It was a big morning in Atlanta today. In case you missed CDC Director Dr. Julie Gerberding this morning on CNN's "House Call with Dr Sanjay Gupta," it was rather interesting:

TRANSCRIPT
VIDEO

If I have read the transcript below correctly, Dr. Gerberding is saying that, yes, in some mitochondrial disorder cases, vaccines can be the trigger that causes "symptoms that have characteristics of autism." So, Dr. Gerberding admits a link -- but then denies that it is a link to autism.

The only problem with this line of argument is that I know for a fact that Hannah, as well as the kids in the new unpublished mito study were, as one doctor told me, "plucked right from autism clinics. They all have autism, there is no question of that."

JULIE GERBERDING, DR., CDC DIRECTOR: "Well, you know, I don't have all the facts because I still haven't been able to review the case files myself. But my understanding is that the child has a -- what we think is a rare mitochondrial disorder. And children that have this disease, anything that stresses them creates a situation where their cells just can't make enough energy to keep their brains functioning normally. Now, we all know that vaccines can occasionally cause fevers in kids. So if a child was immunized, got a fever, had other complications from the vaccines. And if you're predisposed with the mitochondrial disorder, it can certainly set off some damage. Some of the symptoms can be symptoms that have characteristics of autism."

So, complications from vaccines can set off damage that causes characteristics of autism (just not autism itself). I don't believe I have ever heard that from a CDC official before, though that doesn't mean they never said it.

At the same time, this language does not quite jive with what Director Gerberding told reporters just over three weeks ago on a conference call:

"Let me be very clear that (the) government has made absolutely no statement about indicating that vaccines are a cause of autism. That is a complete mischaracterization of the findings of the case, and a complete mischaracterization of any of the science that we have at our disposal today. So I think we need to set the record straight on that."

I guess it all depends on what the meaning of the word, "cause," is.

The CNN interview with Sanjay Gupta continues:

GUPTA: Are we ready to say right now that childhood vaccines do not cause autism?

GERBERDING: We can say absolutely for sure that we don't really understand the causes of autism. We've got a long way to go before we get to the bottom of this.

GUPTA: And you are comfortable saying that with everything we know?

GERBERDING: I'll never be comfortable with everything we know. I mean, I think we have to have an open mind about this. We know that there is very little chance that something related to a vaccine is going to cause a serious problem for a child.

Amid the usual "vaccines save lives" answer to questioning if it's possible that childhood vaccines could cause autism, there is some new and interesting rhetoric in the CDC Director's statements:

To wit:

"Set off some damage"
"Have an open mind"
"Get to the bottom" of vaccines and autism.
"Ill never be comfortable"
"Very little chance" - instead of "there is no evidence"
"Something related to A vaccine" - (as opposed to several vaccines at once)

This seems like news to me, but I could be wrong. At the least, I think it is interesting, and worthy of follow up, should anyone in the media be able to talk with Dr. Gerberding. For some reason, she doesn't return my calls.

When American scholar Warren Bennis said, "Bureaucracies are beautiful mechanisms for the evasion of responsibilities and guilt," he might well have been speaking of the current state of affairs inside the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Once revered around the world, hardly a month passes without another news report questioning the credibility, scientific independence, and integrity of the nation's premier health agency.

Over the past four years headlines frequently chronicle a disturbing litany of allegations charging top CDC officials with wasting money on questionable research priorities, public relations stunts, distorting or ignoring health concerns raised by their own scientists, and retaliation against those who object to the censorship of scientific findings.

The past three years have been particularly unpleasant for CDC Director, Dr. Julie Gerberding, but apparently not as bad as she and her managers are making it for many CDC scientists.

In 2005, alarmed at the rapid decline in morale and concerned for the credibility of the agency, five former CDC directors sent Dr. Gerberding a letter complaining that the agency's politicization was jeopardizing its national and international reputation. You would think criticisms like this would result in a re-evaluation by top CDC officials, but apparently not.

The frustration of long time officials was raised again in an Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) article, "Exodus, Morale Shake CDC" (Sept. 10, 2006). The article quotes Dr. Stephen Cochi, an advisor in the CDC's Global Immunization Division, who said, "The capacity of the CDC to [tackle public health problems] has seriously eroded in a very short time...The American people need to be concerned."

As troubling and often embarrassing revelations continued to plague the CDC, some believed the agency is simply an example of bureaucratic incompetence. Others, inside and out, suggest something far worse. Accusations about manipulation of research data, suppression of safety information, even suggestions of scientific fraud has created a "crisis in confidence" among CDC officials, resulting in scientists leveling harsh criticisms regarding the agency's priorities and asking if its actions, or inactions, are actually putting the public's health at risk.

Chief among the complaints from scientists and citizen's groups has been the way the agency continually disputes, downplays or ignores scientific findings, often from some of their own researchers, and fails to draw any conclusions, or "links," between environmental/industrial pollution and chronic diseases affecting the American public, particularly children.

These criticisms have been voiced for several decades. An example of how the agency can design a study so that it fails to link disease and pollution can be found in the way the CDC investigated the cancer clusters in Fallon, Nevada and Sierra Vista, Arizona. In a 2006 article published in The Tucson Weekly, the CDC's "foot-dragging" and unscientific methods used to investigate the clusters raised serious questions about the study's integrity and the agency's credibility and commitment to protecting the public's health. In describing the CDC's slow reaction to the life and death situations, it is not difficult to see how many would level accusations of "cover-up" to describe the "faulty manner" in which the agency responded to the cluster investigations.

The CDC itself admits the agency repeatedly fails to identify, or connect, environmental chemicals to these clusters. Quoting from the CDC website, "From 1961 to 1982, CDC investigated 108 reported cancer clusters in 29 states and 5 foreign countries...The studies were begun in hopes of identifying a viral cause of cancer clusters. During these investigations, however no clear cause was determined for any of the reported clusters."

Click here to read the remainder of this article.

Atlanta, GA - A newly awarded National Institutes of Health (NIH) ACE Center at the Drexel University School of Public Health will examine risk factors and biological indicators in the development of autism. Craig J. Newschaffer, PhD, Chair of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Drexel School of Public Health, will serve as the principal investigator. Drexel will study 1200 expectant mothers and their babies during the prenatal, neonatal and early postnatal periods (to 36 months of age) through a national network of research sites.

The study, to be known as the Early Autism Risk Longitudinal Investigation (EARLI), will provide a unique opportunity for studying possible autism environmental risk factors and biomarkers during different developmental windows as well as an opportunity to investigate the interplay of genetic susceptibility and environmental exposure.

Laura Bono, a Board Member of SafeMinds and the National Autism Association will serve on the EARLI Network Community Advisory Board.

"I'm glad that NIH is looking into possible environmental triggers of autism," Laura said. "One of the many advantages of this study is if anything new comes along that warrants investigation, like the recent interest in mitochondrial dysfunction in autism, researchers will be able to go back and examine samples taken of children during regression to see what changed and when. Through these biological samples and ongoing contact with families, investigators hope to piece together what triggers regression in children. The study could provide the critical insights we need to produce better treatments for children suffering now and prevent regression in the first place."

Recent research in autism spectrum disorders suggests that both genetics and environmental factors are involved in the causes of autism. In some instances, this complex disorder may be the result of an interaction of many genes with an as-yet undefined scope of environmental influences. In order to facilitate research into this area, Autism Speaks has issued a "request for applications" or RFA to support scientific study into environmental factors, and gene and environment interactions, in autism.

The types of projects that will be funded are pilot research projects to stimulate new research in this area; augmentation or enhancement awards to expand on-going large-scale research projects which will leverage existing research efforts; and funding for workshops or think tanks to stimulate the implementation of novel approaches in the field. Autism Speaks hopes to receive many meritorious applications, with the goals of expanding the interest and expertise in this important area, illuminating which environmental factors should be investigated further, and understanding how those factors may interact with genetic factors in the development of autism.

The first deadline for applications is June 2, 2008.

Download the Request for Application (PDF) for more information.

That's right, go ahead and buy something for yourself -- a new CD, the latest bestseller, everyday essentials like pet food or vitamins, even a computer. But first join www.iGive.com/SafeMinds.

Every time you shop at one of the over 680 name-brand stores in the iGive.com Mall, we'll receive a donation of up to 26% of each purchase you make, at no cost to you.

Remember, donating to SafeMinds won't cost you a thing. But we'll miss out on a lot of extra dough, if you don't join. So visit www.iGive.com/SafeMinds now. Membership is free and your privacy is guaranteed.

Click here to join.

The Age of Autism is the nation's first daily Web newspaper for the environmental-biomedical community - those who believe autism is an environmentally induced illness, that it is treatable, and that children can recover. For the most part, the major media in the United States aren't interested in that point of view, they won't investigate the causes and possible biomedical treatments of autism independently, and they don't listen to the most important voices - those of the parents. Visit the website at www.ageofautism.com.