Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:22 pm Posts: 4715 Location: going to marrakesh
Deadly immunity When a study revealed that mercury in childhood vaccines may have caused autism in thousands of kids, the government rushed to conceal the data -- and to prevent parents from suing drug companies for their role in the epidemic.
- - - - - - - - - - - - By Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
June 16, 2005 | In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to 52 attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva, and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.
The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children.
Even for scientists and doctors accustomed to confronting issues of life and death, the findings were frightening. "You can play with this all you want," Dr. Bill Weil, a consultant for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told the group. The results "are statistically significant." Dr. Richard Johnston, an immunologist and pediatrician from the University of Colorado whose grandson had been born early on the morning of the meeting's first day, was even more alarmed. "My gut feeling?" he said. "Forgive this personal comment -- I do not want my grandson to get a thimerosal-containing vaccine until we know better what is going on."
But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line.
"We are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits," said Dr. Robert Brent, a pediatrician at the Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children in Delaware. "This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country." Dr. Bob Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, expressed relief that "given the sensitivity of the information, we have been able to keep it out of the hands of, let's say, less responsible hands." Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, declared flatly that the study "should not have been done at all" and warned that the results "will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond the control of this group. The research results have to be handled."
In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism.
Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants -- but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines -- including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to 11-year-olds.
The drug companies are also getting help from powerful lawmakers in Washington. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has received $873,000 in contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, has been working to immunize vaccine makers from liability in 4,200 lawsuits that have been filed by the parents of injured children. On five separate occasions, Frist has tried to seal all of the government's vaccine-related documents -- including the Simpsonwood transcripts -- and shield Eli Lilly, the developer of thimerosal, from subpoenas. In 2002, the day after Frist quietly slipped a rider known as the "Eli Lilly Protection Act" into a homeland security bill, the company contributed $10,000 to his campaign and bought 5,000 copies of his book on bioterrorism. Congress repealed the measure in 2003 -- but earlier this year, Frist slipped another provision into an anti-terrorism bill that would deny compensation to children suffering from vaccine-related brain disorders. "The lawsuits are of such magnitude that they could put vaccine producers out of business and limit our capacity to deal with a biological attack by terrorists," says Andy Olsen, a legislative assistant to Frist.
Even many conservatives are shocked by the government's effort to cover up the dangers of thimerosal. Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal after his grandson was diagnosed with autism. "Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic," his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. "This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal, a known neurotoxin." The FDA and other public-health agencies failed to act, the committee added, out of "institutional malfeasance for self protection" and "misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry."
The story of how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public is a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed. I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. Privately, I was skeptical. I doubted that autism could be blamed on a single source, and I certainly understood the government's need to reassure parents that vaccinations are safe; the eradication of deadly childhood diseases depends on it. I tended to agree with skeptics like Rep. Henry Waxman, a Democrat from California, who criticized his colleagues on the House Government Reform Committee for leaping to conclusions about autism and vaccinations. "Why should we scare people about immunization," Waxman pointed out at one hearing, "until we know the facts?"
It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation's preeminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation -- those born between 1989 and 2003 -- who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in 25 years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931.
Some skeptics dispute that the rise in autism is caused by thimerosal-tainted vaccinations. They argue that the increase is a result of better diagnosis -- a theory that seems questionable at best, given that most of the new cases of autism are clustered within a single generation of children. "If the epidemic is truly an artifact of poor diagnosis," scoffs Dr. Boyd Haley, one of the world's authorities on mercury toxicity, "then where are all the 20-year-old autistics?" Other researchers point out that Americans are exposed to a greater cumulative "load" of mercury than ever before, from contaminated fish to dental fillings, and suggest that thimerosal in vaccines may be only part of a much larger problem. It's a concern that certainly deserves far more attention than it has received -- but it overlooks the fact that the mercury concentrations in vaccines dwarf other sources of exposure to our children.
What is most striking is the lengths to which many of the leading detectives have gone to ignore -- and cover up -- the evidence against thimerosal. From the very beginning, the scientific case against the mercury additive has been overwhelming. The preservative, which is used to stem fungi and bacterial growth in vaccines, contains ethylmercury, a potent neurotoxin. Truckloads of studies have shown that mercury tends to accumulate in the brains of primates and other animals after they are injected with vaccines -- and that the developing brains of infants are particularly susceptible. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to much lower concentrations of ethylmercury than those given to American children still suffered brain damage years later. Russia banned thimerosal from children's vaccines 20 years ago, and Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have since followed suit.
"You couldn't even construct a study that shows thimerosal is safe," says Haley, who heads the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky. "It's just too darn toxic. If you inject thimerosal into an animal, its brain will sicken. If you apply it to living tissue, the cells die. If you put it in a petri dish, the culture dies. Knowing these things, it would be shocking if one could inject it into an infant without causing damage."
Internal documents reveal that Eli Lilly, which first developed thimerosal, knew from the start that its product could cause damage -- and even death -- in both animals and humans. In 1930, the company tested thimerosal by administering it to 22 patients with terminal meningitis, all of whom died within weeks of being injected -- a fact Lilly didn't bother to report in its study declaring thimerosal safe. In 1935, researchers at another vaccine manufacturer, Pittman-Moore, warned Lilly that its claims about thimerosal's safety "did not check with ours." Half the dogs Pittman injected with thimerosal-based vaccines became sick, leading researchers there to declare the preservative "unsatisfactory as a serum intended for use on dogs."
In the decades that followed, the evidence against thimerosal continued to mount. During the Second World War, when the Department of Defense used the preservative in vaccines on soldiers, it required Lilly to label it "poison." In 1967, a study in Applied Microbiology found that thimerosal killed mice when added to injected vaccines. Four years later, Lilly's own studies discerned that thimerosal was "toxic to tissue cells" in concentrations as low as one part per million -- 100 times weaker than the concentration in a typical vaccine. Even so, the company continued to promote thimerosal as "nontoxic" and also incorporated it into topical disinfectants. In 1977, 10 babies at a Toronto hospital died when an antiseptic preserved with thimerosal was dabbed onto their umbilical cords.
In 1982, the FDA proposed a ban on over-the-counter products that contained thimerosal, and in 1991 the agency considered banning it from animal vaccines. But tragically, that same year, the CDC recommended that infants be injected with a series of mercury-laced vaccines. Newborns would be vaccinated for hepatitis B within 24 hours of birth, and 2-month-old infants would be immunized for haemophilus influenzae B and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.
The drug industry knew the additional vaccines posed a danger. The same year that the CDC approved the new vaccines, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, one of the fathers of Merck's vaccine programs, warned the company that 6-month-olds who were administered the shots would suffer dangerous exposure to mercury. He recommended that thimerosal be discontinued, "especially when used on infants and children," noting that the industry knew of nontoxic alternatives. "The best way to go," he added, "is to switch to dispensing the actual vaccines without adding preservatives."
For Merck and other drug companies, however, the obstacle was money. Thimerosal enables the pharmaceutical industry to package vaccines in vials that contain multiple doses, which require additional protection because they are more easily contaminated by multiple needle entries. The larger vials cost half as much to produce as smaller, single-dose vials, making it cheaper for international agencies to distribute them to impoverished regions at risk of epidemics. Faced with this "cost consideration," Merck ignored Hilleman's warnings, and government officials continued to push more and more thimerosal-based vaccines for children. Before 1989, American preschoolers received 11 vaccinations -- for polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and measles-mumps-rubella. A decade later, thanks to federal recommendations, children were receiving a total of 22 immunizations by the time they reached first grade.
As the number of vaccines increased, the rate of autism among children exploded. During the 1990s, 40 million children were injected with thimerosal-based vaccines, receiving unprecedented levels of mercury during a period critical for brain development. Despite the well-documented dangers of thimerosal, it appears that no one bothered to add up the cumulative dose of mercury that children would receive from the mandated vaccines. "What took the FDA so long to do the calculations?" Peter Patriarca, director of viral products for the agency, asked in an e-mail to the CDC in 1999. "Why didn't CDC and the advisory bodies do these calculations when they rapidly expanded the childhood immunization schedule?"
But by that time, the damage was done. Infants who received all their vaccines, plus boosters, by the age of six months were being injected with a total of 187 micrograms of ethylmercury -- a level 40 percent greater than the EPA's limit for daily exposure to methylmercury, a related neurotoxin. Although the vaccine industry insists that ethylmercury poses little danger because it breaks down rapidly and is removed by the body, several studies -- including one published in April by the National Institutes of Health -- suggest that ethylmercury is actually more toxic to developing brains and stays in the brain longer than methylmercury. Under the expanded schedule of vaccinations, multiple shots were often administered on a single day: At two months, when the infant brain is still at a critical stage of development, children routinely received three innoculations that delivered 99 times the approved limit of mercury.
