Dachel Media Update: Community Shuns Boy with Autism?
Battle for California - Dare to Hope?

AoA on the NYT...P

NYTPBy Anne Dachel

The New York Times has been around for over 150 years and it’s considered the premier U.S. newspaper by many people.  I’ve been monitoring the autism/vaccines/autism and vaccine coverage at the Times for over ten years, and it’s been a constant disappointment. 

Who could forget when Jeannette Catsoulis reviewed the movie, The Greater Good, back in 2011 for the Times?  In that piece Catsoulis openly stated that even if there is a link between vaccines and autism, it doesn’t matter; so many lives have been saved by vaccines, it’s all for the greater good.

2011 New York Times Reviews The Greater Good Movie Tells Vaccine-Injured Children to Drop Dead, By Anne Dachel

Jeannette Catsoulis: “. . .  even were such a link proved definitively, all that matters is that its victims number significantly fewer than those of the diseases vaccinations are designed to prevent.”

Several of us have written about the New York Times on Age of Autism.

2010 The Inconstant Gardiner: The New York Times’ Fervent Disconnect Between Drug and Vaccine Reporting, By Adriana Gamondes

2010 NYT's Gardiner Harris Wears White and Black Hats


And this was addition coverage in 2007.

2007 Why are They Afraid to Look? By Anne Dachel

There have been endless NY Times stories over the years that cited the current, ever-changing autism rate without one iota of concern about the fact that it’s always based on studies of children.  They never questioned the official spokesperson at the time who claimed that this particular increase may just be better diagnosing and no real increase at all.  (It never is for the CDC.)

The news about Hannah Poling, the young Georgia girl whose claim of vaccine-induced autism was conceded by medical experts at HHS, was covered by the Times. 

On March 8, 2008, Gardiner Harris wrote, Deal in an Autism Case Fuels Debate on Vaccine.  

Harris quoted CDC head, Dr. Julie Gerberding, who made it clear that this concession did not mean that the government acknowledged that vaccines could cause autism. 

To his credit Harris did include Hannah’s parents. 

Hannah's father, Dr. Jon Poling, was a neurology resident at Johns Hopkins Hospital at the time, and she underwent an intensive series of tests that found a disorder in her mitochondria, the energy factories of the cells.

Such disorders are uncommon, their effects can be significant but varied, and the problems associated with them can show up immediately or lie dormant for years.

There are two theories about what happened to Hannah, said her mother, Terry Poling. The first is that she had an underlying mitochondrial disorder that vaccinations aggravated. The second is that vaccinations caused this disorder.

''The government chose to believe the first theory,'' Ms. Poling said, but added, ''We don't know that she had an underlying disorder.''

The Times seemed interested in looking into the Poling case as stated in the editorial, A Puzzling Autism Case, March 11, 2008. 

The Times even allowed Hannah’s dad, Dr. Jon Poling,  to respond to an inaccurate op ed piece by Dr. Paul Offit. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/31/opinion/31offit.html

That was followed by the story, Will a 9-Year-Old Change the Vaccine Debate? on April 12, 2008.

This was very promising coverage at the Times, but it was not to last.  No one at the Times was interested in how many other autistic children might have the same health condition that Hannah did.  Furthermore, the phenomenon of regressive autism and what might trigger it, was of no concern at the Times.

Notice the most recent coverage from the Times, stories that contradict each other in their content and the experts cited. 

On Aug 17, 2015 Jennifer Senior reviewed Steve Silberman's book, Neurotribes 

for the New York Times.  Senior touted Silberman’s vision of autism as an age-old condition, unrecognized until it was named in the second half of the 20th century.  Because of the Nazis presence in Austria, we didn’t get to hear about the work of Hans Asperger and high functioning autism.  Instead, Leo Kanner’s view of classic autism as rare and caused by cold, indifferent mothers was accepted as the definition of autism. 

Senior dismissed the dramatic increase in autism as merely “an optical illusion,” because of Kanner’s false belief that only a few people were autistic.  He was only concentrating on severe cases.  The diagnostic criteria were finally expanded in 1994 to include Asperger’s Syndrome and that alone caused the soaring rate increase.  “Autism” finally would “include those who had slipped through the sieve for ­decades.” 

Senior went on to blame Dr. Andrew Wakefield and his study linking the MMR vaccine to autism for further stymieing efforts to provide services and accommodations. Instead we were focused on the cause of autism.

According to Senior, Wakefield’s work was “scantily substantiated from the start, a poisonous red herring that spooked a generation of parents. It contaminates the public consciousness to this day, though it has been debunked many times over and retracted by The Lancet.”

Three weeks later, on Sept 6, 2015, the New York Times published, Adult, Autistic and Ignored, by Eli Gottlieb,

It was all about the scary future faced by hundreds of thousands of young autistic adults aging out of the public school system, and it’s the most illogical situation imaginable if we believe the Senior/Silberman premise.

