As the walls close in on the bogus claim that vaccines don’t cause autism, the latest trick of the vaccine injury deniers seems to be calling it something else.
So we’ve got idiopathic autism (meaning cause unknown). Secondary autism (meaning triggered by some acceptable environmental factor, like valproic acid, in the womb). Regressive autism (like, we just didn’t notice it before). Autistic-like features due to some genetic vulnerability merely triggered by vaccination (like, mito disorder). And even vaccination that results in autism but doesn’t cause it.
And now comes “isolated” autism. This charming term popped up in the William Thompson whistleblower investigation. One of the stated purposes of the 2004 study he has renounced was to look for “isolated” autism as a risk of earlier MMR administration – “isolated” being a subset defined by the paper’s authors as “those with autism and without comorbid developmental disabilities.”
According to the powerful fraud complaint filed this week with the HHS Office of Research Integrity, the research did in fact turn up a link with “isolated” autism, just as it did with black males, but both findings were suppressed.
Reading the description of “isolated” autism brought to mind those hoary days of yore, lo a decade ago now, when I looked into the rate of autism among ye olde Amish. Much time and effort has gone into debunking my humble anecdotal observation – which was, and is, that in this group with a documented lower vaccination rate, there appeared to be less autism.
One of the debunkers, Autism News Beat, no friend of this site, did me an accidental favor. Mr. News Beat reported that Dr. Kevin Strauss, a pediatrician at the Clinic For Special Children in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, told him “the idea that the Amish do not vaccinate their children is untrue,” something I never claimed anyway.
Then came the beauty part: “Strauss said the clinic treats ‘syndromic autism,’ where autism is part of a more complicated clinical spectrum that can include mental retardation, chromosomal abnormalities, unusual facial features, and short stature, as well as Fragile X syndrome. ‘We see quite a few Amish children with Fragile X,’ he said.
“Strauss said he doesn’t see ‘idiopathic autism’ at the clinic, which he defines as children with average or above average IQs who display autistic behavior. ‘My personal experience is we don’t see a lot of Amish children with idiopathic autism,’ Strauss said. ‘It doesn’t mean they don’t exist, only that we aren’t seeing them at the clinic.’”
In other words, all those Amish kids whose autism can’t be explained as part of a genetic spectrum present from birth – where the hell are they? They sure aren’t hard to find in the rest of the country.
Idiopathic autism. Isolated autism. Same difference. That’s because there’s a low rate of autism in otherwise typical children who are not inflicted with the CDC’s bloated infant vaccine schedule. There’s a high rate of autism in previously typical children who are.
That’s why the CDC had to change the rules – their protocol -- in the middle of the game – their 2004 study –- to flee from the data showing a higher rate of autism. Remember, there is not supposed to be any cause-and-effect between vaccination and autism, ever, under any circumstances. Not for a particular vaccine, or the timing of the vaccine, or the group that receives it. So signals like the ones suppressed in the CDC study are far more significant than “subgroups.” This isn’t supposed to happen to any child, anywhere. If it does … well, if it does, then vaccines cause autism.
Which, of course, they do.
And speaking of nutty nomenclature, Lou Conte and Wayne Rohde wrote a great piece for AOA this month on a new law review article on the vaccine court’s miserable performance. In the Omnibus Autism Proceedings, the judges had said vaccine-induced autism couldn’t happen (six impossible things before breakfast, etcetera). But get this quote that the authors of the law review article got from David Bowman, a spokesman for the Health Resources and Services Administration:
The court "has not compensated any cases based upon autism alone in the absence of sudden serious brain illness after vaccination," he wrote in an email.
You’ve got to be freaking kidding me! Our whole argument is that serious brain illness – encephalopathy, about which vaccine manufacturers warn in their official product labels – leads to the behavioral syndrome called “autism.” So how is compensating autism following “sudden serious brain illness after vaccination” supposed to be a complete defense? It’s actually a signed and dated confession.
So, to summarize:
“Isolated” autism is not isolated – in any sense of the term, since about 1 in 68 kids in this country have it. Thanks to William Thompson, we know on-time vaccination is a big risk.
“Idiopathic” autism (cause unknown) is not idiopathic. It doesn’t seem to show up in less vaccinated groups.
Autistic-like features following vaccination in a child with a mitochondrial anomaly does indeed add up to vaccine-induced autism.
Brain damage from vaccination that leads to autism is, in fact, vaccine-induced autism.
When are some of the smarter and more independent members of Congress, the medical profession and the mainstream media going to get with it here? Now would be good.
Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism.