I'd be happier than a pig in gluten/casein free schtoof, if it were not for the continued harping on the thimeresol issue. I saw it last night on Larry King; Jenny spouting about vaccines and causation and looking expectantly over at her DAN! doctor Jerry Kartzinel. Jerry looked quite uncomfortable; he knows full well that any misstatement will be dissected, analyzed and shouted down by those looking to discredit anyone who has an anti-vaccine bent. Even Larry King got in on it, asking the good doctor what we should do about vaccines if there indeed was an issue; Larry did not get a good response.
Despite their shortcomings on causations, I thought they have a good story to tell about autism. Our kids our precious; we should question medical wisdom that there is nothing that can be done for them; we should not give up on who they are and can become and that this can be accomplished both therapeutically AND biomedically. Sometimes I fear that my opinion is the minority in thinking that biomedical interventions are and should be distinct and separate from the thimeresol argument. I feel that much of the good biomed can do is swallowed up in the vaccine discussions.
Some are saying that the Jenny McCarthy publicity is actually hurting the autism population. That discussions about vaccines obfuscate the needs of the parents of autistics and more importantly autistic adults. That her 'don't give up' message is demonizing those who choose to not go down the biomed path. While I agree to a certain extent, I would also like to take those to task who are ardently anti-biomed or only pro mainstream approach:
- Isn't it hurting those in the autistic community as well to deny the possible link of gastro-intestinal issues in some of the autistic population?
- Doesn't it hurt some in the community to deny that Applied Behavioral Analysis IS a viable therapy?
- Is it so far fetched that certain autistic children MAY have trouble properly processing heavy metals and/or other insults in the environment?
- Wouldn't you agree that the mainstream medicine is frequently giving people on the spectrum substandard treatment and that; just like law enforcement, they may need to be 'trained' on how to deal with autistic patients and what may be common cocommitants?
I understand fully the need to rail against the one note sambas being played by likes of Safeminds and others locked into the 'hope' that it is all in the thimeresol. But in the pursuit of the truth, I feel we are throwing quite a few babies out with the bathwater. Quackery is pushing easy answers and simplistic, sometimes expensive therapies. I frequently disagree as to causations, but there are kernals of truth in what some are doing that are being whitewashed; things that could help many in the community.
6 comments:
It is certainly likely that some kids with autism have other medical issues as well, and that these medical issues may contribute to or even, in rare cases, be the primary cause of their atypical development. The problem is that the majority of people who embrace biomedical approaches make the claim that sufficient biomedical treatment would "cure" any autistic person. There is also a strong sense that they do not value autistic people as autistic people. Rather they see them as damaged normal people. For that reason, I feel that they should not be involved in forming community opinions concerning autistic people. That job would be better done by people who like and respect autistic people.
But should we let the autistic people form the opinion for the next generation, the younger kids out there, when the autistic adults have their own separate (and equally important, mind you) agenda?
I think sometimes that biomed vs ND is almost a 'young vs old' issue. Or maybe a newly diagnosed vs those who have been through it already. Kinda like teenagers railing against their parents about idealism and the inequities of the world. Biomed 'teenager' says "yea there HAS to be a better way, we need to FIX this". The ND 'parent' saying: "in an ideal world, yes, but I've been there, I know better, I have more knowledge and experience. You're tilting at windmills."
Parents can learn a lot from their teenagers, or at least remember the inequities that parents stopped fighting for, and guide them toward a better fight and a deeper understanding.
Nicely put. And certainly there is a world of difference between a parent with a new diagnosis who is looking into a GFCF diet and quacks who are making money off detoxifying foot baths or worse.
(And thanks for dropping my my blog, too!)
I feel everything you say..I have a son age 10 with autism...I personally think Jenny is hurting out cause more than helping it.....
I'm with VAB.
Respect for autistics is primary in my book. Why would you ever want to get treatment or advice from someone that didn't respect you/your kid?
Second is a respect for the scientific method. That doesn't mean that I expect respect for all scientists and all institutions. But I do expect that if I'm going to subject my son to anything more than a dietary change, I expect that there will be real, credible, reproducible studies that back it up.
Joe
Is it so far fetched that certain autistic children MAY have trouble properly processing heavy metals and/or other insults in the environment?
It is no more far fetched than saying bigfoot may be real. They are both possibilities. There is good evidence for neither.
Post a Comment