Top Federal Panel Endorses Autism Research That Includes Vaccines - Dueling Press Releases Ensue
by David Kirby
On Tuesday, the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC), Washington's leading arbiter for directing federal funds to autism research, unanimously voted to recommend studies that include investigations into possible links between autism and environmental triggers - including vaccines - in certain subsets of children.
The IACC has not yet posted details on what was decided at the meeting, but two opposing autism organizations are already applauding either A) the inclusion of vaccine-autism studies in the federal research plan; or B) the rejection of such studies from the plan - depending on whose statement one reads.
On Wednesday, the nation's largest, most mainstream autism foundation, Autism Speaks, issued a press release under the headline: "IACC Includes Vaccine Research Objective In Strategic Plan For Autism Research - Autism Speaks is Encouraged by New Language Recommending Funding of Vaccine Research."
According to the release, Autism Speaks is pleased with the IACC, which it said "unanimously calls for studies to determine if there are sub-populations that are more susceptible to environmental exposures such as immune challenges related to naturally occurring infections, vaccines or underlying immune problems."
Autism Speaks has reason to support more research in this area. A new, small study in the Journal of Child Neurology shows that mitochondrial dysfunction, vaccine-realted fever, and autisitc regression may be related, in some cases.
Researchers looked at 28 children with ASD and mitochondrial disease and found that 17 of them (60.7%) had gone through autistic regression, and 12 of the regressive cases happened following fever. Among the 12 children who regressed after fever, a third of them had fever associated with vaccination, as was the case of Hannah Poling v. HHS.
Meanwhile, the Autism Speaks statement rightly noted that Congressional leaders who drafted the Combating Autism Act (CAA) of 2006, specifically said in the Colloquy to the bill that the IACC should use CAA funds to investigate "all possible causes of autism - including vaccines."
But Autism Speaks has a fledgling and Lilliputian rival, spawned in part from the defection of its former spokeswoman, Alison Singer, called the Autism Science Foundation (ASF), formed earlier this year. ASF was founded to study all potential causes of autism, except for vaccines, whose link to the disorder, the new group says, has been thoroughly debunked.
The Autism Science Foundation issued its own press release on the IACC vote, but curiously, instead of protesting the inclusion of vaccine-autism research into the recommendations, the group chose to deny that any such recommendations were actually made in the first place.
"Autism Science Foundation Agrees with Decision to Keep Vaccine Research Out of the IACC Autism Plan," the opposing press release said. "Alison Singer joined her colleagues on the IACC in voting to eliminate references in the autism strategic plan that could imply that vaccines cause autism or that call for additional vaccine research," the ASF release said.
And, Singer added: "Draft materials submitted to the IACC suggesting vaccines and/or vaccine components were implicated in autism were rejected by the committee because the IACC determined that they were not based on good science."
The IACC rejected vaccine-specific studies, but according to Singer, "Two initiatives in the plan, one old and one new, could allow for vaccines to be studied as part of larger environmental initiatives if circumstances warranted."
The IACC, she said, voted to keep previously approved language "calling for studies of environmental exposures outlined in the 2007 IOM report 'Autism and the Environment,' which could include vaccines." The panel also voted unanimously to "add a new objective to study whether or not there are certain subpopulations that are more susceptible to environmental exposures such as immune challenges (including naturally occurring infection, vaccines, and/or immune disorders)."
And, Singer added: "There is nothing in the plan that specifically calls for additional vaccine research because there are no data implicating vaccines as a possible cause of autism." She said that "research on environmental factors is important," without specifying what factors should be researched.
And there was this statement:
Singer added that some groups seem to be misinterpreting the inclusion of the word 'vaccines' in the list of examples of immune challenges as a mandate for vaccine research, and have issued misleading statements. 'Based on the votes taken yesterday, the IACC was clear in its position about autism and vaccines. But if there is public confusion about this new research objective then I will try to make sure we clarify it at our next meeting.
So, just to recap: The Federal Government's top autism panel has voted unanimously to support studies into autism and its possible environmental triggers - including vaccination. In turn, Autism Speaks has cheered "including vaccine research objectives in the IACC plan" while its supposed rival, ASF, has equally cheered that "vaccine research (is) out of the IACC autism plan."
Some parents I spoke with grudglingly accepted ASF's view of events, however. "IACC took out ALL proposed vaccine research studies; They specifically elimated A) a vax unvax study, B) an unvaxed or partially vaxed sibs study and C) an adjuvant study - all gone," one mother wrote. "They only left the word "vaccine" in a along laundry list of POTENTIAL future possible (translation never) study topics."
Whether the IACC has recommended specific vaccine-autism research, or environment-autism research, vaccines remain on the list of possible contributors to autistic regression as far as the US Government is concerned.
And that is just how Congressional leaders intended it to be.
David Kirby is author of Evidence of Harm, a founding contributor to Huffington Post and a contributor to Age of Autism. His next book, Animal Factory: The Looming Threat of Industrial Pig, Dairy, and Poultry Farms to Humans and the Environment will be released within the year and is available now for pre-order at Amazon.
Anyone up for some dark humor? I saw this recently and thought maybe we should be advocating for something new in Washington:
(attributed to Louis Conte)
"Take out all the mercury and aluminum now. The new vaccine preservative dujuor shall be plutonium.
Mercury is for wimps anyway.
Why go with the second most deadly substance on earth, when you can inject human infants and toddlers with the most deadly substance on earth? I will “bet the house” that plutonium kills bacteria way better than that old mercury based thimerisol ever could. Why make them autistic when you can make them glow?"
_
(By the way- to Kathy Blanco- I'm totally with on the retroviral particle theory...especially since ALL MMR shots are contaminated with ALV- Avian Leukosis Virus and God knows what else...) -Janet Sheehan
Posted by: Janet Sheehan | November 13, 2009 at 07:22 AM
Where are the studies that show the vaccines our kids were given "In the combination they were given" are safe??? God bless you all that work so hard for our kids.
Posted by: N | November 13, 2009 at 06:41 AM
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." ~ Benjamin Franklin
MAKE AUTISM STOP
Posted by: MAKE AUTISM STOP | November 13, 2009 at 12:07 AM
Thanks Lyn Redwood for your hard work.
Posted by: Lisa @ TACA | November 12, 2009 at 09:53 PM
All the IACC cares about is money. They don't care about our children. It looks like "we, the people" are going to have to get our own scientist, doctors and researchers to show these monsters that we are smarter than they want us to be. Looks like more and more people are catching on. What will their next lie be to try and convince people that vaccines "cannot possibly be harmful". Disgusting!!!
Posted by: Jenn | November 12, 2009 at 08:14 PM
UGGG...
Thank you Lyn Redwood for your work.
Posted by: science | November 12, 2009 at 08:04 PM
Are there people serving on the IACC that are supposed to be supporting vaccine research? If so..who are they..and...do they agree with the observations made by this one mother:
"IACC took out ALL proposed vaccine research studies; They specifically elimated A) a vax unvax study, B) an unvaxed or partially vaxed sibs study and C) an adjuvant study - all gone," one mother wrote. "They only left the word "vaccine" in a along laundry list of POTENTIAL future possible (translation never) study topics."
After all, from what I understand...the decisions regarding removal of specific vaccine research were approved "unanimously...right?
Shouldn't those IACC members supporting vaccine research explain what happened and not leave it to Dave and Katie to try and decipher the contrasting opinions between AS and ASF?
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | November 12, 2009 at 03:03 PM
I'm just amazed that I can read and write...I mean, as stupid as those teachers and professionals were 20-30 years ago, that they didn't see that SO MANY FREAKING CHILDREN were autistic...
You know...they are just diagnosing it better. Right? Right?
JB, I will bet they will pour millions into a study to link mold to autism. As long as they don't study vaccines, they can waste money on any other %^&%** thing they want to study.
Don't forget, those studies did show that the more mercury you get, the smarter you are....
There is no victory AS... Just more of the same garbage from the IACC
We will just keep fighting, because our kids and our future generations need us to.
Posted by: Judith | November 12, 2009 at 02:59 PM
Maybe these people should look at the fact that retroviral contamination in vaccines, first hitting the scene decades ago, has caused a seeding of autism in subsequent generations of children. (see www.vactruth.com and click on DAWN CRIMS ARTICLE) Yes it's true...vaccines affect your DNA and RNA. These retroviruses are capable of causing damage in utero, and out, and vaccines trigger it to awaken even more robbing the body of it's last stores of B and T Cell lymphocytes. We have sown our own undoing. We have manipulated the immune system so that it no longer functions as designed. We no longer have an immune system that knows self cells and foreign cells. The bovine serum, the chicken, the human aborted...all have influenced our dna to present. No wonder, we have growing epidemics of minimal to large brain damage by neutropic viruses and toxins to boot. No wonder we have cancers on the increase.
No wonder we have stupid pseudo concerned committees, stirring up ire in those who know what has caused this...and no wonder I can plainly, and without question, if I had the opportunity, to spit on their faces and then their shoes. I have no more tolerance for these people, than hitler/terrorists whanabees themselves.
They know these things...and will not share. They will till their dying days, defend their stock options over our children. God help them in the next life...where they will pay for the undoing of mankind.
Posted by: Kathy Blanco | November 12, 2009 at 01:44 PM
My concerns in August 2008:
http://autism.freedomblogging.com/2008/08/14/an-open-letter-to-thomas-insel-of-nimh/152/
Posted by: Kelli Ann Davis | November 12, 2009 at 01:42 PM
Not surprising, but interesting. At the same time that the global public is overwhelmingly rejecting the H1N1 vaccine, a government committee is defiantly and rather proudly refusing to investigate vaccine and adjuvant safety. They are too wrapped up in their Dilbertian committee to see that their deliberate refusal to act has serious consequences, even above and beyond the destruction of a generation of children. No, you pathetic cog, it should NOT be up to the "scientists" what to study. We've waited for more than ten years, and they've done nothing and are not one iota closer to finding the cause or cure for autism. When the public that is the audience for your product is rejecting that product, and rightfully demanding the safety tests that your scientists have never conducted, you should do everything in your power to provide that audience with the safety information they are demanding. These people are so stupid it depresses me.
Posted by: Garbo | November 12, 2009 at 11:29 AM
A couple of things.
1. Great work, David.
2. I have never expected anything positive to come from the IACC. Nothing ever will. It's sole purpose is to pacify the masses with false attention to a cause and a whole lot of paper shuffling. It's bullshit in its purest form.
3. Autism Speaks "cheered" because those *@$!x know that they have been losing donations rapidly, and it's NOT simply because of the economy. They KNOW parents are becoming more and more aware of vaccine injury, and they're not taking the lip service they used to. I can respect ASF, because they cheered the truth. What Autism Speaks did is almost like what the power company did in the movie "Erin Brockovich" when they said "chromium is good for you".
4. What next? Any suggestions for the real autism organizations, and how they can help move this forward? Specifically the vaxed/unvaxed study? The NVIC has already started raising money to do it themselves. Should we give up on chasing the government to do it, and instead turn up the heat on DC to provide the NVIC with a sizable grant to perform the study?
5. The IACC is a farce. It has about as much credibility to me as ACIP. The few members that aren't mired in corruption will never be able to make a difference, and if you ask me, should simply walk away from the table.
Posted by: Autistic Living | November 12, 2009 at 11:23 AM
bensmyson,
Good grief! You are right Singer did say those things...
Yeah with her record as AS... don't think she's someone we want make any kind of decision for us. Sheesh.
Posted by: Casey Ohlsson | November 12, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Lots of depressing news this morning....This and the HBOT study(saying it doesnt work!). Hopefully NAA conference gives me something to cheer up!
The government just isnt going to solve our problems. We need a different route.
Posted by: David | November 12, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Good Gosh!
It has never been the government that has moved this country forward!
It has been the people!
Those that work for the government are those that are good a reguriatating what they have learned.
On the cognitive scale of things they are intelligent but they are not creative.
That is the difference between people in government and the American People.
Posted by: Benedetta | November 12, 2009 at 10:21 AM
I'm curious, isn't Ms. Singer the woman that said on camera she had fantasies of killing her child? Was she wanting to kill herself as well or just the "problem"?
My wife's biggest misery is the fact that she signed the waiver allowing Ben to be vaccinated. It is this false sense of guilt that plagues her more than anything. She is a bright woman and said it would be much easier for her to believe that the vaccines didn't injure Ben. But she is also an extremely strong woman and KNOWS that the vaccines took her son, she knew it before I did.
I do not know Ms. Singer, vaguely remember the documentary and her words and emotions. What I do know is that someone that has had such fantasies does not need to have the position of authority that makes powerful decisions, decisions that may be contaminated with emotional or even psychotic prejudices.
If Ms. Singer did in fact experience such suicidal and homicidal fantasies and has refused to address them in the same public manner that she broadcast them, she needs to step down. I feel like we need to know she is sane enough to sit where she sits.
I dont pretend that most of us have not experienced deep dark depressions, sadness, loneliness, guilt, or self destructive behaviors (over eating, not eating, drinking, drugs, addictions) at one period or another in our attempts to rescue our children but very few of us would ever consider killing our children and very few of those parents would ever feel comfortable enough with their perverse fantasies to admit it, much less admit it in front of your child, in front of your coworkers, in front of the world unless, in my opinion, you are crazy. I want to know Ms. Singer is not crazy, and is not letting her guilt or whatever taint the decisions of the IACC.
Posted by: bensmyson | November 12, 2009 at 09:21 AM
"IACC took out ALL proposed vaccine research studies; They specifically elimated A) a vax unvax study, B) an unvaxed or partially vaxed sibs study and C) an adjuvant study - all gone," one mother wrote. "They only left the word "vaccine" in a along laundry list of POTENTIAL future possible (translation never) study topics."
This sounds about right.
Posted by: MB | November 12, 2009 at 08:53 AM
I listened to the Panel 3 conference call that within an hour removed all references to vaccines. Taking giant step backwards after a year of writing plan revisions. It was the saddest conference call I had been on. I did not have the heart to take the day off to listen to the entire meeting. IMO Alison Singer would take us back to the days of refrigerator mothers
Posted by: Tanners Dad | November 12, 2009 at 08:11 AM
In my study of one,whom has been seen by metabolic specialist 8 years ago. I found that once I stopped challanging his metabolic stores with vaccine he suffered no further regressions..
Posted by: no further regression | November 12, 2009 at 07:51 AM
I actually listned to that miserable 8 hr meeting. With the exception of Lyn Redwood, IACC was uniformly hostile to the mere idea of vaccine research.
It was noted that 99% of the thousands of e-mails were pro vax research, Cindy Lawler (as a non autism expert and non parent of an affected child)sinffed and said, "it is up to the SCIENTISTS, not the public to decide this." Lawler has clearly deluded herself in believing she is some kind of autism expert. I have spent spent many, many painful hrs listening to the convoluted inner workings of the Lawler brain and find Cindy cannot grasp the smallest details of most biomedical research. She hems and haws, talks in circles- it's truly awful.
Finally I am aghast that AS sees this pathetic plan as any kind of victory. Did they even listen? I mean the word "vaccine" appears in a long laundry list of possible, potential fture topics of study (translation never going to happen). Lyn fought for the word vax to stay- otherwise it would have been specifically ruled out.
Please, this was a travesty, not a victory.
Posted by: Katie Wright | November 12, 2009 at 06:42 AM
I guess the press releases at least explain how they were able to reach an unanimous vote. Some believe or hope this language means one thing. Others seem well-assured this means another. Where has this assurance come from?
Posted by: JenB | November 12, 2009 at 03:20 AM
Ms singer should have her basement tested for mold, it's a potent neurotoxin. JB
Posted by: JB | November 12, 2009 at 12:44 AM