Re: Better Diagnosis, My Arse

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:

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)

>

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...

> >

>

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: