Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lucas

The Autism File

Recommended Posts

I had a read, nearly broke into tears and then went home and wrote an angry e-mail.

 

-------------------

 

Dear sir/madam,

 

Despite this quarterly publication being in it's eight year, I only just stumbled on it today in WH Smith. It was a subscription-only mag until last week when WH Smith started stocking it and Tesco is expected to circulate it in their larger stores soon, so I can understand why I never heard of The Autism File before. Curious and hyperlexic as I am, I decided to read through it to see what this soon-to-be-widely-circulated and potentially mainstream source of information about Autism had to offer to the general public and interested persons like recently diagnosed adults and teens and parents of recently diagnosed children and teens. I should point out here that I have an AS diagnosis and do not conform to the perjorative and ill-informed notion that this means my condition is 'mild' or that I am 'high-functioning'. I'm prone to panic attacks, speech-loss, incontinence and sudden unexpected bursts of hyper-sensitivity, so try to relax as much as possible out in public to prevent a chain-reaction of catastrophic circumstances from gaining momentum. This was a struggle whilst reading this excuse for a pseudo-scientific medical gloss-mag.

 

I don't think my point will be clear unless I'm frank and precise about two matters: the first one is the nature of the magazine, the second is the National Autistic Society's involvement in it which for me was the most shocking part when I found the head of the Think-Different campaign had written an article for it.

 

I'll begin as is traditional; with the first. The alarm bells in my head were ringing the moment I read the editorial, espousing the virtues of 'showing all sides' and being non-judgemental, supporting this with all the usual cliches about how Autism is a complex disorder and we are all different, ergo we deserve to have all notion of ethics and critical consideration fed into a wood-chipper feet-first(if abstract concepts like values have feet). On this basis the editor, Polly Tommey, claims this is an un-biased magazine. It is nothing of the sort. I'm of the same frame of mind about science and Autism as Canadian Autism researcher Michelle Dawson who is also Autistic: good science, good information which is well-sourced and well-founded on evidence is a GOOD thing for Autistics. But once again going with tradition, fond of it as I am, this means that pseudo-science, quackery, superstition, hysteria, hearsay, canard and ancedote are certainly very bad things that harm Autistic people. This magazine is ruin incarnate. The majority of the articles talked about the widely discredited falsehood that vaccines or heavy metals/miscelleneous toxins(advocates of this idea are never consistent) cause Autism, Homeopathy, chelation, GF/CF diets and all the differing versions on these general quack ideas(and a credulous arguement from an MD that "There can't be a genetic epidemic". It's no wonder all the advertising space in The Autism File is full of dangerous for-profit hookum from Son-Rise to Doctor's Data inc, one of the most prolific sham mail-order labs that misappropriate their resources to convince gullible and scared parents that their children are Mercury Poisoned. Every one of these ideas and organisations has had their basis ripped to shreds by qualified and critical skeptics. The magazine does not 'show all sides' because it certainly does not give any, let alone equal time, to the criticism. Apparently that would be either just too judgemental and therefore not in the remit of the magazine, or such people have been contacted but having been previously informed of it's calibre rightly decided to not lend it legitimacy by making any contribution to it.

 

Science is hard. Science is restricted in the claims it can make, by the evidence available. If the claims are extraordinary, the evidence must be extraordinary. If the evidence is limited, then the claims must be limited. Charlatans, chancers and con-artists like those who contribute to and advertise in The Autism File are not restricted like this: they can make absolutely astonishing and credulous claims, twisting unknowns and inconclusive evidence into visions of the light fantastic, to dazzle and attract followers to their magic elixirs. Science is very boring in comparison, and doesn't give the instant-gratification that such empty promises do. So this credulous thinking by default will win out in a publishing enviroment where equal weight and false equivilence is given to 'all sides'. The redemption of science over fraud comes from the critical process, which The Autism File does not allow. In the light of critical consideration, the lies and faults of investigative methods and the conclusions they lead to are exposed. Compared in such light, science wins because compared to the broken fantasy it is not only preferable but vital. That does unfortunately not account for the reality that some people can not be convinced their ideology-based intervention is wrong; you can not reason people out of something they didn't reason themselves into.

 

The Autism File will soon be the most accessible source of information about Autism to the public. It is unfortunately not a quality item and the nightmarish effects of it which have crippled Autistic self-advocates efforts in the US and Canada will be imported to Britain, which has managed to keep relatively free of it. The thanks for that can largely be attributed to the NAS, which as the largest Autism charity here, has refused join in with the fund-raising techniques of Cure Autism Now, Autism Speaks, Families for Effective Autism Treatment, Autism Society Canada and the Autism Society of America; who learned long ago that the more they demonise Autism(and by association, Autistics themselves), the larger the flow of cash to them increases.

 

This brings me to the second(and shorter) part. Why did the National Autistic Society contribute to The Autism File? Did they not know what kind of harmful brain-rot it is? Was this a one-off or has anyone in a senior position at the NAS contributed to this putrid sentimentalist Daily Mail-esque manual of mass-idiocy before? As I've already indicated, involvement of reputable persons in a disreputable enterprise lends it legitimacy and credibility it hasn't earned. I was too nervous and frustrated to realise it at first, but on the bus home I realised there was an irony that the person who was presented as the article's author was the head of the Think-Different project, of which the latest phase was the laudible 'I Exist' campaign drawing attention to the most neglected group: Autistic adults, which I am a member. It's ironic because the magazine heavily featured viewpoints from persons and groups which are entirely certain that we certainly damn well do not exist. Remember the MD that said "There can be no genetic epidemic"? Of course he implicitly denies with that arguement that the rise in incidence is down to the criteria change. Why did the NAS share a platform with him? The organisations that sell their muck in the mag(and even the articles are barely-concealed advertisements) promote them on the basis that the so-called 'epidemic' has been caused by an increase in 'insert agent which our product treats here'. This in turn is entirely reliant on denying one truth devastating to their idea of an actual massive increase: There are considerably more Autistic adults than there are Autistic children, consistent with the Neurotypical population. The number of Autistic adults is proportionally consistent with the number of Autistic children, as is made clear in the National Autistic Society's own estimate figures: 535,000 Autistics in the UK, and somewhere between 150,000-180,000 are children. Account for how much more likely a child is to be diagnosed and adults overwhelminly are the more representive demograph. Autism quacks consistently promote their treatments by claiming that children are the larger group outright. It's core to the epidemic myth.

 

Autistics daily live the consequences drawn from the sum of all things said about Autism. I will have to deal with The Autism File exporting en masse what has already taken control in North America. So will all Autistics. And so will you. When The Autism File appears in Tesco, a lot more people than ever before will read it and even the slight modicum of doubt about it's incredible claims will disappear as soon as their eyes land on the page authored by a decision-maker at the UK National Autistic Society. It's the NAS's goal to get something better for us, I for one would love some services to help me get new clothes, move out of my mother's home(I tell people I don't live with her; she lives with me), find a suitable work enviroment and all that stuff. Did you know that the major contributers to The Autism File once again use the credulous selling pitch: unless they get the infinite cash cow that is the public purse, the government would have to actually pay for services for Autistics(and it would cost MORE....if you leave out the net economic contribution of Autistic people like the figures always do)? Yes, they activily do what they can to make sure we do not get the kind of help 'I Exist' says we deserve and by the look of things over the past decade they seem to have been having an impact and we can expect them to have an even bigger one soon.

 

So the big question is why did the NAS do it? I've seen the brilliant full-page ads in the papers, I'm hearing people talking about them. Are you so desperate to spread awareness of the campaign that you'd actually jeopodise it's eventual goals? The ends can never justify the means, but here the means won't justify the ends because the biggest barrier to progress has been allowed to bask in the reflected glory of the best chance for progress. Please tell me the NAS has some grand design to have it's awareness-raising cake and eat it? The newspaper ads, the website, the info-mercials: that's having your cake. Lending credibility to The Autism File: that's eating the cake, it's gone. Ka-Poofff!!. How do we get it back?

 

 

Yours regretfully,

 

Lucas McCarty. Autistic person.

Edited by Lucas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mother inlaw saw this magazine a short while ago in WH Smiths and brought it for me in an attempt to be supportive and to show her understanding, however I felt most uncomfortable reading the articles and unhappy in the manner they were written with the potential to harm and distort others already limited knowledge of autisim.

 

The copy I have is the Winter 2007 edition, issue 26, I most certainly won't be buying this material again and will encourage others not to do so either. But guess the damage is already done.

 

Clare

 

PS Lucas congrats on your 1,000th post !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lucas - and congrats on the 1000th post :thumbs:

 

I haven't heard of this magazine, but will look out for a copy now...

It is very worrying that advertising for 'cures' is being included in a magazine that will undoubtedly be read by parents/carers of newly diagnosed children... the very fact that the ads appear in something that 'looks' official (and any national magazine that is autism specific will 'look' official to the uninitiated) adds a degree of authenticity/gravitas that is certainly inappropriate and unrealistic. The most annoying thing is that 'ads' do not demand the same editorial impartiality and balance that the content should strive for - the ultimate cop out... I'm sure many of the ads will be made to look like articles too, with only a barely legible 'advertisement' disclaimer hidden somewhere at the bottom...

 

Obviously i can't comment on the magazine specifically, 'cos I haven't seen it, but I really do have concerns about any 'product' targeted at such a specific readership, because the kind of advertising it would attract is pretty much a forgone conclusion :( (and that begs the question - what editor is going to attack his/her own advertisers)...

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah it appears Smiths has been stocking it far quite a bit longer then, it's just MY WH Smiths that has started stocking it last week. I know because everytime a new issue of any magazine appears on the racks I notice it. I'm fairly sure it wasn't there last week when I went and read all the Marvel comics without buying them(again).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah it appears Smiths has been stocking it far quite a bit longer then, it's just MY WH Smiths that has started stocking it last week. I know because everytime a new issue of any magazine appears on the racks I notice it. I'm fairly sure it wasn't there last week when I went and read all the Marvel comics without buying them(again).

 

 

I had not seen it before either, it was purchased in January 08

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obviously i can't comment on the magazine specifically, 'cos I haven't seen it, but I really do have concerns about any 'product' targeted at such a specific readership, because the kind of advertising it would attract is pretty much a forgone conclusion :( (and that begs the question - what editor is going to attack his/her own advertisers)...

 

L&P

 

BD

 

Ah, with autism 'on the rise', there's a whole new section out there of vulnerable people to target and make moolah out of!!

 

I haven't read or seen this mag yet but will endeavour to do so. And then, if it's as bad as Lucas is saying (I don't doubt you, Lucas, I just like to see it myself kind of thing!) then I will be writing a very angry letter to the NAS, questioning their support.

Quack remedies are certainly something we can all do without!!

 

Esther x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baddad, whilst they do indeed peddle 'cures', I've learned in my experiences lurking the science and skeptic blogospheres that there is a reason why they rarely ever use words like 'cure'.

 

The innuendo is 'recovery' or 'removal of diagnosis'. Why do they do this? Because if there were ever a genuine way of making an Autistic person non-Autistic, it would be very big news. Recklessly throwing the 'cure' word around attracts unwanted critical attention from bigger people than just bloggers and researcher. Quacks have learned this and that's why the coded langauge is used. Virtually all alternative therapies sold in the UK have official or unoffical guidelines that say "NEVER claim to be able to cure a specific ailment"(which appears on the Royal Society of Homeopaths guidelines which are public). Chinese Medicine shops, of which Harrogate seems to have at least six; two within yards of each other, have not yet learnt this can get them into legal trouble. So where you live you might notice Chinese Medicine shops displaying signs making incredible claims in broad daylight. Only once a sufficiently popular case of a large organisation being sued out of business or raided by trading standard, will they start using more vague langauge.

 

The Autism File was full of such uses of langauge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a copy a few months ago and wasn't terribly impressed either.

 

Most of the articles were articles that were previously printed in earlier issues, and that seemed a bit silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw this in a larger WH-smiths before christmas............I thought it was American in origin(don,t ask me why)..........I flicked through and put it straight back on the shelf :angry: ..............did,nt like it one bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EEEEEKKK!!! Just had a look at the online link. What a load of ***********!!! Looks like the sort of mag that should only be on sale alongside "crystals" on hippy market stalls. (no insult intended to any hippies present!!). I think the NAS should step back pretty smartish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...

 

I've just looked at the Home page of the link...

First thing you see is a picture of a child with his name alongside. Underneath that is an unattributed quote reading:

'... Quite simply the most important and influential magazine for parents of children with autism...'

Alongside that is a link to a radio interview with someone sharing the same surname as the child in the picture, who happens to be the editor of the magazine!

Perhaps the quote is from the editor? Perhaps it is from the child who shares the editor's surname? Who KNOWS??

 

I said above I'd buy a copy for a looksee... think I'll save my money :rolleyes:

 

L&P

 

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mmm... I went online too and to be honest I didn't bother with reading too much of it after Lucas' appalling description, but I was a bit disappointed that this crowd mentioned Dunfirth Farm here in Ireland as a place *they liked*. I always thought that Dunfirth Farm was a nice place, designed not to cure anybody, but to give a nice residential place with a chance to learn to grow organic vegetables to young people in the spectrum who cannot cope with the stressful demands of our society. I hope I did not get the whole picture wrong :unsure:

 

Publications like this leave me very disappointed. I assure you Lucas that around there are some good researchers who are really dedicated into eliminating the whole "cure" approach from the language commonly used in dealing with the Autistic Spectrum. As a parent of an Aspie and a researcher myself, I struggle everyday (without even being payed ...) in order to give my little contribution to this cause. Then something like that get out in the newsagents and it feels like starting from square one.... :crying:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work with children who have autism, some severe autism and do people, like the one who wrote this magazine, not

think that if a cure was possible then the parents of the children who I work with, and other parents, would have tried it and then they wouldn't have to have their children living away from them in a residential place...............It makes me :angry: to have people think they can give such false hope if you like to some parents who can be very volnurable.

As a mother of a child who has AS I personally wouldn't want to 'cure' my child as his AS makes him who he is at the end of the day.

Edited by kellyanne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm...

 

I've just looked at the Home page of the link...

First thing you see is a picture of a child with his name alongside. Underneath that is an unattributed quote reading:

'... Quite simply the most important and influential magazine for parents of children with autism...'

Alongside that is a link to a radio interview with someone sharing the same surname as the child in the picture, who happens to be the editor of the magazine!

Perhaps the quote is from the editor? Perhaps it is from the child who shares the editor's surname? Who KNOWS??

 

I said above I'd buy a copy for a looksee... think I'll save my money :rolleyes:

 

L&P

 

BD :D

 

My husband used to work for a book publishing firm that also produced magazines. It was and is apparently common practice to plump up a magazine, especially in the early days of its life, with letters, reviews and articles etc produced 'in house' along with photos of people doing stuff, and they were employees or relatives of employees.

It was, however, arts and crafts type magazines. Nothing as emotive or open to abuse as this sounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never heard of this publication before. I'd be intersted to know what response, if any, you get Lucas.

 

The NAS involvement is worrying.

 

K x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't had the chance to get my hands on the magazine yet, but it appears to be a very dangerous development.

 

Something to remember is that most newspapers and magazines are businesses that exist to make money as opposed to supplying information. There is a possibility that some big moneyed interests are behind this magazine with a particular (and not very nice) cause they have in mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't impressed with the cover :blink:

 

Picked it up - turn it round in my hand, spotted the back page

'Found our child after months of.......'

'Cured'

'The only solution'

Or similar such c*ap.

 

Put tat back on shelf and went on my merry way! :shame::sick:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wasn't impressed with the cover :blink:

 

Picked it up - turn it round in my hand, spotted the back page

'Found our child after months of.......'

'Cured'

'The only solution'

Or similar such c*ap.

 

Put tat back on shelf and went on my merry way! :shame::sick:

 

Yes I had similar experience.

Other half-spotted it in the shop and thought I might be interested...quick flick through the adds...no.no.I don't think so....back on shelf rapidly. :o:o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lucas - I couldn't believe I just logged on and saw your post.

 

My hubbie bought this for me at the weekend mainly because of the front cover headline 'students with Asperger's' and 'SEN - The Legal Maze'.

 

Last night was the first chance I had to have a look and I only managed to read a couple of articles and flicked through the rest because it made me so annoyed - and I vowed I would be writing a letter at the weekend.

 

The interview on Bryan Jepson was infuriating to say the least and so contradicting - to say in his opening statements that he learned that autism was a treatable condition - yet later state that the majority of children improve through a combination of many different therapies.

 

But it wasn't just that article - it was the whole magazine that I didn't feel comfortable with - the way it was written, the content of the articles, the article titles - everything - even down to the adverts and the way it looked. It didn't feel friendly or supportive or understanding or even informative - and the two articles that I thought would be useful were really not even worth reading (well I didn't because it had that feeling that sends you to sleep after the first few lines).

 

To me there is so little support, help and advice easily available (especially if you haven't got the internet) that as a parent I'll grasp at anything to read hoping that there'll be a snippit of something that will help - and I think there's possibly a big market out there for someone to hit on if they got this right, but until then I'll be keeping my �5 in my pocket.

 

Take care,

Jb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spotted this in WH Smiths and bought it then wished i'd not wasted my money,i thought i was a load of rubbish!!I wish i'd spent the money on something for DD instead!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...