And it is pretty weak this time, so I’ll make it brief.
David Kirby has a new blog post up on the Age of Autism.
He reports on a meeting of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee and their consensus statement. Mr. Kirby quotes the Concensus Statement:
As they stated in a draft “consensus statement”:
“(There is) a strong desire to study the health impact of the immunization schedule, potentially through a ‘vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study’. Outcomes to assess include biomarkers of immunity and metabolism, and outcomes including but not limited to neurodevelopmental outcomes, allergies, asthma, immune-mediated diseases, and learning disabilities. The inclusion of autism as an outcome is desired”
Implying that the NVAC has a “strong desire”.
Oh, wait, he didn’t exactly quote, he changed something into (There is). He provides the original, so read and compare:
Public and stakeholder engagement activities have identified a strong desire….
Yeah. It isn’t NVAC who has the “strong desire”, but, well, the organizations Kirby represents (and may be paying him).
Kirby then throws in some of his boilerplate: story ideas he wants others to do.
It isn’t even good spin anymore.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Yes, the MM is going on and on about why the media doesn’t notice their point of view. Recently, AgeOfAutism posted a whole list of media contact addresses, and exhorted the faithful to press for their point of view to be covered.
So, today on EoH a couple of members posted their idea of great letters to the media. Yes, sir, these letters will get them noticed all right. But not in a good way. Take a look at these:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EOHarm/message/96723
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EOHarm/message/96725
When it comes to anything written (or said) by Kirby, I find ‘bad’ is a redundant modifier.
Saying “Bad Kirby spin” is a bit like saying “Dead murder victim”.