The Autism-Vaccine Debate: Why It Won't Go Away

[justdrew]

debating a cause for a nebulous ill-defined "syndrome" supposedly occurring along a "spectrum" who's ends don't even look similar and that we have no idea what "it" even "is" is pointless and foolish. You all accept that there is a thing called "autism" that some (children) "have" - I'm saying this is a socially constructed non-disease. There is no disease model for the autism spectrum. At one end there are persons who clearly suffer from cognitive impairment and developmental delays who display a loose set of typical behaviors. These persons I feel would be fair to refer to as autistic, if we wanted to keep the term at all, which I think is counterproductive actually. The other end of the hypothesized "spectrum" is very loosely defined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum
the entirely hypothetical http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome

and these pro's are now working up whole new checklists to put people into diagnostic buckets with...
see for example... Pathological Demand Avoidance. Read those diagnostic criteria.

look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_autism under "causes"... They are describing how complex the genetic basis must be. There is no genetic basis any more than there is a genetic basis for being a selfish un-curious conformist shithead. The complexity is so high, because they are looking at basic human mental variability. The DISEASE exists ONLY in the Parents and the Society that refuse to accept that not all people are the same. Accommodate the child's needs and there will be no problem in the long run. Insist that every square peg be hammered into the round holes and we've got a recipe for neuro-atypical holocaust.

[Plutonia]

debating a cause for a nebulous ill-defined "syndrome" supposedly occurring along a "spectrum" who's ends don't even look similar and that we have no idea what "it" even "is" is pointless and foolish. You all accept that there is a thing called "autism" that some (children) "have" - I'm saying this is a socially constructed non-disease. There is no disease model for the autism spectrum. At one end there are persons who clearly suffer from cognitive impairment and developmental delays who display a loose set of typical behaviors. These persons I feel would be fair to refer to as autistic, if we wanted to keep the term at all, which I think is counterproductive actually. The other end of the hypothesized "spectrum" is very loosely defined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum
the entirely hypothetical http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome

and these pro's are now working up whole new checklists to put people into diagnostic buckets with...
see for example... Pathological Demand Avoidance. Read those diagnostic criteria.

look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_autism under "causes"... They are describing how complex the genetic basis must be. There is no genetic basis any more than there is a genetic basis for being a selfish un-curious conformist shithead. The complexity is so high, because they are looking at basic human mental variability. The DISEASE exists ONLY in the Parents and the Society that refuse to accept that not all people are the same. Accommodate the child's needs and there will be no problem in the long run. Insist that every square peg be hammered into the round holes and we've got a recipe for neuro-atypical holocaust.

Great points JD! Although we have come along since autism was classified as a mental illness (childhood schizophrenia) a few decades ago. I am interested in out-of-field theories about "autism" that don't rely on the disease model, including the possibility that it may be a brain adaptation to a technologized environment.

You may be interested in http://www.shiftjournal.com/ for innovative thinking around autism/aspergers. Here's its editorial statement:

Autism has been here all along.

Considered as an evolutionary condition with far-reaching social implications, its full presence and impact remain hidden in plain sight, unrecognized and uncredited.

Part neurological mystery, part social construct, and part secret society unbeknownst even to its own members, autism does not lend itself to explanation by those who hold it apart from society, from themselves, or from consciousness itself. Definitions are revised, overhauled, and abandoned all while efforts to explore and examine this condition on its own terms are only now gaining momentum.

Shift Journal aims to showcase and encourage such efforts. Entertaining the notion of autistic as a legitimate way to be in the world, from the crossroads of theory, society, and personal experience, Shift welcomes relevant contributions from all comers.

Mark Stairwalt
Editor and Publisher

Andrew Lehman, who writes for Shift (or used to, he had surgery for an aneurysm last year and hasn't been heard from since ) has developed a theory of autism based on neotany - that is the psycho-physiological effects of "tameness", which accounts for the high heritability of autism and which accounts for autistic features of "maturational delay."

"Neoteny is the evolutionary biological principle that the infant features of a species can evidence themselves in the adults of their descendants."

Autism as Evolutionary Condition

January 21st, 2010

If the results from these three studies are combined, the overall proportion of left-handers is 13.3 per cent for autistic children and 8.3 per cent for matched controls, not a significant difference. However, if left- and mixed-handers are summed, then the frequency of non-right-handedness among autistic children is considerably higher than that found in age-matched normally developing children, although it is similar to that found in other children of the same intellectual ability (Bishop, D. V. M. (1990). Handedness and developmental disorder. London: Mac Keith Press. p. 111)

There is a close associated between handedness and maturational delay. There is a close association between autism and handedness. There is a close association between maturational delay and autism. There is a close association between a mother’s testosteone levels and her children’s handedness and autism.

Seems pretty clear that a mother’s testosterone levels are closely associated with maturation rate. There is a whole science devoted to maturation rates as those rates relate to evolution. That science is called heterochrony. Consider that autism is an evolutionary condition.

And his editorial statement from his other site: http://www.neoteny.org/

Thirteen Things
You'll Find Here

1. A feminine theory of evolution with estrogen controlling the timing of events.
2. A theory of autism that also explains the origin and evolution of normal human split consciousness (theory of mind).
3. Art and play are elevated to become central to evolution.
4. An integration of Darwin's 3 theories: natural selection, sexual selection & pangensis
5. Biological evolution and social change are joined and reframed as part of an identical process.
6. Teleology, a large scale social trend, is described as a social structure concept.
7. The environment and social structure are elevated to become central to evolution and social transformation.
8. Human migration patterns emerge as influential in cerebral development.
9. Mating two humans with only very distant ancestors (50,000 year gaps) can create autism and/or forms of hybrid vigor.
10. Evolution evolves. This site describes how the actual structures of evolution have transformed.
11. Female infanticide is redefined as a powerful stabilizing force in patrifocal social structure.
12. A century of dropping puberty onset is reducing cerebral synapses & diminishing spiritual experience.
13. Understanding autism we discover the etiologies of a number of currently mysterious diseases and conditions.

