Archive by Author

1 In 166. Really?

26 May

In a recent blog post, David Kirby repeated the oft-cited figure of 1 in 166 people now having autism. That figure, according to Kirby, used to be 1 in 5000 in the eighties.

He goes on to ask that if autism is solely genetic then where are all the old autistics now?

As a writer, Kirby is pretty good. As a researcher he’s suspect and prone to errors. As a critical thinker he’s woeful.

Something happened between now and the eighties alright. Something that can definitely account for the increase in prevelance. Simply put – the criteria changed. What constituted autism changed between the eighties and now. Changed drastically. Changed so much in fact that a lot of diagnosticians doubt that Hans Asperger would recognise what is now considered to define Aspergers Syndrome, changed so much that people who were once thought of as AS would be today diagnosed as autistic.

The diagnostic criteria in the DSM, which provide a differentiation between autism and Asperger’s syndrome, have been examined by several research studies over the last five years. There has been some criticism from clinicians and research that the criteria do not identify the disorder Hans Asperger originally described. The four cases he described in his original paper would be diagnosed, according to DSM criteria, as having autism not Asperger’s syndrome. (Miller and Ozonoff 1997).

Dr Tony Attwood

So here we are with this sudden reclassification of a lot of peoples diagnosis. Further, those who would one have been classed as having Aspergers are now routinely being diagnosed as being autistic. I don’t have any stats (and I doubt they exist) on these numbers but common sense would indicate that these people make a real and significant (and continuing) impact on prevelance rates.

Going back one stage for a moment – who exactly is Kirby referring to with this ‘1 in 166’ figure? Is he talking about the prevelance of ASD? Or is he talking about the prevelance of Kanners (classical) autism? You see, the words ‘autism’ and ‘ASD’ are, in modern medical history, interchangeable. I don’t know but my gut feeling is that when people quote this 1 in 166 number they are referring to ASD – the spectrum of autism and not Kanners autism in particular.

If I’m right then we have another huge amount of people to add to our prevelance rates – the recently diagnosed. As stated the diagnostic criteria has significantly widened and as it has, the number of medical and non-medical people trained to spot ASD’s has risen massively. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what would happen if you vastly widened the qualifying criteria for something and vastly increased the opportunity to see if people did qualify.

There are people (I know some of them) who in their thirties suddenly discover that the problems they’ve managed to live with since childhood actually have a name and an overridding condition. These people get diagnosed too.

Why is it that I know about these people and the likes of Kirby and the various mercury zealots do not (or choose not to?). Because I talk to autistic people. I don’t talk to their parents, or their carers or their advocates. I talk to them. I hear their stories and it all comes out – some (most) were diagnosed in childhood but a significant (and growing) number are getting their diagnosis’ as adults. They can do this because more is known about autism and their are more places to go and ask. When you couple this with the widening of the diagnostic criteria then you suddenly include a whole range of middle aged people who weren’t able to be included in ‘official’ stats before.

So can these people account for all of the ‘1 in 166’. I have no idea. But then I also have no idea who Kirby et al are actually counting when they reach these figures. Kanners autistics? Those with Aspgers Syndrome? Those with a generalised Pervasive Developmental Disorder? Tourettes? In the eighties it was Kanners. Today, autism is all of the above.

Variation in the administrative prevalence of ASD is associated with education-related spending, which may be associated with better-trained educational staff who can recognize the problem, and more and better trained in-school specialists who can provide screening. It is also associated with the availability of health care resources. Increased access to pediatricians and school-based health centers may lead to improved recognition of ASD. Interstate variability in the identification of ASD should be taken into account when interpreting the results of prevalence studies based on administrative data and the associated system characteristics taken into account by policy makers working to improve the recognition of ASD.

David S. Mandell, ScD; Raymond Palmer, PhD

The incidence of research-identified autism increased in Olmsted County from 1976 to 1997, with the increase occurring among young children after the introduction of broader, more precise diagnostic criteria, increased availability of services, and increased awareness of autism. Although it is possible that unidentified environmental factors have contributed to an increase in autism, the timing of the increase suggests that it may be due to improved awareness, changes in diagnostic criteria, and availability of services, leading to identification of previously unrecognized young children with autism.

William J. Barbaresi, MD; Slavica K. Katusic, MD; Robert C. Colligan, PhD; Amy L. Weaver, MS; Steven J. Jacobsen, MD, PhD

We observed dramatic increases in the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder as a primary special educational disability starting in the 1991-1992 school year, and the trends show no sign of abatement. We found no corresponding decrease in any special educational disability category to suggest diagnostic substitution as an explanation for the autism trends in Minnesota. We could not assess changes in actual disease incidence with these data, but federal and state administrative changes in policy and law favoring better identification and reporting of autism are likely contributing factors to the prevalence increases and may imply that autism spectrum disorder has been underdiagnosed in the past.

James G. Gurney, PhD; Melissa S. Fritz, MPH; Kirsten K. Ness, MPH; Phillip Sievers, MA; Craig J. Newschaffer, PhD; Elsa G. Shapiro, PhD

SEO And Dissemination Of Google PR

21 May

I read a great post from Cody regarding SEO tips recently. I don’t agree with every point – in my experience it makes no difference how far up the code block your content is for example – and there’s a couple he missed – notably the importance of submitting your site to the major directories – but its still a great list.

Something thats rarely touched on outside of dedicated SEO communities is the best way to get a good Google PR structure for your site. Its not as simple as get a good PR on the home page. In fact sometimes that can be counter-productive.

What Is PR?

Google’s PageRank (PR) technology is a mark of importance that Google attach to a particular page. Allegedly. There is a significant school of thought that claim PR is useless as a measurement of the success of a site in Google and yet another school of thought think that it was once used seriously by the Google search algorithm but since the Autumn 2003 ‘Florida’ event, Google have been using it less and less and some even suspect its used as a double-blind technique to make SEO black-hatters (those who use dodgy SEO techniques) falsely optomise their pages for PR.

Personally, I think its all about site structure and that PR isn’t so much part of Google’s seach algorithm but more a mark of how well you are doing _in_ that algorithm.

The Trick

Not really a trick – nothing ever is in good SEO – but more a long hard slog to get the right balance. Its very difficult originally but once you get the idea behind it and put in the donkey work you start to see some real results.

Think of a web forum – any web forum, the subject is irrelevant – look at the structure of it. How a web forum builds its structure should be how you are aiming to get a good site balance that will give you a good, well disseminated PR thats passed through to every page of your site.

A forum is tiered. Every seperate tier ‘drills down’ to a more concentrated and specialised area of the forum. Lets take a web forum about cookery for example. Teir one (or level one if you prefer that terminology) is simply ‘cookery’.

Tier two breaks that down into slightly more targetted areas – say, ‘utensils’, ‘cooks’ and ‘recipies’ for tier two headings.

Tier three goes into even greater targetted areas. Tier three of the second tier about ‘recipies’ for example might be ‘french recipies’, ‘spanish recipies’, ‘italian recipies’ etc etc you get the idea. Tier four of each of these tier three areas are your ‘money’ pages.

Lets go back to tier one and demonstrate how we use keywords throughout these levels. On tier one, the keywords are very generic and concentrate _solely_ on the idea of cookery. You don’t make _any mention_ of the keywords you’ll be using on tiers two/three/four/etc (depending on how ‘deep’ your site structure is). Everything on tier one is fairly generic regarding cookery.

Tier two is again fairly generic about the seperate categories you have here and your keywords should make brief mention of tier one but should be weighted for keywords regarding tier two but again, make no mention of any tiers _below_ this level.

Tier three’s keywords make very brief reference to tier one, a decent reference to tier two but are very specific to tier three. Once more – no mention of any tiers below this one should be made.

OK, I’ve designated tier four as our ‘money’ pages – this is as far as my hypothetical cookery site content actually drills to. So this page can mention tier one in passing, make brief reference to tier two, brief reference to tier three but really go to town on this (its own) tier. This is where you start heavy (but not too heavy) mentions of your three and four keyword phrases. Make your pages as readable as possible for humans – _all_ humans – by which I mean make your site as accessible as you can. An accessible site always ranks better as it is readble by both humans and machines alike. If your pages are easily viewable and navigable with styles turned off (or in Lynx) then you’re definitely on the right tracks.

So the goal with your keywords/phrases is to make them more and more specific on each level. Tier one concentrates on a very broad subject and tier four deals with very specific areas within that subject. Tier one should concentrate on one, possibly two generic keywords and tier four should make use of four or five very targetted two/three word keyphrases.

Doing this properly should result (eventually) in a PR of 2, 3 or 4 on your home page and as you get more relevant anywhere between 6-8 on your heavily targetted tier four pages. These tier four pages are where you should aim to get all your backlinks pointing to (a backlink is exactly as it sounds – a link back to you. Please note: a backlink is _not_ the same as a link exchange which won’t get you as good rewards). Depending on your market (and some markets can take a very long time) if your tier four pages get a lot of high quality backlinks then your PR on these pages can get up to the 8-9 level.

Another thing to note – the PR level in the Google toolbar frequently differs from the real PR. For a more accurate picture of your PR, try and find your site in the Google directory. If its not there you need to submit your site to DMOZ as soon as possible as it can take a *long* time to get a site accepted in DMOZ. A site I submitted in Jan 2004 still isn’t listed today for example. Obviously this entirely depends on how busy your category is but don’t leave this standing – sort it out as soon as you can.

Web Designers And Autism

21 May

I read a post at Matthew’s blog today describing his current feelings towards his own motivation in which he said:

I think a lot of ‘creative’ types would agree that it is very easy to self-diagnose with borderline manic depression, OCD, Aspergers, and a variety of other personality traits that go with the territory of trying to create something that other people will appreciate…

Now obviously with my daughter being classicaly autistic and Aspergers being a companion to Kanners autism (they are both autistic spectrum disorders – ASD’s) my interest was immediately piqued.

I commented that I had noted that a _lot_ of my fellow designers seemed, from reading their comments or blog postings, to have definite ASD characteristics – most notably of Aspergers Syndrome – but I then chickened out and refused to name names.

It seemed only fair though to offer my fellow designers a chance to find out for themselves whether they display a disposition towards autism and to that end I’ll point you to the online ‘AQ’ (autistic quotient) test.

Unlike a lot of online tests, this one won’t tell you what sort of Star Wars character you are or what your Hobbit name is. This one measures your responses to key questions that determine whether or not you have a disposition towards autism. Its developed by a team at Cambridge University led by Professor Simon Baron-Cohen (if you recognise that name then yes, they are related – its his cousin).

If you score 32 or higher then you have an increased chance of having a disposition towards autism. Its nothing to worry unduly about – if you’ve coped fine up till now then there’s no reason why you shouldn’t continue to do so but if you do struggle and you get this score or more then maybe you should see your Doctor.

I’m also happy to tell you more about autism and point you to some great resources if you need it. Add a comment or email me privately if you’d rather.

NB: The CGI script thats processing the results seems to be broken – manual scoring is at the bottom of the test.

Kirby Posts On The Huffington Blog

21 May

David Kirby posts one of what he considers to be the key questions:

There is no such thing as a genetic epidemic. Yet U.S. autism rates have gone from about 1-in-5000 in the 1980s to 1-in-166 today. But if autism is purely genetic (without an environmental “trigger”) and has always been prevalent at the same constant rate, then where are the 1-in-166 autistic 25-year-olds (those born in 1980)? Where are the 1-in-166 autistic 55-year-olds? Why can’t we find them?

Kirby.

NB: I don’t think autism is solely genetic. I think all genuine autistics have a genetic predisposition but I also think that for some, an environmental trigger event could be required. That trigger though is definitely not vaccines.

I don’t have an easy answer to this one – because data collection on autism is historically very bad its difficult to even verify Kirby’s figures. I do have a few suggestions for him though.

First, please quotes your sources when you make assertions like this. I’ve already shown you to be factually wrong on figures before. Forgive me if I don’t take everything you say at face value.

Secondly, as you probably well know, the diagnostic criteria for ASD vastly altered in the 9o’s to include a wide variety of PDD’s including for example, Aspergers Syndrome. I don’t have any figures to hand to state what the exact before/exact after was but common sense dictates that a large part of this so-called ‘epidemic’ is down to this. There would also seem to be at least one book thatdoes have the figures and they deduce the same as me. I’ll get a hold of that as soon as I can.

Thirdly, detection methods and centres of detection have vastly bettered and increased respectively.

I know it is not a very popular view, but it is possible that the dramatic increase of children with autism world-wide is due to better diagnosis, better awareness, changing diagnosis, and the growth of services. When I started in this field 20 years ago, there were only about 3 centres in the whole of the UK where one could go to get one’s child diagnosed with autism, from a specialist. Today, there are many clinics in every town that can provide this service.

Professor Simon Baron-Cohen

Another question for Kirby: If autism is mercury poisoning why is it that boys make up three quarters of all autistics? Are we to believe Thimerosal is selective?

As a point of note to sensationalist reporters turned writers – apply Occams Razor first: look for what is most likely based on the facts at hand. If the facts can’t account for everything, then perform an investigation. Your basic error is that you would seem to have skipped the first stage of that process.

Another Review Of Evidence Of Harm

20 May

Another first class review of Evidence of Harm, this time from Debunkers.

Cutting stright to the chase, the reviewer exposes the fallacy of Kirby’s book:

…Kirby’s Brockovich-esque page-turner, featuring a group of parents of autistic children as David and big pharma/big government bureaucrats as Goliath, must be taken for what it is, a story of parental love and determination – and not for what it isn’t, an instructional and unbiased medical text.

No one doubts that the ‘mercury is autism/causes autism’ crowd love their children (although I and many other parents of autistics who don’t belive the connection exists have been openly accused by these same people of abusing our kids by not chelating them, have had these people offering to start collections to pay for chelation of our children and have been told we will be going to hell as we are terrible parents.) and want the best for them. Its simply unfortunate that books like Kirby’s peddle their poor science in such a well written way – its the ultimate in spin, if the science doesn’t exist, present anecdotal evidence and present it in a way calculated to inflame their target market. All style, no substance.

As the reviewer also points out there have been poorly researched conspiracy theories regarding autism and vaccines going back to the 1980’s. One by one they’ve crumbled into nothing as will this one regarding Thimerosal. Of course I doubt any of the parents who’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on ‘treating’ their childs autism will be in any position when the next big boogeyman (which wil apparently be Aluminium) raises its head – they’ll be too busy trying to recoup all the money they laid out in false cures. You have to shake your head in despair at the mentality of anyone who swears that a ‘cure’ exists and then goes on to prove it by needing $500,000 worth of treatment. At some point you would’ve thought they would’ve noticed that the ‘cure’ doesn’t work at all – except in the instances of children who are mercury posisoned. Newsflash: if it worked for your child, then they weren’t autistic, they were mercury poisoned. If it continues not to work after half a million dollars worth of treatment thats because your child is autistic and chelation doesn’t cure autism. I wonder – when this mercury conspiracy theory falls apart at the seams, will Kirby refund all these people he’s profited from? I doubt it.

The reviwer also points out the sad fact about followers of Kirby – they ignore valid science as it disagree’s with their case:

Regrettably, a book written instead on the data presented at Vanderbilt by CDC pediatrician and epidemiologist Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsopp (whose study of autism prevalence trends indicates that the “epidemic” may be attributable to better and broader diagnostic criteria) would probably sit on bookstore shelves gathering dust. As we all know, cries of “the sky is falling!” turn far more heads than “all’s well.

As I’ve documented previously, the state of the science behind the ‘mercury is/cause autism’ theory is frighteningly inept. The holy trinity of Geier, Geier and Wakefield – all darlings of the lucrative speaker circuit in the US have been either laughed out of their own country (Wakefield) or disallowed from being an expert witness in trials involving vaccines due to their ignorance of the subject (Geier senior) or not actually be a Doctor at all (Geier junior).

The reviwer is also spot on when it comes to how those of us who don’t believe in the connection get treated:

Those who have fought against the demonizing of thimerosal have to put up with absurd accusations of being industry shills. In actuality, many of those who are fighting against the fear – some of them parents of autistic children themselves – strive to make clear the value of vaccinations.

I personally have been accused of being a bad parent, of being a liar, of being an idiot, of being on the payroll of vaccine manufacturers – one email even accused me of being ‘in league with Satan’ and quoted Revalations at me! Why? Because I follow the science, not the conspiracy theory. And why do I do that? Because I value the health of my child and I’d rather find an intervention that worked than a ‘cure’ that never will.

Overview of Wakefield’s Contribution To Science

Wakefiled was one of 13 authors of a paper published in The Lancet alledging a connection between MMR and autism. In fact, there were only 12 people studied, 9 of whom were autisitc – it seemed Wakefiled made the schoolboy error of deciding on his conclusions and working backwards to find his ‘culprit’.

On the question of these 12 subjcts, it later transpired that some of the 12 were not randomly selected but supplied to Dr Wakefield by a firm of lawyers acting for the parents who believed their kids were ‘made’ autistic by the vaccine. Wakefield was paid about £50,000 for his work and was lined up for lots more as a paid expert witness when legal action against the Pharma’s swung into action. As Ratbags say:

Put bluntly, Wakefield was paid to find a certain result (which matched his beliefs anyway) and was going to get a lot more money if he found it.

Shortly afterwards 10 of the 13 authors of the original report authors issued a statement saying that the paper was not evidence of a connection between MMR vaccine and autism and The Lancet now say they would never have published the paper at all if they’d known about Wakefields payments..

Imaginary Conversations Part II

19 May

[phone rings]

Me: ‘lo

Client: Hey Kev its me.

Me: Hey Generic Client, how’s it going?

Client: Not bad, not bad. I just wanted to ring to let you know we’re all really loving the work you’re doing for us. We’re all pretty excited about how it’s going.

Me: Nice one Generic Client – remember though, don’t clap, just throw money! AHAHAHAHA.

Client: Sorry?

Me: It was a joke dude. Forget it. Jesus.

Client: Right. Anyway, as I say, we’re all simply adoring your input on this one. Seriously, we love it. There’s just one tiny problem we need you to sort out.

Me: OK.

Client: Little flags.

Me: Little flags?

Client: Yeah, you know – to indicate the different languages our clients might speak. We basically want 10 different versions of the site. Each sperate version should be written in a seperate language – Spanish, French, German, American…

Me:…and on the home page you want a flag for each of these guys that they click to access ‘their’ site. Am I right?

Client: Totally! We knew you’d see the potential. And make them animated – like they’re in a breeze.

Me: A breeze.

Client: Yeah!

Me: But don’t you remember Generic Client? We talked about this – I said I’d write a script that would detect the incoming IP of each visitor, perform a reverse look up on it, resolve the country of origin for that visitor and swap all the content in based on that persons native language.

Client: Oh. Right.

Me: We agreed it would be easier guy – ‘one design, many contents’ remember? Makes your life much easier when it comes to updating the design or structure.

Client: I guess.

Me: So whats with the grief?

Client: We really like the little flag idea. I mean *really* like it. We had a board meeting and everything.

Me: I’m telling you Generic Client, having 10 versions of your site is such a bad idea that it could well be the worst idea that anyone’s ever had. Ever. In the history of ideas. In fact, This idea makes Captain Oates idea of ‘going for a little walk’ look like one of the stellar ideas of the world. When the lookout on the Titanic decided to look the other way for a bit, that was, it can’t be denied, something of an erroneous decision. But its not as bad as this. I’m begging you Generic Client – don’t do this.

Client: OK, OK! We’ll stick with your idea…..

Me: Nice one.

Client…..but…..

Me: What?

Client: Is there some way we can use the little flag thing? It’d look so cool!

Me: I’ll see what I can do. Christ.

Client: You rock! Did I tell you how much we love you over here?

[phone down]

Autism Is ‘Older’ Than Mercury

18 May

One of the key points that advocates of the ‘autism is mercury poisoning/mercury causes autism’ theory often cite in defence of their theory is that autism wasn’t diagnosed until Mercury started to be used in vaccines. Shortly after it was, they say, autism started to be diagnosed.

Pretty impressive eh? Well, no. Not really. Leaving aside the fact that citing this as evidence is akin to saying that breathing causes ear infections because I never got an ear infection until after I started breathing, there’s very compelling (and fascinating) evidence to indicate that autistics have been with us since the Victorian era (early 1800’s).

In an absorbing post on the Wisconsin Medical Society site, Dr Darold A. Treffert shows how people with ‘symptoms’ close to what we would consider autism today were studied by Dr J. Landon Down in 1887.

In an 1887 book entitled ‘On Some of the Mental Affections of Childhood and Youth’ J. Landon Down, M.D. published ‘The Lettsomian Lectures delivered before the Medical Society of London in 1887 together with other papers.’ It was there he found ‘a convenient place to describe an interesting class of cases for which the term ‘idiots savants’ has been given, and of which a considerable number have come under my observation. This name has been applied to children who, while feeble-minded, exhibit special faculties which are capable of being cultivated to a very great extent.’ He then describes a number of cases of children with the artistic, musical and numerical skills that have so regularly been described in by other observers, including myself, this past 117 years (Treffert, 2000). He also keenly pointed out that ‘extraordinary memory’ was linked with the special abilities in the savant, a finding reported consistently in all of the cases documented in the literature in the many years since that first description. One of his patients, for example, had memorized large portions of the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire and could repeat them back verbatim.

Leaving aside Dr Landon Down’s awful labelling of ‘idiot savants’ these people sounds autistic to Dr Treffert.

Intriguingly, Dr Landon Down (who is responsible for defining Downs Syndrome) even went so far as to apply a diagnosis of ‘developmental’ disorder in an astonishingly modern take on the issue.

In these children the early months of childhood were uneventful and “intelligence dawned in the accustomed way.” But later, around age six or so, ” a change took place in that the child’s look had lost its wonted brightness; it took less notice of those around it; many of its movements became rhythmical and automatic.” There was “cessation of increasing intelligence”, deferred speech and “lessened responsiveness to all the endearments of its friends.” Dr. Down writes “I have had many examples of children who had spoken well and with understanding, but who lost speech at the period of the second dentition, and had also suspension of mental growth.” Dr. Down provides several examples. One was a boy who “attracted no particular attention during the first six years of life” but then “during the period of second dentition” suddenly lost speech. “He heard everything that was said, but never replied to a question.” This child did gradually regain some speech but “afterwards always spoke of himself in the third person.” The other case example was that of two brothers who also “both lost speech at the period of second dentition.”

Dr Treffert theorises that these children were kids who today would be disgnosed with ‘late onset’ autism:

Autistic Disorder, while not named such until 1943, has existed for the same long time as other forms of developmental disorder and mental retardation. It is not a new disorder.

So where does this leave the ‘mercury causes autism because they happened at the same time’ arguement? I’d urge them to read the list of symptoms Dr Landon Down categorised in 1887:

world of their own,” talking in the “third person,” being in a “dreamland,””echolalia,””self-contained and self-absorbed,” “automatic and rhythmical movements,” a countenance and “repose of brightness and intelligence,” lack of “physical features” of retardation, “no response in words,”

None of this is proof in the scientific sense but to me its simply more evidence that autism has been around much longer than people think and that the ‘mercury/autism’ link is simply wrong. For your amusement, I post a link to a story about a parent-led group similar in nature to the ‘mercury/autism’ group who belive that plastic cups cause autism. Seriously, you couldn’t make it up.

Evidence Of Harm States Its case

17 May

David Kirby unveils the extent of his evidence that mercury causes autism and presents it in the ever eager to please Schafer Autism Report.

Very recent studies, presented by top university researchers at major autism conferences or published in respected, peer-reviewed journals, have reported the following findings possibly supporting a link between mercury and autism. Some of this work has been derided by the CDC as ‘junk science’ conducted by ‘charlatans’.

So lets get rid of the dross and spin first. “major autism conferences” as a source is frankly, laughable. Not only are they unnamed, they are likely to be run by hysterical parent-led groups. I think its safe to discount these as credible. This leaves us with ‘top university researchers’ publishing in ‘respected, peer-reviewed journals’. Lets also bear in mind that that, by Kirby’s own admission these are ‘findings’ (as oppose to evidence or facts) that ‘possibly’ (as oppose to do) ‘support’ (as oppose to are) a link (as oppose to cause) autism.

So lets write out what Kirby and his motley crew wish they could say here and what they can say:

Kirby Crew: “Autism is mercury poisoning – here is some factual evidence to back that up.”

Reality: “There may be a link to indicate the possibility that some forms of mercury might have some relationship to autistic-like symptoms.”

There is not one shred of evidence that I know of that would prove that mercury poisoning causes autism.

Univeristy Of Washington / National Institutes Of Environmental Health Sciences – Published In Environmental Health Perspectives. In primates, ethylmercury from vaccines (in the form of thimerosal), once it enters the brain, converts to inorganic mercury at two to three times the rate of methylmercury, which is found in fish. Inorganic mercury lacks a natural transport system out of the brain, where it remains for long periods of time, perhaps indefinitely. A previous study by the same team found that inorganic mercury was the main cause of serious changes in brain tissue, including a major expansion of microglial cells (white matter), which is consistent with the finding of “big brains” in autistic children.

Note firstly the lack of a direct quote from the article itself. Once you get past the spin you can only deduce from the above that primates brains changed when you put mercury into them. Apparently this is ‘consistent’ with autistics big brains.

At this point I’d like to reveal the results of my own scientific investigation. Once, I gave an ice cream to a monkey which it promptly ate and shrieked in a monkey-like way in gratitude. As autistic children eat ice cream and occassionaly make strange shrieking noises too I hereby annouce that ice-cream causes autism. Where’s my Nobel prize?

In all seriousness, no one is saying that putting Mercury into kids in elevated quantities is a good thing. Its right there should be limits and maybe even a ban. This is because it can lead to mercury poisoning. Not because it causes autism. There really is a difference.

University Of California – M.I.N.D. Institute – Presented At The 2005 Interational Meeting For Autism Research. Children with autism have a markedly different immune profile from normal kids. They are found to have increased autoimmunity, extremely high levels of certain immune cells and cytokines, and an imbalance of immune cells to antibodies (TH1 vs. TH2 response). ALL of these abnormal conditions appear in the literature on mercury toxicity.

What? How is this evidence? All it shows is that some aspects of some autistics immune profile share some characteristics of mercury toxicity. I don’t know anyone in the field who doesn’t know that autism and mercury poisoning share characteristics. How exactly does this even support a link, let alone offer supporting evidence?

Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School Of Public Health – Published In The Journal Pediatrics. The rate of increase in new cases of autism among children born every year in the United States was relatively stable until 1987, when the rate suddenly began to spike, and then continued to rise among children born in each subsequent birth cohort. A second spike in the rate of increase was noted in 1992, a few years after which, the rate began to level off. (It is interesting to note that, between 1987 and 1992, with the introduction of new thimerosal containing vaccines, total mercury exposure from infant immunization went from 75 to nearly 240 micrograms). Meanwhile, the reported incidence of mental retardation and other childhood disorders remained constant, meaning that “diagnostic substitution” was not an explanation for the rise in autism cases.

Demonstrating both a frightening attitude to misinformation and a nice line in arrogance regarding how the US sees itself as the centre of the world. Firstly, what happens in America is relevant to America only. The rest of us don’t see that tally. If Kirby wants to rename his book ‘Evidence of Harm Between the Years 1987-1992 and Only In America’ based on this ‘evidence’ then that might go some way towards addressing his interpretation of data. Still won’t make it any more relevant though. And ‘diagnostic substitution’? What the hell? Is Kirby suggesting that Doctors don’t know the difference betwe autism and mental retardation? Or is this just a really stupid way of trying to persuade people the the autism ‘epidemic’ isn’t better detection and reporting plus an increase in the width of diagnostic criteria? I suspect the latter.

University Of Arkansas – Arkansas Children’s Hospital Published In The Journal Biology. Children with autism have extremely low or depleted levels of sulfur-based bio-chemicals known as thiols (a synonym for thiol is mercaptan, or literally, “mercury capturer,”). The reason is thought to be genetic. Without these substances, such as the protein glutathione, these genetically variant children suffer from oxidative stress, and show a reduced capacity to liminate heavy metals like mercury. Biomedical intervention with a variety of natural substances was shown to elevate thiol levels in study children to normal levels.

Er, OK. So what Kirby seems to be saying here is that if autistics have low levels of thiols they can’t liminate mercury. How that supports the theory of mercury poisoning causing autism is beyond me. This line of argument is almost a living breathing definition of the word ‘circumstantial’. Or ‘crap’.

Columbia University – Published In Molecular Psychology. Mice with a genetic predisposition to autoimmunity showed horrific reactions to thimerosal containing vaccines, compared to mice without the autoimmunity. Sensitive mice showed repetitive and self-injurious behavior, including grooming themselves or their cage mates incessantly, sometimes to the point of death. They also were found to have increased brain size compared to the typical (control) mice exposed to the same vaccine schedule.

I must admit to the odd snigger or two by this point. Is this really what Kirby thinks is ‘supporting evidence’ of mercury as a causative of autism? Tell you what Dave mate – when I see two autistics grooming each other to the point of death then I’ll start to worry.

Here’s what Craig Newschaffer of Johns Hopkins says:

Epidemiologist Craig Newschaffer of Johns Hopkins says that animal experiments such as this are important to determine the physiological effects of exposure to toxic substances. But, he notes, it’s impossible to say with certainty that lab animals exhibiting certain kinds of behavior have autism or that what happens in lab animals translates to people.

Science News.

Of course, the mercury crowd don’t care for logic. How they think you can diagnose a mouse with autism is simply baffling.

Northeastern University – Published In Molecular Psychiatry. Thimerosal, when exposed to cells with certain genetic mutations, can interfere with critical metabolic processes, including something called methylation. Methylation is crucial for proper gene expression and DNA/RNA growth, and for the development of neurotransmitters and essential fatty acids – including myelin – which protect the nerves and brain. Methylation is also needed for the development of sulfur-based thiols (or “mercury capturers”) such as glutathione, and other detoxification functions.

So really, what you’re saying is that if someone doesn’t have these ‘certain genetic mutations’ then Thimerosal can’t harm them? But…but…I thought all the mercury crowd thought there was no genetic basis for autism. Talking to such hysterics as Lujene Clarke gave me the idea that it was either/or with you guys. And even if you do support the idea of a genetic basis – what exactly are these ‘certain genetic mutations’? I can’t help but note no-one says what these mutations actually are. Possibly because they have no bearing on autism?

Here’s what proper scientisits have to say about this study:

The authors conclude that “The potent inhibition of this pathway by ethanol, lead, mercury, aluminum and thimerosal suggests that it may be an important target of neurodevelopmental toxins.” Unfortunately, the authors tacked on the statement that “…vaccine components (i.e. thimerosal and aluminum) may have contributed to the risk of autism, ADHD and other developmental disorders.” We understand the pressures on scientists to justify the relevance of their research and maintain funding of their work but the problem is that sometimes basic research is just basic research and nothing more.

Medicinenet

Next!

University Of Texas – Published In The Journal Health And Place. Mercury released primarily from coal-fired power plants may be contributing to an increase in the number of cases of autism. The study found that autism increased in Texas counties as mercury emissions rose. For every thousand pounds of environmentally released mercury, there was a 61 percent increase in autism rates. The study looked at Texas county-by-county levels of mercury emissions and compared them to the rates of autism and special education services in 1,200 Texas school districts. One county with low mercury emissions but significant autism rates was found to harbor the nation’s largest mercury mine. An author of the study said it shows a potentially “important connection between environmental exposure to mercury and the development of autism.”

61% increase? Funny that, because Professor Palmer himself says

We found that for every 1,000 pounds of mercury released by industry, there was a 17 percent increase in autism,” Palmer tells WebMD.

Please do your research properly. The Professor also says:

Palmer is quick to point out that this kind of study does not prove mercury pollution causes autism. “We show a significant relationship between mercury release into the environment and autism. But that does not prove causation,” Palmer says.

FOX

So, once again. No proof that mercury poisoning either is, or causes, autism. There may be a link but what that link is or even if it exists at all is pure conjecture. In the meantime, what isn’t conjecture is the amount of money Kirby, Generation Rescue et al make from manipulating the emotions of parents into buying hysterical books on the subject and purchasing thousands of dollars worth of chelation ‘therapy’.

I’m merely happy that the more hysterical and easily led of these groups exist mainly in the US and Canada. Thankfully in the UK common sense still seems to largely prevail. Then again, we’ve never been of the opinion that everything difficult can be solved be stamping our feet and showering it with money.

Adopting The Correct Phone Manner

17 May

One of the things that is never taught to young web designers (whom I like to amusingly refer to as ‘weberoonies’) is how to adopt the correct phone manner when talking to clients, suppliers, other agencies. A correct phone manner is vital to ensure good communication and to ensure that the rest of the team/your family know how difficult your job is.

1 – You Make Me Weak

A classic phone manner. This entails resting your right elbow on the desk whilst you support your forehead in your hand – your face is effecively downcast. Hold the phone tight to your ear with your left hand.

What you’re saying here is “I can’t believe this – I’m a designer and you’re not. Shut up, you’re making me weak.”

Try and inject as much rejection and despondancy into the slump of your shoulders as possible. Typical conversations that make best use of this phone manner are ones where the client is explaining why s/he hates your concept design.

2 – Man Of Action

A phone manner borrowed from the passive/aggressive Reagan/Thatcher stock market phone manners of the late 80’s, this one invlolves balancing the phone in the crook of your shoulder whilst you place your tented fingers on the desk in front of the keyboard and peer intently at the screen. The twist is you remain standing! This gives you the air of a ‘man-on-the-move’. This manner is particularly beloved of middle managers (Studio Heads and their ilk).

This stance says “Don’t hold me down! I’m a busy and important guy – look at me!”.

3 – The Four Fourty-Five

Leaning back in your mock leather chair (its better than the shit the office minions have, right?), a cup of [insert beverage of choice here] in your right hand and your phone holding arms elbow cocked rakishly in the air whilst your grin at the ceiling, this phone manner clearly indicates that you’re in the comfort zone – maybe you’re having the final chat with a client after a successful project launch, maybe you’re ordering more RAM or a bigger FST monitor or maybe its 4.45 and you’re off home in an hour. Whatever the occassion, this phone manner says “I don’t give a shit.”

Good for you – in 15 mins time you’re going to have conversation number one regarding your new project.

4 – Nervous Worry

A variation on phone manner one. The stance is almost identical except you need to ensure (this is key!) that the whole of your back is turned to the rest of the office – that way everyone can safely pretend they didn’t hear you after you’ve finished. You should also bring both arms tight to your body. As the nervousness increases you should correspondingly increase the tightness of the arm to body ratio. Think foetal.

This phone manner is reserved for those times when you have fucked up. You know that time you decided to ignore a clients typeface and use a ‘better’ one? Remember the conversation you had with the client after you showed him? You did this then.

5 – The Errant Bullshitter

Stand and look off through the window whilst chatting. With your free hand (or Illustrator (injokes rock, right?)) you should stroke or lightly tousle your hair. These are aids to inspiration and get the bullshit flowing more freely. Practice looking sincere in a mirror and if you often end up bullshitting people then remember to put some kind of hair product in your bag.

Musical Baton

16 May

I’ve been passed a musical baton.

Total volume of music files on my computer:

12GB.

The last CD I bought was:

Kings Of Leon – Occassionaly OK, mostly disappointing.

Song playing right now:

Walk – Pantera.

Five songs I listen to a lot, or that mean a lot to me:

  1. Clash – I Fought The Law
  2. Canned Heat – Mannish Boy
  3. Metallica – The God That Failed
  4. Led Zep – Kashmir
  5. Deep Purple – Highway Star

Five people to whom I’m passing the baton:

Adam Howell, Matthew Pennell, Pierce Gleeson, Cody Lindley, Andy Hume.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →