Jenny McCarthy
(The following was sent to me from Savva Vassiliev)
Since January 3rd, news stories began circulating on the internet that Jenny McCarthy admitted her son may have actually never had autism to begin with. Democrats and their apologists immediately jumped on this revelation; many gleefully foamed from the mouth. One blogger, named Ashley wrote:
“Whether or not Ms. McCarthy drew attention to autism or not, she needs to apologize for misleading the public. She is a public figure and therefore has a certain responsibility to the public. When you campaign so hard for something and it turns out you were completely wrong, you should say so. Publicly. ”
So why would I suggest Libertarians defend a “charlatan and baby killer” like McCarthy? Why argue against a story that even the mainstream Radaronline.com had published? Because it turns out the story is completely phony. In some civilized corners that might be considered libel. So untrue was this story, that Radaronline.com has since taken down the story and Jenny McCarthy herself fired back on Facebook and Twitter on January 4th, making the truth crystal clear:
“Stories circulating online, claiming that I said my son Evan may not have autism after all, are blatantly inaccurate and completely ridiculous. Evan was diagnosed with autism by the Autism Evaluation Clinic at the UCLA Neuropsychiatric Hospital and was confirmed by the State of California (through their Regional Center). The implication that I have changed my position, that my child was not initially diagnosed with autism (and instead may suffer from Landau-Kleffner Syndrome), is both irresponsible and inaccurate. These stories cite a “new” Time Magazine interview with me, which was actually published in 2010, that never contained any such statements by me. Continued misrepresentations, such as these, only serve to open wounds of the many families who are courageously dealing with this disorder. Please know that I am taking every legal measure necessary to set this straight.”
This is yet another example of her being smeared for just telling the truth about vaccinations. What is the truth? The truth is that Miss McCarthy doesn’t even oppose vaccines. Nope, despite all the smears and hit pieces and distortions, she is simply seeking to get any junk like thimerosal (which is part mercury) out of vaccinations to, “Green our Vaccines” as she calls it.
Meanwhile on Saturday, Radaronline didn’t put up a retraction, but instead, rather quietly published a different story about Jenny setting the story straight herself, and well, acted as if they didn’t help circulate the false story to begin with; under the radar, if you will. A shameless and unapologetic move from a media bent on defending the still-current industry standard of putting mercury into many vaccines.
Libertarians who claim to believe in the non-aggression principle should do more than just believe in it, but follow it and live that idea. Mercury is a neurotoxin which when injected into humans, well, acts like a neurotoxin and binds to fat tissue in the body, crosses the blood-brain barrier and damages them. In the brain, it degenerates brain neurons (while mercury contained in fish etc, when consumed, is almost all, if not all, excreted from the body). This can easily be resolved by taking thimerosal out of vaccines and getting the word out about “greening” vaccines.
Michael Specter, from The New Yorker previously wrote:
“Jenny McCarthy…will be the show’s first co-host whose dangerous views on childhood vaccination may—if only indirectly—have contributed to the sickness and death of people throughout the Western world.”
Even Bill Nye the “Science Guy” has bashed the newest co-host of The View. Libertarians should be on the forefront of society, rather than lurk in the background and leave prominent people like McCarthy looking like a lone nut; especially when it should be obvious that she’s actually very much on target. Jenny McCarthy, and recently Rob Schneider in 2012, have been getting people to think about what they’re having injecting into themselves and their children. People are starting to ask their doctors if their vaccines are free of thimerosal, aluminum, formaldehyde etc, and educating themselves, rather than just accepting what they’ve been told. Libertarians, out of all people, should take a stand against dirty vaccines and back Jenny McCarthy. The lady is a heroine! However, maybe this all makes sense, after all, as Oscar Wilde allegedly once wrote, “No good deed goes unpunished.”
Short Biography:
Savva Vassiliev is a 28 year old writer, actor, radio show host and humorist among other things who was born in Leningrad, Soviet Russia. He is an alumni of the American Academy of Dramatic Arts in Hollywood and Chair of the Progressive Libertarian Coalition. He also served on the Executive Committee of the Libertarian Party of California and as a California Caucus Leader for Free & Equal, as well as holding the position of Vice-Chair of the Monterey County Libertarian Party from 2008-2012.
Over a month later & I’m still trying to figure out why anyone gives a flying crap what Jenny McCarthy thinks or what this has to do with the Libertarian Party.
God bless Jenny McCarthy. She has beautiful mammory glands and would be a great wife if only she had natural hair color.
I’m guessing they assess that someone is likely to have autism?
Jenny says one of California’s 21 regional centers diagnosed her child? Regional Centers don’t diagnose a child. They do assessments. Jenny McCarthy has a lot of money. It’s not uncommon for rich parents to push for the autism diagnosis to get services, or in this case, to solidify the diagnosis. What is baffling here, though, is that Ms. McCarthy has enough money NOT to need the services a Regional Center would provide in the first place. And what is further baffling is that if the child was “cured” of autism, the services would stop after another assessment discovered the child was no longer “autistic”, unless, of course, there were lawyers involved.
Do you mean here or somewhere else?
I don’t presume she’s a dingbat because she’s an actress/model. I presume she’s a dingbat because there is conclusive evidence to support the assertion that she is, in fact, a dingbat.
/snark
Seriously though, yeah, I should have been a bit more diplomatic. Entertainers aren’t more inclined to be “dingbats” than any other group that has to dedicate their lives to a monomaniacal pursuit of perfection in their field to achieve success (e.g. lawyers, doctors, etc.); they are, however, more inclined to have a camera or microphone in front of them when they open their mouths. As someone who just grazed himself in the foot with a poorly worded comment on the internet, I can definitely appreciate the potential hazards involved with such access.
Yeah, I don’t see any reason to presume she is a dingbat just because she is an actress/model. Some of them are, some aren’t.
I think David’s piece would have been better if he had left
“Short story long, I think Jenny McCarthy is a dingbat, but that’s generally true of a lot of Hollywood types. Like many other people (even me, from time to time), because they’re experts in their field (acting, entertaining, etc.), they think they’re experts in other fields. Jenny, for example, thinks she’s an expert on vaccines, public health, and autism. She’s not, but she’s charismatic enough to convince a few others that she might be, so here we are. The most the rest of us can do is shake our heads, acknowledge her right to freedom of speech, and counter her speech with our own.
What I will not be doing, however, is encouraging libertarians to defend her against Democrats or others that are, in turn, using their freedom of speech to rightly ridicule her positions on vaccines. Quite the contrary – I will be using my freedom of speech to express my disagreement with those that think that “libertarian” is code for “defender of unscientific woo” and demand that I defend those that push it.”
Off or had found a less insulting way of saying it. His discussion of the other bits more or less restate the CDC’s position. And I suspect are more or less correct.
So I suggest we leave ridiculing to the democrats (and republicans) and we firmly, competently and respectfully make our points.
Is that addressed at anyone or any comment in particular?
the problem with using ridicule as a way of making a point is….. 1) it won’t change the minds of the people that have the belief that you challenge 2) some of the people who agree with you will be embarrassed by you 3) a lot of others will think you are a “insert your own 4 letter word” and stop listening to you
Far better to say… I believe that so and so is wrong and the evidence is such and such and if you want to check out the relevant studies they can be found at……
Correct.
“Democrats” attack Jenny McCarthy? Sounds like an attempt to bait people into believing the vaccination/autism issue is a partisan one? Last I checked, this scientific issue really didn’t fall on partisan lines. Libertarians can be found on both sides.
Sorry, criticism is 1st amendment material. If she was being forcibly silenced, that would be one thing, but last I checked that’s not the case here. (The talk of holding her legally accountable for the negative effects of people following her advise is just over the top hyperbole)
This whole business about potential revisions to her son’s diagnosis is just a pointless media side-show anyway. Ironic, if true. Poor journalism if false.
I don’t know that she is or isn’t. Some people think that because they’re experts in their field (acting, entertaining, etc.), that they’re experts in other fields. Some other people think that because those people are experts in their field (acting, entertaining, etc.), that they’re not experts in other fields. Neither is necessarily correct.
I get that the same instinct that questions authority enough to criticize the government is the same instinct that will also question other forms of authority, like doctors, scientists, and so on. I truly do. So, I’m usually willing to turn the other cheek on stuff like this and let people think what they will. However, vaccines are a big deal – it’s because of them that the only experience I have had with measles and polio are grandparents that either had those diseases or knew others that had them.
Based on conversations with those that were around when those diseases were endemic, if autism is caused by vaccines, and that’s a mighty big if, they’re still worth it.
Which brings us to autism – as Sarwark pointed out above, we’re actually diagnosing autism now. Back in the day, you had to be pretty clearly autistic to get the label slapped on you; nowadays, leaning “introverted” would probably get you a diagnosis somewhere on the autism spectrum (I exaggerate slightly). For example, when I was a child, I was diagnosed with a “speech impediment” (I was extremely shy and had difficulties talking to strangers, including other children and adults) – nowadays, I probably would have been diagnosed with some form of anxiety or autism, depending on how serious it was. Rest assured, this wasn’t caused by vaccines, and even if it was, I’d rather be a little socially awkward than have smallpox scars, useless polio-ravaged legs, or any of the other side-effects of the diseases we vaccinate against.
