Discover Magazine Ignores Much of Vaccine-Autism Story

The following letter was sent to the editors at Discover Magazine last week, regarding a recent article on vaccines and autism. The magazine claimed that the debate is over, but ignored the fact that federal and private support of research into a possible association continues.

I have seen a number of online postings and comments from readers of Discover Magazine who are wondering why freelancer Chris Mooney did not interview doctors and scientists who believe that more vaccine-autism research is warranted in his recent article, "Why Does the Vaccine/Autism Controversy Live On?"

Chris contacted me in mid-March to ask if he could interview me for the piece. When I wrote back to say that was fine, I added that I hoped he would consider "doing an honest examination of this controversy."

I also urged Chris before, during and after our 90-minute interview to not just listen to me, but to speak with several scientists and clinicians who do not feel like the vaccine-autism question has been thoroughly answered.

Chris and Discover Magazine have every right to craft an article as they see fit, and I would not tell another journalist how to do their job. Nor am I complaining about how I was personally portrayed in the piece. I am writing this simply for the record.

Among the things I mentioned to Chris was that Department of Health and Human Services' National Vaccine Advisory Committee Vaccine Safety Working Group (NVAC VSWG) had just recommended appointing a panel of experts to explore the strengths and weaknesses of conducting studies on health outcomes in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children, and they said it was "desirable" to include autism as one of the health outcomes.

I suggested he might want to contact some of the mainstream doctors who supported the measure, which is still moving forward, even if they didn't personally believe in a connection. I sent him the names of many of these doctors, including Bruce Gellin, M.D., MPH, Director of the HHS National Vaccine Program Office (NVPO) and Executive Secretary of NVAC, Andrew Pavia, M.D., an NVAC Member and Chair of the NVAC Vaccine Safety Working Group, and James Mason, M.D., DrPH, an NVAC member and member of the Vaccine Safety Working Group and a former CDC Director and former Assistant Secretary of Health.

I suggested Chris speak to researchers doing some interesting work coming out of Harvard (Herbert et al) and Johns Hopkins (Vargas et al) in terms of autistic brain tissue and oxidative stress, chronic neuroinflammation, autoimmunity, microglial activation, etc. I also mentioned that Martha Herbert had been looking at the role that glutathione depletion and mitochondrial dysfunction might play in autism symptoms -- and that a new study from Stanford said that glutathione depletion is probably a marker for mitochondrial disorders. Other people I mentioned were Dr. Jill James et al at the University of Arkansas and Dr. Thomas Burbacher at the University of Washington.

I brought up the court cases of Hannah Poling and Bailey Banks, and suggested that Hannah's father Dr. Jon Poling might have some interesting perspectives on mitochondria, vaccines and autism. I also said that Bailey Banks's lawyer could attest that the previously normal boy developed acute brain damage after an MMR shot, which then turned into PDD-NOS, for which he will be compensated.

(As an aside to those who still don't think that PDD-NOS is an autism spectrum disorder, or ASD, the new autism report from the State of California's Department of Developmental Services states, "ASD includes Autistic Disorder, Asperger's Disorder, Rett's Disorder, Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (PDD NOS), and Childhood Disintegrative Disorder.")

I also mentioned that researchers at HHS and the EPA working on the National Children's Study, in which federal researchers expect to find 600 to 700 kids with an ASD by age three and will compare these outcomes to genetic and environmental factors, including vaccines.

I spoke about the CDC program called the CADDRE Network, whose five year goal is to "identify what might put children at risk for autism," including "specific mercury exposures, including any vaccine use by the mother during pregnancy and the child's vaccine exposures after birth."

I suggested that Chris contact scientists at the Cleveland Clinic, Harvard University, and Johns Hopkins University who wrote in a recent study that "There might be no difference between the inflammatory or catabolic stress of vaccinations and that of common childhood diseases" and that "Large, population-based studies will be needed to identify a possible relationship of vaccination with autistic regression in persons with mitochondrial cytopathies."

Among the authors of that paper were Dr. Richard I. Kelley of the Department of Pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University Medical Center and Division of Metabolism at the Kennedy Krieger Institute and Dr. Margaret L. Bauman of the Department of Pediatrics and Learning and Developmental Disabilities Evaluation and Rehabilitation Services (LADDERS) at Massachusetts General Hospital. I said that Dr. Bauman, in particular, might have some interesting perspectives, given that she withdrew her name as a witness for the government in the Autism Omnibus Proceedings in federal vaccine court.

Along those lines, I also suggested that Chris might want to speak with Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, a pediatric neurologist and research scientist at Kennedy Krieger Institute and Associate Professor of Neurology and Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. Dr. Zimmerman also withdrew his name as a government witness in vaccine court, and recently published a groundbreaking book titled "Autism-Current Theories and Evidence," According to the publisher, Zimmerman's goal is to "show how the scientific method is revealing the biological bases of this spectrum of disorders, thereby leading the way to their treatment and prevention using evidence-based medicine." The book is divided into 6 sections, including one on immunology and another on environmental mechanisms and models.

I also told Chris he might enjoy speaking with Dr. Douglas Wallace, Professor of Molecular Medicine and Director of the Center for Molecular and Mitochondrial Medicine in Genetics at UC Irvine. A member of the United Mitochondrial Disease Foundation's scientific board, and father of a son with autism, he testified that children with mitochondrial disorders are not only at greater risk for autistic regression, but they are also more likely to suffer from vaccine injuries. And, he told the NVAC: "We advocate spreading vaccines out as much as possible. Each time you vaccinate, you're creating a challenge for the system, and if a child has an impaired system, that could in fact trigger further clinical problems."

There were other prominent researchers I that thought could contribute to the article, such as former NIH Director Dr. Bernadine Healy, and Dr. Geraldine Dawson, Scientific Director of Autism Speaks, which currently supports and funds vaccine-autism research.

I also mentioned Dr. Duane Alexander, Director of the National Institute of Childhood Health and Human Development, who supports autism-vaccine research and who said that, "Genetic variations exist that cause adverse reactions to specific foods, medications, or anesthetic agents -- it is legitimate to ask whether a similar situation may exist for vaccines." He added that there may be, "subpopulations unable to remove mercury from the body as fast as others, or some adverse or cross-reacting response to a vaccine component, or a mitochondrial disorder increasing the adverse response to vaccine-associated fever."

Finally, I brought up Dr, Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases who recently said that, "If we can show that individuals of a certain genetic profile have a greater propensity for developing adverse events, we may want to screen everyone prior to vaccination (for) undetectable diseases like a subclinical mitochondrial disorder." Chris said he was interested in the idea of small groups of children being genetically vulnerable to vaccine injury, and in researching ways to identify them and, as I suggested, create an alternative vaccine schedule for them.

Perhaps Chris did contact some of these experts but did not find their remarks as compelling as mine, which seems doubtful.

I am sure that he and Discover Magazine have their reasons for not including comments from any of these professionals. Also for the record, I also spent over an hour on the phone with a factchecker at Discover, discussing much of the above information. Perhaps the magazine will let us know why their reporter chose not include any comments from Doctors Gellin, Pavia, Mason, Herbert, Vargas, James, Burbacher, Poling, Kelley, Bauman, Zimmerman, Wallace, Healy, Dawson, Alexander or Fauci.

First posted at www.ageofautism.com

Comments

[abitcrunchy]

"Let me ask you this, since you've obviously got it all figured out...what SPECIFICALLY is different in brain of those displaying ASDs as opposed to those without? Don't cite symptoms or observations...what are the fundamental differences in the affected neurons. What receptors are affected? What part of the brain is responsible for these difference?"

This was not directed at me but I'm answering it.

Immature myelin sheath. Maybe the reason I was not brain damaged by the very same DPT that caused my brother's brain damage (verified by many doctors back in the 70's) is possibly because the myelin sheath matures faster or slower in some babies. That would explain the "affected neurons". Maybe my myelin sheath was more mature than my brother's...I WAS older when I got that jab then he was when he got his.

Funny thing is - if the DPT wasn't causing brain damage, aka: mental retardation, aka AUTISM - then why the hell did they have a need to reformulate it??? Why do we now have the DTaP instead? And why was the severity of the "brain damage" less severe with the new vaccine? Oh, it's STILL autism, just less severe now days.

[abitcrunchy]

Why are studies being ignored? And why does the mere mention of the myelin sheath end the discussion?

[kwombles]

Levitt, P., & Campbell, D. (2009, April). The genetic and neurobiologic compass points toward common signaling dysfunctions in autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 119(4), 747-754. Retrieved May 17, 2009, doi:10.117­2/JCI37934


"Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder with high heritability. Here, we discuss data supporting the view that there are at least two distinct genetic etiologies for ASD: rare, private (de novo) single gene mutations that may have a large effect in causing ASD; and inherited, common functional variants of a combination of genes, each having a small to moderate effect in increasing ASD risk. It also is possible that a combination of the two mechanisms may occur in some individuals with ASD. We further discuss evidence from individuals with a number of different neurodevelopmental syndromes, in which there is a high prevalence of ASD, that some private mutations and common variants converge on dysfunctional ERK and PI3K signaling, which negatively impacts neurodevelopmental events regulated by some receptor tyrosine kinases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]"

[abitcrunchy]

It seems each study gets contradicted by another every time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/health/research/16gene.html

[kwombles]

I fail to see how the link you provide in anyway contradicts this study. Perhaps you could elucidate specifically on the ways it does so.

[dugmaze]

Great article Mr. Kirby.

There are a lot of new parents out there that are just learning about some of these issues. The more good information they get the more likely they are to question the mainstream and do some research on their own.

Love your work, just bought Evidence of Harm and can't wait to dig in but as always have too many irons in the fire.

[AutismGrandma]

David Kirby went to great lengths to share extensive information with the author of this article, but this journalist apparently ignored all of this and did not chose to research and investigate further thus demonstrating his lack of responsibility for his influence over the public. Does this man simply have blinders on, or was he instructed to produce an article with the "desired outcome" that the vaccine industry dictates? As Dana Ullman commented, "Mooney is a known columnist for the 'Skeptical Inquirer', a magazine known for scientists who are fundamentalists and who are antagonistic to anything other than conventional medical and scientific points of view".

David Kirby is on the front lines leading this war against Big Pharma Propaganda, along with so many others who are "fighting the good fight". More and more parents, doctors, scientists and researchers as well as journalists like David Kirby are discovering that the facts support the truth and not the lies. And this united front is making headway and producing results in spite of the prevailing climate of Ignorance and Denial. Highlights from the following 2008 National Public Opinion survey demonstrate that the American Public is being awakened to the autism issues:

(83%) thought that finding a cure for autism should be a national priority.

(24%) respondents said that because vaccines may cause autism it was safer not to have children vaccinated at all.

http://www.theoneclickgroup.co.uk/news.php?start=2380&end=2400&view=yes&id=2912#newspost

[autismnostrum]

And a larger percentage of people voted for George Bush. Does that mean they were right?

[Josephius]

Yes, just like I said:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090312115133.htm

[Josephius]

Some of the comments validate this conclusion:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090312115133.htm

Kirby has done a great job of utilizing the "appeal to authority" fallacy. The fact is, most of the people he cites to make his point would not agree with his claims or conclusions.

What is really sad is that readers here don't even realize that. It seems he's supplying them with what they want to hear. Go figure!

[TURNINGTIDE]

Ya, it's like ear candy. (except I'm reading it so I guess it's eye candy)

[Josephius]

Here is a recommenda­tion....lo­ok at the work performed by some of the individuals Kirby provided as his "evidence" that others have a different opinion in the "debate". If you take the time, you will see that most of those listed DO NOT subscribe to the position that vaccines/t­himerosal/­MMR/too many too soon are driving an "autism epidemic". I think David is betting that most of you won't even bother to look at their actual work and see that the use of their name as a reference for his (Kirby's) claims is fraudulent.
But like I said...he's saying what some of you want to hear, not reality.

[TURNINGTIDE]

Maybe that's why Mooney didn't use it. The claims are all fraudulent. Mr. Kirby sure wasted a lot of time putting that worthless list together.
And to quote Josephius "Bwahahaha!"

[virginia1931]

Josephius-

You keep changing your tune, "moving the goalpost", to suit your pro-industry needs.

Last week it was "there is no thimerosal" and now it's" fraudulent use of names."

Sounds like you are losing your battle and so you have to change your tactics frequently. The facts keep building on the vaccines cause autism side.

What will you use next week?

[ObjectiveAutismDad]

This from the same guy (allegedly a scientist) who stated that "No one has ever added MERCURY to a vaccine."... and then complained (in the same post) about the lack of basic chemistry knowledge. Google it (without the CAPS).

[Peakdavid]

Thanks for this report, David, and another overwhelming list of evidence that--contrary to the non-reality-based, totally predictable posters in the comments--the scientific debate is far from over although the Establishment media's job is to pretend that it is.

Discover Magazine and its editorial decisions about autism research are not hard to understand if viewed through Jay Rosen's lens of the "deep politics" of journalism: http://bigthink.com/jayrosen

In brief, there are three concentric circles. The innermost is the legitimate sphere of debate: topics and their frames that mainstream journalists are allowed to debate.

Next is the sphere of consensus--the things we all agree on and therefore journalists feel no need to write about: "anyone can succeed in America," "Abe Lincoln was a great president."

Finally, the last and outermost circle: the sphere of deviance--views and people not worthy of discussion by serious, mainstream journalists.

All the stuff that you sent to this "journalist" and that was subsequently ignored is found in the sphere of Establishment deviance. Not writing about these people and ideas was not given any more analysis than that: they are not worthy. They do not fit. They deviate from accepted dogma I follow to keep my job.

More important, had they been written about, Discover would have risked its allotted position in the sphere of legitimate debate as well as its ad revenue.

How do we get inside? One David Kirby, one Huff Post at a time.

[nopseudoscience]

You already posted this one. How many of the same post do you need to make a point?

[JamesMom]

What I don't understand is how Discover Magazine could publish such a biased article using outdated lines like 'autism is genetic' and 'there is no real autism epidemic', while two years ago this same magazine published a great article about the gut and immune issues in autism and cited extensively the work of Martha Herbert (Autism: It's Not Just In the Head, March 22, 2007). I was impressed with that article and how up to date with the last research Discover Magazine was. What happened since then???

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/apr/autism-it2019s-not-just-in-the-head/?searchterm=autism

[autismnostrum]

Maybe they decided to actually be up to date with the research this time?

[ObjectiveAutismDad]

Apparently you didn't read David Kirby's recent article on this subject -- see above.

[dugmaze]

JamesMom,

Thanks for the great link.

[DanaUllman]

One must be very suspicious when people (journalist, scientists, or whomever) insist that "no more research is warranted," especially when such individuals are known to have a "fundamentalist" point of view. I am concerned that DISCOVER chose Chris Mooney to cover this controversial topic because Mooney is a known columnist for the "Skeptical Inquirer," a magazine known for scientists who are fundamentalists and who are antagonistic to anything other than conventional medical and scientific points of view.

My concern is Mooney's and other skeptics' lack of humility and lack of recognition of the possibility of various phenomena. This viewpoint is ultimately anti-scientific because it is closed-minded.

The fact that Mooney didn't follow-up on Kirby's recommendations are part and parcel of Mooney's and other skeptics' efforts to set-up straw men, just to knock them down.

The best scientists remain humble...and almost always call for more and better research, rather than assume that all is already known about a subject.

[mikies]

Mr. Ullman's point makes it clear why the Chris Mooney's et al would never make good scientists. They lack the requisite humility, but unfortunately possess an over abundance of arrogance. And as many of us have come to recognize: Arrogance is "ignorance backed up by stupidity".

[ObjectiveAutismDad]

Very nicely put -- pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!

[nhokkanen]

Most reporters covering the vaccine/autism story seem to be using the same tired template.
1. State outright that the link is not proven.
2. Claim that only "desperate parents" are keeping the controversy alive.
3. Drop in some quotes from Paul Offit (vaccine profiteer), Marie McCormick (IOM colluder), and perhaps a generalist TV medical specialist or AAP trade union rep.
4. Scare the public into thinking they'll either get sick or legally prosecuted if they don't vaccinate.

Meanwhile the Chris Mooneys of the world handily ignore the growing numbers of researchers, physicians and other medical professionals who have found compelling evidence to support the vaccine/autism link. It's gratifying to know that some journalists, such as David Kirby, still have professional ethics and a conscience.

[amiriliano]

"Drop in some quotes from Paul Offit (vaccine profiteer), Marie McCormick (IOM colluder), and perhaps a generalist TV medical specialist or AAP trade union rep."

So you think these folks are byassed becuase they stand to profit?...So how is that different from Kirby who makes millions from his book (see "evidence of Harm" Amazon link on the article!!

Talk about byass...why would you put the product you sell next to your "independent" journalism article?

[amiriliano]

that's "bias"...typing on the go....

[amiriliano]

"Herbert et al) and Johns Hopkins (Vargas et al) in terms of autistic brain tissue and oxidative stress, chronic neuroinflammation, autoimmunity, microglial activation, etc. I also mentioned that Martha Herbert had been looking at the role that glutathione depletion and mitochondrial dysfunction might play in autism symptoms "

Again, Kirby focuses on molecular data, which may seem compleing but is ultimately weak. but neglects the dozens of other studies which are epidemiological, and thus much more powerful, showing no autism-vaccine link.

[virginia1931]

Epi studies are not more powerful in showing data in autism research. Looking at the children, their brains, labs on GI and immune issues, mitochondria markers, glutathione levels, etc., all present extremely powerful data, and when many of the same children, with the same diagnosis also present with these same biochemical differences, how powerful is that?

More research is needed like that done by Herbert and Vargas.

[amiriliano]

That's actually completely incorrect and not accepted at all by the scientific community. You can show any number of molecular changes from any given environmental source, but the actual outcome is what matters. For example, a drug that is developed for condition X: In vitro (in the lab) it may show molecular effects that are desired. However, when given to the population, it does not affect the pathology it was designed for. Example: cromolyn and asthma.
Think about it like this: if thimerosal, used in the past in vaccines does cause autism, you should definately see and increase in ASD rates in kids exposed to it as opposed to not. This is independent of whether ethyl-mercury causes brain cell damage or not. The real question is: does it cause autism, which we now know it does not.

So epi studies are in fact, the end-all-be-all and our popular medical interventions should be based on them, not in vitro studies only.

[SearchForTheTruth]

If I tested positive for a disease, I would not throw out the result because someone told me "that's not supposed to happen"

[amiriliano]

I don't think that's what we're saying.

[nhokkanen]

Fraudulent use of epidemiology to disguise the vaccine/autism link has been well detailed. All that remains is for people to open their minds and read.
http://www.safeminds.org/Generation%20Zero%20Pres.pdf

[nicole473]

"Safe Minds" is not a credible source of information, and this report was not created as a study by scientists, nor peer reviewed.

I would hardly call it "well detailed".

[amiriliano]

I apologize for taking a day to respond, but I wanted to make sure I read your memo. I have one question for you: are you serious?

This is it? This is what you're basing your judgment on vaccines and data interpretation on?

First of all, his original data does not show anything meaty regarding vaccines and the named disorders.

The RRs quoted here have to be analyzed for confidence intervals, something the author has not included, but, would make the RR's unusable should the CI cross 1.

Lastly...the idea that data is manipulated can be easily shot down with the simple fact that the studies showing no MMR or thimerosal link to neurological deficits are not only numerous and non-"Pharma" based, they are also international.

Are you suggesting that there is a conspirecy between Denmark, Japan, Canada, the US etc...to fake results on dozens of studies showing no link??
The probability of that approaches zero.

See:
1) "Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years"
- New England Journal of Medicine9/ 2007)
A beautiful study showing no difference in neuroppsych outcomes regardless of thimerosal exposure.

Also:
2) "Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Prospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association"
- Pediatrics, 9/2004)

3)"Thimerosal and the Occurrence of Autism: Negative Ecological Evidence from Danish Population-Based Data"
- Pediatrics 9/2003)

and I have many more if you need them

If this is your "evidence"...good luck...

[ObjectiveAutismDad]

WHAT? Epidemiology is more powerful than empirical science? What alternative reality did you come from?

[amiriliano]

Epidemiological tudies for questions of environmental exposure are absolutely the most powerful. I'm not sure why you think otherwise, someone mislead you along the way. Also, they are a subset of "empirical" science, assuming there is a control group...those concepts don;t contradict eachother.

[TURNINGTIDE]

Most of the articles written on autism follow the same tired old template regurgitating the same flawed talking points. If what you offer David doesn't fit into that template, it's left out. Pretty straight forward really.

They are gradually starting to admit to the reality that the numbers are increasing but at the same time, they are overselling the genetic causation. These two arguments don't work together but how often do you see that in the same article?

Now they are being forced to admit that many of these children can be recovered. This "spontaneous" recovery argument being pushed by those such as Offit won't last long.

They can drag this out but only so far. Articles like this help so much in this fight and give parents of childrend with ASD a great deal of hope.

[Josephius]

"Now they are being forced to admit that many of these children can be recovered. This "spontaneous" recovery argument being pushed by those such as Offit won't last long. "

How do you figure? Are you claiming that our understanding of stage-specific gene expression is invalid? The whole area of epigenetic research is worthless?

Before you stick your foot any further in your mouth, you should look the basics of genetics and at other genetic diseases that regress at specific developmental milestones.

[virginia1931]

Typical responses from Josephius or Orac or the character of the hour that you are playing right now.

Autism is not a genetic disease of regression. It is a regression, either immediate or subtle, of previous skills and is correlated with an exposure to either an environmental source ie mercury, or vaccines (and their components). There may be a genetic vulnerability and that is where more research, especially a vaccinated vs unvaccinated study will prove to be helpful.


How much longer are you going to try and make up false information?

[TURNINGTIDE]

I'm not saying it's worthless but the best I've heard is that 10% of ASDs can be related to genetic causation. I'm not saying that vaccines are the only cause either. However, I'm sure you've heard this before but what's so hard to wrap your mind around than the possibility that a certain percentage of children are vulnerable to vaccine injury due to genetic/en­vironmenta­l factors. I know what the problem with that is. Right or wrong, vaccine defenders can't risk having the finger pointed in their direction. I realize that the public perception of the vaccine program is crucial to have uptake goals met but you've got to give a little here. The focus on safety should be the first priority.... even before your precious herd immunity levels.

[Twyla]

So, Josephius, you're saying that autism is a genetic condition which worsens and gets better because of stage-specific gene expression? Wow, you're really using your imagination! That is pure fiction! Yes, genes can turn off and on at certain times, but aren't the guys on your side the ones who keep telling us only to believe what has actually been proven in published peer reviewed articles about autism? Where is the research to back up your statement that people with autism get worse and better at "specific developmental milestones" due purely to epigenetics, without environmental factors such as vaccines to make them worse or treatments to make them better? Nowhere. You are just speculating.

[Seadogdoc]

Chris Mooney obviously suffers from "Ostrich Disease". Quckly, somebody call Paul Offit and see if there's a vaccine for it.

[Shirley Fisk]

5/12/09
11:14am
Alexandria,VA

Hi,David.

I.saw.you.­at.the.New­.Canaan.Li­brary.a.fe­w.years.ag­o.when.you­.spoke.abo­ut.autism.­..I'm.sure­.that.I.wa­s.the.angr­iest.paren­t.present.
I'm.still.­angry.abou­t.what.hap­pened.to.m­y.son.even­.though.he­.is.now.18­.and.doing­.great--gr­aduating.f­rom.high.s­chool.and.­working.
Keep.up.th­e.good.wor­k..If.you.­can.spare.­one.child.­what.my.so­n.went.thr­ough.then.­you.are.a.­saint.