"Mark Probert" <mark.probert@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:e76086b4-2953-4dec-8b74-
[ ]
UDP/OFF. Hello Marcia.
efe273981143@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jul 22, 12:49 pm, Ilena Rose <B...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
"Ilena Rose" <BIA@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:lm3c8454l822oc2drm393vs2nhuhp0uubc@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From Health Lover, Ilena Rosenthal:
> http://ilenarose.blogspot.com
>
>
> David Gorski is another S****-oil Vigilante Vaccination Propagandist
> ... great expose on his perfidy.
> www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/S****-oil.htm#David-Gorski
>
> http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/05/david-gorski-md.html
>
>
> DAVID GORSKI, M.D.: THE WORLDWIDE WANKER OF "WOO"
>
> Gorskiorac_1By J.B. Handley
>
> What if you wrote a blog under a pseudonym-- "ORAC" --an acronym for
> an online programming language and the name of a wayward computer in
> an old BBC sci-fi series?
>
> What if you also blogged as "SoCalGal" and pretended to be a woman?
>
> What if you proudly declared to the world, "My recreation of choice
> most evenings these days is to blog. It truly is my hobby"?
>
> Then you would be David Gorski M.D, the Worldwide Wanker of Woo (he
> uses the term "woo" to refer to what he believes is pseudoscience), an
> annoying blogger who also happens to be a surgeon.
>
> Mr. Gorski has become a bit of a thorn in the side of our community,
> if only because his blog is widely read and quoted by others. Consider
> a recent post from Mr. Gorski regarding the recent AutismOne
> conference:
>
> "If you want to know the difference between science and pseudoscience,
> the AutismOne conference is a great example. In science, evidence and
> experimentation rule. Scientists are always looking for ways to poke
> holes in the prevailing hypotheses. True, we scientists don't always
> live up to that ideal, and some of us may be too comfortable, but
> nonetheless the real way to glory in science is to shoot down an
> accepted hypothesis and replace it with one of your own--all through
> evidence of course. No one ever won a Nobel Prize for incrementally
> sup****ting the existing paradigm. In pseudoscience, on the other hand,
> we see people safely wrapped in a cocoon of their own groupthink,
> blissfully oblivious to contradicting evidence and not caring that not
> only are the scientific consensus and multiple large, well-designed
> epidemiological studies against them but that no one on "their" side
> has been able to produce any scientifically compelling evidence to
> sup****t the vaccine hypothesis. Instead we get the Geiers and their
> incompetent epidemiology or Dr. Laura Hewitson and her poorly designed
> monkey studies, along with glaring conflicts of interest."
>
> Mr. Gorski's blog, Respectful Insolence, is anything but. His putdowns
> and demeaning language aimed at our community (and many of his
> colleagues) are rampant. And, so, in the spirit of Mr. Gorski's novel
> use of the word "respectful", I insolently offer up:
>
> A DOZEN REASONS TO RESPECTFULLY HATE DAVID GORSKI, M.D.:
>
> 1. He lives in a very cheap glass house
>
> Mr. Gorski writes proudly, "As far as I've yet been able to ascertain,
> I'm the only academic surgeon with R01 funding in the world with an
> active -- and, even more shockingly, even a somewhat popular -- blog."
>
> The obvious question that he never asks is, "Why don't any of my peers
> spend loads of their time publicly ba****ng other scientists?" The
> answer to that question would be, "Because most research scientists
> are not idiots who place ego gratification through reader adulation
> above professional conduct."
>
> 2. He is a nobody in the science world
>
> I could care less about Mr. Gorski or his career. I'm sure he has
> worked hard to get where he is. But, relatively speaking, Mr. Gorski
> is a nobody. He's an "Assistant Professor."
>
> When Bill Walton criticizes NBA players, he annoys some, but the man
> is highly accomplished in his field, so people listen and respect his
> point of view. Mr. Gorski's only claim to fame is that he blogs
> frequently enough to be high in the search rankings.
>
> Mr. Gorski is very proud of himself. He writes: "I got into the
> University of Michigan Medical School, which got around 3,000
> applications every year for around 180 positions."
>
> Wow!!
>
> 3. He's a complete wanker
>
> Some people are just such tool jobs they should probably not do a lot
> of public blogging. Don't take my word for it, just consider this gem
> from Mr. Gorski:
>
> "[In College] I was then, as I am now, pretty geeky and had only a
> relatively small circle of friends. I rarely 'partied.'"
>
> This is the equivalent of John Candy mentioning in Stripes, "Some of
> you may not have noticed I have a bit of a weight problem."
>
> Geeky? Really? With that stunning visage looking like the love child
> of Lurch and Sam the Eagle, I figured you ruled the school.
>
> 4. He is a crazy daredevil
>
> This one really bowled me over:
>
> "So insane was I that one year I took 17 credits in the fall semester,
> all but 3 of which were hard-core science cl*****, including graduate
> level biochemistry, and then did the same thing again the next
> semester."
>
> No! NO!! You are a MADMAN!!
>
> 5. He often speaks in the third person
>
> Why do people speak in the third person? Mr. Gorski not only does it,
> but he speaks in third person pseudonym:
>
> "You don't tug on Superman's cape
> You don't spit into the wind
> You don't pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger
> And you don't mess around with Orac"
>
> Oh, no, run!! Here comes Orac!!
>
> 6. He dismisses any scientists who consider the vaccine-autism
> connection
>
> This is a classic knee-jerk of the mainstream health establishment
> when combating the growing evidence of a vaccine-autism connection:
> paint any scientist who entertains the notion of a connection between
> vaccines and autism as a crank. Consider his "respectful" comment
> regarding Dr. Hewitson, a member of the recent vaccine-monkey study
> discussed at IMFAR:
>
> "Unfortunately, Dr. Hewitson wouldn't be the first researcher whose
> personal brush with autism led her down the path of questionable
> science; I hope she doesn't descent too far into
> antivaccination-related research to get out before doing permanent
> damage to her career."
>
> It's interesting to contrast Mr. Gorski's comments with those of Dr.
> Bernadine Healy, a graduate of Harvard University, Harvard Medical
> School, former CEO of the Red Cross, and former President of the
> National Institutes of Health:
>
> "There is a completely expressed concern that they [mainstream
> scientists] don't want to pursue a hypothesis because that hypothesis
> could be damaging to the public health community at large by scaring
> people. First of all, I think the public's smarter than that. The
> public values vaccines. But more im****tantly, I don't think you should
> ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you're afraid
> of what it might show."
>
> It's worth pointing out that Dr. Healy does not blog under a pseudonym
> nor has she actively called out any specific researchers to accuse
> them of being "cranks."
>
> 7. He knows Hannah Poling better than her Dad (a doctor) does
>
> When the Hannah Poling case hit the news, Mr. Gorski was quick to
> sup****t many of the talking points the other side used to try to
> minimize the impact of the court's decision. It's interesting to
> compare Mr. Gorski's comments with those of Jon Poling, Hannah's
> father- a practicing neurologist.
>
> Mr. Gorski writes:
>
> "Mitochondrial disorders of the sort suffered by Hannah are genetic in
> nature and rare, an estimated 5.7 individuals per 100,000
> worldwide.the subset of these disorders that cause autism-like
> symptoms is even more rare."
>
> But, Dr. Poling, a neurologist, says:
>
> "No one knows if Hannah's mitochondrial dysfunction existed before
> receiving vaccines."
>
> Mr. Gorski writes:
>
> ".what was really diagnosed was a regressive encephalopathy that had
> some features of ASD.The bottom line is that it is fever from any
> source, be it a vaccine reaction or, more commonly, an infection that
> can exacerbate mitochondrial disorders and provoke encephalopathy.
> Moreover, because of the confounding factor of multiple ear
> infections, it's not 100% clear that her vaccinations even caused her
> regression"
>
> But, Dr. Poling says:
>
> "Our daughter, Hannah, developed normally until receiving nine
> vaccines at once. She immediately developed a fever and
> encephalopathy, deteriorating into what was diagnosed, based on the
> Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or D.S.M. IV,
> as autism."
>
> Mr. Gorski writes:
>
> ".mutations in the same gene that Hannah had a mutation in are
> incredibly rare.it is very likely that the reason the Poling case was
> dropped as a test case from the Autism Omnibus is because it is so
> unusual and atypical."
>
> But, Dr. Poling says:
>
> "How many Hannah Polings are out there? The short answer is that
> nobody knows. However, there is emerging data to suggest that she is
> not alone. Dr. Shoffner will be presenting his experience with 37
> patients with combined autism and mitochondrial dysfunction at the AAN
> meeting in Chicago this April. 65% of his referrals are positive for
> mitochondrial dysfunction. Of course, his yield is subject to
> referral bias as a mito expert, so the prevalence of mitochondrial
> dysfunction in Autism is surely less than 65%. The best estimate to
> date of the prevalence of mitochondrial dysfunction in autistic
> patients comes from Oliviera et al. in a population of 120, 5 of 69
> (or 7.2%) showed mitochondrial dysfunction. If this is generalized to
> the US estimate of 1 million patients with ASDs, then the number of
> kids like Hannah could be 72,000! Isn't this worth further study?"
>
> Mr. Gorski Says:
>
> "It is also known that children with mitochondrial disorders are prone
> to develop an encephalopathy in response to stress or fever that can
> cause them to regress. The source of this stress is often an
> infection, such as a cold or normal childhood illness, that results in
> a fever. The reason is that the mitochondria are the "batteries" or
> energy sources of the cell, and mitochondrial diseases can lead a
> child to be "energy challenged," so to speak.
>
> But, government attorneys and scientists conceded in the Hannah Poling
> case that the cause of her encephalopathy was:
> ".underlying mitochondrial dysfunction, exacerbated by vaccine-induced
> fever and immune stimulation that exceeded metabolic reserves."
>
> 8. He thinks our kids spontaneously recover
>
> "Spontaneous Recovery" has been a semantic trick used by the
> mainstream to explain why some of our kids recover, despite the fact
> that it means absolutely nothing. "Spontaneous" does not describe what
> happened, biologically, to allow a child to go from severely impaired
> to normal. It shows an extreme lack of medical curiosity.
>
> Mr. Gorski subscribes to the "Spontaneous Recovery" theory to explain
> our recovered kids. I pressed him on this issue in private emails,
> asking him how, as a physician, he can ignore the stories of formerly
> diagnosed children now living normally? His response was that it is,
> "very easy to be fooled, particularly in the cases of mild ASD." Mr.
> Gorski's science that sup****ts the position of spontaneous recovery is
> a sole study titled Diagnostic stability in very young children with
> autism spectrum disorders. The study, featuring all of 77 children,
> looks at diagnosis of all ASD labels over time. Take a read for
> yourself.
>
> Mr. Gorski's response to what he contends is "pseudoscience"
> is.pseudoscience.
>
> 9. Solely citing epidemiology, he says the vaccine-autism debate is
> over
>
> Mr. Gorski often writes of the ".science failing to find a link
> between vaccines and autism."
>
> Mr. Gorski uses many of the tricks of the mainstream in trying to make
> it seem like the vaccine-autism debate is over. In order to do this
> successfully, you have to ignore some ugly truths:
>
> - All studies conducted have been done by conflicted parties
> - Most studies have only considered thimerosal levels in vaccines, and
> then only compared kids who received more thimerosal versus those who
> received less
> - No studies have ever considered children who received the entire
> vaccine load versus those who received none
>
> Consider a comment from British Epidemiologist Geoffrey Rose, which
> would sup****t the folly of solely analyzing vaccinated children:
>
> "Imagine, Rose suggested, if everyone smoked a pack of cigarettes
> every day. Any study trying to link cigarette smoking to lung cancer
> 'would lead us to conclude that lung cancer was a genetic
> disease.since if everyone is exposed to the necessary agent, then the
> distribution of cases is wholly determined by individual
> susceptibility.'"
>
> Or, this commentary on epidemiology from the New England Journal of
> Medicine:
>
> "A common feature of epidemiological data is that they are almost
> certain to be biased, of doubtful quality, or incomplete.Problems do
> not disappear even if one has flawless data, since the statistical
> associations in almost any nontrivial set of observations are subject
> to many interpretations. This ambiguity exists because of the
> difficulty of sorting out causes, effects, concomitant variables, and
> random fluctuations when the causes are multiple or diffuse..Even when
> the data are generally accepted as accurate, there is much room for
> individual judgment, and the considered conclusions of the
> investigators in these matters determine what they will label cause."
>
> So despite holding other scientist to the highest standards, Mr.
> Gorski will gorge on narrowly-constructed, rat**** epidemiology funded
> by the CDC to close the case on vaccines and autism?
>
> 10. He thinks we should be more careful when we vaccinate monkeys
>
> Mr. Gorski was quick out of the blocks to criticize the emerging
> results from a study that vaccinated monkeys on the US vaccine
> schedule and compared them to unvaccinated monkeys. In fact, he seems
> to be developing an entirely new theory about why the vaccinated
> monkeys appear to be so sick. He writes:
>
> "How long is the life expectancy and time to maturity of these
> monkeys? In other words, were the investigators scaling down the time
> between injections pro****tionally to the difference in time to
> maturity between humans and these monkeys? That could end up being a
> lot of shots in a short period of time. So I looked it up. Rhesus
> Macaque monkeys live around 25 years and males reach ***ual maturity
> by around four years of age, approximately 1/4 of the time it takes
> humans males to reach ***ual maturity. That means, if I interpret
> correctly the methodology claiming to "adjust for age" that these
> monkeys could have received a lot of shots in a really short period of
> time."
>
> Did he just say that "a lot of shots in a really short period of time"
> could cause a problem?
>
> Boy, that sounds familiar.
>
> Thanks for looking out for the monkeys, Dr. Gorski, don't mind the
> several million kids over here who got "a lot of shots in a really
> short period of time" and are now completely ****ed up. The CDC's
> epidemiologist, who now works for Glaxo Smith Kline in the vaccine
> division, says they there is no link based on his "well designed"
> study comparing kids who got a lot of mercury with those who got quite
> a bit. You should feel like you have this all figured out.
>
> 11. He's not a parent
>
> While hard to believe based on Mr. Gorski's stunning looks,
> confessions of being "geeky" in college and blogging as his only hobby
> (what'd he do before blogs?) - Mr. Gorski has yet to procreate.
>
> This means Mr. Gorski's exposure to autistic children, schools
> bursting with special needs kids, and parents in every community
> lamenting developmental challenges in their kids is non-existent. I
> highly doubt he has any friends who went to the doctor for a "well
> baby" visit and returned with a child descending into autism.
>
> 12. He's got it backwards
>
> Mr. Gorski writes:
>
> "The one good thing is that the point of graduate school in sciences
> is more to teach you how to think and how to apply the scientific
> method. Science changes so rapidly that the information we had to
> learn was not as im****tant as learning how to teach ourselves, read
> the scientific literature, and apply it to our research."
>
> Mr. Gorski does not live up to the lofty standards he has set for
> himself or his colleagues, many of whom he publicly berates and
> humiliates. As an individual, he is a nobody, which is why he blogs
> under a pseudonym.
>
> The reason Mr. Gorski drives us nuts is because he selectively applies
> his scientific standards to anything that sup****ts his position-a
> common behavior of the mainstream health establishment. He reminds us
> of our pediatricians who told us we were crazy.
>
> In Mr. Gorski's world, highly flawed epidemiology gets a hall pass but
> anybody or anything that sup****ts a connection between vaccines and
> autism is quackery written by cranks. Ask him to apply his high
> standards to the CDC's "science" and he won't do it.
>
> Claude Bernard, in An Introduction to Experimental Medicine, wrote:
>
> "It is better to know nothing, than to keep in mind fixed ideas based
> on theories whose confirmation we constantly seek, neglecting
> meanwhile everything that fails to agree with it."
>
> Dr Bernandine Healy has been imploring her colleagues to open their
> minds to the possibilities of what our community is saying. The
> Worldwide Wanker of Woo, David Gorski, would be well served to listen.
>
> JB Handley is Editor at Large for Age of Autism and co-founder of
> Generation Rescue.
>
> in JB Handley | Permalink
>
> Digg This | Save to del.icio.us
>>Ilena,
Is not the subject.
David Gorski (aka) Orac--(who LIES for you) is the subject.
|
