Facts, not Fantasy

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Vaccine Times: Repeat after me: Scientists do science, politicians...


Don’t do science. Sounds simple enough, yet for some reasons it needs to be spelled out to the anti-vax crowd. In typical, reason be damned fashion, the nice folks at InsideVaccines are riled up, because some politician proposed a law which allows adoptive parents to have their recently adopted kids vaccinated in the US as opposed to their country of birth to avoid “exposing their adoptive children to unsafe immunizations in foreign countries.”
The bill also allows U.S. parents adopting foreign-born children to safely immunize their children in the United States within 30 days of their arrivals, rather than have to subject their children to potentially unsafe immunizations in foreign nations. Previously, parents who adopted internationally were frequently required to immunize their children before bringing them to the United States.
Of course, whenever a politician says something, it is guaranteed that they have done all the research, contacted all the authorities and experts in the field, because, obviously, the last thing a politician ever wants to do is to make factually incorrect statements. Therefore, it is perfectly justified, for an anti-vaxer at least, to take a simple sentence uttered by a politician and run with it. Because what better authority on foreign vaccine safety than a U.S. Senator, right?
We can only hope that all those foreign nations don’t pick up on this news story and wonder why it is okay for children who are remaining in Africa, Asia, South America or Eastern Europe to receive unsafe vaccines.
I hope the French and English don’t get a wind of this; we’d be screwed. What about Canada? Would they be considered foreign? Why is the US hogging all the safe vaccines? Selfish bastards! Well, exposing this travesty is not enough; the anti-vaxers now will fantasize, I mean get to the bottom of the reason why the foreign vaccines are so unsafe, they caught the eye of a U.S. politician.
There are, of course, two obvious answers to why these vaccines are unsafe.
1) Needle re-use.
2) Mercury content. Due to a lack of refrigeration and a shortage of money, most vaccines in the developed world come in 10 dose vials, preserved with that wonderful, inexpensive toxin, thimerosal.
Of course, why the hell not; since we’re making stuff up I think another reason foreign vaccines are unsafe is that people on the other side of the world are hanging upside down. Now, someone who was honestly trying to hypothesize a real reason why vaccines in some foreign countries might not be as safe as those in developed countries (let us entertain the idea for the moment), might have come up with a third logical reason: inappropriate storage and usage after expiration date, but that would make Option #2 sound less plausible and scary, so it is conveniently left out. After all, they KNOW that thimerosal causes autism and are just waiting for the science to catch up with Jenny McCarthy.

The funny thing is that, if the anti-vaxxers want to rely on what the politician says about vaccines, they must then concede that vaccines in the U.S. are safe; after all the politician is saying the children should not receive the unsafe foreign vaccines, but get vaccinated here. Therefore, U.S. vaccines are safe and Age of Autism will be closing up shop and InsideVaccines will officially change their website to Inside-Foreign-Vaccines-US-vaccines-are-not-a-problem.com.

I wouldn’t count on that happening though. See, that is the beauty of cherry-picking, they pick the parts they want to and completely ignore the other parts, or logic for that matter.

Vaccine Times: U.S. whooping cough update

U.S. whooping cough update

On December 7, 2010, in ALL POSTS, EPIDEMICS/OUTBREAKS, Pertussis, by Leart Shaka 
 
The whooping cough has not affected only California, although it is at its worst there, with over 7,000 cases and 10 infant deaths so far. The disease has also affected other states. Here are the latest numbers as reported by the CDC (which may be behind in gathering the information, given that it is only reporting 2,536 cases in California whereas the California Department of Public Health has reported 7,297, so if anything the CDC numbers may be understated):
  • California – 7,297 cases, 10 deaths all infants under 3 months (CDPH data not CDC #)
  • Texas – 2,322 cases
  • Ohio – 1,546 cases
  • Michigan – 1,269 cases
  • Pennsylvania – 755 cases
  • Illinois – 728
  • Minnesota  – 698 cases
  • Iowa – 510
  • NY (Upstate) – 507
Other states have reported less than 500 cases during the year, for a total CDC reported number of 17, 854. When taking into account the rougly 4,800 difference between the California numbers as reported by the CDC and by the CDPH, we’re looking at well over 22,500 total cases of whooping cough in the United Staes in 2010.

Vaccine Times: The story of mercury in vaccines

The story of mercury in vaccines

On December 9, 2010, in ALL POSTS, ANTI-VACCINE WATCH, Ingredients, by Leart Shaka

Why thimerosal was removed from vaccines in the early 2000s

I recently wrote an entry which sparked a mini-war in the comments between myself and, what appears to be an anti-vaccine proponent. Many arguments were discussed, a few barbs were exchanged, and inevitably the topic of thimerosal came up. The commenter claimed that thimerosal was removed by the authorities “based on scientific analysis”. My reply was the standard: thimerosal was removed as a precautionary measure, in response to public outcry, stirred on by the anti-vaccine movement and their fear-mongering that mercury in vaccines was causing autism. The commenter replied to this:
No, you need to buff up on your history. Thimerosal was investigated because the government and EPA identified the danger of mercury exposure to the population at large and ordered an analysis into every exposure. The FDA then realized that exposures were occurring through Thimerosal and since mercury is a potent neurotoxin (that’s why the analysis was ordered in the first place) and that exposures were causing problems in the population, that it was prudent to eliminate that route of exposure. You seem to be falling for some manufactured history here.
Could it be that my understanding of the history of thimerosal is wrong? It is certainly possible, after all we all know how unreliable memory can be and how we humans can remember things wrong. So I decided to look it up, as a refresher, and to ensure that my comment was in fact correct. The CDC thankfully has a general timeline of the thimerosal saga. So let us go through it and see if the authorities did in fact remove thimerosal because  they realized that mercury exposure “was occurring through Thimerosal”, or they removed it as  a precaution.

Thimerosal Saga Timeline

07/07-1999 - The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Public Health Service issue a joint statement that says “there is no data or evidence of any harm caused by the level of exposure that some children may have encountered in following the existing immunization schedule. Infants and children who have received thimerosal-containing vaccines do not need to be tested for mercury exposure.“  Furthermore it states (emphasis added):
The recognition that some children could be exposed to a cumulative level of mercury over the first 6 months of life that exceeds one of the federal guidelines on methyl mercury now requires a weighing of two different types of risks when vaccinating infants. On the one hand, there is the known serious risk of diseases and deaths caused by failure to immunize our infants against vaccine-preventable infectious diseases; on the other, there is the unknown and probably much smaller risk, if any, of neurodevelopmental effects posed by exposure to thimerosal. The large risks of not vaccinating children far outweigh the unknown and probably much smaller risk, if any, of cumulative exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines over the first 6 months of life.
Nevertheless, because any potential risk is of concern, the Public Health Service (PHS), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), and vaccine manufacturers agree that thimerosal-containing vaccines should be removed as soon as possible. Similar conclusions were reached this year in a meeting attended by European regulatory agencies, European vaccine manufacturers, and FDA, which examined the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines produced or sold in European countries.
So, what the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics were saying on 07/07/1999 is that there is no known risk from exposure to thimerosal, but regardless they were moving to have it removed regardless of this lack of evidence, solely based on “potential risk”. This seems to support my claim that thimerosal was removed out of precaution, not evidence of harm.

11/05/1999 – CDC states that vaccine manufacturers, FDA, and other agencies are working together to reduce the amount of thimerosal in vaccines, or to replace them with thimerosal-free vaccines, as soon as possible. It stated the following (emphasis added):
The risk, if any, to infants from exposure to thimerosal is believed to be slight. The demonstrated risks for not vaccinating children far outweigh the theoretical risk for exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines during the first 6 months of life.
Given the availability of vaccines that do not contain thimerosal as a preservative, the progress in developing such additional vaccines, and the absence of any recognized harm from exposure to thimerosal in vaccines, hepatitis B, DTaP, and Hib vaccines that contain thimerosal as a preservative can continue to be used in the routine infant schedule beginning at age 2 months along with monovalent or combination vaccines that do not contain thimerosal as a preservative.
1999 – From the CDC website (emphasis added):
The FDA reviews the use of thimerosal in childhood vaccines and finds no evidence of harm, but as a precautionary measure, recommends removing thimerosal from vaccines routinely given to infants.
05/05/2001 – A risk assessment of thimerosal use in childhood vaccines, published in the journal Pediatrics, finds no evidence of harm from the use of thimerosal as a preservative, other than redness and swelling at the injection site. More specifically the authors concluded as such (emphasis added):
Conclusion. Our review revealed no evidence of harm caused by doses of thimerosal in vaccines, except for local hypersensitivity reactions. However, some infants may be exposed to cumulative levels of mercury during the first 6 months of life that exceed EPA recommendations. Exposure of infants to mercury in vaccines can be reduced or eliminated by using products formulated without thimerosal as a preservative.
10/01/2001 - IOM’s Immunization Safety Review Committee issues a report concluding there is not enough evidence to disprove claims that thimerosal in childhood vaccines causes autism, attention deficit hypersensitivity disorder, or speech or language delay. This is yet another better safe than sorry kind of report; there is no evidence that it is harmful, but we can’t prove it isn’t either.

