Child Health Safety: The Wakettes arise

I mentioned the blog Child Health Safety last post, alluding to Wakettism of the first order.

I recently commented under the post Wakefield and MMR – Brian Deer fails to answer. Apparently my observations deserved an entire blog post, headed Autism Figures – Existing Studies Show Shocking Real Increase Since 1988. This was copied and pasted back as a reply ignoring the content of my comment. The thrust was to debunk my claim of no real autism epidemic. I’d used Brugha et al. “Epidemiology of Autism Spectrum Disorders in Adults in the Community in England.” Archives of General Psychiatry  –  doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.38. This paper uses today’s diagnostic criteria and shows adults have autism at a rate of 9.8/1000 in adults.

Today’s rate is difficult to ascertain, but can be 10/1600 to 10/1000 in children. The latter is the more common – 1%, although this is probably high given other estimates. Brugha concludes no epidemic exists, but that diagnostic criteria has changed, suggesting he alludes to the 10/1000 figure. Many who point to large scale increases also support the reality of changing diagnostic criteria. Brugha’s paper is discussed here on Ars Technica, Autism Epidemic? More likely we’re just better at diagnosis which also uses the 10/1000 – or 1% figure today. Other publications discuss the findings: “Most adults with autism go undiagnosed” AlphaGalileo. “University of Leicester researchers present further evidence from first ever general population survey of autism in adulthood.” Disabled World

Our Wakette at Child Health Safety is claiming a 1200% increase in autism frequency in eight years. He chose an Israeli study – as is plain if you read his post above, with 0.84 cases per 1000 – Advancing Paternal Age and Autism by Reichenberg et al. Then he uses Baird’s well known figure of 11.6/1000 to get his 1200% increase. Just one lone paper no doubt chosen to sustain this 1200% increase claim. The three variables impacting on frequency are criteria, age of cohort and geographical location. Age and location impact on our friends mythical 1200%.

So, over to this new post I went. Now, you may wonder what the relevance of a comment stream is. However, I found this typical of antivaccination lobbyists particularly those who seek to maintain the autism myth. I’ve always wondered what made the crackpots behind this site tick. They have “secrets” on Wakefield. Brian Deer and the BMJ are the real fraudsters. “Governments” have been exposed. Typical conspiracy central meanderings.

Rather than address the clear challenges we find a challenging tone and combative presentation. Combined with false dichotomies by association, censoring of comments by deletion then eventual banning. I actually began by apologising below for sending them off in a huff. One comment (under a piece defending Wakefield) that nailed them left them pleading inability to understand. Anyway, I commented;

I’m sorry but you’re markedly in error.

You quote Reichenberg et al’s Israeli study from the Archives of General Psychiatry to “set a benchmark”, which you then compare to Baird’s UK figures. Yes both use DSM IV. But the genetic and environmental differences in two races/nations present challenges to your theory. No offence but you can’t just make up relationships between unrelated data sets without correcting for other variables. You need to show statistically why the individual sets relate to your argument. This is a common flaw. Genetics, environment, parental education and rearing techniques… etc.

Still, let’s go with it. 8.4:10,000 or 0.84 per 1000. Then Baird’s UK figures of 116.1:10,000 or 11.6 per 1000. From this you argue a 1200% increase insinuating vaccination. Yet Baird had written.

“Whether the increase is due to better ascertainment, broadening diagnostic criteria, or increased incidence is unclear.”

Thus, you make conclusions from Baird’s work that even he did not. I shall argue you selected the lone Israeli paper for it’s dramatic impact. Now onto research that seeks to determine if any increase at all has occurred. We can stay in the UK eliminating the genetic and environmental confounding variables of Israel data. Let’s examine adults using the same diagnostic criteria.

Epidemiology of Autism Spectrum Disorders in Adults in the Community in England – Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011;68(5):459-465. doi:10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.38

We find 9.8 per 1000 (95% confidence interval, 3.0-16.5). The author’s write:

“The prevalence of ASD in this population is similar to that found in children. The lack of an association with age is consistent with there having been no increase in prevalence and with its causes being temporally constant.”

It’s documented by Baird that younger children – indeed younger subjects often have a higher score in diagnosis. Using this reality we expect to see significant decreases in adults. But we have Baird’s 11.6 and Brugha’s 9.8 per 1000. Given the approximation of these figures using today’s diagnostic criteria and the huge age difference one may assume autism is falling as we’d expect to see a much lower rate in adults. More so, in 2003 Baird himself writes in Diagnosis of autism – BMJ;

“… several factors account for the increase–for example, changing conceptualisation to a spectrum rather than a core categorical condition; changes in diagnostic methods; …”

That’s probably enough. Although consider:

1 in 150 (1988-1995; Bertrand et al., 2001)
1 in 175 (1990-1991; Baird et al., 2000)
1 in 85 (1990-1991; Baird et al., 2006)
1 in 150 (1992; ADDMN, 2007)
1 in 160 (1992-1995; Chakrabarti & Fombonne, 2001)
1 in 150 (1994; ADDMN, 2007)
1 in 58 (1993-1997; not published)
1 in 170 (1996-1998; Chakrabarti & Fombonne, 2005)

– which is markedly inconsistent with the myth of an epidemic. it is consistent with methodology. Selecting data to suit your argument will not change reality.

I apologise for having such fun with your bag of errors. It was an appalling reply and a ridiculous blog post however. The above post is very plain in showing that you’re inventing a phenomena not supported by research nor even by Baird himself. Autism rates have not changed. Diagnosis has. A decrease is most likely.

Thank you.

And;

Your comment in blue above:

We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures.

… is meaningless. I stressed this in another comment but you couldn’t answer. Let me be quite plain. Compensation for encephalopathy or general brain disease is due to vaccination. It may be accompanied by…. autism. It may also be accompanied by blue eyes, blonde hair or bad breath. None of these are due to vaccination. This comment is one of many that stress compensation for vaccine induced autism has never occurred. Even Poling had a predetermining mitochondrial disorder.

As I stressed elsewhere. Only reading something like; “This child was compensated due to autism developing directly as a result of vaccination”, will sustain the allusion above. As I said elsewhere, defeating your ability to reply – Even the recent Pace Law school student foray into 21 VCIP cases and over 60 biased phone call interviews offered “it strongly suggests” a link. (Quoting Danielle Orsino media rep).

That paper is “Unanswered Questions from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: A review of compensated cases of vaccine induced brain injury”. But as Orsino says, there’s a “suggestion”. Period.

You contention is demonstrably flawed on many levels.

Thank you.

Apparently no point to answer exists;

Paul @ 2011/08/20 at 2:01 am

I’m sorry but you’re markedly in error.

Really? In an earlier comment elsewhere you drew our attention to the letter in the peer reviewed Journal of the Israeli Medical Association which draws attention to the figures from the Paternal Age paper. Thanks for that. We did not know and have added a reference to this article so it now can draw on authority of a peer reviewed journal.

You seem not to be able to agree with any medical experts. That’s fine. We are letting you let off steam here.

And;

Paul @ 2011/08/20 at 3:02 am

“Your comment in blue above:

We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures.

… is meaningless.”

Oh dear. You just cannot trust governments can you? The US Health Resources Services Administration give a quote to a journalist of a national TV news broadcast network confirming the US government has compensated cases of children who developed autistic conditions from vaccines and paid out lots and lots of dollars to them and it turns out to be meaningless.

LOL. Back to the drawing board for everyone.

I replied;

I think you have seen the flaw. That comment is all over the place here. Yep – meaningless.

“Autistic conditions” are not vaccine induced autism. You’re at least changing language – the first step in accepting facts. Sadly, there’s no LOL. I’m glad you think it’s funny. One in 1 million children suffer encephalitis from vaccine reactions. They are compensated as is just. Many have autism. The comment is debunking the very untruth you seek to make.

“…. may be accompanied by an array of symptoms”.

Until you can produce “compensated because of their autism”, you have no case. The facts and government positions are against you. Global research is against you. From ethyl mercury to vaccines to numbers of vaccines no link can be shown.

Accept it.

Thanks again.

Then horror upon horror, they clicked on my URL and delivered;

LOL, Rant on Paul.

We are content to rely on a peer reviewed journal. Thanks for drawing our attention to it – so we could add the link to the article.

You might as well let everyone know you are a friend of Peter Bowditch and the “skeptics” crowd who are happy to victimise and attack people personally on the web, spread misinformation lose legal actions and then claim they have not. Similarly Terry Polevoy – Terry Polevoy vs Ilena Rosenthal.

Birds of a feather flock together. What a lot of flockers.

Those nasty skeptics all linked up like a hive… I tried again;

I thought this was about debating and/or defending the premise of your post?

I think given the tone and lack of substance of your replies, it’s clear I’ve upset your apple cart here. Again I ask that you refute my sources. Eg; Baird 11.6/1000 in 2006 followed by Brugha 10/1000 in 2007 shows a 13.7% decrease in just one year. Why can’t you address this simple reality? The above reply is most unbecomming.

Yes I know of Peter and enjoy the skeptic community. So, you clicked a link to my site. Welcome. I’m ignorant as to the case you refer to or Polevoy. I do know Peter posts everything on his site so is unlikely to spread misinformation. Either way I could be head of GSK yet I still have a valid argument you avoid. No laughing matter. Autism is decreasing if we involve your figure from Baird.

Also, go back to my original comment. You have much work to do. Don’t feel embarrassed – science is all about being proven wrong. No need to turn aggressively defensive. I’m not judgmental.

