David Kirby's Comments at the Vaccine Safety Meeting On Friday

Reports and transcripts from the NVAC meeting on Friday are trickling out. Age of Autism will be posting some later.

For now, here are David Kirby's comments. He brings to their attention important points about public trust and challenges Dr. Marie "Scientifically Illiterate Parents" McCormick that her rush to 'reassure' parents will be fruitless if real answers to all the questions parents have are not given. (From what I have heard about the meeting, Dr. McCormick still does not get that her 'just take my word for it, I am a doctor' means nothing any more.)

Kirby then goes on to put some of those questions on the record. My list of questions is a good deal longer, but even getting these addressed properly is a good start.

If they make no attempt to address them, then we know that this is just for show.

Hello, my name is David Kirby, I am an author and journalist, and my only conflict of interest is that I wrote a book about vaccines and autism. But I don’t plan on selling any books here today.

This has been a really extraordinary meeting, and I am very happy that everyone came together to discuss this important topic. I will probably be reporting on this in various venues, though I am not quite sure what my, what we call “take home message,” is going to be.

But I do want to say, and at the risk of overstatement: History will judge each and every one of you. A year from now, five years from now, ten years from now, people like me will look back on the history of vaccine safety in this country, and look at you folks, and say, “What did they do?”

Now, I am going to guess from your body language that you know that there is an issue here. We have a problem with the vaccine schedule. We don’t know what it is.

You have the power to listen to these community people, and make some decisions. And you are maybe going to make the decision that you are going to look into this situation, and change things.

Or, you are going to decide to protect the status quo. And if you do that, you do that with several risks.

One risk is that there really is a problem, perhaps, with the vaccine schedule. We know that Hannah Poling was injured by her vaccines, and now she has autism.

For all we know, some kid right now with mitochondrial dysfunction getting vaccinated with multiple vaccines may get seizures, may get fevers. We don’t know what the ultimate outcome for that child may be. Keep that in mind as you are revising the schedule – or not.

Now, you can choose to support the status quo, and pretend that we don’t have a problem with this. But if you think you have trust problems now, you can imagine how far away you are going to send parents from vaccination.

I am extremely pro-vaccine. But I live in Park Slope, Brooklyn, and I talk to young parents in my neighborhood all the time. These are not autism parents, these are not vaccine activists.

These are frightened, young Americans who are looking to you for guidance. And you know what? They don’t trust you. And I take no pleasure in saying that.

But you have a real problem on your hands, and as a journalist, I am here telling you: Yes, they want to vaccinate their kids. Yes, they want to believe in the medical establishment, and the government. But they don’t trust you, a good number of them. And I know that doesn’t sound nice to hear. But you have to take that into account.

A couple of other comments that were made here today - and as a journalist, I probably will mention this in my reporting – Dr. McCormick asked “How quickly can we get the information out to the public after these RCAs (Rapid Cycle Analysis of vaccine adverse events) are done?”

She wanted to know so that we can reassure the public. Well, that data is not always going to be reassuring. And I understand the desire to reassure. Everybody wants to reassure. It feels good to reassure people.

But when people have genuine concerns about vaccine safety, and all they get is reassurances when their questions are not being addressed directly, that doesn’t build trust, that doesn’t support transparency. Instead, that will drive parents away from vaccination in very dangerous droves. And nobody in this room wants to see that happen. We all want to protect the children of this country.

Now, I just have a few very quick questions about the vaccine schedule:

● We have been hearing a lot of talk from the CDC lately about flexibility. And my question is: If there is flexibility, and parents do have the right to talk to their doctor, will Hepatitis B vaccine still be basically mandatory at birth? Or will parents have a right to say, “No, I prefer to wait a while?”

● On that subject, what exactly is the rationale for giving Hepatitis B vaccine at birth? I have heard about four or five different rationales from different public health people. And without knowing the exact reason, it makes it very hard to decide whether it is a good idea or not.

● I would like to know, if MMR titers can be offered to parents, so that after the first set of vaccinations, if the child has developed immunity, is it necessary to revaccinate? Would a certificate be available for that child to prove that they have immunity, and don’t need to get revaccinated?

● On MMR, can we possibly separate out the M, M and the R, if parents want? Can we encourage industry to produce more monovalent vaccine? And can we work with parents who want to go that route?

● And again, can we encourage them to come back and get the other vaccines? No one wants children to go unprotected. But parents have reasons for asking these questions, and if they are not given the proper answers, they may just not vaccinate.

● Can we get testing on vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations in this country? To give us some idea if there really are any differences? Maybe there are no more adverse events in the vaccinated over the unvaccinated population. But if there are, that will at least give us some direction of things to go look at.

● What is being done to identify children with mitochondrial dysfunction, before vaccination – whether it is a nuclear DNA test, a mitochondrial DNA test, or even just a simple blood test for certain metabolic markers? If we are able to identify these children, I realize that it is very precarious. They should be first in line to be vaccinated, because they might be more at risk for regression due to febrile infections.

● But, should we create a separate schedule for those children? Yes, they may need to be vaccinated first, but that one-size schedule does not fit all, including the children with mitochondrial dysfunction.

● And finally, my last question, (let me look at my notes), when we talk about relative risk, can we also look at lifetime risks? Particularly for the flu vaccine, which some people get every year. And my understanding is that lifetime risks are actually magnified quite a bit when you talk about yearly vaccination.

These are not just rhetorical questions. I don’t expect an answer, but I did want these questions to be put on the record.

Thank you very much. I appreciate the chance to speak.

David Kirby is About To Hit CDC Again, With A Triple Punch This Time

David Kirby, the man who has dug up more on the vaccine scandal than anyone, has yet again given the heads up to everyone that the hits to the CDC's 'no link' claims just keep on commin'.

Now I can tell you that as you are reading this now, the CDC, the DOJ and HHS has already read this. They are on the internet autism lists, and they read this blog and the others who write about the vaccine autism link.

So to you, our health authorities, and especially to those of you visiting from in side the CDC building:

It is time to end the charade. Vaccines plunge children into autism. It is proven. The legal precedent has been set. The research is in. It is on paper. The word is out. "The Debate Is Over".

Because you insist on allowing this plainly untrue 'no link' statement insanity to continue unchallenged, you are destroying the vaccine program, and more importantly you are continuing decimate lives of children and their families world wide.

So, CDC employee who got into your line of work to IMPROVE people's health, and I am talking to the people doing the real work because this message clearly has been lost on your leadership, stop the hemorrhaging. Stop propping up these foolish leaders who think parents are so dumb that they will watch Hannah Poling win a million dollar judgment for her vaccine induced autism and then swallow CDC claims that there is no link between vaccines and autism.

Salvage the integrity of your profession by acting with integrity.

Blow the whistle.

Call the Atlanta Journal Constitution and start talking on the record.

Call Congressman Dan Burton and tell him you are ready to tell congress what is really going on inside the CDC and what they really know about vaccine injury.

In case you cannot recognize it below, what follows is the handwriting on the wall.

There is still time to address this responsibly before we start seeing large scale numbers of children with vaccine preventable illnesses, but that window is closing as parents are beginning to choose to completely abandon the vaccine program because they know their government is lying to them.

It is time to end this now.

Hello all

Just a little heads up to my friends – and especially, non-friends – that I am working on THREE new stories – all of them bombshells.

I expect the first one to break early this week – It involves new documents received through FOIA that are nothing short of shocking – and I am not shocked by much anymore. I hope the AJC will run it.

The second one might break by the end of the week, or early the following week. When it is announced, it will keep certain government folks up nights, worrying, if not speed-dialing their attorneys.

Finally, the third piece of news might be a few weeks away, but it is also rather nuclear. It has to do with the many more Hannah Poling carbon copies out there – and the impact this will have on future court cases, not to mention public opinion.

David Kirby: CDC Has Lost Control of the Autism Argument

CDC Has Lost Control of the Autism Argument
David Kirby
Huffington Post
April 3, 2007

On Wednesday, CNN's Larry King hosted Jenny McCarthy, myself, and several others to discuss the growing evidence of a link between childhood vaccines and autism. The CDC refused to send someone to appear on the show. Instead, on Thursday, the agency issued a statement meant to reassure the American public that all vaccines are safe for all kids.

But the CDC statement only served to show how out of touch the Administration of George (Really? Gas costs 4 dollars?) Bush really is.

A recent government decision to award nine-year-old Hannah Poling taxpayer dollars for her multiple vaccine-induced autism, has left parents anxious and alarmed, especially when their own kid has a pending appointment to receive 5 or more vaccines in one sitting (Hannah had 9 at once).

So the CDC now issues a written statement meant to soothe jittery parents, by saying that "the recommended vaccine schedule is flexible." Such decisions, the friendly announcement said, "are best made in consultation with the child's doctor, and parents shouldn't be reluctant to have such discussions."

Of course parents shouldn't be reluctant to have this discussion, but they are. I get nasty emails from some pediatricians, and the number-one complaint I get from them is that, because of people like me, they must now "waste" (their word, not mine) precious billing hours talking to layperson parents about vaccine science.

These doctors' hostility is palpable, (and they hopefully represent a minority of pediatricians). And while I cannot imagine ever consulting anyone of such temperament for medical care in the first place, many parents are simply cowed into silence. For them, the CDC suggestion to ask vaccine safety questions at a well-baby visit is laughable, if not risible.

Interestingly, after years of being told that autism is purely genetic, and not some environmentally triggered epidemic, parents now learn that the CDC has begun a massive investigation, called the SEED study, to look at "genetic, environmental and hormonal factors, as well as selected mercury exposures," that cause autism

This is encouraging news, though one can assume that thimerosal is not among those mercury exposures that have been "selected" for study.

But the real problem here is the track record and credibility of the CDC to continue conducting any vaccine safety studies at all. This is not helped when the CDC continues to issue statements such as:

"Top scientists -- with the open-mindedness that characterizes good science -- planned and conducted the highest-quality, large-scale (vaccine safety) studies. No links to autism have been found."

Now, I have no doubt that CDC officials believe these truly were the "highest quality" studies available. But but many scientists, including some who authored the studies, disagree. They say many of the studies were flawed and/or inconclusive.

THE US STUDY

The flagship study was a four-year analysis by the CDC of a large US database called the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). This study, published in the journal Pediatrics, was authored by Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, a visiting researcher from Belgium.

The final, published version of the study found no evidence of a link between thimerosal in vaccines and autism, though earlier analyses - discovered through the Freedom of Information Act - showed remarkable correlations.

At the time, the CDC called it one of the highest quality studies of its kind ever conducted.

But in 2006, Congress asked the National Institutes of Health to convene a special panel to investigate the quality and usefulness of the VSD database - and by extension, the Verstraeten study itself - as a means of investigating such a link.

The panel determined that there were "several serious problems" with the database and the study, including many "weaknesses" and "limitations" that could render certain analyses "uninformative and potentially misleading. "

The NIH Panel was "concerned" about how autism diagnoses were made and recorded by HMOs who take part in the database, and questioned if the HMOs had adequate services for autism families, who might seek care elsewhere. Panelists said these and other problems likely led to an "under-ascertainment" of autism cases in the HMOs.

The panel also cited many problems with the Verstraeten study design. It warned that a "large proportion, around 25%, of births were excluded from the analysis." Panelists wrote that these same children "may represent a susceptible population whose removal from the analysis might unintentionally reduce the ability to detect an effect of thimerosal."

Other "serious problems" were the facts that there was no consideration of pre-natal thimerosal exposures from immune globulin, or "other vaccinations given during pregnancy," (i.e., flu shot), and no accounting for, "the cumulative exposure to organic mercurials through diet or other environmental sources. "

The NIH panel determined that these problems, "reduce the usefulness" of the VSD to prove or disprove a link between thimerosal and autism.

Shortly thereafter, panel chair Dr. Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Professor of Public Health at U.C. Davis School of Medicine, told Dan Olmsted (formerly) of UPI that the VSD study "was not the last word... things need to be looked at again, perhaps with different methodology."

And Verstraeten himself said the study proved nothing. In a letter to Pediatrics, he wrote that, "We found no evidence against an association, as a negative study would. On the contrary, additional study is recommended, which is the conclusion to which a neutral study must come."

THE DENMARK STUDIES

Two studies conducted in Denmark are always referred to by the CDC and others when trying to defend the injection of organic mercury into the systems of newborn babies and infants. These are among the best of the "highest quality" studies, we are told, that show no link between vaccines and autism.

The main Denmark study reported that the removal of mercury from vaccines was followed by a sharp increase in reported autism cases. But the authors admitted that much of this increase was possibly due to a major change in the way Denmark counted its autism cases during the study period (switching from inpatient diagnosed cases only, or about 13% of the total, to cases diagnosed in inpatient AND outpatient settings, or 100% of the total).

The CDC touts the high quality of the study, even though the authors cautioned in the study itself that "methodological limitations" - such as the exponential expansion of patients (due to counting both inpatient AND outpatient cases) -- "may have spuriously increased the apparent number of autism cases."

Adding insult to understatement, Dr. Hertz-Piccotto said that, as bad as the VSD study was, the Denmark papers were even worse. "Some studies are stronger than others," she said. "The Verstraeten study was an improvement on other studies, including the two in Denmark, both of which had serious weaknesses in their designs."

THE IOM REPORTS

In 2004, a committee of the Institute of Medicine reviewed the US, Denmark and a few other similar studies (whose methodology have been questioned in other venues including my book, "Evidence of Harm").

The IOM committee relied almost exclusively on large population studies (epidemiology), and virtually ignored the growing body of evidence emerging from clinical, animal and test tube studies from the fields of toxicology, immunology and other scientific disciplines.

(Interestingly, the US Federal Court system has determined that epidemiology alone is "insufficient" when trying to disprove a link between exposures and outcomes in an individual).

The committee concluded that the evidence did not support a vaccine link to autism. But it added that, "We cannot rule out, based on the epidemiology, the possibility that vaccines contribute to autism in some small subset," something that parents have been saying all along.

Finally, in 2005, another panel of the IOM criticized the CDC for a "lack of transparency" in its vaccine safety programs, particularly the VSD database. The IOM panel report noted that a CDC official had testified that some of the original datasets in the Verstraeten study, "had not been archived in a standard manner," and, "may not allow all the re-analyses that one might want to do, or in fact may not be available at all."

This same IOM committee, citing the Federal Information Quality Act, which makes it a felony to intentionally lose or destroy any publicly funded records, recommended that vaccine officials at the CDC's National Immunization Program "seek legal advice."

And despite all of this (and more) the CDC wants us to believe that these studies represent the "highest quality" analyses available.

The leadership of CDC Director Julie Gerberding has been replete with crushing morale depletion, embarrassing media coverage, congressional investigations into Katrina trailers, and a general sense of an agency in decline.

Sadly, the words "CDC" and "highest quality" can rarely be used in the same sentence anymore.

Jenny McCarthy and David Kirby on Larry King

Tonight was another hallmark in the national vaccine/autism debate.

Never before has there been REAL debate.

A pissed off autism mom, a smart investigative journalist asking the hard question, an experienced pediatrician frustrated with his own profession, all face to face with hard core denial doctors like Harvey Karp and my pal David Tayloe who does not believe that vaccine injury even exists, and does not know how to read vaccine safety package inserts.

I have never seen David Kirby, usually the mellow, middle ground man, calling for more study, and 'let's see where things go', be so passionate. "The Debate Is Over"!

The very mature and measured Jon Poling could only shake his head at the AAP doctors misinformation.

Jay Gordon was clearly working hard to hold back his annoyance with his own AAP's party line and their lack of ability to reason beyond "vaccines good... make public health good...", to the varying health needs of individual children.

I have to guess that the Kirton's were booked on the show to make the 'genetics' point, and I have to wonder if they were disappointed when John Kirton said the word, "vaccines".

And then there is Jenny... shouting "Bullshit"!

And then there is my husband and me, jumping up and down in our living room!!!!

NOW the main event has started!

I want 10 more shows like this, but with fewer guest and with Larry asking questions that progress the debate a little better. ("Why do you keep having children?" Seriously Larry?)

Let me say outright, I cannot imagine for the life of me why the AAP has chosen David Tayloe as their new chief. He is a PR nightmare for them! In the current climate, when every day more and more parents quit vaccinating all together, choosing a dinosaur like Tayloe who is stuck in the 1950's polio epidemic, and who does not seem to notice that the threats to children's health have dramatically changed in the last half century, is just plain stupid.

I am going to say something here... and it will be the most harsh thing I have ever said about anyone on this blog before, but it needs to be said.

Dr. Tayloe said that in his practice that has seen 100,000 patients that he has never referred one person to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund. If he has never seen a serious vaccine injury, it is not because he has not come across one, it is because he has his head up his ass.

Tayloe is just dangerous.

This man has GOT to be removed from the position that he has been elected to before he takes office. I would take Karp in a second over this guy. Karp was wrong, but he wasn't crazy person saying insane things with a smile wrong.

Jay Gordon gives me hope that there are doctors out their who recognize that we have gone to far with vaccines and it is time to re-examine.

RISE UP WISE AND COMPETENT PEDIATRICIANS EVERYWHERE! RISE UP! Who do you want to take recommendations from, Jay Gordon, or David "The Dinosaur" Tayloe?

I know I am biased, way biased, but our guys won and the other guys just looked foolish.

Question of the evening goes to David Kirby who exposed the AAP docs for the close minded relics that they are:

David Kirby: "There is a bill in congress to study vaccinated v. unvaccinated populations in this country. Doctor would you support that legislation?"

David Tayloe: "Please allow me to talk around the answer by saying something politically correct but not going on record for supporting the legislation."

Jenny McCarthy: "Will you support the vaccinated v. unvaccinated study?"

David Tayloe: "We support lots of things, like flowers, and lemon drops and My Little Pony."

