Feigned Exasperation and Ignorance: The AAP PR Strategy

By J.B. Handley
 
There have to be at least a few members of the AAP who fully recognize that the “science” exonerating vaccines from causing autism is, well, complete and utter bullshit. If those people exist, and I’m sure they must, they are keeping their thoughts to themselves for now. In the meantime, the AAP is efficiently educating rank & file pediatricians on the talking points they need to combat the horrible lies being told by all of us “anti-vaccine” lunatics.
 
Their most recent spin, and one that can be effective in the right crowd, is to feign exasperation: “For God’s sakes, man, we have looked at vaccines! There is nothing there to see! What is wrong with you? Do you think the lunar landing was staged, too?”
 
When that doesn’t work, and when the details of the science that has and hasn’t been done are actually spelled out, the AAP tends to fall back on ignorance. I call this the Eddie Murphy “it wasn’t me” defense (yup, it’s a test for those of you who came of age in the 1980s). It goes something like this:
 
Anti-vaccine looney: “They have only looked at MMR. What about the other 34 vaccines our kids get?”
 
AAP talking head: “We have studied vaccines. These are reproducible studies. There is no causation.”
 
Anti-vaccine looney: “But, at a 2 month visit, a kid gets 6 vaccines. Not a one has been studied, and combination effects never considered, are you hearing me? What about all of those vaccines”
 
AAP talking head: “ We have studied vaccines. The CDC, WHO, and IOM all say the same thing. It’s been studied. We need to move on.”
 
Feigned exasperation. And, when that doesn’t work, bold and blinding ignorance.
 
For a great real life example, consider the email exchange below, which was triggered by a friend sending out the NAA’s recent (and awesome) action alert for 09.09.09 (HERE). A pediatrician, who I have chosen not to name, and who received the email in the spirit of asking him to take action on behalf of our kids, decided to respond to a very large chain with his enlightened point of view. Our exchange, which can be read from top to bottom, appears below (and how did Alison Singer make a local pediatrician’s talking points?):

From: Random pediatrician drinking AAP kool-aid
Date: September 9, 2009 4:12:36 PM EDT
To: Very large chain, including some of my relatives
Subject: Vaccines and autism

Same misinformation that has been circulating for years.

The anti-vaccine movement is constantly changing their claims.  They are so sure it has to be that vaccines are harmful that when one of their questions gets answered (that the claim-of-the-day is not found to be real) they move on to a new accusation.  The types of studies that they are suggesting now are not just impractical and unethical, but downright impossible.  If they say the only way to prove to them thing are safe is to do the un-doable than we were never going to convince them of anything to begin with.  There are dozens of studies looking for links between autism and vaccines.  We aren’t finding a link because it isn’t there.  All of this went before a court that was looking at the claims of almost 5000 families that their children’s autism was from the vaccines.  After 7 years and more than 218,000 pages of documents, all three judges found nothing convincing about this theory. They not only found the science lacking, but also the “experts” claiming a link had significant credibility problems.
Bottom line – it is safer to do the shots than to skip them.  If that weren’t the case why would I not only give the shots to my patients, but also to my own precious daughters?

Dr. Random

From: JB Handley
Date: September 9, 2009
To: Very large chain, including some of my relatives, and Dr. Random
Subject: Vaccines and autism
 
Sigh. I don’t usually take time to respond to the ignorance of individual doctors regarding the correlation between vaccines and autism, but since my wife and I are at least partially responsible for the chain from the National Autism Association below, I feel compelled to say something. If you are a parent weighing the decision on how to approach vaccines with your kids, you’ll probably find this somewhat interesting, and if you aren’t, you probably won’t.
 
I’ve taken the liberty of quoting Dr. Random’s rather caustic email, so that my responses are specific to the things he wrote:
 
“Same misinformation that has been circulating for years.”
 
