Another Senseless Tragedy...

People who prefer to find blame in vaccines, often look at us who embrace neurodiversity as being unrealistic. We even are accused of not having our children's best interests in mind. First and foremost, after years of studies continue to find no link between vaccines and autism, why is there still a debate? Why is anyone wasting their breath on this? All the money and media mention--for what?

Those who hold onto the hope of a cure for autism and support pouring millions into such research, also look at us in this same light. Let's be brutally honest here: there will never be a true "cure," not in the traditional sense of the word. What will come in the next several years, most likely, is a prenatal screening for well-documented "autism genes" or other markers for autism. Then, just like we've seen with Down Syndrome, pregnant women will be counseled to abort their fetus based on the positive autism test. A secondary "cure" would most likely be a combination of medications and supplements. There will never be a "magic pill" or procedure to "rid" someone of autism.

So, with all of that in mind, these same people continue to attack those on the ND side of things. We are called every name in the book. There is plenty of confusion as to what Neurodiversity means (as well as what Autism awareness should be), and what so many of us are fighting for. For me, and for most of the parents I know, we are fighting for better services for our children. We want programs created and funded now for teen and adult autistics. We demand better teacher training, employer seminars, first-responders' awareness on autism. We see a dire need for better options for autistics and their families: living arrangements, vocational and education programs, and so on. We also desire our children to be accepted by society, and at the very least tolerated in our communities. We want the world to embrace our child, and see all the gifts we see (for all our children, all over the spectrum).

Our concerns stem not only out of the love we have for our children, but from our fears that arise hearing about stories of abuse. Talk about intervention and treatments (that are respectful to autistics), yes. But how can any of us spend another minute blaming vaccines and promising cures, when our children are being abused, neglected, and killed?

Gabriel Poirier was nine years old when he was suffocated to death at his school. The details of his death are horrifying, and we yet to have all of the facts (like, why the teacher thought this was a viable option?). From The Gazette:

On April 17, Gabriel began to disturb his class with loud sounds. After being told repeatedly to calm down by a teacher, he was rolled in a weighted blanket. With his arms by his side, he was left on his stomach for over 20 minutes with only his toes exposed.

When the teacher went to check on him, he was "listless and blue in the face," the Coroner's report said. The teacher called 911 but the boy was already in a deep coma and passed away the next day in the Sainte-Justine hospital.

"He was a very gentle boy. Sometimes he was loud, but he was never aggressive or violent," Gilles Poirier, the boy's father, said today.

The parents' lawyer, Jean-Pierre Ménard, said vulnerable children like Gabriel need better protection.

"We're asking Minister Courchesne to implement a legal framework to regulate how these children are handled," Ménard said.

To think of how terrified Gabriel must have been as he gasped for breath, and the pain his parents are feeling--we cannot look the other way. My heart goes out to his family and friends. We must all learn from Gabriel's story, and not let his death be in vain. This is yet another wake-up call: our attitudes toward autism and autistics needs to change. What is it going to take to for all of us, autism parents and society, to come together and ensure such a tragedy never happens again?

In the words of Gabriel's father:

"Things, or action should be taken to prevent this, to never happen again."

For more information on how you can get involved, please visit these sites:

End Abuse of Children in Residential Programs: ACT TODAY!

APRAIS - The Alliance to Prevent Restraint, Aversive Interventions, and Seclusion

CAICA - Coalition Against Institutionalized Child Abuse

Today Autism & Recovery, Tomorrow Crystals & the New Earth

These previous writings have led to this. There has been talk amongst the autism community as to whether Jenny still believed her son was a crystal and she, an indigo. Her Indigo Moms website disappeared without explanation overnight. Many had wondered and assumed she had left these beliefs behind, and her focus was on autism recovery and vaccines.

Well, we now have an answer. As you learned from the previous entries, much of the Indigo/Crystal belief system revolves around the idea of over-diagnosis and overuse of medication with regard to Autism and ADHD. Not to mention messages from Kryon himself that say we give too many vaccines today. So, Jenny's new message actually isn't much different from her Indigo identity.

The Phoenix has another view on the Indigo thing. For those who have missed her Indigo Moms website, have no fear, it shall return soon. And, it seems, Jenny's next book is self-described as an "Indigo book." She is leading a movement alright. But perhaps not the same one that thousands (1,500-8,000 strong--depending on your source) of her "followers" believe in. It seems that her mission is to come out with the autism/recovery and anti-vaccine message first, and all of this will slowly lead into full-blown indoctrination of Indigos and Crystals.

To listen to this interview from The World Puja Network, you have to log-in to this site. It's a quick sign-up procedure. The show is called “CosmiKids' Inspired Parenting” with host, Sandie Sedgbeer. I have emphasized in bold the terms and words related to Indigos. The interview begins around roughly 26:00 minutes, it took place a couple of weeks prior to June 1, 2008 (it's air-date). The highlights (my rough summary and amateur transcripts):

JM: "I believe that without a doubt, Evan's vaccinations triggered his autism."

She then expands on other "triggers" of autism such as environmental mercury, pesticides, herpes, etc. Not surprisingly, zero mention of genetics. She clarifies with,

JM: "But the major one that's playing the biggest role right now are the vaccinations."

Talk continues on about the number of vaccines given compared to previous years. Discussion of the GFCF diet and supplements. Jenny says that sentences came after GFCF diet, recovery from autism (became "fully conversational" as she puts it) after treating her son's yeast issue.

JM: "It's like a ticking time bomb of you know and I...you know what a really good scenario is--is these kids,these kids with autism are really the canaries in the coal mine, you know, they're the ones that are showing us the effects of what is happening around us and they just happen to be more sensitive to it. And we can either take their warning and do what I did, and alter my lifestyle to a healthier one, or you can, you know, go down with the ship or be stuck in the mine with no oxygen. It's really them "tweet, tweeting" I keep saying. These are our canaries, and everyone needs take a look, listen to the messengers and let's start doing something about it."

We heard Jim Carrey declare the "canary in the coal mine" metaphor at the Green Our Vaccines (now also known perhaps as "Kryonize Our Vaccines") rally. Expanding on this generation of parents (the moms who follow their intuition and don't just sit around and let things happen to our children), Jenny says:

JM: "We're definitely the Indigos, you know, breaking down these walls so this, you know, New Earth behind us can happen."

I had honestly missed most of the "Indigo" language, until this point. I heard "Indigos" and was rather surprised at that. When I listened again to write it down, I heard "New Earth," but it didn't mean much to me, until I learned it's a part of Indigo (see Children of the New Earth) After the following statements, I looked into the Indigo "concept," and learned what those terms mean. Now realizing the significance of those words, it's clear that Jenny is still well-immersed in the Indigo/Crystal deal. At 45:34, this question is asked:

SS: "You mention the word Indigo. What happened to your Indigo Moms website?" JM: "You know I had to take that down and I was so sad to take it down, for a while anyways, it'll be coming back up. People got really confused because I was coming out with Evan's autism at the same time. And, they thought that I was healing Evan through Tarot cards instead of biomedical treatments.

So I realized I had to separate my messages and I had to take down one message which is the indigo and crystals, for now. I said, 'oh the world is getting confused with these two different paths,' you know. I consider them to be one. But people aren't quite there yet and I kinda had to, not lower my vibration, change my vibration to focusing on the world hearing that message. Hearing that biomedical treatment does help these kids.

And then, slowly, you know I can put it in my speeches. and then in my last book I talked about the indigos and crystals. And I'm just like, I'm really following source, kind of I felt the need to do that, I'm just kind of dribbling it here and there until people, you know, have that spiritual awakening of spirituality."

Either immediately after this statement, or later on, she reiterates this,

JM: "I was definitely feeling that from source."

When speaking about her new book, JM says:

JM: "It's really an Indigo book."

The interview ends with Jenny's message to the listeners:

JM: "The parents...the parents. It is time to take back your power. It's time to remember your power. Go within. Remember you have a voice. We are the seekers and doers of change and it is possible as long as you believe it. So join me in this collective awakening, in this new world, so we can have a perfect world for our kids."

And they call us radical? This last "rally cry" could just as easily be found on any Indigo site or message board. This same type of language and message are seen time and time again by the Indigo/Crystal believers.

So, I pose this question: How will the anti-vaccine group be altered once Jenny goes all-out with her Indigo message? Since it's apparent that Kryon and the Indigo concept is against most vaccines, at least that message will remain the same. But will the entire group get behind her, and also believe in the Indigos, Crystals, and Kryon? I wonder how many of those who follow the DAN! protocol and are against vaccines already believe their child is a Crystal?

Kryon On Vaccines

Yes, Kryon, the entity behind the Indigo child concept. Here is what he says, apparently having been channeled, on vaccines:

QUESTION: Dear Kryon: I've read and heard information for and against immunizing against various diseases, particularly those that affect children. Can you help me understand immunization? There are many options for immunization now. Are all necessary for children?

ANSWER: This is good science and was brought to you early so that you and your children could extend your lives. The original "mixture" for immunization that was created for the few basic diseases is still good for you and your children. However, there is now a tendency to increase the immunization to include over 17 different targets (or more). There's a problem with this, and it has already shown itself, but is not yet understood.

Ask for the original mixture if you can get it. It's the safest and most viable.


QUESTION: Dear Kryon, I have a new grandson. He's going for his first vaccination in the next few weeks. If we're beginning to transmute toxins with reconnections to our endocrine system through our DNA, then what happens to our babies, who by law have to be vaccinated? What are your thoughts on this subject?

ANSWER: First, know that vaccinations are a God-given science that humanity earned. They're a tried and proven homeopathic method that have been with you for years. You were probably vaccinated yourself, and it worked.

We have three answers: (1) God is not in a vacuum. Even the vaccinated Human Being who's older can modify and rework their DNA. So there's no time limit, and there are no rules that say "Once vaccinated, you're ruined." (2) The Human who is of the age of awareness can say, even as they are vaccinated, "Let nothing inappropriate enter my chemistry." This is a conscious instruction given to your "intelligent cellular structure" (the same one responsible for kinesiology and homeopathic results). This will result in your cells only using what they need and casting away everything else. (3) Finally, about babies: There has been a push by your science lately to vaccinate against many things at the same time. You'd be advised to seek out a doctor who will only vaccinate your child for only the basic diseases that have been known in the last 40 years. Eliminate the vaccinations for the new ones. This leaves you with approximately seven or eight - the very ones that have been used for years. What your science is not appreciating yet is the results of combining all the vaccination substances together. There's a problem that will show itself in time. Stick with the basic ones.

Now, it becomes more clear perhaps what Jenny means when she and her followers state "too many too soon" and "change the schedule!" Perhaps "Kryonize Our Vaccines" just didn't flow as well as "Green Our Vaccines."

Is Jenny Really An Autism Mom--and Why Should We Care?

Why am I concerned as to whether or not Jenny's son really is autistic? Why have I bothered to spend a few hours researching various conditions for these related posts? There are several reasons. First, I am not attacking Ms. McCarthy, I am simply trying to put some pieces together and ponder some possibilities (perhaps even offer insight). She herself has said several times now that her son no longer has autism, and that neurologists tell her he never had autism.

If this is the case, then we autism moms/dads and the entire autism community have to ask: Why she is still putting herself in the public eye as "THE" autism mom who represents each and every single one of us? It is one thing to be an actress or other celebrity and use your fame to bring attention to a cause (child abuse, drugs, medical conditions like cancer, etc.) and/or raise money for reputable charities. It is entirely different to do interviews, public appearances, be in magazines, and write books about autism, when or if your child doesn't actually have autism. This is a matter of ethics as well, since profits are being earned.

Most concerning is that her message is one of "recovery from autism," proclaiming that she "healed" her son. Why should parents pay attention at all, and even gain hope from, her son's supposed recovery in light of her now saying a. he no longer is diagnosed as having autism and b. doctors now say he never had autism? If you maintain that a certain treatment or diet "recovered" your child, there had better be zero doubt that this child has that which you claim to have recovered him from.

How can Jenny McCarthy claim to be an "autism mom" or to have "recovered" her autistic child, if there's any possibility her son never even had autism? Why should any of us, and anyone in the public, listen to her? I think these are legitimate questions, and ones we all have the right to ask.

Is Jenny Really An Autism Mom? (Part 3)

On Autism and Diagnosis:

A final point on whether or not Jenny's son truly did have autism is on how his diagnosis came to be. Apparently, he was diagnosed by the "best doctor" in town or some such. Even the best doctors can make misdiagnoses, and even mistakes. Part of this depends on the information he is receiving, either from the parents or from other physicians. The other part is the doctor's own experiences through his education, training, and with other patients. Evan may very well have appeared autistic in this physician's office. He was lining objects up and flapping. With such an observation, combined with a history of speech delay and seizures, it's not hard to see how the diagnosis of autism could be reached.

However, I feel it's important to note that this was a second opinion. Ms. McCarthy wasn't happy with the epilepsy diagnosis she had received from a previous doctor. It's possible that autism clicked with her (she herself says "this man is right," see below), an autism diagnosis made more sense to her perhaps. It was a diagnosis that tied up those loose ends she was concerned about (the stimming, the language loss, etc.). I know we felt a certain sigh of relief when given particular diagnoses for our daughter. It was a "oh, now I get it" reaction. There was information to be given, some resolution, and sometimes more resources. It may seem odd to people who don't have children with health or developmental issues, why a parent would feel an ounce of relief from a diagnosis. But, as a parent, we often see a new diagnosis as something that wraps our concerns up in a nice, neat package. It almost makes the issues we are facing easier to consume and easier to understand.

From Jenny's interview on Oprah:

Two days later, a doctor diagnosed Evan with epilepsy. "[The doctor said], 'There's got to be someone with seizures on your side of the family.' I said, 'No, actually I know every branch. I know what's going on. There's nothing. No one [with] epilepsy," she says. "And they discharged us." Jenny says every instinct she had was telling her that her son was not epileptic—so she went for a second opinion. After spending 20 minutes with Evan, a neurologist gave Jenny what she describes as a devastating diagnosis—Evan had autism. "And boy, my mommy instinct said, 'This man is right,'" she says.

I realize there are doctors so familiar with autism, they can apparently look at a child and give a fairly accurate diagnosis. That being said, do you want a "fairly accurate" diagnosis for your child, or a diagnosis based on hours of observation and information gathering? Our daughter had been followed by a neurologist for almost 3 years before we went for the official autism evaluation. She already had many diagnoses (apraxia, sensory processing disorder, developmental delay, static encephalopathy, and so on), and was receiving therapy for her needs. However, it was apparent her social and behavioral issues, combined with everything else, warranted an autism evaluation (to give us an answer, and to assist her in receiving proper school services, etc.).

With a rather hefty folder filled with records from our child's pediatrician, multiple specialists (including neurologist and geneticist), and her therapists, we headed into the psychologist's office. This psychologist was one of two "autism experts" in our area. She is one of those who can look at a child, and fairly accurately say autism or not. Still, she insisted on asking my husband and I questions, have us fill out surveys (together and separate, with her and at home), reviewing our child's extensive records, and interacting and attempting to play with my child. This was clearly a responsible thing to do. She was better able to educate us on autism (and specifically what that meant to our daughter), intervention and school recommendations, medications, and so on.

We went for 3 hour-long appointments, over the course of 3 weeks. And then, at the end of the month, we went back for our last appointment. We were handed a multiple page document, and the doctor reviewed her diagnosis (moderate autism, with a history indicative of moderate to severe autism). I have to say, I'd prefer to commit to 4 hours of testing and discussing to come to a diagnosis than 20 minutes of observing and asking questions.

Since a third opinion was never sought, it seems, we can't know what yet another physician would draw from Evan's case. Would the next doctor feel that his severe seizures had affected his language, and that perhaps he did have other neurological manifestations? We can't say for certain, but again, it could be a possibility.

*Disclaimer: I do not have any personal knowledge of Jenny McCarthy or her son's medical history, other than that made available to the public (via media outlets, et al). These are simply questions I feel worth raising, and ideas worth investigating.

Whooping Cough, Again...

Whooping cough has again made the news in recent weeks. The subject has hit closer to home for me, as there have been cases in an elementary school not far from where I live. I have contacted that county's Department of Health--as thus far the media nor the county's website have spoken of these. I do have confirmation (letters from the school officials) however that there are indeed cases. Will update as I receive more information.

So often, people who are anti-vaccine tout that measles and whooping cough really aren't that bad. They tend to cite a child they knew who got one of the diseases and is fine. As I've mentioned before, whooping cough nor measles are anything to take lightly. And, certainly for the parents who have lost a child due to either of these diseases, these diseases are an absolute nightmare.

Last month, the East Bay Waldorf School in El Sobrante, California closed down due to a whooping cough outbreak. As the writer, Matt Keller, notes in his article, this entire event, and the whooping cough is "easy to avoid with a simple vaccine." An unknown writer at the San Francisco Chronicle ends his May 28 (2008, on page B-8 of the newspaper) editorial with this,

The Waldorf school closure offers some perspective: There is a risk in any medical decision - including the decision not to act. In this case, the choice of each parent became the shared infection of an entirely preventable disease.

There's also this report out today, that reminds us of the importance of booster shots. And, at the very least, of ensuring those who work with the youngest in our population are immunized against these diseases (and, also trained to realize symptoms and to not continue work when symptoms may be related to whooping cough or other serious, fatal diseases):

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Public health officials investigating a 2004 outbreak of whooping cough, or pertussis, among newborns in Texas identified the source as a health-care worker where the babies were born.

Staff members at a children's hospital in Texas noticed that six infants admitted with whooping cough had been born during the first half of June at the same general hospital.

A review of records uncovered a total of 11 such infants, on average about a month old, whose symptoms included cough, congestion, vomiting and arrested breathing. Nine infants had to be admitted to the hospital, including five treated in the intensive care unit.

According to their report in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, J. L. Hood and colleagues identified a 24-year-old health-care worker who had symptoms of cough, which brought on vomiting, and difficulty breathing while working in the newborn nursery from early June until mid July.

During that time she directly cared for 113 infants, including the 11 who came down with whooping cough.

All the babies recovered after treatment.

The health-care worker in this case had been fully immunized against pertussis during childhood. However, the CDC points out in an editorial note that the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends that health-care workers with direct patient contact and adults who have close contact with infants should be given the Tdap (tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis) vaccine.

SOURCE: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, June 6, 2008.

I wrote yesterday about "Do Vaccines Cause That?" One of the sections that really stood out was regarding pertussis (whooping cough) and outbreaks that occurred following concerns over the vaccines. It is startling. And one can only wonder, when will we learn from history?

Because of the concerns about whole-cell pertussis vaccine, immunization rates had dropped in 1978 from 80% to 30% in the United Kingdom—and whooping cough epidemics soon followed. Indeed, between 1977 and 1979 the United Kingdom experienced 102,500 cases of whooping cough with 36 deaths...

Bold for emphasis by me, of course. Does that register with anyone who doesn't give their child the pertussis vaccine? 102,500 cases in 2 years, 36 deaths. Are you really willing to gamble your child's life?

In Japan a national debate resulted in the Ministry of Health and Welfare changing the recommended age for immunization because of concerns about the whole-cell pertussis vaccine’s safety and claims that it was no longer necessary to immunize because pertussis was not present in the community any more. Vaccine coverage for infants fell from about 85% in 1974 to 14% in 1976.4 Then, in 1979, a whooping cough epidemic resulted in 13,105 cases and 41 deaths. In the early 1980s Japan re-introduced pertussis-containing vaccines—using the newer acellular pertussis vaccines that cause less fever and local reactions—and the number of cases of whooping cough went down.8

Sweden had a similar experience. After discontinuing pertussis vaccine, rates of whooping cough returned to the levels seen in the prevaccine era. Of 2,282 who were hospitalized for whooping cough in 1981–1983, 4% had brain injury from the illness.4

Again, figures put in bold by me. 13,105 cases in one year, with 41 deaths in Japan. In Sweden, you have 2,282 children hospitalized, 4% of those have brain injury. Again, I ask--are you willing to gamble your child's life? To hold onto a belief that cannot be supported by any scientific data (that vaccines cause autism), and make serious (possibly life or death) decisions regarding your child's health is at best utter ignorance and selfishness, at worst, child endangerment.

Still feel whooping cough is no big deal? Watch this. And don't turn it off after 2 seconds, thinking your unvaccinated child is somehow "immune" from this. Watch the entire video. This is what whooping cough is. This is what a non-immunized child could sound and look like if they catch this horrible disease.

EDITED: I altered the time on this, as I wanted it to be the lead story for the day (not Jenny on TV)

Jenny McCarthy: On The Record

Well, I have to say I'm rather disappointed by this interview with Jenny McCarthy. Greta Van Susteren is typically (as far as I have seen) a good interviewer, challenging her guests and asking tough questions. This was nothing more than a fluff piece. It was a "autism is horrific" and then Jenny spatting her lies. Too bad.

Some of the falsehoods:

*That this rally was "for people to see the true faces of autism"
*11 shots contain mercury, again suggesting your child is receiving 11 shots with mercury
*Conspiracy theory: government is lying, the same old story from these folks
*"too many too soon" an idea that remains completely unproven
*Jenny says she uses a "great analogy" for autism, it's like "getting hit by a bus"
*Hannah Poling...government has conceded that "autism was triggered by vaccines" UM NO!
*8,000 people from across the country

Some rather questionable statements about autism from Greta:
"terrible for the child and the family if you're on the bottom range"
"how horrible"
"completely disruptive to the family"

To which Jenny asks us to imagine "having a perfect child" and "then all of sudden that child is gone before your eyes." She also says many mothers liken autism to having a spaceship come and steal your child. I absolutely detest those statements. How could a parent say their child lost their soul? Further lack of respect toward autistics.

Jenny continues to say, "us moms aren't treating autism", they are treating a "vaccine injury." First, let me say, I'm glad to hear it's the moms who are "treating" their child's "condition." Okay, fine. Your children have a "vaccine injury," mine and the rest of us in the "autism community" you claim to represent, our kids have autism. So, go rally for your so-called "vaccine injuries" and leave our children alone! You are only harming the future for our kids, for those who won't "recover" and doing nothing to help autistic children, teens, or adults.

Jenny confirms what I questioned in my recent post: neurologists are now saying that her son never had autism. He is not autistic. She argues this by saying he was diagnosed by the state of California and doctors (at UCLA, I believe). Well guess what Ms. McCarthy? Doctors make mistakes. You'd think the one who claims the government and doctors are "poisoning" children would be the first to think that doctors might have messed up. Really though, many doctors will tell you that an autism diagnosis at a young age (I believe Evan was around 2 1/2, more on this in an upcoming entry), may not remain accurate as the child gets older. For that precise reason, our neurologist advised us to wait for the evaluation until after our daughter was 3. She already has several neurological diagnoses (and recognized developmental delays), and he always assured us that regardless of diagnosis, we were doing all the right things. Again, I will write more on this shortly.

The interview (rather brief) ends and they give a statement by the AAP.

From earlier:
Okay, due to breaking news, the Jenny McCarthy interview by Greta Van Susteren is being a bit delayed. However, on the GretaWire blog, you can add comments now and throughout the show. Thus far, I've seen many "I love Jenny & finally this message is getting out..." and so on. Make our side heard!

Here's what I've written so far, I imagine I'll be adding more as the interview & so on airs:

Honestly, why should a woman who admits she's never even met an autistic adult be the chosen representative for autism? She does not represent me (and yes, I AM an autism mom). My child was born with autism, she never had any reaction to vaccines. She has not improved with any special diets, and due to medical concerns, pursuing the GFCF or DAN! Protocol is not feasible (nor could I see shoving 20 pills down her throat along with injections, none of which is proven to be of benefit).

So what is Jenny doing for my child? She won't "recover," she won't be the child I can parade in front of others getting credit for "fixing" my child. My daughter is precious, and yes we have ups and downs, and life can be extremely rough--but first and foremost she is my child (not kidnapped or soul-less), and I love her. The public perceives autistics (due to these cure & recovery message) as unteachable, unworthy, and even unlovable. They are not respected--wherever they fall on the spectrum. I fear for what the future brings for her. Will society change by then?

Currently, there are extremely limited adult services (including independent or semi-independent living situations, vocational or career programs, etc.) and help for teens is difficult to attain as well. The public views my child and others like her as damaged, not worthy of civil or human rights, something to be gotten rid of. What is Jenny and Jim doing to help change that???? Have they done anything incredible to raise public awareness on this dire need? I fear for when my daughter reaches adulthood--what services will be there for her? Yes, she will make progress, as she continues to do so. But, we still don't know exactly how much assistance she will need. What happens when we can no longer take care of her? That is what keeps me up at night.

I refuse to waste my time, and my daughter's, by believing in some PR guy's claims that the government is "damaging" our children via vaccines. Do your research, read REAL scientific studies (done across the globe), and realize there is ZERO proof of any link between vaccines and autism. Even in the case of Hannah Poling. If you do not understand the science of that particular case, do not even bother discussing it. The government did not concede that vaccines gave her autism. Also, learn the difference between causation and correlation.

I advise you too, read the Omnibus proceedings of the last few weeks--then let's see how much faith you have in the DAN! docs' "heavy metal screenings" and "treatments." It's amazing what these docs must admit while under oath.

The Autism Whisperer Cometh

From Jim Carrey's speech during the "Green Our Vaccines" really.

Autism is everywhere. It's on every street, in every town. It's a warning from the universe that there is a serious imbalance in our environment and that immediate changes must be made.

Woah--almost sounds like some of that new-age Indigo type of talk. I wonder if he is a crystal? He continues on,

To quote Burton Goldberg, an expert on the new age of medicine, 'autism is the canary in the coal mine.'

Bev at Asperger Square 8 has a different take on the canary metaphor (which apparently is also popular with a one Dr. Bryan Jepson). Dr. Burton Goldberg, I feel it should be noted (since we are referencing autistic children, vaccines, and other medical-related issues) received his Doctor of Humanities Hon. from a Capital University of Integrated Medicine (it may also be of interest that this school closed down in June 2006). He is a publisher, and the self-proclaimed "Voice of Alternative Medicine." That's right--he is not a medical physician.

Mr. Carrey continued on with the importance of trusting a mother's instinct, not trusting the government, and bashing the drug companies. He then adds, in reference to the pharmaceutical companies:

...they are far too busy fighting the scourge of restless leg syndrome.

Roars of laughter, hollering, and applause. He continues,

Also known as lazy ass disease.

This also is met with screams and yelps and more laughter. I loved it the one time when I was at a fund-raiser for cancer research, the speaker cracked a joke about people with diabetes. It was hysterical! Oh, wait, that never happened. That would never happen--would it? No, I think only people with the mindset that autistic individuals (along with any person with a neurological or mental difference, disability, or disorder) are not afforded the same respect or rights as others would say such a thing.

There is making light of one's differences, and then there is outright bashing. This was not funny (although it appears the audience was rather entertained), and certainly not amusing to the people who really do suffer from Restless Leg Syndrome. My mother has it. She is not on one of the new medications for it, but on some nights she does take Ambien. It is something that has plagued her for as long as I can remember. She simply has had an official name for it in recent years; but she stayed awake many a night well before a name existed for this condition. I simply can't imagine making fun of someone else in such a manner, at such an event. But, then again, we are speaking of the same group of people who time and time again present themselves as less than professional (see below for more on that!).

Jim Carrey does actually say that "these children have a purpose" at the end of the speech. However, the tape shifts to Jenny's speech. So, I'm unsure what he perceives as the purpose of "these" children. Is it to be a part of society, respected and welcomed? Or is it to make some great change via the "greening" of vaccines?

Jenny goes on to speak, and describes herself as a mom of a child "who had autism." I wonder if she's changed her mantra--which used to be that he'd never be "cured" of autism. In every article, they define her as the mother of an autistic child. I believe my favorite Jennyism from that day was this:

"...and the ingredients like the freakin' mercury..."

What class. Once again, please don't group me in with the "autism community" and the "autism moms" you, Jenny, claim to represent.

Can someone who has watched the YouTube video posted here, please explain what the headless child sculptures are at the end? Please, please, tell me that is in no way related to this rally or to autistic people.

Do Vaccines Cause That?

That's the title of a book I recently read and strongly recommend for those who have questions about vaccines. In "Do Vaccines Cause That?" the authors Martin G. Myers, MD and Diego Pineda, MS explain every facet of the vaccine debate. To be honest, I was skeptical about this book prior to reading it. Part of it was that I dreaded reading what I thought would be a whole bunch of science jargon, the other part was that I figured it was all old hat. I obviously have an interest in vaccines (specifically with regard to autism and the ongoing debate), and so the title greatly interested me. After reading this book, I'm happy to report my prior skepticism was unnecessary.

The authors have written this book in such a way that every reader can fully understand the material. They use realistic examples, cite many studies, and speak to their reader in a clear, concise manner. As a busy mother, reading this book late at night or in between errands during the day, this approach was greatly appreciated. I've always felt we made the right decisions with regard to our children's vaccines. And after reading "Do Vaccines Cause That?" I was fully affirmed in my beliefs. This book is very timely, even including the case of Hannah Poling.

For the most part, how the media reports (and often sensationalizes) the vaccine-autism issue is far from objective journalism. Too frequently, parents are basing their decisions off of emotional portrayals of a family's story, and from journalists, lawyers, or physicians profiting from the anti-vaccine movement. This book breaks down both sides, something that's been needed for a long time. To dispute cold, hard facts (science) simply because of how a journalist or celebrity portrays this debate is inexcusable.

Making the decision to not vaccinate your child should come from real scientific evidence, not from the innuendo and hype often found in magazine articles, message boards, or other agenda-driven sources (including journalists, politicians, and celebrities). Parents need to fully and completely understand the realities of vaccine-preventable diseases, the very real risks that exist today, and the dire consequences of not vaccinating your child. Recognize and comprehend the risks of such diseases, the risks of vaccines, and realize there is zero scientific evidence to link autism to vaccines (on the contrary, countless studies in various countries continue to outright disprove such a connection). Only then can a parent make an educated decision on whether or not to vaccinate their child.

Maybe It IS Easy To Be Green?

As Kristina at Autism Vox points out, the message of "change the schedule!" is rather diluted, and fairly innocuous. We never saw a difference post-vaccines with our child. She was diagnosed with developmental delays by 6 months of age, likewise she had issues at birth. So, we would opt to have our child get fewer pokes. Also, as Dr. Chew points out, this also amounts to less doctor visits and fewer co-pays as well.

That being said, anyone who opts to space them out (vaccines), I don't have much issue over that. I would feel rather different, however, if this "spacing out" of immunizations included complete avoidance of any specific vaccines currently available for our children. This is often the rallying cry, to not "expose" your child to the MMR (although let's all remember that the MMR never contained thimerosal, and I'm unsure what they believe is truly achieved by splitting it up). I'm fairly certain Ms. McCarthy has said publicly if she had to do it again, she would not vaccinate her child (or at the least, she'd avoid the "autism shot" as she refers to it; she'd prefer measles to autism remember).

Perhaps further down the road, we'll get a more accurate definition of "Green Vaccines" by Jenny, Generation Rescue, TACA, or others. At this stage, it sure sounds like amongst the antivaxxers, this term means many different things to many different people.

The Whole Green Mess...

I've been busy lately. You can tell, as I've been absent from my blog. I had even forgotten what today was. We were headed to Speech Therapy when the ABC radio reporter issued a brief statement about the rally. I called my husband to see if he had seen any coverage on the T.V. This evening, I searched and searched, but could not find a single morsel. The majority of the coverage was on the presidential race.

This particular clip of the whole "rally" seemed utterly surreal (it's from ET Online, go figure). That's all I'll say, you judge for yourself.

What I heard Jenny say was how 10 vaccines still have mercury in them (in the guise of thimerosal, Big Bad Pharma at it again). She said how it's right there on the FDA website. I had to immediately check it out (TEN vaccines??!!??). Well, this is, I presume, the page she refers to. I'm baffled. It's late, so I could be wrong...but I don't get how it adds up to 10. Well, I take that back. Yes, there are several vaccines that contain trace amounts of thimerosal (which, would then contain trace amounts of mercury, so in the vaccine, you are getting trace amounts of trace amounts of a preservative). However, it's declared as if your child is getting TEN vaccines with mercury. No, that's not the case. If you look at Table I, you will see that of the "vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and younger," only one particular brand of DTaP (Tripedia) contains trace amounts (≤0.3 µg Hg/0.5mL dose) and that the other vaccine is for influenza (which, has thimerosal-free versions, FluZone thimerosal free and FluMist). Both vaccines are available in thimerosal-free formulations. There is a second table, with a list of additional vaccines, such as Japanese Encephalitis (containing 0.007%), that our children do not typically receive. On that table, the highest percentage of thimerosal content was 0.01%. Startling. I thank Jenny for sharing such a valuable resource with all of us.

There was also this picture, courtesy of the Chicago Tribune. Now, I'm all for showing affection for your sweetheart. And, I love my husband very much. But I can state with 99.9% certainty that if we were ever at a rally (say for funding for programs aimed toward autistic teens and adults), we would not be making out. Sure, we may hug, but a passionate kiss? Leave it at the hotel room people. This seem to be a theme for Jenny, being less than professional (ex. shouting bulls**t on Larry King Live) while on this "crusade." You are celebrities, people are taking your picture, act accordingly--if you want your message to get out. I wouldn't want an image like this to be one of the first few listings on Google (c'mon, Jenny, you have your Google degree, don't you?) for a rally that was of the utmost importance to me. Just my two cents, a little advice for Jim and Jenny.

It also appears that the turmoil is bubbling over with regard to Jenny's public messages on vaccines (that she is NOT anti-vaccine at all, just for safer, more spaced out, yada, yada, yada). The anti-vaxers are angry with her, and upset that the rally today was apparently not open to those preaching a total anti-vaccine message.

To be honest, the ABC link I mentioned previously is the only substantial mention or article I have found. For the most part, the media is clinging onto the celebrity factor (and even more, the celeb-couple factor). This may have been a big, fun story for ET and Extra!, but as for making a real impact and being treated as a serious issue, it seems to have missed its mark.

Apparently 8,000 people showed up today. I'm not sure if that is more or less than what anyone anticipated. I for one was a bit appalled at the message to parents about how to do whatever they can to get to D.C. Borrow from family, do fund raisers, etc. Here's the thing, the majority of us "autism families," don't have bundles of extra cash stowed away to fly to a rally (or for anything else!). I could never, would never, ask anyone for money so that I could attend a march (of any sort). My family would surely think I had gone over the edge entirely. Please give me money so I can fly to D.C. for a rally. Yes, I know I have medical bills. Yes, I know my child has therapy. Yes, I know we may need to hire an advocate to get better school services. But, this is really important! WHAT??? Outrageous! Again, I see a disconnect from celebrities and the rest of us. Flying or driving anywhere these days is awfully expensive, I can think of a hundred ways that money may be better spent for a family like ours (and, like many "autism families," I suspect).

Edited to add: From reports, it appears that 8,000 figure may have been rather inflated. It seems the numbers were more like 500-1,000 people in attendance (and, apparently, half of those were children).

If you read nothing else today...

It should be this! Kev (LeftBrain/RightBrain) continues to do an outstanding job reporting on the Autism Omnibus hearings. Specifically today on Elizabeth Mumper's (medical director for DAN/ARI and founder of the Rimland Centre) testimony.

Some highlights: If you are testifying & referencing a study for a statistic (to support your beliefs), make sure those statistics are actually in the study! How accurate is the Porphyrin test (especially with regard to results in both autistic and non-autistic children), and does it detect mercury in the brain? Do not miss this!

Something interesting I came across was this: Dr. Mumper states she has never treated a child for mercury poisoning. Which, is somewhat startling to me, seeing as she is a DAN! doctor. I came across a few things that made her statement all the more puzzling. Here, from a vaccinetruth.org:

Chelation Use in Autism Spectrum Disorders

The role of heavy metals such as mercury in autism has been heavily debated, and many parents are turning to chelation as a potential treatment. Dr. Elizabeth Mumper presented her findings from treating children at the Advocates for Children Pediatric Clinic in Virginia.

She reports that she has treated 280 children with autism who showed altered metabolism of porphyrins in blood and urine. She uses this disruption in porphyrin levels as an indirect marker for heavy metal exposure, and in addition noted that these patients show a disruption in the methionine synthase pathway, also measured in urine and blood. In addition to chelation therapy, children receive vitamin supplementation to compensate for possible loss of essential metals lost during succimer treatment.

Although no statistical analyses were conducted on the effectiveness of chelation therapy in children with autism, Dr. Mumper has cited positive responses from parents who report an improvement of symptoms following oral succimer chelation therapy as part of the DAN! protocol.

And then here, on the DAN/ARI website, scroll down to the box at the bottom and read the "Treatment Options for Mercury/Metal Toxicity in Autism and Related Developmental Disabilities: Consensus Position Paper." You will see that Dr. Mumper was one of the signed physicians on this paper.

So, let's see--it would appear she believes in Mercury/Metal Toxicity, has treated 280 children who she claims had markers for "heavy metal exposure," and that these children's parents have "cited positive responses" from her treatment. I'm curious if all of those parents realize that Dr. Mumper was treating their child for a "diagnosis" (heavy metal exposure) based on a test that she now states does not provide any evidence that mercury is in the brain.

I also wonder if all of those 280 sets of parents (or the many more that have been "treated" since) believed their children were not being treated for mercury poisoning. This idea, of mercury poisoning, is plastered throughout the DAN/ARI and Generation Rescue websites. In fact, many of the parents and activists affiliated with DAN, Generation Rescue, et al refer to autism as "mercury poisoning."

Jenny's New Book

I was checking out Amazon.com when I stumbled upon Jenny's new book. It is entitled, "Mother Warriors: A Nation of Parents Healing Autism Against All Odds," and is available for pre-order, with a release date of September 23, 2008. Mother Warriors? Really? That title is hefty, it's sure to raise more than a few eyebrows. I assume Ms. McCarthy got the "Mother Warriors" from Oprah. On her show, she said to Jenny and Holly Robinson Peete (and perhaps to all us "autism moms" or maybe just the ones who are fighting autism?), "You're mother warriors is what you are." I've heard Jenny use the "W" word before, but I'm not sure if it was before or after her appearance on Oprah.

I have no doubt this will be another bestseller. Good for Jenny and TACA. Bad for us. I've written on my concerns of such a book previously. I'm curious to see what the criteria for being "healed" from autism is? Is there a set of tests or surveys? Are the families profiled subjected to testing, if so with what and by who?

Bigger than my doubts on what "recovery" from autism is, is the issue I have with this mentality. The idea that "recovery" is within every autistic child's reach, and that we as parents (or more often, as mothers) are staring down some doom and gloom timeline to "fix" our kids. We have seen parents who feel they have done all they were "supposed" to do, they had tried everything, and still had not gotten "rid" of their child's autism. Children have been murdered by their parents (and other carers) or died during chelation and some of these other so-called treatments. This idea that your child needs to be cured, that it's like they've been "hit by a bus," and that we should try various treatments (keeping in mind that like chemotherapy, these treatments won't help every child) until they are "recovered," can be very dangerous. Nobody, especially the media, wants to tell this side of the the cure autism movement.

Celebrating only the autistic children who are able to supposedly be "healed" or "recovered" only devalues the life of autistic individuals. It distracts society from the dire need for adult services, and blurs the reality that autistic children do really grow up to be autistic adults (yes, Jenny, once again--there ARE autistic adults). It also further burdens parents who do not see the same progress in their child--especially if they bought into the propaganda and tried all those supposed treatments. This growing mindset, and a book such as this, can be very dangerous.

Ramblings this week...

The other day, I was flipping through the channels. I missed most of the interview (which, I can't say I was upset about!) with Deirdre Imus on Fox News. The banner on the bottom of the screen read, "Parents trace link between mercury in vaccines & autism." What they fail to mention in that headline, is that this link has no scientific basis. Once again, Mrs. Imus, just like Jenny and others, denies the possibility of a genetic link to autism. This perspective is somehow held onto by these people, despite real, hard evidence of various genes related to autism. Twin studies are very interesting to review. Here's what Deirdre had to say:

"...no such thing as a genetic epidemic & autism is an epidemic."

It was a brief piece, at least what I caught of it. What's unfortunate, is that Deirdre's irrational points, along with that ridiculous headline about a "link" between vaccines and autism, all got the last word. I was surprised the phone wasn't ringing, family and friends asking "did you see Don Imus' wife on T.V.?" Questions about the Omnibus cases, and also, I imagine, why the heck Mrs. Imus was involved with this debate. No one did call, so I assume they all, like I almost did, missed this brief snippet. One thing is for sure, the anti-vax message is spreading. For a while, it was found only on MSNBC, and then CNN, and now Fox. It's clear to see who has all the money--and what they are doing with it. Why ever would this elite bunch, with their cash cow organizations, want to actually help autistic people with the money they raise?

Something I found strangely ironic, was a while after this autism-vaccine piece, the show featured a comedy troupe in the U.K. (doing a Facebook sketch). This troupe is called "Idiots of Ants," which when pronounced aloud is, "Idiot Savants." I imagine that no one at Fox News understands the irony. Well, based on statistics, perhaps at least one person on the production crew, in the back office, or in the studio got it, if their child is also autistic. The term "idiot savant" is no longer used, but was once how autistic savants (and in general, most savants) were referred to. Webster's defines "idiot savant" as

"a person affected with a mental disability (as autism or mental retardation) who exhibits exceptional skill or brilliance in some limited field (as mathematics or music) —called also savant"

This thought came to me tonight, amidst all this autism-vaccine hubbub. What do the anti-vaxers have to say about Childhood Disintegrative Disorder? It was first documented in 1908. The fact that the symptoms and onset of CDD is very similar to regressive autism (age being the main differential), would make one wonder if they both have the same cause. Recently, there has been some written on autoimmune and environmental factors in CDD. However, since it has been affecting children since at least 1908 (and surely prior to a doctor identifying and naming it), one has to wonder if a vaccine link to CDD is truly feasible. Surely the children with CDD in the early 20th century were not vaccinated. Curious...to me at least.

Too Many Masters of Illusions...

"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance -- it is the illusion of knowledge." ~ Daniel Boorstin

Thanks to the misrepresentation of facts and out of control spinning by many out there, most have not a clue about Hannah Poling's disease, its origins, and its significance. I have tried to explain it, to the best of my knowledge, having read multiple studies, having friends whose children have mitochondrial disease, and even having gone through the process of mito evaluation for my child, with Dr. Shoffner. Many bloggers have written on this, some have also written articles for various new organizations. The authors include other parents, both fathers and mothers ,(one of those moms also happens to have her PhD.), along with neurologists, scientists, and other physicians.

Despite that, people are opting to look past the facts and embrace half-truths and all-out lies. They prefer the sensationalist value of conspiracy theories and blaming the government for "injuring" our children. There are far too many masters of illusions weaving webs and indoctrinating parents into their beliefs, all for their own fame and fortune. To say that it's now been proven that vaccines cause autism (or mitochondrial disease), is beyond ignorant. Who cares if I don't have a clue about what disease Hannah Poling has? What difference does it make if she was born with this condition? I still blame the government!

The realization that Hannah Poling has a disease, one that was not caused by vaccines, and one that doesn't change anything for your own child or court case might be very upsetting to you. I get it. You were exhilarated by the Poling case (especially by those that hyped it to no end), feeling you too would be awarded money for your child's autism. Then you come to find out that Hannah, is in fact, not like your child--how disappointing for your case. I understand that. I realize it may feel better to hang onto something you have believed for so long--even when there is no solid proof or evidence to support those views. To think in new terms, acknowledge that all you had come to believe was all wrong, can be very difficult. But please, I urge you, look at the facts. Look at what the real science shows and proves, with regard to Hannah's condition. See what the real scientists, not a journalist, a lawyer, or other spin "doctors" are saying.

READ THIS, from Scientific American author Nikhil Swaminathan on what Dr. John Shoffner (a mitochondrial disease expert) has to say:

He notes that the route from the vaccine to the child's autism was by no means direct. Hannah's mitochondria were already underperforming, so when she developed a fever from her vaccine, the increased energy requirements likely pushed them past their thresholds. A fever caused by an ear infection or the flu would likely have triggered the autism symptoms if they occurred before or between the ages of 24 and 36 months, he says, which is when classic, regressive autism, which affects one third of sufferers, usually appears.

Shoffner notes that parents and advocates looking to impugn vaccines as triggers for autism—or mitochondrial disease—need direct, not just circumstantial, evidence. "If you were sitting in a waiting room full of people and one person suddenly fell ill or died or something," he says, "would you arrest the person sitting right next to them?"

Jon Poling, says Shoffner, has been "muddying the waters" with some of his comments. "There is no precedent for that type of thinking and no data for that type of thinking," Shoffner says.

So, now you know what a mito expert has to say. Not just any mito expert, but THE one who was involved in a study with Dr. Poling, and MOST significantly, the ONE who diagnosed Hannah Poling with mitochondrial disease. Now what say you?


Illusion

Pronunciation:

\i-ˈlü-zhən\

Function:

noun

Etymology:

Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin illusion-, illusio, from Latin, action of mocking, from illudere to mock at, from in- + ludere to play, mock

1 aobsolete : the action of deceiving b (1): the state or fact of being intellectually deceived or misled

a (1): a misleading image presented to the vision (2): something that deceives or misleads intellectually b (1): perception of something objectively existing in such a way as to cause misinterpretation of its actual nature

synonyms see delusion

This is an illusion:



This is not:



In the first picture the dots don't really exist, they are all an illusion. In the second, the dots are really there, a fact that is easily proven. Illusions are all around us. They are fun and novel, when they come in forms of art and imagery. However, they are dangerous when they stem from issues of medicine and science.

Questions for David Kirby

I read this quote on Left Brain Right Brain, it is from David Kirby's blog on the Huffington Post. I have a few questions for Mr. Kirby. Here is the quote:

"But I have personally identified at least a dozen (and there are reports of many more) children with cases in the court who meet the exact same medical criteria as Hannah, and whose cases will almost surely be compensated as well—each time with the attendant media fanfare."

I'm curious, how did he go about "personally identifying" these "dozen" children? Can Mr. Kirby offer any documentation of these children? Are parents whose court cases are pending in vaccine court consulting with him? Exactly what criteria is Mr. Kirby using, and what records does he have access to in order to "identify" these children?

Lastly, and most interesting to me, are the children that "meet the exact same medical criteria as Hannah." I am assuming these children have had muscle biopsies and diagnoses of mitochondrial disease, exactly like Hannah. Otherwise, they could not be categorized as having the "exact same medical criteria" as Hannah. So, I would be curious to know--have these children undergone mitochondrial and genetic testing? What were those results? How did Mr. Kirby gain access to those medical records?

Is It Fever? Mercury? Thimerosal?

Pick a cause, any cause. The growing list of possible causes of autism continues to grow. It could be mercury, thimerosal, ultrasound, french fries, the television, excessive hygiene, and we can't forget "refrigerator moms." Now, is fever the new cause du jour of autism?

An idea being tossed around by people commenting on this piece, is now that it's the "vaccine-induced" fever that is affecting these children with "mitochondrial dysfunction." Is this becoming an idea that is adopted by Mr. Kirby and others?

Are we to blame fever now for autism (ala mitochondrial dysfunction)? How shall we go about "greening" fever or banning it? One can easily predict that even if we "green our vaccines," fever would still be a common side-effect. Likewise, splitting up vaccines does not lessen the chance of fever post-immunization. The fever is due to our immune system's response to the microorganisms in the vaccine. So, is this idea of the "vaccine-induced" fever just another stepping stone to banning vaccines altogether?

Is it fever or is it mercury or is it thimerosal or is it vaccines altogether that are to blame? I wait with bated breath for the next autism "cause" that will be "uncovered."

More Mito Docs Speak...

Finally. More mito docs are coming out of the woodwork (please read Mitochondra and vaccines - the science), and speaking out about the Poling case (even those directly involved in it). And, let me back that up by saying these physicians are highly-respected, very intelligent, experts in their fields. They spend their days and nights caring for patients with mitochondrial disease or evaluating people for possible mito abnormalities, performing studies, reading other physician's reports, and researching, researching, researching. These doctors eat, sleep, and breathe mito.

Why any parent would prefer to try and gain understanding of the complexities of mitochondrial disease (something which is a difficult task for most pediatricians and other docs to do even) from a P.R. guy, or a lawyer, or anyone other than the mito experts is beyond me. If your child has a broken bone, would you take medical advice from your stock broker? Now, your stock broker is probably very intelligent, nicely groomed, and well-spoken, but again, wouldn't you rather ask his opinion on the markets than medicine? So, why are so many parents listening to David Kirby and others like it's the gospel?

Make an appointment with Dr. John Shoffner, or Dr. Salvatore DiMauro, or Bruce Cohen, to name a couple. Let them explain the ins and outs of mitochondrial disease. Ask them if vaccines cause it. Ask them what they think of the outcries from those on the anti-vax side. Then, and only then, can real discussion on this topic begin. When you have THE experts on mitochondrial disease, saying that vaccines didn't cause mitochondrial defects in Hannah Poling, what is there to question?

I suppose the anti-vax brigade will claim that "well, they are doctors on the CDC's payroll" or some such nonsense. Take your head out of your asinine conspiracy theory for just a moment. If the running idea is that all these docs are corrupt, out to make a buck, and covert agents for the government--wouldn't they be the ones saying, "yes, kids with autism probably all have mito disease, come get tested by me."

Talk about rolling in the dough. To get a good and thorough evaluation of mitochondrial diseases and other genetic abnormalities, you are easily looking at $20,000 - 40,000. That is PER patient. If every child involved in the omnibus gets such thorough evaluations, these doctors will be millionaires in no time. So, why would these doctors state that vaccines don't cause mitochondrial disease, and therefore, vaccines do not cause the autism (or autistic features) that can sometimes occur along with mitochondrial disease?

They aren't doling out shots in their clinics, so they're not getting paid by Big-Bad-Pharma to be spokespeople for the vaccines. Why would they "cover up" a link between mito and vaccines? For no reason, that's why. There is no link. These physicians have high ethical standards, and if it was found that vaccines indeed caused mitochondrial disease, they would be the first to say it. They are striving to find a cure for mitochondrial disease. There is no reason for them to deny a possible cause to a disease they are fighting to get rid of.



**Hats off to Kristina & Kevin for their coverage on this ever-developing story!

Subpoena: QUASHED!

My congratulations to Kathleen Seidel. Here are the details of the "Endorsed Order granting Motion to Quash Subpoena."

Again, It's NOT The Vaccines

Kev at Left Brain/Right Brain writes about Pertussis (a very real, very lethal disease). If you visit here, click to listen to what whooping cough sounds like. I'm still scratching my head over those who claim a possibly fatal disease like pertussis, or say measles, is preferable to autism. On Tuesday, a 9 month old baby boy died from pertussis. Here are the risks and complications of this disease:

Pertussis can be a serious illness, particularly for babies and young children. More than 50% of babies with reported cases of pertussis must be hospitalized. Coughing can be so severe that it is hard for babies to eat, drink or breathe.

• Babies may bleed behind the eyes and in the brain from coughing.
• The most common complication is bacterial pneumonia. About 1 child in 10 with pertussis also gets pneumonia, and about 1 in every 50 will have convulsions.
• Brain damage occurs in 1 out of every 250 children who get pertussis.
• Pertussis causes about 10-20 deaths each year in the United States

I suggest you re-read those numbers. More than 50% of those infected will be hospitalized, 1 out of every 250 will have brain damage, and 10-20 will die from pertussis. The anti-vax brigade will declare that not that many babies die from pertussis. So, it's no big deal, right? I mean, what's a handful of infants dying anyway? In the year 2000, 17 infants died from pertussis. I can't imagine reading the two case studies--how the babies suffered, and not feeling pain for their families. In Oregon alone, from 2000 to March 2008, 5 babies died of pertussis. Those who claim those fatalities are nothing significant, I suggest they speak to the families of those babies. Perhaps they should ask them if it was a big deal or not.

From Medical News Today:

"While pertussis cases in all age groups have been rising, it is important to know how the disease is spread, particularly to infants who are too young to be vaccinated themselves, so that steps can be taken to prevent infections in these vulnerable infants and potentially save lives," said Annelies Van Rie, M.D., assistant professor of epidemiology in the UNC School of Public Health. "It is troubling to learn that infants are often infected with pertussis by their own family members, who are often unaware of having pertussis themselves."

Herd immunity is important to us all. You will read claims that the concept of "herd immunity" is all a sham. People will explain that since there are states with lower percentages of vaccinated populations, and there is no widespread outbreak of disease, that herd immunity is not legit. What they fail to realize is that with each parent who opts to not get their child vaccinated, those percentages dip further and further. We are on the brink of a tipping point. It's no wonder just in the last year, we've seen outbreaks of measles in Milwaukee (just this past week, reports are ongoing), San Diego, Pima County, Arizona, elsewhere, and pertussis in Mississippi, South Carolina, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Ohio. This is only a sneak peek of what will come, should the numbers of children not getting vaccinated continue to rise.

If you're unsure what the diseases that can be prevented by vaccines look like, have a look:

Make an on-line slide show at www.OneTrueMedia.com

**I commend actress Keri Russell for doing her part to get the word out on pertussis.