The Speed of Dark

Sometimes I feel like jumping up and screaming “FINALLY!” at the research end of things.   This summer there have been several really good research reports, some mentioned in national media as well, on autism-spectrum issues.  But what I want to highlight tonight is the one that sparked the “FINALLY!” reaction.

Read the rest of this entry »

It’s understandable that parents of children with autism, like parents of children with any developmental problem, want to know what caused  it–and often want to know who’s to blame.    Unfortunately, in the case of autism and childhood immunizations, a combination of greed, bad logic, and outright lying by some unscrupulous  “investigators” has created a situation in which innocent parents have come to believe that evil vaccines caused their children’s autism.

It’s not true.   Yet, like many errors, it’s become ingrained in some peoples’ minds–largely because of three factors.  First, it gives parents someone to blame and gets them off the hook with relatives.   If it’s caused by vaccines, they don’t  have to consider the known causes, including genetics.  Second, it makes a huge profit for those who promote the vaccine hypothesis and offer goods and services to ameliorate the supposed damage done by the vaccine.  And third, there’s the profit motive: if autism were caused by vaccines, then suing vaccine manufacturers (and now, the government because it’s taken over the liability) could make a lot of money for lawyers and parents alike.

To understand why the vaccine hypothesis is wrong requires some history as well as good science.

Read the rest of this entry »

A recent Commentary in the international science journal NATURE (11 December 2008, vol 456, p.702)  discussed the science and ethics of the use of cognitive-enhancing drugs by the healthy.   As the article pointed out, substances believed to help people control attention, remain alert when working at night or extra house, and learn faster/better are now in widespread off-label use–used by those who do not have the diagnoses for which these substances were developed.

Coercion–pressure to use these substances even if the individual doesn’t want to–is already being applied (for instance, by the Armed Forces for the use of certain stimulants, and by teachers who  believe a child will be less trouble in the classroom if put on Ritalin) and employers began to looking at the possibility of enhancing work performance with drugs some years ago.   Since coercion by an employer is one of the plot drivers in The Speed of Dark it seemed like a good topic for this blog.

What is “cognitive enhancement” and what kinds of issues should be considered when anyone (disabled or not) faces a decision about the use of pharmacological or any other method of “enhancement?

Read the rest of this entry »