Re: Fwd: The latest news on the Combating Autism ...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 7/19/2006 9:38:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, aedape4@... writes:

rom another list

<chelatingkids2 >,< >, Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 11:15:51 -0700Subject: [ ] The latest news on the Combating Autism Act-is this what we agreed too?

I don't know why everyone is so upset about this bill. First, we should not cut off our nose to spite our face here. I do that a lot with programming at school when there is resistance - we get our feet in the door, then expand from there. Second, I think it's important that we do use evidence based best practices. If these biomed treatments are really helping kids with autism, then why wouldn't people want this proven with research so it can become a standard practice/treatment? The wording seems to say to me that they must promote and develop research on this stuff and I'm not sure why that wouldn't be one area of research. I am not up on the politics because I am busy with the politics in my own backyard. So if I'm missing something...???

Roxanna

kneeleee@...

[Guest guest]

The problem is the technical language in the bill.The CDC's (and other government agencies such as the IOM, NIH, FDA) downplay of the vaccine connection and biomedical treatment in the past makes us pretty darn sure that they will NOT be exploring the biomedical avenues (it would point to way to much liability for them). The CAA does not specify enough. Giving the CDC $5 million and telling them "here's some money, do some research" won't help us in the biomedical corner any. The bill DOES state that research into environmental causes must be explored but that could mean spending the money on research into whether or not elephant droppings causes autism. When the NIEHS was asked to look into the vaccine connection, Senator Joe Lieberman specifically asked that the research NOT be done by the CDC due to their massive conflicts of interest and the unethical manipulation of date in the past (Simpsonwood 2000 and the Verstraten study).

This continues to be a concern. When it comes to "evidence-based" we have some serious concerns as to what that means. If evidence-based means relying on reports such as the 2004 IOM report stating that there is no connection between autism and thimerosal, the CAA will do us a lot more harm than good. Another point: If we readily accept this bill we will provide congress with an opportunity to shut the door on us in the future. Imagine going to congress in the future and being told "what do you want from us, we already gave you 1 billion dollars" The CAA could turn out to be the carrot in front of the horse, leading us away from what we are trying to accomplish. A-CHAMP and other organizations have withdrawn their support of the bill. This does NOT mean that they oppose it - just that they are not supporting it. Jane Ohio A-CHAMP coordinator kneeleee@... wrote: In a message dated 7/19/2006 9:38:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, aedape4@... writes: rom another list <chelatingkids2 >,< >, Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 11:15:51 -0700Subject: [ ] The latest news on the Combating Autism Act-is this what we agreed too? I don't know why everyone is so upset about this bill. First, we should not cut off our nose to spite our face here. I do that a lot with programming at school when there is resistance - we get our feet in the door, then expand from there. Second, I think it's important that we do use evidence based best practices. If these biomed treatments are really helping kids with autism, then why wouldn't people want this proven with research so it can become a standard practice/treatment? The wording seems to say to me that they must promote and develop research on this stuff and I'm not sure why that wouldn't be one area of research. I am not up on the

politics because I am busy with the politics in my own backyard. So if I'm missing something...??? Roxanna kneeleee@...

Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.

[Guest guest]

Yes. It is important that this bill not be supported as is. The key,

as Jane brought up, is that Sen. Lieberman, did indeed specifically

request that the CDC NOT be in charge of this research due to a

conflict of interest. We all know what that " conflict of interest

is. " Yet with the language the way it is, the CDC is once again

given licence to use that money for research however they see fit.

From their past track record, do you really think that biomedical

research will be a priority? It is highly unlikely, because it does

not involve the use of pharmceutical drugs. Their pockets are so

heavily lined with vaccine profits, that they cannot afford to

direct their research toward a vaccine-autism connection. Whether or

not there is doubt that so many autistic children were mercury

poisoned, there is enough evidence to explore it extensively. It is

those two areas of research that could be totally ignored.

With the language the way it is stated, the CDC is once again

given the power to shift the focus on other causes of autism. And

yes, there are most likely other causes... like the air we breathe,

the fish we consume, the poison in our dental fillings and the

chemicals that are forced into our homes and foods. These ARE other

possible causes. But I can tell anyone that without a doubt, my

grandson became autistic directly following a flu shot. He was the

recipient of a thimerisol laden HepB the moment he entered this

world. He continued to receive his vaccinations on schedule. Then

one day, at a well check, his mom was " guilted " into that flu shot,

being told that without it, he could die! While holding her newborn

in her arms and the other 3 in tow, my poor daughter had no clue

that she could have said " NO " ! The way that Dr. presented it to her,

she was a bad mother for not protecting her children against this

deadly flu. Within days, this apparently healthy toddler began to

lose language, eye contact and began developing characteristics that

would eventually be identified as " autism. "

As parents, grandparents and concerned advocates, we are

continually being told by the CCD, IOM, NIH and FDA that we are

crazy. Although they acknowledge that there have been a few vaccine

related injuries, they still want to sweep the mercury-autism theory

under the rug. They also want to discredit biomedical intervention

as a means to helping these children recover.

So in reality, we are not burning bridges by withdrawing support

for this bill, we are simply sending a message that we are well

aware of past practices and messages that the CDC wants the world to

believe... that there is no causal relationship between vaccines and

autism. We need to lurk over their shoulders and let our presence be

known. We have to keep ourselves well informed. We need to protect

children everywhere and we need to prevent and find a cure for

autism.

Whew... it doesn't take much to get me going! And I haven't even had

my morning coffee, yet!!!

-Trish

> In a message dated 7/19/2006 9:38:17 P.M. Eastern

Daylight Time, aedape4@... writes:

> rom another list

>

> <chelatingkids2 >,

> < >,

>

> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 11:15:51 -0700

> Subject: [ ] The latest news on the Combating Autism

Act-is this what we agreed too?

>

>

> I don't know why everyone is so upset about this bill. First,

we should not cut off our nose to spite our face here. I do that a

lot with programming at school when there is resistance - we get our

feet in the door, then expand from there. Second, I think it's

important that we do use evidence based best practices. If these

biomed treatments are really helping kids with autism, then why

wouldn't people want this proven with research so it can become a

standard practice/treatment? The wording seems to say to me that

they must promote and develop research on this stuff and I'm not

sure why that wouldn't be one area of research. I am not up on the

politics because I am busy with the politics in my own backyard. So

if I'm missing something...???

>

> Roxanna

> kneeleee@...

>

>

>

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and

30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 7/21/2006 6:41:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Ladyshrink111@... writes:

There is a chelation study being done in Arizona by Dr. Jim , the results are being made known/published later this year. Preliminary results are said to look very good.

Well, then there ya go. Why wouldn't people and groups support the CAA then if this stuff is coming around? Again, short sighted and self serving.

Roxanna

[Guest guest]

Roxanna, I will be more than happy to discuss this in detail with you. However, maybe this list is not the place to do it. My response would be very loooong. If anyone wishes to know more about the combating autism act, please email me privately at autismjtm@... Jane kneeleee@... wrote: In a

message dated 7/21/2006 6:41:16 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, Ladyshrink111@... writes: There is a chelation study being done in Arizona by Dr. Jim , the results are being made known/published later this year. Preliminary results are said to look very good. Well, then there ya go. Why wouldn't people and groups support the CAA then if this stuff is coming around? Again, short sighted and self serving. Roxanna

Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.