A sad, premature death cynically exploited by antivaccinationists

I must admit, I've been enjoying my vacation thus far and have hardly paid attention to the blog, other than a couple of quick posts. For me, this is quite amazing. Still, every so often there pops up a story that I can't resist commenting on, particularly given that I'm just sitting around watching the Olympics, and I'm deadly tired of beach volleyball. (As an aside, notice how it's always women's beach volleyball that NBC shows, not men's, no doubt because the powers that be think that toned young women in bikinis playing volleyball translate into big ratings. Unfortunately, they seem to be right.)

While I was sitting there thinking about changing the channel out of boredom, I happened to check out the comments on my post from a couple of days ago, when I noticed an off-topic discussion beginning (which, I guess, sometimes happens when my blogging activity falls off) that caught my attention. It's a story out of New Zealand about an 18-year-old woman named Jasmine Renata, who tragically died nearly three years ago of unclear causes, although what happened sounds consistent with the sort of idiopathic heart conditions that sometimes (and, fortunately, very uncommonly) cut short the lives of young people in their teens and early 20s. Now, Jasmine Renata might never have been known outside of her grieving family and friends, except for one thing. Her mother is convinced she knows the reason why Jasmine died. In brief, she has an explanation for her daughter's death that is simple, emotionally resonant, and almost certainly wrong, and that explanation is that Gardasil was the cause of her daughter's untimely death:

The mother of a teenager found dead in her bed has told an inquest that her daughter's physical and mental health deteriorated sharply when she was given the Gardasil cervical cancer vaccination.

Jasmine Renata, 18, died in September 2009 in a sleepout at her home in Upper Hutt, north of Wellington.

She had received the last of three injections of Gardasil six months earlier.

Once again, whenever I encounter a story like this, I am saddened, first of all because the life of someone so young ended so unexpectedly. It's quite understandable that a parent, faced with such a tragic loss and consumed with shock and grief, would look for an explanation and grasp at any seemingly plausible explanation she can find. In this case, Rhonda Renata has latched on to Gardasil, even though the timing doesn't even argue particularly persuasively for causation by Gardasil. In other words, while humans frequently confuse correlation with causation, in this case there doesn't even appear, on the surface at least, much evidence of correlation. Six months after the last booster shot of Gardasil is a long time. Now, nearly three years after her death, there is a coroner's inquest into Jasmine's death, and two familiar figures have entered the picture. More on that later.

By way of background, various reports suggest that Jasmine had suffered symptoms that could indicate that she had a cardiac anomaly. Sudden death among young people is rare, but when it happens, it's often due to cardiac causes, most commonly hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, coronary artery abnormalities, or the long QT syndrome (LQTS), the latter of which can cause a rapid, chaotic heartbeat and sometimes ventricular fibrillation and cardiac arrest. Since her daughter's death, Ms. Renata has steadfastly refused to have herself, her husband, or any of her family tested for gene mutations associated with sudden cardiac or tested for idiopathic heart disease because she knows of no history of heart disease in her family if you don't count the death of her daughter. While on the surface this sounds like a reasonable argument, it is not a good reason to conclude that Jasmine couldn't possibly have had an idiopathic heart condition. For example, some of the gene mutations that are associated with sudden cardiac death increase the risk of such an outcome; they don't guarantee it, and carriers might not be symptomatic or might be so mildly symptomatic that they are never worked up for a cardiac condition. More likely, Ms. Renata doesn't want to look for evidence that might disconfirm her now fixed belief that Gardasil killed her daughter, or, as she wrote two years ago:

Even though we have not yet received a final autopsy report and the pathologist has only recently begun doing tests based on my belief that the vaccine sent Jasmine's health on a downhill spiral to death. During the autopsy the pathologist did not find any health problem that could have contributed to Jasmine's death and I know in my every being that the vaccine was the cause.

In the same piece, Rhonda Renata describes a history of vague symptoms suffered by Jasmine:

During a routine visit, Jasmine's doctor persuaded her to get the Gardisil vaccine because it would help keep her safe from developing cervical cancer in the future. Jasmine received her first Gardisil vaccine in September 2008. Jasmine was always concerned about her appearance and she was quite distressed that shortly after the vaccine she noticed dry skin and warts appearing on her hands. She complained that she thought she was losing more hair than usual and that her pimples were getting worse. On the 20th of October Jasmine visited the doctor to treat her warts and dry skin. Jasmine had 4 or 5 warts frozen off. The doctor also said that her immunity was compromised so he prescribed a multivitamin as well as Locoid cream for the dry skin. The Locoid cream didn't help the dry skin.

What this means is unclear. For one thing, there appears to be no record, at least none mentioned in the press accounts that I've been able to find, of these complaints. Indeed, several press reports state that the nurse testified that she asked Jasmine whether she had had any problems after her Gardasil doses and whether she was feeling well. Jasmine reported no side effects. What we do know is that Ms. Renata somehow hooked up with an antivaccinationist named Hilary Butler, who blogs for the antivaccine crank organization the International Medical Council on Vaccination and blogs on her own at Beyond Conformity. Indeed, she has written several posts about Jasmine Renata, including Did Gardasil Kill Jasmine? It's full of conspiracy mongering, insinuations that some sort of coverup was occurring. It includes a link to the autopsy report, which showed no structural abnormalities in the heart or evidence of an inflammatory process. The report does note, however, that heart tissue had been taken and submitted to the Inherited Diseases Group in Auckland so that the "decendent's genetic structure and family can be investigated in case there is a molecular abnormality of the cardiac electrical conduction system that might result in sudden unexpected death." It was also noted that "this process usually takes many months and requires the cooperation of family members."

Interestingly, the pathologist also noted that Ms. Renata had contacted Dr. Christopher Shaw, who urged the use of the Morin stain to test for aluminum in Jasmine's brain. In response to this, the pathologist noted:

The pathology laboratory is unable to offer a routine specific test for aluminum in neurones (I believe that this is very much a research tool rather than a diagnostic tool). Even if aluminum were to be found, I would not know how to interpret its presence. I was unable to see evidence of damage to, or a reactive process involving, neurones in Jasmine's brain.

You might recall Christopher Shaw. He published a truly awful "review" of the medical and scientific literature trying to link aluminum-containing vaccine adjuvants to autism and appeared in the antivaccine movie The Greater Good arguing—you guessed it—that aluminum adjuvants cause autism. In fact, he went further than that and said in the movie that we’re all living in a “toxic” soup and that vaccines are part of that soup, all overlaid with a cartoon of green, stylized people floating in a disgusting soup of pollution, vaccines, and garbage. It turns out that Dr. Shaw was scheduled to testify at the inquest. Apparently, Dr. Shaw examined some of Jasmine's brain tissue. Anyone want to bet that Shaw will report that he found aluminum there and that it caused massive damage to Jasmine's neurons?

No, don't bother. That's about as sure a bet as I can think of, and only a sucker would bet against it. After all, Ms. Renata wouldn't have called Shaw to testify if he hadn't found what she wanted him to find. Given the time difference between here and New Zealand, it's likely that by the time you see this he will have already testified, and I'm sure readers will post news accounts in the comments. Oh wait, there already is. (Yes, I added this bit of paragraph after finishing my post and doing one more Google search.) Dr. Shaw behaved as expected, claiming he found both HPV and aluminum in Jasmine's brain, as well as unspecified abnormalities. This particular news report did not explain how Dr. Shaw found these things, and, given his track record, I'd want to know his methodology, in particular his negative controls for HPV before I'd believe him. Indeed, as I explained before, the amount of HPV DNA in Gardasil is minuscule; so it defies plausibility that the vaccine could be the source of so much HPV, if it really were there. Remember, in order to detect HPV DNA in the vaccines themselves, it took a super-sensitive PCR test (perhaps so sensitive as not to be specific). In other words, the amount of HPV DNA in Gardasil in the vaccine itself is minuscule, barely detectable only with an extremely sensitive assay. Now introduce it subcutaneously into someone's body, thus diluting it enormously, and then wait six months? No, it's utterly implausible to assume that the presence of HPV, if what Dr. Shaw is reporting is not a completely spurious result (which it probably is, given his track record), means that it could only have come from the vaccine.

Which brings us to the next "expert," another member of the rogues' gallery of antivaccine doctors and scientists, who testified before Dr. Shaw:

Dr San Hang Lee a pathologist at Milford Hospital in Connecticut gave evidence on the second day of the inquest by videolink.

He had been sent Jasmine’s post mortem blood and found her blood and spleen were positive for the human papillomavirus, or HVP.

The Gardasil vaccine is given to prevent some strains of HPV.

He said it was not the result of a nature HVP infection, most likely the DNA was bound to aluminium which was also found in Jasmine.

“The HPV gene is foreign DNA and its detection six months after injection is not normal,’’ he told the inquest.

He said the DNA may cause a reaction that could lead to lethal shock although it was not known if it caused her death but it needed further investigation.

He said it was not known if it was the cause of death but it needed further investigation.

Dr Lee said he also tested five samples of the vaccine sent from New Zealand and found HVP in each.

One wonders if the inquest board was aware that Dr. Lee was unceremoniously given the boot as director of the diagnostic laboratory at Milford Hospital in December 2010. His chairman also didn't recommend that Dr. Lee's medical staff privileges be renewed. Given that you can't get medical staff privileges without the endorsement of the chair of your department or the chief of your clinical service (in a nonacademic hospital that doesn't have chairmen, for example), that means Dr. Lee's chair basically fired him from the hospital altogether. The last time I blogged about this (October 2011), Dr. Lee was appealing and still had medical staff privileges. I also said at the time, if I were a new chair of a department and found someone like Dr. Lee consorting with a loony antivaccine group like SaneVax, I'd can him too.

As I pointed out above, the amount of HPV DNA in Gardasil is so tiny that it requires nested PCR to detect it. For all intents and purposes, it might as well be homeopathic. Actually, that gives me an idea. Maybe it was the memory of HPV that resulted in all that HPV being detected in the autopsy specimens! But apparently that tiny amount of HPV is so powerful that it can cause "microcompetition." Well, not really. As I explained before, the amount of HPV DNA involved is so tiny as to be inconsequential and it is not easy to get DNA into cells, much less to get it to express its proteins.

I do note, however, yet another morphing of a hypothesis. Or maybe I should call it the merging of two woos. Now it's not just the HPV DNA or the aluminum adjuvants. Now, apparently, somehow the evil aluminum combines with the dastardly HPV DNA (as tiny amount as it is) in order to become synergistically diabolical. One wonders how this came about. Maybe Drs. Lee and Shaw met at a SaneVax meeting. Who knows? However this happened, in retrospect I suppose I should have seen it coming. Now, not surprisingly, SaneVax is all over it, citing Dr. Lee as saying, "The naked DNA in the vaccine was probably stabilized through a chemical binding between the mineral aluminum and the phosphate backbone of the double-stranded DNA." One notes that there is not a plausible chemical mechanism by which aluminum can do this in the body in the manner that Dr. Lee claims.

In the meantime, what I see is a tragic story of a young woman cut down in the prime of her life, most likely (although not certainly) by a genetic defect in cardiac conduction that led to arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. A grieving mother, shocked by the suddenness and randomness of the tragedy, is unable to accept the most likely explanation, particularly given the uncertainty, latches onto something she can blame. Why? Who knows? But it didn't help that she hooked up with antivaccinationists like Hilary Butler, who immediately began flogging the Jasmine Renata case as "proof" that Gardasil kills. The end result causes harm not just to public health but to Rhonda Renata as well. She'll never be able to let go and heal as long as she is convinced (almost certainly mistakenly) that Gardasil killed her daughter.

Categories

More like this

I guess this is in effect part two of yesterday's post. Regular daily readers (and you are a regular daily reader, aren't you?) will remember that yesterday I commented on the recent uptick in anti-Gardasil vaccine rhetoric coming from the antivaccine crank blog Age of Autism and other sources, in…
Remember Dr. Sin Hang Lee? If you don't remember Lee, maybe you remember a while back, when the antivaccine group SaneVax touted findings that it claimed were devastating to Gardasil. Specifically, they claimed that there was vaccine-derived human papilloma virus DNA in Gardasi. Ring any bells yet…
Over the weekend, I chilled out a bit, at least as far as the blog was concerned. I won't make too much of a secret of it, but thanks to the new policy of the new owners I have a decision to make. In the meantime, while I'm dithering, you, my readers, were deluging me with requests. Well, it wasn't…
Remember SaneVax? Before I encountered SaneVax, I hadn't realized that anti-vaccine groups specialized, at least not to this degree. Oh, sure, I remember that Generation Rescue used to specialize in fear mongering about mercury in vaccines, at least before it changed its tune to "too many, too soon…

Yay! Quackadoodles!

*facepalms*

When my kids were younger I stated that my job as a mother was to make sure they were alive when they went to bed. This was used as an excuse to not homeschool then, especially with a particularly stubborn middle child.

Then my oldest was diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with obstruction when he was fourteen years old. I realized how lucky we were when he was diagnosed because of a heart murmur instead of the typical way: autopsy after sudden cardiac death.

There is an online forum dedicated to HCM, but I found it too depressing. It turns out that the abnormal heart muscle growth also screws up the heart cells electrical functioning. Many times a person who is thought to be perfectly healthy goes to bed, but in the morning is discovered dead.

After learning this, I found myself fearing the morning. Like today, when he overslept. I had to wake him up for cardiac rehab because he has had surgery to remove the extra heart muscle. Even though the obstruction is gone, there is still the mucked up electrical orientation of the cells. So there is a still a bit of fear when I call to him to wake up.

The genetic tests concluded my son had none of the known genetic sequences. If it had, we would have tested his siblings (and his siblings), but that did not work out. So all direct relatives (parents, siblings) need to be tested. Later this month we go in for a family echocardiogram session.

I hate people like that. They prey on the vulnerable and prevent them from grieving properly.

Instead of learning to cope and move on they cling to a cause and fight to blow open a scandal that doesn't exist.

I hope that NZ asks for an independent verification of Shaw's bullshit claims, and that they realize that Lee is on the woo wagon.

Hilary Butler is also the founder of the Immunisation Awareness Society (IAS) that I've had occasion to address, e.g.

http://sciblogs.co.nz/code-for-life/2012/02/24/ias-talks-about-vaccinat…

Over recent years that group has locked itself up - i.e. no comments on their blog and removing any comments they don't like from their Facebook page, no matter how polite or relevant. The group runs under a by-line of "for an informed choice", but only supplies an anti-vaccine angle.

By Grant Jacobs (not verified) on 08 Aug 2012 #permalink

It's interesting how almost every time a case like this comes up, the "experts" prove to be someone you've already written about. Shows how small the world of hard-core antivaccination really is: the number of people with actual medical credentials (of any sort, however dubious) involved is tiny. Ms. Renata couldn't find people to testify her way in New Zealand, she had to import them from Canada and the US. That alone might make the court take a hard look at these so-called expert witnesses.

various reports suggest that Jasmine had suffered symptoms that could indicate that she had a cardiac anomaly.

Specifically, the autopsy report mentions episodes of "real bad chest pain" and a racing heart in the weeks before Jasmine died.

Still not sure why Dr Shaw thinks that aluminium and HPV -- detected in Jasmine's brain tissue via his Super-Secret methods -- have anything to do with her death.

she knows of no history of heart disease in her family if you don’t count the death of her daughter.

That was the part I liked. "There is no ill-health in my family, apart from the ones who die!" Ms Renata has spoken of the long lives of her parents, and her parents' parents, studiously omitting any mention of her husband's family history.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 08 Aug 2012 #permalink

" Since her daughter’s death, Ms. Renata has steadfastly refused to have herself, her husband, or any of her family tested for gene mutations associated with sudden cardiac or tested for idiopathic heart disease because she knows of no history of heart disease in her family if you don’t count the death of her daughter. While on the surface this sounds like a reasonable argument, it is not a good reason to conclude that Jasmine couldn’t possibly have had an idiopathic heart condition."

Perhaps the saddest part of the mother's blog is this..

"Jasmine earlier that year had bought and hid two brand new bikes for her brothers for Christmas. She never got to see them open them. It certainly wasn't a happy Christmas for us without her."

Doesn't this grieving mother realize that by her refusal to permit her two surviving children to be tested for genetic mutations and for cardiac anomalies, she may be putting either one, or both of her sons, at risk for sudden cardiac death?

These are the same type of parents who lose an infant to SIDS and forevermore are convinced that a vaccine killed their baby.

Orac, I was planning to send you some links about this case because the mere thought of the family refusing tests for an inherited condition is so stunning, but I thought I'd wait until the 'expert' witnesses had appeared - and meanwhile you beat me to it! As the mother of an 11 year old daughter i've followed this case with particular interest but my conclusion - today's 'dodgy' evidence not withstanding- is still that this vaccine is truly remarkable!

By nz sceptic (not verified) on 08 Aug 2012 #permalink

One wonders if the inquest board was aware that Dr. Lee was unceremoniously given the boot as director of the diagnostic laboratory at Milford Hospital in December 2010

The coroner is not completely uninformed. Right at the start of the inquest, he invited testimony from a high-ranking public-health adviser (about the checks that had been performed on this particular batch of Gardasil, and about the information available for informed choice) from a cardiologist; from the nurse.

I suspect that the coroner knows perfectly well about Dr Lee's current situation of self-employment, but one aspect of his job is to let grieving families say whatever makes them feel better... and if this involves letting their experts' claims about professional standing go unchallenged, so be it.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 08 Aug 2012 #permalink

Hmm, even one link gets moderation here. Ah, well - that's the way it goes.

herr doktor bimler - I’ve quoted you in the link above.

By Grant Jacobs (not verified) on 08 Aug 2012 #permalink

Hi - my comments are being held up for moderation. Could you let me know what's causing this so I can avoid it. Can't see anything untoward that I'm doing. Perhaps it's that your blog now doesn't like links in the "location" field?

(Excuse this.)

By Grant Jacobs (not verified) on 08 Aug 2012 #permalink

(Repeating this testing if my comments are held for moderation over using a different email address than usual.)

Hilary Butler is also the founder of the Immunisation Awareness Society (IAS) that I’ve had occasion to address, e.g.

http://sciblogs.co.nz/code-for-life/2012/02/24/ias-talks-about-vaccinat…

Over recent years that group has locked itself up – i.e. no comments on their blog and removing any comments they don’t like from their Facebook page, no matter how polite or relevant. The group runs under a by-line of “for an informed choice”, but only supplies an anti-vaccine angle.

herr doktor bimler – heads-up and all that - I’ve quoted you in my latest post at sciblogs (that points readers here).

By Grant Jacobs (not verified) on 08 Aug 2012 #permalink

One more try. Maybe this blog wants only my first name and other variations are blocked as possible sock-puppets?? (My previous comments have now vanished and the most recent is still under moderation.)

Hilary Butler is also the founder of the Immunisation Awareness Society (IAS) that I’ve had occasion to address, e.g.

http://sciblogs.co.nz/code-for-life/2012/02/24/ias-talks-about-vaccinat…

Over recent years that group has locked itself up – i.e. no comments on their blog and removing any comments they don’t like from their Facebook page, no matter how polite or relevant. The group runs under a by-line of “for an informed choice”, but only supplies an anti-vaccine angle.

herr doktor bimler – heads-up and all that – I’ve quoted you in my latest post at sciblogs (that points readers here).

@orac - I, too, am amazed that the typical anti-vaccine crank believes that the very small, miniscule amount of "whatever toxin of the week" they are ranting against, can suddenly turn into what seems to be gallons of product inside the body.

How exactly is stuff like Aluminum and "mercury" supposed to multiply by itself? Or what chemical process can they point to that would have any hope in hell of producing it on its own (perhaps they believe in alchemy & turning calcium into mercury or something).

They aren't rational, they can't even keep their own conspiracy stories straight - because if you take a step back and look at everything that the anti-vaccine loonisphere is claiming - if it was all true, just about everyone should be dropping dead the moment they receive a shot (of anything!).

As a pathologist, it is painful for me to hear about antivax nonsense enabled by other pathologists.

Earlier we had dubious path reports of "inflammation" in small bowel biopsies from autistic children allegedly linked to vaccination with MMR. Now there's Dr. Lee bizarrely claiming that DNA from the Gardasil vaccine could have caused fatal shock - 6 months after the last injection! (how he found a difference between "natural" HPV DNA and Gardasil HPV DNA in this patient is another matter we can only wonder about).

From Orac's article:

"...the autopsy report...showed no structural abnormalities in the heart or evidence of an inflammatory process. The report does note, however, that heart tissue had been taken and submitted to the Inherited Diseases Group in Auckland so that the “decendent’s genetic structure and family can be investigated in case there is a molecular abnormality of the cardiac electrical conduction system that might result in sudden unexpected death.”

It should be noted that evaluation of heart tissue for conduction system abnormalities is not a routine part of hospital or forensic autopsies. It requires a specialized technique and evaluation by someone with the proper training (unclear it that was done in this case). Even in instances where such study is performed, I doubt a localized abnormality can always be discovered.

This entire train of circumstances antivaxers are blaming on the Gardasil vaccine reeks of implausibility and nonsensical woo.

By Dangerous Bacon (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

Blaming Guardasil or MMR or vaccines in general absolves the parents for the genetic 'gift' that likely killed their child. It allows them to live with the repressed guilt. Neither the vaccine nor the parents are to blame but Guardasil is an easier target for the rage.

The saddest part of the story are the pain, suffering and death to come. The girl's siblings are not tested, possibly exposing them to the same fate. Also, some people will be moved by the irrational and unproven connection to Guardasil risking more girls pain from HPV. A sad business indeed.

As an aside, notice how it’s always women’s beach volleyball that NBC shows, not men’s, no doubt because the powers that be think that toned young women in bikinis playing volleyball translate into big ratings. Unfortunately, they seem to be right.

Toned young women in bikinis doing ANYTHING translates into big ratings. I'm not sure there's anything unfortunate about it, though.

@ Chris: Thanks so much for sharing your son's heart problems with us. My heart goes out to you and your family for all the years of concern until your guy had his surgery.

As (I think) you know, my husband had A-flutter which required a right atrial ablation...and then A-Fib which required a left atrial ablation. Even after each ablation, he had quite irregular heartbeats...attributed to the fact that the ablation procedures themselves irritated the chambers of his heart...which slowly resolved as the weeks and months passed, post ablations.

I hope this is the case with your son...but if he does eventually need these procedures, please try not to worry about them. I have some excellent cardiac ablation retrospective studies that I can link you to. :-)

lilady:

Even after each ablation, he had quite irregular heartbeats…attributed to the fact that the ablation procedures themselves irritated the chambers of his heart…which slowly resolved as the weeks and months passed, post ablations.

It was not an ablation, but a surgical scooping out of the abnormal muscle growth inside a chamber. And it does irritate the heart, which caused very rapid heart beat. The assistant surgeon described it as making the heart "angry."

There is the thing, the hear functions with electrical impulses, that can be affected by things like levels of calcium, and other things.

Toned young women in bikinis doing ANYTHING translates into big ratings. I’m not sure there’s anything unfortunate about it, though.

I can tell you that, among people who are volleyball fans, a very large number of whom are male (that includes me), there is a lot of disgust regarding the beach outfits. Volleyball fans, of course, claim that the sport itself is what is great, and that parading players in skimpy bikinis is basically "selling out" - it's turned into basically the Lingerie Football League. The counter argument is that it makes the sport popular, and isn't that a good thing? So what's the price of dignity these days?

The indoor team is playing right now (US up 1 set over Korea)

By Marry Me, Mindy (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

In other news:

Jake aggravates Seth Mnookin via Twitter.

The sky continues to be blue.
Dogs and cats usually don't like each other.
Something is wrong on the internet.
.

.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

I knew a woman long ago whose young husband died unexpectedly while at home alone with their child while she ran an errand. The cause of death was determined to be long QT syndrome. When she told her husband's family, along with a recommendation that they get tested themselves, they went absolutely NUTS. They ransacked her house while she wasn't there and found some paperwork indicating that she had given up a baby for adoption when she was very young, and then accused her of killing her husband by revealing this information. They refused to get tested. All I can conclude is that the death of a seemingly healthy young person is so traumatic and the unexpected idea that the death might have occurred because of a genetic legacy so unacceptable that some people just lose their ever-loving minds and try to blame anything at all for the death rather than a well-known syndrome.

By Elizabeth Reid (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Pablo ( a/k/a MMM);

Believe it or not, I have been watching men's field hockey and have logged in quite a few hours of handball, football, volleyball and obviously tennis. The jerseys and short pants are very attractive. So says me and probably a few million gay men.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Chris: I know your son had a far more complicated cardiac procedure than dear hubby's ablations. His cardiac arrhythmia first occurred with acute onset EBV infection...at age 64! He underwent cardio-version and was prescribed anti-arrhthmia medication which seemed to hold him for a few years, but then the right and left ablations were required.

He still has benign bigeminy and trigeminy episodes, which he has adapted to...being that he is more than four years "out" from his last ablation.

BTW, did you read Dr. Hall's book review of Heart 411?

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/an-owners-manual-for-the-…

It is a superbly written book and my husband and I both read it. We got a copy from our local library and it is, I believe, available as an E-Book.

Disclaimer: (I think I can speak for Dr. Hall)..we are not shilling for the authors.

Lilady, I hope it all goes well, and you hubby never needs to get an implanted defibrillator. Due to some weirdness in the EKG of my son's stress test last November, that was a test the hospital wanted to do again. They were double checking to make sure they did not have to give him one.

They said that while the implanted defibrillator can save a life, it also can go rogue with false alarms. The resulting shock is quite painful, so they were glad when the recent stress test showed he did not need one.

I have not read the book yet, but I'll try to see if it is in my local library again.

I have not had a chance to get to that book yet.

@ Elizabeth Reid:

My cousin's father always re-counted sad tales of young relatives dying tragically back in Ireland- having read O'Neill , she always assumed it was consumption or another infectious disease: many years later, her 40-something brother needed a pace-maker and then, a teenager needed one as well. Many people in this huge family were tested and several have related heart problems, including her.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

Chris: I have had an implanted defibrillator for 4 years and it has never zapped me. I'm glad because the sensation is likened to being kicked in the chest.
it is good that he did not need one.That is one less surgery he will have and no quarterly check-ups. Right now I think it is a pain, but I am sure I will change my tune if I ever need it.

My great-uncle dropped dead in the middle of Basic Training during WWII, very likely of this exact same kind of genetic condition (though he is the only one in the family who has).

Thank you, Rose. That is good to know. The physician's assistant at the cardiologist must have wanted us to know all the risks. She was quite dramatic with her description, and told us they really wanted to make he did not need one.

HPV and girls: Head and neck cancers associated with HPV have been increasing. They are mostly men. I haven't been able to exactly compute it, but I think we have reached the point where it's associated with more male than female deaths. (H+N is more common than cervical cancer.)
Guys: get the jab.

Sports: let the men wear nothing.

"Toned young women in bikinis doing ANYTHING translates into big ratings"

There's a lesson there for the shooting contestants, although recoil might be a limiting factor.

By Dangerous Bacon (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

Surely this is incorrect (quoted from Orac's "Dr. Shaw behaved as expected" link above):

The human papillomavirus (HPV16) was found in her brain, which could have only got there through the vaccine, Prof Shaw said.

There is no virus in Gardasil. If he really thinks he found the virus itself, it most certainly did not come from the vaccine. I have to assume he really claimed to have found either HPV proteins (which are the active components in the vaccine)or HPV DNA (which could theoretically represent trace carry-over from the recombinant genes used to express the HPV proteins in yeast). Either way, it would be outrageous to claim that such could only have come from the vaccine.

And in any case, since when is Shaw qualified to test autopsy samples for HPV contaminants? Even assuming he has the experience to do such tests for research purposes, he has no business claiming definitive results unless he's validated his methods for such purposes. Anyone want to wager that he has?

@ Rork...I'm not going anywhere near your naked men in sports remark :-)

About the incidence of HPV head and neck cancer in men, it seems you are correct:

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18563_162-20037508.html

Evidence now shows two-thirds of the cancers of the tongue and tonsils are caused by HPV -- and 80 percent of these cases occur in men.

"It seems like ten or more sexual partners is the threshold, that's where we start seeing a bigger jump in risk," said Dr. Anna Giuliano, author of the study and leader of cancer and epidemiology at Moffitt Cancer Center."

"Researchers found that while 50 percent of the 1,158 healthy men ages 18 to 70 who participated in the study were infected with genital HPV, only six percent had the strain that causes most (90 percent) HPV-linked head and neck cancers. In 90 percent of people, the virus goes away on its own. But it may persist in men more than women."

The researcher Anna Giuliano PhD quoted in the CBS news article has been involved in multiple HPV studies; here take your pick...

http://ccrab.moffitt.usf.edu/research--clinical-trials/individual-resea…

Good news, everyone. My preventricular contractions are all but gone. Amazing what getting enough sleep, drinking less coffee, and ignoring the trolls can do for your heart.

Well, I know that there is an AED near the waiting room I was in earlier today.

qetzal,

There's a few problems in the media reporting. I haven't got the link handy, but one of the SaneVax articles quotes from the testimony. My recollection is that he is saying the portions HPV DNA, with "bound" aluminium, were found but the media has misreported this. It's the reason I noted wanting a copy of the original testimony in my own article on this issue before commenting on the science. It seems to me that there is just too much inaccurate reporting going on in the MSM.

PS: Apologies for the multiple comments earlier - it seems my previously "deleted" comments have been resurrected!

Toned young women in bikinis doing ANYTHING translates into big ratings”

There’s a lesson there for the shooting contestants, although recoil might be a limiting factor.

Not to mention all that hot brass being ejected.

I've changed my mind. Tattoos and body paint permitted.

I perhaps wasn't clear earlier either. I was trying to say that perhaps HPV now kills more men than women per year, adding up all cancers (not just H+N). ( I realize we have not demonstrated that the vaccine will reduce HPV-positive H+N cancers - that will take years to prove directly - but my biologist think it is likely true.) So get the jab and be more relaxed when doing tricky deeds desired by your loved one(s).

@ rork:

I called several female tennis players and ran your suggestion past them verbatim: no one objected, a few were enthusiastic. Oh, why not?

@ lilady:

I took a peek at the huff''s comments: be aware that in the fevered imagination of PRN, the phrase 'offiicial truth' is used as an equivalent to tobacco science, the orthodox position, junk science etc. You can tell who they reference by their pet idioms: another fave, "Do your homework!" and variants thereof.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

The combination of phenomena is beyond the grasp of the human intellect. But the impulse to seek causes is innate in the soul of man. And the human intellect, with no inkling of the immense variety and complexity of circumstances conditioning a phenomenon, any one of which may be separately conceived of as the cause of it, snatches at the first and most easily understood approximation, and says here is the cause.

Count Leo Tolstoy, “War and Peace”

@ rork:

re body paint: might be historically accurate for the present Games. Go, Blue!

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

I'm curious about this DNA they say is bound to aluminum. I mean, I know that magnesium ions are cofactorial to DNA, and I found a paper that shows aluminum phosphate makes a very good vaccine adjunct for DNA microparticles:

(Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Jan 18;97(2):811-6.
Cationic microparticles: A potent delivery system for DNA vaccines.)

What I'm wondering, though, is why they get to propose an entirely new way for aluminum to act on biomolecules? Don't you have to have some sort of supporting work when you advance a hypothesis like that?

My heart goes out to Jasmine's family.

By c0nc0rdance (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

c0nc0rdance,

"I’m curious about this DNA they say is bound to aluminum."

- That's a large part of the reason I wanted the original testimony.

If tiny traces of HPV DNA cause sudden death, I would expect most warts (which are essentially HPV DNA factories) to be fatal.

As for beach volleyball, apart from finding it hard to get my head around the venue, between Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence Old Admiralty Building, I can't stand the brief blasts of music. It sounds like a bizarre game of musical chairs.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

I agree, Krebozien. The suggestion that DNA could "cause a reaction that could lead to lethal shock" is ludicrous.

Newsflash for Dr. Lee: we've injected milligram doses of DNA into thousands of people in hundreds of gene therapy trials. Some of those have even included (gasp) DNA mixed with aluminum adjuvants, in an effort to develop DNA vaccines If DNA could cause "lethal shock" we'd know it by now.

It was not a cardiac disease (though one branch of my father's family - his sister, and both her sons, died of sudden cardiac events before 45), but when my father tested positive for a dominant hereditary condition he wrote me one of the most painful letters I have ever read. He actually apologized for ever having ... well, contributed to my existence. I can't remember ever feeling more heartbroken for him. It is a very hard thing as a parent to know that you might contribute to your child's suffering. I guess that there are those who have a knee-jerk reaction that puts them immediately on "denial" and they don't ever open their mind again after that moment. It's sad, especially if they might contribute to the death of their children in doing so.

Everyone is ignoring the mother's statement- "At an inquest in Wellington yesterday before coroner Ian Smith, Rhonda Renata said her daughter was fit, rarely got sick, didn't smoke and rarely drank alcohol.
But after her first Gardasil dose in September 2008, she developed pains in various parts of her body, suffered a racing heart beat, weak arms, tingling in her hands and legs, and became tired and irritable.
Her hair started falling out and she was sleeping as much as possible."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10825660
This is a mere coincidence??

I think I'll make a list of vaccines to get this year:

- Gardasil
- DTaP (or DTwP if available)
- Flu

what else?

By Alain (aka Aut… (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

Cheers to oretch for starting another wild circle jerk of barking jackals. Just one question to the leader of the pack and any little jacks: If jasmine died from hocm or cad how do you suppose that went unnoticed on autopsy? And then I wonder if you ever ever think a vaccine has done anything harmful?

Make your own inferences about the necessity of this vaccine.

[Makes own inferences]

Sounds good to me.

@ ken, no one is ignoring the mother's testimony, however it is the mother's testimony and not that supported with medical evidence which we don't have yet. I also don't see what she described as a reported side effect from Gardasil. Don't forget, the same was said of the poor young girl who died hours after her Cerevix jab and her autopsy revealed a malignant tumour. It very well could be a mere coincidence and it is without question, not what Dr. Shaw is submitting.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

ken are you TTP? these are all possible symptoms of heart disease. They are so vague they also qualify as the majority of symptoms in anxiety and panic disorders.

Ken,

Yes. It is plausibly a coincidence. I can think of two issues:

1. Just because one thing follows another does not mean that the first caused the second and

2. The mother's memory is human and therefore fallible. Hopefully the inquest sought documentation.

By Niche Geek (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

Bsbuster,

Do you have access to the autopsy report? You imply that you do.

By Niche Geek (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ken

12 410 woman have cervical cancer, that's 12 410 too many according to my tastes.

regarding the side effect, I've had mild side effect both after being vaccinated and before being vaccinated and the side effect were worse before being vaccinated (fainting) as compared to after (a small red circle at the site of the needle).

Alain

By Alain (aka Aut… (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

Oh, and before anyone ask, I'm being screened annually for cardiac risk (I have 2 immediates relatives having cardiac issues) including when I fainted before receiving my flu vaccine.

Alain

By Alain (aka Aut… (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

Here in Australia, it was announced recently that the federal government will fund Gardasil for boys (previously only girls) in year 8 (age ~13) from January 2013.

Even if the benefit for men is less than for women, it will reduce the risks for women. So winners all round.

By DrBollocks (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

Ken - six months ago I switched to a new medication. One month later I'd completely lost the use of my legs, the ability to speak clearly, and a total inability to get out of any position I was placed in.

Should I sue the manufacturers? Should I also consider action against the pub I'd eaten in that week, my best friend who may have doomed me with her kisses, and my mother, for ever bearing me?

I made sure my daughter had the full Gardasil series.

I also plainly explained to her that while HPV is (or was) considered a sexually transmitted virus, getting the shot would not protect her from everything, only the 4 strains of the virus present.

When my son is old enough, I'll be getting him the series too. As someone who has had HPV - a 'wedding gift' from my first husband - I know the risks of cervical cancer.

You're damn right I'm going to do everything to prevent my children from going through what I have.

But after her first Gardasil dose in September 2008, she developed pains in various parts of her body, suffered a racing heart beat, weak arms, tingling in her hands and legs, and became tired and irritable.
Her hair started falling out and she was sleeping as much as possible.”
This is a mere coincidence??

Ken, you ignorant little plonker, you might want to look at the side-effects of depo-provera, which the dead women was also receiving.

The moral of the story is that if your daughter starts reporting chest pains and tachycardia, then rather than write them down in a comprehensive list of "Nasty side-effects caused by EVUL VAXXINES", perhaps it is a better idea to make an appointment with a heart specialist.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 09 Aug 2012 #permalink

@HDB - the mother probably chocked this up to "typical teenage angst," or something similar, at the time.

But, if my son started showing those types of symptoms, you bet your ass I'm getting him down to the cardiologist, just to be on the safe side.

They have been running commercials recently to highlight the risk of congenital heart defects in children & teens - that fairly simple testing can spot these problems early & it is possible to, if not totally correct, at least take steps to minimize the overall risk.

This sucks that a potentially very relevant and concerning affliction - congenital heart defects - is totally being overshadowed by this woman's vendetta against vaccines.

Lawrence,

I've read what I take to be the report the mother filed to CARM (NZ's equivalent to VAERS) & I have to admit I'm taken aback by why she didn't have the symptoms checked out further - or least that's hindsight for you.

Who is Orac? I know who Jasmine Renate was... and yes she did matter! To say Orac (name?!) out of boredom I happened to check out....? Jasmine meant more than that!
Jasmine just didn't suddenly die, her health deteriorated. She did have side effects after each vaccine.
Rhonda saw her daughters health deteriorate.
6 months after her last immunization Jasmine died... she had a lot of side effects prior to that time.
Immunizations were once about one of lifetime immunity...
suddenly it's life long immunizations for the same diseases.
Just one immunization to protect you... no sorry two.... no sorry three....whoops I meant four....
That will be the case for the HPV vaccine also. Life long immunization.
Never immune.... never safe.

By sarcha king (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

Do some more research before you so abruptly write such an article. Perhaps her parents are incorrect in this instance but doesnt mean that Gardasil is safe. For more information check out this website http://truthaboutgardasil.org/injuries/

@ Shay

Toned young women in bikinis doing ANYTHING translates into big ratings”

There’s a lesson there for the shooting contestants, although recoil might be a limiting factor.

Not to mention all that hot brass being ejected.

All rifle and pistol events now use .22 rimfire. Even the 12 gauge loads for trap and skeet competition are pretty light.
Sorry for the derail. SIWOTI syndrome this morning.

By machintelligence (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Grant: That email sent to the Judge, *written* by the parents is a script...authored by a doctor. If the *case* goes forward, I hope someone remembers to question the mother about her objections to submitting themselves and their sons to testing...and hear *in her own words* about her objections.

If the mother (she's the one who is promoting the Gardisil angle as the cause of death), is so well-versed in laboratory science jargon...why isn't she aware that testing might reveal a genetic cause for her daughter's death?

She's no different than some of the parents who brought their children to Wakefield for his *study*...after being referred to the lawyer, by an anti-vaccine group, to make the case against the MMR vaccine manufacturer.

I've lost a whole lot of sympathy for these parents.

Is this the same Dr. Sin Hang Lee...who is no longer employed by Milford Hospital as a pathologist? Look what he's be up to now...

http://www.cankercillin.com/sutton_pharm,_inc_.htm

I *think* it is a topical treatment for canker sores, but maybe it is a treatment for oral cancers...

"Canker Sores are recurring, shallow, painful ulcers of the mouth. During 2009 canker sores will afflict an estimated 575,060,800 people in the United States, Canada, Mexico, Member States of the European Union, Russia, China, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. Generally, an estimated 20 percent of the general population of each country suffers from this recurring disease. The incidence rates of recurrent cancer sores among patients with autoimmune disorders, such as HIV/AIDS, Crohn's Disease, and Behcet's Disease are even higher, approaching 100% under certain subsets of patient population." (dumb editing)

I have to agree with Lilady.

If my kid is having shortness of breath, etc I'm going to be marching her right to the doctor's and insisting on testing be done.

God forbid if I lost a child like that, you bet your ass everyone in my family is getting tested for that defect. No exceptions.

@ Darwy: I actually had my son's blood tested (and paid for the test, as well) for chromosomal abnormalities just after he was born in 1976. It was fascinating to see the large photograph of his paired chromosomes, which were normal. I wanted to know if there was a chromosomal abnormality that my daughter needed to be concerned about.

The results of the de novo gene mutations study, implicated in his rare genetic disorder, were published a few months before my son died in 2004.

Now Mrs. Renata is *stuck* with her statement about palpating her daughter's rapid pulse and her steadfast refusal to have her family members submit to testing.

Coming later to the comments so often means there are multiple points to address. Just two today:
1) Aluminum is the third most common element in the Earth's crust. There should be nothing shocking about finding at least some in human tissue.
2) I watch the women's beach volleyball and the bikinis have something to do with it. But now we have this thing, the Intertoobz I think it's called, and if I choose I can find women to watch wearing less and doing more remarkable things than volleyball any day at any hour. Even if it was the volleyball, Google searches on "naked beach volleyball" and "nude beach volleyball" between them came up with over 30,000 hits. So for at least some viewers, me for one, there is something I can't quite define that makes it far more appealing than naked Playboy bunnies flopping around the California shore. I also believe (strictly in the interests of fairness, don'cha know) that the male beach volleyball players should wear only tight shorts.

By Old Rockin' Dave (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

If any positive result was the outcome, how would that affect one way or the other any link with Gardasil potentially being the trigger for the death?

From the correspondance between Renata and Shaw. In other words, they're not interested in any results that don't vilify Gardasil. Shaw should be sacked from his university for what he is doing.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

The antivaccine hive must have received word from their overlords about this post this morning. I expect a flood of long debunked nonsense soon.

ken would like us to "make your own inferences" about the necessity of the Gardasil vaccine - his inferences apparently being that over 12,400 cases of cervical cancer annually in the U.S. and 4,000+ deaths are too piddly to be concerned with.

Antivaxers typically focus only on deaths from infectious diseases, the better to minimize the impact of these diseases (in their own minds; rational people find the death statistics alarming enough). In the case of Gardasil, what antivaxers overlook is the incidence of cervical dysplasia (precancers) due to HPV infection (in the range of 250,000 to 1 million cases diagnosed per year). The cost for those women is increased surveillance, biopsies and more invasive and painful procedures to eliminate dysplasia (electrosurgery, laser surgery, cone excisions and hysterectomies), potentially loss of childbearing ability and of course economic costs as well.

My inference from all this is that Gardasil has value in sparing women (and men) from the consequences of HPV infection.

ht_p://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cervical_dysplasia

By Dangerous Bacon (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

sarcha king:

Immunizations were once about one of lifetime immunity…

When was that? Tetanus boosters every ten years have been required for decades.

And as far as who Orac is, try clicking on his name under the article title, you'll find this:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/author/oracknows/

Thinking of kids and heart issues - back in high school, my eldest was sent home from field hockey practice (very active, athletic child) with a message that she had complained of feeling faint and the coach, upon feeling her pulse, felt she was WAY too tachycardic for the exertion she'd had - mind, this was mid-late season, so she was in great physical shape. I had her IN the ER and and EKG done that night! I can't imagine not doing anything like that, especially when you have the good health care Australians do. Yes, I had to pay a hefty copay for the ER visit. It was worth it ( - IIRC, a mild cardiac murmur was found, with possibly some PVCs due to mild dehydration. She was fine after hydration, and the murmur has never been a problem).

@ MI Dawn: When my son was a few days old and tachypneic in the NICU, the neonatologist detected a heart murmur...which was confirmed by the pediatric cardiologist.

My son underwent heart catheterization when he was eight days old. It took several hours to do the procedure because he was so tiny and he required *one unit of blood* One unit of blood for him was 20 ccs (estimated total blood volume for a 5 lb. infant is 200 ccs).

The cardiologist assumed that he would find Tetralogy of Fallot:

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/tof/

Instead, the cardiologist found a huge atrial septal defect, which would, "never spontaneous heal" and would require surgical closure. So, he was medicated with Lanoxin (digoxin) to slow down his heart rate, which was administered in his gavage feeding tube. I continued to monitor his heart rate and continued to administer the Lanoxin through the gavage feeding tube, one he was released from the NICU 10 weeks later.

Slowly his heart rate came down and the heart murmur was no longer heard. At six months of age, his cardiologist determined that the huge ASD closed spontaneously. The cardiologist really did call the healing "a miracle".

I'm so glad we had my son in our lives for twenty-eight years, and the spontaneous closing of the ASD allowed us to donate his cardiac valves upon his death.

@ Ken - from that same link you posted - Gardasil is a PROTEIN component - there IS NO VIRAL NUCLEIC ACID in the vaccine.

"Q: Is it possible to get HPV or any disease caused by HPV from GARDASIL?
A:No. It is not possible to get HPV or any disease caused by HPV from GARDASIL. That’s because there is no live virus in the vaccine.

Instead, GARDASIL contains a protein that helps the body’s immune system produce antibodies against HPV—without causing an infection."

One other thing about this HPV DNA (they are implying an "infection") in the brain. Let's take a step back and remember the TYPES of cells that papilloma viruses infect: SQUAMOUS CELLS. That's right, HPVs do not infect neurons. No receptors on neurons for papilloma viruses. This does not even go into the facts surrounding what you would see if there was some sort of rogue papillomavirus infection. The most sensitive biomarker in cervical cancer lesions is the overexpression of HPV oncogene mRNA - I have no doubt that this will soon be found to be the best biomarker for H/N cancers as well (see IncellDX's work on this subject). If there was some sort of neural infection you would expect stains like p16 to be positive, as well as perhaps an immunostain. I am sorry for this mother's loss, but feel she is doing her remaining children a grave disservice by not having them checked out for herediary cardiac problems and instead focusing on strawmen.

By Dede Pierry (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

Is this the same Dr. Sin Hang Lee…who is no longer employed by Milford Hospital as a pathologist? Look what he’s be up to now…

Ah, so he's invented an ointment for mouth ulcers that contains penicillin to kill bacteria. I bet everyone else is kicking themselves and wishing they'd thought of that.

In the Cankerkillin website, the "world-renowned scientist and researcher" asserts that he is still "a pathologist at Milford Hospital and the director of Milford Medical Laboratory", before citing his inclusion in a series of notorious vanity Who's Who publications.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

I looked up the Tea for Health website while blogging on Dr Lee's entrepreneurial zeal, and yes, it's the same guy.

Elsewhere on that website he again lists his "Who's who" inclusion as evidence of his credentials; we also learn that he is a pioneer in breast-cancer research ("the first FDA-approved histochemical estrogen receptor assay for breast cancers"), and in detecting "Mycoplasma pneumoniae infection". At least he doesn't repeat the claim to be still employed at Milford.

Dr Lee has made lemons into lemonade and cites the repeated attentions from the FDA as official evidence of their approval:
the FDA has officially allowed the first qualified green tea health claim as follows:...

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

IANAL..but married to a lawyer.

Here's the decision that Dr. Sin Hang Lee bases his claim, on

http://www.hpm.com/pdf/blog/Fleminger%20QHC%20GT%20Decision.pdf

Fast forwarding to the end of the 54 page decision...

"As the Pearson I court acknowledged it is not the role of the courts to draft
precise declaimers but instead “leave[s] that task to the agency in the first
instance.” Pearson I, 164 F.3d at 659. The Court accordingly remands
Fleminger’s health claim to the FDA for the purpose of drafting appropriate
disclaimers consistent with this Memorandum Opinion.3"

So not only is the good doctor a pseudo-scientist, he is also a pathological liar.

herr doktor bimler - thanks for low down on these two experts. It seems there's rather more to them that at first appears...

lilady - I (and at least one other at my blog) suspect the assistance is from the local anti-vaccine community rather than a doctor. (Hilary Butler is a possible, if not likely, candidate. Her articles on her website indicate she approached Renata soon after the death of her daughter. Jasmine died 22nd September; Hilary says she approached Rhonda and was in touch with her "since October" [paraphrased])

Darwy - Here's what I take to be the CARM report mentioned in my earlier comment: http://bit.ly/P5C1Zd
(Accessed via a google search; the original is from Hilary Butler's "Beyond Conformity" website. I take it that 'depo inj' means an injection of Depo Provera, the contraceptive.) If you think that what written in the letter is striking, this, to me, is more so.

There's plenty more on-line, of course. One google search that's particularly informative is

site:http://www.beyondconformity.org.nz/ jasmine

The PDFs you'll find are the formal correspondence associated with this case filed on Hilary's site (hence the site: portion of the search). Hilary's articles are, unsurprisingly, one-sided anti-vaccine efforts (I have to admit the word "rant" often comes to mind when I read her material...)

lilady,

Saw the same letter here earlier:

http://beyondvaccination.com/showthread.php?1583-Jasmine-Renata.

There's quite a bit wrong with that letter - starting with the date Hilary has written at the top of it... It's dated as before the dates in the letter, including before Jasmine's death. A time-travelling anti-vaccinist?! :-) Seriously, there's her take on the national immunisation register, for one. (You'll see a similar slant again and again in her articles. It's maddening that she keeps pushing that out.) And... er, I'll leave it at that. There's a lot more of this. If you do the search I mentioned earlier you'll find she's written a series on it (sigh).

when my father tested positive for a dominant hereditary condition he wrote me one of the most painful letters I have ever read....... It is a very hard thing as a parent to know that you might contribute to your child’s suffering.

My dad took the other path. He just didn't tell us - and nor did mum. I was pretty annoyed when I found out. And even more put out when I tested positive. Though the test wasn't desperately necessary - the physical abnormalities are pretty obvious when you know what you're looking at.

@ Grant:

More for you about Dr. Sin Hang Lee; he posted here...

http://lymedisease.org/news/lyme_disease_views/blumenthal-lyme-legislat…

There's a whole background story on Senator Blumenthal and how he is being used by patients who claim to have chronic Lyme disease...and had their LLMDs (Lyme Literate Medical Doctors) send blood to Milford Hospital for Sin Hang Lee's bogus Lyme B.burgdorferi PCR blood tests.

Here's the letter sent by the good doctor's lawyer to the Connecticut Department of Health for an investigation into his being booted out of the pathology lab. Scroll on down and see since his dismissal, that Milford Hospital is not accepting packages with serum submitted for HPV PCR tests or Lyme B. burdorferi PCR tests...heh...heh.

http://www.canadiangardasilawarenessnetwork.com/uploads/8/1/8/2/8182128…

since his dismissal, that Milford Hospital is not accepting packages with serum submitted for HPV PCR tests or Lyme B. burdorferi PCR tests

Suspicious minds will recall that Lee took Milford Hospital to court to retain his medical privileges there, with SaneVax supporting his lawsuit, their argument being that without access to the Hospital's laboratory facilities he would have nowhere to perform his tests.
So where is he performing them now?
No wonder the results are always positive.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

Perhaps he's doing them on the HiFi DNA site?

Hmm. The contact for that looks like in a mall. (Hawley Lane Mall, Trumbull.) Anyway, good question.

The sense of privilege in that lawyer's letter is impressive: "Milford Hospital should continue to provide Dr Lee with access to their laboratory facilities because otherwise he will unable to continue running his private business there."
It may be time to bring it to the attention of a few NZ journalists.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

I grew up in CT; I'm well familiar with Lyme disease (grew up ~20 mins from Lyme and Old Lyme).

Blumenthal is (as usual) pimping this to test the waters for a hop to a bigger political pond.

@Grant

I was on Depo for 2 years. (Personal anecdote inc): you couldn't pay me to ever take it again. My MD told me that she wouldn't allow anyone to use it for longer than 2 years, because it could impact your bone density.

I was cranky and irritable after my injections and the weight gain wasn't a plus either. I had a bone density test done when I came off it, I was one of the lucky ones, my losses were minimal.

I should have thought of the virus’s cellular specificity & didn’t (& now I am metaphorically kicking myself).

I don't know if the target specificity of HPV is going to convince anyone. Obviously the anti-Gardasil crowd have been careful to remain vague, avoiding particulars about the nature of the threat posed by the purported trace contaminants of HPV-DNA in the vaccine... they may give the impression that the DNA is actively infecting the recipient of vaccination, but you would be hard-pressed finding someone who says that explicitly.

Dr Lee's own argument is that (1) these are DNA fragments, not the intact HPV genome; (2) the fragments are not the native infective HPV, but rather the recombinant DNA used to produce antigenic proteins (and his magic test is fine-tuned just to pick up the rDNA, not the native form from warts), and (3) the DNA is bound somehow to colloidal microparticles of aluminium hydroxide from the adjuvant, so it can't enter cells, and remains in the bloodstream indefinitely -- because his test finds it in blood samples.

Why this otherwise-invisible DNA/Al chimera should be a bad thing as it sloshes around through the circulation is never explained.

I say again, there is the *implication* that the DNA is being expressed (despite being bound to Al particles, and outside cells), and is multiplying (despite the absence of fresh sources of Al to make new copies of the DNA/Al chimera), but you won't catch anyone saying so in as many words.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 10 Aug 2012 #permalink

lilady, under the resume section of that page is, subsection 'license' there is: "We have not yet received this doctor's license history—including disciplinary actions, if any—from the state authority."

herr doktor bimler,

There seem to be a lot of odd things about his Al-DNA conjugate might-be-trouble idea. Personally I'd want to know the actual amounts involved and some solid evidence that the DNA can actually get any real distance from injection site (on top of the obvious hurdles of the DNA trying to get into a cell, integrating, being expressed... when you add all this up it looks rather incredible eh?) Orac's earlier article "Oh, no, there's DNA in my Gardasil") is worth reading - it covers most of this.

(Maybe I'll stop trying to work out if there's a cheap USB TV tuner I can get to make iMac able to show & record Freeview and get back to the science, or rather "science", of this story…)

@Lilady

I used to be a Day subscriber, but since I'm not local anymore I didn't see the point of paying for the newspaper - even the online version when the Bulletin was still free to read. I've been so busy out here I've lost touch with the political scene in CT - I hadn't realized folks had actually elected Blumenthal to the Senate. That's some scary shit right there.

@Herr doktor bimler

They're going on about the rDNA-Al complex because trashing Al is a tenet of the AV camp. I expect they'll soon start quoting Tom & Shaw's crappy aluminum papers (I can never spell her name right and don't feel like looking it up), and then ride on the 'OMG NEUROTOXIN" train.

...and it looks like my comment(s) will be held up in moderation.

Sigh.

[Dr San Hang Lee] said the DNA may cause a reaction that could lead to lethal shock

As others have already pointed out, DNA in the blood causing issues is quite a wild assumption. If it was true for any DNA, we should be falling like flies on a daily basis. Just for myself, I always have some cold virus preying on my sinuses, so I would guess that my blood DNA level is quite high, from all the infected cells getting blown up.
If it's specific of the HPV DNA, well, I won't say it's impossible, because I don't know everything, but... [citations needed], please, doctor. From other scientists, preferably.

@ Sarcha king

Immunizations were once about one of lifetime immunity

Err, no. Immunity, especially if induced by illness, was once thought to be lifelong, but that turned out not quite true.

As Chris pointed out, "booster" vaccines have been part of vaccination schedules from the beginning. It's just that only children vaccination is more or less mandatory. Adults do whatever they want and don't necessarily keep their vaccinations up to date.

Also, you overlook one reason why childhood illnesses are, well, affecting mostly children: in most societies through history, adults are in daily contact with children, their own and those of the extended family, or of the families next door... Thus exposing them continuously to the pathogen agents, and keeping their immunity well-exercised and up to date to the latest strains.
One result of mass vaccination is that a number of these wild pathogens are not circulating anymore that much (measles, chickenpox), thus not granting to most adults a "natural" vaccine booster anymore. Thus, no lifelong immunity anymore.
I won't say I'm sorry about this. The idea that children should fall ill so I can keep my immunity up and running is not very appealing to me.

By Heliantus (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Heliantus: Somewhere in the far reaches of my mind, I recall that immunity to viral illness, whether contracted by a past history of the disease or through the appropriate vaccines M-M-R and Hepatitis B vaccine, is considered lifelong. Bacterial diseases, such as D-T-P have always (or in the recent past) required booster vaccines every 10 years. Until the licensing of Tdap vaccine, the booster dose given in 10 year intervals for adolescents and adults was the Td vaccine.

I've linked to the very strict recommendations for health care workers..

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr6007.pdf

This rather long article, seems to confirm my recollections. I attended the yearly CDC teleconferences each year, until my retirement from public health eight years ago, where the Recommended Childhood and Adult Vaccine Schedule was always discussed.

My State's health department strictly followed the CDC health care workers recommendations...as did every hospital and health care facility with the County I worked, which included testing older prospective employees who were born before 1957 for the presence of positive IGG antibodies to M-M-R...and once the varicella vaccine was licensed, testing all prospective employees and employees for IGG antibodies against varicella. (Born before 1957 always got you a "pass" for M-M-R titer testing or documented history of vaccination to enter college). No "pass" was ever given, IIRC, for employment as a health care worker, even if you were born before 1957.

Very few people (health care workers or *civilians) who had the actual M-M-R diseases or the 2-dose MMR vaccine have ever been exposed to actual cases of these diseases...so they don't have the benefit of the "boosting" effect, yet they remain immune. The varicella vaccine is relatively new, so it would be hard to predict yet, if absent the boosting effect, people remain immune if they had varicella...or if they had the vaccine.

Regarding the hepatitis B vaccine; the CDC believes it confers lifelong immunity. HCWs who received the serum-derived vaccines starting 1981 and HCWs who received the recombinant DNA vaccine, starting 1991, were tested for immunity (positive surface antibody titers) immediately following the completion of the 3-dose series. When retested years later the overwhelming majority were found to be immune. The few whose titers dropped below immune status or who "lost" their surface antibody, it is believed by the CDC, will have an anamnestic boosting response, if exposed to the virus again:

http://www.immunize.org/askexperts/experts_hepb.asp

It is entirely too premature to determine whether the HPV vaccine which is manufactured in a similar way...using rDNA technology...as the hepatitis B vaccine is...might confer lifelong immunology.

These are just my thoughts...I welcome your opinion.

Grant: Type in "Sin" for first name and "Lee" for last name and scroll down to highlight "Connecticut".

The question of whether viral vaccines confer lifelong immunity came up recently. Reaching back into my immunology classes some years ago, and having dug around a bit I think the answer is that they probably do, but we aren't really sure yet, partly because of the natural boosting effect mentioned above.

Also, antibody titers are not always a good way of measuring immunity unless they are measured after an antigen challenge i.e. your antibody levels may have waned but your memory beta cells are still primed to produce more antibodies if exposed to the appropriate antigen, so you won't actually go down with the disease and if you do it is likely to be mild.

Whatever way you look at it, the idea that natural immunity is superior to vaccine-induced immunity is wrong.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Krebiozen:

"natural immunity is superior to vaccine-induced immunity"-
the meme that launched a thousand rants.
And all they've got.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

Oooh, Krebiozen! You know how often vaccine-refusers talk about the need to have titers checked before getting boosters? Are you saying that they are mistaken?

I remember someone telling me that I should have had my son tested for titers before he got a Tdap vaccine. I told that kind person that with my son's heart issues along with other medical issues I would have known if he had had pertussis. Because he may not have survived.

They just keep forgetting that many of those diseases actually cause serious harm.

@ Liz Ditz: I forgot about the anti-vaccine crowd saying that you should get titers drawn before boosters for tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis.

Another of their favorite themes is that the "natural" disease confers lifelong immunity as opposed to the "temporary" immunity conferred by vaccination. Remember the "pox parties" and the mailing of chicken pox lollipops that was advocated last year. Sid Offal made his radio debut on a cross Atlantic hook-up to a U.K. late night radio show , where he defended the pox parties and the sharing of lollipops. He got his *kishkes* handed to him, by a physician/professor of immunology/infectious diseases.

A past infection with the hepatitis A virus does confer lifelong immunity Here's the CDC Pink Book-Hepatitis A chapter; note the statement about prolonged immunity with the newer hepatitis A vaccines

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/hepa.pdf

"Both vaccines are highly effective in preventing clinical
hepatitis A. The efficacy of HAVRIX in protecting against
clinical hepatitis A was 94% among 40,000 Thai children 1 to
16 years of age who received two doses 1 month apart while
living in villages with high HAV disease rates. The efficacy
of VAQTA in protecting against clinical hepatitis A was 100%
among 1,000 New York children 2 to 16 years of age who
received one dose while living in a community with a high
HAV disease rate."

Data concerning the long-term persistence of antibody and
immune memory are limited because the current vaccines
have been available only since 1995 and 1996. Estimates
of antibody persistence derived from kinetic models of
antibody decline indicate that protective levels of anti-HAV
could be present for 20 years or longer."

Here's the "Needle Tips" publication available on the Immunize.org website. It is an excellent reference that deserves a "bookmark" on your computer:

http://www.immunize.org/nslt.d/n52/askexperts.pdf

On a personal note...I see Bill Atkinson is retiring...what a loss to the public health community. He presented at Immunization conference sponsored by the CDC and also on most of the teleconferences I attended when I worked in public health.

Liz Ditz,

Oooh, Krebiozen! You know how often vaccine-refusers talk about the need to have titers checked before getting boosters? Are you saying that they are mistaken?

That would be surprising wouldn't it. [/sarcasm] As with all diagnostic tests, the important question is what effect the results have on the management of the patient. It makes more sense to have antibody titers checked after, not before, vaccination. It's perhaps worth noting that a booster will not do any harm whether or not immunity has waned, and the risk of an adverse event following venepuncture is considerably greater than the risk of an adverse event following vaccination, though both risks are miniscule.

Incidentally, there is a cultural difference surrounding venepuncture (or should it be "venipuncture", since I do my best to use US English on this blog?) in the UK and the US, which may partially explain Andrew Wakefield's casual birthday party child phlebotomy. In the UK you do not need any qualifications to be a phlebotomist, and phlebotomists are among the lowest paid healthcare professionals you will find in a hospital, quite wrongly IMHO considering the skill required and the importance of the job. In the US I think I'm right in thinking that phlebotomists have to be trained, qualified and registered in most states.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Krebiozen:

"Venipuncture" (American style)

In order to draw blood (outside of a hospital)...you usually don't have to be licensed...although when I have ever had blood drawn in a doctor's office...it is usually drawn by a "trained" medical tech.

http://www.americanmedtech.org/Certification/Phlebotomist.aspx

In the acute care setting, there are venipuncturists, who probably undergo some training within that hospital to become certified. They draw all the bloods for tests that doctors have ordered and they "cruise" the hospital floors constantly to draw blood on patients whose doctors have ordered blood tests. If there is a "stat" order for a blood test, doctors or nurses assigned to that patient will draw the blood and make certain the ward clerk brings it to the hospital lab...stat.

IV lines/replacement of IV lines are usually done by roving teams of IV nurses..who are also trained to start a PICC line. Simple peripheral IV lines are often done by the ward nurses.

Central lines, IIRC, are only done by a doctor.

Lilady,
That sounds very similar to the UK, where phlebotomists get training (of course!) but don't legally require certification. We have phlebotomists doing ward rounds, others doing outpatient bloods and still others doing GP bloods; only a few GPs in my area have their own phlebotomist which is something I have been trying to change, as getting to the local hospital and then waiting for hours to have blood taken is a serious problem for many patients. I have often been amazed at watching a phlebotomist finding an invisible (to me) vein, calming and then getting blood out of a squirming screaming child (or sometimes an adult).

I see where my mistaken idea came from as I recall being amused at finding out that Robert O. Young isn't qualified to take blood for the bogus "live blood analysis" he performs, but that's because he is in California which, according to your link, "requires all Phlebotomy Technicians to be certified and to have a state license", even for a capillary (fingerprick) sample.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

Perhaps someone can explain why, even if it were true that having the disease conveys lifelong immunity, that would be preferable to vaccination, even with regular boosters?

The whole point of vaccination is to avoid getting the disease. Natural immunity fails at preventing the disease. By definitin. The best you can can say is that it prevents getting the disease ... Again.

By Marry Me, Mindy (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

Personally I’d want to know the actual amounts involved and some solid evidence that the DNA can actually get any real distance from injection site (on top of the obvious hurdles of the DNA trying to get into a cell, integrating, being expressed… when you add all this up it looks rather incredible eh?)

Before any of that, I would like some solid evidence that the DNA *actually exists*.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ MMM: See my posts and Krebiozen's posts above, for the difference between bacterial diseases/vaccines and viral disease/vaccines. We both tried to recall our immunology courses and my CNE courses when I worked in public health.

Basically you should have long term/possibly lifetime immunity against a particular virus...as long as that virus doesn't mutate...and there is no difference in that immunity whether if comes from "natural" infection or a vaccine. You cannot possibly catch the EXACT same cold virus that you have had before. But, cold viruses can mutate which leaves you vulnerable...and there are literally hundreds of cold viruses circulating at any given time, in the environment.

Antigenic drift and antigenic shift in circulating influenza viruses, are the reason why a new seasonal influenza vaccine is manufactured every year. The H1N1 influenza virus which appeared Spring/Summer 2009 was particular devastating to infants, young children and pregnant women. They were the ones who were offered the H1N1 vaccine first when it became available in limited supply, October 2009. Older people (quite older people), were not a priority, because they had exposure to very similar influenza strains 40-50 years before. The H1N1 strain is one of 3 strains that is now incorporated into the seasonal influenza vaccine each year, since 2010.

The smallpox vaccine (actually vaccinia vaccine) "Dryvax" which was used exclusively in the United States for childhood vaccination before 1971, when it was discontinue and used for travel to foreign countries for a number of years after that, was also used to immunize a small group of health care workers during the run-up to the WMDs scare. That is the vaccine I got when I volunteered to be vaccinated. I located the Dryvax VIS dated 2003, for you:

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/smallpox/vaccination/pdf/smallpox-vis.pdf

There have been some good studies since the WMD Dryvax vaccination program that state that immunity lasts quite a bit longer (up to 50 years), than what that old VIS states.

The bacterial diseases/vaccines do not confer longterm/ lifelong immunity...hence the 10 year booster recommendation for Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis.

Of course, I would love Ren, to come posting here, to check out and correct any misinformation I have posted here. He's the "real expert" on immunology.

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/smallpox/vaccination/pdf/smallpox-vis.pdf

Marry Me Mindy,

Perhaps someone can explain why, even if it were true that having the disease conveys lifelong immunity, that would be preferable to vaccination, even with regular boosters?

Like Denice I'm intrigued by the psychology of these odd beliefs. There does seem to be an idea that somehow childhood diseases are a rite of passage that makes a child's immune system stronger, whereas vaccines are evil and unnatural and weaken a child's immune system. However, I have never managed to figure out how a child's immune system is supposed to be clever enough to figure out that an antigen belongs to a vaccine that weakens it and not a to a pathogen that strengthens it. I also don't understand why a fever, which is about the worst common adverse event you can expect from vaccination, is somehow worse than the considerably nastier symptoms induced by most of these childhood diseases. Like most of these beliefs it doesn't bear close scrutiny and I don't really understand why so many people cling to it.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

herr doktor bimler - :-)

Same thing if the amount = 0 ;-)

Leaving aside straight-out scamming or other dubious practices for the sake of argument:

Considering the route to the brain tissue from the injection site, it seems extraordinary that he'd find any at all and then at truly minute amounts. The thing for me is that's a red flag to look closer at what he's actually finding. Or not. I wouldn't be all that surprised in trace amounts of DNA near the injection site but the idea that he can detect it in brain tissue after 6 months is a little too "striking" to go unquestioned. As far as the inquest goes it seems to me that scientific evidence there should be beyond this sort of questioning or it'd be near here nor there and thus useless to the inquiry. They need to not only present the evidence, but also the standard of it, the "state of play" of that technique in the field, etc. This need is indicated briefly in the autopsy report (or one of the other reports); I'd like see if that was laid more clearly in the inquest. Hopefully I'll get around to elaborating on this point on my blog later today. (Time and interest permitting...!)

MarryMeMindy @August 11, 5:27 pm

The best you can can say is that it prevents getting the disease … Again.

And not always: my anecdata includes a family member who contracted the chicken pox twice, fortunately both times while still young.

Krebiozen @August 11, 6:58 pm

I also don’t understand why a fever, which is about the worst common adverse event you can expect from vaccination, is somehow worse than the considerably nastier symptoms

I’m with you on that one. My own posting here on RI began with a days long discussion with a mother who thought the one instance of a somewha high fever her child suffered post-vaccination was somehow much more awful than my then-3.5-yo’s weeklong high-fevered bout with H1N1 (before vaccine was available, and we gave it to him anyway once it was just in case).

I can only imagine that there are a lot of folks out there who are lucky enough to have not had to watch their children bereally sick for several days.

Vaccines are a victim of their own success indeed.

apologies for the html fail - post activated itself while I was proofreading. Whacky laptop.
It should read:
who are lucky enough to have not had to watch their children be really sick for several days.

Chemmomo:

And not always: my anecdata includes a family member who contracted the chicken pox twice, fortunately both times while still young.

I got mumps twice as a kid. I guess one reason the vaccine is not perfect is that there are several like me who cannot become immune to i.

Chris: Mumps! My house has proof than immunitym however acquired, works. My sister (not vaccinated; it was the 70s) got the mumps. She gave them to my mother, who'd never had them. My dad and grandma had had them as children, and didn't get them.

Neither did I: I was given the MMR at the beginning of the outbreak. Through the school system. They didn't give it to my sister's grade because that's where the outbreak started.

Le sigh. We both provide evidence that anecdotes are not data.

My parents actually brought me to the base infirmary thinking it was something else. They were amazed that I could get mumps again. It was the year the vaccine became available (1968). I was miserable for a couple of weeks (only to eclipsed a couple of years by dengue fever, but that is another story).

There is someone else on this blog who has had a similar experience. And I remember, but cannot find the news report, there was a doctor during the mumps outbreak in the MidWest a few years ago who ended up with mumps multiple times during that year.

Viruses are funny things. As are our own unique immune systems.

Along with how many funny voices my twenty-one year old son can make as a dungeon master. He is between housing situations. I really hope his friends find a house for them to rent before their college classes start this fall. I want his cat out of this house (she does not get along with daughter's cat).

I only just got around to pursuing all the links in Orac's original "DNA in my Gardasil" link-farm -- post, I mean -- and found this one:
http://www.naturalnews.com/031535_HPV_screening.html

The SaneVax / Lee collaboration turns out to be far, far sleazier than I had previously realised. Not only do they claim that Gardasil has *side-effects*, but they claim that it *doesn't work*, because all the researchers who have specialised in HPV are wrong about the dangerous varieties.

Apparently there are "13 high-risk HPV genotypes" -- not just the two singled out by the NCI -- and it has taken a non-specialist in the form of the Nobel-Prize-worthy Dr Lee to work this out. Do not trust the HPV-genotyping offered by the NCI! What do *they* know?

But fret no longer, you can send a tissue sample plus $50 ("Most health insurance companies will reimburse this cost") to SaneVax and Lee for his special "short-target DNA sequencing PCR", and they will tell you whether you in danger! This is yet another of his business activities -- linked to his tests for recombinant DNA, obviously, but targetting a different consumer group.

In the same post, Orac asks Which vaccines are “necessary” and “effective”? The answer, it is increasingly clear, is "ones to be developed and sold by SaneVax and Lee".

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Doktor Bimler: Dr. Sin Hang Lee is also listed as a treatment *practitioner* for people who are HPV vaccine-damaged. Take a look at this rogue's gallery; the practitioners include a chiropractic neurologist, a nutritionist and ta-da...Dr. Rebecca Carley.

http://sanevax.org/medical-professional-listing/

Carley is possibly the craziest person I've ever met, inside or outside a psychiatric hospital:

http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/carley1.html

Update on Dr. Carley...her NYS medical license was revoked.

lilady -

Ha. I’m reading "Dr. Carley no longer practices medicine, and does NOT give medical advice. Rather, she teaches her students what she would do if she were you after reviewing your individual history of assaults to your body’s immune system" as to mean that she practices medicine, and gives medical advice, just at arm's length.

(Q: is the medical profession aware of her activities? Sounds a breach to her conditions of non-practice - ?)

Note Dr. Lee is the only one on that list that they offer no website, but ask that readers email SaneVax and that they will forward the message on. (Perhaps related to the he no longer works at Milford as they claim - ?)

@lilady

Update on Dr. Carley…her NYS medical license was revoked.

I knew it! The Masons just had to be behind it all. Dr. Carley and Dr. Sin Hang Lee should have known better than to mess with the Masons :)

By Militant Agnostic (not verified) on 11 Aug 2012 #permalink

It was the Masons, the Illuminati, The CDC Zombies attacks and the Zionists...all along.

Somehow, she got my name and my direct line at the health department and I would hear from her every few weeks. She was literally frothing at the mouth with her verbal gibberish about vaccines and the their role as the the true weapons of mass destruction. After about 15 minutes on the phone, my eyes would roll to the back of head while I slowly sunk down in chair, lost my equilibrium and would crash to the floor. If ever a nurse deserved combat pay...I surely was a candidate.

I'm curious about Chris Shaw, the aluminum-obsessed Canadian neuroscientist (and anti-Olympic activist, oddly). Does anyone know how he ended up sliding down the antivaxx rabbit-hole?

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 12 Aug 2012 #permalink

HPV is nasty. I had a large chunk of cervix removed a long time ago as a result. Personally, I advocate all boys and girls getting either one of the two HPV vaccines - boys can spread it unknowingly (especially if unwilling to do the right thing and use condoms), girls can get it (if they are raped or bullied into not using condoms for some stupid starry-eyed reason)...or either party might be drunk/high and forget.

@lilady,
I glanced at that page earlier and just took another look, which sent me on a diversion about acetaminophen, not vaccines, supposedly causing autism, and also asthma (which caught my attention as salicylates give me asthma attacks). This seemed odd coming from aluminum-obsessed Shaw, until I realized that whale.to had goofed and put links to a different Dr. Shaw on the same page. Anyway, there must be some back-story to a neuroscientist at a real university producing such poor research. I shall continue digging.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 12 Aug 2012 #permalink

Off topic to the current discussion but I have a new post up, it's not to my standard of quality but better to push something based on a sufficiently complex article than wait 5 weeks until I do a review of 5-6 articles.

http://www.securivm.ca/2012/08/bonjour-lecteurs-pour-ce-blogue-je-vais…

plenty of neuroscience and neuroimaging, 99% of it in english (the first line just says that I'll do a version in french next friday) but it's not complete; I skipped the neuroimaging result for the pattern matching test and focused instead on the Raven Standard Progressive Matrix.

Enjoy
Alain

By Alain (aka Aut… (not verified) on 12 Aug 2012 #permalink

Going further into the Google, it does look as if Dr Sin Hang Lee's genotype test for the different HPV strains is an important part of the backstory behind his issues with the virology mainstream that has failed to recognise his genius.

In 2008 he was suing the FDA (through his company HiFi DNA Tech) because they refused to endorse his test. The FDA argued that Lee had showed them insufficient evidence that his test was any more specific or reliable than existing tests, what with extravagant claims not being enough on their own. Evidently their argument was convincing since the court found for the FDA, and in 2009 we find Lee appealing to the 2nd Circuit Court, amid a flurry of accusations of conspiracies and conflicts-of-interest between FDA officials and the suppliers of tests that are endorsed.

Conspiracy is also responsible for the NEJM declining to publish a manuscript from Lee on the economics of HPV screening (and how much better it would be with his test). We find him harassing the editorial board here, and appealing to a professional group that he believes can over-rule them

There was a Dr Sin Hang Lee, of Connecticut, sacked from a shared pathology practice in 2003. In 2006-2010 he was (unsuccessfully) suing the employment lawyers of that practice for allowing him to sign a revised employment agreement. Of course there might be *multiple* pathologists of that name in CT with the habit of employment-loss-related litigation.

Now reading Alain's post.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 12 Aug 2012 #permalink

@Herr Doc
"Ken, you ignorant little plonker, you might want to look at the side-effects of depo-provera, which the dead women was also receiving."
Orac DID NOT MENTION THIS-his blogs are long enough without having to source more.

@Kreb- At 26+ minutes into the video Chris Shaw actually states and uses the term "rabbit hole" and explains why he went down it.

The video is more detailed and comprehensive and goes into
depth about the research which I'm sure Orac would love to
demolish, maybe Krebs too.

@ ken:

Here’s the prescribing information for Depo Provera, which has a “boxed warning” about Bone Mineral Density being affected by the drug.

http://labeling.pfizer.com/ShowLabeling.aspx?id=522

“It is unknown if use of Depo-Provera Contraceptive Injection during adolescence or early adulthood, a critical period of bone accretion,will reduce peak bone mass and increase the risk for osteoporotic fracture in later life. (5.1)”

On other medical sites, I learn that doctors are quite reluctant to prescribe Depo Provera for adolescent girls ages 13-18 because of the unknown consequences and unknown increased risks for osteoporosis/fractures as these women age.

Scan the Prescribing Information document to see that each and every one of the symptoms that the mother reported for Jasmine…and that she later attributed to the HPV vaccine…have been reported by Pfizer in the Prescribing Information for Depo Provera.

ken: Orac DID NOT MENTION THIS-his blogs are long enough without having to source more.
So you couldn't be bothered reading anything about the inquest?
Please explain why you believe your opinion to be of either interest or value.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 13 Aug 2012 #permalink

@Herr D-My opinion does not matter- I never said it did-I am not a scientist. You have the option of ignoring my posts.
Loss makes people act irrationally at times w/o substantial evidence.

sheepmilker:

Christopher Shaw is antivaccine. He was one of the orgaizers of the so-called Vaccine Safety Conference that took place in Jamaica last year. The list of speakers(http://www.vaccinesafetyconference.com/speakers.html) makes that clear i.e. such luminaries as Russell Blaylock, Barbara Loe Fisher and Wakefield.
Another clues: Shaw's bio for this conference proudly states that his youngest child is not vaccinated.

I am ashamed that this tool is on the same faculty of medicine that I graduated from.

True, you are under no obligation to have an *informed* opinion before sharing it.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 13 Aug 2012 #permalink

You have the option of ignoring my posts.

Or mocking them ruthlessly. That works, too.

(Of course, this from the wag who came up with "Provide links not rhetoric- you are getting tiresome.")

Thanks TBruce for the above link.
I prefer Dr. Blaylock's evidence to those of wannabes narad and herrd.
Jealous? because this is your only audience-ha ha.

Thanks for the info TBruce. Yikes.

Somewhat appropriate:

What's a physiologist?
A pharmacologist who doesn't know the dose!

By sheepmilker (not verified) on 13 Aug 2012 #permalink

Jealous? because this is your only audience-ha ha.

You would appear not to be particularly familiar with the meaning of thiis word.

@ Narad:

Yours truly addresses the wag @ the Jamy Ian Swiss thread.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 13 Aug 2012 #permalink

@narad-you are still not a convincing source.
If my wife had breast cancer I would not send her to a neurosurgeon. Extrapolate from there. You are w/o substantial credentials to bother to listen to.

You are w/o substantial credentials to bother to listen to.

I'm sorry, what are you babbling about?

ken and sheepmilker & TBruce,
Thanks for the links re: Chris Shaw which I shall peruse. In regard to Blaylock, a couple of years ago I spent a lot of time deconstructing one of his articles about the Simpsonwood conference, looking at his references and going back to the original source material. He had twisted and/or misinterpreted so much of this that I came to the unavoidable conclusion that he is either deliberately dishonest or he is an idiot, or possibly both.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 13 Aug 2012 #permalink

I came to the unavoidable conclusion that he is either deliberately dishonest or he is an idiot, or possibly both.

I'm going with "both."

I’m going with “both.”

Ugh. I like the bit about flu vaccine causing Guillain–Barré syndrome. You know what causes far more cases of Guillain–Barré syndrome? Flu. It's a bit like complaining about the broken ribs a seat belt can cause in an RTA but ignoring the damage that hurtling through the windshield can cause.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 13 Aug 2012 #permalink

ken,

You are w/o substantial credentials to bother to listen to.

Why, then, should we bother to listen to you? By your own argument we should ignore everything you have to say until you present relevant credentials.

Ugh. I like the bit about flu vaccine causing Guillain–Barré syndrome.

I think my favorite so far is "if you vaccinate the entire country particularly concentrating on the young people we may end up with a mass problem of infertility in our country." Deagle doesn't seem to have picked up on the trope-nod. The looming schizophrenia epidemic isn't bad, though.

@narad
This is not a blaylock interview-this is a sham pretense of an interview to discredit the man.

I'm confused, ken...are you claiming that the interview itself is fabricated or that it distorts Blaylock's true viewpoints?

This is not a blaylock interview-this is a sham pretense of an interview to discredit the man.

I really don't think he needs any assistance in that area.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 13 Aug 2012 #permalink

Herr Doktor - one wonders what he'd think of those folks who offer shark cells for autism etc (mentioned previously by our esteemed host)

This is not a blaylock interview-this is a sham pretense of an interview to discredit the man.

Oh, do elaborate.

That interview is as mad as a box of frogs.

Oh, yeah, and the dendritic cell which is kind of like half an immune cell, half nerve cell?yeah.

That interview is as mad as a box of frogs.

Since ken (and I can empathize with losing the bulk of one's majuscule fortune in the Great Alphabet Crash, I promise) seems to have insinuated one of a couple of things, the audio is here. Now, existence aside, I'm not sure where he would intend to go other than that Blaylock was somehow duped. Nonetheless, he was right back on the show on August 18.

Re the shark fin pills, I almost hope that meme gets around just to reduce the demand for shark fins in supplements (as well as soup).

losing the bulk of one’s majuscule fortune in the Great Alphabet Crash
Clearly it was a mistake to invest all one's wealth in uncial script.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 14 Aug 2012 #permalink

Loath though I am to harp on Dr Sin Hang Lee, I just can't give him up. Here, the FDA responds to his request that he be allowed to make stronger claims for his cancer-preventative tea. One page of the document (my emphasis):
---------------------------------------------------------------
g) You claim that some studies are more relevant that others in considering the total body of evidence in support of a relationship between green tea and cancer because some study populations had access to higher quality green tea than others. Your assertions along this line include the following.
•The articles by Suzuki et al. (2004) and Sonoda et al. (2004) should not have been used by the FDA because they were conducted in northern rural Japan where the quality of green tea is of poor quality.
• Green tea consumers in Los Angeles know where to get quality green teas because they are descended from the Middle Kingdom of China, which values quality of green tea, as opposed to the residents of Miyagi, Japan who filled out the Suzuki et al. (2004) questionnaire.
•The Sonoda et al. study finding no relationship between consumption of green tea and reduced risk of prostate cancer is flawed because the cases came from two regions of Japan that consume green tea of very different quality because of different access to quality green tea -- one region borders a famous tea producing region, the other does not produce tea.
•Jian et al. should have received more consideration because it was conducted in a region of China that has access to high-grade green tea with more EGCG by weight than lower quality green tea.

In support of your arguments, you reference a picture of a tea peddler in Hangzhou, China and a map of tea producing regions of Japan and two studies (Fujiki et al. 2003; Fujiki 2005) which you claim are relevant to the question of quality of green tea consumed in different locations of Japan and its effects on cancer prevention.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 14 Aug 2012 #permalink

Clearly it was a mistake to invest all one’s wealth in uncial script.

You don't even want to imagine what happens when one forgets to close out a long position on raw serifs in the futures market. Cash settlement? Heh, not these people.

This strikes me as a particularly amusing example of "aluminum phobia" among ani-vaxxers. Exactly what IS it supposed to prove when organic tissue is found to contain ONE OF THE MOST COMMON ELEMENTS ON EARTH?

David N. Brown

By David N. Brown (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

It proves there's the potential to exploit the gullible.

Time travel rears its ugly head--my response to david at 1:47 arrives at 1:46. I blame Chopra...

David:
Just for clarity: the CNS tissue in question was run through a battery of IHC assays. Morin was not used, rather a variation of a stain used by Walton and colleagues based on their AD studies. We never claimed that aluminum caused the CNS damage or the death, merely that it was
there. We also did not claim it came from the vaccine since there are numerous sources of aluminum, vaccines being only one such. As for the HPV antibody assays: these used a commercial antibody to a piece of HPV 16 protein. What is is doing in the CNS samples is anyone's guess
at this point. Maybe it is common, maybe not. Maybe, as you suggest, it is a fluke of this particular assay or our technique. We'll know more when we have more samples from other cases.

I realize that you enjoy ad hominem attacks on others and that much of your readership seems to relish the same. Fine, enjoy, but don't confuse these with discussions about science. An ad hominem comment (Latin for "to the man"), as you know, is a logical fallacy as it attempts to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.

Re methods: If you, or your readers, want to see the methods, great, I'm happy to send them since they
are hardly "secret." or "mysterious". The same applies to our other assays for autoimmune markers. Otherwise, I'm going to assume that your commentary is not about the science but about scoring points with a built-in cheering section.

Finally, in regard to the ad hominem stuff: apart from the
entertainment value, there is really very little need to insult those you disagree with. You are, after all, a scientist and a professor. Therefore, it might be nice if you acted a bit more professorial and professional. Let your readers do the insults if they wish, but it is really beneath you.

With regards.

PS. I haven't published on shark fin or anything of the sort, but thanks to one of your readers for asking.

PPS. UBC doesn't "sack" me because it actually is an institution that believes in academic freedom. Academic freedom, at least here, means the freedom to question all the so-called received wisdom in any field. Without the ability to do so, science could never advance. I
direct your readers to Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific
Revolutions for a discussion of how science progresses.
.

By Chris Shaw (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Chris Shaw wrote: "We also did not claim it came from the vaccine since there are numerous sources of aluminum, vaccines being only one such."

Could you please quantify the relative exposure of people to aluminum? Here are some facts to start with:

"During the first 6 months of life, infants could receive about
4 milligrams of aluminum from vaccines. That’s not very much: a milligram is one-thousandth of a gram and a gram is the weight of one-fifth of a teaspoon of water. During the same period, babies will also receive about 10 milligrams of aluminum in breast milk, about 40 milligrams in infant formula, or about 120 milligrams in soy-based formula."

And:

"By the time children become adults, they will have
accumulated between 50 and 100 milligrams of aluminum, almost all of which comes from food."

http://www.chop.edu/export/download/pdfs/articles/vaccine-education-cen…

Can you please tell me how much aluminum is in the HPV shots? For the other readers who may not be willing to wait for your response, "Gardasil contains 225 mcg (0.225 mg) of aluminum per dose."

0.225 mg x 3 is less than 1 mg. Food provides 50-100 mg. Which is likely to be more important?

By Broken Link (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Time travel rears its ugly head–my response to david at 1:47 arrives at 1:46. I blame Chopra…

I don't, I imagine that the data structure for some reason is a stack with minute-binned pops. Then again, the last I checked, the NG monkeys still hadn't figured out how to set a clock. Let's see... 22:00:00 EDT at the press of "submit."

Yup, they've actually managed to worsen the previous four-minute error.

Your numbers are no doubt correct, but you neglect the route of administration which may be key to the extent and timing of any toxicity. Dietary aluminum, except in those with insufficient kidney function, is rapidly removed by the kidneys.Where it is not, as in the former cases of dialysis associated encephalopathy, is highly neurotoxic. Injected aluminum, insofar as the work of Prof. Romain Gherardi and his colleagues is correct, goes into the draining lymphatics and from there is picked up by circulating macrophages. It is apparently transported by these cells into the CNS. Given that we don't know what level of aluminum or aluminum complexes are toxic in CNS, this may be problematic. Or not...however, given that aluminum tends to be toxic to most biological systems on Earth, it may be a safe bet that it is a bad thing to have inside your brain. I'd suggest you refer to the work of Dr. Chris Exley on this topic about aluminum in general or Dr. Dan Perl, a neuropathologist, who has noted the correlation of aluminum deposits and NFT in AD patients. Of course, the latter is only correlation, but could mean that it participates in the cascade of events known to occur in AD. I'd also refer you to the work of Dr. Walton who has a model of AD in aged rats. Her work, incidentally, is about dietary (water) based aluminum exposure so may be relevant to your initial query.

By Chris Shaw (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

This could be a good point to note that Dr Shaw is not responsible for the distorted way that SaneVax or the NZ media have misrepresented his testimony to the Renata inquest. I disagree with the Tomljenovic / Shaw aluminium-autism paper but in future I'll try not to be unfair about his work.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Thanks for the last. Please, readers, and Orac, feel free to contact me at cashawlab@gmail.com. As long as you keep it respectful, I'm happy to address any of your questions/concerns/critiques. If I don't know the answer (and this may be too common, alas), I'll tell you so.

By Chris Shaw (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Dr. Shaw:

An ad hominem comment (Latin for “to the man”), as you know, is a logical fallacy as it attempts to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.

I believe they are discussing your shoddy research methods. Much like it was discussed here.

Then there is your claim of finding actual human papillomavirus in the young girl's tissues, when there are none in the vaccine. So from the CDC Pink Book's HPV chapter:

The antigen for both vaccines is the L1 major capsid protein of HPV, produced by using recombinant DNA technology. L1 proteins self-assemble into noninfectious, nononcogenic units called virus-like particles (VLP).

And Gardisil in particular:

Each 0.5-mL dose of HPV4 contains 20 μg HPV 6 L1 protein, 40 μg HPV 11 L1 protein, 40 μg HPV 16 L1 protein, and 20 μg HPV 18 L1 protein.

Dr. Shaw, is it an "ad hominem" to ask how come you cannot tell the difference between the virus and one of its proteins?

Oh, by the way: how was your trip to Jamaica? Was it all work and no play, or did you get to relax a bit?

There are other routes for aluminum to enter the body. After all, it is one of the most abundant elements on earth. I'd appreciate you directing me to references that show that aluminum tends to be toxic to most biological systems on earth. I would think that biological systems must have evolved to deal with the regular exposure to aluminum from many sources besides food. What about scratches which accumulate dirt? Dirt is full of aluminum. What about breathing? - dust contains aluminum. How is that aluminum cleared from the body?

You say that dialysis associated encephalopathy suggests that Al is neurotoxic. Turns out that the IV administered is very high in Al. "Dialysis fluid aluminum was high at 140 microg/liter. " Wow. That's a HUGE amount of Al compared to the total amount administered in vaccines - people on dialysis are given large doses, over long periods of time. The dose makes the poison.

By Broken Link (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

I find it amusing and particularly telling that Dr. Shaw decided to leave as soon as HPV DNA was mentioned...

Why not discuss it here, Dr. Shaw?

Too bad he's gone: I was wondering what he thought of his colleague, Dr Tomjenovic, being a guest at the Progressive Radio Network today: is that an appropriate venue for a serious researcher?

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

It is telling that he does not wish to answer questions on a public board. I know he goes to anti-vaccine conference (like the one in Jamaica), but does he present papers at actual scientific conferences?

Perhaps he should write a paper on how he found the actual virus in the tissues and present it at the next annual meeting of the American Society of Virology. I am sure they would be delighted to hear how virus like particles turned into full viruses.

Then there is your claim of finding actual human papillomavirus in the young girl’s tissues, when there are none in the vaccine

Ah, a journalist reported that Dr Shaw found viral DNA, but it is far more likely that the journalist -- who may not even have attended the inquest -- was simply conflating a hearsay summary of Dr Shaw's testimony with earlier claims from Dr Lee.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Dr. Shaw seems not to understand what an ad hominem attack is. Hint: Most insults are not ad hominems; rather, an ad hominem is an argument that states that the person making it is wrong because of some characteristic of that person. For instance, saying that Chris Shaw is wrong because he's an idiot (or, less inflammatory, because he's a Republican or Democrat, for instance) would be an ad hominem attack. However, saying that Chris Shaw is ignorant and citing a bad argument he made about a scientific topic as evidence to support that characterization of him would not be an ad hominem.

See:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html

Dr. Shaw just doesn't like what I said about his testimony, as reported in New Zealand news sources, which is what I had, and his previous activities or my mentioning his previous activities in support of the antivaccine movement. For example, as one might recall, Dr. Shaw co-authored an astonishingly bad review article trying to link aluminum vaccine adjuvants to the rising prevalence of autism:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/12/08/and-global-warming-is-caus…

The above links to a detailed deconstruction of Dr. Shaw's review article without a single ad hominem in it, although the criticism of what Dr. Shaw writes is harsh and somewhat sarcastic—and deservedly so, given how hideously bad the article is.

In any case, let's look at what Dr. Shaw is reported to have said during his testimony:

Neuroscientist Professor Christopher Shaw of the University of Columbia in Vancouver told the inquest via video-link today that he was sent Ms Renata's brain tissue to test.

He said there was aluminium in all the samples he tested and there were some abnormalities in the samples.

The human papillomavirus (HPV16) was found in her brain, which could have only got there through the vaccine, Prof Shaw said.

Gardasil is given to prevent some strains of HPV, and so a small amount of the virus is in the vaccine.

Mrs Renata asked Prof Shaw if the vaccine was likely to have caused her daughter's death.

He said there was a "biological plausibility" that that was the case because of the abnormalities in her brain he had examined.

However, he could not say conclusively that was the cause of her death.

This would seem to conflict with what Dr. Shaw just said above:

As for the HPV antibody assays: these used a commercial antibody to a piece of HPV 16 protein. What is is doing in the CNS samples is anyone’s guess

at this point. Maybe it is common, maybe not. Maybe, as you suggest, it is a fluke of this particular assay or our technique. We’ll know more when we have more samples from other cases.

So which is it, one wonders? That the HPV "could only have gotten there through the vaccine" or that what the HPV "is doing there is anyone's guess"? Does Dr. Shaw even have the slightest clue just how tiny the amount of HPV DNA is in Gardasil, given that it takes an incredibly sensitive nested PCR reaction to detect it? Here's a hint: It's certainly not enough that it can somehow find its way into neurons (or other CNS cells) and express actual HPV 16 protein. Not even close. It's rather disappointing that a neuroscientist would not realize this instantly.

A far more likely explanation for the detection of HPV 16 protein is a false positive, which is why I'd want to know the positive and negative controls. Certainly, the positive result can be explained by numerous other things other than the HPV vaccine; yet apparently Dr. Shaw testified that that was the only way it could have gotten there. If Dr. Shaw's testimony has been accurately reported, then it's hard not to conclude that he is clueless about some very basic aspects of molecular biology.

And saying that is not an ad hominem. It is making an inference from Dr. Shaw's reported sworn testimony. If that sworn testimony was not accurately reported, then now is the time for Dr. Shaw to correct it for the record.

Dammit! Did Shaw leave already? I have a bajillion questions about his aluminium papers methods.

Funny how he questions our host's professionalism when he is taking advantage of a desperate woman using his academic credentials and institution to do so.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Then there is your claim of finding actual human papillomavirus in the young girl’s tissues, when there are none in the vaccine. So from the CDC Pink Book’s HPV chapter:

The antigen for both vaccines is the L1 major capsid protein of HPV, produced by using recombinant DNA technology. L1 proteins self-assemble into noninfectious, nononcogenic units called virus-like particles (VLP).

D'oh! I should have looked that up. It would have made my post so much more effective.

In all fairness, it's possible that the antibody Dr. Shaw used was to the L1 protein, but unless he comes back and tells us we have no way of ever knowing. Even if that were the antibody that Dr. Shaw used, it wouldn't change the basic ridiculousness of the assumptions that underlie his claim that the HPV protein he detected (even if not spurious, which it almost certainly was spurious).

It's truly sad to see someone who appears to have been a decent scientist before descent so rapidly into antivaccine crankery. It depresses me to observe it. One can only hope there's still time for him to turn away from the Dark Side.

What makes it worse is that I only have an undergraduate degree in engineering, though with some graduate classes in applied math and I have only ever taken one biology course.

But even I know that modern vaccines are not made by just disabling a virus with formaldehyde, etc. Oh, and I also know that the CDC Pink Book has very clear descriptions of how the vaccines are made.

(perhaps it helps that I am addicted to Dr. Racaniello's three podcasts. Much of it goes over my head, but I do learn quite a bit.)

To all:
Alas, I don't really have a lot of time to linger on any blogsite, this one included.

By Chris Shaw (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Injected aluminum, insofar as the work of Prof. Romain Gherardi and his colleagues is correct, goes into the draining lymphatics and from there is picked up by circulating macrophages.

The correctness of Prof. Gherardi is indeed a pivotal assumption. It has been called into question in earlier RI comment threads. Reservations about Gherardi's work stem from (a) his choice of Medical Hypotheses as a place to publish ['poisoning-the-well' fallacy, I know], and (b) the non-reporting of his 'macrophagic myofasciitis' clinical entity outside of his own research group.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Continuing...
I'm not trying to duck any serious discussion, but, honestly, a blog is not the place for scientific reviews. One reason for this is simple: if I provide this blog with the complete ms (still in preparation), then it is not publishable in a main stream journal as it would be considered prior publication. How about this: once we submit it and, if, it is accepted, I'll post it here and David and others can shed it to their heart's content? In fact, David, I'd be happy to suggest you as a reviewer. Of course, you'd have to park your "attitude" at the door and do a real scientific review, but you have the background and training to do so, right? Perhaps you'd reject the ms for various reasons and claim it was "awful", but at least in a peer review, unlike here, you'd have to be very specific about why. And cite references, etc. You've been holding AMA and JIB to task for publishing our recent studies, so how about trying to make the science better by offering some constructive criticism before, rather than after, the fact? I'll happily return the favour and would be only to happy to review any of your estrogen receptor studies. Fair enough?
One correction: we didn't find the virus, we found something the 16 antibody binds to. The HPV 18 ab was negative. No doubt various reviewers will deal with this issue in great detail when we do submit. For everyone's information, the JIB paper had three rounds of reviews by three reviewers and then was gone over by the editor and associate editor in detail. Maybe some would say they are all idiots, but I'd venture to guess that they actually have at least the scientific credentials of Orac and got where they are by having some scientific knowledge. I invite the readers to check the editorial board and convince themselves of this.

Finally, my offer stands: my email is posted and any who want to discuss anything related to our work are free to write me.
Cheers.

By Chris Shaw (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

PS: Yes we do present at "regular" conferences. For example, the various Keele meetings on aluminum (2009 and 2011) and the recent International Conference on Autoimmunity (May), neither "anti vax" meetings by any standard.

By Chris Shaw (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

The correctness of Prof. Gherardi is indeed a pivotal assumption. It has been called into question in earlier RI comment threads. Reservations about Gherardi’s work stem from (a) his choice of Medical Hypotheses as a place to publish ['poisoning-the-well' fallacy, I know], and (b) the non-reporting of his ‘macrophagic myofasciitis’ clinical entity outside of his own research group.

I'm not surprised HDB, after all Shaw also invoked Exley but left out Talbot, Priest, Keith and Flarend just to name a few whose works are relevant to IV and IM injected aluminium, excretion and tissue retention patterns.

It’s truly sad to see someone who appears to have been a decent scientist before descent so rapidly into antivaccine crankery. It depresses me to observe it. One can only hope there’s still time for him to turn away from the Dark Side.

Sorry Orac, I'm afraid that Shaw is going to be providing blog fodder for a long time to come.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Dr. Shaw,

Spare me. My blog post criticizing your review article was quite detailed and explained exactly why its arguments are wrong. Certainly, I haven't seen you refute any of the critiques in it. In particular, your identifying spurious correlations and trying to infer potential causation from them was one of the biggest howlers I've ever seen in the peer-reviewed literature anywhere anytime. Clearly, whoever reviewed the manuscript did not include a competent epidemiologist. That's a newbie mistake that a first year epidemiology student should recognize.

"a blog is not the place for scientific reviews"

Heard that one before, I'm afraid, and for me it doesn't ring true.

I'm a scientist. A blog is just a means of communication - just like email. That it's open doesn't make what is said "wrong".

You might like to look at your UBC colleague Prof. Rosie Redfield's blog by way of example: http://rrresearch.fieldofscience.com/ (I'd encourage you to try talking to her.)

Personally, I would encourage you to continue. By limiting yourself to email I feel you'll be making yourself part of the problem rather it's solution.

A problem (for us in New Zealand too) is that media reports have tied your and Lee's testimonies to the vaccine (something you claim you didn't do) - not necessarily through explicit statements but (also) implied through headlines or simply not explicitly saying otherwise, etc., as is often the case with the media.

People have been trying to get an accurate picture by what means they can. If you limit yourself to email, people can only return to trying to get an accurate picture by what means they can - and the situation you are objecting to. In the meantime there will be no reasonable way to present an accurate picture to people.

(One frustration I have expressed elsewhere is the lack of transcripts of the inquiry, which would have been very helpful to clarify—or correct as the case may be—media reports.)

You write that you don't want to talk because a manuscript is "still in preparation" - forgive me for asking, and I realise there are deeper issues this being involved in an inquest, but do you think it appropriate to present work that has yet to be tested by peers, as such, at an inquest? As a (tentative) parallel, would you consider what is known as "publication by press release" sound? (There someone talks to media ahead of the paper being available for critical examination.)

A issue to all this is once an idea is placed into the general public's mind they can be very hard to remove and can cause considerable problems.

taking advantage of a desperate woman using his academic credentials and institution to do so

That's hardly fair. Dr Shaw was invited into the imbroglio, presumably through Hilary Butler; he is above-board in the correspondence that Ms Renata's parents made available.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

PS: Yes we do present at “regular” conferences. For example, the various Keele meetings on aluminum (2009 and 2011) and the recent International Conference on Autoimmunity (May), neither “anti vax” meetings by any standard.

Not anti-vax huh? Let's see what you presented at the 2009 Keele Meeting: One of your dodgy aluminium studies: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0162013409001809 And the 2012 International Congress on Autoimmunity. Shaw chaired and presented and his little post-doc presented in Vaccine Safety. Also chaired by none other than Claire Dwoskin the matron saint of Jamaican anti-vaxx junkets and who told John Stossel on Fox, "Vaccines are a holocaust of poison on our children’s brains and immune systems.”

Oh no, not anti-vaxx at all.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Dr. Shaw:

For example, the various Keele meetings on aluminum (2009 and 2011) and the recent International Conference on Autoimmunity (May),

Looking at "International Conferences on Autoimmunity", I found one last September. So using the search terms "International Conference on Autoimmunity May shaw", I found this:
http://www.westonaprice.org/childrens-health/vaccinations

Where Ms. Manookian tells us:

In May 2012, I attended a conference on autoimmunity and vaccine safety and listened to a dozen scientists present their research showing a wide spectrum of harm following vaccination, ranging from brain damage including cognitive impairment and behavioral changes, to autism, autoimmune disease, obesity and even infertility.

You might want to be a bit more clear about which "scientific" conferences you attended. Oh, wait, I found it:
2nd International Symposium on Vaccines

Sponsored by the "THE DWOSKIN FAMILY FOUNDATION." Isn't that the same family who sponsored your conference in Jamaica, and includes a member who has been a board member of NVIC, with an email address that starts "novaccine4me"?

That’s hardly fair. Dr Shaw was invited into the imbroglio, presumably through Hilary Butler; he is above-board in the correspondence that Ms Renata’s parents made available.

I disagree HDB; Shaw is operating outside his expertise and Mrs. Renata was on a fishing expedition. Dr. Shaw could have easily and ethically informed her that the aluminium present in a Gardasil vaccine would not cause neurotoxicity as he should know that the brain is the last tissue of deposition and given the minute quantity of aluminium in the vaccine is not enough to cross the toxic threshhold. Instead he jumped at the chance and already, his testimony for Mrs. Renata and what he is reporting here has inconsistencies.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Chris, I have a link-heavy comment awaiting moderation that repeats some of the same information you posted. Guess what is at the bottom of the programme? A screening of the "Greater Good".

By Science Mom (not verified) on 15 Aug 2012 #permalink

Yes, Science Mom, it looks likes it directly contradicts his claim: "neither “anti vax” meetings by any standard."

Looking at the link provided by herr doktor bimler, I see Dr. Shaw wrote: "Some of the bahavioural symptoms (memory lapses; tingling in hands and feet; unilateral weakness in arm) are symptomatic of neurological disorders."

Actually they are symptoms my son experienced with his genetic heart disorder! What do you think happens with tachycardia and reduced blood flow out of the heart! I am just an engineer, and even I know that reduced blood to the extremities and brain cause these symptoms.

Ms. Renata responds to reasonable and standard request to talk to and test family members for the possibility of a cardiac electrical conduction issue by saying: "Since a sample has already been sent to the Cardiac Inherited Diseases Group for testing, how will talking to us assist in the sampling for a molecular abnormality?"

Well I can answer that, as a parent of a child with an inherited cardiac disease that has never shown up in our family histories: some of those molecular abnormalities have to do with things that can only be seen in living patients, not just tissue. If they do an EKG on each family member, and also do some metabolic screens that narrows down what genetics they need to look for. Genetic testing is not like it is on police forensics shows.

By the way, next Monday morning we have family echocardiogram session at the cardiologist. My son is going in to see how his heart is several weeks after surgery, and the rest of us are being screened to see if we have the abnormal anatomy. My son's genetic test did not shown any of the eighteen known sequences for the disorder.

Mea culpa time. I did refer to Chris Shaw as a "tool". Perhaps that wasn't the nicest thing to do, but keep in mind the Urban Dictionary's definition of a tool as: "One who lacks the mental capacity to know he is being used."

As I am fond of saying: "It's not an insult, it's a description."

One reason for this is simple: if I provide this blog with the complete ms (still in preparation), then it is not publishable in a main stream journal as it would be considered prior publication.

I seem to have missed the part where anyone requested any manuscripts in preparation. There is certainly no embargo on things that don't exist, nor is discussing aspects of one's work "prior publication." Pretend it's a poster presentation.

Aluminium's bioavailability is poor... about 0.1-0.3 percent of what is ingested. An adult absorbs, on average, about 7ug per day. A baby, about 1ug per day, a bit more with formula and soy fed babies...

A 6 week old baby in New Zealand at least, even premature babies weight 1-2 kg, gets injected with 1,320ug of aluminium… repeated at 3 months and 5 months… a total of 3,960 ug… over 108 days… that’s an average of 36 times the expected amount absorbed via food, in bolus doses.

It is not scientifically defensible to claim that the amount of aluminium injected into babies is the same as consumed via food... as a tiny fraction of what's in the food gets absorbed.

Ron Law,

It is not scientifically defensible to claim that the amount of aluminium injected into babies is the same as consumed via food… as a tiny fraction of what’s in the food gets absorbed.

The insoluble aluminum salts injected into muscle as vaccine adjuvants slowly dissolve in interstitial fluid and are excreted by the kidneys. At no time do blood aluminum levels reach anything even close to toxic levels after vaccination, and no one has managed to reproduce Dr. Romain Gherardi's work that he claims shows that aluminum nanoparticles are transported from muscle to the brain by macrophages, something that seems extremely unlikely to me.

Only a small proportion of aluminum in food is absorbed, it is true, but there is a great deal of aluminum in food and in medicines. If 0.2% of ingested aluminum is absorbed, and 5,000 to 10,000 µg are ingested every day, I make that an average of 15 µg absorbed each and every day. Someone taking an aluminum antacid may absorb as much as 5,000 µg (0.1% of 5 grams) every day without ill effects. Compare that to the 4,000 µg injected in vaccines over a period of 6 months, or about 22 µg per day, which is only absorbed slowly into the bloodstream. By the way, what exactly do you mean by "a bolus dose"? See Aluminium Toxicokinetics: An Updated MiniReview for more details of aluminum toxicokinetics.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

Also see Flarend 1997 for some elegant work on aluminum toxicokinetics rabbits using radioisotopes of aluminum.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

In rabbits, I meant, New Zealand White rabbits, no less. Aluminum, rabbit-holes, rabbits, is there a pattern developing here?

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Krebiozen, it puzzles me why an aluminium researcher like Chris Shaw does not use aluminium radioisotopes in his work. And how he should know what you stated yet entertained Mrs. Renata anyhow.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Science Mom,
Yikes, he's a bit further down that rabbit-hole than I realized. Point taken.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

... while son is doing post-surgical cardiac rehab. Something the late young Ms. Renata should have had a chance to do years ago.

Dr. Shaw, you should seriously try to present a paper at this conference:
http://www.vaccinecongress.com/

Perhaps you can convince the Dwoskin Family Foundation to pay your way as a way to present in a mainstream medical conference. And if you survive the feedback, you might get just a wee bit more respect. Or perhaps you'll open your mind to learning how to become a more competent researcher.

@ Science Mom, 9:37 AM

It puzzles me why an aluminium researcher like Chris Shaw does not use a stain that is specific for aluminum. He keeps publishing using Morin stains when it is known that Morin crossreacts with iron, zinc, and scandium (which is sometimes used in aluminum processing). There are control assays used by competent researchers to exclude these signals (Perl's stain for iron, which doesn't detect Al, to rule out that specific crossreaction) however Shaw does not do mention any of these controls in his published papers. Shoddy.

He also believes that Gherardi's work with macrophagic myofacsciitis in genetically restricted human populations constitutes replication of his mouse data... Astonishing. Neither I nor any of my colleagues can replicate his mouse data, even though we inject over 400 times more Alum than he reports, unless we inject directly into the spinal column. Yet he insists that his work is defensible and replicated based on Gherardi's slop - which if anything looks like a genetic defect in metabolism in a very very small population.

Crap science all around.

By Jay Chaplin (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

Interesting Jay, I wasn't aware of the Morin stain non-specificity. I would like to talk to you if you're game. You can go on my blog and click the "contact us" link. No pressure, only if you like.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

Happy to.

By Jay Chaplin (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Chris Shaw,

If the manuscript issue is a concern: a number of biologists have deposited papers in the arXiv preprint archive before formal publication. At this point in time, I believe you need to clear this with the journal, but it can be done. Rosie Redfield, who I mentioned earlier, did this with her critique of the ‘arsenic life’ work.

Did you have chance to talk with Rosie Redfield? (I feel a little guilty in mentioning her name without asking first if she's happy to help; I just hope my mentioning her is OK.)

Alison, he has not addressed the question... he's given inflated adult data in answering a question about babies whose intake is only 1ug per day from food... and babies receive their im doses over 3.5 months, not 6 as stated. Also, the higher the dose ingested, the lower the proportion absorbed... 0.01% or so... citrate and other ligands also moderate absorption.

A 12 year old reference seems to be a bit outdated, too...

@ Ron, that 12 year-old reference is a good one and is available in full text; I suggest you read it to get a handle on aluminium adjuvant kinetics as they relate to infants. I also provided you with a very relevant (as in directly addresses your question) one year-old reference. What is your complaint with that?

By Science Mom (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

Dr Shaw:
I haven’t published on shark fin or anything of the sort

Sharks' fins came up in this thread because (a) shark products as a purported Alternative Therapy have been mentioned previously at RI, and (b) I encountered the story about their neurotoxic properties while educating myself about the BMAA bio-accumulation theory for the Guam ALS / PD syndrome. No implication was intended that you have personally researched the topic.

You’ve been holding AMA and JIB to task for publishing our recent studies, so how about trying to make the science better by offering some constructive criticism before, rather than after, the fact?

Well, there are concerns about the particular issue of the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry in which the Tomljenovic / Shaw paper was published -- the special issue on Aluminum and Life - Living in the Aluminum Age (ed. Exley). It does put you in the same company as the "deodorant causes breast cancer" story.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

Ah Ron Law, vaccine expert, whose qualifications consist of degrees in Theology and Business Studies. Just in case you're thinking we're all mad in NZ, maybe we are. This priceless story appeared on the NZ Herald site this afternoon only to vanish 4 hours later. By then it had been picked up by an Australian publication. Enjoy! http://www.qt.com.au/story/2012/08/17/name-change-cured-baby/

By nz sceptic (not verified) on 16 Aug 2012 #permalink

nz sceptic - that story is embarassingly bad. I wish I'd seen it on their site; periodically I have a go at the results of some of their reporters' complete lack of sceptical thinking & that would have been a doozy.

Ron Law has degrees in Theology and Business Studies. That might explains his lack of understanding of chemistry. It doesn't explain his lack of logic.

That's an interesting location, Alison :-) Understandable, though. I had a mind to do a quick post on it myself - being Friday night at all that.

Science Mom, have you read Mitkus? It provides no evidence re aluminium adjuvant kinetics as they relate to infants. The paper is theoretical models based on a study of one (ie 1) adult and four rabbits... hardly convincing given the hundreds of millions of children injected which a known toxin.

ChrisP, I'm afraid you have made up stuff... can you state what page on the NZ Immunisation Book you reference gives your figures? The figures you quote are for aluminium, not the salts...

nz sceptic, and ChrisP... I don't mind personal attacks like this as they demonstrate you are not able to argue the evidence, and you demonstrate that you don't have a clue as to my background, interests, or even modus operandi.

It intrigues me how easy so-called objective-evidenc-based defenders of the faith resort to inuendo and personal attacks when they have no evidence to put up.

Um... Ron... Is publishing your qualifications really a personal attack? Aren't you proud of your academic achievements? Don't worry, I'm well aware that you go by the rather grandiose title (self-styled, of course) of risk and policy analyst but it doesn't exactly make you a vaccine expert - does it?

By nz sceptic (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

RonL:
ChrisP, I’m afraid you have made up stuff […] The figures you quote are for aluminium, not the salts…

I'm not seeing the made-up component. These are ChrisP's figures: "INFANRIX 0.82 mg of aluminium salts = 0.24 mg Al
SYNFLORIX 0.5 mg of aluminium phosphate = 0.11 mg Al".
Let me Google that for you...

According to the specs, SYNFLORIX also contains 9-16 micrograms of Protein D carrier protein, 5-10 micrograms of tetanus toxoid carrier protein and 3-6 micrograms of diphtheria toxoid carrier protein and 0.5 milligrams of Aluminium phosphate.

And from here: aluminium hydroxide, hydrated (Al(OH)3) 0.5 milligrams Al3+
aluminium phosphate (AlPO4) 0.32 milligrams Al3+

Need I add that ChrisP's figures are correct, for the weights of the aluminium component of these aluminium compounds?

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

Alison,
Please feel free to post any of my comments on SciBlogs. I hope you will forgive me if I don't join you guys there.

Ron Law,
Since you accuse me (on SciBlogs) of a lack of critical analysis, allow me to explain what convinced me that concerns about aluminum in vaccines are unfounded. Firstly, we know that aluminum adjuvants are poorly soluble, we know that they are injected into muscle, and we know that after intramuscular injection in rabbits these substances take several weeks to dissolve in body fluids and get excreted by the kidneys. In monkeys the same experiment has been done but looking at how much aluminum is left in the muscle after several weeks. The muscle physiology in these mammals is similar to human muscle, and there is no reason to expect human muscle to behave any differently. There have also been human experiments that support that conclusion. We also know that the aluminum concentration in the blood of babies post vaccination with an aluminum-containing vaccine barely increases; in fact it is only recently that methods sensitive enough to measure such a tiny increase have been developed. Blood aluminum levels after ingestion of aluminum-based antacids have also been measured as has the time it takes for these levels to return to normal and its excretion in the urine.

Secondly, we know how high blood aluminum levels have to be to cause neurological problems from kidney patients and premature babies (who also often have impaired renal function) who suffered from aluminum poisoning in the past. Normal levels of aluminum in blood are around 1-2 micrograms per liter. Ingestion of antacids can increase that to around 30 micrograms per liter, but in people with normal kidney function they rapidly fall and after a few hours are back to normal again. People with kidney disease are less able to excrete aluminum and when levels reach 80 micrograms per liter they may suffer neurological problems. The amount of aluminum in vaccines is clearly far too small to cause problems even in a premature baby with poor kidney function.

If you dig around in PubMed and other scientific websites you will find plenty evidence that supports all of my assertions. I have only mentioned a fraction of the available evidence (a useful source of references is here. The only evidence that seems to contradict this comes from people like Shaw who seem determined to find evidence to support the idea that vaccines are bad at any cost.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

Science Mom, have you read Mitkus? It provides no evidence re aluminium adjuvant kinetics as they relate to infants. The paper is theoretical models based on a study of one (ie 1) adult and four rabbits… hardly convincing given the hundreds of millions of children injected which a known toxin.

Rabbits are a good surrogate for infants and they made excellent corrections for infant glomerular filtration rates based on infant/child data. What do you base your claim that "children injected with a known toxin" on?

By Science Mom (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

It's also perhaps worth mentioning that the study Ron quoted on SciBlogs concludes:

"Nevertheless, the study clearly showed that the absorption of aluminum, at least in rabbits, is neither instantaneous nor complete up to one month following intramuscular injection.

That supports what I wrote above, and strongly suggests that very little of the injected aluminum ends up in the brain where it could cause problems. Also, Ron seems to have a poor understanding of the scientific method, as he criticizes some of the research I cited as being old and only using a few subjects. If more recent and higher quality work has superseded earlier work, it is fair to point to the later work. The age of a paper is not per se a valid reason to criticize it. Also, in a clinical trial, the statistical power of the analysis depends on the number of subjects. If you simply want to find out what happens to radioisotopes of aluminum when they are injected intramuscularly, a few subjects are sufficient to give a good idea of what is going on.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

Alison,

If you’ll forgive me, I’ve copied Krebiozen’s comments over so that they might be there at earliest convenience, as it were.

That story on QT is a horrible example of what happens when you put headlines above quality journalism. I honestly can't understand how any self-respecting writer would take that assignment, let alone make it "balanced" (ie uncritical).

Ron Law has degrees in Theology... It doesn’t explain his lack of logic.

On the contrary; a degree in theology has as a prerequisite the willingness to abandon logic when it conflicts with preexisting beliefs.

@flip - it almost makes me think you've never been in a supermarket checkout line...I just assumed QT must be no different than "The Star," "The National Enquirer," etc. Was I wrong and QT is considered a reputable publication?

@Mrs Woo

My problem is not that I never go into supermarkets. It's that I don't watch the news, read newspapers, or buy magazines. (Outside of an occasional National Geo. or something similar)

I find most news programs and magazines to be full of 'fluff', gossip, and warmed over media releases. So I never pay any of them any attention. Particularly at the checkout.

Mrs Woo - the 'name change' story was originally published in the NZ Herald, which used to pride itself as being our preeminent daily newspaper (before a regrettable slide into woo in some of its reporters).

@flip - fascinating. I kind of enjoy it. The ludicrousness of some of the stories amuses me (hate it, though, when Mr Woo actually wastes money purchasing them for their "informative research").

@Alison - that is disappointing. I would think, at most, this could be posted under "human interest," but even then it should have had some kind of balance to it (i.e., stories of other rare infants who survived, what a rarity it is). The way it was done implied too much credibility to the name causing illness (that doesn't even begin to be plausible to the average person). Wow... you have to wonder if woo is becoming that commonplace or if too many education systems have been "dumbed down" in recent years.

Science Mom, have you read Mitkus?

It would be gracious at this point to credit Alison for sending RonL a copy of the Mitkus paper.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

hdb -as it would be gracious of RonL to credit Science Mom with having read it, since she provided the reference in the first place :-)

ChrisP... thanks for correcting the 50%... now regarding Synflorix... there is an error in the doc you link to... it is the consumer sheet... the one for professionals has this, "adsorbed onto Aluminium phosphate (0.5 mg Al3+)."

http://www.medsafe.govt.nz/profs/Datasheet/s/synflorixinj.pdf

Google synflorix and WC500054346 and you'll get the eu 70+ pager... with same 500ug Al3+

Don't believe everything you read... critical analysis is a good skill to develop.

herr doktor bimler, with respect, 0.5 and 0.32 of Al3+ = 0.82... Al3+... so ChrisP's figures are wrong... and there is an error in the consumer sheet.

Excuse, but don't you have to be a minimum age to receive the HPV? Why are you all talking about infants?

nz sceptic, I gather you have not studied theology... One of the finest set of skills I learnt was in the exegetical studies. That and ferreting references dating back more than 1,000 years, and critiquing historical evidence with oral traditional records, and geology/archeology. It would be fair to say that the method was much more robust than many I've seen in undergraduate university classes.

As for my comment about posting qualifications... you omitted a significant portion of my background. For the record;

I have been a risk and policy adviser for more than a decade... that's what people pay me to do... give them risk and policy advice... on a wide range of issues mostly environmental and health. I have only ever spent $300 on a single advert, which got me a got worth $300!

My career spans twenty years as a medical laboratory scientist,( including 10 years as a clinical biochemistry lecturer when I spent a day a week immersed in the medical library,) 5 years as a university business management lecturer, including research methodology, 4 years as executive director of a trade association, and
more recently as an independent risk & policy analyst. I have a masters degree in international business studies as well as a double major bachelors degree in applied theology, studies which included linguistics, cultural anthropology, and exegetical studies. I was appointed by the Ministry of Health as a member of the expert group that advised the Director General of Health on the reporting and management of medical injury in New Zealand's healthcare system.

I won't bore you with the details, except to say that I smile when I see people attack my credentials as it is evidence that the science can't bee too bad if they have difficulty critiquing that. Besides, I doubt many posters here have any qualifications in medical science at all...

Mr. Law, then why do you think babies get the HPV vaccine?

mmm... neither here nor there... just that it demonstrates that you ow me the other 50% of the apology... Didn't you mention something about crap and credibility before???

Re HPV... the studies were done on older teenagers and adults, but the vaccine is given to 9-12 year olds...

The discussion is regarding the reliability of evidence that aluminium injected im is safe/unsafe... and the plausibility that aluminium can/can't/could cause health problems.

I never said they got the HPV vaccine routinely, though there are examples in NZ at least where the doctor has given it to newborn babes by mistake... and then everyone jumped up and down and said it was perfectly safe for the baby...

I did thank Alison for the paper...

Ron,

Besides, I doubt many posters here have any qualifications in medical science at all…

If it matters I trained and qualified as a biomedical scientist specializing in clinical biochemistry in Cambridge UK and also have a degree from London University as well as over 20 years clinical experience working and lecturing in various UK hospitals. You don't seem to have much to say about my comments above. I have explained what I think happens to the aluminum when a child is given an i.m. injection of a vaccine with an aluminum adjuvant and I have explained why. That happens to coincide with the mainstream view. What do you think happens, based on what evidence?

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

Mr. Law, do you have anything to say about it being reported that Dr. Shaw found HPV in Ms. Renata tissues, when the vaccine does not (it has only a certain protein)?

RonL -yes, you did :-)

@ Ron Law: I don't think I've responded to you in this discussion, but I would like to inform you that I am 1)no one's sockpuppet and 2) a Registered Nurse with nearly 30 years experience, Bachelor's of Science in Nursing and Master's of Science in Nursing, as well as a Certified Nurse-Midwife.

So, there you have my qualifications in medical science. Many of the other commentors also have medical science experience (physicians, nurses, medical researchers). Your plea to authority can be answered by a good many of us.

Chris (Neither here nor there...),

Because Ron is side-tracking to aluminium in vaccines, a wider thing. Sidetracking to his own interests is something he often does. Some in the anti-vaccine community are pushing this angle and, I guess, hoping to use this inquest as part of their pushing it. Lousy connecting the dots, as you say, but that's the anti-vaccine groups for you.

Just a heads-up even though it'll be obvious by now. Standard practice from Ron Law is to studiously avoid what others have presented to him and nit-pick whilst "overlooking" the important relevant points raised. For him more about "winning" and "point-scoring" than the science.

By way of example, he's avoided replying Krebiozen by playing word games to throw mud at me to try set me up to answer Krebiozen's points over at Alison's blog. But that's RL for you. Disingenuous as ever.

Grant:

Because Ron is side-tracking to aluminium in vaccines, a wider thing. Sidetracking to his own interests is something he often does.

Since most of the "oh noes aluminum in vaccines is bad" papers comes from Dr. Shaw, perhaps Mr. Law is trying to deflect from Dr. Shaw's incompetence.

Vis-a-vis qualifications, I use a Teutonically-themed nym so that no-one has any right to complain or act surprised that I'm being pompous & pedantic.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

Chris,

"Since most of the “oh noes aluminum in vaccines is bad” papers comes from Dr. Shaw, perhaps Mr. Law is trying to deflect from Dr. Shaw’s incompetence."

I've often thought that's (part of) his game. He only seems to turn up at our place (sciblogs) when he feels on of the "supporters" of an anti-vaccine position is being shown in a bad light and does invariably try to side-track the discussion through his own brand of trolling.

By the way - link to Alison's blog to catch his re-directed reply to Krebiozen:

http://sciblogs.co.nz/bioblog/2012/08/10/dodgy-experts-gardasil-further…

(I'm going to ask Ron to simply talk to the person who he's actually replying to!)

Excuse me pursuing this diversion, but it's an area that interests me and I think perhaps it's worth making this very simple. Normal blood aluminum is 1-2 µg/L resulting from constant absorption of aluminum from water and food and in the air we breath and constant excretion by the kidneys. That's how toxicokinetics work; constant absorption and excretion results in a steady state; increased absorption results in increased excretion and an increased steady state blood concentration. Small amounts of aluminum are retained, mostly in bone but also in other organs including (lastly) the brain. Our kidneys have a large excess capacity to excrete far more aluminum than we normally absorb, not unexpectedly considering the ubiquity of aluminum in our environment. Neurotoxicity from aluminum occurs at blood levels exceeding 80 µg/L. Blood levels of 30 µg/L do not cause any symptoms in adults after ingestion of aluminum antacids and this is rapidly cleared by the kidneys, and even daily doses of aluminum antacids in people with normal renal function do not cause neurological symptoms. An adult taking aluminum antacids will absorb as much aluminum every day as a child will absorb over a period of several months. The evidence for aluminum neurotoxicity in AD is limited, and even if you accept it, it occurs after a lifetime of accumulation of aluminum in the brain. Blood aluminum levels are barely elevated after vaccination with vaccines containing aluminum adjuvants, perhaps 10% above normal and certainly not exceeding 2µg/L. Why would anyone expect neurotoxicity from the small i.m. doses of aluminum in some vaccines? I just don't see this as at all plausible.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

Krebiozen:

Why would anyone expect neurotoxicity from the small i.m. doses of aluminum in some vaccines? I just don’t see this as at all plausible.

Remember these are the same people who think that if there was no history of cardiac disorders in a family, that automatically rules out any kind of cardiac disorder in the young woman. And then there is Dr. Shaw who thinks that the symptoms exhibited by the young woman could only be neurological, when they are common with many cardiac disorders. The same Dr. Shaw who is reported to see full HPV in her tissues, even though the vaccine only contains "virus like particles" in the form of proteins.

Do you see a pattern?

RonL Re HPV… the studies were done on older teenagers and adults, but the vaccine is given to 9-12 year olds…

Possibly because we know that children not much older than that can be sexually active, & so at least this way they have some protection against the HPV strains implicated in cervical cancer?

Also, back on Sciblogs(NZ), & regarding your claims concerning Al neurotoxicity in infants (my emphasis), you've said if I was giving advice to the politicians and vaccine industry about politics and risk I’d be advising them to do some legitimate studies on babies and pre teens to put the issue to bed

So you now seem to be saying that the Al adjuvant in vaccines is also a Bad Thing for children (not 'just' prem babies)?

Also, just what would you regard as a 'legitimate' study? After all, since you seem to regard Al as so toxic, then what would be the experimental & control arms of your study?

A small comment on Ron's analogy on SciBlogs:

It’s a bit like saying that the tap is only leaking a little bit and then claiming that the wood won’t rot. A little bit over a long time is not good for wood… a lot over a little time does very little harm…

That's a terrible analogy, as if we expect a material to be constantly exposed to small amounts of water, we waterproof it. Our bodies are designed to excrete small amounts of aluminum that we constantly absorb from the environment; in your analogy the tap is constantly dripping, but you expect us to believe that if it drips twice as fast the wood will rot, when we know that even if you turn the tap on to a trickle the water drains away safely and the wood still doesn't rot. The amount we absorb from vaccines is similar to the amount that we absorb from other sources, and we have a large excess ability to excrete it.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

The top three elements on this planet's surface are oxygen, silicon and aluminum.

Now oxygen is vital to our survival, but according to some reading I have done it was exhaled by the earliest forms of life like cyanobacteria, for which it is a toxic. Obviously certain lifeforms formed that were tolerant of oxygen, and even used it.

Silicon is very similar to aluminum in that it is very reactive. It is important to biology, but mostly sea creatures (diatoms), and plants. Not so much land dwelling animals. So we are okay with eating silica, and our bodies manage to deal with and get rid of it. I know my kids have eaten plenty of sand.

So it seems to me that animals have evolved to deal with the environmental quantities of aluminum. It is everywhere, from the soils used to grow food to much of the structures used in modern life (like fences, laptop chassis, and aircraft). It does react with biology a bit more than silicon, but you still need rather large quantities.

Persevering on the teeny tiny bits in the HPV vaccine versus the obvious things that could have lead to Ms. Renata's symptoms is unrealistic.

And now the basement computer has the proper cookies to get the recent comments to update. Time for some dinner, and then back to figuring out how to pay college tuition for three kids and a car loan (the latter is a unexpected expense because we had to replace the car that was totaled when someone ran a stop sign, our insurance is now going after the driver because she did not have insurance). Monday I am selling off a stagnant mutual fund.

Ron Law enters this discussion with:

It is not scientifically defensible to claim that the amount of aluminium injected into babies is the same as consumed via food… as a tiny fraction of what’s in the food gets absorbed.

Then later says:

Besides, I doubt many posters here have any qualifications in medical science at all…

My qualifications are noted above. I admit to having an education in engineering with only one college level class in biology.

Yet, even I know that the HPV vaccine is not given to infants. Dude, what were you thinking?

I have learned more because of a kid who is much too interesting. And that includes the only member of this family to have this particular cardiac disorder.

So, sorry, about knowing all of the ins and outs of what it is like to live with cardiac disease in your own child. I used to joke that I did not homeschool my kids because as a mother my job was to make sure they went to bed alive. And considering the attitude of middle kid, his longevity would have been in question if I had to teach him. But then my oldest ended up with a heart murmur, and turned out to be obstructive hypertrophic cardiomypathy. There was (and still is) a chance that while he goes to bed alive, his heart may not be beating in the morning.

I'm a bit irritated that Ron came here and made some assertions about aluminum that I responded to, but is now sniping at me on another blog, so I have signed up at SciBlogs to continue the discussion there.

Chris - I was hit by an uninsured driver several years ago and found that in the UK there is an uninsured drivers fund that insurers pay into to compensate people in your situation. It may be worth finding out if there is something similar in your locality that your insurers haven't mentioned. In my case the driver turned out to be from a large well-known criminal family and managed to evade the police until the time limit on his prosecution had expired, but at least I got my expenses back.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 17 Aug 2012 #permalink

The presence of an acid (lactic, citric) will raise the solubility of an ingested aluminum compound. If the mother exercises at all, there will be lactic acid found in the breastmilk. As many mothers are pressured into losing the baby weight as fast as possible or to 'regain their bodies' - there is certainly an elevated amount of aluminum being taken up by their breastfeeding infants.

As far as the dangers of an Al ligand, Ron neglects to consider the competition for ligand formation, as the amount of Al 2+/3+ is dwarfed by the amount of Fe2+/ 3+ present in the muscle tissue.

so I have signed up at SciBlogs to continue the discussion there.

And it's very nice to see you there - thanks for coming over. Although - herr doktor seems to have had the last word for the moment, regarding goalposts :)

@Mrs Woo

I guess for me it's mainly that I'm not interested in argument from authority, which is what most of the gossip-y news is about (ie. you're famous, therefore you must be of interest to the average person).

Regular news is ok, but it depends on where I get it from. I tend to watch the more European shows which I find to be less sensational.

I'd also point out in regards to the article in question that these days journalists aren't given a lot of time to research an article. Let's say you have a quota to fill each day before deadline and one of those articles requires a lot of scientific knowledge... you may just put in minimum effort. Especially if you're not all that aware of the obvious logical fallacies behind these things.

It's like I said above: newspapers are putting more effort into attention-catching headlines than the content that goes into the main article.

herr doktor seems to have had the last word for the moment, regarding goalposts

He does indeed. I suspect Ron will be back though. I find it odd that he accuses us, presumably including me, of being "unable to critique the science" when I have done nothing but point to evidence that strongly contradicts his position and that he appears to be incapable of refuting.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 18 Aug 2012 #permalink

Krebiozen,

You wrote: “I find it odd that he accuses us, presumably including me, of being “unable to critique the science” when I have done nothing but point to evidence that strongly contradicts his position and that he appears to be incapable of refuting.”

He frequently accuses others of what he's doing himself. There are more examples of this general things by Ron elsewhere in that thread. See Chris' comments re Ron, too (above).

@ alison's blog, RonL complains that a there is a "distinct lack of critical analysis" at sci-blogs ( 1 day ago).

Being a psychologist, I wonder what he feels DOES have critical analysis. People get their ideas from specific places from which they synthesise their own ideas about a subject.

So Ron, if you're still around: Who/ what do you read? A simple list of influences would be sufficient: courses at a university, texts, periodicals, blogs, books, specific writers et al all count.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 18 Aug 2012 #permalink

Krebiozen:

Chris – I was hit by an uninsured driver several years ago and found that in the UK there is an uninsured drivers fund that insurers pay into to compensate people in your situation.

Thank you, but my insurance premiums include a small bit to cover uninsured drivers. We were compensated for the loss of our seventeen year old car, and the company itself is taking action with the driver.

What Ron Law is doing is very common with the anti-vax crowd. They try to divert the discussion away from the flaws of their brave maverick researcher, and persevere on tiny little pointless details. They like to talk about the zebras, but miss the horse that is about to trample them.

Now Ron thinks water with something dissolved in it is not water.

What next?

The guy is unbelievable.

I think I have give up in the face sheer... I don't what word to put here.

Chris, I'm reminded of a baby boy of six weeks who was injected with Gardasil vaccine by mistake... he died a few weeks ago aged three... of a rare form of leukaemia... of course, the two events are entirely co-incidental...

Grant, would you drink a glass of water with arsenic in it?

Ron,

“Grant, would you drink a glass of water with arsenic in it?”

Word games, twisting meanings and shifting goalposts. All you ever do.

@Ron - please care to explain how the biological mechanism would work for Gardisil to give a baby leukemia?

@Ron Law: citation requested. Not that I doubt your claim that a child was accidentally injected at 6 weeks with Gardisil (although I do find it highly unlikely), and then died 3 years of later of a rare leukemia (type of leukemia, please). But without more information -VAERs citation, whatever, your information cannot be verified and extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof....

@Ron

Arsenic is found in groundwater in many places; New England being one of them.

Remember the phrase, "The dose makes the poison."

So chances are if you've been to New England, you've had a glass of water with arsenic in it. Chances are, if you've eaten rice, you've eaten rice with arsenic in it.

But the amounts of arsenic in the groundwater we drink and the foods we eat isn't really the issue here, is it?

Try to stay on topic.

@ MI Dawn: Save yourself the trouble. Ron Law will now come back with a *report* of a six week old boy in New Zealand who was supposedly was given Gardisal vaccine in error. He later was diagnosed ~ 2 years of age, with AML.

He reminds me of "Grandma Marsha" and "lurker"...two cranks who posted here with little factoids about the "deleterious effects" of vaccines, that they read on the internet

I played the *game* with them for a little while...but it is a never ending pastime for them. Best to just ignore this troll.

@ Ron Law:

In order for us to believe that Gardisil is indeed a danger we would ALSO have to believe that there is a vast conspiracy of medical organisations, universities, journals and governmental agencies that are suppressing the truth whilst promoting Gardisil as being safe and effective; obviously, they would be further enabled by the media around the world who would assist in keeping the real story out of the news.

There's something wrong with this: such an imbroglio of inter-connections would be difficult to maintain and would need thousands of willing operatives to keep in place AND
probably eat up any profits from the vaccine. You would have us believe that ALL of these people, companies, agencies and associations were un-trustworthy.

And who precisely is giving us this alternate version? How trustworthy are they? Could they possibly be grieving parents angry at medical services and researchers eager to use the situation to make a name for themselves? Might others who promote these ideas be alternative medicine advocates with an axe to grind against SBM who might profit- in monetary terms or in reputation- by promoting these ideas?

So should we trust the experts and governments across the globe or a few contrarians and supplemen salesmen? Which is more likely: thousands of cheats or a few?

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 19 Aug 2012 #permalink

I asked Ron Law earlier if he doesn't care for the Mitkus et al. paper, what does he accept in terms of publications that demonstrate aluminium from vaccines is dangerous for infants. He has responded to others but hasn't answered that question.

Why Ron?

By Science Mom (not verified) on 19 Aug 2012 #permalink

Mr. Law:

he died a few weeks ago aged three… of a rare form of leukaemia…

By that logic off the kids in this video, including the young man who created (the one in the orange t-shirt) were accidentally given a dose of Gardisil.

Mr. Law, when you hoof-beats you are thinking of zebras, not horses.

When I hear a helicopter, I think that a child is quite ill. But unlike you I have a real reason. I happen to live a few blocks of where that video was filmed. I see many kids like that and their parents in the local grocery story, and near the Ronald McDonald house that is in my neighborhood.

You seem to have forgotten there are so many ways for kids to get sick, and there are more obvious answers than one tiny vaccine.

And unfortunately, there are several serious heart disorders that cause sudden death in young people. My son has one, but he was diagnosed early. It is a shame that the late Ms. Renata was not screened. Unfortunately there is debate the costs of doing those screenings, which is why one family created a foundation to do them: in memory of a son.

Chris, you are wrong... again... Ms Renata WAS screened... all tests came back negative... but that hasn't been reported by the media which seems to be the only source of evidence objective-science-based-scibloggers seem to go by... anecdotal evidence.

The lab report dated 20 September 2010 states, "Conclusion: The genetlc test result reveals no currently known pathogenie mutations within the selected genes linked
to Long GT syndrome..."

CIDG Recommendations: CIDG recommends that a sampie ofDNA should be retalned by Lab Plus wlth family consent
in case new genes related to arrhythmie syndromes are dlscovered,..."

What more can I say? Objective-science-based-scibloggers don't exercise much objectivity?

For the record, the lab report was signed by the Chairman of the Cardiac Inherlted Dlsease Group at ADHB.

Genetic screening does not count. It is quite clear that my son has a genetic heart disorder, but his genetic screening came up negative. They have not discovered all of the genetic sequences that cause the issues.

Do you have evidence that she had an EKG, a stress test or metabolic screen?

The little boy RonL refers to was Chace Topperwien, who did indeed receive the Gardasil vaccine as an infant. He died earlier this year of acute myeloid leukaemia (http://sciblogs.co.nz/infectious-thoughts/tag/topperwien/). However, as Siouxsie Wiles points out in the post I've linked to here, the odds that the two events are linked (ie that the vaccine caused the cancer) are extremely low.

All my sympathies are with Chace's parents; it must be terrible to lose a child, and I can understand how they could cast around to find a cause.

From Orac’s article:

“…the autopsy report…showed no structural abnormalities in the heart or evidence of an inflammatory process. The report does note, however, that heart tissue had been taken and submitted to the Inherited Diseases Group in Auckland so that the “decendent’s genetic structure and family can be investigated in case there is a molecular abnormality of the cardiac electrical conduction system that might result in sudden unexpected death.”

Orac obviously is drawing conclusions from incomplete information... as noted above the results were reported nearly two years ago...

“Conclusion: The genetlc test result reveals no currently known pathogenie mutations within the selected genes linked
to Long GT syndrome…”

CIDG Recommendations: CIDG recommends that a sampie ofDNA should be retalned by Lab Plus wlth family consent
in case new genes related to arrhythmie syndromes are dlscovered,…”

What more can I say? Objective-science-based-scibloggers don’t exercise much objectivity? Or they comment on the 'facts' when they don't have the facts?

RL: “Conclusion: The genetlc test result reveals no currently known pathogenie mutations within the selected genes linked
to Long GT syndrome…”

CIDG Recommendations: CIDG recommends that a sampie ofDNA should be retalned by Lab Plus wlth family consent
in case new genes related to arrhythmie syndromes are dlscovered,…”

My emphasis added. As Chris has noted, you can have a negative test but still have the disease; all this means is that scientists haven't identified the markers for your variant yet.

Chace died in June 2012. The "sciblog" Alison linked to says, "The HPV proteins that Chace inadvertently received are highly unlikely to have interrupted his immune system. More likely they will have vaccinated him against HPV."

Highly unlikely and more likely are not definitive terms... Tragic deaths like this must be included in pharmacovigilance databases so that signals can be investigated... this is a signal in itself.... If gardasil had been injected into a single baby rabbit and the rabbit had developed

In 2009 the media reported this...

Nurse gives Hamilton boy wrong vaccine

The Immunisation Advisory Centre reassured the couple their son was unlikely to suffer an adverse reaction. However, they wrote to the clinic's practice manager and a meeting was arranged with senior medical staff and a centre representative to discuss their son's welfare.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/2870462/Nurse-gives-Hamilton-boy…

So wouldn't it be reasonable to ask the question if your baby was given the wrong drug... and were told, It's unlikely to cause problems, but we'll monitor him... and then two years later he develops a rare form of leukaemia only to be told be defenders-of-the-faith that there is no link... with no evidence or even causality assessment????

Of note, the Gardasil package insert states, "13.1 Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility
GARDASIL has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity."

I should have completed the sentence, If gardasil had been injected into a single baby rabbit and the rabbit had developed a rare form of cancer surely that would have raised suspicions warranting further studies?

Alison, I agree with you totally re testing... my point is that the known tests WERE done on Jasmine... and they were negative... but Orac was either not aware of that or he chose not to report it. Why should the family be vilified if the tests were negative? And for what it's worth, the family have never refused testing of parents/siblings etc... they certainly have asked what's the point if Jasmine's tests were negative and there is no history in the family... they have always agreed to testing once other test results were reported.

Chris, you are wrong… again…

Let us be charitable and assume that RonL is here conflating commenter "Chris" -- experienced in the genetics of heart disorders -- and the commenter "ChrisP" whom he earlier accused of "making stuff up". Different nyms and gravatars, I know. But otherwise the gratuitous accusation of repeated wrongness makes no sense at all.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 19 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Ron Law, please stop dodging and answer my question. It was quite straightforward.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 19 Aug 2012 #permalink

Science Mom, it is straight forward. Mitkus et al MRL's supposedly developed by

TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR ALUMINUM
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
September 2008

There's only one problem. The ATSDR never established MRLs for intramuscular route of entry.

Have a read of that 350+ page document... scan for the term half life and read around the hits... at one point it even says, "When 26Al levels were monitored more than 3 years after a single subject received the injection, a half-life of approximately 7 years was calculated (Priest et al. 1995). However, when the subject was re-examined approximately 10 years after the injection, a half-life of about 50 years
was estimated (Priest 2004)."

Clearly ingesting aluminium is not the same as having it injected.

I haven't read any, but are you aware of any studies injecting 160-200mg of Aluminium (Al3+) intramuscularly into an adult over three months? I haven't seen any.

Mr. Law:

“…the autopsy report…

You obviously did not understand that Ms. Renata should have been screened when she was alive. The EKG (or ECG) taken at an autopsy would be quite flat and boring.

I am saying that she should have had a more thorough exam sometime between the onset of her symptoms (like the numb extremities) and her death.

Health screenings are only done on people who are alive. And when a family member is found to have some kind of cardiac disorder (either through symptoms or sudden cardiac death), then all first degree relatives need to be screened. In this case, the young woman's younger brother.

There’s only one problem. The ATSDR never established MRLs for intramuscular route of entry.

IV dialysis of renally-impaired patients were taken into consideration. The aluminium MRL has a huge correction factor built in to err on the side of caution (and incompleteness of reporting). Why would IM administration cause more problems?

Have a read of that 350+ page document… scan for the term half life and read around the hits… at one point it even says, “When 26Al levels were monitored more than 3 years after a single subject received the injection, a half-life of approximately 7 years was calculated (Priest et al. 1995). However, when the subject was re-examined approximately 10 years after the injection, a half-life of about 50 years
was estimated (Priest 2004).”

I did and don't you think that also applies to any retained aluminium? You are also ignoring the order of tissue deposition which puts the brain last.

Clearly ingesting aluminium is not the same as having it injected.

Clearly it's not but you don't get to make shit up. The data, taken together do not implicate IM aluminium as the bogey man you and Shaw like to make it out to be. I'm absolutely for research into any vaccine excipient where there are gaps but I'd like to see those done with good methods, not the tripe Shaw produces.

I haven’t read any, but are you aware of any studies injecting 160-200mg of Aluminium (Al3+) intramuscularly into an adult over three months? I haven’t seen any.

Quite dodging my earlier question. Given the citations in the Al MRL report (funnily no Shaw/Petrik cites), the numerous citations in PubMed that you readily dismiss, surely you can produce some compelling studies that have caused you to latch onto your belief. What are they?

By Science Mom (not verified) on 19 Aug 2012 #permalink

Mr. Law, do you have any reference to Ms. Renata having a perfectly normal electrocardiogram?

@Chris

I am saying that she should have had a more thorough exam sometime between the onset of her symptoms (like the numb extremities) and her death

I suspect this why her parents have such a great need to blame the HPV vaccination. With the benefit of hindsight, they are aware at some level that they missed these symptoms and they may have been able to prevent her death. By putting the blame on the vaccination, they do not have to face this.

Ron Law

I haven’t read any, but are you aware of any studies injecting 160-200mg of Aluminium (Al3+) intramuscularly into an adult over three months? I haven’t seen any.

I

I such a study existed you would reject it anyway if it did not support your hobbyhorse.

By Militant Agnostic (not verified) on 19 Aug 2012 #permalink

" I’m absolutely for research into any vaccine excipient where there are gaps but I’d like to see those done with good methods..."

OK then, if there are no significant gaps in the use of aluminium adjuvants, can you please explain the following...

1. How they ACTUALLY work, as opposed to how it is THOUGHT that they work...
2. What happens to the aluminium once it's injected over time.
3. What studies have been done to demonstrate that injecting 4mg of alunimium (Al3+) into prem babies over the space of 3.5 months is safe.

Chris, as far as I know Jasmine never had an ECG because there was never need for one. The seven genetic screen tests were all negative and the pathology was uneventful.

Can you tell us what the statistical correlation between a "perfectly normal (whatever that is) ECG and sudden death of a teenager is?

The lab report dated 20 September 2010 states, “Conclusion: The genetlc test result reveals no currently known pathogenie mutations within the selected genes linked
to Long GT syndrome…”

A source for this information would earn my gratitude.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 19 Aug 2012 #permalink

LOL... the reports say they are only addressing oral and dermal exposure, another references that and uses it to validate intramuscular exposure and I'm the one dogged to coughing and spluttering regarding the dodgy referencing????

Besides, where have I said that aluminum is harmful? What I have said, and I've seen it consistantly over 42 years of involvement one way or another with medical science (and other sciences) is that the use of Finnigans Finagling Factor is alive and well... Thomas Khun was so right...

1. How they ACTUALLY work, as opposed to how it is THOUGHT that they work…

Ah, the devastating Juggalo gambit.

@ Ron Law:

"Of note, the Gardasil package insert states, “13.1 Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility
GARDASIL has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity.”

Hmmm, let me FTFY, by providing the complete Prescribing Information and the large studies conducted pre and post-licensing:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ajhwHFRYbUBQ

Did you happen to forget the rest of that statement?

13.1 Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility

GARDASIL has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity.

GARDASIL administered to female rats at a dose of 120 mcg total protein, which corresponds to approximately 300-fold excess relative to the projected human dose, had no effects on mating performance, fertility, or embryonic/fetal
survival.

Also check the rest of the Prescribing Statement for carcinogenicity and genotoxicity and the lack of any carcinogenicity and genotoxicity, reported after the licensing of the vaccine.

You sure sound like Grandma Marsha and lurker, the two trolls who came posting here months ago...flitting from topic to topic about the HPV vaccine, that they had read on anti-vaccine sites on the internet. (Just as dumb when it comes to immunology, disease process and understanding of pre-licensing and clinical trials of vaccines...as well as the continuous monitoring for safety, for all vaccine).

From that same Gardisal Prescribing Information that you referenced from Merck...here are the reported deaths from the large pre-licensing study for the vaccine:

@ Ron Law:

From that same Gardisal Prescribing Information that you referenced from Merck…here are the reported deaths from the large prelicensing clinical study for the vaccine:

Deaths in the Entire Study Population

Across the clinical studies, 24 deaths were reported in 25,274 (GARDASIL N =13,686; AAHS Control N = 11,004, saline placebo N = 584) subjects (9- through 45-year-old girls and women; and 9- through 15-year-old boys).

The events reported were consistent with events expected in healthy adolescent and adult populations. The most common cause of death was motor vehicle accident (4 subjects who received GARDASIL and 3 AAHS Control subjects), followed by overdose/suicide (2 subjects who received GARDASIL and 2 subjects who received AAHS Control), and pulmonary embolus/deep vein thrombosis (1 subject who received GARDASIL and 1 AAHS Control subject). In addition, there were 2 cases of sepsis, 1 case of pancreatic cancer, 1 case of arrhythmia, 1 case of pulmonary tuberculosis, 1 case of hyperthyroidism, 1 case of post-operative pulmonary embolism and acute renal failure, and 1 case of systemic lupus erythematosus in the group that received GARDASIL; 1 case of asphyxia, and 1 case of acute lymphocytic leukemia in the AAHS Control; and 1 case of medulloblastoma in the saline placebo group.

I

Mr. Law:

Chris, as far as I know Jasmine never had an ECG because there was never need for one.

I can understand how that can be missed. When my son was thirteen he fell and hurt his arm. We obviously thought the pain in his arm he experienced later was from the fall, but the heart murmur heard at his "well child check up" to get his tetanus booster at age fourteen changed all of that.

But still, the record shows that Jasmine experienced the symptoms of tachycardia prior to her death. I quoted Dr. Shaw earlier:

Some of the bahavioural symptoms (memory lapses; tingling in hands and feet; unilateral weakness in arm) are symptomatic of neurological disorders

Actually, they are also symptoms of cardiac issues, but no one followed up on them. I can understand that.

This does not rule out a genetic cardiac issue, and the Renata family still needs to be screened with EKGs and echocardiograms.

@ Chris:

Mrs. Renata, in her own statement to the media said this about her daughter's ongoing tachycardia...

"But after her first Gardasil dose in September 2008, she developed pains in various parts of her body, suffered a racing heart beat, weak arms, tingling in her hands and legs, and became tired and irritable."

Yet, Mrs. Renata twice refused to have herself, her husband and her two young surviving sons undergo cardiac testing to rule out (or rule in), the possibility that there are familial cardiac anomalies. Foolish woman.

Chris, for the record, I dislike titles... always have... they belong in a by-gone era IMO... Ron is fine... Are you suggesting that all children should have ecg's routinely? At what cost? For what benefit? So that we end up with another screening industry that lines the pockets of the medico/pharma industries? Economists have already shown that more doctors at the margins cause more deaths...

Lilady, don't believe everything you read. In this case the report is factually incorrect... and besides, the genetic tests done on Jasmine were negative. Mrs Renata has not refused genetic testing as reported. That is well documented in evidential records before the court. She is not a foolish woman at all... grieving? Sure... but definitely not foolish. And certainly not uninformed as many commenting on this blog so obviously are.

Across the clinical studies, 39 deaths were reported in 29,323 (GARDASIL® N = 15,706; Placebo N = 13,617) individuals (9- through 45-year-old girls and women, and 9- through 26-year-old boys and men).

www.merck.ca/assets/en/pdf/products/GARDASIL-PM_E.pdf

A big problem with this reporting is that there were nowhere near that number of placebo subjects.

And certainly not uninformed as many commenting on this blog so obviously are.

I am here to learn stuff and inform myself. Any links to the records before the court documenting the genetic tests would be appreciated.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 19 Aug 2012 #permalink

RL: Are you suggesting that all children should have ecg’s routinely?

No. What Chris is suggesting is that where a child has symptoms that could indicate a cardiac problem, then an ECG could be a means of confirming that or ruling it out. As Chris pointed out, you can have a negative genetic test but still have the disease confirmed by other means.

where have I said that aluminum is harmful?

Not in so many words, perhaps, but if you don't think it is, for some reason you're spending an awful lot of time (& words) trying to give the impression that you do.

herr doktor bimler,

I can post the link to the report Ron referred to later (have to get a very late dinner sorted first), but my recollection is that
it was made in the context of their pushing for their "experts" to do testing and pushing aside testing from other sources.

If you're inclined to find these yourself, use the google search I mentioned in the comments on my thread, picking out the PDF files; they're documents hosted on Hilary's website and include what Ron is referring to.

OK then, if there are no significant gaps in the use of aluminium adjuvants, can you please explain the following…

1. How they ACTUALLY work, as opposed to how it is THOUGHT that they work…

What is unknown to you isn't unknown to others. Well that and what Narad said, juggalo fallacy indeed (I think he just coined a new term).

2. What happens to the aluminium once it’s injected over time.

You don't know? It's in the ADSTR document and this is quite helpful: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2782734/ Although they don't tell you how effing magnets work.

3. What studies have been done to demonstrate that injecting 4mg of alunimium (Al3+) into prem babies over the space of 3.5 months is safe.

Infants do not get 4 mg of aluminium over 3.5 months. There is no indication that the small amount of aluminium in vaccines is unsafe particularly since they have been used for over 60 years.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 20 Aug 2012 #permalink

Besides, where have I said that aluminum is harmful?

Here and as Allison said, you're certainly implying it.

Science Mom, have you read Mitkus? It provides no evidence re aluminium adjuvant kinetics as they relate to infants. The paper is theoretical models based on a study of one (ie 1) adult and four rabbits… hardly convincing given the hundreds of millions of children injected which a known toxin.

Anyone who pulls the toxin gambit is obviously not in favour of something. I'm not interested in your claims of ignorance or your inflated numbers. I want to know if you think aluminium is a toxin, what led you to believe that.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 20 Aug 2012 #permalink

Nitpicking really, but Al3+ implies a dissolved ionic form, not the form injected in vaccines which is Al(OH)3 or AlPO4, which slowly dissolve in carboxylic acids in interstitial fluid to form Al3+.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 20 Aug 2012 #permalink

@Krebiozen

It's not really nitpicking because Shaw's claiming the Al 3+ forms a ligand with the HPV DNA - and the amount of Al 3+ in the interstitial fluid is dwarfed by the amount of Fe 3+ making such an Al-DNA ligand rare.

Mr. Law:

Are you suggesting that all children should have ecg’s routinely? At what cost? For what benefit?

Anyone who has tachycardia like Ms. Renata did should definitely get an ECG. The young woman was showing symptoms, what part of that do you not understand? And I am going to post this link for the third time, I suggest that you actually click on it and read what it says:
http://nickoftimefoundation.org/programs/screenings/

Also for the third or fourth time Mr. Law: not all genetic sequences for heart disorders have been discovered.

When my son was first diagnosed no sequences were known to cause it. Then about five years ago the first HCM sequence was found. The Mayo Clinic brochure said there were fourteen, but my son was tested for eighteen. And a quick look on PubMed shows that there are some other candidates for genetic sequences.

The Renata family may be carriers for another kind, and they do need to have a cardiac screening with ECG and echocardiograms.

Ron,

As others have said, and I'll repeat: Saying "all the genetic tests given were negative" doesn't prove that there wasn't a genetic problem. The reason being that we don't have tests for all possible genetic problems -- in fact, we don't know what all of those problems are!

Even if we could definitively rule out genetic and/or developmental issues, it still would say nothing about what the actual cause was. The proposition "If not genetics then Gardasil" lacks a lot -- starting with a plausible connection between Gardasil and cardiac problems. The connections I've heard here sound very much like the "but what if..." games I played with my kids when they were young.

The fact that the young woman's cardiac issues were loosely correlated in time with her Gardasil injection proves absolutely nothing. I realize that post hoc ergo propter hoc is a very powerful idea, but it's a blatant logical fallacy.

@ Ron Law you now link us to this study:

http://www.merck.ca/assets/en/pdf/products/GARDASIL-PM_E.pdf

Across the clinical studies, 39 deaths were reported in 29,323 (GARDASIL® N = 15,706; Placebo N = 13,617) individuals (9- through 45-year-old girls and women, and 9- through 26-year-old boys and men).

Ron...you now make this ludicrous statement:

"A big problem with this reporting is that there were nowhere near that number of placebo subjects."

Are you that dumb that you don't understand that no matter which arm of the clinical study a subject was in, (Gardasil N=15,706; Placebo N=13,617, "The events reported were consistent with events expected in healthy adolescent and adult populations."

"Deaths in the Entire Study Population

Across the clinical studies, 39 deaths were reported in 29,323 (GARDASIL® N = 15,706; Placebo N = 13,617) individuals (9- through 45-year-old girls and women, and 9- through 26-year-old boys and men). The events reported were consistent with events expected in healthy adolescent and adult populations.

The most common cause of death was motor vehicle accident (5 individuals who received GARDASIL® and 4 individuals who received placebo), followed by drug overdose/suicide (2 individuals who received GARDASIL® and 6 individuals who received placebo), gun shot wound (1 individual who received GARDASIL® and 3 individuals who received placebo)"

Motor vehicle accident was the reported cause of death for five individuals within the Gardasil group 5/15,706 = 0.0003 and motor vehicle accident was the reported cause of death for four individuals within the Placebo group 4/13,617=0.0003
STATISTICALLY EQUAL

Drug Overdose/suicide was the reported cause of death for two individuals within the Gardasil group 2/15,706=0.0001 and drug overdose/suicide was the reported cause of death for six individuals within the Placebo group 6/13,617=0.0004
THE PLACEBO GROUP HAD FOUR TIMES AS MANY DEATHS FROM DRUG OVERDOSES/SUICIDES AS THE GARDASIL GROUP.

Gun shot wounds was the reported cause of death for one individual within the Gardasil group 1/15,706=0.00006 and guns shot wounds were the reported cause of death for three individuals within the Placebo group 3/13,617=0.00022.
THE PLACEBO GROUP HAD FOUR TIMES AS MANY DEATHS FROM GUN SHOTS WOUNDS AS THE GARDASIL GROUP.

My statistics show that reported deaths from motor vehicle accidents were STATISTICALLY EQUAL in both the Gardasil group and the Placebo group. Deaths from drug overdoses/suicides were reported at FOUR TIMES the rate within the Placebo group versus the Gardasil group. Deaths from gun shot wounds were reported at FOUR TIMES the rate within the Placebo group versus the Gardasil group.

Do check my statistics out for yourself.

@ lilady:

If we weren't SB we could therefore trot out statistics that show that Gardasil protects people from gun shot wounds, drug overdoses and suicides.
IF...

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 20 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Denice Walter: I was *so tempted* to make that observation :-)

Several comments before I go back to work:

First, I can only think the Renatas are using the vaccine to protect themselves from the possible knowledge that IF they had had their daughter's symptoms checked out by a physican, she might still be alive. Personally, as a parent, ANY time my child complains of palpitaions, shortness of breath, anything, she will see a doctor. The fact that Ms Renata got all 3 injections makes me wonder what on earth they said to her physician, that she got the 2nd and 3rd vaccines with no determination of the cause of the symptoms (allergy? cardiac? neurological?)

Second: while AML may be rare, it is NOT unheard of, even in very small children who haven't gotten the Gardasil vaccine. So there is no real proof there. I tried to find some good statistics, but my Adobe Reader keeps locking up.

Third: @lilady and Denice: Gardisil IS protective. Neither of my children have had gun shot wounds, drug overdoses OR committed suicide. They got all 3 injections...(Gardisil is also protective about MVA deaths: they've both been in MVAs but with little or with no injury)

@ MI Dawn:

Here's are the statistics for the yearly diagnoses of all types of leukemia, including AML, within the adult and childhood populations of New Zealand:

http://www.leukaemia.org.nz/uploads/file/a734abd35d338879bb7c7f39392e74…

• Each year in New Zealand around 700 adults and 40 children are diagnosed with leukaemia.
• Of these around 150 adults and around 10 children are diagnosed with the type of leukaemia called acute myeloid leukaemia (AML).
• AML is a relatively rare type of cancer but it is the most common type of acute leukaemia diagnosed in New Zealand adults. AML can also affect children but it more commonly occurs in adults.
• Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) is more common in children than in adults. Around 35 New Zealand children are diagnosed with ALL each year making it the most common type of cancer in children aged 0 to 14 years.
• Overall, chronic leukaemias are more common in adults than acuteleukaemias. They rarely occur in children. Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is about twice as common as chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML).

The nurse who administered Jasmine's 3rd Gardasil injection gave evidence at the coroner's inquest. She said Jasmine did not mention any problems or possible side effects she might have experienced in the period since the initial dose.

By nz sceptic (not verified) on 20 Aug 2012 #permalink

“Conclusion: The genetlc test result reveals no currently known pathogenie mutations within the selected genes linked
to Long GT syndrome…”

Repeating the repeated request to RonL to a source for this report.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 20 Aug 2012 #permalink

@lilady: thanks! I had the ACS site open, looking for statisiccs but it kept freezing in Adobe Reader, and I had to get back to work so fighting with it wasn't an option

@nz sceptic: thank you. Very interesting. If I though my kid was ill in any way, I would have mentioned it, even if at the time I wasn't playing "blame the vaccine".

nz sceptic, it would be very interesting in the coroner's inquest to hear what the doctor who was treating the young lady will have to say. We can assume that her symptoms warranted a visit to the GP.

Regards the source of Ron's quote - best ask him, you'll want his source after all and as a pragmatic matter I'm short on time. Some of the documents are scanned images (in PDF format) - no keyword searching available unless OCR is applied and I haven't time for that or a manual screen.

If you're googling around, look for long QT syndrome rather than long GT syndrome. (The typos suggest Ron has typed this in rather than cut'n'pasted the quote.)

Tangentially related, this by Hilary Butler (haven't time to relate a more complete context - bear that in mind): "The family again refused to see Dr Neas [who offered the genetic tests] until the tests had been done in Canada,"

(Source: http://www.beyondconformity.org.nz/BlogRetrieve.aspx?PostID=72887)

Mi Dawn & Chris,

The CARM report Rhonda Renata filed (I think I linked to it earlier in this thread) is built around a medical file with the mother inserting her own accounts in between portions of the medical file on her daughter. Check for yourself, but my recollection is that the doctor only notes the daughter's symptoms once, despite seeing her several times later. You can read that several different ways (i.e. with "fault" on different people) but that it's only noted once has been bothering me.

I have just read the CARM and the coroner's report. I am bothered by the interpretations of the mother in the CARM. She noted the depo-provera injections, and I wonder why the daughter's symptoms were not brought up with those.

What was interesting about the coroner's report was that the first page says the mother claimed no symptoms, but then later he says she brought up many more.

This is why I am interested in the testimony of the medical care practitioners.

Chris,

One factor is that the D.P. injections may have been done by a nurse, so those visits may not have been doctor's visits as such.

Lilady said, "Ron…you now make this ludicrous statement:

“A big problem with this reporting is that there were nowhere near that number of placebo subjects.”

Are you that dumb that you don’t understand that no matter which arm of the clinical study a subject was in, (Gardasil N=15,706; Placebo N=13,617, "

I absolutely understand what the term placebo means... There were no 13,617 in the placebo group... there were two small studies done with a placebo... the others used the AAHS formulation that’s used by Merck in the manufacture of Gardasil.

So, with the greatest of respect, I'm not dumb, and placebos are rarely used in vaccine studies, and mostly were not in studies of Gardasil. If you look at page 7 of the monograph, it says, "GARDASIL® or AAHS control were given to a total of 1133 women (vaccine N = 582, placebo N = 551)"

Notice the sleight of hand... AAHS control becomes the innocuous placebo just like that...

Further down it even refers to mothers who received "AAHS placebo."

AAHS can never be a placebo.

Further down it says, "In clinical trials, GARDASIL® was generally well tolerated when compared to placebo
(Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate (AAHS) Adjuvant or saline).

So, if AAHS is reactive and Gardasil which contains AAHS and AAHS are compared and there is no difference, how on earth can one say that Gardasil has been tested against placebo for adverse reactions????????

Table 1 on page 8 also helps explain the sleight of hand...

So, with respect, I'll let you sort out the rest of your confusion by yourself

R

Grant says I should pop over as you were all missing my contributions... How nice.

herr doktor bimler, source was lab report.

@ Ron Low:

Back at you...You made reference to this study:

"Ron Law
August 20, 4:17 am

Across the clinical studies, 39 deaths were reported in 29,323 (GARDASIL® N = 15,706; Placebo N = 13,617) individuals (9- through 45-year-old girls and women, and 9- through 26-year-old boys and men).

http://www.merck.ca/assets/en/pdf/products/GARDASIL-PM_E.pdf

A big problem with this reporting is that there were nowhere near that number of placebo subjects."

So, with the greatest of respect, I’m not dumb, and placebos are rarely used in vaccine studies, and mostly were not in studies of Gardasil.

Do you understand that you have just eliminated one of two popular bêtes noires from competition?

Ron is still going on about teh ebil aluminium? The absolute effects of the antigens in Gardasil were being tested, not the aluminium adjuvant so a placebo prepared with everything but the antigens is a proper placebo. There was also a small saline arm.

Would Ron like to tell us how aluminium causes suicides, automobile accidents, drownings, gunshot wounds, etc.? And how that the Gardasil antigens seems to magnify those causes of death? Or maybe Ron, shit just happens. Ockham's Razor and all that.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

lilady... I know I gave the reference... but that doesn't mean one accepts everything one reads without critical analysis...

the fact is, the study claims to have used placebo but ready it in detail it soon becomes obvious they didn't.

What a shame... the objective scibloggers closed the discussion on the NZ blog down. I wonder why...

He's a post I'd like a response from Krebiozen

Krebiozen said, “So if 4 mg of aluminum phosphate is injected only 0.0032644 µg per hour will be absorbed, which works out to less than 0.1 µg per day.”

Let me try and understand the maths.

4,000 ug is injected (and keep in mind it is a mix of phosphate and hydroxide… mostly hydroxide) and has an absorption of “only 0.0032644 µg [ie 3.2 picograms] per hour” that equates to an absorption of 0.0783456ug per 24 hours. at that rate it would take 51,055.83466 days to clear… that’s 139.8789991 years (give or take a little bit for leap years.)

That’s interesting, because our medicines regulator just told the Coroner at Jasmine Renata’s inquest that the vaccine is bound to aluminium and the reason that the aluminium is there is so that the vaccine is – the injection goes into the muscle and it can gradually be exposed to the bloodstream. But the aluminium and the vaccine, if you were to put a vaccine in without the aluminium it would all be destroyed within a few days of its initial injection. So the idea of putting it in the aluminium is it forces it to hand about, as it were, around the vaccination site for a period of time so that all the aluminium is not absorbed at once. It’s actually absorbed over a period of time, up to several weeks, in fact, so it’s not that you get a sudden big burst of high levels of aluminium in your blood. You get a gradual increase over several weeks and then a gradual decline again back down to your normal background level…

In response to a specific question from the Coroner relating to the fact that Jasmine died 6 months after her last Gardasil vaccine dose, the medicines regulator said that the amount of aluminium that would have been present in the injection, at the injection site, would have been, I would expect to be almost non-existent.

So who is correct? Are you saying that the New Zealand Medicines Regulator in Chief has provided the Coroner with false and misleading information???

the fact is, the study claims to have used placebo but ready it in detail it soon becomes obvious they didn’t.

What did it thus eliminate?

@ Ron Law: You don't get to define what a placebo is in a vaccine study.

"What a shame… the objective scibloggers closed the discussion on the NZ blog down. I wonder why…"

Why don't you tell us why the scibloggers closed down the discussion Ron?

Are you saying that the New Zealand Medicines Regulator in Chief has provided the Coroner with false and misleading information???

Without a source for the claims you keep making about the inquest, you are asking people to disagree with hearsay.

the objective scibloggers closed the discussion on the NZ blog down. I wonder why…

Perhaps it had become repetitious, with one of the participants treating the thread like a form of simultaneous chess. Displaying one's ability to repeat the same insults, deflect questions and ignore evidence from multiple foes at once must be great for the self-esteem, but it kind of misses the central point of a comment thread -- i.e. the opportunity to marshal one's evidence, make a case, and convince people.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

i asked admin to close it down because, frankly, the 'discussion' was going nowhere. As Ron is aware, I had also made my expectations around common courtesy quite clear. He is also quite free to setup his own blog to share his point of view; there is no obligation on me, as the host, to provide an endlessly available soapbox.

Ron,

First, "placebo" doesn't mean what you think it means. If you are testing a new antigen, you don't usually compare it against water (although you can); you usually compare it against a null vaccine; all the same ingredients as the real vaccine, but without the antigen. It cannot produce immunity. If there is a synergistic effect between the antigen and the adjuvants (which is, I presume, what you mean by "vaccine is bound to aluminum", since that phrase is fairly nonsensical from a chemistry standpoint), then you will be able to tell from this sort of a placebo; if there is such a relationship, the effects will only be apparent in the study group, not the control group.

Secondly, if there are side effects due to adjuvants alone, they should show up equally in both groups. This is how the placebo used in this case is helpful; it makes it possible to tell not only that there is a problem, but also gives a good idea of where to look to find the culprit. In science, it is always a good idea to try to reduce the possibilities when you're running an experiment, so you have some way of discerning what's going on and don't bury yourself in confounding variables.

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

BTW, I am skeptical that the coroner was actually told such a thing, because that sounds absolutely absurd. Not just the nonsensical "vaccine bound to aluminum" (vaccine is a concoction of many ingredients, including aluminum; you'd think they'd be a teensy bit more accurate when speaking to professionals and say what they think is bound to the aluminum) but also the idea that including aluminum stops it breaking down too fast or creates a controlled-release formulation of some kind. I'm not a medical scientist, but I'm pretty sure that's not how it works at all.

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

Ron,

Regards the source of your quote, you haven't added any more information given your quote itself already gives ("The lab report dated").

Clearly herr doktor bimler (and I, for that matter) are asking for more than that or we wouldn't have bothered to ask in the first place.

I think it's clear what herr doktor bimler and I mean by sources* are URLs so we can view the full source ourselves, access to the original being the whole point of it and all.

-----
* Plural, there are several statements you've have made regards testimonies or content of the inquest that you seem to be avoiding substantiating.

Thanks Grant...He really is a crank anti-vaccinationist, isn't he?

He also obviously knew nothing about the meningococcal disease prevalence amongst Pacific Islanders and the Maori populations in New Zealand, which I studied intently circa early 1990s.

What about his "credentials", heh, heh? And, how about the old dog still pulling his same old tricks of stalking bloggers on the internet?

Send more our way, so we can all enjoy the spectacle. :-)

herr doktor bimler 12:27 am

"[RL]Are you saying that the New Zealand Medicines Regulator in Chief has provided the Coroner with false and misleading information???

[hdb] Without a source for the claims you keep making about the inquest, you are asking people to disagree with hearsay.

OK... let's assume my source is impeccable (which, trust me it is..) so IF I'm correct, Are you saying that the New Zealand Medicines Regulator in Chief has provided the Coroner with false and misleading information???

if you’re looking to be entertained, one more:

Wait, is the BZP part real?

RL: OK… let’s assume my source is impeccable (which, trust me it is..)

Now, why on earth would we do that? Grant & hdb have both repeatedly asked you for your actual evidence in support of what you're saying here. Why won't you simply provide it, if it's so 'impeccable'?

Actually, I have no page anywhere that I'm aware of... if others set up pages that's for them... I've never had any communication with whale.to or rense as far as I know...

Maybe this link on New Zealand's Ministry of Health website will also suggest I'm a woo-ist...

Toward Clinical Excellence: learning from experience
http://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/publications/clinicale…

Yep, I'm obviously a woo-ist!!!

So why not focus on the science????

^ Eh, sorry. Link still works.

Grant pleads, "I think it’s clear what herr doktor bimler and I mean by sources* are URLs so we can view the full source ourselves, access to the original being the whole point of it and all.

—–
* Plural, there are several statements you’ve have made regards testimonies or content of the inquest that you seem to be avoiding substantiating."

Grant, it is clear you do not have access to information I have access to, and yet you are more than willing to shadow box beyond your weight.

Trust me, what I've stated is factual... and since when did evidence have to be available via a URL...

You clearly are out of the loop... so you should wait until you are able to discuss matters from an informed source.

As you should know with the MeNZB scandal, Sumner and I had access to information, statistics, opinion from even MOH and Ak University researchers that most people don't have access to...

One day all will be revealed... meantime, you are shadow boxing beyond your weight... enjoy!

Narad, if you had studied the risks associated with over 30 million doses of BZP use in New Zealand then you would be able to make an informed comment, rather than a simple snide remark based on anecdotal comment.

Your comments don't bother me, although I'm sure they'll increase the salivation of members of the so-called objective sci-blog community.

I have done a lot of work for a lot of clients with only ever advertising once (a $300 add that got me $300 worth of work... essentially a pro-bono job.) I have never taken a job with a pre-determined outcome, and have regularly turned down good paying work when asked to...

Don't focus on the packaging... look for the chocolates.

Norad, for the record, I prepared a code of practice for the social tonic industry in NZ... it included manufacture of pills under GMP conditions, upper levels per dose, restrictions on pack size etc... I worked with the legal industry and we got about 90 percent of the product complying with the code... a few idiots supersized doses and even sold the white powder in sachets... which I always argued should be illegal. The Ministry of Health and Food Safety NZ threatened manufacturers that they would lose their licenses if they manufactured these legal substance... and so the industry went and manufactured anywhere with few controls... even though their products were explicitly legal under New Zealand drug law.

Government funded research was being undertaken which was canned by the researchers when they realised that the BZP was improving driving... go figure...

Anything can be taken out of context... and twisted...

Alison, you'll just have to live with it until all is revealed...

"Narad, if you had studied the risks associated with over 30 million doses of BZP use in New Zealand then you would be able to make an informed comment, rather than a simple snide remark based on anecdotal comment."

Here's the research folks...enjoy!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzylpiperazine

Have all the countries which have banned BZP, including New Zealand, now unbanned it?

Calli Arcale, 12:34 am

"BTW, I am skeptical that the coroner was actually told such a thing, because that sounds absolutely absurd."

All will be revealed in time... it is a fact... but the media didn't report the absurdity... only what suited.

Lilady, the wikipedia article is not bad but is incomplete and includes outdated data...

I agree fully with this... "Adverse effects have been reported following its use including acute psychosis, renal toxicity, and seizures.[2] No deaths have been reported following a sole ingestion of BZP, although there have been at least two deaths from the combination of BZP and MDMA."

The report noted the tens of millions of doses consumed in NZ, so it is not surprising that there are some reported adverse effects...

Can I suggest you step back and think about this... 30,000 people given gardasil or control substance and 30 or so die and that's to be expected...

30,000,000 doses of BZP are consumed with a few reports of adverse reactions and two deaths which were attributed to other drugs and all hell breaks loose as to how evil and dangerous this substance is.

Can I suggest you step back and reflect on this.

R

Ron,

“OK… let’s assume my source is impeccable”

I wrote: “so we can view the full source ourselves, access to the original being the whole point of it ”

There was no questioning of the nature of the source, but wanting to see the full source. You’re evading giving the source, as you have with every remark you made directly about the inquiry itself to date.

For example, earlier you made some remarks about the Renatas asking for other tests, but left out the full context. It's not that the source is good or not, but if your representation of what was said is fair and accurate. We should be able to judge that for ourselves. To do that we need the full context, just like your remarks about the medicines regulator at Alison's bog. (I haven't found time to catch up with comments there yet to see what was written since I last wrote there.)

Another possibility, one that herr doktor bimler touched on, is that you don't have a independent source, that's it's just your recollection, in which case it's hearsay.

One day all will be revealed…

That sounds eerily familiar to what most cranks say. Ron, would you care to put a date on *when* your truth™ will be revealed?

And will it include a link to any evidence other people can read, or will it just be provided by your assertion?

"Can I suggest you step back and think about this… 30,000 people given gardasil or control substance and 30 or so die and that’s to be expected…"

How many individual doses of Gardisal have been administered and how many people have died?

(Citations desperately needed)

We are all waiting for "all to be revealed">

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/HPV/Index.html

let’s assume my source is impeccable (which, trust me it is..) so IF I’m correct

No, I will not assume that. Rather than criticise a third party based on your hypothetical stipulations, I prefer to work within this reality. You have given me no reason to trust you or the insider knowledge to which you claim access. You may or may not be quoting documents accurately, with the proper context -- we do not know.

If this knowledge is not publicly available, then it serves no purpose in the discussion -- other than to shut down arguments in lieu of winning them -- and as far as I am concerned it doesn't exist. You might as well cite the messages you receive from the leprechauns in your trousers. If the full facts will vindicate you at some point in the future, feel free to wait until then. Gloating in expectation of that future vindication is all very well but it doesn't convince anyone.

To clarify an earlier comment...
one’s ability to repeat the same insults
I am not complaining about insults per se, and indeed am in no position to complain. But they should be varied. When it is the same sneer each time, the entertainment value soon wears off.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

"Alison, you’ll just have to live with it until all is revealed…"

So you are saying you are offering unsubstantiated material out of the full context needed to determine their accuracy about an inquiry whose report has yet to be released?

Shows you're two-faced, presenting potentially misleading material ahead of the coroner's report. I've already seen you offer one such item well out of context. Others might choose to infer from that example that any other remarks from you are equally out of context.

"Alison’s bog"

Erp. Sorry Alison :-) That should be Alison's blog.

RL “Can I suggest you step back and think about this… 30,000 people given gardasil or control substance and 30 or so die and that’s to be expected…”

O-kay, so someone receives the vaccine & some months later is killed in a car crash. How, exactly, does this demonstrate the causal relationship that you are attempting to demonstrate?

The complete details (from the monograph linked to by lilady):
The most common cause of death was motor vehicle accident (5 individuals who received GARDASIL® and 4 individuals who received placebo), followed by drug overdose/suicide (2 individuals who received GARDASIL ® and 6 individuals who received placebo), gun shot wound (1 individual who received GARDASIL® and 3 individuals who
received placebo), and pulmonary embolus/deep vein thrombosis (1 individual who received GARDASIL® and 1 individual who received placebo). In addition, there were 2 cases of sepsis, 1 case of pancreatic cancer, 1 case of arrhythmia, 1 case of pulmonary tuberculosis, 1 case of
hyperthyroidism, 1 case of post-operative pulmonary embolism and acute renal failure, 1 case of traumatic brain injury/cardiac arrest, 1 case of systemic lupus erythematosus, 1 case of
cerebrovascular accident, 1 case of breast cancer, and 1 case of nasopharyngeal cancer in the group that received GARDASIL®; and 1 case of asphyxia, 1 case of acute lymphocytic leukemia, 1 case of chemical poisoning, and 1 case of myocardial ischaemia in the placebo group.

So, which of these deaths should have caused alarm about the vaccine, & why?

Alison, that the data in the medicines datasheet... what it doesn't say is some of those deaths occured more than a year after the last dose. I have never said that those deaths were caused by the vaccine, have I? Where have I said that?

What I object to is double standards on the one hand, and sleight of hand on the other.

For example, IF (and I simply say IF) aluminium adjuvant is a problem as suggested by some rightly or wrongly, using it as a so-called 'placebo control' does not enable claims of safety for Gardasil, does it? Especially when 1:750 of the subjects died during the study period (however long that is.)

On the other hand, when none of 200,000 plus users of BZP die (2 if you include the two who had consumed illicit drugs) then it is demonised by some and banned.

I might add that the experts who looked at BZP said it wasn't dangerous enough to prohibit... it was demonised and prohibited for political reasons only.

herr doktor bimler, Alison, Grant, if you know someone who can meet me in west auckland I'm happy to show you my primary source documents...

Grant & Alison have my email so feel free to nominate anyone... perhaps we could meet at Westgate McCafe for a coffee... my shout...

How many Gardisal vaccines have been administered?

How many deaths have been caused by the vaccine?

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/HPV/jama.html

The study's main findings include the following:

More than 23 million doses were administered nationally since the HPV vaccine was licensed in June 2006. There were a total of 12,424 reports to VAERS of adverse events following HPV vaccination through December 2008.
Since the HPV vaccine was approved, the vast majority (94%) of adverse events reported to VAERS after receiving this vaccine have not been serious. An adverse event is considered serious if it is life threatening, or results in death, permanent disability, abnormal conditions at birth, hospitalization or prolonged hospitalization.
The most common events reported were:
Syncope (or fainting)–common after need injections, especially in pre-teens and teens
Local reactions at the site of immunization (pain and redness)
Dizziness
Nausea
Headache
Of the 12,424 reports of adverse events, 772 (6% of all reports) described serious adverse events, including 32 reports of deaths.
The 32 death reports were reviewed and there was no common pattern to the deaths that would suggest they were caused by the vaccine. In cases where there was an autopsy, death certificate, or medical records, the cause of death could be explained by factors other than the vaccine. Some causes of death determined to date include diabetes, viral illness, illicit drug use, and heart failure.
There were two reports of unusual neurological illness (per autopsy, probable variants of Amytrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) often referred to as “Lou Gehrig's Disease”) that resulted in the death of two young females. There is no current evidence suggesting that the HPV vaccine caused these illnesses, but researchers from several highly regarded academic centers are studying the cases.
There was increased reporting of syncope and pulmonary emboli (blood clots of the lungs) compared with what has been found for other vaccines given to females of the same age. Of the people who had blood clots 90% had a known risk factor for blood clots, such as taking oral contraceptives (birth control pills). VAERS reports cannot prove the vaccine caused the adverse event in women with these risk factors. However, this finding needs further investigation.

Time to shut this anti-vaccine citationless troll down now.

I’m happy to show you my primary source documents

The offer is kind. Does it include making a copy of the documents, to read at leisure? I am a fast reader, but you do not state how many pages there are. And I have a reasonably good memory, but it is far from eidetic.

I have been careful through this thread to use words like "access" or "available" in connection with RonL's sources of inside information. To my mind, "being shown" does not fit with either of these words.

A brief examination of the appropriate threads at Alison's and Grant's blogs reveal any number of times when RonL has mercilessly mocked the insufficient skepticism of Science bloggers, who simply take the innocuous nature of aluminium on faith, trusting what they hear from Authorities, rather than carefully scrutinising every detail of the source documents. I imagine he will be gratified that in this case I do not take things on faith or trust what I am told.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

Alison,

I was more worried that some people might read it in the sense of Kiwi slang, y'know that place you relieve yourself... ("at Alison’s bog")

Ron:

Email a scanned copy to us care of the SMC, their details are on their website.

"For example, IF (and I simply say IF) aluminium adjuvant is a problem as suggested by some rightly or wrongly, using it as a so-called ‘placebo control’ does not enable claims of safety for Gardasil, does it?"

You're travelling a circle - you've raised this before and it was pointed out to you that it was done that way to test the antigens, etc. etc.

And, no, you have not "simply said" you are examining if the aluminium adjuvant might be a problem - you have been persisting in trying to wave away what doesn't appeal to you.

A problem you have is that you start with what you would like to be true, then try alter or fit things to it.

"So why not focus on the science????"

Pretty rich coming from you, given I tried over days to get you to do that and instead you persisted in mud slinging, etc., at me.

Grant says, "Ron:

Email a scanned copy to us care of the SMC, their details are on their website."

RALFL... Grant you simply don't understand NZ's legal system, do you... It's simple... if you know someone in Ak who can meet me for a cuppa coffee I'm only too happy to SHOW them... obviously you objective-minded sci-bloggers are arguing your case blind...

Ron

"Alison, that the data in the medicines datasheet… what it doesn’t say is some of those deaths occured more than a year after the last dose. I have never said that those deaths were caused by the vaccine, have I? Where have I said that?

Here, Ron...

“Can I suggest you step back and think about this… 30,000 people given gardasil or control substance and 30 or so die and that’s to be expected…”

I suggest that you think about your anti-vaccine activities. Don't you think you've done enough harm with your "preaching" to credulous parents about the *dangers* of the meningococcal vaccine, while lying about the approval process and lying about the epidemic of invasive meningococcal Type B disease among Pacific Islanders and Maori populations?

herr doktor bimler, if I was allowed to give you copies, I would... do you know anyone prepared to meet for a coffee? Or hot choc, if they aren't into drugs.

@ Grant:

Ron Law has no credibility here...or within the science community. What he does not realize is that his conduct here, his faulty reasoning, his juvenile refusal to answer questions, his lies and his inane rants will be all over the internet within a few days.

We gave him enough rope to hang himself and he has done just that.

You're busted Ron.

Lilady, for the record, I have never told anyone they should not vaccinate. The MeNZB issue was a specific issue, and all of what Sumner Burstyn & I wrote was sourced from official documents, company documents, documents obtained via official information requests, or documents that simply arrived unsolicited.

Lilady, I'm not busted... I work independently and anything said on sites like this have zero impact on me... hence I do not hide behind pseudonyms like many on here...

I don't advertise my services. I simply help people with no preconditions.

@Ron Law:

Alison, that the data in the medicines datasheet… what it doesn’t say is some of those deaths occured more than a year after the last dose. I have never said that those deaths were caused by the vaccine, have I? Where have I said that?

How about at comment 294, where you said:

a baby boy of six weeks who was injected with Gardasil vaccine by mistake… he died a few weeks ago aged three… of a rare form of leukaemia… of course, the two events are entirely co-incidental...

Yes they are, actually.
You are using the old tactic of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), you claim that you have impeccable data but refuse to show it, you cite reports out of context and you (mis)use VAERS in a dishonest attempt to make Gardasil look dangerous.

By Julian Frost (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

@Ron Law:

I'm not busted...

Yes, you most definitely are.

By Julian Frost (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

Julian Frost, as you've noted, I never said the vaccine caused the death... if you had any understanding of pharmacovigilance you would know that causality can't be determined on a whim...

What intrigues me is how Jasmine is claimed by some to have most likely died of a genetic defect, when there is no evidence to suggest she did. There is some evidence to say she didn't...

When Jasmine's mum says her daughter suffered this or that it is hearsay. When the autopsy report mention symptoms (presumably info obtained from the mother) it is science... I'm afraid that how the system works...

Don't even bother to explain any of your actions Ron...or that of your partner Sumner Burstyn.

You've been busted.

@ Julian Frost: Wait until the other science blogs pick up on this thread. Poor Ron's been busted.

@Ron Law:

I never said the vaccine caused the death...

You insinuated it. Like I said: Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.

if you had any understanding of pharmacovigilance you would know that causality can’t be determined on a whim.

You cited VAERS reports of deaths and mentioned a story where a child developed cancer literally years after getting a Gardasil jab. You owe me a new Hypocrisy Meter.
@lilady: that should be fun. I wonder if Abbie of ERV will have anything to say.

By Julian Frost (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

If I'm going to be "BUSTED" I may as well post some links to some resent work I've done. As a person who is fully vaccinated, whose children are fully vaccinated, whose grandchildren are fully vaccinated, I guess by your definition that does make me anti-vaccine...

Anyway, this will obviously be damning....

http://www.nyrnaturalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/UK_Bubbles_Gra…

http://www.nyrnaturalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/EU27-Relative-…

Slightly older

http://www.laleva.cc/petizione/ronlaw/relative_risk_boeing72.pdf

These are all sites that have put my work on their websites... they are not my websites... and they did not ask..

Thanks

"and mentioned a story where a child developed cancer literally years after getting a Gardasil jab. You owe me a new Hypocrisy Meter."

It was two years after... hardly years in the context of cancer development...

"Email a scanned copy to us care of the SMC, their details are on their website.”
Grant you simply don’t understand NZ’s legal system, do you

RonL, you are in effect telling us that e-mailing a scanned copy is illegal under NZ law. Truly your knowledge of the legal code runs deeper than mine. Now I live in fear of the knock at the door for all the times I have violated this statute.

Perhaps you mean that the documents are *confidential* -- but that cannot be, for you are willing to break their confidentiality by allowing someone to read them (you *are* offering a reading, aren't you?)

Do you mean that someone asserts copyright over them? Let us know who, and under what clause of the copyright law, and perhaps we can find an exemption.

Is it a case of official secrecy? Rest assured that as a legacy of my previous employment, I retain a high-level security clearance (Alison can vouch for this claim).

herr doktor bimler, if I was allowed to give you copies, I would… do you know anyone prepared to meet for a coffee? Or hot choc, if they aren’t into drugs.

Ah. You are suggesting that if some acquaintance of mine were to see the documents on which you base your statements (about genetic testing, and the incompetence of NZ's health officialdom in the course of an inquest) -- no talk of actually *examining* them -- this would somehow allay my concerns that you have misunderstood them or made some error in your summaries, or that you have omitted some crucial context in the details you have represented here, or that those details are representative of the documents.

Does this *really* strike you as a reasonable proposition?

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

herr doktor bimler, it's your call... if you want confirmation of what I've said I'm offering it to you... if you don't that's your call...

It doesn't bother me... I know what I've said is correct... the offer stands.

It was two years after… hardly years in the context of cancer development.

So you now admit that you were insinuating the jab caused the cancer?
Keep the comments coming Ron. I'm enjoying the target practise.

By Julian Frost (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

You are not offering confirmation. You are offering the opportunity for someone else to be shown a pile of papers.
Elsewhere, you complain that science bloggers are too willing to believe Authorities' assurances about the innocuous nature of aluminium, blissfully trusting what they are told when they should personally scrutinise every detail of the source documents.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 21 Aug 2012 #permalink

Why does Ron remind of another Australian poster that graced our presence a couple of months ago? "Keeper of the Secret Knowledge" and all that....perhaps Ron has been visiting the guru in his Lean-To in the Australian Rain Forest?

I love it, when in response to massive amounts of evidence that contradicts their position, the crank will respond with "Trust me, I have a source" but reveal nothing.....evidence people, it does not mean what Ron thinks it means.....

hdb: you *are* offering a reading, aren’t you?

As in the sense of, a chance for a quiet sit-down to go through the documents in detail? Somehow, the suggestion that they be 'shown' to you or your proxy makes me doubt it...

As in the sense of, a chance for a quiet sit-down to go through the documents in detail?

With coffee! Or hot chocolate!

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Firstly, Ron, how do we know that you haven't taken the data out of context and aren't showing incomplete data?
Secondly, and forgive my suspicious nature, how do we know that if we take up your offer you won't suddenly turn around and say that there's a problem and you can't show us the evidence after all.
In short, proof or GTFO.

By Julian Frost (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

As in the sense of, a chance for a quiet sit-down to go through the documents in detail.

With coffee! Or hot chocolate!

You asked for verification... I'm offering it...

Julian Frost... 6:00 am

"Firstly, Ron, how do we know that you haven’t taken the data out of context and aren’t showing incomplete data?"

If I have whoever sees them will be able to report back that you've all been duped... it's my credibility at stake here.

"Secondly, and forgive my suspicious nature, how do we know that if we take up your offer you won’t suddenly turn around and say that there’s a problem and you can’t show us the evidence after all."

Why would I embarrass myself by doing that????

You asked for verification… I’m offering it…

In which case, how about a bit of clarity as to what is actually being offered? As herr doktor has said, he's a fast reader but not that fast. Would he or his proxy have the opportunity to read carefully through the totality of those documents on offer, or is this more along the lines of 'look, here they are, see!'. I ask because there is a world of difference between showing someone something, & allowing them to examine it thoroughly for themselves. Herr doktor has pointed out that you complain that science bloggers are too willing to believe Authorities’ assurances about the innocuous nature of aluminium, blissfully trusting what they are told when they should personally scrutinise every detail of the source documents.
So you can hardly be surprised when we try to nail down exactly what it is that's being offered.

Lawrence I don't want to sound pedantic but much as it pains me to say this, Ron is a New Zealander, not an Australian, although if they would like him..........

By nz sceptic (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

nz sceptic,

"not an Australian, although if they would like him………."

After all, he's already rubbed shoulders with Viera Scheibner in the on-line comments section at BMJ ;-)

The risk of party pills was "infinitesimal" if they were used in recommended doses, and not as harmful as alcohol, he said. Young people chose to take party pills, but were having "an untested vaccine forced on" them. He said he was scientifically qualified with a certificate gained working in a medical laboratory for 20 years. He also had a Master of Business Administration degree.

This is just precious. "Medically-qualified" because you did rote monkey work in a lab? And you get dose makes the poison? And then there is this gem:

Can I suggest you step back and think about this… 30,000 people given gardasil or control substance and 30 or so die and that’s to be expected…

30,000,000 doses of BZP are consumed with a few reports of adverse reactions and two deaths which were attributed to other drugs and all hell breaks loose as to how evil and dangerous this substance is.

Can I suggest you step back and reflect on this.

Gee Ron Risk Analysis Advisor, do you think there might be a difference in the reporting schemata for those enrolled in a controlled clinical trial as opposed for those taking recreational drugs?

By Science Mom (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

lilady, too much I could suggest but you could google: "ron law" BMJ

Ron,

He’s a post I’d like a response from Krebiozen. Krebiozen said, “So if 4 mg of aluminum phosphate is injected only 0.0032644 µg per hour will be absorbed, which works out to less than 0.1 µg per day.”
Let me try and understand the maths. 4,000 ug is injected (and keep in mind it is a mix of phosphate and hydroxide… mostly hydroxide) and has an absorption of “only 0.0032644 µg [ie 3.2 picograms] per hour” that equates to an absorption of 0.0783456ug per 24 hours. at that rate it would take 51,055.83466 days to clear… that’s 139.8789991 years (give or take a little bit for leap years.)

You meant nanograms not picograms as you mentioned on Alison's blog. I did give you the reference for those dissolution figures: Priest (PMID: 15152306), and he quotes dissolution of aluminum phosphate as 8.1 x 10-4 mg h -1 g -1 and of hydroxide as 2.7x 10-4 mg h -1 g -1. Priest gives his reference for this as Hem who used Flarend's figures. If you think they or I have made an error, do please point it out. I used the more soluble phosphate to be charitable, but if you prefer we could figure it out for
hydroxide. 2.7 x 10-4 mg is 0.27 µg so 0.27 µg of every gram of aluminum hydroxide injected dissolves every hour, 4 mg is 0.004 grams and 0.27 x 0.004 makes 0.00108 µg per hour, multiplied by 24 makes 0.02592 µg per day, if you'll forgive the ludicrous number of decimal places. I don't think I have made an error in my math, but do feel free to correct me if I have.

I'm interested in ball park figures within an order of magnitude or two, and as I'm thoroughly weary of repeating, and whatever way I look at it the amount of aluminum even a premature baby with renal impairment can excrete is many times greater than the amount absorbed from vaccines. If you have any substantial evidence that refutes that, or some reason to refute the evidence I have presented that doesn't involved nitpicking irrelevant details, please share it, otherwise I'm becoming extremely bored by this discussion.

That’s interesting, because our medicines regulator just told the Coroner at Jasmine Renata’s inquest that the vaccine is bound to aluminium and the reason that the aluminium is there is so that the vaccine is – the injection goes into the muscle and it can gradually be exposed to the bloodstream. But the aluminium and the vaccine, if you were to put a vaccine in without the aluminium it would all be destroyed within a few days of its initial injection.

There is a difference between being exposed to the bloodstream and the various components of the immune system it contains, and dissolving in the bloodstream. It sounds as if your medicines regulator is trying to put this in terms a layperson can understand. As I understand it the antigen is adsorbed onto aluminum phosphate or hydroxide, rather than being chemically bound to it. Anyway, several studies have found aluminum remaining at the injection site even years later, which is the reason for the known local irritation problem aluminum adjuvants cause, so that figure isn't so unlikely when you consider that the rate of dissolution slows as the amount remaining falls, which is of course how half lives work. In theory the aluminum will never clear entirely, just as Xeno's arrow will never hit its target.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Grant: Thanks for the reference to the BMJ Quick Response site.

Not only has our *expert* risk analysis commenter rubbed shoulders with Vera Scheibner...he's in *good* company with John D. Stone and Clifford Miller. Is he that clueless that he doesn't know the many etiologies of NPAFP?

He's NOT ANTI-VACCINE....so how many other vaccines has he commented on and lied about? So far I count Gardisal, Meningococcal and Polio.

What vaccines does the Ron Risk Analyst think, in his *professional opinion* are safe? Do any of them have aluminum adjuvants?

Grant, you and Alison were more that patient with this creep. Trust me "all is now revealed" about Ron Law...he's busted.

I also wanted to respond to one other thing Ron wrote on Alison's blog. I wrote, "Do you not agree there is a difference between experiments which result in blood aluminum concentrations of 150 µg/L and vaccines which result in blood aluminum concentrations of less than 6 µg/L?” Ron responded:

The short answer is, yes. As New Zealand’s Forensic Pathologist, nick name of Sherlock Holmes, said to the coroner at Jasmine’s inquest when confronted with conflicting experimental evidence, “So what?” It’s quite comical, really… the same Sherlock Holmes complained to the coroner that Dr Lee’s evidence was too scientific and should have included a lay summary so that he could understand it!! What a hoot!

How is this in any way conflicting experimental evidence? I suppose it does conflict with your prejudices about aluminum. There is no conflict at all if you simply accept that aluminum is not neurotoxic except when absorbed by the body in quantities that cannot be readily excreted, leading to grossly elevated blood concentrations. You seem to believe that aluminum can be transported from muscle to brain in excessive quantities without traveling through the bloodstream on its journey. I assume that's why Prof. Romain Gherardi has come up with the idea that macrophages can somehow transport aluminum to the brain without being detected. If all the aluminum rushes straight to the brain via macrophages after injection, I have to wonder at the excessive levels of aluminum found at the injection site (11,000 mg/kg in the case of aluminum hydroxide) six months later in monkeys (PMID:15661384). What a hoot indeed.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Yes Narad the “party pill” is real…it’s similar to methamphetamine.

Oh, I knew the substance was real. I mean the shilling for it part. The idea that someone could, with a straight face, complain that Gardasil studies aren't up to his standards while at the same time going on about the safe-as-milk nature of a barely studied neurotransmitter knob-twiddling white powder (which barely studying nonetheless turned up two cases of status epilepticus, for crying out loud, in 80 adverse events in the course of six months in Christchurch alone) is truly impressive. The man is a living monument to intellectual dishonesty.

@ Narad: Even more hilarious (?), is how Ron Risk Analyst defended his shilling for the "party pill", right here, when you busted him.

And now we have this from Medscape.com... do we accept it uncritically? Critically examine it then decide? or do we reject it uncriyically?

Doctor Sentenced to Death for Ordering Unnecessary Scan
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/769111
Andrew J. Vickers, PhD, DPhil

Posted: 08/16/2012

Dr. Philip Bird, a family practitioner in Oxford, Mississippi, has been sentenced to death by lethal injection for ordering an MRI on a patient with uncomplicated low back pain. Bird's sentence is believed to be the first under the state's new "get tough" 3-strikes law. The presiding judge, the Honorable Marsha Williams, told the court that although she sympathized with the defendant, the law left her no discretion. Bird twice previously had been found guilty of ordering unnecessary scans: a CT for a woman reporting pregnancy-related tension headache and a bone scan for a patient with localized prostate cancer.

Prosecuting attorney Luke O'Neill said that justice had been served. "It gives me no pleasure to send a man to death row," said O'Neill, "but Dr. Bird had a choice and knew the consequences of that choice." State senator Grant Douglas, Jr., a former hospital administrator who introduced the "3 strikes" law, said that he hoped the case would "serve as warning to the medical community. We've tried everything to bring down the rate of unnecessary scans. We've done studies, presented evidence, written guidelines -- hell, I've even gone down on my hands and knees and begged -- but nothing doing. Scratch your ear in front of a doctor and next thing you know you'll be shoved into a CT machine. Really, they left us no choice but to threaten them with death."

Dr. Josephine Watkins, a medical economist, said that she doubted the ruling would affect medical practice. "The economic and malpractice incentives to scan are so extreme that even the possibility of years in a windowless cell followed by a botched execution is unlikely to be a deterrent." Bird himself was unrepentant. In a statement released by his attorney, he said that Douglas "needed his head examined" and that either CT or functional MRI should be considered.

If you accept "(which barely studying nonetheless turned up two cases of status epilepticus, for crying out loud, in 80 adverse events in the course of six months in Christchurch alone)" uncritically then you accept all of the adverse reactions and Sudden Unexplained Deaths following Gardasil... I don't think you have connected the dots yet. What are the background levels of illness?

More deflection Ron? It seems to me you have made a number of statements that have elicited queries. Perhaps stay focused (like I tell my six year-old) on the task at hand and stop with the inane attempts at distraction.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

@Ron - are you reading the Onion now?

Krebiozen said, "As I understand it the antigen is adsorbed onto aluminum phosphate or hydroxide, rather than being chemically bound to it."

That's been the understanding... an understanding that Dr Lee has challenged in his evidence... time will tell weather he's correct or not.

Dr Lee has said that if the relationship was a simple one of adsorption, then they would separate at a high pH, which he claims didn't occur... he said the plausible explanation was that they had become chemically bound, which makes it a new/novel compound that hadn't been studied.

So Dr Lee's results challenge your understanding... that's one of the key points of his evidence... the other relates to finding fragments of DNA in Gardasil that regulators had, until now, said were not present in the vaccine. Whether/how significant that is is yet to be determined. The regulators have accepted the fact and said it's normal and to be expected... they just have denied it in the past.

Alison, it's simple... I made some statements, denialists have said I made it up and want verification, I'm offering a means to verify what I said.

It doesn't bother me if denialists disagree/or name call/ or whatever... that's what denialists do...

I made a couple of statements... how long does it take to verify a couple of statements?

And now we have this from Medscape.com… do we accept it uncritically? Critically examine it then decide? or do we reject it uncriyically?

I think "we" note that it is styled as "From Medscape Humor" and then laugh at you instead.

Lawrence, it's enough to make ones eyes water... alas, it is an article on Medscape.com... They acknowledge it comes from onion, though, whatever that is.

@ Lawrence: Welcome back; we missed you. Ron Risk Analysts doesn't realize that it was a humorous article placed on Medscape.

BTW, Ron Risk Analyst...have you ever seen someone in status epilepticus? It is a major medical emergency.

Still trying to deflect the well-deserved criticism you received for your street drug party pill shilling, eh? You're still busted, Ron.

@Ron - you've either been hiding under a rock or have been using too much of your own product if you don't get the "part of the Medscape Humor Series" clearly labeled in the article.

@lilady - glad to be back. Been slumming in the comments section on USToday.com - omg, I thought the trolls here were bad.....

@ Lawrence...I posted directly online at Christine on that "other blog"...or yes I did...about the lack of enforcement of their comment policy. Care to join me?

As a matter of interest, in light of snide comments above about how Gardasil protects people from MVAs etc.

A government funded study was canned under the pretense of serious adverse effects when in fact the alleged effects were not serious at all... the study revealed that taking BZP improved driving ability...

The Ministry of Transport got the ESR to test hundreds of MVA cadavers for recreational and pharma drugs... not a single one contained BZP which was not what they were expecting given that 10-20 percent of the populace were using it.

BZP is not the same as amphetamine... early studies showed it had about 1/10th the psychoactive effects, but it was not addictive and no one was ever arrested in NZ for adverse behaviour due to BZP use... Alcohol is by far... by a country mile, far more problematic than BZP ever was...

From my extensive reading of the literature, and seeing research undertaken at Auckland University (but not allowed to be published) BZP (100mg) has a similar effect as 2-3 espressos.

...*or yes did*...= *oh yes I did (brain fog)

Actually, Lilady, I was fully aware it was humour... hence my comment about "do we accept it uncritically? Critically examine it then decide? or do we reject it uncri[t]ically?"

One thing I learnt many moons ago, Critically examine it then decide... especially medical science.

I wrote a totally factual comment on the BMJ about AFP/Polio and it gets tagged with woooooooo by association...

If I was concerned about "being busted" [by the way, to whom, and who cares anyway???] then why would I be one of the few on here to not hide behind a pseudonym???

"From my extensive reading of the literature, and seeing research undertaken at Auckland University (but not allowed to be published) BZP (100mg) has a similar effect as 2-3 espressos."

More super secret suppressed studies, busted one?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzylpiperazine

I must, however, thank Ron Law for having caused me to pick up another papillomavirus tidbit: the jackalope is real.

"BTW, Ron Risk Analyst…have you ever seen someone in status epilepticus? It is a major medical emergency."

I used to work with someone who had regular seizures... we would simply make sure his immediate environment was safe, and he soon came too and got on with life... he'd fit once a week or so, despite the best of medication...

200,000 users... two admissions to ED with SE... coincidence? or causal? What's the background rate?

Who cares whether or not you hide behind a 'nym Ron?

Truth be told, we all have our reasons. A number of science bloggers have been contacted relentlessly through their email accounts...just like you behaved toward science bloggers in New Zealand. Some science bloggers have had their livelihood threatened by persistent trolls. A sixteen-year-old blogger from Wales received threatening emails.

I myself have my very own cyber-stalker, since banned at RI, who still "lurks" here and pursues me on other science blogs. A cannabis-addled troll threatened my professional license, by calling me a drug pusher.

Ron Risk Analyst, I read all your BMJ "Instant Responses" about NPAFP....and you are clueless and still busted.

why would I be one of the few on here to not hide behind a pseudonym???

I'm thinking "nothing to lose anyway."

Alcohol is by far… by a country mile, far more problematic than BZP ever was…

And cervical cancer is by far... by a country mile, far more problematic than aluminum adjuvanting ever was. HTH. HAND.

@ Ron Risk Analyst: I'm calling bullshit on your work colleague whom you state was in status epilepticus....you saw someone with a grand mal seizure...not in status epilepticus.

My son was in status epilepticus for hours, until IV push medication (lorazapam) finally stopped the seizure. He was resuscitated and left with post-ictal Todd's paralysis, which resolved 12 hours later.

I used to work with someone who had regular seizures

"Regular seizures" =/= Status epilepticus. The latter is not handled by ensuring a safe immediate environment.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

I always wonder why people tout "oh, I don't hide behind a pseudonym!" As if any of us would even be able to tell. Or care. Your arguments should stand or fall on their own merits, Mr Law, not on your name. It is also telling that in response to my criticisms, and those of others, your only response is that "all will be revealed". I have to wonder just what it is you hope to accomplish by that. It's an admission that you have nothing with which to convince us. Not that it matters, since you hedge your position like a politician, perhaps in order to avoid being wrong about something.

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

I have a comment stuck in moderation...perhaps because I actually used the word b*llsh*t on a post back at Ron Risk Analyst about status epilepticus.

Here again, using the asterisks, is my post

@ Ron Risk Analyst: I’m calling b*llsh*t on your work colleague whom you state was in status epilepticus….you saw someone with a grand mal seizure…not in status epilepticus.

My son was in status epilepticus for hours, until IV push medication (lorazapam) finally stopped the seizure. He was resuscitated and left with post-ictal Todd’s paralysis, which resolved 12 hours later.

Ron, Could you please tell us how Gardasil and/or an aluminium adjuvant caused the CODs listed in the clinical trials? Could you please tell us how you can compare the surveillance between an RCT and recreational drug use?

By Science Mom (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Ron, it sounds as if your co-worker suffered from grand mal epilepsy. This is in no way, shape or form the same as status epilepticus: http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1164462-overview & to dismiss the latter shows you didn't even bother to look it up.
And I see lilady has pointed this out rather more strongly.

The term "grand mal" is now deprecated in favour of "Tonic-clonic" seizures. Only the most up-to-date epilepsy nomenclature here!

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Just some general thoughts. Excuse my replying to several people in one comment. Not good form, but I haven't time to wait for the blog "comment pause" feature to clear a second, third, etc. Still haven't found time to read the last posts on Alison's nor all the new ones here either so my apologies in advance if I've missed some.

Ron wrote: "If I have whoever sees them will be able to report back that you’ve all been duped…"

That's not what is at question here. (As can be see from his other comments it's typical of Ron re-frame things to insinuate others. It's also inaccurate another way: duping is when the writer intentionally seeks to mislead. I doubt very much that journalists nor those at the inquiry acted with intention to deceive as his use of the word 'dupe' would imply.)

Ron wrote: "What intrigues me is how Jasmine is claimed by some to have most likely died of a genetic defect,"

It was pointed out that the most frequent cause of "unexplained" deaths in fit younger people have apparently proven to be rare inherited heart disease, etc., etc.

Ron wrote: "when there is no evidence to suggest she did. There is some evidence to say she didn’t…"

Which is neither/nor there.

Lilady wrote:

He’s NOT ANTI-VACCINE….so how many other vaccines has he commented on and lied about? So far I count Gardisal, Meningococcal and Polio.

What vaccines does the Ron Risk Analyst think, in his *professional opinion* are safe? Do any of them have aluminum adjuvants?

- We've asked similar over the years. Ron's anti-vaccine through and through. He'll now come along an deny that; that circle is (very) familiar.

Krebiozen,

Good replies. Is one aspect to Al being in the interstitial space is that it's not interacting with anything in a harmful way as it potentially could within cells?

Ron: wrote "And now we have this from Medscape.com" - bait'n'switch? Waste of time.

Ron wrote: "Alison, it’s simple… I made some statements, denialists have said I made it up and want verification, I’m offering a means to verify what I said."

Not correct. It's already been explained to you (several times now) it's the full context people are after. (Ron's dig at denialists is a silly dig at me from Alison's blog. Nothing new there. Alison: I got the 'l' this time!)

Regard RL's BZP statements, he was a former representative or whatever for the ("natural") supplement industry. (Haven't time to elaborate or verify, but I believe he in effect appointed himself to this position, applied for NZ to join the international organisation who subsequently threw him out by way of throwing the NZ branch/organisation/whatever out. I've always wondered what he did to piss them off that much. He had a huge hissy over this including putting the letter rejecting him/his organisation on-line. But all that's past history, right Ron?)

lilady: "A number of science bloggers have been contacted relentlessly through their email accounts" - While I wouldn't say "relentlessly" in his case, Ron used to email me even after I asked him not to, one of the reasons I developed the comment policy in my About page.

200,000 users… two admissions to ED with SE… coincidence? or causal? What’s the background rate?

It's a U-shaped distribution, Rob. Do you think just maybe a history might have been taken in these cases? Mebbe zum eckzahminaayshooon? Zum laabveerk? "Background rate," my ass: your question is "how many non-drug-using kids otherwise corresponding to the bathtub-psychoactive demographic show up in the ED with SE?" Maybe you should check with your super-sekrit sources.

Doggerel #7: "You're Just an Anonymous Blogger!"

I'm glad I posted that entry. That's one fallacious argument that really rubs me the wrong way. I think it touches heavily on the authoritarianism inherent in woo: It doesn't matter to them if your arguments are sound, it's who you are and all the irrelevant details of your personal life that determine whether they should be closed-minded or open-minded.

By Bronze Dog (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

It’s a U-shaped distribution, Rob Ron.

Sorry about that.

Oh, darn. I occasionally get a left-right typing error over / and the single-letter HTML tags, which result in them not being closed properly. *sigh*

The Christchurch study is here, BTW. I've just scanned it, but "selected cases with severe toxicity had urine or blood samples sent to confirm the presence of BZP or other illicit substances." Whether this is supposed to imply that there were unselected cases with equally severe toxicity (to put the cart before the horse) is not entirely clear upon a quick scan.

Alison, Grant and Doktor Bimler: Has Ron Risk Analyst ever graduated from any university program that has anything to do with human immunology, bacteriology, virology, chemistry, etc., etc.? (Those *foreign* letters after his name are unfamiliar to me)

I stand corrected Dr. Bimler...I should have used tonic-clonic seizures to refer to my son's seizure disorder. He also had psychomotor seizures. Since his death eight years ago, I'm only dealing with my *other son*...my son's best friend...and his Lennox Gestaut seizures.

@ Grant: You should have wielded the ban hammer...months ago...when Ron Risk Manager first started his cyber-stalking. :-)

Grant,

Is one aspect to Al being in the interstitial space is that it’s not interacting with anything in a harmful way as it potentially could within cells?

I don't think so. Neurotoxicity and interference with bone metabolism seem to be the main areas where aluminum can cause problems so you would not expect a non-soluble form of aluminum to cause any problems at all as it can't get to the brain or to the bones without passing through the blood first, and once it appears in the blood it is rapidly excreted in the urine. As Wikipedia observes, aluminum is remarkably nontoxic.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Vis-a-vis lilday's query, I will repeat a comment I left at Alison's blog when the question of qualifications came up there:

There are otherwise-sensible people at the Respectful Insolence blog who care about credentials and qualifications but I don’t get the point. I mean, this is the Internet, so we are in effect all anonymous. I could be Herr Doktor Hans-Peter Bimler the orthodontic surgeon and inventor of Bimler’s Apparatus (who died a few years ago, lauded and loved by colleagues and family); I could be Doctor Richard Bimler, devout Lutheran and president of Wheat Ridge Ministries; I could be some other Bimler who co-authors and reviews and edits papers on neurotoxicology. Or more to the point, I could be some18-year-old anarchist adopting the identity of any of these gentlemen. You don’t know, so any experience I might claim are moot. I would be very disappointed if anyone were to take any of my comments as more or less frivolous depending on whom they believe me to be.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

the study revealed that taking BZP improved driving ability…

From my reading of Goodman and Gilman while bored during night shifts I know that this is also true of small doses of dextroamphetamine, methamphetamine and cocaine. These drugs improve alertness and reaction time which is why they have often been used during wartime by pilots and by generations of truck drivers and students. The problem is they are very prone to abuse and are addictive as Japan discovered after WW2 when the market was flooded with surplus amphetamines, starting a drug problem and an organized crime industry that plague Japan to this day. My point is that finding that a drug improves some aspects of a person's behavior under some circumstances isn't very good evidence for making it legal. Drug abuse is a thorny problem with no easy solutions, and the rise in the popularity of legal highs about the effects of which we have less information than traditional drugs of abuse is another problem made worse by prohibition. I really don't see that adding a host of poorly researched chemicals to the possible range of things that people poison themselves with is very helpful.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Doktor Bimler: I do care about credentials...when it comes to people such as Ron Risk Manager posting his inanities about vaccines and vaccine adjuvants...while shilling for *party pills* that contain methamphetamine and Ecstasy.

Does anyone here get the impression that he or she is addressing a brick wall, a boulder or a large chest of drawers?
I asked Ron a question about conspiracies 3 days ago: the same question I asked Jake Crosby.
Perhaps I missed his response.

@ herr doktor bimler:

I know what you mean: I am emphatically *not* from Hobart.
-btw- I hope that that poor woman isn't getting hate mail on her facebook/ work related pages because of my sceptical activities. Or that busineswoman in Germany. Or the national Trade Commisioner... etc.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

lilady: by 'foreign' letters you mean these: MBS, BMin, DMLS, MRSNZ, NMNZSRM?

MBS = Master of Business Studies
BMin is a theology degree, Bachelor of Ministries
DMLS is not one you see a lot but is (I believe) a Diploma in Medical Laboratory Science
MRSNZ = Member of the Royal Society of New Zealand
MNZSRM is Member of the New Zealand Society for Risk Management

For the last 2, these are professional organisations with an annual joining fee.

but also, what hdb said in his last post. On the internet, most cats are grey :-)

Krebiozen,

Thanks - that was my impression too.

lilady,

One take on Ron's career(s) is here in this article Rage against the vaccine

"Were you aware that Ron Risk Analyst was engaging in that same behavior here?" - Seen that one before; thanks, though.

"You should have wielded the ban hammer…months ago" - a small nitpicky correction: as my About page describes in the scheme I set up I only place short temporary suspensions - extensions of these are in the hands of the transgressors.

Excuse my earlier loose recollections on Ron's previous role(s) in the supplement industry; my real point was not the details of how that career progressed but that he has an element of a conflict of interest with regards to his stance on BZP

On the subject of credentials - I'd distinguish the paper certificates, etc., once gained and current knowledge or use of skills or background. In the latter people stand and fall by their arguments in most respects. You can have paper credentials and no longer have the skills they might imply through lack of practice, etc.

lilady: by ‘foreign’ letters you mean these: MBS, BMin, DMLS, MRSNZ, NMNZSRM?

MBS = Master of Business Studies
BMin is a theology degree, Bachelor of Ministries
DMLS is not one you see a lot but is (I believe) a Diploma in Medical Laboratory Science
MRSNZ = Member of the Royal Society of New Zealand
MNZSRM is Member of the New Zealand Society for Risk Management

For the last 2, these are professional organisations with an annual joining fee.

I suppose that's one way to pimp out one's name. Isn't it tacky to use those titles?

By Science Mom (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Science Mom: yes, & no. Someone who is active in our (ie NZ) science communication community probably belongs to SCANZ (the Science Communicators Association of NZ) & could well use the initials in their professional life, for example.

Denice,

Does anyone here get the impression that he or she is addressing a brick wall, a boulder or a large chest of drawers?

Yes,. I have repeatedly made essentially the same point, phrasing it in different ways (which is sometimes effective) without any substantial response, just nitpicking at irrelevant details. I get the feeling that Ron has trouble seeing the wood for the trees (or perhaps he is distracted by a squirrel).

I asked Ron a question about conspiracies 3 days ago: the same question I asked Jake Crosby.

I would like to know if he thinks that all the thousands of negative tests for polio in stool samples from AFP patients in India are false negatives due to incompetence or are deliberately faked.

Perhaps I missed his response.

I don't think so.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Grant:

One take on Ron’s career(s) is here in this article Rage against the vaccine

That was an interesting article. Especially this paragraph:

"I'm a medical laboratory scientist with 20 years' experience in clinical biochemistry. I've been studying medical literature for 35 years. I lectured in management, including in research methods, at university. I've got bachelors degrees and a masters degree."

So how come we had to tell him multiple times that just because the genetic tests showed that young Ms. Renata did not have several known genetic sequences that cause a particular cardiac disorder, that does not exclude the possibility that she many have had an unknown genetic sequence that causes electrical issues in the heart.

It is a pity that the Renata family is not being screened. Electrocardiograms are not that expensive.

I would like to know if he thinks that all the thousands of negative tests for polio in stool samples from AFP patients in India are false negatives due to incompetence or are deliberately faked.

I do believe you have the polio-denialist argument wrong and understandably since we can't lodge our heads up our arses. You see polio has been misdiagnosed all along because labs weren't always performed pre-vaccine. Now that virological confirmation is more widely utilised for AFP cases, we get to declare polio eliminated in most countries. You're just so close-minded Krebs.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Krebiozen:

I would guess that he'd say- "deliberately faked".

Alt med folk need conspiracies in order to explain ( to their audiences) precisely *why* their ground-breaking, paradigm-shifting, mind-shatteringly brilliant hypothesis has not been widely accepted. It is rejected because it threatens the powers-that-be or corporate profits- not because it's stupid.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

@ Science Mom

I suppose that’s one way to pimp out one’s name. Isn’t it tacky to use those titles?

Well, it is quite a bit more than tacky to tack on FRCS as Wakefield did in his recent suit against Deer, Godlee, et al, (http://briandeer.com/solved/slapp-motion.pdf), since Wakefield reportedly has not paid his dues to the society since 1996 and so is clearly NOT a fellow and thus not able to claim that distinction.

You can check if Wakefield is actually a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons ("Is your surgeon or specialist a current member of the Royal College of Surgeons of England?") here:

http://www.rcseng.ac.uk/patients/find-your-surgeon

Tacky, indeed--and dishonest.

Re: the NZ Herald article

Is it me or does Ron sound like the Meryl Dorey of NZ?

I made some statements, denialists have said I made it up and want verification, I’m offering a means to verify what I said.

"Denalists" here meaning "people who are unconvinced that the aluminium in vaccinations is a health hazard". Seems to me that the use of the term is an unambiguous assertion that there is something to deny, i.e. that RonL is indeed asserting that aluminium and vaccines are hazardous -- even if he elsewhere denies ever making such an assertion.

By way of analogy, if you call someone a "holocaust denialist", you are asserting that the Holocaust *did happen*.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

If Ron Risk Analyst has a degree in medical lab science...why doesn't he know about the differential diagnosis of AFP? Why did he lie about the prevalence of invasive meningoccal disease?

The *preacher man* is an opportunist and is as anti-vaccine as they come.

@ Brian: Wakefield is still revered in some quarters as the brave maverick doctor...not the carney barker he has become.

denialists have said I made it up and want verification, I’m offering a means to verify what I said.

By way of analogy: RonL informs us that the leprechauns living within his trousers have vouchsafed dispositive evidence to him. He offers me verification of the leprechauns' testimony... not, however, in the form of a tape-recording, for that would apparently violate some as-yet-unspecified statute of NZ law. But he will display the bulges in his trousers to my chosen proxy (no photographs, though).
This is my turn to shift the goalposts, for I assert that this is not verification.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Alison, lilady, Science Mom, etc.

Regards Ron's citing his membership of - "MNZSRM is Member of the New Zealand Society for Risk Management"

Ron is not listed as a member on this organisation's website and I have confirmed with the admin officer of that society that they have nobody of the name of 'Ron Law' as a current member; apparently he was a member at one point and has since resigned his membership.

I'm not able to relocate Ron's LinkedIn account to confirm what he currently lists as his credentials. He may have closed his LinkedIn account; yasni has an old link to it, but it's "not found" on following it.

Regards the BZP advocacy thing Ron is raising - I've just learnt that Ron is a partner in 'Stargate International'. It took me a moment to recall who Matt Bowden, described as one of the co-founder, is: he's infamous in NZ for selling "legal highs". Check Matt Bowden's wikipedia entry; more favourable to Matt at this point in time than some (many, most?) NZers would see it I suspect. Whatever your views on him, Matt is a colourful figure.

http://www.stargateinternational.org/pages/whois.htm

See in particular the who is and political advocacy (esp. BZP section) pages of Stargate International. Juderon Associates is Ron Law's business. (Or was, whatever the status of it is now.)

herr doktor bimler - good catch. (As ever.)

Good sleuthing Grant. So here we have him, Ron," I am not a regular user of herbs and the like... and I don't advocate their use..." Law, busted. Thanks for posting the Herald link too. I'd forgotten how on-the-button it was!

By nz sceptic (not verified) on 22 Aug 2012 #permalink

Grant, he really is a sicko...now with utterly bogus "credentials" in a risk management society. Would he know truth from fiction if it came up and hit him upside the head? I despise b.s. artists.

now with utterly bogus “credentials” in a risk management society
To be fair, the cited list was from 2-3 years ago. People do change their affiliations.

LOL... lilady
August 22, 5:38 pm

"@ Ron Risk Analyst: I’m calling bullshit on your work colleague whom you state was in status epilepticus….you saw someone with a grand mal seizure…not in status epilepticus."

Take a look at what I wrote... then take a deep breath and chill... where did I say I saw someone in SE? I said, "I used to work with someone who had regular seizures… he’d fit once a week or so, despite the best of medication…

As I've said, people need to observe and critically evaluate... not jump to wrong conclusions...

For those throwing bricks ;-)

You might note my comments was polite and factual. I'm not really focused on the "bashing" aspect it might seem. I am concerned about the apparent conflicts of interest and, if I might be frank, what I see as, to be polite, stupidity.

I have no idea of the details behind why Ron resigned from NZSRM or closed his LinkedIn page (if that is the case). One possibility is closing the business or retirement (hence the "or was" in my comment), but in that case why the continuing work elsewhere? (e.g. recent work presenting an 'analysis' of natural products vs. conventional medicine.)

I am rather surprised at his link with Matt Bowden, even if it makes sense in some ways (with respect to his previous positions).

Alison advertises: Those with an interest in, um, information leavened by an interesting sense of humour… …may enjoy this offering: http://eusa-riddled.blogspot.co.nz/2012/08/omg-element-of-surprise.html

The 'Aluminati'. *OFGS* :-)

(Aside with regard to the Riddled post: I had meant to segue off from 'bog people' [that Ron mistyped on Alison's blog] to zombies eating bars of aluminium by way of silly humour, but never got around to it.)

Grant, why am I not surprised at your extensive vitriolic attack on me... most of it is fiction... which of course is typical of a denialist who claims to be an objective sci-blogger. I could refute most of what you've said, but I have not need or desire to.

For the record, I prepared numerous documents for the Social Tonics Association of New Zealand. The document Dr Gee refers to in his NZMJ article can be found here... it provides parliaments health select committee with a brief overview of some unique circumstances in Christchurch. I'm open to feedback... keep in mind this was 2004/5.

http://wayback.archive.org/web/20050401000000*/http://www.stanz.org.nz/…

Grant, you claim "Regards the BZP advocacy thing Ron is raising – I’ve just learnt that Ron is a partner in ‘Stargate International’." is a blatant lie... it is made up, and totally false. I defy you to provide any evidence whatsoever to substantiate your shameless slander. Of all the fabricated statements you've made about me, that is the most fabricated. You clearly have no shame and your dishonesty defies logic.

For the record...

From: "NZSRM Executive Officer"
Date: 13 August 2009 1:16:22 PM NZST
To: "Juderon"
Subject: Re: NZSRM Outstanding Subscription

Thanks Ron, we'll look forward to your rejoining some time in the future.

Regards
Allan Price
Executive Officer
NZ Society for Risk Management
P O Box 31 071
Lower Hutt, NZ 5040
Phone: 64 4 5677512
Fax: 64 4 5677513
----- Original Message -----
From: Juderon
To: NZSRM Executive Officer
Sent: Thursday, 13 August, 2009 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: NZSRM Outstanding Subscription

Hi Allan

Due to the need to review costs I have decided that membership of the NZSRM is not a priority so have decided not to renew my subscription at this stage. I'll review that decision in the future, but at the moment I can't justify the expense.

Thanks for all of your efforts.

Regards

Ron Law

Ron,

Try follow the link rather than insinuate, please. On the page it has:

Partners
[…]
Risk Analysis / Policy Development
Juderon Associates
juderon@clear.net.nz

Krebiozen asked, "I would like to know if he thinks that all the thousands of negative tests for polio in stool samples from AFP patients in India are false negatives due to incompetence or are deliberately faked."

My point is that before the polio vaccine campaigns were introduced, most AFP cases were diagnosed as polio; there was no routine polio testing done. Once polio programmes are introduced the testing is routinely done and cases of AFP negative to polio virus are classified as NPAFP.

This is exactly what happened in India, and was the point I made. The graph was created from official WHO data... it speaks for itself.

the thousands of negative tests for polio in stool samples from AFP patients in India are not false negatives due to incompetence nor are they deliberately faked.... it's just that before the vaccine was introduced they were classified as polio.

Ron,

Regards your accusations at me: please note carefully that my comment was observations, not accusations. Please also note my follow-up comment clarifying that stance. If you want to correct or elaborate on the observations, by all means do—politely—but don't make unwarranted accusations, thank you.

They've said partners, that's what is there. If you don't like that, talk to them about it.