scientists identify genetic causes of autism

[elportodelgato]

story here from the Guardian

lots of people on here already know my views so just opening this up for comment. Does this research change anyone's opinion re: MMR?

pssst Eartworm - don't need to buy the book - Leonie is transcribing it page by page Save yourself a few quid

Leonie, he spent two years prevaricating in the libel case. The judge pointed out that he didn't seem like someone in any rush to clear his name, that he just wanted the advantage of having a libel case, so he could threaten anyone else who printed anything wakefield didn't like (which he did) without actually resolving the case.

earthworm you are right that things like the patent and Justice Eady's Judgement

" It thus appears that the Claimant wishes to use the existence of the libel proceedings for public relations purposes, and to deter other critics, while at the same time isolating himself from the ?downside? of such litigation, in having to answer a substantial defence of justification. Tactics of that kind would militate against the granting of a stay."

I suspect there is far more truth about the whole saga than any book written in self interest that Leonie wants to quote from..

Sassy- I don't know why not, I do know as someone studying asd I wouldn't touch wakefield with a bargepole wretr to rpojecxts and dissertations. It's too much of an issue with polarised people on both sides and a huge stigma now.

maybe it is that simple?

OnEdge- research into whether there is a link between the subgroup and bowel damage might be a start? I can't even get a GP to investigate poor ds1's gut issues.

Oh and good luck with the SENDIST appeals hguys.

Our senco went to teh LEA offices to find out why we'd not ehard about ds1's review (applciation for SNU place at comp and extra 5 hours to cover nreaktimes)- found most staff off sick and appeals / statements literally lining the room unread! Ridiculous. The LEA hadn't even opened the envelope.

Does anyone know much about movement between govt depts, health jobs etc and pharma?

"research into whether there is a link between the subgroup and bowel damage might be a start?"

But if the sub group was defined as being children who had been exposed to a law firm looking for business in a very profit maximising way, how would that help resolve a scientific question

Of course not Cyber

Look, the only research that will change vaccination outcomes (which is what I presume people want?) is a study of alink between the subgroup and MMR. Whether people poo-poo that or not that's a simple truth: if it is vaccination rises people want that's all that will cut it.

However, as a parent who has a child with quite painful gut issues I would like to see some study into the suggested subgroup: as someone who is very invovled with ASD I see a lot of people who seem to be in that group, yet you go to a GP and they just go 'oh it's stress' or prety much ignopre you.

That needs addressing too.

People need to be clear on what their desired outcome ehre is: for me, it's not vindication of Wakefuield- that's a pointless toad to follow and he has the appeals system should he choose.

The potential outsoinme is a rise in mmr and there's only one route that will work for that.

I know what won't work though: calling people whoa re concerned names, comments about silver foil hats, rejecting concerns. That just puts any aprents into a group that looks as if it is being targetted and reinforces peoples concerns.

But presumably all the vaccine soap opera is what has put people off taking your ds's problems seriously? My nephew had some minor bowel problems as a young child but it all got investigated and resolved.

Presumably it is Cyber. Can't undo that though. And research is the only way to move forwards.

It all sounds utterly compelling Leonie, and all backed up by pages of footnotes to prove its all true!

He will have no trouble whatsoever appealing against the GMC verdict, pursuing a libel case AND suing Brian Deer.

Furthermore, his complete vindication will allow serious scientists to step up to the plate and prove the legitimacy of his research once and for all.

It is a celebratory day for his supporters, that's for sure.

I wonder when he'll start the ball rolling on all of that?

"well of course you're gonna say it was written in self interest... i say he wrote it to set the facts straight.

He said in the book he didnt have the finances to pursue libel."

That is strange in itself as the libel case was financed by the Medical Protection Society.

He wasted two years of a libel case. The judge himself stated that if wakefield had acted properly in the libel case it would have been over and done with.

I know these ten minute consultations with gps are not ideal but I suppose you just have to keep asking if there is anything that can be done. There seems to be a lot of gut bacteria research going on which is a good thing

Cyber, why this insistence, bordering on the offensive at times, that there is NOT a group of children who, post mmr, started showing serious symptoms of bowel disorder? The pace paper, which describesthese symptoms, and the children's history (and that isall it does, after all) has not ever been challenged. Wakefield's biggest detractors say the paper was good science, which still stands. If there was any doubt about the existrnce of the bowel disease found, do you thinly they would have said that? They had theory chance to completely destroy the hypothesis right there and then, and they praised it, and said it was am excellent case series - odd, no?

And for the record, NONE of the original 12 were involved in litigation at the time of their referral to wakefield - they were NOT introduced via lawyers, they were referred on to a highly respected gastroenterologist due to GI issues, who carried out clinical investigations, along with an experienced air respected team, and found a new type of bowel disease. Why do you keep denying this group exists?