This is an interesting way to begin a reply, it’s both sweeping and dismissive. Well, here’s some information that no one can disagree with. Today, autism impacts 1 in 100 kids. In the early 1980s, it impacted 1 in 10,000. According to some, this is all due to better diagnosis, which would mean approximately 99% of children with autism in the 1980s were MISSED by their parents, teachers, and friends. If you have met a kid with autism, you know this is impossible. At the same time, the number of vaccines given to children has grown from 10 in the 1980s to 36 today. And, tens of thousands of parents report their children regressed into autism AFTER a vaccine appointment. And, we know for certain, and the government concedes, that vaccines can cause brain damage in a small percentage of children. There’s some information for you.
 
“The anti-vaccine movement is constantly changing their claims.”  
 
When doctors use the words “anti-vaccine movement” it always spells trouble. If I advocated wearing seat belts, would I be anti-car? If I wanted planes that don’t crash, would I be anti-airplane? No. But in the medical profession vaccines are so sacred that questioning them in any way means you must be nuts, or simply anti-vaccine. It’s too bad. We know vaccines have benefits, but they also have material risks, as a quick spin of our government’s own Vaccine Injury Compensation Program clearly spells out HERE

“They are so sure it has to be that vaccines are harmful that when one of their questions gets answered (that the claim-of-the-day is not found to be real) they move on to a new accusation.”

I thought doctors were taught to listen to their patients? I’ll repeat myself: tens of thousands (not a small number) of parents claim their child regressed after vaccination, and the stories continue unabated. Who wouldn’t want to listen to them? 

“The types of studies that they are suggesting now are not just impractical and unethical, but downright impossible.”

Hmmm…this is an unfortunate generalization, and indicative of a doctor who is used to patients just taking his word for it. This type of arrogance is taught in medical school, but it really works against our kids on something as complex as autism. The only study we are advocating that might be eliciting this response is a request for our authorities to look at the neurological outcomes of unvaccinated children. Since roughly 5% of children in the US are already unvaccinated (due to parental choice), they already exist and they are easy to find. Heck, a county in southern Oregon reports 15% unvaccinated? Why would it be unethical to see if these kids have 1 in 100 rates of autism? (Most anecdotal information tells us they don’t).

“There are dozens of studies looking for links between autism and vaccines.  We aren’t finding a link because it isn’t there.” 

This proves that Dr. Random’s grasp of this particular topic is superficial at best. Of 36 vaccines that children receive, exactly 2 have been studied for their relationship to autism. Of 50 some odd additional ingredients in vaccines, exactly one has been studied. That may be enough research for the doctor, but not for me. Of the 5-6 vaccines your child is scheduled to get at their 2 month vaccine appointment, not one has been studied for its relationship to autism. Comments like Dr. Random drove me so nuts and demonstrated such ignorance, I created a whole website to refute it, which you can read here: www.fourteenstudies.org

“After 7 years and more than 218,000 pages of documents, all three judges found nothing convincing about this theory. They not only found the science lacking, but also the “experts” claiming a link had significant credibility problems.”

The cases you’re referring to were for 2 of 36 shots on the schedule, and the cases are being appealed. Are all other vaccines, which keep getting added every year, exonerated due to the transitive property?

“Bottom line – it is safer to do the shots than to skip them.  If that weren’t the case why would I not only give the shots to my patients, but also to my own precious daughters?”
At 1 in 100 kids with autism and thousands of parents claiming regression after vaccines,

I’m not sure America believes you. Also, there are SAFER ways to do shots (doing fewer, delaying) and more dangerous ways to do shots (doing 6 in one day) that may have a material outcome or adverse event.
 
Why’d you give them to your precious daughters? Well, if your email is any indication, partially because you don’t really understand this issue!
 
J.B. Handley
 
From: Random pediatrician drinking AAP kool-aid
Date: September 9, 2009 4:12:36 PM EDT
To: Very large chain, including some of my relatives
Subject: Vaccines and autism
 
First off I would like to apologize to all of the readers who have had to read such ugly and false accusations towards me.  I am forced to fill your inbox with another email with respect to upholding the truth.

Isn't that nice. 

Mr. Handley calls my email caustic and then calls me ignorant, arrogant and dismissive.
There may be many things that Mr. Handley and I will have to agree to disagree on, but I think it is disingenuous to stoop to name calling. 

As I interpret the the science we have I do not draw the same conclusions he does.  It happens that the Centers for Disease Control, World Health Organization, and countless other scientific institutions have come to the same conclusion as I have.  I am not opposed to continuing to research the causes of autism.  I am not even opposed to further research into your theory that vaccines play a part in the process.  I am opposed to the fear mongering that is being perpetuated by people with blind convictions.

In the medical community we listen to patients and use that information to ask the questions to help us understand diseases.  We use the scientific method.  Doing so demands that we look at the data with an open mind to interpretation.  Here the theory would be that vaccines cause autism.  Where I differ from Mr. Handley is how we approach the data that is collected in trying to answer the question.  When studies are completed and reproducibly find no link, we owe it to our autistic families to move to a different question, or a different approach.  Taking a thoughtful approach to this problem is not dismissing our patient's concerns, but rather is trying to separate correlation with causation.  Two things that happen around the same time may or may not be cause and effect.  For those people reading that are not as familiar with the issue I will give an example.  In this upcoming flu season it is recommended that pregnant women be vaccinated against both seasonal and swine flu.  If we vaccinate 10,000 women, around 1,500 will miscarry.  However, if we don't vaccinate those same 10,000 women 1,500 will still miscarry.  To those women who had a normal pregnancy until they got their vaccine and then lost their pregnancy it is devastating, and I am sure some will question if the vaccine contributed.    The vaccine will not change the miscarriage rate, however. It is not causative.

Mr. Handley's approach has been to say that it just has to be the vaccines causing the autism.  It is important that the medical community listen to the patients, their parents, and those in the autism community.

Recently Alison Singer, the executive vice president of communications and awareness at Autism Speaks, one of the nation’s leading autism advocacy groups, announced her resignation, citing a difference of opinion of the organization’s policy on vaccine research. She is quoted as saying "dozens of credible scientific studies have exonerated vaccines as a cause of autism."  She goes on to say, "I believe we must devote limited funding to more promising avenues of autism research.”  She concludes with, "I disagree with the policy that says, ‘Despite what this study shows, more studies should be done.’  At some point, you have to say, ‘This question has been asked and answered and it’s time to move on.’  We need to be able to say, ‘Yes, we are now satisfied that the world is round."
The bottom line is that we all want what is best for children.  None of us want autism, or any other childhood diseases.  None of us would do anything on purpose to put our children at risk for the diseases.  Withholding vaccines places our children at known risk of severe disablility and deadly diseases.

If you want more information about the good science backing the proven safety and advantages of vaccines please visit the following websites.
http://www.vaccine.chop.edu
http://www.who.int/immunization/en/ 
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/
http://www.aap.org/healthtopics/Immunizations.cfm
 
Respectfully,

Dr. Random

p.s. Mr. Handly, if you would like to continue the discussion I would be happy to do so, but I will not continue to do so in this format of reply to all.  The hostility in your reply does nothing to further our knowledge, the scientific process, or help our children.
 
From: JB Handley
Date: September 9, 2009
To: Very large chain, including some of my relatives, and Dr. Random
Subject: Vaccines and autism
 
Dr. Random did not respond to a single one of my specific comments. Instead, he cited a bunch of organizations, everyone of which has their entire existence tethered to the vaccine program working in its current form, as proof that he must be right. It’s like citing the fact that Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds, and Lorriard all agree with you that cigarettes don’t cause lung cancer. What do we make of so many official people saying, and at times shouting, the same thing? The late Michael Crichton, himself an M.D., addressed this notion of a bunch of pedigreed people shouting the same lie, with a level of eloquence I could never summon:

"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had."

Autism Speaks is the largest autism organization in the country. It has a $50 million war chest and over 100 employees. Ms. Singer left because she was one of the only Autism Speaks employees who didn’t support looking more closely at vaccines and their correlation to autism. Her departure supports your point how? What about the point of view of the rest of the organization, the people who are still there? And, she was fired.
Dr. Random, if it hurts your feelings to be called ignorant, arrogant, and dismissive, perhaps next time don’t write an email that embodies those three adjectives. Just because you are yourself a pediatrician doesn’t give you the authority to speak about a topic that your email clearly demonstrates you don’t fully understand. Autism has now reached 1 in 100 kids, and your profession can’t come up with a single reason why. But, you are damn sure you know what doesn’t cause it?

In the interest of everyone’s time on this email, I promise not to write again. Warm regards,

J.B. Handley

J.B. Handley is Co-Founder of Generation Rescue and a founding contributor to Age of Autism.

Comments

[michael framson]

Dr. Random,

I would recommend you read, Julie Obradovic's analysis of the "19" studies. You claim there are "dozens". Is this an overstatement on your part?

Further, everyone of the 19 studies have serious flaws, and conducted by those with involvement in vaccines in one way or another.

It is only you and the entire vaccine medical industrial complex that elevate these biased, flawed, incomplete, irrelevant studies as if they were the word of God.

As Julie Obradovic has so well-articulated, "you would have to willfully ignore and purposefully twist reality in so many directions to come to that conclusion." God couldn't have stated it any clearer.

Give the autism community access to ALL the raw data from the VSD that the CDC restricts, and then we will see what science got it right or wrong.

[Teresa Conrick]

Dr. Random,

Your post did not answer any questons nor was it about autism. Again, it was accusatory and almost paranoid.

A very diligent mother and autism blogger asked a reporter recently about these autism-medical issues (following this comment)as the reporter had not done his homework before claiming in an article that vaccines were not the cause of autism. I post it here as a guide for you and other doctors to do your homework and "first do no harm".

Vaccines can harm and to perpetuate the myth that they do not is a lie and will have parents lose faith in the medical establishment. Safer vaccines, less vaccines and a schedule that resembles the vaccine program of the 1970's would keep "public health" safe while keeping children safe from an overload of toxins and viruses. Also, try not being an enemy to your patients and "customers" as health care should be a partnership.

Are you aware of these and how do you deny the science behind each of them?

* Vaccine induced encephalopathy in "autism" (the Poling and Hiatt cases)
* Vaccine induced acute disseminated encephalomyelitis in "autism" (The Banks case)
* Thimerosal induced mitochondrial dysfunction and its possible role in "mitochondrial autism"
* Mercury metabolism and glutathione depletion in those with "autism"
* The role of environmental mercury in "autism" incidence
* Autoimmune disorders and neuroinflamation in "autism"
* How vaccine adjuvants work, the autoimmune disorders they cause and how they could not possibly be causing the neuroinflamation found in those with regressive "autism"
* The role of the live rubella virus in "autism" causation both prenatally and at age one
* The administration of vaccines in combinations that are untested and to populations for which there is no safety data
* The VICP ruling that the Hepatitus B vaccine causes MS and how administration to infants in the first hours and days of life may be causing neuroimmune disorders
* Julie Gerberding's private document admitting to Congress that the CDC's only autism/thimerosal study was useless
* Dr. Gerberding's "vaccines do and do not cause autism" stance as stated on CNN
* The professional misconduct and conflicts of interests of those who in the scientific community and media industry who claim that "all the questions have been asked and answered".

[Kathy Blanco]

The children of India, Israel, Japan, and many other countries, are able to master complicated subjects in a language that's not native to them, because they are not on the Spectrum, and neurologically damaged from getting too many vaccines.
1) In Japan it's VOLUNTARY.
Because they wait to vaccinate, more wait longer there, and give less shots, and are famous for being geniuses.
2) In New Zealand it's VOLUNTARY. (called "Informed Consent")
3) Europe WAITS 6 MONTHS.
4) America DOESN'T WAIT, gives too many shots, too soon. America's educational system has been brought to it's knees, lowering what can be taught, because of the pervasive numbers of children in public schools today, on the end of the Spectrum.

PERSONALLY, I think no vaccine is safe...but interestingly just have learned that the DPT and it's other Dtap derivatives or the DIPTHERIA part of the shot, is the second most deadly bacteria known, to BOTULISM, so when they make the vaccine, they have to put int an ANTI TOXIN ingredient so it won't kill people...gee thanks guys...

The whole BREW, the toxins, the viruses, the bacteria, the contaminants, the adjuvents, ARE ALL UNSAFE....

Do we not get this yet, you can't make a vaccine green...but if your going to vaccinate, why is our country so stupid?

[hera]

Dr Random,
firstly I am glad your daughter made it through her vaccines safely; more unfortunately than some of those posting here can say.
And statistically your daughter is less likely to have autism than any son (or grandson) you may have.1 in 36 I think is the current odds of autism for a boy?

One thing you can say is that all those with vaccine injured children once thought exactly as you do.Dr Poling had no idea there was a risk to his daughter.Yet the government conceded that in that case, the vaccines did injure the child.

The case of Bradley Banks is also sad.He had seizures following his vaccine(DTP I think) The emergency room took the unusual step of immediately scheduling an MRI which actually showed the acute brain damage.He, also with an autism spectrum disorder, got government compensation.
The MMR contains live viruses and on the package insert it states that it is not safe to be given to those with compromised immune systems.Co-incidentally no doubt, the risk of autism increases with family history of autoimmune dysfunction (rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes etc; you can read about it in peer reviewed journals.)
Are you one of those rare doctors who check out whether the baby has immune system dysfunction before vaccinating ?? Or is there a medical reason why you feel that is not important?
Penicllin can have serious side effects, some people are even allergic to nice non toxic peanut butter, yet despite the existance of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Board, many in the medical community seem to believe that vaccines never have side effects.
I wonder why.

[Maggie]

Dr. Random sounds unstable and scary. Is here for real or somebody acting like he has a rabies infection. Actually, I'm serious about this, I've noticed many older men (about 50) having public rage fits lately.

[JB Handley]

Dr. Random:

The initial post you wrote, which triggered this entire back and forth was condescending and dismissive. But, don't take my word for it, re-read your own words:

"Same misinformation that has been circulating for years...The anti-vaccine movement is constantly changing their claims...The types of studies that they are suggesting now are not just impractical and unethical, but downright impossible...it is safer to do the shots than to skip them...If that weren’t the case why would I not only give the shots to my patients, but also to my own precious daughters?"

So, let's talk specifics:

- Please cite the unethical and impossible study our side is advocating
- Please cite the specific published research that convinced you vaccines don't play a role in autism

You have yet to engage in any specifics. Here's your chance.

JB Handley

[Sue M.]

"I think it is very cute that you all sit online telling each other how right you all are".

Cute, Dr. Random? Get a grip. Many of us do go outside of our comfort zone and discuss the topic outside of this little group. Having said that ... is there something wrong with an online support system of people who have similar beliefs? Keep getting your talking point nonsense from the AAP/CDC (your own little group). You are doing a spectacular job NOT figuring out why kids are so sick these days. It's really working well for you.

"Which side of this debate has closed their mind to the possibility that they could be wrong"?

Ah, yours! When thousands of parents have the same thing happen to their children post-vaccination... It wouldn't friggin' hurt to investigate that concern.

ps. Out of curiosity... Are you going to be destroying peoples' immune systems this year will thimerosal/squalene infested H1N1 flu vaccines this year? Never mind, seasonal flu shots... Your little friends at the CDC/AAP will tell you they are safe and effective no doubt. Sick.

[bek]

Hi Dr. Random. I'm glad to know you're reading this, I was hoping. Here's my earlier post:

"Dear Dr. Random,

I have 3 children, none with autism. I don't even have relatives or close friends that have children with autism. What I do have is a brain and I use it.

I do not have my children home-schooled. I excercise my right to use the exemption form in the public schools. I vaccinated each child NOT according to schedule, my 1st child starting at age 2 and then 1 or 2 shots at a time (didn't ever get ALL of those darn shots on the GOLDEN SCHEDULE.) The 2nd child I vaccinated less. (More research) The 3rd child only had 2 shots (more research) and we're done. Our next child will be UNVACCINATED.

There are many many people like me who question and don't rely soley on the words and wisdom of a physician. We listen to other parents and their wisdom, don't you know! Like the parents of my childrens' classmates that recount the days that their child was developing on schedule, suddenly struck by vaccines, then regressed. (To all of you THANK YOU for continuing to speak loudly!!!! You are all so BRAVE!!!!)

There are many who have not vaccinated their children at all. The vacc vs. unvacc study is NECESSARY. When the medical profession knows less than me - a stay at home Mom- about vaccines, that is a pretty good indication to avoid these vaccines. Many doctors and nurses don't even know that some vaccines have thimerosal in them (don't know ANY of their ingredients and don't care!!!!), they just know that in 1999 thimerosal was supposed to have been removed so they think it's completely out.

I have 3 children that will know to question vaccines. They will someday have children. My grandchildren, I'm guessing at least 6, will not be vaccinated according to some cacamaime schedule. And, thanks to me and all of you parents warning us of the dangers of vaccines, I have several friends and relatives (having babies) that are questioning the vaccines and the schedule.

WE ARE MANY. WE ARE NEVER NEVER NEVER GOING AWYAY. So, either the study gets done, or you will keep having this lack of trust. And this lack of trust does not begin and end with vaccines, but the whole of medicine.

Sincerely,
Random Mom Grateful to Age of Autism"

Good to hear from you that other doctors read this. I actually don't ONLY post with friends here that agree with me. I have written to my former pediatrician, written the public health dept. that I went to for immunizations, written letters to the editor in our local paper, and openly discuss this with people that agree and those that don't.

I find it very cute, your last line "Which side of this debate has closed their mind to the possibility that they could be wrong?" From my experience, many doctors are all about being right because you're so educated (arrogant), yet time and time and time again I hear from friends and loved ones about your mistakes. If it is "cute" when we "sit online telling eachother how right" we are, then what should we define the fact that you doctors tell the public at large how right you are (when you're not quite frequently). Someday, when your precious vaccines are found to be more faulty than already known, I hope you recount all of us here, speaking honestly and openly.

[Dr. Random]

I am Dr. Random.
I think it is very cute that you all sit online telling each other how right you all are. Only posting when your friends that agree with you. Many of us doctors do read Mr. Handley's posts. Which side of this debate has closed their mind to the possibility that they could be wrong?

[ElizaCassandra]

From "across the pond":- To S C Rankin and others.

If you want a really good read (read heavy sarcasm) please google "merck mmr vaccine" which should take you to Merck's website and the product insert (Material Safety Data Sheet) for the MMR 2. If it's got the coding "9739304" then you're reading what I'm reading. It's twelve pages long including just over two pages of references.

Of particular interest are the lists of Adverse Reactions on p.4 which include "Nervous System" - Encephalitis, encephalopathy; measles inclusion body encephalitis (MIBE) (see CONTRAINDICATIONS); subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE); Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS); febrile convulsions; afebrile convulsions or seizures; ataxia; polyneuritis; polyneuropathy; ocular palsies; paresthesia". All of these are rare reactions but, in my dictionary, "rare" has a different meaning to "never".

Does anyone out there have a copy of Merck's product insert for the original MMR? This can no longer be found on the internet. Could you please let Kim know and we'll arrange contact.