Now that I’ve dispensed with Mike Adams’ attacks (for now), It’s time to get back to business as usual. No way am I going to let Adams interfere with the business of this blog for more than one day to take note of it, even though he’s now gone basically batshit crazy.
Unfortunately, no sooner has Andrew Wakefield’s quackfest of a propaganda “documentary” (VAXXED: From Cover-up to Catastrophe) been dealt with than another antivaccine propaganda film rears its ugly head. Readers have made me aware of a new Facebook page, website, Twitter feed, Instagram page, and YouTube channel for a movie called Man Made Epidemic: A Journey to the Truth About the Autism Epidemic. You can tell right away by the title that it’s going to be yet another antivaccine propaganda film in the mold of VAXXED and The Greater Good, but if the title alone isn’t enough to tip you off, check out this description:
Filmmaker Natalie Beer sets off on a journey around the world speaking to leading doctors, scientists and families to find out the truth about the autism epidemic and whether or not vaccines have a role to play.
The film explores the common misconception that autism is solely genetic and looks into scientists concerns over recent years about environmental factors such as medication and pesticides which continue to leave our children with physical and neurological damage.
If that isn’t a tipoff that this movie will be a load of antivaccine propaganda, there’s a link to the TODAY SHOW interview with Robert De Niro about VAXXED and there’s this trailer:
Tellingly (and almost de rigueur for antivaccine propaganda films), the trailer starts out with an image of a presumably autistic boy hitting himself followed by the image of another boy stimming. The voiceover is a quote from President Obama about the “skyrocketing” autism rate. Following these images is a scary graphic:
Followed by another scary graphic:
And who’s doing the narration of this segment claiming that autism prevalence has skyrocketed from 1:5000 to 1:25 in the course of a mere 40 years? It’s a British voice, a man’s voice, it’s—oh, hell, it’s Andrew Wakefield’s voice! I’d know that voice anywhere, unfortunately! Well, so much for any claims on the part of the filmmakers that the documentary isn’t antivaccine! On the other hand, next up is an old man whom I don’t recognizing opining about how autism can’t just be genetic, how there must be an environmental cause. I do hate to tell the filmmakers that there is one well known environmental contributor to autism, mainly because it’s rubella infection while the mother is pregnant; i.e., congenital rubella syndrome. And guess what prevents that? The MMR vaccine! Of course, for those who are into “autism biomed” quackery to “treat” autism, it’s vaccines, but it’s also other “environmental factors” that must be the cause, hence this graphic:
To drive the message home, we see a woman saying that it must be glyphosate, an herbicide commonly used in combination with genetically modified organisms rendered resistant to it. At first I thought was Stephanie Seneff, the foremost promoter of the idea that glyphosate causes autism, but it doesn’t look like her
Whoever she is, the next bit consists of narration asking, in essence, “Where are the autistic adults?” This is a common antivaccine gambit, its implication being meant as a rebuttal to the explanation for the increase in autism prevalence over the last couple of decades that it’s due to diagnostic substitution, increased awareness, and screening, in much the same way that the increase in incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ is primarily due to mammographic screening programs. It turns out that the prevalence of autism in adults is roughly the same as the estimated prevalence of autism in children—as one would expect for a condition that is primarily genetic in origin. Moreover, the rate is very consistent across nationalities.
Of course, after this, it doesn’t take too long for the claim that vaccines cause autism to rear its ugly head, too. There’s a mother with two sons diagnosed with autism, but to her it has to be the vaccines, of course. It couldn’t possibly be genetic even though both of her sons developed autism. This quickly segues into the “too many too soon” gambit and the question that “all these vaccines together” have never been tested. They have, of course. Every time a new vaccine is added to the schedule, before it is added it is tested against the background of the existing vaccine schedule. Not that that stops the film from quoting someone saying that the vaccine companies are only in it for the money and therefore won’t fund research into potential adverse effects of vaccines.
The derp in this trailer reached its apogee with this image:
Then, hilariously, the trailer shows an excerpt from Ben Swann’s report about the so-called “CDC whistleblower.” At this point, I actually laughed. I laughed hard. Only one of two things could be going on here. Either the filmmakers are so ignorant that they believe this overripe and long debunked conspiracy theory or they have such contempt for their viewers that they don’t care and present it anyway. (I suppose both could be true to differing extents.) As regular readers know, William W. Thompson, a.k.a the “CDC whistleblower,” claimed that his co-authors on a seminal CDC study tried to hide evidence of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism in African American boys, but an analysis of the actual documents he provided to Rep. Bill Posey show no such thing. It’s so bad that Thompson himself doesn’t appear to believe that his document dump shows evidence of wrongdoing. The filmmakers even include the risibly deceptive claim that the authors got together to destroy all the primary documents containing data for the study.
The final shot in the trailer before the film’s logo shows up is—you guessed it!—Andrew Wakefield. Again, you’d think that by now filmmakers would realize that Wakefield is toxic, that any film in which Andrew Wakefield appears and is allowed to pontificate about the “CDC whistleblower,” vaccines and autism, or the CDC without rebuttal from a real scientist will rightly be viewed as antivaccine. Of course, if your purpose is to make an antivaccine propaganda film, you can’t do better than getting Andrew Wakefield on board. After all, to antivaccine loons, he is “Nelson Mandela and Jesus all rolled up into one.”
After having reviewed the trailer, which was only marginally less obviously antivaccine than the trailer for VAXXED, I wondered just who the filmmakers are. Natalie Beer, who both produced and directed this movie, is listed has having worked on several major Hollywood productions as an assistant director. IMDb shows her as having worked on movies such as The Bourne Supremacy, Æon Flux, and a TV movie Rommel, Nothing in her history leads me to believe that she can critically evaluate medical or scientific topics. The executive producer, Lothar Moll, who similarly shows no discernable evidence of having the ability to critically evaluate medical evidence.
So what we’re left with is yet another in a line of “documentaries” that promote antivaccine pseudoscience that is growing longer by the year.
- Log in to post comments
The more I keep getting involved (and I use that term very loosely - I just read up on the stuff, I'm no activist or scientists or doctor) with the topic, the more I am feeling awfully sorry for people on the spectrum.
The message that keeps being hammered in is:
You are a damaged human being.
You are a burden to everyone you know.
Your parents wanted a "normal" kid but they got stuck with you instead.
There was recently an article on "Cracked" about people who wound up in films which they didn't want to. Two of the entries involved "documentaries" where the people appearing had their words sliced and diced. I wonder if that's going to happen here.
Ugh. This question is one of my criteria to detect that someone is not seriously informed and militant about autism.
In my country, we have quite a few family associations engaged in improving diagnosis of autism, especially adults. It is unfortunately not rare that autistic adults have received an inacurate diagnosis (MR, schizophrenia, psychosis...) and inappropriate care / therapies, in closed psychiatric wards (a completely inappropriate environnement) for YEARS.
Each time someone ask this question, I want to tell them to go ask it at an Autisme France / Arapi / Sesame Autisme conference, and count the seconds before an angry parent punch them in the face.
Nothing says 'propaganda' like black and white film scenes.
I'm indeed afraid that, as little as a decade ago, our collective awareness of autism was close to zero.
Fortunately, it's a topic which is gaining some traction in our country.
In the recently released French movie "Médecin de campagne", one of the sub-plot is about the younger doctor's proper diagnosis and interaction with an autistic teenager.
Adults with autism? My previous doctor went over my "symptoms" with me:
Didn’t talk until three years old. When the doctor had me read an entire newspaper article out loud at that same age, he told my parents to stop worrying.
Exceptional math/science skills. Never had to study, even diff eq. Just made sense when explained once.
Socialization issues/making friends. Was always “different” as a child. “Lives in his own world.” I still have trouble maintaining eye contact (which I have to constantly explain to my wife is NOT a sign of disinterest).
Can become overly focused or obsessed with specific interests.
Very clumsy. (My golf handicap was single digits at one point, so I’m not completely physically inept.)
Still can’t sleep. Still can't freaking sleep.
My doc said I probably had a form of Aspergers or something similar and just moved along from there. She didn't make any issue out of it - at all.
I'm nearing 50 and I have never officially been diagnosed, but would I fall on the spectrum today? Was there even a diagnosis other than " a little odd" 40+ years ago?
@ScienceMonkey #6: Well, there was "the weird kid" (who was doing calculus from his father's college math books at age 6 and didn't really play with us, or talk to us much) or "the scary kid" (who threw major tantrums in school over what we saw as minor issues - changing activity, putting on coats to play, etc - and required the principal's help to carry him out of the room).
Or, you were just put in the "ret*rd room" and languished for 6 hours.
Both the rhetoric and the beliefs that underlie it is quite awful, no? You also get the the subtle (sometimes not so subtle) implication that autism is as bad or worse than death (the Holocaust comparisons play on this). One particularly insidious one is "vaccines stole my child". What message does that give the child they still have?
Make no mistake, AVers are not autism advocates. AV parents aren't even advocates for their own children. The leaders are in it for the money and everyone wants a slice of the superiority pie (sources tell me humble pie tastes better).
Amethyst@1: Ever seen Pushiest Parents or Dance Moms? Same thing, with a ton of additional resentment and loathing on top for being unable to live vicariously through such useless offspring. Because no other parent in the world ever had to raise a delayed or disabled child, never mind ever find any kind of happiness amongst the additional hardships.
Honestly, I suspect most of these poor kids would be better off in institutions, where they're merely undersupported or ignored, than in such circularly self-hating and abusive households. It's clear their parents have already rejected them; I can only assume the sole reason they've not abandoned them to the state is that would be - even worse - a public admission of their own failure.
It's a shame nobody does a documentary about such tragically, horribly twisted "autism families", because it could be of great service to everyone. We might discover how many of these parents were once regular people went off the rails in response to the stress of raising a seriously disabled child, falling into a seemingly supportive but poisonous quasi-religious cult due to inadequate governmental and charitable support. Versus how many of them were always pathological personality disorders, endlessly raging against a universe that insults and cheats them of what's rightfully theirs at every turn, who now find great strength and lust for revenge at the head of the aforementioned cult. And, of course, of all the torture and suffering inflicted on autistic kids in the service of this dangerously delusional and contagious mindset. I reckon its all hidden horrors laid bare would make the Salem witch trials look like a cutesy new-baby episode of the Today show.
Around 5 years ago I had a conversation with my 2 colleagues I shared an office with (this is 3 senior MH nurses working in child and adolescent MH who spent a lot of time working with autistic bairns): we had all trained in different large MH hospitals between the mid-80s and mid-90s, i.e. BEFORE most of the currently used diagnostic tools for autism had been developed and just after Lorna Wing first coined the term "Asperger's Syndrome"...
All 3 of us could distinctly remember people we had known on back wards of those hospitals who would fit the criteria for the autistic spectrum but who had diagnoses of one form of psychosis or another (anyone else remember such things as hebephrenia?).
I also recall in the mid-90s when I was a CAMHS in-patient unit ward manager having a 16 year old referred by a community psychiatrist as being schizophrenic. The lad wasn't: it didn't take us long to spot that he was classic Kanner autistic...
A consultant child and adolescent psychiatrist of my acquaintance went to see the film "A Beautiful Mind" and all she could talk about the next day was how John Nash had been mis-diagnosed: she was convinced he had Asperger's.
Then there were a couple of mates at university in the mid-70s, both studying maths, who I now look back on and think "Asperger's!".
" anyone else remember..."
I also know two men - via one of my gentlemen- age 50-70s who are most likely Asperger's. There may be additional issues as well because they are 'difficult people'.
Similarly, a person I know dx'ed Paranoid Schizophrenia- age 40- has a few characteristics that present like ASD.
I can imagine that he might fit in as well. In primary school, he was diagnosed as "emotionally disturbed and learning disabled".
or they have such contempt for their viewers that they don’t care
No -- they know their target audience isn't going to notice. They're preaching to the choir.
One minor point: glyphosate is a herbicide not a pesticide.
Minor counterpoint: "pesticide" is a broad term encompassing herbicides.
Pesticide: "A substance or agent used to kill pests, such as unwanted or harmful insects, rodents, or weeds."
I have already viewed 3 entire anti-vax epics and seen parts of many others.
I had a horrible thought- but after all, that is often my province and occasionally, my cup of tea.
Suppose evil government operatives needed to torture their charges into submission and wanted to skirt international regulations and suchlike:
they could subject the poor unfortunates to a schedule- a long, long lineup- of anti-vax films.
Think of the possibilities!
VAXXED! Trace Amounts! The Greater Good! Vaccine Nation! The Silent Epidemic! Autism: Made in the USA!
This New One!
And that's just the start: if we average 90 minutes each-
That's 630 minutes!
More than a whole season of binge-watching Game of Thrones ( sans rape and castration, of course)**
Let's do it! Fellow and sister minions of Orac's evil cult.
Oh crap! Our opponents might actually like this bilgewasser.
** unless if you count that some anti-vaxxers call vaccination 'rape' and the Geiers chemically castrated boys.
“Where are the autistic adults?”
Well, there are quite a few depicted in this series from a local television station:
It is a much better use of your time than the dreck by Wakefield and Ms. Beer.
Oh I'd better:
My comment above is meant purely in jest.
I do not advocate torture in any form including the metaphorical
We minions are not members of any cult-
Oracian or otherwise..
@ Science Monkey #6 - My situation is similar: both the psychiatrist and the psychologist treating me for anxiety/depression told me I fit the criteria for Aspergers/high functioning autism, but since I'm 33 years old and, stereotypicaly enough, have found a relatively accepting niche in academia, neither of them saw any point in getting me "officially" diagnosed.
I don't have time to look up the paper right now, but when the Autism Spectrum Quotient test was developed, they tested it by having a group of random, non-diagnosed adults take the test, and about 2% of them had scores indicating that they would probably meet the criteria for an ASD diagnosis. That's 1 in 50 - about the same as the CDCs current estimate. But, of course, antivaxxers don't consider it "real" autism if you can function relatively independently in society. They deceptively cite the CDC's prevalence stats, which include high-functioning autistics, as evidence that there's been a massive increase in severely disabled children that's being covered up - as if it would even be possible to cover up something that, if true, would have such far-reaching effects on society.
It's been a while since I have seen such highly concentrated thermonuclear stupid, and I didn't even watch the trailer.
The "environmental factors" graphic includes a drawing of what is clearly meant to be a cell phone tower. That by itself would be a red flag.
They're playing the "tobacco shill" gambit. The link between smoking and cancer was established by the 1950s, and sufficiently proven by 1963 for the US Surgeon General to mandate warnings on cigarette packs. It's true that tobacco companies tried to discredit the science for about three decades after that (the current "global warming is a hoax" campaign is largely modeled on what the tobacco companies did), but it was obvious to anybody in the mainstream of medical science that cigarettes were dangerous.
And of course you generally find a lot more of something when you know what to look for. I have seen examples of this in my field. Autism diagnosis is another of those things. I have long suspected that I am on the spectrum, but have never been diagnosed as such because they didn't know what to look for 40 years ago--I had heard of autism as a kid, but in those days only the more extreme forms were likely to be diagnosed.
And then there's Wakefield, lending credibility to the film when his own credibility account has long since been overdrawn. These folks must not want to know about Wakefield's past. I can't think of any other plausible reason why they not only voluntarily associate with him, but in many cases actively seek him out.
Sarah A and Science Monkey:
Don't tell Ann Dachel.
@Eric Lund #19 - I always viewed the vaccine/tobacco trope the OPPOSITE way the ant-vaxxers do.
The doctors/scientists claiming tobacco caused diseases had the science on their side while the doctors claiming cigarettes were safe had a financial incentive to do so.
The doctors/scientists claiming vaccines are extremely safe have the science on their side while the Mercolas/Adams/Wakefields of the world have financial incentives based on ignoring or discrediting the science.
The key study that solidified my anti-Wakefield position was authored by Wakefield himself. His response to Taylor et al in The Lancet included data that strongly implied that the increase in autism diagnoses had nothing to do with the timing of the introduction of the MMR in the US and UK. His own graph showed the opposite of what his text said. His graphs showed something else had to be the cause of the increases (which we now attribute to the changes at the time of the criteria of what constituted autism).
Wakefield was set up by noted dog of Big Pharma, Brian Deer.
You've left out the Rupert Murdoch step.
Was there even a diagnosis other than ” a little odd” 40+ years ago?
"FLK" was popular.
This crap infuriates me to no end. I had a cousin who suffered from Congenital Rubella syndrome. If the vaccine had been around in the early sixties, May would not have been blind in one eye, almost deaf, and had a intellectual impairment. She would not have spent her adult life bouncing between hostels that she continually ran away from. She almost certainly would not have been raped by a carer.
Which probably where she acquired HPV, that result in the cervical cancer that killed her. Oh yeah, had she had been given Gardasil when she was a teenager she'd probably still be alive. Unfortunately for May, she was born at the wrong time.
Unlike these idjits.
This is just a little off topic, but I'd like to suggest a different approach to discussing AW. The term "struck off" makes sense to the British, but in the U.S., we would point out that "he had his medical license revoked by the authorities." I think we should also make a distinction regarding the reason he had his license revoked. It presumably was not because he did bad research or even skewed the data. Falsification is an offense against science, but is it also considered an offense against acceptable medical practice? If I understand correctly, the license revocation had to do with doing invasive procedures without the proper permissions, and for medically unnecessary reasons. Is this what happened? I'm a little confused because there was another doctor whose name keeps coming up due to an appeals board deciding not to continue against somebody who was already retired.
If Brian Deer reads these comments and is willing to weigh in, perhaps you could clarify things. Thanks.
GiJoel -- What an awful story!
It goes to show once again how vaccines are a victim of their success -- these people have no idea how devastating some of these "mild" diseases can be.
As the mainline Protestants say, "Peace be with you."
The executive producer, Lothar Moll, who similarly shows no discernable evidence of having the ability to critically evaluate medical evidence.
I wonder if this new-age goof is the main driver of the movie. Apart from his day job in designing better-ventilated buildings, he is enthusiastic about bringing the art of "active intuition" -- which apparently is Chakra-based intelligence to complement one's rationality -- into business management. He has a website full of Motivational Quotations and brainwave neurobollocks
Also, he believes in the evils of cellphone radiation and Electrosmog:
Let us say that his philosophy does not place excessive weight upon "evidence" or "reasoning".
I remember my mother rushing us all in when the local high school offered the first rubella vaccines! We didn't know what the big deal was, but she sure did.
And I remember telling my (ex) psychiatrist that I thought I had Asperger's, and he chuckled and said "no, if you had that you'd be in an institution!"
I seem to recall them calling it "freak" and "retard" and "weirdo", and not letting me sit by them on the school bus until the driver made them (and then pinching me all the way home).
When I saw the title of this piece 'man made epidemic' I thought it was going to be about a documentary on the recent pertussis out break being due to a reduction in vaccinations.
that's the real man made epidemic
What I find interesting is how the War on GMOs that evolved inexorably into the Demonization of Herbicides has cross fertilized with both the alt.med quacks and the antivaxx crackpots to form a rather generalized matrix from which no conspiracy theory is excluded and against which no topic (no matter how benign) is safe from infiltration and invasion. None of us are safe.
Especially since the larger American institutions political groupings appear to be under stress, if not outright dissolving. Where will the pieces fall? What new monsters are being born?
As I recall, even John Stone (and perhaps Jenny Allan) has endorsed rubella vaccination at AoA for the nubiles who have not been fortunate enough to benefit from endemic infection. But they aren't available separately, etc.
Where are the autistic adults?
We can start with the one I see in the shaving mirror every morning, diagnosed at age 50.
There's my nephew, now in his early 20's.
There are the other young adults in his sheltered workshop.
There are the people recently shown in the film "Autism in Love".
There is John Elder Robison, author of several books about autism.
There is Temple Grandin.
There is the couple in the book "Mozart and the Whale".
There are the soldiers in support and maintenance roles in the Israel Defense Forces.
There's the guy in New York who keeps sneaking in to joyride buses and trains.
There's Dan Ackroyd.
To name but a few.
Oh, yeah, here once again is the ever-popular "scientists said tobacco was safe" gambit.
So who proved it wasn't? Reiki masters? Jenny McCarthy?
If recall serves, statisticians started to make a case for the smoking-lung cancer link as far back as the 1920s (I think this was in Germany.).
The milestone moment was the Surgeon-General's Report, not the Naturopath-General's Report. And it came from - wait for it - wait for it - you guessed it - scientists!
In my catalogue above, I left out all those people who were once called "idiot-savants" now known by the shorter, but not much kinder, "savants".
I'd actually like to question this. Is it even true? From what I know, it was scientists who found out about smoking's link to cancer. Also, I understand that in the 1960s the tobacco companies funded their own research into whether smoking causes cancer in the hopes that said research would prove it didn't, only to confirm it did. So...
Which scientists said that smoking was safe? (Apologies for the alliteration.)
@ Ol'Dave #35
... and then there's Maude!
@ has #9
I don't really watch that kind of stuff (other than the odd episode of Honey Boo Boo just to see if everything I've heard about it was true - it was...) but simply looking up either on the ol' Google Machine filled me with dread. How do these people still have custody of their children?!
Bob G @26
Here is the relevant detail, lifted from W*k*p*d**, which is pretty accurate on these things:
"Was being paid to conduct the study by solicitors representing parents who believed their children had been harmed by MMR".
Ordered investigations "without the requisite paediatric qualifications" including colonoscopies, colon biopsies and lumbar punctures ("spinal taps") on his research subjects without the approval of his department's ethics board and contrary to the children's clinical interests, when these diagnostic tests were not indicated by the children's symptoms or medical history.
"Act[ed] 'dishonestly and irresponsibly' in failing to disclose ... how patients were recruited for the study".
"Conduct[ed] the study on a basis not approved by the hospital's ethics committee."
Purchased blood samples—for £5 each—from children present at his son's birthday party, which Wakefield joked about in a later presentation.
"[S]howed callous disregard for any distress or pain the children might suffer"
Wakefield denied the charges; on 28 January 2010, the GMC ruled against Wakefield on all issues, stating that he had "failed in his duties as a responsible consultant", acted against the interests of his patients, and "dishonestly and irresponsibly" in his controversial research.
For those unacquainted with the use of language of British medical organisations, that is very damning indeed and things which are not said lightly.
He has also had his fellowship of at least one of the medical Royal Colleges revoked, although that has not been made very public - I only know because I know another fellow of that particular Royal College.
As I have said before you really have to go some to get that amount of sh*t thrown at you and have it all stick.
I should also note that those investigations ordered and/or carried out by Wakefield breach most, if not all, our rules on informed consent and are near as dammit assault, if not actual bodily harm.
In other Wakefraud-related news, he "defends" his fraudumentary on Fox:
Orac's comment that Wakefield was anti-vaccine made me think. He isn't totally anti, remember he had a patent application on an alternative Measles single vaccination when he did his "research". He is for safe vaccines, e.g. ones he will make money out of.
I suppose a 'documentary' about the flat earth, would not be shown on film festivals as well, not because it is controversal, but because it is not a documentary.
What's needed here is to make a counter-documentary. Do it in stealth mode in order to get interviews with Wakefield, Adams, and others of their ilk. Try to get them to hang themselves on camera (figuratively speaking). And include interviews with parents whose kids have had measles or whooping cough.
Done right, something like that could get traction, and could begin to undo the damage that these anti-vax propaganda flicks are doing.
Wait a second. 1 in 25 kids in 2015 have autism? Where does that stat come from? I seem to recall the latest estimate to be 1 in 68, which is the same as the last estimate that came out.
@Todd W. (#46): That stat came from the same place the antivaxxers get many of their stats, of course. But more kids HAVE to be diagnosed with autism if we're ever going to get to tehe1 in 2 kids by 2030 or whatever it is.
AV maths Todd.
5 reasons not to vaccinate your children
Orac really only has time to call stuff like 'Man Made Epidemic" to our attention, and note the usual pseudo-science cliches that pop up in the trailer. To push back against AV propaganda most effectively we need to take a deeper look at how it works in at least two senses:
The first is how the text works as persuasion – not noting the 'stupid' points skeptics expect the public to catch, but the devices used to present the case in a way that might appeal to 'fence sitters'. This includes things like cinematography, editing, casting, writing style... Either 1) we might conclude that it's a sucky film that won't appeal to anyone not already cemented into the bubble – in which case, there's not much to be gained by talking about it, or 2) we get a better means to undermine the message by deconstructing and revealing its method.
The second is how it works in socio-economic terms. Where does the money to make it come from? Whose agendas are behind it? What chances, if any, does it have of reaching a vulnerable audience? How will it be distributed and promoted? How (quite separate from it's content) are these things given meanings that articulate to social debates, and how do these meanings function on that contested terrain?
So here's yet another anti-vax film. What might be usefull to know about it beyond the outline Orac has provided.
All we have is the trailer. It suggests Man Made Epidemic (MME) covers a lot of the same ground as Vaxxed, but there appear to be some important stylistic differences. None of the documentary faux pax of Vaxxed appear: no lies about Thompson, nothing way out of context, no BS with the filmmakers appearing as interviewees. The presentation of the autistic kids is more restrained. The cinematography, editing, use of b-roll are all more polished and professional. So we might guess this will be more persuasive to 'fence sitters' who may see it, and that by sticking close to accepted documentary convention, it will be more more acceptable to programmers.
However, the 'downside' of this is that it probably lacks the 'sizzle' factor of Vaxxed. Both in content and form, it's looks to be pretty 'been there, done that', and at this point, after Greater Good, Bought, Trace Amounts, Vaxxed, it may be naught but a yawn. The fact the interviewees all appear to be European doesn't add any attraction for American audiences, either. So it's probably not worth worry about unless it gets some distribution and promotion here. It might get a lot more festival screenings than Vaxxed, but that's no sweat: the audiences will be tiny, the 'validation' trivial, the news value negligible. But since it seems it will be more presentable than Vaxxed, ot could wind up on some minor cable network or something, which would not be good. So, my 'text' summary is 'could be trouble, but only if it gets fairly wide distribution, which isn't very likely.'
2) IN THE SOCIAL
Where did this come from? (Follow the money...) In film, that starts with the 'executive producer', in this case Lothar Moll. He's German, and there isn't much on the web about him in English. He's the CEO of Pro Clima, a manufacturer of 'eco-friendly' sealing membranes used in building construction – "and the insulation is perfect" – with distribution in 35 countries around the world. He also runs something called Gradiavita, which does consulting and seminars on 'intuitive management'. The site has some pseudo-sciencey looking stuff about brain waves, and a bio of Moll (http://tinyurl.com/j9zojdn);
So he's got money, and he's wooey. But there's no sign he's ever backed a film before, and Googling his name with 'autism' or 'vaccines' yields no hits on Google. Thus, sans more info, we can't know whether he himself is a veteran AVer tossing off some excess wealth in a pet project, or is merely open to this sort of thing and has been drawn in by some associate/friend/family – nor whether whatever his connection, he's trying to make money and/or break into film producing with this, or it's just a passion project. Unlike AJW, there's no obvious sign of a grift.
Natalie Beer is listed as 'producer/director'. The 'producer' tag means she probably came up with the idea, and isn't just a hired gun. She's a film professional, but not in a creative role. 'Assistant director' on features is a somewhat misleading term. ADs are somewhat analogous to stage managers in theater. They run the set, their main function being to keep everything on schedule per the daily rundown sheet – the time-nazis who enforce discipline, and shout 'Moving On' denying the creative players options to do the shot one more time. It's a job you can do without having any of the skills needed to direct a documentary. Beer has made one previous doc, 'Waiting Area' (2012) in German, about the difficulties pregnant women in Ethopia have in getting proper medical care. It appears to have screened at some film festivals in Europe, including Amsterdam, which has a very good rep - but not received any distribution and basically disappeared. Again, Googling her name with 'autism' or 'vaccines' yields no hits. So, again, sans more info we can't say whether the film comes out of anti-vax passion, or just seemed like a good topic to someone trying to make their mark in the documentary world.
Nothing in the background of the two principals suggests this thing is heading for any kind of distribution. It's probably just one of the thousands of ultra-long-shot grabs for the brass ring of cinematic success that get generated every year. There's a skeletal website with the trailer and not much else, a Facebook page with less (comments in the single digits). I'd guess they don't even have a rough cut yet, and just put the web stuff up now to try to get some attention on Vaxxed's coattails. The OP probably increased the awareness of the thing in the US at least tenfold.
In sum, exactly what's going on here is kind of an intriguing mystery, but I doubt we'll ever find out...
He also runs something called Gradiavita, which does consulting and seminars on ‘intuitive management’. The site has some pseudo-sciencey looking stuff about brain waves
You will notice also that Luther Moll in his intuition-trumps-evidence wisdom also believes in the evils of electro-smog, fitting in with Eric Lund's observation (@19) that the "environmental causes" evidently include cell towers.
Thank you for posting this link.Institutions like the one at Rainer,described in Part 1 of this series,is one reason there are so few autistics over the age of 40 who are not high functioning.Institutions like this were a death sentence.
Those who did not end up in institutions,often took their own lives.Something science is just coming around to admitting..
As I have said here and elsewhere,my mother was one of the few who fought schools,doctors,etc to keep me out of institutions in the late 60s and 70s.I had an autism diagnosis that was low functioning enough to be diagnosed under the DSM-II.I lived with my mother up until a few days before she died.Because of this,I was was able to live long enough to get health care,based on advances in science to help me learn my autism was due to an inherited and treatable medical condition.,but I was one of the lucky ones.
@walkingmap #49: LOL! Thank you so much for posting that! I was expecting a load of bilge I could easily deconstruct, not the snark filled mockery of antivaxxers I got. Thanks once again.
My guess is they're not doing any significant damage, just preaching to an ever-decreasing choir, and they're basically the death throes of anti-vax as anything beyond the sort of fringe cult that will never go away but doesn't really matter much in the big picture.
I can imagine several concepts for good documentaries on anti-vax, but I doubt they'd attract funding, or have much better chance at distribution than the AV docs. A super-dedicated maker could still get it done, but I'm not sure it's worth three years of labor-in-poverty.
No need for stealth. These folks love to film themselves, and they put the noose around their own necks every time they open their mouths. Re purposing their footage would all be Fair Use.
I've thought of making something that would just deconstruct the BS in this corpus – less the 'science does prove vax safe', more 'these are lies and batpoop theories' ('1 in 2 by 2032') - which I could just do by myself using the 'found footage' and put up on YT. But given my health issues and all the life-stuff-balls I'm already dropping, I'll probably never get around to it...
It shows their ignorance that they put themselves on the same side as the Taliban and Boko Haram.
Watch the the movie. It truly isn't anti-vaccine. They believe a simple solution is separating out the MMR into three doses. That was the only advice Wakefield gave back before he was called a "fraud". And he isn't even anti-vaccie—he says the first step is to separate the MMR into three shots. What's the hassle behind that? Most of the people in the documentary support the administration of vaccines but have concerns about the safety of them. Knee jerk reactions to anything that goes against what the pharmaceutical companies and the CDC report is not helpful in ensuring that our children are receiving safe vaccines. I was very very very pro-vaccine before my daughter received her first dose of (d layer) vaccines at 18 months. Her reaction was so severe that her doctor recommended that she start receiving them one at a time in a very spaced out schedule. It was an extremely terrifying experience to go through as a mother.
Which movie? VAXXED? Be careful what you wish for, as it's coming to my town next weekend...
I meant to say delayed vaccines.
Funny, you forgot to mention Wakefield had a solid financial interest in those seperatly given vaccines.
1) It costs more to make 3 vaccines than one triple shot.
2) It requires 3 visits to the doctor, so the consultation fees are higher.
3) There is a greater chance that a vaccination will be missed.
Pharma Shill Gambit noted.
What evidence do you have that vaccines are unsafe? What evidence do you have that they are more dangerous than the diseases they protect against?
Bwhahaha. Those in the movies are active participants in anti-vaxx activities. They make "pro-safe vaccine" noises so as not to come off as the nutter anti-vaxxers they really are. Ask them what vaccines they would give their children and you'll get crickets.
Joan: "They believe a simple solution is separating out the MMR into three doses. That was the only advice Wakefield gave back before he was called a “fraud”."
What evidence is there to get three separate shots? It certainly was not in the 1998 Lancet paper when Wakefield gave that "advice" during the press conference about that paper. When he said those words, just about everyone realized he was coming to a conclusion with evidence.
It was the first indication of his fraud.
By the way, the MMR vaccine has been around since 1971 in the USA. Where is the evidence it caused the issues that Wakefield claims?
Also, here is one very good reason why you should not make up your own schedule: your child has a greater of getting a disease, and if they get measles at a very young age this can happen:
I can understand being wary of vaccines after your experience ; and if you don't know a lot about Wakefield and co, he sounds like he has a point.
However, Wakefield proved by his actions through the years that he is not a competent / honest advocate of safer vaccines. His actions have been amply documented in this blog, and others like Left Brain Right Brain.
"Anti-vaccine" doesn't necessarily mean "against all vaccines" ; it can also be someone who advocates extremely unrealistic ways of making safer vaccines, based on no or unconvincing evidence.
The "CDC whistleblower" pseudo-scandal has also been detailed in these blogs. Here is an introduction : http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2014/09/mmr-cdc-and-brian-hooker-media…
And as for the movie, the trailer already had quite a few lies and deformations in it, which didn't bode well for the rest of the movie. (For example, insinuating that the DeStefano study would have proven that vaccines can cause autism in ALL children, when the only controversial result is among black boys vaccinated in a certain timeframe.)
So at this point, there is no "knee-jerk reaction" ; we only recognize lies long debunked.
Question for our more medically-minded commenters, as Joan's claim of a serious vaccine reaction followed by spacing out of subsequent vaccinations has a cargo cult whiff about it:
If her child really suffered a serious reaction to an initial vaccination, what difference would spacing out subsequent vaccinations make? If a child is allergic to a specific component - e.g. virus protein, substrate, adjuvant, or preservative - wouldn't it be logical not to vaccinate her with any other vaccines that contain that component while giving her the rest of her vaccinations on schedule? Or just biting the bullet and not take the risk of any additional vaccinations, and relying on herd immunity to keep her protected? I mean, if the child seriously reacts once, why would waiting a few extra months make her less likely to react again? What's the actual guidelines here for responsible pediatricians?
Of course, Joan doesn't say what "serious" actually means: blotchy and miserable with a temperature for several days, or a mad rush to the ICU. If the former, I'm guessing her child's pediatrician was just humoring a wildly over-reacting parent for the good of the patient, since an extra year's risk of contracting serious diseases is still preferable to an extra lifetime's worth. If the latter, then whaaaa... all round.
Though I'm guessing it was more likely the former, as anti-vaxxers are hardly famous for their ability to reliably assess or report genuine risk vs harm. I wonder if Joan also feeds her daughter, or drives her around town, or keeps her at home, as there is extensive hard evidence of children suffering serious adverse reactions to food, cars, and houses too; up to and including death; honestly it'd be a much safer world if everyone just got their tubes tied at birth.
Funny, you forgot to mention Wakefield's study was both unethical and scientifically worthless.
Funny, you forgot to mention Wakefield' co-authors all had their names removed from the article and subsequently it was disavowed by The Lancet, where it had been published.
Does any find this statement of Joan to be very odd: " I was very very very pro-vaccine before my daughter received her first dose of (d layer) vaccines at 18 months."
If she was very pro-vaccine why did she wait a year and a half before giving her the first dose? What is a "d layer"? And isn't the dreaded MMR usually done closer to fifteen months?
Funny, you forgot to mention Wakefield's bogus research was paid for by a lawyers looking for a new frontier in dubious malpractice suits from a legal aid fund meant for patients' claims.
@Chris (68) she noted in a later comment she meant "delayed" not d layer.
However...the question remains: why was her daughter getting her FIRST vaccines at 18 months? Which one(s) did she get?
Nothing about Joan's post makes sense and is one of those "I'm not an anti-vaxer but I really am an anti-vaxer" stories that I've seen way too often.
Dear Joan, the W*k*p*d** entry ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield ) on Mr Lying Trousers Fraudy Pants tells you all you need to know about what a dishonest, venal and corrupt individual he is.
Just to be clear that page is very heavily monitored and the editors are scrupulous about references and documentation: I tried to add a paragraph about him having his fellowship of a Royal College revoked, but I don't have documentation, as the only people who have access to that are members of that Royal College, one of whom is a friend.
I read almost all of your comments in here and I'm really appalled on some of you that say this kids should be taken from their families because they don't deserve them, first of all do any of you scientist in here have a autistic child? For me that I do, I just want to find answers possibly cure my son to be the happy child that I knew, am I just to let him be...... Scream, hit is head, don't acknowledge you, not able to show any emotions, not speaking one word, I'm not disputing the science I'm just trying to find out why a perfectly healthy baby that once said words, hugged me and saaud goodbye when I would go to work suddenly stopped and it got worse as time went on, now my 10 year old is totally nonverbal, bites everything that he sees to a point that he has chipped his teeth, he hurts inside and I know in his eyes and some of you have the nerve to tell me just let it be, don't look for answers. The reason I'm looking at vaccines is simply because when you look up autism and how was or when was detected is like hearing your sons story through another parent, it all started after the 18 month vaccination, I'm not a doctor nor a scientist but I would do anything to make him better, like many autistic kids he has seizures I don't know and never would say it's the vaccinations, I simply don't know but I sure want to find out if I can what happened, why after 18 months, why after vaccines, am I allowed to ask questions? You guys in here are making people feel bad for just asking questions, I don't know nothing about the film nor the director, I don't know what's the motive behind it, I just try to make sense and hopefully find some relieve and if some of you think that I don't deserve my son because I just have to let him be ..... Than come and live with us for couple of days, he has the most loving and caring parents you'll find but I don't know how to explain to you I see pain in his eyes and I can't help him.
"... first of all do any of you scientist in here have a autistic child?"
I do, I do! Now do I get a prize? My kid even had seizures before he had his first vaccines. Do I get another prize?
By the way, many of the people who commented on this thread are actually autistic. Instead of tone trolling, I suggest you watch the program I linked to in Comment #16. Then go down and read Roger Kulp's comment.
@Ilir Saipi - I only read one comment that suggested that some children might be better off taken from their parents because their parents - in that person's eyes - clearly hate their children. I don't happen to agree with that comment. Some people have strong opinions.
Autism is developmental delay. Of course you are not going to spot it until your child gets to the point where he or she is supposed to develop but doesn't. Your child always had autism, you just couldn't tell until - coincidentally as correlation does not mean causation - around the time of his or her shots.
Your child isn't hurting in that way. He is not living a tortured existence, he is just different - not neurotypical. That is the one and only answer. He was not, and is not, "damaged". You can't "catch" autism. It is not the flu.
The vaccines/autism link has been debunked so thoroughly and the evidence is easy to find if you know where to look. There is no need to "ask questions" in this case. You'll have to forgive the regulars as "I'm just asking questions,maaaan!" is a common excuse a lot of trolls/anti-vaxxers use to spout their bullshit, so they've grown quite "triggered" by the term.
Nobody is telling you not to look for answers. What we're saying is that the people who are telling you that it's due to vaccines are lying to you. Some of them intentionally. I've been following Wakefield's claims since day one, and although at the start I thought he was merely misguided by his own sloppy science, as more evidence has come out I am now certain that he knows perfectly well it's all a lie. But he's living pretty well off of that lie, and so he continues to milk it.
Do you want to know why talk of autism cure worries us? Because of the sorts of cures people, particularly those who believe vaccines are the cause, have been promoting. Wakefield has recommended colonoscopies for autistic children, even in the absence of any bowel symptoms. Colonoscopies! That's a hell of a thing for an adult to put up with, never mind an autistic child. And there is no reason for it; his advice is based on lies. He invented "autistic enterocolitis" to give himself patients to treat, that nobody else could because nobody else could detect his invented condition.
And then there are the chelators. They claim autism is caused by mercury in vaccines, and they promise to remove it. But they use tests guaranteed to return a positive even if the person doesn't have excess mercury, and they use dangerous methods of chelation. (Which would be all of them, frankly -- chelation is inherently risky.) The Geiers combined chelation therapy with chemical castration of autistic children. And at least a couple of kids have actually been killed by this treatment, a treatment which does no good. And since the practitioners rely on faulty tests, they have to know that they're recommended something useless.
And then if you start moving outside the "vaccine injury" believers, you get even more disturbing proposed treatments for autism. Supposed "cures" that do nothing but enrich the proponents, and at worst could do serious harm to the children. Children like yours and mine are profoundly vulnerable; we have to use extra care to be sure the treatments we try are not doing harm. For instance, consider "rebirthing therapy". This therapy would contravene the Geneva Convention if practiced on a prisoner of war, and has killed children. Some states have banned it. It still happens, though. And then there's this new one, that alleges autism to be caused by an intestinal parasite that can be cured by drinking or receiving enemas containing the Miracle Mineral Solution (MMS). It's bleach. The supposed "parasites" that subsequently turn up in the child's stool are actually bits of intestinal lining. That's pretty horrific. The parents are told it's normal, so they keep administering it. There are a few actions now banning sales
And that is the sort of thing that we've all seen here, and why we are deeply suspicious now of anyone promising a cure for autism. Too many are lying for their own enrichment, and too many will do far more harm than good.
And we've met too many people who are "just asking questions". Look, asking questions is fine and wonderful. But you have to do more than that. You have to be prepared to listen to the answers and do a bit of mental work to evaluate them. Too many people just come in and parrot the same question over and over again, rejecting the answers. I hope you are different, and that we can have a conversation.
@Amethyst: I rarely disagree with you but here, I do:
Ilir Saipi's son *may* be hurting. But, when you have a non-verbal child, then they have to do a lot more work to figure out why. Are they having gastric issues? Allergies? Headaches? Cramps? Unfortunately, too many times, it's assumed that the behaviors are related to the delay, not a physical cause.
I'm not saying you are ignoring that fact, but his son may be living a tortured existence if there are untreated physical issues. However, I do agree that his son is not damaged, lost, or a "blight" (shudder - Wakefield should be thrashed for that comment).
Ilir Saipi@73: Here's your problem: The question to which you're demanding an answer is "Who do I blame?" when the most important question you should be asking is "How can I understand and communicate with my child, whose perception and interaction with the world is radically different to mine?"
And you won't get an answer to that question from scuzzweasels like Andrew Wakefield, whose entire shakedown racket is 110% reliant on maintaining his marks in a constant state of blind rage and distraction.
Well the good thing is that I got a lot of replies, listen guys I'm not saying that vaccine caused this but I'm just telling you what I know and seen in my son, one comment was that my son was autistic from birth and he just started showing his autism after the 18 month, now my eyes and videos that I have are going to tell you something else that it's known in a lot of autistic kids wich is he slowly started losing his skills verbal and other that he had after the 18 month, and yes that was the vaccination time, so that's where I'll ask questions comes from, guys the bottom line is that my son or God or however you want to put it found a great comfortable place in my house and my heart, the challenge that we face are hard in so many levels, I had to bring my mom from Europe a retired teacher so she can help me, because Tony needs 24 hours somebody with him, what I'm saying and reading lately like the Huffington post article today that we the parents of autistic kids should never ask questions and also we have to let them be...... I just don't agree with that, the spectrum of autism is so wide and if you are in here writing, typing, speaking, communicating and say see I'm autistic ...... That's what I want for my son and I would do ANYTHING to make that happen if I can, I don't want a PERFECT kid by no means, I just want somebody that can tell me what he wants, where hurts, why hit himself where I can see it hurts him afterwards, listen no I'm not an expert I'm just a parent that is trying to see if I can find a way so I can communicate with him than I'll do anything, I'll look for answers in the craziest places and like I said I care more about his life than mine to hurt him, some of you guys are maybe more knowledgeable about this that I'm so please share any thoughts just don't put words that I don't say that I'm just asking questions because I believe vaccines did it, I'm not saying that I believe In science, I'm just trying to figure out what caused it and if there is a way to make him better and please for god sake don't give me the bs that he is the way he is and that's it, sorry for any grammar or other mistakes, I'm writing from my phone also English is my second language, faleminderit.
I worded it poorly. I never meant to say that there weren't other complications that could be causing suffering (especially, as you say, when you can't tell anyone about them!) - I just wanted to stress the point that autisim in itself is not a tortured existence; it is but a different one.
Everything points towards autism being genetic, as well as affected by various other factors such as the age of the parents. I know that using Wikipedia as a source is generally frowned upon, but as we're both laymen here I think we're allowed to make an exception:
As for your second point, while there is no "cure" for autism you should know that autism is categorized as a developmental delay and there is improvement as the person ages.
"I’m just trying to figure out what caused it and if there is a way to make him better and please for god sake don’t give me the bs that he is the way he is and that’s it, ..."
What you really need to be doing is connecting with the social services offered by the country you are living in! The "cause" is unimportant, it is how you will deal with it now the that is the most important.
Where is the best school? What therapies can you get? What can you do to plan for the future, like who will take care of him if you are not there?
@Ilir Saipi #80:
In the Omnibus Autism Proceedings before Vaccine Court, Michelle Cedillo was one of the test cases. To bolster the case, her parents introduced video of her at 15 months old to show she was fine before then. An expert in autism was able to show that Michelle was already engaging in autistic behaviours at that age, and that her parents were unconsciously adjusting their behaviour towards her because of it.
Autism typically becomes noticeable at 18 months. The fact that you did not realise your son was autistic before 18 months doesn't mean he wasn't. And it does not mean that the MMR "turned" him autistic.
And the consequences of Wakefield's lies occur again.
Alternative medicine doctors profiting from antivax views? Same as organic farmers wildly rich compared to your AGrobussiness. People your math sucks. Wakefield has no vaccine patent, unlike the vaccine darling Paul Offit( he has made untold millions, and I am quoting). I am sorry but to claim the antivaxxers are making millions it's just plain stupid, or you are drinking the cool aid. And as for the herd immunity........all those college kids and older if they have not been recently vaccinated the immunity has worn off. Herd immunity is a myth. And repeated vaccinations will help you into the road to autoimmune disease. Don't believe me? Please don't, look it up!
Were ignorance bliss, you'd be euphoric. Wakefield formulated a single measles vaccine.
Who are you quoting?
Wakefield owns or owned a house worth some $1,500,000. He isn't exactly short of money. A lot of antivaccine doctors have high net worth.
<blockquote.Herd immunity is a myth.
Indeed we don't.
That's not how it works around here. You make the claim, you stump up the evidence.
Patent WO1998055138AInventor: Andrew Jeremy Wakefield.
@Troels: what do you want to bet she'll claim that's not *really* a vaccine...?
In addition to antivax myths, Citrine has bought into the fable that the organic food industry is dominated by small farmers.
"Another heading on the Whole Foods banner says "Help the Small Farmer." "Buying organic," it states, "supports the small, family farmers that make up a large percentage of organic food producers." This is semantic sleight of hand. As one small family farmer in Connecticut told me recently, "Almost all the organic food in this country comes out of California. And five or six big California farms dominate the whole industry."
Citrine: "Don't believe me?"
After your parade of falsehoods and distortions, why should we?
I would guess either no reply or she'll just move on to the next point and forget she brought it up.
One more thing
Smells like a drive by to me.
How does this happen? I get not understanding science but this is q simple matter of fact checking. Is it not looking for fear of the truth? Is it knowing and simply ignoring?
Either way, god forbid they question God-king Wakefield lest your loyalty be questioned. This goes far beyond a critical thinking error. It strikes me more as "2 + 2 = 5" brainwashing.
1. That the skeptical community notes some very disturbing trends among some in the affected by an autistic child community doesn't mean we (well other than PGP) believes all y'all are merely upset your child isn't perfect and willing to abuse them in whatever way necessary to "restore" them to some ideal. Unfortunately too many people seem to express those opinions and do those actions and they often rope other people in and circle the wagons to make sure you don't find out that reasonable people find it horrifying.
My advise. Be careful of isolating yourself with they folks that rant about how someone, anyone, (used to be fairies, now it is big Pharma or some other consipracy) stole their child from them and they are doing things to that child that would be considered abuse if you did it to a neurotypical child (like force feeding them bleach and giving them bleach enemas) but they think is totally reasonable to undo whatever "they" did to the child.
2. Most of the just asking questions things if you used the search on this or any other long running blog you will see it has been asked and answered so many times that it seems more of a tactic than honest questioning. It often is an early warning sign so you can predict exactly what the rest of the conversation will be like. Sometimes it is someone honestly asking, but more often than not it is someone who knows for fact they know all the answers and are just out to stick it to anyone that dares to disagree. They can't back their opinion up with evidence so they try to tear down any other viewpoint and JAQ is one of the standard tactics.
3. Even if we never find the cause (either globally of all autism or specifically for your child) no one is saying stop fighting for your child and give them every opportunity to grow and develop to the best of their capabilities. Just be careful who you trust. Anytime people "will do anything" to make it better the scammers and abusers of the world start salivating and come up with all kinds of schemes that will harm your child and your finances. Sure it will all sound good, but that way just leads heartache and sometimes financial ruin. I do believe there is a lot that can be done to help these kids, even the most severely effected, but I do worry how many never get effective interventions because their parents are chasing whatever the current illusion that is being spun to take advantage of the desperate.
Not exactly sure which post is best for this BUT since AJW is being mentioned....
More on VAXXED and its perpetrators:
I've found a few places across the net ( AoA, @ KImRossiStagliano/ Twit, Jeffery Jaxxen, VAXXED, #panran ).
where videos of Del BIgtree chasing Dr Pan down the halls and stairs of a state office building in Sacramento are being circulated. Andy was nearby as well.
A thought occurred to me- whilst the usual suspects make much of the doctor's actions, IIRC wasn't he threatened by anti-vaxxers and given police protection when the bill was being discussed in state congress and anti-vaxxers were protesting outside ?
I'd run too if I had endured death threats.
Sceptics should take a look at these recent shananigans as what we may be up against for being reality-based.
Del may be as loony as Jake. Andy has more understandable motivation for his participation.
Denice & all: Yes, Andy & Del Bigtree & Polly Tommey & entourage went to Pan's office with a posse (I think 5 in all) none of whom are Pan's constitutents. They did not have an appointment and it was a day the Senate was in session. They demanded an interview with Pan; he declined and made his usual brisk way to the stairs down to the Senate floor.
On twitter, the usual suspects are trying to make a big deal about #PanRan, but Pan's formidable staff shot back with #del2slow. Jeremey White, who writes for the Sacramento Bee, caught it all:
When I began to frequent the Plow and Stars in Cambridge some decades ago, not only because it was the Boston area's most notable purveyor of Guinness Stout but also because it was within crawling distance of my charmingly decrepit rent-controlled apartment in Harvard Square, I quickly learned both that it was useless to debate a drunk in a bar and that if someone refused to debate me it was because I was acting like a drunk in a bar.
It seems that Del Bigtree and his Age of Autism supporters haven't reached even that level of self awareness. Sad.
BTW, Joshua Coleman, who recorded Pan, was charged with willful cruelty to a child, vandalism and obstructing a public official after a bizarre incident that left Coleman hiding from police behind a garbage can. Coleman was reportedly arrested and charged with willful cruelty to a child after it was discovered that he had left his other children at home alone.
Oh, Sacramento !
I have to put In a word for this strange little city. A few years ago while in the Bay Area my companion suggested a side trip to Sacramento. I thought, " Not much there".
After much discussion, I relented and went there by way of Vallejo and Vacaville ( including seeing an adobe and rice growing) : I was pleasantly surprised. It is oddly charming with the Gold Rush era buildings, the river and interesting historical artefacts - and decent food. We had drinks at an 1850s gigantic, elaborately carved wooden bar. I met an artist/ silversmith. The only problem was intense dry heat and the sun beating down on you ( in late June ).There are lovely gardens and green areas near the river. Victorian architecture. A very diverse city.
Odd in a good way.
a bizarre incident that left Coleman hiding from police behind a garbage can.
For shame. We have Coleman's word for it that he is not anti-vaccine! He is just pro-safe-vaccines!
For my sins, I listened to yesterday's selfie video with Polly Tommey and Del Bigtree (hurry I think they only stay up for 24 hours).
All vaccines cause brain injury.
"there's no school, no job, no house, no anything worth putting a vaccine in your child"
I listened to the whole thing, because I was trying to record it in quicktime. I failed. Another high point: the reality-impaired Nevada attorney Revolt Revoke Restore hired for their anti #SB277 litigation has been attacking andy and poor Del is buffaloed.
Polly was whining that "a lot of moms called Pan's office to tell him we were coming and he ignored them!" <--paraphrase. News flash cupcake if you are not a constituent Pan really doesn't have to talk to you about a bill that was signed into law almost a year ago.
Bigtree went on and on about how Pan knew that vaccines were dangerous before he worked to get SB277 passed, because Andy had sent him all the Thompson/Hooker information. Bigtree demands to know how Pan could be so corrupt. Etc.
Can anyone explain to me what the picture of Steve Harvey is doing in AoA's "reportage" on this item?
People who are conspiring to cover up the fraud perpetrated by the CDC are the lowest form of human scum. The autistic community has had war waged against it by the CDC and the pharmaceutical establishment and it is time to realize this is a real war and begin to act accordingly....
Sure thing, Jimmy (yet another Wakers fanboi).
Let's see if we can dig up more about the "conspiracy." A version of the MMR vaccine has been around since 1971. Please uncover the verifiable documentation dated before 1990 that autism in the USA went up in the 1970s and 1980s corresponding to the use of the MMR vaccine there, It is much larger country that was using the MMR vaccine much longer than the UK, so that data should exist.
The autistic community has had war waged against it by the CDC and the pharmaceutical establishment
I am not convinced that "Jim" is in a position to speak on behalf of the autistic community.
The lickspittle douchebag community, perhaps.
Jim, as herr doktor bimler writes, you do not speak for me. That so called "fraud" has been looked at. It is "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, and signifying nothing".
People who are conspiring to cover up the fraud perpetrated by the CDC are the lowest form of human scum
Since the CDC has released all of the related documents, where's the cover-up?
Have you ever been in an actual war, Jim?
You self identify as living in city with active US military – multiple bases and branches. You should feel ashamed of yourself for voicing that analogy.
it is time to realize this is a real war and begin to act accordingly….
Apparently the appropriate action in a Real War is to leave anonymous comments on a blog. Not exactly Pearl Harbour, Jimbo!
Re herr doktor bimler @ #108
(Shamelessly stolen without attribution)
Jim is clearly a member of the Fightin' 101st Chairborne Division, since this was a drop-in attack.
First of all, get your facts straight!!! The first words in the movie are "we are not anti-vaccine." This entire movie is about the dangers of combining vaccines without texting. I don't think there is any question that the MMR has caused autism. Now, unless you get your head on straight, you will have as much blood on your hands as the pharmaceutical company!!! No is saying don't vaccinate, they are saying single doses after the age of 3. Wake up!!!!
"The first words in the movie are “we are not anti-vaccine.” "
So what? What good is that statement when Wakefield is a pathological liar?
"This entire movie is about the dangers of combining vaccines without texting."
And the evidence is what?
"I don’t think there is any question that the MMR has caused autism."
Prove it. The first MMR vaccine was introduced in the USA in 1971, and it was modified in 1978 (when it was also chosen as the preferred vaccine for the Measles Elimination Program). Please post verifiable documentation dated before 1990 that autism was rising in the USA during the 1970s and 1980s coincident with that vaccines use.
The MMR vaccine was used in the USA for twenty years before Wakefield even knew of its existence. If any MMR vaccine caused autism it would have been noticed in a country that is several times larger than the UK, where the vaccine had also been used for much longer. Where is that evidence.
"No is saying don’t vaccinate, they are saying single doses after the age of 3."
Does this include the DTaP vaccine? The multi-serotype polio vaccine? Which were used decades before the first MMR vaccine.
I don't think we are the ones who need to "Wake up!"... perhaps you should learn some history, and figure out how to look up the medical literature. Please do not get your "science" from fake documentaries by known frauds.
You don't say.
"The first words in the movie are “we are not anti-vaccine.”
Which is a typical claim by those who are vehemently anti-vaccine (an example being contributors to JFK Jr.'s recent book on the purported dangers of thimerosal). Yessir, vaccines are horribly dangerous, but don't call _us_ antivaccine.
The best comeback to anyone making this dubious and self-serving protestation is to ask what vaccines on the current pediatric schedule they think kids should get - a question that seldom gets a forthright answer (feel free to jump in with your response, Linda).
"This entire movie is about the dangers of combining vaccines without texting."
Isn't texting while vaccinating hazardous? I saw a bumper sticker about that the other day.
You are correct. There is no question about it. A metaanalysis looking at over 14.5 million subjects answered the question. If the MMR caused even a fraction of cases of autism, the study would have detected it. It didn't, so we can proclaim that vaccines do not cause autism.
This entire movie is about the dangers of combining vaccines without texting.
I always send text messages while I'm combining vaccines!