Youngest Infants May Help Pinpoint Progress of Autism

The interesting thing of this study may reflect those parents such as myself, who seen early signs but had no idea they meant anything, and that I seen no regression. I seen no progression. Babies can show signs, but they are so subtle and being an infant, they sort of already are debilitated. As the grow, they learn new abilities and it is at about 6 months to 1 year, a parent may notice these things. I had one odd baby, but he was fun. He always gave me eye contact (he never did others) but he was quite under reactive and over reactive. I wondered why he never played peekaboo, I wondered why he had to be burped hard, but I think more of my attention was to get him to sleep all night than seriously consider the odd things should or could be looked into. Now as he became older, there was no doubt how debilitating whatever he had was. I remember comments day care providers said to me but I was convinced my baby was a typically developing baby/ toddler, I didn’t care what those providers thought yet still today, my son’s autism isn’t as obvious to me as it is to others since I am with my son all of the time. I think I suffered that same thing when he was a baby, I became used to the under reactive, over reactive, no peekaboo, no startle effect right at birth and he still has no startle effect to this day. Autism was there, I just didn’t see it as that.

What else is interesting of this article, is when very early signs are seen this could be the trigger alarm so many might medically need when making medical choices.

This study is amazing. We’re continually told that all the autism is due to “better diagnosing” by doctors. Are we to believe that doctors have gotten it wrong for years?
According to this study, the signs of autism appear gradually between six months and 18 months.
I’m not quite sure what the difference is. Something is happening to our children. Something causes children to lose learned skills. Does anyone care? Did the researchers of the study simply stand by observing children regressing and do nothing but take notes? Is the best we can hope for “early recognition”? Is anyone interested in why we’re losing our children?

Anne Dachel Media editor: Age of Autism http://www.ageofautism.com/

It really get’s offensive to keep hearing we’re loosing our children. My literal son would take it to mean just that. I don’t think any doctor can definately determine the rise of autism, but that’s been speculation by many since a couple of things all coincided at the same time as other things. This study was more about reconizing early signs and with that, maybe they’ll locate that cause but for the child what’s most important is to realize what the signs might be for a child that young.

I get really upset when people keep making excuses for doctors not being able to recognize when a child
is beginning to regress, or in the middle of regressing or has completed regression. What does it matter if a child shows signs of regression at 8 months, 10 months, 18 months. It solves absolutely nothing. For some children it could be the build up of toxins, viruses etc at an early age, for other when they are a bit older. And what good will early intervention do in South Carolina when they have already dispensed with the early autism/pDD early intervention program for lack of funds and are planning to end all funding for 26,000 people with disabilities in SC ? I kid you not. Don’t be surprised if other states follow. I get so tired about hearing about early intervention. Let’s just stop autism instead.
maurine Meleck

“Second, our most widely used and recommended practice for gathering information about symptom onset, parent-provided developmental history, does not provide a valid assessment of the slow decline in social communication that can be observed prospectively.”

I find this comment very offensive. Maybe in Sandy’s case it was different and she did not realize that unusual behaviors / reactions meant anything, but for the authors to say that parental reports on symptom onset and develomental history is not valid is a bunch of baloney.

This group, of susceptable children, siblings of already diagnosed autistic brothers, may not represent the majority of the regressive autistic. (correct me if I misunderstood this)
We do not know the vaccine status of these children, can we guess they , as most children started Hepb at birth? Could we extrapolate ,from this information, that “if” regression is caused by vaccines, that another group, born before the prescribed hepb at birth, may have begun regression later than six months. I’m not sure this study means anything, other than a “hmm”, with no explanation, clearly nothing was factored in, with the exception – factor x (sibling of autistic child).
Now that we know in the case of “some” sutism, regression occurs, as many of us already knew, let’s find out , as Maurine mentioned, what caused it. To address everything under the sun, would be appropriate.

Barbara – I quite agree that a “hmmm” is probably an appropriate response!

Indeed, since this group of kids was specifically selected because they have a sibling on the spectrum, they don’t represent a broad range of kids with autism, and findings certainly can’t be understood as relating to every kid with autism.

It may, however, help to describe the process whereby autism “comes on” in some kids. And that may be helpful for earlier diagnosis and for developing better benchmarks and tools for observing differences in development.

Lisa

Anne, you don’t have to read far to see how many people still cling to (worship?) the idea of MMR=regression=autism. If the timing of the origins of regression are better understood, we can focus on the relevant set of factors. So, I would say it matters quite a bit. That’s not to say that SOME kids do not regress more suddenly and later then others, but for many others, and siblings or close relatives in particular, the window for optimal intervention may be earlier than is available today. It also lends support that those who continue to focus on the MMR shot are still on the wrong path towards improving outcomes in autism.

This study may not had been attempting to represent the majority at all or a sub set. I believe they selected these children which had siblings since the study was to look for earlier signs, you’d sort of have to have children more susceptible in order to have a chance to observe anything. Interestingly, all 25 were later diagnosed with autism.

I agree parents of today might know to look closer at behaviors of their infants, but previous parents may not have and there was video evidence of this in some other study. Parents who had children with autism, upon looking at home video’s, autism signs were present very early on.

I think if anything, studies as such for new parents of today will cause alot of stress on them, wondering what this behavior might be, what that behavior might be…

Now maybe some one can do a different study to also include vaccines into it.

I also think some of these signs are very subtle… and if this is your first child, or you’re not very familiar with typical child development, it can be awfully tricky to spot slow or mild regressions.

I have to say, for us, that the hardest part of spotting issues in our child was the fact that we rarely saw him in context with other kids. We dropped him off and picked him up at preschool, and we went to events… but overall he seemed to be doing just fine. It wasn’t until we intentionally observed him with other kids and LOOKED for differences that they became obvious.

In fact, I even checked all the developmental lists (says three word sentences? check! points and shows what he wants? check! starting to show interest in letters and numbers? check!). What those lists DON’T say are things like “uses novel combinations of words to express a variety of ideas,” or “uses letters and numbers in context,” etc.

In our case, it wasn’t that our son was obviously disordered or delayed, but rather that his development was “off.” Not something I’d think most parents would see without some basis of comparison or direction.

Lisa

its also possible that while a child is regressing, they are continuing to learn new things and appear to be progressing. It just may not clear how much old stuff they are losing at the same time until a large deficit has amassed.

Parents of today may know signs but I’m not even sure baby books these days ever mention exact developmental delays or what to look for in autism and it may not be the first thing on any parents minds. When I did ask others, and I did often, everyone said every baby does that but what was odd, I wasn’t seeing other day care babies doing it. So my baby was never interested in toys, but he sure was in those ceiling fans. Nothing in his infant behavior would had at all pointed me to thinking autism later. My son was obvious as an infant, if you added up everything I seen maybe one might had considered autism, but I never heard of it and no one did consider autism. Also, since I was a new mom, there’s no way I’d ever remember when he did what at what age during autism assessments at age 3. But I happened to had written every single thing my baby did on a calendar, I had planned it to be a little book for him when he grew up, who knew I’d use that to determine when he did what, and all the odder things he did. Even today, many doctors only focus on language skills than behavior. Just prior to age 2 his peds was wondering only about that language but when my son ran his head into her office sink and he didn’t cry, no bells went off for that doc. Now when he hit 2 years old, which then was that magic number I guess, no words + behaviors must has meant we better look into this. What is amazing was his diagnosis of severe autism, and he was all that. What this study did was not look at language at all, and had they looked maybe my child could had started sooner with EI.

I think regardless of school cuts, no one really has to rely on them for EI. The first thing I thought of after the diagnosis was not the school district. I still think what is important of this study is many may have had earlier signs that people just blew off as meaning nothing, and there’s nothing wrong if they did. It wouldn’t make any one a bad parent. I think it’s important to look at behaviors than to wait so long as many do for that language, as if autism is all about that and not also behaviors.

Seeker – excellent point!

Lisa

You know Seeker, that’s a great point. My son was certainly in his own world and you’d never know he was paying any attention to his surroundings or the people around him at all. Once he started really talking at around 5 or 6 years old, he was recalling his memories, and alot of them and they were of course when you had no idea he paid attention to you at all. He was really ‘there’ the whole time, only maybe he didn’t know what to do with all of that info around him at the time. For my son who was non verbal for a very long time, I had no idea how much he had retained nor would I know had he not spoken about it as he became older.

That mmr is certainly the bogeyman to many, just for sharing, I DID notice ,with all of my kids , a series of ear infections popped up shortly after it, and with one a four month bout of gi disturbance of “unknown” cause. My son, was speaking and interacting, however, he started looking sick, droopy, stopped talking altogether, completely lost speech, before his mmr. These days, we have BAD days, and I just started noticing he ,on these days, has bright red ears!? Does anyone else notice bright red ears?

My kid has bright red ear when he’s mad, mostly just one and when he over heats, he get’s blotchy red skin patches, both are also signs of high blood pressure. My friend has both things happen when she’s really really mad. She doesn’t have to say a word, just look at her ears and skin.

I’ve heard people mention red ears before, though never seen it with my own child. Interesting, though!

Yep Sandy, it’s when he’s mad, blotchy face too, he has fair skin..strawberryish’ hair ,blue eyes, so skin blotchiness I may not have noticed as much as being different, but those ears are HOT ,firey hot. So you think it’s a result of being angry, or a physical symptom that triggers getting angry? I was thinking some trigger, chemical in school or something, but maybe just being mad makes it happen ,like you suggest.

I am endowed with Asperger’s.
We all know we are born with instinctive behaviors; sucking, suckling, imprinting, swallowing, the moro reflex (grabbing and crouching when startled), pain avoidance, etc.
We expect and accept that some of these behaviors are “programmed” to diminish with maturity.
If a behavior is programmed to diminish with age, but is not replaced by an age appropriate substitute, is it regression?
In other words, if we are born with an imprinting instinct to follow motion and look at faces, and that instinct diminishes on schedule, but is not replaced with the more mature learned behavior, has regression occurred, or is it the first sign of the inability to learn to recognize faces?
We take for granted that these instincts will come and go on schedule… but I am a 55 year old adult who still has an extreme moro reflex. For years I have been subject to the cruel humor of idiots intentionally startling me to watch me helplessly fall and curl into a fetal position, even from a standing position. Three years ago someone intentionally startled me so badly that it did permanent damage to the deltoid muscle in my right arm.
I have broken bones from the falls, and I have broken bones and strains from the intensity of the jerks. I bite my tongue, and once when I didn’t bite my tongue, I shattered a tooth. Massive doses of the anti-seizure drug Keppra help slightly, but not enough to be worth the $600 a month cost.
The timing of brain growth, and the timing of infant reflexive behaviors is controlled by protein signals turning on and turning off on cue; miss a cue, miss a protein, and the results are quite unpredictable. How subtle a genetic defect would it be to merely affect the timing of protein expression?

My kid only get’s one very red ear, and always has. Just the one. Blotchy skin too but not just his face, it’s his chest and arms. Not specifically meaning you, but many look at other medical things or odd things and wonder how it fits into autism (I’d be one from time to time) and it may have nothing at all to do with it. I myself never paid much attention to other kids getting mad to notice their ears but talking with others, I know autism or not my kid isn’t the only one.
I think for my kid, the blotchy skin is partly a sweat thing. Mad or over heated, something happens. Can being extremely mad or over heated cause higher blood pressure? I don’t have a blood pressure tester here, but I bet it does. Happens to my sons dad too, and he does have high blood pressure. He has blotchy skin and red ears all the time cuz he’s yelling all the time. If one was to consider the heart, blood flow, all that, higher blood pressure when mad would explain it.

That startle effect always interests me. Where Bill as a hyper startle effect, my son has zero. What I mean is, he reacts to fire alarms due to sensory hearing but there is no startle. You cant sneak up on him and go “boo”, well you can but the expected reaction just isn’t there.

The world truly is a cruel place to tease Bill like that. It’s horrible to read and know adults are doing this.

I’ve always been interested in the startle affect. I have one that does go to the floor, and then cries, and then gets mad and wants to hurt the one who “did it”. I have another who jumps, then finds it funny and laughs. Sandy, my 2000 doesn’t react much if at all,either. The baby, he jumps then cries.
I think you may have something there Bill, is it regression or were replacement behaviors missing. Interesting, although I don’t have anything to add, perhaps someone could study this. We do stop crawling when we walk, stop babbling when we talk, yep, an interesting angle.

I think Bill has a very good point and thinking back I think what he describes might most accurately coincides with my son’s development, that is not so much a regression but a failure to replace some basic instinctive behaviors as they diminished with the appropriate learned behaviors. I believe one of the early intervention programs we researched based its teaching philosophy on this premise, and indeed my son has learned many of these behaviors, although I can’t say for him whether the appearance of acquiring these skills involves some individual adaptations he has made or not.

Although autism awareness when my son was small was not what it is today (he’s now 21), I have to agree with Lisa and say that I always felt that something was just “off” (but perhaps not far enough off to warrant “panicking” right then, in accordance with the “normal” standards of expectation back then). Although some might judge us (my husband and I) more harshly now for having waited, back then “wait and see” was considered an appropriate way to react to the subtle signs of autism emerging since very few people (including myself) had any idea at all that something such as autism even existed.

I think now, with the increase in autism awareness, there is less and less tolerance for variances in childhood development that were, at one time, considered perfectly “normal.” This is not necessarily a bad thing, but I think one impact of this study might be to narrow down general tolerance of deviation from an ideally progressive childhood development model even more. Of course an obvious benefit can be the ability to spot children at risk for autism sooner and to begin treatments sooner; but there is another side to this coin and I can’t help but be just a little concerned about the point that any societal allowances for the development of “individuality” completely disappear.

Depending on how this study gets interpreted, it may seem to have been designed in part to “test” the idea of a rapid regression (which is the sort of regression parents describe following vaccination). It does appear to refute the idea of sudden regression, but as barbaraj pointed out, the vaccine history of the children involved is not revealed.

Hmmm.

I don’t think the vaccine history is relevent at all, not to this study or any unless that was the specific purpose. Vaccines just clutter the information of the study. Not all parents whose children experienced instant regression happened near at right after a vaccine. It also doesn’t really say sudden regression still couldn’t happen when early symptoms are seen.

Some of the interesting things this study found was
“They found that specific social communicative behaviors clearly decreased, rather than failing to progress, as previously thought, with losses especially dramatic between 6 and 18 months.”

If we follow anti-vaccine arguments long enough, two themes emerge: that the true prevalence of autism is skyrocketing, exploding, ballooning, tsunamiing, etc.; and that (pick a large number) of parents witnessed regression after a vaccine.

I have yet to see convincing evidence for or against the skyrocket hypothesis. I’ve heard most of the arguments for it, none of which are remotely convincing. And that’s not just me talking – it’s the consensus of the epidemiologists who study this stuff.

But what about the “thousands of regressions” hypothesis? Has anyone verified these claims? Not that I know of. Even the supposed number of regressions is a wide open question. McCarthy, et. al. (Google, 2008) claim to have “personally spoken with” 60,000 individual parents who “tell the same story.” This claim is about as doubtful as everything else she has to say. I’ve also heard 5,000 cases, which is no doubt based on the number of petitioners in the not-very-successful Autism Omnibus Proceedings. I’ve also seen “hundreds of thousands” and “millions.”

If anti-vaccine parents want to be taken seriously, they need to pay more attention to details. For instance, what does “after” mean in the sentence “thousands of parents witnessed their children regress after a vaccine”? It’s an important question. Strictly speaking, every child will die “after” receiving a vaccine. I will die after today. The world will end after the Academy Awards presentations. But in order for those sentences to carry any weight, we need to be more specific about how soon after.

Another issue is the reliability of parental reports of symptom onset. They aren’t reliable. Somehow, vaccine rejectionists have taken this simple fact and twisted it into “scientists think we are stupid.” No, actually, scientists think you are human, and since human recall is unreliable, then the same thing can reasonably be said about parents. In the Cedillo case, HHS witnesses determined that the child was showing signs of developmental delay well before the MMR shot. Cedillo lost, by the way, even though the case was chosen as the strongest, by the PSC lawyers, from thousands of other cases. So to recap, the very best case that anti-vaccine lawyers could lay on the special masters involved parents who didn’t notice for months that their kid had autism. Were the Cedillos stupid? No, of course not. Were they delusional? Nope. Dishonest? No evidence for that, although their lawyers and expert witnesses acted like it, according to the special masters.

So tell me anti-vaccine people, what evidence do you have that thousands of parents saw the same thing, and that their recall is reliable? Are these parents not human? Perhaps a race of cyborgs sent here to bankrupt the pharmaceutical industry? Or is it just a statistical fluke – the parents are outliers on the bell curve of human recall, two standard deviations from the mean and one step from perfect?

Or maybe the anti-vaccine movement itself is ethically-challenged in its rush to put one in the win column. That’s the simplest explanation of all.

ANB – “The world will end after the Academy Awards presentations.” ROFL – it’s funny because it’s true (Homer Simpson).

Actually, what intrigued me about this study is the validation of the idea that regression may occur even in children who don’t “appear” to regress. Seeker’s thought – that kids may PROgress even as they REgress – makes a lot of sense to me.

Lisa

Notice how real scientists are willing to amend their beliefs when they are challenged by new evidence? When was the last time Generation Rescue, SAFEMINDS, TACA, ASA, etc. did an about face on a previously held belief in order to accommodate new evidence? There are signs that head vaccine rejectionist JB Handley is backing off from his long-standing “MMR causes autism” stance, but he has yet to publicly admit it.

Before anyone believes mmr,dpt,hepb,and others are cleared as being responsible for autism, a lot more research needs to be done.
This latest study, could very well indicate that as children are receiving their vaccines 2/4/6 months,the signs of regression are coinciding.
It could well be that the addition of each vaccine , with an ingredient aluminum..phenol..thimerosal..antigens..continues to cause more damage.

There’s only trace amounts of Thimerosal in vaccines, so little it’s not even worth mentioning. Honestly, it goes both way. Before anyone believes mmr, dpt, hepb, and others actually for sure causes autism, alot more research needs to be done.

This article isn’t about vaccines. So why make it into vaccines.

barbaraj, you said, “These days, we have BAD days, and I just started noticing he, on these days, has bright red ears!? Does anyone else notice bright red ears?”

I have no idea if this is an issue for your son and I definitely have no expertise in dietary intervention, but I just want to mention that I have read that red cheeks and ears can be a sign of sensitivity to phenols. There is some information on this site, which I just found by Googling so I can’t vouch for its reliability, but anyway fyi and evaluate the info for yourself:

~~~~~~~

http://www.allnaturaladvantage.com.au/Phenol%20Sensitivity.htm

Potentially over 80% of autistic children have a deficiency in a key detoxification pathway. The pathway involves using sulphur in the form of sulphate (known as sulphation). The enzyme involved is phenol sulphur-transferase (PST)…

This detoxification pathway processes other phenolic compounds including salicylates (salicylates are a subset of phenols), artificial food colourings, artificial flavourings, and some preservatives. Besides requiring PST, research has found the salicylates further suppress the activity of any PST enzyme present, making matters worse. Food dyes also have been shown to inhibit the PST enzyme…

Symptoms Of Phenol Sulphur-Transferase Defect
If the sulphation pathway is not functioning well, a person may not be able to process out the phenolic compounds as fast as they consume them. There is a cumulative effect. When the phenols start backing up in the system, it can cause a myriad of negative reactions.

Symptoms of phenol intolerance include (not all of these need be present):

Ø night waking for several hours, night sweats, difficulty sleeping

Ø dark circles under eyes,

Ø irritability, hyperactivity, aggression

Ø red cheeks/face/ears,

Ø lethargy,

Ø self-injurious behaviour, head banging

Ø inappropriate laughter

Ø diarrhoea,

Ø eczema, and other skin conditions.

~~~~~~~

I have read that people with phenol sensitivity can be helped by:
- Epsom salt baths. Add 1/2 to 1 cup of epsom salt to bath and soak for 15-20 minutes. The sulphate in the epsom salt assists this detoxification pathway
- Avoid high phenol foods.
- There are some digestive enzymes designed to help with phenols. (I don’t know whether they work.)

Again, I have no idea whether this would help your son, and I have no expertise! Just sharing what I’ve read about in case it is of interest.

Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency is a rare inherited disorder where the body is deficient in an enzyme which makes them unable to process phenols and other toxic substance in the body. If 80 percent of those with autism have this, then they got it from a parent. It affects less than 200,000 people in the US population.

HMMM and more HMMM Twyla..and Sandy!
In our family, before autism, there were a few that had multiple chemical sensitivity. Phenol was to be avoided, no one could use the old lysol products because on exposure to the slightest amount they would get fevers. I’m not sure how rare chemical sensitivity is, however this is interesting. Most interesting to me, since the swine flu scare, there has been increased use in school of antibacterial agents on most all surfaces.Could yesterdays mcs patients be todays autistic ones? 80%!! There was much discussion about glutathione/inability to detoxify, with mcs, perhaps that’s the basis of much autism, too many chemicals injected ,phenol is one, is it not?

2-Phenoxyethanol Preservative, stabilizer DTaP(Infanrix, Daptacel), DTaP-Heb B-IPV(Pediarix), Hepatitis A(Havarix), Hepatitis A-hepatitis B(Twinrix), Poliovirus inactivated (Ipol), Td(Sanofi Pasteur)
I found the above…so yep our kids are getting phenol injected..(my son did not have the mmr when he lost speech) I saw something about phenol and the blood brain barrier,however, I need to read more to understand.

There’s 18 sypmtoms of Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency, and odd it wasn;t brought up, one symptom is autistic behavior, another head banging, one self injury. Not sure that Phenol is in vaccines, but it is used in a ton of things including food and only if you inherited the issue with it, most people wouldn’t have an issue. That 80 percent of those with autism, is a guesstamate. Goes right along with those divorce rates. This is a rare genetic disorder, so if 80 percent of those with autism have this, then more people share the same genes than once thought and then it’s not so rare.

The interesting thing is a person with this inherited disorder may also have issues with vaccines. Makes some sense however since the disorder itself causes some of the same symptom’s of autism, the real issue wouldn’t be vaccines nor would vaccines be the only concern or exposure.

Are you sure Phenoxyethanol is the same thing as Phenol?? You might want to look that up. One is a organic chemical compound, the other is a carbolic acid.

There have been quite a few substances considered as possible triggers for autism (including, among other things, acetominaphin). And of course we know that certain drugs, such as Valproate, are known to cause autism in the womb.

I don’t suppose any individual chemicals or drugs are individually responsible for a huge rise in incidence, but it’s certainly possible that some are responsible for some cases of autism.

If you think about it, there’s already a fairly long list of known and generally agreed-up causes of autism (that is, “autism-like symptoms”) outside of those that are controversial.

I keep going back to the thought that we are looking a collection of disorders characterized by some similar and some dissimilar symptoms… and for reasons that continue to elude me, researchers are generally more interested in the similarities than the differences.

Lisa

Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency is genetic, with 18 symptom’s which other disorders also have some of those 18 symptoms. If 80 percent of children with autism have Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency, then they probably don’t have autism; what they have is a genetic Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency. The 80 percent claim is interesting, that would mean only 20 percent had the actual disorder or autism.

According to professional diagnosticians, the cause of autism is not the determining factor for a diagnosis. The diagnosis is based only upon symptoms.

I think I agree Lisa, if I understand this, if one area in the brain is affected, no matter by what, the symptoms would manifest the same. If my child has tonsilitis, is it viral, bacterial, or a result of allergy, without finding the cause it can’t be treated, however at a glance they are red, they are swollen, it’s the same “illness”.

I’m not one that believes all allergies, sensitivities are caused by genetics. I do, however, believe, a kind of autoimmune reaction is possible in a large portion of the population given the right triggers. While reading page 50 of the Simpsonwood transcripts I was drawn to the comment concerning thimerosal, while most agreed at this point in the study that thimerosal vaccines were showing causation with autism, they commented that they couldn’t be certain because none of the other ingredients, including thimerosal was being address alone. IMO and yep , I took from that, that there is an ingredient in vaccines causing “some” autism, but they don’t know which ingredient. Who knows? no one? what chemical synergy, reactions among the chemicals themselves, could be the cause. This should have called for much more research.
Sandy, thanks for that information, and thanks Twyla for sending me off into yet another path that’s gonna drive me nutty
I copied and pasted the phenol as an ingredient in dtap,hep and others Sandy, it’s accurate, there is phenol in the shots. As for phenol/phenyl yes there is a difference, however, phenyl is a product of phenol.
Tylenol is acetaminophenOL..perhaps they left off the OL in an effort not to alarm the user?
Interesting find in my overnight searches, is that Crohn’s victims produce large amounts of phenol in their urine..this may suggest something???
I came across another little fact, phenol crosses the blood brain barrier…
ahh..the implications are many..which drug company do we suggest funds the research

If the cause of autism is not the determining factor for a diagnosis, according to your to professional diagnosticians, then why care about vaccines or cause of autism at all? Because of those professional diagnosticians seem to think this way, they may totally miss a child having disorder’s such as, let’s say Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency.
I’m really glad professional diagnosticians where I live look at the whole child rather than just the symptoms presenting before they slap a diagnosis on a child.

Diagnosis is just one part of the overall interaction with a patient. While some doctors do just “slap on a diagnosis,” others are much more involved with developing treatments. And when physical symptoms are also present, a good doctor will order physical tests.

There’s no question that there are many different causes for autism, some known and some unknown. But understanding the cause is not the same thing as defining the disorder.

Lisa

Barbara – I’ve written a few articles on diagnosis. The bottom line is that there are a set of tests which can be administered (including parent interviews) to determine whether a child under age 3 has symptoms consistent with autism spectrum disorders.

If they do have those symptoms, an autism spectrum diagnosis is appropriate.

That doesn’t mean that diagnostician knows a ding dong thing about WHY the child has such symptoms. In some cases they do (e.g., Fragile X, tuberous sclerosis, valproate in utero, etc.). But most of the time it’s “idiopathic,” meaning “of unknown origin.”

Lisa

2-Phenoxyethanol is said to be used in some vaccines (I only seen 3) to replace Thimerosal, yet not all vaccine makers use it in their production. Again, you’d have to know the manufacturer. Many still use Thimerosal and it was never replaced, that’s why there’s trace amounts.
2-Phenoxyethanol is used in perfumes, insect repellents, antiseptics, it is used in dyes and inks, germicides, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. Again, if we’re to worry about 2-Phenoxyethanol in vaccines, it’s clear it hasn’t always been in those few vaccines made by those few manufacturers to have much relevance on the increase of autism, or to actually cause autism.

When ‘physical’ symptoms are present, a psych would then send you to another doctor. We’re not talking about physical symptoms unless that’s what you consider autism symptom’s. Autism-like behaviors such as seen if a child had Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency, would not be autism nor would the treatment of it be the same. I’m sure some doctor, just seeing the autism behaviors would surely diagnose autism. It’s a given, isn’t it?
This is why the autism rates are flawed.

By physical symptoms, I’m referring to issues such as gastrointestinal problems, epilepsy, etc. I assume that a reputable doctor would refer a child with these issues to a specialist in that field, yes.

Meanwhile, however, if a child is exhibiting the symptoms of an autism spectrum disorder and a professional (developmental pediatrician, pediatric psychiatrist, pediatric neurologist, etc.) observes and measures those symptoms, and they fit the criteria for an autism spectrum disorder, it is appropriate to provide a diagnosis on the autism spectrum.

Quite a few children with appropriate ASD diagnoses lose those diagnoses. Again, it is the symptoms which lead to the diagnosis, and not an investigation into possible causes. A person can have an autism spectrum diagnosis AS A RESULT of many factors.

Lisa

What if these children are for the most part reacting to some chemical? What is the explanation for full recovery in some? I remember reading that some rubella/autistic children cleared the virus and recovered. Could some children clear the chemicals and recover? I am admittedly obsessed with finding out “why”, Would getting my son a dtap booster, give his autistic symptoms a boost as well? Would giving him tylenol perhaps do the same? I think of my son as carrying around a package of symptoms, like in a syndrome,and if I can remove one , I have hope. I plan on talking to his teacher about the use of antibacterial sprays, I plan on avoiding weed and feed products, and I am going to throw all tylenol in the trash. Will it help, heck if I know, but this is what I do. This is why I no longer vaccinate, imo, it’s a suspect. I see him removing things on his own, bread,chocolate,cheese,fruit things that for some reason he finds nauseating.
If there is anything I’ve learned from others, is that “autism” is just a lable that often doesn’t resemble itself , some children function fairly well, some, as with my friend’s son can not be cared for at home. While others, another friend, wishes her son would eat anything, or speak one word, others like me wish selfishly that I could get a hug. I listen to my five year old on the phone asking a friend to join him online for a game, chatting away about the game, while I push my nine year old to call for the same, and listen to his “total” conversation, “I’m playing now,bye”. Same result they get to play online with a friend, but gee. Then again, some with the lable can not speak. BTW, I do find the virtual friendships are better than none, playing an online game is a good thing,”for us”. With headphones on, they can talk to each other if they choose, and he has learned to say things like “good move”, from hearing others say it to him, he understands it’s appropriate to comment at times.

Thank you, Lisa, for continuing to affirm that the definition of autism is based on behavior, not causation. For some purposes it is important to diagnose “autism”, but it is also important to look at individual etiologies. When causation is determined in a particular case, that does not mean that it is not actually autism. The definition of autism does not include anything like “a lifelong disorder caused by defects in the brain caused by genetic mutations of unknown origin”. That is not the definition.

As this doctor stated:
” One important fact to remember is that Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) seems to be composed of multiple diseases presenting with similar symptoms. Therefore, there is not one treatment that works for everyone with ASD. The extreme variability demands highly individualized treatment plan, and sorting through this even for one child can be a monumental task for any medical professional…

“Many researchers now believe that ASD is triggered by an auto-immune process, affecting multiple systems including the GI tract, the brain and the liver. Significantly elevated levels of auto-antibodies against multiple antigens, including Myelin Basic Protein (MBP), have been detected in ASD. GI endoscopy studies have shown significant numbers of esophagitis, duodenitis, colitis and lymphoid nodular hyperplasia. The majority of these children have allergies or sensitivities to milk products. Over 90% has been shown to have very low sulfate levels. Phenol-sulfur-transferase (PST), thought to be a key mechanism in detoxification, has been found to be very low in most of these children. Glutathion peroxidase and superoxide dismutase (important in antioxidant mechanism to inactivate free radicals) were found to be significantly lower than controls.”
http://www.autism.com/treatable/treatingphysicalsymptoms.htm

Although Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency may be a rare inherited disorder where the body is deficient in an enzyme , there may be other forms of this deficiency which are either environmentally induced (e.g. by effects of mercury on enzymes) or where the level would not be deficient in a cleaner environment but is insufficient to handle the level of detox challenges that exist today (including vaccines).

Dr. Rosemary Waring found low levels of free sulfate in the plasma of autistic people. She found that the deficiencies in the sulphur-transferase capabilities of people with autism was not the consequence of a missing enzyme (sulphur transferase) but of insufficient sulphate ions for the sulphation to be accomplished.

This is, needless to say, complicated chemistry beyond my level of knowledge, but very interesting. This is also very variable in how (and how much) it affects people. It is good to know, though, that epsom salt baths are one of the cheapest, easiest, and lowest risk treatments around, and worth a try.

Dietary intervention is worth a try, too, and observation of whether certain foods seem to affect the child. It’s hard because people with autism seem to react to so many foods in different ways, but nobody can live on distilled water alone! But worth looking into the variety of special diets out there, from Feingold to BED etc.

Oh this is interesting Twyla! This suggests, while it can be a genetic disease, it can manifest from a cause outside of genetics. While one is born with the deficiency another can aquire the deficiency with no difference in disease presentation. I can understand the baths, but only in the context of having dermal exposure to these chemicals, I must be missing something here. It sounds like neutralizing to me? Which would make sense if exposed through pools, lawns, sprays, etc.. or is the epson salts drawing something out of the body?

My understanding is that the epsom salts bath provides sulphates, which are a necessary part of the phenol-sulfur-transferase process, one of the body’s chemcial detox processes which among other things processes phenols. Phenols are present in many foods and when the body cannot fully process them they can accumulate. Sulphate ions are not well absorbed through the gut and can be better absorbed via the skin. (Again, I’m just repeating what I have read, and heard at conferences.)

Here is some info from TACA:
http://gfcf-diet.tacanow.org/phenols-salicylates-additives.htm

Every one knows what the definition of autism is, and there is a difference between that and cause however when you combine the two as often as it’s done on this blog, one it makes it confusing for any new reader, as well as other things can cause those autism-like symptoms. It’s the whole idea being presented that if a child displays autism-like symptoms, more than likely they get that diagnosis based on those symptoms alone, and of course presenting before age 3. There 50 other things that mimic ADHD, as well as a list that we know mimics autism. We’re talking misdiagnosis and it happens a lot, and because it does those autism rates are away off. Autism being lifelong is presented by many experts and it’s neither considered part of the diagnosis or cause.

April 13, 2009 from autism.about.com
“Autism is a pervasive developmental disorder. Its symptoms include differences and disabilities in many areas including social communication skills, fine and gross motor skills, and sometimes intellectual skills.”

March 11, 2009 from autism.about.com
“The bottom line is, no one knows for sure what causes autism. Most experts will say that autism is probably caused by a combination of genetic and environmental factors.”

You may want to update that.

Having autism does not preclude children from having physical symptoms of other conditions, nor does having certain physical conditions preclude any particular child from also having autism. Therefore, I must disagree with the statement that: “If 80 percent of children with autism have Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency, then they probably don’t have autism.” (Direct quote from Post No. 37).

It seems to me that Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency has its own list of symptoms, some of which might be considered to be “autistic-like”; but autism has its own list symptoms, many of which are not indicators of Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency. Therefore, having the deficiency doesn’t not preclude children from also having other autistic-like behaviors – enough to warrant an autism diagnosis. True, autism is the more subjective diagnosis of the two, but dual diagnoses are certainly within the realm of possibility.

Since there IS a medical test for Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency, IF it’s accurate that 80% of children with autism test positive for it and since autism rates within the population are now cited at roughly 1:100-ish, then the deficiency much be affecting more than “200,000 people in the US population.”

Could it be that this deficiency is not actually as rare as it has been thought to be? Just like people argue whether or not autism is actually on the increase or just went unrecognized for so long, couldn’t it also be argued here: Is Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency on the increase, or just that we didn’t test enough people for it to realize how common it has been all along? Could it also be that the 80% figure represents people with autism with a slight deficiency, but not enough of a deficiency to actually warrant a diagnosis of Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency?

My point is that there are generally some allowances made for acceptable natural variances in almost all medical diagnoses, and there are probably such ambiguities built into the diagnostic parameters for Phenol Sulfotransferase Deficiency as well.

Thanks Lisa,

I hadn’t noticed this publication.

It seems that whenever you blog about science issues a couple of themes reoccur.

First, that it is often difficult to get good data on important autism issues. I think this is the nature of the spectrum–which is then exasperated by trying to generate really world (not well controlled) data.

Secondly that one needs to understand both data and the limits of data–how it can be reasonability interpreted.

One useful aspect of the study is it reminds us that arguments that go: my kid was completely normal, then got vaccinated, then suddenly got autism is simply bogus on some many levels.

I think someone previously mentioned the Cedillo case as a perfect example as to how absurd this argument is.

Thirdly, when data like this comes out, to complain about pediatricians not being able to recognize when a kid regresses when often their own parent’s could detect the regression seems really unhelpful to me. People should read the study and comment on pros/cons of the data.

Anyway, I suspect that the de facto end to the vaccine story is in sight.

The vaccines cause autism camp has completely “struck out” in the scientific community and through legal actions.

I saw this week that (what I believed was inevitable) has happened.

Leading DAN practitioners are being sued for malpractice. If we listen to the parents, these DAN docs were flagrantly unethical and incompetent, Based on the early reports is seems like the parents will win their malpractice suits and that this will start a tidal-wave of additional suits. Strike 3.

Once the money train goes away, I suspect the entire issues will (mostly fade) to oblivion.

W&N

A gift..
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2010/03/04/vaccines-dont-cause-autism/

The above reminded me somehow of “guns don’t kill, people do”..

W&N ,it seems the parents are divorcing and in a marital dispute using the child. However, one mention , I enjoyed, while discussing suing DAN with the reporter, the affected child was within sight playing with his siblings and neighborhood friends. Sounds good to me!
The mom sees improvement and DOES not want treatment stopped.

There should be a topic about this legal case. Rossignol was recently in the news. Any one read the filed court papers on this? Since when can any doctor prescribe over the phone without ever seeing the child? Every single tox test this child had always ended up in the 90 percent area, and this is the one area where parents are fooled the most. They gave that poor child IV chelation, it was prescribed over the phone by a doc who never set eyes on the child. It’s also sort of a conflict of interest to get that docs specific brand of vitamins.
How sad for that little boy and good for the dad to stand up for his son. This also isn’t the first case of the likes of this. A playing child does not make that child less damaged by unneeded medical things. Kids with cancer on chemo still smile and play.

I agree Sandy, they can still smile and play, however, autistic children happily playing in a group? may be an accomplishment.

Hi Barbaraj,

The marital status of the parents doesn’t really tell us anything about the actions of the physicians or the testing lab.

Did you read the actual legal complaint?

46 pages of accusations that are incredibly damning–negligence, fraud, battery (on the child), unethical actions…”intentional misrepresentations” that resulted in large medical bills and injured the child–isn’t this legal language for calling the DAN docs and the testing lab liars?

The complaint seem to exactly be saying that the testing used to diagnosis and treatments used to treat were outright frauds.

But….these same tests and treatments are basically the foundation of the “biomedical” movement.

I think these are much more important topics then the parent’s alleged divorce.

W&N

Barbaraj – liked your post about the online gaming. My kids (including the 10 yr old who is neurotypical) don’t really use the Internet to communicate … though Tom is now emailing back and forth with relatives.

It’d be great to hear more about how your child with autism has build virtual relationships. Who’s he talking/playing with? Sounds like a great idea!

Lisa

My kid parallel plays in a group, has since he was 3 and still does to this day. Even still, playing in a group is a minor autism issue, from a video you cant tell if any child’s interpretation of that social group is accruate.

I stopped counting at about Count 10 of the complaint. Always coming up with 90 percent heavy metals when testing does sort of point to fraud, that whatever they were doing wasn’t really doing anything at all.

Sandy – you say “from a video you cant tell if any child’s interpretation of that social group is accruate.” I TOTALLY agree, and it can be so misleading.

I have plenty of photos that LOOK LIKE my son is collaborating, interacting, and generally laughing/hanging out with same age peers. The reality, though, is that he was present and having fun, but really didn’t understand what the other kids were up to or why they were cracking up.

IMO, there’s a lot of misleading video and photography out there…

Lisa

If one pays close attention, you can tell is it’s parallel play or actual social skills, hard to do of another child and much easier if you’re looking at a video of your own kid. That’s why DAN! covention video’s of kids on stage talking, it’s truly hard to see if they’re recovered or not. They could just be scripting. From looking at a video of this boy, it could be once he was off all those seemingly unneeded treatments, he did start to improve. I did read in those court papers, unless I am mistaken, the boy never had an actual diagnosis.

In any event, you simply can not look at video from the media to tell anything, most times they only air the better shots and edit out those meltdowns. I certainly wouldn’t want my son on TV having a meltdown. Like any doctor out there, any can have their motivations in the wrong place and many do. There’s no reason to condemn or not unless one reads more but certainly one cant tell this from a video of a child from the media. It could be these doctors did all the right things (however I disagree with never seeing the child before ordering a treatment plan, not sure why that would be acceptable) or these docs could be totally in the wrong.
Many times married couples disagree on treatments for their children, and in this family, the court papers state most of the communication was with the mother however what’s really interesting is all the dates this dad provided, as well as info leading me to believe even if he didn’t have phone conversations with the doc himself, he was very involved just the same.

Lisa, I’m not sure I can explain it, so I’m providing a link.
My son plays with one boy that has been in his class since kindergarten, they “understand” each other, to a point. In person I only allow them an hour for a visit. I’ve tried extending it, but it doesn’t work. Online they are better, much better.
I have a friend in SC whose son is 16, he’s a very,very kind gentle guy, who suffers with capd, he is the BEST for online gaming. There is one other who he plays if he spots him online. I don’t encourage, in fact I stay “around”, meeting with strangers, however, he can play, just not offer any information, this always bears watching regardless of the kid. We started with lego star wars, lego batman, rock band, madden, spiderman and yes, I shouldn’t admit it, but I do let him play one war, I think it’s the original Halo. I buy nothing online, other than the membership, the games I buy at gamestop with the exception of halo, I think it came with our system. We use a wireless connection and headphones so he can talk to his friends. While playing you can hear out of the TV others talking and commenting. I would like to say they play at home with each other nicely, that’s not usually the case, it causes fights, it’s much nicer to play with someone that’s not in the house. There offer all sports, and for the house there are many fun games , online there is far too many offerings for adults , fewer for kids. You can probably guess that it will also feed an obsession, he knows every player in the nfl, their position, the year they did this and that, and can make the call before the referees, but I guess there are worse things. Some of the games they just connect with one chosen person, others they can go into play areas together and be part of teams. I connected the system to the living room tv so we can all be “aware”.
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live

Since when can any doctor prescribe over the phone without ever seeing the child?

Mark Geier diagnoses precocious puberty over the phone. On a scale of one to ten, how outraged does that make you feel?

Since my son was just given the implant for precocious puberty, and being able to visually see all the test results myself before deciding on treatment (the bone plates are so close to closing there’s a slight hope the implant will delay it so my kid might grow taller) I’d say a 10. Odd, reading up on Geier and this other doctor prior previously and then finding out exactly what precocious puberty is and never thought we’d experience this, those kids cant ever get the implant since their given higher doses than normal, which leaves only the painful injection so the can manipulate that dose. This is why we go to specialists in their field’s.

Just wanted to say “thank you” for an interesting conversation in which people can disagree and debate without it becoming personal.

My hope is to have a forum where people can disagree and debate in such a way that the conversation stays on topic and avoids personal insinuations and accusations. And it’s working!!

Thanks again.

Lisa

Now if our host learned the proper use of exclamation marks, this would be the perfect site! ; -)

“The marital status of the parents doesn’t really tell us anything about the actions of the physicians or the testing lab.” (from Post No. 58)

I agree; however, at this stage, the accusations by the plaintiff don’t really tell us anything either. The courts are yet to hear or decide on the matter.

Online gaming – My son occasionally does this and, while he seems to enjoy the interactions (He laughs, etc.), I wouldn’t say that he’s been able to really build any new friendships. My son does know well what info is pretty safe to talk about and what he should never reveal, so I’m not as concerned about the safety of it as I once was. He’s non-violent and doesn’t show any more than “average” interest in war-related games, so controlling which games he plays really isn’t a concern for me either. However, most interactions I have overheard seem pretty fleeting/cursory to me and, much like social networds, the “group” games can also contain a lot of “bullying.” So, I don’t really believe in it as a great friendship building tool.

I agree Mary, it’s not a great friendship tool, and mine, being only nine, doesn’t go on unless he calls a friend to join him,(sometimes a friend calls him to join) he doesn’t go into a “virtual” play room alone. I would let him, he just likes it this way, for him it’s a way of insuring a “virtual playdate” with someone he already knows. Yes, if you make a move that others think is stupid they will say it, not your friend , but the “unknown members”, so yep, he gets to hear himself called stupid once in awhile, but he also gets to hear other kids called stupid once in awhile. Another thing, I could be finding too much positive in this, but I think it seems to make him feel like a member, a joiner, not the guy left after the team is picked. I’ve watched a bit, and little lessons, like if you betray a friend in a game, you may virtually get kicked off, so if someone were to betray him, instead of being upset the game “rules” warn the betrayer, and if it happens again they get removed from that play. Again, I may see too much positive, I will go as far as think that it helps with his coordination and most of all, this is not scientific, but I think it helps with hand /eye coordination and visual skills in general. His other favorite activity, is hopping, hopping,hopping on his pogo stick.

There are some games that you can play only against the peson you choose, and it’s always best for games to be played alone a bit until you gain a little skill,before entering a play area. The one game he plays, alone only, he gets to work, earn money, marry, have children, have friends, if you do things ethically, if you do not, you have no friends, no wife, no children and no job. Another, Spore, he plays alone, and makes animated creatures. He loves Nintendogs, on his DS, where he can take care of a puppy, it’s an adorable game. In a wireless house DS’s can communicate.
ANB I would like “for this to be perfect” my own little edit button, often I see my spelling/grammar errors and wish I could “fix’em”.

ANB – I’m in the market for a full time, volunteer copy editor! Any takers?? :->

Actually, not sure what’s wrong with the exclamation points? They look okay to me…

Lisa

I agree. Many of the games have a lot of positive, skill-building aspects inside of them… and the reasons you list are exactly what we came up with when we decided to allow my son to start to play online. I don’t regret it, but it is just good to be aware of the limitations beforehand… so that a person doesn’t have expectations that it can substitute for the “other” ways humans build relationships. My son also started out by arranging virtual playdates with people he already knew and, I think at least, these sort of arrangements still make up a large portion of the time he does spend gaming online.

Despite its drawbacks, the internet has pretty much become a fact of life and our children (with autism or without it) are pretty much compelled to learn to how to “network” on it safely. It has sort of become a survival skill for almost everyone, but part of me would like to go back to the way I remember things were BN (before Net).

Re online gaming as well – One thing I had to actually teach my son was a list of appropriate retorts to agressive online bullies he found within the games. Otherwise, he just “took” it all, internalized it, and then would meltdown over it periodically. It has taken a long, long time for him to gain enough language skills to spontaneously defend himself (verbally through his headset or in writing). He still gets thrown for a loop now and then, but at least he usually comes to me now for help rather than let all the negative feelings build up inside.

In comment #8 “Seek” says that this article “lends support that those who continue to focus on the MMR shot are still on the wrong path towards improving outcomes in autism.

Actually, this article concluded that these babies lost skills between the age of 6 and 18 months, which does not contradict the MMR being a factor. As for those infants who showed some autism-like symptoms before the MMR, this does not clear the MMR from being a factor, and it certainly dies not clear vaccines. Babies start vaccinations on the day of birth with the Hep B, and other vaccines begin at age 2 months. I have heard some parents describe their children as having health issues and vaccine reactions and developmental issues which then culminated in a more severe reaction and regression after the MMR.

Sometimes there seems to be a deficient logic where it is argued that if something does not cause all autism, or does not always cause autism, or is not the only cause of autism for a given person, then it is proven safe. It seems to me that autism is multi-factorial, and includes the following factors:
- Genetic susceptibility — which may be a “nerd” family history and/or a family history of immune system disorders (such as autoimmune disorders, allergies, or immono-deficiency), GI disorders, mitochondrial disorders….
- Environmental toxins. For example, studies have shown higher rates of autism in areas with more environmental mercury.
- Vaccines — including many aspects of vaccines, not just thimerosal, not just MMR.

This nobel prize winning scientist back in 1913 found that when he repeatedly injected very small amounts of proteins or toxins into dogs, some dogs did not react, some became desenitized, and some developed increasingly severe immune system reactions. He theorized that, just as we have different psychological personalities, we also have different immune system characteristics, with some more likely to react than others. He said that repeated injections can have a cumulative effect on the immune system. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1913/richet-lecture.html

The obvious severe noticeable vaccine reaction followed by regression and loss of skills is only one kind of vaccine reaction.

This is a great new topic. Do you guys mind if I lift a few of these comments to start off a new blog post?

Lisa

Teaching him not to emulate the tactics of the bullies was also a bit of a chore.

Some interesting information regarding a key scientist behind the Denmark study so often pointed to as “proving” the safety of vaccines:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/first-fraud-dr-poul-thorsen-and-the-original-danish-study.html

One of the lead authors of the above study is being accused by Aarhus University officials of forging documents supposedly from the CDC to obtain the release of $2 million from the University. In addition, he “held full-time positions at both Emory University in Atlanta [home of the CDC] and Aarhus University simultaneously. Dr Thorsens double Full-time employment was unauthorised by Aarhus University, and he engaged in this employment situation despite the express prohibition of Aarhus University.” Statement of Aarhu U:
h t t p : / / w w w . rescuepost.com/files/thorsen-aarhus.pdf

Also see:
h t t p : / / w w w . ageofautism.com/2010/03/frantic-cdcs-dr-diane-simpson-travels-the-world-to-find-dr-poul-thorsen.html

Hi Lisa,

I’m assuming you’re referring to “online gaming” as a topic. Still, in any case, I have no objections.

whew – so many exchanges. Yes, the online gaming was the topic I was thinking of, and thanks!

Lisa

Actually, not sure what’s wrong with the exclamation points? They look okay to me…

Too many, too soon.

WOW Twyla!

Autism Action Network have reported that the key scientist involved in studies proving that there was no link to thimerosal in vaccines and autism has forged documents and absconded with $2 Million.

Poul Thorsen MD Phd, a scientist at the Unversity research unit originally hired by the CDC and Prevention to prepare a series of studies, to rule out any link with the preservative thimerosal in vaccines, the MMR and autism has disappeared from the University of Aarhas with $2 million and is being investigated by the Danish police for fraud which puts the results of the studies in doubt.

Now, while Wakefield was a witch hunt, this guy was bought and paid for to influence “the world”, of the safety of vaccine!

Odd, 2 court-related issues of wrong doing, 2 very different reactions to both.
I guess we’ll have to see both sides to know the outcome.

There seem to be several cases ongoing right now. My feeling, though, is that these individual cases are much more relevant to the people than to the findings/treatments they represent.

That is, even if Rossignol winds up being convicted of malpractice, it means nothing relative to the validity of HBOT, etc. It just means Rossignol shouldn’t had prescribed from a distance.

Lisa

Getting away from the flurry of activity on autism-related blogsites… I can find no news releases on this event and Aarhus U’s website doesn’t mention anything about it at all.

Back to the sense of the mmr. Parents are not likely wrong. It’s been parents in the past that have uncovered mysteries surrounding their children’s health. While my son did not have his mmr during the time of regression, he did react violently to the group of others. I “did” go back and look at pictures, and did notice him looking ill for months with “sick eyes”. I can pinpoint the week that the eyes started looking that way by viewing these pictures.This imo qualifies as dramatic! My sister, whose son got ill after the mmr, started to cry so much about a week after the shot, on day ten he had a fever, his glands became swollen and he had diarhea, their summer vacation was shortened because of his crying and backlash from the inlaws about “making that baby stop”. She noticed an odd arm/leg startle thing going on, one expected in newborns, for months before he had his seizures. He was nineteen months old. Four months of chronic illness before the seiaure! He was rushed to Johns Hopkins via ambulance and had his seizures put under control, no basis for them, no fever, nothing.(he’s never had another) He cried during his first hours at Hopkins, Mommy home,play turtles…he liked ninja turtles. When she brought him home, two days later, with no diagnosis, she noticed he could not speak or look at her, no longer played with his turtles ,no longer wanted to toss a ball. So yes, the seizures probably did damage, but what was going on for those four months? He was diagnosed ” mentally retarded ” shortly after by Kennedy Kreiger. A later diagnosis was PDD, then later Autism. He now is a miracle, he woke up, is acting better,he has a lot of behviors to work on that didn’t evolve over the last 16 yrs..but for all intents he can function pretty well. He graduated high school, is going to community college, is not now or ever was MR.He has suffered for years with gut disturbance, this last summer losing fifty pounds,and chronic exzema. Now at 18, I have noticed he has to curb a few things, very embarrassing things, what some men think he says….my sister is working on this. At sixteen he decided to start cursing, that was lovely too, but she trained him to stop. A lot of what he would do over the years , she allowed, by saying, that’s fine, but not publicly, go into your room and curse it up, yell scream ,whatever, come out when you are finished.
Having said all of this, I can not be certain my son didn’t have his mmr, I didn’t sign for it, but.. I never signed for HepB either, and it was given to 1996…and I never signed for HIB and it was given to 2004..so I will never really know. I had a “nurse battle” with 2007, putting a sign over his bassinet wasn’t helping, nurse saying “I’m giving him the shot unless your prove to me you are hep negative”, my crying trying to get my ob to open his office on a weekend to supply the proof..it’s terrible..the power they exert!
Science can provide facts, but similar “powers” seem to prevent it from getting to us , as in the case of Wakefield. IF they choose to discredit his methods, and therebye clear the mmr, what in this suggested the press release..vaccines don’t cause autism??

Interesting that any of the few sites with the story isn’t general media realease and the sites who have this story about a statement Aarhus University officials don’t eve link to their source. So far I cant find that statement anywhere. I also don’t recall Poul Thorsen, MD being the only name on those studies.

If you don’t know the method or manner of cause from a vaccine, then there will never be hope of creating a test prior to vaccines. Unseen powers cant find that prevention or the reasons why it happened to some, but not all.

My cousin way back had a horrible MMR reaction. Big hype in my mom’s large family. The cousin had no long term side effects but that one reaction is what made my mom not choose vaccines for the rest of her kids, even though the rest of the 12 siblings did vaccinate (zillions of cousins on that side of the family, minus the 6 of us) only the one cousin had a vaccine reaction. My mom based her choice on out right fear, plain and simple yet what we all need is to know the science, and how to prevent vaccine reactions other than knowing there is that risk for anyone.

The justices on Monday also agreed to hear an appeal from parents in Pittsburgh who want to sue the drugmaker Wyeth over the serious side effects their daughter, six months old at the time, allegedly suffered as a result of the company’s diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled against Robalee and Russell Bruesewitz, saying a 1986 federal law bars their claims.

That law set up a special vaccine court to handle disputes as part of its aim of insuring a stable vaccine supply by shielding companies from most lawsuits.

Wyeth, now owned by Pfizer, Inc., prevailed at the appeals court but also joined in asking the court to hear the case, saying it presents an important and recurring legal issue that should be resolved.

The Obama administration joined the parties in calling for high court review, although the government takes the side of the manufacturers.

Only one state appeals court, the Georgia Supreme Court, has ruled that families can sue in a vaccine case. The vaccine industry has fiercely opposed the Georgia ruling in the case of Marcelo and Carolyn Ferrari. They claim their son suffered neurological damage after receiving vaccine booster shots made by pharmaceutical companies Wyeth and GlaxoSmithKline that contained the preservative thimerosal.

The family has since withdrawn its lawsuit, possibly in an effort to avoid an unfavorable Supreme Court ruling, although the Georgia court’s opinion allowing similar lawsuits remains in force.

The court did not act on the companies’ appeal Monday, but the decision in the other case almost certainly will apply to the Georgia case.

According to the lawsuit, Hannah Bruesewitz was a healthy infant until she received the vaccine in April 1992. Within hours of getting the DPT shot, the third in a series of five, the baby suffered a series of debilitating seizures. Now a teenager, Hannah suffers from residual seizure disorder, the suit says.

The vaccine court earlier rejected the family’s claims.

Wyeth lost another high court fight last year over whether federal law barred lawsuits against drug makers. That case, involving a botched injection, asked whether federal law included an implicit prohibition on the lawsuits. The court said it did not.

In this appeal, however, Congress clearly laid out how claims over vaccines were to be made, and the court has repeatedly ruled against plaintiffs when Congress has explicitly sought to bar lawsuits.

Other than the Georgia court, state and federal courts have uniformly invoked a provision of the 1986 federal law, which seems to bar most lawsuits against vaccine makers.

The idea behind the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was to ensure a stable supply of childhood vaccines by shielding drug makers from most lawsuits, and setting up a federal vaccine court to handle disputes. The law would serve to block state laws that otherwise would give families the ability to sue the manufacturers.

In recent years, the legal fight has frequently come from families of autistic children claiming that mercury-based thimerosal is linked to autism. Numerous studies have addressed vaccines and autism and found no link, including with the preservative.

Thimerosal has been removed in recent years from standard childhood vaccines, except flu vaccines that are not packaged in single doses.

Last year, special masters appointed by the vaccine court concluded that vaccines aren’t to blame for autism, disappointing thousands of families hoping to win compensation and others who remain convinced of a connection.

But the vaccine court still must rule on additional cases that argue that vaccines with thimerosal are to blame, if the mercury reached and damaged brain cells.

The case, to be argued in the fall, is Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, 09-152.

Is this what it’s going to be, the courts will decide if vaccines are dangerous…putting forward some interesting “scientific” studies I’m guessing…

Barbaraj – what source are you citing above?

Lisa

My question is what does it have to do with autism?

It’s a copy and paste job from a REUTERS story. Here’s another version, posted on a Mexican TV station website.

The plaintiffs lost big time in vaccine court. Choosing Mark “the castrator” Geier as an expert witness didn’t help their case. The court took special notice when Geier cited a Russell Crowe movie as evidence for the theory that a DTP vaccine causes seizures:

Petitioners filed Dr. Geier’s fourth report, dated March 22, 2002. P. Ex. 33. Here, inter alia, he discusses the movie “A Beautiful Mind” as evidence that DPT can cause afebrile seizures because the lead character was administered insulin in order to cause him to have afebrile seizures which was hoped to be a cure of his schizophrenia. Dr. Geier thinks DPT lowered Hannah’s blood sugar, causing afebrile seizures.”

What’s next, quoting Avatar to build a case that vaccines cause children with pertussis infections to turn blue? This would be funny if it were not that parents are being played by anti-vaccine propaganda, resulting in unnecessary injury and death from preventable diseases.

#88…CBS

Sorry about that, I normally would copy from the beginning with site included, this was placed in the middle after a story on gay rights..again..sorry

That Hannah Bruesewitz article one has nothing to do with autism and two, the statue of limitation would had expired. It’s sad that the girl has those issues, but we cant be looking at every single vaccine court case and make it fit some how into an autism topic, unless that’s what we’re here to do.

You also have to include links or this site can be in hot water for copy right infringements.

Sandy I believe it’s very important to the topic of autism…”Last year, special masters appointed by the vaccine court concluded that vaccines aren’t to blame for autism, disappointing thousands of families hoping to win compensation and others who remain convinced of a connection.

But the vaccine court still must rule on additional cases that argue that vaccines with thimerosal are to blame, if the mercury reached and damaged brain cells. ”

This part of the story, mentioned that the “courts decided thimerosal didn’t cause autism” this is why the comment I made..and do believe we should not leave science up to the judges..

Vaccines causing seizures isn’t the same as autism. All vaccines carry a risk factor to begin with and looking at every single case aside from autism is off topic to autism and off topic to this topic. We’ve all already read that caption as well from those Special Masters, why it brought that up is beyond me however, even during those cases, there was a statue of limitation and this case clearly is beyond that time frame.

Here’s another article. This is from the Copenhagen Post, not an autism group:
http://www.cphpost.dk/news/international/89-international/48229-researcher-accused-of-cheating-uni-out-of-millions.html

Former research leader suspected of fraud now living in US and has not been questioned by police

Aarhus University has confirmed that a former head of research at its North Atlantic Neuro-Epidemiology Alliances department has committed possible fraud totalling up to 10 million kroner against several of the school’s research partners, reports Århus Stiftstidende newspaper.

Until last March, the man was head of an 80 million kroner joint research project between the US government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the University of Southern Denmark and Aarhus University.

Jørgen Jørgensen, Aarhus University’s rector, confirmed that police charges have been filed against the former researcher and that it concerns a sum of around 10 million kroner. Numerous applications for funding for the research were apparently signed with forged signatures.
The scientist – who is reportedly living and working in Atlanta in the US – resigned from his post last March. But he allegedly continued to pass himself off as the head of the international project, which dealt primarily with research into the possible causes of autism.

Aarhus University also claims that the researcher took another permanent position at Emory University in the US while still heading the Danish-based project.

http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2010/03/08/supreme-court-vaccine/7240/
Currently, about 5,000 families are claiming that vaccines caused conditions like autism in their children. A ruling from the high court could determine whether these families have recourse against vaccine makers.

I believing it bears watching, it has “everything” to do with autism and the rights of parents.

Is it safe to assume Twyla that he was in Atlanta working for the CDC? This rings a “little” of the doc in the sixties that claimed birth control pills were 100% safe ..hiding results showing young women dying of blood clot related strokes..he “wound up” in a villa in Spain with a few million in his pocket. Perhaps “he” is under “cdc” protection. Lord, I always felt like conspiracy theorists needed a pat on the head..now I’m becoming one. I think the government slipping in pharma protection in homeland security bills had an affect on my thinking.

It has everything to do with magical thinking, and the human need to blame others. The PSC chose its strongest cases from among those 5,000 families, and still lost. Spectacularly so. How many more bites at the apple do these clowns get? At what point can these families have the measure of peace they deserve, free of their lawyers’ bogeymen? When can these parents really help their children, instead of the lawyers?

Let’s resort to my favorite place for informaton, which was quite helpful to many at the time:

Can You Take Part in the Autism Vaccine Trials?
Friday June 15, 2007
http://autism.about.com/b/2007/06/15/can-you-take-part-in-the-autism-vaccine-trials-find-out-how-find-out-now.htm

I thought the Special Masters already have spoken for starters. This case of Hannah Bruesewitz is well past the 3 year stats of limitation. Regardless of this case or any of those 5000-ish, each case in an individual case and either way the decision goes/ went, would not always effect the whole or future cases.

It’s really too bad every single topic ends up vaccines. Maybe a nice new feature could be submitting topics for future consideration than clog each topic up.

Well if this is somehow consoling, I do believe ANB that nothing will come of this “second” chance…I was just amazed it’s been granted.Surely if we want the end to autism we must find the cause. You must agree that pills and therapy are never going to stop it, or cure it.

The Hannah Bruesewitz isn’t about autism or finding the cause. That case is about what caused that child’s seizure disorder. I seen an article about her, she looks pretty happy.
Success & News Stories
http://www.dynavoxtech.com/success/autism/details.aspx?id=118

From your link Sandy ” One tool that helps Hannah transform thoughts into words is the DynaVox V she first used while attending school at The Sheila and Milton Fine Classrooms for Students with Autism at The Day School at the Children’s Institute of Pittsburgh in the fall of 2008″

I “believe” what we are going to see over the course of the next year ,are cases presented avoiding the word “autism”. Seizures, sadly can be a part of autism, sometimes not striking until the teen years, other times,as in the case of my nephew, very early into the course. During puberty it’s likely that one in four autistic children will have their first seizure. Don’t think I don’t FEAR this, I don’t expect it, but I have to consider the odds.

It’s going to be interesting.

Hannah Bruesewitz must have had one of those deals where those symptom’s appeared before age 3, even though seizures can cause brain damage, they call it autism. Hannah is deemed a success story.

Kids with autism can also have seizures as well as ADHD and anything else. Kids can also have many of the same things and not have autism. Many kids have seizure onset at any age as well, not just those with autism. At any age a child could be in a car accident and die. I think during those vaccine courts they already a while ago quickly figured not to use the word autism which is sort of odd. If it is autism, why not outright just say it is, court or not? Let’s instead give the shady pretense no one knows what ‘this’ is, but it’s for sure vaccine injury. So the party afterwards of a won case would not mean yea for autism. It would be a party for yes ‘this’ unknown thing. Sort of sounds like those Pharma people keeping valid info from everyone.

It’s really too bad every single topic ends up vaccines. Maybe a nice new feature could be submitting topics for future consideration than clog each topic up.

I see this as positive, why should we take a gamut of symptoms and call it autism. Why not take it case by case, symptom by symptom. For example, what if I took my child to court to sue pharma/vaccines for his eczema. We know that the most likely cause of eczema is exposure to toxic metals, yet our pediatricians waste our time testing for wheat,etc..All of the usual testing comes back negative, so we in court use information based in scientific fact that mercury exposure causes eczema and no known allergin is behind our allergy tested child. Can I prove he did have an exposure to mercury, yes. I win. Do I win for autism, yes, it would be a small step, but a step. Another parent could do the same with seizures, since 1/3 of all autistic children have them…another for capd..and on…
The news today of the scientist, the news of the courts, put vaccine back into focus Sandy, I don’t think we can avoid it.

Yes, you can avoid it by not going to a topic thread related to vaccines. That’s what this thread, well was, not about vaccines in the sense you’re making it. Some of the rest of us might have enjoyed the topic it was.

Okay, I’ll agree, it was not about vaccines, I , along with some others, did feel that because none of the children expressed symptoms of autism at birth in this study, perhaps it could be a consideration. Again, there are many factors that have been considered in regressive autism, from vaccines to vinyl flooring, this study mentioned none. It clearly concluded, the kids were fine for months,without a hint of “what happened”.

Thanks, barbaraj, for providing the link to the Copenhagen Post.

I know things seem to get somewhat confrontational when vaccines are discussed, but I do think both sides should be heard out on all the issues. It may well be that debate within the courts, case by case, is the only way to get the job done. Although many people have lost faith in the justice system and it may take a long, long time, at least the courts have rules for presentation of evidence and debate procedures. I don’t think the courts will be doing the science for either side (i.e. determining if vaccines cause autism), but they will, no doubt, have to be weighing the quality of the science being presented. The Net can seem to be somewhat of a free for all, as each side tries to “scream louder” than the other.

I think the original article that Lisa linked to and this study could be subtly about vaccines… i.e. disproving the rapid regression scenario most commonly reported by parents who believe their child’s autism was linked to the MMR, I based this on the following two statements taken directly from that article:

“They concluded that this suggests onset of autism spectrum disorder, marked by loss of social communication behaviors, occurs much more often than has been recognized using parent report methods.”

“However, rather than the rapid and marked losses typically reported, they saw relatively subtle and gradual declines, which were often preceded by earlier parental concerns and often followed by failures to progress in other areas.”

As I stated in my initial post to this thread, however, the article did not reveal the vaccination history of the children and gave no indication of whether the researchers kept track of that information or not. IF the children were vaccinated, I think the study does perhaps discredit the rapid regression scenario to some degree. IF the children were not vaccinated (perhaps a logical assumption because the children were sibs of autistic children and their parents may be more inclined to have decided not to vaccinate), IMO, it only adds yet another autism progression scenario into the mix. As a result, I do think the vaccine discussion has been at least somewhat relevant to this particular article.

Regarding the Autism Omnibus Proceedings, I would like to point out that there is no reason to look at the decisions in the Cedillo and Hazelhurst cases as closing the door to further exploration of all of these issues. I did not agree with these decisions, and it appeared to me that the special masters were defending the vaccine program rather than being objective. Moreover, these special masters have background in fields such as law, engineering, military procedures, patent infringement litigation, and tax law — not medicine or science.

cont. (re Omnibus proceedings)

P.S. So rather than saying “science has spoken”, one could say, “a tax attorney has spoken” or “a patent litigation expert has spoken”.

This study wasn’t about cause, or cause of regressive autism. It was about how early symptoms can be detected. It was a few who made this into a cause topic, again.
As for sides trying to scream louder than the other, it’s clear which side that is when every topic turns into vaccines.
Each side does need to be heard, in it’s appropriate place and topic.

Gotta say that I agree the subject of vaccines can get a bit overwhelming… and it certainly isn’t my personal area of fascination or focus.

BTW, the issue of this Danish prof, of whom I heard only yesterday, seems to still be very much in speculation and hearsay mode. Before building entire theories around a possible misdeed, it might make sense to wait and see what’s really going on. Even if he is working two jobs and shouldn’t be – how does that relate to possible causes of autism?! Hardly a smoking gun.

Anyhoo… moving on today to announcing new articles on the subject of autism and higher education… may be interest to a few of you.

Lisa

So let’s move onto the topic of earlier and earlier detection and “more finely tuned” development tests, then. I did mention several points along these lines in my first post and no one seems to have noticed them.

I see this as a bit of a double-edge sword since “finely tuning” anything usually means less room for variance. My first post commented on how attitudes have changed over the last 17 years or so about many of the symptoms of autism. I think I did notice many of them very early on, but the acceptable attitude back then was to “wait and see” first if what we were noticing actually became a “problem” for the child. If it didn’t, it was deemed just to be part of that child’s personality or individuality.

Many people who have since been diagnosed with autism or Aspergers as adults have indicated that this oversight of their symptoms as children caused them lifelong uncertainty and anxiety. My son, however, was diagnosed and has had to live down a label all of his life that perhaps he could have done better without. I had many days where I wished he would just be treated as good as everyone else (i.e. without having to face the prejudices people expressed).

Back then, biomedical treatments were generally not available and educational therapies were considered pretty experimental. Early intervention was a very new concept. Even without all of this though, my son has significantly adapted and will probably lead a fairly normal life… so, instead of people celebrating his accomplishments, I get confronted by people who tell me that my son never had “real autism.”

Honestly, I just don’t know anymore where any of this is headed.

Mary – I tend to agree that we are overdoing the “fine tuned” diagnosis. In fact, the criteria for diagnosis really make it clear that if the symptoms don’t cause significant problems with day to day living… they aren’t really “symptoms” at all!

Plenty of successful adults have a hard time making eye contact, prefer solitary time or 1:1 interactions, etc. If they are successfully independent, are those preferences symptoms or traits?

Obviously there are many people with severe disabilities who are diagnosed appropriately with autism spectrum disorders. But what exactly is the cutoff line? Especially with an infant, I’d imagine no test would provide a precise dividing line between “normal delayed” and “not quite normal delayed,” etc.

Lisa

Lisa – My question exactly.

In my son’s case, it does pose an ongoing dilemma for him. In part created by the ever changing criteria and the ever changing public opinions. He was diagnosed with PDD-NOS, but not almost seems to anyone that he doesn’t have it. He could probably get a job easier by not divulging his diagnosis; because people generally believe that people with autism can do what he actually CAN do; but if he doesn’t say anything and then oops out comes a behavior that is “autistic-like” and the employer looks into his past – Boom, fired for hiding something significant.

Another conundrum – My son has been taught all his life to believe he is how he is because he’s autistic… now, he faces people who say he’s not really autistic. The professionals haven’t retracted their diagnosis yet; but if the proposed changes to the DSM cause them to do so, won’t that thrust my son into the same sort of state of uncertainty that the people who have been only diagnosed as adults relate that they’ve had to live with all their lives because their symptoms were missed?

Sorry if that last post seems almost incoherent… my fingers aren’t doing what my mind tells them this morning. It should read:

In my son’s case, it does pose an ongoing dilemma for him, in part created by the ever changing criteria and the ever changing public opinions. He was diagnosed with PDD-NOS, but now it almost seems to anyone who meets him casually that he doesn’t have it… until something goes wrong, that is. He could probably get a job easier…

Mary, I think many of us go through the same sort of thing no matter the age of the child. My son has an autism diagnosis, worked hard to progress and yet casually at school it’s as if he doesn’t have autism or many behaviors until 1) something goes wrong which we’re going through right now or 2) they do an FBA and actually pay closer attention to where behaviors of autism really are effecting my child’s day and oh what a shocker it is to the school, which obviously thought autism only occurs in my house.
For those children who’d qualify for SSI, as a child progresses often they ‘age out’ of their criteria. It doesn’t mean the child is less autistic, it more means progress is taking place. Regardless of the changes in the DMS, the child/ adult also changes, too in which no criteria addresses that fact.

I believe aside from the ever changing DSM and a child’s ability to progress, what every casual person expects to see is a child on the spectrum as seen on TV: throwing meltdowns, hitting, not listening… and so on. When people, one being his own dad, question the autism it makes my child feel that that person doesn’t at all understand him and how he ‘works’ and to my son, makes him feel he himself isn’t accepted, not so much the autism he has. Now I tell my son over many things that what other people say doesn’t matter as long as the most important people in his life do understand. He’ll run into this alot as he get’s older, and over things not even related to autism.

Looks like we agree completely on this one, Sandy

I enjoy talking to them when they are grown. I find it exceedingly interesting the way in which the visual and capd are described. I think doctors would serve the autistic community far better if they listened to them. I am almost convinced, that the way in which my nephew describes his vision, was a basis for his childhood behaviors, as well as the capd , the same. I wonder if many of the symptoms of regression are brought about by the fine tuning just not working for both hearing and vision. When they stop being able to clearly make out a face, or clearly hear someone speaking to them, perhaps some odd behaviors can compensate and gratify them.

Hi Mary,

Re #68: I agree with you that the conclusion is much more important than the initiation of a malpractice suit.

I also think that there is value in looking at the accusations.

E.g. it might be useful to a lot of folks thinking about biomed treatments to see the claim that the mercury challenge testing is malpractice.

They might want to ask why they make this claim and to think about the arguments being made. I think this topic is much more interesting and important then divorces.

W&N

All,

Obviously there are many different aspects to autism and its impact on families.

One reoccurring topic is the science on the etiology of autism—especially with respect to vaccines.

For anyone genuinely interested in understanding why scientifically the argument if vaccines cause autism is over, I suggest you ignore people’s statements about the omnibus hearings and start reading, and keep on reading:
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/omnibus-autism-proceeding

Bios for the special masters are on the site. Vowell trained as a scientist—any statement that they have no background in science is not true.

The document trail demonstrates petitioner’s lawyer’s attempts to suppress important information—belying any claim that they were interested in the truth.

The testimony is even worse.

By day two we learn for example that the petitioner’s scientists were caught: fabricating their credentials, inventing work history, and hiding their previous ethical failings. And it keeps going down-hill from there…

The special masters detail how every aspect of the arguments that vaccines cause autism are grossly wrong.

7.5 years and petitioners had less than nothing.

But it wasn’t a complete loss: the interim legal bill for the petitioners is over $7million (and counting)—this is after almost a million for false billings was rejected by the courts. Must be nice work….

Bottom line: it is all detailed for anyone that is interested in the subject.

W&N

W&N,

There is a reason why the principle underlying the justice system is innocent until proven guilty and not the other way around. Accusations of malpractice do not necessarily mean that malpractice has occurred regardless of how strong the plaintiff may believe in their accusations. When a suit is launched, it is expected that the plaintiffs will at least believe they have a “good case” and produce a strong list of accusations… or else they may be found guilty of bringing forth a spurious lawsuit.

There doesn’t appear to be a Statement of Defense entered yet, so we (the public) don’t know any of their actual position on the matter yet. (I do sincerely doubt the defense will be based on the premise of a “messy divorce” motive by the plaintiffs.) Therefore, interesting or not, it’s really just too premature to speculate about it’s usefulness either way (which I believe is what I was implying in my post #68).

Whtie&Nerdy~ good link.
Just like in the Wakefield case, regardless of accusation of malpractice, many times a guilty party is not found guilty, or is but either way it does bring attention to that person good and or bad. I’m surprised with the investigation a news paper did a few months back didn’t spark malpractice sooner, and my guess is as this case goes forward, more cases will come forth.

I just hope there is at least as much attention paid the Thorsen information as was paid the Wakefield saga.
I “do” have a hard time with conspiracy theories, however, I read one this morning that fit into the early bits that were printed about Wakefield, just from the other side.Is this “true” is this BS ? Time will tell.
from “fluwatch”
quote
“Thorsen was the administrator of a 80-million crown research project funded by the CDC to uncover the causes of autism involving many different universities, including Aarhaus University.

In 2002, he was an author along with Kreesten Madsen of a key study that used data from Danish children to show that there was no link between mercury

The study was criticized for the way data was apparently manipulated but became the basis for several other high profile studies that have been used by the pharmaceutical industry and bodies such as the CDC, EMA and WHO to justify continuing to use mercury in vaccines.

The revelation that Thorsen had a second secret job will raise fears of a hidden bias in the studies and undermine the scientific case for thiomersal.

The decision by Aarhaus University to wait almost one year to inform the general public of the involvement of a leading autism author in fraudulent activities strongly swuggests the notion that scientists, government officials and big pharma are involved in a cover up of a “Vaccine-gate” style scandal.
“

Sigh… it always amazes me how easily a scientific/logic argument can get lost in speculative rhetoric the moment someone sniffs out a juicy scandal that they happen to agree with. Yes, sometimes guilty people are found innocent and sometimes innocent people are found guilty. Errors can be made in law just as readily as in science (and, need I say it, vice versa, too) ;D

A good scientist collects at least tries to collect all of his data before drawing any conclusions.

barbaraj~ had you read the sites users agreement, you can not copy and paste and also not include the link to the source. You cant do that on any site. A simple from fluwatch isn’t enough and that’s not to mention the site you copied froms TOS and permission rights.

“The revelation that Thorsen had a second secret job will raise fears of a hidden bias in the studies and undermine the scientific case for thiomersal.”

Unfortunate, but true. Reasonable fears held by reasonable people must be addressed. Unreasonable fears are virtually unaddressable. We already have people calling the validity of work that Thorsen was involved in into question on the basis of an allegation that has very little to do with the actual data or processes involved in that work, unlike the multiple proven charges against Wakefield that exposed his data and processes as flawed and unethical.

It’s unfortunate that some people are so invested in defending Wakefield that accusations of financial impropriety are jumped on as evidence of fraudulent data, without – unlike in the Wakefield case – any additional evidence to support the additional insinuations.

The person at the core of this should be investigated. But until theres additional evidence of fraudulent data it should be treated as the incidence of financial impropriety it is, and not nudge-nudge wink-wink’ed into working as evidence of something bigger.

Sandy and Dedj – re cutting and pasting, it is certainly preferable to include an actual link, and there are rule of “fair use” which allow a limited degree of direct citation.

I honestly wouldn’t worry a whole lot about a short, credited cut and paste job in a blog comment… but in future, please do keep the materials brief and do include a specific credit if you’re citing directly at any length.

Thanks,

Lisa

Paragraph 4, i and a sentence might be fair use but anything else would require the terms of this site plus permission from the other site. Jane Burgermeister has the site copyright All Rights Reserved.

Robert Kennedy Jr comments…I do wonder with all of this ..what the facts are..
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-f-kennedy-jr/central-figure-in-cdc-vac_b_494303.html

sorry if I didn’t follow a rule properly..I try..

Lisa, did you have permission from medpage prior to copying a portion of their article?
http://www.medpagetoday.com/About/Terms-of-Use/

Now about.com has their own as well http://www.about.com/gi/pages/uagree.htm

Not sure what I’m being mentioned for. I was responding to a posted quote.

We must remember that a reference acts two ways. It either signals agreement with the material being reffered to, or indicates material that the refferer believes supports the discussion or should be discussed.

The central point that the current accusations against Thorson are in no way equivilant to the proven charges against Wakefield, in terms of how we should interpret the ethical and proceedural integrity of the data and hypothesis associated with each person, still stands until further evidence is found and presented.

Actally, Dedj you’re right. There is a difference between the two cases, however on any case, there will always be true believers and nay sayers regardless of the evidence.

I think the Thorson case is just a conspiracy to over shadow Wakefield. Odd that they’re both MMR related.

Sandy, I routinely cite portions of press releases and articles with attribution and links. I never cut and paste entire press releases and articles. According to the About.com editors, this is considered Fair Use.

I really wouldn’t worry too much about this. We have had training on plagiarism issues, and this is not plagiarism. Were I to simply lift articles without comment, with or without attribution, it would be plagiarism. If I were to simply rewrite the article it would be plagiarism. I am doing neither. I am citing with attribution.

In addition, honestly, for Dedj to include content in a blog post without “proper” attribution is not a big deal.

Lisa

whoops – sorry Dedj. I meant Barbaraj.

Either way, not a big deal.

Lisa

Lisa, so you don’t actually read each sites Terms prior to copying portions of it? You base it on Fair Use alone? That’s quite interesting considering the terms of this site and Med Page Today, why then bother adding those paragraphs? One specifically addresses use to another web site.
Plagiarism is not the same as copyright infringement.

http://www.11alive.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=141643&catid=3

It’s beginning to show up in Atlanta news channels…

My nephew was arrested about a month ago, media picked it up in 10 other states, all 10 having nothing to do with the arrest or charges. That’s what the media does, feed off each other but that hardly means anything of value.

What is really more interesting about this Poul Thorsen, is the CDC press release, and depending on the article one reads they mention mercury as the purpose of the study. Not sure why there’s such a hype on this Danish study, other countries did studies as well. So far no one of those other countries who also did studies fled.

This is my “personal favorite for the day”.

The findings appear in the February issue of the journal Pediatrics

The new study included 1,403 Italian children who were given vaccines in the early 1990s and underwent brain function tests 10 years later. Those tests showed no signs of problems and only one case of autism was identified, the Associated Press reported.

Interesting, as well, is the mention that only 1% of these Italian children got the HepB at birth.
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:gt_-sSpS-YAJ:www.krakowlawfirm.com/uploads/2009_Issue_31_Tozzi_RJK_Autism_File.pdf+february+pediatrics+autism+vaccine+italian&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjQcDpU0PW2k7dPWTJZaLxY_c6c0u05VhjVdSBaT440YLvMHZH4KRHKXZGB2g1mmeYqPhlB_vHHOs2e3yooHYtyabQejwhycmGU4yZ7YSNDYuU5-6iDrq1OdwJ82PDGt4NbjTDu&sig=AHIEtbQdgZUc36MPk7zhBnFiTG0QQ5Qqgg

I was a bit slow in finding this…note the study mentions those that may have been cognitively impaired may have chosen not to participate…

This is what our tax dollars are paying for, we should give it some attention..jmo..

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/123/2/475

Indeed, any well written study should make the reader aware of potential limitations, even though – in this case – there appears to be no evidence that the data was affected.

Interestingly, few significant sub-clinical artifacts appear in the data, yet vaccine-skepticism may lead us to believe there is a dose related response.

If ++Thim=developmental problems then one would expect there to be an apparent relationship in the higher Thim. group, even with the self-selected exclusion of subjects with clinical developmental impairments.

Unless one believes vulnerability to Thim. damage only occurs past a certain dose and then only occurs ‘full on’, there is nothing in the data that indicates the limitations of the study invalidate the conclusions.

I think at this point, as with many CDC sponsored studies concerning this issue,it’s going to be a wait and see. We will wait and see WHY a group of children receiving far less thimerosal than children in the US, were chosen for this study, as in the other ,Danish, study. We should ask why, when relationships are discovered, as with this one, suggesting neurological symptoms they are call “small and likely coincidental”. Autism , at 1 in a hundred, could be considered the same using these standards.
I couldn’t help but be mystified that any one group of studied children showed autism at a rate of 1/1400 until I read that children with cognitive issues “may have opted out of the study”. This isn’t science, this is bought and paid for garbage. JMO of course.

Your opinion would be worth more if it was informed by something other than anti-vaccine propaganda.

JMO

I respect Barbaraj’s thoughtful well researched opinions.

ANB you really do not understand my position in this, I am far from being “anti vaccine”.I want to protect my children as much as the next “guy”, I just don’t want to poison them. There was never a worse day for me, when my husband looked at me , after my child regressed and said, “YOU knew better”. I did know better, I had played a kind of Russian Roulette and lost. I really wanted to think I could hold my breath and it would be okay, after all , at that time the odds were what..one in 300 or so? Not now, now the kids that are two years older than mine are up there with 1 in 100, my 2000 will likely belong to a group counted as 1 in 25 boys by the time his birth year is calculated. We have a billboard in my neighborhood, it says..every thirty minutes an autistic child is diagnosed. Pretty bad when the billboards are up..ya think?

So your comments are also informed by billboards?

Who put the billboard up and is it one of those new flashy neon ones? Also, who is the one diagnosing autism every 30 minutes? I just seen a show on Discovery Health about 7 year old boy previously diagnosed with autism. He had every expert in the hospital looking at him, ended up with a chromosome defect and it wasn’t autism at all. So knock one off that autism rate. Just how accurate is every thirty minutes an autistic child is diagnosed?

One every 30 mins sounds low to me. There are 8,760 hours in a year (365 X 24). Double that you get 17,520. The US has about 4.5 million lives births a year. If only 17,520 kids per birth year cohort are diagnosed, that gives a rate of ~40:10,000, or 1:250.

So the actual figure is closer to one diagnosis every 15 minutes. But what does that tell us? That would depend on your own frame of reference. If you are already convinced that the US government, the AMA, CDC, FDA and the UCLA marching band are conspiring to turn our kids into zombies, then that billboard is provides one more irrefutable data point. But if real evidence still matters, then you will see the billboard for what it is – a focus-group tested tag line intended to inflame the emotions, rather than inform the public.

ANB – gotta say I’ve also been baffled by the Autism Speaks “odds are” ads.

When they say the odds of becoming an Olympic Skater are a zillion to one, are they counting all the humans in the world versus the 100 people who become Olympic Skaters? Or all the skaters? Or all the really GOOD skaters? Or all the really good skaters who try out for the Olympic Team? Or…

The odds of becoming a freelance writer with a sub-specialty in autism who happens to have two cats and two kids are pretty slim, too… but I’m not not thinking that would make much of an ad lol!

Lisa

Lisa

BTW – marching bands, you say?? hmmmmm…

Further correction to my post #116:

“He could probably get a job easier by not divulging his diagnosis; because people generally believe that people with autism CAN’T do what he actually CAN do…”

how to become a actor how can i its hard help me plz im young about teen plz help plz tips plz.