Maybe she has some kind of poisoning in her own brain. Anyway, there is no "autism epidemic".
directly/indirectly responsible for autism? How about being responsible for my own autism? -sure, as half of my consciousness as a spermatozoon coordinated with the other half of my consciousness as an ovum to will myself into existence with the unique genetic code that is me.
Ignore stupidity and correct ignorance.
Hi Gareth (I'm over at ImmInst as well, you can probably guess who I am!) -- this "Wonder" person seems totally unreachable...I tried responding to her as well, to no avail. The "autism is mercury poisoning" thing is like a fundamentalist religion to some people. You can give them piece of evidence after piece of evidence and sometimes they'll even outright admit that they're going to keep believing in the mercury "epidemic" nonsense regardless of what you say. It drives me batty that this kind of misinformation is being perpetuated everywhere, and I'm really not sure what we can do except post rebuttals -- maybe not for the sake of those who have closed off their brains completely, but for the sake of people who wander by and happen to read the thread without really knowing much about autism at all.
Hi Gareth (I'm over at ImmInst as well, you can probably guess who I am!) -- this "Wonder" person seems totally unreachable...I tried responding to her as well, to no avail. The "autism is mercury poisoning" thing is like a fundamentalist religion to some people. You can give them piece of evidence after piece of evidence and sometimes they'll even outright admit that they're going to keep believing in the mercury "epidemic" nonsense regardless of what you say. It drives me batty that this kind of misinformation is being perpetuated everywhere, and I'm really not sure what we can do except post rebuttals -- maybe not for the sake of those who have closed off their brains completely, but for the sake of people who wander by and happen to read the thread without really knowing much about autism at all.
I always post rebuttals when possible, otherwise we might as well just give up and let chelation become a legally required medical treatment or some other pervesion of common sense.
Then there are the ones who insist that "maybe you do not need a cure because you only have Asperger's .....blah, blah." I am not against all treatment for people with autism, just certain types - I just do not like Cure Autism Now. Also some people are too stupid to see that CAN also funds animal research. Their website even lists all the studies they have funded. There were at least 6 in 2006 that involved animals.
Then these idiots will say they think that CAN is a great charity because it is helping people with autism. Then they mention the people in their family with autism and how it affects the whole family - just a major inconvenience. Just how much money is CAN providing for programmes and help for families affected by autism? As far as I can tell from their website - zero.
They do not realize that genetic mapping will result in genetic testing for autism markers. This will be used for prenatal tests and then the most common treatment for autism will be death (abortion) and discrimination against people with autism already alive. Then the reduction in the future population of children with autism will occur and further treatments and therapies will be diminished because they will not be feasible.
"maybe you do not need a cure because you only have Asperger's .....blah, blah." Maybe the man with one leg shouldn't get the disabled parking spot because someone with no legs might need it?
How can anyone take seriously an organisation that has named itself after a toilet?
How can anyone take seriously an organisation that has named itself after a toilet?
Flush! Let me throw in my contribution first.
CAN is an acronym for Cure Autism Now. Someone was making a joke calling CAN - a can. A can is a vulgar slang term for toilet, chamberpot, or commode. Calling CAN a can is expressing total disdain and hostility and disrespect for the charity. Actually it is not all bad, just mostly bad.
CAN is an acronym for Cure Autism Now. Someone was making a joke calling CAN - a can. A can is a vulgar slang term for toilet, chamberpot, or commode. Calling CAN a can is expressing total disdain and hostility and disrespect for the charity. Actually it is not all bad, just mostly bad.
Where's the good?
They are funding some research for therapies for people with autism. I can not see that all therapies are bad. They are also supposed to be educating doctors about autism and diagnosis. Ignorance about autism can not be considered a good thing.
If pulled the "cure" from the name, put people with autism of their board of directors, started listening to people with autism, promoted acceptance of autism in society, stopped funding animal research, and stopped paying their CEO $300,000 per year, plus whatever other greivances. - they might be a good charity.
I tend to try to find the smallest amount of good in anything. Usually it gets me into trouble. It is what gives me hope in this world.
I actually hate "Cure Autism Now".
Which therapies in particular are they funding and what % of their donations are going there?
All the studies that they fund are listed on their website. Each study has a short description of what the study is about and its goals as well as the researcher's name and institution. It does not list the grant amount on the current studies but the amounts are listed in the previous year's tax return.
they are here:
http://www.cureautismnow.org/site/c.bhLO...__2006.htm
I can not be ignorant of the types of studies they are funding for treatments if I am going to be argueing with people about how I think CAN sucks. Some of their studies sound like they could lead to therapies helpful and not harmful but others seem like a waste of money. Money that could be used for anti-bullying campaigns, fighting prejudice against autistic people, helping someone with autism get lifeskills training or assistance to live independently.
From a quick skim over those studies it seems like a mix of helpful, harmful, neutral and pointless. Their tax returns though do list a large majority of their donations going towards programmes such as AGRE.
AGRE is the Autism Genetic Resource Exchange. They are asking for families with two or more children diagnosed with autism, PDD or Asperger's syndrome to participate in giving information and genetic samples. Common genetic markers for autism could then be mapped out. There is no way of knowing how this information could be used: - for prenatal genetic tests, genetic tests for insurance coverage or diagnosis. Of course, the family and individuals would receive confidentiality but somehow I feel very uncomfortable giving any "donation" to this type of study. This is one of the reasons why I refuse to disclose my Asperger's diagnosis to my family. I know my cousin's daughter has it and I suspect my nephew but there is no way I am going to partcipate in any studies.
My parents did receive a "package" from some "relatives" in England (?Sheffield) for a study there. They filled in the questionnaire and obtained a sample from me without my consent. A researcher phoned and told me that I had ASD (which I knew already) but noticed I had not signed a consent form. The researcher had to disregard my data. I was very angry. My mother wrote to the "relatives". They were not "relatives" at all, just the parents of my "false fiance" (long story). Then this woman phoned me and told me that it was a good thing that her dead son and I did not get married because we would have "***" children. There must be some other children with autism in their family.
From CAN's 2005 tax return:
funding of research grants in an effort to find biological treatments, and possibly a collarborative gene bank for autism and related disorders.
$4, 655, 636.
-support autism genetic resource exchange (AGRE) $1, 501, 514.
That is out of a total $10,000,000 revenues.