Apparently Vaccine Epidemic is Getting Under AAP's Skin

As you know, a few weeks ago our book, Vaccine Epidemic, was released to the public. It quickly rose through the ranks on Amazon to #117 on their bestseller list, and was the number one book in several categories, including Public Health. Three days after the launch, the book went into its second printing, as both Amazon and Barnes & Noble have requested more copies. Reports I get from people trying to buy the book in the stores is that they are finding it sold out.

Really pretty good for a little book like ours that has had no mainstream press what so ever.

By contrast, Paul Offit's most recent book attacking our community, Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All, has been out for more than two months, didn't break the #1,000 threshold on Amazon's list, and spent the weeks since our launch trailing our book in Public Health and the other related categories. That is, until yesterday.

On Sunday, someone sent me a link to this:

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Mass Bookbuying Event Tomorrow: Raise Awareness of Safety & Efficacy of Vaccines

A group of pediatricians are planning a mass book-buying event tomorrow, Monday February 21st.

Here's the action:

Go to Amazon and purchase a copy of Paul Offit's Deadly Choices: How the Anti-vaccine movement Threatens Us All. The hard-cover edition is $17.11 and the Kindle edition is $9.99.

Remember, Dr. Offit is donating all royalties from the book to the Autism Science Foundation.

Motive:

Moving Deadly Choices onto Amazon's Hot New Releases List. If his book is the biggest seller on Amazon on Monday the 21st, this will raise much needed publicity about the importance and safety of vaccines.

But I already have a copy of the book!

So? Buy another and donate it: to your local library, to a local high school library, to a high school or community college teacher of biology, health, or journalism, to your pediatrician...let your imagination be your guide.

On Personal Medicine, a blog that aims at, "enabling Primary Care Physicians to return to a simpler more gratifying method of medical practice, enhancing physician needs for lifestyle, professional satisfaction and income," we find that entreaty passed along. We also learn from Alison Singer's email that has been posted there, that the plucky "group of pediatricians" that are bravely banning together to get the urgent word out to parents that questioning vaccines is "deadly" is in fact the American Academy of Pediatrics. A 60,000 member strong, the Pediatricians Union, snuggled tightly into bed with Offit and Pharma, that once upon a time was concerned with the health of children and that would abruptly cease to exist if it ever admitted that the practices that it was prompting its doctors to practice were causing neuroimmune disorders in an entire generation of children.

Dear Friends:

AAP District 1 is promoting a mass book buying event on amazon.com for Dr. Paul Offit's most recent book, Deadly Choices. This event will take place on Monday Feb 21st (tomorrow). See the note from District 1 leadership below. Also, please know that Dr. Offit has generously agreed to donate all royalties from book sales to the Autism Science Foundation, so that we can fund research to learn the true causes of autism. Many thanks. Alison

Alison Singer
President, Autism Science Foundation

Apparently AAP no likey that the public is choosing the actual good faith arguments in Vaccine Epidemic over yet another propaganda screed like Deadly Choices.

We see that "Chip" at PedSource encourages pediatricians to:

GET THE WORD OUT.
From Dr. Jill Stoller:
In an effort to raise awareness for the importance of childhood vaccinations, the Section I chair for the American Academy of Pediatrics (the Section on Administration and Practice Management) is promoting a mass buying event on amazon.com for Dr. Paul Offit's most recent book Deadly Choices
Dr. Offit is the Chief of Pediatric Infectious Diseases at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. He is a relentless in his advocacy for children's health and childhood vaccination. As a favor to me, and all the children you know and love, please purchase a copy of his book on Monday February 21 on amazon.com.
If his book is the biggest seller on Amazon on Monday the 21st, this will raise much needed publicity about the importance and safety of vaccines. Even if you don't have the time to read his book, purchase it and donate it to your local library!

Thank you for helping in this effort!
Update (5:30PM, Jan 21): Deadly Choices is #4 on the Amazon Movers and Shakers list and is now #28 on their sales list! A 40,000% increase - amazing.

Note that people are not expected to actually READ the book, just to buy it.

What is the medical equivalent of "astroturf?"

So Offits book shot to #27 on the Amazon best seller list yesterday.

Seth Mnookin's book got a bump as well, rising from the #5,000 neighborhood where he and Offit had been dwelling, despite all the media hype of their books (and Offit even appearing on Colbert), and Seth made it as high as #777 by my tracking.

So congratulations to Offit and Mnookin for getting the people whose asses you are covering by writing these books, to buy these books.

And to the AAP, you know what you could have done instead? You could have asked your doctors to read our book and actually started a real, common sense, good faith conversation with the HALF of the country that doesn't believe you on your vaccine safety claims, and begun to repair the damage that you have done by lying to the public. But once again, instead of course correcting, you double down.

I will end this as I have dozens of posts on this blog. By urging wise pediatricians to take back their profession. All those patients that you are arguing with in your offices are real people who want to have good faith conversations with you on vaccines. A bunch of them got together and wrote a book outlining many of the REAL problems in the vaccine program in this country. Realize that the AAP is not your friend if you want the truth on vaccine safety, read the book and (like Dr. Oz did last week) start the real conversations. Stop allowing yourselves to be propegandaized by Merck's boy Offit and the AAP who is trying desperately to prevent you from waking up to the fact they have lied to you for years.

A Window Into the Negotiations Between The American Academy of Pediatrics and Defeat Autism Now in 2008

On Wednesday, JB Handley wrote a piece for Age of Autism called AAP’s Errol R. Alden, MD: The Worst CEO in America, Looking to Target “Vaccine Opponents” and “Celebrities”. In it, he chastened the leadership of the American Academy of Pediatrics for their vaccine/autism stance and focusing in on the AAP CEO Dr. Errol Alden.

In the comments section of the post, Paul Robinson, Alden's brother in law, responded to Handley, disclosing that he has a child with ASD, and claiming that Handley and Jenny McCarthy's group, Generation Rescue, had sabotaged the relationship between AAP and DAN!, that was burgeoning in 2008, by criticizing AAP too harshly. Handley responded with another post the following day called, "Dr. Errol Alden, CEO of the AAP, has a Nephew with Autism", in which he addresses Robinson's comments.

Handley expresses a sentiment, which I share, that references the difficulty of the idea that victims of malpractice should be deferential to those who have caused life long damage to children, because those public health officials are too sensitive to be criticized for their malpractice.

He then points Robinson back to the actual problem, which is that the American Academy of Pediatrics, under Alden's leadership, is encouraging physicians to commit widespread malpractice, and away from the fake smokescreen problem that the AAP is trying to distract the world with, the fact that parents and minority physicians are complaining about the actual problem.

So now that this is being put out in the open, I think it is appropriate to ask, what happened in 2008? As I am witness to a small piece of the puzzle, I will share what I know here.

I was in attendance at the April 2008 DAN conference in Cherry Hill. The month before, the Polings had announced that Hannah had been paid for her vaccine induced autism, Julie Gerberding had been forced to admit on CNN that vaccines can cause autism in children with mitochondrial dysfunction, Jenny McCarthy had announced the "Green our Vaccines" rally, the AAP had announced that it was going to work with ARI/DAN in treating autism, and Jenny McCarthy went head to head with the AAP on Larry King in an explosive interview.

Two days later, the DAN! conference started. It was jammed with people. During the conference, Misty Hiatt, a mother from Florida, stood up and told the crowd that her daughter Madison had also been paid by the VICP for her vaccine induced encephalopathy/autism. And the AAP had sent a group, lead by Dr. Louis Cooper, one of the inventors of the Rubella vaccine.

It was a charged weekend to say the least. On the last day, I sat in the back of the ballroom and somewhere in the middle of Sid Baker's speech, the fact that what had been done to my child, had been done to my child, washed over me and I started crying. I just sat in the back and cried quietly for an hour or so... happy to be in the back at a table next to the sound board by myself.

As the conference ended, I stayed put and watched Dr. Cooper talk with a woman at the front of the room and Stan Kurtz and a few others, waiting to see if Stan would be alone. I had been introduced to him once and hoped that he would give me a little bit of information on Cooper and the AAP's reaction to the conference. While was waiting, Dr. Cooper walked to the back of the room and took a seat about ten or fifteen feet away from me and waited. After a minute, Dr. Jerry Kartzinel, DAN doc and Jenny McCarthy's co-author, pulled a chair around to face Cooper, sat down and asked what he thought.

As you might imagine, I stayed put, closed the blog post that I had begun writing on my impressions of the conference, opened a clean document and began taking notes on the conversation.

About five minutes later, Stan Kurtz joined them and the three talked openly as the room cleared until it was just the four of us.

Cooper lead most of the conversation, he was on the enthusiastic side about what he had seen and heard. Not ecstatic, but I was encouraged an that he seemed much more into it than I would have expected. I would expect that he would have played it more cool and close to the vest. On the contrary, he seemed to be very honest and speaking freely from the heart.

Kartzinel and Kurtz did more listening than talking. They were both very gentile with him, asked good questions that got to the point of the matter with out being aggressive at all.

These are the notes I took as they talked:

My notes on a conversation overheard between Dr. Jerry Kartzinel DAN! doctor, Dr. Louis Cooper representing the American Academy of Pediatrics and Stan Kurtz, immediately following the DAN! Conference on April 6, 2008

All information is directly from Dr. Louis Z. Cooper unless otherwise noted.

Dr. Cooper came into this when Stan Kurtz called Cooper and Jenny was “raising hell”. It was time to “learn about DAN!… and now the current academy leadership and I are here at DAN!.”

Cooper noted with some surprise that “the doctors in the room are our doctors”, meaning AAP doctors. He expressed concern (for several years now) for the loss of trust from parents. He posed the question, “How do we move this forward and get rid of the appearance of combativeness?”

Dr. Cooper mentioned his Rubella and HIV experience a lot. He was quite rooted in those experiences and might/maybe using that model a little too much.

On his role in the 1964 Rubella epidemic:

He took lab from Belleview with him (to Cold Creek? I am not sure where.)

When he was working on HIV, Jim Olestine called him and said, “We’ve got these kids… we need a pediatrician to look at this.”

Cooper said, “That was the second crisis in my life as far as disease epidemic. This is the third.”

Kartzinel asked Cooper what his recommendations for approaching this should be.

Cooper said, “We need to quickly pull together and have a task force and committee.”

Diagnostic tests, definitions, clear treatment protocols were what worked for Rubella.

“This is a multi system disease, a multisystem syndrome. You guys know that. It also has ethical issues, mental health issues, GI issues, public health issues, epidemiological issues, financial issues, insurance issues…”

Cooper says he will recommend that the AAP make a task force for this.

"What I want to include that’s different is…". (could not hear the end of the sentence)

Drug companies have taken over health and there has been hope that health consumers would take that back. “This group represents the best of that”.

He wants to assemble a group place for exchange of ideas and beliefs that would include academy education programs.

“The tool kit is a great start, but that let’s take it to the next step.”

Kartzinel: “What is that step?” Jerry suggests that, ‘If the leaders in each field say, this is a problem, then it becomes real.’ “If the leaders in the GI field say, “we recognize this as a problem”, that would go so far. Then docs would be free to explore the GI track.”

In reference to the pediatrician who stood up in her community and was ostracized, investigated and left the AAP, and who broke down in tears with Stan, Cooper said that that sort of thing should not be happening. He spoke with compassion toward her.

Kartzinel mentioned the Boston ’06 GI meeting that AS sponsored. It was a very distinguished group. What AAP did was provide AS with (could not hear this part) … “But there was no AAP logo” and no official sanction.

In discussing how to get DAN! theory and practice accepted, Cooper said: “Rubella advancement was accepted because”:
1. Two years after diagnostic test
2. “I was at a prestigious institution”
3. “We had the backing of world leaders”

People who were movers and shakers elite and fashion and entertainment industries opened doors for them, and from them he learned a lot about making things happen.

The term “Developmental Disabilities” was coined by congress because of the efforts of a few powerful men. Harvey Firestone had a child with CP and President of ABC and Kennedy’s sister – they talked congress into the Developmental Disabilities Services Act.

“These were accidents of politics that have impact. HIV had a different story. You have a different story.”

“I’m concerned about immunization policy and how you protect immunization.”

“I chaired a CDC blue ribbon panel for Julie Gerberding. We wrote at report and that report got buried. And then Jenny and the Polings came along, God bless them, they have raised so much hell.”

“You are helping me and what I need to do. It has engaged me at a level that I would not have been engaged in.”

Kartzinel: “How do we move forward?”

Cooper: “You have a body of work that will provide receptors with the academy.”

Jerry then shared the problems they have had with submitting research and told about his rejection from one publication. He explained that they returned it with strange objections, “They said, ‘You had no control group.’ Of course I had no control group, it was a case series, it was written write there.”

Cooper: Did you send to pediatrics?

Kartzinel said no, that he didn’t even try.

Cooper: Send it to pediatrics.

They talked about Wakefield.

Cooper: He came out with speculation about splitting the vaccine with no data, and then his failure to disclose poisoned the well.

“My colleagues have a self righteousness.”

No one does controlled measures when they are making observations.

Kartzinel: Is a fully vaccinated group of children at age 4 as healthy as an unvaccinated group of 4 year olds?

(Up until this point in the conversation, Cooper has been outgoing and engaged. When Kartzinel ask this question, Cooper starts to draw into himself a bit.)

Kartzinel: You can’t start out doing a study of vaccinated v. unvaccinarted children because of the ethical problems, but you can do it in primates.

Jerry then tells him about the vaxed v. unvaxed primate study about to begin.

Cooper: “Is there any reason to give Hep B vaccine at birth”? (said as if he is seriously questioning why we are doing it.)

Kartzinel: University of Pittsburgh veterinarian, phase two will be done in Seattle.

Here Cooper raised some question which Kartzinel takes to mean that he is worried about cost, and said that the study is already fully funded and that people are already in place for the study.

Kartzinel didn’t outright invite him to be a part of the study, but left the door open for Cooper to say he wanted AAP involvement. Cooper didn’t bite and was trying to get away from the study idea. Obviously hit a nerve and was outside of his comfort zone.

Cooper: “The public trust has been my major preoccupation in the last few years”. (Cold Spring outlined the problem and made some recommendations?)

One was to work on communication strategies – for pediatricians not be demeaning. Another was a large investment in the safety of vaccines, “not trying to cover up”.

Stan: what do we do from here… what are the objectives?

Cooper: “I want to reflect on in it. I will try to make this attractive to a cross disciplinary task force.”

No single individual should represent the academy.

“That’s how I won rubella. I learned pediatrics.”

Stan: “Parents here have learned pediatrics.”

Louis Z Cooper and Stan Kurtz at DAN! 2008
Photo by Christine Zichittella-Heeren

Amazing to know this conversation took place, isn’t it?

At this point, hotel staff came in and began stacking the chairs so we all moved out of the ballroom. Kurtz, Kartzinel and Cooper walked off together and I hopped into a cab to the train station. On the way home I wrote this cautiously optimistic post: The American Academy of Pediatrics Shows Up in Autism Treatment

I wrote that “it was my understanding that AAP thought…” and never hinted at all that I had heard, because I didn’t want to carpet bomb the delicate process that was underway between AAP and DAN/Team Jenny. What I did do was offer AAP guidelines on how they could use this window of opportunity to end the madness and the war with parents, by eating a little crow, apologizing for the bad behavior and partnering with parents.

I noted that those parents were going to be showing up in DC in just two months, and if AAP was not on board by the time of the Green Our Vaccines rally, then their actions would be seen as empty gestures and public relations maneuvers; and that window would begin to slam shut pretty quickly.

And sadly, that is what happened. AAP did not show up, they merely sent TACA their ‘autism took kit’, which of course is a joke, because TACA is itself an ‘autism encyclopedia’ and should be writing AAP’s literature for them. They again treated us like the red headed step child, the divide between our community and AAP got wider and for all their money and power, AAP has continued to loose the “autism war” to a bunch of broke, stressed out, “Justamoms”, who daily, fearlessly, continue to speak truth to power.

But AAP still does not get that they are in the wrong, and are still under the delusion that if they just find someone with perkier boobs than Jenny McCarthy to become a vaccine cheerleader, then they can turn this thing around. Their tactics keep failing, yet they keep trying the same failing tactics over and over… “this time it’ll work”, they must be saying to each other in their offices… “..because this time we will have FOCUS GROUPS!”

They do not get it.

Rather than stopping the runaway train, they have just increased their speed as they head toward the edge of the cliff… unalarmed by the increasing numbers of parents and physicians quietly disembarking the crazy train.

There is none so blind as those that will not see.

So this brings up a lot of questions.

First off… if AAP was earnest, why would they send the man who invented the Rubella vaccine to present an evaluation on whether or not “his baby” was now giving children brain damage? It was clear when vaccine issues came up that Cooper became uncomfortable, but to his credit, he seemed genuinely impressed with biomed treatment and that he wanted to move forward on it. Did AAP expect him to dismiss all of DAN?

I am convinced that Cooper was earnest in what he said to Kurtz and Kartzinel. Did he make the recommendation to set up a task force to AAP? My BS meter had been pretty finely tuned at that point, and when he talked about treatment, he was sincere as far as I could tell. Unless he is one of those guys that really means it at the time, but really believes something else when he is with a crowd of another persuasion? So if he made these recommendations to the AAP, what happened? Did AAP blow them off? Did Tayloe and Alden put the kibosh on it?

What happened to, “Diagnostic tests, definitions, clear treatment protocols”?

Cooper said, “disease epidemic”. Why won’t AAP say it?

Cooper said that AAP wanted people weaning off Pharma and being good health consumers. And that we represented the best of that. So why are we being demonized? Did doctors want that, until they got it, and then discovered they didn’t like being challenged?

Didn’t AAP want to see the results of the primate study? Or did they use this as a heads up to bury it?

Here’s a biggie: WHAT WAS THE BLUE RIBBON PANEL THAT COOPER CHAIRED FOR GERBERDING, WHOSE RESULTS GOT BURIED? WHY DID HE NOT UNBURY THEM AND USE THEM?

Here is an easy one, “How do we move this forward and get rid of the appearance of combativeness?” I don’t know… stop being combative? Seems like its worth a try.

What were the other reports from the other docs who visited the conference?

And here is the most obvious one. If public trust is so important to the AAP, why are they lying to the public? Why are they crapping on their customers? What exactly do they think will happen if they treat parents with dismissals, insults and really bad PR?

Paul Robinson wrote this:

“Things were proceeding quite well when suddenly Stan had to leave DAN and then he joined G.R. Jenny's continual national attacks brought so much heat on Errol from the AAP's constituency that he had to back away from the whole process. G.R.'s belligerence ruined a very likely alliance and who suffers? the kids! Nice work G.R.!”

If AAP was working with DAN/ARI, then why didn't they just continue working with DAN/ARI? Who the hell cares what Jenny McCarthy was doing? If Stan ran naked through an AAP meeting and Jenny threatened to burn down Chicago just to spite the AAP, who the @#&$% cares!? Either these treatments heal our children or they don’t! Robinson’s argument seems to be that it is OK for physicians to throw children under a bus (and that phrase is only BARELY used figuratively here) if they are offended by a shock/comic actress and a guy who owns a preschool?

I don’t want to completely trash Robinson here, because he seems like he has come part of the way on this (although JB is right, IMHO he should have, and still should, throw down the gauntlet with his brother in law), but Robinson does not seem to understand that he is making the case for us on how corrupt the AAP is. If they don’t like how a few people act, they are allowed to commit malpractice on yours, mine and every child with autism in this country? And say that Generation Rescue made them do it!

And the AAP is shocked when parents are pissed at them? (It takes all my self control not to continue on in a stream of expletives at this point.)

Jerry Kartzinel could not be a nicer, more professional doctor, and he is very widely respected. If they didn’t like Stan any more, they couldn’t call Jerry? Or Lyn Redwood who was on the IACC? Or Jane Johnson at ARI? Or anyone one of the hundreds of really boring, zero drama, non-comic actresses that daily serve children with autism?

Exactly what is the mean age of an AAP member? 15?





“I’m a teenage girl. My BFF texted and said that Jenny said something mean about me. And that’s a problem. Now, I’m emotionally compromised and… whoopsies… I have just inflicted brain inflammation, neurological regression, GI damage and immune system failure on 300 children today. I’m all, OMG… Jenny is a slut”

Have we discovered a new defense for child abuse?

Judge: Billy Bob... you stand accused of hitting your child in with a base ball bat and breaking his arm. How do you plead?

Billy Bob: Not guilty by reason of Jenny McCarthy was mean to me. So I had to take out out on my boy. What else could I do?

Prosecutor: Oh, Your Honor, we had no idea that Ms. McCarthy had insulted Mr. Bob. We drop all charges.

Judge: Case dismissed with the apologies of the Court. Your are free to go Mr. Bob.

If Generation Rescue insults Pakistan, does that mean they are then allowed to nuke India? I need to get a read on just how far the McCarthy defense goes.

I will end the way I have been ending these posts for years. By asking AAP/CDC et. al. WHAT IS YOUR PLAN? How long are you going to drag this out? How far do vaccine rates have to drop, how bad does your reputation have to get? What is “bottom” for you? What is your plan here?

Wise pediatricians… rise up and take back your profession. If not you… then who? If not now, then when? How man thousands of sick children are you willing to watch fall just to keep your job or your seat at the table or your invite to the party?

You are the grown ups… take back the steering wheel.

We Finally Get a Vaxxed v. Unvaxxed Study, Vaccinated Primates Have Brain Changes Seen In Autism

We finally get a vaccinated v. unvaccinated study. No... no actual children yet, but infant rhesus macaque monkeys.



And no wonder main stream medicine doesn't want vaccine studies with an actual baseline (completely unvaccinated), because the results are dramatic.

The infant primates vaccinated according to the US vaccine schedule (equivalent to their size/development rate, pre 2002 shots WITH full doses of mercury) showed the same brain changes found in children with autism. The amygdala, the fear and anxiety center, did not mature properly in the vaccinated group, and those differences did not appear until AFTER the 12 month vaccines were given.

The abstract:

Influence of pediatric vaccines on amygdala growth and opioid
ligand binding in rhesus macaque infants: A pilot study

Acta Neurobiol Exp 2010, 70: 147–164
©2010 by Polish Neuroscience Society - PTBUN, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology

Laura Hewitson1,2,*, Brian J. Lopresti3, Carol Stott4, N. Scott Mason3 and Jaime Tomko1

1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA;
2Thoughtful House Center for Children, Austin, TX, USA; 3Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of
Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 4Independent Chartered Scientist, Cambridge, UK;
*Email: lch1@pitt.edu

This longitudinal, case-control pilot study examined amygdala growth in rhesus macaque infants receiving the complete US childhood vaccine schedule (1994-1999). Longitudinal structural and functional neuroimaging was undertaken to examine central effects of the vaccine regimen on the developing brain. Vaccine-exposed and saline-injected control infants underwent MRI and PET imaging at approximately 4 and 6 months of age, representing two specific timeframes within the vaccination schedule. Volumetric analyses showed that exposed animals did not undergo the maturational changes over time in amygdala volume that was observed in unexposed animals. After controlling for left amygdala volume, the binding of the opioid antagonist [11C]diprenorphine (DPN) in exposed animals remained relatively constant over time, compared with unexposed animals, in which a significant decrease in [11C]DPN binding occurred. These results suggest that maturational changes in amygdala volume and the binding capacity of [11C]DPN in the amygdala was significantly altered in infant macaques receiving the vaccine schedule. The macaque infant is a relevant animal model in which to investigate specific environmental exposures and structural/functional neuroimaging during neurodevelopment.

Key Words: rhesus macaques, Macaca mulatta, non-human primates, animal model, neuroimaging, PET, MRI, amygdala, opioids, ethyl mercury, thimerosal, neurotoxicity

The full paper: Hewitson et. al.

The editorial written by the editor of the journal, who says:

An alarming finding is reported by Hewitson and coworkers showing that, in infant monkeys that were immunized, the amygdala does not show the normal pattern of maturation but is hypertrophied. Although these are only preliminary data, given the well-known role of the amygdala in generation of fear and other negative emotions, they support the possibility that there is a link between early immunization and the etiology of autism.

Mark Blaxill and Dan Olmsted's discussion of the paper: New Study Shows Vaccines Cause Brain Changes Found in Autism

It should be noted that in the spring of 2008, The American Academy of Pediatrics was informed of this study. At the conclusion of the DAN conference in Cherry Hill, NJ in April of 2008, Dr. Jerry Kartzinel personally discussed it with Dr. Louis Cooper who was there representing the AAP. Cooper skirted the issue, acting as if he was concerned with the cost of the study, and Kartzinel replied that the study was fully funded and underway. Cooper was clearly not comfortable with the discussion of the study, and changed the subject. In their discussion of what Cooper had seen at the conference and how to proceed with some sort of partnership between ARI and AAP, Cooper had already stated to Kartzinel:

"I’m concerned about immunization policy and how you protect immunization."

To my knowledge, AAP never got back to anyone on their input into, or involvement with, this primate study. Note that the study was not published by Pediatrics, where it belongs, as it is AAP's journal and AAP is Pharma's main vaccine distributor. I am sure they want this buried as deep as is possible.

I am interested to see what AAP's public comment will be on this. If there is one.

AAP's (@ameracadpeds)twitter page can be found here: http://twitter.com/ameracadpeds

Feel free to call this post to their attention.

The American Academy of Pediatrics Thinks Docs Should Just Google Autism

From Wendy Fournier, head of the National Autism Association:

"Better diagnosing? I just got a call from a pediatrician’s office in Dallas looking for a toolkit to help them evaluate patients for autism. I told them they should call the AAP. They already had. The AAP told them they didn’t have any materials to send and the doc should Google autism for information. Seriously."

So Jenny McCarthy had it right when she got her autism education from "Google U."? Because apparently Googling autism is best practices according to AAP.

Seriously... they didn't even point the doc to the DSM?

I didn't think that it was possible for AAP to care less about our kids and the autism epidemic that they have helped create and sustain.

I was wrong.

Clearly I was thinking too highly of the American Academy of Pediatrics International Guild of Pediatricians.

David Tayloe and AAP Lawyers Take Umbridge At Jay Gordon's April Fools Satire

You have GOT to read this post on Hoyden About Town:

AAP & formula funding April Fool

As an April Fools Day satire, Dr. Jay Gordon, under his own name, put up a fake letter from David Tayloe The Unethical, head of the AAP, on a lactation message board apologizing for the AAP's sleazy ties to baby formula companies.

Everyone knew it was a joke and got the joke. It was a really good satire.

But AAP's lawyers are now crying defamation.

There seems to be no limits to Tayloe's myopic and inane endeavors.

I reiterate my call for all wise pediatricians to rise up and take back their profession. THROW THE BUM OUT!

CDC States that Chemical Exposures Will Be Shown to Cause Autism

I am a little speechless.

Apparently David Kirby has attained some sort of Jedi mastery and has gotten the Centers for Disease Control, The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Minnesota Department of Public Health snapping to attention to answer his questions. And all in one day!

One letter full of questions to each of them has elicited lengthy responses and more promised to come. This is in stark contrast to CDC's response to him in 2005. He wrote a big fat book about their malfeasance and their only response was to post a note on their web site that they were reading the book and would respond, and then just took down the notice a few months later with out ever responding.

Some sort of fire has been lit under some asses somewhere. Could it be in response to the rumor that Julie Gerberding is on her way out, and during her lame duckiness everyone is scrambling to make themselves look like they were doing the right thing all along so that if/when Secretary Daschel walks in the door on Jan 21 and asks to see the Poling files, their flesh will not burn under the white hot sunshine that starts to flood the place?

(Now you know what I dream about at night).

I will let you read for yourself, but the highlight of the work is this statement from CDC, in fact Julie Gerberding's officer itself, that Chemical Exposure will be shown to be one of the causes of autism through "today's research".

"While it is important to understand if autism is affecting any group of children disproportionately, it is also important to keep in mind that there are likely multiple causes of the autism spectrum of disorders. Most scientists agree that today's research will show that a person's genetic profile may make them more or less susceptible to ASDs as a result of any number of factors such as infections, the physical environment, chemical exposures, or psychosocial components."
-CDC Director’s Office of Enterprise Communication (OEC)

Oh... and they also mentioned that infections may cause autism as well.

Minnesota and the CDC Confer on Somali Autism Situation: CDC’s Office of the Director: Autism May Result from “Chemical Exposures”.

New AAP President Shows Us His Priorities, And It Is Not The Health of American Children

Last month David 'no such thing as vaccine injury' Tayloe, was sworn in as the President of the American Academy of Pediatrics. Naturally, on day one of his new job, he laid out his priorities for his tenure:

'Tayloe said that he intends to focus on 5 main areas this coming year -- "Medicaid payments, vaccine financing issues, fair payment of pediatricians, retail-based health clinics and funding medical students' education."

As Anne Dachel notes in her piece, there are no actual children's health issues on his list of priorities. What is important to Tayloe, is getting pediatricians paid.

His priority is money.

Since he has decided to shift the focus of the group from children's health to doctors liquidity, it only seems appropriate to change the name of the group from the American Academy of Pediatrics to the Pediatricians Guild or the American Union of Pediatricians, so that the public can know who they are really dealing with.  A group that puts the interests of pediatricians above the interests of children.

Or I would have recommended those names, before I read this article today:

Dubai to welcome US paediatric group

Dubai: A US-based advocacy and education group for paediatricians is setting up practice in Dubai, bringing regulation and education standards for child health to an area lacking uniform paediatric policies.

The Dubai chapter of the American Academy of Paediatrics (AAP), would be the first overseas chapter of the medical group, comprising mostly of paediatricians, dedicated to the well-being of children.

The organization sets out guidelines and recommendations for child care in the US, while also looking after the interests of child healthcare providers. These policies have now been adopted as standard policy in many countries.

Dr. David Tayloe Jr., President of AAP, told Gulf News Dubai was ripe for a chapter. "A number of countries are underdeveloped, poverty is an issue - and that is not the case here," he said.

He added the UAE's struggle with child health issues, such as obesity and diabetes - on par with developed countries, were issues the AAP usually dealt with. Dr Tayloe expects the chapter to work closely with UAE health authorities on child health policies...

Tayloe's first order of business is not only NOT the health of American children, it is not anything American or health related. His first order of business is to expand his group internationally, and to expand it to one of the richest nations in the world. He was not kidding about getting paid, now was he.

I have a friend who is a pediatrician. She makes house calls, she does not charge her low income patients a good part of the time, she spends one month out of the year digging wells and treating kids who live on an island in Indonesia with no doctor and a few time she has even babysat her poorest patients when their single mothers had job interviews and other opportunities to elevate them selves and their little families. Her patients can call her cell phone at three in the morning and they will get her. While she and I don't agree on how vaccines should be used, I have a great deal of affection for her, because it is clear from the way she lives her life that the well being of children is what is vital to her.

When I stand David Tayloe next to her, the contrast is stark. His are the actions of someone who cares about money, hers are not. Hers are the actions of someone who cares about the health of children, especially poor children, his are not.

If he was concerned about the health of children, his focus would be on fixing the HORRIBLE condition of children's health in this country, that has happened under the watch of his own group, instead of exporting and OBVIOUSLY broken system to the children of Dubai. If he was concerned about the plight of foreign children, he would go to Africa to confront AIDS, or Thailand to confront the child sex trade, or even Minneapolis to confront autism. Instead he goes to UAE where their most notable characteristic is an overabundance of cash.

This is not the move of a man who is working for the benefit of children, this is a man who is looking to expand his business internationally. Dubai is not a place for health missionaries, it is a place for expanding market share.

I thought I couldn't get more cynical about this man. Well he managed to make that happen after only one month in his position.

So now if we want to properly name the American Academy of Pediatrics, we have to drop "American" because Tayloe is taking it global; we have to drop Pediatrics, because it is not about the art of keeping children in good health, but getting docs and their reps paid while covering their collective asses; and after his nonsensical comments on The Today Show, well let's just say that referring to any group that follows his lead as an "Academy" is a poor choice.

International Guild of Pediatricians seems like a good fit.

To the people of UAE, please take a look at the health of American children.  Around 1% have autism; 17% have a developmental delay or disability;  diabetes, asthma and cancer are through the roof; and our country is consistently listed near the bottom of modern countries in terms of children's health.  Why in the world would you want to invite in and adopt the policies of the professional organization that ushered in this health disaster?  Smile politely at Tayloe, and move on.

And again... to our wise American Pediatricians who have watched silently as your professional organization decays into a corrupt, ass covering, buck making organization... rise up... take back your profession.

Paul Offit Acts As A Spokesman For The AAP

This is a pretty good local news report on alternate vaccine schedules featuring Dr. Bob Sears who advocates breaking up the MMR and giving no more than two shots at a time.

But the most interesting part of the piece was this statement:

"The I Team asks the American Academy of Pediatrics why they are opposed to different vaccine schedules. Infection disease specialist Dr. Paul Offit responds on its behalf, saying, "...by delaying those vaccines, all you're doing is increasing the period of time during which children are susceptible to vaccine preventable diseases with out any benefit."

Paul "100,000 vaccines at once are safe for babies" Offit is a vaccine millionaire. Having him speak on behalf of the AAP is analogous to having the president of Merck speak on behalf of the AAP. This is completely inappropriate.

Now I and others in our community have railed against the ethical breaches and the revolving door between Pharma, government, Pharma non-profits and professional medical associations, but this move demonstrates that there is no door any more.

Having a vaccine patent holder (again not disclosed in the story) represent the AAP shows complete boundarylessness. Offit can apparently represent CHOP, Merck, AAP, CDC/ACIP, and the best interest of children, and there are no conflicts of interest, because, as he claims, he is a good guy and only has the good of children in his heart.

He is an infectious disease specialist who writes a book on autism, even though he does not treat autism, that clears him, his associates and his profession of any culpability in the autism epidemic?

This is just crazy. Do we allow lawyers to represent both opposing litigants in a case? Do accused bank robbers get to be the judge or jury at their own trial?

If you went to the bank tomorrow to deposit your paycheck, and found that all your accounts were empty, and the bank responded to your astonished and urgent demands to know where all your money went with, "Good news sir! We have audited your accounts, and ourselves, and we have exonerated ourselves of any wrongdoing! We found that you never had any money in these accounts. So you can feel safe going ahead and depositing your next paycheck"... there is not a chance in the world that you would say, "Whew! Good thing that is straightened out. Here is my hard earned paycheck!".

Again... do they think that people are really this stupid? Do they really think this continued madness will work long term?

And again... I call out to you wise pediatricians out there who are members of the AAP. Rise up, take back your profession and bring ethics and integrity back to pediatrics.

Every Child By Two Wants to Take the Vaccine Debate to Oprah

Amy Pisani, director of Every Child By Two, (a vaccine advocacy non-profit funded by Pharma) has asked her supporters to write to the Oprah show and ask "that she dedicate a show to the science behind the question of whether vaccines cause autism".

We here at Adventures in Autism think that is a GREAT idea.

It is LONG past time to have an ACTUAL public debate between physicians, researchers and parent advocates that believe that there is a link and those that think there is not, an ACTUAL debate on the merits of the arguement. Have your opponent right there to respond, rather than just having AAP and CDC issue statements that they cannot be questioned on.

As a matter of fact Pamela Felice of The Educated Parent got in touch with Oprah earlier this year and asked for exactly that.

So if you are so inclined, I would encourage you to write to the Oprah show and let them know that you would like to see such a debate, not just Paul Offit and ECBT being given an hour to say whatever they want unchallenged, but an actual, equal time, debate.

Time and time again, those of us on this side of the debate have requested that CDC/AAP/those who deny the vaccine autism connection appear on TV alongside us to actually debate the issue, but apart from Larry King's program last spring with Jenny McCarthy, that request is pretty much universally turned down. And CDC would not even show up to sit next to AAP on Larry King. They just issued one of those damn statements to be read.

Is the topic of a vaccine/autism connection is of so little importance, and so little concern to the American public, that they can't spare one single person to show up and talk about it?

So we thank Ms. Pisani for being willing to participate in this public debate. Let Oprah know that this is the debate that you have been waiting to see!

Dear Oprah,

I am the mother of a child who regressed into autism following his 18 month vaccinations. I have been reading and writing about the vaccine/autism connection for four years and believe that there is more than sufficient evidence to prove a link.

More importantly, apparently so does the Department of Health and Human Services as they have been quietly paying children with vaccine induced autism from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund for more than 15 years now, and they list the symptoms of autism under vaccine induced 'acute encephalopathy' on the VICP's web site. In addition, the head of the CDC, Julie Gerberding, went on CNN this spring and said that vaccines trigger autism in a subset of the population.

It is been incredibly frustrating to see advocates of the vaccine autism connection, like Jenny McCarthy, appear on national programs like yours to discuss it, and hear that CDC/HHS ubiquitously refuses to appear along side them and have an actual debate and be questioned on their claims. Instead they issue a statement to be read at the end of the show that they can never be questioned on.

Do they think that this is not an important enough issue for them to send one person to speak on their behalf? If the science is so sound that vaccines don't cause autism, then why are they so afraid to show up and be questioned on it?

However, it is my understanding that Amy Pisani of Every Child By Two has contacted the show and asked for an episode on the autism/vaccine connection, and I am writing to support her in her request. What this country needs is OPEN debate on this issue between physicians/researchers and parents on both sides on what the science really says, what the science is silent on, and who is overstating their case.

I think that Ms. Pisani has envisioned an hour for her and her experts (ECBT is funded by pharmaceutical companies) to extol the virtues of vaccines and ignore the questions and points that parents like me and our physicians would make, but honestly, that is pretty much what has been going on in this country for the last decade.

So instead, I hope you will consider Pamela Felice's request to your show from last spring:

With autism awareness month approaching in April and in light of the recent court ruling regarding Hannah Polling's vaccine related autism, I thought it might be interesting for Oprah to host a debate on the topic of vaccine safety.

Some suggested guests might include; David Kirby, author of Evidence of Harm, Dr. Robert Sears, Author of The Vaccine Book , Dr. Boyd Haley, head of the Chemistry Dept at Kentucky State University, Dr. Jerry Kertzinel, the DAN! Dr. treating Jenny McCarthy's son and Barbbra Lowe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Ctr. on the Critic side.

Possible panelists who support the current vaccine program might include, Dr. Paul Offit, Dr. Julie Gerberding, Director of the CDC, a representative of the American
Academy of Pediatrics and/or a representative of Every Child By Two.

Personally, I would like to see Bernadine Healey expound on her understanding of the state of the research and why she is of the opinion that we can't no longer say that vaccines don't cause autism, or neurologist Jon Poling explain his understanding of the relationship between vaccine induced autism and undiagnosed mitochondrial disorders.

Thank you for your attention this vital issue.
Ginger Taylor, M.S.
AdventuresInAutism.com

GMA Confirms Jenkins Comments Were About Autism

Last week GMA ran a piece on vaccines and autism that included a quote by Rene Jenkins of the AAP.

 "Ninty Seven plus percent of children don't have these defects, so, when you look at what the risk and the benefits to children are, and, you really weigh the risks, then the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."

I wrote a piece heavily criticizing AAP for throwing away three percent of the population to serious vaccine injury.

Andrea Keller called GMA to see if they would release the rest of the interview.  They said their policy is not to release unused footage, but that the context of the conversation was Autism.

Daivd Kirby called AAP and asked for comment, and they said that Jenkins 'misspoke' and she was talking about minor vaccine reactions like "localized pain and swelling, and/or fever."

I spoke with the producer of the GMA piece this morning who interviewed Jenkins.  She reiterated that they don't release unused interviews, but she was nice enough to read me the question that was asked and Jenkins full response.

The discussion was about autism and not minor vaccine reactions.  The question was a version of 'can you rule out an association between vaccines and autism', and Jenkins answer was something to the effect of 'you can never rule out an association between anything and anything else, but we don't see an association.... but in the case of Hannah Poling...', (the interviewer had not mentioned Hannah).  And that lead into her quote, "Ninty Seven plus percent of children don't have these defects, so, when you look at what the risk and the benefits to children are, and, you really weigh the risks, then the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."

So ABC DID use the quote correctly and in context.

David Kirby reports:

"I was told [by AAP] that Dr. Jenkins misspoke when she referred to children with “defects.” What she was talking about is the subset of children who have adverse vaccine reactions such as localized pain and swelling, and/or fever."

Jenkins was NOT talking about minor reactions and autism was the subject Autism and Hanna Poling WAS Jenkins reference point.

If Jenkins was misspeaking then that was a pretty out there misstatement.  If someone was asked about about the percentage of people who get brain damage from boxing, how would one rationally include bloody noses in the answer?

I encouraged ABC to follow up on this and help us get a real statement from AAP (or CDC) on what they believe the percentage is for kids who are at risk serious vaccine reaction and autism.

Failure to Disclose Conflicts of Interest in "Vaccinate Your Baby" Kick Off

The American Academy of Pediatrics, Every Child By Two and Dr. Paul Offit, whom I have now decided to refer to as the Axis of Conflict of Interest, forgot to mention something during the press conference this morning, when they were encouraging everyone to "Vaccinate Your Baby".

They forgot to mention their conflicts of interest.

This after having the CBS Evening News expose their serial nondisclosure of their financial ties to vaccine makers only ten days ago!

From Jane Johnson director of DAN!, whose account of the event was on AOA this morning when I asked if the Axis disclosed their financial ties to vaccine makers:

"Not a peep.  Amanda referred, vaguely and defensively, to 'following the money trail,' but if you hadn't seen Sharyl Attkisson's CBS news piece you wouldn't have known what she was talking about.  She made an analogy to Boeing investigating airplane safety that was mystifying--I'm still trying to remember what she said and make sense of it.  There was no mention by anyone else that they make a penny off of anything relating to vaccines."

This the day after Paul Off it made a statement to Inside Autism claiming that he discloses his vaccine profits.

"Do we ever hide information? Of course not. I have declared my potential conflicts of interest regarding my relationships with Merck on the development of the Rotavirus vaccine ever since I was on the (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) starting in 1998. Every time I’ve written an article, whether it was for the New York Times or the New England Journal of Medicine, I’ve declared that, because I’m not ashamed of it. Quite frankly, I’m proud of it. I’m the co-inventor of a vaccine that’s currently in five developing countries and clearly has already made a difference in this country."

Apparently he was not proud enough of his patent this morning to mention it to the press covering the event.

Don't miss the part where Offit flip flops on CBS's story on him.

First Attkisson lied:

“Did (reporter Sharyl Attkisson) lie about whether or not we provided materials? Of course,” said Paul Offit"

But when pressed for specific errors, he only can object to the "tone" of the story.

"Asked whether any specific facts in the story were wrong, he said it was primarily the tone he objected to. But he did say that the hospital owns the patent, not him (though he received a share of royalties from it). Also, when Attkisson noted that he had been quoted as saying children could safely take up to 10,000 vaccines at once, “what I actually have said is at least 10,000. It’s probably closer to 100,000."

So I guess Attkisson did get one thing wrong... Offit's claims of vaccine safety are WAY crazier than she gave him credit for.

Posting the video again:

AAP Decides that Three Percent of Children are Throw Aways

Today Amanda Peet appeared on on GMA to show the world how little show knows about vaccines.  More on Amanda's statements later, but for the moment I want to focus on the story that ran before her interview and the current head of the AAP, Renee Jenkins', statement on vaccine safety and the charge that vaccines play a role in autism:

"Ninty Seven plus percent of children don't have these defects, so, when you look at what the risk and the benefits to children are, and, you really weigh the risks, then the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."

Ergo, for 3% of children, who have these "defects", the risks DO outweigh the benefits?  What are the "defects" and what is the outcome of vaccinating those with "defects"?  Who are those three percent?!

What are you doing to find out who those three percent are so you can keep from hurting them!

If you KNOW that three percent of vaccinated children will fall ill, why are you not moving hell itself to find out who those kids are?  AND WHY ARE ARE YOU OK WITH VACCINATING ALL NEWBORNS  BEFORE THEY EVEN LEAVE THE HOSPITAL KNOWING THREE PERCENT WILL BE INJURED!!!

Four years ago my son turned out to be the one in 33 kids that had such a "defect" and for him, the risks of vaccinating FAR outweighed the benefits.  If he had been unvaccinated and exposed to EVERY serious illness, I don't think his chances of death or life long disability would have been as high as three percent.

As I have mentioned, my father his little brother and their father both got polio at the height of the epidemic and my grandfather died as a result.  So my grandfather was 1 in 60,000 for loosing his life to the disease, my father and uncle were each 1 in 3000 for getting the disease (both recovered and went on to be decorated Naval Aviators), but my son in 1 in 33 for being damaged by a vaccine against such diseases.  (Note, I have been as generous as I can to polio rates, I used the highest rates of infections and death I could find, and then rounded up)

Why would any parent vaccinate their child knowing they have a 1 in 33 chance of that vaccine doing damage?!  And you can't tell them in advance if they are more likely to be part of that three percent or not!

Especially when AAP, who recommends they vaccinate anyway, treat that three percent like throw aways.  They don't try to protect them in advance, they don't treat or even acknowledge the injury once it has happened, and they teach doctors how to throw a child out of a practice if the parents won't vaccinate.

So, in effect, AAP saying to hell with those at the bottom of the bell curve.  The genetically weakest three percent.

Would it be wrong for me to suggest that Rene Jenkins is at risk for spending three percent of her afterlife in hell?

UPDATE:  Andrea Keller contacted the producer of the piece at ABC who said that they do not release unused footage so we don't get to hear the rest of what Jenkins said.

David Kirby contacted the AAP who said that the 3% she was referring to was minor reactions like fever, swelling at the injection site, etc.  If that is the case, then why did ABC use the quote in a piece about serious neurological disorders?

ABC needs to share the rest of that interview.  They have opened a can of worms and we need to know what exactly Jenkins was saying.

Another UPDATE:

I spoke with the producer of the GMA piece who interviewed Jenkins.  She reiterated that they don't release unused interviews, but she was nice enough to read me the question that was asked and Jenkins full response.

The discussion was about autism and not minor vaccine reactions.  The question was a version of 'can you rule out an association between vaccines and autism', and Jenkins answer was something to the effect of 'you can never rule out an association between anything and anything else, but we don't see an association.... but in the case of Hannah Poling...', (the interviewer had not mentioned Hannah).  And that lead into her quote, "Ninty Seven plus percent of children don't have these defects, so, when you look at what the risk and the benefits to children are, and, you really weigh the risks, then the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."

So ABC DID use the quote correctly and in context. 

David Kirby reports:

"I was told [by AAP] that Dr. Jenkins misspoke when she referred to children with “defects.” What she was talking about is the subset of children who have adverse vaccine reactions such as localized pain and swelling, and/or fever."

Jenkins was NOT talking about minor reactions and autism was the subject Autism and Hanna Poling WAS Jenkins reference point.

If Jenkins was misspeaking then that was a pretty out there misstatement.  If someone was asked about about the percentage of people who get brain damage from boxing, how would one rationally include bloody noses in the answer?

I encouraged ABC to follow up on this and help us get a real statement from AAP (or CDC) on what they believe the percentage is for kids who are at risk serious vaccine reaction and autism.

AAP, ECBT, Offit and Peet Hold A Press Conference to Tell You To Vaccinate

You have to admit, they have balls.

A week after having CBS hold the spot light on their conflict of interest and all the cash they get from vaccine manufacturers, AAP, Every Child By Two and Paul Offit will hold a press conference together, along with Amanda "Parasites" Peet, to tell everyone "The Facts About Vaccination®" and to kick off their "Vaccinate your Baby" campaign.

I guess they have decided that the best defense is a good offense, rather than simply responding to CBS and addressing their credibility problems.

I am reminded of Ken Lay's assertions that Enron was just dandy when the press started asking questions after Jeff Skilling took his money and ran.  August 24th 2001, two months before the stock hit the fan:

Business Week: "There has been some concern among investors that perhaps there is more to his resignation than meets the eye, perhaps accounting or other issues that have yet to come to light. Is there anything more?"

Ken Lay: "There are absolutely no problems that had anything to do with Jeff's departure. There are no accounting issues, no trading issues, no reserve issues, no previously unknown problem issues. The company is probably in the strongest and best shape that it has ever been in."

JB Handley has unearthed more info on Every Child By Two, turns out half their income is from Pharma.

Jenny McCarthy has sent a shout out to all available hands that can get into NYC tomorrow to picket and get our mesage out.

I will go ahead and repost the CBS piece from last week to remind us that what is on tap for tomorrow is merely a commercial brought to you by the good folks who sell vaccines:









And a blast from the past so that you may remember the bravado and seduction that was Enron, when in their last days they promised that they could protect you from the weather:






The lesson?  If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

If someone promises you that your child can be free of all diseases, down to the common flu, with no side effects... buyer beware.

UPDATE:

The press release mentions that the mother of a child with autism will be there.  Apparently it will be Ann Hotez whose husband Peter Hotez is a vaccine researcher and President of the Sabin Vaccine Institute.   So it looks like Amanda Peet will be the only one there not getting a check from Vaccine Inc.

CBS News on AAP, Every Child by Two and Paul Offit's Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Promotion

Finally.

AAP, Every Child by Two and Paul Offit have begun to get the public scrutiny from a mainstream medial outlet on the huge sums of money they get from pharmaceutical companies and how those conflicts of interest (both disclosed and undisclosed) should call into question their claims of 'independence' and their claims of vaccine safety.  These three sources are almost always portrayed in the media as reliable sources for vaccine safety information that are only working in the interests of children that parents should turn to for advice. Their Pharma ties are almost never mentioned.


Sharyl Attkisson was generous to these three vaccine promoters in her piece.  She didn't even mention Offit's scolding by congress for his serious ethics breaches and conflicts of interest during his time on the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.  Nor did she mention the absurd safety statements that the incoming head of the AAP, David Tayloe, has been making, as he did on Good Morning America.  Really there is enough here for hours of in depth news magazine coverage or even a book or two.

I hope that this story will lead to some more in depth coverage of the shenanigans that are going on in the relationships between Pharma, health authorities, professional organizations and the medical industry and get the media to examine with new eyes the evidence for the vaccine/autism connection.  I hope that parents will consider these huge cash payouts before taking the word of these people as gospel.

And I ESPECIALLY hope that wise pediatricians who do want to make balanced, informed vaccine recommendations for their patients will stop listening to these very questionable sources and begin to do their own research into vaccine safety, rather than taking the AAP's word.  We are never going to bring balance to the vaccine program or transparency to the vaccine/autism relationship until those who are making bank off shots stop calling the shots and influencing the process.

Someone email this to Amanda Peet before she does those ads for Every Child by Two.  She has already sullied her self by considering calling Paul Offit as "doing her research", and she needs to know who she is getting into bed with.

My Dear Husband's comments:  "That is the first interview Paul Offit has ever turned down."

Failure to Disclose Conflict of Interest in AAP/Pediatrics Statins for Children Recommendation

Earlier this month the AAP got their hinder handed to them by... well everyone... for recommending that children as young as eight years old be put on cholesterol lowering meds. From Pharmalot:

Quote Of The Day: ‘I’m Embarrassed For The AAP’

"The American Academy of Pediatric guidelines released this week recommend that some children as young as 8 years old be given cholesterol meds is, predictably, causing controversy. Why? A lack of evidence, for one thing. Nicolas Stettler, an assistant professor of pediatric epidemiology at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and a member of the AAP panel defends the decision by saying extrapolating data from adults using cholesterol meds makes sense. Not everyone agrees.

“To be frank, I’m embarrassed for the AAP today,” Lawrence Rosen of Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey, and vice chairman of an academy panel on traditional and alternative medicine (see photo), tells The New York Times. “Treatment with medications in the absence of any clear data? I hope they’re ready for the public backlash."

Today we have learned that the Pediatrics article in which the recommendation was made did not include the conflicts of interest of the writers. Shocker.

From the Center for Science in the Public Interest:

Pediatrics Fails to Disclose Industry Ties in Lipid Guide for Kids . . .

The American Academy of Pediatric’s new cholesterol guidelines for children did not reveal the industry ties of three of the six authors despite its policy requiring conflict of interest disclosure in its flagship journal. The recommendations, which appeared in the current issue of Pediatrics, caused a national uproar by recommending statin drugs for children as young as eight if suggested dietary interventions, including the use of foods fortified with fiber, stanols, and sterols, proved ineffective in lowering lipid levels in overweight children.

The lead author, Stephen R. Daniels, a professor of pediatrics at Cincinnati Children's Hospital, has served as a consultant to Abbott Labs and Merck. Abbott makes baby food, while Merck markets Mevacor, a statin. Co-author Nicolas Stettler, an assistant professor at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia , consults for numerous firms including Wyeth Nutritional and the Dannon Institute, a non-profit wholly funded by Dannon Yogurt.

Co-author Jatinder Bhatia, a professor at the Medical College of Georgia, has commercial ties to Mead Johnson, Ross Labs, Forest Laboratories, Dey Labs, and Inhibitex. Mead Johnson, a unit of Bristol-Myers Squibb, produces fortified foods for infants and young children.

So parents if your elementary school child has high cholesterol and is overweight, don't bother changing him to a diet of whole, unprocessed foods like organic fruits, veggies and naturally raised meat bought straight from farms that use healthy farming practices or taking him off the processed foods made for you by the good people at Dannon. Just put them statins made by Merck, who is totally sure that their Gardasil is not killing your daughters.

I can't believe that anyone (Amanda Peet) is questioning whether or not the medical industry is capable of "conspiracies". They are in the press practically every day!  All they have to do to is just not give you important information like, 'Oh yeah.. we are all getting paid by companies that will profit from our recommendations', or '...and when we say there is no proof that chelation will improve autism, by that we mean that we have never looked into it' and of course it would be helpful for parents decision making if they actually said, "What I mean by 'there is no convincing evidence that vaccines are a cause of autism, what I am really saying is that there is lots of evidence that vaccines cause autism, but we won't read it and therefore we don't allow ourselves to be 'convinced' by it'.

HT: Mary Webster

Round Up: Aborted Fetal Cells in Pentacel, Psychologists Conflict of Interest, Shame for AAP, Government CYA

• Newly-Approved Pentacel Vaccine Uses Aborted Fetal Cell Line MRC-5
• Senator Grassley Probes Psychiatrists Over Ties To Pharma
• Quote Of The Day: ‘I’m Embarrassed For The AAP’ over their policy that children as young as 8 years old be given statins, cholesterol meds.
• Hepatitis B Vaccine: Good for 'Newborn' Prostitutes and Drug Users, but Who Else?  The title of the article really says it all doesn't it?
• O Ring Safety v. Vaccine Safety, we saw what happened when they didn't properly test the O Rings, we are living with what happened when they didn't test the vaccines. ANOTHER NATIONAL TRAGEDY: SELF PROTECTION AT THE CDC Just another CYA story.
  

Julie Deardorff at the Chicago Tribune Annoys the AAP

Julie calls out the AAP for their recent tactics:

The AAP Gets Tough on Vaccine Dissenters

AAP gets mad at Julie for questioning their tactics:

The AAP Responds to 'Vaccine Dissenters'

Uppity Julie, going off and doing your own thinking. Can you just sit down, be a good girl and write what you are told to write like that nice Shankar Vedantam over at WaPo?

But seriously Julie. Thanks for using your noggin. - Ginger

AAP Decides that Insulting Parents Will Increase Vaccination Rates

The American Academy of Pediatrics now recommends (see update) that pediatricians tell parents who don't vaccinate their children that they:

Are "Selfish"
Are "Self-Centered"
Are "Complacent or Lazy"
Are often "Emotional" decision makers
Have "Unacceptable attitudes"


But they do not believe that insulting you like this is in any way coercing you to vaccinate your child.

Further, they kindly tell you that if you decide to only get one or two shots at a time, your child might die, but they are not trying to scare you into sticking to the full CDC schedule.

'Oh... and vaccinate or you are out of our practice and we won't recommend any other docs to you... but seriously... don't feel pressured.'

I have criticized the AAP in the past for making today's vaccine decisions based on the health threats that my father faced when he and his brother contracted polio, and lost their father to the disease, in the epidemic of the 1940's, rather than basing them on the modern heath threats my child, who contracted autism, faces a full sixty years later, in the current epidemic of developmental and immune disorders of the early 21st century.

But now they have topped themselves. In the letter that they are holding out to pediatricians as a model of what to tell their patients (from All Star Pediatrics), they are citing the small pox threat (which was eradicated 30 years ago) that Ben Franklin's son faced, and died from, in 1736!

They reiterate that they believe that neither vaccines nor thimerosal causes autism, or other any other developmental disabilities, and that "ALL children and young adults should receive ALL of the recommended vaccines according to the schedule published by the Centers for Disease Control." [emphasis mine]

This despite the multitude of research to the contrary, and in complete contradiction to the vaccine safety package inserts themselves that list contraindications and say that certain people should not receive certain vaccines.

All this is a part of the collaborative effort between the AAP and other organizations (yes of course Pharma and Paul Offit are among them, I can't believe you even asked) under their new "Childhood Immunization Support Program" or as they might as well call it, "We Know Everything and Parents Are Idiots Program".

Like pediatricians, and many of you reading this, I make my living by providing a service to people. I wonder how many of my clients and potential clients would still want to do business with me if I handed them a letter that in any way even remotely suggested that they were selfish, self-centered, complacent, lazy, emotional people with unacceptable attitudes if they didn't take my recommendations on which services of mine they should purchase? Any one of you wanna give it a try for a week in your business and see what happens?

By digging in and taking this increasingly absurd stance they are not just potentially damaging the vaccine program, they are putting at risk parents trust in their their statements about EVERYTHING. When you stand in front of your doc and hear him make the statement that vaccines have nothing to do with autism, then watch Hannah Poling get a million or so check from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund for her "autistic symptoms", then listen to the head of the CDC explain how vaccines cause autism in the presence of mitochondrial disorders on CNN, then go back and ask him about the whole thing and hear him reiterate that vaccines don't cause autism, but this time handing you a piece of paper that insults you, are you going to take his word about about anything else?

