"Expert" links autism to mothers drinking

"Mothers" say that expert must be drunk.

I didn't drink during my pregnancies. I probably average eight or ten drinks a year. (Alcohol is not tasty to me).

This theory is just counter intuitive. In the 1950's women routinely drank during pregnancy as they didn't understand the risks it posed. Autism was unheard of then. Today if a pregnant woman orders a glass of wine at a restaurant, the waitress calls child protective services. Autism everywhere.

Why You Should Support The Writers Strike

Bottom line .... because many of those writers are parents of autistic children, and the residuals that they are fighting for will go to support their autistic children for years and years to come.

My dear husband's first writing job was on a WGA show for Discovery Kids in 1998. About 5 years ago he was flipping through the channels and randomly saw it running. He thought, "Great! I will be getting a little money." But no money ever came.

Then a year later he saw it again. So he put the show on the Tivo and found that it was running constantly. So he called the Writers Guild and they did some research and found that the show had been running non stop all over the world and his episode had aired around 400 times.

When it was all said and done, the WGA had to go after the production company, and of the $40,000 that was owed to my dear husband, he received $2,000. Just this spring.

I try not to think about all the good we could have done for Chandler with that $38,000. It hurts. We had to discontinue most of Chandler's biomed for much of 2006 because we just didn't have the resources.

So if you are thinking about getting annoyed with the writers for holding up your favorite shows, and are tempted to believe the media corporations claims that the writers are being unreasonable, keep in mind that those companies like reselling their shows over and over again, and don't like to pay writers their fair share when they can get away with it. Even when they DO have a contract they still don't always pay.

And to put a human face on this strike, remember my dear husband Scott... Autism Super Dad... who is working his butt off to provide for his autistic son.

(And yes he made those costumes for his boys.)

Send a note to who ever makes your favorite show and ask them to pay the writers that create the characters and stories you love.

For info on how to support the writers visit www.UnitedHollywood.com.

UPDATE:

Thanks for all the kind words from our United Hollywood friends! Welcome writers, feel free to browse and educate yourself about the current state of Autism in America in between picketing gigs, then go back and write about our kids when ConHugeCo Inc. comes to their senses and makes a fair deal.

For my regular autism visitors, please take a moment to view some videos about what this strike about:





Now watch The Daily Show's writers explain in their own way:

The Rescue Post is now Age of Autism

The Rescue Post has joined forces with Dan Olmsted of UPI's The Age of Autism fame, to become AgeOfAutism.com

Put them on your favorites list because they will surely be a force to be reckoned with.

Does Autism Speaks Support Autism Eugenics?

Whose Planet is it Anyway has called our attention to some truly upsetting information about Autism Speaks associations.

I have repeatedly mentioned that if AS is successful in their autism gene search before treatment options are fully developed, that the "Cure" for autism will become the same as the "Cure" for Downs Syndrome. Abortion.

I have always assumed that AS did not actually intend this to be the outcome from the beginning, but I may have been naive.

Autism Speaks' Eugenic Agenda

It's not really news that the ultimate goal of Autism Speaks is to wipe out the entire autistic population through prenatal testing and eugenic abortion. After all, one of their leading researchers, Dr. Joseph Buxbaum of the Autism Genome Project, frankly admitted as much in an interview almost three years ago, before NAAR merged into Autism Speaks.

But for the most part, they've managed to put up a somewhat plausible pretense of being a mainstream charity that just wants to prevent suffering, and so forth. Most of the material on their website is carefully designed to keep the public unaware of their close ideological affinity with the white supremacist agenda of creating a master race through eugenics. A casual reader might not notice a page featuring the views of Dr. James Watson, with whom Bob and Suzanne Wright had a friendly chat regarding autism genetic research at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory:


autismspeaks.org/inthenews/wrights_cold_spring_harbor.php


Watson, a molecular biologist, is famous for his genetic research discoveries. He is equally infamous for his long history of advocating white supremacy and eugenic extermination of people with neurological differences, which he characterizes as curing stupidity.

On October 18th, Watson was suspended from his position as the Chancellor of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory after making racist comments during an interview with a British newspaper that included these remarks about blacks: "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really" and "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true."

It's frankly impossible that Autism Speaks, in making the decision to feature their association with Watson on their website, could have been unaware of his bigoted extremist agenda. His racist attitudes have been well known for many years.

Local Chapter of Autism Speaks Splits From Autism Speaks

Apparently the good folks of Burlington, VT have wised up to the fact that Autism Speaks sucks the money out of local communities and does not give back.

Local autism group splits off from national nonprofit
October 21, 2007
By LISA D. CONNELL

BURLINGTON – The state chapter of a national autism group has spun off to form a separate nonprofit.

The Burlington-based Autism Support Daily was formed by a group of advocates who split off from the national Autism Speaks last year.

The schism was over money.

Now there will be two autism fundraising walks in Vermont. Autism Support Daily held its event on Sept. 29; Autism Speaks, which had its own walk scheduled for Sept. 30 postponed its fund-raiser because of the timing conflict. It plans to hold a similar event in early summer.

That's because the Burlington group questions how locally raised funds were used by the national organization. Autism Support Daily believes money raised in Vermont should remain in Vermont.

The local organization also questions how much of that money should be devoted to medical research, and how much should be made available to help local families with autistic children cope with living and medical expenses.

The chance that a child, particularly a boy, will develop autism is now about one in 160, records note. NIH officials define autism as a complex brain disorder.

"Autism involves communication and social difficulties, as well as repetitive behavior or narrow interests. Autism is often grouped with similar disorders, all of which may be referred collectively as autism spectrum disorders. The underlying causes of ASD are unclear. Currently there is no cure for the disorders and treatments are limited," an online report states.

New York-based Autism Speaks in its first Vermont walk last year raised about $50,000, according to Erica Jacobson, an event planner and fund raiser for one of the New England Autism Speaks chapters. Jacobson, who earned a bachelor's degree in sociology from Northeastern University, has spent her career working for nonprofit groups.

She is relatively new to the national group's staff. She said she walked alongside Autism Support Daily members last year. One of Jacobson's tasks has been to rebuild staff at the New England regional office. Jacobson said that she is completely supportive of Burlington-based Autism Support Daily.

"As a parent, you want what's best for your child," she said.

For members of Autism Support Daily, that means giving out all of the money raised for an awareness walk in Vermont to local families in need. The group's Web site, www.autismsupportdaily.com, gave its first financial award at the close of December 2006.

The first "wish it could be more" grant totaled $1,350. Three additional grant awards were given out for $10,906, $2,600 and $2574, totaling $16,080.

According to the group's Web site, funds are given "to families of children and young adults with autism to help them offset the huge expenses they incur on a daily basis in order to get necessities, prescriptions, supplements, and many other items that place a huge financial burden on families."

The names of the 10 leaders of Autism Support Daily, including Angela Timpone and an honorary member, comprise the group's executive list. The all-volunteer organization, recently received its 501(C) 3 nonprofit charitable status, said Timpone.

That's a major difference between Autism Speaks and Autism Support Daily, she said. There is no payroll for any of the staff of the Vermont group, Timpone said.

"Think of this as a grassroots effort," said Timpone. "I think we're completely different."

Autism Speaks Inc., which was formed in February 2005, is the largest national autism group. Its focus, according to its Web site, is on medical research. Its total public support revenue for 2006 was $33.3 million. Its mission is to "aggressively fund global biomedical research into the causes prevention, treatments and cure for autism," according to the Web site, autismspeaks.org. Autism Speaks has 26 board members, plus 20 upper management employees at its offices based in Manhattan in addition to employees working in states across the country, according to its 990 form filed with the IRS in 2006.

Seventy-five percent of the money raised during a state walk goes toward funding research, research dollars overseen by the national group, Jacobson said. The other 25 percent goes toward running the organization, she said.

"It's not a competition. We're all here for the same cause," said Jacobson. "We're here for research and we're here for awareness."

Timpone agrees that more research is needed. "Why is this? We're in the midst of an epidemic and more research does need to be done but at the same time we need the organizations to help support the family who is here now with autism."

"We are not in any way saying we don't support Autism Speaks," said Timpone during a telephone interview. "There needs to be an added component to that. There's families in Vermont that really need help."

Jacobson said she received an e-mail from the local group, indicating it would go its own way. If she had known earlier on of the Vermont group's concerns about where the money raised should be directed, she would have made an effort to deal with Timpone's concerns, said Jacobson.

"We are also dedicated to helping families," said Jacobson. Whether a parent or adult supports the goals Autism Support Daily or Autism Speaks, there is commonality among the two groups, she says. "Because at the end of the day, it's just people supporting autism research and awareness, whether they're directly affected or not," said Jacobson.

NAA: Sad News From Our Friends At BrainChild

From the National Autism Association:

Michael Lang, founder of BrainChild Nutritionals, died on Tuesday, October 16, 2007, after a brief but heroic fight with Pancreatic Cancer. Michael passed at home, surrounded by those who loved him. Michael was a brilliant, stubborn, generous, incredibly good and gentle man, who made great strides toward his great hope for curing autism.

Michael created vitamin and mineral supplements to help his own children, and then extended that gift to thousands of children, by founding BrainChild Nutritionals, to make exceptional liquid supplements for kids on the autistic spectrum. Michael used his last bit of energy to make a presentation to the DAN! Doctors' Think Tank from the hospital less than a week before he died. He was very excited about this presentation showing new information he'd recently gathered using his natural chelation program and wanted others to help carry on his work.

BrainChild Nutritionals will continue as it always has, in Michael's memory. Thank you all for being part of our extended family. We know that many of you loved Michael as well, and that he helped many of your children. Please know that Michael didn't suffer, and that his work will continue.

A fund is being set up to help Michael's children. A link with details on how to donate to this fund will be on the BrainChild website within the next couple days.

Michael Lang has been a great friend to NAA with his long time support of our Helping Hand Project, and to many of us here on a personal level. He was the ultimate "nice guy". He was genuinely caring, thoughtful and kind. We send our love and sympathy to Michael's children, family and everyone at Brainchild Nutritionals. He will be sadly missed.

Autism: The Non Urgent Crisis.

I thought Anne Dachel's response to this piece deserved a good read.

Autism Center Helping Families Cope With Disorder
WISC, WI - Oct 11, 2007

The story on the new autism school called Common Threads gave us some disturbing information. We're told that one in every
150 children in the U.S. now has autism. WISC-TV calls autism "a crisis" yet they can give us no reason why so many children
are affected with this devastating disorder.

Associate Dean of Research for the Waisman Center Dr. Susan Ellis Weismerm tells us that "in the past 10 years, there has been
an explosion in autism research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and much of it is being done at the Waisman Center.

Actually, there's been an explosion in the number of children with autism from one in 10,000 in the 1970s to one in every one
150 kids today, including one in every 94 boys, but the Waisman Center has long told us that there is no "crisis" or any
increase in autism.

A Spectrum of Disputes - New York Times

What's happened according to the Waisman Center is "better diagnosing" by doctors and an expanded spectrum of autism disorders. In other words, we've always had so many kids with autism, they were mislabeled. The problem with that claim is that no one asks people who make that claim to prove it. Why isn't there even one study that can find the misdiagnosed/undiagnosed adults with autism at a rate of one in 150?

When we talk about autism, we're talking about kids with autism. The rate of one in 150 came from studies of eight year olds, not eighty year olds. That simple fact should be scaring us all. Most adults never knew anyone labeled autistic or who displayed autistic behavior when they were young, but anywhere you bring up the subject, people start talking about kids they know with autism.

Research has shown that eighty percent of Americans with autism are under the age of eighteen. That means that within the next five to ten years these autistic kids will be adults dependent on the taxpayers for their support and care. Imagine what it will be like when one in every 150 eighteen year olds isn't going to work, or to school, or into the military, but applying for Social Security Disability for life with autism.

Right now the impact of the autism epidemic is being felt in our schools. Boston Globe reporter Carey Goldberg for example, wrote the story on July 5th, With rise in autism, programs strained - The Boston Globe in which we were told, "Statewide, the number of schoolchildren diagnosed with autism has nearly doubled over the last five years, from 4,080 to 7,521, according to soon-to-be-published data from the Department of Education."

In Massachusetts, one in every 130 kids has autism officially. Goldberg wrote, "Autism programs are faced with enormous needs and no one feels like we have enough programs to meet the up-and-coming numbers of children," said Rita Gardner, executive director of Melmark, in Andover, which serves children in its school, in their homes, and in public schools. "I would argue that this is one of our biggest public health crises in this country.

"A few years ago, when state public health authorities began providing autism services to children under 3, they expected about 500 children to enroll. At last count, they are serving more than 1,100.

Goldberg also reported that educating all these disabled children costs the state over $3 million dollars a year. Does anyone seriously think that this is happening merely because doctors are better at diagnosing? The same autistic children who are bankrupting school districts and on endless waiting lists for services will be overwhelming Social Security in the next five to ten year.

These are the current statistics on autism in the U.S. based on Dept. Education figures. http://www.vaprojec t.org/autismasds tatistics. html The explosion in the autism rate is clearly evident. Now imagine a similar increase in the number of young adults applying for Social Security Disability. This is also a double blow. These disabled young people are meant to be the replacement work force to help support the retiring post WWII generation. Not only won't they be paying into Social Security, they'll be living off of it for the rest of their long lives.

Findings by Michael Ganz at Harvard makes a chilling prediction of the future cost to our society as more and more autistic kids become autistic adults. His findings are felt by others to be a gross underestimate of the eventual autism price tag.Autism Has High Costs to U.S. Society, press release of Tuesday ....
It can cost about $3.2 million to take care of an autistic person over his or her lifetime. Caring for all people with autism over their lifetimes costs an estimated $35 billion per year.

See other figures from Lifespire: http://www.a-champ.org/documents/Lifespire%20Costs%20rev.2-23-06.ppt.pdf

Lifespire puts lifetime cost for a single autistic person at $10.125 million.

For more information on the cost of autism, contact Robert Krakow <rkrakow@earthlink.net>

At the height of the polio epidemic in the 1950s, one in 3,000 Americans was affected. That was a national crisis. A major effort was made to address it. Autism affects far more people, but no one seems concerned about what's going to happen to all these children. The most important comparison to be made with polio is the fact that most of the victims of polio recovered and went on to lead productive lives. The same won't be said about the victims of the autism epidemic. They will need support and care for life.

The words of Laura Bono of the National Autism Association are a grim forecast for the future: "As those children reach adulthood, the U.S. is ill-equipped to care for them. Not only do we not have enough services for adults now, the light at the end of the tunnel is a train. Frankly, we don't know what we're going to do."

Anne McElroy Dachel
Chippewa Falls, WI USA

UK: GMC Advises UK Docs To Commit Fraud over MMR

The GMC is Britain's medical ethics council that is currently trying Andrew Wakefield over alleged ethics violations in regards to his research on the MMR.

Apparently they are encouraging doctors to remove children who refuse the MMR from their list of patients to fraudulently raise the MMR uptake statistics.

The docs can then get payments for seeming to have met the governments MMR uptake goals.

So the GMC, whose job it is to maintain ethical medical practices, is apparently giving the nod for docs to commit fraud to prop up vaccine uptake stats and to get cash payments.

I am sure that Wakefield will get a fair hearing.

From UK Lawyer, Clifford Miller:

GMC Advises UK Docs To Commit Fraud over MMR

Is medicine institutionally corrupt? Here you will see the UK's General Medical Council advising UK medical doctors how to commit fraud on the UK's National Health Service for personal financial gain.

The GMC's role is to protect, promote and maintain the health and safety of the public by ensuring proper standards in the practice of medicine by medical doctors. This includes prosecuting UK medical doctors when their behaviour may bring the medical profession into disrepute. Dishonesty, financial impropriety and fraud fall within its purview. This link [1] provides an example of a decided case from its website.

The GMC is a statutory body independent (allegedly) of the NHS and of Government, with responsibility for maintaining the medical register for the United Kingdom. The GMC has statutory powers under the Medical Act 1983 to take action where there are concerns about the fitness to practise of a registered medical practitioner. Where the GMC finds that a doctor is not fit to practise, it has powers to erase that doctor's name from the medical register, to suspend the doctor from the register or to place conditions on the doctor's practice. These restrictions apply to practice in any sector of employment in any part of the UK. [2]

In the UK if doctors meet target levels for numbers of MMR and other vaccinations administered they can claim bonus payments for doing so. If they fail, they cannot claim those payments. One way of claiming the payments is to make a false return.

So how can it be that the GMC advises doctors on how to commit fraud? The GMC pose the question "Can GPs remove some children from their lists, temporarily, for the purpose of calculating the MMR target payment?" Here you will see that its currently available advice is to the effect that "it's OK provided you have patient consent" [3], [4]. It seems it also happens to be OK if it helps to increase the MMR uptake figures. The advice does not appear to be offered for other vaccinations.

And notice how they fail to make any mention of the financial and moral impropriety of doing so when they answer the question they pose like this:-

"This must not be done without the parents' agreement. Parents must be given a full explanation of what was proposed and why, their child's rights as an NHS patient, and the implications for their child's future care. Doctors working within the NHS must treat all patients entitled to NHS services on an equal footing. So temporarily removing a child from a GPs list must not adversely affect their care, for example in accessing secondary care and out-of-hours services, or in providing relevant information to ensure continuity of care and allow effective working with other agencies. Doctors must act honestly in their financial dealings. So GPs must ensure that any arrangement to remove a child from their list and re-register them for ‘immediately necessary treatment', or on some other basis, would be in line with their contractual obligations to the NHS."

Notice that provided the doctor does what the GMC advises and ensures "that any arrangement ... would be in line with their contractual obligations to the NHS" it is fine as "Doctors must act honestly in their financial dealings". Am I missing something or is this starting to look like we need the "men in white coats" to take away the men in white coats?

Not only that but the GMC advice is that if the evidence is available this is not contrary to GMC guidance on good medical practice:-

"Are temporary removals from a GPs list acceptable to the GMC? In the absence of evidence that ‘temporary removals' satisfy the concerns outlined at Q5, we cannot give any reassurance that such arrangements would be seen as consistent with our guidance on good practice."

GMC advice to UK doctors is that doctors "must not ask for or accept any inducement, gift or hospitality which may affect or be seen to affect the way you prescribe for, treat or refer patients." [7] But it seems the GMC do not mind when it comes to MMR, even where the inducement is so strong it encourages fraud on the NHS. But then, the GMC does not seem to mind about that either.

So now you know. If it concerns getting MMR uptake up, fraud is fine. But you had better make sure you implicate the parents and what better way to do that than to pressure them into agreeing their children become temporary patients possibly for emergency treatment only or else be dumped from the patient roster completely. Naturally, I am not saying that is happening nor am I saying the GMC advice is taken to suggest that be done - as it does not, but it could encourage that kind of behaviour. As a lawyer advising pro bono I have direct experience of patients being removed from an NHS doctor's roster after objections to childhood vaccinations.

The GMC has an agreement on cooperating and coordinating with the NHS Counter Fraud service [5]. And "GMC Today" newsletter carried a story ironically titled "Is the NHS immune to fraud?" about reducing and reporting fraud in the National Health Service [6]. The story gives a number to call the confidential NHS Fraud and Corruption Reporting Line and an email address too. It reports:-

"If you have a concern about a fraud taking place within the NHS, please call the confidential NHS Fraud and Corruption Reporting Line on 0800 028 40 60. All calls will be dealt with by trained staff and professionally investigated. Lines are open Monday to Friday 8 am–6 pm. You can also email us at nhsfraud@cfsms.nhs.uk at any time."

I haven't got the heart to tell 'em. Have you?


[1] http://www.gmc-uk.org/concerns/hearings_and_decisions/ftp/ftp_panel_islam_20061013.asp

[2] http://www.gmc-uk.org/about/partners/national_health_service_counter_fraud_service.asp

[3] http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/current/library/targeting_preventative_measures.asp

[4] http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/archive/Target_payments_for_preventative_health_measures_2003.pdf

[5] Memorandum of Understanding between the General Medical Council (GMC) and the National Health Service Counter Fraud Service (NHS CFS)

[6] Is the NHS immune to fraud? - GMC Today - Oct 2005

[6] Paragraph 74 Good Medical Practice

New Biomedical Support Group in Rockport Maine

From Laura Plorude of the Portland Maine biomed support group:

The new midcoast support group will be starting the 27th of October and will always be the last Saturday of the month. It will be held from 10 to 12 at Namaste Institute in Rockport.

This is on Beech Hill road across from Hobokin garden on Rt 1. It is about one mile up that road on the left. A little black sign is at the foot of the drive. (for the local MOMs)

The directions are also at Namasteinstitute.com

Dan Olmsted Is Back

... and calling out the CDC's shenanigans on The Rescue Post.

If you have not already made The Rescue Post a part of your regular blog reading, time to grab the feed.

TACA Offers A Guide To Your Journey With Autism

Jenny has brought biomedical autism treatment to the forefront of the country's mind, and my blog stats are through the roof, so for all those parents and friends that are new to the world of autism treatment, I wanted to point you in TACA's direction.

Talk About Curing Autism, the group that Jenny McCarthy represents, has a get started guide that my husband and I wish had existed when we started out on this journey three years ago. It covers all the bases.



It is a great one stop for what you need to know to get your child the help they need. If you are the friend or family member of someone with a child with autism, get one for them and one for yourself. They will need lots of help in the journey, and you can't claim that you really love them if you don't shoulder their burden.

Head's Up. More CDC CYA/BS Commin' Our Way

The CDC truly has no shame.

They didn't even include autistic children in this study. How much you wanna bet that dispite this fact, we will be reading media headlines that say, "new CDC study proves that vaccines not linked to autism".

[Update: That didn't take long. "New Study Results: Vaccines Not Tied to Autism"]

Exclusion of low birth weight babies, 70% participant drop out rate, focusing on blood mercury levels and ignoring brain mercury, conclusions not backed up by the data, conflicts of interests with all the researchers and on and on...

It is like a greatest hits of all the bad research done in the last decade wrapped up in one convenient package.

This thing looks to be Verstraeten all over again.

Thanks to A-CHAMP for the heads up.

Dear A-CHAMP subscribers:

On September 27, 2007 the New England Journal of Medicine will publish a study entitled, "Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years." For more than two years we at A-CHAMP have been hearing rumors of a new study that "exonerates" thimerosal, despite the fact that the study results were supposed to be kept strictly confidential.

Now the rumors have been turned into hype - another government funded study that tries to spin data and clear thimerosal of any suspicion of causing neurodevelopmental disorders. The study authors claim in their "Conclusions" that "[o]ur study does not support a causal association between early exposure to mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines and immune globulins and neuropsychological functioning at the age of 7 to 10 years."

The statement is plainly false. The study's conclusions do not reflect the study's data or the limitations of the study,

Unfortunately we have come to expect misleading statements – some might say fraudulent statements – from studies emanating from the CDC and their associates. It is not merely the fact that the authors of the study are burdened by large conflicts of interests - almost all of the 18 study authors have worked for vaccine manufacturers, received money from them, or performed research on their behalf. What is truly shocking about this study is that it does, indeed, find significant associations between thimerosal-containing vaccines and tics, speech, executive functioning and attention, but irresponsibly dismisses the associations. The study did not even look at children with autism – that is the subject of another uncompleted study – and children who might be more vulnerable to mercury, like low birth weight babies and children from families with lower incomes, were excluded or under-represented in the study sample

Fortunately, an advocate from our own community was an external consultant to the study, participated in its development from the outset, and is intimately familiar with the data and methodology. She has dissented from the study's conclusions. In addition, our colleagues and fellow parents at SafeMinds will be issuing a critique of the study in the near future. We are also told that the study data will be made publicly available so that independent researchers may examine it and draw their own conclusions.

Although detailed analysis of the study is beyond the scope of this letter, below are some key points that cause us to distrust this study as another attempt to manipulate the scientific and public debate on thimerosal to the detriment of the health and safety of America's children:

1. The Study's Claim of No Causality is Contrary to the Study's Data

The study authors claim that the data disproves causality when in fact, several findings show a negative effect on neuropsychological functioning warranting more study. At least one such adverse association was also found to be associated with low dose thimerosal exposure in other studies. As with earlier studies hyped by vaccine promoters, the study is unable to prove or disprove causality. The blanket dismissal of the troubling neuropsychological outcomes in this study is disingenuous and misleading.

2. Children with autism were excluded from this study

The early media contacts we have received suggest that this study shows no association between thimerosal and autism. In fact, the study specifically did not look at children with autism as the sample size was too small and the testing is impossible to complete for the typical child with autism. The exclusion of children with autism from the study may have undermined the power of the study to draw any conclusions about thimerosal.

3. The Study's Authors Misrepresent Previous Toxicokinetic Studies of Thimerosal

The study authors falsely claim that research by Burbacher et al. at the University of Washington (distribution of thimerosal as compared with methylmercury in infant monkeys) shows that ethylmercury is safer than methylmercury. But the authors focus only on the blood "half-life", ignoring data, showing twice as much inorganic mercury trapped in the brains of monkeys than from same dose of methylmercury.

4. The Study's Methodology has Serious Limitations Negating Any Conclusions Drawn

Major flaws that that causes a large underestimation of neurological adverse effects burden the study: 70% of the families recruited for the study failed to participate. This kind of bias in epidemiological studies is well known to distort even large studies of health effects. (See , for example, NY Times Magazine, "Do We Really Know What Makes Us Healthy" by Gary Taubes 9/16/07). It is well established that people who choose to participate in this kind of study are probably very different than those who refuse to participate (the "healthy person" or "complier" effect); especially when the ones who refused to participate said they were too busy.

Simply put: if you have a kid with ADHD or mild ASD or other neurodevelopmental disorders, you are likely to be busier, more stressed, and less available than the mother of a healthy normal child. This phenomenon serves to amplify the effect of the "complier", the "healthy families," - those who do cooperate with the study - confounding or confusing the study's results. The cooperative parents included in the study were more likely to be those with relatively trouble-free kids

5.Major Conflicts of Interest Burden Almost Every One of the 18 Study Authors

Many of the study authors have either worked for or received money from vaccine manufacturers. Others are employed by the CDC, which has been criticized by an IOM committee for its inherent conflict of interest in promoting vaccines while simultaneously monitoring safety. Many of the remaining study authors have conducted studies for vaccine manufacturers. The conflicts of interest cast doubt on the validity of the study, especially of the clearly biased final conclusions.

6. The High & Low Thimerosal Exposure Groups Too Small to Draw Conclusions

In addition to the number of children of the study being too small to draw statistically significant conclusions, the numbers of children in the high exposure group and the low exposure group were far too small to draw conclusions. Yet the study ignored this limitation and drew sweeping conclusions of no causality.

7.Vulnerable Children Were Excluded from the Study; Early Intervention Was Ignored

Children with a birth weight under 5 lbs. 8 oz. were excluded from the study further skewing the results, as these children are likely more vulnerable to thimerosal than larger babies. In addition, the fact that early intervention may have reduced deficits such as speech delay detected by neuropsychological testing of children aged 7-10 was not accounted for in the study results. There also was no analysis of combined prenatal and postnatal mercury exposures. Only 103 mothers who were exposed to mercury from prenatal immune globulins participated in the study, far too small a group for researchers to draw conclusions regarding the safety of thimerosal in these products.

8. The Study Fails to Account for the Subset of Children with "Efflux Disorder"

Only approximately 1000 children participated in the study, out of more than 3000 that were recruited. In addition to the "complier" bias discussed above, the study sample size is too small to accurately estimate the adverse effect of Thimerosal on the subset of the population who have a problem in mobilizing and excreting mercury. While the study's author's focus on the average time it takes for mercury to clear from the blood, itself misrepresented, we know that in 15% of the population this average is greatly exceeded. It is these children who are vulnerable to the effects of mercury from thimerosal. This study fails to account for the effect of mercury from vaccines on this subset of children.

These are but a few of the serious problems with the study and the way the data have been presented. We look forward to the forthcoming SAFEMINDS critique of the study and thank them for their continued close monitoring and analysis of the scientific research that affects our children.

In the meantime, if you see headlines stating that "Vaccines Cleared in New Study" or "New Study Finds Thimerosal Safe" know that we are all again being played, and that those who we should be able to trust are compromising the truth and the health of our children.

Sincerely,
Bob Krakow, for A-CHAMP

America, Meet Your Unvaccinated Kids

The Rescue Post is calling your attention again to the first study of vaccinated v. unvaccinated children and their risk for disorders like Autism, ADHD, Asthma and the like. The study was released in June and ignored by the mainstream media.

Those of you who are here because you saw Jenny MCCarthy, our new autism spokes mom, on the tele should take a look at the survey.

If you vaccinated your son, they have a %155 higher chance of having a neurological disorder had you chosen not to vaccinate.

The question that we have been screaming at the CDC for years, and they will not answer, is this:

Are we trading curable communicable diseases for incurable neurological diseases by over vaccinating our children, and by not screening to see which children cannot tolerate vaccination.