Yeah... they don't support that legislation.

The quote of the evening goes to David Tayloe who, when Jenny pointed to the chart of 36 vaccines and asked, "Do we really need ALL of these?", nodded his head and replied, and this is really great... listen to this:

"They're recommended!"

Well Doctor Tayloe... if 12 guys in Atlanta who tell mom's with good questions like, "Why don't you make a recommendation for pregnant women to receive only thimerosal free flu shots?", to sit down and stop asking questions in public vaccine policy meetings designed to let the public ask questions, then dammit... that is good enough for me! Bring on the vaccines!

36 Vaccines! It's Recommended!



(Check this space for more footage when I get around to it.)

[UPDATE: OMG! Turns out the Vaccine Injury Compensation Court exists in part due to the 3.5 million dollar malpractice suit that Dr. David Tayloe lost in 1985 when a child he gave the DPT shot to magically got permanent brain injury!! That Asshole just got on TV and implied that he had never SEEN a vaccine injury in his practice!!!

Here is what he said:

Tayloe: "I have yet to see a patient who I sent to the compensation program because I thought they had a permanent injury. Extremely rare."

He lost 3.5 million dollar lawsuit, apparently one of the biggest awards ever, the year before the vaccine court was created!

And then BRAGGS about not sending any other children to the injury program?!

And having a court force him for giving a shot to a kid who could not handle it was still not enough to teach him the lesson that not all vaccines are safe for every child, because he went on the Today show and said that ALL VACCINES ARE SAFE FOR EVERY CHILD!!!!

AAP you have lost your collective mind putting this man in charge!? Are you kidding me!!!! I think I am gonna have an aneurysm.

[More UPDATES: Gotten more information that this may have been Tayloe's father David Tayloe Sr. Which would make David Tayloe Jr. a little less evil, but sill evil. I am trying to confirm details but I am traveling today and only have like 10 more minutes of wifi.]

[YET MORE UPDATES: Thanks for your patience as I got reconnected after a day of travel. I got an email from someone Tayloe went to med school with that says this was his father. In thinking about where to adjust my judgmentalism meter, I think that I will retract my declaration that he is an asshole, and say that he is a dangerous, foolish man.

A jury told his own father that he was more than three million dollars worth of wrong for administering a shot that plunged a boy into brain damage, and he learned nothing from it, continuing to claim that 'all vaccines are safe for every child', and that there is no such thing as serious vaccine injury. (or maybe, but barely ever, as his statement last week was that there was not "any relationship between vaccines and permanent injury", and this week he has downgraded his stance to "extremely rare".) Even though it was not directly his, he should still know better because of his father's legacy.]

Info on David Tayloe's Malpractice Suit [HT: Kevin Barry]:

Medical Malpractice/Negligent Administration of the DPT Vaccine
$3,500,000 Jury Verdict, May 1, 1985


The Minor Plaintiff, Bernard Forehand, Jr., was seriously injured when the Defendant Pediatrician's Nurse failed to communicate to the Defendant Pediatrician, David Tayloe that the Minor Plaintiff had an adverse reaction to the first vaccination shot. The administration of the second shot left the Minor Plaintiff with a significant brain injury. The Defendant Pediatrician, David Tayloe, who at that time was the President of the National Pediatric Association, strenuously fought this case all the way to a jury verdict. On May 1, 1985, the jury handed down what was at that time the largest jury verdict in a medical malpractice case in the State of North Carolina, in the sum of 3.5 million dollars.

***********

Following is a newsletter article that I (Barbara Loe Fisher) wrote in the summer of 1985 on the Forehand lawsuit:

"In May, a North Carolina jury in the Wilmington U.S. District Court decided that David Tayloe, M.D. and T. Frank Stallings, M.D., of Washington Pediatrics, P.A., were guilty of medical malpractice in the pertussis vaccine-induced brain damage suffered by Beau Forehand, Jr. The child was awarded $3.5 million in compensatory damages by the jury but the judge overturned the verdict and it was appealed.

It was the highest medical malpractice award in North Carolina history. Beau was represented by attorneys Anne Werum Lambright and Richard Polling of the Charleston West Virginia firm of Preiser and Wilson. The defense claimed that the two doctors were following the vaccination guidelines contained in the American Academy of Pediatrics 1970's "Red Book" which was in effect at the time Beau Forehand received his first DPT shot in January of 1974.

Beau reacted to his first short with a 103 degree fever and inconsolable crying, which his mother reported to the doctors. Six weeks later, Beau had a febrile seizure and was hospitalized. However, despite the reaction to his first shot and the subsequent seizure, he was given another DPT shot even though he had a cold and a slight fever at the time of the second vaccination. Within three hours of his second DPT shot he went into a major seizure and has had an uncontrolled seizure disorder ever since. He was left with severe mental retardation.

The 1970 RedBook did not list inconsolable crying, a fever of 103 degrees, a history of convulsions or a cold at the time of vaccination as contraindications to the pertussis vaccine. Attorney Lambright stated that the jury's verdict in the case sent a clear message to physicians that "The American Academy of Pediatrics Red Book should not be used as the sole guide to contraindications or adverse reactions to vaccines. The basic premise in the Forehand case is that doctors have to use their common sense, medical training, skill, knowledge and experience to make appropriate determinations for vaccination on a case by case basis."

If the jury's verdict is upheld on appeal, the Forehand case will be an important precedent-setting case. It would mean that individual physicians are responsible for obtaining knowledge and making decisions about the advisability of vaccination in individual cases which go beyond automatic reliance on the recommendations listed by the AAP or the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Examples of additional information available to physicians are the vaccine manufacturer's product inserts included in vaccine packages. which historically have listed more contraindications than those listed by either the AAP or ACIP, and the more than 40 years of scientific literature on the subject."

In a Winter 1986 newsletter, I wrote:

"On September 18, 1986, Forehand V. Tayloe and Stallings was settled for $1.1 million in North Carolina. A North Carolina jury had concluded that two pediatricians were negligent in the pertussis vaccine induced brain damage of Beau Forehand, Jr. and had awarded the boy and his parents $3.3 million. The judge overturned the verdict and the case was appealed on behalf of Beau by the law firm of Preiser and Wilson, of Charleston, West Virginia, before the Sept. 18 settlement ended the lawsuit."

BRIEF VACCINE INJURY COMPENSATION SYSTEM (VICP) BACKGROUND:

The Forehand settlement was one of a series of DPT vaccine malpractice cases against negligent physicians, as well as a few high profile punitive damage awards for DPT vaccine brain damage that went against vaccine manufacturers between 1981-1985 which persuaded Congress that both drug companies making vaccines and doctors giving vaccines should be protected from liability for vaccine injuries and deaths. The vaccine manufacturers threatened to leave the country with no vaccine if they did not get protection. Doctors threatened to stop giving vaccines if they weren't protected. Both doctors and the companies wanted a federal compensation system that banned all vaccine injury lawsuits for all time. We fought for protection of the right to access the civil justice system to sue companies or doctors if the child was turned down for federal compensation or offered too little or if it could be proved the vaccine manufacturer engaged in criminal fraud or gross negligence in the manufacture the vaccine or the doctor did the same in administering the vaccine.

I hope this is helpful.

Best,
Barbara Loe Fisher

Julie Gerberding Admits on CNN that Vaccines can Trigger Autism

This weekend Julie Gerberding, the head of the CDC, appeared on Dr. Sanjay Gupta's show, House Call, and explained that vaccines can trigger autism in a vulnerable subset of children. This is the claim that parents like me have been making since at least the 80's, and have been dismissed and even mocked for making it.

But no one in the main stream media seems to have noticed. Not even CNN. Not even Dr. Gupta who was sitting right in front of her.

[Video updated 4/2/08]





Apparently, if you dress in soft pink and speak in dulcet, reassuring tones, you can indict yourself in the biggest international health crisis of the times and not even your interviewer will notice.

It is time for Dr. Gerberding to be forced to give cogent answers to the difficult questions that it is her responsibility to truthfully address. From all I have seen, it will take an act of Congress to do it.

I am joining Hannah Poling's parents in calling for the immediate release of the Poling case documents, and calling for congressional hearings into the autism cases in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

This obfuscation and double speak must end.


*For more on this interview, read these:

An Invitation to Julie Gerberding to Help Her Find the Missing Information on Autism

Wait! Did Julie Gerberding Just Admit that Vaccines Trigger Autism!?

Wait! Did Julie Gerberding Just Admit that Vaccines Trigger Autism!?

I think that she did!

She could not have talked around it or downplayed it more... but she said it.

I only saw the video on CNN's web site, but Kirby found the transcript of the whole show.

I am gonna dig through the transcript and get back to you.. in the mean time:

UPDATE: She did. Let's go to the tape.

CNN, CDC, and Some Truth
Posted March 29, 2008 | 02:20 PM (EST)
Huffington Post

It was a big morning in Atlanta today. In case you missed CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding this morning on CNN's "House Call with Dr Sanjay Gupta," it was rather interesting:

If I have read the transcript below correctly, Dr. Gerberding is saying that, yes, in some mitochondrial disorder cases, vaccines can be the trigger that causes "symptoms that have characteristics of autism." So, Dr. Gerberding admits a link -- but then denies that it is a link to autism.

The only problem with this line of argument is that I know for a fact that Hannah, as well as the kids in the new unpublished mito study were, as one doctor told me, "plucked right from autism clinics. They all have autism, there is no question of that."

JULIE GERBERDING, DR., CDC DIRECTOR: "Well, you know, I don't have all the facts because I still haven't been able to review the case files myself. But my understanding is that the child has a -- what we think is a rare mitochondrial disorder. And children that have this disease, anything that stresses them creates a situation where their cells just can't make enough energy to keep their brains functioning normally. Now, we all know that vaccines can occasionally cause fevers in kids. So if a child was immunized, got a fever, had other complications from the vaccines. And if you're predisposed with the mitochondrial disorder, it can certainly set off some damage. Some of the symptoms can be symptoms that have characteristics of autism."

So, complications from vaccines can set off damage that causes characteristics of autism (just not autism itself). I don't believe I have ever heard that from a CDC official before, though that doesn't mean they never said it.

At the same time, this language does not quite jive with what Director Gerberding told reporters just over three weeks ago on a conference call:

"Let me be very clear that (the) government has made absolutely no statement about indicating that vaccines are a cause of autism. That is a complete mischaracterization of the findings of the case, and a complete mischaracterization of any of the science that we have at our disposal today. So I think we need to set the record straight on that."

I guess it all depends on what the meaning of the word, "cause," is.

The CNN interview this morning with Sanjay Gupta continues:

GUPTA: Are we ready to say right now that childhood vaccines do not cause autism?

GERBERDING: We can say absolutely for sure that we don't really understand the causes of autism. We've got a long way to go before we get to the bottom of this.

GUPTA: And you are comfortable saying that with everything we know?

GERBERDING: I'll never be comfortable with everything we know. I mean, I think we have to have an open mind about this. We know that there is very little chance that something related to a vaccine is going to cause a serious problem for a child.

Amid the usual "vaccines save lives" answer to questioning if it's possible that childhood vaccines could cause autism, there is some new and interesting rhetoric in the CDC Director's statements:

To wit:

"Set off some damage"

"Have an open mind"

"We don't know"

"Get to the bottom" of vaccines and autism.

"Ill never be comfortable"

"Very little chance" - instead of "there is no evidence"

"Something related to A vaccine" - (as opposed to several vaccines at once)

This seems like news to me, but I could be wrong. At the least, I think it is interesting, and worthy of follow up, should anyone in the media be able to talk with Dr. Gerberding. For some reason, she doesn't return my calls.

The Study That FINALLY Got The CDC to Pay Attention

Last night we learned from David Kirby that the CDC is actually waking up to the vaccine/autism connection because of the recent revelation of previously missing middle man Mr. Mitochondria.

Here is the study that was the slap in the fact that has been so badly needed for so long:

Epidemiology of autism spectrum disorder in Portugal: prevalence, clinical characterization, and medical conditions

Guiomar Oliveira MD PhD, Centro de Desenvolvimento da Criança, Hospital Pediátrico de Coimbra; Assunção Ataíde BSc, Direcção Regional de Educação do Centro Coimbra;
Carla Marques MSc, Centro de Desenvolvimento da Criança, Hospital Pediátrico de Coimbra; Teresa S Miguel BSc, Direcção Regional de Educação do Centro, Coimbra;
Ana Margarida Coutinho BSc, Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência, Oeiras; Luísa Mota-Vieira PhD, Unidade de Genética e Patologia moleculares, Hospital do Divino Espírito Santo, Ponta Delgada, Açores; Esmeralda Gonçalves PhD; Nazaré Mendes Lopes PhD, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade de Coimbra; Vitor Rodrigues MD PhD; Henrique Carmona da Mota MD PhD, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra; Astrid Moura Vicente PhD, Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência, Oeiras, Portugal.
*Correspondence to first author at Hospital Pediátrico de Coimbra, Av Bissaya Barreto, 3000-076 Coimbra, Portugal. E-mail: guiomar@hpc.chc.min-saude.pt

The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) and identify its clinical characterization, and medical conditions in a paediatric population in Portugal. A school survey was conducted in elementary schools, targeting 332 808 school-aged children in the mainland and 10 910 in the Azores islands. Referred children were directly assessed using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn), the Autism Diagnostic Interview–Revised, and the Childhood Autism Rating Scale. Clinical history and a laboratory investigation was performed. In parallel, a systematic multi-source search of children known to have autism was carried out in a restricted region. The global prevalence of ASD per 10 000 was 9.2 in mainland, and 15.6 in the Azores, with intriguing regional differences. A diversity of associated medical conditions was documented in 20%, with an unexpectedly high rate of mitochondrial respiratory chain disorders.

David Kirby Drops Another Bomb: Autism Risk May Be 1 in 50

Of the thirty kids with regressive autism that were screened, 100% of them had the same biochemical imbalances as Hannah Poling.

All 30.

100%

Hannah is in no way, rare.

"The biochemistry of 30 children was studied intensively, and in each case, the results showed the same abnormalities as those found in Hannah Poling, participants said. Each child had moderate elevations or imbalances in the exact same amino acids and liver enzymes as Hannah Poling."

And... (I can't even believe that I am typing these words) on the conference call that Kirby is writing about the CDC was discussing adjusting the vaccine schedule to make it safer.

Keep reading...

UPDATE: Kirby offers bullet points to help us wrap our heads around all the info here:

I realize my Huffington essay was rather long and complicated. Here is a brief synopsis of just SOME of the larger points raised in the piece. I will probably alter this a little, but it hits most of the main topics. Please feel free to circulate - DK

● Up to 1 in 50 children (2%) may have a genetic mutation that puts them at risk for mitochondrial dysfunction.

● Up to 20% of all children with autism may have an underlying mitochondrial dysfunction

● Children with mitochondrial dysfunction are more likely to regress into autism between the ages 1 and 2 years, if they have fever or illness from viral infections or vaccines.

● The CDC is aware of this difficult situation and is taking measures immediately to address the current national vaccine schedule.

● The genetic susceptibility for mitochondrial dysfunction in autism is inherited through the father, not the mother, as previously thought, and is not rare at all.

● The DNA mutation might not be enough in itself to confer cellular dysfunction, and many doctors believe there is an environmental trigger as well.

● They note that thimerosal, mercury, aluminum, pollution, pesticides, medicines and prenatal alcohol exposure have all been shown to damage mitochondria.

● Other doctors believe that a corn-byproduct based diet in America has put children in a constant inflammatory state, thus making the DNA mutation more pathogenic.

● While some children with mitochondrial dysfunction regress into autism following fever and illness from a viral infection; other kids, like Hannah Poling, clearly regress following a reaction to vaccines.

● The exact percentage of people with vaccine induced autism is unknown. But even a 1% rate could mean 10,000 Americans with vaccine related autism, at a cost of many billions of dollars for lifetime care.

The Next Big Autism Bomb, Are 1 in 50 Kids At Risk?
Posted March 26, 2008 | 09:30 PM (EST)
David Kirby
Huffington Post

On Tuesday, March 11, a conference call was held between vaccine safety officials at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, several leading experts in vaccine safety research, and executives from America's Health Insurance Plans, (the HMO trade association) to discuss childhood mitochondrial dysfunction and its potential link to autism and vaccines.

It was a sobering event for all concerned, and it could soon become known as the Conference Call heard 'round the world.

The teleconference was scheduled by a little known CDC agency called the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Network, a consortium of six research centers working on "immunization-associated health risks," in conjunction with the CDC's Immunization Safety Office and the health insurance lobby -- whose companies cover some 200 million Americans.

The hot topic of the day was mitochondria - the little powerhouses within each cell that convert food and oxygen into energy for use by the body. Recent news events have implicated mitochondria in at least one case of regressive autism, following normal development.

Some researchers on the call reported that mitochondrial dysfunction is probably much more common than the current estimate of 1-in-4,000 people. The potential implications for autism, then, are staggering.

"We need to find out if there is credible evidence, theoretically, to support the idea that childhood mitochondrial dysfunction might regress into autism," one of the callers reportedly told participants.

"THE CLOCK IS TICKING"

One person on the call (those interviewed for this article asked to remain anonymous) told me that, "the CDC people were informed, in no uncertain terms, that they need to look into this issue immediately, and do something about it." The clock is ticking, they were told, and if they don't respond, the information will be made public.

Still, the doctor said, he was enormously impressed by the "seriousness" with which CDC officials treated the possibility of a link between mitochondria, autism and possibly vaccines as well.

In the recent landmark Hannah Poling case, filed in Federal "Vaccine Court," officials conceded that Hannah's underlying mitochondrial dysfunction was aggravated by her vaccines, leading to fever and an "immune stimulation that exceeded metabolic reserves."

But on March 6, CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding claimed that Hannah's case was a rare, virtually one-of-a-kind incident with little, if any relevance to the other 4,900 autism claims currently pending in the court -- or to any other case of autism for that matter.(There were conflicting accounts about whether Gerberding was on the call or not).

Since then, however, Dr. Gerberding and other CDC officials were made aware of a Portuguese study, published last October, which reported that 7.2% of children with autism had confirmed mitochondrial disorders. The authors also noted that, "a diversity of associated medical conditions was documented in 20%, with an unexpectedly high rate of mitochondrial respiratory chain disorders."

"Apparently, the Portuguese study really got their attention," one of the participants said. "It's a highly significant finding. And it's worrisome enough to definitely look into. I think the CDC people know that."

They also know that some reports estimate the rate of mitochondrial dysfunction in autism to be 20% or more. And the rate among children with the regressive sub-type of autism is likely higher still.

Vaccine safety officials on the March 11 call may have been open to discussing mitochondria and autism, but they were probably highly unprepared for what was to come next.

One doctor reported his findings from a five-year study of children with autism, who also showed clinical markers for impaired cellular energy, due to mild dysfunction of their mitochondria.

The biochemistry of 30 children was studied intensively, and in each case, the results showed the same abnormalities as those found in Hannah Poling, participants said. Each child had moderate elevations or imbalances in the exact same amino acids and liver enzymes as Hannah Poling.

All thirty children also displayed normal, healthy development until about 18-24 months of age, when they quickly regressed into clinically diagnosed autism (and not merely "features of autism"), following some type of unusual trigger, or stress, placed on their immune system.

Researchers explained on the call that some data show that mitochondrial dysfunction can convert into autism "in numbers that make it not a rare occurrence," one participant told me. They explained this as "a distinct syndrome; not a mixed bag at all. Every kid had mild mitochondria dysfunction and autistic regression."

Another surprise came when one researcher announced an "inheritance pattern" that linked each case through the genetics of the father: In families where two cousins had autism, the genetic link was always through the father.

This unexpected discovery would clearly implicate nuclear DNA inheritance, and not mitochondrial DNA, which is inherited only through the mother.

Gerberding and others had previously insisted that Hannah and her mother, Teri Poling, both had the same single point mutation in their mitochondrial DNA. CDC officials asserted that Hannah had a pre-existing disease, a rare genetic glitch in her mitochondria, that may well have manifested as "features of autism" on its own, perhaps even without an environmental trigger.

"It's not in the mitochondrial DNA, and it's not rare," one participant confirmed. In fact, he said, many people probably carry the nuclear DNA mutation that confers susceptibility to mitochondrial dysfunction, they just don't know it.

1-in-50 GENETIC RISK?

On the call, speculation on the prevalence of a genetic mutation that could confer mild mitochondrial dysfunction in the general population ranged from about 1-in-400, to a staggering 1-in-50, or 2% of all Americans.

There was talk about the urgent need to do mapping studies, and find the locus of this gene. Some of the researchers said they want to test all 30 children for the actual DNA mutation. There was some expectation that they might discover that the mutation goes back generations, so parents and grandparents might be tested as well.

One belief is that a particular mutated gene may have become prevalent over the centuries, because of selective advantage. Mild mitochondrial dysfunction reportedly has been associated with intelligence, because it can increase activity of the brain's NMDA receptors. A large number of receptors can produce increased intelligence, but it can also increase risk of brain disease, one doctor explained to me. It's possible that increased receptor activity acts in same way.

But not everyone agrees that mitochondrial dysfunction is a purely inherited affair. Some researchers believe that, while a susceptibility gene for mitochondrial problems certainly exists, some type of environmental trigger, or "adversity," as one doctor put it, is needed to turn the mutation into a dysfunction.

The medical literature is replete with studies on mitochondrial health and the adverse impact of mercury, aluminum and other toxins. Even AIDS drugs like AZT and prenatal alcohol consumption can damage mitochondria and impact cellular energy.

The mercury-containing vaccine preservative, thimerosal, for example, "can definitely kill cells in vitro through the mitochondria," one teleconference participant told me. "And some people are beginning to suspect that the dose of hepatitis B vaccine given at birth might be interfering with proper mitochondrial function in certain children."

While the cause of mitochondrial dysfunction is up for the debate, so too is its potential effect on regressive autism.

All the researchers I spoke with agreed that, in many cases, there was an underlying, asymptomatic mitochondrial dysfunction, aggravated by some other stressful event imposed on the child's immune system, resulting in autism.

Such "metabolic decomposition" occurs when a child's system simply "cannot meet the energy demand needed to fight the stress of illness," one doctor explained.

But what causes the stress? That is a very big question.

Apparently, in only two of the 30 cases, or 6%, could the regression be traced directly and temporally to immunizations, and one of them was Hannah Poling. In the other cases, there was reportedly some type of documented, fever-inducing viral infection that occurred within seven days of the onset of brain injury symptoms.

All 30 of the regressions occurred between one and two years of age, at a time when the still-developing brain is particularly vulnerable to injury.

But if a significant minority of autism cases was caused by mitochondrial dysfunction aggravated by common childhood illnesses, then shouldn't we see fewer cases today than, say, at the beginning of the 20th Century? And wouldn't developing countries likewise show far more prevalence of autism than the United States?

Not necessarily, some experts said. They noted that many viral infections are still quite prevalent in modern-day America, and many children still get these types of viral infections about once a month, on average.

If that is the case, then why doesn't every child with "mito" dysfunction regress into autism? Surely, they must encounter viral infections during their yearlong window of neurological peril.

Again, not necessarily: Some doctors said it would depend on the severity of the dysfunction, the type of virus encountered, and perhaps other factors that are still not understood.

But at least two of the 30 kids with mito deficiencies were pushed over the edge into autism by their vaccines, and some researchers feel the number is probably much higher than that in the larger population.

"Vaccines, in some cases, can cause an unusually heightened immune reaction, fever, and even mild illness," one participant said. "A normal vaccine reaction in most kids would be very different in a kid with a metabolic disorder. We know it happened to at least two kids in this study, and I'm certain there are many more Hannahs out there."

One theory currently in circulation about what happened to Hannah and other children like her, is an apparent "triple domino effect." According to this hypothesis, it takes three steps and two triggers to get to some types of autism, and it goes like this:

STEP ONE: Child is conceived and born healthy, but with an underlying nuclear DNA genetic susceptibility to mitochondrial dysfunction, inherited from dad.

TRIGGER ONE: An early environmental "adversity" occurs in the womb or during the neonatal period, perhaps caused by prenatal exposure to heavy metals, pollutants, pesticides and medicines. Or, it occurs in early infancy, through environmental toxins, thimerosal exposure, or even the Hepatitis B vaccine "birth dose." This trigger results in:

STEP TWO: Child develops mild, usually asymptomatic mitochondrial dysfunction (though I wonder if the ear infections and eczema so common in these cases might also be symptoms of mito problems).

TRIGGER TWO: Child, now with an underlying mitochondrial dysfunction, suffers over-stimulation of the immune system beyond the capacity of his or her metabolic reserves. This stress is either via a viral febrile infection, or from multiple vaccinations, as in the Poling case. This trigger results in:

STEP THREE: Acute illness, seizures, encephalopathy, developmental regression, autism.

Such a scenario might help explain why autism has increased right along with the addition of more vaccines to the national schedule.

And it might help explain why autism rates are not plummeting now that thimerosal levels have been significantly reduced in most childhood vaccines.

It's possible that exposures from the flu shot, and residual mercury left over in other vaccines -- perhaps in synergistic effect with aluminum used as an "adjuvant" to boost the immune response - might "contribute to the toxic mix that causes childhood mitochondrial dysfunction in the first place," one of the doctors said.

But like many hypotheses, this one has competition. Some researchers believe that the modern American diet is largely to blame for an increase in the number of children whose underlying mitochondrial dysfunction is "triggered" into autism by febrile infections.

The answer, they hypothesize, is corn.

The American diet has become extraordinarily dependent on corn oil and corn syrup used in processing, these experts contend. They say that corn oil and syrup are inflammatory, whereas fish oil is anti-inflammatory. Could our diet be a factor in making this mutated gene become more pathogenic? It's a biochemical defect that leads to biochemical disease, supporters of this theory say: The gene itself becomes more of a problem.

WHAT NOW?

This information raises so many questions it makes your head swim.

First and foremost among them: What to do about vaccinating children with known mitochondrial dysfunction?

In many respects, these kids should be first in line for vaccination, to prevent some illnesses that might trigger an autistic regression during the window of vulnerability. On the other hand, with multiple vaccinations, such as the case with Hannah, there is also a risk of overtaxing the immune system, and likewise triggering regression into autism.

What's needed most urgently, if possible, is a quick, affordable and efficient method of testing children for low cellular energy, perhaps before vaccination even begins.

There was some discussion on the conference call about altering the vaccine schedule in some way, to lower the risk of immune over-stimulation in susceptible children. Certainly, pressure will grow for a change in the schedule - the question is how, when, and if such changes will be made.

Some of the suggestions may not be popular among public health officials. They include:

1) Establishing a maximum number of vaccine antigens to which any child could be exposed on any given day.

2) Permitting the option of separating out the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) live virus combination vaccines into three distinct "monovalent" shots.

3) Not giving the varicella vaccine (chicken pox) on the same day as the MMR injection - the CDC recently withdrew is recommendation for the Pro-Quad MMR+Varicella vaccine because it doubled the risk of seizures.

Another option is to create new "recommendations for administering multiple vaccines to children who have fallen behind in the recommended childhood immunization schedule," according to the website of the Institute for Vaccine Safety at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Hannah had missed some shots and her doctor decided to "catch up" with the schedule by administering five shots, containing nine vaccine antigens, at once. But some autism activists have pointed out that giving five shots in one day is not that uncommon.

Moreover, they claim, many children regressed into autism following normal vaccination, when the parents religiously adhered to the official schedule.

According to the Johns Hopkins site, "Additional research is needed to determine if other children with autism, especially those with 'the regressive form' of autism, have the same or similar underlying mitochondrial dysfunction disorders."

It adds that, "the advisory groups who make recommendations regarding vaccines will undoubtedly examine this case carefully and make decisions regarding the potential need for changes."

That day may come sooner than you think. It was just announced that, on April 11 in Washington, DC, the National Vaccine Program Office at HHS will convene a meeting of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee's Vaccine Safety Working Group. The Working Group was established to go over the CDC's Immunization Safety Office draft research agenda, and to, "review the current vaccine safety system."

The meeting is open to the public, and I have my seat reserved. But I honestly don't envy the Working Group's very tricky task at hand.

It remains to be seen how all this plays out. And many important questions still lie ahead.

For example, if mitochondrial dysfunction turns out to be as common as 200-per-10,000, and autism is now at 66 per 10,000, did anything bad happen to any of the other 134-per-10,000 children, apart from autism (i.e., ADD, ADHD, speech delay, etc.)?

Moreover, if 10-20% of autism cases can actually be traced to an underlying mitochondrial dysfunction, then what about the majority of autism cases where this did not come into play?

And, if 20% of autism cases are mito related, and 6% of those cases regressed because of vaccines, that would mean that at least 1% of all autism cases were vaccine related. Some estimates of autism go as high as a million Americans - that would mean 10,000 people with vaccine-triggered autism, and billions of dollars in the cost of lifetime care.

(While we are on the subject, isn't it time to fund a study of vaccinated and unvaccinated children, to settle this debate once and for all?)

Finally, the goals of the CISA Network, (which convened the teleconference) are rather progressive and far reaching. It remains to be seen how well the Network fulfills its stated mission, which includes:

Conduct research into "the role of individual variation" on vaccine injury;

"Empower individuals to make informed immunization decisions;"

Help policy makers "in the recommendation of exclusion criteria for at-risk individuals," and;

"Enhance public confidence in sustaining immunization benefits for all populations"

Let's see how long it takes before Network members hang out the proverbial banner: "Mission Accomplished."

CDC Offers Another Non Response on Autism and Vaccines in the AJC

The CDC has issued a response to David Kirby’s piece entitled, "Give Us Answers on Vaccines" offered to us in yesterday’s AJC by Rear Admiral Anne Schuchat, MD.

I have done a lengthy break down of it, ridiculous assertion by empty statement, and responded to Dr. Schuchat on several of her statements.

"Vaccines' Benefits Outweigh Dangers"

Let’s start here, with the title. Have you heard this one before? Have you hear this one a thousand times before? We keep finding out more and more information about the dangers of vaccination and the increases in the risks, but no matter how much risk of danger is added to the balance, the scale not only never tips, but it never moves.

Vaccines like RotaShield cause so much damage that they get removed from the market, yet, this statement never wavers. There is never any variation like, "although we have discovered that risk of vaccine injury extends to those with mitochondrial dysfunction which must be taken into account when making vaccine decisions, we believe the benefits outweigh the dangers".

And it is all lumped together. Always. Every vaccine seems to have the same benefit/danger risk for everyone. There is never a CDC press release that says, "benefits outweigh dangers, except in the case of the Hepatitis B vaccine for those with mitochondrial dysfunction and an history of vaccine reaction".

No matter how much new information comes to light on the risks of vaccines, 'benefits outweigh risks' remains the mantra.

"Autism claim shouldn't deter parents"

Ok… she has made an emphatic 'should' statement telling parents what to do. Let's look at the information that she offers to justify giving that direction to parents

"By ANNE SCHUCHAT
Published on: 03/26/08
David Kirby's March 20 opinion column, "Give Us Answers on Vaccines," misinterpreted available information about a case before the National Vaccine Injury Compensation program and may have parents wondering what is best for their child when it comes to immunizations.

So Kirby got it wrong… let's find out where.

"That is unfortunate, given that our nation's childhood vaccines are very safe and are proven to protect and save lives."

Well… she has made the "very safe" safety claim, but that is kind of the statement that Kirby and mom’s like me are demanding proof of in light of the Poling case and the research that got HHS to concede it. We are looking to see what she has to offer us.

"Parents should know that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, along with other agencies in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the wide range of scientists and health professionals involved in the nation's immunization programs take seriously questions and concerns related to vaccine safety."

Well… again… we don’t believe that this statement is true, because we don’t see actions that would prove it true. No one at the CDC investigates our vaccine injury claims, when I walked into my Pediatrician’s office with the safety data sheet of the first shot that harmed my son, he wouldn’t even read it because he didn’t have time. He was respectful, but said that he can’t even keep up with what the AAP was sending him.

The AAP takes direction from the CDC, if CDC is so concerned with vaccine safety, then why did my ped, who is only two degrees of separation from them, have no interest in my son’s vaccine injury?

And I myself have raised lots and lots of questions and echoed the questions and concerns of other parents, and CDC has completely ignored them. In the spring of 2005 CDC posted a notice on their web site saying that they would be responding to the questions and concerns raised in David Kirby’s book, Evidence of Harm, and three years later, still no response.

Dr. Schuchat, parents DON’T know that CDC takes questions of vaccine safety seriously, because you completely ignore them. Until you behave differently and actually even discuss and debate the questions and concerns publicly, why in the world would we just accept this easily disprovable statement from you?

I have often compared CDC’s claim of seriousness about dealing with the vaccine/autism connection to my claims of seriousness about dealing with the size of my big behind. If I got up and declared that I was obsessed with fitness, one would merely have to glimpse the size of my two hundred and (cough, cough, cough) pound form to see that such pronouncements, are indeed, malarkey.

You are not addressing the vaccine/autism question any more than I am jogging around the block. Let’s not embarrass ourselves by making claims that are so obviously false.

"Furthermore, our efforts in vaccines, developmental disabilities..."

What efforts in developmental disabilities are you referring to exactly?

"... and the health of children go far beyond our professional interests, as many of the dedicated professionals involved are also parents and grandparents."

While it is nice that many employees have children, I am not sure what that proves. I did note though from your bio that you do not seem to have children, so you are not really in the same risk boat that we are. Vaccine injury will never make you quit your career to care for a sick child as it has for most of us.

"Kirby's column included many inaccuracies related to childhood vaccines."

Great… now we are going to hear what they are and where Kirby was wrong.

"As such,.."

Wait, Doctor… don’t you have to list what those inaccuracies are and counter them with some sort of correction or argument to the contrary? You just made the statement, decided it was true and move onto, "As such"! How is this exactly advancing the vaccine autism discussion?

Are we just supposed to take your word for it that Kirby was wrong?

"As such, it illustrates…"

I guess that we are just supposed to take your word for it.

Except that you have not made your point, and now you want you point to actually prove another point?

"...that when it comes to immunizations, child development and specific medical conditions, the best source of guidance is the child's health care provider."

So now we are supposed to make two leaps here? David Kirby is wrong, which we know because you said so, which somehow also proves that pediatricians are right?

"Parents should not be reluctant to ask their child's doctors or nurses about any health concerns, including immunizations."

Dr. Schuchat, have you ever taken a baby into the office and actually done this? Try this experiment. Take off your uniform, put on a blond wig, borrow a friend’s baby and walk into a pediatrician’s office and say, "doctor, I have concerns that vaccines may cause autism" and watch what happens.

What usually happens to us is that, at best, we get belittled, at wost, reamed and dismissed from the practice. We even get harassed by nurses. I once had a doctor yell at me over the phone and hang up on me.

Is that behavior might make parents 'reluctant' to raise concerns about vaccinations?

"Vaccines are often given early in life in order to protect against diseases that can seriously harm infants and young children. The joint immunization recommendations of CDC, American Academy of Pediatrics and American Academy of Family Physicians do recognize there are instances when a child should not receive a recommended vaccine or when a recommended vaccination should be delayed."

They do? Because that is not what the head of the AAP, Dr. Tayloe, said on the Today show two weeks ago. He was asked the following question:

"Do you believe that all vaccines should be used on every child?"

His complete response:

"Yes. I think any of the vaccines we have today have been tested and proven to be safe, and the credible studies don't show any relationship between vaccines and permanent injury. So we favor this and we know that unless we have vaccination rates that are in the 90 to 95% range we are not going to prevent epidemics from coming into this country of measles, of polio, from countries where these diseases are still endemic. So its very important that we vaccinate all our children."

"Those decisions, however, are best made in consultation with the child's doctor."

This would be the doctor that is the member of the AAP and takes direction from Dr. Tayloe? Because not only does Tayloe not take the vaccine/autism concern seriously, he does not even believe that permanent vaccine injury exists.

How seriously do you think the medical professionals who follow his lead take vaccine injury and parental concerns about autism?

"As the column correctly noted, vaccine injury cases are often handled through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation program administered by HHS' Health Resources and Services Administration."

They are "often handled" there (as opposed to 'always handled' there)because most vaccine injuries are not handled at all.

Many people who are victims of vaccine injury are not told that they are even victims of vaccine injury (raising my hand), and when they do believe they are, don’t even hear about the compensation program until the three year statute of limitations has run out. Their vaccine injury cases are not handled anywhere.

"This program is charged with determining whether a claimed injury meets pre-established criteria or if vaccination may have contributed to a child's serious medical or health condition. If such a determination is made, the program works to provide timely and compassionate compensation."

And by "timely" she means that it takes around 7 to 10 years to have your case heard, and by "compassionate" she means that when you actually win and award, they hold on to it for you and make you apply for your own money when you have a need of some kind.

A great example of this "compassionate" compensation is the family whose disabled daughter grew out of her wheelchair and when her parents tried to access her VICP money to buy her a new one, the "compassionate" program declined the request because they had already purchased a wheel chair for her. The one that she no long fit into.

Can you feel the government compassion!

"Since 1988, HRSA's vaccine injury program has provided compensation in about 2,100 cases, including some that have involved vaccines and encephalopathy (injury to the brain). While Kirby's column suggested otherwise, to date, this program has never determined in any case that autism was caused by a vaccine."

So says you. Let’s see the proof! Kirby says he has a document, you obviously have all the documents from all 2,100 cases. Get a big black marker out and start blacking out names and let’s get to readin'!

With 2,100 cases of proven vaccine injury, who knows how much we could learn about how many medical disorders and their causes and treatments! Not just autism, but who knows how many! Well... you know how many, because you have all the documents... but imagine the expansion of the knowledge base for everyone else!

I mean look how much we learned about the relationship between mito dysfunction and autism from just that ONE Poling document that Kirby released and then Dr. Poling commented on.

The autism world is abuzz with this new piece of the puzzle and talking with mito experts and I am even learning more about what could be going on in my own son’s little body.

Isn’t the thought off that flood of information entering the scientific community an exciting idea for you?! I mean, you and all the other officials at the CDC, NIH, HHS, AAP are so concerned about vaccine safety, and take these questions and concerns so seriously, so I would assume that you guys would be jumping for joy and the thought of such a big giant bolus dose of proven vaccine injuries to pick through and examine and contrast and compare! I know I am excited about the idea of what it could teach me about Chandler’s vaccine induced autism.

And we could even have some kind of open public forum for doctors and scientists and families and health officials and even the families of the settlement recipients (if they want to share more of their stories) can participate in so that we can all just feed off the information that will be out there!

When do we get started?!

"In comparison, during this same time period, about 100 million American children received recommended childhood vaccinations, and cases of vaccine-preventable diseases in the U.S. have decreased to record or near-record lows."

That is interesting, but that is not what we are talking about. Whether or not vaccines prevent diseases and whether or not vaccines trigger autism are two completely different, mutually exclusive questions. Both could be true or false and either statement's veracity actually has no impact on the other.

We are not examining the question of whether or not they prevent infectious disease right now. We are examining the question of whether or not they contribute to autism and other autoimmune and neurodevelopmental disorders.

Once we have the correct answer to THAT question, then we can go back and examine your title thesis that the ‘benefits outweigh the dangers” by comparing them to risks associated with disease from non-vaccination.

But you seem to try to get us to ignore the million dollar autism/vaccine question by distracting us with the 'prevents disease' assertion.

So can we set that aside until we actually know the real risk to compare to the benefits?

"Recently, mitochondrial disorders have become the focus of media attention with respect to vaccine injury compensation. Mitochondrial disorders, which occur very rarely in children, are believed to be genetic."

Not by these researchers. They found that thimerosal causes mitochondrial dysfunction.

You claim that the CDC is all about taking questions and concerns seriously. Why then will you not discuss the idea that, as Dr. Poling is asserting, that the first round of vaccines set up his daughter’s mito dysfunction and another round of vaccines interacted with that mito problem to cause the autism? HHS has already conceded the second half, and research clearly shows that the first half is possible too.

So why are you ignoring all this and saying that it is believed to be only genetic?

"Children born with these disorders often appear normal through the first years of life. When placed under severe stress from such things as infections, fever, dehydration, malnutrition or lack of sleep, children with these disorders often experience loss of some brain and nervous system functions."

Or vaccines… you forgot to mention vaccines.

"Some have suggested that infants and children be screened for mitochondrial disorders before getting recommended vaccinations. Unfortunately, mitochondrial diseases are very difficult to diagnose and it is usually not possible to identify children with such disorders until there are signs of developmental decline. A definitive diagnosis often requires multiple blood tests and may also require a muscle or brain biopsy (removal of a portion for testing, usually under anesthesia). Therefore, providing routine screening tests on children who have no symptoms would bring other medical risks and raise many ethical questions."

And honestly, and in all frankness, I don’t care how hard it is to do.

Figure it out.

HHS has admitted that mito dysfunction is a precursor to Autism. I don’t wanna hear "too hard", I don’t wanna hear, "too expensive", I don’t wanna hear any excuses what so ever.

You have billions of dollars at your disposal to figure out this problem. If you want to vaccinate every person in this country then come up with a way to discern which children are at risk for LIFE LONG PERMANENT BRAIN DAMAGE.

DO IT!

Repeating my mantra… My children are not acceptable losses in your war against communicable diseases.

"At present, we do not know definitively if vaccines can trigger neurological or developmental declines among children with mitochondrial disorders."

Then wait just a minute! HHS said that they did in Hannah Poling! They are paying her a million bucks or so because of it!

You guys need to make a decision. Either they do or they don’t. If they do, then you need to get into high gear and figure out exactly what this all means, and if they don’t and as an American tax payer I don’t want one single penny going to the Poling family for their fraudulent claim.

You don’t get to go with which ever theory is convenient to you in the moment. How dumb do you think we are?

"We do know, however, that infections can cause neurological and developmental declines among these children — and we also know that childhood vaccinations protect children against some of the same infections known to cause developmental decline among children with mitochondrial disorders. These include vaccine-preventable diseases like measles, chickenpox and influenza."

Again… distracting us from question A by diverting us to question B which does not help us answer question A in any way what so ever.

"In the case of children with mitochondrial disorders, we do not yet have sufficient evidence to make general immunization recommendations."

And I am betting, from the complete lack of interest in the mito question that you have shown since the Polings went on CNN (and since the concession was made last year for that matter) you will probably never get around to finding that "sufficient evidence" to make changes in recommendations in the vaccine schedule.

It is most likely on your list right under "Get back to David Kirby on that whole 'Evidence of Harm' thing".

"Physicians who care for children with these disorders usually recommend that these children receive their childhood vaccines, but, depending on the child's health status or medical condition, they may change when those vaccinations are provided."

It would be appreciated if the CDC could provide us a list of these physicians who might actually deviate from the vaccine schedule due to the health needs of an individual child. It is hard for us to find them on our own.

"We recognize that developmental disorders, whether related to mitochondrial disease, autism or other causes, are a serious challenge for many families. In the case of autism, CDC has actively supported vaccine safety research in this area."

Are you joking? Can you seriously say something like this and expect autism parents not to scream at you at this point? After years and years of bogus studies and ignoring us?

You should be ashamed at yourself for making this statement.

"To date, the best science indicates that there is no association between vaccines and autism."

Bull-shit.

"As part of our efforts to foster understanding of autism, CDC is currently conducting the largest study to date designed to identify potential autism causes and risk factors."

CDC has not yet addressed 'questions and concerns' with their last disaster of a vaccine/autism study, but actually stands by Verstraten, but you think we will be placated by the next one? How about you open up the Safety Data Link, bring Thomas Verstraten back into the country and have an open examination of that study.

Then when we get all our questions and concerns properly addressed there, we can move onto the next study, making sure it is open and transparent and not a piece of crap like that one.

"We recognize that much of the success of our nation's immunization efforts comes from the trust of parents. We do not take that trust lightly. Rather, CDC, FDA and other HHS agencies are continually working to expand efforts in vaccine safety research and science as well as clinician and parent input and involvement. Like parents, we want the best information possible when it comes to protecting and ensuring children's health."

Clearly you don’t understand that you have already lost the trust of the autism community and the rest of the public has taken notice, and call us for vaccine advice instead of their own doctors, or any of you.

"Our nation's high immunization rates are the reason why very few children suffer from vaccine-preventable diseases that in the past used to harm them in large numbers. These high rates show that parents realize the importance of childhood vaccinations."

Well if you keep insisting on touting the effectiveness of vaccines to distract from the question at hand, then I am just gonna post this:



And this:

"CDC is committed to maintaining that high level of support as well as making sure all our efforts are working to foster the health of children."

…Well not for your specific child, per se, but for most children. I mean if all the children in the US were melted into one big child, that child would be kinda healthy. That is the "children" we are referring to.

So that is the CDC's response. We never did get to find out what Kirby wrote that was incorrect, or get any of our vaccine questions answered, but we did get to hear, once again, that "CDC cares", "Vaccines safe and don’t cause autism", "benefits outweigh risks", and we have now added a new point to the old standbys, "Mito dysfunction too hard to screen for".

Truly Anne Schuchat has calmed our fears and addressed our lengthy and complicated questions with her repetition of the ethos, "Just Trust Us".

Except that blindly trusting government is what got us here in the first place. So we don't.

Wrapping up, I would like to point out that Admiral Schuchat has told us what her personal directive is on her bio:

"My top priority is to improve our ability to do excellent infectious disease science leading to public health impact." - Rear Admiral Anne Schuchat, MD

Her top priority is infectious diseases, and autism is not an infectious disease. It is an autoimmune disorder, a toxic injury and a GI disorder, among other things. This is just another example of the phenomena that I have been complaining about for years now.

When we ask for answers on autism, we are not offered responses by immunologists or toxicologists or gastroenterologists, who might actually offer us some real understanding on the processes going on in our children’s bodies, and how vaccine additives like mercury and aluminum may be triggering the dysfunction of those processes.

Instead we are, time and time again, offered the testimony of government virologists Like Dr. Schuchat who are basically trotted out to defend their life’s work.

Here is a taste of her bio:

"…director of CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases and has spent over 18 years at CDC working in immunization, respiratory, and other infectious diseases. Prior to her current appointment, she served as the director of CDC’s National Immunization Program (NIP); acting director of the National Center for Infectious Diseases (NCID)…" and on and on.

Read the whole thing. The woman has lived and breathed viruses and vaccines her entire professional life. But the CDC expects that we will see her as an unbiased source from whom we should be taking direction from on the safety of vaccines?

(I have long speculated that the reason that they don’t have a toxicologist come out and allay our fears about vaccines toxins, is that they can’t find one who will do it.)

This pronouncement is nothing more than a continuation of the public misinformation, political bullshit and CYA tactics, that we get every single time CDC addresses autism. Year after year I attend conferences and absolutely drown in new information on what is going on causes and treatments for autism. I can’t keep up with all of it.

But CDC hears none of it, recognizes none of it, discusses none of it, shows up at 0 conferences, interviews 0 parents who claim vaccine injury, and investigates 0 cases where parents claim recovery from autism.

But trust them… we may not be able to see it, but down deep, inside, they care.

Autism: The Musical - David Kirby's Review

Time to take a break from causes and cures and just appreciate our beautiful babies with autism. If you don't have HBO, you can watch it online starting tomorrow.

David Kirby: HBO and Autism: Perfect Together
Today, March 25, 2008,
Huffington Post
David Kirby

A lot of adults (myself among them) are arguing very vocally right now over the scope, cause, and impact of autism in America. Acrid debates over mercury, vaccines, special diets, alternative therapies and conceded court cases are flooding the media almost daily.

It's enough to give autism a bad name.

Then, along comes an honest little documentary like "Autism: The Musical." This all-too-real movie lifts the heart up and then slams it right back down on the pavement--and we love every minute of it.

This simply shot, beautifully conveyed portrait of life with autism premieres tonight on HBO (and will stream for free for one week at hbo.com). It serves to remind us all that, no matter what "causes autism," no matter what, if anything might "cure" it, children affected by the disorder deserve all of the honor, love and patience that we, a nation consumed by our own attention deficits, can muster.

This moving and funny film opens with the jarring data that autism in America has spiked from 1-in-10,000 kids in 1980 to 1-in-150 today.

But instead of dwelling on the cause of autism, the film focuses mostly on five wonderful kids - two boys with very high functioning autism who are brilliant, charming, and yes, "quirky;" a teenage girl who sings (and looks) like an angel; a little boy who rarely speaks, but who can express himself vividly through his cello; and one Russian adopted boy who is completely nonverbal (until he gets a computer) and who will break your heart when you see him.

Anyway, they put on a show, and it is riveting, joyous and tearful. But the real message here is that kids with autism are human beings, just like everyone else on God's green earth - with their own hopes and fears, intellects and personalities.

They deserve more than our compassion, our love and our dollars. They deserve our respect.

Meanwhile, "Autism: The Musical" unflinchingly shows just how stressful the disorder can be on families. The weight on couples is obvious: One marriage suffers through infidelity, another ends in painful divorce.

Some people might complain that the potential causes and treatments of autism are only touched upon here - though we do see clear evidence of heart-wrenching autistic "regression," and there is some talk about vaccines, environmental toxins and "damaged kids."

Others might worry that the portraits of the two high functioning boys - so bright and charismatic you want to hang out with them for hours (though their peers shun them into a lonely world of their own) - will leave the mistaken impression that most children with autism are like this. If they were, then the epidemic might be slightly less painful to bear.

Sadly, however, most kids with autism are more than just a little "quirky." And as much as we truly adore all the children in this film, few, if any parents of "typical" kids could honestly say, "I wish my child were like that."

"Autism: The Movie," then, gives us the whole unvarnished "spectrum" of autism spectrum disorder. Little Neal, the adopted boy who can neither speak nor hold a gaze, tells us what we should know: These extraordinary children (and many adults with autism, too) need and deserve our attention, and help.

Here, I hope, is a movie that everyone can watch and appreciate. From those of us who think that many autism cases were triggered by environmental toxins; to the "neuro-diversity" people, some of whom think that autism is a natural, inborn variation of human brain wiring, and should be celebrated, not treated; to the CDC, who wishes we would ALL just go away.

Please watch this film: You will be treated to an achingly accurate portrait of what autism is, isn't, and can be.

David Kirby on Ring of Fire

http://www.adventuresinautism.com/images/AirAmericaKirby032208.mp3

The Spectator: Another Piece in the Jigsaw

They are catching on to Hannah's story in the UK.

Another piece in the jigsaw?
22 March 2008
Melanie Phillips
The Spectator


A propos the Wakefield affair discussed in my post below, a recent case in America should not pass without comment. In a landmark ruling, the US Court of Federal Claims, Office of the Special Master, under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Programme, conceded a vaccine injury to a child from Georgia who, having been developing normally until she received multiple vaccinations, subsequently developed serious brain and body disorders.

Nine year-old Hannah Poling, who at 18 months was recorded by paediatricians as meeting all her developmental milestones, was then given no fewer than five vaccinations in one day — DTaP, Hib, MMR, Varivax, and IPV. Id — following which she suffered a catastrophic breakdown in brain and bodily functions, regressing in language and social development and with persistent gut problems. The court ruled that

the vaccinations CHILD received on July 19, 2000 significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder.

Writing in the Atlanta Journal Constitution, journalist David Kirby goes further and says:

The November report said Hannah's vaccine reaction had ‘manifested’ as early-onset brain disease, with ‘features of autism spectrum disorder.’ But the February report is more blunt. It says that Hannah's vaccines ‘caused’ her ‘autistic’ brain disease.

This ruling is the first time a causal link has been established between childhood vaccines and autistic spectrum disorder. It is important to note straightaway an important point of difference from the MMR controversy in the UK. This child’s immune system collapsed not as a result of MMR alone but because she received multiple vaccinations in one day, including the MMR triple jab.

Precisely what caused Hannah Poling’s catastrophic reaction, therefore, cannot be established. We don't know whether it was one of these vaccines or the fact that they were in combination. Nevertheless, this case should not be dismissed as having no relevance. These vaccines did include MMR, and the symptoms she displayed bear remarkable similarities to those reported by countless parents in the MMR controversy. Despite the differences, the significance for the MMR controversy is that this ruling established for the first time that a hitherto unknown problem with a child’s cellular system caused a catastrophic reaction in that child to a vaccination schedule, including delivery of the already multiple MMR, that has produced no ill-effects in other children. This suggests that, in some children, multiple vaccines overload immune systems that are particularly vulnerable.

In America, the health authorities are dismissing this ruling as a one-off with no further significance. But surely it suggests instead that urgent questions now demonstrably need to be asked about both the safety of these these childhood vaccines in themselves and the policy, so dear to the medical establishment on both sides of the Atlantic, of multiplying the number of vaccines delivered simultaneously to small children?