I’ve been in email communication with David Kirby over the last week or so. You may remember that I wrote awhile ago about how a New York Times interview quoted Kirby as saying that if the amount of cases of autism didn’t decrease before the end of 2005 then that would be a severe blow to the autism/thiomersal hypothesis.
The confusion stemmed from Kirby claiming 2 months later in an email conversation with blogger Citizen Cain the exact same thing but this time with a date of 2007. I wondered why Kirby had moved the goalposts.
At the time I was predisposed to put it down to trying to wriggle out of a stated position but the more I thought about it, the less likely that seemed so I mailed David Kirby to ask him. He responded:
Many thanks for your note. The Times misquoted me. I actually asked for a correction, but did not receive one. What I told the reporter is that “we should know in the next few years.” I believe this is also what I said on Meet the Press.
Which is true. The transcription shows that thats exactly what happened. Kirby went on to say:
The Times wrote: *Because autism is usually diagnosed sometime between a child’s third and fourth birthdays and thimerosal was largely removed from childhood vaccines in 2001, the incidence of autism should fall this year, he said.* When I said “the next few years,†I meant by around 2007. I would never say “this year,†and that is why I requested the correction.
All in all then, I think I have to apologies to David Kirby in this instance. Its pretty bad of a prestigious newspaper like the NYT to actively mislead people like this and its very perplexing as to why they wouldn’t issue a retraction or correction in such a vitally important matter but thats not Kirby’s fault any more than it is mine so I think we have to take Kirby at his word here and go by what he wrote in Evidence of Harm and repeated on Meet the Press.
What we can do is take Rick Rollens to task though. He actually _did_ state that the first fall off would come last year. David Kirby again:
I did, however, quote Rick Rollens as saying “the first impacted birth cohort should start showing up in 2005.†But that is Rick’s opinion, not mine.
So – confusion alleviated. We can all go back to watching 2007.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Because autism is usually diagnosed sometime between a child’s third and fourth birthdays
Is that true? Is that a mean average? What percentage of children are diagnosed before they are three or entered in to the birth-to-three program? They should be able to eliminate that program by now given the precipitous drop off in new cases. Even assuming that half are diagnosed after three wouldn’t that mean far less under three diagnoses? Still there are plenty of autistic children born after 2001 and even 2003. How many thimerosal containing vaccines would a child receive if he or she is born in ’03 or ’04? There should be very few autistic 2-3 year old children right now if thimerosal was ever a major contributing factor. Any Neurodev’s notice a decline in toddler evals?
In what manner did Kirby quote Rollens? Was it to bolster his own argument? I am still reserving judgment at this point. The NYT not only misquoted him, but also would not print his retraction? Really? Has he retained an atty to address this matter? AND didn’t he used to work for the Times? This is all very curious indeed.
An honorable (I tried spelling it with the English “u” but your spell check told me that the American spelling was correct) post from a most honorable blogger.
Because thimerosal is only part (albeit a big part) of the problem, I’m not sure how large the decline should be, but we certainly should see some decline in the next year or so.
In response to “say what,” although Mr. Kirby wrote some for the NYT, my understanding is that it was on a freelance basis (I might be wrong about that). It is a bit much to say he “worked for” the Times. And hiring an attorney to force a retraction would be both overkill and kind of useless. First, any retraction would come so long after the original story that most readers are just going to scratch their heads. Second, Mr. Kirby might hope to have a byline in the Times again, and suing a paper tends to diminish the chances of being published by them inn the future.
oops. Make that “in the future.”
If I were misquoted by the Times, I would force legal action. Furthermore, I’d never want to accept a paycheck from them again. What’s more an NYT printed retraction would also be good for a future printing of EOH.
NOW HIRING
Say what wrote:
“If I were misquoted by the Times, I would force legal action.”
-Really? Maybe you have more time on your hands than David Kirby. I would guess that 99% of the population do not have a clue one way or the other so whether he said “this year” or “2007” would not mean anything to them. Would it be worth legal action? I don’t think so but I guess that’s what makes the world go round…
-Sue M.
