Autism’s false prophets revealed

appIn the brief time that Science-Based Medicine has existed, I’ve become known as the vaccine blogger of the group. True, Steve Novella sometimes posts about antivaccine pseudoscience and fear-mongering (unlike me, he’s even been directly attacked by David Kirby) and both Mark Crislip and Harriet Hall have each done one post about it, but, at least this far, hands down I’ve done more posts about the misinformation, pseudoscience, and outright quackery spread by antivaccine activists such as J. B. Handley’s Generation Rescue and his recently recruited empty-headed celebrity spokesperson Jenny McCarthy, not to mention a number of others who promote the resurgence of infectious disease by sowing doubts about the safety of the most effective weapon the mind of humans have ever devised against it. Truly, few uses of “alternative” medicine bother me as much as the antivaccine orientation of so much of the movement supporting it, a movement that has also led to all manner of “biomedical” treatments (quackery).

What you might not know is how I developed my interest in this particular area of dangerous pseudoscience. After all, I’m a cancer surgeon and an NIH-funded cancer investigator, not a pediatrician, immunologist, or neurologist. As hard as it is for me to believe, given that it seems today that I’ve always been refuting this nonsense, I only first discovered the antivaccine movement about three and a half years ago. True, I had been a regular on certain Usenet newsgroups for at least four or five years before that and had encountered antivaccinationists there before, but my contact with them online had been sporadic, and they seemed “out there” even in comparison to the usual run-of-the-mill alt-med maven. But then in the spring of 2005 I started to notice in a big way the cadre of pseudoscientists, parents of autistic children, and others who pushed the myth that thimerosal-containing vaccines or vaccines in general cause autism. Oddly enough, it started out with the Huffington Post, of all places. In May 2005, Arianna Huffington started a large group blog, chock full of famous pundits and celebrities writing blog posts. Within three weeks of its formation, I had noticed a very disturbing aspect of the Huffington Post, and that was that it appeared to be providing a major soapbox for antivaccinationists, including a post by Janet Grilo of Cure Autism Now, two posts by that propagandist of antivaccinationists David Kirby (with whom our fearless leader Steve Novella has managed to get into a bit of a tussle), and posts by that Santa Monica pediatrician to the children of the stars, Dr. Jay Gordon, a man who assiduously denies being “antivaccine” but parrots the most blatantly obvious talking points of the antivaccine movement and is currently best known as being the pediatrician for Jenny McCarthy’s son Evan. At the very least, Dr. Gordon is an apologist for the antivaccination movement, and he has become one of the “go-to” guys for the media looking for physicians who are “vaccine skeptics,” making numerous radio and TV appearances to promote his “skepticism.”

The next phase of my “awakening” to just how pervasive antivaccine fearmongering and pseudoscience were came when Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. wrote an incredibly dishonest and deceptive screed that got wide coverage in the summer of 2005. His article, called, charmingly enough, Deadly Immunity was a rehash of all the misinformation about thimerosal in vaccines and autism wrapped up with in a bow of conspiracy-mongering worthy of a 9/11 Truther with a penchant for quote-mining that would make a creationist blush. The article appeared simultaneously on (which normally doesn’t publish such nonsense) and Rolling Stone, a magazine that really should stay away from science and stick to covering entertainment and politics. It was followed by a media blitz by RFK Jr. and antivaccine propagandist David Kirby, best known for his credulous treatment of the thimerosal/autism link, Evidence of Harm: Mercury in Vaccines and the Autism Epidemic: A Medical Controversy, published a few months before RFK, Jr.’s article, and his subsequent activities posting antivaccine nonsense on Huffington Post and, more recently, on the quackery-promoting antivaccine blog Age of Autism.

I’ve alluded to the fact before that I have quite a bit of blogging experience under another guise. Indeed, I’m sure many of the readers here know what that guise is. Suffice it to say that at the time I prefaced a post about RFK, Jr.’s article by saying that had “flushed its credibility down the toilet” and referred to the article itself as the “the biggest, steamingest, drippiest turd has ever published.” Clearly (and fortunately), I use much less–shall we say?–colorful language on this blog, but I bring this up so that the reader knows where I am coming from. Indeed, since that time in the summer of 2005, I’ve been wondering when scientists, public health officials, and physicians supporting science-based medicine would finally wake up and start to push back against this tide of antivaccine nonsense, which is starting to result in the resurgence of measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases. This year, I’ve seen some hopeful signs, including organizations like Voices for Vaccines and Every Child By Two, as well as other signs of push-back against the antivaccine movement, which, I hate to admit, has been clearly winning the P.R. war. What there hasn’t been yet is a book written from a scientific viewpoint that directly addresses the history of the recent resurgence of the antivaccine movement and refutes the pseudoscience that it promotes.

Until now, that is.

Released earlier this month is a direct shot across the bow of the antivaccine movement in the form of a book by vaccine scientist and physician Dr. Paul Offit of the University of Pennsylvania’s Childen’s Hospital of Philadelphia, a man whom the antivaccine movement views as an unholy combination of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Darth Vader, and Satan Incarnate because of his staunch advocacy of vaccines and his willingness to stand up to the antivaccine movement. The book is entitled Autism’s False Prophets: Bad Science, Risky Medicine, and the Search for a Cure. Overall it is an excellent primer on the subject and should be required reading for anyone curious about how the antivaccine movement became so pervasive and powerful.

The book begins with a rather interesting choice for a quote:

When religion was strong and science weak, men mistook magic for medicine. Now, when science is strong and religion weak, men mistake medicine for magic.

– Tomas Szasz

Actually, I would quibble about whether religion is actually weak these days. In this country, at least, fundamentalist religion, in particular fundamentalist Christianity, seems stronger than ever, permeating society so thoroughly that it is unthinkable that an atheist President will be elected in my lifetime. Elsewhere, fundamentalist Islam and other religions hold sway. Later in the book Dr. Offit makes the connection between religion and the antivaccine movement, which strikes me as a bit incongruous with this quote. However, the quote does characterize quite succinctly that what we are dealing with in the antivaccine movement is not science. Rather it is more akin to religion, because scientific evidence exonerating vaccines as a cause of autism rarely changes the minds of adherents to the antivaccine faith.

One thing I was not aware of is just how much Dr. Offit has been harassed by antivaccine zealots because of his advocacy for vaccination. He lays it all out right from the very first passage in the book:

I get a lot of hate mail.

Every week people send letters and e-mails calling me “stupid,” “callous,” an “SOB,” or “a prostitute.” People ask, “how in the world can you put money before the health of someone’s baby?” or “How can you sleep at night?” or “Why did you sell your soul to the devil?” They say “I don’t have a conscience,” am “directly responsible for the death and damage of hundreds of children,” and “have blood on [my] hands.” They “pray that the love of Christ will one day flood [my] darkened heart.” They warn that my “day of reckoning is coming.”

Dr. Offit then describes how he became interested in pediatrics and vaccines and the path that led him to become an infectious disease specialist studying vaccines, describing in moving terms one child he took care of who died of a rotavirus infection and how that led him into his current work. Fairly conventional stuff, but it’s necessary to understand where Dr. Offit’s coming from. He then goes on to describe how he became an advocate for vaccines in the 1990s and how that led to his daily vilification. (Just search Age of Autism if you want to get a flavor of the sort of stuff Dr. Offit is subjected to day in and day out by his enemies.) As part of this campaign, Dr, Offit has even been subject to death threats and calls in which implied threats were made against his family and children. Indeed, after he had casually mentioned his children’s names during Congressional testimony in front of quackery-supporting antivaccinationist Congressman Dan Burton’s committee, in which he answered a question by Representative John Tierney about whether he vaccinated his own children, a concerned member Tierney’s staff warned him, “Never, never mention the names of your own children in front of a group like this.” Some of these threats were credible enough that the University of Pennsylvania routinely checks his mail for suspicious letters and packages and he has periodically required an armed guard.

Personally, I find Dr. Offit’s story quite credible. Indeed, I’ve occasionally been at the receiving end of but a small fraction of the vitriol directed at him. True, I have never been physically threatened (although one time I met someone whom I mistakenly thought–just for an instant–was a particularly persistent antivaccinationist who detested me and it momentarily frightened me), but antivaccinationists have certainly done their best to destroy my Google reputation. Usually, the attacks take the form of slander and ad hominem attacks. For example, not only have I been personally attacked by J.B. Handley of Generation Rescue himself on Age of Autism in a prolonged screed, the comments after which mocked my appearance and questioned my manhood, but one particularly deranged antivaccine advocate, who has in the past shown up at least once in the comments on this blog and is so off the deep end that even antivaccinationists are embarrassed by him, has written posts accusing me of “sodomizing autistic children” and of being a “member of NAMBLA.” (Google it if you don’t know what the acronym means.) He bases his accusations on a list circulated on Usenet by Holocaust deniers back around 2000 designed to smear those of us involved in the fight against online Holocaust denial as pedophiles. The list is so obviously a pile of lies (for instance, it has me living and working in both New Jersey and Chicago seemingly simultaneously), but that didn’t stop him and it doesn’t stop other cranks from periodically resurrecting this zombie and setting it loose to try to eat the brains of those who see it. Indeed, this same blogger/commenter has even tried to link Kathleen Seidel to NAMBLA as well. (More on her later, as she is a major player in the book.) Now I’m just a rather insignificant blogger, not a vaccine researcher who has been on national television and testified in front of Congress about vaccine safety, and I’ve experienced a bit of this vitriol. That’s why I’m not surprised that Dr. Offit has been subjected to much worse.

After describing his stake in this debate, Dr. Offit dives right in, beginning with a brief history of vaccines and then of the condition known as autism, serving as a background, including some earlier forms of autism “treatments” such as facilitated communication, a now discredited technique that led to false accusations of rape and child abuse against parents based on nothing more than suggestibility and the ideomotor effect. He then proceeds to describe how Andrew Wakefield’s litigation-funded research published in The Lancet in 1998 led to a scare over the MMR vaccine that has not abated even a decade later and has also led to measles again becoming endemic in the U.K. That’s just the warmup. I have to admit that this is the first book I’ve ever read about a topic that I had been following in detail and writing about myself periodically. Consequently, my review is filtered through that prism. It may also be the reason why I found how Dr. Offit structured the first part of his story particularly jarring. He begins the thimerosal story with a chapter entitled “Mercury Rising.” This chapter is a fairly straightforward and relatively uncritical recitation of the “science” used by antivaccinationists to show that mercury causes autism. From my perspective, having read and analyzed many of these studies and knowing that they are at best irrelevant and at worst rank pseudoscience, I found this chapter especially disturbing. I think I know what Dr. Offit was trying to do: To show how the steady drumbeat of such studies can give the impression that there is scientific legitimacy to the question fo whether vaccines cause autism, but it was hard to swallow. True, Dr. Offit immediately follows the chapter with “Mercury Falling,” in which he demolishes over and over again the “science” claiming to show that mercury in vaccines causes autism, but the overall effect disturbed me. Of course, that’s just me. I’d be curious to hear what others who have read the book thought of this structure.

One person who comes in for criticism is Dr. Neal Halsey, who in 1999 was head of the American Academy of Pediatrics’ vaccine advisory committee and was also instrumental in persuading the CDC to recommend the removal of thimerosal from vaccines even though there wasn’t any real science to show it to be dangerous. Two interesting points come out of this chapter that I hadn’t been aware of. First was the dynamic of how this came about. Many of the meetings held to discuss the matter were done by conference calls often dominated by Dr. Halsey. Indeed, the CDC committee was initially not at all enthusiastic about Dr. Halsey’s recommendations because they didn’t see any science compelling enough to warrant urgency. However, through force of will during several conference calls Dr. Halsey ultimately won the day. What seems to have happened is that, absent sitting in a room with all the players, members of the CDC got the impression that a “snowball” was growing in favor of doing something. Members later said that they were extremely skeptical but that with Dr. Halsey dominating the conversations and the inability to see the body language of other members of the committee, they didn’t realize that they were not alone in their extreme skepticism about the advisability of “doing something now.” The second point is that the banning of thimerosal absent compelling evidence that it caused harm was a fantastic example of the “precautionary principle” run amok, in which a ban was recommended “just in case.” That decision more than any other, argues Dr. Offit, was responsible for the subsequent nine years of antivaccinationist fearmongering over mercury in vaccines. After all, parents not unreasonably think, if the CDC and AAP recommended removing thimerosal from vaccines, there must have been a reason. Maybe there was something wrong that is now being hidden! Reassurances by the CDC that the recommendation was “just as a precautionary measure” designed to “make vaccines even safer” were not particularly convincing in comparison. Actions speak louder than words, after all. In other words, although antivaccine advocates were agitating about thimerosal in the late 1990s and likely would have continued to do so, the ultimate magnitude of the thimerosal scare in the U.S. was largely a self-inflicted wound on the part of the CDC and AAP.

One face familiar to me was featured prominently in this book, a woman named Kathleen Seidel, who created the Neurodiversity website and blog. She has been a thorn in the side of antivaccinationists for several years now. Arguably her biggest contribution is how she has revealed the sordid details of the conflicts of interest and pseudoscience “Behind the Mercury Curtain,” so to speak (the title of the chapter in Autism’s False Prophets featuring Seidel). She was the first to uncover how Dr. Mark Geier and his son David formed a dubious and “elusive” institute and packed an institutional review board of that institute with their cronies to rubberstamp their unethical “clinical trials” using chelation therapy and the powerful anti-androgenic and -estrogenic drug Lupron under the guise of treating “precocious puberty.” Indeed, my learning about the Geiers and their highly unethical research behavior back in 2006 was the second “awakening” I had about the antivaccine movement. Also interviewed for the book is another online friend, Camille Clark, also known as the Autism Diva, as well as others with autistic children who do not buy into antivaccine pseudoscience.

Through the latter part of the book, Dr. Offit reviews all the other major players in the antivaccine movement. They’re almost all there: J.B. Handley of Generation Rescue (now apparently known as “Jenny McCarthy’s Autism Organization”) and Age of Autism; Jenny McCarthy and her “Green Our Vaccines” nonsense; aging shock-jock Don Imus; chemistry professor-turned-antivaccinationist Boyd Haley; Mady Hornig; Richard Deth; David Kirby; and, of course, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. None of them are spared, nor should they be. For someone as interested as I, there wasn’t much there that I didn’t already know, although I was surprised to learn just how tightly RFK, Jr. is affiliated with trial lawyers (I had always thought he was idealistic but seriously misguided on the question of vaccines) and how David Kirby apparently used to bluster and bully that he was “with the New York Times” to try to obtain interviews when in fact he was never anything more than a freelancer who was occasionally published in the Gray Lady. However, to those who aren’t familiar with these characters, it is potentially eye-opening. Unfortunately, one aspect of this story that is missing is how antivaccine activists have coopted the case of Hannah Poling to serve their propaganda. True, the case didn’t really explode onto the scene until March. Perhaps it was too late to include it in the hardcover book, and I hope that Dr. Offit will write an update for the paperback edition. Indeed, the manipulation of the Hannah Poling case and the way that antivaccinationists latched on it as “evidence” that rare mitochondrial disorders are allegedly a factor predisposing to “vaccine injury” causing autism warrant a complete chapter in and of themselves.

