# The check must have finally cleared, or: Mawson’s incompetent “vaxed/unvaxed” study is back online

It looks as though the check has finally cleared.

You might be wondering what I’m referring to. A little more than a week ago, I took note of how a truly awful survey masquerading as a “study” had risen from the dead once again as two publications in a notorious bottom-feeding predatory “open access” journal after having been retracted after publication in a somewhat less notorious but similarly bottom-feeding predatory “open access” journal. Whether or not these studies were actually retracted the second time around is somewhat unclear. What is known is that they were on the Open Access Text (OAT) website, and then they weren’t.

Retraction Watch reported:

For the second time, a journal has quickly retracted a study that suggested vaccines raise the risk of autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders.

The study first raised a furor last year, prompting a Frontiers journal to quickly retract it. After it was republished in the Journal of Translational Science this month, that journal has also retracted it.

Although the titles of the two papers changed, the abstracts were nearly identical. Both studies surveyed the parents of 666 home-schooled children, 39% of whom where not vaccinated, and concluded that vaccination increased the risk of neurodevelopmental problems, particularly if children were born prematurely.

A representative of the Journal of Translational Science told us “Pilot comparative study on the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6- to 12-year-old U.S. children” has been retracted, and it will update us with an explanation.

Not surprisingly, that never happened, and the mystery remained. Someone from the journal told Retraction Watch that the studies had been retracted, and then yesterday people started noticing that they were back on OAT website. Not surprisingly, given the nature of OAT journals, including the Journal of Translational Science, the jokes about the check finally having cleared wrote themselves. My purpose here is not to reiterate what’s wrong with the two studies, the first of which purported to show that vaccinated children are much unhealthier than unvaccinated children, and the second of which purported to show that the only reason premature birth is a risk factor for neurodevelopmental disorders is because of vaccines. I discussed them both in great detail quite enough. I’m more interested in what this whole incident shows about the bankruptcy of antivaccine “science.” Whatever happened, the CMSRI is gloating that the studies are back:

For instance, there’s Celeste McGovern, some of whose antivaccine nonsense I missed last week, referring to the study as the “big taboo.” That’s how antivaxers always portray themselves, as the persecuted warriors for “truth” while those evil “skeptics” (or “Skeptics,” as McGovern refers to them) are trying to “suppress” that truth. Here, she describes what happened when a Frontiers journal first retracted the Mawson paper:

There was no thought or delay in the Skeptic response. They did not waste time with letters of inquiry or professional concern. They did not wait to consider the methodology or the data or its interpretation or to read the full discussion.

Um, no. It was apparent from what we knew about the genesis of the survey and from the abstract itself that the methodology was without merit. McGovern was only getting started, though:

They jeered and screamed “anti-vaxx” – which is the equivalent of ‘racist’ or ‘sexist’ and thrown like a bludgeon at anyone, even a credible professor and researcher with a 30-year career, who questions the safety of the expanding use of this particular type of pharmaceutical product for children. “Anti-vaxx” is a silencer.

A fumbling editor at Frontiers tweeted in haste that the study had only been provisionally accepted and the review would be re-opened “in response to concerns raised.”

One skeptic is gloating that he is solely responsible for blighting the entire study consideration process:

“I pride myself to have caused the Frontiers anti-vaxx retraction with one tweet!” Leonid Schneider tweeted this week. “The anti-vaxx paper was published as abstract, a reader alerted me, I tweeted, Frontiers got scared, pulled the paper.”

Even Retraction Watch reported the story that way. After receiving criticism on Twitter, Frontiers released a public statement, noting that the study was only “provisionally accepted but not published,” and is being re-reviewed. “

I described what happened when it happened. From my perspective, the study was so bad that even a Frontiers journal considered it too bad to complete the publication process and publish the entire article. So Mawson shopped the paper around and found a journal with even lower standards than a Frontiers journal.

McGovern then addresses the most recent “retraction” (or whatever the temporary “depublishing” of Mawson’s papers was):

Now, an editor at the Journal of Translational Science has bowed to these forces again. Retraction Watch reports that the study has been “retracted – again.” But there has been no formal statement issued by the journal. I emailed the Editor in Chief, Terry Lichtor, a professor at Arkansas State University, twice. When I didn’t hear from him I called the London office and was told they would telephone him to make sure he got my questions. The person on the phone seemed to know about my emails. I’ve had no reply.

I contacted two editors at Retraction Watch and asked if they weren’t using the term “retracted” rather loosely for the study, considering the professional ethics and implications. No reply.

“With millions of views, the concerns that this study raises will not be easily wiped away from the public consciousness,” says Claire Dwoskin, founder of the Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute, which contributed to funding for the study.

“It would more greatly serve the interests of public health and science to replicate the study on a larger scale and determine the accuracy of the results, rather than harkening back to a time where book burning and persecution of scientists reigned the day. If the study is not restored on the journal’s website, it may be fair to conclude that some of the lessons of the past have not been learned after all.”

This is the dodge that all quacks and pseudoscience advocates fall back on whenenver their terrible scientific methodology and bogus studies are criticized. In the case of one of the studies, we know that one of its key findings is so out of whack with what is known from many, many, many high quality studies dating back to the 1970s showing that premature birth is a major risk factor for neurodevelopmental disorders that it was a huge red flag. Moreover, the methodology and statistical analyses of the studies were so bad, so incompetently carried out, that it’s quite safe to say that the results are almost certainly invalid. There is no need for “further research,” at least not based on Mawson’s utter dreck of a couple of studies. But I do love how predictable McGovern is in crying, “Persecution!” and comparing a retraction to a book burning.

She also, like most antivaxers, misunderstands what scientists mean when they refer to a finding as “settled science”:

But people who say “vaccine science is settled” are being dishonest. Science is never settled. By its very nature, science questions orthodoxies and constantly seeks and discovers new things.

Well, yes, but not quite how McGovern means it. There are certain findings in science that are so well-supported by evidence that the burden of evidence to change or refute these findings is very, very high. Such findings are considered “settled science.” That’s not to say that they are findings that will never be changed or even radically altered; rather, it’s a recognition of just how high the bar is to challenge findings in terms of evidence, given the level of evidence supporting the them.

I like to use homeopathy as an example because it is so incredibly, ridiculously improbable and for homeopathy to work huge swaths of existing chemistry and science would have gto be not just wrong, but spectacularly wrong. Even so, I concede the tiny possibility that this much science might be wrong but point out that to demonstrate that homeopathy “works” would take a mass of evidence at least as large, high quality, and compelling as the existing scientific evidence supporting current theory in physics and chemistry. One little study won’t do it. But that’s what homepathy advocates cite.

The same is true for antivaxers. Although it is less implausible that vaccines might cause autism than that homeopathy works, it is still very, very implausible indeed, based on a large, robust, and mutually reinforcing body of scientific research from multiple disciplines. Two crappy “studies” based on a crappy “survey” of an unrepresentative population, which, when you come right down to it is all Mawson’s “studies” are, won’t seriously challenge the existing scientific consensus that vaccines are not a risk factor for autism. Not even close!

None of this stops McGovern from engaging in the common crank fantasy of ultimate vindication:

Skeptics have closed ranks against this one line of inquiry. We don’t know how important that line is. But we can be pretty sure that history repeats itself and when medical history textbooks are rewritten a long time from now, there will be names of medical heroes like Semelweiss in there, people who challenged orthodoxy and went where no one wanted to go. And there will be brief allusions to the hordes of nameless scientific fools who impeded medical progress while countless children suffered.

Of course, skeptics have not “closed ranks against this one line of inquiry.” We merely point out how incompetently Mawson and other antivaxers engage in this line of inquiry. After all, it’s not as though real scientists (as opposed to antivaccine scientists) haven’t done “vaxed/unvaxed” studies before comparing health outcomes between the two groups. There have been several such studies. And guess what? The results aren’t what antivaxers would have you believe. Such studies have generally found either that there is no difference between the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated children or that vaccinated children are actually healthier. But that’s not what people like McGovern want to hear.

I can’t help but finish with a very old “friend” of the blog, J.B. Handley, founder of the antivaccine group Generation Rescue:

If you’re confused, you’re not alone. And just to clarify: this study has NEVER been retracted, only removed by two journals, and re-published by the second one…Starting to think this is the study that just “won’t go away!”

I notice that The Gnat also thinks I wouldn’t address this. Silly Gnat.

No, it is, as I referred to it before, the zombie study. Or the Jason study. Or the Michael Myers study. Or the Freddy Krueger study. Or pick the name of your favorite movie monster that appears to die at the end of one movie and always returns for another movie to kill again. I hope Retraction Watch will follow up on what happened, but somehow I doubt that there will ever be a coherent answer to the question of what happened here. My best guess remains that the check finally cleared, because Mawson’s study is so bad that even a pay-to-publish journal balked.

1. #1 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“No, there is not “widespread, intense and chronic inflammation in the brains of autistic people.””

CITATION NEEDED.

Every study ever done on this question has reported the same thing: widespread, intense and chronic inflammation in the autistic brain.

And, a study of several dozen autistic brains is a good size study. Very difficult to obtain human autistic brain samples and analyze them. You are expecting/demanding a study of THOUSANDS of brains? Really?

The Vargas 2005 study looked at dozens of cytokines and inflammatory markers in numerous brain regions separately, in controls and autistics. That study was a huge amount of work.

Its not reasonable to demand such an impossibly high level of evidence.

2. #2 Lawrence
May 23, 2017

Again, I’m confused why VP is wasting time on us “ignorant” folk & not applying to the Nobel committee….

3. #3 Alain
May 23, 2017

VP,

Again, how many papers do you have on your website? And also, is that an exhaustive search for papers?

Alain

4. #4 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“And also, is that an exhaustive search for papers?”

I dont understand this question.

5. #5 brian
May 23, 2017

Vaccine Papers,

You responded to DB’s citation of a study that suggested that lesions in the brains of people with autism arose early in gestation by stating that “cortical layers continue to form postnatally.” Uh huh.

In response to a citation of work that involved the comparison of whole exome sequencing data from over 80,000 individuals, you indicated that you don’t like twin studies. Got it.

You’re just embarrassing yourself.

• #6 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Thats an insult, not an argument.

6. #7 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“And that rhesus monkey study you mention had 13 subjects and 11 controls. “Underpowered” doesn’t even begin to cover it.”

Thats a decent size for a monkey study, which are very expensive to do.

The results were highly statistically significant, which is what counts.

7. #8 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“In response to a citation of work that involved the comparison of whole exome sequencing data from over 80,000 individuals, you indicated that you don’t like twin studies. ”

The claims of high heritability are based on the twin studies, not the genome sequencing studies, because genome sequencing has failed to provide evidence that its highly heritable. There are hundreds of genes associated with autism, most with weak association. That indicates its NOT a genetic disorder. Its a gene-environment interaction.

8. #9 Alain
May 23, 2017

Not to tooth my horn but I also wonder why VP isn’t inclined to read only 128 papers of my own choosing while, in my case, from our publication, there is this text:

Of over 7000 articles retrieved, 58 (19 PET and 39 fMRI) satisfied all inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis

Of which, I personally read over 2000 of them at a rate of 50 per day 😉 While attending my undergrad study…and doing my usual daily chores.

That said, I’m perusing the list of 128 article I provided to VP to trim that down to a readable list…if only VP would give me the number of publication for his / her evidence that autism is brain damage…Will I be waiting? 🙂

Alain

• #10 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Papers on the VP website are contextualized and explained. They are not merely listed without explanation, as you have done.

9. #11 Alain
May 23, 2017

VP,

To answer your question, for our paper, we did an exhaustive search for papers (which in our case, was over 7000 papers needing screening and assessment). I want to know if the list of papers on your website is as complete as possible and how many there is? Your website doesn’t specify the number of papers you have there. I want a number.

Alain

• #12 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

You are free to go count them. I havent done that.

10. #13 vinu arumugham
May 23, 2017

# 167 Dr. Corcos,
“Is there any randomized trial of delaying vaccines in high risk babies?”

What is considered “high risk” in this case?

11. #14 Alain
May 23, 2017

You are free to go count them. I havent done that.

oooohhhh….Now that doesn’t support your argument that there is massive evidence of brain damage if you are not even able to count the number of papers on your website which is the bare minimum task to do if one want to be considered a scientist. Did you even read them?

Alain

May 23, 2017

Again, how many papers do you have on your website?

I’m sure that curl or wget would be more than happy to provide you with the answer to that. More interesting to me is how many of them are pirated.

13. #16 Alain
May 23, 2017

Sure I can and will do that but I wanted to verify his / her assertion that there are massive evidence of brain damage.

Alain

14. #17 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Here is a suggestion: you should engage with my evidence and arguments. Explain why my arguments are wrong.

15. #18 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Explain why this causal chain is wrong:

Al adjuvant injection > transport to brain > inflammation in brain > autism.

16. #19 Lawrence
May 23, 2017

Again, why are you wasting time trying to convince us of your hypothesis?

Why aren’t you accepting a Nobel Prize as we speak, since you’ve got it all figured out?

17. #20 Alain
May 23, 2017

Ok,

I will mention it again, the enhanced perceptual functioning and associated hypothesis (Markram et al. at least but there are other) goes against your hypothesis that autism is a result of brain damage. Furthermore, IQ range of autistic peoples goes from mental disability range (not testable) to over 150 IQ point score (98th percentile on the RSPM) which argue against brain damages.

Of course, there can be inflammation in autistic brain but that can be present in the normal brain too (fever among others), that is not, automatically brain damages. Furthermore, there is evidence from, at a minimum, the lab I was working in of excellent memory (we also studied autistic savants for which, the epidemiology is 1/5 autistic subjects having savants abilities compared to the general population rate of 1%).

Which again, goes against brain damage. Yes, autism is a pathology (a social one and sometime, a language one) but that doesn’t mean brain damage.

You get it?

Alain

18. #21 Dangerous Bacon
May 23, 2017

While VP insists that “every” study on the question reveals that there’s widespread chronic inflammation in the brains of those with autism, VP ignores that such inflammation to some extent may be the _consequence_ and not the cause of autism.

https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-suggests-brain-inflammation-hallmark-autism

If we accept the idea that inflammation causes autism, then VP will have to continue doing a dance around evidence that autism begins during gestation and inflammatory changes in utero could have a causative role.

“Autism likely begins in the womb, during brain formation, and animal studies indicate that layer formation in the fetal brain may be damaged by inflammation in the mother. A study published in February 2014 followed 1.2 million pregnancies in Finland. Researchers measured the women’s levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), a well-established measure of inflammation. They found that the risk of autism in the children of women with the highest levels of CRP was 43 percent higher than in those of the women with the lowest levels.”

“Other studies have begun to show that mothers who have certain pro-inflammatory conditions are at greater risk of having children with autism—these conditions include rheumatoid arthritis, asthma, celiac disease, diabetes, and obesity. Women with autoimmune diseases are more likely to produce “antibrain antibodies,” which can attack the brain tissue of a fetus. Women who have an infection during pregnancy may also be at increased risk of having children with autism.
These studies suggest that measuring inflammation in pregnant women may help identify those children most at risk for developing an ASD and help get them early intervention.”

http://www.healthline.com/health-news/connection-between-inflammation-and-autism-052214

Note that last part about infection-associated risks. VP would have you believe that minute quantities of aluminum-based adjuvant or other Vaccine Toxins are grievously harmful to developing brains, but somehow serious infections with their raft of actual toxins causing release of large amounts of cytokines are inconsequential.

In a way, it’s amusing to see so many fallacies dressed up in pseudoscientific jargon in defense of antivax ideology.

But it’s also depressing.

• #22 Dorit Reiss
May 23, 2017

I want to reemphasize your later point – that if inflammation was the issue, the diseases would be the concern, not the tiny amounts of aluminum salts in vaccines. VP suggested earlier that measles does not cause inflammation in the brain – which is strange in a disease for which one of the complications is encephalitis, in about 1:1000. Mumps can also cause encephalitis, and other diseases also have such effects. So if the issue was inflammation, why are the vaccines the culprit and not the solution?

• #23 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

” Researchers measured the women’s levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), a well-established measure of inflammation. They found that the risk of autism in the children of women with the highest levels of CRP was 43 percent higher than in those of the women with the lowest levels.””

Elevated inflammation during gestation creates higher risk of injury from inflammation from vaccines. Its the “two-hit” model. First hit does not cause great damage, but creates vulnerability to a second hit. The second hit (vaccines) causes the injury.

“VP would have you believe that minute quantities of aluminum-based adjuvant or other Vaccine Toxins are grievously harmful to developing brains, but somehow serious infections with their raft of actual toxins causing release of large amounts of cytokines are inconsequential.”

The quantities are not minute. They are proven to cause life-long debilitating brain injury and inflammation in the brain, at vaccine dosages. Al adjuvant causes long term chronic inflammation in the brain, because it puts aluminum in the brain. Normal infectious illnesses do not do this. They cause transient inflammation, not necessarily in the brain.

19. #24 Lawrence
May 23, 2017

Of course he doesn’t.

Because he’s talking about a “brain damage” which is so specific that this “inflammation” cannot be replicated by anything other than aluminum salts adjuvants.

Which leads me back to the question of why we find autistic children (and adults) who are entirely unvaccinated.

20. #25 Alain
May 23, 2017

Al adjuvant injection > transport to brain > inflammation in brain > autism.

The part in bold: inflammation in brain, does not always lead to autism. This is a non-specific finding which can present in every brain on this planet leading to different results or pathology, if any (pathology that is) is present.

Alain

• #26 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“Of course, there can be inflammation in autistic brain but that can be present in the normal brain too (fever among others), that is not, automatically brain damages. Furthermore, there is evidence from, at a minimum, the lab I was working in of excellent memory (we also studied autistic savants for which, the epidemiology is 1/5 autistic subjects having savants abilities compared to the general population rate of 1%).

Which again, goes against brain damage. Yes, autism is a pathology (a social one and sometime, a language one) but that doesn’t mean brain damage.

You get it?”

yes I get it. Thank you for explaining.

Yes inflammation must be intense and/or long enough to cause injury.

Autism is associated with intelligence genes. So, association with some types of improved cognitive function does not establish its not injury. We dont know what the cognitive function would be like in these individuals if they were not autistic.

As I mentioned, there are MANY reasons why autism is an injury-the inflammation, missing purkinje cells and associations with diseases. We know some of the causes, like early life infections and toxin exposures, and they are definitely not beneficial or benign.

• #27 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

See the literature on immune activation and autism. Experiments in animals prove causation, i.e. the link:

inflammation 9IL-6) >> autism.

example:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22310922

21. #28 Alain
May 23, 2017

Lawrence,

Agreed. Time for me to go to work.

Later 😉

Al

22. #29 brian
May 23, 2017

It’s a gene-environment interaction.

Remarkably, recent evidence suggests that gene-environmental interaction at very early periods of fetal brain development produce ASD-related phenotypes. This has nothing to do with postnatal administration of adjuvanted vaccines.

Atladottir HO, Thorsen P, Ostergaard L, Schendel DE, Lemcke S, Abdallah M et al. Maternal infection requiring hospitalization during pregnancy and autism spectrum disorders. J Autism Dev Disord 2010; 40(12): 1423-1430.

Baron-Cohen S, Auyeung B, Norgaard-Pedersen B, Hougaard DM, Abdallah MW, Melgaard L et al. Elevated fetal steroidogenic activity in autism. Molecular psychiatry 2015; 20(3): 369-376.

Birnbaum R, Jaffe AE, Hyde TM, Kleinman JE, Weinberger DR. Prenatal expression patterns of genes associated with neuropsychiatric disorders. The American journal of psychiatry 2014; 171(7): 758-767.

Brimberg L, Sadiq A, Gregersen PK, Diamond B. Brain-reactive IgG correlates with autoimmunity in mothers of a child with an autism spectrum disorder. Molecular psychiatry 2013; 18(11): 1171-1177.

Courchesne E, Mouton PR, Calhoun ME, Semendeferi K, Ahrens-Barbeau C, Hallet MJ et al. Neuron number and size in prefrontal cortex of children with autism. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association 2011; 306(18): 2001-2010.

Jiang HY, Xu LL, Shao L, Xia RM, Yu ZH, Ling ZX et al. Maternal Infection during Pregnancy and Risk of Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta analysis. Brain Behav Immun 2016.

Lee BK, Magnusson C, Gardner RM, Blomstrom A, Newschaffer CJ, Burstyn I et al. Maternal hospitalization with infection during pregnancy and risk of autism spectrum disorders. Brain Behav Immun 2015; 44: 100-105.

Lombardo, MV, Moon, HM, Su, J, Palmer, TD, Courchesne, E, Pramparo T. Maternal immune activation dysregulation of the fetal brain transcriptome and relevance to the pathophysiology of autism spectrum disorder. Molecular Psychiatry advance online publication 21 March 2017; doi: 10.1038/mp.2017.15

Parikshak NN, Luo R, Zhang A, Won H, Lowe JK, Chandran V et al. Integrative functional genomic analyses implicate specific molecular pathways and circuits in autism. Cell 2013; 155(5): 1008-1021.

Stoner R, Chow ML, Boyle MP, Sunkin SM, Mouton PR, Roy S et al. Patches of disorganization in the neocortex of children with autism. N Engl J Med 2014; 370(13): 1209-1219.

Willsey AJ, Sanders SJ, Li M, Dong S, Tebbenkamp AT, Muhle RA et al. Coexpression networks implicate human midfetal deep cortical projection neurons in the pathogenesis of autism. Cell 2013; 155(5): 997-1007.

May 23, 2017

If they’re so toxic, why don’t they kill the macrophages before they magically arrive at the brain to deliver their sinister payload?

Good question. Its likely because the Al adjuvant particles are present inside the macrophage lysosomes, which can be considered to be outside the macrophage.

Do you even know what a lysosome is?

24. #31 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“”Because he’s talking about a “brain damage” which is so specific that this “inflammation” cannot be replicated by anything other than aluminum salts adjuvants.

Which leads me back to the question of why we find autistic children (and adults) who are entirely unvaccinated.

Anything that causes the right type of inflammation in the brain, of sufficient duration and/or intensity, can cause autism. Infections can cause autism, because infections can cause inflammation in the brain.

25. #32 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“Remarkably, recent evidence suggests that gene-environmental interaction at very early periods of fetal brain development produce ASD-related phenotypes. This has nothing to do with postnatal administration of adjuvanted vaccines.”

The injury can occur prenatally or postnatally.

There is nothing in your cited papers that indicates the injury can occur only in the prenatal period.

The human brain has intense development after birth, including the formation of most synapses. Synapse formation is known to be disrupted in autism.

26. #33 brian
May 23, 2017

“There is nothing in your cited papers that indicates the injury can occur only in the prenatal period.”

Remarkably, prenatal development can explain postnatal phenotypes, but postnatal exposure to adjuvants cannot explain observed ASD-related changes during fetal development.

• #34 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“but postnatal exposure to adjuvants cannot explain observed ASD-related changes during fetal development.”

Actually they can, because your evidence is mere correlation.

Differences observed in the prenatal period are simply indicators of vulnerability to vaccine injury.

Specifically, this vulnerability can be caused by things like nutrient deficiency (e.g. vitamin D deficiency) or genetic tendency to high inflammation or autoimmunity (which would create vulnerability to vaccination).

27. #35 Science Mom
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
May 23, 2017

Autism is brain injury caused by early life inflammation in the brain. And thats exactly what Al adjuvant does.

Al adjuvant in fact stimulates the exact same type of immune activation (interleukin-6) proven to cause the disorder.

No it doesn’t and your hand-waving isn’t a substitute for evidence. As usual the VP crank starts off with his aluminium fixation, can’t answer rebuttal nor provide evidence to support his claims then moves on to his other obsession, IL-6. Tell me VP crank, what is the order of tissue deposition for aluminium?

28. #37 Julian Frost
Gauteng East Rand
May 23, 2017

Thats a decent size for a monkey study, which are very expensive to do.
The results were highly statistically significant, which is what counts.

That study had 11 controls and 13 subjects. There is no way on Earth it was statistically significant.

• #38 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Summary of the results. Several results had P<0.01.

(A) Maternal immune activation (MIA) off- spring exhibit increased frequency of motor stereotypies and self-directed behaviors. Left panel: When observed alone in a large cage at 10 months of age, second trimester MIA (MIA2) animals produce significantly more repetitive behaviors than control animals (CON) (**p # .01). The first trimester MIA (MIA1) offspring also produce more repetitive behaviors than control animals, but this difference does not reach statistical significance at 10 months (p 1⁄4 .06). Middle panel: When observed alone at 22 months of age, MIA1 offspring produce significantly more repetitive behaviors (*p # .05). Second trimester MIA animals also produce significantly more repetitive behaviors than control animals at 22 months (**p # .01). Right panel: When tested at 17 months of age in the Y- maze social preference assay, MIA2 treatment animals produce significantly more repetitive behaviors than control animals (**p # .01). (B) Maternal immune activation offspring display decreased affiliative vocaliza- tions. Left panel: At 22 months, MIA2 offspring produce significantly fewer coo calls than control animals (**p .01). Right panel: When observed with a novel conspe- cific at 24 months of age, MIA1 offspring produce significantly fewer coo calls than control animals (*p # .05). (C) Maternal immune activation offspring exhibit inappropriate interactions with unfamiliar conspecifics. Left panel: First trimester MIA offspring demonstrate inappropriate social interactions with an unfamiliar animal, as indexed by high frequency of approaching (*p 0.05) and more frequently moving within arm’s reach of the unfamiliar animal (**p .01). Right panel: First trimester MIA offspring remained near the unfami- liar animal, as indexed by the duration of time spent in physical contact or within arm’s reach of the unfamiliar animal (*p .05).

May 23, 2017

“And that rhesus monkey study you mention had 13 subjects and 11 controls. “Underpowered” doesn’t even begin to cover it.”

Thats a decent size for a monkey study, which are very expensive to do.

The results were highly statistically significant, which is what counts.

You’re really not clear on this concept, are you?

30. #40 Julian Frost
Gauteng East Rand
May 23, 2017

By the way, most of the Papers you list use the words “suggest” “may” and “might”.

• #41 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Such language is common in scientific literature, which is typically written with an (over) abundance of caution. What matters most is the data presented, not the opinions of the authors. The Wei IL-6 paper reviews strong evidence proving that IL-6 causes autism in animal models. Its proven beyond any reasonable doubt, at least in the animal models.

Also see this (IL-6 induces IL-17, so this paper is another replication of the IL-6 results):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26822608

31. #42 Alain
At work waiting after the computer
May 23, 2017

If I resume that correctly:

Autism is brain damage caused by 9IL6 which is a causative agent even in autistic people having an IQ off the chart for which if there where no vaccines given and no injuries to the brain, autistic people would have even greater IQ. Everything else is correlational.

I think there’s lots of assumptions in there but I’ll leave it to the regulars because of work and commenting on a phone is awful.

Al

32. #43 Lawrence
May 23, 2017

“autism in animals” model?

So, via the current DSM, what should autism in a Rat look like?

• #44 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

abnormal social and communicative behavior, and repetitive behavior. Also, damage to purkinje cells and cerebellum. Successful animal model replications have been done in monkeys, which are obviously more human-like. The animal models are excellent models of human disease, since immune activation (infection) also causes autism in humans, and they produce the same physiological damage and behaviors. Also, the same drugs and brain inflammation is observed. The animal models match human autism in every way thats been tested. The validity of the immune activation animal models is accepted, by consensus.

• #45 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

A recent quote from a well known autism researcher:

“These MIA (maternal immune activation) animal models meet all of the criteria required for validity for a disease model: They mimic a known disease-related risk factor (construct validity), they exhibit a wide range of disease-related symptoms (face validity), and they can be used to predict the efficacy of treatments (predictive validity).”
–Dr Kimberley McAllister, UC Davis MIND Institute, Science, August 2016 (i.e. this paper: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6301/772 )

33. #46 brian
May 23, 2017

Differences observed in the prenatal period are simply indicators of vulnerability to vaccine injury.

Uh huh. So here are some fetal neurodevelopmental “indicators of vulnerability to vaccine injury”:

Blurring of the gray/white matter junction as the result of a migratory defect where cells that should move to the cerebral cortex get stuck in the subplate region.

Corpus callosum abnormalities that indicate axonal guidance defects related to abnormalities of neuronal migration, e.g., heterotopias, an increase in subpial neurons, and cortical malformations.

Disorganization of minicolumns, the units of the basic architecture of the brain.

Reduction of the number of interneurons along with abnormal migration of radially migrating neuroblasts as a result of mistiming of migration.

• #47 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

You dont have evidence that those defects are present prenatally. Thats ASSUMED.

May 23, 2017

Differences observed in the prenatal period are simply indicators of vulnerability to vaccine injury.

Uh huh.

“Begging the question” appears to be something else that has failed to sink into Dan’s cranium.

35. #49 Lawrence
May 23, 2017

Autism is a “spectrum” which ranges from very severe to high functioning…..so pray tell, how can you use these “animal models” that you put so much faith in, to relate back to a single vaccine ingredient?

Again, if you’re so sure, why aren’t you receiving your Nobel Prize?

• #50 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

“how can you use these “animal models” that you put so much faith in, to relate back to a single vaccine ingredient?”

The connection is IL-6.

IL-6 causes the injury in the animal models, and aluminum adjuvant induces IL-6 in the brain.

Al adjuvant > IL-6 in brain > autism

36. #51 Science Mom
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
May 23, 2017

You should read my arguments, including articles on the VP blog, before commenting.

Lots of scientific evidence supports the IL-6 > autism connection.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23994594

Something something opinion piece and nothing to do with vaccines as usual.

37. #52 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

You guys are supposed to have mountains of evidence that vaccines do not cause autism, right? How come I have not seen any such evidence with regard to aluminum adjuvant?

38. #53 Science Mom
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
May 23, 2017

What matters most is the data presented, not the opinions of the authors.

This was a howler. Data pl. numpty and the interpretation of the data by the authors who know a helluva lot more on the subject than you do matters, not your free-wheeling associations and lack of intellectual integrity.

• #54 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

They argue that IL-6 causes autism.
quotes:

“All these evidences suggest that brain IL-6 may play an important role in the development of autism.”

“IL-6 elevation in the brain, caused by the activated glia and/or MIA could mediate autism- like behaviors, through impairments of neuroanatomical structures and neuronal plasticity”

“Wei et al. developed a mouse model of over-expressing IL-6 in the brain with an adenoviral gene delivery approach and confirmed that IL-6 is an important mediator of autism-like behaviors. This study found that mice with an elevated IL-6 level in the brain developed autism-like behaviors (Wei et al., 2012a). These findings suggest that IL-6 elevation in the brain could modulate certain pathological alterations and contribute to the development of autism.”

39. #55 Science Mom
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
May 23, 2017

IL-6 causes the injury in the animal models, and aluminum adjuvant induces IL-6 in the brain.

Al adjuvant > IL-6 in brain > autism

If there is no animal model for autism, you haven’t established vaccines induce IL-6 in the brain to produce pathology and that pathology is autism, then how can you possibly expect not to be laughed at.

• #56 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

There is an excellent animal model of autism: immune activation exposure during early development.

Several studies show al adjuvant induces long term inflammation in the brain and pathology, and there is some evidence now that it induces IL-6 in the brain. Several studies show Al induces IL-6.

http://vaccinepapers.org/aluminum-inflammation-interleukin-6/

40. #57 Science Mom
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
May 23, 2017

Oh and still waiting for VP crank to list the order of tissue deposition for aluminium since he’s such an expert on the subject.

Well Dan, when you going to get around to that?

41. #58 Science Mom
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
May 23, 2017

There is an excellent animal model of autism: immune activation exposure during early development.

Well what is it? There is no animal model of autism and I’m not going to your blog, you can cough your evidence up here. I’m not doing your job for you.

42. #59 Lawrence
May 23, 2017

Because he can’t….guess he’s too busy writing up his Nobel submission, right?

May 23, 2017

So?

May 23, 2017

The connection is IL-6.

May 23, 2017

^ “[sic]” for the subs.

May 23, 2017

There is an excellent animal model of autism: immune activation exposure during early development.

“Model.” You keep using that word, etc.

47. #64 Dangerous Bacon
May 23, 2017

VP: “Autism does not begin in utero.”
VP: “The injury can occur prenatally or postnatally.”

I detect a subtle lack of consistency here. 🙂

Of course, we’re dealing with someone who’s convinced of “strengths” in the Mawson article, while being incapable of understanding how its conclusions are disqualified by its multiple fatal flaws. When it comes to critical thinking skills, lack of consistency is the least of VP’s problems.

Of course, this post will be dismissed as “snark” that doesn’t address The Science – which I and others have discussed at length, only to be met with denial, Gish galloping to other misunderstood and/or irrelevant publications, and admonitions to read VP’s blog, where all will be revealed..

• #65 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Correction: Autism usually is not caused in utero, but the conditions that create vaccine vulnerability may begin in utero, though these conditions will not cause autism on their own.

48. #66 JustaTech
May 23, 2017

Going back to VP’s thing about aluminum. First VP says that Al (injected intramuscularly) can’t be excreted, that it is stuck in the muscle.
Then VP says that Al moves to the brain.
Well, which is it? AL is stuck in the muscle forever, or Al can move through the body?

You can’t have it both ways.

• #67 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Never said it was stuck in the muscle. I said it was stuck in the BODY. The particles dont dissolve and they cannot be excreted by the kidneys.

Some of it travels into the brain. In the mouse experiments with 200mcg/kg, about 1.3% traveled to the brain, which was enough to cause long term brain inflammation and brain injury.

Its carried into the brain by macrophages. Thats explained here: http://vaccinepapers.org/vaccine-aluminum-travels-to-the-brain/

49. #68 brian
May 23, 2017

There is an excellent animal model of autism: immune activation exposure during early development.

How does altered gene expression during fetal development suggest that macrophages carrying postnatally-delivered, vaccine-derived particles of aluminum across the blood-brain barrier cause ASD?

50. #69 Calli Arcale
http://fractalwonder.wordpress.com
May 23, 2017

Vaccine Papers:

There is an excellent animal model of autism: immune activation exposure during early development.

Um, are you unclear what “model of autism” means? Because you just said that the animal model of autism is the thing you claim causes autism.

We’re not asking what you claim causes autism. We’re asking how you know these animals have autism at all (or something similar enough to count). Merely possessing the thing you claim causes autism isn’t enough, because you’re trying* to test whether or not this thing causes autism.

*Well, theoretically. I’m making the possibly unwarranted assumption that you possess some degree of intellectual honesty.

• #70 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

Same behaviors. Same physiological damage. Same treatments are effective as humans. Same causes as in humans.

Thats a good animal model.

“These MIA (maternal immune activation) animal models meet all of the criteria required for validity for a disease model: They mimic a known disease-related risk factor (construct validity), they exhibit a wide range of disease-related symptoms (face validity), and they can be used to predict the efficacy of treatments (predictive validity).”
–Dr Kimberley McAllister, UC Davis MIND Institute, Science, August 2016 (i.e. this paper: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6301/772 )

51. #71 brian
May 23, 2017

You dont have evidence that those defects are present prenatally. Thats ASSUMED.

Those statements are based on decades of research in developmental biology. If you hope to contradict not only that evidence but the evidence from an entire field of biology, you need to do something more than wave your hands.

May 23, 2017

Let’s see if I can not-b0rk the markup here:

[‘]Women with autoimmune diseases are more likely to produce “antibrain antibodies,” which can attack the brain tissue of a fetus.[‘]

<stagmom>And are due to maternal vaccinations.</stagmom>

[‘]Women who have an infection during pregnancy may also be at increased risk of having children with autism.[‘]

<Dachelbot>”Besides bad genes, experts like to associate the habits of mothers with the developmental of autism: old moms, young moms, fat moms, moms who have C-sections, drinking moms, smoking moms, moms who have babies too close together, moms who marry old dads, moms who live too close to freeways.”</Dachelbot>

• #73 Vaccine Papers
May 23, 2017

All those things cause inflammation prenatally, which greatly increases vulnerability to vaccine injury. When there is already inflammation present, additional inflammation (from vaccine) is made more harmful.

May 23, 2017

“IL-6 elevation in the brain, caused by the activated glia and/or MIA could mediate autism- like behaviors, through impairments of neuroanatomical structures and neuronal plasticity”

Oh, dear. The odd thing is that this really only appears in the abstract* and pretty much identtically in the conclusion. Well, that, and the fact that the subject warranted a six-page review paper.

How the VG thinks this glues anything together for his idée fixe beyond selective word associations is beyond me.

* Apparently the only part of a Neuroscience paper that receives the otherwise conventional benefit of “hyphenation.”

May 24, 2017

^ Dan’s copy of Wei et al. (2013) (PDF) came from LibGen,* just in case anybody was wondering whether he actually got off his ass and went to the library or anything before posting it.

* XMP, honeybunch.

• #76 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

So you prefer to attack me instead of attacking my evidence and arguments.

I say thats because you dont now how to refute my arguments.

55. #77 brian
May 24, 2017

Autism usually is not caused in utero, but the conditions that create vaccine vulnerability may begin in utero, though these conditions will not cause autism on their own.

Ah, of course–and which vaccinated-unvaccinated studies–the studies that your fellow travelers claim have never been conducted–show this? Because vaccines.

May 24, 2017

All those things cause inflammation prenatally, which greatly increases vulnerability to vaccine injury. When there is already inflammation present, additional inflammation (from vaccine) is made more harmful.

Was I talking to you, Dan? Mind your place.

57. #80 Daniel Corcos
May 24, 2017

@ VP
I don’t think that your hypothesis is impossible. But before it is seriously considered, you should provide some evidence of the correlation between aluminium in vaccines or changes in the schedule of vaccines and the rise in autism incidence.

• #81 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

There are no epidemiological studies of Al adjuvant exposure and autism. There is zero human data. The MMR-autism studies dont count because MMR does not contain aluminum. No studies of autism look at Al adjuvant exposure.

There is the Shaw ecological study, but being ecological, it doesnt mean much. Its useful for hypothesis generation only.

The animal studies on autism and Al adjuvant are convergent and strongly indicate that Al adjuvant is a serious safety hazard. Animals suffer brain injury and inflammation from the same dosages given to human infants.

58. #82 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

@ Dorit reiss”VP suggested earlier that measles does not cause inflammation in the brain – which is strange in a disease for which one of the complications is encephalitis, in about 1:1000. Mumps can also cause encephalitis, and other diseases also have such effects. So if the issue was inflammation, why are the vaccines the culprit and not the solution?”

I never stated that measles does not ever cause inflammation in the brain. it definitely can. But your risk of 1:1000 is overstated. That may be the risk for REPORTED cases, not total number of actual cases of measles.

Vaccines are the culprit because of the aluminum adjuvant. it travels to the brain, which is extremely sensitive to low levels of aluminum. Vaccines contain far more than enough aluminum to cause brain injury. In the recent experiment with 200mcg/kg, about 1.3% traveled to the brain over 6 months, which was enough to cause brain injury and long term inflammation.

59. #83 herr doktor bimler
May 24, 2017

Slightly OT: looks like the VAXXED folks have pi\$\$ed off a Maori doctor.

And Lo, there was a mighty butt-hurt across the land, and great was the clutching of pearls.

60. #84 herr doktor bimler
May 24, 2017

Orthodox medicine faces the blame for the epidemic of vaccine brain injury known as autism.

You are trying to convince Alain that he is brain-damaged. Alain does not believe you. Your main rhetorical technique seems to consist of begging as many questions as possible within each single sentence, so you’re probably not convincing anyone else either.

• #85 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

Sorry. I dont know Alain. Its nothing personal. Im not here to insult anyone.

61. #86 Orac
May 24, 2017

OK. I get an e-mail notification every time there is a comment. I’m getting tired of seeing half the comments here by VP. This is basically the sort of flooding of a comment thread designed to drown out the rest of my commenters. I’ve put up with it for around three days now, but it has be, and VP’s responses are very repetitive and incredibly tiresome. If the pace of posting doesn’t slow, I will take measures to slow it. I won’t ba outright, but I have my ways. Moderation delay is generally the first step.

• #87 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

I am merely responding to objections and questions. Im not trolling or flooding. I am the only one here representing contrary opinion, so of course that creates a higher level of responses. Not my intention to take over. Sorry that impression occurred. Was planning to abandon this thread today, since it is getting repetitive.

Orac-

Are you going to address the new science showing brain injury from Al adjuvant? Like the new Crepeaux paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27908630

The new science showing the Mitkus analysis (the foundation for Al adjuvant safety) is wrong?

This is where the vaccine controversy is headed.

• #88 Orac
May 24, 2017

Oh, you’ll be back. You always come back eventually. This episode had just started to get on my nerves because of your repetition. And, yes, you were trolling and flooding. As for the “science,” you do seem way too enamored of mouse studies.

• #89 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

I will be back!

A big advantage of animal studies is that they can be properly controlled. Poorly-matched controls is the big problem with human epi studies of vaccines (i.e. healthy user bias).

We have some good studies now on immune activation brain injury in monkeys.

• #90 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

62. #91 Julian Frost
Gauteng North
May 24, 2017

[Dorit’s] risk of 1:1000 is overstated. That may be the risk for REPORTED cases, not total number of actual cases of measles.

It is next to impossible to miss Measles. And if anything, Dorit understated the risk of Measles encephalitis.

You are trying to convince Alain that he is brain-damaged. Alain does not believe you.

And neither do I

63. #92 Daniel Corcos
May 24, 2017

@ Vinu
I mean babies with autist siblings.
@ VP
What has to be explained is the rise in autism incidence after adjustment for diagnostic criteria change. If there is no evidence for concomitant changes in aluminium injections, why would people be interested in your hypothesis, knowing that testing it will be tricky?

• #93 vinu arumugham
United States
May 24, 2017

“I mean babies with autist siblings.”

In that case we have to account for the fact that autism may have been caused by maternal autoantibodies against the fetal brain.

64. #94 Science Mom
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
May 24, 2017

Same behaviors. Same physiological damage. Same treatments are effective as humans. Same causes as in humans.

Thats a good animal model.

“These MIA (maternal immune activation) animal models meet all of the criteria required for validity for a disease model: They mimic a known disease-related risk factor (construct validity), they exhibit a wide range of disease-related symptoms (face validity), and they can be used to predict the efficacy of treatments (predictive validity).”
–Dr Kimberley McAllister, UC Davis MIND Institute, Science, August 2016 (i.e. this paper: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6301/772 )

Another case of Dan the VP crank hearing what he wants to hear and not understanding or critically-evaluating.

65. #95 Science Mom
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
May 24, 2017

Are you going to address the new science showing brain injury from Al adjuvant? Like the new Crepeaux paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27908630

Oh look it’s the Who’s Who of aluminium cranks. Another case of overdosing, non-randomisation, non-blinding, irrelevant animal tests, a couple of statistically-significant results and no clinical relevance. But this tells the VP crank what he wants to hear so it’s “good science”.

The new science showing the Mitkus analysis (the foundation for Al adjuvant safety) is wrong?

What is this “new science” you speak of?

Evidence?

This is where the vaccine controversy is headed.

Only in your fevered imagination. But I guess every crank needs a hobby.

66. #96 Dangerous Bacon
May 24, 2017

Darn, I was hoping to hear further revelations about f VP’s Dreadful Particles, which “dont dissolve and they cannot be excreted by the kidneys” but somehow magically cross the blood-brain barrier and cause The Autism.

I’m sure that can be explained as readily as the concept of brain inflammation in utero and in early infant life which is perfectly harmless if it comes from infection and maternal autoimmune disorders – but not if it is due to DEM EVIL VACCINES, in which case it causes The Autism.

67. #97 dingo199
May 24, 2017

I see VP is still fixated on the idea that IL-6 from “vaccine induced inflammation” is the cause of autism, but somehow overlooks the inconvenient fact that the main triggers for IL-6 production are infections, particularly the childhood vaccine-preventable ones.

If IL-6 caused autism, then the rates would have been higher prevaccine than they are now.

May 24, 2017

I was hoping to hear further revelations about f VP’s Dreadful Particles, which “dont dissolve and they cannot be excreted by the kidneys” but somehow magically cross the blood-brain barrier

Yah, he failed to get back to me on that hiding-in-lysosomes proposal, apparently preferring to wait for something he could whine was a personal attack instead.

69. #99 Lawrence
May 24, 2017

Oh look, Vinu is blaming the mother’s vaccines now.

70. #100 Alain
May 24, 2017

Thanks HDB,

You are trying to convince Alain that he is brain-damaged. Alain does not believe you. Your main rhetorical technique seems to consist of begging as many questions as possible within each single sentence, so you’re probably not convincing anyone else either.

Given that in the last two day, I only slept 3 hours but did enjoy an overfull night of sleep last night, I had the time to think about the whole mess and will write about it targeting VP in a few hours but I had to dig deep in the past WRT some of my experiences posting on AoA (among other) but definitely Orac is very right on a recent post (not referring to this one although this one is very right & fine too).

Al

71. #101 Alain
May 24, 2017

Sorry.|
I dont know Alain. Its nothing personal. Im not here to insult anyone.

Me. I go by my first name. You could even deduct my last name from the post where I list the publication I worked on as part of the team of scientist coworker working on an auditory neuroimaging meta-analysis close to 10 years ago.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21833294

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00241/full

I have no qualm about putting up my real name here.

Alain

May 24, 2017

For certain values of “understand.” Face it, Dan: your whoe trip is priggish in the extreme. Is there some reason you host the pirated material rather than just commenting on it and telling you audience how to steal it themselves?

I’m somehow reminded of the Little Rascals/Our Gang episode in which a chicken plucks off the cowlick from a hiding Alfalfa, who has to suppress a loud cry of “My personality!”

73. #103 JustaTech
May 24, 2017

Given the behaviors unvaccinated mice exhibit (eating their babies for one) I’m not sure that they’re a great behavioral model for humans.

74. #104 Chris
May 24, 2017

So did you check out the genetics of autism that was discussed on this video:
https://youtu.be/ub3WlwRM1F0?list=PLjvfRtcMhn4PB0NTW0RlvsMJGu1Csnn5s

• #105 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

Yes.

Its not genetic. Its a gene-environment interaction, which explains:
1) why all the twin studies show high heritability (a wrong result).
2) why there are hundreds of associated genes,.

75. #106 Chris
May 24, 2017

Aargh, failed “Copy video URL” in moderated comment!

Okay, VP (Dan), since you said ” Its helpful to understand opposing opinion” it would seem you would understand actual opposing data. Did you watch the video I posted earlier on autism genetics? Did you understand that this is what is going forward with discoveries that will actually help children?

In case you missed it, here it is again (I hope):

76. #107 Chris
May 24, 2017

Danny Boy who thinks his Vaccine Papers are relevant: “Its not genetic. Its a gene-environment interaction”

So you did not even watch the video. You really do not want to even watch opposing fact. Pity.

• #108 Vaccine Papers
May 24, 2017

I watched the stupid video. its wrong.

Heritability estimates are derived from twin studies, which must assume there is no GXE interaction. That assumption is wrong, so the high heritability estimates are wrong.

The associations of hundreds of genes with autism is meaningless. No way to calculate or estimate heritability from those results.

77. #109 Chris
May 24, 2017

VP (Dan the Vape Man): “I watched the stupid video. its wrong.”

So that is your answer? Do tell us how being a vape supplier gives you moew expertise than the actual autism researchers who gave the presentation. Then post the PubMed indexed studies that show the following is wrong:

(for those following along, the relevant pie charts start at about a half hour into the video)

5% are Genetic Syndromes like Fragile X, Tuberous Sclerosis (TSC1 and TSC2), …. etc

10% are Copy Number Variants like 15q11-1, 1q21…. etc.

2% are 16p11.2

30% are De novo gene variants like DYRK1A, ADNP, … etc

1% CHD8

8% are rare inherited gene mutations (letters too small to make out).

And 45% are still unknown, hence the massive recruitment for families for SPARK for Autism by the Simons Foundation (https://sparkforautism.org/).

At around the 57th minute there is a slide of various groups parents have formed around the specific genetic sequence their child has. It includes FamiliesSCN2A and ADNPkids.

At 59 minutes there is a slide showing how knowing the specific gene sequence is important. For instance those with SCN1A need to avoid sodium channel blockers, and those with SCN8A need to use sodium channel blockers.

Just post your “Vaccine Papers” showing those sequences are wrong right here. Because we are not going to your silly cherry picked web site.

78. #110 shay simmons
May 24, 2017

And Lo, there was a mighty butt-hurt across the land, and great was the clutching of pearls.

He frightened her, the big bully.

(Say, do Kiwis always go off into a haka like that when they’re angry? It’s pretty impressive)

79. #111 brian
May 25, 2017

It’s amusing to see yet again that while anti-vaxxers think that “gene X environment” interactions must somehow, sorta-kinda implicate vaccines, they ignore that the environment includes the expression of other genes. I suppose that the fact that the parents and siblings of children with ASD are more likely than the general population to be similarly affected or to evidence the broader autism phenotype must mean, in AoA-speak, well, nothing. Or vaccines. Because vaccines.

80. #112 Chris
May 25, 2017

Oh, lo! Here I am stuck in automatic moderation because of a stupid sock puppet from Wisconsin! And yet Dan the Vape Man can tell us exactly why he is smarter than actual PhD persons who research autism genetics.

Woot!

• #113 Orac
May 25, 2017

I don’t think you are. I looked at the list and didn’t see your e-mail address anywhere on the automod list. I can’t figure out why you got stuck. Ditto for a couple of the other regulars, whom I also checked. Strange are the ways of WordPress.

May 25, 2017

I watched the stupid video. its wrong.

Heritability estimates are derived from twin studies, which must assume there is no GXE [sic] interaction. That assumption is wrong, so the high heritability estimates are wrong.

At the end of the day, I think it’s Dan’s carefully reasoned nuance that really makes the performance so persuasive. It’s not as though there are dozens of spot-on reviews he could be “deconstructing” on his site, after all.

The associations of hundreds of genes with autism is meaningless. No way to calculate or estimate heritability from those results.

Muttley, Mumbly . .&nbsp. Mumbly, Muttley. So many choices.

May 25, 2017

^ So close, yet so far.

83. #116 Daniel Corcos
May 25, 2017

Gene environment interaction may mean, for instance, that, in order to get a disease, you MUST have some genetic factors AND an environmental factor. If the environmental factor is widespread, then you may conclude that there is very strong heritability. Is it so hard to understand, or should people refer to authority? Like these two:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25554788
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28336671

84. #117 Alain
Success lane :)
May 25, 2017

Please allow me one offtopic comment but really great news.

For many years, I’ve been an important person in the life of the daughter of my best female friend (I’ve been living with them for many years despite having my own apartment) and I learned very recently that she got accepted to veterinary medicine school and will begin her studies next august.

Alain (best friend also said that I make a really good father).

85. #118 herr doktor bimler
May 25, 2017

I learned very recently that she got accepted to veterinary medicine school

Kudos to your friend’s daughter. Med school is for people who aren’t good enough to get into vet school.

86. #119 herr doktor bimler
May 25, 2017

(Say, do Kiwis always go off into a haka like that when they’re angry? It’s pretty impressive)

I have never performed a haka, nor have any of my immediate family, and it is not for lack of getting angry. Of course we may not be representative Kiwis. Family traditions are more along the lines of “Gnaw at the edge of shield, howl like a bear, froth at the mouth, charge into battle wielding sword in a frenzy”.

This turns out to be an unconstructive way to approach an academic disagreement.

87. #120 Dangerous Bacon
May 25, 2017

“I watched the stupid video. its wrong. ”

And that’s VP, intrepid Person of Science, who derides others for allegedly favoring snark over substance.

Meantime, while we hear of celebrities who go to the dark side, here are a couple of them supporting children’s health. And they had to navigate dense underbrush and brave an onslaught of hippos, crocodiles and antivaxers:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4516300/Julia-Roberts-Bear-Grylls-team-deliver-lifesaving-vaccines.html

88. #121 Chris
May 25, 2017

Orac: “I don’t think you are.”

Thank you. Though it has been frustrating this past week.

89. #122 Gilbert
May 25, 2017

Ohh, oh… there’s ‘a study to show’:

In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial—the gold-standard design—a component of marijuana called cannabidiol (CBD) reduced seizures in children with a rare and devastating form of epilepsy…

The trial was sponsored by GW Pharmaceuticals, which has branded its CBD oil Epidiolex. The company has already received a “Fast Track” designation from the Food and Drug Administration to hasten its approval process, which will begin later this year. Currently there are no FDA-approved drugs specifically for Dravet syndrome.

Of course, there is no ‘high’ associated with CBD although the whole herb witch includes THC remediates some CBD side effects.

I’m ambivalent; Something that is deemed ‘medicine’ is still taken away from the people and put behind a sometimes-insurmountable prescription wall.

Similarly, he voted against a measure to allow Veterans Affairs doctors to recommend medical marijuana to their patients, as well as against a separate measure to loosen federal restrictions on hemp, a non-psychoactive variant of the cannabis plant with potential industrial applications.

“the only way I would agree to consider legalizing marijuana is if we had a really in depth-medical scientific study. If it does help people one way or another, then produce it in pill form.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/04/12/the-new-white-house-drug-czar-has-quite-an-idea-for-where-to-put-nonviolent-drug-users/

Fekkin’ pharma shill.

90. #123 Johnny
127.0.0.1
May 25, 2017

Ohh, oh… there’s ‘a study to show’:

In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial—the gold-standard design—a component of marijuana called cannabidiol (CBD) reduced seizures in children with a rare and devastating form of epilepsy…

Yeah, but did you read the entire article? Didja see this part?

But these benefits had costs. Ninety-three percent of those taking CBD reported side effects, while only 75 percent of placebo participants made similar reports. The most common side effects reported in the CBD group (and at much higher rates than the placebo group) were sleepiness, diarrhea, and loss of appetite. Other side effects included fatigue, vomiting, raised body temperature, lethargy, upper respiratory tract infections, and elevated liver enzymes. Eight participants taking CBD withdrew from the trial due to the side effects, as did one in the placebo group.

Effective? Maybe. Safe? Gee, I dunno.

Of course, there is no ‘high’ associated with CBD although the whole herb witch includes THC remediates some CBD side effects.

Citation needed. I don’t see that in either the report you linked to, nor at http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1611618 I freely admit I haven’t seen the entire paper. Have you?

Something that is deemed ‘medicine’ is still taken away from the people and put behind a sometimes-insurmountable prescription wall.

There’s a lot of medicines that are prescription only. Mostly those that are effective and have high incidence of side effects. You know, like possible liver failure.

“the only way I would agree to consider legalizing marijuana is if we had a really in depth-medical scientific study. If it does help people one way or another, then produce it in pill form.”

Isn’t that the smart thing to do? Controlled, measured dosage to achieve the desired therapeutic effect. That’s hard to get in a biological sample – too much variation. That is, if your goal is good medicine. If you just wanna get high, well, YMMV.

Fekkin’ pharma shill.

I know, right? Who paid for this study? From your link –

The trial was sponsored by GW Pharmaceuticals, which has branded its CBD oil Epidiolex.

Did you read the disclosures? (bolding mine)

Dr. Devinsky reports receiving grant support from Novartis, PTC Therapeutics, and Zogenix and holding equity interest in Rettco, Pairnomix, Tilray, and Egg Rock Holdings. Dr. Cross reports receiving grant support, paid to her institution, from GW Pharmaceuticals, Zogenix, Sanofi, and Vitaflo; fees for serving on an advisory board, paid to her institution, from Eisai; lecture fees, paid to her institution, from Shire and Nutricia; and consulting fees, paid to her institution, from Takeda. Dr. Marsh reports serving as a site primary investigator for a trial supported by Neuren Pharmaceuticals and receiving consulting fees from Stanley Brothers Social Enterprises. Dr. Miller reports receiving honoraria and travel support from INSYS Therapeutics. Dr. Scheffer reports receiving travel support and fees for serving on a scientific advisory board from GlaxoSmithKline; receiving travel support and lecture fees from UCB and Sanofi; receiving lecture fees from Eisai and Transgenomic; holding a patent on diagnostic and therapeutic methods for epilepsy and mental retardation limited to female patients, for which a single royalty payment has been made to University of Melbourne Commercial (WO2009086591); and holding a patent on methods of treatment and diagnosis of epilepsy by detecting mutations in the SCN1A gene, which has been licensed by Bionomics (WO2006133508). Dr. Thiele reports receiving consulting fees from Eisai, grant support and consulting fees from Zogenix Pharmaceuticals, and grant support from Courtagen. Dr. Wright reports being an employee of GW Pharmaceuticals, holding a pending patent on the use of cannabinoids in the treatment of epilepsy (WO2015193667), and holding a patent on the use of phytocannabinoids in the treatment of epilepsy (EP2448637). No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

And may the Gods of HTML protect me from the lack of preview.

91. #124 Gilbert
May 25, 2017

elevated liver enzymes

Hmm. That was addressed in the article. Valproic acid (depakote), which is also given for seizures/epilepsy, will elevate detected liver enzymes all by itself:

But some of the side effects may have been due to drug combinations, not CBD alone. For instance, kids in the CBD group who were also taking the epilepsy drug valproate were the only ones to experience liver problems as a side effect.

Controlled, measured dosage to achieve the desired therapeutic effect. That’s hard to get in a biological sample – too much variation.

What is the major damage of this society that disgards *use until desired effect* for an otherwise non toxic substance? There is immediate feedback with smoking/vaping vs ingested/pills. People are different; The homogenized ‘standard dose’ is retarded with most drugs — Universal joint; fits everything but your car.

92. #125 Gilbert
May 25, 2017

**THC remediates some CBD side effects.**

Citation needed.

It is universally known amongst users that the THC component stimulates appetite and alleviates nausea. That is why it is popular amongst those undergoing chemotherapy or HIV individuals.

Citation? I guess, there are no studies to show. Is there a study to show that multiple stab wounds can mean shorter lives?

93. #126 JustaTech
May 25, 2017

Chris @112: At least you’re only stuck in moderation here. I’m stuck in moderation over at Aardvarcheology too.

94. #127 Johnny
127.0.0.1
May 25, 2017

Gilly*, just say that you want easy access to legal pot so you can get high, and stop with the medicine stuff, m’kay? We know it, you know it, and it would save all of us a lot of time. It might even happen someday. I want drive-thru 5 cent beer stands, and, while beer is currently legal, I think you’ll get your wish sooner than I get mine.

I’ll admit that there might be a therapeutic use for weed. There are enough chemical compounds in it that I believe it’s more than possible. But claiming it’s a cure all prior to finding the evidence is just dishonest.

Yes, the current drug laws are pretty messed up. Pot is mostly legal to have and use almost everywhere, but it’s illegal to import, grow and sell across the entire country. It was a screwed up situation during Prohibition, and it’s just as screwed up now. Working to change the law is a noble endeavor, but trying to back-door legalization under the guise of “it’s medicine” is despicable.

*Heh – autocorrect changed it to Silly. Sometimes it knows better.

May 26, 2017

I have Timmeh in the killfile, but . . .

Of course, there is no ‘high’ associated with CBD although the whole herb witch [sic?] includes THC remediates [sic] some CBD side effects.

I vaguely wonder whether these include cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. Whatever.

96. #129 christine kincaid
United States
May 27, 2017

@ Chris #102:

I have zero interest in pursuing a future in Epidemiology. I just question why many studies list “excluded due to confounding variables” that match the criteria in the “Conditions commonly misperceived as contraindications” column in the CDC guidelines.

If a demographic group has already been declared as part of the representative group by the CDC, don’t you lose the discretion to exclude?

It occured to me that something may have changed as I have not worked Mom/Baby for about 10 years so I did check & Colorado is still vigilant in their “Colorado Universal Hep B” campaign that provides incentives & annual “scoring” of facilities & MD’s utilizing standing orders.

My statement was not meant to imply that vaccination is done without signed consent; it was made in the context of a study that could have been invalidated due to recall bias of the mothers, as it did not utilize medical records to cross-reference their recall.

This is my position based on personal assessment vs “just” professional & I don’t claim any scientific precedent for my reasoning.

Simply put; I gave birth to 11 children here in Colorado & 9 out of the 11 were born after 1991 when the Hep B was added to the CDC schedule.

I can “recall” giving consent for exactly 5 of those 9 although their immunization records reflect that I consented for all my children to receive not just the Hep B but all their recommended immunizations.

I’m sure the consents are legit; I would not have refused. I just don’t “recall” it.

Seven of the eleven were born during the years when the “Discharge home 24hrs post-delivery for low-risk prenatal/birth/infant apgar” was a trend with MCO’s. Do you know how many times various department representatives run in & out of the room with stacks of papers to be signed, all while you are sleep-deprived & half delerious when discharge is planned for 24 hrs post-delivery?

I just don’t think there is much potential for “accurate recall” & the study relies soley on accurate recall; thats all.

And; you & your links. I vascilate. I’m concerned & I want to be wrong. Am I not in the right place (this blog/venue) if I’m looking for the right people to make me wrong?

I’m pretty sure I’ve written less than 10 comments here & I believe I’ve asked questions as many times as I’ve made statements. Carry on …

97. #130 Chris Preston
Australia
May 27, 2017

I just question why many studies list “excluded due to confounding variables” that match the criteria in the “Conditions commonly misperceived as contraindications” column in the CDC guidelines.

Because they are confounding variables and will confound.

So, we know for example that fragile X syndrome results in symptoms similar to autism. If you include these children in a study of whether vaccines are related to autism, you will have a whole group of children showing autism-like symptoms regardless of whether they were vaccinated or not. That muddies the water unnecessarily.

The fact that you lack the understanding that this is a problem renders your comments about which children should be included in a study useless.

98. #131 Dangerous Bacon
May 27, 2017

While all you pro-vax losers are spending Saturday night home alone in your basements “blogging”, the Fun people are whooping it up at the AutismOne gala in Colorado Springs, featuring:

“A meaty carving station, hor d’oeuvres, a mouth-watering fountain of chocolate dessert options, and more included!

TWO-HOUR OPEN BAR! (Followed by cash bar.)

Check out the ever-exciting raffle, and dance, dance, dance to the DJ’s tunes!”

Sort of disappointing they aren’t dancing to the hip tunes of The Refusers. And seeing the emphasis that crowd places on avoiding unhealthy diet to improve symptoms of autistic children, they’re not setting a great example with a menu heavy on meat and calorific chocolate desserts.

May 28, 2017

While all you pro-vax losers are spending Saturday night home alone in your basements “blogging”

Hey, I was in the basement alone because I was trying to figure out what was going on with an iMac A1174 from the campus recycling so I could hand it off to a friend who really needs an upgrade.

100. #133 Chris
May 28, 2017

Actually, we had some strawberries with thick dark chocolate sauce with a nice Merlot wine, and just now finished watching “The Accountant” with Ben Affleck playing the autist who is a sharpshooter with math and bullets.

101. #134 Chris
May 28, 2017

Dear WordPress: :-p

I hate automatic moderation, and so does Orac if he is not in control of it!

102. #135 Panacea
May 28, 2017

@DB: I spent MY Saturday night (and all day Saturday) riding roller coasters at the local amusement park.

I have no doubt I had a much better time than attending a crank fest. And that includes the sun burn.

103. #136 Alain
May 28, 2017

#131 –> travis???

Al

104. #137 Julian Frost
Gauteng East Rand
May 28, 2017

@Alain no. Just Dangerous Bacon being really sarcastic.