US television broadcaster ABC has a series entitled Eli Stone and an as-of-now pending episode treats the topic of a component of vaccine as the cause of Autism. The TV show has generated quite a lot of interest (probably great for the advertisers, no?) with many publishing opinions about whether it is appropriate to air the episode. Among others, the American Academy of Pediatrics weighed in with a letter condemning it and Edward Wyatt of the New York Times published a critical review.
As one should expect, people who advocate for the proposition that thimerosal causes Autism have published critiques of these expressions of concern. Certainly chief among these is David Kirby, who has long promoted the connection between minute amounts of mercury and Autism. Fortunately, people who know how to reason have examined Mr. Kirby’s comments and, not too surprisingly, found them wanting. Orac, who also chastised the show on his Respectful Insolence, examined Mr. Kirby’s comments and systematically showed how they reflected slippage in thinking; I encourage folks to read Mr. Kirby’s article with an eye for slight-of-rational arguments and then read Orac’s analysis and see how many of those slights of rational Orac identifies are the same as those the reader identified. And, after that, check Steven Novella’s entry at NewoLogica Blog for another worthwhile view; as he notes, the broadcasters “have the right to show their reckless drama, but that right does not relieve them of any responsibility. I and others have the right to heap scorn upon them for their callous irresponsibility, and you might say we have a responsibility to do so.”
Check the section of ABC’s Web site on the Eli Stone series; one can see a 12-min preview of the show and the episode in question. Read the AAP letter and Mr. Wyatt’s review. Check Mr. Kirby’s arguments for yourself. Here’s the link to Orac’s older entry about the show and another link to the excellent take-down of Mr. Kirby’s comments. And here’s a link to Dr. Novella’s comments.
By the way, I’m TV challenged. We have the machine, but we can’t get reception where we live without cutting down a half-acre of trees to provide open sky for a satellite dish. Y’all will just have to watch for me…or not.
Sphere: Related Content
Here are my two cents. ABC is engaging in shameful anti-vaccination propaganda.
Lots of links to other bloggers on the issue.
Liz, do you have a child? Does your child suffer from autism?
If not, why do you care? What gives you the right to attack ABC or any other network? I think they touched on many issues
and both sides were given the same chance to prove their case.
The truth is that we may not have conclusive answers for years
If you don’t like the show, don’t watch it! Chicken Little comes to mind… .
We DO have a definitive answer, j. The mercury is present at levels toxic to bacteria, which is why it was used in the first place. Now that that substance is banned, certain vaccinations are not as safe, especially in the developing world. However, the mercury is multiple orders of magnitude smaller than the smallest dose (per unit of time) shown to effect humans of any age beyond five weeks old.
As far as the Kanner’s autistic child starting to lose speech or show other signs of autism in the time period just following vaccinations, it is important to note that the same incidence occurs in the same timeframe in populations that do not receive vaccinations (such as third-world countries). It’s like saying Clearasil causes homosexuality, because CLEARLY AND OBVIOUSLY Clearasil use and the first urges of homosexuality occur in the same period of time in a person’s life.
And if that’s offensive, consider this: I am a person with autism. My mother and father raised a child they didn’t expect: a child with a great mind but no friends, a child with a gift for reading and logic, but who couldn’t look them in the eyes for more than a moment.
Curing me would destroy the treasure they discovered. Would they be as happy to have the treasure they once expected to find?
People who claim thimerosal toxicity have had their chance to prove it through science. The causal link did not stand up to scrutiny, experimental, forensic, or statistical.