Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Discuss autism theories, media stories, and efforts to put ASD on the government agenda here.

Moderator: ModeratorBill

Forum rules
Please limit quotes from articles to five paragraphs. Also, researchers may post study information here.
Willsmom
Posts: 1166
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:32 pm

Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Willsmom » Sat Mar 26, 2016 1:29 pm

http://www.ageofautism.com/2016/03/robe ... l#comments

Despite Pharma trolls, the showing of VAXXED at the nation's premier film festival goes on, thanks to founder Robert DeNiro.

De Niro and his wife, Grace Hightower, issued a statement on Friday, defending the screening.

>> “Grace and I have a child with autism and we believe it is critical that all of the issues surrounding the causes of autism be openly discussed and examined. In the 15 years since the Tribeca film festival was founded, I have never asked for a film to be screened or gotten involved in the programming.

“However this is very personal to me and my family and I want there to be a discussion, which is why we will be screening Vaxxed. I am not personally endorsing the film, nor am I anti-vaccination; I am only providing the opportunity for a conversation around the issue.”>>>

:P :P :P

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Sat Mar 26, 2016 2:27 pm

lol, apparently this blogger saw you coming:

"I almost feel sorry for Mr. De Niro. Almost. He’s about to be besieged by antivaccine cranks, who will now look at him as a hero and try to get him to support all sorts of wacky quack and pseudoscience causes. I hope he likes his new admirers."


New York Times:

Robert De Niro Defends Screening of Anti-Vaccine Film at Tribeca Festival

By PAM BELLUCK and MELENA RYZIKMARCH 25, 2016

In a decision that has dredged up the widely debunked link between vaccines and autism, the Tribeca Film Festival plans to screen a film by a discredited former doctor whose research caused widespread alarm about the issue.

The film, “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” is directed and co-written by Andrew Wakefield, an anti-vaccination activist and an author of a study — published in the British medical journal The Lancet, in 1998 — that was retracted in 2010. In addition to the retraction of the study, which involved 12 children, Britain’s General Medical Council, citing ethical violations and a failure to disclose financial conflicts of interest, revoked Mr. Wakefield’s medical license.

On the festival’s website, the biographical material about Mr. Wakefield does not mention that he was stripped of his license or that his Lancet study was retracted. Rather, it says that the Lancet study “would catapult Wakefield into becoming one of the most controversial figures in the history of medicine.”

Article continues:http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/26/health/vaccines-autism-robert-de-niro-tribeca-film-festival-andrew-wakefield-vaxxed.html?_r=0
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

Santosg
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 5:33 am

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Santosg » Sun Mar 27, 2016 2:28 am

I think it is obvious that Robert Deniro questions the safety of vaccines. But he can't just come out and say that. So he uses his influence to get the movie screened but does not endorse it. He seems scared. Scared to be attacked viciously by people who actually want to make it illegal to question the safety of vaccines, who want to make it illegal to personally refuse to take them. A complete breach of our legal rights, of the right to free speech or sovereignty over our own bodies.

Wakefield has to be denied everything, his professional career was not enough. The funniest part is the accusation that he failed to disclose personal interest....given that all the scientist that validate the safety and efficacy of vaccines--to say nothing of the regulators--have clear financial incentives to have them approved.

The entire west is going into such and illiberal direction.

If vaccines work as they say, who are the anti vaccine crowd putting at risk but themselves? Certainly not the vaccinated. So by what logic should they not have the right to make that choice?

Santosg
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 5:33 am

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Santosg » Mon Mar 28, 2016 12:13 am

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/mo ... story.html

Removed within a day of being announced. Incredible. DeNiro is such a coward, can't even stand by his decisions. It is his festival and he is put under so much pressure he immediately backs out. People can say all kind of things about the anti-vaccine crowd but what side is doing all the intimidation?

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Mon Mar 28, 2016 5:44 pm

Santosg wrote:http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-robert-de-niro-tribeca-andrew-wakefield-movie-cancels-20160326-story.html

Removed within a day of being announced. Incredible. DeNiro is such a coward, can't even stand by his decisions. It is his festival and he is put under so much pressure he immediately backs out. People can say all kind of things about the anti-vaccine crowd but what side is doing all the intimidation?
Actually, judging from comments in social media and on news articles, it seems he is being attacked by anti-vax/ conspiracy/Wakefield followers. Though I expect the ignorant comments to balloon into a new, new, new conspiracy theory involving men in black threatening Robert De Niro into pulling the screening. As usual.

Santosg wrote:Wakefield has to be denied everything, his professional career was not enough. The funniest part is the accusation that he failed to disclose personal interest....given that all the scientist that validate the safety and efficacy of vaccines--to say nothing of the regulators--have clear financial incentives to have them approved.

Lol, you're kidding, right? Wakefield’s conspiracy gig is quite a bit more profitable than his “professional career:”
What are some of the classic traits we’ve come to know from Andrew Wakefield? First, he’s a martyr who suffers for the cause, but the rock of strength. He tells us he’s lost everything, his job, his career, his country…heck, there’s even a film out there where he talks to a mirror and tells us he’d gladly die for the children. I find this imagery rather difficult to accept given the size of his house from his Austin days (5900 square feet, one of four properties listed in the Austin area as owned by the Wakefields) and $270k/year base salary (my guess significantly higher than “academic gastroenterologists” make in the UK). But more to the point, why did he keep half the money from his autism research charity as his salary? But, again, it seems one can’t watch Wakefield speak without hearing about how strong he is and how much he’s given up for the cause.

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2016/0 ... wakefield/


Nice crib, huh?

After failing to use and defraud the medical and science communities for his personal gain, duping people to follow and promote him as the self-sacrificing doc, on a mission for children, to expose a global conspiracy, tuned out to be very lucrative. And waaay easier.

And judging from the comments by his followers on social media and news articles, he doesn’t have to worry about any of them checking facts. Not even really simple facts. They just repeat and believe what they see on conspiracy blogs and easily discredited sources like Age of Autism.

Santosg wrote:So by what logic should they not have the right to make that choice?
Parents deserve accurate information when making any medical decision. Wakefield’s propaganda isn’t accurate information, and he is not a credible source of information. He’s just dishonest (and still profiting from it).

Kudos to De Niro for looking more closely and checking facts.
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

Santosg
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 5:33 am

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Santosg » Tue Mar 29, 2016 2:41 am

Let's go over a few facts:

In all the years that DeNiro has organized the Tribeca Film Festival he stated he has never personally requested to have a specific film shown. That is, until the documentary related to Wakefield. Given his own statement, it is obviously an issue he cares very much about. Otherwise, he would not have made this a personal request and completely at variance from the way films were previously selected.

Now within a day DeNiro totally reversed course and had the film pulled. Within a single day.

From these series of events you conclude that he did this because he was being harassed by Wakefields 'followers' and the anti-vaccine movement. The people who were going to be given a voice attacking the man who gave them a platform? Right. Come on, you know that makes absolutely no sense. In fact, it flies in the face of the obvious. Mr. DeNiro was intimidated by the vaccine crowd, probably with promises that the death of any unvaccinated child would rest on this head and he might even be legally liable.

But you think it was all done simple because DeNiro suddenly checked the 'facts.' No intimidation at all.

I personally know many doctors. The type of doctors who are interested in making money don't go into research. They to into private practice immediately. UK doctor's who want to get rich come to America to practice. There is no money to be made from academics. So why did Wakefield pursue research for such a long period of time in the UK if this is all just a great con?

Wakefield was one of the first researchers to look into the relationship of autism and the gut. Decades ahead of the mainstream. The relationship was flatly denied but now is a 'hot topic' of autism researchers. Many parents know just how critical this relationship is for their own children.

There is a post a while back when the question of autism/vaccines/heavy metals was being discussed. You were skeptical of there being any scientific studied that even looked at the relationship. Kulkulkan kindly posted a number of studies from pubmed that found a positive relationship. Wakefield is not the only researcher to call into question the safety of vaccines but he's the most vocal. Wakefield did not publish the article in the Lancet alone. He had co-authors and the paper was peer reviewed. But all other individuals involved simply washed their hands of the matter. Wakefield refused to do this and it cost him his medical license. To see this as somehow financially motivated is to have a very peculiar view of accounting.

If you are to see this in purely economic terms--with financial motive being the shift prism of analysis--it would seem logical to be a bit more skeptical of the pharmaceutic companies. Vaccines are a billion dollar business--made even more profitable by a government who literally mandates that everyone take them--thus ensuring a captured market.

I'm sure you're familiar with the legal issues surrounding Dr. Poul Thorsen, the man who was suppose to have completely refused for the CDC Wakefields findings about the relationship of autism and vaccines. He has been indicted for defrauding the government with false expenditure for over a million dollars. By that same token, we would use Thorsen to 'debunk' the vaccine safety argument. The point is that science is complicated, made by individuals, and all of them have agendas. You can't state that Wakefield has an agenda and deny that the other actors--with billions at stake--don't.

The only people who worship the 'conclusions' of science are people who have no idea how 'science' is actually produced. Basically, these are established by statistical correlations and nothing more. The conclusions that can be drawn from statistics are easily altered based on even a small chance in 'inclusion' and 'exclusion.'

I think that you're naturally a skeptic. That's great. I am skeptical by nature. I think one say in a rational manner and without being a conspiracy theorist that the US government has become a tool of oligarchy, increasingly captured by special interest. The government lies about war and literally killed millions of people around the world. Millions. Hell, we fight Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and literally arm them to topple a secular government in Syria.

One of the first laws these criminals put on the books when they invaded Iraq was Order 81. That order made it illegal for farmers to save seeds from season to season. That's right, they made it illegal for farmers to farm as they have done for thousands of years. Instead, they hoped to make them dependent to purchase Monsanto's gmo barren seeds year after year. How could you not question a government that does such things.

How people can be completely 'trusting' of such a government or what it produces is beyond me. I'm not against government, I'm not against vaccines, but I can see just how abusive the system can become--such as in the case of the US invasion forces in Iraq. The anti-vaccine movement has actually done a service for vaccines: it has highlighted the role of dangerous additives and works to get them increasingly removed. That's a win-win. We'd still be putting mercury into babies--at dangerously high levels--by EPA standards--but not CDC--if it were not for those 'tin foil' hatters.

Wakefield deserves a voice because he helps to keep the fire to the vaccine manufacturers, to increase oversight politically of the entire process. Hell, just on the basis of free speech.

monkeyman
Posts: 95
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2015 1:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby monkeyman » Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:18 pm

I fully agree with Santos on this one, especially from the danger of setting a precedent of removing a film based on a perceived controversial reception. This could have far-reaching ramifications in the future when any other film is proposed that deals with an issue of real substance (which tend to attract the most controversy).

The vaccine issue is one I have given a lot of thought over the past year-and-a-half, and while I am not 100% convinced there was a link between my sons regression and the vaccines, I believe there is a good chance there was damage caused by them, and I have stopped vaccinating my son for now. I also think there’s something to the fact that every doctor I have spoken to who specializes in ASD recommends against following the CDC vaccination schedule, and most recommend against vaccinating at all.

I think if you ask most doctors, they will acknowledge that any drug (OTC or prescription) will have adverse effects on a percentage of the population. I remember reading that aspirin kills about 1000 people a year, and while it is not harmful for the overwhelming majority of those who use it, it does harm a small percentage of users. Ask their loved ones what they think about it.

I also find the idea of blindly trusting government “just because” laughable. Hypothetically, even if the CDC discovered or produced strong evidence that vaccines did cause problems in a percentage of kids, I doubt they would publicly acknowledge it. To do so would be to admit that they were wrong for years and destroy public faith in them, which is exactly what they need to continue to be able to tell people how to make medical decisions.

I assume the movie will be made (or has already), and many of us here will watch it. It’s no surprise this issue will be swept out of the mainstream. To do anything else would be a powerful rebuke of our government agencies propagating the idea that vaccines are absolutely not harmful, and that is just not an option in their mind.

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Wed Mar 30, 2016 2:01 am

Santosg wrote: Let's go over a few facts:

Okay.

Many of your statements are incorrect and incomplete (chronologically and factually). I assume that, because the complex series of events surrounding Wakefield’s fraud unfolded years before your son was even born, you may not be familiar with these.


Santosg wrote:But you think it was all done simple because DeNiro suddenly checked the 'facts.' No intimidation at all.

Quite likely – because if his “understanding” came from the same sources yours did, learning the actual facts would be an eye-opener indeed. Probably people who were against the screening were also among those who brought the facts to his attention.

Wakefield’s sordid past is vast, so I’ll just address some of the points you raised.


Santosg wrote:I personally know many doctors. The type of doctors who are interested in making money don't go into research. They to into private practice immediately. UK doctor's who want to get rich come to America to practice. There is no money to be made from academics. So why did Wakefield pursue research for such a long period of time in the UK if this is all just a great con?

Wakefield was paid by a plaintiff’s attorney to find evidence of an mmr/autism link in the children of the attorney's clients who wanted to sue. Children who were plaintiffs in the suit were also study subjects. This is not what scientists and academic researchers do (aside from being an undisclosed COI – like a really serious one).

Wakefield also filed a patent for a vaccine of his own (without the knowledge of his research hospital). And patents for a treatment to enter a business arrangement with a father of one of the children in the study. link


Santosg wrote:Wakefield did not publish the article in the Lancet alone. He had co-authors and the paper was peer reviewed. But all other individuals involved simply washed their hands of the matter. Wakefield refused to do this and it cost him his medical license. To see this as somehow financially motivated is to have a very peculiar view of accounting.

Well, that’s not really how it happened. Wakefield was the principal on this paper, and his unethical COI and financial incentives for a positive correlation were not known to his research hospital, co-authors, or peer-reviewers. When his co-authors learned of his dishonesty and unethical behavior, they withdrew their support for the paper and interpretation of the results.

These along with other charges of misconduct led to the loss of his medical license.

If the situation could possibly get worse, it did. Several years later it was found that lab/histological samples used to “prove” Wakefield’s hypothesis did not show disease as was reported in the study. link

And Wakefield's research was not replicated, nor was he exonerated, as he insists. A group of actual research gastroenterologists did study this further – you won’t find studies like this one on any of those conspiracy sites:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2526159/


Santosg wrote:The only people who worship the 'conclusions' of science are people who have no idea how 'science' is actually produced

Okay, so ignorant people consider the actual science, while the smart people get their information from internet sales personalities and anonymous internet testimonials. That is why the smart people know to recover their children with bleach enemas or 300 rounds of AC chelation. Got it. ;)

The integrity of study design, limitations, rigor of the peer review, and quality of the journal in which a study is published can vary considerably.


Santosg wrote:How people can be completely 'trusting' of such a government or what it produces is beyond me.

This seems to be a hyperbolic straw man, along with seeds and Syria. Really, no one said anyone is “completely trusting of such a government.” Sadly there is corruption in all governments – at all levels. Companies too. And professions -- and individuals. But to tease apart the facts and make informed decisions on any issue, one has to look beyond conspiracy sources on the internet.


Santosg wrote:I'm sure you're familiar with the legal issues surrounding Dr. Poul Thorsen, the man who was suppose to have completely refused for the CDC Wakefields findings about the relationship of autism and vaccines. He has been indicted for defrauding the government with false expenditure for over a million dollars.

Yes, he is among 6 or 7 authors, but no, he was not a principal on the study. He was indicted for stealing research monies (as you noted), not research fraud. And yes, he is a criminal.

Santosg wrote:By that same token, we would use Thorsen to 'debunk' the vaccine safety argument.

So let’s check the logic in that token:

1. If the CDC and the government are involved in the big global conspiracy to conceal a link between vaccines and autism, and Thorsen is a player in this plan, then why would the CDC expose him and the government indict him?

2. Have you ever seen anyone (pro-vaccine or otherwise) defend Thorsen? Or indicate that he is being unjustly persecuted in order to bolster their argument? No, you haven’t.

3. Have you ever seen anyone defend Wakefield? Or indicate that he is being unjustly persecuted, in order to bolster their argument? Yes, you have. ;)


Santosg wrote:Wakefield deserves a voice because he helps to keep the fire to the vaccine manufacturers, to increase oversight politically of the entire process. Hell, just on the basis of free speech

Wakefield has done A LOT more damage than good to the cause he pretends to champion. Perhaps that realization is the reason De Niro pulled Wakefield’s film. Asking questions and gathering accurate information about vaccines (or anything else) are good things – Wakefield’s ongoing self-serving nonsense is not.

As far as “free speech” and similar accusations of “censorship” I’ve seen -- it’s a film festival. Films not chosen (or cancelled) do not constitute a denial of free speech or censorship.

Wakefield is free to post his manufactured propaganda anywhere he chooses – as he has done in the past. If he really wants to get this message out to the masses, he can post it on youtube. Everyone can watch for free. As often as they like. :)

You are a smart guy Santos – and you are right to question. But you are way too smart to just accept what you read on conspiracy sites.
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

Jupiter
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Jupiter » Wed Mar 30, 2016 10:30 am

Image

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Wed Mar 30, 2016 5:45 pm

monkeyman wrote:I also find the idea of blindly trusting government “just because” laughable. Hypothetically, even if the CDC discovered or produced strong evidence that vaccines did cause problems in a percentage of kids, I doubt they would publicly acknowledge it. To do so would be to admit that they were wrong for years and destroy public faith in them, which is exactly what they need to continue to be able to tell people how to make medical decisions.

So who is blindly trusting?

The conspiracy mongers and profiteers who spread misinformation about autism causation and treatment are nothing new – the only thing new here are parents who are new to autism (like you).

For over a decade the people involved with outlets like Age of Autism and Generation Rescue have been obsessed with manufacturing vaccine causation and promoting misinformation and quackery in the treatment of autism. Age of Autism has dissolved into being a lot less about autism and a lot more about vaccine misinformation.

And enlisting a dimbulb congressman, willing to grandstand for votes and contributions, who will parade a quack to testify before congress, without checking any facts, is nothing new either.

Let’s step back in time and see how those you trust and quote for the “truth” have served parents and children with autism with truth and credible information. This time around it is J.B. Handley (founder of Generation Rescue and contributor to Age of Autism), Congressman Dan Burton, and Rashid Buttar (promoted by Handley, Gen Rescue, Age of Autism, and Burton), eleven years ago.

I will copy and paste some of this from a previous forum thread concerning later research on Transdermal DMPS not being TD at all (TD DMPS was Buttar’s magic potion @ $180 per bottle):

Generation Rescue promoted Buttar, and JB Handley (founder, Generation Rescue) declared (with authority!), among other falsehoods, that TD-DMPS drops would cure a child of autism is less than two years (watch for yourself on this NBC news broadcast -- youtube -- here):

J.B. Handley says:

Autism is a misdiagnosis for mercury poisoning. If you line up 100 symptoms of mercury poisoning and 100 symptoms of autism, they are exactly the same.

So rather than go down the path of ABA or other developmental therapies, we focused on getting the mercury out of his body.

We put drops on our son’s skin every other day. The drops go into his bloodstream and bind to heavy metals and pull the heavy metals out of his body.

You get the mercury out, you get your child back.


This is mercury poisoning -- the whole thing -- autism -- adhd – they are all the same thing.

And by the way, the reason that it is 80% boys -- testosterone is a synergistic toxin with mercury it accelerates the toxicity.

(Interviewer)Now, the therapy that you’re using, is this going to have to continue for the rest of his life?

Absolutely not -- Its at maximum, a 2 year process, probably less…once the metals come out .. which we measure every month -- we’re done, we get our son back. And I know hundreds of parents whose children are completely recovered (interviewer: 100%?) Absolutely! Neurotypical -- no different from their peer group.

The whole notion of autism is mythical. It didn’t exist before thimerosal in vaccines.

ALL these children, every single one, is heavy metal poisoned.


And Congressman Dan Burton (Representative -- Indiana), who has an autistic grandson, paraded Buttar in front of a congressional committee to testify. Yes, a congressional committee actually received autism cause and cure information from Rashid Buttar. Dan Burton, bless his heart, is apparently not capable of verifying even basic information (even with a tax-payer sponsored staff).

If Dan Burton could possibly be further duped and do more to promote this quackery – he was and did. Burton and Diane Watson nominated Buttar for the “National Institute of Health Director’s Pioneer Award.” I guess neither he nor Watson ever bothered to check Buttar’s credentials or claims – the nomination, in its full nonsensical glory, as per Burton and Watson, can be viewed here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20061006185709/http://www.hyperbaricmedicalassociation.org/docs/NIH_Directors_Buttar.pdf

"It is with great pleasure and enthusiasm that we take this opportunity to nominate Dr. (Buttar), one of the most accomplished and clinically successful physicians in the United States, for the NIH's Director's Pioneer Award."

"He was able to prove that regardless of the manifestations of children with neurological delays such as autism and PDD (Pervasive Developmental Delay), all these children show the same commonality regarding the inability to process and eliminate mercury."

"Dr. (Buttar's) unique applications and methods to treat mercury toxicity in very young children has been conclusively shown ..."

"If identified and corrected within the first 9 to 10 years of life, Dr. (Buttar) has been able to demonstrate conclusive evidence of the entire pathology being reversed with almost 100% resolution."

"He has shown that regardless of the original cause of mercury toxicity, he can treat and rehabilitate this component of our future generation"


Unfortunately, nothing about J.B's yarn, Buttar's cure, or Burton's promotion was true. But it didn’t stop parents from clinging to J.B. Handley’s proclamations and swearing in their own online testimonials that their child was “recovering” with Buttar’s magic drops, even on this forum, and using Burton's support for both as proof of cred.

The current CONSPIRACY! outcry is just more of the same – same personalities and players promoting and benefiting from the show – Age of Autism, Gen Rescue, Wakefield, and a congressman (now Posey) who just reads the script without checking the facts. And of course parents looking for reasons and cures – bitter ones who want to prove they were “right” all these years, and parents new to the scene who don’t know the history and just accept the info they trip across on these conspiracy sites.

So if you are wondering why none of these clowns have any cred with legitimate researchers, legitimate autism experts, or legitimate news outlets, it's probably because they exposed their lack of credibility a long time ago and have just continued to damage themselves since.

I hope a congressional hearing will be held soon – every time their ginned-up manufactured claims have been dragged into the clear light of a hearing focused on actual evidence, the “truth” of their claims collapses. Unfortunately, no amount of evidence will ever satisfy the conspiracy-mongers -- they are focused on ginning up cherry-picked junk to confirm their beliefs, not finding the truth. Their children with autism are teenagers now -- they need to move on causes that will actually benefit their children as they transition into adulthood.

I just don’t understand why they aren’t angry with the people who duped them with false causation and cure claims, because it’s the same people who continue to dupe (and profit from) them now.

:?:
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

Santosg
Posts: 196
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 5:33 am

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Santosg » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:59 pm

Sorry for my late reply, I've been sick as a dog recently.

There are lot of elements in your response.

The only real question regarding Wakefield is whether he falsified data or not. I was not familiar with the accusation that he falsified the data he was using in his argument. If that is the case, I don't make an excuse for his behavior.

Even to the question of the data that was used by Wakefield to identify a new form of autistic bowel disorder, you find, per the BMJ article, there were abnormalities in the samples. The fact that they don't fit the standard criteria of colitis is almost beside the point, as these children obviously had significant bowel issues.

My son had two 24 hour eeg's performed. Both have come back as 'normal.' But it doesn't take a genius to know that his brain is operating far from 'normal.' My point is that you can actually find abnormalities within a test but, provided that they fall below a specific threshold, are still classified as normal.

The standard histopathological criteria of colitis no more rules out that these children had a bowel disorder than a normal eeg rules out the that my son has autism. There are massive gaps in these tests. That's not to say that Wakefield did not falstify data, but I think one has to be measured in how much the final report can be used to dismiss his findings.

There is now a lot of evidence that a subset of autistic children have significant digestive/bowel issues. Wakefield was, again, one of the first to investigate this.

The real controversy regarding Wakefield is 1) that he linked bowel disorders with autism, 2) that he linked bowel disorders with MMR shot, and 3) linked the MMR shot with autism.

Can vaccines actual cause bowel disorders? Apparently, some can. The rotavirus vaccine has been linked directy to causing a bowel disorder.

Rotavirus Vaccine Linked to Bowel Disorder
http://www.webmd.com/children/vaccines/ ... l-disorder

The biggest omission by the pro-vaccine crowd is that they argue that vaccines are safe, end of discussion. The value of vaccines rest on their ability to prevent deaths on a large scale. Vaccine experts know that a percentage of people die or are injured directly as a result of vaccination. As you'll see in the above linked article, the rotavirus treated as a 'winner' because is prevents hospitalization far more than it causes complications. But complications do arise and, some cases, death.

It is remarkable that pharmaceutical companies are legally protected from lawsuits caused by vaccines. You literally cannot sue a vaccine manufacturer. Vaccine makers have legal immunity from prosecution, including from 'design defects' (be it harmful additives or harmful side effects) in the vaccines themselves.

As Monkeyman stated in terms of aspirin, non-trivial number of people die from what is seen as a harmless--in fact, beneficial--over the counter drug. Another OTC drug, acetaminophen, is also linked to autism but regularly suggested by pediatricians to parents to treat fevers.

Beyond the efficacy of vaccines, there is the secondary issue regarding the safety of the additives in vaccines. As I stated in my previous post, the issue of the safety of the additives in vaccines have not been questioned by Wakefield alone.

The logic of the pro-vaccine faction goes something like this:

Wakefield said vaccines are unsafe
Wakefield is a liar
Therefore, vaccines are safe.

I don't think that such a leap in logic is warranted.

There is little hard scientific data regarding relationship of vaccines and their effects on the body. I know there was a primate study that showed a relationship of vaccines to autism in phase 1, but did not show a relationship in phase 2. However, even in phase 2, it did show there were significant brain differences between unvaccinated vs vaccinated primates.

Unlike you, I can't dismiss entirely the myriad anecdotal reports of parents that feel that vaccines triggered autism. Certainly, some of them might be deluded, but all of them?

Sure, Buttar can be used to undermine chelation, but that's beside the point. Many parents have reported benefits from chelation. Are all of these parents simple delusional fools? I place a lot of weight on anecdotal information for autism. First, there are many areas that won't be investigated through double-blind, placebo controlled studies for years--or ever. There was a study that Rick Neubrander posted recently showing benefit from B12 shots. Of course, many parents have reported such benefit for years on this forum. They didn't weight for a formal study to be conducted. In our case, I find it better to experiment a bit, try different approaches, always altering and fine tuning the intervention I develop for my child.

Chelation has been a big help. So has the MB12 shot, particularly when I went to administering it daily.

Lastly, on the basis of sheer published data, there is no evidence that something like chelation does not help. The few reports that have been published in the scientific literature were positive in their results. They were finally going to do a study to test the benefits of chelation on a large population of autistic children, the study was shut down. It did not prevent parents from chelating their children, but it did prevent us from actually getting hard data on how it might be benefiting them.

In terms of Wakefield, I don't have enough information yet to decide to condemn the man. I definitely will be seeing his film when the opportunity arises. I do feel, though, that these issues are much wider and more complex than any single individual.

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:46 am

Santosg wrote:Sorry for my late reply, I've been sick as a dog recently.


Hope you are feeling better Santos. :)

I will get to this --
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Fri Apr 01, 2016 5:16 pm

Santosg wrote: The only real question regarding Wakefield is whether he falsified data or not. I was not familiar with the accusation that he falsified the data he was using in his argument. If that is the case, I don't make an excuse for his behavior.

That’s certainly not the only real question regarding Wakefield.


Santosg wrote:The standard histopathological criteria of colitis no more rules out that these children had a bowel disorder than a normal eeg rules out the that my son has autism. There are massive gaps in these tests. That's not to say that Wakefield did not falstify data, but I think one has to be measured in how much the final report can be used to dismiss his findings.

Well, he did. I can't agree that your eeg comparison explains this away. As it turns out, Wakefield did not identify a new form of autistic bowel disorder or link the MMR to autism. There have been a number of legitimate studies published since then – including a recent one I posted the other week concerning bowel disorders and autism.


Santosg wrote:Can vaccines actual cause bowel disorders? Apparently, some can. The rotavirus vaccine has been linked directy to causing a bowel disorder.

Rotavirus Vaccine Linked to Bowel Disorder
http://www.webmd.com/children/vaccines/ ... l-disorder

The biggest omission by the pro-vaccine crowd is that they argue that vaccines are safe, end of discussion.

Not that your link has anything to do with autism, but note in your linked article that the agency involved in monitoring this safety and publishing this finding of bowel disorder is the CDC. And note that the FDA recalled a previous rotavirus vaccine. So if these agencies are involved in the big pro-vaccine cover-up, why are they publishing info about a bowel disorder and/or recalling vaccines?

“Safe” is a relative term – nothing is 100% safe. But serious adverse events are rare considering the millions of doses of vaccines that are administered each year. At least there is some oversight and regulation here – the same people screeching about vaccine safety often don’t think twice about administering some nutty substance to their child with no safety info whatsoever (things like OSR and MMS come to mind).


Santosg wrote:It is remarkable that pharmaceutical companies are legally protected from lawsuits caused by vaccines. You literally cannot sue a vaccine manufacturer. Vaccine makers have legal immunity from prosecution, including from 'design defects' (be it harmful additives or harmful side effects) in the vaccines themselves.

Actually that is not true. Parents who file a claim in vaccine court, but who do not prevail, may then sue the manufacturer. Vaccine court pays their attorney fees, regardless of whether or not they prevail, and the burden of proof in vaccine court is actually less than that required in a civil suit.


Santosg wrote:The logic of the pro-vaccine faction goes something like this:

Wakefield said vaccines are unsafe
Wakefield is a liar
Therefore, vaccines are safe.

I don't think that such a leap in logic is warranted.

I don’t either. And I don’t know of anyone who would use Wakefield’s dishonesty as a backhanded measure of vaccine safety. We obviously read in different places.


Santosg wrote:Unlike you, I can't dismiss entirely the myriad anecdotal reports of parents that feel that vaccines triggered autism. Certainly, some of them might be deluded, but all of them?

A lot of factors come into play here – including parental recall bias, to which we are all subject. I wouldn’t dismiss every anecdotal parent report, but I guess the best source of material regarding an examination of parental claims would be the Autism Omnibus hearings. The evidence just didn’t support the claims of the even the strongest cases/claimants, which were chosen by the plaintiff attorneys for the best likelihood of prevailing. Admittedly, it was easier to keep up with these cases as they unfolded in real time – going back through this information and testimony in retrospect would probably be a bit overwhelming.


Santosg wrote:Sure, Buttar can be used to undermine chelation, but that's beside the point. Many parents have reported benefits from chelation. Are all of these parents simple delusional fools?

Many, many parents reported amazing benefits from Buttar’s TD DMPS. Metals just pouring out. Lots of internet chatter about hundreds of children recovering (see J.B. Handley’s proclamation in my previous post). Julia Berle – whose son Baxter for years was the recovery poster child for Gen Rescue, DAN, etc, -- promoted this far and wide (just google). And then it is shown years later that TD DMPS isn’t TD and doesn’t even enter the bloodstream. So you tell me.


Santosg wrote: I place a lot of weight on anecdotal information for autism. First, there are many areas that won't be investigated through double-blind, placebo controlled studies for years--or ever. There was a study that Rick Neubrander posted recently showing benefit from B12 shots. Of course, many parents have reported such benefit for years on this forum.

Wait – but on your point of anecdotal information -- the parents of children in this study did not report a benefit – and that was on two measures (ABC and SRS). The investigators reported a benefit using the CGI-I, which takes less than five minutes to administer. I’m not sure how one could establish improvement in a child with autism who cannot answer questions in regard to his condition -- in less than 5 minutes -- but the full text is not open access. I’m not sure what to make of it – Rick didn’t respond on this point after it was raised on the thread.

So, even when some children show some improvements, do these improvements rise to the level of Neubrander’s hype? A lot of my angst is centered around the claims made about these treatments, and I have ragged Rick about this for years. Wonder what happened to the study mentioned in that link (Neubrander was involved as a consultant)? It was hyped while in progress (including on this forum), presented at IMFAR while in progress, but when completed and the results did not show significant improvement, it sorta just quietly disappeared. Why?


Santosg wrote:Chelation has been a big help. So has the MB12 shot, particularly when I went to administering it daily.

I hope your son continues to improve!


Santosg wrote:Lastly, on the basis of sheer published data, there is no evidence that something like chelation does not help.

There is no evidence that there aren’t fairies in the garden, either. But since there are thousands of reported sightings, we know fairies exist? C’mon Santos. ;)


Santosg wrote:The few reports that have been published in the scientific literature were positive in their results. They were finally going to do a study to test the benefits of chelation on a large population of autistic children, the study was shut down. It did not prevent parents from chelating their children, but it did prevent us from actually getting hard data on how it might be benefiting them.

There is nothing very compelling in anything published about chelation – and certainly nothing whatsoever to support wildly fantastic claims like Cutler’s – which is what attracts most parents in the first place. There may be some benefit of ALA or DMSA for some children – though I am of the opinion that this may be due to effects that have nothing to do with chelating mercury from the brain.

The cancelled chelation study was pulled due to safety concerns – a study involving rats showed that those without actual lead poisoning suffered neurological symptoms from the treatment. So we can’t subject healthy children to an experiment that could cause harm.


Santosg wrote:In terms of Wakefield, I don't have enough information yet to decide to condemn the man.

I can’t think of anything else to point you to – again, this was easier to keep up with as it unfolded over time -- going through accounts of the proceedings in the UK, his dishonesty and misrepresentation since that time, and other studies that flatly don’t support his theory, all in retrospect, is certainly time-consuming.

And when someone has commits Wakefield’s word into to their belief system, there isn’t any amount of evidence that will change their mind. This would be like trying to convince someone their religion is wrong with a factual argument – it’s futile.


Santosg wrote:I definitely will be seeing his film when the opportunity arises. I do feel, though, that these issues are much wider and more complex than any single individual.

Wakefield didn’t even make it through the film trailer without being dishonest – he spliced comments to make it appear something was said that wasn’t. I expect the remainder of the film will be similarly dishonest with similar sleight of hand. But he will be happy to sell you a ticket. ;)

Ask yourself why Wakefield never released the transcripts he claims are so damning – he could have done so over a year ago. I think it is because he wanted to shield these from scrutiny – every time his claims are dragged into the clear light of day his dishonesty is exposed. So instead he could spin the facts any way he liked and make himself the hero of a dramatic “bombshell” video. Still profiting from his following who just believe without checking. Gen Rescue, AutismOne, Age of Autism, Thinking Moms Revolution – the same groups and bad sources of info, who back up any kooky thing (like Kerri Rivera and so many others) – will disseminate Wakefield’s nonsense far and wide.

Matt Carey, also the dad of a child with autism, requested the documents from Posey. You can read some commentary – and even follow links to the actual documents if you wish – here:

http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2016/01/04/the-william-thompson-documents-theres-no-whistle-to-blow/

Out of curiosity I would watch Wakefield's film – but I certainly won’t pay to watch it. I’m actually more interested in a congressional hearing to pull all of this into the clear light of day.
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

dgdavis64
Posts: 5241
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:51 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby dgdavis64 » Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:27 pm

Oh goodness ... to argue it's easier to be brainwashed by the true facts than the corrupt mainstream media pharma jackholes ... silly.

Here is the entire Lancet paper account from the parents point of view who, by the way never made a single compliant against Dr Wakefield. They contacted him seeking help for their sick children who were failing to thrive. Just look at Jonathan Edwards and how sick he was...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeMw23aCczw
Last edited by dgdavis64 on Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Beware of the pharma trollbot shills posting from anonymous proxy servers

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:59 pm

dgdavis64 wrote:Oh goodness ... to argue it's easier to be brainwashed by the true facts than the corrupt mainstream media pharma jackholes ... silly.

Here is the entire Lancet paper account from the parents point of view who, by the way never made a single compliant against Dr Wakefield. They contacted him seeking help fir their sick children who were failing to thrive. Just look at Jonathan Edwards and how sick he was...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeMw23aCczw


Since Wakefield was hired by their attorney to find a vaccine link so they could sue, it's no big surprise that they didn't complain about him. Not that that is relevant anyway.

Speaking of personal injury suits -- how are yours going? Did you ever find an attorney to take your cases (or lack thereof) after the one you hired for vaccine court severed his relationship with you?
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

dgdavis64
Posts: 5241
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:51 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby dgdavis64 » Fri Apr 01, 2016 11:00 pm

Where does it say Wakefield was hired by their attorney? Even if this is true, so what? What other options or recourse would you suggest for their situation? You don't think attorney's hire experts routinely all over the world to prove their cases? You don't think children who have been almost killed and injured for the rest of their entire lives should be compensated taking one for the 'ol herd?

Civil litigation is very expensive and not many already financially strapped families of vaccine injured children with "autism" can afford to go that route, which the Vaccine court is counting on, at least where autism is concerned. So don't make it sound like all there is to do is file a claim, it's much more complicated than that.

Beware of the pharma trollbot shills posting from anonymous proxy servers

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Fri Apr 01, 2016 11:40 pm

dgdavis64 wrote:Where does it say Wakefield was hired by their attorney? Even if this is true, so what? What other options or recourse would you suggest for their situation? You don't think attorney's hire experts routinely all over the world to prove their cases?


Are. you. kidding.

You have been vomiting your Wakefield defense all over the internet for years and years, and all this time you are not even familiar with the basics of Wakefield's case?

Wait! Why am I surprised?

But thanks for demonstrating my point about the anti-vaccine howlers and Wakefield followers in the conspiracy camp. They are not very reliable sources of information, and not very handy with actual facts, either.

dg, accepting money from an attorney to stage a study designed to prove/win his case is a no-no. This is not the same thing as an expert witness. I hope you don't need a more detailed explanation to grasp that.

Let me help you locate the pertinent info:

ANDREW WAKEFIELD, the former surgeon whose campaign linking the MMR vaccine with autism caused a collapse in immunisation rates, was paid more than £400,000 by lawyers trying to prove that the vaccine was unsafe.

The payments, unearthed by The Sunday Times, were part of £3.4m distributed from the legal aid fund to doctors and scientists who had been recruited to support a now failed lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers.

Critics this weekend voiced amazement at the sums, which they said created a clear conflict of interest and were the “financial engine” behind a worldwide alarm over the triple measles, mumps and rubella shot.

“These figures are astonishing,” said Dr Evan Harris, Liberal Democrat MP for Oxford West and Abingdon.

“This lawsuit was an industry, and an industry peddling what turned out to be a myth.”

According to the figures, released under the Freedom of Information Act, Wakefield was paid £435,643 in fees, plus £3,910 expenses.

Wakefield’s work for the lawyers began two years before he published his now notorious report in The Lancet medical journal in February 1998, proposing a link between the vaccine and autism.

This suggestion, followed by a campaign led by Wakefield, caused immunisation rates to slump from 92% to 78.9%, although they have since partly recovered. In March this year the first British child in 14 years died from measles.

Later The Lancet retracted Wakefield’s claim and apologised after a Sunday Times investigation showed that his research had been backed with £55,000 from lawyers, and that the children in the study used as evidence against the vaccine were also claimants in the lawsuit.

At the time Wakefield denied any conflict of interest and said that the money went to his hospital, not to him personally. No disclosure was made, however, of the vastly greater sums that he was receiving directly from the lawyers.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/article56794.ece



dgdavis64 wrote:Civil litigation is very expensive and not many already financially strapped families of vaccine injured children with "autism" can afford to go that route, which the Vaccine court is counting on, at least where autism is concerned. So don't make it sound like all there is to do is file a claim, it's much more complicated than that.

Yes, I would imagine having an actual case to take forward would be helpful. Luckily the vaccine court paid your attorney fees anyway. Just claiming that vaccines caused your kids' autism probably won't be enough to convince a contingent-fee attorney to take this to civil court.
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

Mouse
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2015 10:46 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Mouse » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:34 am

I wish DeNiro didn't cave. We needed this conversation. Hiding Wakefield only gives the vaccine safety crowd more reason to distrust the media.

Winnie
Posts: 4227
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:48 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby Winnie » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:12 pm

Mouse wrote:I wish DeNiro didn't cave. We needed this conversation. Hiding Wakefield only gives the vaccine safety crowd more reason to distrust the media.


uh, you do realize that Tribeca is not a television program, right? Or a media news outlet?

It appears that Wakefield is the one hiding his video and the Thompson documents from you. Wakefield is free to share his video anywhere -- just like he has done in online venues the past.

That's what the holocaust-denial nutters do to get the word out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlBA2zp992c
Winnie
"Make it a powerful memory, the happiest you can remember."

dgdavis64
Posts: 5241
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 11:51 pm

Re: Robert DeNiro and the drama of the Tribeca Film Festival

Postby dgdavis64 » Sat Apr 02, 2016 1:51 pm

Straight from the deceiver Brian Deer himself who lied about his identity to obtain confidential medical information about the sick Lancet cohort kids?

Starts off with a lie here
...whose campaign linking the MMR vaccine with autism
The Lancet paper did not even say this.

And look at the contradictions in this few paragraphs... which is it?

According to the figures, released under the Freedom of Information Act, Wakefield was paid £435,643 in fees, plus £3,910 expenses.


or this?

Later The Lancet retracted Wakefield’s claim and apologised after a Sunday Times investigation showed that his research had been backed with £55,000 from lawyers


Who knows?

And where are all the other "doctors and scientists?" Did they have General Medical Council hearings and lose their medical licenses also?

Beware of the pharma trollbot shills posting from anonymous proxy servers


Return to “Autism Articles, Studies & Politics”