I don’t suppose any of us will forget the terrible events of last year. A wave of terrible size and power engulfed a massive amount of land and killed a heartbreaking amount of people. Some of the stories that came out were almost too heartbreaking to hear and some of the video footage was too awful to watch for too long.
One group of people who know better than most of you reading this blog about what that day was like and terrible price it took are the Vesessins who blog at Nidahas.com. As native Sri Lankans they were literally at the heart of the issue in a way those of us in the West simply couldn’t be.
In a country that suffers from divisions that run very deep, the overriding message one year on seems to be:
As we remember the thousands who went to the waves, and the many more who are now homeless, let us commit ourselves to bring about a safe and peaceful Sri Lanka for those who did survive. Let us always remember the truism which took a tsunami to bring to light. Above all, we’re all Sri Lankans.
A message of hope and one of a profound wish to end a fight after getting some real perspective on the fragility of humanity.
It saddened and angered me to learn not long after the events of last year that there were some in the autism community who wished to make political hay whilst the sun shone after the tsunami. One Rick Rollens, fellow parent of an autistic child decided to utilise the horrific reaction all people had to the word ‘tsunami’ to better make his point:
California’s Autism Epidemic Tsunami Rapidly Growing….In California’s developmental services system, 8 out of 10 persons with full syndrome autism are between the ages of 3 and 17 years old, 7 out of 10 under the age of 14. The tsunami has arrived.
Leaving aside the fact that Rollens is totally wrong in both his methodology and conclusions, the words and tone he chose to use were at best ill judged and at worst, incredibly tasteless and insensitive.
Firstly is the fact that he was using the word ‘tsunami’ solely as an attention-getter. It has no legitimate context with autism. Secondly is the incredibly insulting use of the word as it applies to autistic people. Comparing them to people flooded out of their homes and lives is very misrepresentative of the nature of autism.
Thirdly is the absolutely shameful belittling of the events of last year. Whatever we feel may _cause_ autism, the fact is that it is a neurological condition at bottom. To associate this state with the death of hundreds of thousands of people is mind bogglingly trite and facile. *These people are dead*. I winced when I first read Rollens words and hoped that none of the relatives of the victims, nor any of my Sri Lankan friends would read them in the first months after the Tsunami. To endure the pain of losing a loved one is the worst thing I can imagine, to lose them in such a way must be awful beyond words. To see one’s country ripped apart must be painful beyond belief. To hear some pontificating person attempt to trivialise their loss by attempting to squeeze political mileage out of it would’ve been just terrible.
It took me a year to blog extensively on either the Tsunami and Rollens ignorance. The reason was mainly that I didn’t want Prabhath or any of the other guys at Vesess to read about it too soon.
Words matter. It really matters what words people use and how they’re used. With words you can build up and knock down. Using words you can show a reality or twist it. There are a lot of people out there who need to think long and hard about the sort of associations their words create and whether they are mature enough to use illustrations from a perspective that is clearly beyond them.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Thanks Kev. Indeed, a kind word goes a long way…
“To hear some pontificating person attempt to trivialise their loss by attempting to squeeze political mileage out of it would’ve been just terrible.”
Not to disagree with you on a poor choice of words, Kevin, but aren’t you using the memory of that terrible tragedy as a tool to criticise folks in our camp?
You’re just attacking word choices out of their intended context in order to further your own opinions…AND you’re playing the sympathy card for the tsunami victims as though that sympathy should transfer to YOUR argument!
You should take another tact. Something less petty.
Erik,
You are wrong. It’s not just the poor choice of words, it’s a heinously callous choice of words used to bolster an opinion that is baseless, and worthless used by someone who is a “politician” according to someone who likes Rollens at the MIND institute. Rollens was so far over the top with that statement, and no one in “your camp” is willing to point that out. You want to downplay it. “Oh, Rick, his heart is in the right place…blah blah.”
No, Rick Rollens’ heart is selfish and self-centered and callous to the suffering of those thousands who died last year and their loved ones left behind. His heart is callous to the fact that autism is not death and his own son, Russell, is not the equivalent of a dead son.
And it’s “tack” not “tact”.
http://espn.go.com/oly/ac2003/s/2002/1016/1446964.html
Tact is something that Rick Rollens never learned, or has chosen to cast aside, and something that Kevin has, in spades.
Way to go Eric!
_”Not to disagree with you on a poor choice of words, Kevin, but aren’t you using the memory of that terrible tragedy as a tool to criticise folks in our camp?”_
No, I’m criticising Rick Rollens appalling callousness. If you see that as an ‘attack’ on your camp then thats a matter for you.
_”You’re just attacking word choices out of their intended context in order to further your own opinions…AND you’re playing the sympathy card for the tsunami victims as though that sympathy should transfer to YOUR argument!”_
Right….so what is the right context Erik? And ‘playing the sympathy card’? To transfer what? People died Erik. Real people. Rick Rollens took advantage of the negative association to try and squeeze some tawdry political mileage into a defunct message.
_”You should take another tact. Something less petty.”_
Is that right? Prabhath, the guy who comments above you is from Sri Lanka. He lives there. I consider him as much of a friend as one can make over huge distances. I would wager that to just about everyone who went through the actual tsunami, nothing about it seems petty at all. I was ashamed that someone who exists in the same community as I do could say something so breathtakingly trite and belittling and that my friend might stumble across it and think thats how all of us in that community view what happened in his area of the workd – as political fodder. Thats also the reason I didn’t blog it for a year. It was too soon. This post was prompted by a blog posting made by the guys at Nidahas which I quote from above. Without their blog post, I never would’ve made this one.
I’ll say it again – words and their intent matter. Its not good enough for people to play off natural disasters (especially of this magnitude) for political gain. If you consider that irrelevant and petty then I honesty, truly hope that no one you care about ever ends up in an event that proves you wrong.
Erik, “petty“???
Congratulations, you’ve earned the respect of 777. That’s something to boast about. Amazingly, Champagne informed the readers of Diva’s blog that vaccines weaken the immune system. He also tried to garner sympathy from the readers of this blog by informing us that he’s a blue-collar employee of a trucking company in western PA and that he’s potty training his 4 y.o. son. Funny, his blog has him from Syracuse, NY. His intellectual contribution to debate centers on spamming and plagerizing the scientific misinterpretations and propaganda of other extremists and trying to pass them off as fact. This is the guy patting you on the back. Relish it.
Bart,
I never told you I was from Western Pennsylvania. Never! I met Eric recently at a conference and I do have a lot of respect for him. Just like JB Handley, Erik has sacrificed a lot of time and money to help other families by creating Fair Autism Media. Erik’s site is very educational and is a great resource for the families of autistic children.
When I told you about potty training my son, it wasn’t to get sympathy.
Vaccines do weaken your immune system, especially in children. Bartholomew Cubbins will tell you otherwise because he works for a big pharma funded university, a university that is presently working on a new flu vaccine. What a joke!
As for as my “plagerizing the scientific misinterpretations and propaganda of other extremists,”. Nevermind where I get my information from or how I post it, just try to show me where the information that I post is inacurate, and you can start with vaccines. Unvaccinated children are generally healthier
I inaccurately spelled the word inaccurate in my last post. Get over it.
“Unvaccinated children are generally healthier”?
Note that word ‘generally’ – that leaves a lot of wiggle room.
If it does turn out that unvaccinated kids are healthier than the norm, (I’ll leave it to others to point out the specific problems in the cited studies) there is likely to be other factors at work.
For instance, parents who don’t vax their kids are more likely to be health-concious and middle-class, with a higher-than-average income. Such families are always going to be healthier, regardless of vaccination status.
But all this vaccination-makes-you-sick propaganda just shows up the crazy and illogical thinking of the anti-vaxxers. If exposure to diseases such as measles, mumps, polio and so on is so health-enhancing, how come anybody ever thought there was a need to protect kids from them?
Triple Kevins wrote: Vaccines do weaken your immune system, especially in children. Bartholomew Cubbins will tell you otherwise because he works for a big pharma funded university, a university that is presently working on a new flu vaccine. What a joke!
Have you any idea how offensive that is? You are saying that BC is so motivated by his modest salary that he is willing to participate in a conspiracy to harm children everywhere including his own children? Does that make any sense to you? Probably since your heroes don’t bother to consider the damage they are causing.
_”….Bartholomew Cubbins will tell you otherwise because he works for a big pharma funded university, a university that is presently working on a new flu vaccine….”_
_”…Nevermind where I get my information from or how I post it, just try to show me where the information that I post is inacurate…”_
Can you hear yourself? Seriously. You thrash around like a apoplectic eel ranting at the most bizare things imaginable _and then contradicting yourself in the very next paragraph_!
I understand you have your beliefs Kevin and you’re welcome to them but at least try and apply the standards you set for yourself to others.
Given your aggressive defense, I actually checked to see if I was not inventing some memory. You see, Kevin, I actually take what people, even you, say as something worthwhile until it has proven otherwise. And yes, just about everything you’ve ever said has been proven to be less than worthwhile. Here you go for your own quote from
“I am not an expert on any of this. I am a Teamster and this is what I do for a living. Read “What is a Capacity Yard Truck†on the right side of the page. Not a big surprise considering my spelling and communication skills right? I know I am in over my head when it comes to trying to debate some of you that are scientists. I will admit that sometimes I try to come across as knowing more than I really do. I am just the father of a child diagnosed with autism and I never stop researching. Except for a few pee (potty training I mentioned earlier) accidents that I missed this afternoon while doing this, my son is getting better now through chelation and it’s all good! I’ve found out everything I know on this subject by going to autism conferences, books, and internet searches. My son is getting better now through chelation and it’s all good! I don’t want to have a pissing contest with any of you, pun intended!”
Go to the original entry to get the link to the western PA truckyard.
You weren’t calling me a liar, were you Kevin?
Clone3G,
I agreed with Erik’s comment and then BC unloaded.
Do you also find this offensive? He also tried to garner sympathy from the readers of this blog by informing us that he’s a blue-collar employee of a trucking company in western PA and that he’s potty training his 4 y.o. son. .
I guess when you pat another so-called “mercury parent” on the back you will come under fire here.
Prometheus recently said, Finally, rejection of your argument should not be seen as an implicit rejection of you. You both seem to take this much to personally. I wonder why?
BC the photo is now gone from the website so I am not sure about the reference to Western Pennsylvania you say you saw in the photo. I was only using the photo to show what I do for a living not where I do it and I see that was a mistake now.
Clone said,
Have you any idea how offensive that is? You are saying that BC is so motivated by his modest salary that he is willing to participate in a conspiracy to harm children everywhere including his own children? Does that make any sense to you? .
I guess that is one conclusion you could draw from my comment, but I think that is quite a leap. Maybe you should read it again.
Kevin Leitch said, I understand you have your beliefs Kevin and you’re welcome to them but at least try and apply the standards you set for yourself to others.
People on your side have recently come up with what they think are cute little diagrams of thimerosal winking and waving or stupid immature songs about mercury. I remember a comment from Kevin L. recently where you said that no one is saying that thimerosal doesn’t cause autism but that the science to prove the causation just isn’t there. Well I think you would have to admit that those of us that are convinced, or if you were convinced that thimerosal is what harmed your child then you would find these songs and diagrams offensive and distracting.
Offensive comments and other foolish above mentioned things are everywhere across the autism blogosphere, don’t single me out.
777 – I also checked out your link. The “proof” that children without vaccinations are healthier was an entry on your blog. The graphic you are using for that entry is hotlinked to The Final Call, the “newspaper” of the Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakhan. It’s good to see that you’re starting to temper your extremism by chilling with some moderates who value fact-based science. Look at this piece as one example.
Sophia – regarding “generally“, he meant this.
777 – You keep surprising me. If nothing else, I’d have to say that you’re quite consistent. Regarding a “big pharma funded university“, I would have thought that you’d realize that most american university biomedical dollars come from NIH. You know, the institution that funded and continues to support Burbacher and Deth.
_”Offensive comments and other foolish above mentioned things are everywhere across the autism blogosphere, don’t single me out”_
I didn’t find what you said offensive in any way. When referring to you I intimated that you have no internal logic. You ask people to attack your points, not where they originated from and then in the very next paragraph you attacked BC because of where his ideas came from. Surely even you can understand how bloody silly you make yourself look when you spout stuff like this?
Kevin, who else, besides Autism Diva, in the “blogosphere” is using things like parodies and cartoons of thimerosal to mock the unbelievable bad science of the mercury-parents (mercury phobes)?
As far as I know no one else is. So avoiding stuff that openly and humorously mocks your purely unscientific belief system is easy. Avoid Autism Diva blog.
Kevin’s blog doesn’t feature that kind of silliness, and tactlessness, if you like. So there’s no point in calling him on the carpet (or Prometheus, or Orac, or the neurodiversity.com blog’s mistress) There are very, very few blogs that regularly take on the thimerosal stupidity… they would be Autism Diva, this one, and Orac’s, and Prometheus’ … And only Autism Diva has a propensity for outright mockery of your belief system, but then Autism Diva blog is loaded with references to peer reviewed and accepted basic science, it’s not just a bunch of opinions.
Your (and Erik’s) antivax stance is deeply offensive to lots of people. Your conspiratorial thinking is deeply offensive to lots of people. The fact that you promote that kids shouldn’t get vaccinated at all could lead to the deaths and maiming of many children. And you basically don’t care, apparently.
That’s offensive.
That’s violence. Much more offensive than any little animated thimerosal molecule on a little blog (it’s not on national television) could ever be. It hasn’t been on bookshelves and TV programs all over the country like the horrifically offensive, dangerous and stupid book, “Evidence of Harm”. So give me a break, huh?
When you see Autism Diva on national television promoting her talking, animated plush toy thimerosal molecule you can kvetch about that, ok?
You have no rational reason to think that thimerosal caused your child’s autism. NONE. Your belief (and Erik Nanstiel’s) is irrational, it’s nuts, it’s bonkers, it’s bizarre.
Kev’s post is not about thimerosal.
It is about the tsunami and showing proper respect for the dead.
All of you, whatever “camp” you’re in, quit the petty bickering about Autism Diva’s cartoon and Kevin Champagne’s job. It is totally inappropriate and disrespectful in the context of Kev’s post. Go argue somewhere else.
But, Bonnie, the post is about thimerosal. It’s about a “tsunami” of supposed to be better-off-dead autistic kids utterly *destroying* the economy of California (the context of Rollens’ tsunami comment is money). This imaginary tsunami was supposedly caused by the use of thimerosal, entirely by the use of thimerosal. No thimerosal, no tsunami.
Kev said,
Thats also the reason I didn’t blog it for a year. It was too soon. This post was prompted by a blog posting made by the guys at Nidahas which I quote from above. Without their blog post, I never would’ve made this one.
Oh …really?
You didn’t blog this for a year?
_”Oh …really?
You didn’t blog this for a year?”_
The two things are the same are they? One is discusing the statistics California use and mentions the Rollens phraseology as a side issue. In this post, I directly addressed Rollens phraseology, hence not blogging about this for a year. I didn’t say I didn’t mention it at all.
You seem to have lapsed back into your former ways Kevin. Focus on whats in front of you, not what you wish was. I’ve also deleted your abusive posting towards Camille as it contributed nothing to the discussion.
You’re (once again) treading a fine line here Kevin.
I’ve also deleted your abusive posting towards Camille as it contributed nothing to the discussion.
What about her abusive posting toward me? That will not get deleted …will it?
Which abusive posting towards you is that? I can see Camiile explaining why your stance is offensive and I can see her calling that belief nuts. Nowhere can I see her calling you nuts which is what you did.
You are unable to not personalise this Kevin. For example, I think my Uncles belief in the Tory party as a valid choice for the UK is nuts. It doesn’t mean I think he is. Believe it or not, this debate isn’t all about Kevin Champagne so stop seeing everything that goes on as a personal slur – unless of course it is.
If I could go back to an earlier point for a minute. I would be very interested in seeing a study of the health of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children. I think that the comparison would be eye-opening. I will be the first in line to volunteer my children’s health records for the study.
Let’s see. I have 3 children. Exact same genetics (same mother, same father). Here’s a little blurb about each of them.
Child 1 (girl) : Diagnosed with type 1 diabetes (autoimmune) at age 11 months. Diagnosed with Celiac disease (autoimmune) at age 19 months. Bad excema as infant.
Child 2 (boy) : Intolerant to gluten and casein as infant. Terrible excema as infant. Chronic diarrhea as infant/toddler. Went to 3 “specialists” for medical eval’s as infant… allergist, GI doctor, endocronologist. Had an endoscopic scope at 16 months to figure out what was going on. Two or three serious “viral” infections. Stopped talking at 2 1/2 (after flu shot). Diagnosed with “sensory integration disorder” – yeah right…
Child 3 (boy): colic as infant. 1 ear infection. We are watching his language development closely – a little behind, but not alarming (2 years). That’s it. No more. Happier and much healthier than the other two BY FAR at the same ages.
Anyone want to take a guess at which two were fully vaxed according to the infant vaccination schedule and which one was only vaxed up until 4 months of age – no more since then??
-Sue M.
Child One (boy): Vax’d according to the schedule of the time. Had mild asthma as a young child. Is now a big strapping 13 year old with no developmental issues at all.
Child Two (girl): Vax’d according to the schedule of the time. Is autistic.
Child Three(girl): is a little behind on some vaccinations due to illness as a newborn. So far, no sign of any developmental issues.
This proves only that both your last post and mine are meaninglness in context of vaccines causing developmental issues Sue.
Certainly, you are entitled to your opinion about your own kids’ medical records. Not mine, though. Sorry, Kev. Notice, I am also bringing other issues into this such as the type 1 diabetes, etc. Vaccinations are medical experiments on our children. No way around that. Thimerosal is by far the WORST of the issues but there are certainly more issues. This made me laugh from Sophia8 above:
“For instance, parents who don’t vax their kids are more likely to be health-concious and middle-class, with a higher-than-average income. Such families are always going to be healthier, regardless of vaccination status”.
-Dang, I thought that I was health concious. That’s exactly why I got my kids’ vaccinated. I thought that I was doing the right thing. I wish that I knew before that the “health conscious” families DON’T get their children vaccinated. Darn.
Then this little gem from her:
“But all this vaccination-makes-you-sick propaganda just shows up the crazy and illogical thinking of the anti-vaxxers”.
-Really? Illogical thinking? Injecting your kids with mercury is a terrible idea… seems pretty darn logical to me.
-Sue M.
Kev, I didn’t make this about me, Bartholomew Cubbins did. I think you’re really splitting hairs with your explaination of I think my Uncles belief in the Tory party as a valid choice for the UK is nuts. It doesn’t mean I think he is. but, I will drop it and move on.
_”Certainly, you are entitled to your opinion about your own kids’ medical records. Not mine, though. Sorry, Kev.”_
Its not an opinion Sue, its a fact. Two isolated accounts taken on an ad hoc basis with no background data and no real context are just background noise. Sorry.
_”Kev, I didn’t make this about me, Bartholomew Cubbins did.”_
And I’m commenting on your post to Camille. If I could offer you one piece of advice for 2006 Kevin it would be, stop trying so hard to be offended and stop trying to catch people out. Its a style that doesn’t suit you at all.
_”I think you’re really splitting hairs with your explaination”_
I had no doubt that you would. You come from a belief system that has demonstrated its inabilty to detect nuance. You desire absolutism and I’m afraid the world simply doesn’t work that way.
Can I comment here under my real name in 2006?
Kev wrote:
“Its not an opinion Sue, its a fact. Two isolated accounts taken on an ad hoc basis with no background data and no real context are just background noise. Sorry”.
-Did you miss my point when I wrote this:
“I would be very interested in seeing a study of the health of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children”.
I understand that my family’s experience does not make up a “study”. To me, it speaks volumes and tells me all that I need to know… to others, it is just one “subject”. I think that it would be a good idea to follow up on the idea of the health status of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children. Seems logical. Doesn’t it?
Interesting to note, Before Christmas, I went to my son’s old school where he used to go for help with his “sensory integration disorder”. Right there in the lobby were no less than three books/pamphlets on the dangers of vaccinations. One, in particular, was focused on neurological disorders/vaccinations. I had never seen them there before. Approximately a year ago, I attended a talk at a local chiropractors office in regards to this issue. Who were the first people that I saw when I walked into the office. My son’s OT teachers. Speaking quite openly about what they considered the dangers of vaccinations. It was fascinating. Here we have a group of people with a lot of training who are working in one of the state’s best facilities for developmental delays, etc. and they are putting the pieces together. The mainstream physicians are still sitting on their butts waiting for the “real science” and the “officials” to tell them what to say and how to say it… Disturbing.
-Sue M.
Hey Sue,
I guess I will junmp back in here.
