Eggs and the power of no

I've been doing a lot of choices by asking twenty questions. Sometimes King knows the words, and sometimes it's a matter of finding the thing he doesn't say no to. 

This morning for breakfast. 

He followed me into the kitchen and said what sounded like "cup,"  but he said no to all the cups I offered. I lifted him up and he picked out a plate. I asked him what he wanted on the plate, but he couldn't say. Finally I pulled out a pan and asked if he wanted eggs. Yes. He wanted eggs.  He practiced saying and signing eggs while we cooked them.   

It's as if he's finally hit that "language explosion" that most kids get at around age two. He knows what language is. He knows he needs to learn it, and he's taking lots of notes. Sometimes literally. He's taken to writing "BINGO" on his magnadoodle lately to get us to sing along. 

This Question Has Been Asked and Answered

Ok, I love her. Well, for this anyway. She made a controversial comment on that whole Autism Every Day video that I had a lot of problems with, but on this? She's totally right.

Alison Singer says she left Autism Speaks because they kept using their limited resources on vaccine research instead of focusing on things that actually had some potential. I've had this frustration, too. It's dead, Jim!

Here's another story. A few weeks ago, Jodie went to the pediatrician. She had Tdap [tetanus-diptheria-pertussis] vaccine, a flu shot and a vaccine against meningitis. The next day her teacher remarked to me that Jodie was much more attentive and participated in class much more than usual. Her gym teacher said that for the fist time Jodie was able to compete in an obstacle course. Should I start pontificating that vaccines are a great treatment for autism? Of course not, that's not science. That's called coincidence. Here's the full Newsweek article.

Sewing anxiety

Princess is good at sewing. I mean, she's seven, so she's not making prom dresses or anything yet, but she's very good at sewing for her age. She stopped sewing for a while, and she kept telling me that "sewing was boring." She'd get exited about wanting to sew something, but would most likely not start the project, would ask me to do it, or would declare it to be "boring" the first time she ran into any snags. 

Yesterday we finally got over some of that hump. Really what was going on was that she was worrying too much about making mistakes or poking herself with a pin, and it would distract her to the point where she couldn't actually do any work. I also suspect she's like her mom and gets bothered when the project seems overwhelmingly big. 

Anyway, she wanted to sew a fairy dress for a book report. I traced off the simplest pattern I could - basically  a long T-shirt, so there were only four pieces to sew, and I hemmed the collar for her. She struggled with it at first, but when she finally got into sewing, she decided that "sewing makes my brain calm down!"  When she'd start to worry about the next step, she decided that "my brain is too worried - I need to sew to make my brain calm down." And she did. And she finished her project and asked if she could sew some more tonight. 

Blue!

King is in a total no phase, which is mildly annoying in two year olds and a big relief in four year olds that previously weren't talking. He's even stopped his scripted response to "Are you all done?"  

It used to be that we'd ask him if he was all done, he'd automatically say "yes" and then get upset that his things were taken away. Then he moved towards saying yes and then shoving you away to keep working on whatever it was. Now he says no and runs back to the table to continue with his activity. 

Last night he pointed at a patch of blue wallpaper and clearly labeled it as blue. Yay for colors. Well, one of them, heh. And then he said Blue's Clues, so he's associating the word Blue with something besides one specific shade of blue, so good there. When I try with other colors, he's associating them with fruit and doesn't label the color, except for orange, heh.

And then earlier he wanted to sing Bingo, so he brought out the magna-doodle. I pretended to not understand his intent and wrote "CAT" on it. I swear he said, "Stupid, no, stop!"  Wow. Ok, then. Back to writing BINGO. 

Kirby also needs to go away

Ok, here's the story. Olbermann does his "worst person in the world" stick. 

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

It's Wakefield! For forging data. And deservedly so. 

But noooo, that's so not fair, since according to David Kirby, (a man with a huge financial interest in maintaining vaccine paranoia) Brian Deer, the reporter who broke the Times story, was the original complainant in the medical review of Wakefield and this fact was not disclosed in the article.  

Which prompted Olbermann to name Deer the next day:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Well, aside from the fact that I wouldn't be bothered by a reporter calling the police on a criminal and then later reporting more about the bad deeds of the criminal, it turns out that the accusation was flat out not true.  Deer didn't make the complaint. As is easily shown with the power of a bit of Google-fu. Sheeesh. 

And Kirby wrote Evidence of Harm, one of the reasons vaccine paranoia jumped to the US.  I didn't see Kirby post this conflict of interest over at Huffpo. I just saw links to his book. 

Oh, and in case you're not tired of Kirby and Olbermann smackdown, here's some more. 

Wakefield Needs to Go Away

Andrew Wakefield has pissed me off for years. Why? He's responsible for the whole vaccines-cause-autism paranoia. 

Once upon a time, a researcher named Wakefield got paid by a legal team to help them in their case against the MMR vaccine. At the same time, and quite probably for the same reason, he decided to do a study on his hypothesis that autism was caused by measles lingering in the "leaky gut" of a subset of kids. He took 12 kids, some or all of whom had parents involved in the lawsuit by the legal team, and put them in his "study."  

"Why that would be unethical" you might say. Why yes, it would be. It would be even more unethical to give these children, ages 3-10, unnecessary medical procedures such as MRIs, colonoscopies, and spinal taps, now wouldn't it? Especially if you didn't quite actually have ethical approval for this study.  

And then it would be even more unethical if you were to not disclose your relationship with these children and the full source of all your funding and then publish your paper in the Lancet. And yet, that's exactly what he did. 

Oh, it gets better. He claims to have found measles in 8 out of 12 of those kids. His assistant didn't see it, but maybe his assistant just didn't want to believe as much as he did.  That's the sort of behavior that gets you brought up on charges of professional misconduct. Which he was.

Recently he's been brought into the spotlight again by accusations that he also outright falsified his data. 

But, oh, the poor Wakefield. Why won't Brian Deer leave him alone? Maybe because Wakefield's theories are totally bogus?