Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  3 4 5 6 7  Next ›  Last »  (8 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:09 PM on 02/03/2010
What is so hard to understand about "Andrew Wakefield found 'irresponsible' by GMC over MMR vaccine scare"?
"Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who claimed to have discovered a link between measles virus, bowel diseases and autism and thereby sparked widespread fear of the combined MMR jab, conducted unnecessary, invasive tests on children, the General Medical Council found today.

Branding him a dishonest, irresponsible doctor, the GMC disciplinary panel, which has sat and heard evidence for 148 days over two and a half years, finally found a long array of charges against him proven."

If you claim you want what's best for children, how can you continue to hold a torch for this man? It's maddening,

It's over. Leave Jenny McCarthy behind and begin to use your enthusiasm to raise funds for good developmental education.
01:30 PM on 02/03/2010
My vaccine injured twins receive treatment at Thoughtful House. My neighbor's son does as well. Her son's progress has been even more extraordinary than my own children's and we interact with hundreds of other parents with the same story. The science is real, Wakefield is honest, GSK was behind this miscarriage of justice. Call us all liars but you're impeding progress with your blind adherence to embedded media and corporate fraud.
02:31 PM on 02/03/2010
Wakefield was paid £55,000 by a lawyer to do that study. The lawyer was representing parents that wanted to sue MMR vacine producers and wanted "proof" for his case. He never disclosed this conflict-of-interest.

Wakefield paid children at his kid's birthday party £5 each for blood samples for his study.

Wakefield performed invasive, painful and unnecessary treatments on the kids such as colonoscopies and lumbar punctures without any real valid medical reason to do so. At least one of the children was actually injured by a colonoscopy he performed.

Wakefield believed some of the children he wanted for his study were more likely to develop/had developed autism and went so far as to pay their parents to put them in the study.

Wakefield altered his data and was caught rather blatantly because the dates in his records did not correspond to the actual onset dates of autism in the children in the study.

Wakefield patented a measles vaccine that he hoped would replace MMR vaccines the same month his study was published.

Wakefield tested that vaccine on one of the kid's in his study.

Wakefield is a fraud and needs to lose his license.
03:32 PM on 02/03/2010
I will grant you this, reading Wakefield supporters often leads to stress relief as I bust out laughing.
01:42 PM on 02/03/2010
Hogwash. The ruling of the GMC will not change anyone's (who understands the science and

who has no connections to Merck et al) thinking that Andew Wakefield 1) found a new and

concerning bowel disease in children who had previously been normal who then regressed

into "autism". 2) that there is evidence that the MMR vaccine had caused it , 3) that there was

evidence found of the vaccine strain measles virus within the GI of some children who developed

autism, 4) that there is much evidence in the states of vaccine injury causing "autism" via

research. 5) that there have been legal cases won in the states for vaccines causing autism

(incuding specifically MMR), 6) children with an autism diagnosis are losing symptoms of autism

and even the full blown dx through biomedical treatments aimed at healing injured

01:54 PM on 02/03/2010
The research methodology was mistaken, as documented in the OAP. It was not only ethically wrong, it was factually and scientifically wrong as well.
03:33 PM on 02/03/2010
"who understands the science" --- hah, that was a good one, really, it was. :-)
12:38 PM on 02/03/2010
Thank you, Kim, for this article, and Dr. Wakefield, for your work. I hope that some day your work will be recognized as the turning point in the history of vaccinations. For all of the closed-minded people out there - we used to believe cigarettes were healthy (doctors even promoted them into the 1950's), and only in our recent past have we acknowledged toxic lead in paint is harmful. I have read many accounts from parents of normal children who were diagnosed with Autism within months after vaccination - that's all I need to hear, and it's sad that the rest of you choose to ignore them.
Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
01:03 PM on 02/03/2010
"I have read many accounts from parents of normal children who were diagnosed with Autism within months after vaccination - that's all I need to hear, and it's sad that the rest of you choose to ignore them."

Sadly, I think that you're serious.
03:12 PM on 02/03/2010
Hopefully this person is serious.

Many of us had normal children - until we had them vaccinated.
01:32 PM on 02/03/2010
How can you seriously stare at the mountains of evidence contradicting your misinformation and continue on this dangerous and unethical path?

It is statements like yours that make me think a lot of human beings are incapable of rational thought.
12:35 PM on 02/03/2010
Kim, Thanks for a great post. We, the parents of children with autism and the children themselves, need more people to understand how serious this is. As you said before: we can never die, who would take care of our children?
02:51 PM on 02/03/2010
If only you could understand you are endangering other people's children by promoting anti-vax paranoia that encourages others to not vaccinate their theirs.
03:22 PM on 02/03/2010
If we focused more on improving our diets, exercising, reducing stress and getting enough rest - most "germs" wouldn't end in death or disability!

Our country can be so backwards. If your vaccines "work" - it doesn't matter if others skip theirs. You should be protected. If your shot doesn't work - there should be more research into why! (P.S. - I already know all about "herd immunity". What a joke that is!!!)
09:57 AM on 02/04/2010
You're off topic. My post was about the fact that people don't understand how serious life is for children with autism and their families. I didn't say anything about being anti-vaccination. In fact I am rather pro-vaccination. I don't think there is anywhere near the testing and validation that should be done -- but that's a different thing. So don't try to put words in my mouth.
11:23 AM on 02/03/2010
Now that the dishonest Wakefield paper has been thoroughly exposed and refuted, hopefully the anti-vax autism community will turn their attentions to real science to help and understand their children's situation. Based on Stagliano's reaction and denial it doesn't look good.

What is interesting is that she seems to equate empathy with validation of quackery, and that because science and medicine can often seem detached from day to day experience, that somehow makes them the "bad guys".

it looks like they will continue to burrow deeper into conspiracies and paranoia because to admit one is wrong and/or been deceived is the more difficult and courageous path to take.
Man From Atlan
12:14 PM on 02/03/2010
The Wakefield paper is neither dishonest, nor has it been "thoroughly exposed and refuted". Reminds me when Gulf War Syndrome was labelled a psychosomatic disorder.The only people who've been exposed are the 'scientism' cultists, and I very much doubt parents are going to turn to them in the future.
Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
12:59 PM on 02/03/2010
Ergon, explain to us how the findings of the GMC panel are incorrect. They only scratch the surface of what was wrong with Wakefield and his paper. But let us start there.

For example, Wakefield was asked at meetings about selection bias in the paper. He dishonestly denied it. If he had told the entire truth about the selection process, his paper would never have been published in The Lancet.

According to Wakefield, the paper was just a case study of 12 children. In fact, it was the result of a research project trying to link mmr vaccine via the gut to autism. That was held to be dishonest of Wakefield.
01:57 PM on 02/03/2010
Trying to equate this with Gulf War Syndrome is a logical fallacy. There is no comparison between two. But let's take a look anyways. Science and the medical community did not dismiss the possibilities, it was the military that refused to investigate because of the political ramifications about the war. On this you can make a comparison with the Tillman coverup because the motives are the same. Science and medicine had no such conflict of interest although it is possible that some people were personally dismissive because of political empathy.

Claiming science is a cult or religion is another logical fallacy. Science is a process to affirm or negate possible outcomes. There is no preset code which all outcomes must validate. No matter how much the woomeisters and religious fundamentalists try to claim otherwise, it will never make it so. It is willful or programmed ignorance on a grand scale.

But it is sad, if you are correct, that parents will stay in denial of the truth. It is their children who ultimately pay the price.
09:58 PM on 02/03/2010
Wild K. There is a Science involved here believe it or not.
The science is that the amount of Mercury in Vaccines is 40 times the amount
considered safe by the FDA. Also most Kids have normal Glutathione levels so
they are not at risk. Glutathione is the bodies natural chelator that helps remove
mercury from the body and it is considered the Mother of all Antioxidants.
Unfortunately some kids mostly Boys have a Genetic Quirk in witch there body
dose not make enough Glutathione and stops them from excreting out the
mercury from the body. The longer the mercury stays in the body the more likely it is to cause
damage AKA. Autism! The reason boys are more likely to be Autistic is
because girls have a Back-up system called Estrogen.
I have No Problem with you Throwing your Opinion around,but at least know what the Hell your talking about!
Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
10:22 PM on 02/03/2010
Ahh... even if you're really, really sure you are right, you don't want to scream it so loud. And if you do, you really want to spend a little more time to make sure you're right.

The FDA never said there was 40 times too much

04:32 PM on 02/04/2010
Even assuming the 40x amount is correct, which it isn't (the irony of demanding others know what they are talking about) - to not contain enough Glutathione in the body to deal with the itty bitty amount of mercury that comes with the vaccine would most likely mean the child would not have survived the world long enough to have received the vaccine.

Or in other words, only having 70% of the amount of something is not an issue if you don't need anywhere near 100% to deal with the mercury. If you were on the margin of Gl levels and that tincy tiny bit of mercury pushed you over the edge, surviving to the stage where you were old enough to receive the vaccine would probably qualify you for miracle status.
11:16 AM on 02/03/2010
“When did autism go from a rare diagnosis to a disorder that affects 1 in 110 children but still warrants little to no medical care outside of psychiatric drugs and behavioral therapy?”
When the diagnosis of Autism and Autism Spectrum Disorder was opened to include things which were once ignored. This is not a growing epidemic but a redefinition which is helping children (and adults) who need care get it. The best REAL science seems to show that there could be an increase of almost 10% (not hundreds of % as you and research illiteracy may show).
One of the major problems is that the ‘doctors’ perpetrating many of these ideas (MMR vaccines especially) are making alternative therapies look like insane quack ramblings. New ideas may be stifled because quacks like Andrew Wakefield have soiled any alternative treatment. The MMR formula was changed to remove the ingredient claimed to ‘cause Autism’ was removed. These quacks did not quit. They just kept making their claim. Did not even wait for evidence of a difference to come out. Just kept on yelling!! The only examples are anecdotal and there is no proposed mechanism as to HOW they would cause Autism. Therefore there is no scientific test which could be done.
I understand people are saddened and scared by such a disorder but there is no reason to give up on science. Alternatives help quackery does not.
12:42 PM on 02/03/2010
No, the increase is a 600-700% increase over the last 17 years in California. Even taking into account a larger diagnosis pool, that still doesn't explain the increase.

The issue is not alternatives, the issue is we need more research into environmental causes and possible food, water, drug and chemical exposure risks for mothers and babies.
01:35 PM on 02/03/2010
I'm all for additional research yes, but not hysterical torch marches against vaccinnes that have proven themselves more than almost any other pharmacological agent repeatedly to be safe.

Everyone wants a bad guy, and their incompetence in dealing with the fact that the bad guy is still unknown is causing serious harm to our society and our children.
A sometimes pseudonymous surgeon
02:52 PM on 02/03/2010
I'll translate here.

"Environmental causes" = "The evil vaccines done made my baby autistic."

Maybe that's not what you mean here, but it's definitely what anti-vaccine activists like Kim mean when they invoke "environmental triggers" for autism. Invoking "environmental" causes of autism is just antivax code for "vaccines."
Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
10:37 PM on 02/03/2010
The MMR vaccine never contained thimerosal. .

This isn't a surprise because I think the preservative (thimerosal) would damage any attenuated virus vaccine.
10:33 AM on 02/03/2010
This news does not change the fact that more research is needed. Research into vaccines, genetics, the environment - all potential contributing factors. And research for treatments as well.
09:57 AM on 02/03/2010
Yeah, right Kim. A thousand doctors would be great. If someone on the evidence-based medicine side of things published something as flawed and full of conflicts as Wakefield's garbage, you people would be apoplectic.

Yes, I am in academia, and no, I don't receive any money from any companies that produce or develop any vaccines.
10:14 AM on 02/03/2010
"If someone on the evidence-based medicine side of things published something as flawed and full of conflicts as Wakefield's garbage, you people would be apoplectic".

Newbie alert. Ikane, do some research on some of the 'mainstream' studies done on autism and you will see 'flawed' studies. Check out the Danish autism studies. If you are an honest person you will laugh your head at the absurdity of those studies. When's the trial for those going to be? I'll be there.

Wakefield didn't claim to have 'proven' anything ... he asked for more research to be done... and people here have a problem with that? What is wrong with you?
Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
10:58 AM on 02/03/2010
In the 1998 paper, Wakefield says he isn't saying that there is a link between MMR vaccine, the gut and autism. But then at a news conference for the paper trashes the MMR vaccine.

In the paper, Wakefield implies that nothing is known about finding measles vaccine virus. But he already knows that in the case of the 12 children in The Lancet paper and others before the paper is published, that no vaccine measles virus is found in the samples from the gut or spinal fluid of these children.

And it goes on and on.
02:04 PM on 02/03/2010
Who's the newbie again? Go read this post by Dr. Novella about the criticisms of Madsen et al.:
"So they did a reasonable assessment of the effect of adding outpatient to inpatient records on their data by looking at the inpatient data alone, and they found the same trend. "

It's also informative to read Dr. Novella's response to Handley (after the post above) where he schools JB about the difference between incidence vs. prevalence.
10:31 AM on 02/03/2010
Since you are "in academia" perhaps you can answer a question for me. How many universities in this country have conducted toxicological research regarding the effects of thimerosal, the mercury based preservative that was once commonly found in most childhood vaccines? You know the stuff that was supposed to be removed from ALL childhood vaccines .. yet .. inexplicably .. remains in the annual flu vaccines recommended for pregnant women and babies?

I mean how difficult and expensive should it be to put thimerosal into a petri dish with living cells and then observe what happens to those cells? Please, if you know of such a study I would be very interested in learning of it?
10:50 AM on 02/03/2010
The amount of thimerosal in vaccines has been reduced to almost nil, as you indicated. If the previous increase in thimerosal exposure, which accompanied the expansion of the vaccine schedule, were responsible for the autism "epidemic," then there should have been a decrease in the number of new autism diagnoses. Unless, you think that exposure to any amount of thimerosal "causes" autism somehow. And, no, putting something on cells in a petri dish doesn't prove anything. Sorry if you don't understand how biology works.
10:51 AM on 02/03/2010
Ethyl mercury (the mercury compound in Thimerosal) is known to penetrate the blood brain barrier faster and more easily than organic mercury. Any PhD chemist with a toxicology background, already knows this.

The main problem is there could be a number of factors all contributing to autism (along with Thimerosal use in vaccines) including environmental pollution, water and food toxicity.

Studies aren't being conducted because of the lack of funding and the potential legal suits which would naturally follow.
Julia Bailey
09:19 AM on 02/03/2010
You do not have 'proof' about anything. You have a bunch of episodes that you think are repression. You want us to continue to waste time and money on hocus pocus things that have nothing to do with treatment or cure.

You say no one was hurt, what about the children who didn't get vaccinated because of the false study saying it was bad. They got sick. Some of them died. Actions have consequences.
03:56 PM on 02/03/2010
"Actions have consequences."

Indeed they do.

Vaccines have consequences for some. It's insensitive - at best - to dismiss all of the children and families who are suffering from vaccine side effects.
09:19 AM on 02/03/2010
The truth is so very hard to find, because Big Pharma has near totally co-opted all of acadamia. They ghost write BS articles for publication. They discredit healing remedies and practitioners. They are pure evil.
02:49 PM on 02/03/2010
You clearly have no clue what you are talking about and have never stepped into an academic research environment. There seems to be a major misconception that the pharmaceutical industry is the only group of people capable of research. This is clearly not true. I work at a large academic research institution, which shall remain nameless, and I can tell you that, of the researchers I know here (n > 30), not one has ties with the pharmaceutical industry. We have one of the world's largest autism research groups and they have absolutely no ties to the pharmaceutical industry. It is a major slap in the face to academic research when you tie us in with the world of pharmaceuticals and assume that we're all in it for the money. NEWS FLASH: I make an atrociously small amount of money for the time that I put into my research and I do this because I actually CARE about the children afflicted by the diseases I research.

"They discredit healing remedies and practitioners." - Doesn't something need to be quackery to be discredited? Aren't you basically admitting here that all of the "healing remedies" proposed by AoA and related groups are BS? If something can be discredited, that would suggest that it had no merit in the first place.

Side note: It would be interesting to see how many items developed by academic research and pharmaceutical companies are in the homes of all these people who constantly bash science....
03:04 PM on 02/03/2010
Beautifully written, rDNA. See also my related comment above
07:53 AM on 02/03/2010
You guys are championing a man that subjected children to unnecessary, unethical testing, got paid by lawyers to produce a result, AND has a patent to a vaccine he intended to replace the mmr vaccine.
His research has been discredited, and he brought shame on the journal, himself, and the whole field. He needs to be stripped of his medical license.

The man is a paid mercenary.
08:45 AM on 02/03/2010

While I completely disagree with your assessment of Dr. Wakefield... frankly, it doesn't do much good going over why what you say above may be overstated and/or unwarranted. As you know, 'your' side has its own conflict of interest issues and 'paid witness' problems, etc. So, putting all that aside for now, can you tell me what it is about this conclusion (directly from Wakefield's study) that bothers you so much?

"We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described.

Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine".

By the reaction of some people (yourself included) one would think that Dr. Wakefield was this evil person who was asking for something completely irrational in his study. Someone needs to explain to me - sorry if this is a repeat - what it is about 'we did not prove an association' and 'further investigations are needed' which gets your panties all in a bunch? Please advise.
09:02 PM on 02/04/2010
Lets hear this again:

"I completely disagree with your assessment of Dr. Wakefield."

after the statement of:

"..a man that subjected children to unnecessary, unethical testing, got paid by lawyers to produce a result, AND has a patent to a vaccine he intended to replace the mmr vaccine.."

How you could draw any other conclusion from the above is beyond me.
01:28 PM on 02/03/2010
Emily- You are wrong about his research -

(Krigsman et al.), published on Thursday

Papers Supporting the Original Finding

The claim to have found a new inflammatory bowel disease published in the 1998 Lancet paper as ‘consistent gastrointestinal findings’ involving ‘nonspecific colitis’ were supported first by a series of peer reviewed papers including in The Lancet itself:-

Furlano R, Anthony A, Day R, Brown A, Mc Garvey L, Thomson M, et al. “Colonic CD8 and T cell filtration with epithelial damage in children with autism.“ J Pediatr 2001;138:366-72.

Sabra S, Bellanti JA, Colon AR. “Ileal lymphoid hyperplasia, non-specific colitis and pervasive developmental disorder in children”. The Lancet 1998;352:234-5.

Torrente F., Machado N., Perez-Machado M., Furlano R., Thomson M., Davies S., Wakefield AJ, Walker-Smith JA, Murch SH. “Enteropathy with T cell infiltration and epithelial IgG deposition in autism.” Molecular Psychiatry. 2002;7:375-382

Wakefield AJ, Anthony A, Murch SH, Thomson M, Montgomery SM, Davies S, Walker-Smith JA. “Enterocolitis in children with developmental disorder.” American Journal of Gastroenterology 2000;95:2285-2295

Ashwood P, Anthony A, Pellicer AA, Torrente F, Wakefield AJ. “Intestinal lymphocyte populations in children with regressive autism: evidence for extensive mucosal immunopathology.” Journal of Clinical Immunology, 2003;23:504-517.
03:34 PM on 02/03/2010
1) Those papers support possible GI problems in children with autism, not a link to the MMR vaccine. The most recent was published in 2003 and since then there have been several studies showing that GI problems in children with autism are non-specific and do not warrant the ridiculous gluten-free diets touted by the likes of Jenny McCarthy, et al.

2) The Krigsman article shows the same thing. it doesn't even mention the MMR vaccine. All it's basically showing is that a number of kids with autism have GI problems.

3) If that article was actually high-impact, it would have been published somewhere other than an online journal with a turnaround time of ~2 weeks for 90% of submissions.
07:09 AM on 02/03/2010
OrphanWanderer - no, not really a good analogy, no good comparing vaccines to natural antigens as you don't shoot up any of the antigens found in nature up your veins!

Secondly, natural antigens to not spontaneously combine themselves with various immune stimulants that are used in vaccines, whose mechanism of stimulation we are only starting to understand (look up “aluminium – immunogist’s dirty little secret” article published last year in a leading science journal, which amply illustrates how little we know about things we are shooting up our children’s bodies).

Also, natural antigens are not produced in the lab, grown in animal cells lines, open to possibility of contamination, transposing of retroelements etc. And before you shout about “safety and purification procedures” in vaccine manufacture, consider this: vaccine manufactures are “strongly advised” to make sure their product has been checked for purity. They are not required to do that by law.

Lastly, we know next to nothing about many of vaccine adjuvants WHEN USED INTRAVENUOSLY. Take oil-based adjuvants like squalene, and them being “same as food”, ask yourself if you would be willing to shoot fish oil up your veins?

Actually we do know something about this: “Vaccination-Induced Systemic Autoimmunity in Farmed Atlantic Salmon”
01:31 PM on 02/03/2010
"no good comparing vaccines to natural antigens as you don't shoot up any of the antigens found in nature up your veins!"

Natasa, how about entering the real world here--vaccines are not given intravenously.

"Secondly, natural antigens to not spontaneously combine themselves with various immune stimulants that are used in vaccines, ..."

Yes, they do. How do you think that adjuvants were discovered?

"...whose mechanism of stimulation we are only starting to understand (look up “aluminium – immunogist’s dirty little secret” article published last year in a leading science journal, which amply illustrates how little we know about things we are shooting up our children’s bodies)."

At least you didn't falsely claim that they were being shot up intravenously...
01:31 PM on 02/03/2010
"... grown in animal cells lines, open to possibility of contamination,"

**All** the natural antigens you encounter are contaminated--far more than in any vaccine!

"... transposing of retroelements etc. "

What are you talking about? Transposons move around all the time in the world outside the lab.

"And before you shout about “safety and purification procedures” in vaccine manufacture, consider this: vaccine manufactures are “strongly advised” to make sure their product has been checked for purity. They are not required to do that by law."

A citation of the relevant law would help, but I predict that you won't.

"Lastly, we know next to nothing about many of vaccine adjuvants WHEN USED INTRAVENUOSLY. "

Natasa, WE DON'T ADMINISTER VACCINES INTRAVENOUSLY! Do the caps help you understand this basic fact?

"Take oil-based adjuvants like squalene, and them being “same as food”, ask yourself if you would be willing to shoot fish oil up your veins?"

No, I'm not willing to have any vaccine shot up my veins. I take vaccines IM, like people do in the real world.

"Actually we do know something about this: “Vaccination-Induced Systemic Autoimmunity in Farmed Atlantic Salmon”"

And autoimmune diseases aren't prevalent in the real world? Why don't you look up G-B syndrome?
04:02 PM on 02/03/2010
Smokey - how do you know that vaccines aren't being injected directly into the veins - since the CDC is telling nurses not to use aspiration any longer when vaccinating?

If they were still using aspiration - when pulling back on the syringe, in the past, if they saw a flash of blood - they would start over. Now, they have no idea if the vaccine is entering muscle, tissue or vein.

"I have been a nurse since 1974, and I went Thursday to get a flu vaccine at the health dept. and discovered the they did not aspirate when they gave the injection. When I questioned it they informed me, this was the new recommendation by cdc. They also said this applied when giving insulin. They told me the theory was , you did not receive all the vaccine when apirated. Now if cdc advises this, what happens if this vaccine is injected directly into a blood vessel.; and insulin what happens here. I know nursing is changing but I think this is risky. "
02:50 AM on 02/03/2010
Thank you, Kim!

And thank you, Andy Wakefield.

Dr. Wakefield's 1998 Lancet paper got the attention of some serious GI docs and in the US, and those docs have been able to help many autistic kids including mine.

His work has inspired a variety of scientists to examine a range of hypotheses. The science is continuing to move forwards, despite the efforts of many powerful companies and organizations.

We will, sooner or later, figure out what damaged our children and how to prevent it from happening to future children. The real science is happening, with limited publicity. Those who say it can't be done should get out of the way of those who are doing it.

Shame on the GMC and the Lancet.
Julia Bailey
09:21 AM on 02/03/2010
Yes, Shame on GMC and Lancet for publishing the paper in the first place. It obviously shouldn't have gotten published, the sample size was too small and proper ethical procedures weren't in place.

And we have now wasted millions of dollars trying to prove this hypothesis - AND HAVE FAILED BECAUSE IT WAS FALSE.
09:10 PM on 02/03/2010
The research was only a case series, a review of a small number of cases. The doctors hadn't intended to do a research study with the necessary sample size to prove anything. They were merely describing cases. This is a normal practice and journals are filled with such studies.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:44 AM on 02/03/2010
Thank you for this post expressing much of which I have seen and experienced also.

Thank you to Dr. Wakefield, Carmel, and your children, for your courage and work and sacrifice in behalf of our children!

The GMC/Lancet actions only underscore the truth of Wakefield's message for me. He has gained nothing by standing by his work except perhaps seeing the improvement of health in those his research benefits.

Our medical authorities have everything to lose by sticking to the genes-are-causal-and-somehow-therefore-it's-ok-to-do-nothing-to-actually-heal paradigm of autism, even if the truth does implicate iatrogenic practices, their own policies. Fifty plus years ago this same eugenics approach to the "mentally ill" did nothing to advance the quality of the human race, only extended their suffering (How much of their suffering stemmed from preventable, possibly reversible environmental exposures, but we never learned the truth because the effected were just considered "innately inferior?"). Now here we are, poisoning away our future, our children's bodies and minds, at an even greater pace, and it seems like our health agencies are either unaware of the probable roots of their entire approach to this crisis, or worse.

It's time for them to change, or for us to change who decides how we regulate our environment and our approach to care.
Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
01:15 AM on 02/03/2010
Where did the GMC Go Wrong on Saying it was Research not Clinically Indicated?
There are scores of defenders here of Dr. Wakefield against the unfair decision of the GMC.

Can everyone who defends Dr. Wakefield please tell me how the GMC was wrong to say that he and Walker-Smith and Murch planned and had kids undergo procedures that were not clinically indicated but were being done for research purposes?

The GMC found that kids procedures were those set out in the research project sent to the ethics committee known as 172/96 where Walker-Smith specifically promised the committee with copies to Wakefield and Murch, that all procedures were clinically indicated.

It isn't an answer to say that the family doctors were in favor of it. It isn't an answer to say the parents were in favor of it. These were three academics who certainly knew by the time they submitted the proposal that they would have to break the rules if they wanted to get started quickly.

And please don't say they were part of another approved study, because we now know that all that 162/95 did was let Professor Walker-Smith take two extra biopsies for research purposes on colonoscopies he performed. This was considered so minor that it was approved without a meeting of the ethics committee.

Please be specific.
01:52 AM on 02/03/2010
See the articles at
Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
02:14 AM on 02/03/2010
I asked for specifics, but I'll supply them for you. I assume you're referring to Bill Long's essay in the March? edition.

When I read them first at his web site, they sounded plausible about the two studies. I even posted a couple of comments supporting the idea.

However, what sounded like baloney was the idea of an ethics committee giving anyone blanket permission --- which was the claim made by Wakefield as to Professor Walker-Smith, under which Wakefield was supposedly protected.

What was missing was the specifics of the permission for Professor Walker-Smith. Since this was the cornerstone of their defense, you would think it would be easy to find, just like the 172/96 proposal. But I couldn't find it.

Now we know it was merely taking a couple of extra biopsies on kid he was performing colonoscopies on.

Bill Long has a long and distinguished list of accomplishments. We'll just have to see if he wishes to revise his essays now that the secret of 162/95 is now out.

Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
12:50 AM on 02/03/2010
Too Kind to Diets and Nothing Pathologically Special about ASD's kids guts
I may have been too kind to special diets for ASD kids. Some of the diets may damage the children.

One of the experts who has investigated diet and ASD kids has said something that isn't surprising--- a point I've been making about groups supporting Wakefield. That is, "Buie said researchers and doctors have avoided digestive issues in autism because of their connection with Wakefield’s disputed research, which set off a backlash against vaccines that continues to this day."

Two sources to look at: and more practically

Neither of these minimize the bowel problems of autistic children. But there just isn't special about their guts.
07:29 AM on 02/03/2010
"I may have been too kind to special diets for ASD kids. Some of the diets may damage the children".

Really? Please... I read your links. One of them discussed possible nutrient loss - which can easily be supplemented. So, anyone who decides to go on a diet such as this should work to supplement for what the child may be missing.

One of the other links discussed bone thickness as it relates to boys with ASD who were on a gluten free/casein free diet. It talked of how their bones may not be quite as thick as ASD boys not on the diet (layman's terms). Did any of these genius researchers take into consideration the fact that for the most part those who would start a gluten free/casein free diet would naturally be families of children who have suffered the most with diarrhea, GI problems? So, whose to say the bone problems didn't come about due to lack of nutrients as the child was growing and eating foods that he was unable to process or went through the body...

The gluten free/casein free diet has worked wonders for so many. While it certainly does not help everyone... it is certainly worth a shot if your child suffers from GI problems.

Sheldon101, why are you grasping at straws so vigorously here?
10:28 AM on 02/03/2010
Agree with WakeUp2009 - Don't write off the special diets.
When you have no medicines, no proven medical treatments, and your doctors can't or won't help you, you do what you can for your child.
When my son was 3, this is where we found ourselves. My son had little or no speech and limited eye contact. He would drop and bang his head on the ground before you could catch him. He had chronic diarrhea like so many autistic kids. Almost immediately after going on a GFCFdiet, his language and behavior improved and the diarrhea stopped.
If there are any autism parents out there searching for help, you should find a DAN! doctor (Defeat Autism Now) and look into trying the GFCF diet.
Sheldon101 Wakefield transcripts
11:20 AM on 02/03/2010
Compared to some of the other treatments for ASD kids used in the alternative medicine community, diets are much more benign.

But if decent studies of the diets show they don't work, then you're probably wasting time, money and your efforts in following them -- even if they appear to be working. Time, effort and money that isn't being used productively.

But before you put your kid on a gluten free diet, get them tested for the disorder. The tests have gotten much better in recent years.

But actually, I don't get too worked up about the diets.
01:19 PM on 02/03/2010
This is a recent symposium and consensus fro the American Academy of Pediatrics
"Evaluation, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Disorders in Individuals With ASDs: A Consensus Report"

"Recommendations for Evaluation and Treatment of Common Gastrointestinal Problems in Children With ASDs"

from that report: "Children with altered intestinal motility may have underlying mitochondrial disease.12

Recent studies have suggested a frequent association of ASDs and mitochondrial dysfunction."