A new breed of drug pusher...

The Washington Post this morning has an article on more American kids being prescribed psychiatric drugs. According to the report, a recent University of Maryland study "found that by 1996, more than 6 percent of children were taking drugs such as Prozac, Ritalin and Risperdal, and the researchers said the trajectory continued to rise through 2000."

The study looked at the medical records of 900,000 children either enrolled in Medicaid or a private HMO. There are a number of troubling aspects of this issue, most of which are discussed in the article, such as the lack of research on the long-term effects of these drugs on developing children and increased marketing by pharmaceuticals towards this age group. Also discussed was the possibility that these drugs are being prescribed because they are viewed as less expensive than other methods of treatment, such as counseling or other therapy. Particularly worrisome is the higher prescription rates among lower incomes; "Such powerful medications, normally meant to treat schizophrenia, were increasingly being prescribed to children on Medicaid, said the study's lead author, Julie Zito -- possibly as a way to restrain difficult children."

Although the Post article focuses on the use of these meds to treat psychiatric problems, they seem to miss the fact that many of these drugs, Prozac, Ritalin and Risperdal in particular, are now widely used to treat neurodevelopmental diseases, such as ADHD and autism. And while Risperdal in particular has recently shown promise in use by autistic children, its main benefit was to help them to learn better. But Risperdal also is known to have very serious lifelong side-effects, and no long-term studies have been done in children.

The only proven effective treatment for children with autism and other developmental disorders is Applied Behavioral Analysis, or ABA. ABA is intensive, generally one-on-one therapy, which, according to Lovaas' studies in the 1980s essentially "recovered" approximately 50% of its participants, and led to significant improvement in nearly the remaining 50%. ABA is the preferred therapy in many school districts around the US, including my own. Problem is, its very expensive, with per pupil costs generally surpassing $50K per year. Of course, in the long run its also cost effective, as 50% of its participants not only do not need the life-long care previously required for almost all individuals with autism, they are "indistinguishable from their peers", requiring few, if any, further special education assistance. But in the short run, in light of looming budget deficits, ABA seems a perfect target for the budget axe.

One would think that the safeguards incorporated in IDEA would protect students from such cuts. Currently, those protections are there, but often school districts, when given the choice between litigation and providing children expensive services, will forego the latter for the former, gambling on many American's reluctance to sue those they're supposed to trust, their children's school. In addition, proposed changes in IDEA by the Bush Administration could have a profound effect on the interpretation of IDEA , particularly by Bush's new federal bench. Its quite possible that the benchmarks used to ascertain "improvement" may be modified to favor those more easily accomplished by merely medicating, rather than actually teaching, our special needs children, and at a greatly reduced cost over methods such as ABA.

The big winners in all this are the pharmaceuticals, some currently under the IOM's microscope as possible culprits in the increase of neurodevelopmental disorders. The irony of it all.

So why is it the actor who plays the President acts more Presidential than the man appointed as President?

Actor Martin Sheen leads anti-war rally

AFP - US movie star Martin Sheen on Saturday led thousands of people in a rowdy protest march in Los Angeles against President George W Bush's plans for a possible war with Iraq.

Sheen, who plays a fictional US president on the hit television show The West Wing, called for Americans to fight for a peaceful approach to the Washington administration's crisis centring on Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

"A lot of people have been silenced for a long time but that is ending," he said.

"We are telling the world that we are patriotic Americans but we do not support going to war with Iraq.

"From this time forth, may all our thoughts and deeds be a non-violent response to violence," he told the cheering crowd.

Funny, I can actually picture him saying this, with his hands in his pockets, of course.

[link via Skippy]

(as a side note, I'd like to point out that nearly an equal number of Mainards came out to protest racism against Somalis yesterday)

Maybe the not-so-"liberal" media is finally getting a clue

This AP story has been picked up by a couple dozen news outlets in the past two hours. Certainly doesn't portray our Dr. Senator in the most positive light.

WASHINGTON -- Shortly after Sen. Bill Frist introduced legislation limiting suits against vaccine makers, the drug industry's trade group gave $10,000 to the surgeon-turned-politician's political action committee.

Throughout his political career, the new Senate majority leader has supported the health care industry and the industry has supported him.

Frist, R-Tenn., has raised more than $2 million from doctors, health insurers, drug companies and others in the health care industry. That's roughly 20 percent of all the contributions to his two Senate campaigns.

Here's the rest of the story.

Here's a novel approach to concealing racist intent:

Rep. Wayne Pettigrew wants the public to know that he’s after historical accuracy, not bringing up specters of a painful part of American history in his effort to have the Cherokee Brave Confederate flag flown at the [Oklahoma] state Capitol plaza.

However, one African-American lawmaker and a spokesman for the Cherokee Nation both question Pettigrew’s motives and historical accuracy....

Apparently, the only difference between the first National Flag of the Confederacy ("Stars and Bars") and the Cherokee Brave flag is the latter has five red stars in the center of a circle of white stars. And the words "Cherokee Brave" that Pettigrew wants to remove.

Read the whole article. The audacity of Pettigrew, who is not an Indian, is beyond description.

At least someone knows how to handle the Bushies

Winnebago Tribe gives BIA eviction notice

The Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska gave the Bureau of Indian Affairs a 30-day eviction notice Wednesday, claiming the bureau hasn't paid rent for five years.

"We have given BIA officials numerous opportunities to clear up their delinquency, but at some point enough is enough," said Winnebago Tribal Chairman John Blackhawk. "The BIA has simply got to get their act together if they expect to be taken seriously by tribal governments. Hopefully this will serve as a wake-up call to federal officials."...

"The BIA already has a long track record of financial irresponsibility," he said. "Clearly their fiscal affairs are a mess from top to bottom."

The tribe claims the BIA owes nearly $200,000 in unpaid rent on the building, where 30 BIA workers provide services to the Winnebago, Omaha and Santee reservations....

Wednesday, the tribe changed the building's locks and disconnected its electricity and phone service.

With a trillion dollar deficit looming if Bush gets his economic plan, can the American people do the same for the White House?

Bigotry and hope in a small New England city

When it comes to reporting the upcoming white-separatist and "Many & One" rallies in Lewiston today, Canadian media has its counterparts in the US beat.

The rallies start in less than an hour, with security the tightest its ever been for an event in Maine. My spouse and six-year old daughter left for the diversity rally at Bates College a few minutes ago, and I can't say that I didn't experience a bit of a twinge as they left. Its been speculated that due to World Church of the Creator grand-wizard (or whatever he calls himself) Matthew Hale's arrest earlier this week for soliciting the murder of a federal judge, the possibility for violence has increased exponentially. Various groups from outside of Maine have also rolled into Lewiston, vowing to confront the racists.

If the idea that racism and bigotry would find itself at home in lefty, crunchy Maine surprises anyone, a brief history lesson is in order. In the 1920s and 30s, Maine had the highest per capital membership in the KKK outside of the Deep South. With a membership of between 50-150,000 statewide, white knights and their families flocked to openly advertised meetings, picnics and "socials", including one in Portland which drew a crowd of upwards of 15,000. Ralph Owen Brewster was elected governor in 1924 with the open endorsement of the Klan, and a Klansman was elected mayor of Portland. I suspect my own home was built in 1914 by a Klansman, whose day job was the city tax assessor. That was the same time my Indian gr-grandparents were running a laundry in the West End, down the street from various other Klan members' homes, some built by the talented J.C. Stevens.

But how could this be, with Maine's African-American population of less than 1%? In Maine, however, the target of the Klan's wrath was not its black population, which frankly was experiencing internecine problems at the time between the long-standing middle-class freeman community, and new emigrants freed during the Civil War. Maine's Protestant Yankee bigotry was aimed at its large Franco-American and Indian communities (in the western half of the state, the two were often indistinguishable due to significant intermarriage.) Laws banning French in school and denial of state suffrage for Indians until the mid-1950s were largely the work of Klan members, most of whom never bothered to hide their identities behind hoods. Racial riots in Lewiston and Waterville were often provoked, and more than a few "wood niggers", as we were called, "went missing", only to be found in the Kennebec River or tied to a tree. My great-grandmother's uncle, a veteran of the highly decorated Maine 19th, was one such victim, prompting his remaining family to flee to the relative safety of Portland. But by the 1920s, even the city wasn't safe. My grandfather, who died only a few years ago at age 80, remembered clearly the taunts and physical blows he endured in the schoolyards of Portland. Some of those offending classmates, here and throughout Maine, including Lewiston, may be ancient but living, and the bigotry they heard around the kitchen table, or at the Klan picnic, passed from one generation to the next. Every once in a while it raises its ugly head, whether in the form of "concern" over Somali refugees or the rejection of protections for gays and lesbians.

We'll find out today at the rally just how deep Maine has buried its racist past. Hopefully, deep enough that the thousands of feet at the pro-diversity rally can tamp it down so we never see it spring forth again. My daughter's small feet are there to help do just that.

Hot off the presses...

I guess Wolf Blitzer's poll yesterday (75% for holding vaccine manufactures accountable) held some sway with the Mayberry Machiavellis. From Boston.com:

Vaccine makers' protection will be eliminated, Republicans say

WASHINGTON (AP) Republicans said Friday they would reverse several favors to special interests in the Homeland Security law, including a much-criticized provision to limit lawsuits against vaccine makers.

House and Senate Republicans said they also would get rid of a loophole under which companies that locate overseas to avoid paying taxes could still compete for agency contracts, and would revise language that gave one university, Texas A&M, special access to federal research money.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., who supported the original vaccine provision and said he still hopes to take up the issue later this year in more comprehensive legislation, said he would include the special interest eliminations in a fiscal 2003 spending bill the Senate will take up this month.

Get me some Kleenex:

Lilly, in a statement, said it was disappointed by the decision to repeal the vaccine provision but pleased by the promise to take up comprehensive vaccine legislation in the first half of 2003. It said there is no scientific evidence linking Thimerosal to autism.

Hmmmm...not exactly what the IOM says, but I'm open to debating it on its merits.

Kudos to Snowe, Collins and Chafee.

A wee bit of intrigue brewing...

From Yahoo News, regarding the Eli Lilly provision in the HLS bill:

[Sen. Patrick] Leahy on Tuesday joined Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) in introducing legislation that would repeal the provision enacted in November, which Stabenow said "takes away the legal rights of parents to protect their children." Reps. Tom Allen (D-ME) and Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) are introducing a House version of the bill.

Meanwhile, a second group of lawmakers is working on another approach, which would modify but not repeal the language in question. Just before the Senate passed the bill, Maine Republican Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, along with Lincoln Chafee (R-RI), threatened to block the bill until House and Senate GOP leaders promised them the language would be revisited in January.

A spokesman for Snowe said the senators have been working with Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), the incoming chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, on language that would clarify parents' ability to use the federal vaccine compensation program for thimerosal claims, even if their children's injuries occurred outside the normal three-year time limit.

Since I just got off the phone with Senator Snowe's office, I plan on withholding judgement until I see how the chips fall on this one. The Senator's healthcare staff have been very accomodating and gracious, and I only hope that she's able to stand her ground. In the meantime, keep calling and faxing those Senators, reminding them that as it currently stands, hundreds of thousands of kids are left out in the cold.

Know the Cause, Find the Cure Rally coverage

Today's blogging will cover yesterday's rally in Washington. But first, click on over to Wolf Blitzer's website at CNN to see his poll for the day: Should Americans be able to sue companies that make vaccines?

As of 7:30am EST, 72% of respondents said yes.

Here's the bill, S-105.

Ms. Stabenow introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on ___________________________. A BILL to repeal certain provisions of the Homeland Security Act (Public Law 107-296) relating to liability with respect to certain vaccines, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled,
3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF CERTAIN VACCINE LIABILITY PRO-
4 VISIONS
5 (a) IN GENERAL. ----The Homeland Security Act of
6 2002 (Public Law 107-296) is amended ---
7 (1) by repealing sections 1714, 1715, 1716, and
8 1717; and two
1 (2) in the table of contents, by striking the
2 items relating to sections 1714, 1715, 1716, and
3 1717.
4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE. --- This section shall take effect
5 as though enacted as part of the Homeland Security Act
6 of 2002 (Public Law 107-296).

The cosponsors of S-105, as of yesterday, are:

Sen Boxer, Barbara (D-CA)
Sen Daschle, Thomas A. (D-SD)
Sen Dayton, Mark - (D-MN)
Sen Dodd, Christopher J. (D-CT)
Sen Dorgan, Byron L. - (D-ND)
Sen Durbin, Richard J. - (D-IL)
Sen Feinstein, Dianne - (D-CA)
Sen Landrieu, Mary L. - (D-LA)
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. - (D-NJ)
Sen Leahy, Patrick J. - (D-VT)
Sen Levin, Carl - (D-MI)
Sen Sarbanes, Paul S. - (D-MD)

Below are the list of Democrats and moderate Republicans needed to pass Sen. Stabenow's bill. Please call and fax them requesting that they cosponsor the legislation. Faxing is most effective, as all faxes are logged.

Blanche Lincoln (D - AR) (202) 228-1371 (fax) (202) 224-4843 (phone)
Mark Pryor (D-AR) (202) 228-0908 fax (202) 224-2353 (phone)
John McCain (R - AZ) (202) 228-2862 (fax) (202) 224-2235 (phone)
Joseph Lieberman (D - CT) (202) 224-9750 (fax) (202) 224-4041 (phone)
Joseph Biden, Jr (D - DE) (202) 224-0139 (fax) (202) 224-5042 (phone)
Thomas Carper (D - DE) (202) 228-2190 (fax) (202) 224-2441 (phone)
Bob Graham (D - FL) (202) 224-2237 (fax) (202) 224-3041 (phone)
Bill Nelson (D - FL) (202) 228-2183 (fax) (202) 224-5274 (phone)
Zell Miller (D - GA) (202) 228-2090 (fax) (202) 224-3643 (phone)
Daniel Akaka (D - HI) (202) 224-2126 (fax) (202) 224-6361(phone)
Daniel Inouye (D - HI) (202) 224-6747 (fax) (202) 224-3934 (phone)
Tom Harkin (D - IA) (202) 224-9369 (fax) (202) 224-3254 (phone)
Evan Bayh (D - IN) (202) 228-1377 (fax) (202) 224-5623 phone)
John Breaux (D - LA) (202) 224-2435 (fax) (202) 224-4623 (phone)
Edward Kennedy (D - MA) (202) 224-2417 (fax) (202) 224-4543 (phone)
John Kerry (D - MA) (202) 224-8525 (fax) (202) 224-2742 (phone)
Barbara Mikulski (D - MD) (202)224-8858 (fax) (202) 224-4654 (phone)
Paul Sarbanes (D - MD) (202) 224-1651(fax) (202) 224-4524 (phone)
Susan Collins (R - ME) (202) 224-2693 (fax) (202) 224-2523 (phone)
Olympia Snowe (R - ME) (202) 224-1946 (fax) (202) 224-5344 (phone)
Max Baucus (D - MT) (202) 228-3687 (fax) (202) 224-2651 (phone)
John Edwards (D - NC) (202) 228-1374 (fax) (202) 224-3154 (phone)
Kent Conrad (D - ND) (202) 224-7776 (fax) (202) 224-2043 (phone)
Ben Nelson (D - NE) (202) 228-0012 (fax) (202) 224-6551 (phone)
Jon Corzine (D - NJ) (202) 228-2197 (fax) (202) 224-4744 (phone)
Jeff Bingaman (D - NM) (202) 224-2852 (fax) (202) 224-5521 (phone)
Harry Reid (D - NV) (202) 224-7327 (fax) (202) 224-3542 (phone)
Charles Schumer (D - NY) (202) 228-3027 (fax) (202) 224-6542 (phone)
Hillary Clinton (D - NY) (202) 228-0282 (fax) (202) 224-4451 (phone)
Ron Wyden (D - OR) (202) 228-2717 (fax) (202) 224-5244 (phone)
Arlen Specter (R - PA) (202) 228-1229 (fax) (202) 224-4254 (phone)
Lincoln Chafee (R - RI) (202) 228-2853 (fax) (202) 224-2921 (phone)
Jack Reed (D - RI) (202) 224-4680 (fax) (202) 224-4642 (phone)
Ernest Hollings (D - SC) (202) 224-4293 (fax) (202) 224-6121 (phone)
Thomas Daschle (D - SD) (202) 224-7895 (fax) (202) 224-2321 (phone)
Tim Johnson (D - SD) (202) 228-5765 (fax) (202) 224-5842 (phone)
Bill Frist (R - TN) (202) 228-1264 (fax) (202) 224-3344 (phone)
Jim Jeffords (I - VT) (202) 228-0776 (fax) (202) 224-5141 (phone)
Patty Murray (D - WA) (202) 224-0238 (fax) (202) 224-2621 (phone)
Maria Cantwell (D - WA) (202) 228-0514 (fax) (202) 224-3441 (phone)
Russell Feingold (D - WI) (202) 224-2725 (fax) (202) 224-5323 (phone)
Herb Kohl (D - WI) (202) 224-9787 (fax) (202) 224-5653 (phone)
Robert Byrd (D - WV) (202) 228-0002 (fax) (202) 224-3954 (phone)
John Rockefeller IV (D - WV) (202) 224-7665 (fax) (202) 224-6472 (phone)

Buried in the middle of those numbers are those for the Senate Majority Leader, William Frist. He in particular needs to hear that this is not something which has been forgotten over the December holiday.

Around the web...

My two favorite sports rolled into one: Basketball and payback (and from the Moonie Times - what's up with that?):

DENVER — Don't be surprised if the hottest ticket in college basketball this season turns out to be a match between the Fighting Whites and the North American Stealers.

The pride of the University of Northern Colorado, the Whites won only two games in their intramural basketball league last year, but their idea of turning the tables on schools with American Indian mascot names has spread like wildfire.

Students at a handful of colleges across the rural West and Indian country are considering forming their own Fighting Whites-style intramural teams this season, inspired by the success of the team, first planned as "the Fightin' Whities," in drawing national media attention to the mascot issue.

An intriguing tidbit further down:

The Whites concede that some T-shirt buyers missed the point and saw them as a statement of white pride. Likewise, when a conservative Web site, FreeRepublic.com, ran a story about the North Dakota art exhibit, it was flooded with responses from readers asking where to buy the jerseys.

"Cleveland Honkies! Where do I buy it? I think I'd pay $100 for a jersey so emblazoned. I'm completely serious," said one e-mailer.


Speaking of payback...Ron Brownstein in the LATimes lays out Bush's underlying tax cut agenda:

WASHINGTON -- The huge new round of tax cuts President Bush proposed Tuesday, building on policies he has already advanced, could reshape the federal government's role in society as profoundly as the tax and spending plans President Reagan drove into law more than 20 years ago.

By proposing nearly $700 billion in additional tax cuts when the government is already facing large budget deficits and projecting steady increases in military spending, Bush has laid out a fiscal blueprint that could constrict spending for years to come on the domestic priorities Democrats favor.


The Eli LillyPizza Payoff?

Described as the "pizza rule" by both Republicans and Democrats, the measure would allow outside interests to pay for "perishable food or refreshments offered to members of an office." Last year, for example, a lobbying firm representing pharmaceutical interests sent in dinner for House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert's (R-Ill.) staff while they were working late on a prescription drug bill....

Ethics committee chairman Joel Hefley (R-Colo.) said he had objected to the change, but was overruled by GOP leaders....

But Hefley said he hopes to revisit the issue. "I don't think anyone can be bought for a piece of pizza, but I think it looks bad," he said. "Part of our job is to avoid the appearance of evil, as well as evil."

What's the real story here now?

In a post on Saturday, Atrios aptly expressed his ire over the purported holiday infiltration of the US by "suspected" terrorists:

The administration has apparently made up this story. There is no evidence it happened. No evidence of 5 guys going to Canada. No evidence of 5 guys coming over the Canadian border. No evidence that the 5 guys are connected to each other or terrorism. They mysterious gentlemen are alternatively described as "Arab" or "Middle Eastern" even though one of the photos was of a Pakistani guy who is currently in Pakistan, and all the names appeared to be Pakastani. Bush announced that he personally sent the FBI on a nationwide manhunt for these guys, which one newspaper article described as a 'posse,' and authorities asked the public to help.

One thing Atrios did not address was the obvious racist undertone to the whole affair, and I'm not talking only of the hunt for "Middle Eastern" men. On January 2nd, the NY Daily News (available now only through its archive) claimed that an FBI source had fingered the point of entry for the five men at the St. Regis/Akwesasne Mohawk reserve border. The Boston Globe repeated the informant's assertions on January 3rd:

Another American law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that investigators also are probing the possibility that some of the individuals sneaked into the United States by way of the Akwesasne Mohawk Reserve, which straddles the borders of Ontario, Quebec, and New York State.

For years, the reserve has been a notorious smuggling route, serving as a conduit for illegal immigrants bound for the United States and for contraband goods, mainly cigarettes and alcohol, headed for Canada to avoid heavy US taxes. Indians with ties to biker gangs and organized crime typically serve as well-paid guides through the dense brush and across the waterways of the reserve.

Let not forget the fact that Canadians dispute the FBI's Mohawk fabrication:

Although senior U.S. officials say the five made their way into the United States through Canada, there appears to be virtually no evidence to support the claim.

"The suggestion that these five people, or any one of them, might have entered the United States from Canada, or even been in Canada at any time, has not been substantiated by any law-enforcement source that I am aware of," RCMP Sergeant Paul Marsh said yesterday.

The lie continues to be circulated on editorial pages, including that of the first rumormonger, the NY Daily News.

Mohawk tribal leaders were justifiably outraged,

"We get the blame right away, yet there's no proof they came through here," Akwesasne Grand Chief Raymond Mitchell said. "I'd like to see if they have proof to back up what they're saying."

Americans should also be incensed at the Administration's barely disguised race baiting. Security along the 10 mile border where the two Mohawk reservations meet is no different than that of hundreds of miles of comparable rural and forested crossings. The number of unguarded logging and snowmobile roads between Maine and Quebec alone has yet to be calculated. Tribal officials have numerous times since 9/11 requested additional funding to hire more tribal police, only to be rebuffed, despite the fact that Canadian whistleblowers have raised alarms over forgery rings. An official with the Mohawk police maintained that the Mohawks were not even contacted by the FBI or the RCMP regarding the purported border smuggling.

Why has the Administration chosen to paint Indians as so disloyal, even treasonous, as to assist possible terrorists access to the US? For hundreds of years, Mohawks and other American Indians have upheld their treaty obligations and defended the US in every war since the Revolution. From the US Navy's website:

As the 20th century comes to a close, there are nearly 190,00 Native American military veterans. It is well recognized that, historically, Native Americans have the highest record of service per capita when compared to other ethnic groups.

Bush is currently sending those Indian servicemen and women into harm's way, while questioning their very patriotism. Forget that the border tale was fabricated, for whatever reason. This should be the real story, and shame on the Democrats if they don't call the Administration to the mat for such egregious behavior.

Leave No (Special Education) Child Behind Update

Slow blogging of late, as everyone in the house has been battling some form of cold or flu. I've been wanting to expand, though, on a conversation begun on a small special-needs email list to which I belong. The topic of discussion revolved around implementing standardized tests for disabled students under Bush's 2001 No Child Left Behind education initiative. For those not familiar with the details of the new law (in actuality, a reauthorization and expansion of the Johnson Administration's Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965) as they relate to special need students, the changes are both straightforward and complex at the same time. In simplest terms, NCLB requires special needs education to be held to the same accountability standards as regular education, that is, consistent year-to-year improvement as measured by statewide standardized tests. Sounds like a noble goal. Unfortunately, like much associated with "Leave No Child Behind', the devil is in the details.

First and foremost, as currently written, NCLB runs smack into IDEA, the 1974 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Whereas standardized tests by their very nature eschew individual accommodation - how can one get a precise snapshot of children's reading ability if different children get different tests? And yet under IDEA, children with disabilities are to have their progressed measured through individualized education plans (IEPs). Some administrators and government bureaucrats have actually suggested that even mentally disabled and autistic children "just take the tests", and they'll be scored on some kind of a "curve". However, there is reason to believe that forcing children to take tests far above their ability may be crushing to self-esteem, as the children are already set up for failure. In addition, some states, such as Florida, have found the administrators who wrote the "accommodation" rules were inarguably out of touch: Blind students who had barely studied Braille (due to modern talking computers) were forced to learn just to take the tests. Talking calculators were also banned - an abacus was allowed instead. Governor Bush has said that the accommodations will be "fixed", but possibly not before the final high stakes test (Florida also uses it standardized test to award diplomas). So this year's special needs seniors may be out of luck altogether.

Second, the Arizona State University study released last week found that a high number of kids were expelled from school just prior to the exams. If IDEA is changed as many conservatives want it to be, special-ed kids will be able to be expelled from school for behavioral issues. One could see administrators dumping, either through coercion or expulsion, special ed kids just prior to the tests, so as to not affect their school scores. A quick check of Maine (no high-stakes testing) versus Texas (Bush's original petri-dish for NCLB) indicates a considerable difference in drop-out rates, particularly among special needs students, with Texas averaging around 40% of its drop-out population (versus 25% for Maine.)

Third, something I didn't know until I read it this week - school performance is judged not only by overall increase in test scores, but in the test scores of 5 subgroups (special ed, ESL, Title I poverty level, and a couple minority groups.) Schools are deemed to be failing if scores from those groups do not improve from one year to another. However, its not the case where its improvement (or lack thereof) within the same group. If your special ed scores drop one year (say because your number of autistic kids doubles) but then increases the next year, but your African-American and/or ESL scores drop due to an influx of Somali immigrants, then your school is deemed "failing". (These examples are exactly why my children's school, which consistently outscores 98% of other US schools in math and reading, will, under Bush's plan, fail this year.) Think of schools with small minority populations - if any of those kids happen to have a bad day and pull the scores down even slightly, the school fails for that year.

In part, its really a guise to union-bust, I think. If a school continues to fail (and under these scenarios most schools will), administrators and teachers are all fired and replaced (probably with younger, less experienced and hence cheaper ones.) If the school still fails, its turned into a charter school (essentially private and not governed by union protections) or taken completely "privatized". Its important to remember that none of the wealthy, including the President's family, have to deal with this - their kids go to private schools, and don't have to do the yearly standardized test thing. Also has the added benefit of making public schools teach to the tests, which the ASU study showed reduced SAT scores and GPAs. So fewer public school kids have the opportunity to compete with wealthy prep school kids for slots at Harvard and Yale. (And will it matter if a kid has a 4.0 GPA, if that GPA comes from a failing school?)

(edited: fixed broken link)

Pet Peeve...

I am very pleased with the amount of media attention autism is finally getting (seeing that its now more prevalent in children than type I diabetes and Down Syndrome.) But I just wish some reporters would actually do a little homework rather than relying on other reporters for their information. I don't know who was the first to circulate this particular erratum, but I wish someone would pass it along, through the barking chain or however journalists convey information, that it is wrong. And whether or not you're on the right or wrong side of the fence on the issue of mercury in vaccines, parents of autistic children (TM) the world around shake their heads whenever they see it.

A few recent examples:

An actual question and answer column in the Aberdeen American News:
There are lawsuits pending that thimerosal in the suspect vaccines may have a link to autism. There's also a feeling that the vaccines' high content of ethyl-mercury actually causes autism and other neurological disorders.

The measles-mumps-rubella vaccine is among the most scrutinized because of its heavy metal content.

Tom Diemer of the Cleveland Plain Dealer:
The preservative had been used in vaccines meant to protect children from mumps, measles and rubella.

Even New York Times columnists are not immune. Last week, Bill Keller wrote:
In the twilight of the congressional session, some legislator anonymously arranged for a provision to be slipped into the Homeland Security bill protecting vaccine makers (mainly Eli Lilly) from lawsuits filed by the parents of autistic children. Hundreds of parents are pressing a claim that the mercury in a measles vaccine contributed to their children’s disorder. (I'm taking Keller to task as I even emailed him, and saw no appropriate correction in the Times this week. Hmph!)

Anyone figured it out by now? The measles vaccine, whether in combination with the mumps and rubella vaccines (MMR) or alone, does not, and never has, contained the preservative Thimerosal. I'm fairly sure that this is due to the fact that the measles virus in the vaccine is a live virus, and Thimerosal, besides being a preservative, is a well-known antiseptic. Well, that was until it was removed from the over-the-counter market by the FDA for being somewhat less than safe. Thimerosal has been used most often in DTP/DTaP, HepB, HIB and influenza.

Its obvious that these, and other guilty journalists and pundits, are confusing the Thimerosal issue with concerns over whether the MMR also causes autism (and inflammatory bowel disease,) although through a different mechanism. But a simple Google search could have cleared up any confusion. Perhaps a little more effort next time?

There. I feel better already.

(updated) I forgot to mention the piece which sent me off on this rampage today: From Yahoo!News, by Ed Edelson, the supposed HealthScoutNews Reporter, regarding the new study on an increase in autism prevalence in Atlanta (mentioned below),

Yeargin-Allsopp's study does not mention one controversial hypothesis that has gained widespread publicity -- that the increase in cases is caused by the mercury-based preservative used in the vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella.

Arg! Alright, no more GoogleNews for me today. Time to watch Scrubs or something equally mindless.

Tell us something we didn't know already...

From today's New York Times:

Autism is about 10 times as prevalent today as it was in the 1980's, according to the country's largest study ever on the problem. Some of the increase is the result of widened definitions of the disorder, researchers say, but the explanation for the rest of the increase is unknown.

The study, conducted in metropolitan Atlanta in 1996, found that 3.4 in every 1,000 children ages 3 to 10 had mild to severe autism that year. In the late 1980's, 4 to 5 in every 10,000 children were thought to be afflicted.

The higher rate, described in today's issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, is in line with rates found in recent smaller studies in the United States and abroad in which the autism prevalence was 4 to 6 children in 1,000.

The researchers, from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said the prevalence rates they found would mean that at least 425,000 Americans under age 18 have some form of autism.


Its important to note that the study actually takes its data from 1996, six-plus years ago. And while the Times notes the figure as 3.4 per 1000 children, it may be easier to comprehend, when comparing different birth cohorts, to describe the number as a ratio, that is 1:294. When I go back and calculate an equivalent cohort group in Maine (i.e., children 3-10 in 1996), the number is reasonably close, 1:333 (or 3.0 per 1000). However in Maine, since 1996, numbers have continued to increase dramatically, particularly among younger children. If we look at December 2001 numbers (the last ones currently available), the overall autism rate for children ages 3-10 was 1:252 (3.975 per 1000) and the rate for 6 year olds (the age when children enter school and thus most will have been diagnosed) was 1:175 (5.7 per 1000).

In both the Atlanta study and published Maine data, there is an unexpected increase in prevalence starting with children born in 1988. Like a number of other epidemiologists, Eric Fombonne, writing on the study in JAMA, notes:

Although it would be tempting to interpret this age trend as indicative of a secular increase in the rate of ASD (ie, the younger the birth cohort, the higher the prevalence), such an explanation is both unlikely and biologically implausible because rates plateau for birth cohorts aged 5 through 8. Rather, the authors suggest that these differences might reflect new diagnostic criteria for autism and increased availability of developmental disability services for children with autism in the 1990s.

The problem that I've always had with this argument is that it assumes some form of "collective amnesia"; as if all children diagnosed prior to the "loosening" of the criteria have never been re-evaluated, and hence the older cohort's numbers never properly adjusted. While this may be the case for a few children, to argue it would account for the tremendous increases in just two or three years is unfathomable. In Maine, the prevalence of autism in children born in 1985 is 1:850; for those born in 1988, its 1:374. In addition, the DMS-IV was only "loosened" in 1994 to include other autistic spectrum disorders, such as Asperger's Syndrome, and thus its unlikely that many diagnosing professionals had started to fully apply the new standards (which actually only impact a small portion of the total number of autistic individuals, as moderate to severe autism is more commonplace than "high-functioning" autism.) As the NY Times suggests, while changes in diagnosing autism may account for a small portion, we need to look to other factors, such as environment, for a more full accounting of the causes behind the new epidemic just now being documented, but which parents of autistics have known of for years.

Thimerosal addendum (addendum)

Mark Kleiman and Glenn Reynolds are having a go-around about the legal aspects of the Thimerosal provision as it currently stands, tacked onto the Homeland Security Bill, but without the proper funding requirements. While Mark has most of the details right, he's not exactly correct on a couple:

1) In his timeline, Mark fails to mention that after Frist's original bill died in committee back in April, he attempted to revive it by amending it to Democrat-sponsored prescription drug legislation in July. That attempt also failed - the amendment wasn't even called for a vote. Not surprisingly, that amendment was offered at the last minute as well.

2) Mark stated "all the thimerosal claims are time-barred by the terms of VICP. Neither the Frist version nor the Armey version deals with that."

Frist's original bill, as well as the proposed amendment to the Schumer-Edwards bill, did extend the time limit for filing to the NVICP from 36 months to 6 years, as well as establishing a one-time grandfather period of two years for all injuries sustained since 1988. Armey's provision, which only deals with reclassifying preservatives as vaccine ingredients, does not.

However, be under no illusions that Frist's bill in any way wanted to assist children potentially injured by ethylmercury in vaccines. A September press release alludes to such:

Perhaps the most significant proposals in the bill, however, are a series of modifications to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). This program was created in the mid 1980's to rapidly compensate those who suffer rare but serious side effects from vaccines while lowering the legal risk to vaccine manufacturers and doctors and nurses who administer vaccines. Lately, however, the VICP has become overwhelmed with new claims -- many of which lack merit. This has not only delayed consideration of legitimate claims, but caused the spill-over of costly lawsuits into our court system.

Essentially, as I've mentioned previously, Frist's bill would further tightened the restrictions on the Vaccine Injury Table. Whereas the table originally did not disqualify a child from compensation if the child had an underlying genetic condition which may have contributed to the severity of the reaction, Frist's changes would make such a genetic problem a disqualifying factor. Thus, if a child showed a genetic predisposition of improperly metabolizing heavy metals, which some recent research indicates may be the case in some autistic children, even if the child was exposed to neurotoxic levels of ethylmercury in vaccines, that child's injury would be disqualified. It is woefully apparent that Senator Frist, despite the evidence proffered by his medical colleague in the House, Dr. David Wheldon (R-FL), through two years of committee meetings on the subject, has fully made up his mind that filings to the VICP claiming ethylmercury injury are without merit. Its also clear that Frist has his eye on the VICP's surplus, which he addressed in his earlier bill, but left out of the HLS bill. But Frist hasn't forgotten about the billion-plus in the fund; in early December he again called for the passage of his original bill, this time showering the bill with the support of the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines (ACCV). The supposedly non-biased, non-partisan scientific advisory body whose members are appointed by the Administration. (see below)

"Stacking the Deck"

Some issues seem to get lost in the holiday crush, and need revisiting once the dust around the tree has settled. On December 17th, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) issued a joint press release with groups as diverse as the Alliance to End Childhood Lead Poisoning, the Consumer Federation of America and the World Wildlife Fund, asserting that the Bush Administration was "stacking the deck" with highly "vetted" political appointees to some of the most important scientific committees at the CDC. The group condemned HHS (the department which has oversight for CDC and its committees):

The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) is playing politics with appointments to key scientific advisory committees at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), citizens’ watchdog groups charged today. The groups accuse Secretary Tommy Thompson of replacing respected scientists with industry insiders on influential committees advising on lead poisoning, environmental health, and other issues.

The press release also claimed that potential appointees were screened with what appeared to be a political litmus test:

In recent months, the Bush administration has also come under fire for applying ideological litmus tests to nominees for key scientific advisory posts, by quizzing nominees about partisan politics or political issues. Today, the health and environmental groups told Secretary Thompson that the often-undisclosed financial ties of the nominees to those posts and the lack of a written conflict-of-interest policy at CDC runs afoul of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

William R. Miller, a professor of psychology and psychiatry at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, elaborated in a December 24 interview with LA Times reporter Aaron Zitner. Miller said that early in 2002, he had been asked if he would serve on the National Advisory Council on Drug Abuse, which guides funding and policy decisions at a unit of the National Institutes of Health. But only recently had a call come from HHS Secretary Tommy Thomspon's office asking some rather unusual questions.

The first question he asked me was, 'Are you sympathetic to faith-based initiatives?' I said yes, and he said, 'OK, you're one-for-one.'

Then the caller asked Miller about his views on needle exchange programs, the death penalty for "drug kingpins" and abortion, keeping a running tally of where his views agreed with those of the White House.

Finally, the caller asked whether Miller had voted for Bush. When Miller said he had not, the caller asked him to explain.

Miller said that he must have failed the pop-quiz, as he was never asked again to serve on the advisory committee.

But while its not completely unusual for an Administration to select political appointees who share their views on many subjects, the Bush Administration has gone even further, by filling committee openings with individuals nominated by the very industries the committees are supposed to be "watchdogging". One example of this is the Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention. The 27-member committee advises the government in determining the level of lead exposure which is considered harmful to children. It is expected to soon review current federal lead safety levels to determine if they should be lowered or even raised. A recommendation to increase the acceptable blood lead level associated with health problems developmental delays could make it more difficult for the government to force lead-producing industries to clean up toxic sites or for victims of lead poisoning to pursue litigation against industries associated with lead products, such as paint manufacturers.

A report released by Congressman Edward Markey's office lambasted the Administration's attempted to replace well-respected experts on the Advisory Committee with lead industry lackeys:

This report reveals recent changes to the membership of the Advisory Committee that indicate that the nominations of renowned scientists with a long record in determining the health effects associated with childhood lead poisoning are being rejected, and that instead the vacancies are being filled by individuals who have direct ties to the lead industry, which has a financial interest in the policies adopted by the Advisory Committee; If the acceptable blood lead levels are revised upwards, of if new scientific evidence indicating they should be revised further downwards is ignored, the health of many children in this country will be imperiled, and corporate polluters will be allowed to trade the long-term health of children for short-term commercial gain.

Its rare that the Advisory Committee's recommended nominees are rejected. However Drs. Bruce Lanphear, a pediatrician at U. of Cincinnati, and Susan Klitzman, of the Hunter College School of Health Sciences, both authors of numerous peer-reviewed studies on lead-poisoning in children, were snubbed by HHS. But rarer still was the Administration's decision to reject the reappointment of a committee member, as in the case of Dr. Michael Weitzman, Pediatrician-in-Chief of Rochester General Hospital, and well known researcher on lead poisoning.

Instead of these exceedingly well-credentialed pediatricians, the Administration offered five public policy analysts, environmental scientists and paid consultants for various lead industries, three of whom admitted to having been contacted by lead industry representatives regarding their nominations. The most egregious of these appointees was toxicologist William Banner, whose handful of PubMed citations includes a 1993 Pediatrics article, "Mythology of lead poisoning". Banner's expertise came under intense scrutiny in last week's TNR report, Toxic,

[I]t's one thing to question the new studies, quite another to question the entire body of research suggesting that lead could cause intellectual or behavioral problems in children--which is precisely what Banner, the Oklahoma toxicologist, has done. When a lawyer in the Rhode Island paint case asked Banner if studies had ever demonstrated a link between lead exposure and cognitive problems in children, he said flatly, "I don't think anybody has demonstrated that." When a lawyer pressed him, Banner indicated that except in cases of encephalopathy--a severe physical condition that shows up at blood levels of 70 micrograms per deciliter or higher--there was no proof that lead causes "central nervous system deficits or injuries."

One Administration nominee, Joyce Tsuji, a scientist for Exponent, Inc., a consultant to several lead manufacturers, removed herself from consideration, citing conflicts-of-interest. The Alliance to End Childhood Lead Poisoning and other concerned groups sent a letter calling upon Secretary Thompson to immediately remove Dr. Banner, and to rely on CDC’s recommendations in making future appointments (the next openings come up in May, 2003.)

There are many more CDC, NIH and FDA advisory committees which also allow for political appointments, such as the Mine Safety and Health Research Advisory Committee, the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Advisory Committee, and the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Besides the aforementioned Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention (important to me personally as my youngest son was severely lead poisoned in early 2001), I'm particularly interested in the Bush Administration's appointments to the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and National Vaccine Advisory Committee. But never again will I fall for the pretense of scientific objectivity brazenly flouted by all such committees. If a cool million in campaign donations by the lead industry can buy, I mean "nominate", five members for the ACCLLP, imagine what Eli Lilly's $5,899,220 (for 2001/2) can get them.

Maybe a little less "Insta"-punditing, and a little more fact-checking...

What is the old saying? Don't run with scissors...Early to bed, early to rise...Ah, I remember, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Once again, Glenn Reynolds is a living example of the reasoning behind such old time wisdom. Just for starters, Reynolds begins his latest bit on the HLS midnight-rider fiasco,

"BILL FRIST: Lackey of Eli Lilly? Or of Rosalynn Carter?"

I guess I could take the easy road and ask if there are really differences between Eli Lilly and Merck, Aventis Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline and Wyeth-Ayerst. Oh, not clear on the connection between the latter four vaccine manufacturers and the Rosalyn Carter-Betty Bumpers Every Child By Two Program? Well, they're only the foundation's principal funding partners. Obviously, then, they're biased, right?

However, as Professor Reynolds should himself learn, although telling in some aspects, such assumptions don't always reveal the whole picture. While Dr. Frist may have (somewhat inaccurately) appropriated ECBT language to support his argument against removing the Thimerosal provision from the HLS bill, he did not explain ECBT previously stated reservations to his own bill, S 2053, the near word-for-word template for the Eli Lilly exemption. ECBT stated in its April "From the Hill" newsletter supplement,

"ECBT supports proposed changes to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. A similar bill to Title II of Senator Frist’s is Congressmen Dan Burton (R-IN), Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Dave Weldon's (R-FL) National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Improvement Act (H.R. 3471). The bill has several cosponsors. Both the House and Senate versions would allow compensation to families for counseling and guardianship costs, would raise the compensation payment ceiling, would allow claimants to recover interim costs before final judgment is reached and would extend the statute of limitations from three to six years from the appearance of symptoms before filing. Senator Frist’s bill is more favorable to vaccine manufacturers as it does not offer parties claiming injury legal options that are quite as liberal." (my emphasis)

Reynolds admits his confusion on the history of the matter (one might expect that when your source of information regarding the subject appears to be the Fox-News crawl.) In addition, it seems he's never heard of House-Senate strategy meetings, such as the one Republicans called the weekend after the midterm elections, where pending legislation is discussed. But that doesn't stop him from concluding,

"But at the very least, claims that Frist was acting secretly in support of the language are contradicted by the speech -- on the Senate floor -- supporting the language. And claims that this was some sort of sleazy corporate bailout would seem to be contradicted by the words from the Rosalynn Carter - Betty Bumpers Campaign. Unless the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy has gotten really, really vast."

I've spent some time trying to understand Reynold's logic here: Because Frist openly supported language which was identical to that which he had crafted for his own bill, as well as that which he attempted to tack onto the Schumer-Edwards "Greater Access to Affordable Pharmaceuticals Act" in late July, he obviously couldn't have been involved in a behind-the-scenes lobbying effort to have his colleagues in the House tack it on to pending legislation at the last minute? And moreover, because a single foundation, whose sole purpose is to promote universal vaccination, states its concern regarding the impact the debate over Thimerosal (which is no longer even used in US vaccines) on vaccination rates, one has to naturally conclude that no malfeasance or impropriety has occurred? Do I understand it to be true that Reynolds is a law professor?

I am a strong proponent of a safe and rational national immunization program, and I support many of the goals of the Carter-Bumpers campaign. However, like most public policy initiatives, its goals are developed by analysts, not necessarily scientists. What is particularly interesting, during the weeks that Reynolds has punditized on this subject, he has supported his arguments with soundbites from politicians, columnists and policy wonks, rather than from research by toxicologists and epidemiologists. I strongly urge that he spend some time over at the IOM's Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes Meeting website listening to the "junk science" presentations of the IOM invited speakers and committee members. Even Dr. Neil Halsey (also cited by Senator Frist) stated that the "evidence was more than sufficient" as to why the US should be helping other countries to remove thimerosal as quickly as possible. In fact, after Professor Reynolds reviews Dr. Halsey's testimony, perhaps he can explain to us how this obvious strong arm attempt by Halsey's superiors, as well as the supposed correction to the NY Times article are not indications of at least the appearance of his touted right-wing conspiracy.

Speechless...

I am, that is. My 4 and a half year old, Sam, just came up to me and said for the first time, "Mommy, I yuv you", and then ran away giggling.

{updated} I should really elaborate on this, as I'm fairly sure its one of those things that only my (one or two) hardcore fans and other POA (Parents of Autistics (TM)) will understand right off.

Sam is my eldest son, diagnosed autistic at just under two-and-a-half. He was a normal baby and infant, but rapidly regressed between fifteen and eighteen months, losing all speech and eye contact. After failing a sound-booth hearing test at 20 months, he was diagnosed as profoundly deaf. We didn't learn for another 2 months that his hearing was perfect. We finally started admitting to ourselves, and then to others, that we suspected autism around his second birthday. A neurologist confirmed our suspicions a few months later.

Sam did not say another word until shortly before his third birthday. He was in a Lovaas-Floortime hybrid preschool 30 hours a week, and soon we had a few more words. Then a few short sentences. But mostly echolalia - repeating back what he had heard then or before. At the same time, however, his receptive language was increasing dramatically, to the point that he was almost age appropriate. His imaginative play took off (his toys this Christmas were dragons, castles and merry men in Sherwood Forest), as did his peer-to-peer skills. He was always affectionate - on his terms. But he seldom called me Mommy, and never spoke of affection spontaneously. You never realize how much you miss hearing your child tell you they love you, or hate you, until they can't.

So hearing those few words, which so glibly fly off the tongues of children and Casanova's alike, are like cool rain falling on a drought-stricken field. I don't know when or if I'll ever hear them again - its impossible to predict what will come out of the mouth of an autistic child. But hearing them this one time was enough.

Pharmaceuticals declare war on the working poor

In a stunning upset for 110,000 working-poor Mainers, on Christmas Eve the Scrooge-like District of Columbia Court of Appeals struck down Maine's HHS-sanctioned prescription drug discount program for low-income Mainers, the Healthy Maine Prescriptions Program. The initiative, which required a Medicaid-equivalent discount of up to 25% for non-Medicaid eligible residents making 300% of the federal poverty level, was strongly opposed by PhRMA, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, who then filed suit against Maine.

In what can only be described as arrogance or cluelessness, depending upon how gracious one feels, PhRMA Spokesman Bruce Lott called the decision

"a victory for Medicaid patients in Maine and everywhere because their access to needed medicines won't be limited by bureaucrats putting budget needs over patient care."

This decision had no impact on Medicaid recipients, who receive a full drug benefit under MaineCare. The small cost of the program fell mostly upon pharmaceuticals, by requiring the same wholesale prices for the low-income program as for other state-sponsored programs, such as Medicaid. Unless, of course, PhRMA is arguing that this miniscule cut in profits will harm consumers, as research and development will be crippled. This is exactly what PhRMA claims in response to competition from generic drugs;

"A study released earlier this month by researchers at the University of Chicago, Bates College, and the University of Virginia finds that accelerating generics to the market harms consumers by reducing innovation leading to new prescription drugs."

A PhRMA press release earlier this month stated,

"We recognize the desire of states like Maine and Vermont to help seniors pay for their prescription drugs, but these programs are the wrong way to do it. States should work with us to urge Congress to pass a Medicare prescription drug benefit this year."

Ironically, Maine 36,000 poorest seniors are not effected by the court decision, as they are covered under a different initiative, the Drugs for the Elderly Program. This decision primarily effects the 25% of working Mainers with no medical insurance or prescription drug benefit. Fortunately, Maine's Attorney General Steve Rowe and Human Services Commissioner Kevin Concannon vowed to rework the program so as to not violate the court's narrow ruling. Even Senators Snowe and Collins, recipients of millions in campaign donations from pharmaceuticals, have declared their support for the Maine drug program.

Oh brother, where art thou?

I don't know about you all, but I'm still feeling despair over Al Gore's choice not to run for re-election in 2004. The other candidates in the pack just don't do it for me; Kerry's plagued by the Dukakis ghost, Dean has Abenaki skeletons in his closet, Lieberman's a better choice to replace Cheney on the ticket, and Daschle lost his spine somewhere along the way. At this point, Martin Sheen looks better than the lot of them.

So I'm holding out that after 9 or so months of the same, Democrats will wake up and realize what we lost when Gore removed his hat from the ring and do our mightiest to convince him that we need someone of his caliber to lead the charge. In the meantime, if you want to ask Gore to reconsider his decision not to run, head on over to Democrats.Com and sign this petition.

A child's reminder..

For Christians and secular holiday celebrants, tomorrow is Christmas. This morning, my six year old daughter asked me to help her get father his Christmas gift. After hearing my favorite Band Aid song (scroll down for lyrics, permalinks screwy again), Grace wanted to know how we could help "feed the world". Fortunately charitable giving is a mouse click away. So if you want to do some last minute shopping which makes you, the recipient and many other people happy, consider visiting one of these sites and, like my sweet Grace, spread some joy this holiday season. Also, you can find financial and other information on most US-based charities at Give.Org.

Oxfam America
Save The Children
UNICEF
CARE
Doctors Without Borders

And a very special one to our family:
Cure Autism Now

Once again, blame the IRS

Note to Armey: If you intend to tack a midnight provision on to popular legislation, make sure you turn the light on first and read the fine print...

Some interesting points have been brought up regarding loose ends which were apparently not tied up prior to passage of the HLS bill, and its Eli Lilly bail-out clause. Pop on over to Mark AR Kleiman, PLA, and the original source (although maybe to his own chagrin), BlissfulKnowledge for the whole (for now) story.

As a relevant addendum, it should be pointed out that the original source of the Eli Lilly provision was essentially word-for-word language from Senator Bill Frist's earlier bill, S2053, the Improved Vaccine Affordability and Availability Act. Frist's plan from the start was to deny autistic kids and their families the right to sue in state court over Thimerosal, primarily by reclassifying preservatives as vaccine components and thereby forcing families into the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. In that way, he would protect Lilly. But autism does not currently appear on the injury tables, and Frist had no intention of altering that minor detail. In fact, his bill would change definitions in the NVICP so as to exclude those cases of autism where an environmental factor, such as mercury in vaccines, triggered an underlying genetic predisposition. Then, after jumping through all the Vaccine Court's hoops, only to have it determined that their injuries did not qualify, families who then wanted to continue to seek redress could only do so in federal, not their state, courts.

One of the most telling pieces of the Frist Bill legislation was its final provision. If one logically expected even a portion of the children injured by mercury in vaccines to submit their claims to the NVICP, before long, with lifetime medical and educational expenses totally in the millions, the fund's surplus of nearly 2 billion would soon be paid out. However, Frist anticipated no such decrement of the program's funds. In fact, he added the following provision for raiding the fund,

Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall submit recommendations regarding how to address the growing surplus in the Vaccine Trust Fund, and the rationale for such recommendations to--
(1) the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee of the Senate;
(2) the Finance Committee of the Senate;
(3) the Energy and Commerce Committee of the House of Representatives; and
(4) the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives.

Since the HLS bill only accomplished one of Frist's goals, protecting Eli Lilly, one would expect we'll see the other provisions of S2053 soon, particularly with Dr. Frist as Majority Leader.

A recent quote from the Wall Street Journal:

"A mom who eats a tuna fish sandwich probably passes along more mercury during breast-feeding than a kid gets in a vaccination."

Michael Pichichero, lead investigator of a study published in The Lancet which concluded mercury in vaccines are safe.

So lets do some math. The FDA and EPA list four species of fish to be particularly susceptible to mercury contamination; tilefish, swordfish, shark and king mackerel. One ounce of swordfish averages 1.00 ppm mercury, or 28.5 ug Hg per ounce, according to Dr. Neal Halsey of John Hopkins University. According to the FDA, canned tuna has a mean of 0.17 ppm, or 4.85 ug Hg per ounce.

A typical 4 ounce tunafish sandwich would thus contain around 19 ug Hg. That methylmercury, however, is ingested and digested, with only a portion being absorbed into the blood stream. Even if the transport from blood to breastmilk was 100% (highly unusual), the amount of methylmercury from the original 19 ug in the tuna fish sandwich has now been reduced considerably.

Following the CDC vaccine schedule, a child could receive upwards of 237.5 ug of ethylmercury by age 18 months. A single round of vaccinations could yield an injected load of between 12.5 and 62.5 ug. Thus, while the amount in the original tunafish sandwich may have compared with the low end of the amount in a single thimerosal-laced vaccine, Pichichero's statement did not stop there. He surmised that the amounts infants received were weighted towards the sandwich, which was ingested by mother, made into breastmilk, and then ingested by baby. Recent research has demonstrated that mercury levels though breastmilk consumption drop to 1/5th those of a direct blood route. So even with an improbable 100% ingestion and a 100% transfer to breastmilk, we're still left with only 1/5th of that original 19 ug Hg - a far cry from the 12.5 to 62.5 injected directly into the bloodstream of newborns and infants.

The point of all this is that this is that even though I am a scientist, I am neither a toxicologist nor immunologist, and was still able to do the math. Dr. Pichichero, a renowned immunologist (but not a toxicologist), was not, and yet his recent work has been lauded far and wide as the near-final word on Thimerosal.

Move over Trent Lott

This from Ron Andrade on the Triballaw mailing list:

State Representative Carl Isett is planning to run for the (Texas) 19th Congressional House race which will become open in January. In a recent speech before a local Chamber of Commerce he told them one of the greatest recent legislative accomplishments was the abolishment of the Texas Indian Commission. He told them that it had gone well since there was not an uprising of the among the local Natives. This was filmed by local news stations.

Ron will be sending a transcript as soon as he receives it. Of course, chances of a racist remark against Indians warranting even a "boo" from the media or general public are remote, but I thought I'd opt for full disclosure of Mr. Isett's stand on the issue.

Clueless quote of the day

"The biggest thing I learned from the process is that within the Native American community, opinions were so varied," he said. "There is no one single voice for the Native American community."

David Snively, assistant director of WVU Extension Service, on the West Virginia 4-H controversy over perpetuating American Indian stereotypes at its summer camp programs.

Hot off the presses...

Bush Administration Withdraws Motion to Seal Thimerosal Documents

PRNewswire via COMTEX - The US Department of Justice agreed today to withdraw its motion to the US Court of Federal Claims Office of Special Master to seal all documents related to present thimerosal-autism claims. The Mercury Policy Project and SAFE MINDs said that the withdrawal of the motion was a step in the right direction. However, the groups questioned whether documents in future cases would be subject to the secrecy order.

"The Bush Administration has overreached in its attempt to seal documents in thimerosal cases and the withdrawal of their motion bears that out," said Michael Bender, director of the Mercury Policy Project. "Unfortunately, this agreement only addresses half the loaf of bread. While the motion's withdrawal may help those involved in current litigation, it leaves unresolved what this means for future cases."

While the groups acknowledge that some information unearthed in court should be kept private -- like trade secrets -- they maintain that scientific studies and information should not qualify. In addition to the documents obtained through discovery from Eli Lilly, these also include unreleased confidential documents from the Centers for Disease Control stating that mercury in children's vaccines is a potential source of neurological damage in children including ADD/ADHD, speech and language delays and other neurological disorders including autism.
more... (scroll down to entry #2034)

What is the definition of propaganda?

I wonder if Santa will be handing out common sense to some netpundits this holiday season, as it appears some are sorely in need of such. A quick jaunt following the Thimerosal trail, from Instapundit (linked from Counterspin) to Derek Lowe to Medpundit Sydney Smith has me shaking my head. Each of these commentators (not Hesiod) has bought into the pharmaceutical industry's new media strategy; put a study out on vaccines, and no matter how flawed the study, protocol or results, declare unconditionally that it proves no link between "x" vaccine or vaccine component. The media will swallow it it hook, line and sinker, and even throw to the news shows some medical talking head with little or no experience in the field of epidemiology or toxicology to hold the company line. (Just ignore the man behind the curtain with the millions in research grants from drug makers in his back pocket.)

Case and point is the Pichichero study in Lancet. Researchers followed 40 children who received immunizations containing Thimerosal. Autism rates are somewhere between 6-8:1000, or around one child in 200. That in-and-of itself should raise red flags for serious researchers, as its more likely than not to miss a child who might develop a developmental disability as a result of injection with Thimerosal. There were no consistent protocols used; blood and stool samples were taken anywhere from 3 to 28 days after vaccination. At no time were peak levels assessed. Pichichero et al. asserted that the relatively low levels in the infant's blood samples were a good sign, and concluded that Thimerosal was therefore not dangerous. But they never addressed the well documented research that mercury collects in brain tissue at a rate five times that of blood, and that peak levels reach the brain at less than 24 hours after exposure.

Autism specialists who testified in front of the House Committee on Reform last week were blistering in their criticism of the study. They revealed the morbid irony of Pichichero's technique of "averaging" mercury levels over the 180 day period utilized by the researchers; one commented that using this rationale, a subject could receive a lethal dose of mercury, but by averaging it out, could have it declared "safe", even though he'd be dead.

But back to the aforementioned blogging on the issue. Derek Lowe makes the almost laughable assessment

"Blood levels of mercury were lower than expected, well under the toughest EPA standards. And the mercury was found to be cleared much more quickly from the children's system than had been expected (a week versus the predicted 45 days.) This goes a way toward clearing things up, because it makes it less likely that there's an accumulation of mercury with multiple vaccinations. A key part of the anti-thimerosal case has been that exposure to it was allowed to creep up over the years - the hypothetical autism epidemic is much more recent than the use of thimerosal per se."

While there has been some concern about the total mercury load children are exposed to during their first year, the main concern of neurologists and toxicologists is the massive neurological injury sustained at the time of immunization by the immediate mercury load - just a couple of vaccines at one time exceeded the recommended dosage for adults, let alone children. What does it matter if you're nibbled to death by goldfish if you've already taken a bullet to the head?

I've commented before on the hypocrisy of the "vaccines never cause autism" crowd previously in that they utilize some form of bait-and-switch logic in their arguments: Pose a completely irrelevant question, test it using suspect data, summarize with a "See! This proves there's no link between vaccines and autism" and feed it to the Wall Street Journal for starters. Works every time.

(I really shouldn't blog when I'm this peeved...ugh!)

A small blog policy change.

My first exposure to the wit and eloquence of Jim Capozzola of the Rittenhouse Review was the day after he first kindly linked to Wampum. One of his posts that day, We Are The Company We Keep, stirred a great deal of controversy in the Left, and Right, blogosphere, as Jim stated his intent to "manage" his blogroll. Following shortly on the heels of Jim's essay were the NYTimes article, Telling All Online: Its a Man's World (Isn't It?) and Jeanne D'Arc's thought-provoking spin on the subject. The latter two articles recently led me to do some soul searching of my own, particularly in regards to the lack of women's and non-Western voices on my own blogroll. I now feel compelled, however, following Jim C's lead, to be even more pro-active, and apply a stricter criteria to those websites I promote, even the purportedly "Progressive" ones. Thus, I recently visited all my blogroll sites, checking for even a modicum of diversity. I'm pleased to say that I was, for the most part, pretty impressed with the results. On the downside, I did find at least one site, which shall remain nameless, but has been removed from the permanent links, which not only displayed a dearth of women and non-Western permanently-linked sites, but rarely included those voices in its commentary as well. I did email the site owner requesting an explanation for the omissions, but received no reply. Not that he, or anyone else, cares what I think. But I was a naive and foolish Beta when I initially dressed up my sidebar, thinking such things don't matter. But what you don't say means as much as what you do.

A bounty now in Lillygate...

Even in the midst of the Lott fiasco, a number of Progressive bloggers and websites have kept up the pressure for full disclosure of the facts behind the last-minute provisions on the Homeland Security Bill passed last month. In particular, Hesiod of Counterspin Central, Dwight Meredith of PLA, and Lisa English of Ruminate This, have all been hot on the heels of Eli Lilly's mysterious benefactor. On top of this, one lefty website, TomPaine, is willing to put money down, to the tune of 10K, for the first sleuth to come up with the goods on the notorious midnight rider.

Back in November, I lined up the usual suspects: For anyone who missed the earlier post, the cast included,

Mitch Daniels: Former Eli Lilly VP of Corporate Affairs, until he was nominated in 2001 to be G. W. Bush's Budget Director. Claims not only to have no knowledge of the HLS provision, but of Thimerosal itself, asserting in response to a request for information by Rep. Waxman, "I had not even heard of Thimerosal until I received your letter, which is not surprising because Eli Lilly stopped making Thimerosal a decade before I began working there and the lawsuits appear to have been filed after I left." Hesiod catches Daniels in this lie, as Daniels' tenure at Lilly began in 1990, while Lilly still manufactured the preservative. In addition, Lilly purchased and distributed Thimerosal throughout the 1990s.

Syndey Taurel: CEO of Eli Lilly, tapped for a much coveted seat on the President's Homeland Security Advisory Council. Taurel gave $55,500 to candidates and PACs in the 2000-2 campaign cycles, 92% of it to Republicans.

Deborah Steelman: Former Reagan and Bush-41 appointee, during the '90s, she lobbied heavily for pharmaceuticals and healthcare interests. In 1998, she was nominated by Senator Trent Lott to a 17-member bipartisan commission on Medicare. In 2001, she was hired by Eli Lilly to replace Mr. Daniels as VP of Corporate Affairs.

Congressman Dick Armey: As soon-to-retire House Majority Leader, Armey has reluctantly assumed the mantle of the "fall-guy", even though his own staff asserted that "Mr. Armey is not a doctor, like Senator Frist. He's (Senator Frist) the source of the language." Initially Armey claimed the impetus came from the White House.

George Herbert Walker Bush, aka "Poppy": Bush joined Lilly's Board of Directors after leaving the CIA in 1977. The position was a gift from Quayle's father and uncle, who owned controlling interest in the Indiana company. While Vice President, Bush was ordered by the Supreme Court to stop lobbying the IRS on behalf of Lilly and other pharmaceuticals.

An anonymous "official at the Department of Health and Human Services": According to the Washington Post, this unnamed member of the Administration gave the final approval for the thimerosal provision.

Add to the previous list, a new suspect,

Senator Bill Frist: The language tacked on to the HLS bill was identical to that which Frist included in an earlier vaccine bill, S 2053 (Improved Vaccine Affordability and Availability Act.) Congressman Dick Armey, while claiming ultimate responsibility, alluded to Frist's involvement to Carville on CNN's Crossfire, "Well, you know, you really have to say it was my bill, I wrote it, I put it in. But I put it out in consultation with Senator Frist, the most well-respected doctor in Congress and the White House."

Although I lack the smoking gun TomPaine requires for payment of its bounty, my bet is on a Frist-Steelman-Daniels collaboration. After the defeat of the first Bush Administration, Steelman moved back into the private sector as a health issues lobbyist. One of her largest accounts, to the tune of $180K in 1997 was the Society for Thoracic Surgeons, of which Frist is a leading member. Another, the Healthcare Leadership Council, donated over $41K to Frist's campaign through the CBM Pac. Both Frist and Steelman were on the 17 member Medicare Commission in the late '90s, and Steelman was a financial supporter of Frist's 2000 Senate campaign. As VP of Lilly, she was well aware that with a number of recent plaintiff victories in state courts regarding Thimerosal, the wolves were at the door. A call to her predecessor, now at the WH, a suggestion to Senator Frist (personally, or through Daniels), and Lilly itself becomes immunized. Not bad for a day's work.

A kinda-sorta victory..I guess...

From CNN this morning:

MORGANTOWN, West Virginia (AP) -- Youngsters in West Virginia's 4-H clubs will abandon some American Indian traditions that a panel found to be stereotypical, officials said Monday. Other rituals, deemed respectful to the Indian heritage, will continue.

Children attending the state's 4-H summer camp take pride in joining one of four tribes -- Mingo, Cherokee, Delaware or Seneca -- and that practice should continue, the review committee announced.

But feather headdresses, "stereotypical motions and dances," and chanting a tribal cheer of "Ugh! Ugh! Ugh!" should stop next year, it said.

While it is a welcome sight to see the removal of the most overtly offensive behaviors, the changes are really just whitewash: The whole "Indian-as-Woodland-Savage" model is, in and of itself, the real problem, one which 4H officials refused to address, deeming the practice "respectful". Indians are locked in a romanticized nineteenth-century ethnohistoric time warp, living in teepees (which none of these tribes actually did) as nomadic hunters and gathers (all four tribes had been sedentary agriculturalists for 500 years by the time of Columbus.) Children are fed the lie that real Indians are extinct, or living way away, on Western Reservations. The descendants of the four appropriated tribes, all of whom still live in West Virginia, are harmed more than others, but it is in fact a blow to all American Indians. Unfortunately, it would take several doctoral theses to explain the problem in its entirety, and my own Indian children need to be fed Cheerios, dressed in Gap jeans and sent off to public school.

In light of the current flack surrounding Senator Lott, imagine thousands of happy, frolicking white children, spending their summer vacation pretending to plow fields and pick cotton, working on the perfect "yes, Massa" and singing Negro spirituals, all the time in "blackface." As long as no whippings or slave markets are in evidence, I'm sure one could make the argument that such a program "honored" the African-American experience. I expect the NAACP would argue differently, and rightly so.

But why is it that the media (and many Americans) view the hypocrisy of white children dressing up in feather headdresses and whooping around a campfire in the same terms as the Majority Senate Leader-elect's statements condoning segregation, and yet fail to see the problem with our political leaders attending Redskin, Chiefs or Indians ball games, cheering while the crowd does the "Tomahawk Chop" and "Chief Wahoo" prances around?

And on a celebratory note...

My soul mate and partner of eight years (seven wedded) hit the half-century mark today. Happy Birthday.

More Republican cries to tax the poor

The Washington Post reports that the idea floated by the WSJ just a few weeks ago, arguing that the "Lucky Ducky" working poor and middle class need to be taxed more, has been picked up by the White House and will be incorporated into the President's new tax plan.

Economists at the Treasury Department are drafting new ways to calculate the distribution of tax burdens among different income classes, which are expected to highlight what administration officials see as a rising tax burden on the rich and a declining burden on the poor. The White House Council of Economic Advisers is also preparing a report detailing the concentration of the tax burden on the affluent and highlighting problems with the way tax burdens are calculated for the poor.

In a return of Fuzzy Math, the President's former economic advisor Lawrence Lindsey recently tried to make the case that employment (Social Security) taxes weren't really taxes at all, since they pay for an entitlement which is "cashed in" in later years.

Lindsey compared the Social Security tax to a deposit in a neighborhood bank's Christmas Club. In such clubs, periodic deposits are returned in a lump sum during the holiday season, and Lindsey said no one would consider such deposits a tax.

I guess one could then make the argument that my property taxes are school tuition and the state's sales tax, an insurance premium. Gee, I guess I really am not paying my fair share of taxes. Please, tax me more.

Skippy is soliciting favorite "Holiday Tunes". Although I can't claim I've been suitably missionized, despite the best efforts of nearly 400 years of Jesuit and Puritan proselytizing, I will throw out my two favorites, which seem particularly poignant in this time of warmongering.

Happy Christmas
John Lennon/Yoko Ono

So this is Christmas
And what have you done
Another year over
And a new one just begun
And so this is Christmas
I hope you have fun
The near and the dear ones
The old and the young

A very merry Christmas
And a happy New Year
Let's hope it's a good one
Without any fear

And so this is Christmas (War is over)
For weak and for strong (If you want it)
For rich and the poor ones (War is over)
The world is so wrong (Now)
And so Happy Christmas (War is over)
For black and for white (If you want it)
For yellow and red ones (War is over)
Let's stop all the fight (Now)

A very merry Christmas
And a happy New Year
Let's hope it's a good one
Without any fear

And so this is Christmas (War is over)
And what have we done (If you want it)
Another year over (War is over)
And a new one just begun (Now)
And so Happy Christmas (War is over)
I hope you have fun (If you want it)
The near and the dear one (War is over)
The old and the young (Now)

A very merry Christmas
And a happy New Year
Let's hope it's a good one
Without any fear

War is over if you want it
War is over now

Do They Know Its Christmas
B. Geldof, sung by Band Aid

It's Christmastime; there's no need to be afraid
At Christmastime, we let in light and we banish shade
And in our world of plenty we can spread a smile of joy
Throw your arms around the world at Christmastime
But say a prayer to pray for the other ones
At Christmastime

It's hard, but when you're having fun
There's a world outside your window
And it's a world of dread and fear
Where the only water flowing is the bitter sting of tears

And the Christmas bells that ring there
Are the clanging chimes of doom
Well tonight thank God it's them instead of you
And there won't be snow in Africa this Christmastime

The greatest gift they'll get this year is life
Oh, where nothing ever grows, no rain or rivers flow
Do they know it's Christmastime at all?

Here's to you, raise a glass for ev'ryone
Here's to them, underneath that burning sun
Do they know it's Christmastime at all?

Feed the world
Feed the world

Feed the world
Let them know it's Christmastime again
Feed the world
Let them know it's Christmastime again

Eurocentricism?

Recently, Jeanne D'Arc of Body and Soul gently rebuked lefty "blogtopia" for its fairly obvious androcentricism. A number of poliblogs have attempted to remedy this, although mostly women who realized we were silently supporting the assumption "women can't punditize" with the deficiency of our own blogrolls. You can still frequent an inordinate number of lefty sites where only a few women bloggers are either cited in the oration or the permanent links.

While I find this pretty disheartening, in the wake of the Trent Lott debacle, on a turn through my favorite progressive weblogs, I found an equally disquieting idiosyncrasy; the apparent "whiteness" of it all. I say "apparent", as its nearly impossible to tell the color of one's skin from the pixels on their website, and one could easily lie about their own ethnicity. But while progressives are very apt to comment on the plight of civil rights, et al., the deficit of non-white voices needs to be redressed if we truly want to represent diversity. And just as I found that I had been complicit in not plugging feminist blogs on my own site, I am guilty of not giving due to other women and men of color.

To rectify this, I'm actively supporting affirmative action in the Progressive blogsphere, and am adding diversity to my blogscroll; sites which I promise myself to frequent even before I tread my traditional path (from PLA, to Body and Soul, to Alas, to Rittenhouse, and so on....)

Unfortunately, although I may have my finger on the pulse of the Indiginet, my links to non-Indian non-European bloggers is, as best, limited to what Google can pull. But I did find some interesting sites yesterday, such as the reasonably-peeved Charlie Chan's Revenge and an African-Canadian view of American politics at Formica. Some others include AllAboutGeorge, 8legs and Ray Hanania (although not currently up to date). I'm in the process of soliciting from my AI/NA friends and colleagues their favorite weblogs, but I will post one on indigenous rights that I frequent, Rhinosblog. For political humor, Black People Love Us, reminded me of every time I've heard "You know, my gr-gr-gr-grandmother was an Indian Princess" used as an icebreaker.

For my permanent politics links, I'm adding Political Circus and BlackElectorate.

I'd like to add many additional sites, so please feel free to email or add to the comments section, your favorites.