Back to vaccines, though, do they have some scary-sounding chemicals in them? Sure. Aluminum sounds scary enough, at least until you remember that we drink soft drinks and beer out of containers made of the stuff, and that car engines are made out of the stuff, and we have rolls at home made out of the stuff to keep leftovers safe in the fridge. So, maybe some environmental exposure to aluminum isn’t all bad. Then there’s formaldehyde, which is a mouthful of a chemical and sounds pretty scary, at least until you remember that it’s been in smog for the past 100 years and was used heavily in various early 20th century industrial processes. Comparing the amount of formaldehyde in a vaccine with environmental exposure over the past 100 years shows that vaccine-related exposure is literally a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things. Finally, there’s mercury, which has a special place in my heart due to its role in shaping Northern Nevada’s destiny – it’s used heavily in processing gold, and since environmental protections and concerns in the 19th century weren’t what they are today, there’s plenty of mercury in our watersheds now. Again, even when there was mercury (ethyl mercury, mind you, which is rather different than the methyl mercury that’s actually seriously poisonous) in vaccines, the amount in them is negligible compared to what you’ll find in a single trout from Lake Lahontan.
Short story long, I think Jenny McCarthy is a dingbat, but that’s generally true of a lot of Hollywood types. Like many other people (even me, from time to time), because they’re experts in their field (acting, entertaining, etc.), they think they’re experts in other fields. Jenny, for example, thinks she’s an expert on vaccines, public health, and autism. She’s not, but she’s charismatic enough to convince a few others that she might be, so here we are. The most the rest of us can do is shake our heads, acknowledge her right to freedom of speech, and counter her speech with our own.
What I will not be doing, however, is encouraging libertarians to defend her against Democrats or others that are, in turn, using their freedom of speech to rightly ridicule her positions on vaccines. Quite the contrary – I will be using my freedom of speech to express my disagreement with those that think that “libertarian” is code for “defender of unscientific woo” and demand that I defend those that push it.
The issue was previously brought up here in this article/thread:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/04/libertarian-opinions-out-with-the-crackpots-and-a-modest-proposal-for-ending-the-drug-war/
Jed,
Even the CDC states that if your child has shown certain types of reactions to certain vaccines then the standard vaccine plan should not be used.
“For children with a prior history of allergic reactions to any of these substances in vaccines, parents should consult their child’s healthcare provider before vaccination.”
So yes in general what we need to keep diseases under control is fairly widespread vaccines but believe it or not you don’t to have to have everyone vaccinated.
For a communicable disease you have to come in contact with someone who has it. If almost everyone around you has been vaccinated and you haven’t the chances of you getting the disease are pretty small.
Steve M., good points…I agree.
I believe the point that were raised in the above article are about what is contained within some of the vaccines such as mercury, aluminum and formaldehyde.
I believe that if these elements/compounds are within some of the vaccines then having a science based discussion about why they are there, what are the risks of them being there and should we be working on different types of vaccines is relevant.
I believe that those who seek not to have this type of discussion and use personal attacks on those trying to have such a discussion are doing everyone a disservice.
As a note according to the CDC Thimerosal the ingredient containing mercury has not been in any childhood (use for under age 6) vaccine since January of 2003. The CDC also lists a number of studies that dispute the links between autism and childhood vaccines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversy
I will say that all this anti-vaccination activism has gotta be good news for the people who make those little baby coffins. Makin’ it rain at the child casket factory!
Get your kids vaccinated. Autism is a challenging disorder, and we won’t find a cure through superstition & mass hysteria.
Tell me more about this claim. Anything more than the solo nude photoshoots?
Same thing causing the explosion in the numbers of ADHD children; increased use of the diagnosis. And I use diagnosis advisedly, given the changes to the definitions of autism in each successive version of the DSM.
Something is causing the explosion in the numbers of autistic children. A family friend who has an autistic grandchild thinks might be the quantity of vaccines that are given at one time.
If I had an infant at this time, I’d have them spread way out, if that’s possible.
But we should take criminal law advice from a guy named Michael a web site comment section?
I’m sure Miss McCarthy has done a lot of research and probably has more experience and knowledge on the subject than most people. I’m also sure she has consulted with medical experts as well.
Seriously, you want to criminalize free speech and differences of opinion?
I think that anyone that advocates not vaccinating a child should be charged with murder should that child die from a disease that could have been avoided. It was proven that the first “article” by a UK scientist proposing a link between vaccines and autism has not only been discredited, (http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-summary.htm)
Since parents have shied away from vaccines measles and other diseases are up among children. Truth is truth, no matter how you splice it. McCarthy is not and never has been a medical professional; why would anyone seriously take medical advice from a porn star?
I think the vaccine debate has come up before, but I’m not sure whether it ever got its own separate article.
Thanks for posting the article, Joshua. It’s a little different than what we usually talk about..
Thank for the heads up! I’ll remember that on future pieces!
Hi Joshua – thanks for posting. When posting opinion articles, please include the author’s name in the headline, not just the body of the article.