You said:
“I think that it would be a good idea to follow up on the idea of the health status of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children. Seems logical. Doesn’t it?”
It does, but there are a couple safeguards to throw in. Are you familar with the Texas sharpshooter fallacy. It is where we find a cluster of certain traits (which we are looking for) and draw our parameters around that cluster.
It is a fallacy because we are stacking the deck in favor of whatever result we wish to find. I think this would be an issue if we try to exclusivley use the Amish or Homefirst children. We would need other folks who aren’t part of those groups to help control for this.
Chiropractors have never had much respect for vaccines and have been advocates against them for some time (from what I can tell). Accourding to chiropractic theory, vacines shouldn’t be necessary in the first place; avoidance of disease is empowered by health, health is empowered by lifestyle choices and proper energy flow through the spine. That is a bit of simplification, but I will present it as is.
By the way Chiropractics’….uh….disinclination towards science, has resulted in lack of trust in them.
OT’s by the way, although they get closer to science, also have a disinclination towards it.
I had a friend who was an studying to be an OT when we were undergrads. We did biology and some other science based stuff together. She didn’t have to do a research methods class, or stats, or critical thinking. OT’s are typically practically based, not research based. I would be first in line to question how well their training prepared them to answer etiological questions.
Jonathan wrote:
“Are you familar with the Texas sharpshooter fallacy. It is where we find a cluster of certain traits (which we are looking for) and draw our parameters around that cluster”.
-Certainly, I understand that point. Also, I have no expertise on how a study like this would need to be handled, with what parameters, etc. I don’t claim to have that knowledge. I do think that getting families together who have both vaccinated AND unvaccinated children (same genetics) would be interesting. Now, I would imagine that many families with both vaccinated and unvaccinated children may have a reason for not vaccinating their other children. As an example, a child diagnosed with autism, the parents research and decide not to vaccinate the younger child… This, to me, would be good because you are talking about the same genetics, same household, same upbringing, etc. Certainly, there will be problems with any study like this. No doubt. It would be interesting, that’s all. I also find it so interesting that people are so quick to say you can’t use the Amish because… blah, blah, blah… You can’t use Homefirst children because… blah, blah, blah… You can’t use families with both vaccinated and unvaccinated children because… blah, blah, blah… Too easy to just dismiss the idea.
I also understand your oversimplification of chiropratic care. I believe that chiropratic care is great but it is certainly not the end all, be all for me. Some of it goes a bit overboard. I do think that their idea of preventative health is valid. I mean, I wouldn’t go to a chiropractor if I broke my leg… I would go to a mainstream doctor. If I am looking for preventative care, I would consider listening to a chiropractor as opposed to a mainstream doctor. It just makes sense to me that it is not a great idea to inject tiny infants with such things as mercury, yeast, bacterial and viral DNA, latex rubber, monosodium glutamate, aluminum, formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, phenol/phenoxyethanol, etc… Now, you could probably persuade me that I should consider 1 or 2 vaccinations in the pediatric schedule to be worthy of taking a risk on but CERTAINLY not all of them at such a young age. No way. The fact that mainstream medicine is willing to take that risk with my children and do so with such a unflinching attitude is disturbing to me.
Jonathan wrote:
“By the way Chiropractics’….uh….disinclination towards science, has resulted in lack of trust in them”.
-You aren’t blind to the lack of trust that people have towards the mainstream medical profession, are you?
Jonathan wrote:
“OT’s are typically practically based, not research based”.
-Trust me, I understand that OT’s aren’t the defining word on this topic. I do like the fact that they are practically based, not “research based” (in a broad sense). In my experience, the OT’s were discussing parental observation (what happened to their kids after vaccinations). The increase in numbers of kids in the 90’s (yes, they KNEW there was an increase in numbers and severity). They have been in the trenches – seeing what they have seen, talking to parents, etc. I like that. This has been MY experience. I’m sure that there are tons of OT’s who would laugh me out of a room… that’s fine. We can agree to disagree.
-Sue M.
Sue: If you knew, for certain, that if you didn’t vaccinate your child against (insert disease that children get vaccinated against), that they WOULD get that disease…
… would you still be opposed to vaccinating them?
Sotek wrote:
“Sue: If you knew, for certain, that if you didn’t vaccinate your child against (insert disease that children get vaccinated against), that they WOULD get that disease”…
-Sotek, we both know that that is a very unrealistic question. That just would not happen. If I didn’t know that vaccinations can destroy the immune system or if my kids didn’t react negatively to vaccinations then I would probably say vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate. That is not my reality, though. So instead, I need to weigh the risk/reward very carefully. As I have stated above, there may be 2 vaccinations that I would consider having my unvaccinated child vaccinated against (thimerosal-free, of course).
-Sue M.
Hi Sue,
You wrote
“I do think that getting families together who have both vaccinated AND unvaccinated children (same genetics) would be interesting.â€
Agreed…
You said
“You can’t use Homefirst children because… blah, blah, blah… You can’t use families with both vaccinated and unvaccinated children because… blah, blah, blah… Too easy to just dismiss the idea.â€
I agree that it is easy to dismiss the idea, but if it is done, I am sure that I would want it to be as controlled as possible. Maybe, that is why all the “blah blah blah†has merit; it reminds us how to do it right next time.
You said
“You aren’t blind to the lack of trust that people have towards the mainstream medical profession, are you?â€
No, and I was relatively sure that you were going to say this. I think the difference is in the audiences who do the “distrustingâ€. The audience you referred is mostly a position primarily held by parents. The audience I referred to is primarily a medical/scientific one. I will not argue that one of these has more merit due to elitism (expertness); I simply want to point out that there is a difference.
I am fond of OT’s in general and I have learned some techniques from them that I have been able to use in practical sense everyday. However, I really hate the fact that they are not research based. Some of their theories have little background in established fact (take the much beloved Wilbarger Technique also called “brushingâ€). It is my observation, that the more a theory is considered true in the absence of ongoing research the more likely the practitioners are willing to discard evidence they stumble across to the contrary.
I can see how the OTs would see more autism I the 90s. However their powers of observation are flagging a bit if they noticed in increase severity per the whole of autism.
There is no epidemiology anywhere, even the ones I think are hopelessly flawed and disagree with that suggest the severity is on the rise per the whole. In fact it has been the exact opposite of this. This in one of those things that would truly good to know, if one is a professional of any sort in the field of autism, who’s job involves advising parents.
Sue: Thank you, that’s what I wanted to know.
You’re opposed to vaccines because you don’t believe they work. Fine; but that means I see no reason to listen to anything you say on medical matters.
Sotek wrote:
“You are opposed to vaccines because you don’t believe they work. Fine; but that means I see no reason to listen to anything you say on medical matters”.
-So, that’s what you got out of my response? Ok, I see no reason to listen to anything that you say either because obviously, your reading comprehension skills are lacking. I suggest you do go to real medical professionals to discuss medical matters. Just don’t believe them hook, line and sinker.
-Sue M.
Jonathan wrote:
“I agree that it is easy to dismiss the idea, but if it is done, I am sure that I would want it to be as controlled as possible. Maybe, that is why all the “blah blah blah†has merit; it reminds us how to do it right next time”.
-I don’t have an issue with a well thought out reason why some of these studies cannot be done. If there is a real valid reason behind the blah, blah, blah… I am willing to listen. It seems at times that some throw out the idea that this cannot be done because… reasons x,y,z… without thinking it through.
Jonathan wrote:
” I think the difference is in the audiences who do the “distrustingâ€. The audience you referred is mostly a position primarily held by parents. The audience I referred to is primarily a medical/scientific one. I will not argue that one of these has more merit due to elitism (expertness); I simply want to point out that there is a difference”.
-Personally, I take parents observations as seriously as any “doctors” opinion. Mainly, because I am a parent and there is a little thing called “mother’s intuition”. Have you ever heard of it? It is rarely completely wrong.
Jonathan wrote:
“I can see how the OTs would see more autism I the 90s. However their powers of observation are flagging a bit if they noticed in increase severity per the whole of autism”.
-I definately misspoke here, Jonathan. Thank you for pointing it out. The OT’s that I am speaking about were actually talking solely about the numbers of cases and not the severity of individual cases of autism getting worse. My bad.
-Sue M.
Hey Sue,
You wrote
“Personally, I take parents observations as seriously as any “doctors†opinion. Mainly, because I am a parent and there is a little thing called “mother’s intuitionâ€. Have you ever heard of it? It is rarely completely wrong.â€
Mother’s intuition? Yes, that one I am familiar with. My own Mother can be coaxed into talking about her own intuition. She is enjoys telling the tale of how she just felt that we (my friend and I at age 10) were in danger and rushed over to a house under construction across the street to find us happily exploring it. She proudly cited her intuitive ability. Now, never mind the fact that we were 10 years old, that we were boys, that she was well aware that we were playing right next to it anyway, and that it fascinated us. This shouldn’t have been that hard of a deductive exercise. However, I suppose I have to chalk one up for Mother’s Intuition.
Her own mother was a farm girl in Kentucky/Ohio. She has some great stories about her premonitions about her children. They make nice stories (kinda spooky) someone should write them down one day. If I remember right her Grandfather was a Baptist preacher in Tennessee. I would be sorely disappointed if he didn’t also have premonitions and speak in tongues.
Of course Mothers intuition isn’t always dead on. My Mother confronted me at around age 12, perfectly certain that I was into voodoo (not kidding you) as she had found a number of tiny string dolls in a woven bag in my desk. These were the proof that I was experimenting in the occult. Now as it turns out, she had bought these for me herself several years earlier at a Christmas shop, and they are some sort of replication of a Mexican wishing doll, or something like that. She bought them because she thought they were interesting and thought I would find them so (I love archeological things). I had to hunt down my father and a sister, to validate my story before she would believe me.
My mother’s intuitive voodoo was wrong about my supposed voodoo.
Then there were all those lovely car trips when I was growing up and where I was happy to daydream while staring out the window as opposed to having a lively conversation about (insert topic here). This was taken as sure sign that I had a dreadful day and was locking it in (or some pseudo-psychological nonsense like that). She would pester and insist to know why I was upset. After about 3 minutes of this…uh… parent-child conversation, I probably did seem truly upset.
And being a good son I will say that my Mother’s voodoo is better than yours (grins)
I apologize Sue, I couldn’t resist just a little bit of foolishness.
In seriousness though, intuition is great when it is logical and really anyone has the right to speak up (and should if they have a concern). However when intuition displaces science, then we have a serious problem. As far as Mother’s intuition, who does the counting for when they are right vs wrong? Actually, no one. It makes it a little tricky to know how often mom’s are right/sorta right/wrong.
Jonathan:
Your stories above are cute but they sort of highlight your youth and naivete. I was talking about mother’s intuition when it comes to medical or developmental concerns with their children. They (mothers and fathers) are the best judges of their own children’s development and health concerns.
Jonathan wrote:
“However when intuition displaces science, then we have a serious problem”.
-When pseudo-science (reports of the safety of thimerosal in vaccinations and bogus epidemiology) displaces intuition and common sense, then we are in the midst of a medical nightmare.
-Sue M.
Hi Sue,
You said “Your stories above are cute but they sort of highlight your youth and naivete.â€
I will be the first to admit this. What bearing this has on the serious aspects of what I said, I am not sure however. Youth and naiveté will not excuse me if I am wrong, but they also do not offer a rationale excuse to discount an argument that I make. I wanted to point that out.
You said “They (mothers and fathers) are the best judges of their own children’s development and health concerns.â€
Are they? I really wouldn’t agree with that across the board. It is hard not to think of the kids who have gotten hurt because their parents were fond of some form of quackery.
That is not to say that they shouldn’t be the ones’ with the final say (and I wouldn’t have it any other way).
I am not sure which epidemiology you were referring to, if it is the Danish studies then we agree. If it is Fombonne’s work then you still have a serious problem (if you are a fan of the vaccine etiology theory) but we would not agree.
As far as common sense, I will ask who’s common sense are we talking about? As for intuition, a mother’s gut feeling is still a gut feeling. When it is passed off as definite truth it has started to be magical thinking.
Other Mother’s intuition go the opposite way.
In will ask in all seriousness this time whose intuition is better and why?
Ms. Clark wrote: You have no rational reason to think that thimerosal caused your child’s autism. NONE. Your belief (and Erik Nanstiel’s) is irrational, it’s nuts, it’s bonkers, it’s bizarre.”
Where do you get the notion that it isn’t rational? Or plausible enough to warrant further research? But bonkers and bizarre?
That’s just downright ignorant. It’s your stubborn blindness that I consider to be “bonkers and bizarre.”