Vaccinations and the demon-haunted world
[This is the first part of two.]
So this is what it’s come to.
Our largely successful struggle to eradicate the once-common infectious diseases of childhood through the mechanism of vaccines has been so successful that many parents voluntarily eschew them in the name of avoiding feared side-effects that are probably unconnected to the shots themselves. If that isn’t irony, I don’t know what is.
Groups of upscale parents are frightened by anecdotal evidence, unproven by the bulk of official scientific studies but disseminated widely online and by word of mouth, that the MMR vaccine causes autism and other disorders such as asthma. Growing numbers are taking advantage of laws that allow them to claim exemptions from the need to vaccinate their children and yet to retain the ability to send them to school—and to infect others (the vaccines are not 100% protective, but rely for complete effectiveness on the fact that the entire population be vaccinated). There have been outbreaks of measles in San Diego, for example, among these pockets of unvaccinated children.
Sybil Carlson may be typical of such parents when she says, “I refuse to sacrifice my children for the greater good.” What she is forgetting is that the diseases vaccines guard against are potentially dangerous ones, and that—unlike the connection between the vaccines and the syndromes she fears—the harm they can do is proven.
Mark Sawyer, a pediatrician and infectious disease specialist at Rady Children’s Hospital in San Diego, puts it very well when he says:
The very success of immunizations has turned out to be an Achilles’ heel…Most of these parents have never seen measles, and don’t realize it could be a bad disease so they turn their concerns to unfounded risks. They do not perceive risk of the disease but perceive risk of the vaccine.
When I was young I was entranced by Paul de Kruif’s Microbe Hunters, which I read until it literally fell apart (yeah, I was a strange child). The book made the pioneering work of scientists such as Pasteur, Koch, and Ehrlich seem enthralling and inspiring.
But I also knew firsthand what infectious disease could do. Polio still existed, and our parents’ fear of it was communicated to all of us children every summer. I was one of the first children to get the Salk vaccine, bravely offering up my arm and closing my eyes. Like all the other children I knew, I got measles, mumps, and chicken pox—the real diseases, not the vaccines.
But I knew that measles held a special danger. My own cousin had contracted measles encephalitis when he was six and I was two. He sustained permanent brain damage from it, and died at eleven from complications of the disease.
No, I needed no reminders. Nor did the adults of my parents’ generation. They thanked their lucky stars that their children had been born in a time when it was finally possible to immunize against illnesses that had killed so cruelly for centuries.
My mother related how her mother used to say that, in her day, a child was considered at high risk for death until the age of three from—of all things—diarrhea, otherwise known as “summer sickness.” This was caused mostly by bacterial contamination of spoiled food due to lack of refrigeration in the hot weather, but people didn’t know it at the time. The children died in droves until the importance of refrigeration was figured out. Science, again.
Go to any old graveyard—there are lots of them here in New England—and you can see the evidence from the past. Tiny tombstones with angel faces and wings carved into the stones. Or maybe just a name and a date that tells the viewer that this particular life was very short. Sometimes there are many of them in a row, felled by the same contagion in the same epidemic.
They didn’t know what caused disease back then—the vapors, the evil eye, the Jews, witchcraft, anything and everything was fair game. Spallazani and Pasteur, as related in Microbe Hunters, came up with clever experiments to prove that what was known as “spontaneous generation” and widely believed at the time in that demon-haunted world—flies springing up from dead matter without any fly antecedents—was not true. This paved the way for further experiments that led to understanding what did actually cause infectious diseases, and how to combat them far more effectively and even prevent them.
Our disease travails still exist, but they are minor compared to what these earlier generations faced. Science is almost infinitely better now at explaining disease as well as preventing it. But there are still inexplicable ailments that fell young children and break parents’ hearts. Autism is one of them, and although it’s not common, it still happens with some frequency. Now that there’s so much less to worry about, that doesn’t minimize the fear a parent can feel about the dangers that remain. In fact, it can make the fear worse, since now there’s an expectation that bad things will not happen, that we can guarantee safety and health, and that if anything goes wrong it is science’s fault.
When I was in high school we studied Ben Jonson’s poem “On My First Sonne.” As young as I was when I read it, his words were like a knife to the gut, searingly sharp and sad in his vain attempt at stoicism and acceptance in the face of the death of a much-loved child.
The poem was written in 1603 on the death of Jonson’s seven-year old son and namesake. These were the circumstances, not at all unusual in that day and age:
The registers of St. Martin’s Church state that his eldest daughter Mary died in November, 1593, when she was only six months old. His eldest son Benjamin died of the plague ten years later (Jonson’s epitaph to him On My First Sonne was written shortly after), and a second Benjamin died in 1635.
I reproduce the text here (if you’d like some help with interpretation, scroll down to “analysis,” here):
Farewell, thou child of my right hand, and joy ;
My sin was too much hope of thee, lov’d boy.
Seven years thou wert lent to me, and I thee pay,
Exacted by thy fate, on the just day.
Oh, could I lose all father now ! For why
Will man lament the state he should envy?
To have so soon ‘scaped world’s and flesh’s rage,
And if no other misery, yet age !
Rest in soft peace, and, asked, say, Here doth lie
Ben Jonson his best piece of poetry.
For whose sake henceforth all his vows be such
As what he loves may never like too much.
[NOTE: The phrase “The demon-haunted world” comes from the title of a book by the late Carl Sagan on the difficulty of understanding scientific evidence and the persistence of fear-driven superstition.]
The anti-vaccination movement is partly driven by chiropractors. I’m not blaming all of them, mind, but I do notice that the medical “authorities” quoted in anti-vaccination letters to the editor, etc., are often chiropractors. The whole premise of their quackery is that all disease is caused by misalignments of the spine, so obviously vaccination and the germ theory of disease don’t really fit into that paradigm.
This is just another phase of what I think of as the “sacrifice of the innocents to the gods of intellectual insanity.”
It’s ironic that the same problem is arising both among rich liberal Western idiots and among ignorant medieval death-cult victims in the poorest parts of the world (Polio is making a comeback in Afghanistan….)
As a kid (b. 1969), I remember wondering what happened to all these “childhood diseases.” On reruns of old TV sitcoms (some as late as “The Brady Bunch”), things like measles and chicken pox were recurring plot points. And generally not terribly serious ones, just a “oh, something every kid gets once” sort of thing.
How come these TV kids regularly got these diseases, but it had never happened to either me or any kid I knew?
It wasn’t until much later that I realized Beaver Cleaver, the Bradys, et al, hadn’t gotten those annoying shots I had to suffer through, and just how effective they were….
What’s the use of mysticism, spiritualism, even in traditional theology without divine intervention from time to time … who are we humans to mess around with destiny, god’s design, or as I’ve said mess around, over-ride, attenuate the judgment of god. Human beings are unique from nature according to theism; it’s said that we have souls, that we are the masters and caretakers of the nature, and we believe we are until the earths crust cracks erupting and innocent people die, or disasters from what we should expect from meteorological sources. This is not exclusive to any one political affiliation, these people are on both sides, but again we begin to see the source of such stupidity, and the inability for one to argue against the other for when they do they argue against themselves.
I must correct the assertion that 100% of vaccination is needed to prevent epidemic. Real figures are more modest, usually 70-80% coverage is enough. And, also, by the very nature of the procedure in some cases autoimmune complications, such as asthma (the most severe of them) in some fraction of vaccinated is inevitable. These vaccines usually contain not only target antigen, but a lot of other proteins and polysaccharides that can provoke autoimmune response. The number of such complications is now many, many times bigger than it was 40 years ago, because for healthy development of infant immune system, breast feeding for a year at least is needed; this was routine then and almost ceased now, so autoimmune maladies of babies are many times more frequent now.
In my family a very disastrous thing happened with our elder son. For three years my wife was against smallpox vaccination of him, but at last she has to agree to make him attend day care centre. He got tubecular encephalomeningitis as a result, this deformed his whole development afterward: he got a form of epilepsy and all subsequent psychologic troubles. And all this was in vain, because the next year after vaccination it was advertised that natural smallpox was globally eradicated.
Interesting how, in the field of public health, “big government” was actually a positive thing. I wonder if its success in fighting epidemic diseases convinced many people that it could succeed in fighting social and economic “diseases” as well.
I’m just old enough to remember stuff on TV about iron lungs and kids with crutches and massive metal leg braces – polio. And I used to be scared of ending up like that. Maybe some of these parents didn’t watch the same stations I did.
On the other hand, I think a lot of parents feel the need (consciously or not) to have more control over their children’s lives – and their own. Refusing vaccines is probably just their way of “caring.”
Unfortunately, unless the government cracks down on them, they won’t reconsider their position until another outbreak of flu or TB kills some of their loved ones. Then, of course, they’ll blame the government for letting it happen.
sergey – That’s a terrible thing, and I’m sorry it happened to your son. Obviously the issue looks different when your own family is affected. My apologies if I sounded callous in my previous comment.
Sergy In my family a very disastrous Man, Sergy, I am sorry to hear this, you remind us how very serious this issue is. Because of your post I’m going to make it a special point this evening to review with my wife our sons recent vaccinations.
sergey: Sorry to hear about what happened to your son.
Your story reminds me that the son of some very good friends of my parents almost died from the smallpox vaccination he got as a baby. He was exempt from having another, even though in those years it was required.
My point is not that complications of vaccines never happen. They do. The point is that vaccines are necessary to keep the diseases from spreading the way they used to, which would be far worse. And yes indeed, it doesn’t require 100% immunization to do this. But if measles could get going in a place like San Diego, with its extremely high rate of immunization, it doesn’t take much to realize that if this trend to refuse vaccinations catches on it could be very dangerous. Life requires that we all assume risks; we cannot eliminate them. I’d like to see people use logic when evaluating the relative risk of two competing alternatives.
After reading _The Dragons of Eden_ I agree with Walker Percy: Carl Sagan was an unfortunately undereducated person–so much so that when he praised Newton as liberating thought from religious superstition, he didn’t realize he was praising the world view of the medieval church. Sagan desperately wanted to wear the mantle of Jacob Bronowski, the true renaissance scientist, a role for which he was not suited–whether by intelligence or lack of education I leave to others to determine.
Magic, and the supernatural generally, is the consequence of not knowing the medium through which effects are caused, and none of us are immune. Anyone who cannot burn or discard all those unwanted photos of relatives in the attic is to some degree a mystic. While it is satisfying to be smugly scientific and empirical in a social arena where so many live in “The demon-haunted world,” the difference between us and them is not so great. You could be a top notch internist graduated from the top medical school in this country and yet believe that demons and devils caused all human ailments. Got a bad case of appendicitis? That’s Azazel’s doing. He likes to attack humans there. A relatively minor surgery and some antibiotics for the bad bugs Azazel deals in will have you feeling like new. What? The surgeon didn’t see Azazel in your appendix? What an idiot! Azazel is a spirit; you don’t see spirits, you see their effects. Science is a method, and will carry amost any belief piggyback. Ultimately, the sole basis science has for rejecting spiritualism is that, like weeds and trash, it is misplaced matter relative to the objectives of science. I think that is an excellect reason for an empiricist to reject spiritualism. It is a grossly inadquate basis for Saganesque aggrandizement.
Wow. Excellent defense of Science of Reason. Thank you. I hope that at least some people have the veil lifted from their eyes upon reading this.
Polio and smallpox were the most urgent and successful cases of vaccination, but they were also plagued with serious complications. In both cases a live, attenuated virus was used, which usually do not cause a disease but gives you immunity. These small round scars on forearms of all persons older 40 are lesions where virus was reproduced. But in certain fraction of vaccinated it reproduced also at cerebral membranes, leaving here leisions, or even in cerebral tissue as well. These complications are potentially fatal and almost always incure some neurological damage.
I have seen on TV a story from early days of polio vaccination. In some batch of a polio vaccine in USA the vaccine strain used has reverted to virulent form, and instead of immunity gave infantile paralysis. There were handred of cases before alarm started.
In nowdays bioethics an informed consent to any medical intervention is required. But how can we be informed? Even for me, a mathematician with some expertise in epidemiology (I was a scientific editor of the Russian translation of Anderson and May monograph “Infectious diseases: Prevention and Control” – the official publication of World Health Organization, which embodies its policy) it is hard to make robust cost-risk-benefit analysis. It is impossible to do from anecdotic evidence, and comprehensive statistics in most cases is not available.
There is a small dirty secret which medical professionals would not let you know: It is not in the best interest of your child to be vaccinated, when coverage is already high enough. This is in interest of somebody else, to keep coverage adequate, that is, high coverage is a common good. Would you risk your child health for common good – and at what risk treshhold? How to introduce moral considerations in risk assessment calculus? I have no solution to this dilemma. I simply refused to vaccinate all our next children, four of them, because smallpox and polio are now eradicated, and all other infections are not so hazardous, being effectively treated by antibiotics, antiviral drugs and anatoxins, applied only if disease actually present and seems serious.
Besides mumps, measles, and chickenpox, the other childhood illness that everyone once got was what we used to call “German measles,” or rubella — the “R” in the MMR vaccine. It is usually mild, so much so that you might not even know you had it. But it is very contagious, and if a pregnant woman contracts it, the consequences for her unborn child can be catastrophic. The symptoms of congenital rubella syndrome include deafness, blindness, mental retardation, congenital heart disease, bone disease, and much more — often all at once.
In the mid-60s, after a rubella epidemic, tens of thousands of kids were born in one year with CRS. One of my first jobs after college was working at a boarding school for the blind, in a classroom of kids with CRS. They were all eleven or twelve. (If any of them are still surviving now, they’re in their mid-60s.)
All of the kids in that class were profoundly retarded and unable to hear or see. All were completely non-verbal. None were toilet-trained. Their capacities were so devastated that our classroom goals were limited to trying to teach them the simplest skills of daily living like putting on their socks or washing their hands, one tiny step at a time. It could take an entire school year for one of those kids to master the step, say, of turning a faucet.
Worse, they were so deeply frustrated or lonely or neurologically damaged — I don’t know which — that they were sad and angry all day long, all the time. Most of them were emotionally unreachable. You might calm one of them down with a hug, and for a moment or two she’d relax in your arms. But in another minute, she wouldn’t know any more who you were or remember the encounter. Some went home on weekends, but most never saw their families. The caretakers tried to love them, but in most cases couldn’t.
One of them, Ross (a made-up name) would launch himself at anyone near him at random intervals every day, hitting, biting, kicking. This was hard enough to deal with in a little boy, but he was hitting puberty, getting muscles, and growing. Another, Vera (also made up) had little psychomotor seizures every few minutes all day long that led her to scratch and bite herself, drawing blood if you didn’t stop her quickly enough. She had diabetes in addition to her other disabilities, so the dozens of little wounds always all over her arms were slow to heal and quick to get infected.
New cases of CRS have been effectively eradicated in the US by the MMR vaccine. Google tells me that there have been something like 4 cases in the past five years, only one in a baby whose mother was born in this country. When I hear some young parent now, pontificating about how she’s protecting her child by avoiding vaccines, or how “Big Pharm” just wants to make money by selling vaccines without regard to the side effects, I wish I could make her watch the memories of those kids that play in my head. Vaccines are the reason that oblivious young mother has never seen a child with such a condition. Ironically, vaccines are the reason that she can’t understand the value of vaccines.
In Britan they accepted the policy to vaccinate against rubella only girls in age from 12 to 16, and only if they have not already reported to have this disease in their anamnesis; in this age group occurence of autoimmune complications is much less than in earlier age group. That seems reasonable for me, because for boys this infection has no serious consequencies. Congenital fetus brain damage from rubella can occur only if it strike during the first trimester of pregnancy, and alternative measure would be avoid any contacts with small children in this period.
In early 1970 I worked as a laborant in Moscow Gamaleya Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology, the leading Russian research center in immunology and vaccines development. The official line was that vaccines are neccessary and safe, all propaganda machine asserted this, but we, who actually developed them, knew better. There was a panic when it became known that our anti-measles vaccine inflicts autoimmune brain damage, and our senior immunologist, prof. Svet-Moldavsky, was sent to investigate. The vaccine was produced by inoculation of young rats with virus, whose brain tissue was then harvested for vaccine production. It turned out that in producing laboratory they used overgrown rats, in violation of protocol demanding using very young rats only. This was the source of the problem. All such incidents were kept secret, in a fear that information leaks can result in general panic and mass refusal from vaccination.
I would love to know what happened to SARS.
If the opinions on your blog represents what neocons are really like – you are sadder than I thought. What a deluded, souless group you are.
I was one of the first children to get the Salk vaccine, bravely offering up my arm and closing my eyes.
Not me! I swear, my doctor dulled those needles! It scared the cr*p out of me! I can still remember the relief when the Sabin Oral Vaccine came out.
I have three university educations: in mathematics, in biology and linguistics, and PhD in math. ecology and genetics, but these rants about how science has replaced spiritualism looks for me very childish and obsolete. Science by definition can not use supernatural causation in its discourse, but this in no way can exclude its reality; science simply has nothing to say on this matter.
Undereducated persons naively believe that natural causation is enough to account for every event and development in universe. This is called mechanical determinism, a 18-century philosophy, completely undermined by quantum mechanics and nonlinear dynamics revolutions. But understanding these concepts requires advanced mathematical training. So anti-supernaturalism actually is outmoded superstition.
What scientific revolution of 20 century really achieved is that it liberated us from both atheism and theology dictatorships. Now rational, skeptical, well-educated and critically thinking person can with clear conscience embrace any spiritual doctrine at his wish (atheism included). Realm of spiritual is now what it should be: a realm of freedom. What a pity that most of the public is completely unaware of this great liberation, and its very foundations can not be explained to undereducated folks.
Polio, measles and other infectious diseases are bad. Autism is bad too—I speak from experience. It’s also becoming an epidemic, just as much as polio. back in the 50’s.
It might help if science, assisted by reason, would actually try tackling autism, the way it did polio and smallpox; hunting for a cure and trying to find out why we have so much of it now, instead of telling parents—and their autistic kids—that they will just have to learn to cope somehow, there’s nothing we can do, nup, nup, nup, but there are so many wonderful social programs out there to help you (no there aren’t), and we think it might be genetic—um, no, it might be environmental—er, uh, maybe it is those vaccines! Or misalignment of the spine. Or evil spirits. Hey, we’ve just narrowed it down to 50 chromosomes that might have something to do with it! Isn’t that great? Maybe in another few decades, we’ll figure out what’s actually going on.
Hellen Harvey Says:
March 22nd, 2008 at 8:37 am
If the opinions on your blog represents what neocons are really like – you are sadder than I thought. What a deluded, souless group you are.
Hellen: Since you made a comment here, you are now a neo-con.
So are you saying you’re self-deluded?
Sergey said: I have three university educations: in mathematics, in biology and linguistics, and PhD in math. ecology and genetics
Um but according to Hellen you’re a neocon which means that you are souless and deluded.
Clearly Hellen knows more about the biochemical implications of pathogens in the context of former liberals changing thier political persusion and how that influences the prescene of an eternal spirit dwelling in one’s mind.
Why should anyone listen to you Sergey?
/s
A child lost to autism is just as lost as the boy in Jonson’s poem—or one lost to polio, or some infectious disease. Yes, they’re still alive, but you’re always haunted by the person they could have grown up to become—and now, never will. And by the fact that they’ll always have to be dependent, taken care of by others after you die.
de Kruif also wrote _Hunger Fighters,_, which I recall as being pretty good, too.
sergey: Those are questions I plan to take up in Part II, if I ever manage to get around to it. One huge issue is how to evaluate relative risk/benefit: personal vs. societal. Obviously, if everyone did as these parents do, then the pendulum would swing back to these diseases being endemic, which would be a higher risk than any problem arising from vaccinations today. But where is the break-even point? What is the real risk of vaccination right now? Obviously it’s small, but how small? Is it worth risking the return of such diseases by non-vaccination, and at what point does that risk become far greater than the risk of vaccination (these parents in San Diego were probably very surprised that their children actually got measles at this point)?
In addition, even many educated people (not yourself!) have become, unfortunately, almost unable to evaluate scientific data. I see this time and again—anecdotal evidence of things happening in succession becomes equal to causation, for example. If event A follows event B, many many people believe that proves causation. Science is not the answer to everything, for sure, nor is it perfect. But a good grounding in scientific method is extremely important for the population to have.
Sergey wrote: “Undereducated persons naively believe that natural causation is enough to account for every event and development in universe.” Yes, the materialism of Newtonian physics is the boundary of the popular imagination. I wonder what will happen in the popular mind to notions of cause and effect when the implication of anti-matter are understood
Shortly after the Salk vaccination program was swung into action, the American Public Health Service (June 23, 1955) Announced that there had been “168 confirmed cases of poliomyelitis among the vaccinated, with six deaths……How many vaccinated children will eventually be reported as developing the disease is as yet unknown . .
“The interval between inoculation and the first sign of paralysis ranged from 5 to 20 days and in a large proportion of cases it started in the limb on which the injection had been given. Another feature of the tragedy was that the numbers developing polio were far greater than would have been expected had no inoculations been given. In fact in the state of Idaho, according to a statement by Dr. Carl Eklund, one of the Government’s chief virus authorities, polio struck only vaccinated children in areas where there had been no cases of polio since the preceding autumn; in 9 out of 10 cases the paralysis occurred in the arms in which the vaccine had been injected.” (News Chronicle, May 6, 1955)
sergey: I remember that incident well. A good friend of mine received one of these tainted inoculations.
As I said, there are always risks involved. And the risks in the early days of the development of a vaccine (or a drug, for that matter) are greater. My point is that many people exaggerate or misunderstand these risks, and underestimate the risks of the diseases involved, precisely because of the enormous success of the inoculation programs.
Within the popular imagination of our times there seems to be an unfortunate tendency to confuse correlation with causation. I’m sure Sergey and neo-neocon will agree with me on this. The implications for this kind of ignorance is far-ranging, and is most exemplified in the “global warming” controversy.
Sergey, your contribution to this discussion is much appreciated. Always a pleasure to read your posts. I also appreciate your comments directed at those who blithely disparage the role of the spiritual in people’s lives. I happen to think that we are on the last legs of a long period whereby many people have been anchoring their lives to various kinds of what are called “reductionisms.” The most widespread of these is called physicalist reductionism.
One can be a person of both faith and reason. The importance of that cannot be overstated. Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI, a couple of years ago at Regensburg, put the issue of faith and reason back on the front burner when he was commenting on a 13th century Greek’s thoughts about Islam.
Science and faith need not be mutually antagonistic. The reconciliation of these is actually well underway, although in the popular consciousness most people are still stuck in the 19th century or early 20th century mentality. Academic/educational institutions still encourage and inculcate the older consciousness, but those on the cutting edge know that it’s dead as a doornail. It only continues to kick back in certain vituperative rants that still have not incorporated what’s been happening in physics and astrophysics.
I strongly support the programs we have had to administer the inoculations that head off a host of childhood diseases. At the same time, I have read some recent articles from inside the medical community that give some pause about a more complex relationship between genetics, diet, AND certain chemicals in the injection serums. We are not talking about causality here; the phenomenon simply cannot admit of it and defies such an easy reductionism (there, I’ve used that word again!). The fact is that there has been an alarmingly high incidence of autism going on for some years now. One out of 160 kids developing some form of it, ranging from the most severe location on the spectrum on up to the most mild forms of Asperger’s is not an insignificant thing.
Sorry, Sergey, to hear about what happened to your son. I know it’s hard to convey empathy across keystrokes, but certainly respect can be communicated in this way.
In my reading, Sergey’s posts are less about being opposed to inoculation programs, and more about full disclosure as to both the risks and the fact that at a certain point of population saturation, getting an inoculation is taking a risk pro bono.
One cam imagine how infuriated, hopeless and eager to grasp at straws, any straws, the parents of children stricken with polio would have felt if, instead of scientists working to find a cure, they’d been told, “Polio is a veeeeery mysterious disease, with a broad spectrum. We don’t know a damn thing about it, but not to worry! Here’s a social worker to take care of you, and here’s a nice iron lung to stick your kid in, and you can always join a support group and why don’t you become politically active? That will help a lot! We don’t know how, but we’re sure it will.”
Well, this is exactly what parents of autism are being told all the time. Yes, some of them are getting frustrated. Some of them are turning to quacks, or latching on to vaccines to blame, because nobody’s telling them a damned thing!
As I pointed out above, a child lost to autism is just as lost as one crippled by polio, or struck down by influenza. And, as FredHjr points out, it’s an epidemic, and the number is rising—one in every 160 (and I’ve seen some studies that put it even higher.) A parent with an autistic child isn’t comforted by talk of anti-matter, speculations about what would have happened, or what might happen, or the glories of science, or how proximate causes are always the cause of something, etc., and so forth. Okay, it’s not vaccinations responsible? (And I, myself, don’t think that it is), fine! Tell us what IS doing it! Try finding an actual cure, or a way of at least dealing with the problem, other than sending us to support groups and lumbering us with doltish social workers, who talk to us reading off a list of questions, from a mimeographed page! (“What do you see little autistic Timmy doing in three years? What are you hopes for him?” Feel good stuff, none of it actually intended to accomplish anything. Parents of polio-stricken kids would have rioted, if they’d been treated the way parents of autistic kids are today.)
And while I can understand the fear of forgotten diseases returning, we’ve got an actual epidemic on our hands right now. So, if it’s not caused by vaccines, find out what is causing it! We were assured that products from China were perfectly safe; then came the rash of pet food poisonings. We were assured that our own food supply was safe, healthy and clean, and, more and more, we’re hearing about spinach, or beef or some other sort of food being contaminated with some sort of junk, and being withdrawn. It may not be rational, it may not be scientific, but the public is, I think, losing faith in all those reasonable, scientific voices that keep telling us not to worry, it’s alright, everything’s fine.
TalkinKamel: What you’re describing is also at least in part the result of advances in science. Let me explain. It used to be that all a doctor could do in so many cases was to provide comfort and maybe make a prediction (one that didn’t always pan out): this patient will die; that patient will recover. Cures were few and far between, and usually provided by nature or providence. As science and medicine and diagnosis and treatment and prevention advanced, people began to believe that medicine could be able to find a cure for almost everything some day. And then it segued into a belief that medicine would be able to find a cure for everything, and soon. And then it became a belief—in some cases a demand—that medicine should be able to find a cure for everything, and now.
neo-neocon, I am not convinced that, in this case, science is even looking for a cure for autism, or even to find why it’s risen so dramatically in the past few decades. The whole thing is getting shuffled over to the “helping” industries, i.e., social workers, special ed schools and the like. Out here in California, it’s starting to become grafted onto the whole illegal alien industry; when I asked about a recent support group for autism, I was first asked if I spoke Spanish. When I went to the meeting, it was mostly about how those on welfare, or getting government benefits, could get more goodies from the state, for any number of disabilities, not just autism.
If something is going drastically wrong with our children, all the political activism, support groups and government benefits in the world aren’t going to help. If science really can’t come up with the answers, and if psychologists remain more interested in tending monied neurotics dribbling on about their sad childhoods then helping the autistic, the retarded, the schizophrenic—the truly mentally ill—then people are going to look for answers where they can. It’s not rational, it’s not scientific, but this is an epidemic; this is a good chunk of a generation that will never live a full life, and may always be dependent, because the medical industry can’t be bothered to do anything about it. There’s an obscene amount of money and energy expended on the plastic surgery industry, yet when it comes to autism, and the mysteries of the human mind, it’s suddenly, “well, science really can’t everything!” Neo, I love your writing, but, I’m sorry, that’s a load of. . . stuff! The medical industry is continually coming up with ways to inject garbage like botox into aging flesh, and new plastic surgery techniques; I live in a world where nothing can be done to help my autistic son, but, if I wanted, I could get a humongous pair 40-D breasts (if I wanted such an idiotic thing.)
If the medical industry really is turning its back on those most in need, it should just admit it, stop pretending it can do anything to help, and let us find our own answers.
When physicians can’t help patients, they send them to counseling to get help accepting that they can’t be helped. It is an old story for lots of diseases/disorders/disabilities science can’t deal with. Should you ever want some company for your misery, google RSD or Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. I reference that disease or whatever it is because a member of my close family has been to hell and back with it–relentless pain 24/7 and short of general anaesthesia, no one knows how to stop it.
I understand that you think your anguish has nothing to do with the deification of science, but neo-neocon is right: your high expectations versus the reality of medical science clash in almost every sentence you write. Sergey is exactly on target with his observation that the deification of science is but the mirror image of superstition.
You have drunk and seen the spider, but were you really better off when you believed? Rather than transform the God Science into its mirror image Devil, why not accept it as simply another human enterprise, some times glorious, heroic and triumphant, some times mundane, cowardly, and failed.
As someone who has also run the medical gamut of hope and despair, I wish you and your son all the best. I should probably stop there, but let me suggest that neither “medical science” nor “the medical industry” is monolithic. They are abstracts, convenient fictions. It does not help your son, and ultimately harms you, to hate a fiction.
TalkinKamel: I would love for more to be known about autism. It’s a terrible problem that I first became interested in long ago, back when the going theory of its origins was far more pernicious than anything current today—Bruno Bettelheim and the “refrigerator mother.” This theory was an example of “blame the parents” of children suffering from a tragic illness the cause of which no one really had a clue about.
I know many people who work in the field of child pscyhology and they say it is clear that the incidence of autism is on the rise. But it’s not even clear whether that represents an actual increase, or whether it is simply that diagnosis has become better and also broader, with milder cases being more frequently diagnosed. It is possible there is in fact an actual increase of autism, and it is possible it is an artifact of diagnostic changes.
The desperation and the suffering of parents of these children are profound. I am almost certain there isn’t a parent of an autistic child who hasn’t been treated badly by some helping professional at some point, and perhaps many at many points. But in general, as with cancer, diabetes, heart disease, AIDS, schizophrenia and other complex medical problems, medicine is interested in finding the answers. It is an unfortunate fact that the answers are often very difficult to come by.
No doubt you’re familiar with the controversy about better diagnosis vs. actual increase in autism cases. If not, however, here’s a typical summary article about the issue.
I wish you and your family the best.
Sergey “…how science has replaced spiritualism looks for me very childish and obsolete.”
I for one would push that door open with you. The numinous is innate for the spiritualist or the scientist, the faith-based or the skeptic; nothing has been replaced, it’s our common-ground. The numinous is hard wired in our species, for normal individuals, from the ten of thousands of years of short-lived generations, when we knew next to nothing about the physical world, today we use art, music, discovery, and even prayer to evoke this unique feeling.
I have a hypothesis about autism epidemic, relating it not with vaccination (for which there is no evidence at all), but with widespread modern pattern of abandonment breast feeding of infants and early termination of a close relationship between mother and child due to expansion of day care centers used by working mothers. Both are ill effects of women emancipation from their primal duties.
Nothing can be more devastating for infant psychical development than dysfunctional mother, and one need not be a therapist or neocon to understand a profound psychologic importance of breast feeding in infancy. This is not about nutrition or even immune system development (while these considerations are also important); this is about early and most crucial stages of emotive formation of personality.
There is a syndrom called hospitalism, which is rampant in orphanages, children hospitals and other institutions where small children are held without maternal care. Even when nutritional, hygienic and other conditions are adequate, children are retarded in their intellectual, physical and especially emotional development. Many symptoms of autism and hospitalism are the same. This is, in my view, is an indication (not proof, but indication) of causal relationship of early emotional deprivation due lack of breast feeding and 24/7 maternal care with autism.
Such a fascinating post; the divisions revealed are not the usual ones of neo-cons = US = Good versus liberal = THEM = Bad. While some of those who do not vaccinate their children may well be selfish, unthinking, liberal soccer moms doing so for all the wrong reasons, Sergey shows that the issue is far more complex and personal than that.
What I find most curious from a political standpoint is that the topic shows one of the major big government programs in healthcare in such a positive light. It is pretty easy to see today how effective it was to have government subsidized and directed, (near) universal, inoculation programs for polio, measles, chicken pox, small pox, etc. However great the costs may have been in mid-XX century dollars, the direct savings and indirect benefits pretty obviously add up to show that the overall effort paid off in so many ways, not the least of which are the tens of thousands of healthy productive adults who might well have succumbed to these diseases and been left crippled for life.
Is it then too great a leap to suggest that healthcare may be among those areas where individual consumers operating in a free market is not necessarily the better choice for us as a society to make? When there is, as TalkinKamel points out, an obscene amount of money and energy expended on the plastic surgery industry while research into the surge in autism appears under funded, doesn’t it reveal the inherent flaw in viewing health as a commodity and healthcare an industry? Ultimately, as an industry, healthcare must place profits for shareholders above the needs of patients, as all industries have the fiduciary responsibility to do. Whether it is autism or AIDS, are market forces sufficient to induce the needed investment in research and to focus that research on prevention and cures rather than long term treatment options which may well, from a purely business standpoint, have a better return on investment?
All in all a fascinating post; one that has shown the depth of the pain and frustration so many of those personally affected by serious medical issues face. Like everyone here, let me convey my best wishes and sympathy to all those for whom these are not abstract issues, but are all too personal and painful daily realities.
Sergey, my son was breast feed, neither my husband nor I ever terminated our relationships with him and he never spent a day in a child care center. Try another, ‘kay?
Before the current autism epidemic—and, yes, I believe it is an actual epidemic—autism was, supposedly, a rare mental disorder, that appeared in children who had been abandoned, or raised in institutional environments, and who had become extremely withdrawn. Now, it is widespread, and it is happening to children who were loved and wanted, and who’se upbringing was reasonably normal. The refrigerator momma, bad institution stuff, won’t fly any more. As for breast feeding, here in the US, breast feeding has been encouraged, and a great number of America women at least try to breast feed their kids. Yet still, autism. So I don’t think that’s the answer. If bottle feeding were the problem, why didn’t the boom generation suddenly become autistic? Because they were mostly bottle fed.
Yes, I’m aware of the the controversy between diagnosis, and the rise of the disease, and, quite frankly, I think it’s sailing down a river called Da-Nile. It allows would-be researchers to say, “Oh, it’s not really so bad, it’s just the way they classify it, we’re doing so much better at catching autism early these days, la-la-la.” It also allows some parents to deny their kids have real problems. “There’s nothing really wrong, they just put all kids with language problems into this category. It’s not really serious!”
What we seem to have is a growing number of kids who, for whatever reason, have severe communication problems, mimicking classic autism. This is happening all over the world, not just in America, or in places where kids are routinely institutionalized. You can call it autism, you can call it whatever you like. But it’s a problem. I don’t think it’s caused by vaccinations, but the medical profession, in ignoring or brushing off parents of autistic kids, has pretty much left itself open for things like widespread vaccination scares, and paranoia about toxins in the atmosphere. (Look, I’ve gone to some of those support groups, and I’ve heard “experts” there assuring parents that evil vaccinations, and food and diet, are responsible for their kids’ problems! On the one hand, I sympathetize with those who fear the outbreak of diseases, but, on the other hand, the medicos have left themselves wide open for this sort of thing by deciding they can’t be bothered with this problem, and dumping it all on the “helping” industries.)
I don’t know about the market in general, vis-a-vis healthcare; I am seeing “support” industries for autistic kids blossoming into big business. I hate the thought that a cure, or at least prevention, might be out there somewhere, but no one’s going to try and find it, because it would put too many support workers out of a job, and because vaginoplasty is ever so much more lucrative. After all, we’ll teach you how to ADJUST to your son’s condition, won’t that be lovely? And you can always get the state to get you some more money, yeah, right. . .
DuMaurier-smith, your little fairy tale about drinking and seeing the spider makes no sense to me whatsoever.
I thank all for your good wishes.
Sergey: I doubt anaclitic depression is a factor in autism; it is too reversible. As soon as Spitz’s finding received publicity, hospital staff began providing stimulus for the infants, and the situation turned around. There is some indication that early trauma can lead to depression in later life, so perhaps the infants, contrary to perceptions back then, were not restored to normalcy.
What the anaclitic infants required was not a mother, as such, but sensory stimulation. Neo-neocon mentions an earlier time when psychopathology was blamed upon parents–who were both mystified and anguished by what they’d done wrong. The behavior of “schizophrenogenic” parents was scrutinized and causes found–typically materal–impervious, intrusive, double-binding mothers caught most of the blame.
