Monday, March 13, 2006

JAPANDS Dismisses Retraction Request - Offers to Plublish Letter to Editor Instead

In response to my request to retract the Greier's paper, I have received the following response from the Editor-in-Chief:


Dear [Joseph]:

Your letter has been forwarded to me.

Do you wish us to consider this as a letter to the editor for publication in our journal?

Also, all letters to the editor are subject to editing for length, style and format. Unlike the Institute of Medicine, we welcome scientific debate and investigation. Derogatory and/or ad hominem elements, however,
will be omitted.

If you wish us to consider this as a letter to the editor for publication, please provide us with a statement regarding disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest and tell us something about your qualifications in the area of vaccinations,
mercury toxicity and epidemiology.

L.R. Huntoon, M.D., Ph.D., F.A.A.N.
Editor-in-Chief
Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons
[Email removed]


I have replied with the following:


Dear Mr. Huntoon:

No, my primary intention was not to have a letter to the editor published in your Journal. I simply would like my concerns to be addressed and answered in some way, preferably by having your peer reviewers contact CDDS directly to verify if the data presented in the paper reflects reality. The issue with the "New Cases" terminology is well known, non-trivial and documented by CDDS itself. It's not something I just came up with. By way of analogy, imagine that a peer-reviewed Journal publishes a paper on population growth where the authors define "Number of Births" as the difference in the population one year minus that of the previous year. Furthermore, the paper might argue, the "Number of Births" in Germany per year is below zero now. Would you agree or not that such a paper would need to be retracted? I look forward to your response.

This has nothing to do with credentials or conflict of interest, as I am not arguing about methodological flaws or discussing the paper's interpretation of facts. I am simply pointing out that there appears to exist a well-known terminology error in the paper.

Sincerely,

Joseph

P.S. I am copying CDDS and will also be blogging this.


Comments or suggestions?

96 comments:

  1. Bravo Joseph!

    Thanks Jonathan. Have you considered writing a letter yourself? You probably have the credentials they ask for and I know you have a long list of issues.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes,

    A letter or a commentary, I am not sure which I am qualified to write for those folks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unlike the Institute of Medicine, we welcome scientific debate and investigation.

    Can you imagine any scientific journal writing a letter with this preface?

    ReplyDelete
  4. NM;
    Yes, I can imagine a publication that is not beholding to drug company advertising saying that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Applauds.
    )*(
    )*(
    )*(
    )*(

    Good on you Joseph.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Yes, I can imagine a publication that is not beholding to drug company advertising saying that."

    Especially if that publication wants to appear peer-reviewed to its congregation, and many of its contributing authors are so-called "expert" witnesses in major vaccine litigation. Oh wait NM, you meant "Real Scientific Journals" didn't you?"
    Never mind.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Fore Sam,
    I've read where you've said something along the lines of "I don't understand the science so I defer to scientists like Haley, The Geiers, Cuttler, etc." Is that roughly accurate or have I misquoted you?

    ReplyDelete
  8. NM;
    I understand the science quite well. Take a healthy infant, add mercury, get an autistic infant if the kid can't excrete mercury. Take the mercury out and increase your chances of getting a healthy kid again. Everything else is obfuscation produced by the criminals. Anything about that you can't understand?
    DOC;
    It is peer reviewed. Whether they testify or not is immaterial. The junk you call real scientific journals are paid for by the criminals who poisoned my kid and yours you dumb fuck.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ah, thanks for that. If I had read anything to suggest you do understand the science or that you were of even average intelligence, that might be mildly insulting.

    English Major was it? how many weeks?

    Fore Sam: If I start studying biochemistry, that's just more time I can't spend on the golf course. I don't think my learning the science is going to make me smarter than Cutler so I'll just do what he tells me.

    And:

    Andy Cutler is his best chance not me trying to become more knowledgeable than a graet and benevolent scientist who is helping our kids.

    Anyway, is it true that you prefer to listen to others with a better understanding of science or would you like to try to impress us with your grasp of science?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Fore Sam,

    Would my kid have had to receive a Thimerosal-containing vaccine for you to conclude that he was poisoned? Or will any old vaccination do? And why the name calling? I have always been nothing but polite with you. Go back and check every comment. In my opinion, we all get a little smart-assed, but you jump straight to unneccessarily rude. I actually enjoy some of your smart-assed comments, but the name calling is simply not needed.

    ReplyDelete
  11. NM;
    Intelligence is not determined by your major. I see you opt for the ND ploy of harvesting quotes from anyplace instead of just discussing something. Doesn't say much for your IQ. I could grasp the science if I wanted to but I'd nuch rather grasp a golf club or a Racing Form. The Racing Form is more of an intellectual challenge. The mental challenge of golf is something I doubt any of you can grasp.

    ReplyDelete
  12. DOC; Sorry, I got caught up in the heat of the moment. No, thimerosal isn't the only culprit. Look up The Autism Autoimmunity Project to learn more. And, of course, MMR.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Fore Sam said: "It is peer reviewed. Whether they testify or not is immaterial."

    Have you read all the documents in the USCFC OSM AutismDocket?

    Chelation research published in JAP&S in 2004 was conducted by plaintiff's so-called 'expert' witnesses. Chelation research is underway again by them (This will be likely content for their testimony) so I'd argue that it is not irrelevant if they do testify. With the plaintiff's testimony pending the conclusion of additional research, do you see how it is a conflict of interest for these plaintiffs to be conducting the research, using DDI, and publishing in JAP&S?

    If you personally don't see a conflict of interest, why do you suppose ASU's IRB kicked the now SCNM chelation research to the street? ASU has been quite lenient with Jim Adams research proposals in the past.

    ReplyDelete
  14. It's not a tactic, I didn't want to misquote you.

    In summary:

    You could grasp the science if you wanted to, but you either don't want to or can't.

    You admire and respect scientists that do seem to grasp the science as long as they believe that thimerosal causes autism.

    You don't admire or respect any scientist or layperson who don't agree with your opinions about mercury and autism even if they have a better grasp of the science than the scientists who believe thimerosal causes autism

    Anyone who agrees with your opinion is fighting the good fight and helping our children but those who don't agree with your opinions are criminals and/or in collusion with pharmaceutical companies.

    You insist that your son was made autistic by mercury and the cure is chelation even though he hasn't been cured after years of chelation and other biomed interventions.

    All autism is caused by mercury since it was invented at the same time as thimerosal but you will allow for a few exceptions as you see fit.

    On your side are the brilliant independent scientists and grass root parent activists and the everyone else is your enemy.

    Is that about right?

    Funny you should bring up TAAP. Ray spent years telling the world how his son was made autistic by MMR and would need to be sent away to an institution if he couldn't be cured by various interventions, the last being homeopathy. Sadly that's exactly what happened. I fear you've already decided your son's fate and it all hinges on a bogus cure. Like everything else in your world, it's all black and white.

    Mercury poisoned or not Autistic

    True Believer or Neurodiverse

    Cured or sent away.

    ReplyDelete
  15. NM;
    Ray isn't the only person who faces having to send their child away. Every one of us whose autistic child isn't high functioning faces the same fate.
    You can hook up with these ND's if that's what makes you feel you're doing the right thing by your child. I don't recall if you mentioned how well your kid functions. Perhaps you don't think your kid was born normal. I know mine was. I don't think all of these ND's are real people. I don't think some of the others who write blogs are real pepople. There's just too much opposition to curing kids and that makes zero sense unless you're a high functioning autistic who doesn't know any better. For any parent to buy into this crap requires either abject stupidity or an ulterior motive.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Fore Sam,

    I took your advise and reviewed the TAAP website. They say how the autism epidemic is still rocking and rolling in 2005. They had IDEA data and everything, but the Geiers say that the autism rates are going down....

    Now lets pretend I am a true and devout believer in autism = thimerosal; which autism patriach should I believe, the Geiers or Ray Gallup?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Fore Sam:Ray isn't the only person who faces having to send their child away. Every one of us whose autistic child isn't high functioning faces the same fate.

    I disagree but your choice of the word fate, tells me your mind is made up.

    You can hook up with these ND's if that's what makes you feel you're doing the right thing by your child.

    I haven't hooked up with any ND's but I appreciate your acknowledgement of my free will.

    I don't recall if you mentioned how well your kid functions.

    I'm not sure why that should matter but I might have you beat by your definition of functioning.

    Perhaps you don't think your kid was born normal. I know mine was.

    My first child was apparently born normal, regressed and developed all of the symptoms of autism shortly after being vaccinated.

    Same story with my second, completely unvaccinated child. Do I win?

    I don't think all of these ND's are real people. I don't think some of the others who write blogs are real pepople.

    Strange thing about reality, John. Your perception of it matters very little.

    There's just too much opposition to curing kids and that makes zero sense unless you're a high functioning autistic who doesn't know any better.

    I don't stand in opposition of helping or even curing kids, when they are sick, when there is a treatment for the illness. Autism isn't mercury poisoning and doesn't require your chelation cure.


    For any parent to buy into this crap requires either abject stupidity or an ulterior motive.

    If that helps you to understand parents like me, I'm OK with that. I'm not the smartest person I know but I don't appreciate being called stupid. My motive? I don't like it when people say things that are untrue or harmful about my children. I know you can relate but I don't go around telling other parents what's wrong with their kids. I'd like to understand the causes of autism and the mercury bandwagon has parked itself on my front lawn for too long now.

    Is that ulterior enough for you?

    ReplyDelete
  18. NM;
    Whether you like it or not, you're an ND now. You probably already were one and just made up the story about having been normal.

    ReplyDelete
  19. FYI, got this response from CDDS:


    Thanks Joseph – let us know if you need supporting statements or other information.



    Paul Choate
    DDS Data Extraction
    [phone removed]


    I'm sure they are aware of the paper, its misuse of language, and are probably enjoying the exchange.

    I wanted to blog about this, but some bozo has apparently flagged my blog as "questionable" surely as a desperate act as they are unable to argue the facts I present.

    Meanwhile, JAPANDS is apparently considering taking action, as they have told me they will forward my comments to the Geiers to give them a chance to respond. That was yesterday. There is no answer yet as far as I know.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Every one of us whose autistic child isn't high functioning faces the same fate.

    I'm planning a post where I will show this is false, with numbers.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "I wanted to blog about this, but some bozo has apparently flagged my blog as "questionable" surely as a desperate act as they are unable to argue the facts I present."

    I wonder who that was ;o)

    Don't worry about it Joseph, there's no chance your blog will get tagged as objectionable by Blogger.

    "Every one of us whose autistic child isn't high functioning faces the same fate."

    Grow up John, stop being a drama queen and try and invest a bit of time in reality.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Fore Sam said: "It is peer reviewed. Whether they testify or not is immaterial."

    Have you read all the documents in the USCFC OSM AutismDocket?

    Chelation research published in JAP&S in 2004 was conducted by plaintiff's so-called 'expert' witnesses. Chelation research is underway again by them (This will be likely content for their testimony) so I'd argue that it is not irrelevant if they do testify. With the plaintiff's testimony pending the conclusion of additional research, do you see how it is a conflict of interest for these plaintiffs to be conducting the research, using DDI, and publishing in JAP&S?

    If you personally don't see a conflict of interest, why do you suppose ASU's IRB kicked the now SCNM chelation research to the street? ASU has been quite lenient with Jim Adams research proposals in the past.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Kevin;
    The reality is that you're letting your kid just rot while sane people are helping their children.

    ReplyDelete
  24. DOC;
    I don't see anyone else doing the research. Will the CDC let anyone else look at their data? I don't know what all your acronyms mean.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "The reality is that you're letting your kid just rot while sane people are helping their children."

    I sometimes wonder if you're just a script somewhere running from a Cron job that just ploughs out the same set of phrases every x days or so.

    No, I know you don't know what that means. That must be something of a familiar feeling.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Will the CDC let anyone else look at their data?

    They should. Frankly, it's silly to only let the Geiers look at the data and screw up the interpretation. The data is quite corrupted by litigation and hype anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Kevin;
    If you spent some time helping your daughter instead of showing us all how stupid you are, she might be better off.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Joseph;
    If there was more hype and every parent bothered to notify the CDC, the data might be accurate.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Fore Sam,

    But the Geiers and Mr. Gallup have opposing claims.

    Both claims can not simultanously be true.

    So, which one is right?

    ReplyDelete
  30. If there was more hype and every parent bothered to notify the CDC, the data might be accurate.

    BTW, have you notified the CDC about Sam's mercury poisoning which you never had him tested for?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Jonathan;
    Both can be true.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Fore Sam,

    You see the Geiers and Mr. Gallups statements are what is termed "mutually exclusive". So no, they can not both be true. One might be true, but it excludes the other.

    Now they could both be true via magical thinking. Hey, I am all for Harry Potter, but I don't like to mix fantastical thinking with science.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Jonathan;
    So you think mercury is the only cause of autism?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Fore Sam said...
    NM;
    Whether you like it or not, you're an ND now. You probably already were one and just made up the story about having been normal.


    Really? I'm an ND? What is that exactly? Just a little label you assign those who don't see things your way? If it's Nice Dad then I won't return the compliment.

    When did I tell a story about being normal? I'm far from normal by your definition, thanks.

    Maybe I made up the whole thing, The story about my kids. It's possible.

    But you know what? If I worked for a vaccine manufacturer or one of the other groups you see as your enemies, and I wanted to discredit the Thimerosal causes autism movement, I would want to invent a character exactly like you. You've single-handedly destroyed any credibility that your cause might have enjoyed before you went online. The Best part is that your maniacal ramblings have been preserved and will show up for years to come whenever someone googles certain keywords like chelation and autism and mercury, etc.

    Was that your goal? Are you for real?

    ReplyDelete
  35. NM;
    That's interesting. I always thought you were female. I guess you just write like a woman.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "I always thought you were female. I guess you just write like a woman."

    Interesting John. I guess we can add misogyny alongside racism and homophobia.

    Tell me John - is there any group of people, aside from those who believe mercury causes autism, that you don't hate?

    Life's a wonderful thing John, in all its infinite variety. If only you were grown up enough to see that.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Thanks,
    That I'll take as a compliment even though it was another one of your sexist remarks.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Fore Sam,

    You wrote "So you think mercury is the only cause of autism?"

    (laughs) No, I draw the line at reading Harry Potter. I don't get into the hard core fantasy stuff like trek conventions, or SCA, or
    Generation Rescue.

    So, what is your advise about this moral conundrum of mine. Is it the Geiers or Gallup.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Kevin;
    Just because some guy writes like a woman doesn't mean I have some prejudice towards women. I know that's hard for your warped, simple mind to fathom. You confirm yourself as a moron with everything you say. It's such a pity your daughter has to rely on you to make decisions for her.

    ReplyDelete
  40. You've single-handedly destroyed any credibility that your cause might have enjoyed before you went online.

    I think this is true John. Where are the other mercury parents? It would seem they ran away. I propose they'd prefer not to be associated with you.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Joseph;
    I don't know why only a few of us bother to oppose your nonsense publicly. It's time consuming for one thing. Pretty soon, I won't have the time for it either. As we've seen, it's a waste of time to oppose Lietch on his blog where he deletes comments that he can't argue with. Kathleen does the same thing. Maybe some people are afraid of you because some of you are prone to violence. I was thrown out of the AutAdvo group because nobody there could had the brains to argue with me. I suppose a lot of parents figure it's just not worth the bother but I hope I can educate you so you can help yourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Jonathan;
    Don't forget Wakefield.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Fore Sam,
    Joseph hasn't deleted any of your comments and neither have I. We know you don't grasp the science, you rely on junk science from bad scientists, and you respond to direct questions with insults, so what are you and your Generation Rescue friends doing to prove your wonderful stories?

    Tell us again how thimerosal caused autism in a small percent of children while others were unaffected.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Joseph hasn't deleted any of your comments and neither have I.

    I deleted the comments of Kev's impostor, but that's a different guy for sure :)

    ReplyDelete
  45. Tell us again how thimerosal caused autism in a small percent of children while others were unaffected.

    NM: This one is a great one for the FABNAQ:

    - Thimerosal theory proponets say that there's a gene or genes that associated with a mercury excretion liability. This gene obviously must have a very low prevalence in the general population. They also propose that mercury is a relatively new aspect of human civilization, and that before it came into the picture, autism basically did not exist. In other words, the mercury excretion gene has only become a liability in recent times. If this is the case, why is the prevalence of the mercury excretion gene so low? (And I would add to this that John has proposed this gene might provide some advantages).

    ReplyDelete
  46. NM;
    You have made the mistake typical of ND's. You call good science junk science and fail to realize that the junk you call good science is actually corrupt science. That is why the science can't give you the answer. The answer is in the politics so you have to follow the money. If you can understand that, then you will realize why you should stop associating with neurodiversity.
    Thimerosal did cause autism in a relatively small percentage. However, the rest were not unaffected. One in six are affected by thimerosal which also causes ADD, ADHD etc.. So it is a question of APO-E$ or E3 or E2 plus the ammount of mercury and when they got it. If they got it before they had a blood brain barrier, it was more dangerous, That;s why a higher percentage of premature infants became autistic. That's why the numbers shot up in 1994, three years after the start of HepB on the day of birth.
    I'm sure you know that shooting mercury is more hazardous than eating it in fish since the digestive system can get rid of most of it before it gets into the brain.

    ReplyDelete
  47. You call good science junk science and fail to realize that the junk you call good science is actually corrupt science.

    Oh, yes, the same old tired diatribe stating that all autism researchers except for the Geiers and company are part of the big conspiracy, and know about the mercury link even though they don't admit it.

    How is this different to the UFO coverup conspiracy, and do you really think reasonable people might actually come to believe it?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Joe;
    I never had much interest in UFO's so I won't address that. I did hear someplace though, that the Government has things classified as Top Secret. I worked on projects involving Top Secret material so I know that there are things they keep hidden. Of course, I don't know know what those things are because they're Top Secret.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Fore Sam Said: "The answer is in the politics so you have to follow the money."

    Ok Fore Sam, heed some of your own advice. Go back and read my last question to you, which you left completely unanswered.

    Have you read all the documents in the USCFC OSM AutismDocket?

    Chelation research published in JAP&S in 2004 was conducted by plaintiff's so-called 'expert' witnesses. Chelation research is underway again by them (This will be likely content for their testimony) so I'd argue that it is not irrelevant if they do testify. With the plaintiff's testimony pending the conclusion of additional research, do you see how it is a conflict of interest for these plaintiffs to be conducting the research, using DDI, and publishing in JAP&S?

    If you personally don't see a conflict of interest, why do you suppose ASU's IRB kicked the now SCNM chelation research to the street? ASU has been quite lenient with Jim Adams research proposals in the past.


    See any compensation, attorney fees, or so-called 'expert' witness fees tied to this that may help you answer the question?

    ReplyDelete
  50. DOC;
    As a plaintiff in the case (pending resolution of statute of limitation), I don't begrudge anyone some reasonable fees for helping us win. The money that is causing all the corruption is the trillion or so that the drug companies stand to lose if some of us win. We're not getting any answers from our government because the politicians are protecting the drug companies. Our govt. is trying to sweep our poisoned babies under the rug. That includes your kid if your an American. Our govt. is supposed to protect baies from being poisoned not the drug companies who poisoned them. Can you understand that or do I need to use smaller words?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Doc
    I forgot to mention again I don't know what your acronyms stand for.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Fore Sam said: One in six are affected by thimerosal which also causes ADD, ADHD etc.. So it is a question of APO-E$ or E3 or E2 plus the ammount of mercury and when they got it.

    Holy crap John, did you just bring up APOE alleles again? If the e2,e3, and e4, distribution is similar between autistics and the general population how does APOE place a person at risk for either autism or mercury poisoning.

    Now go ahead and explain the purpose and function of apolipoprotein and how it is involved with mercury toxicity. Go on, strut your stuff.

    btw, If the BBB isn't as tight as it ought to be wouldn't that let mercury out just as well? Haven't you claimed it gets trapped in the brain causing the brain to rot?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Clone;
    Nice to hear from you again tonight. Did Joseph also hire you to make an idiot out of yourself? People with APO-E4 can't excrete mercury. Why don't you now explain why your question about population distribution is bogus?

    ReplyDelete
  54. Did Joseph also hire you to make an idiot out of yourself?

    Nope, I do that for free.

    People with APO-E4 can't excrete mercury.

    So you claim. Prove it.

    Why don't you now explain why your question about population distribution is bogus?

    It isn't and since I'm not making the claim, nothing to explain.

    There is no association between APOE-e4 and autism.

    ReplyDelete
  55. "As we've seen, it's a waste of time to oppose Lietch on his blog where he deletes comments that he can't argue with."

    Ah John, truly you're priceless :o)

    How many comments of mine have you deleted in your last post alone? Five? Six?

    When are you going to start taking some responsibility? Or is it that the case that 'the rules' don't apply to you?

    Don't you understand? People on 'my' side of the debate feel relieved to be insulted by you. It means we can rest assured that we are a good, long distance in thinking from someone as knuckle-draggingly stupid as your good self :o)

    I'm going to set you a little challenge John. Here's a link to my daughters favourite games of the moment. Download it and tell me which level you get to on your first try. You should easily be able to beat a 6 year old with a rotten brain right?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Fore Sam,

    Did you ever figure out who between the Geiers and Gallup is correct?

    ReplyDelete
  57. Clone;
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller14.html
    Harvard Med Mainstream doctor.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Kevin;
    If I'm to be called knuckle-draggingly stupid by a guy who won't help his kid while mine is improving from chelation, that's fine.
    The only computer game I ever played was Pacman but I might try your game later.
    I deleted your comments because all you were doing was insulting me. I told you if you had something intelligent to add I'd leave it there. I don't think you're capable of meeting that standard but you're welcome to try. As long as you're still afraid of having me educate your witless associates at your blog though, you really have no complaint.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Jonathan;
    It's quite obvious the Geier's are correct. TAAP and Wakefield might be right, too. That may explain why all kids aren't cured with chelation. Some of them may have received a double or triple whammy. It's best to keep all options open so we can help the kids, don't you think?

    ReplyDelete
  60. It's quite obvious the Geier's are correct.

    FYI, I'm currently waiting on confirmation from CDDS on that. Exciting, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  61. "If I'm to be called knuckle-draggingly stupid by a guy who won't help his kid while mine is improving from chelation, that's fine."

    What evidence do you have that I'm not helping my daughter? What you mean is that I'm not chelating her. The two things are not synonymous.

    "The only computer game I ever played was Pacman but I might try your game later."

    So she's already better and more experienced than you. Quite a feat for someone with a rotten brain. A few days ago she came into the front room and said "drink, Dad" - the first time she's ever used more than one word and the first time she's ever called me Dad. Still, you go on equating development with chelation. Here on Planet Earth we'll stick with equating development with education, love and maturation.

    "I deleted your comments because all you were doing was insulting me."

    ....which is the exact same reason I banned you. Join the dots John.

    "As long as you're still afraid of having me educate your witless associates at your blog though, you really have no complaint."

    I have absolutely no complaint at all :o) what you've done is demonstrated yet another of your double standards. You're painfully easy to manipulate John :o)

    ReplyDelete
  62. Question for you John: Do you agree with the contention that people with dental amalgams excrete about 30 micrograms of mercury per day?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Kevin;
    Your kid will always be more experienced than me at playing computer games. Real games are much better for you socially, physically and mentally. I'm glad she talks some, that's great. She probably has the APO-E3 and the estrogen most likely helps get rid of some mercury too. Why don't you try some methyl B-12 and see if her speech improves more rapidly? I haven't heard any reports of it being harmful.
    You can maintain you banned me for insulting you all you want but we both know that's false. Go get the MB-12.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Gosh thanks John. I think you posted that link before but it's still good for a chuckle.

    The brain has a house-cleaning protein that removes dangerous waste products, which comes in three varieties: APO-E2, APO-E3, and APO-E4. The APO-E2 protein can carry 2 atoms of mercury out of the brain; APO-3, one; and AOP-E4, none.

    I think the folks over on Sesame street helped put that together. I may be misreading it but it almost sounds like he thinks the numerical designation has to do with available coordination sites for mercury atoms. 2 means 2 open slots. 3 means 1 open slot. 4 means no room in the Taxi. Sorry mercury, you have to hang around in the brain for awhile until some of my APOE friends come by.
    1-2-3, Count with me!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Fore Sam wrote:

    "Jonathan;
    It's quite obvious the Geier's are correct. TAAP and Wakefield might be right, too. That may explain why all kids aren't cured with chelation. Some of them may have received a double or triple whammy. It's best to keep all options open so we can help the kids, don't you think?"

    No, one of them is right and the other is wrong on this issue. It is as simple as that.

    You say the Geiers are right, great, but that means that Gallup is wrong about the increase.

    You can not magick the incidence of autism to be both going up and down at the same time.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Fore Sam,

    Oh, and there are some things we want to rule out in autism. Not all options are a good idea e.g. (Use of chemical castration agent).

    ReplyDelete
  67. FYI (still unable to post) CDDS informs me that Dr. Geier has requested data on real new cases, I suppose in order to be able to respond to my retraction request. (Evidently, they did not have that data to begin with, and their paper is still wrong regardless).
    CDDS is offering to send me a copy of the data. This will get interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Jospeh - some other places offer free blogging. You should be able to export your posts from here to a suitable format.

    Let me investigate a few options for you and get back to you.

    ReplyDelete
  69. "Your kid will always be more experienced than me at playing computer games."

    And better. Thanks for your retraction that my daughters brain is rotting.

    "Real games are much better for you socially, physically and mentally."

    Maybe, maybe not - whats your point?

    "You can maintain you banned me for insulting you all you want but we both know that's false."

    You called me a child abuser (which you continue to do) and you said my daughters brain was rotten (something you still do). I can't imagine how you could possibly get more insulting.

    "Go get the MB-12."

    No thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Jospeh - some other places offer free blogging. You should be able to export your posts from here to a suitable format.

    Thanks. It looks like the create feature is back this morning. I was planning to create a new blog if this continued to be blocked a few more days.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Kevin;
    Computer games don't give you any exercise, don't help one forge friendships and don't challenge your brain since the games are always the same. A monkey can be taught to use a computer but it can't learn how to play poker. Sure, the fact that your kid can do something on a computer is progress but she'd benefit more by playing with other kids. If you gave her the MB-12, she might be able to interact with kids.
    You call my good advice insults. I know admitting a mistake is difficult so I used terms that might make you think critically about your poor reasoning ability. You have hooked up with a group of people who accept their fate of living with rotting brains because no cure was available to them and that was their only option. You have chosen a position from which it is difficult to back down and your kid is suffering because of it. Pointing out the flaws in your reasoning is not an insult but it can be a blow to your pride. You're letting your pride get in the way of your daughter's best interests. I think you should discuss this with some parents who have cured their kids privately to keep your pride out of the equation. You can find some of those parents at Generation Rescue and they will be happy to help you while protecting your privacy so you don't lose face in public.

    ReplyDelete
  72. "Computer games don't give you any exercise, don't help one forge friendships and don't challenge your brain since the games are always the same."

    I can always count on you for a chuckle John.

    Exercise,
    friendships, games are always the same.

    Things have moved on quite a bit since you last played Pacman John.

    "A monkey can be taught to use a computer but it can't learn how to play poker."

    Wow, guess I was wrong - you can get more insulting than saying my daughter has a rotten brain - now she's comparable to a monkey? Nice de-humanisation.

    And John? She taught herself. She continues to teach herself every day.

    "Sure, the fact that your kid can do something on a computer is progress but she'd benefit more by playing with other kids. If you gave her the MB-12, she might be able to interact with kids."

    Where did I say she didn't interact with other kids? I said she played computer games - just like the vast majority of kids these days - I didn't say she did that to the exclusion of everythign else.

    You call my good advice insults.

    I call labelling all parents who don't chelate as child abusers an insult. I call labelling my daughter as having a rotten brain as an insult.

    What you offer is not good advice for children John. You offer a poisoned chalice fuelled by fear and anger.

    "You have chosen a position from which it is difficult to back down and your kid is suffering because of it."

    Explain to me exactly how my child is suffering. Also explain to me how you have any idea at all what happends in her life. Further explain to me how you, as someone who hits and admits to encouraging fights with his own son, is a good judge of parenting.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Kevin;
    You are very thin-skinned. Did you cry a lot as a child? Did you grow up playing computer games instead of real games?
    Any decent father teaches his sons how to fight. Otherwise, they might grow up to be pussies.

    ReplyDelete
  74. "You are very thin-skinned. Did you cry a lot as a child? Did you grow up playing computer games instead of real games?"

    I grew up playing a mixture of both. To you I'd address a more pertinent question: Did you grow up?

    "Any decent father teaches his sons how to fight. Otherwise, they might grow up to be pussies."

    LOL...you really are desperate to establish your machismo aren't you? I must admit I do wonder why sometimes - a case of 'methinks the lady doth protest too much'? :o)

    ReplyDelete
  75. Kevin;
    You equate teaching a kid how to fight with bad parenting. What kind of parent is a guy who accepts his daughter being poisoned by mercury? I'd say that guy is a pussy for not fighting it. Perhaps you'll become a man someday and stand up to idiots who try to prevent you from helping your kid. But first, you'll have to get smart enough to realize the stupidity of an argument that says it's a good idea to leave poison in a kid's brain.

    ReplyDelete
  76. "You equate teaching a kid how to fight with bad parenting. What kind of parent is a guy who accepts his daughter being poisoned by mercury?"

    What makes you believe she's mercury poisoned? Oh right - because she's autistic...and so we go round and round.

    Just to clarify my position - someone who hits disabled kids isn't a man, he's a coward. Using words like 'pussy' doesn't make you a man either John. Neither does a fictional military career. Equating people you don't like to women doesn't make you a man and illustrates how highly you rate women. Equating homosexuality to perversion isn't manly either. It illustrates how far out of touch you are and how little you have developed in terms of human senses like enlightenment. Equating the Muslim religion with terrorism isn't manly either John, it illustrates your ignorance and tendency to judge.

    I don't expect you to understand any of that John - just go and have a swing on the practice range. Maybe you can get one of your manly friends to hold your balls for you.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Kevin;
    I notice you didn't have anything to say about leaving mercury in kid's brains. You did some more good name calling though. Just to clear up your nonsense Kev, I was an Air Force officer so that makes you a liar for claiming I wasn't.
    Claiming homosexuality is not a perversion shows how out of touch you are, Kev. Acceptability doesn't make it normal.
    The terrorists are Muslims. I didn't knock all Muslims. I knocked Muslim terrorists. I know you can't present a decent argument so you have to resort to twisting my words. That says lots about your manliness, Kev. I suspect you'd be good at holding my balls on the range. You ain't smart enough to hit them.

    ReplyDelete
  78. I notice you didn't have anything to say about leaving mercury in kid's brains.

    If a kid has abnormal levels of mercury in his brain I'd definitely be in favor of removing said mercury. Now, should we just assume that kids have mercury in their brains and chelate them just in case? No, I don't think so.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Joe;

    Now, should we just assume that kids have mercury in their brains and chelate them just in case? No, I don't think so.

    Since there was no autism before we started putting mercury in kid's brains, that's a safe assumption.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Since there was no autism before we started putting mercury in kid's brains, that's a safe assumption.

    Kev said it well; round and round we go.

    Unfortunately you continue to believe the impossible even in light of conclussive evidence to the contrary.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Joe;
    Kevin dredged up a few people who were diagnosed posthumously that mihg thave been autistic prior to 1943. He didn't show whether or not they had fragile X or if they worked in hat factories or anything about them that might point to the cause of their behavior. A few cases of this extremely rare malady prior to when Eli Lilly started poisoning people doesn't prove anything.
    Good information on the EOHarm board lately about Congress forcing the issue with the CDC, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  82. Kevin dredged up a few people who were diagnosed posthumously that mihg thave been autistic prior to 1943. He didn't show whether or not they had fragile X or if they worked in hat factories or anything about them that might point to the cause of their behavior.

    For starters, it's ridiculous for you to accept that Fragile-X existed before it was first identified, and at the same time make the outlandish assertion that autism couldn't.

    Descriptions of autistic behavior can be found in the literature predating the 1930s. Besides what Kevin showed you, Amanda also posted something she found the other day from the 1910s.

    The CDDS does have some autistics in the range of 60 and over. I can pull up the numbers if you want.

    Anecdotal accounts:

    My husband is 70 and we have only just recently found a name for what has troubled him for 70 years.

    Fritz V. born 1933

    And BTW, my dad was born in 1944 in a farm in a remote area. I'm quite sure there were no vaccinations and no mercury at all.
    He escaped any sort of a diagnosis, and he today would most likely be diagnosed as autistic or at least HFA.

    In a planned next post I will demonstrate, once and for all, that there hasn't been an autism epidemic, using CDDS numbers. As always, you're invited to comment.

    ReplyDelete
  83. If autistic traits did not exist before the 1930s, we wouldn't be typing up stuff on computers. We'd most likely be in caves socializing and talking to each other.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Joe;
    I don't know when geneticists identified fragile X but I'll guess it was not before 1943. It has probably existed for a long time. It doesn't have anything to with the mercury poisoning that we call autism.
    I don't know who Amanda is.
    It stands to reason that we should have some autistics up to 75 or maybe 80 years old since they started using thimerosal in 1931. I don't remember how old Moe Norman the golfer was when he died last year. He was certainly nothing like the kids today who can't function at all. Even Rain Man could talk. These kids are getting into their 20's and can't talk.
    I expect Clone will chime in to chastise you for presenting some anecdotal evidence.
    There were vaccinations around in 1944. I don't see why your father would not have had some.
    You can show anything you want juggling statistics. What you won't be able to show, however, is an equal number of adults that are anything like the kids born since 1990 who will soon be filling institutions. Will you be using Verstraeten as a model to keep juggling until you get what you want?

    ReplyDelete
  85. Joe;
    As I've said before, high IQ's are not the sole property of autistics. Guys who build houses are generally as far from autistic as you can get so they would've had us out of caves without any trouble. I suppose Abner Doubleday was autistic along with Eli Whitney and every other inventor who ever lived. I suspect the high IQ's found among autistics would be higher if mercury wasn't interferring.

    ReplyDelete
  86. It stands to reason that we should have some autistics up to 75 or maybe 80 years old since they started using thimerosal in 1931.

    I see. So when you ask us to produce the really old autistics, you really mean 'dead autistics'. You really know how to move the goal post.

    ReplyDelete
  87. I didn't say autism was necessary for high IQ. But obsessiveness and focus on things and concepts (as opposed to people) are autistic traits - very important traits at that. Many people not considered autistic have those traits to one degree or another, and it's a good thing that there are people who do consider those traits more important than a social life.

    Mercury cannot explain the results of Dawson-Mottron, no matter how much you try. It's quite clear autistic intelligence is different, not inferior - in average better than NT intelligence in certain areas, in average worse in other areas (socio-lingustic skills being the most noticeable one). It's really hard to explain this as a brain insult.

    Also, explain Albert Einstein. Late talker, considered retarded by his teachers, disappointed his parents, repeated sentences under his breath, and could not speak very fluently until he was 7 or 9. He also had a son diagnosed with schizophrenia - probably Asperger's syndrome misdiagnosed as that. You may or may not agree that Einstein was autistic, but clearly you cannot claim he was a perfectly neurotypical person. BTW, he was born in 1879.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Joe;
    I'm not suggesting you look for dead autistics. There are plenty of people over 75 still alive. There just aren't any autistics that old because Eli Lilly started poisoning babies after these people were out of danger.

    ReplyDelete
  89. You have to realize that HFA and Asperger's has become a fashionable diagnosis as of late. While there are people over 70 that might seek a late diagnosis, I'm pretty sure that by the time I'm that age, the problems of autism will be minor compared to the problems of aging. Hence, very few anecdotal accounts from people that age will be found.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Joe;
    Now you're saying it would be OK to accept anecdotal evidence? If you were going to find some old folks with autism, you would have to produce indisputable scientific evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Here's your indisputable evidence.

    In Dec. 2005, only 62 clients in the 62-99 age range (1.2%) are autistic. However, as many as 91% are listed as having some level of mental retardation or unknown.

    Compare this to the 6-9 age range. As many as 36.88% of clients are listed as autistic. But only 57% have some level of mental retardation or unknown.

    Is that clear enough or do you need help interpreting this data?

    ReplyDelete
  92. Joe;
    That sounds like poor diagnosis in listing 57% of autistics as retarded. Since we know that most of them will be normal after chelation, we'll just have to chelate them all to prove it. That's just more idiocy from the pseudo science of psychology who perform most of the diagnosing.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Fore Sam makes the assertion that Apolipoprotein E e4 (epsilon 4) genotype makes people more susceptible to mercury poisoning (a hypothesis made in two studies looking at Alzheimer's disease, which also has not been shown to be caused by mercury). His exact quote is:

    "People with APO-E4 can't excrete mercury."

    Perhaps he can explain why, in the two published studies looking at apolipoprotein E genotypes in autism, one found no association (i.e. the distribution in autistic individuals was no different than in the non-autistic population) and the other found an association with apolipoprotein E e2?

    The studies are:

    Raiford KL et al. "No association between the APOE gene and autism". Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2004 Feb 15;125(1):57-60.


    and

    Persico AM, et al. "Enhanced APOE2 transmission rates in families with autistic probands". Psychiatr Genet. 2004 Jun;14(2):73-82.


    Well, Fore Sam, you've said that you understand the science, so here's your chance to shine. Or is this another example of the "pervasive conspiracy to cover up the connection between autism and mercury"?

    Your ball.


    Prometheus

    ReplyDelete