Last week, a story on Slate discussed how non-vaccinated children can have a potentially negative impact on children whose immune systems are compromised by leukaemia or other conditions. But one of the most candid, no-bullshit media reports on the anti-vaccination movement has to be the cover story of Wired magazine’s November issue, “An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All”.

The story very clearly states that vaccines do not cause autism, a fact that is at odds with the messages that come from one Jenny McCarthy and her organisation Generation Rescue and similar organisations like Austism One.

To break it down further, writer Amy Wallace clearly states that there is no scientific evidence of a cause-effect link between vaccines and autism. She also notes that the idea that vaccines are no longer necessary is a falsehood, and that they only seem unnecessary because they’ve succeeded so well at eradicating disease. She also points out that while allergic reactions to vaccines do happen, they are so rare that they are statistically insignificant.

One of the sidebars that accompanies the story even goes so far as to identify “the misinformants”, the well-known people who have crusaded against vaccinations and, in Wallace’s estimation, planted seeds of doubt where they don’t belong. Among those misinformants? McCarthy’s beau Jim Carrey, Robert F. Kennedy Jr and McCarthy herself.

The piece makes some very convincing arguments and is worth a read. I’m particularly curious to hear how people who consider themselves “anti-vaccine” react to this story. Did reading it change your mind, or do you think the Wired article doesn’t present a full enough picture of the issue?

Image: Wired magazine

Apparently, a local political rally had been informed (possibly from someone inside the jury room) that one of the paramedics accused of attempting to extort $US25M from John Travolta would be found not guilty.

John Travolta really had to put a lot on the line to try and bring these guys to justice, including going against the Church of Scientology by acknowledging that his son suffered from autism. Still, I guess the judge had no choice but to call for a retrial.

Man, I really feel for Travolta after this. Not only did he have to relive his son’s tragic death and suffer an “emotional collapse” in the process, but now he’s going to have to do it all over again. Is it going to get any easier the second time around? I wonder…

Source/Photo

At the outset, the idea is shocking — the family feeds their nine-year-old pot-laced cookies every day.

But Lee’s story of son J’s life prior to the cookies is equally shocking for those of us lucky enough not to have firsthand experience with autism.

She relates days when his teachers mark him down for as many as three hundred “aggressive” moments in one school day. She talks of uncontrollable compulsions that cause him to eat his own clothing and bed linens, of the aftermath when his body then has to pass the fibrous fabrics.

When she first wrote about her plan back in May, Lee weathered attacks on her parenting, among them people advising her not to drug her kid…but advocating her to work for a cure. Would you tell a cancer patient not to take advantage of something that shrinks his tumour because it isn’t the cure that he could be out working toward?

What makes the difference here? That he’s a child?

A cure would be wonderful for every autistic child, but like the cure for any of life’s currently incurable diseases, it’s a lopng ways off. And yet pot has made the worst of J’s symptoms disappear, allowing a child suffering from a syndrome with no cure a semblance of normal life. It is the next best thing to a cure — a treatment that works.

It’s worth pointing out, too, that asking a parent not to “drug” her kid sounds hollow when the other options to pot are all technically drugs as well. Legal though they may be, pharmaceuticals are mind/mood-altering substances as well.

Researchers have already harnessed illegal drugs to treat childhood diseases – what, after all, is the basis of most ADHD medicines but speed? Maybe medical marijuana is next for a child’s medicine cabinet near you.

Image: Chicago Now

The government study examined data from the National Survey of Children’s Health, a group of 78,000 children between the ages of three and 17.

What they found was that 1142 of those children had received a diagnosis of autism at some point in their childhood — 494 mild, 320 moderate and 90 severe.  Nearly 500 of the children no longer carried the diagnosis.

While the increase in numbers may seem alarming, experts say that it’s likely due to a higher awareness, better diagnostic tools and more testing.

What stumps researchers is that group of 499 kids who no longer carry the diagnosis.  They aren’t sure whether they were misdiagnosed to begin with, or if early intervention services helps children with mild cases overcome their symptoms.

Bob Wright, co-founder of Autism Speaks, an advocacy groups that says there’s growing evidence that autism affects one per cent of the population, says on the group’s website that these numbers should spur a call to action.

“These new numbers should serve as a renewed call to action to take on what is clearly a major public health crisis not only in this country, but around the world.  People with autism are still not getting the therapies they need and adequate medical care for the medical conditions often associated with this disorder….We must act now to address these short and long-term challenges.”

Studies have shown that boys appear to be more at risk than girls, and that white children are diagnosed with the disorder at a higher rate than black and multi-racial children, according to Healthday.

Photo: Jeff Kubina, Flickr

According to an insider close to John, the grieving father remains “firmly committed” to Scientology, despite reports that Church big wigs aren’t happy with his public acknowledgment of Jett’s disease.

John apparently doesn’t hold a grudge against the Church, which doesn’t acknowledge chronic mental illnesses or prescription medications used to treat them — even though it’s now generally accepted that John’s son Jett suffered from untreated autism.

Jett died of complications resulting from an apparent seizure brought on by his untreated illness back in January.

Source/Photo

But doctors and some parents with autistic kids are sceptical. In fact, some are worried that this will only fuel parental anxiety, particularly when it comes to autism.

The company, LENA, claims the $US200 device is meant to help early detection of autism. Right now, autism disorders are caught, on average, when kids are nearly 6 years old. Children who have been diagnosed earlier, they say, receive earlier intervention, giving them an advantage over kids who had been diagnosed when they were older.

Here’s how the LENA system works, according to the website:

After providing the requested order and payment information through our online shop, you will receive a kit with a LENA Digital Language Processor (DLP—a small, unobtrusive recording device), LENA Clothing, and some questionnaires. On the recording day (we recommend a weekend day), you dress your child in the LENA Clothing, turn on and insert the DLP in the clothing pocket and record 12 to 16 hours of your child’s daily vocalizations. The next day you send the DLP and other materials back to us in a prepaid FedEx envelope. We process the data and send you the results and reports within two weeks of receiving your packet.

The report consists of scores etc and gives parents a probability of the likelihood of autism. Probability of the likelihood? Sounds like a whole lot of hedging to us.

A big selling point of the device, some claim, is that paediatricians spend only an average of seven minutes with the child at doctor’s visits — not enough time to pick up on possible signs. Okay, but then that’s a problem with the kind of care kids are getting from paediatricians, who might need to start screening at the 2- and 3-year-old well-child check ups. The LENA system is meant for kids as young as 24 months up to 48 months old.

One sceptical mother of an autistic child said the device wouldn’t have picked up anything on her daughter, since she didn’t talk that much. Another said she realised something was wrong when her kid was checked out — there weren’t signs in her language.

I’d love to know LENA’s batting average so far. Does the probability score put a lot of parents into panic mode?

What do you think? Is this high-tech way to read tea leaves? A battery operated crystal ball? Have you had an autism scare? How was your child diagnosed with autism?

Almost one year ago to this very day I was attending an orientation day with other parents at our local public school. One of the parents there, a bright, peppy and rather forthright woman, was inquiring about the facilities for children with special needs. Her child has Aspergers Disorder or Aspergers Syndrome as it’s more commonly known.

S’ok. Just a few days ago I bumped into the same peppy lady at our local park. All you parents out there will know the kind of park I’m talking about. The standard plastic play equipment in awful bright colours designed to ’stimulate’ the children and be relatively free of lawsuit potential for the local city council. I find them homogenous and monotonous and rather sterile. It’s all a little too IKEA for me.

Anyway, sitting there on the spongy surface with bits of sand in our coffees, peppy lady and me got to talking. It’d been a year and I was interested to find out how things were going for her little boy – compare some notes. Had she decided on that Eastern Suburbs primary? And, if so, how were they providing for her son’s Aspergers?

Well, you’ll never guess, she says. It turns out her son doesn’t have Aspergers after all.

“He’s just gifted!”

Gifted?

Just?

Well blow me down. Another gifted child. One day it’s Aspergers. The next day it’s extraordinary gifts. Then, oh what a relief, it’s the Aspergers or Autism that gives your kid the extraordinary gifts. I just can’t keep up with all the mental trends flying around these days. And in the last year or so I’ve noticed it’s almost becoming chic to have Aspergers or Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder or just Attention Deficit Disorder or whatever else. There’s a feeling on the streets that having Aspergers makes you pretty cool and kinda ‘out there’.

Look, I’m not going to cast any Asperger-sertions here. I know that there’s something out there called Asperger Syndrome and I’m not about to debate the existence of Aspergers or ADHD. But I know, too, that parents who ACTUALLY deal with the added stresses and strains of kids with these conditions probably suffer just a little bit more because of the new Aspergers cool. Now everyone is piggy backing on Aspergers or ADD to explain away their own kids’ nasty behaviour and, ironically, it loses its specificity or special quality. Now everyone has special needs. And I’d be willing to bet it’s become an excuse. He’s not actually a badly-behaved little bastard – he’s ADD!! Yay! We must nurture his tantrums – they could lead to great art or a Nobel Prize for physics.

But I wonder how many Asperger sufferers or ADD kids running around our hood would actually be diagnosed as such according to the standard clinical criteria?

There’s a veritable race to define our children as different, as special or gifted. I mean it’s all gone a little bit hyper these past few years, hasn’t it? This rage against the ‘normal’? “What’s normal?” I keep being asked. “My children!” I cry. Both of them are pretty much average. Not too bright. Not too dumb. “Oh you poor thing” is the condescending reply. “You mean they don’t even have Auditory Processing Disorder? Aren’t they even allergic to nuts?”

The parental urgency to have your child stand out in the competitive child market has established a crazy race to the bottom. Wild-child? A misfit? Aspergers? Gifted? ADD? ADHD? APD? What’s your baby’s Unique Selling Point?

I suppose it’s just part of individualism. We all need to feel like we’re special. And now with all these medical conditions we can get the scientific veneer of specialness – ‘objective proof’ that our kid is more interesting and talented and brighter than all the other kids. And we can sit back and bask in their amazingly gifted glory.

I guess what I’m riled about is the idea of a “gift” – of intelligence as a “gift” or a “blessing”. Is it the religious tone that concerns me? Or is it the biological determinism – the idea that some things are just “innate” or “in our genes”? Or maybe it’s how the quasi-religious idea of a gift from above is being re-issued in a modern style as biology.

Any way you cut it, I feel we’re all being subjected to a con job. The pressure is on parents to produce worthy and brilliant progeny in a world that increasingly divides people into ‘winners’ and ‘losers’. We all worry about our kids’ futures in this unstable time. And so we’re trying to set them up. It’s understandable.

But this golden child scenario has all got a bit too much. Surely they can’t ALL be the Chosen One? Now I KNOW there might be some children who are off the chart when it comes to all the indicators and indices we’re using these days. But they have got to be EXCEEDINGLY rare. These are the kids we don’t understand. They’re the anomalies we helplessly call ‘geniuses’. But I sincerely doubt that there are 15 of them in your kid’s classroom.

Follow Angry Dad on twitter!

Early warning signs include: not responding to one’s name, not sharing interests through pointing and eye gaze, lack of joyful expression, an absence of babbling, difficulty establishing eye contact, and staring too long at inanimate objects. Researchers compiled this list by studying home videos of children with autism and their younger siblings, who have high rates of autism.

At the Yale Child Study Center, researchers measure when toddlers stop blinking while watching a video; typical children will do so at scenes of emotion, while a child with autism will fixate on the opening and
closing of a door.

At Vanderbilt University, babies are shown a sealed jar of cookies, their reactions recorded and evaluated; typical children will seek the assistance of a caregiver through eye contact and gestures; a child with autism will repeatedly place the caregiver’s hand on the jar but never make eye contact

These studies, along with others, were presented at a conference at Columbia University’s Teachers College. The goal: to identify autism as early as possible so that intervention and assistance can begin as early as possible.

Investigators stress that no one test or behaviour alone is indicative of autism, and the goal is not to officially diagnose these children but rather to identify them as “at risk” and get them assistance as soon as possible.

“The environment in the early years has an active role in shaping the brain,” says Geraldine Dawson, chief scientific officier of the advocacy group Autism Speaks. “What we see in autism may be partly the result of not engaging with the social environment. So if you engage the baby through an intervention, you might prevent or at least reduce the development of autism symptoms.”

Some studies aim to help children as young as eight months, such as one at the University of Washington funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dawson explains, “What we are doing is teaching the parents how to structure interactions to promote eye contact and babbling.” The goal, she says, is to “begin before the full autism syndrome is present and prevent it from emerging.”

Of course, not every baby that is slow to babble has autism. Which begs the question: does identifying these early warning signs truly help children? Or does it simply fuel parents’ fears?

As reported in the Daily Telegraph, Thomas the Tank Engine has already proven very popular with autistic kids, perhaps because they have very clear facial expressions, Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect) says.

They’ve joined forces with Thomas and Friends’ owners, HiT Entertainment, to use them in games and promotions.

The “emotions game ” on the Aspect website asks players to recognise which engine has the sad face, the happy face and so on.

“We know children with autism relate particularly to Thomas and now we have the chance to build on that relationship,” Aspect CEO Adrian Ford said.

What a wonderful initiative. This is why I’ll never think all licenced characters and TV shows are rubbish. It’s all about context.

Lee is trying to help her autistic son, who spends large parts of his days and nights in pain from an inflammatory bowel condition and the results of an operation on his spinal cord. And also from aggression that is symptomatic of his autism.

Does it work? Mmmm kind of. Is it illegal? Sort of but not really.

Lee lives in Rhode Island, one of 13 states that has legalised the use of marijuana for medical reasons. Her son’s doctor signed off on it. The benefit to her son is better sleep, less aggression and a way to avoid “sedating, antipsychotic drugs like Risperdal.”

Writing for Double X, an excellent new smarty pants women-focused Web site that launched yesterday, Lee explains how she settled on pot, how she gets it an, so far, whether it’s working.

But since we started him on his “special tea,” J’s little face, which is sometimes a mask of pain, has softened. He smiles more. For the last year, his individual education plan at his special-needs school was
full of blanks, recording “no progress” because he spent his whole day an irritated, frustrated mess. Now, April’s report shows real progress, including “two community outings with the absence of aggressions.

Anybody else out there medicating with pot? What do you think of this mom’s solution? What about the criminalisation of marijuana in the first place?

Photo: DoubleX