|
tazzygirl -> RE: Stephen Hawking: There is no heaven; it's a fairy story (5/21/2011 12:03:22 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Funny how your research skills screech to a halt when they find something that you dont like.
Sue Swedo, MD, chief of the pediatric and developmental neuropsychiatry branch of the National Institute of Mental Health, says federal researchers have not closed the door to looking at whether vaccination might, in rare cases, be linked to autism.
The strongest case for a link comes from children with regressive autism -- children who seem to be developing normally, but who then lose the social and language skills they had developed and slide into autism. To parents, such children seem to have been the victims of some environmental toxin. As this regression occurs at the same time children receive multiple vaccines, many wonder whether vaccines might carry such a toxin.
"Our studies of regressive autism are taking a very shotgun approach to environmental factors in autism," Swedo tells WebMD. "We are saying we don't really know right now whether such factors might be involved."
The Childhood Autism Risks From Genetics and the Environment (CHARGE) study is under way at the University of California, Davis. Funded by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and enrolling more than 600 families with autism, this study is looking at the interplay between genetic and a wide range of environmental factors in autism. Vaccines are one of the many environmental factors being analyzed.
In addition, the CDC's Centers for Autism and Developmental Disabilities Research and Epidemiology network (CADDRE) is collecting data on environmental risk factors, including vaccines, that might put children at risk of autism.
Using the same environmental-factor checklist as CHARGE and CADDRE, the NIMH is looking at differences between children with regressive autism and children with more classic forms of autism.
"We are looking at differences in environmental exposures, including vaccines but also including things like older brothers who had a cold and mothers who drank a lot of diet soda during pregnancy," Swedo says.
The CDC and the NIH are also performing epidemiologic studies in Norway and Denmark to expand previous research into whether vaccinated children have any more autism than unvaccinated children
And odd that you claimed you couldnt find anything about current studies at all, before you missed the above webmd article.
This is the first hit on google:
US support for vaccine/autism studies
You graduated cum laude from the KenDoll School of Intellectual Dishonesty
Better than the school of believing anything you wish, willbe... I heard you got high honors there! Congrats!
As far as your link goes.. one.. its not WebMD... I doubt you can even get into that site.
Second, you need to check your dates, all those research studies and recommendations were started as early as 2005...
Of note, the Committee receives many public comments that reflect concerns about vaccines as a potential environmental factor in autism. Some members of the public are convinced that the current data are sufficient to demonstrate that vaccines do not play a causal role in autism and argue against using limited autism research funds to do additional vaccine studies when many other scientific avenues remain to be explored. At the same time, those who believe that prior studies of the possible role of vaccines in ASD have been insufficient argue that investigation of a possible vaccine/ASD link should be a high priority for research (e.g., a large-scale study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated groups). A third view urges shifting focus away from vaccines and onto much-needed attention toward the development of effective treatments, services, and supports for those with ASD.
Long-Term Objectives
Note: Dates that appear next to the objectives indicate the year that the objective was added to the Strategic Plan. If the objective was revised in subsequent editions of the Plan, the revision date is also noted.
2009 A. Conduct a multi-site study of the subsequent pregnancies of 1,000 women with a child with ASD to assess the impact of environmental factors in a period most relevant to the progression of ASD by 2014. IACC Recommended Budget: $11,100,000 over 5 years.
2009 B. Identify genetic risk factors in at least 50% of people with ASD by 2014. IACC Recommended Budget: $33,900,000 over 6 years.
2009 C. Determine the effect of at least five environmental factors on the risk for subtypes of ASD in the prenatal and early postnatal period of development by 2015. IACC Recommended Budget: $25,100,000 over 7 years.
2009 D. Support ancillary studies within one or more large-scale, population-based surveillance and epidemiological studies, including U.S. populations, to collect data on environmental factors during preconception, and during prenatal and early postnatal development, as well as genetic data, that could be pooled (as needed) to analyze targets for potential gene/environment interactions by 2015. IACC Recommended Budget: $44,400,000 over 5 years.
http://iacc.hhs.gov/strategic-plan/2011/caused_prevented.shtml
A further read would have told you that this study isnt limited to vaccines but to all areas, including disease processes, family history, evironmental factors and genetic mutations. And that it began before that idiot had his license pulled.
At the request of CDC, the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) Vaccine Safety
Working Group advised on the content and priorities of the Agenda. CDC finalized the Agenda
and responded to NVAC feedback. The NVAC Vaccine Safety Working Group reviewed the
Agenda and made 32 recommendations in three categories: general, capacity, and research needs
recommendations. The prioritization criteria included significance of the exposure to a vaccine,
prevalence of the adverse health event following immunization, public concern, scientific
concern and degree to which further study is warranted, impact on policy, and feasibility of the
study. A summary of the NVAC recommendations is included in Appendix C: Summary of
NVAC Recommendations. The NVAC recommendations to the Agenda were approved by the
Assistant Secretary for Health of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and
sent to CDC on July 29, 2009 (NVAC, 2009).
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/00_pdf/ISO-Final-Scientific_Agenda-Nov-10.pdf
The Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines met for the first time on April 20-21, 2009. At the
open session, staff from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which is operated
out of the Health Resources and Services Administration, presented a working list of adverse events
associated with the four vaccines under review by the Committee.
http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/Research/VaccineAdvEffectReview/Working-List-of-AEs-January-10.pdf
Again, 2009.
Why is that year important?
In a statement explaining its retraction of Wakefield's paper, the Lancet said: "Following the judgment of the U.K. General Medical Council's Fitness to Practice Panel on Jan. 28, 2010, it has become clear that several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield et al are incorrect ... in particular, the claims in the original paper that children were 'consecutively referred' and that investigations were 'approved' by the local ethics committee have been proven to be false. Therefore we fully retract this paper from the published record."
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/AutismNews/lancet-retracts-controversial-autism-paper/story?id=9730805
Supreme Court bars lawsuits over side effects from children's vaccines
The Supreme Court upholds a federal law that offers compensation to victims while shielding vaccine makers from lawsuits by parents.
February 23, 2011|By David G. Savage, Los Angeles Times
The Supreme Court has shielded the nation's vaccine makers from being sued by parents who say their children suffered severe side effects from these drugs.
By a 6-2 vote, the court instead upheld a federal law that offers compensation to these victims but also closes the courthouse door to lawsuits.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/23/business/la-fi-court-vaccine-20110223
And, now to the crux of the issue... why...
Autism is not specifically listed in the VICP's Vaccine Injury Table. That means that all claims that vaccines caused autism must be taken to the Special Masters. Each claimant must prove that vaccination was the likely cause of his or her autism.
As of May 2008, there had been 5,365 autism injury claims with 5,007 still awaiting a decision. Since each and every claim must prove the vaccine was the likely cause of autism, the sheer volume of the cases threatened to overwhelm the court.
So in 2002, the Special Master's office made a deal with lawyers on both sides. Instead of thousands of hearings to determine whether vaccination can be a cause of autism, there would be just three, with three test cases in each hearing.
These hearings are called the Omnibus Autism Proceedings.
The government was about to pay out massive claims
The Omnibus Autism Proceedings will be the final test for three somewhat different theories about how vaccines might cause autism:
The first "theory of causation" is that measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccines and vaccines containing thimerosal (a mercury-based preservative) can combine to cause autism.
The second theory is that thimerosal-containing vaccines can cause autism.
The third theory is that MMR vaccines, without regard to thimerosal, can cause autism.
http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/features/faq-vaccine-court-hears-autism-cases?page=4
Follow the money trail, willbe.
The VICP covers all vaccines listed on the Vaccine Injury Table maintained by the Secretary of Health and Human Services; in 2007 the list included vaccines against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), measles, mumps, rubella (German measles), polio, hepatitis B, varicella (chicken pox), Haemophilus influenzae type b, rotavirus, and pneumonia.[5] From 1988 until 2008-01-08, 5,263 claims relating to autism, and 2,865 non-autism claims, were made to the VICP. 925 of these claims, one autism-related (see Previous Rulings), were compensated, with 1,158 non-autism and 350 autism claims dismissed; awards (including attorney's fees) totaled $847 million.[6] The VICP also applies to claims for injuries suffered before 1988; there were 4,264 of these claims of which 1,189 were compensated with awards totaling $903 million.[6]
903 million dollars... thats alot of money... more than the 70 million for the studies you cited.
With the commencement of hearings in the case of Cedillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (Case #98-916V), the battle over vaccine injuries moved into the courts. A panel of three special masters began hearing the first cases of the historic Omnibus Autism Proceedings in June 2007. The lead petitioners, the parents of Michelle Cedillo, claimed that Michelle's autism was caused by a vaccine. Theresa and Michael Cedillo contended that thiomersal seriously weakened Michelle's immune system and prevented her body from clearing the measles virus after her vaccination at the age of fifteen months. At the outset Special Master George Hastings, Jr. said "Clearly the story of Michelle's life is a tragic one,"[16] while pledging to listen carefully to the evidence. On February 12, 2009, the court ruled in three test cases that the combination of the MMR vaccine and thiomersal-containing vaccines were not to blame for autism. Hastings concluded in his decision, "Unfortunately, the Cedillos have been misled by physicians who are guilty, in my view, of gross medical misjudgment."[17] The ruling has been appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals.[18]
On March 13, 2010, the court ruled in three test cases that thiomersal-containing vaccines do not cause autism. The test cases were among the strongest for this theory. Special Master Hastings concluded, "The overall weight of the evidence is overwhelmingly contrary to the petitioners' causation theories."[18]
[edit]Current proceedings
Currently, nearly 5,000 families are attempting to demonstrate that vaccines can cause autism, despite the medical and scientific consensus that there is no evidence that autism is caused by vaccines or any preservative or additive ever used in vaccines.[2][19]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibus_Autism_Proceeding
Follow the money trail to see why those studies were recommended BEFORE the Lancet made its retraction.
|
|
|
|
