on vaccines and autism? You don't, so your point is irrelevant.

Many of the studies you are attacking are peer reviewed, so until you can show me valid rebuttals, the only thing I can do is dismiss them as biased opinion.

Artie Christou said...

NONE of those studies are peer reviewed. Show the peer reviews.

You can't blame David for the acts of others. I don't know Crosby, Jenny McCarthy is a public figure and has been treated like that for a long time, and John Poling has been behaving no better than you except that he has the guts to put a name to his work. Anonymity has one big negative. No respect.

You should respond to them because they question the studies. If they are genuine and correct you should be able to do this easily. And yet you won't. You have no credibility whatsoever. So your dismissal of the valid rebuttals that show practical weaknesses in the studies is the act of a coward who won't back up their words.

And no, you haven't written any papers on the subject. If you have, let's see them. Oh no, of course you won't show them. Therefore, you have't written any.

To use you own words, shit, or get off the pot.

Gambolputty said...

Still no studies on vaccine and autism from Gorski? What about from Ditz? From Carey?

And, you just completely ruined your own credibility by the fact that you said none of these studies are peer reviewed. Thanks.

So, since you admit that Gorski hasn't written any papers on vaccines and autism (nor have the other individuals rebutting these studies), and since he is also not an expert on the subject matter (ditto), then you also admit that these rebuttals have no validity. Thanks again.

And, don't you know that Gorski says that its bad to badger someone about their identity? Tsk tsk.

Here, I'll put it so simply that even a child can understand it. If Gorski and the individuals making these rebuttals can't take their own rebuttals seriously enough to go through the proper channels to add validity to their own reviews (instead posting them to 3rd rate blog-sites that are rifled with hatred, bigotry, and profanity), then why should I?

You are clearly getting very agitated about this conversation. It certainly doesn't reflect well upon you to show such unhinged behaviour. Relax, have a glass of wine, check your blood pressure; I wouldn't want you to have a heart attack.

Artie Christou said...

Strange. You calim my credibility was gone when I said those reports weren't peer reviewed, and yet you didn't show me that they were.

So they aren't. Therefore they are free meat for anyone who has experience in the field even if they don't have the specific experience you're talking about. You are still yet to rebutt David's arguments. That's because you can't. How about admitting that I have you cornered instead of running around like a chicken with no head thinking you'll escape?

There is no need for "Proper Channels". The studies are not valid, and have been proven so.

So you have a simple choice, and I'll repeat it. Shit, or get off the pot.

I don't drink wine by the way. I don't consume any alcohol at all. And my heart is in great condition and my blood pressure is fine. Yours is the concern because you are living in fairy land. Time to come down out of the clouds and show your hand. I don't mean your name. I mean some proper rebuttals to David's statements (and the others).

Artie Christou said...

I'll give you a start;

"65. Hepatitis B vaccine induces apoptotic death in Hepa1-6 cells (Original Taylor number = 55)

Correct citation: Hamza H, Cao J, Li X, Li C, Zhu M, Zhao S. Hepatitis B vaccine induces apoptotic death in Hepa1-6 cells. Apoptosis. 2012 May;17(5):516-27. doi: 10.1007/s10495-011-0690-1.

An in-vitro study of how mouse (murine) cells derived from a cancerous tumor react to being bathed in Hepatitis B vaccine. No mention of autism. No relevance to autism."

Show how this report mentions Autism and is relevant to Autism.

Gambolputty said...

Ok, clearly you do not understand what a peer reviewed journal is. This tells me that you are not someone who is actually versed in science and who is only pretending to be so.

So my question to you is this; is the Journal of Toxicology Environmental Health a peer reviewed journal?

The answer is yes. Otherwise, the studies would not have been published in the article.

From their about page:

"The Journal welcomes the submission of manuscripts that meet the general criteria of significance and scientific excellence. Papers will be published shortly after acceptance. All articles published in the JTEHS are peer-reviewed."

So, this demonstrates that you have no idea what you're talking about.

If the studies had been "proven" to not be valid, then the proper channels would have been taken. The individuals making these opinion pieces would have had their comments checked and reviewed for scientific rigour. They have not.

My health is just fine, by the way. However, your childish responses do bring some cause of concern regarding your mental health. I encourage you to get help.

Now, here's the fun part; I'm not the one defending these unpublished rebuttals from individuals with no background in the proper scientific fields and who have posted their biased opinions on 3rd rate blog sites. So, the burden of proof falls on you to show how they are legitimate or should be treated as anything other than biased opinion.

You can't.

If these opinions you are defending cannot stand up to the same standards that people like Gorski impose on others, then they should be considered as biased opinion.

If they can't take them seriously, neither can I. It's that simple.

Wacka Dawson said...

Gambol, I strongly recommend that you review your conduct at this point. You accuse Artie of having mental health issues. It is you with the mental health issues. Anyone who supports the assertion that vaccines cause Autism is seriously deluded.

The rebuttals posted by Artie are well reasoned and are based in common sense and logic. These are creeds that command respect. You need to think again about your support for an unproven link, because it threatens the lives of present and future generations.

Your insistence that the reports must be rebutted in science and science only is intolerant and narrow minded. Open your mind and recognise that there are unanswered questions arising from the reports that you and Ms Taylor rely upon. These questions were answered by the links. Forget about your personal issues with the owners of the links, and show us how the answers were incorrect in common sense and logic.

Whether or not the study is from a peer reviewed publication is not relevant, because the issue is the specifics of a link between vaccines and Autism. Not general scientific credibility.

Gambolputty said...

And, your view that people who question the safety of vaccinations are delusional is just as intolerant and narrow-minded. I do love the "I-Know-You-Are-But-What-Am-I" going on here, as well. Also, I'm fully vaccinated. So, how again am I endangering anyone?

Let me see if I can make it simple for you. The opinions posted are just that; (biased)opinions. But what Artie has not done is shown that these opinions are any more valid than the science that they are trying to rebut. Does this mean that I am defending the articles in question? No; I am questioning the validity of those doing the criticism. I am holding them to the same standards that they hold others. None of the individuals who are criticising these articles have published anything, and none of them are trained in vaccines or autism. Since they are calling this "junk" science, then they need to show how their critiques are more valid than the studies/articles.

But no; they chose to post these rebuttals on blog-sites. This tells me that they are not actually taking them seriously. So, if they won't take them seriously, then I won't.

Artie is defending these rebuttals, so it falls to him to show how these opinions are more valid than the science they question.

provaxquacks said...

"Your insistence that the reports must be rebutted in science and science only is intolerant and narrow minded."

You mean like this comment?

"Anyone who supports the assertion that vaccines cause Autism is seriously deluded."

This is hilarious. It should be rebutted with science and science only because we're discussing science.

The vaccine injury denier boards that I usually lurk on and laugh at are constantly confused by the insistence that their beliefs and actions are like a religion. And your comment that I mention above is the exact reason why. Allow me to demonstrate.

"Anyone who supports the assertion that there is no God is seriously deluded."

Congratulations! You're a religious zealot. Next thing to do for you is to picket the funerals of parents with vaccine injured children.

Ginger Taylor said...

Just catching up on this thread, and want to thank GP for making my arguement better than I have. If this is supposed to be about the science, then lets read the published science. Gorski et. al is not published science, and they can make no claim that they have trouble getting published because of industry bias.

Further...

David Gorski is a discredited writer in my book.

As I mentioned, I spent many years trying to have earnest exchanges with him. I sent you links to my position on him and where I published my final exchanges with him, to show you that he is indeed a bad faith player who either will not or can not have a real conversation with me on the pertanent issues.

Our last exchange litterally ended with me sending him my phone number and telling him to call me if he actually wanted to solve anything. That was four years ago. If he was a real doctor that was actually concerned about what I was writing about, he could accept one of several invitations that I have extended to have respectful discussion on things. He doesn't!

There is a reason you are here commenting and Gorski is not. He ONLY wants to make public rants. He does not want any actual dialogue to happen. He does not want to see us as actual humans that he would have to treat like ligitmate people. He does not want to actually be subject to review. If he did, he would have done that with me a decade ago.

So I am cutting and pasting my exchanges with him so you can see that he has no intention of ever dealing straight on things (from http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2009/09/chris-mooney-sheril-kirshenbaum-lori.html):

"But then David Gorski (a senior cancer surgeon who is pushing 50 but still calls himself "Orac" as he holds out the very low standards of behavior for a physician to his readers and whom I have attempted to have a civil, productive discourse with for a few years despite his contempt for me and my point of view) responded to my letter to Lori, Chris and Sheril. His response can be found here:

In which Orac defends Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum...

Note that he misses the entire point of my letter.

So I wrote to him, attempting one last time to have an earnest discourse with him:

Ginger Taylor said...

...Subject: Your piece today
From: Ginger Taylor
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:43:10 -0400
To: Orac

David,

I see that you wrote a condemnation of me and my piece. I have not read it entirely, but just skimmed the top and the bottom and wanted to write you about two things:

1. You do know that we have selectively vaccinated my older son, since his younger brother's regression right? (basically he got one of everything) We likely won't be giving him any more, unless we perceive that there is a serious threat to him in which the benefits of vaccinating him might actually outweigh the risks. I wanted to call this to your attention, as you repeatedly call me anti-vaccine. I write about informed consent and corruption in medicine, but I have never told anyone not to vaccinate.

Just wanted to make sure you were clear so that you could be as accurate in your writing as possible.

2. "Finally, I can't help but note in closing that the call for "playing nice" from Ginger and other anti-vaccine zealots is always one-sided."

As I wrote to you in our last exchange, I work very hard not to display the kind of personal meanness that is going on in this debate. I have come to you personally and privately any time that there was a concern that I was not being fair in any way (as I am doing again now) so that I could correct anything that I have written that is incorrect, or address quickly any personal offense.

So let me do that again with you.

I have pointed out in my piece (because Chris is missing this in his analysis of the disconnect) that the dismissal in your community of us is driving this disconnect in many ways, and I used your propensity for insults of people like me as my example (keep in mind that you and I were having many exchanges on vaccines just after my son's regression, before I became a committed vaccine blogger, in which I was genuinely trying to hear from you as to why I should believe that the timing of his regression was coincidental to his vaccines, and you were dismissive and pretty rude about my earnest appeals. I gave up.). I feel that my point has been proved by your mention again in your closing comments that you don't care about reaching parents like me (or me specifically).

Right now my conscience is clear in regards to treating you fairly, as I have come to you many times in private, and in good faith, to address any sub standard behavior on my part. And as of now, I believe that I have listened to your criticism (that I needed to be more humble) and, I thought, responded well (I took my credentials off my site at the time, as you will note my profile only says that I am an autism mom. I have mentioned it in places where it is relevant, as in the letter to the LAT, as I have a foot in both camps [or at least a toe anyway], although I don't identify myself as a 'scientist' by any stretch. Just a mom with enough education to spot the problems in research and its applications).

HOWEVER

I am absolutely open to hearing from you if you believe that I have been unfairly harsh to you personally.

Please let me know if I have personally offended you in any way.

I will read the entire article, but I honestly don't think that I will have the chance to do so and offer any cogent response until my children return to school next week. (just getting this email sent this morning has been a challenge, I won't bother taking the time to proof it or it will take till evening, so please forgive the errors that I am sure are there) If you have any good points that merit an alteration or retraction on my part, I will respond to those, but I will likely not respond to the attacks on me publicly as I have no interest in getting into a war with you. I will make sure I respond privately though.

But in the mean time, let me know if there is some misrepresentation of, or offense against you that I have to address.

Thank you for your time,
Ginger....

Unfortunately his response was as inhospitable as ever:...

Ginger Taylor said...

...Subject: Re: Your piece today
From: Orac
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:41:37 -0400
To: Ginger Taylor

Ginger,

I suggest you read carefully the second to last paragraph of my post in particular for my answer to the question of your "civility." I take it a bit personally when you indiscriminately label my entire profession as corrupt, arrogant, and dogmatic, even going so far as to liken us to the Catholic Church hierarchy who looked the other way over pedophile priests, and then to pile on bloggers whom I know, such as Chris Mooney. I'm funny that way. Besides, you fired the first shot in my direction. One might even say that shot was worthy of Respectful Insolence. In fact, it may even surpass me; in my nearly five years blogging I don't recall ever invoking pedophilia in any of my criticisms of the anti-vaccine movement, although I have been called a pedophile by at least one person on "your side." About nine years ago, a Holocaust denier did the same thing because I also am involved in fighting online Holocaust denial; that's not good company to be in as far as tactics go.

You may think that by adopting an oh-so-superiorly self-righteous pose of civility to individuals but gleefully (and with lots of ALL CAPS) lambasting entire professions indiscriminately, you show yourself to be superior to your critics, that you escape the charge of nastiness, arrogance, and condescension that you level at Chris, me, and others, but you are mistaken. Your approval, either tacit or explicit of the overblown attacks on people like Paul Offit tells me that. I don't recall ever having seen you criticize your buddies at AoA for being so "nasty" to Paul Offit and Brian Deer, for example, and you certainly seem blissfully unconcerned about Andrew Wakefield's massive conflicts of interest, which compare unfavorably with those of big pharma. To you it's all hunky dory or you remain silent. Of course, that's because you agree with them, and nastiness is just fine as long as it's coming from "your" side. When I see you lament the equal incivility coming from the likes of J.B. Handley, I might actually start to take your complaint seriously.

David

And that was apparently that was the end of the patience I have been able to extend to David Gorski:
...

Ginger Taylor said...

...Subject: Re: Your piece today
From: Ginger Taylor
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 02:21:33 -0400
To: Orac

David,

I will address all this, but I want to clarify something first.

I don't feel like you understand the context of this problem. The problem Chris posed was that mainstream America (and educated Americans at that) were rejecting science.

In this scenario, you (generalizing) "the science community" have a product that the people are not buying. I am making the point that may be because your customers believe that you hate them and don't care if your product hurts them or not. As evidenced by the fact that you blanketly reject whole sections of society who don't say/do/think what you want.

It is not the job of the customer to be nice to the salesman. If parents like me, or Handley, or ANYONE offend you or upset you, why does that exactly matter?

And keep in mind, we have other outlets besides you now. My son regressed five years ago, my docs would not address my questions and concerns, you (you personally) were a total jerk to me, and I found doctors that actually listened to me. When I did what they told me to, my son started talking again, making eye contact again, calling me mommy again, he is mainstreamed in school now, his GI problems are all but gone (unless he steals a piece of bread from his brother), and while not recovered, he is a fully engaged member of our family again.

The point I am trying to make, because I ACTUALLY am trying to help you guys understand the problem so that there can be ACTUAL coming together of our two camps, is that your viciousness is driving away anyone who might really want to have earnest debate and figure out where the disconnect is in our two understandings of what is going on in vaccine adverse events and autism!

You are a used car salesman, who is mean to his customers and won't answer their questions in any earnest or remotely satisfactory way. Even the ones who stick around and TRY like I did eventually just throw up their hands and leave. And walk next door where not only the sales people treat you like a human being, BUT THE CARS ARE WAY BETTER!

Do you get this? Do you understand the point of my whole piece? You seem baffled that Jenny McCarthy holds more sway with the public than you guys do. Well she stepped into a vacuum that was left by you guys.

YOU HATE US! YOU HATE ME! You said so in your article. I don't count. I am too far gone!

But the "us" that you hate, is just getting bigger and bigger. Half the population now thinks vaccines are causing widespread damage, so now you hate half the public, and half the public knows that you hate them....

Ginger Taylor said...

...So my question is to you, why should anyone care if you (personally) are offended? Let's say for the sake of argument that I was just completely fed up with your shenanigans, decided to ignore my conscience and decided I really didn't give a crap what you thought any more and I was going to just be as vicious to you publicly as I possibly could. I decided that Handley had it right all along (I seriously can't believe you are comparing his behavior to mine) and just went on the attack. I am the science customer and you are the science salesman. The burden of proof that I need your brand of science is on you.

We are not two kids on a playground, "they were mean to us so it was ok to be mean back to them". You are a frigging DOCTOR! You have the responsibility! This is not a game. Children's lives and futures are at stake! You act like a bitchy hairdresser in a salon slashing people with your words to prove that you are the most clever and can be the most popular, David. Are you really proud of your writing? Are you proud of the fact that you personally can treat parents like me as if they just don't count?

When I wrote that I thought Chris did not see his targets as his equals. I didn't qualify that statement, I said what I meant. I didn't mean professional or educational or intellectual equals. I mean fellow human beings of equal value, worthy of self determination. Equals.

It is absolutely clear to me, because you keep saying it over and over, and because your actions follow it up, that my community and me don't count. We are unpeople to you.

When you do that to people who are in a in a higher SES or power position, that is foolish. When you do it to people who in a lower SES, struggling, impaired or burdened more than you, that is just awful. You are a doctor, who makes fun of parents of sick children who spend their days (and nights) cleaning excrement off the walls and trying to keep their kids from jumping out of windows.

Did you get into medicine to behave like this?

You know what... I know that this is not a humble letter, and I wish it was, but apparently I just don' t have in me tonight, but you are the one that is supposed to be the physician. You are the one that is supposed to be the grown up. Do you have ANY idea the kind of damage you do? Let's even say that it turned out you were 90% right... do you really think that your presentation, filled to the rim with insults and all of the same poor logic and ad hominem attacks that you accuse everyone else of, side stepping all the important questions, is solving the problem of the publics cynicism about mainstream medicine???

And you lie! My last email [exchange with] you I asked you to just give me a simple outline of your position, and you evidence for your position. You rejected my request with the oh so selfless argument that you didn't see anything in it for you! I wanted to call you and scream, "NOTHING IS IN THIS FOR EITHER OF US YOU ADOLESCENT! IT IS ABOUT CHILDREN NOT GETTING SICK AND DYING FROM VIRUSES OR VACCINES YOU SELFISH BABY". I resisted that temptation as I was really trying to be gracious and learn more humility, and I said a polite good bye. And yet in your piece about me, you claim that you just can't get through to me for all your trying? SERIOUSLY!?

I wrote a piece about the credibility problem mainstream science has because they have behaved so badly and because they hate their customers. And you responded to it with a piece in which you behave badly, exclaim that yes, you do hate your customers, and say that it is ok because those people don't count. I couldn't have asked for more proof that I was right than your column. Can you see?

Do you have any capacity for self examination?...

Ginger Taylor said...

...Bottom line... you can behave how ever you want. Autism/vaccine science is not your field, so you are subject to no oversight. But I am trying to get you to understand that there are consequences to your behavior beyond getting your little circle of followers to digitally high five you. You have spent years berating the public, while more and more in your community are making front page news with their egregious behavior and amorality. They are now leaving. Chris wrote a whole book pointing out that fact. Lots of mainstream physicians are going with them.

re:other stuff... I think I have only written a few pieces about Wakefield the others are just positing articles. Honestly I have not really followed his stuff. My son never got the MMR, he regressed after DTaP and Hep B, so that is where my focus was. And from where I sit, he is not really a problem. I have friends with sick kids, they go to Thoughtful House, they get treated, they get better. All of the Wakefield info is being sorted out and I am not up to speed to do that, but he is making sick kids better David. Do you get that.

Do you get that thousands and thousands of kids with "autism" are getting better, dramatically? Have you met any of these kids? Have you gotten out from behind your computer and actually looked at any of these kids? Offit wrote his whole book and admits that he doesn't treat kids with autism and doesn't know any kids with autism. He just read some stuff and heard some stuff.

It was then I decided to write a book about colon cancer.

Also the reason that I don't post lots of critical things about my community, is that I don't post critical things about parents. You might note that I don't critize the ND community, [ND Parents], any of those people. Because they are parents. They can behave how they want to behave. They can raise their kids as they see fit. I don't pick on everyone like you do. I criticize those in positions of power who have legal and ethical standards to uphold. Physicians, Politicians and public health officials, in that order of severity. You might note that I am not even that critical of individual doctors on either side. Only those who decide they want to get into this fight, go on TV and say stupid things. Dr. Wakefield treats our kids, but I have never seen him on TV.

And please stop putting words in my mouth. I did not compare scientists to pedophiles. I compared unwelcome EVIDENCE to unwelcome EVIDENCE.

You are not a stupid man. There is no way that you really think that I really said that. You know that starting off with my lack of humility, when humility on the part of the public or parents is not a part of the issue, is the same stupid ad hominem attacks you are always bitching about. You know that I do not behave like JB Handley. You know that I have been earnest in my dealings with you. And it is just bizarre that you have an expectation that I should be humble, while you explore the heights of "insolence"... what is that about? Can you see where I say that you don't consider me an equal?

It is two am and I am going to end my rant, go find some tea that will lower my blood pressure and go to sleep. If you really want to address any of this, for real, call me.

Ginger
207-729-xxxx...

Ginger Taylor said...

...As you might imagine, he was not willing to do any work with me on this, and our conversation ended thusly:

Subject: Re: Your piece today
From: Orac
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:13:08 -0400
To: Ginger Taylor

Ginger,

I do not "hate you." That is a massive straw man argument (and, boy do you love the logical fallacies, as I pointed out how many of them you used in your post to AoA, along with canards such as "science is a religion," etc.). It's such hyperbole that it simply reinforces my point about your being far gone into the anti-vaccine movement to be persuaded. The evidence is there; it's been there for years; you simply won't acknowledge it.

David

Subject: Re: Your piece today
From: Ginger Taylor
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:00:13 -0400
To:

So again... you are going to continue to ignore the entire point of my article, that you are alienating the public with your venom?

Is 'hate' to strong a word? What would be more appropriate? Contempt? Dislike? Pity? How would you characterize the emotion or state of mind that you have towards me and my community that allows you to believe it is ok for you not to consider us?

And if you count me, a mom who has partially vaccinated her son as "anti-vaccine" then who else is anti vaccine? Anyone who does not stick to the CDC schedule? So doesn't that make a large and growing percentage of the US population "anti-vaccine" and not worthy of your consideration or respectful engagement?

My mainstream pediatrician told me he has a lot of concerns about the H1N1 vaccine and may not offer it. Is he "anti-vaccine" and "to far gone"?

Again... are you capable of any self-examination at all?

And that will probably be the last time I ever hear from him...

...Follow Up: After I posted this article, Dr. David "Orac" Gorski sent me a flattering email saying he had actually always respected me and asked me to remove the piece. When I declined, he let the insults fly again. So... not the most honest and straightforward guy.

A few months later, we learned that Gorski has spent the last several years developing a drug for vaccine maker Sanofi, which he had some how forgotten to mention in his hundreds of posts about these issues, so I do feel a bit the sucker for approaching him as if he was actually a somewhat disinterested party in this debate. Had I known I would not have wasted so many hours trying to have a real discussion with him, but live and learn I guess."
...

Ginger Taylor said...

...He did visit my blog one more time. I mentioned somewhere that it was learned that he was not disclosing that he was developing a Sanofi drug the whole time. He pipped in that he didn't have to disclose it because he was being paid by his university, which had a contract with Sanofi, rather than getting his checks directly from Sanofi. He actually claimed that because his paycheck didn't say Sanofi on them, that this was not a COI or anything that he needed to disclose.

I wrote back and said basically that I didn't care if he was being compensated with hugs by kindly grandmas, or not compensated at all... but if he was developing a Sanofi drug, then it was something he had to disclose. Asked him another question.

He never returned to answer.

So again... I DON'T CARE WHAT GORSKI THINKS!

If after all the crap he has pulled, and all his bad writing, you feel he is a legit medical professional and scientist, then feel free to follow his writing.

But I KNOW that he is full of shit. I know it first hand. I made my case publicly four years ago.

So conversation over, I don't expect you to pay attention to Andy Wakefield's work as you don't find him credible. You cannot expect me to pay attention to "Orac's" work as I don't find him credible.

I think we are clear that you think that we are morons for our opinions, interpretations of the science and decision not to take Gorski and his crew seriously. So... got it... thanks.

Unless there is anything else, any other point that you have not made, I think that this conversation is winding down.

But if you insist on writing more, and exposing your basic ignorance and lack of willingness to understand the messages that we are putting out, then feel free to keep posting remarks that show you don't even know what "peer review" means. You are hardly hurting my case with your presence here.

And if you talk to Gorski, remind him that he has my number, and if he truly wants the issues addressed, to call me. And we can pick up where we left off in 2009 on sorting things out.

Artie Christou said...

I know what a peer reviewed journal is, Gambolpotty (spelling intended). That's not the same as a peer reviewed study. So again, where are the peer reviews? And I mean specifically in the field of vaccines and Autism combined.

The "proper channels" do not need to be taken when the study fails the test of common sense like Wacka Dawson said! I already told you; prove that the specific study I mentioned is about the link between vaccines and Autism. And you are avoiding the point totally!

Love your user name, Wacka!

I see that Ginger Taylor is concentrating on personal attacks. Why don't you try to explain what Gambolpotty can't or won't? Or are you really that gone as David said, and "But the "us" that you hate, is just getting bigger and bigger" proves it. Ignorance is getting bigger and bigger and that is a problem isn't it?

You show us that the studies that are noted as NOT being about either vaccines or Autism ARE in fact on the subject. Go back through the notes I posted and find the ones I'm talking about, and address them.

Gambolputty said...

Still no peer reviewed studies from Gorski and the others I mentioned? So, then you admit that Gorski and the people mentioned have no expertise in the fields of science in question, so therefore their rebuttals should be considered as biased opinion and not science. Thanks!

Also, it says so much about you when you make fun of someone's name instead of providing the peer reviewed studies of the individuals in question. Very mature of you.

Wacka Dawson said...

Artie, there are no peer reviews for the link between vaccines and Autism. There are only general science peer reviews. As you rightly pointed out, there are a number of studies mentioned in your list that do not address one of the two issues at all including the one you specifically asked for an explanation on. Your challenge to Gambolputty is valid and his ignorance of it is frankly breathtaking in it's lack of intelligence.

My user name comes from an Australian play entitled "The One Day of the Year".

To Provaxquacks, no it should not be rebutted by science because it fails the test of common sense and logic. If you are choosing to ignore this that I have been proven correct about the presence of delusion. Belief, including religious belief, is a source of a lack of logic and common sense when taken to extremes. So your twist into the scientific argument about the presence/non-presence of God is not relevant. I would indeed picket the funeral of vaccine injured children, calling for the person who administered the vaccine to be charged with murder. And on that day, while visiting the funeral of said vaccine injured child, I will also attend twenty funerals for children who weren't vaccinated because of the ignorant scientific savagery of people like you. Said for some perspective.

One more thing, Ms Taylor. Has David Gorksi had his ability to practice medicine revoked? Not as far as I know. Andrew Wakefield has. A very strong difference. I remember seeing the name Geier amongst Artie's rebuttal list. They have also had their ability revoked. Not that it matters that much because the rebuttals are based in common sense and logic. If they fail that test, the fail in science is inevitable.

I made an examination some time again about the lack of responses from the scientific community to these assertions. The explanation is that the scientific community is ignoring them. This is because the claims are so outlandish they are seen as a fad that will blow over eventually as more children die from vaccine preventable diseases. So they won't waste their breath with people like Ms Taylor and others who are seen by said scientific community as harmless cranks. I'm not so sure you are harmless. The Jenny McCarthy Body Count is ample evidence of true "Evidence of Harm".

Gambolputty said...

But it's not a challenge, Wacka. I'm dismissing the rebuttals because they are opinion. They are biased. He has not provided a single reason why I should respond. The authors obviously don't take them seriously, so why should I take the time to respond?

I am holding the authors to the same standards that they hold to everyone else. Artie is the one defending these rebuttals, and yet he can't give a valid reason why people who have no training in vaccines or autism should be taken more seriously than authors of study who went through the time and effort to have their studies published.

Surely an intelligent person would have the capability to understand something so simple. It's clearly too complicated for you.

Artie Christou said...

I'll put this in capital letters so you get it....

SHOW THE LINK BETWEEN VACCINES AND AUTISM IN THIS REPORT.

"65. Hepatitis B vaccine induces apoptotic death in Hepa1-6 cells (Original Taylor number = 55)

Correct citation: Hamza H, Cao J, Li X, Li C, Zhu M, Zhao S. Hepatitis B vaccine induces apoptotic death in Hepa1-6 cells. Apoptosis. 2012 May;17(5):516-27. doi: 10.1007/s10495-011-0690-1.

An in-vitro study of how mouse (murine) cells derived from a cancerous tumor react to being bathed in Hepatitis B vaccine. No mention of autism. No relevance to autism."

Wacka Dawson said...

No, Gambolputty, you are the one who doesn't understand.

The opinions expressed are valid because of their base in common sense and logic. You are insisting on a certain style of response and I have explained why you will not get that. You are missing the point that the studies are not relevant to vaccines or Autism and you have been asked to provide proof that they are relevant. A simple read of the studies by a layman show that they are not relevant to the matter at hand. That is not science. That is practical fact. Do you deny the validity of practical fact? Or do you insist that science is able to over rule practical fact?

provaxquacks said...

Busy bees while I've been away!

You guys aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, are ya?

His stance is perfectly clear; he has no reason to respond because he doesn't take them seriously. He even explained why he doesn't take them seriously. You haven't given him a reason to respond. Not too complicated.

"I see that Ginger Taylor is concentrating on personal attacks."

Anyone else see the irony in someone complaining about personal attacks while making personal attacks? I know I do...

"To Provaxquacks, no it should not be rebutted by science because it fails the test of common sense and logic in my untrained opinion"

There, ftfy. You fail to provide any legitimate reason why they fail the common sense test. So, unsubstantiated opinion.

" Belief, including religious belief, is a source of a lack of logic and common sense when taken to extremes. So your twist into the scientific argument about the presence/non-presence of God is not relevant."

Oh, but it is very much relevant. Because the abusive rhetoric that you employ against those who question vaccine safety is the exact same rhetoric that religious fanatics use against infidels and heretics. You are a true believer. Common sense has nothing to do with it; your belief is based totally on faith. Your words and actions add credence to that statement. You don't turn a critical eye on the studies that defend your faith.

"The Jenny McCarthy Body Count is ample evidence of true "Evidence of Harm"."

Ah yes...the Body Count Site. A massive strawman based on a lie. Yup, she is an infidel, so she must be shunned. You have the stones ready, too?

"You are missing the point that the studies are not relevant to vaccines or Autism and you have been asked to provide proof that they are relevant"

Except for the ones that are published that are relevant to vaccines and neurological conditions (which includes autism). Artie is calling them junk science. He posts some weak rebuttals from people without any training in the scientific discipline in question and expects us to take it seriously? Laughable!

The issue as that the studies that Ginger mentions show how vaccines can damage and harm people. Autism, encephalitis, they show the mechanism of harm that could be occurring to children.

Wacka Dawson said...

Provaxquacks, you are the most unhappy creature.

Common sense and logic are the very essence of being a member of the human race. All of us have, or should have, an ability to engage in common sense and logic. So are you admitting that this human trait is useless to the matter in hand? There is no faith in what exists and what does not. It is practical fact. Black or white. It doesn't require degrees or any other qualifications to recognise this. It also doesn't require belief. To say that it does is a strawman argument designed to divert attention away from the fact that the studies that are listed as not mentioning either vaccines or Autism are not relevant.

You attempt to create links on your own by stating that the issue is vaccines causing general harm. This is an assumption on your part and that of other people. There are many diverse neurological conditions that have no relation whatsoever to Autism, so the reports need to be more specific. They are not and this is why they fail the practical test of relevance. Clutching at straws to prove a point is a tactic that is worthy of contempt in science and practical fact.

The Body Count is not a lie. It shows how many children have died from or have suffered a vaccine preventable disease since she started undermining vaccine integrity. Again, the pure numbers are practical fact even if the link to Ms McCarthy is debatable.

Please prove to us that you are not a narrow minded individual who will not listen to reason.

Ginger Taylor said...

"Please prove to us that you are not a narrow minded individual who will not listen to reason."

Aaannnnndd this is the comment that tells me this has just descended into obnoxiousness.

Comments policy on this blog is that you have to make a point, not merely insult people. And this is just now insults and I am not hearing any new points.

So again... no more insults... just points of logic, or please don't post any more on this thread.

Because again... we are clear that you think we are narrow minded, dangerous idiots. Got it!

And again... I don't care what you think, as you are not remotely engaging in a good faith process. Not listening to the points that are being made.

So before this descends into full on bullying, I am going to ask that you take a step back, and either make a respectful point that has not been made, or end the discussion.

I hate bullies.

Wacka Dawson said...

As the owner of this blog, and the originator of the list of reports that Artie provided rebuttals for, I ask that you provide the further information that Gambolputty has not at Artie's request. Please prove that the reports that are listed as not relevant to Autism or to vaccines are in fact relevant.

provaxquacks said...

"Common sense and logic are the very essence of being a member of the human race. All of us have, or should have, an ability to engage in common sense and logic. So are you admitting that this human trait is useless to the matter in hand? There is no faith in what exists and what does not. It is practical fact. Black or white. It doesn't require degrees or any other qualifications to recognise this. It also doesn't require belief. To say that it does is a strawman argument designed to divert attention away from the fact that the studies that are listed as not mentioning either vaccines or Autism are not relevant."

And, speaking of strawmen! I pointed out exactly why I think your belief is akin to faith and not science. I never claimed the logic and common sense are useless; I said that you failed to demonstrate how they applied. And, again, you use the same rhetoric that religious nuts use to argue the presence of a supreme deity (i.e. "You must be a most unhappy person to not believe in something greater than yourself"). And, I am a very happy human being, thank you. I am highly amused by the flailing and sputtering of yourself and Artie on this page. Gambolputty rightfully pointed out that he is holding you to the same standards that Gorski and the rest of his clowns hold others, and you can't measure up. And, nice try in attempting to dehumanize me by making me seem less than human. Also a tactic used by religious nuts.

"Clutching at straws to prove a point is a tactic that is worthy of contempt in science and practical fact."

Which is what you are doing by using semantic word games to say that the brain injury caused by vaccines is not actually autism. I feel so much better that it's only brain damage...at least it's not autism...

"The Body Count is not a lie. It shows how many children have died from or have suffered a vaccine preventable disease since she started undermining vaccine integrity. Again, the pure numbers are practical fact even if the link to Ms McCarthy is debatable."

It is a lie because she has never said not to vaccinate. Do you have the proof that she has killed all of these people? That's what the site is accusing her of.

"Please prove to us that you are not a narrow minded individual who will not listen to reason."

Right back atcha.

Ginger, I know some of my comments above are a bit on the insulting side, and I apologize to you. I've made my point. I just wanted to make sure that I responded and drove the point home.

Wacka Dawson said...

It is rather amusing that you didn't notice that my opening rhetoric that you quoted was sarcastic, and you took it seriously.

Lesson number 1. Autism is not brain damage. It is brain difference. As a qualified psychologist (I call myself a psychotherapist for purely business reasons) I am well trained in the difference between the two. Any damage that you and others speak of are due to neglect of various parties and not vaccines. This is the factor that you fail to take into account in your musings. Also, as you have in effect called Autism brain damage this reveals hate for the condition, so you are not a "happy creature" at all.

Lesson number 2. Common sense and logic are very simply demonstrated. In each report that Artie listed that notes no mention of either vaccines or Autism, common sense and logic dictate that they are not relevant to the argument that vaccines cause Autism. How, pray tell, can it be anything else using common sense and logic? Do explain that to us all. Your opinion does not count as it is opinion and not practical fact.

Lesson number 3. It doesn't matter if Ms McCarthy said "don't vaccinate" or not. What she did - and others have done including Ms Taylor on this blog - is questioned vaccine safety. That was enough to scare many people away from vaccinating and that is why the Body Count as a general number is valid. Everyone who has been preaching the same line as Ms McCarthy is equally guilty of causing those numbers. Ms McCarthy is merely the public face of it, and if she was smart she would distance herself from the issue as quickly as possible.

Lesson number 4. I find it insulting that you would say the things that you have. You have failed to make a dent in the practical facts of the debate, which go completely against you. So I put the same challenge to you as I did to Ms Taylor. Please show where "Autism" is mentioned in the study that Artie listed above. And again please note, Autism is not brain damage.

Ginger Taylor said...

WD,

Thank you for your respectful request. It actually is a constructive one and has me thinking about the right way to have this science teased out.

First... no. Not going to get into blogging debates on this any more. I am not really a blogger and don't have time for reiterating things that have a number of books written on them. Especially with people who clearly don't want to understand what the links are between vaccines and autism and how this work demonstrates them.

(If you want to understand the mechanisms at play, I would encourage you to read "Changing the Course of Autism http://www.amazon.com/Changing-Course-Autism-Scientific-Physicians/dp/1591810612 but even that is behind as it was published before some of this research... but it gives you the framework)

Have my actual work to get done.

But even if I had all the time in the world to do that, not interested in adding more words into a fruitless debate when it is not where the discussion should be taking place anyway... and this is where your request is actually helpful.

As I mentioned above, the debate should not be settled on the internet, but earnest and respectful exchanges in medical journals and open debates between researchers... and of course in the civil court system, the who point of which is to vet these things carefully where real conflict occurs.

Part of my work is getting this back into the courts where it belongs, but you are right that this research list should be discussed and explained.

What really needs to happen is that it needs to be sorted properly (right now it is just a pile of papers), stratified, vetted and expanded on. (I have more research that people have sent me this summer, but I have not even had time to read the abstracts.

Then it should be a subject of open scientific debate between those who are not controversial figures in this online debate.

So I will start working toward that end when my current projects wrap up.

This is research that should have been openly debated in esteemed circles long before now. Will look for feedback from those who are publishing the research and using it in practice to see the best way to proceed in getting the real debate off angry internet web sites and into real venues.

Thank you for your respectful question.

provaxquacks said...

"Also, as you have in effect called Autism brain damage this reveals hate for the condition, so you are not a "happy creature" at all."

But that's not what I'm saying. Again, you're attacking a strawman. I'm pointing out that encephalitic reactions post vaccination present as autism-like symptoms. My child had this happen, Hannah Poling had this happen. It doesn't mean that I "hate autism" and "am not a happy creature," (again that hateful dehumanization) it's me calling a spade a spade. Your semantic word games aside, this is still occurring . Brain damage is brain damage, even if its symptoms look like autism. These reactions are still causing the brain damage. You claim to be a psychologist, yet are incapable of understanding that?

"Common sense and logic are very simply demonstrated. In each report that Artie listed that notes no mention of either vaccines or Autism, common sense and logic dictate that they are not relevant to the argument that vaccines cause Autism."

Except for the ones that demonstrate vaccines and neurological damage. Are those relevant? Again, you use semantic word games to claim that these studies don't talk about a link between vaccines and autism. But the neurological damage described, in Dr. Poling's study for example, can present as autistic symptoms. And you still fail to demonstrate how it isn't common sense. If you can't do that one simple thing, then it isn't common sense. You claim to be a psychotherapist and don't understand that concept?

"What she did - and others have done including Ms Taylor on this blog - is questioned vaccine safety."

And this is exactly what I was talking about. This is how a religious fanatic sees things. You do not question dogma. This dogmatic comment shows me that you are incapable of evaluating your own stance and that you will not accept conflicting evidence, ever. Another thing; if what you say about the body count site is true (that Ms. McCarthy is scaring people away), then we can reasonably say that we can count David Gorski among those who are scaring people away. His hateful rhetoric, his abuse of parents who have children who may have been damaged by vaccinations, and his demonstrable hatred of anyone who doesn't follow his point of view is instilling distrust and animosity toward vaccination and doctors in general. So yes, the site is a strawman based on a lie.

"I find it insulting that you would say the things that you have"

And I find it insulting that you would accuse me of "ignorant scientific savagery" when you are guilty of the exact same thing.

It's pointless to debate the specifics with you since you cannot argue with a religious zealot.

Gambolputty said...

Ms Taylor,

I, too, despise bullies. Which is why I tend to stand up to them.

Speaking of, let's get started.

I find it quite amusing that Artie is getting so agitated that I don't find the rebuttals that he listed worthy of my time to respond. It's very telling his reaction, almost like the behaviour of a naughty child having a benny. Instead of addressing my simple request (show me the published studies from these individuals that show that their opinions are relevant), he instead complains of personal attacks, only to proceed to make personal attacks and comment on my name, which is so much easier than responding to my simple request. A simple "I can't find any" would have sufficed.

His "challenge" to me is not a valid challenge because he has failed to defend his position that the opinions he has posted are both relevant and valid. He has failed to demonstrate how the individuals who wrote those rebuttals have opinions that are more valid than the authors who spent the time to have their studies published in scientific journals. Those individuals instead used personal blogs to post their criticisms, which tells me that they actually do not take their own criticisms seriously. Therefore, they are not worth my time.

The use of the "not a happy creature" invective; this too is quite telling. It shows me that Wacka is not actually here to debate anything, but merely to brow-beat and bully those who don't agree with him. So, again, responses to the pleas for attention to the opinions listed are not worthy of my time.

Wacka Dawson said...

Ms Taylor,

You said "the debate should not be settled on the internet, but earnest and respectful exchanges in medical journals and open debates between researchers... and of course in the civil court system, the who point of which is to vet these things carefully where real conflict occurs."

I do not agree. The law court is the last place to settle a scientific argument, because science evolves and the law does not due to precedents.

I do take note however of your desire to take this debate off the Internet and into proper venues. The Internet is part of the problem and certain individuals inhabit the Internet who, whilst they may be on your side on several points, are detrimental to your cause. I have come across one by the name of Oliver Canby, who I have written a blog about (and I should get back to that one of these days). I understand that you have had dealings with another by the name of John Best. Here in Australia we have a person named Meryl Dorey, who is gaining herself a real life reputation of being quite unstable in her presentation of her views and unlike you will not pay any heed to any reasonable challenges to her views.

I do recommend when you review your papers that you remove the ones that do not mention vaccines or Autism. I don't think that issue affected all of them as I recall so you still have some material to work from. However I wish you luck in getting the attention of the scientific community as no matter what, they regard people like yourself as harmless cranks best ignored. Having said that, if you are able to gain a credible base that they can't ignore that would be a different matter.

Wacka Dawson said...

Provaxquacks,

You are the sort of "ally" Ms Taylor can do without. To begin with, "autism-like symptoms" is not Autism. It never has been and it never will be. So the connection you attempt to make with brain damage is not applicable. This also applies to neurological damage (it's the same thing). Do you understand that? Does that make sense to you?

I find it amusing that you would compare a public attention hound like Ms McCarthy to a single blog owner like David Gorski. Ms McCarthy has recieved much wider media coverage than Dr Gorski ever has in his dreams, and you have the nerve to claim that Dr Gorski scared just as many people?? That is an incredible assertion that has no basis in logic or practical fact.

I am also amused and curious as to how I am engaging in ignorant scientific savagery when my arguments are all about common sense and logic and by my own admission not science, because I don't need science to prove my point to you. If you wish metaphorically put your fingers in your ears that is your problem and not mine.

Gambolputty,

I find it interesting that you claim that responding to Artie's pleas and indeed my echo was not worth your time, and yet Ms Taylor has taken the time as I have taken note of above. So what is your excuse to not do as she has done? Your assumptions are an attempt to bully me and they will not work.

Gambolputty said...

A quick response, and then I will leave you be.

The issue here that provaxquacks pointed out is that there are some children who are experiencing reactions to vaccination that are causing some pretty serious problems. Things like encepalopathy and brain damage. Sometimes, as in the case of Hannah Poling, this brain damage looks very similar to autism. But instead of addressing this, you say "brain damage is not autism," which is not what is being argued here. What is being argued is that there are cases of vaccines causing encepalopathy and brain damage that look an awful lot like autism. Do you understand that? Does that make sense to you?

The comment regarding Gorski shows the ridiculousness of the Body Count site and how the same logic could be applied in Gorski's case. The fact that you deliberately chose to misinterpret that comment again shows that you are only interested in insulting and belittling anyone who disagrees with you.

In my opinion, my interpretation of the "ignorant scientific savagery" applies to your deification of science and your unscientific behaviours, not your failure to explain how these are common sense and simple logic. But, I don't wish to put words in his (or her) mouth.

Finally, it isn't worth my time, and I've explained why it isn't worth my time. You aren't here to discuss the science; you are here to bully and belittle those who disagree with you (evident with such comments as "You are the most unhappy creature," which, as PQ demonstrated, is an attempt to make him/her appear to be less than human). As PQ mentioned, nothing will change your mind, so why bother?

I will say, however, that your response to Ginger is most reasonable. If you had approached this conversation previously in this way, then the conversation would have likely been much different. However, you have shown your true colours, and I just can't find it in me to respond in any other way than amused ambivalence.

Ginger Taylor said...

WD,

We actually do kind of agree, "The law court is the last place to settle a scientific argument."

When you have to fighting factions, and at least one has entrenched self interests, the final place to settle matters is in the courts.

In the US we have a public health system that is a vaccine patent holder AND their own judge and jury. They are NEVER going to admit the damage being done, because they are functionally a vaccine company that gets to set public health policy, recommend vaccines and the police themselves.

They CANNOT be taken to court to have their claims tested, because they passed laws exempting themselves from being sued.

IF this matter had been in the US courts decades ago, where it belonged, we would not be in this debate today. US HHS is putting out "science" that is not only junk, but is being published, in a few cases, by a man under indictment for 22 counts of fraud and money laundering.

And few in mainstream medicine have the courage to demand that this junk science be retracted. Those that do speak out are punished.

That is when the courts are necessary.

But before that should be earnest scientific discussion. Which again... the medical community does not want to have, because it indicts their products and practices (including, but not limited to, vaccination) in the autism epidemic.

No one is more resistant to the idea that they are causing harm. See Semmelweis Complex.

When those earnest scientists/medical professionals are ready to talk again on a level playing field, the debate will begin in earnest, but don't see that they are ready for that yet.

In the mean time, nope... not removing research that supports the vaccine/autism link because you don't understand it.

Because, bottom line, for the people who are actually USING this research in daily life with children with and autism diagnosis, IT FRIGGING WORKS!!! It is amazing! My son is half way recovered and I am thrilled!

So please... you must understand that you are operating in an echo chamber that has no intention of ever even trying to see what is happening to children with vaccine induced encephalopathy that gets diagnosed as "autism".

If you really want to understand this, look at it through the this lens. Vaccines can cause.... mitochondrial dysfunction, autoimmune states, GI damage, brain inflammation, metabolic problems... and we see all these things in children given an "autism" diagnosis. When we treat those conditions, the "autism" abates.

The position we are taking is that "autism" in the medical sense, is a junk diagnosis. These are sick children whose brain is affected, and are given an archaic diagnosis of "autism," because the medical community refuses to accept the huge body of research that I have listed.

Literally... the US HHS Vaccine Injury Table lists the symptoms of autism, then calls it vaccine encephalopathy, but no docs have ever read it, so when children with textbook vaccine encephalopathy walk into their offices, they have been trained to call it "autism" and tell the parents it has nothing to do with vaccines.

If you are earnest, read the book I suggested, then come back to the research list.

Artie Christou said...

To Provaxquacks,

You're an idiot. No clue. Wacka Dawson called you out well and truly and all you can do is squeal from an impossible position and dig yourself in deeper in the process, and you're too stupid to see it happening! You want to call me out on perosnal attacks? I call you out on the same thing and I'm only doing it because it's a language, and probably the only language you understand! And even Ginger saw what was going on and backed up!

But now you lot are admitting that this ISN'T about Autism! Oh hooray! About fricking time! It's about "autism like symptoms" that Wacka said isn't Autism. And yet you and Gambolpotty and still trying to make the connection! Get with the program, dumbasses! The reports that don't mention Autism are not relevant and they don't even mention "autism like symptoms"! That's why I demanded an explanation for that one listing I repeated, twice, and you two decided "Uh Uh don't want to know about it"!

Idiot. Coward. Doesn't understand.

I'm through with both of you failures. You're a disgrace to disease prevention and won't take it seriously preferring lies that end up killing kids and seniors. I've never heard of the three people Wacka named but if they're anything like you two I don't want to know!

As of right now, I'm making it my business to find out who you two are, and if you are parents and haven't vaccinated your kids I'll have your local DCS at your door in an instant!

Gambolputty said...

Wow! What a spectacular melt-down. Truly epic. He's like a little boy stomping his feet because he's not getting his way. Magnificent!

I have nothing to say at all whatsoever; his immaturity, paranoia, and lack of anything even resembling rationality is a true testament to what it means to be anti-science. Well done, Artie...well done.

When describing why so many are turning away from vaccinations, I'll make sure to point people to your comment here.

Child, I don't have to respond to your juvenile and demands for attention. I told you that before. I had you pegged from the get-go; you have no interest in rational discussion, so why should I give you the attention you crave? Poor lad...

Oh, and good luck finding out my identity. I'll also be sure to take a screenshot of this very threatening comment for posterity, and I encourage PQ to do so as well. I do not have children, but if PQ does, and they find out you're stalking them, this can be used in the legal proceedings.

Au revoir. Auf Wiedersehen. Sayounara.

Wacka, this the sort of "ally" you can do without. You, at least, seem somewhat reasonable. This child, though...wow!

Ginger Taylor said...

And with that Artie... you are now banned from commenting on my blog.

Congratulations.

In Nine years of blogging I have had to ban only one other person, none other than John Best, for unacceptable behavior here. And that was, also after being warned to be more respectful, choosing to threaten people.

Do not comment here again.

provaxquacks said...

Dude!! Holy crap, that is one crazy individual!

"Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking."

And what's your lawful reason? Because someone wouldn't give your vacuous mumblings attention? OMG...how freakin' childish can you be? A rightful challenge?

http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3uny63/

You do know it's perfectly legal in the United States to have a child who is partially or even completely unvaccinated, don't you? No, clearly you don't...

"Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can!"

He's been quite rational, actually. Compare that to your rabid, spittle-flecked, hateful explosion, and he is the very modicum of civility and rationality. There was no running away involved, you complete and utter cretin...he was dismissing your childish attempts at gaining attention; he was ignoring your drooling diatribes as inconsequential. But the way you blew up and became unhinged is an awesome thing to behold and completely ruins any credibility you had.

Watch out, Ginger...he's declaring a jihad upon us. I am positively quaking; absolutely terrified, I am. Yup...

Man...I'm saving this one so I can post it on my facebook page and laugh about it.

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it.

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it.

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it.

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it.

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it.

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it.

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Gambolputty said...

Oh, dear. The poor child is ranting again. Oh well, I thought he was through with us...guess not.

Only one other person has been banned from this site, and that was John Best? That's some pretty disreputable company to be in. Also, note that continuing to comment after she has told him to stop doing so is a form of harassment, and she can take legal action if she so wishes. I hope she does. His words and actions are those of someone who is deeply disturbed.

I was never running away from his comments, the poor child. It's just that his ranting was unworthy of my time or effort to respond to. I knew he wasn't interested in discussing the issues and only wanted to feel smart and important. I could tell otherwise, and I treated him accordingly.

I will say that I am truly concerned about his health and well-being. Someone that angry is bound to hurt himself or others, and I would feel absolutely dreadful if something bad were to happen to him or because of him. I do hope he gets some professional help.

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it and I have oodles of patience!

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it and I have oodles of patience!

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! That's why I'm harassing you, because you deserve it. You wouldn't let an unruly child behave the way you have would you? Would you? It's your mental health that's in question here!

Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it and I have oodles of patience!

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! That's why I'm harassing you or rather reading you the riot act, because you deserve it little boy/girl. You wouldn't let an unruly child behave the way you have would you? Would you? It's your mental health that's in question here!

Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it and I have oodles of patience!

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! That's why I'm harassing you or rather reading you the riot act, because you deserve it little boy/girl. You wouldn't let an unruly child behave the way you have would you? Would you? It's your mental health that's in question here!

Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it and I have oodles of patience!

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! That's why I'm harassing you or rather reading you the riot act, because you deserve it little boy/girl. You wouldn't let an unruly child behave the way you have would you? Would you? It's your mental health that's in question here!

Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up. I'll keep adding this until you leave it and I have oodles of patience!

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! That's why I'm harassing you or rather reading you the riot act, because you deserve it little boy/girl. You wouldn't let an unruly child behave the way you have would you? Would you? It's your mental health that's in question here!

Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! I'll keep adding this until you leave it and I have oodles of patience and time! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up.

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! That's why I'm harassing you or rather reading you the riot act, because you deserve it little boy/girl. You wouldn't let an unruly child behave the way you have would you? Would you? It's your mental health that's in question here! You're the one who needs help, not me.

Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

Artie Christou said...

First Amendment, Taylor! I'll keep adding this until you leave it and I have oodles of patience and time! And if I am to be banned, ban Gambolpotty and Provax as well because they have been just as bad! Ban them, and I'll shut up.

Gambolpotty, you are the child here. You are a coward and an idiot and won't defend yourself from rightful challenges. That is a perfect example of a lack of rationality. This isn't about seeking attention for me. This is about proper scrutiny, which you are running away from as fast as you can! That's why I'm harassing you or rather reading you the riot act, because you deserve it little boy/girl. You wouldn't let an unruly child behave the way you have would you? Would you? It's your mental health that's in question here! You're the one who needs help, not me.

Provaxquack, that is not rational no matter which way you slice it! AND it IS running away. Look out Usain Bolt!

Seeking out a person's name for a lawful reason is not stalking. Yeah by the book it's legal to have an unvaccinated kid but that doesn't make it right!

provaxquacks said...

"That's why I'm harassing you or rather reading you the riot act, because you deserve it little boy/girl. You wouldn't let an unruly child behave the way you have would you? Would you? It's your mental health that's in question here!"

Ginger, I do hope you are capturing this comments. He's admitting to harassing you. You can easily obtain his IP address and use these comments to file legal action against him.

And Artie, he wouldn't let an unruly child the behave the way you have. Which is why he dismissed, then ignored you.

"It's just that his ranting was unworthy of my time or effort to respond to. I knew he wasn't interested in discussing the issues and only wanted to feel smart and important. I could tell otherwise, and I treated him accordingly."

And you were 100% correct in doing so.

Ginger Taylor said...

So turns out Artie... not so super stable of a guy. He is spamming the comments. So all done comments.

Say night, night.