As Orac has announced I’m next up for hosting the Circle on the 26th October. I’ve started to receive submissions already and if anyone else fancies submitting their best skeptical blogging then please mail me.
Archive by Author
Mark Geier, David Geier and the VSD
10 OctIntroduction
One of the many anecdotal lynch pins of the Mercury Militia is the fabled story of what happened when the Geier’s attempted to study the VSD database.
Please bear in mind that to the Militia this story carries a *lot* of weight. It is one of the few supporting crutches left under the hypothesis that since thiomersal was removed from vaccines autism cases have gone down. Educational data has failed them. CDDS data has failed them. The Geier’s paper using VAERS (a non starter if they’d only thought about it) was so bad it couldn’t be published in a proper science journal and so this VSD story is all that’s left.
This story is enshrined in the hallowed pages of Evidence of Harm although the source of the story is unclear. Here’s the Militia version.
What The Geier’s Said
The VSD is the Vaccine Safety Database. This database carries raw data related to vaccine safety. The Geier’s were allowed access to this data, together with their computer expert Vale Kernik who would run the statistical programming tool in the SAS language that the CDC’s VSD uses. SAS is a widely used solution for statistical analysis.
The VSD’s Wikipedia page says that:
Only two outside researchers, Mark Geier and David Geier, have thus far gained access to the raw data. They faced formidable obstacles before being allowed into the CDC computer center, and then resistance from staff and software malfunctions once inside. Nevertheless, they reportedly found highly elevated risks for autism among children in the highest mercury exposure group. The Geiers study on the VSD, “A two-phased population epidemiological study of the safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines: a follow-up analysis” was published in the Medical Science Monitor in 2004 volume 11(4):CR160-CR170.
NB: This page has been edited by a member of the Geier household – against Wikipedia recommendations.
Evidence of Harm (the Kirby book) deals with the same event:
In late July the CDC informed the Geiers that the requested data set had been assembled. After paying a processing fee of $3,200, the Geiers were given two dates in August to come and run their studies. But there was another entirely unexpected wrinkle. Just two days before their appointment, a CDC technician called to make sure they were fluent in the programming language SAS, which is used in the VSD database. The Geiers had never heard of it before. “You must not be epidemiologists,” the technician said, “They all speak SAS.” If that were true it was news to the Geiers……Reluctantly they cancelled the appointment. It took two weeks to find someone who could run SAS…..They got new dates in October 2003… the dad, Vale Krenik, flew in from Texas. The were met by a woman who introduced herself and said she would be their “monitor
Evidence of Harm, p280 – 282.
And then things got very surreal. Their ‘expert’ programmer (who apparently taught himself SAS in two weeks) was stymied by the most dreaded sights for programmers – a command line interface.
How on earth can this be happening?” Mark muttered shaking his head, “Once again they got us.” Silence filled the room. There would be no number crunching today. The men stared at the screen.
Sorry. I’m being facetious. Any ‘expert’ who can’t work in a command line at even a very basic level is _not_ an expert.
The weirdness continued when the CDC monitor who was due to accompany the fearless trio for the duration of their stay popped her head out the door, looked both ways, came back into the room and:
She sat down and took a deep breath. “Don’t tell anyone this,” she said in a low voice, “But I can help you.”….I’m telling you, they know,” she said conspiratorially. “There’s a big problem”…..”The autism numbers are going down,” she said, “We are watching them drop.”
This mystery CDC monitor became known as ‘Mrs Toast’. Over on the EoH Yahoo Group, it was discussed why:
There is a woman who I refer to as Mrs. Toast. She is a CDC staffer who was responsible for monitoring the Geiers when they were instructed to visit the Vaccine Safety Datalink by Congress. When she saw the Geiers datasets, she walked out into the hallway, looked both ways, and came back into the room shutting the door behind her.
The Geiers thought they had epi-evidence. Mrs. Toast told them to look at hers. She told them she was responsible for running weekly autism datasets. She was instructed to run datasets on HMO vaccination adverse outcomes to see what effect removing thimerosal from vaccines was having on the epidemic. She had an affected child and made sure that the Geiers understood that the rates were dropping each and every week.
Author David Kirby had an interview set up, flew down to Atlanta, was in a car on the way to CDC to talk to her, but CDC had found out and they were threatening for end her career if she spoke to him.
When Congressman Dave Weldon found out about her not willing to blow the whistle on CDC’s cover-up he said, “THIS WOMAN IS TOAST!” Which is were I gave her the formal name of Mrs. Toast.
Hilarious right? Mrs Toast.
And so, off trudge the Geier’s with their expert (the one unable to operate DOS). _Imagine_ their surprise when they get a letter from the CDC that said:
1) The Geier’s had violated the terms of their IRB
2) They asked how to merge datasets in a contradiction of the agreed terms of use of the data
3) They were told they couldn’t and yet they tried to anyway
4) If they had managed to merge the datasets they would have increased the risk of a breach of confidentiality.
5) The research team had attempted to rename data files to make them look like part of the SAS program (by changing the file extension to ‘.sas’)
As a result of this, the Geier’s IRB (Kasier) suspended them from undertaking any more data collection at the VSD.
The Geier’s responded by hotly denying these allegations. They first state that they didn’t violate the protocol but as Kathleen says in her exhaustive look at their reply:
The Geiers here claim to have followed the design of their research protocol, yet simultaneously acknowledge that they were attempting to conduct analyses of information not encompassed by it.
More amusingly, on page two of their reply the Geier’s state:
It is impossible for the datasets given to us by CDC to be merged
And then on page three of the same letter state:
What we were attempting to accomplish was to merge the datasets given to us by CDC to build a record…
And so the situation is now that the Geier’s pet ‘expert’ couldn’t figure out SAS, they had no meaningful results and what they did have was gained under extreme deception to the point their IRB approval was suspended.
And so, they decided to go ahead and publish anyway (well, you would, wouldn’t you?) and thus A two-phased population epidemiological study of the safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines: a follow-up analysis was born in 2005 (hereafter referred to as G05).
Geier, Geier, pants on fire?
G05 made reference to the VSD data that the Geier’s couldn’t collect/collected part of/pick your belief. In this respect it was similar to a paper written by ex-CDC staff member Dr. Thomas Verstraeten which _also_ used VSD data to look at thiomersal and autism in 2000. This paper (hereafter referred to as V00) found a statistically significant correlation between thiomersal and developmental disorders.
Oh no!!!! Doesn’t this back up the Geier’s et al?
Well, it _might_ except that as Verstraeten himself states in a letter to Paediatrics:
The CDC screening study of thimerosal-containing vaccines was perceived at first as a positive study that found an association between thimerosal and some neurodevelopmental outcomes. This was the perception both independent scientists and antivaccine lobbyists had at the conclusion of the first phase of the study. It was foreseen from the very start that any positive outcome would lead to a second phase. The validity of the first-phase results needed urgent validation in view of the large potential public health impact. Did the CDC purposefully select a second phase that would contradict the first phase? Certainly not. The push to urgently perform the second phase at health maintenance organization C came entirely from myself, because I felt that *the first-phase results were too prone to potential biases* to be the basis for important public health decisions.
Because *the findings of the first phase were not replicated in the second phase*, the perception of the study changed from a positive to a neutral study. Surprisingly, however, the study is being interpreted now as negative by many, including the antivaccine lobbyists.
So, in short, the first phase of the study using a small sample size indicated there might be an issue. When the second phase was undertaken with a larger sample size, the issue disappeared. Not uncommon in the slightest. Its standard practice to conduct a small, pilot study to see if there’s any issue to study further before committing large amounts of public money to a full scale study.
But I digress – back to the Geier’s.
They knew about the V00 paper – of course they did, it would be hard not to – and as they wrote G05 then they looked at it again. Remember that the Geier’s had struggled at the CDC VSD headquarters.
As Kathleen once again unearthed, the Geier’s – with a lack of VSD data at their disposal wrote their paper. It had some odd elements to it. Here’s a table of stats from the V00 pilot study:
And here’s a table of stats from G05:
Take a look at the numbers. Aside from one category they’re identical. Further the V00 paper states:
The final number of children thus included in our cohort was 109,993.
And G05 states:
The final number of children thus included in the cohort examined was 109,993
Woah! Spooky! By some miraculous, completely bizarre accidental coincidence, the Geier’s – who had little to no data from their visit to the VSD – have the _exact same cohort numbers and divisional figures_ as a paper written 5 years earlier resulting from a pilot study that showed a now debunked association!! What are the odds of _that_ ? I wish I knew a betting man who could tell me!
And maybe my betting amigo could tell me the odds of those same two papers having over ten more virtually identical passages and/or tables of figures? Maybe the Geier’s should drop the litigation gigs and move to Vegas and live on the strip.
A Different Interpretation
So here’s what _I_ think happened. Just conjecture but persuasive I think.
First of all, this odd SAS programming language. The CDC think its common amongst stat-fans. The Geier’s say its really really rare. Google says there are over four and a half million web related resources for SAS programming. That doesn’t sound pretty rare to me.
A leading SAS expert says:
Millions of people around the world in business, science, government, and education use SAS software to work with data. SAS software runs on many operating systems, including Microsoft Windows, UNIX, OS/2, Mac, MVS, and VMS. Most features of SAS software operate the same way in these different operating systems.
Still not sounding rare. In fact its one of the few apps that runs on Win, Mac and Unix. Not a good indicator of rarity.
And as for how quickly their ‘expert’ was defeated by SAS, SAS author Rick Astor states:
Fortunately, SAS programming is not that hard to learn.
Unless of course you’re a computer expert terrified of command lines. Vale Krenik is quoted and described on this page. His job (and former jobs) is described as:
Business Manager, Strategic Supplier Manager, Global Telecom Manager
It’s true that one of these roles has a techy requirement but absolutely _none_ can be swapped with the title ‘programmer’ or ‘expert’.
I think that the Geier’s needed someone who knew computers and settled on Krenik. When it came to it, Krenik didn’t know what the hell to do with SAS. If you’re reading this Mr Krenik, the three lines of code you need to merge datasets in SAS are available. I think they panicked and tried to grab as much data as they could in a brute force attack and then change the data files appearance to try and make them look like SAS files by renaming them with a ‘.sas’ extension.
I further think that the whole Mrs Toast episode is entirely fictitious. It even reads like a bad John Grisham novel. Bloch states that Kirby had an interview set up with the nameless Mrs Toast and that she cancelled at the last minute. Frankly, I don’t believe a word of it. I wonder who set up and then cancelled this meeting? One of the Geier’s by any chance? Does anybody know?
And then there’s the magically duplicated data. The Geier’s realised their VSD data landgrab had failed utterly and so they copied the data (and hence conclusions) from the V00 paper.
I don’t believe the Geier’s have ever seen VSD data. I don’t believe ‘Mrs Toast’ exists.
Our thanks and appreciation should go to Kathleen for the painstaking research she has assembled on the Geier’s. I know mine do.
DAN! – On a mission from God
9 OctThe Exorcist
Back in 2004, a self ordained minister (well, technically he was ordained by his brother but seeing as the ordination happened at a ‘storefront church’ I’m going to go ahead and call it a load of old twaddle anyway) killed an eight year old autistic boy, Terrance Cottrell Jr, and was convicted of:
felony physical abuse of a child causing great bodily harm
The ‘minister’ was attempting an exorcism…:
..to remove “evil spirits” of autism from Cottrell. Hemphill, who weighed 157 pounds, described how he would sit or lay on “Junior’s” chest for up to two hours at a time, whispering into the boy’s ear for the “demons” to leave his body.
This ‘man of god’ decided to appeal (de rigeur these days for those who have no sense of personal responsibility) and in August this year, his appeal was happily quashed.
I’ve written before about this story but I’m bringing it up again as I was notified about something pretty incredible – at least to me.
Jeff Bradstreet – Man of God
Dr Jeff Bradstreet is two thing. The fist thing he is, is a DAN! doctor. The second thing he is, is an expert witness in the Autism Omnibus case to be held next year.
But in fact, Jeff Bradstreet is _three_ things. Just like that compassionate driver of autism demons Ray Anthony Hemphill of the above tragedy, Jeff Bradstreet is a keen advocate of Exorcism as a treatment for autism.
No, I’m not kidding. Here’s an email message from Holly Bortfield of a pro-chelation group ‘Autism Recovery Network’ made to the Yahooo Autism Biomedical Discussion (ABMD) group in Feb 2005, the group is not open to the public so you can’t read the original unless you sign up (if you do its message 49660) but I’ve linked to a screenshot of her message:
You certainly have a right to the opinion that Jeff [Bradstreet] is the diety himself, but as a former patient and friend to a number of former patients, I can assure you not everyone holds him in such high regard. If you’d like to check out list archives from 1998 and 1999 I bet you will find the discussions of his exorcism referrals (I kid you not)…
When someone on the list suggested the word ‘exorcism’ was too strong, Bortfield replied (message: 49764):
Honey, that was his word not mine. I can think of a dozen people he told to have their kid exorcised
And poster Larry Leichtman chimed in with:
Actually, I heard that from him myself. He is a true believer in the devil and exorcism.
And not only does DAN! offer exorcism, it seems the National Autism Association heartily endorse it, as this message (49765) from Jo Pike of the NAA in reply shows:
Well may[be] its working LOL! I’ve talked to so many parents who have told me their children are improving dramatically and they all give credit to their office. Bottom line is the outcome and it seems they’re helping a lot of families.
And Ricci, the owner and list-moderator for the ABMD board also voiced concern in a long list of troubling DAN! traits. Its too long to quote here (screenshot here, but the lsit included DAN! practitioners who:
1) Have had their licenses suspended for overbilling insurance companies
2) Have had their licenses suspended for substance abuse
3) Have pushed MLM (multi level marketing/pyramid schemes – outlawed in the UK I believe) and lied about their involvement.
4) Received their degrees from a diploma mill in a strip mall
5) Have treated children for conditions they didn’t have and ignored conditions they clearly did have
6) Charged outrageous fees (Ricci quotes $300 for a bottle of Japanese secretin one can buy onesself for $5)
*7) Have performed exorcism on their own autistic children and recommended others to do the same*
Frankly, this is a little more than disturbing. Its crazy. Here’s Jeff Bradstreet – who the Autism Omnibus lawyers are putting forward as an _expert witness_ recommending exorcism as a viable treatment for autistic kids.
How is this man still a DAN! Doctor? Are there really people out there who are happy about this person ‘treating’ their kids? Is the American legal system seriously going to make itself into a laughing stock by admitting this man as a viable expert witness?
Site Housekeeping
8 OctA bit more site news on a general scale.
Firstly, concerning the Hub, following consultation with my fellow Hub members the strapline has now been changed. It was felt the old one (we don’t need no stinkin’ cure) whilst nice and pithy and punchy wasn’t really representative of _all_ of the ideas, beliefs and concepts the Hub membership had so a new one, written mainly by Dad of Cameron, has taken its place. It reads:
Autism Hub promotes diversity and human rights, with ethics and reality as the core guiding principles; aspects include empowerment/advocacy, acceptance, and a positive outlook.
which is much more comprehensive.
Secondly, I’ve made two changes to this site. The first change is the new ‘media’ page which I’ll use to collect interviews/articles etc as they happen.
The second change I need some help with. Your help Constant Reader.
I’ve introduced a wiki (see link in main navigation section at top of page) which will be used to collect, collate, explain and centralise a lot of the issues surrounding autism from both an anti-quackery standpoint and an advocacy standpoint.
Myself and a few others have made a start in bringing this material together but the more people we have contributing, the faster this project builds. Anyone who’s interested in exposing quackery relating to autism or interested in advocacy for autistic people to lead the autism community should please email me for details of how to edit the Wiki.
Crumbling science
3 OctKrigsman, Wakefield Error Highlighted
A study this month in Paediatrics tackles head-on the ‘science’ that is still yet to be published (a number of years later) by Arthur Krigsman in which he claims that he has found evidence of persistent measles virus in autistic kids and thus backing up the work of his business partner Andrew Wakefield.
In layman’s terms what this study did was replicate the result of Krigsman et al and then eliminate the poor science that led Krigsman to his erroneous conclusions. Of the samples that still showed as positive, no trace of MV was found.
The real-time assays based on previously published primers gave rise to a large number of positive reactions in both autism spectrum disorder and control samples. Almost all of the positive reactions in these assays were eliminated by evaluation of melting curves and amplicon band size. The amplicons for the remaining positive reactions were cloned and sequenced. No sample from either autism spectrum disorder or control groups was found to contain nucleic acids from any measles virus gene. In the nested polymerase chain reaction and inhouse assays, none of the samples yielded positive results. Furthermore, there was no difference in anti-measles antibody titers between the autism and control groups
Now thats pretty hardcore science language. I’ve emailed the authors to see if they are willing to explain (and be quoted) on an English translation of the above but in essence, the facts are as I state them above. Krigsman et al (and Wakefield before him?) failed to eliminate false positives and counted them as part of his result set. When these false positives are eliminated then the samples left contain no MV.
I’m hoping that Bart Cubbins, No Mercury, Maria, Ms Clarke et al (who are wise in the ways of this terminology) might offer more input into the meaning of the exact phraseology used and as I say, I’ve mailed the authors for clarification too. In the meantime – Krigsman’s (unpublished) work is now pretty much refuted (by published work).
Daubert’s Revenge – Martha Herbert
As reported by Autism Diva, Dr Martha Herbert has now reached the dizzy heights Boyd Haley and Mark Geier have scaled in having her ‘expert testimony’ found severely wanting following a Daubert hearing.
Herbert basically claimed that a childs autism (diagnosed by her following a differential diagnosis) was caused by mold. Yes, mold. However, upon being cross-examined:
When asked whether there is ‘any evidence that mold is a trigger [for autism],’ Dr. Herbert responded by referring to research regarding brain inflammation and immunological abnormalities in autism. Asked about research showing that ‘any of the mold or any of the mildew or any of those other things also cause brain inflammation,’ she responded ‘that’s a hole in my knowledge. In terms of autism, I don’t believe that’s been done.’
Right. Well, thank goodness she’s so rigorous. Wouldn’t want to just make assumptions right? That would just be a waste of everyone’s time right?
In another classic piece of thinking Herbert goes on to say:
Dr. Herbert commented, ‘she doesn’t have any of the known genetic syndromes, or known in-utero infections. I personally consider it symptomatic, but not in the established set of categories, in that I hope that when more research is done she’ll move in the symptomatic category.’
In other words she doesn’t know what caused the childs autism (gasp!) but that it doesn’t fit any known profile but that maybe some research at some unspecified point in the future might help categorise it (whatever ‘it’ is).
Oh, it gets better.
Dr. Herbert was asked, ‘[c]an you say to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that if Emilia Ward had been in a sterile environment, she would not suffer from autism” She responded, ‘My guess would be, yes, that she probably would not.’ The basis for that ‘guess,’ she testified, was ‘her having regressed after the mold exposure and that she gets worse with exposures.’
Wait… _guess_ – her _guess_ ? Well surely she meant ‘informed opinion’, or ‘scientific judgement based on the evidence to hand’…..except there _is_no evidence to hand:
In response to questions she acknowledged that she has never done any research on mold or mildew as an environmental toxin, and is not aware of any published peer review articles that link mold and mildew exposure to autism.
And so it is no great shock to find the court saying:
Dr. Herbert’s publications indicate that she is an outspoken advocate of increased attention to the possibility of environmental influences. Even she, however, despite that acknowledged perspective, speaks in her published work of possibilities and potentialities, rather than of the ‘reasonable degree of medical certainty’ to which she offers to testify under oath in this case.10 Neither Dr. Herbert’s publications, nor any others cited, identify mold exposure as even a suspected, still less a known or proven, trigger of autism……Dr. Herbert’s method, to the extent the Court can discern it from the materials offered, is a series of deductions based on possibilities…..*Clearly, Dr. Herbert’s method is not generally accepted in the scientific community*. Dr. Herbert’s theory of environmental triggers of autism may some day prove true. It has not yet. *Her proffered testimony does not meet the standard of reliability required by the case law*, and cannot be admitted in evidence at trial.
FDA Spanks Mercury Milita
Back in 2004, Dr Paul King of dr-king.com, uh, fame, submitted a ‘citizen petition’ to the FDA requesting:
[The FDA]…take numerous actions pertaining to vaccines and other FDA-regulated products containing thimerosal or other mercury-based preservatives….After review and consideration, we deny the petition for the reasons stated below in this response.
The response is very detailed (the whole thing is available at Kathleen’s site) but can be summed up in one quote:
The evidence on which your petition relies either does not support your requests, or is too flawed to be considered valid scientific evidence.
Which seems to be something of a growing refrain for the mercury (and apparently mold!) militia.
Damn science with its rigorous pursuit of accuracy eh? If only we could rely on opinions and guesses.
Open letter to Raun Kaufman of Son-Rise
30 SepI read your press release today Mr Kaufman and I just wanted to pass on a few thoughts to you. Your PR piece for an upcoming tour of my country begins with:
Parents of autistic children around the world face daily prognoses of hopelessness. Recent media stories highlight this: In April this year, Alison Davies, 40, leapt to her death from the Humber Bridge in northern England, taking her 12-year-old autistic son, Ryan, with her. In the U.S., Karen McCarron, 37, killed her three-year-old autistic daughter, Katherine, by placing a plastic bag over her head and then tried to overdose on over-the-counter medication a day later. She faces two charges of first-degree murder.
Every day around the world, parents like these are told that their children will never speak, attend a typical school, make friends, or even learn to dress themselves. Raun K. Kaufman tells parents something very different. He offers hope, help, and a concrete blueprint to reach “unreachable†children.
I am sickened and angry at your attempt to ‘justify’ two murders by passing them off as the end product of some alleged hopelessness. Ryan and Katie were murdered. Nothing – I repeat, _nothing_ – can justify that or make it understandable and your attempts to coerce emotional empathy from people by using their murders in so baseless a way is an appalling and reprehensible act of moral cowardice and cynical emotional blackmail. Your message seems to me to be clear: come hear me speak or you’ll end up killing your kids.
I’ve had the honour to become close with Katie’s Grandad and I would like to speak from the position of adopted family: this is not appreciated, wanted or deserved. After Katie was killed, Mike contacted Stephen Drake to let him have some photos of Katie. The terms of their use was made clear:
They do not wish for the photos to be used in any way suggesting Katie’s death is associated with a “problem” arising from a lack of services, or a symptom of “desperation” felt by other families. Using Katie’s picture in these ways would only be an insult to her memory and cause more pain to an already grieving family.
Whilst you stopped short of usurping photographs of Katie, you did the next worst thing and usurped the memory her family have. What gave you this right other than the ‘right’ you took upon yourself to emotionally blackmail parents?
You owe the family an apology Mr Kaufman. I hope you can make it sound as sincere as your pious whining about hopelessness.
Grandmas
29 SepI spoke recently about Grandad’s and how Nat’s Grandad, Katie’s Grandad and Megan’s Grandad all helped their kids and their grandkids just through being there and accepting. Grandads bring calm and perspective.
What about Grandmas?
Its no exaggeration to say that without Naomi’s mum we would’ve been sunk a long time ago. In so many ways she has helped us and therefore helped Meg. She was calm when we were stressed. She brought food when our freezer broke, she used to pick me up from work sometimes. She comes over at least two or three times a week to help Naomi educate Meg and look after Tabby. All day. Not just for an hour or so.
Whenever she goes shopping she buys presents for the girls. Just a little something so that they know she’s thinking of them and indirectly that we know she’s thinking of them too. When we went through our bad period with Megan’s school last year she was there to listen. She made sure we knew she was outraged on our behalf. She understands exactly when the right time to approach Meg is and when the right time to leave her alone is. When Meg was diagnosed she kept reminding us in silent ways that Megan was who she was. She bought her nice clothes. She bought her toys that she knew Megan would like (toys that spun mostly;o) ) and always treasured and valued her. Long before we came to terms with the fact Megan was autistic and that that wasn’t a bad thing, her Grandma had. She reminded us that having children is not a right but a privilege but she never did it in a way that made us feel bad. She led by example.
Some people never get awards, or knighthoods or recognition and these are people who usually richly deserve that very recognition. Naomi’s mum hasn’t solved world hunger or absolved the debt of developing nations or found a cure for cancer but she is a hero to us. I said once of Mike McCarron’s relationship with Katie and now Meg that everyone should have such a Grandad. I’d extend that to Naomi’s mum – everyone should have such a Grandma. We love her very much.
Autism Podcast Interview
28 Sep
Michael from Autism Podcast interviewed me yesterday. It was the first time I’d been interviewed via Skype or trans-atlantically which was a novel experience. I was a bit concerned at how well the connection would hold up with VOIP still being a technology in its infancy but I think both Michael and I were pleasantly surprised at the quality of the voice connection.
The interview itself was very interesting and thought provoking (for me anyway) – its always good to examine (or re-examine) your own ideas and motives I think and Michael asked me some good questions on the purpose and aims of the Hub as well as asking me about Megan and how we approached raising her.
I tried to lighten my voice and flatten my local accent for US audiences (my voice is stupidly deep and Midlandsy) but I still come off as a cross between Robbie Williams and Barry White. Bah.
Also, here’s a little snippet of Meg :o)
Grandads
27 SepAfter the murder of Katie, one of the things that shone through clearest of all in news reports and in blog comments sections and most of all in my private correspondance with him was the unquestioning love and total acceptance Mike has for Katie. My family nd Mike’s have swapped pictures of each other and in one of the many of the McCarron’s we have had printed and framed is a picture of Katie sitting on Mike’s knee. The expression on Mike’s face is something to behold. It is total and utter pride and happiness. He’s looking at his beautiful granddaughter, not the camera.
Another picture Mike sent us was one of the extended McCarron clan holding up a sign with a message for Megan, their newest granddaughter, on it. The message is private, the act one of pure unquestioning acceptance and love.
Megan’s other granddad is a Captain for British Airways. A quiet, reserved, very British man he personifies the unflappable Englishman in all he does and says. His life is one of quiet pragmatism in all matters. Except when it comes to his granddaughters. For Megan he recently walked the streets of New York covering a distance of fifteen blocks searching for a toy that Amazon.com did not carry because he knew that Meg would get a lot out of it. He should’ve been resting between flights but elected to sacrifice that time for his granddaughter who he dotes on.
Today I read an entry from Susan which demonstrates once more what grandparents can do to help their children and grandchildren. The poem Susan wrote is very very good. The picture she posted of her Dad and her son exchanging a look of mutual love is pure gold.
Just Sayin: Part III
26 SepA film/documentary will be released in Spring 2007 about the link (ahem) between mercury and autism. After viewing the trailer I thought that possibly an examination of same of the claims made and scare-tactics used might be in order. I kept a tally of the more obvious logical fallacies as the trailer progressed.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Recent Comments