"Here in Canada there is a person with autism who tries to prevent parents from getting ABA for their children. You can read some of the comments on her efforts here:http://tinyurl.com/6mhnct"
thanks for the link. I think problems start when people want to impose their view to others. ABA is not for every child and every family, in the same way Bio-med isn't for everyone.
I think that there is a big difference between sharing one's experience to imposing a point of view. I do understand that this is a very emotional subject for everybody involved and strong feelings can be stirred.
At this point we, as parents, just have to try different things and see what works and be open minded about it.
We have stopped looking for a "cure" and started looking at who he is as a person and how we can support him best to bloom into his full self.
This change of prospective has really help me cherish him, and ultimately truly accept him for who he is.
He is doing so well and has come so far!
I am such a proud mama bear! :-)
From your post it sounds like your son is doing very well, and I am very happy for you and him. Keep it up! and "good job" to all of us! :-)
“I also hope that you are informed enough to understand that what has been true for your child is not for many other kids suffering the same condition. At this point we are still not clear on the causes of ASD.”
I have always maintained that “ASD” is nothing more than a label for a subjective description of behaviours.
This ASD label has nothing to do with cause. It’s like being diagnosed with a rash. There are many causes for a rash and consequently many different treatments but on the surface what is obvious to all is just the rash.
“My personal feeling is that in 20-30 years we will move away from the autism dx umbrella and talk about children who have genetic predisposition, children who have specific allergies, etc. and provide specific intervention based on a more accurate diagnosis.”
That is certainly my hope too. But I don’t see the hostility towards parents whose child regressed after vaccination ending anytime soon enough to look into anything other than genetics.
“I am starting to wonder if Jenny McCarthy "format" is similar to Peet and Leary: stir controversy to gain press coverage, sell her books and further her own career.”
Maybe. But JM is the only parent out of the three that has a child that was diagnosed with autism. Peet could have promoted vaccines without stepping into the ring with parents who have had to make the tough decision not to vaccinate. If the science is so sound and irrefutable on the safety and efficacy of vaccines there would be no need to attack parents with opposing views. I am suspect of Peet’s apology; I usually dismiss any apology that is followed with the words “but” or “however”. Sounds more like damage control for someone with a movie out.
“For all of this and more, I do distance myself from Jenny McCarthy. She is not talking on my behalf, and I do feel sad that she has chosen to be a divisive figure, and believe that she is ultimately hurting the Autism community and cause.”
I don’t know if JM has stated that she is speaking for the autism community as a whole: I would assume she means parents that are like-minded about the issue of a vaccine-autism link. (And to be frank, I really don't want to defend quotes that come from someone other than myself.) I understand what you are saying though. I think because it is such a complex subject you are going to get more than the fair share of spokespeople. Here in Canada there is a person with autism who tries to prevent parents from getting ABA for their children. You can read some of the comments on her efforts here:http://tinyurl.com/6mhnct
I wouldn’t exactly call her efforts unifying either. The movement that she represents does not speak for my son. Best regards.
Dear samaxtics,
"I don’t think Jenny McCarthy owes the (general) autism community anything. She chooses to talk about her own experience and her passion with the issue (vaccines/treatments) and due to the culture of celebrity that we live in, she has a format. Obviously as someone who believes my child was injured by vaccines, I support Jenny’s message."
point taken. I also hope that you are informed enough to understand that what has been true for your child is not for many other kids suffering the same condition. At this point we are still not clear on the causes of ASD. My personal feeling is that in 20-30 years we will move away from the autism dx umbrella and talk about children who have genetic predisposition, children who have specific allergies, etc. and provide specific intervention based on a more accurate diagnosis.
So I think it is pretty irresponsible of JM declaring during an interview:
"I don't think autism is genetic".
Mind, she is not saying: I don't think that Evan's autism as a genetic origin. She is saying that the autism disorder has no genetic connection.
Amanda Peet's comment was out of line, no doubt, however she did apologize.
Although Ms. McCarthy didn't accepted the apology and went on saying:
"She (Peet) has a lot of [nerve] to come forward and be on that side, because there is an angry mob on my side, and I like the fact that I can say she's completely wrong,"
Angry mob?
With Dennis Leary, JM went the route of name calling by saying that he is "stupid" (well, at least she didn't use the "r" word).
And again hinting to violence: "“Whoo! First of all, let me tell you, the autism community has received probably 10,000 emails [saying] ‘Go kill him!’ ‘Go yell at him,’”.
I think that a lot of us were upset, by Mr. Leary's comments but also understood this was a sad move to try to revive his dieing career.
I am starting to wonder if Jenny McCarthy "format" is similar to Peet and Leary: stir controversy to gain press coverage, sell her books and further her own career.
For all of this and more, I do distance myself from Jenny McCarthy. She is not talking on my behalf, and I do feel sad that she has chosen to be a divisive figure, and believe that she is ultimately hurting the Autism community and cause.
“When public figures, such as Jenny McCarthy, take on causes as urgent and important as Autism, they owe to its community to educate the public, and be a model of tollerance by using moderation, and restrain toward the Amanda Peets and Dennis Leary of the world. I feel that Ms. McCarthy has lost valuable opportunities to bring to the national attention crucial issues such as the importance of funding research, and bringing to the attention of the general public how every child in the school system would benefit from congress fully funding IDEA, or pressing to pass law to make insurances to pay for ABA interventions.”
Simply put, I disagree. I don’t think Jenny McCarthy owes the (general) autism community anything. She chooses to talk about her own experience and her passion with the issue (vaccines/treatments) and due to the culture of celebrity that we live in, she has a format. Obviously as someone who believes my child was injured by vaccines, I support Jenny’s message.
However, I don’t think that JM is the right person to talk about issues such as public schooling or needing insurance to cover ABA. No one would buy it coming from any celebrity and it would probably be a hindrance instead of a help. I have no insight to (or grudges about) JM’s finances but the general perception would be that Jenny would be able to easily cover such expenses including private schooling and so would hardly elicit any empathy.
To date, I have not seen any comments by JM about what Leary said. I don’t know of any quote attributed to JM about Amanda Peet that showed lack of restraint. Perhaps you can supply them. But one must keep in mind that Peet did call parents “parasites” and even though I once supported vaccination as Peet now does, I would never have called someone a “parasite” in conversation let alone in a magazine interview. IMHO, Leary deserves no restraint. He could have excerpted any chapter from his book but he chose this one, why? Solely to stir it up for financial gain with absolutely no regard for the people hurt. Speaking of parasites.
Amber, that's just what your blog should be - your own safe place. The day commenters start making you worry, you start moderating comments. There's no law that saws every Tom, Dick (and I do mean dick) and Harry have to have access to every blog on earth.
You're welcome here anytime. We sometimes get heated - but I try to keep the debate civil. Keep in touch with me off-blog too please.
Jennifer:
I agree with you, I don't think that bio-med approaches and supporting neuro-diversity should be mutually exclusive.
I think that as a parent you got to follow your guts, and stick with whatever make your child gain skills and progress. I also think that what works for one kid may not work for another and no one-way approach should be advocated.
I also think we should be supportive and accepting of one another as a community.
samaxtics:
I want to commend you for advocating for your child during IEP. I do believe that every time we set a precendent someone else after us will have the way paved a little smoother. So, kuddos to you!
I do shudder in front of the US magazine hinting about a cure for autism, because it is not true. Not every child with autism can be recovered, for once we don't even know what are the causes of this condition, let alone a cure. Bio med works for some but not everybody.
Now that Ms. McCarthy has announced through a huge media splash that autism is curable, where does leave the cause of Autism? Where does it leave that mom with the quirky kid at the park, the one that inadvertantly pushes other kids off the play structure, and spends most his time stimming on running water? If in the eye of the general public, autism is now curable, why little Jimmy is yet to be "fixed"? If the reactions expressed on this thread give us a clue we may have a new "freak": little Jimmy's mom, who will be now judged either too lazy, or in denial, or having a "guilt projection". (to mention a few of the comments).
Great, now the already stressed, overly tired, overwhelmed and already somewhat ostracized moms of the tantrum-prone, hitting, bolting and head banging children cannot even feel supported within their own community.
When public figures, such as Jenny McCarthy, take on causes as urgent and important as Autism, they owe to its community to educate the public, and be a model of tollerance by using moderation, and restrain toward the Amanda Peets and Dennis Leary of the world.
I feel that Ms. McCarthy has lost valuable opportunities to bring to the national attention crucial issues such as the importance of funding research, and bringing to the attention of the general public how every child in the school system would benefit from congress fully funding IDEA, or pressing to pass law to make insurances to pay for ABA interventions.
Amber, looking at your blog your story is quite sad. Hopefully you can get out of your abusive marriage for the sake of those kids and your own life. Good luck.
It's more mature than bashing on someone based on their hair color.
I don't agree with everything Squid (or anyone else for that matter) does or believes, but I don't feel the need to use silly personal attacks to feel better. The only person who has a right to be offended at calling McJenny an ass is McJenny herself.
Believe it or not, if you'd read Squid's blog from the beginning, you'd see that she has tried just about everything. She's a lot more polite in her opinions than others are (myself included), and I'm surprised to see such childish attacks. If you're going to bash on her, why not attack her treatment plans vs her hair color? Seriously... This isn't 5th grade.
Why would anybody in the world care what kind of a diet I have my kid on, as long as my kid and my family are happier and healthier that way?
Why would an MD actively *discourage* a diet that might help my child, and will certainly be harmless in any case?
Why would an MD tell me, "Chelation isn't a do-it-yourself project," then offer no help to guide me in chelation, even while admitting that my child is full of mercury?
They screen for lead. They admit that lead is bad. They will chelate for lead. But not for mercury.
Why?
I think we all know why: guilt, $$$$, more guilt, and my favorite:
“I do shudder in front of sensationalistic media blurbs that shouts: Beating Autism: "how I saved my son" as in this week US magazine cover. As much as I cheer Jenny McCarty's personal victory as well as the victory of other families who have seen their children do well, I wonder how all this plays for some distraught parents whose child is not "fixable" in spite of the all the intervention. Several months ago, the New York Times came out with an article talking how the unfulfilled promise of a cure has drove some parents over the edge and led them to harm and at times kill their autistic children. Why can't we, as parents, keep the fight up, but also advocate for acceptance of neuro diversity?”
Do you shudder as well when you read those magazines with the by-line “How I survived cancer” by (insert celebrity here)? Do you wonder how that plays for terminal patients?
I don’t know what all therapies Jenny McCarthy used for her son, but I don’t think it is unreasonable that she should only speak about those she believed to be the most beneficial. And seriously, why should she be speaking about those children whose parents believed them to have autism from birth if her experience with her child was different from that?
I haven’t read the NY Times story but the way you present it here it sounds rather sensationalist. I think most people would agree that it was more than just the failure of a cure that compelled someone to harm their child.
Although I believe vaccines injured my child, I do (as I believe most parents do) advocate for acceptance every time I sit down for an IEP or interact with our school. Please don’t underestimate what we are doing for children with disabilities. Every child who comes to our school will benefit from my advocacy just like we have benefitted from those that came before us.
Sam you could be right about the bitter thing- what does strike me when I look at her blog is how self-absorbed she seems to be. Her site is exactly the reason I don't let my own 15 year old do the facebook thing. The time it takes to do all that writing might be better spent with her kid.
LCD-I'm pretty new to this site too and I hear your frustration over some children not responding to bio-med treatment. I honestly think that most people (Jenny McCarthy included) would validate your point about some children seeming to be born with autism (or more of a genetic basis for their autism) I don't think she is against neurodiversity she just has witnessed that for many children with autism there have been some very real successes with bio-med treatment along with other therapies. I guess in a way it could be like cancer where some people recover and some do not (and that doesn't seem fair, either). You are right that we all need to be accepting of people with differences-I just don't think that supporting neurodiversity and believing in bio-med has to be mutually exclusive.
I'm growing so wary of the entire debacle, as I suspect most are that share my views. I get so tired of bloggers for hire (obviously they are, I mean, who's got time to blog about anti-vaccination literally nonstop?) classifying certain aspects of debate as "gambits", whilst spewing tired, "skeptical" talking points, asking loaded strawman questions.
Dedicating a website to "stop Jenny McCarthy" is just laughable, the entire website is laughable. I think I'll start a website entitled: Stop Neurodiversity Socialism... let's face it folks, that is precisely what western medicine is - Socialism.
The folks that perpetuate "skepticism" under the guise of scientific discourse are drowning in their own conceit. Surely their intellect is making them aware of the isolation they are creating for themselves... or perhaps it's their own vaccine damage getting in the way of that desperately needed discovery?
Why do they care if people are feeding their children more appropriately and they are getting better? Why are they surprised that a child would perform better on a diet free from allergens? This is on the verge of ridiculous.
I would take that crew with a grain of salt. Half of them have pink or purple hair (they look a little old to be carrying that look off) and seem to have plenty of money to be seeking biomedical for their kids if they wanted to. They seem to talk an awful lot about nice vacations, expensive homes, rich in-laws and so on. I don't think they are resentful of money, I think they are bitter because of guilt.
"Ditz" is a perfect name for that woman. Really "Liz Ditz", get a life. You sound like the head of the CDC. Also, her friend "Squid" (that would be Shannon-the one with the pink hair)is baffled why she is being questioned for her "moderate" opinion on Jenny. Moderate? Is this woman kidding me? She calls someone an ass, bashes parents who pursue biomedical and she calls that moderate? Wow!
Seems there's an entire group of them in northern California that are friends. This one not only bashes anything and everything biomedical/vaccine safety, she doesn't even have a child on the spectrum. My question is, does someone like this have nothing better to do with their time?
Hi there,
I am new to this blog, landed here via a friend and read the thread of comments for this entry, and feel compelled to add my humble 2 cents.
I do feel uncomfortable with Jenny McCarty's position for a few reasons:
- She concentrates mainly on making vaccines clean and a biomed approach, which are all good things, but address only part of the problem. Some of the ASD children do respond to a biomed approach but a lot don't. Some children do regress after receiving vaccine shots, but others are born that way.
At this point Autism is diagnosed based on a range of symptoms not causes, hence not every child with the same diagnosis benefits from the same treatment. Perhaps it would be more sensible of Ms. McCarty to advocate for a more holistic approach which includes, ABA, occupational therapy, speech therapy AND biomed intervention AND spacing out vaccinations.
- I do shudder in front of sensationalistic media blurbs that shouts: Beating Autism: "how I saved my son" as in this week US magazine cover. As much as I cheer Jenny McCarty's personal victory as well as the victory of other families who have seen their children do well, I wonder how all this plays for some distraught parents whose child is not "fixable" in spite of the all the intervention. Several months ago, the New York Times came out with an article talking how the unfulfilled promise of a cure has drove some parents over the edge and led them to harm and at times kill their autistic children.
Why can't we, as parents, keep the fight up, but also advocate for acceptance of neuro diversity?
thanks, Marcy, my mistake. I looked up the link you sent and she and her buddies seem to be really resentful of Jenny's money more than anything else. I saw that she had quite a few responses that didn't agree with her view of JM and I would have responded too but it seemed like I needed some account and I decided against it. Thanks, though for pointing it out, Jen -sorry GR
Jennifer-this is the blog that comment came off of. GR was also expressing disgust at the individual writing the blog with this entry. I have seen this blog before. It is written by a mother from Redwood, California named Shannon De Rosa. Clearly since biomedical either didn't work for her son or she gave up on it, her style is to lash out apparently.
GR: I feel sorry for you and I can 't pretend that I understand all your circumstances but maybe, just maybe,you have to allow for the fact that many children can "recover" and be gracious about it. Why is it disrespectful to say that some children can recover? Is it disrespectful to say someone can recover from cancer?
I'm sure that it is very expensive to do the bio-med route and also inconvenient but obviously a lot of parents are trying it with success. For newly diagnosed families it might be even more important to try this stuff first. I used to work for an "early intervention" program so I believe in using all approaches -nutrition, physio, fine/gross motor, speech/language therapy, behavioural strategies etc. Also counselling to deal with any issues (and we all have them).
well i can see alot of problems . it seems the DEVIL is after anything good. and JENNY IS WONDERFUL. she has helped my grandson. so much . so all you miserable people without alife. go find another cause to diminish.
How about this mom named Shannon and her blog entitled, The Adventures of Leelo And His Potty-Mouthed Mom. The name of the blog says it all! Bitter, no class and clueless all in one. I hope and pray for Leelo but with a mom like this.....lord help him.
10.01.2008
Jenny McCarthy: Stop Being an Ass
Jenny McCarthy is a loudmouthed ass, but we all knew that before she had a kid with autism (oh, wait, her kid is recovered, right?). I had hope that she, and so many others who have usurped roles supposed to be filled with role models, would learn that it pisses people off and doesn't help your cause when you throw expletive-laden mud at your enemies, and that just because someone else calls you a name doesn't mean you have to call them one, too. But, le sigh.
It makes my eyeballs explode when Jenny McCarthy is cited as an autism advocate. It pisses me off that her son and Leelo have the same diagnosis, when they are so obviously very different children with dramatically different needs. She says that Amanda Peet hasn't walked in her shoes, that she doesn't get what it's like to have a kid with autism. I would point out that my friends and I have walked in Jenny McCarthy's shoes much longer and with less "success" than she has. And few of us still believe that vaccines caused our kids to be who they are. She does not speak for us, do you hear me? Don't ever think she does.
I especially don't give a shit about anyone who can only talk about autism in terms of recovery, because that is disrespectful and just not realistic for most families with autism. Are we failures because Leelo is still autistic? I hardly think so. Newly diagnosed families need to put their energies into approaches and therapies that will help their children gain real skills (modified ABA, speech therapy, occupational therapy, social skills groups if they have the language), and then try the more harmless vitamins and supplements/BioMed/diet approaches if they have any energy left over.
I don't care how many websites they come out with that say Jenny is wrong, this one is wrong and that one is wrong. All I know is that Jenny led me to these websites. Once on these websites I learned things I could do to help my son. AND NOW MY SON IS BETTER. My son is recovering everyday! My son feels better and will tell you so. SO they can blow smoke up someone else's ass...Mine is filled with knowledge.
God bless Jenny and everyone else out there willing to fight for their children!
The Bunny ears over the stop sign..... How immature and inappropriate and also SEXIST! They can kiss my ass with all the silly media degrees they have. I also have several degrees from two well known Universities but in no way am I going to brag about a Master's degree in media and post it on this Child like Website! LMFAO!
Read their laughable "About us" below:
About Us:
Kylie Sturgess credits her childhood enthusiasm for the long-running consumer affairs program "The Investigators" on Australian television for her life-long interest in consumer education, media claims and how we are led to believe 'weird things'.
A former high-school teacher turned M.Ed thesis-writer, blogger at Podblack and educational researcher, she is currently working on a survey with Dr Martin Bridgstock on paranormal, pseudoscientific and conspiracy theory beliefs.
Michael Rosch received his Bachelors Degree from New York University’s Gallatin School of Individualized Study and holds a Masters Degree in Media Studies from New School University.
He has no formal medical training or professional medical or scientific experience. He attests to having no investment, whether financial or otherwise, in any medical and/or pharmaceutical organizations or products that would constitute a conflict of interest.
He is simply a concerned citizen who is deeply troubled by the growing degree of myths and misconceptions about vaccines and autism being perpetuated in the popular media. And, although he does have a niece diagnosed with autism, he does in no way consider that relationship nor any other personal relationship to alone be sufficient experience for making a proper medical diagnosis.
Concordantly, he asks that you not simply trust him or simply trust the information provided on this website but to additionally seek the advice of trained medical professionals who support the conclusions of the medical consensus arrived at through a preponderance of evidence presented in proper peer-reviewed medical journals.
I recently had a college student (and now former friend of my brother) tell me that he "hopes my children die, you worthless piece of s***" because I wrote a blog on facebook about my son's journey and how vaccines destroyed him, and then my brother posted it on his facebook. He then also went on to write about how I'm "what's wrong with America" and how I'm "setting back years of scientific research" with my "Neanderthal brain". Well, gosh-n-golly, who was I to argue with a college sophomore at Western Illinois University. ;)
Impressive,
A whopping 3 testimonials and one depressing poem.
I guess I will take my recovering, talking son any day of the week, over this kind of junk.
It sure beats poop smearing.
Wallow in your Autism if you choose, I love having my kid back from acute Mercury poisoning.
Thimerosal disrupts DNA fools. It's mutagenic in it's own material data.
Causes mito to delete in university studies.
Show me your Autism gene (Oh that's right no one has found one.) and I'll show you dozens of others damaged by toxins.
Michael Rosch from "Stop Jenny" has this to say in the comments:
"I have not read either of Jenny’s books and have only read a few excerpts, but as my fellow contributers have already said, we are not interested in judging her writing or her character. We’re strictly interested in refuting the inaccurate claims she is making regarding vaccines and autism."
How exactly can they refute claims they have not even read?
I'm a parent without a license who recovered her son (with the help of Jenny's book leading me to a DAN! doctor and websites like this to educate me).
I don't care what others think of me and my positions anymore. I know I did the best thing for my child. I will defend Jenny and other parents like me when called upon to fight. Let's remain organized so our voice is loud. God Bless Jenny, God Blessed and continues to Bless us all. We will recover others who are brave enough through these channels.
"yeah, you are so right- there's NO way that any environmental factors like vaccination could play a role in the development of autism (hearing the sarcasm?), there is NO such thing as SV-40 (there is), NO one has ever developed Guillaume Barre from a flu shot (my nana did), giving hep b to babies makes TOTAL sense (cause you know how sexually active and drug experimental those little rascals are!), all those military vaccine-injured people are LYING (anthrax etc.) and it is beyond IMPOSSIBLE that the pharmaceutical companies could have any bias (LOL)"
"...but that does not make Jenny's google research and interpretation of the experiences more valid than others who have had the same experiences and come to different conclusions. We ask that Jenny re-evaluate her assertions, and ask all parents to learn about the issue in depth."
I read this the other day and my first thought was Jenny is ALSO entitled to her views (after all, she is a fellow parent) and just because *others* have come to a "different conclusion" doesn't mean they're right and she's wrong!
It's this whole mentality of *we* get to decide what is "correct/right" and anyone else who believes differently is *wrong* and therefore, they need to get back in line with us.
The ONLY reason they feel like Jenny's conclusions are being accepted as "more valid" than their own is because SHE is successful in her advocacy of those positions and a boatload of people are hearing her message.
My response when I encounter this push back: "Buddy, no one is stopping YOU from advocating for your own child! Go for it, just don't tell *me* I can't advocate for my child because *you* don't agree with what I'm saying!"
Harsher response to
conspiracy theorists
Thanks for Columnist Mary Ellen Schoonmaker's "Confronting facts and myths about immunization" (Other Views, Sept. 19), on the vaccination myths being perpetuated in the popular media. I hope to see many more articles like this in the future.
My only disagreement is that Schoonmaker advises, "Parents should never be criticized for wanting the best for their children and wanting to protect their kids' health and safety." Normally this is a sound policy, but leaders of the anti-vaccination movement, such as journalists David Kirby and Dan Olmstead and TV personality Jenny McCarthy, have crossed the line with organized campaigns of misinformation, as evidenced by their constant conspiracy theory appeals that vilify all who disagree with them, including Dr. Paul Offit, director of the vaccine center at Children's Hospital in Philadelphia.
Regardless of whether they believe their own propaganda or whether they happen to have autistic children, these movement leaders waste no time in making baseless public accusations against the nation's leading medical minds and organizations without considering the serious consequences of those conspiracy claims.
For this, they should receive harsh criticism for their poor character and judgment. Their arguments should be challenged. Those are responses we'd expect for any other propagandist. They should not receive special treatment because their children have autism.
Michael J. Rosch
Since he mentions that he supports Offit, there may be more to this site than a misguided attempt to glorify vaccines.
It's just some neurodiversity followers. Not even on par with Orac's page, and they link quotes to classic neurodiversity sites like LeftBrain/RightBrain. They might as well quote AutismDiva.
Nothing they have there is original, or even interesting. Honestly, if the best they can do is "the kids get better just by natural development", then they may as well give up and go home.
I honestly had a good laugh when I saw this site. Plain and simple; it means we're winning! We are succeeding in being heard, and the fact that these idiots would stoop to such extremes to try to discredit a mother who has successfully helped her child shows how desperate and scared they are.
I blew off those idiots. They aren't even worth the poop my son smears on the walls.
If Jenny is wrong, then so is Boyd Haley, Thomas Burbacher, Frank Engley and so many others. BTW, they do have the educational background. They are the experts and they link vaccines to autism. Telling us, "Children with autism develop bigger brains by the time they are two years old," as if this explains why suddenly we're overwhelmed with hundreds of thousands of kids everywhere with autism is truly the junk science.
I know why the vaccine makers can't stand us, but I can't figure out the goal of the ND's. I don't care what route (or lack of one) they choose for their kids, so why do they care what anyone else does? I really wonder why it bugs them so much that our kids are getting better. I honestly believe they would rather be right than get kids to heal. That site is completely idiotic!
I contacted them using the web form and let them know what I think of their crusade and misinformation. How awful of them to try to censor a voice of reason.
Good for you, LCD. That's about where I stand, as well.
Posted by: Amber | October 24, 2008 at 03:08 PM
"Here in Canada there is a person with autism who tries to prevent parents from getting ABA for their children. You can read some of the comments on her efforts here:http://tinyurl.com/6mhnct"
thanks for the link. I think problems start when people want to impose their view to others. ABA is not for every child and every family, in the same way Bio-med isn't for everyone.
I think that there is a big difference between sharing one's experience to imposing a point of view. I do understand that this is a very emotional subject for everybody involved and strong feelings can be stirred.
At this point we, as parents, just have to try different things and see what works and be open minded about it.
My personal position is close to Squid's last post.
http://www.squidalicious.com/2008/10/why-don-we-want-to-recover-leelo.html
We have stopped looking for a "cure" and started looking at who he is as a person and how we can support him best to bloom into his full self.
This change of prospective has really help me cherish him, and ultimately truly accept him for who he is.
He is doing so well and has come so far!
I am such a proud mama bear! :-)
From your post it sounds like your son is doing very well, and I am very happy for you and him. Keep it up! and "good job" to all of us! :-)
Posted by: LCD | October 24, 2008 at 12:11 PM
“I also hope that you are informed enough to understand that what has been true for your child is not for many other kids suffering the same condition. At this point we are still not clear on the causes of ASD.”
I have always maintained that “ASD” is nothing more than a label for a subjective description of behaviours.
This ASD label has nothing to do with cause. It’s like being diagnosed with a rash. There are many causes for a rash and consequently many different treatments but on the surface what is obvious to all is just the rash.
“My personal feeling is that in 20-30 years we will move away from the autism dx umbrella and talk about children who have genetic predisposition, children who have specific allergies, etc. and provide specific intervention based on a more accurate diagnosis.”
That is certainly my hope too. But I don’t see the hostility towards parents whose child regressed after vaccination ending anytime soon enough to look into anything other than genetics.
“I am starting to wonder if Jenny McCarthy "format" is similar to Peet and Leary: stir controversy to gain press coverage, sell her books and further her own career.”
Maybe. But JM is the only parent out of the three that has a child that was diagnosed with autism. Peet could have promoted vaccines without stepping into the ring with parents who have had to make the tough decision not to vaccinate. If the science is so sound and irrefutable on the safety and efficacy of vaccines there would be no need to attack parents with opposing views. I am suspect of Peet’s apology; I usually dismiss any apology that is followed with the words “but” or “however”. Sounds more like damage control for someone with a movie out.
“For all of this and more, I do distance myself from Jenny McCarthy. She is not talking on my behalf, and I do feel sad that she has chosen to be a divisive figure, and believe that she is ultimately hurting the Autism community and cause.”
I don’t know if JM has stated that she is speaking for the autism community as a whole: I would assume she means parents that are like-minded about the issue of a vaccine-autism link. (And to be frank, I really don't want to defend quotes that come from someone other than myself.) I understand what you are saying though. I think because it is such a complex subject you are going to get more than the fair share of spokespeople. Here in Canada there is a person with autism who tries to prevent parents from getting ABA for their children. You can read some of the comments on her efforts here:http://tinyurl.com/6mhnct
I wouldn’t exactly call her efforts unifying either. The movement that she represents does not speak for my son. Best regards.
Posted by: samaxtics | October 23, 2008 at 05:19 PM
Dear samaxtics,
"I don’t think Jenny McCarthy owes the (general) autism community anything. She chooses to talk about her own experience and her passion with the issue (vaccines/treatments) and due to the culture of celebrity that we live in, she has a format. Obviously as someone who believes my child was injured by vaccines, I support Jenny’s message."
point taken. I also hope that you are informed enough to understand that what has been true for your child is not for many other kids suffering the same condition. At this point we are still not clear on the causes of ASD. My personal feeling is that in 20-30 years we will move away from the autism dx umbrella and talk about children who have genetic predisposition, children who have specific allergies, etc. and provide specific intervention based on a more accurate diagnosis.
So I think it is pretty irresponsible of JM declaring during an interview:
"I don't think autism is genetic".
Mind, she is not saying: I don't think that Evan's autism as a genetic origin. She is saying that the autism disorder has no genetic connection.
Amanda Peet's comment was out of line, no doubt, however she did apologize.
Although Ms. McCarthy didn't accepted the apology and went on saying:
"She (Peet) has a lot of [nerve] to come forward and be on that side, because there is an angry mob on my side, and I like the fact that I can say she's completely wrong,"
Angry mob?
With Dennis Leary, JM went the route of name calling by saying that he is "stupid" (well, at least she didn't use the "r" word).
And again hinting to violence: "“Whoo! First of all, let me tell you, the autism community has received probably 10,000 emails [saying] ‘Go kill him!’ ‘Go yell at him,’”.
I think that a lot of us were upset, by Mr. Leary's comments but also understood this was a sad move to try to revive his dieing career.
I am starting to wonder if Jenny McCarthy "format" is similar to Peet and Leary: stir controversy to gain press coverage, sell her books and further her own career.
For all of this and more, I do distance myself from Jenny McCarthy. She is not talking on my behalf, and I do feel sad that she has chosen to be a divisive figure, and believe that she is ultimately hurting the Autism community and cause.
Posted by: LCD | October 23, 2008 at 01:42 PM
Hi LCD,
You wrote:
“When public figures, such as Jenny McCarthy, take on causes as urgent and important as Autism, they owe to its community to educate the public, and be a model of tollerance by using moderation, and restrain toward the Amanda Peets and Dennis Leary of the world. I feel that Ms. McCarthy has lost valuable opportunities to bring to the national attention crucial issues such as the importance of funding research, and bringing to the attention of the general public how every child in the school system would benefit from congress fully funding IDEA, or pressing to pass law to make insurances to pay for ABA interventions.”
Simply put, I disagree. I don’t think Jenny McCarthy owes the (general) autism community anything. She chooses to talk about her own experience and her passion with the issue (vaccines/treatments) and due to the culture of celebrity that we live in, she has a format. Obviously as someone who believes my child was injured by vaccines, I support Jenny’s message.
However, I don’t think that JM is the right person to talk about issues such as public schooling or needing insurance to cover ABA. No one would buy it coming from any celebrity and it would probably be a hindrance instead of a help. I have no insight to (or grudges about) JM’s finances but the general perception would be that Jenny would be able to easily cover such expenses including private schooling and so would hardly elicit any empathy.
To date, I have not seen any comments by JM about what Leary said. I don’t know of any quote attributed to JM about Amanda Peet that showed lack of restraint. Perhaps you can supply them. But one must keep in mind that Peet did call parents “parasites” and even though I once supported vaccination as Peet now does, I would never have called someone a “parasite” in conversation let alone in a magazine interview. IMHO, Leary deserves no restraint. He could have excerpted any chapter from his book but he chose this one, why? Solely to stir it up for financial gain with absolutely no regard for the people hurt. Speaking of parasites.
Posted by: samaxtics | October 23, 2008 at 12:38 PM
Amber, that's just what your blog should be - your own safe place. The day commenters start making you worry, you start moderating comments. There's no law that saws every Tom, Dick (and I do mean dick) and Harry have to have access to every blog on earth.
You're welcome here anytime. We sometimes get heated - but I try to keep the debate civil. Keep in touch with me off-blog too please.
Kim
Posted by: Stagmom for Amber | October 23, 2008 at 06:33 AM
Jennifer:
I agree with you, I don't think that bio-med approaches and supporting neuro-diversity should be mutually exclusive.
I think that as a parent you got to follow your guts, and stick with whatever make your child gain skills and progress. I also think that what works for one kid may not work for another and no one-way approach should be advocated.
I also think we should be supportive and accepting of one another as a community.
samaxtics:
I want to commend you for advocating for your child during IEP. I do believe that every time we set a precendent someone else after us will have the way paved a little smoother. So, kuddos to you!
I do shudder in front of the US magazine hinting about a cure for autism, because it is not true. Not every child with autism can be recovered, for once we don't even know what are the causes of this condition, let alone a cure. Bio med works for some but not everybody.
Now that Ms. McCarthy has announced through a huge media splash that autism is curable, where does leave the cause of Autism? Where does it leave that mom with the quirky kid at the park, the one that inadvertantly pushes other kids off the play structure, and spends most his time stimming on running water? If in the eye of the general public, autism is now curable, why little Jimmy is yet to be "fixed"? If the reactions expressed on this thread give us a clue we may have a new "freak": little Jimmy's mom, who will be now judged either too lazy, or in denial, or having a "guilt projection". (to mention a few of the comments).
Great, now the already stressed, overly tired, overwhelmed and already somewhat ostracized moms of the tantrum-prone, hitting, bolting and head banging children cannot even feel supported within their own community.
When public figures, such as Jenny McCarthy, take on causes as urgent and important as Autism, they owe to its community to educate the public, and be a model of tollerance by using moderation, and restrain toward the Amanda Peets and Dennis Leary of the world.
I feel that Ms. McCarthy has lost valuable opportunities to bring to the national attention crucial issues such as the importance of funding research, and bringing to the attention of the general public how every child in the school system would benefit from congress fully funding IDEA, or pressing to pass law to make insurances to pay for ABA interventions.
Posted by: LCD | October 22, 2008 at 11:58 PM
Sam,
Thank you. My blog is a place for me to whine/rant/whatever I need to do, not so much to gain sympathy... But I appreciate the kind words.
It's a bad situation, but it would be irresponsible to take off with the kids with no plan in place for our future... So for now we stay...
Posted by: Amber | October 22, 2008 at 11:17 PM
Amber, looking at your blog your story is quite sad. Hopefully you can get out of your abusive marriage for the sake of those kids and your own life. Good luck.
Posted by: sam | October 22, 2008 at 10:07 PM
It's more mature than bashing on someone based on their hair color.
I don't agree with everything Squid (or anyone else for that matter) does or believes, but I don't feel the need to use silly personal attacks to feel better. The only person who has a right to be offended at calling McJenny an ass is McJenny herself.
Posted by: Amber | October 22, 2008 at 06:52 PM
Yes Amber, and entitling a post "Jenny Stop Being An Ass" is VERY mature isn't it? Give me a break.
Posted by: BGT | October 22, 2008 at 06:31 PM
Believe it or not, if you'd read Squid's blog from the beginning, you'd see that she has tried just about everything. She's a lot more polite in her opinions than others are (myself included), and I'm surprised to see such childish attacks. If you're going to bash on her, why not attack her treatment plans vs her hair color? Seriously... This isn't 5th grade.
Posted by: Amber | October 22, 2008 at 04:45 PM
Anonymous Antivaccinationist,
Well said.
I can't add much, but I think it's guilt, too.
Why would anybody in the world care what kind of a diet I have my kid on, as long as my kid and my family are happier and healthier that way?
Why would an MD actively *discourage* a diet that might help my child, and will certainly be harmless in any case?
Why would an MD tell me, "Chelation isn't a do-it-yourself project," then offer no help to guide me in chelation, even while admitting that my child is full of mercury?
They screen for lead. They admit that lead is bad. They will chelate for lead. But not for mercury.
Why?
I think we all know why: guilt, $$$$, more guilt, and my favorite:
DENIAL, also known as:
Don't Even kNow I Am Lying
Terri L.
Posted by: Terri Lewis | October 22, 2008 at 12:44 PM
LCD,
“I do shudder in front of sensationalistic media blurbs that shouts: Beating Autism: "how I saved my son" as in this week US magazine cover. As much as I cheer Jenny McCarty's personal victory as well as the victory of other families who have seen their children do well, I wonder how all this plays for some distraught parents whose child is not "fixable" in spite of the all the intervention. Several months ago, the New York Times came out with an article talking how the unfulfilled promise of a cure has drove some parents over the edge and led them to harm and at times kill their autistic children. Why can't we, as parents, keep the fight up, but also advocate for acceptance of neuro diversity?”
Do you shudder as well when you read those magazines with the by-line “How I survived cancer” by (insert celebrity here)? Do you wonder how that plays for terminal patients?
I don’t know what all therapies Jenny McCarthy used for her son, but I don’t think it is unreasonable that she should only speak about those she believed to be the most beneficial. And seriously, why should she be speaking about those children whose parents believed them to have autism from birth if her experience with her child was different from that?
I haven’t read the NY Times story but the way you present it here it sounds rather sensationalist. I think most people would agree that it was more than just the failure of a cure that compelled someone to harm their child.
Although I believe vaccines injured my child, I do (as I believe most parents do) advocate for acceptance every time I sit down for an IEP or interact with our school. Please don’t underestimate what we are doing for children with disabilities. Every child who comes to our school will benefit from my advocacy just like we have benefitted from those that came before us.
Posted by: samaxtics | October 22, 2008 at 12:24 PM
Sam you could be right about the bitter thing- what does strike me when I look at her blog is how self-absorbed she seems to be. Her site is exactly the reason I don't let my own 15 year old do the facebook thing. The time it takes to do all that writing might be better spent with her kid.
LCD-I'm pretty new to this site too and I hear your frustration over some children not responding to bio-med treatment. I honestly think that most people (Jenny McCarthy included) would validate your point about some children seeming to be born with autism (or more of a genetic basis for their autism) I don't think she is against neurodiversity she just has witnessed that for many children with autism there have been some very real successes with bio-med treatment along with other therapies. I guess in a way it could be like cancer where some people recover and some do not (and that doesn't seem fair, either). You are right that we all need to be accepting of people with differences-I just don't think that supporting neurodiversity and believing in bio-med has to be mutually exclusive.
Posted by: jennifer | October 22, 2008 at 12:22 PM
Classic psychiatry - guilt projection.
I'm growing so wary of the entire debacle, as I suspect most are that share my views. I get so tired of bloggers for hire (obviously they are, I mean, who's got time to blog about anti-vaccination literally nonstop?) classifying certain aspects of debate as "gambits", whilst spewing tired, "skeptical" talking points, asking loaded strawman questions.
Dedicating a website to "stop Jenny McCarthy" is just laughable, the entire website is laughable. I think I'll start a website entitled: Stop Neurodiversity Socialism... let's face it folks, that is precisely what western medicine is - Socialism.
The folks that perpetuate "skepticism" under the guise of scientific discourse are drowning in their own conceit. Surely their intellect is making them aware of the isolation they are creating for themselves... or perhaps it's their own vaccine damage getting in the way of that desperately needed discovery?
Why do they care if people are feeding their children more appropriately and they are getting better? Why are they surprised that a child would perform better on a diet free from allergens? This is on the verge of ridiculous.
AA
Posted by: anonymous antivaccinationist | October 22, 2008 at 12:21 PM
Jennifer:
I would take that crew with a grain of salt. Half of them have pink or purple hair (they look a little old to be carrying that look off) and seem to have plenty of money to be seeking biomedical for their kids if they wanted to. They seem to talk an awful lot about nice vacations, expensive homes, rich in-laws and so on. I don't think they are resentful of money, I think they are bitter because of guilt.
Posted by: sam | October 22, 2008 at 10:34 AM
"Ditz" is a perfect name for that woman. Really "Liz Ditz", get a life. You sound like the head of the CDC. Also, her friend "Squid" (that would be Shannon-the one with the pink hair)is baffled why she is being questioned for her "moderate" opinion on Jenny. Moderate? Is this woman kidding me? She calls someone an ass, bashes parents who pursue biomedical and she calls that moderate? Wow!
Posted by: Francis | October 22, 2008 at 08:36 AM
http://lizditz.typepad.com/
Seems there's an entire group of them in northern California that are friends. This one not only bashes anything and everything biomedical/vaccine safety, she doesn't even have a child on the spectrum. My question is, does someone like this have nothing better to do with their time?
Posted by: MER | October 22, 2008 at 06:34 AM
Hi there,
I am new to this blog, landed here via a friend and read the thread of comments for this entry, and feel compelled to add my humble 2 cents.
I do feel uncomfortable with Jenny McCarty's position for a few reasons:
- She concentrates mainly on making vaccines clean and a biomed approach, which are all good things, but address only part of the problem. Some of the ASD children do respond to a biomed approach but a lot don't. Some children do regress after receiving vaccine shots, but others are born that way.
At this point Autism is diagnosed based on a range of symptoms not causes, hence not every child with the same diagnosis benefits from the same treatment. Perhaps it would be more sensible of Ms. McCarty to advocate for a more holistic approach which includes, ABA, occupational therapy, speech therapy AND biomed intervention AND spacing out vaccinations.
- I do shudder in front of sensationalistic media blurbs that shouts: Beating Autism: "how I saved my son" as in this week US magazine cover. As much as I cheer Jenny McCarty's personal victory as well as the victory of other families who have seen their children do well, I wonder how all this plays for some distraught parents whose child is not "fixable" in spite of the all the intervention. Several months ago, the New York Times came out with an article talking how the unfulfilled promise of a cure has drove some parents over the edge and led them to harm and at times kill their autistic children.
Why can't we, as parents, keep the fight up, but also advocate for acceptance of neuro diversity?
Posted by: LCD | October 22, 2008 at 01:23 AM
I've got one comment to make about the website's reference to Jenny having been a Playboy bunny...
So was Gloria Steinem.
Posted by: sign lady | October 21, 2008 at 11:41 PM
thanks, Marcy, my mistake. I looked up the link you sent and she and her buddies seem to be really resentful of Jenny's money more than anything else. I saw that she had quite a few responses that didn't agree with her view of JM and I would have responded too but it seemed like I needed some account and I decided against it. Thanks, though for pointing it out, Jen -sorry GR
Posted by: jennifer | October 21, 2008 at 04:13 PM
http://www.squidalicious.com/
Jennifer-this is the blog that comment came off of. GR was also expressing disgust at the individual writing the blog with this entry. I have seen this blog before. It is written by a mother from Redwood, California named Shannon De Rosa. Clearly since biomedical either didn't work for her son or she gave up on it, her style is to lash out apparently.
Posted by: Marcy | October 21, 2008 at 03:45 PM
GR: I feel sorry for you and I can 't pretend that I understand all your circumstances but maybe, just maybe,you have to allow for the fact that many children can "recover" and be gracious about it. Why is it disrespectful to say that some children can recover? Is it disrespectful to say someone can recover from cancer?
I'm sure that it is very expensive to do the bio-med route and also inconvenient but obviously a lot of parents are trying it with success. For newly diagnosed families it might be even more important to try this stuff first. I used to work for an "early intervention" program so I believe in using all approaches -nutrition, physio, fine/gross motor, speech/language therapy, behavioural strategies etc. Also counselling to deal with any issues (and we all have them).
Posted by: jennifer | October 21, 2008 at 03:17 PM
well i can see alot of problems . it seems the DEVIL is after anything good. and JENNY IS WONDERFUL. she has helped my grandson. so much . so all you miserable people without alife. go find another cause to diminish.
Posted by: BARBARA | October 21, 2008 at 02:14 PM
How about this mom named Shannon and her blog entitled, The Adventures of Leelo And His Potty-Mouthed Mom. The name of the blog says it all! Bitter, no class and clueless all in one. I hope and pray for Leelo but with a mom like this.....lord help him.
10.01.2008
Jenny McCarthy: Stop Being an Ass
Jenny McCarthy is a loudmouthed ass, but we all knew that before she had a kid with autism (oh, wait, her kid is recovered, right?). I had hope that she, and so many others who have usurped roles supposed to be filled with role models, would learn that it pisses people off and doesn't help your cause when you throw expletive-laden mud at your enemies, and that just because someone else calls you a name doesn't mean you have to call them one, too. But, le sigh.
It makes my eyeballs explode when Jenny McCarthy is cited as an autism advocate. It pisses me off that her son and Leelo have the same diagnosis, when they are so obviously very different children with dramatically different needs. She says that Amanda Peet hasn't walked in her shoes, that she doesn't get what it's like to have a kid with autism. I would point out that my friends and I have walked in Jenny McCarthy's shoes much longer and with less "success" than she has. And few of us still believe that vaccines caused our kids to be who they are. She does not speak for us, do you hear me? Don't ever think she does.
I especially don't give a shit about anyone who can only talk about autism in terms of recovery, because that is disrespectful and just not realistic for most families with autism. Are we failures because Leelo is still autistic? I hardly think so. Newly diagnosed families need to put their energies into approaches and therapies that will help their children gain real skills (modified ABA, speech therapy, occupational therapy, social skills groups if they have the language), and then try the more harmless vitamins and supplements/BioMed/diet approaches if they have any energy left over.
Posted by: GR | October 21, 2008 at 12:36 PM
I don't care how many websites they come out with that say Jenny is wrong, this one is wrong and that one is wrong. All I know is that Jenny led me to these websites. Once on these websites I learned things I could do to help my son. AND NOW MY SON IS BETTER. My son is recovering everyday! My son feels better and will tell you so. SO they can blow smoke up someone else's ass...Mine is filled with knowledge.
God bless Jenny and everyone else out there willing to fight for their children!
Posted by: Erica in Alabama | October 21, 2008 at 10:33 AM
STOP JENNY????
Please...that is laughable...One could no sooner stop that Warrior Momma then one could stop an oncoming train!!
Posted by: Meg N | October 21, 2008 at 08:24 AM
More piranha...fake names...desperate claims--yaaaaawn
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/10/20/stop-jenny-mccarthy/
Posted by: Teresa | October 20, 2008 at 10:06 PM
The Bunny ears over the stop sign..... How immature and inappropriate and also SEXIST! They can kiss my ass with all the silly media degrees they have. I also have several degrees from two well known Universities but in no way am I going to brag about a Master's degree in media and post it on this Child like Website! LMFAO!
Read their laughable "About us" below:
About Us:
Kylie Sturgess credits her childhood enthusiasm for the long-running consumer affairs program "The Investigators" on Australian television for her life-long interest in consumer education, media claims and how we are led to believe 'weird things'.
A former high-school teacher turned M.Ed thesis-writer, blogger at Podblack and educational researcher, she is currently working on a survey with Dr Martin Bridgstock on paranormal, pseudoscientific and conspiracy theory beliefs.
Michael Rosch received his Bachelors Degree from New York University’s Gallatin School of Individualized Study and holds a Masters Degree in Media Studies from New School University.
He has no formal medical training or professional medical or scientific experience. He attests to having no investment, whether financial or otherwise, in any medical and/or pharmaceutical organizations or products that would constitute a conflict of interest.
He is simply a concerned citizen who is deeply troubled by the growing degree of myths and misconceptions about vaccines and autism being perpetuated in the popular media. And, although he does have a niece diagnosed with autism, he does in no way consider that relationship nor any other personal relationship to alone be sufficient experience for making a proper medical diagnosis.
Concordantly, he asks that you not simply trust him or simply trust the information provided on this website but to additionally seek the advice of trained medical professionals who support the conclusions of the medical consensus arrived at through a preponderance of evidence presented in proper peer-reviewed medical journals.
-Michael
Posted by: Elucidatus | October 20, 2008 at 05:33 PM
I recently had a college student (and now former friend of my brother) tell me that he "hopes my children die, you worthless piece of s***" because I wrote a blog on facebook about my son's journey and how vaccines destroyed him, and then my brother posted it on his facebook. He then also went on to write about how I'm "what's wrong with America" and how I'm "setting back years of scientific research" with my "Neanderthal brain". Well, gosh-n-golly, who was I to argue with a college sophomore at Western Illinois University. ;)
Posted by: Cindy Lozano | October 20, 2008 at 04:17 PM
Impressive,
A whopping 3 testimonials and one depressing poem.
I guess I will take my recovering, talking son any day of the week, over this kind of junk.
It sure beats poop smearing.
Wallow in your Autism if you choose, I love having my kid back from acute Mercury poisoning.
Thimerosal disrupts DNA fools. It's mutagenic in it's own material data.
Causes mito to delete in university studies.
Show me your Autism gene (Oh that's right no one has found one.) and I'll show you dozens of others damaged by toxins.
Posted by: karenatlanta | October 20, 2008 at 02:34 PM
There is an interview of the creators of "Stop Jenny" by "Skeptic Dad"
http://skepticdad.wordpress.com/2008/10/19/stop-jenny-interview/#comments
Michael Rosch from "Stop Jenny" has this to say in the comments:
"I have not read either of Jenny’s books and have only read a few excerpts, but as my fellow contributers have already said, we are not interested in judging her writing or her character. We’re strictly interested in refuting the inaccurate claims she is making regarding vaccines and autism."
How exactly can they refute claims they have not even read?
Posted by: Val from Ohio | October 20, 2008 at 01:29 PM
I'm a parent without a license who recovered her son (with the help of Jenny's book leading me to a DAN! doctor and websites like this to educate me).
I don't care what others think of me and my positions anymore. I know I did the best thing for my child. I will defend Jenny and other parents like me when called upon to fight. Let's remain organized so our voice is loud. God Bless Jenny, God Blessed and continues to Bless us all. We will recover others who are brave enough through these channels.
Posted by: Deb in IL | October 20, 2008 at 01:06 PM
I read it and I replied to them:
"yeah, you are so right- there's NO way that any environmental factors like vaccination could play a role in the development of autism (hearing the sarcasm?), there is NO such thing as SV-40 (there is), NO one has ever developed Guillaume Barre from a flu shot (my nana did), giving hep b to babies makes TOTAL sense (cause you know how sexually active and drug experimental those little rascals are!), all those military vaccine-injured people are LYING (anthrax etc.) and it is beyond IMPOSSIBLE that the pharmaceutical companies could have any bias (LOL)"
Posted by: jennifer | October 20, 2008 at 12:39 PM
"...but that does not make Jenny's google research and interpretation of the experiences more valid than others who have had the same experiences and come to different conclusions. We ask that Jenny re-evaluate her assertions, and ask all parents to learn about the issue in depth."
I read this the other day and my first thought was Jenny is ALSO entitled to her views (after all, she is a fellow parent) and just because *others* have come to a "different conclusion" doesn't mean they're right and she's wrong!
It's this whole mentality of *we* get to decide what is "correct/right" and anyone else who believes differently is *wrong* and therefore, they need to get back in line with us.
The ONLY reason they feel like Jenny's conclusions are being accepted as "more valid" than their own is because SHE is successful in her advocacy of those positions and a boatload of people are hearing her message.
My response when I encounter this push back: "Buddy, no one is stopping YOU from advocating for your own child! Go for it, just don't tell *me* I can't advocate for my child because *you* don't agree with what I'm saying!"
Arrrrgggg....
Posted by: Kelli Ann Davis | October 20, 2008 at 12:32 PM
It is lame and a ridiculous site but in googling M Rosch, I did find a disturbing letter that he sent to The Record in New Jersey:
http://www.northjersey.com/news/health/30079394.html?page=all
Harsher response to
conspiracy theorists
Thanks for Columnist Mary Ellen Schoonmaker's "Confronting facts and myths about immunization" (Other Views, Sept. 19), on the vaccination myths being perpetuated in the popular media. I hope to see many more articles like this in the future.
My only disagreement is that Schoonmaker advises, "Parents should never be criticized for wanting the best for their children and wanting to protect their kids' health and safety." Normally this is a sound policy, but leaders of the anti-vaccination movement, such as journalists David Kirby and Dan Olmstead and TV personality Jenny McCarthy, have crossed the line with organized campaigns of misinformation, as evidenced by their constant conspiracy theory appeals that vilify all who disagree with them, including Dr. Paul Offit, director of the vaccine center at Children's Hospital in Philadelphia.
Regardless of whether they believe their own propaganda or whether they happen to have autistic children, these movement leaders waste no time in making baseless public accusations against the nation's leading medical minds and organizations without considering the serious consequences of those conspiracy claims.
For this, they should receive harsh criticism for their poor character and judgment. Their arguments should be challenged. Those are responses we'd expect for any other propagandist. They should not receive special treatment because their children have autism.
Michael J. Rosch
Since he mentions that he supports Offit, there may be more to this site than a misguided attempt to glorify vaccines.
Posted by: Teresa | October 20, 2008 at 11:35 AM
It's anonymously registered through a company called DomainsByProxy.com.
Posted by: CooperHawkes | October 20, 2008 at 11:00 AM
It's just some neurodiversity followers. Not even on par with Orac's page, and they link quotes to classic neurodiversity sites like LeftBrain/RightBrain. They might as well quote AutismDiva.
Nothing they have there is original, or even interesting. Honestly, if the best they can do is "the kids get better just by natural development", then they may as well give up and go home.
Posted by: doodle | October 20, 2008 at 10:38 AM
I honestly had a good laugh when I saw this site. Plain and simple; it means we're winning! We are succeeding in being heard, and the fact that these idiots would stoop to such extremes to try to discredit a mother who has successfully helped her child shows how desperate and scared they are.
I blew off those idiots. They aren't even worth the poop my son smears on the walls.
Posted by: Craig Willoughby | October 20, 2008 at 10:08 AM
If Jenny is wrong, then so is Boyd Haley, Thomas Burbacher, Frank Engley and so many others. BTW, they do have the educational background. They are the experts and they link vaccines to autism. Telling us, "Children with autism develop bigger brains by the time they are two years old," as if this explains why suddenly we're overwhelmed with hundreds of thousands of kids everywhere with autism is truly the junk science.
Anne Dachel
Media editor
Posted by: Anne Dachel | October 20, 2008 at 09:27 AM
I know why the vaccine makers can't stand us, but I can't figure out the goal of the ND's. I don't care what route (or lack of one) they choose for their kids, so why do they care what anyone else does? I really wonder why it bugs them so much that our kids are getting better. I honestly believe they would rather be right than get kids to heal. That site is completely idiotic!
Posted by: Nicole | October 20, 2008 at 09:13 AM
I think it is a mistake to call any attention to something like this. Just ignore it.
Posted by: Steve | October 20, 2008 at 09:13 AM
Hmmm...also ECBT?
Posted by: Diane | October 20, 2008 at 07:32 AM
I contacted them using the web form and let them know what I think of their crusade and misinformation. How awful of them to try to censor a voice of reason.
Posted by: Angela | October 20, 2008 at 06:50 AM