Autism Vaccine War: Is Scientific Inquiry Being Suppressed?

Dr. Beatrice Golomb's presentation This Is Your Brain On Politics pulls no punches in its critique of conflicts of interest, bias, censorship and intimidation involving pharmaceutical companies, health authorities and academic institutions and publications.  Professor Golomb's presentation includes commentary on pressure tactics, including intimidation, used by some pharmaceutical industry representatives to silence criticism of their products and the research that accompanies them.

Professor Golomb's presentation provides an interesting framework with which to consider the continued pressures exerted on Dr. Andrew Wakefield over an article he wrote in 1998 for which, in 2011, he was denounced, by journalistic decree,  as being guilty of fraud.  A refutation of the Wakefield fraud allegations by research microbiologist David Lewis was published in the BMJ  but has not received the major US or world media attention that the original fraud allegations attracted.

An even more recent  demonstration of pressure on those who question or study issues pertaining to vaccine safety has arisen in response to an article on vaccine adjuvants published by two UBC Ph.D.'s.  In Tom Sandborn's article in the Vancouver Courier Responses to UBC vaccine paper a problem for free scientific inquiry and expression UBC researchers raise questions, experience backlash Sandborn describes what appears to be an effort to suppress publication of peer reviewed journal articles which raise potential vaccine health issues. None other than Dr. Paul Offit is reported to have weighed in with comments which appear to suggest that studies or articles criticizing vaccine safety in any way should not be published:

"Shaw, who is on faculty at UBC with the Departments of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences and Experimental Medicine and the Graduate Program in Neuroscience, and his colleague Lucija Tomljenovic have recently published a carefully parsed and thoroughly peer reviewed paper on vaccine safety, without a doubt one of the most controversial topics in medicine today. Despite the cautious and professional tone of the paper, and despite the authors' clear statement that their findings are not in themselves decisive, only pointing to the need for more extensive research into vaccine safety, the paper, published in November 2011 in the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry which describes correlations and possible causal links between increased exposure to aluminum salts used as adjuvants in vaccines and increased levels of neurological trouble in exposed populations, seems to inflame angry and punitive responses in some quarters.


For example, when I discussed the Tomljenovic/Shaw paper with Dr. Paul Offit, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, a strong proponent of vaccines and the developer of a successful new vaccine that has made him a multi-millionaire, he told me that the paper "should never have been published," despite the fact it was rigorously peer reviewed before publication. (Like many who want to insist that all questions of vaccine safety have been settled, Offit invokes the notorious Andrew Wakefield affair involving a now discredited and withdrawn paper published in The Lancet in 1998, which suggested a link between MMR vaccines and autism. Offit claims that paper is responsible for avoidable deaths as worried parents failed to vaccinate their children. Wakefield has recently filed a suit for defamation against Brian Deer, the investigative journalist whose work was central to the storm of criticism that surrounded the Lancet paper.)"

In the context of the autism vaccine war the late Dr. Bernadine Healy expressed confidence in the general safety of vaccines while talking about the need to explore possible vaccine impacts on susceptible populations. She also expressed confidence in public understanding of the value and importance of vaccines in protecting and promoting pubic health and safety while cautioning public health authorities against dismissing further scientific research on autism vaccine issues:

"There is a completely expressed concern that they don't want to pursue a hypothesis because that hypothesis could be damaging to the public health community at large by scaring people. First of all, I think the public's smarter than that. The public values vaccines. But more importantly, I don't think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you're afraid of what it might show."

The concerns expressed by Dr. Healy about the suppression of scientific inquiry into vaccine autism issues by public health authorities appear to be supported by the attempts to suppress the publication of articles like that of the UBC professors published after rigorous peer review which pointed to possible issues with aluminum salt adjuvants in vaccines.  Dr. Offit, and others who wish to suppress such inquiry, claim to be afraid of ignorant members of the public who will react out of fear and refuse to vaccinate their children.  The attempts at suppression however give rise to an equally plausible hypothesis as suggested by Dr. Healy ...  that Offit and company are afraid of what such inquiry might show.

NOTE: As the author of this blog comment I advise that my children have received all recommended and mandatory vaccines and that I have received vaccines at different times including during the H1N1 panic two years ago. I recognize the importance of vaccines in public health and safety. I am, however, seriously concerned about the incessant attempts to suppress scientific inquiry of vaccine safety issues and the view that all possible connections between vaccines and autism spectrum disorders have been explored and "debunked" for all time.  

Will New Prohibition Against Exploring Possible Vaccine Autism Connections Stop ALL Environmental Autism Research?

The last few years have seen an all out offensive to shut down discussion of vaccines as possible triggers of autism disorders.  The withdrawal of the 1998 Lancet article, the banishment of Dr. Andrew Wakefield by British medical authorities, the conviction of Andrew Wakefield of fraud in The Court of Brian Deer and the mainstream media puppeting and promotion of the Deer conclusions have occupied much public space in discussion of autism disorders.  And of course no less a public figure than Bill Gates has accused those who question vaccine safety of killing children around the globe. Autism Speaks has declared that it "is time to change the conversation".  In other words "sssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhuuuuuttttttt up" or face the consequences.

In the era of the New Prohibition, the prohibition against discussion of  possible vaccine autism discussions, will research which MIGHT implicate vaccines as possible be prohibited? Environmental autism research focused on prenatal and early postnatal environmental impacts on the fetus and developmental disruption has been featured in reports to the US senate on the State of Research on Potential Environmental Health Factors with Autism and Related Neurodevelopment Disorders:

Paul Anastas Ph.D. Assistant Administrator for Research and Development and Science Advisor U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Because of its extraordinary complexity, prenatal and early postnatal brain and nervous system development can be disrupted by environmental exposures at much lower levels than would affect adults.5,6,7,8,9 We are learning that there are critical windows of susceptibility both prenatally and in early childhood, during which the effects of exposures to environmental contaminants, depending on dose and timing, can be significantly more severe and can lead to permanent and irreversible disability.10,11,12 For these and many other reasons, EPA is especially concerned about potential effects of environmental chemicals on children’s health and neurodevelopment.

Linda Birnbaum, Ph.D., D.A.B.T., A.T.S. Director, National Institute of Environmental and Health Sciences and National Toxicology Program National Institutes of Health, United States Department of Health and Human Services

Development of the nervous system begins in the womb and extends through childhood. During these periods of rapid development, the brain is vulnerable to some environmental exposures that may have the potential to disrupt the chemical signals that organize development. Even small changes in the timing of critical development events can potentially have major consequences for brain structure and function. Thus even brief exposures at these vulnerable stages can have lasting effects on adult brain function. We refer to "windows of susceptibility: to mean the life stage at which the brain is exposed, during which different agents can effect the brain in specific and deleterious ways. For example, the dose of lead that is neurotoxic to an infant is much less than the dose that would be neurotoxic for an adult, so infancy in this case is a "window of susceptibility" .... Learning disabilities are on the rise in the United States and we now have a significant body of information on how exposure to certain environmental agents can affect children's intelligence quotients (IQs). For example, scientific literature attests to the effect of lead exposure in early life on IQ. ... Mercury also has been shown in multiple studies to be a developmental neurotoxicant. .... A study published last year from Columbia University showed that a mother's exposure to urban air pollutants known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) can adversely affect a child's IQ.  PAHs are released into the air from the burning of coal, diesel, oil, gas and other organic substances such as tobacco.  In urban areas motor vehicles are a major source of PAHs. 

Bruce P. Lanphear MD, MPH Senior Scientist, Child & Family Research Institute, Professor, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Adjunct Professor, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center

Children’s environmental health -- the study and prevention of disease and disabilities in children from exposures to social, physical, biologic, and chemical agents -- has emerged as a new field of research, policy, and clinical practice (Landrigan et al. 1998). The growth of this field has been fueled by the emergence of new morbidities in children, research showing that the fetus and child are particularly vulnerable to environmental influences, and mounting evidence implicating environmental exposures as major risk factors for prevalent diseases and disabilities in children (Lanphear, 2005).


One in six American children have a developmental problem, from a subtle learning disability to overt behavioral disorders, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or autism (Boyle et al. 1994; Hertz-Picciotto, 2009). These conditions can severely impair a child’s ability to succeed in school, elevate their risk for violent and criminal behaviors, and dramatically diminish their ability to contribute to society. The findings from some of the most thoroughly studied and widely dispersed environmental toxicants indicate that exposure to exceedingly low levels are risk factors for the “new morbidities” of childhood -- intellectual impairments, behavioral problems, asthma and preterm birth (Lanphear, 2005). Indeed, there is often no apparent threshold and, in some cases the effects appear to be greater at the lowest levels of exposure (England et al. 2001; Canfield et al. 2003; Lanphear et al. 2005; Yolton et al. 2005).

Exposures to established environmental toxicants -- such as lead, tobacco, PCBs and mercury -- have consistently been linked with higher rates of intellectual impairment or behavioral problems, such as conduct disorder and ADHD (Needleman et al. 1990; Schantz et al. 2003; Kahn et al. 2003; Wakschlag et al. 2002; Stewart et al. 2003; Needleman et al. 1979; Lanphear et al. 2005; Yolton et al. 2005). There is emerging evidence that a whole host of new environmental chemicals – such as Bisphenol A, PBDEs, pesticides, phthalates, and airborne pollutants – are associated with intellectual deficits or behavioral problems in children, but the evidence is not as conclusive (Rauh, 2006; Engel, 2010; Eskenazi, 2007; Braun, 2009; Perera 2009; Herbstman, 2010). Much of this research was done by the NIEHS/US EPA Children’s Environmental Health Research Centers working collaboratively with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


Children’s developing brains are more vulnerable to certain toxicants and pollutants than adults. The central nervous systems of the fetus and young child, which are undergoing rapid changes, are particularly vulnerable to some toxicants. The fetus is a recipient of toxicants through placental transfer (Perera et al. 2003; Whyatt and Perera 1995; Bearer 2003). In some cases, such as mercury, the fetus is exposed to a larger dose than the mother (Ramirez et al. 2000). In other cases, such as organophosphate pesticides, the fetus may lack critical enzymes to metabolize environmental toxicants (Chen et al. 2003). Toddlers are often at greater risk for exposure to many environmental toxicants because they have a high degree of hand-to-mouth activity and they absorb some toxicants more efficiently (Bearer 1995).

As the above quotes illustrate environmental  research is examining many potential causes and triggers of autism disorders at the prenatal and early childhood stages.  Mercury is only one of the potential causes of autism being researched but it is one which is very sensitive to those who insist that discussion and research of possible vaccine autism issues must stop.   Teresa Binstock wrote about the "it's gotta be genetic" model of autism and the consequences for any professional who explored vaccine autism connections over a decade ago.   Much of what Binstock discussed is taking place now as Dr. Andrew Wakefield is well aware.  The current suppression of vaccine safety discussion and research will probably be accompanied by a complete return to the 100% genetic model of autism, a model which has already sucked the life out of environmental autism research funding for decades.  All serious efforts to find the environmental causes of the vaccine epidemic, to find out what is really happening to  our children are likely to come to an end.

Failing and Flailing The Current Pro Vaccine Campaign Promotes New Autism Myths

It appears that those who promote vaccines as an important  public health tool are losing their battle to persuade people that vaccines are perfectly safe and do not cause any harm, do not cause neurological damage and do not  cause or trigger any of the neurological disorders in any children ever.  I say this as the father of two children who have received all required and recommended vaccines. I say this as the father of a 15 year old son  with Autistic Disorder and profound developmental delays who has never attributed his son's disorders to vaccine injury.  I say this as a person who believes that vaccines are in fact an important, but not a perfect,  public health tool. I say this as a person who believes that Bill Gates' screaming and  frothing from the corners of his mouth while yelling murder, murder at the top of his lungs will not work.  I believe that the current strategy of attack will not work, will be counterproductive and will result in further declines in vaccination rates.

I say this because I believe that those who engage in such attacks have failed, utterly failed to demonstrate any knowledge or understanding of autism disorders or the challenges faced by the parents they belittle and denigrate directly and by implication with their simplistic allegations.  I believe that those who continue these unproductive strategies should themselves accept responsibility for declines in vaccination rates.  They have failed and now they flail. They flail wildly and continue their failure and quite possible increase the numbers of persons who will now be suspicious of vaccine safety.

The current offensive against those who ask any questions about vaccine safety has gone from alleging poor research, to making unproven in a court of law allegations of fraud and homicide.  The research of one journalist forms the basis of a world wide big media stream of allegations of fraud against Dr. Andrew Wakefield.  The bases for Bill Gates wild eyed claims that those who question vaccine safety are responsible for killing children is not articulated anywhere in any comprehensible form.  New autism myths are created and one of the myths that demonstrate the ignorance of those who promote vaccines at any cost is the myth that large sums of autism research dollars have been diverted from finding causes of autism disorders to proving that vaccines do not cause autism.

At Medical News Today Christian Nordqvist (Editor in Chief and CEO of Medical News Today) confesses in The Tragedy Of The Fraudulent MMR Autism Link, A Personal Story    that he once had nagging doubts about whether his son's Asperger's Syndrome was caused or at least aggravated by receipt of an MMR vaccine.  Now he is satisfied beyond all doubt, after reading the Brian Deer "research" alleging fraud against Dr. Wakefield that the MMR vaccine played no role in his son's conditions.   There is not much substance in Mr. Nordqvist's recounting of his struggles with his nagging doubts but there is one glaring and false autism myth which the Editor in Chief and CEO of Medical News Today is quite happy to promote when he states:

The billions of dollars, Euros, Pounds and Yens that did not go into autism research between 1998 and today, because philanthropists, grant givers and government departments might have been distracted by these false findings, now need to go into autism research. We do not know whether a huge grant might have occurred during this period that would have achieved a massive breakthrough in this field if that study had not been published - if so, I name it a tragedy for babies with autism born yesterday, today and in the near future, and also for their parents, siblings and other close relatives.


(Underlining added HLD)

That is one of the biggest reaches that I have yet seen in the debates about autism and autism research.  Mr. Nordqvist starts by stating that "billions of dollars, Euros etc" did not go into autism research beteween 1998 and today"  because potential sources of research dollars MIGHT have been distract by what he calls Wakefields false findings.   No evidence, study, research or source of any kind is referenced to support this wild speculation.  Mr. Nordqvist is happy to then go on and speculate about all the autism research that might have resulted in a massive breakthrough had the Wakefield study not been published.


Might, might, maybe, ah ha! pretty well sums up Mr. Nordqvist's sorry logic.

OK, the article by the editor in chief and CEO of Medical News Today might be the weakest and loopiest of all the comments made in the heated vaccine autism wars but it does show clearly the depths to which  those who seek to silence anyone who questions vaccine safety will descend. 

Should Wakefield Be Prosecuted as "Special to CNN" Commentator Advocates?

Alex B. Berezow, according to the CNN Opinion site, is the editor of RealClearScience and holds a Ph.D. in microbiology.  Mr. Berezow has provided a "special to CNN" opinion in which he argues that Dr. Andrew Wakefield should face  criminal prosecution for fraud in the United Kingdom AND in the United States. Alex B. Berezow Ph.D. repeats the accusation published in the BMJ that Wakefield falisfied patient histories in the now retracted Lancet study.  

Berezow leaves no doubt that, in his mind, Wakefield is guilty of fraud:

"It is for these reasons that Wakefield should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of American and British law. Perhaps if he spends the next few years behind bars, people who have suffered from the impact of his actions will see that justice is being done."

Berezow does not consider the other possibility, the possibility that Wakefield is NOT guilty of fraud.  This humble small town Canadian lawyer lacks the intellectual brilliance of a microbiologist and CNN commentator, and lacks the ability to get past, as the mainstream media appears to have done,  that old fashioned "presumption of innocence" thing. 

It is not my place to tell authorities in any jurisdiction who they should prosecute, or for what alleged offences.  I do not advocate that Dr Wakefield should face prosecution based on the work of journalist Brian Deer or any journal publication.  If a prosecution does take place though,  as Mr Berezow desires, it would, at least, give Dr. Wakefield an opportunity to answer the allegations. At this time the fraud allegations, remain just that ... allegations, notwithstanding the massive media piling on and promotion of those allegations as though they were proven facts.

Will a fraud prosecution happen?  Or will unproven fraud allegations continue to be made with abandon in the mainstream media?  Dr. Wakefield would obviously lose much if convicted.  But the credibility of the BMJ, the Mainstream Media and Brian Berezow would suffer greatly if Dr Wakefield was acquitted or found NOT GUILTY.

I am going to guess wildly that no prosecution will occur, that those who allege Wakefield committed fraud  are happy to let the Mainstream Media repeat the allegations as fact and let it end at that.

What Court of Law Convicted Dr Andrew Wakefield of Fraud?

The "autism" news has been overwhelmed in the past 48 hours with news that Dr Andrew Wakefield committed fraud in conducting and publishing the MMR study which has since been retracted.  

I was aware that a medical society tribunal in the UK had found problems with the MMR study but I was unaware that a court of law, or governing medical society tribunal, had found Wakefield guilty of the serious offence of fraud.

If anyone knows which court of law,  or governing medical society tribunal,  found Dr. Wakefield guilty of fraud could you post a link to this site please?

Thank you.

Does Wakefield Decision Prove Vaccines Never Cause or Trigger Autism Disorders?

Does Wakefield Decision Prove Vaccines Never Cause or Trigger Autism Disorders? No it does not.

The UK General Medical Council found that Dr. Andrew Wakefield had engaged in several instances of unprofessional conduct. The decision has little, if any, bearing on the science involved in vaccine autism issues.

Several prominent health authorities and researchers have stated that there is a need for stronger science on autism vaccine issues including Dr. Bernadine Healy, Dr. Julie Gerberding and Dr. Irva Hertz-Picciotto..

Dr Wakefield's Formal Complaint Against Journalist Brian Deer

Some bloggers and mainstream media took as gospel, as decided fact, the allegations made against Dr. Andrew Wakefield by journalist Brian Deer in the Sunday Times (UK) last month. The article ran the week prior to the Vaccine Court's omnibus ruling in three cases involving allegations that vaccines caused autism and only 24 hours after Dr Wakefield claims he was informed of the story allegations. As reported by David Kirby at the Huffington Post, Dr. Wakefield has now filed a formal complaint against Mr Deer with the UK Press C0mplaints Commission. It should be must reading especially for those who accepted as decided facts the allegations made in the article.

Dr. Wakefield deals with the allegations in very specific, documented detail. As a lawyer who is regularly concerned with issues of fairness, proper notice and due process I am disgusted that a story such as Mr Deer's would run only 24 hours after giving notice to the person against whom the allegations are made. To make it worse the allegations were made against a person involved in a proceeding involving the same matters, a proceeding in which the journalist who wrote the article has been a key participant.

Some bloggers and mainstream journalists who accused Dr. Wakefield of data manipulation based on Mr. Deer's article may want to read Dr. Wakefield's complaint against Mr. Deer. They might also want to consider extending an apology to Dr. Wakefield.

autism

So Much For Due Process: TimesOnline Convicts Wakefield Of Fixing Autism Data

In England, the land where the common law was born that ultimately provided the foundation for legal systems around the world, including the United States, Canada and Australia, due process is apparently viewed by the media as a quaint historical relic. At least one could reasonably reach that conclusion after reading MMR doctor Andrew Wakefield fixed data on autism published February 8 2009 on TIMESONLINE. Dr. Wakefield, with two professors, John Walker-Smith and Simon Murch, is currently facing charges of serious professional misconduct brought by the General Medical Council (GMC).

Wakefield and the two professors deny the allegations but the TIMESONLINE, in an article by Brian Deer, has apparently decided to dispense with old fashioned notions of due process and is informing the world of its verdict:

"Andrew Wakefield manipulated patients’ data, which triggered fears that the MMR triple vaccine to protect against measles, mumps and rubella was linked to the condition.

...

The research was published in February 1998 in an article in The Lancet medical journal. It claimed that the families of eight out of 12 children attending a routine clinic at the hospital had blamed MMR for their autism, and said that problems came on within days of the jab. The team also claimed to have discovered a new inflammatory bowel disease underlying the children’s conditions.

However, our investigation, confirmed by evidence presented to the General Medical Council (GMC), reveals that: In most of the 12 cases, the children’s ailments as described in The Lancet were different from their hospital and GP records. Although the research paper claimed that problems came on within days of the jab, in only one case did medical records suggest this was true, and in many of the cases medical concerns had been raised before the children were vaccinated. Hospital pathologists, looking for inflammatory bowel disease, reported in the majority of cases that the gut was normal. This was then reviewed and the Lancet paper showed them as abnormal."

These are obviously very serious allegations. Perhaps I am biased, being a humble, small town lawyer in New Brunswick, Canada but I prefer to await the decision of the tribunal before reporting the verdict.

autism

National Autism Conference Featuring Advances in Autism Research, Treatment and Therapy

NIXA, Mo., Oct 31, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- The latest advances in autism research, treatment and therapy will be presented during The National Autism Conference in Fort Lauderdale. The comprehensive four-day conference, hosted by the National Autism Association and sponsored by CARE Clinics, is scheduled for November 13 through 16 at the Hyatt Regency Bonaventure Conference Center & Spa in Weston, Florida.

The conference will feature keynote speaker U.S. Congressman Dave Weldon. Other speakers include renowned experts on autism who will share their knowledge and expertise with both parents and practitioners. Topics to be covered are cutting-edge environmental research, dietary and behavioral interventions, legal and legislative strategies, estate planning, autism safety, marital support, and more.

Conference speakers include Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Dr. Jeff Bradstreet, David Kirby, author of the New York Times bestseller "Evidence of Harm," Dr. Doreen Granpeesheh and Neurofeedback expert Dr. Michael Linden who was recently featured on "The Doctors" television show.

"We're thrilled to be able to bring our national conference to Florida this year," said Rita Shreffler, parent and Executive Director of NAA. "This is an exceptional opportunity for parents to learn from today's most knowledgeable experts in the field of autism. Parents will leave this conference armed with both knowledge and hope for the future of their loved ones."
A first-of-its-kind workshop will be held on Thursday evening entitled "Just For Dads." The workshop will be conducted by Dr. Jonathan Tarbox of the Center for Autism and Related Disorders and will cover issues unique to fathers of children on the autism spectrum.

On Friday evening, conference sponsor CARE Clinics will host a treatment workshop for parents and will be providing a free buffet dinner for all attendees.

Saturday evening will feature a Beach-Party themed dinner event including a silent auction of unique items donated by Doug Flutie, Dan Marino, The Black Crowes and country music star Alan Jackson.

In addition to CARE Clinics, the National Autism Conference is sponsored by Autism Speaks, Hansen's Natural Beverages, LoJack and Project Lifesaver. For more information on the National Autism Conference, or to register online, visit www.nationalautismconference.org.

CONTACT:

Wendy Fournier, NAA (Portsmouth, RI) 401.835.5828
Rita Shreffler, NAA (Nixa, MO) 401.632.6452

SOURCE National Autism Association

http://www.nationalautism.org

autism

Fighting Autism

It is not often that I run across a useful autism site on the internet but I was pleasantly surprised to 'Stumble Upon' the Fighting Autism site which provides information concerning autism statistics, incidence and prevalence. The site features some handy tools such as prevalence maps, graphs, and reports and an autism clock an image of which I have copied on to my side panel. The information is provided for dissemination and visitors are free to use the maps and graphs and publish same to their own sites.

http://www.fightingautism.org/about/index.php#contact

The graph feature is particularly interesting. The site authors do not publish the data for adult autistic persons over 22 because they do not consider the available information reliable.
















Fighting Autism is a nonprofit organization based in Pennsylvania with a mission:

To improve the quality of life for children with autism through research, education, advocacy and treatment.

Research. Fostering scientific research to understand the underlying biological conditions of autism spectrum disorders.

Education and Advocacy. Educating parents, scientists and healthcare professionals about autism treatment strategies through conferences, seminars and community fundraising events.

Treatment. Creating a world-class autism treatment center in the greater Pittsburgh area encompassing biological and opportunities to participate in clinical research studies.

The Fighting Autism organization itself does not appear to have been active in organizing conferences since 2005 and at that time appeared to be focussed on dietary, gut brain information and ..... Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Regardless of Dr. Wakefield's current predicament or the generally low acceptance of his theories in the scientific community the statistical information tools provided on the Fighting Autism site are interesting.