Guest guest Posted February 20, 2007 Report Share Posted February 20, 2007 > Steve Goodman and other epidemiologists have looked at the data and > concluded that there's nothing compelling to support an autism > epidemic. That doesn't make him a shill or a jerk or a used-car > salesman. > It just means he and others have found evidence that doesn't fit the > thimerosal theory. > >> > OK, can Dr. Goodman show us what evidence he is relying upon. >> >> Yes, it's freely available for download as a PDF file. Go to the >> Institute of Medicine's site and read the report " Immunization Safety >> Review: Vaccines and Autism " Regarding what Steve Goodman and others did or did not say, below is an excerpt of a letter that Bobbie Manning and I prepared in connection with A-CHAMP's effort on legislative initiatives. It clarifies Goodman's thinking - he and others did not dismiss the thimerosal hypothesis, but everyone in industry and government did completely distort and misuse the IOM to attack the thimerosal hypothesis, even some members of the review committee itself. The Vaccine Safety Review Committee stated in its report, among other statements, The 2004 IOM Immunization Safety Review report failed to rule out an association between vaccines and autism in a subset of the population of children. Indeed, the Vaccine Safety Review report explicitly acknowledged the serious limitations of epidemiological studies on which the IOM relied, noting, “[t]his hypothesis cannot be excluded by epidemiological data from large population groups that do not show an association between a vaccine and an adverse outcome. Depending on the frequency of the genetic defect, a rare event caused by genetic susceptibility could be missed even in large study samples.” It should be noted that the Immunization Safety Review 2004 report looked only at autism and not other neurodevelopmental disorders, often mislabeled as “autism”, that may have an association with vaccines. [note that one genetic " defect " recently associated with autism by a researcher at Vanderbilt occurs in 47% of the U.S. population!!!] Support for vaccine research also comes from Dr. Clements, vaccine adviser to the World Health Organization (WHO). Dr. Clements echoed the need for non-epidemiological vaccine research when he commented that, " t is not possible to prove that [thimerosal] is completely safe – epidemiology can only quantify a risk, not prove its absence.” Clement's view is confirmed in Verstraeten's own comments about his study in Pediatrics, when he stated in a letter published in Pediatrics that his study was NOT A NEGATIVE STUDY, only one that could be used to generate hypotheses. As to Goodman, here is the passage in our letter discussing his views: " Vaccine Safety Review Committee member Dr. Steve Goodman of the s Hopkins University School of Medicine stated that the IOM did not, contrary to prevailing belief, direct a discontinuation of research into the thimerosal/autism hypothesis. Dr. Goodman explained that the IOM’s statements were misconstrued. Dr. Goodman stated that, “First of all, we didn't dismiss anything. What we did say is if you've got a fixed pot don't spend huge amounts more on epidemiology. What we said was that resources would be better spent on understanding the biology. " Couple the foregoing with the questionable procedures used by the IOM, the conflicts of interest that exist in the IOM, all evidenced by the closed door transcripts, it becomes clear that the IOM report is no longer relevant and cannot be used to dismiss the vaccine link to NDD's. Arguing even more strongly for dismissal of the IOM report is the fact that many studies have been published since the IOM report that strongly implicate thimerosal in vaccines as a cause for neurodevelopmental disorder, including autism. You cannot rely on a review committee that did no original research when new research shows that a link exists. Provide unfettered independent researcher access to the Vaccine Safety Datalink before dismissing the thimerosal link. I respectfully submit we are going to have to look more closely at the vaccine/neurodevelopmental disorder link and not simply rely on historical review documents such as the IOM report to resolve the debate. Dr. Goodman himself seems to have stated the very same thing. On Feb 20, 2007, at 4:34 PM, rhodopsin1 wrote: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Mr. Krakow stated: " The 2004 IOM Immunization Safety Review report failed to rule out an association between vaccines and autism in a subset of the population of children. Indeed, the Vaccine Safety Review report explicitly acknowledged the serious limitations of epidemiological studies on which the IOM relied, noting, " [t]his hypothesis cannot be excluded by epidemiological data from large population groups that do not show an association between a vaccine and an adverse outcome. Depending on the frequency of the genetic defect, a rare event caused by genetic susceptibility could be missed even in large study samples. " My Response: Yes, I agree. These studies can't rule out rare events. But rare events do not create epidemics and that is the larger point that earned Dr. Goodman such enmity on this list. Mr. Krakow next reviewed a statement by Dr. Goodman: " Dr. Goodman stated that, " First of all, we didn't dismiss anything. What we did say is if you've got a fixed pot don't spend huge amounts more on epidemiology. What we said was that resources would be better spent on understanding the biology. " My Response: Again, I agree. The recent ability to quickly and cost-effectively scan the whole genome to look for autism-associated alterations in genes and the environmental factors that influence the expression of those genes is the most important area of research. It will settle the-cause-of- autism argument once and for all. Mr. Krakow next stated: " Couple the foregoing with the questionable procedures used by the IOM,the conflicts of interest that exist in the IOM, all evidenced by the closed door transcripts, it becomes clear that the IOM report is no longer relevant and cannot be used to dismiss the vaccine link to NDD's. Arguing even more strongly for dismissal of the IOM report is the fact that many studies have been published since the IOM report that strongly implicate thimerosal in vaccines as a cause for neurodevelopmental disorder, including autism. You cannot rely on a review committee that did no original research when new research shows that a link exists. " My response: Here is where we part company. The conflicts of interest are imagined by those who would like to discount the IOM report. The many studies published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. The lack of evidence supporting the thimerosal link is nicely underscored by the long and thoughtful response of the FDA to Dr. B.S. Hooker and his consigners petition to remove thimerosal from vaccines. The response was as thorough and timely as it was devastating to the arguments this group put forth. Lastly, Mr. Krakow stated: " I respectfully submit we are going to have to look more closely at the vaccine/neurodevelopmental disorder link and not simply rely on historical review documents such as the IOM report to resolve the debate. Dr. Goodman himself seems to have stated the very same thing. " My Response: I concur that the IOM report and studies it evaluated did not settle whether a small subset of genotype(s) is susceptible to mercury. That will be settled by genome wide association studies, hopefully before any litigation is decided. Epidemiology is not the right tool for detecting rare events. But epidemiology has done a very good job of finding the causes of epidemics and the IOM, Dr. Goodman and all of the studies published have not found evidence to support an autism epidemic. And unless I'm mistaken all of the conflict has been about a purported epidemic caused by thimerosal. Tom (Not Autism Diva) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Nice Tom... Go for the initials... That's always mature... Can't criticize my definitive arguments - do poorly with Mr. Krakow's. Ergo, jump the shark and play the " B.S. " card... > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 " Rare " could be 1 in 150 or if you believe that only half of " autism " cases are related to vaccines, 1 in 300 That is rare enough not to be picked up in poorly designed epidemiological studies, or ones manipulated not to find the subset. Dr. Walter Spitzer, an esteemed epiemiologists specifically made this point with respect to the Danish MMR epidemiology study. The enmity against Dr. Goodman by some on this list relates to the fact that he denies an epidemic that is obvious to any person whose eyes are open. That is beside the point- the point is that Dr. Goodman denies the epidemic without any support, and appears to deny a vaccine-autism link in contradiction to the IOM study and without affirmative epidemiological or other scientific support. > The recent ability to quickly and cost-effectively > scan the whole genome to look for autism-associated alterations in > genes and the environmental factors that influence the expression of > those genes is the most important area of research. It will settle > the-cause-of- autism argument once and for all. If you are referring to the recently published Gene mapping study I cannot disagree with you more. This study found no gene associated with autism with any statistical significance whatsoever. At best, it may have identified susceptibility genes, which is no surprise as it is universally agreed that " autism " or related neurodevelopmental disorders have a genetic component, as do most chronic diseases. The genetic study you cite will likely help to prove that there is, indeed, an environmental or vaccine component. The authors' interpretations and claims, especially Buxbaum's, are absurd and are not supported by their own data. The study is a virtual fraud. But I do agree the failure of the gene-mappers to identify an " autism gene " will help resolve the autism etiology issue once and for all. It will help show that there is an environmental cause. After that, Tom, we seriously disagree. But further debate with you appears fruitless. Suffice it to say that many studies not considered by the IOM or completed since are of great value. The genetics will resolve nothing. You do make one revealing point: the purpose and timing of the genome work is an effort to defeat the litigation. Statements by Buxbaum that 90% of autism is " genetic " are false on their face, and completed unsupported by the genetic work. Read the study - there is not one gene identified that has any statistically significant relationship to autism. If improving the lot of our children rests on this study and these geneticists then there is little hope, indeed. The researchers are simply playing for more $millions of research funding to further their foolish pursuit. There is no autism gene. If you know of one, please let me know what it is. On Feb 20, 2007, at 10:50 PM, rhodopsin1 wrote: Mr. Krakow stated: " The 2004 IOM Immunization Safety Review report failed to rule out an association between vaccines and autism in a subset of the population of children. Indeed, the Vaccine Safety Review report explicitly acknowledged the serious limitations of epidemiological studies on which the IOM relied, noting, " [t]his hypothesis cannot be excluded by epidemiological data from large population groups that do not show an association between a vaccine and an adverse outcome. Depending on the frequency of the genetic defect, a rare event caused by genetic susceptibility could be missed even in large study samples. " My Response: Yes, I agree. These studies can't rule out rare events. But rare events do not create epidemics and that is the larger point that earned Dr. Goodman such enmity on this list. Mr. Krakow next reviewed a statement by Dr. Goodman: " Dr. Goodman stated that, " First of all, we didn't dismiss anything. What we did say is if you've got a fixed pot don't spend huge amounts more on epidemiology. What we said was that resources would be better spent on understanding the biology. " My Response: Again, I agree. The recent ability to quickly and cost-effectively scan the whole genome to look for autism-associated alterations in genes and the environmental factors that influence the expression of those genes is the most important area of research. It will settle the-cause-of- autism argument once and for all. Mr. Krakow next stated: " Couple the foregoing with the questionable procedures used by the IOM,the conflicts of interest that exist in the IOM, all evidenced by the closed door transcripts, it becomes clear that the IOM report is no longer relevant and cannot be used to dismiss the vaccine link to NDD's. Arguing even more strongly for dismissal of the IOM report is the fact that many studies have been published since the IOM report that strongly implicate thimerosal in vaccines as a cause for neurodevelopmental disorder, including autism. You cannot rely on a review committee that did no original research when new research shows that a link exists. " My response: Here is where we part company. The conflicts of interest are imagined by those who would like to discount the IOM report. The many studies published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. The lack of evidence supporting the thimerosal link is nicely underscored by the long and thoughtful response of the FDA to Dr. B.S. Hooker and his consigners petition to remove thimerosal from vaccines. The response was as thorough and timely as it was devastating to the arguments this group put forth. Lastly, Mr. Krakow stated: " I respectfully submit we are going to have to look more closely at the vaccine/neurodevelopmental disorder link and not simply rely on historical review documents such as the IOM report to resolve the debate. Dr. Goodman himself seems to have stated the very same thing. " My Response: I concur that the IOM report and studies it evaluated did not settle whether a small subset of genotype(s) is susceptible to mercury. That will be settled by genome wide association studies, hopefully before any litigation is decided. Epidemiology is not the right tool for detecting rare events. But epidemiology has done a very good job of finding the causes of epidemics and the IOM, Dr. Goodman and all of the studies published have not found evidence to support an autism epidemic. And unless I'm mistaken all of the conflict has been about a purported epidemic caused by thimerosal. Tom (Not Autism Diva) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Tom wrote: My response: Here is where we part company. The conflicts of interest are imagined by those who would like to discount the IOM report. The many studies published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. 's response: Oh, I see, and the IOM has noone in it that has conflicts of interest? Careful, researched , and thought-out observation. See Krakow's earlier post, or 's, perhaps you missed some references from them. If so, I can provide you with similar references of my own. " Tom " wrote: The lack of evidence supporting the thimerosal link is nicely underscored by the long and thoughtful response of the FDA to Dr. B.S. Hooker and his consigners petition to remove thimerosal from vaccines. The response was as thorough and timely as it was devastating to the arguments this group put forth. Is this the same FDA that admitted in transcripts that it was " asleep at the switch " when it came to failing to calculate all of the thimerosal in the ever-increasing vaccine schedule? The same FDA that has repeatedly made " bad choices " as I would say to my children when they are doing so? The same FDA who recently approved cloned beef and " bacteria eating viruses " to our nations food supply without having to disclose this to the nation's consumer public? O.K - just checking. Yes, they are very trustworthy. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 For some reason, both Goodman and Neal Halsey turned on this issue. They must have felt tremendous heat on this thing. They've been corrupted (based upon my personal experience, information and HO). Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse Too bad I didn't save the rude and crass email I received from him; I'd love to share it with all on this list.I think you're wasting your time trying to convince the knowledgeable and dedicated parents on this list that mercury, particularly thimerosal, has not contributed to the autism epidemic. We all know that epidemilogical evidence doesn't hold water in a court of law. I have corresponded with an actuary and statistician who is known for his work in the U.S. insurance industry who told me, "The studies used to exonerate thimerosal in the autism epidemic are complete garbage and would never be acceptable in my industry."We are all familiar with the lab and clinical science that supports our claim that thimerosal injured our kids. Many of us have the urine toxic metal reports showing that mercury is pouring out of our kids after we chelate. We have all read the MSDS for thimerosal, the transcripts from the Simpsonwood Meeting, and "Mercury in Medicine - Taking Unnecessary Risks". Please ask Dr. Goodman why the VSD data is not available so that the Verstraeten study can be replicated. Also, ask him why the AAP changed the wording when reporting the results of the Denmark study (we have FOIA documents confirming that it was reported that autism rates "decreased" when thimerosal was removed in Denmark, yet the AAP used the word "increased" in their reporting of the study results.)> > Hey, didn't you guys hear that well dressed professional man on 60 > minutes tell the world there is no autism epidemic? Isn't it just > better and a broader diagnosis? What's wrong with us? We're supposed > to believe him. He looked sincere. He sounded like he was sincere. > My 21 yo daughter said he sounded like a used car salesman. > > Harry H.> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 That's probably true. But epidemiologists often become advocates, rather than impartial truth seekers. Re: Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse Steve Goodman and other epidemiologists have looked at the data and concluded that there's nothing compelling to support an autism epidemic. That doesn't make him a shill or a jerk or a used-car salesman. It just means he and others have found evidence that doesn't fit the thimerosal theory. > OK, can Dr. Goodman show us what evidence he is relying upon. Yes, it's freely available for download as a PDF file. Go to the Institute of Medicine's site and read the report "Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism" Regarding what Steve Goodman and others did or did not say, below is an excerpt of a letter that Bobbie Manning and I prepared in connection with A-CHAMP's effort on legislative initiatives. It clarifies Goodman's thinking - he and others did not dismiss the thimerosal hypothesis, but everyone in industry and government did completely distort and misuse the IOM to attack the thimerosal hypothesis, even some members of the review committee itself. The Vaccine Safety Review Committee stated in its report, among other statements, The 2004 IOM Immunization Safety Review report failed to rule out an association between vaccines and autism in a subset of the population of children. Indeed, the Vaccine Safety Review report explicitly acknowledged the serious limitations of epidemiological studies on which the IOM relied, noting, “[t]his hypothesis cannot be excluded by epidemiological data from large population groups that do not show an association between a vaccine and an adverse outcome. Depending on the frequency of the genetic defect, a rare event caused by genetic susceptibility could be missed even in large study samples.” It should be noted that the Immunization Safety Review 2004 report looked only at autism and not other neurodevelopmental disorders, often mislabeled as “autism”, that may have an association with vaccines. [note that one genetic "defect" recently associated with autism by a researcher at Vanderbilt occurs in 47% of the U.S. population!!!]Support for vaccine research also comes from Dr. Clements, vaccine adviser to the World Health Organization (WHO). Dr. Clements echoed the need for non-epidemiological vaccine research when he commented that, "t is not possible to prove that [thimerosal] is completely safe – epidemiology can only quantify a risk, not prove its absence.” Clement's view is confirmed in Verstraeten's own comments about his study in Pediatrics, when he stated in a letter published in Pediatrics that his study was NOT A NEGATIVE STUDY, only one that could be used to generate hypotheses.As to Goodman, here is the passage in our letter discussing his views:"Vaccine Safety Review Committee member Dr. Steve Goodman of the s Hopkins University School of Medicine stated that the IOM did not, contrary to prevailing belief, direct a discontinuation of research into the thimerosal/autism hypothesis. Dr. Goodman explained that the IOM’s statements were misconstrued. Dr. Goodman stated that, “First of all, we didn't dismiss anything. What we did say is if you've got a fixed pot don't spend huge amounts more on epidemiology. What we said was that resources would be better spent on understanding the biology." Couple the foregoing with the questionable procedures used by the IOM, the conflicts of interest that exist in the IOM, all evidenced by the closed door transcripts, it becomes clear that the IOM report is no longer relevant and cannot be used to dismiss the vaccine link to NDD's. Arguing even more strongly for dismissal of the IOM report is the fact that many studies have been published since the IOM report that strongly implicate thimerosal in vaccines as a cause for neurodevelopmental disorder, including autism. You cannot rely on a review committee that did no original research when new research shows that a link exists.Provide unfettered independent researcher access to the Vaccine Safety Datalink before dismissing the thimerosal link.I respectfully submit we are going to have to look more closely at the vaccine/neurodevelopmental disorder link and not simply rely on historical review documents such as the IOM report to resolve the debate. Dr. Goodman himself seems to have stated the very same thing.On Feb 20, 2007, at 4:34 PM, rhodopsin1 wrote: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Very cerebral, Henry... But we don't like you for your mind, just your sense of humor! > > > > Hey, didn't you guys hear that well dressed professional man on > 60 > > minutes tell the world there is no autism epidemic? Isn't it just > > better and a broader diagnosis? What's wrong with us? We're > supposed > > to believe him. He looked sincere. He sounded like he was > sincere. > > My 21 yo daughter said he sounded like a used car salesman. > > > > Harry H. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 So the argument is now simple semantics. BTW- do you know Twoweasleys? Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse Mr. Krakow stated: "The 2004 IOM Immunization Safety Review report failed to rule out an association between vaccines and autism in a subset of the population of children. Indeed, the Vaccine Safety Review report explicitly acknowledged the serious limitations of epidemiological studies on which the IOM relied, noting, "[t]his hypothesis cannot be excluded by epidemiological data from large population groups that do not show an association between a vaccine and an adverse outcome. Depending on the frequency of the genetic defect, a rare event caused by genetic susceptibility could be missed even in large study samples."My Response:Yes, I agree. These studies can't rule out rare events. But rare events do not create epidemics and that is the larger point that earned Dr. Goodman such enmity on this list. Mr. Krakow next reviewed a statement by Dr. Goodman:"Dr. Goodman stated that, "First of all, we didn't dismiss anything. What we did say is if you've got a fixed pot don't spend huge amounts more on epidemiology. What we said was that resources would be better spent on understanding the biology."My Response:Again, I agree. The recent ability to quickly and cost-effectively scan the whole genome to look for autism-associated alterations in genes and the environmental factors that influence the expression of those genes is the most important area of research. It will settle the-cause-of- autism argument once and for all.Mr. Krakow next stated:"Couple the foregoing with the questionable procedures used by the IOM,the conflicts of interest that exist in the IOM, all evidenced by the closed door transcripts, it becomes clear that the IOM report is no longer relevant and cannot be used to dismiss the vaccine link to NDD's. Arguing even more strongly for dismissal of the IOM report is the fact that many studies have been published since the IOM report that strongly implicate thimerosal in vaccines as a cause forneurodevelopmental disorder, including autism. You cannot rely on a review committee that did no original research when new research shows that a link exists."My response:Here is where we part company. The conflicts of interest are imagined by those who would like to discount the IOM report. The many studies published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. The lack of evidence supporting the thimerosal link is nicely underscored by the long and thoughtful response of the FDA to Dr. B.S. Hooker and his consigners petition to remove thimerosal from vaccines. The response was as thorough and timely as it was devastating to the arguments this group put forth.Lastly, Mr. Krakow stated:"I respectfully submit we are going to have to look more closely at the vaccine/neurodevelopmental disorder link and not simply rely onhistorical review documents such as the IOM report to resolve thedebate. Dr. Goodman himself seems to have stated the very same thing."My Response:I concur that the IOM report and studies it evaluated did not settle whether a small subset of genotype(s) is susceptible to mercury. That will be settled by genome wide association studies, hopefully before any litigation is decided.Epidemiology is not the right tool for detecting rare events. But epidemiology has done a very good job of finding the causes of epidemics and the IOM, Dr. Goodman and all of the studies published have not found evidence to support an autism epidemic. And unless I'm mistaken all of the conflict has been about a purported epidemic caused by thimerosal.Tom (Not Autism Diva) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007  I believe that Goodman denies the epidemic because he has a cattle prod up his arse. Re: Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse "Rare" could be 1 in 150 or if you believe that only half of "autism" cases are related to vaccines, 1 in 300That is rare enough not to be picked up in poorly designed epidemiological studies, or ones manipulated not to find the subset. Dr. Walter Spitzer, an esteemed epiemiologists specifically made this point with respect to the Danish MMR epidemiology study.The enmity against Dr. Goodman by some on this list relates to the fact that he denies an epidemic that is obvious to any person whose eyes are open. That is beside the point- the point is that Dr. Goodman denies the epidemic without any support, and appears to deny a vaccine-autism link in contradiction to the IOM study and without affirmative epidemiological or other scientific support. The recent ability to quickly and cost-effectively scan the whole genome to look for autism-associated alterations in genes and the environmental factors that influence the expression of those genes is the most important area of research. It will settle the-cause-of- autism argument once and for all.If you are referring to the recently published Gene mapping study I cannot disagree with you more. This study found no gene associated with autism with any statistical significance whatsoever. At best, it may have identified susceptibility genes, which is no surprise as it is universally agreed that "autism" or related neurodevelopmental disorders have a genetic component, as do most chronic diseases. The genetic study you cite will likely help to prove that there is, indeed, an environmental or vaccine component. The authors' interpretations and claims, especially Buxbaum's, are absurd and are not supported by their own data. The study is a virtual fraud. But I do agree the failure of the gene-mappers to identify an "autism gene" will help resolve the autism etiology issue once and for all. It will help show that there is an environmental cause.After that, Tom, we seriously disagree. But further debate with you appears fruitless. Suffice it to say that many studies not considered by the IOM or completed since are of great value. The genetics will resolve nothing. You do make one revealing point: the purpose and timing of the genome work is an effort to defeat the litigation. Statements by Buxbaum that 90% of autism is "genetic" are false on their face, and completed unsupported by the genetic work. Read the study - there is not one gene identified that has any statistically significant relationship to autism. If improving the lot of our children rests on this study and these geneticists then there is little hope, indeed. The researchers are simply playing for more $millions of research funding to further their foolish pursuit.There is no autism gene. If you know of one, please let me know what it is. On Feb 20, 2007, at 10:50 PM, rhodopsin1 wrote:Mr. Krakow stated: "The 2004 IOM Immunization Safety Review report failed to rule out an association between vaccines and autism in a subset of the population of children. Indeed, the Vaccine Safety Review report explicitly acknowledged the serious limitations of epidemiological studies on which the IOM relied, noting, "[t]his hypothesis cannot be excluded by epidemiological data from large population groups that do not show an association between a vaccine and an adverse outcome. Depending on the frequency of the genetic defect, a rare event caused by genetic susceptibility could be missed even in large study samples."My Response:Yes, I agree. These studies can't rule out rare events. But rare events do not create epidemics and that is the larger point that earned Dr. Goodman such enmity on this list. Mr. Krakow next reviewed a statement by Dr. Goodman:"Dr. Goodman stated that, "First of all, we didn't dismiss anything. What we did say is if you've got a fixed pot don't spend huge amounts more on epidemiology. What we said was that resources would be better spent on understanding the biology."My Response:Again, I agree. The recent ability to quickly and cost-effectively scan the whole genome to look for autism-associated alterations in genes and the environmental factors that influence the expression of those genes is the most important area of research. It will settle the-cause-of- autism argument once and for all.Mr. Krakow next stated:"Couple the foregoing with the questionable procedures used by the IOM,the conflicts of interest that exist in the IOM, all evidenced by the closed door transcripts, it becomes clear that the IOM report is no longer relevant and cannot be used to dismiss the vaccine link to NDD's. Arguing even more strongly for dismissal of the IOM report is the fact that many studies have been published since the IOM report that strongly implicate thimerosal in vaccines as a cause forneurodevelopmental disorder, including autism. You cannot rely on a review committee that did no original research when new research shows that a link exists."My response:Here is where we part company. The conflicts of interest are imagined by those who would like to discount the IOM report. The many studies published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. The lack of evidence supporting the thimerosal link is nicely underscored by the long and thoughtful response of the FDA to Dr. B.S. Hooker and his consigners petition to remove thimerosal from vaccines. The response was as thorough and timely as it was devastating to the arguments this group put forth.Lastly, Mr. Krakow stated:"I respectfully submit we are going to have to look more closely at the vaccine/neurodevelopmental disorder link and not simply rely onhistorical review documents such as the IOM report to resolve thedebate. Dr. Goodman himself seems to have stated the very same thing."My Response:I concur that the IOM report and studies it evaluated did not settle whether a small subset of genotype(s) is susceptible to mercury. That will be settled by genome wide association studies, hopefully before any litigation is decided.Epidemiology is not the right tool for detecting rare events. But epidemiology has done a very good job of finding the causes of epidemics and the IOM, Dr. Goodman and all of the studies published have not found evidence to support an autism epidemic. And unless I'm mistaken all of the conflict has been about a purported epidemic caused by thimerosal.Tom (Not Autism Diva) > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Where it apparently scrambled his brains! The world is not yet exhausted; let me see something tomorrow which I never saw before.