Misery loves company, and so do controversial journalists.
As someone who has come under, shall we say, "sniper fire" for refusing to concede that there is no link between vaccines and autism, I now have a semi tongue-in-cheek response to my once and future critics: "Go tell it to Dr. Healy."
Tonight on CBS News, Sharyl Attkisson, (another reporter who questions the government's dismissal of any vaccine-autism link) conducted an extraordinary interview with "a powerful medical voice," who is "breaking ranks with her colleagues" on the autism contretemps: Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of the National Institutes of Health.
She was interviewed on the first day of the first test-case hearing in so-called Vaccine Court, on whether the mercury-based preservative thimerosal can cause autism.
"I think public health officials have been too quick to dismiss the hypothesis as 'irrational,' without sufficient studies of causation... without studying the population that got sick," Dr. Healy told Attkisson. "I have not seen major studies that focus on 300 kids who got autistic symptoms within a period of a few weeks of the vaccines."
This is exactly what I, and many other government critics have been saying for years: Large population studies are not enough to disprove a link. One must look at the kids who actually regressed into autism, and determine what factor or factors might have contributed to their regression.
This is especially true if there is a subset of children who are particularly susceptible to such environmental triggers. "Populations do not test causality," Dr. Healy said, "they test associations."
And she noted, "We do have the opportunity to understand whether or not there are susceptible children -- perhaps medically, perhaps they have a metabolic issue, mitochondrial disorder, medical issue -- that makes them more susceptible to vaccines, plural, or to one particular vaccine, or to a component of vaccines, like mercury."
The problem is, prestigious groups such at the Institute of Medicine have concluded there is no link, based almost solely on large population studies, without giving enough consideration to data culled from children who actually developed the disorder.
Dr. Healy is a member of the IOM: "I love Institute of Medicine," she said, "but a report from 2004 basically said, 'Do not pursue susceptibility groups. Don't look for those children who may be vulnerable.' I really take issue with that conclusion."
The reason why officials didn't want to look for those groups? "Because they were afraid that, if they found them, however big or small they were, that would scare the public away," Dr. Healy explained. "They don't want to pursue this hypothesis because it could be damaging to the public health community at large by scaring people. I don't believe the truth ever scares people."
Dr. Healy is hardly "anti-vaccine," and neither am I. In fact, I agree completely that, "if we identified a particular risk factor for vaccines, or if we found out that they should be spread out a little longer, I do not believe that the public would lose faith in vaccines. I think the public is smarter than that. You should never turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you are afraid of what it might show."
What it "might show" is precisely what attorneys are arguing this month in vaccine court: According to research from the University of Washington, primates exposed to thimerosal had an accumulation of mercury in their brains. Similar accumulation has been shown to activate certain brain cells, producing "neuro-inflammation" and brain swelling. Autopsies on deceased people with autism also show chronic neuro-inflammation and activation of the same brain cells, known as glial cells.
Like many people reading this post, Dr. Healy at first considered the vaccine-autism link to be "silly." But, she said, "the more you delve into it, if you look at the basic science, if you look at the research that has been done in animals, if you look at some of the individual cases, and if you look at the evidence that there is no link, what I come away with is, the question has not been answered."
Thank you, Dr. Healy. On behalf of open minded journalists, researchers, parents, politicians (including all three presidential candidates) and Huffington Post readers, your candor is a welcome addition to this debate. You have placed a much-needed wake up call to your esteemed colleagues: Some will attack you; but the majority will listen.
NOTE: CBS correspondent Sharyl Attkisson has posted her own blog on this subject.
CNN correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta also interviewed Dr. Healy and wrote about it on his blog.
I think it is unlikely preservatives or metals in vaccine formulations actually cause autism - but I do suspect there is a real possiblity that the way in which vaccines nonspecifically expand components of adaptive immunity (antibodies in particular) that may lead to the development of conditions such as autism and severe allergies (peanuts are now banned from preschool!). From what I've gleaned, children with autism have an unusually high number of auto-antibodies (which some researchers tried to link with immune cells from the mother) as well as a high degree of food intolerances.
Because there aren't many populations that don't give any vaccines to infants these days and the difficulty in diagnosing autism makes it unlikely to pick up in areas where vaccine programs aren't implemented nationally, epidemiological studies cannot pick-up either causation or association with any degree of confidence.
I have just started looking into the connection between the rise in allergies and autoimmune disorders and the wide spread initiation of intensive vaccine schedules. A good starting reference to give you would be the following study:
"Is Infant Immunization a Risk Factor for Childhood Asthma or Allergy?"
Trudi Kemp; Neil Pearce; Penny Fitzharris; Julian Crane; David Fergusson; Ian St. George;
Kristin Wickens; Richard Beasley; Epidemiology, Vol. 8, No. 6. (Nov., 1997), pp. 678-680.
From their findings "The Christchurch Health and Development Study comprises
1,265 children born in 1977. The 23 children who received no diphtheria/pertussis/tetanus (DPT) and polio immunizations had no recorded asthma episodes or consultations for asthma or other allergic illness before age 10 years; in the immunized children, 23.1% had asthma episodes, 22.5% asthma consultstions, and 30.0% consultations for other allergic illness. Similar differences were observed at ages 5 and 16 years."
This would be evidence of bystander effects of polyclonal expansion of antibodies.
For parents who may be concerned about vaccine safety, I'd like to suggest you look at the website:
http://voicesforvaccines.org/Home/
this is a site created by people who understand and believe in the safety of vaccines. It is not funded by any pharma or medical organization. I would direct you to the "stories" section, where you can read the story of a young boy who died needlessly of a vaccine-preventable disease.
This shouldn't stop the research that those on this blog want, but we need to balance the consequences of messages they make parents worry about with the consequences of going unvaccinated. And remember, the consequences of going unvaccinated has clear, proven consequences. We can't say the same about vaccines and autism.
(Indicidentally, I am not and never have been paid to promote vaccine or any drug products by anyone. I'm simply who believes that vaccines save lives. Like all things in medicine, they have risks, but autism is not one of them)
Rahul Parikh, MD
I noticed that Dr. For-Profit-Offit is on the steering committee for the site you referenced. So much for conflict of interest.
It's really sad when children die. And it's really sad that you're not doing anything to assuage the fears that people have when it comes to a (more than likely) life long debilitating condition. The decrease in the vaccination rates is a direct result of the obfuscation and blind folded arrogance of the main stream medical community.
Not everyone can take penicillin. Not everyone can eat peanuts. (Both of things can potentially kill you, if you're allergic to them.) But for some reason everyone HAS to take their vaccines; and if you don't we'll make a law to force you to.
I have one other question if someone can answer it for me? Looking at that 2004 IOM report Dr. Healy is questioning, I don't see her name on the review committee or as an author of the report. Can someone explain why she is speaking out if she wasn't directly involved in the review of the evidence.
If not, could this be the equivalent of another celebrity endorsement?
You have not been honest nor answered direct questions. I doubt anyone here puts much trust in you, your information, and your tactics in propaganda distribution (Pediatrics).
If you are trying to use Dr. Healy's IOM dates as your "proof", how sad is that.....
Again, what do you gain by denying harm AND continuing to turn your back on susceptible groups?
We question the safety of the current vaccine program because we have anecdotal evidence from parents and empirical evidence from reputable researchers that there may be a problem. The vast majority of your comments are objections, to those of us who are affected by this, for even asking these questions. Along comes yet another respectable Doctor and you object to her questions. You are part of the problem right now -- rather than helping to find a solution.
http://www.amazon.ca/Autism-Medical-Management-Michael-Chez/dp/1843108348
You must have some connection to Chez as I have never heard these compliments. Many parents reported that Dr Chez was rude and not very objective as moderator of the recent IACC meeting. Putting DAN! down while pushing his own book may not win too many parents, fwiw.
Teresa
But there is a clear correlation between possible retardation, physical restriction, and death and childhood diseases -- especially when the unvaccinated person is an adult. I do not wish to disregard the subject of mercury preservatives or bad vaccines -- my mother contracted polio as a result of the smallpox vaccination campaigns -- but the fact remains that you are more likely to be stricken with a highly communicable disease without vaccination than you are to develop autism with vaccination. And unless you have found a novel approach to presenting all the complexities of this issue to the average person, you open up the possibility for more people to not only become sick, but to also transfer disease to others.
For more information on the Vitamin D link, a good place to start is the Vitamin D Council -- they are part of the supplement lobby, but they provide links to the primary materials:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/11/opinion/11shattuck.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=paul+shattuck&st=nyt&oref=slogin
That leads me to question how much she's really done her homework
Again, it's the principle of social authority--if "an expert" says, is it true? We need to ask tougher questions about charges this serious
Second, Mr. Kirby should link to studies he is referring to. The UW study, among other flaws, looked at thimerasol effects in vaccines injected into infant monkeys. Infant monkeys weigh a kilo less than human infants, and in pediatrics, we dose everything by weight. So essentially, by weight, you're admintering tremendously high concentrations of mercury into this monkeys.
The point being that it is more appropriate to do the same study, but use proportional doses of vaccines to the monkey's weight, then see what happens.
In the end, I think it would be best if the government simply released the documents of the Poling trial so we could all get a look at them.
Rahul Parikh, MD
What she is asking, which is the same thing that all of us are asking, is that we look at these injured children. We look at these children who suddenly developed regressive autism after receiving a vaccine. But, the government agencies are denying this; they are saying, "'Do not pursue susceptibility groups. Don't look for those children who may be vulnerable."
That is a very damning statement. Especially considering that there have been no, absolutely NONE, studies looking at these subsets. Perhaps YOU should be the one doing their homework, particularly when it comes to legal matters. I have a feeling that this whole facade will be crashing soon, and parents are going to be looking at people like you as to why this happened to their child.
The interview and comments of Dr. Healy are pretty staggering. Those who accuse vaccines of causing autism will latch onto it as further proof that they are correct.
But here's a more reasonable way to look at it. Dr. Healy is not saying vaccines cause autism. Her comments are calling for further research, despite a decade's worth of research that should reassure the public.
That's ok, if that's how those in the autism and medical community want to spend our ever tighter health care dollars.
And if we do find that vaccines cause autism, we in the medical community will have a lot of explaining and apologizing to do. Because that science will be as close to the truth as possible.
But let me ask the question: Let's say we do thoe and find that there is no link between autism and vaccines? Then what? Will the debate end?
I don't think it will--per the pattern I've seen, the arguement will continue to shift. First it was MMR, then thimerasol, now it's aluminum or formaldehyde. People have staked out positions in this debate. In the case of people like Mr. Kirby, Dr. Gordon, the Geiers etc. they've staked their incomes and/or reputations as well. In other words, we believe what we want to believe, and dismiss that which conflicts with those beliefs.
(continued in next post)
You may have missed the HuffPost's Pick--
"there is in fact real shared and driving fear on the part of public health officials and medical researchers that they may have "blown it big time".
Your posts here reflect that description. If you were more humble, thoughtful, and scientific, it would make you appear humanistic. As it stands, you will continue to defend that Titanic with the gaping hole. You missed all of the SOS calls and warnings as you were too grandiose and sure of yourself. I guess you're going down with your ship.
Dr. Healy has nothing to gain by her comments except saving these "susceptible children". What do you gain by continuing your denial of harm?
Teresa
You do not know what causes autism (although you have emphatically stated that "it's not the vaccines"). Dr. Healy is saying that we should look more closely at the children who have been affected. Your decade's worth of statistical studies that don't focus on these children are less and less convincing to the public in light of empirical science that is starting to shed more light on potential causes. Your response is we should stop looking at this or go look elsewhere -- but you don't say where.
To what end? You supposedly care about these children. Your words seem to be in conflict with that supposition.
Any parents out there wanting to just talk about how they go through their lives and have advice for others are welcome to email me.
Thanks, Lin
linlousmith@gmail.com
No, it is not a problem answering a question. It is just if you are not working on research on autism-vaccine issues, how can you feel compelled to support the studies?
The bottom line is that there have been extensive investigations into the hypothesis that vaccines are connected to autism, and those investigations have failed to show any connection. The longer the True Believers, goaded by the likes of Dr. Healy, remain fixated on this scientific dead end, the longer we'll have to wait before the real cause of autism is found.
Nope.
Are you an acreddited doctor? Have you done any research into this? Do you have any training or expertise? I guarantee she has more than you.
The bottom line is, really, that she thinks we need to investigate these children who may be susceptible, who may have regressed. It isn't a dead end, especially after that damning statement from her superiors that said, "Do not pursue susceptibility groups. Don't look for those children who may be vulnerable"
You people do this to every doctor who speaks out againt the Vaccine Gods. You've done it to Dr. Poling, and now you are doing it to her.
pHARMa's days are now number, and I have a feeling that you are going to feel really stupid when it comes crashing down.
However, I believe it is too late at this point. While science at some point in the future might belatedly look into susceptibility markers and vulnerable individuals and populations, evidence at this point clearly reveals that many children have been irreparably hurt. Integrity has already been lost. It will be a long, long time before certain institutions recover their reputations. Maybe some, like the AAP, will eventually need to be disbanded, and replaced with a new professional pediatric organization that is taint-free.
I once heard Dr. Loop say that "the best science will ultimately deliver the best medicine." I was heartened to think that this attitude would prevail in the medical community and we could get a fair and unvarnished test of our claim that our son was irreparably damaged by the vaccinations that he received. For us it wasn't a theory. We watched it before our very eyes.
Dr. Healy must be commended for her public remarks, as they remind me that all we ever asked for was the "best science." Sadly, over the past decade we have witnessed a kabuki theater of special interests that keep us from the truth. For our family, it has also deprived us of justice and a chance for a more stable life, not just for our son, now 15, but for each family member.
Hope dies last.
This is also happening because brave parents worked hard to put together cases in the vaccine court.
Hearing Dr. Healy is like a dream as her words are perfect. It is also emotional for all of us to hear the truth-
" if you know that there is a susceptible group, then you can save those children"
"if you turn your back on the notion that there is a susceptible group"....(with disgust/amazement)-"what can I say"
What I can say is we have been scorned, ridiculed, and had too many backs turned away from us. Those Offits, Gerberdings, Fombonnes, Gardiners, etc (oops, that's the first name), will need to look into the mirror and know that they perpetuated this epidemic with their untruths and blatant disregard. They put salt into the wound and added insult to injury whenever science would get closer to telling the autism story.
PS- I doubt dr p will show up to this blog. This has blown the wind out of the big ship, AAP. Icebergs ahead for them....
Teresa/red
I
I will say this, David has been a tiredless voice for us. We've been chasing down this "myth" (as you call it) for years, trying to get someone to listen. He listened, and he continues to listen, and for that alone, he has my undying gratitude. Can you say the same? Can the scientists and doctors who are your peers say the same?
What's next? Sadly, I see a smear campaign coming for Dr. Healy, just like it has for every other doctor who has championed the link. But it's one more voice, and soon, you and the rest of the world won't be able to help but hear us.
And I'm sorry if Dr. Healy's words hurt your feelings or shattered your world view. It needs to happen.
"But public health officials have been saying they know, they've been implying to the
public there's enough evidence and they know it's not causal," Attkisson said.
"I think you can't say that," Healy said. "You can't say that."
This Doctor understands that you can't prove a negative. NONE of the studies that you're basing your statements that "vaccines don't cause autism" actually say that. I think you've stated in posts elsewhere that you have some training in science. I would think that you would understand this.
This, from the CDC, is an objective logic statement:
"I think it's important for the average parent to know that the government hasn't made
a link between vaccines and autism," said Dr. Anne Schuchat of the Centers for
Disease Control.
Which is NOT the same thing as saying there isn't one; it's basically saying 'we've haven't found anything yet'.
Dr. Healy is saying what most of us have been saying all along: We want more empirical research on the effects of vaccines and their components. We want a safer vaccine program. We want a large scale study to compare vaccinated vs unvaccinated populations.
More voices will be heard from. More court cases will be settled. The train has left the station; you best move off the tracks.
Dr Healy, thank you for looking past the head-lines and not letting your conclusions get clouded by conflicts of interest. I hope your voice will influence colleges to do the same.
What really stuck me about the CBS interview is when Dr. Healy said “If you know there is a susceptible group, you can save those children” How many susceptible children have not been “saved” and how many will continue to not be “saved” until more doctors like Dr. Healy “break ranks”.
My son is one of those susceptible children. He’s been recovering ASD/ADHD through biomedical for almost 3 years, but still has several health issues. We are not a part of the Autism Omnibus, but I’ve been paying close to the reports and recently had him tested for mitochondrial dysfunction. Thus far, tests indicate he has MtD, so we’d added more to his protocol, and are seeing improvements. Recovering him has cost our family a lot of money (and our health insurance too). With only a fraction children with autism in the Autism Omnibus, what is going to happen financially for all of the other ASD children harmed by vaccines?