Sorry for the error: “materal” should be “maternal.”
widespread modern pattern of abandonment breast feeding of infants and early termination of a close relationship between mother and child excellent point, needs to be heard more.
Except that, in America, where breast feeding is pretty widespread, autism is still prevalent, and it occurs even in families where the mother has a close relationship with her child.
Look, breast feeding is a good thing. Early termination of the mother and child relationship is a bad thing, but I doubt the lack of one, or the presence of the other, causes autism.
DuMaurier-Smith
They’ve eased off somewhat, but mothers are still expected to shoulder a lot of the responsibility, and still catch a lot of blame, if their children don’t immediately turn into perfect, silent angels, under whatever autistic treatment program they’re put under. Some programs ask the mom to spend 4-6 hours a day in floor play with her child (a schedule even a normal child would balk under; and what if she has a job? What if she has other kids?). And all mothers of autistic kids are pressured to become “politically active”, to involve themselves in their IEP programs (which the schools won’t much like, by the way). to become advocates of their kids, to work 24 hours on their behalf.
Some of this might be necessary, but it puts an awful burden on the mother, and, of course, she is the one blamed when the kid still “acts autistic”. The unspoken expectation seems to be that she, single-handedly, can somehow “fix” the kid.
“Stupidity is its own reward.”
Why these supposedly intelligent people refuse to investigate the claims is beyond me. They are condemning their own children to diseases because of unfounded fears. Idiocy!
TalkinKamel:
And as with schizophrenia, I think autism will be found to be a structural, bio-chemical disorder, rather than an acquired disorder. When you see such stereotypic behavior, it seems to me very unlikely to be caused by or much affected by parental behavior.
There’s a flaw in our system: we don’t have to have done anything wrong to feel guilt; feeling guilt only requires that others act toward us as if we are guilty. And when those people wear the robes and lab coats, it’s hard to fight off.
In the sequel to this post I plan to tackle some of the evidence about autism, TalkinKamel.
But suffice to say here that it was never primarily a disease of institutionalized or abandoned children. There was no actual evidence that children with autism, even many decades ago, were unloved or unwanted or raised any differently than their normal siblings. The theories about this were generated by people such as Bettelheim (who, by the way, recommended institution—in his own facility—as treatment) from their own personal anecdotal observations of what they believed they saw in the families of autistic children. These theories did not hold up under scrutiny. In those days, blaming the parent was all the rage, and it was done with the flimsiest of excuses.
I know, of course, that hospitalism is completely reversable, even easily reversable, and that its victims are very responsive to attention – of any person attention – and even more responsive than normal children are, while in genuine case of autism you are before a stone wall, which no amount of love and care can bring down. We have to assume that serious psychical disorders, unlike neuroses, are mysterious diseases, and about them science has very little to say. More generally, we know almost nothing about other developmental epidemics, like acceleration, that come like tidal waves and than recede. Developmental biology is still in its infancy due to decades of neglect.
See also http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/569281/another-piece-in-the-jigsaw.thtml
about first in USA court ruling establishing causal relation between vaccination and autism.
Sergey: I’ve never read of human developmental acceleration qua species or within the species as opposed to within an individual system. Has such been demonstrated?
Sergey, my own son is anything but a “stone wall”—he’s very affectionate, very sweet-natured, always smiling, usually cheerful. It’s language, and communicating, he has a problem with. I’m wondering if some new condition hasn’t developed over the past few decades, and is being called “autism” simply because nobody’s been interested enough, up till now, to really investigate what’s happening, so “autism” seems the most likely thing to call it.
I look forward to seeing the sequel to this post, Neo, and many thanks for letting me vent here. Happy Easter, to you and your family.
See also
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/568226/the-wakefield-witchhunt.thtml
Here is a discussion on a hypothesis of american surgeon Wakefield about possible connection of autism and MMR vaccination.
Acceleration was a big story in 1970, when in many developed countries pediatrics specialists reported about shift in onset of puberty in both girls and boys: it began earlier, so period of rapid growth became longer, and height of adolescents became up to 10 cm bigger. Furniture and clothes manufacturers had to change their range of sizes. Only half of population were affected, so in schools it created a problem, when half of class were pre-pubertat, and another half was already in a heat of it and and a head above them. Than this epidemics receded, but nobody can explain the phenomenon.
See also
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=376203&in_page_id=1774&in_a_source
Nobody can persuade me that measles vaccine containing live attenuated virus can be safe. I was in epicenter of a debacle with such type of vaccine, when a small, seemingly insignificant modification of protocol for its preparation triggered an epidemic of measles meningitis among vaccinated. This was not some dubious statistical correlation, but a proved diagnosis, established also by autopsy (there were dozens of letal outcomes). This scandal never poured intopress, beyond our Institute, due to Soviet era secrecy, but everybody working there knew the gloomy details.
Of course, I do not know the exact procedure of vaccine production in case of MMR, but I know that it contains live virus, and this is enough for me. From the days of Pasteur attenuated viruses are produced by passage on animal brains (rabbits or rats), they can not be sterilized (this will kill the virus which need to be alive), and can contain all kinds of neurotrophic viruses not known to science or other non-viral infectious agents of prion nature. The main target tissues for all viruses (except embrionic) are small intestine epithelium and brain tissue, so connection between gut problems due vaccine-induced persistent viral infection and brain damage is very plausible.
To Talkingcamel: In Russia, autism is defined as a form of children schizophrenia, with emotional detachment and lack of reaction to surrundings as a leading symptom. No form of dyslexia as such without this symptom can not be classified as autism.
The war between science and religion comes down to the fact that, while science can’t find all the answers, those answers it does find are certain to within a measurable margin of error. Religion, on the other hand, achieves its strength by comforting people when they are faced with the unknown, and its power wanes with each answer science finds, even when science finds out that the religion was right all along.
Turf wars always get ugly, no matter how high or low or even imaginary the stakes are.
and its power wanes with each answer science finds, even when science finds out that the religion was right all along.
Name me something that religion got right that science empirically validated — which is what is suggest when one says, “got it right”? Even if it did what how is it moral to rely on faith over science? You can arrive at the root cause of this problem if you can’t see how faith is used to attenuate what science produces, not how that product is used, but what it produces.
** can’t arrive at the root…
As a Christian , I believe God is responsible for our existance and the natural order. so to me there is no contradiction between “science” and faith.
I never quite understood the need some people have to create such a division between the two , as if they’re comparable to one another.
To me science is simply a methodology to figure out how our material/energy universe works. People who turn that into some sort of ideology I think are a bit obsessive in letting everyone know what a good little atheist they are.
And faith is about, for me at least, one’s relationship with a revealed God.
Science can tell us nothing about things that cant be observed or inferred , and faith tell us nothing about the rules of the natural order as they are today.
Do I believe the world is 6,000 years old ? No.
Do i believe mankind has evolved from apes hundreds of thousands of years ago? No. I see no evidence.
I do believe civilization is about 6,000 years old and did start in the garden.. do I know if the garden was literal or a metaphor? No.
Do i know if all life was made with in 6 24hour days ? No.
Do I believe in evolution? No. I see no evidence.
Do I care about what happened 6000 years ago? Not really. What difference does it make?
Do i really care if mankind was evolved or created as-is? Not really. I think the theory of evolution is false, so since there’s no alternative material theory, I consider the question open.
I’ve no doubt whatever Eden is a myth. But it is also a treasure in its illustration of how the symbolic can reveal truth beyond what is “literally” available–whatever “literal” is supposed to mean.
Recall that there were two trees in Eden: one fruit yielded knowledge of good and evil and one of everlasting life. Adam and Eve nibbled on the good-evil fruit. And their eyes were opened. What were they before, blind? More like sleep-walking.” Consider also that in the act of eating the fruit, they were directly opposing God’s command. He’d told them to leave it alone, or they’d surely die. (You have to exaggerate for kids.)
So they asserted their own will against that of God and the first thing they discovered was that they were naked and felt ashamed. That’s pretty clear evidence of a rush of ego/self-consciousness where there’d been none, right? It’s probably also significant that the serpent’s arguments were based upon ego appeals–you can become gods. God himself worried about this happening if they ate from the tree of everlasting life, and decided to kick them out before that happened.
And what will be their fate? They will suffer as only the ego-laden, the self-conscious can. They will eat their bread in the sweat of their faces, Eve will suffer child birth. Animals don’t work for their food. When they’re hungry, they just go looking. There’s no ego saying “No!” and making every step heavy. If you watch animals give birth, unless something goes badly wrong, they don’t appear to experience suffereing–perhaps because they don’t fear and resist it–they just do it.
Finally, a Jewish psychiatrist told me his rabbi told him that in ancinet Hebrew the words for good and evil, when applied to environment, meant useful and useless. Useful and useless are relative to applications, or particularizations of points of view. Furthermore, what possible meaning could such ideas have in the midst of perfection? A great deal if tied to ego. Useful/useless to whom? How do you pick and choose amid perfection? On the basis of narrow personal feelings, likes and dislikes. In zen there is a saying: The perfect way is not hard, it only avoids a picking an choosing. The act of ego, the creation of a self in perpetual contradistinction to the objects of the world, expelled Adam and Eve from Eden.
Isn’t it marvelous how much truth about the existential conundrum created by human emergence into consciousness gets expressed in this very silly little myth? Is there any “literal” rendering of the price of ego that is more truthful than eating your daily bread in the sweat of your face?
Scientific discourse is not more “literal” or true than religious symbolism; it just works differently on different levels. “Literal” and “true” are not scientific constructs nor do they have any scientific meaning except in relation to scientific operations, where they generally mean “verifiable” or “operationally valid,” predictive.
DuMaurier-Smith : great post. Thanks
Those of us over 40 are definitely the last generation to have a sense of the damage infectious diseases inflict, not because of our own experiences, but because of our parents’. I already got the vaccination for measles, mumps, rubella, and polio, but my parents and their friends didn’t.
My Dad had scarlet fever, my Mom had diphtheria, two of their friends suffered the horrible effects of polio, and others had heart problems because of measles. They knew children born disabled because their pregnant mother had measles. I grew up listening to these stories and took them very much to heart.
Perhaps because I’m a history major I also have a vivid sense of how quickly a disease spirals out of control, growing at an exponential rate that leaves so much death and destruction in its wake. When I speak with the young, usually affluent, usually well-educated mothers in my community, who not only opt for vaccination free childhoods, but also feed their kids unpasteurized foods, I just want to drag them through the history books.
No words, however, seem to bring them to a realization that, when it comes to vaccinations, the only thing that protects their children from horrific diseases is the fact that people like me vaccinate, creating a herd immunity that protects their little darlings. My willingness to take a risk is their salvation.
Of course, when it comes to the unpasteurized foods, I worry that those mother’s foolish chickens are going to come home to roost on the backs of some very sick little children. (A strained metaphor, I admit, but it makes my point.)
I often deliver public lectures about science and religion, evolution and creation, literal and not-so-literal interpretation of Scripture, and I found that the most frequient causes of conflictits are purely terminological. Different strata of society speak different languages, but do not understand this. Actually, as a linguist I can assert that there is no such thing as “literal” meaning: language is always methaphorical even when we speak about mundane matters, we simply do not notice it. And understanding is always an interpretation, is always contextual, even if the context is implicit.
The trouble with literalism can be best illustrated by controversies about interpretation of US constitution. What was original intent and original meaning of every line or phrase of the text? For Supreme court, it can make all the difference. But that text is only 200 years old, it was written in plain English. And Genesis is at least 3500 years old, it was translated four times: from Hebrew to Greek, than to Latin, than to medieval English, and than to modern English. Every translation is an interpretation, dependent on cultural background of translator. What was original meaning? A tough question. For dozen centures Rabbies were disputing original meaning of original Hebrew text and derived different conclusions, and now some guy in Pensilvania take King James Bible, the only one which he can read, and, knowing no single Hebrew, Greek or Latin word, asserts that his interpretation is the only “literal” and “true”? Excuse me, please, I do not buy it.
As Sergey points out, there has been some speculation that there may be a problem with the MMR vaccine.
A lot of parents are worried about that particular vaccine, as well as the Hepatitis B vaccine. Even though vaccination in general is useful, there has been a great deal of concern about these particular vaccines, and I don’t think parents are necessarily paranoid for doubting the need for them. There’s also been some concern about the very young ages at which kids have been getting them. It seems to me these are reasonable questions to ask. Michelle Malkin talks about this very subject today, over at her website.
And please. . . a lot of you guys just don’t get it, do you? Autism is an epidemic at the moment, and an autistic child is just as lost as one who got polio, or influenza. You may not know any autistic kids. They go to different schools than your safely innoculated little darlings do (if they go to school at all) you don’t have to deal with them, not your problem. Hey, it’s sad, but life is sad, and those horrible parents who are worried about vaccinations. . . they’re just threatening the rest of us!
Infectious diseases are bad. What we have now with this rise in autism is also bad. Maybe refusing vaccination isn’t the answer; maybe all vaccinations aren’t dangerous, but maybe there are problems with Hepatitis-B, MMR, etc. Shouldn’t this be looked into? Whatever the cause, autism is scary; it’s a life time condition, there’s no cure, so, yeah, a lot of parents are terrified of it, so don’t dismiss them with sneers about their “little darlings” or “chickens coming home to roost.” And hoo-hah for your bold willingness to take risks, and defend the rest of us! Yee-haw, we’re impressed.
Got any plans as to how we, as a society, are going to take care of today’s bumper crop of autistic kids? How they’re going to integrated into society? How we can avoid warehousing them? What can be done to help them, even medically alleviate their condition, if that’s possible?
Yeah, I thought not. You’re so brave though. Makes us feel a lot better. Yeah. Right.
History isn’t a static thing. History moves. Today’s current events are tomorrow’s headlines. What’s going to happen to this current crop of autistic kids, when they reach adulthood? Sometimes we have to worry about what’s going on today, because it’s certainly going to impact tomorrow. I’m aware of the horror of infectious diseases in the past. Unfortunately, we have a new sort of epidemic to worry about now.
I think the entire subject of what is given to one’s kid is one parents can, and should, ask questions about and, considering the seriousness of autism, not be automatically dismissed as evil, uncaring wretches, eager to spread disease among unprotected youngsters out of sheer perversity.
I’m glad my son has been protected against infectious diseases, Bookworm.
I just wish he’d been protected from autism as well.
“Name me something that religion got right that science empirically validated – which is what is suggest when one says, “got it right”?”
Dead bodies need to be buried, or otherwise removed from the presence of the living.
There are probably other examples, but that one comes to mind right away. To claim that a blind squirrel cannot possibly gather even a few nuts renders it impossible to account for the continued survival of the squirrel; “its just too stupid to die” isn’t any more a scientific explanation than “God said so.” Or, for that matter, “I see no evidence.”
Aren’t a lot of the hygene laws of the Torah such that they were designed to prevent the spread of disease even though at the time the peolpe back then would have no concept of such a thing?
Also, as one poster over at Michelle Malkin’s site pointed out, why is there all this concern about whether or not certain upper-class American parents are vaccinating their kids, when, every day, hordes of unvaccinated illegals come pouring across the border, many of them carrying infectious diseases, TB and the like. And, remember, a lot of them are going to be working in service industries, such as food, housework, even hospitals.
And yet you never hear anything about tracking them down, and forcing them to get immunized.
Thanks for the explanation, Sergey. Here in the US, they rate kids according to an “autism spectrum”, which means—-well, basically, it means just about anything the college student who’se been assigned to your case to evaluate you for possible benefits, decides it ought to mean.
Here, they tend to focus more often on lack of language, rather than, say, personality disorders as a qualification for autism, though many “experts” tried for years to convince us that our friendly, inquisitive and generally cheerful son desperately needed to be brought out of himself, to be taught how to smile, and to laugh (they’d say this even as he was in the room with them, smiling at them and laughing happily), to have his fears calmed by being put on a rigid schedule (when he wasn’t especially fearful, and hated being on a fixed routine), and that he desperately needed to be shown how to express affection, even as he was hugging them, and trying to sit in their lap.
It’s really hard to listen to people like this.
“And yet you never hear anything about tracking them down, and forcing them to get immunized.”
Did someone track your son down and force him to get immunized? You could sue, you know, but you would have to prove that you were forced to do so at literal, rather than metaphorical, gun point.
I’m more inclined to think that, like the “autism epedemic” that somehow I’ve never noticed any sign of in all my medical research, all these things mostly exist in your head. Including your son’s autism; my brother’s condition sounds more in line with the definition of “autism” than what you’ve described, but he’s classified as educably mentally retarded, rather than autistic.
“friendly, inquisitive and generally cheerful son desperately needed to be brought out of himself, to be taught how to smile, and to laugh (they’d say this even as he was in the room with them, smiling at them and laughing happily), to have his fears calmed by being put on a rigid schedule (when he wasn’t especially fearful, and hated being on a fixed routine),”
TalkinKamel: It’s way out of my field, but that’s the strangest case presentation of autism I’ve ever heard. I assume you’ve had a variety of medical opinions on your son to confirm that diagnosis; the picture you draw of your son is the antithesis of classic autism.
Dead bodies need to be buried, or otherwise removed from the presence of the living.
Come on, that would nearly rank with don’t eat your own vomit. The smell alone would suggest that one would do something to extinguish, bury, the odor. Early man knew nothing of germ theory.
Maybe they liked the smell back then?
Autism epidemic is ravaging, this is beyond any doubt. When I read the statistics, I was shocked. 116 cases in average for 10 000 children? Autism was really very rare condition 15 years ago. “Very rare” means that you hardly can see even 1 case in 10000 sample. And so this still is among Amish, and among Chicago suburban middle-class homes-schoolers. Both populations does not vaccinate. Rationalize this away by noting restricted gene pool of Amish is disigenious. This amounts to assert that autism proclivity is 100% hereditary, which is a weird supposition. I have not seen any data about ethnic or racial difference in autism incidence. For schizophrenia – yes, but not for autism.
Yes, Tatterdemalian, the fact that my son’s verbal ability is extremely limited, that he’s unable to communicate basic needs and desires and that he’s been diagnosed as autistic by three different pyschologists—that’s all in my head. I imagined the whole thing. I imagined those shrinks. I imagined my son. In fact, I’ve imagined everything, including the entire Planet Earth, and everything in it. Gee, the power of imagination! Autism doesn’t really exist. Disease doesn’t really exist. If we all stick our heads up our respective posteriors, and chant La-la-la, it will go away.