IF, as they claim, autism has always been here, why is there a problem?

Gottlieb explained the current situation:

I knew plenty about childhood autism, of course. Who doesn’t? A malady sometimes described as a form of perceptual overload seems somehow a fitting response to today’s speeding, signal-clotted life. And the numbers are dizzying: From a reported incidence of one child in 150 with autism in the year 2000, the prevalence has now risen to one in 68.

Gottlieb went on to cite all the things that are provided for CHILDREN WITH AUTISM.  Inspired by all their newfound knowledge, “researchers are currently backdating the history of autism” looking for unrecognized ASD people in the past.

Gottlieb next described that dead-end after high school for 21st century Americans with autism. 

This is where Gottlieb stopped making any sense. 

IF we’ve always had almost two percent of the population with autism, what did we do with them as adults?  We would have had to provide for their needs even if we didn’t call their condition autism.  Why can’t autistic young adults go where autistic adults have always gone?   Why can’t the 20 year olds take over the work of the retiring autistic senior citizens?

Gottlieb cited a 2011 study that found “that 39 percent of young people with autism in the United States received no services whatsoever after high school. … An estimated 90 percent of adults with autism are unemployed or underemployed.”

How is this possible?  Americans pride themselves on recognizing and providing services for the disabled.  We’re supposed to be an example to the world, but when it comes to addressing autism, the U.S. seems more like a struggling, under-developed country in Africa.

Gottlieb doesn’t see this as bizarre.  Somehow we’ve spent our entire national history doing nothing for Americans with autism.

Gottlieb wrote:

It’s part of a larger disconnect. There is virtually no current substantive national discussion on the fate of middle-aged or elderly autistic people like my brother, who are living in therapeutic communities, or with their aged parents or in group homes, or sometimes undiagnosed in mental hospitals. Little research money is spent on members of this demographic, and there is almost no public policy debate on how best to serve them. Not much is known of the particular health problems linked to their long-term care, or how their autism progresses and changes over time, or what the cumulative effects might be of the medication they take to render them tractable enough to live in social settings. As Dr. Joseph Piven, a professor of psychiatry, pediatrics and psychology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, has put it, “There is almost no literature on older adults with autism in the field, so we have virtually no knowledge base.”

It doesn’t occur to Gottlieb that maybe the reason there is nothing for/about adults with autism out there is because we’ve never had a significant disabled population like this before.  Maybe autism is an epidemic of recent origin that overwhelming affects children.

Of course that’s the UNTHINKABLE for Eli Gottlieb, Steve Silberman, and Jennifer Senior.  They’re trying to convince us that autism has always been here. 

I have a challenge for these three.  Get out there and find the adults with autism.  And I don’t want to hear about how Albert Einstein actually had Asperger’s.  I want to see 40, 60 and 80 year olds with classic autism.  The ones who are nonverbal or who have profound echolalia. The ones who are in diapers and prone to wandering off.  The ones who flap their hands constantly and are self-abusive.  The ones whose history includes starting out their lives as normally developing babies, but suddenly and dramatically losing learned skills, including speech, and ending up with autism.  I want to see lots and lots and lots of adults just like this. 

IF Gottlieb, Silberman and Senior can’t produce these individuals after scouring adult group homes and nursing homes everywhere, then they should retract everything they’ve been saying about autism. 

We have already lost a generation of children to autism and we’re now working on a second one.  In a few more decades we won’t remember a world without autism as part of the human condition.  As these children become middle aged and beyond, we’ll have a consistent rate across the population. The problem, as Eli Gottlieb explained, we aren’t going to be able to provide for them and still continue as a prosperous country. 

The truth is, mainstream news outlets only report what they’ve been told to say.  No one is allowed to ask questions like, where are the older Americans with autism?  Why do healthy children regress into autism?  Why don’t officials ever know if there’s been a real increase in autism?  Why do the numbers continue to increase when the definition of autism was expanded back in 1994? 

Regarding the safety of vaccines, the press is equally complicit.   No reporter will ever ask who funded the research when they tell us, “Studies show no link.”  Except for Fox News, the press refused to cover the revelation about dozens of vaccine injury claims that included autism and were compensated by the N.V.I.C.P. that came out in 2011. They never ask why there’s never been a vaccinated/unvaccinated comparison study, or any study on the toxicity of the mercury additive thimerosal or on the cumulative effect of more and more vaccines in the childhood schedule.

Instead, every story is predictable.  Autism is NEVER A CRISIS for the media or health officials.  The impact of this disaster has been universally covered up by the complicity of network and print news sources.  Vaccines are always above reproach and no parent has a right to exempt their child from vaccination.

The New York Times knows exactly what they’re covering up and they told Robert Kennedy, Jr  that they don’t ever intend to honestly report on this controversy.

Back in 2006, Robert Kennedy and Boyd Haley, PhD, a recognized expert on mercury toxicity, visited the New York Times to talk about an op ed piece Kennedy had written about vaccines and neurological damage in children.  To his surprise, Kennedy found no one at the Times was interested in the science that supported his claims.

Kennedy: ‘I expected a discussion with the editor of the Times, but when I went in to meet, they had assembled a group of science editors that were so hostile and antagonistic, it was like talking to a brick wall.  They were absolutely determined that there would be no public discussion in their paper about mercury and neurological disorders.’

No matter how much scientific research Kennedy had on his side, the Times would only believe what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had to say. 

I wrote about it in April, 2008 after I interviewed Dr. Haley about their visit.

Robert Kennedy asked me to accompany him to the Times and the description in this article is very close to how I remember the meeting. The writers were not at all interested in the published science. I would make a comment about thimerosal toxicity . . . and they would look surprised---but they never asked for any of the stack of reports to verify what I said. Afterwards, one of the writers, a young man, whose name I don't remember, followed me out the door and downstairs seemed interested and asked some detailed questions, but later wrote an article and did not mention any of the published science about the toxicity of thimerosal. I lost a lot of respect for the New York Times that day and felt quite sorry for Robert Kennedy who was just asking for a logical look at the autism/vaccine issue. The Times did the opposite and wrote totally supporting the CDC line that their experts had eliminated vaccines as being involved.

True to their promise, the Times hasn’t been willing to honestly cover Kennedy’s claims.

March 23, 2015, the Times published a piece ripping at Kennedy for daring to criticize the CDC and the vaccines requirements in New Jersey.

In July 2015, Frank Bruni at the Times wrote California, Camelot and Vaccines, a piece that slammed Kennedy for lending his name to the claims of Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey and opposing the end to vaccine exemptions in California.   According to Bruni, there’s no such thing as a toxic vaccine. 

Three days later, the Times published Kennedy’s response, but clearly it had no affect on their attitude on this issue.

In order to cover up the link to our ever-expanding vaccine program, the press has to feed every lie.  Autism can’t be a problem and there is nothing wrong with vaccines—ever.  These are very hungry lies and they have to be constantly fed with more lies.  That’s why the press is ignoring the statement by a CDC researcher, Dr. William Thompson, who has admitted that his agency falsified study data that showed a link between the MMR vaccine and autism in African American boys.  And it’s only the beginning.  More evidence is mounting and vaccine promoters will have to be constantly on the defense.

Anne Dachel Book CoverAnne Dachel is Media Editor for Age of Autism and author of  The Big Autism Cover-Up: How and Why the Media Is Lying to the American Public, which is on sale now from Skyhorse Publishing.



In reply to Roger Kulp. You can only believe what you say if you were born in the 70s and or 80s. I was born in 1948 and grew up in a Catholic working class town where it wasn't uncommon for parents to have ten kids. Our family of four kids was considered small..like an only child family of today. There were so many kids running around that the noise of kids playing outside filled the air like traffic does today. Yes, there were "homes" for kids who were "mentally retarded" as was the language of the era and I actually knew one family that had sent a child away--people did talk about it and they knew. Generally, though, i doubt working class parents of that era could have afforded the cost of private institutions. During a mining strike the schools would provide free lunches so kids wouldn't go hungry in families of unemployed miners. Institutionalization was for families of privilege like the Kennedy's. I did know several families who had "mentally retarded" children kept in the home. Parenting was suppose to be easy back then, and in fact sometimes parents would lock the kids out of the house to get the cleaning done and dinner made. Most of us weren't expected back home until dinner. No one helped kids with homework--unheard of. Class sizes were huge and quiet as a pin. Nearly every sack lunch contained a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

No one died of chicken pox--unheard of; no one dying of measles; no one dying of the mumps. It was like that song "Poison Ivy" which basically lists every disease that now children are vaccinated against and says in the end that nothing is as bad as poison ivy, so watch out. I didn't even hear the word autism until twenty years ago as if it was an entirely novel disease...something out of a nightmare, which it is.


Is it too radical to say that the New York Times is a mouth piece for every bad idea of the last two decades. The New York Times promoted the invasion of Iraq because supposedly Iraq had "mobile" weapons of mass destruction. The New York Times took a bogus study out of Stanford that said organic food was exactly the same as junk food--eat up folks! The New York Times has been aching for a war with Syria and in fact made that a headline a few years back and only when the Congress/White House was inundated with calls did it retract. Basically there isn't a war that the New York Times has not promoted, nor a GMO product, nor a vaccine... The New York Times always comes out in favor of whatever Big Pharma wants, whatever the military industrial complex wants. I think many years ago the NYTs was oriented to an intellectual elite and the reputation stuck. The New York Times would probably love it if the U.S. citizenry lost all civil liberties and became a totalitarian society.

Roger Kulp

I don't post here much any more,but I thought I would bring this blog to your attention.I don't expect to change anyone's mind,but I just thought I would say something about this post from a blog I discovered recently,that would explain very well why there are so few older,lower functioning autistics.


The author of this blog talks about Hans Asperger and his wishes to hide his low functioning patients from the Nazis to protect them from execution.Something you do not hear about from neurodiversity types.Did Silberman mention this in his book?

This blogger also talks about the description of children with seizures,GI problems,and behaviors now recognized as autism in the 1870s at Great Ormond Street Hospital in London,and their treatment with Potassium Bromide,now known to regulate neurotransmitters and be effective for seizures.

As this blogger also states

Until relatively recently most children with disorders like Downs Syndrome or classic autism were sent from a very young age to live in so called “homes for the feeble minded”.In recent times this occurs far less common and nobody uses terms like feeble-minded,but nonetheless difficult to control children are still put “into care”.

It really was a case of out sight being out of mind.

As we saw in the data on Down syndrome in the US,life expectancy was extremely short in these massive institutions where the kids lived in dormitories.The average being only 10 years as recently as 1970.

As in Austria and Germany,in the US being sent to a home for the feeble minded was very often a death sentence, albeit a slower one.The Germans even went as far as to financially justify their actions by quoting the cost of keeping a child in an institution for 10 years (the same life expectancy of Down's kids in the US,just 50 years ago).

Given this backdrop,not surprisingly everybody kept quiet about autism, almost nobody was interested in treating it and nobody would dream of using the word autism, for someone who was fully verbal and not mentally retarded.

So it is hardly surprising that there are/were very few older people with autism, or indeed Downs Syndrome.

Further down we see

Going back 110 years in the United Kingdom,you can see where terms like feeble minded came from:

In 1904 a Royal Commission was appointed to consider “the existing methods of dealing with Idiots and Epileptics and with Imbeciles and Feeble-Minded not certified under the Lunacy Laws.”

They disallow the name of “Lunatic” and “Asylum” and classify the mentally defective as follows:-
· Persons of unsound mind (who require care and control).
· Persons mentally infirm (who are incapable of managing their own affairs)
· Idiots. Defective in mind from birth.
· Imbeciles. (Capable of guarding themselves against common physical dangers, but incapable of earning their own living).
· Feeble-Minded. (Persons who may be capable of earning their own living under favourable conditions, but are incapable of competing with others or managing themselves).
· Moral Imbeciles. (Persons who display some Mental Defect with vicious or criminal propensities on which punishment is no deterrent).
· Epileptics.
· Inebriates. All of these three are considered Mentally Defective.
· Deaf, Dumb and Blind.

Almost all such people were, in effect, locked up. In the UK at that time there were 149,628 such people deemed to be mentally defective.That is 0.4% of the population at that time.

This blogger/researcher is in the UK,but the same held true in the the USA,pretty much up until the 1980s.There were a few parents,who went against the prevailing wisdom of the day,or the advice of doctors and psychiatrists,and kept their severely disabled children at home rather than sending them to institutions.My mother was such a parent,but they were rare.There are a few such other parents of older autistic adult children,who have posted here at AoA.Living at home,with a loving,caring parent would give you a much better chance at a longer life that being sent to an institution.This is a big reason why most of the adult autistics over thirty are high functioning. Most of the rest are dead.A sobering thought.

As for mitochondrial disease,there is another good post on this blog.


Before treatment,I was verbal,but otherwise very low functioning.My first regression,of many,was caused by acute meningitis at the age of six months.I am finally coming to the end of my long journey to a mitochondrial disease diagnosis.Along the way,I have picked up a few other diagnoses.Severe MTHFR Deficiency,Cerebral Folate Deficiency Syndrome,secondary immune deficiency related to folate metabolism,megaloblastic anemia.

I am unique.There simply are no other adults with autism who have been diagnosed with all this other stuff.I came to realize I have been a trail blazer for other adults.All health care and research into autism related medical care for the last three decades has been geared towards children.Adults have been shut out all along as all this metabolic and immune stuff about autism has been discovered.I was the very first autistic adult to be seen at Arkansas Children's Hospital.That was in 2014.Before that they had not seen any autistic adults.ACH is hardly unique.

Speaking of ACH,Dr. Frye's clinic and research are in serious financial trouble.They have had a gofundme page for a few months that has only raised a pathetic $15.They could really use your help.


John Stone

Hi Anne,

To add to the bibliography:



Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)