Over the weekend there was a very good article in the Concord Monitor about Kathleen Seidel and her legal battle with Clifford Shoemaker, whose intrusive "fishing expedition" subpoena recently drew condemnation even from prominent antivaccination activists such as David Kirby and Dan Olmsted and was ultimately quashed with the possibility of sanctions. What this article does a good job for those new to the debate is to put things in some perspective in a relatively brief treatment; I encourage you to read the whole thing, and I will focus mostly on a couple of interesting tidbits in the article. First, this article confirms what I already knew: That Seidel has become quite important and influential in combatting the nonsense being peddled by antivaccinationists such as the Reverend Lisa Sykes and her husband Seth Sykes, whom Shoemaker was representing at the time he got slapped down for his intrusive subpoena. For example:
Advocates and fans say her exhaustive research sets her apart and makes her blog a must-read for those who care about the scientific, legal and political swirl surrounding autism.
"She is the Erin Brockovich of autism spectrum disorders," said Irving Gottesman, a psychiatry professor at the University of Minnesota Medical School who studies the causes of autism and is convinced that there is no vaccine link. Gottesman compared Seidel's investigative work to what he'd expect from a research team of several graduate students working under a professor. "Amazing," he said, for an amateur.
I agree. Indeed, I have used the fruits of Kathleen Seidel's patient research, mostly culled from online sources, publicly available information, and Freedom of Information requests. Of course, as I've pointed out before, it was Kathleen's very doggedness and success that led her to be targeted by antivaccinationists, who, consistent with their general paranoia and tendency towards conspiracy-mongering, just can't believe that she isn't in the pocket of Big Pharma. It's nothing more than the "pharma shill gambit," of course, being used to try to discredit her; a tactic that is periodically directed at me, so much so that I've been known to be facetious about it in my posts.
More interesting, however, are the responses to Kathleen's massive amount of work that resulted in an ever-growing series of posts that has revealed just how unethical Dr. Mark Geier and his son David Geier have been in pushing unproven and potentially dangerous treatments without a shred of scientific evidence on autistic children and, most disturbingly of all to me, in carrying out their "research" from their home in Silver Spring, MD:
Welcome to the Institute for Chronic Illnesses, which is run out of Dr. Geier's home. Indeed, Seed magazine once did a story about Mark and David Geier and how they had a small laboratory in their basement where they carried out their "research." Sadly, it was more or less a puff piece. I assure you, however, that it was done before I joined ScienceBlogs and didn't find out about it until some months after I had joined the collective. If I had known about it before, I may not have joined up. In any case, I assure you that if Seed ever does a story like it again the editorial staff will have Orac to deal with.
But I digress.
What interested me were Mark Geier's responses to Kathleen Seidel's extensive and well-documented charges against them, a few of which included:
- That David Geier listed a title that he had not earned in a manuscript.
- That the Geiers were deceptive in citing articles as supporting their work when in fact they did not.
- That the Geiers constituted an IRB packed with cronies and friends to oversee the human subjects research they were carrying out. (Note: I also discussed this issue and just how incredibly unethical the Geiers' action was.)
- That the Geiers are carrying out research on autistic children involving the use of a powerful anti-sex hormone drug called Lupron that is used to treat advanced prostate cancer, to shut down ovarian production of hormones during in vitro fertilization cycles to permit complete control of hormone levels by the administration of exogenous hormones. (Note: I also discussed the lack of scientific plausibility of this protocol and its potential danger in one of my first posts after joining ScienceBlogs.)
- That there was an undisclosed conflict of interest in a patent application for this dubious protocol.
- That the Geiers plagiarized a draft article prepared by CDC scientists.
First, however, Dr. Geier states how unhappy he is with Seidel:
For his part, Geier said he wasn't that troubled by Seidel's work, but he described her as "vicious."
"To go after us and call up universities and take every single paper that we write and to write every single editor and say, 'these guys are crooks,' " Geier said. "I don't understand."
Actually, Seidel has never, to my knowledge, said that the Geiers are "crooks." Unethical, yes, a charge with which I heartily agree. Using bad science to peddle a scientifically highly implausible and potentially harmful treatment for autistic children? Definitely. Maybe the charges hurt so much because they're so well-documented. I'm sure Dr. Geier views it as horribly unfair that someone like Seidel is "harassing" them, but given their treatment of autistic children based on a pseudoscientific idea that testosterone forms "sheets" that bind mercury and that lowering testosterone levels will make mercury more "available" for chelation therapy to remove it and thus alleviate autistic symptoms, he should be grateful that it's only a lone blogger "harassing" him and not his state medical board and the federal government. More hilarious are his "answer" to Kathleen's charges:
Geier answered each of Seidel's charges. The inaccurate title was the result of an editing error. The review board list she saw was a preliminary version, not the actual board. The patent is not designed to make money. The similarities between the papers are not plagiarism.
"I don't know, maybe she's an English teacher," Geier said. "That's done in science. I'm sorry, that's not exactly criminal."
Actually, no, wholesale copying of large swaths of someone else's text without attribution for a manuscript is not considered proper form in science. It may be true that scientists will sometimes recycle some text for the introductions and methodology of articles on highly related topics, they do not in general do so for results and discussions, and there is a certain threshold, exactly what threshold there may be disagreement about, over when such recycling goes too far. As for the Institutional Review Board, even if the Geiers' account were true, packing a "preliminary" IRB list with friends, relatives of patients, and cronies reveals either a total lack of research ethics or a total ignorance of how human subjects research is supposed to be done. Actually, my guess is that the list Seidel dug up only became "preliminary" after the fact, specifically after Seidel had exposed the Geiers' wretched, digustingingly unethical practice of packing the board charged with human research subjects protections with their friends and fellow antivaccinationists, none of whom could by any stretch of the imagination be considered independent or impartial. Personally, I am happy to see that Seidel has earned the Geiers' wrath. It means she's getting results. No one else I'm aware of is doing what she does, shining the light on the underbelly of autism pseudoscience that is the Geiers and others, such as Dr. Rashid Buttar. Sadly, even Seidel's best efforts appear not to have stopped the Geiers' efforts.
Of course, it is interesting to note that it was Seidel's investigation of the Geiers that led her to Clifford Shoemaker and the infamous post, The Commerce in Causation, which apparently provoked Shoemaker's subpoena. Maybe the reason antivaccinationists think in essence that everyone who argues against them and opposes their pseudoscience must be in the pocket of big pharma or otherwise part of a conspiracy is because of the incestuous relationship they all seem to have with each other, such as the Geiers' frequent testimony for lawsuits brought by Clifford Shoemaker.
Not surprisingly, other antivaccinationists are not happy with Seidel, either:
Kathleen is hurting people. She's not just disagreeing with us, she's going after people," said Amy Carson, the founder of Moms Against Mercury, a group that is trying to eradicate mercury from vaccines. Carson said that her autistic child is sick, and mercury-eliminating treatments have helped him. "She's like a pitbull when she is going after someone. She takes hold of them and doesn't let go."
Seidel didn't stop at examining the Geiers' publishing history on her website; she also began sending letters to journal editors and calling the legal departments of pharmaceutical companies. In those communications, she expressed her view that the Geiers are ethically compromised and asked why the institutions supported their work. According to Wikipedia discussion records, Seidel's husband, Dave, repeatedly revised an entry on Mark Geier in the online encyclopedia.
Mark Geier said that members of his review board have received threatening phone calls from Seidel's readers after she published their names. He also said that he's aware of other autism researchers whose jobs had been threatened by her activism.
Poor Dr. Geier. Now perhaps he has an inkling of how pro-vaccine scientists like Paul Offit and Eric Fomebonne feel, not to mention a number of people who combat antivaccination pseudoscience. They have been subject to harassment and threats by supporters of the same sort of antivaccination pseudoscience that the Geiers peddle. Naturally, I do not approve if indeed the Geiers have received threats. However, I highly doubt that supporters and colleagues of the Geiers have suffered anywhere near the number or intensity of threats that pro-vaccine scientists willing to speak out against antivaccinationists routinely have to deal with. Now that Jenny McCarthy has teamed up with J.B. Handley to organize a protest in Washington, DC on June 4, coupled with all the attendant publicity that she has brought to the cause, I only expect the situation to get worse. In any case, Seidel is entirely within her rights to contact journal editors and dig into just how some the Geiers can get away with their activities, the most egregious of which are their clinical trials. As I wrote before about this phenomenon:
The mercury militia has become in essence a religion. Like a religion, its members have developed a self-contained belief system, namely that mercury in vaccines causes autism and thus that their children are "victims" of vaccines who are "vaccine injured"; that the government, in cahoots with big pharma, has covered it up through the CDC; that scientists are in on the conspiracy because of a fanatical belief in vaccination; and that chelation therapy, along with a lot of other quackery that goes under the rubric of "biomedical treatments" can reverse the "vaccine damage." They are mutually self-supporting. Like pseudosciences inspired by other religions, namely creationism and its "intelligent design" variant, they churn out poor quality papers chock full of bad science to "support" their beliefs...
Mark and David Geier, along with others, are among the high priests of this religion, which demands the sacrifice of autistic children on its altar, a sacrifice that may extend to non-autistic children who will suffer unnecessarily from vaccine-preventable diseases if this religion spreads and undermines herd immunity. I'm just happy that there are heretics like Kathleen Seidel willing to spend so much time and effort to expose their dark rituals to the light of science and reason.
Thank you!
"Seidel's husband, Dave, repeatedly revised an entry on Mark Geier in the online encyclopedia."
It's funny how this is mentioned by them to make Mr. Seidel out to look like a fanatic, but he wouldn't have to revise if his edits weren't overturned to whitewash criticism.
I am amused by the idea that Kathleen could not possibly have the drive and focus to amass her information on her own, without being paid. Have these people never met an Aspie before? Gathering information is their speciality. My six year old knows more facts about mustelids than a high school biology teacher. He's no genius, just a regular Aspie. If he were an adult with a degree in library science he'd have the world's most informative wolverine blog.
Where I think Kathleen is extraordinary is in her moral courage. She is taking a risk by her frankness and by being public with her identity. I am very glad that at least this attempt by Shoemaker to harass her has back-fired.
People who practice such quackery should be stripped of their license to practice medicine (if any) and jailed.
For Drs Geir: remember that fellow who said "First, do no harm"?
I doubt that you do.
Thank you, indeed! Not having any children, until I started reading your blog, I really had no knowledge or understanding of the extent of the antivaccination silliness. I'm still trying to wrap my head around a group of people who, having had those "nefarious" vaccinations themselves and suffered no harm, can blithely blame those same vaccinations for their children's problems. Nor can I understand why people feel the need to find some scapegoat; if it's not "God's punishing us for X", it's, "Those dadblamed mediciney thingies musta done it!", but then, I'm not a psychiatrist.
It really does approach the level of a religion, at least the dogma is firmly in place. Having lurked on a couple antivax boards, I've seen antivaxers make a mild objection to the party line of that particular board and it immediately becomes that scene from, "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" -- "Not one of us!!!" All of which is pretty ironic considering how they paint themselves as brave free-thinkers outside of the medical box.
Thank you, indeed! Not having any children, until I started reading your blog, I really had no knowledge or understanding of the extent of the antivaccination silliness. I'm still trying to wrap my head around a group of people who, having had those "nefarious" vaccinations themselves and suffered no harm, can blithely blame those same vaccinations for their children's problems. Nor can I understand why people feel the need to find some scapegoat; if it's not "God's punishing us for X", it's, "Those dadblamed mediciney thingies musta done it!", but then, I'm not a psychiatrist.
It really does approach the level of a religion, at least the dogma is firmly in place. Having lurked on a couple antivax boards, I've seen antivaxers make a mild objection to the party line of that particular board and it immediately becomes that scene from, "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" -- "Not one of us!!!" All of which is pretty ironic considering how they paint themselves as brave free-thinkers outside of the medical box.
Arggggh! Sorry about the duplicate post. It came up as an internal server error so I reposted it. (kicks server angrily)
Are the Geiers and Moms Against Mercury basically saying that their activities should not be scrutinized; that they should be allowed to operate with impunity? That would be quite ridiculous a suggestion, wouldn't it? I'm glad Kathleen takes the time to look at this stuff and posts the information for all to see and evaluate.
It's interesting that the Geiers are now claiming that they've received death threats. After years of harrassing scientists and "just plain folks" who dare to question their received wisdom about mercury and autism, perhaps the mercury/vaccines-cause-autism movement is sensing a "down-side" to that sort of behavior.
Personally, I doubt very much that the Geiers have received death threats because the skepiticism and debunking don't generate that level of emotion.
It's quite easy to imagine a person worked up to the point of making a death threat (or even carrying one out, which hasn't happened - yet) by claims that "They're poisoning our children!" and "You're trying to keep us from helping our kids!".
However, it's not so easy to imagine someone getting to that point because the Geiers are using an untested, unsupported and - frankly - laughably simple-minded treatment on autistic children. Unless they were doing it to my child. Maybe the Geiers should look through their "client" list for potential suspects.
No, I think that the Geiers are simply trying to "level the playing field" - to make their opponents look as irrational as their supporters.
Ultimately, the effort will fail. Eventually, even the "average person" will see that giving Lupron to an autistic child because you think that it will prevent or break up "sheets" of mercury and testosterone that have only been formed in the lab using high concentrations of mercury and testosterone dissolved in hot benzene is rather pathetic.
As I've said before:
Prometheus
Har! Prometheus, that was a long-needed antidote to a tired old saw.
Geier sounds like a crybaby. "That Kathleen is being mean to us! She says we're wrong and stuff!" If he were any kind of scientist, he'd want to be the first to know there might be a problem with his conduct or research.
Kathleen had an ethical duty to report what she discovered about the Geiers' pattern of behavior. This isn't about grownups' egos, it's about children's health. Get over yourself, Geier.
If he were any kind of scientist, he'd want to be the first to know there might be a problem with his conduct or research.
So true it should be repeated.
I think the Geiers have better things to do, like curing autistic kids, than to bother with the lunatic fringe from neurodiversity.
I wonder if Dave or Kathleen Seidel have the guts to answer my concerns about the way they lie about decent people who help autistic kids. I doubt it.
Fasinating really.
I did not realize the following taken from the Concord Monitor;
"In the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, patients are held to a much weaker standard of proof than the one used in traditional courts. They are judged by "special masters," instead of judges, and the court reimburses the plaintiff's legal fees, whether he wins or loses. The system, which is funded by a 75-cent tax on all vaccines, is designed to make it easy to bring claims and likely that injured patients will get relief. If patients are dissatisfied with the outcome, they can then go to the civil court system."
Seems like this compensation program merely wetted the appetite of many lawyers.
There are very very big pockets to go after on the part of the anti vacc'ers (Phizer, Glaxo etc etc). Those whom think that vaccination is not a player have virtually no monetary gain other then advertising on thier websites. And of late have the added burden of being trampled by the mob.
Fear breeds panic, some see panic as a monetary opportunity, others see it as fear breeding panic....
Note in the photo of Geier's home that two of the three garbage cans are turned over.
This would indicate that;
1. There are instabilities with darker cans?
2. There is garbage in one can and not the two others indicating that people are being forced to accept cans they do not need?
3. Blue can has a lid and will not fill with water so garbage is filled in the top rather than from underneath in black and brown?
4. Black and brown cans contain mercury on thier upper edges which is a very heavy element causing them to invert?
5. Black and Brown cans assimilate with each other and the the brown can was merely mimic'd what the black can was doing?
This concludes our first observational assessement in vaccine correlation.....
That was a great piece by the Monitor. I had no idea that Ms. Seidel had no 'formal' medical or scientific background. From reading her blog, I thought she had a PhD in Neuroscience or Psychology given her strict adherence to finding evidence and looking for the correct evidence in each situation.
She should consider doing an MPH in epidemiology looking at vaccines/mercury/ASD. I think- given her drive- she would be successful and produce some pretty high-impact work.
Anyone wishing to do battle with woo should note that this blog post on how "vaccines may have caused autism" is one of the top Word Press posts right now. The sensible posters are being swamped by the antis: http://libizblog.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/vaccines-may-have-caused-auti…
What concerns, Mr. Best? Please explain.
Not too far off topic, I hope, but Orac, what do you think about the Texas epidemiological study of autism correlated with distance from coal-burning power stations?
[sniff-sniff-sniff] Ewwwwww, man!!!
Smells like an ass full of stupid. Best must be posting again.
Phoenix,
Seidel's lies are well documented throughout my blog. My latest concern is the stupidity of a newspaper that was conned by her.
Bones,
I'm glad I can count on you for intelligent rebuttal.
To follow on Prometheus' post...
Alties of all stripes absolutely need to play victim, since it is a key element of their proof of validity. Without it, they are left with whatever facts they can muster, and that is damn little, at best.
As for John Beast's rantings. Pay them no mind. John types with both hands, and when he does, he has to let go of reality to do so. John uses his child as a laboratory test animal.
Mr. Best: If she's lying, can you do a quick synopsis here? With appropriate links? Your blog didn't have anything that refuted what PZ mentions in the body of this post.
Pssst, Phoenix Woman.
You're other loyalties are showing.
*wink*
Phoenix, No, I don't feel like rewriting things I've already written. Who's PZ?
Probe, Are you just jealous because you're too stupid to help your kid?
Seriously, John?!? Let's take a look at some of your "intelligent" statements, shall we....
"Kathleen Seidel is a conniving, deceitful and vicious bitch."
or how 'bout...
"So, scumbags like Seidel..."
and...
"This moron calls Seidel an Erin Brockovich when sane people know that she more closely resembles Joseph Goebbels..."
I get it, John. Your longheaded, pentagonal skull, outward bulging parietal bones, flattened cranial vault, forward projection of the upper jaw, and low-set eye sockets prevent you from reasoned, rational thinking (among other things) like that of your more highly evolved cousin - the Human - but please you should at least know enough to keep quiet.
Better to be thought a fool then to open your mouth and prove it. Might be a little late for you, but hey....
Bones,
How come you can try to insult me but can not offer any rebuttal to my statements about Seidel? I think she would be flattered by my comparing her to Joseph Goebbels. I'm acknowledging thst she's good at what she does.
OK, so John Best doesn't want to post evidence here but instead is trolling for clicks to his blog. Got it. Into the killfile he goes! Sorry for wasting the time of the sane people here -- I just wanted to give him a chance.
Beast blathered: "Probe, Are you just jealous because you're too stupid to help your kid?"
You mean the one with a M.F.A. from one of the top schools in the country?
Unlike you, I treated my son like a human, not a lab animal, as you do yours.
Phoenix,
It's not my fault you're too lazy to do your research on this issue. Since opposing the truth about autism is insane, there aren't many sane people on this site.
And then we have mental cases like the Probe here, who wants to compare a kid with Asperger's to a low functioning autistic. What kind of asshole does something like that?
Observations as to the subpoena issued Ms. Seidel:
1. Although the subpoena was soooo outrageous on its face that it attracted the attention, comment, and generally the condemnation of some legal bloggers, it was the non-legal (scientific, medical, academic, etc.) blogs that kept the story alive, and provided the information showing that Ms. Seidel's blogs on the Geiers are well-supported by the facts. Unfortunately, our so-called "news media" failed to report the story.
2. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (and most state rules, since most of them are closely modeled on the FRCP) provide few protections against discovery abuse directed at non-parties to the suit, other than expert witnesses. Subpoenas for trial to non-parties, especially in the state courts, are abused even more frequently (it is not uncommon for a non-party to receive a subpoena to testify at trial -- and have to show up on penalty of having a bench warrant issued for failure to do so -- and be interviewed for the first time by the attorney who issued the subpoena or learn that the case settled, and also learn that the basis for the subpoena was someone said, that they believe that someone else believed that someone else thought that the non-party might, maybe and perhaps, have some personal knowledge of the facts). Althought the US Supreme Court promulgates the FRCP, making complaints about them difficult for most people to raise to the Justices, there is nothing stopping people aware of the facts concerning the subpoena issued Ms. Seidel from contacting their Congressional representatives and asking that the FRCP be changed to add protections against abuse of non-parties. Before a discovery request is issued to a non-party(non-expert), the proponent of the discovery request should be required to file a motion seeking leave of court to issue it, with a copy of the discovery request (or summary of issues to be covered in a deposition) and explanation of how the discovery request is reasonably expected to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and the posting of a bond to cover the non-party's costs (including reimbursement of lost wages). If enough people raise these issues with Congress, the House and Senate Judiciary Committees will take up the issue with the Justices. Members of Congress appear to be especially receptive to their constituents in election years.
3. As Uncle Dave aptly pointed out, the standards of proof for recovery in the Vaccine Court are "much weaker" than in other courts, and the attorneys and "experts" get paid even when they lose. Those are your tax dollars at work. If, as a scientist, physician, professor or tax-payer you are troubled by this, contact your Congressional representatives and complain -- it is an election year. And, as Uncle Dave noted, a loss in the Vaccine Court doesn't prevent a suit against the vaccine manufacturer. So, the Vaccine Court is sort of a dry-run in which the US pays the plaintiff's attorneys' fees and experts'. It is the only set of laws I am aware of in which a party gets a second bite at the apple (absent fraud, jury tampering or something akin to that). A decision by the Vaccine Court should estop any other suits by the plaintiff (I actually wouldn't mind the lower (IMO much lower) standard of proof in the Vaccine Court if that court's decision ended the matter -- instead of being set up to promote additional suits.
4. Implicit in Uncle Dave's comment -- it's all about the money. Follow the money and you'll find the motivation. That's probably why Ms. Seidel's critics can't understand her -- she isn't in it to make money.
John wrote:
"And then we have /John Best/ like the Probe here, who wants to compare a kid with Asperger's to a low functioning autistic. What kind of /John Best/ does something like that?"
John,
To the extent that you have a coherent argument, it is that there has been a tremendous increase in the number of cases of autism in recent decades. If you don't count Asperger's cases as part of the autism spectrum then that increase just goes away. So the person you're arguing with here is yourself. When you decide which part of your argument you want to abandon, then come back and let us know - or don't come back.
Andrew, Are you stupid enough to think anyone is going to believe that autism has not increased regardless of Asperger's?
"Are you /John Best/ enough to think anyone is going to believe that autism has not increased regardless of Asperger's? "
I don't care what anyone believes; I care what the evidence shows.
Andrew,
The evidence shows that physicians injected too much mercury into infants and caused an epidemic of autism.