The closing third of the book deals with how science is handled in the courts and in society. There is an extensive discussion of the Autism Omnibus and how weak the plaintiff’s case was in the first “test case.” More importantly, Dr. Offit echoes a lament that I have made time and time again about how science is so frequently misrepresented and abused in the media, describing specific examples. One point he makes is that scientists always tend to qualify their remarks and be very careful about stating conclusions. That’s nothing but good science (remember, science can never absolutely prove that there is no correlation between vaccines and autism, only suggest just how very, very unlikely it is that there is one), but such “weasel words,” which are normal qualifications of the uncertainty inherent in scientific conclusions, leave the average layperson thinking that there really is a major controversy among scientists. In the case of whether vaccines cause autism, there is not. Dr. Offit also compares the P.R. techniques used by the antivaccine movement to discount the science exonerating thimerosal-containing vaccines or vaccines in general as a cause of or contributor to autism to how the tactics tobacco companies used back in the 1950s and 1960s to try to convince people that there was still a scientific controversy over whether cigarette smoking causes lung cancer. He also points out how, in this age of science, belief in magic and the paranormal remain very common, making the connection between the lack of critical thinking skills that allow such superstition to continue to flourish and how easily pseudoscience can become accepted as “fact”–a point I have made many times before, although not so much on this blog.

Of course, no review would be complete if I didn’t briefly mention two things that bugged me about this book. No book is perfect, and Dr. Offit’s is no exception. Don’t get me wrong, though. Overall Autism’s False Prophets is an excellent book that I recommend highly. Nonetheless, I do have two minor nits to pick. The first is that Dr. Offit approvingly quotes Steven Milloy twice and Michael Fumento once, both of whom are well known corporate shills, apologists for conservative politics, antienvironmentalists, and anthropogenic climate changeskeptics.” (Indeed, Steve Milloy is known for his famous and dubious “Ultimate Global Warming Challenge.”) Moreover, both have been accused of ties to the very tobacco companies to which Dr. Offit compared antivaccinationists to, and both have conflicts of interest in the form of ties to and/or funding from the industries whose interests they virtually always champion, be it big oil, big pharma, or big tobacco. That they happen to be correct in condemning the antivaccination movement is not a good enough reason to cite them, and Dr. Offit could have made his points just as well without including quotes from such tainted sources. Even though the quotes themselves argue Dr. Offit’s case about science and society and the law, anyone who has skeptically examined the rhetoric of Milloy or Fumento will know that neither of them is a credible spokesman for science-based medicine.

The second nit is that Dr. Offit comes off as a bit credulous about the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM). Indeed, at one point he states:

But what worried many scientists and physicians about NCCAM was that alternative medicines would be exempt from the scientific method. Fortunately, that hasn’t happened.

Actually, I (and all of my cobloggers here, I daresay) would argue that that is exactly what has happened with the rise of NCCAM. Dr. Offit then goes on to argue that NCCAM has tested “several alternative medicines” and concluded that they didn’t work, mentioning laetrile. Actually laetrile was tested and found to be ineffective back in the 1980s, several years before the office that was the precursor to NCCCAM was ever established in the NIH. In any case, if he sees this review, I invite Dr. Offit to read articles by Wally Sampson, Steve Novella, Kimball Atwood, and me that argue otherwise and that NCCAM is a corrosive force against science-based medicine and for the accelerating infiltration of pseudoscience into academic medicine.

Be assured, however, that from my point of view the two nits I just picked are inconsequential compared to what is good and accurate about Autism’s False Prophets. Indeed, that I noticed them at all is probably a consequence of my having been active in the skeptical movement a long time (i.e., I “know too much”). After the virtually nonstop barrage of antivaccine propaganda and pseudoscience that has permeated the national zeitgeist, especially since Jenny McCarthy became a convert to antivaccinationism a little more than a year ago, Dr. Offit has provided a refreshing, science-based change of pace on the topic of vaccines and autism that pulls no punches. Every parent who has concerns about vaccines should read it to learn just how weak and without basis in science the claims of antivaccine “scientists” and advocates are and just how riddled with conflicts of interest every bit as bad as any attributed to big pharma so many of the luminaries of the antivaccine movement are. Even better, those out there who might be worried that Dr. Offit will be profiting from sales of his book can take comfort in the fact that Dr. Offit will not receive any money from it. He has promised to donate all royalties from sales of Autism’s False Prophets to autism research. Of course, it won’t be the type of autism “research” funded by Generation Rescue or performed by the likes of Boyd Haley, the Geiers père et fils, Andrew Wakefield, Laura Hewitson, Raymond Palmer or other false prophets of autism. It will go to real scientists doing real research on the science of autism and treatments designed to help autistic children, rather than subjecting them to a mind-dizzying panoply of “biomedical” interventions that are not only expensive but useless and potentially dangerous.

Education and contributing to science-based medicine, what more could one ask for? Buy and read Autism’s False Prophets instead of Jenny McCarthy’s new book Mother Warriors. Your brain will thank you.

Posted in: Book & movie reviews, Neuroscience/Mental Health, Politics and Regulation, Public Health, Vaccines

Leave a Comment (37) ↓

37 thoughts on “Autism’s false prophets revealed

  1. joseph449008 says:

    The first is that Dr. Offit approvingly quotes Steven Milloy twice

    I thought exactly the same thing when I read that. Steven Milloy owns, which is clearly not a site about junk science at all. It’s a site designed exclusively for the promotion of global warming denialism. The “global warming challenge” is no different to, say, Jock Doubleday’s “thimerosal challenge.” Obviously, they won’t pay anyone a dime over it.

    I was wondering when anti-vaxers would figure that one out. I guess they never did.

  2. D’oh!

    I guess I let them know. :-)

  3. DavidCT says:

    This is a little off the point but I am reading “Natural Causes” by Dan Hurley. Chapter 4 deals with how active use of PR was manipulated to push through the notorious DSHEA regulation that opened the floodgates for the supplement quacks. If you do not win in the arena of public opinion, being right will not win the day. For most people emotion is more powerful than reason. When these people vote – the truth be damed.

  4. tarran says:

    Dr Gorski,

    I strongly encourage you and all your co-bloggers to read Propaganda by Edward Bernays. Bernays is widely considered the founder of the field of public relations, and among his many accomplishments is the man who convinced women to take up smoking in large numbers.

    This book is a roadmap on how a special interest can trigger a mass movement, by “engineering consent”. It is the roadmap being used by the anti-vaccine zealots. It will, I think, help you counter them more effectively.

  5. msclark says:

    Today there was a fairly lengthy interview with Dr. Offit on WHYY

  6. mandydax says:

    Dr. Gorski, this book is the subject of the ScienceBlogs Book Club ( ) starting on Oct 1. I received a copy this weekend and am almost through it. Much of the time I spent reading Mercury Rising and Mercury Falling were spent with my mouth agape, and my jaw nearly dropped off my cranium during Behind the Mercury Curtain. Dr. Offit will be on the panel, so you could make sure that he reads your critique, and since you are so well versed on the subject, I’d be thrilled to see you commenting over there.

  7. Oh, Dr. Offit will see a version of my review. Trust me on this one. ;-)

  8. HCN says:

    Dr. Offit did not spell Olmsted’s name correctly, nor did he point out the problems with that guy’s idiotic “Age of Autism” series. But, perhaps that is the point… it was to idiotic to be taken seriously.

  9. Now that you mention it, that should have been a section in one of his chapters. After all, Olmsted did make a big stink through his series, although I’m sure his support for quackery is what probably finally got him booted from the UPI. Ah, well. So much idiocy, too little space in the book!

  10. AntiVax says:

    Offit–owned by Merck and proven liar

    which must account for his insanity: “In fact, Dr. Offit’s studies show that in theory, healthy infants could safely get up to 100,000 vaccines at once.”

  11. Oldfart says:

    They have a rule here and on scienceblogs, AntiVax. Any reference to automatically discredits your comment.

  12. HCN says:

    For any newbies:

    AntiVax = John Scudamore =

    “In any discussion involving science or medicine, citing as a credible source loses you the argument immediately …and gets you laughed out of the room.”


  13. Calli Arcale says:

    Scopie’s Law is quite correct, HCN, but there is a certain delicious extra charm to the fact that AntiVax *is*, because not only is he invoking Scopie’s Law, but he’s also quoting himself. Almost always, his only “evidence” consists of things he’s said himself. Things so ridiculous they get *other people* laughed out of the room.

    It amuses me greatly. ;-)

  14. HCN says:

    (psst, Callie Arcale, that is what I meant when I put AntiVax = JS =

  15. Calli Arcale says:

    I know, but I just love the double-whammy silliness that is AntiVax so much that I had to emphasize that particular part.

    I apologize for the disjointedness of my posts sometimes; I have ADD. It’s probably all the vaccines. :-P *nods frenetically*

  16. bcorden says:

    Thanks for the review. Once again, as a practicing pediatrician, today I had to ask a family to identify another doctor for their child because they absolutely refused the MMR at one year of age. I am supposed to be professional and discuss this rationally and without rancor. It is hard when you know, as you point out, that they are not going to listen to what you say at all. Its like talking to a rock. Of course, as the blurb from the AAP today about the measles case out West (I think) shows, not only does an unvaccinated child get put at risk, but they can spread the disease to all those unvaccinated babies under one in your waiting room. I shouldn’t say this, but I wish Jenny would catch a mild case of SSPE.

  17. HCN says:

    bcorden said “I shouldn’t say this, but I wish Jenny would catch a mild case of SSPE.”

    Actually she may already have SSPE. This might explain her rampant idiocy.

  18. sandman says:

    I shared this piece with an ID friend who enjoyed it. I’m sure this point has been made but it’s ironic that vaccination’s success is the very thing that emboldens the anti-vaccinationists – because these infectious scourges have been made so rare in the developing world, credulous folk are able to run amok with their denials of vaccine-efficacy. And the autism link is just charlatans taking advantage of naive, wishful parents. Even the most enlightened among us, when confronted with the rigors of caring for an autistic child, will be tempted by these sirens. I have great sympathy for these longsuffering parents – no sympathy for the charlatans and hucksters.

  19. The Blind Watchmaker says:

    I am always amazed that people are still clinging to the Thimerosal issue. It is gone. Gone. Gone. We do not give vaccines with Mercury in it to children. Even the Peds flu shot does not have it for kids under 3.

    Never mind that thimerosal has never been associated with anything except keeping vaccines preserved. Never mind the “methyl mercury / ethyl mercury” thing. It doesn’t matter.

    Yet, nearly every week, or sometimes more than once a day, I have parents telling me that they don’t want shots because of all the mercury. I tell them that there isn’t any. They don’t believe me because the media and pop culture keeps talking about it as if vaccines are made of thermometer juice.

    It seems that when we talk about facts and evidence brought forth by the scientific method, it doesn’t matter. Critical thinking is sorely lacking in our education system. We need a Hollywood superstar on the side of reason.

    By the way, speaking of reason and the scientific method, the new study in PLoS ( should be the nail in Dr. Wakefield’s coffin. This should be talked about on Oprah. But it won’t.

    It doesn’t matter. I hope that it will matter one day.

  20. HCN says:

    Dr. Blind Watchmaker, you might be interested in reading the discussion of this book on Scienceblogs:

    You will note that just yesterday some silly person posted a diatribe about the mercury in vaccines, and all that kind of stuff. There is some intelligent discussion on the book, but lots of the discussion was noting that several people who were critical of the book had not read the book.

    Also, the primary author of the study you linked to is mentioned in the book a few times. She is the one who claimed to have autistic mice in a study funded by SafeMinds. This quote from page 148 is very interesting:

    “In 2003, she also published a paper showing that a particular breed of mice, highly susceptible to autoimmune diseases, developed autistic symptoms after they were injected with thimerosal. Hornig’s choice to use mice with severe abnormalities of the immune system was a poor one. Children with autism have never been shown to have brain abnormalities consistent with an autoimmune disease (as is seen, for example, in multiple sclerosis). Hornic presented her data to researchers at the IOM, who later stated the obvious: “The relevance of rodent models is difficult to assess because the rodent ‘clinical’ endpoints may not reflect the human ones [and] may bear no relationship to pathogenesis of human disease.” Two years later, researchers at the University of California at Davis and the NIH, using the same strain of mice, failed to find what Hornig had found.”

  21. The Blind Watchmaker says:


    Thanks. I’ll check it out.

    O.K., Dr. Hornig isn’t perfect. At least this was a good replication of a study that was done badly. The data pretty much speaks for itself.

