I think I have a good pick for McCain’s VP. Maybe she could even be his science advisor.
And before everyone jumps all over me for being unfair, maybe you ought to read this first, or perhaps this. Ms. McCarthy, who I find can actually be quite funny and charming, knows nothing about science or the scientific method, and has made it clear that she is among the worst of the worst when it comes to promoting anecdotal data and antiscientific claims as truth.
Hat tip to Fark.
If you went to BadAstronomy.com and found yourself here, never fear: the BA Blog has moved to its new home at Discover Blogs. The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking and all that) is still online, too.
Phil Plait, the creator of Bad Astronomy, is an astronomer, lecturer, and author. After ten years working on Hubble Space Telescope and six more working on astronomy education, he struck out on his own as a writer. He has written two books, dozens of magazine articles, and 12 bazillion blog articles. He is a skeptic, and fights misuses of science as well as praising the wonder of real science.
 |
"Reading this book is like getting punched in the face by Carl Sagan. Frightening, but oddly exhilarating."
-- Daniel H. Wilson, author of How to Survive a Robot Uprising
DISCOVERmagazine.com: Latest Articles on Space DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom
March 6th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
From her bio at the end of the article: “Jenny McCarthy was best known as host of the enormously popular series MTV’s Singled Out.”
Uh, no.
Jenny McCarthy is best known for walking into the offices of Playboy in the early nineties, literally out of the blue, and emerging Playmate of the Year. That is what she is most famous for.
Her TV work is marginal at best.
But her PLAYBOY work, as a literal unknown before walking through those famous bunny-etched double doors, is superb.
Just stating facts.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
I don’t understand, BA. Is it sarcasm? Or is it serious? Is it good or bad that she’s the worst? What is she worst at again? I don’t understand the end of that sentence.
I’ve read some of the refered text. She wants a better education for our children. I would say that it is… good?
March 6th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
And hey, adding her name to the ballot will balance out the fact that McCain is a strapping young lad of 71 years.
But… No. I’m not sure that I could handle that much stupid. McCain-McCarthy would be as bad as Huckabee.
March 6th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
I don’t get it either. Are you picking on her? If so, why? Because she’s not a scientist? If you’re not picking on her, then what, exactly, are you trying to say? Does she have an actual connection to McCain I don’t know about?
March 6th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Maybe he’s drawing the connection because McCain has been pandering to the anit-vax, autism is caused by vax, and the anti-science crowd. The same crowd that McCarthy is talking to all the time…
March 6th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Is this pick on a random celebrity day? If you want to pick on a celebrity for promoting anecdotal data and antiscientific claims as truth I think you may be able to find much more qualified candidates than Ms McCarthy…
March 6th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
I thought I was being clear. The first link goes to her talking about autism and making outrageous antiscience statements, and the second goes to my post about McCain making outrageous antiscience statements about vaccines and autism.
Then I made sure by adding two more links that clearly show Ms. McCarthy is antiscience.
So yes, I was being sarcastic, but backing up my statements with evidence.
March 6th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
i dont think ANY of the canidates are worthy of the white house, they all are to far on one side of the extreme
March 6th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
Here’s another scary religious candidate for everyone to worry about:
http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/334482.aspx
March 6th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
dear dr.plait:
ms mccarthy is plain wrong, of course, but you must have take note that she has a son with autism… i think she should have our sympathy, and our respect, even in her errors, not our mock. if you are searching for a running mate for mr.mccain there is tom cruise. he is young, healthy and bright…
March 6th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Damn. I like McCain, I really do. Might have something to do with the fact he was my senator all through my childhood. While I disagree with him on quite a few things, I don’t think he’d make a bad president. But you’d think a guy who survived a plane crash and a rocket explosion would recognize the importance of the frickin’ scientific method.
Right now, I don’t care who wins. All three choices, regardless of other qualifications, are miles better than Bush. But none of them are paying attention to issues that really matter to me. And no one cares. We could do that science debate thing, for example, but who would watch?
Oh, to live in one of those European countries where the right wing is somewhere to the left of the Democrats…
March 6th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
“So yes, I was being sarcastic, but backing up my statements with evidence.”
As my mother used to say, “There’s being right, and there’s being nice. There’s no reason you can’t be both.”
I know speaking out against anti-science is important, but with all the anti-science malevolence in the world, I think you could pick your battles with a little more integrity.
I’m sorry. I know that wasn’t very nice of me…
March 6th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
>>Oh, to live in one of those European countries where the right wing is somewhere to the left of the Democrats…
You mean the ones that are considering instituting Shariah law as a nod to multiculturalism?
March 6th, 2008 at 7:15 pm
Earl’sTV and alex c.: I have great amounts of sympathy for parents of autistic children. And I can try to understand the depths of their desire to help. But campaigning against vaccines and relying on blatant antiscience are doing so much damage that I must speak out.
They want to help kids, but they are actually condemning them to a life of illness. Do these people seriously want polio to come back? How about epidemics of measles, or mumps, or rubella?
Vaccines are a triumph of medical science.
Mind you, I didn’t call her an idiot, or say she was stupid. I said she was antiscience, and called her out for it. I also afford a small joke about her and McCain both being on the wrong wrong wrong side of this issue. That’s it.
March 6th, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Blu-Ray-Venon said:
“i dont think ANY of the canidates are worthy of the white house, they all are to far on one side of the extreme”
I’ve thought exactly the same thing, but I wonder if we agree on which side that is . . .
March 6th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
I concur with the BA. McCarthy seeks to harm children by promoting her patently wrong nonsense. Parents don’t get a free pass to harm children, period.
Doesn’t matter what kind of favored status their child might have - gifted, “Crystal,” autistic, whatever - no free pass. People who want to harm children in this way should expect to be subject to more than just derision, and getting off with BA’s very mild slapdown is showing more respect than they have any right to expect.
March 6th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
dear mr plait:
i am with you in your fight against anti science. it is one of the causes that made me one your readers… i am too pro vaccines (all vaccines). i remember perfectly well been a child and living under the polio’s scare!!! so i accept your criticism/attacks against mccain. (i’m not a fan of him) i would accept, of course, a scientific critic/attack against ms.mccarthy.
but you must remember too that she is a suffering mother. autism, alzheimer, down syndrome, “dementia sennil”, are very very taxing illness for the relatives of the patients, so we must understand their plight and have some kindness to them. so making fun on them, even “a small joke”, to put it mildly, very incorrect.
you must know that science is only a brach of philosophy. another very important brach is ETHIC…
March 6th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
I note that this week the AP carried a story “linking” vaccines with autism. See “Government Concedes Vaccine Injury Case” in the paper near you. You have to read about half-way down before you find the words that studies have found no link between thimerosal and autism and that the person affected had a pre-existing condition. If you make it all the way to the end of the article you find what must be an annoying little fact for the anti-thimerosal crowd: Autism is still increasing despite a decrease in use of thimerosal as a vaccine preservative. Not that the general spin and tone is anti-thimerosal. Someone who simply skimmed the article could come away thinking the government admitted a link when in fact it has done the opposite.
GIGO applies to more than just computers. How many in the general public knows that it’s been shown there’s no link between thimerosal and autism? How many in politics? Nothing I’ve seen makes me think any candidate, be it Hillary, Obama, McCain, or Nader, would think much differently.
Why yes: I *am* full of “cheerful thoughts” tonight. How did you know?
March 6th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
You people can argue about the merits of the various candidates all you want. Me, I’m going with the one man who has repeatedly demonstrated his superior intellect and the strength of rational thinking.
Yes, I’m writing in Tom Cruise for President.
March 6th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
I held my nose and waded through all of the links. I have just one question:
WHAT THE [HECK] IS AN INDIGO AND A CRYSTAL?
Over and over she says “I am an indigo and my son is a crystal” as if what that means is a given and anyone who doesn’t know what that means must have crawled out from under a rock!
March 6th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
McCain already has a VP, The Press.
March 6th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Alex, she’s dating a rich guy, and is rich herself. She probably doesn’t suffer any shortage of people willing to help. On the other hand, she is pushing a farcical solution and expensive hard-to-follow diet and supplements with no evidence. It’s hard enough to get my son to eat - trying to force him to take pills, or crush them up in his food, or tell him he can’t have some of his favorite foods because some Hollywood lady said so, well I say what right does she have. Her anecdotes somehow trump my own experience because she is famous? They trump science again, because she is famous?
She needs to go back to school, and keep her own “solutions” to herself and concentrate more on caring for her son. You want to help, Hollywood lady? Stump like John Stewart for a general fund for autism research.
March 6th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
it is too late for me (2 A.M.) i have to go to bed. but before: i do know that 80% of the actor and actress of hollywood are morons (Spears, Cruise, Lohan, Hilton, etc. etc.), the problem is that they think that they are more intelligent than us!! i did not know that ms.mcarthy is married to a rich guy (i don’t read that class of biography, i know about her because her sons illness), i do know too the harm that she could do. i don’t even know if her pain is sincere, but that is not the point. what i have said, is that there are some ethic limits, that we must not trespass. one limit is the pain of a mother/father. making fun of her is one those limits. we must with due respect, tell her, the public in general that she is wrong, dead wrong but make fun… and making fun on her disgrace!!!
put YOU in her position, and then tell me. if we don’t respect her pain (sincere or not) we lost autorithy we debased ourselves. she is wrong, we not only know she is wrong, we know WHY is she wrong!!! we know how to comunicate our knowlege don’t we??? so what is the purpose of the “small joke”??? please grow up!!!
and you all must remember what the ETHIC says:
THE ENDS NEVER JUSTIFY THE MEANS!!!!
que tengan lindos sueños
March 6th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Oh, man! Why did you have to go and bring up that bimbo? Now I feel a full-blown rant coming on…
Rant_Mode_On
It’s bad enough being the parent of a kid with autism, a condition I can do little about, and a condition that the medical establishment has IMHO really dropped the ball on during the last decade or so. But what makes it infinitely worse is all the absolute charlatans running amok in the field. McCarthy is one of them.
“I didn’t call her an idiot, or say she was stupid.”
O.K. I will. Jenny McCarthy is an absolute idiot. She is STUPID. You should be able to come to that conclusion by listening to half a minute of her incoherent babbling. She went on Oprah a few months ago and spouted her pseudoscientific B.S.
“one limit is the pain of a mother/father. making fun of her is one those limits. we must with due respect, tell her, the public in general that she is wrong, dead wrong but make fun… and making fun on her disgrace!!!”
She is the disgrace! She is the one who doesn’t know her head from her posterior. She is the one touting pseudoscientific B.S. cures for autism. Do you realize how much influence she wields? There will be thousands of parents of autistic kids who will read her book, watch her interviews, and end up spending tens of thousands of dollars on her pseudoscientific B.S. “cures” (i.e., quackery). That money will be diverted from therapies (e.g., ABA) that have been proven to work with autism. She is doing real damage to autistic kids in the United States and throughout the world.
McCarthy, keep your mouth shut until you have something intelligent to say (which will be never)!
Rant_Mode_Off
March 6th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Didn’t you americans already have a problem with a senator McCarthy, I do not think a vp McCarthy will be any better.
March 6th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
As soon as I read this, I knew it was trouble:
What type of Inner Fairy do you have? A fun Inner Fairy Guide Quiz by Cecily Channer is in the Articles section. Let your inner child come out to play, and find out which fairy you are!
March 7th, 2008 at 12:26 am
Clean for Gene!
March 7th, 2008 at 12:27 am
Odd. At no point have I seen her tout diet and nutrition as a “cure” for autism. Like many parents with autistic children she’s trying everything she can to make a difference for her son. Perhaps it is misguided, but it is still weak to ridicule her for it.
But hey, maybe the slut with a big rack in your ads can cure autism, she seems to be the cure for all sorts of ailments.
Mr BA, it is unfortunate that so many pro-science/atheists come off looking like arrogant self-important over-inflated wankers. Get over yourself. The routine is getting old.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:49 am
@Kaptain K:
Warning - the next paragraph might cause headaches in scientific minded beings:
I took the pain to investigate
Among other capabilities, “Indigos” “Know they belong here until they are told otherwise” and “Have spiritual intelligence and/or psychic skills”. On the other hand, “Crystals” “Communicate telepathically” and are “able to see other worlds and dimensions”.
If you don’t believe me, look for yourself (and have some Aspirin handy): http://web.archive.org/web/20061019002301/indigomoms.com/art_indchar.html
My analysis:
All I can see from the “classification” at the end of that link is that most of the points used to describe “Crystals” (with the exception of the forementioned psychic abilities) are classic authistic behaviors, and likewise, the “Indigos” are ADHDs.
I can understand McCarthys position in a certain way: Authism cannot be cured - and she as a (loving) mother can not accept this, and tries to find hope. Any hope, for that.
I feel pity for her, and even more pity for her son.
March 7th, 2008 at 2:27 am
I tend to disagree with the opinion that has been mentioned a few times in here - that those ’suffering’ are to be treated differently over those who don’t (in McCarthys case).
Basically, this opinion is fair - of course those suffering must be treated with more care - but this case is different. McCarthy does travel the country promoting her ideas and must therefore face criticism and alike. And the more stupid the ideas promoted, the harsher the criticism. It wouldn’t be any different if the BA were to promote Evolution at the Discovery Institute with all the ID/Young Earth/etc followers as his audience (who do of course think that the BAs ideas are more stupid than anything).
Folks, when someone does step out onto the stage, then he or she will be judged. And while you guys will take his or her personal history and situation into account, you shouldn’t forget that it doesn’t make critizing or even joking about him/her off-limits.
I at first did feel a bit unwell about the BAs comments, remembering somewhere in the back of my head that my Mrs. has a McCarthy book in her bookshelf that she enjoyed reading during her pregnancy, but after doing a little bit of reading into the sources provided here and elsewhere on the web, I strongly agree with the BAs opinion on this matter. While everyone’s free to blurt out their personal opinion, they need to deal with the response as well - you don’t get away unharmed because you’re ’suffering’ in one way or another.
They deserve our pity, our care and respect - but just like a guy with shorter legs wont automatically be judged differently in a sprint race, personal history cannot be taken into account when promoting ideas that are questionable - full stop.
Regards,
(HEARTS)
[who has short legs .. but doesn’t race]
March 7th, 2008 at 3:12 am
My guess is that the Clinton machine will get so nasty that Obama gets driven out of the party and ends up as McCain’s VP as a unity ticket.
March 7th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Er .. sadly, Huckabee strikes me as MaCacain’s most likely running partner.
Then McCain’ll have a stroke or be diagnosed with senile dementia or chronic ag’d incontinence or suchlike thing and it’ll be President Huckabee.
&
AMERICA - DOOOMED! :-O
Please Yanks think very, very hard and DON”T VOTE RETARDICAN!!
As to this other woman, well I don’t believe anybody or anythihng should be exempt form humour at their expense. (Never heard of her before now. Got aspergers syndrome - a related condition to autism - myself )
Nor do I beleive there is, could be or ever should be any such thing as a “right NOT to be offended.”
Free speech - & the right to reply when people are talking BS - is what we’re supposed to be fighting for - & not just in your illegal invasion & occupation of Iraq either …
————————————-
“The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers!”
- Princess Leia, ‘Star Wars V: A New Hope.’
“Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest!”
- Dennis Diderot (1713-1784)
“There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an advantage and security to all, but especially to democracies against despots - suspicion.”
- Demosthenes, Phillipics-2. [Collins Concise Dictionary of Quotations, P.108.]
March 7th, 2008 at 3:55 am
“The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers!”
- Princess Leia, ‘Star Wars V: A New Hope.’
& incidentally that’s my favourite line in the whole ‘Star Wars’ saga -except for Ben Kenobi’s which goes something like :
“.. & these blaster marks too precise to be anything but imperial storm troopers!”
When throughout the remainder of the original three movies they can’t manage to hit the side of a barn door at point blank range!
March 7th, 2008 at 4:09 am
Good manners, politeness, respect and consideration for the feelings, situations and ideas of others are generally desirable and right. Make no mistake on that.
But when a public figure steps out in public and advocates self-destructive nonsense - not calling them on it is far worse and more harmful than saying ‘Well, she’s [X] so I can’t really criticise …’
Folks have the right to be treated fairly & given a hearing.
Folks do NOT have a right to NOT to be made fun of or to leap up and take offence at everything they disagree with.
If someone says something silly (& hey, I often do!
) - then its silly whatever their circumstances whether they have one-leg, a disabled famliy, an abusive partner, half a brain or whatever! 
March 7th, 2008 at 4:52 am
Then you haven’t been paying attention, but decided to sound off anyway, making yourself come off looking like an arrogant self-important over-inflated wanker. Congratulations.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:56 am
We need a Woo party, with Oprah for president and McCarthy for VP.
Of course if McCarthy runs with McCain, we could have the spectacle of some aid wondering if it might look like an affair, the NY Times reporting about it, and everybody in the world thinking the Times accused McCain of having an affair.
(Seriously, did anybody actually read the original article?)
FWIW, I’m with BA on this one. Somebody who uses the bully pulpit of wealth and fame to promote antiscientific stupidity needs to be shot down at every opportunity.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:57 am
# Lab Lemmingon 06 Mar 2008 at 7:12 pm
>>Oh, to live in one of those European countries where the right wing is somewhere to the left of the Democrats…
You mean the ones that are considering instituting Shariah law as a nod to multiculturalism?
To get back to an astronomical theme…
There is a strawman the size of a planet.
March 7th, 2008 at 6:01 am
That Autism stuff really hit home with me. I have a son with Asbergers syndrome. The first time I heard it my first thought was “Oh great the syndrome du jour”. It’s real though. Now I take solace in the the closing credits of Animal house “Senator and Mrs. John Blutarski”. Oh yeah and George Bush got to be president…FOR TWO WHOLE TERMS!!! How lame can the Dem’s be to let that happen? And I’m aright leaning libertarian!
March 7th, 2008 at 6:30 am
My reactions were varied when I started reading the linked posts.
Diet Cola cures Autism? Well, I got slightly ticked off. Okay, McCain says that vaccines cause autism, but this is taken off to a whole new level.
And the Indigo Child… Sorry to say this, but come on, what a selfish woman! “Ooh look I have an indigo child he’s gonna save the world and I’m gonna get famous”.
March 7th, 2008 at 6:37 am
It would be nice to see some greater attention on Autism in USA which now affects 1 in 116 newborn boys. Why a greater impact in USA than elsewhere?
As to the Jenny solution of diet & vitamins, it may be as good a program as witch-doctors & voodoo at this point since we do not appear to have a clue.
March 7th, 2008 at 6:56 am
McCarthy and the rest of the anti-vax community are prime examples of the Dunning-Kruger effect in action.
March 7th, 2008 at 6:58 am
There is a good article by David Kirby of the Huffington post discussing the autism - vaccine link. I love the following quote of his near the end of the article.
”
When a kid with peanut allergy eats a peanut and dies, we don’t say “his underlying metabolic condition was significantly aggravated to the extent of manifesting as an anaphylactic shock with features of death.”
No, we say the peanut killed the poor boy. Remove the peanut from the equation, and he would still be with us today.
”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-concedes-vacci_b_88323.html
March 7th, 2008 at 7:04 am
Phil, if you’re serious about combatting autism woo then you should consider adding a link to the following blog:
http://autismdiva.blogspot.com
She has a lot of good information about McCarthy. Here are some excerpts:
“This past week Jenny McCarthy hawked her book on both Oprah, and on ABC’s 20/20. The 20/20 reporter introduced Jenny’s story by saying that when Jenny gave birth to her son Evan, he in turn gave birth to her new career as a writer. As Jenny said on Oprah (about modeling in a bikini while worrying about her son’s health,) “Mommy’s gotta work it.”
If you’d like to read Jenny’s Crystal-less pearls of wisdom about autism without forking over the dough for her book, she’s posted some of them to Oprah.com. She helpfully points out that she’s not a doctor, but lists what she did with/to Evan. Including:
#4 Starting anti-fungal meds to kill Candida/fungus. Meds like Diflucan, Nystatin. Evan started to come out of autism completely after I killed CANDIDA!!
First of all, what’s the deal here? She says he “started to come out of autism” when she, personally, “killed CANDIDA!”. But he started to come out autism “completely” meaning that he eventually became normal? “Completely”? Why is he called her “autistic son” on the cover of People magazine? Why is he still doing repetitive and stereotypical behaviors and why does he stil have problems with “abstract understanding”? One can only assume that Jenny feels deeply as if she has failed when Evan flaps because her efforts with diet, Diflucan and Nystatin haven’t killed every last imaginary crazy-making yeast bug in his body.
Candida infections only become very serious if a person has no immune defenses at all, as in a person with full-blown AIDS. In that case the Candida is going through the person’s whole body, the infection is systemic. But Candida albicans became the bête noire of the worried well in the 1980’s, everyone who thought they had Candida infections did, because they just did, and Candida was could be named as a cause for practically any symptom a person might have.
Jenny might have known that Candidiasis is just so eighties, and that it fell from favor when people figured out that “treating” Candidiasis didn’t remove their symptoms. Candida is practically a quaint relic of health-faddism, and has been replaced by Lyme disease and maybe Morgellons (both are said to cause autism) and who knows what else as a fave of hypochondriacs and their curers. Jenny might not be expected to know about fads in the 1980’s, being as how she was 10 years old in 1982, and we know she was busy being a bunny and second rate actress in the 1990s.
Jenny said on Oprah that she chose to go with the GFCF diet and antifungal drugs after getting her son’s blood and stool checked. It’s likely that she got the Candida blood test results from one of the providers of questionable lab tests favored by quacks. Yeast (Candida) is a big topic of discussion on autism “biomed” parent forums. They are chock full of parents discussing how they diagnose “yeastiness” from the child’s behavior as in, “Oh, I can tell when Johnny is yeasty, because he starts acting crazy….” “Yeastiness” can be “diagnosed” by these parents just by looking at a child’s behavior. Jenny explained how she had to break off from seeing Jim Carrey for some time because her son had gone “crazy” from yeast and needed her full attention.
Interestingly, it seems that not too long ago Medicare pulled the CLIA operating certificate for Immunosciences Lab (not so affectionately known as Immunoseances). Medicare’s inspection looked for validity in the tests Immunosciences offered and found it severely wanting. That one lab is said to have been the major provider of bogus Candida testing. If you go to the Immunosciences lab’s website they announce via pdf, that they are no longer in business as of a couple of months ago. So one can imagine that perhaps Jenny’s son was found to have “CANDIDA!” via a nonsense lab test ordered by her son’s DAN! doctor. Meaning that it’s possible that her son was put on prescription drugs (Nystatin and/or Diflucan) for no reason. But it seems safe to say that knowing that will not going to stop her from attributing his “coming out of autism completely” to these drugs (and diet).
Evan went from being a 2-year old (diagnosed) autistic boy (with seizures) to a 5 year old autistic boy apparently still on meds to prevent seizures, in 3 years. This is supposed to be an amazing thing. It’s not. Not unless we are to believe that all autistic children stagnate at their two year old level and can never learn anything or develop skills beyond that. Jenny doesn’t attribute his development to, uh, development, but to her magical mystery cures that she got by way of quack dox and quackery promoting autism websites which of course, she discovered by doing “Google research.” Oh, but she’s a heroine for saving her son, from… what? From being a 2-year old, low functioning, psychic with a few too many autistic traits? Jenny seems to have a hard time keeping her story straight.
On Oprah.com, Jenny takes time out from her busy schedule to spread lies about vaccines, like they contain “aborted fetal tissue.” Thanks, Jenny. Thanks, Oprah. Maybe now some kids will die of vaccine preventable diseases because they trusted the vomit eating side-show girl with the high-school diploma to give them medical advice.”
March 7th, 2008 at 7:12 am
i admit i’m a bit partial to jenny mc carthy (man, her show on MTV was simply hylarious and, while obviously it wasn’t really what she was famous for, i loved it) but in the links you posted i can’t find reference to the fact that she links vaccines and autism.
what she says in those articles sounds reasonable to me. ok, she uses the word “divine” quite often and i’m still trying to understand what the heck indigo and crystal mean.
but my point is that maybe there’s not much scientific proof behind her claims that a certain diet can help autism but if the diet is healthy, well, it doesn’t look like a big problem to me. and wanting organic cafeterias and outdoor lessons doesn’t sound too bad either.
i think she doesn’t deserve so much spite and hatred from what i read in those links.
anyway, I have the strange sensation that I’m possibly missing something here (i.e. i have no idea of what she says beside those articles)…
Marcello
March 7th, 2008 at 7:13 am
Dee, don’t even go there - because this metabolic condition would have emerged anyhow. There is no way a small dose of mercury could give her this metabolic condition, which is what the parents allege. It would have to enter each and every one of her cells, enter the mitochondria in each and every one of those cells, and mutate them all in exactly the same way. Infeasable, unlikely, and you could probably check her cord blood and find the same ailment long before any of this.
A peanut allergy does not up and kill you if you never encounter peanuts; this condition would have emerged regardless.
March 7th, 2008 at 7:16 am
No, wait, i’ve just found out what a “indigo children” is.
She’s totally nuts.
Still absolutely lovely and hilarious, but completely nuts.
Marcello
March 7th, 2008 at 7:38 am
Pat,
I think the point in not that the vaccine caused the mitochondrial disease but rather that in situations where there is a child with a mitochondrial disease but the symptoms are mild (and therefore not detected) this child may be at risk of developing symptoms of autism as a result of a vaccination. see the following quote.
”
Another article, published in the Journal of Child Neurology and co-authored by Dr. Zimmerman, showed that 38% of Kennedy Krieger Institute autism patients studied had one marker for impaired oxidative phosphorylation, and 47% had a second marker.
The authors — who reported on a case-study of the same autism claim conceded in Vaccine Court — noted that “children who have (mitochondrial-related) dysfunctional cellular energy metabolism might be more prone to undergo autistic regression between 18 and 30 months of age if they also have infections or immunizations at the same time.”
March 7th, 2008 at 7:40 am
If she becomes McCain’s running mate, are we at risk of having a VPILF?
March 7th, 2008 at 8:20 am
The one thing that is not made clear enough in any report of the most recent Vaccine court case finding is how very different the “Vaccine court” is from an actual US court. The rules are different and the burden of proof is much, much lighter then in traditional courts. The vaccine court was created to protect the drug compaines from litigation and ensure that vaccine research and development continues without threat of being derailed by endless litigation. And as a result, as much for PR purposes as anything else, they tend to err on the side of the petitioners. And even this court agrees that this case is an “exception” more than a precedent, given the pre-existing condition with this child.
I hear people spouting off about how “the courts found a link between vaccines and autism”… and unfortunately the media has a great deal to do with this mis-conception. The fact is that in a REAL court, this verdict would have likely been very different.
March 7th, 2008 at 8:23 am
I really am all in favor of speaking out against anti-science. But when we, for instance, oppose the election of a school board member with the anti-science agenda of putting creationism in science text books, do we do so in order to protect the scientific community? Of course not. We already know better than to be influenced by such things. We oppose such anti-science in order to protect those for whom the Scientific Method and critical thinking are foreign concepts. We do so in order to help enlighten the “masses” by promoting science and critical thinking.
Ms. McCarthy is such a member of the masses. She is not anti-science. She is merely unscientific. She didn’t declare war on science by inventing the autism-vaccine link. She is merely a casualty in that war. Suffering or not, This is why I think she should be treated differently from those who actually war against science. Dimwitted as she is, she is a representative of the masses we are actually trying to help. Singling her out for ridicule strikes me as similar to ridiculing a fifth-grader who is stupid enough to believe that creationism is a scientific theory simply because she read it in her science text book.
In our war against anti-science, let’s not confuse those who have an actual anti-science agenda with those who are simply unscientific. If you want to strike out against anti-science, engage the actual combatants, not those who simply lack the tools necessary to pick a side. Those are the one for whom we are fighting.
March 7th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Let me qualify “Real Court” as to mean a criminal or civil litigation court.
March 7th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Thank you for the clarification, Mr BA. You may call me Anti-Subtle. No, you may call me Really-really-really-obvious.
March 7th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Please Yanks think very, very hard and DON”T VOTE RETARDICAN!!
Well, with mature commentary like that, how can people disagree?
(rolls eyes)
Can you people understand, EVER, how the name calling does NOT help us win?
Authism cannot be cured
Authism? Wait, isn’t that the one where a person has a compulsion to write?
March 7th, 2008 at 8:52 am
How come I didn’t hear a peep here about John Edwards having anti-science past when he still a Democratic contender?
March 7th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Celtic_Evolution
I don’t think parents of these children are worried about lawyers and their jurisprudence. These parents really are interested in finding out the truth. Not just feigning “the search for truth” like the lawyers and judges in courtrooms do.
March 7th, 2008 at 9:50 am
“making outrageous antiscience statements” - I find no evidence from the article you linked that she did so. As a person who has been involved with the mother of an austistic child, I daresay that those same mothers who deal with this situation every single day and network with thousands of like mothers - may actually have a more valid point of view than yours. As for being anti-science, I don’t see any evidence that she is being so.
I understand you having a dislike for her clutching at any and everything out there as giving her hope for her child, if it doesn’t meet your exacting scientific specifications. Whatever gives Ms McCarthy hope to deal with this situation is fine by me. It’s a horrible situation for a parent to be in with their child. And believe you me, if your own child were in it, and Science wasn’t giving you ANY answers whatsoever at this point, you would be grasping at any hope out there.
In the article you linked, (which was a cheap local tv network which gave us more info on her hair color and who she was dating than it did on Autism) Her plea was simply was to get the word out that vitamin supplements and diet was helping children like hers in the families she networks with, and apparently, the medical community wasn’t responding to her experience.
She’s got every right to reach out to other parents. American Doctors, in my experience concerning autism (and in many other parent’s experience) aren’t very helpful or even concerned as they simply wait for your all-omniscient scientific community to solve the problem for them. Well, good luck with that- but until then, I am sure if her advice gets to a few parents of autistic children and it does help even in the tiniest bit, it was well worth the “cost” of her merely speaking out.
March 7th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Dee -
I don’t think anyone here is interested in surpressing the truth, either. So I’m not sure what the point of your comment was. My post was made in an attempt to bring the truth to light, and that is that the mis-conception that the courts had found a link between autism and vaccines is just plain inaccurate. People who read the story in the media, or are just relayed the story, might be lead to believe that this ruling was made in a civil or criminal court and thus carries a burden of proof that in fact it does not… and I think that is a very important distinction where this matter is concerned.
I have two autistic children in my close circle of family and friends, one a nephew, one the child of a very close friend. So please don’t get all sanctiminious with me. And although I’m not a parent of an autistic child and don’t fully know what it’s like, I know full well the struggle that the parents of those children endure, and pinning their hopes on anti-science solutions is not only a waste of time and money, but also leads understandably desperate people to follow those misguided beliefs, and thus shift the focus away from the real science and therapies that will actually help these kids, in additioan to potentially subjecting their own children needlessly to illnesses that these vaccines prevent.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:09 am
O.K., here’s a rant: I don’t understand all the shorthand which some of you folks use when you post, and I have to take the time to Google each of the unknowns - most of which are acronyms. The last one is VPILF. I can’t find any reasonable answer to that one after searching six links in the Google search response.
If communication is the goal in writing, then clarity of thought, terseness (as opposed to wordiness) AND specificity are important. The folks who respond to the scientific parts of this blog seem quite able to do so using language which most of us not trained in a science can understand, or at least can research further using their responses. For the rest of you, I haven’t a notion in hell what some of you are talking about when the posts are larded with the latest in internetspeak, textspeak, or whatever flavor of abbreviation-du-jour crops up in the text. Can’t we all just make ourselves understood?
End of rant…
Will. M
March 7th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Fade, where is your compassion for the kid in this situation? For any of the children? Your appeal to authority is feeble at best, and does not go one iota towards excusing this woman. People do grasp at straws; but should their children suffer because one woman is able to trumpet her false hope louder than anyone else? She’s only special because she has money and influence, and therefore is a legitimate person to criticise. She’s attempting to push her unscientific solution on others not through testing and funding of research but by brute force of personality and, similar to your “a person who has been involved with the mother of an austistic child” appeal to authority.
The kids are the real focus here - and pushing an expensive litany of false cures does not help a child if there is less stability and other resources left in the home as a result, or if the child is denied actual working physical and speech therapies because their parents are now convinced that if they can leverage enough fish oil down their child’s throat they’ll be cured.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Sigh.
I will stand by the claim that Jenny McCarthy is antiscience. Her own statements, posted all over the ‘net, make that very clear. There is a difference between “being not scientific” and being antiscience. It’s a matter of activism, I would say, and of clutching at ideas that are clearly against all the evidence accumulated over the years. Ms. McCarthy falls into the latter category.
Do vitamins and diet help? I’d bet they can’t hurt, and I would guess that anyone who has a healthy diet will probably do better in life than someone who doesn’t.
But Ms. McCarthy is on record as having made all sorts of outrageous claims about alleviating her son’s autism. This is *at best* anecdotal data, and at worst will turn people away from medical treatment that might in fact help.
I cannot make any claims about individual accounts with the medical establishment. I have had a series of bad doctors when it comes to a particular ailment I have, for example. That happens. But I don’t say the entire medical establishment is suppressing a cure for me, nor do I turn to acupuncture or homeopathy or some other quackiness to ameliorate myself. I just continue researching what I can, using skepticism when I look over medical claims, and try to find a doctor who will actually help.
As far as the autism/vaccine case, that’s a court case, and not a medical finding. Please read this article by Orac, and then this one.
And I will state it again: I sympathize greatly with parents of autistic children. But railing against vaccines is incredibly bad. Not only are they wasting their own time in a cause that is scientifically shown to be wrong, they can tie the hands of scientists who might otherwise figure out what is really going on. They are shooting themselves in the foot, wasting millions of dollars, and potentially harming millions of children.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:22 am
To Jennifer A. Burdoo: McCain has been one of my senators for 23 years now. The man hasn’t found a principle he won’t expunge for a vote. He’s such a hawk that he wanted a ground war in Kosovo. No way do I want his finger near the button.
And to Lab Lemming, let the Europeans add shariah law. When Gen. Sir Charles Napier was in India, he was told the Indians had a custom of burning the widow on the funeral pyre with their husbands. His reply:
“You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also
have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around
their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it,
my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And
then we will follow ours.”
We should follow the same advice with shariah law.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Big fan on BA and not as regular a reader as I’d like… That said, I think there may be a ‘blurring’ of what is known what is NOT known and some blatant hysteria thrown in for good measure.
My nephew has been diagnosed with ‘Phenylketonuria’ PKU for short. The best summation of it I could find follows…
“A genetic disorder of the metabolism which will result in brain-damage during the first years of life unless special dietary measures are taken. Inadequate production of the enzyme which converts the amino acid phenylalanine into another amino acid, tyrosine. The extra phenylalanine accumulates in body fluids and converts to several chemicals that damage the brain. Symptoms include mental retardation as well as some of the symptoms of autism. PKU has been eliminated by screening all children immediately after birth so proper dietary measures can be taken.”
So not agreeing with what either she or McCain says, this is what I see as a blurring of some factual info, some suspicion and some outright BS. PKU can be controlled with diet, and it can lead to autism-like symptoms so maybe she is confusing some crap with some facts.
Or maybe her breasts are cutting off the oxygen to her brain.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:45 am
i have a lot to say, but reading FADE, EARLTV and Quiet desperation. i see that they have said it better. i expect that in future post mr.plait would be more circumspect in his comments.
P.S. StevoR: one thing is criticize, attack, combat a person, a party, an idea, it is a constitutional right, another very different thing is to insult a person, in this case a woman with an autist son. in the last case, you always will lose
March 7th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Will, google “milf” (not while you’re at work), and imagine what VP might mean…
March 7th, 2008 at 11:23 am
“Ms. McCarthy is such a member of the masses. She is not anti-science. She is merely unscientific. She didn’t declare war on science by inventing the autism-vaccine link. She is merely a casualty in that war.”
So many apologists for the bimbo it makes me want to puke! People, you don’t understand what is going on. McCarthy is just the celebrity mouthpiece for DAN! (Defeat Autism Now!). Why do you think Dr. Jerry Kartzinel, a well-known DAN! doctor, appeared with her on the Larry King show? Do you think that’s a coincidence? BTW, the transcript of that show is at:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0709/26/lkl.01.html
And why did the same Dr. Kartzinel write the introduction to McCarthy’s new book? This is all part of the DAN! agenda to get vaccines banned and chelation accepted as mainstream autism treatment. There are powerful people pushing the message McCarthy is spewing. I doubt she would even be smart enough to do any of this on her own. McCarthy is a DAN! puppet controlled by DAN! puppet-masters.
http://www.defeatautismnow.com - IMHO the most dangerous medical organization in America.
March 7th, 2008 at 11:23 am
ohhh!! i did not read the last post of mr.plait. he’s totally right, i’m 100% with him. then, so why the “small joke” in the original post????!!!! it was necessary??? of course not. i suspect that mr plait tried to be funny, but, well, he is not david letterman…
in my country we say “es de muy mal gusto reirse de las desgracias ajenas” (it is of bad taste to laugh about the others people disgraces -or something like that)
and well, the post was “de muy mal gusto” and he weakened his defence of science.
end of the story, i wait that in the next posts he abstain to make “small jokes”
March 7th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Quiet_Evolution
Sorry for the snarky comment. I only meant to cast doubt on the veracity of the courts and their commitment to the search for truth. I do not doubt yours.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
I meant Celtic_Evolution.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Some of you may not be aware of how far the DAN! agenda has already gone:
http://www.909shot.com/Issues/state%20exemptions.htm
The following 19 states allow vaccination exemptions based on philosophical beliefs:
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin
All but 2 states (Mississippi and West Virginia) allow exemptions based on religious beliefs.
March 7th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
@ Dee -
Apology accepted… and in your point, as just stated, I would tend to agree with you, although my belief is that the court system is ultimately charged, as its goal, with finding the truth. That is its one and only purpose. As for whether or not that always happens and whether or not politics enters the equation, well, that’s another discussion.
@Tom Marking -
Thank you for your links and more information on DAN!. It’s a group I’ve heard mentioned recently by the people I know with Autistic children but one I knew little about… and the name sounds so positive for such a dangerous, junk science organization. I’ll be sure to gently give them the information on this group you’ve provided so they can be as educated as they can about their sources for support. Thanks again.
March 7th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
“…the name sounds so positive for such a dangerous, junk science organization…”
Yes, one of the great tragedies happening right now in the autism community is that many well-meaning parents are falling for the DAN! therapies hook, line, and sinker. There is no adequate pro-science counter-balance to DAN! and the government does not seem to care one way or the other.
One of the few web sites taking the pro-science approach is http://www.asatonline.org. ASAT stands for Association for Science in Autism Treatment. I would urge any parent of an autistic child to check out a prospective therapy on
http://www.asatonline.org/resources/treatments_desc.htm
before deciding to pursue it. They list them all from animal therapy to vitamin therapy. It will tell you the real scoop on what scientific research (or usually lack thereof) is backing the particular therapy.
March 8th, 2008 at 12:11 am
BA. Sorry mate. There is no humor here. I checked out those links and they appear to be nothing but support groups. What the hell has that got to do with politics. The whole post comes across as a bad attempt at mixing up issues and using people to get a laugh. I’m sure you see some scientific moral here, and I am also sure you are correct with the points you are making, but you really have to dig through all the links and actually understand all the issues to get it.
It just looks wrong to take a mother with an autistic child and use her scientific ignorance as a platform to make a joke about apparent similarities with some politicians ignorant view on science. It’s just not cricket. Even if she is a celebrity.
I also don’t like the idea of labeling people with words such as ‘anti-science’. I have no doubt you are technically correct with certain aspects of what you are saying, being that certain beliefs of certain support groups may condone anti-scientific ideas etc, but to label her, as an individual as ‘anti-science’, well , it’s just arrogant, and rude.
I’m sure you may think I am not getting the point, but the bigger issue here is tact. It does not matter how correct someone is, if they are tactless in their presentation of the facts, people generally will switch off. It may also be the case that it was not your intention to be tactless, but you were. It undermines credibility.
March 9th, 2008 at 3:47 am
I’m not interested in what Jenny has to say, but:
Certain Autistic behaviors can be aggravated by certain foods. I have observed this with the Autism in my family, but jeez, it almost goes without saying at the chemical level, folks*. It’s possible that it may be similar to the link between dyslexia and certain foods (which I am experiencing as I type this).
Look at it this way: all a “drug” is, is a substance that, when put in the body, causes the body to act chemically different, in certain ways, than it would have if the drug was not there. This also describes many foods. Just two examples of obvious drug-foods: chocolate, coffee. At the chemical level, dairy can be a drug to some people. So, in the autustic body, foods can aggravate symptoms. And don’t forget, Autism is a spectrum, not a single condition.
*you know you’re getting old when you unironically use the word “folks”!
March 9th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Oh my stars and garters! How sheltered a life I lead…
May 13th, 2008 at 12:06 am
Alex C said:
“dear dr.plait:
ms mccarthy is plain wrong, of course, but you must have take note that she has a son with autism… i think she should have our sympathy, and our respect, even in her errors, not our mock. if you are searching for a running mate for mr.mccain there is tom cruise. he is young, healthy and bright…”
While I have sympathy for her (I daresay raising an autistic child is a big challenge), this does not change the fact that she panders to and propagates antiscience nonsense. For which she should rightly be mocked. There is no excuse for credulously accepting and expounding such rubbish.
October 15th, 2008 at 1:47 am
JENNY MCCARTHY IS A DAMN IDIOT. CURE AUTISUM- HEALING- RECOVERY. WHAT AN IDIOT. SHE HAS ALOT TO LEARN. WHAT A HORRIBLE STATEMENT TO MAKE WHEN I DEAL WITH THESE CHILDREN/ADULTS DAILY. PLEASE!!!