2001 – Except for influenza (flu), thimerosal is removed from or reduced in all vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and under manufactured for the U.S. market.

08/2003 – A study looks for a link between autism incidence and the use of thimerosal-containing vaccines. The study does not find a link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism in Denmark and Sweden, where autism rates continued to increase although thimerosal was removed from vaccines in 1992. Study authors conclude as such (emphasis added):
CONCLUSIONS: The body of existing data, including the ecologic data presented herein, is not consistent with the hypothesis that increased exposure to Thimerosal-containing vaccines is responsible for the apparent increase in the rates of autism in young children being observed worldwide.
11/2003 - Another study, published in Pediatrics, finds no consistent significant associations between exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines and a variety of kidney, nervous system, and developmental problems. The authors concluded as follow (emphasis added, TCV means Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines):
Conclusions. No consistent significant associations were found between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Conflicting results were found at different HMOs for certain outcomes. For resolving the conflicting findings, studies with uniform neurodevelopmental assessments of children with a range of cumulative thimerosal exposures are needed.
05/17/2004 - After reviewing scientific studies that examined thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism, the Institute of Medicine, IOM, concludes in a report that the studies “consistently provided evidence of no association between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.”

07/07/2007 – CDC issues a statement on autism and thimerosal that states in part “Some people believe increased exposure to thimerosal (from the addition of important vaccines recommended for children) explains the higher prevalence [of autism] in recent years. However, evidence from several studies examining trends in vaccine use and changes in autism frequency does not support such an association.“

09/27/2007 – A CDC study does not support an association between early exposure to thimerosal in vaccines and nervous system disorders in children between the ages of 7 and 10 years.
The weight of the evidence in this study does not support a causal association between early mercury exposure from thimerosal-containing vaccines and/or immunoglobulins and neuropsychological functioning at ages 7 to 10 years.
09/13/2010 – Another CDC study, published in Pediatrics, shows no connection between prenatal and infant exposure to thimerosal and autism rates.  The authors concluded as such (emphasis added):
CONCLUSIONS In our study of MCO members, prenatal and early-life exposure to ethylmercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines and immunoglobulin preparations was not related to increased risk of ASDs.
Conclusion
First, let us bear in mind that this entry’s goal is not to summarize all the evidence, or lack there off, about thimerosal and its safety, but the goal was to verify my comment in the exchange with the commenter that the authorities decided to remove thimerosal not because of the scientific evidence showing harm, as the commenter claimed, but as a precautionary method.

All the documents linked to above point in the same direction; each one reaches the conclusion that there was no evidence of risk from thimerosal in vaccines. All risks are hypothetical, and since these studies could never prove definitively that thimerosal in vaccines doesn’t cause any extremely rare serious, they’re all couched in the “maybe” language. They all read as follows: No evidence of harm was found, but we can’t prove it so let’s take it out just to be safe. This is being interpreted by the anti-vaccine crowd as the “authorities admitting that the scientific evidence shows that thimerosal is harmful”.

I am the one who is being told to re-learn the history, but based on this evidence I’ve presented here today, it appears it is some on the anti-vaccine crowd that either do not know, or willfully misinterpret, the history.

