I don’t think in an ignorance fighting board this comment is acceptable, to me anyway. Just for what it’s worth, the minute my daughter was suspected of being autistic the doctor ordered the full range of blood work. Mercury was not, and is not an issue with autism. Perpetuating that myth is doing so much harm to our children and I think it’s criminal to be allowed to push forward with those myths.
The minute a parent falls for this spew, they engage in risky “therapies” that have no chance of succeeding, and can just as well kill the child.
You think the government is hiding this for what purpose? To protect the pharmaceutical industry? To… what? It’s 35,000,000,000USD a year in costs for autism as we speak.
DS Young,
I’ve been pointing to cured children and children who regressed after being injected with way too much mercury. I linked to a post that has all sorts of links that discuss the proof. I went to the trouble of describing how Richard Deth showed EXACTLY how mercury caused the epidemic. There are no fallacies there.
Doctors who gave babies 200 times as much mercury as is thought to be safe by the CDC did commit malpractice. The fact that they are protected from lawsuits by “standard of care” makes them legally untouchable. However, that negligence is still malpractice. They should have known how much mercury was in the vaccines.
Would you care to explain why they added a provision to the Homeland Security Bill to protect Pharma from lawsuits if they had done no wrong?
I mentioned Verstrtaeten but you ignore that. Care to discuss Simpsonwood?
Your argument sounds familiar, knock me, pick a fallacy, deny there’s a coverup but don’t bother trying to answer any of the points I’ve raised.
Would you like to argue against why there are four times as many males with autism as girls? Boyd Haley showed us on a video how quickly mercury with testosterone added to it kills cells. He also showed that testosterone decreases the toxicity of mercury. Could you confine yourself to the specifics without the personal knocks?
Could you explain to all the parents who followed my advice and watched their children improve how anything I’ve said is not 100% accurate? Can you also explain how your refusing to listen to solid evidence helps any child? I’d love to hear that answer without you resorting to searching for a logical fallacy to hide behind. This is not a courtroom. Legal considerations have no place when it comes to helping children.
I agree with DSYoungEsq, they do not mean the same thing. A person with autism, means that the person has a condition; an autistic person, defines the person - and anyone who claims to be “an autistic” can now belong to a group with their ownautistic culture .
Over the last few years the term autistic has become a noun, and “an autistic” could mean anyone on the ever-extending ‘autistic spectrum’, from the severely disabled individual with Autism at one end to a fully-functioning, successful person with an autistic personality type, or traits, at the other. That is why Neurodiversity activists have been able to compile an ever-growing list of famous autistics or famous people with autism, and how geeks, nerds and people with resolved schizophrenia, other mental-illnesses and personality disorders can now claim to be autistics, and “have autism”.
Since 1999 there has been an active campaign to change attitudes towards Autism, and it began with the appearance of Jasmine O’Neill’s book "Through the Eyes of Aliens: A Book About Autistic People.
Describing herself “a “Classical Kanner Autistic”, and a “mute autistic savant in writing, art and music”, O’Neill was the first person to celebrate her autism , to call it beautiful, and to announce to the world that, “”‘normalizing’ autistic people is not just ineffective but wrong”. In 2000, the journal ‘Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities’ published her autobiography “My View of Autism”.
The question is: Does Jasmine Lee O’Neill who made these global statements about autistics and autism, and had her autobiography published in a an Autism and disability journal, actually have the condition?
In the autobiography , she writes, “Being unusually bright, gifted, and able to communicate, I wasn’t recognized as being autistic when I was a child.”, and she describes herself as, “an extremely sensitive, emotional, misunderstood, shy young girl”.
In the MAAP archives , she says she was misdiagnosed with social phobia by a “quack” and discovered her autism at the age of 26. Soon after her book was published she met the man of her dreams, flew off to Hawaii to get married, recovered her voice, and has since vanished completely from the autism world.
Could anyone here explain how O’Neill’s Classic Kanner’s Autism was missed until she was 26? And if they believe as I do that Jasmine O’Neill has never had Autism, could they offer an explanation as to how her book which has become the bible to so many “autistics” now claiming to have autism, could have been published, and how her autobiography wound up in an autism and disability journal? I’d really like to know.
Um, she’s full of shit? Just a guess… And as far as the success of her book? Well, I’ll give you a hint- there’s one born every minute. After all, millions of people have made Kevin Trudeau’s books best-sellers…
I am absolutely astounded that you linked to a website that claims that a bunch of famous people, including Al Gore, have autism or autistic traits, as if it were some kind of proof of the functioning capability of autistic people, and neither you nor the website gives any citations or proof of any kind that these folks are autistic. How, exactly, have these “Neurodiversity activists” compiled this list?
If the results of the latest study have been posted already, I’m sorry if I missed it.
So, yet another study that scientifically reinforces the evidence that the trace amounts of mercury in shots has had little to do with the syndrome(autism).
I’m unfortunately sure that this will do little to assuage the convictions of parents desperately seeking answers to their plight.
foresam, I am not expert at autism, or mercury. But I am expert at reading what others I trust say about it, and I am expert at logical thinking.
I do not believe in what you believe in. I am not going to debate you, just as you have no intention of truly debating anyone here. You simply point to what others that you have faith in say and assert: they have the “truth.” So my post is simply intended to remind everyone that “debating” you is useless, since you will not listen, as you have not, to the cogent arguments given in response to your statements. Since you cannot yourself debate the underlying issues (forcing you to point to what others say, others who are not here discussing, not that it would matter since they are just as dedicated in “belief” as you are), discussion is pointless.
You believe what you wish to believe. That is your right. But in the absence of an ability to argue from a position supported by empirical studies (which, despite the multiple requests here you fail to provide), no one is going to believe with you. That’s because the members of this Board believe in debunking myth, and looking at fact. And, in determining what “works” on an issue like this, your anecdotal evidence isn’t sufficient to make a scientific conclusion.
If being disbelieved or ignored for the failure to be able to support your assertions with cold, hard, data (you know, the type that involve trustworthy statistical analysis) causes you difficulties, you are posting on the wrong Board… :eek:
OK, DSYoungEsq, I think you have made your point. (I can even sympathize with you–see any of my posts on threads dominated by the presence of lekatt.)
Having made your point, however, I suggest you back off a bit to see whether your message has made it to the Teeming Millions (and before you incur any negative attention from those of us in power-wielding authority who are compelled to enforce the rules of this message board.).
First off, I’d like to thank the powers-that-be for restoring and unlocking this thread.
Second of all, I’d like to second Tom’s request (okay, edict really) that we move on from discussions regarding the nature of a particular individual’s condition(s) and appreciate KathleenSeidel’s effort to flesh out what she at least means by “the neurodiversity movement”. And certainly one of the effects of the tremendous broadening of the label “autism” to include a spectrum that overlaps and blends seamlessly into the normal population (besides of course, having created many more people being called “autistic”) is the fact that some of these now labeled as having high-functioning autistic spectrum are pretty high-functioning indeed. They can function as independent adults and have some significant strengths along with their significant challenges. In today’s world there are more opportunities than ever for them to work around their deficits and maximize their strengths. These particular people are not tragic and not disabled. More power to them and any comfort they garner from associating with each other in a “pride” movement … so long as such pride doesn’t include the presumption that they can talk for those with more significant autism, so long as they do not attempt to prevent the minimizing the disability in others not so minimally affected. I am still confused as to why Ms. Seidel promotes the work of someone (whatever her actual status) who does argue against the early and appropriate treatment and the research that she advocates for. But maybe she will flesh that out some more later.
Her bemoaning the quackery inflicted (and often honestly believed) by some, is well illustrated by the posts of our other guest, foresam. I will return to address some of his claims but first would like to discuss the broader subject of desperate and frustrated parents attraction to fringe medicine like chelation therapy for autism. It is to some extent understandable. They are dealing with mainstream doctors honestly telling them that their child has a chronic condition for which there is no cure, only a lot of hard work that will minimize disability, telling them that while it is primarily a genetic condition we do not yet have the multiple genes clearly identified and we have only some interesting guesses as to how these multiple genes lead to this set of conditions called autistic spectrum. On the other side they are dealing with attractive actresses on Oprah saying that they know what causes it and holding out hope for a “cure”. Short frumpy me giving unwelcome news or Jennie McCarthy pointing a well manicured and attractive finger? The fact that some find the simplistic an irresistable fantasy is understandable. It is my job as a primary care doc to do the educating needed. If I fail (and I sometimes do, at least at first) and parents choose to avoid immunization or to go for megavitiamin therapy, chelation, and other whacko fringe approaches, then to some extent it is my culpability. It’s those lousy people skills we docs all got, I guess.
The immunization conspiracy theorists are a persistent lot. Just like stories of cats exploding in microwaves: many know someone who knows someone who swears their child became autistic from a shot … urban myths have long lifetimes. They capitalize on fears of what we poorly understand.
Meanwhile some actual facts:
These are old canards. The MMR allegation has been so completely debunked that almost all of the original authors have gone on record saying that they were wrong. Meanwhile thimerosal has been out of the standard vaccine that kids get for about seven years now (it is still in influenza vaccines in multi-dose vials, generally only given to adults, or offered as an option in a shortage situation, and adult tetnus vaccine). In the absence of absolute proof of its safety, and with the availabilty of newer meercury free preservatives, it seemed prudent to remove it. If it had been a factor then by now we would be seeing a significant decrease in new cases diagnosed nationwide for years now. {Checks his patient population.} Nope hasn’t happened. Which is no surprise as the Danes had been ahead of us on eliminating thimerosal and actually saw an increase after they did! Curiously enough the Brits found the same tendency to less autism in those who received the vaccines. (Probably some selection bias actually … kids who get labeled as autistic later in life are subtly “off” much earlier in life. Some parents could be reacting to those subtle signs and more likely to avoid these bad press associated shot. Just a guess, but I cannot believe that thimerosal is actually protective. The same result was found in MMR studies: those who go the shot were actually at lower risk of autism compared to those who did not. Go figure.) Meanwhile a study in today’s NEJM (I hope that this link to summary of it works, but Samclem also has a link if it doesn’t) has also shown no significant association of thimerosal with cognitive issues. Of the slight associations found, more were positive than negative findings … again.
But of course the Danes, the Brits, and us Yanks are all in on the conspiracy doncha know?
It does get frustrating since good money ends up defending good medicine against bad science. Instead of being spent on more real basic science at understanding root causes. Especially as I personally believe some exciting real work is going on in the field. We are beginning to understand autism as a complex polygenic common phenotype, a state that the brain settles into when its networks are imbalanced in various ways early in development. Understanding these networks, understanding how they become imbalanced in various ways, will lead to better means of early identification and intervention.
Let’s move on to that work and keep kids healthy with our thimerosal free vaccines. ''Kay?
And oh btw, no bill was added to protect pharma from lawsuits. It merely said that it needed to go through the established VAERS compensation system first. If dissatisfied with the result a lawsuit was still an option. The lawyers fought it (and mischaracterized it) knowing that the longer we go without seeing a decrease in new autism after having discontinued thimerosal the weaker their cases would be, and this would indeed slow the process down.
I wouldn’t mind if it was just a few crazy people who’ve been deceived by this woman, but remember her book was published by Jessica Kingley Publications , “publishers of accessible professional and academic books in the social and behavioural sciences”; her autobiography appeared in the disability journal ‘Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities’; her article “I live in a home within myself” appears on the National Autistic Society (UK) website under “Real Life Stories of People with an ASD”, and even Kathleen Seidel advertises her book on her Neurodiversity website. Please read the review on this page. And here’s another , with the heading in bold, “Accurate information from the source”, and from the review, “I am Autistic, and I love this book. Autism is not a condition, it is a personality type. This book succeeds in making that point.”
And the author of the Getting the Truth Out website has said that this is one of the 70-odd books on autism she has read, but this particular book is her bible which she carries around everywhere with her.
That is just one of many lists, but I would say associating genius and autism began in 1999 when newspaper and magazine articles associating Bill Gates and Einstein started to appear, and when the Irish autism expert Professor Michael Fitzgerald began to study famous historical people whom he claims had Aspergers syndrome: Ludwig Wittgenstein, Sir Keith Joseph, Eamon de Valera, Lewis Carroll and William Butler, 21 famous writers, philosophers, musicians and painters including George Orwell, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Andy Warhol, Herman Melville, Simone Weil, Ludwig van Beethoven, Vincent van Gogh, Enoch Powell, Stanley Kubrick, Aldous Huxley, Sir Isaac Newton, Alfred Kinsey, Patricia Highsmith, William James Sidis, Robert Walser, Joy Adamson, Kurt Gödel, Robert Emmet, Pádraig Pearse, Éamon de Valera, Robert Boyle, William Rowan Hamilton, Daisy Bates, WB Yeats, James Joyce and Samuel Beckett
“Asperger’s syndrome swings from very high-IQ people like Isaac Newton, President Eamon de Valera, Samuel Beckett, James Joyce, and Einstein, to much lower IQs and much less talented people.”
So it would appear that around that time an Asperger’s spectrum was introduced.
Are you aware that 2002 Nobel Prizewinner Vernon Smith has also been diagnosed with Aspergers, and speaks against treatment and cure?
1999 was when people began hearing about autism and genius, and started diagnosing themselves with Aspergers. Like this person, and then, without a diagnosis, they join other online autistics to speak against treatment, therapy and possible cure for Autism.
Frank Klein became another autism advocate at 29, after reading an article in The New York Times magazine, ‘The Little Professor Syndrome’ which he said, “explained everything”. He then set up his “Asperger’s Advocacy” website which he later changed to “Autism Advocacy” when he said he realized he was more High Functioning than an Aspie. Amongst other articles, such as, “Don’t Cure Autism Now!” and “The Truth of The Myth of The Lack of Autism Recovery”, he wrote ”“Autism, Genius and Greatness” ”.
These are some of the people who layed the foundations of the Neurodiversity Movement.
Wow, the standard obfuscatory arguments have surfaced but, as usual when I engage Pharma apologists, nobody addressed the specifics.
First, I made an error late last night and wrote that testosterone decreases the toxicity of mercury when I meant to type the word estrogen, not testosterone.
“…mainstream doctors honestly telling them that their child has a chronic condition for which there is no cure…” D Seid could have said this to patients prior to 1999, before Verstrtaeten told us that thimerosal in vaccines had caused the epidemic and it would have been acceptable. After this information became available, that statement became malpractice. As I pointed out earlier, as long as all pediatricians stuck to this story, they were protected from lawsuits by “standard of care”. Since every parent who opts to bring their kid to a doctor is not a judge or jury, they are not bound in their critical thinking by legal definition, and can clearly see that doctors who do not tell their patients the whole truth about thimerosal are, in fact, committing malpractice every time they make that obsolete statement. Admitting that injecting about 200 times the allegedly safe dose of mercury did cause autism would cause irreparable harm to physicians lofty reputations. Parents’ trust in the profession would decline substantially.
Calling chelation quackery is nothing short of criminal behavior. All doctors are taught in medical school that chelation is the proper treatment for mercury poisoning. The best method of curing autism is to remove the mercury as soon as possible which ceases the killing of brain cells while the child is still producing lots of new ones. Delaying chelation lessens the child’s chances of recovery.
True logical thinkers would start ignoring the legal advice to “stonewall” the truth. The sooner doctors admit that they and Pharma were negligent by never testing thimerosal and begin helping the children who they poisoned, the sooner they can start their own recovery process of regaining their reputations which will take a major hit when the truth becomes common knowledge. They will make themselves look better if they admit the truth now and begin to help the kids they harmed.
D Seid, if you’re anywhere near New Hampshire, I cordially invite you to come to my house, view videos of my son when he was a “vegetable” and see what he’s like now while undergoing chelation. I guarantee it will change your misguided opinion of chelation. But, of course, we all know that your “opinion” as stated is a public stance that you are required to take to protect all of your colleagues. We know you don’t need to see the truth since your med school textbooks already told you what I had to learn to help my son.
Some babies get loaded up with mercury from their mother’s amalgams as the mercury crosses the placenta’s blood barrier. If there is also a genetic predisposition this becomes an additional risk factor as regards mercury.
Some babies get loaded up with mercury from their mother’s amalgams as the mercury crosses the placenta’s blood barrier. If there is also a genetic predisposition this becomes an additional risk factor as regards mercury.
Also, in New Zealand e.g. babies of consenting parents get their first Hepatitis B shots at 6 weeks, though I don’t know if this vaccine contains mercury or not.
[QUOTE=RyJae]
I don’t think in an ignorance fighting board this comment is acceptable, to me anyway. Just for what it’s worth, the minute my daughter was suspected of being autistic the doctor ordered the full range of blood work. Mercury was not, and is not an issue with autism. Perpetuating that myth is doing so much harm to our children and I think it’s criminal to be allowed to push forward with those myths.
The minute a parent falls for this spew, they engage in risky “therapies” that have no chance of succeeding, and can just as well kill the child.
You think the government is hiding this for what purpose? To protect the pharmaceutical industry? To… what? It’s 35,000,000,000USD a year in costs for autism as we speak.
The increase in autism follows EXACTLY the increase in the mercury load accumulated by increasing number of vaccines with mercury given to children. I also know a New Zealand mother whose son was severly affected by a vaccine-induced autism spectrum disorder, but who reverted back to normal after he underwent a mercury detoxification programme.
Well, the problem is that at this moment the term ASD covers a range of people from the lowest functioning people with autism who require 24/7 care to people who are possibly a bit odd in certain situations and require no care at all. ADHD is moving ever closer to being placed on the autism spectrum.
The part in the DSM IV which requires that the behaviors which mark autism to be “significant” is routinely disregarded. Or possibly our notions of what is significant have also broadened along with the definition of ASDs.
With all this broadening an issue comes to the fore:
Here’s another clue: as the numbers of the “other” increase and as they enter society, whomever the “other” may be, society is re -tooled to accomodate them. If one in a hundred people have ASD, then it seems a little, um, ambitious to eradicate the disorder in exactly the way you propose, wouldn’t you say?
It’s my honest opinion that these numbers indicate a definitional problem, which I expect will be taken care of over time as research proceeds apace. In the beginning we see the similarities; as we keep looking we see the differences.
But in truth, when statements like yours pass unremarked and unexcepted to, one can see why it is that people with disabilities withdraw into a subculture and create diversity movements and engage in forensic diagnosis of people long dead.* You appear to think they should not be alive and one can certainly understand their taking exception to that.
**Though with Wittgenstein they may have a point. *
