Comments on: Mercurys Rising in Nature Medicine

By: The R Word and Not So Nice Language

The R Word and Not So Nice Language — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 05:43:01 +0000

[...] less than super nice blog comments are nothin’ compared to the death threats and more that vaccine researchers have received. And let’s not get started at what, well, “not niceness” gets cast when some [...]

By: Paul Offit on Hannah Poling and the VICP

Paul Offit on Hannah Poling and the VICP — Thu, 15 May 2008 04:02:17 +0000

[...] Paul Offit, M.D., chief of infectious diseases at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. He is frequently quoted regarding the controversy over a vaccine-autism link; he emphasizes the importance of vaccines for public health. Dr. Offit is, accordingly, not exactly a beloved figure among those who claim that there is a link between autism and vaccines and has even been the recipient of death threats. [...]

By: Immunization, Children, and Lots of Questions

Immunization, Children, and Lots of Questions — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 05:01:33 +0000

[...] vaccines in autism and you can feel the mercury rising and the conversation become an exchange of volleys between those who state their child became [...]

By: Kev

Kev — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 06:20:27 +0000

Toxic – hohum, same old stuff from you guys, asked to provide evidence for your statements and never can.

Here’s a little incentive for you Toxic. If you can find me threatening to hurt the kids of people I disagree with or making death threats then I promise I will not only eat my own shoes, I will video myself doing it and post it on YouTube.

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 02:02:59 +0000

Mr. (Ms.) Toxic, Your comment could be made regarding many websites, blogs, etc. that argue for a link between mercury, vaccines, etc., and autism.

By: RAJ

RAJ — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 00:34:38 +0000

It is not a broadening of diagnostic criteria, it a vastly expanded definition and would include any introverted kid who may be perfectly normal. Here is an excellent description in Medscape on how the criteria changed and how the entire 'autism epidemic' can be explained. Medscape: What are the significant changes in diagnostic criteria for autism between 1980 and 1994? Dr. Gernsbacher: Whereas the 1980 DSM-III entry required satisfying six mandatory criteria, the more recent 1994 DSM-IV offers 16 optional criteria, only half of which need to be met. Moreover, the severe phrasing of the 1980 mandatory criteria contrasts with the more inclusive phrasing of the 1994 optional criteria. For instance, to qualify for a diagnosis according to the 1980 criteria, an individual needed to exhibit ''a pervasive lack of responsiveness to other people." In contrast, according to 1994 criteria, an individual must demonstrate only ''a lack of spontaneous seeking to share.... achievements with other people'' and peer relationships less sophisticated than would be predicted by the individual's developmental level. The 1980 mandatory criteria of ''gross deficits in language development'' and ''if speech is present, peculiar speech patterns such as immediate and delayed echolalia, metaphorical language, pronominal reversal'' were replaced by the 1994 options of difficulty ''sustain[ing] a conversation'' or ''lack of varied ...social imitative play." ''Bizarre responses to various aspects of the environment'' became ''persistent preoccupation with parts of objects."

By: toxic

toxic — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 23:09:07 +0000

To Joseph,Kev, notmercury:
Boring. Same old thing you always do – gang up when someone doesn\’t share your opinion.
Stop asking for examples and go reread your own blogs.

By: toxic

toxic — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 23:06:09 +0000

To Joseph, Kev, and NotMercury – hohum, same old stuff from you guys. You gang up on people who don\’t share your opinion.
Stop asking for examples and go reread your blogs.

By: notmercury

notmercury — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 17:59:58 +0000

Harold,
I’m left wondering why you seem so threatened by the idea of better diagnosis or the possibility that we aren’t in the midst of an autism epidemic?

Is it that you are so certain some external force or agent is responsible that you feel it necessary to have an explosion of new autism cases to support this idea or does it have more to do with making others aware of your plight and lack of services?

I also wonder how you arrived at your ideas concerning neurodiversity and some of the bloggers who support the concept.

I’ve read where you’ve said things like “There are those who criticize the so called mercury camp in equally vicious terms including some of the names you mention.”
but I’ve yet to see you provide specific examples.

By: Kev

Kev — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 17:52:18 +0000

“The viciousness you refer to on the part of those you deride as being in the mercury camp is not unique to them. There are those who criticize the so called mercury camp in equally vicious terms including some of the names you mention.”

Would you like to post some references to comments where ‘those names’ mentioned have offered threats against children? Or threats of violence? Because thats what the anti-vaccine brigade do. In fact, when Brad Handley of Generation Rescue made a threat of physical violence to me you lauded him for speaking his mind.

You Harold, are a painfully obvious hypocrite who sees his own blog and other peoples comment sections as a chance to play politics.