Member since: Wed Feb 10, 2010, 12:12 PM
Number of posts: 4,402
Number of posts: 4,402
- 2016 (7)
- 2015 (118)
- 2014 (217)
- 2013 (275)
- 2012 (107)
- Older Archives
Where is the outrage over the massive ONGOING failures described below in PA and present all across the country according to PROTECT?
July 20 at 5:26am
A law enforcement sweep this week is targeting 20 suspects in the Silicon Valley for trafficking in video of children being raped and abused. Sweeps like these could be repeated weekly or monthly in larger jurisdictions, but are infrequent due to the severe strain they put on understaffed law enforcement. We hope authorities are also putting maximum resources into searching for possible child victims. http://bit.ly/OCpRbB
Penn State Tragedy Inspires Law Targeting PA’s Attorney General
By Tara Murtha
Posted Dec. 27, 2011
The introduction of the Pennsylvania Attorney General Mandated Reporter Law by Rep. Dan Deasy (D-Allegheny) on the steps of the Allegheny county courthouse in early December didn’t make much of a splash here, but the implications of the legislation are explosive: Supporters allege that the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s office is sitting on thousands of leads on child sex abusers, collecting the data on their possible whereabouts but not trying to find them.
“The facts are that there are 22,000 graphic child pornographers in Pennsylvania, thousands of them are likely to be committing child abuse right now, and if we’re not giving out that information to local law enforcement, which is the case … we are not doing our job as best we could,” says former U.S. Representative Patrick Murphy, currently campaigning to become the first Democrat elected as Pennsylvania Attorney General next year.
The bill’s supporters want the Attorney General’s office to share leads generated in RoundUp, a sophisticated forensic tool that scours peer-to-peer file-sharing networks like Gnutella and BitTorrent and pinpoints IP addresses of computers sharing graphic child pornography.
Murphy sees the new law as a stateside extension of the federal PROTECT Our Children Act in 2008. During Congressional testimony for that legislation, the FBI and Department of Justice estimated less than 1 percent of all leads are investigated.
Material includes graphic videos of child rape and ‘grooming materials’—videos designed to teach children it’s normal for adults to touch them sexually.
Supporters of the bill include Murphy, Deasy, Rep. Dan Frankel (D-Allegheny), Rep. Michael Sturla (D-Lancaster), national nonprofit PROTECT and high-profile advocate Alicia Kozakiewicz. They say they want the attorney general’s office to “push out” the leads to each of the 67 county district attorneys every 24 hours, and have each instance count as a new investigation into a possible—or statistically speaking, probable—child abuser.
They say where there’s smoke there’s fire, and research backs them up. Though estimates range widely on the percentage of overlap, studies and arrest data confirm the modern phenomenon of “dual offenders,” people whose crimes involve both possession of child pornography and child sex abuse.
Kozakiewicz says that since the Penn State scandal broke, it’s more important to her than ever to make some progress in her home state.
“The Penn State tragedy is horrible, and really shocked the world into something that, while it may have been a secret, (is) nothing new,” says Kozakiewicz. She sees Attorney General Linda Kelly’s comments on Penn State hypocritical. “(Kelly) pointed her finger (at) Penn State and has been accusing them (of withholding information) while she herself could also be accused (of the same thing),” says Kozakiewicz.
“If inaction is a crime, on the part of Penn State officials, then certainly Tom Corbett and Linda Kelly are guilty of the same crime,” says Camille Cooper, who helped draft this bill as legislative director of PROTECT. “That’s why Pennsylvania, and that’s why now.”
Posted by proverbialwisdom | Thu Jul 26, 2012, 07:55 PM (1 replies)
Source: Press-Register Community News , Mobile AL
Geneticist charts effects of nuclear disasters
Published: Monday, July 16, 2012, 7:15 AM
By Sally Pearsall Ericson
MOBILE, Alabama — Dr. Wladimir Wertelecki, a physician, geneticist and professor, could rest on the laurels of a prestigious career with international accomplishments.
But he is more interested in contributing to a clearer scientific and public understanding of the global impacts of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986. His ongoing research into the effects of disaster-related radiation and other environmental pollutants on long-term child development has taken him around the world.
Formerly chairman of the Medical Genetics Department at the University of South Alabama from 1974 until 2010, Wertelecki now continues his work along with child development research teams from California, SUNY, Indiana and Emory Universities.
At a recent scientific colloquium at the University of South Alabama, Wertelecki pointed out two main lessons learned from the Chernobyl and the Fukushima-Daiichi disasters:
"It is not the scale of a nuclear accident itself that makes a human disaster it is the response by officials afterward and the public panic produced. The public should not be treated as idiots and told only the 'good half' of the story, as is often done by official agencies. People have the right to know, the need to believe those who are in charge."
Wertelecki's investigations in Ukraine show elevated population rates of certain types of birth defects, mostly of the brain and spinal cord, according to his 2010 article in "Pediatrics," the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics ( http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/4/e836.full ). However, the geneticist noted, statistics illuminate realities but cannot prove causes.
Wertelecki believes that the often-made comparisons of Chernobyl or Fukushima-Daiichi outcomes with those that followed the atomic bomb explosions at Hiroshima and Nagasaki are wrong.
The impact of the bombs was external radiation, which was intense but short-lived, said the physician. The impact of Chernobyl and Fukushima-Daiichi is ongoing and radiation still in the environment is inhaled or swallowed, leading to accumulation in the body. One mushroom eaten in affected areas may deliver as much radiation as hundreds of chest x-rays, he concluded.
Read more: http://blog.al.com/pr-community-news/2012/07/geneticist_charts_effects_of_n.html
Posted by proverbialwisdom | Mon Jul 16, 2012, 03:13 PM (0 replies)
When Science and Health Policy Trumps Inconvenient Evidence
Below are Mark Blaxill's public comments to the IACC:
My name is Mark Blaxill. I am the co-author of the book, The Age of Autism and recently helped to launch a movement called The Canary Party, which was created to stand up for the victims of medical injury, environmental toxins and industrial foods. Unfortunately, we need to stand up for these victims, the proverbial “canaries in the coal mine,” because so many of them cannot speak for themselves. I am also the father of a 16 year old daughter diagnosed with autism. Thanks to biomedical interventions and therapy, Michaela is more verbal, social and flexible than most affected children, but sadly, she will not live independently. She most certainly does not have a capacity for self-advocacy, so (like most affected individuals) her parents must speak for her.
Unfortunately, the climate for parent advocates, never favorable in autism, has grown progressively more hostile. We have gone from being bad parents whose contempt for their infant children caused them to withdraw into autism, to raving lunatics who are a danger to the public health and whose opinions must be suppressed.
Why? Because the autism parent community refuses to stand down in offering inconvenient evidence to the makers of science and health policy. This evidence is simple. Before 1930, the rate of autism was effectively zero. Before 1990, autism in the United States was exceedingly rare, as low as 1 in 10,000. Three months ago, we learned that 1 in 88 children born in the year 2000 were autistic, 1 in 54 boys. The conclusion is inescapable: autism is manmade.
The health policy implications of this evidence are obvious. The only rational policy for autism would:
Declare a public health emergency as our country did with poliomyelitis (a much smaller epidemic) and AIDS.
Urgently gather good numbers on the nature and extent of the epidemic.
Objectively and without financial conflict, consider the short list of candidates for such an unusual and massive scourge.
Collaborate closely with affected families to develop answers: prevention, treatments and resources throughout the lifespan.
Sadly, the policy response of the health agencies of our government has been precisely the opposite.
The NIH has funded research to concoct arguments that the crisis is an artifact of better diagnosing. Instead of mobilizing for the epidemic, science policy has promoted denial.
The CDC has organized surveillance to measure autism rates that are at least a decade old and trend evidence that starts just a few short years after the epidemic started. Instead of urgently gaining insight, health policy has promoted ignorance and delay.
The agencies of HHS act in unison to promote vaccination, a candidate exposure of great concern to parents, while agency leaders rotate out of their government positions to take lucrative jobs at pharmaceutical companies. Instead of objectivity, the investigation of cause has become fraught with conflicts.
The IACC, newly reconstituted after the explosive 1 in 88 report, appears to have been recruited to rubber stamp this policy of epidemic denial. Instead of collaboration with parent leaders, public servants have turned their backs on us.
Autism parents spend a lot of time debating how the science and health policies surrounding autism have gotten to this place. Is it because autism is merely fodder to help recover and extend the massive research investment in the human genome? Is it because psychiatry grabbed hold of autism with Leo Kanner and refuses to release its grip? Is it because pediatricians are afraid to confront the idea that they may be harming more children than they are helping? Is it because the massive resources of the pharmaceutical industry have so tilted science and medicine in the direction of their financial goals that policy is now driven by money rather than reason? Is it because government officials are too busy worrying about their retirement, too afraid to rock the boat and confront inconvenient truths? Is it because the idea that there are human costs to some aspects of technical progress is too difficult for intelligent people to accept?
Or, more hopefully, is it because some people have simply made bad decisions that we have the freedom to unmake?
I don’t propose to answer all of these questions today. Instead I want to offer you all a challenge. Unmake your bad decisions. Treat autism as an emergency and not as something to celebrate. Approach the problem of prevention with the intellectual and moral urgency that an epidemic requires. Treat the canaries in the coalmine as signals of a crisis of public health not as a public relations problem. Offer respect and standing to those who speak for the injured, don’t handpick more convenient representatives to speak against us.
Most of all, I challenge you to do the right thing. Until you do, we will keep making you feel uncomfortable.
Posted by Age of Autism at July 10, 2012 at 3:26 PM in Current Affairs, Mark Blaxill, Vaccine Safety | Permalink | Comments (13)
Posted by proverbialwisdom | Tue Jul 10, 2012, 06:38 PM (1 replies)
Here's a recent peer-reviewed publication by prestigious researchers citing 3 papers co-authored by Dr. AJ Wakefield out of 95 total references, and from among Wakefield's "over 140 original scientific articles, book chapters, and invited scientific commentaries."
Published online 2011 September 16. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024585
Impaired Carbohydrate Digestion and Transport and Mucosal Dysbiosis in the Intestines of Children with Autism and Gastrointestinal Disturbances
Brent L. Williams,1 Mady Hornig,1 Timothy Buie,2 Margaret L. Bauman,3 Myunghee Cho Paik,4 Ivan Wick,1 Ashlee Bennett,1 Omar Jabado,1 David L. Hirschberg,1 and W. Ian Lipkin1,*
1Center for Infection and Immunity, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America
2Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
3Department of Neurology, Harvard Medical School and Departments of Neurology and Pediatrics and Learning and Developmental Disabilities Evaluation and Rehabilitation Services (LADDERS), Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
4Department of Biostatistics, Columbia University, Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York, United States of America
3. Wakefield AJ, Anthony A, Murch SH, Thomson M, Montgomery SM, et al. Enterocolitis in children with developmental disorders. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;95:2285–2295.
4. Wakefield AJ, Ashwood P, Limb K, Anthony A. The significance of ileo-colonic lymphoid nodular hyperplasia in children with autistic spectrum disorder. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005;17:827–836.
9. Ashwood P, Anthony A, Torrente F, Wakefield AJ. Spontaneous mucosal lymphocyte cytokine profiles in children with autism and gastrointestinal symptoms: mucosal immune activation and reduced counter regulatory interleukin-10. J Clin Immunol. 2004;24:664–673.
The Wakefield Rehabilitation?
By Kent Heckenlively, Esq.
October 11, 2011
No responsible historian quotes Unabomber Ted Kaczynski for a proper understanding of the Industrial Revolution and the struggles of a technological age.
So why is uber-scientist Dr. W. Ian Lipkin of Columbia University quoting with approval the work of Dr. Andrew Wakefield? Isn't Wakefield supposed to the author of our common mass delusion that vaccines are linked to autism?
Can somebody please explain all of this to me?
Isn't Dr. Wakefield supposed to be some super-villain, leading all of us gullible parents to believe that vaccines aren't quite as safe as sugar water? Didn't he make up fake diseases? So, after being stripped of his license to practice medicine in the U. K., it turns out there really is something called autistic entercolitis and ileo-colonic lymphoid nodular hyperplasia in children with autism. At least Dr. W. Ian Lipkin seems to think so.
Has anybody told Trine Tsouderous of the Chicago Tribune about this? I'm sure she'll want to get right to work getting Dr. W. Ian Lipkin fired from Columbia University.
Translation for those of you who are not Columbia University Professors - There's a lot that's wrong in the digestive system of kids with autism! Maybe it's affecting their brain and behavior! Let's investigate!
After more than ten years of loose stools from my daughter, I don't need to be a Columbia University professor to know that.
But if a big shot scientist like Dr. W. Ian Lipkin is quoting Dr. Andrew Wakefield as a reliable source, maybe the rest of the world will soon be doing the same thing.
And that would be righting one of our new century's greatest injustices.
Kent Heckenlively is a Contributing Editor to Age of Autism
Here's the case that the Lancet paper should be reinstated following the successful appeal by Professor John Walker-Smith in March.
The Lancet should Reinstate the Andrew Wakefield Paper
By Martin Hewitt
Posted by Age of Autism at April 23, 2012
In the wake of the High Court judgment on Professor John Walker-Smith’s appeal against the decision of the General Medical Council (the UK regulatory body for doctors) to delicense him, what should now happen to the retracted paper he co-authored with Dr Andrew Wakefield? The decision lies with The Lancet editor, Dr Richard Horton. But what are the grounds for reinstating the paper as a properly conducted clinical investigation into 12 children with autism and bowel disease admitted to the paediatric gastroenterology department at the Royal Free Hospital (RFH) London in the mid-1990s? The paper was the focus of the GMC’s trial of the three senior authors on charges of serious professional misconduct which led to the delicensing of Walker-Smith and Wakefield.
Few academic articles have been dogged by the controversy attending the now retracted Lancet Paper ‘Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children’ since its publication in February 1998. (Another link to retracted paper here: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2897%2911096-0/fulltext#article_upsell .) In seeking to avert controversy The Lancet published an editorial accompanying the paper to warn against drawing the wrong conclusions that the paper had established that the MMR caused autism and bowel disease. The paper, which went through several cautious redrafts, said it "did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described”, adding that “Virological studies are underway that may help to resolve this issue”.
On publication the RFH took the exceptional step of holding a press conference to launch the paper in the hope of preventing the media and public from concluding that the MMR was unsafe and to avert a collapse in MMR take-up. When Dr Andrew Wakefield the lead writer was asked by the press if he would personally support the three-in-one MMR vaccine, he responded by advising parents to choose the single measles, mumps and rubella vaccines spaced out at intervals. Whilst his comments were seized on by the press as evidence that the MMR was unsafe and by the medical establishment as highly irresponsible, his answer accorded with official government policy. At the time the government vaccination schedule offered the choice between MMR and the three separate vaccines, in accord with the Department of Health's express policy when the MMR was launched in 1988.
‘Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children’ published in the Lancet, February 1998.
The Mitting Judgment and the Lancet paper
Having digested much of the hearing's 149 days of submissions and evidence and many other related papers, and heard Queens Counsels for Walker-Smith and the GMC, on 7 March J Mitting quashed all charges against the Professor.
Inevitably the thorough and irrevocable negation of the charges against Walker-Smith and of the GMC’s legal case, based on its deep misunderstanding of The Lancet paper, raises an important question of the status of the Wakefield et al paper, which is still listed as retracted, to which we now turn.
There is no doubt that the Mitting judgment goes to the heart of the way the GMC exercised its regulatory powers in this case. He outrightly criticises the "universal inadequacies" and "inadequate and superficial reasoning" of the disciplinary panel's approach, and recognised the personal suffering the GMC had inflicted on Walker-Smith. "It would be a misfortune if this were to happen again" he concluded on delivering his judgment.
More specifically, the Mitting judgment rejects the two fundamental grounds the GMC gave for finding the three doctors guilty of serious professional misconduct and so undermines The Lancet‘s argument for retraction based on these grounds; out go the claims that the patients were not consecutively referred to the department of paediatric gastroenterology and that the investigations did not have ethics committee approval.
Jon Edwards Video Trailer: A Story of Hope and Autism
Posted April 30, 2012
By John Stone, UK Editor for Age of Autism
Following the exoneration of John Walker-Smith in the High Court in March I wrote to the Lancet’s editor, Richard Horton, pleading with him to re-instate the Wakefield 1998 paper in the interests of children in the UK being denied medical investigation and treatment following the witch-hunt against Wakefield and colleagues both in the Sunday Times, and latterly British Medical Journal. Horton replied lamely:
“Dear Mr Stone - I would be horrified if doctors did not take the symptoms of any child seriously. So I sincerely hope that a child with symptoms of autism would be examined and investigated with care and sensitivity.
“My Best, Richard Horton”
(Email, 15 March 2012, 10.07pm)
To which I fired back:
“That is why you should re-instate the paper. It has become ideologically taboo in this country to accept that there is a real problem. The GMC tried to make out that the cases were fabricated and that gastro symptoms were only superficial, and the judge decided that they only selected the evidence which suited them. But for years members of the medical profession have been terrified to follow in their footsteps, and really based on the words of Mr Deer, Evan Harris, Tony Blair and Liam Donaldson. Two of these people may have been doctors of a sort but none of them had the knowledge, the ethical probity or the kindness of John Walker-Smith.”
And answer came there none: Dr Horton may or may not be “horrified”, but so far he is not prepared to do anything about it. As Martin Hewitt pointed out here last week there is not now the faintest scientific or legal reason not to re-instate the paper. But unfortunately this not only a matter of historical fairness. As the case of Jon Edwards – highlighted in a new film from Autism Team – makes abundantly clear, until our political class and medical establishment address their bad consciences nothing for these children is going to happen in the United Kingdom.
Posted by proverbialwisdom | Thu Jul 5, 2012, 07:25 PM (0 replies)
Go to Page: 1