  22. HCN says:

    Actually, what is interesting is that she is dragging her career out of the gutter by doing real research. It is like someone told her it is better to good science than to pander to special interests.

  23. The Blind Watchmaker says:

    A good scientist must be willing to change his / her mind when presented with new (and good) evidence.

  24. The Blind Watchmaker says:

    A good scientist should always be ready to change her/his mind in light of new (and good) evidence.

    This would have been on Oprah, though, if the results were different.

    By the way, I haven’t heard Dr. Oz chime in on vaccines yet. Now there’s a voice that my patients listen to.

  25. The Blind Watchmaker says:

    A good scientist should always be ready to change her/his mind in light of new (and good) evidence.

    This would have been on Oprah, though, if the results were different.

    By the way, I haven’t heard Dr. Oz chime in on vaccines yet. Now there’s a voice that my patients listen to.

  26. HCN says:

    I tried looking it up, but he seems to be coy about saying something one way or another. Though I did find a cached bit with the old “vaccines cause autism” idiocy here:

    I remember when I was a new mom I did watch those silly daytime talk shows, including, to my eternal shame, Oprah. It seemed that their search for the best stories that sensation won over reality. I found myself scared of every little thing.

    I found that the best thing I could do was to take the baby, wrap him up, put him in the stroller and get out of the house! I went and found real people to spend time with (who I had to query on their children’s vaccine status since my kid was denied protection from pertussis due to his history of neo-natal seizures).

    I also found my local library, and the resource center of my local children’s hospital. Much better places to get information.

    (though, the stupid library did have the idiotic Glenn Doman books on “How to help your brain damaged baby”, which was a book length advertisement for his patterning method and his facility in Pennsylvania… Dr. Novella’s article about that, and Berneen Bratt’s book “No Time for Jello” were cures for that silliness!)

  27. The Blind Watchmaker says:


    You sound like a good mom and a nice person. I hope that your baby’s seizure disorder is stable or resolved.

    Nice talking to you.

  28. HCN says:

    Thank you. He is now 20 years old, and his last seizure was during an illness (which is now vaccine preventable!). He has a severe speech communication disorder and attends community college with disability services.

    It has been a nice way to spend a Sunday afternoon (getting ready for a family birthday gathering, using the new ice cream maker I got last week for my birthday… and listening to podcasts like the Skeptics Guide to the Universe)

  29. just the facts says:

    Somehow, the belief that scientific fact is expendable doesn’t seem to fit with the “skeptic” philosophy.

    From your blog: “One point he makes is that scientists always tend to qualify their remarks and be very careful about stating conclusions. That’s nothing but good science (remember, science can never absolutely prove that there is no correlation between vaccines and autism, only suggest just how very, very unlikely it is that there is one), but such “weasel words,” which are normal qualifications of the uncertainty inherent in scientific conclusions, leave the average layperson thinking that there really is a major controversy among scientists.”

    The idea that the standard precautionary language used when discussing scientific theories consists of “weasel words” and thus there is justification for misstatements of fact in order to communicate the “true” meaning of science to the public is a dangerous one. Twisting the truth to attempt to persuade the public of the veracity a particular viewpoint which promotes the agenda of a particular philosophy qualifies as propaganda.

    Communicating science to the public is a difficult task. That fact does not justify a double standard of communication. The educated public is capable of discerning the implications of such a double standard. And who is to be the arbiter of this paternalistic double standard? Paul Offit? When Offit makes blatant misstatements of fact which are widely disseminated in the media, such a Newsweek article quoting his book “The notion that vaccines cause autism, he writes, has “been clearly disproved.” (Newsweek, November 3, 2008 “Stomping Through a Medical Minefield”) he is just another loose cannon, albeit a highly educated, generously funded and influential loose cannon who should know better.

    Offit’s comments are given much weight in the media due to his widely acknowledged expertise on the subject of vaccines, which is why he should choose his words carefully. Scientists and physicians who follow his example risk destroying their own credibility and further eroding the public trust.

Comments are closed.