- ************************************************************************* Re: Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse "Rare" could be 1 in 150 or if you believe that only half of "autism" cases are related to vaccines, 1 in 300That is rare enough not to be picked up in poorly designed epidemiological studies, or ones manipulated not to find the subset. Dr. Walter Spitzer, an esteemed epiemiologists specifically made this point with respect to the Danish MMR epidemiology study.The enmity against Dr. Goodman by some on this list relates to the fact that he denies an epidemic that is obvious to any person whose eyes are open. That is beside the point- the point is that Dr. Goodman denies the epidemic without any support, and appears to deny a vaccine-autism link in contradiction to the IOM study and without affirmative epidemiological or other scientific support. The recent ability to quickly and cost-effectively scan the whole genome to look for autism-associated alterations in genes and the environmental factors that influence the expression of those genes is the most important area of research. It will settle the-cause-of- autism argument once and for all.If you are referring to the recently published Gene mapping study I cannot disagree with you more. This study found no gene associated with autism with any statistical significance whatsoever. At best, it may have identified susceptibility genes, which is no surprise as it is universally agreed that "autism" or related neurodevelopmental disorders have a genetic component, as do most chronic diseases. The genetic study you cite will likely help to prove that there is, indeed, an environmental or vaccine component. The authors' interpretations and claims, especially Buxbaum's, are absurd and are not supported by their own data. The study is a virtual fraud. But I do agree the failure of the gene-mappers to identify an "autism gene" will help resolve the autism etiology issue once and for all. It will help show that there is an environmental cause.After that, Tom, we seriously disagree. But further debate with you appears fruitless. Suffice it to say that many studies not considered by the IOM or completed since are of great value. The genetics will resolve nothing. You do make one revealing point: the purpose and timing of the genome work is an effort to defeat the litigation. Statements by Buxbaum that 90% of autism is "genetic" are false on their face, and completed unsupported by the genetic work. Read the study - there is not one gene identified that has any statistically significant relationship to autism. If improving the lot of our children rests on this study and these geneticists then there is little hope, indeed. The researchers are simply playing for more $millions of research funding to further their foolish pursuit.There is no autism gene. If you know of one, please let me know what it is. On Feb 20, 2007, at 10:50 PM, rhodopsin1 wrote:Mr. Krakow stated: "The 2004 IOM Immunization Safety Review report failed to rule out an association between vaccines and autism in a subset of the population of children. Indeed, the Vaccine Safety Review report explicitly acknowledged the serious limitations of epidemiological studies on which the IOM relied, noting, "[t]his hypothesis cannot be excluded by epidemiological data from large population groups that do not show an association between a vaccine and an adverse outcome. Depending on the frequency of the genetic defect, a rare event caused by genetic susceptibility could be missed even in large study samples."My Response:Yes, I agree. These studies can't rule out rare events. But rare events do not create epidemics and that is the larger point that earned Dr. Goodman such enmity on this list. Mr. Krakow next reviewed a statement by Dr. Goodman:"Dr. Goodman stated that, "First of all, we didn't dismiss anything. What we did say is if you've got a fixed pot don't spend huge amounts more on epidemiology. What we said was that resources would be better spent on understanding the biology."My Response:Again, I agree. The recent ability to quickly and cost-effectively scan the whole genome to look for autism-associated alterations in genes and the environmental factors that influence the expression of those genes is the most important area of research. It will settle the-cause-of- autism argument once and for all.Mr. Krakow next stated:"Couple the foregoing with the questionable procedures used by the IOM,the conflicts of interest that exist in the IOM, all evidenced by the closed door transcripts, it becomes clear that the IOM report is no longer relevant and cannot be used to dismiss the vaccine link to NDD's. Arguing even more strongly for dismissal of the IOM report is the fact that many studies have been published since the IOM report that strongly implicate thimerosal in vaccines as a cause forneurodevelopmental disorder, including autism. You cannot rely on a review committee that did no original research when new research shows that a link exists."My response:Here is where we part company. The conflicts of interest are imagined by those who would like to discount the IOM report. The many studies published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. The lack of evidence supporting the thimerosal link is nicely underscored by the long and thoughtful response of the FDA to Dr. B.S. Hooker and his consigners petition to remove thimerosal from vaccines. The response was as thorough and timely as it was devastating to the arguments this group put forth.Lastly, Mr. Krakow stated:"I respectfully submit we are going to have to look more closely at the vaccine/neurodevelopmental disorder link and not simply rely onhistorical review documents such as the IOM report to resolve thedebate. Dr. Goodman himself seems to have stated the very same thing."My Response:I concur that the IOM report and studies it evaluated did not settle whether a small subset of genotype(s) is susceptible to mercury. That will be settled by genome wide association studies, hopefully before any litigation is decided.Epidemiology is not the right tool for detecting rare events. But epidemiology has done a very good job of finding the causes of epidemics and the IOM, Dr. Goodman and all of the studies published have not found evidence to support an autism epidemic. And unless I'm mistaken all of the conflict has been about a purported epidemic caused by thimerosal.Tom (Not Autism Diva) > Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast with the Search weather shortcut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Dear Tom This is a very interesting statement: “The many studies published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty.” Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in regards to the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, Univ of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ; Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a plausible biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor to regressive autism. I will gladly question these people point blank about your allegations and publish their responses in the Huffington Post. I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies of “poor quality,” as you say, given the rigorous peer review system to which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals in the field). Any specific information you have on the integrity of these researchers and their studies should be shared with the public immediately. Many thanks Kirby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Calling Dr. Goodman a used car salesman and inferring that he's disingenuous I cannot imagine anyone being so nice in describing such a man.....the only problem with thimerosal as the guilty cause is that thimersosal is not the only source of mercury exposure. And as they have taken out the mercury in vaccines in the US mercury has increased everywhere in concentration. Now you American citizens prepare for the 150 new coal fired energy plants that are going to be built.............here in Brazil we have no coal fired plants, only hydroelectric and one nuclear plant, perhaps two. But beyond all belief they double up on the mercury in vaccines and never even dream of taking it out. Thats right the birth shot of Hep B has 50 mcgs.............perhaps someone though, what the hell, we dont have much mercury air pollution so lets give them more in the shots. I really cannot think of a better explanation. Mark Sircus Ac., OMDDirector International Medical Veritas Association http://www.imva.info Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 IT APPEARS THAT THe INCIDENCDE of AUTISM INCREASED SIGNICANTLY IN 2005 and 2006. Hep, B VACCINE, MANDATORY FOR THE NEWBORN IN THE FIRSt 24 HOURS of LIFE , AND RICH IN THIMERSOL, IS PROBABLY RESPONSIBLE, AND MANY INFANTS RE RECEIVED A FLU VACCINE CONTAINING THIMERSLOLH. H.Fudenberg, M.D.,DDG.IOM Inman, SC 29349 (864) 592 8076 Website nitrf.org EOHarm From: dkirby@...Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 11:14:59 -0500Subject: Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse Dear Tom This is a very interesting statement: “The many studiespublished since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. Thestudies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poorquality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests,histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty.” Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in regards to the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, Univ of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ; Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a plausible biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor to regressive autism. I will gladly question these people point blank about your allegations and publish their responses in the Huffington Post. I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies of “poor quality,” as you say, given the rigorous peer review system to which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals in the field). Any specific information you have on the integrity of these researchers and their studies should be shared with the public immediately. Many thanks Kirby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Must say I missed the size 24 font. Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse Dear Tom This is a very interesting statement: “The many studiespublished since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. Thestudies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poorquality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests,histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty.” Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in regards to the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, Univ of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ; Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a plausible biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor to regressive autism. I will gladly question these people point blank about your allegations and publish their responses in the Huffington Post. I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies of “poor quality,” as you say, given the rigorous peer review system to which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals in the field). Any specific information you have on the integrity of these researchers and their studies should be shared with the public immediately. Many thanks Kirby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 21, 2007 Report Share Posted February 21, 2007 Those increases in 2005-06 can, in my op, be directly correlated with the mandated flu vaccines. The year those started, what, around 2003?, would be turning the age of dx. Debi > > > IT APPEARS THAT THe INCIDENCDE of AUTISM INCREASED SIGNICANTLY IN 2005 and 2006. Hep, B VACCINE, MANDATORY FOR THE NEWBORN IN THE FIRSt 24 HOURS of LIFE , AND RICH IN THIMERSOL, IS PROBABLY RESPONSIBLE, AND MANY INFANTS RE RECEIVED A FLU VACCINE CONTAINING THIMERSLOLH. H.Fudenberg, M.D.,DDG.IOM Inman, SC 29349 (864) 592 8076 Website nitrf.org > > > EOHarm@...: dkirby@...: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 11:14:59 -0500Subject: Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse > > > > > > > Dear Tom > > This is a very interesting statement: > > �The many studiespublished since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. Thestudies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poorquality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests,histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty.� > > Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in regards to the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, Univ of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ; Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. > > These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a plausible biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor to regressive autism. > > I will gladly question these people point blank about your allegations and publish their responses in the Huffington Post. > > I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies of �poor quality,� as you say, given the rigorous peer review system to which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals in the field). > > Any specific information you have on the integrity of these researchers and their studies should be shared with the public immediately. > > Many thanks > > Kirby > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Tom, Deth showed us that mercury prevents methylation. The kids can't convert B-12 into methyl B-12. Without methyl B-12, it is impossible for anyone to pay attention to anything. That's what autism is, an inability to pay attention to anything. Neubrander showed us that over 90% of kids improve with the addition of methyl B-12. It's a temporary solution until the mercury can be removed and the kids can manufacture their own MB-12. That's really all you need to know, Tom. Now, why don't you go ask Mrs Seidel to stop bugging the Geier's and other decent people who help kids and ask her about the fraud that is Baggs? > > > > Dear Tom > > > > This is a very interesting statement: > > > > " The many studies > > published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The > > studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor > > quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, > > histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. " > > > > Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in > regards to > > the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha > > Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, > Univ > > of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ; > > Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. > > > > These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a > plausible > > biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor > to > > regressive autism. > > > > I will gladly question these people point blank about your > allegations > > and publish their responses in the Huffington Post. > > > > I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies of > > " poor quality, " as you say, given the rigorous peer review system to > > which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals > in the > > field). > > > > Any specific information you have on the integrity of these > researchers > > and their studies should be shared with the public immediately. > > > > Many thanks > > > > Kirby > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 > > Well hello , > > What a generous offer. > However, since none of the authors you mention presented data to > implicate thimerosal as the cause of autism, it would be a misplaced > gesture on your part. or an easy way out of responding to the specifics of 's request concerning your blanket allegation on them as well " Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in regards to the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, Univ of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ; Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Geier bashing? C'mon, it's been done to death. Is that the best " Tom " can do? No data analysis, no rhetorical deconstruction, just ad hominem hit-and-run? Sigh... Society would benefit more by " Tom " reminding People Magazine not to use the phrase " suffered from Asperger's syndrome. " Today I chastised a local columnist who quoted that phrase. - Hokkanen > > > > > > Dear Tom > > > > > > This is a very interesting statement: > > > > > > " The many studies > > > published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The > > > studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of > poor > > > quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, > > > histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. " > > > > > > Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in > > regards to > > > the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha > > > Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; > Burbacher, > > Univ > > > of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC > ; > > > Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. > > > > > > These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a > > plausible > > > biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing > factor > > to > > > regressive autism. > > > > > > I will gladly question these people point blank about your > > allegations > > > and publish their responses in the Huffington Post. > > > > > > I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies > of > > > " poor quality, " as you say, given the rigorous peer review system > to > > > which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals > > in the > > > field). > > > > > > Any specific information you have on the integrity of these > > researchers > > > and their studies should be shared with the public immediately. > > > > > > Many thanks > > > > > > Kirby > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Best Jr wrote: Neubrander showed us that over 90% of kids improve with the addition of methyl B-12. It's a temporary solution until the mercury can be removed and the kids can manufacture their own MB-12. Humans cannot manufacture their own MB-12, B12 , or any other B12 vitamin. It will be a long time before someone finds a way for kids lacking in B12 to do this. If I am wrong about this, please let me know, Aasa Best Jr <bettwice33@...> wrote: Tom,Deth showed us that mercury prevents methylation. The kids can't convert B-12 into methyl B-12. Without methyl B-12, it is impossible for anyone to pay attention to anything. That's what autism is, an inability to pay attention to anything.Neubrander showed us that over 90% of kids improve with the addition of methyl B-12. It's a temporary solution until the mercury can be removed and the kids can manufacture their own MB-12. That's really all you need to know, Tom.Now, why don't you go ask Mrs Seidel to stop bugging the Geier's and other decent people who help kids and ask her about the fraud that is Baggs?> >> > Dear Tom> > > > This is a very interesting statement:> > > > "The many studies> > published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The> > studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor> > quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests,> > histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty."> > > > Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in > regards to> > the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha> > Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, > Univ> > of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ;> > Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester.> > > > These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a > plausible> > biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor > to> > regressive autism.> > > > I will gladly question these people point blank about your > allegations> > and publish their responses in the Huffington Post.> > > > I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies of> > "poor quality," as you say, given the rigorous peer review system to> > which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals > in the> > field). > > > > Any specific information you have on the integrity of these > researchers> > and their studies should be shared with the public immediately.> > > > Many thanks> > > > Kirby> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 does not say that the data implicates thimerosal as the cause of autism, what he states is there " are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a plausible biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor to regressive autism. " It seems that junk science is in the eye of the beholder. It will probably take an impartial jury in a court of law to substantially settle if there is enough evidence of harm to implicate thimerosal andor vaccines in autism. Bye the way, my name is Lenny Schafer. 's name is Kirby. What is your full name, Tom? Lenny > > > > Dear Tom > > > > This is a very interesting statement: > > > > " The many studies > > published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The > > studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor > > quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, > > histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. " > > > > Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in > regards to > > the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha > > Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, > Univ > > of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ; > > Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. > > > > These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a > plausible > > biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor > to > > regressive autism. > > > > I will gladly question these people point blank about your > allegations > > and publish their responses in the Huffington Post. > > > > I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies of > > " poor quality, " as you say, given the rigorous peer review system to > > which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals > in the > > field). > > > > Any specific information you have on the integrity of these > researchers > > and their studies should be shared with the public immediately. > > > > Many thanks > > > > Kirby > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 I think he meant convert it.. Debi > > > > > > Dear Tom > > > > > > This is a very interesting statement: > > > > > > " The many studies > > > published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The > > > studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of > poor > > > quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests, > > > histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty. " > > > > > > Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in > > regards to > > > the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha > > > Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; > Burbacher, > > Univ > > > of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC > ; > > > Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester. > > > > > > These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a > > plausible > > > biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing > factor > > to > > > regressive autism. > > > > > > I will gladly question these people point blank about your > > allegations > > > and publish their responses in the Huffington Post. > > > > > > I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies > of > > > " poor quality, " as you say, given the rigorous peer review system > to > > > which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals > > in the > > > field). > > > > > > Any specific information you have on the integrity of these > > researchers > > > and their studies should be shared with the public immediately. > > > > > > Many thanks > > > > > > Kirby > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Tom, Lets watch our wording here... Thimerosal causes "autism"How about... "mercury causes mercury poisoning". There are claims there is no scientific data that demonstrates evidence of harm, but THE SAFETY DATA SHEETS state there WILL BE HARM if Thimerosal comes in contact with the human body. I agree with Eli Lilly and Merck when they state on their MSDS "Thimerosal contains mercury and Mercury Poisoning may occur" (I believe they are correct). Tom, Go argue your "thimerosal is safe" point with Merck and Eli Lilly, they state on the MSDS Thimerosal is anything, but safe. Refer to the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) on Thimerosal. The stringent warnings of neurological damage from Thimerosal found in the MSDS written by Merck and Eli Lilly describe my daughter's condition and the exact symptoms she suffers from. Merck and Eli Lilly clearly did their own research on Thimerosal and provide stringent warnings and dangers of its toxicity on their Safety Data Sheets. Below is a quote from the Eli Lilly Safety Data Sheet (in caps to emphasize): "THIMEROSAL CONTAINS MERCURY. MERCURY POISONING MAY OCCUR... EXPOSURE TO MERCURY IN UTERO AND IN CHILDREN MAY CAUSE MILD TO SEVERE MENTAL RETARDATION TO SEVERE MOTOR COORDINATION IMPAIRMENT." Merck's Safety Data Sheet states: (Red scull-and-cross-bones) " PRECAUTION: ALL CONTACT WITH THE HUMAN BODY MUST BE AVOIDED..." "VERY TOXIC... INHALATION, SWALLOWING IN VERY SMALL AMOUNTS CAN CAUSE CONSIDERABLE DAMAGE TO HEALTH AND BE LETHAL." "TOXOLOGICAL INFORMATION: "THE PRINCIPAL SIGNS MANIFEST THEMSELVES IN THE CNS [which include] IMPARED SPEECH, VISION, HEARING,SENSITIVITY, LOSS OF MEMORY, HALLUCINATIONS, AND DELIRIUM..." The Code of Federal Regulations,(General Biological Products Standards) Title 21 Sec. 610.15 clearly states "ALL PRESERVATIVES IN VACCINES SHALL BE NON-TOXIC TO THE RECIPIENT" (MSDS states it is toxic). The information above are NOT my words, it was quoted directly from the Safety Data on Thimerosal (Eli Lilly and Merck) and from the FDA. Tom, your IOM statements and epidemiological number crunching studies will never change the fact of what is written on the MSDS sheets concerning the extreme dangers of Thimerosal to the fetus and children. I wish I was given the opportunity to have read the toxological information on Thimerosal before my daughter recieved over 200 micrograms of bolus doses of mercury via injection before the tender age of two. She is now 8, she suffers from a rare rhumatoid auto-immune disease (among other illnesses), has extensive motor and sensory problems and has never uttered her first word... Mercury is an extremely poisonous neuro-toxin and should NEVER, be injected into an infant! Don't you agree? Tom, are you for or against newborn injections containing this "very toxic" fungicide/preservative Thimerosal, Eli Lilly and Merck clearly warn us about? > >> > Dear Tom> > > > This is a very interesting statement:> > > > "The many studies> > published since the IOM report fail to implicate thimerosal. The> > studies that have appeared in the literature since 2004 are of poor> > quality and/or authored by scientists with conflicts of interests,> > histories of plagiarism, outright negligence, and dishonesty."> > > > Please provide me with the evidence of these allegations, in > regards to> > the following researchers: Deth, Northeastern U; Martha> > Herbert, Harvard U; Jill , Univ of Arkansas; Burbacher, > Univ> > of Washington; Vargas, s Hopkins; Isaac Pessah, UC ;> > Mady Hornig, Columbia U; Mark Noble, Univ of Rochester.> > > > These are the studies which, when taken together, suggest a > plausible> > biological mechanism for mercury exposure as a contributing factor > to> > regressive autism.> > > > I will gladly question these people point blank about your > allegations> > and publish their responses in the Huffington Post.> > > > I cannot imagine that any of these researchers conducted studies of> > "poor quality," as you say, given the rigorous peer review system to> > which they were subjected (by some of the most respected journals > in the> > field). > > > > Any specific information you have on the integrity of these > researchers> > and their studies should be shared with the public immediately.> > > > Many thanks> > > > Kirby> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Hey, Tom... I'm still waiting for the toxicity data that shows thimerosal is safe to put into any medical device, let alone an injectable. Come on. Can't you do better than to attack the Geiers? That's pathetic, and weak. Harry H.AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 22, 2007 Report Share Posted February 22, 2007 Tom, you list the Geiers " lupron " protocol as the worst of what they've done for our children. Before meeting the Geiers and investigating their protocol, my daughter wasn't very sociable... didn't like being touched, had gained few skills in the last five years and rarely demonstrated the extent of her " receptive " language vocabulary. She also had some self-injurious and destructive behaviors... she also would smear poop in the middle of the night... leaving us to clean her fecal frescoes in the morning. She was extremely moody, suffered from nasty G.I. problems & chronic diarrhea... do you really want me to go on??? Since placing her on the protocol, we took her testosterone down from a high level of 23 ng/dcl (about 3 times her reference range) to hover around 10 or 11 ng/dcl. And what a difference that has made. She lost her tactile defensiveness (or most of it, anyway)... she is much more affectionate. She suddenly started understanding what a fork was all about and began using one at meals. She lost interest in her sippy cup and started drinking from regular cups. Her gut improved dramatically... and we now have much fewer problems with chronic constipation & diarrhea... the fecal frescoes are a thing of the past. She's happy, affectionate... and actually LIKES being hugged now. Her teachers have remarked at her dramatic improvements in school. She will actually sit and wait her turn with various activities... where she used to flit about the room knocking things off shelves. I could go on, but I suspect you don't care about my daughter. The Lupron protocol has been a godsend for my family... and we have had NO side effects. The Geiers are among a very few doctors who have been willing to investigate these related biochemistries and use an FDA-approved mainline medicine to treat the problem. And the vast majority of their patients (of which I speak with a few dozen) are reporting similar or SUPERIOR results than in our experience. I have been demonized by a group of despicable " ND's " who refuse to really look at the science and listen to the parents whose children are benefitting from this protocol. They would prefer to take away my daughter's recent gains and improvements... but somehow I doubt they would be willing to help her (or us) live with the countless problems that her medical conditions have presented. The Geiers have really stepped up to help... more than many other doctors we've worked with, they have consistent follow-up, they're very thorough with testing... and they are accessible when we have questions or concerns. Tom, you've allowed Kathleen Seidel to draw you in with her tapestry of misrepresentations, lies and half-truths. You can make anything look frightening with the right lighting... > > ....and worst of all treating children with lupron. > > > Many, many thanks, > Tom > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.