Not to mention Steven Salzberg in Forbes 'Congress holds an anti-vaccine hearing'

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2012/12/03/congress-holds-an-anti-vaccination-hearing/

"...it is clear that SafeMinds denied "changing the topic of the hearing away from vaccines/autism".

I see no denial anywhere in your copy and paste. Please cite the line.

"it is a shame to call this amazing event a failure."

I never said that.

"I have no idea what is going on behind the scenes..."

That is obvious.

"Tim Bolen's tone and approach are very divisive."

You don't seem troubled by Bolen's report that Blaxill attempted to censor an Autism One speaker by withdrawing a $9000 donation. But you object to the "tone" in which Bolen reported this and other facts?

"I don't think it makes sense to say or imply that Brian Hooker had the power to singlehandedly cause this hearing to take place..."

I never said he did it singlehandedly. I said it wouldn't have happened without him, and I think the evidence supports that. He was the primary force behind this hearing being scheduled on the original topic.

"She has to put up LiLady, Autism Newsbeat and all the rest and she does it and always manages to get in the last few blogs.....Does she have to do the same thing at home base?"

If she visits those blogs, then she should know that they are siding with SafeMinds and Blaxill in this controversy. (Hint: You're supposed to want Orac etc. AGAINST you.) If Twyla is responding to skeptics, I applaud her efforts, but I hope her comments are better informed and more precise than they are here.

Madvocate, you say that SafeMinds/Blaxill do not deny changing the topic of the hearing away from vaccines/autism, but actually in their statement SafeMinds does deny this.

http://www.safeminds.org/news/safeminds-and-house-committee.html

"Over the years, SafeMinds has established a professional relationship with the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (COGR) due to its ongoing interest in autism. Since 2000, six SafeMinds board members have testified before COGR, its precursors or subcommittees, in hearings regarding mercury, vaccines and the autism epidemic. The most recent hearing took place on November 29, 2012.

"Brian [Hooker] spoke to us directly and expressed his concern that we maneuvered to block him from testifying, which we did not do... Our contact there... concurred with our internal view of events that at no time did SafeMinds misrepresent our organizational affiliations to congressional staff, nor did we or any of our affiliates seek the recision of Brian Hooker’s invitation to testify before the COGR.

"Jake [Crosby] has criticized us for going light on the vaccine issue. Mark covered vaccines in his written testimony, hammered the government on its denial of the epidemic in his oral testimony and reintroduced these issues pointedly during the questioning by Committee members, calling them the 'Great Unmentionables, vaccines and mercury, as causation factors.' (See the entire public panel segment for Mark's words during testimony and Q&A here. Time segment 3:11:55). Committee members had been briefed by many members of the community including SafeMinds and Brian, so they knew what to ask. Members did an incredible job and we thank them.

"In addition, SafeMinds submitted extensive written testimony to the committee for those who wish to judge whether we ignored vaccines. These efforts included the distribution of Mark Blaxill and Dan Olmsted’s book Age of Autism to committee members.

"SafeMinds also organized a Congressional briefing on May 18, 2012 to engage Congress and educate members on the problems with the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. This briefing highlighted the Unanswered Questions Report which links government-compensated vaccine injuries and autism, and it called for Congressional Oversight hearings. For this briefing, we chose as presenters Clifford Shoemaker, the Chairman of the Vaccine Injured Petitioners’ Bar Association, Dr. Peter Meyer who has written an exhaustive review of the inherent flaws of the NVICP, several parents of victims and Louis Conte, a long-time criminal justice professional, co-author of the paper and a Board member of EBCALA..."

Clearly SafeMinds did play a huge role in preparing the committee meetings. In addition, at the beginning of his testimony Mark said that he was submitting testimonials of 300 families. SafeMinds is not afraid of talking about vaccines.

In the various parts of his testimony, Mark talks about how real the autism increase is, how CDC has covered up research, how vaccines and mercury are prime suspects, how the majority of research on mercury is on the side of a link between mercury and autism, how genetics cannot explain the huge increase, how the agencies are not doing their job and we need congress' help, and more.

Again, I have no first-hand knowledge of what went on behind the scenes, but it is clear that SafeMinds denied "changing the topic of the hearing away from vaccines/autism".

@ various comments directed to me from SafeMinds/Mark Blaxill supporters

You call those of us who disagree with you "divisive" and accuse us of "infighting," which implies that you represent the majority opinion in the vaccine injury/autism community. But you do not. You represent a small group that is run by an Autism Speaks board member. All you have to do is read the comments under articles critical of SafeMinds to know that you do not represent the majority opinion in our community. That said, I would never tell you to agree with me because you're being "divisive." What a poor reason to ask anyone to change their mind.

Feel free to stand behind Mark "I-don't-have-a-lot-of-hope" Blaxill. And I will find someone to stand behind who doesn't threaten Autism One with pulling his $9,000 donation to them unless they fire a speaker whom he doesn't like. (I don't support people who use their money to try to censor other people. If you do, that's your choice.)

I happen to believe that changing the topic of the hearing away from vaccines/autism (which SafeMinds/Blaxill do not deny doing) was one of the worst mistakes anyone representing our community has ever made. I also believe apologies are in order, from them to us. But I won't hold my breath.

re: "(2) You don't respect each other's abilities or opinions, (3) you don't work together, (4) You don't help each other"
That's funny, Tim, because you don't seem to be respecting anybody's abilities or opinions here, and you don't seem to want to help anyone or work together - you simply seem to want to grandstand, throw your weight around, criticize, be the big boss.

re: "All together now, let's say the "V" word. Say it out loud. Go open your front door and yell it out into the street. Quit letting Thomas Insel and Paul Offit decide what words you can utter."
People constantly talk about and write about vaccines. There's not fear of saying the "v" word. You're focussing on five minutes of testimony by Mark Blaxill and ignoring his many years of work and advocacy. And ignoring that after that in the Congressional hearing he did talk about vaccines. If you want to bring the autism community together, why are you alienating a large part of that community with your hostile criticism of someone's decisions regarding the best strategy? I have no idea whether Mark was right or wrong, what has gone on behind the scenes, what is going on now, what is being planned for the future, but I do know that there are often differences of opinion on the best approach, and I give Mark the benefit of the doubt because of his track record of service to our community.

And overall, that was an absolutely amazing hearing. I have never seen anything like the congresspeople questioning those two agency representatives. How the panelists were chosen, I don't know. But that doesn't change the breakthrough nature of the rest of the hearing.

Your approach, TIm, does not build community or teamwork. You speak of uniting all the various groups, yet your approach seems to be "my way or the highway". You can't unite large groups with an attitude of disrespecting individual's decisions. You can't unite large groups with an attitude of only respecting those who hold the same position as you. And you can't unite with meanness and hostility.

Furthermore, one could ask similar questions to you: Have you succeeded in changing mainstream medicine? What have you accomplished?

Jim: Somebody, at some time, has to say it. What the Autism community is doing IS NOT WORKING.

So, I'm saying it.

This isn't about hurt feelings. This is about solving the Autism problem as quickly as possible.

nhokkanen: I have no client in this argument. No one is paying me to attempt to solve this problem. We are not living in Pollyannaville. You cannot continue the attitude that everything is fine. It's NOT fine.

You don't want to hear this, but: From what we see from over here in the Health Freedom Movementis that (1) the Autism community simply lacks organizational skills, (2) You don't respect each other's abilities or opinions, (3) you don't work together, (4) You don't help each other, (5) you have no communications network, and (6) you certainly have no General Plan - and you don't know how to make one.

It is a time to change strategy and tactics. Period.

All together now, let's say the "V" word. Say it out loud. Go open your front door and yell it out into the street. Quit letting Thomas Insel and Paul Offit decide what words you can utter.

Tim Bolen
www.bolenreport.com

The ed assistant in me wants to say, "T" (timeout!). Enough nasty comments. I agree with what Benedetta said about everyone having a role to play.
Let's think back to that important phrase, "the problem is the problem." The bad guys are the bad guys.

"Then Batra made a great argument for the inclusion a sensory integration expert/ OT on the treatment team. Anshu emphasized that parents are impatient for treatment research that encompasses issues beyond early intervention and ABA. Terrific idea I thought! But nothing happened because Dr. Batra did not have the name anyone to nominate. So frustrating."

"Too much time was wasted by IACC members discussing, as if for the first time, the issues Wendy Fournier and Lori McIlwain brought forward 2 years ago."

"The IACC office maintains meticulous records of past IACC committees, public comments and Strategic Plans."

It might help to create and make public a detailed analysis of all past IACC meetings. Specifically, get the records and make a chart. For each meeting list the issues raised, the community members present and their contributions, and then make columns: in one column the participant's name, in the next column the issue/problem that the participant raised or acknowledged, in the next column what solution/action the participant proposed (if any), in the next column what action was taken and by whom, and finally, in the last column, the IACC's evaluation of the effectiveness/outcome of the action and whether the action/results were evaluated/carried forward for further problem resolution in future meetings.

This would show in black and white exactly what has transpired, whether there has been any productivity and continuity, who is trying to get it done and who is there for decoration.

Twyla states:- "I had gone through this (Congress)hearing and made notes because I thought this would be useful"

Thank you Twyla. I found this very useful and enlightening and have copied and saved your notes. Some other commenters on this thread have told us about links etc, but there is no substitute for transcripts. Thank you for taking the time to 'scribe' these important comments, concerns and representations.

Some are saying that SafeMinds co-opted the topic of this hearing, preventing a discussion of vaccines and autism. For instance after I wrote, "The hearing was mostly about vaccines and autism," Madvocate responded, "Twyla, maybe in a parallel universe. Not in the one I inhabit. It's obvious you've rewritten history to suit your agenda. Enjoy."

Here are some excerpts from this hearing. I had gone through this hearing and made notes because I thought this would be useful in the face of vaccine defenders. Who would've thought I'd be sharing these in the face of vaccine critics. These are not exact transcriptions, but are generally accurate.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/309672-1

00:38:27 Rep. Darrell Issa (R–CA) asks good questions (5 min. 30 seconds)
• Did autism predate vaccines? In other words, was there autism before there were vaccines?
• Is it fair to say that today the state of science is that autism has multiple causes?
• Is autism a group of afflictions with multiple causes, forms of treatment, prevention?
• Is it fair to say that we can rule nothing out in absolute terms as a contributor? Mercury in the air? Vaccines? We can rule nothing out including causes we have not yet looked at?

00:44:00 Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) In talking with the folks behind them there seems to be frustration about coordination of efforts, research. (“I wish you could see them behind you – there’s frustration!”) I want us to move towards making a difference. What can we do to help the folks behind you get to the coordination, the kind of things they’re looking for, to have an impact?

00:50:40 Rep. Dan Burton (R-Indiana) shows a video from the University of Calgary on the effects of mercury on nerve cells (4 min. 30 seconds) “I know there’s many causes of autism, but the one we’re talking about today is mercury in vaccines and in the environment.” “It is worse than an epidemic. It is an absolute disaster.” “How can anyone look at this and see the actual brain cells deteriorating and say that mercury does not have an impact on neurological problems?” “My grandson got 9 shots in one day and it turned him into a horrible situation, where we found him banging his head against the wall, unable to use the bathroom…” “I would beg you to take mercury out of all vaccines…”

01:04:36 Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Arizona), who is a dentist, talks about his family history of celiac disease, how much his autistic nephew benefited from a GFCF diet, and what a shame it is that there is not more study of dietary intervention. “We should be focusing on the family; they’re telling you what’s going on... We’ve got researchers who don’t listen to them.” (5 minutes)

01:10:10 Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) talks some more about mercury in the environment. (5 min. 35 seconds)

01:15:46 Rep. Patrick Meehan (R-Pennsylvania) asks a bunch of hard hitting questions and gets woefully inadequate responses from the to govt officials. For example:
“Have you ever seen anything in which there has been such a dramatic progression in the incidence of diagnosis in a 6 year period, in your experience at the CDC?” Dr. Boyle says they look at trends blah blah blah, and Rep. Meehan follows up, “Has anything had a trend with this kind of accelerating pace?”
He asks why this is a referred to us a “public health concern” rather than a “public health crisis”, and says that this should be on the front burner of CDC every day. Dr. Boyle says that this is very important to the CDC and they are monitoring it. Rep. Meehan asks about accountability and asks who is in charge. Dr. Guttmacher says that the IACC comes up with a plan every year. Rep. Meehan asks who wakes up every morning and says “This is my priority. I am going to drive this train and make sure something happens today”? Rep. Meehan wants a “comprehensive national strategy with real accountability and timelines” and “dynamism in which emerging evidence is used” and a “real focus on a critical path”. Dr. G says they’ve seen an “acceleration in progress”. (6 min. 14 seconds)

1:22:20 Rep. John Tierney (D-Massachusetts) asks Dr. Boyle why thimerosal hasn’t been removed from all vaccines – is still used in multi-dose vials of flu vaccines. Dr. Boyle says she’s “not a vaccine expert” but her understanding is that multi-dose vials “are needed in certain contexts from an international or global perspective” and she’ll get back to him after confirming that. He asks about prevalence data in other countries and what is done to try to determine why there are different rates, and Dr. Boyle talks about a study of families. (5 min. 13 seconds)

01:38:53 Rep. Bill Posey (R-Florida) – one of the very best – don’t miss it!! Asks so many great questions that I can’t list them all, and he doesn't accept evasive answers.
• Congressman Weldon was a well respected medical doctor. Gleaned from him some certainty that he felt thimerosal in vaccines was definitely a contributing factor to autism.
• Recently read an article which said that until we introduced vaccines to Africa the African children were autism-free.
• Has the CDC done a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children?
• Do you believe additional study would provide useful data in assessing the safety of childhood vaccines?
• So clearly definitely unequivocally you have studied vaccinated vs. unvaccinated? (um, no)
• Stop right there, that was the meaning of my question, you’ve wasted two minutes of my time.
• What steps has the CDC undertaken to ensure the integrity of the research that was performed by Dr. Thorsen who as you know has been indicted for misconduct and misallocation of resources?
• Have you gone back to validate the variety of studies he participated in? I mean you know this guy is a humongous scumbag, one of the most wanted men on earth, and you relied on him for data to determine whether thimerosal had a negative effect?
• You mentioned that you only have thimerosal in multi-dose vials? Why is that?
• Because I would think that if they took it out of the other vials there was a reason. How many multi-dose vials are there?
• I’ve seen a chart that ranks the longevity of the 30 nations with the best mortality rates in the world… We didn’t even make the top 30 – we’re the 34th, and ironically we require more vaccinations than any other country that’s healthier and has a lower mortality rate than us.
• Nobody’s talking about/against vaccines. We’re talking about thimerosal in vaccines and multiple bomb blast of vaccinations in a short period of time…

01:50:10 Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) says that it hurts the effort when people keep saying that the increase is due to better diagnosis, such as Dr. G. quoted in a NYT article saying that “the jury is still out”. Rep. Smith chairs the African Global Health and Human Rights Committee Foreign Affairs and African committee and has worked on the Foreign Affairs committee for many years, and says that they have never seen such a prevalence spike in Africa as they have seen during the past 15 years [during a time of more and more vaccines being distributed in Africa – many of which still contain mercury in the preservative thimerosal]. Asks why NJ has high autism rates, also asks about gut flora, and suggests having an office devoted to autism. (7 minutes)

01:57:10 Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) – another one of the very best.
• Rep. Maloney calls autism a “growing epidemic”.
• Used to be 1 in 10,000, now 1 in 88. Asks why, and says, “And I don’t want to hear better detection. We have better detection, but detection would not account for a jump from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 88 – that is a huge, huge, huge jump. What other factors could be part of making that happen besides better detection?”
• Are you looking at vaccinations? Is that part of your studies?
• Are you having a study on vaccinations – and the fact that they’re cramming them down and having kids have 9 at one time? Do you have any studies on vaccinations?
• I must have had 50 different parents write me or come to me and say: I had a healthy child, then they had 10, 9, 6, vaccinations at one time and that child changed overnight and was knocking their head on a wall, was a changed child. In fact I had a family in my office today, and the mother broke down crying, she said my child was wonderful, bright, precocious, talking - she took those vaccinations and the child became incredibly sick and has never recovered.
• Now it used to be – my child never got more than three vaccines at a time. In the state of NY children are recommended to get 6 shots every two months. Why does the schedule require so many shots in such a short period of time? Why do you have to cram 9, 6 at one time when the verbal evidence seems so strong from so many people that they had a healthy child until they got vaccinated. You gotta just listen… Verbal evidence coming from parents – I had a normal child, gave them vaccinations, and then they came down with autism.
• Why do we have to have 9 or 6 vaccines every two months instead of spacing them over years, and wait for the scientific evidence?

02:03:05 Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Florida) asks whether children get 40 vaccines today. Dr. Boyle and Dr. G. don’t know! Rep. Buchanan asks why we are getting so many more shots than in other countries, and than 40 years ago. Have we looked at the impact of these combinations of vaccines? Are we over-vaccinating our children? 1000% increase in autism during period when # of vaccines increased from 6 to 40. Talks about costs of autism – 2.3 million per person cost of life-time care, 137 billion per year for the country? Dr G “doesn’t have the data to agree or disagree” with these figures, just knows it’s a high number. (4 min. 20 seconds)

02:07:25 Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland) gets right to the heart of the matter: “There’s something wrong with this picture. There’s something wrong… When you’ve got this combination of shots, and you go from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 88, it seems to me somebody would say, Wait a minute, let’s put the brakes on this and at least let’s try to figure out whether, if I’m giving a baby 9 shots in a day, how much impact that’s having – I mean it just seems logical – if they gave me 9 shots I don’t know what that... Let’s put some brakes on this – look at whether the multiple shot situation is causing this. I wish you could see the faces behind your. Grown men crying, and women crying. It seems like someone would say, maybe there’s an issue here? And if we’re going to err, let’s err on the side of keeping children safe, even if we just give one shot per day?
A beautiful, simple, eloquent statement. Says, let’s put the brakes on this and at least figure it out. (1 min. 40 seconds)

02:09:22 Rep. Issa (R-CA) – Says that the committee is going to consider the question of FDA approving individual drugs or vaccines without thoroughly studying the interaction. There has to be a systematic approach towards dealing with all of what we put in our body.

02:11:10 Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) asks about the disparities in autism rates in different states. Utah has a rate of 1 in 47. He asks whether they are studying reasons for these disparities. Of course Dr. Boyle talks about differences in how states identify autism. Rep. M asks skeptically whether Utah is so much better at diagnosis? He asks whether they actually have validated that the reason for disparities is different rates of diagnosis, and do they have target dates for the current studies’ results. The response is vague assurances that they are looking at risk factors, vague statements about monitoring over the past ten years, “It’s a puzzle – we’re putting together the pieces”. Then he asks if there are any new effective therapy approaches emerging. Dr. G. says there are some behavioral therapies but they’re much farther from finding any medical therapies, but he hopes that they will find some eventually. (4 min. 30 seconds).

OK, we could argue about whether "most" of the hearing was about vaccines and autism. we could count up all the sentences spoken and compare the number of sentences on various topics. But there surely was a lot of airing of these issues. Groundbreaking.

Thanks for sharing that, Bayareamom - good to know.

Twyla,

I have made sense - loads of it. You want to continue with this merry-go-round, have a party. I've worked my bums off trying to help this cause, but I didn't have enough political clout, funding or NUMBERS of folks to get off their rear ends and DO what needs to be done.

FYI - I used to be the National Vaccine Information Center's Director for the State of California for approximately one year, until other priorities in my family's life changed and I had to change course.

But I can assure you that I have worked my you-know-what off for almost 20 years trying to get the word out about vaccines, and starting in a year (1993) when most people thought I was an absolute loon for even daring to mention the V word when it came to our son's health issues.

I find this all very sad, and a big setback. I have no doubt that every person involved here has the best interest of our children in mind. I think it is good that people are willing to step up and bring forward information that is in the interest of full disclosure.

We all know that our situations are difficult. I don't see how judging people's personal lives is helping our situation. If it is a concern certainly a blog is not the best place to do it. I am feeling a lot of sympathy for the people whose personal situations have been shared and the hurt people have to go through while fighting for what is right for our children. Creating a more difficult situation certainly does not help our cause. I think we need to remember our purpose while keeping in mind this makes all of our lives more complicated.

Jackie

"The hearing was mostly about vaccines and autism."

Twyla, maybe in a parallel universe. Not in the one I inhabit. It's obvious you've rewritten history to suit your agenda. Enjoy.

Linda have a dig at this one ..Lucija Tomljenovic

30 Years of Secret Official Transcripts Show UK Government Experts Cover Up Vaccine Hazards To Sell More Vaccines And Harm Your Kids

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/government-experts-cover-up-vaccine-hazards/

That was a year ago and it is now just getting coverage by What Doctors Dont Tell You(WDDTY)

Sorry correction ....Palm Beach Florida , Not California.

I'm afraid my opinion of the Beth Clay Safeminds skullduggery remains the same , and the more I read the worse it gets ....infiltration by PharmaHarma .

How can I get myself one of those big fat paychecks Beth ?
Nah ,upon further thought , sorry I refuse , my childs health was and never will be up for sale .

But maybe it isnt ca$h at all . Maybe its simple threats & intimidation but whatever it is , it has happened !

I love vaccines , they are the greatest , I want all these people to take their fill of them , Insel , Clay , Carey , JulieG , Bill & Mel , Salisbory , Profit , Godless , Dear , Elleman and so on .....Pls gourge yourselves

John,

I don't mean to devalue the efforts of everyone here. Progress is made every day by the posts here and on other sites, by lobbying and by attendance at committee meetings. Even if the members of Congress aren't acting, Pharma and it's government allies were exposed that day in full public view. That's a very good thing. But we shouldn't have a false sense of accomplishment or security either.

I think Tim Bolen is correct in how he's sized up the opposition. I don't have to tell you that for Pharma this isn't about vaccines. It's isn't about benefiting public health or about the public good. For Pharma, this is about selling products, efficacious, safe, or defective and harmful. It doesn't matter as long as they are profitable. They go to great lengths to market and defend them, to hide unfavorable research, to suppress opposition and do PR damage control.

This is an industry that has no problem advocating giving 2 and 3 year old children psychotropic drugs. I never in my life thought I'd see such a horrible thing, but it's done all the time. These are people who prey on orphans in state custody, pushing addictive, brain damaging drugs in order to reap financial gain. I wouldn't put it past them to try to start newborns on Adderal because they kicked too often in the womb.

I'm sorry to be so negative. I know that the readers here are dealing with so much. But this is the truth. If Pharma, which has become so powerful, was interested in public health, Dr. Wakefield would have been honored and would still be practicing. I agree that the Congressional committee members did seem genuinely motivated, but what will it take for them to act? Given Pharma's power, CAN they act? Why wasn't Dan Burton able to accomplish anything in all the years he tried?

As for this Gorski character, this life is over in the blink of an eye. Where he's going there will be no popcorn, no sick children, no grieving parents, and no honest doctors or journalists for him to dig his dirty claws into and entertain himself with. I'm sure that there will be a special place for him as a physician who, instead of using his gifts to provide comfort and healing, instead chose to be Pharma's viscous attack dog.

Linda

Of course, a necessary belief for achieving anything is believing it can be done, and actually some of those congress people seemed quite motivated. You only have to think how upset the trolls were:

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/12/prof-stephen-salzberg-and-the-congressional-autism-hearing.html

Nor, whatever training they've had am I impressed by their acumen of the people hanging out on Salzberg's blog.

John

Tim Bolen says:- “Jenny Allen - You may not like street fighting, but it is absolutely necessary for the Autism community to understand who and what their attackers actually are - and what motivates them.”

Aha-“know thine enemies”. I agree this is essential, Mr Bolen; as for what motivates them, money, power and ambition will do for starters. Street fighting is criminal in the UK, but ‘peaceful protest’ is tolerated. Autism Warrier, Joan Campbell, uses her banner to keep Brian Deer in order. We were all there at that demo. I have read all of your internet blogs Mr Bolen and agree and approve. Here in the UK we just do what we can.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJ0gL2Ltmws

Below is an extract from Professor David Salisbury’s ‘bio’. He seems to have the world’s vaccination business completely ‘sewn up’. I wish I had a £ for every official reply I have received quoting the World Health Organisation’s stance on the MMR and other vaccines:-

http://www.csap.cam.ac.uk/network/david-salisbury/
"Professor David Salisbury is Director of Immunisation at the Department of Health, London, responsible for the national immunisation programme……..In addition to his UK responsibilities, Professor Salisbury works extensively for the WHO on the Global Programme for Vaccines. He is the Chairman of the WHO Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Vaccines, Chairman of the European Region Certification Commission for Poliomyelitis Eradication, and is a member of the Eastern Mediterranean Polio Elimination Certification Commission, and the South East Asian Polio Elimination Certification Commission. He is an adjunct member of the Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety and is a Liaison Member of the US Advisory Committee on Immunisation Practices and the US National Vaccine Advisory Committee. He is Co-chairman of the Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Group for the Global Health Security Action Group of G7 countries. He also chairs the European Vaccine Advisory Group for the European Centre for Disease Control and is a member of the Policy and Practice Committee of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization.
Professor Salisbury has written around 80 publications on immunisation and paediatric topics."

Mavocate asks, “which is it?...Are vaccines ‘one of the most important advances in medicine’ as Beth Clay wrote in the letter you cited? Or are vaccines the primary cause of the autism epidemic, making them the most tragic and costly medical mistake to befall this nation's children?”

The two are not mutually exclusive. Vaccines can have a role in combating disease, yet also have harmful effects which must be better understood. Vaccines in moderation may be o.k. for most children, but as the vaccine schedule has grown exponentially, more and more children have fallen by the wayside.

In the course of my life I have seen certain diseases disappear when vaccines were implemented. Some argue that vaccines were not actually responsible for the demise of smallpox, polio, and diphtheria. I’m not an immunologist, and I’m sure I can’t convince you otherwise, but to “distrust” anyone who believes that vaccines do play a role in fighting disease would be unfair to the many sincere people who hold this opinion.

And yes, there are various potential problems. Before the mumps vaccine we almost all came down with mumps in childhood. Now it’s very rare for children to come down with mumps, but the vaccine immunity wears off so this generation may be more vulnerable to mumps as teenagers/adults when it can be more harmful. Not to mention that the mumps vaccine we use may be increasingly ineffective, per a recent whistleblower lawsuit.

A lot of children used to die of diphtheria before the vaccine was invented. This changed. I don’t think this was just a coincidence, just like I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the rate of autism has escalated at the same time as the increase in vaccines, and that many children have regressed into autism after a round of vaccines, and that the rate of many other neurological and immune disorders have increased as well.

I’m meandering, but what I’m trying to say is that there can be sincerely held differences of opinion. To have a litmus test such as that only someone who thinks that all vaccines are bad is trustworthy is imo wrong.

I never said that only Beth Clay organized the congressional hearing, and I never said that “Brian Hooker simply hallucinated that he did”. But I don’t believe that Brian Hooker singlehandedly initiated or organized the hearing. There were other people involved as well, and both SafeMinds and Beth Clay have a history of advocating to Congress regarding vaccines and autism.

The hearing was mostly about vaccines and autism. The congresspeople demanded to know why our govt agencies have no explanation for the increase in autism, why thimerosal hasn’t been removed, why there has been no vaxed vs. unvaxed study, why we give so many vaccines at the same time.

Bob Moffit, I did not admonish you to hold your own rally, and thank you very much for the work that you have done.

@ John

"And if there is no one there to advocate they will - as I have said before - be able to turn and say "You only have yourselves to blame". Her presence to my mind clarifies the narrative rather than obscures it. It really obscures it to blame her."

John .. my friend .. I am NOT "blaming or pillorying" Lyn Redwood for her hard work to make her participation worth the effort.

"Of course, people need to constantly appraise how they can be more effective."

As far as I can tell .. this is EXACTLY what people questioning the benefits of maintaining a "seat" on the IACC are suggesting.

In my humble opinion .. I would suggest SafeMinds issue a public statement announcing the issue is .. at the very least .. UNDER CONSIDERATION .. for the reasons stated in the public announcement ... which I am confident .. Lyn can personally attest to.

@ Jenny

"My own 'weapons' are politely expressed opinions, backed up as far as possible by factual evidence. I campaign about a number of health issues, and network informally with others, via the internet. I am not interested in being 'nice' but I always TRY to incorporate 'positive' solutions. Being overtly confrontational, simply does not achieve anything.

As for myself .. my nonverbal grandson is thirteen, eleven years since he "regressed" and our family became .. as one poster labeled herself .. "foot-soldiers" .. in the ongoing battle to gain justice for him as well as thousands of other families just like our own. I, too, am not interested in being "overtly confrontational" .. but .. I think we may have a differing opinion on what constitutes "overtly confrontational".

Such as .. the "early years of activism" that required my family in the New York City area .. to travel .. on more than one occasion .. .. sometimes more than once a year .. to "rallies" held in Washington, DC, Atlanta, Ga, Trenton, NJ, Albany, NY.

Except for the handful of "foot-soldiers" who gathered in front of national radio host Mike Savage's radio station in NYC .. to "loudly confront" his extremely hurtful and ignorant remarks that parents simply demand their nonverbal kid to "stop the nonsense and speak up" .. I don't consider any of the rallies mentioned above "overtly confrontational".

Twyla .. please don't admonish me to organize my "own rally" .. as I said .. our family consider ourselves loyal "foot-soldiers" .. of those who "paid their dues" (SAFEMINDS!).. through personal hard work, extraordinary sacrifice and tireless effort .. that have earned them .. rightly so .. leadership roles.

All I am asking is to CONSIDER resigning from the IACC. Is that too much to ask from a loyal footsoldier?

Twyla, which is it?...Are vaccines "one of the most important advances in medicine" as Beth Clay wrote in the letter you cited? Or are vaccines the primary cause of the autism epidemic, making them the most tragic and costly medical mistake to befall this nation's children? I don't see how both statements can be true, and I mistrust anyone who claims they are.

If you want to believe Beth Clay organized the Congressional hearing from the start and Brian Hooker simply hallucinated that he did, that's your choice. If you think Mark Blaxill not talking about vaccines in his testimony, and changing the topic of the hearings AWAY from vaccines/autism was the right thing to do, you're entitled to your opinion. However, I'm also entitled to my opinion which is that the actions you support will not make a dent in the autism epidemic.

Why, I ask, do you people insist on playing nice?-So asks Tim Bolen.

I cannot speak for any other campaigners, but I will NEVER, EVER resort to the ad hominem vile slurs and slanders, often with accompanying profanity, used by those persons who would seek to 'rubbish' us and our causes. To do this would simply bring us down to their level. Of course, this is exactly what our enemies want.

My own 'weapons' are politely expressed opinions, backed up as far as possible by factual evidence. I campaign about a number of health issues, and network informally with others, via the internet. I am not interested in being 'nice' but I always TRY to incorporate 'positive' solutions. Being overtly confrontational, simply does not achieve anything. Allowing the 'establishment'to 'save face' is not 'failure' if reforms are quietly implemented behind the scenes. Believe it or not this OFTEN happens.

Mark Blaxill's testimony was excellent. I know John already posted the text, but here is the video. It is worth seeing again.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/309672-1

Mark's initial testimony starts at 2:36:48

At 3:12:00 Mark speaks again, rebutting the idea that autism hasn't really increased, and then discussing that mercury and vaccines are the two prime candidates for causation.

At 3:15 Rep. Mike Kelley mentions how far off the mark the IACC is. He asks Bob Wright about what should be done, and surprisingly one if the things Bob mentions is "especially safety research on vaccines."

At 3:18:24 Mark speaks again and discusses the "great autism gene hunt".
At 3:20:00 rep. Mike Kelley says that Rep. Issa has clearly stated the intention of this committee to continue to look at these issues. He says, "You would arm us if you would help us with identifying the kind of questions you would like to have asked if we had these same individuals from that coordinating committee sitting at this table, that would help us articulate in your voices the kind of inquiry that would shake that and produce a result that would help us deal on the front end..."

Will it happen? Will there be a congressional oversight committee with top people from the IACC on the hot seat, being interrogated by congresspeople armed with parents' questions? I don't know. I'm sure there are a lot of people working overtime to prevent this from happening. But it's possible. And all this discouraged nay-saying certainly isn't going to make it happen. There is momentum here which needs to be built on, not impeded.

Will Brian Hooker be allowed to speak to this committee? I sure hope so. I don't know what prevented him from speaking before. I read somewhere that one Democratic congressman was able to prevent him from speaking, or at least from putting him back on the panel after he was removed. There were some poor speakers there. I'm happy to have a speaker or two talking about services for adults, and the experiences of HFA/aspies, but I don't know why the neurodiversity advocates have to discount the experiences of people elsewhere on the spectrum and their parents.

Why do some people say that Mark took Brian's position? Why not blame any of the other speakers? Why castigate the one person who spoke out about mercury, vaccines, the undeniable huge increase in autism, the health crises among today's children?

Mark also mentioned that he had submitted the written testimony of 300 families.

The questions asked of Guttmacher an Boyle by the congressional committee members were for the most part excellent. They really did seem to have been armed with parents' questions. Clearly a lot of work went into educating them.

John,

During California's most recent AB 2109 issue, one of the Assemblywomen who voted on the bill is/was a recently convicted shop-lifter (her husband is a well known Judge). This woman came up with the most inane excuse re: her shoplifting. I read the story myself in our paper. But there she was, voting on AB 2109, a bill (now law) that will impact many California's parents.

I'm all for forgiveness, believe me, but for the most part, these political figures are ROTTEN TO THE CORE. They will sell their Grandmothers' souls to push their own agendas.

In our political realm, it's about who scratches these guys' checks, John - it's not about doing the right thing!

Thats the way to John we are all doing pretty well just now...

Angus

John,

If a doctor prescribed a certain antibiotic to you - you took it and had a reaction, what would you do. I would think you'd call said physician up, explain your situation, and the conversation might proceed, thusly: Well, John, you need to continue to take this antibiotic, even though it caused you to faint.

I had this happen to me, believe it or not. I actually keeled over in a dead faint after I'd taken a certain antibiotic a few years back. I realized my life could have potentially been at risk, so I called my physician back, explaining what had just happened.

He actually told me to continue taking the prescription, unbelievably. I was thoroughly disgusted with his response and told him in no uncertain terms that I didn't intend ever taking that antibiotic again. On top of this, this physician knew my family background with various allergies to certain antibiotics. My mother was so allergic to penicillin, that one more dose of ANY antibiotic containing a derivative of penicillin, would have killed her. My issues with this physician were justifiable; he saw me as but another statistic/client in his busy everyday practice and didn't take the time and the EFFORT to counsel me appropriately about my situation. He didn't care enough to do so.

So I fired him.

Eventually, a physician's assistant - in this same medical office - came out and stated that most likely my infection would clear up ON ITS OWN. So yes, I used common sense, dumped the antibiotic in the trash, and two days later I felt much better.

My point? WHY would you continue to sit on these committees when they CLEARLY don't have your best interests at heart? Your answers, above, don't even make sense, John.

Please understand these government entities are involved in gamesmanship with the tokens they 'allow' to sit on these committees. They make all nice, listen and smile at opportune moments and then...NOTHING HAPPENS afterwards.

For all the lauding that Dan Burton has received for holding those mercury/vaccine hearings, what TRULY happened afterwards to CHANGE all of this?

Honestly? Absolutely nothing.

What's the fear, here, if you let go of these governmental groups and think of another better aimed at the target, strategy? From where I'm sitting, this strategy hasn't worked very well.

Bob

Maybe, but I don't think in Katie and others' narrative of this over the years, or in view of what Mark said that anyone could have considered Lyn Redwood's presence on the committee as endorsement by her or Safeminds of the committee's decision making. My personal view was that sitting this out with all the disagreeable back-chat (remember particularly the Story Landis incident)

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/10/dr-story-landis-autism-not-a-multi-symptom-disease-but-a-money-making-scheme.html

was a courageous thing to do, and not the easy option. The purpose of course was to advocate for the things they won't consider or do. And if there is no one there to advocate they will - as I have said before - be able to turn and say "You only have yourselves to blame". Her presence to my mind clarifies the narrative rather than obscures it. It really obscures it to blame her.

John

Tim

As you ought to know Matt Carey of LeftBrain/RightBrain was appointed to the IACC last year as part of a committee packing operation. So, perhaps they were actually scared of something. But Carey doesn't matter: it's Insel and Collins, and industry cronyism (as Mark said).

Something else I've learned from this very wise lady in my life. She said to me the following, "To know your friends, you need to know who your enemies are first."

@Tim -

I like the approach you've stated in your last comment.

Just mo, but there is room for a lot of people and a lot of different approaches to help to save this generation of children from vaccine injury. I really don't care if everyone likes everyone else or agrees on the minor details of their approaches or not; every person who is acknowledging vaccine injury in any way is valuable.
Donald Trump, A of A,Jake Cosby, Tim Bolen,Mark Balxill, Dan Olmstead, Dr Hooker, Dr Gordon, Dr Wakefield, the many posters here; they are going to say things differently, they are not all going to agree with each other about every little detail; but every one of them is bringing this issue further forward.
To be honest, imo its a bit like the story of the 100 monkeys; there is a saturation point that preceeds the whole population understanding an issue, and we are very close to it now.
Even the media stories are changing..People who consoled themselves with the idea that vaccine injury was producing kids who were like Einstein and there were very few of them anyway are now being hit in the face with the huge rise in numbers.The numbers don't go away, the kids don't go away, the parents don't go away. And many of the children are becoming adults who need lifelong care. Eventually, autism special interests is going to be one of the biggest voting blocks in the country.
One thing about the new DSM; if as seems likely high functioning people who don't want to be "cured" ( fair enough) aren't going to be given a diagnosis ( which I think is also fair ; why diagnose someone who from self report does not have a problem?) it will be much harder for people to confuse their life with the life of the majority of people with autism.
It seems that many of the "no cure" parents are already less than convinced about it, while paying a bit of lip service to the sentiment.
News flash; if you are giving your kids psychotropic drugs to change their personality, you are not a "no cure " parent.
i think with all the rising costs of special ed etc, the general public is starting to question things a lot more.
Its a bit like a tidal wave; starts as a small swell, but as more and more people join in, it becomes overwhelming.

Tim

What a really great idea. May I remind you what Mark Blaxill actually said at the Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing in November:

"In the midst of this crisis, the federal agencies responsible for the health of our nation’s children have failed in their duty. CDC’s negligence has led the way. Many believe CDC has actively covered up the evidence surrounding autism’s environmental causes

"NIH has received the lion’s share of Congressional funding, money they have wasted on status quo research and gene studies. It’s absurd to focus on genetic research in this crisis, there’s no such thing as a genetic epidemic.

"CDC first started investigating environmental causes in 1999 in Brick NJ. Their survey data showed that autism rates went from zero in 1989, to 1 in 128 four years later. But they used statistical tricks (and the fact that autism surveys miss many three and four years olds) to publish a finding that there was no increase.

"A CDC analyst also discovered in 1999 that higher levels of infant exposure to a mercury compound in vaccines increased autism risk more than tenfold relative to zero exposure. The analyst wrote about this result to his supervisors: “It just won’t go away,” he said. But he and his colleagues used more statistical tricks and published a finding that made the risk go away.

"In the financial world, the result of the pressure to manipulate numbers to provide the answers bosses want has a name - securities fraud. In medicine there are similar pressures: they’re called special interest politics and peer review and what the CDC has given us is the medical equivalent of securities fraud. All to avoid the inconvenient reality of the autism epidemic.

"In 2006, Congress gave the NIH a mission to “combat autism.” You authorized $850 million for that mission. Frustrating to most in the autism community, NIH spent most of that money on the great autism gene hunt while blackballing environmental researchers and defying parent concerns. It’s been a colossal waste of money and time. Not a single case of autism has been prevented. Not a single child received improved treatments. American families deserve better.

"In 2011, autism parents asked Congress to fix the bill. We told you that when you spend that much money on the wrong things, you haven’t just wasted taxpayer dollars, you’ve compounded the problem by reinforcing the denial. Unfortunately, Senate leaders didn’t take the time they needed to fix the problems; they simply extended the old bill for three more years and the House went along rather than see nothing move forward.

"In the face of a national emergency, government agencies, especially CDC and NIH, have performed poorly and behaved badly. We need accountable, new leadership on autism at the NIH and the CDC. We need an advisory committee that believes in combating autism, not one newly stocked with appointees who oppose the mission, who want us to surrender to autism and oppose prevention and treatment research. We need a Combating Autism Act that truly combats autism. We need to stop investing in the autism gene hunt and identify what has changed in the environment that could have possibly injured so many children.

"We need to conduct independent research into the great unmentionables, mercury and vaccines, connections that we’ve documented in the earliest cases. (I have provided to the Committee copies of my book, The Age of Autism which provides this history). These are the only environmental factors identified so far that are plausible causes for the magnitude and timing of this crisis.

"Ultimately, we need to face and answer the question, why are so many American children sick? We will only do that hard work if agency leaders are held accountable to the American people, not powerful interests in the medical industry. So we’re asking you, the members of the Committee for your help..."

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/12/safeminds-mark-blaxill-testimony-at-autism-hearing.html#more

And if you tell me that Brian Hooker should not have been displaced, I won't disagree with you, but I don't see any 5th column message here from Mark.

John

Good job Katie...

And I love the comments, which, to my way of thinking, are a LARGE step in the right direction.

Obviously, it has occurred to most of you that the IACC is being abused, and misused, intentionally. So, wouldn't you think it might be a good idea to gather overwhelming evidence of that and hook up (pun intended) with Brian Hooker to schedule a scathing expose of Insel's operation in front of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee?

