Stat-tastic!

12 Jan

if the total number of 3-5 year olds in the California DDS system has not declined by 2007, that would deal a severe blow to the autism-thimerosal hypothesis…..total cases among 3-5 year olds, not changes in the rate of increase is the right measure.

David Kirby, Nov 2005.

Time’s up Mr Kirby. The last quarter numbers for 2006 are now in.

Jonathon even took the trouble to highlight on his graph where the Geier’s made asses of themselves declaring an early decrease in their 2006 paper. As can be seen from Jon’s graph (and even more clearly on Dad of Cameron’s) – _the numbers are still going up_.

A severe blow to the autism-thimerosal hypothesis has been dealt.

Jospeph tells us what to expect in the coming months in the way of excuses from Kirby. Something I also discussed in April 2006. In short, the militia will argue that there’s still TCV’s sitting around waiting to be used up (rubbish, but even if true, would be a very, very minimal amount, click the link to my previous post to see Sallie Bernard of SafeMinds struggling to locate TCV’s in June 2001), they will also argue that the flu shot supports the ‘epidemic’ (again, rubbish. Are we really comparing mandatory TCV administration culminating in 187 ug Hg with optional flu vaccines, administered in one season of the year, culminating in 25 ug Hg?). They will also argue that RhoGAM was a contributing factor (but as we all kow, that one’s got no legs.). They may also try and argue that some other vaccine/environmental ‘thing’ comes into play. This takes us right back to square one and is a virtual admission that thiomersal doesn’t do a goddamn thing except act as a preservative.

In fact, that process is already under way from the Big Cheese himself. In a post on Jan 9th 2007 to his munchkins on the EoH yahoo group, Kirby said:

I believe this puzzle will be solved by looking at TOTAL “environmental” toxic burden from ALL sources, including other chemicals, and, of course, thimerosal in vaccines,

Oh, of _course_ ;o)

This prompted a bit of controversy: H Coleman replied:

Please stop it- you’re all giving me a headache.

And Robert Krakow replied:

I disagree somewhat with the emphasis of your message. I don’t know anyone who focuses on the vaccine issue who believes that other environmental exposure is unimportant. To suggest so underestimates the intelligence of most of the members of this list.

‘Most’ obviously not including John Best, Rescue Angel, who said on that same group:

I view any talk of mercury in the air as a problem as utter nonsense. It’s just propaganda to deflect blame from pharma and I don’t buy one word of it.

See Robert? There’s more than a few idiots who need things spelled out to them on EoH.

Anyway, the impact of Kirby’s statement has not been lost amongst the rank and file militia members. They know he’s trying to move on. Memo to Mr Kirby: it would be quicker and more painless to just fess up: _A severe blow to the autism-thimerosal hypothesis has been dealt._

20 Responses to “Stat-tastic!”

  1. Joel Smith January 12, 2007 at 13:21 #

    Well, they are nothing if not predictable in this. Big Coal, watch out!

    That’s the great thing with “knowing” some unknown enivornmental pollution caused your kids’ “brain damage”. You’ll never run out of pollution (although mercury in the environment is a relatively bad one to pick, as it is going down, not up, and has been for a while). You can then, when you can’t prove coorelation, start blaming *combinations* of things. And there’s plenty of people with big pockets who cause pollution, so you have plenty to sue.

    (not that I have any problem with eliminating pollution, but, like the global warming debate, there are too many people with bad and flaky understandings undermining the real work of scientists to document and understand these problems – and thus fix them).

  2. Joseph January 12, 2007 at 14:18 #

    It’s plain to see that John Best Jr. really isn’t interested in any environmental triggers that are not in vaccines, at all. Even mercury outside vaccines. Not hard to imagine why exactly that is. His odds are really really low now, but as a gambling man he realizes shifting to alternatives is worse.

  3. Junior January 12, 2007 at 15:00 #

    Did anyone see “30 Rock” last night? There was a funny bit where Tracy Morgan was doing an informercial to hawk his “Meat Machine”. The Meat Machine “fuses” 3 meats together, and eliminates the need for bread to make sandwiches. A “doc” (played by Chris Parnell) with a degree from the “Ho Chi Minh City School of Medicine” joins in the informercial.

    Tracy: “Is it true that bread eats away at your brain?”

    Doc: “We have no way of knowing because the powerful bread lobby keeps stopping my research.”

    Tracy: “Well folks, bread will never maybe attack your brain again.”

    It immediately made me think of the DAN and mercury folks. You can see a clip (it’s much funnier when you watch it) at this link, it’s at the beginning of Part 3. http://www.nbc.com/Video/rewind/full_episodes/30rock.shtml?show=30rock10

  4. Kev January 12, 2007 at 16:06 #

    Junior – I can’t get that to work, however, my favourite conspiracy theory is right here.

  5. Junior January 12, 2007 at 16:38 #

    I like that conspiracy theory, makes perfect sense to me. 😉

    Is the link not working, or is the video not working? They are both working for me. The infomercial bit is about 1 minute into Part 3 of the “Rural Juror” episode.

  6. Brian Deer January 12, 2007 at 16:41 #

    Reminds me of some friends back in the 1980s who were sure that HIV didn’t cause Aids. One wrote a book called “Surviving Aids”, and died not long after. The other wrote a book called “The HIV Myth”. Dunno where he is.

    They never did quite get it that (after about the first ten minutes) the chances of the kind of mass professional conspiracy that would be the necessary pre-requisite for their propositions to have merit were approximately nil.

  7. livsparents January 12, 2007 at 18:38 #

    I’m sick and tired of hearing things
    From uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocritics
    All I want is the truth
    Just gimme some truth
    I’ve had enough of reading things
    By neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians
    All I want is the truth
    Just gimme some truth

    No short-haired, yellow-bellied, son of tricky dicky
    Is gonna mother hubbard soft soap me
    With just a pocketful of hope
    Money for dope
    Money for rope

    I’m sick to death of seeing things
    From tight-lipped, condescending, mama’s little chauvinists
    All I want is the truth
    Just gimme some truth now

    I’ve had enough of watching scenes
    Of schizophrenic, ego-centric, paranoiac, prima-donnas
    All I want is the truth now
    Just gimme some truth

    You can apply it to any side/persons you like; I just want to know what is causing 1 out of 166…

    Let’s understand what it is, who is impacted, how they are impacted, what may have caused it (whether genetics, environmental) and what we/they can do to help all of us…
    Bill

  8. Friend in California January 12, 2007 at 19:47 #

    Point taken, Bill. But the answers exist.

    “I just want to know what is causing 1 out of 166…”

    Try this:
    http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1576829,00.html

    “Lets understand what it is,…”
    Ask autistic people – they will tell you exactly what it is for them as individuals.

    “Who is impacted…”
    Currently, that would include anyone who is autistic and anyone who has personal involvement with those who are autistic.
    In the future, should the general society realize the strengths autistics can offer, they will be impacted as well.

    “What may have caused it (whether genetics, environmental)…”
    Nobody knows, Bill. At this point, we only know what does NOT cause it.

    “And what we/they can do to help all of us…”
    It is not a safe position to wait for the cavalry to come in on this one. Joining a community like the Autism Hub, for example, is a step in the right direction towards helping “ourselves” (autistic people and those who care about them).

  9. David N. Andrews MEd (12-2006) January 12, 2007 at 19:50 #

    Joseph: “It’s plain to see that John Best Jr. really isn’t interested in any environmental triggers that are not in vaccines, at all.”

    Absolutely. But this is what we’ve come to expect of him. You mentioned the Wisconsin Card Sort Test elsewhere, but I’d be very interested in his own responses (or those that could be surmised from his behaviour on the net over the past couple of years) to the Adorno F-Test.

    Joseph: “Even mercury outside vaccines.”

    Evidently… I saw at least one remark suggesting that even THAT notion was part of a conspiracy… the mind boggles.

    Joseph: “Not hard to imagine why exactly that is.”

    Gimme an I, gimme an M, gimme a B, gimme a… ah, you already know what word I’m looking for!

    Joseph: “His odds are really really low now, but as a gambling man he realizes shifting to alternatives is worse.”

    To be honest, I don’t think he’s learned that much from being the gambling addict he evidently is.

  10. anonimouse January 12, 2007 at 20:32 #

    It’s plain to see that John Best Jr. really isn’t interested in any environmental triggers that are not in vaccines, at all. Even mercury outside vaccines. Not hard to imagine why exactly that is. His odds are really really low now, but as a gambling man he realizes shifting to alternatives is worse.

    The good news is he’ll probably stop pumping his kid full of chelating drugs and supplements.

    The bad news is he’ll probably start ignoring his cash cow — er, his child..

  11. Ms. Clark January 12, 2007 at 20:47 #

    The thing that the facts seem to point to is that “autism” has a whole slew of “causes” and/or contributing factors, including things like maternal stress, and whatever your grandfather and grandmother ate, no joke.

    If you have “a problem” really a gajillion related issues, with a gajillion causes, there isn’t ONE THING (unless it’s massive and catastrophic) that can make a huge impact on “the problem.” The problem is too complex for one simple answer, and the correlary of that is that the problem is too complex for one simple cause (or one less simple cause).

    (Kev, may I scream “DUH!!” now, even if it’s very rude to do that?)

    People have been sold a bill of goods including that there’s one simple cure (like B12) for the majority of autistic kids. It’s a lie. A lie. Very simply, it’s a lie. Then they move from one lie to another simple lie, “use HBOT. IT WORKS!” and then to another lie, “TD DMPS! IT’S THE BEST” until the kid gets hurt (or killed), or too old, or starts to act more normal, or the parents imagine that the kid is acting more normal, or they run out of money…

    What caused YOUR child’s autism is your real question Bill. I doubt you are that concerned with what caused the autism in my family, and we can presume that they are different causes, statistically.

    You can try to go through the 5 tiered diagnostic protocol that I’ve blogged, you might find a subclinical genetic disorder, otherwise, you’ll have to wait until someone comes up with something plausible that actually applies to your kid.

    Whining that no one knows what causes autism isn’t going to help your child any time soon, in my opinion. Listening to quacks is a very bad idea. Kids can gain speech and make other gains rapidly in the presence of a quack treatment or not. Kids have had these great gains under the placebo arm of a placebo controlled trial… hellooo! Secretin?

    People will swear that their kids make huge gains just with ABA, and they swore that Bettelheim’s abusive psychotherpay did wonders for their kids, too.

  12. qchan63 January 12, 2007 at 21:01 #

    Be interesting to see if Arthur Allen has this info in hand for tomorrow’s big showdown in San Diego. (Although i guess if he does bring up the numbers in conjunction with Kirby’s “severe blow” comment, it’ll make for a very short “debate” …)

  13. meany January 12, 2007 at 21:12 #

    I want to see Kirby cry. They are going to tape the debate. Maybe we’ll get to see his lower lip start to quiver and maybe we’ll see him sputter, “But, but you don’t understand! The children, the children. The moms, the moms and the diarrhea! And the spoilt Persian carpets, and my rent in Brooklyn! And I hate the mean old CDC. I want my mommy! Waaaah.” After the debate the lady from the Lyme Disease Causes Autism group will be there to hand out fliers, pick up the broken hearted parents and put them on another bandwagon. Cookies will be served.

  14. livsparents January 12, 2007 at 22:45 #

    But, Ms Clarke, if we can’t say, with ANY certainty, what causes it nor what might help the symptoms, can I try to get you to agree that certain things MAY have caused a regressive form of autism? Or that B12 (used in limited form) MAY help certain individuals? That ABA used in a ‘non-abusive’ way MAY help a good portion of children? I can admit that all these therapies are NOT blanket ‘cures’, but I find the railing, condecending and sometimes abusive language brought on anyone looking for ways to help their children to occasionally be as generalistic as the Kirbies and Geirs everyone rightfully takes to task.
    All I’m asking for is many of the symptoms, comorbidities and onsets of the disorder to be looked at and treated as subgroups all with their own possible causes and treatments…

  15. ND and Proud of it January 13, 2007 at 02:41 #

    railing, condecending and sometimes abusive language brought on anyone looking for ways to help their children
    Let’s turn this around a bit…
    railing, condecending and sometimes abusive language brought on anyone NOT looking for UNPROVEN and UNTESTED and POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS ways to help their children
    You see, Bill, it works both ways.
    Some people accused ME of abusing and neglecting my autistic child because I wasn’t chelating, MB12ing, and HBOTing him, nor was I willing to subject him to unnecessary invasive and frightening procedures to discover nonexistent medical issues.
    My son is perfect the way he is.

  16. livsparents January 13, 2007 at 03:58 #

    Exactly MY point, zealots pushing THEIR points. No one should be claiming abuse when none exists. I’m sorry, but I do not consider a intramuscular shot every third day to be child abuse. Nor do I consider parents who choose not to use any treatments. But, hey, it STILL looks like thinly vailed critism to me. Untested, yes. Unproven, somewhat. Potentially dangerous, in some cases, yes; in others, critisism with just as wild theories attempting to ‘demonize’ reletively harmless therapies as reckless, harmful and dangerous…

  17. Kev January 13, 2007 at 07:42 #

    Bill –

    I’ve heard stories about kids being administered shots that would make your eyes pop. One parent related how he had to hold down his daughter and wrap his legs round hers to stop her trying to escape from the shots. Shots that are utterly unnecessary. That sounds like plain old abuse to me.

    Take a look here. Its a site created by NAA head honcho Wendy Fournier and is a place for people to vent about how awful autism is. One comment is:

    _”Every time I get on the phone, my daughter follows me around the house talking to me. It’s driving me NUTS!”_

    Further down the page is a photo of a little girls arm after getting some shots.

    Nobody’s demonising the therapies Bill. But those who push them, those who ‘test’ for them and those who administer them need to take a long, hard look at themselves.

  18. livsparents January 13, 2007 at 13:41 #

    I also saw on that posting board people complaining about telemarketers, complaints about yelling people etc. It was a vent board not necessarily an ASD vent board; I could say the exact thing about my NT kids and the phone. The shots, in reality, were a complaint about a lab who claimed to be good with children. Granted, there was a lot of feces flying on that board, but I get the impression sometimes from you guys that if someone doesn’t have a positive attitude in this world that somehow that person misses the whole point of autism. People are stressing about how to deal with a disorder with a whole bunch of questions and very very few answers.

    Personally, biomed is not a shortcut to good parenting (which is the impression I will frequently get from commentary by the ‘skeptics’); but another way of dealing with her issues. Not a magic pill that will obsolve me of spending time with my child; but a way to hopefully help her spend more time with me.

    The shots we give? Nary a flinch; I have more trouble (and guilt) washing her hair, she can’t STAND water on her head…
    Bill

  19. Kev January 14, 2007 at 10:00 #

    _”I also saw on that posting board people complaining about telemarketers, complaints about yelling people etc. It was a vent board not necessarily an ASD vent board;”_

    Hmmm. Possibly. I think the preponderance of remarks went a certain way though.

    _”The shots, in reality, were a complaint about a lab who claimed to be good with children.”_

    That’s really not the point Bill. Wendy Fournier is a big shill for the more extreme form of biomed as are her colleagues. I’m going to stick my neck out and wager that blood draw was utterly unnecessary.

    _”Granted, there was a lot of feces flying on that board, but I get the impression sometimes from you guys that if someone doesn’t have a positive attitude in this world that somehow that person misses the whole point of autism.”_

    Not at all. The whole shit thing does get a little bit boring – is shit really the worst thing in the world? As I’ve said elsewhere, we quickly learnt one universal truth – shit washes off.

    As for attitude, I don’t think autism has a ‘point’ as such. Life does though – you can either enjoy it or bemoan it. Is shit pleasant to deal with? No. Is it worth anywhere near the amount of (virtual) ink that’s been spilled on it lately? No.

    _”People are stressing about how to deal with a disorder with a whole bunch of questions and very very few answers.”_

    That’s not what I see today. That would be an honest response. I know I get stressed sometimes. What I see is a bunch of parents who’ve swallowed bad science who are reacting.

    _”Personally, biomed is not a shortcut to good parenting (which is the impression I will frequently get from commentary by the ‘skeptics’); but another way of dealing with her issues. Not a magic pill that will obsolve me of spending time with my child; but a way to hopefully help her spend more time with me.”_

    I’m not going to knock you for biomed Bill. I practice aspects of it myself. However, as you well know and have stated your discomfort with yourself, some forms of biomed are dangerous.

    _”The shots we give? Nary a flinch; I have more trouble (and guilt) washing her hair, she can’t STAND water on her head…”_

    Again, giving shots is not the issue. Giving shots two/three times a week? Not so good.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Left Brain/Right Brain » David Kirby/Arthur Allen Debate Part I - January 15, 2007

    […] However, this sentence also damns Kirby to sticking with those sources. If he wants to quote them to back up his points then he needs to realise you can’t simply abandon them when they don’t – and one of those sources is CDDS, and CDDS has very recently contradicted Kirby. […]

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: