Hating Sanity: My Very Own Sockpuppet

13 Mar

Someone (and its really not hard to guess who) has created a little sockpuppet site for me. Whomever (ahem) it is has also started sprinkling the blogosphere with spicy comments from ‘me’.

How cool is this? Someone (ahem) is worried enough about what I say to start a whole new blog to sockpuppet me!

I could get annoyed about such a thing but really, we have to look at it this way – I must be making a much bigger impression on someone (ahem) then I thought I was. Enough for them to be really worried about the success I’m having in getting through to people.

But lets not ruin the possible fun here. Lets have a bit of a Cluedo type blog post to work out the suspects….who is ‘kev’????

Is it:

a) JB Handley?

Evidence for: He’s got form for trying to coerce people to his beliefs. He’s also good for a bit of name-calling.
Evidence against: Probably knows I wouldn’t be anything but amused.

b) SueM?

Evidence for: Has the wit.
Evidence against: Lacks the motivation.

c) John Best Jr?

Evidence for? Has been repeatedly made to look foolish by a myriad of people on his own blog and other peoples but as I have adopted a position of purposefully getting in his face, I’ve probably stuck in his brain longer than most. Possibly because I continually post his racist (equates Muslims to terrorists), homophobic (believes homosexuality is a perversion which can be cured by a dose of ‘self-respect’) illogic (believes autism was invented by Eli Lilly in 1931) back in his face.

Lately I pointed out to Joseph that attempting rational debate with John was useless. His two crowning moments for me were when he said that there was no autism in China prior to 1999 (whereupon he was deluged with comments pointing to the many studies that predate 1990, let alone ’99 in China) and that autism didn’t exist before 1931 (whereupon I pointed out the diagnosis for case studies stretching back to the 1880’s) and it was at this point that I referred to him as ‘spectacularly stupid’ by which I meant that I was occasionally in literal awe of how stupid he truly was.

Evidence against: Can someone that stupid have a mildly amusing idea like this?

d) Sigourney Weaver?

Evidence for: Took umbrage at my post disagreeing with her statement that autism is a gift. Also annoyed that I confessed to lusting after Gillian Anderson and Geena Davis as well as her.

Evidence against: Is quite obviously in love with me.

So there we have it. Put on your deerstalkers, sniff your class A narcotic of choice, play the stringed instrument you like the best, indulge in a same sex relationship and claim its platonic, be insufferably condescending all the time and inspire lots of really good black and white movies starring Basil Rathbone.

103 Responses to “Hating Sanity: My Very Own Sockpuppet”

  1. killerjabs March 24, 2006 at 15:56 #

    Kev,

    Jonathan Semetko, who I think we both have a great deal of respect for, agrees with Mark Blaxill’s analysis of the Danish studies. Mark has no conflict of interest. I can’t speak for RFK’s comments regarding the UK study. I stated above Mark’s feeling about the UK study and was even willing to concede that one as valid – only b/c Mark hasn’t officially critiqued it. But like I mentioned in my prior post, these 5 studies hardly seem like evidence against a link.

    You say “A very peculiar statment coming from an organisation that denies that the US’s change in diagnostic criteria has any bearing on autism prevalence.”

    But that’s not completely true. Have you read Blaxill’s paper titled “The Question of Time Trends in Autism?” http://www.safeminds.org/research/library/The-Question-of-Time-Trends-in-Autism-Blaxill.pdf Here is a quote from his paper:

    “Some evidence suggests that the shift away from the
    Kanner criteria may have effectively broadened the scope of
    the diagnosis. One group of investigators in Finland applied
    both the Kanner criteria and the ICD-10 criteria in a population survey.34 These researchers interpreted the Kanner criteria as more restrictive and reported a lower rate for what they called classic autism of 5.6 per 10,000, compared with 12.2 per 10,000 for childhood autism. The mean prevalence rate for 11 studies using the Kanner criteria was two per 10,000.35–45 This compares to a mean of seven per 10,000 for 13 surveys of infantile autism that applied either the Rutter or DSM-III criteria or similar “post-Kanner” clinical criteria.46–58”

    Where you may disagree with Mark is his view on the three sets of DSM criteria. He states the following:

    “The three sets of DSM criteria for autism have varied
    modestly in breadth. Some have argued that the move
    from DSM-III to DSM-III-R broadened the concept of
    autism, contributing to an apparent increase in prevalence
    over time; however, in the shift from the DSMIII-
    R criteria to the DSM-IV/ICD-10 criteria, “a corrective
    narrowing occurred.”59 Thus, differences over time
    in the breadth of the diagnostic criteria are unlikely to
    have had a meaningful effect on reported disease frequency.”

    You said:
    “Indeed, in this paper Blaxill makes heavy repeated reference to the fact that thiomersal exposure in Denmark is much lower than the US….how does he square that with his further findings that the UK also have much lower rates of thiomersal and yet he himself then goes on to show the same rate at the same time?”

    I have no problem admitting that we don’t have all of the answers yet. It’s true that there was less thimerosal exposure in the UK as compared to the US. But that fact alone doesn’t tell the entire story. In 1990, the UK changed their DPT practices, moving the schedule from a 3, 4.5 and 8-11 recommendation to a 2/3/4 month schedule and also
    changing the payment model from fee for service to payment for on-schedule compliance. This dramatically increased early exposure to thimerosal, and vaccines in general.

    I say “vaccines in general” because there are other ingredients in vaccines that could also be causing problems. Here’s an article describing a soon to be published Canadian study on vaccines & aluminum: http://www.straight.com/content.cfm?id=16717

  2. Kev March 24, 2006 at 17:04 #

    _”Jonathan Semetko, who I think we both have a great deal of respect for, agrees with Mark Blaxill’s analysis of the Danish studies. Mark has no conflict of interest. I can’t speak for RFK’s comments regarding the UK study. I stated above Mark’s feeling about the UK study and was even willing to concede that one as valid – only b/c Mark hasn’t officially critiqued it. But like I mentioned in my prior post, these 5 studies hardly seem like evidence against a link.”_

    As I said, I can see where Blaxill’s coming from re: the Danish studies. I don’t think they’re as bad as he makes out but neither do I think they’re massively supportive of any argument I can put forward. I reject the ‘conflict of interest’ argument put forward by Bernard and the subsequent ‘something is rotten’ document.

    _”“Some evidence suggests that the shift away from the Kanner criteria may have effectively broadened the scope of the diagnosis.”_

    Its good that he acknowledges that but he then virtually retracts that by stating:

    _”The three sets of DSM criteria for autism have varied modestly in breadth.”_

    And you’re right, I _do_ disagree. I dare say you know the name Dr Tony Attwood, an eminent autism researcher? He had this to say on the reclassification process:

    _”The diagnostic criteria in the DSM, which provide a differentiation between autism and Asperger’s syndrome, have been examined by several research studies over the last five years. There has been some criticism from clinicians and research that the criteria do not identify the disorder Hans Asperger originally described. The four cases he described in his original paper would be diagnosed, according to DSM criteria, as having autism not Asperger’s syndrome. (Miller and Ozonoff 1997).”_

    Varied ‘modestly in breadth’? If peoples diagnosis is altering from AS to autism thats not a modest variation. It also indicates that not only has the diagnosis for autism loosened, so has the diagnostic criteria for AS. The _spectrum_ of autism, including ‘traditiona/kanners/classical/full spectrum/whatever’ autism has in fact _widened_, not closed as Blaxill suggests.

    _”I have no problem admitting that we don’t have all of the answers yet. It’s true that there was less thimerosal exposure in the UK as compared to the US. But that fact alone doesn’t tell the entire story. In 1990, the UK changed their DPT practices, moving the schedule from a 3, 4.5 and 8-11 recommendation to a 2/3/4 month schedule and also changing the payment model from fee for service to payment for on-schedule compliance. This dramatically increased early exposure to thimerosal, and vaccines in general.”_

    At the height of thiomersal use, the UK body burden for a child was 75 µg of Hg. The US rate was 187.5 µg Hg. Thats more than double the Uk rate. All you’re doing by adding the scheduling factor in is adding yet another constraint to your theory. Not only do you now have to explain how thiomersal causes autism (or indeed _if_ it does) when autism bears no resemblance to mercury poisoning, you now have to further explain exactly how the scheduling of these vaccines effects poisoning.

    _”Here’s an article describing a soon to be published Canadian study on vaccines & aluminum”_

    Wondered who’d be first to cite that – congrats KJ, I’ll email you a virtual pint.

  3. David H March 24, 2006 at 18:36 #

    I’m officially giving up the KillerJabs name. I’ll be going by David H from now on.

    Kev,

    “The diagnostic criteria in the DSM, which provide a differentiation between autism and Asperger’s syndrome, have been examined by several research studies over the last five years. There has been some criticism from clinicians and research that the criteria do not identify the disorder Hans Asperger originally described. The four cases he described in his original paper would be diagnosed, according to DSM criteria, as having autism not Asperger’s syndrome. (Miller and Ozonoff 1997).”

    But does that statement really dispute what Blaxill was saying? Your quote seems to be referring to a change between Hans Asperger’s criteria and the DSM. Isn’t Blaxill referring to changes solely in the DSM? I could be misinterpreting but that was my impression.

    “Not only do you now have to explain how thiomersal causes autism (or indeed if it does) when autism bears no resemblance to mercury poisoning, you now have to further explain exactly how the scheduling of these vaccines effects poisoning.”

    We all need to know if thimerosal, or vaccines in general, can cause autism. And yes, the scheduling needs to be explained as well. Luckily, these questions seem to getting asked by people in the US who have the power to make the studies happen. I’m sure you’ve seen the congressional letter sent to the NIEHS by now http://www.a-champ.org/Congressionalletter2-22-06.html and Senator Lieberman said he will lobby Congress to mandate the study if it faces resistance. Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney is supposed to introduce a bill next week to fund a study of vaccinated vs unvaccinated children.

    Regarding autism bearing no resemblance to mercury poisoning. Are all historical cases of mercury poisoning identical? Did the children who suffered from Pink Disease look the same as the Iraqi children who were mercury poisoned?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: