Lies, Damn Lies and Blog Posts

Some people are so desperate to prove they are right (regrettably when wrong, of course) that they will stoop to pretty much anything. Blogs are a great place to see this.

Here are some examples, à la Kev Leitch’s blog’s highly unreliable accounts of the vaccines-to-autism issue. Here you can see how Kev quickly manages to discredit everything that appears on that blog. Thanks Kev mate. It makes life so much easier for the rest of us when we can see this clearly.

 

Exhibit 1 - Or Who’s Not Telling The Truth Kev?

Poling vs HHS - Something is definitely beginning to smell - Apr 30 2008 - Author: Kev

Here Kev Leitch claims the parents of successful US MMR vaccine damage claimant Hannah Poling won’t release key information about their daughter’s case. Leitch goes so far as to claim outright they are liars no less. Is that something psychologists call “classic projection”? Read on to judge for yourself.

It was the Polings who applied to the Court for “complete transparency” for all the documents - see the very court document Kev links to on his blog and just look at its title “ORDER DEFERRING RULING ON PETITIONERS’ MOTION FOR COMPLETE TRANSPARENCY OF PROCEEDINGS” and the Polings are the petitioners on their daughter’s behalf. So they are the ones seeking complete disclosure, not cherry-picking by the US government officials.
 

But Leitch says “why won’t the Poling’s let key medical details that would ‘address innaccurate statements that were being made publicly’ be released right now? Why do they claim that they are asking for complete disclosure when it is clear they are not? Why did their counsel blatantly lie about the press conference?”

Leitch then goes on to claim “Now this is a bombshell. It was not the Poling’s who first wanted to release documents, it was HHS. They asked for the Poling’s consent to permit HHS to disclose medical information in order to ‘address innaccurate statements that were being made publicly’.

Really Kev? Bombshell? Ha!

So the Polings want everything disclosed but the HHS want their selected tidbits disclosed. So Kev accuses the Polings of wanting to withhold information when it is the HHS that is being selective and ensuring all the information is kept back and the Polings who object and instead want full disclosure. Then Kev calls them liars.

Who do you think is not telling it as it is? Is Kev’s site a reliable source of information? Judge for yourself - read on:-

 

 

Exhibit 2 - Or how Kev Cured Hannah Poling’s Autism

Kev claims Hannah Poling is not autistic.

Vaccines, Autism and the Concession - Mar 1 2008 - Author: Kev

He claims she has not enough symptoms and he does so by reference to the concession filed by the US government experts that conceded the case - which he posted on his site but which he now has changed to:-

Concession Report (This document has been removed due to the possibility of it being illegally obtained). If people really wish to read the document for themselves it can be founf here, at the Huffington post

But he has specifically failed to tell people that when Hannah Poling was originally diagnosed with autism, she had many more symptoms than she has now. So Kev claims she is not autistic. But he does so when it was he who disclosed himself on exactly the same web page of his the very document which contains the relevant information showing that Hannah Poling originally had many more symptoms:-

Zimmerman Case Study

So he not only has the very information not just under his nose but he sticks it under everyone else’s but tells them something completely different. Nice one Kev. Don’t ya get dizzy spinning so fast?

 

 

Exhibit 3 - When All Else Fails Its “Kev’s Big Innuendo Time”

When Kev originally had nothing to say about the Hannah Poling case, he came out with some invented innuendo to imply the Polings were out to hide something (but quite what is impossible to fathom). Kev’s claim then was that the Polings would not allow Zimmerman to comment on the case:-

“Something is beginning to smell… - Mar 5 2008 - Author: Kev

So without a shred of evidence to back it up and when there are much more obvious explanations, Kev goes for the smear tactic because he has nothing else.

Firstly, professionally, Zimmerman is not allowed to comment. Secondly, there is no suggestion he has asked for permission to comment. Thirdly, in his shoes, I would want to keep well out of it. Fourthly, this is the Poling’s “show”, about their daughter, so it is not Zimmerman’s place to comment publicly. Fifthly, if I were Hannah Poling’s dad, I would be bloody furious if the treating physician went public about my kid’s case and more especially so in the circumstances like these.

And last but by no means least, Hannah’s Dad, Jon Poling is an expert himself and a neurologist at highly respected Johns Hopkins in the USA so he does not need Zimmerman to comment. He is more than able to do so himself and which he does here most ably:-
 

Child’s case shifts autism debate Atlanta Journal Constitution, USA - 11 Apr 2008

 

Well done again Kev. Thanks for showing us all what you are made of.

19 Responses to “Lies, Damn Lies and Blog Posts”

  1. First off - thanks for the links ;)

    Second, I think you might need to go back and read what I actually wrote.

    Dr Zimmerman is the co-author of the case study that looked at Hannah Poling’s medical details. These are *all* the details that Poling/Zimmerman et al recorded as those being tied to the vaccines. Whether he has asked for permission or not is irrelevant. If someone says they are making full disclosure then they should free everyone involved to be able to comment if they so desire or not.

    Bearing that in mind, why won’t the Poling’s give permission to Dr Zimmerman to speak publicly? Do they want full transparency or not?

    The fact of the matter is that whether you like it or not, the Poling’s counsel did lie about the press conference. I understand you don’t like that - whatever, get over it.

    Your claim that I am saying Hannah Poling is not autistic is bizarre given that I say she may well be autistic. I’ve said it many times on my blog and I’ve just said it again here. What I am saying (and this is an important distinction) is that given the medical evidence presented in the case study (and no, nothing is hidden in this study, its co-authored by Jon Poling remember) it is impossible to say that the vaccine reaction looked like, triggered or caused autism. See here for what I mean.

    re: disclosure - I don’t really care what HHS disclose or don’t disclose. What is important is that the Poling’s are at the centre of a self-generated media storm in which they claim to want full disclosure. If they want full disclosure why don’t they fully disclose?

  2. Here we go again - spinning like a top.

    To get full disclosure all we need is the HHS to agree but they are the ones who do not agree to full disclosure.

    The Polings have asked the Court for full disclosure but they cannot have it because the US government authorities won’t agree.

    But Kev says it is all the Poling’s fault. There there there Kev, never mind.

    What is it the HHS is hiding Kev? Why won’t they come out and agree we can see all the documents? Looks pretty smelly and it smells pretty smelly too.

    As for Hannah’s autism, Kev listed out the symptoms in the HHS concession document instead of the ones which Hannah was originally diagnosed with and then he claims she only had some symptoms of autism and was not autistic. I just love the spin on that one. Glad to see Hannah has got better with treatment Kev. Aren’t you - doesn’t seem that way from they way you are carrying on does it? You trash the parents of a little girl who won compensation because the US government admitted her autism was caused by vaccines and claim her injuries are not really what they are. That is the bottom line on this one.

    And look at how Kev has to explain himself all over again on this Blog. Wot Kev, one blog not enough for ya?

    As for Kev’s claim Poling’s lawyer is a liar, it seems everyone is a liar except for Kev, aren’t they Kev.

    Absolutely classic. I love it.

  3. Hi

    Lying seems to be the way out for some vaccinists - when science and other evidence can’t help them.

  4. “Here we go again - spinning like a top.” Yep.

    “Lying seems to be the way out for some vaccinists - when science and other evidence can’t help them.”

    It’s hard for them to stay objective when they see their profit margin shrinking before their very eyes.

    Thank goodness the details of the Poling case has come out to the public. The pro-vaccine crowd has a field day making fun of Jenny McCarthy, since they’re such great humanitarians, but it’s much harder to demonize the Polings, who are medical professionals.

    I was blown away watching their press conference on CNN, and Teri Poling admitted that Hannah’s vaccine reactions weren’t reported to VAERS (the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System). What’s more, she and her husband didn’t even know about VAERS at the time. If the “experts” don’t know about something this important, how can we count on them to tell the truth about vaccine reactions?

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0803/06/cnr.02.html

  5. “To get full disclosure all we need is the HHS to agree but they are the ones who do not agree to full disclosure.”

    Read my lips: I agree with you. [EDITORIAL NOTE: DEFAMATORY INNUENDO DELETED] if they were - why don’t they simply let Andrew Zimmerman speak publicly? What’s to hide?

    “But Kev says it is all the Poling’s fault. There there there Kev, never mind.”

    I did? Where did I say that?

    “As for Hannah’s autism, Kev listed out the symptoms in the HHS concession document instead of the ones which Hannah was originally diagnosed with and then he claims she only had some symptoms of autism and was not autistic. I just love the spin on that one.”

    No, once more you didn’t read what I wrote. I listed *all* the symptoms presented in both the concession document (written by HHS) and the case study report (written by Poling/Zimmerman/Shoffner et al), this gives us a complete list of *all* medical symptoms described as being caused by Hannah Poling’s vaccines. There are simply not enough to say vaccines caused her autism. If you want to dispute this list I suggest you take it up with Jon Poling, Hannah’s dad.

    “Glad to see Hannah has got better with treatment Kev.”

    Has she? Is she no longer autistic then?

    “You trash the parents of a little girl who won compensation because the US government admitted her autism was caused by vaccines and claim her injuries are not really what they are. That is the bottom line on this one.”

    Well, that’s your opinion which you’re welcome and entitled to but I’m afraid its simply not supported by the facts presented. Sorry. If you believe the US government has admitted that vaccines caused Hannah Poling’s autism then please paste and link to that statement from them.

    Just for the record, as you were wrong about me saying Hannah Poling didn’t have autism, you are also wrong that I don’t believe (as you seem to) that she was damaged by her vaccines. She quite clearly was.

    “As for Kev’s claim Poling’s lawyer is a liar, it seems everyone is a liar except for Kev, aren’t they Kev.”

    [EDITORIAL NOTE - GRATUITOUS INSULTS DELETED]

  6. Kevin,

    Why would Dr Zimmerman want to speak? You have created the fiction that he would wish to enter into public debate, but unless he has communicated this view to you, you are just indulging in innuendo. His name is on the paper.

    You certainly did make the spurious point - just from memory - that the fact that Hannah had autistic symptoms did not mean she was autistic. If you now agree that this is another red-herring and a fallacy, all well and good.

    You certainly have retraced your steps over the Polings preventing the HHS from disclosing.

    All noted.

    Best wishes,

    John

  7. Wow, Kev really does tell wopping great big spins.

    First of all, lets get one thing clear - contrary to all Kev’s claims that Hannah Poling was not autistic and his claims that “no one has said thus far that the child has been diagnosed with an ASD.” Hannah Poling was diagnosed as autistic.

    Kev missed out from his March 1 blog the professional expert medical diagnosis of autism. Bit misleading that Kev.

    Here is where the diagnosis of autism is reported in the Zimmerman paper and which Kev failed to mention:-

    “The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) score was 33 (mild autism range), and she also met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-IV criteria for autism.”

    Kev claims here that he “listed *all* the symptoms” of Hannah Poling. So how come he missed so many out?

    What he claims he listed in his March 1 blog “gives us a complete list of *all* medical symptoms.” In fact it does not because Kev does not have the full court documents setting out Hannah Poling’s full clinical history. That is because the US HHS will not agree to full disclosure which the Polings require (contrary to Kev’s spinning innuendos).

    Also, he refers to the document filed in court as the “Concession Report” as if it was a fully balanced account by independent assessors.

    It was instead a document the US government experts and lawyers had filed in court explaining why they conceded the case without fighting it.

    That, Kev, is really misleading of you. The “Concession Report” was the furthest the US government was prepared to go. It does not represent an independent unbiased objective opinion on what symptoms were or were not caused by Hannah Poling’s vaccinations. It does represent a biased not independent and subjective opinion from the perspective of the US government.

    Thanks for not telling your readers that Kev. We would not want them to have a balanced and accurate account of the facts would we - that would just not do would it.

    So let us see what symptoms Kev listed on his March 1 blog as the only ones matching the DSM IV ciriteria for autism:-

    - Eye Contact
    - Relatedness
    - CHILD watched the fluorescent lights repeatedly during the examination

    And he then said:-

    “To meet the DSM criteria a person must meet no less than 6 of the criteria. So, as described perfectly exactly by the Dr Zimmerman in the concession report, this child has features consistent with an ASD. But its clear she does not meet the criteria for autism.”

    And what Kev also fails to tell everyone is that the reason the behaviours reported are not listed in DSM IV is because the descriptions of symptoms in DSM IV include those kinds of symptoms but do not describe them in the same terms as the family might report them. For example, as you can see below, a couple of the behaviours were “spinning” and “gaze avoidance” which are classic kinds of autistic behaviours.

    This Kev, ole chum, is why we have trained professionals to apply DSM IV and make these diagnoses instead of middle aged blokes on blogs with nothing better to do when they are not being website designers.

    And what Kev also failed to tell everyone on his March 1 blog is that the symptoms on which the formal diagnosis of autism are based are not set out in full in the Zimmerman paper or the Concession document. The Zimmerman paper was recording the clinical history prior to the formal diagnosis which history included symptoms reported by the family. These included:-

    - irritable
    - increasingly less responsive verbally,
    - spinning,
    - gaze avoidance,
    - disrupted sleep/wake cycle,
    - perseveration on specific television programs
    - all expressive language was lost by 22 months
    - chronic yellow watery diarrhea
    - regression
    - appetite remained poor
    - body weight did not increase.
    - atopic dermatitis,
    - slow hair growth,
    - generalized mild hypotonia,
    - toe walking.

    And if you are a reader of this and want to know what DSM IV says, so you can see how misleading Kev has been, do a search on the web. You won’t find “toe walking”, “perseveration on specific television programs” or “spinning” listed because that is not how DSM IV works as will be apparent if you take a look yourself. For example, the US CDC describes symptoms of autism here but as this example shows, you won’t find DSM IV listing every one of this extract of lengthy US CDC descriptions of some kinds of autistic behaviours in full:-

    “Unusual behaviors such as repetitive motions may make social interactions difficult.

    Repetitive motions are actions repeated over and over again. They can involve part of the body or the entire body or even an object or toy. For instance, people with ASDs may spend a lot of time repeatedly flapping their arms or rocking from side to side. They might repeatedly turn a light on and off or spin the wheels of a toy car in front of their eyes. These types of activities are known as self-stimulation or “stimming.” “

    Oh, and just because this little girl fortunately started to recover her language skils, Kev says recovering means the loss of language does not count.

    Good grief Kev, what kind of creature are you? This is a little girl and there are lots more like her. All you do is spin, spin, spin - wheels within wheels.

    And as I see someone else has noted, what you should do Kev is say, “these kids need help and we need to stop this happening to kids asap”. But that is the one thing you don’t seem to do - unless I mssed it somewhere.

    You are just too busy misleading people about all of this. Quite why anyone would want to the Lord, praise his name, only knows but you are.

  8. “First of all, lets get one thing clear - contrary to all Kev’s claims that Hannah Poling was not autistic and his claims that “no one has said thus far that the child has been diagnosed with an ASD.” Hannah Poling was diagnosed as autistic.”

    Good God. Directly above this comment is a comment from me stating that I agreed Hannah Poling was autistic.

    “Kev missed out from his March 1 blog the professional expert medical diagnosis of autism. Bit misleading that Kev.

    Here is where the diagnosis of autism is reported in the Zimmerman paper and which Kev failed to mention:-

    “The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) score was 33 (mild autism range), and she also met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-IV criteria for autism.””

    Once again, I am not - and never have - claimed Hannah Poling is not autistic. Please try and grasp the distinction: I am claiming that the medical evidence as thatbeing caused by vaccines did not make her autistic.

    “What he claims he listed in his March 1 blog “gives us a complete list of *all* medical symptoms.” In fact it does not because Kev does not have the full court documents setting out Hannah Poling’s full clinical history. That is because the US HHS will not agree to full disclosure which the Polings require (contrary to Kev’s spinning innuendos).”

    Again, this is not difficult. We have two seperate arenas. The court setting where all we have is the detail in the HHS report. Then, entirely seperately, we have the scientific setting which is where the Poling/Zimmerman/Shoffner case study comes from. This study is not subject to any court rulings of any kind. It contains the full set of medical evidence.

    “So let us see what symptoms Kev listed on his March 1 blog as the only ones matching the DSM IV ciriteria for autism:-”

    No, the symptoms YOU list are the ones from the HHS. The ones I linked to above are from both the HHS and the Case Study. These are:

    fever to 38.9°C
    inconsolable crying
    irritability
    lethargy
    refused to walk
    waking up multiple times in the night
    having episodes of opisthotonus
    no longer normally climb stairs
    Low-grade intermittent fever
    generalized erythematous macular rash
    spinning
    gaze avoidance
    disrupted sleep/wake cycle
    perseveration
    expressive language was lost
    chronic yellow watery diarrhea
    appetite remained poor for 6 months
    body weight did not increase
    decline on a standard growth chart
    atopic dermatitis
    slow hair growth
    generalized mild hypotonia
    toe walking
    normal tendon reflexes.

    “And what Kev also fails to tell everyone is that the reason the behaviours reported are not listed in DSM IV is because the descriptions of symptoms in DSM IV include those kinds of symptoms but do not describe them in the same terms as the family might report them.”

    So at one time you claim Jon Poling is an expert, but now you’re saying he doesn’t know how to report properly? LOL.

    “And what Kev also failed to tell everyone on his March 1 blog is that the symptoms on which the formal diagnosis of autism are based are not set out in full in the Zimmerman paper or the Concession document.”

    Of course they’re not. Why would they be?

    “And if you are a reader of this and want to know what DSM IV says, so you can see how misleading Kev has been, do a search on the web. You won’t find “toe walking”, “perseveration on specific television programs” or “spinning” listed because that is not how DSM IV works as will be apparent if you take a look yourself. For example, the US CDC describes symptoms of autism here but as this example shows, you won’t find DSM IV listing every one of this extract of lengthy US CDC descriptions of some kinds of autistic behaviours in full:-”

    Oh dear. I really think you’ve misunderstood the CDC website. It is not stating that the things you list are enough for diagnosis. It is saying they may exist. Which of course they may - but they’re not part of the diagnostic criteria as they’re not applicable to every single case of autism.

    And you’re right, I am not a dignostician. So I asked three very well known diagnosticians. They all agreed that the symptoms presented were not enough to meet a diagnosis of autism. If you don’t believe me on that score I suggest you contact some diagnosticicns yourself.

