Wakefield’s callous introduction

28 Oct

Below is a section of Andrew Wakefield’s book, “Callous Disregard”. This section is available as part of the free sample of the book. It is Mr. Wakefield’s semi-fictionalized account of a mother’s murder/suicide. A news account can be found here.

Another north-easterly wind insinuated its
futile energies between the massive brick
piers of Hounds Ghyll viaduct. Although the
wind endured, the earlier downpour had
turned to a light drizzle – light for County
Durham, in the far north of England – as
their journey came to an end.

As if for the first time, Mark seemed
attuned to his mother’s sense of purpose
and he offered no resistance. He did not
scream, or fight, or hit himself in the face;
he did not bite his scarred and scabby arms
or suddenly collapse to the ground as if
invisible guy-ropes could no longer hold
him. Instead, entranced by the raindrops
and in awe of the viaduct’s ordered
brickwork, he mouthed in silent wonder at
it all. At the midpoint of the viaduct she
turned to the north, the deep valley before
her – in places its walls sheer, glistening
black, cut by relentless waters that were
now barely visible in the fading light far,
far below. Mark looked up into his mother’s
face; beyond its years, alone, harassed,
pursued, and he understood her
unhappiness. He loved her, although he had
no way – no wiring – that allowed him to
express this.

With the aid of some old timbers she
helped him onto the parapet, her grip so
firm that it hurt them both. This was the
hardest part, the lichened stone wet and
perilous, her fear of heights. Standing there
at last, against the wind and against the
world, he looked at her and she at him.
“No,” she thought, “this is the hardest part.”
Without a word, without another thought
she stepped into oblivion, her most precious
possession taken with her, to rank in death
with Egyptian queens. They were not equal
to the wind and in one final effort it gusted
into them, threatening to smash the
waif-like Mark into the merciless viaduct.
She knew. She was ready. Falling ever faster,
she pulled him to her, love and instinct
keeping him safe.

At the time I read this I thought it could very well be entirely fiction. Not that I think that such a killing/suicide couldn’t happen. The recount, in my opinion, well, let’s just say that I sincerely hope that Mr. Wakefield never attempts to fictionalize my life or that of my family.

News accounts around the time of the event describe Ms. Rogan as a devoted mother who was growing increasingly afraid that she might lose her child. Not exactly the image presented above.

Other than a few facts, much of what happened on the viaduct is unknown. I can find no account of whether Mark had “scarred and scabby arms”. One description of him by a neighbor stated, ‘Mark was a beautiful little boy. To look at him, nobody would have known he was suffering any illness.’

What really stands out in Mr. Wakefield’s account, at least to me, is this phrase: “He loved her, although he had no way – no wiring – that allowed him to express this.”

I wonder how, after some 14 years working around autistic children, Mr. Wakefield could have written that. Not just in this case, where the police were quoted as describing the family as having “a very close and loving relationship between a mother and son”.

Detective Superintendent Harry Stephenson of Durham Constabulary said the force’s inquiries indicated “a very close and loving relationship between a mother and son”. He said: “This is an appalling tragedy and one that has been very traumatic to deal with even for some very experienced police officers. It would seem Miss Rogan was finding it difficult to cope with her personal circumstances but despite all that she seemed devoted to her son and prepared to do anything for him.

Beyond that news account, how could Mr. Wakefield write that a child had no wiring that allowed him to express his love for his mother? That sort of description is something to fight against, not something an “advocate” should be making.

Callous Disregard. Mr. Wakefield chose that title from one of the charges proven against him by the General Medical Council.

Advertisements

90 Responses to “Wakefield’s callous introduction”

  1. stanley seigler October 31, 2010 at 19:51 #

    FYI…probably aware…but in case not and if searching for the truth…

    Comment fr: Autism Spectrum Disorders Blog http://autism.about.com/b/2009/01/28/researchers-agree-on-autism-vaccine-connection.htm

    [clips]

    And I suspect that, if you were to poll serious scientists at research facilities and hospital, the vast majority would NOT support a connection. They would base their beliefs on a number of factors, not least of which are the many studies which seem to refute such a possibility…Could these “serious scientists” be wrong? Of course. But I think it’s premature to suggest that the autism-vaccine debate is over!

    […]

    You must think the only reason why people do research is because they believe they will find a causative link between two things. You are wrong. People do research to settle research questions. Even those who believe there is no link between vaccines and autism believe autism research should be done because that’s the only way to KNOW one way or the other whether one’s belief can be substantiated.

    [end clips]

    Comment fr: Vaccines, Autism and Brain Damage: What’s in a Name http://nwoandsecretsocieties.wordpress.com/2010/09/18/vaccines-autism-and-brain-damage-whats-in-a-name/

    [clip] The debate over any links between vaccines and autism – a behavior problem triggered by brain damage – couldn’t be more contentious. The great majority of medical opinion holds that vaccines don’t cause autism. However, many of the same experts don’t dispute that vaccines can, in rare instances, cause brain damage. [end clip]

    the question of course: vaccines can cause brain damage but not autism…also, may have missed it but dont believe wakefield was mentioned in either of the above references…perhaps the above blog/article are in some way connected to wakefield..

    Of course, course…it just came to me (getting old)…this thread is “wakefield’s callous introduction”…not “who gets the most ink, wakefield or BP”…apologies for spending so much ink off thread…hope there is some value in off subject posts…if not;

    LBRB owner can delete my posts…assume those responding to my post would also agree to delete their responses…or move all to a thread: “wakefield v. BP ink”.

    stanley seigler

    • Sullivan November 1, 2010 at 02:08 #

      stanley siegler,

      I appreciate your input, and your tenacity.

  2. daedalus2u November 1, 2010 at 19:47 #

    Stanley, autism is not characterized by brain damage. Brain damage can cause autism-like symptoms, but a great many people with autism have no detectable brain damage. By every test that can be done their brains appear perfectly normal. Different in some ways, but with no changes that could be characterized as “damage”.

    I appreciate that this is difficult if not impossible for many NTs to comprehend, that just because someone elicits in you the feelings that a person with autism does does not mean that they are “damaged”.

    It is difficult for many autism researchers to comprehend too. Most of them are NT and being only human they allow their human feelings, their NT derived human feelings to influence how they think. That NT-type thinking compels NTs to pathologize behaviors that are not neurotypical. This is normal behavior for NTs. It is difficult to overcome that normal human inclination to see someone different as “the other”, and to pathologize their otherness.

    If you look at the autism literature carefully, a great many researchers pathologize autism behaviors that are simply different. Even when those behaviors and neurological abilities are superior to NT abilities. How can a superior ability be a pathology? Don’t ask me, ask the people who pathologize superior abilities. How can damage to a brain cause it to have superior abilities? Don’t ask me, ask the people who look at people with some superior abilities and call them “damaged goods”.

  3. Prometheus November 1, 2010 at 23:26 #

    From what I see, it appears that Mr. Seigel seems to think that if we castigate Dr. Wakefield for his dishonesty, deceit and callous disregard for ethics, we are rendered incapable of attacking “Big Pharma” for its trespasses. I fail to see the connection between the two.

    A more realistic view might be that ‘blogging about Dr. Wakefield’s egregious betrayal of parents who trusted him, children who were entrusted to him and a scientific community that assumed his work was rigorous and ethical is entirely unrelated to whether or not “Big Pharma” has committed various and sundry offenses. Why would there be a need – real or perceived – for “balance” between these two unrelated topic?

    In fact, Dr. Wakefield’s offenses were committed – at least in part – because of his desire to make money on his “transfer factor” treatment for measles and autism. In a sense, criticism of Dr. Wakefield’s “callous disregard” is ciritcism of “Big Pharma” (or, at least, “Little Pharma”).

    Dr. Wakefield was not – as some of the “alternative” autism practitioners may be – selflessly trying to “help” autistic children. He was trying to find (or manufacture) a connection between autism and measles vaccine (having already failed at finding a connection between Crohn’s disease and measles vaccine) in order to make his patented treatment (transfer factor) worth a lot of money. Greed – just like the greed of “Big Pharma”, “Little Pharma” and “Intermediate Pharma” – was what was driving Dr. Wakefield, greed and a thirst for fame, glory and attention.

    You see, Mr. Seigel, greed and callous disregard for human lives isn’t restricted to “Big Pharma”.

    Prometheus

  4. stanley seigler November 2, 2010 at 01:09 #

    [prometheus say] we are rendered incapable of attacking “Big Pharma” for its trespasses. I fail to see the connection between the two…greed and callous disregard for human lives isn’t restricted to “Big Pharma”.

    whyohwhy does one pose things i never said then go on ad nauseam in disbelief that what i never said is not connected…sigh, kinda like arguing with themselves…a day in the red queens court…off with my head.

    i never said/implied anyone incapable nor greed restricted to BP.

    i said: “i do not believe VAXs cause autism…but i do not understand the anti-Wakefield crusade…it lets BP (big pharma) off the hook for many sins”…then;

    that i do not understand is orders of magnitude different than saying one is incapable and greed is restricted to BP.

    when brian deer explained, i said;

    “thanks for responding to my concerns vice coming out of left field beating (with too cute comments) a horse (VAXs cause autism, in the 5th) i am not riding…if what you [brian] say is true then wakefield is indeed evil and the crusade justified…i have not read enough to know the truth…so still question whether/not wakefield is twains “mysterious stranger”…more sure BP is controlled by “screwtape”.”

    stanley seigler

  5. stanley seigler November 2, 2010 at 03:47 #

    [d-2u say] Different in some ways, but with no changes that could be characterized as “damage”.

    ok “different” however…”The debate IS over any links between vaccines and autism – a behavior problem triggered by brain DIFFERENCE”…debate NOT over difference v damage semantics.

    i will not get into a semantics, off issue, discussion with you…and believe there is nothing to be gained discussing a possible connection with a true believer…ie, you state there is no connection except when monkey fly out of your ass…but;

    for the record; i do not believe my daughter (anyone on the spectrum) is damaged…probably before you were born i have though/said those with autism are a step up the evolutionary ladder…

    sad discussions with some on this list have made me rethink this…some are as closed mind, arrogrant and petty as us dumb-a normal folks.

    stanley seigler

  6. daedalus2u November 2, 2010 at 15:49 #

    Stanley, no, it is not “semantics”. Words have meanings and the meaning of “damaged” is very different than the meaning of the word “different”.

    “Damaged” implies “not as good” and implies that there needs to be transformative change before the person is “as good” as someone who is not “damaged”. The belief in a need for a transformative change, limits the solution space that curebies search in their efforts to reverse the “damage” and find the “cure” to “treatments” that are outside everyday experience and normal development. Curebies look to treatments such as chelation, Lupron, supplements, HBO, and all manner of quackery, rather than simply supplying more of what every child needs, love and affection.

    I do appreciate that some children with autism are difficult for some parents to love. I understand the physiology of that. I understand the physiology of why, when parents have such difficulty loving their autistic child it drives them to do desperate things and to externalize their desperation rather than own it as their own feeling.

    When parents have feelings of hatred for their autistic child, it is better for them and for their child to displace those feelings of hatred onto something else; Big Pharma, mercury, vaccines, witches, demons, autism, non-curebies, Paul Offit, Orac. Temporarily displacing those feelings onto a scapegoat while the person comes to terms with the actual sources of those feelings and deals with them without needing to scapegoat anything is what scapegoats are used for, and have been used for since antiquity. The human need to do that is why we have the term “scapegoat”. It is better still to understand where those feelings of hatred and desperation are coming from and to deal with them in ways that are constructive to all involved rather than destructive.

    Destroying the objects that the hatred has been displaced on will do nothing to help anyone with autism, or to help anyone. Scapegoats are only useful as a temporary crutch, and then only for the people who desperately need them.

  7. stanley seigler November 2, 2010 at 16:56 #

    [d-u2 say] “damaged” is very different than the meaning of the word “different”.

    not in the context of the issue of a possible link.

    d-u2, you never addressed my original issue (why LBRB devoted so time to wakefield)…instead you addressed monkeys flying out of your ass (cute)…now you change the issue from no VAX connect to semantics…now you change the issue to how parents feel.

    as said, see nothing to gain from a discussion with a true believer with monkey flying out of his ass…and i certainly dont need a lecture from you re my (any parent) feelings toward my beautiful daughter (any child)…the end.

    stanley seigler

  8. daedalus2u November 2, 2010 at 18:12 #

    Stanley, I am not an author of LBRB. I can’t address their choice of topics. When they post stuff that is not of interest to me I don’t read it or comment on it. If it were up to me, every post would be about nitric oxide. It is probably a good thing that it is not up to me 😉

    Blogging about Wakefield does have relevance to autism and children’s health in ways that blogging about Big Pharma does not. With no scientific evidence connecting autism and vaccines, there is very little to blog about. With people accepting Wakefield’s lies as truth, children are hurt by vaccine preventable diseases. Children have died due to measles after vaccination dropped due to Wakefield’s false shouting of “fire” in a hysterical crowd. In a just world Wakefield would be held accountable for those injuries and deaths.

    Your inability to learn from what you consider to be a “true believer” is about you. I can learn from “true believers” all the time. What I learn is that when their beliefs do not correspond with facts and logic, there must be something else behind them.

    Why do anti-vaxers hate Paul Offit, Steve Novella, David Gorski, and the others so much that they depict them as baby eating monsters? Knowing the facts of the situation that I do, there is no rational way that what those people have done is comparable to being a baby eating monster. That anti-vaxers feel that way tells me that there is a non-rational mechanism that has caused those feelings. Trying to understand that non-rational mechanism is something I have tried to do, and I think I have succeeded.

    I have written a blog which lays out a hypothesis about xenophobia which I think explains why irrational hatreds develop via normal human characteristics. It is easy to apply that to how people with autism are treated by NTs and why people with autism are such a target of bullying. It does explain why some parents of children with autism abuse and even kill them. My goal in writing and posting on that topic is for people to understand where those feelings come from so they can not abuse their children.

    I understand you hate Big Pharma. I also understand that you can’t provide any facts that explain that hatred. I don’t doubt that your hatred of Big Pharma is quite real. I don’t doubt that you feel that you have a rational explanation for that hatred. So far you have not articulated it. If you can articulate it, I would like to hear it. You don’t need to articulate the basis for your feelings, you are allowed to have any feelings that you want. But if you want anyone else to use your feelings as a basis for policy or action, you need to be able to explain them.

    I have read a great deal of autism, vaccines and mercury literature. I know there is no “smoking gun” of vaccines causing autism. The only way that the “vaccines cause autism” idea could be correct would be if the data in many hundreds of papers by many hundreds of authors spread out over many decades of time is completely wrong. The data in a few papers can be wrong, the analysis of data in a few tens of papers can be wrong, the conclusions of hundreds of papers can be wrong. The data in many hundreds of papers by many hundreds of different authors is extremely unlikely to all be wrong.

    I am prepared for the “vaccines cause autism” idea to be correct, but only on the basis of data. So far there is no data. There certainly isn’t any data that is sufficient to counter the data in the many hundreds of papers that I have personally read and personally analyzed that force me to conclude that there is no connection between vaccines, mercury and autism. There is certainly no data that gives a hint as to how the data in many hundreds of papers by many hundreds of authors over many decades could all be wrong in exactly the same way so as to falsely hide a vaccine and mercury connection with autism.

