A Letter from Michael J. Goldberg, MD,
FAAP
With the hearings in Washington; the
good news is there is little (if any)
opposition to the idea we are dealing with a
different syndrome from "traditional"
autism. Unfortunately, based on my
experience at the NIH and the rally, it is
obvious that the "gap" is still in the idea
that while many are recognizing this as
different, "triggered," and likely a disease
process, I believe that few understand that
this means an ongoing "evolving" disease
process vs.
the concept of a static encephalopathy or
fixed condition.
The good news is that we may be very
close to bridging that gap in understanding
(I would dare say the "switch" was hopefully
thrown at the hearings for a few of the NIH
people there). The bad news is that while
the establishment might be swayed into
dealing with the real crisis, if confronted
with solid and real science, (even if that
means a."paradigm" shift in thinking) it
will fight adamantly if assumptions are
thrown out that do not make sense or are not
supported scientifically.
For example, looking at the current
vaccine "crisis": IF one is foolish enough
not to recognize that there is a temporal
relationship between what is happening to
some of these children and "vaccine
stresses," (in the midst of an enlarging
truly horrible epidemic), then that person,
congressman, or researcher is going to begin
to look pretty foolish. But if that persons
is given the opportunity to fight, and they
are confronted with statements that won't be
supported by science (i.e. implications that
the vaccines are the cause of this crisis /
epidemic), then they will be able to
use"real science, real facts", to prove
these accusations wrong, feel like they have
won another skirmish, while in reality
merely continuing a fruitless battle, nobody
will really win in the end.
I went back to Washington with the
ability to safely say that with funding and
manpower, we could have one to four new
agents in trial within the next six to eight
months for your children (that is still
dependent upon funding and hiring support
personnel, but that is now the ONLY
contingency).
However, as many of you are aware, I have
always stressed that to get a pharmaceutical
company to look at your children now (NOT
after years of adult work) was something
that had never happened before (but COULD
happen now). With the science falling into
place, and the "logic" looking appealing, if
a "class action lawsuit" (over the MMR link)
is undertaken, it is likely that every
pharmaceutical company and organization
would go into a defensive holding pattern,
possibly stopping any chance at new trials
for your children. WE need the
pharmaceutical companies, the Academy of
Pediatrics, and others in the "system." IF
we are to have any chance to change this
fast enough for the majority of children out
there. The next few months are likely to be
critical for all of you and your children.
|
