This week, actress Amanda Peet called parents who don't vaccinate their kids "parasites," and then essentially went on to lie when she announced that scientists have concluded there is "no association between autism and vaccines."
Peet saw fit to blast "the media and journalists" and "a few fringe medical groups and parent advocacy groups" for "presenting vaccine safety as a controversy." She thinks the debate, save for a few dangerous holdouts, is over.
I thought that Ms. Peet (and her ill-advised advisors such as Dr. Paul Offit) might want to see from whence these parasitic, fringey parents and doctors have been getting their cues of late.
Here are just a few recent examples:
July 15, 2008 - A workgroup report of the IACC (the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee, which includes HHS, CDC, NIH and others) says that some members want "specific objectives on vaccine research" included in the new, multimillion-dollar national autism research program, as mandated by Congress in the Combatting Autism Act.
Notes from the meeting indicate that workgroup members want federal researchers to consider "shortfalls" in epidemiological studies cited as proof against a vaccine-autism association (by Offit, Peet, et al); as well as a specific plan "for researching vaccines as a potential cause of autism." The workgroup also says that the final research agenda should "state that the issue is open."
July 14, 2008 - Rep. Brad Miller (R-NC), Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, (Committe on Science and Technology) writes to HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt to complain that current federal autism research "shows a strong preference to fund genetic-based studies," even though there is, "growing evidence that suggests a wide range of conditions or environmental exposures may play a role" in autism. He cites a recent study on vaccines and monkeys, presented as a poster (unreviewed) at the International Society for Autism Research, which, "suggests that research on primates is about to emerge that will provide additional evidence of environmental contributions to ASD."
Rep. Miller specifically cites the case of Hannah Poling as "just one example that is suggestive of very important lines of inquiry," and he recommends some "very suggestive writings along these lines," such as the April 5, 2008 letter from Terry Poling, (Hannah's mother, an attorney and former nurse) to The New York Times titled, "Vaccines, Autism and Our Daughter, Hannah."
Finally, Rep Miller writes that HHS "has lost much of the public's trust," and urges Mr. Leavitt to form a Secretarial-level Autism Advisory Board to provide public feedback, liaise with parents groups, and "assist in reestablishing the public trust" that Ms. Peet herself said was lagging. Miller recommends tapping groups such as Safe Minds, Generation Rescue, Autism Speaks and the Autism Research Institute for their, "experience evaluating research' and an "in-depth knowledge of the current body of ASD research." All four groups support vaccine-autism research, and thus presumably fall within the rubric of what Ms. Peet terms as "fringe."
May 12, 2008 - Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of the NIH and the American Red Cross and current Health Editor of US News & World Report tells CBS News that, "Officials have been too quick to dismiss the hypothesis as irrational," and says they "don't want to pursue a hypothesis because that hypothesis could be damaging to the public health community at large by scaring people."
But, unlike Amanda Peet, Dr. Healy believes that, "the public's smarter than that. The public values vaccines. But more importantly, I don't think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you're afraid of what it might show."
April 21, 2008 - Presidential Candidate Sen. Barack Obama, speaking at a rally in Pennsylvania, answers a question about autism by saying: "We've seen just a skyrocketing autism rate. Some people are suspicious that it's connected to the vaccines. The science right now is inconclusive, but we have to research it."
April 11, 2008 - The HHS Vaccine Safety Working Group (comprised of the nation's leading vaccine experts) meets to review the CDC's draft research proposal for vaccine safety issues. Among the top vaccine questions that CDC wants answered: "Are neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism, clinical outcomes of vaccine injury?" And, "Is immunization associated with increased risk for neurological deterioration in children with mitochondrial dysfunction?"
March 29, 2008 - Dr. Julie Gerberding, Director of the CDC, speaking about the Hannah Poling case on CNN says: "If a child was immunized, got a fever, had other complications from the vaccines, and was pre-disposed with the mitochondrial disorder, it can certainly set off some damage (including) symptoms that have characteristics of autism." And she adds: "I think we have to have an open mind about this." Meanwhile, the CDC website lists autism studies it currently funds on thimerosal and the MMR vaccine.
March 11, 2008 - The CISA Network (Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment), headed by the CDC, receives a report from top researchers at Johns Hopkins University that 30 typically developing children with mitochondrial dysfunction all regressed into autism between 12 and 24 months of life. At least two of them (6%) showed brain damage within one week of receiving simultaneous multiple vaccinations.
Included in this vaccine safety network is the US health insurance industry - which is now being forced by many states to cover autism treatments, and wants to know what possible role vaccines are playing in the neurodevelopmental health of children. A month later, the CISA network announces it has "formed a working group to study methods related to mitochondrial disorders and immunization."
February 25, 2008 - Presidential Candidate Sen. John McCain says at a rally in Texas that "It's indisputable that (autism) is on the rise amongst children, the question is what's causing it. And we go back and forth and there's strong evidence that indicates that it's got to do with a preservative in vaccines." McCain notes that there's "divided scientific opinion" on the matter, with "many on the other side that are credible scientists that are saying that's not the cause of it."
February 22, 2008 - Medical Personnel at HHS concede an autism case filed by the family of Hannah Poling in the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, before the claim can go to trial as a "test case" of the theory that thimerosal causes autism. Though portrayed by some (ie, Dr. Offit) as a legal decision, it is in fact a medical decision. HHS doctors admit that the "cause" of Hannah's "autistic encephalopathy" was "vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation that exceeded metabolic reserves," which exacerbated her underlying mitochondrial dysfunction. At 19 months of age, Hannah was given 5 injections containing nine vaccines.
January, 2008 - Presidential Candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton, responding to a questionnaire, says that autism is "epidemic," and that she is, "committed to make investments to find the causes of autism, including possible environmental causes like vaccines." When asked if she will support an autism study of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children, she replies: "Yes. We don't know what, if any, kind of link there is between vaccines and autism - but we should find out."
So there you have it. Since the beginning of the year, we have heard from:
1) Three United States Senators
2) The next President (and possibly Vice President) of the country
3) The Director of the CDC (and her "open mind")
4) The former head of the NIH and the American Red Cross
5) The Chairman of a House Science Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight
6) A respected Pediatric Neurologist and Resident at Johns Hopkins University Medical School (Dr. Jon Poling)
7) The HHS Vaccine Safety Working Group
8) The CDC's Vaccine Safety Research Agenda authors
9) Medical personnel at the HHS Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
10) The Strategic Planning Workgroup of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee
11) The Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment Network
12) Leading autism researchers at Johns Hopkins University Medical School
13) America's health insurance companies
Virtually all of the above advocate, or have at least considered, exploring the possible links between vaccines and autism.
I am not a parent, and I am not anti-vaccine. But if I were going to listen to experts on this subject, I would be more likely to consult some of these people, rather than a well-meaning but grossly misinformed actress who is guided by a doctor who will likely make money from his own work helping to develop a childhood vaccine.
Ms. Peet apologized for calling parents "parasites," and that's nice. But it is her continued use of the "fringe" label, I believe, that will ultimately come back to bite her the hardest.
The vaccine-autism debate may be over in the firmly closed minds of Peet and Offit, but for serious, rational thinkers such as those listed above, this debate (and the real work that lies ahead) has only just begun.
Why is the rate of diagnosis not mentioned more often? When my son, 26, was growing up, much less attention was paid to the causes of learning disabilities, or mental retardation. Children who did not learn were treated kindly or ignored, and those whose acting out was troublesome to parents were medicated or institutionalized. It is not so long ago that any baby or child who was not "normal" was diagnosed, not so individualized treatment could be provided, but so that the newborn, or child, could be removed from the home asap so the family could "get back to normal" and go on living.
I feel for all of you, and wish all the families well in their learning and healing, but I would encourage a good scientific method of enquiry, being aware that bias can occur on drug company's side, and also support group's.
We can't drop this as parents of vaccine injured children. We can't just let it go. We can't let this happen to any more children.
Alternative science worked REEEEAL well for Steve McQueen, didn't it?
I'm sorry that your children are ill, but blindly jogging behind Forrest Gump is not going to change the world. It's just going to leave you stranded in the middle of the desert.
If you're sorry about our kids then that's fine. Just remember it's YOUR tax dollars that are going to pay the bulk of their support for the rest of their lives (my son is already enrolled in a private school at tax-payers expense -- the tuition there is higher than most universities).
So, what do we tell our kids? "Oh, I'm just kidding...I was lying. Here, take these psychotropic drugs that cost $20 a pill."
To deny what has happened is to deny what we are fighting for EVERY DAY to give our children the best possible life. I refuse to do that. I can not and will not deny what I have seen with my own eyes. I have medical documentation that states that my son developed an encepalopathy after receiving a vaccine and regressed into autism.
So, go ahead and stick with the rest of the blind sheeple that jog behind the pHARMa-scum Pauly prOffit and be stranded in the middle of the desert. When you wake up, we'll be waiting.
I understand wanting legislation that makes vaccinations safer, and wanting the health care community to investigate links between autism and other diseases. There are other risks too. When I travel internationally and need a vaccine I get a big packet listing all the possible side effects. But to not vaccinate at all due to these risks is far more dangerous. It's like not wearing a seatbelt for fear it could get stuck in a fire. I have worked in various orphanages and health care centers in third world nations, and i have seen the effects of a society in which vaccines are simply not available. The infant death rates from these diseases are truly hellish, and hygene is just not enough to prevent them.
I know that vaccines have their risks, and as I said I fully support measures to make them safer. I think the autism link should be fully investigated. But most people who are completely anti-vaccine have probably never been to a country where these diseases run rampant due to no vaccinations at all. Side effects can be tragic, but the small risk of something going wrong is far preferable to these diseases spreading unchecked, killing children like flies.
You're addressing people who think vaccines don't work at all. People who only know what they read on a select few internet sites who will tell you that nobody every dies from measles, or that it's better to get a disease "naturally" than with a weakened or dead antigen. These people also think vaccines contain "anti-freeze", and refuse to believe that formaldehyde is a naturally occurring substance that is found in all of our bloodstreams. But nice try.
And, BTW, it is absolutely well documented that you do acquire much greater immunity from getting the disease than getting the vaccines. That's the whole point behind getting booster shots. If some kid throws eggs at your house you might consider getting a light in your front yard. If they break in and trash the place your more likely to get a full blown alarm system... Your body does the same thing.
Finally, a word of advice... Stick to the points and stop attacking people for being who they are. You have considerably less respect (zero from many here) if you just attack people ad hominem.
And Ken? How often does a child in the US die of Measles? Say, for the past 20 years.
I know that measles can cause an encepalopathy and can cause brain damage in some children. Like what happened to my son after he received the DTaP and MMR on the same day.
And why confine the death toll to the US? What, Africans don't count?
And when did I call you an "unreasonable idiot"? Is that really how you feel about yourself?
No one here wants fatal diseases rampant in this country or world, but do demand cleaner vaccines, safer ones.
;-)
I never understood why vaccinations are required in the public school system. A child cannot walk into a school without the appropriate vaccines (unless given special permission). Not to sound impersonal, but if my kids are covered, if a child contracts an illness because not vaccinated (by choice), my kids won't get it or any other child vaccinated. Conversely, if my kids end up with autism or brain damage, the shoe is on the other foot. Brain damage and autism are not contagious.
I would much rather be a parent making decisions for my kids and their health care rather than being told I have to do so. We know our children and their health better than our government.
When I was 13 I contracted Whooping Cough, which had been vaccinated for. Further tests showed that I had a genetic predisposition for my NOT accepting the whooping cough vaccine. It was as if I had never had the vaccine. It turns out that a small number of people can be vaccinated for something but still not become immune to it. When I developed whooping cough the CDC came to my school and YMCA and tested everyone, since others (though vaccinated) could have contracted it for the same reasons I had, and I was put on a drug regiment that made me non contagious.
So I think the reason they don't want non vaccinated kids in school is because if they bring in a disease, they are still able to pass it along to vaccinated kids. The rationalization is probably this: they want to prevent the spread of disease as much as possible. For those few kids whose bodies don't accept the vaccine, there's nothing more you can do. Children who are NOT vaccinated, however, pose a preventable threat. Schools do not want PREVENTABLE vectors of disease on top of the non preventable vectors (like myself) who are already within the population.
So that is my GUESS as to why schools require vaccinations. I've no opinion either way on the issue.
So why is this vaccine useless for herd immunity? The bacteria which causes whooping cough produces a toxin. The vaccine protects against the toxin, sometimes, but not against the bacteria. Therefore, logically, we can all tote the pertussis bacteria hither and yon, sick or not sick and share it at any moment.
The vaccine does have one interesting side-effect. It makes it very hard for a doctor to diagnose whooping cough correctly in a vaccinated person. This means that someone could have an active case of whooping cough and think they have bronchitis or asthma. Nifty! Another interesting side-effect of the vaccine is to lessen the symptoms of whooping cough, which might be nice, but, as it doesn't interfere at all with the sharing of the disease, the vaccine is probably causing more cases as it reduces the symptoms.
Here is a nice little article about the vaccine and the CDC information (all of the CDC information): http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/?p=84
Ms Peet is perfectly entitled to express her opinion without being vilified. But here is the thing - you don't have to listen to her. She isn't an authority on the subject, and even if she were, nobody is forcing you to do anything.
My argument lies in exactly that, choice. My kids were vaccinated, by choice - and believe me, I thought through this issue and weighed the pros and cons carefully. I did see the harsh, rude treatment of parents who did not wish to have their children vaccinated. Some of their children were late starting school because of it.
I think the issue lies in the choice and not the vaccines themselves. Thousands upon thousands of children are vaccinated without problems. Good information, risks and benefits and close contact with your pediatrician, as well as conversations with other parents is necessary and the duty of every parent.
My kids were healthy, fat, bouncy babies born on time, if not late. If I had given birth to an underweight, sickly child, I would not have vaccinated.
This is incorrect. In most states, all you need to do is sign an exemption form that you object to the vax. All states except for 2 have religious exemptions. Many others have philosophical exemptions. Schools won't publicize this, but savvy parents know their rights.
The recent articles about CFLs breaking and releasing a minute amount of mercury vapor supposedly requires a call for a Haz Mat clean up.
Yet injecting mercury into very young children with undeveloped immune systems is supposedly ok.
Huh?
Yet injecting mercury into very young children with undeveloped immune systems is supposedly because... there is such a small amount. It's no more dangerous than getting mercury from eating fish. Peet is right; Jenney McCarthy is wrong.
Studies have shown that a significant percentage of autistic children can not detox heavy metals. When they get these shots it gets into their brains... And it's not easy to get out. You don't have a clue what you're talking about.
Thimerosal still exists in shots. Aluminum is higher in shots as well. Trace amounts are considered more toxic than what should be in drinking water.
ANB: A child could receive Meningococcal and the flu vaccine and be exposed to 50 mcg in one day. Add in another shot with 12.5 micrograms or trace amounts of thimerosal and then the others in the rountine schedule with aluminum. These are standard vaccines given routinely to children.
Source; thimerosal http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaccine/thimerosal.htm#t3
Would you be willing to line up for the same vaccines?
Trace amounts of what are considered more toxic than what should be in drinking water? Thimerosal? Aluminum? Both?
And to answer your final question, yes, I would. In fact, I received the meningococcal and Hep B on the same day, at a time when I believe there was still thimerosal in the Hep B vaccine. It was summer, so it wasn't time for a flu vaccine.
"I am not a parent, and I am not anti-vaccine. But if I were going to listen to experts on this subject, I would be more likely to consult some of these people, rather than a well-meaning but grossly misinformed actress"
Oh, you mean Jenny McCarthy?
I rephrase: "who is guided by a doctor who will likely make money from his own chemical castration and manufactured research to support his well rejected testimony".
Are we talking about NIH funding? I don't know how well the general public understands the funding process or the current funding situation. Investigators submit grants, which are reviewed by study sections consisting of other investigators. The study sections rank the grants based on their scientific merit, etc, and thereby select which grants to fund. The system in general works pretty well, and a similar setup is used by a number of private societies that also fund research.
However, the problem at the moment is that money is tight. Paylines in some institutes are in the single digits. That means that less than 10% of grant proposals actually get funded, despite how good the science may be.
So tell me...how many researchers are looking for funding to work on the vaccine/autism issue? Are their grants any good? Is there compelling preliminary data in those grants?
If no one is applying for grants to study the vaccine/autism issue, then of course it's not funded. Is that a failure of the funding system? If bad grants without a lot of preliminary data are being submitted, then of course they aren't getting funded. There are plenty of great grants with lots of data that aren't being funded.
Also, part of the problem has been that those who do these studies often find that they're soon out of a job. The medical establishment doesn't want these studies to be done -- because it scares the heck out of them.
"Also, part of the problem has been that those who do these studies often find that they're soon out of a job. The medical establishment doesn't want these studies to be done -- because it scares the heck out of them."
People aren't typically forced out of jobs for doing good science. Do you have any specific examples of this you'd like to share? Who exactly is "the medical establishment"?
I did however find a long list of studies that HAVE been done on the link between autism and vaccines. Most of these studies were initiated by doctors who did in fact suspect a link. These peer reviewed, multi disciplinary studies have concluded that the MMR, Flu shots, and Thimerosal do not cause autism. The studies state that autism typical reveals itself in children the same age they receive many vaccines.
Furthermore, the original study from 1998 which suggested that these vaccines cause autism, the study that caused the whole vaccines-cause-autism movement, has been retracted by 10 of the 13 authors. Their follow up studies showed that many of the children in their study actually exhibited signs of autism PRIOR to vaccination.
With any scientific inquiry you want to be as sure as possible, and I would certainly want more reasearch into the matter. There are many studies are still being reviewed that may tell us conflicting information.
But your claims of conspiracy in the medical establishment are simply unfounded. Either you or your sources are simply lying to try and prove a non existant conspiracy, which is what people usually end up doing when empirical data does not support their position.
Ms Peet offered no apology, just a slap in the face.
Amanda, sit down and take the time to research. You are selling yourself short by simply reading some articles. Your trust is misplaced.
http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/?p=981
His piece entitled, "David Kirby vs Accuracy" has major errors within the first few paragraphs which I pointed out in his blog comment area (notice he doesn't even get Mark's last name correct):
"I’m sure that some members do want this. Lynn Redwood and Mark Baxhill to be precise. As the upcoming IACC account will show, I don’t think any other IACC workgroup members were interested."
Kev:
Right out of the gate and you've got it wrong! Whoever your note taker is I'd suggest you *fire them* since they aren't even providing you with the correct basic information!
For example, Mark Blaxill is *NOT A MEMBER* of the IACC -- you know, the meeting that took place on Tuesday and the one in which you are writing with such authority about -- and therefore doesn't have a direct say in what the IACC decides. He wasn't even present!!
You're getting the IACC mixed up with their *workgroup* which by the way, wasn't at the table making any decision on Tuesday! In fact, Peter Bell was the only *workgroup* member I recognized and he was sitting in the room -- *NOT AT THE TABLE* since he is not a member of the IACC!
Bottom Line: Might want to do some basic fact checking before you start trying to discredit another writer's story, no?
http://tinyurl.com/5g7snr
Amanda, sit down and take the time to research. You are selling yourself short by simply reading some articles. Your trust is misplaced."
Peet did offer an apology, which is more than I've ever heard from Jenny Mc for the insults and baseless accusations she's made against against people she disagrees with.
And her apology? Wasn't really an apology but more of a way for her to push across her (i.e. the pHARMa-scum (tm) Pauly prOffit's) propaganda.
thanks again
Sorry about the sour grapes from someone else who's "parasite money" from the in-laws must be running out.