  9. stanley seigler November 2, 2010 at 22:58 #

    d-u2, you are “a legend in yo own mind”…and have more than monkeys flying out of your ass…eg, excuses for not addressing issues maybe…and moving the goal post…

    said previously the end…but hard to resist asinine, non issue, comments…eg;

    your comment: “children with autism are difficult for some parents to love”…absolutely nothing to do with possible VAX link to autism or time LBRB spends on wakefield…BTW;

    my daughter (non verbal, classic kanner autism) is not hard to love…she taught me the meaning of unconditional love, she is my reason for living…

    perhaps your woefully wrong esoteric bs opine of some parents and vilification of those who choose not to VAX…is based on yo personal experience…if so, pity.

    stanley seigler

  10. Anne November 3, 2010 at 05:52 #

    “USA courts proved OJ Simpson didn’t murder two people…they have also proved children on the spectrum are not autistic…thus do not qualify for state/fed support funding…”

    Not exactly, Stanley. The prosecution failed to prove that OJ Simpson murdered two people (though he is serving a 33 year prison term anyway on kidnapping and armed robbery convictions from that Las Vegas incident). Nobody proved that OJ didn’t murder anyone; they failed to prove that he did.

    Likewise, the claimants in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding failed to prove that the MMR vaccine or thimerosal-containing vaccines cause autism. Furthermore, scientific studies have failed to prove such causation. True, failure to prove a hypothesis doesn’t conclusively establish that it can never be true. But at some point, the failure of proof becomes sufficient to draw the conclusion that further attempts would be futile.

    I think Wakefield gets the ink because, in doing what he did – which was proved to be unethical – he targeted autistic children, subjected them to unnecessary invasive procedures, lied about his results, and used them for financial gain. Now he has written a book, in which he’s expressed his view that the murder of an autistic child was a loving act. It seems appropriate to me to complain about what Wakefield has published on an autism-related blog. This has nothing to do with Big Pharma, and in no way lets Big Pharma off the hook for anything as far as I can tell. Murdering a child is not a loving act, Big Pharma notwithstanding. That’s my opinion.

  11. stanley seigler November 3, 2010 at 07:00 #

    [anne say] That’s my opinion

    everybody has one…

    [anne say] Nobody proved that OJ didn’t murder anyone

    OJ found not guilty of murder by the legal system…in the eyes of the law he did not murder anyone …you semantically nit pick…anyway;

    point was/is courts, the state, the legal system, makes mistakes…

    [anne say] Likewise, the claimants in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding failed to prove that the MMR vaccine or thimerosal-containing vaccines cause autism.

    likewise the courts, the legal system makes mistakes…please i’am not saying they did…only one cant exclude the possibility.

    [anne say] I think Wakefield gets the ink because, in doing what he did – which was proved to be unethical

    tho not sure what was proved…thanks anne…finally someone (except brian deer, sullivan) responded to my concern re why LBRB’s anti-wakefield crusade…

    stanley seigler

  12. Julian Frost November 3, 2010 at 09:05 #

    Stanley:

    the legal system makes mistakes…please i’am not saying they did…only one cant exclude the possibility.

    Which is why we have Appeal Courts. May I remind you that the first three cases in the Omnibus Autism Proceedings (Cedillo, Hazelhurst and Snyder) were appealed in Federal Court and lost, and that the Hazelhursts and Cedillos then appealed to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, and lost again. Three different courts came to the same conclusion: MMR does not cause Autism. It may be possible that all three courts got it wrong, but I doubt it.

  13. lilandtedsmum November 3, 2010 at 09:27 #

    Stanley,

    This is an Autism blog. Why would you expect an Autism blog to discuss the short-comings of Big Pharma unless they were directly linked with autism in some way? As there has never been a proven link I’m not sure why you would expect to see it discussed here.

    There are terrible things being done all over the world all the time but I wouldn’t expect to see them discussed on LBRB unless they somehow were linked to Autism.

    Also, in my opinion the blog would lose all credibility if it started to look at the short-comings of “Big Pharma” because some of you have a hunch that it may be linked to Autism but are not really sure why…it’s just a feeling.

  14. Brian Deer November 3, 2010 at 10:03 #

    Far be it for me to be picky, but the OJ Simpson information is misleading.

    He was found not guilty against a criminal standard of proof, and later guilty against the civil standard of proof.

    Wakefield was found guilty against the criminal standard of proof, and MMR was found not guilty, even against a very much diluted standard of civil proof.

  15. stanley seigler November 3, 2010 at 18:52 #

    [brian deer say] Far be it for me to be picky, but the OJ Simpson information is misleading

    [Julian Frost say] It may be possible that all three courts got it wrong, but I doubt it.

    guess misleading if one is picky…and agree 3 courts probably didn’t get it wrong…butbutt ask the innocents on death row if the legal system makes mistakes…and

    based on limited experience [construction claims and watching Boston Legal:)]…lawyers are not searching for truth but in twisting/hiding facts to win.

    probably shouldn’t have brought up OJ…as my original comment had nothing to do with the courts, i said: “i didn’t understand the LBRB anti-wakefield crusade”…

    still not sure why except that perhaps some posters believe wakefield is the “mysterious stranger”…but no one said i should understan and we are close to beating a dead horse..

    [lilandtedsmum say] my opinion the blog would lose all credibility if it started to look at the short-comings of “Big Pharma” because some of you have a hunch that it may be linked to Autism but are not really sure why…it’s just a feeling.

    my feeling is LBRB may lose some creditability if it appears, to some, to be a shill for BP…on my part has nothing to do with a hunch…but guess as the “some” are delusional parents it doesn’t matter.

    [lilandtedsmum say] …the short-comings [should not be discussed] of Big Pharma unless they were directly linked with autism in some way

    BP is in many ways linked to autism…probable not as the cause…but they do harm pushing psychotropic drugs…and they removed (are phasing it out, not in all countries) Hg even tho they said it was not harmful…and it dont rain in indianapolis…

    it was mentioned i hate BP…as with many statements made…so one could argue with one’s self…nothing could be further from fact…i just recognize corporate (BP-etal) mentality puts profits before the common good…and bare responsibility for much mis-information. and harm…

    stanley seigler

    ps. please dont explain to me that LBRB is not a BP shill…i know this…

  16. Chris November 3, 2010 at 19:36 #

    How does this blog shill for Big Pharma?

    Does bringing up Wakefield’s lack of credibility, that he was going to market Transfer Factor and has absolutely no understanding of autism a type of shilling for “Big Pharma”?

    Your comments are very close to the Pharma Shill Gambit. An old tired and completely boring argument. How about something new and refreshing, perhaps with an actual point? And make it very novel and interesting by supporting it with actual data and evidence.

  17. Julian Frost November 3, 2010 at 20:05 #

    Stanley,
    The reason that we “go after” Wakefield is because of the damage he has done. He fabricated the data linking MMR to Autism. The result is that a great deal of research was done into the link. All research costs money. We’re angry that money was wasted studying a bogus link; money which could have funded other autism research.
    I hope this answers your concern.

    • Sullivan November 3, 2010 at 20:47 #

      I would add,

      I do not “go after” Andrew Wakefield. I respond to his misinformation.

      I also don’t plan on spending the rest of my blogging career on Andrew Wakefield. He’s an embarrassment. That isn’t really news anymore.

  18. stanley seigler November 4, 2010 at 02:03 #

    [sullivan say] He’s an embarrassment. That isn’t really news anymore.

    and this is why i didnt/dont understand all the LBRB ink and on my simple comment “i didnt understand”…

    stanley seigler

  19. Roger Kulp November 4, 2010 at 05:13 #

    Julian,to that add Wakefield is the man who single handedly created the whole “vaccines cause autism” fabrication,and the antivaccine movement as we know it today out of whole cloth.It’s very likely if “Saint Andrew” Wakefield never had never published his bogus study in the first place,Generation Rescue,Age of Autism,JABS,and the rest would not exist,and parents would not have wasted millions of dollars/pounds,euros,etc subjecting their children to all sorts of worthless “treatments”.

    Not to mention any and all outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases.Wakefield may go down in history as one of the greatest threats to public health and well being the world has ever seen.

    Not to mention a false messiah,and a cult leader.

  20. Chris November 4, 2010 at 09:19 #

    Mr. Seigler:

    and this is why i didnt/dont understand all the LBRB ink and on my simple comment “i didnt understand”…

    It might help if you actually read an recommended book. You should be able to find it in your local library.

  21. Theo November 4, 2010 at 14:36 #

    Truly I find myself disregarding anything the mercury militia says at this point. When I first heard of the so called link, I did what they so heavily tell us to do. I researched! I held the DSM IV criteria for an autism diagnoses up next to the symptoms of mercury poisoning. I saw NOTHING that convinced me there was any link while doing this.

    In fact, it seemed to me they were so unlike one another that I couldn’t understand how so many starting blaming mercury posioning in the first place! Now I am not above saying that there are probably indeed enviormental factors. Isn’t there always? But to me it seems more likely that it is a mixture of genetics, brain wiring, and enviorment married together that is the cause.

    And with how drastic the differences can be from one end of the spectrum to the other, how much of the three things mentioned together and in what ways it changes our brain wiring is probably what impacts where we land on the spectrum. Though I happen to have this idea that all of us are on the spectrum somewhere. 😛 In fact when I catch my mom repeating something over and over outloud, or starting at the tv for an hour, I tell she is having an Aspie moment! 😛 To enjoy it, it’s healthy and good for her! 😀

    Anybody ever watch NTs and see them have thier own moments of autism-like behaviors? I kind of find it fun. And find it’s a great teaching tool, a way of saying we are far more alike than we are different. People like Wakefield focus some much on the differences, and the negative ones at that, that they devide us. People like him turn me into my diagnoses, an inanimate object, if you will, instead of a human being with my own thoughts, my own feelings, and my own way of approaching the world.

    People like him insist my brain is damaged. After being tested a few years ago for epilepsy (my dad had it and since I was young I had times where I could spend several hours being absolutely still and stare out without blinking)I got back scanned images of my brain. There was no brain damage there! It was unique in ways, but no damage. I sometimes wonder if he shouldn’t get tested for brain damage!! I tell people like him all the time that I have more issues as a result of working through having Post Traumatic Stress then I EVER had with simply being on the spectrum.

    Then again I have been told that the PTSD is also a result of mercury poisoning…..

    Sometimes I don’t know whether to laugh, cry, or pull out the ever present book in my purse and start reading and pretend I didn’t hear anything!

    Alright, this Aspie is done rambling for the moment.

  22. kapoore February 7, 2011 at 04:24 #

    Wakefield is a great hero to those of us who have children who have suffered from vaccine injuries. My daughter at 4 years old lost her coordination, regressed in her speach, and couldn’t hold a pencil in her hand after her MMR. She was constantly sick. At one time she had been the most coordinated baby in her Mommy and me class. Now she would never be able to jump rope. For many years she struggled in school. Sometimes I was her only friend because everyone rejected her. Wakefield entitles his book Callous Disregard because this is the treatment that vaccine injuried people and their parents receive. Finally, I met a psychiatrist who was willing to experiment with different drugs on my daughter. She gave her valtrex (a common anti-viral drug for herpes) and within three days my daughter brightened and even started drawing these amazing pictures. I won’t go into all the details of the many cycles of recovery and relapse I’ve been through with her. I am utterly convinced she has brain inflammation –a condition that is barely recognized by the medical establishement. Finally at 28 she got a diagnosis as a celiac and off wheat for two years she seems remarkably better. She will never as long as she lives have another vaccine, nor will I, nor will my husband, and now I only have to convince our son. We’re convinced they are toxic.

  23. Prometheus February 7, 2011 at 05:19 #

    Kapoore comments:

    “Wakefield is a great hero to those of us who have children who have suffered from vaccine injuries.”

    My condolences. Your hero appears to be a fraud.

    “Finally, I met a psychiatrist who was willing to experiment with different drugs on my daughter. She gave her valtrex (a common anti-viral drug for herpes) and within three days my daughter brightened and even started drawing these amazing pictures.”

    Are you aware that the MMR vaccine has three live viruses in it and none of them are herpes viruses? In fact, all of them are RNA viruses, so valcyclovir (Valtrex) won’t have any effect on them. Valcyclovir inhibits the herpes virus thymidine kinase, which is more sensitive than the human thymidine kinase. In the absence of a herpes virus infection, all valcyclovir can do is cause side effects.

    “Finally at 28 she got a diagnosis as a celiac and off wheat for two years she seems remarkably better.”

    Not even Andy Wakefield is claiming that the MMR vaccine causes coeliac disease, so this seems a bit of a stretch for “vaccine injured”. What seems more likely is that your daughter experienced the onset of her coeliac disease at age four and had more behavioral symptoms than GI symptoms (a sub-type only recently recognised).

    This is a perfect cautionary tale for parents – if the diagnosis doesn’t seem to fit (or if the “usual” treatments aren’t working), get a second, third or fourth opinion. My experience has been that some physicians (and a lot of “alternative” practitioners) are too quick to dismiss signs and symptoms that don’t fit their diagnosis and will tend to pass them off as “behavioral” (especially if the diagnosis is “autism”).

    It is particularly ironic that a person whose “hero” is Andy Wakefield later finds out that their child’s problem was not “vaccine injury” but was coeliac disease (a GI disorder that is relatively easy to test for).

    Prometheus

  24. sharon February 7, 2011 at 05:20 #

    @ kapoore, you are happy to give your child pharmaceutical drugs, but not vaccines? That seems a bit odd to me. AS does your description of recovery and relapse. I wonder if there was an actual ‘relapse’ as you put it, then how was there any recovery? Perhaps what you are experiencing are cycles of development? My son can have developmental bursts, in language for example, when his echolalia tends to fade for a short while then it returns again in full force. I dont see that he was recovered, simply undergoing a deveopmental process.

    AS for Wakefield being a hero? I wonder what you thought you might achieve by coming here to make that claim? I am genuinely curious.

  25. this contact form December 17, 2015 at 14:42 #

    Gone are the days of one way marketing or merely just posting comments about your
    site or other related topics. Improving Site Structure – This second
    part tells you how to properly structure URLs.
    I am hoping to show you that I can help you achieve top rankings in the sites like I have for all my other clients.
    In this way, it is informed about the kind of information that a surfer is looking for.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Harpocrates Speaks: CBS Sympathizes with Murderers - January 2, 2014

    […] Wakefield, is actually trying to help those with disabilities, here's an excerpt from his book, Callous Disregard: Another north-easterly wind insinuated its futile energies between the massive brick piers of […]

  2. Movie review: Who Killed Alex Spourdalakis | Left Brain Right Brain - February 12, 2015

    […] and documentary videographers. We are also talking about Andrew Wakefield, who in the introduction to one of his books glorified a murder-suicide involving an autistic and his […]

  3. Was the murder of Dustin Hicks committed by a biomed mom? | Left Brain Right Brain - November 10, 2015

    […] Wakefield has been at the forefront of the vaccines-cause-autism movement for about 20 years now. He introduced one of his first books with a glorification of a murder/suicide. He gives a fictionalized account of a real incident in which a mother jumped to her death, taking […]

  4. Polly Tommey won’t judge parents who murder their disabled children. That’s part of the problem | Left Brain Right Brain - July 13, 2016

    […] The speaker is Polly Tommey. Polly Tommey has a long history of bad autism advocacy. When people think of the autism parents who just do advocacy wrong, they are thinking of people like Polly Tommey. She’s been a voice in the “vaccines-cause-autism” movement for a long time. She’s worked with Andrew Wakefield (whose unethical actions in relation to disabled patients at his hospital lost him his medical license. To name one of his many failures). This in itself demonstrates bad judgement and poor reasoning. Recall that Andrew Wakfield fictionalized an account of a parent murdering her autistic child, framing it as an …. […]

  5. Emerging evidence indicates that children with disabilities in general and with autism in particular are frequent victims of murder-suicide | Left Brain Right Brain - August 22, 2016

    […] In the past I have also criticized Ms. Tommey’s colleague Andrew Wakefield. He has not just downplayed murder, but has portrayed the murder of autistics by parents as an act of love. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: