Respectful Insolence

It appears that while TAM9 was dominating all my extracurricular, non-job-related attention, with my having to get ready to give a talk, I failed to notice another thing besides the placebo/asthma paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine last Thursday. But fear not. If it’s important (to me, at least, and hopefully to you too), I’ll eventually see it, allowing me to toss off a jaunty, “Better late than never!” and then launch into a topic, even if I’m a week late. So it is this time around, except that the topic is so big that it might require more than one post, perhaps spread out over this blog and that of my “good buddy.” The reason is that taking on the fallacies in logic and dissecting all the misinformation, cherry-picking of studies, and dubious assertions all in one post would probably be too much, even for one of my characteristic bouts of vaccine-soaked blogorrhea. Or perhaps I could set the stage here and then do a more definitive deconstruction later this week or early next week.

So what popped up while I was gone? Well, I was reminded of it again because the merry band of anti-vaccine loons at the Generation Rescue propaganda blog Age of Autism decided to shill for it again yesterday, having shilled for it a week ago. The website, run by the anti-vaccine group SafeMinds is called SmartVax.

I really do have to hand it to the anti-vaccine movement in general and SafeMinds in particular. Whatever the deficiencies in their knowledge of science, anti-vaccine advocates sure can spin the Orwellian language, where up is down, left is right, and vaccines are alway, always, always the cause of autism. I think that, in this post, I will take the bird’s eye view–an overview, if you will–of the SmartVax site and then in a future post, either here or under my not-so-super-secret alter-ego, deconstruct the claims in detail, because there are some doozies there that appear superficially plausible on the surface (as all good pseudoscience does) but fail massively upon more detailed inspection.

The first stroke of propaganda genius about this site is the term “SmartVax” itself. Yes, it’s painfully obvious. After all, who wants to be in favor of “DumbVax” or “StupidVax,” although I fervently hope in vain that some day a vaccine against dumb and stupid will one day be invented? Yet that’s not the propaganda genius, at least not in and of itself. What elevates this dreck into the realm of brilliant P.R. is how the anti-vaccine loons contrast “SmartVax” with what they call “MaxVax.” Let’s take a look, shall we? It begins with a massive bit of revisionist history:

In the early 1900’s, scientists coined the terms “allergy” and “anaphylaxis” to describe vaccine-injuries; at present, the mechanism by which vaccines cause injury is still not scientifically understood. Historically, the vaccine-injury risk has caused vaccine manufacturers and public health officials to be conservative when recommending new vaccines or administration of vaccines at earlier ages. However, vaccines proved effective against some deadly diseases and by the 1970’s a “maximize vaccination” philosophy arose that viewed vaccines as always having more benefits than risks.

Uh, no. The assertion that scientists coined the terms “allergy” and “anaphylaxis” to describe vaccine injuries is a massive distortion, with one minor grain of truth. Let’s start with the term anaphylaxis, the coining of which had nothing to do with childhood vaccines. Rather, it derived from the studies of Charles Richet and Paul Portier over 100 years ago of the toxin produced by a jellyfish, the Portuguese Man of War. During an oceanographic expedition, Richet and Portier managed to isolate the toxin and thought that they might be able to use the toxin in order to obtain protection, or, as they called it, “prophylaxis” in order to protect swimmers who came into contact with the jellyfish. When they returned to France, they didn’t have access to the jellyfish anymore; so they turned their attention to the toxin produced by the sea anemone Anemona sulcata, the “sea nettle”, which could be harvested in large quantities from the Mediterranean Sea. They injected venom from the sea nettle at various doses into dogs. The dogs that survived were allowed to recover and then reinjected. To their surprise, subsequent small doses of the toxin produced a dramatic illness that resulted in difficulty in breathing followed by rapid decline and death. Richet and Portier called this reaction “anaphylaxis,” meaning “against protection.” They concluded correctly that the immune system becomes sensitized to the toxin and that re-exposure to the same substance could result in a severe reaction, a discovery for which Richet won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1913. Vaccine injury is not exactly the same thing as what the SmartVax website is referring to. After all, Richet and Portier were using large doses of toxin and then reinjecting the dogs that survived.

Neither is allergy, which actually was not coined to describe vaccine “injuries.” Rather, the term “allergy” was first coined in 1906 by Clemens von Pirquet. A year earlier, von Pirquet studied the describe adverse reactions of children who were given repeated shots of horse serum to fight infection. (Here’s a hint: Injecting horse serum to fight infection is not the same thing as being vaccinated.) The following year, the term allergy was proposed to explain this unexpected “changed reactivity” in response to exposure to the horse serum. Later, in 1907 Pirquet characterized the same effect due to repeated doses of the smallpox vaccine–after he had coined the term for other observations.

After that little paragraph of revisionist history follows more revisionist history that consists largely of confusing correlation with causation (the “autism epidemic” that isn’t), claiming that the anti-vaccine groups that arose during the 1980s advocated a “smarter” vaccine schedule, and pointing out the 1986 law that created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program without mentioning that anti-vaccine grande dame Barbara Loe Fisher was a driving force behind the passage of that law. Anti-vaccine groups only turned on the law when they didn’t like how the Vaccine Court tried to use actual science to determine what does and doesn’t constitute a true vaccine injury. It didn’t matter that the Vaccine Court bent over backwards to give parents the benefit of the doubt and that it paid most legal fees fo its petitioners, whether they won or lost. When the Vaccine Court didn’t accept the pseudoscientific view that vaccine injuries cause autism, the anti-vaccine movement turned on it and now generally rant that the requirement that vaccine injury claims go through this special court has allowed vaccine manufacturers to avoid any accountability. Never mind that the FDA and FTC regulate them and that the regulations covering pharmaceutical products (like vaccines) require considerably testing and oversight.

The revisionist history here doesn’t exactly make me confident in anything else on this website, but let’s move on. Here is where we get to the meat of the matter; this is what SafeMinds describes as the difference between what it calls the “SmartVax” and the “MaxVax” philosophies:

SmartVax and Max-Vax are both “pro-vaccine” philosophies, in that both philosophies consider vaccines an important component in an overall children’s health program, but SmartVax differs from Max-Vax in important aspects of safety, research, and policy. The SmartVax philosophy is all about being smart with vaccinations: don’t over-use them, don’t bypass good science, understand the risks, and ensure that the risks are not hidden from the public.

Bullshit.

Does SafeMinds really think we’re stupid enough to believe that its philosophy is in any way “pro-vaccine”? Think about it this way? Have you ever seen SafeMinds advocate the use of any vaccine? No. What you see instead are claims that vaccines are unsafe or haven’t been adequately tested based on misinterpretation and cherry picking of studies, fear mongering, and rejection of studies failing to find a link between vaccines and autism almost before they are published. Just type the word “SafeMinds” into the search box in the upper left hand corner of this page, and you’ll see copious evidence of the anti-vaccine activism of SafeMinds, including, most recently, its purchasing public service announcement time in AMC Theaters for its anti-vaccine message. That’s hardly about “not bypassing good science,” which is exactly what SafeMinds does every time it trashes studies that fail to find a link between vaccines and autism.

Basically, SafeMinds contrasts its “SmartVax” (i.e., its anti-vaccine policy in disguise) with “MaxVax” (what it labels the current vaccine schedule) by two “pillars”:

  1. Evidence-Based Scientific Research (go where the evidence leads)
  2. Appropriate Checks-and-Balances on Vaccine Policy

Pillar one is based on a delusion coupled with a massive straw man:

The first rule of SmartVax is the pursuit of evidence-based scientific research on vaccine-injuries to an unbiased conclusion, without being afraid of what the evidence might show, to develop the knowledge for a safer and more effective vaccine program in the long-term. This is in stark contrast with the Max-Vax tenet that such research should be avoided because the results might undermine public confidence in the current vaccine program.

The delusion is, of course, that SafeMinds or any other anti-vaccine group does anything that is unbiased or that it pursues evidence-based research. Quite the opposite, as I’ve documented time and time again over the last six years. The straw man is that scientists claim that research should be avoided because the results might undermine public confidence. A more accurate and honest representation of the so-called “MaxVax” position would be that a link between vaccines and autism is highly implausible and that, although it is impossible ever to prove a negative completely (i.e., that there is no link between vaccines and autism), enough studies have been done to estimate the chances of such a link existing to be very, very, very low. After all, even Generation Rescue’s attempts at finding a link between vaccines and autism have failed. In actuality, it is SafeMinds and its ilk that require more and more such research for the very purpose of undermining public confidence in the current vaccine program; that’s the raison d’être of anti-vaccine groups.

Here’s pillar two:

The SmartVax view holds that appropriate checks-and-balances on vaccine policy will produce the most beneficial vaccine program long-term for children’s health. Government-owned research data on vaccine-injuries should be made open to the public and easily accessible to all researchers. Long-term double-blind placebo studies tracking both acute and chronic health conditions (e.g. asthma, allergies, ADHD, and autism) should be required prior to any vaccine approval. Philosophical exemption, by which a parent can opt to delay or exempt certain vaccines for the child without discrimination such as loss of federal benefits or access to public schools, should be a fundamental right in the USA (as it is in Canada and other countries).

As I’ve explained before many, many times, performing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of currently used vaccines is completely unethical because it leaves the control group unprotected against vaccine-preventable disease. In fact, the only time such a trial could be ethical is if there is no currently existing vaccine for the disease; i.e., the vaccine is a new vaccine for a condition for which there currently isn’t a vaccine. If the vaccine is for a condition for which a vaccine currently exists, then the appropriate design of a clinical trial is to test the new vaccine against the old vaccine; doing otherwise would leave the control group unprotected against a vaccine-preventable disease. On the other hand, in a perverse way, I’m glad that SafeMinds has put itself on the record as supporting an unethical clinical trial design motivated by its anti-vaccine views. It makes it so easy for me to go after its position.

The rest of its position is the same sort of superficially plausible-sounding nonsense that we’re accustomed to hearing from SafeMinds and its ilk. The real reason it wants access to data on vaccine injuries is so that it can “reanalyze” it and come to different conclusions, the way Mark and David Geier tried to do five years ago, and, of course, its call for “philosophical exemption” is nothing more than warmed-over “health freedom” rhetoric.

Overall, then, there appears to be nothing new in the “philosophy” behind SmartVax. It’s nothing more than what we’ve been hearing from the anti-vaccine movement for a long time. It is, however, wrapped up in an appealing-sounding package. Unfortunately, the material is rotten to the core. The explanation of why that is will, unfortunately, have to wait for another day.

Comments

  1. #1 Colin Jenkins
    July 20, 2011

    Amusingly their facebook page and site comments have antagonistic comments from antivaxers, so they have succeeded in conning some folk. The facebook page info says “SmartVax is the philosophy of taking a balanced, scientific, and safe approach to vaccination”. And yet all of their Likes are antivax organisations, not one scientific Like; so much for balance..! As you say, just another antivax site claiming it’s something it’s not.

  2. #2 Kristen
    July 20, 2011

    Philosophical exemption, by which a parent can opt to delay or exempt certain vaccines for the child without discrimination such as loss of federal benefits or access to public schools, should be a fundamental right in the USA (as it is in Canada and other countries).

    I think immuno-compromised children should be free to go to public schools without fear of an unvaccinated child getting them sick with a preventable disease. But I’m all sappy like that.

    But antivaxers like to sweep kids with cancer or AIDS or that are otherwise immuno-compromised under the rug. They are so inconvenient to their whole “we aren’t hurting anybody” argument.

  3. #3 Lawrence
    July 20, 2011

    So, the current cultural definition of “fair & balanced” has come to mean be so over the top & biased on the other side of an issue (like bringing a fatter kid to sit on the other side of your perceived teeter-totter).

    Yeah, that’s work out just fine…..gotcha.

  4. #4 Composer99
    July 20, 2011

    SmartVax “pillar” #2:

    Appropriate Checks-and-Balances on Vaccine Policy

    Because, you know, it’s not like any vaccine manufacturer or government agency in the US engages in pre-licensure trials or post-licensure surveillance, or anything like that. /sarc

  5. #5 Todd W.
    July 20, 2011

    Long-term double-blind placebo studies tracking both acute and chronic health conditions (e.g. asthma, allergies, ADHD, and autism) should be required prior to any vaccine approval.

    Another way of reading this from how Orac did is that they want studies to follow subjects for years and years (how long is long enough? a lifetime?) before any new vaccines are approved. The length of time they likely have in mind is most likely unfeasible.

  6. #6 Marty
    July 20, 2011

    Why would anyone think injecting newborns for no reason with a 25,000 ppb solution of a short-chain alkyl-mercury solution is a bad idea? These anti-vaccers just don’t understand science!

  7. #7 Todd W.
    July 20, 2011

    @Marty

    Hey, there! So, what newborns (what age is “newborn” btw?) are injected with a “short-chain alkyl-mercury solution”? Another question for you: is 25,000ppb (aka, 25 micrograms) above or below the NOAEL for this solution?

  8. #8 Calli Arcale
    July 20, 2011

    SmartVax? A name like that makes me think they’re vaccinating against intelligence. I’m sure that’s not what they meant to convey.

    And of course they want long-term double-blind placebo controlled studies tracking both acute and chronic health conditions. That would effectively ban vaccines, except they know they look like freakish wackos if they just come out and say “we want to ban all vaccines”. It’s as intellectually honest as the Intelligent Design “wedge strategy” to get creationism taught as fact in public schools.

  9. #9 Krebiozen
    July 20, 2011

    @Marty

    Why would anyone think that choosing a unit just so you get a big scary number is a sensible thing to do on a blog frequented by people who know what the numbers mean?

    Why not call it a 25 parts per million solution, or a 0.025 parts per thousand solution? The only reason to choose ppb is to make the number as big as possible to scare people who don’t understand the science. Calling it 25,000,000 parts per trillion would have been a bit over the top I suppose.

    What is the significance of the concentration anyway? It is the dose that is important. If you are referring to the multidose vial influenza vaccine, I think you will find it actually contains 50 micrograms of thimerosal (which is equivalent to 25 micrograms of ethylmercury) in a 0.5 ml dose.

    Here’s a little perspective on this. The head of a pin weighs about 2,500 micrograms, or 100 times as much as the mercury in a flu shot. There are on average 140 micrograms of the considerably more toxic methylmercury in a 4 ounce can of tuna (average of 0.128 ppm), or more than 5 times as much as there is ethylmercury in a flu shot.

    If you don’t believe me, look it up for yourself. The information is easily found.

  10. #10 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 20, 2011

    Why would anyone think injecting newborns for no reason with a 25,000 ppb solution of a short-chain alkyl-mercury solution is a bad idea?

    “For no reason”?! Ye gods, Marty, how dumb are you? Do you actually think giving children (or adults for that matter!) medicine that hasn’t been protected from bacterial contamination is a good idea??

    Seriously, you made yourself look pretty bad here. “For no reason”? Way to identify yourself as not having done even the most trivial research.

  11. #11 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    As I’ve explained before many, many times, performing randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of currently used vaccines is completely unethical because it leaves the control group unprotected against vaccine-preventable disease.

    Sometimes real human kindness is reflected even in that analogy. Oh wait a minute. Was that supposed to be an analogy? I thought you meant you don’t want them to play your game —-the Russian Roulette.

  12. #12 kktkks
    July 20, 2011

    @Marty

    Of course it doesn’t work. It’s not even 3C! Needs to be diluted further.

    /sciencefail

  13. #13 Marty
    July 20, 2011

    Hi Krebiozen, the reason I use parts per billion (ppb)is because that is how mercury is monitored, measured, referenced in all material. Hazardous waste for example cannot exceed 200 ppb of total mercury. Drinking water is 2 ppb. Multi-dose vaccine vials contain 50,000 ppb (except the Hepatitis B which is administered to newborns for no reason, it contains 25,000 ppb). Now you bring up fish. Is the mercury in the fish you talk about being extracted and injected into newborns and infants? That would be a fair comparison.

    As far as ethylmercury vs. methylmercury, ethylmercury is much more toxic than methylmercury. Why? Both of these short chain alkyl mercury compounds are distributed to the brain. Once in the brain, the more unstable ethylmercury compound rapidly converts to Hg++ which remains permanently trapped and has been identified as the form of mercury most responsible for degenerative brain diseases. Also, ethylmercury is injected directly into the bloodstream thus by-passing all the protective mechanisms of the gastrointestinal system.

  14. #14 Mu
    July 20, 2011

    Great analogy thingy, shows the great dangers of trying to talk about something without understanding it. Russian Roulette, as played by the Russians, was a perfectly safe parlor trick, due to a unique feature of the Nagant revolver the Russians used at the time. Unlike US models that allow the cylinder to spin freely (truly randomizing the bullet position) the Russian model stopped spinning once you stopped moving it. So the guys sitting on that lonely Siberian outpost had plenty of time to figure out just where you had to place the cylinder on your hand to move the bullet to the opposite spot from the firing position, with a couple of open slots for safety.
    It only became dangerous when people tried to copy it with a different model. Lack of understanding kills.

  15. #15 Mu
    July 20, 2011

    Marty, you do realize that 25 l of drinking water contain as much mercury as that 1 ml shot? At what point do we change our newborns to a dry powder diet to avoid this fatal chronic exposure?

  16. #16 Beamup
    July 20, 2011

    Hi Krebiozen, the reason I use parts per billion (ppb)is because that is how mercury is monitored, measured, referenced in all material.

    Some limits are set that way, but ppb is irrelevant from a toxicological perspective. DOSE is all that matters. Some limits are set by assuming a certain amount of the substance will be consumed and using that to convert from a dose to ppb. But comparing the standard for drinking water (consumed in large amounts) to vaccines just proves that you haven’t the faintest clue what you’re talking about.

    Just to illustrate why you’re so utterly wrong, consider this. According to the argument you’re making, vaccines would be safer if diluted 1:1000 and then given 1000 injections at a time. Hopefully it’s clear why this is crazy talk.

  17. #17 lilady
    July 20, 2011

    Gee Orac, somehow I just knew that you would jump on this story…it also helps my “intuition” to go “slumming” at Age of Autism to view their latest campaigns and “theories”.

    They have got to be the dumbest group of reporters and editors that I have seen on the internet…ever…it is their last hope to show they have relevance in the autism community. Yet, no poster there (who has survived their “moderation”) ever questions their junk science, inaccurate links and their re-writing of the history of scientific discoveries.

    I’ve noticed a decided desperation on their part recently with the most inane drivel with even more specious articles about government conspiracy, the martyrdom of parents of children (who may or may not meet the diagnostic criteria for autism) and their desperation to avoid any discussions about genetics, prenatal and in utero causes for their children’s disabilities. And, their closed minds and the nastiness directed toward any “non-believers”
    is downright creepy.

    Just keep dishing out your wonderful Respectfully Insolence about the “vaccine-autism link”, it is so appreciated in the medical community.

  18. #18 Todd W.
    July 20, 2011

    @Marty

    A few things. First, ingested vs. injected mercury. Approximately 95%, give or take, of ingested mercury makes it into your system, so if you happen to ingest 25 mcg mercury, you’ll have 23.75 in your system. Not much different than the injection.

    Second, not a single vaccine on the pediatric schedule is injected into the bloodstream. Vaccines are delivered in one of four methods: into the muscle, just under the skin, orally (e.g., rotavirus vaccine) or nasally (FluMist).

    HepB vaccine for infants does not contain thimerosal. I’d like to see your source for the 25,000ppb number.

    Ethyl vs. methyl. Ethylmercury is cleared from the body in several days to about a week or so. Unless there is additional exposure during that timeframe, it does not have time to build up in the system. Methylmercury, on the other hand, takes weeks to months to clear from the body and is therefore of a much greater concern for exposure. Also, if you take a look at EPA guidelines for methylmercury, you’ll find that a person can be exposed to .1mcg or methylmercury per kilogram of that person’s weight per day. So, an average newborn infant of about 3.2kg could safely be exposed to .32mcg methylmercury every day (probably considerably more, considering the EPA’s fudge factors) with no ill effects. And that threshold only increases as the child gains weight, which most babies do.

  19. #19 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    Mu,

    Lack of understanding Nagant revolver kills.

    I couldn’t agree more but still you would give them the gun anyway and force them to play the Russian Roullete.

  20. #20 Denice Walter
    July 20, 2011

    I look over these websites – and their number keeps on growing, read permutations of the same material re-arranged and re-gurgitated at AoA, and hear/read the web woo-meisters prevaricate endlessly about vaccines. The same lines recited by the same, rather small, cast of characters. The topic really seems to stick in their craws. I wonder why is that?

    Doesn’t this smack of obsessional thought with perhaps a dash of delusion tossed in? I ask, “At what point does being, and staying, mis-informed become pathological?” Seth Kalichman talks about delusional denialism in respect to HIV/AIDS. In both cases, non-scientists speculate and find “reasons” to dis-believe the findings of scientific consensus: their objections are oddly creative while unrealistic. Any port in a storm.

    Two of the woo-meisters** I review link vaccines with “corporatocracy”- e.g. today Mike Adams surveys the Murdoch connection; Gary Null has taken on Bill Gates. And assaults on health freedom. I venture that we’re approaching deeper issues as well: while these entrepreneurs are of course concerned with the bottom line ( they sell the “alternative to vaccines”- at least in their fevered minds- supplements) the degree of emotional vehemence in their diatribes about vaccine supporters is telling: totally out of proportion.

    Fear of external control? Contamination? Impurity? Fear of the powerful? Seems primal almost. Vituperation of this degree *must* be fuelled by emotional conflict.

    ** btw, both critics have their own corporations. Perhaps they envy Mssrs Murdoch’s and Gates’ bigger ones.

  21. #21 Dangerous Bacon
    July 20, 2011

    I’m reminded of the slogan the New York City Dept. of Health used during their last outbreak of smallpox (circa 1947), when relatively few had sufficient vaccine protection and they were launching a major vaccination initiative. The slogan went something like:

    “Be smart, be safe – vaccinate!”

    There’s a good account of the outbreak and public health response in Berton Roueche’s story “A Man From Mexico”.

    I suspect that “SmartVax” is a doomed effort. Once you’ve convinced yourself that vaccination is an evil toxin-ridden Pharma Conspiracy, it’s hard to accept even limited immunization. That antivaxers would even attempt such a campaign, however, is an acknowledgement of how badly they’ve failed in trying to shake public confidence in vaccines.

  22. #22 Lawrence
    July 20, 2011

    Let’s ignore stupid troll on this one – no reason to feed the troll after the fattening up it got on the last topic.

  23. 25,000ppb?

    That’s 1.5E19 parts per mole!

    (Unless I made a mistake on my quick post-it math)

    =Karl Withakay

  24. #24 MikeMa
    July 20, 2011

    @Marty,
    We go over this every time mercury comes up. Waste limits for mercury are much lower because they accumulate unlike the vaccination materials which are flushed. Please try to keep up.

  25. #25 Allie
    July 20, 2011

    I am not a scientist, but I find it amusing that their efforts have the opposite of the intended effect. I live in a world where “maximum strength” is the bottle I reach for. “MaxVax” sounds ideal to me, especially in a state where, two towns down from where I live with my infant, they are closing schools due to pertussis outbreaks and, just across the river, there’s a measles outbreak.

    My aunt is deaf due to measles. My brother wound up in the hospital when he had chicken pox. My daughter will, God willing, get none of these things.

    Load her up. Protect my baby. Maximum strength vaccinations is JUST WHAT I WANT. The sooner she hits one and can get her MMR, the better I’ll sleep at night.

  26. #26 Jen
    July 20, 2011

    The other thing you failed to see that “popped up” while you were gone was that pesky new twin study(largest, best of it’s kind). CATS, J. hallmayer and L. lotspeich.

  27. #27 Scottynuke
    July 20, 2011

    I wonder if Marty’s recitation will earn the coveted Mercury Militia merit badge.

  28. The deceit is, of course, that SafeMinds or any other anti-vaccination group do anything disinterested, or that evidence-based research endeavors.

  29. #29 Clare
    July 20, 2011

    Hi Jen,

    I had a quick look at that paper (Genetic Heritability and Shared Environmental Factors Among Twin Pairs With Autism by Hallmayer et al 2011) and vaccines are not mentioned at all. It simply says that previous studies have underestimated the impact of environmental factors, it looks to be about 50% genetic/environmental and the environmental factors they list include parental age, weight at birth and those sort of things. This paper does not say vaccines cause autism (like all of the other)

  30. #30 triskelethecat
    July 20, 2011

    Does anyone else here think Marty and Thingy are friends? They both seem to believe vaccines are injected into the bloodstream.

    But Marty still thinks infant/pediatric vaccines contain thimerosal, too. Marty seems to be about 10 years out of date (don’t mention the multidose flu vaccine, Marty; very few children even GET the flu vaccine, and those that do get the single dose vaccine that does not contain thimerosal).

    @Jen: Look. Stop. We know about the twin study. You’ve posted it every where you go, and ignore the fact that everyone has pointed out to you that the study does not come to the conclusions you claim it does. Do I really need to post the extract again, Jen? The study simply concluded that environmental factors may have more of an impact than currently suspected.

  31. #31 Anjon
    July 20, 2011

    @Mu
    Marty, you do realize that 25 l of drinking water contain as much mercury as that 1 ml shot? At what point do we change our newborns to a dry powder diet to avoid this fatal chronic exposure?

    I believe you’ve failed to appreciate the nature of Marty’s anxiety – it is all about “blood”, particularly the “pure blood of the innocent newborn”. That the environment in which we live is full of frightening poisons is too great a conceptual load to take on board for what is effectively a mass hysteria ‘hygene anxiety complex’. However the ‘piercing of the skin’ (notional rape of the innocent) to introduce even the tinniest element of the exterior toxic environment is more emotionally containable, expressed as it is as a conception of ‘an assault on the innocent’.

    Marty may or may not be a religious adherent but he’s pushing a beilief system that is heavily influenced by an antichthonic determination to protect the ‘divine child’ from an earthly devil who has a hypodermic syringe extruding from the tip if his animalistic tail.

  32. #32 Enkidu
    July 20, 2011

    Todd W: “Another way of reading this from how Orac did is that they want studies to follow subjects for years and years (how long is long enough? a lifetime?) before any new vaccines are approved.”

    The question of how long is one I always had. I’ve asked anti-vaxers, and they have no answer for me. I guess they want us to still be in the throws of polio and smallpox, while we are studying long-term effects of vaxing against them.

  33. #33 Neta
    July 20, 2011

    There’s actually a small but significant group of anti-vaccinators that favors vaccination for a few diseases but nothing else. Anthroposophists (the people who run Waldorf schools) have historically been in favor of vaccination for tetnus and polio, but not for any of the febrile childhood illnesses[1], because Steiner viewed getting them as a child to be developmentally important (mostly in a spiritual sense, although I have seen Anthroposophists claim that going through measles is beneficial for mental development).
    Now, to be clear, I don’t think that this is what the people behind SmartVax are thinking of, but they could potentially use people with Anthroposophy-influenced views on vaccination as examples of what they claim to favor.

    1. Some Anthroposophical people are so convinced of the importance of immunization against tetnus and polio and of not immunizing against “the childhood illnesses” that in jurisdictions where getting a religious or philosophical exemptions requires that you abstain entirely from vaccination, they will maintain two sets of immunization records for their children, one with no immunizations and one with the tetnus and polio immunizations done “under the table” by a sympathetic doctor.

  34. #34 Todd W.
    July 20, 2011

    @Enkidu

    It would certainly seem that way. It must be very difficult living in such a constant state of fear.

  35. #35 Mu
    July 20, 2011

    Clare, as far as I understood it Hallmayer is only considering pre-natal exposure of the parent anyway as potential factors. So vaccines admitted to the baby are actually excluded as a cause, but that doesn’t disturb the disturbed.

  36. #36 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    tris,

    Does anyone else here think Marty and Thingy are friends? They both seem to believe vaccines are injected into the bloodstream.

    Vaccines are injected into the bloodstream through intramuscular or subcutaneous routes. Do we have any big problem with that?

  37. #37 Liz Ditz
    July 20, 2011

    Why are the websites like SmartVax so sticky? Here’s one explanation

    Evidence has long shown routine vaccines to be safe and effective, but a growing community of critics still claims that they pose more danger than the diseases they prevent…..

    Given the success of vaccines in preventing a long list of diseases, why is opposition to vaccination gaining hold? Decision-making expert Valerie Reyna contends that it’s because anti-vaccination messages tell a compelling story compared to official sources, and they meet people’s need to understand rare adverse outcomes…..

    Reyna presented her model of vaccine decisions at the University of Erfurt, Germany, in May to an international meeting of scientists examining the implications of the Internet and social media such as Twitter on public health messages about vaccination.

  38. #38 Krebiozen
    July 20, 2011

    Hi Marty,
    I think others have covered most of this, but I want to reply anyway, I have been writing this bit by bit during the day so apologies for any repetitions of what others have written.

    the reason I use parts per billion (ppb)is because that is how mercury is monitored, measured, referenced in all material. Hazardous waste for example cannot exceed 200 ppb of total mercury. Drinking water is 2 ppb.

    It’s a very misleading way to describe trace amounts of a preservative in a pharmaceutical preparation as it is the dose that is important. Hazardous waste is usually measured in tonnes or thousands of liters, people drink on average 2 liters of water a day, but a flu vaccine shot is only 0.5 ml. You are using the same units to compare things that differ in volume by several orders of magnitude.

    Multi-dose vaccine vials contain 50,000 ppb (except the Hepatitis B which is administered to newborns for no reason, it contains 25,000 ppb).

    If you mean the Engerix B vaccine, that is no longer given to newborns. Hepatitis B vaccine is not administered to newborns for “no reason”, hepatitis B is an unpleasant illness that causes lifelong problems in a lot of people and death in some. It is now believed that the hepatitis B vaccine confers lifelong protection from the disease. That seems a very good reason to me.

    Now you bring up fish. Is the mercury in the fish you talk about being extracted and injected into newborns and infants? That would be a fair comparison.

    I was simply giving a little perspective to your deliberately alarmist portrayal of thimerosal. As Todd has pointed out, it’s how much ends up in the blood, and ultimately the brain that matters, and we know from human studies using radioactively labeled mercury that almost 100% of ingested methylmercury is absorbed. Why is that not a fair comparison?

    As far as ethylmercury vs. methylmercury, ethylmercury is much more toxic than methylmercury. Why? Both of these short chain alkyl mercury compounds are distributed to the brain. Once in the brain, the more unstable ethylmercury compound rapidly converts to Hg++ which remains permanently trapped and has been identified as the form of mercury most responsible for degenerative brain diseases.

    Do you have a citation for that? Methylmercury is actively transported to the brain, but ethylmercury gets there by passive perfusion. The studies I have seen show lower neurotoxicity of ethylmercury compared to methylmercury, and the acute doses of ethylmercury in vaccines are orders of magnitude lower than the chronic doses of methylmercury that have been shown to cause measurable symptoms. Studies also show a much quicker clearance of ethylmercury and thimerosal as compared to methylmercury, and much lower concentrations of mercury in the brain, ten times lower in this study.

    Also, ethylmercury is injected directly into the bloodstream thus by-passing all the protective mechanisms of the gastrointestinal system.

    An intramuscular or subcutaneous injection does not go directly into the bloodstream, it stays in the tissues for some time stimulating adaptive immunity and slowly leaches into the blood, so peak blood concentrations are much lower than they would be with an intravenous injection. Anyway, what protective mechanisms does the GI tract have against ingestion of tiny doses of organic mercury?

  39. #39 The only problem with it
    July 20, 2011

    “Vaccines are injected into the bloodstream through intramuscular or subcutaneous routes. Do we have any big problem with that?”

    The big problem is that this is a lie. But you’ve never had even the slightest problem lying.

  40. #40 Beamup
    July 20, 2011

    I suspect that the “rapidly converts to Hg++” is the standard idiocy. With a given starting amount of methyl or ethyl mercury, after some time the amount of inorganic is the same for both but there’s more methyl left than ethyl. So the mercury that’s still around from the ethyl dose has a greater percentage of inorganic and somehow this proves that it’s more toxic.

    That’s right, being excreted more rapidly makes it WORSE because the (same) amount of inorganic left behind is now a larger percentage of the total remaining amount…

  41. #41 Andrew
    July 20, 2011

    Krebiozen: You’ve said everything that I was going to say, but I’m going to try to simplify it a bit, in case there’s any continuing confusion.

    Parts per billion is a convenient measure of the proportion of a quantity, but effects are caused by the total amount, not by the proportion. The FDA calculates the acceptable portion of a quantity based on the assumption that people will be consuming large amounts over the course of an entire lifetime – it’s ridiculous to compare the parts per billion that causes harm in that situation with the parts per billion in a tiny amount given a few times over a lifetime. Yes, the amount of thimerosal that used to be provided in a vaccine was above the parts for billion limit for drinking gallons a day for a lifetime, but so what. The amount of alcohol in a mixed drink is way above the ppb allowed in drinking water too, but unless you’re drinking nothing but mixed drinks over the course of your life, the health effects of exceeding the ppb limit by a factor of 10 or 100 is completely neglectable.

  42. #42 Bronze Dog
    July 20, 2011

    All this whining the anti-vaxxers are doing about concentration to distract from dose and response suggests either they’re innumerate, or that they think they can just juggle numbers a little to fool us. Or, most likely, both.

  43. #43 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    Krebiozen,

    Hazardous waste is usually measured in tonnes or thousands of liters, people drink on average 2 liters of water a day, but a flu vaccine shot is only 0.5 ml.

    It’s 0.5ml but you’re getting the same equivalent dose genius! Geez.

  44. #44 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    Vaccine-induced viremia,

    You know what I’m talking.

  45. Th1Th2

    “Vaccines are injected into the bloodstream through intramuscular or subcutaneous routes. Do we have any big problem with that?”

    I have a problem with people incorrectly describing intramuscular and subcutaneous injections is injections into the bloodstream.

    Intramuscular and subcutaneous injections are no more injections into the bloodstream than is a suppository.

  46. #46 Stu
    July 20, 2011

    Vaccines are injected into the bloodstream through intramuscular or subcutaneous routes. Do we have any big problem with that?

    No, we have big problems with clownshoes who call that “intravenous”.

  47. #47 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    Stu,

    No, we have big problems with clownshoes who call that “intravenous”.

    Are you talking to me? If so, provide evidence please, otherwise, go pound sand.

  48. #48 DLC
    July 20, 2011

    why is it some people never bloody learn.
    Ignorance is Bliss ?
    we got a lot of blissful people over at SafeMinds.

  49. #49 Lawrence
    July 20, 2011

    Stu, et.al. ignore idiot troll.

  50. #50 Gray Falcon
    July 20, 2011

    Just so you know:
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/04/stop_cbs_from_airing_anti-vaccine_ads_on.php#comment-3620414
    This is how vapid she is. She thinks “intravenous” and “injected into the blood stream” are two different things. Like Lawrence said, don’t bother with her.

  51. #51 Krebiozen
    July 20, 2011

    It’s 0.5ml but you’re getting the same equivalent dose genius! Geez.

    If it’s the same equivalent dose, I guess you agree that the thimerosal in vaccines is no more dangerous than a few liters of tap water. I do my best to avoid ingesting hazardous industrial chemicals, but I understand it’s very popular among you antivaxxers.

  52. #52 Marty
    July 20, 2011

    Here’s my response to Krebiozen. Can you other Einsteins just read our exchanges. Maybe you’ll actually learn something.

    “Thimerosal, an antiseptic containing ethylmercury, continues to be used as a preservative of vaccines distributed and administered worldwide. Direct intramuscular injection of this compound provides rapid access to the blood stream and thereby privileged access to its target organs”.

    Effects of chelators on mercury, iron, and lead neurotoxicity in cortical culture. Travis Rusha, Julie Hjelmhauga and Doug Lobner, Neurotoxicology. 2009 Jan;30(1):47-51.

    Ethylmercury converts to Hg++ in about 8 hours. It is not cleared, it’s just converted to a different form. Methylmercury is stable and recycles in and out of tissue. Ethylmercury enters the brain after the initial exposure (injection). Why? Like dissolves like.

  53. #53 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    Gray,

    This is how vapid she is. She thinks “intravenous” and “injected into the blood stream” are two different things. Like Lawrence said, don’t bother with her.

    Stupid dyslexic. There are several parenteral routes in which a vaccine can be delivered into the bloodstream, IM, SC and IV. Now do you have any problem with that?

  54. #54 Giliell
    July 20, 2011

    Anthroposophists (the people who run Waldorf schools) have historically been in favor of vaccination for tetnus and polio

    Some do, some don’t. My cousins ex-partner had her boys vaccinated against tetanus because *drumroll* grandma refused to take them on a holiday if she didn’t.

    My other cousin’s (lots of cousins here) goddaughter just contracted the measles. She’s 11 months old and had her vaccination scheduled next week :(
    No fault of the parents, no neglect of schedule, no freedom to make any such decission.
    Got it from her cousins who got it at the kindergarten. One of those boys is already in hospital, we’re hoping that the little girl doesn’t need hospitalization.

  55. #55 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    Gray,

    This is how vapid she is. She thinks “intravenous” and “injected into the blood stream” are two different things. Like Lawrence said, don’t bother with her.

    Stupid dyslexic. There are several parenteral routes in which a vaccine can be delivered into the bloodstream, IM, SC and IV. All you have to do is to choose. How easy can it be?

  56. #56 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    Krebiozen,

    If it’s the same equivalent dose, I guess you agree that the thimerosal in vaccines is no more dangerous than a few liters of tap water.

    Hahaha. Why the need for a few liters of tap water when they can get the same equivalent dose at 0.5 ml so easily? Do you get that genius?

  57. #57 lara
    July 20, 2011

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-wFqkvK7ww&NR=1 The BRAIN IS DEVELOPING IN THE FIRST 2 YEARS OF LIFE
    The CDC now reports 1 in 6 children are developmentally disabled.
    Brain inflammation is a very real result of disease and vaccines.

  58. #58 lilady
    July 20, 2011

    “Stupid dyslexic. There are several parenteral routes in which a vaccine can be delivered into the bloodstream, IM, SC and IV. All you have to do is to choose. How easy can it be?”

    I recall this dumb troll’s other postings about vaccine administration! IV route for vaccines!!!

    Stop feeding this delusional, nasty dumber than dumb troll.

  59. #59 herr doktor bimler
    July 20, 2011

    ethylmercury is much more toxic than methylmercury. Why? Both of these short chain alkyl mercury compounds are distributed to the brain. Once in the brain, the more unstable ethylmercury compound rapidly converts to Hg++ which remains permanently trapped and has been identified as the form of mercury most responsible for degenerative brain diseases.

    I am intrigued, Marty. Where are you getting this stuff? — Because you certainly aren’t reading it in any textbooks on toxicology or neuropathology. Do you hear it from the voices in your head, or the invisible leprechauns in your underpants? Do you encounter it on magical-thinking websites, and think “This runs contrary to mainstream science so it must be true”?

    It really is an impressive accomplishment to write an paragraph that contains more false statements than sentences.

  60. #60 Denice Walter
    July 20, 2011

    The brain is developing in the first two years of life?
    How about *before* ( gestation) and *after* ?
    Oh, what’s the use…

  61. #61 herr doktor bimler
    July 20, 2011

    Where are you getting this stuff?

    The Great Google answers my question… “Marty” is a cut-&-paste troll, repeating verbatim a claim that appears dozens of times elsewhere around the Intertubes.
    Plagiarism, says I! For shame!

  62. #62 lara
    July 20, 2011

    Denice Walter-of course *before* and *after* but the majority of vaccines are given in the first two years. ???What’s the use??? Make your point!

  63. #63 Krebiozen
    July 20, 2011

    |Marty,

    [Quoting a study I can’t find a full text version of] “Direct intramuscular injection of this compound provides rapid access to the blood stream and thereby privileged access to its target organs”

    I suppose it depends on what you mean by “rapid”. This study suggests it takes 12-24 hours for maximal blood levels of mercury to appear after vaccination with a vaccine containing thimerosal in human infants.

    Ethylmercury converts to Hg++ in about 8 hours.

    Do you have any evidence for this assertion? I see no good chemical reason for a carbon-mercury bond to be more easily broken in ethylmercury than in methylmercury. Some methylmercury is excreted through the bile and converted by gut flora into inorganic mercury that is excreted in stools, some of this methylmercury is reabsorbed into the blood. It is likely that a similar process occurs with ethylmercury. I can’t find any studies that suggest ethylmercury breaks down into inorganic mercury in the body any more readily than methylmercury.

    It is not cleared, it’s just converted to a different form.

    That’s not true, it is excreted mostly in the stools – see the study I link to above.

    Methylmercury is stable and recycles in and out of tissue.

    If that is true (though I see no reason why it should be), it would support the hypothesis that it is more neurotoxic than ethylmercury, as inorganic forms of mercury are considerably less toxic than organic forms.

    Ethylmercury enters the brain after the initial exposure (injection). Why? Like dissolves like.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “like dissolves like” in this context. Inorganic mercury does not readily pass across the blood brain barrier, so if your assertions about ethylmercury rapidly breaking down to inorganic mercury while methylmercury does not are correct, this would mean far more methylmercury ending up in the brain than an equivalent dose of ethylmercury.

    As I wrote above, my reading suggests that methylmercury is actively transported into the brain, while ethylmercury diffuses passively, resulting in a ten-fold higher concentration of mercury in the brain after methylmercury exposure as compared with ethylmercury. See the link I gave in #37.

  64. #64 Queen Khentkawes
    July 20, 2011

    Orac and company:
    Long-time lurker, first-time poster here. This is off-topic, but have you seen the article in Salon about how Mary Elizabeth Williams’s daughter was supposed to get a meningitis vaccine, but got the HPV vaccine instead? While the kid should have gotten what she came there for, MEW seems to think that the sky should fall. I thought you’d be interested in reading it: http://www.salon.com/life/motherhood/index.html?story=/mwt/feature/2011/07/20/wrong_vaccine

  65. #65 Krebiozen
    July 20, 2011

    Lara,
    A year or two ago I wasted many hours looking at one of Blaylock’s articles about the 2000 Simpsonwood meeting. It was riddled with inaccuracies, misquotes and distortions, a truly appalling piece of work. I wouldn’t take anything Blaylock says seriously.

  66. #66 herr doktor bimler
    July 20, 2011

    Like dissolves like.
    We are dealing with Galenic thinking here.

    Krebiozen wonders:
    Do you have any evidence for this assertion?
    I’m just guessing here, but “Marty” (or the original source somewhere in the bowels of the Intermesh whom Marty is plagiarising) seems to draw heavily on the works of one Boyd Haley from Kentucky, well-known chelation charlatan.

  67. #67 Yojimbo
    July 20, 2011

    herr doktor bimler

    Like dissolves like.
    We are dealing with Galenic thinking here.

    Echoes of Hahnemannic thinking, too. Maybe like cures like while dissolving it?

  68. #68 Krebiozen
    July 20, 2011

    Herr Doktor Bimler,
    I think the source may be Michael F. Wagnitz, a Metals Analysis Chemist and member of the National Autism Association, unless he was regurgitating someone else’s claims. Wagnitz must be a vaccine expert as he has his own page at whale.to /sarcasm.

  69. #69 Dangerous Bacon
    July 20, 2011

    “There’s actually a small but significant group of anti-vaccinators that favors vaccination for a few diseases but nothing else. Anthroposophists (the people who run Waldorf schools) have historically been in favor of vaccination for tetnus and polio, but not for any of the febrile childhood illnesses[1], because Steiner viewed getting them as a child to be developmentally important (mostly in a spiritual sense, although I have seen Anthroposophists claim that going through measles is beneficial for mental development).”

    I remember reading awhile back a mother’s gripe about the elimination of or vast reductions in once commonplace childhood diseases, on the grounds that medicine has done away with the soulful/bonding aspects of parent-child interactions during such illnesses. The idea apparently is that if your child is severely ill for a week or more with measles or other infectious disease, there’s a wonderful closeness with the parent(s) that is harder to come by now.

    There’s something to that, I suppose. We’ve also lost out on a lot of hospital bedside vigils, spiritual times in the intensive care unit, long-term bonding as a result of blindness and permanent neurological sequelae of these diseases, plus the spiritual awakening that can only come when a parent has suffered the death of a child.

    It’s too bad we value good health so much these days. We’re missing a lot.

  70. #70 lilady
    July 20, 2011

    @ Queen Khentkawes: Stop your long time lurking here and start posting…I love your link to the Salon article…and the 58 comments that the dumb article elicited. I suspect that if author Mary Elizabeth Williams ever “makes it” in the journalism field that this article will haunt her throughout her career.

    The comments that I read thoroughly took this mommy-author to task for making a mountain out of molehill due to a simple error in administering a vaccine and for extraordinarily poor coping and parenting skills. Not Williams’ finest hour and my faith in the newer generation of parents who commented has been restored.

  71. #71 Jake Crosby
    July 20, 2011

    “…rejection of studies failing to find a link between vaccines and autism almost before they are published.”

    Pharma, that’s because SafeMinds was an external consultant to those studies as a compromise for the fact that your CDC would not open its Vaccine Safety Datalink up to independent analysis by outside researchers. After all, your CDC would defeat the point of its own tobacco science if it did.

  72. #72 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 20, 2011

    Denice Walter-of course *before* and *after* but the majority of vaccines are given in the first two years. ???What’s the use??? Make your point!

    “Make your point” is an ironic thing for you to be saying, Lara. Here’s your own argument, de-YouTubed and reformatted:

    “1. The BRAIN IS DEVELOPING IN THE FIRST 2 YEARS OF LIFE
    2. The CDC now reports 1 in 6 children are developmentally disabled.
    3. Brain inflammation is a very real result of disease and vaccines.”

    Now, there’s a problem with the relationship between your premises 1 and 2 and your conclusion at 3. Namely, that there is none. I could substitute “Brain inflammation is a very real result of infant formula” or “Brain inflammation is a very real result of the PBS Kids cable channel” and the argument would hold together just as well if not better.

    I suspect that what you intended to suggest was something like the following:

    1. There are some disorders which most frequently become noticeable during the first two years of life.
    2. A lot of vaccinations also happen within the first two years of life.
    RULE: When two things are closely related in time, there must be a cause-and-effect connection between the two.
    3. Therefore, vaccines must cause the disorders in question.

    This is a much clearer argument. Unfortunately, it’s bull doots, because the “rule” being used to join the premises together is nonsense. How many people come by bus or train to visit NYC in an average day? How many people came for such a visit on 9/11/2011? By the “rule” above, each person whose first sightseeing trip to NYC happened on 9/11 caused the collapse of the Twin Towers. After all, they both happened within the same 24 hour period, which is far more precise than “within the same 17,520 hour period,” which is what the first two years of life equals. If you say that hundreds of unrelated tourists cannot be held responsible for the events of 9/11, you have just identified the reason why vaccines are not implicated for disorders that manifest in the first two years, just because they are administered within that time span.

  73. #73 Denice Walter
    July 20, 2011

    @ lara: neuro-development is a continuous process that is prenatal ( important early critical period – first 12 weeks) and goes on throughout childhood ( important), adolescence( important), and early adulthood ( executive functions). Someone who *phrases* it in that manner is either not well versed or is deliberately trying to mislead parents about vaccines, many of which are given in that time period.

    Blalock is well known for his outlandish theory and is often featured by natural health advocates (i.e. the usual suspects eviscerated here regularly) who spew other nonsense as Krebiozen has kindly illustrated. The 1 in 6 figure reflects changes in diagnostic categories especially post DSM IV as well as long familiar syndromes. Are children really worse off or are more problems identified and addressed earlier so they may be helped? Natural health advocates would have you believe the former. They have products or treatments to sell.

  74. #74 Krebiozen
    July 20, 2011

    I just found a primate study comparing exposure to methylmercury and thimerosal. It supports some but not all of what Marty has claimed. In this study thimerosal did result in a higher percentage of inorganic mercury in the brain compared to methylmercury, but this may or may not be the result of more effective detoxification. The study found a much lower half life of ethylmercury (8.6 days) versus methylmercury (21.5 days) in blood and also in brain (24.2 days versus 59.5 days), and 3-fold lower brain levels of mercury after thimerosal than after methylmercury.

  75. #75 lilady
    July 20, 2011

    @ Dangerous Bacon: Been there and done that with a critically ill child on many occasions and it is NOT a bonding experience. It is a frightening time to watch your child struggle to survive.

    Perhaps the silliest thing I have ever heard are the loss of the bonding experiences “suffered” by new mothers who were unable to deliver their infant vaginally and underwent a crash C-Section. The new mothers acknowledge that the fetal heart rate was plummeting…but they nevertheless “suffer” through the loss of the bonding experience of completing their labor for delivery. See, it’s all about experiencing the “bonding” versus the risk of fetal death or an infant permanently injured from anoxia…some mighty screwed up priorities.

  76. #76 lara
    July 20, 2011

    Antaeus -They are 3 statements of facts #3 is not a conclusion. I was in a hurry and don’t like to be long-winded with stupid analogies like WTC. The video is from a
    neurosurgeon who states “in his opinion”- I am unvaxed ex. for smallpox and some flu which I will never again get! IN GREAT Health -had measles,mumps, chickenpox
    as a child before vaccines were given and they were minor nuisances for me and all
    of my classmates!

  77. #77 lara
    July 20, 2011

    Denice- Merck generates over $1 billion worth of revenue from the HEP B vaccine alone. A Hep B on the first sacred day of life? Give me a break!

  78. #78 Denice Walter
    July 20, 2011

    @ lara : how much does it cost to develop and test a new vaccine ( for pharma) vs how much to develop and test a new dried green vegetable powder (for a web woo-meister)?

    btw I’m a psychologist who happens to study investment as well.

  79. #79 Orac
    July 20, 2011

    Pharma, that’s because SafeMinds was an external consultant to those studies as a compromise for the fact that your CDC would not open its Vaccine Safety Datalink up to independent analysis by outside researchers. After all, your CDC would defeat the point of its own tobacco science if it did.

    Indeed. Sallie Bernard was happy enough to be a “consultant” on those studies, even though her scientific qualifications to serve in such a capacity are nil; that is, until the data analysis showed that the study wasn’t going to show what she wanted it to show. When that happened, she turned on her previous benefactors:

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/01/sallie_bernard_responds_to_the_new_engla.php

    The hilarious thing is just how ignorant Sallie Bernard is, as evidenced by her utter misinterpretation of the results of Thompson et al and her cherry picking of results.

  80. #80 Queen Khentkawes
    July 20, 2011

    @ lilady: Praise from you is praise indeed! Salon’s posters are a pretty unpredictable bunch, but they certainly came through today. What shocked me about the article (aside from the fact that it was written at all) was that not only was MEW upset, but that she proceeded to upset both her daughters too. I hate to think of what life is like in the Williams household.

  81. #81 lara
    July 20, 2011

    Denice- Give me proof the Hep B is necessary at birth- Children’s lives are more important- Money-so that justifies giving Hep b at birth- I hope you are in research and not dealing with patients who would probably remain in therapy too too long….to pay for your whatevers.

  82. #82 Denice Walter
    July 20, 2011

    @ lara : Hep B is highly contagious; babies may contract it at birth or early in life through close contact with infected people. So it’s *smart* to take this precaution.

    I mostly work with young adults and adults interested in getting ahead through higher education. FYI I charge on a sliding scale.

  83. #83 Lawrence
    July 20, 2011

    And yet we are the ones that are called hateful…..

  84. #84 lara
    July 20, 2011

    Denice- Sorry….In other countries it is a problem. Apologies but you brought up R&D. Not necessary for babies born to HBV negative mothers in the US. transmitted like HIV

  85. #85 Thomas
    July 20, 2011

    “I am unvaxed ex. for smallpox and some flu which I will never again get! IN GREAT Health -had measles,mumps, chickenpox as a child before vaccines were given and they were minor nuisances for me and all of my classmates!”

    Know what you mean – people always tell me not to run red lights, but I’ve never had an accident. What a bunch of wimps people are!

  86. #86 lara
    July 20, 2011

    thomas – I hate to tell my age but I’m 68 with great genes and two cousins with
    autistic grandchildren with really healthy parents-Looking for answers. I might get the flu but there has been a correlation with too many flu shots and Alzheimers. My son was not vaccinated at birth he’s 43 (before vaccines) who trekked Everest!!!
    Don’t really know what causes it but….

  87. #87 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 20, 2011

    Antaeus -They are 3 statements of facts #3 is not a conclusion.

    Ah, that explains a lot! It’s not just that you don’t understand how syllogisms work, it’s that you don’t even understand the difference between “an assertion” and “a fact”.

    I was in a hurry and don’t like to be long-winded with stupid analogies like WTC.

    Well, that’s too bad. If you had more of an attention span then you might be able to apply more critical thinking skills to the YouTube videos you watch, and not be put in the embarrassing position of spouting second-hand nonsense. If you have the time to comment here five times in as many hours, you’ve got the time to educate yourself about logical fallacies, and stop packing your comments with so many of them.

  88. #88 TBruce
    July 20, 2011

    Merck generates over $1 billion worth of revenue from the HEP B vaccine alone.

    OMFG!!!!! Someone is making money!!!! From preventing lethal disease!!!! We can’t have that!!!

    What are you, a communist?

  89. #89 Thomas
    July 20, 2011

    That’s nothing – I’m 101 with various superpowers.

  90. #90 Narad
    July 20, 2011

    Some do, some don’t. My cousins ex-partner had her boys vaccinated against tetanus because *drumroll* grandma refused to take them on a holiday if she didn’t.

    I’ve noted in the past that tetanus is one of the few things that seems to cause disquiet among the MDC antivax crowd. I don’t know that it’s so much a realization that “immune boosting” is nonsensical in this case as that the condition is not communicable and thus somehow spooky–inhuman, like the Holy Ghost. Even the serious cranks who assert that hydrogen peroxide destroys spores (to the extent they understood their existence) didn’t seem to get much traction.

  91. #91 Hinterlander
    July 20, 2011

    LOL Thomas! Well my daughter is only 1 and has superpowers too. I’m amazed at her ability to seek and consume the smallest item on a freshly vacuumed floor and somehow know to wake up from her nap the second I sit down with a cup of tea. Like lara’s relatives, I’m looking for answers. It might not be the vaccines, but…

  92. #92 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    I have a problem with people incorrectly describing intramuscular and subcutaneous injections is injections into the bloodstream.
    Intramuscular and subcutaneous injections are no more injections into the bloodstream than is a suppository.

    Geez. (Hint: Band-aid).

  93. #93 Anonmom
    July 20, 2011

    As the mother of a child with chronic Hep B (acquired from birth mother), i worry daily about the non-vaccinated kids who play with my child. Yes, it is transmitted as HIV is, but it is also 100 times more contagious. And I don’t know if you have kids, but they bleed all the time. Bug bites, nose bleeds, scrapes, scratches. Most parents I see don’t teach their kids standard precautions, and kids are quick to help their friends when hurt. Hep B is out there, it’s at my house.

  94. #94 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    Thomas,

    Know what you mean – people always tell me not to run red lights, but I’ve never had an accident. What a bunch of wimps people are!

    Are you sure they are not your loved ones?

  95. #95 dedicated lurker
    July 20, 2011

    Thingy, if you’re using band-aids as suppositories, I have to inform you you are Doing It Wrong.

  96. #96 Jake Crosby
    July 20, 2011

    “even though her scientific qualifications to serve in such a capacity are nil”

    And yet, an MD, Ph.D. “scientist” (you) can’t even defend this study against someone whose scientific qualifications you say are “nil.”

    “that is, until the data analysis showed that the study wasn’t going to show what she wanted it to show.”

    …or what the data itself showed that did not sit with the authors’ preconceived opinions – especially with tics and speech/language, as seen in previous studies.

    “she turned on her previous benefactors”

    Except that the only reason why she was made a consultant was to avoid having to allow her access to the database itself.

  97. #97 augustine
    July 20, 2011

    @ lara : how much does it cost to develop and test a new vaccine ( for pharma) vs how much to develop and test a new dried green vegetable powder (for a web woo-meister)?

    @De-Nice, how much does it cost to develop and test a new cd? How much does it actually cost to produce said CD? Pennies. Vaccines are profit makers. End of story. Myth debunked.

    Not to De-Nice: Pharmaceutical companies aren’t philanthropists. They are profit driven. And they do it better than any other industry. There’s a reason why pharma is heavily investing in vaccines and vaccine research. It’s money. Pure and simple. $$$

  98. #98 Todd W.
    July 20, 2011

    @Anonmom

    Thank you for posting that. I was working my way through the comments and was planning on addressing how HepB can be spread. One thing you forgot to mention is that it can also be spread through biting, something that young children may resort to when they have a disagreement with another child.

    Also, it is worth noting, that HepB leads to a chronic infection more commonly the younger the patient, putting infants at the highest risk for chronic infection. The other down side to chronic infection is that it increases the risk for liver cancer.

    There is plenty of good reason to vaccinate infants against the disease. Even if the mother is negative, other family members, children and even casual contacts may not be.

  99. #99 augustine
    July 20, 2011

    @ lara : Hep B is highly contagious; babies may contract it at birth or early in life through close contact with infected people. So it’s *smart* to take this precaution.

    De_Nice, please provide data. And spare us the psycho babble, please. Data and context would greatly be appreciated. Please limit said data to the U.S.

    Risk factors for Hep. B would also be greatly appreciated.

    Could you also tell us why it would be reasonable to refuse this vaccine? Thank you.

  100. #100 Th1Th2
    July 20, 2011

    dedicated lurker,

    Thingy, if you’re using band-aids asafter suppositories, I have to inform you you are Doing It Wrong.

    In fairness, I have given out a clue yet you still failed miserably. Go tell the original poster not to use band-aids after giving suppository. I only use them after a needle injection.

  101. #101 augustine
    July 20, 2011

    Toddy Woddy

    Even if the mother is negative, other family members, children and even casual contacts may not be.

    You guys are on a roll tonight. Please explain “casual contacts” and give data to support your fear mongering.

  102. #102 Science Mom
    July 20, 2011

    @ Jake Crosby

    Pharma, that’s because SafeMinds was an external consultant to those studies as a compromise for the fact that your CDC would not open its Vaccine Safety Datalink up to independent analysis by outside researchers. After all, your CDC would defeat the point of its own tobacco science if it did.

    Orac addressed your first fallacious statement; I will address the second. The VSD is open to independent investigators so you would be wrong there too. Have a look yourself: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/library/vsd_pubs.html

    The VSD opened its files to the Geier boys and they were caught red-handed trying to uncode personal data among other egregious violations. How soon and conveniently you forget. The “tobacco science” drivel is not only original but old and tired; you need a new shtick. Maybe JB can help you out with that.

  103. #103 Todd W.
    July 20, 2011

    @augie

    Ask and you shall receive. (that’s 4 separate links)

    By “casual contacts,” I meant people who are not caregivers, relatives or close friends, but someone with whom they may have a very brief interaction. I was not referring to “casual contact” like hugging, kissing or handshakes. If saliva (e.g., drool) is involved, there is potential for transmission of the virus.

  104. #104 Todd W.
    July 20, 2011

    Got a comment in moderation with studies on transmission of HepB. Be patient and it will be revealed.

  105. #105 Science Mom
    July 20, 2011

    That should be, “not only unoriginal…”

  106. #106 Narad
    July 20, 2011

    Please explain “casual contacts”

    It’s like when you don’t have time to put lipstick and a little wig on your hand, Augustine.

  107. #107 Composer99
    July 21, 2011

    ugh troll:

    Try the CDC website.

    Please note that your requests for citations will be taken seriously when you begin offering either credible citations or correct interpretations of your sources.

    Since you have failed to distinguish between gross revenues and net profits, your feeble attempts to argue based on “Pharma $$” are, well, feeble.

  108. #108 Jake Crosby
    July 21, 2011

    “The VSD is open to independent investigators so you would be wrong there too. Have a look yourself:”

    Those are not publications by outside researchers. In fact, most of those publications share coauthors with the Thompson, Price and Verstraeten papers about thimerosal – if not those specific papers.

    “The VSD opened its files to the Geier boys and they were caught red-handed trying to uncode personal data among other egregious violations.”

    Actually, they detected an error in the system while they were there and informed NCHS about the screw-up. The allegations the CDC made against them – which they were never meant to see – did not surface until well after they left and accused them of physically impossible actions, much in the same way Brian Deer accused Wakefield of forging physician records he never had access to.

    “The ‘tobacco science’ drivel is…old…”

    Indeed, it is old – it dates back over 100 years before the term was even coined!
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/06/the-original-paul-offit.html

  109. #109 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    Now that the chemical castrating Geier tag team is out of commission, there may be a new calling for boy wonder cub reporter Jake Crosby; after all he is taking several combined majors, including epidemiology in grad school.

    Jake, are you aware that when you apply for a real job, that the personnel wonks “Google” your name and your support of the anti-vax heroes (Geiers and Wakefield) and your association with Age of Autism, will have an impact on your chances of ever getting a job. In addition, every time you post here with some of your notorious inane theories, “Google” also picks up those postings. You better stay friendly with Handley…surely he will find a position in the mail room for his young protege.

  110. #110 dedicated lurker
    July 21, 2011

    You may only use them after an injection, Thingy, but I’ve used them to cover scrapes and blisters. In fact, the last few vaccines I got I didn’t get a band-aid over them. You couldn’t even see the place the needle went in, (The last time they took my blood, however, I had a giant black and blue spot from where the vein blew. I love my crummy rolling veins.)

  111. #111 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    According to Thingy “Stupid dyslexic. There are several parenteral routes in which a vaccine can be delivered into the bloodstream, IM, SC and IV. All you have to do is to choose. How easy can it be?”

    Thingy, we are waiting for some clarification of your statement, specifically, which vaccines in particular are given IM, which vaccines are given SC and which vaccines are given IV?

    Also, on what basis (in your clinical practice and with your vast clinical experience) do you “choose” the route for immunization?

  112. #112 Delurked lurker
    July 21, 2011

    Bloody hell it took boring troll 96 posts to wake up and start being boring, must be some kind of record?

  113. #113 Orac
    July 21, 2011

    Actually, they detected an error in the system while they were there and informed NCHS about the screw-up. The allegations the CDC made against them – which they were never meant to see – did not surface until well after they left and accused them of physically impossible actions, much in the same way Brian Deer accused Wakefield of forging physician records he never had access to.

    My goodness, you’re more gullible than I thought.

  114. #114 Orac
    July 21, 2011

    …or what the data itself showed that did not sit with the authors’ preconceived opinions – especially with tics and speech/language, as seen in previous studies.

    You’re cherry picking. As I said in my post analyzing Thompson et al:

    Second, A-CHAMP is cherry picking associations here. It is true that there were some negative correlations found that achieved statistical significance. When running 42 tests, it would be shocking if there were not a few anomalous findings. What makes the study authors fairly confident that the findings are anomalous is that they were divided roughly equally in both directions, good and bad. Consequently, if A-CHAMP is going to insist that the correlation, for example, with increasing mercury exposure and poorer performance on the GFTA-2 measure of speech articulation test, then it must also accept the findings of a beneficial association between mercury and identification of letters and numbers on the WJ-III test, as there is no reason to reject it. Naturally, the mercury militia picks on the associations as being true that they want to be true and ignore the other associations, which, if true, would be arguments for including thimerosal in vaccines. It’s far more likely that all of them are just noise. Again, the reason that investigators can reasonably conclude that the associations found are most likely due to random chance is because of their random distribution between positive and negative.

    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/09/a_bad_day_for_antivaccinationists.php

  115. #115 Tony Bateson
    July 21, 2011

    Well this blog is obviously one for considerable scientific skills and extensive knowledge of ‘the double blind-placebo-control group’ tendency. I do not fit into those groups but I do possess one great skill – I can count. The problem is that even after the most extensive fifteen year period of seeking to count autistic people amongst the sizeable un-vaccinated population I can’t find any. I haven’t been able to count one. Nor do I ever get a reply when I ask the clever people who argue that vaccination is not connected to autism to point me in the direction of an autistic person who has not been vaccinated. In short I never get the opportunity to use my counting skills. I think this is a more profound observation of the facts that all your Hg ppb ethyl vs methyl nonsense. Unvaccinated autistic people do not exist QED.

    Tony Bateson, Cheltenham, UK.

  116. #116 Jake Crosby
    July 21, 2011

    ‘Actually, they detected an error in the system while they were there and informed NCHS about the screw-up. The allegations the CDC made against them – which they were never meant to see – did not surface until well after they left and accused them of physically impossible actions, much in the same way Brian Deer accused Wakefield of forging physician records he never had access to.’
    “My goodness, you’re more gullible than I thought.”

    Care to actually address any of this? You know, they were also accompanied by an autism parent. I guess he must be lying, too, or dreamed up the whole visit just like all those parents are dreaming up the mercury in their children’s vaccines, or how the Lancet parents dreamed up their kids’ reactions to MMR.

    “You’re cherry picking.”

    No, thimerosal has been repeatedly associated with causing speech and language disorders since 1999. I have yet to see one other study besides Thompson that associates mercury exposure with better “achievement.”

    Your persistent rejection of science for personal prejiduce against critics of the vaccine industry makes you a shill of the vaccine industry…along with your pharma ties.

  117. #117 Julian Frost
    July 21, 2011

    Jake:

    Brian Deer accused Wakefield of forging physician records he never had access to.

    Wakefield misrepresented the children’s medical data in his ahem Case Study. That’s what Deer accused him of doing (amongst other things). If you have a link showing where Deer accuses Wakefield of forging the physician records, please post it. Oh, and quotes of quotes don’t count.

  118. #118 Jake Crosby
    July 21, 2011

    “That’s what Deer accused him of doing (amongst other things).”

    Right, of committing fraud because of supposed discrepencies between what was in the paper and the physician records Wakefield never had access to. In other words, forging unaccessible physician records.

  119. #119 Composer99
    July 21, 2011

    No, thimerosal has been repeatedly associated with causing speech and language disorders since 1999.

    {citation needed}

  120. #120 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    dedicated lurker,

    In fact, the last few vaccines I got I didn’t get a band-aid over them.

    In line with post #45 asserting that parenteral injections are no more than a suppository administration is sheer ignorance. The band-aid is the difference. If unavailable, I’m sure there are cotton balls or gauze to cover that needlestick injury. Failure to apply such is negligence on part of the vaccinator. Lilady is well known for that.

  121. #121 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    lilady,

    Thingy, we are waiting for some clarification of your statement, specifically, which vaccines in particular are given IM, which vaccines are given SC and which vaccines are given IV?

    Check this out. http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p3085.pdf
    IV administration of vaccines is NOT recommended.

    Also, on what basis (in your clinical practice and with your vast clinical experience) do you “choose” the route for immunization?

    Check it again. There are some vaccines that can be given either per IM or SC.

  122. #122 Beamup
    July 21, 2011

    I just found a primate study comparing exposure to methylmercury and thimerosal. It supports some but not all of what Marty has claimed. In this study thimerosal did result in a higher percentage of inorganic mercury in the brain compared to methylmercury, but this may or may not be the result of more effective detoxification. The study found a much lower half life of ethylmercury (8.6 days) versus methylmercury (21.5 days) in blood and also in brain (24.2 days versus 59.5 days), and 3-fold lower brain levels of mercury after thimerosal than after methylmercury.

    That’s the study I was referring to in my prior post. Here’s the real money shot that demonstrates why it really doesn’t support anything Marty claims at all. Compare Figures 4 and 7. Notice in particular that the amounts of inorganic are very similar. The difference in PERCENTAGE is almost entirely driven by there being less organic left after the thimerosal exposure.

    Which means the claim really does boil down to LESS mercury being MORE toxic. Homeopathic reasoning!

  123. #123 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 21, 2011

    ‘Actually, they detected an error in the system while they were there and informed NCHS about the screw-up. The allegations the CDC made against them – which they were never meant to see – did not surface until well after they left and accused them of physically impossible actions, much in the same way Brian Deer accused Wakefield of forging physician records he never had access to.’
    “My goodness, you’re more gullible than I thought.”

    Care to actually address any of this?

    That’s not the way it works, Jake. The fact that you can repeat crazy rumors that you picked up from your friends at AoA doesn’t obligate everyone else to debunk what was never more than a triumph of wishful thinking over reality checking. Oh wait. That sentence contained too many big words. I’ll have to try and rephrase it so you can understand:

    Unsupported accusations mean nothing.

    No one needs to lift a finger to debunk your accusations, until you can manage to support your accusations.

    Hmmm, I have the suspicion that’s still too complicated for you to process, but it just doesn’t get any simpler than that.

    Here, I’ll demonstrate the principle: You accused Brian Deer of accusing Andrew Wakefield of “[the] physically impossible actions […] of forging physician records he never had access to […]” Now, obviously, when you say “forging physician records” you do not mean “Wakefield misrepresenting records from other physicians,” because there is nothing “physically impossible” about that; he obviously had access to read what those records said, and he had a responsibility to report the relevant portions of those records (which is how he got the opportunity to misreport the records, which is what the GMC determined after examining the evidence that he had done.) So, obviously, you mean that Deer accused Wakefield of literally forging physician records – ones he never had access to.

    Provide the evidence that Deer ever made that accusation and I’ll donate $10 in your name to any charity you choose, even Generation Rescue if you feel like it. Remember, the evidence has to match your version of the story – Brian Deer accusing Wakefield of forging physician records he didn’t have access to, and not merely misrepresenting the records he did have access to.

    When you find out you are unable to substantiate your accusation, even when money for your favorite charity is on the line, you will realize why no one else is obligated to refute that accusation. Talk is a cheap currency, Jake, precisely because people like you make big statements with nothing backing them.

  124. #124 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    Ask and you shall receive. (that’s 4 separate links)

    That’s 4 non-data speculating, hypothesizing links. Not one shows evidence of children getting Hep B through saliva. But more importantly how many get hep B through saliva and how was this determined? (actual absolute numbers) I also noted you liked to use African studies. Is that somehow comparable to someone’s risks in the U.S.?

    I know that you know that you don’t know this. Hence, it’s why I asked. But carry on with your non evidence speculations. It’s sounds really science medicine evidence based even though it’s not.

    route of infection during horizontal transmission in childhood is unclear.

    Yet you imply that Hep B is just so easy to get yet none of these articles that you’ve pieced together supports your hypothesis.

    Just another example of fearmongering. SBMers do it so often that they don’t even realize it’s just what they do.

    @flute player,
    FYI the CDC is not an original source. Your skeptical antennae should have picked up on this. I know, I know it’s an authority to you but that still doesn’t make it an original source. Although I have to admit they are good with the “framing” of their message through omission.

  125. #125 Todd W.
    July 21, 2011

    @augustine

    I said that it is possible to spread even if they are not close contacts (a brief contact with open wounds would be sufficient). I also said that HepB can be spread via bites/saliva. I supplied evidence to support that claim. The point of my post was to illustrate that there are more ways to get HepB than just sexually or through IV drug use, which is what most people think of. I never claimed that other modes of transmission were common or that it was “just so easy” to get. I personally do not have that data and so made no claims about that.

    So, we see you building straw men to knock down and moving the goalposts (“Ah, but it wasn’t in the U.S.!”). Please stop flogging logic. What did ever do to you?

  126. #126 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    Todd

    There is plenty of good reason to vaccinate infants against the disease. Even if the mother is negative, other family members, children and even casual contacts may not be.

    You pretty much included everybody. And in doing so you are fearmongering that everybody is at risk without giving data to the actual context of that risk. I knew you didn’t have that data or if you did it wouldn’t support your “plenty of good reasons to vaccinate” fact free statement. You were being deceptive and I called your bluff. You can call it a strawman if you want. The point was made.

    OMG, the germs! They’re everywhere! Nobody is safe! We’re all gonna die. Everybody has to vaccinate. Oh, the agony!

  127. #127 Science Mom
    July 21, 2011

    “The VSD is open to independent investigators so you would be wrong there too. Have a look yourself:”

    Those are not publications by outside researchers. In fact, most of those publications share coauthors with the Thompson, Price and Verstraeten papers about thimerosal – if not those specific papers.

    Jake, do define “independent” then. Most of the authors have affiliations outside of the CDC, which is independent. This would include Dr. Thompson who is with The Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, WA. and Dr. Price with Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado. Collaboration with CDC affiliates is going to be expected; it’s called collaboration and experts commonly do this, something you would know if you had a clue about science and publication.

    Why don’t you list your “independent” investigators and how they aren’t allowed to access the VSD. If your “experts” can’t even be arsed to apply for access, that is no fault of anyone else.

    “My goodness, you’re more gullible than I thought.”

    Care to actually address any of this? You know, they were also accompanied by an autism parent. I guess he must be lying, too, or dreamed up the whole visit just like all those parents are dreaming up the mercury in their children’s vaccines, or how the Lancet parents dreamed up their kids’ reactions to MMR.

    Orac was being kind to you by calling you gullible. I will state that you are flat-out lying and woefully dishonest. What kind of public health employee do you expect to become if you refuse to check your sources’ validity? Yes, the Geiers and their so-called SAS expert are lying too. http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/article/92/strategic-disregard

  128. #128 Krebiozen
    July 21, 2011

    @Beamup
    I realized you were referring to that study a few microseconds after hitting the ‘post’ button :-) I agree with you, there is not much of a difference between the absolute amount of inorganic mercury left in the brain after thimerosal or methylmercury, though 8 methylmercury exposed monkeys had unquantifiable levels of organic mercury in their brains, and do not appear in Figure 4. It is the 3-4 fold higher total brain mercury levels in methylmercury as compared to thimerosal exposed monkeys that are really striking.

    By the way, Blaylock has mentioned studies that show that mercury in the brain can block glutamate transport proteins that protect the brain from glutamate excitotoxicity. The concentration at which mercury does this is in the region of 1000 ng/ml (5 micromolar, see PMID 16286679), but the maximum concentration seen in Burbacher’s study after thimerosal exposure was 40-50 ng/ml, considerably lower than that required to produce excitotoxicity, in mice at least.

  129. #129 Composer99
    July 21, 2011

    ugh troll:

    If the CDC is incorrect in its assessment of HepB and recommendations to prevent its transmission, I eagerly await your provision of evidence.

    You asserting without any support whatsoever that the CDC is wrong or that it is not a legitimate source will not suffice.

  130. #130 Beamup
    July 21, 2011

    You pretty much included everybody.

    Well gee, that would seem to imply that it would be a good idea to vaccinate everybody. Oh wait, that’s exactly the point. In other words, you’re complaining that Todd has presented evidence to support his point – what exactly did you expect?

    And in doing so you are fearmongering that everybody is at risk without giving data to the actual context of that risk.

    So why don’t you provide the evidence demonstrating that Todd’s evidence is wrong and some identifiable population is NOT at risk?

  131. #131 Denice Walter
    July 21, 2011

    @ Antaeus, Todd W., lilady, Julian, and other supporters of reality:

    I nearly despair about how various trolls and scoffers, even young Jake, respond to our efforts. It’s like talking to the proverbial dining room table. However, there’s significant value for us to continue beating our heads against our respective walls.

    I studied executive function, formal operational thought, metacognition ( i.e. higher mental processes), adolescence, and complex research design: yet here I find myself reviewing the activities and sales techniques of charlatans,i.e. anti-science littered with dodgy research, and occasionally ( via our esteemed host @ RI), “speaking” to its followers who repeat its memes (see above). Am I slumming? A masochist? No. I feel uniquely qualified to deal with this material and interactions: as they say, “Only Nixon could go to China”.

    We are involved in cyber-education via conversation. Think “coffee houses” in post-enlightenment London but with macs or hps. OK, I’ll give you that our opposition may not be that “worthy”: yet we gain insight with every scoff and jeer. A few things that they don’t “get”: science is not a collection of isolated findings but an inter-related network of evidence transforming itself eternally via new information. If you are arguing against consensus, *you* are responsible for providing the earth-shattering evidence. No one is immune from psychological factors- that’s why we like statistics and research design so much. None of us came to our beliefs lightly, SB attitudes may follow years of pain-staking study and research- these cannot be boiled down to 15 sentences.” Oh, I could go on…

    My concern for students in general brings me to Jake: I wring my hands over Jake.

    @ Jake: Now you’ll probably dismiss all I say to you, because I leave off my *real* last name, like your nemesis did. I guess that makes me guilty of mis-representation. so be it. Don’t you find your anti-vaccine beliefs at odds with what you studied at Brandeis and with what you’ll study in grad school?

    Your field of interest makes use of consensus information such as governmental sources. How do you fit that with your vaccination views? It’s not my field, you should speak to Rene Najera ( a/k/a EpiRen). To wrap my head around the dissonance, I can only compare it to myself studying developmental psych and then using Astrology or Reincarnation to explain personality and ability differences in individuals, ignoring the tons of research I studied and its theoretical implications.

    I work with people trying to get an education and know their worries. I sincerely believe that your writings may interfere with your career path. Don’t shoot yourself in the foot. But best wishes whatever your choice. Peace.

    Two economic crashes in ten years haven’t driven me to drink so I doubt that this will.

  132. #132 Militant Agnostic
    July 21, 2011

    Krebiozen@126 – 1000 n/ml vs 50 ng/ml

    Details, details – what is an order of magnitude or two to quack.

    I like Andrew’s alcohol analogy @41 for explaining concentrations versus dosages. A single mug of beer contains considerably more than 1% of a lethal dose of ethanol and nobody thinks anything of this, but people have conniptions about 0.5% of a potentially toxic dose of something in a vaccination.

  133. #133 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    I play flute in my bow tie

    If the CDC is incorrect in its assessment of HepB and recommendations to prevent its transmission, I eagerly await your provision of evidence.

    If you have that data Todd is talking about then I’m sure he’d like to see it. Why don’t you see if the CDC has it?

    They don’t? What do you mean? It’s the CDC!

    Still not an original source.

    OMG hepatitis is going to kill all of the children! We’re all at the same risk. No one is immune (except vaccinees, of course).

  134. #134 Jesse
    July 21, 2011

    augstine, Hep B vax isn’t necessary for every single person, bu certainly in situations where there will be carriers in some environments it’s probably a damned good idea. As Hep strains go it’s pretty contagious. it isn’t airborne like the flu but it is more durable than say, HIV.

    For instance: I worked in an intermediate care facility for the developmentally disabled. We had a guy there who was non verbal and sometimes violent, and a Hep B carrier. We had to be very careful and give the man his own dishes. He was a biter. And a hitter.

    The deal is kids find all kinds of ways to bleed on each other or spit on each other or all manner of really gross things. (C’mon, think back to some things you did when you were four, or ask your mom). So if someone has Hep B carriers around getting vaccinated is not a bad plan. Hep B is no goddamned joke.

  135. #135 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    beamup

    So why don’t you provide the evidence demonstrating that Todd’s evidence is wrong and some identifiable population is NOT at risk?

    That’s not my burden. He needs to show the absolute risk for saliva hep B transmission and resultant disease to justify the fearmongering. He doesn’t have that data and neither do you.

    So if you believe all populations are at risk, do you believe this risk is homogenous. Do you have evidence of homogenous risk? If you don’t believe the risk is the same then do you have absolute data that shows the differences in the least at risk to the most at risk?

    You don’t?

    Thank you. Have a seat.

  136. #136 Beamup
    July 21, 2011

    Don’t need any of what you’re demanding to demonstrate that the risk is real. Essentially, you’re wanting a measurement of the temperature and spectrum of the flames coming out of the oven before calling the fire department.

  137. #137 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    We had to be very careful and give the man his own dishes. He was a biter. And a hitter.

    Yes you are correct most people don’t play with hep B alligators like you.

    The deal is kids find all kinds of ways to bleed on each other or spit on each other or all manner of really gross things.

    Sounds good in theory but it just doesn’t work that way in real life. Having a kid in day care is not a major risk factor. You could help Todd out if you could tell him how many kids in day care spit swapping facilities contracted Hep B from playing with their mates last year. If you could give him some significant data as evidence it would help with his disease mongering campaign. He would appreciate that.

  138. #138 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    @ Thingy: For the third time…here is your complete quote in reply to Gray Falcon:

    55

    Gray,

    This is how vapid she is. She thinks “intravenous” and “injected into the blood stream” are two different things. Like Lawrence said, don’t bother with her.

    Stupid dyslexic. There are several parenteral routes in which a vaccine can be delivered into the bloodstream, IM, SC and IV. All you have to do is to choose. How easy can it be?

    Posted by: Th1Th2 | July 20, 2011 5:43 PM”

    Thing, how about elaborating on that posting?

    1. Did you in fact post this reply to Gray Falcon?

    2. Which vaccines are given IV..as noted in that posting?

    3. “All you have to do is chose (which route of administration)”

    4. Which vaccines have you ever given via IV route?

    We are all awaiting your reply…but fully expect none…your typical M.O.

    If we get no reply then we know, once again, you are full of it.

  139. #139 anonmom
    July 21, 2011

    As I said earlier, I have a child with chronic Hep B and a very high viral load. People with hep B and HIV/AIDS have no legal responsibility to disclose their status to anyone (daycare, school, workplace, etc.). We disclose our child’s status to very few people. My point is, you often don’t know if you are around someone with Hep B. Very often, people with Hep B do not know they even have it.

    I am not worried about my child spreading Hep B through his saliva. I am, however, worried about nose bleeds, scratched bug bites, and any number of other blood incidents that children have EVERY day. One bleeding bug bite meets a scrape on another child and there you go. I have seen teachers ignore bleeding bug bites in schools, I’ve seen them wipe up blood with tissues and then toss them in the trash and not use gloves or wash their hands afterwards. They’ve all received training on standard precautions, but they forget. Makes the school nurse crazy!

    We had a daycare provider refuse a place for our child because only half of her other kids were vaccinated and she didn’t feel comfortable not telling those families. This is illegal, I know, but to fight the fight, we would have had to disclose his status even further. Not willing to do that.

  140. #140 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    @ Augustine: Stop being an Ugh Troll, by demanding actual cases of hepatitis B transmission other than the usual routes of transmission…especially when you are noticeably deficient in ever providing citations from peer-reviewed journals:

    In order to get you to STFU, however:

    Unusual Cases of Hepatitis B Transmission-Immunize.org

    Notice Ugh Troll, these cases were fully investigated and the links were verified in many cases of secondary transmission via DNA fingerprinting.

    Thanks Beamup…for the the opportunity to take Ugh Troll apart.

  141. #141 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    Beamup

    Essentially, you’re wanting a measurement of the temperature and spectrum of the flames coming out of the oven before calling the fire department.

    Your empty rhetoric is noted.

    Don’t need any of what you’re demanding to demonstrate that the risk is real.

    Well demonstrate it then.

    You must be a junior critical thinker/atheist. Are you new at this or is this your pinnacle?

    Don’t be vague. How real? Give me some spit swapping data. You know, the results of the tested measurements of your hypothesis. And then the real life data. Otherwise sit back down.

  142. #142 Beamup
    July 21, 2011

    Let’s be clear here. Todd said that it was possible. You denied this. Todd provided the evidence that it is possible. You then proceeded to demand that the absolute risk be proven, which is a fundamentally different question than whether it is possible.

    In other words, you’ve been demonstrated wrong and responded by changing the question. You don’t get to do that.

  143. #143 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    Beamup

    Let’s be clear here….

    Sit back down, Junior. Nobody wants to hear your “anything is possible” speech.

  144. #144 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    @ Beamup: Yes, Todd said it was possible and Ugh troll asked for instances…they were provided by me…actually verified by epidemiologists and confirmed by DNA fingerprinting.

    Ugh Troll will now disappear from the blog…hoping we all forget that he’s been busted again. Or perhaps, return shortly and question the validity of DNA fingerprinting for case finding and confirmation. What a POS troll.

  145. #145 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    anonmom,

    My point is, you often don’t know if you are around someone with Hep B. Very often, people with Hep B do not know they even have it.

    The shortest distance between an uninfected newborn and Hepatitis B is the vaccine.

  146. #146 Todd W.
    July 21, 2011

    @augie

    How are those straw men holding up? Don’t you get itchy all over from building them all the time?

  147. #147 Composer99
    July 21, 2011

    I am really not certain why the ugh troll should think flute players in orchestras or bands wearing bow ties while performing constitutes some sort of insult.

    At any rate, I am still waiting for the ugh troll to substantiate his assertion that the CDC is not accurately representing the literature on HepB.

    Also, while he is at it, the ugh troll should explain, in detail, why the citations provided by Todd W and lilady are unsatisfactory.

  148. #148 kelly
    July 21, 2011

    How could I vaccinate my child with this vaccine after I read this from the CDC-it would take a leap of faith! http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/Rotavirus.html

  149. #149 novalox
    July 21, 2011

    @kelly

    Um, did you read the whole article…

    .

    The number of Kawasaki syndrome reports does not exceed the number of cases we expect to see based on the usual occurrence of Kawasaki syndrome in children. There is no known cause-and-effect relationship between receiving RotaTeq or any other vaccine and the occurrence of Kawasaki syndrome.

    The available data support the safety of the RotaTeq vaccine and its effectiveness in preventing rotavirus infection, a common cause of severe infant diarrhea and hospitalization. CDC and FDA continue to monitor the safety of RotaTeq and all vaccines.

    You;re looking a little foolish there, dear

  150. #150 lara
    July 21, 2011

    Dear anonmom,
    I wouldn’t worry if I were you- here is the report from CDC on Hep B vaccinations-It appears that most parents have vaccinated their children
    http://www2a.cdc.gov/nip/schoolsurv/nationalDetail10.asp?v=Hep%20B&y=2010

  151. #151 Todd W.
    July 21, 2011

    @kelly

    Did you miss the parts where the number seen are not different from what is expected among those who have not received the vaccine? Or that there does not appear to be a causal connection?

    Or the part where it mentions that 6 million doses have been distributed so far, with only 5 cases reported. That’s 5 out of 6 million.

    Yes, CDC should keep an eye on it, but it is not a cause for concern, based on the current data.

  152. #152 kelly
    July 21, 2011

    @Todd
    I’m still doing research and found this on Kawasaki and mercury- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19075648

  153. #153 Anonmom
    July 21, 2011

    @Lara I wish that was the case where I live. I know for a fact that I have kids at my house everyday who are not vaccinated. We’re the Boulder of the northeast… A parent told me that she didn’t do that vaccine because she knew her child wasnt a sex worker. I’m not an overly emotional person but that almost made me cry. I’ve heard similar things at playgroups, etc. People seem to most often skip chicken pox, hep b, and MMR around here.

  154. #154 CG
    July 21, 2011

    The shortest distance between an uninfected newborn and Hepatitis B is the vaccine.

    Except of course the part where there’s no hepatitis B virus in the vaccine.

  155. #155 Beamup
    July 21, 2011

    Sit back down, Junior. Nobody wants to hear your “anything is possible” speech.

    And what speech exactly would that be? You’re making stuff up (i.e. lying) again.

  156. #156 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    Todd W.,

    Did you miss the parts where the number seen are not different from what is expected among those who have not received the vaccine?Or that there does not appear to be a causal connection?

    But the question still lies, how much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

    Reminds me when they found no evidence of causal association between a rotavirus infection and intussusception.

    These infection-promoters are like children waiting for Big Daddy to deliver the candies.

    Have some due diligence.

  157. #157 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    CG,

    Except of course the part where there’s no hepatitis B virus in the vaccine.

    There is no virus but the vaccine contains Hepatitis B viral genome made especially for infection-promoters like you.

  158. #158 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    Miss I wish I were a doctor but I just couldn’t cut it

    Yes, Todd said it was possible and Ugh troll asked for instances…they were provided by me…actually verified by epidemiologists and confirmed by DNA fingerprinting.

    I didn’t ask for instances. I’ll make it simple for you Miss know it all bachelors degree nurse.

    Fill in the blank and provide references:
    The number of Hep B infections caused by “casual contact” ie saliva is______ .

    Hard data would be the number required not some inferred theoretical BS. It’s pretty simple and the number SHOULD rationalize Todd’s penchant for disease mongering.

  159. #159 CG
    July 21, 2011

    There is no virus but the vaccine contains Hepatitis B viral genome made especially for infection-promoters like you.

    No, it doesn’t.

    You might want to look up how they actually make the HepB vaccine.

  160. #160 Narad
    July 21, 2011

    Sit back down, Junior.

    Oh, to be a fly on the wall when this bit of self-lovin’ sweet talk is actually deployed. Aside from the necessary enucleation, of course.

  161. #161 Vicki
    July 21, 2011

    Because she knows her child isn’t a sex worker, and will never be a sex worker. And will marry her/his first sexual partner, who is magically guaranteed to have had no previous partners and to never have an affair.

    The CDC guidelines for adult hepatitis B vaccination include sexually active and not in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship; the chart also says “more than one partner in the last six months.” That doesn’t just mean people who are involved with more than one partner, or are having casual sex with friends or people they meet in bars. It’s common when people are dating: break up with person A, get involved with person B three months later, do they stop to think that this puts them in a defined risk group?

    Even if you believe you can raise a child so s/he will never go outside your ideas of appropriate sexual behavior, you can’t count on the strangers who are raising her/his eventual partner.

  162. #162 Clare
    July 21, 2011

    Hi Auggie,

    Here is a paper: Epidemiology of hepatitis B (1993) SHAPIRO and CRAIG.

    It specifically says the risk of children catching Hep B in daycare is very low so Anonmom probably doesn’t need to worry that much. However it does say that about 30% of adult cases cannot be explained (e.g. by sex/drugs). For me this is a good enough reason to have (also I had to get it for my degree, here in the UK it was not part of the schedule) I realise this will not convince anyone else (auggie) but it might help anonmon.

    (The paper is behind a paywall sorry)

  163. #163 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    CG,

    No, it doesn’t.
    You might want to look up how they actually make the HepB vaccine.

    The vaccine is produced using recombinant DNA technology and the residual protein and DNA levels are present in the vaccines (Recombivax HB, Engerix B, and GenHevac B)

  164. #164 CG
    July 21, 2011

    The vaccine is produced using recombinant DNA technology and the residual protein and DNA levels are present in the vaccines (Recombivax HB, Engerix B, and GenHevac B)

    Correct. So any residual DNA or proteins in the vaccine are going to be yeast. There’s no viral DNA present, at most you’d have the few genes used to express the viral proteins.

    No viral genome is present. Once again you’ve been caught in a lie you will promptly try to escape from. My bet is you will try to redefine genome to mean gene.

  165. #165 DWu
    July 21, 2011

    So let me get this straight @augustine. The very real possibility for HepB infection of young via unsuspected and innocuous trasmission modes (mentioned in exhaustive detail by those before me) exists – and it can happen in any environment.

    Is it more likely to happen in poor, third world countries with inadequate medical facilities? Yes. But can it happen in the U.S.? Absolutely.

    Is the HepB vaccine harmful? There have been no conclusive evidence at all to suggest that it is harmful. Is HepB a terrible disease? Yes, it’s a lifelong disease that is incredibly damaging.

    So, as a prophylactic measure, why NOT vaccinate against HepB? HepB is not like smallpox – the reason we don’t vaccinate against smallpox anymore is because the only known smallpox viruses remaining in the world are located in CDC and Russian research installations. Can you demonstrate that HepB has been, like smallpox, eliminated in the general population? That it is gone and that vaccination is no longer necessary because it no longer exists in the wild? No, of course not because then you’d be lying.

    So your requirement as proof for transmission of an epidemiological study of HepB incidence rate due to a specific mode of transmission that is specific to the U.S. However, because HepB is so well controlled via vaccines, an outbreak of HepB in a U.S. nursery, school or hospital is exceptionally unlikely and, in order for a study like the one you want to be performed, HepB vaccines need to be suspended and “see what happens.” That, some how, sounds extremely unethical…that you should knowingly deny a access to the HepB disease in order to study the incidence of HepB among children via contact through saliva. Can justify that extreme moral lapse? And your justification can’t be “vaccines are dangerous” since there is no evidence to support that.

  166. #166 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    @ Ugh Troll, Mr. Know-Nothing High-School Dropout. You’ve been provided a site about unusual transmission of hepatitis B including the transmission via a sneeze to a pregnant woman by one of her young students.

    Mr. Know-Nothing-High-School-Dropout…the transmission of the virus was via a sneeze that contained saliva and confirmed via DNA fingerprinting.

    Why don’t you?:

    1. Start studying for your GED

    2. Take some basic reading courses; Reading for Internet Trolls would be a good start.

    3. Get a job

    4. Get off the dole

    5 Try to get into a community college by taking remedial English classes

    6. Get a life

  167. #167 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    dwu

    Can justify that extreme moral lapse?

    You guys just live in some bizzaro world where science is scientism and evidence is just speculation.

    In a logical world the law of identity applies. A is A. A is not A-tism. A is not A-culation.

    Just some data on the number of “casual contact” Hep B infections. Either you have the evidence for justification of fear mongering or you are speculating. Plain and simple.

  168. #168 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    Well, at 11:45 AM I again posed a few questions to Thingy about her “choices” when immunizing a patient via the IV Route…as if the Thing is anywhere close to practicing in a clinical setting.

    I also posited that Thingy would revert true to form:

    “We are all awaiting your reply…but fully expect none…your typical M.O.

    If we get no reply then we know, once again, you are full of it.”

    Posted by: lilady | July 21, 2011 11:45 AM

    Yes, Thingy is full of it!

  169. #169 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    CG,

    Correct. So any residual DNA or proteins in the vaccine are going to be yeast. There’s no viral DNA present, at most you’d have the few genes used to express the viral proteins.
    No viral genome is present. Once again you’ve been caught in a lie you will promptly try to escape from. My bet is you will try to redefine genome to mean gene.

    Jebus Christ, what the hell are you talking about? The residual protein and DNA levels pertain to the viral protein which is about 1-2% of the total yeast protein. (Hint: This is Hepatitis B vaccine not a yeast vaccine)

  170. #170 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    lilady,

    Maybe a pair of new glasses will help. Check #119 and take note of the time it was posted.

  171. #171 CG
    July 21, 2011

    Jebus Christ, what the hell are you talking about? The residual protein and DNA levels pertain to the viral protein which is about 1-2% of the total yeast protein. (Hint: This is Hepatitis B vaccine not a yeast vaccine)

    Wow, you really are quite ignorant.

    It’s a recombinant vaccine. The genes for the viral proteins were cloned out and put in yeast. The yeast then express the proteins which are used to make the vaccine. This is really basic stuff.

    There’s no viral DNA in the vaccine. Any DNA would be yeast. Any residual protein aside from the desired antigens would also be yeast. Both would be in minuscule amounts.

    You clearly don’t know how they make recombinant proteins.

  172. #172 Composer99
    July 21, 2011

    How about explaining in detail any problems with Todd W’s or lilady’s citations, ugh troll, instead of moving goalposts, playing with straw, and ignoring evidence presented to you.

  173. #173 Allie
    July 21, 2011

    How anyone can listen to the mother of the HepB+ child talk about how worried she is of passing her child’s disease onto other children unknowingly and STILL be against vaccinating is beyond me.

    There are children from third world countries where I live, There are children who are the children of sex workers and IV drug users. There are all kinds of people in the city where I live, and kids get scratches and bug bites and bloody noses and canker sores and seriously, load my child up with the vaccines she needs to fight this onslaught.

  174. #174 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    CG,

    Recombinant statements:

    So any residual DNA or proteins in the vaccine are going to be yeast.

    Any residual protein aside from the desired antigens would also be yeast.

    No wonder your ignorant that recombinant vaccines have a certain allowable amount of DNA in the final product.

  175. #175 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    Thingy: Maybe a new brain would help? You still haven’t answered to your posting about IV vaccines and the “choices” you make about the route of administration You are still full of it and going into your typical avoidance tactics.

    Give it up Thingy…you have no education in even the basics of elementary school science, certainly no college education, are totally unqualified for any job in the health care professions and cannot distinguish between truth and your imaginary play world of pretense…just another troll.

  176. #176 CG
    July 21, 2011

    No wonder your ignorant that recombinant vaccines have a certain allowable amount of DNA in the final product.

    So you just avoid the fact there’s no viral DNA in the vaccine at all and you’ve been caught in yet another lie?

    Typical.

  177. #177 Krebiozen
    July 21, 2011

    From the Recombivax HBV vaccine package insert:

    The vaccine contains no detectable yeast DNA

    It is impossible to get infected with hepatitis B by an antigen produced by genetically modified baker’s yeast.

  178. #178 CG
    July 21, 2011

    It is impossible to get infected with hepatitis B by an antigen produced by genetically modified baker’s yeast.

    Except in Thingy’s mind where infection=immune response. To her, any vaccine causes an infection.

    Don’t think about that too hard.

  179. #179 Jake Crosby
    July 21, 2011

    “it’s called collaboration and experts commonly do this”

    They also commonly allow other research teams outside their collaborations to access their data so their results can be independently confirmed – something the CDC has yet to do in this case.

    How funny, after you say I have no clue about science and publication, you then link to the website of an unemployed librarian as your sole reference.

    The CDC alleged that they were attempting to merge data on the basis of direct patient identifiers – information completely unavailable – rather than what they were attempting and approved to merge data for which was autism diagnoses, thimerosal exposure and the relevant demographic information to go along with them.

    Seidel quoted the response out of context by saying they were attempting to merge files when they were specifically referring to information they were approved to access and not the information they could not access to but were accused by the CDC of acquiring.

    She also alleged that they admitted the CDC caught them mislabeling files when in fact it was the autism parent accompanying them who had alerted the CDC of the screw-up in the first place.

    You can see on Brian Deer’s own website that he said Wakefield:

    ‘changed and misreported results in his research’
    http://briandeer.com/solved/solved.htm

    And yet, in the GMC hearing, Professor John Walker-Smith testified that the pathology reports Brian Deer alleges Wakefield “changed” were “totally unrelated to Andy Wakefield.”

    You owe me $10.

  180. #180 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    CG,

    So you just avoid the fact there’s no viral DNA in the vaccine at all and you’ve been caught in yet another lie?

    Haha. First you lied about the existence of viral proteins in the vaccines and now you’re denying the presence of HBV DNA in the vaccine. You’re merely asserting because you don’t have any evidence. Well I have.

  181. #181 Th1Th2
    July 21, 2011

    Krebiozen,

    Who cares about yeast DNA? That’s not what the vaccine is for? Geez

  182. #182 Vicki
    July 21, 2011

    Another way to get hepatitis B: be treated in the same hospital as a complete stranger who has the virus. The dead woman’s family have called for an investigation, and 150 other patients have been told they may be at risk.

  183. #183 Lawrence
    July 21, 2011

    Can we please stop feeding the trolls – at this point, they are regurgitating the same stupid spew over and over again.

  184. #184 CG
    July 21, 2011

    First you lied about the existence of viral proteins in the vaccines

    No, I said there weren’t any viral proteins contaminants. The only HBV proteins are the ones meant to be there.

    you’re denying the presence of HBV DNA in the vaccine.

    There is no HBV genome in the vaccine, which was your claim. If you had evidence you would have presented it by now.

    There is residual yeast DNA. There’s also going to be the remnants of the few viral genes they put in the yeast, but that would be a tiny fraction of what little DNA is in the vaccine. It’s also not a genome.

    It’s pretty clear you had no idea how the vaccine was made and then fell back on vague claims when you were called out for your ignorance.

  185. #185 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    @ Krebiozen and CG: Here’s an anecdotal but true story about the original Hepatitis B vaccine Heptavax B.

    Heptavax B vaccine was the first vaccine licensed by Merck Sharp and Dohme in 1981. It was manufactured using micro organisms harvested and filtered from plasma of hepatitis B carriers.

    My son was scheduled to be admitted into an ICF/DD (Intermediate Care Facility for the Developmentally Disabled) in the early part of 1985, yet I delayed his entry until mid July in order to get him immunized against the virus…once I learned that two other residents were chronic Hep B carriers.

    At the time, an agency person stated there was minimal risk…which was a total lie…and that the vaccine was unavailable…another confabulation. A quick call to my local pharmacist and a check for $ 300 enabled me to secure the vaccine vial from Merck. He was immunized on schedule at 0-1-6 months schedule and when tested at 67 days post 1st and 2nd immunizations, had a high (immune) titer for surface antibody and was admitted into the facility.

    In 1986, the first recombinant Hepatitis B vaccine was licensed and is still used today for protection against the Hepatitis B virus.

    Each year, my son was tested for the presence of Hepatitis B surface antibody and was still immune, up until his death in 2004.

    In spite of the immunization of millions of people with the plasma derived Hepatavax B vaccine…while HIV was a newly identified virus… there was never an instance of transmission of HIV or any other blood-borne disease.

    Yes indeed, I’m proud to be a nurse clinician in the United States which is in the forefront of medical advances and research, especially in the fields of immunology and public health.

  186. #186 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 21, 2011

    You can see on Brian Deer’s own website that he said Wakefield:

    ‘changed and misreported results in his research’
    http://briandeer.com/solved/solved.htm

    And yet, in the GMC hearing, Professor John Walker-Smith testified that the pathology reports Brian Deer alleges Wakefield “changed” were “totally unrelated to Andy Wakefield.”

    You owe me $10.

    If you had actually met the challenge, Jake, I would owe $10 to a charity, not to you. That point is moot, however, because you could not back up your statement. You said that Brian Deer had accused Wakefield of “forging physician records.” Not “misreporting,” Jake, “forging.” Two completely different things.

  187. #187 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    How about explaining in detail any problems with Todd W’s or lilady’s citations, ugh troll

    Why? They are useless to the question of how many hep B infections actually occur in the manner he proposes. He was just trying incite casual fearmongering and then roll on by. I called him out. Everyone is not at the same risk for Hep B disease. Yet reccomendation for vaccine use is universal.

  188. #188 Science Mom
    July 21, 2011

    They also commonly allow other research teams outside their collaborations to access their data so their results can be independently confirmed – something the CDC has yet to do in this case.

    That is precisely what the CDC/VSD does Jake. There are independent investigators with access to the VSD data who, in many cases collaborate with CDC/VSD investigators. What you propose is a conspiracy of epic proportions, which is not surprising but doesn’t hold any water. You still haven’t provided any names of your “independent investigators” who have applied for and were denied access to the VSD data. Why is that?

    How funny, after you say I have no clue about science and publication, you then link to the website of an unemployed librarian as your sole reference.

    But you haven’t refuted her information one whit, just ad hominem. Laughable considering her impeccable education and research skills and coming from some wayward, uppity kid without even an undergrad degree in anything even remotely relevant. Give solid refutations to her blogpost; that’s how it is done.

    The CDC alleged that they were attempting to merge data on the basis of direct patient identifiers – information completely unavailable – rather than what they were attempting and approved to merge data for which was autism diagnoses, thimerosal exposure and the relevant demographic information to go along with them.

    You will need something more substantial than what the Geiers whine about on a YouTube video. They got caught and you are defending a couple of documented, dishonest charlatans who are guilty of multiple charges of fraud. You might want to do some more investigative work there.

    Seidel quoted the response out of context by saying they were attempting to merge files when they were specifically referring to information they were approved to access and not the information they could not access to but were accused by the CDC of acquiring.

    Translation: “I can’t think of anyway to refute Seidel’s supported allegations so I’ll just make more stuff up”. Prove it Jake.

    She also alleged that they admitted the CDC caught them mislabeling files when in fact it was the autism parent accompanying them who had alerted the CDC of the screw-up in the first place.

    Sure, I’m going to take the word of a biased “autism parent” who doesn’t know SAS from SPSS and the Geiers. Prove it Jake.

    You can see on Brian Deer’s own website that he said Wakefield:

    ‘changed and misreported results in his research’
    http://briandeer.com/solved/solved.htm

    And yet, in the GMC hearing, Professor John Walker-Smith testified that the pathology reports Brian Deer alleges Wakefield “changed” were “totally unrelated to Andy Wakefield.”

    And this has fuck-all to do with the Geiers and VSD investigators how? You may fall for, “ooo look, shiny object”, but no one else here does.

    You owe me $10.

    No, you owe yourself more of an education than you have allowed yourself. I hope you aren’t racking up too many student loans, you’ll never pay them off.

  189. #189 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    Ugh Troll is incapable of ever admitting he is wrong, wrong and wrong. Typical Ugh Troll behavior is to back track, back peddle and spout inanities.

    I provided the Ugh Troll with a site at # 106 above and in typical Ugh Troll fashion, he puts words into other poster’s mouths. Totally unable to speak the truth, understand the truth or understand scientific facts…even if it is presented to him and smacks him upside the head.

    Ugh Trolls such as Augie are at little risk for Hepatitis B unless it seeks “escorts” and has unprotected sex. Ugh Trolls imaginary children cannot contract imaginary Hepatitis B. and Ugh Trolls have no “occupational risk”…being on the dole does not qualify as an “occupation”.

  190. #190 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 21, 2011

    I’ve recently come to understand something about the Ugh Troll’s dysfunctional psychology that may help people understand why talking to him for his own sake will almost always be wasted effort. There is an unfortunate tendency in most people, at least until they understand it and correct it, towards zero-sum thinking, that is, the unthinking assumption that, in order for them to win, it is necessary for someone else to lose. The Ugh Troll, however, has adopted (perhaps to persuade itself that its existence has a purpose) what might be called a strong zero-sum delusion; that is, it believes it is necessary and sufficient for someone else to lose in order for it to win. You can see why this would appeal to it; it does not have the competence to do much except annoy people, disgust them, and waste their time, but adopting a strong zero-sum delusion allows it to believe that it has accomplished something of value when it does so.

  191. #191 Denice Walter
    July 21, 2011

    @ Antaeus: I think you can see why my concern for Jake(@131) doesn’t diminish as I learn more about him.

  192. #192 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    Ugh Troll is incapable of ever admitting he is wrong, wrong and wrong.

    Please tell me where I’m wrong. Oh please show me the backtracking. Have you provided the relevant data on saliva swapping casual contact scaremongering yet? I didn’t think so.

    @Anteusfeldspar

    Wrong. I don’t believe in a zero-sum game. Nice attempt with your psycho babble. Dr. Phil needs a side Kick.

  193. #193 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    @ Clueless Dense Ugh Troll: Go back to your cave now, we’ve had our fun with you and find you utterly boring. See if you can link up with Thingy who is on your intellectual level and has the same degree of lunacy…maybe you should read the bible together before you embark on that “friends with benefits” relationship…and let us know how that first date turns out.

  194. #194 kelly
    July 21, 2011
  195. #195 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    Lilady Gaga

    Go back to your cave now, we’ve had our fun with you and find you utterly boring.

    Lilady, your IQ and education is only slightly above home schooled Venna’s. You’re not having fun or playing with anybody when it comes to intellectual games.

    Now do you have data that shows how many people get casual contact saliva transfer Hepatitis B, ala Toddy’s hypothesis, or not?

    Have a seat lilady.

  196. #196 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    Just this one time Kelly, I’m not going to totally devastate you…I’m giving you credit for not citing the thoroughly debunked Stony Brook med students study…the all-time favorite of the anti-vaxers.

    Why not try PubMed for newer, more accurate studies about the efficacy and safety of Hepatitis B vaccine…such as this one:

    PubMed 16372285

    The study is one of the many conducted and published in peer reviewed journals that confirm Hepatitis B vaccine to be safe, with high efficacy and of course, long lasting. It was published in the Journal of Medical Virology-February 2006.

  197. #197 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    Vaccine Industry proponents seem to think vaccines are like Groupon. They need everybody to buy in so they can get the group discount. The way they carry on you’d think their vaccine didn’t work unless a certain amount of others get in on the buy. Much like groupon doesn’t kick in until a certain number buy in. It’s all or none in vaccine fairy land.

    “We’re all gonna die if we don’t get herd immunity (groupon discount) up. My vaccine will fail me”

    All the babies need the Hep B vaccine. Child molesters are going to get them all. Teething babies will get the rest.

  198. #198 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 21, 2011

    Lilady, your IQ and education is only slightly above home schooled Venna’s. You’re not having fun or playing with anybody when it comes to intellectual games.

    By the standards Ugh Troll applies to others, he has just committed the ad hominem fallacy. I wonder why he thinks it’s okay for him to do what he stretches to construe others as doing so he can criticize them for it?

    (Just kidding; we already know why. Ugh Troll has a dull-witted, primitive value system where he believes that filling others with disgust and anger at what a dishonest, lying fool he is somehow benefits him and his causes. Some people believe that if they have done something in a day to make the life of someone out there a little bit better, that day has been worth it. Ugh Troll believes almost the same thing, except he thinks that bringing annoyance and nausea to someone out there he doesn’t like is just as good as making someone’s life better. Or maybe he only views one of the two as being within his reach.)

  199. #199 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    By the standards Ugh Troll applies to others, he has just committed the ad hominem fallacy.

    I apply YOUR standards to YOU. But YOU can’t hold them. Your biased philosophy won’t let you. I’ve never claimed to be tabulae rasa.

  200. #200 lilady
    July 21, 2011

    @ Antaeus Feldspar: Gee I wish I said that; you nailed him succinctly.

    I suppose the creep is upset that I came to Venna’s defense when creepy tried his usual new poster stunt with Venna. I told Creeping Jeez that in his absence the “regulars” had a secret ballot and voted Venna into our elite group of intellectuals and at the same time voted Ugh Troll off the island.

    Venna is one of my favorites for her genuineness, her intelligent postings, honesty and for her parenting of her (real) children including Viktor who is on the autism spectrum.

    Creepy on the other hand is downright creepy, lacks basic intelligence, has imaginary children and is a parasite goldbricker on the dole with no intention of ever being gainfully employed…truly the essence of an Ugh Troll.

  201. #201 augustine
    July 21, 2011

    The mommy on the left is a science blogger.

    Unfortunately she can’t see the evidence of a forest because all she looks at is the peer-reviewed trees.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ow2RKD9Mn0M

  202. #202 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 21, 2011

    Vaccine Industry proponents seem to think vaccines are like Groupon. They need everybody to buy in so they can get the group discount. The way they carry on you’d think their vaccine didn’t work unless a certain amount of others get in on the buy. Much like groupon doesn’t kick in until a certain number buy in.

    Goofus is not interested in being right, of course, only in being an annoyance, but he nevertheless comes interestingly close to being right. Adding just a few words to one of his sentences would have actually made it a good observation:

    their vaccine [doesn’t] work to protect the unvaccinated and immunocompromised unless a certain amount of others get [vaccinated]

    Presto! Goofus, at least with our help, at last comprehends the principle of herd immunity! When a “certain amount of people” in a population become resistant to an infectious agent, even those who can’t be made resistant to the infectious agent directly are made less likely to be infected by it!

    Some might not be familiar with this concept, and may not understand how people could affect anyone’s chances of catching a disease besides their own, or why it would take a certain number of people to do it.

    The clearest analogy I’ve ever come across was someone on this blog who compared it to clearing dead grass and other brush from the ground during wildfire season. If a wildfire spark drifts in on the wind, and most of the ground is covered with dead brush, that spark is going to start a flame, which will produce more sparks, which will probably fall on more fuel, and you’re looking at one big fire in the making. But if a sufficient amount of dead brush is cleared away from the ground, the chances are good that a spark which blows into the area will land where there’s nothing for it to burn.

    By the same logic, someone may have a compromised immune system which can’t be bolstered to give them direct resistance to an infectious agent, but if most of the people around them can and have acquired such resistance, the chances are greatly reduced that the vulnerable person will ever encounter the infectious agent!

  203. #203 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    Presto! Goofus, at least with our help, at last comprehends the principle of herd immunity! Sorry Antaeus, the comprehension is but a fleeting episode of coherence…which will end abruptly.

    Addressing Goofus is like talking to a blob of protoplasm, left over from a failed experiment in a laboratory. Goofus knows only too well the principle of herd immunity but doesn’t give a whit for anyone who might benefit from herd immunity; truly a self-centered ego-driven certifiable head case.

    Not to be too blunt about Goofus’ mental condition, but he gets his “jollies” from insulting people including our esteemed host, Orac. Then Goofus backs off a bit until he finds himself in need of another “jollies” fix (Look it up in the DSM IV under psycho-sexual disorders).

    Goofus also inhabits a fantasy world and misreads any and all comments directed at him as being complimentary and also believes he has some sort of unique ability to understand anything associated with science or medicine; probably the worst case of delusionary, removed from reality, thought processing, outside of a mental ward, I have ever seen. Thingy, his sock puppet, runs a close second in that category.

  204. #204 Jake Crosby
    July 22, 2011

    “You said that Brian Deer had accused Wakefield of “forging physician records.” Not “misreporting,” Jake, “forging.””

    You completely ignored that Deer said Wakefield committed fraud, in part, because he “changed” test results, which were actually acquired entirely separately from Andrew Wakefield. That is what I call an accusation of forging physician records.

    “If you had actually met the challenge, Jake, I would owe $10 to a charity, not to you.”

    Whatever, make with the money; give it to Age of Autism.

    Now for my response to Pharma Mom:

    “There are independent investigators with access to the VSD data who, in many cases collaborate with CDC/VSD investigators.”

    In “many cases”? Looks like pretty much all cases judging by that list you posted earlier. Your reasoning is also completely contradictory. If they’re collaborators, then they are not outside researchers.

    “You still haven’t provided any names of your “independent investigators” who have applied for and were denied access to the VSD data. Why is that?”

    We’ve been talking about three of them this whole time in case you haven’t noticed.

    “Laughable considering her impeccable education and research skills and coming from some wayward, uppity kid without even an undergrad degree in anything even remotely relevant.”

    Actually, I have a bachelor’s degree in both history and health: science, society and policy. The only science Kathleen Seidel studied was library science, and she’s not even putting that to good use.

    “Give solid refutations to her blogpost; that’s how it is done.”

    Since you apparently have a very short memory, I will direct you to my previous comment where I did:
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/07/smartvax_the_orwellian_repackaging_of_ol.php#comment-4542337

    “You will need something more substantial than what the Geiers whine about on a YouTube video.”

    I don’t know what video you’re talking about, but Seidel’s spin is obvious right there in that blog post of hers that you linked to.

    “Prove it Jake.”

    Why don’t you actually read Seidel’s post that you cited? The researchers made clear what they were studying and Seidel cherry-picked and artificially quoted out of context part of their letter to make it look nefarious. She also alleged they admitted to being caught by the CDC over misnaming a file when they informed the CDC of such an error in the system.

    “And this has fuck-all to do with the Geiers and VSD investigators how?”

    It doesn’t, I was responding to the other troll who actually owes me – or rather AoA – $10.

    “…you owe yourself more of an education than you have allowed yourself.”

    Speak for yourself; you can start by reading your own links. It will spare you some otherwise well-deserved humiliation.

    “I hope you aren’t racking up too many student loans, you’ll never pay them off.”

    Blogging for pharma is certainly more lucrative than blogging against pharma, isn’t it?
    Thanks, but I’ll pass.

  205. #205 Venna
    July 22, 2011

    @Tony Bateson

    I take offense to your statement that non-vaccinated autistic people don’t exist. My son is one. Well, he became autistic without the vaccines, but he is fully immunized now. I’m not the only parent of an unvaccinated autistic child. In fact, there is a well know anti-vax activist who had her second child, did not vaccinate and still has autism. She actually blames her second child getting autism on the vaccines her first child got. I’m not entirely sure how she worked that logic out, but that’s what she is saying. Autism has been around for ages, even before vaccines and if vaccines caused it, we would have seen an increase in cases LONG before now considering how many millions of people in the course of vaccine history have been vaccinated. Personally, I believe, once they remove PDD-NOS from the spectrum in the DSM V the incidence of ASDs will drop significantly. Of course this means little to me because my son has autistic disorder, so he will always be on the spectrum no matter what they do with the other disorders on the spectrum that aren’t actually autism. Either way, your assertion is incorrect and offensive. I’ve been told this exact same thing when I went looking for support at AoA (before I knew what they were about, which I found out pretty quickly). They called me a liar, told me my son didn’t really have autism or if he did his autism doesn’t matter since he wasn’t ‘vaccine injured’. Don’t believe everything the anti-vax people say. Most of it is not correct.

  206. #206 Julian Frost
    July 22, 2011

    Jake:

    “You said that Brian Deer had accused Wakefield of “forging physician records.” Not “misreporting,” Jake, “forging.””

    You completely ignored that Deer said Wakefield committed fraud, in part, because he “changed” test results, which were actually acquired entirely separately from Andrew Wakefield. That is what I call an accusation of forging physician records.

    Then you’re an idiot. You know, I take it, that Wakefield oredered numerous tests (lumbar punctures, barium meals, endoscopies) on the children? The results Wakefield got back didn’t say what he wanted them to say, so he lied and cooked the data. When Deer was given the Original Medical Records as part of Wakefield’s lawsuit against him, he compared them to what Wakefield’s “Case Study” said, and found that there were major discrepancies.
    To summarise:

    Deer accused Wakefield of misrepresentation in the Lancet paper. He did not accuse Wakefield of forging the children’s medical records, and you have not proved that he has.
    Read, understand, grok.

  207. #207 Krebiozen
    July 22, 2011

    Venna,

    I have lost count of the number of times I have seen Tony Bateson make this same claim on blogs and other forums. Generally someone points out one or more cases of unvaccinated autistic individuals, or a study that found the number of unvaccinated autistic individuals in the population is as chance would predict, or even higher (the Generation Rescue phone survey for example) but he just ignores this and pops up again a few months later making the same claim.

    Back in 2003 he was claiming that he could find “a very few unvaccinated autistic individuals”. At other times he has described finding other unvaccinated autistics, but dismisses them because of maternal vaccination, or because they have dental amalgams. Then he forgets them all entirely and again claims, “I can’t find any. I haven’t been able to count one.” I’m quite sure he will ignore your son, and will continue claiming he can’t find even one unvaccinated autistic individual.

  208. #208 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 22, 2011

    You completely ignored that Deer said Wakefield committed fraud, in part, because he “changed” test results, which were actually acquired entirely separately from Andrew Wakefield. That is what I call an accusation of forging physician records.

    No reasonable person would call that an accusation of forging physician records, because the word “forging” has a specific meaning and it cannot be used just because you want your description to sound more dramatic, or because you want $10.

    Take RFK Jr.’s error-ridden “Deadly Immunity” piece for an example. RFK read the transcripts of a CDC meeting, including descriptions of a study by the lead investigator who said, ‘we specifically looked for any indication of a link between thimerosal and autism, but even looking specifically for such a link, the data didn’t support that idea.’ Supposedly basing his claims on that study, RFK claimed falsely to be reporting on a meeting where a decision was made to cover up evidence of a link between thimerosal and autism – i.e., exactly the link the lead investigator said they had looked for but failed to find.

    Did RFK prevaricate? Yes. Did he misrepresent the study, grotesquely? Yes. Did he misreport the study. Unquestionably. Did he change the results of the study as he pretended to be reporting them unchanged? Yes. But did he forge the results of the study? No. The word has a specific meaning and you just can’t stretch it that way.

    Now if RFK had, for example, taken the conference transcript, erased the part where the lead investigator said “We did not find a link” and wrote “We did find a link,” and then presented it to people purporting that it was a true and accurate transcript, that would be forgery. But just because forgery is a form of misrepresentation doesn’t mean you can simply substitute “forging” wherever you see “misreprenting.” Words have meanings, Jake. If you keep throwing around accusations you don’t understand the meaning of, you’re a libel suit waiting to happen and no employer will hire you for anything better than a job in a parking garage. “My God, look at this here! He disagreed with this other guy about whether the other guy owed him ten bucks or not, so get this: he accused the other guy of ‘counterfeiting’ the ten bucks! Yeah, just because he thought there was some funny business going on with the money and he knew ‘counterfeiting’ meant some kind of funny business involving money, he accused the guy of the federal crime of counterfeiting! That settles it; I don’t want this guy anywhere where he could be mistakenly thought to be representing our company. There’s no way we can take the risk of what a guy that careless would say, and he wouldn’t even be smart enough to realize when his false claims had gotten him into trouble and stop digging himself deeper.”

  209. #209 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 22, 2011

    You completely ignored that Deer said Wakefield committed fraud, in part, because he “changed” test results, which were actually acquired entirely separately from Andrew Wakefield. That is what I call an accusation of forging physician records.

    No reasonable person would call that an accusation of forging physician records, because the word “forging” has a specific meaning and it cannot be used just because you want your description to sound more dramatic, or because you want $10.

    Take RFK Jr.’s error-ridden “Deadly Immunity” piece for an example. RFK read the transcripts of a CDC meeting, including descriptions of a study by the lead investigator who said, ‘we specifically looked for any indication of a link between thimerosal and autism, but even looking specifically for such a link, the data didn’t support that idea.’ Supposedly basing his claims on that study, RFK claimed falsely to be reporting on a meeting where a decision was made to cover up evidence of a link between thimerosal and autism – i.e., exactly the link the lead investigator said they had looked for but failed to find.

    Did RFK prevaricate? Yes. Did he misrepresent the study, grotesquely? Yes. Did he misreport the study. Unquestionably. Did he change the results of the study as he pretended to be reporting them unchanged? Yes. But did he forge the results of the study? No. The word has a specific meaning and you just can’t stretch it that way.

    Now if RFK had, for example, taken the conference transcript, erased the part where the lead investigator said “We did not find a link” and wrote “We did find a link,” and then presented it to people purporting that it was a true and accurate transcript, that would be forgery. But just because forgery is a form of misrepresentation doesn’t mean you can simply substitute “forging” wherever you see “misreprenting.” Words have meanings, Jake. If you keep throwing around accusations you don’t understand the meaning of, you’re a libel suit waiting to happen and no employer will hire you for anything better than a job in a parking garage. “My God, look at this here! He disagreed with this other guy about whether the other guy owed him ten bucks or not, so get this: he accused the other guy of ‘counterfeiting’ the ten bucks! Yeah, just because he thought there was some funny business going on with the money and he knew ‘counterfeiting’ meant some kind of funny business involving money, he accused the guy of the federal crime of counterfeiting! That settles it; I don’t want this guy anywhere where he could be mistakenly thought to be representing our company. There’s no way we can take the risk of what a guy that careless would say, and he wouldn’t even be smart enough to realize when his false claims had gotten him into trouble and stop digging himself deeper.”

  210. #210 Composer99
    July 22, 2011

    augustine seems to be living proof of Penny Arcade’s Greater Internet -wad Theory, with the caveat that he’s probably a troll in real life as well as on teh Toobz.

  211. #211 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    @ Jake Crosby: Antaeus Feldspar just reiterated what I stated above. You seem to think you are libel and slander proof; you aren’t, no matter how invincible your handlers have told you that you are.

    You already have a reputation for some dirty tricks and outrageous behaviors by your alignment with the anti-vax crowd. You continue to make the most outrageous claims for your heroes the disgraced Geiers and Wakefield and that will be duly noted by the personnel wonks, whenever you apply for a real job.

    Just keep it up Jake, we take particular delight in shooting down your specious arguments…perhaps you noticed that posters here have a degree of competence never seen on the restricted Age of Autism site, where the sycophants keep complimenting you on your superb analytical skills,cub reporting and for your hero worship. The real working world is a cruel place and is not impressed with your “diagnosis”, won’t cut you any slack and each and every resume you submit will end up in the round file. And, you continue to believe your “diagnosis” is a protective halo leaving you judgment proof.

  212. #212 Science Mom
    July 22, 2011

    Now for my response to Pharma Mom:

    Blogging for pharma is certainly more lucrative than blogging against pharma, isn’t it?
    Thanks, but I’ll pass.

    Since everything else you wrote is just redundant and not accurate, I will address this. Really? Is this what you have to resort to when you get in over your head? Everyone is a pharma shill who refutes your vapid arguments? The bottom line is, is that you are out of your league and always will be; that doesn’t make everyone else a shill you fuckwit.

  213. #213 Denice Walter
    July 22, 2011

    @ Jake:

    I can’t help but notice that your arguments sound surprisingly like those I hear or read from natural health advocates ( e.g. Gary Null, Mike Adams) which are acceptable- and even quoted- by AoA. Did you ever think that there is a *reason* that these arguments are not generally accepted by most experts in medicine or psychology- *other* than “Pharma suppresses the Truth” or suchlike?

    It is because they don’t fit into the body of research that has been developing over many years. Wakefield’s case study was done in 1998- that’s 13 years ago- a very long time period in a rapidly evolving area of research. Why hasn’t it been replicated by anyone *other* than an avowed follower? Why hasn’t a researcher – far from Murdoch, based in India or China- reported findings on related issues that would support AW’s ideas?

    In order for us to call *interference* by pharma conspiracy we’d need to show multiple junctures where this has occured. Wouldn’t a hoax of this magnitude be awfully difficult to maintain? All those people sworn to secrecy?
    You know how well that usually works out.

    When Orac and commenters agree – is that fuelled by pharma dollars as well? How likely is that?( The only pharma money vaguely related to me in any way is that a mutual fund I own since 1997- and hold as an index- has a pharma portion. I do not cash it.) Isn’t it more likely that most of us came individually to our own conclusions based on our own diverse studies and life experiences?

    I first heard of Wakefield’s study early on and wasn’t impressed because it didn’t fit at all with what I had studied in neuro-development. Plus it had only 12 subjects. I was surprised when my cousin feared vaccinating his child in 2001- I told him, ” I wouldn’t worry”. Why would I do that, endangering a child of a person who is very important to me? Because I didn’t believe it.

    In short Jake, I am concerned about students in general- and you’re one. Don’t allow yourself to be inveigled out of the mainstream into a backwater of pseudo-scientific meanderings. Allow yourself to survey the scientific literature -referenced by our esteemed host, Orac- read with an open mind without the lens of the anti-vaccination movement. You owe it to yourself.

    Best wishes to you.

  214. #214 kelly
    July 22, 2011

    To all the arrogant know it alls-

    THE CURRENT VACCINATION SCHEDULE HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN SAFE;
    THERE ARE NO STUDIES ON POSSIBLE SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT VACCINES AND INJECTING THESE INTO CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 2 AT THE CURRENT RATE IS INSANE.

    I AM SURE THAT PARENTS WHO SUPPORT A SANE VACCINATION SCHEDULE WOULD VOLUNTEER AS A CONTROL GROUP- I WOULD!!! THERE ARE CHILDREN WHO CAN TOLERATE THE CURRENT SCHEDULE AND THOSE WHO CANNOT. WHERE IS YOUR “COMMON HERD SENSE”!!!!!!

  215. #215 Orac
    July 22, 2011

    Because wingnuttery is always more convincing in all caps…

  216. #216 kelly
    July 22, 2011

    THE KNOW IT ALLS ARE POLARIZING REASONABLE PARENTS BY THEIR BULLYING AND ARROGANT TACTICS. THIS BLOG IS HOME TO TOO MANY OF THEM!!!

    I”M LOOKING FOR SOME SANE PEDIATRICIAN NOT A ROBO-DOC!!!

  217. #217 Lawrence
    July 22, 2011

    All caps does not denote a rational argument either….

  218. #218 Bronze Dog
    July 22, 2011

    Riiiiight. Because bald assertions in an all caps post comes across as so much more sane and reasonable than someone who has a sharp tongue, but properly cites his sources.

  219. #219 kelly
    July 22, 2011

    GOT YOUR ATTENTION- MY AIM

    Vaccines do have side effects-I’ve seen the package inserts. Viruses mutate and I surely don’t want them to win. But nature is smart, just look at your wonderfully engineered all by nature body with a soul to boot.
    Why are 1 in 6 children now developmentally disabled-I certainly don’t know.

  220. #220 Bronze Dog
    July 22, 2011

    We know they have side effects. Your implication that we don’t believe that is a lie. And you know it’s a lie. All treatments that do something inherently carry risks of side effects.

    Those side effects for vaccines, however, don’t include autism or developmental problems. If you’ve got evidence to the contrary, cite your sources.

    Oh, and do you know what life was like for people before vaccines? Disease was much more commonplace. Nature is not a Disney invention.

  221. #221 Stu
    July 22, 2011

    GOT YOUR ATTENTION- MY AIM

    I haven’t seen behavior like this since my daughter was 3 years old. Do you actually expect to be taken seriously, or are you just venting your sad, impotent rage, Don Kelly?

    THE CURRENT VACCINATION SCHEDULE HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN SAFE

    …other than millions of children undergoing it without any ill effects.

    I AM SURE THAT PARENTS WHO SUPPORT A SANE VACCINATION SCHEDULE WOULD VOLUNTEER AS A CONTROL GROUP

    You’re a monster.

    I”M LOOKING FOR SOME SANE PEDIATRICIAN

    …that agrees with my preconceived notions.

    But nature is smart,

    *points at his nipples and appendix*

    just look at your wonderfully engineered all by nature body with a soul to boot.

    Oh goody, crank magnetism. Define “soul”. I DOUBLE DOG-DARE YOU.

    Why are 1 in 6 children now developmentally disabled-I certainly don’t know.

    They always were — they just didn’t get diagnosed. Yesteryear’s “dumb” is today’s “developmentally disabled”.

  222. #222 Todd W.
    July 22, 2011

    @kelly

    Vaccines do have side effects

    No one denies this or has claimed otherwise.

    Viruses mutate and I surely don’t want them to win.

    Okay, but what does this have to do with vaccines? Are you attempting to imply that vaccines result in viruses mutating? Vaccines are not like antibiotics. They do not kill some viruses/bacteria, allowing others to survive and propagate resistant genes.

    And using caps lock just makes you look a fool, even if your only purpose is to get attention.

    @augie

    Still trying to get someone to provide evidence for a claim that no one made, eh?

  223. #223 Militant Agnostic
    July 22, 2011

    wonderfully engineered all by nature body

    You mean like the wonderfully engineered immune system that causes my asthma. Not complaining though at least it isn’t overtly trying to kill me via an autoimmune disease like lupus. And then there is human spine which is a kluge that is not suitable for walking upirght.

  224. #224 novalox
    July 22, 2011

    I think kelly is a bit mad that her argument has been thoroughly shot down.

  225. #225 Bronze Dog
    July 22, 2011

    I will not be surprised if kelly comes back with the ‘they’re minor diseases!’ card, trying to whitewash all the blindness, deafness, and all other sorts of morbidity and death from the history books. A lot of people like kelly seem to think that the past is just another movie setting where all you have to do is change the fashions to get an accurate portrayal.

    I listened to my grandmother’s experiences with disease, and childhood friends dying. I went on a tour of a graveyard filled with dead babies’ graves, and the guide mentioned how sometimes if one baby died early, they’d just name the next baby the same thing.

    It’s shameful that people want to sterilize history. Part of it is vaccines being a victim of their success: They’ve been so successful, the people who believe in Disneyfied Nature have taken their health for granted.

    Oh, and thanks for comment #220, Stu. You’ve pointed out a line I missed about unethical child experimentation in there. The anti-vax crowd is just riddled with a lot of people who think children are mere property to be toyed with.

  226. #226 kelly
    July 22, 2011

    Really admire your debating skills-they are formidable- but not convincing-I am unfortunately not your equal in debate and arrogance– this is about looking for truth not winning…Adios amigos

  227. #227 Stu
    July 22, 2011

    Kelly, what did we say that was not true? Name one thing.

  228. #228 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    No good deed goes unpunished; I should not have given Kelly a “pass” on a prior posting:

    “Just this one time Kelly, I’m not going to totally devastate you…I’m giving you credit for not citing the thoroughly debunked Stony Brook med students study…the all-time favorite of the anti-vaxers.

    Why not try PubMed for newer, more accurate studies about the efficacy and safety of Hepatitis B vaccine…such as this one:

    PubMed 16372285

    The study is one of the many conducted and published in peer reviewed journals that confirm Hepatitis B vaccine to be safe, with high efficacy and of course, long lasting. It was published in the Journal of Medical Virology-February 2006.”

    Posted by: lilady | July 21, 2011 10:20 PM

    I see there is no need for me to roast this troll over the coals of truth…I defer now to other posters who are heaping the scorn that Kelly so richly deserves. Gee we haven’t had an ALL CAPS Troll on this site for a long time…I forgot how much fun they are.

  229. #229 Bronze Dog
    July 22, 2011

    Ah, the arrogance card. It’s what trolls play when we refuse to let them define us with their straw men, when we refuse to defer to their say-so, and in short, when we fail to give them blind, unearned reverence.

    Or maybe it’s a reference to the idea that we can improve on nature, since the Disney version of nature is never, ever, ever red in tooth and claw. I hate to break it to ya, but yes, nature is sometimes nasty.

  230. #230 Lawrence
    July 22, 2011

    I can think of more than a few areas of the world where people clamor for vaccinations – plus access to modern medical care.

  231. #231 kelly
    July 22, 2011

    God I really hope that the current vaccine schedule “has done no harm”

  232. #232 Lawrence
    July 22, 2011

    kelly – maybe if you took the time to examine the massive amounts of evidence and supporting research, you’d actually have a leg to stand on.

  233. #233 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    NO BRONZE DOG!!!! YOU MAKE PRESUMPTIONS ABOUT TROLL’S MOTIVATIONS!!!!

    WHEN TROLLS TROLL, ARE TOTALLY BEREFT OF ANY KNOWLEDGE, THEY RESORT TO ALL CAPS!!!!AND EXCLAMATION POINTS!!!!, THEN WHEN CALLED OUT ON IT STATE IT IS A GIMMICK TO GET OUR ATTENTION!!!!

    I LOVE TROLLS WHO USE ALL CAPS AND USE EXCLAMATION POINTS!!!!

    !!!!lilady!!!!

  234. #234 Todd W.
    July 22, 2011

    @Stu and Bronze Dog

    I took her comment as saying that the parents would volunteer themselves, not their children, for such a study.

    @kelly, you may want to give this post and the three subsequent ones (linked at the bottom) a read, then get back to us on research and ethics.

    And to echo Stu, what has anyone here said that is untrue (well, except for the other two trolls, Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum).

  235. #235 Bronze Dog
    July 22, 2011

    Kelly, you’re living in a dream world if you think any medical intervention can “do no harm.” The ridicule of the Hippocratic oath is pretty weak. Of course, you are the one who brought up performing an unethical medical experiment on children that, IIRC, violates the Helsinki Declaration.

    The important thing is that the vaccine schedule does far less harm than what the diseases would do, even if you factor in treatments.

    Of course, I could be wrong about that last bit. The only way I could find out is if some anti-vaxxer grows a spine and cites good evidence to the contrary. Of course, that would require you to learn something about us that your altie gurus haven’t lied to you about.

    Here’s a hint: There is such a thing as self-determination. You don’t get to define our beliefs for us.

  236. #236 lara
    July 22, 2011

    Interested on your comments on this study
    Kawasaki’s disease and mercury
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19075648

  237. #237 lara
    July 22, 2011

    Kelly posted this yesterday- She’s scared about vaccinating her child.
    Kawasaki’s disease and mercury
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19075648

  238. #238 Beamup
    July 22, 2011

    @ lara:

    I can’t see the full text, but the abstract raises a huge red flag. Namely, if mercury were implicated in Kawasaki’s and thimerosal in vaccines were largely responsible for the described increase, why hasn’t it then gone away? And why thimerosal, as opposed to the much larger exposures from other sources like fish? In short, the supposed supporting data makes no sense.

  239. #239 Marry Me, Mindy
    July 22, 2011

    Kelly brought that up in the context of the concern abvout the rotovirus vaccine. Nobody responded to the comment about mercury, presumably because they were dumbfounded by the non-sequitor.

    What does the potential relationship between mercury and Kawasakis have to do with RotoTec?

    The only children’s vaccine that contains thimerasol is the multidose flu vaccine, which has not been associated with Kawasakis.

  240. #240 Heather Fraser
    July 22, 2011

    Your post appears to have missed the point regarding the early findings of Richet and Von Pirquet.

    The mass administration of diphtheria sera (made using the blood of infected horses) using a hypodermic syringe began around 1895. When up to 50% of children injected with this serum developed “serum sickness” doctors moved quickly to better understand and solve this obstacle to mass vaccination.

    Von Pirquet conducted his meticulous research at a children’s hospital in Vienna. He observed that children with ‘serum sickness’ exhibited symptoms similar to those of people with hyper-sensitivities to pollens and bee venom. To describe these symptoms, he coined the term allergy (altered reactivity). Serum sickness was the first mass allergic phenomenon in children.

    And Richet coined anaphylaxis to describe one of three outcomes of vaccination with the needle. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1913/richet-lecture.html

    Both men identified contaminant proteins through injection as a cause of this evolved immune system defense — Richet stated that any protein that bypasses the modifying effects of the digestive system and persists in the bloodstream can result in anaphylaxis. This condition is universal and predictable.

    With this new understanding, vaccine makers better refined all ingredients to reduce contaminant proteins and thereby to reduce the prevalence of serum sickness. However, the problem of allergy/anaphylaxis following injection today is still a concern. One relatively recent example was the outbreak of gelatin allergy in children following the DPT vaccination in the mid 1990s. Doctors discovered the problem when children were experiencing anaphylaxis following admin of the MMR. It too contained gelatin. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9949325

    Doctors have been and continue to be well aware of the inevitable creation of anaphylaxis in some people following vaccination, from Hilleman to the family GP. There is no distortion here.

  241. #241 kelly
    July 22, 2011

    All I seem to find are anti-vax sites.

    Any pro-vax with parents with children over the age of five fully vaxed to the current schedule?

  242. #242 Lawrence
    July 22, 2011

    Maybe because the pro-vax majority don’t see the need to create rabid websites spouting the latest conspiracy theories….and as a father of two, not only are my wife and I fully vaccinated (with recent boosters), but my two children are vaxxed to the current schedule as well – with no ill effects whatsoever (and all of our friends with children are the exact same).

  243. #243 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    @ Lara & Beamup: I cannot get the full report from the citation either. However I did find a rather complete report based on analysis of VAERS reports 1990-2007, reported in the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Journal on December 4, 2009; I think you will have have to key in the entire title and tag on Medscape on the end of the title:

    Kawasacki Disease after Vaccination: Reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System 1990-2007

    (linking of articles is still elusive for dumb lilady, sorry)

    The conclusions drawn after extensive analysis and reporting is that there is no increased risk for Kawasaki Disease after any single one or combination of immunizations given to children.

  244. #244 kelly
    July 22, 2011

    Dear Heather Fraser,

    Thank you very much.

  245. #245 kelly
    July 22, 2011

    Thank you Mindy, Lawrence, lilady, Beamup

  246. #246 W. Kevin Vicklund
    July 22, 2011

    Here’s the link lilady was talking about.

    Some thoughts:

    Rather than going down after thimerosal was removed from vaccines, the KD rate continued to rise. KD is strongly associated with Japanese and Korean ancestry (e.g., ~50 times higher rates in Japan than the UK), and the rise has coincided with increased immigration from those areas. The VAERS data actually has a lower reporting rate than the background incidence rate; however, this shouldn’t be used to argue that vaccinations protect from KD.

    With the outside knowledge from the report lilady found, the report kelly found seems to be on the order of “40% of sick days are on Mondays and Fridays!”

  247. #247 Krebiozen
    July 22, 2011

    @kelly

    Any pro-vax with parents with children over the age of five fully vaxed to the current schedule?

    Frankly, I don’t know anyone whose children are not fully vaccinated. I am in the UK (Wakefield country) and probably know a disproportionate number of people who work in health-care, but I think I’m safe in saying that everyone I know well would regard a parent who did not fully vaccinate their child as a dangerous lunatic.

  248. #248 Venna
    July 22, 2011

    @Kelly
    I have 5 children over the age of five that are fully vaccinated according to the CDC schedule (minus flu shots) and one child who is four, also fully vaccinated according to the CDC schedule. I’m confused though on why were you asking for pro-vax parents with children over 5 who are fully vaxed? Could you explain maybe?

  249. #249 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    @ Heather Frazer: Why not throw in bloodletting and cupping as examples of medicines doing harm? No one ever stated that there are not (very rare) incidences of anaphylaxis following the administration of vaccines or other medicines.

    Just how many instances of anaphylaxis have you actually seen after administration of any vaccine? I had a long career in public health and administered thousands of vaccines in busy public health clinics and nary a one instance of anaphylaxis. My colleagues (doctors and nurses) at the Department of Health who collectively administered hundreds of thousands of vaccines, have never reported an episode of anaphylaxis following immunization. And, we always had epinephrine ampules and syringes nearby to treat anaphylaxis…they were always discarded unused upon expiration and replaced with newer ampules.

    Are you deliberately confusing diphtheria toxoid used in vaccines that contains no horse serum with diphtheria anti-toxin (DAT) which contains horse serum?

    Your promoting of false information to deter parents from immunization with primary series DTaP and booster vaccines is simply reckless.

    Diphtheria anti-toxin (DAT) is available only through regional CDC offices and only used in ICUs when an unimmunized patient is struggling to survive a case of diphtheria. I pity the poor parents of such a patient who believe your line of horse****, as they stand vigil at bedside awaiting the arrival of lifesaving DAT.

    Here’s a site for all you fence sitters who don’t immunize against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis and find yourselves in an ICU awaiting a supply of diphtheria anti-toxin:

    CDC Diphtheria Anti-Toxin (DAT)

  250. #250 Jake Crosby
    July 22, 2011

    “Deer accused Wakefield of misrepresentation in the Lancet paper.”

    And of flat-out changing test results – in other words, forging them.

    “But did [RFK Jr.] forge the results of the study? No.”

    First of all, that was not the study Kennedy was referring to, as he made clear here:
    http://dir.salon.com/story/news/letters/2005/06/25/thimerosal/index.html

    Secondly, Kennedy was never accused or committing fraud, nor was he a coauthor to that study like Wakefield was to the Lancet paper.

    You’ve just made the case for Brian Deer accusing Wakefield of forgery, by mistake.

  251. #251 Jake Crosby
    July 22, 2011

    “Everyone is a pharma shill who refutes your vapid arguments?”

    Nope – you’ve done no such thing.

  252. #252 Jake Crosby
    July 22, 2011

    ” Did you ever think that there is a *reason* that these arguments are not generally accepted by most experts in medicine or psychology”

    Not any more so than they’re previous claim that autism was caused by homicidal parents.

    “Why hasn’t it been replicated by anyone *other* than an avowed follower?”

    You mean research teams in multiple countries on continents throughout the world?

    “far from Murdoch, based in India or China- reported findings on related issues that would support AW’s ideas?”

    I don’t know, why hasn’t any of the vaccine industry’s tobacco science come out of India or China either?

    Btw, GSK board member James Murdoch is in charge of New Corporation’s Asian operations, so China and India are not “far from Murdoch.”

    “In order for us to call *interference* by pharma conspiracy we’d need to show multiple junctures where this has occured. Wouldn’t a hoax of this magnitude be awfully difficult to maintain? All those people sworn to secrecy?
    You know how well that usually works out.”

    Indeed:
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/07/when-does-a-conspiracy-theory-become-a-conspiracy-fact.html

    “When Orac and commenters agree – is that fuelled by pharma dollars as well?”

    I don’t know, but Orac’s research is being fueled by pharma dollars.

    “Isn’t it more likely that most of us came individually to our own conclusions based on our own diverse studies and life experiences?”

    No clue, but “diverse studies” and “life experiences” can still be swayed by special interests.

    “Why would I do that, endangering a child of a person who is very important to me? Because I didn’t believe it.”

    Probably because you erroneously think it’s because it was on the basis of The Lancet paper that Wakefield told people to avoid MMR; it wasn’t. It was because the vaccine had not been properly safety tested, as further confirmed in the Cochrane Review, which concluded the safety data for MMR was “largely inadequate.”

  253. #253 Liz Ditz
    July 22, 2011

    Kelly was wringing her hands over “one in six American children are now considered developmentally disabled”, and was implying the high number was new and was caused by vaccination.

    “Developmentally Disabled” sounds horrible and scary, doesn’t it? Like a child who will never learn, or never live independently in adulthood?

    The facts are otherwise.

    The source of the “one in six” is a paper in Pediatrics, Boyle et al. (2011) Trends in the Prevalence of Developmental Disabilities in US Children, 1997–2008 Pediatrics. 2011 Jun;127(6):1034-42. Epub 2011 May 23. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-2989)

    Unfortunately, I only have access to the abstract. I have added emphases:

    Participants and Methods:We used data on children aged 3 to 17 years from the 1997–2008 National Health Interview Surveys, which are ongoing nationally representative samples of US households. Parent-reported diagnoses of the following were included: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; intellectual disability; cerebral palsy; autism; seizures; stuttering or stammering; moderate to profound hearing loss; blindness; learning disorders; and/or other developmental delays.

    Screening for and remediating learning disorders are my areas of expertise. I would say the one in six figure (16.6%) is possibly low. Dyslexia is classed as a developmental disability. Some dyslexia experts put the actual prevalence rate at up to 20%.

    It would be a great day for children in America if all students were screened for dyslexia at the end of kindergarten, so that appropriate remediation could begin immediately. Of course, instituting such a course of action would mean a rise in both incidence and prevalence. What a terrible thing! Not.

    The change in incidence and rise in prevalence of autism has been widely discussed previously (for starters, see Steven Novella at Neurologica.

    The incidence and prevalence of ADHD are well, contentious. The prevalence rates vary from about 6% to over 15% on a state-by-state basis. As the CDC notes:

    …because of the evolution of the case definition and differences in how the case definition is operationalized, there is disagreement as to prevalence and precise characteristics of children with the disorder.

    Due to the lack of a single, consistent, and standard research protocol for case identification, variable and disparate findings have been noted in the literature.

    What’s the take-away message here? For Kelly, lara, and others who use the “one in six” headline as a prompt for fears of vaccines, I fear it won’t do much. Evidence-resistant ideologies don’t change much in response to facts…

    For everyone else, when you see the “one in six” figure, now you know what it refers to, and now you know why it isn’t a fearful figure.

  254. #254 herr doktor bimler
    July 22, 2011

    Not any more so than they’re previous claim that autism was caused by homicidal parents.

    It would help if you could provide details of the “experts in medicine or psychology” who made such a claim. Bruno Bettelheim (a Freudian psychotherapist) made a claim along those lines, but he was recognised at the time as a lying bullshit artist. The fact that the media took him seriously and promoted his lies is certainly an indictment of journalism but is hardly a reflection upon medicine or psychology.

    I don’t know, why hasn’t any of the vaccine industry’s tobacco science come out of India or China either?

    A large amount of vaccine research comes out of India and China, as you would find in a few seconds if you bothered to look it up.

    What kind of evidence would persuade you to admit an error? Should we conclude from your use of the term “tobacco science” that your mind is closed to actual information?

  255. #255 lara
    July 22, 2011

    @ lilady- according to the CDC there are fewer than 5 cases of diptheria a year in the US

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002575/

  256. #256 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    Watch it Crosby, you are dealing with Herr Doktor Bimler, our esteemed science poster, not your typical sycophant hero-doctors.

    I think I’ll pour myself a vodka-tonic and enjoy the show which promises to be a smack-down of your smart ass.

  257. #257 Beamup
    July 22, 2011

    @ lara:

    Precisely because of mass vaccination. If we stopped the vaccine, it would come back.

  258. #258 augustine
    July 22, 2011

    @augie

    Still trying to get someone to provide evidence for a claim that no one made, eh?

    There is plenty of good reason to vaccinate infants against the disease. Even if the mother is negative, other family members, children and even casual contacts may not be.

    You are guilty of engaging in fear mongering by attempting to attack reasonable objections. You know that the risk is small for infants who fall into this category. I don’t think you’re ignorant . You’re trying to needle in on ALL mothers trying to make them feel as though “no one is safe”. You also fail to disclose that the risk is not homogenous. It is reasonable to reject this vaccine.

    By “casual contacts,” I meant people who are not caregivers, relatives or close friends, but someone with whom they may have a very brief interaction.

    Your links didn’t give any data. It only gave you a mechanism for speculation which you used for fear. No Data. No evidence. Platform for fear and doubt. “oh you never know when some spit may blow in the wind or some baby may bite your baby”

    And, for a claim that no one made, you and lilday sure tried try to defend it. Too bad her immunize dot org propaganda organization’s vaccine compliance objection paper included “unusual” modes of transmission. Meaning not very common. Meaning not a reason most would vaccinate if you put it into context. Fear mongering is the only way you could dupe and control people with that.

    Good luck with that Avian flu vaccine campaign again. And your swine vaccine campaign, and HPV campaign, etc,.,etc.,

    Fear is the game. Keep people confused and keep them scared. Strip their power of consent and tell them Big Brother Todd will take care of their children.

  259. #259 Chris
    July 22, 2011

    Lara, so what? It is that low due to high levels of vaccination. Here is what happens when there is an interruption of vaccine programs: Diphtheria in the Former Soviet Union: Reemergence of a Pandemic Disease.

    How many people a year need to die from a disease for you to think it is worth preventing?

    Several babies have died from pertussis in the USA in the last few years. Do you think it might be worth to vaccinate against pertussis, and even more importantly to get the Tdap yourself to prevent transmitting it to a baby?

  260. #260 Lawrence
    July 22, 2011

    So, boring troll – how exactly is that different than the “fear campaign” sponsored by Generation Rescue & AoA that vaccines “definitely” cause autism?

  261. #261 augustine
    July 22, 2011

    Beamup

    Precisely because of mass vaccination. If we stopped the vaccine, it would come back.

    What percent would be alcoholics. According to your precision science based calculations and formula, of course. Could you write out that formula that gave you your prediction for us?

  262. #262 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 22, 2011
    Deer accused Wakefield of misrepresentation in the Lancet paper.

    And of flat-out changing test results – in other words, forging them.

    Oh, Jake.  You just aren’t a very good liar, Jake.  I’m sure you feel pretty slick, and think you’ve successfully weaseled out of the hole you dug for yourself – but you didn’t.

    When you first made the claim that Deer accused Wakefield of “forging physician records”, you claimed that this was a “physically impossible action” because Wakefield supposedly never had access to the records in questions.

    Now you’re trying to pretend that when you chose to use the word “forging,” you didn’t mean anything different than ‘misrepresenting the contents of.’  Sure.  That’s all you meant.  Really.  Who could fail to believe you?

    Except there’s one little problem, Jake.  What’s “physically impossible” about misrepresenting something you’ve read?  Obviously Wakefield had access to read the records in question, because he could never be expected to make accurate representations of records he couldn’t read.  And obviously, since there is no physical component to representing the contents of what one has read or perceived (aside from the trivial component of tapping a keyboard, and the like) neither accurate representation nor misrepresentation can be “physically impossible.”

    What does have a physical component, and therefore could be physically impossible, is the act of making false or altered documents and trying to substitute those documents for the originals – that is, forging the physician records, in the sense that you meant the word when you originally accused Deer of accusing Wakefield.

    You try to pretend now that you never meant to imply that Deer was accusing Wakefield of anything other than misrepresenting the records, but it’s BS, Jake, BS through and through.  Not only is the allegation that Wakefield misrepresented the records not “physically impossible”, it’s not even incorrect, as the GMC confirmed that Wakefield did exactly that.

  263. #263 Lawrence
    July 22, 2011

    Boring troll – take France & stuff it up your pie-hole, seems to me that one instance alone makes you both a liar & a putz, less vaccination = more disease.

  264. #264 augustine
    July 22, 2011

    “The incidence was highest in the winter and spring, involving only indigent persons and primarily urban alcoholic persons with poor hygiene [23]. Similarly, in Sweden since 1984, diphtheria has been mainly diagnosed among men abusing alcohol [5, 37]. A report from the recent (1993–1994) diphtheria epidemic in St. Petersburg, Russia, reported that 29 (69%) of the 42 diphtheria deaths were among persons classified as chronic alcoholics [25].”

  265. #265 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    Yes Lara, diphtheria cases are rare now, thanks to DTaP primary series and booster vaccines. An excellent reference for the incidence and rate of diphtheria, before the availability and widespread use of vaccine is contained in:

    Pink Book Diphtheria

    I’m a wee bit (or more) older than you with a now deceased mother who was a registered nurse who first entered the profession in the early 1930s before licensing of the diphtheria vaccine. She shared so many stories of serious cases of diphtheria and the resulting loss of life from diphtheria. And, in spite of the Trolls’ theories of public sanitation measures decreasing the incidence of respiratory diseases, DTaP (and DAT) made the difference in the incidence and rate of childhood deaths from this disease.

    There was a death of a young woman from diphtheria recently in
    Australia; you can read the article at:

    Shocking Death in Australia: A Diphtheria Case

    Please read it and learn how not getting recommended diphtheria booster vaccine caused the death of this young woman.

  266. #266 lara
    July 22, 2011

    To all-

    Thank you all for your comments and input.

  267. #267 herr doktor bimler
    July 22, 2011

    GSK board member James Murdoch is in charge of New Corporation’s Asian operations, so China and India are not “far from Murdoch.”

    Just think, up until a few weeks ago, the recurring ad hominem against Brian Deer was that he was a free-lance journalist, and therefore less reliable than a staff reporter would be. Apparently this made him a mercenary, taking money from all sides. J. B. Handley accused him of being in the pocket of Big Pharma, the BMJ and the US Department of Justice.

    See, for instance, the comments thread here, in which one Jake Crosby congratulates Handley for pointing out that Deer is “not a Sunday Times reporter, and never has been”.

    And now Jake Crosby wants us to believe that Deer was working for the Sunday Times, and is therefore tarred with the Murdoch brush.

    Jake, I know you’re trying to win arguments, but does it ever occur to you that there are more important goals in life, like remaining honest to yourself?

  268. #269 Science Mom
    July 22, 2011

    “Why hasn’t it been replicated by anyone *other* than an avowed follower?”

    You mean research teams in multiple countries on continents throughout the world?

    Oh do you mean those “studies” that either have nothing to do with the “gut-brain” Wankers hypothesis and/or written by him and/or his co-authors on other papers? No wonder you have a difficult time with the term “independent” and intellectual honesty.

    “Everyone is a pharma shill who refutes your vapid arguments?”

    Nope – you’ve done no such thing.

    Yes, I did, by citing Ms. Seidel’s excellent, meticulously-sourced blogpost. All you did was the equivalent of ‘nuh-uh, she’s a librarian and I don’t like what she said.’ And now look, you cite AoA’s hand-waving post with Natural News and AoA as sources, by JB Handley no less, a financier with no science or research background. Hypocrisy, thy name is Jake. You then turn to the predictable “shill” accusation; better deepen that silly little bag of tricks there Jake because I haven’t worked outside of academia yet and have never been funded by any pharma money, all government.

    I don’t know, but Orac’s research is being fueled by pharma dollars.

    You know, whiz kid? No amount of playing six degrees, nor back pats from equally dim-witted AoA commentors validate your drivel. The fact that you really believe the accolades you receive from very disturbed individuals requires an inordinate amount of cognitive dissonance and some really piss-poor self esteem. You really don’t know what it is like to function in the real world do you? More’s the pity for you; I’d stay in school for a really long time if I were you because I just don’t see a future outside of it for you.

  269. #270 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    I am so enjoying this tete-a-tete (rout, butt whupping) betwixt the boy wonder cub reporter and Herr Dokter Bimler.

  270. #271 Andrew
    July 22, 2011

    Jake:

    >Blogging for pharma is certainly more lucrative than >blogging against pharma, isn’t it?

    I’m glad you finally admit that you’re paid lucratively to blog in support of untested and dangerous pharmaceuticals.

    >Thanks, but I’ll pass.

    Your exams? Not too likely.

  271. #272 Speaking of tobacco money
    July 22, 2011

    Speaking of “tobacco science”: the one scientist involved in the vaccine controversy who did work for the tobacco companies is JB Handley’s favorite scientist, Dr. Healey. How much money did old JB pay her to switch from promoting the safety of tobacco to promoting the dangers of vaccines?

  272. #273 herr doktor bimler
    July 22, 2011

    I am so enjoying this tete-a-tete
    Jake is (IMHO) wrong and misguided — and sometimes I suspect that he is not entirely arguing in good faith — but he deserves a response, because at least he is not a troll… he is not simply spouting bullshit that he knows to be bullshit, for the dubious satisfaction of prompting smarter people to reply.

  273. #274 lilady
    July 22, 2011

    @ Herr Doktor Bimler: No Jakey is not a troll…and not an innocent “disabled” kid either. He is bought and paid for by his mentor JB and quite capable of vicious attacks. Also, stupid and not grounded in the real, cruel world of people who compete for jobs in this society…where his “diagnosis de jour” counts for nothing.

    “Go for it Doktor Bimler and Science Mom”

  274. #275 Lisa J
    July 22, 2011

    I would like to volunteer that I am fully vaccinated (served USN, so probably more vaccinated than many) with fully vaccinated children and now grandchildren (per schedule on the youngest) and none of them have had a bad reaction, none of them have any learning disabilities as far as I know (the youngest is 12, the other 20). They are all perfectly healthy. I do have an autistic (step) grandchild. He also has been vaccinated appropriately, and we actually suspect that, if anything, his mother’s (illicit) drug use during pregnancy affected his neural development.

    I do suffer from autoimmune disorders and honestly wonder where that comes from – if it is something genetic, or environmental or both? I do wonder if the various environmental contaminants that seem more common now (pollutants, etc.) have anything to do with various autoimmune disorders, or if it is the much increased consumption of processed sugar, or the fact we no longer eat whole foods as much…. or if it is that the less hardy are able to reproduce more readily because they no longer die young.

    A problem when you get into LARGE populations is that there are so many things in common you cannot (and should not) point to ONE thing that they all have in common and immediately insist that it is the cause. The one disease I have is rather rare, and I get very frustrated to read some of the support chat rooms where patients try to blame it on everything from food coloring or additives to whether or not their mother breast fed them or if they weren’t encouraged to play with other children enough at age seven (okay, that’s a bit of an exaggeration, but you get my point).

    Vaccines get to be the boogeyman in this because they ARE so common – the largest majority of people in civilized countries get them. What better thing to blame? Maybe you should blame it on water? or air? I’m sure they all breathe, too. I wouldn’t be surprised if they DID find any small relationship that they would find that it is this vaccine ingredient with THIS genetic inheritance plus THIS other contributing source – I doubt that they will ever find ONE single thing to point to and say THIS is exactly (and the only) the thing that causes autism.

    For one – there are way too many who are exposed to that who AREN’T autistic, period.

  275. #276 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    @ Lisa J: I hope you have been following Orac’s many blogs and the postings here. We have discussed in detail the factors that make it appear that there is a higher incidence of autism including changing diagnostic criteria as outlined in the DSM IV, earlier diagnosis of autism and the fact that children who were formerly diagnosed as having learning disabilities, ADD and ADHD and intellectually impaired have now been diagnosed as being on the autism spectrum. Unfortunately, some parents would prefer having their child diagnosed on the spectrum rather than the other diagnoses mentioned above because of their mistaken belief in the vaccines-autism link…perpetuated on anti-vaccine internet sites. I suspect that this allows them to vent their anger about having a child with disabilities and vaccines are the target of their anger.

    I do hope that your grandchild is receiving appropriate services through the local school district as early, intensive appropriate interventions are really the best way for children to meet their full potential. Slow and steady progress for the affected child brings much joy to those who love them

  276. #277 Jake Crosby
    July 23, 2011

    Antaeus,

    You obviously lack a basic understanding of what Brian Deer accused Dr. Andrew Wakefield of doing.

    “Obviously Wakefield had access to read the records in question, because he could never be expected to make accurate representations of records he couldn’t read.”

    What was used in the Lancet paper was the end product of a process that begins with a routine pathologist’s review and ends with an evaluation by the expert pathologist. Deer accused Dr. Wakefield of changing the test results from the routine pathologist even though it was part of a process that had nothing to do with Dr. Wakefield. So yes, what Deer accused Dr. Wakefield of doing was physically impossible, unless Deer starts to implicate other doctors in his conspiracy theory.

    “What does have a physical component, and therefore could be physically impossible, is the act of making false or altered documents and trying to substitute those documents for the originals”

    Which is exactly what Deer accused Dr. Wakefield of doing with the pathology records.

    “Not only is the allegation that Wakefield misrepresented the records not “physically impossible”, it’s not even incorrect, as the GMC confirmed that Wakefield did exactly that.”

    Not at all – the GMC was where Prof. John Walker-Smith testified that the diagnostic process by which Deer claims Dr. Wakefield committed fraud had nothing to do with Dr. Wakefield!

  277. #278 Jake Crosby
    July 23, 2011

    “Bruno Bettelheim (a Freudian psychotherapist)”

    Who also falsely claimed to have an MD and was described as such until after his death.

    made a claim along those lines, but he was recognised at the time as a lying bullshit artist.”

    Indeed, by Dr. Bernie Rimland of the Autism Research Institute, who recognized that same BS decades later in the vaccine industry.

    “It would help if you could provide details of the “experts in medicine or psychology” who made such a claim…The fact that the media took him seriously and promoted his lies is certainly an indictment of journalism but is hardly a reflection upon medicine or psychology.”

    He was also promoted in Pediatrics and Archives of General Psychiatry – both places that have published tobacco science seeking to exonerate vaccines.

    “A large amount of vaccine research comes out of India and China, as you would find in a few seconds if you bothered to look it up.”

    Well…okay, I take your word for it.

    “What kind of evidence would persuade you to admit an error?”

    I’ve been asked that question before by Seth Mnookin when I met him in New York City. My answer to you is the same as my answer was to him: scientific evidence is not about persuasion; it’s about finding answers to scientific problems. He agreed with me on this point. So-called “evidence” produced for the purpose of persuasion, however, is tobacco science.

    “Should we conclude from your use of the term “tobacco science” that your mind is closed to actual information?”

    Well, you could, but then that wouldn’t be scientific because you’ll just be dismissing my criticisms on the basis of assumptions and personal prejudice rather than engage in any scientific scrutiny.

  278. #279 Jake Crosby
    July 23, 2011

    “And now Jake Crosby wants us to believe that Deer was working for the Sunday Times, and is therefore tarred with the Murdoch brush.”

    What? I never said Deer was a staff reporter for The Times, nor do I want anyone to believe that he is.

    This does not change the fact, however, that he is being investigated for his acquisition of children’s private medical records.

  279. #280 Jake Crosby
    July 23, 2011

    “Oh do you mean those “studies” that either have nothing to do with the “gut-brain””

    I mean those studies that made the same intestinal findings in autistic patients as the Lancet paper.

    “Yes, I did, by citing Ms. Seidel’s excellent, meticulously-sourced blogpost. All you did was the equivalent of ‘nuh-uh, she’s a librarian and I don’t like what she said.'”

    Not even – I clearly showed you what was wrong with her post and you accused me of “making shit up.” It’s obvious you did not even read Seidel’s post:
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/07/smartvax_the_orwellian_repackaging_of_ol.php#comment-4542337

    “I haven’t worked outside of academia yet and have never been funded by any pharma money, all government.”

    What part of government?

    “You know…?”

    He’s funded by Bayer; he said so himself.

  280. #281 Jake Crosby
    July 23, 2011

    “Your exams? Not too likely.”

    Good one – except that I recently graduated. So I obviously passed my exams.

    “who did work for the tobacco companies is…Dr. Healey.”

    Because Dr. Healy used to be part of Steven Milloy’s group, which includes Michael Fumento on its advisory board? Milloy and Fumento are on your side of this issue.

    “No Jakey is not a troll…and not an innocent “disabled” kid either.”

    Oh, so I don’t have an ASD diagnosis? Is that what you’re claiming?

  281. #282 aug
    July 23, 2011

    Unfortunately, some parents would prefer having their child diagnosed on the spectrum

    Like Venna? Isn’t her child diagnosed as PDD? Or do you even know? Is her child vaccine regressive?

    I suspect that this allows them to vent their anger about having a child with disabilities and [“pro informed consent”] are the target of their anger.

    You do know Venna has been homeschooled right and sheltered from formal education right? Do you recognize this? Or is her lack or reasoning skill overlooked because she irrationally agrees with your ideology?

  282. #283 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    Is her child vaccine regressive?

    Pay attention, troll, her child was diagnosed before he was vaccinated. Your insinuations are pointless and silly.

  283. #284 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Pay attention, troll, her child was diagnosed before he was vaccinated.

    I know exactly what I said Ms. unambiguous transgenders are people trapped in the wrong bodies and THAT is science based rationale.

  284. #285 lara
    July 23, 2011

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21691704 Although hepatitis B vaccine prevents infection, previous studies have shown that it has several side effects that are caused by the aluminum adjuvant. Therefore, we applied more sensitive and more scientifically well-grounded methods for the quality control of vaccine safety. We confirmed by quantitative RT-PCR that hepatitis B vaccine changed the expression level of seven genes that were selected as biomarkers, which reflected subtoxic/adverse effects of the vaccine, especially subtle liver injury. In addition to other genes that were significantly changed and detected by microarray comparing with control to get the fold change data as a criteria was depended in other pre- vious studies of vaccine safety by gene expression meth- ods, This study tested the hypothesis that gene expression profiling can reveal indicators of subtle liver injury that is induced by a dose of a substance that does not cause overt toxicity as defined by conventional criteria of toxicology. Microarray does not replace the classical toxicity method but it can be used in pre-clinical development vaccine.

  285. #286 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    @ Chris: Such typical odious behavior on the part of Ugh Troll. He cannot abide any of my postings here and pulls this crap on every new poster as well. I can only hope that Orac broadens his criteria for banning this pathetic downright creepy troll.

  286. #287 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    lara, that is some serious cherry picking. Are your children mice?

  287. #288 Narad
    July 23, 2011

    I know exactly what I said Ms. unambiguous transgenders are people trapped in the wrong bodies and THAT is science based rationale.

    Oh, look, it’s on the sauce.

  288. #289 novalox
    July 23, 2011

    Guess we’re seeing augie’s “christian” love in action here….

  289. #290 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    NoNads

    Oh, look, it’s on the sauce.

    Hey NoNads, Chris said it not me. She believes that it’s rational to believe that one can be trapped in the wrong body and need science based medicine surgery to remedy that conundrum.

  290. #291 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    Narad, obviously that was some serious drunken posting from some guy living in his mother’s basement.

  291. #292 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    @ novalox: No we are seeing Troll’s warped interpretation of his Christian faith all wrapped up in his hatred of every woman that is a threat to him (intellectually, emotionally and spiritually)…just a vile and pathetic excuse for a human being.

  292. #293 Narad
    July 23, 2011

    She believes that it’s rational to believe that one can be trapped in the wrong body and need science based medicine surgery to remedy that conundrum.

    Actually, Augustine, the decay in your ability to assemble a sentence is pretty noticeable. Time to put down the Listerine.

  293. #294 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    To recent arrivals to Respectful Insolence: Little Augie brings out the transgender bit only because he cannot understand why a person can be both an engineer and a mother. It is part of his inherent sexism.

    All the more reason to ignore the troll.

  294. #295 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Novalox

    Guess we’re seeing augie’s “christian” love in action here….

    Oh, are you a Christian? Are you also a Skeptic like James Randi?

  295. #296 herr doktor bimler
    July 23, 2011

    Lara @ 280: I read the paper to which you link. The authors claim that

    Although hepatitis B vaccine prevents infection, previous studies have shown that it has several side effects that are caused by the aluminum adjuvant.

    — but rather alarmingly, they provide no details or citations about these “previous studies”. Then they go on to state
    The evidence for a link between aluminum neurotoxicity and Alzheimer’s disease continues to grow stronger.
    — but again, there is no information in the paper or citations to information in outside papers as to what this evidence might be. I am forced to the melancholy conclusion that they’re making stuff up.

  296. #297 herr doktor bimler
    July 23, 2011

    people trapped in the wrong bodies
    This is no laughing matter. I am trapped in a body that is too old, balding and unattractive to be the right one.

  297. #298 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Chris

    All the more reason to ignore the troll.

    No, it’s because you’re caught in a politically uncorrect conundrum that defies logic and science that you don’t won’t to deal with. You keep ignoring the question over and over because you don’t want to deal with logic and science. Scientism is much easier for you.

    To recent arrivals to Respectful Insolence: Little Augie brings out the transgender bit only because he cannot understand why a person can be both an engineer and a mother. It is part of his inherent sexism.

    What’s strange is what you think new people think about you. This let’s me know that you are consensus driven. Not logic and science driven.

    To recent arrivals to Respectful Insolence: Little Augie brings out the transgender bit only because he cannot understand why a person can be both an engineer and a mother. It is part of his inherent sexism.

    You don’t care about truth. You care about what certain people think about you.

  298. #299 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    @ lara: So what is your interpretation…how does it apply to humans…and:

    Does a study done in China on mouse livers have any relevance for the Hepatitis B vaccine that has been used successfully in the Western world since 1981 with no proven effect on the genes, the liver, any other organ including the brain and does not trigger autism, have any relevance to any discussion here.

    Do you even know what type of vaccine was tested in China or are you just “assuming” it was the type used in the Western World…not very scientific of you.

    How about the aluminum adjuvant? That too has been tested in thousands of studies testing the many vaccines that use aluminum as adjuvants for the past fifty years.

    Too many cherry-picked hypotheses here to ever be considered as a scientific study.

  299. #300 lara
    July 23, 2011

    Herr D- It’s a PDF file also on springerlink –

    http://www.springerlink.com/content/m638153u46007433/

  300. #301 lara
    July 23, 2011

    herr d-

    here’s the PDF

    http://bit.ly/pDdDvV

  301. #302 herr doktor bimler
    July 23, 2011

    lara, your link leads to a subscription barrier. I read the paper here:
    http://www.rescuepost.com/files/hamza11hepbinflamaationgeneexpression.pdf

  302. #303 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    I thought that would shut you up. Chris: science, logic….crickets.

  303. #304 lara
    July 23, 2011

    http://www.ntpharma.com/en/page/page.aspx?id=1a777801f6c84a5390110eee8b86185b

    Pharma partners with china- GSK

    Our vaccine promotion product portfolio includes GSK Engerix-B® (Junior), a hepatitis B vaccine for children; GSK Twinrix®, the only imported hepatitis A and B vaccine for adults in China; Sanofi-Pasteur Meningo A+C, the only imported 2-valent meningococcal vaccine in China; and CNBG Huiyikang, the only domestically manufactured 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine.

  304. #305 herr doktor bimler
    July 23, 2011

    science, logic….crickets.
    Tractors: Turnip! Buttocks!

  305. #306 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    Thanks for the link to the article, Lara.

    The Pubmed citation you at first provided described aluminum in the vaccine as a adjuvant…according to the actual article it is not an adjuvant…you need to get some science credits under your belt to understand what an adjuvant is.

    Per the complete article the study was done on mice with a Chinese manufactured Hepatitis B vaccine cultured out of Chinese hamster ovary cells. Aluminum salts were added not as an adjuvant but to render the surface antigen insoluble.

    The study had nothing to do with autism; it was to research a possible link with the vaccine (or maybe the non adjuvant aluminum salts contained in the vaccine)…the study was decidedly unclear about that…and genetic changes(or aluminum toxicity) triggering cases of Alzheimer and/or Parkinson diseases.

    Lara, aluminum as causative of these diseases was first theorized 60 years ago. Repeated scientific studies in the intervening years and post-mortem tissue pathology tests have never found any evidence of that theory.

    You seem to be overly concerned about genetic changes in Chinese mouse or human livers and as I stated in my prior post, thousands of studies using tens of thousands of histological specimens have never found genetic changes.

    Genetic changes (oncogenes) have been found in the livers of people who are unimmunized against Hepatitis B and who become chronic carriers of the virus. Chronic carriage of Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C are the cause of most cases of incurable primary liver carcinomas.

  306. #307 lara
    July 23, 2011

    http://www.ntpharma.com/en/page/page.aspx?id=1a777801f6c84a5390110eee8b86185b

    Pharma partners with China- GSK

    Our vaccine promotion product portfolio includes GSK Engerix-B® (Junior), a hepatitis B vaccine for children; GSK Twinrix®, the only imported hepatitis A and B vaccine for adults in China; Sanofi-Pasteur Meningo A+C, the only imported 2-valent meningococcal vaccine in China; and CNBG Huiyikang, the only domestically manufactured 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine.

  307. #308 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Of course in science blog fashion “i have to be right and I have to get the last word in” she’ll say SOMETHING worthless or someone like her doctro the bimler will speak for her because he can’t let it go either.

    That’s right Cancer Doktor: crickets.

  308. #309 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Genetic changes (oncogenes) have been found in the livers of people who are unimmunized against Hepatitis B and who become chronic carriers of the virus. Chronic carriage of Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C are the cause of most cases of incurable primary liver carcinomas.

    3 day OLD Babies? Or did they “catch” the disease at 3 days old? Do you have the mean average, from this study you reference (yeh right you have the reference) of the age that these genetic aberrances first caught the Hep B virus and subsequent disease?

    Oh you dont’? WHy I’d be silly to ask such an evidentiary question wouldn’t I?

    Following, pharma shill Todd’s logic, how many of those caught Hep B. from “causual contacts” like daycare?

    Oh you don’t have that evidence either? I’m sorry. I thought I was on a evidence based medicine expert website.

    You better go to bet and come back with some evidence miss CDC nurse laday. I’ll be waiting for you factless or out of context post.

  309. #310 lara
    July 23, 2011

    lilady-
    Concerned about the Hep B vaccine for my cousins grandchild.

  310. #311 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Your risk of hepatitis B infection is increased if you:

    Have unprotected sex with more than one partner
    Is your cousins grand child at risk?

    http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/hepatitis-b/DS00398/DSECTION=risk-factors

    Have unprotected sex with someone who’s infected with HBV
    Have a sexually transmitted disease such as gonorrhea or chlamydia
    Are a man who has sexual contact with other men
    Share needles during intravenous (IV) drug use
    Share a household with someone who has a chronic HBV infection
    Have a job that exposes you to human blood
    Receive hemodialysis for end-stage kidney (renal) disease

  311. #312 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    Lara I hate to burst your bubble or disparage Chinese research or public health, but the Chinese government has been slow to acknowledge the problems of their huge population with chronic Hepatitis B, in spite of chronic Hepatitis B carriage in its citizens that exceeds 15 % of the population in many of the provinces. (Chronic carriage in the United States, Western Europe, Japan, New Zealand and Australia is 1-2 %)

    Many years after scientists researched and reported that Hepatitis B is a blood-borne, blood-transmitted disease, the Chinese had a wide spread “cottage industry” of blood component donations that was permitted to exist under the auspices of their government. Villagers underwent apheresis to draw off platelets, plasma and WBCs and the remainder of the blood from hundreds of donors in hundreds of villages was placed in a common vat. Consequently, when the pooled blood minus the components was re-infused through the donor’s vein each recipient got infected by the few chronic hepatitis B carriers.

    Furthermore, when the Western world began testing all pregnant women for the Hepatitis B surface antigen about twenty five years ago and providing prophylaxis to the at risk newborn, China did not even test women, did not provide prophylaxis and millions of Chinese newborns ended up infected…for the rest of their lives.

    China has finally adopted measures to test pregnant women and to provide prophylaxis treatment to newborns…yet thousands of women and their newborns fall through the cracks and the many of the young Chinese children who are adopted by Western families in the United States and elsewhere have lifelong Hepatitis B infection and the looming chance of fatal hepatic disease and liver carcinomas.

    Just because we live in societies with top not medical and public health, do not assume this is the case in developing countries…it is a fallacy.

  312. #313 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    Lara, I mean this in all sincerity; I believe you have some issues with your worry for your cousin’s grandchild. Now if you are uncomfortable about revealing the reasons for your worry about the youngster, feel free to ignore these questions.

    Are you worries about the child shared by your cousin or the child’s parents

    How old is the youngster and has he/she received any Hepatitis B vaccines of the three part series? If so, has the child had any serious reactions and what were those reactions?

    Just what are you concerns about the vaccine and are they justified?

    Have you read the Hepatitis B VIS (available on the internet)

    Will you read the Pink Book Hepatitis B chapter for some history of the natural disease and the development of vaccines to protect children and adults from acquiring the disease?

    I would like to help you gain more knowledge about hepatitis B, once you have done some research on your own.

    Again, feel free to ignore this posting if you find it intrusive, as it is a sincere desire on my part to educate you about the disease process and the science behind immunizing against the disease.

  313. #314 Krebiozen
    July 23, 2011

    It might be worth mentioning that the mice in the study Lara cited were injected with one or two full human doses of the vaccine. Since the mice weighed between 17 and 20 grams, and a newborn human baby weighs something like 3000 grams, the mice were injected with 150-300 times the dose per kilogram a baby would be given.

    Also, as far as I know, none of the hepatitis B vaccines used in the US are made from hamster ovary cells. They are all made from baker’s yeast.

  314. #315 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    @ Krebiozen: Thanks for the correction…yes indeed any human size dose given to a small test animal will certainly impact the results.

    The design and the administration of large doses of vaccines or medicines reminds me of the testing done on labs animals to test for MLD (mean lethal dose)in humans.

  315. #316 Composer99
    July 23, 2011

    I’m sure I’ve posted this link as a characterization of the ugh troll many times before, but I find it to be a suitable way of expressing what he seems to be up to here.

    He has no serious purpose on this thread, no useful perspective to offer on science & medicine, no understanding of logic, statistics, or risk evaluation, no appreciable critical thinking skills.

    He just feeds on everyone else’s irritation & contempt.

  316. #317 Kathleen Seidel
    July 23, 2011

    “How funny, after you say I have no clue about science and publication, you then link to the website of an unemployed librarian as your sole reference.”

    LOL, I missed this diss because I’ve been too busy working, and consequently sparing myself Jake Crosby’s jejune, ideologically hidebound fulminations.

    When Jake first showed up on Age of Autism back in 2008, I felt some sympathy for him; I saw him as a bright, eager kid, so clearly being manipulated and groomed by his elders to serve as the autistic mouthpiece of the autism=poisoning crusade. Since that time, he’s morphed from a naive tool to just another arrogant young extremist, convinced he’s got the whole world figured out, when his only special insight pertains to his own rectal interior.

    Science Mom, thanks for sticking up for me.

  317. #318 Mu
    July 23, 2011

    Well, at least we know that little Augie has never attended a birth, otherwise he’d understand why “exposure to human blood” would be in indication for immediate vaccination of the newborn.

  318. #319 Gray Falcon
    July 23, 2011

    I know this is a bit late, but after dealing with augustine for a while, I know the only thing I can say to him is this: If you’re not going to engage us as an adult, please leave. If he wants to act like a small, petulant child, then treat him like one.

  319. #320 Krebiozen
    July 23, 2011

    Augustine,

    The subtext of your comments appears to be that only bad people get hepatitis B, and that bad people don’t deserve to be protected. You seem to assume that only gay men, IV drug users and health-care workers are at serious risk from hepatitis B, and I assume, from some of your comments, that you believe these are bad people.

    Leaving aside my distaste at your moral stance, I think you are wrong in your assumptions. There are more than a million people with chronic hepatitis B in the USA. About a third of these don’t know how they contracted the disease. Maybe they contracted it through saliva or other casual contact, we don’t know for sure.

    We do know that transmission of hepatitis B without having unprotected sex, injecting IV drugs or being born to a mother with hepatitis B is possible as the article Lilady linked to, which included more than 500 documented cases of ‘unusual transmission’ of hepatitis B, makes clear. ‘Unusual transmission’ of hepatitis B may be less unusual than we think, and in any case, being told that you have hepatitis B but that the way you contracted it (perhaps by accidentally using your room-mate’s toothbrush, by getting a tattoo or through acupuncture) is very unusual would not be a great consolation. I don’t see why we need to know precisely how often such transmission occurs before applying the precautionary principle and recommending vaccination for all.

    Recent studies suggest that hepatitis B vaccine is likely to offer lifelong protection from the virus and that it is remarkably safe. It seems to me that giving a person lifelong protection at birth from a disease that they could easily contract by accident is a good thing. No one has a baby expecting them to grow up to be an IV drug user, or to have promiscuous unprotected sex when they are older, but many people do engage in those activities as adults. The more people who are vaccinated, the fewer will end up with a chronic illness that can result in liver cancer or death and makes them a reservoir of viruses that can infect others. Hepatitis B has no animal reservoir and could be eradicated globally like smallpox was, which I think would be a very good thing.

    By the way, I am assuming you are in favor of vaccination at birth of the babies of mothers who are infected with hepatitis B. Surely even the most rabid antivaxxer would not object to that (though it wouldn’t hugely surprise me if someone proved me wrong). Why do they deserve to be protected from infection, but other babies don’t?

  320. #321 Denice Walter
    July 23, 2011

    @ Jake Crosby:

    I’m so sorry to take long in responding.

    I do despair for you! You don’t see the forest for the trees. I will address the latter first.

    No one taught us that “homicidal parents” caused autism: Bettelhiem’s “refridgerator mother” idea was presented as a *curiosity* only. Bimler comments on this.

    Orac has shown ( see search box above) how replications of AW’s work were done by adherents of his. Also Todd W.’s site.

    If Orac gets pharma money, it’s news to me. Perhaps also news to him. Why not ask him.( Didn’t you get in trouble about something like this?)

    The Murdochs rule the world? OK, but I doubt that that extends to Parliament.

    On to grander things:

    Science is a body of research findings that are continuously challenged and re-assessed, transforming endlessly, based on mathematics. Serious students learn the current consensus and its serious challenges and are tested.
    I specialised in psychology, as others may survey medicine or biology.

    When I spoke about my confidence re vaccines addressing my cousin’s worry, it was based *on my studies and knowledge of the consensus*- not anything else. AW’s work did not interfere one jot. Nor does it now.

    The commenters here, I believe, like me, came to their conclusions through study and experience. Special interests? Yes, getting down to the nitty gritty of truth eventually via research. Is money the only reason people advocate for what they believe is valuable? I could write a book about this topic *vis a vis* attribution research.

    Conspiracy is a cheap way to explain the workings of the world in comparison to our grander methodology above. It is more parsimonious to postulate a single cheat than thousands upon thousands of them: do the math. How likely would that be?

    If you use phrases like “tobacco science” you place yourself in the company of poseurs like Null and Adams who see a conspiracy behind every word and deed in the universe. They are proselytisers for a belief system about health upon which their own respective financial empires rest.I have heard them speak about psychology and it is not anything like what I studied- and btw, I doubt that either is a Galileo overturning the state of knowledge.

    My final question: look at your own views about vaccines and mine ( or Orac’s or the commenters in agreement with him)- ask your past and future professors about *their* own views. Do theirs resemble yours or ours more? Tally the numbers.

    I truly believe that you are mistaken : being an advocate for a set of beliefs entirely out of the mainstream of science, you are risking your future. I go out on a limb to tell you this because I care about students and would help one even if they disagree with me. Education and science are the important things- eventually truth will out.

  321. #322 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    So now I see why the vaccine industry has duped you rank and file science bloggers into thinking EVERYBODY needs a Hep B Vaccine.

    http://www.sgm.ac.uk/pubs/micro_today/pdf/050005.pdf

    Hepatitis B vaccines were initially targeted at specific at
    risk groups, including healthcare workers and business
    travellers, and were made either from antigen from the
    plasma of infected donors or from antigen expressed in
    genetically modified organisms, such as yeast. They were
    (and remain) expensive, but have now been incorporated
    into global vaccination programmes, including universal
    usage in most developed countries as the impact on
    incidence following targeted use was not great. The
    usage in developed countries can therefore subsidize that
    in developing countries, but only if valid and recognizable
    uses in wealthy markets exist.

    Some of you have been duped into vaccine ideology so deep that you actually believe some of this stuff the industry and Scientism Based Medicine Puts out.

    This vaccine is ALL about the MONEY. You guys are pawns. Babies and taxpayers are the victims.

  322. #323 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Vaccine Industry: We need your babies regardless of risk. We’re fighting a war out here.

    http://www.cdc.gov/MMWR/PREVIEW/MMWRHTML/00033405.htm

    In the United States, most infections occur among adults and adolescents (2,3). The recommended strategy for preventing these infections has been the selective vaccination of persons with identified risk factors (1,2). However, this strategy has not lowered the incidence of hepatitis B, primarily because vaccinating persons engaged in high-risk behaviors, life-styles, or occupations before they become infected generally has not been feasible.

    Vaccinating adolescents and adults is substantially more expensive because of the higher vaccine cost and the higher implementation costs of delivering vaccine to target populations. In the long term, universal infant vaccination would eliminate the need for vaccinating adolescents and high-risk adults.

    Hepatitis B vaccination is recommended for all infants, regardless of the HBsAg status of the mother.

    There is plenty of philosophical and scientific evidence to reject this vaccine. But keep pushing ideology over informed consent and the people.

    This same strategy is and will be used for the HPV vaccine. They’re going to go after all babies. But you scientism bloggers will have to make up some more facts to change your arguments to make it look like it’s for the good of ALL.

  323. #324 The Christian Cynic
    July 23, 2011

    augustine: You have read that bolded portion entirely wrong, inserting your own prejudice. The author (Minor) is saying that developing countries can’t afford the vaccine because it is expensive, and so providing the vaccine – which developing countries need, even if only for at-risk groups – at a cost people in developing countries can afford will actually cost vaccine manufacturers money. It’s only the universal coverage in developed countries that helps even out the costs for manufacturers (that’s the “subsidize” part). There’s nothing in that statement that could be reasonably construed to mean “Vaccine manufacturers are just scare-mongering to make more money” rather than “Universal coverage is useful for making an expensive vaccine available to places where it is needed.”

  324. #325 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Vaccine Industry: We need your babies regardless of risk. We’re fighting a war out here.(put’s back of hand to mouth) An economic war.

    I believe it was William Schaffner, a pharma shill out of Vanderbilt Univ.,(and don’t try to defend the label, he literally is a pharma shill) who pushed this governmental medical policy on the people.

  325. #326 Tom
    July 23, 2011

    So Jake,

    Do you believe your ASD is the result of a vaccine injury?

  326. #327 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Christian Cynic

    augustine: You have read that bolded portion entirely wrong, inserting your own prejudice. The author (Minor) is saying that developing countries can’t afford the vaccine because it is expensive, and so providing the vaccine –

    “Efforts to vaccinate persons in the major risk groups have had limited success. For example, programs directed at injecting drug users failed to motivate them to receive three doses of vaccine.”

    No I didn’t read it wrong. I said what it says. The strategy to vaccinate ONLY the at-risk targets didn’t work. They needed a new stategey. Target babies.

    The same strategy also failed with the flu vaccine. New stategy: target ALL babies and Baby Mommas.

    HPV a sexually transmitted virus: target babies.

    Vaccine XYZ for disease that mainly affects XYZ: Target: A-Z.

    Targets XYZ= no money. Targets A-Z = taxpayer treasuries= Billions of Dollars + no accounatability.

    Our children are bought for a price.

  327. #328 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Hey Todd maybe you will want to look at this and tell them they need to fund a campaign against saliva carriers. You can send them your 4 links as evidence and justification for billions of dollars in allocation. Scream that EVERYBODY is at risk. Especially the babies.

    Take your microscope and zero in on the non-risk population. Blow it up real big and start a PR campaign to take the risk out of context so as to distort it from objective reality. The CDC ought to give a few million for that. With the country in financial straights, you should be able to justify that wealth transfer to Pharma and their shills. The CDC’s vaccine industry partners would be very pleased.

    Oh wait, William Schaffner M.D. already beat you to it. Quick. Contact Merck and see if can get in on that HPV gravy train. Dang it. Too late, that ball is already moving. Hey, I heard malaria’s making a comeback.

    “Hepatitis B is effectively a sexually transmitted disease in developed countries, but is endemic in other parts of the world such as Africa, or particularly China.”

  328. #329 TBruce
    July 23, 2011

    Augie, you look really silly with that froth all over your mouth.

  329. #330 The Christian Cynic
    July 23, 2011

    Nice attempt at the bait and switch, Augie, but no go. For one, you switched sources, which doesn’t mean that your lack of reading comprehension is suddenly resolved; Minor still didn’t say what you claimed he was saying. Then there’s the fact that you very selectively quoted from the second link you provided:

    Efforts to vaccinate persons in the major risk groups have had limited success. For example, programs directed at injecting drug users failed to motivate them to receive three doses of vaccine (CDC, unpublished data). Health-care providers are often not aware of groups at high risk of HBV infection and frequently do not identify candidates for vaccination during routine health-care visits (CDC, unpublished data). In addition, there has been limited vaccination of susceptible household and sexual contacts of HBsAg carriers identified in screening programs for blood donors (23). Hepatitis B vaccination of health-care workers appears to have resulted in a substantial decrease in the rate of disease in this group, but has had little effect on overall rates of hepatitis B (2). Moreover, to achieve widespread vaccination of persons at occupational risk, regulations have had to be developed to ensure implementation of vaccination programs (24).

    In other words, it’s not just that they tried to get at-risk groups to vaccinate and they wouldn’t (and no reason is given, so we can’t really be sure why those programs didn’t work); there are a number of reasons why identifying those who definitely do need the vaccination is problematic. The easiest solution, then, since there is no evidence that the HepB vaccine is unsafe, is to vaccinate infants:

    In the United States it has become evident that HBV transmission cannot be prevented through vaccinating only the groups at high risk of infection. No current medical treatment will reliably eliminate chronic HBV infection and thus eliminate the source of new infections in susceptible persons (27). Therefore, new infections can be prevented only by immunizing susceptible persons with hepatitis B vaccine.

    There’s lots of other good stuff in that link, but none of it helps your case.

  330. #331 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    @ Tom: Have you read boy wonder cub reporter’s biography that he put on his website? It seems that boy wonder cub reporter was on a boatload of medications that indicate his original (and proper) diagnosis was ADD or ADHD…that is until ASD became the disorder de jour.

    Whenever the “flavor of the month” changes, boy wonder cub reporter will get himself re-diagnosed again…

  331. #332 lara
    July 23, 2011

    Hepatitis B Vaccination for Newborns

    Good Intentions, Bad Science, Worse Policy

    Hepatitis B is a viral disease associated with risky lifestyle choices such as intravenous drug use or promiscuous sex. This virus causes a dangerous and miserable infection that can have long-lasting debilitating effects on the liver, so taking steps to prevent Hepatitis B is a good idea for those at risk.

    For infants, Hepatitis B is an especially serious disease. If a pregnant mother carries this virus, it is certainly important to protect her baby from the disease.

    However, most normal infants are at low risk for this disease. Infant infections are typically found only in babies born to a Hepatitis B-positive mother, and tests can determine who carries or is infected with the virus. By screening the mothers, only those babies who are at risk would need to be vaccinated at birth.

    Perhaps any attempt at prevention would be a good bet if the vaccine were harmless, but it’s not. Today there are more reports of adverse reactions from the vaccine than there are reported cases of the disease in children. Data created by the government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in 1996 confirm 872 serious adverse events in children under 14 years of age who had been injected with Hepatitis B vaccine. These kids were either taken to an emergency room, had life-threatening health problems, were hospitalized, or were disabled following the vaccination. 214 had the Hepatitis B vaccine alone, and the rest received it in combination with other vaccines. 48 kids died after being injected with Hepatitis B vaccine in 1996, and 13 of them had received the Hepatitis B vaccine alone just before they died. In contrast, in 1996 only 279 cases of Hepatitis B disease were reported in children under age 14.

    The World Health Organization only recommends infant vaccination for Hepatitis B in areas where carrier prevalence is 2 percent or greater. This does not apply to the U.S., except for certain ethnic groups in Alaska. But current U.S. health policy is based on an exaggerated perception of the prevalence of Hepatitis B, and here vaccination is required for every newborn.

    An argument has been made that infants are easier and cheaper to vaccinate than adolescents. Does this mean we should vaccinate all infants in order to prepare them for the day when they might become promiscuous and/or intravenous-drug-using teenagers? Beyond this insulting presumption, lawmakers also presume that the vaccination will even last long enough to protect those kids during the supposedly risky teenage years.

    This amazing degree of non-science and arrogance is shaping the national health policy for our families. Policymakers based their 1991 infant Hepatitis B vaccination recommendations on the assumption that the vaccinations would last from infancy through adolescence. However, scientific information has not only failed to support that premise, it has often contradicted it.

    The story behind this policy is that the maker of Hepatitis B vaccine, Merck, makes almost $1 billion USD a year from this single product. One wonders how many lawmakers this amount of money could buy.

    The cost to our society of all the injuries and medical services generated by this vaccine is incalculable. It’s time to require scientific proof that these vaccines are safe, effective, and necessary before we naively permit state-enforced injection of an unproven medicine into our newborns.

    Further resources for vaccination information:

    http://www.vaccinationnews.com
    http://www.909shot.com
    http://www.redflagsweekly.com

    The letter below was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). It references several studies and reports that question the wisdom of the U.S. Hepatitis B policy.

    Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 286 No. 5, August 1, 2001

    To the Editor:

    In their article on the impact of recommendations regarding the birth dose of Hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccine, Dr. Daum and colleagues1 concluded that “special efforts may be required to make at-birth administration of HBV vaccination universal.” However, since HBV vaccination of newborns has never been shown to be better than vaccination after the maturation of the immune system, this worry about missing the birth dose seems misplaced.

    There is no scientific evidence to justify HBV vaccination before the age when those risk factors associated with the HBV transmission (sex, needles, etc.) become relevant. Recent risk-benefit analyses show HBV vaccination among children carries one of the largest unjustified risks and substantial financial costs, second only to the new controversial conjugate pneumococcal vaccine. Specifically, HBV immunization has been associated with 53 deaths and 828 serious injuries, but for 38 million children younger than age 10 years, the total yearly incidence of HBV infection is 191. For children younger than age 14 years, the estimated total mortality secondary to HBV disease is only 11. With such statistics, it is difficult to rationalize HBV vaccination for newborns.
    Erdem I. Cantekin, PhD
    Department of Otolaryngology
    University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
    Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh
    Pittsburgh, PA

  332. #333 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    @christian Cynic,

    I thinks it’s clear, to objective people, that this vaccine policy was driven by economic motivations, not by changes in disease incidence in the low risk population. Now the low risk population is the largest consumer and purchaser of this vaccine. THAT is the bait n switch.

    Same thing happening with the HPV vaccine and all this HPV “education”. It’s part of the microscope PR campaign. Blow it up. Distort it. Take it out of context. Cause confusion and doubt. Presto formula works. Pharma gets rich via deception fear mongering and government medical policy.

  333. #334 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    Okay Lara: Just disregard my prior posting and I rescind my offer to help you get some scientific information about Hepatitis B and the Hepatitis B Vaccine.

    You tipped your hand with your your two references (a)vaccinenews.com and (b)whale.to where I located Erdem I. Cantekin…who by the way has been removed from his position at the U.Penn School of Medicine…years ago before he ever latched on to his vaccine damages “theory”.

    You never had concerns for your cousin’s grandchild…merely a figment of your fertile imagination and a device to play us for fools.

    You played the game well Lara, but hereafter we will treat you as the anti-vax loonie you are.

  334. #335 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    “Trust your government on this one folks. It’s not a conspiracy. Listen to the experts. Just get your damn vaccines!” -Nancy Snyderman MD, pharma shill.

  335. #336 Lawrence
    July 23, 2011

    And yet you never respond to the fact that exceptions & excemptions are made on a daily basis – certainly there are people that either can’t or shouldn’t receive vaccines.

    And for all of your claims of fear-mongering, you never respond to the “THE VACCINES CAUSE THE AUTISM” fear campaigns of Generation Rescue & AoA.

  336. #337 Composer99
    July 23, 2011

    ugh troll:

    There is plenty of philosophical and scientific evidence to reject this vaccine. But keep pushing ideology over informed consent and the people.

    If so, you have manifestly failed to provide any.

  337. #338 dedicated lurker
    July 23, 2011

    so, St. Augustine, what is exactly the harm caused by the vaccine in this case? What makes it so bad that you need to avoid it at all costs?

  338. #339 augustine
    July 23, 2011

    Flute Boy

    If so, you have manifestly failed to provide any.

    If you weren’t so mired in mass vaccine ideology you could read what I just posted and then you would see the evidence. Let me rehash. Targeting at risk populations didn’t work. New try. Target every body and every baby to see if that works for the at risk populations. At risk populations and countries can’t afford the expensive vaccine so the non-risk taxpayers are needed to subsidize the campaign. None of what I just posted is science except for the vaccine failing to stem Hep B incidence with previous strategy. It economic driven and philosophically driven. And since there never was any science to support the mass vaccination of ALL developed country babies then YOU need to provide said science.

    Instead you’ve been left a fool trying to convince non-low risk people that they are at high or unknown fear mongering risk with dubious and specious claims. The vaccine industry loves you.

    It never was about the science. It was and is about the money.

  339. #340 The Christian Cynic
    July 23, 2011

    augustine:

    I thinks it’s clear, to objective people, that this vaccine policy was driven by economic motivations, not by changes in disease incidence in the low risk population.

    You thinks wrong. And I am always highly skeptical of any claim that should be “obvious” or “clear” to the “objective” person, especially when no actual evidence has been provided for the claim, only innuendo.

  340. #341 The Christian Cynic
    July 23, 2011

    If you weren’t so mired in mass anti-vaccine ideology you could read what I just posted (@330) and then you would see the evidence.

    FTFY, augie.

  341. #342 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    Augustine: We all understand your position completely, being that you are a well-respected member of your community, beloved by all for your charitable works, who is gainfully employed and pays his taxes and is concerned for all children…even little black and brown babies. You are so admired because you are a God-fearing Christian and cognizant of what the budget expenditures in the United States are, for people on the dole and for taxpayer-provided health care and its impact on the young folks that you so adore…what a guy!

    Please never change from your adorable self…and continue to post here to instruct us sinners on our civic duties, our responsibilities to others less fortunate and to humanity. We hold you in the highest esteem for your wonderful qualities, your Christian virtues, your astute cogent observations and analytical skills and we would be totally at loss without your kindnesses, guidance and rare qualities.

  342. #343 lara
    July 23, 2011

    lilady,
    My cousins grandson Gage now 8 months old is looking a little spacey-(hope I am wrong) . Thank you for your offer of help but I’m still not convinced the Hep B is necessary or entirely safe. I will now longer be posting on this page. Thank you for your update on China.

  343. #344 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    @ lara: Not only are you a troll, but you use deceit masterfully. Don’t let the door hit you on your troll posterior on the way out. Oh, and say hello to your imaginary child, as well.

  344. #345 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 23, 2011

    Lara, it’s considered bad form to paste huge chunks of text that you got from elsewhere, with no attribution. It can also backfire on you, because other people can Google and find out that your copypasta comes from the website of a ‘naturopathic physician’ who has no credentials in real medicine.

    He also is quite clearly a gullible conspiracy theorist, since elsewhere on his website, he reports with no questioning the claims that “during the Vietnam War, soldiers were injected with the Rambo chip, designed to increase adrenaline flow into the bloodstream”, that implanted microchips can transmit back to a base what the implantee sees and hears, that “zombified individuals can … be programmed to murder and remember nothing of their crime afterward … examples of this phenomenon can be found in the U.S.” and even that the description of paranoid schizophrenia in the DSM-IV was specifically tampered with by “psychiatrists working for U.S. intelligence agencies” to cover up the symptoms of microchip implantees. (I’d love to ask the author of the piece, or “NaturoDoc” who posted the raving on his website along with advertisements for “related products” “CV Complex, Livit-2, Mercury Detox, Modifilan, Phosphatidyl Serine Complex”, whether James Tilly Matthews was just suffering from a disease completely unrelated to paranoid schizophrenia, which just happens to mimic the description of paranoid schizophrenia devised by intelligence agencies centuries later, or whether he was implanted with a microchip in the 18th century.)

    If “NaturoDoc” doesn’t have the expertise or the decency to recognize and refuse schizophrenic ravings such as that microchip rant, we have no reason to think that any of the things he has to say about vaccines have any more logic or accuracy.

  345. #346 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    lara, you seem to be using questionable sites. The 909shot site is from Barbara Loe Fisher’s NVIC, which has a reputation for cherry picking. Something we saw with your cite of mice being overdosed with vaccine. the other two are notorious vaccine mis-information sources.

    If you wish real answers, then contact the Parents of Kids with Infectious Diseases. They are a group started when their kids ended up with hepatitis B. For a more realistic look at the situation read their report here:
    http://www.pkids.org/diseases/hepatitis/pediatric_hepatitis_report.html

  346. #347 lara
    July 23, 2011

    lilady’-I’m sorry that many people have deceived you in your life and that you have become venonous and so ego-attached to certain issues. I am certainly not anti-vax but I am overly cautious and questioning. I do not tell any of my friends or relatives to not vax or vax- that is entirely their decision. I feel I have no right. My grandchildren are fully vaxed-that is their parents decision. Granddaughter had mild vaccine reaction after the flu and Dtap were given on the same day. BTW their names- Arielle and Talia.
    I have an ongoing debate every year with my significant other about the flu vaccine. He is absolutely pro-vax and this year I decided not to get it- (have for the past ten years or so) contained H1N1 and mercury. Of course I will get vaxed if I travel to foreign lands I’m not stupid nor a liar.

  347. #348 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    Young Master Crosby, you should never sit in your room after midnight drinking and commenting on the internet. You’ll turn into another Little Augie.

  348. #349 TBruce
    July 23, 2011

    Lara is also referencing defunct sites (www.redflagsweekly.com). IIRC, this was the website of Nicholas Regush, an HIV denialist who never saw or imagined a “medical conspiracy” that he didn’t like. He became infamous for losing the largest defamation award against the news media ever in Canada.

  349. #350 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    lara:

    Of course I will get vaxed if I travel to foreign lands I’m not stupid nor a liar.

    Do you ever go where folks who have flown in from foreign lands can be found? Like anywhere near your local grocery store or shopping mall? You should really check out http://www.pkids.org/about.html. Now what is it about their location and that of Asia (where hepatitis B is endemic) that you notice?

  350. #351 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    Wait, TBruce, that is gone? Please, lara, give an explanation of why you are using sites that no longer exist? How recent is your information?

  351. #352 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 23, 2011

    The reason she’s referencing sites that no longer exist is that she’s copy-pasting without attribution from websites. I have a comment in moderation (due to the number of links) that points to the original site and another credulous page on the same site which claims that soldiers were implanted during the Vietnam War with a “Rambo chip” that increased adrenalin, that the DSM-IV description of paranoid schizophrenia was tailored by psychiatrists working for intelligence agencies to cover the symptoms of microchip implantation, and other such fol-de-rol.

  352. #353 Chris
    July 23, 2011

    I did a bit of googling, and saw that Ragush died in 2004. She really needs to check her sources more carefully.

  353. #354 lilady
    July 23, 2011

    Lara: I thought you were leaving? Came back for character-assasination, eh.

    I really believed you although I suspected you had some “unusual” concerns and you lead us on with your “concerns” about Hepatitis B. Out of the goodness of my heart and my (misplaced) belief in your state of “confusion” I took the time to to read your (cherry-picked) articles and citations…I confess I missed the red flags you were throwing back at us.

    If you score points through deceit and deception and you get your jollies with that behavior, good for you because genuinely honest people find those behaviors despicable and and abominable.

    You said “Thank you for your offer of help but I’m still not convinced the Hep B is necessary or entirely safe. I will now longer be posting on this page. Thank you for your update on China”. Can we can we take you at your word now (“I will now (sic) longer be posting on this page”?)

    Thank you Lara for teaching me a lesson about deceitfulness.

  354. #355 AOA - the real tobacco scientists
    July 23, 2011

    “Because Dr. Healy used to be part of Steven Milloy’s group, which includes Michael Fumento on its advisory board? Milloy and Fumento are on your side of this issue. ”

    So JB is lying every time he claims that Healy is on his side? I dare you to tell him that…

  355. #356 Dedj
    July 23, 2011

    “Which is exactly what Deer accused Dr. Wakefield of doing with the pathology records.”

    False, Deer accused Wakefield of misrepresenting – not of altering them.

    You have been asked to demonstrate where Deer has made the exact claim you state he has. You have yet again failed to perform even the most basic task required to have a case.

    “Deer accused Dr. Wakefield of changing the test results from the routine pathologist even though it was part of a process that had nothing to do with Dr. Wakefield”

    Except that we do know that Wakefield sat in on many of the MDT meetings in which pathology results were interpreted and discussed, that he sat in and was part of the meetings to discuss and apply the senior pathologists proforma, and that Wakefield was the main authour in reporting the findings in the initial paper.

    His involvement in interpreting and representing the test records is mentioned explicitly at multiple times by a number of people throughout many stages of the GMC hearing. It is totally false to assert that he ‘had no part’.

    Wakefield may not have had input into the test results. But that is not what he was accused of. The accusations concern his usage and representation of the test results and the MDT meetings.

    You have yet to bother your arse to make even the most minimal of effort to demonstrate otherwise.

    Get to it you lazy git.

  356. #357 Dedj
    July 23, 2011

    “”Milloy and Fumento are on your side of this issue. ”

    Indeed, but:

    there aren’t that many people (on ‘this’ side) who know who they are.
    would care who they are if they did,
    would know what views they have on vaccinations and autism,
    would follow those views because of the standing of those people.

    Compare this to the ‘pro-safe-vaxx’ following of Dr Healy where:

    few knew who she was until she said things that could be used for their own ends,
    few would have regarded her as anything less than a pharma-shill if she had come up with a pro-vaxx arguement,
    her previous employment nearly two decades ago is repeatedly used as a validation of her arguement,
    few use any other source but her when arguing about vulnerable sub-groups,
    the arguement about vulnerable sub-groups was a fringe arguement in the pro-safe-vaxx ‘side’ until an ‘important’ figure made it. The ‘mass’ damage of ‘previously normal’ children arguement was far more popular, and still is to some extent.

    Face it, Milloy and Fuemento could disappear from existance tommorrow and it wouldn’t make a bean of difference. If Healy had never popped up her head then a major strand of argumentation from ‘your’ side simply wouldn’t exist in any recognisable form or in any serious numbers, unlike today.

    Healy is followed by ‘your’ side precisely because she has the background to make her seem credible, so ‘your’ side has latched onto her. Thats a world of a difference from simply having two people agree with the same things ‘we’ do.

  357. #358 Dedj
    July 23, 2011

    “Face it, Milloy and Fuemento could disappear from existance tommorrow and it wouldn’t make a bean of difference”

    Should read:

    “Face it, Milloy and Fuemento could disappear from existance tommorrow and it wouldn’t make a bean of difference to the pro-vaccine arguement”

    Milloy and Fuemento are obviously well regarded and important in their own right. This would be why Jake attempts to use them as ammo for his own purposes of (yet again) dodging the arguement concerning Healy.

  358. #359 Composer99
    July 24, 2011

    It never was about the science. It was and is about the money.

    Still waiting for your evidence on that count, ugh troll.

  359. #360 Venna
    July 24, 2011

    @aug #282

    LOL! That’s all I can say to that!

    Well, ok, not really. My son was NOT vaccinated until after he presented with autistic like symptoms and had begun Early Intervention with significant developmental delay. They did not begin the diagnostic process until he was three years old, which is standard for everyone in their program, just in case. In order for him to take place in their program, because it is operated through the public school system, he had to be fully vaccinated, so he was, and continues to be and I never had a problem with having him vaccinated other then a financial one.

    He did have regression, but about 20 – 40% of children with autism experience regression so he was not out of the ordinary in that regard. His official diagnosis, if you must know, is Autistic Disorder, Global Developmental Delay, Sensory Integration Disorder, Receptive and Expressive Language Disorder, Echolalia and behavioral issues and other issues they suspect but didn’t evaluate him for at the time.

    I was not home schooled and THANK GOD for that because my dad would have beat us all silly as he never had the patience to deal with us, and my mom would have tried to guilt trip us into teaching each other because she never did anything on her own (including her own school work).

    I had to re-learn a lot of things once I was on my own because I found many things my parents believed and conditioned me to believe (have you ever been brain washed? I have) were not only not true but down right dangerous to believe and practice. You may take issue with me all you like, you don’t effect how I live and what I know one bit and I still feel sorry for you.

  360. #361 Jake Crosby
    July 24, 2011

    Kathleen Seidel,

    You concocted a conspiracy theory. You’ve in effect done exactly what I am being accused of doing by your own compatriots right now – alleging a conspiracy exists amidst some people you disagree with that doesn’t.

    Speaking of which, this autism=poisoning “crusade” you say I’m a mouthpiece of has certainly gotten awfully bigger over the last three years – former CDC director Julie Gerberding, former NIH director Bernadine Healy, NIH director Francis Collins, IACC chairman Thomas Insel, Columbia sociologist Peter Bearman who has ironically become something of a darling to your “neurodiversty” movement – heck, even your own friend Paul Offit has agreed that vaccines cause autism spectrum disorders!
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/05/paul-offit-agrees-that-vaccines-cause-autistic-spectrum-conditions.html

    What are you gonna do when the entire medical community – including everyone you’ve sided with – finally agrees that the autism epidemic is real? Are you going to concoct the same conspiracy theories you accuse “extremists” like myself of concocting?

    Denice,

    I don’t know whether to pity you, or be disgusted by you when you say the following:

    “No one taught us that “homicidal parents” caused autism: Bettelhiem’s “refridgerator mother” idea was presented as a *curiosity* only.”

    Kanner coined the term “refridgerator mothers” FYI. Bettelheim popularized it and took it further by saying the mothers wanted to kill their kids, who developed autism as a result of fearing for their lives. He likened them to SS guards in Nazi concentration camps. He and his cronies often took the children away while driving the parents to commit suicide. Bettelheim said and did all this and for you to claim otherwise not only shows total ignorance on your part – after lecturing me about how you came to your conclusions because of your meticulous research no less – but is also an insensitive and cruel trivialization of what had been a very bad period in history for the autism community.

    “Orac has shown ( see search box above) how replications of AW’s work were done by adherents of his.”

    No, it was independently replicated throughout the world.

    “Why not ask him.”

    Because he said so himself.

    “The Murdochs rule the world?”

    Um, no.

    “…it was based *on my studies and knowledge of the consensus*- not anything else.”

    And if your *studies and knowledge of the consensus* regarding vaccines is anything like your *studies and knowledge of the consensus* regarding Bruno Bettelheim, then I’d say you have an awful lot of restudying and relearning to do.

    “Conspiracy is a cheap way to explain the workings of the world in comparison to our grander methodology above. It is more parsimonious to postulate a single cheat than thousands upon thousands of them: do the math. How likely would that be?”

    You seem to be historically illiterate of the way conspiracies have worked. They don’t work anything like the way you say they do; they typically involve a small group of people in high positions of authority who become corrupted, which in turn affects the organizations they run. It does not mean that everyone in such organizations are all culpable and keeping a secret. But tragically, many such people often go along with what happens and not do anything about it. That’s why it took so long for the phone hacking scandal to become public knowledge, for example, even though it happened years ago.

    In relation to Brian Deer, he was assigned to “find something big” on MMR by Paul Nuki, whose father George Nuki served on the Committee on Safety of Medicines in the eighties when it was considering to approve the MMR vaccine, banned for causing meningitis. Sitting alongside Nuki was David Hull, who as chair of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, started the attacking the ethics of Wakefield’s work in 1998. Such accusations of ethical violations would be exactly what Deer would accuse Wakefield of in 2004. Deer is now facing a police investigation for acquiring children’s personal medical records.

    “If you use phrases like “tobacco science” you place yourself in the company of poseurs like Null and Adams who see a conspiracy behind every word and deed in the universe.”

    You are really not addressing my arguments.

    I’ve never said these studies are bad because they are part of some conspiracy. I’ve said they are bad because they are in fact bad science cranked out by conflicted researchers.

    That said, there are instances where such researchers have found positive correlations and associations but only reported negative correlations and associations instead. There are those who knew their study designs were junk but went ahead with them anyway. There are also those who said they’ll never say autism is a true side effect of vaccines. There are also those who said that vaccine research should not have been done at all. What do you make of all of this?

    “Do theirs resemble yours or ours more? Tally the numbers.”

    Science is not what the majority of people think or the majority of professors. It is a self-correcting process shaped by the scientific contributions of individuals.

    “being an advocate for a set of beliefs entirely out of the mainstream of science, you are risking your future.”

    Then risk it I shall, because what you call “the mainstream of science” I call tobacco science for reasons previously stated.

    “You have been asked to demonstrate where Deer has made the exact claim you state he has. You have yet again failed to perform even the most basic task required to have a case.”

    You love to argue semantics, it’s much easier than arguing real points after all.

    “It is totally false to assert that he ‘had no part’.”

    That’s what was testified by the senior author of the Lancet paper.

    “You have yet to bother your arse to make even the most minimal of effort to demonstrate otherwise.”

    Unlike you, I provided a specific quote.

    “Get to it you lazy git.” – speak for yourself.

    “Face it, Milloy and Fuemento could disappear from existance tommorrow and it wouldn’t make a bean of difference”

    Obviously not, otherwise Paul Offit wouldn’t have generously cited them both in his book about autism the same year Healy spoke up.

  361. #362 lilady
    July 24, 2011

    @ Venna: Pay you know who, who has no life, no mind. He loves to stick the needle into your soft underbelly…his christian values at work here. And, he loves to throw up information that you have provided, his specialty being our disabled children. He’s done it to me and a number of others similarly situated and he’s done it to posters on the autism spectrum.

    Brava to you…I read some of your postings that got through “moderation” at Age of Autism as well as the snide remarks from Stagliano, Stone and others…thank goodness they are not working for a group that is supposed to be supportive and helpful.

  362. #363 lilady
    July 24, 2011

    There are so many threads wrapped up now…which are tied into tenuous Big Pharma conspiracy theories, “safe vaccines” (anti-vaxers latest schtick) and of course the indefensible defense of heroes such as Wakefield and the Geiers.

    Another theme is the cost to immunize infants against hepatitis B so that they don’t get infected perinatally and in turn infect their own infants perinatally. Some posters here think that it is not a worthy cause…too expensive. Such narrow minded thinking is unacceptable and based on Xenophobia. The bible even states “we are our brother’s keeper” and people who have a moral compass care about the health of infants and adults worldwide.

    Using old position papers about the cost of vaccine is their justification…when newer research tells us that world leaders including some of our ex-Presidents (Carter and Clinton) have been very much involved to lower the cost of life saving vaccines and medications to prevent or treat such diseases as Guinea Worm, HIV, Tuberculosis and Malaria…to name just a few.

    Here, just for you Composer99 (for your diligence in trying to get straight answers from the Troll) is the latest WHO position paper on Hepatitis B immunization worldwide…such diligence for “the cause” is appreciated:

    WHO Hepatitis B Position Paper October 9, 2010

    There are Position Papers for every other disease that the WHO is coordinating efforts to ameliorate or eradicate worldwide.

    Also Composer, WHO has weekly reports quite similar in format to the MMWR, available on the internet that describe the activities of the WHO:

    WHO Weekly Epidemiology Record

    There is another (monthly) journal available on the internet that you may find of interest, that details efforts to eradicate, contain and treat diseases worldwide:

    CDC Emerging Infectious Diseases Journal

    Now Composer stop beating your head against the wall to elicit any responses from the Troll.

  363. #364 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 24, 2011

    even your own friend Paul Offit has agreed that vaccines cause autism spectrum disorders!
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/05/paul-offit-agrees-that-vaccines-cause-autistic-spectrum-conditions.html

    Jake, you need to start thinking for yourself, and not just repeating John Stone’s idiocies without critical examination.

    What Stone said in the linked article amounts to this:

    “1. I believe that if a child has any of the symptoms that lead to a diagnosis of an ASD, it means they have an ASD.
    “2. Paul Offit says that measles encephalopathy can cause some of the symptoms that lead to diagnosis of an ASD.
    “3. Therefore, Paul Offit believes that measles encephalopathy* can cause ASDs.”

    (* I’m skipping over the fact that John Stone uses “vaccine” and “measles encephalopathy” interchangeably even though measles encephalopathy is usually the result of measles, not measles vaccine.)

    The problem is that Stone is trying to put together one thing that Paul Offit believes, and one thing that he believes even though Paul Offit doesn’t and combine the two to try and claim “this is what Paul Offit believes and has admitted.” John Stone even admits that the premise on which his whole “Paul Offit admits” conclusion depends is something which Paul Offit doesn’t believe, although he phrases it as “Offit … does not seem to understand.” Stone does not seem to understand that he can’t announce “Paul Offit supports this conclusion” when the conclusion is based on exactly the premise Offit refuted.

    It’s John Stone who does not seem to understand how ASDs are diagnosed. There are many symptoms indicative of ASDs, but merely having a symptom or even two does not automatically translate into an ASD diagnosis. Stone calls it “a distinction without a difference”, I call it “something where John Stone didn’t understand what was being said, and if he had, would have refused to understand it because he liked the implications of his misunderstanding better.”

    Of course, since you’re widely known for the same thing, I’m having trouble finding an analogy clear enough that even you can’t wishfully (or willfully) misunderstand it. Let’s try this one:

    Paul Offit says “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck. But that doesn’t mean that anything that meets any of those criteria is a duck. Decoys, for example, look like ducks, but that doesn’t make them ducks.”

    John Stone comes along, and out of all that Offit said, he takes only the half-sentence “Decoys … look like ducks,” and he trumpets “Did you hear that?! Did you hear that?! Paul Offit admits that decoys are ducks! He came right out and said that decoys look like ducks, and even if he doesn’t understand that looking like a duck means you’re a duck, we know that’s true, so Paul Offit just admitted that decoys are ducks!!”

    It should be clear even to you that what John Stone did was unjust, both to Offit whom he lied about, and to the audience he told the lies to. Are you going to repudiate that lie, Jake? Or are you going to continue telling the lie because it’s so much more convenient for your cause than the truth?

  364. #365 Denice Walter
    July 24, 2011

    Again, Jake avoids the Big Picture and focuses on Bettelheim who, by the time I was in grad school,was considered a minor figure promoting an unlikely theory.
    He then evaluates my knowledge and education- in a field he never studied in depth even as an undergrad- and calls me insensitive.
    OK, he’s 22 or so.It comes with the territory.

    …Oh Jake, I was not presenting you with a scientific argument- others have already done that and it didn’t work very well-I was merely trying to get you to question your own involvement in the anti-vax movement and your own sources of information. I believe that if you do ask your profs, you’ll see how out of synch your ideas are: this is of *personal* not scientific relevance. I was attempting to pull you out of an intellectual backwater into the freer flowing currents of scientific consensus….

    You know what they say: “No good deed goes unpunished”. So I wash my hands of him.

    The ideas promulgated at Age of Autism, by AW, or on other alt med sites ( re vaccines) are very far out of the mainstream. They stand or fall by tortured logic, intimations of skulduggery on a massive scale,
    and conspiracy theory. I have heard so many alt med “Galileo”s
    proclaim “Scientific Revolution” or “Paradigm Shift” it sounds like a near-weekly event. I sincerely doubt the reality of these self-evaluations. Not very likely.

    Perhaps my fellow and sister commenters amd I will be the subject of a post by Jake. Possible titles anyone? I suppose it’ll include “evil minions” or suchlike… To help out, I volunteer some real life information on me you might find interesting: I leave off my second last name on the internet; I have never received a cheque from Mr Murdoch ( as of today); the reason I use phrases like “how likely is that” is because probability is my first approach to issues; I have never met Orac… in person; I have worked in advertising; I have lovely blonde hair and gorgeous blue eyes; I play tennis with rich people. I monitor NYSE and FTSE on weekdays.

  365. #366 Ashtanga London
    July 24, 2011

    There’s nothing wrong with a bit of Autism, one of my students is on the spectrum. It’s not as bad as an infectious disease!

    I do wonder if the Yoga is helping him? He doesn’t seem half as ‘quirky’ as he was when he started but who knows what else has happened to him during that time?

    Hey how much would it cost to get a 6 month study done, 20 people with higher functioning autism or aspergers doing yoga 5 or 6 times a week to see how it turns out? How much does all that testing and interpretation stuff cost?

  366. #367 Jake Crosby
    July 24, 2011

    @Antaeus:

    Whether Paul Offit said measles encephalopathy as a result of vaccines, or as an example of something that can cause autism spectrum disorders like vaccines, he clearly acknowledged that vaccines can cause autism spectrum disorders.

    Since ASDs are defined solely by symptoms, something that causes symptoms which fall within the autism spectrum – by definition – causes autism spectrum disorders.

    Denice,

    Arguing with you is becoming a waste of time. Perhaps you ought to read Bruno Bettelheim’s 1990 New York Times obituary and see just what a “minor figure” he became. It was only weeks after the time of his death that the public started getting an accurate picture of who Bettelheim was and what he did.

    “in a field he never studied in depth even as an undergrad”

    How do you know? You followed me around during college?

    “I was not presenting you with a scientific argument- others have already done that and it didn’t work very well”

    Because they’re arguments didn’t work very well.

    “in the anti-vax movement and your own sources of information.”

    I’m in no such mythical movement, invented by the vaccine industry.

    “I believe that if you do ask your profs…”

    You know, there was faculty in attendance at Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s lecture at Brandeis, along with students and staff.

    “I was attempting to pull you out of an intellectual backwater into the freer flowing currents of scientific consensus….”

    …actually a scientific con posing as one.

    “…are very far out of the mainstream.”

    No, very far out of the corporate fringe, actually.

    “Perhaps my fellow and sister commenters amd I will be the subject of a post by Jake”

    Who are you speaking to?

    “I have never received a cheque from Mr Murdoch”

    Um, I never said you did.

    “in person; I have worked in advertising”

    Didn’t you just say you were a shrink?

    “I have lovely blonde hair and gorgeous blue eyes; I play tennis with rich people.”

    Are you feeling alright?

    “I monitor NYSE and FTSE on weekdays.”

    Bye Denice.

  367. #368 Krebiozen
    July 24, 2011

    Jake Crosby,

    Speaking of which, this autism=poisoning “crusade” you say I’m a mouthpiece of has certainly gotten awfully bigger over the last three years – former CDC director Julie Gerberding, former NIH director Bernadine Healy, NIH director Francis Collins, IACC chairman Thomas Insel, Columbia sociologist Peter Bearman who has ironically become something of a darling to your “neurodiversty” movement – heck, even your own friend Paul Offit has agreed that vaccines cause autism spectrum disorders!

    None of these people, with the possible exception of Bernadine Healy, could in any reasonable way be described as a part of your “autism=poisoning crusade”.

    For those who don’t know, Julie Gerberding is the president of Merck’s Vaccine division, and has said that children with a rare mitochondrial disorder a fever can trigger encephalopathy which shares some symptoms with autism, and that fever sometimes occurs after vaccination. In children with this rare mitochondrial disorder, a vaccine-preventable disease is far more likely to trigger encephalopathy than a vaccine. To claim that this adds Gerderding to the ranks of the anti-vaccine crusaders is laughable.

    What about Bernadine Healy, who has written, “vaccines are eminently safe”? To be fair she has also apparently supported some of the most idiotic nonsense about vaccines and autism I have ever read. Orac has written about her more than once, and I don’t need to add to that.

    Francis Collins? You mean because he wrote that autism, among other childhood diseases, “must be due to changes in the environment, including diet and physical activity, which may produce disease in genetically predisposed persons”? That’s hardly a ringing endorsement of the “autism=poisoning” crusade.

    Thomas Insel who has stated: “There is no evidence at this time of any association with the number of vaccines, the kinds of vaccines and …autism.”? I don’t think so.

    Or Peter Bearman who says, “he believes social influences are the leading cause for the high autism rates in Los Angeles, although the researchers continue to examine environmental issues”? Nope.

    As for Paul Offitt, that’s just silly as Antaeus Feldspar has explained.

    If that’s the best you can do Jake, your “movement” is in even bigger trouble than I thought!

  368. #369 Composer99
    July 24, 2011

    Jake, may I suggest that you start using blockquote html tags when quoting other people when you appear on Respectul Insolence?

    It really, really makes things much easier following along what you are trying to say. Communication being a two-way street an all that. I am sure you are not obliged to increase the clarity of your posts. Nevertheless I am sure it would be appreciated by both those in agreement and those in disagreement with your positions.

    —————
    lilady, I will try to heed your advice, and thank you for pointing me to the WHO for information.

  369. #370 Denice Walter
    July 24, 2011

    @ Krebiozen: I *do* bring out the best and worst in people. It’s part of my charm. People reveal themselves- and their abilities- to the skilled interviewer. I rest my case.

  370. #371 Julian Frost
    July 24, 2011

    Jake,
    You know you said that Andrew Wakefield’s results were replicated? Well, I’m sorry to tell you this (not really) but Wakefield was lying. He claimed that various people had replicated his results and listed five studies. Unfortunately for him, Sullivan from Left Brain Right Brain had a look at those studies.
    Not one of them replicated Wakefield’s results. In fact, as I recall, one of them contradicted Wakefield.
    Here’s some friendly advice from a fellow spectrumite. Stop spouting anti-vaxx falsities. You just look silly when people check them out and find that they are lies.

  371. #372 Chris
    July 24, 2011

    Julian, a few of us went through the list that is often posted as studies that independently replicated Wakefield’s findings. Here is another posting on how that is a false statement: Still no independent confirmation of Wakefield’s claims.

  372. #373 Jake Crosby
    July 24, 2011

    “For those who don’t know, Julie Gerberding is the president of Merck’s Vaccine division, and has said that children with a rare mitochondrial disorder a fever can trigger encephalopathy which shares some symptoms with autism, and that fever sometimes occurs after vaccination.”

    She was referring to the case of Hannah Poling – a girl diagnosed with classic autism.

    “children with this rare mitochondrial disorder”

    And yet, mitochondrial disorders were found in 8 out of 10 children with autism in a recent study.

    “a vaccine-preventable disease is far more likely to trigger encephalopathy than a vaccine.”

    Maybe, maybe not.

    “To claim that this adds Gerderding to the ranks of the anti-vaccine crusaders is laughable.”

    Why, of course not. Gerberding never advocated banning all vaccines.

    “Orac has written about her more than once, and I don’t need to add to that.”

    Because a nameless, pharma-funded blogger is far more credible than a past director of the National Institutes of Health.

    “That’s hardly a ringing endorsement of the “autism=poisoning” crusade.”

    Except that admitting autism is environmentally-caused does not really leave room for much else.

    Thomas Insel stated the burden of proof was on people who claim the autism increase is artificial.

    Peter Bearman told me the increase in autism is real when he visited my university earlier this year and can only be partially explained by “social factors” – the latter claim I refuted here:
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/07/peter-bearman-given-millions-for-his-opinions.html

    “As for Paul Offitt, that’s just silly as Antaeus Feldspar has explained.”

    No, Antaeus Feldspar’s “explanation” is just silly, as I have responded.

    “If that’s the best you can do Jake, your “movement” is in even bigger trouble than I thought!”

    Nope, there’s also Phil Landrigan of Mount Sinai.

    Composer99,

    Tell me how, and I will.

  373. #374 Julian Frost
    July 24, 2011

    Jake,
    Hannah Poling had “Autism-like symptoms”. That means she had symptoms of autism, but not enough to have a diagnosis of autism. Despite what the people at AoA say, there’s a difference. If one symptom was enough to diagnose autism, we’d all be on the spectrum.
    Hannah Poling did not have autism. She won compensation because the Court ruled that her vaccination probably worsened her underlying mitochondrial disorder.

  374. #375 Jake Crosby
    July 24, 2011

    “Stop spouting anti-vaxx falsities.”

    Then by all means, show me the “falsities” I’m spouting. What’s been happening so far can be described like this: I’ll make points that no one can refute, you all change the subject and move on to something else and make similarly unsuccessful arguments, and the cycle repeats.

    “Unfortunately for him, Sullivan from Left Brain Right Brain had a look at those studies.”

    Well, Sullivan can play gastroenterologist all he wants.

    “In fact, as I recall, one of them contradicted Wakefield.”

    Um, no, the clinical findings in all the replicated studies were the same as in the Lancet papers. As I recall, the paper you cite said that it did not discover a novel disease. It still counts as a replication since no such claim was made in the Lancet paper either.

    “Here is another posting on how that is a false statement: Still no independent confirmation of Wakefield’s claims.”

    Those are studies which can be supportive of the role of GI disorders in ASDs; no one ever claimed they were all replications of the Lancet paper, which makes that blog post one big straw man.

  375. #376 Psorta Psychic
    July 24, 2011

    Sad that a young man who grew up in the age of the internet does not know how to use HTML blockquote.

    Or even know how to think for himself.

  376. #377 kelly
    July 24, 2011

    How will I know if my baby girl due in sept does not have a mitochondrial disorder-
    do they screen for this anywhere? My friends children are ok but I am still worried.

  377. #378 Ashtanga London
    July 24, 2011

    If Jesus did any healing back then it would have been plants and herbs and whatever else was going at the time. I think the miracles and praying part was added by the church who wanted to take the credit (on behalf of their god) for something good like healing.

    I’m an atheist but I don’t believe in stories coming from no-where. There’s always treasure hidden in those old stories. Somewhere underneath the parts that obviously don’t exist, like god!

    Like, “Don’t eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge”? What?

    That’s what I’d say to someone if I didn’t want them to find out what the tree in question really did! Maybe it cured measles!

  378. #379 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 24, 2011

    Since ASDs are defined solely by symptoms, something that causes symptoms which fall within the autism spectrum – by definition – causes autism spectrum disorders.

    Except, as you should already know, they are not diagnosed by simply picking out one of the symptoms which are consided indicators of ASDs and saying “Okay, everyone who has this symptom has an ASD, no ifs, ands or buts!” There are plenty of people who manifest one or more of those indicators but do not have ASDs. That’s a pretty basic fact about ASDs, Jake, and it doesn’t reflect well on you or John Stone to profess ignorance of it.

    You know, I’m used to antivax loonies displaying massive entitlement complexes, but the more I think about this one, the more amazed I am at its scope. The world would be a much simpler place if every single disease and disorder had a totally unique set of symptoms, and no two disorders could ever share any symptoms. That’s a nice little fairytale vision (though why you would depart that far from reality, and not just choose “diseases and disorders don’t exist,” I don’t understand.) Of course, here in the real world, it doesn’t work that way: the list of symptoms that are unique to one cause is very slim. But when John and Jake say “ASDs are defined by symptoms and therefore to have a symptom is to have an ASD,” what they’re really saying is “ASDs should be simple! We are owed that by Mother Nature! They shouldn’t share symptoms with anything else, because if they did, things wouldn’t be simple! And if we just remain stubborn and refuse to believe that anything besides an ASD could produce any of the symptoms of an ASD, maybe that’ll become reality!”

    You know the irony of John and Jake’s position? If mental health professionals in the past had thought the way they insist we should all think now, we wouldn’t be talking about ASDs. Everyone that would now be diagnosed as having an ASD would be diagnosed as mentally retarded instead – because hey, if you have a symptom, there can only be one disorder associated with it, right? Absence or impairment of imaginative and social play? Mentally retarded! Restricted patterns of interest that are abnormal in intensity or focus? Mentally retarded! Mental retardation is defined by symptoms, so if you have one of those symptoms, you must have mental retardation! What sort of foolishness are you talking about, saying that those are also symptoms of something called an “autism spectrum disorder”?? How silly! Those are symptoms associated with mental retardation so anything that causes those symptoms is by definition causing mental retardation, and not anything else!

  379. #380 Kelly
    July 24, 2011

    Never mind- I found a site-The United Mitochondrial Foundation

    http://www.umdf.org/site/c.otJVJ7MMIqE/b.5472191/k.BDB0/Home.htm

  380. #381 AOA - big tobacco lovers
    July 24, 2011

    Jake:

    In this thread you claim both that Bernadine Healy supports the vaccine=autism lie, and that she opposes it. Truly you have a dizzying intellect.

  381. #382 Composer99
    July 24, 2011

    Jake: Try < a href="http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_blockquote.asp">here.

    Found it using Google search, term was ‘HTML blockquote’.

  382. #383 Composer99
    July 24, 2011

    HTML fail on my part (this is why it is better to suggest better HTML practices rather than lecture ). Cut & paste http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_blockquote.asp

  383. #384 Composer99
    July 24, 2011

    Saith Krebiozen @367:

    Francis Collins? You mean because he wrote that autism, among other childhood diseases, “must be due to changes in the environment, including diet and physical activity, which may produce disease in genetically predisposed persons”? That’s hardly a ringing endorsement of the “autism=poisoning” crusade

    Jake Crosby’s, er, evidence-filled rejoinder:

    Except that admitting autism is environmentally-caused does not really leave room for much else.

    Uh, sure Jake. You keep on thinking that.

  384. #385 Krebiozen
    July 24, 2011

    @Jake

    Since ASDs are defined solely by symptoms, something that causes symptoms which fall within the autism spectrum – by definition – causes autism spectrum disorders.

    Not true. Take a look at the DSM IV definition of autistic disorders (easily found, I won’t link or this will get moderated) which requires:

    A total of six (or more) items from (A), (B), and (C), with at least two from (A), and one each from (B) and (C)

    Or if you prefer the proposed definition for DSM V:

    Autism Spectrum Disorder – Must meet criteria A, B, C, and D

    I think the definitions are self-explanatory. You need a certain number of symptoms in each group for a diagnosis of autism or ASD. For example, if someone has these symptoms:

    Excessive adherence to routines, ritualized patterns of verbal or nonverbal behavior, or excessive resistance to change; (such as motoric rituals, insistence on same route or food, repetitive questioning or extreme distress at small changes).

    This would be consistent with severe OCD, in the absence of other symptoms, or ASD in the presence of other specific symptoms. I had a friend who had several symptoms similar to those of ASD, but his were due to a head injury.

    She was referring to the case of Hannah Poling – a girl diagnosed with classic autism.

    Can you support that claim? I understood she was diagnosed with encephalopathy caused by a mitochondrial enzyme deficit.

    And yet, mitochondrial disorders were found in 8 out of 10 children with autism in a recent study.

    Citation? And are you suggesting that all autism is caused by permanent structural changes and irreversible damage to the brain due to encephalopathy in children with mitochondrial disorders? I would suggest that makes vaccination even more important in such children, as a full-blown measles infection, for example, could well be fatal.

    “a vaccine-preventable disease is far more likely to trigger encephalopathy than a vaccine.”

    Maybe, maybe not.

    According to the NEJM, “whereas it is clear that natural infections can exacerbate symptoms of encephalopathy in patients with mitochondrial enzyme deficiencies, no clear evidence exists that vaccines cause similar exacerbations. Indeed, because children with such deficiencies are particularly susceptible to infections, it is recommended that they receive all vaccines”.

    I’ll make points that no one can refute, you all change the subject and move on to something else and make similarly unsuccessful arguments, and the cycle repeats.

    I haven’t seen you make a single point that hasn’t been refuted. That is the opposite of what I see happening here.

  385. #386 lilady
    July 24, 2011

    Not to berate the issue about boy wonder cub reporter Jake, but I would like to address some of the replies he made to Denice Walter:

    “”in a field he never studied in depth even as an undergrad”

    How do you know? You followed me around during college?

    No Jake, we know that you graduated with a BA in a double major; History & Health, Science Society & Policy…you never studied any of the hard sciences in college. Now, some of us science types who actually took those hard sciences and are qualified to evaluate someone’s knowledge readily admit that many intelligent people who graduated with non-science majors are quite well versed in immunology and epidemiology…you clearly are not.

    “”I believe that if you do ask your profs…”

    You know, there was faculty in attendance at Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s lecture at Brandeis, along with students and staff.

    Jake, were those the same faculty that you tried to inveigle to sit in on a panel discussion with Wakefield and who categorically refused to participate with the disgraced Wakefield? And, the same ones that you specifically named in your whiny article on Age of Autism..chastising them for not wanting to participate on any panel that your “hero” is on? Jake, faculty was in the audience to see the dog and pony show that you and Andy put on, just like others were there..the “others” posted here in an unbiased manner about The Andy-Jake Dog and Pony Show.

    “Perhaps my fellow and sister commenters amd I will be the subject of a post by Jake”

    Who are you speaking to?

    I think Denice was talking to her fellow and sister commenters…let me be the first to state that I would welcome any mention of my posting name in an article written by boy wonder cub reporter Jake in the comic strip Age of Autism. Indeed, I would treat it as a “badge of honor” to be mentioned in your dopey ranting articles.

    Anyone else want to put themselves on Jake’s hit list?

  386. #387 Krebiozen
    July 24, 2011

    Jake Crosby,

    And yet, mitochondrial disorders were found in 8 out of 10 children with autism in a recent study.

    ‘Mitochondrial disorder’ is a blanket term that includes a large number of different disorders, not just the mitochondrial enzyme deficit of the sort Hannah Poling has.

    Here’s a recent study looking at the role of mitochondrial DNA mutations in autism spectrum disorder. It concludes:

    Our results are compatible with the idea that mtDNA mutations are not a relevant cause of ASD and the frequent observation of concomitant mitochondrial dysfunction and ASD could be due to nuclear factors influencing mitochondrion functions or to a more complex interplay between the nucleus and the mitochondrion/mtDNA.

  387. #388 Dedj
    July 24, 2011

    “Thomas Insel stated the burden of proof was on people who claim the autism increase is artificial.”

    But that doesn’t mean that people who claim that the increase is real do not also have a burden of proof when they make a claim about a pathway.

  388. #389 kelly
    July 24, 2011

    Jake,
    They are narcissistic windbags-they are pushing me into your defense by their rantings. I really never heard any anti-vax people rant like these idiots.

  389. #390 augustine
    July 24, 2011

    Lilady

    Another theme is the cost to immunize infants against hepatitis B so that they don’t get infected perinatally and in turn infect their own infants perinatally.

    Again, why not just target the at risk group? Answer: because vaccinating the ones that mattered failed.

    Some posters here think that it is not a worthy cause…too expensive. Such narrow minded thinking is unacceptable and based on Xenophobia.

    Logical fallacy. Straw man.

    The bible even states “we are our brother’s keeper” and people who have a moral compass care about the health of infants and adults worldwide.

    How objectively scientific of you.

    You’re implying that people who don’t agree with mass vaccinations do not have a moral compass.

    And… Your rhetoric implies that you are addressing an individual but what you are saying is let the government and PHARMA be your brothers keeper. And that means big profits and no accounatability.

    Aaron did build a golden calf to honor YHWH. Did your Jesus vaccinate? Do you worship medicine or man’s mind?

  390. #391 The Christian Cynic
    July 24, 2011

    Did your Jesus vaccinate?

    Do you reject all modern medicine then, augie? Clearly, Jesus wouldn’t have used penicillin (aspirin, etc.), after all.

    (Also, isn’t it a little absurd to ask if Jesus would have vaccinated? Wouldn’t He have just healed himself of measles? But then again, absurdity seems to be a certain someone’s M.O.)

  391. #392 Jake Crosby
    July 24, 2011

    “Sad that a young man who grew up in the age of the internet does not know how to use HTML blockquote.

    Or even know how to think for himself.”

    Sad you must make up assumptions about me as opposed to listen to what I have to say.

    “Except, as you should already know, they are not diagnosed by simply picking out one of the symptoms which are consided indicators of ASDs and saying “Okay, everyone who has this symptom has an ASD, no ifs, ands or buts!””

    Paul Offit was not referring to “one symptom” he was referring to symptoms that fall within the autism spectrum. Interesting how the point of that entire diatribe of yours can be summed up by that one sentence.

    “In this thread you claim both that Bernadine Healy supports the vaccine=autism lie, and that she opposes it.”

    Now that is a lie.

    “Uh, sure Jake. You keep on thinking that.”

    Well, autism is already known to be caused by rubella infection, thalidomide and valproic acid exposure during pregnancy – exposures that would support that autism results from some sort of poisoning or at least wouldn’t sit with Kathleen Seidel’s notion of “neurodiversity.”

    “Can you support that claim?”

    Yeah, her parents support that “claim.”

    “Citation?”
    http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/12/the_revenge_of_the_return_of_the_resurre.php

    “…no clear evidence exists that vaccines cause similar exacerbations.”

    Even though government admitted so.

    “I haven’t seen you make a single point that hasn’t been refuted. That is the opposite of what I see happening here.”

    Well, let’s see: you haven’t proved Paul Offit wasn’t referring to autism spectrum disorders. You haven’t proved that natural infectious are more common causes of encephalopathy and the link you provided doesn’t support that. And you haven’t proven that Hannah Poling isn’t autistic, when her own parents including her father who’s a neurologist say she has autism.

    “Jake, were those the same faculty that you tried to inveigle to sit in on a panel discussion with Wakefield and who categorically refused to participate with the disgraced Wakefield? And, the same ones that you specifically named in your whiny article on Age of Autism..chastising them for not wanting to participate on any panel that your “hero” is on?”
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/05/brandeis-hoot-letters-to-the-editor-on-dr-wakefield.html

    “‘Mitochondrial disorder’ is a blanket term that includes a large number of different disorders, not just the mitochondrial enzyme deficit of the sort Hannah Poling has”

    Except the whole point in saying Hannah Poling’s disorder was rare was because mitochondrial disorders in general are “rare.” So much for that.

    PS: I don’t see how you think the study you cite supports what you’ve said, but it doesn’t.

  392. #393 Denice Walter
    July 24, 2011

    @ lilady: *Merci beaucoup*

    I tried very hard to get him to look beyond the party line- to no avail; however, he did reveal his core beliefs, made easy mistakes ( I’m a shrink?), mis-interpetted simple language, didn’t disregard irrelevant information, couldn’t see a jest or use the probability idea, etc.

    It’s unfortunate because he is a young impressionable person most likely being used to dis-advantage by a coterie of adults with an agenda: which is a shame -whatever his position and not at all fair to him.

    Oh well, be that as it may, I’m sure we’ll make the top 20 list @ AoA’s countdown of Top Pharma Hit Men/ Women of 2011.

  393. #394 Apology to Jake
    July 24, 2011

    Jake writes:

    >”In this thread you claim both that Bernadine Healy supports >the vaccine=autism lie, and that she opposes it.”

    >Now that is a lie.

    I apologize – I misunderstood. You really said that Bernadine Healy’s tobacco company ties don’t count because you can find someone else who also worked for a tobacco company, but hasn’t yet been hired to sell the vaccine-autism lie yet.

  394. #395 augustine
    July 24, 2011

    Christian Cynic

    Also, isn’t it a little absurd to ask if Jesus would have vaccinated? Wouldn’t He have just healed himself of measles?

    I didn’t ask her to speculate would he. I asked “did he”?

    Wouldn’t He have just healed himself of measles?

    That’s not a miracle. Statistically most would heal from measles just fine.

  395. #396 Chris
    July 24, 2011

    Kelly:

    I really never heard any anti-vax people rant like these idiots.

    Ever hear of Kent Heckenlively? An example:

    The Dark Forces which in the past have destroyed the careers of those who have found clues to the afflictions of our children and other disease communities are once again on the move. You may very well read about their actions this week. And I can’t do anything to stop them.

  396. #397 Dedj
    July 24, 2011

    “Unlike you, I provided a specific quote.”

    Which was demonstrated by multiple people to contain absolutely none of the elements you claim it did, and to be based on a severe misunderstanding of Deer’s claim and to be usuing an utterly idosyncratic and possibly maliciously dishonest definition of ‘forgery’.

    In short, you messed up what should have been a simple task to the point where several people are worried about your mentality, competance and employability. Again.

    This is what I mean by lazy, you took a quote and then assumed it must mean to everyone else what it meant to you, even after it was pointed out to you that your accusation has a very specific meaning that was not indicated either within the quote or the arguement that the quote was from.

    I remain utterly unconvinced that you’ve even personally read the relevant part of Deers work at all.

    Deer went in to rather a lot of detail about precisely what he meant by ‘changing the results’. None of it matches up to claiming Deer claimed Wakefield altered the master-copies of any test result.

    “You love to argue semantics, it’s much easier than arguing real points after all.”

    If you have no real case then just say so.

    “That’s what was testified by the senior author of the Lancet paper.”

    And testified against by people who did have a part in the process.

    Wakefields attendance and participation was attested to on:

    Day 32, by Dr Davies, who indicated that Wakefield participated in the histpathology meetings,
    Day 33, by Dr Davies, who indicated that Wakefield participated in the pathology review meetings, and that Wakefield and others had a different opinion of the interpretation of the test results.

    To claim that Wakefield ‘played no part’ when the histopathologist herself clearly states that he did, and clearly lays out that Wakefields interpretation of the results was at sometimes odds with the reports, that is bloody mindedness of the highest order.

    Deer makes it very clear that he is talking about Wakefield using his input into these meetings to manufature a particular interpretation when he talks about ‘changing test results’. One thing Deer does not do is accuse Wakefield of changing the master-copies.

    Deer is very clear on this. The confusion is entirely yours, yet again.

  397. #398 The Christian Cynic
    July 24, 2011

    I didn’t ask her to speculate would he. I asked “did he”?

    For Christ’s sake¹, augie, you might as well have asked if he went aboard the Challenger or fought at the Alamo for all the sense the question makes.

    I do find it funny that you didn’t answer my actual question, though. Since Jesus didn’t use modern medicine, do you think justifies not using it today? It applies as much to vaccination as penicillin and so forth.

    That’s not a miracle. Statistically most would heal from measles just fine.

    The point is that Jesus wouldn’t need medical interventions so that even if He was one of the unlucky ones who suffered the most severe symptoms, He could just raise Himself from the dead. Most² people don’t have that option.

    ____________________________________
    ¹Literally.
    ²That’s what we in the biz call “intentional understatement.”

  398. #399 augustine
    July 24, 2011

    Lil misled lady

    …people who have a moral compass care about the health of infants and adults worldwide.

    Does this industry have a moral compass? If so which way does it point? Maybe you don’t know which way YOUR moral compass points.

    http://www.omsj.org/corruption/how-drug-companies-get-away-with-murder#more-3275

    “Office of Medical and Scientific Justice”

    Anderson Cooper explains how and why these drug companies get away with murder.

  399. #400 Dedj
    July 24, 2011

    “Obviously not, otherwise Paul Offit wouldn’t have generously cited them both in his book about autism the same year Healy spoke up.”

    How on earth did you not understand the point that was being made? You are not this stupid.

    I was very clearly referring to the idea that ‘your’ side has adopted Healys’ arguement for little reason other than it originates from Healy, whereas Milloy and Fuemento are important in their own right, but are not the sole or even major cause of the majority of pro-vaxx arguements.

    You even indicated so in your deliberetly dishonest, faux-forgetful and swivel-eyed-conspiracy mongering jibe at Orac “Because a nameless, pharma-funded blogger is far more credible than a past director of the National Institutes of Health.”. This indicated clearly that her support is mostly argument from authourity.

    You know that Orac is not nameless, your reasons for believing him to be a pharma-shill were shown to be: crass, based on a severe misunderstanding of how internet ads work, based on seeing a conspiracy with-in a tangential affiliation that was fully explained to you, based on a severe misunderstanding of the terms used in your own arguement, and based on crass logic that would have you and many of your fellow employees fairly labelled as company-shills themselves.

    Now, stop being an arse and deal with what people say to you, rather than deliberatly coming up with patently transparent dodges.

  400. #401 Dedj
    July 24, 2011

    “Since ASDs are defined solely by symptoms, something that causes symptoms which fall within the autism spectrum – by definition – causes autism spectrum disorders.”

    Utterly false. Not your fault this time as you have no relevant academic, clinical, vocational, voluntary or technical experience in assessment or the diagnostic process.

    If you have, you have never indicated so. If you do have any, then you should know why Dr Offits statement does not mean what you have claimed it does.

    ASDs are a cluster of symptoms. A condition that causes any ASD symptom does not inescapably cause enough ASD symptoms to warrant a diagnosis. For example, NvLD, PDA, S-PLD and others can share the symptoms of autism, but are not ASDs themselves. In their case, there is still some debate about whether the should be considered part of the autism spectrum or not. In the case of schizophrenia, aTBI, tTBI, OCD, CVA, Social anxiety disorder, avoidant personality disorder, anorexia, dyslexia and ADD/ADHD can have symptoms that are also on the ASD list, but this does not make them ASDs’.

    Now that you have been told this multiple times by multiple people, I do not expect you to carry on making the same false claim again. Sorry, I do fully expect you to, I just don’t expect you to either recognise the falsity of it, nor do I expect you to admit to it.

    The diagnostic manuals are very clear that autism is only an option if the symptoms are not better explained by the list of exclusionary disorders.

    You might want to try reading them one day. For yourself that is. You might want to start reading things first hand a lot more. You’ll stop making an arse out of yourself on such a frequent basis.

  401. #402 Krebiozen
    July 24, 2011

    Jake,

    Well, let’s see: you haven’t proved Paul Offit wasn’t referring to autism spectrum disorders.

    Are you deliberately being obtuse? If Offit was referring to ASD he would have said so. He didn’t, here’s what he said in the NEJM article I linked to above:

    Because autism is a clinical diagnosis, children are labeled as autistic on the basis of a collection of clinical features. Hannah Poling clearly had difficulties with language, speech, and communication. But those features of her condition considered autistic were part of a global encephalopathy caused by a mitochondrial enzyme deficit. Rett’s syndrome, tuberous sclerosis, fragile X syndrome, and Down’s syndrome in children can also have autistic features. Indeed, features reminiscent of autism are evident in all children with profound impairments in cognition; but these similarities are superficial, and their causal mechanisms and genetic influences are different from those of classic autism.

    Does that make it clearer?

    You haven’t proved that natural infectious are more common causes of encephalopathy and the link you provided doesn’t support that.

    It is looking increasingly as if vaccine induced encephalopathy is a myth. This 2008 study states that, “Overall, there is no evidence to suggest that vaccines cause central nervous system injury, epilepsy or infantile spasms”. I think that entirely supports what I wrote. If vaccines don’t cause encephalopathy, but natural infections clearly do, then of course natural infections cause encephalopathy more commonly than something that doesn’t cause them at all.

    And you haven’t proven that Hannah Poling isn’t autistic, when her own parents including her father who’s a neurologist say she has autism.

    Hannah Poling has a brain injury caused by encephalopathy due to a mitochondrial enzyme deficiency. Isn’t that different from classic autism? According to an article by her father, Hannah Poling scored 33 on the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) which means she is barely mildly autistic (a minimum score of 30 is the cutoff for a diagnosis of autism on the mild end of the autism spectrum) and she does meet the DSM IV criteria for autism. But as Dedj rightly points out, “autism is only an option if the symptoms are not better explained by the list of exclusionary disorders”.

    Except the whole point in saying Hannah Poling’s disorder was rare was because mitochondrial disorders in general are “rare.” So much for that. PS: I don’t see how you think the study you cite supports what you’ve said, but it doesn’t.

    Gerberding referred to “this rare mitochondrial disorder”, meaning the specific mitochondrial disorder Hannah Poling has, not any mitochondrial disorder. It is the specific rare mitochondrial enzyme deficit Hannah Poling has that left her vulnerable to encephalopathy as result of any fever. The study you cite only included ten subjects with autism, so it isn’t that convincing though it is certainly interesting. Even if all or even a significant proportion of autism is caused by encephalopathy due to an underlying mitochondrial disorder, then surely those individuals would be vulnerable to even more severe injury from natural infections, in which case vaccination is all the more important.

  402. #403 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 24, 2011

    Paul Offit was not referring to “one symptom” he was referring to symptoms that fall within the autism spectrum.

    It seems clear that Jake insists on playing Goofus, so we have no choice to treat him as one.

    Autistic spectrum disorders are not diagnosed because the person has one or two symptoms out of a list of indicators, but because the person has a high number of such symptoms.  For convenience, let’s refer to this as an “ASD confluence” of symptoms.

    When Goofus says that measles encephalitis, ME, can cause ASDs, it is equivalent to claiming that ME can create not just individual symptoms that are also found in ASDs but an entire ASD confluence.

    Goofus claims that Paul Offit “agrees with” this claim.  Yet if we look at the words that were actually quoted from Offit to support this claim, we find that they do not; they say nothing about ME or any other non-ASD disorder being able to create an ASD confluence.  It isn’t even any sort of logical extrapolation from what Offit said, as Offit’s entire point was that other disorders can share symptoms with ASDs without being related.

    It’s as if a teacher said about a multiple-choice test, “you might get any single question right with a lucky guess, but you’re not going to get a passing grade without studying,” and a very lazy student heard only the first part and said, “Hey, if any single question could be answered right with a lucky guess, then really really lucky guessing might get every single question right!” and proceeded to tell others “Teacher told me I could get an A without having to study!”  The student’s fantasy of a lucky A may be derived from what the teacher said, but in no way is the student right to present it as what the teacher said or “agreed.”

  403. #404 lilady
    July 24, 2011

    @ Ugh Troll, I’m sure Jesus didn’t have a computer or use the internet to sermonize. We all hope that you follow in Jesus’ footsteps and discard your computer (“What would Jesus Do?”) and get off this site…I think I can speak for posters affiliated with a religion, or agnostics or atheists, as well, to encourage you to follow Jesus in this regard.

    I wonder why Ugh Troll is so concerned about tax dollars to do God’s work to prevent, treat and cure disease in developing countries? Ugh troll, knickers all twisted up, doesn’t pay taxes and is scamming the system by using tax dollars for his on-the-dole miserable existence and for tax dollar financed health care…truly a worthless parasitic POS.

    Give me that old time religion…

    “While we were with you we gave this order, If anyone doesn’t want to work, he should not eat” (II Thessalonians 3:10)

    Thank you Jake for providing the Brandeis “Hoot” letter that you put up on the Sunday Funnies Age of Autism site…that was your defense of my statement that you thoroughly trashed your professors?

    Jake, a while back I cued you in about personnel wonks who check job applicants names on the internet…you know your handler J.B. cannot get Google to redact the face pages that the personnel wonks locate, don’t you? BTW, the wonks in personnel also “Google” any of your references, as well, so you better think seriously about using your cronies from Age of Autism for references.

    Listen up boy wonder cub reporter, anyone who has a minimum of knowledge about Asperger Syndrome is exquisitely aware that your activities and your dirty tricks (letter writing campaigns to get your enemies fired from their jobs), is not remotely typical of the behaviors consistent with an Asperger Syndrome diagnosis. One might logical conclude that your full of it with your claim of an Asperger Syndrome diagnosis and the behaviors and activities you have engaged in are typical of an anti-social personality disorder.

  404. #405 augustine
    July 25, 2011

    Lilady LPN

    Ugh troll, knickers all twisted up, doesn’t pay taxes and is scamming the system by using tax dollars for his on-the-dole miserable existence and for tax dollar financed health care…truly a worthless parasitic POS.

    So do you have any evidence of this? With no evidence is this part of your reasoning skills? Is it an insult or is it an ad hominem? Of course it’s only an insult. Scientism bloggers are incapable of producing a logical fallacy.

    Your ignorance is amusing. ONly surpassed by you ability to copy and paste from your bible, the CDC pink book.

    Lilady, you’re getting bitter in your old age. Snapping at anyone who agrees with your policies and opinions. Is it your arthritis or the multiple medications you are on? This emotion is clouding your objectivity. Although it could be argued that you’ve never been objective.

  405. #406 herr doktor bimler
    July 25, 2011

    even your own friend Paul Offit has agreed that vaccines cause autism spectrum disorders!

    Recapping the comment from Antaeus Feldspar, Offit made no such concession. Stone misrepresented his words (or “forged” them if you prefer) and added his own profound ignorance of the diagnostic criteria for ASD.

    Impressively, Jake Crosby’s response to Feldspar’s explanation is simply to reiterate Stone’s lie, simply omitting the attempt to justify it with the now-discredited link:

    Whether Paul Offit said measles encephalopathy as a result of vaccines, or as an example of something that can cause autism spectrum disorders like vaccines, he clearly acknowledged that vaccines can cause autism spectrum disorders.

    And then:

    Well, let’s see: you haven’t proved Paul Offit wasn’t referring to autism spectrum disorders.

    He didn’t mention ASDs. To the rest of the world, this would be enough evidence that he wasn’t referring to them.
    Obviously it was Offit’s fault for failing to anticipate that Stone might distort his words so egregiously, and failing to prevent possible distortions by listing all the things that he wasn’t referring to.

    Jake, you’re being childish. If I found myself resorting to this kind of risible sophistry in order to defend my world-view, I would think seriously about revising the world-view.

  406. #407 lilady
    July 25, 2011

    Hello Ugh Troll…As you well know I am a licensed registered nurse and as we all know you have no education, no gainful employment and pay no taxes on your taxpayer supported “benefits”

    Fool, everyone, except you, apparently knows that I am a techie deficient poster…I’ve owned up to that fact and poke fun at myself all the time. I don’t know how to “cut and paste” from a reference book and don’t know how to “link”. It’s nice to know that you think my postings and analyses of data in my original words, are those of a medical text writer.

    You, on the other hand, “cut and paste” and liberally “link” to cherry-picked articles from non-peer reviewed journals or articles that are years old and totally disproven. What a joy to watch the misinterpretation of those very citations and links because of your imaginary qualifications in medical science. You are so amusing as your argue with people who actually know how to read an article, know the science involved and don’t “fake it” as you are wont to do.

    We are still waiting for you to live the biblical life and discard your computer…because Jesus never used a computer to communicate to his disciples.

    Still getting your “jollies” I see, from all the well deserved derision your postings elicit.

  407. #408 herr doktor bimler
    July 25, 2011

    Jake Crosby:

    So-called “evidence” produced for the purpose of persuasion, however, is tobacco science.

    Hmmm. I wonder how many scientific publications are not produced for the purposes of persuasion. A scientist has a theory and devises experiments to persuade other people of its correctness: that’s how science works.
    By this criterion, Wakefield’s reports were “tobacco science”.

    A person with a closed mind could easily use this criterion to give himself permission to ignore anything he doesn’t want to know. An intuition into the motives of the researchers magically turns otherwise-conclusive evidence into “tobacco science”.

    “Bruno Bettelheim (a Freudian psychotherapist)” […] Who also falsely claimed to have an MD and was described as such until after his death

    I’m glad that we can agree about one thing: Bettelheim was neither a doctor nor a psychologist. Progress!

    It only remains to repeat my invitation (@ 254) for you to ‘provide details of the “experts in medicine or psychology” who made such a claim’ (“that autism was caused by homicidal parents”). Certainly not Drs Kanner or Asperger. Telling me that “Rimland […] recognized that same BS decades later in the vaccine industry” wins points for product placement, but is not actually relevant to the question.

    A small point, I know. But if the “homicidal parents” explanation for autism never existed, then who knows what else you have imagined?

  408. #409 Jake Crosby
    July 25, 2011

    “In short, you messed up what should have been a simple task to the point where several people are worried about your mentality, competance and employability.”

    And that’s why you abused people while hiding behind a fake name, right?

    “It’s unfortunate because he is a young impressionable person most likely being used to dis-advantage by a coterie of adults with an agenda: which is a shame -whatever his position and not at all fair to him.”

    For a person so quick to accuse me of assuming you’re a pharma shill, you have no problem making up assumptions about me personally as well as my motives.

    “None of it matches up to claiming Deer claimed Wakefield altered the master-copies of any test result.”

    Ahem:

    “A Sunday Times investigation has found that altered data was behind the decade-long scare over vaccination”
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5683643.ece

    Actual quotes from Dr. Susan Davies in BMJ letter:

    “I was not the lead pathologist for this, or any other Wakefield project.”

    “Secondly, I was not responsible for reporting the majority of the biopsy specimens from the twelve children, initially written up in the Lancet paper(3).”
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/04/histopathologist-from-the-lancet-study-rebuffs-brian-deers-article-in-british-medical-journal.html

    I see you still have no quotes.

    “How on earth did you not understand the point that was being made?”

    You said they could disappear tomorrow and it would make no difference, but it obviously would make a difference because the vaccine industry spokesman, Paul Offit, relies on people like them to help make his case.

    “I was very clearly referring to the idea that ‘your’ side has adopted Healys’ arguement for little reason other than it originates from Healy,”

    Well, that’s kind of how your whole side forms its arguments, based on who they came from, the CDC, FDA, NIH, ABC, XYZ etc. And anybody who says otherwise is labeled a conspiracy theorist.

    “whereas Milloy and Fuemento are important in their own right,”

    Who continue to serve and be a part of that front group – also supported by pharma btw – as they’ve been for a long time. Healy’s involvement was brief and was from more than a decade ago. If anything, it suggests she’s realized pretty quickly that joining such a group was a bad idea and has since decided to help out the consumers. Saying this poisons her past somehow especially when this group is now very much on your side and supported by vaccine manufacturers, including Paul Offit.

