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.
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.
Posted by: michael framson | September 17, 2009 at 10:08 PM
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".
Posted by: Teresa Conrick | September 16, 2009 at 01:18 PM
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?
Posted by: Kathy Blanco | September 16, 2009 at 10:07 AM
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.
Posted by: hera | September 15, 2009 at 01:11 PM
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.
Posted by: Maggie | September 15, 2009 at 11:59 AM
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
Posted by: JB Handley | September 15, 2009 at 10:53 AM
"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.
Posted by: Sue M. | September 15, 2009 at 10:09 AM
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.
Posted by: bek | September 15, 2009 at 08:45 AM
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?
Posted by: Dr. Random | September 15, 2009 at 12:45 AM
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.
Posted by: ElizaCassandra | September 14, 2009 at 04:46 AM
SC is that just the plain old every year flu packet insert or did you get ahold of the H1N1 flu insert. They have not even got that vaccine made yet (I guessss) so it is just the regular flu.
My stubborn daughter says she is gettin the plain old flu vaccine this year, even though right now she has an inflammatory disease brought on by the Hib B.
Stubborn girl!
Posted by: Benedetta Stilwell | September 14, 2009 at 12:25 AM
From the package insert of the flu vaccine...
8 USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS
8.1 Pregnancy
Pregnancy Category C. Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with FLULAVAL. It is also not known whether FLULAVAL can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. FLULAVAL should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.
8.3 Nursing Mothers
It is not known whether FLULAVAL is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when FLULAVAL is administered to a nursing woman.
8.4 Pediatric Use
Safety and effectiveness of FLULAVAL in pediatric patients have not been established.
8.5 Geriatric Use
In the 2 clinical trials, there were 157 subjects who were ≥65 years of age and received FLULAVAL; 21 of these subjects were ≥75 years of age. Hemagglutination-inhibiting (HI) antibody responses were lower in geriatric subjects than younger subjects after administration of FLULAVAL. Solicited adverse events were similar in frequency to those reported in younger subjects (see ADVERSE REACTIONS [6]).
Safety and effectiveness have not been established for use in pediatric patients! Does the AAP read the package inserts of the stuff they inject in our children?
Here are the adverse reactions...but of course they are rare...
6.3 Postmarketing Experience
The following additional adverse events have been identified during postapproval use of FLULAVAL in Canada since 2001. Because these events are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their incidence rate or establish a causal relationship to vaccine exposure. Adverse events described here are included
7
because: a) they represent reactions which are known to occur following immunizations generally or influenza immunizations specifically; b) they are potentially serious; or c) the frequency of reporting.
Blood and lymphatic system disorders: Lymphadenopathy.
Eye disorders: Conjunctivitis, eye pain, photophobia.
Gastrointestinal disorders: Dysphagia, vomiting.
General disorders and administration site conditions: Chest pain, injection site inflammation, rigors, asthenia, injection site rash, influenza-like symptoms, abnormal gait, injection site bruising, injection site sterile abscess.
Immune system disorders: Allergic edema of the face, allergic edema of the mouth, anaphylaxis, allergic edema of the throat.
Infections and infestations: Pharyngitis, rhinitis, laryngitis, cellulitis.
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders: Muscle weakness, back pain, arthritis.
Nervous system disorders: Dizziness, paresthesia, hypoesthesia, hypokinesia, tremor, somnolence, syncope, Guillain-Barré syndrome, convulsions/seizures, facial or cranial nerve paralysis, encephalopathy, limb paralysis.
Psychiatric disorders: Insomnia.
Respiratory, thoracic, and mediastinal disorders: Dyspnea, dysphonia, bronchospasm, throat tightness.
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders: Urticaria, localized or generalized rash, pruritus, periorbital edema, sweating.
Vascular disorders: Flushing, pallor.
6.4 Adverse Events Associated with Influenza Vaccines
Anaphylaxis has been reported after administration of FLULAVAL. Although FLULAVAL contains only a limited quantity of egg protein, this protein can induce immediate hypersensitivity reactions among persons who have severe egg allergy. Allergic reactions include hives, angioedema, allergic asthma, and systemic anaphylaxis (see CONTRAINDICATIONS [4]).
The 1976 swine influenza vaccine was associated with an increased frequency of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). Evidence for a causal relation of GBS with subsequent vaccines prepared from other influenza viruses is unclear. If influenza vaccine does pose a risk, it is probably slightly more than 1 additional case/1 million persons vaccinated.
Neurological disorders temporally associated with influenza vaccination such as encephalopathy, optic neuritis/neuropathy, partial facial paralysis, and brachial plexus neuropathy have been reported.
Microscopic polyangitis (vasculitis) has been reported temporally associated with influenza vaccination.
8
And my favorite...
14 CLINICAL STUDIES
In 2 randomized, active-controlled trials of FLULAVAL, the immune responses, specifically HI antibody titers to each virus strain in the vaccine, were evaluated in sera obtained
10
21 days after administration of FLULAVAL. No controlled trials demonstrating a decrease in influenza disease after vaccination with FLULAVAL have been performed.
Does anybody read the packabe insert?
Posted by: SC Rankin | September 13, 2009 at 08:45 PM
I will never apologize for being "anti-vaccine." I'll wear that badge proudly. No one would berate a mother who turns anti-gun after losing her precious child to gun violence. And, incidentally, I didn't turn anti-vaccine until AFTER I witnessed my son's complete and total regression two days after his MMR/Varicella/multiple other, etc "catch-up" vaccines at the age of three.
Thank you, JB, for putting this less than eloquent doctor in his (her?) place. You are a hero in my book!
Posted by: Bonnie | September 13, 2009 at 05:24 PM
We've given up on using Pediatricians. Frankly, I don't find them useful for treating kids - most have ZERO curiosity about anything but are willing to prescribe drugs, antibiotics and vaccines at the drop of a hat.
We may be able to affect some change simply by electing to take our children to DOs or FNPs. We have a DO now as our primary care doc (necessary for medicaid stuff) and he's great. Much more open to what I have to say about my child rather than assuming anything. I wonder if the AAP would start to think differently if they started to lose business en masse and found their specialty to be suddenly obsolete.
Posted by: Amy in Idaho | September 13, 2009 at 02:28 PM
I was at the Autism Society of Minnesota's annual conference a couple years ago when some Univ. of MN dude who wrote some book on autism was there touting his expertise.
I opened his book to look up thimerosal and/or vaccines and found exactly one paragraph spouting the "dozens of studies".
I told him there should be a study here 1000 children could be picked to recieve the very same mercury containing vaccine schedule thte kids in the 90's got and 1000 kids who get zero vaccines, and follow up after 7 years.
His argument was not that it was unethical to NOT vaccinate, it was that with all the "unfair" publicity that thimerosal has gotten you would not get 1000 families to agree to allow thimerosal to be injected (250 mcgs in 18 mo's to be exact) into their babies.
I said "Well, thats no problem, I am sure you could find 1000 of your freinds and mercury loving Colleages who would think thimerosal is so safe to offer up your babies and grandbabies for the study! And if they ARE showing some concern, the study could be as a'"real world' scenario -just don't tell them - like no one told us! Pretty simple, eh?" If it it was not unethical then it can't be unethical now!
Posted by: Tim Kasemodel | September 13, 2009 at 11:15 AM
This is the same conversation every ped and GP will have with you.
I have a completely unvaxxed son-very healthy, walking and speaking at 10 months. My family from my husband's side is all medical and worship the holy church of vaccines.All thier children (I think we have 3 in the extended family)have developmental delays like you cannot believe- eczema, speech delays etc and are vaccinated to within an inch of their lives.
I do not even try to bring up the topic of vaccines and nobody dares discuss them with me ( I can be a very scary person when I want to be)but they wait to get my husband alone and try to indoctrine him on the benefits of not only the vaccination program but how it must be done as per schedule and how we must not question recommendations at all. If he brings up the rising Autism rate, he gets the standard - studies have proved no link - and such heresy is nothing short of blasphemy.
My son has not seen a ped since I fought with one and refused shots at his 2 month visit.
The indoctrination is so complete in the medical community- its impossible to argue with them. Their colossal egos always result in the arguments being worded exactly as doctor random.... " 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."- such a classic line - like we can serioulsy belive that doctor random has tried replicating the studies himself and concluding the same results ( especially love the use of the word countless- such an accurate scientific term!!!)
I has pretty much the same argument the other day with the family member GP- the one who's son didnt speak till three and get coke before 10 in the morning so that he can be on a proper sugar high all day -regarding organic food, which he felt was just as good as conventionally grown pesticide ridden food for developing young children.He sent me the same study done by the FSA 3 times.....
James E Carlson said it in his book Genocide - In medical school, you are not taught to think, you have to just follow protocal and prescribe medicine.
Posted by: supriya | September 13, 2009 at 07:45 AM
Wonderfully written, J.B.!
Posted by: Cathy Jameson | September 13, 2009 at 02:12 AM
JB. Love your style and you know that. Excellence. That's all I can say. Once again, and I expect no less from you in anything you write.
Regarding Big Brother... I have a few thoughts on that, only in my world it's called the black helo. Yep, your military mom here. I have ALWAYS said I would put my ass on the line for our kids (all kids not just military kids). Let them mark me. Let them take me or take me out. But if my voice is loud enough and I am speaking the truth as I know and have lived, then people will start asking questions.
Big Brother lives in fear. I chose to follow the path of No Fear (although I do joke about it in postings sometimes). I know what happened to my boys and my oldest daughter. They were all injured by vaccines to one degree or another. Once I realized what had really happened (it didn't take very long but my kids weren't vaccinated according to "the schedule"), I spoke up. I will continue to do so for as long as it takes, or as long as I am alive.
We ARE at war, and we must bring people to their senses. When you are at war, do you run and hide; or do you take the "enemy" down in a logical and well thought out manner. Let the CDC mark me. The military already has. I would take their survey gladly. And I would tell them what happened to my children, and also loudly tell them that my youngest is COMPLETELY unvaccinated and has been the HEALTHIEST of all of my children. No chronic diarrhea. No chronic ear infections. And on and on and on.
I am forever grateful to those who have had LOUD voices and some that I work with who have not only given me hope and resources, but those who enlightened me and gave me the extra umpf my strength needed to speak out and not fall prey to "Big Brother".
My oldest is playing football this year for the first time. It's football season. There's a saying with football that is pretty much commonly known. Football is 90% Heart, and 10% Skill. My thoughts: when you play football you gain more skill and knowledge, but where is your heart. In other words, where is your truth?
I am not afraid of some big brother, nor am I afraid of a black helo.
Thank you again JB! Awesome!
Posted by: Angela Warner Don't Be Afraid of the Black Helo (Big B) | September 12, 2009 at 11:44 PM
Autism Grandma, YOU ROCK! No, YOU ROCK... I mean it...and i meant what I said, vaccines are a crock, and as soon as we get that, the sooner the vaccinators will back off into their little corners and maybe, just maybe start to listen to us...what will hurt them is to boycott them, not clean them or slow them down, but that's just MY humble opinion...or is it the opinion of many many many many people?
Sooner or later, us Grandmas will tell you young moms the truth, after being in this autism bizwax for too many long years, with too many advocacy moments gone and passed, I have finally realized the key to protest, to always hit them where they are weakest, and that is, they are weak when they are not making money off or our children. Talk about a TEA PARTY that would be...hey, that's a good idea...an anti vaccine TEA PARTY, yeah, I like it...
Posted by: Kathy Blanco | September 12, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Jessica I understand the feeling of big brother! Creepy!
Posted by: Benedetta Stilwell | September 12, 2009 at 05:07 PM
"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." HA!!! I love your Righteous Indignation and the way you express this so perfectly. Thank You for all that you do in our behalf.
This information from your shared emails is an excellent way to demonstrate the ignorance and arrogance of the majority of medical doctors. Here are a few of this doctor's "utter bullshit" statements that really infuriate me:
A.) "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."
1.) Does not this brilliant doctor ever wonder why these 3 "Special Masters" opinions are now being overturned by the Federal Court?
2.) If this same exact evidence was presented to a jury of 12 logical people, the outcomes would have been entirely different, and all of the settlement funds would already have been awarded by traditional jury trials.
3.) The legal immunity from vaccine injuries and deaths was orchestrated by the pharmaceutical industy which has influenced Congress to give them a "hunting license with no limit, so it's open season on our deer children." [There are 2 full time pharmaceutical lobbyists for each congressman and many millions of dollars available for "influence" ie:Bribery]
4.) Increasing the vaccine schedule to 48 doses by age 6 has only been a Win Win for them and a Lose Lose for all of us: Autism, ADD, Asthma, Cancer, on and on...(Statistic Barbara Loe Fisher/NVIC)
B.) “The types of studies that they are suggesting now are not just impractical and unethical, but downright impossible.”
1.) "Impractical"? Oh really. To give a bunch of people some telephones and have them call unvaccinated families for anonymous surveys asking the simple question; "Do you have any autism in your family?" Oh I see; obviously highly impractical.
2.) "Unethical"? Yes it is just so terribly unethical to ask parents of unvaccinated children, if their children have autism, isn't it? If the parents agree to willingly answer this question there is no "invasion of privacy" or any other unethical action. How can this be logically categorized as "unethical" when research organizations, marketing companies, politicians and news media conduct phone surveys all the time?
The only unethical repercussion that I can see is if the government conducts this study, the database of information could be used to enforce mandatory vaccines. And since Big Pharma is going to make absolutely certain that this study is NEVER done by any government agencies, I vote to ditch the government entirely and put all of the efforts and resources into creating an independent study. With all of the fraud that is used to accomplish medical studies, I am scared to death that they would use these same techniques to create a study that produces their own calculated results, just like they did with the "14 Studies"!!!
3.) "Downright impossible"? The only reason that this vaccinated versus unvaccinated study is "downright impossible" is because the medical industry is causing it to be downright impossible. There are many other potential sources for this study whereby the vaccine industry has no power over. So why would we ever continue to hope that our Big Pharma controlled government is EVER going to do this??!!! In fact there are lots of good reasons why any other organizations should conduct this study, but please not the Big Pharma Government coalition. SHALL WE CONTINUE TO BEG FOR THE WOLVES TO BE IN CHARGE OF THE SHEEP???!!!
J.B. Handley, I agree with every statement you have made in this entire communication. And Kathy Blanco, every single word that you have stated about the vaccine fiasco here and on your other posts is right on. Vaccines are the single biggest SCAM that has ever been perpetrated against our innocent children in the so called "Health Care" system.
Posted by: Autism Grandma | September 12, 2009 at 02:34 PM
thanks again JB.
What we have from the endless alphabet of medical associations is the eternal ability to "shrug and play stupid" ...as they prepare to send thousands of children into the "Autism ditch" with their fall vaccine program.
Posted by: curtis | September 12, 2009 at 11:35 AM
Gee Whiz J.B. Handley you are good! I would not want to be on the receiving end of your writing or logic! Your points are very good and the doc couldn't take it!
Posted by: Benedetta Stilwell | September 12, 2009 at 09:11 AM
Jack - I received a phone call from this survey on a work line for some reason. I was going to be sure and call them and say very plainly that my son has NOT been vaccinated since he was 2 years old, and then the "Big Brother" is watching paranoia got to be and I decided not to. I did call the number once and realized it wasn't an automated call - I was going to have to wait on hold for who knows how long...
I wonder how many others have the same feeling, and would not even respond truthfully to such a survey in fear of being "marked" in some way by the CDC?
Posted by: Jessica | September 12, 2009 at 09:06 AM
Here are the latest numbers from the CDC on vaccination coverage.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5833a3.htm
It lists 76.1% as getting the full series (does not include flu or PCV) but says only
0.6% are completely unvaccinated.
This was actually done by telephone survey with something like a 63% response rate on the houses they called. I'd be willing to bet that the parents of completely unvaccinated children are more likely to hang up the phone when the CDC calls, so I believe it is pretty safe to say the 0.6% number is an underestimate.
Posted by: Jack | September 12, 2009 at 07:27 AM
Hey Zed,
I'd like to see this study and possible cite it in my book.
Can you please send me a message:
[email protected]
Thanks!
Posted by: Mor Sagmon | September 12, 2009 at 03:00 AM
correction "their words"
Posted by: Nora B. | September 12, 2009 at 02:17 AM
Today I was so sad as I opened up some picture books of my Grandson before he was brought down with autism by vaccines. He was so healthy and happy. Now at 3 we are fighting to recover him.
Give'em hell JB and make them all eat there words in shame!
Posted by: Nora B. | September 12, 2009 at 02:14 AM
Dr. Random needs to have a chat with Mayer Eisenstein M.D. J.D. M.P.H. and see what a lack of vaccines can do to the autism rate.
The public (that has been hit) does not believe in the authenticity of the so-called vaccine studies by the govt./ Big Pharma.
Posted by: "Autism via flu shot" mom | September 11, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Thank you for the kind post. No vaccines also translate into virtually no asthma,allergies,and more.
Mayer
Posted by: Mayer Eisenstein | September 12, 2009 at 01:56 AM
So... Apparently you have chosen to delete my comment, put it down as "error", and leave your $39M overestimate unacknowledged. Who is being perseverative now?
Posted by: David N. Brown | September 11, 2009 at 11:44 PM
2008 Biologics Recalls
Product Correction: Hepatitis B Surface Antigen AUSAB EIA-Abbott Laboratories
Recall of Rho(D) Immune Globulin (Human); Hyper RHO S/D, Mini-Dose-Talecris Biotherapeutics, Inc
Posted by: Heidi R | September 11, 2009 at 10:59 PM
2009 Biologics Recalls
Recall: Prevnar Pneumococcal 7-valent Conjugate Vaccine, Wyeth
Important Notification: FLUVIRIN (Influenza Virus Vaccine) Luer-Lok pre-filled syringes - Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics Limited
Posted by: Heidi R | September 11, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Seems to me there are quite a few DAN doctors who became DAN doctors because their OWN kids regressed after a vaccine, and they had to finally look into the whole deal - for REAL. They had to bypass the AAP's holy propaganda and the CDC's sacred CYA BS, and actually LOOK AT A STUDY, with their own eyes and see what the studies actually show. Or who knows? Maybe they finally picked up a vaccine package insert and read the ugly truth?
And suddenly, instead of respected medical professionals, they too became "crazy anti-vaccine, looking to place blame parents.
Dr. Random - Why exactly do you think the pharmaceutical companies wanted, lobbied so hard for, and NEEDED vaccine liability immunity? Have you ever LOOKED at the VAERS? Why do you think it exists?
Because vaccines HARM.
Posted by: Lisa | September 11, 2009 at 10:15 PM
Doctors are so dumb. Have they not read the Obamacare bill? They are going to get screwed so BAD and they are too dumb to even know it. They don't stand up for themselves or their patients, they deserve it. See, how effective divide and conquer is.
Posted by: Maggie | September 11, 2009 at 09:43 PM
J.B
I would very much like to believe that 5% of
the children are already unvaccinated, but is that so? or do you mean 5% are either unvaccinated or alternatively/selectively
vaccinated?
School exception rates will not tel you wether a child is completely unvaccinated or not, so I would like you to refer me to some sources.
Posted by: Guri | September 11, 2009 at 05:48 PM
Good God, I guess I am one of those anti vaccine nuts they are studying up on, who are armed with full knowledge of the hidden facts they neglected to share with the public...that is, most vaccines never have shown to ameliorate, prevent diseases, and that for the most part, they are initiators of the NEW DISEASES of our day. If that is anti vaccine, I am in that camp with marshmellows, gluten free graham crackers and chocolate bars. I will never be a vaccine lover, never enjoy what they have done to my children, and others, and I will shout from the highest rooftops if needs be, what they are about to do to another child...go on pediatricians, make my day...go tell me I am an irresponsbile tree hugging mom, who hasn't a clue how the body works, and that I should not worry what ingredients are in those darn things, and just shut up and be a good little sheeple...bah bah bah...NOT!!!!!
Posted by: Kathy Blanco | September 11, 2009 at 05:41 PM
Doctor Random lives in a world where all the science is in on the question of vaccines and autism. Exhaustive studies have come up blank. Incredibly, no has one has conflicts of interest or ulterior motives.
Most of all, autism isn't an issue to Random. A flood of sick children fill doctors' offices. These kids have all kinds of developmental problems that weren't around twenty-five years ago. The numbers keep increasing and no one can tell us why. Suddenly there's a generation of children who can't behave, can't learn, and can't communicate. They come with concomitant health problems like epilepsy, bowel disease, asthma, allergies and more. Doctors are told by the CDC and AAP that these kids are nothing new. They've always been around, we just called them something else. Thanks to the skill of modern doctors, one in every 100 kids has autism and one in every 6 has a learning problem like ADD and dyslexia.
Random cites the "dozens of studies looking for links between autism and vaccines" and he's convinced that there should be no controversy. Furthermore he claims, "In the medical community we listen to patients and use that information to ask the questions to help us understand diseases."
He provides links to learn more about how safe vaccines are.
http://www.vaccine.chop.edu
http://www.who.int/immunization/en/
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/
http://www.aap.org/healthtopics/Immunizations.cfm
Maybe the truly naïve or uninformed would believe his testimony, but those of us following this issue for years now on a daily basis, it's a sick joke.
Random expects us to be convinced by the information from CHOP (Children's Hospital of Philadelphia) along with the AAP and the CDC, yet the public is waking up to the fact that these places are owned and operated by the pharmaceutical industry.
CHOP, home of vaccine promoter Paul Offit, is a perfect example of the vaccine makers in control. In the Age of Autism story http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/voting-himself-rich-cdc-vaccine-adviser-made-29-million-or-more-after-using-role-to-create-market.html by Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill we read,
"Dr. Paul Offit of the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) took home a fortune of at least $29 million as part of a $182 million sale by CHOP of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine to Royalty Pharma in April of last year, according to an investigation by Age of Autism. Based on an analysis of current CHOP administrative policies, the amount of income distributed to Offit could be as high as $46 million."
In another story
http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/137596/the_merck_company_foundation_the_childrens_hospital_of_philadelphia_and/ we learn,
"The Hilleman Chair will accelerate the pace of vaccine research at the University of Pennsylvania. The Merck Company Foundation will provide a $1.5 million endowment, which will be held jointly by University of Pennsylvania and CHOP. CHOP will contribute $500,000 in matching funds, bringing the total endowment to $2 million."
Since Offit is now famous for saying that the immune system of a baby can stand 10,000 (and even 100,00) vaccines at once, Merck can look forward to endless numbers of new vaccines in collaboration with the U of PA and CHOP.
Random may think it's fine to have pharma money funding research, but the general public will have to wonder whose interests are really involved here.
In CBS News on AAP, Every Child by Two and Paul Offit's Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Promotion
http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2008/07/cbs-news-on-aap-every-child-by-two-and.html we hear about the millions of drug industry dollars being funneled into organizations like the AAP and Every Child by Two.
There is a revolving door between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the vaccine industry. Former head of the CDC, Julie Gerberding is a prefect example. On Ginger Taylor's blog,
http://www.wellsphere.com/autism-autism-spectrum-article/julie-gerberding-now-officially-a-paid-pharma-shill-withholding-her-conflicts-of-interest/747827 she writes,
"Gerberding left CDC in January at the request of the Obama administration and subsequently went to work for the global giant PR firm Edelman as an 'adviser on global health strategy.'
"And Edelman represents PHARMA. And AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer, Abbott Laboratories, and Johnson & Johnson.
"And Merck."
Both the FDA and the CDC have been criticized in Congressional committee meetings for their vast web of ties to the pharmaceutical industry..
http://www.vaccineinfo.net/issues/conflictofinterest/ConflictsOfInterestHearing.shtml
Random expects us to believe that doctors actually take parents seriously, yet he has no explanation for the thousands of children whose parents claim that their normally progressing children lost learned skills and regressed into autism following routine vaccinations. One in 100 children with autism still hasn't gotten the attention of the AAP or the CDC, yet these children are a very real crisis and they're not going away.
All the doctors and all the official organizations like the CDC and the AAP who denied this epidemic was happening will have to answer when the pubic demands answers. These damaged children represent bankrupting costs to the taxpayers and no one is warning anyone that they're coming. Right now, autism is a children's disorder. We simply don't have a significant adult population with autism. That will be changing and all those who failed to sound an alarm over autism will be remembered.
Anne Dachel
Media
Posted by: Anne McElroy Dachel | September 11, 2009 at 04:46 PM
Mr Brown's comment was posted in error. He has perseverated on this topic and was abusive to our staff in the past. If he has a blog or site, feel free to continue the discussion there. Not here. Thank you.
Posted by: Managing Editor | September 11, 2009 at 04:15 PM
Good God, the Sergeant Schultz approach-- "I see nothing! Nothing!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34ag4nkSh7Q
Is the AAP providing acting lessons to help peds feign exasperation?
Posted by: Gatogorra | September 11, 2009 at 03:53 PM
Ooops. 1% of all adults...
Cynthia Cournoyer
Posted by: Cynthia Cournoyer | September 11, 2009 at 03:35 PM
Don't leave out observation as part of the scientific method. Observe the video taped babies with typical behavior BEFORE the MMR. Observe vaccine-strain viruses in guts of autistic children. Observe the lack of autism in pockets of unvaccinated populations. Observe public school classrooms and schools OVERWHELMED by special education students, that by observation again, you can look at the structure of classrooms a generation ago and NOT FIND this problem.
Missed diagnosis? Where are the 10% of all adults with autism in our population? If we just "missed them" a generation ago, then go out and diagnose them today. You won't find 1 in 100; the adults will be closer to one in 1,000 or one in 10,000.
Thanks J.B. for all you do.
Cynthia Cournoyer
http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/06/science-vs-mothers-emotion-turn-a-lion-into-a-vegetarian.html
http://www.whataboutimmunizations.com/
Posted by: Cynthia Cournoyer | September 11, 2009 at 03:32 PM
Mor, after I heard about this study, it took me approximately a year to track it down. I finally received a copy from the Palmer Health Sciences Library. (originally published in the Journal of Chiropractic Research, Summer 1989). The abstract states that two hundred pediatricians and two hundred chiropractors were randomly selected and surveyed to determine what, if any, differences were to be found in the health status of their respective children as raised under the different health care models. The results were very interesting, and confirm the benefits of the chiropractic model of health care on the health status of children.
Posted by: Zed | September 11, 2009 at 03:30 PM
We should ask pediatricians to boycott the AAP until pharmaceutical ties have been severed. An agency that is supposed to advise its members of the latest knowledge of how to best promote health of children cannot accept funding from an industry that profits from the sickness and "lifelong" injuries of children.
Posted by: JenB | September 11, 2009 at 03:11 PM
Would Mr. Brown kindly post a link pertaining to Offit's profits?
On the other hand - whatever the number is - why would someone who profits from vaccines be part of the same system that mandates vaccines? Is that not an inherent conflict of interest?
This is where my skepticism originates - there (potential conflicts of interest) and in the area of informed consent.
Posted by: Angela | September 11, 2009 at 03:01 PM
Zed, I'd love to find Van Breda's study you're talking about.
Couldn't find it.
Please refer me to it!
Thanks!
Mor Sagmon
Posted by: Mor Sagmon | September 11, 2009 at 01:36 PM
I am constantly amazed at the inability of physicians to apply critical thinking skills in their practice of medicine. As some of you have pointed out,however, the system does not reward critical analysis, but instead rewards doctors who are rigid thinkers who will not deviate from the party line and who choose not to believe the evidence that their eyes can see. It seems to me that pediatricians , especially, would want to do research on the subject on their own, because they are the ones who are injecting the vaccines, and they will be the ones bearing the brunt of the blame when the TRUTH finally comes out. It will be the death knell for their profession. They should be screaming for more research i.e.the vaxed vs unvaxed study which is the only definitive way to prove whether vaccines are harmful or not. They took an oath "to first do no harm", yet they see the harm that is being done to the kids in their care and remain in denial. How can they close their eyes and ears to the pain and suffering of these kids and their families? How can they close their minds so they won't have to comprehend that their medical interventions ( vaccines) are the cause ? It reminds me of a line in the song "Blowin in the Wind." by Bob Dylan. " How many times can a man turn his head, and pretend that he just doesn't see?" "The answer, my friend, is blowin in the wind." Didn't these ped's ever hear of Semmelweis? Wasn't it arrogance and ignorance and dismissiveness that caused the medical profession to ignore and persecute him ? JB hit the nail right on the head with those 3 words.
Posted by: ct teacher | September 11, 2009 at 01:20 PM
I'd love to see JB's excellent semantical analysis published as a research article in a psychology journal.
That phrase "shifting the goal posts" is a pejorative defense by people unwilling to incorporate emerging scientific evidence into their limited mindset. An elaborate exercise in work avoidance.
Another flippant phrase used, "asked and answered," is deeply offensive. Asked? Yes, but using the wrong questions. Answered? Yes, but incorrectly.
Dr. Random doesn't realize that the Omnibus Autism Special Masters issued a statement indicating they didn't feel it was their job to determine whether vaccines cause autism. Which begs the question: If not them, then who? Who is accountable?
Dr. Random still says that "benefits are greater than risks" -- which translates into "risks exist, but I ignore them." Rephrased for the gentry, "If your shot injures you, then you're glued, screwed and tattooed."
Regarding name-calling: Sometimes it gets attention more quickly than tugging gently at another's shirtsleeve.
Posted by: nhokkanen | September 11, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Enormous restraint on your part, JB.
Re: Dr. Random's assertion that vaccines must be safe or he wouldn't give them to his precious daughters: According to a study done by Van Breda and Van Breda (1989)
5.6% of pediatricians reported that their own children were completely un-immunized.
They also reported that 31.1% had opted out of polio vaccine, although most (91.9%) had utilized MMR.
This study was obviously conducted prior to the tripling of childhood vaccine recommendations, but it's plausible that the percentage of unvaccinated pediatric offspring has increased since that time. (might be an interesting study).
I guess my point is that there is really no way for any of us to know if Dr. Random has actually followed the CDC mandates or not. What's good for his children might not be so good for his reputation...or his pocketbook.
Intrestingly, this pool of pediatricians stated that (besides antibiotics) 70.2% NEVER USED medications to treat their own kids. 11.8% stated that even antibiotic use had never been implemented.
If Dr. Random is under the illusion that all sensible medical doctors stick to the schedule, maybe he should sit down and have a serious talk with Jon Poling.
Posted by: Zed | September 11, 2009 at 12:20 PM
Dr. Random needs to have a chat with Mayer Eisenstein M.D. J.D. M.P.H. and see what a lack of vaccines can do to the autism rate.
The public (that has been hit) does not believe in the authenticity of the so-called vaccine studies by the govt./ Big Pharma.
Posted by: "Autism via flu shot" mom | September 11, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Thank you again JB for your efforts. You make your points very, very well.
The "Survey Science" that big pharma uses to support their "vaccine safety claims" is basically done in the same manner & format that the show "Family Feud" uses to secure the answers to their questions.
"Survey Said!"...Ding!...no problem here...
Posted by: curtis | September 11, 2009 at 11:13 AM
"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."
You should have added to the point "MISSED by their doctors"
Posted by: I812 | September 11, 2009 at 11:02 AM
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
Posted by: bek | September 11, 2009 at 10:41 AM
Well, that doctor has lost his way in his profession. He's truly not a healer. He is a preventer in more ways than one. Why did he go into the profession, me wonders.
Posted by: maggie | September 11, 2009 at 10:38 AM
Kim wrote:
"Have you noticed that the lone researcher to come out and speak about a vaccine that has safety issues is a WOMAN?"
Hey Kim--I think you are forgetting about Dr. Wakefield and his male coauthors who still haven't backed down from asking questions.
I suspect it is excruciatingly difficult for any researcher--man or woman--to buck the party line on this one, and in many ways I think it is probably far more difficult for a woman (than a man) to do this because women have a tendency to want to just "get along," to dislike fighting, and because of the prejudices against women researchers (and doctors) that do still exist in some circles.
I have great respect for all the researchers and doctors--both men and women--who have had the courage to ask questions and voice doubts. It can't be easy for any of them.
Posted by: Sue | September 11, 2009 at 10:34 AM
JB, you're a bulldog with a big brain and even bigger set of brass cajones! Great job! I get weary encountering doctors like this. Sometimes it's easier to go after lower-hanging fruit and convince those who were neutral on the subject. However it is valuable to educate the "educated" and kick them in their complacency. THANK YOU for this!
Posted by: Erik Nanstiel | September 11, 2009 at 10:23 AM
As I see it a big part of the problem lies with our education system. Doctors are the people who got good enough grades to get into medical school. How do students in most schools get good grades? By giving the "right" answers on the tests. What are the "right" answers? Whatever the teacher says is the "right" answer.
Our medical professionals are mostly people who are very good at memorizing and regurgitating information. In medical school the successful ones are those who could best memorize and regurgitate the names of the bones, the muscles, the names of diseases, their symptoms, the most widely used treatments, and the history of medicine as written by the AMA. Most are not the sort of people who are good at questioning, at understanding scientific methods, or evaluating the quality of research behind a paper in a "peer-reviewed" journal. Outside the box thinking and questioning are not the skills required to get A's on medical school exams. So, by and large, doctors are among society's best memorizers--period.
Another problem is that thinking outside the box can be a good way for a doctor to get into trouble if the treatment you try is not the widely applied "standard of care." The way the system works now, it really doesn't matter if your patient gets well, or gets worse. A doctor is safe from malpractice as long as their treatment is the standard method. Consequently, doctors are good at parroting whatever information they have been taught, and treating (or creating) health problems in whatever way the majority of other doctors do. Fail to give and promote vaccines and a patient dies of the flu or measles--you may be sued and lose your practice. Promote and inject vaccines and a patient dies of SIDS or gets autism (or ADHD, bipolar, asthma, Guillaine Barre, diabetes, or whatever)--no problem, you provided the accepted "standard of care" and no court can blame you or find fault with the "evidence based" (cough, cough) care you provided. Its not your fault the patient got worse--it was just the patient's faulty genetics.
Posted by: Sue | September 11, 2009 at 10:21 AM
I totally admire your persistence. Even the little amount of responding I do takes some time and effort. You rock.
Posted by: jen | September 11, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Thank you for sharing. I think it's funny that he says:
‘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."
Um, when it was first discovered that the Earth (not the world, right?) was indeed round, weren't the top scientists insisting it was flat? For some reason, I think Dr. Random would be one of the ones saying that it had been proven that the Earth was flat, and it was time to move on...
Posted by: Joanna | September 11, 2009 at 09:55 AM
This was awesome JB!!! You are a great at this and I so happy you advocate so hard for our kids. I can use this exchange in my little battles against brainwashed MD's.
btw..Stagmom....you crack me up!
Posted by: David | September 11, 2009 at 09:50 AM
I think I smell smoke ~
"We now possess a knowledge of nicotine far more extensive than exists in published scientific literature….... For good reasons the results have been kept at a high level of secrecy” February 13, 1962 British-American Tobacco Report, Trial Exhibit #11938
"Instituting a biological program today will be argued to be an implied admission that the company believes it has not in the past been doing all it could and should have been doing to find the scientific facts respecting tobacco use and health"
1965 memo to Cyril Hesko, vice president and general counsel for American Tobacco by attorney Janet Brown St. Paul Pioneer Press 02/11/98
"Members of this Research Department have studied in detail cigarette smoke composition. Some of these findings have been published. However, much data remains unpublished because they are concerned with carcinogenic and cocarcinogenic compounds. This raises an interesting question about the former compounds. If a tobacco company pled 'Not guilty' or 'Not proven' to the charge that cigarette smoke (or one of its constituents) is an etiological factor in the causation of lung cancer or some other disease, can the company justifiably assume the position that publication of data pertaining to cigarette smoke composition or physiologic properties should be withheld because such data might affect adversely the company's economic status when the company has already implied in its plea that no such etiologic effect exists?"
1962 RJR report by Alan. Rodgman, The Smoking and Health Problem - a critical and objective appraisal of. (Page 13) Trial Exhibit This document was discussed in the Minnesota trial on Jan. 29, 1998
Sound familiar??? Wouldn't yah just love to see the internal emails of the CDC??
Posted by: Tracy McDermott | September 11, 2009 at 09:15 AM
Thanks Mr. Handley!!
If it wasn't so serious it would be hilarious, it was like watching Einstien explain gravity to a two year old. I just wish I knew who this doctor was...
Keep up the good fight for all of us!
Posted by: Casey Ohlsson | September 11, 2009 at 09:03 AM
Wow! What an idiot. Dr. R sounds just like my ex-ped -ignorant.
Posted by: Holly M. | September 11, 2009 at 08:49 AM
JB,
It always continues to astonish me how autism parents are able to respond to the most inane comments, over and over again, with calm and reasoned responses.
If this issue had been tried like any other tort case, instead of in a Special Court, it would have been over decades ago.
Posted by: Robin Nemeth | September 11, 2009 at 08:34 AM
"If that weren’t the case why would I not only give the shots to my patients, but also to my own precious daughters?"
We'll see if he changes his tune when his precious daughters become paralyzed by gardisil or get guillain-barre from the H1N1 vaccine.
Posted by: Libby | September 11, 2009 at 08:23 AM
This is what they are taught in medical school. Not only in medical school but down in the first years of college. I had a class called "Communicable Diseases" and I heard these speeches for about a couple of weeks over and over again. It was the only thing that I ever heard my professor become passionate about. Never mind that a much older student who was attending school part time and worked as a nurse, sitting in the front row trying to tell him again and again that there were parents coming into the hospitals with some really scary, but believable tales!
Posted by: Benedetta Stilwell | September 11, 2009 at 08:18 AM
A former relative of mine - a pharmacist - used to routinely tell me that physicians know very little about drugs or their interactions (which is why they keep their PDR's handy in most offices). Most pharmacists will tell you to consult them if you have questions about drugs.
Why on earth would we expect harried pediatricians to keep up with the latest science and developments pertaining to vaccines? How many peds actually read the studies they cite? How many peds understand the chemistry and biology behind these formulations injected straight into children?
It is MUCH easier, more efficient (in the age of managed care) and probably less risky from a legal/liability standpoint, to "hawk" the party line from the CDC, WHO, AAP, etc. I'm not surprised by this particular ped's reaction. But at least parents may think twice. We parents DO have a choice - and the right to know the TRUE risks - and that's the pertinent point.
Posted by: Angela | September 11, 2009 at 08:09 AM
I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN!
THERE ARE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION WE MUST GO TO WAR!
OF COURSE I'LL RESPECT YOU IN THE MORNING!
Have you noticed that the lone researcher to come out and speak about a vaccine that has safety issues is a WOMAN?
Men protect their turf - it's in their genes. The AAP has been throwing pots of boiling oil on us parents for close to two decades.
Posted by: Stagmom | September 11, 2009 at 07:42 AM
Thanks J.B. for your sane stamina. Dr. Random is an ignorant person. The sweeping conclusions that he makes are parrot remarks. We hear them all the time and they are just ridiculous. It is just so frustrating to have to waste energy on educating a person who should be able to read, interpret, and draw a rationale conclusion.
Instead it is the opposite, and it is like the Twilight Zone - yes, vaccines can harm, have been shown to cause autism (encephalopathy, seizures, mitochondria dysfunction- these are actual terms used to describe "autism" in cases won in vaccine court, or in a concession without even going to court)- yet Dr. Ransom and so many like him ignore, deny, and use twisted logic to try and dismiss that vaccines can and do cause autism.
The fact that he quotes Alison Singer is just bizarre. She is a nothing, a nobody who had a job in an autism organization. She is not a scientist, nor is she an expert on autism. She gives every indication of being another person in this autism saga who is involved not due to genuine concern and alarm over autism but instead, personal advancement and the benefits (monetary and ego) that they give.
Reading this exchange is like a crazy Marx brothers scene or the infamous "Who's on First"- sanity vs stubborn ignorance. The same bullshit over and over. Do they know how stupid this makes them appear?
Posted by: Teresa Conrick | September 11, 2009 at 07:04 AM