If You Read the Paper | Mon May 24

Words
Monday, May 24th, 2010 at 10:14 am

Not doing anything? VDOT needs help mowing grass.

Dear VDOT (I love saying your anagram out loud, so futuristic),

You must be confused. The Pilot described you as “cash-strapped” when you made a call to volunteer grass-cutters around Hampton Roads. Last Monday you “accidentally” found $100 million lying around.

If you thought we’d forget, your estimation of public intelligence is dangerously low.

And, seriously, who cares about tall grass? You say that you’re going to take care of it if it obstructs roadways or impairs drivers’ ability to see the street. Aren’t there, like, A LOT of more important things to volunteer ?for?

Britain bans doctor who linked autism to vaccine

Politely, I am avoiding the enormous rant whirling in my brain. I will only say that when pharmaceutical companies produce studies, whether their results were ethically produced is rarely checked. And pharmaceutical companies have millions of dollars at stake. (Who has the money to fund research into drug-company produced studies? Not the average concerned parent.)

They also have millions of dollars to spend on attacking one of the (but not the only) people who studied the links between vaccinations and serious reactions.

Big risk, big boon: Offshore drilling could create 15,000 jobs

Inspired by the BP spill, McDonnell wonders whether a [possibly miscalculated] 1,500-15,000 job increase in the state of Virginia is worth the thousands of jobs and state income and money and tourism and MARINE LIFE that would disappear in the case of a big spill, here.

First of all: get the numbers straight. What would the employment gains actually be?

And then: Figure out another way to create those jobs. (Light rail, better public transportation, etc…,)

Woman charged in child’s whipping

So, I have a mom-blog, and I read several other mom-blogs every day. This is relatively new for me (I started blogging about three months ago), and I am continuously surprised by how hard parents are on other parents. Calling each other neglectful for letting their kids go to the park by themselves or for allowing their baby to eat a too-hard-to-gum piece of banana and then spit it out. Berating and guilt trips are fair game for middle-class moms with wi-fi.

And then there are the moms, like me, who call ourselves out for the “neglect” we impose on our kids: I only bathe my daughter when she’s dirty. In order to facilitate elimination communication, she poops and pees outside of her diaper, sometimes.

The weird, puffed-up drama of mommy-blogging is half funny, half depressing–because I know quite a few families who really do neglect their kids. One family that I know has had lice for three years. A 10 year old in that family never goes to school, hasn’t for years. They’ve had Children and Families called on them a few times, and nothing happened. Growing up, a friend of mine called the police on her abusive parent. A policeman told her, “Sometimes, parents need to keep their kids in line.”

When it comes to real abuse and neglect, people get “caught” and, many times, nothing happens. I’m always wondering at the double standards we have in the case of children: lawmakers will convict them as sexual offenders for “sexting,” and use tax dollars to pay for their years in jail, but we do not have a solid system for caring for children post abuse and rehabilitating neglectful parents. If someone is in Portsmouth belting her kid at a gas station, in front of people, the cops get called, and the story ends up in the paper. I wonder how this will pan out: Will she slip through the unkempt baseboards of our child advocate system or will she be made an example of?

It doesn’t really matter, either way. When child abuse appears in the newspaper (there are two other stories of it today, but I’ll let you scavenge for those yourself if you’re into that sort of thing), we read it with one eye closed. We feel pangs of ickiness, empathy for the child, maybe. There are a few god-like individuals who work their tails off every day as good foster parents and child counselors, but most of us are focused on complaining about budgets, health care reform, oil spills. Of course, those things are important, essential topics. But while Angelina adopts a child per country, the kids in our own are suffering. And we fold our newspaper into the recycle bin, play with our own kids, and live our lives on the fringe of the popular issues.

Orphaned children, faulty systems, federal involvement in parenting (whether it’s useful or not), sucky (unfunded) education, a criminal “justice” system gone wonky: these issues aren’t on the list of lobby priorities. But, damnit, they should be.

He’s now a she and wants to serve the VFW as a woman

It’s a little weird that the story of Larry Bush, a member of the General MacArthur Memorial Post 392 and Navy veteran after 24 years of service, who has come out as a woman (now Laura) during a Post meeting last month, is headline news.

But I guess that’s what the Pilot means when they say they are media news.

Anyway, Laura, you go girl.

The issue, according to the Pilot, is that when Laura announced that she was transgendered, she did it dressed as a woman. Which surprised the people who approved his announcement (but I bet it doesn’t surprise many of the readers).

“[The post commander who approved the announcement] Brady, however, said Bush disrupted the post by coming in dressed as a female, upsetting and embarrassing other members–many of whom are in their 50s and 60s.”

Embarrassed because she was better dressed than the audience? Upset because at the magical ages of 50 or 60, people (who are a part of an organization that is generally supportive of its transgendered members) lose the ability to tolerate change?

I would be a little surprised if a co-worker of mine who usually sported stilettos and an up-do appeared at a work function in overalls and hiking boots. Our gender identities are personal and severely important facets of ourselves. Coming out is a huge event for anyone, and it seems like it was an extremely important occasion for Laura. “Embarrassed” and “upset” aside, I commend her.

Growing Vegetables Upside Down

I caught garden fever a little late this year, but it’s sort of like when I caught the flu in March: It was way more intense than the flus my friends caught earlier in the season. I have gone garden nuts. On the 8th, I’ll be posting an everything-you-need-to-compost article on my blog. Currently, I have over 30 potted plants.

Anyway, if you’re garden crazy like me, this NY Times article about growing hanging vegetable plants is rad. It provides a rough outline of how to DIY the containers, links to other DIY sites, links to places to purchase containers, and a nice little story about a guy and his successful tomatoes.

One of the best Lives I’ve read…

I’ve been waiting to post this since last week: Since Jesse informed me that Lives exists, I tune in pretty regularly.

Honestly, many times, I am unimpressed. But not on May 17. This gem documents the author’s experience as a “background artist” (formerly known as an extra) on the Sex and the City sequel. I’ve done a bit of this kind of work before, and last year, my dog performed alongside Chloe Sevigny and Michael Shannon in the hard-to-find My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done by Werner Herzog. Working in the background on film or TV is always interesting and telling of popular acceptance of stereotypes (only business men with bellies ride Segways, or stroller-jogging moms always have a latte in the cup holder on the stroller handle).

"
"
Bookmark and Share

COMMENTS

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Facebook comments:

  • Jessica Sandlin | May 24, 10 @ 11:33 am

    GREAT recap- I missed the vaccine article and will go back for it. Thanks.

  • Grant Cothran | May 24, 10 @ 11:36 am

    Asha,

    While I will politely refrain from a direct confrontation, what I interpret from your comments above lead me to believe you are more skeptical of the drug lobby, government and the medical community at large than Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Despite my own occasional cynicism toward Big Pharma, in this particular matter there is something much greater at stake: the health and well being of children around the world. I would like to have read your full rant, because I don’t know how much of it would have been directed at (I hope) exposing the Drug Lobby’s ongoing questionable practices or (I fear) defending Dr. Wakefield and his research.

    I would really like to get your feedback, or anyone else’s, that can contradict the following statements, based on my own research and discussions with medical professionals:

    1. To this day no independent health organization (government, NGO, health lobby, professional organization or otherwise) has stepped forward to back Dr. Wakefield’s claim that there is a link between childhood disease vaccines and autism. Many have stepped forward to debunk it.

    2. Despite numerous other studies performed since Dr. Wakefield’s in 1998, his findings have never been replicated. Dr. Wakefield’s study remain the ONLY study to have been published in a peer-reviewed journal of medicine.

    3. The journal that originally published Dr. Wakefield’s study in 1998, The Lancet, retracted its article in 2004 citing “dishonesty and irresponsibility” in doing his research. In January 2010, the Lancet issued a second and full retraction.

    4. 10 of the 12 authors of that study have retracted their support for it and its interpretation.

    5. And perhaps most importantly, a direct quote from the AP:
    “Vaccination rates in Britain have never recovered since Wakefield’s research was published in 1998 and there are measles outbreaks in the country every year. [Measles] is also on the rise in the U.S.”

    —

    In science, it’s okay to be wrong. Progress depends on people taking chances, finding alternate conclusions, and sifting the bad stuff out (this is how the peer-review process works). Where I draw my ire is Non-Dr. Jenny McCarthy, apostle of Dr. Wakefield, who recently said “the world is being subjected to a remarkable media campaign engineered by vaccine manufacturers.” The world is also being subjected to a remarkable resurgence in Jenny McCarthy’s career, engineered by opportunists and literary agents, to turn one bogus study into millions of book sales.

    To quote Mark Twain: “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”

    • AshaB | May 24, 10 @ 12:57 pm

      Grant-

      I chose not to go into this issue for two reasons: 1. My research materials are packed away as I’m about to move. 2. One controversial (so research required) opinion follows another. I didn’t think it was fair, given the nature of IYHRTP to write at such lengths about one (multi-faceted) subject.

      Yes, my opinions are *anti* Big Pharma. My main issues with the linked article have nothing to do with supporting Dr. Wakefield or his research.

      Concerning the decision whether to vaccinate my child, I have spoken to a lot of Doctors and bought and read a lot of books and journals, as it appears you have. Before my research, I had planned on spreading out the vaccinations for the simple reason that they damage a very young infant’s immune system (I don’t know a doctor who would deny this). Then I began the research. My first objective was understanding the way that research is conducted, the way that statistics are obtained, the way that diseases affect the body, spread, and how dangerous they really are. And then I began my research into each specific vaccine, it’s development, and the way that it is tested for safety. Unfortunately, vaccines are not tested for safety (at least not effectively), unless we consider testing to be creating new schedules for doctors to sell to their patients when the old schedules don’t work.

      Today’s article irritates me because the hype over Dr. Wakefield centralizes the effort that myself and many other parents advocate for: to have vaccines tested for links to adverse reactions such as: Crohn’s disease and leukemia (Measles), brain damage (DTP), and polio (polio). In the absence of these studies, it is really difficult to make an accurate decision about our own children and the health of the public. With the Wakefield hype, the “anti-vaccine” (or vaccine-knowledge) effort appears to hinge on the mistakes of one doctor and Jenny McCarthy. The Wakefield/McCarthy group is a group in which I and many other mothers who have made the same decision as myself do not belong. While autism very well may have something to do with vaccinations, it hasn’t been proven, and I get that. Frankly I am more concerned with continuing research on vaccines than I am about the public fate of Dr. Wakefield.

      I wish that people would accept Dr. Wakefield’s mistake and recognize that one mistake doesn’t dismiss the (very mildly related) issue: that vaccines are possibly unsafe, for reasons unrelated to autism. And they need to be tested before they are sold as the soldiers of public health.

      So, I cannot disprove (or even, really, address) most of your numbered statements. I assume they are correct, except for one: the quote about measles. This specific quote was the element that pushed me to include the article in my post. I have spoken to several doctors about this specific childhood malady, and everyone I’ve spoken to, even my pediatrician who supports the standard vaccination schedule, has asserted that except in very rare cases (similar to chicken pox) and with the proper care, measles is a mild disease. Of course, complications can arise from any viral disease, but, in the case of measles, they are rare. The quote that references the outbreak of measles in the UK and measles being on the rise in the US implies that these are severe issues (It seems like a fear tactic, to me). Which is interesting because it seems to be pretty common knowledge that the measles vaccine only lasts a decade or two, most people do not get their boosters past childhood, and many of the outbreaks that I have read about in the United States happened in communities which were 100% vaccinated.

      Your comment is the first discourse-engaging set of remarks I’ve received on anything I’ve written for AltDaily (so thanks!). I am still learning about vaccinations and diseases and am interested in pursuing graduate studies in epidemiology. This subject is insanely important to me, and I am interested to see whether anyone will address the list you posted.

      • Grant Cothran | May 24, 10 @ 5:24 pm

        Asha,

        Thanks for your response… I read it very thoroughly, and then a second time through. I really appreciate your perspective and it shows that you’ve done some real homework on the issue. Most importantly your concern that “the hype over Dr. Wakefield centralizes the effort” to work toward better testing of vaccines is very well founded… as I’m sure was clear by my post earlier, it’s the Wakefield/McCarthy faction that makes my blood boil.

        To take the debate to another field, debunking Dr. Wakefield’s study as proof that vaccines are all perfectly sound is like discrediting climate change because of a single book-cooking global warming scientist. At the same time, Dr. Wakefield might erroneously create a wave of parents whose skepticism will persists long after this rumor subsides (I’m sure you have found yourself in philosophical agreement with vaccine skeptics who cite Dr. Wakefield? Kind of like me being shoulder to shoulder with a completely misinformed stoner at a greenie rally?).

        Interesting your comment about measles not being a more serious disease. I thought the AP article was poorly written, and I shouldn’t have repeated the measles statistic – not because it’s not true, but because it fans the alarmist flames. Thanks for the response, I enjoyed reading your additional comments. Do I foresee a more detailed AltDaily feature?

        …And personally I’m very happy you’re not a McCarthyite, as this would disrupt my ability to enjoy your Monday posts.

        • AshaB | May 24, 10 @ 8:02 pm

          Grant-

          I agree totally with “…debunking Dr. Wakefield’s study as proof that vaccines are all perfectly sound is like discrediting climate change because of a single book-cooking global warming scientist.”

          I weekly attend breastfeeding/alternative parenting groups, so, yes, I am frequently finding myself in the presence of people who have beliefs aligned with my own for completely different (and to me, incorrect) reasons.

          I have written one other thing for AltDaily and have been working (for way too long) on some others. Some day I’ll get down to finishing them! Thanks for your support (via discourse).

          Your posts on “…the paper” are always super stimulating; I’m warming up to the rhythm of the column, so hopefully I’ll find a way to approach issues more thoroughly in the future.

  • Mary W | May 24, 10 @ 4:23 pm

    Before my research, I had planned on spreading out the vaccinations for the simple reason that they damage a very young infant’s immune system (I don’t know a doctor who would deny this).

    I know lots and lots of doctors who would deny this. Any child’s (any person’s) immune system reacts by making antibodies when it is exposed to a germ, whether in the wild or in an immunization. It does not make sense that an immune system could be “damaged” by the introduction of a germ in a vaccine. How, exactly, would that work, even in theory?

    That’s not saying I don’t want safety tests on vaccines. I do. I also have beloved children.

    But immunizations have brought untold health and freedom from illness for the last several generations. In fact, it is ironic that we continue to desperately seek an immunization for HIV at the same time there is an unfounded disbelief in the value of immunizations for polio/MMR and etc and a worrisome lack of immunizations in some pockets of the country.

    Be careful where you “research” the “facts” about “immunizations damage the immune system” and such claims.

    • AshaB | May 24, 10 @ 7:13 pm

      Mary,

      I am very careful during my research. As I said earlier, I do not have my research at my disposal at this moment, but I found this article

      (http://www.cure-guide.com/Vaccine_Guide/Vaccine_articles/Immune_system_damage_from_vacc/immune_system_damage_from_vacc.html)

      which cites some examples of research done on the effect that vaccinations have on the immune system.

      • lizzelizzel | May 24, 10 @ 7:38 pm

        Do you have any sources that are NOT from an acupuncturist/promoter of homeopathy?

      • lizzelizzel | May 24, 10 @ 7:47 pm

        Scratch that – you just said you don’t have anything on hand, but if you have a chance, I’d be interested in seeing articles written by people on the *other side* that also agree.

        • AshaB | May 25, 10 @ 8:18 am

          I commented with a few links that I had bookmarked, but I guess, bc of the links my comment is awaiting moderation. When I researched this issue, I did it in print (I know, old school) otherwise I would have more links. Dr. Jay Gordon is a pretty awesome, well educated person, and he is not an acupuncturist/homeopath. He provides a lot of good info on his website.

          • Hannah Serrano | May 25, 10 @ 8:59 am

            Sorry about that Asha. With a lot of links, the system thinks it’s spam. Just approved it though.

      • jason levesque | May 24, 10 @ 8:15 pm

        Hey Asha, the link you provided is an example of what Mary W was warning about. If your research is completely disregarding the bulk of modern evidence you may need to broaden your scope. You may want to ask yourself “What evidence could i find that would change my opinion on this subject.” If you can’t imagine such a thing it’s more likely you’re limiting your research to articles that support your belief.

        The issue at stake here with vaccines is huge and worthy of comprehensive research before the advocation of potentially dangerous minority opinions.

        • AshaB | May 25, 10 @ 7:16 am

          I agree with you, and I have done research on both sides, because I have found many sources which are anti-vaccination which do not provide solid evidence.

          You are correct that the vaccine issue is:
          “….worthy of comprehensive research before the avocation of potentially dangerous minority opinions.”

          My point on this thread has been that thorough, comprehensive research has NOT been done on any vaccination. I am “advocating” for research to be done. Yes, that is a minority opinion, which, I feel, is the problem.

          As far as vaccinations weakening the immune system. (I used the word “damaging,” but I did not say “destroying.” Many, many doctors, have discussed this weakening of the immune system with me. My pediatrician, who supports vaccinations on the current, recommended schedule, engaged in discourse with me about my decision to stall vaccinations until I understand them better, have done more research, etc… During this discussion, he pointed out during this discourse that my child would have a stronger immune system throughout the winter if I did not vaccinate.)

          The person who owns the website I linked to does not, however, disregard the bulk of modern evidence. He does have strong, anti-vaccination opinions, but the reason that I linked to him is that he provides raw data intermixed with his opinion.

          Since I did not have my own raw data, I linked to his.

          The important thing about his website is the data, which can be accessed separate from his opinions.

        • AshaB | May 25, 10 @ 7:47 am

          And, yes, I can imagine, and have read, compelling data about vaccination safety. But I have not seen any research proving their safety, which is what I’m advocating for.

          I find it strange that my research methods are being scrutinized in this thread even though I have decidedly *not* included them.

          I have, in fact, only asserted that I wish for more testing to be done, and that I am approaching a career that will allow me to participate in that research, because I feel that this issue is elemental for public health.

  • Mary W | May 25, 10 @ 6:06 am

    Jason: exactly.

    Often people seem to think (and actually propose!) that “mainstream” medicine (as opposed to this concept called “alternative” medicine) is ignoring compelling evidence or refusing to accept alternative explanations for what amounts to anecdotal reports of vaccine problems. I don’t believe this is a fair picture.

    The website Asha referred to is not an example of “research”. It’s a compilation of easily accessible medical literature, some of it dating to 1952, and much of it taken out of context and much of it refuted by other studies not referred to by the author of the article on the website.

    For a response (not a direct response to the article mentioned, but rather a response to parental worries), see the free full text of this article: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/111/3/653

    Make sure to read the eletters available in response to the full text article, too.

    Anyway, I am coming across as needlessly argumentative. I’m not. I would describe myself as “mainstream” at this point (having been a nurse for many decades and still working) but I am interested in dispensing correct information and understanding vaccine safety issues. To accept the current science about vaccine safety is not to have one’s head in the sand (or elswhere!) I just want us all, as a society, local and national, to be cautious and correct before spreading potentially harmful information. Vaccines so far have been remarkably safe, over all. I have seen in my lifetime bacterial meningitis drop from a common cause of illness, brain damage, and death to a rarity. From childhood vaccines. Wow. That’s what I say about that.

    • AshaB | May 25, 10 @ 7:36 am

      The website does include research that can be accessed, while my own documents cannot. I only linked to it to show that there is research available which argues that vaccines weaken the immune system (My original statement was that I did not want to vaccinate a very young infant because the vaccines do weaken the immune system, however temporary it is.)

      As to the other studies which refute the research he has listed in his article, I would like to know which of those he referenced have been refuted and when. Do you have that research available? (I’m asking because I am genuinely interested in all sides of the “vaccine debate.”) (Until now, I really wasn’t aware that there was a debate over whether vaccines weakened the immune system. From all of the discourse I’ve had, I thought that it was common, medically sound, knowledge.)

      I do appreciate the discourse, as I am *not* a medical professional, and the only assertions I’ve made have come from assertions made by more than one medical doctor (pediatricians and neurologists who I have spoken to directly).

      I am aware that there are a great variety of opinions circulating the medical community, so when I have discussions with any MD, I usually ask for evidential research.

      In this thread, I have not asserted anything super anti-mainstream. I have only said that I really want research to be done before a vaccine is promoted publicly. (And I’m also advocating for more research to be done on our current vaccines.)

      It seems that, to that effect, you and I fundamentally agree? And our only disagreement is over how, exactly, jabs affect a young infant’s immune system?

  • Mary W | May 25, 10 @ 3:26 pm

    It seems that, to that effect, you and I fundamentally agree? And our only disagreement is over how, exactly, jabs affect a young infant’s immune system?

    It’s really hard to tell in this format who is responding to whom (or whom to who…I digress), so I am taking the liberty of thinking you are addressing me. I hope I’m right.

    I do not think we fundamentally agree. I think we fundamentally disagree, but politely. :-)

    There has been much research done on vaccine safety. There continues to be research done. I believe the Pediatrics article I provided full text of (or a link to the full text) can and does let parents know many of the valid, replicable testing results currently assessing vaccine safety.

    I absolutely do not agree that vaccines “weaken the immune system” and further, do not understand how the theory that they do “weaken the immune system” can even work as a theory.

    I absolutely do not agree that there is any current basis of scientific fact for the argument that “vaccines cause autoimmune disorders”, and in fact, there is current research discussed in the linked Pediatrics article discussing and refuting this.

    As someone currently in the “medical community” (if my nursing brethren will not stone me for that description) and in the maternal-child field specifically, I can attest that there is not, in fact, that great a variety of “opinions” about the safety of childhood vaccines. I cannot refute or comment on every single piece of “evidence” cited on the original website you referenced (the one from the homeopath). The article from Pediatrics discusses much of that “evidence”, which I insist be put in quotations because a list of articles with interesting titles does not, in itself, present any “evidence”.

    It is far better for someone who is not a medical researcher (and that includes this nurse-with-a-bachelor’s-degree–me–too!) trying to wade through a mess of conflicting information to find reliable sources of information and start there, than to try to judge somehow the merits of isolated articles and reports taken out of context and out of the realm of one’s own specific field of knowledge. Think about the difference between the article written on the homeopathic page and one written on the CDC webpage referenced above by Jason. This is not to disparage anyone, just to point out the different level of expertise and knowledge available to the person writing the article.

    Experts can be wrong. Complacency is not called for. However, it is WRONG to say that vaccines are not being studied; they are. Currently, there is no credible evidence that they cause allergies, autoimmune disorders, autism, or “weakened immune systems”, and that is fact. Currently. Fact.

    “I think vaccines can cause a weakened immune system” is a statement of opinion. “Vaccines cause a weakened immune system” is an arguable point. “Studies prove that vaccines cause a weakened immune system” is, if not an outright lie, a purposely misleading statement.

    mary

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.