Vaccine Times: Presidential Proclamation

Presidential Proclamation-National Influenza Vaccination Week

On December 10, 2010, in ALL POSTS, NEWS, by Leart Shaka 
 
Here is the full text of the Presidential Proclamation declaring this week National Influenza Vaccination Week. The original can be found at the White House website. Yet another good reason to vote for Obama in 2012.
Last year, as the world prepared for a pandemic of the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus, we were reminded of the severity and unpredictability of this serious disease.  Thousands of Americans suffered serious complications from the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus, resulting in hospitalization or even death.  Tragically, influenza and flu related complications take American lives each year.  During National Influenza Vaccination Week, we remind all Americans that the flu vaccine is safe and effective in preventing the spread of flu viruses.
Annual flu vaccination is recommended for all people 6 months of age and older.  Under the new health reform law, the Affordable Care Act, individuals enrolled in new group or individual private health plans have no co-payment or deductible for influenza vaccinations.  While the flu can make even healthy children and adults very sick, certain individuals are at greater risk for serious complications from the flu.  Pregnant women, young children, older adults, as well as people living with HIV, chronic lung disease, diabetes, heart disease, neurologic conditions, and certain other chronic health conditions are especially encouraged to get a flu vaccine.  Our Nation’s health care workers and those caring for infants under 6 months of age should also be vaccinated to protect themselves and those within their care.  I encourage all Americans to visit www.Flu.gov for information and resources on vaccinations and how to prevent and treat the flu.
Everyone can take steps to promote America’s health this flu season.  Though there is no way to accurately predict the course or severity of influenza, we know from experience that it will pose serious health risks for thousands of Americans this season.  We can all take common-sense precautions to prevent infection with influenza, including washing hands frequently, covering coughs or sneezes with sleeves and not hands, and staying home when ill.
However, vaccination is the best protection against contracting and spreading the flu.  The vaccine is available through doctors’ offices, clinics, State and local health departments, pharmacies, college and university health centers, as well as through many employers and some primary and secondary schools.  Seasonal flu activity is usually most intense between January and March, and vaccinating now can help curb the spread of this disease.  Together, we can prepare as individuals and as a Nation for this year’s flu season and help ensure that our fellow Americans remain healthy and safe.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim December 5 through December 11, 2010, as National Influenza Vaccination Week.  I encourage Americans to get vaccinated this week if they have not yet done so, and to urge their families, friends, and co workers to do the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this seventh day of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth.
BARACK OBAMA

Just the Vax: Evidence trumps blanket statements (or whack-a-bob)

Evidence trumps blanket statements (or whack-a-bob)

I have a number of other blogs planned, but this little gem needed treating first. On The Vaccine Book discussion forum, a poster asked a couple of days ago:
Dr. Bob - the other day you answered a question for me regarding titers and MMR. You mentioned that immunity could last up to 10-15 years. Someone had a follow up question as follows:
does that mean that we would have to re-vaccinate when child is 14 or older? (Having been originally vaccinated at age 4). Will the one MMR not last a lifetime? Or would we just check titers again after the ten to fifteen year mark?
These are very relevant questions, given the dangerous MMR recommendations that Dr. Bob spreads on his board and blog. Here is his answer:
I'd check titers. It's fairly unpredictable and individual as far as how long titers will stay positive. You could check every 5 years starting around age fifteen. OR, knowing that the diseases are so rare, you could just not bother after checking at fifteen. MOST adults have lost their imunity, and no one checks (unless a person's occupation requires it, or during pregnancy for rubella).
Wow - there is so much wrong with that, lets take in in bits:

I'd check titers.: Yes, you would, as a doctor in private practice, that sounds like a very attractive way forward. Not sure how appealing this is to parents and children, though.

It's fairly unpredictable and individual as far as how long titers will stay positive.: It is funny he should say that, when the current Dr. Bob recommendation is to vaccinate children once with MMR when they are four since that is sufficient then ("for State requirements", in the small print).

You could check every 5 years starting around age fifteen.: A blood draw and expensive titers (not sure how expensive, but his vaccine visits cost $80 to $200) every five years, mmh, ok.

OR, knowing that the diseases are so rare, you could just not bother after checking at fifteen.: Dr. Bob logic at work. I have called him a public health threat before - here is a quick recap of one of the reasons why:
Why are M, M, and R rare? Because of the 2xMMR vaccine policy in developed countries.
What will happen if everyone followed Dr. Bob's recommendation? M, M, and R would resurge - his 1xMMR vaccinated patients would provide the ideal breeding ground. Dr. Bob's home visits for measles patients do not come cheap.

MOST adults have lost their imunity: That one left me almost speechless. Luckily, while Bob's anonymous sycophants were busy name calling, cbe did a minute of research:
the evidence? by cbe - posted on 11/30/2010
All the evidence I see for rubella and measles says adults have MAINTAINED their immunity. Where is the evidence on the other side?

Is it "rude" to ask for that evidence?

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/408098 Here we see measles immunity of 81-89% of adults and higher...and these are in birth cohorts that DID NOT receive the 2 dose schedule. So we know that many of these individuals are not immune because the 2 dose schedule came into effect later.

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=19060889

this study looks at mumps 21 years after 2 dose vaccination. 70%+ immune. This is consistent with what SM is saying about mumps being the least effective part of the vaccine. BUT even here Dr Bob's assertion that "most" are not immune is not playing out in the numbers. I assume "most" would mean at least 50% + 1.

93%+ canadian mothers were found to be immune to rubella:

http://tinyurl.com/27gf9s6

Again 90%+ immune to rubella:
http://tinyurl.com/2eoxurz

I can show tons more for measles, too.'

But where is the evidence that most adults have lost immunity?
That was easy, right? Turns out that Dr. Bob had never invested that minute:
Hey CBE - thanks for the info by Dr. Bob - posted on 11/30/2010
I haven't looked at this research. I was answering simply on the general belief among the medical community that most vaccines don't last into adulthood. Since I don't do adult medicine, I've never had to counsel parents through this type of information and I've never actually looked it up. It looks like you are right about the MMR titers though - it seems that they do last into adulthood for more people. Thanks for pointing that out. I appreciate you doing so in a straightforward, respectful manner - very adult of you.

I haven't looked at this research.: now that was blindingly obvious.

I was answering simply on the general belief among the medical community that most vaccines don't last into adulthood.: I was answering simply on the general belief I didn't bother to look up the evidence before I posted utter nonsense in the forum (there, I fixed that for you).

Since I don't do adult medicine, I've never had to counsel parents through this type of information and I've never actually looked it up.: So Dr. Bob doesn't consider the consequences of his "alternative vaccination schedule" for his patients when they become adults? Wow.

This anonymous poster expresses their frustration:
Cath, This is bizarre to me - if the diseases are by - posted on 11/30/2010
"so rare" as Dr. Bob says, and most adults have lost immunity, then why do we bother vaccinating at all? It seems that older kids and teens would be at much MORE risk from mumps and measles, and we would want to make sure that they remained immune to these diseases all through adulthood. If adults have lost immunity, aren't babies at risk from adults from than from children? Where is the ratinale in this thinking?
as does this:
I don't think SM posted a rude comment at all by - posted on 11/30/2010
The thinking is illogical to expect parents to keep checking titers every five years, or not check at all since most of us are not immune anyway! I think for myself, it makes no sense at all to keep checking titers, when I know with almost certaintly that immunity will "wear off" after 5-10 years or so according to Dr. Bob. If we know that immunity from MMR wears off after several years, how can we safely get by with just one dose? I want my children to be protected when they are older and more prone to serious risks from measles and mumps. Same feeling with chickenpox. I think we will do one MMR at age four, and check titers once soon after to make sure it worked, then the second dose at age 12, before puberty. This was the old recommendation from AAP, since these diseases are MORE dangerous as kids pass adolescence, and they wanted to insure immunity into the later years.
and this:
Then if someone is going to make money by - posted on 12/1/2010
by offering that advice as an "expert" on the topic in print form, shouldn't they be willing and able to look up accurate information about said topic? Particularly if offering blanket statements? That is more rude than any attacks I've seen.

This site is a money-making venture.

No further comment needed.

Tuesday, December 07, 2010

Bad Astronomy: Autism Science Foundation

Just a repost of something from Dr. Plait that needs to be passed along to folks.  Please do what you can, and at least pass this information around.

The Autism Science Foundation

[Over the next couple of weeks, I'll be posting some calls to action for donations and such. I don't want to overdo them, so I'm only putting up ones I feel strongly about - ones that promote science and skepticism. This blog reaches a lot of people, and we are mighty. Thanks.]

I write a lot about the antivaccination movement, people who think vaccines cause autism (among other ills). This movement is very strong, despite there being no real evidence to support their claims, and tons and tons of solid evidence against them. The antivax message puts children’s lives at risk, and that’s something that must not stand.

But an important point gets lost among the shouting: while we know vaccines do not cause autism, we don’t know what does. The good news is, while the antivaxxers tilt at windmills, there are scientists out there trying to find out the roots of autism. One organization, the Autism Research Foundation, is just such a science-based group. They’re running a year-end campaign called recipe4hope, and they’ve put together this cute video:






As they say, every little bit helps. If you’ve got something, please send it along. Thanks.

Friday, November 26, 2010

Study: Some Autistic Brains Really Are Wired Differently

And not a single mention of Vaccines!  For someone who is in the least bit intellectually honest, that is not surprising.

Study: Some Autistic Brains Really Are Wired Differently
Too many tight connections in frontal-lobe circuits and too few long-distance links between the frontal lobe and the rest of the brain may cause some of the language,  social problems and repetitive behavior seen in autism spectrum disorders, according to a new study published in Science Translational Medicine. The research links a variant of the CNTNAP2 gene to this particular type of rewiring in the brain.

The new findings, which used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to measure the types and strength of connections between brain regions, could provide autism experts with some important clues for early intervention and treatment. (More on Time.com: Special Report: Kids and Mental Health)

"I think it is quite a beautiful study," says Kamila Markram, director of the Autism Project at the Brain Mind Institute of the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in Switzerland, who was not associated with the current research. "What's new is that it brings the genetic data together with the functional brain activity and that is usually not done. Either people look at gene expression or they look at functional brain activity. To bring them together and relate them to say, 'That particular gene is responsible for the different connection pattern that one observes,' that's a unique research area and that's the beauty of the study."

The gene produces a protein called CASPR1 and is active during brain development — mostly during frontal-lobe development. "During early development, it is localized to parts of brain that are 'more evolved' — areas where learning and language happen, the frontal lobes where really complex thinking takes place," says Ashlee Scott-van Zeeland, a postdoctoral fellow at the Scripps Translational Science Institute in La Jolla, Calif., and lead author of the study. "[It is] thought to help structure the brain." The gene also influences the development of reward regions of the brain, which are involved in motivation, pleasure and learning. (More on TIME.com: Is Picky Eating an Early Sign of Autism?)

For the new study, researchers compared 32 autistic and typically developing children, aged 11 to 13. Some had an autism-risk variant of CNTNAP2, while others had a non-risk variant. In the sample, the non-autistic children were just as likely to have the risk variant as the autistic children. Indeed the CNTNAP2 gene, which 1 in 3 people in the general population carry, doesn't guarantee autism — the gene is only one of many risk factors involved in the disorder. "In autism, there are many roads to Rome," explains Scott-van Zeeland. "You can have some of the common risk variants and they all stack up. [Only] if you have enough of them [will you] fall over edge."

All the kids underwent an fMRI scan. While in the scanner, the kids played a learning-related game that gave them monetary rewards for correct answers. The task was chosen because it activated many of the brain regions affected by CNTNAP2, including those involved in reward. (More on Time.com: 1 in 5 Kids With an Autistic Sibling Show Subtle Symptoms Too).

Regardless of autism diagnosis, the children with autism-risk variants showed different patterns of activity within the frontal lobe and between the frontal lobe and the rest of the brain. During the task, they showed more activity throughout the frontal cortex. For example, they had increased activity in the medial prefrontal cortex, which normally tends to be active when the brain is not engaged in a task; carriers of the risk variant showed less decrease in activity during the game than those without the risk variant. (More on TIME.com: Genetic Testing for Autism)

In children with the non-risk variant of CNTNAP2, brain pathways more strongly linked the frontal regions to parts of the left side of the brain, areas that typically specialize in language. In risk-variant carriers, the frontal lobe was connected more diffusely to both sides of the brain, which may help explain why the variant can be associated with delays in speech.

In addition, children without the risk variant had better long-range connections between brain regions — from the front to the back of the brain, for example. There were no differences in IQ associated with the risk variant alone.

CNTNAP2 — pronounced catnap two — is "a really interesting gene," says Scott-van Zeeland. It was first discovered in a family whose members suffered from obsessive-compulsive disorder and Tourette's syndrome (symptoms of both disorders are also frequently seen in autism). The same gene has also been linked to ADHD, schizophrenia and a language disorder known as Specific Language Impairment. (More on Time.com: A Five-Minute Brain Scan Tracks Kids' Development and May Spot Disorders).

"Genes do not code for diagnoses. They code for proteins, which then go about creating an effect," says Nancy Minshew, professor of psychiatry and neurology at the University of Pittsburgh, who has done prior research on brain connectivity in autism but was not associated with the current research. "Hence the same genes may be seen in clinically related disorders." All of the related disorders involve problems with directing attention and controlling behavior.

The new findings lend support to the "intense world" theory of autism, which has posited that patterns of brain circuitry that result in excessive functioning in some regions may lead to extremes in attention and perception, which can produce both the deficits — and the sometimes extraordinary intellectual talents — that characterize some people with autism. (More on TIME.com: Is Anorexia a 'Female' Form of Autism?)

In a brain wired with hyper-local connections, those regions would be prone to hyperactivity; in turn, the excess activity leads to hyper-responsiveness to incoming information and quick learning. "They react more to stimulation than normal circuits. And not only do they react too much, they also learn too much," says Markram, an author of the intense world theory.

Although that sounds like it could be a good thing — it may well explain the abilities of autistic savants, who are extremely gifted in mathematics, computer science or music — in the context of decreased long-term connections between brain regions, the end result can be overwhelming. Indeed, many people with autism describe being incapacitated by sensory experiences — whether they are bright lights, loud noises or social interactions.

"At a psychological level, basically, it would mean that the autistic person could feel, perceive and learn too much. That could lead to sensory overload, as well as consequences like social avoidance or withdrawal and repetitive behavior," says Markram. Autistic people tend to use these behaviors to keep their world the same, and to keep an overly intense world at bay.

"If you have too much noise — all that talking that's going on in the frontal lobes — it might be hard to figure out what sources of information to pay attention to," says Scott-van Zeeland. "To figure out what's going on requires these long-term connections."

Still, in the absence of other genes or environmental risk factors that lead to full blown autism, the pattern of brain connections associated with the risk variant of CNTNAP2 may carry certain advantages. "It would be really exciting to see what would be the strengths of this kind of connectivity pattern," says Scott-van Zeeland. "A lot of people carry this variation — if it weren't beneficial in some way, you would expect it to disappear."

Going forward, researchers may focus on using the new information to improve early autism interventions. Early brain development is complex and shaped by environmental signals, but a brain that is paralyzed by sensory overload misses early social cues, which may change the entire course of its development. So autistic children may have social problems not because their social brains are defective, but because sensory overload and the methods children use to cope with it prevent them from absorbing and understanding the information they need to develop socially.

Early social intervention could help prevent — or at least significantly mitigate — the disability associated with autism. "If you can identify these early brain signals and know what the problem is, you can do more intensive therapy," Scott van-Zeeland says. "A child's brain is so flexible. So instead of letting a child obsess over trains, you could spend a lot more time teaching them to pay attention to mom's face and trying to get that be rewarding. Once we find out what circuits are not automatically doing what they should, if you can explicitly tell them what they should do, that would go a really long way.”

As autism researcher David Mandell told the New York Times this week in a story on early autism intervention:
What you ultimately might be doing is preventing a certain proportion of autism from ever emerging ... I'm not saying you're curing these kids, but you may be changing their developmental trajectory enough by intervening early enough that they never go on to meet criteria for the disorder. And you can't do that if you keep waiting for the full disorder to emerge.

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

The Skeptical Teacher: Anti-Vaccination PSA Coming to a Theater Near You… Literally!

I saw this, and had to spread this around.  For some reason, there are people out there that will tell any lie than can in order to promote their dangerous and skewed agenda, and endanger the public while they are at it.  The level of deceit that goes into something like this is boggling.  There is no way that these people can honestly not know that they are lying, right?  Sadly, the nature of these sort of denialists and nutters is that their brains have something wrong with the wiring, and they end up like this.  I present you someone else's reaction to this unedited.  If he sounds furious, that's good, because I'm sure he is, as well as I am.

Anti-Vaccination PSA Coming to a Theater Near You… Literally!

Posted by mattusmaximus on November 20, 2010

**Update (11/23/10): I may have spoken too soon with my earlier update, folks.  It seems that over the last day or so we’ve received some conflicting reports about exactly what is & isn’t going on at AMC with these ads.  Elyse Anders provides more details over at Skepchick on this – until we have more info, stay tuned & continue contacting the theaters in question.


**Update (11/21/10): It appears the executives at AMC (which owns some of the theaters in question) have listened to the public outcry – they say they have pulled the ad and do not plan to show it. However, some of the other theaters may not be owned by AMC, so please contact them.

===============

It’s time to kick some ass… I just found out that the anti-vaccinationist groups called Age of Autism and SafeMinds are planning on running a public service announcement (PSA) in movie theaters nationwide the weekend following Thanksgiving. I’ve seen the 30 second ad, and it contains the usual thoroughly debunked nonsense regarding “mercury toxins in vaccines” and how this is supposedly dangerous for children.  The facts are that there is ZERO evidence that the mercury preservative in vaccines, called thimerosal, is any sort of danger – there are no links between thimerosal & autism, either (a common claim by various anti-vaxxers).  In fact, even after the U.S. government removed thimerosal from the vaccine schedule for children the rate of autism continued to rise!

But don’t tell that to the anti-vax crowd, because they don’t give a whit about the science.  They believe in their heart of hearts that they know the “truth about vaccines”, and they don’t care one way or the other what the actual evidence is… and they want to proselytize this lunacy to you:




Folks, the purpose of this ad is simple: it is to sow fear & distrust of vaccines in the hopes that you & your kids don’t get them at all – that’s it.  These anti-vax groups are, for whatever reason, ideologically opposed to the very idea of vaccinations, and they’ll use every slimy tactic in the book to push it on you.  If you can stomach it, here is their ad…



And here is the list of theaters that are currently being targeted by Age of Autism for this dangerous propaganda (with the potential to reach over 500,000 people):

*Empire 25 in New York City
*Long Beach 26 in Long Beach, California
*River East 21 in Chicago, IL
*Boston Common 19 in Boston, MA
*Phipps Plaza 14 in Atlanta, GA
*Tyson’s Corner 16 in McLean, VA
*Northpark Center 15 in Dallas, TX
*Rosedale 14 in Saint Paul, MN
*Pavillions 15 in Denver, CO

We cannot let this stand… I suggest that if you live in any of these areas (or know people who do) that you contact the theater in question to find out whether or not they plan to run this PSA, and if they do plan to do so then make it well known to them that you will boycott that business in perpetuity (and you will encourage everyone you know to do the same) – when it comes to stuff like this, money talks & bullshit walks.  I would also notify your local health department and medical doctors’ organization about this, on the chance that they might wish to make some kind of public statement against this idiocy.

And spread the word – the skeptical & pro-science community needs to send a strong, clear message to those who would spread such life-endangering pseudoscience that we will not stand for it.  We didn’t ask for this fight, be we will fight it & we will finish it.

 

Friday, November 12, 2010

Vaccine Central: 2009 H1N1 toll in the US

Remember, those numbers aren't just numbers.  They are people.  Someone's wife, husband, brother, sister, child, etc.  Every single one of those numbers have a name.  And something as simple as a vaccine could have prevented them from going to a hospital or grave.  Even if the pandemic was not as horrible as the insane media made it out to be, there were still 12,000 people who DIED as a result.

2009 H1N1 toll in the United States

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has tabulated estimates of the toll the 2009 H1N1 pandemic took  in the United States. The numbers are sobering and require no additional comments. The CDC tabulated the numbers through direct observation in 62 counties covering 13 metropolitan areas of 10 states, which were then extrapolated to the entire US Population. So without further ado, here is what the 2009 H1N1 pandemic did in the US.
  • Total Cases – 60,837,748 (yep, millions) which break down as such:
    • 0-17 years   – 19,501,004
    • 18-64 years – 35,392,931
    • 65+ years – 5,943,813
  • Hospitalizations – 274, 304 which break down as such:
    • 0-17 years    - 86,813
    • 18-64 years  - 160,229
    • 65+ years     –  27,263
  • Deaths – 12, 469 which break down as such:
    • 0-17 years    - 1,282
    • 18-64 years  - 9,565
    • 65+ years     –  1,621
So, to put this in perspective. If you’re a 30-year-old such as myself, over 9,500 of our peers have died; 1,282 of our children are dead, and 1,621 of our parents are gone, all due solely to H1N1 flu. Chances are then, there is someone out there who lost his spouse, child and one parent to this disease. Makes you think twice about not vaccinating no?

Friday, November 05, 2010

Vaccine Central: Vaccine Misconception of the day – Aluminum in vaccines

Since most parents are NOT chemists, nor do they understand biology on an intimate level, this particular canard seems to be really prevalent in their decisions to expose their children to life threatening diseases that can easily be prevented.  Take that Big Boob (oh, wait, was that supposed to be big pharma?).

Vaccine Misconception of the day – Aluminum in vaccines

One of the common arguments the anti-vaccine advocates use is the “toxins in vaccines” argument. They say that because some substance in vaccines is known to be toxic, such as aluminum, then its mere presence makes vaccines dangerous. What they fail to mention in almost every case however is how much of said substance is in vaccines, and at what levels is this substance toxic.

Water can be toxic to a human in high enough quantities; it’s called drowning. Oxygen can be poisonous; it’s called oxygen poisoning. The list of examples goes on and on but the take home point is this: any substance can be toxic in the right dose; and most substances will not be toxic at low enough levels. As they say the dose makes the poison. The same applies to aluminum.

So, how much aluminum is there in vaccines anyway, and is that level dangerous for babies? To answer that, the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia has set up a short, concise, informative PDF that is available to all, for free, titled “Aluminum in Vaccines: What you should know“. And unlike those in the anti-vaccine camp, the Vaccine Education Center provides all their sources in the PDF itself, for anyone who wants to verify the accuracy of their report.

What they report should satisfy everyone’s curiosity.
During the first 6 months of life, infants could receive about 4 milligrams of aluminum from vaccines. That’s not very much: a milligram is one-thousandth of a gram and a gram is the weight of one-fifth of a teaspoon of water. During the same period, babies will also receive about 10 milligrams of aluminum in breast milk, about 40 milligrams in infant formula, or about 120 milligrams in soy-based formula.
So to put this in perspective: a baby will get 2.5 times the amount of aluminum from breast milk, 10 times the aluminum from infant formula, and 30 times the aluminum from soy-based formula. I know of no babies that are raised without either breast milk or formula, including the babies of each person in the anti-vaccine camp, and any baby who wasn’t vaccinated due to parent’s fear of aluminum toxicity in vaccines. 

It appears to me that the anti-vaccine crowd should switch its focus from “greening” vaccines to “greening” baby formula. I hear Big Formula makes a lot of money too out of its product….!