Thursday, 15 January 2009

Obviously this is only anecdote…

A new poster by the name of Maxybrown has asked if anyone on the JABS site has an unvaccinated child with autism.

Amethyst, a fairly regular poster and anti-vaxer has politely replied:

Yes I have a 5 year old who has autism and he is free from vaccination, apart from VIT K which was administered without our knowledge or consent.

He was born 10 weeks prem so at the moment, we put his condition down to that.

I have a 17 year old damaged by the MMR who is on the AS and a 14 year old who was vaccine damaged by the DTP, causing him massive brain damage, also on the AS.

This, to me, and probably to you too, suggests that Amethyst's family is a prime example of autism being primarily a genetic condition; three children on the autistic spectrum, blamed on three different environmental factors? You've got to be pretty pigheaded to just deny out of hand that this could in any way be genetic.

Another new poster, by the name of Forbalance has pointed this out:

Several studies have demonstrated that autism has a strong genetic component. If one child in a family is autistic, there's about a 10 percent chance that a sibling also will have autism.

Hurrah for Forbalance. But then Cybertiger - who let's not forget IS A DOCTOR, a real, medical doctor - not a naturopath or anything else made-up; a proper doctor - sticks his oar in:

And your point is, Mr. Balance?

Now, Dr Struthers, you know perfectly well what Forbalance's point is. He's suggesting that in this case it would not be unreasonable to suggest that the cause to Amethyst's three childrens' atuistic spectrum disorders is genetic. However, because you need the loons and the nut-jobs, the religious nutters and the out and out liars on your side to bolster your own agenda, you're using your status as a doctor to imply that you believe this to be absolutely not the case. You've been quite clever - you've not actually written anything that could get you into trouble - just implied it. I'm prepared to bet that this thread will be full of the usual suspects by teatime, claiming that there's no genetic component to autism, and that it's all environmental.

I feel so sorry for Amethyst - I can't begin to imagine what she must go through every day - but Cybertiger is quite happily propping up her paranoia and fears by suggesting that no, it's not genetic, yes, it's something she did to her children, she's to blame, and she has to live with that for the rest of her life. Dr Mark Struthers should be stuck off.

1 comment:

John H said...

Becky - as an anti-jabbophobe sniper you clearly operate in a target rich environment.

One's heart has to go out to people like Amethyst. To have three autistic children in one family must be heartbreaking.

You would have to argue that she has either been stupendously unlucky and is a highly improbable statistical anomaly, has certain genetic problems with respect to her and her partner or is subject to some environmental problems.

So one could have been rendered autistic by a Vitamin injection (?). One could have been rendered autistic by MMR and one by DTP.

Even the jabbophobes do not argue that vaccination affects every child who receives it so we can count out the statistical unlikelihood.

Environmental reasons would suggest themselves but it seems unlikely to me that anyone who lives in the western world is going to be subjected to such a risk independently of their neighbours etc. These things do not seem to cluster.

What does that leave ?