To paraphrase Orac…

2 Mar

stagnomilf.jpg

…even more evidence its not about the mercury. Or even about the autism.

Meet Kim. Kim likes to say things like:

“Some days you’re the windshield. Some days you’re the bug.” This week I was the bug. And the autism world (those of us who care about helping kids feel better that is) have been “the bug” for a long time. So today I took off the gloves on HuffPo. I might have even taken off my bra and panties

Um. Form an orderly queue gents?

So Kim – she who is part of the community who care about helping kids feel better – posts a good ol’ rant on Huff Po:

Moms and Dads are waking up and refusing to drink the Kool Aid offered by their patronizing pediatrician, CDC Pharma shill, FDA schmuck…..When docs start pushing a “cervical cancer” vaccine (Gardasil) to boys, even the dimmest bulb of a parent starts to realize that there is a marketing agenda taking precedence over health.

Yeah, even the dimmest bulb of a parent.

Gardasil is a vaccine against certain types of the human papillomavirus (HPV).

HPV is highly communicable…..Both men and women are carriers of HPV. To eradicate these particular strains, men would eventually need to be vaccinated

The forms of HPV that Gardasil is designed to vaccinate against also include a form that is responsible for throat cancer, something my paternal grandfather died from.

So yeah Kim, you carry on taking your clothes off if it makes you feel better. I think those people with the dimmest bulbs would thank whatever diety they worship that they couldn’t see the results of that particular exercise. And out here in the real world, where the discussion continues to be about _autism_ (remember that Kim? the thing that all three of your daughters have – the three daughters of whom only one is vaccinated?) and vaccines we can get back to science instead of ego-stroking.

30 Responses to “To paraphrase Orac…”

  1. Schwartz March 2, 2008 at 18:43 #

    Kev,

    When there is evidence that Gardisal is effective against throat cancer, I’ll agree your argument has merit.

    Until then, it’s pure conjecture and certainly not evidence based.

    Or are you proposing mandatory mass medication without evidence of efficacy?

  2. Kev March 2, 2008 at 19:23 #

    Gardasil is designed to prevent infection with HPV types 16, 18, 6, and 11.

    16 is associated with throat cancer.

    Here’s a report showing the high efficacy of Gardasil, including HPV type 16. It mentions mouth and throat cancer early in the piece.

  3. Kerry Maxwell March 2, 2008 at 19:23 #

    How does this woman think that being paranoid/ delusional helps *kids feel better*? Maybe she thinks my two autistic kids would *feel better* if I poisoned them with chelation? My kids feel just fine with two rational parents who understand and respect science-based medicine. I find her implication that only the delusional and misguided are part of the *Autism World* disgusting and offensive.

  4. Oldfart March 2, 2008 at 19:50 #

    Neither of my daughters will vaccinate THEIR daughters with Gardasil until such time that long-term studies have been done. Have any long term studies been done?

  5. No thanks... March 2, 2008 at 20:23 #

    Um. Form an orderly queue gents?

    Um, you can have my spot in line, Kev.

  6. HCN March 2, 2008 at 20:26 #

    In case my other posts don’t show up (two links), here are the papers from the New England Journal of Medicine:

    Volume 347:1645-1651 November 21, 2002 Number 21,
    A Controlled Trial of a Human Papillomavirus Type 16 Vaccine,
    Laura A. Koutsky, Ph.D., Kevin A. Ault, M.D., Cosette M. Wheeler, Ph.D., Darron R. Brown, M.D., Eliav Barr, M.D., Frances B. Alvarez, R.N., Lisa M. Chiacchierini, Ph.D., Kathrin U. Jansen, Ph.D., for the Proof of Principle Study Investigators

    and
    Volume 356:1928-1943 May 10, 2007 Number 19,
    Quadrivalent Vaccine against Human Papillomavirus to Prevent Anogenital Diseases,
    Suzanne M. Garland, M.D., Mauricio Hernandez-Avila, M.D., Cosette M. Wheeler, Ph.D., Gonzalo Perez, M.D., Diane M. Harper, M.D., M.P.H., Sepp Leodolter, M.D., Grace W.K. Tang, M.D., Daron G. Ferris, M.D., Marc Steben, M.D., Janine Bryan, Ph.D., Frank J. Taddeo, Ph.D., Radha Railkar, Ph.D., Mark T. Esser, Ph.D., Heather L. Sings, Ph.D., Micki Nelson, B.S., John Boslego, M.D., Carlos Sattler, M.D., Eliav Barr, M.D., Laura A. Koutsky, Ph.D., for the Females United to Unilaterally Reduce Endo/Ectocervical Disease (FUTURE) I Investigators

  7. Schwartz March 2, 2008 at 20:44 #

    Kev,

    I certainly understand the difference between efficacy of creating anti-bodies to HPV and it’s ability to prevent Throat cancer, as I’m sure you do. A mention of throat cancer is pretty weak evidence.

    So I’ll ask again, do you have any credible evidence that shows the Gardasil vaccine prevents throat cancer?

    Otherwise, you are promoting mass vaccination without scientific evidence.

  8. Schwartz March 2, 2008 at 20:46 #

    OldFart,

    The safety studies done on Gardasil, were primarily in women older than the age for which it is being mandated in school. There is some concern in both medical and scientific circles about this.

  9. Schwartz March 2, 2008 at 20:47 #

    HCN,

    I’m not sure who you posted the studies for, but none of them study the efficacy of the vaccine against throat cancer in men.

  10. Meet Kim and Barbara March 2, 2008 at 21:19 #

  11. Kev March 2, 2008 at 21:38 #

    _”Otherwise, you are promoting mass vaccination”_

    Oh no!

    Come on Schwarz. The throat cancer thing is just one aspect of the stupidity of Kim’s statement.

    Here’s a vaccine that has been developed which has absolutely no bearing on autism whatsoever and yet Kim feels obliged to mention it on AgeofAutism and in context of the only parents/people who care about people with autism.

    She also totally misleads regarding the limits of its role, stating that its pointless giving it to males when a simple web search reveals that it is far from pointless giving it to males.

    Further, you seem hung up on proving the efficacy of Gardasil in relation to Oropharyngeal whereas I stated it was _designed_ to vaccinate.

    I have read statements from you where you claim that you are only interested in accuracy and science. I am beginning to suspect thats bull. I am beginning to think you just don’t like vaccines.

  12. Schwartz March 3, 2008 at 00:22 #

    Kev,

    OK, I’m splitting hairs (not the only one mind you), but I’m doing it because you imply that Gardasil can be used against throat Cancer when there is no evidence whatsoever to illustrate any efficacy for that application. Gardasil is a sore point for me since I feel my tax dollars are being wasted, and it bothers me to no end when myths about it are propagated in a site like this.

    I still support vaccination of other specific vaccines and this has not changed.
    You should not stereotype me for commenting
    negatively about specific vaccines or policies (sometimes I object to the policy, not the vaccine).

    For the record, I didn’t like Kim’s article at all — it opens with name-calling to start with. However, I think rant commentary is better left to Orac and co. It suits him much better.

  13. HCN March 3, 2008 at 01:32 #

    Schwartz, I was answering Oldfart’s question.

    You aren’t the only person commenting on this blog posting.

  14. Pass the Aggression March 3, 2008 at 04:45 #

    For the record, I didn’t like Kim’s article at all—it opens with name-calling to start with. However, I think rant commentary is better left to Orac and co. It suits him much better.

    Do you read what you post? Seriously, give it a try.

    This snippet for example. You move seamlessly from “I don’t like name calling” to basically name-calling.

    It sounds a lot like, “I don’t want to let people accuse me of name calling, so I am much more passive aggressive”

  15. Kev March 3, 2008 at 16:51 #

    _”but I’m doing it because you imply that Gardasil can be used against throat Cancer when there is no evidence whatsoever to illustrate any efficacy for that application.”_

    Simple logic Schwartz. Throat cancer is a HPV type 16. Gardasil has an established efficacy with HPV 16.

    _”You should not stereotype me for commenting
    negatively about specific vaccines or policies”_

    Why shouldn’t I? I’ve yet to see one comment from you referring positively to vaccine policy. You are stereotyping yourself I’m afraid.

    _”For the record, I didn’t like Kim’s article at all—it opens with name-calling to start with”_

    So your objection as voiced here, not on HuffoPo or AoA (as far as I can see) is to name calling. Not inaccuracy.

    I’m being very very patient with you Schwarz. People have mailed me to tell me I’m wasting my time but I chose to give you the benefit of the doubt and have apologised to you and admitted error when I was wrong. You are beginning to strike me as someone who just wants a row about vaccines.

  16. Joseph March 3, 2008 at 17:45 #

    Was Kim Stagliano anti-vaccine before she had any kids? Is she anti-vaccine for reasons other than autism? I mean, it boggles the mind that two (or is it one?) of her autistic children were never vaccinated. Has she ever explained this aspect of her belief system? What is she after? If she sees autism as a disease, wouldn’t it be more pragmatic for her to push for research into causes that don’t have to do with vaccines, so that she can find out what happened to her children?

    I’m asking that out of sheer curiosity. I frankly can’t begin to explain her position.

  17. David N. Andrews M. Ed. (Distinction) March 3, 2008 at 19:37 #

    “Um, you can have my spot in line, Kev.”

    And mine too…

  18. Lenora March 3, 2008 at 19:39 #

    Ms. Stagliano refers to an e-mail that Dan Childs from ABC sent around to other reporters asking for more information about the case. She suggests that the reason he (Childs) hasn’t followed up with the story is that he was in some way silenced(by ?). Do you have any information about Childs and why he didn’t go forward with a story?

  19. Vax me against Staglianoism March 3, 2008 at 19:43 #

    I think Kim puts herself wherever it is she can get attention. If she could get worshipful adulation and get a book published for saying that her girls are Indigo children, she would. She has said something to the effect that someone told her that she had two Indigo girls and a Crystal girl. Maybe the unvaxed one is the Crystal. She thought it was ok to think of them as Indigo/Crystal children.

    I think she has one unvaxed kid, lets hope that one doesn’t catch a vaccine preventable disease and end up in a hospital with polio or ?

    If her girls were typical and not autistic, I wonder if she’d be pushing for the Gardisil vaccine for them because of how liberal she is in talking about being willing to have sex with multiple partners. Didn’t she offer to have sex with researchers who would cure her daughters?

  20. Brian March 3, 2008 at 20:37 #

    I have to butt in on the tangential point that, you give Schwartzy a hard time, but (without wanting to suggest that I’d be the judge), IMO, if he’s anti-vax, his challenges are about 98 points of IQ above what one usually gets.

    My vote is to have the discussion without always being quite so generic.

  21. kristina March 3, 2008 at 21:34 #

    Who knows, but maybe it’s precisely because she has three autistic children that she’s so determined to make anything but genetics the cause of autism—-so the “blame” does not fall on the children’s parents (i.e., herself).

  22. Chloe Edwards March 3, 2008 at 23:09 #

    This is vaccines…
    Think of the effects of all this shit and chemicals were eating and drinking in day to day life. . . no wonder cancer and other illnesses are going mad.

  23. Regan March 3, 2008 at 23:58 #

    Take HCN’s links and add,
    D’Souza, G., et. al. (2007). Case–Control Study of Human Papillomavirus and Oropharyngeal Cancer. NEJM. 356:1944-1956
    http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/356/19/1944

    Gillison, M.L., et. al. (2000). Evidence for a Causal Association Between Human Papillomavirus and a Subset of Head and Neck Cancers. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 92(9): 709-720.
    http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/92/9/709

    If you want to further study the risk factor involved with HPV16 and oropharyngeal cancer,
    put “Case–Control Study of Human Papillomavirus and Oropharyngeal Cancer” into the search engine for google scholar…

    Keeping it just to Gardasil for girls for a moment–my older daughter had the full series without incident and my younger the first of the shots, ditto.
    My grandmother died of cervical cancer–not a pretty or dignified death. If the vaccine gives some safeguards for my girls against such…good.

  24. Schwartz March 4, 2008 at 01:52 #

    Kev,

    The logic you use for HPV and throat cancer is not that dissimilar to the logic used for mercury and neurological damage. You rightly insist on credible evidence of damage in the case of mercury. Why don’t you insist on credible evidence of efficacy before calling for a mandate of mass vaccination?

    “Why shouldn’t I? I’ve yet to see one comment from you referring positively to vaccine policy. You are stereotyping yourself I’m afraid.”

    Stereotypes are not applied to one’s self, as they are a judgement applied by others. You are correct, that I am quite dissatisfied with most vaccine policies, but that does not make me anti-vaccine. One of my children is now partially vaccinated by choice. It is very easy to be quite dissatisfied by government policy on the whole. Do you consider every person who is anti-Iraq war to be anti-American?

    “So your objection as voiced here, not on HuffoPo or AoA (as far as I can see) is to name calling. Not inaccuracy.”

    Yes, I voiced it here in partial support of your rant. I think I’ve only posted on AOA once (due to a disagreement I have with Autism News Beat — who edited, and deleted, and then quoted my responses out of context). I do not post comments at AOA or HuffPo because they heavily moderate. I post here, because you do not appear to do so.

    Despite my complaints — which I suppose can be misleading because I usually don’t jump in if I agree, like most bloggers comment when they disagree with something — you also come across as reasonble making it worthwhile to have a discussion here.

    “I’m being very very patient with you Schwarz. People have mailed me to tell me I’m wasting my time but I chose to give you the benefit of the doubt and have apologised to you and admitted error when I was wrong. You are beginning to strike me as someone who just wants a row about vaccines.”

    As I stated earlier, I am quite dissatisfied with vaccine policy but I’m not here to draw your article off topic. I try very hard to only post about what is written. I’m sure you are also aware that I disagree with what many people consider “conclusive” science on the topic. That does not make me anti-vaccine. However, it certainly puts me on the opposing side of many debates on this site. If you find my posts offensive (sometimes they are angry), then I’ll stop posting here, you only need to ask, as my objective is not to harass you.

  25. Schwartz March 4, 2008 at 01:53 #

    HCN,

    My appologies if I duplicated your post. I was reading quickly, and only saw the links you posted (and I followed them) but I didn’t see who or what you were responding to.

  26. Schwartz March 4, 2008 at 02:01 #

    Pass the Aggression,

    You really can’t see the difference between:

    a) “offered by their patronizing pediatrician, CDC Pharma shill, FDA schmuck.”

    b) stating that Orac posts “rant commentary” even though he is a self professed ranter: “The miscellaneous ramblings of a surgeon/scientist…”

    Give me a break.

  27. Diane March 6, 2008 at 19:04 #

    Kev – Funny for you to say that out the real world (where you presumably put yourself) the discussion is about “autism”, when, in fact, you spend a great deal of you time writing about people who think differently than you. Absurd.

  28. navi March 16, 2008 at 14:08 #

    um… one little thing that’s bugging me…

    It’s deity not diety.

    to Schwartz, I don’t think he was pushing using Gardasil on boys because it can guard against hpv 16 which can cause throat cancer – so arguments requesting its efficacy have nothing to do with the original post’s context; he was using it as an example as why it’s not entirely useless on boys, besides preventing them from infecting girls – or for preventing them from getting genital warts, for that matter (btw, saying boys shouldn’t take it b/c it prevents a cancer that affects women is, well, sexist, because most women catch hpv from men, not other women).

    That said, the argument that Gardasil should not have been mentioned because it is not associated with autism is also weak, as she was using it as an example of how vaccines are pushed on the public too much, rather than saying it causes autism. It also appears to be used in the context she chose because Gardasil is something that is controversial to those that could care less about autism and vaccines, so it works for her otherwise weak argument.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: