Saturday, May 4, 2013

Seriously, its going to take an Act of Congress?

When I talk to people about vaccines, unless they’re on the front lines and deeply in the battle like we are, they are generally fairly aghast when I tell them that there has never been a study done comparing rates of autism in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children.   For my feelings on vaccines, hop over here.

Nope, there has never been one.  The CDC says it would be unethical.  I call BS.  There’re whole enclaves of completely unvaccinated children in homeshool groups, in Amish communities, etc.  There’s no reason that the data cannot be gathered. I think the CDC and NIH are afraid of what they’ll find. We all know that correlation doesn’t equal causation. And I personally know several unvaccinated children who have autism. But they have clear, major, family autoimmune disease history.  This is another big factor.

Last week, Rep. Posey from Florida presented legislature to require the CDC to do the vaxed vs. nonvaxed autism study.   I fully intend to shake this man’s hand and thank him personally because he’s going to be attending Autism 1 in a few short weeks.

From his statement to Congress on Friday:
On December 19, 2006, the effort to address this epidemic took a major step forward as President Bush signed into law the bipartisan Combating Autism Act. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the Autism community to reauthorize this program next year. Though the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee each year produces a strategic plan to address Autism, the billion-dollar allocation of resources to autism has not been evenly invested among genetic, epigenetic, and environmental factors. I must concur with the experts who have been willing to speak out, that the epidemic increase in the rates of autism are not a 'genetic' epidemic. Indeed, you don't have genetic epidemics. While there is likely a genetic component to many who have been diagnosed with Autism, we must seriously consider that there are likely several key factors in autism.  Also, so some who have suggested that the increase in Autism is due to better diagnosis, you don't go from 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 80 in three decades due to better diagnosis alone. And, if that were the case, where are the tens of thousands of autistic adults in their 40s, 50s and 60s. While better diagnosis may be a factor, common sense says there is a real increase and something is causing it.  While some may be borne with Autism, there are many parents who testify to the fact and present cases where their children were
progressing normally but something triggered a regression where they lost speech, abilities, and regressed from developmental milestones that they had earlier met. Was that regression due to external factors sich as medical injury, exposure to environmental toxins such as lead or mercury, or was it adverse reactions to medications that lead to high fevers, brain inflammation or seizures? We must get answers to these questions.

And he talks some about the hearings last November.  He called the CDC Lady on her evasiveness too.  Good to know that at least SOME of our of lawmakers have a functional bs filter:

I was pleased to participate in a November 2012 House Oversight and Government Reform hearing on the Federal Response to Autism. That was one of the most attended hearings I have participated in since coming to Washington in 2009. Indeed at this hearing it was standing room only, and overflow rooms had to be used to accommodate the public. This was a much anticipated hearing from many parents of children suffering from Autism who want clear and unbiased answers to questions surrounding the epidemic.  I, like many in Congress, were frustrated with the lackluster response from the federal witnesses, particularly the CDC witness that was evasive and took more than five months to respond to the Committee's questions. The responses that finally arrived this month were incomplete, often evasive, and showed a complete lack of urgency on the part of the CDC. I was also disappointed that the federal government witnesses did not have the courtesy to remain at the hearing to listen to the testimony of the public panel representing non-profit organizations and academic institutions focused on Autism and Asperger's Syndrome....

Before coming to Congress in 2009, I heard from some in the autism community who have advocated for a retrospective study to examine whether there are different health outcomes when comparing vaccinated children and unvaccinated children, including autism and chronic conditions. I have continued to hear these requests over the past four years. At the hearing I asked CDC if they had conducted such a study and they said they've done dozens of studies related to autism but never have looked at a comparison of vaccinated versus unvaccinated. In fact, a recent study they published compared fully vaccinated children to those who were not fully vaccinated, but for some reason it did not include data on completely unvaccinated children. Seems like common sense to do a study comparing vaccinated children vs unvaccinated and this week I was pleased to be joined by my colleague Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) in introducing H.R. 1757, The Vaccine Safety Study Act.  This would direct the National Institutes of Health to conduct a retrospective study of health outcomes, including autism, of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children. That should bring an answer to this decades long question

So, please, call your lawmaker and ask them to cosponsor this bill. Its ridiculous that its going to take an act of congress, but I’ll frankly be surprised if we can get this passed given the, ahem, relationship between the pharmaceutical companies and our government.

No comments: