The Pentagon -- A Voice of Reason on Vaccines and Autism?
UPDATE - I recently received a response to my query from Paul Stone, AFIP Public Affairs. He wrote that: "Dr. Centeno's presentation, entititled 'Mercury Poisoning: A Clinical and Toxicological Perspective,' did mention Thimerosal. However, its inclusion was specifically intended to point out that although there has been some speculation about a potential association between Thimerosal and Autism, currently there is no data or science to support such a claim. Neither the AFIP nor Dr. Centeno have been involved in or conducted research on Autism."
I have asked Mr. Stone to clarify why Methly B-12, DMPS and glutathione GSH appear under the heading "treatments" on Dr. Centeno's thimerosal slide -- DK
When it comes to fighting autism, maybe we should send in the Army.
Autism and the military have a deep history together. Children of service members are reportedly almost twice as likely to have autism (1-in-88) than those in the general population (1-in-150). Meanwhile, the Department of Defense quietly spends millions in taxpayer dollars researching the possible causes of autism at far-from-the-spotlight centers around the country.
Recently, several documents have been brought to my attention which, when viewed together, suggest that the Department of Defense has legitimate concerns about vaccine injuries and their possible connection to autism, perhaps more so than other branches of the Federal Government.
These documents raise several questions that I am currently trying to get answered from DOD officials:
1) Autism may be an "adverse event" of Tripedia (DTaP) use
According to the website of the Vaccine Healthcare Centers Network, run by DOD and CDC, autism is listed as an "adverse event" associated with use of the Tripedia triple vaccine for diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis.
My questions are: Why does autism appear here? Does VHC consider autism to be a possible adverse event of DTaP use, or has it simply been reported that way by parents?
2) Patients who have bad vaccine reactions should avoid multiple vaccines in the future
According to this VHC slide, any patient who has a "Systemic Event" following immunization - defined as "symptoms and signs of illness after vaccination" and "any reaction that does not involve the injection site" - should avoid multiple vaccines in the future, if possible.
My questions are: Is that standard DOD policy? Is there an alternative schedule for these patients? Does this advice apply to children of service members as well? Why is this information not shared with civilian doctors and pediatricians?
3) Patients who develop serious neurological diseases might need vaccine exemptions in the future
This VHC slide says that a patient who develops a severe neurologic disease following vaccination might need temporary or permanent exemption from future vaccines. Such diseases include peripheral neuropathy, encephalopathy (including autism, presumably) Guillain-Barré syndrome and progressive focal neurologic disease. Such patients should be given temporary exemptions from future vaccinations.
Meanwhile, risks for recurrent reactions should be assessed before additional doses are given, and "permanent vaccine exemption may be required."
Again, is this DOD policy? Are such exemptions given? Because autism is listed as a "severe neurological disease," would those patients (ie, children of service members) also be exempt from future vaccinations? And, on a related note, does VHC consider autism to be a "neurological disease," as opposed to a developmental/behavioral disorder?
4) Mercury, and possibly thimerosal may cause autism and dementia
According this slide (#22) on the vaccine preservative thimerosal, from the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP), "exposure to mercury in utero and children may cause mild to severe mental retardation and mild to severe motor coordination impairment." The slide also seems to indicate that autism and dementia might questionably be "health effects" of mercury or thimerosal exposure.
My question is: Why does autism appear on a list of health effects on a slide about thimerosal, even if it is followed by a question mark?
5) Alternative biomedical treatments may be prescribed for thimerosal exposure
The same slide says that "treatments" for thimerosal exposure include: "Methyl-B12, ointment DMPS, & glutathione (GSH)." These are all alternative (some would say fringe, radical and dangerous) treatments being used today by thousands of autism parents and their children's physicians, with varying degrees of success (including reports of full recovery).
Methyl-B12 - has been shown to repair damage to the process of methylation, and to restore methionine and glutathione levels in patients with autism to within normal ranges.
DMPS - is a sulfur-based amino acid used in the process of chelation - in which sulfur molecules bind with heavy metals such as mercury, and eliminate them from the system.
Glutathione - is a sulfur-based protein that binds with heavy metals and eliminates them from the system. It is also a powerful anti-oxidant. Many children with autism show signs of glutathione depletion, heavy metal accumulation and oxidative stress.
My questions are: Was the speaker simply refering to treatments that some people have tried, or is the AFID endorsing these treatments for thimerosal toxicity and/or autism? On what evidence is this based? Are Methyl B-12 and GSH, like chelation, considered standard of care in the military for mercury toxicity? Can you explain why autism families in the military have these treatments covered, (at thousands of dollars a year), even if they also have an autism diagnosis? Is this why military insurance will pay for visits to doctors in the Defeat Autism Now network, which advocates the use of these non-traditional treatments?
I eagerly await the replies from VHC and AFID officials, and will update this blog as soon as I hear anything.
Meanwhile, regardless of the Pentagon's positions on the above questions, we know for certain that DOD is concerned about the risk of injury from multiple vaccines.
In fact, it may even need to reconsider the practice.
"We have preliminary findings from one of our many on-going research studies that suggest a relationship between adverse events and multiple vaccinations exist," US Army Colonel Renata J. M. Engler, MD, director of the VHC, (a "collaborative network" of the Defense Department and the CDC), wrote to Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY). "These findings will require validation, but heighten our concern for the current clinical practice of multiple vaccinations."
"The more drugs one is exposed to, the greater the likelihood of having an adverse event so as vaccine numbers increase, and (sic) we will see more people who have efficacy or safety issues," Col. Engler said. "The standard of care (ie, in the context of mixing vaccines) is to minimize drug exposures because of the recognition that the more drugs being used, the greater the chance of a reaction and potentially a serious adverse event."
I wonder when the CDC and America's pediatricians will issue an equally thoughtful and cautionary statement, instead of their usual reassurance that small children can easily get 100,000 shots at once, without a single "serious adverse event" among them.
PS: For a list of scientists and government leaders who called for more vaccine-autism research in 2008, please CLICK HERE.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
This is the question that you need to ask yourself if you hold strong to the vaccine-autism connection:
What evidence, or how much evidence, would it take to change your mind to realize that there is no link? What would it take for you to actually say, "Wow, I guess I was wrong on that"?
If you still stand by your conviction despite all the evidence then you simply stubborn.
A good question. One you should ask yourself as well.
Here's my answer: Prove to me that this didn't happen to my son's brain:
http://mov
Non sequitur.
Perhaps you should read the following study and ask yourself the same question that you asked us:
http://www
Here's a brief summary:
“This study found statistically significant evidence to suggest that boys in United States who were vaccinated with the triple series Hepatitis B vaccine, during the time period in which vaccines were manufactured with thimerosal, were more susceptible to developmental disability than were unvaccinated boys.”
"What evidence, or how much evidence, would it take to change your mind to realize that there is no link? What would it take for you to actually say, "Wow, I guess I was wrong on that"?'
That's the problem with the anti-vaccine movement. They continually change the hypothesis to match the evidence. That's where the goalpost shifting comes in. First the problem was thimerosal, but when autism diagnoses didn't decline along with the decline in thimerosal uptake, the hypothesis was changed. Now it's anti-freeze and ether, except that vaccines contain neither. That's OK - it's the aluminum!
Well, the problem with the anti-safe vaccine movement is that they keep moving the goalposts to divert attention away from the true culprit. First the problem was with refridgerator moms. Then it was too much TV, then it was elderly fathers, then it was alcoholic moms, then it was this, then it was that.
The pro-safe vaccine crowd has always said it was the vaccines and what's in the vaccines.
So, what is it, Kenny?
Thanks for your great work - I am fighting the US Military right now to get a waiver on the NEW mandatory flu vaccine requirement for all children over the age of 6 months if they attend a military base daycare/schools. The Thimerosal is real concern to me in the flu vaccine for my preschool children. Not too mention my kids have egg allegies but that does not seem to matter to the DOD.. they just want there vaccine scheduled adhered too..
Yes.. it's a imperative question.. why does autism appear on the list for side effects of Thimersol and why are they MANDATING a vaccine with Thimersol in it for preschool kids if this is the case?
I found your information thru Autism Salutes and Angela Warner.. I am so thankful as I am basically begging for a waiver for the 2008 flu shot for my 2 kids and I will print your blogs and put it in my packet as I grovel at the feet of the Dept of Defense not to kick my kids out of the base day care if they don't get a flu shot.. THANKS for your incredible work!!!!!!
I just got back from a great game - After getting booed at the start of the season Mike Teel proceeded to break several all time school records at Rutgers for a QB, including throwing 7 TD's in a game that was as fun as any I had ever watched.
Then I come back and read your post here, and you have trumped that experience. Thanks for being our QB and staying in the game after getting booed, and thanks again for blowing me away by shedding a bright light on a case that was supposed to be closed.
Great slides – interesting to see the use of mercury as a fungicide on crops and in latex paint.
If they know that you should probably avoid multiple vaccinations after an adverse reaction, why do it in the first place?
I like this quote at the end -
Neither treatment nor
tragedy need occur if
prevention prevails…
"I wonder when the CDC and America's pediatricians will issue an equally thoughtful and cautionary statement, instead of their usual reassurance that small children can easily get 100,000 shots at once, without a single "serious adverse event" among them."
It may be a long wait David, since both the AAP and the CDC have a vast web of conflict ties with the vaccine makers. Promoting vaccines takes precedence over adjusting the mandated schedule. Remember that the man who made the "100,000 shots as once," Dr. Paul Offit, developer of the rotateq vaccine, said the money he made off this was like "winning the lottery."
Anne Dachel
Media editor: Age of Autism
I have a question that has intrigued me since I read my first MSDS on thimerosal.
Ken, (I'm sorry, - I mean "AutismNewsBeat") maybe you can answer this one since you have all the answers...
On David's item #4 regarding thimerosal, the link takes you to a slide describing "routes of exposure".
Why is "INJECTION" not listed as a route of exposure? I notice the same thing on MSDS sheets. Is this because the manufacturers do not think anyone would be stupid enough to INJECT it?
I do not see any other route of exposure that fits the bill of "intramuscular injection".
Please "AutismNewsBeat", Please tell me the answer to this!!!!!.
I highly doubt that Dr. Centeno approves of Mr. Kirby's biased and sloppy interpretation of these slides. I expect that the AFIP will soon be issuing a statement to that effect.
Spooky. How did I know?
David, Thank you for your fine work and your dedication.
In yesterday's article at AoA http://www
“The consultation does not prove or disprove causality association but it is from these consultations that we have refined our understanding of the questions, a critical first step to future refinement of research agendas. It is our firm belief that increased research into side effects that are more severe but may be short duration, may help us understand more severe adverse events (more rare at 1 in 10-100,000). However, our work over the past years has been humbling in relation to the knowledge gaps.”
Again, "our work over the past years has been humbling in relation to the knowledge gaps.”
This is what the autism community has been screaming for years. There are many, many questions that have not been asked by our scientific community through valid studies...
See Barbara Fischkin's Profile
thank you david. For this and all the postings that you wrote during the busy Thanksgiving season. As always your reporting is respected and your hard work is much appreciated.
I forgot to mention that perhaps the whistle-blower to end this tragedy in public health experimentation might even be the military.
great digging, David. I am still wondering which group, collectively, will be the one that steps up and calls a halt to this huge, sick experiment on our children? THe doctors, the pediatricians, the coroners, the researchers, the politicians???
The parents.
Certainly not the autismdeadbeats
This reminds me of the comment I had from David Salisbury, the UK's vaccine supremo, when I quizzed him about the Offit doctrine which he had cited in a BBC TV interview. This is what he said in an email:
"Turning to my comments on Newsnight - I suggest you read Paul Offit's paper - as I have done....My words were "The immune system of a baby has got huge spare capacity to deal with challenge. If we didn't, the human race wouldn't survive. But let's look specifically at vaccine. This has been studied carefully. A baby's immune system could actually tolerate perfectly well 1,000 vaccines". At no point did I suggest that 1,000 vaccines would not increase the probability of adverse reactions - a quite different matter."
Email August 26, 2004 10.03am
While Dr Salisbury was very courteous I note the (i) he elides a theoretical proposition with hard science (ii) he agrees, even so, that exposure to more vaccines would increase the risks of adverse reaction - which, of course, is not something he told TV viewers!
I wonder if anyone seriously thinks that if you attempted a modest 20 vaccines in one go, it would not be instant catastophe? The point about talking about 1,000 or 10,000 or 100,000 is surely that it is a rhetorical device for persuading people that they are getting off lightly with 5 or 6.
WOW! I am in tears. Thank you David. This is nominated for the best post in our fight for services in 2008. I hope we can send it over to the special masters. Keep digging. Thanks again.
http://www
Mr. Kirby, here's what Offit originally wrote about the number of vaccines that a child's immune system could theoretically respond to at once. If you disagree, then tell us why.
"A practical way to determine the capacity of the immune system to respond to vaccines is to consider the number of B and T cells required to generate adequate levels of binding antibodies per milliliter of blood. Calculations are based on the following assumptions: 1) approximately 10 ng per ml is likely to be an effective concentration of antibody directed against a specific epitope; 2) approximately 10e3 B cells per ml are required to generate 10 ng of antibody per ml; 3) given a doubling time of about 0.75 days for B cells, it would take about 7 days to generate 10e3 B cells per ml from a single B-cell clone; 4) because vaccine-specific humoral immune responses are first detected about 7 days after immunization, those responses could be generated from a single B cell clone per ml; 5) one vaccine contains about 10 immunogenic proteins or polysaccharides; 6) each immunogenic protein or polysaccharide contains about 10 epitopes (i.e. 10e2 epitopes per vaccine); and 7) approximately 10e7 B cells are present per ml of blood. Given these assumptions, the number of vaccines an individual could respond to is determined by dividing the number of circulating B cells (i.e. approximately 10e7) by the average number of epitopes per vaccine...
I,m not David Kirby but didn't you just read what his article quoted Dr. Engler as saying about multiple vaccinations and adverse events. It has become pretty obvious to any who have an open mind that there is definite reason to use caution with vaccines. Why would you give an individual 3 or 5 simulated illnesses at once when nature only gives 1 at a time. It goes against common sense. Hannah Poling also demonstrates the harmful effect of "catching up" and inundating the poor child's body with too many vaccines. I am not sure that we even need to understand exactly what this "practical way to determine the capacity of the immune system to respond to vaccines" is because it might just simply be wrong. I'm sure the tobacco companies had some means/formulat to calculate that tobacco could be taken in extremely high quantities with no detrmental effects. If it's wrong it's wrong.
"I,m not David Kirby but didn't you just read what his article quoted Dr. Engler as saying about multiple vaccinations and adverse events."
No, he didn't read it...this IS Kenny we're talking about.
Ken aka Autismnewsbeat-
Offit's spin here is like a 5-year-old trying to sound intelligent reading out of an encyclopedia. Your perseverative attempts to use it as evidence of NO harm is ridiculous.
Key words that display this paragraph as frankenstein biology logic are:
-based on the following assumptions
-approximately
-likely to be
- it would take about
-those responses could be
-contains about
-Given these assumptions, the number of vaccines an individual could respond to
These phrases are interesting in that they demonstrate a bunch of unrelated textbook facts held together by drivel to attempt to prove an untested and dangerous THEORY that Offit would like to make true. Hardly science and hardly evidence of safety.
Teresa
Teresa - I was thinking the same thing
Imprecise word counts in that paragraph along the path to a claim:
assumptions -2 (total assumptions = 7)
approximately - 4
likely - 1
about - 6
could -2
average - 1
Total fudge words used in determining a safety parameter - 16, yet who is he calling the false profit?
Coming from the guy who moderates out scientific evidence on his own blog...
The primary issue with this completely unproven and untested theory is that it looks at a single isolated component of a very complex immune system and makes a systemic estimation (and assumption) based on that. In the real world that's pretty typical of specialists and almost always results in a massive simplification of real life which inevitably is wrong. This is especially true when our general understanding of the whole immune system is relatively basic, let alone other interactions with the rest of the body.
It's like looking at the tires of a car and determining they will hold 3000 pounds of weight. I saw a guy like that at home depot loading up his car with bricks. He started to drive away and his tires held out no problem. To bad his axel broke after about 10 yards.
David:
Great job -- as always. I think for me, the biggest *whopper* is the fact that the military has a PowerPoint that discusses mercury, thimerosal, vaccines, autism, chelation, B12, and GHS all in one place. It endorses what we all have been saying for years and takes the *quackery* out of the equation -- once and for all.
The next time I hear anyone *diss* chelation, I'll being pointing to this story and suggesting they lodge their complaints with the military.
Best,
Kelli
I'm personally wondering if these documents could be used as a basis for demanding philosophical and more easily-accessed medical exemptions in every state.
Somehow I'm not surprised that the military has its own separate medical standards. One of the first remarks my mother made after I sent her articles about the galluping rates of autism and the link to environmental toxins was "How the HELL are they going to run a war?"
What if the Somali rates are a harbinger of future rates for the offspring of the most thimerosal-exposed 1990 generation of vaccinated kids? Who will the military get to soldier or command the armed forces if 1/28 future children have autism?
Even if the magic bullet is found and these kids partially recover, they'd hardly be prime for command or combat with the multiple food and substance sensitivities or perceptive and coordination issues that may plague many for the rest of their lives. Let's be honest: even our miracle kids-- those children who seem to recover almost completely-- are never, ever going to fly fighter jets. Something's got to give and it looks like the Pentagon-- at least-- may recognize that fact.
David,
Thanks again for a wonderful post.
My 9 year old has autism and his father has been in the Navy for 20 years.
You are correct. We get many biomedical treatments covered by our military insurance (thank god). As a result, my son continues to improve. He was 6 when he first called me "Mommy". We are now having conversations, just three years later. IV Chelation and Glutathione have been life savers for our family. I only wish other insurance companies would cover treatments and supplements like Tricare.
My son was given 15 viruses in one day at about 19 months old. There is no way this can be safe.
Tricare in my opinion has a long way to go in covering treatments and supplements. From where I stand Tricare has not covered the diagnosis testing for my son. When I call to find out how to approach what is next for my son regarding care for my son who was born while my husband was on activity duty, developed speech issues while my husband was on active duty but received the diagnosis of autism AFTER my husband retired, I was told, "EW!" Yes that was the Tricare representative's response. She said that because my husband was retired my son is not eligible for programs or a case manager.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
