1. As early as December 1999 senior CDC personnel knew
of a signal from the VSD database relating to
neurodevelopmental disorders and the administration of
thimerosal containing vaccines.
2. In January of 2000 this signal was again reconfirmed
by Thomas Verstraeten to senior officers of CDC.
3. In February of 2000 Phase I of the CDC VSD analysis
of thimerosal was prepared by Thomas Verstraeten and
circulated to CDC officials including Frank DeStefano. In
the Phase I analysis Dr. Verstraeten reported a relative
risk of autism and thimerosal exposures greater than 62.5
mcgs at three months of age equal to 2.48.
4. In June of 2000 Dr. Verstraeten reported a relative
risk of autism and thimerosal exposures greater than 62.5
mcgs at three months of age equal to 1.69.
5. There are major discrepancies between the datasets
analyzed by Dr. Verstraeten in February 2000 compared to
June 2000. An additional 34,334 children were added to the
database. The majority of these children were added by
altering the inclusion criteria especially the category
"continuously enrolled for one year". In addition,
additional children were added to the population by
updating the HMO data cycle from 6 to 7. These additional
children would not have had an autism diagnosis since they
were born in 1997 and were just turning two at the time
the analysis was performed.
6. SAFE MINDS is calling for a Congressional and United
States Attorney investigation into the generation and
alteration of these reports including but not limited to
subsequent oral testimony by Roger Bernier of CDC
reporting an "inconclusive relationship" between the
administration of thimerosal containing vaccines and
neurodevelopmental disorders.
7. SAFEMINDS has obtained an email from former CDC
employee Thomas Verstraeten to Dr. Phillip Grandjean dated
July 14, 2000 in which Dr. Verstraeten states: " I know
that much of this is very hypothetical and personally I
would rather not drag the Faroe and Seychelles studies
into this entire thimerosal debate, as I think they are as
comparable to our issue as apples and pears at the best.
Unfortunately, I have witnessed how may experts, looking
at this thimerosal issue, do not seem bothered to compare
apples to pears and insist that if nothing is happening in
these studies then nothing should be feared of thimerosal.
I do not wish to be the advocate of the anti-vaccine lobby
and sound like being convinced that thimerosal is or was
harmful, but at least I feel we should use sound
scientific argumentation and not let our standards be
dictated by our desire to disprove an unpleasant theory."
8. SAFEMINDS has obtained a transcript from a CDC
sponsored consultant meeting at the Simpsonwood Retreat
Center in early June of 2000 at which the following
comments were made: "This association leads me to favor a
recommendation that infants up to two years old not be
immunized with Thimerosal containing vaccines if suitable
alternative preparations are available….Forgive this
personal comment, but I got called out a eight o’clock for
an emergency phone call and my daughter-in-law delivered a
son by C-Section. Our first male in the line of the next
generation, and I do not want that grandson to get a
thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is
going on…."