Scroll down to the part called How the Scam Works after clicking on the quackbusters link.. Doesn't this sound exactly like Neurodiversity? This is too similar to just be a coincidence.
I hope all of the people associated with Neuroinsanity will read this. It just points out what I've been telling you all along. Your leaders are simply a sham and are using you to help Pharma and mainstream medicine increase profits. These maggots couldn't care less about you or autistic rights. It's high time you folks with Asperger's woke up and stopped these bastards from using you to increase their profits. Any Autism Hub bloggers with half a brain who are not paid members of Quackbusters should quit the Hub right now, consult Generation Rescue and publicly denounce the Neurodiversity leaders.
I can only guess at who the anonymous or pseudonymous shills are. My best guess would be that it's the ones who won't publish any of my comments. That includes Kathleen, Kev, Kristina, Diva, DoC, Michelle, Amanda Baggs, along with Prometheus and Orac when they can't come up with an argument to refute what I have to say. While Joseph usually publishes my comments, that's only because he mistakenly thinks he's smarter than me. He's also, by far, the smartest of the Neurodiverse which makes me think he could only be a shill. My opinion on Estee Klar is that it's a tossup whether she's really as dumb as she acts and is a well meaning mother or that she is simply playing the role of the dumb blond with some bit of education.
Tim Bolen tells us this about Quackbusters: "It's sole purpose is to discredit, and suppress, in an "anything goes" attack mode, what is wrongfully named "Alternative Medicine." It has declared war on reality." I hope the innocent victims associated with the Autism Hub are paying attention. What fits in with this better than Kathleen's attacks on parents who are simply trying to help their children? Why do Diva and Kevin relentlessly bash parents who are desperate to save their kids?
Why would any parent bash another parent for helping a child? One thing you can be certain of is that the truth about autism will be the worst black eye the medical profession has ever had. They are going to great lengths to avoid it. Having their blogs show up on page one of most searches shows they are accomplishing their goal.
I can only guess about whether or not Neurodiversity is really Quackbusters. I don't have the resources to track down these idiots and have them investigated. It does make sense though, all the anonymous twerps calling anyone who helps an autistic child a quack, the personal attacks on scientists and parents. Why didn't we hear any of this nonsense until a couple of years ago? One would think that a sect of crazed parents would have sprung up long before that if these nitwits were really who they claim to be. There can't really be any people who celebrate having a child afflicted with autism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
94 comments:
"Does Neurodiversity Equal Quackbusters?"
Yes, I think so.
John, I might be wrong, but here's why I believe Stephen Barrett is Prometheus:
http://www.quackwatch.org/10Bio/bio.html
An expert in medical communications, Dr. Barrett operates 22 Web sites; edits Consumer Health Digest (a weekly electronic newsletter); is medical editor of Prometheus Books...
Of course that might just be a coincidence...
Watson, Wasn't Barrett fighting off some lawsuits recently? That could explain why Prometheus took a long break from blogging.
Yes, Neurodiversity equals Quackbusters. And that's because Quackbusters are the private detectives of medicine. Just like Joey Greco on Cheaters! And just as accurate! Quackbusters will be the first to expose the quacks who supply chelation for the purpose of curing Autism for what they are - quacks!
And we only started making noise when idiots like you, Foresam, started making noise about your own twisted demented views as though they were fucking law!
In the end - Quackbusters will get YOU!
But John Best is really Stephen Barrett isn't he? Have you ever seen them in the same place at the same time?
Correct ... he has lost many lawsuits recently ... including Barrett Vs Rosenthal in the Supreme Court of California.
a href="http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/BarrettVsRosenthal.htm"
Maybe....
http://www.bolenreport.net/feature_articles/feature_article050.htm
I don't ever post anything under any assumed name. Nor do I ever post anything anonymously.
Steve, Does this mean you and your idiots have nothing to do with Neuroinsanity?
Anonymous nitwit, Many of us have already proven you to be quacks by curing our kids from the poison the medical profession gave them. How long do you think you can defend this crime?
That was a very quick response from Stephen Barrett.
Watson, One of his nitwits must have alerted him.
Could there possibly be another explanation?
Watson, It could have been some nitwit sockpuppetting him. Or, he could be scared. Who knows.
Indeed.
His "rag-tag posse" infiltrates every newsgroup, blog, and boards on the internet ... unfortunately including Wikipedia.
Here is a link to my explanatory website about his many losses in court. It reveals how Paul Lee and David "Orac Knows" Gorski and others push his propaganda ... often using alaises.
http://tinyurl.com/yba48z
http://tinyurl.com/2cxu5r.
(Can someone tell me how to get a link to work here??? I have several I'd like to share.
http://www.BreastImplantAwareness.org
Stephen Barret,
What takes more courage? To buck the traditional medical system in order to rescue children from conditions like autism, that the traditional community dooms them to a lifetime of living with OR to sit behind a computer screen scoffing at the inovators? I vote for the former, and one day the biomed doctors will be branded heros. They are already my heros. You are simply a coward and a failed one at that. http://www.quackpotwatch.org/quackpots/quackpots/barrett.htm You steal away people's hope and replace it with nothing, while blatantly ignoring all the people who are successfully recovering their children.
Ilena, That ruling about intimidation sounds exactly like what some lawyer pulled here to shut up an autistic woman who was exposing a fraud associated with Neurodiversity. I'ts good to hear that you beat these lowlifes.
Hey John - that one guy ilena mentions - david "orac knows" gorski. he has a nasty comment & link to your cho story on his blog about cho. they were already watching you.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/04/vaccines_caused_the_virginia_tech_rampag.php
Anon, I don't pay much attention to Orac anymore. He's dishonest.
John, I clicked on Ilena Rose's site and was very surprised (well, intrigued actually) to see James Laidler's name on the same page as Stephen Barrett, Peter Bowditch, and Robert Baratz, because I recalled a Jim Laidler from the autism lists (Autism-Mercury,
ORAutismSupport) in 2001. He was a DAN! doctor.
I googled "Jim Laidler" and discovered that it is the same person, and he now runs Autism Watch at Quackwatch. (1)
This is the same Jim Laidler, who Bernard Rimland chose in 2001 to write the DAN! Position Paper on Mercury Detoxification of Autistic Children. (2)
Apparently, Dr Rimland met Laidler in 2000 and seems to have been impressed by his extensive knowledge of metal toxicity - and no doubt he was delighted to discover that he had successfully treated his own two autistic children for mercury toxicity "with excellent results". No wonder then that he was chosen.
Now why, only a short time later, would Jim Laidler, a DAN! practitioner not only disassociate himself from alternative treatments, but speak vociferously against them, and join the Quackwatch team, when in 2001 he said, "mercury detoxification therapy has worked well for my own children and hundreds of other children with autism".
And why did he encourage parents back in 2001 to keep sending letters to their senator or congressman, like he said he did every week "detailing the burden and expense of trying to raise a child made autistic by a vaccine"?
He has certainly changed his tune! Now he links to Kathleen Seidel's Neurodiversity, Bartholomew Cubbins and Autism Diva blogs.
Both Jim Laidler and his wife, Louise Kirz, were DAN! practitioners. Curiously, his wife is still listed as a DAN! doctor in Portland Oregon. (3)
Some years ago Jim Laidler left medicine to study for his doctoral degree in biology at Portland State University. (4)
Is it a coincidence that Prometheus is a biologist?
Could this be the connection we are looking for?
Is Jim Laidler Prometheus?
Refs:
(1)
http://www.autism-watch.org/
(2)
http://www.autismcanada.org/Research/arimercury.pdf.
(3)
http://www.autismlink.com/services/index/radius:30/zip:97109
(4)
http://quackfiles.blogspot.com/2005/06/talk-on-autism-in-eugene-oregon.html
Watson, I looked at Ilena's site too. I spent some time yesterday looking at Quackwatch and at Tim Bolen's site. It all fits in nicely with what these slimeballs have done. Somebody else who was commenting here thought that NotMercury was Laidler. I suppose the police could track down their ISP's and find them. No wonder Mr Bolen thinks they may be leaving the country.
They've caused some damage to autistic kids by convincing some uneducated parents that thimerosal is blameless and chelation won't work. I found a list on one of the sites I was looking at yesterday that listed who contributes to Quackbusters. Some drug companies were on the list but I can't recall where I saw it. It would be interesting to see if GE or NBC was on that list. It would help explain Autism Speaks' reluctance to tell the truth about thimerosal.
Margaret Toigo, I'm not posting your comment because Laidler is a horse's ass who used a ridiculous chelation protocol for a very short time and was too damn stupid to listen to anyone who would teach him more about the subject. Anyone who wants to see what this nitwit has to say can easily find his idiocy.
I also don't post comments from moronic ex-strippers who write pure bullshit and refuse to answer questions that I ask them. I realize that you are too dumb to answer the question I asked you but I'm not taking that as an excuse.
Fore Sam said...
Somebody else who was commenting here thought that NotMercury was Laidler.
No, I don't think it can be.
Jim Laidler has two sons who'd be about 14 and 10 by now, and they were both vaccinated. He said that the younger one had regressed after MMR.
NotMercury has talked about his or her "fully vaccinated and completely unvaccinated ASD children". So, s/he has at least one completely unvaccinated child, maybe more.
(One might ask, if vaccines didn't cause the first child's autism why the other child still hasn't been vaccinated.)
Somewhere on your blog you say that Prometheus is the Head Teacher and NotMercury is a parent. I agree. Prometheus is not just a parent. He's a biologist, and so is Jim Laidler. Now that might be a coincidence, but I don't think it is.
Oh.. and I would like to know exactly when Jim Laidler met Stephen Barrett. They have obviously 'known' each other for some time as Laidler was posting on Barrett's HealthFraud list in 2002.
For a doctor to go from believing that vaccines have damaged his children, criticizing vaccine manufacturers, writing letters every week to his senator to protest about unsafe vaccines, using alternative treatments for his own children- secretin, supplements, gf/cf diet, chelation - treating other children with autism, and writing the DAN! Position Paper in 2001 to joining the Quackbuster crowd in 2002 - if that's when it was - is a huge jump to make in less than one year.
Is it a coincidence that other neurodiversity activists are members of HealthFraud, and Kathleen Seidel, on her Health Fraud page, links to Peter Bowditch's Ratbags.Com?
They're all entwined, John. Like snakes.
Watson, These people are good liars. It might serve his purpose better to claim he had an unvaccinated kid with autism. You can't believe anything they say.
How about Frank Klein? He was the first alleged autistic I heard criticizing DAN and saying he didn't want to be cured a few years ago. He started the AutAdvo list in 2003. He claimed he didn't feel like doing advocacy anymore and Joseph's blog appeared sounding very much like Frank.
Johnny, do you ever post any comments where you are criticized? Or, are you a coward?
Coward, You can look through this blog aned find all sorts of criticism. I'll be happy to post any criticism that's not anonymous. Then I'll correct your flawed thinking.
Benjamin, I published your thoughts. However, they were off topic so I deleted them.
Googlybear,
Your comments to Dr. Barrett were interesting.
"What takes more courage? To buck the traditional medical system in order to rescue children from conditions like autism, that the traditional community dooms them to a lifetime of living"
Do the said innovators actually rescue children? Is there good evidence for such?
Also, is it true that in the absence of treatment persons with autism will lead terrible, meaningless lives? What does the research say on the subject?
“with OR to sit behind a computer screen scoffing at the inovators?”
Does he attack treatments that are innovative or treatments that do not have scientific support?
“I vote for the former, and one day the biomed doctors will be branded heros”.
Will they?
“They are already my heros.”
It is good to have heroes, but even heroes can be wrong.
“You are simply a coward and a failed one at that.”
A failed coward? So, you accuse him of being brave.
“You steal away people's hope and replace it with nothing”
Is hope an always a good thing?
Are scientific data (or the lack thereof) bad thing if they presented?
“while blatantly ignoring all the people who are successfully recovering their children.”
Do children with autism naturally recover from autism in the absence of treatment? If so, how does one know if any treatments not given under highly controlled circumstances are were able to help?
Interverbal,
Guess I found a new, errr, friend.
