Showing posts with label Poling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Poling. Show all posts

Monday, March 10, 2008

Features of Autism Spectrum Disorder



Of our two kids, one is on the autism spectrum. So I'm not surprised when I come home and see toys lined up as in the above picture, as people often write that such things are common. In retrospect, I also shouldn't be surprised that the same child that lined those toys up also had a lot of GI issues as a baby, likes to hide under tables at times, and is somewhat hyperactive. We have also had a lot of problems with toe walking, to the point of having to put leg casts on for several months. Even though not all of these things are listed in the DSM-IV, many children on the spectrum have these same issues, so it shouldn't be surprising that my child displays these features.

Except for the fact that the child I'm referencing above is my younger one, Sweet Pea, who is most definitely not autistic.

Sweet Pea is one of the most social kids in her class, and would never qualify for an autism diagnosis.

Recently, in the Poling case, the Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation decided

In sum, DVIC has concluded that the facts of this case meet the statutory criteria for demonstrating that the vaccinations CHILD received on July 19, 2000, significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder.


Many people say that this document says that the government admits that vaccines cause autism. Rather than focusing on what Hannah Poling primarily has (mitochondrial disease), many have focused on the phrase "features of autism spectrum disorder".

Having never met Hannah Poling, I'm not sure if she is on the autism spectrum. It is entirely possible that she is. If one out of 150 individuals are, then it makes sense that at least one out of every 150 individuals with mitochondrial disease is also autistic, independent of their mito disease (I know, there may be more, but I'm talking independent of their mito disease, not linked to it). But the court document doesn't say Hannah is autistic, just that she displays "features of autism spectrum disorder". And someone looking at certain aspects of Sweet Pea's behavior and condition might decide that she had "features of autism spectrum disorder" too, which I know is totally false.

Saturday, March 8, 2008

In Case There Was Any Doubt

There are a lot of interviews out there with the Polings, following the announcement that the Vaccine Injury Compensation program had ruled in their favor. One of them I saw was over at ABC News.

Two things struck me when I viewed the video that's up in the upper right corner on that page. The first is "What's their lawyer doing with them?" I mean, the decision is already in, and this is a civil case, not a criminal case. Were they afraid that they would say something incriminating? Or were they afraid that they would say something that would jeopardize the amount of the pending settlement?

So then I looked up the lawyer. The lawyer is Cliff Shoemaker, who is no stranger to vaccine litigation. As it says on his website,

"Today, Cliff is one of the lawyers focusing his attention on the national disaster that occurred in the 90's when we poisoned a substantial number of our children with mercury, creating an autism epidemic."


Cliff was also evidently the lead attorney for CoMed (Lisa Sykes) in suing the FDA to get mercury out of vaccines.

The other thing that struck me about that ABC interview was that the father, Dr. Jon Poling, referred to the head of the CDC, Dr. Julie Gerberding, as "Ms. Gerberding" when there's about 3:30 left in the video. Now it may have just been a slip of the tongue on his part, but I find it hard to believe that a doctor would not know that the head of the CDC was a physician (who also holds a Master's in Public Health). And I also find it hard to believe that a doctor would not use a fellow physician's title when referring to her. Unless of course he was trying to purposely make her seem less knowledgeable and important. I mean, after seeing over at Kristina Chew's site that Jenny McCarthy is calling for the immediate resignation of Julie Gerberding as the head of the CDC, I started to wonder. If I was a conspiracy theorist, I might think that the Polings were coordinating with the Age of Autism folks to try and get Gerberding removed.

Meanwhile, Lenora pointed out in a comment to my last post that Dr. Poling gave an interview over at WebMD that didn't seem to jive with the press conferences.

Indeed, in that interview Poling says both

"I don't think the case should scare people," says Poling, 37, who emphasizes that vaccines, like all of medicine, carry risks and benefits.


as well as

"Vaccines are one of the most important, if not the most important advance, in medicine in at least the past 100 years. But I don't think that vaccines should enjoy a sacred cow status, where if you attack them you are out of mainline medicine."

"Every treatment has a risk and a benefit. To say there are no risks to any treatment is not true.''

"Sometimes people are injured by a vaccine, but they are safe for the majority of people. I could say that with a clean conscience. But I couldn't say that vaccines are absolutely safe, that they are not linked to brain injury and they are not linked to autism."


This interview seems to be a "face saving" attempt by Dr. Poling with the mainstream medical community. A way for him to say that he knows that there is no science behind the court decision, but that he didn't need science, just a little doubt. The WebMD quotes are clearly different from his media interviews, where he emphasizes that he feels strongly that there are thousands of other cases just like his. Statements that will certainly scare people away from vaccination.

I find it hard to comprehend why a physician could (rightly) admit that there are risks to every procedure or treatment, and then feel entitled to payment when something happens. Has he bought into the theory that every bad outcome needs to be compensated? I hope he isn't too disappointed when patients start sueing him for every bad outcome that happens to them, whether it was his fault or not.

My parents used to criticize me hanging out with certain kids because they weren't good kids. They rightly told me that I would be judged by the company I keep.

Well, Dr. Poling, I think you're going to be judged by the company you keep, as well as all the comments you make. A little backsliding on a medical site won't make up for the fear mongering and atrocious statements not backed up by science that you make to the media, or the fact that you are hanging out with people who hold views that are not supported by any science at all.

Friday, March 7, 2008

It's Not Our Fault!!


photo credit-eatmeatnow
creative commons license


Thanks to S.L. for putting up a link to the Poling news conference on the CNN website.

Kristina Chew has detailed this case (the case that some claim links vaccines to autism, but most see no such "concession" by the government) here and here.

As I watched the news conference, I became increasingly frustrated, and then angry. You have this high power couple (he a neurologist, she a nurse turned lawyer) who obviously aren't hurting for money. Even if they haven't made it big yet, they certainly would have been able to provide for their daughter (as well as their two other kids) without the government settlement. So why did they feel compelled to go forward with this case? One thought kept coming back to me. I could almost here mom say,

"We've been cheated!"

"We had a nice, NORMAL, daughter. We were supposed to have a summer house on the Outer Banks, ski in Colorado every year, and in general be a power couple". Now mom didn't really say those things, but that's what I understood her meaning to be.

The mother did say "Hannah needs constant one on one supervision" and "My husband's heart broke when he realized his daughter might have autism". Meanwhile, the camera pans over to show a cute, well behaved 9 year old interacting with two people over on the side. And I can't help but feel sorry for this girl, who will grow up with the story that she was "damaged" by vaccines, but the parents got the evil government to pay. How she was "normal" before this (despite her genetic mitochondrial disorder-which the parents never mention), but now she is damaged goods. Supposedly mom (Terry Poling) also has a mitochondrial disorder, but has no outward signs.

Maybe mom feels guilty about "causing" her daughter's "autism", and wants to make sure that no one in their circle of friends will blame her. Perhaps she's thinking, "The government admitted it! They're the ones that did this to us! We're just like you, really we are."

I find this rather sad.

The money from the government will assist the Polings in keeping up the lifestyle they feel entitled to. They can point to the government case to "prove" that they are truly a "normal" power couple who were done wrong by their own government. And poor Hannah will always be identified within the family as "damaged goods", because that's the only way that mom and dad can keep up the pretense that everything is fine.

Meanwhile, they obviously have no concern regarding the effects on public health in this country. When the next pertussis or measles outbreak occurs because of them parroting the nonsense that vaccines cause autism (which will certainly further decrease vaccination rates in this country), will they feel the least bit guilty? Or will mom look to "help" those moms who lost their kids to vaccine preventable diseases by becoming the lawyer that encourages those parents to sue the government, too?

Here's my unsolicited advice to the Polings:

OK, you pulled it off. You managed to tap into the financial largess of the US government (which means the rest of us are paying for this). Once you get your check, do us all a favor (especially yourselves) and just stop talking about this. Because I know that you'll never publicly admit that you were wrong, that Hannah had a genetic disease that something was bound to aggravate, and it just happened to be a fever that may have been caused by vaccination, but nobody really knows.

And I know that if you get stuck in the "pity party" and blaming others that you'll never come to truly accept and love Hannah as she is. You may think that trying to constantly trying to "fix" your daughter is the best thing you can do for her, but she will tell you later how devastated she was that you never accepted her for being her. Let go of the anger you feel, or it will disintegrate your family. The rest of us will take the extra 5 years to undo the damage you've done, and educate the American public that vaccines really don't cause autism. Just take the money and go away.

-------------------------
Addendum: Three other posts that give great background on this are Steve's, Emily's, and S.L.'s.