Autism Street

Perhaps I should, but this year I’m not making New Year’s resolutions, I’m suggesting some for another blogger.

I just read Kent Heckenlively’s latest, Entering the New Year as Public Enemy #1 over at Generation Rescue’s “Age Of Autism” blog. Most Autism Street readers probably already see the AoA blog as having very little to nothing to do with autism. Many readers are also likely to be familiar with some of Heckenlively’s writing through other blog articles:

Heckenlively’s Data
The price of anti-vaccine fanaticism: Case histories
Deeper into Heckenlively, AoA, and Anti-Vaccination Stances

Heckenlively’s recent post takes issue with a Discover Magazine story, “Vaccine Phobia Becomes a Public-Health Threat.” In the post, Hecklively seems to take ownership of vaccine phobia through what looks like attempted justifications of fear of vaccines. In my opinion, those justifications look like little more than appeal to former authority, misunderstanding of epidemiological research, persitent, yet unconnected-to-autism fear of thimerosal or aluminum, and somewhat ambiguous fear of neuroinflammation in the suggested context of heavy metals, or viral or bacterial infection. Not surprisingly, Heckenlively’s article does not directly connect any of these fears with autism, rather it accepts the title of “Public Enemy #1″ (apparently on behalf of those who fear vaccines) in exchange for hope that points raised by Heckenlively will simply be addressed by someone in the media.

This is a free country, and Heckenlively is certainly entitled to speak his mind, writing about his suspicion of vaccines (unfounded or not). But it bothers me that the article begins with, “As a science teacher…” yet doesn’t seem to be written with a truly scientific mindset at all. Yes it’s pedantic to take issue with this mention of career (which is really probably only intended to provide context as to why he’d be reading Discover Magazine, rather than to claim actual qualifications on scientific subjects in any way), but my point is intended to be constructive. It’s not intended to address Heckenlively’s  issues list (but commenters feel free if you’ve read his post), but rather the credibility of beginning an article with, “As a science teacher…” on a blog that claims to be related to autism. If one’s going to be a science teacher and mention it in public writing, I think it would set a good example to others, to attempt to write at least a little more scientifically to some degree.

On that note, I have 5 suggested New Year’s Resolutions that I think would improve Mr. Heckenlively’s writing if he wants his list of issues to be taken seriously by any mainstream media reporter.

1. As a science teacher, I resolve to stop using the word “theory” interchangeably with “idea” when writing about vaccines. I’ll acknowledge that the word “theory” in a scientific context has specific meaning, and that within this meaning (as it applies to things like relativity, the big bang, and evolution), more accurate descriptive termniology for an autism/vaccine duality is “idea”, “hypothesis”, or “notion”.

2. As a science teacher, and given my first resolution, I resolve to be capable of explaining that there really isn’t a scientific vaccine/autism “theory”, and work to help lay people understand the difference between beliefs, hypotheses, and scientific theories.

3. As a science teacher, I resolve to be as accurate and responsible as possible with epidemiological facts about autism spectrum disorders. When hypothesizing about “vaccines/autism”, I’ll be careful to distinguish whether I’m referring to all autism spectrum disorders or something more specific, paying careful attention to pair suggestions of biological plausibility in the context of hypothetical claims of vaccine injury with the corresponding epidemiology.

4. As a science teacher, I resolve to try to resist thoughts of conspiracy.

5. As a science teacher, I resolve to really do something relevant and meaningful to enhance vaccine safety for all children. I’ll contribute, and encourage others to contribute, to bona-fide vaccine safety research. I’ll acknowledge that Generation Rescue seems to have done very little in this regard, and I’ll work to change that.