I await your reply with eagerness.

All the best now.

Next, missing the point of Brugha’s comparison to contemporary childhood figures;

Paul @ August 21, 2011 at 2:04 am

Again I ask that you refute my sources. Eg; Baird 11.6/1000 in 2006 followed by Brugha 10/1000 in 2007 shows a 13.7% decrease in just one year.

Shame you have not read either paper or maybe you have and you know you are talking rubbish. Comparing chalk and cheese just like your mates Bowditch and Polevoy to lie about the facts. Baird was dealing with children. Brugha was dealing with adults. So you are saying the same children Baird covered became adults in one year and 13.7% of them simultaneously were cured.

LOL. Nice one.

Pretty good refutation we think. But then that is just the style of Bowditch, Polevoy and friends.

The old, “tar ’em with the same brush trick”, eh? I continued self flagellating;

I may have been generous with my stats. It’s a 13.79% decrease. My bad… apologies.

Pretty much a 14% decrease in autism in the same nation in one year. Geographic location is a plus. Age is a plus. Criteria is a plus. The 3 variables effecting frequency of autism. You still need to address your “theory” using Israeli data to compare to a different location & age group.

All the best.

Things deteriorated along those lines. More allusion to “Bowditch and Polevoy” and whatever case of which I had no knowledge. Sadly, my dear comment protagonist first began censoring comments that refuted his ongoing claims, then banned me altogether. Perhaps referring to “the awesome Ben Goldacre” was pushing my luck. Back in 2007 he’d written an excellent article. Clearly whomever it is holding the reins at Child Health Safety has a thing about Polevoy and dear Peter Bowditch. He/she/they did have one point. I mentioned Brugha as “citing” the 10/1000 figure of todays frequency vs his adult findings of 9.8/1000. I was in error. Brugha studiously avoids picking any of the many autism frequencies out there today.

Yet Brugha’s 9.8/1000 in adults advanced as showing no change to todays child frequencies of 10/1000 (the widely used 1%) leads me conclude it’s safe to argue with the 10/1000 figure. That’s rather clear in the post deleted but found here. Also Brugha et al. wrote;

The prevalence of ASD in this population is similar to that found in children. The lack of an association with age is consistent with there having been no increase in prevalence and with its causes being temporally constant.

From Alpha Galileo we have;

Dr Brugha said the new scientific article confirms the already published report from the survey (2009) that 9.8 per thousand adults in England meet official diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorder. There was no evidence of an ‘autism epidemic’ of marked increase in people with the condition.

He said: “Overall our findings suggest that prevalence is neither rising nor falling significantly over time. This favours the interpretation that methods of ascertainment (case finding) have changed in more recent surveys of children compared to the earliest surveys in which the rates reported were considerably lower”.

I could have chosen the 10/1600 figure, rendering Brugha’s finding more compelling. It’s fascinating to consider that adults today may present at 9.8/1000 vs children at as little as 10/1600. Knowing that increases in cohort age correlate to a reduction in frequency diagnoses, and adults have learned many skills that also lower overall score, we’re left to consider an actual drop in autism over the last generation. How wonderful if that were true and perhaps due to the protection from measles induced encephalitis due to MMR vaccination.

In conclusion, this poor author has unwittingly proven my point. Had he shown the courtesy of reading my sources he’d have noted studies devoted to examining the very question, don’t support an epidemic. Had he even read Baird’s papers he’d have seen Baird herself doesn’t claim an absolute increase but stresses causes are unclear and changing diagnostic criteria are a variable. I guess what got up my nose is fishing for an obscure study, comparing it to Baird’s work and using this to conclude there’s a 1200% increase in autism due to vaccination.

Not only is this not repeated anywhere no attempt was made to eliminate confounding variables. No understanding of using unrelated data sets or attempt to justify correlation between them exists. Just a very low figure plucked out and used “as a benchmark”.

Moving away from Baird and Brugha we find a range of diagnostic papers that fail to support the contention of a steady increase. I’ll give the last word to Ben Goldacre from 2007, writing About that surge in autism, in The Autism Crisis;

Autism advocates are free to seek that recent surge in autism–that catastrophic epidemic–in anecdotes, in education numbers or the CDDS, in sensationalist headlines and so on. This is all in keeping with the rotten standards of science and ethics they’ve imposed on autistics, and with their own steadfast resistance against verifiable information. But on the off-chance anyone’s interested in the published, peer-reviewed data, I thought I’d go fetch some. If anyone finds any factual errors in the information I’ve presented, I’d greatly appreciate knowing. Accurate information is always good for autistics.

Indeed.

The Wakettes

As many readers will know there’s been a hysterical spike in attempts to exhume the corpse of the vaccine/autism myth this year. Certainly this has reached fever pitch since Wakefield was expunged from the registrar of humane beings.

Like watching a religion evolve his adherents have been gripped in ecstasy, rejecting evidence for fantasy. I mean, just check out the font size at Dr. Wakefield’s work must continue. You can imagine them living on a small island that time forgot – much like out of a King Kong movie. Dressed only in loin cloths, bodies glistening in the fire light given off by burning effigies of Paul Offit, carrying Wakefield on a sedan chair made of discarded MMR syringes and the bones of dead Pharma executives held together with saliva soaked vaccine package inserts.

You may laugh but it appears this is indeed what has happened. The audio below was captured by intrepid journalists on an off the map Pacific island covered in deep jungle, behind the walls of an ancient stone fortress just as Wakefield was carried past his adoring crowd.

We had the Groundbreaking vaccine-autism investigation, promising to shatter the earth only to fizzle to muffled laughter back in May this year. Despite promises of putting Big Pharma to the rack it emerged that a bunch of Pace Law school students produced “Unanswered Questions from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: A review of compensated cases of vaccine induced brain injury”.

Media spokesperson Danielle Orsino must have felt a goose when all she could muster was that this “strongly suggests” a link. In fact it suggested naught but the reality these unfortunate cultists will continue to manipulate, abuse and obfuscate data whilst lying to the public and exploiting those with autism and their families. Meryl Dorey took the results – debunked 10 days earlier – by the horns turning the meaningless review of 21 VICP cases into “the vaccine court… has paid compensation to hundreds, possibly thousands of families [for autism]” as she lied on air to David and Tanya on 102.9 KOFM last May.

Tanya on KOFM was carelessly querying Dorey about parents who have a child vaccinated, then “… suddenly have an autistic child on their hands….. Fact or fiction?”. “Oh Tanya, I wish I could say it’s fiction but it’s fact”, Dorey lied. Later Tanya argued with David (who to his credit says parents who don’t vaccinate children are selfish), saying to listeners “aren’t you scared with statistics mentioned by Meryl… thousands of cases of autism, ADD, ADHD…”.

The VICP associated court has paid no-one compensation for autism due to vaccination. Hannah Poling herself has an underlying mitochondrial enzyme deficit. Hannah does not have autism. Hannah has encephalitis. Hannah’s parents believe vaccination triggered the encephalitis. Her mitochondrial disorder is documented as causing encephalitis between first and second years of life. Vaccination is not documented as causing autism. The Polings are very lucky the court erred in allowing compensation. One case, and a shocking anomaly it is.

The tragic thing about how easily Tanya was scammed by Dorey is that the “latest figures from the USA” Dorey alluded to came from the above paper. Crucially there’s not one statement to the effect “this child was compensated due to developing autism as a result of vaccination”. Children with autistic like symptoms are compensated quite rightly for demonstrable vaccine injuries. Children with autism who develop encephalitis as a result of vaccination are compensated. These poor children are exploited ruthlessly via the false insinuation there’s causality between the vaccination and autism. Yet I stress again there’s nothing suggesting compensation “because of their autism”.

Like something out of a Wakefield cultists version of Mission Impossible this paper would self-debunk in 10 seconds. Filled with self-serving nonsense such as “acknowledged autism or autism-like symptoms through vaccine induced encephalopathy and seizure disorder”, “settled cases suggesting autism”, “language that strongly suggests autistic features”, “published decisions that used terms related to autism”, “payment of vaccine injured children with autism”, even providing a case table headed, “Language suggesting autism or autistic-like symptoms”. But no, nothing definitive. It was a sham from day one.

Consider this oft’ repeated quote on that dumping ground of all things grossly offensive Child Health Safety. You may have recently read Dorey’s links to this blog claiming that the real fraud was by Brian Deer and the BMJ. Under conspiracy speak headings like “Secret British vaccine files on MMR forced open by legal action” then “read here what will be discovered and more”, we get… nothing. Granted it goes back to January 19, 2011 before the epic failure of May 10th. But we’re told breathlessly this quote is from an email to CBS written by the Health Resources Services Administration of the US.

We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures.

I mean, you can’t make this stuff up. As I’ve commented over yon scribe, encephalopathy may be accompanied by blue eyes, blonde hair and bad breath but nor are these linked to vaccination. The statement is clarifying the very lie the author has attempted. Compensation for vaccine induced encephalitis for a child who also has autism, is not compensation for vaccine induced autism. Encephalitis can effect measles sufferers at a rate of at least one in 5,000. MMR vaccination presents a rate of less than one in 1 million. Given the size of the USA, UK and European populations we are going to see large numbers of children with encephalitis following vaccination.

Subacute Sclerosing Panencephalitis hits one in 8,000 children under two with measles. MMR vaccination yields zero cases. Measles causes death in one in 2,500 – 5,000 depending on age. MMR vaccination results in death in zero cases. 15% of SSPE children will die. SSPE can strike at a later age after measles resolves, and is often fatal. Still however, we have people feverishly working to allow these horrific realities to increase. Misinformation and lies are created and fed to people by deluded and insistent miscreants who cannot admit their error. Wakefield’s continued defence is testimony to the misled. But the perpetrators are something altogether more malignant.

So prevalent are people who keep doing this in the face of overwhelming evidence, and so unconscionable are their tactics we really need a new term to describe them. They represent the nadir of intellectual and humane evolution of our species at present, and thus deserve to be recognised. I propose Wakette. 

As in “… well known Wakette, Meryl Dorey wrote a piece on Wakefield’s Kangaroo Court“. Or “… and in other news, over at Child Health Safety we read yet another typical Wakette piece that invents associations of hilarious proportions”. Or Erwin Alber…. er, no. Come to think of it I don’t want to Alber anything unless absolutely necessary. [group involuntary shudder]

For the record, Skeptard is lurking in the urban dictionary. Definition;

Any one who is blindly skeptical to the evidence around them, regardless of research done on any given topic, in addition to any one who refuses to do the research necessary, before jumping to conclusions.

So for Wakette we can propose;

Any person who continues to maintain that vaccines cause autism, despite being aware of the Wakefield fraud and the abundance of dissenting evidence, in addition to any person who sets out to misrepresent research to claim this link can be revived anew.

So let’s take Wakette for a test flight. Say in 15 years or so:

“Hey remember that Nimrod Weiner guy?”.

“Sort of, who was he again?”

“The wakette who didn’t even know where Wakefield’s fraudulent paper was published”.

“Oh, yeah… I remember him. What about him?”

“Saw him chirobusking* in the subway at Central Train Station”.

“Huh, figures. He had a carny gig at the travelling circus next to the fortune teller for a while”.

“Yeah, heard that too. Most of those wakette’s are history now”.

(High fives and laughter)

[* – “chirobusking” is the term given in future to chirpractors who busk alongside magicians, mimes, acrobats and musicians for small change. They have little fold up tables and have swapped white coats for coloured robes]

See! It works quite well. Plus serves as a handy mnemonic device. As the science of Wakettism improves we’ll be able to distinguish between Alpha Wakette’s like… er, Wakefield, or Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill (from Age of Autism), or dominant and submissive wakette’s. Dorey’s a rather dominant wakette on her Facebook page and the submissive wakette’s members just go along, knowing they’ll be banned if they happen to speak the truth or produce any evidence.

Then there’s loner wakettes who wish to be Alpha Wakettes. Here’s where our friend at Child Health Safety comes in. Master of deceit, obfuscation and pure invention with a talent for plumb conspiracy language you probably know the site.

Having a look at this will be the subject of my next post.

Newtown Community Chiropractic present Weiner… Nimrod Weiner

Weiner. Nimrod Weiner. Shaken and stirred. We’ve met Nimrod before, whilst taking a look at chiropractors and their brave observations on vaccination. Including it being “the biggest sham since bloodletting”. 64% of The Australian (anti) Vaccination Network‘s members are chiropractors – a damning statistic indeed.

Nimrod Weiner: Prominent Anti-vaccination lobbyist

Weiner, as I noted before is from Newtown Community Chiropractic and is prone to run anti-vaccination seminars. Exactly why Newtown Community Chiropractic would want to run anti-vaccination seminars and use slides with Newtown Community Chiropractic emblazoned on each one is a mystery perhaps known only to Newtown Community Chiropractic. I can’t find out because visiting their vaccination events page seems to yield a hastily emptied office.

Nimrod thinks vaccines are nasty things because when you look at humans we’re sick. Sick dear reader, very, very sick. The sort of sick only Newtown Community Chiropractic can fix. Because as Nimrod Weiner says, you don’t see animals with diseases and cancers. No Sir!

Those horses with Hendra virus – dying and killing people due to the lack of a vaccine and those Tasmanian Devils with incurable cancer with a 100% fatality rate aren’t as sick as we are. In fact you don’t see cancers in animals Nimrod Weiner from Newtown Community Chiropractic tells us. This must be bemusing news to those at The Australian Animal Cancer Association or the scientists that documented the many variations of the four primary animal cancers.

Australia’s list of 93 notifiable animal diseases is clearly just taking up valuable internet space. Not to mention the many non notifiable diseases that just distract us from our own sickening sickness. What with our living longer than ever before, beating diseases more than ever before, curing disease during gestation, preventing disability from birth, rehabilitating post illness and injury and of course having almost wiped out vaccine preventable diseases that killed our ancestors we’re obviously so very, very sick.

Could vaccines be doing this? You can talk about vaccines without any qualifications for 2 1/2 hours, “But that’s nothing, let me tell you”. Obesity, lack of exercise and predicted consequent cardiovascular disease are just some of the problems that effect children but not animals Nimrod from Newtown Community Chiropractic intones. Todays children could be the first generation to not live longer than their parents he warns ominously dangling the “V word” but giving absolutely no evidence as to why. So, why?

This is certainly due to the fact life expectancy has sky rocketed in recent decades with medical advances, improvements in safe living and the big one – vaccination. Children born over the last couple of decades were born into a world of scientific achievement allowing sedentary lifestyles and buffets of junk food. This explains why they may not live notably longer life spans than their parents. Gradually we’ve been getting more sedentary in recreational pursuits, spending less time doing physical labour, enjoying wonderful advances in labour saving devices and worshipping the silicon chip.

It isn’t that children are “sick” at all – they’re not. It is true that their parents were particularly healthy, active and enjoyed largely unpolluted environments. The younger the parent the more sedentary their lifestyle also. In fact today a child’s potential for longevity at birth and for the first few years remains higher than ever before. It is lifestyle habits and how long one maintains them that dictates. But anti-vaxxers love to use these fake scare tactics to claim children are sicker than ever before. Simply put: sedentary lifestyle, changing familial habits, processed food often due to time constraints, affluence in eating and rising obesity. From here we have predicted a slightly shorter lifespan.

The lie of an autism epidemic continues even though we know it’s down to entirely different diagnostic criteria. Some children on the ASD spectrum are indistinguishable from other children until critiqued via diagnosis. Using todays criteria we find adults present at a rate of 9.8/1000 and children at a rate of 10/1000. In a UK survey, none of the “new cases” discovered knew they had autism. This speaks volumes as to how wide the spectrum now is. Strong arguments suggest the 2% difference is due to learned skills, and may likely be more – increasing the adult rate above children. Which ultimately suggests we have less autistic cases today provided we stick with today’s diagnostic criteria across generations.

The Australian reports that the Australian Medical Association condemned as “outrageous” claims made by Weiner. One has to agree;

In a public talk, the Sydney chiropractor linked vaccines to asbestos, thalidomide and cigarettes, and said they contained bits of aborted fetus. The chiropractor backed the debunked research of deregistered British doctor Andrew Wakefield – which suggested the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine might cause autism – as “scientifically good”.

The parents and pregnant women who attended the talk in March were told “homeopathic vaccines” – which are regarded as scientific nonsense by most experts – were safer than conventional vaccines. [….]

Adelaide chiropractor Phillip Donato, chairman of the Chiropractic Board of Australia – one of the 10 national registration boards that are part of the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency – said chiropractors were expected to offer advice that was “absolutely balanced, non-biased and evidence-based”.

“It appears at the very least that he (Mr Weiner) is misinformed, and at the worst may be providing misleading information,” Mr Donato said.

“We would encourage people to put in a notification (to the board), and we would deal with it.”

Weiner made Radio National today:

Or download audio here.

Newtown Community Chiropractic slides include:


The Australian had more on the bizarre, ignorant anti-vaccination fear mongering standards and Nimroddery from Newtown Community Chiropractic;

In his talk, Mr Weiner said vaccine makers grew germs such as the chicken pox virus “on human fetus, because it’s the best medium to grow it on”.
“What happens is they take a scraping of that aborted fetus with the virus on it, and put that into the vaccine itself,” he said.

In fact, a federal government guide says while fetal cells are used to make some vaccines, these are the lab-grown descendants of cells taken from three fetuses aborted for medical reasons more than 40 years ago, since when no further fetuses have been used.

What these cowboys of new age mumbo jumbo are doing discussing immunology is patently clear. Creating a market based on fear. Weiner’s product is ignorance and fear and we’d all be wise to have nothing to do with his ilk. They are even keen to blame the Australian Skeptics for reasons I can not begin to comprehend.

When it comes to vaccines speak only to a real doctor.

Howard’s bigoted legacy is still with us

Yesterday was National Marriage Day, a celebration of homophobia, bigotry and fundamentalist clap trap held at Parliament House and organised by my old agents provocateur Warwick and Alison Marsh of The Fatherhood Foundation aka Dads4kids.

In recent years I spent a great deal of time in the immensely rewarding debunking and challenging of Christian Science and fundamentalism that had crept into illicit drug policy, leaving high numbers of vulnerable Aussies dead and/or abused in exorcisms. Young earth creationists, enemies of Darwin and “postmodernist science”, I remember one member writing on a public email list that I was “filled with hate” after I quoted from a Skeptic publication. I had begun to call family values “the F Word”.

Thanks to John Howard’s archaic views and federal health minister (no less) Tony Abbott’s short sightedness Australia fell away from being a world leader in harm reduction. In crept new terms like “harm prevention” (behaviour modification) and the argument amongst many that a family that eats together and goes to church together is “drug proofing” children, that jail was “compassionate”, even “love”. “I can’t help you if you can’t read (the bible)”, offered one opponent.

Debates on controlling lethal blood borne viruses flowed easily across the lines of discrimination and strident attempts were made to ban “addiction causing” needle exchanges, close injecting facilities and revive that old standard – condoms “cause” AIDS by promoting sexual promiscuity. We struggled to defend against well funded attacks from those who treated addiction not as a health problem, not just as a crime problem but as sin. Our problem, one Parliamentary Inquiry was told was that we suffered from “the disease sex, drugs and rock n roll”.

The epidemiological mechanisms of HIV spread are well known. Safe sex and safe injecting as components of harm reduction protect our entire community. Yet for some God fearing conservatives “beasts” and “self abusing sinners” just must not be. Worse, one only need read Andrew Bolt to see how easily is is to whip up support for all things “unnatural”. Drug policy critics, architects and representatives of the gay community and HIV educators were all targetted. Slowly but surely they drew their plans against us.

Yet, with reality being the undeniable thing it is, they gradually faded into the background. Although not until undermining 25 years of public health progress that is still years from being regained. To be sure the creatures from Drug Free Australia are still with us but are presently relegated primarily to preaching to Swedish and Scandinavian based human rights opponents. Where organised far right wing Christian fundamentalism against anything left leaning (that arguably bolsters dangerous minds like Anders Brevik) has it’s home.

A constant feature popping up and leaving you momentarily too stunned to move – like some moral horror from a Whack-a-Mole game designed by Stephen King – was Dads4Kids. Their delusion is simple. A Christian family “as God intended” is the answer to all social ills, whilst it’s absence is the cause.

So, it was with little surprise yesterday that I noticed Wazza and Aly playing much the same tune as on 18th September 2007 when John Howard took the podium at the National Strategic Summit on Marriage, Family and Fatherhood (see video below). John was also kind enough to open up Parliament House for the occasion. “Key leaders” in the “marriage, family and fatherhood movement” gathered along with whom Wazza and Aly claim were “academics and researchers”.

The “marriage manifesto” – A vision for the renewal of marriage in Australia today was born to these proud beaming parents. No doubt a phobic blueprint for discrimination against equality and same sex union, peppered with horrors that must befall the little ones, it’s success is mimicked in the fact that no-one has ever heard of it. They also released 21 Reasons Why Gender Matters (embedded below) which links homosexuality to drug abuse, crime and paedophilia. Speakers also included Senator John Holt, then Attorney General, Philip Ruddock, shadow Attorney General Joe Ludwick, minister for family and community, Mal Brough, minister for immigration, Kevin Andrews “and many others”. John Howard takes us back to Missouri circa 1950;

…. I am a strong believer that every child should have the opportunity of growing up with a mother and a father. I have that very strong view and you will be aware that I practiced what I preached in relation to policy issues on that, stretching way back to some stances I took in relation to IVF and er.. the like, some years ago. And of course the changes to the definition of marriage in the federal marriage legislation which I sponsored in 2004. I also happen to believe that a proper functioning family is the best social welfare system mankind’s ever devised [Applause]…. I wish you well and I think the goals of your coalition are first rate and I hope to keep in communication with you…

Oh my. How quickly we forget. How well Abbott has blinded us to the dysfunctional impact of conservatism. Given Abbott has no alternative policies and runs on the adrenalin of contrary attacks on Julia Gillard we would do well to remember this is the very dreck we so longed to have gone from federal office. In November 2009, Nicola Roxon dumped from her staff a “health ambassador” who was a co-author of 21 reasons why gender matters. At almost the same time, Abbott described himself as “the ideological love child of John Howard and Bronwyn Bishop”. Be afraid dear reader, be very afraid. The bigotry of the Coalition is alive and well.

So yesterday’s phobic fun fest was predictable. Always attention seeking and always unprofessional Warwick and Alison Marsh chose to channel Miranda Devine, who recently linked gay parents and Penny Wong to the London riots. It was no accident that Devine published her article in the lead up to National Marriage Day, and took a swipe at Labor’s upcoming national conference with same sex marriage on the agenda. Devine wrote in part;

The traditional heterosexual norm of a nuclear family and children is something to be kept in a closet like an embarrassment… No one can be a wife or husband any more. Everyone is a “partner”.

“You don’t have a child to make a political point, do you?” [Wong] says. But others are having a field day, cynically using the four-month pregnancy as a weapon in the relentless push for same-sex marriage.

You only had to see the burning streets of London last week to see the manifestation of a fatherless society. The collapse of family life in Britain has been laid bare, reported to have the highest proportion of single mothers in Europe and nearly half of all children suffering family breakdown by the age of 16.

Devine is still fighting criticism on Twitter almost three days later as I write. The Marsh couple, whose impact on kids who don’t fit their narrow views is all too clear and who use creepy terms like “father wound” to describe the absence of a father, also missed the primary flaw in this foul argument. Over one third of heterosexual marriages fail and one would expect these moral judges to get their own house in order before launching into single mums and gay couples. Nonetheless Wazza and Aly shine with their duo performance;

Warwick: Cultural elites many are whom are ultra-feminists have waged war on marriage and fatherhood in Britain for three decades. Last weeks riots are a prime example of their success.

Alison: Tragically exactly the same thing is happening here in Australia. Congratulations have flowed to the well known radical feminist Penny Wong, and her lesbian partner on the impending birth of her partners new baby.

Warwick:  But where are the tears for the child who will grow up without her father in the home? Or where are the tears for the fatherless children who will one day occupy over 70% of the capacity of our already overcrowded jails?

Alison: Where are the tears for the fatherless children who medicate their father wound through self destructive alcohol, drug, porn and sex addiction? And who will in many cases end up taking their own lives.

Bob Katter was there seeking to reclaim the word “gay”. “Nobody has the right to take that word off us… and that image off us”. No real comment other than an observation. The only other time I’ve heard this nonsense was during an awesome episode of The Infidel Guy in which Regi did battle with a hate filled and foul mouthed Tim Phelps. The son of Westboro Baptist founder Fred Phelps, Tim also had deep longings for this “beautiful word”. I imagine Fred Flintstone is similarly shattered.

Fortunately Peter Reith, Fran Kelly and Peter Lewis give this insult the swift disposal it deserves. “Disgraceful, shameful… a warping of the debate to talk about fatherless children as though they’re the children of gay couples… the most offensive thing I’ve heard on The Drum, including anything panelists have ever said”.

Now on with the show below. But I’ll stress this one more time. Just what do you think the science illiterate Tony Abbott has to offer Australians? Be afraid… be very afraid.

National Marriage Day Critiqued on The Drum

National Strategic Summit on Marriage, Family and Fatherhood 2007

Why Gender Matters

Selenium: to supplement or not to supplement

Selenium is present in many foods and available as a supplement. Expensive urine however, may not always be the worst case scenario for those duped by the vitamin/supplement industry.

Not to mention the “multi-dose” capers which are almost certainly increasing vitamins and minerals you don’t need, keeping you chronically dosed on those you need in tiny quantities and overdosing you on supplements or fat soluble vitamins you’re getting in sound quantities from your diet. Selenium dietary levels vary due to the origin of the plants or animals in ones diet.

A large, long term Selenium trial had to be suspended due to onset of many adverse effects including diabetes in participating subjects. Now you expect me to say something about supplement-pushing anti-vaccine lobbyists who blame vaccination for diabetes, don’t you? Wouldn’t dream of it.

Consider the poor chap in the MJA document below, who erroneously diagnosed impending prostrate cancer using the internet and natural remedy websites. He then ordered selenium online and with no monitoring from any health professional died from acute selenium poisoning. Serum selenium levels of below 100 ng (nanogram) per ml and above 160 ng per ml can be problematic. Which of course means absolutely nothing to those of us who didn’t get a fully staffed pathology laboratory for Christmas.

So, don’t be swayed by little warnings of doom on supplement bottles. Do appreciate that the range from insufficient to excessive is not only minor but demonstrably unaided by the swallowing of supplements.

Regarding the gentleman below, well he got hold of 200 grams of sodium selenite powder and went to town on it. The authors conclude;

A brief Internet search revealed 287 000 sites discussing the use of selenium in prevention and treatment of prostate cancer. This provides the public with large amounts of information that is not critically evaluated for validity. After reading Internet information on the possible link between selenium and prevention and treatment of prostate cancer, our patient was able to purchase 200 g of sodium selenite powder without adequate instructions.

He selected a dose himself, with catastrophic consequences. This case highlights the risks associated with failure to critically evaluate Internet material and exposes the myth that natural therapies are inherently safe. Internet sites which fail to disclose the potentially fatal effects of advocated treatments are an emerging threat to health. The World Health Organization has devised guidelines to help consumers evaluate medical information on the Internet, which are available online through the Therapeutic Goods Administration.12 Adverse outcomes of complementary and alternative medicines should be better publicised and more stringently reported to the Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee (ADRAC), in tandem with adverse outcomes of conventional medications, to create a database of side effects of all current therapies

This Tonic clip originally aired on the ABC, Sunday August 14th and looks at the rather rash linking of low serum selenium to various cancers – a notable problem in NZ with their low selenium content soils, and high levels of prominent cancers. How ever, the issue of genetics may also play a role. Australia has varying selenium levels in soil.

Be sure to chat to your doctor about using any supplements. Get a blood test if you wish and have the results explained. Try to avoid selenium supplements and the advice of beaming naturopaths.

If you’re worried about selenium scoff down a hand full of Brazil nuts every week rather than popping pills of dubious quality and concentration.

Accidental Death From Acute Selenium Poisoning