Say it ain’t so, Amy Farrah Fowler!

Yoga, or ‘survival knowledge’ as it is alternatively known, can be taught to a switched on aspirant in a year or two.

However, the teacher wants the aspirant to work for him for 20 year or more as payment for sharing this knowledge. Luckily, the aspirant has heard about the teacher’s ability to ‘harvest the big spiritual fruits’ and so is willing to chase the dangling carrot of enlightenment, under expert direction, for a very long time.

Woo, or ‘expert direction’ is just ‘filler’. None of it works, unless you are that teacher 😉

I would still rather take my chances with 2 years of good yoga plus 20 years of useless woo, than to take my chances with 20 years straight of western medicine, Orac-style.

To find out more, google ‘Crazy Wisdom’.

So it’s probably for the best that she’s gone back to acting rather than pursuing a scientific career any further?

I guess BBT becomes a bit like watching “My Name is Earl”, I lost most of the enjoyment from watchiong it when I found out that the lead actor is a scientologist.

That is *very* disappointing.

Her approach to parenting is basically neglect.
One of mine figured out how to use sentences at 14 months, but the next one down required about 3 years of speech therapy and then a year of special teaching to get her reading – she was reading everything backwards for some reason. She’s a very bright girl, but her brain was doing something very odd.

Without this early expert attention, she would be a dunce in class and a dyslexic. She would not “progressed in her own way at her own pace”, she would have ended up in serious academic difficulty.

I always assume people like Bialik, who have demonstrated some sort of advanced intelligence, eventually have a “Doh!” moment and realise what idiots they’ve been.
I’m afraid there could be an ego thing that prevents this moment from ever arriving.

There’s a scientist in my family (well, there are several)….who is a climate denier. And showing no signs of having his “Doh!” moment yet.

Given what happened to my wife during her first child-birth experience with bad “pain-manangement, botched epidural” – which required some pretty serious intervention to finally deliver, then comparing that to her second experience, with very effective pain management, and despite having a baby that was 1/3 larger in size (9 lb vs. 6 lb) the experience was way less traumatic, the baby was fine, and my wife was able to walk out of the hospital under her own power.

Modern medicine is where is it for a reason – it works, it is effective, and without it, people tend to die, a lot.

@Kayla

The reason for my dismay is that Mayim Bialik is using her celebrity to support and raise funds for an organization that preaches medical ideas that are demonstrably dangerous to children, such as antivaccine views and alternative medicine. If she were living her crunchy, “holistic,” vaccine-free lifestyle and not promoting it, I’d be disappointed but probably wouldn’t care that much. She’s not. She’s a celebrity spokesperson for the Holistic Moms Network, an organization as quacky as any I’ve ever seen, and she’s using her celebrity to promote her woo ideas in a book. (Does anyone doubt that she’ll discuss her views on vaccines, homeopathy, etc., in the book, along with attachment parenting?) So, yes, normally I don’t care much if the actor is anything like the role. This time I do because the actor is using her celebrity from the role to promote quackery.

Of course, I find the new “My Little Ponies” to be profoundly creepy as well…..

One of the first things I learned as a parent is that kids need to be taught basically everything. And they get better with practice.

And even if there are some physical things that will develop, saying please and thank you is completely a learned activity

@12 MM,M

I have found that teaching children to use the phrases “Excuse me.” “Thank you” and “Please” correctly work wonders with their perceived social skills. Using those even with people they do not like at the moment is especially good practice.

I’m thinking of my own two delightful darlings. Interrupting a spat and forcing them to use each others’ names instead of “stupid head” and using complete sentences is a great way of emphasizing that politeness is not just for people you like. In fact, good manners are often most useful when you are upset since it gives you something safe to say.

Orac @8 – the other problem is that Bialic isn’t just your random empty-headed actor or model (like Jenny). She does a PhD, and so that gives her an air of authority. Irrespective of the fact that her phD makes her no more of an authority than I am, but that won’t stop the Woomeisters from trumpeting it as much as possible.

@Lawrence

It isn’t all that bad. At least it is better than previous seasons(generations).

@7 Kayla

“If I had to stop watching every movie, play, or tv show because one of the actors was a scientologist, or only lived by my own moral values, or even my own scientific reasoning, I think I might have very little left to watch.”

You might indeed. Problem?

There are two things at play here for me though – Firstly I now know she’s a kook, and will be thinking that if I see her on tv again. Secondly I don’t really wish to support people that do stuff I disagree with. I know my own viewership is of minimal value and consequence, but it falls in line with my attempts to not buy products from companies with what I consider to be questionable ethics. I know a personal boycott won’t achieve much, but at least I’m not part of the problem.

@ Hudge:

You see, I think that many of us have heard veganism trumpetted alongside woo so frequently that we may sometimes- unfortunately- associate them. I realise that there are sane vegans and vegetarians who are perfectly reasonable: a former president wants to avoid another by-pass or cathetherisation; it’s a traditional way of eating in their family ( esp lacto-vegetarians from India); a key weight control method. I asked a young hipster about his vegetarianism – it wasn’t political or health-oriented but fuelled by his love of animals. “Even chickens?”, I asked “Even chickens”.

Woo often imparts a nearly magical role to phyto-nutrients and raw vegetable energy: it is the life force encapsulated within the plant. Perhaps they free associate the ancient connection concerning observation of plants “dying” ( winter) then being miraculously “resurrected” with the coming of spring -like the dead and dying g-ds who re-appear re-energised and re-animated. They want a piece of that action. Let the magic of photosynthesis empower your life! Purity forbids the eating of *dead* carcasses! These ideas flow un-impeded throughout the woo-esphere.

One bone to pick: while Bialik’s version of home birth is total crap, home birth in general doesn’t imply free of pain meds. Nor is there an implication of heightened danger, if done correctly.

Bialik recommends dangerous practices in the link you’ve given, and a hospital birth is certainly easier in terms of how much organisation has to go into the process for the soon-to-be mother. But this doesn’t mean that a hospital birth is safer. Indeed, research coming out of the Nordic countries implies that a properly planned home birth is safer than a properly planned hospital birth, due to lower stress levels in the mother, and lower infection rates. Improperly planned births tend to go better in hospitals, for obvious reasons.

TL;DR: a stopped clock is right twice a day, and some woo has a kernel of truth, apparently. Home births aren’t half as dangerous (when planned) as most people believe.

About her education Orac wrote: “It just goes to show that understanding in one area of science doesn’t necessarily translate into an understanding in another.”

It’s worse than that. The PhD by itself does not guarantee intelligence or an understanding of anything (though I admit I expect someone with suma from Harvard medical school to be sorta smart in some ways). If you haven’t had occasion to realize this, consider yourself lucky.

Jay Gordon is her ped.

Is he? Or does she just know him somehow from being involved with the Holistic Moms Network?

Since they’re so heavily into homeopathy, shouldn’t the website for the Holistic Moms Network feature a totally blank screen?

The more invisible the message, the more powerful it is…

@ nastylittlehorse:

about not supporting awful people and companies…
I have tried so hard to do this *however* here’s where I got stuck: I have mutual funds that frequently own some really despicable companies – if you made up a list of horrible US and UK companies, I can assure you that I probably own several of them this way. This puts me in a quandary- I hate the companies but they usually make money. It’s not always easy to get rid of these things and when you buy a new one, you wind up in the same place. I know about so-called ethical investing. My practicality usually outweighs my idealism. But it bothers me that I actually own something created by Rupert M! ( Never say his full name- he may materialise on your doorstep-and who wants that!)

@ Minions and shills:

While we’re on the topic of toxic momism- @ AoA today- Anne Dachel seems rather upset that brain scans may discern very early indicators of autism. As I’ve stated before, this growing body of evidence will stick in their craws as much as the predicted DSM-5 changes and the continuing downward spiral of AJW ( soon to be seen at Long Beach, CA).

Oh my lord. She’s a teacher’s nightmare — the parent who thinks the world needs to adapt to her children, and not the other way around. That may work in the short term, but she won’t be around to adapt the world them forever. Even ignoring the obvious signs of developmental delay, it’s clear she doesn’t believe in challenging her children; I wonder how long it will be before they learn how to read. Or if they’ll learn to read. I don’t think she’s doing them any favors this way.

Not being able to roll over before age 1 is pretty serious. She seems only concerned with him doing it when he’s ready; she has no concern about any underlying defects that could have caused this unusual delay, and obviously no worry about how the impairment could endanger him. (Being unable to roll over is actually a bad thing; it means he has no way of escaping if, say, a cushion falls over on him. His only protection is the attention span of his caregivers. Maybe she’s arrogant enough to think that’s enough, and that if she’s looking out for him, he doesn’t need to do so himself.) He could have muscle problems, he could’ve been weak due to a vitamin deficiency, he could have an undiagnosed metabolic disorder, he could have neurological deficits….. Yet she has no concern about any of that. He’s her kid, ergo he’s fine.

I agree with Hudge. I am a vegan for mainly ethical reasons, and I have no stomach for woo and pseudoscience. There doesn’t appear to be any need to bring up her dietary choices, unless it’s something she’s foisting upon her children and causing them to be malnourished. Which she could be, but that would be more relevant than her own veganism.

Perhaps after much consideration, she with the keen scientific mind and PhD in neuroscience, has actually made the correct decision for her children.

Lets wish her a long and successful acting career so that she
a) does not have to return to science
b) has money to pay for her kids treatments later one
c) leave them enough money to make up for the lack of education and social skills in later life
I add her to my Tom Cruise file so.

@23 Medivh home births have a far higher rate of death for both the baby and the mother.
http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2012/02/two-new-studies-show-increased-risk-of.html

I hadn’t thought of that. Sheldon is making fun of homeopathy fairly frequently…

Oh, well. That’s why they call it “acting.”

@ harold:
– not an amateur – but I agree with you mostly. While the entertainment industry may be reality centric about AGW and environmental concerns *and* against creationism and restrictive social mores, I do believe that the woo doth flow profusely and luxuriantly. Like the sap in springtime.

Here’s what perturbs me to no end: women often have real social, aa well as earning, power in this industry. And there they go spouting support for woo – I read Vogue and interviews frequently show high-level nonsense about health, especially when it’s appearance-related . While I have some sympathy that perhaps these women- like many people who study liberal arts or the arts- just never received a decent background in science, maybe it’s not entirely their own fault. *But* can’t they have the good sense to not carry on about topics wherein they have no expertise? That’s a basic adult skill that most people should develop around adolescence – does fame interfere with the development of self-appraisal? Performance involves self-criticism and gauging the audience’s reaction to your work.

Indeed, research coming out of the Nordic countries implies that a properly planned home birth is safer than a properly planned hospital birth, due to lower stress levels in the mother, and lower infection rates.

Citation, please. All the work I’ve seen so far, in the US, Australia, Europe, and Canada, has consistently shown an increased risk. I’m perfectly prepared to admit that I haven’t read every last bit of the literature and might have missed something. Though I’d find the result you’re claiming surprising.

Orac: I doubt her kids will be homeschooled forever. She’s a PhD; she presumably has a certain amount of respect for university education at least. Then again, at the rate their going, one wonders if they’ll even qualify for their GED. It seems more like unschooling than homeschooling (and unschooling is an actual movement that some people are consciously adopting, as opposed to non-schooling via neglect; I find it baffling, myself).

re: homebirth:
I wouldn’t be surprised if homebirth rates for second births are better than homebirth rates for first births; those for whom it went wrong the first time aren’t likely to try again (or be encouraged to do so by midwives; most midwives select only low-risk cases).

James M — are you seriously *that* lacking in a real argument?

I know how you feel, Orac. When I discovered Leonard Nimoy was just pretending to be a Vulcan, I was crushed.

Its worse than that Sid, I just learned from LAB’s comment #36 that Vulcan doesn’t even exist 😮

Equating neuroscience with science is a mistake (we should already know equating Psychology with science is an even larger mistake). Certainly a goodly percentage of neuroscientists are scientists, without question. That said, there are many who are avid dualists way out of touch with science. You can easily get your Ph.D. with one of those.

She sounds like a complete nightmare.

My mother (a doctor) used to do the routine immunisations, growth, hearing and vision checks for the local education board. This meant an annual visit to every school.

She HATED going to the local Steiner school.The kids were generally horribly behaved special snowflakes and the parents treated simple hearing and sight tests as some sort of terrible tortures that were being unnecessarily inflicted on their children. She considered it a good visit if she wasn’t bitten, kicked or punched by a child, or verbally assaulted by a parent.

I’m sad for Bialik- I can’t imagine what raising non verbal toddlers must be like, but it must be very frustrating at times. My 2.5 year old daughter sings and chats constantly and is just the best fun to be around. Sometimes I wish she was a little less verbal (like when she told her paediatrician that he could use his stethoscope to listen to her chest, and that she had nipples on her chest- did he have nipples too?) but I don’t think I would trade.

She says Gordon’s their ped in an interview:

http://www.bloggymoms.com/profiles/blog/show?id=4608538:BlogPost:115376&commentId=4608538:Comment:122370&xg_source=activity

People leave academia for all sorts of reasons, of course, but I can’t help but wonder whether Bialik is an actress because she couldn’t find a post-doc after finishing her neurology degree.

In any case, a degree in neurobiology doesn’t give you any special insight into the immune system. And, as any number of posts by Orac about doctors of dubious scientific abilities show, a doctoral degree is no guarantee of ability to think skeptically.

This won’t bother my enjoyment of TBBT. I still like My Name is Earl. I enjoyed Captain America and Julie & Julia despite Stanley Tucci being in each. I like to watch the occasional Frasier rerun.

An actor being a fucking moron doesn’t really have much to do with a performance being enjoyable or not. Acting, quite honestly, really doesn’t require much in the way of intelligence or logic.

Vulcan was only destroyed in an alternate reality. : )

With a group of leukemia & lymphoma patients, I recently got to tour a lab that has made ground breaking discoveries that have saved our lives. I asked the lab director, an MD PhD, why doesn’t our culture put these scientists working at the bench on a pedestal? Why do we worship actors?

I think Ricky Gervais comments after the Golden Globes sums up my feelings: “I was poking fun at a room full of people who pretend to be someone else all day,” he said. “It wasn’t a room full of wounded soldiers. These are Hollywood actors.”

Dialogue idea for the show ( based on Orac’s character sketch, I haven’t seen it, unfortunately)

Sheldon- wonders if Simon Baron-Cohen’s hypothesis about the children of hyper-systematisers ( scientists, engineers) being more likely to have ASDs would have anything to do with their future children…

Amy- concurs that there is definitely a chance of this happening because as, “We ALL know, ASDs have a strong genetic component and have *absolutely* nothing to do with vaccines despite all of that stupid fear-mongering based on crappy, fraudulent research”. Ms B says this with conviction while shaking her head.

“Certainly a goodly percentage of neuroscientists are scientists, without question. That said, there are many who are avid dualists way out of touch with science. You can easily get your Ph.D. with one of those.”

Amen.

Imagine, someone with scientific or medical training creating a mass media (or Internet) character and using that celebrity to promote his ideas.

Sounds like Orac to me.

This is a great post and even greater set of comments.

Best,

Jay

@Dr. Jay – if a toddler was brought into your practice showing those same developmental delays (i.e. not a celebrity child) would you recommend therapy?

Is she on Facebook or twitter?

Yes.

I wonder how she’d react if she found Orac’s post.

Not at all, I’d venture.

I found out about her parenting beliefs 1.5 years ago and eventually got over her woo stuff and just enjoy her performance on the show. I actually do like some of her writing on other subjects like Israel and body image, but yes I do completely disagree with her on vaccination, homebirth and parenting by intuition only.

I’ll say it: it’s child neglect in my book. When my husband and I became concerned about our older daughter’s development (at about 20 months of age), we began lining therapy up for her even before a final diagnosis. She had about 30 words–all nouns–and the only thing she could do with them was label things. She would look at board books for hours (no exaggeration) and could name “juice,” “milk,” etc. but could not communicate one bit. If she wanted juice, she couldn’t point to it or lead me to it, nevermind using the word to get what she wanted. She cried and we had to figure out what she wanted.

Within one week of starting speech, OT and ABA she was using basic signs and then signing with words for emphasis. I think she figured that when she signed “more” and said “more” very loudly several times, that she would get what she wanted that much faster. She did 30-40 weeks of intensive therapy as a toddler, and then preschool and more therapy. By kindergarten she was completely mainstreamed.

She still has autism, but today is a straight-A 7th grader who just won her school’s spelling and geography bees and had a part in the school play. She recently scored 28 on the ACT and is going to Davidson College this summer to take a 3-week class in immunology and diseases through the Duke TIP program. She’s wanted to be a doctor since she was five. She is not an athlete but has done gymnastics and dance to work on her gross motor skills.

My husband and I are terribly proud of her–she has worked very hard and so have the people who’ve helped her overcome some of her challenges. She’s a bright, funny, super curious kid who has a real shot at going to med school and living on her own. She plans to go into research because, as she says, “my social skills aren’t the greatest.” She’s exceedingly polite, and those manners help to smooth over some of her more awkward social exchanges.

I can’t imagine how frustrating it must have been for her to not be able to communicate, when she has always had so much to say. Our only regret is that we didn’t figure out how delayed she was months earlier.

Ms. Bialik is doing her children no favors.

Imagine, someone with scientific or medical training creating a mass media (or Internet) character and using that celebrity to promote his ideas.

Sounds like Orac to me.

Jay, Jay, Jay. We are of course well aware that you view the Brady Bunch as a source of medical knowledge.

It may therefore come as a surprise to you that there is actually a difference between using a persona, fictional or real, to promote ideas that are well-founded in evidence, and using such a persona to promote BS. It may further surprise you that the big difference is not in which persona is fictional or non-fictional, but in which is publicizing realistic information and which is spouting idiocy. Here, let me draw up the possibilities, since you will, I’m sure, have trouble following this, and be tempted to change the subject to breastfeeding:

Fictional persona, realistic information: Good
Real persona, realistic information: Good
Fictional persona, spewing BS: Bad
Real persona, spewing BS: Bad

Now I know you’ll be shocked and upset at that last category – no, wait. I don’t know if you’ve caught up, yet. Let me explain, then: Orac, the Plexiglass box of blinking lights, is in the first category. You, the pediatrician who under his real name claims that measles is symbiotic with humans, are in that last category. Sorry to be the one to break the news, but you’re a disgrace.

Jay Gordon–

Nice of you to drop by.

You gave Andrew Wakefield your unwavering support. How do you feel about that now?

Yes, we do learn about Avogadro constant in school. That doesn’t mean that those who claim that homeopathy works understand what it is. It is often mistaken for “herbal medicine.”

Still, there are actual medical doctors who become homeopaths, like Peter Fisher.

I am not an expert in infant development, so I’m willing to cut Ms. Bialik some slack in how she raises her children. I’ve certainly heard some people I consider to be otherwise sensible state that the various milestones and timelines are not etched in silicon, that children develop at different rates, and that you shouldn’t obsess about whether your child is on schedule. I have an issue with the politeness thing, but perhaps that’s my own prejudice.
Likewise, she’s not the only woman who has experienced childbirth without the benefits of drugs and, hey, it’s her body.
Not to say she should not be criticized for those practices she advocates that are clearly at odds with known science.

Meph – there are certainly ranges in developmental milestones, and parents do get overly concerned. However, failure to roll over by 1 is well-outside an even generous range. No, it might not be a problem, but is certainly grounds for concern. There could be an underlying problem, and if so you will want to get started on helping. It might not be a problem, but if not there is nothing lost.

Serious developmental delay like she is describing needs to be looked into to rule out an underlying cause, and “mommy intuition” is not sufficient.

@ Mephistopheles O’Brien:

Sometimes when people face family illness – or in this case- the possibility of disability, they may forestall the inevitable by turning a blind eye: a form of denying that there even is a problem. For example, a child** with mental health problems will be tolerated- adjustments will be made by the family to adapt to the child- (rather than the other way around, which will eventually enable the child to learn how to fit in with society) *until* something happens outside the home- someone at school will notice, a doctor will intervene, the police, etc. When there is minimal contact with the outside world, perhaps only through *paid* assistants ( who may not want to speak up) things might go on for a longer period. I hope that in this case, their doctor will counsel the family towards evaluation *if* necessary.

** it could also be an increasingly debilitated elder.

I did not say Judaism leads to ant-vax, nor do I believe it (or Christianity) does. But there are plenty of people who use their faith to claim in natural beliefs, for they believe natural is god’s (or whatever diety they choose) way of life. I was under the impression, from some reading on her or something, I don’t remember why, that this was her belief (that her personal belief leads to natural fallacy, as it does for many people). Please don’t confuse me suggesting her personal religious beliefs leads to her personal natural lifestyle (which I thought she’s implied herself, but as I said, I don’t remember where, so I very well could be wrong) with a suggestion that an embrace of religion, of any kind (generally speaking, as there are sects that do promote a natural lifestyle), leads to natural lifestyle or anti-vax. That is not what I said.

Calli Arcal,LizDitz,lilady,Cynical Pediatrician,et al

After all, many children who are developmentally delayed ultimately “catch up.”

ORAC,I’m calling you out on this.

There are far too many of us,from the Baby Boom,and Gen X generations,who were born with autism,and other serious developmental delays,before many of the current advances in therapy were made,who prove this statement wrong.It is really too bad there are not more of us out there,where we can be seen,even as YouTube videos,to drive home the point that these more of these kids do not “catch up”,than those who do.This often is a myth,one that ORAC here seems to buy into,as well.This disappoints me almost as much as Amy Farrah Fowler disappoints you.

Yes I do realize you are a cancer surgeon,not a specialist in child development,but I sort of expect anyone who finished medical school to know better than to say such things.

Fowler seems to have the same mindset that all antivax parents do,their kid is perfect,and can’t have any genetic issues that would cause autism,or developmental delays.It doesn’t take a PhD in neuroscience to look at a family medical history,where you might have histories of mental retardation,or schizophrenia,and realize there might be a genetic problem with your kids.This may not always be the case,but often it is.

Lilady you hit the nail on the head,these people have the goal of setting medicine,and treatment of the developmentally disabled back hundreds of years,even if they do not come out and say it.They may as well be calling for a return of Bedlam,as treatment for the “feeble minded”.

I wonder if she’s a germ theory denialist,too.

Bialik does not appear to have any publications whatsoever in neuroscience, according to a Pub Med search. Wikipedia cites only her thesis, nothing published in an actual journal.

With this record it’s no surprise she returned to acting. No way could she get a job in science.

@ Roger Kulp: You may have misinterpreted Orac’s remark…he said many…not most…”children who are developmentally delayed ultimately “catch up”.

I know many children who have have shown some signs of developmental delays..in receptive or expressive language, speech, and fine or gross motor lags and many…not most…ultimately “catch up”.

There are some alarm bells that I am hearing with parents who “unschool”, parents who won’t allow their children space to explore relationships with their peers and parents who do not acknowledge that their children should be evaluated for developmental delays. Furthermore, children who have no guidance, no “rules” and no gentle discipline will never learn how to grow up with increasing independence and maturity.

@ harold (# 82):
“Sadly, these guys are good.”
Oh, I know. Since I survey their miserable…. *informational websites* and *alternative media*, I know only too well.
Not only do they sell natural life styles/ spirituality but libertarian politics and bizarre so-called economics. The best I heard ( at the market lows of March ’09) “Sell all of your stocks! Buy gold!” Sell low, buy high! ( Lord, those last 4 words were even hard to type!)

Karl Withakay @74 “Seeing as Bailik’s children are not vaccinated, I wonder where she might assign blame. It’ll be toxins somehow, I bet you.”

Well, she has banished Dem Ebil Toxins. From the same interview linked to previously:

“We have eliminated pretty much all the toxic chemicals or products in our house, that’s a big one”

What I want to know about is the Pampers Conspiracy – the one she references in the interview, talking about how Pampers wants to keep kids in diapers till age 3 or beyond (some study she says Pampers funded, while assuring us she is not a conspiracy theorist).

Maybe we’ll hear more about it in her parenting book – the one for which Jay Gordon is writing the foreword.

Bialik is just the latest celebrity Warrior Mom in Gordon’s Legion of Crackpottery.

Consistent with her desire not to “force” her children to develop “faster” than is “natural,” she also has a whole list of things she doesn’t want to “force” her children to do, including sharing, being polite, or excelling at anything, all of which she disparages as “just creating children who are monkeys, imitating behavior without independently experiencing it or really understanding it.”

I would call it preparing your children to be adults and function in wider society. Sometimes I think people just don’t understand that they aren’t just raising children they are raising future adults who will be interacting with the wider world.

M, I only have one problem with your assessment. Attachment parenting was not based on “shoddy research.”. It was based on NO research. REmember that AP was asserted whole coth by Bob Sears. He went on an AP kick after his 4th child or so was born with special needs, and needed constant care like AP. They did it and he decided that everyone should be doing that with all their kids, regardless of their actual needs.

Make no mistake, AP is not about the needs of the children, it is about the needs of the mother. They are doing it because makes them feel in control, and in the worst cases (like this one) makes them feel superior to us poor saps who don’t do near as much foer our kids (how many books are written about the “just trying to get through the make it up by the seat of my pants parenting style?)

Michelle @81, I hope your daughter enjoys her summer at Duke. I did TIP as a teen and I loved it. It was so much fun to be surrounded by lots of other kids who were “nerdy” and loved classes.

So Dr. Jay, are you fulfilling your mandatory reporting requirements under CA P.C.11165.2 for neglect? Or would you call a non-verbal toddler of that age “thriving” and not requiring of intervention?

I’m glad we intervened when we did, because it gets harder to fix later on.

Sure. It’s no big deal to do an assessment early on. Maybe there’s not an issue, and if not, you go on. But maybe there is? As I said, delayed speech could be an indication of a hearing problem that you’d want to address. Far better to be proactive and get on it early.

@Dianne

Indeed, research coming out of the Nordic countries implies that a properly planned home birth is safer than a properly planned hospital birth, due to lower stress levels in the mother, and lower infection rates.

Citation, please. All the work I’ve seen so far, in the US, Australia, Europe, and Canada, has consistently shown an increased risk. I’m perfectly prepared to admit that I haven’t read every last bit of the literature and might have missed something. Though I’d find the result you’re claiming surprising.

Have you read Outcomes Associated with Planned Home and Planned Hospital Births in Low-Risk Women Attended by Midwives in Ontario, Canada, 2003–2006: A Retrospective Cohort Study? It’s well done, with a large sample for such studies, and is based on fairly recent data, in a province with midwifery that is well integrated into the health system. Care is taken to ensure that the comparison is with low risk planned hospital births.

@109 Marry Me. Thanks for clarifying. Though I don’t actually believe that AP is based on “shoddy” parenting, you are right that it came from Dr. Sears’ own experience and was fleshed out over the course of making a buck on it by selling a book.

At this point, however, it’s gospel in the AP community to parrot this badly misinterpreted research that Sears used to bolster the argument. There was research done on kinds with attachment problems and they found that, to no one’s surprise, early abuse and neglect are highly correlated. On deeper look, it was extended periods of ignoring crying, not meeting needs, not giving enough attention, not holding young babies enough / at all, too much time in car seats and swings, etc. Brain studies found stress-related damage, others found that crying “floods the brain with stress hormones” and he sloppily put those two concepts together.

Sears then took that research and, in a classic error, assumed that if neglect=bad and unattached, then the opposite of neglect would=good and attached. And from there to his untested conclusion. Never let the kid cry, never put the kid down, eschew a stroller because the kid needs to be attached to your at all times, don’t let them feel any frustration, and never ever do any sleep training because that can involve some crying. Breastfeeding is best because neglected kids are usually bottle-fed, never mind the confounding factors there. And so on.

@115 Terry, well said also.

@Marry Me, Mindy

I had the same initial thought when I read the bit about the delayed language. I don’t know the exact stats on it, but my impression is that delays in language are often indicative of hearing problems. At least, that’s something to rule out before other things, barring co-occurring symptoms.

Another thought on the late development of self-turning. Could this, perhaps, be due to having little opportunity to attempt, e.g., by being held constantly and never (or rarely) set on the ground? Could this lead to underdevelopment of the muscle strength required to accomplish?

@26, “Marry me, mindy”:

Your entire post is a bunch of caveats, and boils down to “When the birth goes ok, then homebirth is as safe as a hospital birth”

Which is tautology.

Your second paragraph would be why you need to learn reading comprehension. I said home births tend to do better when planned, not when everything goes well.

@26,41:

http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/

Is there some memo I missed? Are we doing argument from authority now? Plutosdad, I’m reading the article that you linked directly and it seems that Dr. Tutuer has some problems with skepticism. For a start, she seems to think that including all hospital births in a study between hospitals, birthing centres and homes is somehow overestimating the infant fatality rate in hospitals. And that’s just in the linked article.

The long and short of her other posts tells me that Dr. Tuteur seems to rely on “just knowing” as much as Dr. Bialik does.

@47, Dianne:

Citation, please. All the work I’ve seen so far, in the US, Australia, Europe, and Canada, has consistently shown an increased risk.

Admittedly, I was speaking from memory. When I went digging, the one cite I found was De Jonge, et al, “Perinatal mortality and morbidity in a
nationwide cohort of 529 688 low-risk planned
home and hospital births”, published in BJOG in 2009.

Unfortunatly for me, Moderation @36 tells me that I should expect that Nordic studies aren’t relevant elsewhere, because of more stringent standards for midwives in these countries. Which is fair enough, but tells me more that we need to train midwives better, not that we need to abandon home birth.

Medivh – btw, the de Jonge study had some apparent methodology problems, which were addressed in a subsequent article (van der Kooy). You know what was found? Homebirth in the Netherlands is more dangerous than the hospital.

Here’s a summary

http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2011/10/new-dutch-study-raises-troubling.html

Here’s a key quote from the paper: “Our conclusions apparently contradict those of De Jonge et al … Our principal approach (natural prospective approach) compares neonatal mortality in the actual populations delivering at home compared with the hospital, whereas the approach of De Jonge et al compares neonatal mortality in a hypothetical group resembling our perfect guideline approach population.”

@Dominica Strong: Please tell me you’re kidding, or a sock puppet. You “freaked out” about a flu vaccine with mercury – did you do any reading about thimerosol at all? It’s in minute amounts, used in multi-dose vials. At this point, it’s been out of your body for months as you excrete it in a very short time. And, the release generally has more to do with allergy risk (some people are allergic to it) and CYA risk if you’re pregnant.

Yes, you can “psyche” yourself up for childbirth. As a midwife, I used to tell my clients it’s a marathon race. Long, tiring, and they can do it. But not everyone DOES finish a marathon. Some need medications. Some need surgery. Some breeze right through labor. Some have labors from hell. Mental preparation helps but it doesn’t prevent all things. Sometimes pain means “this is muscle stretching” and sometime pain means “OMFG something is very wrong” and you need to know which is which.

You seem to be an intelligent woman, so please, drop the ‘Valley Girl’ persona and write complete, legible sentences. We’re happy to educate, here. We’ll give you links to research. We’ll admit when we are wrong. But we won’t accept illogical thinking.

Attachment parenting: I did a version of that. I DID carry my kids a lot; a stroller was too much hassle sometimes, and the baby sling I got was a bonus. Free hands and able to carry baby/toddler. But they also were put down, allowed to cry, given bottles (horrors!), punished when bad and who learned to self-comfort if mommy or daddy couldn’t get there that very second. I now have 2 independent adult children.

(Funny note: my spellcheck doesn’t like thimerosol and wants to change it to Merthiolate! Ah, the days of painting yourself red with the little glass stick….)

Roger Kulp:

Yes, many children who are developmentally delayed do catch up enough to function independently as adults, with no one realizing what their diagnosis was. They may even no longer meet the criteria for that diagnosis. But please don’t take that to mean I was suggesting this is to be expected in every case.

Kids are smarter than we give them credit for — even developmentally delayed kids — and the brain is an extraordinary machine for learning. A kid who qualifies for an autism diagnosis at 4 might have worked out ways to get along with the world by age 18, entirely on his own, but that is not to say his condition will be ideal, nor that this is the typical outcome. It will happen often enough to furnish anecdotes that the woomeisters can use, but most of the time, the kids who do progress enough to appear normal do so only with a great deal of help. “Unschooling” these kids is liable to be disastrous.

I strongly suspect that my eldest daughter will progress to the point where she is indistinguishable from normal folks, to all but those who know her very well. My brother did. But this has been with tremendous support and help. She’s on medication, she’s under psychiatric care, and she is getting superb help from the special ed team at our local public school. I have no doubt she would be doing much worse otherwise.

Actually, talking of my eldest, I’d like to take a moment to express how proud I am of her. Today, she had her final vision therapy assessment, to quantitatively measure the progress she had made and determine whether or not they could release her from further therapy. She passed with flying colors! The improvement was really dramatic. Last summer, if you waved your finger in front of her and asked her to track it visually, her performance was a -1 on a four point scale. That is to say, absolutely no succcess at all — her eyes were almost never where the finger was, and if they were, it appeared to be by accident. Today, she scored a 4, flawlessly tracking without any apparent effort. The only symptom we’d seen was an increasing resistance to advancing her reading level, and a particular hatred for chapter books or anything else with moderately dense text. (This paragraph? Would’ve been anathema.) But two weeks ago, the school tested her at a grade 5 reading level (she’s in grade 3, and in a special ed classroom besides), and she’s gone from hating writing to loving it. The problem actually wasn’t autism — it was difficultly properly pointing her eyes, maintaining focus, converging properly, etc. No anatomical or neurological problems; just something that needed training. Most people learn it on their own, but sometimes people don’t catch on as quickly. We could’ve waited a year, seen if she’d outgrow it by figuring it all out on her own (many do) — but by doing the therapy, we’ve not only guaranteed her success, we’ve accelerated it.

I’m so proud of her. It was very hard work, but it worked. It’s been very good for her, and she seems to be doing better all over the place; it’s surprising how dramatic the difference can be. Bottom line: if your child isn’t meeting milestones, it might not be anything to worry about, but you can’t know that unless you *check*. And if you find that something *is* wrong, fixing it earlier will be better than fixing it later. I wonder how many kids being raised via AP have undiagnosed hearing or vision problems; there isn’t much occasion to notice the problems in that parenting style. My first clue there was something wrong with my eldest came from others; I had no idea, mainly because I had no basis for comparison.

Dominica Strong

“Whoa…did I miss something. I am only a kid in college. But didn’t vaccines given to infants born during 1989-2001 have mercury in them? Isn’t mercury bad?”

Yes, you did miss MANY things. I’ll just deal with a small few of them: Routine vaccines given to children did previously have the mercury containing preservative thiomersal in them. It was removed in the absence of scientific evidence when the vaccine scare came along as a practice of the precautionary principal. As decent data became available, it turns out that removal was unnecessary. Since the removal of thimerosal from the childhood vaccine schedule has nothing to convince antivaxers that thrimerosal does not cause autism, we can’t even say that at least it put an end to the idea that vaccines causes autism. What we can say is that the removal has helped highlight the antivaxers crankery.

Additionally, there are numerous forms of mercury. The form that used to be used in childhood vaccines and still used in multi-dose flu vaccines, is ethyl mercury. It is easily excreted and less toxic than methyl mercury, which is what you find in tuna. Further, the dose makes the poison, and the amount of mercury in vaccines was and is relatively minuscule, far less than the amount of mercury ingested when you eat a can of tuna. There’s really no reason to fear or worry about thimerosal in your flu vaccine.

@ 126 MI Dawn

First I am not advocating for or against any of Bialik’s or the author’s views on vaccines, chidbirth, or childrearing. Mainly I felt like some of things that were said were not fair to Bialik and just out right dismissive. I didn’t like vaccines were just written off as non-controversial and that her comment on birth was some sort of wishful thinking.

Second I have a right to freak out, or at least be concerned. And I did do reading on thimerosol, and while yes it is mainly posted for those who have an allergy to mercury, doesn’t mean I didn’t want to stop and second guess my choice to get the shot. I don’t recall being tested for a mercury allergy so who knows I might have been, so I paused, and wrote Freaked out for dramatic effect. Besides those with autism may have had an allergy or genetic predisposition to being sensitive to mercury. A reaction which could cause encephalitis…damage which may lead to autism. While this all just theory, it’s still based on logical thinking. Which is why scienctists like Ratajczak are extensively investigating not only the effects of thimersosol but also the effects of other components of vaccines and the possible links to autism spectrum disorders.

So NO I am not a sock puppet. My aim was to bring up the fact that vaccinations are at least in disscussion in the scientific and medical community, if not a controversy on some levels. I wasn’t taking sides as I have been vaccinated for things and so far haven’t made a choice to stop in the future. Just pointing out it is a valid scientific issue that is being actively and logically researched.

I think in my comment I made the argument that some women may opt for painkillers or whatever they feel is best for them. In fact I wrote: “Some women can’t. So for them the pain is a problem and should be addressed however they want, it’s not woo, just preference.”

However, for myself painkillers during birth is something I wouldn’t choose. I hope to have a natural birth in a hospital if I do have children, as long as there is nothing needing extra medical attention during my pregnancy and labor I hope to have/need no medication. Also I do know which pain in my body is indication of something wrong vs something ordinary. I didn’t say mental preparation is a cure all, and I think that is what Bialik was also saying. But as with anything its a step that can be taken. What I didn’t like was how it was assumed she was going for the Secret or “wishing” away the pain.

Thirdly, my casual writing style is not for everyone. However, as a writer of my own blog I do tend to take liberties online that I do not take in other settings. I write professionally. In the past for a local magazine and currently on a sci-fi series. But when I’m not working I like to have fun and write in whatever voice comes through in my head at the time. Again that’s not for everyone…but you don’t have to read the whole thing…you can stop at anytime.

Lastly, I have links and research of my own that I also do not mind sharing. Autism, vaccines, genetics, child rearing, learning disorders are all subjects I’m well versed in, as I have a personal story which fuels my interest in them. I didn’t go into any of that in my above comment, because again, that wasn’t my point. My issue was with the dismissive tone used the two sections indicated in my above comment and the fact that Bialik’s comments on the pain of childbirth and non-vaccination could have been reacted to differently instead of immediately just seen as “woo” or whatever you wanna call it. I also said I could care less how she raises her kids…I didn’t even touch the attachment parenting thing…and don’t want to.

@ 126 MI Dawn

First I am not advocating for or against any of Bialik’s or the author’s views on vaccines, chidbirth, or childrearing. Mainly I felt like some of things that were said were not fair to Bialik and just out right dismissive. I didn’t like vaccines were just written off as non-controversial and that her comment on birth was some sort of wishful thinking.

Second I have a right to freak out, or at least be concerned. And I did do reading on thimerosol, and while yes it is mainly posted for those who have an allergy to mercury, doesn’t mean I didn’t want to stop and second guess my choice to get the shot. I don’t recall being tested for a mercury allergy so who knows I might have been, so I paused, and wrote Freaked out for dramatic effect. Besides those with autism may have had an allergy or genetic predisposition to being sensitive to mercury. A reaction which could cause encephalitis…damage which may lead to autism. While this all just theory, it’s still based on logical thinking. Which is why scienctists like Ratajczak are extensively investigating not only the effects of thimersosol but also the effects of other components of vaccines and the possible links to autism spectrum disorders.

So NO I am not a sock puppet. My aim was to bring up the fact that vaccinations are at least in disscussion in the scientific and medical community, if not a controversy on some levels. I wasn’t taking sides as I have been vaccinated for things and so far haven’t made a choice to stop in the future. Just pointing out it is a valid scientific issue that is being actively and logically researched.

I think in my comment I made the argument that some women may opt for painkillers or whatever they feel is best for them. In fact I wrote: “Some women can’t. So for them the pain is a problem and should be addressed however they want, it’s not woo, just preference.”

However, for myself painkillers during birth is something I wouldn’t choose. I hope to have a natural birth in a hospital if I do have children, as long as there is nothing needing extra medical attention during my pregnancy and labor I hope to have/need no medication. Also I do know which pain in my body is indication of something wrong vs something ordinary. I didn’t say mental preparation is a cure all, and I think that is what Bialik was also saying. But as with anything its a step that can be taken. What I didn’t like was how it was assumed she was going for the Secret or “wishing” away the pain.

Thirdly, my casual writing style is not for everyone. However, as a writer of my own blog I do tend to take liberties online that I do not take in other settings. I write professionally. In the past for a local magazine and currently on a sci-fi series. But when I’m not working I like to have fun and write in whatever voice comes through in my head at the time. Again that’s not for everyone…but you don’t have to read the whole thing…you can stop at anytime.

Lastly, I have links and research of my own that I also do not mind sharing. Autism, vaccines, genetics, child rearing, learning disorders are all subjects I’m well versed in, as I have a personal story which fuels my interest in them. I didn’t go into any of that in my above comment, because again, that wasn’t my point. My issue was with the dismissive tone used the two sections indicated in my above comment and the fact that Bialik’s comments on the pain of childbirth and non-vaccination could have been reacted to differently instead of immediately just seen as “woo” or whatever you wanna call it. I also said I could care less how she raises her kids…I didn’t even touch the attachment parenting thing…and don’t want to.

@ Dominica Strong: Why would you be worrying about a flu vaccine when you are not pregnant? Why would you be worrying about a flu vaccine…even if you are pregnant? Why don’t you educate yourself on the recommendations for flu vaccine during pregnancy (that have been in place since 2004)?

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/vaccine/qa_vacpregnant.htm

If you have any questions after reading the link I provided, just post them here…we will be happy to provide you with additional information.

Hey…what’s up?

Well not much by looks of it. I was looking forward to your educated opinion, and possibly even some discussion, of the statements made by Ms. Ratajczak regarding the human DNA in vaccines and homologous recombination in the vaccine recipients.

To wit:

[Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes–A review.
Journal of Immunotoxicology,2011; 8(1): 68–79
p70]
The human DNA from the vaccine can be randomly inserted into the recipient’s genes by homologous recombination,a process that occurs spontaneously only within a species. Hot spots for DNA insertion are found on the X chromosome in eight autism-associated genes involved in nerve cell synapse formation, central nervous system development, and mitochondrial function (Deisher, 2010). This could provide some explanation of why autism is predominantly a disease of boys. Taken together, these data support the hypothesis that residual human DNA in some vaccines might cause autism.

I am curious to hear someone who has studied molecular biology explain how these “residual human DNA” (fragments?) transverse, firstly the cell membrane and then the nuclear membrane?

I was also wondering if you could explain to me the mechanism of homologous recombination which results in the human DNA from the vaccine being randomly inserted into the recipient’s genes?

If I remember correctly, homologous recombination and cell transformation were/are covered in relative depth in first year? Even first semester maybe?

@ Dominica:

Are you familiar with the term “manufactroversy?” It refers to a situation where there is no actual uncertainty or question about the truth, but certain parties use lies and misinformation to produce the appearance of an actual controversy. This is exactly what the antivax brigade is engaged in.

@ IOrr:

Come back when you’ve reviewed the copious evidence that homeopathy does not and cannot have any effect other than placebo. “Personal experience” is a grossly unreliable gauge to such things.

@Dominica Strong

Vaccination is only controversial amongst a small subset of the population. 99% of scientists, doctors, nurses, epidemiologists, etc. will tell you that vaccines are some of the safest and most effective medical interventions currently used, and the data almost unequivocally supports that.

The ones who are against vaccination are generally either frauds, quacks, or people who just don’t know how to correctly interpret scientific data (or they’re some combination of all three), and the most vehement antivaccine supporters are actually a pretty small number who just happen to shout really, really loudly.

So saying that vaccination is controversial is sort of like saying that there’s controversy over whether the moon landing was real or faked: there’s absolutely no logical reason to believe that it was faked and most people consider the theory absolutely laughable, but there’s a very small and vocal minority who insist upon it and try to inflate their opinion into something that seems important or influential even though it’s absolutely not.

@ lOrr

“Just because you can’t wrap your brain around the science of homeopathy doesn’t mean it isn’t valid.”

I just laughed hard enough to get my whole lab to stare at me. Thanks for that.

Mind sharing with us some of the ‘science of homeopathy’ that you understand so well but that we can’t ‘wrap our brains around?’ I’m always interested in learning.

I was as skeptical as anyone 20+ years ago, until I was introduced to homeopathy by my doctor.

You say this (“I was as skeptical as anyone…”) as if it makes you sound dispassionate or something. But all it tells me is that, while you may have been a skeptic, you were a pretty stupid skeptic if all it took to change your mind was a single-sided, non-blinded test.

Falling so easily for such claptrap does not make me impressed with your skeptical skills

(I am the same with the people say, “I used to be an atheist but then I saw the light” and trot out something stupid like Pascal’s Wager; I’m like, really? You think something as lame as Pascal’s Wager is a good enough reason to believe in God? You go ahead and stay a theist, then, because I don’t want people thinking that atheists are this idiotic)

WAIT, what about Helen Ratajczak’s article in the Journal of Immunotoxicology, “Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes–A review.” […] it’s not controversy if no one else bothers to look at anything as extensively as Ratajczak has

What about it? Have you read it? More to the point, have you read the two systematic rebuttals also published in subsequent issues of the Journal of Immunotoxicology? I think they’re at least as relevant as Ratajczak’s original review.

Just because you can’t wrap your brain around the science of homeopathy doesn’t mean it isn’t valid.

On the contrary my dear, most here are well versed in both the theoretical and the experimental science of Homeopathy.

“Wow….you feel pretty strongly about this. It’s really too bad you haven’t a clue. I was as skeptical as anyone 20+ years ago, until I was introduced to homeopathy by my doctor. She didn’t push it, she just gave me the choice to try it. Now, my kids use it with their families, since they experienced the benefits as they were growing up and they trust it because it works. I can count on one hand the times my family of eight has needed antibiotics in the past 20 years.”

Tell that to these parents:

http://www.immunize.org/reports/report077.pdf

Or, tell that to these parents:

http://www.immunize.org/reports/report046.pdf

You do understand, don’t you, that antibiotics are only prescribed for bacterial diseases…some of which are prevented by vaccines administered to prevent invasive HIB and Meningicoccal diseases.

BTW…I am not “clueless”. I worked as a public health nurse and (unfortunately) investigated cases of vaccine-preventable diseases, some of which were due to credulous parents who believed in homeopathy in lieu of the Recommended Childhood Immunizations.

@ Chris138

While I accept my tone in my first comment wasn’t well received, it didn’t equal ignorant and illiterate. And I’ll admit using a more youthful and nonchalant voice wasn’t best choice, now that’s over. And I’ll even thank Indigo_Fire for their comment.

Also no I’m not pregnant…but reading mercury made me look twice. I think I have that right to look twice…did I get the vaccine, yes. I said that earlier. Did I look twice…yeah, did I get the shot, yes, but did I leave and tell everyone don’t get a flu shot, no. So, I’m lost as to why it’s such a bad thing that reading mercury unsettled me for a moment.

Again, I wasn’t defending Ratajczak’s paper or anything in it. And again, my point was addressing this blog’s post and how it’s comments seemed dismissive/mocking of Bialik’s statements, and so I also initially wrote my first comment in a tone that was mocking as well.

Maybe I should be more clear. Bialik hold’s a PhD, and apparently more was or is expected of her based on her educational background. That’s fine. What I was meant was equating what she said about mind over matter to being wishful or similar to the Secret came off to me as condescending (as have some of the responses to my comment…) I may be sensitive and overly so. I got the same feeling when vaccines were brought up as a non issue. Manufactroversy, which is not apparent to everyone, everywhere (I’m sure that’s intentional) even highly educated parents.

So, simply put, I was addressing, a tone that came off as condescending and dismissive. There is a gap, between truth and the media. What can cause a sensation is often pushed regardless of how supported it is in actuality. Correcting is something this site is great at. Referring to CBS’s site was to show how this is in the public’s eye, and I wasn’t advocating Ratajczak’s paper or what’s contained in it as fact or fiction.

I like this site, but I’ve never commented before, and I thought my first comment was focused on such a small part that it wouldn’t even be read. If anything I expected someone to write who cares we’re condescending! My first comment was long, verbose, and I regret circumventing my main point.

@Sauceress 139

Actually a lot is up. I can discuss homologous recombination and cell transformation with you all night if you like, I’m in a comp lab so I gotta log off, but I think my comments link to my blog so you can leave your email address there privately if you want, and I’ll send it right over. However, I never said I agreed with anything in Ratajczak’s paper, so I don’t see the point. Unless it’s to prove my intelligence or education to you which is also pointless, but could be fun, and good for a review. 🙂

Dominica, using a few words in random order does not make you intelligent or educated, it just means you’re really good at the worthless university of google educational system. Right now, your education and intelligence is rather suspect.

Dr. Jay,

His research should have led to further more extensive study of the issues he uncovered.

Did I miss something? Have there not been other studies that tried to replicate his findings and didn’t? Or have I – yet again – gone over to some alternate reality?

Also…

I support his conclusion that vaccines are connected to the increase in autism in children.

So you support the conclusion of a “study that small” with questionable conclusions?

I’m going to go drink some coffee, take some aspirin, try to stop the bleeding from my nose, and then come back and re-read your comment because, clearly, I missed something in the way of credible evidence for your beliefs.

Dominica, you would have had a better reception if you had actually lurked on this site a bit more. You will have noticed the general level of grammar that is expected to be taken seriously. If you had read some other threads you will that there many drive by comments that come off as illogical and with very bad grammar.

Also, if you had used the handy dandy search box in the upper left part of this page you would have seen how Ratajczak’s paper was received here. The reason we did not understand that you were not defending it was because your point was not clear. That will be something you need to work on.

Before you continue to criticize our tone, go back and read more of the articles. I hope you stay around and learn a bit. But if you wish to just be a tone troll, you are welcome to leave.

@ brian:

I sincerely doubt that you will be hearing any such admissions: I know quite a few people who invest in the market and loudly proclaim their wins but never mention their losses- however, there are some really awful people around, like me, who mentally calculate their tab and then ask sweetly: “How are those futures going?”
Unlike those who give professional advice, the only ones these investors hurt are themselves.

@ Todd W: Oh dear, what would Dr. Jay do to prevent an outbreak of measles…after the Index Case exposed his other unimmunized patients, in his office waiting room? How about reporting the measles case to the California Health Department? Note the (!) next to “Measles” on the reportable disease list that requires immediate notification to the Health Department…and the penalties for a physician for non-compliance.

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/HealthInfo/Documents/Reportable_Diseases_Conditions.pdf

See the complete Measles Case Report Form (page 2) “VACCINATION/MEDICAL HISTORY”

http://www.cdph.ca.gov/pubsforms/forms/CtrldForms/cdph8345.pdf

I think Dr. Jay would be sh** out of luck, once the health department audited his patients’ immunization records.

“I have removed references to Dr. Wakefield’s work from my website. I don’t believe that a study that small should have ever been given the promotion and credence that the Lancet afforded it….”

Big deal, Dr. Jay. Let’s say I’m underwhelmed when you still have this on your website:

Feb 23, 2010
MMR Vaccination, An Important Notice from February 2006

“I no longer give or recommend the MMR vaccine. I think that the risks exceed the benefits. Obviously, discuss this with your doctor but please know that the CDC declared rubella officially eradicated in the U.S. in 2005, measles remains a rare disease in America (30-40 cases/year) and mumps is also not very common.

Mumps can cause decreased fertility in teenage boys who get the illness and suffer testicular infection, but this is a very rare occurrence.

All three of these viruses continue to be associated with severe life-threatening complications in other countries, but the vaccine—including the “split” vaccines—enough risk to outweigh the benefit for healthy North American or European children.”

@ TBruce:

Dr. Jay is still pandering to his celeb moms and still hawking his video on his website and other websites:

http://childcaremedia.com/welllovedbaby/store-2

Try watching the 3 minute video for Dr. Jay’s “Third Point of View” about vaccines…what he calls “the judicious use of vaccines”. Listen to his comments about the Recommended Childhood Vaccine Schedule, “…it is unscientific and just a little bit ugly”.

And, watch and listen to his comments about vaccines causing autism.

MESSAGE BEGINS——————-

Miss Flinders! That will be quite enough! Your little charade with the Shills and Minions has been a diversion from more pressing tasks, please return to the matter driver calibration project at once. Your attention to detail is essential if we are to get them online before the grand opening of this facility. I did appreciate your pseudonym however. Now get back to work. Totes . . .really.

Lord Draconis Zeneca DZ V7iHL
Commander, Terrabase DIA, Foreward Mavoon of the Great Fleet, Pharmaca Magna of Terra

00100101001111

——————————-MESSAGE ENDS

Dominica

Actually a lot is up. I can discuss homologous recombination and cell transformation with you all night if you like, I’m in a comp lab so I gotta log off, but I think my comments link to my blog so you can leave your email address there privately if you want, and I’ll send it right over.

Ah, but can you discuss homologous recombilation tiniker all night?

@Lord Draconis and the matter driver project delays.

That would explain why a Ford GT has not materialized in my driveway yet. However, I do appreciate the blackc helicopter escort* that have provided.

*Eat your heart out Ms. Denice (I’m an 8, I’m so great) Walter.

I wrote (though did not reference) the Wikipedia criticism of AP that it lacks a convincing body of research to support it. Mind, it wouldn’t be for lack of trying. There have been quite a few interesting attempts, even some by AP true-believer Ph.Ds, to make such a case, but they inevitably fall into one or both traps of 1) conflating attachment parenting with attachment theory or 2) applying research carried out on children/animals with absent, negligent or abusive parents (complete non-response or malignant response to a child’s distress) to mainstream parenting practices (very partial, developmentally appropriate non-responsiveness). When you delve into the practices of NFL (Natural Family Living, which is what Mayim subscribes to) the justifications get even less science-based and downright bizarre, and as you pointed out, heavily mired in the naturalistic fallacy.

And while Mayim Bialik is a very good actress, I agree that knowing her biases and parenting habits makes it more difficult for me to enjoy her character on TBBT (though there are aspects of Amy’s character I identify with).

Most esteemed and venerated Lord Draconis…I am in receipt of your lovely *gifts*. The Prada purse arrived just in time for me to take it to the next Pharma Shill Conference and the Proof Krugerrands are securely tucked away in the Cayman Islands bank vault.

Eat your heart out Militant Agnostic…the RI ladies only ask for small and precious filthy lucre.

So, now I know what’s wrong with all you guys, you have a little bit of book sense, but absolutely no common sense is a way of describing many of you know-it-all personalities; who in actuality really know nothing. We have a distorted picture of true intelligence now-a-days because our current measures of intelligence are limited to just one dimension (technical intelligence) and ignores important areas of intelligence like wisdom, common sense, social skills and practical knowledge. Common sense usually produces the right answers in the social domain; something you supposed know-it-alls are completely lacking in. Otherwise, you would be able to see that a one size vaccine schedule does not fit all.

“Intelligent people with high levels of technical ability are seen (by the majority of the rest of the population) as having foolish ideas and behaviours outside the realm of their professional expertise. In short, it has often been observed that high IQ types are lacking in ‘common sense’ – and especially when it comes to dealing with other human beings.”

Clever Sillies – Why the high IQ lack common sense

http://medicalhypotheses.blogspot.com/2009/11/clever-sillies-why-high-iq-lack-common.html

@ Comment #105 – re: Pampers Conspiracy. I am a non-attachment, meat- eating and non-woo parent who chose to use cloth diapers. I looked into it, and felt this was a better choice for environmental and economic reasons (if you are going to use cloth, however, a
lot of the advantages click in only when you cold-water wash and line dry – not an option for everyone.)
Now, if you are using cloth, there are quite a few advantages to getting your kid out of diapers as quickly as possible. If you are a company making disposable diapers, there are a lot of advantages to keeping kids in them as long as possible.
I don’t think there is any big, bad conspiracy, I just think there has been a gradual normalistion of older children using diapers. These days you will see TV ads for Pampers showing kids who look to be 3 or 4 years old. The sizes you can buy are larger. There are lots of new product lines like “pull-ups”, designed to look more like normal underwear, but still fulfill the role of a diaper. I’m sure the “normal” age for toilet training in the 1950s (as recommended in parenting books) was younger than the age seen as “normal” today.

Dominica Strong,

I suggest that you make yourself familiar with Pablo’s First Law of Internet Discussion. It will save you from sounding like a fool.

I also suggest that you learn how the grown-ups do it: when a person makes public statements that are nonsensical or frankly harmful to children (as Bialik has done), adults should criticize those statements, even in harsh terms.

Some of the commenters here have children with developmental disabilities or challenges. Some of the commenters here are people with developmental disabilities such as autism.

What Bialik is doing to her children is neglectful and actively harming her children.

As to Bialik’s rejection of vaccination and active promotion of anti-vaccine lies and misinformation….well some of the commenters here have (a) expertise in immunology and vaccinology and (b) public health.

Anti-vaccine misinformation is a disservice to public health. Vaccine rejectionism is a blow to social justice, as the burden of illness from vaccine-preventable disease falls more heavily on the poor and the marginalized.

Rachel @181

Common sense usually produces the right answers in the social domain; something you supposed know-it-alls are completely lacking in.

Common sense, on the other hand, often produces the wrong answers in other domains, such as the natural sciences. Consider what it tells us about the sun orbiting the earth versus the earth orbiting the sun, or the etiology of ulcers(stress vs. h. pylori).

Otherwise, you would be able to see that a one size vaccine schedule does not fit all.

Why not? The routine ‘one size fits all’ schedule incorporates exceptions which addresses those individuals who for specific identifiable reasons are not viable candidates for immunization, and I’m aware of no credible or compelling evidence which suggests the schedule is inappropriate for otherwise healthy individuals. Can you offer anything other than an unsupported assertion “It’s just common sense!” which supports your claim that it’s not?

Rachael @181 :

Common sense usually produces the right answers in the social domain; something you supposed know-it-alls are completely lacking in. Otherwise, you would be able to see that a one size vaccine schedule does not fit all.

It may have escaped your notice, but immunology isn’t in the social domain.

Also, let us suppose that common sense tells you that the recommended vaccine schedule doesn’t fit *this child*. Okay, what does your common sense tell you is the correct schedule for *this child*? Did your common sense help you out there? What about that child, and the one over there, and the next fifty that come through your pediatric practice? What basis are you going to give for each and every one of your recommendations? “It’s common sense?”

For anyone new to Dr. Jay and his views, this is recommended reading, and I would like to reiterate my response to him.

Dr. Jay, do you still believe that your subjective experience is more valuable than real data?

LW: Common sense would suggest that, if we are giving our children more than five dozen vaccinations from day of birth to age 18, we are over-vaccinating our children. Yet, authorities continue to insist that “more is better” when it comes to vaccines without providing adequate scientific evidence to justify that assumption.

They don’t take into account that some people are genetically more susceptible to cancer, colds, flues and infectious diseases than others (suppressed immunity). Some are more genetically susceptible to inflammatory conditions, allergies and autoimmune disorders, such as rheumatoid arthritis and lupus (over-active immune response). One size does not fit all in any other area of medicine except vaccinations. Universal vaccination recommendations don’t take into account that we are not all one and the same.

We are not cookie cut-outs of each other. We are individuals who all react differently to medications (including vaccinations) and we ‘present’ differently with different illnesses. Their blindness to these facts are hard to understand.

On that note, could you name just one physical property of matter than is strengthened upon dilution?

Well derp, the wateriness of course. Sheesh. That should be totes obvious, amirite?

Rachael wrote,

Common sense would suggest that, if we are giving our children more than five dozen vaccinations from day of birth to age 18, we are over-vaccinating our children.

Au contraire! Common sense would suggest that protecting children from birth to age 18 from falling ill with Hepatitis B, Rotavirus, Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Haemophilus influenzae type b (HIB), Pneumococcal, Influenza, Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Varicella (chicken pox), Hepatitis A, Meningococcal, or Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) is a good thing.

And advances in immunology and vaccinology have suggested that, say, adding a second dose of the MMR vaccine improves a child’s resistance to the disease. Making the pertussis vaccine safer by making it with an acellular formulation also entails requiring additional doses of the vaccine to achieve the required level of immunity.

Rachael, you did not answer my question. How does your common sense tell you what vaccination schedule to use in each child that comes before you?

I suspect your answer is, “common sense tells me never to vaccinate any child for any disease”, but that’s a one-size-fits-all solution, so you can’t say that.

So what do you say? What does your common sense tell you about children with asthma? Or juvenile diabetes? Or mitochondrial disorders? No fair looking up the research, by the way, as that would be relying on a bunch of nerds with no social skills, not your vaunted common sense.

Sorry your complaints fall on deaf ears.

ANY celebrity who isn’t a Scientologist these days is ok in my book.

Hepatitis B is a sexually transmitted disease caused by promiscuous homo/heterosexual conduct as well as commonly sex-related IV drug use

Well, not entirely. An estimated one third of the 1.25 million Americans infected with chronic active HBV acquired their infections before the age of five.

Jay Gordon: “If I ran this site, I’d be embarrassed at the persistent ad hominem attacks and the low level of discourse. I’m waiting for someone here to call me a poophead. (Go ahead, make my day.)

“I remember a time when these posters were the exception rather than the rule.”

I remember when you routinely made use of ad hominem attacks here (insulting the intelligence of your critics, intimating that they were pharma shills etc.). Nowadays you seem to have mostly cut that out, preferring instead to do random drive-bys to scold, to avoid substantive discussion and to post heavily edited snippets that you think support your antivax beliefs*.

*for instance, linking to a summary of a newly published Cochrane review on the MMR vaccine to highlight its statements about limited safety studies – while neglecting to mention that the review authors concluded that on both safety and efficacy grounds, continued use of the MMR vaccine is medically justified. It’s in the full report, which should be available to you. I suggest you read it.

Rachael:

* Hepatitis B is a sexually transmitted disease caused by promiscuous homo/heterosexual conduct as well as commonly sex-related IV drug use and

Where did you get this information? Perhaps this might help: Hepatitis B Virus: Kids Can Infect Kids

It says:

In household settings, non-sexual transmission of HBV occurs primarily from child to child, and young kids are at highest risk of infection. We’re not sure exactly how transmission occurs, but frequent contact of non-intact skin or mucous membranes with blood-containing secretions including, perhaps, saliva, are the most likely means of transmission. HBV remains infectious at mild temperatures for extended periods and can be found on and transmitted through sharing of inanimate objects such as wash towels or toothbrushes.

From the About page of that site:

PKIDs (Parents of Kids with Infectious Diseases) started in 1996 when some parents couldn’t find babysitters, playmates, or even many relatives willing to spend time with their children. Fear and ignorance of hepatitis B and C and HIV make people do such things.

Does anyone else here read Bialik’s inane comments and is forcibly reminded of Jenny McCarthy’s “indigo child” phase, when she tried to pretend her child’s developmental issues were in fact a sign of his Christlike greatness?

Think about it. In both Bialik’s and McCarthy’s cases, we’re seeing a parent who, when first confronted with obvious developmental problems in their child, tries to do a dipsy-doodle of a rationalization, pretending that the problems are in fact good things.

Eventually, McCarthy was no longer able to pretend that her child had issues, but instead of addressing those issues rationally and actually getting her child treatment and training of the kinds that made commenter Michelle’s daughter grow up to be a wonderful young lady, she wasted precious months and years of her son’s childhood trying to “cure” him of autism. What will Bialik do when she’s no longer able to pretend that her children are “Indigo Kids”? Or has she given up her brain to Jay Gordon so completely that she’d feed her kids arsenic on his say-so?

Good grief, what Mayim Bialik is doing is not Attachment Parenting. It is just bad parenting, pure and simple. I am a strong advocate and practitioner of Attachment Parenting and, I can assure you, my parenting is nothing like hers.

Rachael @208:

Brand new one day old babies are routinely injected with the hepatitis B vaccine in US hospitals, yet it can be very dangerous and is completely unnecessary. Hepatitis B is a disease spread most often by unprotected sex and infected drug needles neither of which the average newborn will participate in. The disease is about as hard to catch as the HIV virus yet no where near as dangerous.

Please Read Liz Ditz’s comments @206 and Chris’s comments @207. You are wrong.

90-95% of all hepatitis B cases completely recover after a few weeks of symptoms such as headache, nausea and fatigue. The disease is far from deadly…

So there’s a 5-10% chance that a hepB infection will end with serious consequences like liver cancer, cirrhosis, or liver failure needing a transplant? I’ll take my chances with the vaxx, thanks.

As for more serious side effects, the Hepatitis B vaccine has also been reported to cause a variety of immune and neurological health problems. There have been persistent reports of the vaccine being related to sudden infant death syndrome which is most likely to occur at 2 months, 4 month and 6 months exactly the same time as the hepatitis B vaccine series is often given. Other reports indicate such adverse reactions such as Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), transverse myelitis, optic neuritis, and multiple sclerosis as well as immune system dysfunction including chronic arthritis. Some speculations have also come about insisting on a connecting with Autism and the hepatitis B vaccine as well as several more on the recommended immunization schedule.

Citations please. And not from whale.to.

Rachael, when copying and pasting an entire block from another source, it is customary to credit the original source. So, “your” paragraph @208 is copied from here.

Rachael at 208’s source was a hysterical, unsourced article from Dec. 2006. That’s right, 5 years and two months ago.

From PubMed:

A 2006 report found There is no evidence of an association between hepatitis B vaccines and the sudden infant death syndrome. A 2009 report on demonstrated benefit of universal infant vaccination program.

There have been persistent reports of the vaccine being related to sudden infant death syndrome which is most likely to occur at 2 months, 4 month and 6 months exactly the same time as the hepatitis B vaccine series is often given.

SIDS most commonly occurs between the ages of 2 weeks to 12 months, not “at 2 months, 4 months and 6 months”. It also occured over this age range long before the Hep B vaccine was ever invented or used. BTW, the incidence of SIDS has plummeted in the past few years. It’s thought to be due to the practice of discouraging placing babies on their stomachs to sleep, however, maybe it’s because Hep B vaccines are now routinely given to newborns. Just sayin’.

I have some working professional knowledge of this area, so It was easy for me to see how much hogwash was in that single sentence. I expect the rest of that cut’n’paste will be just as truthful.

@lilady

He’s tweeting again. This time engaging in ad hominem against the author of an article on Esquire blogs, saying that “Pierce is a non-medical author writing about medicine. Not impressive at all.”

@124/125:

The only way you can make these numbers comparable is if you assume that the extent of high risk deliveries in birthing centers and homebirths is just the same as it is in the hospital, which indicates that they are not restricted to low-risk births, as you insist they should be.

What is your problem with reading comp? I said that home births are safer in low-risk situations. Then I said that for some reason, Dr. Tuteur thinks that home births should be compared to only low-risk hospital births. I do assume that there are idiots who home birth when it’s contrary to survival – i.e. in high-risk situations. It’s Dr. Tuteur who seems to think that comparing apples to apples is bad.

Medivh – btw, the de Jonge study had some apparent methodology problems, which were addressed in a subsequent article (van der Kooy). You know what was found? Homebirth in the Netherlands is more dangerous than the hospital.

Here’s a summary

http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2011/10/new-dutch-study-raises-troubling.html

Here’s a key quote from the paper: “Our conclusions apparently contradict those of De Jonge et al …

Bypassing Dr. Tuteur as being counterskeptical, I went for the paper in question. I got no further than the abstract of van der Kooy(2011) when I found this:

CONCLUSION: Home birth, under routine conditions, is generally not associated with increased intrapartum and early neonatal death, yet in subgroups, additional risk cannot be excluded.

Did you bother to read the paper, or are you just reading Dr. Tuteur’s unskeptical summary? I’d like to know so I know where the cherry picking came from.

That is so disappointing. 🙁

(PS- You rock!)

That said, my anecdotes tell me that women who home birth in countries where this is not the norm tend, like all people who go against norms, to know more about those norms than other laypeople.

I dunno; listening to antivaxxers lately, and listening to Dr Jay, I’m not so sure that people going against the norm generally know more about the norm than other laypeople. They might, but my anecdotes tell me that the predictive value of this is poor at best.

@227, Calli Arcale:

I dunno; listening to antivaxxers lately, and listening to Dr Jay, I’m not so sure that people going against the norm generally know more about the norm than other laypeople.

A fair point, but only one. Feminists tend to be arguing against the status quo and generally know more about social theory and group psych than other laypeople. Atheists and religion. Childless couples and the pros/cons of child raising. I can go on. Finding a decent divider between the woos and actually knowledgable people is hard, admittedly. Not even the search for knowledge divides the woos from the groups on this list – all of them search, it’s just that the woos find the wrong things.

I guess the defining factor is proper skepticism – meaning the willingness to be wrong.

@228, Giliell: Nice appeal to consequences. Want to actually bother with an argument next time? By the way, who’s claiming patients are to blame for failures of home births now? “9 months of reading desperately” indeed… you don’t perhaps think that there are women who make sure they know what they’re getting into before they get pregnant?

@228, Giliell: Nice appeal to consequences. Want to actually bother with an argument next time?

You don’t actually understand what the appeal to consequences fallacy is, do you? I’ll give you a hint: saying “We should not do X, because the consequences are bad” is not an example. An example would be “if it were true that X, that would be bad for us; therefore X isn’t true.” I don’t have a dog in this fight, and I wasn’t in it before, but now I’m just disgusted with you. Don’t try to illuminate someone else’s “fallacies” if you haven’t taken the time to learn what fallacies are or even five seconds to think it through yourself.

By the way, who’s claiming patients are to blame for failures of home births now?

Well, I don’t know, still you?

“9 months of reading desperately” indeed… you don’t perhaps think that there are women who make sure they know what they’re getting into before they get pregnant?

You mean they study medicine and specialize in gynaecology just for that?
Those women rely on “experts” the same way those ordinary lesser women do, only that they believe the wrong people.
Cause and effect aren’t that easy to tell apart.
But clearly there’s one side who tells them that they can “empower” themselves, that they’ve got “intuition”, that the risks are small, when their target audience actually understands very little about the things discussed.
And yeah, most people prefer to think of themselves as rather intelligent and capable.
Understanding and admitting that you’re not the expert isn’t something that comes easy to most people so the NCB crowd has a good appeal to them.

Relative risk is somewhat of an obsession of mine, so I can’t help but mention that compared to a parachute jump, giving birth is about 6 times more dangerous for the mother, and about 800 times more dangerous for the baby. Obviously a newborn baby is unlikely to be making a parachute jump, but this does support the old saying that being born is by far the most dangerous thing that ever happens to most of us.

Kreb – here’s what I call Pablo’s Scenario

An expectant couple goes to a party on her due date. She isn’t drinking, but he is, and drinks enough to make him legally drunk. She goes into labor, and they jump in the car to drive 8 miles to the hospital. She is in labor, so he drives.

Two things:
1) She is more than 50 times more likely to die while giving birth to the child than she is to die in a car accident, and
2) The baby is more than 10 times more likely to die during childbirth than the father is to get in an accident OR even get a DUI (assuming he would be arrested for DUI).

As you said, being born is the most dangerous thing that happens to us – and that even applies to drunk drivers (the ultimate cost of drunk driving comes not because it is so dangerous, but because it is SO FRIGGIN PREVALENT – the US DOT estimates that there are 27000 drunken miles driven for every DUI, and there are 3 times as many DUIs are there are accidents)

The incredibly tiny subset of parents who have unlimited resources will inevitably have the most whacked-out views about things. Educated or not.

Those of us who work in the regular world and raise our kids in the mainstream can little afford to cope with a preventable disease or handle the emotional and financial burden of a child who can’t/won’t function by society’s quirky and yes, restrictive rules.

Mayim Bialik will likely have the resources to fix any of the problems that might arise from her ankle-biters’ not being vaccinated, or developing a nutrient deficiency, or being diagnosed with a developmental delay. That isn’t true for the vast majority of moms. And yet, every day another holistic-mom-wanna-be will buy into whatever arrogance the Celebrity of the Week is selling.

I am dyslexic. It was caught early and now I only struggle on days when I am super tired or terribly sick. Because my mom took the time to work with me early on and get me the help I needed I am a happier adult than I would be had I been allowed to advance at my own pace.

I don’t know that laying claim to purity of historical usage is really going to go that far. (Bialik was on “Science Friday” yesterday, by the by; I didn’t follow it particularly closely, as it seemed to be filler, but the assertion that vaccination is unrelated to “attachment parenting” was also made. Along with “once a scientist, always a scientist.”)

Lawrence, wrong Dr. Sears.

I apologize for the re-post, but i had so many typos that had to for clarity! (i blame autocorrect for many!)

I can accept her choice to experience the pain of childbirth. When done correctly, Vegan eating is probably quite healthy. The choice of cloth over pampers is an ecologically responsible choice, IMO. Although her inattention to what seems like signs that her children need therapy baffles me, but I am neither a parent nor a pediatrician, so I’ll leave the commentary on that to wiser commentators. I do wonder how attachment parenting might keep children from learning self-reliance and problem solving skills: mommy is always there to fix everything. I have no problem with extended breastfeeding. While I get that she chooses not to teach her children basic manners and recognize that is her decision, I hope she isn’t surprised when other parents choose not to be burdened by her little miscreants at birthday parties and the like. Basically, all of these are choices that I can accept, if not agree with. (I secretly suspect, though, that she is raising little Amy Farrah Fowler boys, destined for lives of awkward loneliness.)

Failure to vaccinate, however, is not. How anyone with a PhD in any kind of science can fail to understand herd immunity is beyond me, and it’s simply morally reprehensible that a highly educated parent such as Dr. Bialik could choose to jeopardize countless immunocompromised children and adults – not to mention per-vaccine infants – because of slavish adherence to quackery.

(Also, does this AP business remind anyone else of the fat people in the floaty chairs from Wall-E?)

@Marc and Lawrence : To reiterate Chris’ comment:

Dr William Sears (73) = Attachment parenting guru, pro vax

Dr Bob Sears = Vocal public anti-vax advocate, son of Dr William Sears

Sorry to snark, but we need to keep the facts straight in these discussions.

Janarella,

Thanks for setting the record straight. I am aware there is a bunch of Dr. Sears working out of the same clinic.

I guess what confused me is that Orac’s piece on Mayim Bialik mentions Dr. Bob Sears, so I assumed he was continuing on in his dad’s footsteps with the Attached Parenthood thing.

So dad is pro-vac and son is anti-vac.* That must create a bit of tension around the office…

*Although he won’t admit it. He pushes a modified schedule, but I presume only to his patients as a compromise who still insist on some vaccinations after he tries to scare them off.

@ Marc: Here’s a commentary on the Time Magaine article on Dr. William Sears…it doesn’t mention vaccines at all:

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/05/11/dr-manny-attachment-parenting-isnt-all-that-bad/