Officials responsible for childhood immunizations insist that the additional vaccines were necessary to protect infants from disease and that thimerosal is still essential in developing nations, which, they often claim, cannot afford the single-dose vials that don't require a preservative. Dr. Paul Offit, one of CDC's top vaccine advisors, told me, "I think if we really have an influenza pandemic -- and certainly we will in the next 20 years, because we always do -- there's no way on God's earth that we immunize 280 million people with single-dose vials. There has to be multidose vials."
But while public-health officials may have been well-intentioned, many of those on the CDC advisory committee who backed the additional vaccines had close ties to the industry. Dr. Sam Katz, the committee's chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and shares a patent on a measles vaccine with Merck, which also manufactures the hepatitis B vaccine. Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine.
Indeed, in the tight circle of scientists who work on vaccines, such conflicts of interest are common. Rep. Burton says that the CDC "routinely allows scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on intellectual advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines," even though they have "interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight." The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisors who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine "had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine."
Offit, who shares a patent on one of the vaccines, acknowledged to me that he "would make money" if his vote eventually leads to a marketable product. But he dismissed my suggestion that a scientist's direct financial stake in CDC approval might bias his judgment. "It provides no conflict for me," he insists. "I have simply been informed by the process, not corrupted by it. When I sat around that table, my sole intent was trying to make recommendations that best benefited the children in this country. It's offensive to say that physicians and public-health people are in the pocket of industry and thus are making decisions that they know are unsafe for children. It's just not the way it works."
Other vaccine scientists and regulators gave me similar assurances. Like Offit, they view themselves as enlightened guardians of children's health, proud of their "partnerships" with pharmaceutical companies, immune to the seductions of personal profit, besieged by irrational activists whose anti-vaccine campaigns are endangering children's health. They are often resentful of questioning. "Science," says Offit, "is best left to scientists."
Still, some government officials were alarmed by the apparent conflicts of interest. In his e-mail to CDC administrators in 1999, Paul Patriarca of the FDA blasted federal regulators for failing to adequately scrutinize the danger posed by the added baby vaccines. "I'm not sure there will be an easy way out of the potential perception that the FDA, CDC and immunization-policy bodies may have been asleep at the switch re: thimerosal until now," Patriarca wrote. The close ties between regulatory officials and the pharmaceutical industry, he added, "will also raise questions about various advisory bodies regarding aggressive recommendations for use" of thimerosal in child vaccines.
If federal regulators and government scientists failed to grasp the potential risks of thimerosal over the years, no one could claim ignorance after the secret meeting at Simpsonwood. But rather than conduct more studies to test the link to autism and other forms of brain damage, the CDC placed politics over science. The agency turned its database on childhood vaccines -- which had been developed largely at taxpayer expense -- over to a private agency, America's Health Insurance Plans, ensuring that it could not be used for additional research. It also instructed the Institute of Medicine, an advisory organization that is part of the National Academy of Sciences, to produce a study debunking the link between thimerosal and brain disorders. The CDC "wants us to declare, well, that these things are pretty safe," Dr. Marie McCormick, who chaired the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee, told her fellow researchers when they first met in January 2001. "We are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect" of thimerosal exposure. According to transcripts of the meeting, the committee's chief staffer, Kathleen Stratton, predicted that the IOM would conclude that the evidence was "inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation" between thimerosal and autism. That, she added, was the result "Walt wants" -- a reference to Dr. Walter Orenstein, director of the National Immunization Program for the CDC.
For those who had devoted their lives to promoting vaccination, the revelations about thimerosal threatened to undermine everything they had worked for. "We've got a dragon by the tail here," said Dr. Michael Kaback, another committee member. "The more negative that [our] presentation is, the less likely people are to use vaccination, immunization -- and we know what the results of that will be. We are kind of caught in a trap. How we work our way out of the trap, I think is the charge."
Even in public, federal officials made it clear that their primary goal in studying thimerosal was to dispel doubts about vaccines. "Four current studies are taking place to rule out the proposed link between autism and thimerosal," Dr. Gordon Douglas, then-director of strategic planning for vaccine research at the National Institutes of Health, assured a Princeton University gathering in May 2001. "In order to undo the harmful effects of research claiming to link the [measles] vaccine to an elevated risk of autism, we need to conduct and publicize additional studies to assure parents of safety." Douglas formerly served as president of vaccinations for Merck, where he ignored warnings about thimerosal's risks.
In May of last year, the Institute of Medicine issued its final report. Its conclusion: There is no proven link between autism and thimerosal in vaccines. Rather than reviewing the large body of literature describing the toxicity of thimerosal, the report relied on four disastrously flawed epidemiological studies examining European countries, where children received much smaller doses of thimerosal than American kids. It also cited a new version of the Verstraeten study, published in the journal Pediatrics, that had been reworked to reduce the link between thimerosal and autism. The new study included children too young to have been diagnosed with autism and overlooked others who showed signs of the disease. The IOM declared the case closed and -- in a startling position for a scientific body -- recommended that no further research be conducted.
The report may have satisfied the CDC, but it convinced no one. Rep. David Weldon, a Republican physician from Florida who serves on the House Government Reform Committee, attacked the Institute of Medicine, saying it relied on a handful of studies that were "fatally flawed" by "poor design" and failed to represent "all the available scientific and medical research." CDC officials are not interested in an honest search for the truth, Weldon told me, because "an association between vaccines and autism would force them to admit that their policies irreparably damaged thousands of children. Who would want to make that conclusion about themselves?"
Under pressure from Congress, parents and a few of its own panel members, the Institute of Medicine reluctantly convened a second panel to review the findings of the first. In February, the new panel, composed of different scientists, criticized the earlier panel for its lack of transparency and urged the CDC to make its vaccine database available to the public.
So far, though, only two scientists have managed to gain access. Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC. Since August 2002, when members of Congress pressured the agency to turn over the data, the Geiers have completed six studies that demonstrate a powerful correlation between thimerosal and neurological damage in children. One study, which compares the cumulative dose of mercury received by children born between 1981 and 1985 with those born between 1990 and 1996, found a "very significant relationship" between autism and vaccines. Another study of educational performance found that kids who received higher doses of thimerosal in vaccines were nearly three times as likely to be diagnosed with autism and more than three times as likely to suffer from speech disorders and mental retardation. Another soon-to-be-published study shows that autism rates are in decline following the recent elimination of thimerosal from most vaccines.
As the federal government worked to prevent scientists from studying vaccines, others have stepped in to study the link to autism. In April, reporter Dan Olmsted of UPI undertook one of the more interesting studies himself. Searching for children who had not been exposed to mercury in vaccines -- the kind of population that scientists typically use as a "control" in experiments -- Olmsted scoured the Amish of Lancaster County, Penn., who refuse to immunize their infants. Given the national rate of autism, Olmsted calculated that there should be 130 autistics among the Amish. He found only four. One had been exposed to high levels of mercury from a power plant. The other three -- including one child adopted from outside the Amish community -- had received their vaccines.
At the state level, many officials have also conducted in-depth reviews of thimerosal. While the Institute of Medicine was busy whitewashing the risks, the Iowa Legislature was carefully combing through all of the available scientific and biological data. "After three years of review, I became convinced there was sufficient credible research to show a link between mercury and the increased incidences in autism," says state Sen. Ken Veenstra, a Republican who oversaw the investigation. "The fact that Iowa's 700 percent increase in autism began in the 1990s, right after more and more vaccines were added to the children's vaccine schedules, is solid evidence alone." Last year, Iowa became the first state to ban mercury in vaccines, followed by California. Similar bans are now under consideration in 32 other states.
But instead of following suit, the FDA continues to allow manufacturers to include thimerosal in scores of over-the-counter medications as well as steroids and injected collagen. Even more alarming, the government continues to ship vaccines preserved with thimerosal to developing countries -- some of which are now experiencing a sudden explosion in autism rates. In China, where the disease was virtually unknown prior to the introduction of thimerosal by U.S. drug manufacturers in 1999, news reports indicate that there are now more than 1.8 million autistics. Although reliable numbers are hard to come by, autistic disorders also appear to be soaring in India, Argentina, Nicaragua and other developing countries that are now using thimerosal-laced vaccines. The World Health Organization continues to insist thimerosal is safe, but it promises to keep the possibility that it is linked to neurological disorders "under review."
