Archive | Orgs RSS feed for this section

Jenny McCarthy’s son was never autistic?

20 May

A provocative piece in the National Post suggests that very thing.

It is not even certain that her child ever had autism; neurologists have pointed out that her description of the symptoms, and recovery, are more consistent with a rare disorder, Landau-Kleffner Syndrome. Ms. McCarthy may thus be trumpeting a “cure” for a disease of which she has no parental experience.

More than a little interested I tracked down this Letter to Neurology Today.

In After Vaccine-Autism Case Settlement, MDs Urged to Continue Recommending Vaccines (June 5), Dawn Fallik correctly cites Jenny McCarthy as a celebrity fanning the flames of the vaccine-autism link. McCarthy also makes parents think that autism can be cured with unproven treatments – as she claims is the case with her son – documented in her much publicized book, Louder than Words: A Mother’s Journey in Healing Autism (Dutton 2007).

Unfortunately, what the public does not realize as well as perhaps McCarthy is that her son was most likely misdiagnosed with autism in the first place. His disorder began with seizures and, subsequently, with the seizures treated, he improved. This would be more consistent with Landau-Kleffner syndrome, which often is misdiagnosed as autism.

Daniel B. Rubin, MD, PhD

OK, so next stop Landau-Kleffner syndrome.

It is characterized by the sudden or gradual development of aphasia (the inability to understand or express language) and an abnormal electroencephalogram (EEG). LKS affects the parts of the brain that control comprehension and speech. The disorder usually occurs in children between the ages of 5 and 7 years. Typically, children with LKS develop normally but then lose their language skills. While many of the affected individuals have clinical seizures, some only have electrographic seizures, including electrographic status epilepticus of sleep (ESES).

…..

The syndrome can be difficult to diagnose and may be misdiagnosed as autism, pervasive developmental disorder, hearing impairment, learning disability, auditory/verbal processing disorder, attention deficit disorder, mental retardation, childhood schizophrenia, or emotional/behavioral problems.

And is Rubin right? Did Jenny McCarthy’s son Evan’s illness begin with epilepsy?

“I found Evan seizing in his crib,” she told ABC’s Deborah Roberts. “He was foaming at the mouth and his eyes rolled back.”

McCarthy rushed 2-year-old Evan to the hospital. After a few days of multiple seizures, doctors concluded that Evan had epilepsy, but McCarthy was not convinced. Her maternal instinct told her that something was still wrong.

Angry and skeptical of the medical advice she had been given, McCarthy went to a second neurologist who gave her an earth-shattering new diagnosis: Her son has autism.

So yeah he is. Evan’s first presentation was epilepsy.

Not exactly enough to give anything approaching a definite answer but still, interesting. I wonder who diagnosed Evan.

A Neurodiversity FAQ

17 May

Following Ari Ne’eman’s interview in Newsweek being published yesterday, a storm of blog posts about him, autism and neurodiversity in general have appeared. There is a series of comments on the Newsweek forum featuring that bastion of idiocy and bigotry, John Best and sadly, even someone I respect a great deal, Jonathan Mitchell, has stooped to equating autism with sexual abusers. With that in mind, I want to re-post (with slight edits) an old post of mine about what I see neurodiversity as.

Proviso: I am not a spokesperson for any other person and/or group. The term ‘neurodiversity’ did not originate with me. What follows is my personal opinion and what I believe the concept of neurodiversity represents. I believe I voice opinions common to many in the neurodiversity group but I may well be wrong. Sometimes I refer to ‘we’ and sometimes ‘I’. When I refer to ‘we’ I think I am repeating the consensus of neurodiversitiy opinion but bear in mind I could well be wrong.

*1) Neurodiversity proponents are anti-parent.*

False. I’m a parent. I’m parent to 3 kids of whom two are NT and one is autistic. I’ve never felt anyone in the ‘neurodiversity crowd’ is anti me. Kathleen Seidel is a parent. Camille Clark is a parent. Anne Bevington is a parent.

*2) AutAdvo makes up the entire population of Neurodiversity proponents.*

False. There are literally hundreds of websites with thousands of participating autistics of all ‘levels’. The vast majority advocate acceptance. There are also a very large number of NT parents who advocate Neurodiversity. The desire to ‘cure at all costs’ autism is heavily weighted towards North America.

