Anti-vaccine contortions: They never end

Let's review.

Once upon a time, according to anti-vaccine zealots, the MMR vaccine caused autism. Soon after that, the explanation morphed. No, it wasn't so much the MMR that caused autism; rather, it was the mercury in the thimerosal preservative that used to be in several childhood vaccines in the U.S. until the end of 2001. Then, as evidence accumulated exonerating mercury in vaccines as a cause of autism, it became the "toxins." (Antifreeze, formaldehyde, and human fetal parts, oh my!) Finally, it became "too many too soon."

And the anti-vaccine movement rested, because its latest excuse was good. It was vague and very difficult to falsify.

But even "too many too soon" is no longer enough. Now, according to a press release I received in my e-mail, it's:

Press Release

Parents of autistic children shed light on controversial vaccinations in new book

Michael J. Dochniak and Denise H. Dunn's new book calls for removal of allergy-inducing rubber latex from vaccination packaging to minimize cases of autism

MINNEAPOLIS (MMD Newswire) May 10, 2011 -- Autism is on the rise, and the latex rubber often used in vaccine packaging and delivery systems may be one of the causes say authors Michael J. Dochniak and Denise H. Dunn in "Vaccine Delivery and Autism (The Latex Connection)" (ISBN 1456570056). Autism Speaks, the nation's largest autism science and advocacy organization, estimates that doctors diagnose the disorder in about one in 110 American children. These scary statistics highlight a condition now more prevalent in children than cancer, juvenile diabetes and pediatric AIDs combined. While researchers have not pinpointed the cause of autism, many find that atypical immunity plays a role.

Dochniak and Dunn began investigating the relationship between vaccinations and autism after Dochniak's son was diagnosed and Dunn's son developed unusual behaviors following a routine vaccination. This book collects their research on how allergens found in a natural rubber used in the transportation of vaccines are increasing the chances of autism development.

Hevea brasiliensis dry natural rubber (HDNR), derived from the liquid latex found in natural rubber trees, is still used in some vaccine packaging and delivery systems. The authors explain how the naturally occurring proteins found in latex rubber, which are also responsible for latex allergies, can affect the occurrence of allergy-induced regressive autism once one has been exposed to HDNR.

"The increasing prevalence of allergy-induced regressive autism doesn't have to be the inevitable result of immunization," Dochniak says. "If vaccination manufacturers and providers start to reduce their use of HDNR, we will see a dramatic reduction of allergy-induced cases."

Because vaccinations are required by most states for schooling, the topic has proven controversial among parents, scientists and medical providers. Dochniak and Dunn aim to provide more awareness of a potential cause for the disorder that threatens more and more children each year.

"Vaccine Delivery and Autism (The Latex Connection)" is available for sale online at Amazon.com and other channels.

About the Authors:

Michael J. Dochniak and Denise H. Dunn are leading experts in the etiology of allergy-induced regressive autism and have previously authored a book for Nova Science, entitled "Allergies and Autism." Dochniak is a scientific researcher in the field of Hevea brasiliensis natural-latex induced autism. Dunn is an early childhood educator who works closely with autistic children and adults, and has been teaching for more than 15 years.

MEDIA CONTACT:

Michael J. Dochniak

Email: mdochniak@yahoo.com

Phone: (612) 836-8237

Website: www.amazon.com/Michael-J.-Dochniak/e/B002P9CA2K

www.amazon.com/Denise-H.-Dunn/e/B0037LGJP4




REVIEW COPIES AND INTERVIEWS AVAILABLE



###



The views and opinions expressed in this press release do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CreateSpace or its affiliates.

----
This press release distributed by Mass Media Distribution LLC, 3350 Riverwood Pkwy Suite 1900, Atlanta, Georgia 30339 USA. If you no longer wish to receive press releases or news from our service, please respond to this email and let us know.

That's right. According to anti-vaccine zealots, now it's the packaging and delivery systems used for vaccines that cause autism. It never ends. It never will end.

Because, to the anti-vaccine, first and foremost, it's always about the vaccines. Always. No matter what the evidence shows. Never forget that.

More like this

A while back I wrote a brief, snarky post about a bizarre hypothesis that I considered so risible as not to be worth applying my usual 1,500 to 3,000 words of not-so-Respectful Insolence to. My original post was in response to a press release announcing a book by Michael J. Dochniak and Denise H.…
Arguably, the genesis of the most recent iteration of the anti-vaccine movement dates back to 1998, when a remarkably incompetent researcher named Andrew Wakefield published a trial lawyer-funded "study" in the Lancet that purported to find a link between "autistic enterocolitis" and measles…
The anti-vaccine movement is nothing if not plastic. It "evolves" very rapidly in response to selective pressures applied to it in the form of science refuting its key beliefs. For instance, when multiple studies looking at the MMR vaccine and autism failed to confirm the myth that the MMR causes…
Regular readers know that I have a tendency every so often to whine about when writing about the antics of the anti-vaccine movement seems to engulf this blog. Yes, it's true. Every so often I get really, really tired of the bad science, pseudoscience, magical thinking, misinformation, and even…

Mr. Dochniak, you have some interesting friends. Do you touch your loved ones with those sock puppets?

Dan (#482) would like us to see another side of Mr. Dochnak:

"I have actually had the privilege to know mike and i have been in a lot of scientific discussions with him and what he says makes a lot of sense to me."

Well, Dan, we've been in a lot of "sort of" scientific discussion with "mike" and we don't find that he's making much sense at all.

Here's the problem, Dan - if you don't know much about science (and I'm assuming that description fits you), then "mike" sounds pretty reasonable and even scientific because he's got the jargon of science down pretty well. Well enough, at least, to fool those who don't know more science than the average person.

To those who know something about science,what "mike" has to say makes about as much sense as talking about "home runs" in a football game or saying "The square root of blue is koala." It may sound like sports talk or mathematics to someone who doesn't know anything about sports or math, but it's clearly nonsense to anyone who knows the topic.

But Dan's not done yet - he has something to say about "arrogant scientists":

"Now a lot of you talk like your [sic] high up [?] scientists and your [sic] all stuck on the idea he is wrong so prove he is wrong because he is getting ahead because his theory is getting very recognized [sic]."

Dan, some of us are "high up scientists" (I assume this means scientists who are educated, experienced and recognised in our fields), which is why we're giving "mike" such a hard time. He's spouting nonsense and he isn't giving any evidence (we "high up scientists" call that "data") to support what he says.

The fact that some people who don't know much about biology or medicine are nodding in agreement with "mike" doesn't mean that he's right. In fact, it's his job to prove that he's right - we don't have to prove that he's wrong. That's how real science works, Dan.

Just saying that latex can cause autism because some people are allergic to latex and some autistic people show signs of immune dysfunction isn't very convincing to real scientists, Dan. That's why we haven't found "mike's" evidence very convincing.

To use your words, Dan, "...none of you noticed it was evidence" because it wasn't evidence, it was just unsupported claims and a not-too-convincing "Just So Story".

Stick around, Dan - you might learn something, even if you don't want to.

Prometheus

Mr. Dochniak, Orac frowns on those who sock puppet other users.

Or ban your IP address.

Well, if the troll isn't a sock puppet of Mr. Dochniak, he is certainly not doing him any favors. It just makes Mr. Dochniak and his pet theory look even more pathetic.

Prometheus writes (#490), "In fact, it's his job to prove that he's right - we don't have to prove that he's wrong. That's how real science works, Dan."

MjD's response:

In fact, medical science continues to cause pain, suffering, and death with H. brasiliensis natural-latex based medical products (e.g., vaccine packaging).

Where's the humanity in "we don't have to prove that he's wrong. That's how real science works."

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 05 Oct 2011 #permalink

Look on the positive side, Mr. Dochniak, it leaves the opportunity to prove your assertions are correct!

By the way, a real scientist actually learns when things do not go they way he/she wishes. It is because it opens up new possibilities. That is the advantage of having an open mind with a willingness to take in new and novel evidence.

Unfortunately, you have not provided any new and novel evidence for your assertions.

Out of curiosity, Mr. Dochniak, when you went for your Master's didn't you have to stand for an oral exam? Did you have a thesis to defend? Or in your employment, don't you have to defend your work in front of a group of customers and by providing actual evidence?

How can you function in science or engineering if you cannot defend your own work with the required evidence?

By the way, I have had to defend my engineering structural dynamics analyses in front of hostile customers, plus I had to stand for an oral exam in thermal solid mechanics with a hostile professor when I was in an engineering master's program... the treatment you have received here is positively docile.

Just so you know, I don't have any firearms, and I didn't write any comments threatening anyone with one. And if the comment I'm referring to is deleted, ignore this one, because it won't make sense otherwise.

Where's the humanity in "we don't have to prove that he's wrong. That's how real science works."

Since you're an alleged warlock, maybe I should burn you at the stake because you may have put a curse on someone. Seriously, measure first, then cut.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 05 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr Dochniak's latest - and possibly most feeble - attempt to promote his book:

"In fact my opinion, medical science continues to cause pain, suffering, and death with H. brasiliensis natural-latex based medical products (e.g., vaccine packaging)."

Fixed that for you. Continuing...

"Where's the humanity in 'we don't have to prove that he's wrong. That's how real science works.'"

I have a few simple questions for Mr. Dochniak:

Are you actually arguing that we shouldn't expect you to provide data to support your extraordinary claim that latex from vaccine vial stoppers is causing autism?

Are you actually arguing that we should immediately react to any wild idea someone cooks up while sitting in their wing-chair without asking for some indication that it is correct? Or even more likely than not to be correct?

Are you really that self-absorbed that you can't see how stupid that is?

By the way, nasty little group of sock puppets - are they yours?

You disgust me, Mr. Dochniak.

Prometheus

Chris,

According to Mr. Dochniak's LinkedIn profile - which I assume he wrote - he doesn't have a Master's degree, only a B.S degree (double major: psychology and chemistry) from the University of Wisconsin - River Falls. Given that he put his listing in the "Marquis Who's Who in American Science and Engineering 2012", I assume that he's updated his profile recently.

There are also some Masters programmes that don't require a thesis, even some in the sciences (there's an institution in town that offers one in biology - not my university).

So, to answer your questions, Mr. Dochniak hasn't had to defend his ideas against a critical audience - until now. From my observations, he's not doing a very good job - I'd fail him if this were his thesis defense.

Prometheus

Where's the humanity in "we don't have to prove that he's wrong. That's how real science works."

I dunno, where's the humanity in "1 + 1 = 2"? It seems to me there isn't any "humanity" in that, or any need for it. It's not a decision, after all, it's a statement of fact. 1 plus 1 doesn't equal 2 because someone decided to be humane, or cruel, or whimsical, or vindictive, or patriotic - and certainly not because someone repeated it eighteen thousand times. 1 + 1 = 2 because that's mathematics.

In a similar fashion, where the burden of proof falls is neither based on nor influenced by "humanity"; it is a matter of amassed evidence. You have devised a speculation, but it remains that, a speculation; it would be stretching the truth grossly to even call it a "hypothesis." There are glaring holes in the speculation which you show no interest in resolving and rather than amassing the sort of evidence that would actually convince someone (someone not desperate to be convinced, that is) you simply repeat your assertions and cite circular logic and try to play the pity card. It's not inhumane to observe that you haven't done the work that would be necessary to give anyone else the obligation to disprove your speculations; it's simply an observation of fact.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 05 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus:

According to Mr. Dochniak's LinkedIn profile - which I assume he wrote - he doesn't have a Master's degree,

Funny, I wonder why I thought he had a Masters? I do confess I don't have one either. I'm a grad school drop-out due to having to work overtime, and buying a fixer upper house. Dear Spouse told me to cut out something before I drove him crazy with my sleep deprivation. But I've done a few design reviews with critical audiences (at least one time I came in after discovering that a critic was using the wrong data set, hah!).

And I have teenage children. What audience is more hostile than that?

Mr. Feldspar writes (#503), "In a similar fashion, where the burden of proof falls is neither based on nor influenced by "humanity"; it is a matter of amassed evidence."

MjD's response:

If herd immunity through vaccination is imperative, every aspect of vaccine safety should be thoroughly investigated.

Latex warnings on vaccines is bad karma.

Where's the humanity in forcing parents to decide if such vaccines are safe for their children?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 05 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak:

Where's the humanity in forcing parents to decide if such vaccines are safe for their children?

Where is the humanity in making statements on the safety of vaccines without any supporting evidence?

This is exactly what Wakefield did in 1998. In the press conference for his now withdrawn Lancet paper he told parents to get single vaccines, even though he had no evidence to support that statement. In fact, the MMR vaccine in use at that time in the UK was (and is) very similar to the MMR vaccine that has been safely used in the USA since 1971.

Because of those statements, that turned out to not be supported by any evidence, that were never independently verified, and later found out to be fraudulent, the number of children getting protection from measles, mumps and rubella fell in the UK. At least two children died in the UK, and more in Ireland... and several more permanently disabled from the actual diseases.

The further "questioning" of vaccines with actual evidence has caused the death and disability in real children in the USA from pertussis, Hib, etc. The actual diseases are not to be ignored.

Where is the humanity in having children suffer because of false information, just like the frivolous Dochniak latex warnings?

Remember, when you play scientist that there can be dire consequences

I missed some letters in a crucial sentence, it should say:

"The further "questioning" of vaccines without actual evidence"

And yes, Mr. Dochniak has failed to produce the actual evidence.

I just wonder if he would be happy if someone decided a bridge he had to drive over everyday was going to collapse any minute because the color of the dust he/she saw on the road bed. Obviously he/she believes in the observation and prediction of events. That has got to be better than the state inspectors who claim the bridge is just fine, especially since it is less than ten years old.

(I made up the scenario... I have no idea if he lives near a bridge, I was mostly inspired because I had to drive around two bridges the city rebuilt for safety reasons)

If herd immunity through vaccination is imperative, every aspect of vaccine safety should be thoroughly investigated.

Latex warnings on vaccines is bad karma.

Where's the humanity in forcing parents to decide if such vaccines are safe for their children?

As discussed earlier, all the vaccines on the schedule have latex-free formulations available. So parents aren't being forced to make that decision. If it's a concern, or if there is a valid medical reason, they can get the latex-free vaccine.

Mr. Feldspar writes (#503), "In a similar fashion, where the burden of proof falls is neither based on nor influenced by "humanity"; it is a matter of amassed evidence."

MjD's response:

If herd immunity through vaccination is imperative, every aspect of vaccine safety should be thoroughly investigated.

Vaccine safety is important and legitimate questions should be investigated. What MJD has been doing is not investigating, because that verb implies examining the facts, letting them determine the conclusion, and then terminating the investigation when a secure conclusion has been reached. MJD's efforts fail those criteria.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 06 Oct 2011 #permalink

@Mr. Dochniak

Would you agree with my earlier assertion that natural latex causes people to be named Bob? I ask, because I have just as much evidence behind my assertion as you do for yours. If you find your claims to be sound, then you must accept mine as well. If you find my claims to be faulty, then you must reject your own.

What amazes me is that, in over 500 comments, Mr. Dochniak has yet to produce any real evidence supporting his opinion that latex allergies cause autism. Simply astounding.

Michael Dochniak @506: Yes, indeed, where is the humanity in scaring parents away from life-saving medication? Where is the humanity in leading them to think that they have to choose between protecting their children from measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, diphtheria, and a variety of other diseases, and protecting them from autism? Where is the humanity in screaming that the sky is falling because nobody has proven to your satisfaction that it isn't, even though there's no evidence that it is?

Todd,

It isn't all that amazing that Mr. Dochniak hasn't provided any real data - he doesn't have any.

Mr. Dochniak has fallen for one of the most pervasive confidence games in the world: he believes what he believes because he believes it. Something started him down the road to "latex-in-vaccines-causes-autism" and he lacks the scientific background to realise that his "epiphany" was most likely a coincidence or random event - he may even lack the scientific grounding to conceive that a random conjunction of events like his "epiphany" could occur without a causal relationship.

Mr. Dochniak isn't alone in his deficiency - sadly, the vast majority of people who graduate with a bachelor's degree in the sciences haven't learned about critical thinking or even how to formulate and test a hypothesis. Some argue that graduate school is where these skills are taught, although I disagree.

Anyway, having had his pseudo-epiphany, Mr. Dochniak also lacked the education and training to know that he should submit his idea for independent review - run it by some people who know about the fields in question and see what they think. I imagine that Mr. Dochniak's review process was more along the lines of asking some friends and family members, who knew as little about the science involved as he did, if not less, what they thought.

Having impressed a group of scientifically naive (at least in the fields involved) people with his hypothesis, Mr. Dochniak made the final fatal error and didn't bother to reconcile his hypothesis with all of the extant data. This is the error that has caused him the most grief on this 'blog. There are huge, undeniable facts that his hypothesis can't explain - in fact, that directly contradict his hypothesis.

Confronted by a skeptical audience - after having written and "published" two books on the subject - Mr. Dochniak has shown the (sadly) usual responses of someone facing legitimate critique of their ideas for the first time: he has blustered, postured and lashed out.

If he were wise, he would eventually learn from the experience. Sadly, his responses suggest that what he "learned" was that his ideas are too "revolutionary" for dogma-bound scientists. I suspect he will from now on focus his attempts to spread "the word" on people who know less about science than he does.

In short, Mr. Dochniak doesn't "get it". He thinks that he's found a "shortcut" to scientific discovery when, in fact, he's found the same blind alley that hundreds of thousands of pseudo-scientists have "discovered". What he's done is take an idea and "research" the literature to find whatever he thinks supports it and ignored the rest. He's honed his "argument" in an echo-chamber filled with people who know less than he does about immunology and autism and he's deceived himself that writing two books - including one that he thinks is directed at "scholars" - makes him a de facto expert.

This, sadly, is not a rare phenomenon. The bookstores are full of books written by people who know little or nothing about the subject of their writing (e.g. any book title that ends with "...that THEY don't want you to know about."). The blogosphere is even more full of those people, all of whom feel that they have somehow stumbled onto "The Truth" that experts can't (or won't) see.

I say "sadly" because I was right there in the same place years ago. The only difference was that I had mentors and teachers who guided me and helped me find where I was wrong. I was just as full of misguided "revelations" and just as ignorant about how to form and test a hypothesis, but I had a graduate committee.

Prometheus

Mr. Vicklund writes (#509), "If it's a concern, or if there is a valid medical reason, they can get the latex-free vaccine.

MjD's response:

It is unreasonable to expect that a parent would know if an infant has latex sensitivity. With such uncertainty, why continue to expose millions of infants to natural-latex tainted vaccines?

I'm sure if Prometheus had latex-sensitivity as an infant, he would have articulately conveyed such information to his doctor or nurse prior to vaccination.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Oct 2011 #permalink

Repeating unsupported contentions does not make them true. You have to support them with real evidence, which you have not done.

And bringing out your nasty sock puppets is not helping any shred of credibility you may have had (and it wasn't much). Mr. Dochniak, you are turning into a joke.

I suggest you grow a backbone and stop your whining. Find some other more productive way to assist disabled children, like promoting their support as they become adults.

I'm sure if Prometheus had latex-sensitivity as an infant, he would have articulately conveyed such information to his doctor or nurse prior to vaccination.

Why not? I did. But my sensitivity, which arose through the more usual methods of environmental exposure to an ubiquitous substance, was never severe enough to require using latex free vaccines. Latex is everywhere. If you have a latex sensitivity bad enough to contraindicate these vaccines, you know beforehand because you'll have been exposed in much higher concentrations.

Mr. Vicklund writes (#517), " But my sensitivity, which arose through the more usual methods of environmental exposure to an ubiquitous substance, was never severe enough to require using latex free vaccines. Latex is everywhere."

MjD's response:

Government statistics suggest the prevalence rate of autism is increasing 10 to 17 percent anually. While the causes of autism are complex and puzzling, a consensus is emerging that atypical immunity likely plays a dominant role.

What if...

- parents start refusing vaccines that contain H. brasiliensis natural-latex to help reduce latex allergy?

- pharmaceutical companies practice H. brasiliensis natural-latex exclusion to help reduce latex allergy?

- the U.S. government regulated the protein content of H. brasiliensis natural-latex to help reduce latex allergy?

- physicians implemented blood screening tests prior to vaccination to help reduce vaccine related injuries?

From the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection", Introduction, page XIII.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Oct 2011 #permalink

Sure as a monkey flings its poo, Dochniak responds to people questioning why we should believe any of the illogical claims he makes in his book, by spamming excerpts from his book.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 06 Oct 2011 #permalink

I recently listened to RadioLab's Loops, On Repeat. There was a story of a woman who experienced a form of temporary amnesia where she forgot everything (her daughter thought she was having a stroke so she called an ambulance). In the hospital her memory was only about 90 seconds, so for over two hours she had the same 90 second conversation with her daughter for over two hours. Her brain was doing loops.

This is exactly what Mr. Dochniak is doing. He has no memory of the responses in the previous 500 comments going back five months. He is in a loop.

The memory of the woman slowly increased, and after a week or so her memory returned. It would be nice if there was that kind of hope for Mr. Dochniak, but I am afraid he is permanently lost in his own unreal loopy world.

Mr. Dochniak suffers from a mind that is welded shut. No new information or change is allowed in his brain.

What makes it sadder is that Mr. Dochniak resorts to his sock puppets, and if they are not sock puppets, then he has some very demented friends.

What makes it sadder is that Mr. Dochniak resorts to his sock puppets, and if they are not sock puppets, then he has some very demented friends.

I presumed it was stoner whatshisname.

Narad:

I presumed it was stoner whatshisname.

If that was the case, the Mr. Dochniak could redeem himself by asking the morphing troll to cease making look him even more foolish. All he has to do is post a comment that says: "Please stop making obnoxious comments as you pretend to be persons participating in this thread. You are not helping."

If that was the case, the Mr. Dochniak could redeem himself by asking the morphing troll to cease making look him even more foolish.

Yes, he could, but it's not clear to me that he actually understands the medium well enough to have picked up on this. It can of course be trivially settled by our gracious host.

I suspect Mr. Dochniak is using the sock-puppets in order to goad Orac into banning him so that he can crow to his fan-base that he was "banned by Orac" because his ideas were "too threatening to mainstream medicine". It's a sort of notoriety, if not a good sort.

The sock-puppets are doing nothing to enhance Mr. Dochniak's credibility, although it could be reasonably argued that nothing, at this point, could decrease his credibility.

In his latest comment (or, at least, the latest comment he puts his name to) Mr. Dochniak provides yet another of his FactLite⢠claims:

"Government statistics suggest the prevalence rate of autism is increasing 10 to 17 percent anually [sic]. While the causes of autism are complex and puzzling, a consensus is emerging that atypical immunity likely plays a dominant role."

Below is a corrected version of that statement which conforms to data available in this Universe.

"Government statistics, based on certain sources of administrative autism data, suggest the prevalence rate of autism is increasing 10 to 17 percent annually. While the causes of autism are complex and puzzling, a consensus is emerging that atypical immunity immune system abnormalities likely plays a dominant role are a feature of at least some cases of autism, although it remains unclear whether this is a cause or an effect of autism."

Again, it is important to note that while autism prevalence - as reported by educational and social-service agencies - is increasing steadily, the exposure to latex proteins has been steadily decreasing - even in vaccines. This - as has been repeatedly noted above - is one of the primary holes in Mr. Dochniak's hypothesis, a hypothesis that has more holes than a colander.

The rest of Mr. Dochniak's comment condenses down to "Read my book...please!"

Prometheus

Prometheus

The rest of Mr. Dochniak's comment condenses down to "Read my book...please!"

Winter is coming and he would like to have room in his garage so can bring his car inside. I suspect he has a large inventory of unsold books.

By Militant Agnostic (not verified) on 07 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#527), "Again, it is important to note that while autism prevalence - as reported by educational and social-service agencies - is increasing steadily, the exposure to latex proteins has been steadily decreasing - even in vaccines. This - as has been repeatedly noted above - is one of the primary holes in Mr. Dochniak's hypothesis, a hypothesis that has more holes than a colander."

MjD's response:

The Rubber Foundation states, " World natural rubber production is forecast to rise 4.3 percent annually to 12 million metric tons in 2013". It also states, "Growing sales of medical rubber products will also aid natural rubber sales."

See: http://www.rubber-foundation.org/docu/2575natural.pdf

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 07 Oct 2011 #permalink

@ Dochniak: Why haven't you disavowed the "sock puppets" that have infested this discussion?

"Winter is coming and he would like to have room in his garage so can bring his car inside. I suspect he has a large inventory of unsold books."

Weeks ago I made the observation that Dochniak will be handing out his books to kids who are "trick or treating" on Halloween, handing them out to everyone on his Christmas list, and "gifting" them in lieu of presents for weddings, baptisms and bar mitzvah celebrations...bummer.

Mr. Dochniak,

World natural rubber production â  US/EU/UK medical natural rubber consumption.

Can I be any more clear?

Prometheus

Prometheus writes (#532), "World natural rubber production â  US/EU/UK medical natural rubber consumption".

MjD's response:

In the book that Orac introduces at the begining of this Science blog (i.e., Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection), a complete chapter is devoted to how infant exposure to H. brasiliensis natural-latex products (e.g., bottle nipples and pacifiers) after vaccinations can affect allergy-induced regressive autism through sublingual absorption of the Hevea-allergens.

For some infants, post vaccination exposure to H. brasiliensis can be extremely harmful in that vaccines are known to shift immunity toward Th2.

Mr. Vicklund is very observant when he writes(#517), "Latex is everywhere."

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 07 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, do you understand why we keep asking you for evidence?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 07 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak is in some kind of loop. He is pushing his book again.

He is a joke.

Obviously, Mr. Dochniak has realised that the use of latex in bottle nipples and pacifiers is increasing 10 - 17% annually, not to mention the use of latex in examination gloves, diaper covers, crib mattress covers, and the myriad other items that infants are exposed to.

What was that....? Oh. The use of latex in those items hasn't been increasing - and it's been decreasing in a number of them? And the use of latex stoppers in vaccine vials has also been decreasing?

Oh.

Then what on earth is Mr. Dochniak yammering about?

One wonders - indeed, one does.

Prometheus

Well that does it every body vaccines cause can autism my proof the show that never lies SOUTH PARK says so. if you don't believe me go to southparkstudios.com and watch the episode ass-burgers
Prometheus

By Prometheus (not verified) on 07 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak,
I have to admit I've neither bought nor read your book. So you may well have answered all the objections in this thread there and, presumably, don't want to put out any spoilers.
However.
What you've said here makes a case (I'm not saying how good) for a plausible mechanism. There is, of course, a difference between "plausible" and "supported by evidence as actually happening".
Some months back someone made a plausible case that autism was caused by fluorescent lights.
Your "case" against latex could easily be made against any other known (or indeed, unknown) allergen - peanuts, pet dander, fresh cut grass, nickel - environmental influence - electromagnetic waves, day/night cycles, chemical exposure, solar neutrinos - or indeed, unseen forces - say, Martian ice warriors.
Why should someone think your case is more right than any of these others?

By Mephistopheles… (not verified) on 07 Oct 2011 #permalink

M O'Biien writes (#526), "Your "case" against latex could easily be made against any other known (or indeed, unknown) allergen - peanuts, pet dander, fresh cut grass, nickel - environmental influence - electromagnetic waves, day/night cycles, chemical exposure, solar neutrinos - or indeed, unseen forces - say, Martian ice warriors.
Why should someone think your case is more right than any of these others?

MjD's response:

The greater number and diversity of antigenic proteins in natural-latex makes it an immunologically dangerous material, compared to other sources of allergens (e.g.,peanuts, pet dander, fresh cut grass, nickel)

As an analogy, the greater number and diversity of bacteria in a Komodo Dragon's mouth gives it a lethal bite compared to a human bite (excluding Prometheus and his chronic halitosis).

Therefore, H. brasiliensis natural-latex must be taken out of vaccines.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 08 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#525), "Then what on earth is Mr. Dochniak yammering about?"

MjD's response:

Vaccinations and repeated exposure to the antigenic proteins in H. brasiliensis natural-latex is causing an evolutionary change in adaptive immunity.

Allergies, allergies, allergies, allergies...

This is music to Big Pharma in that allergy medication means big profit.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 08 Oct 2011 #permalink

What a joke.

MjD - once again, prove it.

You've continued, time and time again, to make bold statements regarding autism & allergies - specifically your latex fetsh, without offering one single shred of proof beyond "read my book."

If you actually have anything to offer, beyond, "hey, read my book" go ahead & post it up. If not, just leave, because you're frakin' annoying.

Mr. Dochniak,

As an analogy, the greater number and diversity of bacteria in a Komodo Dragon's mouth gives it a lethal bite compared to a human bite

That's yet another myth you are propagating there.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/05/15/0810883106.abstract

(excluding Prometheus and his chronic halitosis)

Classy.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 08 Oct 2011 #permalink

Vaccines that have latex warnings.

Allergic reactions to vaccines used to be a prime concern to pharmaceutical and vaccine makers. That changed after the passage of the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2006 [PREP Act 42USC 247(d)-6d] that, basically, exonerates vaccine makers of any damages from vaccines and/or vaccinations.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 08 Oct 2011 #permalink

That changed after the passage of the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2006 [PREP Act 42USC 247(d)-6d] that, basically, exonerates vaccine makers of any damages from vaccines and/or vaccinations.

No, that is also an anti-vax myth along with the forced vaccinations nonsense. A compensation scheme is also set up to deal with emergency response. There is also still NVICP which deals with the "prime concern" of allergic reactions to vaccine excipients. What on Earth are you going on about?

Science Mom writes (#535), "There is also still NVICP which deals with the "prime concern" of allergic reactions to vaccine excipients."

MjD's response:

If a parent feels that their child has been harmed by vaccines, it is important to know that under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, a no-fault system, parents do not have to prove a vaccine caused their child's injury. The parent has to show that the child had an injury that could be caused by the vaccine. A specific example, my autistic child has (or had) sensitivity to natural-latex in vaccines (i.e., Hevea-allergen insult) affecting their allergy-induced regressive autism.

Refuse vaccines that have latex warnings.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD - you have yet to prove that allergy-induced regressive autism exists.

Put up or shut up (again).

What tests can be run to improve vaccine safety?

Specific blood and saliva tests are recommended to help physicians and parents determine if a vaccine should be administered. The tests are intended to measure adaptive-immunity biomarkers (i.e., IgE expression, cytokine profile, and NGF expression) to help determine an immunity profile for the child. Children having an 'atypical' adaptive-immunity profile need to be exempt from vaccinations.

Here's the list of references from Chapter 11 (Forseeable Future) of "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection".

1. Gehan A. Mostafa et al., âAllergic Manifestations in
Autistic Children: Relation to Disease Severity,
J. Pediatr. Neurol. 6, 2 (2008):115-123.

2. CA Molloy et al., âElevated cytokine l
evels inchildren with autism spectrum disorderâ,
J. Neuroimmunol, 2006 Mar; 172(1-2):198-205.

3. Eric Courchesne et al., âMapping Early Brain
Development in Autism.â Neuron 56, 2 (2007):
399-413.

4. J.K. Nam, J.W. Chung, H.S. Kho, S.C. Chung, et al.,
âNerve Growth Factor Concentration in Human
Saliva, Oral Disease 13, 2 (2007):187-192.

5. Autism Society of America, Incidence numbers
from other countries, http://www.autism-society.
org/site/PageServer?pagename=community_
world_incidenc, accessed 1/11/11.

6. Martin Knapp et al., âEconomic Cost of Autism in
the UK,â Autism 13, 3 (2009):317-336.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Oct 2011 #permalink

Yes, we know autistic children can have allergies just like other children. How about answering the question that we have been asking you for several months:

What evidence do you have that allergies, specifically latex, cause autism?

Otherwise, put down the shovel and stop digging. You have gone beyond pathetic.

If a parent feels that their child has been harmed by vaccines, it is important to know that under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, a no-fault system, parents do not have to prove a vaccine caused their child's injury. The parent has to show that the child had an injury that could be caused by the vaccine. A specific example, my autistic child has (or had) sensitivity to natural-latex in vaccines (i.e., Hevea-allergen insult) affecting their allergy-induced regressive autism.

What in this word salad defends your claim that the PREP act "exonerates vaccine makers of any damages from vaccines and/or vaccinations."? If you feel as though you have a case for your child's "allergy-induced regressive autism", then why don't you file an NVICP claim? Even you recognise it as a forum with far less rigorous evidentiary standards than a scientific standard. Go for it and let us know how that works out for you.

Micheal J. Dochniak

If you do not either return the backhoe you rented from us immediately or pay the outstanding rental fees as well as the current month's rental fee we ill be forced to turn the matter over to the internet police.

Collections Department
Ace Equipment Rentals

By Ace Equipment … (not verified) on 09 Oct 2011 #permalink

The CDC continues to state that, Vaccines are developed with the highest standards of safety. However, as with any medical procedure, vaccination has some risks. Individuals react differently to vaccines, and there is no way to predict how individuals will react to a particular vaccine.

MjD's response:

In contradiction the CDC states, If a person reports a severe (anaphylactic) allergy to latex, vaccines supplied in vials or syringes that contain natural-latex should not be administered unless the benefit of vaccination outweighs the risk for a potentialallergic reaction.

What happened to vaccines are developed with the highest standard of safety?

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning!

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Oct 2011 #permalink

Ace Equipment Rentals:

You're out of luck. I have it on good authority that MjD has struck magma, and your backhoe is now a lump of molten metal. Procedure to issue a warrant for claim of damages awaits your approval.

Internet Police Dept, Precinct 49

Unfortunately, oral vaccines are another vaccination delivery-system that may contain natural latex. An example includes the rotovirus-vaccine Rotarix, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals. The tip caps and the rubber plunger of the oral applicator contain dry natural rubber. It has been recommended that infants with a severe (anaphylactic) allergy to natural latex should not be given Rotarix.

It is well known that repeated exposure to H. brasiliensis natural latex increases the incidence of latex allergy.

Why does medical science and government agencies (e.g., FDA, CDC) allow infants to be repeatedly exposed to natural-latex, through vaccinations, knowing increased exposure can induce latex allergy?

Quote:

The evidence (vaccines cause autism) is now overwhelming, despite the misinformation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Institute of Medicine - Bernard Rimland (American Research Psychologist)

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning!

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD - given that there hasn't been a single study that has shown a link between vaccines & autism - you are full of manure.

You obviously have a latex fetish - I can probably find some clubs out there that you would probably find very interesting.

Please take your line of BS somewhere else, because your broken record mantra got old about 400 posts ago.

Internet Police @543

OK go ahead - but what are we going to do with a container load of unsalable, fact free, evidence free pseudo science books?

By Ace Equipment … (not verified) on 09 Oct 2011 #permalink

Lawence writes (#545), "Please take your line of BS somewhere else, because your broken record mantra got old about 400 posts ago"

MjD's response:

It's obvious you haven't noticed but this Scienceblog is about a book I co-authored. Larry, read the begining of this blog where Orac introduces the book titled "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection.

The co-author is Denise H. Dunn. The dedication reads: To Harmony Dunn, you're inspirational, compassionate, insightful, and creative; making this book possible.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Oct 2011 #permalink

And??????

Seriously, if you can't offer up even a single fact, supported by evidence (and "its in the book" isn't an answer) - you really need to be somewhere else.

You're a joke, if you haven't gotten that already.

It's obvious you haven't noticed but this Scienceblog is about a book I co-authored.

And that translates into permission for you to flog your book here over and over for nearly half a year... how?? That makes it okay for you to "defend" your crappy self-published book through irrelevant attacks on other posters' supposed personal appearances, answering questions that no one asked and ignoring the questions you were asked, and repeating already-debunked claims incessantly... how??

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 09 Oct 2011 #permalink

Antaeus Feldspar writes (#549), "That makes it okay for you to "defend" your crappy self-published book through irrelevant attacks on other posters' supposed personal appearances, answering questions that no one asked and ignoring the questions you were asked, and repeating already-debunked claims incessantly... how??

MjD's response:

Everyone agrees that H. brasiliensis natural-latex can cause severe allergic reactions and anaphylactic death.

Mr. Feldspar, do you agree that H. brasiliensis natural-latex should not be in vaccine packaging?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

I am not Antaneus Feldspar, but the level of risk from using natural-latex in vaccine packaging seems insufficient to me to say it should be removed. I do not oppose removing it in favor of a substitute that presents less risk; I do not say it should be removed.

By Mephistopheles… (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

I would say that in an effort to "do no harm" it would be advisable/prudent to remove latex from vaccine delivery systems. Mainly, because it would probably be relatively easy and inexpensive if done over a period of a couple years.

I never got back to ask some of the other questions that I wanted to ask you (MjD)

1. Are there data out there that support the contention that the immune response following a vaccine with NRL is quantitatively or qualitatively different than a vaccine that does not contain NRL. If there are data to this end, could you provide the research studies which show this?

2. Do any of these findings from #1 resemble the autism--adaptive immune data that is extant?

3. Do any of the findings from #1 above correlate with autism behavioral scores?

It seems that you have preemptively "connected" the NRL in a vaccine delivery system with autism, by connecting some of the dots that have arisen in the neuroimmune realm of autism.

It seems prudent to take the proper steps of hypothesis building and testing, if you are genuinely interested in advancing science in a certain domain.

I would suggest first formulating a hypothesis that explores whether vaccines containing NRL, do actually elicit a measurable difference in immune response than vaccines that do not contain NRL. If there is a difference that is statistically significant then you may have something worth looking into more thoroughly.

This would probably be ethical if you were to use a cohort of babys that come from HIV infected mothers, because they receive a lot of routine blood draws in early infancy (which is what would be needed to do a study of this sort.) Also, both groups would receive vaccines, just one with and one with out NRL.

Justin

550
Antaeus Feldspar writes (#549), "That makes it okay for you to "defend" your crappy self-published book through ... answering questions that no one asked and ignoring the questions you were asked ... ... how??

MjD's response:

Everyone agrees that H. brasiliensis natural-latex can cause severe allergic reactions and anaphylactic death...

Amazing. Not even any recognition of the irony. Dochniak might actually rank behind Thing-troll in ability to pass a Turing test; Thing can at least pretend to be comprehending and attempting to intelligently answer questions.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

Thing can at least pretend to be comprehending and attempting to intelligently answer questions.

It can? I think I must have been away.

By Sauceress (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

Justin writes (#552), "It seems prudent to take the proper steps of hypothesis building and testing, if you are genuinely interested in advancing science in a certain domain".

MjD's response:

Great statement Justin.

If your interested in learning, in detail, how the antigenic proteins from H. Brasiliensis natural-latex affect allergy-induced regressive autism read the following books:

1) Allergies amnd Autism (Nova Science);
http://www.amazon.com/Allergies-Autism-Infectious-Diseases/dp/160876352…

and

2) Allergies and Autism - The Latex Connection (Createspace)
http://www.amazon.com/Vaccine-Delivery-Autism-Latex-Connection/dp/14565…

Thanks for your input!

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

OMG - seriously! Another frakin' "read my book" answer....

MjD - get a life and try for once to cite something concrete other than your own damn book.

Lawrence writes (#556), "MjD - get a life and try for once to cite something concrete other than your own damn book".

MjD's response:

Describing atypical adaptive-immunity, in the aetiology of allergy-induced regressive autism, involves multiple mechanisms and interactions including genetics, epi-genetics, environmental insult, vaccinations, and comorbid interactions.

Co-author Denise H. Dunn and I have spent years studying such and after exhaustive examination of the evidence, which is thoroughly described in the books, have concluded that allergy-induced regressive autism is preventable.

Lawrence, would you like me to post another list of references from a chapter of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection'?

Which chapter references would you like?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

Which chapter references would you like?

The ones that independently show that allergies (specifically latex) cause autism. You know, the answer to that question we keep asking you, and yet you continually fail to answer (oh, and we already know autistic kids have allergies just like other kids).

Justin writes (#552), "I would say that in an effort to "do no harm" it would be advisable/prudent to remove latex from vaccine delivery systems".

MjD's response:

Have you seen the study on Latex and Autism from Peking University? State-of-the-art research exploring allergy-induced regressive autism.

Here's the site:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20957522

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

I don't think we need the real Michael J. Dochniak posting here. We just need a bot with the same name that periodically posts "Read my book '"Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection'!"

By dedicated lurker (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

That study says: "Considering the fact that the family members were in close contact with natural rubber latex"

Oh, yeah. That happens to every kid!

Chris writes (#561), "Considering the fact that the family members were in close contact with natural rubber latex. Oh, yeah. That happens to every kid!"

MjD's response:

In 2010, millions of doses of flu vaccine required latex warnings. See site below:

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/general/news/aug3110…

That's just one of many types of latex-tainted vaccines given to children and adults.

Needless exposure which we could describe as "Herd" latex-insult.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak, do you have some kind of reading comprehension problem? Please answer the question you were asked.

#196

I've worked with a Biotechnology Company in an effort to remove the antigenic proteins from NRL to provide a safer natural-rubber.Briefly, the null hypothesis is satified when the global natural-rubber industry exclusively uses ultra-low protein NRL (i.e., Hevea brasiliensis)

Independantly, I've discovered a new adsorption process which removes the antigenic proteins from NRL to undetectable levels, based on the current analytical standards.

(my bolding)

I was going to say that Michael J. Dochniak's vested interest in peddling a latex- autism connection obviously goes far beyond peddling his hypothesis/book, but Prometheus (#218)...

His (dead parrot) hypothesis is supported primarily (it seems) by his financial interest in a latex-substitute rather than anything even vaguely resembling data.

...already said it rather well.

My question to Michael J. Dochniak is: Do you declare such a glaring conflict of interest in the front of your book?

By Sauceress (not verified) on 10 Oct 2011 #permalink

Sauceress writes (#564), "Do you declare such a glaring conflict of interest in the front of your book?"

MjD's response:

Preface from book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection":

I believe (declare) that Hevea brasiliensis dry natural-rubber(HDNR) exclusionary practice and ultra-low protein natural latex will show us that when exposure to the Hevea-allergens is eliminated, the incidence of atopy and allergy-induced regressive autism will diminish in successive generations.

Over the years, Iâve learned much about how HDNR can affect our lives in very different ways. For most, HDNR is a material that contributes to a better standard of living, while for others, exposure can be harmful and even life threatening.

I also support the idea that in many rubber applications, itâs naïve to believe that HDNR can be completely replaced with synthetic rubber; natural latex has a price/performance characteristic that continues to
be second to none. Because of this, every effort should be made to substantially remove the allergens from HDNR.

Although in medical applications, including vaccines, HDNR should not be used, as the allergens can never be
completely removed.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

What studies independently show that allergies (specifically latex) cause autism?

You know, the answer to that question we keep asking you, and yet you continually fail to answer (oh, and we already know autistic kids have allergies just like other kids).

I believe we would get more useful answers from Eliza.

Mr. Dochniak, A simple yes/no question: Do you or do you not declare the conflict of interest Sauceress pointed out in the front of your book?

Repeating that you think natural latex is dangerous is not a declaration of a conflict of interest.

Alternatively, are you prepared to state that you have no such financial conflict of interest, will gain no financial benefit if Vytex or any other synthetic replaces natural rubber, and have no financial or business connection with the manufacturers of Vytex or any other rubber substitute?

@Sauceress, Chris and Vicki

Since Mr. Dochniak is being so coy, I thought I'd take a look on Amazon and use the "Search Inside" function. From what I could find, there is no declaration of any financial conflict of interest. A bit dishonest, that.

Are any of Mr. Dochniak's evasive answers and plugs for his book at all surprising? Incidentally, I suspect he is merely trying to increase his Google juice by mentioning his book so often here, particularly in light that no one is paying him any mind on Amazon.

Dochniak (#559):

"Have you seen the study on Latex and Autism from Peking University? State-of-the-art research exploring allergy-induced regressive autism."

Justin, the Shen at al study was already deconstructed by me in comment #93. Mr. Dochniak is looping.

Prometheus

Todd W. writes (#568), "From what I could find, there is no declaration of any financial conflict of interest."

MjD's response:

No financial conflict of interest.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

Oh, really? Who is the lead author of this?

Well, well, well.....isn't that interesting.

I also notice that quite a number of MjD's assertians seem to come directly from that corporate presentation (advertising).

They are local - perhaps I'll pay them a visit & ask some pointed questions about relationships.

While we're about it: Are you the Mike Dochniak who Google tells me is in sales and tech support at Vystar (or was as of last summer)?

#565 Michael J. Dochniak
So the answer is no.

Your preface should read...

[I also support the idea that in many rubber applications, itâs naïve to believe that HDNR can be completely replaced with synthetic rubber; natural latex has a price/performance characteristic that continues to
be second to none. Because of this, every effort should be made to substantially remove the allergens from HDNR.

Independantly, I've discovered a new adsorption process which removes the antigenic proteins from NRL to undetectable levels, based on the current analytical standards.]

This enables your readers to see that you have strong financial and career incentives in having your hypothesis accepted and acted upon.

I have another question:
When (an official date please),and where, was it that you independently "discovered a new adsorption process which removes the antigenic proteins from NRL to undetectable levels, based on the current analytical standards."?

Where can one access the information and/or publication paper of this discovery?

By Sauceress (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

Hmmmm.....you rail against natural latex, claim you have no financial stake in the game, yet you are a technical consultant for a corporation that has developed a latex alternative?

So, explain to us how that is supposed to work (and not be a conflict of interest)?

Mr. Dochniak reminds of this song.

(Of course I had to think of that song. Yesterday I picked up some dry cleaning and their computer system had an order I forgot about almost a year ago. They were the puppets my kids played with almost fifteen years ago: Lamb Chop, Charlie Horse and Hush Puppy!)

Chris, et al.,

It may be wise to get screen grabs of stuff you find, in case, like one Mr. Daniels, he starts making things disappear or change.

Sauceress writes (#577), "When (an official date please),and where, was it that you independently "discovered a new adsorption process which removes the antigenic proteins from NRL to undetectable levels, based on the current analytical standards."? Where can one access the information and/or publication paper of this discovery?

MjD's response:

It's a 2011 U.S. provisional application that I've transferred all rights away and I have not made a penny from it and will not make a penny from it in the future. There is no public disclosure at this stage.

My efforts continue to be safety driven and altruistic.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD:

My efforts continue to be safety driven and altruistic.

Then why not put your book up on the web for free? That would ensure that the information in your book is spread as widely as possible.

By Matthew Cline (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Cline writes, "Then why not put your book up on the web for free? That would ensure that the information in your book is spread as widely as possible."

MjD's response:

I'll ask the co-author about putting the book "Vaccine and Autism - The Latex Connection" on the web for free.

Thanks for your input.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was
But they'll continue singing it forever just because...

Fringe science is a flavor of conjecture
Conjecture is an ingredient of creativity
Creativity is a recipe for hypotheses
A hypothesis feeds medical science
Medical science then nourishes mankind
Knowledge grows

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, you seem to have left a critical step of that flow: Evidence. And in terms of critical, it's like building a plane without any means of propulsion.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

Gray Falcon writes (#586), "Evidence"

MjD's response:

In 1927, descriptions of allergic reactions to natural latex started to appear in the medical literature.

Stern J. Ueberempfindichkeit gegen Kautschuk als Ursache von Urticaria und Quinkeschem Oedem Klin Wochenschr 1927;6;1479.

Over eighty year later, natural latex is still in vaccines.

The evidence is clear...

Latex allergies may impair
Harmful proteins always there

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 11 Oct 2011 #permalink

Actually MjD - I'd like to see your evidence that Natural Latex is an active component of vaccines, because all you've managed to trot out is that NL is used in packaging.

Where is your peer-reviewed study & analysis regarding the amount (if any) of NL or any component thereof that is present in a dose of a vaccine?

That I'd like to see - because if it isn't there, you don't even have a leg to stand on regarding your so-called hypothesis.

Also, please address how being the technical consultant for a company that manufacturers a "natural latex substitute" doesn't comprise a quantifiable conflict of interest for your stance against Natural Latex.

@MjD

This may come as a shocker to you, but doggerel is not a valid substitute for scientific evidence.

You have established that natural latex can cause allergies. This is not disputed. Also, there are people who have both autism and allergies. This also is not disputed. But the thing you have yet to show, and which has been asked for multiple times, is evidence that natural latex allergies cause autism.

So, please, enough with stating how NL causes allergies. You don't need to state that any longer. And no more statements that some people that have autism also have latex allergies. Just answer the damn question that has been asked of you over, and over, and over in this thread.

What scientific evidence is there that NL allergies cause autism?

If you can't answer that one very simple question, then please stop wasting everyone else's time here.

Lawrence writes (#588), "Where is your peer-reviewed study & analysis regarding the amount (if any) of NL or any component thereof that is present in a dose of a vaccine?"

MjD's response:

Here's an article from the emdt about dry-natural-rubber-components in prefilled syringes. The first paragraph in the article states:

The release of allergenic proteins from the dry natural rubber (DNR) components of prefilled syringes into aqueous pharmaceuticals may potentially induce an immediate allergic reaction in individuals with a latex protein allergy. This article reviews the current risks to patients in the context of vaccine delivery. It also refers to other device applications that contain DNR.

http://www.emdt.co.uk/article/dry-natural-rubber-components-prefilled-s…

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 12 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that never ends,
It just goes on and on my friends.
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was,
And they just kept on singing it and this is what it was.

#581

It's a 2011 U.S. provisional application that I've transferred all rights away and I have not made a penny from it and will not make a penny from it in the future.

From your Linkin page (hat tip to Lawrence @#576 for the link)

Michael J. Dochniak's Patents
Method to affect the development of autism spectrum disorders
United States Patent Application 20070034214
Filed August 12, 2005
Inventors: Michael J. Dochniak, et al
The invention discloses a method that may affect the development of autism spectrum disorders. The method can be used to substantially reduce mammalian immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated reaction antibodies that are induced by the allergens inherent in products formed from natural rubber latex. The method may be particularly useful as a proactive approach to affect developmental, learning and behavioral disabilities in children.

Is the basis of the above application the same as that of the 2010 provisional application?

This application was lodged in 2005 before the publications of your latex/allergies-autism connection papers? Yes? No?

I've transferred all rights away and I have not made a penny from it and will not make a penny from it in the future.

How, and wher, could interested parties verify that this statement is true?

By Sauceress (not verified) on 12 Oct 2011 #permalink

Lawrence writes (#588), "Where is your peer-reviewed study & analysis regarding the amount (if any) of NL or any component thereof that is present in a dose of a vaccine?"

MjD's response:

Published in European Medical Device Technology, March 2010, Volume 1, No. 3

The emdt write, "The release of allergenic proteins from the dry natural rubber (DNR) components of prefilled syringes into aqueous pharmaceuticals may potentially induce an immediate allergic reaction in individuals with a latex protein allergy".

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 13 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that never ends,
It just goes on and on, my friends.
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was,
And now they just keep singing it forever just because...

Lawrence writes (#588), "Actually MjD - I'd like to see your evidence that Natural Latex is an active component of vaccines, because all you've managed to trot out is that NL is used in packaging."

MjD's response:

On July 1, 2011, the Secretary of Health declared a shortage of certain flu vaccines in multi-dose vials and temporarily suspended Washington's limit on the amount of mercury (thimerosal) allowed in flu vaccine given to pregnant women and kids under three who are allergic to latex.

The federal Food and Drug Administration found that thimerosal-free flu vaccine in single dose, pre-filled syringes may contain trace amounts of latex.

http://www.doh.wa.gov/cfh/Immunize/providers/flu-thimerosal.htm

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 13 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was
But they'll continue singing it forever just because...

Lawrence writes (#588), "Where is your peer-reviewed study & analysis regarding the amount (if any) of NL or any component thereof that is present in a dose of a vaccine?"

MjD's response:

Published in European Medical Device Technology, March 2010, Volume 1, No. 3

The emdt write, "The release of allergenic proteins from the dry natural rubber (DNR) components of prefilled syringes into aqueous pharmaceuticals may potentially induce an immediate allergic reaction in individuals with a latex protein allergy".

MjD

Hmm...no amount in that quoted bit. Maybe it's somewhere else in the paper. I'm assuming MjD was referring to the article "Dry Natural Rubber Components in Prefilled Syringes", though he never gave the actual title of the paper, which would've been helpful. I didn't see any mention of how much latex actually did make it into vaccines, but I did come across this bit, which MjD ignored:

A review of the VAERS data noted that there were no reported cases of allergic reactions related to DNR formulations between 1991 and 2003 in the US. Similarly, BD did not receive any customer complaints reporting cases of allergic reactions in the European and North America markets. Given the approximately 300 million immunisations each year in the US, the occurrence of an allergic reaction possibly as a result of latex protein contamination in vaccine solution appears to be below 0.001 ppm.

So, it doesn't appear to be much of a problem. Something to be aware of and careful about on the part of manufacturers, but not something to worry about.

Now, how about that evidence that latex allergies cause autism?

@MjD

Perhaps you don't understand what the term "active" means. An active component of a vaccine is a live virus, part of a virus, dead bacteria, proteins or other items which are used in the vaccine to trigger the immune response. Everything else is an "inactive" component; this includes trace amount of substances such as latex.

Now, about that evidence that latex allergies cause autism?

Todd W. writes (#597), "So, it doesn't appear to be much of a problem. Something to be aware of and careful about on the part of manufacturers, but not something to worry about".

MjD's response:

You may want to send your ideas to the FDA in an effort to have latex warnings removed from vaccines? This would of course lead medical science down a path of "do harm" instead of "do no harm".

If this is appealing to you, maybe Promethus would like to get involved?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 13 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was
But they'll continue singing it forever just because...

Sheesh!

What Todd's quote shows is that the latex warning system is working and that people are not having allergic reactions to latex. This supports the idea that if latex is connected to autism (something for which no evidence has been suggested), the latex exposure is unrelated to vaccines.

Nobody is claiming that allergies don't exist, or that latex allergies are a myth. The point is that you have yet to provide any evidence that latex exposure causes autism. If I note in passing that wasp stings don't cause polio, I'm not trying to take away people's epipens, nor force my friend with an allergy to stay in the room if wasps invade. "An allergy to X exists, so people with that allergy should avoid certain products" is very different from "X is bad for everyone."

Stop. SIWOTI, but I have real work to do.

Rather than addressing the points raised by Todd -

"A review of the VAERS data noted that there were no reported cases of allergic reactions related to DNR formulations between 1991 and 2003 in the US. Similarly, BD did not receive any customer complaints reporting cases of allergic reactions in the European and North America markets. Given the approximately 300 million immunisations each year in the US, the occurrence of an allergic reaction possibly as a result of latex protein contamination in vaccine solution appears to be below 0.001 ppm."

- Mr. Dochniak launches a vicious attack on a straw man of his own imagining:

"You may want to send your ideas to the FDA in an effort to have latex warnings removed from vaccines? This would of course lead medical science down a path of 'do harm' instead of 'do no harm'."

Must I point out that the quote Todd provided came from a citation Mr. Dochniak provided as supposedly supporting his claims that latex in vaccines causes allergic reactions and, ultimately, autism.

It seems that Mr. Dochniak doesn't read the articles he cites...very poor form, Mr. Dochniak.

Now, I don't recall Todd suggesting that people with latex allergies should be given vaccines out of vial with latex stoppers, despite what Mr. Dochniak writes. I suspect that was simply Mr. Dochniak's way of deflecting attention from his latest embarrassment. However, this is another good example of how exceptionally careful the FDA and vaccine manufacturers are when it comes to even hypothetical dangers.

I think it should be clear by now that Mr. Dochniak's hypothesis is supported by nothing more than his own arm-chair musings. Now that we know he hasn't read the literature he cites, I can only imagine how many factual errors his latest book contains.

Mr. Dochniak may feel that I am picking on him by pointing out his errors of fact and logic. He should see how I am with my students - of course, they are open to learning something new.

Prometheus

Prometheus writes (#), "However, this is another good example of how exceptionally careful the FDA and vaccine manufacturers are when it comes to even hypothetical dangers."

MjD's response:

Description why even minute quantities of natural-latex protein contamination in a vaccine solution can be harmful:

1) It is well documented that many infant vaccine solutions contain the adjuvant aluminum-hydroxide.

2) It is known that aluminum hydroxide effectively binds to H. brasiliensis natural-latex proteins.

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PAL…

3) In animal studies, mice are injected with natural-latex proteins that are adsorbed onto aluminum hydroxide, inducing natural-latex allergy.

http://ajrccm.atsjournals.org/cgi/content/short/167/10/1393

4) H. brasiliensis natural-latex exposure can lead to allergy-induced regressive autism.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/209575

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 13 Oct 2011 #permalink

Vicki writes (#602), ""An allergy to X exists, so people with that allergy should avoid certain products" is very different from "X is bad for everyone." and

"Stop. SIWOTI, but I have real work to do.".

MjD's response:

1) H. brasiliensis natural-latex proteins exist in some vaccines;

2) Exposure to such proteins, through vaccination, can cause latex sensitivity/allergy; then

3) Infants repeatedly insulted with such vaccines have an increased probability of acquiring latex sensitivity/allergy.

In my opinion, this situation is bad. Herd immunity through vaccination must strive to achieve efficacy and safety for everyone.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

Thanks for your input. Hope your "real work" is meaningful.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 13 Oct 2011 #permalink

Obviously, your's is not - you remind me of a guy I met once who's business card said "Futurist." His whole "job" was sitting around with other futurists & brainstorming about things that may or may not happen in the future.

In the post above, you start with a very basic premise (latex) & combine it with something also very basic (allergies) - yet somehow manage to take the leap (off a cliff) that latex causes autism.

You can make all the suppositions that you want - but no evidence is still no evidence. So stop stating as fact things that you have no firm evidence to support.

Also, again explain to us why your work with a "latex-alternative" corporation and all of your patents / applications don't represent a demonstratable conflict of interest? Shouldn't this relationship be disclosed, publically & in your book?

Shouldn't this relationship be disclosed, publically & in your book?

Now I don't at all agree with his reasoning, but I thought it was pretty clear what his reasoning behind that was: according to him, something is only a conflict of interest if it's your motivation for acting. Since he knows himself, and knows that it isn't his motivation for acting, it isn't a conflict of interests, and thus doesn't need to be disclosed.

By Matthew Cline (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD

4) H. brasiliensis natural-latex exposure can lead to allergy-induced regressive autism.

[redacted http]www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/209575

There goes your not actually reading the sources you provide, again. That link goes to this paper:

Studies on bovine leucosis V. A comparative study on the practical value of the agar gel immunodiffusion test, the indirect fluorescent antibody technique and the micro complement fixation test for the detection of antibodies to bovine leucosis virus.
Ressang AA, Mastenbroek N, Quak J.
Abstract

The practical value of the indirect fluorescent antibody technique (I FAT), the micro complement fixation test (M CFT) and the agar gel immunodiffusion test (AGIDT) for the detection of antibodies to bovine leucosis virus (BLV) was investigated. For this purpose 1495 serum samples were examined. There was a remarkably good agreement between the three tests in the demonstration of antibodies to BLV especially if sera with a sufficient high concentration of antibodies ("late serum") were under investigation. These positive sera were derived only from farms which exploited one or more imported animals. A disagreement of results of the three tests was observed in 38 (2.5%) cases. This was due to: (1) difficulties in reading of the test; (2) presumably by the demonstration of different classes of antibody and (3) the fact that in the AGIDT sera could be used undiluted. This discrepancy was especially evident with sera with a low concentration of antibodies ("early or incubation sera"). A drawback for the M CFT is the anticomplementary activity found in 17% of the bovine serum samples.

Please explain to the class where either latex or regressive autism are mentioned. Also, where are the humans in that study?

And here I thought you were actually finally answering our question.

(As an aside, your list o' stuff about how some vaccines may contain trace bits of latex is not disputed. Your links about potentially sensitizing someone to latex and thus making an allergic reaction more likely also is not disputed. Like before, I'm going to request that you refrain from further beating that dead horse.)

A disagreement of results of the three tests was observed in 38 (2.5%) cases. This was due to: (1) difficulties in reading...

Aha! Difficulties in reading! An obvious sign of regressive autism.

Don't all you doubters feel like fools, now?

Todd W. writes (#608), "Also, where are the humans in that study?"

MjD's response:

4) H. brasiliensis natural-latex exposure can lead to allergy-induced regressive autism.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20957522

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

Lawrence writes (#606), "Also, again explain to us why your work with a "latex-alternative" corporation and all of your patents / applications don't represent a demonstratable conflict of interest? Shouldn't this relationship be disclosed, publically & in your book?"

MjD's response:

All of my workings including ultra-low protein NRL, patents, and citizen petitions are thoroughly described in the book "Allergies and Autism". See below:

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=114…

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Some people started singing it not knowing what it was
But they'll continue singing it forever just because...

@MjD

Prometheus already addressed that study in comment #93, and mentioned it again in comment #570. Repeating yourself doesn't make what you say true.

Chris writes (#613), "Prometheus already addressed that study in comment #93, and mentioned it again in comment #570".

MjD's response:

In parallel, a gerbil on a treadmill works very hard but doesn't really accomplish anything.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

Are you hoping that by saying something stupid enough, you'll quiet us down by confusion?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD

Don't be so hard on yourself, Michael. No one is calling you a gerbil. All we want is some valid scientific evidence that latex allergies cause autism. You know, something that shows causation, rather than speculation.

(Cue loop.)

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

(and I am not Todd)

Todd W. writes (#616), "You know, something that shows causation, rather than speculation."

MjD's response:

Allergy-induced autism research continues to explore how certain antigenic-proteins affect adaptive immunity (i.e., cross-reactivity) and neurological development.

It is known that allergies can increase the expression of neurotrophin, including NGF, dramatically affecting neural growth and neural pruning.

In infants, the timing, frequency, intensity, and type of exposure to H. brasiliensis natural-latex antigens can cause cross-reactivity; thereafter affecting the incidence and degree of atypicality behaviors in regressive autism.

Furthermore, in a research paper entitled, "Allergic manifestations in autistic children: Relations to disease severity", researchers concluded that allergy may play a role in the pathogenesis of autism wherein allergic immune responses to some proteins (dietary protein and latex) may induce the production of brain auto-antibodies, which are found in many autistic children.

http://iospress.metapress.com/content/w6820728082nu597/

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD

Perhaps you misunderstood. I asked for evidence, not speculation. The study you provided, "Allergic manifestations in autistic children: Relation to disease severity" by Gehan A. Mostafa, Rasha T. Hamza and Heba H. El-Shahawi, shows that there is some manner of association, but does not differentiate between allergy being a cause and allergy being a comorbid condition.

Indeed, some aspects of autism that may seem allergy-related may, in fact, not be due to allergies at all. Now, allergies may exacerbate behavioral symptoms of autism. Think about it, the more severe the autism and the greater the communication difficulties, the more frustrated one might feel, unable to get across the discomfort you're feeling and thus, unable to remedy the situation.

Now, about that evidence, not speculation, that latex allergy causes autism?

Todd W. writes (#619), "Now, about that evidence, not speculation, that latex allergy causes autism?"

MjD's response:

Here's the question we've (Denise H. Dunn and myself) asked, and answered, using a combination of empirical evidence, anecdotal evidence, and scientific reasoning:

Can exposure to the antigenic proteins in Hevea brasiliensis natural-latex, from vaccines, cause/affect adaptive-immunity induced regressive autism?

Read the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" for details.

Asking a specific question about a detail in said book will get my attention.

Good luck Todd W. and hope you understand.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

Here's a specific question: Do you really care about anything but advertising you book?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

@MjD

I was right in my prediction that you would loop back. When asked "What evidence do you have that latex allergies cause autism?" you respond with "Buy my book".

Sorry Michael, that doesn't cut it. Just admit that you don't have any valid scientific evidence that latex allergies cause autism.

Most likely MjD isn't aware of what a huge leap of logic he's taking. I suspect his book consists entirely of statements of the form "Autistic people can have allergies" and "latex allergies exist", even though they are not enough to prove "latex allergies cause autism".

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

It occurs to me that if we were to assume MjD is telling the truth, he obviously doesn't have any concern for the welfare of the autistic. If it were truly possible to prevent autism by avoiding the use of latex, this would be a profoundly important fact which would need to be widely disseminated. Yet he insists on making a personal profit off of it before letting anyone know.

@Beamup: MjD never gave me a straight answer to one question. "Do you feel it's right to withhold what you feel is valuable information from humanity so you can sell your book?"

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

Not new, then. Sorry, I guess I missed it in the 625-post history!

MjD writes (#620):"Here's the question we've (Denise H. Dunn and myself) asked, and answered, using a combination of empirical evidence, anecdotal evidence, and scientific reasoning:

Can exposure to the antigenic proteins in Hevea brasiliensis natural-latex, from vaccines, cause/affect adaptive-immunity induced regressive autism?"

Justin's response:

Do you have a section in your book where you layout the shortcomings or the weaknesses in your hypothesis or the empirical/anecdotal evidence and scientific reasoning which you feel support your hypothesis? If so, could you elaborate on what you wrote(in your book), so that I can better understand your position?

How would you design a research study(or series of studies) to test your hypothesis? Methodology?

I am really interested in what you have to say about this one based on an earlier post that you made.

"(#585)Fringe science is a flavor of conjecture
Conjecture is an ingredient of creativity
Creativity is a recipe for hypotheses
A hypothesis feeds medical science
Medical science then nourishes mankind
Knowledge grows

MjD"

I agree with a lot of this, but I think that you need to think about line 4 again. Does a hypothesis actually feed medical science? or is it something else?

How I see it, is that a hypothesis only feeds medical science if it is tested and either validated or invalidated. Otherwise, the hypothesis doesn't actually tell you much, and, in reality confuses medical science until it has been tested and some sort of results can be analyzed and interpreted.

So how would you test your hypothesis, so that you can meaningfully advance medical science in the realm of autism?

Thanks,

Justin

Amazon.com review of book:

1.0 out of 5 stars
"Would give -5 star if available", October 14, 2011
By Bill S. Hit "Bull" (Miami, USA)

This review is from: Vaccine Delivery and Autism (The Latex Connection) (Paperback)

First it was the MMR vaccine (Andrew Wakefield), then the mercury (thimerosal), then formaldehyde, monkey kidney tissue, aluminium, calf serum and "too many too soon"; all as definitive causes of autism in children. Time and time again, large epidemiological based studies, or logical scientific explanations disprove these theories. Yet again and again, the goalposts are shifted to lay the blame at vaccines. In "Vaccine Delivery and Autism (The Latex Connection)", the new target is as the title suggests; latex.

Before delving further into this, science-based medicine is one of the most powerful and successful tools invented by mankind. In this, a "hypothesis" is tested scientifically and an account submitted to a scientific journal for review by the individuals peers. After satisfactory review, the science is published for all to see with all the details of how the work was done. Other scientists then test this hypothesis, and eventually when enough evidence is found, this become a "theory". The current book in question is merely a hypothesis with no scientific investigation/experimentation, no peer review and definitely noone else repeating. Furthermore, it would appear that Mr Dockniak has a conflict of interest, as he holds patents on artificial latex compounds (http://www.vytex.com/BizDocs/ASCVystar4609.pdf), which would mean it was in his interest for his product to be used in favour of natural latex from plants.

Overall, therefore this book is nothing more than fear-mongering and adds to the current hysteria of anti-vaccine nonsense that is around. In fact, this is more than nonsense and is in fact outright dangerous. Since the likes of these unscientific accounts have been around, fueled by the likes of Jenny McCarthy, Charlie Sheen and Jim Carrey, deaths have occurred due to low vaccination rates as a result.

Furthermore, this "hypothesis" is about as scientific as the following; why not check out some of the chemicals in vaccines that have been proven to cause human fatalities including; Hydrogen oxide, Dihydrogen monoxide, Hydrogen monoxide, Dihydrogen oxide and Hydrogen hydroxide.

Avoid any similar books that claim to be "scientific researchers", yet have not published anything in the scientific press.

By Bill S. Hit (not verified) on 14 Oct 2011 #permalink

Excellent, Mr. Hit. Unfortunately Amazon removes all web addresses from the reviews. There are now some new tags on the page. Go take a look.

Justin (#628) asks Mr. Dochniak some very good questions, which I note Mr. Dochniak hasn't bothered to answer. In the interest of time, let me try to field a few of them, based on what I have gleaned from Mr. Dochniak's responses to previous questions.

"Do you have a section in your book where you layout the shortcomings or the weaknesses in your hypothesis or the empirical/anecdotal evidence and scientific reasoning which you feel support your hypothesis? If so, could you elaborate on what you wrote(in your book), so that I can better understand your position?"

Justin, until Mr. Dochniak started posting comments on this 'blog, he didn't know that his hypothesis had any weaknesses or shortcomings.

"How would you design a research study(or series of studies) to test your hypothesis? Methodology?"

Again, until he arrived here, Mr. Dochniak wasn't aware that hypothesis testing was part of "research", which is why he refers to himself as "...a leading researcher in allergy-induced regressive autism.".

Seriously, how can someone describe themselves as a "researcher" if they haven't done any, you know, research? Mr. Dochniak, like so many Google-based scientist wanna-be's, didn't know that reading articles (or, based on some of Mr. Dochniak's citations, reading only the title and part of the abstract) isn't considered "research" after the undergraduate level.

I've proposed ways that Mr. Dochniak could test his hypothesis without the effort and expense of a full-fledged clinical research study: for example, he could see if autistic children are more likely that non-autistic children to have latex allergies. Or, he could simply see if the sales data for latex-containing vaccines (those routinely given to children under three years of age) track the prevalence of autism over time.

Of course, he hasn't done any of that and - from what I have seen - he isn't the slightest bit interested in doing anything that might contradict his hypothesis and harm his book sales.

Oh, and let me anticipate Mr. Dochniak's response, if he ever returns: "Read my book!"

Prometheus

Justin writes (#628), "So how would you test your hypothesis, so that you can meaningfully advance medical science in the realm of autism?"

MjD's response:

In the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection", Chapter 11, page 74-75, describes a proactive approach to reduce the future incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism:

1) Medical professionals will do blood tests before and after vaccinations, monitoring adaptive immunity;

2) The expression of cytokines, IgE, and NGF will be monitored in children to help physicians and parents determine if a vaccine can be safely administered; and

3) A child with an "atypical" adaptive immunity profile will be exempt from vaccinations if deemed appropriate.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 18 Oct 2011 #permalink

That's not the question you were asked, Dochniak. You were asked how you would test your hypothesis to determine whether it is true, not what sort of action you would take based on the blind, unreasoning assumption that it must be true.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 18 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

Read my book. Did I tell you to read my book? Anyway, read my book.

Wait, so in order to reduce the risk of an as-yet unproven latex allergy-induced autism, medical professionals will do blood tests before and after every vaccination? Seriously? Since there is no evidence that latex allergies cause autism, these tests would not only be pointless; they would also be totally unethical, as they expose the child to greater risk of infection with no benefit.

Wow. Just...wow.

Now, Mr. D., where's that evidence we keep asking you for? You know, the one that shows that latex allergies cause autism?

OK, I'll bite...

MjD (#632):

"1) Medical professionals will do blood tests before and after vaccinations, monitoring adaptive immunity"

Which blood tests will show that a child has a problem with adaptive immunity that will lead to a latex allergy?

I'm not asking which blood tests will show that a child is susceptible to "allergy-induced autism", since that hasn't been shown to exist, I just want to know which "blood tests" Mr. Dochniak had in mind.

You'll note that I'm not holding my breath waiting for a clear answer. And please also note that vague and disjointed references to rodents don't qualify as answers to this question.

Prometheus

Adaptive-Prometheus writes (#637), "...which blood tests will show that a child is susceptible to "allergy-induced autism".

MjD's response:

In the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection":

Chapter 4 (Long Life), NGF over-expression linked to autism, page 23-24;

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11357950

and

A study has shown that circulating NGF levels are increased in humans with allergic diseases;

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC38265/

Chapter 11 (Foreseeable Future), Cytokine ratio Il-13/Il-10, page 72-73, Research has shown that children with ASD had increased activation of both Th2 and Th1 arms of the adaptive immune response with Th2 predominance and without the compensatory increase in regulatory cytokine IL-10;

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16360218

Thus, cytokine profile and NGF expression are two biomarkers that can be tested to evaluate if an infant may be safely vaccinated.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 20 Oct 2011 #permalink

Also note that the hand does not have the markings of the Devil on it. Clearly, we should eliminate MjD the warlock.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 21 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

@MjD

In the vaccine/autism article below, notice that the hand giving the vaccine is not wearing a natural-latex glove.

And this proves that latex allergies cause autism...how? You still have not answered that question, Mr. Dochniak.

The Cliff's Notes version of the thread so far:

MjD: Latex allergies cause autism. Buy my book.

Reality-based People (RBP): What evidence do you have?

MjD: Buy my book. It's all there.

RBP: Just provide a scientific article showing that latex allergies cause autism.

MjD: Here's a study [showing that people get latex allergies].

RBP: That shows people can get latex allergies. We know that can happen. What it doesn't show is that latex allergies cause autism.

MjD: Here's a study [showing that some autistic people also have a latex allergy].

RBP: That shows that there are some people with autism who also have a latex allergy. What it doesn't show is that latex allergies cause autism.

MjD: Buy my book.

[repeat ad nauseam]

Todd W. writes (#643), "What it doesn't show is that latex allergies cause autism".

MjD's response:

Denise H. Dunn (co-author) and I are showing how environmental insult (i.e., hevea-allergens) affect allergy-induced regressive autism.

Within the autism spectrum, some individuals have exceptional cognitive skills while others have severe and pervasive impairment in thinking, feeling, language, and sociability.

Researchers have proposed that the fraction of autistic individuals who meet the criteria for mental retardation has been reported from 25% to 70%.

Reference:
M. Dawson et al., "Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference", Academic Press (2008): 759-72.

This large range shows a staggering diversity and uncertainty. Atypical adaptive immunity is an aetiology that can encompass such variability.

It is evident that atypical adaptive immunity from hevea-allergen tainted vaccines continues to affect the incidence of mental retardation in ASD.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 21 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, why can't you just print your evidence here?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 21 Oct 2011 #permalink

Copious evidence shows that warlocks cannot answer simple questions and have a tendency to go annoyingly off-topic. The conclusion is therefore clear that all autism is caused by Michael J. Dochniak the warlock.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 21 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD

allergy-induced regressive autism

That bit there is what you have yet to prove. Perhaps you should take some remedial reading courses to help you with your apparent lack of reading comprehension.

Gray Falcon:

MjD, why can't you just print your evidence here?

Because it does not exist.

Justin writes (#628), ""Do you have a section in your book where you layout the shortcomings or the weaknesses in your hypothesis or the empirical/anecdotal evidence and scientific reasoning which you feel support your hypothesis? If so, could you elaborate on what you wrote(in your book), so that I can better understand your position?"

MjD's response:

Here's a few question answered in the book:

What is the protein standards for H. brasiliensis natural-latex in vaccine components and prefilled syringes?

Is the natural-latex in vaccines ethical?

For more information, see the book co-authored by Denise H. Dunn titled, "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection".

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

Read my book. Read my book. Don't question me, just read my book.

MjDBot writes (#650), "Don't question me, just read my book".

MjD's response:

Read the book then question me would be more effective.

Here's a good question. What part of the book do you have a question on MjDBot?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

@ MjDbot: I think if is highly unusual for the troll to be taking all this time out of his busy "work day" and throughout the wee hours of the morning to be posting here. I am wondering about troll's real source of income.

Isn't he a rubber adhesive salesman...or is he now retired...just waiting for the royalties to flow in from the sales of his ("read my") books?

Shouldn't he be taking care of his "latex-injured" child?

When is this "rubber going to hit the road?"

And MjDbot...let us know when your book is published.

lilady writes (#652), "Shouldn't he be taking care of his "latex-injured" child?"

MjD's response:

In 1998, the FDA added a warning on medical devices (e.g., vaccines)containing natural latex. In the 1990's, my healthy and responsive child was damaged from medical devices tainted with the antigenic proteins from H. brasiliensis natural-latex and today is a severely mentally retarded (autistic) adult.

When will the medical profession accept responsibility for the millions of children harmed from their ignorant use of natural latex?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD:

"When will the medical profession accept responsibility for the millions of children harmed from their ignorant use of natural latex?"

When someone - maybe even MjD himself - shows data supporting the claim that "ignorant use of natural latex" has harmed "millions of children" - or even a few.

So far, all we have are the armchair musings of two authors who have thoroughly demonstrated that they have a poor grasp of both biology and the scientific method. No matter how many times Mr. Dochniak repeats "read my book and then ask me questions", the inherent flaws in his hypothesis will remain.

At this point, a wise person would realise that they aren't going to "pull one over" on this 'blog's readers and would either quietly disappear ("limit the damage") or take the information they've received and fix their hypothesis. Only a fool would keep coming back here - day after day - thinking that "read my book" is an adequate response to the problems he has been shown.

Mr. Dochniak's response will tell us whether he is wise or foolish.

Prometheus

Mr. Dochniak you are full of yourself and your theories...right from your website is the description of your son's 2nd birthday party:

"A time of anticipated celebration, a time of joy as brightly colored party balloons, wrapped gifts, paper plates, and inscribed napkins decorated picnic tables for family and friends gathered to share vanilla-frosted cake at Dain's 2nd birthday. Dain playfully mouthed an inflated natural-latex balloon while others cheerfully watched and sang happy birthday. Within the balloon was an invasive danger that would soon severely threaten and change his life forever. Shortly after playing with the balloon, Dain's health steadily regressed as his adaptive immune system recognized and attacked the natural-latex proteins that had transferred, through inhalation and dermal absorption, from the balloon and into his body. As the allergic response progressed and intensified his health worsened, frightened parents comforted their child as each labored breath failed to change the dark-purple color in his lips from oxygen starved blood. Rushed to the hospital emergency room, a nurse quickly injected adrenaline into his tiny shoulder. A mask supplied a steady stream of oxygen and intravenous tubes dripped essential fluids into his arm, rapidly turning his lips a safe pink color again allowing this atopic child to overcome a severe allergic reaction and live another day. Before leaving the hospital, a Doctor discussed his allergy situation. It was recommended that a nebulizer be used at home to relieve any recurrent asthmatic symptoms. The treatments helped his breathing but failed to address its underlying cause and progression - his adaptive immune system was hyper-active and out of control. Within a year, Dain would experience many more allergic manifestations and be diagnosed with Regressive Autism; thereafter helplessly locked forever in a world of behavioral atypicality.

In the book titled, 'Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection' Michael believes that vaccines contributed to his son's allergy-induced regressive autism."

As I mentioned in my post at # 23 above your son did not have an allergic attack...he had an asthma attack and you were given a nebulizer for recurrent asthma symptoms...not an Epipen to prevent anaphylaxis. You don't even know if it was the balloon, the powder in the balloon that he inhaled...or food served at his party that caused his asthma attack.

Furthermore, at two years of age, your son would have had many injections of vaccines (MMR, DPT and perhaps hepatitis B) from vials with latex stoppers in syringes with latex plungers and never, according to you, showed signs of latex induced regression prior to the balloon incident.

Isn't about time you stop posting here with your totally inane pseudoscience theories, your bogus anecdotal history of your son's regression and your shameless "read my books" campaign.

Here's a business plan for you; try posting at the Age of Autism website where they welcome any and all "theories" and would be only too willing to buy your books.

And, for goodness sake, get a real job and in your "spare time" help with the care of your disabled son.

Regressive-Prometheus writes (#654), "At this point, a wise person would realise that they aren't going to "pull one over" on this 'blog's readers and would either quietly disappear ("limit the damage") or take the information they've received and fix their hypothesis".

MjD's response:

Why should anyone believe you when you openly refuse to read the book "Vaccine Delivery asnd Autism - The Latex Connection". Ignorance is bliss?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

"Here's a business plan for you; try posting at the Age of Autism website where they welcome any and all "theories""

Not "any and all," actually. There is one theory in particular that they go out of their way to avoid talking about, because they don't want to have to explain to their loyal readers the "big pharma" influence involved.

By Jen in TX (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, you have an idea. Nearly everybody has ideas. You can't just expect us to throw money at you just for having an idea. You need to convince us it's a good idea. Seeing as you don't know the difference between asthma and allergies, you aren't doing a good job.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

Gray Falcon writes (#658), "Seeing as you don't know the difference between asthma and allergies, you aren't doing a good job".

MjD's response:

Here's some asthma/latex information you may want to read Gray Falcon:

http://www.aafa.org/display.cfm?id=9&sub=21

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

The site you linked to stated that the reaction to latex is an allergy. Your son had an asthma attack, not an allergic reaction. Then again, I can't expect much from someone who thinks that a photo of someone not wearing gloves counts as evidence.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

Why should anyone believe you when you openly refuse to read the book "Vaccine Delivery asnd Autism - The Latex Connection". Ignorance is bliss?

Because you have succeeded in convincing everyone that your self-published book is a steaming pile of garbage, Michael. You. Prometheus posted just a couple of the flaws in your 'hypothesis' back in May. You've posted almost 150 comments since then, and not one of those comments has contained a satisfactory explanation for any of those flaws. It's clear that you do not have a satisfactory explanation; reading the entire book to try and locate what you yourself cannot locate in it (an adequate rebuttal to the pointed-out flaws) would be ludicrous.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

@ Gray Falcon: Nor can Dochniak "explain" why his son did not regress after his early childhood immunizations and why he didn't go into anaphylactic shock when he received adrenaline from a vial with a latex port and with a syringe with a latex plunger...

"Rushed to the hospital emergency room, a nurse quickly injected adrenaline into his tiny shoulder."

Why should anyone believe you when you openly refuse to read the book "Vaccine Delivery asnd Autism - The Latex Connection". Ignorance is bliss?

Well you won't actually let those of us who have requested your book to read it. Prometheus is a highly-respected commenter here with an excellent blog of his own that you know about; plenty of us believe his well-referenced posts because his information can be easily validated. Yours cannot. And that is because you think you can do an end-run around the scientific method. You and your co-author are a joke Mr. Dochniak.

Science Mom writes (#664), "Prometheus is a highly-respected commenter here with an excellent blog of his own that you know about; plenty of us believe his well-referenced posts because his information can be easily validated".

MjD's response:

A photo in the darkness without a flash of light, when it comes to allergy-induced regressive autism.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

@mjd

dochinak, going to the ad hominem now, now that you have been so thoroughly discredited?

Why am I not surprised by your lack of class.

An interesting evolution we have here: from shamelessly self-promoting troll to regular troll. (Boy, somebody's got it in for Prometheus...)

It's also sort of impressive that the posts have actually gotten more substance-less - I figured there would be a threshold for that, but evidently not.

By the way, I'm not a reader of Prometheus's blog, but even I know that it's "photon in the darkness."

By The Christian Cynic (not verified) on 22 Oct 2011 #permalink

Don't ask me questions, you bunch of meanyheads! Just read my book!

Don't ask me questions, you bunch of meanyheads! Just read my book!

This is no way to generate bot cred.

@ Narad: Stop picking on the bot...it merely states plain truth about Dochniak who really is a self-promoting silly troll.

The Christian Cynic writes (#667),"An interesting evolution we have here..."

MjD's response:

Genetic research has shown us that our closest relative is the chimpanzee. It may be understood that humans are intellectually different than the Chimpanzee because of immunity. A study indicates that humans and chimpanzees have remarkably dissimilar adaptive immunity. For example, research at the University of California â San Diego has shown that human T-cells, which are an important orchestrator of the immune system, respond much more robustly than chimpanzee cells do.

http://news.bio-medicine.org/medicine-news-3/T-cell-brakes-lost-during-…

The intellectual progression of mankind rests on the shoulders of immunity.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

It may be understood that humans are intellectually different than the Chimpanzee because of immunity.

Apparently the spammer thinks that "It may be understood" is a synonym for "Someone out there has an unproven hypothesis."

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

Bot Ratings: October 2011

MjDbot - a serviceable, meat-and-potatoes everyday bot: what you see is what you get. 4 of 10

Th1Th2bot- its stylings have grandeur and sweep: far-ranging poetic anomie with just a touch of heart-rending pathos- thankfully un-rhymed. Bots like these fairly rival flesh-and-blood scribblers' verve: I like. 9.5 of 10

The blog "Just the Vax" by Catherine and Science Mom writes,

"Vaccine refusers turn their children into potential murder weapons"

http://justthevax.blogspot.com/
(Saturday, October 22, 2011 post)

MjD's response:

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning and help reduce the incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

I like the way that the spammer includes the text that he's responding to, so everyone can see just what an irrelevant and indequate response it is.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

A quote:

It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the ones most responsive to change. â Charles Darwin

It's time to change the way medical science vaccinates children.

Immunity of Life
Pre-vaccination, keeping baby safe from regression
Test before injection
Immunoglobulins in blood, neurotrophin in saliva
Cytokines and androgen expression

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, you've been going on for months, and you still have not answered any of our questions. What are you honestly hoping to accomplish? Are you unaware of how human society works?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#93), "It has been illuminating to see that there are environmental niches of autism crankery that I had not previously even heard of. I thank you for this, Orac, and also Mr. Dochniak"

MjD's response:

The threshold of sensitivity to the hevea-allergens is unknown. It's time for medical science, and government agencies entrusted to assure vaccine safety, to completely abolish the use of H. brasiliensis natural-latex in vaccine packaging.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning and help reduce the incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning and help reduce the incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism increase the risk of epidemics of preventable diseases.

Fixed that for you. You see, that's what would happen. What you suggest instead has no evidence. At least, you haven't presented any.

I'm almost starting to think that Dochniak just has a script to auto-reply to any posts on this thread, since he never seems to address the actual content of what he's responding to.

Gray Falcon writes (#677), "What are you honestly hoping to accomplish?"

MjD's response:

Specifically, atypical adaptive-immunity in children can cause allergy-induced regressive autism. More specifically, environmental insult (e.g., natural latex) and vaccinations (Th2 shift) are comorbid factors in the aetiology of allergy-induced regressive autism.

The message is loud and clear, put your hearing aid on Prometheus: REFUSE VACCINES THAT HAVE A LATEX WARNING.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

atypical adaptive-immunity in children can cause allergy-induced regressive autism.

Citation needed.

REFUSE VACCINES THAT HAVE A LATEX WARNING.

Why? You've given no justification to do so.

Here is a question for you to answer before you answer any others: why do you not answer our request for evidence that latex allergies cause autism? If you cannot provide evidence, just say so!

Todd W. writes (#679), "Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning and help increase the risk of epidemics of preventable diseases"

MjD's response:

Prometheus would disagree with your statement. I think he would?

Simply request latex-free vaccines and I strongly suggest reducing infant exposure to H. brasiliensis natural-latex.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

Artk writes (#68), "Most importantly, you need a plausible mechanism that connects allergic reactions to autism. Followed by research confirming that connection. Then you can start asking about the latex being carried along with the injection being a cause"

MjD's response:

A proteomic investigation of B lymphocytes in an autistic family: a pilot study of exposure to natural rubber latex (NRL) may lead to autism.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20957522

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

MjD (#682):

"Prometheus would disagree with your statement. I think he would?"

I find it odd that Mr. Dochniak - far all that he tries to denigrate me in his pathetic little way - has repeatedly tried to put words in my mouth to support his arguments.

Mr. Dochniak, if your arguments won't stand on their own (hint: they don't), claiming that I would agree with you doesn't make them any stronger. Have you forgotten that you've made several attempts to ridicule me and show how little I know compared to your own towering intellect?

As so many people on this 'blog (including me) have stated, your hypotheses have some critical flaws that you need to address. Your book - since it is, as you have repeatedly said, based on these flawed hypotheses - must be equally flawed.

Why should anyone pay even $9.95 to read a book whose own author has admitted is based on flawed reasoning and no data?

If there's something in your book that will change that assessment, Mr. Dochniak, the time to bring it forward was months ago. What you've done, instead, is try to convince us that - all evidence to the contrary - you know more about biology and scientific method than your comments have revealed. Your own words have been the most hostile witnesses against you.

You no doubt feel that I've been unfair and overly hard on you, which accounts for your juvenile insults. These are complaints I hear from many students I've had to give D's and F's in my classes. If you want to see how well your hypotheses fare in an "unbiased" forum, I suggest that you condense them to a few pages and submit them to a peer-reviewed journal (hint: Medical Hypotheses isn't peer-reviewed).

You might want to develop a thicker skin before doing that, Mr. Dochniak, because peer-review is not for the faint of heart or the fragile of ego. I know this because I've been through it many times.

Prometheus

Prometheus:

Why should anyone pay even $9.95 to read a book whose own author has admitted is based on flawed reasoning and no data?

Perhaps some more voting on the tags at Amazon?

Bot Ratings: October 2011

Speaking as the Th1Th2bot's operator, I am grateful for the compliment, but I must note that there is a duty in this capacity, which was my (perhaps too elliptical) observation: there is a point of honor in scrupulously hewing to actual auto-generated text. Now, I'm not going to get the American Guild of Variety Bots involved, since this would probably just lead to trying to parse the anachronistic jabbering of the GompersBot sooner or later, but the MjDbot, having expanded upon the vocabulary of its domain, is either extremely sophisticated or using scab nonbot labor.

As the operator of the MjD bot, I don't have nearly enough material to work with as the Th bot, and thus am outsourcing.

By dedicated lurker (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#686), "You might want to develop a thicker skin before doing that, Mr. Dochniak, because peer-review is not for the faint of heart or the fragile of ego"

MjD's response:

Andrew J. Wakefield (Autism Researcher) says, "I continue to fully support more independent research to determine if environmental triggers, including vaccines, are causing autism and other developmental problems. The current rate of autism is 1 in 110 in the United States and 1 in 64 children in the U.K. My goal has always been and will remain the health and safety of children. Since the Lancet paper, I have lost my job, my career and my country. To claim that my motivation was profit is patently untrue. I will not be deterred - this issue is far too important."

Vaccines induced autism peer-reviewed or non-peer-reviewed papers are equally dangerous in my opinion.

Thank goodness for freedom of speech.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

@mjd

OK, I think we can officially say that mjd is a total nutter, if he is going to use wakefield as a source.

Now, excuse me, as I laugh at your pathetic excuse for a cite.

And you still haven't addressed any of the questions that Prometheus and any of the other posters have addressed.

As a follow-up to message #692:

Several years ago I worked as a Staff Scientist at a Biotechnology Company called Segetis Corp.(MN).

The founder had an advanced degree in genetics. After reading the Medical Hypotheses paper titled, "Autism Spectrum Disorders - Exogenous Protein Insult" he told me to stop blaming others for autism because it was genetic.

I was fired shortly thereafter.

My point being, non peer-reviewed papers are also dangerous.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 23 Oct 2011 #permalink

from the person who writes in third person:

My point being, non peer-reviewed papers are also dangerous.

Ya think? The third person commentator has only written in a non-peer-reviewed paper and a self published paper. He has refused to refuse to answer what the actual evidence shows allergies (especially to latex) lead to autism.

My point being, non peer-reviewed papers are also dangerous.

A prime example of a non-peer-reviewed paper being dangerous is "Vaccine Delivery and Autism (The Latex Connection)."

Mr. Dochniak has refused to answer what the actual evidence shows allergies (especially to latex) lead to autism.

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

"Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because..."

Chris...it only seem like forever....

"Vaccines induced autism peer-reviewed or non-peer-reviewed papers are equally dangerous in my opinion."

I'm trying to parse this as an English sentence and failing. This makes me even more disinclined to read his book.

Anyone want to make some money? Glass can be said to contain "negative ions," including the highly reactive noncovalent oxygen, which is what oxygen becomes when it goes bad. Would you inject negative ions, or rotten oxygen into *your* child? Hmm? Now, vaccines sometimes come in glass bottles. You do the math/write the book/etc. And don't even get me started about plastics in syringes. Or do, since I pretty desperately need money too.

LW -- exactly what struck me; Donchiak appears to be making progressively less sense, and that particular comment made almost negative sense. I really haven't the slightest idea what he's trying to say.

His out-of-left-field comment about chimpanzees being less intelligent than human due to immune system differences boggles the mind as well. (Really? Their immune system is the only thing different? I guess it also explains why they have so much hair, can pull half a ton without breaking a sweat, and have such short legs and such long toes. It must be the immune system, ergo latex causes autism. Somehow.)

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 24 Oct 2011 #permalink

You're right, Michael.

There's nothing the world that can compare with pure imagination.

By squirrelelite (not verified) on 24 Oct 2011 #permalink

Seen in the discussion forums for his book: "Why is Hevea brasiliensis dry natural rubber in vaccines?" Answer: "Because the allergens in this rubber increase the sales of allergy medication," from Michael J. Dochniak. As far as I can tell, the concept of evidence is utterly alien to him.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 24 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD (#671):

"Genetic research has shown us that our closest relative is the chimpanzee. It may be understood that humans are intellectually different than the Chimpanzee because of immunity. A study indicates that humans and chimpanzees have remarkably dissimilar adaptive immunity. For example, research at the University of California â San Diego has shown that human T-cells, which are an important orchestrator of the immune system, respond much more robustly than chimpanzee cells do."

When I went to the citation Mr. Dochniak provided, was amazed to find that the news report he cited (and the PNAS article it was reporting on) said nothing about any connection between immunity and intellectual ability. (Nguyen et al, Loss of Siglec expression on T-cells during human evolution, PNAS May 16, 2006; vol. 103, no. 20, pp 7765-7770) Mr. Dochniak's description of the findings as "...human T-cells...respond much more robustly than chimpanzee cells do." is also overly generalised and simplistic - I refer readers to the original article (cited above) which is available free on-line.

MjD (#694):

"The founder had an advanced degree in genetics. After reading the Medical Hypotheses paper titled, 'Autism Spectrum Disorders - Exogenous Protein Insult' he told me to stop blaming others for autism because it was genetic.

I was fired shortly thereafter.

My point being, non peer-reviewed papers are also dangerous."

The word Mr. Dochniak is searching for is "consequences". Being a "Brave Maverick Doctor" (e.g. Andrew Wakefield) or a "Brave Maverick Armchair 'Researcher'" has consequences if you are wrong and fail to recognise it. Science doesn't punish error - it expects error and has an extensive mechanism to recognise and correct error. What it doesn't tolerate is fraud ( Andrew Wakefield) or people who refuse to recognise their errors (e.g. Michael Dochniak).

I have - on occasion - made errors in my scientific work or in the conclusions I drew from that work. I have been fortunate that only one of these errors actually made it into print (followed in few months by my erratum). Peer review, both before and after publication, keeps me on my toes and shows me where I was blind to errors, real or potential. Peer review has saved me - repeatedly - from making an ass of myself in public.

Mr. Dochniak, on the other hand, seems to see peer review as a sort of gauntlet that must be run and resisted, a group of ignorant people trying to kill off "the truth" before it has a chance to grow.

While the circumstances surrounding Mr. Dochniak's firing remain obscure, I can't help wondering if his employer, upon reading the Medical Hypotheses article, decided that Mr. Dochniak wasn't sufficiently aware of scientific method (and his own limitations) to be an asset to the firm.

I've had a similar situation, where a student on rotation through our lab expressed his firm belief in "Intelligent Design". When the time came to decide who to accept as a student, I couldn't see his belief fitting well with the work our lab does, so I declined his application. That is the "danger" (I would say "consequence") of persisting in error. You are free to believe what you want, but you aren't necessarily free of the consequences of those beliefs.

Again, Mr. Dochniak whinges that nobody takes him or his ideas seriously enough to read his book while steadfastly refusing to explain how he reconciles his hypotheses with the contradictory data. The few citations he has provided don't support his claims - in fact, are often not even related to his claims - giving the impression, at least, that he hasn't read (or understood) them.

As I said earlier, a wise man would take these critiques and use them to refine, revise or reconsider his hypotheses. A fool would continue to rant against the unfairness of having to support his assertions.

Which path will Mr. Dochinak take?

Prometheus

Prometheus writes, (#705), "The few citations he has provided don't support his claims - in fact, are often not even related to his claims".

MjD's response:

It's unfortunate that Prometheus rejected the invitation by Michael Dochniak to submit a citizen peition to the FDA in an effort to ban the use of H. brasiliensis natural-latex in vaccine packaging (#449).

In the contrary, Prometheus is trying to convince some that vaccines contaminated with the hevea-allergens from natural-latex is not an issue.

Do something about it Prometheus! For example, request the FDA to remove latex warnings on vaccines that have natural-latex in their packaging. Is your skin thick enough?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 24 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

As knowledge grows science must increasingly become the stimulus to imagination. â Edward O. Wilson

The boundary line between self and external world bears no relation to reality â Norman O. Brown

It appears Dochniak is suffering from some sort of dissociative disorder. He's started referring to himself in the third person. He is also prone to black-and-white thinking, interpreting criticism of his unproven latex-autism connection as meaning that latex has no down side at all (i.e., either latex is horrible, horrible, horrible or it is all happy sunshine).

No one, least of all Prometheus, has suggested that latex is 100% completely safe for every person on Earth.

Stop dodging, Michael. Provide evidence to support your claim that latex allergies cause autism. If you cannot, then shut up.

MjD (#706):

"It's unfortunate that Prometheus rejected the invitation by Michael Dochniak to submit a citizen peition to the FDA in an effort to ban the use of H. brasiliensis natural-latex in vaccine packaging (#449)."

MjD = Michael Dochniak, doesn't it? Then why is Mr. Dochniak referring to himself in the third person? And why would MjD or Michael Dochniak think - for even one minute - that I would support a quixotic crusade to ban latex without having at least some coherent support for claims that it causes autism?

"In [sic] the contrary, Prometheus is trying to convince some that vaccines contaminated with the hevea-allergens from natural-latex is [sic] not an issue."

On the contrary, I'm not doing the convincing, the data are doing the convincing - I'm simply reporting them.

"Do something about it Prometheus! For example, request the FDA to remove latex warnings on vaccines that have natural-latex in their packaging. Is your skin thick enough?"

As has been mentioned - repeatedly - the latex warnings on vaccines are there because some people have anaphylactic reactions to latex. To the best of my knowledge, there have not been any reports of anaphylactic reactions after receiving an injection from a latex-stoppered vial, but it remains a reasonable precaution, especially as there are non-latex alternatives.

Mr. Dochniak seems to think that an FDA-mandated label warning of latex-containing stoppers is support for his claim that latex causes autism. This is, of course, pure nonsense. There are FDA-mandated labels warning that foods might contain or be contaminated with nuts - does that mean nuts cause autism? There are labels warning people not to put their hands, feet or head into the opening of a snowblower - does that mean snowblowers cause autism? [Note: that would explain why the prevalence of autism is so high in Minnesota.]

This "response" (more accurately, "non sequitur") is just the latest in a long, long train of non-answers and irrational rationales we've gotten from Mr. Dochniak. I despair of ever getting a straight answer - apart from "Read my book!".

Prometheus

MjD (#694):

The founder had an advanced degree in genetics. After reading the Medical Hypotheses paper titled, 'Autism Spectrum Disorders - Exogenous Protein Insult' he told me to stop blaming others for autism because it was genetic.

I was fired shortly thereafter.

My point being, non peer-reviewed papers are also dangerous.

Prometheus charitably accepts the implication that there is a cause and effect relationship. I'm more inclined to wonder if MjD is indulging in more post hoc ergo propter hoc. Can you imagine having to work with someone like MjD?

Todd W. writes (#709), "No one, least of all Prometheus, has suggested that latex is 100% completely safe for every person on Earth".

MjD's response:

Thank you!

All parents, refuse vaccines that have a latex warning. Your child is our next generation.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 24 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD

Thanks for what? Giving you something to quote out of context?

Where is your evidence, Michael? Put up or shut up!

Todd W. writes (#713), "Thanks for what?"

MjD's response:

Thanks for giving me insight into how Prometheus feels about the hazards of natural latex (#709).

My perception has been that Prometheus is fine with latex warnings on vaccines in that the needs of the many through herd immunity far outweight the needs of others whom will be harmed from such vaccines.

Todd W., can you tell me if professor Prometheus really gives out D's and F's to many of his students like he says?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 24 Oct 2011 #permalink

The collision theory of reaction rates teaches us that an important variable to covalent and non-covalent bond formation is the concentration of the reactants, affecting collision frequency.

Simply, the more reactants there are the more likely a bond will occur.

This bond formation mechanism doesn't always apply to adaptive immunity wherein "few" allergens can induce an intense immune reaction.

Within adaptive immunity there is a chemical intelligence wherein immune cells recognize and attack even minute quantities of an allergen, sometimes producing anaphylactic shock.

All infants who have been exposed to the hevea-allergens in vaccines are at risk in that re-exposure increases the probability of an adverse allergic reaction.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 24 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

@dedicated lurker:

The Th1Th2bot runs on a Dadadodo 1.04 platform. Given that MJD seems to have gone completely around the bend ("the collision theory of reaction rates," etc.), it might be worth taking a look at for the MjDBot. Straightforward ANSI C, snap to compile.

Todd W. writes (#713), "Put up or shut up!"

MjD's response:

What part or section of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" do you have a question on?

Please provide Chapter and page # with your question.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 24 Oct 2011 #permalink

The chapter and page that has evidence that allergies, specifically latex allergies, cause autism. Plus list all of the independent papers you use to support the connection.

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

MjD (#716):

"All infants who have been exposed to the hevea-allergens in vaccines are at risk in that re-exposure increases the probability of an adverse allergic reaction."

Even if true, "allergic reaction" â  autism

Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends
We're so glad you could attend
Come inside! Come inside!

Would someone please come get me if Mr. Dochniak ever provides some data to support his claims?

Prometheus

Prometheus writes (#722), "Would someone please come get me if Mr. Dochniak ever provides some data to support his claims?"

MjD's response:

Orac mistakingly placed the subject of this blog under the category "Antivaccination lunacy". This has clouded your judgement Prometheus to such an extent that you openly refuse to read the information provided in the book.

Would it help if the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" was put on audio tape?

That way you could simply listen, hearing aid not privided, to the data presented in the book.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 25 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

And just when we thought he'd sunk as low as he was gonna go, Dochniak starts making ableist attacks on Prometheus! I wouldn't be surprised at this point if Dochniak took a random guess at Prometheus' ethnic heritage and started using ethnic slurs based on that random guess.

And yes, "Antivaccination lunacy" is absolutely the right category for Dochniak's nonsense.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 25 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Feldspar writes (#725), "And yes, "Antivaccination lunacy" is absolutely the right category for Dochniak's nonsense"

MjD's response:

Allergy-induced regressive autism from vaccinations is just the tip of the iceberg.

Research has shown that the odds of having a history of asthma were twice as great among vaccinated subjects compared to unvaccinated subjects. Furthermore, the odds of having any allergy-related respiratory symptom was 63% greater among vaccinated subjects compared to unvaccinated subjects.

W. Atkinson et al., eds., Epidemiology and Prevetion of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases (The Pink Book), 6th ed. (Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2000)

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 25 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

Oh, and more recent research (the CDC Pink Book is up to the 12th edition):

Schmitz R, Poethko-Müller C, Reiter S, Schlaud M:
Vaccination status and health in children and adolescentsâfindings of the German health interview and examination survey for children and adolescents
(KiGGS). Dtsch Arztebl Int 2011; 108(7): 99â104.
DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2011.0099

and

Do vaccines modify the prevalence of asthma and allergies?
Sánchez-Solis M, GarcÃa-Marcos L.
Expert Rev Vaccines. 2006 Oct;5(5):631-40.

Research has shown that the odds of having a history of asthma were twice as great among vaccinated subjects compared to unvaccinated subjects.

Hmmm... Could it be that those with a history of asthma are more likely to get vaccines to prevent complications from respiratory infections and their asthma? Or are you claiming that vaccines cause asthma, because you'll need some actual evidence for that bit of crazy.

The text that Dochniak attributes to the Pink Book is actually from a paper by E.L. Hurwitz (a chiropractor very deeply involved with the NCCAM) and H. Morgenstern. It was in fact published in "Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics", which describes itself as "dedicated to the advancement of chiropractic health care," which really invites the question of why they would even publish a paper on vaccines and respiratory symptoms, since none of that falls under the purview of the science-based version of chiropractic health care. Interestingly, I can't find any evidence that the paper ever made it into any version of the Pink Book; anyone else able to confirm/deny?

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 25 Oct 2011 #permalink

Yes, I checked the Pink Book and the papers by Atkinson in its bibliography. No mention of vaccines causing asthma.

Dochniak...Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire:

How dare you attribute a pseudoscience study to any edition of the CDC Pink Book.

Here for your perusal is Bill Atkinson, M.D. M.P.H. and his credentials. I've attended yearly immunization update teleconferences that he conducts on behalf of the CDC. He is well known in public health in the United States and internationally and has authored numerous papers on vaccines and has is one of the physicians who contributes to the AAP Red Book as well as the CDC Pink Book...all editions:

William L. Atkinson, MD, MPH
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC
Dr. Atkinson, a medical epidemiologist, develops technical and training materials for immunization providers and conducts training on vaccine-preventable diseases. His previous responsibilities at CDC included national measles surveillance, investigation, and vaccine consultation. He has conducted numerous vaccine research projects, served as a consultant to the World Health Organization, and published numerous articles and book chapters.

I've read cover-to-cover every edition of the CDC Pink Book and for the past 20 years and never saw any pseudoscience studies that Dochniak refers to.

and
Do vaccines modify the prevalence of asthma and allergies?

I'm not sure that abstract says what you hope it does, MJD.

Narad - that's because Chris was the person who brought it up.

Oh, that's embarrassing. Sorry.

Actually, Narad, I thought you mentioned it to make him look. It is a very interestingly worded abstract.

Side note: Sherri Tenpenny really likes citing the 6th edition Pink Book; I wonder if she's where Dochniak got his false idea that the antivax statistics he cited were from the Pink Book instead of a chiropractor reaching way outside his field of competence?

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

Antaeus Feldspar:

Side note: Sherri Tenpenny really likes citing the 6th edition Pink Book

That makes sense, since the quoted part is not in any recent Pink Book, and the cite was totally screwed up.

MjD (#723):

first link: Mr. Dochniak's Medical Hypotheses "pay-to-play" article. I've read it - no data.

second link: Shen et al (2011) - alread deconstructed in comment #93; it's a case series of autism in a single family (hint: familial autism is a known phenomenon).

third link: Mr. Dochniak's first book. "Read my book!"

fourth link: Mr. Dochniak's second book. "Read my book!"

Is this the best you can do, Mr. Dochniak? That's what I've been forced to conclude, since it is all you ever bring to the table.

MjD (#724):

"Would it help if the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" was put on audio tape?"

I don't like audio books because I can read much faster than a narrator can read aloud. My main reason for not wanting to read Mr. Dochniak's book is that I have only a limited amount of time for recreational reading. I don't see anything in Mr. Dochniak's argument (here or in his Medical Hypotheses article or his first book) that suggests his hypothesis is anything more than armchair musing about how this might be connected to that, with no data and no understanding of how biology actually works. I can get that by reading freshman biology midterm exams, which is part of my job.

Once again, Mr. Dochniak shows that he is hurt by my refusal to take his hypothesis seriously, which is an important first step for him. If he can get past the embarrassment and use the criticism to re-evaluate his hypothesis, he might actually make some progress.