Ginger put together some graphs which may be of interest to you. You can see them here:
http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2006/01/california-autism-numbers-4th-quarter.html
Yikes…
-Sue M.
I was aware of the fact that David Kirby asked the NYT to retract his statement. A reporter for the NYT asked me to help clarify this, because the reporter was sure that he had heard KIrby say “by the end of this year” or whatever it was that the reporters for the NYT had actually written. The reporter needed to answer this question to his editor, of whom Kirby had demanded a retraction. The reporter had heard Kirby say it at “autism one” or a “DAN! conference” not on “meet the press”.
The reporter asked me, “Didn’t Kirby say what we quoted him as saying?” And I said, “I’ll see if I can find where he said it…” I couldn’t. So I e-mailed the GREAT DAVID KIRBY himself, and I phrased the question in the same manner in which the NYT quoted him, “Did I hear you say at the Autism One conference…blah blah blah…” and Kirby wrote back, in a rather irritated manner, “yes I did say that…”
So, I copied that statement from Mr. Kirby back to the reporter at the NYT. The reporter showed the email to the editor and the editor told Kirby to go take a long walk off a short pier or something. Therefore, the NYT did not retract what Kirby had said, because, IN FACT HE HAD ACTUALLY SAID EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS QUOTED AS SAYING. You’ve been lied to by Kirby, Kev. I can find a copy of Kirby’s email and copy it to you.
Kirby is trying to cover his posterior. He should go look for a job at that waffle house. He won’t be writing for the NYT again any time soon. He tried to make their reporters look bad by lying.
Kirby will know who I am now, because he should remember who asked him that question. Maybe he’ll “out” me. That way I can get harrassed by his little minions of darkness mabye threatened, even.
The numbers Ginger is using are not the little kid numbers.
What a stinking sloppy approach to stats. The DDS adds new cases in all age categories. We are only interested in the little kids, right? No word from Rollens.
Yikes.
The DDS has said specifically do not use our numbers to track incidence or prevalence. Ginger don’t care, obviously.
Has California hit 1 in 166 yet? No? Then don’t tell me anything until the percentage of autistic students starts to DROP – I don’t care about the “rate of decrease in the increase”, I want to see a rate of decrease before anyone starts talking about a drop in the frequency.
” Where’s little Ricky? ”
-Look down…
-Sue M.
So Deep Twinkle did you tell Kirby the reason why you were asking? Because doing this:
“So, I copied that statement from Mr. Kirby back to the reporter at the NYT”.
Is pretty lame. Either way, it doesn’t really matter, does it? The numbers will eventually speak for themselves. Somehow I don’t think that Kirby will be needing a job at the waffle house. I’m sure that he’ll be busy enough with the movie and all.
-Sue M.
Sue M: Somehow I don’t think that Kirby will be needing a job at the waffle house. I’m sure that he’ll be busy enough with the movie and all.
Excellent! When will the movie be Unleashed?
TBA
Clone:
Ah, yes, resort to your one strength (humor) when you know that someone else is right and you’re wrong. Are you still researching the question that I asked you on the other blog entry?
-Sue M.
You want to see a decrease compared to when? Which year will satisfy you? If the number of new cases this year is less than last year how is this not a decrease in the number of autistic cases?
The DDS may say not to use their numbers, but then why publish them why even keep track? Where else can we go for the numbers? Is anyone else even keeping track?
I was excited the year I’d heard that the number of new cases had leveled off instead of skyrocketing like it had been for so long. And now there are fewer numbers of people being diagnosed every year.
The fact that they diagnose at all ages too just puts the number of younger kids as new patients even lower.
The year 2007 is the marker year because 2003 is supposedly the year that most of the mercury laden shots cleared the shelves. So you add four years as the typical age of diagnosis and you get 2007. However there are still the mercury laden flu shots infants and pregnant women should get… but don’t eat too much fish they contain mercury.
_”If the number of new cases this year is less than last year how is this not a decrease in the number of autistic cases?”_
It may well be but there are significant problems with the graphs and interpretation Ginger has put on them. However, its probably better to comment on them there. Suffice it to say, those figures don’t address just the key group of 3 – 5 year olds and they don’t show new intakes.
_”So, I copied that statement from Mr. Kirby back to the reporter at the NYT. The reporter showed the email to the editor and the editor told Kirby to go take a long walk off a short pier or something. Therefore, the NYT did not retract what Kirby had said, because, IN FACT HE HAD ACTUALLY SAID EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS QUOTED AS SAYING. You’ve been lied to by Kirby, Kev. I can find a copy of Kirby’s email and copy it to you.”_
I’d be very interested in seeing that. I hope I haven’t been lied to.
Sue M: Are you still researching the question that I asked you on the other blog entry?
Nope. If you say that you never endorsed chelation therapy that’s good enough for me. I apologize.
You do, as often as possible, say that thimerosal causes autism, don’t you? I don’t want to misquote you on that.
Speaking of responding to questions, why don’t we take a stroll through the archives to see how many questions you’ve left unanswered. I’m still waiting for a reply on the Burbacher thread. Oh, that’s right. Science isn’t really your thing. Well, I guess we’re left with humor then.
Hi Mousker,
The descrease is in the “rate†not the actual prevalence. We still diagnosed more 3-5 year old now, than even just a few months past.
We can go to the descriptive epidemiology for the numbers, to answer one of your questions. This is in fact why these things are conducted and presnted in journals.
The DDS numbers are good thing to keep track of if you want to show State legislature who your agency is delivering services to. This is a good thing if you want State funds, ditto for national level grants.
You wrote:
“The fact that they diagnose at all ages too just puts the number of younger kids as new patients even lower.â€
The fact that they diagnose at all ages, means one must take the time and effort to go back and track only the 3-5 years olds in quartly reports. Until one does that it does not follow that ine will know what trend will look like.
How do we know that age 4 is the typicl age of diagnosis?
Rollens unleashed his newest quarterly spin.
But first, this is interesting…
I’m copying my own post to Kevin’s science board here for efficiency:
“Last night Kathleen Seidel asked Margaret Bauman if a particular state’s standards for what they considered worthy of needing special attention might affect the way kids are labelled by a state.
Bauman said that the state of Massachusetts funds intensive treatmtent, big time help for kids who are autistic, all the pdd’s and even those who are AT RISK FOR POSSIBLY GETTING a pdd diagnosis.
Kathleen’s question is, if in a state like California that is very difficult to pry money from (Bauman said dealing with California was like dealing with a “third world country”) wouldn’t there be an artificially inflated number of “autistics” if “autistics” were the only ones who could get help (never mind that the other pdds and possible pdds might need just as much help).
Dr. Bauman said, logically, yes that one would expect that kind of deliberate misdiagnosis in order to get kids services. But I didn’t get her statement written down word for word. Kathleen might remember better what Bauman said, and eventually it will be online on the MIND’s website on video.”
So, in California doctors fudge on the use of “autistic” “full syndrome in order to get services for their child.
Rollens must know that, for all his blustering about “all clincially diagnosed full-syndrome autism” you know the ones that are like a train-wreck. One of those kids diagnosed with “full syndrome autism” and enrolled in the Cal DDS at the North Bay Regional center was 11 years old. His mom had told two different schools that she thought he was autistic, they said, Naaaaah. He’s just spacey. He’s just a discipline problem… but LOOK, here he gets dxd at 11 years old, He’s not nonverbal obviously.
Also, we need to know how the other categories are reacting, a few years ago MR was dropping in an exact mirror image of the line that tracked the increas of autism. It was in a published paper… gotta go find it.
“California Reports: New Autism Cases at 4 Year Low
From California autism advocate Rick Rollens.
According to information released today by the California Department of Developmental Services (DDS), the number of new cases of professionally diagnosed full syndrome autism (NOT including any other autism spectrum
disorder) entering California’s developmental services system in 2005 was the smallest number of new cases since the year 2001.
The DDS year end report for 2005 documents that during 2005, California added 2,848 new cases of autism to it’s system. Not since 2001 (2725 new cases) has California added less new cases of full syndrome autism
to it’s system. Every year since the all time record year of 2002 there has
been a slow, steady decline in the number of new cases of autism entering California’s 37-year old developmental services system.
Between 1979-80 and the end of 2002, California’s developmental
services system experienced unprecedented record increases in the number of
new cases of autism every year over the previous year. The 1990s saw an explosion of new cases of professionally diagnosed full syndrome every single year culminating in the record year 2002 with 3,132 new cases.
Prior to the start of the modern day autism epidemic, autism accounted for less then 3% of all the new intakes coming into California’s system
which also includes mental retardation, epilepsy, and cerebral palsy. Today,
autism accounts for 60% of all new intakes, and is the number one disability entering California’s developmental services system. 18 years ago there were 2,773 persons with autism in the system, today there are 29,424.
Children under the age of 3 years old with full syndrome autism are NOT included in the DDS reports, but instead are enrolled in the Early Start Program.
Nearly two-thirds (2 out of 3 ) persons in the system with autism are between the ages of 3 and 13 years old, with nearly 8 out of 10 under the age of 17 years old.
(Rollens comments: For those who continue to believe in the fantasy
that we have NOT experienced an epidemic of autism, might I ask one simple
question: If the incidence of autism hasn’t increased dramatically over the
past 20 plus years, then where are all the adults with full syndrome autism?
Surely if there is no real increase then we should see roughly the same
number of adults with autism as we do children. I am sure it is about as
easy today, as it has been in the past, to somehow misplace or not recognize
thousands of adults with full syndrome autism…about as easy as missing a
train wreck. Sorry but no Ph.D. or MD required to recognize either one.)”
The older autistics are labelled with different labels, Rick, dear. Margaret Bauman has seen these kids for years, she says only a few of the kids she sees today who are called “full syndrome autistic” and other PDD’s would have been called autistic 30 years ago. She said they gave them other names back then.
How simple is that? Too complicated for Rollens, and gang.
He can bluster all he wants but the main researchers at the MIND aren’t believing the autism epidemic garbage. Otherwise one of the many who were in the audience listening to Bauman would have told her that they know there has been an epidemic or vast increase, whatever you want to call what Rick is spinning. I guess we should be grateful that he avoided disaster terminology this time.
So how bad off are these kids who are not diagnosed or entered into the system until they are 4 years old… aren’t they are regressing at age 18 mos???? Aren’t they all destroyed by the time they are 2 years old and non-verbal… since most kids are talking by 12 mos, aren’t the 2 year olds who are non-verbal as hard to miss as “train wrecks”? How mildly autistic are these 4 year olds who are just at 4 getting a dx? Pretty mildly autistic, that’s how autistic. Maybe, they are AS kids or PDD,nos kids who are just then getting their inflated dx.
I bet there is no one at the MIND who thinks that thimerosal causes autism. It must be quite lonely for Rick there, surely no one thinks his kid was made autistic by MMR.
I guess he didn’t entirely avoid disaster terminology, he said that there was an epidemic of autism, but it was less seismic or meteorological this time, more viral or bacterial…
Rollens will be left out there twisting in the wind. No one from the MIND will say, “dang, that Rick sure is right.”
So, it’s time to invoke the international conspiracy to protect manufacturers of thimerosal, right? The Illuminati (aka Big Pharma and the CDC) have bought all the researchers and grad students at the MIND.
Bad Illuminati, bad!
Clone wrote:
“I apologize”.
-I accept.
Clone wrote:
“You do, as often as possible, say that thimerosal causes autism, don’t you? I don’t want to misquote you on that”.
-Not to be nitpicky but… I actually say that thimerosal can trigger autism in genetically susceptible children. I believe that there is some genetic factor or else why don’t all kids develop autism after being injected with thimerosal? Do I know what that genetic x factor is? Nope.
Clone wrote:
“Speaking of responding to questions, why don’t we take a stroll through the archives to see how many questions you’ve left unanswered”.
-No need. I’m sure that there are tons of them out there. Ah well…
Coming soon to a theater near you… Harvey Fineberg, Paul Offitt, Marie McCormick and Eric Fombonne starring in “The Jailbirds”.
-Sue M.
Darn right, the DDS numbers are not little kid numbers. This quarter they added 700 “new cases” to the total autism numbers, compared to last quarter. Of those, 141 were ages 3-5, 143 were ages 6-9, 90 were ages 10-13 and 173 (!) were ages 14-17, etc. They even added 12 cases to the 52-61 age group. Isn’t it a premise of many parents that it is impossible to miss a case of full spectrum autism in a school age child? These numbers sure don’t bear that out. In fact, Rollens is counting on people who believe that autism is usually diagnosed between the ages of 2-6 to interpret his report to mean that all of the “new cases” are little kids.
The little kid numbers are still steadily increasing. In fact, you can pull the numbers yourself from
http://www.dds.ca.gov/FactsStats/quarterly.cfm
and make a little plot of the total kids ages 3-5 over the past three years. You’ll find a pretty close to linear INCREASE. No sign of a drop yet.
——————————————————————————–
Oh, one more thing. David Kirby is quoted as saying
“Because autism is usually diagnosed sometime between a child’s third and fourth birthdays and thimerosal was largely removed from childhood vaccines in 2001, the incidence of autism should fall this year, he said. When I said “the next few years,†I meant by around 2007. I would never say “this year,†and that is why I requested the correction.”
No wonder he was originally quoted as saying it should be this year. It’s simple logic and math. 2001 + 3.5 = 2004.5 (or midway through 2004, or the end of 2005). Yes, it should be now. I am sure he said it.
Clone said:
“NOW HIRING”
How much are they paying? (Hey, it never hurts to check these things out.)
Jennifer wrote:
“No wonder he was originally quoted as saying it should be this year. It’s simple logic and math. 2001 + 3.5 = 2004.5 (or midway through 2004, or the end of 2005). Yes, it should be now. I am sure he said it”.
-Since you seem so upset about this, Jennifer, I will ask you directly (of course anyone can add their $.02). Who cares? Who really cares whether David Kirby said 2005 or 2007. I’m sure that I’m missing something in this particular debate but… what’s the big deal? He’s just a journalist, right? The numbers are the numbers whatever David Kirby says and they will play out how they play out. Relax. Honestly, if someone has a good reason why this really matters in the scheme of things then I will listen otherwise, who cares??
-Sue M.
I care; I care a good deal.
A lot of the autism=mercury stuff is not being argued by full fledged researchers. What they say seems to have an influence and in the long run affects how certain kids/adults get referred to and treated.
Mr. Kirby seems to have made specific predictions. What he says has had an affect (see the yahoo group EoHarm for proof and see the way some of that crew behave).
When does this individual’s goal posts stop moving?
Jennifer – a question:
If a Reg Ctr Client is dropped by Reg Ctr for a few years and then later the client is able to return and get services again, do you know if they are then counted as a “new case” ?
In 2001 some of the drug companies changed their packaging from ten dose vials (requiring thimerosal) to one dose vials which don’t. Not all of them started this at the same time nor were the ten dose vials recalled. They stayed in the clinics and storage facilities until they were all used. It has been estimated that most of them were used in 2003 but some of them had expiration dates of as late as 2005. So lets redo the math.
2001 + 2-3 years to use up the current supply + 3.5 years of age = 2006-2007
If you factor in the flu shots and all the hype they are getting this year it muddies the waters even more. We won’t be able to get a firm number until thimerosal is banned from every shot infants and pregnant women are given. But I believe we will see a down shift in a couple of years all we can do is wait.
Also if you do go to the DDS site and look at the numbers you will see that the most number of diagnosed kids is school age children between 6-9 the time when parents who’s pediatricians have blown off their concerns or told them to wait get their worries validated by school personnel and their children can finally get a diagnosis. And then you factor in 6-12 months waiting list for an evaluation and you start to understand why the typical age of diagnosis is closer to school age than toddler age even for the kids who are “train wrecks”
Not Counted, the DDS reports do not have numbers for “new cases.” They report the number of people they have each quarter who are classified in each category. Then Rick Rollens gets the numbers, compares them, and calls the difference “new cases.” I believe DDS has specifically said that the difference does not reflect “new cases.”
_”If you factor in the flu shots and all the hype they are getting this year it muddies the waters even more. We won’t be able to get a firm number until thimerosal is banned from every shot infants and pregnant women are given. But I believe we will see a down shift in a couple of years all we can do is wait.”_
See now that I just don’t get. A major part of the thiomersal hypothesis requires the accumulation of thiomersal until a toxic ‘tipping point’ is reaced and the child becomes autistic. No matter which way you cut it, the amount of thiomersal has declined drastically so how does recieving less and less thiomersal contribute towards a toxic tipping point?
Thanks, Anne. My child was dropped as a Reg Ctr Client, so he’s not counted any longer in the Calif numbers. I noticed a drop in his age range and then an increase in the next age range. This makes me wonder if some clients have been able to return. I wish there were numbers for how many clients they drop each quarter.
The thing about having a “genetically susceptible” kid get vaccinated with a thimerosal containing vaccine, is that the kid regresses and gets horrifically ILL immediately. We all KNOW that.
And since the regressions that are reported over and over again happen, not at 6 mos or 6 years, but at about 18 mos to 24 mos… we know that it’s the 18-24 mos dose of vaccines that utterly DESTROYS the immune systems of the kids, ruining the lining of their guts and burning out brain cells right and left creating this horrific regression that is like a train wreck.
SO, all of the kids who were made autistic by thimerosal became regressive autistics by 2001 and they were all born 18 months to 2 years before that…
If you want to believe the “the stuff just sat on the shelves” thing, then the last kid to become autistic from thimerosal containing vaccines became autistic from thimerosal in 2003, but he was born in 2001 or so… making him 4 (maybe 5) years old now?
This hypothetical kid was utterly destroyed at age 18 mos. byt the satanic thimerosal. He stopped talking. He had “burning diarrhea” that he never had before the vaccine, etc. But even with all the publicity about autism and vaccines, his parent(s) still hasn’t (havent’) gotten him dxd because he’s not yet 6 years old???
No one is noticing this step wise increase in severity of autism that matches the dose of thimerosal.
What a crock.
Watch, soon someone will say, but there’s fish and the moms all started getting their teeth filled with dental amalgams… and there’s those historic mercury mines around San Francisco… (isn’t it Aasa who likes that one, or is it Theresa Binstock?) We know that the CIA would use crop dusters to spray school yards with thimerosal to keep the autism rates from falling.
It’s interesting that Sue wants to be so blasé about the stats now. Rick Rollens isn’t being blasé.
Autism Diva found that a few months back:
The total number of autistic children
active in the DDS system and having Client Development Evaluation Reports (CDERs) on file aged 3 to 9 in the California DDS system was 13,096.
An estimate of the number of all children in California in the same age range is a little less than 4 and a quarter million
(4,207,532).
That means for this age group the ratio of autistic to non-atuistic kids age 3-9 in California was 1 in 321.”
I haven’t pulled the same number out for this quarter. I don’t imagine that the number is much closer to 1 in 166 now.
The state IDEA numbers don’t show that California is at 1 in 166 yet. I can’t remember what the ratio is but it’s not even close. Oregon was getting close, and Michigan, I think. But most states had the kids at about 1 in 400, and that includes all the PDDs that were never counted as “autism” 30 years ago.
http://autismdiva.blogspot.com/2005/04/california-dds-responds-very.html
That’s the email from the DDS explaining that people shouldn’t use their numbers for epidemiology.
Poor Rick, he didn’t get the memo.
If y’all want to counsel patience, then y’all need to wait with your mouths shut until the CHARGE study is completed, it will give some solid numbers about California and answer specifici questions about mercury exposure. HINT: they aren’t finding indications that mercury causes autism apparently, mercury is “dead in the water”. Sorry guys.
If they find an environmental “trigger”… the big money is likely going to be in suing Dow chemical or whoever makes flame retardants in foam rubber and pesticides. Snooze y’lose, y’all.
Some quack will invent and imaginary pesticide chelator so they can all stay flush. I predict that Stepanie Cave will get a message from her priest … he will tell her he was just teasing or something, it was the pesticides after all, not vaccines.
“Jailbirds” the movie, is about a DAN! doc who kills several children with grossly unscientific overdoses of vitamins and with toxic chelators, isn’t it?
(topic drift)
Anyone else get the feeling that Dr. McCandless has “left the building”? Someone said that she moved to Hawaii and isn’t taking any new patients, but Dr. McCandless has a clinic for treating aging adults now… her specialty has been doing sex therapy for couples and it looks like she might be heading back to doing that… maybe?
There are 13,639 kids aged 3-9 in with active CDERs in the DDS from this most recent quarter.
Lets say there are a few more kids in California now than there were when I estimated it at c. 4,207,532.
Lets say there are now 4,208,000 kids in California aged 3-9.
The current estimate of the ratio of autistic kids to normal kids would be 1 in 309. But the birth rate of normal kids will keep adding normal kids and the autistic kids are now going back to their pre-epidemic level, so soon the DDS will be taking care of 1 in 500 kids aged 3-9… uhuh. Soon there will be almost no autistic kids in preschools. Has someone sent the memo out the to preschool teachers? Has someone told the ABA therapists that it’s time to retool? Forget early intensive intervention, we don’t need it in California… by now there aren’t any 2 year old autistic kids, right? Certainly, for 2 year olds we can go back to the pre 1990 stats when kids got less thimerosal in their vaccines than they did in the 1990’s and we know how low the autism rate in 2 year olds was in the 1980’s.
I think that the tsunami has washed over California and has receded … whoa, dude. I feel so clean.
Actually it isn’t necessarily immediately evident that there has been a reaction to mercury. If it was there wouldn’t be this controversy. The effects of KNOWN mercury poisoning are NOT immediate. The full effects weren’t evident for weeks to months later. http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=14496
The DDS only tracks moderate to severe they do not track mild or high functioning.
mouseker : Actually it isn’t necessarily immediately evident that there has been a reaction to mercury. If it was there wouldn’t be this controversy. The effects of KNOWN mercury poisoning are NOT immediate. The full effects weren’t evident for weeks to months later.
Oh but every parent who claims mercury caused their child to become autistic before their very eyes says it was immediate. That’s how they can be certain it was the thimerosal. Even so, add a few weeks or months to the reaction. Don’t use age of birth in the formula, unless you think autism begins at birth or before.
Ms. Clark wrote:
“It’s interesting that Sue wants to be so blasé about the stats now. Rick Rollens isn’t being blasé”.
-Where am I being so blase about the stats now? I am being blase about whether Kirby ever said 2005 in any conference anywhere at any time… who cares? The numbers are the numbers – they are going down. You don’t like it. So sorry.
Ms. Clark wrote:
““Jailbirds†the movie, is about a DAN! doc who kills several children with grossly unscientific overdoses of vitamins and with toxic chelators, isn’t it”?
-Nope. Sorry. You will have to come up with your own idea about that. “Jailbirds” will be about your buddy Fombonne, Marie McCormick, Harvey Fineberg, and Paul Offitt — lying, deceiving, covering-up and hurting children.
-Sue M.
Just as a matter of interest, they stopped using thimerisol in vaccines in 1999 here in Australia. The rate of autism has not declined.
I believe the same is true of Canada. At least, I believe it’s correct that Canada has removed thimerisol from vaccines and has not seen a drop in autism rates. (I don’t know when Canada discontinued thimerisol.)
not counted said:”Jennifer – a question:
If a Reg Ctr Client is dropped by Reg Ctr for a few years and then later the client is able to return and get services again, do you know if they are then counted as a “new case†?”
In my understanding these stats shouldn’t be really used to calculate “new cases”. That’s Rollen’s interpretation. My understanding is that they simply reflect the total number of clients in each age range who received services in the last quarter, and thier diagnoses. So, yes, if a person stops getting services, they aren’t counted anymore. If they start again, they are counted at that time.
Canada discontinued thimersol sometime in 1996. The ASD rate there is estimated to be 1 in 170.
Bonni wrote:
“Just as a matter of interest, they stopped using thimerisol in vaccines in 1999 here in Australia. The rate of autism has not declined’.
-Don’t count on it, Bonni. I can pretty much guarantee that 1999 is a bogus date. That’s what they told us here that thimerosal was removed in 1999… Nope, thimerosal-containing vaccinations were still shipping in 2003. If you look here:
http://www.ncirs.usyd.edu.au/facts/f-thiomersal.html
It seems as if 2000 is the date that they give as thimerosal-free, except for 1 version of the Hep B (still contains trace amounts), but it looks like some of the mfg’s are US companies so guess what, look at probably 2003 or so. Don’t know about the flu shot situation over there.
As an aside, it looks like the Australia government is strongly pushing the Prevnar vaccination over there. Stay away. So far it has a horrible track record over here… If they keep up the push look for your rates of type 1 diabetes to skyrocket 🙂 …
-Sue M.
As an aside, it looks like the Australia government is strongly pushing the Prevnar vaccination over there.
Really? I haven’t heard anything about it (and obviously my kids haven’t had it).
I’m too busy to be paranoid.
Also, how the Regional Centers evaluate who is autistic and who is not, or even who is eligible and who is not, depends greatly on the individual Regional Center, and also on how strapped they are for cash and how many parents and/or autistic people they can fool into not fighting back when they deny services. To treat these numbers as figures in an economic and political vacuum makes no sense.
Oh yeah, and I left California last year, so I guess I’m part of a drop in the autism rate.
Bonni wrote:
“I’m too busy to be paranoid”.
-Not paranoid, Bonni, it’s called being “informed”. It took me about 1 minute (while looking up thimerosal info) to see that the Prevnar is now being recommended for all Australian children since 2005.
-Sue M.
Jennifer wrote:
“Canada discontinued thimersol sometime in 1996”.
-Can you show me where you got this bogus information :). Seriously, I understand that you don’t believe the whole thimerosal/autism theory, but if you offer this kind of information up – you need to be able to back it up… I have a feeling that you are wrong, prove me wrong.
-Sue M.
_”but if you offer this kind of information up – you need to be able to back it up”_
Coming from you Sue, who has been unable and unwilling to back anything you claim up, that is derisory.
http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=168927444&p=y689z8y5x
Interesting development.
Kev wrote:
“Coming from you Sue, who has been unable and unwilling to back anything you claim up, that is derisory”.
-Really, Kev? With something SO basic as when Canada stopped using thimerosal in vaccinations. I found that information out in about 2 minutes by typing thimerosal and Canada into google… it wasn’t too difficult and of course, Jennifer is way off base. I’m sure that you already knew that though…
-Sue M.
From Health Canada dated in 1999:
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/ccdr-rmtc/99vol25/25sup/acs7.html