Age of Autism Excels Itself

4 May

It’s my opinion that the blog Age of Autism has not ever once published a post that has contributed anything to the sum of human knowledge in a general sense, nor has it ever published a post that is designed to actually help autistic people live their lives.

However, every once in awhile, it publishes a post that is so monumentally stupid that I literally think the worse of myself for wasting time reading it. And here I am actually blogging about one. Sigh.

Such a post appeared today. It is entitled ‘CDC triggers measles outbreak’. The author of this post, ex-UPI journo Dan Olmsted says:

I’m starting to think we should rename the CDC the Centers for Disease Contagion. You’ve all seen the news that there are suddenly more measles cases in the United States and the CDC is blaming it in part on the increasing reluctance of parents to vaccinate their kids.

But it’s the CDC’s fault, and no other. Getting the “measles shot” means getting the MMR, and the MMR is “the autism shot” in the minds of many, many parents.

So, let me get this straight. It is the CDC’s fault that measles is making a return across the US? I see.

Its not, for example, the fault of the non-vaccinating upper-middle class soccer-mommies and daddies, for example:

Of the 64 people infected by the measles virus, only 1 had documentation of prior vaccination. Among the other 63 case-patients were 14 infants who were too young to be vaccinated. Many of the cases among US children occurred in children whose parents claimed exemption from vaccination due to religious or personal beliefs, or in children too young to be vaccinated.

Hell, no. _That_ couldn’t be the issue, right? Its obviously the CDC’s fault. Damn them for providing the vaccines and a schedule that has led to serious measles epidemics being held at bay in the US and the UK prior to the last 10 years of utter complacency and idiocy.

And why is Dan Olmsted happy to blame the CDC?

Let me tell you one reason why I’m not shy or circumspect about squarely blaming the CDC for this — because Jon Poling, Hannah’s dad, predicted something like this, or much worse, just a few week ago

And as we all know:

Dr, Poling is the real deal, educated at Johns Hopkins, devoted both to his daughter and his patients, tempered by reality. He’s mild-mannered. He’s mainstream. He’s credible.

Riiiiight. This is the same Jon Poling who was recently described by his co-authors as ‘muddying the waters’. The same Jon Poling who’s wife has been a subscriber to the vaccine hypothesis since at least 2001. The same Jon Poling who knowingly uses incorrect epidemiology.

I’m afraid that Jon Poling is right now in the process of extricating himself from the mainstream. And also from any concept of credibility. His refusal to approve access to information that would provide more accuracy to public statements members of his clique have made about the situation is testament to a man who is not governed by any reality other than a desire to push a pre-conceived agenda.

But really, the attempt to point the finger elsewhere by Dan Olmsted is nothing more than a childish ‘It wasn’t me! Its not my fault!’ when both logic and morality show quite clearly that if people decide to eschew something that might not only save their kids lives but the lives and/or well-being of the society in which they live then the finger of responsibility can only point in one direction.

15 Responses to “Age of Autism Excels Itself”

  1. Landru May 5, 2008 at 11:54 #

    Wow. Just wow.

  2. Leila May 5, 2008 at 18:46 #

    Those people have no shame… Do they have mirrors at home?

  3. Patrick May 5, 2008 at 19:37 #

    Dan dammit, face the music that you and the antivaxers have written. It is Your soap/opera that ‘autism shot’ singers, dancers and directors have produced. Wise up and lay part of the blame where it is due, on your own head, and that of David Kirby for inciting sooo much fear, and lack of vaccination.

  4. Regan May 5, 2008 at 23:58 #

    My thoughts ran akin to Patrick’s.

    Sounds a little like someone is trying to get their damage control in early. What is that called? Transference? Something from Orwell or Machiavelli seems like it would go here.

    My feeling is that Dr. Poling either was in on a strategic plan or let the headiness of the moment get the better of his judgement, or both. He may be the real deal, but with only one paper under his belt (on the particular subject of which he’s not exactly a disinterested party), he’s a relative newcomer compared to some (DiMauro, Shoffner) who said that maybe we should hold our horses for a moment. So mainstream may not fully apply.

  5. tembry May 6, 2008 at 02:52 #


    Are you the least bit nervous making statements that are definitely stepping over the line into liable when you are talking about an attorney and her family? Your intensity about this case is nothing short of perseverative. There was nothing heady or exciting about coming forth for the Polings. Someone had already leaked information. I am sure they wish they had never gone public but it was done with integrity. You are defaming someone you know nothing about personally. I hate to think about them reading the posts on this site.

  6. Oh boy.

    Words fail me.

    For once!

  7. qchan63 May 6, 2008 at 23:09 #


    If the word you’re searching for is “libel,” Kev has not come anywhere close to that. He is simply expressing his opinion, and providing facts to support it.

    That’s completely permissible, although I understand it’s the kind of thing some people in the vaccines=autism camp aren’t terribly comfortable with — witness the attorney Clifford Shoemaker’s transparent and ham-handed attempt recently to silence Kathleen Seidel with a subpoena.

    Fortunately that gambit failed, because the courts still support free speech, even if all the people don’t.

  8. Kev May 9, 2008 at 19:07 #

    Tembry –

    1) The word you want is ‘libel’ not ‘liable’
    2) Jon Poling is a doctor not an attorney
    3) What exactly do you consider defamatory? Remember for something to be defamatory it has to be not true.

  9. tembry May 10, 2008 at 17:06 #

    Oh, that explains everyone callng him DR. Poling…

    I didn’t say he was an attorney.

    and again, I refer back to your guide…

    “Common examples of what may be considered defamatory are allegations that suggest a person is:

    Insolvent or in financial difficulties
    The producer of shoddy goods”

    You have suggested numerous times that the Polings are immoral and dishonest. You are very gifted at walking that line that makes the insinuations without quite falling into trouble.

    It makes me sad that this family has to deal with the daily problems that come with their daughter’s disability and then have to face a verbal firing squad for ensuring that her needs will be met. The whole situation is a little akin to hitting someone with your car and then being upset at them for expecting your insurance to pay for their expenses that were incurred because of it. The vaccine compensation program is just that insurance policy for people who are injured by the vaccines. It certainly was not created because they thought no one would ever be injured by them.

  10. Kev May 10, 2008 at 19:21 #

    I didn’t say he was an attorney.

    …when you are talking about an attorney and her family?

    t makes me sad that this family has to deal with the daily problems that come with their daughter’s disability and then have to face a verbal firing squad for ensuring that her needs will be met.

    Sorry, that’s just silly. In order to be justified, a thing has to be true. If we’re giving money away for things that aren’t true and/or accurate then whats the point?

    All of us who are parents of autistic kids need extra help. As do all of us who are autistic. It’d be nice to have an unlimited pot of cash to give out to everyone who _needs_ it but that’s not the reality.

    That said, I am not arguing that Hannah Poling is not vaccine injured and in fact have stated before that she is. What I doubt very much (according to the opinion of mitochondrial experts, autism diagnosticians and the medical evidence presented) is that her vaccines caused her autism.

    Oh, and the issue you seem unable to grasp re: defamation (and I speak as one recently familiar with the legal process) is that in order to defame someone, what you have said has to be _not true_ . See Q9 in the guide I link to.

  11. tembry May 10, 2008 at 19:57 #

    Mrs. Poling is the attorney….I said “an attorney and HER family” Terry, whose words you took out of context in your quotes from recovered kids…she is the attorney.

  12. Kev May 10, 2008 at 20:52 #

    Is she? I thought she was a nurse.


    And how did I take her words out of context exactly? What is the correct context? Maybe you can answer that question after you give me your learned opinion on what I’ve defamed her about. But I won’t hold my breath 😉

  13. Matt May 10, 2008 at 21:25 #


    Ms. Poling is both a nurse and an attorney. My recollection is that she was working as an attorney at the time she decided to stop her professional in favor of her family.

  14. Kev May 10, 2008 at 22:22 #

    Ah yes. I just re-read some of the news articles (and posts on the Yahoo Group). Well, there you go, I guess that proves…something…

  15. lacshmiybarra May 14, 2008 at 02:52 #

    pray tell, Kev,

    what do you think it proves? Hmmm?
    perhaps you should be careful about what you write

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: