Aspies For Freedom

B"H

      Hello.  Thank you for reading my post.  I want to preface by noting that there is a certain individual, whom I will not name, who has a whole movement devoted to "hating" autism.  This individual will not be named, because he has leveled scurrilous accusations against key members of the Neuro-diversity movement.  Slanderers should not be named publicly, because that is what they want.  Naming them brings evil in to the world.
      However, I will note one accusation in particular.  This gentleman, to use the term broadly, seems to suggest that Neuro-diversity activists are in the pay of Pharmaceutical Cartels.  Now, in response, I wrote this person an "Open Letter" raising the profound probability that he is himself an agent of the same economic and political forces that control the Pharmaceutical cartels.  This man rightly claims that there are hidden forces that hold sway over the political process, and then goes on to advocate positions that parallel their agendas in many respects.  I wrote him this open letter to this effect, and he has not had to courage to write me back or to respond in any way.
       My letter points out that one of the key agendas of those super-wealthy cartels has been global population control, something that would be rapidly facilitated if all vaccines were somehow refused by people across the globe.  Plagues would ensue, and the world's population would be reduced to but a few hundred million, a number that key people in high places have wanted for some time.  While he hurdles accusations against Neuro-diversity activists, this man is himself not above question.  I will send anyone a copy of this letter through PM, should they so desire.
        I have to concede one point to this man, something I am reluctant to do, but which I must.  Pharmaceutical corporations *ARE* very powerful. Together with the insurance companies, they have had the power to thwart national healthcare.  And, to be frank, while I do not believe that autism is caused by Mercury, I also believe that injecting people with Mercury is not the best thing for the human system.  That should be obvious to any thinking person.  I do not agree that autism is "caused" by Mercury.  What I believe is that Mercury in the human system is harmful, to NT's and people on the Spectrum alike.
         I do understand the power of Pharma Cartels, and believe that it is conceivable that they can cover up something massive.  Now, that raises a question.  One of the key planks of the ND movement is the belief that there is no connection between Mercury and Autism.  While I agree with Neuro-diversity on the majority of its points, that is the one position that I am not convinced about.  
         Yes, I know about the recent studies.  However, again, as a non-scientist, I do know something about controlling interests and their power over government, including "studies."  Again, I do NOT advocate the position of the one who "hates" autistic people.  And, I do NOT believe that autism is caused by Mercury.   What I do suggest is that Mercury might conceivably be a factor in general health problems, perhaps including turning beautiful young autistic children, destined to great things, in to people who are less able to function than they might have otherwise.  And, the Pharma cartels would have the power to cover something like that up, in conjunction with the Bush Administration.
         It is shameful that J***  B*** would be the spokesperson for any viewpoint.  His attacks on Amanda Boggs, a beautiful soul, are unconscionable.  And, it is sad that his anti-ND viewpoint would be associated with the position of skepticism about Mercury.  Again, I believe that B*** himself holds to positions that are oddly parallel to those of the Pharmaceuticals themselves.  One of those seems to be forcing people to undergo certain "cures" against their will.  One wonders the extent to which B*** might himself be a form of bizarre damage control, to make a certain position look stupid.
         Now, again, I am a believer in the Spectrum.  I do not hold the view that Mercury puts one on the spectrum.  I am also a firm agnostic on the whole question of genetics versus environmental factors "causing" autism.  Personally, my sense is that autism is actually an adaptation, not a condition in itself.  However, my question would be as such; Is it absolutely vital to believe that there could be no environmental causes for autism?  Are Spectrumites, autistic and Aspie, solely defined by genetics?  What about a third possibility, that there is a combination of environmental conditions and genetic causes?  If the former were removed, then perhaps the latter would be free to flower.  If negative conditions in the environment were removed, the person on the Spectrum could flower, and prove J*** B*** and other hateful people wrong.
          I know that this will stir controversy.  I invite all perspectives.  Please understand that I am merely raising questions, since I am not trained in biochemistry.  However, I will leave you all with one last point.  B*** is less dangerous than those who do believe in genetic causes, and then who desire eugenics. The latter group are people who are the ones who probably put B*** forward, as a simpleton who engages in personal attacks, in order to distract attention from themselves.  I believe that B*** may believe that he is in the right, and is probably unaware that he may front for the same forces he believes he is opposing, but one has to wonder where he gets the money and time to do what he does.  He raises questions about others, but does he answer questions about himself?  
          And, to be clear, it is my firm conviction that if all environmental and genetic causes were to be removed, the only way for the Spectrum to survive would be for Neuro-typicals to embrace our perspective and join the Spectrum.  That means communicating ideas effectively.  It should mean avoiding swearing, offensive language, and undue divisiveness.  It also means avoiding racist attacks against anyone's religious or ethnic background.  And, it means acceptance of one another, showing ourselves better people than our detractors.  
          So, my question is as such; Is the Neuro-diversity position at odds with the possibility that there are some environmental factors involved with autism?  Can we have a movement of self-acceptance that does not involve genetic causes?  For one thing, the genetics argument is a powerful one against the Spectrum in the minds of many NT's, and could be far more damaging than B***'s and Dr. Blaylocks's totalistic vaccine argument.  One may want to reconsider linking Neuro-diversity, which is primarily a moral argument in favor of toleration and acceptance, with any particular explanation for Autism that might be faddish or in vogue at any given time.
           OK, I have stirred up enough.  Now, I'd better duck.  Please give me your perspective, and pull no punches.

All the best,

Conspiracy theories, conspiracy theories. I don't know the person of which you speak, though he seems pretty horrible by your account (which is probably far from the only side), but I can't imagine you will counter him by invoking conspiracy theories that are, to be honest, nothing but tin hat-ism, that is, seeing a shadow and conjuring up a whole secret society that machinates how the world works because of it.

Also, it's not an open letter if it isn't out in the open. I suggest you stop calling it an open letter, or present it publicly for us to see.

A few notes.

1) JB isn't worth your time. For starters, the only reason anyone knows he exists is that angry or annoyed autistic people talk about him so often. There's no real way around that - if you talk about him at all, he wins, unfortunately.

This is true even when he recieves letters from rational thinkers such as yourself. It is also true when he is not mentioned by name, as that will merely have a lot of people asking who we're talking about.

I think people fall into the trap of debating with him for three reasons:
Firstly, as a sheer reaction to his offensive statements. Secondly, because other randian issues seem too big to deal with, whereas he is quite small and unorganised. Three, because he's not a good debater, and incapable of influencing people, he's thought of as an easy target.

I even fell into this trap briefly myself. It doesn't go anywhere - he's fueled by hate and perseveration.

I'd say that every single person that knows about him heard about him from someone else complaining about him. His blog thrives on these angry messages for material - without them, he is nothing. Any influence he does have is influence that we have given him.

In short, JB is something that should be scraped from the bottom of your shoe before entering civilised company.

2) I understand that you're coming at this from the position of a non-scientist that knows that studies can be manipulated. However, genetic vs environmental causes is entirely about science - it can't be divorced from that.

Firstly, there's the sheer weight of studies - 13 studies from 13 different sources have shown no correlation between thimerosal mercury and autism. These includes studies from many different countries, making it unlikely that the results could all be tainted by the same brush.

Secondly, twin studies have shown that if one identical twin is autistic, the other twin has a 92% chance of being on the spectrum. Given that there's a margin for error in diagnosis (i.e. people can miss out on diagnoses on technicalities), I'd say the correlation was probably 100%. This is opposed to fraternal twin concordence rates, which are only 10%.

Thirdly, thimerosal mercury was removed from vaccines in 2002, and there has been no decrease in the rate autistic children are diagnosed.

Fourth, no-one has come up with a good reason why mercury would have anything to do with autism. About the only connection is that autism becomes noticeable at around 2-3 years old, which is about the same time kids start getting injections.

Fifth, and a less scientific account, my grandfather was almost certainly autistic, and born in 1912 - a good 18 years before thimerosal was placed in vaccines.

I understand that this was also about other possible environmental causes. For others, the twin studies are what we have to go on, as well as the fact that many people can trace autism back through many generations, living in entirely different places.

3) There's nothing saying that environmental triggers can't influence health issues related to autism. Mercury still gets counted out as far as that goes, though - health issues would increase the diagnosis rate, but the diagnosis rate hasn't dropped since mercury was removed from vaccines.

Wow, that post ended up being longer than I thought! *grins*

It's good to ask these questions every so often - it's the difference between believing things from an informed position or an uninformed position. Hope this has been some food for thought.

ATM:  Wow!  You certainly are informed.  OK.  To be honest, I probably lean more toward the genetic argument, as you do.  I also have strong reason to doubt Dr. Leonard Horrowitz and others who have advanced the vaccine argument.  I knew Dr. Monteith, and respect him, but I am not convinced of his arguments on this one.  And, you are right as far as JB is concerned, as it is best not to respond to people who sink low enough to engage in personal attack, either here on the Forum or elsewhere.  One would understand a father's love for his autistic son, and can sympathize, but Mr. B has taken it beyond the bounds of decency or respectability.

As for the Pharma's, an honest free enterprise system provides vaccines and other improvements in our lives.  However, Pharma's are monopoly institutions.  They rely on state collusion.  That is a whole other animal entirely, unrelated to honest capitalism.  That is why vaccines, far from being forced on people as JB suggests, are actually inflated in price.  And, JB is an alarmist who has done nothing to enlighten the debate.  If he were honest about his convictions, he would be forming an alliance with ND's in order to stand up for freedom as against globalization and homogeneity.  

I will take the thread away from JB and from the Pharma's, and redirect it.  I will not mention them again.  Instead, let us take a theoretical approach.  If it *COULD* be proven that there were environmental factors to Asperger/Autism, such as lead paint, too much rainwater, or what have you, then would that affect your views on Neuro-diversity?  These may be ridiculous, but consider the argument as a theoretical discourse on the relationship between physical causation and your pride in who you are. In other words, would your ability to stand up with pride be affected if the genetic explanation were taken from you?  Can your sense of who you are stand apart from the theories that are often faddish?  

As for me, I hold to the Big Tent, a tent that can include NT's who convert to Aspie principles.  What do you think?  I turn the thread over to you.

*grins* Thanks - I've been debating over at the "Autism Speaks" forum, and I had to do some fairly intense studying to keep my facts straight...

I completely agree with you about the pharma's - there's some quite disturbing things going on. I've just seen enough information to know that the autism one is one that's there's nothing to.

As far as the "what if?" environmental question, yes I would - I'd still be me, after all.

That being said, I think the genetic explanation is quite airtight, and not "faddish" at all - the twin studies are quite conclusive (there's about 7 or 8 of them, the above one being the only study on the autistic spectrum, rather than just on classic autism. All show high concordence among identical twins, and much lower concordence among fraternal twins).

The main reason I'm making such a point of re-emphasising this is that hypotheticals encourage a "try it and see if it works" approach to autism treatment. For example, there's a similar "what if?" thread on chelation therapy going around - chelation is quite a risky procedure that can cause all sorts of health problems due to mineral removal. By leaving that unaddressed, it raises the possibility of parents trying such things on their children.

I'll have to completely disagree with you on the "Big Tent" idea. If I tried to convert to NT principles (which I did, when I was much younger), I'd still be aspie - so it makes sense that it would go both ways. In fact, I'm in the middle of writing a book about that very idea - an NT in an autistic world, trying to fit in...

Drug cartels --- only in America.  Other countries with social health systems can somewhat dictate drugs costs toward the companies.  That is what is called "responsible government".  Why are Americans so brain washed into thinking that a public health care system is evil?

"My letter points out that one of the key agendas of those super-wealthy cartels has been global population control, something that would be rapidly facilitated if all vaccines were somehow refused by people across the globe.  Plagues would ensue, and the world's population would be reduced to but a few hundred million, a number that key people in high places have wanted for some time."  

Really?  How many people would die from chicken pox or Rubella?  How ridiculous!  

Why waste your time on this trash?

ATM:  Zakkie, I would reconsider your position on the "Big Tent."  For one thing, it might be harder to convert to a conformist position, to stifle your individuality, than to convert out of it to a form of creativity that is all your own.  Thus, since Neuro-typicalism is more a social construct than an actual neurological reality, it may be that people are in their natural elements when they are who they are.

So, again, maybe "we" can't convert over the line, but maybe "they" can?  And, we might be able to convince enough of our sympathetic friends to make that leap, not in to a disability, but in to an appreciation of who we are, enough to find something of us in themselves.  But, we're not going to do it with some of the idiocy that can overtake any Forum if the immature are the ones running it.  

That's my take on it.

All the best,

"But, we're not going to do it with some of the idiocy that can overtake any Forum if the immature are the ones running it."

Please replace the term "running it" with "high-jacking it."  That is what I meant to say.

All the best,

I had chicken pox at almost 19.  My brother was 2.5 years younger and I got it from him.

Biblical depopulation...... from disease or starvation or war or a rock from space..... I know the Bible talks about terrifying stuff, and to think it is plausable.  Before Hurricane Katrina I did not think a thousand people could be killed in the United States from a hurricane.

Well, if the evacuation were handled properly, only a fraction of the Hurricane Katrina victims would have lost their lives. This idea of "self-reliance" in the USA has been taken too far. When the flood waters began to subside, rescue workers were stunned to find the drowned bodies of several dozen people in a nursing home. Nobody seemed to have thought of moving them to higher ground when the floods came. Other similarly tragic finds were made in the poorer areas of the city.

There have been many novels dealing with the subject of a worldwide plague. One of the scariest was by Stephen King but I forget its title at present. One would hope that better standards of hygiene would halt the spread of plagues but it costs money to keep a place clean.

Aids has been described as a worldwide plague that is still cutting huge swathes of destruction in African and Asian countries in particular but it seems that much of it is out of sight and out of mind whereas the disease that killed off most of the people in the Stephen King novel attacked the good old USA with a vengeance.

I'd even wonder if a mental plague of sorts could strike the earth: not a plague that directly kills people but one that drives them to despair, making them lethargic and unmotivated and reducing productivity and innovation. This could be some form of widespread depressive illness, an emotional and spiritual "virus". Perhaps it is already well in evidence within our society.

That was "The Stand". Brilliant book, and not a bad movie, except that they butchered the ending.

They call that "Reality TV".

Yeah, too right. Even when the shows have gone way past the point of being totally pointless and boring, they still put on yet more seasons. (:
These are shows like Survivor and Big Brother.

[quote=GuessWho]
Biblical depopulation...... from disease or starvation or war or a rock from space..... I know the Bible talks about terrifying stuff, and to think it is plausable. [quote]

And genocide - it was required during the exodus and upon entry to the land of 'milk & honey'

...oops, I bet this is a can of worms...