    “Oh, and just because this little girl fortunately started to recover her language skils, Kev says recovering means the loss of language does not count.”

    I did? Where did I say that?

    “Good grief Kev, what kind of creature are you? This is a little girl and there are lots more like her. All you do is spin, spin, spin - wheels within wheels.”

    Right. As far as I can see my version is consistently the same. I believe Hannah Poling was damaged by her vaccines. I beleive she was/is autistic. I don’t believe the vaccines caused her autism. These are all opinions gained from reading the medical literature presented.

    Whereas so far we have established that:

    a) Kev claims Hannah Poling is not autistic is false
    b) Kev claims Hannah Poling is not vacciend damaged is false

    You also have ignored my questions:

    a) Kev says it is all the Poling’s fault. I did? Where did I say that?
    b)If you believe the US government has admitted that vaccines caused Hannah Poling’s autism then please paste and link to that statement from them.

    You seem more intent on being angry than making sense my friend.

  9. Hi John,

    “Why would Dr Zimmerman want to speak? You have created the fiction that he would wish to enter into public debate, but unless he has communicated this view to you, you are just indulging in innuendo. His name is on the paper.”

    I am no - and never have - claimed he wants to speak. I am saying he should be allowed to by the Poling’s. KK has communicated to me that until the Poling’s give him that permission he can’t. Why don’t they?

    “You certainly did make the spurious point - just from memory - that the fact that Hannah had autistic symptoms did not mean she was autistic. If you now agree that this is another red-herring and a fallacy, all well and good.”

    Its hardly a red herring John, its central to the whole case. The fact is that a diagnosis of autism is not the same as having symptoms of autism. Does that mean Hannah Poling is not autistic? No. Does it mean that the evidence presented as that being caused by vaccines caused her autism? No.

    “You certainly have retraced your steps over the Polings preventing the HHS from disclosing.”

    Have I? Where did I ever say that the Poling’s have prevented HHS from disclosing? I think I blogged once that the Poling’s needed to give the court (not HHS) written permission before they could release documents.

  10. Well, well Kev,

    Once more into the breach dear friends. Kev agrees Hannah Poling is autistic. Glad we got that one over with.

    And he says he set out all of Hannah’s symptoms. So if he had, when he was trying to convince us her autism was not caused by the vaccines, there was no need to list them all out again on this blog.

    So let us see the real list of symptoms Kev listed - and let us pick out the ones he said were symptoms of autism and compare them with the new list he has just given us which was not in his 1st March blog posting (despite his protestations above).

    Here they are as he himself listed them and for readers not viewing in colour, the matches to DSM IV which Kev picked out are only three of the following - numbers 2,3 and 9:-

    I make nine clear separate symptoms there. Which of these appear in the DSM (IV)? Green equal matches, red equal misses.

    1 Loss of previously acquired language
    2 Eye Contact
    3 Relatedness
    4 disruption in CHILD’s sleep patterns,
    5 Persistent screaming
    6 Arching
    7 the development of pica to foreign objects
    8 loose stools
    9 CHILD watched the fluorescent lights repeatedly during the examination

    To meet the DSM criteria a person must meet no less than 6 of the criteria. So, as described perfectly exactly by the Dr Zimmerman in the concession report, this child has features consistent with an ASD. But its clear she does not meet the criteria for autism.

    Speaks for itself. Kev did not list them in his March 1 blog - but above he claims he did.

    And the front of the man - because his mates in the US government HHS won’t agree to the court documents being made public, as the Polings have clearly asked, here he is demanding the Polings put all of their private non court documents in the public arena so he can paw all over them in his blog and call the Polings liars and trash them and their daughter.

    Is this bonkers or is this bonkers?

    And look at how he spins the justification for this:

    Again, this is not difficult. We have two seperate arenas. The court setting …… Then, entirely seperately, we have the scientific setting

    What has that got to do with it? Why has Kev not laid into the HHS for not agreeing full public disclosure of the court documents? Come on Kev, spit it out. All they have to do is say “yes”. What are they trying to hide? Is it that we will find the truth that shows Hannah’s autism was caused by the vaccines but they used spin in their concession to get out of it.

    It stinks - but instead Kev claims the Poling’s position stinks just because they want to keep their private documents private when we could have all of the court documents if only the HHS will agree.

    Kev lays into the Poling family and call them liars. They are not an anonymous government body but real people with feelings whose little girl was very badly damaged by vaccines as acknowledged by the anonymous US government experts whom Kev does not bother to scrutinise or attack or call liars or personally identify.

    (Oh, Kev “seperate” is spelt “separate“.)

    And look how nastily he makes fun of the Poling family in their distress over what happened to their little girl. I pointed out the symptoms the family reported when she was less than 23 months old (that is still a baby of aged 1). That was around 10 years ago when her father and now Johns Hopkins neurologist Jon Poling would have known little or nothing about autism like most medical professionals. Things are a bit different now after ten years. But Kev in his typically nasty way spins this to pretend Hannah’s dad is not now an expert on autism when he has had 10 years to learn all about it first hand:-

    So at one time you claim Jon Poling is an expert, but now you’re saying he doesn’t know how to report properly? LOL.

    With that, it says it all about Kevin Leitch and his nasty nasty campaign which has the effect of setting back the work to prevent what is happening to millions of kids around the world.

    Spin, spin, spin.

  11. It is so sad to see parents fighting with each other. The Department of Health should be looking at our children and finding out what the hell is going on. So many sick children.
    All our children are suffering and we should all be working together to fight for a centre of excelience in the UK where our children can get proper urgent treatment.
    There is no doubt that the USA will be the place to prove that a sub group of children are damaged by vaccines. The UK medical profession has closed ranks tight and are frightened. In their eyes our children do not exist.

  12. Good grief is this still going on?

    Once more into the breach dear friends. Kev agrees Hannah Poling is autistic. Glad we got that one over with.

    I have never suggested she wasn’t. The only person on here who thought I had was you.

    And he says he set out all of Hannah’s symptoms. So if he had, when he was trying to convince us her autism was not caused by the vaccines, there was no need to list them all out again on this blog.

    Patently there was. You still don’t seem able to see what is in front of you. For example:

    …the new list he has just given us which was not in his 1st March blog posting (despite his protestations above)…..Speaks for itself. Kev did not list them in his March 1 blog - but above he claims he did.

    Simple instructions.

    1) Click the link I supplied.
    2) If your browser software doesn’t scroll automatically down to the third comment, scroll down manually.
    3) Read.

    And the front of the man - because his mates in the US government HHS

    ?????

    here he is demanding the Polings put all of their private non court documents in the public arena so he can paw all over them in his blog and call the Polings liars and trash them and their daughter.

    No, I’ve never asked that. I’ve simply asked they make the medical records that pertain to this court action available. I don’t care when Hannah Poling’s tonsils were removed for example.

    “Again, this is not difficult. We have two seperate arenas. The court setting …… Then, entirely seperately, we have the scientific setting”

     

    What has that got to do with it?

    Are you joking? It has everything to do with it. In the Case Study (lead author Jon Poling) is listed all the medical symptoms associated with Hannah Poling’s vaccine damage. I would love to see HHS release whatever you think they should. But in terms of what medical damage was caused to Hannah Poling from her vaccines, we already have all the information - courtesy of Jon Poling, Andrew Zimmerman, John Shoffner etc.

    But Kev in his typically nasty way spins this to pretend Hannah’s dad is not now an expert on autism when he has had 10 years to learn all about it first hand:-

    No, I’m pointing out your double standards. You cannot simultaneously claim Jon Poling as an expert and then claim he didn’t know how to report symptoms accurately. Besides that, Andrew Zimmerman is an autism expert. The same Andrew Zimmerman that the Poling’s still haven’t given permission to speak freely about this case. Coincidence?

    Now, lets get back to your original claims

    Whereas so far we have established that:

    a) Kev claims Hannah Poling is not autistic is false
    b) Kev claims Hannah Poling is not vaccine damaged is false

    You also have ignored my questions:

    a) Kev says it is all the Poling’s fault. I did? Where did I say that?
    b)If you believe the US government has admitted that vaccines caused Hannah Poling’s autism then please paste and link to that statement from them.

    So - were you wrong about what you claim I said? Can you back up your claim that the US government have admitted Hannah Poling’s vaccines caused her autism?

  13. http://emc.medicines.org.uk/emc/assets/c/html/DisplayDoc.asp?DocumentID=17514

    In children who have not had measles but have received measles vaccine there have been rare reports of gradual mental deterioration, fits and sudden jerking of a single muscle or group of muscles.

    (thousands of children is not rare )

    DOES M-M-R™ II HAVE ANY SIDE-EFFECTS?
    • Because M-M-R™ II is slightly acidic, you or your child may feel a slight burning or stinging sensation in the area where the injection was given. This occurs commonly but should not last longer than 5 minutes.
    Some people may have any of the following:
    • fever (with temperature more than 38.3°C) and skin rash. If these are going to happen, it will most likely be five to twelve days after the injection.
    • the area around the injection site may become red, swollen, tender or painful.
    The following can also occur:
    • Sore throat, feeling generally unwell, fainting, irritability.
    • Swollen painful salivary glands in front of the ears, feeling or being sick, diarrhoea.
    • Swollen glands in the armpits (if the injection was given into the arm) or in the groin (if the injection was given into the leg).
    • A reduction in the number of platelets in the blood causing easy bruising, purple spotted skin rash, nose bleeds or heavy menstrual periods in women.
    • Allergic reactions such as itchy generalised skin rash, swelling of the face and throat, difficulty in breathing, blue discolouration of the tongue or lips, low blood pressure and collapse.
    • Painful joints and/or swollen joints. This does not usually last very long and is more likely to occur in adult women. If this does occur, it is most likely to happen two to four weeks after your vaccination. These are caused by the rubella part of the vaccine.
    • Painful muscles.
    • Fits (convulsions), with or without fever.
    • Headache, dizziness, tingling sensation, inflammation of the nerves causing pain and tenderness and loss of function of muscles.
    • Guillain-Barré Syndrome (a general nerve disease)
    • Loss of co-ordination, unsteadiness.
    • Cough, runny nose.
    • A purple spotted skin rash and red blotches which may spread and form lumps or blisters, a rash with small fluid-filled spots, swelling of the skin.
    • Inflammation of nerves in the eye, inflammation of the innermost layer of the eye one to three weeks after the injection causing headache and visual disturbance, inability to move the eye causing double vision.
    • Ear infection and inflammation of the covering of the eye and eyelid causing red sticky eyes.
    • Deafness.
    • Painful testicles.
    It is possible, but highly unlikely, that M-M-R™ II could cause inflammation of the brain leading to headaches and drowsiness. It should be remembered that this is more likely to be caused by the measles disease itself (one per 2000 cases of reported measles) than by the measles vaccine (one case per million doses given). As with any live vaccine, administration of MMR™ II to patients with a weakened immune system may be associated with particular risks. A type of brain inflammation, that may be associated with inflammation of the lungs and can be fatal, has occurred extremely rarely in patients with severely weakened immune systems, after receiving a measles-containing vaccine.
    In children who have not had measles but have received measles vaccine there have been rare reports of gradual mental deterioration, fits and sudden jerking of a single muscle or group of muscles. It is thought that this occurs once in one million vaccine doses given. This compares with 6 to 22 cases per million cases of measles (that is, measles has a higher risk of causing these symptoms than the measles vaccine).
    Most people do not have any serious or long-lasting reactions to M-M-R™ II. However, if you are worried about any of these, or you or your child experience any other unpleasant effects after your vaccination, tell your doctor or nurse.

  14. I just love it. 

    This just goes to show exactly how carefully people have to read Kevin Leitch’s grossly unreliable accounts of the vaccine caused autism issue.  This is spin mastery extraordinaire, Kevin Leitch’s
    comments of (May 30th, 2008 at 10:57 am). 

    Exhibit 1 - Kevin Leitch’s Most Incredible Spin Ever, “No one is an expert if they were not an expert before they became an expert”

    Kev claims that because Jon Poling and his family were not experts in autism 8 to 10 years ago, the description they used of Hannah’s symptoms then (8-10 years ago) mean Jon Poling is not an expert now.   Just so that Kev does not claim he is being misquoted, this is exactly - yes exactly, what he said:-

    “No, I’m pointing out your double standards. You cannot simultaneously claim Jon Poling as an expert and then claim he didn’t know how to report symptoms accurately.”

    Just so no one misses the significance of this incredible spin from Kev, bear in mind that when Jon Poling was 5 years old he and his family were not experts in autism either. 

    So according to Kev’s logic, Jon Poling cannot be one now.  Wow.  I have to take a rest.  That is just awesome.  That means that anyone who has become an expert in anything is not really an expert because they were not an expert before they became an expert, whether that was 10 years ago or when 5 years old.

    Kev, you are just a genius.  That is so BRILLIANT, BRILLIANT, BRILLIANT  ……   BRILLIANT, BRILLIANT, BRILLIANT how do you do it?  What amazing spin.  This deserves the Nobel prize for trolling and denial extraordinaire. 

    Exhibit 2 - Kevin Leitch’s List and Links That Never Were

    Kevin Leitch comes here and claims he supplied links here to his March 1 blog where he listed out all of Hannah Poling’s symptoms, but there is no link.  But Kev still claims he listed them there when he did not.  Spin?  or Spin?  I also went back to take a look at the third comment down on his March 1 blog that he refers to as well. 

    Nothing there.

    How does he do it.  Where does he get the front from to come here and say all of this bunk?  Beats me.  Just so he does not claim he is being misquoted, here is exactly what, yes exactly what, he said:-


    “Simple instructions.

    1) Click the link I supplied.
    2) If your browser software doesn’t
    scroll automatically down to the
    third comment, scroll down manually.
    3) Read.”

    Exhibit 3 - The Autism Symptoms That Never Were

    As for Hannah’s autism, Kevin Leitch’s spin is just a wonderfully skilled. 

    Is Kevin Leitch misleading his readers or not?  Here are some quotes of his.  I specifically set these ones out here because the point of spin is to confuse and you can judge for yourself what Kevin Leitch is up to by his reply:-

    “Features consistent with. He [Zimmerman] did not diagnose her with autism. “

    [Ed note:  In fact, Zimmerman's paper states clearly Hannah Poling was diagnosed with autism according to two different sets of diagnostic standards/tests.]

    “So, as described perfectly exactly by the Dr Zimmerman in the concession report, this child has features consistent with an ASD. But its clear she does not meet the criteria for autism.”

    “…..  The clinicians concluded that CHILD was developmentally delayed and demonstrated features of autistic disorder.   ….”   ……. Almost the exact same phrasing. Consistent with. But no one has said thus far that the child has been diagnosed with an ASD.”

    “The concession report concludes with: …..  CHILD …. manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder….  it is clear that far from
    suggesting that vaccines cause autism ….. the vaccines worsened an … underlying … disorder which took on a few of the symptoms of autism but was never actually diagnosed as autism at all. Because it wasn’t autism.”

    …….

    It should also be noted that CARS is not designed for diagnosis but is an indicator only. Overall, we get a picture of a child who had an underlying mitochondrial dysfunction exposed by the illnesses following her vaccinations which caused developmental regression. This developmental regression presented with some features of autism.

    Did the vaccinations cause her developmental regression? Seems likely. …… Was her developmental regression autism? No.  At no point in either the concession report is it claimed that the developmental regression the child went through was autism.


    The practice of calling certain things near-autism, or even autism itself is not new. …… Now, we all know that ‘tracing an elephant’ and losing IQ points are not symptoms of autism but it is intriguing to see a doctor describe a regression as ‘practically autistic’.

    Exhibit 4 - Kevin Leitch & the Poling’s Private Documents - A Body Swerve

    Now he says:-

    “we already have all the information - courtesy of Jon Poling, Andrew Zimmerman, John Shoffner etc.”

    That is brilliant spin - total change of direction, quick body swerve and hope no one notices.

    Ta Kev. Nice ones.

  15. Oh, Kevin, if you do come back, let’s hear from you why this is not conclusive proof vaccines cause autism:-

    Japanese Autism Numbers Rose & Fell With Vaccinations

  16. Kev claims that because Jon Poling and his family were not experts in autism 8 to 10 years ago, the description they used of Hannah’s symptoms then (8-10 years ago) mean Jon Poling is not an expert now. Just so that Kev does not claim he is being misquoted, this is exactly - yes exactly, what he said:-

    Just so no one misses the significance of this incredible spin from Kev, bear in mind that when Jon Poling was 5 years old he and his family were not experts in autism either.

    Are you serious? Really?

    At one point in time you (i.e. not me) claim Poling is an expert. You then claim he is not. Your opinion changes depending on what point you’re trying to make right then. Are you therefore suggesting that a neurologist doesn’t know how to report neurological symptoms?

    Kevin Leitch comes here and claims he supplied links here to his March 1 blog where he listed out all of Hannah Poling’s symptoms, but there is no link. But Kev still claims he listed them there when he did not. Spin? or Spin? I also went back to take a look at the third comment down on his March 1 blog that he refers to as well.

    Nothing there.

    OK, obviously the simple instructions I provided weren’t quite simple enough. Lets try again.

    1) Click the link I provided in my first comment to this thread
    2) If your browser software doesn’t scroll automatically down to the third comment, scroll down manually.
    3) Read.

    Exhibit 4 - Kevin Leitch & the Poling’s Private Documents - A Body Swerve

    Now he says:-

    “we already have all the information - courtesy of Jon Poling, Andrew Zimmerman, John Shoffner etc.”

    That is brilliant spin - total change of direction, quick body swerve and hope no one notices.

    No, this is what I’ve said throughout this entire thread. It is you who is claiming that the court documents and the case studies are equally tainted. That’s simply not accurate. If you don’t believe me, email the primaries involved. Hell, even Jon Poling’s co -authors have said he is ‘muddying the waters‘:

    Jon Poling, says Shoffner, has been “muddying the waters” with some of his comments. “There is no precedent for that type of thinking and no data for that type of thinking,” Shoffner says.

    Oh and what Clifford Miller knows about Japan, autism or vaccinations you can write on the back of a stamp. If you want to debate science be my guest.

  17. Kevin,

    Thanks for coming back Kevin to show us all why you write your blog. It is because Kevin Leitch can never be shown to be wrong. But do not take my word for it. Read on here and see for yourselves.

    He comes back here again and again to deny and spin to try to make out he is not wrong.

    He insisted his daughter be vaccinated when his wife was not sure. Megan became autistic. If Hannah Poling got autism as a result of vaccines, then his little girl could have too. That Kev just cannot admit because that means he was wrong and his wife was right. So the Polings he says are liars.

    Exhibit 1 Attack People Personally When You Have No Answer

    Kevin Leitch was asked by me to explain why this evidence is not conclusive proof vaccines cause autism:-
    Japanese Autism Numbers Rose & Fell With Vaccinations

    So if all these Japanese kids developed autism from the measles and MMR vaccines, as the evidence proves they did, then Kevin Leitch’s little girl developed autism from them too. And that would make Kevin Leitch wrong.

    And because Kevin Leitch cannot not answer this strong proof from Japan, he instead goes for personal attacks on individuals - remember the Polings he called liars. So here is his spin (and remember Miller is a trained scientist):-

    “Oh and what Clifford Miller knows about Japan, autism or vaccinations you can write on the back of a stamp. If you want to debate science be my guest.”

    It is Kev’s answer which can be written on the back of a stamp - nothing.

    But instead, just like the Polings he implies Miller is a liar because Kevin Leitch can never be shown to be wrong.

    Exhibit 2 Accuse Others Of Lying When All Else Fails

    Here in his comments on May 30th, 2008 at 10:04 pm Kevin Leitch defends the indefensible. He says:-

    “At one point in time you (i.e. not me) claim Poling is an expert. You then claim he is not. Your opinion changes depending on what point you’re trying to make right then. Are you therefore suggesting that a neurologist doesn’t know how to report neurological symptoms?”

    Kev’s position is simply bonkers. Despite that he comes back here to repeat something that is plainly untrue as anyone can see. But according to Kevin Leitch it is everyone else who are the liars and not him.

    It is worth going into this in a little more detail.

    8-10 years ago, someone from the Poling family reported Hannah Poling’s symptoms. We are not told whom. We do know from the documents Kevin Leitch cites it was Hannah’s Mom who was taking her to the doctor at the time, it seems. The symptoms were reported then as they appeared, which is how they should have been. Hannah Poling’s mother was a nurse, so Kevin Leitch is similarly claiming a trained medical professional should have reported the symptoms in different terms to how they appeared prior to any diagnosis. But let us assume it was Hannah’s dad, Jon Poling who took her to the doctor and reported her symptoms.

    Kevin Leitch says I claim Jon Poling is an expert. I think it would be difficult to disagree Jon Poling is an expert. He does seem to be. Now today he is a medical doctor and a neurologist at the reputable prestigious Johns Hopkins University and Medical School.

    But then Kevin Leitch, who seems to claim everyone else is a liar except hm, says I claim Jon Poling is not an expert. But that is not true. It is just a plain straight untruth. It is whopper spin extraordiaire. And Kevin Leitch has come here to this blog to tell it.

    It seems Jon Poling was not an expert in his daughter’s condition or autism 8-10 years ago. That is obvious and plain from all the facts. I do not know anyone who claims Jon Poling was an expert on autism or his daughter’s condition 8-10 years ago. Was he was a neurologist 8-10 years ago? Who knows.

    But Kevin Leitch implies I am lying because I say Jon Poling is an expert today on his daughter’s condition but was not 8-10 years ago. There is nothing inconsistent in that but Kevin Leitch claims it is.

    When Kevin Leitch has no other argument left, he claims other people are liars. Of course, that has to be the case. If other people were not liars, then that means Kevin Leitch is shown up in public to be wrong and Kevin Leitch can never be shown to be wrong.

    That is why Kevin Leitch’s blog exists and that is why he does all he does, because he is compelled never to admit he is or was ever wrong.

    Kevin, read this carefully

    vaccines cause autism and it seems very your daughter’s autism was caused because you had her vaccinated when your wife was not sure.

    Exhibit 3 The Missing List of Symptoms

    The point of spin is to confuse and make the facts appear something they are not.

    Kevin Leitch did not list out Hannah Poling’s symptoms in his March 1st blog. He listed out other symptoms - a smaller set and then claimed Hannah Poling was not autistic on the basis of those symptoms. He left out a raft of other symptoms and the fact she had been diagosed as autistic according to two separate sets of diagnostic criteria/tests. This was all in his 1st March blog. This was grossly misleading and total spin by Kevin Leitch.

    I challenge him on this and he repeats his claim to providing a link to listing Hannah Poling’s symptoms on his 1st March blog. He says:-

    “OK, obviously the simple instructions I provided weren’t quite simple enough. Lets try again.

    1) Click the link I provided in my first comment to this thread
    2) If your browser software doesn’t scroll automatically down to the third comment, scroll down manually.
    3) Read.”

    But there is no link to Kev’s 1st March blog listing the symptoms. There is nothing in the 1st March blog to correct the false and misleading impression Kevin Leitch set out there.

    So what is the list Kevin Leitch is referrring to?

    Is it a blog where he corrects his 1st March blog and apologises for misleading everyone?

    No.

    Is it the day after his 1st March blog.

    No.

    Is it in a blog at all of his or anyone else’s?

    No.

    Is it anywhere where he is correcting the misleading blog of 1st March?

    No.

    Is it in a blog that links to his misleading 1st March blog so we can all see the false claims?

    No.

    So Kevin Leitch, where is this list?

    It is buried in comments to a blog of 14th March two weeks later. Well done Kevin Leitch. The list does not appear anywhere in your 1st March blog nor anywhere anyone can refer to to correct the spin and false and misleading impression your 1st March blog creates.

    What is more, in those comments Kevin Leitch is still trying to pretend that if the exact words used to describe the behaviours are not in DSM IV then they are not symptoms of autism even when those symptoms fall within the DSM IV descriptions of autistic symptoms.

    And another thing Kevin, where have all the dates gone on your blog archives? What are you hiding Kev? And where is any index by date as well? You seem to have organised your blog so that it is impossible to find anything. But then with blatant spin of the kind we see here, you don’t want people to be able to go back over what you have said to pick out all of the inconsistencies, now do you?

    Exhibit 4 - Kevin Leitch and the Poling’s Private Documents, More Body Swerves

    The point about the documents is a simple one. The HHS will not agree to the release of the Court documents and Kevin Leitch will not criticise them for that but instead attacks the Polings and demands they release all their private documents so he can paw all over them and call them liars.

    His response to that criticism was to change tack and make a completely different claim that those documents are not needed after all because:-

    “we already have all the information - courtesy of Jon Poling, Andrew Zimmerman, John Shoffner etc.”

    Now he changes tack again in response to that criticism and claims I say something I have not been saying at all. It is in fact something that has not even featured in anything I have said. Kevin Leitch’s spin is now to put words in other people’s mouths.  He says:-

    “It is you who is claiming that the court documents and the case studies are equally tainted.”

    Kevin, you have lost it big time my man. A Leitch special spin. You are going over the edge without looking. This dialogue has not gone there. The furthest this has got is to criticise Kevin Leitch for claiming the Polings are liars and claiming they should disclose their private documents when the US govenmnent authorities refuse to agree to disclose all the court documents which is what the Polings have asked for.

    As for Kev quoting a hearsay report of Shoffner, what Shoffner says is tosh and it is Shoffner who is muddying the waters.

    I am most grateful to Kevin Leitch for coming here and assisting to clarify why he writes his blog.

  18. Hi *******

    This is what Kevin Leitch said on his blog trying to make it look like Dr Zimmerman had responded to his email request:

    “When David Kirby wrote his piece in the Huffington Post, I’ll admit I read it with my jaw on my chest. Here was evidence I was wrong. I emailed David Kirby to get the whole report from him and he was kind enough to provide not only a PDF version but a plain text version as well.

    This enabled me to contact a few people that I know are medical people and/or scientists and/or closely connected to this case. For example I contacted Dr Zimmerman and learned that it was not possible for him to offer any sort of opinion on this case due to the fact that his patients parents had not allowed him to discuss his thoughts and opinions with anyone except the court. I was told however that ‘the comments on your site with questions raised and loopholes pointed out about the way others are interpreting the facts of the situation, are right on track.’”

    So I emailed Dr Zimmerman to check if he had said any of the above and got the following response.- see below

    All the best

    ***********

    —– Forwarded Message —-
    From: Elise Babbitt-Welker
    To: >
    Cc: Kevin Leitch
    Sent: Monday, 10 March, 2008 3:34:32 PM
    Subject: Re: Fw: Huffington Post

    Dear ******* -

    Dr. Zimmerman is unable to respond to requests for information/comments about the Poling medical case, as he is bound by patient privacy regulations as in any healthcare setting in the U.S.

    I can certainly see why it was interpreted from Kevin Leitch’s blog that he and Dr. Zimmerman corresponded, but they did not. Dr. Zimmerman was unable to respond to Mr. Leitch for the same reason why he is not able to reply to your email and has not spoken with any reporters. The comment that was posted was from me. It was a piece of a larger comment made in response to many questions Mr. Leitch posed that could not be answered at the time. I was simply sharing with him casually that from what I was reading and learning about the situation, I believed that some of the early insightful comments posted to his blog were correctly interpreting the situation. I did not specify which comments and it was made as a casual remark. I qualified it by saying that I was a layperson, who was reading and trying to educate myself on the situation just as everyone else.

    I was very surprised to see my comments posted, and in a way that made them appear to be attributed to Dr. Zimmerman. Perhaps you can correspond with Mr. Leitch further as to why this was the case. I have copied him here. I’m sorry to not have more insights to offer.

    Best regards,
    Elise

    Elise Babbitt Welker
    Communications Manager
    Kennedy Krieger Institute
    443.xxxxxxxxxx, direct
    410.8 xxxxxxxx, mobile
    http://www.kennedykrieger.org

  19. Dear childhealthsafety,

    Thank you for a very insightful look into the mind and blog of Kevin Leitch. I happened across his blog last April, and was initially impressed by his rigorous analysis, although I disagreed with his conclusions. Then I read the comments section. Kev went after someone who objected to some of his statements in that and a previous blog post, listing the fallacies of logic the person used and generally demeaning them in a very clinically nasty way.

    But I noticed something odd about his responses, notably, that they contained the very same fallacy of logic that he had identified in the comment he was eviscerating. I went back and read through his blog post, and found this same fallacy repeated again and again, and that he was recommending to his readers that they should always be skeptical whenever they read a report with certain information or a certain type of information (sorry to be vague here, but I am recalling this from memory because, as someone noted above, Kev’s blog has an incomprehensible index that seems designed to make finding a previous post impossible). There was no logical basis for this recommendation of his, it was simply pure prejudicial conjecture on his part.

    So I posted a comment to that effect on his blog. He rather quickly replied but merely danced around the point. So I made another comment, this time a bit more specific. He also answered that one with a similar dodge. Over the course of the next hour or two, we exchanged comments. I continued with the exchange because I thought it was rather mean and unfair for him to attack and belittle someone for using fallacies of logic and then turn around and make statements using the very same fallacy, so I guess I wanted to see him say in print that he was wrong.

    As the comments continued, he moved from agreeing with me that his point was a fallacy while claiming that the distinction was meaningless to suggesting that I was there only because I was “looking for a fight.” I guess in Kev’s world, fallacies of logic are only wrong when they are stated by someone else, but (because he is never wrong) when he states them they are somehow blessed and true. After his second accusation that I was only there for a row, I carefully laid out why I was bothering to post on his blog–that I felt it was mean and unfair to belittle someone for their logic and then use the same fallacy in the very next sentence–but I discovered when I attempted to post it that the coward had blocked me from being able to comment on that or any other of his blogs.

    So, from my limited experience with this character, I would have to agree 110% that the one consistent aspect of Kev’s character is that he cannot, and will not, ever admit to being proven wrong, even if it means contradicting himself or doing a Matrix-esque dodge and weave dance that would make Neo proud.

    Respectfully,
    Brian Pamer