It all hinges on his ability to look beyond his ego and use the lessons he's been given. It would mean repudiating the two books he's written based on this false hypothesis, which is going to take some courage. Not too many people can reverse course after so publicly staking out a position, and I'm not sure Mr. Dochniak is up to the task.

Welcome back my friends
To the show that never ends.
We're glad you could attend!
Come inside! Come inside!

Prometheus

Prometheus writes (#740), "Prometheus"

MjD's response:

Who is Prometheus?

What's your real name Prometheus?

If you want to remain anonymous that's fine. But understand this:

When vaccine packaging contains H.brasiliensis natural-latex, hevea-allergens can contaminate that vaccine.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

And what evidence do you have that it causes autism? Just post the journal, title, date and authors of the papers that supports your contention that latex allergies cause autism.

Chris writes (#742), "And what evidence do you have that it causes autism?"

MjD's response:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20957522

Stay in touch, there's more to come.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD

Posting the same study over and over, especially when it has been thoroughly dissected, is a bit foolish, IMO. Stop being a fool, Michael. Provide actual evidence.

I am wondering if Mr. Dochniak has developed some kind of mental illness. It is like he cannot understand the responses. Prometheus already told him that cite was worthless:

second link: Shen et al (2011) - alread deconstructed in comment #93; it's a case series of autism in a single family (hint: familial autism is a known phenomenon).

Yet he keeps repeating it. And, Mr. Dochniak, I hate to tell you this, but a single case study is not proof. You need something that shows it happens more than once and specifically tied to vaccines, not to a family that works with latex.

MjD (#741):

"What's your real name Prometheus?"

I decided to post anonymously (but not with sock-puppets) some years ago after receiving threats to my children from "vaccines-cause-autism" advocates. My "real name" isn't relevant, as I'm not asking you to trust what I say based on my position as a recognised authority.

"If you want to remain anonymous that's fine."

So why bring it up?

"But understand this:

When vaccine packaging contains H.brasiliensis natural-latex, hevea-allergens can contaminate that vaccine."

Yes, I read that article - the questions that remain are:

[1] Is the "contamination" with latex proteins clinically significant; does it cause latex allergy or can it trigger a reaction in people with documented severe latex allergies?

[2] Does latex "contamination" of vaccines cause autism?

The answer to both questions is the same - "unknown". Your repeated assertions do not consitute even a single data point.

Perhaps I need to be clear about this, Mr. Dochniak: I'm not saying that I know you're wrong, I'm saying that you haven't shown you're right - not even close.

Oh, and before you say that it's my responsibility to show that you're wrong, you're wrong about that, too. You made the claim; you need to provide the support (and you haven't).

I can sit in my armchair and come up with no end of "possible" causes for autism or any other ailment or social ill, but that doesn't make them correct and it doesn't shift the burden of proof to anyone but me.

If that makes you want to lash out at me - something that my anonymity makes more difficult - remember that it's also not my fault that your hypothesis is full of holes. I didn't make the holes - I just pointed them out.

Maybe you ought to stick to forums where your ideas are accepted uncritically, Mr. Dochniak; the sort of skeptical give-and-take found on this 'blog doesn't seem to be your cup of tea. I'm not telling you to go, but I don't get the impression you are enjoying this exchange.

Prometheus

@Prometheus:

On the contrary, MJD gets to regularly shriek, "Buy my book!!" to his heart's content, so he's likely quite satisified to continue riding this merry-go-round.

Come inside
The Show's about to start
Guaranteed
To blow your head apart (if you actually listen to MJD)

By Scottynuke (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

I think I can see why Mr. Dochniak may have lost his job and has nothing to do with showing his superior his Medical Hypotheses publication.

I get the feeling that MjD really thinks he's providing evidence for his claims. Never mind that his statements are equivalent to the following syllogism:
A) Guns can kill people.
B) Mr. Smith owns a gun.
C) Therefore Mr. Smith killed Mr. Jones.
In this case, he's using that line of reasoning even though Mr. Jones is still alive.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

I think I can see why Mr. Dochniak may have lost his job and has nothing to do with showing his superior his Medical Hypotheses publication.

Indeed, Science Mom. In fact, I don't think it's stretching the truth to say that today's job interviews ask questions designed to detect applicants like Dochniak before they are hired and their mental/emotional problems wreak havoc.

One of the standard questions interviewers ask now is "Tell me about a time when you made a mistake." The intent is to weed out those people whose egos do not let them accept that they have made mistakes and learn from those mistakes. Is there any doubt Dochniak is among them? He is still flogging the Shen study as support for his supposition that allergies can cause autism even though it was pointed out back in May that their only support for the idea that allergies can cause autism comes from him. A person who cannot or will not abandon the use of circular logic after five months is a job candidate who should be advised to seek employment elsewhere as soon as possible. I highly commend Dochniak's former employer for having done so.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#746), "I'm not telling you to go, but I don't get the impression you are enjoying this exchange".

MjD's response:

Respectful Insolence is a great Scienceblog and almost everyone's opinion is coherent.

Infants can't speak but some caring adults try to speak on their behalf. For example, Jennifer Worth wrote an interesting paper on neo-natal sensitization to Latex.

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/cjne/1999/00000009/00000…

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

I've read all of this with interest. I know I'm nowhere NEAR as educated as most of you, but MjD I always thought a "hypothesis" was a kind of science-y word for "theory?"

In other words, it doesn't state that it is proven, etc., but rather is just a proposed possibility. I don't have the nearly $50.00 to read it to see if the writer asserts by suggesting such thing that it is immediately proven on its face (unlike what you do here), but rather, there is some correlation and that it might be something to further research and prove or disprove.

But, I might actually be rather ignorant in all of this and hypothesis DOES equal proven fact.

Humbly,
Mrs. Woo

Mr. Feldspar writes (#750), "A person who cannot or will not abandon the use of circular logic after five months is a job candidate who should be advised to seek employment elsewhere as soon as possible. I highly commend Dochniak's former employer for having done so".

MjD's response:

I'm still looking for a decent job. Anyone interested? By the way, an investor in Segetis Corp. recently apologized to me about what happened.

Enough about that...

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD (#751):

"For example, Jennifer Worth wrote an interesting paper on neo-natal sensitization to Latex."

Yes, she did - about twelve years ago.

Worth J. Neonatal sensitisation to latex: a hypothesis. Paediatr. Nurs. 1999 Nov;11(9):6-9.

Worth J. Neonatal sensitization to latex: a medical hypothesis. J. Nutr. Environ. Med.1999 Dec; 9(4):305-312

Worth J. Neonatal sensitization to latex. Med. Hypotheses. 2000 May; 54(5):729-33.

Nothing since 2000 that I can find. Then, of course, we have:

Dochniak J. Autism spectrum disorders - exogenous protein insult. Med. Hypotheses. 2007; 69(3):545-9.

Mr. Dochniak, did you read Ms. Worth's article? I note that you didn't cite it in your Medical Hypotheses paper.

It's a speculation paper - like Dochniak (2007) - and has pretty much the same flaws the Dochniak paper has.

Prometheus

I've read all of this with interest. I know I'm nowhere NEAR as educated as most of you, but MjD I always thought a "hypothesis" was a kind of science-y word for "theory?"

Great question, Mrs. Woo. The answer unfortunately is kind of complicated, because the words have conventional meanings (how they're used by the average person or in informal conversation) and then they have more precise technical meanings - and especially in the case of "theory" the conventional and technical meanings can be very different.

What Dochniak has been relentlessly pitching all this time doesn't really qualify as a scientific hypothesis, because it is not an attempt to explain a general pattern of data, but only a single subject. Dochniak's son has latex allergies and/or asthma, and also has autism. Dochniak wants to draw a connection between those two things (I have to wonder if he's got a court case; if he does, that would put the lie to his claims of having no conflicts on interest. But that's a side issue.) Now, if Dochniak had investigated and found an increased prevalence of autism among children with latex allergies (as opposed to among children without latex allergies, then he might legitimately hypothesize a reason for that correlation, such as "latex allergies can sometimes cause autism." But Dochniak doesn't have such a correlation; he merely assumed first the existence of a connection between latex allergies and autism, and then went looking for things to confirm his assumption. Yes, it could be argued that no matter how ridiculous it is, no matter how laughably bad his attempts to support it, it still technically counts as a hypothesis - but I would disagree. Because Dochniak didn't do what researchers do with hypotheses, namely, attempt to falsify it and see if it holds up under those attempts. Under such circumstances, I would say that calling his supposition a hypothesis, or indeed giving it any name that identifies it as being part of that scientific process that Dochniak is making no attempt to follow, is uncalled for.

Dochniak's speculation is most definitely not a theory in the scientific sense, because in science, something only becomes "theory" well after the hypothesis stage. It's much closer to the conventional term "model" than to any term that connotes speculation; it's a body of well-tested principles and data that inform further research in the field. You might open up an economics textbook, for instance, and find a sentence like the following: "Classic economic theory concentrates on two classes of principals: sellers who purvey goods and services, and buyers who purchase those goods and services." Obviously the fact that some people sell, and others buy, is hardly speculative! "Theory" in this sense refers to how a body of well-established data helps us make sense of more observations - for instance, seeing the number of sellers of a good increase while the number of buyers stays constant, one would expect to see the prices starting to drop. Theory, in the scientific sense, is the distillation of our most solid understandings in a field.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 26 Oct 2011 #permalink

Short version: hypothesis means wild guess.

Thank you, Antaeus Feldspar and Chris.

The first hit I found looking for definitions made me feel safe suggesting that the paper which even suggested that it was merely a hypothesis in the title was far from adequate "proof" of his concept, and a later article did explain the hypothesis is less than theory concept. Sometimes it's hard to come up with synonyms in something like this that are accurate. In a way that is a very good thing because it lends itself well to concise speech, but to someone who hasn't been schooled to this degree it can also mean you accidentally misspeak.

What MjD does here seems so much like so many other proponents of woo: there is a hypothesis, completely unproven (okay, in some supplements it actually is to a point where they are experimenting in vitro, other times even in murine models, like the most recent supplement my darling partner is shoving at me) and for whatever reason, either marketing purposes if they're people without conscience, or excited true-believerism if they're genuine, these people run off half-cocked with no proof of concept and no safety studies assuring the uninformed that "natural is always safe" (arsenic is an element and naturally occuring; I don't want to season my breakfast with it) and that "scientists say it does _________!"

When further research either demonstrates it does not work, is not safe or does not work well, they continue selling the product with the cries of "Big Pharma" suppressing "truth."

Mr. Dochniak, for as much as this bruises your ego, these people are actually trying to be helpful to your cause. They WANT you to gather evidence that supports your hypothesis because that is the only way it can truly be taken seriously. Your continued prattling on repeatedly of the same thing, followed by your latex warnings and your little "join me in this crusade" games do nothing to move them because you have yet to demonstrate that what you are doing has any purpose or reason behind it.

Please take a moment to step back and look at the earliest comments (before your insistence got so frustrating) and see what they were really asking you. Is it not logical to want something to support changes like this? It's alarming that anyone can publish a book, pretend it is scientific (the excerpts I have read sound more like a parents' anguished autobiography) and then start crying from the rooftops to raise alarm about something that is unlikely to be a valid concern. I realize you have a right to free speech and a right to publish whatever you want. It's too bad that the right is not tempered with an insistence that uninvestigated scientific claims must have a warning attached.

Mrs Woo writes (#758), "I realize you have a right to free speech and a right to publish whatever you want. It's too bad that the right is not tempered with an insistence that uninvestigated scientific claims must have a warning attached.

MjD's response:

Thank you Mrs. Woo for your efforts in message #758.

Blog comments, although easy and entertaining, is no substitute for actually reading the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection".

Now, what part or section of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" did you have a question on?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

Welcome back my friends

To the show that never ends.

We're glad you could attend!

Come inside! Come inside!

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

Mrs. Woo (#758): Brava!

A. Feldspar (#756):

Although I've generally given Mr. Dochniak the benefit of the doubt and called his speculation a hypothesis, I have to agree that it doesn't meet sufficient criteria to warrant calling it a hypothesis because it fails to explain (or even address) certain rather large facts (e.g. increase in autism when latex use in medicine is decreasing).

The criteria I use to decide if a speculation is a true hypothesis are:

[1] Is it falsifiable? (for those not familiar with "science-speak", that means "Can you design a test that could prove the hypothesis incorrect?")

[2] Does it explain all of the known observations pertinent to its scope? (Example: a hypothesis about bird evolution doesn't have to explain DNA supercoiling or neutron stars but does have to explain penguins)

While Mr. Dochniak's speculations (and those of Ms. Worth, who he cites above) meet the first criterion, they fail the second - as we have been trying to point out for several months.

Perhaps things have changed since I was starting in graduate school (in the Late Cretaceous), but the expected response to someone pointing out a flaw in your "hypothesis" is to either show - with data - why that isn't a flaw or to revise the hypothesis to correct the flaw. Sometimes, when the flaw is too large, the only correct approach is to reject the hypothesis.

I think that A. Feldspar has it absolutely right that Mr. Dochniak has spent all of his time (including the writing of two books) looking for data that (sort of) support his "hypothesis" and has ignored all of the data that refute it. He's been reading about immunopathology, MHC molecules and growth factors and has missed the elephant in his parlour.

From what I can see - based on his writings - Mr. Dochniak started off with two "facts" (which are not necessarily "true"): the linear rise in autism prevalence since about 1985 and the timing of "typical" autism onset at an age when a lot of vaccines are given. The rest, as Hillel is reputed to have said, is commentary.

Prometheus

MjD asks (#759):

"Now, what part or section of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" did you have a question on?"

For those who don't remember, Mr. Dochinak posted a few paragraphs from his book on this 'blog (comment #257), so I'm going to take Mr. Dochniak up on his generous offer.

Mr. Dochniak, in Chapter 9 of your latest book, you write:

"In speculation, genetic material in dry natural rubber, including plasmids and transposons, could leach into the vaccineâs aqueous-solution. For example, according to the cellular origin hypothesis or vagrancy hypothesis, viruses can evolve from bits of DNA or RNA that âescapeâ from the genes. ...

It is known that both DNA and RNA can be extracted
from HDNR. For example, research has shown that expression
of Hevein genes in natural latex has been detected.
(Reference 5)...[emphasis added]

In continuation, a study has shown that the latex
allergen Hev-b 5 transcript is widely distributed after
subcutaneous injection in BALB/c mice of their DNA vaccine.
The researchers concluded that the rapid and widespread
appearance of the Hev-b 5 transcript in the injected mice
confirms that DNA is translocated from the injection site,
transcribed, and expressed in immune and non-immune
tissues after injection. (Reference 7)

It is further speculated that persistent infection from surviving viruses, inclusive with Hevea genetic material, could maintain Hevea-allergen (i.e., Hev-b protein) transcription and its associated memory B-cell population.

In summary,viruses that produce Hevea-allergens will not allow the latex allergy to go into remission. ..." [emphasis added]

My questions are these:

[1] Are you claiming that H. brasiliensis DNA is leaching out of natural rubber stoppers and then becoming a virus which subsequently infects the recipient of the vaccine? Please explain in detail.

[2] Are you aware that in your "reference 5", the "DNA vaccine" was actually a specially constructed expression vector that is designed to insert genes into the genome of experimental animals and that it bears no resemblance to the vaccines currently in human use?

I jave many more questions, but I don't want to overload Mr. Dochniak. If he would answer just these two questions, I think he could clear up a great deal of misunderstanding.

Prometheus

Prometheus writes (#759),

My questions are these:

[1] Are you claiming that H. brasiliensis DNA is leaching out of natural rubber stoppers and then becoming a virus which subsequently infects the recipient of the vaccine? Please explain in detail.

[2] Are you aware that in your "reference 5", the "DNA vaccine" was actually a specially constructed expression vector that is designed to insert genes into the genome of experimental animals and that it bears no resemblance to the vaccines currently in human use?

MjD's response:

#1) No, please read details in book.

#2) Yes

Hope this clears up your misunderstanding.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

Well here's a curious find...

I was looking on Amazon at Mr. Dochniak's book - the one he keeps exhorting me to read - pondering whether it was worth $9.95 (plus shipping) to see how deep the vein of nonsense runs and I happened to try the "Look Inside!" feature. And here's what I found...

Page xii, "Introduction":

"Briefly, there are primarily two types of immunity:
Innate Immunity - The antibodies immunoglobulin-G (IgG) and immunoglobulin- M (IgM), protect us from being harmed by infectious microorganisms. these are referred to as innate immunity; and
Adaptive Immunity - Immunoglobulin-E (IgE) antibodies help defend against viral and bacterial infection, destroy parasites, and capture non-infectious proteins called allergens, which cause allergies and possibly atopy."[punctuation errors in the original]

At this point, I refer readers to any textbook of immunology or even the Wikipedia entries for "innate immune system" and "adaptive immune system". For those too busy (or lazy) to look it up, the innate immune system doesn't produce (or require) antibodies of any kind.

So, Mr. Dochniak, I've read some more of your book and all I've found is another massive error.

I haven't decided yet, but I might just get the book and post a page-by-page deconstruction of all the errors it contains. That would be longer than the original - and would involve far more work than apparently went into the original text - but it might be worth the effort, just to put down the pernicious nonsense of Mr. Dochniak.

Prometheus

Prometheus, if you do will you please direct me to your website? Thank you.

Mr Donchiak:

Blog comments, although easy and entertaining, is no substitute for actually reading the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection".

Now, what part or section of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" did you have a question on?

Why on Earth should she do that when you clearly don't have the simple decency to even read what she said to you? She wrote a very long and impassioned (and compassionate, if you'd been paying attention) message which you completely ignored. You're like my four-year-old daughter, who gets mad when no one listens to her but won't listen to anyone else. In fact, if you ask her if she was listening, she'll indignantly say, "I was listening!" and then when you ask what the other person said, she'll say, "I don't know." Because, of course, she wasn't listening. But this is not unusual at her age. Adults are normally expected to have matured a bit beyond that.

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

For those too busy (or lazy) to look it up, the innate immune system doesn't produce (or require) antibodies of any kind.

Oh good grief, I just had to see that for myself and yup, there it is. If Mr. Dochniak can't get such an elementary fact correct, there is simply no limit to what he has also gotten massively wrong.

Science Mom,

There's even more wrong than that, but I thought the "innate immunity" mega-fail had the benefit of simplicity. It's even funnier because he cites the Wikipedia article on "adaptive immune system" in the excerpt on Amazon (p 16).

I'm on the fence about getting the book - I think I'll give one more try to get it on loan and then I'll have to consider buying it because I can hardly wait to see what other "howlers" it contains. Seriously, if you can't even get through the "Introduction" before finding a major factual error, the rest of the book must be choice comedy material.

I also wasn't surprise by his answers to my questions. "Read my book!"; where have I heard that before?

Prometheus

The researchers concluded that the rapid and widespread appearance of the Hev-b 5 transcript in the injected mice confirms that DNA is translocated from the injection site, transcribed, and expressed in immune and non-immune tissues after injection. (Reference 7)

It is further speculated that persistent infection from surviving viruses, inclusive with Hevea genetic material, could maintain Hevea-allergen (i.e., Hev-b protein) transcription and its associated memory B-cell population.

In summary,viruses that produce Hevea-allergens will not allow the latex allergy to go into remission. ..." [emphasis added]

Seems like it should be possible to detect "rapid and widespread appearance of the Hev-b 5 transcript" in human beings. I assume MjD can point us to that study?

The book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" provides a fresh look at autism, which is one of the most perplexing disorders of our time. In this book, the authors clearly show that H. brasiliensis natural-latex , which is part of some vaccines, can adversely affect adaptive immunity; increasing the incidence of atopy and allergy-induced regressive autism.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, get over yourself. You've made critical errors anyone with even basic knowledge of the immune system could spot. Why should anyone take you seriously?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#764), "Innate Immunity - The antibodies immunoglobulin-G (IgG) and immunoglobulin- M (IgM), protect us from being harmed by infectious microorganisms. these are referred to as innate immunity;

MjD's response:

Definately an error Prometheus. It was meant to read something like this:

The Complement System - The antibodies immunoglobulin-G (IgG) and immunoglobulin-M (IgM),protect us from being harmed by microbes, this is referred to as the classical complement pathway.

I hope this error entices you to do a thorough review of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection"

It seems that errors and not answers really float your boat.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

I'm so sorry Prometheus, I didn't realize your name was blue!

Thank you so much. It has been added to my bookmarks and I'll watch to see if you buy the book. Surprisingly, Mr. WOO (the woo I've married) even finds the "latex to autism" idea a stretch and he's been begging all of his sons (thank goodness they haven't listened) to skip vaccinating their boys so their tiny minds aren't damaged by all of those autism-causing toxins.

So if HE can't fathom it as a good hypothesis, it even becomes more amusing to me. Sadly, it also means I can't convince him to go out and buy me a copy so I can look at it myself.

The book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" provides a fresherror-filled look at autism, which is one of the most perplexing disorders of our time. In this book, the authors clearly showwildly speculate that H. brasiliensis natural-latex , which is part of some vaccines, can adversely affect adaptive immunity; increasing the incidence of atopy and allergy-induced regressive autism.

Copy-edited for accuracy. You're welcome.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak, I must be misunderstanding something - are you saying that just by exposing muscle tissue to a very limited amount of latex (in the microgram or even smaller quantity) that the latex can somehow invade a human cell and replicate itself? Or that the immune system somehow takes latex DNA or RNA and reproduces it and spreads it through the body?

I never heard of the body doing this before, especially if it is something that is causing an immune response (what little I learned about the immune system suggests that it tries to isolate and remove things that bother it, not spread them further).

Which studies show this? I would love to read them.

Antaeus, I think you missed something - he asserts latex is part of some vaccines, but that also isn't necessarily proven - rather he is insisting latex leaches into the vaccine (which is possible, but only at this point proposed, not proven).

perhaps that should read "contained in limited types of vaccine packaging and an unproven contaminant" or something perhaps a bit less clumsy.

The global natural latex should be found in adaptive immunity. In the petition? After the food humanity book vaccine delivery and autism is unknown.

Thus, fixating on track and non-vaccines are increased the greater anti-vaccine. The parent has been exposed to help physicians and allergy; may affect our time. Government regulated the site below is understood that have a run to vaccination.

As an aetiology of this is and so I have a book. The patient question but here's the word adaptive immunity wherein the expression adaptive the aetiology of not causation but time to the greater number and vaccine and autism rate of do you scroll to show that can intensify their children in this issue is emerging that repeated exposure from the book.

See, Researcher, says I remember you: openly refuse vaccines that requires natural latex allergy induced regressive autism; will induce IgE neurotrophin over expression, NGF expression of natural latex allergy from to reduce the vaccine? It appears you scroll to his chronic halitosis, therefore, the global natural latex warnings about the youngest have a parent has a latex Connection chapter page when it's, or had and latex; should ask the latex Connection in the my I asked, have a staggering diversity of autism, the antigenic latex out warnings that atypical adaptive Amazon.

By Ill-Tempered HoboBot (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mrs Woo writes (#777), " rather he is insisting latex leaches into the vaccine (which is possible, but only at this point proposed, not proven).

perhaps that should read 'contained in limited types of vaccine packaging and an unproven contaminant' or something perhaps a bit less clumsy"

MjD's response:

If you feel strongly about this Mrs. Woo, I recommend you petition the FDA to remove latex warnings on vaccines and have them replace it with "something perhaps a bit less clumsy".

Are you aware that government agencies, including the FDA and CDC, continue to aggresively warn industry and consumers about the hazards of H. brasiliensis natural-latex in vaccines?

The threshold of sensitivity and severity of reactions to said natural latex is unknown although minute quantities (e.g., ppb) can trigger an adverse allergic reaction.

Please send my best regards to Mr. Woo and family.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

Ill-tempered Hobobot(#778),

Your summary of the previous 777 messages in message #778 should keep Prometheus up all night.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

Dear Mr. Dochniak,

From what I understood from posts earlier by others, those warnings are there because they want to be sure to prevent anaphylaxis in case there is the possibility that latex might have somehow contaminated the vaccine, not because it is a given that it always will. Since I've read of a girl with nut allergy dying after kissing a boyfriend who ate a peanut butter sandwich earlier that day, I can understand their caution. It is better to mark something as possibly creating an issue and prevent any harm, that is very true.

Further, wasn't it posted earlier that surveillance and observational data on vaccines demonstrate only one latex reaction to any vaccine being recorded in that data? Maybe I'm mis-remembering.

However, the FDA warning does not prove that latex regularly contaminates all vaccines. Your wording suggests that latex is an INGREDIENT, which to me suggests purposeful placement (i.e., all of the vaccines, regardless of packaging would ALL include latex as part of the 'recipe,' so to speak, of the vaccine). That is unclear and could be taken further out of context by a reader. It's a very common mistake for a writer to make - we write what we know without reading what we've written, often conveying a concept inaccurately.

Though I understand you are passionate in your cause, you have to realize that a vaccine alarmist (you assure us that you fully support vaccination and merely want packaging changed) will read that little excerpt and add "latex proteins" to their already long washing list of "poisons" that are being injected in children by a callous medical establishment. I'm sure that you wouldn't want to create that kind of confusion. You seem to actually be very focused on only one cause: reducing or eliminating latex packaging. That isn't such a bad thing. I know that I react to latex and had to switch to silicone for some things.

I will most certainly give Mr. Woo and my little monster (should I include his friends?) your warmest regards. We share the same for you.

Definately an error Prometheus. It was meant to read something like this:

The Complement System - The antibodies immunoglobulin-G (IgG) and immunoglobulin-M (IgM),protect us from being harmed by microbes, this is referred to as the classical complement pathway.

Sadly, even with the benefit of hindsight only due to some scathing attention (by blogpost commentors no less) of your glaring error with regards to adaptive and innate immunity, you still fail to get some basic immunology correct. The classical complement pathway is only induced by antibody-antigen complexes; antibody production that precedes classical complement pathway is a result of adaptive immunity.

I hope this error entices you to do a thorough review of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection"

I guess you are just one of those sad sacks that has sunk to such a low point that any attention is good.

It seems that errors and not answers really float your boat.

Given your refusal for the last 781 comments and (undoubtedly) counting to provide a single answer to our questions that doesn't include, "read my book", I can only say that your boat, Mr. Dochniak, has definitely sunk.

In the dialect of my immediate professional community, MjD's idea would never be called a theory or even a hypothesis; it would instantly be designated a SWAG (sciency-sounding wild ass guess).

MjD has convinced me that his sole purpose here is marketing, as he patently has no interest in learning anything and little interest in putting forth the effort to actually convince anyone. In addition to the remote possibility that someone might yield to his "buy my book" exhortations, future advertising blurbs can now exclaim breathlessly, "This groundbreaking scientific theory generated an unprecedented 800 comments from knowledgeable scientists who read the highly respected Scienceblogs."

In addition to the remote possibility that someone might yield to his "buy my book" exhortations, future advertising blurbs can now exclaim breathlessly, "This groundbreaking scientific theory generated an unprecedented 800 comments from knowledgeable scientists who read the highly respected Scienceblogs."

I wonder if he keeps flogging his book, not to make any money off of it, but to be able to say "noted scientist [whomever] bought my book", in order to get people to take his ideas more seriously.

By Matthew Cline (not verified) on 27 Oct 2011 #permalink

@ Matthew Cline: Do you really think Dochniak would resort to that tactic? What if someone actually checked out the Scienceblogs to see what the "knowledgeable scientists" had to say about his unproven theory before purchasing the book?

In case you haven't added up the "favorable" comments here Dochniak...that would not be the best way to market your book.

Mr. Dochniak, does your county have an outpatient mental health clinic? Please find it and get some actual counseling. It may help you get employment.

This is not a facetious comment. We had a relative who was diagnosed with mental illness, but since she was not a danger to anyone the only help she got was the address to a near by Multnomah County mental health outpatient clinic. They could have helped her, but she never called them. She never recovered and it was terrible.

Please don't do that. Do your family a favor and get some real help. Please contact your local county health mental health clinic, not just for yourself, but for the people who love you.

Mrs. Woo writes (#781), "However, the FDA warning does not prove that latex regularly contaminates all vaccines"

MjD's response:

The first rule of medicine is "do no harm". In the spirit of continuous improvement, latex must not be allowed to contaminate any vaccine.

Sorry to hear you have a latex allergy (#781). I sincerely hope your next vaccine is not contaminated with latex.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 28 Oct 2011 #permalink

lilady writes (#785), "In case you haven't added up the "favorable" comments here Dochniak...that would not be the best way to market your book"

MjD's response:

Orac continues to market the book by placing it as the primary subject of this scienceblog.

I appreciate all comments favorable or un-favorable and expect a preponderance of un-favorable from a site advertised as "Respectful Insolence".

Parents, refuse child vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 28 Oct 2011 #permalink

Per MjD - parents shouldn't be receiving children's vaccines. Now that's something we can support - for gosh sakes parents, make sure you're taking adult vaccines! (LOL)

Lilady @785 --
His advertising can claim that "Mr. Dochniak's inventive explication of autism etiology has generated such intense interest that a single post about it at the respected Scienceblogs site started a discussion that continued for over five months." Then, if he doesn't link to the post or identify Respectful Insolence specifically, less-thorough readers may never locate the actual comment thread.

After all, most of MjD's citations do not support the claims for which he cites them, but not everyone checks cites, so he still fools some people (cf. Laura and blackheart, much earlier in this thread).

MjD seems to acknowledge @ 789 that he cares little for the content of the commentary, just that the thread remain active for marketing purposes.

Chris writes (#786), "Please contact your local county health mental health clinic, not just for yourself, but for the people who love you"

MjD's response:

Your concern for those that have a mental health issue is sincere. In contrast, your concern for vaccine induced mental health issues (e.g., from latex contaminated vaccines) is, in my opinion, misguided.

There is no doubt that vaccinations are an important health and safety initiative, but, it's time to make a change. The mental health of children continues to be adversely affected from repeated exposure to the hevea-allergens in vaccines.

Parents, refuse to give your child vaccines that have a latex warning.- Thanks Lawrence (#791)

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 28 Oct 2011 #permalink

Wow....really MjD?

Mr. Dochniak, please get some real psychiatric help.

@MjD

The idea that the mental health of children continues to be adversely affected from repeated exposure to the hevea-allergens in vaccines has no actual basis in fact and is just the opinion of a misguided individual.

Fixed that for ya.

MjD, it is fascinating that you believe a negative review that Orac uses to further support his own assertion that anti-vaccine rhetoric is based on unscientific supposition with no proof should be considered "good marketing." If you really want lots of sales you should take the advice much farther up in this discussion and market your book to sites like AofA, whale.to, etc.

If you really want lots of sales you should take the advice much farther up in this discussion and market your book to sites like AofA, whale.to, etc.

Or better yet, correct his mistakes.

MjD (#773):

"Definately an error Prometheus. It was meant to read something like this:

The Complement System - The antibodies immunoglobulin-G (IgG) and immunoglobulin-M (IgM),protect us from being harmed by microbes, this is referred to as the classical complement pathway."

As mentioned by Science Mom above, the classical complement pathway is triggered by IgG or IgM but IgG and IgM are produced by the adaptive immune system. The complement system also has the "alternate" pathway which does not require antibodies.

If Mr. Dochniak had read a basic immunology text - or even read the Wikipedia article on the complement system - he would have found that complement is considered to part of the innate immune system. I now predict that Mr. Dochniak's next face-saving maneuver will be to tell us that he meant for this section to read:

Innate Immunity - The complement system protects us from infectious microorganisms.

Of course, that would be wrong, too.

Face it, Mr. Dochniak, you don't know as much about immunology as you think you do (see: Dunning-Kruger Effect) - or as much as you have claimed. You need to get educated about immunology and then go back and look at your "hypothesis" again.

"It seems that errors and not answers really float your boat."

Oh, if that were true, I'd have already ordered the book; I've found significant errors in every part that I've read so far.

Mr. Dochniak seems to think he has a Mesmer-like effect on his readers and if he could just get us to read his book we would be powerless to resist the logic of his arguments (cue appropriate spooky music).

Sorry, Mr. Dochniak. That might work on people who are anxious for any answer to the mystery of why their child has autism, but it won't work for people - like myself and many of the readers of this 'blog - who prefer a correct answer.

So, Mr. Dochniak, go get educated and then come back and tell us what you think about your "hypothesis".

Prometheus

MjD (#767):

"The first rule of medicine is "do no harm". In the spirit of continuous improvement, latex must not be allowed to contaminate any vaccine."

Here's something for Mr. Dochniak to consider: if "do no harm" means "do nothing that any armchair speculator thinks might cause harm", then medicine would pretty much do nothing, since everything "mainstream" medicine does has some fringe loon who thinks it is "harmful". Thus, "do no harm" (Dochniak version) becomes "cause great harm by inaction".

What Mr. Dochniak proposes is the "precautionary principle" ("In the absence of a scientific consensus showing something to be safe, the burden of proof is on those who argue that it is safe, not those who argue that it is dangerous.") taken to its illogical extreme: "Do nothing that any single person thinks might be dangerous because, until you've convinced that last person, there is no consensus of safety".

Now, the precautionary principle, as it is usually implemented, has serious flaws (e.g. it allows unreasonable fears to delay or prevent even actions that will reduce a present harm, since those who fear have no obligation to show that their fears are even plausible.), Mr. Dochniak's version vests absolute power to halt action in a single person with an idea - no matter how far-fetched or contrary to evidence that idea might be.

The first step, Mr. Dochniak, is to show that your fear of latex causing autism is plausible, which would entail having it not be inconsistent with known observations.

Let me anticipate Mr. Dochniak's reply: "Read my book!"

Prometheus

I agree with Chris: Dochniak's mental health is obviously pretty bad. We keep treating him as if he's a rational person, who just needs to be shown the errors in his logic to realize he was wrong and that there is no evidence at all for a latex-autism connection. But he will no more abandon his SWAG because of a consummate lack of evidence for it, any more than the schizophrenic will abandon his tinfoil helmet because someone points out there's no good evidence for mind control satellites.

To be honest, I'm not sure what the most ethical thing to do in the situation is.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 28 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#799), "What Mr. Dochniak proposes is the "precautionary principle" ("In the absence of a scientific consensus showing something to be safe, the burden of proof is on those who argue that it is safe, not those who argue that it is dangerous.") taken to its illogical extreme: "Do nothing that any single person thinks might be dangerous because, until you've convinced that last person, there is no consensus of safety".

MjD's response:

The fact is the FDA requires latex warnings, for safety reasons, on vaccines that have natural latex. In my opinion, this is a legitimate reason for parents to refuse
such vaccines.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 28 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Feldspar writes (#800), "But he will no more abandon his SWAG because of a consummate lack of evidence for it, any more than the schizophrenic will abandon his tinfoil helmet because someone points out there's no good evidence for mind control satellites".

MjD's response:

Here's an interesting paper on Schizophrenia and latex:

http://orthomolecular.org/library/jom/1999/pdf/1999-v14n02-p083.pdf

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 28 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Feldspar writes (#800), "To be honest, I'm not sure what the most ethical thing to do in the situation is".

MjD's response:

To help relieve your "most ethical thing to do" anxiety, I can send you a free hard copy (not pdf.file) of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection".

http://www.amazon.com/Vaccine-Delivery-Autism-Latex-Connection/dp/14565…

Just send me your shipping address to mdochniak@yahoo.com

Kindest Regards,

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 28 Oct 2011 #permalink

MJD,

Here's an interesting paper on Schizophrenia and latex:

The Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine is generally considered a crank journal, and isn't indexed on Medline. Even Medical Hypotheses, which you may have noticed is not held in very high regard here, is indexed on Medline.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

Krebiozen writes (#804), "The Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine is generally considered a crank journal, and isn't indexed on Medline".

MjD's response:

Thank you for your effort.

I'm sure we'll get a similar response from Prometheus.

Judge a book by its cover?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Feldspar writes (#800), "To be honest, I'm not sure what the most ethical thing to do in the situation is".

MjD's response:

To help relieve your "most ethical thing to do" anxiety, I can send you a free hard copy (not pdf.file) of the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection".

Humoring the delusions of a mentally ill person is generally not an ethical practice. That's not where the ethical dilemma lies. The dilemma is how to debunk the delusions of a mentally ill person, repeatedly, in public, without unnecessary cruelty.

It was easier when I thought Dochniak was simply totally dishonest, and part of me wishes I could still believe that, but it's gone too far for that. A completely dishonest but sane person at least understands when his ruse has been completely exposed and tries to cover up the holes in his story. Dochniak just stands there repeating the same claims that have already been debunked. In the fairy tale, the Emperor may have been the last to realize that he had no clothes, but he finally did! Dochniak is simply putting his defrocked speculation out there, putting its fatal flaws on naked display, calmly offering to give people a close-up view of its fine raiment!

If not for the fact that Dochniak's speculation could harm others, it would be easier to justify the decision to withdraw, and simply let Dochniak continue raving on futilely. But every other sentence from him is "Refuse vaccines that have latex warnings blah blah blah," and that is dangerous. If he was saying "Parents, refuse all products made from nuts and all the benefits thereof, because of the very small chance that your child is one of those with a severe nut allergy, and because of the absolutely unproven speculation that nut allergies can cause autism," that would be bad enough - but at least it wouldn't have the same potential to lead to tragedy, because there are no benefits that come from nuts that can't also be obtained from other sources. The same is not true of vaccines. No child is going to die coughing so hard that they break their own ribs because Dochniak convinced their unwary parents that no pertussis vaccine was safer for their child than a pertussis vaccine with a latex warning.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

Krebiozen writes (#804), "The Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine is generally considered a crank journal, and isn't indexed on Medline".

...

Judge a book by its cover?

The reputation of a journal is not its "cover," and when someone is citing a paper in a journal to support a claim, arguing from the authority of the journal, it is entirely legitimate to point out that the journal does not have a good reputation and therefore does not have the authority that is being claimed for it.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

No child is going to die coughing so hard that they break their own ribs because Dochniak convinced their unwary parents that no pertussis vaccine was safer for their child than a pertussis vaccine with a latex warning.

Argh. The above, of course, is the opposite of what I meant to say: no child is going to die just because Dochniak convinced their parents that they should entirely abandon nuts as a source of protein, whereas they may well die if Dochniak convinces their unwary parents that no pertussis vaccine is safer for their child than a pertussis vaccine with a latex warning.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

Antaeus Feldspar (#808) writes, "Parents, refuse all products made from nuts and all the benefits thereof, because of the very small chance that your child is one of those with a severe nut allergy, and because of the absolutely unproven speculation that nut allergies can cause autism,"

MjD's response:

Back to natural-latex and its hazards:

Analysis of the Hevea-allergens in H. brasiliensis natural-latex has revealed a similarity to the Early Nodule Specific Protein of leguminous plants.

http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(04)00266-0/abstract

Thus, latex tainted vaccines could induce such allergies based on protein homology.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

Orthomolecular medicine (including Orthomolecular Psychiatry) has enjoyed a limited fashion amongst those who eschew SBM. In general, it advocates nutritional treatments for serious illnesses, such as niacin for schizophrenia. Dr Titmouse has informed us that this is similar to that which is prescribed by Scientologists. Woo-meisters who reject the "chemical imbalance" ( sic) explanation of SMI ( and therefore pharmacological management) hold with the Orthmoleculars and find that their own scribblings are highly likely be published in the aforementioned journal. (And needless to say, some people with SMI prefer this treatment to meds.)

Antaeus brings up an important question: what does an advocate of SBM do when a person who may (or may not) "have problems" pushes a view that could possibly endanger people ( by decreasing the liklihood that some may vaccinate)? At AoA, those who produce the many posts run the gamut from * agents provocateurs* to milder self-martyring raconteurs, mental health probably varies as well. I think that it's important to re-iterate what we truly know about vaccines ( not being causes of autism) *despite* the source we dispute. All of these hypotheses broadcast around the net as well as the conspiratorial props used to support their acceptance ( "explaining" why these altie views are rejected by the mainstream).However, I do believe that if there is a shadow of a doubt about a commenter's mental health, we should tread lightly and argue gently. Afterall, the gist of what we are trying to communicate is not diminished by its style of presentation. The audience is comprised of many who never speak up.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

Denice Walter:

Antaeus brings up an important question: what does an advocate of SBM do when a person who may (or may not) "have problems" pushes a view that could possibly endanger people ( by decreasing the liklihood that some may vaccinate)?

One thing would be to point people to this thread to witness Mr. Dochniak's behavior. It would be nice if the Amazon reviews allowed links, but they don't (though there are hints in the tags).

Mr. Dochniak, please seek psychiatric help. Do it not for yourself, but for your family. Please do not make them have to call 911, we know from experience that in our county that requires an automatic 72 hour hold in the county psyche ward.

Orac continues to market the book by placing it as the primary subject of this scienceblog.
I appreciate all comments favorable or un-favorable and expect a preponderance of un-favorable from a site advertised as "Respectful Insolence".
Parents, refuse child vaccines that have a latex warning.
MjD

In other words, you are both insane AND a liar. That's quite depressing.

By Constant Mews (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

Denice Walter writes (#810), "I think that it's important to re-iterate what we truly know about vaccines ( not being causes of autism) *despite* the source we dispute".

MjD's response:

I respectfully disagree and encourage medical science and parents to continue to research how forced immunity, through vaccination, can affect cognitive development in children.

Such a "check and balance" is critical to vaccine safety.

If reduced sales of vaccines having latex warnings affects Big pharma profits then they need to provide latex-free vaccines.

Parents, your child is our next generation. Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning and reduce the incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism.

Sincerely,

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak, you are not being rational. The first thing you should do on Monday is contact your local public health mental health outpatient clinic. Please get help for the sake of your loved ones.

Parents, your child is our next generation. Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning and reduce the incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism.

"Michael J. Dochniak is a leading researcher in allergy-induce regressive autism."

The latter is taken from his Amazon "biography", although is undoubtedly an autobiography since Mr. Dochniak is not recognised as any kind of "researcher", let alone a "leading" one. Perhaps Mr. Dochniak would kindly reconcile the fact that he touts himself as a "leading researcher in allergy-induce regressive autism" and espouses such unsupported drivel as, "...reduce the incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism." yet cannot even get some basic facts regarding immunology correct.

I have to agree with Mr. Feldspar's and Ms. Walter's assessments of Mr. Dochniak's mental health and suggestions about countering his dangerous claims. And I will not let them go unchallenged, until at least time I become bored enough. I would like to add that his mental health status, whatever that may be, is a reason but not an excuse for his actions. I would like to also suggest, if not obvious enough, that no one gives this man their address for his book, which I suspect he wouldn't give anyway.

"Michael J. Dochniak is a leading researcher in allergy-induced regressive autism."

Someone once said that the easiest way to be a "leading researcher" in a field is to pick a very small field. Mr. Dochniak's field is about as small as possible: he's not only the top "researcher" in his field (can you be a researcher when you don't do any, you know, research?), he is also the bottom and median researcher in that field.

Let's recap, shall we?

Mr. Dochniak has claimed that the infinitesimally small amount of latex proteins (or was it RNA?) in vaccines with latex-containing stoppers is causing regressive autism.

His evidence in support of this is that the prevalence of autism has gone up steadily since about 1985 and, during the same time, the number of vaccines given has also gone up, although not to the same degree or as steadily as autism prevalence.

Of all the potential components of vaccines, Mr. Dochniak has singled out the vanishingly small amount of latex proteins as the culprit, no doubt based on his own child's latex allergy.

The fact that the use of latex in vaccine vial stoppers has steadily decreased at the same time autism prevalence has increased is not a problem for his hypothesis, Mr. Dochniak claims, because... well, we're still waiting for that one.

Apparently, the only published study that Mr. Dochniak can cite in support of his "hypothesis" is a single case series looking the B-cell proteome of a family with what appears to be familial autism [Shen et al (2011)].

Mr. Dochniak claims to understand immunology well enough to have determined that autism is the result of atypical adaptive immunity, but in his most recent book, he informs his readers that IgG and IgM are contituents of the innate immune system (hint: Nope! They're part of the adaptive immune system).

When confronted with his obvious misunderstanding of basic immunology (covered in the first weeks of the undergraduate immunology class in my unversity), Mr. Dochniak claimed that what he meant to write was that IgG and IgM are part of the "complement system" - which is also wrong.

So, Mr. Dochniak's "hypothesis" has no data, no supporting studies and is in conflict with some very significant observations (e.g. the decline in use of latex in vaccines). In addition, Mr. Dochniak has shown - in embarrassing detail - that he lacks even basic knowledge of the immune system. Since his hypothesis rests on understanding the immune system, Mr. Dochniak's demonstrated ingorance in that field doesn't bode well for the success of his "hypothesis".

Finally, we have come to the point where Mr. Dochniak's persistent denial of the flaws in his reasoning and his relentless hawking of his book have caused some to question his sanity.

Things have indeed reached a sorry state when the most charitable assumption is that Mr. Dochniak is insane. But the only apparent alternatives to mental illness are that Mr. Dochniak either doesn't care that his book is hopelessly inaccurate and misleading, so long as he makes a profit, or that he is so narcissistic that the concept that me might be wrong is inconceivable.

No matter. Whether he is crazy, greedy or simply utterly self-absorbed, there is no reason to read Mr. Dochniak's book or to pay the slightest attention to his obsession with latex.

Prometheus

Prometheus writes (#816), "No matter. Whether he is crazy, greedy or simply utterly self-absorbed, there is no reason to read Mr. Dochniak's book or to pay the slightest attention to his obsession with latex".

MjD's response:

Although some "Respectful Insolence" bloggers are likely to feel frustrated, be moved to anger, or experience a sense of betrayal, acute awareness of this important issue can only lead to a resolution.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 29 Oct 2011 #permalink

I've considered offering to take a copy of his book except (a) I'm worried about giving him my address and (b) his repetitive behaviors seem strange and make me worried about giving him my address. Lose/lose I guess. He probably was looking for bigger fish to read his magnum opus though, anyhow.

Gray Falcon writes (#818), "MjD, have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

MjD's response:

The null hypothesis is described in message #196. Efforts to prove the null hypothesis continue.

Natural latex insult from vaccines is not the only route of exposure for infants.

In 2007, a citizen petition (Docket # 2007P-0486) requested that the Commissioner issue a regulation for Hevea brasiliensis natural-latex, used in the manufacture of infant products, wherein said latex meets the minimum standards of protein content based on The American Society for Testing and Materials D1076-06 (Category 4) that defines latex containing less than 200 micrograms total protein per gram of dry weight of natural-latex.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mrs.Woo writes (#819), "I've considered offering to take a copy of his book except (a) I'm worried about giving him my address and (b) his repetitive behaviors seem strange and make me worried about giving him my address. Lose/lose I guess".

MjD's response:

Thank you for expressing your concerns.

Orac has graciously provided the Amazon website, at the begining of this blog, wherein the book can be purchased.

Reading and learning is always a win/win

Best Regards,

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Please answer my question. MjD, have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

There is a definition of what MjD is - first word is BAT and the last is CRAZY, I think you can fill in what the middle word might be.

All along, he's said that because A (latex) can cause B (allergies), suddenly A can also cause Z (autism) - but he skips C - Y, including any proof that allergies cause autism (because you'd have to accept that any type of allergy - including cat, dog, pollen, peanut, egg, etc - would could have the same effect).

Any good lawyer would immediate recognize that MjD is claiming "facts not in evidence," anytime he even mentions "latex-induced regressive autism" since he hasn't a shred of actual evidence that this condition even exists, much less has any sort of prevalence among the general population.

Since he is unable to answer any reasonable question with anything other than "Read my Book" or cite a single study (from China, based on a single family - hardly a base set) or just reiterating statements that have long been debunked, it is obvious that there is some mental illness involved here.

Perhaps he likes the "persecution complex" & feels that because he is the "lone voice in the wilderness" that eventually he will be proven right. Of course, given his lack of general knowledge on the way the immune system actually works, he'd probably be more accurate by putting together a dartboard of potential environmental factors for autism & throwing darts at it to develop his next hypothesis.

The great thing about his continued presence here is that anyone searching for him or his hypothesis (or wild guess, as it has been proven to be) will more than likely find this blog first & see how totally without basis this "cause" is and go somewhere else.

So, keep posting MjD - all you are doing is showing how truly crazy you are.

The null hypothesis is described in message #196. Efforts to prove the null hypothesis continue.

You call that a null hypothesis? Your awareness of the scientific method is about as impressive as your knowledge of the immune system.

Reading and learning is always a win/win

Sure, you should try it some time.

Gray Falcon writes (#822), "Please answer my question. MjD, have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

MjD's response:

One definition of the word "wrong" is unfair or unjust.

Twenty years ago, it was unfair for me to allow my infant to be handled with powdered latex-gloves and injected with latex-tainted vaccines, knowing that I had latex allergy.

Back then, my ignorance of natural-latex hazards and its prevalence in the hospital setting assured me that it was just an irritant.

Shortly thereafter, latex exposure almost killed me through ANAPHYLACTIC SHOCK and worst of all, adversely affected my child's mind through ALLERGY-INDUCED REGRESSIVE AUTISM.

It's unjust if I don't write:

Parents, refuse to give your child a vaccine that has a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Once again, MjD - your responses show that you have no objectivity & a perverse bias with no evidence other than your own deluded mind.

One definition of the word "wrong" is unfair or unjust.

And to switch definitions in order to evade a question is dishonest.

By The Christian Cynic (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

@MjD:

MjD's response:
One definition of the word "wrong" is unfair or unjust.

You're right. Is it absolutely "unfair or unjust" for you to be using someone else's blog as your personal platform to market your book.

Because Iâm procrastinating:
In the five and a half months since Orac posted this, Michael J Dochniak has posted 126 times. Thatâs 20% of all the comments on this post! Out of those 126 comments, at least 35 of them include a direct plug for (or link to) his book. Another 36 (21.8% of his total) of them include the phrase âRefuse vaccines that have a latex warningâ â including 23 times in the past week (Oct 23 â 30)!

On further analysis, we find since Mr Dochniak resurrected the comments with post #151 back in August (Iâm guessing this is when he lost his job; I forgot to note in which post he revealed this information), heâs posted 154 times, bringing his percentage up to 22.8%.

Mr Dochniak, donât you think your time might be better spent looking for a new job?

Chemmomo:

Mr Dochniak, donât you think your time might be better spent looking for a new job?

And seeking qualified psychiatric help.

Chemmomo writes (#829), "In the five and a half months since Orac posted this, Michael J Dochniak has posted 126 times. Thatâs 20% of all the comments on this post!"

MjD's response:

Thank you for the numbers!

It's clear from the numbers, which Prometheus should verify for errors, that I've consistently responded to blogger questions.

Chemmomo asks, "Mr Dochniak, donât you think your time might be better spent looking for a new job?"

MjD's answer:

Vaccine safety (e.g., latex-free vaccines) directed at reducing the incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism is time well spent.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

It's clear from the numbers, which Prometheus should verify for errors, that I've consistently responded to blogger questions.

MjD, you haven't actually answered any questions, you've just repeated yourself. Now tell me, have you ever considered the possibility you might be in error?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mr Dochniak,
I refered only to the quantity of your comments, not their quality.

#820

In 2007, a citizen petition (Docket # 2007P-0486) requested that the Commissioner issue a regulation for Hevea brasiliensis natural-latex, used in the manufacture of infant products, wherein said latex meets the minimum standards of protein content based on The American Society for Testing and Materials D1076-06 (Category 4) that defines latex containing less than 200 micrograms total protein per gram of dry weight of natural-latex.

Then in 2008...
[all the double yous] federalregister.gov/articles/2008/06/09/E8-12850/natural-rubber-latex-adhesives-disposition-of-tsca-section-21-petition

A Notice by the Environmental Protection Agency on 06/09/2008

A few excerpts...

SUMMARY
On March 6, 2008, EPA received a petition from Michael J. Dochniak under section 21 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) âto establish regulations prohibiting the use and distribution in commerce of Hevea brasiliensis[italics added] natural rubber latex adhesives having a total protein content greater than 200 micrograms per [gram] dry weight of latex based on the American Society for Testing and Materials method ASTM D1076-06 (Category 4).â The petition states: âImplementation of an EPA regulation that guides adhesive manufacturer's [sic] to use Hevea [b]rasiliensis[italics added] natural-rubber-latex that satisfy[ies] ASTM D1076-06 (Category 4) may affect the incidence and prevalence of latex allergy and allergy-induced autism in neonates.â For the reasons set forth in this notice, EPA has denied the petitioner's request.

and..

II. Background
B. What Support Does the Petitioner Offer for this Request?
5. Exhibit E: Dochniak, M.J. Autism spectrum disorders-Exogenous protein insult Medical Hypothesis (2007), doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2007.01.060.Show citation box
This is an article written by the petitioner hypothesizing that increased latex allergen exposure may have affected the incidence of allergy-induced autism. The article presents only a hypothesis that is unsupported by any scientific study or data.
6. Exhibit F: U.S. Patent #7,784,281 (Ichikawa, et al.).
This patent discusses a method for reducing the allergenic protein content in Hevea NRL using digestive enzymes.

and..

III. Disposition of Petition
The petition does not set forth facts sufficient to establish that it is necessary to issue a rule prohibiting the use and distribution in commerce of Hevea NRL adhesives having greater than 200 µg total protein per gram of latex and no detectable Hevea antigenic protein. In particular, the petition does not set forth, as required by TSCA sections 6 and 21, facts sufficient to support a finding that Hevea NRL adhesives that do not meet the ASTM standard pose an unreasonable risk. The petition does not present facts establishing that latex adhesives containing any specific level of protein present an unreasonable risk. Nor does the petition set forth facts indicating that prohibiting Hevea NRL adhesives not meeting the ASTM standard would be effective in reducing the incidence of latex allergies, or that doing so would be the least burdensome requirement to protect against any unreasonable risk from latex.

High probability that this reference has already had at least one ride on this roundabout.

By Sauceress (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

There's no virtue in "consistently responding to blogger questions" if you respond by ignoring the question completely. Or by moving the goalposts. Or by responding to a straw man version of what you were actually asked. Or by insulting the person asking the question for supposedly having bad breath. But then again I'm sure no one except Dochniak is actually unaware that "leading researchers" don't do these things.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Respectful Insolence Scienceblog Poll:

Do you feel vaccine manufacturers should be exempt from placing latex warnings on vaccine packaging?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Do you feel vaccine manufacturers should be exempt from placing latex warnings on vaccine packaging?

Oh FFS Dochniak, all vaccine package inserts come with latex warnings so it's a non sequitur.

We've already gone over this, MjD: We know latex allergies exist. That doesn't prove that they cause autism. Have you considered the idea that latex does not cause autism?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

@835: No, because there could be real problems that result from real latex allergies. There is no reason to have warnings for the nonexistent threat of "allergy induced regressive autism." For instance, my autistic children don't have latex allergies (nor any allergies at all that we're aware of), so that disclosure is no more relevant to us than the disclosure about egg proteins in some vaccines.

By The Christian Cynic (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Michael J. Dochniak, re #835 October 30, 2011 7:16 PM
If you want to conduct internet polls, start your own blog.

Though I know that many have suggested that perhaps Mr. Dochniak is mentally unstable, could it actually be that maybe he's a higher-functioning autistic himself? I'm wondering if that is why he is so obsessed and unable to incorporate our comments and suggestions to adapt his theory.

Since there is a suspected inherited factor to it, it would make sense and would probably change the perspective of this whole, very long web discussion.

The Christian Cynic writes (#839), " For instance, my autistic children don't have latex allergies (nor any allergies at all that we're aware of),..."

MjD's response,

The stealth characteristics of adaptive immunity in classical and regressive autism.

Vaccine safety (Chapter 11, Foreseeable Future):

Test before injection;
Immunoglobulins in blood, neurotrophin in saliva;
Cytokines; and
Androgen expression.

Details in Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection.

http://www.amazon.com/Vaccine-Delivery-Autism-Latex-Connection/dp/14565…

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, that didn't answer anyone's questions. You've made claims, but we need evidence supporting them. Seriously, have you ever considered the possibility that you're mistaken?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Mrs. Woo writes (#841), "...could it actually be that maybe he's a higher-functioning autistic himself?"

MjD's response:

Woohoo, that's one of the nicest compliments I've gotten here at the "Respectful Insolence" scienceblog. After ~840 messages it was Mrs. Woo who actually showed some respectful insolence.

Thank you!

Important message:

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

@Mrs Woo: even if your hypothesis is correct, does that excuse Mr Dochniak from answering any of the actual questions that were asked of him, rather than changing the subject over and over again, or justify his ignoring any of the legitimate issues raised here?

Case in point:
Mr Dochniak ignored my criticism of his appropriating Oracâs blog comment thread to plug his book, yet he replied to a later comment by Christian Cynic (@839) with yet another plug for his book. And he followed that with yet another repetition of his favorite phrase!

@ Mr Dochniak: Do you really think that youâre going to garner any serious interest in any of your ideas with the arguments youâve presented here? Or are you operating under the delusion that any publicity is good publicity?

(And in case you didnât pick up on it: I disagree. Bad publicity is . . . bad.)

Well, I'll answer Dochniak's poll question:

In this Age of Allergiesâ¢, when people are dropping dead from eating food cooked in a pan that was made in a factory whose architect once ate a peanut-butter sandwich, the fact that out of the billions of injections given from vials with latex stoppers, not a single documented case of an allergic reaction has surfacedâyes, I think the warning is overkill.

Of course, "allergy-induced" (something you have failed to show exists) "regressive" autism (something else you've failed to show exists) should occur at a much lower rate than simple allergic reactionsâmuch less than zero, in other words.

By The Very Rever… (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

#820

In 2007, a citizen petition (Docket # 2007P-0486) requested that the Commissioner issue a regulation for Hevea brasiliensis natural-latex, used in the manufacture of infant products, wherein said latex meets the minimum standards of protein content based on The American Society for Testing and Materials D1076-06 (Category 4) that defines latex containing less than 200 micrograms total protein per gram of dry weight of natural-latex.

MjD
My post @834 was held up in moderation. Is the petition you referenced @#820 the same petition I quoted from in post @824?

Also, how on earth is that any sort of answer to Gray Falcon's question @818?

MjD, have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

From where I sit, it appears that your cognitive dissonance completely overwhelms you each and every time you are asked a pertinent question.

The thought that you may simply be a very determined con artist trying for massive book sales also intrudes into my mind each time you deliberately avoid answering questions asked of you here.

btw...I still haven't received any concrete evidence that you have no financial incentive to instil as much fear of Hevea brasiliensis natural-latex as possible.

By Sauceress (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

Sauceress:

massive book sales

Have you seen the Amazon page? Check the reviews (both are bad), and the tags, and there are the actual numbers:
"Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #5,857,697 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)"

That ain't massive.

Have you seen the Amazon page? Check the reviews (both are bad), and the tags, and there are the actual numbers:
"Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #5,857,697 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)"

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*gasp* *gasp* *gasp* *gasp* *gasp*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Agreed Chris. In retrospect,perhaps I should have bolded the word "trying". Hmmm...maybe replace trying with "shilling" or how about "embarrassingly desperate"?

By Sauceress (not verified) on 30 Oct 2011 #permalink

So what have we learnt from Mr. Dochniak's responses these past few day?

Gray Falcon (#818):

"MjD, have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong?"

MjD's first "response" (#820):

"The null hypothesis is described in message #196. Efforts to prove the null hypothesis continue."

????? Here's what Mr. Dochniak is referring to in his comment #196:

"Briefly, the null hypothesis is satified when the global natural-rubber industry exclusively uses ultra-low protein NRL (i.e., Hevea brasiliensis)and the allergy-induced regressive autism rate continues to increase in future generations."

For reference, the "null hypothesis" is the hypothesis that there is no difference between the populations being studied, i.e. that - in this case - there is no difference in autism prevalence between the population that received vaccines from latex-stoppered vials and those whose vaccines came from latex-free vials. Obviously, Mr. Dochniak was absent the day that was covered in class.

MjD's second "response (#825):

"One definition of the word 'wrong' is unfair or unjust."

In other words, "I won't answer your question."

More and more, I am convinced that Mr. Dochniak is so utterly self-absorbed that he cannot even imagine that he could ever be wrong. How else can you explain the endless eel-like slithering around the facts? In his mind, he can't be wrong, so the facts are either "manufactured" or irrelevant.

Face it, he's been shown to be clearly wrong on so many things - the null hypothesis, immunology, etc. - that a rational person would have long ago slunk away in shame. Yet he keeps coming back for his (nearly) daily dose of "respectful insolence". I think he truly believes that he's "winning" the argument.

Prometheus

@Chemmommo - I had no interest in necessarily excusing or justifying the behavior. It had been suggested he had a personality disorder or was delusional. I was curious if perhaps he might have other issues instead.

@Prometheus - I'm pretty sure that part of the issue is rooted in his ignorance of immune system function. It is something he is unlikely to learn overnight, so what information he does find about it he immediately twists to fit his supposition rather than attempting to learn it completely, rationally and with a neutral perspective. How many hours of study would it take to understand immune system function well enough to be able to prove or disprove his supposition?

The Sauceress writes on Halloween, October 31st: cognitive dissonance; con artist; instil as much fear; shilling; and embarrassingly desperate.

MjD's response:

Trick or treats tonight?

I hope your bag of tricks was emptied in your last two messages #847 and #850.

Why test NGF expression prior to vaccinations?

Increased levels of NGF have been shown to induce growth and differentiation of human B lymphocytes (B-cells). B-cells are an essential component of the adaptive immune system.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC298643/

A study has shown that circulating NGF levels are increased in humans with allergic diseases.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC38265/pdf/pnas01524-0428.pdf

NGF over-expression has been linked to autism.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11357950

Allergy-induced regressive autism:

1) Latex tainted vaccines can induce atopy (many allergies);
2) Atopy increases NGF; and
3) Increased NGF is linked to autism.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#851), "...there is no difference in autism prevalence between the population that received vaccines from latex-stoppered vials and those whose vaccines came from latex-free vials".

MjD's response:

Is this your "gut" feeling or will you reference a study?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

The Sauceress writes on Halloween, October 31st: cognitive dissonance; con artist; instil as much fear; shilling; and embarrassingly desperate.

MjD's response:

Trick or treats tonight?

I hope your bag of tricks was emptied in your last two messages #847 and #850.

Why test NGF expression prior to vaccinations?

Increased levels of NGF have been shown to induce growth and differentiation of human B lymphocytes (B-cells). B-cells are an essential component of the adaptive immune system.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC298643/

A study has shown that circulating NGF levels are increased in humans with allergic diseases.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC38265/pdf/pnas01524-0428.pdf

NGF over-expression has been linked to autism.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11357950

Allergy-induced regressive autism:

1) Latex tainted vaccines can induce atopy (many allergies);
2) Atopy increases NGF; and
3) Increased NGF is linked to autism.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD, look up "null hypothesis" in a dictionary. It's up to you to prove latex causes autism, not up to us to prove otherwise. Now, as Prometheus pointed out, you never answered a critical question. Have you ever considered the possibility you might be wrong?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

MjD - if you had actually bothered to read 851, you'd understand the difference in what is actually the "null" hypothesis and what you wrote.

You have no idea what is actually necessary to start testing a hypothesis and your continued postings only add heaping piles to the evidence that you haven't a clue about actual science.

Even better, if you google for (Dr) Melanie Dreher Null Hypothesis you'll get even more :)

By Mela Nidreya (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#851), "...there is no difference in autism prevalence between the population that received vaccines from latex-stoppered vials and those whose vaccines came from latex-free vials".

MjD's response:

Is this your "gut" feeling or will you reference a study?

You're either a complete dunderhead, a lying sack of shit or both. Prometheus presented your null hypothesis on a silver platter since you don't seem capable or willing. Get a life, a job and a clue you fuckwit.

Science Mom writes (#857), "You're either a complete dunderhead, a lying sack of shit or both. Prometheus presented your null hypothesis on a silver platter since you don't seem capable or willing. Get a life, a job and a clue you fuckwit".

MjD's response:

Not that simple, adaptive immunity literally means immunity that is adaptive (i.e., changes). Studing the incidence and prevalence of endogenous proteins that affect atypical adaptive immunity is better science to understand the aetiology of allergy-induced regressive autism.

The Peking study is an excellent example:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20957522

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

LOL - MjD there is obviously something wrong with you. Of course, you have perfected circular logic (given that your entire premise rests upon something that is unproven - allergy-induced regressive autism) to an extent that you would give even the most hardened looney conspiracy-monger a run for their money.

I had no interest in necessarily excusing or justifying the behavior. It had been suggested he had a personality disorder or was delusional. I was curious if perhaps he might have other issues instead.

To be honest, I've taken it for granted for a long time that Dochniak had some variant of autism; the jaw-dropping perseveration combined with the family history of autism made it seem obvious.

But continuing to claim that a particular study is all the support you need for the key claim in your self-published book, after everyone already knows that to be circular logic because the study references the self-published book for the exact same claim - that is either extreme dishonesty combined with extreme incompetence, or it's just plain delusional thinking.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

The stealth characteristics of adaptive immunity in classical and regressive autism.

Seriously, your response is that even though my children don't have allergies, the evidence of such allergies are hidden? And now your wacky hypothesis is not solely limited to regressive autism as well? Somewhere, a football team is missing its goalposts.

Seek help, Mr. Dochniak. That response is clearly indicative of the evidence supporting your claim.

By The Christian Cynic (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

The Christian Cynic writes (#861), "Seriously, your response is that even though my children don't have allergies, the evidence of such allergies are hidden?"

MjD's response:

Every infant that has atypical adaptive-immunity is susceptible to allergy-induced regressive autism through exposure to latex-tainted vaccines.

Now, let's take the latex out of vaccines.

Even with latex-free vaccines, a child's adaptive immunity should be tested to determine if a vaccine should be given.

See the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" for details.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

He's not sick, just committing a string of actions which could be construed as sociopathic. Hate it when people like MjD try to capitalize on the desperation of autistic children's families. Odious man.

By Mela Nidreya (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

He's not sick, just committing a string of actions which could be construed as sociopathic. Hate it when people like MjD try to capitalize on the desperation of autistic children's families. Odious man.

By Mela Nidreya (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

It seems to me that Dochniak has provided a teachable moment, here, by showing that he doesn't understand the null hypothesis. So I'll try to give a short explanation, and if I fumble it, I hope those wiser than me in this matter will step forward to correct my errors.

Science is about trying to correct for the biases that we are all vulnerable to as human beings and as thinkers. Two of the foremost human biases are wishful thinking, the tendency to see things in terms of what we want to be true, and the closely related confirmation bias, the tendency to pay more attention to things that fit our existing beliefs.

Since nearly every scientist dreams of making exciting new discoveries, coming up with new exciting hypotheses that turn out to be correct and win the hypothesizer professional recognition and acclaim... that sets the stage perfectly for the two biases we just described. Something is needed to counteract those biases.

That something is the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis is almost always the opposite of the hypothesis the experimenter actually wants to be true; it's almost always the opposite of whatever result would represent an exciting new discovery in the field. The experimenter must conduct the experiment as a test of the null hypothesis, rather than of the alternate hypothesis that the null hypothesis was formed in opposition to.

We can see why this is so important precisely by looking at Dochniak's own "research." Dochniak obviously started with the hypothesis "There is a connection between latex proteins in vaccines and regressive autism," and obviously pursued his search by looking for everything that would fit in with that hypothesis. Thus, when he looked at statistics claiming that the incidence of regressive autism had increased during a particular period, a period during which he assumed (based on his own impressions of the world) that general latex exposure had increased, he said, "Aha! That fits my hypothesis, therefore, my hypothesis is supported!"

Had he actually understood scientific research and been willing to do it properly, he would have said, "Does this evidence fit the null hypothesis that there is no connection between latex proteins in vaccines and regressive autism?" And his answer, were he to be honest, would be "Yes, it does. The incidence of regressive autism, and the increase in latex exposure, could be happening for completely independent reasons. After all, I can easily find ten thousand other things that also increased during the same time, that couldn't be causally related to either of my other two phenomena, so I have to admit two things increasing during the same time period is consistent with a hypothesis that they're unrelated, which is what my null hypothesis is regarding the two thngs I want to be related. Until I find some evidence that does not fit the null hypothesis, I haven't actually found any evidence for my alternate hypothesis, the one that I want to be true."

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 31 Oct 2011 #permalink

Antaeus, I think it was described (though not this much) and links for further information regarding null hypotheses were shared earlier to him and it ended up with a reply that pretty much said, "So you agree that allergens CAN cause regressive autism! Buy my book!" or something very similar.

However, I LOVED the further explanation. It made it very clear and my 13-year-old would have had no trouble understanding the concept and sharing it with others later.

However, I LOVED the further explanation. It made it very clear and my 13-year-old would have had no trouble understanding the concept and sharing it with others later.

Thank you for the praise! You're quite correct that Dochniak is not going to grasp this or any other concept that doesn't lead to support for his delusions, but he wasn't my intended audience, anyways: my hope was that if someone who was watching the discussion happened not to know what the null hypothesis was, and found the discussion harder to follow than it should have been as a result, I could help clarify that aspect. I've learned a lot by reading this blog as an indirect result of trolls; the trolls spread misinformation, and someone correcting the troll's misinformation informs me of something I didn't know before. I like to try to do the same for others.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 01 Nov 2011 #permalink

Mr. Feldspar writes (#869), "You're quite correct that Dochniak is not going to grasp this or any other concept that doesn't lead to support for his delusions".

MjD's response:

Constructive criticism is also an important aspect of "Respectful Insolence" discussions.

Why is latex still in many vaccines?

Medical science is in its infancy when it comes to understanding adaptive immunity and its role in neurological development and cognition.

Fact, it's well known that the hevea-allergens from latex can adversely affect adaptive immunity.

Parents, your children don't have to be a part of the experiment to determine if the latex/autism hypothesis has validity.

Safety first, refuse giving your child a vaccine that has a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

With every comment that Dochniak posts, he merely provides yet one more example of the very point of Orac's original article.

Safety first, set accused warlocks on fire.

Seriously, MjD, have you ever considered the possibility that you might be wrong?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

Parents,
Your children don't have to be unwilling subjects in the experiment to see if microwave popcorn causes autism or not. Sure, we have no evidence of it, but the correlation is there, and, dammit, that's good enough for the weirdos.

Dochniak (#870):

"Medical science is in its infancy when it comes to understanding adaptive immunity and its role in neurological development and cognition."

Perhaps, but that doesn't mean Mr. Dochniak can "fill in the gaps" with whatever fantasy he likes.

And if "medical science" is in its infancy with regard to adaptive immunity and neurological development, Mr. Dochniak's understanding - as demonstrated right here on this 'blog - is still in the pre-fertilisation state.

Parents, don't be fooled by faux-researchers claiming to have "special insight" into complex medical issues when they have demonstrated appalling ignorance of the basic biology surrounding that issue.

Prometheus

Constructive criticism is also an important aspect of "Respectful Insolence" discussions.

Dochniak, you are not engaging in constructive criticism. You are engaged in lying. There is no demonstrated connection between natural latex in vaccines and autism. None. You have not provided one, you have no demonstrated one.

You are just a con-man, shilling for your book which, if Amazon is to be believed, has sold about five copies.

By Constant Mews (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

Constant Mews writes (#875), "You are just a con-man, shilling for your book which, if Amazon is to be believed, has sold about five copies"

MjD's response:

I'm sure the FDA has a copy and hope vaccine reform is in progress.

Until then, please refuse vaccines that have a latex warning and send a message to big pharma that inducing allergies through latex exposure will not be tolerated in this herd.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

I'm sure the FDA has a copy and hope vaccine reform is in progress.

Once again, MjD floors us with his arrogance. Is he aware of how many people have self-published books about their idea of what causes what?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

I'm sure the FDA has a copy and hope vaccine reform is in progress.

@ Dochniak, have a looksee back on comment #834; Sauceress posted your EPA petition which was roundly denied for no evidence for your claim. If anyone at the FDA has your book, it's to point and laugh.

Lawrence writes (#857), "...you haven't a clue about actual science."

MjD's response:

A quote:

Facts do not 'speak for themselves', they are read in the light of theory. - Stephen Jay Gould

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

Scince Mom writes (#878), "Sauceress posted your EPA petition which was roundly denied for no evidence for your claim.

Automobile tires are made from H. brasiliensis natural rubber and have been shown to have leachable hevea-allergens.

The EPA allows ground automobile-tires as a soft surface on playgrounds. If you can't effectively burn it, bury it, or recycle it then let children play on it.

Children should not be repeatedly exposed to the hevea-allergens.

Parents, avoid exposing you children to H. brasiliensis natural latex (e.g., playground surfaces, vaccines).

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

Mr MjD,

Since you say that the rubber tires with the current type of natural latex should be banned because of the latex that can be contributed to the atmosphere, shouldn't you recommend enclosing your children in bubbles (obviously of silicone or some other non-latex compound) so they have no possibility of running into accidental latex that might be somehow present in the atmosphere? Perhaps playgrounds aren't enough...

Mrs. Woo writes (#881), "...shouldn't you recommend enclosing your children in bubbles (obviously of silicone or some other non-latex compound) so they have no possibility of running into accidental latex that might be somehow present in the atmosphere?

MjD's response:

Industrial societies love fair with H. brasiliensis natural-latex is no accident.

Medical science love affair and subsequent divorce from said latex is no accident.

Children's repeated exposure to said latex is an accident waiting to happen.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

MjD (#882):

"Children's repeated exposure to said latex is an accident waiting to happen."

So you've said...repeatedly. It's the evidence part of the equation that's lacking, sadly.

Latex has been in commercial use since the vulcanisation process was developed in 1844, yet the "autism epidemic" didn't start until about 1985. This "hypothesis" was weak enough when it was about vaccines - making it about rubber tyres and other commercial latex products doesn't make it stronger.

Quit while you can still see out of the hole you're digging for yourself, Mr. Dochniak.

Prometheus

Prometheus writes (#883), " It's the evidence part of the equation that's lacking, sadly"

MjD response:

The following site, about the hazards of latex, is from a European perspective:

IMPLICATIONS OF THE MEDICAL DEVICES DIRECTIVES (93/42/EEC)
IN RELATION TO MEDICAL DEVICES CONTAINING NATURAL
RUBBER LATEX:

http://ec.europa.eu/health/medical-devices/files/meddev/2_5_9rev_latex_…

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#883), "Latex has been in commercial use since the vulcanisation process was developed in 1844, yet the "autism epidemic" didn't start until about 1985"

MjD's response:

Conceptualize how the evolutionary process affects mankinds immune-sentitivity (i.e., adaptive immunity) to the Hevea-allergens?

Vaccines as a vector for latex insult has dramatically increased over that last 30 years.

Prometheus, refuse to give your children vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

Dochniak, do you even read the links you post? What does a 7 year old EU guideline regarding potential latex exposure in potentially sensitised individuals have to do with your goofy proclamations? By the by, the same, perhaps even more stringent guidelines have been implemented in the U.S. for several years now. So what is your point besides fapping mercilessly for months now?

Science Mom writes(#886), "What does a 7 year old EU guideline regarding potential latex exposure in potentially sensitised individuals have to do with your goofy proclamations?

MjD's response:

Just the Vax Science-Mom.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 02 Nov 2011 #permalink

Just the Vax Science-Mom.

(Latex sold separately.)

The last sentence on page 4 of Doucheniak's link:

There is evidence suggesting that latex devices with low levels of leachable allergenic protein do not induce sensitisation.

Since the amount of leachable allergenic protein in vaccines is extremely low, the evidence suggests that there is no reason for parents to worry about latex in vaccines.

MJD is either blind to the failings of his idea, or willfully obtuse. Repetition of an assertion does not make a thing true, but does support the hypothesis of a mental issue beyond mere stubbornness or a desire to sell books and latex alternatives.

MJD, you're being pressed for evidence of your assertion. Try to follow along:

1. You have not shown that âallergy-induced regressive autismâ even exists. This lacuna is fatal; all else hinges upon it. But for the sake of completeness:
2. You have not shown that latex is an unusually problematic allergen in terms of any atopic response: why is it worse than, say, shrimp?
3. You have not shown any link between points 1 and 2; that is, that latex in any form or delivery mode is likely to be associated with unusually increased risk of any particular adverse reaction, let alone autism. Yes, we know that latex allergies exist, but you assert that latex is particularly bad. Why? You attempted an answer in comment 391, but it is grossly insufficient to your purpose, and you refused to elaborate on it.
4. You have not shown that latex allergens are present at dangerous levels in vaccines; in fact, you have cited works that argue the very opposite (see W. Kevin Vicklundâs comment 890).
5. You have not shown that putting any potential allergen into a vaccine makes it more dangerous than the same allergen would be in any other form or delivery mode. Why is chicken-egg protein in vaccines not a problem for most people?
6. You have not shown any link between 4 and 5; that is, that latex in vaccines is likely to be associated with increased risk for any adverse reaction.
7. You have not shown any reason to suspect autism in particular for the adverse reaction contemplated in 6; that is, that vaccines with trace amounts of latex have any special chance of causing autism.

If you had independent, peer-reviewed scientific literature* to support most of those points (preferably all; #1 is absolutely necessary), then you would have a reasonable hypothesis. Upon reaching that stage, it would be reasonable to test your hypothesis. If your idea stood up to that scrutiny, then you could make policy recommendations. But that goal is far, far away. Your endless repetition here is so much whistling in the wind: unless you find some evidence or otherwise learn from these exchanges, you are wasting your time.

*You will be mocked some more if you simply point us to your book. As you clearly demonstrated in comment 391, your comprehension of the scientific points you claim in your support is minimal at best. Combining this ignorance with your demonstrated financial conflict of interest, you have given us no reason to accept the assertions in your book, and ample reason to remain skeptical.

W. Kevin Viclund writes (#890), "Since the amount of leachable allergenic protein in vaccines is extremely low, the evidence suggests that there is no reason for parents to worry about latex in vaccines".

MjD's response:

Thanks for reading the link in message #884.

Vaccines often contain an immunologic adjuvant (e.g., aluminum hydroxide) which significantly increases an immune response.

The leachable Hevea-allergens from natural-latex have been shown to readily bind to said adjuvant, thereafter significantly increasing an immune response. See message #604 for more details.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 03 Nov 2011 #permalink

The leachable Hevea-allergens from natural-latex have been shown to readily bind to said adjuvant, thereafter significantly increasing an immune response. See message #604 for more details.

Funny thing. When someone tells me that something readily binds to something else, that usually means that those two substances now have a reduced effect than if they are individually present. So when you say that an adjuvant binds readily to an allergen, to me that means that it should significantly decrease the immune responses to the allergen and to the adjuvant. However, it's possible that the new compound itself has an immunogenic effect, so let's see what the reference in #604 tells us:

The natural latex rubber, prior to its vulcanization, is admixed with aluminum hydroxide to denature the antigenic protein thus reducing the total protein level considerably.

In other words, you are incorrect about it increasing the immune response (the patent is for a process that reduces the allergenic load of NRL ten-fold by adding aluminum hydroxide). In fact, it is not binding, but rather denaturing the proteins. It is the 3D structure of the protein, not the order of amino acids, which causes an allergic response. Destroy that structure and voila no allergic response. That is why I was able to have murgh makhani for lunch today even though I'm allergic to tomatoes. Cooking the tomatoes denatures the proteins, significantly reducing the allergen load to the point that I can eat it safely 2-3 times a week, even though I get violently ill if I ingest even a single drop of raw tomato.

W. Kevin Vicklund writes (#893), "In other words, you are incorrect about it increasing the immune response (the patent is for a process that reduces the allergenic load of NRL ten-fold by adding aluminum hydroxide)".

MjD's response:

In industry, the hevea-allergens adsorb onto aluminum hydroxide and this complex is separated out (e,g., filtration, centifugation) to provide ultra-low protein natural-latex.

In medical science, the hevea-allergen/aluminum hyrdoxide complex is used to induce latex allergy in animal studies. (message #604).

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 03 Nov 2011 #permalink

Big pharma is forced by the FDA to place latex warnings on vaccines.

The vaccines division of sanofi-aventis Group wrote the following:

The previously approved labeling for these products stated that the products were latex-free. However, recently the US Food and Drug Administration notified affected vaccine manufacturers, including sanofi pasteur, that after completing a review of the âlatex-freeâ claim made by the manufacturer of the syringe tip caps used to cover the tips of prefilled syringes (syringes that are shipped with no needle attached), it was concluded that the documentation was inadequate to support that claim. As a result, FDA has mandated that the PI for such products be revised to note that âthe syringe tip caps may contain natural rubber latex, which may cause allergic reactions in latex-sensitive individuals.â

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/…

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 03 Nov 2011 #permalink

Welcome back my friends

To the show that never ends.

We're glad you could attend!

Come inside! Come inside!

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

... he needs real psychiatric help.

Chris writes (#897), "To the show that never ends".

MjD's response:

If one believes in evolution and that adaptive immunity is part of evolution, then vaccine safety is critical.

Careless immunization could lead mankind from distinction to extinction.

Test a child's adaptive-immunity profile to determine if a vaccine can be safely administered (message #153).

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 04 Nov 2011 #permalink

Careless immunization could lead mankind from distinction to extinction.

Latex has been around for more than a century. People get exposed to far more antigens through breathing than through vaccines. If the problems you were speaking of were real, we'd be extinct already. Have you ever considered the possibility that you're wrong?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 04 Nov 2011 #permalink

Gray Falcon writes (#899), "People get exposed to far more antigens through breathing than through vaccines"

MjD's response:

It is well known that vaccines shift immunity towards Th2, meaning we are becoming more sensitive to antigens because of vaccinations. Thus, vaccinations can make breathing antigens much more dangerous.

Adding insult to injury, some vaccines are contaminated with antigens from H. brasiliensis natural-latex.

Big pharma profits from latex tainted vaccines, that can induce allergies, then profit from the sales of allergy medication.

Vaccines = Profit = Allergy medication = Profits...

Stop this madness, request latex-free vaccines and reduce infant exposure to natural-latex based consumer products (e.g., bottle nipples, pacifiers, toys etc).

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 04 Nov 2011 #permalink

MjD (#900):

"It is well known that vaccines shift immunity towards Th2, meaning we are becoming more sensitive to antigens because of vaccinations. Thus, vaccinations can make breathing antigens much more dangerous." Blah, blah, blah....

Mr. Dochniak has shown - repeatedly (including at least once in his most recent book) - that he has very little understanding of immunology, certainly no more than the average citizen, so there is no reason to accept his "word" that his claims are valid (FWIW, they aren't supported by any data, either).

So, despite being "...a leading researcher in the field of allergy-induced regressive autism...", Mr. Dochniak is not an expert in immunology (nor, in fact, does he have a passable understanding of the field) or autism. He also has no data to support his "hypothesis" and the studies he cites do not support his claims.

In the end, all we have is one man, with no special expertise and no data, making claims he can't support in order to sell a book that is full of his fanciful imaginings. If this were billed as a work of fiction, it wouldn't be a problem, but Mr. Dochniak persists in claiming that it is fact.

Unfortunately, the data don't support this claim, either.

Prometheus

Dochniak wants to drive the post count of this thread up so he can claim "his controversial theory about 'latex-induced regressive autism' has sparked an unprecedented thousand comments on ScienceBlogsâ¢, many by scientists" or some such nonsense. I suspect that we wouldn't have to post again and he would still manage to wank on to bring up the post count.

Prometheus writes (#901), "In the end, all we have is one man, with no special expertise and no data, making claims he can't support in order to sell a book that is full of his fanciful imaginings."

MjD's response:

Teachers are silently inclusive in the questions we ask and the answers we seek.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 04 Nov 2011 #permalink

Science Mom writes (#902),"Dochniak wants to drive the post count of this thread up so he can claim "his controversial theory about 'latex-induced regressive autism' has sparked an unprecedented thousand comments on ScienceBlogsâ¢."

MjD's response:

Just one(1) comment from Science Mom explaining the benefits of Hevea-allergens in vaccines would be equal to about 500 Prometheus comments on ScienceBlogsâ¢.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 04 Nov 2011 #permalink

MjD writes (#903):

Teachers are silently inclusive in the questions we ask and the answers we seek.

LW's response:

"Colorless green ideas sleep furiously."

(from Npam Chomsky)

Welcome back my friends

To the show that never ends.

We're glad you could attend!

Come inside! Come inside!

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

... he needs real psychiatric help.

In some vaccines, aluminum hydroxide (immunologic adjuvant) and Hevea-allergens (contaminant from natural-latex) are a dangerous combination.

The paper below describes how aluminum hydroxide affects Th2 immunity.

http://iai.asm.org/content/69/2/1151.full.pdf

When even minute quantities of the hevea-allergens leach into vaccine solutions and interact with aluminum hydroxide, this complex can induce atopy (many allergies).

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Nov 2011 #permalink

Dude,

When it comes to immunology, you lost a "little" credibility when Prometheus kindly exposed that you have no clue the difference between innate and adaptive immunity.

It will be a long road to regain this credibility amongst those of us that are either trained in this field or familiar with the basics of immunology.

But the good news is it "may" be possible depending on how you proceed.

When even minute quantities of the hevea-allergens leach into vaccine solutions and interact with aluminum hydroxide, this complex can induce atopy (many allergies).

This is a good example of how NOT to proceed with rebuilding credibility, let me tell you why.

You are making a statement of fact "that hevea allergens complexed with AlOH CAN induce atopy" based on your intuition.

I am not saying that this is an impossibility, just that you have to actually provide us with some data from a well designed research study that shows this to be true.

Justin

OK MjD, we'll buy your book. NOW will you please stop giving us a headache with your baseless claims and ignorance?

Justin writes (#909 ), "You are making a statement of fact 'that hevea allergens complexed with AlOH CAN induce atopy' based on your intuition."

MjD's response:

Latex cross-reactivity is well known:

http://allergies.about.com/od/medicationallergies/a/latexfood.htm

For specific details on latex cross-reactivity read the book, "Allergies and Autism" from Nova Science publishers.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Nov 2011 #permalink

T-reg writes (#910), "OK MjD, we'll buy your book. NOW will you please stop giving us a headache with your baseless claims and ignorance?"

MjD's response:

Immunologic-adjuvants antigen juiced
Aluminum hydroxide umpteen boost
Latex contamination
Tainted vaccine
Aluminum to find aluminum to bind
Forced immunity
Misaligned

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.
MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Nov 2011 #permalink

Welcome back my friends

To the show that never ends.

We're glad you could attend!

Come inside! Come inside!

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

... he needs real psychiatric help.

Justin writes (#909), "It will be a long road to regain this credibility amongst those of us that are either trained in this field or familiar with the basics of immunology."

MjD's response:

Thank you for the encouragement.

Hevea-allergens in vaccines, is there a benefit?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Nov 2011 #permalink

Get help. Heed the sign.

Why is the Hevea-allergen/aluminum hydroxide complex dangerous?

1) Aluminum hydroxide can help in the translocation of hevea-allergens to the lymph nodes where they can be recognized by T-cells.

2) Aluminum hydroxide can provide physical protection to the hevea-allergens granting them prolonged delivery.

3) Aluminum hydroxide can increase the capacity to cause local reactions at the injection site (during vaccinations), inducing greater release of danger signals by chemokine-releasing cells such as helper T-cells and mast cells.

4) Aluminum hydroxide can induce the release of inflammatory cytokines, which help recruit b-cells and t-cells.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Nov 2011 #permalink

Chris writes (#915), "Get help."

MjD's response:

I'm the co-author of the book which this particular scienceblog is discussing.

I'm trying to help others understand why it's important to refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

Thanks for your input!

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Nov 2011 #permalink

I'm the co-author of the book which this particular scienceblog is discussing.

No Dochiniak, the operative word is discussed, as in six months ago. You're not a hot topic, nor is your pet hypothesis relevant as you have deluded yourself into thinking.

Science Mom writes (#918), "You're not a hot topic, nor is your pet hypothesis relevant as you have deluded yourself into thinking."

MjD's response:

A system of checks and balances is part of our constitution.

No matter how unpopular, the vaccine industry needs a better system of checks and balances.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 06 Nov 2011 #permalink

Welcome back my friends

To the show that never ends.

We're glad you could attend!

Come inside! Come inside!

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

... he needs real psychiatric help.

A system of checks and balances is part of our constitution.

No matter how unpopular, the vaccine industry needs a better system of checks and balances.

There is a system of checks and balances there, e.g. VAERS, VSD, and CBER (others exist in the EU) and none find any merit to your claim which is yes, unpopular and quite wrong. Given your tenuous grasp of biological sciences, I'm not surprised that you are ignorant of these.

Science Mom writes (#921), "There is a system of checks and balances there, e.g. VAERS, VSD, and CBER (others exist in the EU) and none find any merit to your claim which is yes, unpopular and quite wrong."

MjD's response:

It is well documented that vaccinations make the body more sensitive to allergens.

Pharmaceutical companies, e.g., Merck, are self perpetuating through the sales of vaccines and allergy medications.

Such profiteering is not good for vaccine karma.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning and help reduce allergy medication sales.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 07 Nov 2011 #permalink

Welcome back my friends

To the show that never ends.

We're glad you could attend!

Come inside! Come inside!

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

... he needs real psychiatric help.

I cannot believe (or maybe I can...) that MJD is STILL posting his crap (with apologies to all bowel movements. At least they have a purpose). He can't give decent references, his refrain is simply "buy my book" and the regulars are still trying to get some sense out of him. More power to you all. I stand in awe of your steadfastness.

As for me...I hit "killfile" today and MJD gets to live with little Augie, the Thing, and a few other people I can't stand to read.

MI Dawn writes (#924), "He can't give decent references..."

Provided below are references from the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection", Chapter 13 (Change):

1. âPrevention and Control of Influenza with Vaccines
Recommendations of the Advisory Committee
on Immunization Practices (ACIP),â 2010 July 29,
2010 / 59 (Early Release):1-62, http://www.cdc.
gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr59e0729a1.htm,
accessed 1/11/11.

2. Cincinnati Childrenâs Hospital Medical Center,
âYoung Children Hospitalized for Flu Associated
With Higher Costs and Higher Risk Illness,â
Study results presented May 4 at the Pediatric
Academic Society annual meeting in Honolulu,
Hawaii, http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/
stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/05-01-
2008/0004804012&EDATE=, accessed 1/11/11.

3. World Health Organization, âSeasonal Influenza,â
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs211/
en/index.html, accessed 1/11/11.
4. Donald G. McNeil Jr., âFlu Shots in Children Can
Help Community,â The New York Times, March 9,
2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/10/
health/10flu.html?_r=1&ref=health, accessed
1/11/11.

5. Malik Wilson, âFDA Warns of Latex Reactions from
Flu Vaccines,â Vaccine DailyNews.com August 26,
2010, http://vaccinenewsdaily.com/news/214867-
fda-warns-of-latex-reactions-from-flu-vaccines,
accessed 1/11/11.

Thanks for your input.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 07 Nov 2011 #permalink

MI Dawn writes (#924), "As for me...I hit "killfile" today and MJD gets to live with little Augie, the Thing, and a few other people I can't stand to read."

MjD's response:

A Semmelweis reflex... Even Promethesus refuses to read the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection".

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 07 Nov 2011 #permalink

Welcome back my friends

To the show that never ends.

We're glad you could attend!

Come inside! Come inside!

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

... he needs real psychiatric help.

Dochni could save us all the time and just copy and paste the following phrase in all his replies:

"BUY MY BOOK, I NEEDS THE CASH!"

Simple. Uncomplicated. Easy to read. And it sums up each and every one of his points.

The funniest part of this long, long discussion is that it proves the title so effectively.

Mrs. Woo writes (#928), "The funniest part of this long, long discussion is that it proves the title so effectively."

MjD's response:

I recall answering some of your very good questions Mrs. Woo and I'd like to ask you one too.

What are the benefits of hevea-allergen contamination in vaccines?

I've asked this question to others and have not received an answer.

Hint for Mrs. Woo: Immunotherapy is not the answer.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 07 Nov 2011 #permalink

What are the benefits of hevea-allergen contamination in vaccines?

I've asked this question to others and have not received an answer.

Natural latex is cost effective, the amount of allergens possibly present in a vaccine is negligible and there is no evidence of allergic reaction even among atopic children, let alone causing regressive autism. Read your own links and you wouldn't have to ask anyone here. Too bad you didn't do some homework on biology before you ventured off into your obsession.

There, per your words, that's worth 500 Prometheus comments.

Science Mom writes (#930), "Natural latex is cost effective, the amount of allergens possibly present in a vaccine is negligible and there is no evidence of allergic reaction even among atopic children, let alone causing regressive autism."

MjD's response:

Could you please write about this epiphany in your blog titled "Just the Vax"?

Here's a suggested title, "Just a Latex Warning on the Vax".

Best Regards,

MjD

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 07 Nov 2011 #permalink

Could you please write about this epiphany in your blog titled "Just the Vax"?

Here's a suggested title, "Just a Latex Warning on the Vax".

Get your own blog and title every damn post that you nutbar. My post about your bullshit, when you decide to shut the fuck up will not be flattering nor validating. Although since you haven't said anything remotely new or interesting, I don't know why I should bother waiting when it's obvious you're going to just keep wanking off here.

Mr MjD,

Not only has the answer regarding latex contamination in vaccines and its effect been answered succinctly by Science Mom, it has also been addressed repeatedly in these comments by many people who are trying to explain to you why your suppositions don't have a valid basis in scientific fact.

Though I'm not a scientist, I was skeptical about your suggestion from the beginning. Once the eloquent explanations regarding how the immune system reacts to various things it encounters were posted by multiple scholars, I was even further assured that your theory is unlikely to be an adequate explanation for a possible cause of autism.

There is a cause of autism, be it genetic, environmental (including during fetal development), etc. One thing that floors me is that I see so many posts with links to studies that make it obvious that mainstream science is actually very interested in finding a cause of autism. Just because they no longer focus on vaccines for the cause does not mean that they aren't trying to find answers to this puzzle. It just means that an early supposition has been disproven and they are now looking for answers elsewhere.

If your suggestion had more merit I wouldn't be surprised if you could find those who would willingly further investigate it. Sadly, experts disagree for valid, already known scientific reasons. No matter how many times you repeat it, you cannot make a fallacy a fact by repetition (though if you were a homeopath you might consider diluting and succussing it).

With kind regard,
Mrs. Woo

Science Mom writes (#933), "My post about your bullshit, when you decide to shut the fuck up will not be flattering nor validating."

MjD's response:

Please be civilized Science Mom, there are young minds reading this scienceblog.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

Science Mom, please tell us when your rebuttal to latex warnings on vaccines will be seen on the blog "Just the Vax".

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 07 Nov 2011 #permalink

Although I'm probably the least likely person to make this suggestion - given how many times I've come back to give Mr. Dochniak an intellectual spanking - I think it may be time to give Mr. Dochniak a "time out". He's clearly moved beyond any attempt to defend his "hypothesis" and is simply repeating the same, tired (and thoroughly debunked) slogan-like arguments.

Seriously, anyone so dim or demented that they can't see how an FDA warning about latex-stoppered vaccines doesn't support the "latex-causes-autism" argument isn't worth the time and effort of typing a comment. Even more so when this has been explained to him in plain language over twenty times.

Likewise, I can't even count the number of times Mr. Dochniak has "challenged" us to justify the use of latex stoppers in vaccine vials in the belief that, absent such justification, his "hypothesis" is "proven". Ditto for his insistence that we lobby the FDA to remove the latex warning labels. There is simply no reasoning with the man - to any degree.

Of course, you can all do as you like, but I've (finally) had enough of the perseverative nonsense of Mr. Dochniak. No doubt, he will try to "spin" this as a moral (if not intellectual) victory that somehow - in his fantastic brain - supports his inane "hypothesis".

Prometheus

Prometheus writes (#936), "He's clearly moved beyond any attempt to defend his "hypothesis" and is simply repeating the same, tired (and thoroughly debunked) slogan-like arguments."

MjD's response:

Repeated exposure to H. brasiliensis natural-latex based infant products is known.

http://www.amazon.com/Playtex-Drop-Ins-Orthodontic-Latex-Nipple/dp/B000…

OSHA recognizes natural-latex as a hazard in the workplace:

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/latexallergy/index.html#recognition

Protect your child from repeated exposure to natural latex.

This begins with refusing vaccines that have a latex warning.

The fight against allergy-induced regressive autism continues......

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Welcome back my friends

To the show that never ends.

We're glad you could attend!

Come inside! Come inside!

This is the song that doesn't end,
Yes, it goes on and on my friend,
Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was
But he'll continue singing it forever just because...

... he needs real psychiatric help.

Chris writes (#938), "Michael Dochniak started singing it not knowing what it was"

MjD's response:

A proteomic investigation of B lymphocytes in an autistic family: a pilot study of exposure to natural rubber latex (NRL) may lead to autism.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20957522

Natural latex is hazardous, keep it away from your children.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Prometheus writes (#936), "Likewise, I can't even count the number of times Mr. Dochniak has 'challenged' us to justify the use of latex stoppers in vaccine vials"...

MjD's response:

If you refuse to acknowledge the latex warnings from the FDA, OSHA, CDC, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Michael J. Dochniak etc... Maybe you'll believe the lawyers?

http://www.megalaw.com/top/latex.php

Parents, refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

MjD, do you really think it does you any credit to ignore the flaws others point out in your arguments? Have you ever considered the possibility that you're wrong?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Why has medical science suddenly been blindsided by natural latex?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

It hasn't. Mr. Dochniak you have been blindsided by an obsession and lack of science training, with a bit of psychiatric illness for extra flavor.

Please contact your local public mental health outpatient clinic for an evaluation.

Why do some pharmaceutical companies continue to use natural latex in vaccines even though the FDA requires a latex warning on their packaging?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

When an infant is insulted with a latex-tainted vaccine and becomes disabled with allergy-induced regressive autism, will the pharmaceutical company that supplied the vaccine be responsible?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Mr MjD, you are being disingenuous. However, I will try again.

It was pointed out earlier that there has been one latex reaction post vaccination ever recorded in medical literature. Since it IS a possibility, the FDA requires the labeling of such so that the rare person who already has or is at risk of a bad reaction to the latex is warned and can request the alternatively packaged vaccine.

You have done nothing to prove that allergies, let alone latex allergies definitely cause autism in the first place (this has also been pointed out to you).

I can't figure out if I hope you suggest prospective purchasers come over here (where they can read scientific reasons that your theory holds no water) or worried that you'll just expect them to scroll to the end and realize there was a long debate and input on your supposition.

Debate does not prove it. The attention you've gotten from us does not prove it. It has been our misguided attempts to hope to educate you in the flaws on your theory so you could reconsider. Who knows - you might come up with something that would actually be plausible if you tried hard enough.

Do autistic adults who are mentally handicapped and non-verbal have a means to refuse vaccines that have a latex warning?

Is this the responsibility of the caregiver?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak, please get help. If not for yourself, but for your family.

You should also seek out the agency that assists in getting employment, much like a program here called "Worksource." Often they provide evaluation and referrals for appropriate counseling.

Mrs. Woo writes (#947), "...,the FDA requires the labeling of such so that the rare person who already has or is at risk of a bad reaction to the latex is warned and can request the alternatively packaged vaccine."

MjD's response:

In the ever shifting world of adaptive immunity, how will we know if our infant is at risk of sensitization or a severe allergic reaction to the latex in vaccines?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

In the ever shifting world of adaptive immunity, how will we know if our infant is at risk of sensitization or a severe allergic reaction to the latex in vaccines?

Something called evidence. MjD, you've been shown to lack a basic understanding of how the immune system works. For comparison purposes, that's like demanding I trust a general contractor who thinks toothpaste is a viable building material.

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

For comparison purposes, that's like demanding I trust a general contractor who thinks toothpaste is a viable building material.

Not to take away from your point, but it might well be. Ever left the lid off a tube of toothpaste?

That had nothing to do with my statement. We already know latex allergies exist, and it is grossly dishonest to suggest that we deny that. MjD, are you an honest man?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Gray Falcon writes (#954), "We already know latex allergies exist, and it is grossly dishonest to suggest that we deny that".

MjD's response:

In the ever shifting world of adaptive immunity, early and repeated exposure to the allergens from H. brasiliensis natural-latex (e.g., vaccines) can adversely affect neurological development and cognition in atopic children.

See the book "Allergies and Autism" for details.

http://www.amazon.com/Allergies-Autism-Infectious-Diseases/dp/1608763528

Industrialized societies extensive use of H. brasiliensis natural-latex, and increased sensitization to allergens from vaccinations, has increased the incidence of allergy-induced regressive autism.

See the book "Vaccine Delivery and Autism - The Latex Connection" for details.

http://www.amazon.com/Vaccine-Delivery-Autism-Latex-Connection/dp/14565…

Parents, refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Do infants have a means to refuse vaccines that have a latex warning?

Is it the responsibility of medical science and the FDA to protect them?

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

MjD, do you feel it is honest to ignore people's questions?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Gray falcon writes (#957), "MjD, do you feel it is honest to ignore people's questions?"

MjD's response:

Here's an honest two-sentence answer to the questions:

Children are not immune to the vaccine learning-curve. Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

Thanks for your question.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

MjD, do you feel it is honest to ignore people's questions?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Question: What time is it when your Doctor gives your infant a vaccine with a latex warning.

Answer: Time to get a different Doctor.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 09 Nov 2011 #permalink

Well, you could have done a little more homework, Mr. MjD, instead of limiting yourself to Google U and anti-vaccine rants that you find on the internet. For ONE, the publication referenced in the latex quote is found here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11398071

It was a very small study (12 subjects) which had limited response (2 and 5 respectively) to solutions which had had exposure to natural latex.

It is actually a study that recommends removing latex stoppers from vaccine. It could be what prompted FDA labeling of latex stoppered vaccines and the production of vaccines without latex allergen for those who might be sensitive.

However, the rest is speculation and not necessarily demonstrating that latex in vaccines causes allergy to other substances, NOR does it prove that allergies cause autism.

Did you hear about the new paper just published that showed a much higher neuron concentration in the prefrontal cortex in autistic children vs. controls?

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/306/18/2001.abstract

These changes can only occur during fetal development, most likely in the second trimester, long before that infant is given even one vaccine.

(is now waiting for Mr. MjD to say, "do not vaccinate pregnant mothers with vaccines which have been exposed to latex")

~sigh~

MjD writes (#961), "Question: What time is it when your Doctor gives your infant a vaccine with a latex warning."

MjD's response:

Climate change has been documented to be a real phenomenon, while cell phone use has climbed exponentially worldwide. Meanwhile in the United States and others obesity is approaching epidemic proportions. All the while more and more films are being released on DVDs since their introduction in 1995 (to say nothing of the current escalation of the "Blu-Ray" format). And yet music digital downloads are now eclipsing sales of "CDs."

Therefore, do not let your children eat processed sugars.

Thanks for your question.

MjD

By Cynical Pediatrician (not verified) on 10 Nov 2011 #permalink

Mrs. Woo writes (#964), "do not vaccinate pregnant mothers with vaccines which have been exposed to latex"

MjD's response:

Thanks for reading the article in message #960.

Your message in #964 is very intuitive, thank you.

Expectant mothers, refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

Learn more about how adaptive immunity affects classical autism in the book, "Allergies and Autism" from Nova Science:

http://www.amazon.com/Allergies-Autism-Infectious-Diseases/dp/1608763528

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 10 Nov 2011 #permalink

Ah, Mr. Dochniak, not content to pimp just one of his books and still afraid to answer the question, has started pimping a second of his books. This one has zero reviews and an even worse Amazon sales ranking that the first one he was shilling.

Actually, Todd, I believe Prometheus actually reviewed that book way up thread a bit. He found it at another library and got an inter-library loan. It was not a good review.

Mr. Dochniak is a very sick man, and he really needs to see a qualified mental health professional.

@Chris

Ah, well, I haven't been following every single post in this now near-1000 comment thread. May have missed something. Still, from what I can see, Dochniak is still scared of answering the question that people keep asking of him.

There is something bizarrely fascinating about this thread. It's rather like watching a train wreck, though train wrecks don't usually last for upwards of six months.

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 10 Nov 2011 #permalink

Speaking of questions he has yet to answer, here's one of my first: Mr. Dochniak, why should we believe you're correct?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 10 Nov 2011 #permalink

Yes, Mr. MjD, I do read your responses. In part to understand maybe where you're coming from and how you are reaching your conclusions, since they aren't supported when I look at the big picture.

What research have you done that definitively proves that allergies cause autism?

I predict that the answers to both questions will be "read my book."

Think the JREF would give me the prize for a correct prediction here?

Speaking of the JREF, before the great pruning and changing of the rules of its forum, this kind of thread would been filled with recipes and kitten pictures starting back in July.

Gray Falcon writes (942), "MjD, do you really think it does you any credit to ignore the flaws others point out in your arguments? Have you ever considered the possibility that you're wrong?"

MjD's response:

My efforts have been, and continue to be, validation of the null hypothesis.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 10 Nov 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak, why should we believe you're correct? Do you consider it honest to obfuscate your points and ignore people's questions?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 10 Nov 2011 #permalink

A few days ago I made a nice spicy creamy spread by chopping up roasted jalapenos and sweet red peppers and stirring them into strained yogurt with some garlic, plus a wee bit of salt. It was good on chicken, and made a nice dip for cucumbers.

;-)

Some words about allergy-induced regressive autism:

Where are the children we more often see
locked and entrapped neurologically:
our cries and our calls;
our attempts and our fear;
bring little to save what regresses each year;
slowly yet quickly the behavior takes seed;
a blossom rooted in disability;
everything changes;
dreams disappear;
what will come next is the maker of tears;
a child born with promise, a life turned complex;
unwanted stares and unending stress;
lost hope for the future brings;
what will come next...
Where are the children we more often see
locked and entrapped neurologically.

Refuse vaccines that have a latex warning.

MjD

By Michael J. Dochnial (not verified) on 10 Nov 2011 #permalink

Why, oh why, does he believe that his ravings somehow become more convincing when expressed as freestyle poetry?* Criminy.

* Yeah, I know: because he's mentally ill and believes a lot of things that are at complete odds with the evidence. Still ... yeesh.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 10 Nov 2011 #permalink

Antaeus Feldspar writes (#982), "...he's mentally ill and believes a lot of things that are at complete odds with the evidence."

MjD's response:

The concept of Occam's razor is often paraphrased, all things being equal; the simplest solution tends to be the best one. Using this concept, one may decide which statement or combinations of statements encompass the spirit of Occam's razor and Allergy-induced Regressive Autism:

The increased incidence is influenced by a global increase of genetic mutations resulting in atypical adaptive immunity;

The increased incidence is influenced by a global increase of epigenetic mechanisms resulting in atypical adaptive immunity; and

The increased incidence is influenced by a global increase of allergies, from natural latex exposure, resulting in atypical adaptive immunity.

In my opinion, repeated natural-latex exposure is a leading cause of atypical adaptive-immunity and Allergy-induced Regressive Autism.

For more information, see the book âVaccine Delivery and Autism â The Latex Connectionâ

MjD

By Michael J. Dochniak (not verified) on 11 Nov 2011 #permalink

Mr. Dochniak, why should we believe you're correct? Do you consider it honest to obfuscate your points and ignore people's questions?

By Gray Falcon (not verified) on 11 Nov 2011 #permalink

Given that he can't even give a straight answer on the null hypothesis, he is a lost cause & has been for quite some time.