What this boils down to is this. The Orchestral Theory of Evolution is the study of the rates and timing of maturation with testosterone levels impacting rate and estrogen levels controlling timing, with those environmental or social structure adjustments that influence levels of testosterone and estrogen determining the speed, timing, features and direction of evolution

Interesting no? And doesn't it make sense that if what we call autism is an evolutionary intrusion, reactionary forces would instinctively line up against it's acceptance?

I've downloaded his book (free) but alas, have yet to read it. Soon, soon...

[catbirdsteed]

Right or wrong, there are reasons that the debate will not go away.

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/20110301 ... ntYazbakFE

For years Andrew Wakefield has been vilified and persecuted for publishing an article in Lancet on February 28, 1998.

Since then, he has been accused of inventing a gastro-intestinal illness and endangering the world because he reported that some of the 12 parents in that UK study had stated that their children’s autistic and gastro-intestinal symptoms had started soon after they had received an MMR vaccination.

It is safe to propose that prior to 1998, parents (and pediatricians) in Utah, Minnesota. North Carolina and elsewhere in the United States had not heard of Dr. Wakefield and had no idea that autistic regression sometimes followed MMR vaccination.

I have been interested in VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System since it was launched and have acquired some expertise in understanding and evaluating individual reports.

It was with some surprise that I recently discovered that there had been 15 reports filed with VAERS prior to December 31, 1997 by parents stating that their children had developed autistic symptoms after receiving MMR vaccines in the United States.

There seems to be general agreement about the following two statements:

1: A report to VAERS does not necessarily imply causation
2. Only a small percentage of vaccine adverse events are ever reported to VAERS
...

• From 1970 to 1993, forty eight (48) children met the inclusion criteria of an acute encephalopathy 2 to 15 days after receiving measles vaccine, alone or in combination (MR or MMR)
• Eight children died and “the remainder had mental regression and retardation, chronic seizures, motor and sensory deficits, and movement disorders” (permanent brain impairment)
• The patients ranged in age from 10 months to 49 months, with a median age of 15 months and a mean age of 17.5 months.
• The onset of neurologic signs or symptoms occurred with a nonrandom, statistically significant distribution on days 8 and 9 following vaccination.

The authors concluded that “This clustering suggests that a causal relationship between measles vaccine and encephalopathy may exist as a rare complication of measles immunization.”

~~~~~~~~

Conclusions

On February 28, 1998, thirteen years ago today, Dr. Andrew Wakefield and others published an article in Lancet.

Although Dr. Wakefield never once said that MMR vaccination caused autism, his life has been ruined and his license to practice medicine has been revoked because he dared suggest that research was needed to look at all the possible causes of autistic regression.

It is now clear that before they ever heard of Dr. Wakefield, some US parents had also suspected that their children’s autism and encephalopathy were at least chronologically related to their MMR vaccination.

Fourteen of those parents reported their children’s reactions to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting system between May 28, 1992 and October 4, 1997.

Others filed petitions with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

It is time to stop attacking the messenger.

It is also time to honestly investigate all the possible causes, without exception, of the terrible calamity that has decimated a generation.


F. Edward Yazbak MD
Falmouth, Massachusetts 02540

February 28, 2011

[barracuda]

For years Andrew Wakefield has been vilified and persecuted for publishing an article in Lancet on February 28, 1998.

Since then, he has been accused of inventing a gastro-intestinal illness and endangering the world because he reported that some of the 12 parents in that UK study had stated that their children’s autistic and gastro-intestinal symptoms had started soon after they had received an MMR vaccination.

No. He has been accused of, and admitted to, inventing evidence and performing unrethical experiments on some of the most vulnerable children imaginable. Fallacy of omission.

It is safe to propose that prior to 1998, parents (and pediatricians) in Utah, Minnesota. North Carolina and elsewhere in the United States had not heard of Dr. Wakefield and had no idea that autistic regression sometimes followed MMR vaccination.

Attempting to imply causation from correlation, the classic fallacious argument.

I have been interested in VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System since it was launched and have acquired some expertise in understanding and evaluating individual reports.

It was with some surprise that I recently discovered that there had been 15 reports filed with VAERS prior to December 31, 1997 by parents stating that their children had developed autistic symptoms after receiving MMR vaccines in the United States.

If you had such longstanding expertise, why the recent surprise?

There seems to be general agreement about the following two statements:

1: A report to VAERS does not necessarily imply causation
2. Only a small percentage of vaccine adverse events are ever reported to VAERS

General agreement among whom?

• From 1970 to 1993, forty eight (48) children met the inclusion criteria of an acute encephalopathy 2 to 15 days after receiving measles vaccine, alone or in combination (MR or MMR)
• Eight children died and “the remainder had mental regression and retardation, chronic seizures, motor and sensory deficits, and movement disorders” (permanent brain impairment)
• The patients ranged in age from 10 months to 49 months, with a median age of 15 months and a mean age of 17.5 months.
• The onset of neurologic signs or symptoms occurred with a nonrandom, statistically significant distribution on days 8 and 9 following vaccination.

The authors concluded that “This clustering suggests that a causal relationship between measles vaccine and encephalopathy may exist as a rare complication of measles immunization.”

Examined in the context of the total number of those receiving the vaccine, this can hardly be characterised as a "clustering" at all.

It is also time to honestly investigate all the possible causes, without exception, of the terrible calamity that has decimated a generation.

Decimation? 48 children in 23 years.

[compared2what?]

I'm beginning to get the feeling that "all the possible causes, without exception" is the new mercury.

[Bruce Dazzling]

Not an autism story, but I'm posting it here anyway.

Japan halts Pfizer, Sanofi vaccines after four die
Reuters
By James Topham James Topham – Mon Mar 7, 4:16 am ET

TOKYO (Reuters) – Japan's health ministry has halted the use of vaccines made by Pfizer Inc and Sanofi-Aventis SA to prevent meningitis and pneumonia following the deaths of four children.

The infants died shortly after receiving the vaccines and while it was unclear if there was link between the deaths and vaccines, use of Pfizer's Prevenar and Sanofi's ActHIB will be suspended while the deaths are investigated, the ministry said in a statement.

A ministry safety panel is scheduled to discuss findings in the investigations on Tuesday.

In February last year health authorities in the Netherlands said no relation was found between Prevenar and the deaths of three infants who had received the vaccine.

Three of the children that died in Japan were administered Prevenar together with ActHIB. In addition, three of the children also received a mixed vaccine against diphtheria, whooping cough and tetanus on the same day they received the other vaccines.

Three of the four children died a day after being immunized. The deaths happened between March 2 and March 4.

Representatives for Pfizer and Sanofi in Tokyo said the companies were cooperating with the investigation.

A spokesman for Sanofi said that the company has shipped more than 3 million doses of ActHIB in Japan since 2008 while a spokesman for Pfizer said the firm has distributed more than 2 million doses of Prevenar in Japan since last year.

[Pele'sDaughter]

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/d ... d=13037217

Sometimes, Dr. Andrew Lieber has to tell his patients that it just isn't working out.

When parents refuse to vaccinate their children in spite of his efforts to convince them of the benefits of immunity, he reluctantly lets them go.

"By four months, if I can't help you come to terms with the scientific fact that vaccines are helpful, then I've done my job educating you," Lieber, a pediatrician with Rose Pediatrics in Denver, told MedPage Today.

At that point, he'll tell them to find another doctor -- something he has to do "a couple times a year."

"I feel like I have a bigger responsibility to all the other kids walking through my waiting room," Lieber said.

More pediatricians appear to be taking this hard-line approach, especially now that parents are making greater efforts to screen doctors for one whose vaccination philosophy matches their own.

According to a 2001 American Academy of Pediatrics survey, 23 percent of physicians reported that they "always" or "sometimes" tell parents they can no longer be the child's pediatrician if they won't get the proper shots.

The Academy doesn't have more recent survey data, but physicians say that they see plenty of their colleagues joining the ranks.

Lieber will sometimes work with parents to adjust the vaccination schedule -- "I'm willing to separate some vaccines by two weeks, whatever I can do to increase vaccination rates is good" -- but if an interviewer comes along wanting to cross all vaccines off the list, Lieber will show them the door.

Few physicians find that this practice challenges their ethics, especially in light of recent outbreaks such as pertussis in California and in certain communities within Brooklyn. Indeed, the American Academy of Pediatrics has in the past deemed it ethical to dismiss patients who refuse to get their children vaccinated, and offers a clinical guideline as well as an online toolkit on how to handle the pertinent issues.

"Physicians, like their patients, are moral agents," says Felicia Cohn, PhD, director of bioethics for Kaiser Permanente in Irvine, Calif. "Any physician may refuse an individual for moral reasons or may conscientiously object to providing particular treatments."

David Cronin, MD, a pediatrician with Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee, says it's "entirely appropriate for a physician to refuse elective treatment to any patient. Being a physician does not obligate one to provide care to 'all comers.'"

Refusing to Treat: Unethical?

Yet others say refusing to treat because of vaccine preference is indeed unethical because it punishes the wrong party. Samuel Katz, MD, of Duke University, says it's not right to refuse seeing a child "because it is the parent who is the problem, whereas the child merits medical care."

Many doctors, like Lieber, reach a type of compromise, in which they take on the apprehensive parent and educate them on the science behind vaccines.

Rajiv Naik, MD, a pediatrician from the University of Wisconsin, said in his practice he's had success "in ultimately getting some of these families to change their minds and vaccinate their children."

But he notes that it required "building a relationship with the families and gaining their trust that I have the child's best interests in mind."

Even if a parent can be convinced to vaccinate, they may want to do so on their own terms, which involves adjusting a CDC and AAP-approved schedule.

There's no evidence that vaccines are more efficacious on a different schedule, and there's certainly no data on whether this could reduce rates of adverse events, researchers say.

Indeed, it lengthens the time a child could be vulnerable to a disease, or could be a carrier -- a problem for other young patients in a physician's waiting room.

"Some children who are in the waiting room may have not started their vaccination schedule because they are too young or still completing the schedule and so could be exposed to a child who may get the disease due to lack of vaccination," said Siva Subramanian, MD, hospital ethicist and pediatrician at Georgetown University Hospital.

Many doctors blame the ado largely on British researcher Andrew Wakefield, whose studies linking the MMR vaccine with autism were recently discredited.

Lieber says Colorado is particularly troubled as its vaccination rates are among the lowest in the nation, a fact likely attributable to a culture that promotes alternative medicine.

Vaccinations: Great Medical Advance

On the other hand, few Americans see the larger story when it comes to vaccinations -- which researchers agree are one of the greatest medical advances of our time.

"Vaccination has provided relief of diseases such as polio, smallpox, and the various viral -- chicken pox, measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis -- and bacteriologic -- pneumonia, flu, meningitis -- diseases that once plague small children and has contributed in immeasurable ways to the improvement of humanity," Cronan said.

Lieber says he enacted his policy about 11 years ago, "after an unvaccinated family walked into my waiting room with chicken pox." Last week's incident in which a woman with measels flew through Denver put more fuel on the fire for him.

Yet he emphasizes that he's not refusing to see patients.

"I'm begging to treat the patients," he says, "but the parents are refusing to let me."

[Joe Hillshoist]

Thats a minefield P_D.

I'd be so pissed off if my Dr said, "If you don't stop smoking I'll treat someone who will."

Then again if I was waiting for a whooping cough vaccine and had to share a waiting room with kids whose parents would vaccinate them I'd be pissed off too.

[compared2what?]

debating a cause for a nebulous ill-defined "syndrome" supposedly occurring along a "spectrum" who's ends don't even look similar and that we have no idea what "it" even "is" is pointless and foolish. You all accept that there is a thing called "autism" that some (children) "have" - I'm saying this is a socially constructed non-disease. There is no disease model for the autism spectrum. At one end there are persons who clearly suffer from cognitive impairment and developmental delays who display a loose set of typical behaviors. These persons I feel would be fair to refer to as autistic, if we wanted to keep the term at all, which I think is counterproductive actually. The other end of the hypothesized "spectrum" is very loosely defined.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_spectrum
the entirely hypothetical http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asperger_syndrome

and these pro's are now working up whole new checklists to put people into diagnostic buckets with...
see for example... Pathological Demand Avoidance. Read those diagnostic criteria.

look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_autism under "causes"... They are describing how complex the genetic basis must be. There is no genetic basis any more than there is a genetic basis for being a selfish un-curious conformist shithead. The complexity is so high, because they are looking at basic human mental variability. The DISEASE exists ONLY in the Parents and the Society that refuse to accept that not all people are the same. Accommodate the child's needs and there will be no problem in the long run. Insist that every square peg be hammered into the round holes and we've got a recipe for neuro-atypical holocaust.

WRT the last part, AMEN.

On the spectrum diagnosis stuff, though....I can understand why it sounds like bullshit. But it's probably a better approach than the one they use now assuming that the person really does have some kind of something. And by "better" I mean "closer to medical reality," more or less.

In practical reality, of course, you'd just have the same diagnosis problem we have now. Which is that pretty much every DSM condition I've ever seen discussed here is simultaneously chronically overdiagnosed (as, I believe, we all know) and chronically underdiagnosed -- ie, large, large numbers of people who have (SOME DISORDER) never even enter the system and not because they're doing just fine, thank you very much, but because they live, let's say, in the middle of the country in a non-urban area where people aren't all that into the concept of psychiatric diagnosis, so the ill just end up getting scapegoated by their families and dying young and unhappy without anyone, including them, ever considering they're not the willful authors of their own misfortune.

A lot of people don't have access to any information or care, basically. We who have the bad information and bad care (but can't afford it so moot point anyway) are really the lucky ones!

The system's broken. A wreck. Way out of date, too. And there's your problem. IMO.

[compared2what?]

Um....Sorry. But:

look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_autism under "causes"... They are describing how complex the genetic basis must be. There is no genetic basis any more than there is a genetic basis for being a selfish un-curious conformist shithead. The complexity is so high, because they are looking at basic human mental variability. The DISEASE exists ONLY in the Parents and the Society that refuse to accept that not all people are the same. Accommodate the child's needs and there will be no problem in the long run. Insist that every square peg be hammered into the round holes and we've got a recipe for neuro-atypical holocaust.

The "AMEN" was for accommodating the child's needs. I don't know about "no problem," I guess. That's a lot to guarantee in the long run for any child, no matter what. Life is rife with problems. But I think I know what you mean, and I agree.

I'm not sure I understand your reasons for thinking that there's no genetic basis, though. There's enough heritability for that alone to suggest that there is, for one thing. And there are any number of very strong indicators/proofs that whatever causes the neuropathology -- ie, genetics, genetic predisposition plus (?), environmental toxin/injury in utero -- it starts being caused prenatally. For another. Which makes genetic factors a possibility that you can't just heedlessly rule out.

The complexity thing is annoyingly...well, complex, I agree. But you tend to see that a lot in the poorly-understood-etiology-disease-and-syndrome biz. Across the board, too, not just with psychiatric diagnoses. And that really always seems to me to be pretty much the natural by-product of their having absolutely no fucking clue what they're looking for, in conjunction with not much more than the crudest beginnings of a clue about how anything genetic or neuronal actually works.

I mean, genomes and brains are both really, really, really complex. And nobody really knows very much about either. They know just enough to go poking around finding a bunch of little things that appear to be correlated with the disorder and that might not functionally really be functionally a bunch of little things, they could turn out to be tiny parts of one simple and elegant thing that's part of some system no one's even dreamed of yet. You know? They just don't know what they're doing. Not in an incompetent way. In a we-don't-at-all-comprehend-this-eensy-stuff-we-now-have-the-technology-to-look-at-uncomprehendingly way.

But I'd say that as things stand now, it actually does look genetic. Not well understood. And maybe not really knowable. But nevertheless, for the moment, genetic-looking, per the best of anyone's understanding. Do you have a more better grasp of the state-of-the-art than I do? Because I do try hard, but I totally don't have a grasp on it. So I'd love to be elucidated, if you do.

[bks]

I'm sure someone more in the know will have a behind-the-scenes reason why the CDC is changing course (or will contend this isn't a course change), but I'm surprised no one posted about this. Commenters over at HuffPo noted that this announcement comes after the Supreme Court's February decision reaffirming big pharma's insularity from lawsuits:

CDC To Study Vaccines and Autism

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention wants to study autism as a possible clinical outcome of immunization, as part of its newly adopted 5-year research agenda for vaccine safety, the agency said on its website.

The CDC will also study mitochondrial dysfunction and the potential risk for post-vaccine "neurological deterioration," and convene an expert panel on the feasibility of studying health outcomes such as autism among vaccinated and unvaccinated children.

The CDC plan adopts recommendations approved by the National Vaccine Advisory Committee of the US Department of Health and Human Services. It also comes one month after the federal government's leading autism body, the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC), signaled a shift in research priorities toward environmental triggers for autism, which the IACC said could include toxins, biological agents and "adverse events following immunization."

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Immunization Safety Office Scientific Agenda indentified the need to research "Neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism spectrum disorder (ASD)" as a possible clinical outcome of vaccination.

The plan also seeks to deternine if the mercury-based preservative thimerosal is associated with increased risk for "clinically important tics or Tourette syndrome." The CDC cited one study (Thompson, NEJM, 2007), which "found that increasing exposure to mercury from birth to age 7 months was associated with motor and phonic tics in boys," and added that "an association between exposure to thimerosal and tics was found in two earlier studies (Andrews, Pediatrics, 2004; Verstraeten, Pediatrics, 2003)."

And, noting that the IACC federal autism panel "suggested several studies including vaccinated versus unvaccinated children to determine if there are differences in health outcomes," the CDC said it will convene an "external expert committee to offer guidance on the feasibility of conducting such studies and additional studies related to the immunization schedule, including studies that may indicate if multiple vaccinations increase risk for immune system disorders."

Meanwhile, the IACC has signaled a shift in research priorities into the causes of autism, moving away from genetic studies in favor of investigating the interaction between genes and environmental factors, which it said could include toxins, biological agents and vaccines.

The IACC, among other things, helps direct millions of federal dollars into autism research. Until now, the IACC's updated strategic plan noted, "the majority of this funding (was) directed toward the identification of genetic risk factors (with) less funding and attention toward environmental research."

A number of environmental factors are now being researched, the IACC said, adding that, "Recent studies suggest that factors such as parental age and exposure to infections, toxins, and other biological agents may confer environmental risk. These findings require further investigation."

As for vaccines, "Numerous epidemiological studies have found no relationship between ASD and vaccines containing the mercury based preservative thimerosal," the IACC noted. "These data, as well as subsequent research, indicate that the link between autism and vaccines is unsupported by the epidemiological research literature. However, the Institute of Medicine report acknowledged that the existing population-based studies were limited in their ability to detect small susceptible subpopulations that could be more genetically vulnerable to environmental exposures."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kir ... 37360.html

[Pele'sDaughter]

http://www.naturalnews.com/032216_Thorsen_fraud.html

CDC vaccine scientist who downplayed links to autism indicted by DOJ in alleged fraud scheme

(NaturalNews) CDC researcher Poul Thorsen, who famously headed up the "Denmark Study" that many claim disproved any link between autism and vaccines, has been indicted in Atlanta by a federal grand jury on charges of wire fraud, money laundering and defrauding research institutions of grant money.

Poul Thorson is a scientist who formerly worked for the CDC, and over the last several years, he oversaw millions of dollars in grant money that was used to conduct research to "prove" that vaccines have no link to autism. Dr. Thorson's research papers include the famous "Danish Study" entitled Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism: negative ecological evidence from Danish population-based data. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...)

This paper concludes that thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative used in vaccines around the world, has no statistically significant link to autism. It is one of the key papers used by vaccination proponents who argue that thimerosal is safe to inject into young children. That Poul Thorson's credibility is now being called into question by a federal indictment of fraud and money laundering will, of course, have ripple effects throughout both the vaccine industries and autism support groups (more about that below).

Be sure to see our "Web of Alleged Fraud" chart which accompanies this article: http://www.naturalnews.com/files/We...

Follow the money
According to the official announcement of the indictment, Thorsen was awarded grant money by the CDC as far back as the 1990s. He arranged for the grant money to be awarded to an entity in Denmark, where he provided "input and guidance" for the research projects.

From 2000 to 2009, the CDC awarded $11 million in grant money to two Denmark government agencies to study, among other things, the possible link between vaccines and autism. In 2002, Thorsen moved to Denmark and became the "principal investigator" for the grant money, responsible for administering the research money that the CDC awarded.

But here's where things get interesting: According to the Dept. of Justice, Thorsen began allegedly stealing grant money by submitting fraudulent expense documents that were supposedly related to the Danish study. These fraudulent expense documents were given to the Danish government, Aarhus University and Odense University Hospital, the institutions involved in the research.

From February 2004 through June 2008, says the DOJ indictment, Thorsen allegedly submitted over a dozen fraudulent invoices requesting reimbursement for expenses that were fabricated. Interestingly, these allegedly fraudulent invoices were signed by a laboratory section chief at the CDC, indicating that someone inside the CDC was either duped by Thorsen or potentially involved in the alleged fraud.

What was Thorsen claiming in these allegedly fraudulent invoices requesting reimbursement? He claimed that a CDC laboratory had conducted work in conjunction with the research and was owed funds out of the grant money. These invoices were then handed over to Aarhus University, where Thorsen held a faculty position. Aarhus then transferred "hundreds of thousands of dollars to bank accounts held at the CDC Federal Credit Union in Atlanta," says the DOJ.

But here's the clever part: Those bank accounts were not official CDC accounts at all. They were allegedly private bank accounts belonging to none other than Dr. Poul Thorsen.

Once the money was transferred into Thorsen's private accounts, Thorsen "allegedly withdrew it for his own personal use, buying a home in Atlanta, a Harley Davidson motorcycle, and Audi and Honda vehicles, and obtaining numerous cashier's checks, from the fraud proceeds," says the DOJ.

According to government documents, Dr. Poul Thorsen, one of the key researchers in "disproving" any link between vaccines and autism, allegedly defrauded the scientific research community of over one million dollars.

See the chart we've assembled for this to help show you the web of money and influence at work here:
http://www.naturalnews.com/files/We...

Aarhus distances itself from Thorsen
More details are revealed through a statement issued in January by Aarhus University, which sought to sever its ties with Thorsen. It says, "Unfortunately, a considerable shortfall in funding at Aarhus University associated with the CDC grant was discovered. In investigating the shortfalls associated with the grant, DASTI and Aarhus University became aware of two alleged CDC funding documents as well as a letter regarding funding commitments allegedly written by Randolph B. Williams of CDC's Procurement Grants Office which was used to secure advances from Aarhus University. Upon investigation by CDC, a suspicion arose that the documents are forgeries." (http://www.rescuepost.com/files/tho...)

This letter goes on to state that Dr Thorsen was essentially hoodwinking others into thinking he was still a faculty member at Aarhus University:

In March 2009, Dr. Thorsen resigned his faculty position at Aarhus University. In the meantime, it has come to the attention of Aarhus University that Dr Thomsen has continued to act in such a manner as to create the impression that he still retains a connection to Aarhus University after the termination of his employment by the university. Furthermore, it has come to the attention of Aarhus University that Dr Poul Thorsen has held full-time positions at both Emory University and Aarhus University simultaneously. Dr Thorsen's double Full-time employment was unauthorised by Aarhus University, and he engaged in this employment situation despite the express prohibition of Aarhus University.

The federal indictment against Thorsen
Today, Thorsen is facing 13 counts of wire fraud and 9 counts of money laundering. NaturalNews spoke with the Department of Justice and confirmed that extradition proceedings are under way to bring Thorsen to the United States from Denmark, although no particular timetable for that extradition has been announced.

Thorsen now faces up to 260 years in prison from the wire fraud charges, and up to an additional 90 years in prison for the money laundering charges, plus a total of $22.5 million in possible fines. In addition, the federal indictment also contains a so-called "forfeiture provision" which seeks the forfeiture of the personal property Dr. Thorsen allegedly purchased with money he stole from the CDC's grant activities: A house in Atlanta, two cars and a Harley Davidson motorcycle.

The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Stephen H. McClain and Michael J. Brown, both out of the Northern District of Georgia (Atlanta). This Atlanta office has a well-known reputation for going after crooks, regardless of the political implications. This is the same office, for example, that indicted Atlanta's own mayor for corruption and tax charges in 2004 (http://www.justice.gov/tax/usaopres...).

The prosecuting attorney for that case, Sally Quillian Yates, is the same attorney contributing to this case. She said of Thorsen: "Grant money for disease research is a precious commodity. When grant funds are stolen, we lose not only the money, but also the opportunity to better understand and cure debilitating diseases. This defendant is alleged to have orchestrated a scheme to steal over $1 million in CDC grant money earmarked for autism research. We will now seek the defendant’s extradition for him to face federal charges in the United States."

Understand what is being alleged here: That Thorsen stole taxpayer dollars intended for medical research, then pocketed them in his own private bank accounts and used the money to buy luxury items for his personal use. This is a man with a history of strong ties to the CDC, research universities and medical journals. This is a person whose research has been widely quoted by the vaccine apologists who say vaccines are safe. And now, in the midst of all this, how many mainstream newspapers do you see covering Thorsen's indictment and his ties to the CDC? Virtually none.

This is the great untold story of an alleged criminal ring operating inside the CDC, with the purpose of falsifying research that would "disprove" any links between vaccines and toxic side effects.

The upshot of all this
What you read above are the facts of the case. What you're about to read is my own opinion analysis as the editor of NaturalNews. While I spoke with the U.S. Attorney's Office on these matters, what you're about to read are my own opinions, not theirs.

For starters, given that the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), the American Journal of Epidemiology and many other medical journals have published Dr. Thorsen's work, will they retract his scientific papers now that he has been indicted for fraud and money laundering?

Or do the medical journals only retract papers only from those whose research suggests that vaccines do, in fact, have a link to intestinal disorders and neurological problems in children? Remember, of course, that the conventional medical industry almost couldn't wait to denounce Dr. Andrew Wakefield's research, based on only the flimsiest of allegations which don't even stand up to basic scrutiny. And yet when one of their own "insider" scientists like Dr. Poul Thorsen is indicted for fraud and money laundering, they don't question the integrity of his scientific research in the least. In fact, the CDC is now publicly defending his research! His research is still openly cited on the CDC's own website! (http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/ar...)

So don't hold your breath waiting for the medical journals to denounce Dr. Thorsen's research. His so-called "scientific findings" are such an important cornerstone in the false "scientific" evidence dispelling any link between vaccines and autism that they would probably let his research stand even if he was convicted of rape, murder and incest. No criminal is too criminal for the medical journals, it seems -- especially if his conclusions support the vaccine industry.

Secondly, did you notice that the allegedly falsified invoices submitted by Dr. Thosen to Aarhus University were signed off by a CDC lab section chief? Someone inside the CDC, in other words, was enabling Dr. Thorsen to allegedly engage in this fraud. The question is: Was this person a co-conspirator?

To answer all this, you have to keep one thing in perspective: During the years of 2006 - 2008 when all this alleged fraud was taking place, the vaccine industry was under increasing attack by scientists who questioned their safety. The evidence linking vaccines with autism and gastrointestinal disorders was becoming increasingly evident and increasingly difficult to cover up. Dr. Julie Gerberding was at the help of the CDC, and she was no doubt trying to impress her future employers at Merck, where she is now the president of Merck's global vaccine division, having left the CDC the very next year following Dr. Thorsen's alleged money laundering scheme.

Question: Did the CDC actively enable and support Dr. Thorsen's alleged fraud in order to "pay him off" for falsifying the research that would supposedly disprove any link between vaccines and autism? And was this being masterminded by Dr. Julie Gerberding as part of her effort to prove her loyalty to Merck, where she now runs the global vaccine division?

Consider the ties here: Dr. Poul Thorsen used to have a CDC email address (pct9@cdc.gov). He was on the CDC payroll and spoke at CDC events. He had a private bank account at the CDC Credit Union!

Dr. Thorsen had enough pull with the CDC to get his pet grant project approved, even to the point of having the money wired overseas to a university in Denmark where -- guess what? -- he just happened to be a faculty member with "oversight" of where the money went. For Dr. Thorsen to have pulled off his alleged fraud, he would have needed help from inside the CDC -- from the "lab section chief" who signed his invoices that were submitted to Aarhus University for "reimbursement." Those funds, of course, were then allegedly used by Dr. Thorsen to purchase a home, cars and a motorcycle, among other things.

Was Thorsen a patsy for a larger scheme?
I see two possibilities here: Either the CDC conspired with Dr. Thorsen, or they set him up to take the fall. Every great scam needs a fall guy, you see, and the vaccine industry's fraudulent scientific cover-up of the truth about vaccine dangers is one of the greatest scams ever pulled off in the history of human civilization. The CDC has its fingerprints all over this case, as a former employer of Thorsen, the source of the money (which is really taxpayer money, of course), and even the source of the "lab section chief" employee who allegedly helped make all this happen.

To believe that the CDC may have conspired with Dr. Thorsen is not even a stretch. The CDC, as we've already shown, is deeply in bed with the vaccine industry and the drug companies. That's why the former head of the CDC is now the president of Merck's vaccine division (http://www.naturalnews.com/027789_D...). It's also why the CDC urges everyone to "get vaccinated" at the first sign of a seasonal flu or an emerging epidemic. The pro-vaccine bias of the CDC has been blatant for years.

Other CDC scientists also involved in the fraud?
Writers Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill from the AgeOfAutism.com website have done additional research on this point, and they've found some solid evidence that should raise questions about the CDC's involvement in Thorsen's alleged fraud. As they published recently in an article entitled Poul Thorsen's Mutating Resume: (http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/...)

In addition, several current CDC employees including Drs. Diana Schendel, Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsopp and Catherine Rice were affiliated with Thorsen's now-defunct research group. Age of Autism has obtained Internet-archived pages from the Web site of the North Atlantic Neuro-Epidemiology Alliances (NANEA) that list the members of the “Atlanta autism team” including Schendel, Yeargin-Allsopp and Rice, all of whom have been in leadership positions in the CDC’s autism epidemiology projects. Schendel is described as NANEA’s “coordinator at Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA.”

This article goes on to say, by the way, that Thorsen was also working with the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to alter the definition of "autism" in the DSM-V (the psychiatric industry's bible of diagnosis and treatment).

The CDC, of course, has downplayed the whole thing. It released a statement that attempted to characterize Poul Thorsen's alleged fraud as a "fiscal" matter, not something involving his science, as if to imply that a man can be a crook when it comes to his money, but an angel when it comes to his science.

They said:

"CDC is aware of the allegations by Aarhus University against Poul Thorsen, a Danish doctor who participated in CDC funded research. For the past 10 years, CDC has had a cooperative agreement with the Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation (DASTI) and Aarhus University in Denmark to conduct research studies on issues such as cerebral palsy, autism, alcohol use in pregnancy and Down syndrome. Dr. Thorsen was one of many co-authors on these research projects. All of these were subject to extensive peer review and we have no reason to suspect that there are any issues related to the integrity of the science. The allegations that are fiscal in nature against Dr. Thorsen are being looked into by appropriate authorities."

(http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/...)

But the other possibility in all this is that someone inside the CDC wanted to protect the CDC's reputation from all the quackery and fraud they saw happening there. Perhaps they were clued in to Dr. Thorsen's alleged money laundering, and they were sick of it. Maybe they saw Dr. Gerberding collect a multi-million-dollar salary from Merck while the rest of the people were left behind at the CDC collecting government wages. This is conjecture, of course, but it seems reasonable to suppose that someone from within the CDC could be the whistleblower on all this.

And if that someone reads this, we want to hear from you. Feel free to leak internal documents to NaturalNews any time you want, through our public feedback form. We protect the identities of all our sources and we are interested in seeing justice served. If there is an element in the CDC that is knowingly engaged in criminal fraud and conspiracy, that elements needs to be exposed and removed from the CDC for the good of the entire institution. Otherwise, more of this kind of news will only come out in the years ahead, and the reputation of the CDC will only continue to plummet.

Don't think the world isn't noticing already: Just two years ago, the CDC's reputation was relatively high even among natural health practitioners. But after watching the CDC's behavior through these last couple of flu scares, more intelligent people now fully realize the CDC has become little more than a mouthpiece for the pharmaceutical industry. It was the CDC, after all, that helped hype up the Swine Flu scare that resulted in billions of taxpayer dollars being needlessly spent on vaccines which were mostly thrown away unused after the scare passed.

The DOJ earns street cred
The real hero in all this, it turns out, is the Department of Justice (DOJ). Rather than bowing to the profit interests of the vaccine industry, the DOJ is going after Dr. Poul Thorsen based solely on his alleged criminal behavior, not based on politics or science. It's refreshing to know that some elements of the federal government are actually doing good work. I've seen this before from the DOJ in its indictments of various pharmaceutical companies, and I continue to believe that the DOJ may be the last remaining hope for justice at the federal level.

I did tell my contact at the DOJ, however, that they should watch out for pressure from the vaccine industry. There will be efforts made, no doubt, to limit the exposure of this case to only Dr. Poul Thorsen and not involve any other CDC employees or officials. Honestly, in talking to the DOJ about this case, I think they vastly underestimate the level of commitment the drug companies have to their vaccine profit machine; meaning they also vastly underestimate the tactics that are traditionally used by these companies to limit their damage.

For example, most NaturalNews readers know full well that I've had multiple threats placed on my life, I've been stalked, I've been impersonated, and there have been assassination attempts made on other leaders in the natural health movement who have dared to question vaccines. What the DOJ doesn't know (but I hope they will soon realize) is that the drug companies will stop at nothing to get their way: They will poison your dog, hack your website, threaten your family, leave nasty notes in your mailbox, plant fake bombs under your car and do whatever else it takes to get you to back off.

I know that DOJ prosecutors and attorneys will be reading this, so let me share something with you that you need to know: When you go up against the pharmaceutical industry, you are doing battle with what is essentially organized crime. We're talking a modern-day mob here, and they will not hesitate to engaged in attempted bribery, corruption or threats of violence to get their way. If the DOJ begins to uncover a deeper connection between Thorsen, the CDC and the drug companies, beware of the backlash headed your way from both the industry and even the top folks in D.C. The depth of the fraud and crimes being committed right now in the pursuit of vaccine profits is nothing short of astonishing. We've reported on many here at NaturalNews, and yet we've just barely scratched the surface of the real story.

Even the vaccine pushers in the online world engage in precisely the same kind of criminal behavior; fixing online polls, creating robots to maliciously attack anti-vax websites, engaging in the widespread posting of false information, and so on. This is, of course, a reflection of the exact same psychopathic criminal-minded behavior found inside the vaccine industry itself -- an industry staffed by sick-minded human beings who belong in federal prison, not running research for the CDC.

As the editor of NaturalNews, I have publicly, on numerous occasions, called for the Department of Justice to investigate the CEOs of drug companies for fraud, racketeering and conspiracy. While this indictment of Dr. Poul Thorsen isn't all that, it's at least a step in the right direction that may help uncover the truth about what really goes on behind the scenes with taxpayer "research money."

How much vaccine research is based on outright fraud?
It also raises the question: How many other scientific researchers and grant money administrators are on the take, pocketing taxpayer dollars that were intended for research purposes? How many of these people falsify their research data in order to keep getting grant money injections into their private bank accounts? Just how deep does the collusion between the corrupt scientific community and the fraudulent vaccine industry really go?

And, of course, what is the CDC's role in all this? It has been one of the top cheerleaders for the vaccine industry for at least the past decade. Now, we are learning that a CDC section chief knowingly or unknowingly colluded with a physician and researcher who has now been indicted for fraud and money laundering. How high up the CDC does this alleged fraud really go?

I don't know the answer to that. But it's not that complicated to figure out, especially when CDC employees become Big Pharma vaccine employees, and vice-versa. It's all a giant government-corporate-medicine orgy where the scientific trust was abandoned long ago in favor of Big Pharma profits.

We'll do our best here at NaturalNews to find out the rest of this story and bring it to you. That's what we do. That's why we're the 4th largest alternative news website in the world (and growing every day). We bring you the news about the fraud and corruption in the pharmaceutical industry that most mainstream media sources won't dare touch. Subscribe to my free daily email newsletter to receive a daily email that I send out, containing links to the top stories you need to know about. It's free, so sign up now at: http://www.naturalnews.com/readerre...

By the way, I strongly recommend that you become a regular readers of www.AgeOfAutism.com which provides outstanding reporting on these issues. Make that site one of your regular sources of information. You'll be amazed by what they are able to report.

Additional sources for this story include:
http://kerboblog.blogspot.com/2010/...

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/...

http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/04/...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011...

[Sounder]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-2 ... 91695.html

University of Pennsylvania's Dr. Brian Strom, who has served on Institute of Medicine panels advising the government on vaccine safety says the prevailing medical opinion is that vaccines are scientifically linked to encephalopathy (brain damage), but not scientifically linked to autism.

Dr. Strom said he was unaware that human DNA was contained in vaccines but told us, "It does not matter...Even if human DNA were then found in vaccines, it does not mean that they cause autism."

Is this a hoot or what? This fellow advises the government on safety, but he was unaware that human DNA is contained in vaccines.

Why could human DNA potentially cause brain damage? The way Ratajczak explained it to me: "Because it's human DNA and recipients are humans, there's homologous recombinaltion tiniker. That DNA is incorporated into the host DNA. Now it's changed, altered self and body kills it. Where is this most expressed? The neurons of the brain. Now you have body killing the brain cells and it's an ongoing inflammation. It doesn't stop, it continues through the life of that individual."

[Elihu]

unaware that....Even if...."It does not matter.

seeing a pattern here? those phrases are integral arguments (if baseless) in all the major social sheparding arguments of today. po, agw, gwot, help w/ further alphabet soup.....? used for offense or defense. the question is are they sufficient to evade responsibility or prevent injunction? apparently they are.

reminds me of a chapter on propaganda that i once read: lowest common denominator, repeat ad-nausem, never engage in factual debate of premises, ostracize dissention, something like that. any subject you care to name. let's see if i can hit two birds with one stone (quote): paraphrasing "by engaging our critics in debates over facts we run the risk of losing control of a process that only we understand...." Alan Greenspan. speaks of premeditation and purpose does it not? this from a man in a position of fiduciary responsibility over millions of people. sorry to go off on a tangent sounder. yeah, the first response is to laugh...

[Sounder]

Elihu wrote...

...in all the major social sheparding arguments of today.

Soon I will post in the critical thinking thread on the topic of how and why our 'social sheparding arguments' maintain their effectiveness.

Ta, ta, till then.

sorry to go off on a tangent sounder. yeah, the first response is to laugh...

no apology needed, I wander a bit myself.

I prefer laughing to crying.