Welcome LJ Goes to Adventures In Autism

This blog was supposed to be a log of my journey in being an autism mother.  It was... and as my journey traveled through the corruption that made my son sick, and kept him from healing, it transformed into medical corruption blog.  Because that is where I am on this adventure.

But as you may have noticed, over the past year I kept posting pieces by Lisa Goes, that really resonated with me.  They communicated all of the frustration and anger and pain and chaos that we lived through in Chandler's early years, and they did it with a transparency that I consider brave.  Because it is brave to expose that much of yourself and your pain to the world.

So as I have become a professional activist and my son is so much better (he is a happy, happy child) I wanted to bring some of that former light and energy back to this space.  I am pleased to announce that LJ has come on board to share her experiences with my audience.  She is someone I have affection and respect for, and who loves and defends our children passionately.

Join me in welcoming LJ Goes.

OSHA Supports Health Care Workers Rights To Decline The Flu Shot

Statement from OSHA:

OSHA's Official Position on Flu Vaccination of Healthcare Workers

"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is strongly supportive of efforts to increase influenza vaccination rates among healthcare workers in accordance with the Healthy People 2020 goals. However, at this time, OSHA believes there is insufficient scientific evidence for the federal government to promote mandatory influenza vaccination programs that do not have an option for the HCP to decline for medical, religious and/or personal philosophical reasons.                                                                                                       

While we are supportive of the Healthy People 2020 goal of a 90% vaccination rate, we have seen no evidence that demonstrates that such a high rate is in fact necessary. Furthermore, the current influenza vaccine is no magic bullet. The current state of influenza vaccine technology requires annual reformulation and revaccination and the efficacy is quite variable. Every year there are numerous circulating strains of influenza that are not included in the vaccine. In years where the antigenic match is good, the vaccine only provides protection against the 3 strains in the formulation. In years when the antigenic match is poor, the vaccine may provide no protection at all. The limits of current influenza vaccine technology are especially problematic in the context of a mandatory influenza vaccination program that results in job loss. Lastly, reliance on a mandatory influenza vaccination policy may provide healthcare workers, health care facility management and patients with an unwarranted sense of security and result in poor adherence to other infection control practices that prevent all types of infections, not just influenza. Influenza vaccination has always been just one part of a comprehensive multi-layered infection control program. 

While OSHA does not believe that there is sufficient evidence to meet the bar necessary to support mandatory vaccination programs, we nonetheless are convinced that influenza vaccination is generally beneficial and are supportive of efforts to promote vaccination. Influenza vaccination exemptions should be for HCP with valid medical contraindications to vaccinations, or religious and/or personal objections and a signed declination statement that indicates the HCP has been educated regarding influenza, is aware of the risk and benefits of influenza vaccination, has been given the opportunity to be vaccinated with the influenza vaccine at no charge, and can receive the influenza vaccine in the future at no charge to the HCP."

HT: NVIC

Offit Teaches Physicians How to Talk To The Public About Vaccines: Contemptuously Lecture, Stonewall, Bully and Throw Them Out

Reading Jake Crosby's piece today on being thrown out of yet another Paul Offit speech, I am struck by the ironic pattern in these speaking engagements.  

Paul Offit (and Seth Mnookin) have been holding events at prestigious institutions to tell medical professionals and academics how to handle the public on the vaccine controversy.  Yet I think that it is completely lost on them that they are not just giving a speech on how to handle people who question the current vaccine program, they are actually holding a lab, will full scale demonstrations, on how to handle people who question the current vaccine program.

Because people don't really pay as much attention to what you say as they do to what you do.  (Ask any parent trying to teach a child NOT to do something that they do themselves.  "Don't smoke kids.  Now pass mommy her cigarettes.")  And what Offit and Mnookin have done, is offer a bunch of words that will likely have little impact, but then actually demonstrate how to treat doubters of their message, which has a huge impact.

So here is the take away that event goers are getting when attending an Offit/Mnookin event:

1.  Offit gives a lecture at NIH entitled “Communicating Vaccine Safety Science to the Public,” says a bunch of words, then demonstrates how to communicate "vaccine safety science" to someone who is a steakholder in the issue (Jake Crosby, who may be vaccine injured) by falsely accusing him of being a stalker, by not letting him ask a question (although he is behaving completely appropriately) and by throwing him off the premises. 

Take away:  To communicate with the public, talk AT them.  If they have questions that you don't want to answer, make them your adversary and have them removed from the property.

It is OK, and even preferable, to demonize vaccine safety skeptics, and treat them very poorly. 

Bully them.


2.  Offit gives a lecture at Yale entitled “Hard Knocks: Communicating Science to the Public,” says a bunch of words, then demonstrates how to communicate "science" to someone who is a steakholder in the issue (Jake Crosby, who may be vaccine injured) by falsely accusing him of being a stalker, by yelling at him, by not letting him ask a question (although he is behaving completely appropriately) and by throwing him off the premises.

Take away:  To communicate with the public, talk AT them.  If they have questions that you don't want to answer, make them your adversary and have them removed from the property.  Offit has also inferring that the "Hard Knocks" do not refer to the medical professional being "knocked" when trying to talk to communicate to the public, but actually to the vaccine safety skeptic who was actually "knocked" trying to communicate with the medical professional.  "When engaging the public, it is OK to give them 'hard knocks'."

It is OK, and even preferable, to demonize vaccine safety skeptics, and treat them very poorly. 

Bully them.

3.  Mnookin gives a lecture at  American University's School of Communication entitled  "How to Communicate with Anti-Vaccine Parents," says a bunch of words, then demonstrates how to communicate "science" to someone who wants to make their own vaccine decisions, by telling the audience that you are offended and repulsed by such parents, and that you think they are "Total Assholes."

Take away:  To communicate with the public, hold them in contempt.  Even when they are parents earnestly working in the best interests of their vulnerable children.

It is OK, and even preferable, to demonize vaccine skeptics, even as you admit that vaccines may not even work for their child.

Bully them.

4.  Mnookin appears at the  “Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research” event,  says a bunch of words, then demonstrates public responsibility in vaccine discussion by falsely accusing a stakeholder in the issue (Jake Crosby, who may be vaccine injured) of being disruptive at events, by not letting him ask a question (although he is behaving completely appropriately) and by throwing him off the premises .

Take away:  It is responsible, when dealing with vaccine safety skeptics, to talk AT them while only allowing them to sit quietly and listen.  If they have questions that you don't want to answer, make them your adversary and have them removed from the property.

It is OK, and even preferable, to demonize vaccine safety skeptics, and treat them very poorly.

Bully them.

Do you see the pattern here?

Mnookin and Offit ARE teaching the medical world how to treat those who have questions about vaccine safety.  They are to be treated very poorly.  They are to be held in contempt and bullied.  They are to be removed from the premises.

But of course the problem for medical professionals in taking this advice, is that when they try it in their offices, they loose the argument, the loose the patient, and they loose their reputation in the community.  Taking Offit's advice is akin to shooting oneself in the foot for anyone whose job actually requires them to have a conversation with a member of the public.

And the Offiteers have lost at least A QUARTER of the public to the conclusion that vaccinating according to CDC recommendations is a greater risk to their child than adhering to their recommendations.

So I will echo Mary Holland's most salient question to Paul Offit in this last exchange:

"Would you be willing to engage in a public debate about the vaccine issue?”

And we see that the answer is, and always will be, the one that Offit gives:

“There is no need to debate the science; the science is in.”

Their answer is "No."  

So as Offit (who has become the Bagdad Bob of vaccination) and friends lock the doors to the ivory tower from the inside, to protect themselves from vicious graduate students in epidemiology at that hotbed of anti-science anarchy, George Washington University; but what they don't seem to have noticed is that all they have done is locked themselves in a broom closet, away from the real vaccine discussion that matters.  Their tiny mutual admiration society is having little impact in the direction of vaccine uptake rates, because they are not engaging with the vaccine decision makers.  You know... their customers.  The discussions that are changing vaccine uptake are happening at coffee tables, at bus stops and over back fences.  

I have them on a weekly basis, I don't accuse people who question me of being disruptive or being stalkers, I don't treat them with contempt, i don't call them "Total Assholes," I don't shout them down when they try to ask questions, I don't throw them off the premises and I DO engage them for as long as they want to talk about the issue.

I can show a mother that the claim that "The science is in and vaccines don't cause autism" (and apparently now encephalopathy) is a complete load of horse shit in 2 minutes on my cell phone from our health officials own words documents and web sites.  Not only is Offit not there to defend his stupid claim, local pediatricians are completely ill equipped to win back moms who have been educated at the coffee table, because the only thing they have been taught to do with these moms are:

1. Hold them in contempt.

2. Talk AT them.

3. Don't allow them to ask questions.

4. If they challenge your stance, throw them out.

And then of course, the next time they are at coffee, it's all, "OMG... you were totally right.  They don't know anything about vaccine injury!  He couldn't answer the questions and just tried to bully me!  What is the name of your pediatrician who is cool with your vaccine choices?"

So by all means, keep it up you two... keep it up.  Nothing proves my points more to all the women I talk to than the way you behave.

Hepatitis B Vaccine Can Cause Mitochondrial Disorders and Cell Death

Apoptosis. 2012 Jan 17. [Epub ahead of print]

Hepatitis B vaccine induces apoptotic death in Hepa1-6 cells.

Hamza H, Cao J, Li X, Li C, Zhu M, Zhao S.

Source

Key Lab of Agricultural Animal Genetics, Breeding, and Reproduction of Ministry of Education, College of Animal Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, 430070, People's Republic of China, Heyam68_hamza@yahoo.com.

Abstract

Vaccines can have adverse side-effects, and these are predominantly associated with the inclusion of chemical additives such as aluminum hydroxide adjuvant. The objective of this study was to establish an in vitro model system amenable to mechanistic investigations of cytotoxicity induced by hepatitis B vaccine, and to investigate the mechanisms of vaccine-induced cell death. The mouse liver hepatoma cell line Hepa1-6 was treated with two doses of adjuvanted (aluminium hydroxide) hepatitis B vaccine (0.5 and 1 μg protein per ml) and cell integrity was measured after 24, 48 and 72 h. Hepatitis B vaccine exposure increased cell apoptosis as detected by flow cytometry and TUNEL assay. Vaccine exposure was accompanied by significant increases in the levels of activated caspase 3, a key effector caspase in the apoptosis cascade. Early transcriptional events were detected by qRT-PCR. We report that hepatitis B vaccine exposure resulted in significant upregulation of the key genes encoding caspase 7, caspase 9, Inhibitor caspase-activated DNase (ICAD), Rho-associated coiled-coil containing protein kinase 1 (ROCK-1), and Apoptotic protease activating factor 1 (Apaf-1). Upregulation of cleaved caspase 3,7 were detected by western blot in addition to Apaf-1 and caspase 9 expressions argues that cell death takes place via the intrinsic apoptotic pathway in which release of cytochrome c from the mitochondria triggers the assembly of a caspase activation complex. We conclude that exposure of Hepa1-6 cells to a low dose of adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine leads to loss of mitochondrial integrity, apoptosis induction, and cell death, apoptosis effect was observed also in C2C12 mouse myoblast cell line after treated with low dose of vaccine (0.3, 0.1, 0.05 μg/ml). In addition In vivo apoptotic effect of hepatitis B vaccine was observed in mouse liver.

PMID:

22249285

[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]  

AMA Proposes Forcing People to Participate In Vaccine Trials

You read that right.  The American Medical Association has published a piece in the Policy Forum entitled:

Should Participation in Vaccine Clinical Trials be Mandated?

I am absolutely apoplectic.

The article, written by Suzanne Sheehy and Joel Meyer begins its argument for forced participation in vaccine trials with a quote from Highly Esteemed and Eminent Physician Ethically Challenged College Dropout Bill Gates.  Because he is truly who you should be going to for medical advice.  Cause... you know... he's rich.

Few would argue with Bill Gates when he describes vaccination as “the most effective and cost effective health tool ever invented”

So on the basis of this non doctor's, non-medical opinion (we do know that he owns a vaccine company, right), with no proof of the validity of this statement necessary mind you (because after all, "few would argue with him" and consensus equals truth) we are not only now going to vaccinate everyone, we are going to force people into vaccine trials.

And the medical establishment is completely baffled why people don't trust them any more and won't take their vaccine advice?

If I just stopped here, the fact that they just published this suggestion, should be enough to perhaps get mainstream med to ask themselves whether or not they really have jumped the shark on vaccine policy.  But then again, that should have happened a long time ago.  But apparently not yet.  Let's go on to the arguments they make including the ideas that:

• "Given the often unquantifiable risks to the recipients of vaccines in early stages of development" clinical trials rely on volunteers, which is unsustainable and unethical. 
• Volunteerism in vaccine trials is on the decline.
• It doesn't pay well enough which tells participants that they are undervalued.
• Most participants are "poor and vulnerable" which is unethical since the approved vaccines "benefit the whole population."
• If we pay them more, then they will be seduced by the money and might not be practicing "informed consent"
• Progress on new vaccines must be uneffected by people not wanting to be in vaccine trial, therefore they should consider new strategies
• Forcing people to be involved is one such strategy, and it "is not as outlandish as it might seem on first consideration"
• Many societies already mandate things that are for The Greater Good, like jury duty, opt-out organ donation and the draft.

And I just want to give you this whole quote, so you really see clearly that when we say that our children have been drafted into their war on communicable disease, it is not really an analogy as much as it is... well... fact:

"In both conscription and obligatory trial participation, individuals have little or no choice regarding involvement and face inherent risks over which they have no control, all for the greater good of society."

[emphasis mine]

In his chapter in our book, Vaccine Epidemic: How Corporate Greed, Biased Science, and Coercive Government Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health, and Our Children, Allen Tate makes the point that if one is going to make a greater good argument (that one unsavory thing must be undertaken to get something more important for more people) one must first ACTUALLY PROVE THAT SUCH A THING WILL BRING ABOUT A GREATER GOOD.   He then evaluates the greater good argument made for the current vaccine program (which does not include forced vaccine trial participation) and finds that it does not even meet the standard of a "greater good".

But no problem with that here for Sheehy and Meyer, because as they point out, it is vaccine maker Bill Gates' opinion (who is very rich btw), and few would argue with him... so... it must be the best thing for everyone.

It is at this point that I have to offer Leslie Manookin high praise for so aptly naming her vaccine documentary, "The Greater Good".  Let's pause here for a moment to see what this "greater good" program is doing to the vulnerable in our society:

And that is from APPROVED vaccines.

They truly see us and our children as functionaries in their system.  Medicine does not exist to make you, the individual, better; You, the individual, exist to make Medicine better.  You are theirs to "conscript".  They can draft you into their service as an actual "lab rat."  (And no that is not an exaggeration as the third sentence in this article reads, "The lack of animal models that can reliably predict vaccine efficacy means that development still unavoidably relies on testing of novel vaccines in healthy individuals.")

See?  Not about your and your rights and your health.  Your rights are not even factored into their arguements.  Check this:

"As ever, then, the debate boils down to a consideration of the “greater good” or the “lesser evil.” A key consideration is the risk benefit ratio—risk to the individual volunteer balanced against the benefit to society. "

"As ever..." as in the only thing they are taking into account.  The deciding factor.

Then the article truly falls into Orwellian doublespeak.  They authors acknowledge that forcing people to participate in vaccine trials, will violate respect for peoples rights, violate the Universial Declaration of Human Rights, and destroy trust in the vaccine program.  Their solution?

"A more palatable and realistic option is a policy of “mandated choice.” In this case individuals would be required by law to state in advance their willingness to participate in vaccine trials [15]. The advantage of this system is that it could identify a large cohort of willing volunteers from which participants could be recruited rapidly without jeopardizing individual autonomy. It would encourage an open, noncoercive philosophy for tackling societal challenges without compromising individual freedom or public trust in the health care system."

Mandated choice?  MANDATED CHOICE?!!

UP IS DOWN!
BLACK IS WHITE!
WAR IS PEACE!
VIOLENCE IS LOVE!
MANDATE IS CHOICE!!!!!

So the law REQUIRING YOU to say you will participate before hand, then holding you to it later, is choice!  It is not coercive, does not violate your right to informed consent, and will not destroy trust in the vaccine program or in medicine or government in general!

Welcome to 1984!!  The law will require you to commit you to volunteer your body to science!  The law does not even do that now for DEAD PEOPLE!

And to skip back a bit, follow this logic... paying people lots of money to participate in trials sabatoges "informed consent", but legally forcing them to consent, is "informed consent."  Coercing with money = immoral.  Coercing with a gun = moral!

Then we get to the kernel of the issue.  That people just don't value vaccines enough, so the law must now force them to be valued.  And no such article should go with out a shot at Wakefield and our community:

"But perhaps most importantly, as a society we need to evaluate our perception of vaccination. Any successful vaccine program by its very nature takes a once-feared illness out of the public eye. This means that the benefits of immunization become forgotten while side effects in small numbers of individuals fill the headlines. It is all too easy for sensationalist and unfounded stories such as that claiming a link between the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine and autism [16] to instead take root in society’s collective psyche. Ultimately such a crucial public health intervention as vaccine development may become devalued—and only revalued once a drop in vaccination rates leads to resurgence of severe disease."

"But perhaps more importantly..."  Because more important than honoring the human rights of actual humans, is a valuable perception of vaccination.

Seriously... these people can go to hell.  Or just visit Auschwitz, where medical progress was much more important than allowing people to say to NO to forced experimentation.

So to the publishers of this article:

AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, MEET THE FREE MARKET!

Your product line called "vaccine" is not as valuable as you think it is.  (In business this is called a "bubble".)  People are buying less of it.  You have reached a saturation point.  Time to wake up and smell the informed consent.  The public has been informed... AND THEY DON'T CONSENT!

You will put experimental vaccines into the bodies of my family over my dead body.  


And to Sheehy and Meyer:

I cannot find words that will express my outrage and contempt for what you have done here.  This is absolutely an abomination to the whole point of medicine, and to logic itself.  I hope that you are despised in your communities for floating a balloon like this.  It is nothing short of evil.

I do take solace in the fact that the logic in this article is such utter bullshit (MANDATED CHOICE... I still can't believe you wrote this with a straight face) that anyone with half a brain will see that you are attempting to bring back the good old days of Doctor Mengele and will flush this article down the toilet where it belongs.

So if this was some sort of ironic "A Modest Proposal" type article to point out that we have gone a bit overboard on the vaccine push, then now is the time to speak up on that.

If not... as I proposed earlier, which might not be as outlandish as it might seem on first consideration... go to hell.

Mechanisms of Aluminum Adjuvant Toxicity and Autoimmunity in Pediatric Populations

Mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity and autoimmunity in pediatric populations

Lupus (2012) 21, 223–230.

L Tomljenovic1 and CA Shaw2
1Neural Dynamics Research Group, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC,
Canada and 2Departments of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences and Experimental Medicine and the Graduate Program in Neuroscience,
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Immune challenges during early development, including those vaccine-induced, can lead to
permanent detrimental alterations of the brain and immune function. Experimental evidence
also shows that simultaneous administration of as little as two to three immune adjuvants can
overcome genetic resistance to autoimmunity. In some developed countries, by the time children
are 4 to 6 years old, they will have received a total of 126 antigenic compounds along with
high amounts of aluminum (Al) adjuvants through routine vaccinations. According to the US
Food and Drug Administration, safety assessments for vaccines have often not included
appropriate toxicity studies because vaccines have not been viewed as inherently toxic.
Taken together, these observations raise plausible concerns about the overall safety of current
childhood vaccination programs. When assessing adjuvant toxicity in children, several key
points ought to be considered: (i) infants and children should not be viewed as ‘‘small adults’’
with regard to toxicological risk as their unique physiology makes them much more vulnerable
to toxic insults; (ii) in adult humans Al vaccine adjuvants have been linked to a variety of
serious autoimmune and inflammatory conditions (i.e., ‘‘ASIA’’), yet children are regularly
exposed to much higher amounts of Al from vaccines than adults; (iii) it is often assumed that
peripheral immune responses do not affect brain function. However, it is now clearly established
that there is a bidirectional neuro-immune cross-talk that plays crucial roles in immunoregulation
as well as brain function. In turn, perturbations of the neuro-immune axis have
been demonstrated in many autoimmune diseases encompassed in ‘‘ASIA’’ and are thought to
be driven by a hyperactive immune response; and (iv) the same components of the neuroimmune
axis that play key roles in brain development and immune function are heavily targeted
by Al adjuvants. In summary, research evidence shows that increasing concerns about
current vaccination practices may indeed be warranted. Because children may be most at risk
of vaccine-induced complications, a rigorous evaluation of the vaccine-related adverse health
impacts in the pediatric population is urgently needed.


[ed note: emphasis mine]

Offit/Crosby

So strange.

Jake Crosby has been dissecting autism research, writing about vaccine injury and exposing corruption and conflicts of interests in vaccine apologists for what, four years now?  And suddenly, in the course of three weeks, he has been branded so dangerous that he must be physically removed from not one, but two separate lectures by vaccine industry defenders... after merely asking a legitimate questions, both about Andrew Wakefield?

First Seth Mnookin said he was a heckler, but now wont answer questions or offer details about said heckling.  Now Paul Offit has upped the ante and announced that Jake was his stalker.

So as with Mnookin, I have written to Dr. Offit and asked him for details of Jake's problematic behavior.  You may recognize much of the letter, as I merely modified the letter I sent to Mnookin a few weeks ago, as this is practically the identical scenario that happened a few weeks ago.

-------- Original Message --------

Subject:	Jake Crosby
Date:	Tue, 27 Dec 2011 18:40:00 -0500
From:	Ginger Taylor
To:	Paul Offit

Dr. Offit,

I read Jake Crosby's story on being ejected from your most recent event after asking a question during the question and answer period.

From his telling of the story, what you did seems to me be very heavy handed and inappropriate at the least, and some pretty ugly censorship and slander on your part at most.

As you have been untruthful about offenses that were never committed by your opponents in the past, (I reference JB Handley's successful libel lawsuit against you and the Orange County Register's retraction of your charges against a CBS reporter when you were unable to back them up), I tend to believe Jake's story on its face, but I want to allow for the fact that Jake did not report the incident accurately, thus my reason for contacting you with a few questions.

1.  Did he accurately report the incident, and that he has only been in contact with you once before, two years ago, via email?

2.  If so, do you not believe that an apology to him is in order?

3.  If he did not report the incident accurately, what did he get wrong?

4.  If not, what was the "stalking" incident or incidents that you referred that previously took place and why did it preclude him from asking a non-stalking question at this event?  When and where did it take place, what was said, what administrative or security action was taken, and are there recordings of any such events?

5.  Is Jake precluded from asking you questions in the future?  Is he precluded from attending any of your speaking engagements in the future?  Have you given him any notice to stay away, or a cease and desist or has any form of restraining order been issued?

6.  Like Jake, I have been very critical of your writing in my own blogging.  Am I allowed to attend your events and ask you questions?  If so what are the parameters for asking you questions and do they differ from someone who might agree with you on your vaccine stance?

7.  Is there anyone else from the autism, vaccine injury, vaccine safety or anti-vaccine communities, or from the medical community that is skeptical of the safety and efficacy claims made about the current vaccine program, that are not allowed to attend your events or ask you questions?

8.  Finally, (and with brutal frankness) If Mr. Crosby's story is accurate, and he has been appropriate in his interactions with you, and your own desire to silence your challengers is at the heart of why you had him removed from the room, is this a pattern you intend to continue?  Can anyone asking you a question which you believe you will not not be able to answer well, or which might make you look bad in front of the audience, expect to be slandered and escorted from the room?

9.  As Seth Mnookin made similar charges against Jake earlier this month, have you been communicating with him about Jake, and is this a coordinated effort to slander him?

I want to get this cleared up as people have expressed in increasing interest in attending your speaking events and challenging your assertions, many of which (myself included) believe are grossly inaccurate and/or irresponsible.  We certainly want to know up front if you intend on misrepresenting any of us as you seem to have done with Jake or if it is Jake who is misrepresenting you.

Your prompt response is appreciated.

--

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

Does Geri Dawson Know What Glutathone Is?

Interesting story...

I was speaking with an autism researcher who told me about an exchange he had with Geri Dawson, the chief science officer for Autism Speaks.  He attended an AS reception at a university and approached Dr. Dawson to ask her what she thought about the research surrounding glutathione and autism.  Dr. Dawson replied that she was not familiar with gluthathione/autism research.

There are 12 studies on GSH and Autism (all of which I have listed below) and all of them have found low glutathione problems are tied to autism.

My son was diagnosed with autism in the spring of 2004, and I became familiar with glutathione/autism research before the summer was out.  I believe it is absolutely unacceptable for the "science officer" of Autism Speaks, whom GQ declared one of the "Rock Stars of Science," to not be intimately familiar with what may be one of the most key aspects of why our children as so susceptible to environmental injury, low glutathione levels that leave our children unable to detox.

And as Autism Speaks has highlighted in their own "AUTISM SPEAKS TOP 10 AUTISM RESEARCH ACHIEVEMENTS OF 2011" Autism is a condition brought on by environmental exposures.  And being that one of the GSH/autism studies was actually funded by Autism Speaks, again... no reason that Dawson should not be all over this.

The possibility that Dr. Dawson could not even offer a basic response on a question about glutathione, to put in mildly, troubles me.  The fact that she believes that she is qualified to be directing autism research, knowing so little about this environmental illness, makes me angry.  The fact that Geri Dawson has applied to be on the IACC makes me crazy.  Because with her title, and her "Rock Star" PR, she might just be added to it by Thomas Insel.

Just to be sure that I had my fact straight about Dr. Dawson's response to the GSH question.  I wrote to her to confirm:

Subject:	Glutathione
Date:	Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:59:06 -0500
From:	Ginger Taylor
To:	Geri Dawson

Dr. Dawson,

I am writing a piece on you and would like your response before I publish.

I spoke with a researcher who reports approaching you at an AS reception earlier this year and asking you about glutathione research.  He told me that you said were not familiar with research on glutathione. 

As the glutathione connection in autism is a foundational one to understanding why these particular children are vulnerable to environmentally caused autism (including vaccine induced autism, which you continue to deny despite the evidence HRSA's own admission that vaccine induced encephalopathy can cause autism, and that they list the symptoms of autism on the VICP injury table), and as it is among the first interventions that families implementing biomedical intervention for autism learn about, you can see how alarming that AS's chief science officer seems to have no knowledge of its role in autism causation or treatment. 

I will be writing about this exchange, but wanted to give you a chance to comment before I publish. 

When you were approached about glutathione, did you have any understanding of its role in autism?  What is your understanding now?  Since every study done on GSH and autism has found a link, and since AS has actually funded research on GSH, it is appropriate for AS to have a science officer who is not conversant on it?

Thank you,

--

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

That was more than a month ago, and no response.

So what does Dr. Dawson actually know about this environmental illness?  A comment she made on her "Rock Stars of Science" interview might give us a hint.

"Best moment in medicine/research: Recently, my colleagues and I published the first randomized clinical trial showing very positive benefits of early intervention for toddlers with autism. The moment I saw the results of that study was one of the best moments of my research career."

Dr. Dawson's best moment in research was when she confirmed what we have known for probably twenty years, but the fact that children might be prevented from needing that early intervention in the first place simply by testing infant glutathione levels... completely lost on her?

Listing the GSH research for Dr. Dawson in the hopes that she will review it and realize that she might have a chance to prevent the boat from developing a hole it in, rather than having to spend a lifetime bailing it out.


1. Nutritional and Metabolic Status of Children with Autism vs. Neurotypical Children, and the Association with Autism Severity. Adams JB, Audhya T, McDonough-Means S, Rubin RA, Quig D, Geis E, Gehn E, Loresto M, Mitchell J, Atwood S, Barnhouse S, Lee W. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2011 Jun 8;8(1):34.

2. The severity of autism is associated with toxic metal body burden and red blood cell glutathione levels. Adams JB, Baral M, Geis E, Mitchell J, Ingram J, Hensley A, Zappia I, Newmark S, Gehn E, Rubin RA, Mitchell K, Bradstreet J, El-Dahr JM. J Toxicol. 2009;2009:532640.

3. Novel plasma phospholipid biomarkers of autism: mitochondrial dysfunction as a putative causative mechanism. Pastural E, Ritchie S, Lu Y, Jin W, Kavianpour A, Khine Su-Myat K, Heath D, Wood PL, Fisk M, Goodenowe DB. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids. 2009 Oct;81(4):253-64.

4. Metabolic biomarkers related to oxidative stress and antioxidant status in Saudi autistic children. Al-Gadani Y, El-Ansary A, Attas O, Al-Ayadhi L. Clin Biochem. 2009 Jul;42(10-11):1032-40.

5. One carbon metabolism disturbances and the C677T MTHFR gene polymorphism in children with autism spectrum disorders. Paşca SP, Dronca E, Kaucsár T, Craciun EC, Endreffy E, Ferencz BK, Iftene F, Benga I, Cornean R, Banerjee R, Dronca M. J Cell Mol Med. 2009 Oct;13(10):4229-38.

6. Efficacy of methylcobalamin and folinic acid treatment on glutathione redox status in children with autism. James SJ, Melnyk S, Fuchs G, Reid T, Jernigan S, Pavliv O, Hubanks A, Gaylor DW. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jan;89(1):425-30.

7. Biomarkers of environmental toxicity and susceptibility in autism. Geier DA, Kern JK, Garver CR, Adams JB, Audhya T, Nataf R, Geier MR. J Neurol Sci. 2009 May 15;280(1-2):101-8.

8. A prospective study of transsulfuration biomarkers in autistic disorders. Geier DA, Kern JK, Garver CR, Adams JB, Audhya T, Geier MR. Neurochem Res. 2009 Feb;34(2):386-93.

9. Abnormal transmethylation/transsulfuration metabolism and DNA hypomethylation among parents of children with autism. James SJ, Melnyk S, Jernigan S, Hubanks A, Rose S, Gaylor DW. J Autism Dev Disord. 2008 Nov;38(10):1966-75.

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

11. Metabolic endophenotype and related genotypes are associated with oxidative stress in children with autism. James SJ, Melnyk S, Jernigan S, Cleves MA, Halsted CH, Wong DH, Cutler P, Bock K, Boris M, Bradstreet JJ, Baker SM, Gaylor DW. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2006 Dec 5;141B(8):947-56.

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

Mnookin/Crosby

Update: December 19th. One week out, and other than an auto reply, no response. Not even an "It's the holidays and I am knitting sweaters with my grandma, will get back to you in the new year."

Seth,

I read Jake's story on being ejected from your most recent event after asking a question during the question and answer period.

From his telling of the story, what you did seems to me be very heavy handed and inappropriate at the least, and some pretty ugly censorship and cowardice on your part at most.

As you have censored my own comments on your blog in the past, and have stated outright that you wish that David Kirby would be censored in his vaccine writing, I tend to believe Jake's story on its face, but I want to allow for the fact that Jake did not report the incident accurately, thus my reason for contacting you with a few questions.

1.  Did he accurately report the incident?

2.  If so, do you not believe that an apology to him is in order?

3.  If he did not report the incident accurately, what did he get wrong and is there a recording of the event?

4.  If so, what was the "heckling" incident that you referred to at a previous event and why did it preclude him from asking a non-heckling question at this event?  When and where did it take place, what was said, what administrative or security action was taken, and is there a recording of that event?

5.  Is Jake precluded from asking you questions in the future?  Is he precluded from attending any of your speaking engagements in the future?  Have you given him any notice to stay away, or a cease and desist or has any form of restraining order been issued?

6.  Like Jake, I have been very critical of your writing in my own blogging.  Am I allowed to attend your events and ask you questions?  If so what are the parameters for asking you questions and do they differ from someone who might agree with you on your vaccine stance?

7.  Is there anyone else from the autism, vaccine injury, vaccine safety or anti-vaccine communities, or from the medical community that is skeptical of the safety and efficacy claims made about the current vaccine program, that are not allowed to attend your events or ask you questions?

8.  Finally, (and with brutal frankness) If Mr. Crosby's story is accurate, and he has been appropriate in his actions at your events, and your own desire to silence your challengers is at the heart of why you had him removed from the room, is this a pattern you intend to continue?  Can anyone asking you a question which you believe you will not not be able to answer well, or which might make you look bad in front of the audience, expect to be slandered and escorted from the room?

I want to get this cleared up as people have expressed in increasing interest in attending your speaking events and challenging your assertions, many of which (myself included) believe are grossly inaccurate and/or irresponsible.  We certainly want to know up front if you intend on misrepresenting any of us as you seem to have done with Jake or if it is Jake who is misrepresenting you.

Your prompt response is appreciated.

--

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

Thimerosal Gives Baby Rats Brain Damage

Lasting neuropathological changes in rat brain after intermittent neonatal administration of thimerosal.

Folia Neuropathol. 2010;48(4):258-69.  Olczak M, Duszczyk M, Mierzejewski P, Wierzba-Bobrowicz T, Majewska MD.

Department of Pharmacology and Physiology of the Nervous System, Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology, ul. Sobieskiego 9, Warsaw, Poland.

Abstract
Thimerosal, an organomercurial added as a preservative to some vaccines, is a suspected iatrogenic factor, possibly contributing to paediatric neurodevelopmental disorders including autism. We examined the effects of early postnatal administration of thimerosal (four i.m. injections, 12 or 240 μg THIM-Hg/kg, on postnatal days 7, 9, 11 and 15) on brain pathology in Wistar rats. Numerous neuropathological changes were observed in young adult rats which were treated postnatally with thimerosal. They included: ischaemic degeneration of neurons and "dark" neurons in the prefrontal and temporal cortex, the hippocampus and the cerebellum, pathological changes of the blood vessels in the temporal cortex, diminished synaptophysin reaction in the hippocampus, atrophy of astroglia in the hippocampus and cerebellum, and positive caspase-3 reaction in Bergmann astroglia. These findings document neurotoxic effects of thimerosal, at doses equivalent to those used in infant vaccines or higher, in developing rat brain, suggesting likely involvement of this mercurial in neurodevelopmental disorders.

J Inorg Biochem. 2011 Nov;105(11):1489-99. Epub 2011 Aug 23.

Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?

Tomljenovic L, Shaw CA.

Source

Neural Dynamics Research Group, Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of British Columbia, 828 W. 10th Ave, Vancouver, BC, Canada V5Z 1L8.

Abstract
Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are serious multisystem developmental disorders and an urgent global public health concern. Dysfunctional immunity and impaired brain function are core deficits in ASD. Aluminum (Al), the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant, is a demonstrated neurotoxin and a strong immune stimulator. Hence, adjuvant Al has the potential to induce neuroimmune disorders. When assessing adjuvant toxicity in children, two key points ought to be considered: (i) children should not be viewed as "small adults" as their unique physiology makes them much more vulnerable to toxic insults; and (ii) if exposure to Al from only few vaccines can lead to cognitive impairment and autoimmunity in adults, is it unreasonable to question whether the current pediatric schedules, often containing 18 Al adjuvanted vaccines, are safe for children? By applying Hill's criteria for establishing causality between exposure and outcome we investigated whether exposure to Al from vaccines could be contributing to the rise in ASD prevalence in the Western world. Our results show that: (i) children from countries with the highest ASD prevalence appear to have the highest exposure to Al from vaccines; (ii) the increase in exposure to Al adjuvants significantly correlates with the increase in ASD prevalence in the United States observed over the last two decades (Pearson r=0.92, p<0.0001); and (iii) a significant correlation exists between the amounts of Al administered to preschool children and the current prevalence of ASD in seven Western countries, particularly at 3-4months of age (Pearson r=0.89-0.94, p=0.0018-0.0248). The application of the Hill's criteria to these data indicates that the correlation between Al in vaccines and ASD may be causal. Because children represent a fraction of the population most at risk for complications following exposure to Al, a more rigorous evaluation of Al adjuvant safety seems warranted.

Dear Autism

Dear Autism,

Today you kicked the neighbor, colored on the walls, overturned chairs and ripped pillows to shreds.  You launched off countertops, scratched my son's legs bloody, spit on the mirrors and windows.  You eliminated all the food my son tried to digest in the form of black paste.  You took bite after bite of an apple, spit the fruit meat into the air, then smeared it into my son's hair and face.  You took his speech and replaced it with two solid hours of blood curdling screams. You attempted to break down the front and side doors with all your might.  You opened the car door while our vehicle was in motion, risking the lives of everyone on board.  I know now, a five point harness means nothing to you. You threw family photos across the room and held the shattered glass right next to my son's beautiful brown eyes.  The eyes, you and the Rubella virus are destroying just a tiny bit more with each passing day.  Worst of all, you took my son's joy.  Our Noah is delightful, kind-hearted and loving.  I know you laughed when his three year old brother Liam, shook, screamed and cried, "I hate it!  Make it stop Mommy!  I...I...I hate him!"   I think you particularly enjoyed that.  Let me tell you something.  I know who sent you.  A rapidly growing subculture of intelligent and professional parents around the country know too.  We know about the select few, growing richer and richer, profitting immensely off of a generation of chronically ill children that just "happened."  We understand the legislation that caused this, the motives of doctors turning a bind eye to it, and the politicians and capitalists benefitting from it.

If you are wondering, this peaceful moment for me to write was made possible because the effects from the levo-carnitine our precious Noah needs to take to counteract the effects of the  mitochondrial disease you caused are finally starting to wear off.  Instead of kicking, hitting, screaming and trying to escape the house, he is simply running, spinning and spitting.  Yes, this constitutes, "a peaceful moment".  So friends, please send this to everyone you know who many have a family history of allergies, asthma, autoimmune disease or ADHD.   You could save their children's lives.  I know with all that I am that Noah wants to spare every human possible the pain and suffering he endures daily.  I too, do this not to cause fear or vent--I do it to EDUCATE.  I do not want to rob you of your sense of safety and well being.  On the contrary, I want to provoke you to become a specialist in your child's health.  I have in my possession over 30 studies that show the link between autism and vaccines must be further investigated.  I would be delighted to send them to you.

Best, LJ Goes 

Apparently Your Tongue Goes Down Your GI Tract and Up To Your Brain

J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2011 Aug 8. [Epub ahead of print]

From The Tongue To The Gut.

Negri R, Morini G, Greco L.

* European Laboratory for Food Induced Diseases, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy † University of Gastronomic Sciences, Pollenzo-Bra (CN), Italy.
Abstract

ABSTRACT: The physiology of human taste enjoyed an unprecedented expansion of knowledge brought forward by modern genetics and molecular biology. In the last 10 years the cellular organization of taste receptors from taste buds distributed in the various papillae of the tongue and the soft palate was enlightened. This molecular revolution rapidly expanded over and above the tongue, since several papers reporting the presence of taste receptors in non-gustatory tissues (like the gut and the brain) appeared. Hence the issue of perception of food molecules is not anymore confined to the field of nutrition and food preferences, but is rapidly expanding to gastrointestinal function and, possibly, to gut dysfunction too. In children functional gastrointestinal diseases are strictly correlated to food preference and food aversion and up to now the tools to face these kind of problems were the basic nutritional requirements, familial good sense and a lot of patience: blunt tools to face very common and disturbing complaints. The fact that taste receptors are expressed down the whole of intestinal tract is of particular interest, because of their possible role in digestive behavior and absorption of nutrients; therefore recent and future discoveries in this field will make possible to fine-tune new, sharper tools to face children with functional gastrointestinal diseases.

PMID:

 

21832948

 

[PubMed - as supplied by publisher]