And you, sir, can take all your vaunted medical research, and shove it up your posterior as well.
Du-Maurier Smith, we’ve had more medical opinions issued on my son than I care to remember, but the general consensus is autism. (Some of them fudge it, by saying he’s “somehwere along the autism spectrum.)
However, as the great and wise Marie Curie Tatterdemelian will tell you, I imagined the whole thng—it’s all in my head. There is no such thing as autism, no autism epidemic, so, obviously, I can’t say anything at all on the subject, because it’s all in my imagination. In reality, I’m actually 008 1/2, a dashing secret agent.
(And Tatterdemelian, you’re such a rude jerk, you really don’t deserve a civil answer, but I’ll give you one anyway—In the state I live in, children have to be vaccinated, in order to go to school. Also, if you don’t vaccinate kids, or put it off too long—unless you’re an illegal immigrant, which we aren’t—the state can give you a very hard time, and even take your kid away. So, nobody forced us physically, but the implied threat of state coercion is always there. I actually was a bit concerned beforehand, but my husband was worried that it might interfere with sending our son to school on schedule, so we went ahead.)
And Neo, I hereby offer Tatterdemelian’s reply to me as Exhibit A in “Why many parents are not inclined to blindly trust the medical establishment.” Also, why many of them might be looking for answers to autism on their own, rather than relying on medical researchers who will sneeringly tell them it’s all in their heads, really, they’re just imagining it! It’s all in their heads!
DuMaruier-Smith, in a calmer vein, we were, of course, quite aware that our son’s problems didn’t fit the classic definition of autism (except for his language difficulties), but whenever we brought this up, we were told that we were in denial; that, essentially, what we perceived of him was, essentially, all in our heads (again). Eventually, they bent on this—-they had too, he just too obviously didn’t fit the classic autistic diagnosis—but they still class him as autistic. So, his problems are, I guess, all in our heads, except when we try to deny he’s autistic, in which case we’re in denial, because he’s officially autistic, three shrinks have said so. . . and so it goes.
TalkinKamel: I have virtually no doubt your son has a problem that falls well within the spectrum of autism as it is currently defined. Like many medical diagnoses, and the vast majority of mental health diagnoses, however, it is not a perfect system of black-and-white cut-and-dried diagnostic categories. Far from it. And patients and their parents (if the patient is a child) often experience unbelievable frustrations along the way. Experts would do well, I think, to admit how little they know, rather than (as they sometimes do) blaming the parents.
As I indicated earlier, I plan to do a followup post on this as well as the question of whether there is an actual epidemic of autism rather than an increase in incidence as an artifact of other occurrences (hopefully, I’ll write it tomorrow—although I make no promises on that).
Neo, if have no doubt either. (I do realize that his isn’t the classic version of autism.)
I think you do begin to see, however, just how frustrated parents can get. Heck, now I’m being told that my imagination is responsible for autism, that I somehow fantasized it into being!
That’s a heck of a burden to lay on one human imagination!
Sorry, Neo, I should have said “I have no doubt.”
Unfortunately, whether or not there is a real epidemic (I incline towards this view), or whether it’s simply something else, or even just increased diagnosis—-all three of these are depressing prospects.
If there is an epidemic of autism, or something very like autism, then what is causing it, and can anything be done about it?
If it’s an increase in diagnosis, this raises troubling questions about the medical industry’s competence: are, say, educable mentally retarded kids being thrown in with the truly autistic, because it’s just easier to lump them all in together? While some autistic children are retarded, the fact is that autism, and retardation, are different problems and can’t be treated the same way. (And if it’s something new, we may need another way of handling it.)
Either way it’s troubling, and I’m afraid I have little faith in the experts being able to sort it out, or come up with a solution.
TalkinKamel,
I know a lot about autism. There was a classroom for the severely affected a few rooms down from mine, all of us in the part of the school for Special Ed. I also remember my folks going to IEP meetings. I was in a class primarily for the moderately autistic kids for a few years. Even my classmates and I had plenty of trouble understanding social situations and interacting with the normal world. I can imagine some of what it is like for your son – a bit like living in a completely alien society.
The spectrum of disorders called autism is fairly broad, and I wouldn’t be surprised if there is more than one cause involved. As for therapy, I really don’t know they would approach it. All of the pharmaceutical treatments for various disorders are based on a fairly simple increase or decrease in neurotransmitters like acetylcholine (more for Alzheimer’s, less for Parkinson’s), dopamine (more for Parkinson’s, less for Psychosis), serotonin (more for depression), etc. I’d be really surprised if autism would be correctable with such a simple approach. Also, I’d imagine these drugs have been tried before.
Have you tried looking at the primary literature for research articles on autism? http://www.pubmed.com will get you at least the abstract. Perhaps scientists are researching it, but the keep hitting a brick wall. After all, there are several forms of cancer that are nearly always fatal, like pancreatic cancer. Alzheimer’s is still only slightly treatable and 100% lethal. Mad cow / CJD is still 100% lethal.
I just chatted with a psychiatrist friend–expressing my surprise at the diagnosis of autism for a child such as TalkinKamel’s son. He said that the DSM-IV (1994) requires hits on eight of sixteen criteria for a diagnosis of autism whereas in the prior decade DSM-III required six hits on six criteria were required for the diagnosis. His wry comment was that there have indeed been some paradoxes presented. Obviously the “width” of the diagnosis gate has increased. That would explain some of the increase of autism diagnosis. Another factor, he thought, was that research was generating more typologies, and diagnoses were becoming more sophisticated. (I think I may have snorted because he added–well, you’d probably say “more varied.” But we’re getting a more refined system of classification.) I should note that he doesn’t believe there is an autism epidemic, and, as well, that he is a great belever in progress.
OmegaPaladin, thank you for the link, I will check it out.
Yes, my son does sometimes act as if he came here from another planet. The woman who ran a bakery I used to take him to called her “Little Martian.” I am glad to see you appear to have adjusted very well, and can write such intelligent and interesting posts.
DuMaurier-Smith
Yes, you’re surprised, I’m surprised, your psychiatrist friend is surprised—unfortunately, the psychiatrists we took him to out here, and the California Psy-Care Center have latched onto the autism diagnosis, and latched onto it they will stay. The “Autism spectrum” is now so broad that just about anybody can get onto it. I do agree that, insofar as language goes, he does show some autistic characteristics: repeating back what you say to him, talking in a sing-song voice when he does talk, extremely limited vocabulary, but, as far as his personality goes, he is cheerful, enjoys human contact, laughs, shows empathy with others and seems very aware of what’s going on around him.
In fact, ever since he was attacked by another autistic child, who resented his coming too close to him, we’ve tried to arrange it so that he is never put into a special ed class that’s made up mostly, or entirely, of other autistic kids. We were afraid he’d just get mauled, because he’s too friendly.
Honestly, I’m getting tired of trying to explain the situation to medical experts though. If we point out the ways in which we think he’s not autistic, we’re in denial. If we say there is something wrong with him, and it might be related to this current upsurge in kids with language disabilities, it’s all in our heads. If we look for help, it never quite pans out. Usually, the response is “We don’t know what it is, really, but it looks as if it’s along the autism spectrum.”
I believe in progress too. After my son’s problems, an aunt dying of pancreatic cancer and some other relatives falling prey to Alzheimer’s—I still believe, but I confess my faith is being a bit shaken.
TalkinKamel,
Thank you, I appreciate the compliment. I had very dedicated teachers and an understanding family.
I wonder if your son was mis-categorized? Your son might have a language disorder as opposed to autism. Have you ever had him looked at by a psychiatrist who did not know of the previous diagnosis? (i.e. an independent second opinion)
Yes, we did go to one like that, OmegaPaladin, and he came up with the same diagnosis—“autism spectrum”.
My husband gave up after that. I’d be interested in taking his to a psychiatrist who didn’t know about the previous diagnosis, and who was an expert in speech pathology, if we could find such a person.
Whatever the cause, autism is scary; it’s a life time condition, there’s no cure,
No, no, no. Autism is scary, but it is not a lifetime condition. Children are recovering if they are caught early and get the right therapy. I know children that were diagnosed with severe autism that are now indistinguishable from typical children. My own son is on that path. There is hope. There is hope.
I am one of those stupid, insane, foolish idiots many of you have been discussing here.
In my opinion, (and in my study of rhetoric), dialogue deteriorates once name-calling ensues. It seems a healthier, more open discussion can transpire without intolerance leading the way. I have spent hours reading all of your posts, intrigued & fascinated by the perspectives presented, and disgusted by the arrogant insults, which, to me, are the least intelligent responses posted. No booing & hissing is necessary–just tell me you disagree and why.
We are far from idiots. We are not stupid. We are not insane. You still may still think I am foolish after you read my post, but please, don’t call me a fool.
While this discussion line has veered a bit off course, focusing more on issues of autism in general (which all admit has not been verifiably connected to vaccination), rather than on neo-neocon’s original post, which was a censure of the non-vaccinating parents, I’d like to address her original diatribe.
I am a Crunchy Conservative. I am not a tie-dyed T-shirt wearing Liberal, as some of you consider the non-vaccinating among us. We are highly educated, and well-informed students/graduates of communication, history and politics.
We are not Big Government thinkers. In fact, we see evidence that government lies…a lot…& often…& for its own protection. Don’t you??
Sometimes I think that might be a GOOD thing for the short-term…but mostly…NOT SO MUCH!!!!
* We were assured, as pregnant women in the early 21st Century, that mercury/thimiserol was no longer being included in the manufacturing of vaccines.
* What was hidden (later revealed) was that those sinister products were still on the shelves of American pediatricians, not to expire until JULY 2003.
* My son was born in April 2003, but it was not until 2005 that I learned of the July expiration date…delayed notification…
* Even with the first “assurance” given, we opted not to vacc for a number of reasons…and then felt confident we’d chosen well…for now (in other words, we are not part of some rigid dogmatism on this topic).
* At nine-months of age our son hit high temps, but had low WBC (white blood cell counts). He was diagnosed “neutropenic.” We spent 5 days “in a bubble” separated from any non-medical humanity as test-upon-test was forced on him (most involved needles…), including bone marrow biopsy to r.o. leukemia. Six weeks more of CBC’s following his release from the hospital, and his illness resolved as mysteriously as it had appeared: random “viral anomaly,” we were told.
* IF, DURING THE DISCOVERY OF HIS ILLNESS, HE HAD RECEIVED HIS SCHEDULED VAX, we might have had a far-worse case on our hands…even the hematologist confessed to this. Why? Because my son’s body wasn’t capable of fighting just about anything (but we would not yet have known that at the time of vaccination)! He had such low counts, he was vulnerable to the slightest hint of illness…a vacc with a live attenuated virus might certainly have knocked him over…and I wonder, might the result have been somewhat autistic in presentation…? While I understand that the vacc administered at his age would not (likely?) have been live…it still leaves me wondering…might other children reacting negatively to vaccinations be getting their shots at a particularly vulnerable time, like, say, our son’s situation, only it is hidden from view b/c it is all happening internally?
* I wonder this b/c my husband has Asperger’s Syndrome–(on the Autism Spectrum). So does Bill Gates, BTW. So, supposedly, might have Albert Einstein. Al Gore is a great example of Asperger’s…HIGH-FUNCTIONING people who lack certain connections to human experience…known for their blank stares, their ability to see things through a dominantly logical filter, their inability to pick up on social cues…a long list of traits that make them brilliant & myopic, and therefore quite attractive to Girl-Geeks like me…(grins).
* His mother & uncle are also on the autism spectrum.
* WOULD THAT HAVE MADE OUR SON MORE POSSIBLY SUSCEPTIBLE TO A VACC-INJURY-AUTISM-RELATED-ILLNESS? If he has a genetic propensity for autism, might it have surfaced if we had NOT vax’d? Asperger’s boards seem to indicate a common testimony to family lines of autism (of the AS variety)…fathers and daughters, and so on…
* We never wanted to “find out” through trial…and possible egregious error. (Our support & love to those on here who are living with autism every day).
* Our oppositions are not against all vaccinations, as we most certainly understand what has been stated here as the historical significance of vaccination in the virtual disappearance of so many life-threatening, or life-disrupting illnesses…
* No. Our opposition should make sense to NEOCONS!! We are not BIG GOVERNMENT, and we see political agendas all over the current vaccination schedule…let’s take Hepatitis B, for example…How does someone typically contract Hep B? When you consider the Risk Pool for Hep B, does a one-hour-old infant fit that bill? Ah, no……..well, only if her mother is an intravenous drug user or sexually promiscuous. The problem is that medical professionals cannot ask the screening questions that would define the risk pool, so all child-bearing women must be treated alike. I had been in a mutually monogamous (can you say VIRGIN wedding?) relationship (read “marriage”) for eight years when my son was born, and had never taken any illegal drug/substance into my body (especially not via an infected needle…). So, did my son need antibiotic ointment slathered all over his newborn eyes at the moment of birth for my “possible” STDs, or need a big ole dose of Hep B vacc as a welcome into this world? Heck no. (second dose, the Rotavirus vacc, DTaP (as stated, this is Diphtheria, Tetanus AND Peruses. It seems like ONE vacc, but it’s three-in-one), Hib (Haemophilus influenzae type b), PCV (Pneumococcal), and inactivated poliovirus (IPV). Eight doses…twelve pounds…still being nurtured very closely by momma, hopefully nursing, sleeping 12-15 hours a day, and…getting poked with needles…(in my naturally-minded mind, that was a big disconnect).
I think many of you are speaking about vaccinations generally, but not, necessarily, aware of the current reality of dosage schedules. At the one-year check-up, that same child who has now had 3 doses of Hep B, 3 of Rota, 3 of DTaP, 3 of Hib & PCV, & 3 of IPV, takes an additional Hib, PCV, IPV, and adds influenza, MMR (â†another 3-vax-in-one), Varicella, and HepA.
To me, as a mother, the risks we were willing to take, with autism in our family history, conservativism as our worldview, and the actual current known risks of those illnesses/diseases we were being asked to vaccinate against, determined our path. We just were not willing to vaccinate on the whole. Because our politics are so closely woven to our religious beliefs, as well (not mythologies, but matters of faith), we are able in our state to claim a Religious Exemption.
Those here who advocate the State forcing vaccinations need to grab a hold of yourselves! Why are you reading anything neocon?? This is a free republic. And, if you believe in (that is also “faith”) the vaccinations your children or grandchildren have had, then why do you fear us so very much? It is, in fact, the vaccinated who have suffered from those outbreaks…so maybe your security blanket is more like a safety net, with some big holes…
We are always reading on this topic; always wanting to make the right choice. We simply wanted to DELAY vaccinations, and SEPARATE them. That is a much more difficult coercion with a pediatrician than denying all together (I sign a waiver, we’re done). Since our children have never attended daycare or preschool (we homeschool), vaccination hasn’t hindered them yet. My son plays in our community Little League. Both kids are amazingly healthy…I mean, they should be a mess, right?
CORRECTION:
html error threw off part of the text. Corrected here. Pick up at *No… and continue…
* No. Our opposition should make sense to NEOCONS!! We are not BIG GOVERNMENT, and we see political agendas all over the current vaccination schedule…let’s take Hepatitis B, for example…How does someone typically contract Hep B? When you consider the Risk Pool for Hep B, does a one-hour-old infant fit that bill? Ah, no……..well, only if her mother is an intravenous drug user or sexually promiscuous. The problem is that medical professionals cannot ask the screening questions that would define the risk pool, so all child-bearing women must be treated alike. I had been in a mutually monogamous (can you say VIRGIN wedding?) relationship (read “marriage”) for eight years when my son was born, and had never taken any illegal drug/substance into my body (especially not via an infected needle…). So, did my son need antibiotic ointment slathered all over his newborn eyes at the moment of birth for my “possible” STDs, or need a big ole dose of Hep B vacc as a welcome into this world? Heck no. (I’d like to say h-e-double hockey-sticks-no, but having not posted here before, I do not know how “family friendly” this space is meant to be.). Vaccinations, in the case of Hep B, or antibiotics slathered on a newborn, are NOT family-friendly.
* How far are you willing to take this argument? Conservatives always put barriers around government activities with the “Slippery Slope” warning…and I think we are already sliding pretty fast…because our innocent young daughters are now expected to receive the HPV vacc long before any parent would DARE hope their daughters be sexually involved…and HPV is a…sexually transmitted DISEASE, with the devastating potential aftermath of cervical cancer! So, now we will, again, treat preteens and tweens with a lowest common denominator philosophy (for the “greater good”), like mothers who just…(gasp) gave birth. Giving birth? OH NO! You might give your baby an illness through your vagina! Let’s make sure not…we’ll give him a shot & some ointment. Whew. Now it’s all good…
* For us, even as we looked at the vax we did not oppose for a political reason, I did not like the clustering of vacc for little ones. If a child did experience a vaccination-related illness/reaction, how was the culprit to be identified? In our state/region, we could not find pediatricians who could administer individual vaccinations for Pertussis, for example, a frightening and often debilitating illness. So, was I willing to take the slim risk that he might catch that nasty whooping cough? Or TRUST (we would consider this a major leap of faith) that nothing would/could possibly go awry by shooting him with DTaP, three vax in one…given, by the way, at the same time as Rota, Hib, PCV and IPV…
* When your physician prescribes you a new medication, (s)he should always check the updated drug interaction charts…and if you are on a handful of meds, there is always a concern of over-medicating, or cross-medicating…and yet, a 2-month-old infant is expected, at their tiny weight of maybe 12 pounds, to internalize HepB’s second dose, the Rotavirus vacc, DTaP (as stated, this is Diphtheria, Tetanus AND Peruses. It seems like ONE vacc, but it’s three-in-one), Hib (Haemophilus influenzae type b), PCV (Pneumococcal), and inactivated poliovirus (IPV). Eight doses…twelve pounds…still being nurtured very closely by momma, hopefully nursing, sleeping 12-15 hours a day, and…getting poked with needles…(in my naturally-minded mind, that was a big disconnect).