Teri Arranga v. HHS - autistic disorder (AD) (2017)
Case summary [AI summaries can sometimes make mistakes]
Teri Arranga, as the limited conservator of I.M.S., filed a petition on January 4, 2002, alleging that vaccines caused I.M.S.'s autistic disorder. This case was part of a mini-omnibus proceeding, and the petitioner agreed to be bound by the ruling in the lead case, J.M. et al. (02-10V).
The lead case addressed the theory that residual human DNA and/or retroviral fragments in vaccines could cause autism. The public decision does not detail the specific vaccines administered to I.M.S. or the dates of administration.
The petitioner's counsel was Edward M. Kraus.
The respondent was the Secretary of Health and Human Services, represented by Alexis B. Babcock.
Chief Special Master Nora Beth Dorsey issued the decision on August 31, 2017, dismissing the petition. The dismissal was based on the ruling in the lead case, J.M. et al. (02-10V), which found that the petitioners failed to demonstrate by preponderant evidence that the MMR vaccine or any other vaccination caused autism, rejecting the proposed causation theories.
The public decision does not specify any award amount or annuity terms, as the case was dismissed.
Theory of causation
Off-Table. Petitioner alleged that residual human DNA and/or retroviral fragments in vaccines, specifically MMR II, varicella, and hepatitis A, served as environmental triggers causing autism through insertional mutagenesis or autoimmunity. Petitioner's expert, Dr. Theresa Deisher, Ph.D., conducted a change point study analyzing autism prevalence data against vaccine introduction dates, identifying change points in 1980.9, 1988.4, and 1996.4 for the United States. She posited that these correlated with the introduction or increased doses of vaccines manufactured using human DNA. Respondent's experts, including Dr. M. Daniele Fallin, Ph.D., Dr. Neal Halsey, M.D., and Dr. Dan Arking, Ph.D., criticized Dr. Deisher's ecological study design, data accuracy, assumptions, and statistical methods, finding no reliable evidence of causation. The Special Master found Dr. Deisher's theories lacked a plausible scientific explanation for how DNA fragments reach the brain and cause autism, and that her proposed mechanisms were not supported by the evidence or were speculative. The Special Master adopted the reasoning from the lead case, J.M. et al. (02-10V), which found no preponderant evidence that vaccines cause autism. The case was dismissed for insufficient proof. Attorneys for petitioner: Edward M. Kraus. Attorneys for respondent: Alexis B. Babcock. Special Master: Nora Beth Dorsey. Decision Date: August 31, 2017.