For Immediate Release: Contact: Jaillene Erickson, (202) 225-3671 or
(202)-549-2933
May 18, 2004 Jaillene.Erickson@mail.house.gov
Weldon Calls IOM Conclusions Premature and Hastily Drawn
Rep. Dave Weldon, M.D. (FL) Issued The Following Statement
Today's report is premature, perhaps perilously reliant on epidemiology,
based on preliminary incomplete information, and may ultimately be
repudiated. This report will not deter me from my commitment to seeing that
this is fully investigated, nor will it put to rest the concerns of parents
who believe their children were harmed by mercury-containing vaccines or the
MMR vaccine.
Unfortunately, this report will lead many clinicians to believe that
thimerosal is safe and there is no problem with the MMR; however, it will do
nothing to allay the concerns of thousands of parents of autistic children.
It will only drag the IOM under the cloud of controversy that has currently
engulfed CDC. This concern is what lead me earlier this year to request that
Dr. Julie Gerberding delay this meeting and report.
In 2001 the IOM stated that it is "unclear whether ethylmercury [from
vaccines] passes readily through the blood-brain barrier…" The IOM
recommended several biological and clinical studies to answer this question
and whether this mercury could cause developmental problems. These studies
were in large part never done. Yet IOM chose to ignore the need for this
research and instead has focused its analysis on the data available today,
most of which is statistical, but there is much more research that needs to
be done before it can definitively be said that thimerosal does not
contribute to NDDs. Even today, the IOM cannot tell you with any degree of
certainty what happens to ethylmercury once injected into an infant. Does it
go to the brain? Does is cause developmental problems?
The IOM's scope of investigation was severely narrowed for this review. In
2001 the IOM considered thimerosal's relationship with nuerodevelopmental
disorders as a whole, but here they only consider Autism. This raises
suspicions that this IOM exercise might be more about drawing pre-designed
conclusions aimed at restoring public confidence in vaccines rather than
conducting a complete and thorough inquiry into whether or not thimerosal
might cause neurodevelopmental disorders. Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, the author
of one of the studies upon which the IOM relies, recently stated in
an April 2004 letter to Ped iatrics: "The bottom line is and has always been
the same: an association between thimerosal and neurological outcomes could
neither be confirmed nor refuted, and therefore, more study is required." It
was after this study was published that the IOM scope was narrowed.
Unfortunately, the epidemiology studies that the IOM bases its findings on
are not immune from conflicts or controversy. Many of the authors have
conflicts of interest including funding from vaccine manufactures, employment
by manufacturers, or conflicts in that they implemented vaccine
policies that are now being investigated. Furthermore, the studies were
designed to examine entire populations and would miss subgroups of
genetically susceptible populations. Much like the infamous 1989 study by
The National Institute of Child and Human Development (NICHD) which missed
the link between folic acid deficiencies and neural tube defects, the
epidemiology studies reviewed by the IOM in drawing today's findings, could
easily have missed a link between thimerosal and NDDs. The IOM report is
based on studies examining populations in the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden
and the United States - all of whom have different vaccines, vaccine
policies, and mercury exposures. Study results are only as reliable as the
design of such studies. Relying on these studies to draw conclusions is
shaky ground.
The IOM is not immune to error and has been forced to reverse itself before,
most recently reversing a long-standing finding that chronic lymphocytic
leukemia (CLL) was not due to Agent Orange exposures. A similar reversal is
a very real possibility here.
With regard to the MMR vaccine, the IOM review of this matter is totally
premature; the NIH is only now attempting to duplicate the work of Dr. Andrew
Wakefield. Half of Dr. Wakefield's work has been demonstrated to be
correct. Attempting to draw "conclusions" at this time is
counterproductive. Statistical studies of this matter are of little
benefit, only a clinical pathological study will lay this issue to rest.
Lastly, I am also troubled by the lack of liability or accountability by
these decision-makers should they be proved wrong. I want more than just a
"sorry" from them should their conclusions be found erroneous a few years
down the road. Too many lives are at stake.

The Age of Autism: 'The first casualty'
By DAN OLMSTED
UPI Senior Editor
WASHINGTON, June 27 (UPI) -- The only medical doctor in the U.S. House of
Representatives delivered a harsh judgment this week on public health
authorities whose job is making sure vaccinations are as safe as humanly
possible.
"Federal agencies charged with overseeing vaccine safety research have failed,"
said Rep. David Weldon, R-Fla. "They have failed to provide sufficient resources
for vaccine safety research. They have failed to fund extramural research. And,
they have failed to free themselves from conflicts of interest that serve to
undermine confidence in the safety of vaccines.
"The American public deserves better, and increasingly parents and the public at
large are demanding better."
Weldon concentrated his fire on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
which recommends the childhood immunization schedule through its Advisory
Committee on Immunization Practices -- and has conducted numerous studies that
find no association between vaccines and serious health problems, particularly
autism.
But Weldon said the federal government in total has failed to do its job.
"Several issues relating to vaccine safety have persisted for years. The
response from public health authorities has been largely defensive from the
outset, and the studies plagued by conflicts of interest."
It should be noted the CDC stands behind its research and that last year it
separated its Immunization Safety Office from the National Immunization Program.
Weldon says that's simply not enough to ensure impartial, aggressive
investigation.
Weldon introduced a bill -- co-sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y. -- that
would create a new agency of vaccine safety that reports to the secretary of
health and human services; require research to be independent of any
vaccine-related decisions; and establish an 18-member advisory committee to
create a vaccine research agenda. At least one-third of the committee would be
made up of people with vaccine injuries or a vaccine-injured child.
Given the realities of the legislative calendar, Weldon told me, he's hoping to
build support and hold hearings this fall on the measure and re-introduce it in
the new Congress that convenes in January.
Weldon's approach is wide-ranging. For one thing, he's not putting all his eggs
in the mercury-equals-autism basket, so to speak -- he's not asking for more
research solely to determine whether the mercury-based preservative thimerosal
triggered a huge rise in autism diagnoses in the 1990s.
While that question has been the focus of attention -- and properly so, given
the government's own decision to phase out thimerosal from routine childhood
immunizations beginning in 1999 -- there is the prospect that other vaccine
ingredients, and other side effects, may be insidiously at work.
"There are unresolved questions about the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine
that arose in 1998 that should be fully investigated," Weldon said.
Indeed, this column recently reported on a cluster of cases in Olympia, Wash.,
that suggest a possible risk of autism from getting MMR and chickenpox shots too
close together in a susceptible subset of children.
One of the children diagnosed with autism was in a clinical trial of a new
vaccine combining all four of those live-virus vaccines, including 10 times as
much chickenpox component as the standalone chickenpox vaccine. The
manufacturer, Merck & Co., acknowledged that case -- and another from a similar
trial in Olympia involving an experimental chickenpox vaccine given at the same
time as the MMR -- was not reported to the FDA until March.
That was the same month we first inquired about the cases -- and six months
after the new vaccine, called ProQuad, was approved by the FDA for all children
12 months to 12 years old.
Merck, like other vaccine manufacturers, mainstream medical groups and public
health authorities, says there is no association between vaccines and autism.
Weldon's bill would put that assertion to the test -- without the conflicts he
says make such assurances suspect.
Beyond autism, a range of concerns are "out there" about the childhood
immunization schedule, which has expanded greatly over the past two decades and
now includes a Hepatitis B shot on the day of birth and the prospect of more
combinations and components in coming years.
Few argue against the basic premise of mass vaccination against deadly diseases.
The legitimate public-policy question is whether the authorities have gotten the
details wrong -- vaccinating too soon against too many illnesses, not all of
them life-threatening or likely to afflict children, and undertaking too little
independent surveillance of possible unintended consequences.
From that perspective, it was hard to ignore the convergence of events at the
Capitol Thursday morning -- as Weldon spoke, members were awaiting the arrival
of the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, to address a joint session.
In the new book "Fiasco" about the Iraq war by Washington Post Pentagon
Correspondent Thomas E. Ricks, the failure of public officials to properly gauge
the real risks and potential rewards of the invasion are laid out in devastating
detail.
"None of this was inevitable," Ricks writes. "It was made possible only through
the intellectual acrobatics of simultaneously 'worst-casing' the threat
presented by Iraq and 'best-casing' the subsequent cost and difficulty of
occupying the country."
That made me go back and dig out a paper titled "From Safety Last To Children
First," by Mark Blaxill of the group SafeMinds and Barbara Loe Fisher, president
of the National Vaccine Information Center. It was submitted to a CDC panel on
vaccine safety in 2004.
"The obvious concern is that benefits may be overstated and that risks will be
suppressed," they wrote in terms that eerily echo Ricks'. And they made the war
analogy explicit, citing "a mission of fighting a 'war on disease' that
disregards the secondary and tertiary consequences of war and views innocent
children as inevitable consequences."
"The language of conflict -- the 'war on disease,' 'combating the causes of
epidemics,' 'fighting emerging infections' -- is closely connected to the
language of military power and, of course, 'Disease Control.' History teaches us
that when government officials are determined to fight a war, any war, truth can
be the first casualty."
It would be ironic if the same patterns that led to a foreign policy "fiasco"
were at work in domestic health policy. Weldon's bill is a first step toward
finding out -- and making sure, if that did happen, it gets fixed before more
casualties pile up.
Back to
page