During the 106th Congress, I initiated oversight
investigations to look at the dramatic rise in autism rates and
the many concerns about vaccine safety. Autism rates have
skyrocketed. Conservative estimates suggest 1 in 500 children
in the United States is autistic. However, those rates are
dramatically higher in some places such as Brick Township, NJ,
where the rates are 1 in 150. I think Congressman Smith, who is
going to testify today, represents part of that area.
In the first quarter of this year a child was diagnosed
with autism every 3 hours in California. Last year, that rate
was every 6 hours. Look at that graph. They are having an
absolute epidemic out there.
Indiana is seeing a similar trend in increased rates; 1 in
400 children in my home State is autistic. Between December
1999 and December 2000, requests for special education services
for children with autism went up 25 percent. That is a 25-
percent increase in requests for taxpayer-provided services in
just a year.
We have a national and potentially worldwide epidemic on
our hands. It cannot simply be better reporting or an expanded
definition of autism. There has to be more to it than that.
As with any epidemic, we need to focus significant energy
and research on containing it. We need to locate the cause or
causes. We need to determine if this is the same condition we
understand autism to be or not. Could this epidemic of children
who regress into ``autism'' be another condition being called
autism?
We need to be aggressive in developing and making available
appropriate treatments for both the behavioral issues and the
biomedical illnesses related to this condition. And we need to
provide credible and timely information to the public. Has the
public health sector responded adequately and appropriately to
this epidemic? We will be hearing from witnesses over the next
2 days to find out.
Autism, or Autism Spectrum Disorder, is devastating to
families. I know this from personal experience. My grandson,
Christian, was born healthy and developed normally. His story
is not much different than that of the thousands of families we
have heard from over the last year. He met his developmental
milestones. He was talkative. He enjoyed being with people. He
interacted socially.
Then Christian received his routine immunizations as
recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
and his life changed dramatically and very rapidly. We now know
that through his shots, he may have been exposed to 41 times
the level of mercury than is considered safe by Federal
guidelines for a child his size. This was on top of other
mercury exposure from earlier vaccinations.
Within 10 days of receiving his vaccines, Christian was
locked into the world of autism--within 10 days. Is it related
to the MMR vaccine? Is it related to the mercury toxicity? Is
it the environment, including food allergies? Or is autism
purely genetic? Some would have us believe that a child's
regression into autism within a short time of vaccination is
purely a coincidence. I ask those individuals to show me the
science that proves this theory.
On Monday, the ``Measles-Mumps-Rubella Vaccine and Autism
Report'' was released by the Institute of Medicine's Committee
on Immunization Safety Review. We have Dr. Marie McCormick, the
Chair of this committee, here today to talk about the findings
and recommendations of the report.
I realize the headlines over the last 3 days have said that
the committee found no connection between the MMR vaccine and
autism. I would urge all of you to read the entire report and
recognize that the committee found that there was insufficient
evidence to conclusively prove or disprove a connection between
the MMR vaccine and acquired autism. And yet, on television all
across this country, every parent saw that there was no
connection between the MMR vaccine and autism.
Yet, that is not what the report said. I believe a
disservice has been given to the American people about this.
Parents need to know the risks involved with certain exposures
their children have to face. And they need to have all the
facts, not part of the facts.
It should be noted that the committee notes in its
conclusions that it could not exclude the possibility that MMR
vaccine could contribute to Autism Spectrum Disorder.
In the scientific community, there is an accepted hierarchy
of research methodology that builds a balanced foundation of
the evidence. That is in attachment 1. What we learned from the
Institute of Medicine is that the research has not yet been
conducted to build this hierarchy of evidence regarding the
question of whether or not the MMR vaccine may be linked to the
increased incidence of autism.
We have substantial parental observation, which should
never be discounted. And we have several case studies and
laboratory evidence showing measles virus in the guts of
autistic children who have bowel dysfunction. And we also have
several population-level epidemiological studies.
While the Immunization Committee noted that the
epidemiologic studies do not support an association at a
population level, their report stated that ``it is important to
recognize the inherent methodological limitations of such
studies in establishing causality.''
In essence, the studies that have been published and held
up by the public health community as ``proof'' against Dr.
Wakefield's hypothesis can never answer the question of whether
or not MMR vaccine is linked to autism in some children. We do
not have enough research to make an evidence-based final
conclusion. What we have is a clear indication that a problem
exists for some children. We need to do the research to get our
arms around that problem, so that we can prevent any further
escalation of this epidemic of acquired autism.
When the Institute of Medicine formed their committee, we
were assured that there would be no one on the committee who
had ties to the vaccine industry. We were told there would be
nobody connected to the vaccine industry involved in the
research done by this committee. So I was disturbed to learn
that the committee sent this report out for review and comment
prior to becoming final to numerous individuals who have ties
to the vaccine industry, including the manufacturer of the MMR
vaccine.
They sent it out for critiquing, and there were changes
made by these other people outside. They also sent it to at
least one individual who presented to the committee, but not to
Dr. Wakefield and the rest of the presenters. This preferential
treatment is disturbing, and I would like to know why they did
not send it to everybody who was a presenter.
I am including in the record a letter I received from one
of the reviewers, and a previous witness to this committee
regarding his concerns about flaws in the evaluation of the
published research. He is with the University of Oklahoma, the
Health Center. And that will be included in the record.
Mr. Burton. I want to read just one part of his letter.
``The report highly criticizes the peer review publications
that cite a causal association of the MMR vaccine and autism
and does not provide a similar critique of the peer review
publications that cite a lack of association of the MMR vaccine
and autism.''
It also says, ``One of the publications that are used to
support the lack of the MMR vaccine and autism cites support of
Merck and Company in the acknowledgements.'' They are the
producer of the MMR vaccine.
This is not mentioned in the Institute's report and could
be considered potentially as a pre-existing bias. We want to
ask the person who is going to be testifying about the report
why that happened.
They also sent it to at least one individual who presented
to the committee, but not Wakefield.
I am including in the record this letter I received from
the reviewer about what he believes to be the flaws in the
evaluation of the published research. He also raises concerns
about the lack of the Institute's acknowledgement in their
evaluation that one of the publications used to support a lack
of a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism was
sponsored by Merck, the manufacturer of the MMR vaccine.
www.thinktwice.com