*3) Neurodiversity proponents say we should not treat our kids.*

False. This is one of the biggest points of contention. The issue is one of autism (the main point) versus comorbidities (side points). See the WikiPedia definition of comorbidity. What are some comorbidities? Gastric problems, ADHD, ADD, Depression, migrane. Why would you imagine we don’t want you to treat these things? These things are not autism. They are comorbidities of autism. They cannot be used to illustrate or define autism as they are not common to every autistic.

Don’t take my word for it. Go ask the Doctor who diagnosed your child.

We see your error as the failure to differentiate between the comorbidity and the autism. To us, one is treatable. The other is not. We do not fight for your child’s right to have gastric issues.

You see our error as trying to prevent your child being treated. My own daughter receives PECS and Speech Therapy. I would not stand in any parents way who wanted to alleviate the suffering of their kids. Having terrible constipation is suffering. Having a different kind of thought process is not.

*4) Neurodiversity proponents who are autistic are different than my child.*

True. They are mostly adults. Your kids are kids. However I don’t think thats your point. You believe that all autistic Neurodiversity proponents are ‘high functioning’. This is untrue, both now and historically. The facts are that for a lot of the autistic adults in the Neurodiversity movement their diagnosis was ‘low functioning’ when they were kids. But people grow and progress. Autism doesn’t stop progress, it just sets a different timetable for it. These adults are living breathing proof.

*5) Neurodiversity proponents are full of hate.*

I was bemused to read posts that castigated us for hate speech. Here’s an excerpt from an email I was sent in the year 2005 from someone who hid their identity. This person (who had a Bellsouth IP address) had an in-depth knowledge of Evidence of Harm and although they never said so, that they came from EoH is beyond doubt – I received this email to my Yahoo spam account immediately after making a few posts myself on EoH.

Your retard daughter should just be fucking put down – shes no autist. Little bitch.

And racism? A member of Generation Rescue (or so they claimed) told me to:

…sit next to the nearest Arab with a backpack.

Alluding, of course, to the recent London suicide bombings, this person makes racist generalisations about Arabs as well as wishing death on me.

Ex-Generation Rescue Rescue Angel John Best Jr [John has pointed out that he is now no longer a member of GR] has said that all parents of autistics who don’t chelate their kids are child abusers. Lujene Clarke of NoMercury told me that I was mentally ill because I said I had autistic relatives. My EoH debut was preceded by EoH list members referring to me as an idiot. I’ve been told I’m in the pay of Pharma companies, that I’m stupid, that I’ll go to Hell, that I’m in denial. My autistic friends have been told they are sociopathic, that they have personality disorders, that they aren’t really autistic.

*6) Neurodiversity proponents say we don’t love our kids or want whats best for them.*

False. I have no doubt that you all love your kids just as much as I love mine. I’ve not seen any neurodiversity proponent claim you hate your kids.

What we say is that we think your love for your kids has blinded you to the reality that autism itself is not a problem to overcome but a reality to share with your child. We think that in your honest desire to do the best for your child you are desperate to treat the wrong thing. We also feel that some of the things you use to treat your kids are dangerous. I’ve recently read a post by a woman enquiring about treating her child with Hydrochloric Acid. I’m on record as saying that its no-ones place to tell others what they can and cannot do to treat their kids but by that same token, I feel obliged to point the very real dangers to both your children’s health, your own bank balance and the very future of autism treatment research.

I believe the world should change for the good of my (and yours) child. I don’t believe my child should meekly inherit the mantle of ‘second class citizen’. I see it as part of my job to fight for her right to get the help she needs and at the same time, be who she is.

There are so many better fights than this one you’re on. Better education, better care, better interventions, more rights, more respect. These are the things your child (and mine) will need as they continue to grow.

We’d like you to respect your child’s autism as something unique. We’d like you to treat your child with the medical interventions for their comorbidities that they may need to progress. We’d like you to realise that your children will grow up and if they were autistic then they still will be. We’d like you to think about the strong possibility that one day the autistic adults on AutAdvo might be your kids and another set of parents who believe something passionately will be insulting them by denigrating their worth and their neurology.

You believe thiomersal did your kids harm. You may be right. I doubt it, but you may be. What it definitely didn’t do though is cause autism. This is at the heart of what makes some of us angry in respect of this issue – treat your kids if they are mercury poisoned but please stop propagating so much negative stigma with constant references to autism being mercury poisoning.

*7) So why do neurodiversity proponents say they speak for my child?*

The way I see it is like this – I and my wife know our daughter better than anyone else alive. Whilst she is a child, we speak for her in all matters. But the fact is that she is autistic. It therefore is simple common sense that other autistics have thought processes closer to those of my daughter than any NT does. They think in similar ways. Its not a case of speaking *for*, its more like having a shared reality. If one or more of my kids were gay than I would still speak for them in all matters whilst they were children but not being gay I could not share that reality in the same way as other gay people could. By virtue of their shared reality of autism our kids and autistic adults share an area of being that NT parents can never share. Like it or not, that does give them a commonality and communal existence. With that community sometimes comes a voice. Can you really say, as NT parents, that you are closer in thought process to your kids than autistic adults? When it comes to what makes autistics tick can you really say that you as NT’s know better than other autistics?

Ari Ne’eman on autism

16 May

Ari has had a quite wonderful piece on him in Newsweek. It takes on the hard questions for Ari and he answers them with the aplomb that has come from years of hard work of learning to be an excellent networker:

Ne’eman battles a strange kind of image problem: his critics accuse him of not really being autistic. His mother, Rina, is particularly sensitive about this. “People who see Ari today have no idea where he’s been,” she says. As a young child, Ne’eman was verbally precocious but socially challenged. “I didn’t understand the people around me, and they didn’t understand me,” he says. He was bullied and ostracized—back then he didn’t look at people; he flapped his hands and paced incessantly (he still does both today); he brought newspapers to elementary school as leisure reading. “I think the word ‘freak’ may have come up,” he says. He was, at one point, segregated from his peers in a special-ed school. That led to struggles with depression and anxiety so severe he would pick at his face until it bled. I asked Ne’eman how he manages all the professional mingling he does today. Small talk makes him uncomfortable, but he’s learned to play along. Still, none of it is easy. “You come out of a meeting and you’ve put on a mask, which involves looking people in the eye, using certain mannerisms, certain phrases,” he says. “Even if you learn to do it in a very seamless sort of way, you’re still putting on an act. It’s a very ex-hausting act.”

This is a common attack tactic from people like Jake Crosy at AoA or Harold Doherty. They demean the efforts that autistic people such as Ari have needed and still need to put into their lives to advocate for their own beliefs in favour of the promotion of their own limited and limiting set of autism related beliefs. But as history has shown, its people like Ari – those who are willing to be openly challenged about what they think who will win the respect of people.

Well done Ari, I’m proud to think that you are representing all manner of people on the spectrum, from the very high functioning Jake Crosby to the very low functioning such as my daughter. Thank you.

Autism Science Foundation, Science and Sandwiches

14 May

May 12th saw the first ‘science and sandwiches’ day. Featuring Dr. Ami Klin of Yale who recently published in Nature, the day was session was apparently a great success.

I was heartened to see ASAN‘s Ari Ne’eman in attendance as this reinforced my opinion that ASF are determined to include autistic people and listen to an autistic agenda. Further reinforcement came from the reporting page on the ASF website:

Discussion revolved around this new work’s [Klin’s study] role in both diagnosis and treatment, as well as the importance of respecting the individuality of people with autism.

Inserts mine

Good. Very good to hear. Two thumbs up. Excellent. Round of applause. Should I go on…? No, possibly not.

Anyway, this has been a good year for autistic advocacy I think. A major website has actively sought out and employed an autistic writer for its autism pages and now what will be a major scientific force within autism is listening directly to autistic people. Long may it continue.

Jack Coleman talks back to Jim Carrey, Jenny McCarthy

12 May

Foxnews.com carries a story about Hero’s star Jack Coleman discussing autism and vaccines.

…in his belief the “autism/vaccine” link was unwarranted.

“My sister is a pediatrician and she is not beholden to pharmaceutical companies, which, I know, that’s the big conspiracy theory out there. They did huge research in Europe and they have not found any ties to it at all, there is no longer live mercury in any of these calculations,” Coleman told Tarts. “I just think that from what I’ve read and heard I don’t think it’s connected. I do know that there is a MMR that it makes your child extremely cranky and sick but I personally don’t it contributes to autism, but I am not a doctor.”

And despite McCarthy and her longtime lover Jim Carrey’s relentless lobbying to put pressure on the federal government to remove toxins from vaccines and fight for fewer childhood vaccinations prior to the age of 2, Coleman still supports immunization all the way.

“I have given my child every vaccination there is, but when you are related to a pediatrician, you tend to look much more kindly at vaccinations. As she says, ‘I’ve never seen a child die from an immunization but I have seen one die because of a whopping cough.’ What our grandparents would give to have those immunizations,” he added. “If five years from now, science says that it is the cause, then I will eat my words, but I don’t see that happening.”

A rep for McCarthy did not respond for comment.

Seems like there are maybe more smart celebs in Hollywood than I thought, Jennifer Garner, Amanda Peet, Jennifer Lopez and now Jack Coleman.

MMR doesn’t cause autism: Generation Rescue study proves it!

7 May

Generation Rescue is making a big deal out of their “study” on autism and vaccines. This was a very dishonest attempt to promote their view on autism and vaccines, no doubts about that.

While analyzing their study, I realized how much easier it is to think like someone from Generation Rescue. Rather than challenging my own conclusions, why not go the GR way and start with a conclusion and look for data–any data–to support it! This is a LOT less work, and, heck, fun too!

Let’s take a look at the question, Does the MMR vaccine cause autism? Well, GR has conveniently given us enough data to draw a conclusion! Forget the fact that the GR “data” is bunk. Remember, no critical thinking allowed for this analysis–are we not pseudoscientists? We are Gee-Ar!

Let’s look at autism prevalence by country and compare that to whether they use the MMR vaccine or not. That sounds like we should be able to come to some definite conclusions!

Here are the autism prevalence by country and whether they use the MMR shot in their schedule. (European data are here, Israel here, Japan here).

We are going to ignore the data from the United States. Why? Because it doesn’t fit our conclusions, silly. If you are going to think like GR, go all the way, I say!

Country, prevalence, MMR status:

Denmark: 1 in 2,200. MMR at 15 months
Norway: 1 in 2,000. MMR at 15 months
Iceland: 1 in 1,100. MMR at 18 months
Israel: 1 in 1,000. MMR at 12 months.
Sweden: 1 in 862. MMR at 18 months
Finland: 1 in 719. MMR at 14-18 months
France: 1 in 613. MMR at 12 months and second shot at 13-24 months
Japan: 1 in 475. No combined MMR

Wait a minute–who has the highest prevalence? Japan!!!!

Who doesn’t use the combined MMR shot? Japan!!!

Pretty conclusive, I say (as long as I have my Generation Rescue Thinking Cap on!). MMR doesn’t cause autism!

Hey LeftBrain/RightBrain–this is too tempting. It is so much easier than real blogging. As compared to real scientific research, GR research is a snap! I may just have to accept the vaccine hypothesis just to save some time!

[edit to include correction from the comments!]

Generation Rescue: a dishonest autism charity?

6 May

Generation Rescue has a long history of promoting bad science. They even have tried their hand at it themselves before, with a phone survey that was so bad it would have earned a college freshman in epidemiology a failing grade.

So when they came out with their own “study” of vaccination rates around the world, you can imagine I didn’t expect it to be good. In fact, I just avoided it altogether until they sent me an email telling me how good it was.

So I looked.

It was worse than I expected. Far worse.

The “study” is here. Generation Rescue (GR) looks at the vaccine schedules for multiple countries and compares this with the infant mortality rate and autism rates in those countries.

I read it and, Oh…my…god… I expected bad science and poorly/biased interpretations. Instead, what I found was pretty clear evidence that Generation Rescue is knowingly distributing misleading information.

Before you get worried that this post is way long and question whether you really want to read the details, here’s the short version:

1) They compare infant mortality rates between the US and other countries–even though it is clear (according to their own expert no less!) that the US uses different criteria for infant mortality and it isn’t accurate to compare the US infant mortality to that in other countries.

2) They compare autism rates amongst countries to show the US has the highest rate, suggesting that the higher the number of vaccines the higher the autism rate. They just “forget” to tell you that the prevalences for the other countries are from old studies. We can debate why the reported autism prevalence is going up with time, but no one debates that the older studies report lower prevalences than we see now. So, why does Generation Rescue compare prevalence in the US using 2002 data for kids born in 1994 with, say, a Finnish study using 1997 data on kids born as early as 1979? I consider them very biased, but not incompetent enough to miss those fatal mistakes in their study.

3) They claim that the US has the highest vaccination rates and the highest autism rates. They conveniently ignore prevalence from Canada and the UK, which have comparable prevalences to the US and much much lower numbers of vaccines. Yes, you read that right, they left out the well known studies that would show that their conclusions are nonsense.

The worst part is that it is almost certain that Generation Rescue didn’t make an honest mistake. These are so obvious that whoever wrote that “study” had to know he/she was producing what amounts to the lowest form of junk pseudoscience.

For those who want the gory details, here they are:

Infant Mortality Rates

Generation Rescue points out that the reported infant mortality rate is highest in the United States, which also has the most childhood vaccines. All well and good, but can we really compare the infant mortality rates from country to country?

When I type infant mortality rate into a google search, the first hit is a Wikipedia page which, as it turns out, addresses exactly this question.The answer is a resounding “NO”, we can’t compare the US infant mortality rate with that of other countries.

While the United States reports every case of infant mortality, it has been suggested that some other developed countries do not. A 2006 article in U.S. News & World Report claims that “First, it’s shaky ground to compare U.S. infant mortality with reports from other countries. The United States counts all births as live if they show any sign of life, regardless of prematurity or size. This includes what many other countries report as stillbirths. In Austria and Germany, fetal weight must be at least 500 grams (1 pound) to count as a live birth; in other parts of Europe, such as Switzerland, the fetus must be at least 30 centimeters (12 inches) long. In Belgium and France, births at less than 26 weeks of pregnancy are registered as lifeless.

So, who wrote that 2006 article in US News & World Report?

Bernadine Healy.

Yep, the same Bernadine Healy that is Generation Rescue’s favorite “mainstream” doctor.

One has to believe that GR saw that article in Wikipedia and the US News article. They are, after all, Google Ph.D.’s. Given the author was Bernadine Healy, they have to have considered it accurate, don’t you think? And, yet, GR conveniently forgets to mention the differences in how the US and other countries count infant mortality in their vaccines cause autism “study”.

Autism Rates 1: Autism Prevalence by country

Start with the conclusion of the Generation Rescue “study”:

This study appears to lend credibility to the theory that the U.S. vaccine schedule is linked to the U.S. epidemic of autism, particularly when compared to the published autism rates of other countries.

Given this bold claim, it is critical that they use good data for the autism rates. By “good” I mean that they need data that they can accurately compare to the CDC reported prevalence of 1 in 150. That data was taken in 2002 on 8 year old children. I.e. kids born in 1994. Since reported prevalence numbers are going up with time, it would be very misleading if they were to use, say, prevalence numbers from the early 1990’s, wouldn’t it?

Any prevalence that they use would have to use prevalence numbers from about the same time, on kids of about the same age.

Here’s their table comparing the autism rates.

gr_table3

Let’s take a look at the studies they cited for their numbers, shall we?

Iceland: Prevalence of Autism in Iceland. This 2001 study uses kids from birth years 1984-1993. I.e. most (if not all) of the kids are from the time before the big upsurge in autism diagnoses. Hardly a good comparison to the 2002 CDC study, eh?

For Sweden, they use a paper called, “Is autism more common now than 10 years ago?” from The British Journal of Psychiatry. Published in… 1991. That’s pre DSM-IV. Amongst other problems, they won’t be including the other PDD’s in the autism spectrum, like the CDC study does. Besises, the kids from the CDC study weren’t even born yet, it was so old! Is there any wonder that the Swedish study shows a lower prevalence?

For Japan, they use a paper titled Cumulative incidence and prevalence of childhood autism in children in Japan. The study uses data from 1994 on kids who were born in 1988.

Are you starting to see the pattern here? Time after time, GR is comparing US 2002 prevalence data to much older data from other countries. Let’s go on:

For Norway, they use the paper Autism and related disorders: epidemiological findings in a Norwegian study using ICD-10 diagnostic criteria. The paper was published in 1998 on children 3-14 years of age. Simple math suggests they had kids with birth years going back to at least 1984 in that study. Hardly a good comparison to kids born in 1994.

For Finland, they use Autism in Northern Finland. Here is an updated version from 2005. The study uses data from 1996-97, on kids up to 18 years old. I.e. they are using kids that were born as early as 1979. Also, they are using data on patients from hospital records who used “communal health services”. Sounds a lot like “inpatient”–one of the critiques that GR uses against studies from Denmark. Also, the Finland study didn’t include Aspeger syndrome, as that was a new diagnosis at the time. Hardly a good comparison to the CDC study.

For France, they use Autism and associated medical disorders in a French epidemiological survey. This uses “French children born between 1976 and 1985”.

For Israel, they use Autism in the Haifa area–an epidemiological perspective. This paper looks only at autistic disorder (no PDD-NOS, no Aspergers, no Rett’s no Childhood Degerative Disorder). Right off the bat that reduces the prevalence and makes it impossible to compare the the CDC 2002 study. The Israell study also is, you guessed it, based on kids older than the CDC study: children born between 1989 and 1993.

Last, Denmark. If you’ve been following the thimerosal debate, you know this is going to be ironic. They use Madsen’s paper, Thimerosal and the Occurrence of Autism: Negative Ecological Evidence From Danish Population-Based Data. Generation Rescue refers to this study (incorrectly, I might add) as “This one goes beyond useless”. I guess “useless” is only when it is used to refute the thimerosal hypothesis? Come on, GR, this level of hypocrisy is just painful.

Missing Studies

There are some very well known studies that Generation Rescue somehow forgot to include in their “study”. Could this be due to the fact that they are very good counterexamples to the vaccine-hypothesis ? Let’s look at some and see, shall we?

United Kingdom: Pervasive Developmental Disorders in Preschool Children: Confirmation of High Prevalence ( study performed in 2002 with a prevalence of 1 in 170), and Pervasive developmental disorders in preschool children (study performed in 1998/9 with a prevalence of 1 in 160).

Canada: Pervasive Developmental Disorders in Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Prevalence and Links With Immunizations (birth years 1987 to 1998. Prevalence 1 in 154).

Wow, the United Kingdom and Canada have prevalence numbers comparable to those in the US!

So, let’s complete the comparison, shall we? What is the vaccine schedule like for the UK and Canada? Using the Generation Rescue “study” we get 20 vaccines for Canada and 21 for the UK.

Wow, that’s way less than the US (with 36), and they have the same autism prevalence as the US? How could that be? Is it, perhaps, that the autism is NOT related to the number of vaccines in a given country’s schedule?

Anyone doubt why GR left the UK and Canada off their table of Autism Prevalences Around the Globe? No, I am not giving them a pass that this could be an honest mistake.

To quote Generation Rescue’s top funny guy (Jim Carrey), “How stupid do you think we are?”

Jenny Mcarthy on HBOT

6 May

Given the recent death of a woman and serious injury of a child in a hyperbaric chamber. It is perhaps worth highlighting Jenny McCarthy’s recent “tweet”.

Im inside a hyperbaric chamber. This thing makes me feel amazing.

If a vaccine “exploded” killing one person and critically injuring another with such clear causality, one can imagine McCarthy would be the first to stand up and denounce it. Instead, as one commentator says it’s “All risk, no benefit” when it comes to the quackery surrounding autism, and that’s before you risk dreadful gluten-free and casein-free cup cakes. Meanwhile, despite having no evidence, McCarthy suggests vaccines are dangerous toxic products and may be responsible for the start of an explosion of preventable childhood diseases.

Are the Minnesota Somalis political pawns?

5 May

Let me start out by saying I hope a good answer is found for the high number of Somali children getting special education services in MN under the autism label. The only way to do that properly will take time, money and cooperation from the Somali community.

That said, I will admit that I have avoided this subject up until now. It was very obvious to me that without accurate numbers, this is likely going to just be a game of politics. And, let’s face it, educational numbers are not an accurate way to measure autism. The fact that David Kirby chimed in very early didn’t help either. If I’ve learned anything reading blogs, it is that Mr. Kirby is quite willing to misuse data.

As background, there are more young Somali kids in the Minneapolis schools getting services in autism preschools. Groups such as Generation Rescue have been using this to support the idea that vaccines cause autism. Others have been claiming that vitamin D deficiency is to blame.

It is worth noting that the fraction of Somalis in the autism preschools is about 1%. While this is high compared to the non-Somali’s in preschool, it is about the same fraction for older children in the Minneapolis schools.

As I said, I was planning on leaving this subject alone. That is until I read the Simons Foundation blog on the topic, reporting on this report. The SFARI blog (as it is known) uses precise language to describe the situation (something that would be good for us all to learn).

Public health clusters are usually suspect, but in a report released last week, the Minnesota Health Department and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed that, among 3- and 4-year-old children, those of Somali origin are two to seven times more likely to be placed in preschool programs for autism.

That’s right. They didn’t find that more Somali kids have autism, they found that they were placed in autism programs. You don’t need a medical diagnosis to be placed in an autism school program.

But that wasn’t what got me to write this post. What prompted me to blog was the next sentence:

The report also found other ethnic trends in these classes: just two Asians and one Native American between 2005 and 2007.

Wow. There were even years with zero Asians in those classes. If one is to take the data from the Minneapolis schools as indicating that Somalis have more autism, one has to then explain why Asians and Native Americans have almost no autism!

Why does this bug me? Because it exposed the exact sort of hypocrisy that typifies the efforts of Generation Rescue, Dan Olmsted, Mark Blaxill, and David Kirby (to name a few): “Look until you find something that supports your preconceived notion, then stop!!!!” They have to stop before they find something that would be difficult to explain–like the low prevalence amongst Asians and Native Americans.

Generation Rescue’s motto is “Autism is preventable and reversible”. If so, why aren’t they looking into the low administrative prevalence amongst Asians and Native Americans in Minneapolis.

Jenny McCarthy has often complained that no one wants to study her son to see why he was cured of autism (which begs the question: why hasn’t the alternative medical community studied him?). Why isn’t Jenny McCarthy and her partner Jim Carrey in Minneapolis calling for a study of the Asians and Native Americans in Minneapolis?

I could keep going on and on, but you get the point. Generation Rescue cherry picks the data that supports their notion of vaccines causing autism. They ignore the inconvenient information. One group, the Somalis, are used as political pawns because they help GR with the idea that vaccines cause autism. As to the idea that autism is “preventable and reversible”? I guess if GR really cared they would be looking at the Asians and Native Americans in Minneapolis.

Generation Rescue: an autism research organization?

1 May

Generation Rescue has been trying to rebrand itself as a “research” based organization over the past year. This is a tough sell given their track record of promiting junk as science. Even if they didn’t keep touting their phone survey it would be difficult to forget it. Rather than write the effort off as bad, they cherry picked the “results” which support their political and public relations agenda.

I was reminded of this while I was writing a review of the Science Advisory Board for the newly minted Autism Science Foundation. Why not do the same for Generation Rescue?

it is worth noting that it would have been impossible to review GR’s science advisory board a year ago. It didn’t exist from what I recall. I recall checking fairly recently, and the advisory board consisted of one person.

But, that was the past. GR is ramping up their Advisory Board. Below is the current Advisory Board for GR. I use the ISI Web of Knowledge database to check for papers with the Science Adviser as “author” and the topic as “autism”, just as I did for the Autism Science Foundation. I also did a few other checks, as you will see.

S. Jill James

I get 11 autism papers for Dr. James papers in the search. One of which was cited 84 times (which is very respectable), but most of which have been cited 1 or 0 times.

I found something interesting on her website. Under “Research Support” she lists, “CDC: Mechanisms of Oxidative Stress in Children.”

I find it amusing that the top science adviser to Generation Rescue is accepting funding from the CDC. Were she on the “other side” of the fence on the vaccine question, GR would certainly have claimed that accepting money from the CDC is a clear indication of bias and would call for “independent” research.

I guess you can be independent and still accept money from the CDC.

Dr. Richard Deth

Dr. Deth was recently discussed by Kev, by the way. He has two autism papers in the ISI database. One of which was cited 31 times.

Woody R. McGinnis, M.D.

I only get 3 papers from the ISI Web of Knowledge database for McGinnis WR and topic=autism. Apparently they aren’t listing his papers in the Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology which came out last year.

Jerry Kartzinel, M.D.

I get no hits for an ISI search on papers for Kartzinel as author and subject=autism. He is, of course, the co-author with Jenny McCarthy on her recent book. Not exactly research, though.

This is not a group of heavy hitters in autism research. As noted, Dr. James has a few papers which have been cited a number of times. But, given the nature of this group (and of Generation Rescue) the question has to be asked–is this a real advisory board or is it for show? In general, this is a pretty lightweight group in the autism world. When Jill James is your “heavy hitter” you aren’t going to impress many people who actively watch autism research.

Besides, when has GR ever really acted like they want “scientific advice”? Seriously–they seem to be an organization which thinks scientists exist to confirm the observations of parents.

Compare this Science Advisory Board to that of the Autism Science Foundation, which we recently discussed. GR, an organization that has been around for years, is just putting together their Advisory Board and, well, the effort is slow to get moving. ASF had a reasonable Advisory Board at their launch.

But, Generation Rescue isn’t an organization to let their glass house stop them from throwing stones. You can imagine that when an organization like the Autism Science Foundation comes out with a stance against the vaccine/autism hypothesis it would see some “heat”. True to form, but I admit later than I expected, Kim Stagliano put forth a mild attack. As attacks go, it’s actually sort of amusing. Ms. Stagliano uses as her theme an idea that the ASF is stuck in the past in their approach to research. I find this attack by Ms. Stagliano amusing given Generation Rescue’s approach to research. GR’s concepts of research are like a neaderthal man found in a glacier: they represent ideas frozen in time, and ideas whose evolutionary path led to nowhere. You know the ideas: MMR and thimerosal caused an autism epidemic.

I am left wondering why Generation Rescue doesn’t have Dr. Andrew Wakefield as a science adviser. Certainly if anyone typifies the antiquated stance on science that Generation Rescue holds, it is Andrew Wakefield. GR certainly shows great admiration for the man who fueled the MMR/autism scare in 1998. But, it is one thing to admire the man, it is another thing to add someone to your advisory board whose research is considered an embarrassment by the vast majority of the research community. Who knows, Perhaps Dr. Wakefield turned GR down?

If I may take another minute on Ms. Stagliano’s blog post. She calls in the spectre of the Tobacco companies. It seems to be a favorite contrivance for her and the entire Generation Rescue/Age of Autism crowd. Favorite and patently ridiculous. Here’s what she had to say.

If the American Lung Association had spun off a new group headed up by those with a strong allegiance to Philip Morris and called themselves, INCS (“It’s Not Cigs Stupid!”) would anyone take them seriously outside of those with a financial interest in cigarettes?

The tobacco gambit is a bad comparison to autism from the outset. Epidemiology showed clearly that tobacco causes cancer. The epidemiology on MMR and thimerosal has shown they didn’t cause an “epidemic” of autism.

What takes the tobacco gambit from bad to ridiculous is when, only a few paragraphs later, Ms. Stagilano cites Bernadine Healy. Dr. Healy accepted tobacco company money as part of an organization which denied the dangers of second hand tobacco smoke. One sure sign that Ms. Stagliano’s post is basically propaganda–she refers to Bernadine Healy as “one of the most trusted doctors in America”. Er. Yeah. I would love to poll the “man on the street” and see how many have even heard of Bernadine Healy. Plus, I guess someone can be accept tobacco company money and still be “trusted”? Wll, at least as long as they support the “vaccines might cause autism” concept, eh Ms. Stagliano?

I actually wish Generation Rescue well with their effort to build a Science Advisory Board. I would hope that they would (a) find real scientists and (b) take their advice.

It would be a new direction for Generation Rescue.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →