The other day, I got to thinking about cults. The reason is that it's been clear to me for some time that the antivaccine movement is a quack cult. In fact, a lot of quack groups are very cultish, the example that reminded me of this having been an excellent report published by a young mother named Megan Sandlin, who used to be antivaccine but is no longer. Her post, Leaving the Antivaccine Movement, reminded me very much of the genre of "deconversion" stories, in which atheists who were once fundamentalist Christians describe the process of their losing their religion or cult members describe how they ended up leaving their cult.
Sandlin begins her story by telling first how she became an antivaccinationist when her oldest daughter was about four months old. It was that time that she described discovering the world of "crunchy" parenting, which led her to a world of cloth diapers, "intactivism," and home birth. It didn't take her long to notice that a lot of her newfound friends who raised children that way were hostile to vaccines, which led her to a Google University education that provided her with all the antivaccine "knowledge" and "science" that would mesh with her preconceived notions about "natural" parenting, "toxins," and the like, and fuel an antivaccine world view. And that's exactly what it did. However, even at her most antivaccine, Sandlin had more self-knowledge than the typical antivaccinationist (like the one I described the other day), as Sandlin's musings reveal, or at least, in retrospect she understands where she went wrong:
However, my research was very skewed. I was going into it with preconceived ideas – my anti-vaccine friends had put ideas into my head, such as not trusting government websites. I was forced to rely on whatever I could find while Googling, which were often websites like Mercola or whale.to. I even started “liking” anti-vaccine pages on Facebook – pages that I now understand masquerade as “information” centers. I got added to Facebook groups like “Great Mothers Questioning Vaccines.”Even though all of my supposed research was coming from non-scientific sources, I trusted it.
Hilariously, what ultimately led Sandlin to start questioning her nice, cozy world view and her nice, supportive friends was the phenomenon of crank magnetism, in which a person with irrational beliefs in one area tends to have irrational beliefs in multiple areas. In this case, Sandlin started to notice things about her friends' beliefs that disturbed her:
However, I’ve always considered myself a skeptic, and I began to notice how some of my anti-vaccine friends believed in some other things that I found, well, questionable. For example, several of my anti-vaccine friends posted about chemtrails pretty frequently. I’d never heard of chemtrails, so I did some research and quickly discovered it was just a conspiracy theory easily explained away by people who actually understood how airplane contrails work. I also noticed that skeptic pages I followed occasionally made jabs about “anti-vaxxers” and homeopaths.
It was a slow process, but I gradually began to question my own anti-vaccine views. I stopped posting about vaccines for several months and began seeking out real science that would show me the truth, either way. What I found shocked me.
She went on to describe her process of seeking out real science and real scientific studies and how, more and more, she realized that antivaccine beliefs were not based in science or reason. Ultimately, she did a complete 180° turn and decided that she should be vaccinating her children. So she took her children to the pediatrician and got them their shots, and her two daughters are now in the process of catching up on their vaccines now, which is a wonderful thing. Not surprisingly, however, the reaction of her crunchy friends was not particularly supportive:
The fallout from changing my views was pretty extreme. Within two weeks of “coming out” on Facebook about my new stance, I lost over 50 friends. People who had cheered me on and supported me through my home birth, who had told me countless times that I was an awesome mother and an inspiration, just dropped me like we’d never been friends at all. I was removed from groups and blocked by people I didn’t even know. I was accused of being brainwashed and told that my girls were going to get autism and have terrible reactions. It hurt.
I now view the anti-vaccine movement as a sort of cult, where any sort of questioning gets you kicked out, your crunchy card revoked. I was even told I couldn’t call myself a natural mother anymore, because vaccines are too unnatural. That’s fine. I just want to be the best parent I know how to be, and that means always being open to new information and admitting when I’m wrong.
Notice the characteristics of a cult that I can identify here:
- Authoritarian Leadership: OK, the antivaccine movement, being a diffuse, more dispersed movement doesn't really have this, although it does have heros that it worships who cannot be spoken ill of without severe consequences, like Andrew Wakefield.
- Exclusivism: Antivaccinationists have this in spades. The Thinking Moms' Revolution is a perfect example, in which only the "Thinkers" who have accepted the antivaccine views of the group are viewed as worthy of respect. Everyone else is the enemy.
- Isolationism: The isolationism of the antivaccine movement isn't so much physical but takes more the form of online isolationism, where the antivaccinationists form online communities that avidly try to keep outsiders away.
- Opposition to Independent Thinking: We see this in the case of mothers or other antivaccinationists who start questioning the beliefs of the group, like Sandlin.
- Fear of Being “Disfellowshiped”: We see this in Sandlin's case as well. Until she overcame her fear of losing all her online friends, she couldn't truly be free.
- Threats of Satanic Attack: Antivaccinationists (well, most of them anyway) don't use fear of an actual Satanic attack to keep its adherents in line. It does, however, have Satan equivalents, like Paul Offit, the FDA, the CDC, the government in general, big pharma, and, of course, us skeptics. They are all the enemy that will tempt members from the straight and narrow of the purity of the antivaccine path.
Obviously, the analogy isn't perfect. Cults often have charismatic authoritarian leaders who demand absolute obedience. The antivaccine movement doesn't really have that, but it does have several cults of personality around its heroes. They also aren't as isolated as real cults in that most of them mingle just fine with the rest of the world, with possibly no other problem other than annoying some of their friends for haranguing them about vaccines. All the while it celebrates these online communities thusly:
Thank God for them. Through the message boards, Facebook pages, and websites. I have met some pretty awesome people. Some of them I have even been fortunate enough to meet up with in person a few times. But what I love most about the online community is when I’m having a frustrating/down day I can go to my phone or computer and send them a message. We can chat for hours about all things biomed. We bounce ideas off one another, or just vent. And it’s okay because we support each other, and know that deep down the other one GETS IT!
It's very clear that there are other very cult-like groups going under the alt-med mantle. Perhaps the most prominent one of them is the people who admire Stanislaw Burzynski, which is, if anything, even more cult-like than the antivaccine movement. For example, there is more of a single authoritarian leader who is in charge and about whom no ill can be spoken. He is believed to have powers above and beyond that of average men in that he, apparently alone of all doctors, can cure certain kinds of incurable cancers. For those who believe in him, faith in him is unshakable. No matter how much evidence is presented that he can't do what he claims to be able to do, no matter how much evidence indicating his malfeasance is presented, faith in the Great Savior never wavers. The enemies are the FDA, the NIH, the Texas Medical Board, and, seemingly above all lately, skeptics.
Examples abound of other alt-med practitioners with the same characteristics. The degree to which each of the six characteristics applies varies, sometimes markedly, which is why I'm not referring to these groups as being strictly cults, but rather as being cult-like. Think Robert O. Young, whose defenders have popped up, although unfortunately for him, his cult of personality is nowhere near as powerful as that of Stanislaw Burzynski. Think Jess Ainscough. I could go on and on, but you get the idea.
Irrational beliefs have a great deal of power over the human mind. Beliefs such as those at the core of alt-med appeal to our deepest desires, desires for purity, for health, for immortality, for community, for a purpose in life. In these things and others, belief in such treatments shares many characteristics with religion and cults. As imperfect as the analogy might be, it's still a compelling one. Alt-med, antivaccine beliefs, and the like might not be an actual religion or cult per se, but they share enough with cults for the analogy to help us understand the resistance to evidence, the hatred of outsiders, and the shunning of "apostates" who abandon the religion. Evidence alone can rarely overcome such irrational beliefs, but the case of Megan Sandlin demonstrates, if a member is primed for a deconversion, putting the evidence out there can help it along. It's part of why I do what I do.
- Log in to post comments
Dreg, when you last scurried out of here with your tail between your legs, it was just after you were challenged to support your premise: that commenters here whom you regard as experts 'appear to believe' that vaccines cause autism.
What non-stupid argument can you offer in belated support of that premise? I specify "non-stupid" to eliminate, for instance, the idiotic "he talked about what the evidence shows and somehow that means he doesn't believe what the evidence shows" argument you've squatted and emitted previously.
Please present your answer in the form of a syllogism or sorites. Digressions such as tennis analogies and vague assertions about attributes of Truth should be saved for your private blog.
It was removed. Nothing changed. So STFU already.
OH J-sus! I wonder why he chose an example from tennis? Let me see... who plays tennis here? Orac? Kreb? Antaeus?
Chris?
At any rate, here's a recent real life D-K tennis story:
2 thirty-something guys ask an instructor, Mike, if he could get them a few lessons, "Sure", he responds, "What level are you?" The guys say that they are intermediates and that they played tennis as teenagers.
Well, they show up for the lesson and Mike sees that they are nowhere near being intermediates- they are beginners who remember a little bit from long ago lessons. they are in-expert and un-aware of it. They mix up being about to run around a lot with playing tennis. They over-estimate their own abilities and knowledge. They don't see their own errors in execution or finding the correct positions for play.
They are- "all over the place". But not in a good way.
Which brings uo to the creature's analogy- it doesn't illustrate what he would like it to illustrate.
Are we to suppose that the 'amateurs' are SB researchers/ advocates and that "Roger' is who- ?
Who misses "steps"?
Who understands the "mechanics"?
Who effectively gets the task done and who doesn't?
Setting up this analogy itself illustrates D-K.
-btw- as a perfect example, Dan Olmsted today speculates about the polio-like illness in California and arsenic used previously in the wine-making area.
@ Denice
There was an analogy?
All I saw is his acknowledgement that a common amateur can not do as well as a true professional.
@ Helianthus:
See his last few sentences. It may not be such a bad analogy if he reversed it.
Amateurs mimic superficial appearances while not comprehending the underlying structure/ concepts " faults ...as clear as day to see". I'll say.
@Denise - I was a little surprised by what he wrote, since it could be surmised that he, himself, is the amateur attempting to look swap & replicate critical thinking, but actually doing nothing of the sort.....I'm sure he really didn't think that one through (like he does at anything, for that matter).
Sorry to hear that, notation.
You were doing a really good job over there.
I'm not sure I'll have enough time to keep up with the action, but I'll try to drop in once in a while to try to maintain some sanity.
And on the totally not serious side, I had a thought this morning for a weird bumper sticker....
Support schools for the deaf and blind
Don't vaccinate!!!!
(deafness and blindness are side effects of diseases that can be prevented by vaccinating your children as recommended by the CDC.)
@Greg 496
Please read my comment 472 carefully, word by word, all the way through.
@Greg 497,
If the data show there is not even a correlation between vaccination and autism (which they do from multiple studies by different researchers studying different populations), then why would Occam's razor imply that vaccination is a cause of autism?
The simpler assumption (and Occam's razor is just a guide to making reasonable assumptions about the likely answer) is that the cause or causes of autism is something else and there is little or no connection to vaccination.
squirrelelite: "Please read my comment 472 carefully, word by word, all the way through."
Any bets if Greg will answer my question on which is safer for a baby to get: a DTaP vaccine or a pertussis infection?
@Greg 497,
Your tennis example does have one useful point.
The people who have done the many studies that show no connection between autism and vaccination are experts like Roger Federer. They have spent many hours learning about biology chemistry and statistics and how to compare different factors to evaluate the probability of a correlation and the plausibility of a possible causal effect.
You and I (at least in this area) are amateurs, so I am much more likely to respect the results of their research, particularly since it has been confirmed by other researchers, than I would respect your opinions and guesses (and mine as well in this area).
At least when I try to discuss this area, I go back to the data and look carefully at the best sources and see what they tell me. (I learned that back in high school.)
@Chris, I wouldn't take you up on that bet and I don't think Greg will either!
Just what I thought. I don't even bother reading his silly screeds anymore. I just give them a bit of a glance, it is much more interesting to read the replies to him from those who have the stomach for his nonsense. I salute all of you who do try to reason with him.
@Krebiozen -
FYI. I like the length of your resopnse. You've got style.
A recent study in Guinea Bissau found that almost 10% of children had suffered a rotavirus infection by the age of 2 months, and almost 75% by the age of 2 years.
OK. But in the US we have > 90% coverage for 2 month vaccinations; yes, the robustness of an infection vs a vaccine is different, but we are casting a much wider net at the earliest stages of life.
Why haven’t we seen a dramatic fall in autism incidence now far fewer children suffer infections like this?
If we want to base the entire increase in ASDs on diagnostic shifting, being better at identifying things, it doesn't make much sense to argue that the opposite when it fits our recommended result.
You still appear to completely miss my point that without vaccines children lurch from one infection to another. When I was young almost every child would get rotavirus, measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, pertussis, colds and flu, and many got worse infections.
BUT NOT WHEN YOU WERE TWO MONTHS OLD. Think back to Galic 2008; they only showed effects at PD14, not at PD1 and not at PD20. Try to incorporate this fact into my inappropriate terminology for calling a two month old an infant.
I submit that whatever putative window of vulnerability you choose, an average child is exposed to far less immune activity in the current vaccine era than a few decades ago.
Yes, but lots of those infants died a few decades ago.
If I fall over and graze my knee, getting soil into the wound, how is the immune response my body exhibits qualitatively different to its reaction to an aluminum-adjuvanted vaccine?
How often did you get dirt intramuscularly? You ever play soccer as a kid? I did, and I had scraped knees about three days a week during soccer season. For some reason, I never developed fevers afterwards. Weird.
Why is fever required to disrupt the immune system enough to cause autism in your hypothesis?
Because it is our only avaialble proxy of immune activation available to us considering that measurements of things like cytokines, chemokines and other immune mediators post vaccination are not available. Look, if you could show me that getting a two month vaccination schedule results in the same immune response as a jar of creamed brocolli, you'd have me. Do you honestly think that's the case? Why not post an article that tries to elucidate it?
Show me some normal neurodevelopment being persistently disrupted by a fever and I might be convinced, but even in mitochondrial disorders this is controversial.
Here is a review regarding sham infections (i.e., LPS):
Neonatal programming of innate immune function (Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2011 Jan;300)
Or, a review using actual infections.
The immune system and developmental programming of brain and behavior. (Front Neuroendocrinol. 2012 Aug;33)
Clearly, the use of animal models here is problematic, but it raises to my mind how little we understand. We are just getting started working with rodents. Maybe there is no parallel between the rodents and humans. Maybe the only window of vulnerability in humans is prenatal. I don't know. A lot of people seem to take the fact that animal studies being all we have as a confidence booster, I tend to see it as worrying. Perhaps we have different opinions.
Despite this awareness, close surveillance and numerous studies, I see no evidence that neurodevelopmental delay is a consequence of vaccination.
Please see the IOM report you linked to regarding the 'close surveillance and numerous studies' to this regard.
The committee did not identify literature reporting clinical, diagnostic, or experimental evidence of autism after the administration of vaccines containing diphtheria toxoid, tetanus toxoid, and acellular pertussis antigens alone or in combination.
LOL. The authors looked at exactly one study, a Grier paper. They didn't identify any *other* papers because no one has looked.
The committee reviewed one study to evaluate the risk of autism after the administration of DTaP vaccine. This one study (Geier and Geier, 2004) was not considered in the weight of epideimiological evidence because it provided data from a passive survellance system and lacked an unvaccianted comparison population
That is the strength of data you are relying on, a complete paucity of analysis. I'm trying to figure out if you knew this when you snipped that out or not.
Is it really accurate to describe being injected intraperitoneally with LPS from E. coli, serotype O26:B6 at a dose of 25, 100, or 250 µg/kg as an immune challenge?
Yes. If you goto pubmed and search for 'LPS' and 'immune' you get nearly 12,000 hits. It is an impefect tool, there are large species differences in reactions, but it is very commonly used as a tool for investigating the immune response. You aren't going to argue that it isn't used frequently for evaluating immune response, are you?
So, is a small dose of LPS really analogous to a child being vaccinated? I don’t think so, but even if so, it is a very large leap from this to the idea that something similar causes autism.
I don't know. Well, that is where you and I got into a pretty big disconnect that last time we tried this. I posited that because we have no good data on the in vivo immune response (i.e., cytokines, chemokines, markers of inflammation) that this question is a mystery to us. If you have some data on characterizing that immune response from vaccines in infants provide it. Don't just goto google scholar and insist it is hiding in there. Here's a tip, try searching the IOM report for 'cytokine', 'IL-6', or 'CRP'.
Also, it is important to incorporate into this that children with autism have immune biomarkers consistent with exaggerated innate immune responses.
t? We can look at the various studies that have been done, and the epidemiological evidence. I’m convinced by this that MMR, thimerosal and DTaP have no effect on autism.
Agreed re: thimerosal + MMR. On what epidemiological evidence do you base your thoughts on the DTaP? The Geier paper?
Is the sarcasm really necessary?
LOLS. It wasn't sarcasm. I was actually surprised! [I am trying to work on reducing my sarcasm, with limited results.]
The 13 million to one chance is worth playing because you might win a million? Why isn’t my broccoli hypothesis (or Fred’s cell phone hypothesis, or Jane’s androgens in the water hypothesis, or Fatima’s yoga mat toxicity hypothesis) equally worthy of attention?
Because we have embarked on an expansion of our vaccine schedule, but we have not embarked on an expansion of infant broccoli eating.
No considerable evidence? Have you looked at the IoM report on vaccines?
The IOM report can't incorporate data you can't provide, studies excluding thimerosal and the MMR. I'm going to blockquote a shit ton of text from the article you suggested I read. Can you, or anyone, point out to me within this article where data excluding thimerosal and the MMR is present?
Olmsted's article is up on Age of Autism, about the kids in California with paralysis, with what appears to be an enterovirus:
http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/02/polio-like-cluster-in-california-has…
Will Dan offer his professional services to the CDC and the California Department of Public Health to investigate these enterovirus-associated cases of paralysis?
After all, polio is the only enterovirus that has ever been identified. Oh wait...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterovirus
Two of the California children who have been identified as having "polio-like paralysis", have been diagnosed with Enterovirus-71 infections, according to a CNN report:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterovirus_71
I'm not surprised at Greg's bungling an analogy; I haven't forgotten the time he ended up asserting by analogy that antivaxxers, desperate to 'prove' that vaccines caused harm to children, might resort to inflicting injury upon children themselves so that they could then falsely assign blame to vaccines.
The Olmsted bullshit wasn't even original. He lifted it from Janine Roberts and a whole bunch of books covering the theory.
There's another reason why the analogy is not apropo:
I assume that those being held up for praise here are antivaxxers HOWEVER this group is notorious for scoffing at experts and expertise. Thye have their own rules.
Most tennis players/ sports journalists would consider RF to be one of the best EVER. Not much argument there.
I doubt that most anti-vaxxers would cite experts on vaccines- in fact they despise Paul Offit and the CDC.
Greg, #497, February 25, 2014
The only reasonable response this has been variously attributed to, among others, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, and HL Mencken. It is s obvious here, that I'm surprised that I'm allowed to be the one who mentions it:
Whoever said it (probably more than one), and which if the minor variations one may choose, it fits Greg's VCA myth exactly.
Waht simple, basic arguments are those exactly, Greg? I trust you are talking about something other than post hoc ergo procter hoc logical fallacies or the simple fact that the number of individuals diagnosed with autism has increased over time.
Be specific.
"Professor" CIA Parker has been busy today, posting hundreds of comments on the Mother Jones blog. She really has gone off the deep end of anti-vaccine lunacy:
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/vaccine-exemptions-state…
Lilady: I think Parker does the rest of the country a favor. Any sensible but uninformed person who is curious about the anti-vaccine controversy will get three lines into one of her tirades and conclude that this woman is a raving lunatic.
squirrelelite asks,
He tricked me! That darn Julian tricked me. The instruction he gave me made blockquote of the entire text. Where is my Julian voodoo doll?
@Antaeus
Indeed you're a scoundrel as I already made clear. Please point precisely to where I made this assertion.
The blockquote worked this time. Sorry Jullian!
Shay, Parker is a pathetic paranoid pathological liar, who is neglecting her special needs child.
Further to my outline at #525, detailing the counter arguments against the link and no-link claim, I would like to pose this question: Is it better to have 1000 pieces of evidence coming from one source (ie scientific studies), or 1000 pieces of evidence coming from 1000 of sources (ie circumstantial evidence)?
One source? more likely 1000 sources using the same method of getting the best evidence there is, scientists are peoples too.
Alain
Go ask Bevington.
^ (No slight intended to Press et al.)
Gregger @530:
Leaving aside the fact that multiple studies done in different countries by different researchers using different datasets is not "one source", no.
How much circumstantial evidence of witchcraft is there? Literally thousands of people (mostly women but sometimes men) were put to death for witchcraft over the centuries, yet no hard scientific evidence of witchcraft's existence has been found.
We have told you before that circumstantial and anecdotal evidence are starting points, not end points. We have pointed out the problems with human memory, and that it can be distorted. We have shown you that a lot of the circumstantial evidence you have raised in support of your arguments is flawed. In the Omnibus Autism Proceedings, Michelle Cedillo's parents submitted videotape of her before she received the MMR. An expert revealed that she was already showing autistic traits in that video.
Were you unable to figure out the link?
@ Denice #503/505
Sorry, there was a bit of sarcasm inside my answer :-)
Some other remarks on more recent posts by our visitor.
You call "every vaccine does it, regardless of their chemical content, with a delay period from a few seconds to 6 months", with little holes when trying to add non-vaccinated autistic siblings. a simple hypothesis?
More like carpet-bombing.
There is a reason why "idiot" was historically used as "village idiot".
Yeah, there were plenty of non-neurotypical people, in old times. Other people generally just bagged all of them together as "crazy". And "useless". The more functional ones learned to get by - as court jesters, for a stereotype - or died trying.
Between the 17th and the 19th centuries in old Europe, "lunatic asylums" and other sanitariums started to be created to put them out of the streets. Example: French Charenton., 17th century. I will let the curious ones looking up Bedlam (est. 13th century) or any other famous asylum.
Learned scholars can point at a few historical figures whose behavior would have learned them today a place on the autism spectrum.
Grog, I hesitate to tell you while you are stilll clearly struggling with the complexities of blockquotes, but I need to point out that text which is blue in colour represents a hyperlink - clicking the cursor arrow over them will take you to the link directly.
Good luck.
She has claimed she knows as much about medicine as all the "experts".
Dunning Kruger doesn't even begin to describe this species of creature. She still is in total denial about her child's condition, claiming that autism was the result of vaccines, when she admits she had a late and difficult birth, complicated by a true knot in the umbilical cord which caused fetal distress and hypoxia, necessitating an emergency ceasarean section, and that her daugfhter has a neurexin-1 gene deletion (a genetic condition directly causing....wait for it....autism!). Instead she blames neonatal Hep B vaccine for causing neonatal "encephalitis" (she is an expert in that medical condition too, although this was a self diagnosis and she never went to hospital), and this was what led to "autism" in her view.
The NRXN-1 deletion? Oh, that doesn't cause autism, it merely makes her child "more susceptible" to developing a vaccine reaction.
So, it's the vaccines, always was and always will be, for ever and ever, amen.
@Dingo - she is a real piece of work....despite being repeated shown that her assertions are lies, she just waits a couple of weeks & starts right back up again (using a different alias or just putting a slightly different spin using whatever is the anti-vax play of the week, that week).
@dinglo
Thank you, dingo, for the tip. However, Antaeus' hyperlink did not lead precisely to the comment that he mentioned. It mere led to the article heading, and hence, I suspect Antaeus was attempting to pull a fast one. Again Antaeus, please point (provide the precise hyperlink) to where I claim by analogy parents should injure their kids so that they can claim blame vaccines.
Gladly. If a vile idiot invites me to spell out the embararrassing details of his 'own goal' for all to see, who am I to turn down that offer?
This is the comment in which Dreg first offers his analogy. "Tom", in the analogy, is someone who is solidly committed to proving that "the Evil Eye" visits harm upon children. Obviously, for the analogy to have any relevance to the VCA manufactroversy, Tom must represent the antivaxers.
In Dreg's analogy, Tom, representing the antivaxers, is able to make a startlingly accurate prediction as to what specific harm the "Evil Eye" will inflict upon a specific child. This, of course, is something that antivaxers cannot do in real life. (Indeed, we've seen multiple examples where the medical condition already exists and yet the antivaxers who claim it to be "vaccine injury" cannot describe it correctly; there are certainly no cases where they predicted it with startling accuracy beforehand.)
Commenter Vicki points out (in comment 614, to which I'm omitting the link to avoid this comment being held for moderation) that the most likely explanation for Tom's startlingly accurate 'prediction' is that Tom "either broke the child’s arm himself, or got a friend or hireling to do it", because he wanted so badly to 'prove' that the Evil Eye could harm children. This is the comment where Greg agrees with Vicki, praising her for coming up with "a plausible explanation for the dispute" and agreeing "Indeed it’s possible that Tom may have broken Bobby’s arm." Did Dreg realize he was asserting by analogy that antivaxers might commit injury on children, so that they could lie and claim it was a consequence of vaccines? Perhaps not, but it's what he did, whether he realized it or not.
pD,
I don't have time to address your last point in full, but I will mention the IoM study, since I think you missed my point about it. I specifically wrote, about the vaccine-autism hypothesis:
Yet you replied:
I suggested looking at the evidence as a whole, but you have insisted on focusing on one small area, again.
Why has no one looked, do you think?
It's true they didn't identify any epidemiological studies specifically looking at DTaP and autism, apart from the Geiers' VAERS trawling paper that sought to prove that DTaP containing thimerosal caused developmental delays (which presumably means they think thimerosal-free version does not).
Neither did they identify any mechanistic evidence supporting the DTaP-autism hypothesis, despite a comprehensive search. What this means to me is that no one has come across anything to suggest DTaP causes autism, certainly not anything compelling enough for anyone to carry out an epidemiological study.
I do sympathize; no one takes my broccoli-autism hypothesis seriously either. However, I wouldn't expect anyone to accept a lack of definitive epidemiological studies on broccoli-consumption and developmental disorders as evidence that my hypothesis is correct.
I know that there is little good quality specific evidence that specifically excludes the possibility that DTaP causes autism. My point is that a large body of variable quality evidence points in the same direction, and none of it supports your hypothesis. The evidence considered by the IoM is just a small collection.
The IoM study includes a very thorough review of the evidence for DTaP causing encephalitis or encephalopathy (9 epidemiological studies, 5 mechanistic studies), infantile spasms (1 epidemiological, 2 mechanistic), seizures (14 epidemiological, 20 mechanistic), acute cerebellar ataxia (1 and 1), autism (1 and 0), acute disseminated encephalomyelitis 0 and 5), transverse myelitis (0 and 4), optic neuritis (1, 1).
In each case they concluded that there is insufficient evidence to support a link. If you see this worrying lack of evidence as a good reason to start worrying about DTaP causing acute cerebellar ataxia, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, transverse myelitis, and optic neuritis as well as autism, then I don't think I can help you.
I'm still trying to figure out if you still miss my point or if something else is going on here. Over 60 safety studies on DTaP, none of which show even a hint of an association with any neurological or any other problems, are a "complete paucity of analysis"? I just don't see it like that.
Is it really likely that DTaP is causing autism without increasing the risk of encephalopathy, encephalitis or seizures? I don't think so.
Going back to my 'elephant in the backyard' analogy, I feel like you are gloating over the fact there is no DNA evidence specifically excluding the possibility that there was an elephant in my backyard last night. You think this proves that there might well have been an elephant there.
I'm trying to explain the reason there is no DNA evidence is that there are no footprints, no elephant droppings, nor any other reason for anyone to think the elephant in the backyard hypothesis is likely enough to make DNA testing necessary.
I believe this.
In 1979 I volunteered at a hospital for the 'mentally handicapped' near Cambridge in the UK. There were several wards with literally hundreds of residents of varying degrees of disability, and many more who were there on a temporary basis, giving their parents respite for example. I encountered lots of hand-flapping and head-banging, with several residents in protective headgear because of this. I spent one evening each week there for the next couple of years, helping out the staff of just playing with or talking to residents. I even spent a Christmas Day there; a group of us dressed up as Santas or fairies as taste dictated and we delivered gifts donated by local businesses. It was a lot of fun, and very rewarding.
There were 540 residential patients at the hospital (including the adjacent mental hospital) in 1981. There are now fewer than 100 beds, most of those acute. There must be at least 400 people, probably many more, who would have been residents there had things continued as they were in the 70s, but who are now elsewhere, mostly living in the community.
I saw more hand-flapping and head-banging during that couple of years than I have seen in the three decades since. Does that means that there has been a massive fall in mental disability during that time? Or could it mean that my experience is not representative and that anecdotal observations are not a good way of determining these things?
@Kreb - Derg seems to only know what "he sees with his own eyes." Never mind the history of mental institutions in this country and others, where tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of individuals considered "mentally-deficient" were shut away from the rest of society - institutions, of course, that don't exist anymore because those individuals are now either mainstreamed or live in group environments across the country.
The individuals that Derg seeks have existed long before now - just read the horror stories of 19th Century Mental Institutions (or the stories told and retold of old relatives that were never spoken about - because they were "sent away").
Just another example of how unbelievably stupid Derg is.
Autism is plainly evident in accounts from English lunatic asylums in the 18th and 19th centuries, if not also long before (but I've not looked).
@Lawrence
Excuse me there Lawrence while I take a page out of Dachel's book: So with the institution closed, where the fu€k are all these non-verbal, head banging, hand flapping autistics in their 40s, 50s, and 60s? We are not talking quirky individuals that the British study seeking to justify the lie of better detection went looking for. We are talking about severely affected autistic adults.
Again, which other idiot amongst you (other than Kreb) seriously believes that these adults are out there, and we just have to search harder for them?
The US and UK are dotted with large institutional campuses which formerly housed people with both developmental and psychological disabilities. There's a short story ( available on the internet/ "Told in the Drooling Ward"/ google drooling ward/ tasman) from a hundred years ago: Jack London worked in such a facility but wrote as though he were an inmate who functioned sufficiently well to assist with those who could not.
The place is in Glen Ellen, CA - near London's ranch and present day historical site- and still exists. The large, mostly vacant Victorian buildings suggest that it once did not house as few people as it does today.
Because anti-vaccine advocates are not aware of places like this- or others we could name- doesn't mean that they didn't exist.
I was in those developmental centers and those psychiatric centers more than 30 years ago...including the world's largest psychiatric center...Pilgrim State Hospital, where children and adults with developmental disabilities, including autism were warehoused.
New York State recently announced the closures of the last of the State developmental centers. Marc Brandt President of NYSARC has a press release up, which details the promises made by former NYS Governor Hugh Carey following the Willowbrook Federal Court Class Action Consent to close those human warehouses; promises made and promises kept.
http://blog.nysarc.org/2013/07/29/politics-as-it-happens-state-to-close…
Scroll down to read the one dissenting voice by an individual represent VOR.
VOR? Sound familiar? VOR is the newest sponsor of Age of Autism, which purports to be a national advocacy group. VOR is a front for the union members employed in those human warehouses in every State. They advocate to keep the status quo.
@Chris
Chris, I keep providing you with the study that you been asking everyone for showing that infections from natural diseases are safer than infections from vaccines. The problem is Orac has me on automatic moderation, and at every turn, he is blocking my release of this information. What'dya gonna do with that guy? I won't be surprised if he denies it and all.
Did you hear that, Orac? Look -- I am trying to have a serious discussion with Chris here, so quit screwing around!!
I will try to send the info again, Chis. Let me know in the next day or so if you received it. Chis, you must understand though that my hands are tied with Orac playing his childish games.
Thanks, Squirrel, of the kind words. I find it very discouraging to see the level of stupidity and ignorance on Mother Jones and Alternet, etc. I can only hope the asswaffles like Pi, sabelmouse, and cia are part of a very small minority.
Oops, FOR the kind words! Hate typing on tablets!
Kreb: I saw more hand-flapping and head-banging during that couple of years than I have seen in the three decades since. Does that means that there has been a massive fall in mental disability during that time?
I have a couple of theories: First of all, an instituition, no matter how well it is run, tends to stress the occupants, and stimming is a way of relieving stress. An autistic individual out in the community or at home with family will likely be less stressed and won't need to stim as often. (I don't mean to diss your workplace, Kreb.)
I'd suspect that the lack of an older group of autistic people is due to them not surviving their time in the instituition, or some of them perpetually masking their symptoms.
Another possibility is that a lot of older adults were never diagnosed and were able to pass for NT.
We know today that Asperger's is often overlooked in women- it's not much of a logical leap to think that a lot of autistic women weren't diagnosed or were lumped into categories that no longer exist.
I also suspect that some autistic people were lucky enough to be born into rich families, and therefore were simply labeled 'eccentric' and left alone.
Basically, I believe that the number of autistic people is probably constant; the only reason there seem to be more autistic people around is that they weren't part of the wider community, and because of glitched perceptions (I.E., Greg's crowd's ability to project like Imaxs.)
I've seen this on the TMR blog- one mom seemed to be seeing autistic and gluten-damaged children everywhere, based on the flimsiest evidence. I don't know about you, but I'd be more likely to attribute under-eye circles on a kid to a lot of late-night reading.
@Derg - exactly what percentage of autistics do you believe exhibit that behavior? Because you make it sound like it would be "everyone" that is autistic, when we know that severe autism is a subset of the overall total....so who exactly are you talking about? Because we've also seen plenty of children with autism that start out on the severe side of the spectrum, but do progress with age that includes a reduction in overall symptoms....
You really are a stupid jackass, aren't you?
@ dingo 199 : I posted a comment on Mother Jones blog about Professor Parker being banned at the SOP blog...and her silly posts directed at an infectious diseases doc. :-)
@ Notation: Were you really banned by MJ...or were some of your comments flagged and removed? I issued an invitation to Parker and her colleagues (sockies?) to come and post on RI, where I will be waiting for them.
Why don't you just post that information in a comment on Age of Autism, Dreg? I mean, if that study exists, and isn't just a feeble lie told by a dishonest, malicious half-wit, I'm sure AoA will be overjoyed. (Actually, AoA will be thrilled even if it IS a feeble lie told by a dishonest, malicious half-wit; who could possibly have a better grasp on what their readers want to be told?)
While you're at it, you can answer some of the other questions you've avoided, such as the one at #501.
Thanks for responding Greg.
Obviously a lot of people have commented already, but I'll skip them for the moment to give a direct reply to your points.
1. Please provide direct links to the published studies. There are several large, well-designed studies that show the opposite so these studies would need to be well designed and replicated by independent sources.
2. This is the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Event B happens after event A, so the person observing (the parent) makes a guess that event A caused event B. But, because the developmental changes that lead to a diagnosis of autism happen during the time period when young children are receiving their vaccinations, there are going to be a lot of cases where the diagnosis occurs shortly after the child receives a vaccine.
To distinguish whether this is a real correlation or just random, you need to look at a large number children who receive or don't receive the vaccinations and see if children who get their vaccinations are more likely to be autistic. And the results show they are not.
3. WHAT ?????? Do you have a better reference than PD that autism is an immune dysfunction condition?
Really? I checked a couple references for autism symptoms:
http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/autism-symptoms
and
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/autism/basics/symptoms/co…
and I don't see seizures or brain inflammation as symptoms of autism.
I've been taking medicine for seizures for almost 40 years now and probably had them for quite a few years before then. But, none of my neurologists has suggested I be referred for an evaluation for autism. Do you think they were missing something?
As for a cause, the bottom line still is that we really don't know. As the next page on the Mayo link notes:
But, research on young infants using video of their behaviors detects autistic-like behavior as early as a few months, which is well below the vaccination that supposedly "caused" the autism. The current consensus seems to be that the changes that lead to what is eventually diagnosed as autism happen during the period when the brain develops in the womb.
5. Were you talking about the NVICP or the Italian courts?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2013/08/09/court-rulings-do…
For the NVICP, the people claiming a link picked the cases with the best and strongest evidence of a vaccine-autism link out of thousands of possible claims. They were independently judged and all came back negative. No vaccine-autism link!
Then there are your exceptions.
1. I'm awaiting your answer to point 1 above.
2. Some people who smoke don't get cancer????
You're right. Some of them get emphysema instead. Some of them die of other causes like my grandfather who was a heavy smoker and died about 50 years ago, probably from the prolonged effects of rheumatoid arthritis.
BUT, the same sort of large population studies that fail to show a link between vaccines and autism DO show a link between smoking and lung cancer (as well as emphysema). They also show a weaker but still significant connection between passive exposure to tobacco smoke and lung cancer.
So is Big Pharma better at buying out the researchers than Big Tobacco?
But the real point is, before we look for a causal effect, we need to show that there is at least a correlation. We haven't shown the latter, so carrying on after the former is putting the cart before the horse.
You're welcome, Notation.
I went over to Mother Jones yesterday and was beaten down by the Gish Gallop of repeated false, fallacious and unsupported claims. It was hard to pick out where to even begin to argue against it.
BTW. I posted a response to Greg 525, but stuck 3 links in, so it is in moderation. It will probably come out tonight when it rises to the top of Orac's execution queue.
Oh woe onto him who would instruct the great and powerful Orac in running his own blog! And would accuse him of editing out rubbis.. ( ahem!) MATERIAL and not being on on the up and up. Woe to him!
There is a line somewhere and occasionally the unsuspecting step over it. Then they are greatly surprised when SUDDENLY.....
Gregger:
Somehow I don't believe you.
Some of them are still in other types of residential care such as group homes, some are with families or foster families. Some are undoubtedly no longer alive; many of the more severely affected people had other problems, such as frequent fits and cerebral palsy. If you are suggesting these people didn't exist, the existence of the hospital, the Ida Darwin Hospital, is well-documented as are the number of patients it had.
Which British study went looking for "quirky individuals"? Do you mean this one (PDF) that found 1.1% of adults in England are autistic? It used the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised, which is a revised version of a diagnostic interview for caregivers of individuals with possible pervasive developmental disorders, as described in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (1994;24:659-85), not in the Journal of Quirky Individuals'.
It is interesting that for Greg every single child diagnosed with autism is definitely autistic, but adult autistics are merely "quirky individuals". Sometimes a person's prejudices just can't help coming out.
A question for Greg -
Based on what you have posted here, I have come to believe that you believe the cause of autism is vaccines, and only vaccines.
Do you believe genetics play no role in causing autism? I have to stick to your requirement of a one word ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer.
Considering that I used to work at a MR/DD facility, which has housed MR/DD individuals since the 1800s, and had individuals who would today be classified as having just autism using DSM-V criteria in the 1800s, I'm sure greg's analogy falls flat.
But then again, who should be surprised at greg's lack of intelligence.
There was a free redundant apostrophe in that last comment. Use it wisely.
Actually, Derg continues to show his bias by only referring to individuals by the traits that they exhibit, rather than as real honest-to-goodness human beings that do see a change in their condition over time (i.e. traits shown at age 5 aren't the same or present differently at age, say 30).
He continues to highlight his own ignorance about the condition that he claims to be "intimately" familiar with.
One of my good friends spent a decade as an Autism Mentor / Tutor - assigned to a child with autism to directly assist in his education (starting in Kindergarten & working with him all the way to 6th Grade). In the beginning, he did present a number of the "stimming" traits that Derg claims are permanent conditions of all people with "true autism" - but over time, that student was able to improve to the point where he was able to be fully integrated and successful in the school environment.
These are the individuals that Derg considers "brain damaged" and less than human.....
@Julian - yeah, somehow I don't believe him either.
Greg: "Chris, I keep providing you with the study that you been asking everyone for showing that infections from natural diseases are safer than infections from vaccines. The problem is Orac has me on automatic moderation, and at every turn, he is blocking my release of this information.."
If that were true I would have seen it, but I have not. If your other comments come in, I see no reason why you would be blocked posting a study. Just provide the PubMed Identification Numbers, for example:
11773570
9866730
9652634
10657185
21412506
20643726
20498176
19482753
You can easily find those studies by going to PubMed.gov and plugging the numbers into the search box. Which I suggest you do.
Then tell us which is safer for a baby to get: a DTaP vaccine or a pertussis infection. Provide the PubMed Identification Number of the study by a qualified reputable researcher supporting your answer.
No more excuses.
The fact of the matter is that in the U.S., because the obvious data source (formerly Census, now ACS) isn't collected on the basis of specific diagnoses, it is necessary to tease this information out (e.g., here). The SSI data (PDF; Table 35) are also difficult to interpret, because "austistic disorders" didn't start to get broken out until 2006, so there's very likely mixing into "intellectual disability" and "other mental disorders" in the older groups, since there's no need to go back and reclassify if someone is obviously disabled, and for someone who's not expected to improve, continuing disability reviews are quite infrequent in any event.
I.e., yes, Gerg was too dumb to figure out that there was a spurious quotation mark at the end of the original link.
That isn't what's being asked for, greg.
The question you were asked was "Is it safer for a baby to get: a DTaP vaccine or to get a pertussis infection?" , not "Is it safer for a baby to get an infection caused by a vaccine or an infection caused by the pathogen it protects against?"
Apparently if you bang your head or flap your hands one time, you are required to do it for the rest of your life. Hey, I don't write the rules.
@Kreb 559
In Greg's world, adults with autism, like fairies, simply cease to exist if you don't believe in them.
-vanishes in a poof of quiet social awkwardness-
In all seriousness, though, my diagnosis didn't come until I hit adulthood. I'd been diagnosed as severe ADHD until then. It wasn't until I crashed and burned partway through college that I got a serious re-evaluation and it was fairly obvious at that point that ADHD as a diagnosis was incomplete at best. Comorbidity wasn't helping.
TL;DR Autism is complicated. And if there's anything antivaxxers can be counted on to do, it's to completely be oblivious to the fact that Life Is Complicated and One Thing Is Not Usually Responsible For The World's Ills.
@Johnny
'No'.
Genetics may indeed predispose an individual to the environmental insult of vaccines that may result in autism. In this regard, genetics appears to play a role in autism. Yet, I do not believe it in itself causes autism.
There's a lode of unmined hilarity here. Gerg, why would people have evolved with scores of vaccine-specific genes?
Then why is it, Greg, that when we sequence autistic individuals and their families, we find plenty of de novo mutations in genes that are all deeply connected to neuronal development pathways, but none in genes related to immunity?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3350576/
Once you've grappled with that idea, perhaps you'd like to come up with an explanation for why mouse models with mutated copies of the genes identified in autism sequencing studies exhibit features characteristic of autism and other developmental disorders.
http://omim.org/entry/600855
Did the vaccines cause it in the mice too, Greg?
Greg: "Genetics may indeed predispose an individual to the environmental insult of vaccines that may result in autism."
And the actual disease would be completely harmless? That makes absolutely no sense.
So, what is safer for a baby to get: a DTaP vaccine or a pertussis infection? Provide the PubMed identification number to the study by qualified reputable researchers to support your answer.
@Johnny
I see you inching to appear as the big-man, wanting to talk straight. Very well Johnny, let's see if, unlike your peers, you won't blink: Do you personally believe that vaccines play a role in the causation of autism?
Remember just a 'yes', or 'no', Johnny.
Pathetic attempt to try to change the subject duly noted.
You can call her a liar, a lunatic, deranged...
CIA Parker: The ultimate warrior!
You screwed her over, and now she is screwing you over.
Greg, What is safer for a baby to get: a DTaP vaccine or a pertussis infection? Provide the PubMed identification number to the study by qualified reputable researchers to support your answer.
Here is some reading material to help you with that question: California flu deaths hit 202; infant dies from whooping cough.
Greg, I see you've completely ignored my point about the actual results of genomic studies of autistic individuals.
You claimed that there are genes that, when mutated a certain way, predispose an individual to autism through some kind of vaccine-y, immune-y mechanism that seems to exist in your head.
So why haven't the studies that are designed to specifically find these genes found anything related to immunity? Why is it that the alleles they do find lead to developmental disorders in mice, who have never been exposed to any vaccines?
Johnny, don't answer him. If you say "no" he'll just assume you're lying.
Glerg, what are you, 12? What a fucking asswipe you are.
Groggy,are you denying that children die of diseases that can be,prevented by vaccines? Are you really arguing that?
Ignore the superfluous comma. At least it is better than a coma, which is the apparent state in which Glog exists.
Gerg is no doubt trying to figure out how to delay long enough to the next flounce busily composing thoughtful replies.
As such, Gerg, could you apply your "occam razor logic" to cough up some "beautiful and simple" "truth" so that "average-Joe can rest assured that he is capable, Gerg, of grasping" your "simple, basic arguments" that are stuck having to explain how valproic acid fits into them?
Please be specific about HDAC inhibition, why it's apparently paradoxical, and how your analysis supports your "claim that autism appears to be an immune condition, and vaccines are the likely culprits."
@Narad,
Thanks for the pdf export, it work beautifully :D
Alain
@lilady,
I'll be reading for some time this list of publications:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=((%22Behavior+Therapy%22%5BMesh%5D)+NOT+%22Cognitive+Therapy%22%5BMesh%5D)+AND+%22Child+Development+Disorders%2C+Pervasive%22%5BMesh%5D
I'll be reading them over the night as I have an early appointment tomorrow morning and can't bring myself to sleep. From a glance at the abstract of the 21 free full text that I have access, there seem to be a big lack of IQ score reported (only Geraldine Dawson's Pediatrics publication report it and not even in a table) and I have issue with that considering that only 6.1% of autism cases reported in Narad's publication (http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/02/26/acid-flashbacks-to-antivac…) are of severe autism but it stand to reason that diagnosed case of autism later in life are less severe and in Geraldine Dawson's case, she make the cut at 55 IQ point between the low IQ and medium IQ.
Anyone reading this email and having access to the paywalled publications in this pubmed query can send a few to: alain dot toussaint at securivm dot ca.
Thanks
Alain
@lilady,
Quick question, would you recommend ABA to the full spectrum of IQ score found in autistic subjects?
Alain
Corrected url (current search restrict for clinical trial only):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=(%22Behavior%20Therapy%22%5BMesh%5D%20NOT%20%22Cognitive%20Therapy%22%5BMesh%5D)%20AND%20%22Child%20Development%20Disorders%2C%20Pervasive%22%5BMesh%5D%20AND%20Clinical%20Trial%5Bptyp%5D&cmd=DetailsSearch
alain dot toussaint at securivm dot ca
Thanks
Alain
Corrected url (current search restrict for clinical trial only):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=(%22Behavior%20Therapy%22%5BMesh%5D%20NOT%20%22Cognitive%20Therapy%22%5BMesh%5D)%20AND%20%22Child%20Development%20Disorders%2C%20Pervasive%22%5BMesh%5D%20AND%20Clinical%20Trial%5Bptyp%5D&cmd=DetailsSearch
alain dot toussaint at securivm dot ca
Thanks
Alain
Alain, you were supposed to provide us with your legal opinion about the Declaration of Helsinki as it pertains to ABA therapy.
Need I remind you that you directed some provocative comments at me, when I commented about using a non aversive behavior modification program, to extinguish my profoundly mentally retarded child's self-injurious behaviors?
You posed a question...
"Quick question, would you recommend ABA to the full spectrum of IQ score found in autistic subjects?"
Why would you ever assume that I, who is not a developmental psychologist or a behavioral specialist and who is not qualified to evaluate the appropriateness of instituting ABA for any individual, would ever make such a recommendation?
Alain, you were supposed to provide us with your legal opinion about the Declaration of Helsinki as it pertains to ABA therapy.
This is exactly what I'm doing. I'm scanning the literature because this is a dissertation subject.
Why would you ever assume that I, who is not a developmental psychologist or a behavioral specialist and who is not qualified to evaluate the appropriateness of instituting ABA for any individual, would ever make such a recommendation?
Okay, I won't make that assumption.
Alain
Anything else?
Alain
You cherry picked a section of the Misbehaviors of the Behaviorists and stated that children who were untestable using the Wechsler Test were testable using the Ravens Scale. The Bayley Scale is the appropriate test for infants and toddlers, not the WISC and not the WPPSI…and certainly not the Ravens Scales. A large proportion of Dawson’s supposed “untestable” population were at the 50 percentile (ie. normal intelligence) according to the IQ distribution in the general population.
WTF, You didn't even check my citation of the Michelle Dawson paper (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17680932) and you want to say I cherry pick. Do you really want to step on my nerves or what?!?! The untestable subject was research data I was aware when I did research in that lab!
Look, at least, have the decency to check for my citation!
Alain
@Chris
Well Chris, looking at the matter in terms of death rate, DTaP is well established as a cause of SIDs, accounting for 2300 annual deaths. Whooping cough, on the other hand, accounts for about 20 deaths. Then there is also the matter of the DTaP vaccine proving not to be so effective of late, so it's questionable how much of these deaths it could have prevented. And Chris, I am not even considering the other maladies such as autism, ADHD, LD, cancers, allergies, diabetes, and so on, that vaccines such as DTaP are known to cause. So yes Chris, It would appear that a baby is better off taking its chance with whooping cough that with the DTaP vaccine.
@squirrelelite #556
I think you are missing the main thrust of my argument at #525 with your persistence of wanting to discuss the soundness of pharma' science supporting the no-link claim. As I explained, this matter is superseded by the fact that the no-link claim is in conflict with Occam's razor logic, and which ultimately makes the claim suspect; and as well, your pharma' science.
I also added that Occam's razor logic is a powerful tool that average-Joe can use to discern truth. Perhaps our discussion may be more fruitful if it is restricted to discussing the merits of Occam's razor logic, and what can be made of the no-link claim, with it appearing to be in conflict with this rule.
@Johnny
Tic...tic...tic...
OMG! - OMG!- Lilady and Alain are going at each other with relentless fury. Quick people -- don't just stand around and watch the bludgeon each other to death! For Christ's sake do something!!
@dedicated lurker
Seriously dedicated lurker, in the big scheme of things, why should Johnny care what I think of him? If he responds a certain way, and I accuse him of being a lying, despicable drug pusher, who out of selfish motives is complicit with a treacherous vaccination program that has maimed, and caused debilitating suffering in kids on an epidemic scale.....
If I accuse Johnny of this, and in his heart of hearts he knows this to be not true, then what's the harm?
@Derg - and your evidence that DTaP is related to SIDS at all is, what exactly?
@Derg -
DTaP Vaccine and SIDS
One myth that won't seem to go away is that DTaP vaccine causes sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). This belief came about because a moderate proportion of children who die of SIDS have recently been vaccinated with DTaP; and on the surface, this seems to point toward a causal connection. But this logic is faulty; you might as well say that eating bread causes car crashes, since most drivers who crash their cars had probably eaten bread within the past 24 hours.
If you consider that most SIDS deaths occur during the age range when 3 shots of DTaP are given, you would expect DTaP shots to precede a fair number of SIDS deaths simply by chance. In fact, when a number of well-controlled studies were conducted during the 1980s, the investigators found, nearly unanimously, that the number of SIDS deaths temporally associated with DTP vaccination was within the range expected to occur by chance. In other words, the SIDS deaths would have occurred even if no vaccinations had been given. In several of the studies, children who had recently gotten a DTaP shot were less likely to get SIDS. The Institute of Medicine reported that "all controlled studies that have compared immunized versus nonimmunized children have found either no association . . . or a decreased risk . . . of SIDS among immunized children" and concluded that "the evidence does not indicate a causal relation between [DTaP] vaccine and SIDS."
No wonder Derg likes Ms. Parker - they are both experts at expressing ideas that have been thoroughly debunked & shown to be lies, over and over and over again.....
I'm sorry, but what does that even mean?
No.
You're probably right, dedicated lurker. However, I think this is the first thing Greg has said that I can agree with.
@Greg (525 & 598)
So, compare these two possible explanations for the cause of autism:
1) Genetic variations change the neuronal development of the brain, which changes it to behave in the way we characterize as autism.
i.e. per AdamG @ 575
2. Genetic variations set up the possibility of a change in the neuronal development of the brain, which when triggered by a vaccine, changes the brain development so that it behaves in the way we characterize as autism.
i.e. Greg @ 573
Occam's razor doesn't tell which of those is the true explanation. Only careful research can tell us that. But, Occam's razor suggests that the first explanation (autism is caused by genetics) is more likely to be true than the second (autism is caused by genetics when triggered by a vaccine) because it is simpler. It doesn't require the second factor of a vaccine trigger.
And then there are the pesky data, which don't show a correlation with vaccines anyway.
@ Greg
You never tire of talking out of your ass without providing evidence?
Rhetorical question.
2300 out of how many, 20 out of how many? You are supposedly talking about death rates.
Also, which populations do you compare?
For the curious reader, I was coincidentally reading some old charts from 1898 - death rate for whooping cough was listed as 14 per 1000 in these old good pre-vaccine days; I doubt SIDS was ever at 2300 per 1000...
Actually Wikipedia mentions nowadays death rates between 0.05 per 1000 (Hong Kong) and 6 per 1000 (american indians), with white americans at 0.5 per 1000.
Everybody know that people in Hong Kong, being so destitute, don't vaccinate, so it must be the US vaccines which are the cause of the big difference. (sarcasm)
So, for my hypothetical baby, unproven link toward 0.5/1000 chance of death by SIDS vs documented 20/1000 chance of death by whopping cough... Factor in the documented chance of death by diphtheria and tetanus, also countered by DTaP, and that's a no-brainer for me.
OK. Autism, that's the topic. ADHD, sort of related.
Diabetes, freaking cancer? You are making this shit up.
And your evidence for such an array of bad effects from DTaP is?
Greg: "DTaP is well established as a cause of SIDs, accounting for 2300 annual deaths."
Citation needed.
"Whooping cough, on the other hand, accounts for about 20 deaths. "
So you would rather have babies die from whooping cough than get a safe vaccine.
By the way this part is missing: Provide the PubMed identification number to the study by qualified reputable researchers to support your answer.
Here is one PubMed paper you need to look up:
15889991
OMG, Orac is suppressing me, my last comment #606 is in moderation.
Er, on second thoughts, no. I should not have used some anatomically specific terms to address our visitor.
Sorry, cold not resist.
Also, around mid-way, I forget to say that I was quoting the Wikipedia article on SIDS. Death rates in US about 0.5 / 1000 for white americans, up to 6 / 1000 for indians. To be compared with whooping cough death rate pre-vaccination...
Greg, I see you’ve continued to completely ignore my point about the actual results of genomic studies of autistic individuals.
Why haven’t these studies found anything related to immunity? Why is it that the alleles they do find lead to developmental disorders in mice, who have never been exposed to any vaccines?
I suspect, based on your refusal to engage with the results, that you attempted to read the paper I cited, but quickly became frustrated as you do not understand basic genetics. Would this be an accurate assessment, Greg?
@AdamG
Re the scientific literature pointing to genetics as causing autism, perhaps you shoulld discuss this with someone better verse on this literature. Perhaps also that person will point you to the latest, large twin study reporting that autism is only 38 percent genetic in origin.
I will also remind you that the prevailing circumstantial evidence clearly indicates that environmental influence is driving the autism numbers. I suppose I also need not remind you that there is no such thing as a genetic epidemic.
@Johnny
Thank you sir for your response. But, a full day to respond to such a simple question, big-man? It would appear that indeed you blinked.
@Narad
The time is here again when I must flounce. (You looking at me? Are you looking at me?)
Lawrence:
Oh, don't give the GF/CF crowd ideas, now....
No, ham sandwiches cause car accidents. I was hit by a car minutes after eating a ham sandwich. That's even more of a temporal connection than the SIDS/DTaP one.
That's the total number of SIDS deaths per year, jackass.
@ Helianthus@ # 606:
" You are making this sh!t up"
*Au contraire*: he's repeating crap that other people made up.
The Canary Party ( see website/ "Manifesto"/ a side project of AoA's Blaxill et Cie) holds that many chronic illnesses and serious health conditions that children ( and adults) experience can be blamed on vaccines. And other chemicals that are associated with modern life. TMR has a new peiece up about peanut allergies being caused by peanut oil in vaccines amongst other places.
And 2300 divided into the total number of infants in the susceptible age range IS.....?
@ Alain: Unlike you, who hadn't read Dawson's paper, before you first condemned ABA as a violation of the Declaration of Helsinki, I already read Dawson's paper. Dawson's paper does not prove that ABA is a violation of the Declaration of Helsinki.
You commented without any information about ABA or its forerunner non-aversive behavior modification to amerliorate/extinquish self injurious behavior. You were quite insistent that a profoundly mentally two year old's IQ could be tested using the WISC and if found to be "untestable" could be tested using the Ravens Scale....all the while ignorant of the fact that those tests are not used for infants.
When I asked you for an explanation for your outrageous statement and your support of Dawson's opinion about ABA violating the Declaration of Helsinki, you replied that you support Dawson's opinion because "She's my friend".
Now, you are claiming to be playing catch up by reading scientific papers about ABA to produce a "dissertation".
You were supposed to come back here and provide information to back up your claim that ABA violates the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. That was weeks ago and you posted a comment that you would put forth a cogent statement to back up your statements regarding ABA and the violation of the Declaration of Helsinki.
I'm still waiting for your legal opinion to back up your statements that my infant's successful therapy was unethical.
http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/
.5 per 1000 perhaps?
( Totally rough estimate of infants but you get my point)
One might also note the complete failure to respond to multiple accusations that the following was an undiluted lie:
I was hit by a car minutes after eating a ham sandwich.
Thus doth G*d smite the unbeliever!
If you bring it closer to the introduction of the vaccine, the was 64/100,000 for ages 0–1 and 6.4/100,000 for ages 1–4. Allowing for improvements in supportive treatment, one can still say that Gerg is advocating for a minimum of 3328 life-threatening cases of pertussis annually in children before their fifth birthday. On the basis of a fraudulent claim about DTaP causing SIDS.
There was swiss cheese on it too, so it was extra non-kosher.
^ Unless I'm misreading that 1–4 figure. If calculated on the basis of rolling "not dead" four times in a row, it comes out at 26 deaths per 100,000 for ages 0–4.
Has anyone ever seen the 2 of them in the same room together?
Something that you failed to defend either the veracity or relevance of when you brought it up a week ago. In fact, you've failed to defend every single thing that's oozed out of your head in these comments.
It's odd how Greg can get something so utterly wrong, as long as it supports his delusional idée fixe I suppose.
Occam's Razor (in its most common form) stipulates that "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity". An entity, in this context, is a cause that acts in some way. In other words, it is a good rule of thumb to choose the simplest explanation that adequately explains our observations.
It would be difficult to find a better example of this than vaccines and autism.
The simplest and most elegant explanation for our observations is that autism starts in the uterus, partly due to genetic and partly due to environmental causes, and that vaccines play no role at all. This is supported by our observations of the effects of valproate and congenital rubella, by genetic research, by twin studies and by other data.
The observations by parents that Greg holds in such high regard are substantially correct, in terms of temporal association of vaccines and the signs of autism becoming obvious, but they are mistaken in thinking there is a causative relationship. This is supported by large amounts of experimental evidence proving the unreliability of anecdotal observations, as well as video evidence of children showing signs of autism before they were vaccinated that were not noticed by parents.
Greg's alternate explanation, that vaccines somehow interfere with normal neurodevelopment, requires us to postulate an additional entity, some means as yet unknown by which vaccines cause this to happen. Inventing such an entity is completely unnecessary to explain the data, so Occam's Razor tells us to prefer the null hypothesis that there is no such entity or cause, and that vaccines play no role in causing autism.
Assuming, somewhat charitably, that Greg is an average Joe, his complete misunderstanding of how Occam's Razor is used doesn't bode well in this regard.
Greg, how is the hypothesis that vaccines play no role in causing autism in conflict with Occam's Razor? What entity or causes are we required to propose compared to those required for the hypothesis that vaccines do cause autism?
Isn't it obvious that the exact opposite is true? It is to me.
Gerg's "average-Joe" "occam razor logic" fails him once again (the reference is this), because he fails to grasp that heritability isn't the same as "genetic in origin."
This is also a novel definition of "large," which isn't surprising, given that Gerg assuredly has never looked at so much as the abstract. Naturally, he thus also fails to note that the concordance rate for fraternal twins is higher than that for nontwin siblings, meaning that the "environment" distinctly includes the prenatal environment.
*Sigh* ADD/ADHD is not a malady. Also, I can point to at least two members of my family who were born long before the MMR was ever used who clearly exhibit symptoms.
I now have a picture in my head that can only be removed by desperate measures. Why can't I ever find a guillotine when I need one?
@ TBruce:
Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease! No guillotine.
In fact, there is not ever a necessity for utilising one:
if you have an ( atrocious, unseemly, disturbing, frightening, horrible, unearthly et al/ choose one) image/ thought in your mind's eye, you need to construct another even more (ridiculous, disgusting, hilarious, outrageous, mind-shattering, decadent et al/ choose one) with which to replace it immediately. Try to put effort into creating something profoundly gross or offensive so that it'll become even more difficult to remove.
Then, you might ask, "How do I get rid of that second image?"
Well, you have to go back and create..... etc.
you need to construct another even more (ridiculous, disgusting, hilarious, outrageous, mind-shattering, decadent et al/ choose one)
Count Stan and Parker?
@lilady,
Okay, ABA is unethical when the goals are to render the autistic child indistinguishable from its peers because the capacity to act like a neurotypical child drain a lot of ressources and brain power.
You said you wanted to know why ABA is unethical regarding your son's injurious behaviours; it is not. How about stiming (one of the goals I studied last night)? It is unethical (I stim a lot), it shouldn't be restricted because preventing such behaviours will lead to self-injurious behaviours. Social situations for HFA and asperger, it's unethical because it tries to render the child indistinguishable from its peers.
I have absolutely no problems WRT self-injurious behaviours but please, install a squeeze machine in each homes; this will go a long way. Why do you think I've been non-verbal for most of the week; because I'm drained from social interaction for days on end (for the past month) and I have thrown my brother out after 10 minutes of interaction (he understand). When I was being harassed some years ago, peoples around me didn't understood how I was on the verge of a burnout and no amount of ABA would have relieved the situation. I had to change town and I did display SIBs and stiming for days on end before the move.
I'm trying to raise a business and need all my energy but just dealing with you put me on the edge.
Is that enough?
Now if you refer to the WAIS, the WISC and the Raven for a 2 years old, I'd agree you'll get nothing but I was specifically talking twice and now for the third time about a PUBMED PUBLICATION, THIS ONE: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17680932
There where never a 2 years old subject in that publication. Will you care to read at least.
Alain
and stop shoving words in my mouth, I hate it.
Alain
I would like to excuse myself and ask for pardon for the behaviour I displayed here to lilady. On a quick reflexion (it was quick), I went too far and put too much pressure on myself and my comment tone was uncalled for. Please excuse me.
Alain
Alain,
I don't think you owe anyone an apology. If anything, I think lilady owes you one for being so demanding and thinking she runs this site.
Alain: You still have not acknowledged that your statements about my son's therapy being unethical and a violation of the Declaration of Helsinki were baseless and unwarranted. Have you read the Declaration and do you realize it applies to doctors and human experimentation?
"Okay, ABA is unethical when the goals are to render the autistic child indistinguishable from its peers because the capacity to act like a neurotypical child drain a lot of ressources and brain power.
You said you wanted to know why ABA is unethical regarding your son’s injurious behaviours; it is not. How about stiming (one of the goals I studied last night)? It is unethical (I stim a lot), it shouldn’t be restricted because preventing such behaviours will lead to self-injurious behaviours. Social situations for HFA and asperger, it’s unethical because it tries to render the child indistinguishable from its peers. statement."
You still don't "get it", do you? Behavioral therapies that are not aversive, such as ABA, are not unethical for the ameliorating/extinguishing of self-abuse and self-stimming behaviors, and such therapies definitely do not "drain a lot of ressources and brain power."
Perhaps you need to be reminded about your series of comments about me, my child and ABA starting here on this thread http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/02/03/when-antivaccinationists-p…
"Alain
February 4, 2014
I’d like to bring out a point regarding ABA. Michelle Dawson (PhD…) carefully reviewed every publications and clinical trials of ABA for autistic. None of them was found out to be complying with the human research subject guideline of the declaration of Helsinki. None.
As long as the goals of such therapy are to render the autist indistinguishable from its peers (and lilady, I’ve seen you mention this in the past), such therapy won’t ever be compliant with the human research subject guideline of the declaration of Helsinki. And I’m not okay with it; autistics deserve better. Unfortunately, it is because of these lousy standard dating from the 60′s and 70′s that autistics have a bad reputation in research. Their right are being denied and I’ve been part of a research group who, for all of their failing, only do research according to the standard held by the declaration of Helsinki. Fully ethical research. And it should be a given.
Unfortunately, an ethical replacement of ABA is still in the work; and it couldn’t happen soon enough.
Alain"
You were supposed to provide a legal opinion about ABA two weeks ago..and didn't.
The next time you post a series of provocative and offensive remarks at me Alain...you'd better have the facts to back them up.
@ Arctic Snowbird: What happened to our internet friendship? A few weeks ago you offered to help me with a troll I encountered on the Ho-Po and the LB/RB blog?
Why do I have that sense that you are gambolputty the blogger on "My Socrates Note"?
@lilady,
Fuck off.
Alain
Furthermore, you do intend to carry this battle to the end. Let's do it :)
Alain
“Quick question, would you recommend ABA to the full spectrum of IQ score found in autistic subjects?”
Why would you ever assume that I, who is not a developmental psychologist or a behavioral specialist and who is not qualified to evaluate the appropriateness of instituting ABA for any individual, would ever make such a recommendation?
Surprising isn't it, I conceded that your boy need ABA for its SIBs. Now, are you arguing for everyone else on the autism spectrum to receive ABA upon their diagnostic? Regardless of IQ and further development on IQ later in life? did you happen to notice that the category of ABA subject such as your son where in the severe autism range which take 6.8% of all autism subject in an aforementioned post (please, I'm drunk) who needed ABA for Self-Injurious Behaviours apply to the rest of the population. Now did you acknowledge that the publication of which Michelle Dawson is the author, the scientific one (I don't care about her sentex.net publications) which you refuse to acknowledge after the fourth post (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17680932) might indicate that autistic subject of any IQ might be able to complete the Raven Standard progressive matrix within the range of 50th Percentile up to 98th percentile, regardless if they have completed the WISC or the WAIS (yes, that's right, they did complete a group of 12 on the WISC and 12 on the WAIS).
Isn't it funny.
Alain
I think I'll stay in Sherbrooke next week to see what lilady is up to. Might as well as to cancel the week of work to take care of lilady....
Alain
Read the x-axis, and note that it was a phone survey. You can't read too much into (or out of) that report.
This is an excellent reason to take a break.
I know I'm responding to something posted way back at #597, but the Gregger's mendacity irked me too much to let things slide.
False. In fact, horse droppings. Studies show that vaccinated children are less likely to suddenly die. However, the effect is too small to determine whether it's the vaccines or if the parents of vaccinated children take other steps that lower SIDS risk.
Hm. Is it possible that vaccinating against a dangerous disease lowers the number of deaths from said disease? Oh wait, Gregger thinks that if we stop vaccinating, the diseases won't come roaring back.
Another half-truth. People not going for their full course of shots has led to an erosion of herd immunity, and to infants too young to be vaccinated falling victim to Pertussis. Also, some countries are actually reintroducing wholecell pertussis vaccine.
Wow...
Instead of being gracious and acknowledging that you might be acting rude and offensive to Alain, you continue to pester him, and then accuse me of being someone I'm not. I just happen to be a lurker here who rarely comments, so why don't you accuse me of being a stalker now so that we can follow your typical pattern, shall we?
We aren't friends, but we should stick together against these anti-vaxxers. And we are certainly not going to be friends now.
Alain was kind enough to offer an apology, even though I don't think it's necessary. Maybe you should follow that example?
Or, you can continue to act like an obnoxious b*&%h and give the anti-vaxxers fodder by letting them see us fight.
Your choice.
I think I’ll stay in Sherbrooke next week to see what lilady is up to. Might as well as to cancel the week of work to take care of lilady….
I know, right? Let's all drop what we're doing and capitulate to lilady's demands. It's not like you have anything better to do.
Believe it or not, Dregs is even stupider than that. He believes that we might have wiped out the diseases once and for all if only we didn't vaccinate. Despite this never happening once in all of recorded history with any disease in all the thousands of years we didn't have vaccination.
@Arctic Snowbird
Lilady a b!tch? Au contraire Arctic Snowbird! The mission cannot be stopped, AS, and you have just witnessed another of Lilady relentless sorties. It will obliterate the enemy of 'quack' moms claiming their kids' adverse vaccine reactions, by unmitigated brutality, showing them absolutely no mercy. And, if any friendlies get in the way by questioning any aspect of the denialism agenda, they too will feel the wrath.
Read the x-axis, and note that it was a phone survey. You can’t read too much into (or out of) that report.
It's better than the refrain of all autistics are doomed if they don't get ABA.
This is an excellent reason to take a break.
I shall do battle fasting or drunk. lilady want war, she'll get it.
Alain
I was just looking back on Grog's efforts to manufacture a case for "vaccines cause autism" earlier in the thread, and thought I'd chuck in my 2p worth.
Those studies very few in number, and of poor quality and low validity. One should always consider the totality of evidence, and not place undue reliance on the tiny minority of weak studies that exists, purely because they confirm your own bias.
There are numerous anecdotes, explicable through "anchoring" and extensive "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacious reasoning. Check out Michelle Cedillo if you want specifics on how such irrefutable "evidence" can rapidly unravel in the face of independent objectivity.
Pd has had himself ripped a new a-hole by the other posters here. Go read, and understand. The reasoning is facile, and inconsistent with the proposed hypothesis. "If" autism is an autoimmune or inflammatory reaction, it is inconceivable that the numerous challenges to the immune system which infants face in early life (and comprise antigenic stimuli of several orders of magnitude greater than any induced by a vaccine) would not induce autism of themselves. Everyone would be autistic, vaccines or not.
As do many things with equivalent "plausibility" (such as EMR exposure). You know correlation does not necessarily mean causation, I hope? Correlation here does not meet the Bradford Hill or WHO criteria for possible causation. In addition, for many countries there is an absence of any correlation whatsoever, so the "correlation" itself is variable and inconsistent.
Calling people who understand there is clear historical evidence of such individuals "idiots" is no way to win your argument.
We also had the Salem witch trials for people exhibiting “witch like” behaviour. Doesn’t mean witches exist. But In fact you will find the vaccine courts have never made a compensation payment for autism. If you do not yet know there is a difference between neurological damage which may have some autistic features, or of "autistic behaviours", and the syndrome of "autism", which is a specific neurodevelopmental problem with DSM diagnostic criteria, then go look them up.
Bottom line, Grog: You got nothing here, go away and play with your AoA friends, who might fawn over your superior intellect. Superior to them, that is.
I'd also like to know what Derg considers "countless?" Because we keep seeing the exact same people, making the exact same claims, without any real evidence to back it up - and when we do look at population studies, we find only very small numbers....so which is it Derg - something so vast that only a worldwide cover-up involving millions of people could hide it, or something occurs in such small numbers that even very large population studies are unable to find the link?
Okay, let me pitch in a few cents here. These are just my opinions, but I flatter myself I've been around long enough that you all have reason to know my opinions are, at the very least, considered carefully before I offer them.
Lilady - you have had to fight some very pitched battles in the past, for the best of causes, and I admire you greatly for that. Not all the battles are in the past, either, and again I'm both impressed and grateful that you are ready to fight the good fight.
What I think is a regrettable tendency, though, and perhaps even one that the trolls have started calculating how to exploit, is the tendency to see pitched battles to be fought everywhere. More than once, I've seen you go hammer and tongs at someone over a matter that might have been better handled by saying "You know, you might not have fully thought out that position; has it occurred to you that ....?" or even "Did you actually mean that, or did you mean something else entirely, and just phrased it poorly?"
The reason we go through these discussions is in the hopes that those who hold wrong beliefs will come to understand why they're wrong, and change beliefs and actions accordingly. But a natural human reaction to an aggressive attack, or what feels like one, is to dig in your heels on your current ground and not grant one inch you don't have to.
Alain - You really need to stop digging in your heels. You're a good guy and you have a valuable perspective on things - but everyone, and I mean everyone, needs to be able to step back and say "gee, if everyone else, including people I admire and respect, is taking the opposite side of this issue, is my position maybe flawed?"
I understand that you consider Michelle Dawson your friend. I understand that you want your friend's position to be right. But the arguments you've been advancing have been bad arguments, exactly the kind you wouldn't accept from the VCA crowd that buzzes in here! If someone tried to tell you "vaccination violates the Geneva Convention, because So-and-so says it does and So-and-so is a Ph.D!" you would point out, quite correctly, that Ph.Ds can still be wrong - but you've been pointing to Dawson's Ph.D as if that meant she was correct. If someone, challenged to defend their claim that vaccination is a bad practice that should be avoided, pointed to people with egg allergies and said "see, it's bad for those people, therefore it's a bad practice!" you'd point out that something is not a bad practice, just because it's not appropriate for everyone - but here you are, trying to defend the claim "ABA therapy violates the Helsinki Declaration" by pointing out that it shouldn't be used to try and make autistic people behave neurotypically.
Alain, it will not harm you to say "Okay, I may have been wrong. I'll have to rethink this." People will respect you more, not less, for being willing to change your beliefs based on evidence and reason - and any who don't, well, is their respect meaningful to you??
Arctic Snowbird - butt out. Even if you are not "gambolputty", even if you are not some troll who decided to impersonate a lurker who hasn't been seen in some time, so what? That means that the amount you've "contributed" to this site that isn't trying to stir up fights is, what, 50% at best?
Take everything I said to lilady above about the problems of approaching everything as a fight, whether or not it needs to be a fight. Now subtract everything in there about the respect earned by fighting the good fight, the fights that really need to be fought, because none of that applies to you: you haven't earned anything. You're swaggering around as if you had a pedestal up among the pantheon of good guys from which you can look down on lilady and judge her, but what have you done to earn that? I'll give you a clue for free: Nothing. You sure as hell haven't earned the right to suggest she's a "b*&%h" and then in the same sentence sanctimoniously drone about the importance of a united front against the antivaxers. Do you perhaps naively think we are puppets, whose strings you can pull so long as you wave the "anti-antivaxer" flag? Got news for you: that trick has been tried before. It doesn't work.
In the best case scenario, you are shoving your nose into a fight where you have absolutely no place. In the worst case scenario, you are a snivelling troll with delusions of adequacy. In either case, you can kindly butt out.
@Antaeus - I can't help but agree. The conversation has taken on a real tone of hostility without the benefit of taking that "step back" and looking to see if the responses are truly beneficial to the discussion.
Both Alain & Lilady have valid arguments here - but the way in which they are being directed leaves a lot to be desired.
None?
Alain, it will not harm you to say “Okay, I may have been wrong. I’ll have to rethink this.”
I agree. That was precisely my intent 2 night ago to reread (I read it before being severely depressed) all the data but I don't react well under significant pressure. The last time I did a dissertation in school, that took me over 2 weeks and it's 2 weeks I won't have until 2015 when I take some vacations.
and any who don’t, well, is their respect meaningful to you??
No.
Alain
Bravo Antaeus! Yes -- let's work on Lilady, giving her a make-over, and turning her into a softer, more hospitable shill. You know -- the type of shill you can take home to Mother. (Hee hee hee.)
Thank you Antaeus for your opinion. I really do value it.
My sole goal was to have Alain review all the comments he has made about ABA for the past several weeks about my child's therapy and ABA therapy, and acknowledge that it is an evidence-based treatment that is not unethical and not a violation of the Declaration of Helsinki.
ABA and other intervention therapies when begun in early childhood are the only therapies that have proven track records to ameliorate/extinquish self-injurious behaviors.
Just to clarify, my child was diagnosed with profound mental retardation and displayed autistic-like behaviors.
Julian Frost: "Hm. Is it possible that vaccinating against a dangerous disease lowers the number of deaths from said disease? Oh wait, Gregger thinks that if we stop vaccinating, the diseases won’t come roaring back."
Well his pseudo-answer to my question is that he would prefer a baby to get pertussis, than to get a DTaP vaccine.
He neither understands, nor does he care, that more babies will die from pertussis. I see he gets his kicks by referring to us as "drug pushers." Well his friends are on the record of question whether or not a dead baby had other health issue and flatly did not deserve to live (a classic Cia Parker move), and also for defending actual child killers:
http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2014/02/vactruth-writers-d…
Perhaps now we just need to refer to him as "Greg the baby killer."
Antaeus, that was marvellous!
I think that the discussion can be illuminated by going back to research as well as the historical origins of ABA.
And other stuff....
So we have to ask ourselves Are there data that show ABA works? If so, in *what cases* does it work? Do we find that it is useful? For *whom*?
Most of these therapies - including ABA and CBT- have origins going back to the early days of psychology- what might be called S-R psychology or learning theory. From the early days of Pavlov and Watson to the later revelations of Skinner, this movement has always had critics in that it _ignored_ aspects of people that are specifically and essentially human. These ideas have undergone a long evolution over the past century.
Notice that the first letter in CBT is C- *cognitive*- which means that internal processing or organisation is just as important a factor in achieving the desired results- subjects aren't regarded only as passive, malleable clay for an experimentalist potter to sculpt into an acceptable form. Subjects help determine or choose the outcome. In a way, many adults use a form of unofficial CBT on themselves whenever they attempt to change how they live or behave.
HOWEVER CBT is not applicable in every situation and for every subject: it has limits. It may be not useful for subjects who have a SMI, who are very young, pre-verbal or intellectually disabled.
OBVIOUSLY we can ask, "Who has the right to determine HOW and IF others should change how they behave?" And that's an important question. I think most people can agree though that stopping SIBs is a humane cause even if the decision is made by others, not the subject..
A thornier question is whether we should implement structured change for individuals to make life easier for caretakers and family members at the expense of the subject- who may not have much choice in the matter?
Is aversive therapy EVER to be considered?
Remember though, that ABA is largely non-aversive- we shouldn't discourage a therapy because it can be used in an unacceptable way. Should we get rid of meds because they can be prescribed and/ or used in destructive ways?
There are other questions about whether people with ASDs should be persuaded to learn to be 'more NT'. I don't know- I would hope that it would be left up to them.
Lastly, what can I say when two of our most highly esteemed minions argue publicly?
Oh my. Draconis will not be pleased: we need to show a united front or else the bold rebels will take heart, assisting them on their road to pardigm shift and eventual triumph.
But if we're interested in investigating information uncensored - why not?
Bravo Coach Antaeus -- Bravo!! What a hard-hitting, explosive speech delivered at #650 to motivate the shill football team at half-time, before they return to the field to battle the 'quacks'. Bravo!
Baby killer Dreg -
Did you enjoy it the other day when you challenged me to point out exactly where you asserted by analogy that antivaxers might well commit injury upon children so that they could blame it on vaccines, and I did show exactly where you made that assertion? Did you enjoy having your embarrassing failure spelled out for all to see? Are you hoping, perhaps, that since I've referred to your idiotic assertion that doing nothing to check the spread of a disease might lead to it being wiped off the face of the earth, that I might with proper goading link to where you said that, so that your ignorance can be witnessed by all, and you can be treated as the assclown you are?
I'm starting to think you're not here for the hunting.
Looking back, I think I started this fight between Alain and lilady when I told Alain on another thread that I think ABA is overrated, and he pretty much agreed. I feel sooooo bad! How would I have known that my opinion would cause such hard feelings? *Shaking head*
Now, let's just go back a bit to Arctic Snowbird's comments on this thread...where he claimed he wanted to help, because he claimed that he had experienced some similar problems with gambolputty/Caro from My Socrates Note. (I had mentioned earlier on that thread than an entire post had just been put up about me by gambolputty):
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/01/23/on-orac-isis-pseudonymity-…
This random poster "Arctic Snowbird" tried to keep a dialogue going about the filthy and libelous statements directed at me, made by "The Pothead Troll" and his hundreds of sockies.
Every time "Arctic Snowbird" made a "helpful" comment, I immediately viewed the ongoing comments about me by gambolputty, Craig (Willoughby) and "Anonymous" with their time stamps as well, here:
http://my-socrates-note.blogspot.com/2014/01/musings-on-anonymity-and-l…
So Arctic Snowbird, whose sockie are you; gambolputty's, Anonymous's or Craig Willowby's?
Correction:
So Arctic Snowbird, whose sockie are you; gambolputty’s, Anonymous’s or Craig Willoughby’s?
Antaeus Feldspar @650
For the most part, fair enough. However, let me respond to one particular comment.
You sure as hell haven’t earned the right to suggest she’s a “b*&%h” and then in the same sentence sanctimoniously drone about the importance of a united front against the antivaxers.
Or maybe it's that I saw someone that I perceived was bullying a fellow aspie and I said something about it. Alain made it clear what his opinion was, and lilady continued to harass him demanding answers. Then, the person I spoke up against made a very inaccurate and insulting comment that I took exception to. So, I gave my personal opinion of the way she was acting. Are we not allowed to express our personal opinions here? If not, then these comment sections would be awfully bare. And hey, I call them as I see them, and if the shoe fits, etc.
Alain @653
I agree. That was precisely my intent 2 night ago to reread (I read it before being severely depressed) all the data but I don’t react well under significant pressure.
I think your response was warranted, and I apologize if you felt my comment offering encouragement to you was inappropriate. I know you can take care of yourself. But I sometimes can't help but stick up for a fellow aspie.
Dreg @646
Lilady a b!tch? Au contraire Arctic Snowbird! The mission cannot be stopped, AS, and you have just witnessed another of Lilady relentless sorties. It will obliterate the enemy of ‘quack’ moms claiming their kids’ adverse vaccine reactions, by unmitigated brutality, showing them absolutely no mercy. And, if any friendlies get in the way by questioning any aspect of the denialism agenda, they too will feel the wrath.
If I wanted your opinion, I'd tell you to pull your head out of your a$$.
Now, to lilady
where she claimed she wanted to help, because she claimed that she had experienced some similar problems with gambolputty/Caro from My Socrates Note
There, ftfy. And I didn't say I was having problems, just that I had encountered someone I thought was him/her. I've seen him/her on HuffPo, and I also saw someone I thought may be the same person on Facebook. My inquiry was to determine if my theory was correct and to offer advice.
So Arctic Snowbird, whose sockie are you; gambolputty’s, Anonymous’s or Craig Willoughby’s?
Try none of the above. And trying to "out" me? Really?
I have never commented on that site. Your evidence tying me to these individuals is riddled with your own confirmation bias and is so weak that it can't even be considered to be circumstantial. Really the nicest way that I can express myself regarding your extremely insulting accusation is that you're a f&%king b*&%h. Your extreme paranoia isn't doing any favors to your credibility.
Hey, who am I?
Name a single comment of yours here that you haven't fled from, O lying sack of shıt.
@Antaeus
As you become angry and indignant your 'gentleman' veneer starts wearing, and exposing the raw scoundrel underneath.
C'mon Antaeus -- 'Baby killer Dreg'? I don't even support abortion. Well, maybe in cases where a serious defect is detected. Ok -- maybe I am a 'little baby killer', but I see it as pro-health.
I advocate parents to injure their kids and blame it on vaccines? Seriously Antaeus, what the hell are you talking about?? I didn't make much sense of your last comment referring to this, with you suggesting I only said this by way of analogy, and I didn't mean what I was saying.
I argued that if we stop vaccinating then diseases would disappear? Well -- maybe this was a little silly of me. Like, in the past, diseases have never disappeared on their own without vaccines.
@Narad
You're lucky it's the weekend and I must be on my way again. Otherwise, you would be in big trouble for that comment. Woo hooo -- I am outta here!!
(Just have to take one last nibble at this nut.)
Arctic Snowbird to lilady:
f&%king b*&%h
Greg's tip to lilady:
I think asking for a 't' and a 'c' should bring you some dollars there, lilady. If you haven't solved the puzzle by then, I suggest you buy some vowels.
These are my favorite "correlation is not causation" graphs: http://girljanitor.tumblr.com/post/46426989694/tacticalconscience-even-…
I will take that as a wholesale concession that you've fled from every bit of scat you've dropped on this path, without so much as the sense of a cat in a litter box to cover the detritus.
Thank you Antaeus for #650 and happy to see cooler heads prevail now. Always excepting Greggums however.
Greg, have you ever considered not acting like a ten-year-old?
I am so thankful I found alt med. Symptom free now at 71,
won't bore you with my "delusional" opinion or a list of supplements I take which, of course, is only "anecdotal".
Thanks to all those wonderful people who shared their "anecdotal" stories and brave "out of the box" thinker MDs
who incidentally went to medical school unlike most of Orac's "cult" followers. I am also glad I was not subjected to the chemical poisoning of the current vaccine schedule as an infant; only against the schedule for infants, not vaccines.
Thank you pD@329
@anon - and when would you prefer that children get vaccinated? Because it isn't like infants getting measles, mumps, etc. should be considered a good thing (especially in light of the deaths of infants we've already seen occur from VPDs in recent years).
Sorry that you consider relying on evidence and Science to be a bad thing.
What do you think the most salient parts are, and how do you think that they stack up to the direct rebuttal?
Thank you again pD @399
And how do you explain, anon, the MILLIONS of people who HAVE been vaccinated and don't rely on unproven "alternative" and "homeopathic" remedies, yet are in excellent health? I'm one of them. I don't go to some quack who thinks donkey piss cures cancer; I go to an actual doctor who went to medical school. I drink fluoridated water and I have amalgam fillings. I've never had any major surgery and have never been hospitalized for anything. And I'm not all that much younger than you are.
Explain that.
"I am also glad I was not subjected to the chemical poisoning of the current vaccine schedule as an infant; only against the schedule for infants, not vaccines."
anon definitely was vaccinated against diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus and smallpox before (s)he was allowed into school, and definitely had polio vaccine, during the mid 1950s.
Which types of "alt med" have you found, anon?
@notation- Great genes-
@lilady- only had smallpox-small town budget.
@anon - probably more like dumb luck...unfortunately, a lot of people weren't so fortunate.
@lilady 5 HTP, Tyrosine for depression.
Great genes, my ass. There are millions of people who are alive today that would never have survived had they not had access to vaccines and antibiotics. In 1900, the average life span for a man was ~47 years. What do you think it is today? That's because of modern medicine, not "great genes."
Here's what WebMD has to say about 5 HTP: "5-HTP (5-Hydroxytryptophan) is a chemical by-product of the protein building block L-tryptophan. It is also produced commercially from the seeds of an African plant (Griffonia simplicifolia).
Don’t use 5-HTP until more is known. 5-HTP might be UNSAFE. Some people who have taken it have come down with eosinophilia-myalgia syndrome (EMS), a serious condition involving extreme muscle tenderness (myalgia) and blood abnormalities (eosinophilia). Some people think the EMS might be caused by an accidental ingredient (contaminant) in some 5-HTP products. But there is not enough scientific evidence to know if EMS is caused by 5-HTP, a contaminant, or some other factor. Until more is known, avoid taking 5-HTP."
So much for "alternative medicine" as a safe alternative.
@notation - people like "anon" should take a look at this:
http://www.tycho.pitt.edu/
And then come back and tell us how horrible vaccines are.....
@notation How the hell did you infer I was against anti-biotics?!
That is not what I said. I had blood poisoning as a child- thank God for penicillin. Researchers and out of the box thinkers are needed. I am not against vaccines, just the current schedule
which has been in effect for about 20 years.
And what is "wrong" with the current schedule? Do you have any data to support your misgivings about it? You have yet to answer the question that Lawrence asked you.
There is plenty of evidence to support administering vaccines to infants.
@notation Here's the data on Cymbalta
www.rxlist.com/cymbalta-drug.htm
So? Is your "alternative" better? How?
Cymbalta is not a vaccine, and therefore off topic. Answer the actual question you have been asked.
Thanks to all those wonderful people who shared their “anecdotal” stories
That's exactly what this thread about alt-med as religion has been missing. Someone exclaiming "Share your testimony, brother!" in full-on Pentacostal manner.
So far no snake-handling, though I suppose "Good genes will protect from disease" is near enough.
"Thank you again pD@399" is a pretty telling non-response to Narad's question to you about the direct rebuttal of the post to which you referred, anon. Why can't you answer?
@herr doktor: yeah, those "great genes" must be the ones I inherited from my grandmother. Two of her three triplets died in infancy.
Oops. Edit: I should have written that "two of her triplets died in infancy."
anon,
I agree, which is why I'm so glad there are so many brilliant, innovative thinkers doing research for universities and for drug companies, developing new vaccines among many other things. I think the current vaccine schedule is a spectacular success, almost eliminating many infectious diseases, some of them killers, with serious side effects vanishingly rare despite close surveillance. What's not to like about this?
What useful alternative treatments have NCCAM and OCCAM found? Bear in mind they have spent billions dollars researching this. Why haven't they found anything that has saved a single life? Are they lacking the "out of box thinkers" that clearly work in conventional medicine?
@ anon: Meta analysis of studies of 5-HTP and Tyrosine for depression, from the Cochrane Collaboration:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11869656
What did your "out of the box thinker M.D." tell you about the pneumonia vaccine and the Tdap booster vaccine?
Meta analysis of studies of 5-HTP and Tyrosine for depression, from the Cochrane Collaboration:
Imagine my disappointment that the list of studies therein does *not* include Brander, 1985 -- a good study, with placebo and double-blinding. Also how I met the Frau Doktorin.
Spoiler alert: 5-HTP did not improve mood or alleviate depression.
anon: Did you attend public school in the United States?
These are the vaccines you were required to have when you entered school circa 1948....and during your attendance in school for the next 12 years.
http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-schedule/h…
out of the box thinkers are needed.
I got your out-of-the-box thinkers here!
"Let's think out of the box. I have to poop in it later" Meow.
@notation From the CDC- an historical perspective -
www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm4829a1.htm
@Anon - excellent, so you admit that vaccinations have been an important part of the control of infectious diseases...good for you.
What Lawrence said.
I notice you seem to have forgotten to answer the question I asked you as to your opposition to the current vaccine schedule, anon. Why is that?