As a kid (b. 1969), I remember wondering what happened to all these “childhood diseases.” On reruns of old TV sitcoms (some as late as “The Brady Bunch”), things like measles and chicken pox were recurring plot points. And generally not terribly serious ones, just a “oh, something every kid gets once” sort of thing.

How come these TV kids regularly got these diseases, but it had never happened to either me or any kid I knew?

It wasn’t until much later that I realized Beaver Cleaver, the Bradys, et al, hadn’t gotten those annoying shots I had to suffer through, and just how effective they were….

I’m just old enough to remember stuff on TV about iron lungs and kids with crutches and massive metal leg braces - polio. And I used to be scared of ending up like that. Maybe some of these parents didn’t watch the same stations I did.

On the other hand, I think a lot of parents feel the need (consciously or not) to have more control over their children’s lives - and their own. Refusing vaccines is probably just their way of “caring.”

Unfortunately, unless the government cracks down on them, they won’t reconsider their position until another outbreak of flu or TB kills some of their loved ones. Then, of course, they’ll blame the government for letting it happen.

Your story reminds me that the son of some very good friends of my parents almost died from the smallpox vaccination he got as a baby. He was exempt from having another, even though in those years it was required.

My point is not that complications of vaccines never happen. They do. The point is that vaccines are necessary to keep the diseases from spreading the way they used to, which would be far worse. And yes indeed, it doesn’t require 100% immunization to do this. But if measles could get going in a place like San Diego, with its extremely high rate of immunization, it doesn’t take much to realize that if this trend to refuse vaccinations catches on it could be very dangerous. Life requires that we all assume risks; we cannot eliminate them. I’d like to see people use logic when evaluating the relative risk of two competing alternatives.

Magic, and the supernatural generally, is the consequence of not knowing the medium through which effects are caused, and none of us are immune. Anyone who cannot burn or discard all those unwanted photos of relatives in the attic is to some degree a mystic. While it is satisfying to be smugly scientific and empirical in a social arena where so many live in “The demon-haunted world,” the difference between us and them is not so great. You could be a top notch internist graduated from the top medical school in this country and yet believe that demons and devils caused all human ailments. Got a bad case of appendicitis? That’s Azazel’s doing. He likes to attack humans there. A relatively minor surgery and some antibiotics for the bad bugs Azazel deals in will have you feeling like new. What? The surgeon didn’t see Azazel in your appendix? What an idiot! Azazel is a spirit; you don’t see spirits, you see their effects. Science is a method, and will carry amost any belief piggyback. Ultimately, the sole basis science has for rejecting spiritualism is that, like weeds and trash, it is misplaced matter relative to the objectives of science. I think that is an excellect reason for an empiricist to reject spiritualism. It is a grossly inadquate basis for Saganesque aggrandizement.

In the mid-60s, after a rubella epidemic, tens of thousands of kids were born in one year with CRS. One of my first jobs after college was working at a boarding school for the blind, in a classroom of kids with CRS. They were all eleven or twelve. (If any of them are still surviving now, they’re in their mid-60s.)

All of the kids in that class were profoundly retarded and unable to hear or see. All were completely non-verbal. None were toilet-trained. Their capacities were so devastated that our classroom goals were limited to trying to teach them the simplest skills of daily living like putting on their socks or washing their hands, one tiny step at a time. It could take an entire school year for one of those kids to master the step, say, of turning a faucet.

Worse, they were so deeply frustrated or lonely or neurologically damaged — I don’t know which — that they were sad and angry all day long, all the time. Most of them were emotionally unreachable. You might calm one of them down with a hug, and for a moment or two she’d relax in your arms. But in another minute, she wouldn’t know any more who you were or remember the encounter. Some went home on weekends, but most never saw their families. The caretakers tried to love them, but in most cases couldn’t.

One of them, Ross (a made-up name) would launch himself at anyone near him at random intervals every day, hitting, biting, kicking. This was hard enough to deal with in a little boy, but he was hitting puberty, getting muscles, and growing. Another, Vera (also made up) had little psychomotor seizures every few minutes all day long that led her to scratch and bite herself, drawing blood if you didn’t stop her quickly enough. She had diabetes in addition to her other disabilities, so the dozens of little wounds always all over her arms were slow to heal and quick to get infected.

New cases of CRS have been effectively eradicated in the US by the MMR vaccine. Google tells me that there have been something like 4 cases in the past five years, only one in a baby whose mother was born in this country. When I hear some young parent now, pontificating about how she’s protecting her child by avoiding vaccines, or how “Big Pharm” just wants to make money by selling vaccines without regard to the side effects, I wish I could make her watch the memories of those kids that play in my head. Vaccines are the reason that oblivious young mother has never seen a child with such a condition. Ironically, vaccines are the reason that she can’t understand the value of vaccines.

Not me! I swear, my doctor dulled those needles! It scared the cr*p out of me! I can still remember the relief when the Sabin Oral Vaccine came out.

It might help if science, assisted by reason, would actually try tackling autism, the way it did polio and smallpox; hunting for a cure and trying to find out why we have so much of it now, instead of telling parents—and their autistic kids—that they will just have to learn to cope somehow, there’s nothing we can do, nup, nup, nup, but there are so many wonderful social programs out there to help you (no there aren’t), and we think it might be genetic—um, no, it might be environmental—er, uh, maybe it is those vaccines! Or misalignment of the spine. Or evil spirits. Hey, we’ve just narrowed it down to 50 chromosomes that might have something to do with it! Isn’t that great? Maybe in another few decades, we’ll figure out what’s actually going on.

March 22nd, 2008 at 8:37 am
If the opinions on your blog represents what neocons are really like - you are sadder than I thought. What a deluded, souless group you are.

Hellen: Since you made a comment here, you are now a neo-con.

So are you saying you’re self-deluded?

Um but according to Hellen you’re a neocon which means that you are souless and deluded.

Clearly Hellen knows more about the biochemical implications of pathogens in the context of former liberals changing thier political persusion and how that influences the prescene of an eternal spirit dwelling in one’s mind.

Why should anyone listen to you Sergey?

/s

In addition, even many educated people (not yourself!) have become, unfortunately, almost unable to evaluate scientific data. I see this time and again—anecdotal evidence of things happening in succession becomes equal to causation, for example. If event A follows event B, many many people believe that proves causation. Science is not the answer to everything, for sure, nor is it perfect. But a good grounding in scientific method is extremely important for the population to have.

“The interval between inoculation and the first sign of paralysis ranged from 5 to 20 days and in a large proportion of cases it started in the limb on which the injection had been given. Another feature of the tragedy was that the numbers developing polio were far greater than would have been expected had no inoculations been given. In fact in the state of Idaho, according to a statement by Dr. Carl Eklund, one of the Government’s chief virus authorities, polio struck only vaccinated children in areas where there had been no cases of polio since the preceding autumn; in 9 out of 10 cases the paralysis occurred in the arms in which the vaccine had been injected.” (News Chronicle, May 6, 1955)

As I said, there are always risks involved. And the risks in the early days of the development of a vaccine (or a drug, for that matter) are greater. My point is that many people exaggerate or misunderstand these risks, and underestimate the risks of the diseases involved, precisely because of the enormous success of the inoculation programs.

Sergey, your contribution to this discussion is much appreciated. Always a pleasure to read your posts. I also appreciate your comments directed at those who blithely disparage the role of the spiritual in people’s lives. I happen to think that we are on the last legs of a long period whereby many people have been anchoring their lives to various kinds of what are called “reductionisms.” The most widespread of these is called physicalist reductionism.

One can be a person of both faith and reason. The importance of that cannot be overstated. Joseph Ratzinger, Pope Benedict XVI, a couple of years ago at Regensburg, put the issue of faith and reason back on the front burner when he was commenting on a 13th century Greek’s thoughts about Islam.

Science and faith need not be mutually antagonistic. The reconciliation of these is actually well underway, although in the popular consciousness most people are still stuck in the 19th century or early 20th century mentality. Academic/educational institutions still encourage and inculcate the older consciousness, but those on the cutting edge know that it’s dead as a doornail. It only continues to kick back in certain vituperative rants that still have not incorporated what’s been happening in physics and astrophysics.

I strongly support the programs we have had to administer the inoculations that head off a host of childhood diseases. At the same time, I have read some recent articles from inside the medical community that give some pause about a more complex relationship between genetics, diet, AND certain chemicals in the injection serums. We are not talking about causality here; the phenomenon simply cannot admit of it and defies such an easy reductionism (there, I’ve used that word again!). The fact is that there has been an alarmingly high incidence of autism going on for some years now. One out of 160 kids developing some form of it, ranging from the most severe location on the spectrum on up to the most mild forms of Asperger’s is not an insignificant thing.

Sorry, Sergey, to hear about what happened to your son. I know it’s hard to convey empathy across keystrokes, but certainly respect can be communicated in this way.

Well, this is exactly what parents of autism are being told all the time. Yes, some of them are getting frustrated. Some of them are turning to quacks, or latching on to vaccines to blame, because nobody’s telling them a damned thing!

As I pointed out above, a child lost to autism is just as lost as one crippled by polio, or struck down by influenza. And, as FredHjr points out, it’s an epidemic, and the number is rising—one in every 160 (and I’ve seen some studies that put it even higher.) A parent with an autistic child isn’t comforted by talk of anti-matter, speculations about what would have happened, or what might happen, or the glories of science, or how proximate causes are always the cause of something, etc., and so forth. Okay, it’s not vaccinations responsible? (And I, myself, don’t think that it is), fine! Tell us what IS doing it! Try finding an actual cure, or a way of at least dealing with the problem, other than sending us to support groups and lumbering us with doltish social workers, who talk to us reading off a list of questions, from a mimeographed page! (”What do you see little autistic Timmy doing in three years? What are you hopes for him?” Feel good stuff, none of it actually intended to accomplish anything. Parents of polio-stricken kids would have rioted, if they’d been treated the way parents of autistic kids are today.)

And while I can understand the fear of forgotten diseases returning, we’ve got an actual epidemic on our hands right now. So, if it’s not caused by vaccines, find out what is causing it! We were assured that products from China were perfectly safe; then came the rash of pet food poisonings. We were assured that our own food supply was safe, healthy and clean, and, more and more, we’re hearing about spinach, or beef or some other sort of food being contaminated with some sort of junk, and being withdrawn. It may not be rational, it may not be scientific, but the public is, I think, losing faith in all those reasonable, scientific voices that keep telling us not to worry, it’s alright, everything’s fine.

If something is going drastically wrong with our children, all the political activism, support groups and government benefits in the world aren’t going to help. If science really can’t come up with the answers, and if psychologists remain more interested in tending monied neurotics dribbling on about their sad childhoods then helping the autistic, the retarded, the schizophrenic—the truly mentally ill—then people are going to look for answers where they can. It’s not rational, it’s not scientific, but this is an epidemic; this is a good chunk of a generation that will never live a full life, and may always be dependent, because the medical industry can’t be bothered to do anything about it. There’s an obscene amount of money and energy expended on the plastic surgery industry, yet when it comes to autism, and the mysteries of the human mind, it’s suddenly, “well, science really can’t everything!” Neo, I love your writing, but, I’m sorry, that’s a load of. . . stuff! The medical industry is continually coming up with ways to inject garbage like botox into aging flesh, and new plastic surgery techniques; I live in a world where nothing can be done to help my autistic son, but, if I wanted, I could get a humongous pair 40-D breasts (if I wanted such an idiotic thing.)

If the medical industry really is turning its back on those most in need, it should just admit it, stop pretending it can do anything to help, and let us find our own answers.

I understand that you think your anguish has nothing to do with the deification of science, but neo-neocon is right: your high expectations versus the reality of medical science clash in almost every sentence you write. Sergey is exactly on target with his observation that the deification of science is but the mirror image of superstition.

You have drunk and seen the spider, but were you really better off when you believed? Rather than transform the God Science into its mirror image Devil, why not accept it as simply another human enterprise, some times glorious, heroic and triumphant, some times mundane, cowardly, and failed.

As someone who has also run the medical gamut of hope and despair, I wish you and your son all the best. I should probably stop there, but let me suggest that neither “medical science” nor “the medical industry” is monolithic. They are abstracts, convenient fictions. It does not help your son, and ultimately harms you, to hate a fiction.

I know many people who work in the field of child pscyhology and they say it is clear that the incidence of autism is on the rise. But it’s not even clear whether that represents an actual increase, or whether it is simply that diagnosis has become better and also broader, with milder cases being more frequently diagnosed. It is possible there is in fact an actual increase of autism, and it is possible it is an artifact of diagnostic changes.

The desperation and the suffering of parents of these children are profound. I am almost certain there isn’t a parent of an autistic child who hasn’t been treated badly by some helping professional at some point, and perhaps many at many points. But in general, as with cancer, diabetes, heart disease, AIDS, schizophrenia and other complex medical problems, medicine is interested in finding the answers. It is an unfortunate fact that the answers are often very difficult to come by.

No doubt you’re familiar with the controversy about better diagnosis vs. actual increase in autism cases. If not, however, here’s a typical summary article about the issue.

I wish you and your family the best.

I for one would push that door open with you. The numinous is innate for the spiritualist or the scientist, the faith-based or the skeptic; nothing has been replaced, it’s our common-ground. The numinous is hard wired in our species, for normal individuals, from the ten of thousands of years of short-lived generations, when we knew next to nothing about the physical world, today we use art, music, discovery, and even prayer to evoke this unique feeling.

What I find most curious from a political standpoint is that the topic shows one of the major big government programs in healthcare in such a positive light. It is pretty easy to see today how effective it was to have government subsidized and directed, (near) universal, inoculation programs for polio, measles, chicken pox, small pox, etc. However great the costs may have been in mid-XX century dollars, the direct savings and indirect benefits pretty obviously add up to show that the overall effort paid off in so many ways, not the least of which are the tens of thousands of healthy productive adults who might well have succumbed to these diseases and been left crippled for life.

Is it then too great a leap to suggest that healthcare may be among those areas where individual consumers operating in a free market is not necessarily the better choice for us as a society to make? When there is, as TalkinKamel points out, an obscene amount of money and energy expended on the plastic surgery industry while research into the surge in autism appears under funded, doesn’t it reveal the inherent flaw in viewing health as a commodity and healthcare an industry? Ultimately, as an industry, healthcare must place profits for shareholders above the needs of patients, as all industries have the fiduciary responsibility to do. Whether it is autism or AIDS, are market forces sufficient to induce the needed investment in research and to focus that research on prevention and cures rather than long term treatment options which may well, from a purely business standpoint, have a better return on investment?

All in all a fascinating post; one that has shown the depth of the pain and frustration so many of those personally affected by serious medical issues face. Like everyone here, let me convey my best wishes and sympathy to all those for whom these are not abstract issues, but are all too personal and painful daily realities.

Before the current autism epidemic—and, yes, I believe it is an actual epidemic—autism was, supposedly, a rare mental disorder, that appeared in children who had been abandoned, or raised in institutional environments, and who had become extremely withdrawn. Now, it is widespread, and it is happening to children who were loved and wanted, and who’se upbringing was reasonably normal. The refrigerator momma, bad institution stuff, won’t fly any more. As for breast feeding, here in the US, breast feeding has been encouraged, and a great number of America women at least try to breast feed their kids. Yet still, autism. So I don’t think that’s the answer. If bottle feeding were the problem, why didn’t the boom generation suddenly become autistic? Because they were mostly bottle fed.

Yes, I’m aware of the the controversy between diagnosis, and the rise of the disease, and, quite frankly, I think it’s sailing down a river called Da-Nile. It allows would-be researchers to say, “Oh, it’s not really so bad, it’s just the way they classify it, we’re doing so much better at catching autism early these days, la-la-la.” It also allows some parents to deny their kids have real problems. “There’s nothing really wrong, they just put all kids with language problems into this category. It’s not really serious!”

What we seem to have is a growing number of kids who, for whatever reason, have severe communication problems, mimicking classic autism. This is happening all over the world, not just in America, or in places where kids are routinely institutionalized. You can call it autism, you can call it whatever you like. But it’s a problem. I don’t think it’s caused by vaccinations, but the medical profession, in ignoring or brushing off parents of autistic kids, has pretty much left itself open for things like widespread vaccination scares, and paranoia about toxins in the atmosphere. (Look, I’ve gone to some of those support groups, and I’ve heard “experts” there assuring parents that evil vaccinations, and food and diet, are responsible for their kids’ problems! On the one hand, I sympathetize with those who fear the outbreak of diseases, but, on the other hand, the medicos have left themselves wide open for this sort of thing by deciding they can’t be bothered with this problem, and dumping it all on the “helping” industries.)

I don’t know about the market in general, vis-a-vis healthcare; I am seeing “support” industries for autistic kids blossoming into big business. I hate the thought that a cure, or at least prevention, might be out there somewhere, but no one’s going to try and find it, because it would put too many support workers out of a job, and because vaginoplasty is ever so much more lucrative. After all, we’ll teach you how to ADJUST to your son’s condition, won’t that be lovely? And you can always get the state to get you some more money, yeah, right. . .

DuMaurier-smith, your little fairy tale about drinking and seeing the spider makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I thank all for your good wishes.

What the anaclitic infants required was not a mother, as such, but sensory stimulation. Neo-neocon mentions an earlier time when psychopathology was blamed upon parents–who were both mystified and anguished by what they’d done wrong. The behavior of “schizophrenogenic” parents was scrutinized and causes found–typically materal–impervious, intrusive, double-binding mothers caught most of the blame.

Look, breast feeding is a good thing. Early termination of the mother and child relationship is a bad thing, but I doubt the lack of one, or the presence of the other, causes autism.

They’ve eased off somewhat, but mothers are still expected to shoulder a lot of the responsibility, and still catch a lot of blame, if their children don’t immediately turn into perfect, silent angels, under whatever autistic treatment program they’re put under. Some programs ask the mom to spend 4-6 hours a day in floor play with her child (a schedule even a normal child would balk under; and what if she has a job? What if she has other kids?). And all mothers of autistic kids are pressured to become “politically active”, to involve themselves in their IEP programs (which the schools won’t much like, by the way). to become advocates of their kids, to work 24 hours on their behalf.

Some of this might be necessary, but it puts an awful burden on the mother, and, of course, she is the one blamed when the kid still “acts autistic”. The unspoken expectation seems to be that she, single-handedly, can somehow “fix” the kid.

Why these supposedly intelligent people refuse to investigate the claims is beyond me. They are condemning their own children to diseases because of unfounded fears. Idiocy!

There’s a flaw in our system: we don’t have to have done anything wrong to feel guilt; feeling guilt only requires that others act toward us as if we are guilty. And when those people wear the robes and lab coats, it’s hard to fight off.

But suffice to say here that it was never primarily a disease of institutionalized or abandoned children. There was no actual evidence that children with autism, even many decades ago, were unloved or unwanted or raised any differently than their normal siblings. The theories about this were generated by people such as Bettelheim (who, by the way, recommended institution—in his own facility—as treatment) from their own personal anecdotal observations of what they believed they saw in the families of autistic children. These theories did not hold up under scrutiny. In those days, blaming the parent was all the rage, and it was done with the flimsiest of excuses.

I look forward to seeing the sequel to this post, Neo, and many thanks for letting me vent here. Happy Easter, to you and your family.

Turf wars always get ugly, no matter how high or low or even imaginary the stakes are.

Name me something that religion got right that science empirically validated — which is what is suggest when one says, “got it right”? Even if it did what how is it moral to rely on faith over science? You can arrive at the root cause of this problem if you can’t see how faith is used to attenuate what science produces, not how that product is used, but what it produces.