    “but are not the sole or even major cause of the majority of pro-vaxx arguements.”

    Uh…neither is Healy. I’ve barely cited her throughout this thread. Had you bothered to read most of my comments you would’ve known that.

    “Utterly false. Not your fault this time as you have no relevant academic, clinical, vocational, voluntary or technical experience in assessment or the diagnostic process.”

    Oh and you do? Oh wait, I forgot, your only experience is abusing other people while you hide behind your silly, “phonetically-spelled” name.

    “You’ll stop making an arse out of yourself on such a frequent basis.”

    You need to stop cyberbullying people on the internet behind a fake name. I’ve treated you with utmost respect in most cases and have spent a lot of time trying to have a civil discussion with you. But you have been horrible in every comment of yours back to me because you don’t know how to treat people nicely and because that’s all you’ve got. You have no character.

    “This 2008 study states that, “Overall, there is no evidence to suggest that vaccines cause central nervous system injury, epilepsy or infantile spasms””

    That’s not a study – that’s an article by one guy in Canada who obviously doesn’t pay attention to US government decisions.

    “But as Dedj rightly points out, “autism is only an option if the symptoms are not better explained by the list of exclusionary disorders”.”

    No, autism is only an option when the presenting symptoms fall within the autism spectrum. That’s what autism is, regardless of what caused it.

    “you know your handler J.B. cannot get Google to redact the face pages that the personnel wonks locate, don’t you?”

    Well, that’s because I don’t have a handler, and might also be because I have someone or some people who are perhaps manipulating the search engines…you perhaps?

  409. #410 lilady
    July 25, 2011

    @ Krebiozen: Your citation to the Pediatric Child Health Article is probably the most complete and concise article I’ve ever read about Mitochondrial Disorders and the (non) link to vaccines. The article laid out the sequence of events (illnesses, fevers, the moderate fevers after immunization) that can be the trigger for encephalopathy in a child with the de nova mutated gene for mitochodrial disorders. More importantly, it also detailed the commonalities of mitochondrial disorders and the fact that childhood viruses and associated fevers are the usual triggers that cause the degenerative neurological events in children with these disorders.

    It is interesting that the authors mentioned Rett syndrome as one of the genetic regressive diseases that also is commonly first manifested following exposure to a stressor such as common childhood illnesses, fevers and a fever post-immunization. Children with Rett Syndrome also have autistic behaviors. Once a child is diagnosed with a mitochondrial disorder or Rett Syndrome, parents are faced with the dilemma of possible exacerbation with additional immunizations or the risk of the serious diseases without protective immunizations.

    While these disorders are rare in the general population, parents of children with other developmental diseases and disorders along with a seizure disorder, also face that same dilemma.

    Such parents often take preemptive steps such as re-arranging their anti-convulsant dosing schedule or administering an extra dose or partial dose. The goal here is to have the child’s anti-convulsant blood levels at their peak, instead of a trough level and to lessen the risk of uncontrolled seizures or status epilepticus.

    The article you referenced also provided the link to Dr. Poling’s published case study of his 19 month old daughter Hannah. Dr. Poling a neurologist who was the lead author of Hannah’s case study provided a lot of information about his daughter’s disorder and the progress she has made in the intervening years. As you and the Vaccine Compensation Court pointed out, Hannah had a severe neurological event following fevers and the fevers appear to be caused by the immunizations she had received. But as her neurologist father well knows, any fever caused by a simple cold, an earache or any of the many viruses toddlers contract would have resulted/triggered the neurological event and regression…it is the nature of the mitochondrial disorder.

    Hannah received remuneration and while I may not fault the parents for seeking it to provide a secure financial future for their child, the award was provided not because there is any vaccine-autism injury link, but because immunizations caused the trigger fevers for the mitochondrial disorder to manifest itself.

    Unfortunately, the anti-vax crowd “conveniently” forgets this and have used Hannah as the poster child for vaccine injury autism.

  410. #411 herr doktor bimler
    July 25, 2011

    It belatedly occurs to me that Jake might have been exaggerating for rhetorical effect when he wrote of the medical establishment’s “previous claim that autism was caused by homicidal parents.”

    If he would like to moderate his statement, we have room for discussion, off-topic though it may be. I am aware, for instance, that Bettelheim sometimes accused the mothers of autistic children of wishing the child did not exist. This is a long call from “homicidal”… you know if a parent is homicidal because there is a dead child.

    The popularity of the “refrigerator mother” theory of causation amongst medical professionals — for it is the gullibility of doctors that ultimately concerns us here — seems to a moot point. I’m trying to get motivated enough to blog about it. The Wikipedia article on Bettelheim describes emotional frigidity as “a view that enjoyed considerable influence into the 1960s and 1970s in the United States”, to which some more skeptical contributor has added “[citation needed]”. The article speaks also of the theory’s acceptance “to a considerable extent, in professional circles.” It must be borne in mind that in the 1950s and 60s, not many people cared enough about autism to adhere to one theory or another.

    The Wiki article on Kanner contains some more tendentious statements but we have had enough pedantry for now.

  411. #412 Krebiozen
    July 25, 2011

    That’s not a study – that’s an article by one guy in Canada who obviously doesn’t pay attention to US government decisions.

    Not a study? I’m not sure I understand what you mean by that. My dictionary says that a study is, “an investigation and analysis of a subject, situation, etc.” If the piece of writing I linked to is not an investigation and analysis of a subject, I don’t know what is. Why does the number of authors or his nationality matter? And when did the US government become an authority on scientific matters? I try not to pay too much attention to US government decisions, not being American myself. I’m more interested in the scientific literature. Any comment on the actual science?

  412. #413 Todd W.
    July 25, 2011

    Was gone for the weekend so am just catching up. I haven’t read all of the comments but this was truly a howler. From Jake:

    Since ASDs are defined solely by symptoms, something that causes symptoms which fall within the autism spectrum – by definition – causes autism spectrum disorders.

    By that logic, anyone who suffers muscle tenderness, fatigue, neck/back pain and headaches must have polio, since those are all symptoms of polio. Of course, they may also have recently finished a rigorous exercise routine, which can also cause the same symptoms.

    But then, a more honest look at things would inform you that there are other bits and pieces that can rule in or out a particular diagnosis. For example, in my example above, searching for signs of the poliovirus would be the dead giveaway. For ASDs, the presence or absence of additional symptoms would confirm or disconfirm the diagnosis.

    @augie

    Still making with the straw man arguments, eh? For what it’s worth, not that this will stop your war on grass-based life forms, I said that HepB could be transmitted via saliva, for instance, through bites. You asked for evidence. I gave you three studies that showed the virus was present in sufficient amounts in saliva to make it a possible mode of transmission, as well as an additional study that documented verified transmission of HepB from a chronic carrier to another individual via a bite. You then proceeded to ask for evidence that transmission among casual contacts occurred frequently. Since I never made that claim (indeed, never made any claims about frequency), I need not provide you with any.

    Transmission via saliva can and does occur. It may not be as common, but it is a very real risk to take into consideration, rather than to simply ignore it or think that it cannot happen. Little kids bite. It is therefore reasonable to consider that there is a risk of transmission among children via bites to or from a chronic carrier.

    You can go back to playing with your wheat-and-chaff dolls.

  413. #414 Denice Walter
    July 25, 2011

    @ herr doktor bimler: But you see, casting aspersion upon the medical/ psychological establishment is part of alt med’s- and the anti-vaccinationists’- MOs: you’ll hear a great deal about Tuskegee, “tobacco science”, and exagerating a minor figure’s influence, not so much about life-saving advances. The meme is “Medicine has been wrong/ corrupt/ evil in the past” and “It is again”.

    I tried desperately to get our young friend to re-consider through the concept of probability: is it more likely that there is one cheat or an entire over-arching matrix of thousands upon thousands of entrenched cheats infiltrating the establishment top-to-bottom? My query didn’t provoke attitude change but fuelled derision of my own knowledge about the true workings of conspiracies. Oh well. Them’s the breaks.

    Conspiracy believers paint themselves into a corner where they cannot or will not communicate with individuals who hold to more mainstream views: thus the only feedback they will entertain solidifies their already rigid beliefs.

  414. #415 Todd W.
    July 25, 2011

    Oops. Almost missed this one from augie:

    pharma shill Todd

    Woohoo! I’m a pharma shill! I guess I can be expecting those big payouts any day now. I sure could use me some filthy pharma lucre.

    So, augie, ye who demands evidence at every turn, please present your evidence to substantiate that I am a pharma shill. I’ll wait, but I won’t hold my breath, as I’d likely die of asphyxiation years before you come up with any.

  415. #416 René Najera
    July 25, 2011

    Todd, you forgot this one, also from Jake:

    You need to stop cyberbullying people on the internet behind a fake name.

    However, his cyberbullying of Seth Mnookin, Paul Offit, Orac, etc., while done behind his real name, is okay, right?

    Riiiiiiight.

    Don’t worry too much about Jake, everyone. He’s going to George Washington University to get his MPH. Once he goes through the “design of studies” class, he’ll have more of a clue of what he writes about. (I hope.)

    See you in DC, Jake. This will be fun.

  416. #417 augustine
    July 25, 2011

    lilady

    Ugh troll, knickers all twisted up, doesn’t pay taxes and is scamming the system by using tax dollars for his on-the-dole miserable existence and for tax dollar financed health care…truly a worthless parasitic POS.

    You know how to stick your foot in your uncouth mouth don’t you? Your worthless insults don’t bother me but you’re probably making Venna feel insecure. Maybe you should think before you spout off your opinionated rants. Emotion clouds objectivity.

    You’re also probably insulting the socialist posters who believe that taking from the haves and giving to the have-nots is great policy. Their consciousness encourages the welfare system through altruistic guilt. Political smack talk might not be your forte.

    Didn’t you say the government is your bother’s keeper? Do you think welfare systems that are in place foster responsibility or do they encourage enabling?

    Do you think Venna’s going to find her health in a bottle of pills or at the end of a surgeon’s scalpel? Do you think it’s that simple? All she has to do is “follow the evidence” and everything will be fine, right?

  417. #418 Composer99
    July 25, 2011

    And ugh troll moves goalposts/changes the subject/sets up straw enemies to knock down again.

    All in one post. Not bad. Tiresome & irritating, but not bad.

  418. #419 Krebiozen
    July 25, 2011

    I wondered about the textbook definition of autism, so I got hold of a copy of DSM-IV-TR. Here’s what it says about differential diagnosis.

    When a Mental Disorder Due to a General Medical Condition or a Substance-Induced Disorder is responsible for the symptoms, it preempts the diagnosis of the corresponding primary disorder with the same symptoms (e.g., Cocaine-Induced Mood Disorder preempts Major Depressive Disorder). p6

    A Mental Disorder Due to a General Medical Condition is characterized by the presence of mental symptoms that are judged to be the direct physiological consequence of a general medical condition. The term general medical condition refers to conditions that are coded on Axis III and that are listed outside the “Mental Disorders” chapter of ICD. (See Appendix G for a condensed list of these conditions.) p181

    348.3 Encephalopathy, unspecified p868 Appendix G

    (Axis III refers to General Medical Conditions, and ICD refers to Impulse Control Disorders). Since Hannah Poling’s condition is the direct physiological consequence of a general medical condition, encephalopathy, which is listed in Appendix G of DSM IV, by these criteria she does not have autistic disorder.

  419. #420 Dedj
    July 25, 2011

    “No, autism is only an option when the presenting symptoms fall within the autism spectrum. That’s what autism is, regardless of what caused it.”

    Again false, and badly so, to the point where you can only reasonably seen as either being intentionally dishonest or of the level of competance that strongly indicates that you have either never read any of the current diagnostic criteria or you have clearly not understood them.

    Autism is a cluster of related symptoms, with exclusionary diagnosis, where the client must have a significant proportion of related symptoms in order to qualify as having autism.

    As indicated above, other conditions can share symptoms with the autism spectrum but are far from considered to be forms of autism. If you are willing to follow the arguement right to the end, then you have effectively increased the prevalance of autism manifold.

    You were provided with one of the current diagnostic criteria by another poster – why was this not good enough for you?

    What was wrong with the criteria provided?

    How does you interpretation fit the criteria?

  420. #421 Dedj
    July 25, 2011

    And that’s why you abused people while hiding behind a fake name, right?”

    If you can’t answer the challenge, please refrain from indicating very strongly with your behaviour that I am correct when I say that you prefer to dodge and weave rather than provide a straight answer.

    “”None of it matches up to claiming Deer claimed Wakefield altered the master-copies of any test result.”

    Ahem:

    “A Sunday Times investigation has found that altered data was behind the decade-long scare over vaccination”

    Where-in Deer makes it very clear that the ‘altered data’ was altered between the clinical data and the presentation in the research piece. Please try to read it next time.

    “Actual quotes from Dr. Susan Davies in BMJ letter:

    “I was not the lead pathologist for this, or any other Wakefield project.””

    (although she was “the key pathologist for the clinical gastroenterology paediatric team”). Again, please try to read your references first.

    What she did do was attest that Wakefield was a participant in the Histopathology meetings and in the review meetings. Precisely where Wakefield would have had opportunity to make the changes Deer is accussing him of.

    “Secondly, I was not responsible for reporting the majority of the biopsy specimens from the twelve children, initially written up in the Lancet paper(3).”

    This is irrelevant, as the pathology reports are known to have been done by the trainees and the individual pathologists, as was attested as being usual. This was extensively covered in the GMC hearing.

    This does not answer the charge that Wakefield had opportunity to game the interpretation of these results in the meetings Davies attested that he attened and particpated in, and further along the line in reporting the data in the research piece. That is what Deer clearly, repeatedly and comprehensively refers to.

    By the way, she also said “In personal practice, as evidenced at the GMC hearing, I had a different threshold from the other co-authors who performed the review and translated those findings into words. ”

    Indicating strongly, again, that Wakefield did in fact have input exactly where Deer’s accusations would require him to have. As we know due to her GMC testimony that Wakefield was part of the review team, the letter is rather a slam-dunk against the arguement that ‘Wakefield had no part’.

    Deer even states what the original records were supposed to have found. Indeed, Deer’s access to these records was a point of contention for some time. I don’t know how you managed to miss it.

    Unless you are referring to a very narrow part (i.e. the phsical act of extracting and testing the specimens) it is abundantly clear – from your sources – that it is utterly false that ‘Wakefield played no part’.

    —————-

    A ‘forgery’ arguement would look like this:

    The records say A, but the dates, signatures, handwriting, disease process, numbers and data points do not match up with the rest of the records, indicating that the master-copies have been switched or altered.

    Deer’s arguement repeatedly, clearly and consistantly look more like:

    The records say A, but invested party 1 says the records say B, and the invested party1 sat in on some of the meetings, therefore the invested party1 may have manipulated the ultimate interpretation of the data.

    “You said they could disappear tomorrow and it would make no difference,”

    I’ll repeat, I was very clearly referencing the idea that Healy was taken into the ‘pro-safe-vaxx’ arms precisely because of her (as you admit) rather outdated background.

    “Uh…neither is Healy.”

    No, but her input was clearly very instrumental in giving life to the ‘vulnerable sub-group’ arguement, which was the point.

    “I’ve barely cited her throughout this thread.”

    I don’t believe I accused you of doing so. Please stop making things up and stick to only those events that occur outside of you head.

    “Oh and you do?”

    Yes, on all 5 counts and for assessment, diagnostics and intervention. Minimal, but still better than the vast majority of people I see commentating on ‘your’ side.

    “I’ve treated you with utmost respect in most cases and have spent a lot of time trying to have a civil discussion with you.”

    No you have not, and it is most empathatically clear that you have not been so. Being ‘civil’ refers to more than just the lack of calling people names (which you certainly have done quite a bit), but it also refers to not treating your opponents as ignorant and/or corrupt, two things you do frequently.

    If implying that your opponents are corrupt, part of a conspiracy, money-grubbers, ignorant, stupid, liars is what you call ‘civil’, then you have one hell of a lot of growing up to do. You have had your problematic behaviour pointed out to you very clearly by multiple people over a period of a few years. That you still regard yourself as ‘civil’ indicates that you haven’t taken a bean of it on board, and perhaps never will.

    “But you have been horrible in every comment of yours back to me because you don’t know how to treat people nicely and because that’s all you’ve got.”

    No, it’s just you and Harold, some guy in his moms basement in Germany, Johnathon someone, and maybe one or two others that I am like this to. The connection? All regard themselves as ‘civil’ despite making clearly uncivil comments like the one below:

    “and might also be because I have someone or some people who are perhaps manipulating the search engines…you perhaps?”

    ….which is a clear cut accusation of conspiracy, improper behaviour, maliciousness, and it also does the dishonour of dodging the initial concerns in favour of what you (and you alone) think is the important factor.

    Hardly ‘civil’.

    If it was a joke, it wasn’t funny.

  421. #422 augustine
    July 25, 2011

    todd, scientist wannabe,

    It is therefore reasonable to consider that there is a risk of transmission among children via bites to or from a chronic carrier.

    Well why don’t you QUANTIFY that risk instead of using vague terms like “possible” and “very real risk”(why don’t you just say “very very super real risk” or “anything’s possible” to clarify). Those terms are not justification for the recommendation of 6 billion vaccinations. Again you are vague because you don’t have that data but you still want to cause compliance through fear mongering.

    It is justifiably reasonable to REJECT this vaccine on scientific and evidence based grounds. That is a fact!

  422. #423 Lawrence
    July 25, 2011

    And what exactly is your evidence boring troll? Present something concrete to back up your host of assertions – since you have yet to do so in any of your myriad of boring and mostly inane conversations.

  423. #424 larry
    July 25, 2011

    Lest we forget SV40

    The jury is still out on that.

  424. #425 Chris
    July 25, 2011

    larry:

    The jury is still out on that.

    Not really. Do try to keep up.

  425. #427 Chris
    July 25, 2011

    Larry, actually read the article:

    Even if SV40 DNA were definitively shown to be present in human tumors, this would not answer the question of whether the virus caused the cancer. The debate on the role of SV40 in human malignancy illustrates the difficulty in establishing cause and effect, and provides ample impetus for using genomic technologies to ensure that vaccines and other biological products are free of adventitious agents.

  426. #428 augustine
    July 25, 2011

    Present something concrete to back up your host of assertions – since you have yet to do so

    Why don’t you present the hard data that the switch from target groups to the all out mass vaccination of 3 day olds is based on.

    You must have looked at it and agreed with the conclusion right? Wrong, the mass vaccination strategy is not built on hard data. It is built on a philosophical and economic strategy.

    http://mdm.sagepub.com/content/13/1/4.abstract

    “Implementation of universal vaccination should be considered in North America, contingent on vaccine price reduction.”

    http://www.sgm.ac.uk/pubs/micro_today/pdf/050005.pdf

    They were (and remain) expensive, but have now been incorporated into global vaccination programmes, including universal usage in most developed countries as the impact on incidence following targeted use was not great.

    I shouldn’t have the burden to prove that I or my baby need the vaccine since it was never shown that I, or most people, don’t need it. The strategy was/is to vaccinate all to get at the target groups. Ultimately it makes vaccine manufacturers rich when they can sell a vaccine to the whole world. Also, as far as I know it’s tough to prove a negative. So to credit the vaccine is dubious.

  427. #429 Chris
    July 25, 2011

    Oh, and Larry you forgot this bit in that article: “It was present in batches of both the Salk and Sabin poliovirus vaccines produced and distributed from 1954 to 1963.”

    So the folks who had it are almost are in their fifties. You provide evidence that they have had more ill health than anyone born more than a decade before the vaccine was introduced or after 1963, and then you might have something.

    Essentially bringing up SV40 is worse than bringing up thimerosal, since there have been thimerosal-free versions of all pediatric vaccines.

  428. #430 larry
    July 25, 2011

    My point exactly- Difficult to prove
    I doubt that vaccines will ever be free of “adventitious agents”

  429. #431 Chris
    July 25, 2011

    larry, it has to do with relative risks. Until you can prove that viruses like measles, polio, etc and bacteria like pertussis, tetanus, etc are also full of “adventitious agents”, then we will take your concerns seriously.

    Just tell us exactly how much more dangerous the present form of polio vaccine, the IPV that has been free of SV40 for almost fifty years, is more dangerous than polio with real actual factual scientific evidence. And seeing how you have difficulty reading the evidence you proffered, I think what you produce will be very interesting.

  430. #432 Chris
    July 25, 2011

    Oops: “also full of “adventitious agents”, is supposed say:
    “also free of “adventitious agents”

    And I am sure larry’s answers will be very entertaining.

  431. #433 The Jury
    July 25, 2011

    Lest we forget SV40
    The jury is still out on that.

    Not guilty due to lack of evidence.

  432. #434 augustine
    July 25, 2011

    It is known that vaccines are incapable of causing damage to any single individual. They can only cause theoretical damage, which isn’t real damage. It is also a known fact that a baby can handle 10,000 vaccines at once, even with impurities known and unknown. Worrying about “adventitious agents” is an exercise of futility and waste of precious resources.

    Vaccines can only cause damage in nameless, faceless modeled groups of people. But this too, in fact, is doubtful. So much that if anyone brings vaccine safety into question they will be mocked for even considering the absurdity of the impossibility. It is so unlikely that anyone has EVER been damaged by a vaccine that one can safely conclude that ANY serious side effect would have happened anyway at the exact same time.

    If more than 1000 people blame a vaccine with out considering the microbiological implications , then it can be considered part of the phenomenon of mass psychosis. Therefore making it possible for vaccines to actually NOT cause the damage.

  433. #435 Lawrence
    July 25, 2011

    Boring troll – why don’t you trot out your evidence that anyone here has said anything remotely like what you’ve accused of saying?

    Do vaccines have side effects – yes.

    Have parents been compensated for vaccine injuries – yes, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars since the creation of the vaccine court.

    Do vaccine injuries / side effects still amount to a very small fraction of the total vaccine administered population – yes.

    Are the diseases that we vaccinate for (including the one we eradicated, smallpox) more dangerous, both in their historical context and current outbreaks – like France (with thousands of infected) than the vaccines – absolutely, yes, by powers of magnitude.

    Is boring troll a complete idiot who hasn’t provided any particular stance of his own, supported by any measure of evidence or facts & instead merely takes the opposing view – while also conducting ad hominem attacks, while also ignoring any inconvenient facts or posts that completely demolish its infantile arguments – absolutely yes.

  434. #436 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 25, 2011

    It is known that vaccines are incapable of causing damage to any single individual. They can only cause theoretical damage, which isn’t real damage. It is also a known fact that a baby can handle 10,000 vaccines at once, even with impurities known and unknown. Worrying about “adventitious agents” is an exercise of futility and waste of precious resources.

    Vaccines can only cause damage in nameless, faceless modeled groups of people …

    Remember, folks, Boring Auger is not doing this because he thinks laying down an army of blatant straw men would actually be convincing to anyone. He just believes that his time is so valueless and his mental ability is so negligible that he can’t hope to achieve anything of significance himself, and the most he can hope to do is annoy and waste the time of others.

  435. #437 larry
    July 25, 2011

    From Wikipedia “Hello, my name is Antaeus Feldspar.”

    “I am proud to be the recipient of a WikiMedal for Janitorial Services, awarded by Topbanana.”

  436. #438 Chris
    July 25, 2011

    Well, I was wrong. I thought larry’s answers to my questions were going to be entertaining. Now he is just become a boring troll.

    larry, you are such a disappointment.

  437. #439 larry
    July 25, 2011

    Chris, & Ant
    Googled Antaeus name- At least Jake is transparent and Augustine is right.
    This site is a waste of my time- You are both a..holes.

  438. #440 Lawrence
    July 25, 2011

    Larry – don’t let the hash tag hit you on ass on the way out.

  439. #441 Chris
    July 25, 2011

    Larry, not only do you have issues with reading your sources (hint: when you find a link that your anti-vax lords consider evidence, do yourself a favor and actually read them), you seem to have issues understanding the concept of satire and “self depreciating humor.”

  440. #442 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 25, 2011

    From Wikipedia “Hello, my name is Antaeus Feldspar.”

    “I am proud to be the recipient of a WikiMedal for Janitorial Services, awarded by Topbanana.”

    Wow, that might just be the lamest attempt at character assassination ever.  What, I’m supposed to be humiliated to have it revealed that I once edited at Wikipedia?  Or, wait, no, I bet it’s the fact that I was proud that some of the skilled work I put in there was recognized by others that’s supposed to be so humiliating (’cause Larry, when you work on a team effort, you really really hope what your teammates have to say about you is “that shirking bastard, nothing good ever comes from him,” right?  You’re wayyyy too cool for school, Larry.)

    Ironically, one of the factors that led to me deciding not to edit at Wikipedia anymore was seeing the discussions increasingly dominated by Larry-likes, who said to themselves “Gee, I have a point of view that I think should be reflected; should I attempt to present a case for my view that’s supported by evidence and reasoning, like a mature adult without a personality disorder?  Nah!  I’ll try to show people how right and just my cause is through character assassination of everyone who refuses to acknowledge my way as right!”

  441. #443 herr doktor bimler
    July 25, 2011

    However can we recompense Larry for the time he has wasted here?

  442. #444 larry
    July 25, 2011

    Ant-
    Make sure you check all those vaccines you get for mercury content-you’re
    already “mad as a hatter”

  443. #445 Chris
    July 25, 2011

    larry:

    Make sure you check all those vaccines you get for mercury content

    Dude, I even told you that all pediatric vaccines have had thimerosal free versions for a decade, and yet you still pull the outdated “mercury” canard. Well, at least it is less than one quarter out of date compare the silly “sv40″ bit!

    Well, at least you have become more entertaining.

  444. #446 lilady
    July 25, 2011

    I want compensation for the damage done to my retinas by the burning stupid twaddling of Larry.

  445. #447 Jake Crosby
    July 26, 2011

    “A Mental Disorder” is not autism.

    So this claim…

    “Since Hannah Poling’s condition is the direct physiological consequence of a general medical condition, encephalopathy, which is listed in Appendix G of DSM IV, by these criteria she does not have autistic disorder.”

    …is false.

  446. #448 herr doktor bimler
    July 26, 2011

    “A Mental Disorder” is not autism.
    So this claim… is false

    Jake, you need to flesh out your argument a bit; at the moment it reads like “Steal underpants… so … Profit!!!”

    Krebiozen at #419 has quoted from the DSM-IVTR to explain the diagnostic criteria for autism — specifically, to make the point that symptoms do not contribute towards an ‘autism’ diagnosis if they are already explained by “Mental Disorder Due to a General Medical Condition”.

    No-one has said that “A Mental Disorder” is autism.” Krebiozen’s argument is if anything the opposite… the point is that certain mental disorders are not autism. What are you trying to refute here? In effect you are repeating part of Krebiozen’s comment and calling it a refutation.

    If you have some passage from the DSM-IV-TR that contradicts what Krebiozen and Dedj have said, then bring it out. Otherwise you’re going to sound like Th1th2, assigning your own meaning to words according to whim and convenience, and I’m sure you don’t want that.

  447. #449 Composer99
    July 26, 2011

    Jake, I rather hope for your sake that your argument in this comment is not indicative of your overall style of argumentation.

  448. #450 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 26, 2011

    It’s hard to tell whether Goofus simply misread completely the argument he thought he was refuting, or whether he is trying to argue it with circular logic.

    If he misread part of Krebiozen’s argument as “A Medical Condition caused by a Mental Disorder,” then his protest that “A ‘Mental Disorder’ is not autism” would make, well, some degree of sense, at least as a misunderstanding. It is indeed true that one cannot simply assume that when “Mental Disorder” is said, that “autism” is meant. But since that’s not what Krebiozen or anyone else suggested, it’s rather pointless to point this out.

    However, knowing this Goofus, I suspect he might be simply arguing the way he loves best: by simply assuming that his conclusions are true and arguing from his conclusions to his premises back to his conclusions. Hannah Poling has autism, he insists, therefore any approach which might lead to the diagnosis of her condition as some other mental disorder must be wrong. It’s depressing to see him purportedly graduated from college and not able to avoid such a basic fallacy, but unfortunately, he’s not led us to expect great things in that regard.

  449. #451 lilady
    July 27, 2011

    @ Antaeus Feldspar: Well you simply can’t judge Goofus’ comments here because he is so used to the sycophants at Age of Autism who think wonder boy ace reporter is brilliant.

    Remember too, that the bar is set so much lower for science journalism at Age of Autism…or non-existent.

    Goofus did graduate from Brandeis with some sort of BA double majors that really aren’t heavy into the sciences or analytical thinking. And, with his attitude and his “theories” on immunology, immunization and toxicity, I would love to be a fly on the wall when he attends class in pursuit of his MPH-Epidemiolgy.

  450. #452 Chris
    July 27, 2011

    lilady:

    Goofus did graduate from Brandeis with some sort of BA double majors that really aren’t heavy into the sciences or analytical thinking.

    Of course if he was really serious about the science he would have taken the requirements for a Baccalaureate of Science.

    I don’t know about Brandeis, but where I went to college there is a big difference between getting a BS and a BA in any kind of degree that smacks of science (like chemistry, biology, etc). So much so that my former employer would pay those with a Baccalaureate of Art about half of those with a Baccalaureate of Science!

    (I learned this when a new hire came into the women’s bathroom vehemently complaining about sexism because she could only be hired as a technical aide, which is about half the salary of an engineer/scientist. The three of us women present were concerned and asked her for more details. She told us it was because she had a BA in chemistry. Then we, all with BS degrees in various disciplines, asked her why she did a BA instead a BS, her reply was that it was “easier.” We all backed away and left her quietly.)

  451. #453 lilady
    July 27, 2011

    @ Chris: …”He’ll be receiving a BA with a double major in History and Health: Science, Society and Policy”

    Direct quote from the article: Congratulations Jake Crosby Brandeis Graduate! (Age of Autism, May 22, 2011)

    Nah, Goofus never took any classes resembling serious science courses and we know that “self-taught” doesn’t work for the boy wonder ace reporter.

  452. #454 Krebiozen
    July 27, 2011

    @Jake

    “A Mental Disorder” is not autism.
    So this claim…
    “Since Hannah Poling’s condition is the direct physiological consequence of a general medical condition, encephalopathy, which is listed in Appendix G of DSM IV, by these criteria she does not have autistic disorder.”
    …is false.

    What I understand DSM-IV to be saying is that if someone’s symptoms are explained by a general medical condition like encephalopathy, that overrides a diagnosis of autism. Either Hannah Poling’s symptoms are a direct physiological consequence of encephalopathy, in which case they are not autism, or she has autism in addition to the symptoms caused by encephalopathy, in which case even if her encephalopathy was caused by vaccination (which is arguable), her autism was not. I’m not a clinician, and I am not qualified to make diagnoses, but the logic seems inescapable to me.

    In any case, autism is (rightly or wrongly) currently classified as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) which is the source of the criteria under discussion.

    The real question is whether Hannah Poling’s disorder can throw any light on the etiology of autism in general. I haven’t seen anything that makes me think it can. At present it seems that mitochondrial enzyme deficiency may cause a disorder which shares some features with, but is distinguishable from, idiopathic autism. This study looked at 25 ASD patients with mitochondrial enzyme dysfunction, and found that 24 of them had, “one or more major clinical abnormalities uncommon in idiopathic autism”. It looks to me as if the alleged vaccine autism link in general, and Hannah Poling’s case in particular (heart-breaking as it is), is a huge red herring.

  453. #455 lilady
    July 27, 2011

    @ Krebiozen: (I hate to use this expression but) children with certain mitochondrial disorders are living with a “time bomb” set off by many types of stressors such as a childhood illness (vaccine preventable or non). As we well know young children spike high fevers for many of these viruses that circulate…in later childhood these same-type of viral illnesses cause slightly elevated body temperatures.

    Of course the childhood diseases that vaccines prevent are much more serious for all children and are the stressors that will trigger serious neurological events in a child with a mitochondrial disorder.

  454. #456 René Najera
    July 27, 2011

    @Jake

    Case definitions will also be included in the lesson plans when you work toward an MPH at GW this fall. In fact, interpreting case definitions properly will be a big part of your grade in Epi 101. (I hope your professor is Dr. Cleary.)

    When you learn how to read a case definition, you will understand why what you wrote #447 needs to be clarified for you.

    I can give you some tutoring, if you need it.

  455. #457 lilady
    July 27, 2011

    @ Rene Najara: Jake doesn’t need any help…he knows it all and he will readily involve himself in debates with the professor about the curriculum. After all, he is a respected science journalist on some websites; other websites consider him to be a nasty tool of JB, a dirty trickster and a pompous ass who is in desperate need of a kick to his kishkes.

    Much luck in grad school Jake!

  456. #458 SteveJ
    July 27, 2011

    @Chris

    Of course if he was really serious about the science he would have taken the requirements for a Baccalaureate of Science.

    I don’t know about Brandeis, but where I went to college there is a big difference between getting a BS and a BA in any kind of degree that smacks of science (like chemistry, biology, etc). So much so that my former employer would pay those with a Baccalaureate of Art about half of those with a Baccalaureate of Science!

    Really? My school only offered BA degrees for science degrees. The nurses, business majors and engineers did get BS degrees.

  457. #459 Chris
    July 27, 2011

    Sorry, SteveJ. I should have made it clear it was for this particular university that does offer both BA and BS tracks in several departments, including math, science, etc.

    And my former employer actually has a personnel policy that takes in account what people took in college. Fortunately there are also policies that let a person get promoted from technician to engineer/scientist through performance. I knew one guy who was hired as a tech aide because he had a self-styled BS in Engineering (no department). Through his own diligence and with the support of his supervisor he did get promoted.

  458. #460 Dedj
    July 27, 2011

    “”A Mental Disorder” is not autism.”

    Hard to see what you’re trying to claim here. If you’re trying to claim that autism is not a mental disorder, then you’re wrong by both major (DSM and ICD) diagnostic manuals.

    If you’re trying to claim that mental disorders which are not autism, are not autism, then you’re agreeing 100% with the below statement that you’re claiming is false. If it’s a mental disorder that is not autism, then it’s not autism.

    “So this claim…

    “Since Hannah Poling’s condition is the direct physiological consequence of a general medical condition, encephalopathy, which is listed in Appendix G of DSM IV, by these criteria she does not have autistic disorder.”

    …is false.”

    If someone has enough symptoms of a medical condition that is not autism to qualify for a diagnosis of the ‘not-autism’ condition, then the symptoms are by definition better attributed to the ‘not-autism’ condition.

    Both diagnostic manuals allow for ‘better clinical picture’ diagnosis of autistic symptoms. None of the autistic symptoms are unique to autism (although the specific presentations may be) and it’s possible to have autistic symptoms that are better explained by other disorders.

    I beginning to suspect you have never read the diagnostic criteria. I would suggest that you approach someone with experience in diagnostic differentiation or making dual-diagnosis assessments and ask them to explain to you the difference between ‘autistic symptoms’ and ‘autism’.

  459. #461 Antaeus Feldspar
    July 27, 2011

    As I’ve said, the irony of Goofus’ approach to diagnosis is that if it had been employed by others who came before him, he would be diagnosed as mentally retarded. There probably was someone just as stubborn and just as wedded to a pet hypothesis, and that person probably would have used most of Goofus’ lines. “Mental retardation is defined by symptoms, so these so-called ‘autisitic’ people you talk about are mentally retarded, period. Who cares if their symptoms are a much better match for this so-called ‘autism’? I have certain pet theories that are better served if they are mentally retarded, so I refuse to acknowledge that this ‘autism’ could have any relevance.”

  460. #462 lilady
    July 28, 2011

    @ Herr Doktor Bimler: Well I think you have asked for specific clarification from Jake about his (general) statement that at one time doctors believed autism was caused by HOMICIDAL parents:

    “It belatedly occurs to me that Jake might have been exaggerating for rhetorical effect when he wrote of the medical establishment’s “previous claim that autism was caused by homicidal parents.”

    You offered to discuss his statement once again and once again Jake doesn’t not reply.

    I suspect he hasn’t replied because it is inconvenient (he knows he has no documented proof and he has been called out on the ploy and lack of journalistic integrity)

    I also researched any proof of his statement about homicidal parents and spoke with friends who actually have severely autistic children born in the late 1950s through mid 1960s and they have no recollection that the medical profession labeled parents of children with autism as “homicidal”.

    Now Jake, who has been known to “fudge” the truth and insert extraneous “attributable” quotes and to play semantics with written documents, is still unable to reply.

    Jake, we really want to know where that statement came from; citations from journals or articles will do…please don’t refer us to any of the blogs by the editors of Age of Autism or even worse any of the mommy/daddy warriors posters. If Jake made up that statement out of his fertile imagination (whole cloth), he should “man up” to that and end this inquiry.

  461. #463 Robert Janitorial
    October 20, 2011

    I am with you on this one. There is so much propaganda coming out against vaccines which is not scientifically founded. I could just as well go claim that autism comes from pregnant mothers eating chocolate, or from cleaning their homes or offices. Better go hire a janitorial service, ladies, or you might give you baby autism! It’s just gotten a little bit out of hand, I think.

The site is currently under maintenance and will be back shortly. New comments have been disabled during this time, please check back soon.