Cent4dent Blog

By KEVIN FREKING, Associated Press Writer
Mon May 12, 12:43 AM ET

Families claiming that a mercury-based preservative in vaccines triggers autism will challenge mainstream medicine Monday as they take their case to a federal court.

They seek vindication and financial redress from a government fund that helps people injured by shots.

Two 10-year-old boys from Portland, Ore., will serve as test cases that determine whether the children and their families in similar situations should be compensated. Attorneys for the boys will attempt to show the boys were happy, healthy and developing normally. But, after being exposed to vaccines with thimerosal, they began to regress and show symptoms of autism.

Thimerosal has been removed in recent years from standard childhood vaccines, except flu vaccines that are not packaged in single-doses. The CDC says single-dose flu shots currently are available only in limited quantities. In 2004, a committee with the Institute of Medicine concluded there was no credible evidence that vaccines containing thimerosal caused autism.

Overall, nearly 4,900 families have filed claims with the U.S. Court of Claims alleging that vaccines caused autism and other neurological problems in their children. Lawyers for the families will present three different theories of how vaccines caused autism.

The Office of Special Masters of the claims court has instructed the plaintiffs to designate three test cases for each of the three theories — nine cases in all — and has assigned three special masters to handle the cases. Three cases in the first category were heard last year, but no decisions have been reached.

The two cases beginning Monday are among the three that focus on the second theory of causation: that thimerosal-containing vaccines alone cause autism. The plaintiff in the third case originally scheduled for hearing this month has withdrawn and lawyers and court officials are working to agree on substitute case.

Hearings in the test cases for the third theory of causation are scheduled in mid-September.

Lawyers for the petitioning families in the cases being heard this month say they will present evidence that injections with thimerosal deposit a form of mercury in the brain. That mercury excites certain brain cells that stay chronically activated trying to get rid of the intrusion.

“In some kids, there’s enough of it that it sets off this chronic neuroinflammatory pattern that can lead to regressive autism,” said attorney Mike Williams.

In the end, the families’ attorneys hope to convince the special master hearing their case that thimerosal belongs on the list of causes for the inflammation that leads to regressive autism.

To win, the attorneys for the two boys, William Mead and Jordan King, will have to show that it”s more likely than not that the vaccine actually caused the injury.

Many members of the medical community are skeptical of the families’ claims. They worry that the claims about the dangers of vaccines could cause some people to forgo vaccines that prevent illness.

“I think that what’s so endearing to me about the anti-vaccine people is they’re perfectly willing to go from one hypothesis to the next without a backward glance,” said Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

Autism is a developmental disability that typically appears during the first three years of life and affects a person’s ability to communicate and interact with others. Dr. Andrew Gerber, a psychiatrist, said that medical experts don’t have a comprehensive understanding of what causes autism, but they do know there is a strong hereditary component.

Toxins from the environment could play a role, but currently, data does not support that they do, Gerber said.

Arguments are scheduled to go on throughout the month. A final decision could take several more months. Claims that are successful would result in compensation taking into account lost earnings after age 18 and up to $250,000 for pain and suffering.

The families or the federal government can also appeal the decision of the special master to the Court of Federal Claims or to a federal appeals court.

The court Web site says more than 12,500 claims have been filed since creation of the program in 1987, including more than 5,300 autism cases, and that more than $1.7 billion has been paid in claims. It says there is now more than $2.7 billion a trust fund supported by an excise tax on each dose of vaccine covered by the program.

May 5, 2008
Judge James P. Jones
Chief U.S. District Judge
180 West Main Street
Room 104
Abingdon, VA 24210

Dear Judge Jones:

I read with great interest the information regarding Dr. Shelburne on the website http://www.medicaidruinsgooddentist.com/ and have a number of questions and comments about it.

Foremost in my mind is the fact that the system that provides dental care to the poor in this country is a travesty, and that is why it is so difficult for people working under these government stipends to find a dentist who accepts it. In my own practice, rather than participate with this penurious program, I prefer to select deserving individuals, and render pro bono care to them. Why then, did the prosecutor choose to go after such small potatoes? Aren’t there larger fish to fry?

In 2000, C. Everett Koop, MD, the Surgeon General released a report talking about the deplorable state of dental health in the underserved population. I would never elect to participate in this government run program for many reasons:
• The patients miss a lot of appointments
• The patients have a lot of needs because their diets are improper
• The patients have horrendous home care because parents don’t emphasize the importance thereof
• The payment is typically about ten cents on the dollar for treatment we would deliver in our office.
• The children tend to be very difficult to work on because they are not being treated in a preventive (as opposed to emergency) situation.

So, I would ask you Judge, if the judicial system told you that any case where there is going to be a public defender, and a defendant who really needs to be shackled to behave was going to cause your per diem salary to be decimated, how would you handle it? Would you round your hours up to the next highest number? Would you take sick days, which would be paid at the normal rate? Would you rush through the trial trying to end it as quickly as possible? Would you allow attorneys to produce inflammatory remarks that would cause the jury confusion? Or would you run it as efficiently as possible?

What if several times, the defendant or the PD didn’t show up for court? Could you throw the case out? Remember, you’re not being paid for the time you sit waiting or on no-show days.

I have always read, with interest stories about professionals whose undoing was the participation in the welfare system. I know, in fact, a family whose estates were built using the welfare system. Abuses are rife. What I read on the website about abuses of Dr. Shelburne, unless I’ve been misled are tantamount to padding the bill slightly to extract his pound of sweat, but in my mind a white collar crime of this small amount (I recall $8000 over 5 years) did not build an estate, purchase high-end vehicles or vacation homes, did it?

I also read where the claims reviewer was not working with loupes or illumination to determine whether treatment had been billed, but not performed. I have personally gone through something akin to this with an insurance company that was refusing to authorize needed fillings. You see, there are two ways to diagnose the need for decay:
Visual examination
Tactile examination (today we use a laser, not a hooked explorer to find decay)

Insurance companies don’t want to hear this. They are in business to hold onto their money, and so claims are denied without cause, and the populace is faced with the decision of trusting their doctor, or believing the insurance company is right. Most of our patients understand the adversaries in this, and take the dentists’ side.

I believe that the Constitution calls for a jury of peers to adjudicate a case. My understanding from reading the website was that these were poorly educated jurors, hardly peers. Might I suggest that this case deserves some judicial review, and perhaps a panel of dentists from around the nation (I know many who would volunteer) could come in a review what went on and make recommendations to you so that you might perhaps set aside this verdict. It certainly seems to me that the punishment should fit the crime.

The crime here was what? $8,000 in disputed charges. I think that Big Brother has certainly overstepped. What was the sentence for the toilet manufacturer that was selling parts to the Air Force for ridiculous sums of money? How much money does our government waste on pork barrel projects? I would love to see what the government alleges as their loss in this case. I can certainly tell you that once this letter is widely disseminated the loss will be more intolerable. The welfare recipients will find fewer caring practitioners willing to participate in a program that carries with it a significant disincentive to continue to do so.

I await your reply, and would like your permission to disseminate it to my peers, who are aghast at this travesty (as presented by the friends and family of Dr. Shelburne).

Respectfully,

Steve Markus, DMD FACE