I devoted time to study this issue because I believe that this is a moral crisis that must be addressed. If, as the evidence suggests, our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine. "The CDC is guilty of incompetence and gross negligence," says Mark Blaxill, vice president of Safe Minds, a nonprofit organization concerned about the role of mercury in medicines. "The damage caused by vaccine exposure is massive. It's bigger than asbestos, bigger than tobacco, bigger than anything you've ever seen." It's hard to calculate the damage to our country -- and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases -- if Third World nations come to believe that America's most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It's not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by America's enemies abroad. The scientists and researchers -- many of them sincere, even idealistic -- who are participating in efforts to hide the science on thimerosal claim that they are trying to advance the lofty goal of protecting children in developing nations from disease pandemics. They are badly misguided. Their failure to come clean on thimerosal will come back horribly to haunt our country and the world's poorest populations.
_________________ and our love is a monster, plain and simple though you weight it down with stones to try to drown it it floats it floats
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
Vaccines are proven to prevent diseases that are proven to kill and debilitate children. Thimerosal has not been proven to cause harm in so much as ONE peer-reviewed study.
Y'know what, I argue this all day, every day at work, I'm not going to fight about it here.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:59 am Posts: 18643 Location: Raleigh, NC Gender: Male
B wrote:
Vaccines are proven to prevent diseases that are proven to kill and debilitate children. Thimerosal has not been proven to cause harm in so much as ONE peer-reviewed study.
Y'know what, I argue this all day, every day at work, I'm not going to fight about it here.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
Athletic Supporter wrote:
B wrote:
Vaccines are proven to prevent diseases that are proven to kill and debilitate children. Thimerosal has not been proven to cause harm in so much as ONE peer-reviewed study.
Y'know what, I argue this all day, every day at work, I'm not going to fight about it here.
But...but...DRUG COMPANIES ARE INHERENTLY EVIL!
I shant disagree with you on that.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
Yay! This article made its rounds and has now resulted in more work for me. The funny thing that I noticed is that it's called "Deadly Immunity," but makes no allegations that vaccines kill anyone.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:23 am Posts: 1041 Location: Anchorage, Alaska Gender: Male
B wrote:
Yay! This article made its rounds and has now resulted in more work for me. The funny thing that I noticed is that it's called "Deadly Immunity," but makes no allegations that vaccines kill anyone.
Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC.
You may not be aware of this, but David Geier is a consultant to personal injury lawyers who sue doctors (his company is called MedCon appropriately). His job is to select studies that prove a doctor (or hospital or nursing home) is liable for some malady that a patient suffered while being vaccinated. His father is a "professional witness" against vaccine manufacturers.
Here's an exert from a federal case in which the papa-son team worked:
-------
In the United States Court of Federal Claims
OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS
October 9, 2003
JEANINE WEISS and JOSEPH WEISS, Parents of CHRISTOPHER WEISS, Petitioners,
v.
SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent
No. 03-190V
"He is however a professional witness in areas for which he has no training, expertise, and experience. Petitioners must seriously consider whether they want to proceed with a witness whose opinion on neurological diagnosis is unacceptable to the undersigned. When we reach the end of this case and the question of expert fees arises, there will be serious doubt whether Dr. Geier should be compensated for his time devoted to diagnosing an acute encephalopathy where none exists, and discussing (in his first supplemental affidavit) the MMR reactions of acute encephalopathy and encephalitis when neither is relevant in this case because Christopher, who was alert and in no acute distress on the 15th day after his MMR vaccination (when Dr. Geier opines his acute encephalopathy began on the 14th day, less than 24 hours earlier), could not possibly have had a Table acute encephalopathy or encephalitis. Moreover, three days later, he was also alert and in no acute distress. "
---------
Here's a quote from Dr. John Clements , vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, on the study Kennedy is using:
"should not have been done at all....The research results have to be handled."
I hope that is enough for anyone to see that this artcile is nothing more than an advertisement to sue vaccine manufacturers. Salon (and Rolling Stone) have done themselves a massive disservice by printing this crap.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
kusko_andy wrote:
B wrote:
Yay! This article made its rounds and has now resulted in more work for me. The funny thing that I noticed is that it's called "Deadly Immunity," but makes no allegations that vaccines kill anyone.
what kind of work do you do?
North Carolina Immunization Branch - My job isn't direct education or contact w/ parents, but everytime something like this is in the headlines, we're all on DefCon4 around here. There is already a bill about this in our state legislature that our department has taken an official stance against, so I don't know if this article will cause us any problems that the bill hasn't already done.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
Go_State wrote:
Yeah, I'm going to need some type of published article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal before I'm buying into this.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. wrote:
The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism.
OK, funding a study is not the same as paying the doctors. The IOM is a group of independent doctors and sciences that operate outside of the government. The CDC has no power to force them to do a study or change their findings.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:30 am Posts: 413 Location: back home in Mass.
Go_State wrote:
Yeah, I'm going to need some type of published article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal before I'm buying into this.
Is that the part of the point of this article? That results/research showing that vaccines may be unsafe are being kept from the public and from peer-reviewed scientific journals? Correct me if this is not stated in the article as I read the article a few days ago, but that was my understanding.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
leftofcenter wrote:
Go_State wrote:
Yeah, I'm going to need some type of published article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal before I'm buying into this.
Is that the part of the point of this article? That results/research showing that vaccines may be unsafe are being kept from the public and from peer-reviewed scientific journals? Correct me if this is not stated in the article as I read the article a few days ago, but that was my understanding.
They're kept out of peer-reviewed journals b/c they're flawed and not executed properly. That's the whole idea behind "peer-reviewed." If you want your articles published, you have to convince other people in your field that you're not a flaming idiot.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:30 am Posts: 413 Location: back home in Mass.
B wrote:
leftofcenter wrote:
Go_State wrote:
Yeah, I'm going to need some type of published article in a peer-reviewed scientific journal before I'm buying into this.
Is that the part of the point of this article? That results/research showing that vaccines may be unsafe are being kept from the public and from peer-reviewed scientific journals? Correct me if this is not stated in the article as I read the article a few days ago, but that was my understanding.
They're kept out of peer-reviewed journals b/c they're flawed and not executed properly. That's the whole idea behind "peer-reviewed." If you want your articles published, you have to convince other people in your field that you're not a flaming idiot.
I get the whole idea behind peer reviewed journals. But, isn't Kennedy referring to a meeting were information regarding potential links to autism and thimerosal were not investigated fully after the Simpsonwood conference? I'm not saying I believe that vaccines are unsafe, but rather the idea that they may be unsafe has been ignored. Also, alarming is rate at which autism has increased amongst child. If it is not the vaccines, then why the sudden surge in cases of autism (just curious to what may be the cause)?
I get the whole idea behind peer reviewed journals. But, isn't Kennedy referring to a meeting were information regarding potential links to autism and thimerosal were not investigated fully after the Simpsonwood conference? I'm not saying I believe that vaccines are unsafe, but rather the idea that they may be unsafe has been ignored. Also, alarming is rate at which autism has increased amongst child. If it is not the vaccines, then why the sudden surge in cases of autism (just curious to what may be the cause)?
There is no real sudden surge in "new" cases of autism. What there is are improve methods of differentiating autism from retardation. If you look at the rates, I will try to find a link, the increase is autism diagnosis is parallel to the decrease in retardation diagnosis.
Also note that the above article is the revision. The original was riddled with factual errors and the editors at Salon had to fix them. Kennedy, a shell for trial lawyers, tried the same thing in 2002 against factory hog-farms. he wrote a book about how the factory farmers where conspiring with the Bu$hies and the vast right-wing conspiracy to "turn America back to the Dark Ages". What is his solution? Well, set up a foundation and sue-sue-sue!
He is doing the same thing here. He is playing on the fear of Pharma industry giants and using it to convince the public of a "cover-up" and "rich companies avoiding the truth", then guess what? SUE SUE SUE!!!
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
I have to guess at what went on in the Simpsonwood Conference, but if I had to guess based on 4 years of working hand-in-hand with the CDC's National Immunization Program, I would say that they sat down, looked at that info, and proceeded to destroy the credibility of the work, not in an effort to hide the info, but in an effort to only release correct, proven facts.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:30 am Posts: 413 Location: back home in Mass.
broken_iris wrote:
leftofcenter wrote:
I get the whole idea behind peer reviewed journals. But, isn't Kennedy referring to a meeting were information regarding potential links to autism and thimerosal were not investigated fully after the Simpsonwood conference? I'm not saying I believe that vaccines are unsafe, but rather the idea that they may be unsafe has been ignored. Also, alarming is rate at which autism has increased amongst child. If it is not the vaccines, then why the sudden surge in cases of autism (just curious to what may be the cause)?
There is no real sudden surge in "new" cases of autism. What there is are improve methods of differentiating autism from retardation. If you look at the rates, I will try to find a link, the increase is autism diagnosis is parallel to the decrease in retardation diagnosis.
Also note that the above article is the revision. The original was riddled with factual errors and the editors at Salon had to fix them. Kennedy, a shell for trial lawyers, tried the same thing in 2002 against factory hog-farms. he wrote a book about how the factory farmers where conspiring with the Bu$hies and the vast right-wing conspiracy to "turn America back to the Dark Ages". What is his solution? Well, set up a foundation and sue-sue-sue!
He is doing the same thing here. He is playing on the fear of Pharma industry giants and using it to convince the public of a "cover-up" and "rich companies avoiding the truth", then guess what? SUE SUE SUE!!!
I had forgotten about Kennedy and hog farms thing a few years ago. Changes my view of article regarding his motives. Thanks for jogging my memory.
Joan Walsh, Editor in Chief Gary Kamiya, Vice President of Content/Executive Editor Salon Media Group Inc.
Dear Ms. Walsh and Mr. Kamiya:
A commentary on vaccine safety issues written by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that appeared in Salon and Rolling Stone is rife with factual errors and distortions. Although there are numerous errors in Kennedy's piece that deserve correction and clarification, this letter focuses only on the errors pertaining to the Institute of Medicine.
Commentators and publications should take great care to ensure that their stories dealing with health provide parents with verifiable facts and reliable scientific evidence. Providing any less can lead to unwarranted fears and anxiety.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health asked the Institute of Medicine in 2000 to provide an independent and objective review of a series of vaccine safety concerns. This review resulted in a total of eight reports (for a full list see http://www.iom.edu/imsafety). The charge to the study committee is a matter of public record and was discussed in a public meeting on January 10, 2001.
Sponsors of IOM studies provide funding and their perspectives on what committees convened to carry out the studies should be charged to do. For example, in the case of IOM's studies of vaccines and autism, CDC discussed what would make the committee's conclusions and recommendations most useful and understandable to policy-makers - such as outlining specific research needs rather than giving a general recommendation that more research is needed. However, no organizations - neither CDC, nor NIH, nor medical associations, nor parent groups, nor any others - have control over committee members' conclusions and recommendations. The only factor that influences IOM committees' conclusions and recommendations is the evidence.
This is borne out by the results of IOM's first look at the thimerosal question in 2001. For those who are not aware, IOM visited the thimerosal question twice in its series on vaccine safety. At that time, the committee concluded that although there was not solid evidence linking thimerosal to brain disorders including autism, neither was the evidence sufficient to rule out a link. This would hardly seem to be a conclusion that would be reached by a committee that was "instructed to produce a report debunking the link," as Mr. Kennedy erroneously wrote. In addition, the committee in that report supported a call by the American Academy of Pediatrics for thimerosal to be removed voluntarily from vaccines.
Mr. Kennedy sought to buttress his misrepresentation of the purpose of the IOM studies by selectively using and fabricating quotations from the transcript of an organizational meeting held by the committee. He took words and phrases out of context, combined them, and misrepresented them as direct quotes. The discussions recorded in this transcript focus on the committee members' efforts to make sure that they fully understood their charge and reached agreement on the best way to conduct their study. Part of the discussions focused on the concerns, interests, and stakes held by various parties, including both CDC and parents.
For example, Mr. Kennedy used this partial quote from Dr. Marie McCormick: "[The CDC] wants us to declare, well, these things are pretty safe." Here is the full quote from Dr. McCormick: "I took away [from the previous day's discussion] actually an issue that we may have to confront, and that is actually the definition of what we mean by safety. It is safety on a population basis, but it is also safety for the individual child. I am wondering, if we take this dual perspective, we may address more of the parent concerns, perhaps developing a better message if we think about what comes down the stream as opposed to CDC, which wants us to declare, well, these things are pretty safe on a population basis." The full quote is part of a discussion of the needs of parents to know if a vaccine is safe for an individual child (or if the vaccine is a danger for an ill child) compared with the public health community's need to know if vaccines pose risks to a whole population. In fact, Dr. McCormick proposed that the committee consider addressing the parental concerns about the health of an individual child - not just CDC's concern about population-wide effects.
In its 2004 report, the committee concluded that the totality of the evidence available indicated that neither thimerosal nor the MMR vaccine is associated with autism. Contrary to Mr. Kennedy's assertions, the report clearly recommends that research continue to seek the cause or causes of autism, but that finite resources should be directed toward the most promising paths, and that a significant investment in studies of the theoretical vaccine-autism connection is not useful at this time. The exact text of the IOM report reads: "The committee urges that research on autism focus more broadly on the disorder's causes and treatments for it. Thus, the committee recommends a public health response that fully supports an array of vaccine safety activities. In addition the committee recommends that available funding for autism research be channeled to the most promising areas." In addition, the committee recommended that trends in autism incidence in the United States be closely tracked now that thimerosal has been largely eliminated from routine immunizations. The report offers nine specific recommendations for research on autism, thimerosal, and vaccine safety in general.
To reach its conclusions about the possible links between thimerosal and the MMR vaccine and autism, the committee reviewed a large amount of literature on this topic - more than 215 references are cited in the 2004 report. The committee members based their conclusions on the whole body of the evidence, including toxicology studies, not just four epidemiological studies. The committee included several experts in epidemiology, pediatrics, clinical medicine, statistics, and other relevant fields who reviewed and discussed in detail the strengths and weaknesses of the epidemiological, clinical, and biological evidence pertaining to thimerosal and autism. Their detailed analysis of these strengths and weaknesses is included in their report, which is a public document available to anyone who wishes to read it. Mr. Kennedy did not offer a detailed analysis of why he views four of the studies reviewed by the committee as flawed.
In addition, Mr. Kennedy erroneously conflates the work of two entirely separate IOM committees. The IOM entered into a contract with CDC in 2004 to assess the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) Data Sharing program. (The VSD is a large, linked database of patient information such as vaccination histories, health outcomes, and characteristics that can be used to study whether health problems are associated with vaccinations.) As an independent, nongovernmental organization, the IOM cannot be forced to take on any particular study, nor was there pressure from Congress, parents, or others to conduct this study. The Committee on the Review of the National Immunization Program's Research Procedures and Data Sharing Program did not review the work of the IOM Immunization Safety Review Committee, which wrote the report on vaccines and autism. The committee that reviewed the data sharing program released a report in February 2005 that was directed to CDC and others involved with the VSD, not to the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee.
Mr. Kennedy's piece does not mention that the IOM's studies on vaccines and autism - like all IOM studies - were peer-reviewed (the equivalent of fact-checking in the scientific community) by a group of outside experts before being approved for publication. The Institute of Medicine, a branch of the National Academies, also follows stringent policies for reviewing the potential conflicts of interest or biases of individuals who are chosen to serve on its study committees. The members selected for the committee that reviewed vaccine safety issues had no links to CDC, vaccine manufacturers, vaccine-related litigation or advocacy groups, and they had received no recent funding from the sponsors of the study. They received no remuneration for their work on the committee. The reputation of the National Academies for objectivity, integrity, independence, and competence has been earned through numerous studies, and it is one of our most important assets.
Our corrections are only a subset of the many factual misstatements and errors contained in Mr. Kennedy's commentary. In the interests of accuracy and fairness - and to alleviate unsubstantiated anxiety that this piece may have raised among readers - we call upon Salon and Rolling Stone to publish this full letter and to run a complete correction of the many other errors contained in Mr. Kennedy's commentary.
Sincerely,
Harvey V. Fineberg, M.D., Ph.D. President Institute of Medicine of the National Academies
CC: Rolling Stone magazine Jann S. Wenner, Editor and Publisher Will Dana, Deputy Managing Editor James Kaminsky, Deputy Managing Editor Joe Levy, Deputy Managing Editor
Rolling Stone.com Larry Carlat, Editor in Chief
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum