Talk:Mark Geier

David Geier's occupation

David Geier isn't a lawyer; I am removing that assertion from the lead paragraph. To the best of my knowledge he isn't a member of any bar and he has no law degree. He is president of MedCon, a company which employs lawyers. MedCon draws part of its income from filing vaccine injury lawsuits, which may well be worth noting—but that doesn't make David Geier a lawyer. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 12:41, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Chelation therapy

Chelation therapy is used by mainstream practitioners as a treatment for lead poisoning; I've removed the comment about "alternative practitioners" for that reason. What is controversial is the use of chelation agents in patients that do not have a very high body burden of heavy metals. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 17:37, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, I see your point, but I think maybe we could and should include both points: mainstream practitioners use it for certain very specific disorders; some alternative practitioners believe it, controversially, to be effective treatment for a much wider variety of conditions and disorders. -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:56, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I actually had a heck of a time finding the work Geier did with chelation; there isn't anything apparent in PubMed. So far I've found one paper in an unindexed journal that has him as the last author (PDF is linked below):

• Bradstreet J., Geier D.A., Kartzinel J.J., Adams J.B., Geier M.R., A case-control study of mercury burden in children with autistic spectrum disorders, J Am Physicians Surg, Volume: 8, (2003), pp. 76-79)

It's a pretty small study—not a lot of cases were examined. Has he published any further work on chelation? --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 01:07, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

David Geier and HHS

There is news that David Geier has been recruited by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to work for the US Department of Health and Human Services on their report on vaccines and autism. It might be appropriate to change the name of this article to Mark and David Geier (my preference), or separate this article into two articles. Coverage: Washington Post ScienceFlyer (talk) 23:14, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I was looking for this comment. I think we need a new article on David Geier, given that this one is about his father. (Also, having David Geier automatically redirect to Mark Geier is likely to be confusing for readers - I didn't notice the redirect at first.) Rxtreme (talk) 05:45, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

I agree. I think we can copy enough from here to start a stub article about David Geier. Now that Kennedy has appointed him, he is notable on his own account: "Vaccine skeptic hired to head federal study of immunizations and autism. A long-discredited researcher and vaccine skeptic will conduct a government study on whether vaccines cause autism." -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:14, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

There's a lot of coverage of this effort by Kennedy and David Geier. So more material is available for content and in support of notability. However, it's very possible that this effort by Kennedy doesn't go much further. What about renaming the article to Mark and David Geier, and waiting to split? I'm not sure what's typical for Wikipedia. There's a groups of people category. ScienceFlyer (talk) 17:19, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

@ScienceFlyer I totally agree, as David Geier has been appointed to a significant post in the US health department and warrants his own article, separate from his father. This article information should be transferred to a new distinctly separate Wikipedia article. Stevenmitchell (talk) 21:14, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Split proposed

It's confusing this article is also about his son (I followed a redirect here and was surprised he was dead; turned out the article is actually about dad and I hadn't noticed the first name was different.) Mvolz (talk) 07:36, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Splitting sounds like a good idea - see the instructions at WP:SPLIT. Mitch Ames (talk) 08:21, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

I would agree that David Geier should have his own article. Most people looking at this article are more likely to be interested in reading about David Geier rather than his father given the significant press about RFK Jr.'s Autism report. I think that gives him sufficient notoriety to have his own article. KAugsburger (talk) 05:09, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I completely agree - I actually only found this page on Mark Geier because I was looking for information on the history of the guy RFK picked to lead the recently announced autism study, I think it would be a good time to make a separate article on David Geier, especially as I think we are likely to see more news regarding him come out in the future. 97.120.61.177 (talk) 17:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

I agree. David is now notable enough for his own article. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me)

Sadly, yes. In a better timeline, the junior Geier would have remained obscure. Unfortunately, we don't live in that better world. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:40, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

In the absence of evidence that this is all Bobby Ewing's nightmare, yes. Guy (help! - typo?) 09:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

agreed, it should be split. -TG 23:41, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

One more vote for split. David is the one making headlines right now. (Sorry that I don't know how to properly sign) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjkeefe (talk • contribs) 16:28, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

A split is definitely in order here. GnocchiFan (talk) 10:29, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

@Mvolz

Agree. The court summary used as a source in the introduction is actually about his son. Either the original author was confused or I am. 2601:600:C500:ABA0:4FA6:88AF:B2DC:85CD (talk) 06:42, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

David Geier has a position in the new administration. needs his own page.

• A split is needed. I just created Draft:David Geier. Thriley (talk) 16:56, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Just added some more information based on the below articles (that weren't paywalled) and requested a move to mainspace. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 18:54, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Some coverage of David Geier within the last two months: The Atlantic, NY Mag, Science-based Medicine, Ars Technica, WSJ