UPDATE: Globe and Mail Health Columnist André Picard Abandons Evidence Based Autism Treatment Principle, Embraces SON-RISE PROGRAM®

André Picard is a Globe and Mail public health reporter with the Glboe and Mail which is promoting the Son-Rise Program®, a purported autism program with almost no evidence based support of its effectiveness, a program which is not even mentioned in the recent CMAJ (2014) article or the (2007) AAP (reaffirmed 2010) autism reports reviewing the evidence, or lack thereof in support of various autism treatments.  The 2000 MADSEC (Maine) review did expressly assess Son-Rise Program® as described in my initial commentary on this somewhat startling embrace by the Globe and Mail of a weak to non evidence based autism "treatment".  By tweeting his papers opinion that "Science has yet to catch up with this particular therapy. But for some families, it's breaking through the walls of autism" Picard appears to have condoned his papers rejection of evidence based autism treatment in favor of emotionally appealing anecdotal heart tugging stories which prompt emotion to trump evidence and analysis. 

Picard is entitled to his own opinions. Unfortunately his opinions reach and influence many Canadian parents whose autistic children may be exposed to the risks of lost development time if  their parents abandon evidence based autism treatment for the as yet still weakly evidence supported Son-Rise Program®.

Offit Offensive Has Failed, Vaccine-Autism War Continues, Child Vaccine Refusals Increase in U.S.

Breaking News Update:


I had just posted this comment when I read the CP Breaking News update Parents with more education less likely to let their daughters get HPV shots featuring extensive commentary by Field Marshal Paul Offit the man with great vaccine credibility ... with the main stream media ... not so much ... maybe none at all ...  with parents, including apparently better educated parents.  Personally I think including Paul Offit in an article about vaccine safety is counter productive if parents are the audience that authorities are trying to convince. The article despite the education levels of the parents, blames the internet for leading these parents to question public health authorities pronouncements on vaccine safety.  As always the possibility that parental concerns might be legitimate is not referenced in the article.  The Offit Offensive ... the insanity ... continues.

 
The latest news from the Vaccine-Autism front is summarized succcinctly in the CBC headline Child vaccine refusals increase in U.S. The article reports on the study by Philip Smith and his colleagues of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta which found that "between 2003 and 2008, the percentage of parents who refused or delayed vaccination doses "increased significantly from 22 per cent to 39 per cent."  Authorities will scratch their heads over this information, will wonder how they can get through to those stupid, ignorant, hysterical and ill informed parents who do not accept their dictates about what is best for their children.  They will continue to follow the same insane strategy of trying to convince parents, while insulting them,  that all vaccines, and all vaccine ingredients are always safe no matter how many times they are given and no matter what contrary information they might stumble  upon.  

What the authorities will not do, can not do, is acknowledge that they have not always been forthright in addressing public concerns and that they have ignored credible health professionals who in fact do have questions about the state of the "science" on vaccine safety particularly as it pertains to autism. 

If anyone from American or Canadian public health offices reads this blog commentary and decides that what I  say in this comment is typical "anti-vaxxer" nonsense they should know that I have two sons all of whom have received all of the recommended vaccine shots. I have never attributed my youngest son's severe autistic disorder to vaccination although I do have an open mind on the issue now.  I do not  believe the rhetoric of the failed, and insane, strategy of public health authorities and mainstream media giants who simply dismiss parents, health professionals and researchers who question whether "science" has actually determined for all time that all vaccines are always effective and safe.  The strategy has failed and yet the strategy continues to be relied on by the same authorities and media giants hoping for a different result.

On January 24 2009 in Einstein's Reply to Paul Offit I questioned the rationality of public health authorities and professionals who keep following the same failed strategy to convince parents to vaccinate their children and expecting to see different results.  I set out two quotes as an introduction to that comment:

"These outbreaks have not, apparently, been sobering. If anything, the number of parents choosing to delay or withhold or separate vaccines is increasing. So what will it take?

Paul Offit

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein"

It is now 16 months later and Paul Offit and company keep doing the same thing over and over and over again and keep expecting to see different results. The insanity has not ended and there are no signs that it will. There are no signs that  public health officials or the mainstream media will abandon the Offit strategy which has been an utter failure.  The increases in vaccine refusals are clear indicators that it is insane to keep following the Offit strategy and expecting a different result.

Insulting Jenny McCarthy and other parents fighting for their children will not work.  Let me repeat that one since it is quite simple yet difficult for Offit and company to grasp: insulting Jenny McCarthy and other parents fighting for their children will not work.

Ignoring health professionals and researchers  like Dr. Bernadine Healy  and pharmaceutical official Dr. Julie Gerberding, both of whom have previously stated that a study comparing autism rates of existing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations could and should be done will not work. Ignoring a clinical and academic neurologist and parent like Dr. Jon Poling who has called for more environmentally focused autism research, including more vaccine oriented autism research will not work. Ignoring a researcher like Dr. Irva Hertz-Picciotto who says that the studies allegedly disproving a thimerosal autism connection are flawed and that stronger sceince is needed on the issue.

Playing politics by appointing those like Ari Ne'eman who oppose curing  autism to the IACC will not work.  Allowing an Alison Singer, nominated to the IACC by Autism Speaks, to  abandon that organization's mandate by voting against an historically crucial recommendation for the comparative autism vaccine study before jumping ship to join Paul Offit at the Autism Science Foundation, will not work. 

Parents know that the "science" on vaccines and autism is not as solid as portrayed by the Offit media armies. They know that research of vaccine and other potential environmental triggers of autism has been discouraged since the 1990's.  They know that public health authorities like the IACC have pushed the flawed thimerosal autism studies while refusing to  conduct the comparative studies recommended by Gerberding and Healy and while refusing the Hertz-Picciotto and Poling recommendations for stronger scientific research on thimerosal and other vaccine autism issues.

I am a parent who vaccinates my children but still has questions about vaccines.  I acknowledge the important role that vaccines have played in public health and disease prevention in children.  But there is a resource which is even more important in protecting and promoting the health of children and that resource is parents. It is that resource which has been subjected to unrelenting attack by the Offit armies as part of a failed and insane strategy to convince parents to vaccinate their children. 

It is long past time for the Offit armies, including the new Autism Science Foundation, mainstream media like the NYT, the Chicago Tribune, the Globe and Mail and PBS and internet foot soldiers like the blogging sites listed on the Autism Science Foundation web site to leave the field.  It is time for health authorities and researchers who understand that parents are the number one resource in child health promotion to work with parents and address their concerns instead of dismissing them. 

Will my small voice be heard and have any impact? Highly, highly unlikely.  The odds are good that a year from now, two years from now, vaccine refusals will have increased again in the US and the Offit armies will still be in the field attacking the number one child health resource ... their parents ... and hoping to see a different result.

Autism Priorities and the DSM V: Media Ignores Invisible, Severely Autistic in DSM V Discussions

The invisible autistics, the severely autistic, those with Autistic Disorder, profound developmental delays, cognitive and intellectual deficits, those who can not live independently, who live on hospital wards and in large, antiquated psychiatric institutions do not make regular appearances in the New York Times and its junior Canadian cousin the Globe and Mail. Nor do they appear regularly on the various CBC television and radio shows that have fawned over Michelle Dawson, Amanda Baggs and more recently Ari Ne'eman.

In the big, mainstream media discussions, and opinions about the proposed changes to the developmental disorders section in the DSM V nothing has changed. Ari Ne'eman and other barely autistic, very high functioning persons with Asperger's Disorder continue to receive all the considered attention of the big media while the severely autistic remain, as always, invisible. There is scant mention in any of the mainstream media commentaries of those whose lives are most severely restricted by autism disorders. The Globe and Mail breathes hot air about "a culturally rich autism" while ignoring those severely autistic persons living in institutional care throughout Canada.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

autism

H1N1 Vaccine, Cure or Cause? Moncton Wildcats Hockey Players Contract H1N1 AFTER Receiving H1N1 Vaccine

Since getting the shot, 17 Wildcats have caught mild cases of the flu. Two have confirmed cases of H1N1, and the other 15 suspected. All the sick players are quarantined, and several games have been cancelled.

The Globe and Mail, Nov 4, 2009

So how effective IS the H1N1 Swine Flu vaccine? Seventeen athletic teenagers whose health would be monitored closely by their hockey team contract H1N1 immediately after receiving the vaccine? Did the vaccine actually cause them to contract H1N1?

Hopefully cases where healthy individuals contract H1N1 immediately after receiving the vaccine will be investigated to see if the vaccine itself is causing them to contract the H1N1 Swine flu.

autism

Swine Flu (H1N1) Vaccine Safety Questioned by Drug Policy Researcher and Professional Ethics Director

Some parents of autistic children have, for many years, questioned the safety of vaccines, vaccine ingredients and vaccine schedules in connection with the dramatic rise in autism spectrum disorder diagnoses. The standard response is that vaccines are safe and parents are typically branded as hysterical or ignorant or both. These responses ignore the fact that flu vaccines containing thimerosal are still given to pregnant women and that mercury based thimerosal crosses the placenta. The official "don't worry, be happy" responses also ignore the cumulative amounts of mercury from the multitude of vaccinations young children receive. With the Swine Flu (H1N1) panic upon us some parents question the safety of the Swine Flu vaccine being rushed into production without safety testing. They are not alone.

In What do we know about the vaccines' safety? Not enough , published in the Globe and Mail, Alan Cassels a drug policy researcher at the University of Victoria and Arthur Schafer, director of the Centre for Professional and Applied Ethics at the University of Manitoba, point out the fact hat public health authorities simply do not know whether the Swine Flu vaccine will be effective or whether it will be safe:

Public-health officials around the world seem to be suggesting there is a possibility this flu pandemic could get much worse, that is, become more lethal. If that were to happen, it seems “obvious” that wise people should seek to have a preventive flu shot or access to a pill. Many people will say to themselves: Why not get the shot, just to be sure?

Part of the answer to that question is that until a million people roll up their sleeves to get the vaccine, no one can be sure how safe it will be. This is also a decisive answer to those who favour making vaccination mandatory.

Some public-health officials have described flu vaccines as “highly effective,” but the internationally recognized Cochrane Collaboration (which accepts no money from the pharmaceutical industry) did a systematic review of all high-quality randomized trials (25 in all) studying influenza vaccination. They concluded that “the evidence does not support universal immunization of healthy adults.” Period.

Cassels and Schafer point out that this is not the first time public health authorities have recommended action for treating flu without evidence to support the safety or effectiveness of that course of action. The quote above references a review of influenza vaccination generally which did not support universal immunization of health adults. The authors also discuss Tamiflu and Relenza, anti-viral drugs which are supposed to reduce the severity and length of flu but which have been shown by scientific testing to be little or no better than a placebo. Worse, a recent international study reveals that about 50 per cent of children who have taken Tamiflu experienced side effects from gut problems, diarrhea, to serious, neuropsychiatric problems. Cassles and Schafer take authorities to task for glossing over the problems with these anti-viral drugs.

I have in the past criticized the Globe and Mail for repeating the "vaccines can do no wrong" mantra of public health authorities and marginalizing parents who express concerns about vaccine safety. I commend the Globe and Mail for offering this thought provoking article using credible sources to provide a different perspective on the current Swine Flu Pandemic/Panic and the rush to flood the world with an untested vaccine.

autism

An Open Letter to the Globe and Mail: The Vaccine Autism Debate Is Far From Over, The Research Is Not Complete

The following email was sent earlier today to Andre Picard of the Globe and Mail:

I am the father of a 13 year old boy diagnosed with Autistic Disorder assessed with profound developmental delays. I have never attributed his autistic disorder to vaccines or vaccine ingredients although I currently have an open mind on the subject. I was very disappointed with your opinion piece declaring that the vaccine autism debate should end now and that the science is clear. I submitted a comment on that piece listing some of the many pieces of information and evidence that you simply ignored in articulating your opinion. That comment was not accepted for publication by your moderators.

As a "neutral" in the vaccine autism war I would like to see the proper research done to resolve the issues that are very much alive in respect of these issues. Several prominent health authorities have now declared that the epidemiological studies to which you referred and which are used to support claims that vaccines do not cause autism are not in fact specific enough to explore the possible impact of vaccines in causing autism in vulnerable population subsets. These authorities include former NIH and American Red Cross head Dr. Bernadine Healy, recent CDC director Dr. Julie Gerberding and Dr. Duane Alexander, Director of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), an NIH agency. As of February 24, 2009, as reported at the Huffington Post Dr. Alexander has acknowledged in connection with autism spectrum disorders and vaccines that:

"scientists must investigate susceptible subpopulations of children, including kids with mitochondrial disorders and those who have trouble metabolizing mercury."

Dr. Alexander himself stated in the interview with Autism Speaks' Chief Science Officer, Geraldine Dawson, Ph.D:

"One question (is) whether there is a subgroup in the population that, on a genetic basis, is more susceptible to some vaccine characteristic or component than most of the population, and may develop an ASD in response to something about vaccination. We know that genetic variations exist that cause adverse reactions to specific foods, medications, or anesthetic agents. It is legitimate to ask whether a similar situation may exist for vaccines,"


As you probably know a decision of the US Vaccine Court was released since your opinion was expressed decreeing an end to vaccine autism debates. In Banks v HHS the Special Master accepted the plaintiff's claim that as a result of the MMR vaccination received on 14 March 2000, his child suffered a seizure and Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”) which led to Pervasive Developmental Delay (one of the autism spectrum disorders), a condition from which he continues to suffer. I am sure you are aware of the Poling case in which the government acknowledged that vaccine caused the child's 'autism like symptoms". Autism as you may know is defined entirely by symptoms. CBS has reported that more than 1320 vaccine cases alleging brain injury, some including autism disorders, have resulted in government settlements.

I ask that the Globe and Mail, and you personally, exercise some journalistic balance, and inform the Canadian public, that the Vaccine Autism debate is, contrary to your previous opinion, far from over. Nor does the science make clear your claim that there is no vaccine autism connection. Three senior members of the American public health authority establishment have lent there voices to those of thousands of parents and many health care professionals who want to see the necessary research done to explore these issues.

Research, not the opinion of Andre Picard or the Globe and Mail, will provide the information that will help children, whatever the results of the research.

Respectfully,


Harold L Doherty
Fredericton New Brunswick

cc Facing Autism in New Brunswick

NOTE: As subsequently pointed out by jypsy, the Banks decision itself was made public some time ago and commented on by some involved in autism discussions. The compensation awarded to the injured child was announced last week for that decision.

autism

Vaccine-Autism War: Where In The World Is Dr. Paul Offit?

When the Vaccine Court Special Masters ruled against parents claiming their children's autism disorders were vaccine induced Dr. Paul Offit was the go to guy, once again, for the vaccine industry/public health establishment. The vaccine patent holder was ready with an enthusiastic endorsement of the Vaccine Court's autism triology:

"It's a great day for science, it's a great day for America's children when the court rules in favor of science."

Now another Vaccine Court decision has been made public and .... ooooops ... the Special Master in the case of 2007 Banks v. HHS has ruled in favor of the Plaintiff who claimed that as a result of the MMR vaccination received on 14 March 2000, his child suffered a seizure and Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”) which led to Pervasive Developmental Delay (one of the autism spectrum disorders), a condition from which he continues to suffer. The decision is available in pdf and is discussed in some detail by David Kirby and Robert Kennedy at the Huffington Post.

Will Dr. Paul Offit appear before the cameras and reporters to once again declare a victory for science or will his love for the Vaccine Court wane with a victory for an injured child over the government and the vaccine industry? And how about Andre Picard of the Globe and Mail who removed his journalist's hat and decreed that the debate about vaccines and autism should end? Should the all knowing Andre Picard lose his god like status and be ordered to rejoin the ranks of ordinary citizens who exercise their freedom of expression to discuss public health issues? Or are some Vaccine Court decisions better than others?

autism

Vaccine-Autism War: Teresa Binstock's Prophetic Hunch

The dramatic events of the past two months in the vaccine-autism war were predicted a decade ago by researcher Teresa Binstock in her article IGNAZ SEMMELWEISS and AUTISM: when prevailing paradigms resist change in which she reported the funding bias in favor of genetic based theories of autism causation. She also indicated that studies of potential environmental causes of autism, including vaccines and vaccine ingredients, were unlikely to receive funding. Studies which reinforced the prevailing "it's gotta be genetic" model of autism were favored. Binstock described the health establishment's disregard for parents' observations of their children's reactions to vaccine, the demeaning marginalization of parents and professionals who question the official autism paradigm and the disregard for contrary evidence. Ms Binstock noted that:

"when a medical model becomes institutionalized and its primary spokespersons become set in
their well funded ways, such institutions and individuals strongly resist change"

No medical model is anymore entrenched then the vaccine model of public safety. And few spokespersons are better funded than vaccine patent holder Dr. Paul Offit who has been on a never ending tour promoting his book about what he calls autism's false prophets. There are a number of indisputable good reasons for the entrenchment of the vaccine model: the reduction and near elimination of serious diseases, some of which can kill, are very powerful reasons in support of public vaccination programs. But few systems or models are perfect. Most require adjustment when problems are found.

If vaccines do cause harm in some cases then those harmful, and potentially harmful, effects should be studied and adjustments made. Unfortunately the vaccine programs have been elevated to a sacred level by public health authorities to such an extent that people who ask questions or voice concerns are dismissed as hysterical, as cranks, quacks, charlatans and any number of other pejoratives.

Dr. Wakefield has been the subject of an ongoing investigation by the GMC for several years. Journalist Brian Deer who has had some serious involvement with the laying of charges against Dr. Wakefield has recently published an article in the Sunday Times in which he "convicted" Dr. Wakefield of data tampering. Other imperious journalists like Andre Picard at the Globe and Mail have decreed that the debate over vaccine safety must end now. Imagine, a journalist dictating that free public discussion of public safety issues must end now?

Of course THE primary spokesperson for the entrenched medical model, the entrenched "speak no evil of vaccines model" is Dr. Paul Offit. Dr. Offit is the vaccine patent holder whose genial face, cozy sweaters and "regular guy" flannel shirts appear every other day in a major media interview describing his own heroics on behalf of the children of the world and demonizing the evil parents who have voiced their concerns about vaccines thereby contributing to the growth of disease and death.

In 1999 Teresa Binstock offered the following hunch which has proved prophetic:

My own hunch is that the NIH and NIMH will not change from within; the senior practitioners of the "it's gotta be genetic" model have too much influence. Just as Semmelweiss and his data were suppressed, so too will the NIH/NIMH autism-research insiders continue to act against the the growing body of new data in autism; the NIH's pro-genetic old-timers will cling to their paradigm and its funding. As a result, change within the NIH and NIMH will have to be initiated from outside those tax-supported corporations.

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism (2004) proved Ms Binstock's hunch to be correct when it expressly discouraged further investigation of vaccine safety. Last month the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) confirmed her hunch as prophecy when it reversed its own decision reached only weeks earlier to authorize funding for research of vaccine-autism connections, research that might have provided the kind of evidence found to be non-existent in the recent Vaccine Court Autism Trilogy.

As Teresa Binstock predicted in 1999 any research of non-genetic causes of autism, including and especially, potential vaccine causes, will have to come from outside the public health establishment. Of course the ability to conduct such research will be further hampered by well orchestrated media campaigns led by Dr. Paul Offit with journalists from institutions like the Sunday Times, the New York Times and the Globe and Mail scurrying about helping to suppress public discussion of concerns which raise any doubts about the deeply entrenched vaccine health model.

Personally it is the suppression of research and public discussion which causes me the greatest concern about the safety of vaccine programs. Ultimately, as the Semmelweis case reviewed by Teresa Binstock shows, the truth will out. In the meantime though some vulnerable children might be harmed by vaccines and vaccine ingredients. harm that might have been avoided with some adjustments. The vaccine program itself will most definitely be harmed by the campaign to suppress research and discussion of vaccine safety concerns.

autism

Vaccine-Autism War: Globe & Mail's Andre Picard Decrees Vaccines Safe

Andre Picard of the Globe and Mail has decreed that vaccines do not cause autism. In Picard's own words:

Vaccines do not cause autism.

The science proving this point has been quite clear for a number of years.

There is nothing new in Picard's decree. He relies on the recent vaccine court decisions and resorts to the usual demeaning dismissals of parents and professionals who express concerns about vaccines:

That's because a whole industry of hucksters has sprung up to promote alternatives to vaccines, and the vocal (and Web-savvy) minority of conspiracy theorists will see these thorough, thoughtful rulings as, well, just another part of the conspiracy by Big Pharma to poison kids for profit.

I submitted a comment about Picard's opinion piece to the Globe and Mail but it was not accepted as a comment on the moderated opinion section. I did not insult Mr. Picard or use any inappropriate language. What I did do was:

1) point out that there have in fact been thousands of settlements of vaccine lawsuits where brain injuries and neurological damage including autistic like symptoms have been claimed and that the US government has paid to settle those claims and that there have been many reports in learned journals informing of serious vaccine reactions;

2) point out that in the Poling case which the government settled the government (former CDC head Dr. Julie Gerberding) acknowledged that the vaccine could result in autism like symptoms);

3) point out that Dr. Bernadine Healy has stated that the studies which did not find a vaccine-autism connection were epidemiological studies which were not able to examine possible vaccine-autism results amongst vulnerable population subsets;

4) point out as Dr. Healy stated in 2008, as researcher Teresa Binstock did in 1999 and as shown at p. 152 of the IOM Vaccine Safety Report (2004) and in the recent cancellation of vaccine-autism studies by the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (2009) that government health authorities have actively discouraged and suppressed the type of research which might show a vaccine-autism connection amongst some population subsets;

5) point out that Dr. Julie Gerberding has stated that studies of unvaccinated children have never been done but could and should be done;

6) point out that contrary to Andre Picard's claim, and the frequently stated claim that thimerosal has been removed from all children's vaccines the FDA web site says otherwise:

(FDA Website: "Thimerosal has been removed from or reduced to trace amounts in all vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and younger, with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine").

I also put on the record for the Globe and Mail, in my rejected comment submission, that I am the parent of a 13 year old autistic boy who has never attributed his autism to vaccines. I have changed my mind from the belief that a vaccine-autism connection has been disproved to being undecided.

I am undecided because of the facts set out above. If Andre Picard and the Globe and Mail wish to dismiss me as a conspiracy theorist fine but they should rebut the facts that I have set out in this comment or show that my reasoning in relation to those facts is flawed.

Of course they can use their bully pulpit to issue Picardian decrees about vaccine safety and simply ignore facts and reason.

And they can still continue to pretend to be journalists while they are at it.


autism

TAAAPP - Autism's Confused Anti-Cure, Anti-Parent Movement

Despite the increasing body of knowledge revealing the neurological bases of autism, despite the fact that people who call themselves autistic either have, or are adopting by self-diagnosis, a medical diagnosis which defines autism as a disorder, despite the severe self inflicted injuries which threaten the health and lives of some autistic persons, despite the lives lived dependent on others in various dependent residential care facilities and institutions there are those, particularly on the internet who claim that autism is not a disorder and should not be cured.

There are some in the autism anti-cure movement who acknowledge that it is a disorder, particularly when they are seeking disability accommodation from employers or the provision of government services, but who still say that autism should not be cured. Implicit in this perspective is an anti-parent theme which emerges fully when parents describe candidly and honestly the realities faced by their autistic children particularly the more severely autistic children. Speculating about whether historical figures such as Einstein or Van Gogh were autistic is fine with the anti-cure movement. Touting any autistic savant, or accomplished autistic persons like Temple Grandin is politically correct but woe to the parent who dares speak honestly on behalf of their autistic child.

An interesting example of The Autism Anti-Cure Anti-Parent Perspective which I will refer to by the acronym TAAAPP can be found at Autism is NOT a disorder that NEEDS to be CURED a blogsite operated by someone called Cathy who does not disclose her interest in autism other than her obvious admiration for Michelle Dawson. Cathy only began blogging this month and has only blogged once - "comments re Facing Autism in New Brunswick". This comment contains two of the themes which identify the TAAAPP, anti-autism cure and anti-parent and I reproduce it here in its entirety:

comments re Facing Autism in New Brunswick

I have read this article in which Michelle Dawson(autistic) is mentionned and Erin Anderssen (mother of autistic individual).

I guess my main frustration is that individuals such as Erin are looking to somehow modify their childs behaviour. We live in a society that unfortunately is not tolerant of individuals.

I believe that Autism is not a disease to be cured. When is society going to change their way of thinking and allow for all differences, not just acceptable ones.

As far as specialized clinic's and residential care, shame on you parents that give up and take the easy road out.

Erin maybe if you spent more time with your son, rather than trying to denounce Michelle Dawsons "Scathing remarks" as you so put it, you might be surprised at the outcome.

Apart from Cathy's anti-cure belief she also expressly articulates, in the highlighted comments the anti-parent hostility that underlies much of the TAAAPP and Neurodiversity ideology. She expressly denounces parents who seek specialized clinical care and residential living for their autistic children. I am not sure if Cathy intended to denounce Erin Andersson of the Globe and Mail, or if her comments were directed at me personally, but she again makes it clear that parents should not be weighing in on autism issues on behalf of their autistic children - unless of course they agree with anti-cure icon Michelle Dawson. Cathy's logic is, unfortunately, confused by any measure, but it is a clear and concise reflection of the confused logic of Autism's Neurodiversity and TAAAPP ideologies.

For Cathy's benefit though I will plead guilty, guilty to her charge of trying to modify my son's behavior. Guilty of trying to modify his behavior to prevent him from banging his head on the wall until he injures himself, guilty of trying to modify his behavior to prevent him from biting his hands, wrists and ankles. I plead guilty to trying to modify his behavior to prevent him from walking into automobile traffic unaware of the consequences. I plead guilty to advocating for government funded pre-school, evidence based, autism interventions for my son and other autistic children. I plead guilty to advocating for autism trained teacher aides, resource teachers and autism suitable modified learning environments for my son and other autistic children.

Cathy, I thank you for showing me how intolerant I am in imposing on my autistic son Conor my beliefs that he should enjoy as full, enriched and rewarding a life, with as much independence, as possible.

autism

The Wrath of Michelle Dawson

Erin Anderssen and the Globe and Mail have incurred the considerable wrath of researcher Michelle Dawson of the Autism Specialized Clinic Rivière-des-Prairies Hospital University of Montréal. Ms Dawson objected to the article, ‘Autistics': We don't want a cure, published in today's Globe and Mail , and written by Ms. Anderssen, who apparently did not follow the script Ms. Dawson expected to see in the article.

In Erin Anderssen does not take autism seriously Ms. Dawson, the anti-ABA activist* who does not want to be called an activist, issues one of her scathing attacks, this time against Ms. Anderssen. Ms. Anderssen should not be too concerned though. Anyone who does not march to Ms. Dawson's tune on autism issues receives the same treatment, sometimes with virtually the same title - Autism advocates do not take autism seriously.

I have, once again, been singled out for condemnation by Ms. Dawson in her reaction to the Globe and Mail article. After all I speak candidly in describing my son, who has Autism Disorder, and who is described by two professional assessments as autistic with profound developmental delays. And, I advocate persistently for evidence based interventions to assist autistic children. Two reasons to merit Ms. Dawson's condemnation.

To date only Applied Behavior Analysis, or ABA, meets evidence based standards as an effective autism intervention. Before Ms. Dawson writes yet another blog comment mocking 'Harold Doherty's science' she might want to read what the American Academy of Pediatrics said this week about ABA, following the reports of a number of state and federal agencies in the US over the past decade who have reached the same conclusion:

The effectiveness of ABA-based intervention in ASDs has been well documented through 5 decades of research by using single-subject methodology21,25,27,28 and in controlled studies of comprehensive early intensive behavioral intervention programs in university and community settings.29–40 Children who receive early intensive behavioral treatment have been shown to make substantial, sustained gains in IQ, language, academic performance, and adaptive behavior as well as some measures of social behavior, and their outcomes have been significantly better than those of children in control groups.31–4

American Academy of Pediatrics, Management of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders

That is the result that I, and many parent advocates for ABA intervention for their children, have been seeking to obtain - gains in IQ, language, academic performance, adaptive and social behavior - not for Ms. Dawson and other high functioning autistic adults - but for our own autistic children. Some, like my son Conor, do not enjoy Ms. Dawson's considerable intellectual and communication gifts. For seeking to help our own children we have earned the wrath of Michelle Dawson; a wrath which is in fact a badge to be worn with pride and honor.

*(although the case did not involve her personally, Ms. Dawson appeared as an intervenor "An Autistic at the Supreme Court " in the Auton Supreme Court of Canada case to voice her opposition to government funded ABA treatment for autism, and again to the same end before the Canadian Senate)

Globe & Mail Review of Goody Bledsoe by Heather Doherty

Today was a day of excitement in the Doherty household as the Globe and Mail published its Spring Fiction Books issue and included for review Goody Bledsoe by Heather Doherty, mother of two fine boys, including a fellow named Conor who appears from time to time on this autism blog site. New Brunswick government officials who have been involved on the other end of my autism advocacy efforts over the past 8 years have been rumored to refer to me be a variety of names. Now, I guess I will simply be known as Heather Doherty's Husband.

Some comments from the Globe & Mail review of Goody Bledsoe:

Goody Bledsoe and her little brother have been on her aunt and uncle's New Brunswick farm just three days. In the face of Aunt Jackie's drill-sergeant authority, it's the pigs and Uncle Nathan who offer the warmer glimpse of a world that might be called home. By this point (20 pages in), there has already been ample cause for tears, none of them quite spilling.

The emotional control of Goody and her terminally ill mother is also their author's containment. Sadness brims, but is held in check by Doherty's ironies. I was hooked.

JIM BARTLEY, Globe and Mail, April 14, 2007

http://tinyurl.com/3d6tej

For anyone in the Fredericton area Heather will also be reading from Goody Bledsoe at the Nashwaaksis Public Libarary on April 19, 2007 beginning at 7 pm.

http://heatherdohertywrites.blogspot.com/

Government Was Warned - Now The Time To Pay $3.2 Million Autism Bill Has Already Arrived!

The autism world is buzzing today over a Glove and Mail article which discusses in a frank and straightfoward manner the societal costs, estimated at $3.2 million per person of caring for autistic adults. The costs are derived from the inability of many adults to work and care for themselves. These are some of the unpleasant realities that the rose coloured glasses brigade do not want discussed. But now government is being hit in the face with these realities. The Canadian Senate recently issued a report, a very flawed report, which warned that Canada would have to pay now or pay later for the costs of autism treatmnet and care. That part of the Senate Report at least was right if action is not taken to ensure that proper evidence based treatment for autism is not funded society ends up paying much more down the road.

It is not like government was not warned. In Canada the courageous parents who litigated the Connor Auton case started telling government over a decade ago that the financial burden to society down the road would be tremendous if early ABA intervention was not provided intensively right away and funded. Government chose to fight and resist all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. Along the way government received unexpected help form such sources as Psychiatrist Laurent Mottron an alleged autism expert who publishes reports on dozens of autism cases a year, almost all involving high functioning autistics and Asperger's Persons, almost none involving the low functioning autistic persons who require such expensive intensive residential care and treatment as adults.

In New Brunswick parents were subjected initially to a different response from government. Here we were asked to wait dutifully while an Inter Departmental Committee of Health, Family and Education civil servants along with hand picked "stakeholder" representatives met to assess what services were available specifically for autism needs in New Brunswick. The report and its recommendations were submitted to government where it went unread by the lead Minister Elvy Robichaud for 10 months, by his own public admission. The report's recommendation were timid and only contained a recommendation for evidence based interventions because a local Fredericton activist group called FACE kicked up a fuss. It took another year after the reports release before the government committed on paper to fund pre-school interventions for autistic children. Only now are Teachers and Teachers Assistants being trained in New Brunswick at the excellent UNB-CEL Autism Intervention Training Program.

The cost of government foot dragging in New Brunswick and across Canada on autism issues is now becoming clearer. In New Brunswick residential care and treatment for autistic youths and adults is virtually non-existent. Essentially our more difficult cases are shipped out of province, sometimes out of Canada, to seek treatment. Residential care is essentially custodial care for many autistic youths and adults and they sometimes end up charged with assault when friction arises between untrained residential care workers and autistic residents.

Government was told this day was coming. But it is not down the road as the Senate indicates although the problem will undoubtedly get even bigger down the road. The future, the unpleasant future is now in New Brunswick and much of Canada for the substantial numbers of autistic adults living little more than a custodial existence; cared for by untrained staff and lacking in appropriate medical care.

"Autism a lifelong burden, study shows

Because few adults with the disorder can work, the economic costs continue

ANDRÉ PICARD

Each child diagnosed with autism will accrue about $3.2-million (U.S.) in medical and non-medical costs over his or her lifetime, according to a new study.

The most expensive components are lost productivity and adult care, not medical costs and behavioural therapies that so many parents crave for their children, the research shows.

"Although autism is typically thought of as a disorder of childhood, its costs can be felt well into adulthood," said Michael Ganz, an adjunct professor in the department of society, human development and health at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass., and the lead author."