January 26, 2009

Time to Make Some Noise Over the IACC Shenanigans

Last week I told you about the sabotage of the government research into vaccination as a cause of autism... today it is time for you to protest.

The federal members of the IACC cannot be allowed to get away with these tactics.

From the Autism Action Network (formerly A-CHAMP)

Take Action!
Send a Letter to Your Reps, Key Officials and The Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee

Autism Action Alert:
Protest Federal Autism Committee’s Deceitful Reversal on Vaccine-Autism Research

Click HERE or "Take Action" On This Email To Send A Message Using Our System
If You Are Reading This Message On Our Web Site Scroll Down to Send a Message

The inexcusable actions of the Federal members of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) in retracting vaccine-autism studies must be stopped. Sound science must move forward, not thwarted by Federal agencies with vested interests in on-going vaccine-autism injury litigation.

The autism advocacy organizations listed below implore parents of children with autism - and all those who care about the burgeoning rate of autism and its toll on the health of our children - to take immediate action.

We are asking you to write a letter of disapproval to key government decision-makers on autism. Click here for a sample letter and instructions on sending. Your letter will be sent to President Obama, your Senators and Representatives, HHS Secretary Tom Daschle, the Senate HELP Committee, Senators Christopher Dodd, Joe Lieberman, and Edward Kennedy, and Congressmen Chris Smith and Joe Barton.

Your letters are needed NOW. The next IACC meeting is Wednesday, February 4, 2009 - less than two weeks away!

Here is what happened. Click here (http://www.safeminds.org/pressroom/iacc-blocks-vaccine-autism-research.html) here (http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/01/iacc-rescinds-vaccine-research-initiatives.html) for more details.

In a highly unusual departure from procedure, government representatives to the IACC voted on January 14th against conducting studies on vaccine-autism research despite approval of the same studies at their prior meeting on December 12, 2008. The research was supported by numerous autism organizations and requested by IACC’s scientific work groups and Congress. The maneuver to re-vote was initiated by the IACC’s representative from the CDC and pushed through by the IACC Chair, Dr. Tom Insel, Director of the National Institute of Mental Health of NIH. Review of the studies was not listed on the committee’s official agenda, in violation of normal committee practice.

Unlike most Federal advisory committees, the IACC is dominated by government representatives occupying 12 of the 18 seats. Dr. Insel admitted at the meeting that HHS agencies (which includes NIH and CDC) have a conflict of interest in conducting vaccine-autism research due to “Vaccine Court” litigation in which HHS is the defendant. Of the 6 non-government (public) members, 5 voted to retain the vaccine research at the January meeting. The lone dissenting public member resigned from her organization, Autism Speaks, the night before the meeting. Autism Speaks has issued a statement denouncing her vote.

The Federal members of the IACC must know that the autism community objects to their manipulation of committee procedures to block unbiased research on the possible link between vaccines and autism.

They must hear that parents demand reinstatement by the IACC of the vaccine studies that were already part of the IACC’s Autism Research Strategic Plan, and to restore the funding already allocated to this research.

They must acknowledge the inherent conflict of interest of the NIH/CDC in conducting research on vaccine safety. Research initiatives MUST be coordinated by an independent committee that includes equal numbers of representatives from the autism-vaccine injured community and conducted by independent and non-biased entities.

We also urge parents to attend the February 4th IACC meeting in Washington DC if they are able to. Click here for the IACC website http://iacc.hhs.gov/events/ to register. We encourage you to sign up to make a public comment at the meeting.

Autism Action Network (AAN)
Autism One
Autism Research Institute
Generation Rescue
National Autism Association (NAA)
Schafer Report
Talk About Curing Autism (TACA)
U.S. Autism & Asperger Association
Unlocking Autism


Anonymous said...

Safeminds is a lying site. There is no record anywhere else of this happening. So it didn't happen.

Ginger Taylor said...


This has been reported by several sources, including a press release from Autism Speaks saying that they parted company with Alison Singer, their VP of communications over this because she voted against vaccine research.

Transcripts of all IACC meetings are public record.

It happened.

If you believe it didn't, then please offer some proof that all these sources are lying.

A transcript of the meeting would do just that.


Anonymous said...

I am not referring to the actual meeting which is yet to take place. I am referring to this idea that the IACC has done what the Safeminds site (the original source) is claiming. All the other so called sources are copying Safeminds. Where is the neutral source?

Safeminds have a history of lying.

Ginger Taylor said...

What exactly do you think that they are lying about?

Ginger Taylor said...

Also.. you do realize that Lyn Redwood, one of SafeMinds founders is on the IACC right?

Anonymous said...

Running a political agenda no doubt....

Committee procedure. That's where the lie is. Insel did nothing wrong. Not the first lie Safeminds has told.

Ginger Taylor said...


I am absolutely fine with you challenging the truth of any statement that SafeMinds makes on my blog, but you have to make an actual accusation, and back it up.

"Committee procedure, that is where the lie is" is not an accusation.

What statement did SM make that you believe is untrue, and what reasoning and evidence did you use to come to that conclusion?

'They've lied before so they are lying now' is not a sound accusation, especially since you have not established that they have lied before.

So if you can cut and paste what you believe is wrong, give me your reasoning for your suspicions, I can look into it, but what you are doing is just making unfounded innuendo at this point.

Anonymous said...

Safeminds is against the genetic component and always has been. That's the historical lie.

The maneuver to re-vote was initiated by the IACC’s representative from the CDC and pushed through by the IACC Chair, Dr. Tom Insel, Director of the National Institute of Mental Health of NIH. Review of the studies was not listed on the committee’s official agenda, in violation of normal committee practice.

1. It IS normal practice in an emergency.
2. Dr Insel did NOT push this change.

Enough? No? Do your research again and without emotion if you can.

Ginger Taylor said...

1. It IS normal practice in an emergency.

How exactly would reversing vaccine research approved the month before qualify as an "emergency"?

2. Dr Insel did NOT push this change.

He is the chair and brought the revote to the floor.

I am listening to the current IACC meeting right now and a great deal of the discussion today has been surrounding the actions that SafeMinds reported, and Autism Speaks rep is right now, as I type, condeming them for doing what they did.

I am trying to get the transcript of the meeting so you can read it for yourself.

Anonymous said...

1. Any decision that was found to be extremely dangerous and life threatening would constitute an emergency. Wasting money on useless research would fulfil that criteria.

2. Alison Singer is no longer with Autism Speaks so get your facts right on that. And the argument that you say you are listening to proves nothing. Condemnation does not equal fact.

Ginger Taylor said...


Your arguments are just combative. I invite you to enter into good faith discussion here, but that is not really what you are doing.

1. Wasting money on research is an emergency that is "extremely dangerous and life threatening"?

I don't mean to be rude, but that is just silly. NOTHING changed between Dec and Jan to constitute any kind of emergency of any kind.

2. Alison Singer is no long with Autism Speaks because she resigned from AS the night before the January meeting because she was going to vote to throw out the vaccine research in opposition to AS's position. AS condemned both the IACC and Singer's actions in Jan, and AS showed up at the IACC meeting again today to condemn it again in person. (Alison Singer put out her own press release on the revote for pete's sake).

No one is claiming that this stuff didn't happen! No one at the meeting today condemned SafeMinds for their reporting of the facts of the last meeting... In fact they gave Lyn Redwood 30 minutes to talk at the beginning of the meeting to address all this.

This is all public record... ABC News even had cameras there today!

You are the only person claiming that SM's is lying.

This conversation is getting frustrating. If you don't want to trust SM's, that is totally fine with me. But I can't find any evidence that they are lying. If you believe that they are, then Call Insel or anyone on the committe and get a comment from them that SM is somehow misrepresenting the facts.

Go find the transcript/and recordings of the last two meetings!

But I feel like you just keep saying to me, "Na uh... prove it". I don't have to prove that SM is telling the truth, or that I heard AS and several people at the meeting condemning Insel and the IACC's actions. The burden of proof is on you to make a case.


Anonymous said...

That's because the media in the main know that Safe Minds is a BS tabloid website. As far as the main outlets are concerned there isn't a story here.

A rather more imposing message there wouldn't you say?

Anonymous said...

I forgot to add this;

"NOTHING changed between Dec and Jan to constitute any kind of emergency of any kind."

The wrong decision was made in December and the gravity of the error was such that it constituted an emergency. Not silly at all and to call it so means you don't understand how process can change on a needs basis.