Unthinking Autism Guide Shannon Rosa Attacks Autism Parents .... AGAIN.

Shannon  Rosa, with the Twitter help of Seth Mnookin and Dr. Jon Brock is at it again, misrepresenting autism disorders and the state of knowledge about autism causation and of course blaming autism parents fighting for their children for the latest report of a professional caregiver abusing an autistic child because they dare talk honestly about the negative aspects of autism DISORDERS :

"At their worst, negative media-sown autism messages influence people like Greg Simard, who brutally beat a 12-year-old, non-speaking autistic boy in his care. Simard justified his actions by saying of the boy, .... Some autism parents never find their way out of that initial horror and negativity, .... These parents see other autistics writing, speaking, participating in online communities, and their furor increases -- how dare those autistics say good things about autism, when their kids need 24 hour supervision?"

Ms. Rosa's wild, hostile opinions are not substantiated by evidence or professional consensus of any kind but that doesn't stop Mnookin and Brock  from spreading her hateful messages.  In the instant case there is no basis whatsoever to the claim that the media focuses on negative stereotpyes or that it does so because of  bad autism parents.  Temple Grandin is celebrated around the world.  John Elder Robison and son Cubby regularly receive promotion on CNN.  Television series inevitably portray autism in the form of the socially awkward but otherwise brilliant, high functioning techie, geek syndrome as autism. 

Rosa's claim that the abusive caregiver is influenced by the alleged overwhelming dominance of negative media stories is absurd and, once again, based on no evidence whatsoever. An abuser makes a cheap comment in the media and Rosa accepts it as reality because, in her mind, it confirms her negative views of other autism parents who do not share her views. This is no accident.  A mother in Colorado killed her autistic child and stated that she did so because she feared the child was autistic.  Rosa leaped to the attack against autism parents speaking honestly about their children's autism disorders blaming them for the mother's actions. What Rosa bypassed in her attack  was the fact that the prosecution had concluded that the woman was insane and for that reason did not prosecute her. 

I am not going to repeat all of Rosa's misinformation about autism on this site.  Her statements of fact are in fact simply her opinions, opinions that reflect her hostility towards autism parents who fight to improve their childrens' life prospects by speaking honestly in the effort to find autism causes, cures, treatments and services  for their children.  These parents, and I consider myself one of them, do not conform to Rosa's angry .... and flat out silly ... mischaracterizations.

While Rosa is out with her non evidence based rants about autism disorders and parents fighting for their autistic kids here is a bit of autism reality from the New England Journal of Medicine, the kind of stuff Rosa doesn't want the world to know about:

"Genomics, Intellectual Disability, and Autism

"Autism spectrum disorders have been estimated to affect as many as 1 in 100 to 1 in 150 children.4,5 Disorders on the autism spectrum share features of impaired social relationships, impaired language and communication, and repetitive behaviors or a narrow range of interests. Many children with autism spectrum disorders also have intellectual disability, and approximately 75% have lifelong disability requiring substantial social and educational support. Thus, autism and intellectual disability together represent an important health burden in the population and are frequent reasons for referral to genetics and developmental pediatrics clinics for a diagnostic workup."

Prediction: the next similar tragedy that befalls an autistic child will also be blamed by Rosa on other autism parents with whom she disagrees.  Her views will unfortunately be promoted by the Mnookins,  Brocks and other professional and academic Neurodiversity subscribers.  Thinking Persons Guide to Autism? Not even close.

Wheeling & Dealing & Avoiding FDA Scrutiny at the Vaccine Business Industry (Big Pharma) Congress

The vaccine industry business congress  referenced above states that it is scheduled for Baltimore in the fall of 2011 although the agenda indicates dates in March 2011.   More significantly the first items on the agenda show clearly the priorities of Big Pharma, as the conference brochure itself refers to the vaccine industry, which are maximizing government sponsored funding and avoiding FDA scrutiny.  Great stuff.

Yes, the Congress brochure does refer, several times, to Big Pharma, so don't go all Orac berserk on me for using that expression.

No word on whether  Offit, Orac, Mnookin or Deer were/will be in attendance.

Vaccine Autism War: Roy R. Grinker Ph. D. Omits Inconvenient Names in Book Review/Diatribe

Roy R. Grinker Ph. D. has published a review of Seth Mnookin's "The Panic Virus" in  The American Journal of Psychiatry in which he repeats the Mnookin's  blaming of the "democratization of science" and the public discussion of autism causation by celebrities and, of course, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, for compromising "herd immunity" resulting in the re-emergence of serious diseases.  In a review dripping with arrogance and condescension towards other, less educated, parents of children with autism disorders, Professor Grinker adopts Mnookin's opinions and  points out that Americans, particularly celebrities and parents, lack the intelligence to understand science and fall prey to ill informed bloggers and conspiracy theorists:

The typical reader does not necessarily understand how to discriminate between or evaluate the validity of different sources. For many Internet users, a blogger's opinion and a peer-reviewed scientific article may have equal weight. The Internet thus empowers conspiracy theorists as well as fringe researchers who carry out junk science and disseminate research results and interpretations favorable to the antivaccine movement.

...

Mnookin is particularly strong when describing the classic problem in science education: that science often moves methodically and produces results that are unacceptable to lay audiences in need of clear, simple answers. Indeed, the fear of vaccines continues to be fueled by scientists' inability to satisfy parents' concerns about the etiology of autism as well as by the incremental nature of science itself. As scientists conduct more research, they posit more hypotheses; each hypothesis introduces another level of uncertainty and raises another theoretical possibility. Scientists are trained to accept uncertainty, but the typical parent with an autistic child is not. In other words, the antivaccine advocates want something science will never be able to provide: expeditious and total proof, as opposed to the preponderance of the evidence, and single as opposed to multifactorial causes. Mnookin knows that the best science is rarely as convincing as the words of friends, neighbors, and anecdotes. The Panic Virus is a superb case study in the crisis of science in a democratic society.

Professor Grinker omits some names in his review of those who have expressed concerns about possible vaccine autism links or the need to conduct research to explore possible connections:

Dr. Bernadine Healy, Former Head of the NIH,  CBS Interview, May 12, 2008

"I think that the public health officials have been too quick to dismiss the hypothesis as irrational," Healy said.


"But public health officials have been saying they know, they've been implying to the public there's enough evidence and they know it's not causal," Attkisson said.


"I think you can't say that," Healy said. "You can't say that."


Healy goes on to say public health officials have intentionally avoided researching whether subsets of children are “susceptible” to vaccine side effects - afraid the answer will scare the public.


"You're saying that public health officials have turned their back on a viable area of research largely because they're afraid of what might be found?" Attkisson asked.


Healy said: "There is a completely expressed concern that they don't want to pursue a hypothesis because that hypothesis could be damaging to the public health community at large by scaring people. "First of all," Healy said, "I think the public’s smarter than that. The public values vaccines. But more importantly, I don’t think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you’re afraid of what it might show."


As an example, Healy points to the existing vaccine court claims.


CBS News has learned the government has paid more than 1,300 brain injury claims in vaccine court since 1988, but is not studying those cases or tracking how many of them resulted in autism.


The branch of the government that handles vaccine court told CBS News: “Some children who have been compensated for vaccine injuries…may ultimately end up with autism or autistic symptoms, but we do not track cases on this basis.”


"What we’re seeing in the bulk of the population: vaccines are safe," said Healy. "But there may be this susceptible group. The fact that there is concern, that you don’t want to know that susceptible group is a real disappointment to me. If you know that susceptible group, you can save those children. If you turn your back on the notion that there is a susceptible group… what can I say?"

Dr. Jon Poling, Neurologist, Assistant Professor Medical College of Georgia,  Atlanta Journal Constitution, March 13, 2009

"Fortunately, the ‘better diagnosis’ myth has been soundly debunked. ... only a smaller percentage of this staggering rise can be explained by means other than a true increase.

Because purely genetic diseases do not rise precipitously, the corollary to a true autism increase is clear — genes only load the gun and it is the environment that pulls the trigger. Autism is best redefined as an environmental disease with genetic susceptibilities."

We should be investing our research dollars into discovering environmental factors that we can change, not more poorly targeted genetic studies that offer no hope of early intervention. Pesticides, mercury, aluminum, several drugs, dietary factors, infectious agents and yes — vaccines — are all in the research agenda.

Geraldine Dawson, Ph.D., Autism Speaks chief science officer, November 11, 2009

IACC includes vaccine research objective in strategic plan for autism research

Autism Speaks is encouraged by new language recommending funding of vaccine research

NEW YORK, NY (November 11, 2009) – Autism Speaks is encouraged by yesterday's decision of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) to include vaccine research studies in the objectives of the updated Strategic Plan for Autism Research. The new language, approved unanimously, calls for studies to determine if there are sub-populations that are more susceptible to environmental exposures such as immune challenges related to naturally occurring infections, vaccines or underlying immune problems. "This revised plan is an important step toward a more comprehensive approach to exploring the wide range of risk factors that may be contributing to autism," said Geraldine Dawson, Ph.D., Autism Speaks chief science officer.

The names and agencies listed above are simply ignored by anthropology professor Grinker in adopting the opinion that democratization of science, the internet, and  ignorant, stupid parents, misled by celebrities are responsible for  declines in immunization rates.

No mention is made by the "objective, scientific" professor about the fact that there have been many vaccine injury claims paid out by the US Vaccine Court or the reality that parents are in fact the first to see, and report,  what happens to their children after any event that is followed by a decline in their children's health and well being.

The Offit Offensive has cranked it up considerably with the Mnookin book, the BMJ/Brian Deer conviction of Dr. Wakefield and the big media interviews and articles denigrating anyone who questions vaccine safety. The Grinker Review is the latest cheap shot fired at questioning,  concerned parents. 

Whether this all out offensive results in increased immunization rates remains to be seen.