I’ve said a few times on here and a few times on other blogs that it is dangerous and irresponsible to maintain an absolutist position on just about anything to do with autism. I can’t remember who said it but whenever I see someone claiming to know for sure what causes autism or what the best course of treatment for autism is I recall a quote that goes something like this:
Follow the man seeking answers, flee from the man who says he knows them all.
However, on occasions I have been known to break this self-imposed belief. This is such an occasion.
Skeptico is a blogger that has commented a few times on various aspects of the thiomersal/mmr/autism ‘connection – notably a thorough debunking of the RFK Salon.com piece earlier this year.
Skeptico mailed me today to draw my attention to a comment made on his site to the effect that the wearing of a tinfoil hat designed to prevent alien abduction can successfully treat autism.
As of Dec. 2005 a hat with velostat worn by autistic children has improved their performance markedly. Michael Menkin is seeking more autistic children in the Seattle, Washington area to try the hat. Some of the autistic children who improved after wearing the hat with velostat for over three months are not related to UFOs or any alien phenomenon.
The researhc of Michael Menkin into alien abductions, with interview of several people with encounter experiences, was featured on KINGTV Evening News Program on November 16, 2005.
This is the sort of shit that one has to wade through to find decent research about autism. Is it on a par with the whole thiomersal/mercury thing? Well yes and no.
No because I can at least see a theoretical connection even if I don’t believe that theory and yes because its another example of a theory driven by anecdotal, unverified, untested belief.
Up until Skeptico mailed me this story, my favourite other crackpot theory was the idea that plastic cups cause autism. Again, this is the sort of mindless crap that detracts from valid science, strips autistic people of the dignity they deserve and only extends ignorance.
Notable in the plastic cup story is the role of one Dr. Stephanie Cave, one of the darlings of the thiomersal/autism connection and listed on page one of the Generation Rescue Hall of Fame. She lent support to a theory that claimed:
…that a toddler became seriously ill and, eventually, “began to exhibit autistic behavior,†after drinking from a plastic spill-proof cup made by Playtex. [Dallas-lawyer Brian R. Arnold ] claims the spill-proof cup was designed in a defective manner that allowed bacteria and mold to build in the cup. Alleging the bacteria caused the child’s condition, Arnold accused Playtex of negligence in distributing a defective cup and demanded $11 million in damages.
Cave claimed that the bacteria and mold caused Dysbiosis, a medical term used pretty much exclusively by the alternative health movement.
She was abetted by William Shaw who owns a laboratory famed amongst thiomersal = autism believers as providing accurate tests for elevated mercury. Shaw said that:
…the child had elevated levels of yeast by-products, indicating a “yeast/fungal overgrowth of the gastrointestinal tract.†Dr. Shaw says such yeast infections cause autism.
Unfortunately for Shaw, it seems that the bacteria found on the plastic cup was not the same sort found on the child in question. Good to know that these labs that so many people claim are accurate obviously double check their work.
Autism is a fertile breeding ground for such hocus-pocus and rubbish because it defies current understanding. That we let this sort of thing grow unchecked is dangerous for the health of children (one wonders if this child went on to be chelated based on such a pack of ineptitude and assumption), dangerous for those of us who wish to find a bit of respect for the state of being autistic and ultimately dangerous to us as a society that we are so willing to let such people treat our children.
This is why we need proper, peer reviewed science performed by those who are proponents of theories and treatments that currently have no efficacy or safety studies. If we continue down this road then treatments like the wearing of a tin foil hat used to prevent autism and alien abduction and causes like a plastic cup will become the norm and our children will truly become lost – not in autism but in the real hell of a frenzied knee-jerk search to treat the increasingly bizarre and to forget about what our _children_ who happen to be autistic need more than anything else. I hope you already know the answer to that. If you don’t then I suggest you step away from the quasi-science.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Hi Kev,
You post caused me to reflect on certain arguments in the autism world that often seem to follow someone pointing out a case of pseudoscience. These have occurred quite often in the comments on your blog and elsewhere on the net. I will make prediction that we will see one of these offered on this blog within a week or two.
1 (a) Some children have gotten hurt/killed by chelation.
(b) Vaccines also hurt kids.
(c) To criticize one and not the other is unfair.
(d) Ergo, it is unfair to criticize chelation.
2 (a) Children are suffering due to autism.
(b) The orthodox medical community has done nothing to help.
(c) Alternatives may help.
(d) Ergo, alternatives are sometimes justified to get help.
3 (a) If we see the positive changes following chelation, then it is due to chelation.
(b) We see positive changes.
(c) Ergo, it is due to chelation.
4 (a) The autism epidemic must have a cause.
(b) The change in a suspected cause must align with the prevalence rise.
(c) Thimerosal fits this.
(d) Thimerosal is the cause of the epidemic.
5 (a) A teacher I know has noticed more autistic kids now than before.
(c) Ergo, there is an epidemic.
Substitute premise (a) with “I never heard of autism until my son was diagnosed now the family two houses down has a child with autism too†or “Everyone seems to know about autism now†or “The IDEA numbers show an increase†or “The DDS numbers how an increase†or “Why do wish to pretend that there is no epidemic?†or “Who do you really work for?â€
6 (a) I agree that point (xyz) may be untrue.
(b) Even bad points can be good, because they help create awareness.
(c) Point (xyz) will help create awareness.
(d) Ergo, point (xyz) is justified.
In #5 (c) should be (b)
Maybe Michael can reformat this:
7, You don’t have an autistic child, therefore you don’t know what you don’t have a right to talk about autism and mercury:
a) but my friend, mercury mom A_____ has a child with Asperger’s (who was never too far from normal), but SHE has the right to talk about mercury being the cause of the autism epidemic.
b) the autism epidemic includes my friend’s Asperger’s child (e.g., Lujene C’s Asperger’s child, Angela M’s Asperger child…).
c) the autism epidemic count of 1 in 166 only counts “classic autism” the kind that could never have been missed 60 years ago…
d) the autism epidemic includes whoever I want it to include at any given moment …
e) you don’t understand what it’s like to have an autistic child…you have Asperger’s (your child has Asperger’s).
(lather, rinse, repeat)
~~~~
I don’t have an “ergo”– but you get the point, I think.
So we have:
yeast causes autism
unbalanced gut causes autism
thimerosal causes autism, ADD,ADHD [more horrendous if you get the bottom contents of the vial ]
MMR vaccine causes autism
bilingualism causes autism
You must rub the cream to cure, drink raw milk, gluten free diet, IV therapy, mega supplements, chelate, chelate, chelate.
What must these little ones think of parents gone whacko.
When will this madness end?
it would be nice if the average person escaped from school with an understanding of ‘peer review’ and ‘science’ and ‘evidence’ and so forth that was similar to that of those of us who actually deal with those things as scientists.
it would make a whole range of issues less confused, and much of what gets reported so much less confusing.
unfortunately, many people equate ‘open mind’ with ‘accept anything/everything’ … when what is usually intended is that people be prepared to consider new information and be prepared to adjust their understanding of an issue accordingly.
All quotes are Kev:
“This is why we need proper, peer reviewed science performed by those who are proponents of theories and treatments that currently have no efficacy or safety studies.”
Actually, I’ll go as far as to say that the peer-reviewed scientific studies need to be done by other groups independent of those currently using and urging others to use treatments for which the safety and efficacy have not been established.
“If we continue down this road then treatments like the wearing of a tin foil hat used to prevent autism and alien abduction and causes like a plastic cup will become the norm and our children will truly become lost – not in autism but in the real hell of a frenzied knee-jerk search to treat the increasingly bizarre and to forget about what our children who happen to be autistic need more than anything else.”
I agree entirely here. Kids do not get lost in autism. There’s some weird parents get lost in a cycle of looking for someone/thing to blame, invest heavily in the treatment against that thing or the lawsuit against that someone, and con themselves into thinking that the process is working (as was said elsewhere, cognitive dissonance is a wonderful thing; it’s the advertiser’s best friend… and the quack’s)… and then they go around trying to convert others to their fucked-up way of looking at the world. And treating these others like shit when they don’t convert. We have seen this.
They forget, in the end, to love the kid as is. To accept the kid that (some of them’s) God gave them. As is. And work with said kid, as is.
“I hope you already know the answer to that.”
Um…..
😉
I’m likely to be away from here whilst in the UK. I have no doubt that some mercury parents will think it less cruel on me if I were to be going the same was as my dad will be soon (let’s face it… after the case of the wee lad who died… we know that position there: better dead than autistic!).
I feel sad for those types… who can’t see the idea of “better alive, regardless”!
maelorin: definately agree with you about the science education bit. I managed to get top grades in dual award science GCSE without any knowledge of what makes good research/peer review etc. I’m learning now, but it wasn’t even touched on at school.
As for causes of autism; there is of course the ‘Thomas the Tank Engine’ theory (I mean, those rises in statistics after it was adapted for tv!). As well, the ‘Sci-Fi’ theory: it’s only a matter of time before someone takes the BBC to court for producing such a damn good new series of ‘Dr Who’ , thus of course meaning an increase in autism.
My new one is the ‘not enough lead’ theory. You take the lead out of paint in the 60s, take out all those lead pipes, stop sweetening wine with lead – and rise in reported autism! If it wasn’t for those darned ‘mainstream’ medics I could start up my own quack business, with lots of lovely reproduction Victorian lead teething rattles for children. Pcha.
MW: “I managed to get top grades in dual award science GCSE without any knowledge of what makes good research/peer review etc.”
That is very disturbing!
Education is going downhill 😦
Goodness,
I just left the “Everything Must Change” post.
There is a comment about “Watching the Quacker”.
I found flawed arguments #1, 2, and 3.
I mean…wow…it hasn’t even been 24 hours yet.
Oh, I should add another one that this article reminded me of.
8 (a) To be true a statment requires proof.
(b) You can’t prove that tinfoil hats failed to cause the beneficial change.
(c) My statement about tinfoil hats causing the beneficial change are justified.
Aivittu, Jonathan!!!!!!
… about fucked-up argument No. 8:
a) quite correct…
b) you can’t prove something didn’t do anything period! (A negative is pretty much impossible to prove!)
c) if your statement was anything like “tinfoil hats are fucking useless and make the wearer look a complete prick”, you had a very good argument 😉
I was convinced the “stopalienabductions” site was a joke site, until I checked that it is listed as “crankiest” on Crank.net: http://www.crank.net/abductions.html
I still feel that it is a joke site.
Also, when I checked out Crank.net, I looked at the new additions. Check out the 6 Dec additions:
http://www.crank.net/new.html
Well, it was only a matter of time until the kook watchers of the web found Generation Rescue.
What a shame for a non-profit trying to do good but failing miserably.
Nana said: “Well, it was only a matter of time until the kook watchers of the web found Generation Rescue.
What a shame for a non-profit trying to do good but failing miserably.”
They may be “trying” to do good, but what they actually are doing is promoting possibly dangerous chemical interventions in children. Especially since one of their heroes is combining IV chelation with some other dangerous procedures:
http://oracknows.blogspot.com/2005/11/dr-buttar-has-new-protocol.html
Plus some of the tactics have less than honest:
http://oracknows.blogspot.com/2005/11/internet-squatter-j-b-handley.html
How about this one? http://www.dimensionallife.com/Autism.htm
Dr. Joe Champion!!
HN and Jonathan Semetko,
I was searching the net tonight and found both of you here.
I see it’s ok for you both to site blogs as references but when I site a journalist, I loose all credibility?
NANA said,
Well, it was only a matter of time until the kook watchers of the web found Generation Rescue.
What a shame for a non-profit trying to do good but failing miserably.
Can you provide some references that indicate that Generation Rescue is “failing miserably”?
Someone is having kittens because HN links to an Onion-type joke page? Or Jonathan cites a medical blog to illustrate Buttar using IV chelation? If they said, ‘Accoriding to Orac, chelation cannot work and has never worked’ and then criticized someone for citing newspapers as scientific sources supporting chelation – that *would* be hypocritical. But they didn’t do that.
I’ve taken the comments out of his/her program:
2 N=0
10 Got no science
20 So throw up a screen
30 Step aside
40 Backtrack a bit
50 Get huffy
60 Shoot off nastygram
70 N=N+1
80 If hours on free AOL CD
Using ad hominems does not further your credibility:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
Perhaps I am a hypocrit. I’ve done the inexcusable by dragging my son to speech therapy sometimes two to three times a week for ten years. I’ve dealt with multiple neurologists and psychologists. I’ve spent countless hours at IEP meetings. I will be spending a morning this week dealing with a vocational technical community colleg counselor to see if he can get voc-tech credits while still in high school. Isn’t that horrible?
I’ve included in my posts http://www.pubmed.gov links to real science papers, to the annoyance of Kev because he has to hand-approve the post if it includes more than three URL’s. Oh, the horror!
But most importantly, I’ve annoyed the 777-300 ( http://www.boeing.com/commercial/777family/300back/index.html ) by asking questions that it dare not answer, because it might show a crack in its view of “reality”. It has yet to answer any of my questions satisfactorally… and I’m sure Jonathan may find deficits in the answers from the poster known as an aircraft — but in reality resembles this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fremont_Troll
777-300 Do you think you could recruit someone to speak for y’all on Kevin’s science discussion board? So far no one looks prepared to defend the thimerosal story there. Folks is posting links to free copies of some good studies and some bad studies, some of the mercury mom’s favorites are available on SAFEMINDS.com and Momsagainstmercury.com aren’t they? GR.com probably has a passle of ’em, though I haven’t looked to see. So there oughta be plenty to “site.” Maybe Mark Blaxill could come and ‘splain the autism epidemic to us. Maybe Lyn Redwood could come tell us about secretin. Maybe Ray Gallup can tell us about aliens or the MMR conspiracy. They could even sign in with pen names. Like “Sallie” instead of “Sally”, like. Maybe someone could pay Mr. Kirby by the word to defend the mercury conspiracy tale on Kevin’s board.
Personally, siting journalists with loose credibility sounds like fun. Where shall we site them? On top of tall buildings perhaps? Or decorating the front of ships.
M : Personally, siting journalists with loose credibility sounds like fun. Where shall we site them? On top of tall buildings perhaps? Or decorating the front of ships.
LOL, I vote for an anechoic wind tunnel.
BC,
90 GOTO 10
TripleSev300,
Tu quoque again? Wow….This is almost predictable.
You recall, I am sure, that I have always preached for arguments that had merit (ethics, accuracy, logic). Do you see the difference between that and inisting that all citations simply must be in a peer reviewed journal?
Now when someone makes a extraordinary claim such as the persons you cited, most of us want a very strong proof.
Allow me to give an example: Lets say that someone claimed that diet cola causes autism (that would be Dr. Blaylock whom one of your quotes cam from).
A lot of us are going to call “Bullshit”. This is the moment that you would want to back up what you say with the strongest peer reviewed article you can.
How much more would this be true when if you claim that “earth energy” is a cause of health concerns? That was claimed by Dr. James DeMeo, whom your other quote came from.
You have cited three people who have little to nothing to do with serious autism science. Two of them don’t even dabble in autism. The main thing that distinguishes them is their rejection of mainstream medicine on a profound level, much more than any DAN doctor.
Why is it that I just can’t suppress the feeling that you were involved in this sort of garbage, long before you got into autism, and that you have been told all this before.
Is that not true….I hope it isn’t
I am disapointed TripSev300. I am disapointed, because I thought this was a serious conversation with semi-legitimate
(if un meritous) quotes. Now I find that you are quoting folks who have calim to have found quintessence and ether.
TripleSev300,
Please give up… You are wasting time here… I am too, but I will only allow myself 3 minutes to read their crap for laughs… these people are clinically insane!!
-Sue M.
BC said: “Someone is having kittens because HN links to an Onion-type joke page? ”
Actually http://www.crank.net is not a joke page, it is a list of web sites with a form of believability ranking. I use it to see if a site is a parody (like http://www.dhmo.org) or seriously deranged like the site mentioned by Skeptico. I also enjoy checking out the weekly commentaries on another site that has a similar list… which Generation Rescue is also on!:
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/list04.htm
and
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/health3.htm
and
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/vaxliars1.htm
plus they were included in a comment here:
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/history/2005/08august.htm
Sue,
You would very likely be happier someplace where you find people to be less insane.
Someone who pops in just long enough to call others names on the internet is called a _____. (Answer: Troll)
I am sure that you are too good a person to do that.
Good luck in your search for answers.
clone, I had the complete program including the endless loop of course, but the lessthanorequals sign interfered with the html editor obviously and cut the thing off.
It was supposed to read, “If hours left on free AOL CD are lessthanorequal to 500 then GOTO 10.
my/our fun is very BASIC
HN – gotcha, I see now. You’re still not a hypocrite though.
;-p
Sue M. : Please give up… You are wasting time here… I am too, but I will only allow myself 3 minutes to read their crap for laughs… these people are clinically insane!!
Translation: These people don’t think the same way as you and I, are therefore mentally ill, second class citizens not to be spoken to, but useful for amusement purposes.
Here’s what you need to know about posting on Kev’s Blog.
1) If you have the nerve to offer up a different view from the majority then you will quickly see such references as ad hominem, Tu quoque, Straw man, troll, red herring, etc.
– This means they cannot refute you, so they will throw out these terms as a means to ignore your point.
2) You CANNOT discuss anything from Blaxill, Geier, Wakefield, Hornig, Buttar, SafeMinds, GR site, etc. They are considered invalid.
– Unfortunately this leaves you with very little to discuss since they have ZERO evidence on their side.
3) You are free to quote from the following websites as if they are the Bible:
Quackwatch, RatBags, Skeptico, Orac Knows, Crank.net, Autism Diva, etc.
4) HN will love to point out at every opportunity that Pertussis can be deadly. He/she will post articles on how infants can die from pertussis. It is sad. Keep in mind, thousands of children died or were neurologically destroyed by the very dangerous DTP shot. Those stories are equally as sad. HN will also neglect to tell you that apparently his/her own child benefitted from the “safer” DTaP shot. He/She should be kissing Geiers butt for that, but no, Geier is very dangerous.
4) Any questions about your garden vegetables, go directly to Andrea.
5) Clone has a quick wit, but that’s about all.
6) Jonathan is a grad student. He is decent at coming up with multiple choice questions and he also enjoys Dr. Seuss.
Would love to go, but my three minutes a day that I allow myself on this site is up now…
-Sue M.
Thanks BC!
Sue M, you say lots of stuff, but you don’t back it up with any real evidence. Where is the documentation on the damage due to the DTaP vaccine? (the DTP is not on the present pediatric schedule).
_”If you have the nerve to offer up a different view from the majority then you will quickly see such references as ad hominem, Tu quoque, Straw man, troll, red herring, etc.”_
If you have the nerve to offer up an unsubstantiated view espoused by jouranlists as oppose to scientists then you will quickly see such references as ad hominem, Tu quoque, Straw man, troll, red herring, etc.
_”This means they cannot refute you, so they will throw out these terms as a means to ignore your point.”_
This means that the debate is a scientific one, based on a supposition that thiomersal causes autism. Any points that you might make about the evils of vaccines etc are irrelevant until you can offer even the tiniest shred of real evidence that your belief has scientific validity.
_”You CANNOT discuss anything from Blaxill, Geier, Wakefield, Hornig, Buttar, SafeMinds, GR site, etc. They are considered invalid.”_
You can discuss whatever you like but amongst that motley crew are marketeers who recently had an embarrasing climbdown over a full page ad when the scientists who’s work they were trumpeting said they didn’t want to be associated with them, a man who will very shortly be subject to a hearing that is likely to strip him of his license to practice in this country, a father/son team so inept that the data they created compromised basic principles of patient confidentiality, a man who is using a type of chelation that is recently implicated in the death of a 5 year old boy, an organisation is fast becoming synonymous with anti-vaccination hysteria and a woman who thought that mice behaviour was a good basis for diagnosing them as being autistic.
_”Unfortunately this leaves you with very little to discuss since they have ZERO evidence on their side.”_
What would you like to discuss Sue? Everytime you and I discuss something it ends the same way. You harrangue me for not reading EoH cover to cover and me reminding you that a scientific debate stands or falls on the science. Not the journalism. You tend to go quiet after that until someone else sends you into a tantrum.
I set up a whole forum dedicated purely to the science behind autism. I stipulated to everyone that it would be a respectful place for polite debate and I promised that if it took off I would have a moderating team comprised of people from both yours and my sides of the debate. Strangely, I’ve yet to see you make an appearance to counter any of the ‘ZERO evidence’. Your refutation of the science would be most welcome. You’ve said time and time again how you have it all and we have none so here’s your golden opportunity to back that up.
I’m betting you won’t.
Sue M:5) Clone has a quick wit, but that’s about all.
That’s where you are wrong Sue! I’m not so quick……..HEY! I think that was a backhanded compliment.
Anyway, several commenters on this blog have responded to your comments with intelligent criticisms and questions which you always manage to ignore. I don’t think anyone considers your favorite mercury research to be invalid, but there are many reasons to disagree with their statements and conclusions. If you think these publications are so convincing, why don’t you present one or any of them on Kev’s autism and science forum to see how they stand up. Better yet, extend an invitation to each of them so they can explain their work.
Sue M. said,
Please give up… You are wasting time here… I am too, but I will only allow myself 3 minutes to read their crap for laughs… these people are clinically insane!!
You’re right, I’m done.
“Follow the man seeking answers, flee from the man who says he knows them all.”
This is another way of stating Socrates’ m.o.: (1)
The unexamined life is not worth living” and (2)”For I know nothing.”
Your topic makes me think of this article in the Sunday NY Times, “Madness About a Method.”
Sue M: Please give up… You are wasting time here… I am too, but I will only allow myself 3 minutes to read their crap for laughs… these people are clinically insane!!
Just… please. You expect us to respect your opinion when you’ll happily dismiss anyone else’s because they are ‘insane’? Perhaps you could spend some time looking at this site:
http://www.seemescotland.org/
People. Not labels.
HN and M:
STRAW MAN, AD HOMINEM, RED HERRING!!! Your comments have to fall into one of those categories. I’m sure of it.
Get over yourself, M. I guess it was not very PC of me to use clincally insane… insert ignorant instead. I apologize to all the true clinically insane people on this list whom I have offended.
-Sue M.
Sue M.:
If you want to have an intelligent conversation or to convince people of your convictions, you have ample opportunity on this forum, yet you waste it with bickering. You are doing nothing to demonstrate that your “side” has any verifiable credibility or the ability to withstand argument. Take a hint from the examples of “Wade”:http://injectingsense.blogspot.com/ and “Ginger”:http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/ who have demonstrated that it is possible to have a mutually respectful dialog. Sure, you have drawn some snarky comments, but you are just laying out the bait.
SueM, you obviously didn’t bother following the link. It is relevant to other aspects of things that go on here. You can ignore and dismiss people who you don’t want to hear by labelling. You can denigrate the voices of people by labelling.
Your original ‘insane’ post made me very angry; your response to my response even more so. No I won’t ‘get over myself’ – not until you get over your prejudices.
Perhaps she should follow this link as well:
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/medicine/la-me-cough14dec14,1,6871161.story?coll=la-health-medicine
Did you just use a journalist as a reference?
You left your cup here.
Dave wrote:
“Take a hint from the examples of Wade and Ginger who have demonstrated that it is possible to have a mutually respectful dialog”.
– I agree Wade and Ginger are able to do that very well. Where is your equivalent to a Wade or Ginger here? I have yet to find one. Go back to October to Kev’s blog called “What am I Missing”? This is where I began. From my first post, NOTHING but crap from the regulars on this blog. Did I contribute to it? Yes, of course. That’s what happens when you are in the minority and you feel attacked at every turn. Hence the reason why no one from my side really posts here anymore. Congratulations to your wife on her “Open letter to David Kirby”. Take someone’s comments out of context and then go crying to Papa about how it’s so unfair, they are such meanies, etc. I was one of the posts that she referenced and she completely took my comments out of context. Yes, this is old news but I just happened upon it a few days ago. Nice twisting of reality by her.
-Sue M.
Is this better?
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/159/12/1136
I guess when someone says that they’re gonna leave and that everyone else posting is a moron, what they really mean is that they’re gonna lurk until an opportunity arises to lob a grenade. I’m just wondering if the opportunities correspond to the rising and setting of the sun.
HN:
Your above link made me laugh. Here’s the conclusion:
“Conclusion Regardless of the perspective, the current routine childhood immunization schedule results in substantial cost savings”.
– Ok, so in 1995-2001 (study years), how many children may have become autistic due to unsafe vaccinations? Throw that chunk into the mix and see what you get then? Ha, what a joke. Is this the kind of study that you want to be done instead of studies of thimerosal and biomedical treatments?
-Sue M.
Also, here is the raw data showing the increase of pertussis:
Click to access CM%20-%20OCT%202005.pdf
And the press release from the health department, a bit earlier so there may have more data included by interview to the newspaper:
http://www.applications.dhs.ca.gov/pressreleases/store/pressreleases/05-62.html
What about this?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9718056&dopt=Abstract
I thought you were leaving us Sue?
No?
Well, I am glad that you are staying.
What should we talk about….
For the moment I will follow the topic you have most recently written on.
I have looked at HN and M’s comments to you.
Did their argument alter and thus weaken the argument you put forth?
No, so, not a strawman.
Did they attack your character as opposed to your argument (remember commenting on a lack of proof offered doesn’t constitute this) or did they question your motives in such a way as to make you seem personally/morally/spiritually inferior?
No, so, not an ad hominem.
Have they refused to answer your question or have they thrown in something as a riposte
That changed the subject entirely?
No, so, not a red herring.
I attached a link of logical errors for you to look over. They missed a few, but this list is reasonable.
Am I guilty of any of these? By all means, share which ones complete with quotations from me. I have have learned a lot from situations like this.
Oh and Sue, the number of actual autistics from 1995-2001 never changed, that is what the data show. Go to the board Kev set up and read the epidemiology thread if you seek the exact citations.
I am glad to find that you were merely taken out of context in Kathleen’s letter.
Can you explain how you were taken out of context?
I would be interested in seeing how being taken out of context can somehow justify the use of profanity towards a young teenager by a grownup and a mother.
Let me be blunt Sue. You owe that girl an apology. The fact that she may have made you angry is not justification. You are the role model, you are the grownup.
Or not……As you like. Like someone else told you, your moral compass is your own.
Ahhh,
The logic fallacies list that failed to appear is here:
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html
Trip,
You came back to us too?
I thought you didn’t like us anymore?
What caused the change of heart? Just asking?
Well, welcome back.
Hey, when you get time will you make a reply to some of the points I posted in regard to your quotes.
Now maybe you won’t find too much to work with, but you can probably find at least a few things to comment on.
Good luck!
Well, the discussion is speeding up on Kevin’s science board. Wade is there defending his take on the Burbacher paper.
777-300, Ms jetlinerers, since you decided to grace us with your presences don’t you want to get in there and help him? All it takes is the ability to stick to scientific thinking and logic. There’s no sarcasm allowed there so you don’t have to worry about being slammed if you say something stupid like you might here.
–
I’d like to have a plain (or plane) statement from both 777-300s and Sue M.
Do you believe that it is ever safe to vaccinate?
I think Lenny weasles out of this by saying he is for “safe vaccines” or against “dirty vaccines” but I think that he is hiding the fact that he’s rabidly antivax like the vaclib people.
*Do you think any person should allow any child to be vaccinated ever? (that goes to the airplanes and to Sue M).*
I think this is a fair question.
I am for vaccines myself. I am for the herd immunity. I think you people are terrified over things that aren’t a problem and you wildy exaggerate, without substantiation, the true problems associated with vaccines.
Interesting David Kirby says he thinks “vaccines are great”, I have that in an email from him to me. He’s also said it in the press.
Gotta love old Kirby for standing by vaccines and stating how important they are… same goes for Andy Wakefield, he definitely is pro-vaccine. He created one himself, you know, vaccine thath is… for measles.
Oh, and there’s nothing in Kathleen Seidel’s letter to Kirby that is misleading or taken out of context. The quotes are totally in keeping with the beliefs of the authors. The authors were embarrassed to have their ugliness exposed, but that doesn’t mean that the authors didn’t mean exactly what they wrote.
Go ahead, give some context to show that she took the quotes “out of context”. If you can’t then you just have to admit that she reported the quotes in a way that shows the intent of the writers. (basically she has quotes from people saying that anyone who doesn’t chelate autistic child is a child abuser and that it’s always wrong to vaccinate)
Sue M said: ” Ok, so in 1995-2001 (study years), how many children may have become autistic due to unsafe vaccinations? Throw that chunk into the mix and see what you get then? Ha, what a joke. Is this the kind of study that you want to be done instead of studies of thimerosal and biomedical treatments?”
No, I guess they did put into their equations the number of parents bamboozled into buying quack cures from scam artists. Since there is no real science connecting autism to vaccines (and lots of studies showing no relation) it was just not part of their equation.