I do not follow everything every DAN doctor advises. The characterization of every biomed parent as someone who follows anything and everything any physician in the biomed community advocates is getting old and it is untrue. The DAN doctors are my heros in the sense that they are actually doing something for my child and many other autistic individuals. Regular pediatricians have offered me literally no hope, to offering heavy duty pharmaceuticals. In fact, I can't even get a regular pediatrician to deal with some of the odd co-morbid issues my child has. I've had to seek out alot of the answers on my own.
By the time all these studies come out, how old will my child be?
Do children with autism naturally recover from autism in the absence of treatment?
I think we both know the answer to this, but you asking piqued my curious side. If autism is not a disability, and is an intrinsic part of the an individuals personality/personhood/who they are; then how does one recover from being themselves?
If so, how does one know if any treatments not given under highly controlled circumstances are were able to help?
I suppose so many coincidences follow autistic children. Regressions mysteriously occur after vaccinations or illnesses that require alot of antibiotic intervention and improvments magically start to occur at the same time as biomed treatments like diet, fungal treatment, chelation and so forth.
Sometimes we just have to trust our observations. If you know the history of a disease called child bed fever, which was a deadly infection that women got from doctor's hands after giving birth, then you will understand that one doctor observed that midwives who washed their hands and did not handle the cadavers for autopsy had lowered mortality rate. I'm suer the grateful women who survived from a simple thing like doctors washing hands are glad they didn't have to wait for the double blind, FDA funded, journal published, peer reviewed hand washing study to come out.
Interverbal,
I'm interested in your opinion of Stephen Barrett.
Is he a peoples champion in his role as "Quackwatch"? or is he the "Quackpot" he is accused of being now?
What do you think?
I Would appreciate your thoughts on this.
I absolutely love this thread! I am sick to death of these low lifes who spend all day bashing parents who will stop at nothing to help their children.
We have discovered that our son has an inability to metabolise essential fatty acids, and are giving l-carnitine with very encouraging results.
Hopefully all the parents treating their kids with child autism have had the stool and urine tests done.
But if not, look into this. My wife read some breaking research (can't recall where - we read up so much!), that suggests this could be why there is such a rising incidence of autism. The symptoms of a brain starved of efas, leads to so many things including delayed development and various breakdowns in methylation etc.
Good luck to all.
Jonathan(Interverbal), Barrett claiming that treatments don't have scientific support is a far cry from the fact that they are supported by decent scientists who help children. What Barrett needs to say to avoid being charged with Medical Fraud is that drug company employed scientists do not support treatments that will reflect unfavorably on the drug companies. Do you understand the difference?
Eric, Glad you enjoyed the post. Are you familiar with Glutathione Pleolyposome? I read somewhere that it's tough to get glutathione to stay in the system very long but that this variety of it lasts a lot longer and seems to help kids improve quicker.
Googly, And remember what happened to Semmelweis? He was pilloried and shunned by his peers who just couldn't accept that he was right and that they, Medical Doctors, were responsible for the deaths of many, many thousands of women, and had left many motherless babies. He spent the rest of his life in a mental asylum where he was beaten to death.
Interverbal said...
Do children with autism naturally recover from autism in the absence of treatment?
Well that would largely depend upon what type of "autism" they have, and what caused it.
If children who have RAD or SCS are given a PDD-NOS diagnosis instead, because their behaviour 'fits' the criteria and it sounds better, then they don't need biomedical intervention, do they?
Children with RAD might be helped by a change in environment and Play Therapy, and the SCS children would most likely vastly improve with less parental attention. But children with RAD and SCS don't really have autism, although they are given the 'label' today, along with geeks, nerds, studious and gifted adolescents, and mentally ill adults.
If so, how does one know if any treatments not given under highly controlled circumstances are were able to help?
Because if the right treatment is given the child's behaviour and/or functioning improves.
It's strange that doctors don't question the beneficial effects of the drugs they've prescribed when parents report improvement in their children's behaviour, and they certainly don't attribute any improvement to coincidence, the placebo effect, other circumstances in the child's life, a spontaneous leap in development, or to the parents' imagination, which is what they generally do when a child has improved after biomedical intervention or an alternative therapy.
Hi James,
I think Dr. Barrett is man who argues in favor of a certain view of what constitutes good evidence in a given medical treatment and what does not.
This happens to be a view I share. In fact there are a fair amount of people who take a similar orientation to science as Dr. Barrett. As just one person who shares this view, I would argue that he has been consistent and fair in his statements.
Fore Sam said...
Watson, These people are good liars. It might serve his purpose better to claim he had an unvaccinated kid with autism.
It might. But seeing as everyone knows that Jim Laidler's children were vaccinated, I don't think he would lie about it - even on an anonymous blog. And he's far more useful to Big Pharma and the ND movement as a repentant doctor who after a very short time in grave error, came to his senses, repented, recanted, and rejoined the Fold, with, it seems, the religious fervour of a new convert. He's a perfect spokesman for both parties.
How about Frank Klein? He was the first alleged autistic I heard criticizing DAN and saying he didn't want to be cured a few years ago. He started the AutAdvo list in 2003. He claimed he didn't feel like doing advocacy anymore and Joseph's blog appeared sounding very much like Frank.
Hmmm.. Looks like Frank Klein, at the age of 29, reads the following article in the NY Times magazine in 2000 and everything apparently makes sense to him. He's diagnosed at The Center for Excellence in Autism Research (CeFAR) - which started up in 1997 with $42 million funding from the NIH (even though they were telling parents at the time that there wasn't an epidemic of autism) - and he starts his advocacy the following year.
http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20000618mag-asperger.html
The Little Professor Syndrome New York Times Magazine - June 18, 2000
A 1993 study reported a prevalence of 36 per 10,000 children, while a 1999 paper reported a rate between 2 and 5 per 10,000.
I wonder what he thinks about the current rate of Aspergers, now that every man... and his son... and his cousin... and his aunt has it.
Perhaps he retired, John. His job done.
Fore Sam,
Scientific support is the existence or real published science that can hold up to scrutiny. When Dr. Barrett notes the lack of these things in the world of biomed in autism in autism, he is not speaking of a lack of scientist who support the efficacy of these treatments, but the lack of supportive research.
“What Barrett needs to say to avoid being charged with Medical Fraud is that drug company employed scientists do not support treatments that will reflect unfavorably on the drug companies.”
To be charged with fraud on must knowingly mislead others on medical matters. Evidence would have to be shown that Dr. Barrett did such. I frankly see no danger of this happening.
Also, there is a long history of assessing new treatments which could damage medical companies, by digging into their profits, which has been conducted by employees of medical companies, independent scientists, and others. Sometimes the research validates the treatment, sometimes it does not.
“Do you understand the difference?”
The difference of what precisely Mr. Best?
Do you recognise this thread Jonathan?
It's a shame you couldn't argue your point well enough without resorting to the "sympathy vote".
Interverbal said...
"Yes, I do sympathize as I must
deal with something similar. Myself, Kev, and others who agree with us get called the most abhorrent names in these sorts of debates or via hate mail. I have been called a pharma shill (insinuated that I spread misinformation for vaccine manufactures). Kev has had his child made fun of by an adult. A teenage autistic girl has was on the receiving end of profane and despicable language on a discussion group. All of these acts were perpetrated by the loving parents of autistic children or their allies who are convinced that the vaccines are the source."
X said...
"?I am sorry about Kevin Leitch's distressing experiences, but he has not been subject to a campaign of media misinformation and vilification.?
Interverbal said...
No, that is not correct. He is an autism parent who interacts with a very negative autism parent/quackery culture by choice. He has been called rude names on large discussion lists (not by choice). Also, like all autism parents who do not chelate or use US DAN! approved quackery, he is the subject of media of media campaigns which certainly include misinformation and vilification by certain groups (not by choice)."
The next time you try to debate with the professionals I suggest you tell the truth and don't insult them by underestimating how much they know about what goes on over this side of the Atlantic.
These people know all about Kevin Leitch and you can forget about getting anything past them.
I suspect you've already figured that though.
Jonathan, http://www.quackpotwatch.org/
Click on Barrett's name, he's no expert on anything. His misguided opinions are pure hogwash.
Your opinion of what is a standard for science differs markedly from any parent who wants to help a mercury poisoned child. That, in itself, makes your opinion invalid. The treatments that cure autism have already passed every reasonable scientific test because they work. Demanding extraneous tests only delays getting help to kids who need it now. That makes you an obstruction to suffering children. That also makes you a nitwit. Congratulations!
Googlybear,
“Guess I found a new, errr, friend.”
This is further proof that the internet is a wonderful, egalitarian tool, in that it allows people to connect. I did not realize we were friends, I was merely hoping for polite exchange. Thank you for considering me as such.
”I do not follow everything every DAN doctor advises. The characterization of every biomed parent as someone who follows anything and everything any physician in the biomed community advocates is getting old and it is untrue.”
I do not feel this way, but is this really what others say? Can you find an example that could illustrate your point?
”By the time all these studies come out, how old will my child be?”
If the advocates of these treatment do not push and shout that the providers of the said treatments offer them good proof, then they may never be done all. Your child may be quite old or not so old at all. This burden falls on you and your fellow advocates. The ball is in your court.
Of course if such proof is not important to you, then you can totally disregard this. Unfortunately others will probably speak out against this. You might be able to deal with them in a number of ways. You could:
1 Ignore them
2 Call them names
3 Try to challenge their criticism as best you can with you limited resources
{Do children with autism naturally recover from autism in the absence of treatment?
”I think we both know the answer to this”}
I hope so. It has been known since the Kanner children that some kids get better over time with no extra help. This has been shown again and again in the research. There is even a term for it, spontaneous recovery.
‘but you asking piqued my curious side. If autism is not a disability, and is an intrinsic part of the an individuals personality/personhood/who they are; then how does one recover from being themselves?”
By a process called “maturation” where over time a person attributes alter, new behaviors are gained, and old ones no longer used. A 5 year old’s skills and the details of her personality may not match her skills and personality traits as a 30 year old. Humans, are not static.
”I suppose so many coincidences follow autistic children. Regressions mysteriously occur after vaccinations or illnesses that require alot of antibiotic intervention and improvments magically start to occur at the same time as biomed treatments like diet, fungal treatment, chelation and so forth.”
Thank you for this answer. I have another question. Has there ever been other cases were a fair amount of children were put on a treatment that appeared to help them, yet later the science showed such treatments to be ineffective? If so, what does this suggest, if anything, about the nature of uncontrolled observation?
”Sometimes we just have to trust our observations.”
Do we?
“If you know the history of a disease called child bed fever”
Ah, but I do know this story. The gentlemen who suggested it, Ignaz Semmelweis wasn’t taken seriously by his peers, he died unhappily. And yet, when Pasteur made same suggestions, his peers slowly began to accept it.
What was the difference? Was the world simply now ready for this revelation? Was Pasteur in with the apothecary guild? Or was it perhaps because Semmelweis proposed the root of problem to be “particles” but never showed their existence. He never had a good proof during a time that predated controlled clinical trials. Pasteur, showed what these “particles” were. He offered real proof. The technological innovation to do this, the microscope, would have been available in Semmelweis’s time. He made an assertion, but never backed it up.
Watson,
”If children who have RAD or SCS are given a PDD-NOS diagnosis instead, because their behaviour 'fits' the criteria and it sounds better, then they don't need biomedical intervention, do they?”
Does this happen? What are the rates?
Also, does it happen that children with Autistic Disorder itself ever recover? What does the research say?
Hello James,
I do recognize the thread. I remember it very clearly and I stand by my statements. I did not appeal to pity, I described the unethical treatment of certain people. Unethics should be pointed out and spoken against.
“The next time you try to debate with the professionals I suggest you tell the truth and don't insult them by underestimating how much they know about what goes on over this side of the Atlantic.”
There were professionals in that debate? I would not have guessed given the quality of argument put forth.
Also, James, I did tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the debate. If you think otherwise please show where I lied?
Mr. Best,
I have read Tim Bolen’s site. He does not take issue with Dr. Barrett’s statements, but with his character. Dr. Barrett is not de-licensed, he is retired, he could re-activate his license by simply paying a fee and filling out a form to his medical association.
“Your opinion of what is a standard for science differs markedly from any parent who wants to help a mercury poisoned child.”
I think there are real published science about children shown to be mercury poisoned, but not autistic, whose parents seem to agree with the standards if science I would defend.
“The treatments that cure autism have already passed every reasonable scientific test because they work.”
Passed…because..they.. isn’t that circular reasoning?
“Demanding extraneous tests only delays getting help to kids who need it now. That makes you an obstruction to suffering children. That also makes you a nitwit. Congratulations!”
I have seen the people you call nitwit on your blog. I am proud to be in their company.
Jonathan, The Pennsylvania licensing board says Barrett is "not in good standing". That sounds a little different than "retired".
While you're calling for proper testing on things that we already know work, why aren't you demanding the same tests for thimerosal that we already know caused an autism epidemic?
While I'm at it, we know now that Neurodiversity is associated with quackbusters and is not just a group of parents who want to celebrate the Joy of autism. This proves that Neurodiversity is a fraud, as I've said all along. Are you proud to consider yourself a fraud also?
Mr. Best,
Does it say that?
Can we call an check perhaps?
Also, I support further testing of thimerosal in terms of safety. I also don't mind if it is removed. I have said all this before.
There are some NDs who are also associated with the quackbusters. Not all NDs are or even think the quackbusters are a good thing. For that matter plenty of quackbusters do not support the ND philosophy. These are two seperate. I belive you can undertsand that.
You can consider me using your ethics and intelligence Mr. Best, and then place me in your mind into whatever category you think is most suited. For myself I am proud of associations they are hnonest and logical.
Jonathan, You are not Mr Spock and your associations are illogical if you are not a fraud yourself. Do you remember me telling you you had fallen in with bad companions? Now, we see that these companions are pure evil and are doing exactly what I thought they were doing, using autistic people to further their agenda for Pharma. Is that what you're proud of?
Interverbal,
I'm going to sum this up.
Semmelweis was right because he used his observation. Obviously his theory was getting results. Too bad women still had to die because scientists were waiting for more proof.
Yes, I believe that I can trust my own observations concerning my child. Here is an observation, when I remove milk from the diet my child stops spending all afternoon crying. We tried just about everything else- more sleep, more rigid schedule, different classroom. The proof came later in the form of an allergy test that confirmed an allergy to milk. my observation alone was enough.
Once again, I would like to know, if autism is part of a person, their personality if you will. Then what is this maturation process that allows a person to grow out of what makes them themself? That makes absolutely no sense. Yet, here is something that makes more sense to me. Perhaps they had a toxin burden but their methylation pathways were not as impaired as another child's. After so many years, their body naturally detoxed itself and recovery occured. My husband 'outgrew' severe childhood asthma. But on closer examination, his mother prepares nearly all their meals from scratch with tons of fresh cilantro(a natural chelator) and garlic (which boosts the immune system) along with other fresh and good ingredients. It is just likely to me that slowly over the years his body was able to heal itself.
Googlybear,
Semmelweis was right in spite of not doing his job. He didn't die unhappily because he was wrong, he did so because he didn't find a good way to prove what he was talking about.
He used pure observation. Even back then, this was known to be tricky tool to use right. Ancient philosophers even had a pejorative name for this sort of reasoning. Remember the lesson of Pasteur.
Perhaps observation isn’t enough. Aristotle was a genius of the ancient Greeks. Modern science could not have occurred without his contributions. He started by observation of the natural world. He made observations that others could even replicate and confirm to a degree. Yet, he was very wrong on more than one issue such as the location of earth compared to the sun and stars.
Newton is a contender for greatest mind ever. He made some whopping mistakes with the nature of light based on his observations. Ditto for Einstein.
In Niko Tinbergen was a Nobel prize winner in ethnology. Which involves little, but raw observation. His work has held up better over time than the famous Conrad Lorenz. Tinbergen was probably among the best observers we can find. Yet when he threw himself into the autism world in the 1970s his observations led him to believe that parents cause their children to be autistic. His observations failed him totally.
An observation may suggest that something might be worth checking out. Testing can confirm out suspicions (like your case with the milk) or reject them. Observation is the first step in the scientific process, not the last.
“Once again, I would like to know, if autism is part of a person, their personality if you will.”
Please note, I do not call autism part of one’s personality. I think autism is just a similar set of cognitive profiles that results in some similarity of behaviors. Cognitive tools are not static.
“Then what is this maturation process that allows a person to grow out of what makes them themself?”
Do they stop having autistic like traits when they are older? Or do they still have those traits, but to a lesser degree? Also, how many children appearing in videos of cure children still have many autistic traits? I have heard the term recovery justified as not meaning they are now typically developing, but rather, now they can talk and have typical social skills.
All this could also be had from the people who blamed parents for autism. They had cured kids and glowing parental testimonials as well. So does ABA and several other educational therapies.
Your offering about natural cures is interesting and is testable. This is something that could be put to the test. Will it?
Mr. Best,
I do not believe I claimed to be Mr. Spock.
I do remember you telling me that I had fallen in with bad companions. I listened carefully then looked for evidence that you might be right. Since there was none I rejected your comment, as I do now.
I am proud to be a part of an organization pushing and another separate one, pushing for good science.
Janathan, Neither Neurodiversity nor Quackbusters are pushing for good science. That's just what they claim as part of their deception. Anybody can understand what Deth had to tell us. He spelled it out in simple terms. Neubrander and thousands of parents showed he was 100% accurate.
All your alleged scientists can do is whine about there being no double-blind study which does absolutely nothing to negate the facts we know without having to bother with any studies. There is no poor science associated with the knowledge that mercury caused the epidemic. There is only deception from alleged scientists who will say anything at all to deny these facts and protect the drug companies who pay their salaries.
Kathleen Seidel is engaged in deception when she bashes the Geiers for billing insurance companies for early puberty which may or may not be true. It is deception for her to rant about David Geiers school record. Until one completes a degree, there are many ways to describe ones' student status. It just happens to be a little thing that she found and tried to blow up into something nefarious. And, her calling the use of Lupron on pre-pubescent kids chemical castration is a blatant lie since there is nothing to chemically castrate until they have reached puberty.
Being an associate of this sort of liar is nothing to be proud of. Those lies harm the children of uneducated parents who might not be able to see through her obnoxious bull.
Hi Mr. Best,
“Neither Neurodiversity nor Quackbusters are pushing for good science. That's just what they claim as part of their deception.”
That’s weird, because if I was pushing for good science, I would have said a lot of the same things that quackbusters say.
“Anybody can understand what Deth had to tell us.”
I have read his research. Do remember exactly what it shows vs. what it does not?
Also, double blind research is not the end all of good research. It is one of multiple designs that can prove cause and effect. It might be used if the experimental question makes it appropriate. If not there are other options that might better answer the question. However, none of these various designs have been used to show a good effect for biomed treatments. Dr. Neubrander’s MB12 was put to a double blind test. It showed no effect.
“There is no poor science associated with the knowledge that mercury caused the epidemic.”
Unfortunately there has been a great deal of poor science. The lack of supporting experimental science for biomed is in itself poor science.There is also pseudo-science, like certain parties work with CDDS data or the special ed data. There is also plenty of anti-science, which occurs when one claims that research isn’t needed to know a truth about a treatment.
I did not invent these defintions by the way, the are well known and are part of elementary science textbooks.
Jonathan, Agreed, Joseph's "spin" on CDDS data was definitely pseudo-science.
The study on MB-12 wasn't long enough.
Did you forget a word in your question about Deth, I don't understand the question.
Can you please explain what principle of statistics Joseph violated?
You claim the MB12 study wasn't long enough. However this is strange. More than one parent has gone on record on the internet claiming HBOT helped rapidly. Certainly within the time frame used in the study.
I would have predicted had I been an advocate of this method, that a few weeks should still be enough time to see at least some separation between the data for the control and experimental groups based on parental reports.
You are right; I did miss a word in that one sentence. It should read “I have read his research. Do you remember exactly what it shows vs. what it does not?”
I said...
”If children who have RAD or SCS are given a PDD-NOS diagnosis instead, because their behaviour 'fits' the criteria and it sounds better, then they don't need biomedical intervention, do they?”
Interverbal said...
Does this happen?
Yes. And, after Dr Rimland spending many decades dispelling Bettleheim's myth, I think diagnosing abused, neglected or even over-indulged children with autism is grossly unfair to loving parents, don't you?
But then, I also think it's wrong to diagnose children with known genetic disorders, such as Angelman's, Retts and Tuberous Sclerosis with autism, and babies born with congenital rubella, valproic acid syndrome, or Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. They're all given the "autism" label today, and yet, I wouldn't expect any of the children to have typical development, would you? So, why are experts pretending that they don't know what causes "autism", when in some cases they definitely know?
Same with adults diagnosed with "autism" who actually have BPD, manic-depression, residual schizophrenia or narcissistic disorder - renamed "Latent Autistic Personality Syndrome" around 1999. It shouldn't surprise anyone that unstable, delusional or narcissistic people have social difficulties, and 'fit' at least some of the criteria. But they don't have Autism.
It wasn't until after "Shadow Syndromes" appeared at the same time as Ritvo and Katzs' suggestion that Einstein might have had Aspergers, in 1999, that AS became popular. In just a few years, this speculation turned to fact, and the list of historical geniuses who 'might' have had "autism" is growing longer by the minute. No wonder so many Aspies think they're superior to "neurotypicals" and don't want a cure for "autism".
I'd like to suggest they read a few books published before 1999 and before the ND movement sprang out of nowhere and began its Let's Celebrate Autism campaign - perhaps a few books by Torey Hayden who tells it like it is, or Mira Rothenburg's Children with Emerald Eyes would be a good place to start. A dose of reality might help them see autism and mental illness in a different light.
What are the rates?
Who knows? I don't think anyone's bothering to keep track of rates for any of the subtypes. It's just the one rate that keeps steadily growing because of the appeal of a diagnosis associated with genius. I totally agree with Googly, it has replaced ADD in popularity.
ADD itself became popular in the 90s as soon as it became associated with giftedness. Prior to that, children with attention deficit had a MBD (Minimal Brain Damage) label. So this type of propaganda is not new, and I really think it's time for people to wake up. Something is damaging children's brains.
It was a totally ludicrous idea to lump all children, and then teens and adults, with odd behaviours under one umbrella category, "PDD", give them all the same label, call them all "autistic", and spend a fortune on genetic research to look for an autism gene - unless the aim was to hide a large subset of children damaged by vaccines in the 90s - in which case it has worked remarkably well...
There's no doubt whatsoever in my mind that an unprecedented number of children were vaccine-damaged last decade - and given the "autism" label, and, like many other parents, I was waiting eagerly for the rate of autism to drop once thimerosal had been removed from vaccines. We should have known better.
But I've no doubt that if Big Pharma comes up with a vaccine for autism (perhaps that's already in mind), the rate would drop significantly, and the vaccine would be touted as another Great Success - meanwhile, secretly, autism would be redefined, and children re-classified according to the different subtypes - which, incidentally, is exactly what happened to polio after the vaccine was introduced.
Also, does it happen that children with Autistic Disorder itself ever recover?
That depends what you mean by "recover". I haven't heard of anyone with AD spontaneously becoming "normal", have you?
Don't you think it's strange that when a severely affected child makes significant progress after biomed or an alternative therapy, it's immediately discounted by mainstream? What do you think they would say if the same improvement could been seen with an approved drug? The only reason these alternatives have not been researched properly is that Pharma can't make money out of them. Healthy people don't need their drugs, and the sickness business they're in is extremely profitable. That's the reason behind FDA regulation:
http://www.newstarget.com/021789.html
Hi Watson,
Do you have any evidence that we place RAD and SCS children into the autism criteria at a meaningful rate?
Dr. Rimland deserves credit for his critical role disproving the trauma based etiology of autism theory. Of course he was not he only one important in that effort, but he was perhaps the most important.
”But then, I also think it's wrong to diagnose children with known genetic disorders, such as Angelman's, Retts and Tuberous Sclerosis with autism, and babies born with congenital rubella, valproic acid syndrome, or Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.”
Not necessarily. It is possible to be co-morbid. As to Rett’s Disorder, by definition, those girls can not be given the “Autistic Disorder” diagnosis, even though Rett’s is in the PDDs.
“So, why are experts pretending that they don't know what causes "autism", when in some cases they definitely know?”
The existence of a given genetic condition and autistic disorder, does not prove that one caused the other. Which is why one tends to see these described as co-morbidities rather than “causes” in the research literature.
”Same with adults diagnosed with "autism" who actually have BPD, manic-depression, residual schizophrenia”
BPD an manic-depression? Again, is there any known rates of this error, any case studies?
“narcissistic disorder - renamed "Latent Autistic Personality Syndrome" around 1999. It shouldn't surprise anyone that unstable, delusional or narcissistic people have social difficulties, and 'fit' at least some of the criteria. But they don't have Autism.”
Narcissistic Personality Disorder, has not been renamed. It still goes by NPD in the DSM-IV-TR (2000).
”I'd like to suggest they read a few books published before 1999 and before the ND movement sprang out of nowhere and began its Let's Celebrate Autism campaign - perhaps a few books by Torey Hayden who tells it like it is, or Mira Rothenburg's Children with Emerald Eyes would be a good place to start.”
Which Torey Hayden book? She has written a fair few and I have already probably read too many of her books. I have also previously encountered Mira Rothenberg’s book. I am a bit confused how these authors “tell it like it is”.
These authors are not writing a clinical case study, they wrote an emotional tale about their feelings and interactions with the kids they worked with. They both emphasize the deep rooted emotional problems of their students. They are both psychoanalytically oriented.
I saw little evidence that Hayden used good practices with her autistic students. She didn’t seem to know what to do with them, beyond hoping they wouldn’t get too wound up and teaching some letters and numbers here and there.
And Rothenberg….. she very, very carefully makes it clear that parents were to blame for autism and yet you recommend her? She spends most of her time in CwEE, giving anecdotes such as when she scared the bejesus out of a bunch of kids who were displaced WWII survivors, by knocking a Bible to the ground during a thunderstorm to help the kids get past a superstition. She claims she didn’t help one boy with autism, because she simply loved him too much to remain objective.
”Who knows? I don't think anyone's bothering to keep track of rates for any of the subtypes.”
If by subtypes we mean Autistic Disorder, Aspergers Disorder, Rett’s Disorder, etc. then yes, we are keeping track.
As to rates of kids with reactive attachment disorder misdiagnosed with autism, it seems necessary to me to know that such misdiagnosis does occur at a meaningful rate if I am to assume that this is an actual problem.
“I totally agree with Googly, it has replaced ADD in popularity.”
ADHD is 3-5%, autism is >1% of the population. AHD is several times more popular.
“It was a totally ludicrous idea to lump all children, and then teens and adults, with odd behaviours under one umbrella category”
You accuse them of making an error of reification? You might have a point in terms of Rett’s Disorder. I am not too sure, you make a good point for PDD-NOS etc. Especially if research shows commonalities beyond behavioral topography.
“That depends what you mean by "recover". I haven't heard of anyone with AD spontaneously becoming "normal", have you?”
Yes, as matter of fact, several examples exist in the research literature.
”Don't you think it's strange that when a severely affected child makes significant progress after biomed or an alternative therapy, it's immediately discounted by mainstream?”
Not necessarily, perhaps they are looking for strong proofs, and are unimpressed by the stories they are shown.
Also, there are several authors who spend a fair amount of time telling such stories.
“The only reason these alternatives have not been researched properly is that Pharma can't make money out of them.”
But…. pharma does make money on many chelators and certainly on things like Lupron.
Fore Sam said...
Jonathan, http://www.quackpotwatch.org/
Click on Barrett's name, he's no expert on anything. His misguided opinions are pure hogwash.
Your opinion of what is a standard for science differs markedly from any parent who wants to help a mercury poisoned child. That, in itself, makes your opinion invalid. The treatments that cure autism have already passed every reasonable scientific test because they work. Demanding extraneous tests only delays getting help to kids who need it now. That makes you an obstruction to suffering children. That also makes you a nitwit. Congratulations!
Boy and I thought I was an arrogant bastard! Thanks for dropping in on Graphictruth by the by, you'll see your comment published with my own response, in the comments below
Graphictruth: Evidence of Malice.
I generally leave the autie blogging to others because, well, I've done my time; I've been though all of this before, with the False Memory Syndrome Foundation crowd. I have to say, Sam, you and even Lennie Schaefer have a long way to go to reach that level of sophistication.
Nonetheless, it's now generally accepted that traumatic memory is quite different than ordinary memory, and that while people do both repress and forget memories, recovered memories (when they are recovered and not induced) have been shown to be accurate.
In other words - the reality was a lot more complicated than either "side" would have preferred.
I went round and round again all over with those folks - same authoritarians, different issues - who insisted I could not possibly really be a multiple personality by definition; that my problem was a "delusion."
It took a quick google to find the then-current understanding of what a "personality" was to realize that was a problem with their theology, not my reality.
There's still nothing concrete to establish what number of personalities is normal, much less anything very conclisve about what one is, it's normal formation and what it's supposed to do.
So I'm a little - no, a LOT bored by arguements of this nature, save when they lead to actions that lead to predictable and obvious harm to others.
I'm not an "autistic" blogger. I'm some sort of AS and I blog, but I blog about ethics.
I'll remind you that "an excessive concern with issues of justice" is a diagnostic criteria for AS, though. That always makes me giggle. Would the opposite diagnostic point be "If unavoidable, relax and enjoy it?"
Probably so, come to think of it; that was pretty much the sum of the advice given me on the topic of "getting along" with "normal" children.
And this is where I come directly to the point; society in general and, well, you in particular are demanding that other people - in this particular case - "act normal," and you (as a class of persons) are willing to do almost anything to get your kids to "act normal" for your benefit, comfort and for social reasons.
When actual autistics point out that faking normalcy is of little personal benefit to them and can indeed impede their ability to function in ways more normal for their wetware, the knives come out.
And, as I said, I've seen all this before, in the context of the sexual abuse and exploitation scandals (and so called "witch hunts" of the 80's, the "MPD CRISIS" of the 90's, and now this.
And meanwhile, the tragedy is that in obsessing about your critics to the point of conjuring paranoid-sounding conspiracy theories involving big pharma, dentists, quack busters and for all I know, the Illuminati, you are missing all of the joy of raising the children you have in the name of getting the child you believe you have a right to.
Well, sorry, genetics don't work that way. You get what you get and they is what they am, and while all of this is undoubtably affected by enviornmental and social factors, the most important factor, and the only one you absolutely CAN control is your parental response to your children.
Consider the plight, for instance, of aspie parents who somehow manage to birth a natural athlete, or worse yet, a natural cheerleader; a gregarious unconsciously social, emotional thinker - the most alien being imaginable.
This happens too, ya know. Maybe you could network and swap kids. :P
By the by, I'm by no means suggesting that people shouldn't be seeking ways to help autistic kids function better. I'm not even against chelation therapy, though I'm intensely skeptical of it as a cure for autism, certainly if there is a high load of mercury in one's system, it's just prudent to get rid of it. It's a known neurotoxin, and so long as the therapy isn't actually worse than the toxicity level, it's a judgement call.
When it has worked, I have to wonder if the act of being able to "do something" and therefore alleviate desperate levels of frustration with the child was the "cure." Or it could well be a placebo effect. Or it could just be due to the normal development curve for an Aspie or Autistic - which is really really different.
However, I have to say that there's probably as much anecdotal evidence for the therapeutic use of marijuana to treat some of the more unpleasant aspects of being autistic, with the added benefit of the experience being direct, and not based on observation of behavior with poor communication.
It would not be a bad idea at all to explore Chinese medicine - and there is a college of complementary medicine in Vancouver, British Columbia that specializes in integrating western and Chinese medicine and diagnosis. I don't know what, if any experience they have with autism, but it would be well worth checking out - the whole discipline is simply more suited to treating complex, vague syndromes.
The "Magic Bullet" approach of Western Medicine doesn't work so well when there's no clear target.
As for autism quackery - well, my father was an Irish Traveling Sales man, and I was a great disappointment to him, but I did learn to recognize an "ideal mark."
And if I HAD been the son he wanted me to be, boy, would I have a "cure" for you. Because what I would be selling you is the sense of having done something useful without having to, well, actually change any of your behavior or adjust your expectations.
Didn't work. Your FAITH is weak - give me more money and I'll send you my faith-supporting newsletter and this here holy blessed Jordan Water...
Bob, I don't give a damn about your MPD. All I know about that is I don't want to be anywhere near someone like you. I sure as hell wouldn't let you near my kids.
I am not the least bit arrogant. I just happen to be right while I write this blog opposing a bunch of jackasses who tell people that autism is something to be celebrated. Autism sucks in every way you can imagine. There is not one good thing about it.
You have no clue what's going on here as you compare this to some ancient history you were involved in with some different matter. Nobody is selling us any magic bullets. The science, that your jackasses in Neuroinsanity try to deny has shown us that mercury caused the autism. The obvious solution, even to a knucklehead like you, is to, first, remove the damn mercury from the kids' brains. You know what, it's working. So, shut the hell up and keep your idiotic opinion to yourself.
Interesting post, Bob King. I know it was directed at Fore Sam and not me, but I found it interesting anyway.
The "Magic Bullet" approach of Western Medicine doesn't work so well when there's no clear target.
I completely agree. I've said before that there is no specific cure for autism, only degrees of recovery. Most complex disorders do not have one specific answer. Which is why I can't comprehend why some people (anti-cure, neurodiversity) who think that there is going to be a magic cure that will eradicate autism.
You get what you get and they is what they am, and while all of this is undoubtably affected by enviornmental and social factors, the most important factor, and the only one you absolutely CAN control is your parental response to your children.
I agree about parental response to the child. We got over the fact of our child's autism a long time ago. Seeking to help a child recover or partially recover does not mean the parent does not accept the child as they are. It is this black and white thinking that bugs me. It's a damned if we do, damned if we don't senario. I empathize with my daughter's struggles and I want to help her overcome or alleviate some of the weaknesses/difficulties associated with her condition along with the physical health problems, so we can build on the strengths and she can develop more skills. This is not un-acceptance, this is normal parenting. Normally, parents want their kids to be healthy, do the best they can in life and to grow into independant adults.
Fore: Because everything is better by telling someone to shut the hell up. If you truly were taking offence, in no uncertain terms, the kind of vehemence you're speaking in, you'd simply delete the comment. But no, it's bait to trap some fool who'll spring to the defence of Bob! Not to mention future Bob-censor emplacements.
Mm... Bait. Tasty stuff to take.
"I just happen to be right while I write this blog opposing a bunch of jackasses who tell people that autism is something to be celebrated."
And yet you respond in such fashions? This isn't about truth anymore, but beating those Autistics. Burning them up, toasting them, cripy-fried Autie. You don't want anything more but an excuse to rail against Autism, Autistics, and those of the spectrum, to let your hate flow freely while covering it in the name of science, which is inconclusive for whether it's the cause or a factor, or even simply a blood-chemical oddity causing symptoms. I'm understanding of your theory, but I'm not understanding of how it is now being used a bludgeon on those who aren't of the same opinion. You really need to accept the fact that many people aren't of your opinion. Are all your neighbors of your political stance, Rep or Dem? Are all your neighbors of your religion? Tolerate people, please, because if you continue verbally humiliating, taunting, or abusing people, you'll soon find that people will be unable to accept your views because of the simple fact you have them. All things in moderation. Stop attacking, convey your message in a polite manner, and if you're attacked by others, they'll be found at fault for agression. Meet their fire with water, and extinguish their rages with cool intellect, not fiery anger. I've calmed considerably, and am now writing out of an attempt to connect, and share in knowledge, not contempt.
Advocate your views well, and in a non-offensive manner, support the studies, open and fair, and let the evidence speak for itself. The one thing others can't alter is truth, and only by ensuring fairness can it be found. They may be wrong, you may be wrong, but any which way, we should be focusing on Autism. Have you ever heard the phrase: "Know thine enemy." Apply it, not to people, but to Autism. If you hate Autism, research, support research, discover what Autism is in every fashion and nuance. Only with knowledge can theory become fact.
Googly: I must say, I applaud you and your approach heartily, and find your comments tasteful, accurate, and in keeping with caring for your daughter.
Things are never and should never be claimed as such to be black and white alone. The meet, mingle, and so there is always grey, from the darkest of shadow, to the purest of light, there is always somewhere in between.
You help her alleviate/overcome her weaknesses and difficulties, as well as the health difficulties, building on strengths and developing skills.
Does she like certain physical activities? I loved to swim. It helped me develop muscle tone, and the time I spent in the sun wa great for my skin. It's good to have something physical to do in spare time, with nothing much planned.
I'm very thankful to my parents. Were it not for them and their help, I know I'd have no chance to live independantly. Rejoice with your victories! For with every step taken, you are a step closer to your goals. Good luck with everything. =D
I am not the least bit arrogant. I just happen to be right while I write this blog opposing a bunch of jackasses who tell people that autism is something to be celebrated.
That's not arrogant???? This is planet Earth, bucko! Not freaking Jupiter or wherever!
Autism sucks in every way you can imagine.
So does a lot of other things, like being black, Muslim....need I go on? Get the fuck over it!
Does she like certain physical activities? I loved to swim. It helped me develop muscle tone, and the time I spent in the sun wa great for my skin. It's good to have something physical to do in spare time, with nothing much planned.
she doesn't like alot of physical activity but does love to swim and be in the water. I think it is the weightlessness. I took the kids to the beach last summer and she would just lay in the waves and kind of just go with it. we are buying a trampoline for the back yard this summer so she can do jumping. We are also looking for a local special olympics or special needs rec center, for her to get involved with.
I sense you are getting worn down with this site. Good luck in your future endeavors. I might pop in on your blog frome time to time. I'll keep a look out on the Autism Picture Project for the addition of your picture. Good luck with graduation from high school!
I think Bob King has this whole thing nailed in one. Foreskin is one of us!
*He has obsessions (that's an ASD trait)
*He's selfish (so's that)
*He can't see the wood for the trees (and that)
*He's trying to make his life routine (that's definitely a trait!)
And yet I read somewhere here he was chelating himself.
Hey Foreskin - it's not working! You're STILL one of us and you can't change that! You're not cured and never will be. Neither will your son. Give it up - you can't fight the real truth can you?
Embrace Autism. It's the only way to true happiness.
Anon, Can you have an MD write that up so I can collect disability like all the other phony autistics in Neuroinsanity?
"Autism sucks in every way you can imagine."
"So does a lot of other things, like being black, Muslim....need I go on? Get the fuck over it!"
Being black is a natural thing, just as bieng white is.
Being a Muslim is ultimately something you have a choice whether or not to be.
Neither black people or Muslims suffer cognitive and developmental disfunction bcause they are black or Muslim.
Neither of these examples have any relevance to autism and you have to be an idiot to draw any comparison.
This faux racism analogy to autism, is the trendy argument to support the ND eugenics "you're going to wipe out the autistic race" rubbish. It's so predictable and transparent. Can't you come up with something more plausable?
You can't, so "get the fuck over it" yourself.
This faux racism analogy to autism, is the trendy argument to support the ND eugenics "you're going to wipe out the autistic race" rubbish. It's so predictable and transparent. Can't you come up with something more plausable?
Or use their evolutionary skills to think up something more creative than that timeworn defense. Like I said before, claiming minority status is the new past time.
Googly: I dive, and enjoy skindiving in the lake where we live by in the summer. It's a great place, though a little sparse technologically. I'm happiest out there when several feet below water, weightless and in control of where I move, swimming along with mask and flippers(sometimes goggles). I make some cash on the side, too, salvaging stuff from the water, like cans and bottles, sometimes other things. Beachcombing is great, I get to drive the 9.9hp, on the Aluminum. I'm so glad for my Pleasure Craft Operator Card, it lets me out on the open water, to zip about like mad. Very fun. =D
Well, to be honest Fore, is it really so bad that they get cheques? They don't hand them out like candy, you need clinical data, facts, communiation with the doctor who diagnoses... Not much of a system to be prey to cheating. Wouldn't you like money for your son, to help offset the costs associated with Autsim? Not much different. Mainly, the point being, in my regards to support in the form of cheques, that if the individual attains living sufficency(if not totally self-sufficient), with payments to ensure they're able to live alone to the farthest degree, than being in a care home, costing much more. I think that it is of benefit to the system, to ensure those who may live on their own can, and still be able to concentrate more time and energy on individuals who aren't as capable of living indepentantly. This is my opinion though, not fact, though I'm curious of if there's truth to it...
James: The concept rests as much the same, a group being singled out/persecuted because of a charecteristic. Skin colour, faith... cognizance. The larger group speaking for the smaller, and the individuals feeling persecuted, outcast, only good for what they're told they can do, and lowered in other's eyes.
Which is what you're doing right now, reading what I've written, and dismissing it, as you've done in other comments on this blog, simply based around the fact that I'm the one to say it, and not some normal person.
That would be nearly the same as if you were underestimating me based upon religion, skin colour, or whatever people are biased on these days.
"This faux racism analogy to autism, is the trendy argument to support the ND eugenics "you're going to wipe out the autistic race" rubbish."
Not once did he say anything about Autistic race, or Eugenics. I wonder, I do, just why those sprang to mind?
Enough of using psychological evaluation techniques though. It's late and I'm getting fairly sleepy... Good night.
Neither of these examples have any relevance to autism and you have to be an idiot to draw any comparison.
Yes they do, Jamie boy! It sucks to be black because of racists. It sucks to be a Muslim because of religious bigots. It sucks to be Autistic because of slime balls like you.
Point is - leave us alone! It is natural to be black, so it doesn't suck. People are free to choose Muslim for their religion, so it doesn't suck.
And Autism is covered by the same thing. Freedom. So it doesn't suck either.
The only reason it does is because of others. Like you, Jamie Boy. So - get the fuck over it!
Joeker, when you've lived long enough, you will find out all kinds of crazy things that happen in the world. Not the least of which is disability fraud. If you doctor shop or have a friend who is a physician or if you say, are having an onset of another disorder but want it to be something else. You can eventually fool a physician into a diagnosis.
For example, the guy I was talking about on the Autism Picture Project. 1st page, 3rd row, 3rd pic in. The one I think is faking it. Look at his picture. Most of the people on the project submitted the best picture they could of themselves, like anyone would. He, on the other hand, posts a picture of himself looking crazy in pajamas. He is a computer professional, a father and a husband. Do you really think all the picture he has of himself look like he is on the verge of going insane or was just found wandering the streets in his pajamas? I think he used that picture to try to make a stronger case for himself. You know what they say about someone who protests too much, they are usually lying. Nobody who looks that whack would be entrusted with children by an adoption agency. Their guidelines, interveiw process, home inspections and background checks are super strict and hard for even the most normal families to pass. If he had indeed functioned all these years as an aspergers adult into his 50's, why couldn't he maintain the same level of function after the dx?
By the way, what did you think of Christschool videoing his son in another of his "look at my aspie kid, look, look everyone" videos where he actually prompts his kid to stim for the camera. Talk about working it. I found it funny that his kid got bored with his supposed fixation and ran away. LOL!
Alot of these people are so full of bullshit, they are making more manuer than a herd of cattle.
"James: The concept rests as much the same, a group being singled out/persecuted because of a charecteristic. Skin colour, faith... cognizance. The larger group speaking for the smaller, and the individuals feeling persecuted, outcast, only good for what they're told they can do, and lowered in other's eyes."
I get the "concept", Joeker. The problem with your concept is that differences in cognitive thinking between individuals or groups is not the same as cognitive impairment or disfunction.
The cognitive difference in autism can be in many cases a very real, limiting and debilitating impairment, and not simply a "characteristic" in a minority group that is being singled out by a larger group to
be "persecuted", "outcast" or "lowered in other's eyes".
The sad irony of what you fail to realise, is that there are many autistic children and adults who don't have the cognitive awareness to feel or recognise if they are being "singled out/persecuted", (as you say).
These autistics are being helped and supported through mainstream non-bio, and biomedical intervention, to improve their understanding of the world around them, lessen their anxiety and distress and enable them to gain a better level of understanding and independance where possible.
They have been let down by the system and dismissed by the government, but they are by no means being singled out or persecuted as a minority by a larger group.
How would you have felt if when you were relaying to everyone on this thread how badly bullied you were at school, and had said "being bullied really sucks" only to have someone respond with,
"So does a lot of other things, like being black, Muslim....need I go on? Get the fuck over it!"
You said,
"Not once did he say anything about Autistic race, or Eugenics. I wonder, I do, just why those sprang to mind?"
No, he drew a parallel between how "autism sucks", to how being black or Muslim sucks.
"Mike nicholas" brought religion and color into the equation, and it was his comment I was responding to, that you have taken so personally.
If you don't understand why eugenics "sprang to mind" then you need to do a little more research and blog reading. ABFH's blog would be a good place to start if you want to know why "eugenics sprang to mind".
You strike me as someone who has decided to set up a blog and has jumped head first into the issue of autism. Determined to have your say, making judgements about others while at the same time claiming others are pre-judging or dismissing your opinion on the basis that you are not a "normal" person.
"Which is what you're doing right now, reading what I've written, and dismissing it, as you've done in other comments on this blog, simply based around the fact that I'm the one to say it, and not some normal person.
That would be nearly the same as if you were underestimating me based upon religion, skin colour, or whatever people are biased on these days."
You will have to get used to the idea that people may disagree with you because they think you're wrong. Do you think that could be a possibility, or are you going to rely on presumptions of prejudice against you, and inferences of racism as a fall back argument?
Nice try Joeker, but saying "That would be nearly the same as" and telling people what they are thinking, only shows how you cannot formulate any argument to back up your point, and that would be nearly the same as lying.
Hmmm..you deleted my post where I proved you and Watson are morons.
You moderate posts.
Coward.
I've lived fairly long, 18 years being no sneeze, and learned much about world history. Like, for instance, some facts that stick with me, like the assassination of the Archduke Francis Ferdinad triggered WWI, and the events of pre-WWII Germany, in the event called "Kristalnacht," that the assasination of a German Diplomat in France by a Jewish youth triggered a night of violence against those of the jewish faith, resulting in much injury, and millions of German Marks in damages, paid by the Jews. Not that these are in any way linked, just that they are indeed crazy things that have happened in the world.
Some, now with freedom to post who they are behind the elaborate facade they hve made, decide to put up pictures of themselves happy, or content. Perhaps the PJ's he's wearing are of a fabric he likes the feel of? Perhaps the reason why is, have yu seen his employment records? Was this the first job he lost? Second? Third? Tenth? We don't know. As for how he adopted, well, perhaps he has a friend in the business? Who knows?
I don't think about it, or have an opinion on it, let alone know, care for, or have any interest in these people you keep bringing up, like Christcool. They're fools if they're fools, and I don't care whether they be wrong or right.
James: You seem to think I'm underetimating you. I'm not, I'm only showing you contempt. They're not aware because they're ignorant of it, being kept inside all day, or being exposed to only what is shown to them. They don't know it because they don't have the context for it. How can you be aware of something you can't see, feel, and understand? If you never have been singled out before, you have no idea it's happening. My parents taught me, my enviroment taught me, watching others taught me. I didn't know I was singled out, at first, but I became aware of it by watching others, and realizing what happened to them was happening to me.
I did some of this you mention for myself. I learned much of these things. By learning, and gaining understanding, and by learning to act, I've made mysel fit in.
If they did? I could understand. Blacks were once reduced to slavery, far worse, in my opinion, because I went home at the end of the day. Being Muslim now means that everyone sees you not as a person, but as a bomb-carrying whack-job. I could understand the point of view. You think being followed by the secret service, or having people greet you like a "Gangsta" doesn't suck, it's because you cannot sympathize.
Automatically, those who disagree support these views? The world isn't so black and white, that there are only yes and no answers, for us or against us statements, or a complete stance, ready-made, just pick your choices, good or bad? It really doesn't matter, as both think they're right. Not so much. I'm not a foaming at the mouth lunatic screaming that you're killing babies by having an opinion, nor do I support your views.
With all the things Fore and others are sayig, I'm amazed your thinking so lowly of me. I'm using only what I've had said to me. Fore has made me out to be quite brain-damaged several times. Weren't you reading?
You were getting around fairly well in the other comments on the blog. If you look, you'll see many instances of me being spoken of in third person, of being called patronizing names, and of course, being told I'm brain-damaged. I think I'm perefectly justified in thinking that, with the amount of support you show Fore, you'll hold his opinion of me as well.
To argue my point now; You are aware that I'm Autistic. Points are made about me, based upon the fact that, being Autistic, I am brain-damaged in Fore's eyes. Now, being brain-damaged, I am damaged in the mind, therefore not being on par with everyone else. Not being an equal, and certainly not a greater, I am a lesser. I am thus being discriminated against. I didn't want to trot out the argument, seeing as how it may get me my first censor, but you're not quite realizing that you're barking up the wrong tree. I am not some idiot, I did not just jump right in, and I sure as hell didn't do this to argue minutae with a prideful ass who believes himself to be the Internet's new authority on wisdom. If you feel that I'm wrong, perhaps you haven't been paying attention to just what I've been arguing over, about, and for. Pay attention! I have said time and time again, that I do not support a great deal of people! I'm not some talking head, saying the same things as whoever you think I support. You insult me, and of course, play on my words. You treat me as a fool, for that which you don't know of for fact, but of opinion, based around what I say here, and in this one instance, than what I say elsewhere, and constantly assume I'm a prideful, arrogant, headstrong youth who rushes into things without any forethought. You again make your assumptions of me, and that would be the same as lying. I've taken you to task now, for the same thing you took me out to bat on, the arguments behind it.
Joeker, Autism is brain damage. That's a simple fact, not an insult. My son is brain damaged. I'm not insulting him by stating that fact.
You are going on and on saying the same things. That's what old folks do when their minds begin to go. An intelligent person with autism would appreciate the fact that identifying the cause might result in a cure for the condition.
I understand how you can thibk you don't need a cure since you have never experienced normalcy. You will never be able to see yourself from my perspective, a normal person. You should ask your parents what they think of this new information we've learned about chelation being able to help autistic people. (603)434-3928 Here's my phone number. Have them call me if they want to know more. Perhaps you will trust them enough to accept their opinion if they decide that some treatment for your condition would benefit you.
Can you have an MD write that up so I can collect disability like all the other phony autistics in Neuroinsanity?
Go see a qualified psychologist yourself and do the tests. You'll pass - and nothing phony about it either! You're one of us! Accept it, Foreskin! It proves that Autism is GENETIC!
Joeker,
It's obvious from your last comment that you cannot cope with any criticism. You're not making much sense and seem to have gone to pieces. It would be cruel of me to respond to you any further.
Please get yourself some help.
Autism has fuck all to do with being Muslim or black.
Get that fact through your thick skull, Mikey boy.
Aw, James is scared of validity. James is scared of speaking back. James confirms his statements of patronization, pity, and of course, his obvious correctness.
It insults me if they decide that they can have their cake, and eat it too. First, I'm brain-damaged. Then, I'm a fake. Now we're back to brain damage. The lack of consistencies were making me a little wonky from the indignation.
I keep repeating because new people keep asking. I don't think I need a cure because quite frankly, I'm happier now than I was before, and that's a major improvement. Things just keep getting better, too. I did what I did, learnt in school, my parents taught me valuable lessons outside of school, and I'm feeling fine. I'm content, and going to do something I love.
Oh, and James? I feel you should know; Autism also has fuck all to do with Homosexuality and Bestiality as well, but Fore still had a field day with those. Just search for those words and Fore Sam or John Best, you'll find that there are worse things that Autism could be compared to, and Fore is way ahead of the rest of us.
Nice.
Autism has fuck all to do with being Muslim or black.
Get that fact through your thick skull, Mikey boy.
Don't duck my point, Jamie boy - you're making yourself look stupid.
What do blacks, Muslims and Autistics have in common?
You say nothing.
I say you're wrong. We have one thing in common. We are the victims of abuse because of who we are. And the abuse comes from the same source. Don't want to understand differences in the human race. Colour, religion, disorder - it's all the same to lazy human rights abusers.
If you don't get it now, get your IQ tested, Jamie boy. And get out more.
Joeker, You're starting to sound too much like a couple of neuronitwits who attack everything I say because they're afraid of me. Taking things out of context to put your spin on them will have your comments go unpublished.
As for your happiness, drunks are happy when they're drunk. Wake up.
Mike Nicholas, Autism is not a difference, it's curable brain damage. It's idiots like you who turn into Cho because you won't help yourselves. You should be put away.
(Sorry John, I’ve tried to make this as short as I can.)
Hi Interverbal,
You say that we are definitely keeping track of the subtypes of autism. Is there a database somewhere? I'd certainly like to see the figures.
That children with RAD are being misdiagnosed with an ASD is more of a problem to me than the actual rate. We get enough criticism and accusations of bad-parenting without the disability being associated once again with abuse and neglect.
Even though you are right that children with Retts can't be given the Autistic Disorder diagnosis, as an ASD, Retts is counted in the rate of autism, just as all PDDs are counted. There are many atypicals both of autism and lately of Aspergers which means that almost any child with atypical development is being counted in the rate of autism today - at least that certainly appears to be the case since screening began around 2002.
Calling all people “autistic”, who have some or all of the behaviours of AD or Aspergers, regardless of the mildness or severity of the symptoms, has clouded the issue.
For instance, take ND activists Amanda Baggs and Laura Tisoncik. According to them, any adult believing themselves to be autistic should be allowed to call themselves autistic, and as “an autistic” should be entitled to speak as an expert on the subject of autism at conferences. How do you feel about that?
Perhaps as a parent of a once typically-developing child with regressive autism, I don't see co-morbidity in quite the same way as the experts. I wouldn't expect normal development from babies with malformed brains due to alcohol or drug exposure in utero, or babies with cortical tubers in the temporal lobes and epilepsy - found in the 25-50% of children with Tuberous Sclerosis who do develop an ASD. I would say these children’s brains have been damaged by alcohol, drugs, tubers in the brain and epilepsy, and brain damage is the cause of their autism, not faulty genes.
I would have thought that the existence of children and adults with acquired brain injury with exactly the same symptoms, such as children with autism after measles encephalitis and adults with Kanner’s Syndrome after herpes encephalitis, would also point to brain-damage.
I know several vaccine-damaged children who have received ‘compensation’, and all have autism or autistic behaviour, so although their autism or autistic behaviours appeared quite suddenly after the vaccine-induced organic brain damage, I don’t think anyone could call their brain injury and their autism co-morbid conditions. How about you?
So because autism can follow an encephalitis, and encephalitis can be caused by vaccination, why aren't vaccine reactions taken seriously? Instead of researchers concentrating their efforts on finding a gene for autism, and ignoring the evidence that any kind of encephalitis, vaccine-induced or not, causes these behaviours, I think they should be studying the subset of children with normal development for 18 months, two, three, four, five and twelve years, who deteriorated immediately after a vaccine and became autistic.
Have any researchers asked why historically 1 in 3 children had regressive-type autism, but from about the mid 80s and throughout the 90s, that had changed to 2 out of 3?
BPD and manic-depression? Again, is there any known rates of this error, any case studies?
BPD meaning Borderline Personality Disorder, not bipolar. There are no rates, but there’s no doubt that adults with mental illnesses are shopping around for a more socially-acceptable diagnosis such as Aspergers. And if their behaviour fits at least some of the criteria for Aspergers or autism, some psychiatrists are willing to give them a diagnosis without any evidence of disability in infancy or early childhood.
Would you be surprised to encounter a young woman, with a mental history from age fourteen of paranoid schizophrenia, bipolar, MPD, and Factitious Disorder, diagnosed with atypical/PDD-NOS at eighteen, and Autistic Disorder at nineteen? Do you think that AD could possibly be a true diagnosis for this young woman?
I mentioned authors Hayden and Rothenburg solely because they describe children with Autism so well, and I certainly think their books would be educational for some of the ND Aspies who have never lived with or even met a severely autistic child. If they don't believe that anyone on the spectrum should be cured, they should at least learn about the lives of children and adults at the lower end of the spectrum. Actually, a much better idea would be for them to offer their services as caregivers now and then to give exhausted parents a break. I wonder how they would cope with a totally non-communicative child with autism who screeches loudly every few minutes all day, every day, for years and hardly ever sleeps. I've known two such children.
You say that several examples of children with AD spontaneously becoming “normal” exist in the literature. Do you have references?
According to ND, autism is a life-long disorder and no one ever recovers, so perhaps these cases in the literature would prove to them that treated children do fully recover from autism.
I doubt very much that supporters of conventional treatments want to see strong proofs that alternative treatments and therapies work. For example, take one of the studies of Berard’s Auditory Integrated Therapy. The researchers didn't select a specific group of children with autism who also had difficulties with auditory processing and hypersensitive hearing, they chose a random group of mentally-retarded children - and concluded that AIT didn't work. Do you think that was a fair study? ASHA banned the use of this therapy in 2003.
It is only through alternative medicine and therapies such as AIT that my son has made progress.
Conventional medicine gave us nothing but a diagnosis.
"Don't duck my point, Jamie boy - you're making yourself look stupid."
I haven't ducked your point. Just scroll up through these comments to see my response (in the language you use and uderstand) to your rather aggressive "get the fuck over it" comment.
Not enough for you?
Then read my comments to Joeker:
""James: The concept rests as much the same, a group being singled out/persecuted because of a charecteristic. Skin colour, faith... cognizance. The larger group speaking for the smaller, and the individuals feeling persecuted, outcast, only good for what they're told they can do, and lowered in other's eyes.""
"I get the "concept", Joeker. The problem with your concept is that differences in cognitive thinking between individuals or groups is not the same as cognitive impairment or disfunction.
The cognitive difference in autism can be in many cases a very real, limiting and debilitating impairment, and not simply a "characteristic" in a minority group that is being singled out by a larger group to
be "persecuted", "outcast" or "lowered in other's eyes".
The sad irony of what you fail to realise, is that there are many autistic children and adults who don't have the cognitive awareness to feel or recognise if they are being "singled out/persecuted", (as you say).
These autistics are being helped and supported through mainstream non-bio, and biomedical intervention, to improve their understanding of the world around them, lessen their anxiety and distress and enable them to gain a better level of understanding and independance where possible.
They have been let down by the system and dismissed by the government, but they are by no means being singled out or persecuted as a minority by a larger group."
Now if you don't understand or agree with the above explanation of why I think you and Joeker are wrong, then that's your problem.
I have better things to with my time than to argue the toss with the likes of you.
If you don't get it now, don't bother getting your IQ tested.
The last time I took an IQ test my score was over 150, and that was after a twelve hour night shift. But my IQ has little to do with using my common sense in making judgement when it comes to forming an opinion.
This "slimeball" has a very much loved, understood and cherished autistic child who is by no means a victim of abuse from "lazy human rights abusers", is not being "persecuted", "outcast", "singled out" or "lowered in other's eyes".
Why don't you explain to me why you think I'm a "slimeball".
You must have some reasons other than the fact that I disagree with you.
Better still, instead of churning out one liners like,
"We are the victims of abuse because of who we are"
why don't you tell us just how you are being abused?
You've identified your so called abusers, so lets here more detail about the nature of this abuse so we can judge whether it is has anything to do with racism/racial abuse or religious bigotry.
Mike Nicholas, Autism is not a difference, it's curable brain damage. It's idiots like you who turn into Cho because you won't help yourselves. You should be put away.
You first, you half wit, because you are a filthy liar bent on wiping out a useful condition. Oh sure, help the LFA's like your son. But leave the HFA's and others alone!
You talk about the government and the chemical boys conspiring? You're a part of one massive conspiracy, buddy. The conspiracy seeking the perfect human being and chucking out the rest.
Get a life!
Very well James. Expect my reply soon.
Watson, don’t worry about the length.
“You say that we are definitely keeping track of the subtypes of autism. Is there a database somewhere? I'd certainly like to see the figures.”
Read recent epidemiology. Chakrabarti & Fombonne (2005) etc. If you would like a list, my blog deals extensively on this subject, especially in the earliest articles.
I can appreciate your concern about children with RAD being misdiagnosed with autism. I would call this lousy and unethical. I also agree this has the potential to reflect badly upon parents who is the past, were considered to be the cause, or at least a maintaining variable in autism. However, my concern is that this misdiagnosis may not occur except in extremely rare circumstances.
“Even though you are right that children with Retts can't be given the Autistic Disorder diagnosis, as an ASD, Retts is counted in the rate of autism, just as all PDDs are counted.”
Several autism researchers such as Dr. Fombonne do not include Rett’s in their counts, such as what we see in Fombonne (2003). Also Rett’s is 3.8 per 10,000, or 6% of the total. Furthermore, Rett’s appears to be stable, it is not going up, ditto for Childhood Disintegrative Disorder.
“There are many atypicals both of autism and lately of Aspergers which means that almost any child with atypical development is being counted in the rate of autism today - at least that certainly appears to be the case since screening began around 2002.”
I see little evidence that “any” child with atypical development is now placed into autism, but I agree that many children with atypical development are placed in autism, and especially in the PDD-NOS category. I predict that if the criteria are further broadened or new categories are created then the rate will jump higher still.
”Calling all people “autistic”, who have some or all of the behaviours of AD or Aspergers, regardless of the mildness or severity of the symptoms, has clouded the issue.”
It makes it hard to track in a consistent manner.
”For instance, take ND activists Amanda Baggs and Laura Tisoncik. According to them, any adult believing themselves to be autistic should be allowed to call themselves autistic, and as “an autistic” should be entitled to speak as an expert on the subject of autism at conferences. How do you feel about that?”
Is that what Amanda or Laura said? Can you provide quotes please? For myself, I stand by formal diagnostics. Autistic people may have much to contribute depending on their observations and experiences. At the very least, they can give a description of their own life. If such a first hand account is important, then I think it very appropriate to have autistics presenting at conferences.
”I know several vaccine-damaged children who have received ‘compensation’, and all have autism or autistic behaviour, so although their autism or autistic behaviours appeared quite suddenly after the vaccine-induced organic brain damage, I don’t think anyone could call their brain injury and their autism co-morbid conditions. How about you?”
I may argue against this, or maybe support it, I need to know the specific of the case. I could only guess at the moment.
”Have any researchers asked why historically 1 in 3 children had regressive-type autism, but from about the mid 80s and throughout the 90s, that had changed to 2 out of 3?”
The rate of regressive type autism is a much under researched topic. However, the recent research that does exist does not show an increase here. The only counter example was courtesy of the ARI and was done by survey. It was never published in a peer reviewed journal and is contradicted by better designed research.
”BPD meaning Borderline Personality Disorder, not bipolar. There are no rates, but there’s no doubt that adults with mental illnesses are shopping around for a more socially-acceptable diagnosis such as Aspergers. And if their behaviour fits at least some of the criteria for Aspergers or autism, some psychiatrists are willing to give them a diagnosis without any evidence of disability in infancy or early childhood.”
BPD…. Now I see. Do you have any rates, that provide a reason for anyone skeptical to agree that this is a problem?
”Would you be surprised to encounter a young woman, with a mental history from age fourteen of paranoid schizophrenia, bipolar, MPD, and Factitious Disorder, diagnosed with atypical/PDD-NOS at eighteen, and Autistic Disorder at nineteen? Do you think that AD could possibly be a true diagnosis for this young woman?”
Yes, I have seen cases like this.
”I mentioned authors Hayden and Rothenburg solely because they describe children with Autism so well, and I certainly think their books would be educational for some of the ND Aspies who have never lived with or even met a severely autistic child.”
Careful, I think you may be making an awfully big assumption here. As to Rothenberg and Hayden, I don’t agree that either one of them did a good job describing autism. I can’t imagine ever recommending either of these authors except maybe to show how attitudes towards autism existed in the 50-60s and 70s respectively. I might as well throw in the Tinbergen’s book and “The Empty Fortress” and “Your child is Asleep” into that list as well.
“You say that several examples of children with AD spontaneously becoming “normal” exist in the literature. Do you have references?”
Start with Lovaas (1987).
”According to ND, autism is a life-long disorder and no one ever recovers, so perhaps these cases in the literature would prove to them that treated children do fully recover from autism.”
Only if one assumes that such children have no shadow traits.
”I doubt very much that supporters of conventional treatments want to see strong proofs that alternative treatments and therapies work.”
That would be understandable, but it would cowardice and dishonesty to refuse provisional assent if evidence amasses. I agree that folks within conventional medicine may not like what new research shows, but that does not mean they will fail to acknowledge it.
“For example, take one of the studies of Berard’s Auditory Integrated Therapy. The researchers didn't select a specific group of children with autism who also had difficulties with auditory processing and hypersensitive hearing, they chose a random group of mentally-retarded children - and concluded that AIT didn't work. Do you think that was a fair study? ASHA banned the use of this therapy in 2003.”
I know very little of this case, but I do not agree with the decision based on what you have described.
”It is only through alternative medicine and therapies such as AIT that my son has made progress.”
I am happy for your son and family.
Now, I have a few questions for you. Would you understand why I and other like me may be skeptical that alternative practices helped your child? Or would you insist that because you added treatments and your child improved thereafter, that we agree with your assessment that one caused the other? What could be done to help prove your point? Is doing so even important?
Jonathan, Since you agree with Fombonne, and he doesn't count Rett's in with autism, shouldn't Kassiane be kicked out of the Neuroinsanity cult for including herself with autistics?
Mr. Best,
I do not agree with Fombonne in every regard. His non-inclusion of Rett's in several of his analyses would be one such case.
As to Kassiane, even were Rett's no longer included as a PDD, she could still be an ND, which is not dependent on one's PDD status, but on one's philosophy.
A lot of advocates on the spectrum do lie. That's for certain!
Interverbal said...
Watson, dont worry about the length.
Thanks, Jonathon. I hope John feels the same way about lengthy messages on his blog, and I’ve split this response in two, in the hope that it won’t look quite so long!
W: You say that we are definitely keeping track of the subtypes of autism. Is there a database somewhere? I'd certainly like to see the figures. I: "Read recent epidemiology. Chakrabarti & Fombonne (2005) etc. If you would like a list, my blog deals extensively on this subject, especially in the earliest articles. "
No, I didn’t think there was a database, Jonathon.
Do you think that the rate of PDD in Fombonne’s study of British preschoolers in the city of Stafford, England, screened for PDD from birth, can possibly be representative of the rate of autism, or the subtypes of autism, in the United States, or anywhere else for that matter?
Speaking of Fombonne, I’d much rather read his commentary on Badawi’s study on autism and newborn encephalopathy (2006) than his numerous epidemiological studies designed to disprove any link with vaccines but, like many other interesting articles on encephalopathy and vaccine injury, it isn’t available online.
I: I can appreciate your concern about children with RAD being misdiagnosed with autism. I would call this lousy and unethical.
So would I, but as an autism support person asked me recently, "If some of the diagnostic criteria ‘fit’, why not give them an autism label?" She couldn't see a problem. Perhaps psychologists don’t see it as a problem either. But, you see, Jonathon, if you are waiting for the numbers of autism to drop, and then you discover that children with RAD, SCS and FAS are being given the PDD/NOS/atypical autism label, and are therefore included in the current rate of autism, it matters a great deal.
W: Even though you are right that children with Retts can't be given the Autistic Disorder diagnosis, as an ASD, Retts is counted in the rate of autism, just as all PDDs are counted. I: Several autism researchers such as Dr. Fombonne do not include Retts in their counts, such as what we see in Fombonne (2003). Also Retts is 3.8 per 10,000, or 6% of the total. Furthermore, Retts appears to be stable, it is not going up, ditto for Childhood Disintegrative Disorder.
Perhaps Fombonne doesn’t include Retts in his UK studies because Retts isn’t counted as an ASD in that country. Regardless, it’s not the rate of Retts or its inclusion or exclusion from the rate of ASD that bothers me. My point was that children with regressive autism from vaccines don't have genetic disorders like Rett's, Angelman's, Noonan's, Down's, Tuberous Sclerosis, Congenital Rubella etc., and their brains haven't been damaged during pregnancy by alcohol or drugs. Even though you might regard these as co-morbid conditions, I don’t - particularly when I know that both blind children and deaf children engage in typically autistic behaviours, called ‘blindisms’ and ‘deafisms’ which are not comorbids - nor are they a special autistic “language”, as Amanda Baggs would have us believe.
My son and many other children with regressive autism don’t have co-morbid conditions – unless, of course, brain injury from vaccines can be counted.
I: I see little evidence that any child with atypical development is now placed into autism, but I agree that many children with atypical development are placed in autism, and especially in the PDD-NOS category. I predict that if the criteria are further broadened or new categories are created then the rate will jump higher still.
I agree with you. Clinicians have already suggested the inclusion of ADHD, and if that happens, the autism rate would skyrocket overnight.
That’s why I maintain that the face of autism is changing. Talking to parents over the past two years, I know that toddlers with no more than speech delay are being given a PDD-NOS/atypical autism label, and two-year olds who aren’t as outgoing as social as they ‘should’ be are being given an Aspergers label.
I have also recently met two teenagers diagnosed with Aspergers and neither of them, as far as I could see, had anything wrong with them. The boy, a 12 year old avid sports player, has a 15 year-old girlfriend, and, according to his mother, has an IQ "off the charts". The girl, 16, is out-going, chatty, and has normal eye-contact. She’s also fashion-conscious: see-through top, bare midriff complete with silver navel ring, and very short skirt. I am suspicious of their diagnoses because, in my book, Autistic Disorder and Aspergers are disabilities, and these young people are not disabled. They’re not even Geeks or Nerds. And that’s when a thought occurred to me: “Something is going on”. That’s when I spoke to the support person mentioned above.
W: Calling all people autistic, who have some or all of the behaviours of AD or Aspergers, regardless of the mildness or severity of the symptoms, has clouded the issue. I: It makes it hard to track in a consistent manner.
Precisely!
W: For instance, take ND activists Amanda Baggs and Laura Tisoncik. According to them, any adult believing themselves to be autistic should be allowed to call themselves autistic, and as an autistic should be entitled to speak as an expert on the subject of autism at conferences. How do you feel about that? I: Is that what Amanda or Laura said? Can you provide quotes please?
I can do better than that. You can read what they said for yourself:
http://www.autistics.org/library/whoisautistic.html
Which was in response to Thomas McKean's letter:
http://www.thomasamckean.com/articles/speaking.htm
W: I know several vaccine-damaged children who have received compensation, and all have autism or autistic behaviour, so although their autism or autistic behaviours appeared quite suddenly after the vaccine-induced organic brain damage, I don’t think anyone could call their brain injury and their autism co-morbid conditions. How about you? I: I may argue against this, or maybe support it, I need to know the specific of the case. I could only guess at the moment.
They all follow the same pattern, which is:
Normal baby + vaccination = severe reaction > encephalopathy = Organic Brain Damage/ Cerebral Palsy/ Spastic Quadruplegia (choose one) + autism or autistic traits.
I see no difference between vaccine-injured children developing autism, and adolescents and adults developing autism after an encephalitis. Do you?
W: Have any researchers asked why historically 1 in 3 children had regressive-type autism, but from about the mid 80s and throughout the 90s, that had changed to 2 out of 3?
I: The rate of regressive type autism is a much under researched topic. However, the recent research that does exist does not show an increase here. The only counter example was courtesy of the ARI and was done by survey. It was never published in a peer reviewed journal and is contradicted by better designed research.
Personally, I would be more likely to believe that Dr Rimland had seen a change in the data that he had been collecting for more than forty years, than researchers’ epidemiological studies funded by the NIH, CDC and vaccine manufacturers. But that’s just me.
Do you really believe that if researchers had found a change in the number of children with regressive autism that they would have revealed it to the general public? Nothing can be allowed to damage the current image of the World Wide Immunization Programme saving countless lives. Any link between vaccines that are supposed to be safe for the vast majority of children and brain injury of hundreds of thousands of children internationally cannot be made. How many medical professionals and researchers have pointed out that the consequences of proving a link would have a huge impact on vaccine compliance and many more children would be brain-injured or die as a result? Simon Murch, for instance. In case you didn’t know, Jonathon, there is a war being fought against disease, and some children’s lives are expendable.
The fact that far many more children were damaged from the mid 80s and throughout the 90s than the usual regrettable but acceptable number of casualties, known as collateral damage, drew the public’s attention to the safety of vaccines. Prior to that, only a few people knew that vaccines damaged and killed children, and Jo Public didn’t worry about thimerosal, whole-cell pertussis, live viruses or the oral polio vaccine. They didn’t worry because they didn’t know there was anything to worry about, and didn’t know what questions were the right ones to ask. They just believed whatever their friendly family physician told them.
W: Would you be surprised to encounter a young woman, with a mental history from age fourteen of paranoid schizophrenia, bipolar, MPD, and Factitious Disorder, diagnosed with atypical/PDD-NOS at eighteen, and Autistic Disorder at nineteen? Do you think that AD could possibly be a true diagnosis for this young woman? I: Yes, I have seen cases like this.
Cases, you say? And there I was, thinking that the person I had in mind was one of a kind!
Jonathon, could you please explain how the criteria for Autistic Disorder could not be met one year, and yet could the next?
W: I mentioned authors Hayden and Rothenburg solely because they describe children with Autism so well, and I certainly think their books would be educational for some of the ND Aspies who have never lived with or even met a severely autistic child. I: Careful, I think you may be making an awfully big assumption here.
No, I'm not. Have you visited the Aspies for Freedom website recently, and browsed through some of the posts here on John's blog? If you have worked with children severely disabled by autism, then you will know that the “all they need is love” philosophy doesn’t work.
I: As to Rothenberg and Hayden, I dont agree that either one of them did a good job describing autism. I cant imagine ever recommending either of these authors except maybe to show how attitudes towards autism existed in the 50-60s and 70s respectively. I might as well throw in the Tinbergens book and The Empty Fortress and Your child is Asleep into that list as well.
Why not? It's the children's behaviour they should be reading about. Have you read Torey Hayden's "Just another Kid"? Leslie, the little girl with autism in the story is now in her late twenties, but she is still severely autistic. Being loved by both her parents, and doted on by her father all her life, has not made the slightest difference to her condition.
NDs myth that all children with autism improve, and all they need is love and acceptance is false.
W: You say that several examples of children with AD spontaneously becoming normal exist in the literature. Do you have references? I: Start with Lovaas (1987).
Lovaas? If he was referring to children after ABA therapy, I don’t think that would qualify as spontaneously becoming normal.
Twelve per cent of Kanners first hundred patients became “functional”, but eighty-eight percent did not.
W:According to ND, autism is a life-long disorder and no one ever recovers, so perhaps these cases in the literature would prove to them that treated children do fully recover from autism. I: Only if one assumes that such children have no shadow traits.
Shadow traits are not disabling. Would you agree that no one is normal and that every single person on earth has idiosyncrasies?
ND compares autistics to neurotypicals. Tell me, Jonathon, do you believe that a neurotypical person exists?
W: I doubt very much that supporters of conventional treatments want to see strong proofs that alternative treatments and therapies work. I: That would be understandable, but it would cowardice and dishonesty to refuse provisional assent if evidence amasses. I agree that folks within conventional medicine may not like what new research shows, but that does not mean they will fail to acknowledge it.
It would be comforting to believe that, and I would certainly like to be able to wind back the clock to once again share the Faith that you have in modern medicine, but, once you or a member of your family has been injured by conventional medicine, and you’ve watched as the medical fraternity close their ranks against you, I guarantee you will lose your faith in the establishment, just as I have.
A doctor who violates your complete trust in him is a bad as a priest who sexually violates your child.
Once a person you thought had only your child’s best interests at heart, deceives you, lies to you, and ends up hurting your child, the trust you had in him can never be regained, and the establishment that he represents will never be a source of comfort again.
Doctors are human and can lie just like everyone else, and they will lie to protect their own reputations, and to cover up medical errors and injury. It is definitely their job to promote the safety and efficacy of vaccines to the masses, even though they might chose not to use them for themselves or their families.
How would you feel if you discovered that the doctor who emotionally blackmailed you into vaccinating your own child with dire threats of brain-damage and death from what he called preventable diseases, considers vaccination too dangerous for his own children?
W: For example, take one of the studies of Berards Auditory Integrated Therapy. The researchers didn't select a specific group of children with autism who also had difficulties with auditory processing and hypersensitive hearing, they chose a random group of mentally-retarded children - and concluded that AIT didn't work. Do you think that was a fair study? ASHA banned the use of this therapy in 2003. I: I know very little of this case, but I do not agree with the decision based on what you have described.
The follow-up was too short in another, because the researcher decided it was time for her to take a break. She went on holiday.
Part II
Interverbal said...
Now, I have a few questions for you. Would you understand why I and other like me may be skeptical that alternative practices helped your child?
I totally understand, because I was once where I assume you are today. I believed in modern medicine and completely trusted my doctor to do what was best for our family. I believed that vaccines were absolutely safe for our baby, and that they would protect him from disease. I believed that without them he would suffer dreadfully from a preventable illness, and he could be brain damaged, or even die. I believed that the vaccines, bottles of Tylenol, antibiotics, hydrocortisone creams and anything else that my doctor prescribed were absolutely necessary for my son's health and well being.
I had no interest in alternative medicine, and did not believe that it could work. I had never consulted an alternative practitioner, and I had never taken a supplement, a herb, or a homeopathic remedy. Whenever I was sick, I headed straight for the medical centre, and took whatever the doctor prescribed, without question. I was brought up with the idea that "doctor knows best", so if they told me to go to bed for three days, that's precisely what I did.
But that was a long time ago, before my son was damaged by vaccines and our lives were changed for ever.
Or would you insist that because you added treatments and your child improved thereafter, that we agree with your assessment that one caused the other?
Not at all. The success of the treatments and therapies themselves don't prove that my son's brain was damaged by vaccines.
The reason our compensation claim was not accepted was that I couldn't prove that vaccines had caused his brain damage. They accepted that his severe reactions were caused by vaccines, and, with eye-witness testimonials, before and after video evidence, and A1 health development records for 22 months, they accepted that his regression had followed the vaccine he received at age two, BUT.... because his regression led to a diagnosis of autism, and some children mysteriously become autistic, they concluded vaccines weren't to blame.
He was never physically examined, no tests were run. He was observed, and we were questioned about his behaviour. Loss of language to nil, the complete loss of the ability to communicate, a dramatic change in personality, and the appearance of typically autistic behaviour did not indicate brain damage to them. I saw brain damage. They saw autism. And they told me that the disorder was life-long and that there was nothing further that they could do.
Mainstream medicine had damaged my son and could not help him, so basically doctors washed their hands of him.
That's why we turned to alternative medicine.
What could be done to help prove your point?
That vaccines damaged my sons brain, and that for him alternative treatments worked?
It's impossible to prove that vaccines damaged my son's brain. You can't climb inside and look, or dissect a living brain. But I know for certain that if he'd had measles at the age of two and had been feverish, irritable, anorexic, and his behaviour and disposition had changed as radically as it did after the vaccine, they would have called his condition post-encephalitic syndrome or post-Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis, not autism. And I have no doubt that mainstream would have counted him in their statistics to show how dangerous the measles disease is, and used his case to promote the MMR vaccine to protect other children against this type of brain damage.
I know that alternative treatments and therapies worked for my son, and that's one of the main reasons I'm posting here. And, like John, I don't agree with ND’s philosophy of acceptance and celebration of disability. Parents should be allowed to make their own health decisions for their children; they should not be emotionally blackmailed by doctors or ND activists.
How do I know that alternative treatments worked? Well firstly, because I’m not stupid - I saw the difference, and secondly, because of the positive feedback I got from my son’s SLP, special education support workers, teachers, caregivers, friends and relatives who didn’t know exactly what we were doing but told us that whatever it was, to keep doing it.
If your son had bowel problems for five years and then had his first normal stool after one week of zinc, would you question that the zinc supplement had made a difference?
Would you question the benefit of AIT if your six-year-old son no longer screamed, covered his ears, dropped to the floor and assumed the fetal position in the presence of hand and hair driers, or music in a confined space?
Would you question the benefit of the gf/cf diet if, after a few weeks, your fifteen year-old- son was finally able to tolerate a hug, his hair being ruffled or the light touch of a hand on his shoulder or knee?
But you can’t pick a group of children at random with the same ‘autism’ label and expect only one particular treatment to work for them all, particularly if some children have a genetic disorder and others have brain damage from drugs during pregnancy or a botched delivery. Each individual child’s behaviour has to be carefully observed, and physical ailments such as allergies, food intolerances and gut issues must be treated. Even today, when my sixteen-year-old son’s immune system is challenged, his autistic behaviours return.
Mainstream has never helped us. Doctors appear to rely on their prescription pads and trying drug after drug, and that’s not getting to the root of the problem.
I: Is doing so even important?
To make the connection between vaccination, brain damage and autism? Most definitely.
And I think it’s vitally important for parents to take responsibility for their own children’s health, and not allow themselves to be emotionally blackmailed or bullied into doing anything that might harm their child. They must do their own research, and not rely on anyone to do their thinking for them. Good health doesn’t come from a toxin-laden syringe.
Autism is treatable in the young child, in the same way that brain damage is treatable, but mainstream doctors cannot allow themselves to believe in alternative treatment because if they can’t treat it, then it’s untreatable. It’s a matter of medical arrogance.
When mainstream doctors have turned their backs on brain-damaged children, Glenn Doman has been successfully treating them for fifty years or more. When mainstream doctors turned away children with paralytic polio, Nurse Kenny successfully treated them. And the ketogenic diet has been curing epilepsy for years, and yet mainstream will only use it as a last resort when all their conventional methods have failed. There’s something very wrong with that.
So, yes, thinking outside the square is very important.
Watson,
"It would be comforting to believe that, and I would certainly like to be able to wind back the clock to once again share the Faith that you have in modern medicine, but, once you or a member of your family has been injured by conventional medicine, and you’ve watched as the medical fraternity close their ranks against you, I guarantee you will lose your faith in the establishment, just as I have."
I get the feeling you may have saw this already:
"FROM JOHN STONE
It is essential that anyone who was involved in the MMR litigation gives their attention to this notice
MMR JUDGE FAILED TO DISCLOSE HE WAS BROTHER OF Glaxo SmithKline DIRECTOR AND LANCET BOSS
Just three days ago I discovered while going over the records for 2004 that the judge, Mr Justice Davis (aka Sir Nigel Anthony Lamert Davis), who had dismissed the appeal over the removal of funding of the MMR litigation by the Legal Services Commission was the brother of Lancet proprietor (CEO Reed Elsevier) Crispin (Henry Lamert) Davis who at the time had also recently become a non-executive director of Glaxo SmithKline. Though this has not been reported in the media the following press announcement was issued by the judiciary yesterday afternoon:
"In 2003 Mr Justice Davis's brother was appointed as a Non-Executive Director of Glaxo SmithKline, a company which was formed as a result of a merger with Smith Kline Beecham. At the date of the hearing before Davis J, the possibility of any conflict of interest arising from his brother's position did not occur to him.
"If he was wrong, any possible remedy must be sought from the Court of Appeal."
Former litigants should complain without delay to the Office for Judicial Complaints, focussing on the GSK conflict. Clearly if the judge had said at the time that his brother was a director of GSK but he intended to hear the case anyway his decision would have been regarded with a great deal more scepticism:
http://www.judicialcomplaints.gov.UK/
They should also write without delay to their MPs, and they should contact anyone they know who was also party to the litigation, and draw their attention to this notice. It is very important that as many people do this as soon as possible.
People may like to note the sequence of events:
1) July 2003 Lancet proprietor Crispin Davis become a non-executive director of MMR manufacturer Glaxo SmithKline
2) February 20, 2004. The Lancet throws Andrew Wakefield to the wolves for tenuous reasons. He is dragged through the mud by the BBC and Sunday Times for four days.
3) February 27, 2004. Mr Justice Davis dismisses the litigants appeal for restitution of funding.
4) June 2004. Crispin Davis knighted by the Blair government.
John Stone"
Yeah, a lot of them do, Jedi... like this one. Except, oh wait, the Author isn't Autistic!
Hm... Oh yeah, this is the only confirmed case of a non-autistic person pretending to be thus.
http://www.asohalton.org/My%20Name%20is%20Autism.pdf
Yeah, a lot of these advocates lie.
*ahem*
The ones who're actually not Autistic.
James, No I hadn't seen it. Thanks for posting. The corruption goes all the way to the top, doesn't it? And the stench is absolutely sickening.
Joeker said...
Yeah, a lot of them do, Jedi... like this one. Except, oh wait, the Author isn't Autistic! Hm... Oh yeah, this is the only confirmed case of a non-autistic person pretending to be thus.
Joeker, How do you know that Marty Murphy isn't autistic? She is a board member of the Autism Society of Illinois. She says she is a high-functioning autistic, and speaks at autism conferences.
Post a Comment