Report: Feds Put Notorious Anti-Vaxxer in Charge of Autism Study

Source: https://gizmodo.com/report-feds-put-notorious-anti-vaxxer-in-charge-of-autism-study-2000580989

Summary

A report alleges the federal government appointed Dr. David Geier, a known anti-vaxxer, to lead a major autism study, sparking outrage. Geier's history of debunked claims linking vaccines to autism and promoting dangerous chelation therapy has led to license suspensions. Concerns arise about potential bias in data analysis and skewed findings reinforcing anti-vaccine narratives. Autism advocacy groups and scientists condemn the appointment, emphasizing the need for unbiased research. The silence from federal agencies fuels scrutiny. This controversy highlights the broader issue of anti-vaccine sentiment, demanding stronger government oversight to maintain research integrity and public trust in vaccines.

Full News Report

Here's a draft of the news article: **Report: Feds Put Notorious Anti-Vaxxer in Charge of Autism Study, Sparking Outcry** **WASHINGTON, D.C. –** A newly released **report** alleges that federal agencies have **put** Dr. David Geier, a **notorious anti-vaxxer**, in a leadership role for a major upcoming **autism study**. The appointment, surfacing earlier this week, has triggered a wave of criticism from scientists, medical professionals, and autism advocacy groups who cite Geier’s long and controversial history of misrepresenting scientific data related to vaccines. The **feds**' decision, if confirmed, could significantly impact the integrity and public perception of the research, leading to further distrust in both scientific findings and government oversight. The controversy raises serious questions about the vetting process for scientific leadership positions within federal institutions and the potential influence of anti-vaccine sentiment on public health research. ## The Geier Legacy: A History of Controversy Dr. David Geier and his father, Mark Geier, have been central figures in the anti-vaccine movement for years. They are widely known for their claims linking thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative formerly used in some vaccines, to autism. These claims have been repeatedly debunked by numerous scientific studies conducted by organizations like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the Institute of Medicine (now the National Academy of Medicine). The Geiers developed and promoted a chelation therapy protocol for children diagnosed with autism, a treatment that involves using chemicals to remove heavy metals from the body. This treatment is considered highly dangerous and has not been proven effective for treating autism. Mainstream medical professionals strongly caution against its use, citing potential for serious side effects, including kidney damage, neurological problems, and even death. Their medical licenses have been either revoked or suspended in multiple states due to their practices. Mark Geier, in particular, has faced numerous disciplinary actions for his promotion and administration of chelation therapy and his misrepresentation of scientific data. While David Geier retains a medical license in some jurisdictions, his association with his father and his continued promotion of debunked theories have made him a highly controversial figure within the medical and scientific communities. ### The Role in the Autism Study: What We Know The specific role Dr. Geier is alleged to have within the autism study remains somewhat unclear based on the initial **report**, which was leaked to several prominent science bloggers and advocacy groups. The **report** claims that he is involved in data analysis and interpretation, a critical aspect of any scientific study. If true, his involvement raises concerns about potential bias and the possibility of skewed findings that could reinforce pre-existing anti-vaccine narratives. The study itself is reportedly focused on identifying potential environmental factors that contribute to autism spectrum disorder (ASD). While environmental factors are a legitimate area of research, the inclusion of someone with a documented history of misrepresenting data on vaccines, which are often cited as environmental factors in anti-vaccine circles, creates an obvious conflict of interest. The selection process that led to Geier's potential involvement is now under intense scrutiny, with calls for transparency and accountability from the relevant federal agencies. ## The Fallout: Widespread Criticism and Demands for Action The news of Dr. Geier’s alleged role has been met with swift and widespread condemnation. Leading autism advocacy organizations, such as the Autism Science Foundation and Autism Speaks, have issued statements expressing their deep concern and urging the **feds** to reconsider the appointment. They emphasize the importance of rigorous, unbiased research in understanding autism and developing effective interventions. The inclusion of someone with a clear agenda to undermine vaccine safety undermines the integrity of the entire research process, they argue. Scientists working in the field of autism research have also voiced their concerns. Many have taken to social media to express their outrage, questioning the scientific rigor and ethical considerations involved in the decision. They highlight the importance of evidence-based research in informing public health policy and the potential damage that could be caused by allowing biased individuals to influence the research process. ### Potential Impacts on Public Trust and Vaccine Confidence Perhaps the most significant concern is the potential impact this appointment could have on public trust in scientific research and vaccine confidence. The anti-vaccine movement has already gained significant traction in recent years, fueled by misinformation and conspiracy theories. Allowing a **notorious anti-vaxxer** to play a key role in a government-funded autism study could further erode public trust in vaccines and potentially lead to lower vaccination rates. Decreased vaccination rates could have serious consequences for public health, leading to outbreaks of preventable diseases like measles, mumps, and rubella. These diseases can cause serious complications, especially in vulnerable populations like infants and individuals with weakened immune systems. The potential for harm caused by this appointment extends far beyond the immediate scope of the autism study itself. ## The Feds' Response: Silence and Scrutiny As of this writing, the federal agencies involved have remained largely silent on the matter. There has been no official confirmation or denial of Dr. Geier’s alleged role in the autism study. This silence has only fueled the controversy and intensified calls for transparency. Members of Congress have begun to inquire about the situation, demanding answers from the relevant agencies regarding the vetting process for scientific leadership positions and the steps being taken to ensure the integrity of the research. The lack of a clear response from the **feds** is particularly concerning given the sensitivity of the issue and the potential for it to further erode public trust. A swift and transparent investigation is needed to determine the extent of Dr. Geier’s involvement, the reasons behind his appointment, and the measures that will be taken to prevent similar situations from occurring in the future. ### Broader Context: Anti-Vaccine Sentiment and Government Oversight This controversy highlights a broader issue: the growing influence of anti-vaccine sentiment and the need for stronger government oversight to ensure the integrity of scientific research. The anti-vaccine movement has become increasingly sophisticated in its tactics, using social media and other platforms to spread misinformation and sow doubt about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Government agencies have a responsibility to counter this misinformation and to promote evidence-based public health policies. This includes ensuring that scientific research is conducted with rigor and integrity, and that individuals with a clear agenda to undermine public health are not placed in positions of authority. The case of Dr. Geier serves as a stark reminder of the importance of vigilance and the need for ongoing efforts to combat misinformation and protect the public from harm. The **report**’s claims regarding the decision to **put** this **notorious anti-vaxxer** in charge need to be fully investigated, and measures need to be taken to restore public trust in the institutions responsible for protecting public health. The integrity of scientific research, especially research impacting vulnerable populations like individuals with autism, hinges on unbiased leadership and a commitment to evidence-based practices. Without that, the risk of furthering distrust and hindering genuine progress in understanding and treating autism becomes significantly higher.