Then too, all of you need to start thinking about using the government against itself. The US government is a "check-and-balance" system designed to provide built in accountability. The IACC had to have originally written a Mission Statement. So, find that Statement and analyze whether, or not, it has been following that Mission - and if it has not (and it certainly HAS NOT) file a wave of complaints with the DHHS Inspector General's (IG) office.

Does that work? Oh yeah...

And, if when that evidence is gathered, and you want to start leaking out to certain media, what you've found, well, the North American Health Freedom Movement, myself included, get the attention of around ten million email recipients at the press of the Send button.

More, My friend Robert Scott Bell hits about 1.7 million radio listeners. George Noory (Coast-to-Coast) hits ten times that five nights a week.

"Tinfoil Tim?" Take another look at all of those photos of me. Those piles of metal in the photos in the links below aren't tinfoil...

http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpieces/tim%20bolen.htm

http://www.bolenreport.com/who_is_tim_bolen.htm

Am I recommending aggressive action?

Yup.

Tim Bolen
www.bolenreport.com

An example of people fighting back against the unethical, murderous practices of Pharma is the Nestle Boycott started in the 1970s that still goes on today http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestl%C3%A9_boycott.

It was started because Nestle was marketing formula to poor women in developing countries who had no means to safely bottle feed, deliberately interfering with lactation so the women had no choice but to become a steady customer (like the free first dose of heroin). The reps would enter maternity wards dressed in white, to blend in with the nurses, and give out free samples intended to dry up the mother's milk supply. Having no access to clean water, money to buy enough formula, or fuel to boil water to sterilize bottles or nipples or to make formula with, this resulted in literally millions of deaths from what was called "baby bottle disease".

It isn't the same as vaccines, but it is similar in that it was a transgression by a pharmaceutical company, deliberate misuse of a pharmaceutical product that resulted in great harm. It is different in that governments were not in collusion with Nestle (as far as I know). I don't know how successful the boycott ultimately has been, but it is an example of an active effort to fight back to save children that did have some positive effect.

I thought maybe there is something in this history that can help.

Re: Boycotting IACC

How can we boycott a group that's boycotting us?

Re: "Thank you to Geri Dawson"

For telling us to "change the conversation" when the subject of vaccines comes up? Or for "collaborating" with four major vaccine makers who now want to make money off of autism?

Re: calling Tim Bolen "Tinfoil Tim"

Who are you quoting - SafeMinds? It wouldn't surprise me. Nhokkanen, can you name even one person who has spent a decade building legislators' trust? If that was the case, SafeMinds wouldn't have needed to hire a lobbyist to pretend to be collaborating with Brian Hooker so they could shove him aside, take over the hearing and leave vaccines out of the discussion.

Re: "Honestly, I can't believe the amount of negativity and criticism lately of people who are working hard on issues of vaccine safety and autism."

Who? Where? I haven't seen a single criticism of anyone who is working hard on issues of vaccine safety and autism.

Bayareamom, thanks so much for your anonymous posts saying that you don't have time to get involved but that someone else should get it all together. That's very helpful. Really appreciate your wisdom and insight.

Good to know that your heart tells you that things won't work out for the best. Soaking up the positive vibes.

It's not as if people can only do one thing. Katie Wright and Lyn Redwood go to several IACC meetings a year and Katie writes about them, but they do lots of other stuff too. It's not as if by boycotting the IACC meetings they would be unleashed upon the world, freed to do something else that would change everything.

If they stopped attending these meetings, this committee would be completely unanimously happy with itself, and its BS would never see the light of day. This committee is responsible for spending millions of our tax dollars, and not monitoring them would be a lot worse than monitoring them. Katie and Lyn are witnesses, and they are thorns in people's sides. This is important.

I totally agree with John that "If you don't put any effort in these bodies might become ideologically even more repugnant. I suspect it would be unwise to vacate the territory altogether," and that "they would be only too delighted if everyone walked away and ignored them - that's an utter state of bliss for a government committee," and, "I think that the continuing attempts which have been made to interact with them have just dramatised how out of touch and warped they are. It is a chronicle of stupidity which has been superbly told by Katie over the years... Who else, after all, is paying them any attention for the millions they spend?" and also that if nobody from the biomedical/vaccine injury side participated they could say "If you don't want to contribute you only have yourselves to blame."

Honestly, I can't believe the amount of negativity and criticism lately of people who are working hard on issues of vaccine safety and autism. There are so many different ways that people are active. Does it make a difference when people meet with their congresspeople? It would be easy to say no, yet many of the congresspeople who spoke at the November hearing had clearly been educated by their constituents. Does it make a difference when people post comments online? It would be easy to say no, but without those comments it would just be unanimous CDC/pharma/AAP spin out there. TACA provides help with biomedical treatments and a lot more. AutismOne holds a huge conference every year. The Greater Good producers keep advocating and posting information. The Guardasil moms keep speaking out. Shall we disparage all of them because the world hasn't changed enough? Should we just do nothing at all?

When my son was born 20 years ago I had total faith in the CDC. When our pediatrician said that the CDC recommended a hepatitis B vaccine on the day of birth, I said, "OK, sure!" without questioning. I had no idea there was mercury in that shot, that it was completely unnecessary for him, that there were questions about it's safety. Our son continued to receive all the recommended vaccines on schedule, without my husband or I questioning the wisdom of this course of action. At least now people have doubts and raise questions. At least now there is information available. There has actually been quite an increase in general awareness of vaccine problems in recent years. When my daughter had a febrile seizure after getting the MMR and varicela vaccines at the same time it did not even occur to me that this could have been caused by the vaccines. At least now people would stop and think.

My son was addicted to graham crackers and yogurt. We said, "Wow he's like a drug addict!" We had no idea that gluten and casein were an issue with autism. Now at least people have heard of a GFCF diet.

But really, everyone is free to take the actions that they feel are most valuable. Rather than disparaging others' advocacy, take action yourself and change the world.

I'm with John Stone. If that makes me 'unpopular' so be it. In the UK we metaphorically 'bang our heads against brick walls', trying to get through to government committees and inquiries. I've wasted gallons of printer ink writing letters, most of which are not replied to. My written evidence to the Leveson Inquiry was disregarded. Evidence submitted by other persons re Brian Deer's Sunday Times articles was 'challenged' by Murdoch's News Corp lawyers and ruled inadmissable.

My written evidence to a Scottish Inquiry on hospital superbugs was ruled inadmissable by the 'Inquiry Solicitor'. All parliamentary evidence from the public is vetted beforehand as are any public questions or deputations. Everything is carefully 'stage managed' by an army of spin doctors, who are also responsible for any press releases.

Why do we bother? Well, in the case of Leveson, I was pleased to see he apparently at least agreed with my evidence about the utter uselessness of COPE and the PCC; the latter is being reformed. The Scottish Inquiry Judge, has not yet given his verdicts, but I was pleased to see most of the points made in my evidence, have been very carefully examined by the Judge. Our letters to the Government Science & Technology Committee, re Godlee and the BMJ Deer articles, may not have been acknowledged, but Godlee's attempts to discredit all of Dr Wakefield's colleagues and have every single Wakefield research paper retracted, backfired spectacularly, after the S&C Committee told Godlee to take her concerns elsewhere!! It's good to see Dr Wakefield's other published research papers now being referenced in other papers, researching what are now acknowledged links between gastrointestinal problems and autism.

From my side of the Atlantic, that Congress meeting was a huge success, publicly exposing the weasel words and useless actions of those persons, who are supposed to be in positions of leadership, in terms of ensuring vaccine safety and efficacy in the US. You folks should think yourselves lucky.

@John: I just picture this panel of community members who essentially all have the position that we are not disabled, and either, we don't want you to do anything for us, or to do anything to us, left surrounded by people assigned to appear to "do something" about the epidemic because a bunch of parents who have children who cannot speak for themselves annoyed a bunch of politicians and wonder how long that can last, but I worry you might be right about where things could go.

As I don't have any brilliant ideas of how to do the following I should probably stop, but, if our continually raised points could get out to more of the public than I think they actually do, the IACC has at least given us a great case in point of how "sincere" the federal agencies are in performing responsible vaccine safety research (not like we needed more).

My point over the IACC is that the only thing that you can go on doing with them is showing them up as before. I don't know of any moment when anyone connected with our side has been on-side with the IACC nonsense. There is always the issue whether we have been as effective as we could but in this instance I don't see anything to complain about.

I think they would be only too delighted if everyone walked away and ignored them - that's an utter state of bliss for a government committee.

Just one more comment, then I'm through with this bandwagon I'm on.

My husband and I saw, just on the local school district level, how the political process really works. I've seen this on the state and federal levels as well, with my activism in the vaccine movement.

It's all the same.

Special interests are SERVED - PEOPLE ARE NOT.

I see SO MANY fractionalized efforts (if that's a word) on behalf of the autism movement; everyone wants to be heard, everyone wants 'credit' for this, that and the other.

But I just ponder as to how much true productivity has been accomplished whatsoever. All of us have extended our efforts in only the best way that we can - perhaps. But productivity is the name of the game, or at least it should be, NOT who gets credit for what have you.

The point with all of this is that things are not getting any better - they are, indeed, and quite miserably so, getting far worse.

Quit thinking these 'legislators' are your FRIENDS. They are NOT. They are like the pediatricians that Mark Blaxil once stated during his IACC speech, are NOT your friends.

But if you can get numbers involved in this process, more numbers than you've been able to gather together in the past and really work with other healthcare groups that have a genuine interest in this issue, you will get further ahead than you've been able to, thus far.

An individual who has posted, just proves my point. QUIT with the name calling and conjecturing as to who you feel is wearing a tin-foil hat, or whatever. Do you want this thing to stop or are you going to admit you may need some help, and ASK for it. Because it's out there, if you've a mind to take it.

Typo above "you're' should have been 'your.' Typing too fast...

To bayareamom:
"Tinfoil Tim" Bolen is doing more damage to our cause than Matt Carey.

Autism parents and advocates who've worked a decade or more building legislators' trust don't need so-called help from a self-serving loose cannon who refers to financed targets as "nipple ripper."

Jeannette

Plainly, these points or ones like them go on being made year after year, but I don't think they would disband if we went away, they would just feel a whole lot cosier.

I don't think we are going to make a very strong point since everyone already on our side regards them fundamentally with contempt. I think that the continuing attempts which have been made to interact with them have just dramatised how out of touch and warped they are. It is a chronicle of stupidity which has been superbly told by Katie over the years. That's probably been the major result and it is one worth having. Who else, after all, is paying them any attention for the millions they spend? Also they can turn round and say "If you don't want to contribute you only have yourselves to blame". Strategically, I'd say it is better to let it bleed on as before - a madhatters teaparty that goes on for ever.

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/10/but-theres-mercury-in-the-h1n1-vaccine-curiouser-and-curiouser.html

What's happened is the creative response: it doesn't endorse them in any way.

The more I re-read your above statement, John, the more I have to shake my head. Ideologically repugnant? Really? What is MORE repugnant to me is the FACT that these groups are not doing one thing to help these kids and truly get down to the business re: stopping this world-wide epidemic. These bureaucrats which so many of you seem to want to latch onto are tied into the VERY organizations/groups that are actively covering up this epidemic!

There are groups available out there to assist - they've spoken out and are willing and able to HELP.

I care so very deeply about these kids and their families, even though my own family has not been touched - per se - by the autism issue. I know in my heart my own family could have become easily just another autism statistic.

I would beg of you - those of whom read these comments and website - to try to start thinking about various outside options that have been proffered as a means within which to help. stop. this. thing.

Get rid of the egos; remember what this fight is really all about - our kids...mankind's future.

I don't know what happened to a prior comment of mine wherein I stated that perhaps all of you may want to have a listen up re: Curt Lindermnan's radio show about this very issue.

I agree with Mr. Linderman. It is time to quit being so politically correct and get down to the business at hand. Do whatever it takes (and no I'm not advocating violence here, gawd forbid), but there ARE forces out there who can help.

What's that saying - fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

How many times do you all need to be conned and fooled by these guys before you re-think your strategies?

Bayareamom

I am not altogether sure. If you don't put any effort in these bodies might become ideologically even more repugnant. I suspect it would be unwise to vacate the territory altogether.

John

Dr. Insel looking for a "cure to Autism" is a bit like OJ looking for those responsible for the death of his wife..

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/08/when-vaccine-development-is-family-business-thomas-insels-conflicted-role-on-vaccines-and-autism.html

******
Dr. Insel is rather well known for his refusal to ride in the same ( nearly empty ) elevator with an Autistic child who was attending one of his IACC meetings with his mother.


"...Max stimmed. Insel looked at him, looked at me (yes, he had his little name tag on, so he knew that I knew who he was)
then he hit the open door button and ushered his coworker off.

As the doors were closing, he said "I'm not riding up with them", looking at my son."


http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/10/autism-chair-thomas-insel-refuses-to-ride-in-an-elevator-with-an-autistic-child.html

Matt has been that way since his time on the old Autism Speaks message board. He was once a relatively moderate voice for "the other side" and then became quite different after the influx of members from WP and LB/RB. I really wouldn't care if not for the fact that now he has an important position in deciding what happens to my kid. Given his current viewpoints, I can only hope he squanders his position like so many other IACC members before him. How sad is it that I hope for failure rather than the stuff they may serve up?

"Apparently Dr. Insel’s policy to ignore the outside world and all public input continues in earnest"

If someone knows WHY Insel should change his "policy to ignore the outside world and all public input" .. please, please .. let us all know .. because .. ignoring the outside world and all public input has served HIM and his neutered IACC very well.

By the way .. participating as a member of the IACC doesn't appear to have had ANY success .. so .. maybe the time has come for those who are serving a members of the IACC re-evaluate "whose" purpose they are serving? Their own .. or .. Insel's?

Admittedly, I am not the sharpest knife in the draw .. so I would welcome learning of ANY success that has been gained by having members serve on the IACC? Surely there has to have been SOMETHING gained?