Vaccine injuries are increasing, but tragically are ignored. Imagine the frustration of a parent whose child’s biopsies show vaccine-strain measles in lesions lining the gastrointestinal tract. Or measles virus in cerebrospinal fluid. Antibodies to myelin basic protein. Mitochondrial dysfunction onset immediately after vaccination.

Cases like these are registered in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. You can read expert testimony in the Federal Omnibus Autism proceedings — see the Cedillo case. And also view the February concession by scientists at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, determining that Hannah Poling’s autism was caused by vaccines. And see research by her father, Johns Hopkins neurologist Jon Poling; his wife Teri is an ICU nurse and attorney.

Threats are certainly out of line. However it’s difficult to pity a publicity-seeking doctor whose rotavirus vaccine has killed and injured children. These children he writes off as collateral damage in the war on disease. For these families, the benefits of vaccines do not outweigh the risks.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control is running its immunization department as if people are cattle. Consumers would be better served by physicians and researchers who put time and effort into preventing vaccine injury. But sadly that’s not happening.

Lab tests, not epidemiology, is essential to understand the causes of vaccine injury. Read and understand the difference.

Dear Ms. Spangler:

As the parent of a child with a vaccine injury who also has an ASD diagnosis I am confused by the one-sided nature of your comments.

Your suggestion that the removal of mercury from vaccines – recommended by the Public Health Service and AAP in 1999, but not accomplished even to this day – is the precipitating trigger of concern that mercury in vaccines causes neurodevelopmental disorders is backwards. The call for the removal of the mercury-containing thimerosal preservative was a result of concerns about the preservative’s dangers, not the cause of those concerns. The revision of history in this regard is often repeated. If you review the history of this issue – especially the Hepatitis B control report from 1999 that covered this topic, you can learn an accurate version of events. (By the way, early concerns about MMR dangers could not have precipitated the call for removal of mercury because the MMR never contained mercury – you may be aware of this but it is worth pointing out for others not so well informed.)

Your assertion that autism rates have continued “unabated” despite the “removal” of mercury is also misplaced. First, mercury was not removed from HepB, HIB and DTaP until as late as 2004. Up to that time unexpired mercury containing doses of these vaccines were still being distributed and administered. (An FDA letter to Congress corroborates this assertuib so you need not take my word for it-let me know if you want the url where you can find this document.) In 2003 – 2004 authorities began ever more aggressively promoting the flu shot, which was placed on the recommended vaccine schedule by the CDC on July 1, 2005 for children as young as six months old. Most of the flu vaccines administered to children since then have contained mercury. So in the midst of the popularly misconceived “removal” of mercury from vaccines there were actually additions to the schedule of mercury containing vaccines, for VERY YOUNG INFANTS.

If ASD rates have continued to rise unabated as you claim, therefore, they were rising during a period when expsoures from some sources of mercury were increasing in some vaccines.

There is little data that tells us whether ASD rates are increasing, decreasing or staying the same for the cohort of children born since 2003. Since children from these birth years would only now be turning 5 years of age – and have yet to be diagnosed or if diagnosed yet to be counted in reliable databases on which credible studies are based – the data on this subject is either not available or remains unstudied. NO ONE can say what is happening to ASD rates. I would respectfully challenge, therefore, your unsupported assertion about ASD rates rising unabated.

Another point often overlooked is that we often do not know what we are counting. There is severe “ASD” and not so severe. Are children born since 2003-2004 less seriously affected because their mercury load is lower? Questions like this one remain open; no credible study has considered this kind of question.

Also, no well-informed discussion of the autism/vaccine issue should fail to consider that ASD is a label that covers many disorders that are likely casused by many different agents: genetics, thalidomide, valproic acid, infection, terbutaline, a variety of heavy metals other than mercury, toxic mold, pesticides and more have all been implicated as causing disorders that are often labled or diagnosed as ASD. These factors may also act in combination with each other to cause disorders.

You claim that there is compelling evidence contrary to the assertion that vaccines can cause autism. All of this evidence can be successfully challenged – most of the evidence on which I suspect you rely does not refute the link, but fails to find the link and are NEUTRAL – scientificially and in all respects – on whether a link exists. I can cite evidence in all the leading studies supporting this assertion, including statements by the lead investigators themselves. I would respectfully request that you identify the studies that support your claim that there is compelling evidence contrary to the assertion that vaccines can cause autism. I will then be happy to discuss this evidence point by point. We hear all too often about so-called scientific evidence that refutes the link but this “evidence” is often misinterpreted and misrepresented, leading to misleading and unsupported assertions like the one you have made.

You ask the question: “Why aren’t researchers investigating other potential causes of autism and to what extent are the critics to blame? ”

The answer is that researchers are investigating other potential causes of autism. There is an enormous amount of ongoing research into multiple causes of autism. An especially large amount of money has been spent on investigating the genetic causes of autism, some of it well spent, some not so well spent. A lesser amount of money has been spent on environmental factors. Very little money, comparatively has been spent on vaccine safety research related to autism. If you believe otherwise, I would respectfully request that you produce data showing that significant funds are being diverted to research into the vaccine/autism/neurodevelopmental disorder connection or that such purported diversion is depleting research into other areas of investigation.

I respectfully suggest that your assumption that resources are being misapplied in this way is wrong.

“Most concerning are the personal attacks on members of the scientific community.”

Your statement quoted above is the most troubling one in your presentation. There is a deeply disturbing effort to demonize parents by claiming that somehow there are “attacks” on researchers or others. Dr. Paul Offit and Dr. Nancy Snyderman have most notably made these claims.

Please identify the specifics of such “attacks”: who has been arrested? identify threats” or any other incidents that supports this contemptible claim. Surely, there are regrettable statements and incidents on all sides of a contentious issue. Parents have been attacked by researchers. In fact, I would classify Dr. Offit’s and Snyderman’s unsupported claims of “attacks” as the most contemptible kind of attack, because it purposely characterizes “parents” as irrational hatemongers without providing any information that would allow parents to fairly defend these scurrilous claims.

In any case, the vast majority of parents, including me, vigorously condemn any such attacks, if they in fact occurred. It would serve us all well to eliminate this point from a reasonable discussion and debate about the causes of autism. There is no place for this kind of claim unless the purpose is to demonize parents rather than fairly consider their experiences with their children. My advice to Offit and Snyderman is report such attacks to the authorities so that the offending attackers may be dealt with appropriately.

Related to this disturbing trend is the injection into the discussion by vaccine program zealots of statements regarding the potential reemergence of deadly infectious diseases. I am a parent and one among many parents who have experiential, eyewitness and scientific support for the claim that in some cases vaccines have caused or contributed to neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism. We universally vaccinated our children. Many of us believed and continue to believe in the importance of vaccination. We strongly share the concern about infectious disease and would like to protect our children from these diseases. Our concern is not vaccination as a concept but safety of the vaccine program as administered. We question the safety of some vaccines, not the effort to control infectious disease. (By the way, vaccination rates in the US are at record highs, according to the latest data on this subject that I could find.)

To point to infectious disease fears is a thinly disguised attempt to change the subject from vaccine safety. When parental concern about vaccine safety is adequately addressed, and not condescendingly dismissed, then not only will our vaccine program be protected but the incidence of vaccine injury – it is undisputed that chidren are harmed by vaccines in some cases – will be reduced and we can all take comfort that vaccines are safe.

Finally, the repetition of false claims by Dr. Offit and others ill serves our nation and our children. He has pursued a completely irresponsible path in the debate over vaccines and autism. When I consider his intemperate rhetoric and false accusations – stunningly disappointing rhetoric when one considers his medical credentials – one wonders whether he is motivated by getting to the truth or by some other unidentified factors.

Sincerely,

Robert J. Krakow, Esq.
Parent

Thank you for your thoughtful response. I certainly share your concerns regarding the need to protect our vaccine program, while at the same time elucidating the causes of ASD. How to best achieve those goals is the subject of much debate. The intent of my post was to highlight the fact that too often, well intended actions have unintended consequences. Hopefully, the debate going forward can be respectful and productive for the benefit of all our children.

Dear Amy,

Thank you for your very courteous and reasonable response to what was a very long post (I see now). I know that we share similar goals.

Sincerely,

Robert J. Krakow