Dachel Media Update: Skinny Babies & Toxicity, Er Autism
Read Anne's comments after the jump.
August 27, 2013, WAMC Albany, NY: Dr. Molly Losh, Northwestern University - Birth Weight and Autism
August 26, 2013, Carlisle (PA) Sentinel: Doctor: Request for vaccination exemptions 'frequent'
WAMC Albany, NY
"The study was a collaboration with scientists at the Karolinska Institute who lead the Swedish Twin Registry, which is a population register of all twins born in Sweden. We studied twins between the ages of 9 and 12 years old, where one twin had autism and the other did not, and used medical birth records to examine birth weight in these discordant twin pairs. We found that lighter twins in discordant twin-pairs were more than twice as likely to meet criteria for autism than heavier twins. Because these twins were identical genetically, this finding is good evidence that lower birth weight can increase risk of autism."
This is nothing new. In 2011, a study from Stanford said the same thing.
"If these children were identical twins, why aren't the rates 100 percent for boy twins and girl twins? The environment would have to explain 23 percent and 50 percent respectively."
Studies have also shown that heavier babies are more likely to have autism. May, 2013
It seems scientists are intend on placing the blame for autism on parents, especially the mother. Numerous studies link autism to older moms, moms who marry older dads, moms who drink, moms who smoke, moms who take antidepressants, moms who don't get enough folic acid, moms who have babies too close together, and moms who live too close to freeways.
We are not far removed from putting the blame on the cold unfeeling refrigerator mom of the 1960s. Scientists will study ANYTHING except vaccines. They refuse to do a simple comparison study of fully vaccinated and never vaccinated kids to settle the most heated debated in pediatric medicine: Do vaccines cause autism? If one in every 50 never vaccinated kids also has autism, the proof would be there. Unless and until this study is done, the question remains open.
Carlisle (PA) Sentinel
"As students arrive back at school this week, not all of them will be coming to the classroom with the typical, required childhood immunizations.
"If a parent does not wish to have their child vaccinated, they may ask for an exemption under one of three reasons: medical, religious beliefs or philosophical/strong moral or ethical conviction, according to the Pennsylvania Department of Health. If a student is exempt from the immunizations, however, the school may remove that child from class during an outbreak, the department said.
"Dr. Chad Jumper, a physician at Boiling Springs Family Medicine, said parents may approach their family doctor about the exemption. That physician must sign off on the exemption, and then the decision goes to the school.
"Jumper said while he makes sure all parents who want an exemption get all of the facts, he generally signs off on it. A large number of people seeking the exemption aren't looking to avoid one particular shot, but want to forego all of them, he said."
The doctor is upset that parents are getting info off the Internet and not from their doctors. I posted comments.
Brian Dunning (writer of Skeptoid blog) ripped of eBay for 35 million. It was in the Bolen report.
Posted by: jen | August 31, 2013 at 01:12 AM
Thanks, Jen, great comments! Who's the Skeptic hero indicted for fraud? I haven't heard that one.
Posted by: cia parker | August 30, 2013 at 06:58 PM
ps. cia, that's pretty sick that lilady would track you down like that. She's always going at people about their kids and specifics about their illnesses. It's very inappropriate.
Posted by: jen | August 28, 2013 at 09:25 PM
Chris, you would know about phony, wouldn't you? You and your sycophantic buddies there at RI. One of you made up some stupid paradigm for the 'type' that questions vaccine safety/efficacy (I think it was someone who calls herself a psychologist). Well I guess I don't fit that type because I have given my kids quite a few of the recommended vaccines (not all, though, and certainly no more than one at a time, never when sick and with vit d and probiotics), I don't have a child with autism and I don't have any grudge against society. Yet still I question them and would never give my kids a flu shot due to my grandmother's GB after her flu shot. I believe the parents who saw their kids become ill.
You sound very angry- maybe you question the schedule yourself. I'm glad my doc is not so angry-certainly you do make money off the shots inasmuch as you are the reason many patients even bother to come in. In Canada the vast majority of people do not have Peds but a family doc and the docs don't even give vaccines. They are normally done at health clinics.
Your tactics at RI - to equate vaccine questioners to child abusers is actually insane and despicable. The language there "go take a flying fvck at a rolling donut...my I don't give a shjt tank is empty I don't care about your..." (and this was said to a doctor) is completely beyond. Many have questioned the uneasy mix at "Scienceblogs" of advertising and 'science." (see Bhophal article and Pepsigate). You people make a mockery of honesty and science. Oh and one of your Skeptic heroes has just been federally indicted for fraud. And where is Poul Thorsen? Oh and the godfather of MSBP was struck off and charged with severe negligence. Beat it, creep. And that would be Miss Dachel, to you.
Posted by: jen | August 28, 2013 at 09:08 PM
MR,
Since it is now one in 25 American children who develops autism, virtually always from vaccines, can it still be said that the average child is not at risk of having autism caused by vaccines? It looks to me as if every child had a limit as to how much damage he could withstand before slipping into the abyss, but that the numbers of those doing so are escalating to a point where it is no longer a problem corresponding to an unusually sensitive subgroup. Rather than doing a lot of expensive studies into methods of identifying the most sensitive, would it not be better to just stop the damage for everyone entirely?
Posted by: cia parker | August 28, 2013 at 06:07 PM
And, Dr. Hickey, since the vax/unvax study proposed by Congressman Posey is a retrospective one, you can have no possible objection to it except fear of what it will reveal.
Posted by: cia parker | August 28, 2013 at 06:00 PM
There is nothing unethical about studying kids who have already been vaccinated or who would not be vaccinated if there were nostudy. The idea here is to compare kids and maybe people like you who either would or would not be vaccinated. You might even find out whether you are more likely to get Alzheimers later on.
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | August 28, 2013 at 06:00 PM
Dr. Hickie:
You said yesterday that the vitamin C treatment for pertussis which I mentioned was quack medicine: here is a link to information by or collected by Dr. Suzanne Humphries about how successful vitamin C is in treating pertussis and many other diseases:http://drsuzanne.net/dr-suzanne-humphries-oral-intravenous-vitamin-c/
If you were interested in helping the sick rather than in promoting the ineffective and often dangerous status quo, you would be a much better doctor.
Posted by: cia parker | August 28, 2013 at 05:57 PM
"...allows parents to cite any old reason they feel to "hide in the herd".
Dr Hickie, where exactly are you hiding, and where is the herd hiding, when an innocent child takes one for the team?
And "Hiding in the herd" is an insidious implication, that there is some expectation on the part of every one who asks for an exemption - the expectation being that others will roll up their sleeves on their behalf. I can assure you there is no such expectation on my part. My attitude has implications, you may call it irresponsible, but freedom is by its very nature irresponsible. You and the rest of the herd are free to do the dozens of things you choose to do every day that negatively impact the health and well being of others. There is a matter of degree to consider, perhaps, but there is no difference in principle here. Vaccines have been placed on the altar of modern medicine, and you all have ordained yourselves as a high priests. This has to stop. We must be free to choose, with any medical procedures or protocols.
I personally filed an exemption because of regression, medical history, and laboratory results. And because I feel the need to uphold my child's rights under the Charter, to prevent further damage, and to compel medical goons like you to first do no harm. The fact that I have to file an exemption in order to accomplish any of this should be the greatest concern for all of us.
And by the way, this all started for me a long time before Wakefield and AoA were around for you to bash.
Posted by: Shiny Happy Person | August 28, 2013 at 05:28 PM
MR
Thank you for your comment (not unlike Bernardine Healy btw) but I think if you look also at the funding and conduct of so many of these studies they leave almost everything to be desired on that front too.
Posted by: John Stone | August 28, 2013 at 04:26 PM
Dr. Hickey,
Have you examined the methodology of these studies refuting the autism-vaccine connection? I agree, the studies have proven that the average child is not at risk of autism from vaccines. However, in none of these studies that I have examined have they separated out subgroups. It will be impossible to show whether subgroups of only 1-2% of the population are adversely effected by vaccines with that study design. Any variance would be lost in the noise. This could be remedied by performing studies on just the subgroups that have been shown to predispose children to autism. I have a Ph.D. myself, but I am unable to sign my name as it would be academic suicide.
Posted by: MR | August 28, 2013 at 04:01 PM
Dr. Hickie,
You asked yesterday if I were a lawyer, when I had made no reference to that. I think the only way you could have known that is because Lilady did a background check on me last year, and announced the fact on Shot of Prevention, and Chris later mentioned the year I had passed the Bar. But the only way it is reasonable to suppose that you knew it is if you are all members of the Shill Guild.
Posted by: cia parker | August 28, 2013 at 03:31 PM
Dr. Hickie:
I also found that the Star-Tribune article on the measles outbreak in Texas was either blocked to me or had had all the comments deleted, among which were our interchange. Disqus forwarded to me a piece of a new comment in which you said I was lying about having a daughter whose autism was caused by vaccines, and lying about her having had pertussis after having received DTaP at 2, 4, and 6 months. I am not lying, you're projecting when you say that. And are all the parents of vaccine-damaged children also lying? Are the government statistics on last year's pertussis outbreak lying? Dr. Anne Schuchat saying that the outbreak could not be blamed on the unvaccinated. 42,000 diagnosed, something like 85% of them appropriately vaccinated, but got it anyway because the acellular vaccine is largely ineffective, does not prevent transmission since it doesn't contain ACT, and remains extremely dangerous, causing asthma, allergies, autism, SIDS, seizure disorders, and other conditions which you may find on the package label of whatever brand you inflict on children?
You said that I didn't know how dangerous the VPDs are, but I had already said that I had had measles, chickenpox, pertussis, flu, hep A, and rotavirus, and so am familiar with what a normal case of them is like. The diseases are usually relatively mild, while it is you fear-mongers who have caused our modern epidemic of permanent disability in millions.
You said there had been a death in the Texas measles epidemic. This death has not been publicized, when one would have expected that it would have been, to scare more people into getting the MMR. Can you give us details on it? I asked you if the patient had had a preexisting condition like Mr. Gareth William's asthma, if he or she had taken Tylenol or other fever reducer, which greatly increases mortality. I asked if the death had been caused by measles pneumonia, and if so, if it had been viral (usually mild and self-limiting), or bacterial (usually readily treated with antibiotics). Royal Health figures show that the death rate in the UK from measles thirty years ago was only one or two per ten thousand with the disease. In what way does that make measles a "killer disease"?
Posted by: cia parker | August 28, 2013 at 03:27 PM
Dr Hickie
I am mildly grateful for your appearance here. Disqus has conveyed to me a response from you to a false allegation you made about Andrew Wakefield in the Star-Tribune which I had corrected. However, when I visit the Star-Tribune page none of the 70 comments are visible (so perhaps I am being blocked). Naturally, your response to being corrected about one set of false allegations is to make another:
"That all of those on Wakefield's Lancet paper asked their names be removed from it tells all--Wakefield got caught lying and cheating on his research and again did not disclose to huge financial conflicts of interest."
No, they didn't - what happened back in 2004 was that in the wake of a flood of false allegations (all of which have now been thoroughly disproven in the English High Court) the Lancet put pressure on the co-authors of the Wakefield paper to retract an "interpretation" but not the paper, so the paper was not retracted and they remained signatories (it may be noted that boss of the Lancet, Sir Crispin Davis, denounced Wakefield to a parliamentary committee a few days later, failing to disclose himself (1) that he had recently been appointed the board of defendant MMR manufacturer and case defendant GSK and (2) that it was his brother Sir Nigel Davis who was the High Court judge who three day earlier had pulled the plug on the MMR litigation in a closed hearing). Actually, two of the co-authors, Peter Harvey and John Linnell, stood with Wakefield refusing to sign the so-called retraction at all.
So, actually there was not a word of truth in what you have said, but I doubt whether there will be any professional repercussions. Apparently, if you are on a particular side you are free to lie and lie, and nothing will be done.
PS I guess that is licensed fraud.
Posted by: John Stone | August 28, 2013 at 03:01 PM
Hickie, where is the science when you have already concluded that a vac/unvac study would show that vaccines do not cause autism? What is unethical is not doing the study. Vaccinations are great for your business because you get return customers with ear infections, gerd, asthma, allergies, and all the other common ailments among the vaccinated population. My child who is not vaccinated is a horrible customer for any pediatrician. We rarely have to visit outside sports camp physicals. How do you find so much time to blog? Did you pick the wrong neighborhood to practiced? You might be located too close to a Whole Foods; if so your demographics are way off.
Posted by: Diane W Farr | August 28, 2013 at 12:52 PM
Dr. Hickie, like most physicians I know, you are clearly--on the subject of vaccines--clueless, and oblivious to the history of vaccination efforts and their effects.
I guess VAERS is a collection of opinions, hearsay from disgruntled parents who have nothing better to do than make up a story about their child suffering the inherent toxic effects of being vaccinated. I guess the U.S. federal government compensates families of children that have been brain damaged by vaccines--(called encephalopathy-a term I'm quite sure you're unaware of--and a well documented "side effect" of many vaccines as reported by the vaccine manufacturers)--just for the fun of it (over 2.5 billion to date).
I find you to be obtuse. Your comments further reflect a lack of accountability and respect for "first do no harm" (as a physician assuming a leadership role). Clearly and unfortunately, in advocating for vaccination, you demonstrate an absolute reverence for the antiquated and scientifically untenable notion of "germ theory", with no regard for environmental (man-made) influences to human health, and ultimately (albeit unintentionally) a disregard for the sanctity of every human life, a tenet that may not fit into your "public health" perspective.
You should try reading something independent of vested interests in the business of vaccination (that would exclude most medical/pharmaceutical publications), although it is quite curious that the research demonstrating the toxic effects of vaccines comes from mainstream medical science, with the same vested interests.
Posted by: Stand Up! | August 28, 2013 at 12:46 PM
"You and your bots dis doctors like me claiming we do this for the $$$."
Well, some do it for the money. Some do it because it's what they are told to do. Some believe that it is the right thing to do. You, apparently, do it because you are a fanatic. You would probably do it for free, and are blinded by your fanaticism, which is what makes you dangerous. You are not being scientific. You are also rude. Anne is not "Dachel". Her name is Anne Dachel. You can call her Ms. Anne Dachel, Anne (if she doesn't mind), or Anne Dachel, but not "Dachel". And no one here is a "bot", whatever that is. Name calling is childish and beneath what one would expect from an intelligent adult, let alone a physician. Your juvenile, disrespectful, rigid, aggressive demeanor is revealing.
Frankly, you come across as mentally unstable.
Posted by: Linda | August 28, 2013 at 11:52 AM
Dr. Jumper is as much a part of the problem as you and your lot are, Dachel. He should not be signing those exemptions. I don't sign them in my clinic, but unfortunately, Arizona allows parents to cite any old reason they feel to "hide in the herd". You want an experiment done that cannot be done for obvious ethical and moral reasons. Furthermore, that experiment doesn't need to be done because so many other prior studies have shown, with such strong statistical power that there is no link between vaccines and autism, mercury and autism or pretty much anything you hate about modern medicine and autism. Even if that experiment could be done, when the results showed no link between autism and vaccines, you would refuse to accept the results. You wouldn't know what solid science and research was if it bit you on the butt. You are a menace to public health. You and your bots dis doctors like me claiming we do this for the $$$. Well, I'd make more $$$ not vaccinating in my clinic because I could see more patients and not deal with insurance companies paying me very little above acquisition costs for my vaccines. I'd like to see what you make off YOUR company and YOUR ads, just to see if you are as big a phony as I think you are.
Posted by: Chris Hickie, MD, PhD | August 28, 2013 at 10:12 AM