What do they plan on doing if the VCIP Omnibus Hearings find for the petitioners with Autism?

Do they understand that they are moving from shooting themselves in the foot to shooting themselves in an artery?

Two weeks ago Jim Carrey asked, "How stupid do you think we are?"

The AAP has answered, "You are so stupid that we can not only keep telling you obviously disprovable lies, but we can also insult you, and you will not only CONTINUE to entrust your children to us, you will pay us money to do it!"

Last April the AAP took the wise step of attending the DAN! conference. They said that they were impressed and thought we were on to something.

I wrote a piece on the AAP's chance to mend the widening rift between parents and pediatricians, and to regain the lost trust that was growing by leaps and bounds due to the obvious overstatements on vaccine safety that they were making to patients and their families.

I warned that they had a small window of opportunity to work to change course, work in good faith, and begin to make statements about the true risks of vaccination that abandons the now untenable assertion that vaccines don't cause autism or contribute to neurodevelopmental disorders. I warned that the window would only be open for a short time unless we saw real action, and would probably close around the time of the Green our Vaccines Rally if they didn't show up for us in some respect.

Well the AAP didn't show up for the rally and well... this certainly signals that the window is closed. They want it closed. And it looks like they may be locking it.


UPDATE:

An addendum to address critique that this post has received elsewhere.

-One person seems to have been concerned that I was personally insulted by the AAP and All Star Pediatrics. I want to assure that I am at peace on the matter. After having my son become sick due to AAP's bad policy, not much that they simply say about me, or people like me, hurts my feelings.

Insults given do not necessarily need to be received.

In my life, personally, I believe it is wise to work toward not being "insulted" by insults. Because really, either the person insulting you is right, and you need to do some self examination and change, or they are wrong, and (to be frank) who cares what they think about you.

In this case, I think that Dr. Dyer and his crew are wrong. Deciding not to vaccinate based on your best judgment is not selfish, self-centered, or a product of 'unacceptable attitudes'. (Come to think of it, how exactly does Dyer and company read minds to know what peoples motives are? Especially people he has never met, as the statement is a blanket one?) We are charged with making the best choices for our kids that we can given the information we have. Reducing that decision making process to the motives Dyer wants to believe are behind those decisions is just speculative bullying and communicates low regard for parents.

Especially parents who are earnestly struggling with the issue.

And it is not me being insulted that is the problem. It is the parents on the vaccine bubble. Treat their legitimate concerns with contempt and you only risk making complete vaccine refusal more widespread.

-Umbrage seems to have been taken at my use of the word "recommends" in the opening sentence, "The American Academy of Pediatrics now recommends that pediatricians tell parents who don't vaccinate their children that they..."

I am making the assumption, a reasonable one I think, that choosing only one medical practices vaccine policy letter to patients (one would think there are a thousand out there to choose from) and placing it prominently both on your newsletter and website whose purpose is to give guidance to pediatricians who are members of the AAP constitutes a 'recommendation'. If not a recommendation, it certainly represents a ringing endorsement.

For the sake of accuracy, I will contact the AAP on Monday and ask that they clarify if this was a 'recommendation' or an 'endorsement'.

But, if we can cut the crap and get real for a moment, it does not matter what semantics the AAP decides to play with this. They are holding it out for their members as an example to be followed and even if they DID run a disclaimer (which they didn't) that they don't recommended the letter at all, the message would still be loud and clear to peds.

'Feel free to insult your patients, use coercion to get them to fully vaccinate and dismiss them if they don't. We might 'have' to officially say don't do it, but really, you won't get any arguments from us! (wink)'

Kinda like the conversation I had with my seven year old yesterday, "Son, it is totally wrong to steal cars. Did I ever tell you about Jonsie "Zoom Zoom" Mcgillicutty? Man that guy was great at stealing cars. Here is what he did... now here is how you jimmy the lock to break in... and here is how you hot wire it... and once you have the car you..."

They can say all day they want their docs to 'work with' parents, but what they DO gives us the real message of what they are all about. And what they have DONE is tell peds how to treat patients with earnest vaccine concerns with contempt.

Addendum:

Links to the AAP Newsletter have disappeared, so I am copying the letter here in case the rest do as well:

"All Star Pediatrics’ Vaccine Policy Statement

Editor’s note: The following document is available for download on

the AAP Member Center at www.aap.org/securemoc/immunizations/

allstarpediatrics.doc, and may be adapted for use by practices.

We firmly believe in the effectiveness of vaccines to prevent serious

illness and to save lives.

We firmly believe in the safety of our vaccines.

We firmly believe that all children and young adults should receive

all of the recommended vaccines according to the schedule published

by the Centers for Disease Control and the American Academy

of Pediatrics.

We firmly believe, based on all available literature, evidence and

current studies, that vaccines do not cause autism or other developmental

disabilities. We firmly believe that thimerosal, a preservative

that has been in vaccines for decades and remains in some vaccines,

does not cause autism or other developmental disabilities.

We firmly believe that vaccinating children and young adults may

be the single most important health-promoting intervention we perform

as health care providers, and that you can perform as parents/

caregivers. The recommended vaccines and their schedule given

are the results of years and years of scientific study and data-gathering

on millions of children by thousands of our brightest scientists

and physicians.

These things being said, we recognize that there has always been

and will likely always be controversy surrounding vaccination. Indeed,

Benjamin Franklin, persuaded by his brother, was opposed to smallpox

vaccine until scientific data convinced him otherwise. Tragically,

he had delayed inoculating his favorite son Franky, who contracted

smallpox and died at the age of 4, leaving Ben with a lifetime

of guilt and remorse. Quoting Mr. Franklin’s autobiography:

In 1736, I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the

smallpox…I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given

it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of parents who omit

that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves

if a child died under it, my example showing that the regret may

be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen.

The vaccine campaign is truly a victim of its own success. It is

precisely because vaccines are so effective at preventing illness that

we are even discussing whether or not they should be given. Because

of vaccines, many of you have never seen a child with polio, tetanus,

whooping cough, bacterial meningitis or even chickenpox, or known

a friend or family member whose child died of one of these diseases.

Such success can make us complacent or even lazy about vaccinating.

But such an attitude, if it becomes widespread, can only lead to

tragic results.

Over the past several years, many people in Europe have chosen

not to vaccinate their children with the MMR vaccine af ter publication

of an unfounded suspicion (later re tracted) that the vaccine

caused autism. As a result of underimmunization, there have been

small outbreaks of measles and several deaths from complications of

measles in Europe over the past several years.

Furthermore, by not vaccinating your child you are taking selfish

advantage of thousands of others who do vaccinate their children,

which decreases the likelihood that your child will contract

one of these diseases. We feel such an attitude to be self-centered and

unacceptable.

We are making you aware of these facts not to scare you or coerce

you, but to emphasize the importance of vaccinating your child.

We recognize that the choice may be a very emotional one for some

parents. We will do everything we can to convince you that vaccinating

according to the schedule is the right thing to do. However,

should you have doubts, please discuss these with your health care

provider in advance of your visit. In some cases, we may alter the

schedule to accommodate parental concerns or reservations. Please

be advised, however, that delaying or “breaking up the vaccines”

to give one or two at a time over two or more visits goes against

expert recommendations, and can put your child at risk for serious

illness (or even death) and goes against our medical advice as

providers at All Star Pediatrics. Such additional visits will require

additional co-pays on your part. Furthermore, please realize that

you will be required to sign a “Refusal to Vaccinate” acknowledgement

in the event of lengthy delays.

Finally, if you should absolutely refuse to vaccinate your child

despite all our efforts, we will ask you to find another health care

provider who shares your views. We do not keep a list of such

providers, nor would we recommend any such physician. Please recognize

that by not vaccinating you are putting your child at unnecessary

risk for life-threatening illness and disability, and even death.

As medical professionals, we feel very strongly that vaccinating

children on schedule with currently available vaccines is absolutely

the right thing to do for all children and young adults. Thank you

for your time in reading this policy, and please feel free to discuss

any questions or concerns you may have about vaccines with any

one of us.

Sincerely,

Bradley J. Dyer, M.D.

Jennifer Melnychuk, M.D.

Robert C. Duncheskie, M.D."