Abubakar Tariq Nadama - justice denied
I have written in the past about the case of Abubakar Tariq Nadama here, here and here. In fact my first ever blog post in November 2005 began as an internal discussion document that I wrote for the National Autistic Society [NAS] following Abubakar’s death. It was subsequently published in Communication, the magazine for members of the NAS and roundly condemned by advocates for biomedical interventions in autism. I republished it on Blogger and invited my critics to debate with me there. 145 posts and 1,746 comments later the debate continues.
This week I was shocked to learn that criminal charges against the doctor responsible for treating Abubakar, Roy Kerry MD, had been dropped because the defense had presented new evidence. Science Blogger Orac’s analysis concurred with my feelings that the confusion engendered by misleading statements from the CDC in response to the killing of Abubakar created enough potential for reaonable doubt for the defence attorneys to persuade the District Attorney to drop the case.
But what new evidence could contradict the undisputed facts of a case in which a child was chelated by a physician who had never chelated a child before using a chelation agent with a black box warning that specifically warned against using an IV push to administer the medication? Kerry used the IV push on Abubakar twice and sanctioned the third and ultimately fatal IV push that was administered by a junior employee while Kerry was absent from his clinic.
Just to remind readers.
Abubakar was 5 years old. He was a lively, healthy autistic child. His mother moved with him to the USA to seek treatment for his autism. His father, a doctor who specializes in respiratory diseases, remained in England. Abubakar was seen by Dr Anju Usman, a Defeat Autism Now practitioner, who referred him to Kerry because of persistently elevated levels of aluminium. Kerry used an off label medication to treat him and he died.This is the part that really confuses me.
- I have yet to see any persuasive scientific evidence about a connection between aluminium and autism.
- Even if there were a connection between autism and aluminium there is no clinical indication that any formulation of EDTA, either Kerry’s drug of choice - Disodium EDTA [Endrate] or the allegedly “safe” alternative - Calcium Disodium EDTA [Versenate] has a therapeutic effect on aluminium levels.
- So why did Usman refer Abubakar to Kerry and why did Kerry use Endrate to treat him, not for elevated levels of aluminium, but for lead poisoning? And this despite the fact that Kerry’s own lab tests showed that Abubakar did not have a problem with lead.
The basis for my questions is public knowledge. You can read it in the Order to Show Cause issued against Kerry by the Pennsylvania State Board of Medicine. But you will not find any answers to those questions. I had hoped that a court case would provide answers. The principle players, under oath, would have to tell the truth. So why is there no court case? I began by agreeing with Orac. The CDC flubbed it with their waffle about the wrong chelator, as if there had ever been a right chelator for autism.
But rereading the blogs I came across this entry from Kristina Chew in which she provided a source for the Nadama family’s decision to sue Kerry, his medical practice and his medical supplier, Apothecure. As well as condemning Kerry and his clinic, the legal notice also indicts Apothecure for providing misleading information about the Endrate they supplied to Kerry and accuses them of causing Abubakar’s death.
32. The inaccurate, unsound and dangerous information communicated by the ApothéCure Defendants to Dr. Kerry and Dr. Lewis as described in paragraph 30 was a direct and substantial cause in Dr. Kerry’s commission of the negligent acts described in paragraph 24 and 25. Therefore the ApothéCure Defendants are legally responsible for the conduct described in paragraph 24 and 25.
So is Kerry relying on the incompetence and negligence of his supplier to escape blame for his own incompetence and negligence in the case of Nabubakar Tariq Nadama? Are Pennsylvania going to pursue Apothecure through the courts? Perhaps they should consult with their opposite numbers in Oregon. It seems that Apothecure have a track record of incompetence and negligence in the manufacture and supply of drugs.
There is another possibility. Kerry’s attorney said
He said the defense was prepared to present expert witnesses who would testify the damage that occurred to Nadama’s heart, leading to a lack of oxygen to his brain and his death, was caused by something else, six to eight hours before the treatment at Kerry’s office.
Witnesses would have testified that the chemical used — disodium ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid — was appropriate, and there was nothing wrong with Kerry using an intravenous push instead of a slower I.V. drip to administer it.
So what made this child so sick in the hours before his final, fatal chelation episode at the hands of Kerry? And why was it not apparent and sufficient to postpone the fatal IV push. And who are the bojos prepared to give expert testimony in contradiction of the recommendation of the FDA regarding IV push with EDTA? Do tell, soon, please.
Footnote:
This is the letter I wrote to the reporter who broke the story of Kerry’s escape.
Dear Brian
I have just read your report on the dropping of all charges against Roy Kerry in the case of Abubakar Tariq Nadama. I have blogged extensively on this case as has science blogger Orac, whose most recent post, http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/05/no_justice_for_abubakar_tariq_nadama.php#more is in complete accord with my feelings on this matter. My amazement at the decision to drop all charges is only surpassed by my amazement at Kerry’s announcement that he wants to continue in medicine!Kerry was a member of the American College for Advancement in Medicine. He was listed as a member in 2006, a year after Abubakar’s death. http://www.acam.org/dr_search/index.php?q=Kerry&field=lname&submitted=1 A search today yielded no results. ACAM is an alternative therapy outfit that promotes chelation for heart disease using disodium EDTA aka Endrate because it binds to calcium. The theory is that if heart disease results in calcium plaques forming blockages the Endrate will remove the calcium and destroy the plaques. This is quackery pure and simple and has no basis in science.
Kerry gave Endrate to Abubakar three times in a concentrated IV push, ignoring the black box warnings on the label to only give in a slow dilute infusion. Abubakar showed no indication of any of the diseases for which Endrate is licenced. They used the push instead of the infusion because Abubakar was a lively 5 year old who could not be held still for three hours. 4 adults held him down for 5 minutes strapped to a papoose board for the IV push. By the third treatment his body was so depleted of calcium that his heart stopped.
Although Kerry is no longer listed by ACAM he is on a list of Defeat Autism Now practitioners. http://www.autismwebsite.com/practitioners/us/Roy_Kerry,_M.D..htm DAN supports chelation as a treatment for autism. At the time of Abubakar’s death they made great play of the fact that they supported transdermal and oral chelation and not the IV chelation practised by Kerry. The following year he was admitted to their list after attending a one day conference for clinical training and agreeing to abide by their protocols. DAN’s treatment protocols also have no basis in evidence based medicine. And Kerry’s listing indicates that he will continue to offer IV chelation to autistic children. Will he switch from Endrate to Versenate, the formulation of EDTA that does not pull calcium out of young bodies? Will he use a slow infusion or will he revert to a rapid IV push on children forcibly restrained as in the case of Abubakar? Does DAN know or even care?
If another child should die it is not only Roy Kerry who should appear in the dock.
Mike Stanton
