rigorousintuition.ca

I was involved with a long board discussion last about this with a very astute board member. If it were debate club, I would have lost for certain. Dr. Andrew Wakefield lost his case with the GMC in the UK. If there were a clear winner I would suggest it was GlaxoSmithKlien. Maybe Brian Deer, too.

http://tinyurl.com/ygutshx

No Parent Ever Complained to GMC: Public Statement from Lancet Families Supports The MMR3

No Parent Ever Complained to the GMC: a Public Statement from the Lancet Families Supports The MMR3 (Dr. Wakefield, Prof. Murch, Prof. Walker-Smith.) "All of the investigations were carried out without distress to our children, many of whom made great improvements on treatment so that for the first time in years they were finally pain free."

One fact often lost in the media frenzy over the MMR 3 is that the accusations against the three doctors came entirely from the medical industry and their hired guns, never from the parents of the patients who were served. Most of the parents of the 12 children in the original case series published in The Lancet (now retracted for no reason that anyone involved in the frenzy can explain coherently and support with evidence) made a decision to go public Last May, we posted a letter from the parents of 8 of the 12 children in which they express their support for Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues. We thought it was important enough to post again today.

An Open Letter

To Whom It May Concern.... remainder at link/tiny url

Long time, no see.

It may interest you that there was a related thread in General Discussion just a few days ago:

viewtopic.php?p=317332#p317332

Thanks for recalling the username Barracuda. The other new thread will be good chance to recap the very well made arguments against Wakefield. My assessments and affiliations, however, are with the ostensive occurrence of regression subsequent to various infant (and adult) vac shots, and the recovery from the severity of "autistic" symptomatology often achieved with thorough dietary intervention alone, On a further note, there are recoveries to the point of removal of diagnosis. I personally know a few parents who have been through both of these experiences. More so, those who have been through only one or the other.

I work with a young man -for 1 1/2 years now- who is severely autistic and is quite obviously in severe GI distress. (am not a "doctor" but I do change his diapers- often). Maybe Wakefield did falsify all that "shit" too. By that shit I mean the pale or pitch dark BM's in that diaper that are almost never properly formed, and almost always smell profoundly foul, or at least very strange, full of undigested food, crayons, plastic shards and the like, These sorts of details are rife in the sever/regressive populations, especially as children, as are behaviors that beg an observer to wonder if the child might be in severe pain.

His mother has only a little interest in "my theories" as it would seem is the case with many posters here. Nonetheless, I often brind my own rustic foods (coconut oil, homemade sauerkraut) sometimes with distinct results in regards to calming the young man down for a while. Some here may be incisively critical (C2W), others may be downright hostile. I am certainly not about to parade my Jenny McCarthy/Age Of Autism perspective about much more than this.

Very intelligent and well meaning people can get on board with a "witch hunt", and I suppose the same can be said for supporting a "quack". As should have been obvious to anyone who followed the thread from last year, I'll take my chances with the latter. Later.

Hi, cbs!

It's nice to see you, and thank you for recalling me as astute. Of course he remembers your username, you were (and presumably still are) an interesting and memorable poster, and you rate yourself much too low if you don't know that. That's what I have to say.

And also, of course: Please, please believe that I'm not on any witch hunt. And that furthermore, I think it's not only possible but highly likely that dietary changes can and sometimes do completely reverse the course of what may have appeared for years to have been any number of what were, until that point, thought to be chronic and untreatable illnesses. Mainstream medical professionals frequently have absolutely no clue what they're doing, in my experience and observation. On numerous fronts, one of which is absolutely the heedless, unnecessary and destructive overuse of prescription medications, many of which have much more potential to do harm than their makers ever admit or -- for that matter -- ever allow anyone else to talk about too freely and informatively when they're in a position to prevent it.

So my low opinion of Andrew Wakefield really could not have less to do with my non-existent attachment to or respect for the wisdom of the Big Authorities who say: "Drugs are healing medicines. Here. Have some. If they don't work, we can always try surgery." I condemn him more for having cheated the alternative healthcare researchers and caregivers out of the attention, validation and funding that they deserved and he didn't than I do for any single other thing.

With the possible exception of doing colonoscopies on small children who already had more than their share of difficulties simply because he was on a fishing expedition for the results he was being paid enough to find that he just made up some data indicating that he'd found them after he failed to do so.

I mean, it's kind of difficult not to condemn that. Obviously. Anyway. I wanted to say Hi, nice to see you, still don't agree with you, but it's an honest disagreement, with which I can live and hope you can too.

Best,

c2w

c2w, Thanks for checking back. Do you think it is possible that the Wakefield situation is being used to patently and unequivocally (or even generally) dissuade parents form pursuing dietary and/or bio cure protocols? Are you familiar with the Chicago Tribune reporting of Trine Tsouderos from mid-late last year? Do you think the timing of those articles was at all related to the subsequent GMC ruling, and do you think it matters? Caio. cbs (not the network)

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=28801

WARNING! Jenny McCarthy-ism references in article

There is no question that the publication of the monkey study will lend substantial credibility to the theory that over-vaccination of young children is leading to neurological damage, including autism. The fallout from the study for vaccine makers and public health officials could be severe. Having denied the possibility of the vaccine-autism connection for so long while profiting immensely from a recent boom in vaccine sales around the world, it's no surprise that they would seek to repress this important work.

Behind the scenes, the pressure to keep the work of Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues from being published is immense, and growing every day. Medical journals take extreme risk of backlash in publishing any studies that question the safety of the vaccination program, no matter how well-designed and thorough the research might be. Neurotoxicology, a highly-respected medical journal, deserves great credit for courageously publishing the first phase of this vaccinated monkey study.

The press has been deeply misled in the way The Lancet retraction, and Dr. Wakefield's mock trial, have been characterized. Led by the pharmaceutical companies and their well-compensated spokespeople, Dr. Wakefield is being vilified through a well-orchestrated smear campaign designed to prevent this important new work from seeing the light of day.

What medical journal would want to step in front of this freight train? Moreover, why now, after 12 years of inaction, did The Lancet and GMC suddenly act? Is it coincidence that the monkey study is currently being submitted to medical journals for review and publication?

We urge the media to take a close look at the first phase of the monkey study discussed above and to start asking a very simple question: What was the final outcome of the 14 primates that were vaccinated using the U.S. vaccine schedule and how did that compare to the unvaccinated controls?

The U.S. vaccine schedule has grown from 10 vaccines given to our children in the 1980s to 36 today, perfectly matching the dramatic rise in autism. The work of Dr. Wakefield and his colleagues deserves to be shared with the world to further, rather than censor, scientific progress.

The timing of last months GMC hearing results was quite close to the release of another Wakefield staffed research study that did in fact indicate that the hep B vaccine was detrimental to the behavioral development of young macaque monkeys. I'm not too keen on monkey slaughter for any reason (I wonder how many died in the development of Rota-Teq), and it is very easy to find well schooled critics of the hep B study. It is interesting that Wakefield had a lot of cred in the wonderful world of gastroenterology, and was willing to throw it all away to perpetrate this alleged fraud.

catbirdsteed wrote:c2w, Thanks for checking back. Do you think it is possible that the Wakefield situation is being used to patently and unequivocally (or even generally) dissuade parents form pursuing dietary and/or bio cure protocols?

Yes, I think it's quite likely, actually. So you can put me down for "more than possible." But that's why it's essential for all activists and underdogs everywhere to make it plain that they're not any more okay with, let's say, research that's tainted by a major financial conflict of interest when the study supports their side than they are when it doesn't. I mean, that strategy's fine if you're in it for the fight. But if you're in it because it's the good fight and you hope to win it, bad acts have to trump team loyalty. Ethically speaking, imo. But also strategically and irrespective of practical standards.

Are you familiar with the Chicago Tribune reporting of Trine Tsouderos from mid-late last year? Do you think the timing of those articles was at all related to the subsequent GMC ruling, and do you think it matters? Caio. cbs (not the network)

Well. Now I am, because I was prompted by your post to read a couple. One was on chelation therapy for autistic children, which I believe I already said I thought was unconscionable in our last exchange, way back when; and one was on using the same hormone therapy that was briefly used for the chemical castration of paroled sex criminals on autistic children, which I'd never heard of before but find unconscionable now that I have.

I honestly don't know how newsworthy the latter is (ie -- whether it's making a mountain out of a molehill to give it that kind of play. But at least imo, chelation-mania is certainly widespread enough to be a just and fitting subject for the hard-nosed public-service-reporting treatment it got.

I very much doubt that it was pegged to the subsequent GMC ruling. Because for one thing, as you note, it occurred subsequent to the pub. date and the direction it was going to go in would therefore have been unknown at the time of writing. And for another, because it wouldn't have seemed like much of a peg to the Trib anyway; their readers don't know or care all that much about what other countries are thinking about deciding, they're Americans.

And...Really, I guess that I have no idea why it was assigned when it was. Although it certainly could have been because it suited the agenda of some vile power to see to it that it would be, on basic absence-of-evidence doesn't equal absence-of-existence grounds, given that there certainly are vile powers with agendas in the picture who certainly do have those tendencies.

But since that's not the only plausible explanation for it that I can think of, I don't really have a very strong opinion on the that question, narrowly speaking.

I would think that it mattered if I did know it to be the case, though. FWIW. Because a conflict of interest is a conflict of interest is a conflict of interest, etcetera. Like I said, you do kind of have to oppose all if you oppose any, by my lights.

Were there worser articles in the series that I didn't see?

... BM's in that diaper that are almost never properly formed, and almost always smell profoundly foul, or at least very strange...

Sorry, I haven't been following this topic at all, so am not informed about what the controversy is. But when I saw your description of your client's BM's, catbird, it sounded familiar enough that I did a quick google on celiac and autism and found this celiac link, which wasn't to the autistic kids, but their mothers:

http://tinyurl.com/noa8dj

On the other hand, this study found no link between autism and celiac disease among autistic children:

http://tinyurl.com/yfqrysb

Call it ciliac or what ever you will, but anyone who has spent a lot of time with severe regressive autistic kids, fed them, observed their behavior, and changed their diapers will have to admit that there is usually something wrong with their diet. Ask nearly ANY parent or practitioner who has brought their child out of the depths of the shrieking ,wordless overamped/catatonic states that many of these kids are in if they were having a difficult time digesting or assimilating wheat, dairy protein or any number of foods, ingredients or additives. The science may not be "unanimous" on this, but the practical experience in the field (kitchen, playroom, bathroom) paints a fairly clear picture.

There may be some autistic children that are not sensitive to wheat or dairy, but my guess is that they would be more of the exception than the norm.

Celiacs are often sensitive to dairy, also. I have two relatives who are gluten intolerant. and even a trace of gluten sets their systems off in a very bad way, and one can't tolerate any dairy at all, the other one can only tolerate a bit of dairy. Interestingly, these relatives are two of several members of my family that I've wondered might have mild Asperger's symptoms, too.

It is astounding that this thread is still so close to the top of the health forum. Since I was at the Autism One conference the other day at a full session on cooking for autistic kids (and met Mr Wakefield briefly, he was very affable), I was considering starting a thread "Autistic kids getting better through dietary intervention and biomedical treatment" or something like that. But somewhere in that plan I was reminded of this thread. He (Wakefield) is again, as of this week a media whipping boy for the medical establishment. It might be a problem that so many of the parents who DO "cure " their kids ascribe to the notions of (soon to be not DR.) Wakefield.

If you know much about Autism One and Generation Rescue, you may not be surprised to hear that he has gotten overwhelming support (standing room only crowds, numerous standing ovations, his new book very hot on Amazon ratings) from that crowd and at that very conference, which was held just outside of Chicago this past week, and every week before Mem. Day.

But, perhaps it is not really a problem since the media continues to ignore or deny that these kids can ever -save outgrowing it- achieve any improvement in their conditions, or to deny that kids who "get better" were ever really autistic at all! He has become a much greater advocate for autistic children since his disbarment. In spite of the severe controversy about this issue, I suspect that he WILL, in the long run, decidedly further the cause of understanding the etiology of autism and other febrile/encephalitic childhood injuries. I smelled a rat from the onset of his prosecution, considering I had a skeptical posture about GSK, the CDC and the severe, burgeoning vaccine schedule. At nearly fifty yrs old, I rec'd only a fraction of the shots that kids 10 years ago got. Infants today are poised to get even more.

So the report here is that I continue to meet parents who claim that their child regressed shortly (or very shortly) after an administration of a single or multiple vaccination(s), and that some of these parents, usually against their pediatricians counsel, put their kids on a GFCFSF diet, and institute other more sever and potentially dangerous allopathic interventions, sometimes with wonderful results, often with moderate ones. Most of these parents will cease continuation of the vaccination schedule. I, meanwhile, am gearing up to start a small consulting/food prep/ menu planning business for parents of autistic children. It IS a growth industry, after all. I have changed enough diapers, it is time to approach toileting issues from the inside, or at least from the dinner table.

It's okay C2W, you CAN be opposed the the pharmaceutical agenda and still hate Scientology. Oh wait, she's gone... Maybe someone else wants to argue for the persecutors of Mr Andrew Wakefield (NOT Dr.) All you have got do is read the mainstream press about how he took advantage of children and all that. Oh my, taking advantage of children, now that WILL NOT fly around here, even if it is not at all true in relationship to the generalized sense of the human and child lives that mainstream medicine, psycho-pharmacology and the vaccine program is making every minute of every day.

The vaccine cartel is very heavily funded and leveraged to preempt much of the negative press regarding it's program. In this case, the recent spate of anti Wakefieldism may be related to the forthcoming release of this book:
http://www.vaccineepidemic.com/


From the Amazon page...
Editorial Reviews
Product Description
The book the pharmaceutical industry doesn't want you to read! In this era of ever-increasing vaccination mandates and frequently declared public health emergencies, established civil rights organizations have not adequately addressed the critical issues of vaccination choice, parental consent, and the freedom to make individual healthcare decisions. Featuring more than twenty experts from the fields of ethics, law, and science, Vaccine Epidemic is the essential handbook of the ever-growing vaccination choice movement. Louise Kuo Habakus, director of the Center for Personal Rights, edits and introduces a diverse array of topics such as:
• The vaccine bubble and industry corruption, by financial strategist Michael Belkin
• The legal ramifications of the state vaccine mandates, by human rights attorney Mary Holland, JD
• Vaccination in the military and the lack of consent, by retired Air Force Captain Richard Rovet
• The constitutional issues of vaccine choice and parental consent, by constitutional law professor William Wagner, JD
• The American tradition of dissent and the roots of the vaccination choice movement, by historian Robert Johnston, PhD
• And other important issues.
About the Author
Louise Kuo Habakus is the director and co-founder of the Center for Personal Rights. She holds a BA and an MA in International Policy Studies from Stanford University. She has appeared in numerous media outlets, including ABC World News Tonight, Fox & Friends, and the New York Times. She was formerly a managing director for Putnam Investments. Center for Personal Rights is a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to preserving and defending personal rights. It focuses on the freedom to make healthcare decisions, including individual and parental informed consent to vaccination.

Mary Holland, J.D., Mary Holland, JD, is a co-founder and board member of the Center for Personal Rights. She is the director of the Graduate Legal Skills Program at New York University School of Law. She holds a BA from Harvard University and graduate degrees in law and international affairs from Columbia University. Center for Personal Rights is a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to preserving and defending personal rights. It focuses on the freedom to make healthcare decisions, including individual and parental informed consent to vaccination.

Catbird, are you familiar with Natasha Campbell McBride's work. She recovered her son from autism using diet and minimal supplements. She has written a book called Gut and Psychology Syndrome. The book explores the link between a healthy gut and a diseases such as autism, mental health issues, excema, celiac, etc. She prescribes a diet that is difficult to implement but really works. http://www.gapsdiet.com/uploads/Probiotics.pdf
http://www.gapsdiet.com/Home_Page.html

Funny you should mention that, molecules, I was just at a local chapter meeting of the Weston A. Price outfit, The local pontiff of nutrient dense foods fave a presentation of it, as she has been doing it for months now. I also saw Campbell mcBride at a larger, national meeting of the same group last year. Interesting, and powerful stuff that, nearly-ketogenic diet. Pardon my briefness, but I have put way too much time in on the Wakefield thread on the Big Board. Thanks, CBS ps, do you have experiences with any of those types pf protocols?