- Age of Autism -
Readers of Age of Autism are aware of the term  “the big hungry lie” coined by regular contributor J.B. Handley, used to  describe the tactics of the CDC and the drug industry’s attempts to  disassociate autism from vaccines in any way, shape, or form.
Perhaps  the biggest lie of all is the one that has been repeated all too long,  that after thimerosal was reduced or eliminated from vaccines, autism  rates continued to go up. There have been multiple instances of this  claim and each time it has been proven false, right up to the recent lie  that after thimerosal was removed from vaccines in 2001, autism rates  continue to increase. These two claims, the first that thimerosal was  removed from vaccines, and the second that autism rates have not gone  down as a result, continue to be used to justify the injection of  thimerosal into pregnant women and children with flu shots. The claims  have also been used to justify the immunization of children in  developing countries with vaccines preserved with thimerosal. Sadly,  neither claim is any more truthful than previous equally erroneous  claims, the earliest of which originated from Scandinavia, then spread  to Canada and most recently came out of California.
Cold-Blooded  Lies
The paper by Stehr-Green et al., for example,  purported to study autism rates in Sweden after thimerosal removal in  1993, but only hospitalizations in relation to autism were analyzed.  Anyone remotely familiar with autism knows that it is not the kind of  condition for which one would typically go to a hospital for treatment. In  the same study were also analyses of autism rates in Denmark, which  were even more flawed. Many here remember the infamous Danish studies  published in 2003, which served as the primary basis for the IOM’s  predetermined conclusion in 2004, that autism rates shot up after  thimerosal removal in 1992. In reality what happened was the Danish were  worried there was a connection between thimerosal and autism, and right  after thimerosal was eliminated from all their vaccines, they rapidly  changed their registration program to include a lot more children. Such  an interpretation of these studies -- designed by the CDC, and conducted  by Statens Serum Institut, the largest vaccine-manufacturer in Denmark  -- that autism rates skyrocketed after thimerosal removal, can be  regarded as little more than propaganda.
In  the same study were also analyses of autism rates in Denmark, which  were even more flawed. Many here remember the infamous Danish studies  published in 2003, which served as the primary basis for the IOM’s  predetermined conclusion in 2004, that autism rates shot up after  thimerosal removal in 1992. In reality what happened was the Danish were  worried there was a connection between thimerosal and autism, and right  after thimerosal was eliminated from all their vaccines, they rapidly  changed their registration program to include a lot more children. Such  an interpretation of these studies -- designed by the CDC, and conducted  by Statens Serum Institut, the largest vaccine-manufacturer in Denmark  -- that autism rates skyrocketed after thimerosal removal, can be  regarded as little more than propaganda.
When SafeMinds  reanalyzed the data of the latest Denmark study, Hviid et al., by  applying the same standards of higher case ascertainment to children  born before 1992, they found a prevalence of 1 in 500, compared to a  prevalence of 1 in 1,500 ten years later, a 66% drop. Unfortunately,  this would not be the last time the CDC would design such  self-contradicting studies.                     
In Canada, Eric Fombonne, a psychiatrist with ties to  Sanofi-Pasteur, who is not even an epidemiologist, conducted his own  combined thimerosal-MMR study on a school district in Montreal, and it  was a total failure. His claim that autism rates went up after  thimerosal was removed rested entirely on the Kindergarten cohort, for  which enrollment was optional, so only about half the kids out of the  total enrolled. However, all the children with autism enrolled because  the school provides many services to autistic children. In fact, the  school district Fombonne studied has an autism center for excellence,  and even draws children with autism from other districts. Had enrollment  been mandatory, the estimated prevalence would have dropped by  one-half, indicating a decrease rather than an increase. According to  biochemist Dr. Paul G. King, this is what is called “negative enrollment  bias.” Furthermore, there was also thimerosal exposure during the years  where exposure was labeled “nil.”
His MMR data were no more  reliable. Instead of using local MMR immunization rates to compare to  autism rates, he used immunization data from Quebec City, 145 miles  away. Even though the Cochrane Collaboration had this to say about his  previous MMR study from 2001, "The number and possible impact of biases  was so high that interpretation of the results was difficult," and even  though the collaboration included a person who also acted as a legal  consultant to MMR manufacturers, such discrediting apparently has not  stopped Fombonne from doing more completely flawed, post-marketing  research.
But back to thimerosal, because just two years  ago, Robert Schechter and Judith Grether of the California Department of  Public Health accessed the records of the California Database for  Evaluation and Research (CDER) of the California Department of  Developmental Services in children ages 3-5. The purpose was to see if  autism rates had declined after the supposed removal of thimerosal from  vaccines. According to Schecter and Grether's analysis, they hadn’t.  Using their interpretation, the two researchers determined that  thimerosal must not be a primary cause of autism, in a study published  in the Archives of General Psychiatry entitled “Continuing Increases in  Autism Reported to California’s Developmental Services System: Mercury  in Retrograde.”  However, their own errors, it now appears, contradicted  their conclusions.
Read it all.
 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment