Andrew Wakefield has tried to silence Brian Deer with libel suits and press complaints.
Anti vaccine lawyer Cliff Shoemaker tried to subpoena Neurodiversity blogger Kathleen Seidel.
Homeopaths used the law of libel against Simon Singh.
A pill pusher tried to do the same to Ben Goldacre.
And now this dishonourable roll call of those who would use the courts to silence legitimate criticism of dubious medical practices is joined by Doctors Data. They are unhappy with Dr Barrett and his Quackwatch website because he points out that their testing services are being used to defraud patients.
Doctors Data tests urine samples for heavy metals. But it does so after the patient has been given a chelating agent that will artificially increase the levels in their urine. It also tests after a six hour collection period rather 24 hours. As more metals will be excreted immediately after chelation this boosts the figures even more. Dr Barratt points out that even using a 24 hour collection period provoked tests are artificially high.
One experiment involved ten healthy people whose urine was examined before and after receiving a 1-hour infusion of calcium disodium EDTA. The infusion increased the excretion of lead about 6 times over the baseline level [2].
Another experiment tested workers who had industrial exposure to mercury. The researchers reported that provocation with DMSA raised the 24-hour average urine mercury level from 4.3 µg/g before chelation to 7.8 µg/g after chelation [3].
These figures wrongly compared to the reference levels for adults in non-provoked tests even when the patients are children. Doctors Data claim that they are just offering a service. The interpretation of results s down to the patient’s doctor. So they are not responsible if a healthcare practitioner gives misleading advice based on their misleading lab results. This might just be plausible if they did not clearly indicate, as in this illustration, that they think their results show an excess. Any parent receiving this would be convinced that their child was poisoned regardless of the disclaimer at the bottom.
Even parents who believe in the vaccine autism myth are fed up with Doctors Data and have launched a petition because they want properly referenced tests.
Part of Doctors Data’s case is that they are unhappy because Dr Barrett reports on them to government and regulatory bodies. So they are claiming that Dr Barrett’s activities are damaging a perfectly legitimate operation because his actions might bring them under public scrutiny. If they are so legitimate what do they have to hide? And if they have got something to hide, taking Dr Barrett to court is not the wisest move. The roll of dishonour at the head of this blog were all litigants who thought they could use the law to browbeat their critics into silence. What happened instead was their activities were opened up to public scrutiny and they either lost or quit before it came to court because it was all a bluff. Are Doctors Data any different? I don’t think so. But just in case, Dr Barrett has a defence fund.
July 4th, 2010
Posted by
Mike |
Quackery |
7 comments
Polly Tommey is feeling the pressure. According to an article she wrote for The Age of Autism leading autism organizations in the UK, academics and celebrities are telling her that her continuing support for Andrew Wakefield is a liability. Even her advertisers are threatening to pull out.
Specifically, I have been “warned” not to print any more articles written by Dr. Andrew Wakefield (he wrote for the first time in the last issue); I was also warned not to invite him to speak at our conference. Separately, some organizations have warned me that they will not have anything to do with me if I continue to support and publish papers by him. Some advertisers tell me they have to stop working with us as they are “under pressure” to pull out, and a number of celebrities, high earning individuals, journalists, scientists, practitioners, and people who want to contribute to the magazine or to our campaigns say that it’s more than their job’s worth to be associated with the work of this man more than their job’s worth to even listen to what he has to say. All of them say that they can’t support The Autism File if The Autism File appears to support Dr. Wakefield.
Tommey presents this as a threat to her editorial integrity. “They” are trying to silence her. The pressure is all “political.” Even people who might want to work with her or write for the Autism File are afraid to because Andrew Wakefield has been discredited and if they identify themselves with his most stalwart supporter in the UK they too could be discredited and marginalized. Academics are afraid of losing their government funding.
Tommey offers no real evidence to support these claims. She describes a meeting with a senior representative of a leading autism organization,
The message I was very clearly given at this meeting was that if The Autism File magazine continued to publish Dr. Wakefield’s work, if I continued to support him publicly, and if I allowed him to speak at our conferences, then they could not work with either me or The Autism File. He also reminded me, very pointedly, that they worked closely with the Department of Health and were the decision makers regarding many important issues relating to autism . . . .
At some unspecified time in the past, some time ago, an unnamed eminent academic was invited to join the scientific advisory board of the Autism File
He was keen but stated he could only do so if certain existing members – specifically including Andrew Wakefield – were removed from it. He then bluntly warned me that if The Autism File continued to support Dr. Wakefield it would be “shut down.” Despite his standing and expertise, his concern was such that ultimately he chose not to even write for our magazine because, he said, “it is too controversial,” and, given that he is funded by the government, he felt that if he did, then his funding would be at risk.
Finally, she tells of the time when she was appearing on a popular daytime TV show, The Wright Stuff.
Before going on air, the host Matthew Wright joined us in the “green room” and said that he had been told by the show’s lawyers that if Dr. Wakefield’s name was mentioned, he had to say that Wakefield was “discredited.” We questioned why, but Matthew said that he had no choice these were his lawyers’ instructions . . . .
When I was on GMTV they said pretty much the same thing, and we have all read the same in many newspapers.
That is the sum total of her evidence, or at least the evidence that she chooses to present to support her claim that
a number of people and organizations have evidently decided that they should be determining the editorial policy of our magazine
But Polly Tommey is unbowed. She sets out to refute all claims that Wakefield has been discredited and restates her commitment to publish reports and stories that are sympathetic to Wakefield and his theories.
Part of Tommey’s problem is that she is a victim of her own success. The Autism File is a professionally produced, attractive read. It’s basic premise is that autism is a medical disorder that responds to biomedical interventions associated with alternative therapists - diet, supplements, chelation etc. Tommey’s husband, Jonathon runs an Autism Clinic which is promoted by The Autism File and offers
Dietary Modifications
Nutritional Supplementation
Immunological Regulation/ Modulation
Homoeopathy
Gastrointestinal Treatments
Liver Support & Enhanced Detoxification (methylation and transulfation)
Glandular Support (adrenals, thyroid and pancreas)
Heavy Metal Clathration(sic) Therapy
Physical Therapies - exercise, massage, reflexology, kinesiology, lymphatic drainage, yoga, breathing and relaxation techniques, etc.
This is the secret of its success. It has a core readership amongst those parents who believe autism has environmental causes that are treatable. These beliefs are never challenged. According to Tommey
The Autism File exists to provide help and support to parents, professionals, and caregivers in understanding autism better by bringing informed articles and opinions on the condition from all over the world and enabling them to then make up their minds about whether this advice will help their families and their children. We have done this for over 10 years and our readers’ feedback supports our continuing to do this.
But the Autism File does this by offering positive endorsements to a number of approaches including non-biomedical aspects of autism like behavioural therapies, educational therapies and services for adults. It does not publish critical views of any of these therapies. Though it may publish opinion pieces about why conventional research that does critique these therapies is flawed. Unlike its American counterparts that sneer at neurodiversity it acknowledges some of the concerns of autistic adults. It is supporting Gary McKinnon’s campaign against extradition to the USA. It boasts Temple Grandin on its editorial board and publishes articles on education by Stephen Shore. These are two autistic individuals, prominent speakers and authors who distinguish themselves by either endorsing biomedical cures (Grandin) or displaying a benign agnosticism (Shore).
The Autism File has been a commercial success. The international edition is on sale in over 2000 bookshops in the USA and Canada, there is a Spanish language edition and the UK magazine is available from W.H. Smiths, Sainsbury’s, Borders, and selected Tesco stores. Tommey has used this success to promote herself as an autism advocate. I have referred in the past to her successful PR campaigns that have resulted in meetings with the Prime Minister and his wife and invitations to speak at seminars.
But all this limelight has brought her support for Andrew Wakefield into focus. This did not matter when the Autism File was a subscription only house magazine for the Andy Wakefield Fan Club. But now the magazine and its proprietor are bidding to go mainstream they are meeting with widespread suspicion and hostility for their support of Wakefield.
In her defence of Wakefield Tommey seems to think that this is all the fault of a couple of journalists; Horton at the Lancet and Deer at the Sunday Times. She fondly imagines that their campaign to discredit Wakefield will all come unstuck when the GMC delivers its verdict on Wakefield this year after a lengthy investigation into accusations of professional misconduct and breaches of research ethics. I do not know what the outcome will be. If the GMC runs true to form it will probably deliver a fudge that satisfies nobody.
Never mind. In one sense the hearings are irrelevant. Wakefield is already discredited because his ideas have been proved wrong. The NAS fudged the vaccine question for years. Now they have come out against a link between MMR and autism because the science overwhelmingly says so. The MMR hypothesis has been tried in the US courts and found wanting.
Tommey poses some of the bigger questions.
• Why is it so important that Dr. Wakefield is seen to be discredited?
• Whom is it important to?
• Who stands to gain from this?
• Who will lose out if the truth is revealed?
• What is it that people are so frightened of?
• What is it they don’t want us to know?
Given the overwhelming nature of the evidence against Wakefield’s theories one could equally ask similar questions of the Autism File itself and its continuing support for Wakefield and anti-vaccine quackery.
January 8th, 2010
Posted by
Mike |
Andrew Wakefield, MMR, Polly Tommey, Quackery, journalism |
36 comments
Quackademia
There is an article on Science Based Medicine Crank “scientific” conferences: A parody of science-based medicine that can deceive even reputable scientists and institutions that is well worth reading, along with Infiltration of Quackademic Medicine into Mainstream: A pernicious influence.
The articles describe methods whereby practitioners of Complementary and Alternative Medicine seek to blur the distinction between themselves and mainstream medicine. They reject the substance of science based medicine while hankering after respectability and acceptance by aping its style with their own learned journals, institutes and conferences.
Even better, from their point of view, is when they can position themselves alongside the mainstream as if they are a part of it. And it seems to be working. Boots the Chemist will sell you homeopathic and herbal remedies. The National Health Service Trusts Association maintains a directory of these CAM practitioners, Some hospitals and general practitioners offer these interventions as an additional service. There is even an NHS homeopathic hospital that was refurbished at a cost to the taxpayer of £20 million.
Polly Tommey and the Autism Trust
Of course autism has long been a profitable area for CAM practitioners. But the close links between the anti-vaccine movement and CAM treatments for autism have persuaded most mainstream doctors to give these a wide berth. But for other areas of autism intervention such as education and social care, evidence based interventions are not so well established and CAM practitioners are able to make inroads.
I have previously mentioned The Autism Trust which, on the surface, seems a reasonable organization that wants to provide residential provision and services for autistic adults in purpose built communities it describes as Centres of Excellence. But this organization is the brainchild of Polly Tommey, editor of the Autism File, a magazine that champions the cause of Andrew Wakefield and promotes all manner of CAM treatments for autism. Her husband, Jonathan runs the Autism Clinic which provides many of these CAM treatments. Their plans for the Centres of Excellence include a wellness centre offering all manner of quackery including homeopathy, chelation and hyperbaric oxygen therapy, as well as a training centre and a conference centre promoting these “biomedical interventions.”
Polly Tommey is using the Autism Trust to raise her profile as an advocate for autism. She engineered a meeting at 10 Downing Street with Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his wife, Sarah and was invited to speak at a recent seminar, HOW DO WE BEST ENABLE CHILDREN AND ADULTS WITH AUTISM TO LEAD FULL LIVES ? Meanwhile her continued commitment to anti-vaccine quackery in relation to autism is quietly pushed into the background.
Autism Conference
But it is still central to her agenda as is evident from her most recent venture, an Autism Conference. This is a three day affair with three sponsors.
The Autism Trust sponsor the first day of educational workshops, which looks like quite a good day. OK I could do without the Tommeys’ contributions and one could question the educational value of talks on massage and aromatherapy. But Stephen Shore and John Clements are both mainstream speakers and Sarah-Jane Critchley is Project Head of the Autism Education Trust.
Saturday is more problematical. It is sponsored by the Autism File and is billed as a day of educational and biomedical speakers. Stephen Shore is there again. And there is what looks to be an excellent talk on Autism and Neurodiversity by Tom Berney But Shore’s talk is about transition to adulthood and Berney is talking about adults so it is hard to see how this relates to education. There are the Tommeys again (well it is their conference.) and the financial backer of the Autism Trust, Oliver Jones whose only connection to autism is his 12 year old godson.
Most of the other speakers are committed biomedical interventionists. Ken Bock is a DAN practitioner with no training in autism who was an expert witness for Stephen B. Edelson, a quack practitioner who was sued by a couple who charged that Edelson had defrauded them and negligently diagnosed and treated their autistic child. Edelson settled out of court for an undisclosed sum.
Devin Houston is a biochemist whose main area of research was the effect of marijuana on the brains of lab rats before he went into business selling enzymes that are supposed to help with the digestion of gluten and casein and thus ease gut disorders in autistic children. Paul Shattock remains committed to the gluten casein hypothesis despite recent research that undermines its theoretical basis. Paul is a very nice man who has not exploited parents for financial gain and has also achieved a lot in terms of pioneering autism provision via ESPA and is an honorary vice president of the NAS. That actually makes him more of a problem than a snake oil salesman like Houston. If Paul is backing something it cannot be all that bad. But it is.
Sunday shows just how bad it gets. Billed as a day of scientific research it features Michael Ash, another supplement salesman who boasts a diploma from Patrick Holford’s Institute of Optimum Nutrition. We have Ken Bock again, Lorene Amet, the DAN practitioner from Edinburgh, Wakefield acolytes Stephen Walker and Carol Stott and, topping the bill, the man himself, Andrew Wakefield.
This final day is sponsored by LVS Hassocks, a private residential school attended by the Tommeys’ autistic son, Billy. Their prospectus offers a wide ranging education for children with special needs as well biomedical treatments at £75 an hour. They employ Jonathan Tommey as a nutritional therapist And here we see more blurred boundaries. Apart from Tommey, four of the Friday speakers are employed in some capacity by LVS Hassocks. John Clements is listed as their clinical psychologist, Sarah Sherwood is headteacher, Stephanie Lord is director of special education and Matt Whelan is in charge of personalized learning. I could have understood it if LVS Hassocks had sponsored the Friday education session. But here we have a prestigious school with an eminent team in charge who are attaching their name and their reputation to the thoroughly discredited Wakefield and allowing his ideas a foothold within their own school by employing Jonathan Tommey!
Mistaken or misleading?
Taken together the three days map out a descent from reasonably solid ground to a virtual quagmire of quackery. I wonder how many of the mainstream speakers were aware of the total programme when they agreed to speak? The Tommeys are not above making misleading statements. Jonathan Tommey describes himself as
a member of the British Association of Nutritional Therapists (BANT) and is a registered DAN! Practitioner and is supported as a practitioner by the Caudwell children charity www.caudwellchildren
Elsewhere on his website he uses the Caudwell logo 
and again claims that
I am an authorised practitioner for the Caudwell Children and if successful may grant up to £3,000 per annum for services provided by The Autism Clinic including the purchasing of diagnostic tests and supplements. All applications must be supported by myself.
The first time I mentioned this Ben Sutcliffe from Caudwell Children wrote to me to correct any misinterpretation of Tommey’s statement.
Caudwell Children funds many therapies for thousands of children across the UK. The Charity has no formal agreement with The Autism Clinic or any other provider, it funds the therapy requested by the applicant, which has to be supported by a professional medical reccommendation. To find out more visit our website.
Jonathan Tommey does not have a recognized medical qualification so I would question whether he is entitled to provide a professional medical recommendation. He does have a BSc in Nutritional Therapy from the University of Bedfordshire. This is yet another example of the blurring of the boundaries between science and superstition. The Division of Science at Bedfordshire boasts of its
long-standing links to the Institute of Optimum Nutrition
Yes, a properly constituted university science department of a British university accepts Patrick Holford’s ION foundation degree as a basis for its own honours degree.
Dietician or Nutritional Therapist?
There is some confusion about the relationship between dieticians and nutritionists. Dieticians receive clinical training in a hospital setting and are educated at least to masters level . Nutritionists have a bachelors degree and are employed in the NHS to assist dieticians. They often go on to further their education and become dieticians. Outside the health service the field of nutritional therapy is poorly regulated and the evidence base for many of its treatments is less exacting than that for the clinical practise of a qualified dietician.
Blurring the boundaries
This article has been all about the blurring of boundaries. Some of my examples might seem innocuous. Does it matter if we regard massage as an educational therapy rather than an optional extra? I think so. I have nothing against healthy eating, massage, yoga, aromatherapy and some of the music and movement programmes that are being introduced into schools. I do object to exaggerated claims for their educational and therapeutic benefits that often invoke sciency sounding principles which are not born out by the evidence. The harm comes when similar sciency claims are used to allow potentially dangerous ideas to inform practice. What if the next proposal is for a detox regime or a decision not to facilitate HPV vaccination in your school?
As we have seen this blurring of the boundaries is not only penetrating schools. It has infected our universities. What price a BSc if you can complete part of it at a quackademic establishment like the Institute of Optimum Nutrition? Despite the recent emphasis on evidence based medicine CAM practitioners are making a living within the NHS. UK taxpayers are funding this nonsense while NICE is rationing access to real, effective treatments using cost/benefit analysis.
I feel sorry for the speakers who, however inadvertently, are now contributing to the Tommeys’ Wakefieldfest at their conference next month. I hope their presence is not used to validate the conference and provide a further boost to the Tommeys’ influence.
A while ago I was due to speak at a conference at which two of the Tommeys’ speakers, Lorene Amet and Paul Shattock were scheduled to speak. I along with others expressed our concern
to find that representatives of the anti-vaccine/unorthodox biomedical campaign have been given a prominent role in the Autism Today conference. These include Paul Shattock (the chair for the opening session) and Lorene Amet and Magdalena Cubala-Kucharska (in the final session). The first day of a conference purporting to provide an update on the ‘diagnosis, management and treatment of autism’ for professionals in the field is thus framed between promoters of pseudoscience.
I was booked to speak at the education session the next day but felt strongly enough that I would have cancelled rather than take part in a programme that had so compromised its integrity. Fortunately the organizers took heed of our objections and the invitations were withdrawn. As a final touch, Mike Fitzpatrick was invited to replace Amet and delivered a bravura condemnation of quackery that was applauded by the professional audience.
This is a biannual event and will be on in Edingburgh next month. Both Mike Fitzpatrick and I shall be speaking. And we will not be blurring any boundaries.
October 12th, 2009
Posted by
Mike |
Polly Tommey, Quackery, education, health, science |
46 comments
Today’s Observer profiles Sarah Brown, the wife of British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown. It focuses on her voluntary work which includes an interest in autism.
Nonetheless as her charitable interests expand, so do the risks, as the campaign she will front this autumn shows. Polly Tommey is the mother of an autistic child, who last year launched an eye-catching bid to publicise the plight of families by plastering her mobile number on London billboards and asking Gordon Brown to ring her. When she secured a meeting with the prime minister, health minister Phil Hope and Downing Street policy adviser Greg Beales, to her surprise Sarah Brown came too.
“Sarah said: ‘I really wanted to come to this, because I really want to get more involved with autism’. She genuinely wants to help, and that’s what I like about her,” Tommey recalls.
Mrs Brown, she says, commented on the number of small autism charities all fighting to be heard and suggested that they form a joint lobbying coalition. Her husband then asked Sarah to work with Tommey on setting up a campaign likely to concentrate on the needs of autistic adults, a decision reflecting what is increasingly a working partnership.
Either Sarah Brown was badly briefed or Polly Tommey is applying her formidable PR skills on her own account. While she was busy pushing herself into the limelight a number of autism charities had already got together and were making themselves heard. Here is the list of organizations working together with the National Autistic Society to support the Autism Bill in Parliament.
AIM
Autism Anglia
Autism Education Trust
Autism Initiatives UK
Autism Research Centre (ARC)
Autism Speaks
Autism West Midlands
The Children’s Society
Hampshire Autistic Society
Research Autism
Staffordshire Adults Autistic Society
Sussex Autistic Community Trust
TreeHouse
The Wessex Autistic Society
Wirral Autistic Society
Many of them were represented on the External Reference Group set up to report to government on its adult strategy for autism. Its chair is Mark Lever, CEO of the NAS. The Vice-chair is Anya Ustaszewski, member of the Autism Rights Movement and an adult with Asperger syndrome. The full list of members is appended to this report of its activities. Yet according to Polly Tommey, the prime minister no less, has asked his wife to work with Polly to bring the autism charities together to campaign for the needs of autistic adults. I wonder what Phil Hope made of all this. As Health Minister he has been involved in face to face talks with autism charities and their supporters in the All Party Parliamentary Group on Autism all year on the subject of adult needs. The government has adopted the private members bill on adults with autism and it is now a government bill.The I exist campaign has given a direct voice to the needs and aspirations of autistic adults. Where was Polly Tommey throughout all this? The Observer provides a clue.
However, there are risks in her new venture. Tommey’s belief in nutritional therapies and past comments on MMR vaccinations are controversial among some in the autism community: and Sarah Brown’s interest in autism has already led to sensitive ground.
The Observer is too kind. These are not Polly Tommey’s past views. They are bang up to date as even a cursory perusal of her magazine, Autism File, reveals. Polly Tommey is a fully paid up member of the club that believes vaccines cause autism and biomedical treaments can cure it. Her husband, Jonathon is a DAN practitioner who runs the Autism Clinic, offering a full range of quackery.
Effective protocols offering multiple treatments may involve:
Dietary Modifications
Nutritional Supplementation
Immunological Regulation/ Modulation
Anti-viral Medication
Homoeopathy
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy
Gastrointestinal Treatments
Liver Support & Enhanced Detoxification (methylation and transulfation)
Glandular Support (adrenals, thyroid and pancreas)
Heavy Metal Chelaton Therapy
Physical Therapies - exercise, massage, reflexology, kinesiology, lymphatic drainage, yoga, breathing and relaxation techniques, etc.
All this comes at a price: £300 for an initial consultation and £90 an hour thereafter. But if your household income is less than £45,000 a year help is at hand. The Autism Clinic has arranged a deal with a charitable foundation Caudwell Children to provide grants up to £3000 per annum for treatment. Caudwell is a bone fide organization that helps lots of children. Do they know they are funding quackery when parents apply for grants to pay for visits to the Autism Clinic?
Earlier this year my friend Mike Fitzpatrick published an open letter to Gordon Brown warning him against any involvement with the Tommeys. I also discussed this and looked at the way the Tommeys propose to help autistic adults
Centres of Excellence
The Centres of Excellence proposed by the Autism Trust seek to provide residential communities in rural locations that provide a “safe haven” for autistic adults. They hope that such centres will provide support for autistic adults in the community, setting up in business or becoming self employed. But most people live in urban settings so it hard to envisage how they will benefit. And despite Mr Jones’ protests it is clear that the Autism Trust is as committed as Ms Tommey is to nonsense cures and treatments. Each centre of excellence will feature a wellness centre offering all manner of quackery including homeopathy, chelation and hyperbaric oxygen therapy, as well as training centre and a conference centre promoting these “biomedical interventions.”
I think that Mr Jones’ complaints against Dr Fitzpatrick are disingenuous. If anything Dr Fitzpatrick should be taken to task for failing to mention the Autism Trust in his open letter. At a time when service providers are moving away from the model of self contained autism communities in favour of closer integration of services within everyday society the Autism Trust proposes to build a worldwide network of such communities.
They expect local authorities to fund places in their residential homes while they are free to develop profitable spin offs promoting quackery. Or, as they describe it in their financial model:
The capital development and business operating model will depend on the facility mix and local partners – as well as the engagement and support available from local and national government. A mix of charitable status and commercially self-standing models will be explored in each location.
I believe that Polly Tommey engineered her Downing Street meeting in order to promote this new business venture. She claims to be concerned for the needs of autistic adults but has ignored all the initiatives in which adults are themselves involved. She has not consulted with any of the self advocacy groups for autistic adults. She has avoided any participation in the joint initiatives from the other autism groups in the UK. The Autism Bill does not even rate a mention in her Autism File. This is the woman who complained to the Daily Telegraph last year about Autism Speaks:
“Autism Speaks likes to work on its own,” says Polly Tommey who runs the British magazine Autism File. “Many charities and autism organisations won’t have anything to do with Autism Speaks for this reason.”
This is all a bit rich when you consider how Polly Tommey has sidestepped all the campaigns in the autism community to pursue her own agenda. As I said in my earlier blog post, I think she is unlikely to succeed, even with Sarah Brown, temporarily at least, hitched to her wagon. But she could make things awkward for those of us promoting genuine initiatives with a real likelihood of success.
Next week she is speaking at a seminar in Leeds, HOW DO WE BEST ENABLE CHILDREN AND ADULTS WITH AUTISM TO LEAD FULL LIVES ? I have no doubt that her much publicized meeting at Number Ten helped to secure her invitation. I hope that the assembled speakers who all seem far more qualified than her to speak to this question are not derailed by another bout of self aggrandizement from the women who describes herself in her autobiographical sketch for the seminar as
one of the leading figures in autism in the UK as a campaigning and influential journalist and is featured regularly as a sector expert in the media.
She may be a leading figure to the dwindling band of people who believe that vaccines cause autism and pills and potions can cure it. But she is wrong. And all the business skills and acumen in the world are not going to change that.
September 20th, 2009
Posted by
Mike |
National Autistic Society, Polly Tommey, Quackery, adults, politics |
32 comments
Anyone with a reasonable scientific education can easily spot the flaws in the manifold claims of quackery. But for those who lack a reasonable scientific education, ie most of us, the sciency gloss that many quacks use to cloak their claims with credibility can be very persuasive.
This is especially the case with tests for metal poisoning. The quack doctors give a chelating agent to a patient and then take a urine sample and analyse it. These tests usually reveal levels of metals that are above the reference levels based on large scale population studies that are regarded as normal.
But now the American College of Medical Toxicology has issued an authoritative statement condemning the practise and pointing out the dangers.
Although the ACMT does not go as far as to call this practise fraudulent, it does state its
disapproval of the use of post-challenge urinary metal testing in clinical practice and the use of such test results as an indication for further administration of chelating agents.
People with safe levels of metals will demonstrate excess levels after such a provoked test. The quacks claim that the body sequesters metals in internal organs and the provocation is necessary to reveal the true level of metals in the body. This ignores the fact that the body is taking in, sequestering and excreting toxins continually. The provoked test is equivalent to wringing out a damp cloth that was quite happily drying out and pointing to the puddle as proof that the cloth was actually soaking wet.
Then there are the health risks. Stirring up all those metals and releasing them from sites in the body where they are doing no harm may increase the risks of toxicity. And the quacks do not stop at one test. They chelate and test, chelate and test over and over. Chelation does not just target toxic elements. Essential minerals like copper, iron and zinc are also excreted in quantities that may be dangerous to health. In the case of Tariq Nadama the “wrong” chelator, disodium edetate, removed so much calcium from his system that he died. The “right” chelator (calcium disodium edetate) would have still taken out essential minerals like copper, iron and zinc. Previous treatments of this unfortunate child for alleged aluminium toxicity had already depleted his iron levels.
Those parents who avoid intravenous chelators like edetate in favour of “safe” oral chelators like DMSA and DPMS should be aware that they can redistribute metals like mercury to sites within the body where they can do harm. The ACMT also points out that
There is published experimental evidence that deleterious effects may occur when chelation is applied in the absence of prior lead exposure.
They conclude
It is, therefore, the position of the American College of Medical Toxicology that post-challenge urinary metal testing has not been scientifically validated, has no demonstrated benefit, and may be harmful when applied in the assessment and treatment of patients in whom there is concern for metal poisoning.
They make no mention of autism but their message is plain. There is no scientific basis for using provocation or challenge testing to diagnose metal poisoning. Therefore all the evidence from this type of testing that is used to support claims of metal poisoning in autistic children is worthless. And the repeated treatment of children with chelation agents for this non-existent poisoning has no benefits but carries risk of harm.
So when will the practitioners who carry out this abuse of children be told to stop or risk prosecution?
August 14th, 2009
Posted by
Mike |
Quackery, Uncategorized, abuse, chelation |
one comment
This post first appeared on LBRB Apr 15, 2009
Polly Tommey was due to see Prime Minister Gordon Brown today after a successful billboard campaign, costing a reported £500,000, that invited Gordon Brown to meet with her if he wanted to save £508 million pounds. Ms. Tommey’s son is autistic and she is concerned that there is a terrible fall off in provision and support when you transition from school to adult services. She wants the government to invest in autistic people and her message is that appropriate support will save the government money by lifting autistic people out of benefits and into paid employment. As she says in her press release:
“We want better support, we want politicians to engage with us and we want the acknowledgement and support that our children deserve as fully contributing members of society.”
This is all very admirable. But Dr Michael Fitzpatrick has written An Open Letter to Gordon Brown in which he questions how she expects to achieve her aim.
In her campaign posters, Mrs Tommey, whose 12-year-old son Billy is autistic, offers to save the UK government £500 million a year by helping people with autism to get jobs. But it is not clear from the posters how she thinks this can be achieved. However, The Autism File, the magazine she edits, focuses on two issues: supporting the campaign led by the former Royal Free Hospital researcher Andrew Wakefield against the MMR vaccine and promoting ‘unorthodox biomedical’ treatments for children with autism.
The main point that Dr Fitzpatrick makes is that if her message to the prime minister is the same as the one she promotes in The Autism File she would be well advised to think again. He ends thus:
If she wants better provision of diagnostic, supportive and educational services, she might consider adding her energies to the long-running campaigns of the National Autistic Society and others, currently focused on the Autism Bill.
Ms Tommey’s supporters have been quick to respond. At The Age of Autism, Teri Arranga accuses Dr Fitzpatrick of carrying out an inquisition against the Autism Trust and quotes Trust Chairman. Oliver Jones who responded to Dr Fitzpatrick as follows:
I am both shocked and astounded having read your open letter on the Internet this afternoon. How dare you act in such an ill informed manner about a campaign that I and many others have invested significant time and effort in - when you evidently have no idea about what we are actually focused upon.
I find it remarkable that a professional person can take such an aggressive stance as you have done about The Autism Trust’s campaign without having the decency or following proper protocol by making contact with any of the Trustees and specifically myself to determine the objectives and intent of our forthcoming meetings.
The tone of the article is plain. The Autism Trust is trying to improve services and quality of life for autistic people in the UK and Dr Fitzpatrick is misrepresenting their aims and undermining their efforts because he resents Ms Tommey’s support for biomedical interventions. Having read the Autism Trust’s lengthy press release I agree with Dr Fitzpatrick.
“A Personal Campaign”
The press release is clear that this is Ms Tommey’s “personal campaign.” She wishes to speak to Gordon Brown “on behalf of the thousands of mothers of children with autism in the UK.” It repeats that this is “Her campaign” and highlights her role as Editor-in-Chief of The Autism File.
Credibility
Ms Tommey obviously has a lot of business acumen and is an astute campaigner who is adept at using the media to position herself “as one of the leading figures in autism in the UK.” But, as Dr Fitzpatrick points out, her support for discredited notions about MMR and autism and her promotion of unproven treatments do call her credibility into question. This is underlined by errors in the press release. Ms Tommey claims that:
autism numbers have increased dramatically in the last twenty years from 1 in 10,000 in 1988 to 1 in 100 today.
As long ago as 1966 Lotter established a figure of 4 in 10000 for severely autistic children. When Wing and Gould examined the broader autistic spectrum in 1979 they found 20 in 10000. The present figure of 100 in 10000 includes people without significant cognitive impairments who were only added to the diagnostic criteria in 1994.
But Ms Tommey uses these false figures to argue that we face a fresh challenge as for the first time a significant number of adults enter the system. This is a direct contradiction of the NAS I Exist campaign which has successfully persuaded the government that generations of autistic adults have been ignored. The NAS is continuously engaged in discussions with government ministers and officials to get a commitment to action based on the provisions of the Autism Bill which enjoys unprecedented support amongst MPs.
Centres of Excellence
The Centres of Excellence proposed by the Autism Trust seek to provide residential communities in rural locations that provide a “safe haven” for autistic adults. They hope that such centres will provide support for autistic adults in the community, setting up in business or becoming self employed. But most people live in urban settings so it hard to envisage how they will benefit. And despite Mr Jones’ protests it is clear that the Autism Trust is as committed as Ms Tommey is to nonsense cures and treatments. Each centre of excellence will feature a wellness centre offering all manner of quackery including homeopathy, chelation and hyperbaric oxygen therapy, as well as training centre and a conference centre promoting these “biomedical interventions.”
I think that Mr Jones’ complaints against Dr Fitzpatrick are disingenuous. If anything Dr Fitzpatrick should be taken to task for failing to mention the Autism Trust in his open letter. At a time when service providers are moving away from the model of self contained autism communities in favour of closer integration of services within everyday society the Autism Trust proposes to build a worldwide network of such communities.
They expect local authorities to fund places in their residential homes while they are free to develop profitable spin offs promoting quackery. Or, as they describe it in their financial model:
The capital development and business operating model will depend on the facility mix and local partners – as well as the engagement and support available from local and national government. A mix of charitable status and commercially self-standing models will be explored in each location.
Danger
The greatest danger is not that Ms Tommey and the Autism Trust are going to persuade the government to follow their lead. But by muddying the waters with their campaign they may give the government an excuse to back pedal on existing commitments while they consult with this self appointed autism constituency. The best way forward is to get behind the NAS campaign and keep up the pressure for the provisions of the autism bill to become law.
July 12th, 2009
Posted by
Mike |
Polly Tommey, Quackery, adults, government |
8 comments
Three years ago I wrote a post, Evidence of Pharm, which began,
When scandalous events come to light the local community are always agreed. “We had no idea.” “He was such a pillar of the community.” “They babysat our children.” “They always gave generously to charity.” Etc.
So how will the good people of Silver Spring, Maryland, USA react when some of their own are finally exposed for using bad science to perform medical experiments on helpless children by pretending they have a cure for autism and persuading the parents to claim back the cost from their medical insurance?
It would be nice if they could read it first in the local press. So I am copying this to the editors of the:
Silver Spring Gazette: jgrbach@gazette.net
Silver Spring Voice: bond@takoma.com
Montgomery County Sentinel: editor-mc@thesentinel.com
All that follows is already in the public domain. All I have done is provide a summary. The editors can check it themselves or email me with any queries about sources.
The editors did not respond and the family firm of Mark and David Geier continued to perpetrate medical malpractice on children from their home in Silver Spring, Maryland, USA. I wonder if these editors will respond to recent reports in the Chigago Tribune under the headlines, ‘Miracle drug’ called junk science and Physician team’s crusade shows cracks. The Chicago Tribune has done a great job, no doubt benefitting from the detailed research into the Geier’s activities published by Kathleen Seidel on her Neurodiversity blog. They have also unearthed some real gems themselves.
David Geier told the Chicago Tribune that leading autism specialist, Simon Baron-Cohen, supported ther use of Lupron to treat autism. Baron-Cohen told reporters that
“The idea of using it (Lupron) with vulnerable children with autism, who do not have a life-threatening disease and pose no danger to anyone, without a careful trial to determine the unwanted side effects or indeed any benefits, fills me with horror,”
When
Four of the world’s top pediatric endocrinologists told the Tribune that the Lupron protocol is baseless, supported only by junk science. More than two dozen prominent endocrinologists dismissed the treatment earlier this year in a paper published online by the journal Pediatrics.
Mark Geier responded by saying
that these are “opinions by people who don’t know what they are talking about,” saying the pediatric endocrinologists interviewed by the Tribune don’t treat autistic children and have not tried the Lupron treatment.
Lupron is a powerful drug that blocks the production of sex hormones. The Geiers use it on autistic children at ten times the dose used to treat the legitimate but rare condition of precocious puberty. It is also used to treat prostate cancer and to chemically castrate sex offenders. The long term effects on healthy children are unknown but are unlikely to be good. Its use on autistic children has no scientific backing. It is untested. It has no known therapeutic benefits and the potential for harm.
While Lupron might not have a significant impact on very young children — beyond the discomfort of daily injections — they said continuing treatment into the teen years is another matter. Lupron would put puberty on hold for those children.
A teenage boy “becomes a kid again,” said Dr. Alan Rogol, a pediatric endocrinologist at Riley Hospital for Children in Indianapolis. “He stops making testosterone. They don’t grow as well. It is not good for their bones. They would come to a dead stop.”
Meanwhile the Geiers continue to open clinics across the USA offering this “treatment” and are welcome speakers at fringe autism conferences. The lack of regulation for so-called alternative (aka quack) therapists in the USA makes it unlikley that the authorities will clamp down on their business. But the high cost of treatment is often borne by patients’ medical insurance. This has led one recent convert to the Geier’s Lupron treatment, Mayer Eisenstein, to have second thoughts.
Eisenstein said he would not treat teenagers with Lupron, citing insurance difficulties. “It is easy to explain a 4- to 5-year-old with high testosterone [to an insurer]. It falls under precocious puberty,” he said. “But with an 11-, 12-year-old, it becomes a big fight.”
Eisenstein has visibily cooled towards the Geiers during interviews with the Chicago Tribune over the last few days. The Tribune’s interest has unearthed some unsavoury aspects of his own medical practice which he doubtless would have preferred not to see featured in their pages under the headlines, Autism doctor: Troubling record trails doctor treating autism and Dr. Peter Rosi places blame on some parents for their babies’ deaths
Let us hope that the credit crunched insurance industry will do what the regulatory authorities have so far singularly failed to do. Their refusal to underwrite the Geiers’ junk protocol would protect children as well as their balance sheets. Meanwhile I hope that the Chicago Tribune’s reports will at last provoke the authorities into taking action to end the Geiers’ reckless endangerment of children.
One thing it will provoke is a frenzy of denial and accusations from the usual suspects over at Fromage of Autism (Yes. They are that cheesy) and the rest of the biomeddlesome autism fringe. But there is plenty of support for the Chicago Tribune as well. Here are a few to be going on with.
Left Brain Right Brain
autism.change.org
Photon in the Darkness
Respectful Insolence
Mindless Mommy
Neurologica
Chicago Moms
Finally, do take the time to email the reporters at the Chicago Tribune and thank them for bringing this outrage to a wider audience.
pcallahan@tribune.com
ttsouderos@tribune.com
May 22nd, 2009
Posted by
Mike |
Lupron, Quackery, journalism |
3 comments
Those who wish to ague that autism is a public health disaster frequently cite the lifetime cost of autism as yet another reason why government should take autism seriously and devote huge sums to research into prevention and cure. The major citation is usually the estimated figure of $3.2 million as a lifetime cost per person from Michael Ganz, Assistant Professor of Society, Human Development, and Health at Harvard School of Public Health.
I have questioned the assumptions behind Ganz’s work in a previous post. But in one area at least it seems that he may have underestimated the costs. Ganz puts the lifetime costs of biomedical treatment or, as he describes it, complementary and alternative medicine at $2704. This may be a reasonable figure averaged out over the entire autistic population but for those parents who do take the biomedical route the costs can be much higher.
Over on Autism Watch Stephen Barratt has posted an article in which he advises parents to “Be Wary of CARE Clinics and the Center for Autistic Spectrum Disorders (CASD)” They offer a bewildering array of tests and treatments that are totally unproven and are billing insurance companies for up to $40,000 a person. For comparison Ganz estimates the total lifetime costs for physician and dental costs for an autistic person at $42,259.
These outrageous charges for quack treatments are not part of the cost of autism. They are part of the cost to families and to society as a whole of the campaign to paint autism as an unprecedented health disaster. All the talk of epidemics and autism as a devastating disorder has, on the one hand led mainstream science to direct a multi-million dollar research budget into seeking means of preventing autism by finding its marker genes and devising ante-natal tests. On the other hand, parents of autistic children are vulnerable to to the sort of expensive quackery provided by CARE/CASD.
Meanwhile parents struggle to find basic services like speech and language therapy and respite care. Schools struggle to honour IEPs on limited budgets and autistic adults either cannot find services or are told they are ineligible. Instead of spending money on autism let us spend it on autistic people themselves.
January 18th, 2009
Posted by
Mike |
Quackery, biomedical interventions |
4 comments
Change.org is canvassing for ideas to
be presented to the Obama Administration on Inauguration Day, January 20, 2009 as the “Top 10 Ideas for America.” We will then launch a national campaign behind each idea and mobilize the collective energy of the millions of members of Change.org, MySpace, and partner organizations to ensure that each winning idea gets the full consideration of the Obama Administration and Members of Congress.
At present there are nearly 4000 ideas organized in different categories. You log in to vote and the top three ideas in each category go into a final ballot. One of the categories is Health Care. The most popular ideas in health care are for free or affordable health care, an end to non-medical circumcision and legalizing marijuana, particularly for therapeutic use. Until recently there was an idea related to autism in 4th place.
The author was Ken Stoller,
an anti vaccine activist who offers unproven, alternative therapies for autism like hyperbaric oxygen therapy. So it is no surprise that in his proposal he claims
a positive association between environmental factors, such as mercury and pesticide exposure, and neuroimmune illnesses, most notably autism.
No evidence is offered for this positive association, nor for his claim that autism is a neuroimmune illness. He also seems to think that “pernicious chemicals” found in vaccines are to blame for a lot more than autism.
Many illnesses, including breast cancer, prostate cancer, Parkinson’s disease, and Alzheimer’s have their origins in the rising levels of pernicious chemicals we come in contact with including, but not limited to, the contents of vaccines.
As the piece progresses it is clear that Stoller is targeting pesticides rather than vaccines. He even cites Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, in preference to the usual anti vaccine screeds from Kirby, McCarthy etc. Stoller talks about unspecified neurotoxins and carcinogens which he claims are to be found in pesticides and herbicides commonly used in the USA before going on to cite some alarming statistics about childhood illnesses.
Today, almost 1 out of 3 American children suffer from at least one chronic illness, and 12 million have some form of developmental disorder. The U.S. has the 4th highest incidence of childhood cancer in the world. Since the 1970’s, there has been a 50% increase in childhood acute lymphocytic leukemia and a 35% increase in brain cancer.
Almost 1 in 3 American children are permanently sick? Not exactly. According to this news report
more than 7 percent of U.S. children and youth were hampered in their daily activities by an illness that lasted three months or longer in 2004, compared to just 1.8 percent of children in 1960.
It goes on to list the three most common chronic conditions in childhood: obesity (18%), asthma (9%) and ADHD (5%). Add them all together and yes, 32% is almost 1 in 3. But the most common causes cited are not exposure to toxins but poor diet, lack of exercise and spending too much time indoors, which increases exposure to the dust mites and cockroaches that trigger asthma.
Childhood cancer is another matter and Stoller’s figures do look alarming. But the background information at the National Cancer Institute makes Stoller’s interpretation seem unnecessarily alarmist rather than alarming.
Long-term trends in incidence for leukemias and brain tumors, the most common childhood cancers, show patterns that are somewhat different from the others. Incidence of childhood leukemias appeared to rise in the early 1980s, with rates increasing from 3.3 cases per 100,000 in 1975 to 4.6 cases per 100,000 in 1985. Rates in the succeeding years have shown no consistent upward or downward trend and have ranged from 3.7 to 4.9 cases per 100,000 (2).
For childhood brain tumors, the overall incidence rose from 1975 through 2004, from
2.3 to 3.2 cases per 100,000 (2), with the greatest increase occurring from l983 through l986. An article in the September 2, 1998, issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute suggests that the rise in incidence from 1983 through 1986 may not have represented a true increase in the number of cases, but may have reflected new forms of imaging equipment (magnetic resonance imaging or MRI) that enabled visualization of brain tumors that could not be easily visualized with older equipment (3). Other important developments during this time period included the changing classification of brain tumors, which resulted in tumors previously designated as “benign” being reclassified as “malignant,” and improvements in neurosurgical techniques for biopsying brain tumors. Regardless of the explanation for the increase in incidence that occurred from 1983 to 1986, childhood brain tumor incidence has been essentially stable since the mid-1980s.
According to Stoller the cause of all this is the trillions of pounds of pollutants that are being poured into the environment. The government has failed to act because
the governance of medicine and science has been overly affected by corrupt corporate influences void of humanitarian concerns and focused solely on financial gain.
So there we have it. Totally unrelated disorders and conditions are lumped together and blamed on a vague assemblage of pernicious chemicals. Statistics are abused to make the situation seem more scary than it is. Big government and big business are conspiring to cover up the damage they are causing to the nation’s health … again!
There was an idea
related to autism. It is no longer there. Stoller withdrew it when it became clear that it was not going to make the cut. Despite appeals on all the anti vaccine/autism lists for people to vote for it Stoller had only gained round 400 votes and was slipping down the list. Stoller gave another reason for withdrawing. As he was not going to win what was the point of leaving it up? It was only providing a platform for Neurodiversity to attack him in the comments section. Actually one man, Ken Reibel was asking awkward questions and pointing to errors of fact in Stoller’s replies
Ideas for Change
is a great idea itself. Some of the more interesting proposals are generating a lot of serious discussion as well as votes. But Stoller is not interested in discussion. His is not an idea for change. It is the same old anti-vaccine nonsense tagged onto a lot more unsubstantiated claims about environmental pollution backed up by the misleading use of statistics.
This is unfortunate. There is no doubt that environmental pollution is having an impact on the planet that goes way beyond human health. But we need scientists to investigate specific causes for concern and find out what is really happening. When scientists do investigate the hypothesis that there is a link between pesticides and childhood cancers they often get contradictory results. A review of the literature concluded that
The available literature does not allow firm conclusions with regard to pesticides and any type of childhood cancer. Investing in the acquisition and critical review of exposure information appears to be the crucial step for causal assessment in future research. However, focusing on the presence of pesticides, and not asking the question why they were used, might mask relevant associations to other causative agents.
So, even if we were to demonstrate a consistent association between pesticides and cancer it could well be that the cockroaches or whatever it is we are killing, are themselves the cause. Following Stoller’s lead and imposing a moratorium on organochlorine pesticides would be one heck of a way to find out.
December 22nd, 2008
Posted by
Mike |
Quackery, government, science |
one comment
The new edition of the NAS members magazine, Communication contains a “Right of Reply” to Mike Fitzpatrick’s excellent article, “Defeating autism - a damaging delusion” that appears in the previous issue, by Stephen M Edelson, who has inherited Bernard Rimland’s mantle at the Autism Research Institute. Edelson claims that Fitzpatrick’s objection to chelation as a treatment for autistic children amounts to an abuse of their human rights.
his negative outlook on biomedical interventions, such as chelation, are [sic] best viewed as a human rights issue.
Chelation is a good example of the discrimination against those on the Autism spectrum regarding appropriate medical treatments. Fitzpatrick has been a longtime, outspoken critic of chelation. (Chelation involves a medication, such as DMPS or DMSA, which removes neurotoxic heavymetals, such as lead and mercury, from the body; it is given under the supervision of a doctor.)
Except that autism practitioners who offer chelation therapy do not have to be medical doctors to be listed on Edelson’s own Defeat Autism Now list of practitioners. The list carries this disclaimer.
The following are practitioners who have requested to be listed as providing DAN!-based interventions for helping autistic patients. Most are physicians, others are licensed health-care professionals in medically related fields.
We do not at present have any means of certifying the competence nor quality of practice of any practitioner. We hope to be able to do so in the future.
Some of these “others” are naturopaths, homeopaths, chiropractors, nutritionists - all are allowed to advertise chelation therapy for autistic children on Edelson’s list and some even offer IV chelation.
Edelson fails to mention that oral DMSA is the only medication approved for heavy metal detoxification amongst children in the USA. Everything else is experimental. Under Edelson’s leadership DAN/ARI gives its imprimatur to unqualified personnel who experiment on autistic children. If chelation is indeed a human rights issue it is Edelson not Fitzpatrick who is abusing those rights in autistic children.
If an individual tests with very high levels of one or more heavy metals, chelation is the treatment of choice throughout the medical profession. If test results indicate very high levels in someone on the autism spectrum, isn’t this person entitled to the same medical care as someone without autism? If this rather severe medical problem is ignored, heavy metals can lead to exponential brain damage, and a worsening in cognitive and behavioural abilities.
This is a strawman. Of course every child is entitled to medical treatment. But Edelson’s own protocols on page 24 of ARI publication 40 (April 2007) do not suggest chelation for clinically high levels of toxicity. Instead they propose a provoked test. Give the child a chelation agent that scours its system for heavy metals and compare the results with baseline levels in unchelated subjects. By analogy, place a wet sponge over a bowl and measure its wetness by the amount of water that drips into the bowl. Then take an identical sponge and squeeze it over the bowl. Measure the amount of water in the bowl and use this to declare that the second sponge is wetter.
So far so silly: bad science leading to nonsense conclusions. Laughable. But there was no laughter in the death of Tariq Nadama. Tariq was a five year old autistic child, taken from Britain to the USA to access biomedical treatments for autism that are not commonly available in the UK. He was taken to see Anju Usman, a senior DAN practitioner who referred him on to a retired ear nose and throat specialist who now offered alternative therapies for autism.
In his article, Fitzpatrick brings up the accidental death of Tariq Nadama after chelation treatment. What he does not tell the reader is that Tariq was given the entirely wrong drug, one with a similar name and label that was nearby on the office shelf. Regrettably, these drug errors do happen in hospitals and doctors’ offices and Fitzpatrick has exploited this unfortunate incident several times in the past without explaining the complete story. (I have already corrected Fitzpatrick in a previous issue of Communication, and I am disappointed that the editor knowingly allowed such half-truths to be disseminated to NAS’ membership once more.)
Steven Edelson is the director of the Autism Research Institute (ARI) in the USA. Defeat Autism Now (DAN) is a project of ARI that provides a list of clinicians who follow the DAN method. One of those clinicians is Dr Roy Kerry. I find it inconceivable that Edelson does not know that Kerry, the doctor who killed Tariq, was admitted to the DAN list after Tariq’s death and while he was still the subject of both criminal and professional investigations. It is a reasonable assumption, therefore, that Edelson, as Director of ARI would have acquainted himself with the particulars of this case. After all, his predecessor, the late Bernard Rimland was very clear that Kerry was not a DAN doctor at the time of Tariq’s death and that Kerry was not following DAN protocols when Tariq received the fatal dose in his office.
So why does Edelson give us the fairy tale of the wrong drug on the nearby shelf? Does he seriously believe that Kerry accidentally reached for the wrong drug three times in a row? It was the third round of treatment with the same drug that killed Tariq. And how can he suggest that Kerry reached for the wrong drug by accident when it was the only drug on the shelf? I have made it clear in the past, quoting from the official investigation, that
72. Respondent stated to Inspector Reiser that disodium EDTA is the only form of EDTA that he stocks in his office.
73. Respondent admits that CaNa2EDTA is available but he has never used this agent.
Kerry only ever used “the wrong drug” (disodium EDTA). He had never stocked the “right drug.” (calcium disodium EDTA) Neither of these drugs is on the DAN list of recommended treatments for autism anyway. And Edelson set great store by this in his previous letter to Communication which insists that
(Tariq) received disodium EDTa as a chelating agent; and this is not part of what is taught in the DAN! approach
This rather begs the question. Why did one of DAN’s leading practitioners, Dr Anju Usman, send Tariq for a treatment that was not sanctioned by DAN? And when the treatment proved fatal, why was she not disciplined and why was the guilty doctor then admitted to the club?
Edelson concludes with this.
Fitzpatrick condemns parents who choose to help their children by using biomedical treatments. Over the past 20 years, scientists have clearly documented immune system dysfunction and gastrointestinal problems associated with autism. Many of these problems can be treated successfully using established medical treatments. The published scientific foundations of many biomedical approaches can be found at www.autismresearchsummaries.com
Fitzpatrick does no such thing. He condemns practitioners like Edelson who prey upon parents and exploit their fears. He challenges the science that Edelson claims to support his contention for a link between autism, immune dysfunction and gastrintestinal problems. If FitzPatrick is right, Edelson’s treatments are quackery based on bad science.
Edelson should answer Fitzpatrick’s scientific and medical objections to his protocol. Instead he resorts to impugning Fitzpatrick’s motives, which suggests that Edelson has no answer to Fitzpatrick’s objections. I urge everybody to read Fitzpatrick’s new book, Defeating Autism: A Damaging Delusion, (available in the UK and the USA ) and then judge the adequacy of Edelson’s reply.
Readers may also care to read Kev’s response to Edelson, Stephen M Edelson gets it wrong, wrong, wrong…
December 1st, 2008
Posted by
Mike |
Communication, DAN!, Quackery, chelation |
one comment
