Category: buy Pregabalin usa Health

Blood clots and bruises – a plea to FitBit

April 12, 2018

Dearest FitBit overlords,

Please allow me to begin by congratulating you all on your reputation as a fine purveyor of well-being tracking devices and for excellent customer service, preemptively.

Next I would like to regale you with an X-factor worthy sob story. Seriously. It’s quite bad. I am the new mother to a 3 week old son, Rousseau (yes, we are nothing if not pretentious, but don’t let anyone tell you it was a ‘Lost’ character that inspired his name first, rather than the eminent French philosopher we tell people he’s named for).

I am also the mother of Sienna, aged 2. Her middle names are for Ada Lovelace (Ada Lacie), widely accepted as one of the first computer programmers and a legend amongst women in STEM. Sienna was born on 11 Feb 2016, the first UNESCO International Day of Women and Girls in Science day and also the day gravitational waves were discovered.

Stephen Hawking predicted gravitational waves and he died one week before Rousseau was born so R’s second middle name is Hawk. His first middle name is Arion, after the legendary horse, son of Gaius and Poseidon, kidnapped by pirates and rescued by dolphins. Our children best live up to expectations, eh?

So, back to the sob story. At 35 weeks of pregnancy (late February) I was diagnosed with extensive, bilateral Pulmonary Emboli. That’s blood clots in both lungs. Loads of ‘em. Absolutely riddled, I tell ya.

This was not good news. My son was also breech and was not likely to turn. We focused on recovery from the lung condition, once it was diagnosed (after dabbling, Gregory House style, with two other differential diagnoses of mild asthma suddenly ramping up and an infection, treated with heavy doses of antibiotics). I languished in Tunbridge Wells hospital for 8 days, on and off oxygen. Let’s just say my vital signs were what you’d worry about if you were playing The Sims.

My mood was only improved here and there by the appearance of an attractive male midwife from Spain, who I bonded with over tales of confusion between chorizo and churros on a family holiday. Yes, I ate all that spicy sausage whilst my family dined on beautiful ice cream from Andorra. I had to save my 17 year old, A-Level-Spanish-learning face, you know.

Oh and my husband. Yeah. He was there too through the whole thing. Of course. He would be. Eight days though. On oxygen. You hear the Snow Patrol yet? I’m still thinking X-Factor. Boy, I hope you’ve watched it… “let’s waste time… chasing cars”. Or maybe that one about wires? That would be better. Or the Ed Sheeran one. I can’t think what it is. Ah well. I’m sure you can imagine the soundtrack to this email. I don’t know how to embed music into an email…

So…

When I received my diagnosis of pulmonary emboli, I was struck by how this had happened. I will be frank with you, I’m a big woman. I was bigger this pregnancy than with my first, despite vowing I would not be. My caesarian was my 7th operation and, despite dabbling with running at a Race for Life back in around 2013 or 2014 and purchasing some of your fantastic scales, I had not managed to recover from the 6th operation that I had not long after meeting the man I eventually fell in love with and made my husband in June 2015. They did say, carefully, that a high BMI was a risk factor. I take this seriously. Probably the only thing I have, so far.

I have struggled with my weight for over half my life now – sweets and chocolate being my friends in a world seemingly set on besetting me with medical issues. I’m not a well woman and never really have been. Most people who have had as many operations as me – that’s for the same or similar conditions. Not me. I just wasn’t put together right. But this time I’ve had to love and breastfeed the skin and whatnot that’s been extracted. And this is the worst operation yet. Seriously, a 10 on the pain scale.

So, where does this leave me and my relationship with FitBit? Once I was released from critical care for the P.E. I decided that I would make a personal commitment. Aside from exclusively breastfeeding my son, which I was advised to do specifically by my consultants (both haematology and obstetric), due to the health benefits specifically for me and my conditions, I would focus once again on healthy coping mechanisms for stress. I plugged in my FitBit once again (the second, as the first was lost to a washing machine disaster).

I also fired up the scales and decided that this time… this time I would make it work. The weight loss I mean. Not the Aria scales. They work well except I haven’t hooked them up to my new wifi yet. Lazy!

Caesarian or no (at that point it was still unknown how I would birth my son, as we were investigating turning him), my commitment was that I would walk at least once around Bearsted Green, where I live, with my small dog, Massimo. Daily. His name means ‘the greatest’ in Italian and he’s named for the dishy and intelligent Massimo Polidoro; psychologist, TV personality and executive director of the Italian Committee for the Investigation of Claims of the Pseudoscience (CICAP). I saw him speak at QEDcon in Manchester in 2012.

Anyway, I digress once again. Post-cesarean I’m quite.. How should I best put this? Stressed. A little understatement there. So I’m struggling with sleep and displacement activity of controlling my environment at all hours of the day seems the best idea. I’m sure you’ll be able to see from the stats I have got. I pretty much don’t sleep. Ever. There’s a lot of awake time there.

Exclusively breastfeeding my son, as was my original intention, regardless of medical advice, has me up at all hours anyway and is already having a significant weight loss effect. So did pregnancy. I wouldn’t recommend the ‘pregnancy and PTSD’ diet, but it’s certainly effective.

So here we come to the point of this overly lengthy waffle. I’ve lost the ***ing thing. On Sunday. I haven’t a clue where it is and I think it’s gone forever. I visited two friends’ houses in Littlehampton and my daughter also injured her thumb and was rushed to A&E by my husband and our friend. Losing my FitBit was the least of my worries. I confess to not being as distraught by it, at the time, as you might expect from a customer. I think because it was connected to my bra (Fitbit One), I might have flicked it off when breastfeeding in a hurry – perhaps even in the outside world rather than in someone’s house, as both households have been searched – alas, to no avail.

But now, 4 days on, after last night’s sad loss of a pair of new, favourite glasses from Glasses Direct – sad victims of my husband’s (lovely) derriere, I have succumbed to the sadness of losing things I (a) spent a lot of money on and (b) really bloody like. Sad. Have you picked up on how sad I am?

Especially since I’m a stay at home mum who does very little freelance work and is now having to spend what she that does have on hired domestic help (can you hear the violin strings yet?).

So, I posted on Facebook. As you do. And I was told to contact you as you may take pity on me. So here’s the X Factor bit. It would make my life if you could replace my FitBit and help me beat these stress demons with exercise and weight loss. And I reckon I could probably spin this a bit for you too. I’m in marketing and PR you see, and I plan to write my memoirs on a blog soon. Still brainstorming ideas, but I’m thinking of calling it along the lines of bruises and clots. Something I have both of, in spades!

If you visit fb.me/keepkentbreastfeeding you’ll see I’m not all that bad at social media either as I’ve been running a local campaign. So maybe I could write about how epic FitBit are? Am I being cheeky yet? Off-puttingly so? Or just the right amount?

Ah well, it was worth a go. I’ll probably cut and paste this to Glasses Direct too. Not sure exactly how I can spin the whole ‘I really need replacement designer glasses to be able to change/save my life’, but I can give it a go, eh?

Lots of love FitBit and, if nothing else, hope I’ve given one of your customer service people a good break from any drudgery. Not that I expect there is any at a company of your class and calibre… (ok, I’ll stop now).

Lots of love,

Tannice Hemming x

 

Kent County Council slashes support for breastfeeding mothers

July 25, 2017

Dramatic cuts planned by Kent County Council could be set to hit the county’s already low breastfeeding rates. The cost-saving measure, planned to start from January 2018, would involve slashing services by up to 76% and would limit access to breastfeeding specialists. Currently, Kent families can access breastfeeding support at 40 locations in Kent a week – 17 specialist-led clinics and 23 peer support groups. They are all open to everyone, and include access to different tiers of experienced and knowledgeable experts. Mums can speak to specialists – International Board Certified Lactation Consultants (IBCLCs), as well as seek support and advice from both Breastfeeding Counsellors and Breastfeeding Peer Supporters.

In a move to save £404,000, Kent Country Council plan to limit access to  IBCLCs, remove funding for Breastfeeding Counsellors and heap the responsibility for breastfeeding support on Health Visitors instead, at redesigned ‘Baby Hubs’. These Baby Hubs are planned to be ‘multi-thematic’ and will likely not include the ability to take along infants older than a year. Second time mums will likely find this a struggle, as will Peer Supporters, who often have their own children with them as they provide mother-to-mother support. There will be only 3 hubs per Kent district.

Based on figures from NHS England’s Statistical release of Breastfeeding Initiation and Breastfeeding Prevalence, published in September 2015, around 72% of mothers in the county of Kent initiate breastfeeding*. However, across the UK, sustained breastfeeding rates are shockingly low, as Public Health England found less than half of women who initiated breastfeeding continue after two months.

Tannice feeding her daughter

Tannice Hemming, a graduate Peer Supporter and mother to a 17 month old daughter is shocked by the changes:

“In 2013, Kent County Council (KCC) held a consultation on introducing the services as they stand in 2017. They said that 98% respondents to that consultation agreed that KCC needed to ‘fill the gaps in community breastfeeding support so that there is access everywhere in Kent’. A whopping 100% agreed KCC needed ‘to provide a specialist service where women who are experiencing more difficult problems can receive help and advice’.

It’s clear that these swathing cuts are simply about cutting costs and ignore the very real benefits to Kent families that the incumbent provider, PS Breastfeeding CIC, have provided. Cuts to the service will mean fewer Peer Supporters (who will be renamed Infant Feeding Peer Supporters) and a reduction in breastfeeding rates across the county. Many women who instigate breastfeeding run into issues – some that can be addressed by Peer Supporters and some that are best dealt with by Lactation Consultants. Newborn babies require feeding 8-12 times per day, so making access to specialist Lactation Consultants (IBCLCs) referral-only will sound the end of many breastfeeding relationships. Mothers dealing with pain and potential tongue tie issues need to be seen as quickly as possible. This simply is not good enough.”

Alex with her two children

 

Alex Da Costa, a mother of two in Sevenoaks, said she struggled to articulate how disappointed she is by the cuts. Her second child, a daughter, was born in December last year. Having struggled to exclusively breast feed her first-born, a son, she was keen to get all the support she could with her daughter.

“My daughter had a shallow latch and is sensitive to new surroundings plus I had my 4.5 year old to look after so I could have easily walked away from it if it hadn’t been for the amazing ladies at the breastfeeding Clinic. I went numerous times (once I went to one in Tonbridge as I couldn’t wait till the one in Sevenoaks happened) and have been even twice recently, even though she’s now 7 months old, as there are different challenges as she changes.

If it wasn’t for the drop ins I wouldn’t have lasted 6 weeks, the fact I am still breastfeeding at 7 months is all down to the support given by the Breastfeeding Peer Supporters and Lactation Consultants. Breastfeeding is time critical and cutting down the clinics and making seeing a lactation consultant by referral only would harm breastfeeding rates and cause mothers and babies undue distress. You don’t have time to wait to see someone if you are struggling. The fantastic support we have in this area is that there is a Clinic nearly every day within easy driving distance so mums can get the help they need without having to wait or panic about their babies. Breastfeeding can be tough. Don’t make it tougher. This is a short sighted decision which will do a lot of damage.“

Concerns are that the re-designed ‘Baby Hubs’ will be a busy, noisy and distracting place for new and more seasoned breastfeeding ladies alike. New mothers especially can feel vulnerable and having to work on their baby’s latch in a ‘Hub’ full of other people who are not there for breastfeeding support is likely to be overwhelming.

Tannice Hemming added her experience of the current breastfeeding clinics:

“My daughter was born with a tongue tie – something that no midwife or health visitor even suggested or checked for. I went to a breastfeeding clinic and saw a Peer Supporter who suggested that a Lactation Consultant check her. She didn’t get the tongue tie divided until she was 4 weeks old and I was experiencing real nipple trauma – pain and blistering. I felt comfortable and supported when I was in a room with lots of other women who were there to seek guidance on breastfeeding. I worry that the redesigned baby hubs – where you might not be able to bring your older children – will be a place I wouldn’t feel comfortable expressing worries or having a bit of a cry. The drop-in clinics as they are are welcoming and comfortable places where you feel ok experimenting with different feeding positions and getting a good latch. Confidence can be a big issue for breastfeeding mums and I can imagine the re-designed baby hubs won’t be the best place for getting your breasts out! I also imagine Health Visitors won’t have as much time or expertise as the dedicated breastfeeding specialists have.”

parisons. Peer Supporters, Lactation Consultants and Breastfeeding Counsellors who currently provide the service to Kent families are urging families to get in touch with Kent County Council, who are currently undergoing a consultation. A new campaign website, keepkentbreastfeeding.org has been set up to help publicise the planned cuts and urge people to respond to the consultation.

More information on the changes will be forthcoming on this site and others. See Kent Baby Matters for more details on the changes.

Facebook action groups have been set up for each of the affected areas:

Maidstone and Malling

Dartford and Gravesham

Thanet

Swale

Canterbury, Whitstable and Herne Bay

Shepway

Tonbridge, Sevenoaks and Tunbridge Wells

Ashford

*Breastfeeding initiation rates, as found in the NHS England report, by NHS Trust

Dartford & Gravesham 69.8%

East Kent Hospitals 70.1%

Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells 80%

Medway 67.6%

What happens if we do pre-natal tests for Autism? Neurodiversity, autistic culture, advocacy and the spectrum.

May 1, 2014

It looks like pre-natal tests for autism may be on the horizon. These scare the hell out of me, for many reasons, but principally because the implications of potentially losing people on the autistic spectrum means a great loss to society.

Pre-natal tests could prove helpful for parents of the autistic community, where they are used to detect autistic traits early, and in turn could lead to better early intervention measures.

Early interventions for those on the autistic spectrum can ameliorate the disabling aspects of the disorder whilst developing on the positive aspects of being non-‘neurotypical’.

Terms like ‘high-functioning’, ‘neurotypical’ and others which focus on the disabilities of autism fail to take into account the ‘difference’ that Prof Baron-Cohen discusses in the comment below:

 I do think there is a benefit in trying to help people with autism-spectrum conditions with areas of difficulty such as emotion recognition. Nobody would dispute the place for interventions that alleviate areas of difficulty, while leaving the areas of strength untouched. But to talk about a ‘cure for autism’ is a sledge-hammer approach and the fear would be that in the process of alleviating the areas of difficulty, the qualities that are special – such as the remarkable attention to detail, and the ability to concentrate for long periods on a small topic in depth – would be lost. Autism is both a disability and a difference. We need to find ways of alleviating the disability while respecting and valuing the difference. 

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2007/aug/07/health.medicineandhealth

 I discuss Autism Rights and Autism Advocacy at some length (though not as much as I’d like to) in my Autism Talks series that I am still giving around the country for Skeptics in the Pub. More on that here: www.tannice.co.uk/public-speaking/

Professor Baron-Cohen makes some fascinating comments in the comment piece that inspired this post, firstly;

 “The whole ethos behind medicine is to do no harm and if the test is only 80% accurate, it means a proportion of people will be told they have the condition when they don’t, so you’ve raised anxieties unnecessarily. Equally if the test is missing people, then they’ll be going away thinking I’m fine when they could be getting support.”

Screening for any illness means that there is a risk of both over- and under-diagnosing potential issues. This is common throughout medicine in the cases of Cervical Cancer* as well as Prostate Cancer (PSA tests), Breast Cancer, Colorectal and other disease screening that takes place on what Dr Margaret McCartney (and other doctors) refer to as the ‘worried well’. Dr McCartney also has views on charity and pharmaceutical industry interests with respect to screening, as well as private health screening, which is another topic entirely, not for this post.

Read More

Race for Life – sponsor me!

May 15, 2013

I’m doing Race for Life in Epsom on June 30th and I’d like to ask people to sponsor me.

http://www.raceforlifesponsorme.org/tannice

Here’s why.

In December 2011 my Dad was diagnosed with cancer. It was horrible and scary and I won’t go over the pain and heartache this caused because it’s very personal but suffice to say it was very hard to cope with. Luckily, he’s doing very well and is now happy, healthy and leading a normal life.

Last month I was under investigation for lymphoma – a further terrifying time for my family – especially since my Aunty is currently having treatment for breast cancer. Luckily I’m A-OK.

I Race for Life for all those who haven’t been so lucky; for my Dad, and for all families affected by this.

My original target was £200 but thanks to the generosity of my friends and family, I have actually smashed it! I want to raise more money, if I can, so I’m asking anyone and everyone to sponsor me.

BJzbmGdCMAAXc_Y.jpg-large

Massimo having a great time at the park – he loves all this walking!

Today I managed to run the length of a football pitch – not much for the majority of people but for someone like me, who has been…. (let’s say chubby) for much of her adult life, this is a long way. I walked 8.3k yesterday, with my trusty sidekick, Massimo. I’ve walked nearly every day since the 16th March and I’ve seen a lot of improvement.

Average speed 3.1 km.h

Average speed 3.1 km.h

 

 

 

4.8 km/h

Today – 4.8 km/h

Screen Shot 2013-05-15 at 16.46.19

yesterday – 8.3km!

Ihttp://www.raceforlifesponsorme.org/tannice

Here I am in Edinburgh on 22nd August 2012

Blaming mummy for MMR

April 21, 2013

When did the heat move from Wakefeld and the media, to parents?

On Thursday I saw a tweet asking “what kind of C*** stops their child having the MMR anyway?” I have to say, this kind of switch in dialogue around where blame lies sets my teeth on edge. And there’s a good reason for that.

I don’t have children, yet. I hope to have a few some day but I have worked with them in my role as an ABA tutor (Applied Behaviour Analysis – used in this case for children diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder), helping frazzled parents cope with the bureaucracy of the Local Education Authority, their child’s education establishment and the demands (which I recognise are many) of running a successful ABA programme. Not to mention the normal stressors parents face and the additional difficulties of having a child who needs extra care, education, help and attention.

Ask any parent of a neurotypical child and they’ll tell you sometimes they struggle to have enough time to go to the toilet in peace.

So when I see someone decrying parents’ fears over the MMR I get pretty angry. I can well understand, based on my affection for my tiny dog (I know, I know – it’s not the same – but it’s what I’ve got!) that parents spend their time worrying constantly about their kids. At the height of the scandal, in 2001, Cherie and Tony Blair were widely criticised for asserting MMR was safe whilst at the same time avoiding confirming their infant son Leo had been vaccinated. This also is nonsensical. My medical records, your medical records and Leo Blair’s medical records are no one else’s damn business. Cherie later confirmed, in her autobiography ‘Speaking for myself’, in 2008, that he was vaccinated, but many children have health reasons that preclude them from immunisation.

Given we’re now reaping what Wakefield first sowed in 1997 – 808+ infections of teenagers (as of reports on the 18th April 2013) and the death of 25 year old Gareth Williams in Swansea – it’s time to really think about health information and how it’s disseminated.

Much light is made of the Daily Mail’s list of what will kill or cure you of Cancer but unfortunately I’m going to give them a break and side with them. A bit. Last week, on my way to work, I heard about new research stating that women who drink one glass of wine when pregnant could, instead of damaging their baby, end up with a more intelligent child. The radio report ended with a confirmation that Department of Health advice to avoid all alcohol during pregnancy remains unchanged. Health advice, from the point of view of the layman, seems to just keep bloody changing (changing, note; not developing). It was the same when I was born in the mid-80s – advice on whether to lay your child on her front or back when sleeping had just changed. My mum sleeps on her front, I sleep on my side. “Scientists can’t make their bloody minds up!” comes the cry. You can hardly blame sleep-deprived parents of one year olds for being reticent.

So what’s an expectant mother – or a new parent of a 12 month old, a month away from getting the MMR, in 1998-2001 to think? Should I give my precious child the MMR injection and risk him developing Autism or should I take the risk he’ll develop measles? An illness most people have never seen the full effects of? Herd immunity has been so high, historically, most people had never met or remembered someone with a bad case of measles, mumps or rubella. “Anyway, it’s unlikely just this one kid is going to have that much of an effect on herd immunity.” Or so they think.

Anti-vaccination arguments are powerful and emotive . Powerful and emotive is, to me, just another way of saying ‘damn convincing’. The trouble with Scientists, despite their perceived air of authority, is that they just don’t talk the same language campaigners do. They don’t come out with things that seem plausible and obvious to the ill-educated on the subject of vaccinations – “a child can’t cope with three vaccines at once!”

I don’t blame parents for being frightened- especially those with little to no real knowledge of how vaccines work or are developed and tested. They simply don’t have time to do all the research and when your daily newspaper, talking to you in language written for you, tells you there’s a debate and a controversy to hear about vaccines I think you could be forgiven for making what seems a logical risk-benefit analysis to make. Risk measles – that few people suffer from (they thought) or risk a developmental disability that will affect my child’s, and my life forever. Seemingly no contest.

Health information does change and develop and there is, rightly or wrongly, suspicion around Big Pharma and a perceived authoritarian government. I think if skeptics really want to get their point across about vaccines they have to do the following (and it involves a lot of work!)

– go to meetings of anti-vaxxers (like my friend Simon Clare did) and find out what their actual arguments are. Some are misunderstandings, some are twisted facts. They are many and they are fickle.
– Actually learn how vaccines are made and developed. Find out about their history – it’s more complicated and involved than you may first imagine
– Learn to speak the language of emotion and rhetoric – stories are powerful but numbers are not.
– Rebut specific claims rather than boldly asserting vaccines are safe. Realise some vaccines have been improved and ingredients removed (not because of the danger – because of public perceptions surrounding safety)

– Find really good, hard hitting evidence that’s easy to demonstrate where specific claims are incorrect. This graph is an excellent example (from http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/vaccines/nommr.html, accessed 21/04/2013)

Graph showing, persuasively that ASD diagnoses continued to rise after MMR was withdrawn in Japan in 1992

Cumulative incidence to age 7 years

NO EFFECT OF MMR WITHDRAWAL ON THE INCIDENCE OF AUTISM: A TOTAL POPULATION STUDY

As I prepare to write a forthcoming Skeptics in the Pub talk on the history and development of vaccines I hope to write and learn more and do some activism around public awareness. Stay tuned.

Pod Delusion Live at QEDcon 2013

April 17, 2013

On Saturday I was privileged to not only appear on the Skeptics in the Pub Panel with Sid Rodrigues of London SitP and Michael Marshall of the Merseyside Skeptics society at QEDcon but I was also on a live recording of the Pod Delusion – I think my 4th appearance.

Here’s what I said:

I do a talk about Autism and quack therapies for it and within that talk I mention vaccinations as a purported cause for Autism. Of course, we know that’s not the case and, historically, in order to fit my talk into 45 minutes to an hour my slide on the MMR vaccine has been curt. It simply reads ‘MMR – I’m sick of MMR’. I then go into a short rant about how MMR should not and should never have been part of the dialogue when it comes to talking about the aetiology of Autism.

However, I may have to alter my talk since MMR is, again, a blisteringly hot topic.

MMR is a vaccine intended to prevent Measles, Mumps and Rubella. I could rehash the story of discredited former doctor Andrew Wakefield and his unethical studies on children in order to peddle his own single vaccinations, but if you’re unaware of this then can I recommend Darryl Cunningham’s comprehensive comic on the subject, available as a link on the show notes. This will give you the background you need if you don’t already know.

The media frenzy surrounding Wakefield’s study results has, without a doubt, clearly influenced the conversation around Autism and vaccines in general. Unfortunately, the British propaganda slogan ‘careless talk costs lives’ is true in cases where journalists take a story like this and run with it. For years and years and years. Even in January this year, we had a story in the Daily Mail with the headline ‘American parents awarded £600,000 in compensation after their son developed autism as a result of MMR vaccine’ – an article by David Gardner – an exceedingly misleading headline given the article itself acknowledges that the decision doesn’t apportion blame or lay fault for the child’s condition with the actual vaccine.

What many parents don’t realise is that measles is highly infectious and can lead to blindness and death. Most people, since the measles vaccination was introduced in the UK in 1968 (63 in the US) haven’t seen a child really suffer with the illness as herd immunity quickly strengthened.

Whooping cough is another deadly illness, with 5 children dying in 2012 – children too young to be vaccinated (under 13 months old) are suffering from the reduction in herd immunity. Between January and June 2012, there were 2,466 confirmed cases.

12 years (correction – should be 15!) since Wakefield’s study was first published, we’re now seeing the deadly and injurious results – an increase of measles cases can be clearly seen since then. In Swansea, at the time of writing on Thursday 11th April, 693 children have been infected.

As Sarah Ditum wrote in the Guardian on Monday April 8th, “with measles cases so low, it was easy to forget what the vaccines were protecting us from.. the illnesses sounded almost picturesque – vintage diseases from the 50s. It was as difficult to imagine as the taste of Spam.”

But now Wakefield is on the offensive. He claims, on Age of Autism dot com, which has, this morning, been republished on the Independent website, that the British Government is culpable for the Measles outbreak, since they have denied parents the single vaccines he was championing. The trouble with single vaccines is that there’s little evidence of a benefit for them. He claims they are not in use solely because the government is trying to cover up the dangers of the combined vaccine and this is motivated by money. However, single vaccines involve delaying protection for children, risking missing the doses and attrition and injecting them three times instead of just once. Adam Finn, quoted in the Independent today, said “his proposal for single vaccines … came straight out of his head…. single vaccines are used in poorer countries that cannot afford MMR. No country in the world has switched from MMR to single vaccines.” What’s most interesting in this statement, for me, is that Autism is in fact found in every culture and every country in the world and chrildren are diagnosed with autism whether they’ve been given a vaccination or not. MMR is given at 13 months old but autism can now be diagnosed as early as 6 months and most parents notice some kind of developmental delay before their child reaches 12 months of age. 

In February 2012 The Cochrane Library published a systematic review called ‘Vaccines for Measles, Mumps and Rubella in children, with the “To assess the effectiveness and adverse effects associated with the MMR vaccine in children up to 15 years of age.”

They searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and used five randomised controlled trials, a controlled clinical trial (CCT), 27 cohort studies, 17 case-control studies, five time-series trials, one case cross-over trial, two ecological studies, and six self controlled case series, concluding “exposure to the MMR vaccine was unlikely to be associated with autism”

Only last week the centre for disease control in the US released a new study that confirmed what we already have enough evidence to assert with good confidence levels – those with autistic spectrum disorders are no more likely to have had more jabs than the other – Frank Stefano, the lead author, stated his study of one thousand children simply found no relationship between vaccine antigens and ASD.

So why does this continue? Why must children suffer from ignorance? Conspiracy theories are attractive and grieving parents who haven’t yet come to terms with their child’s differences – differences they never anticipated – will grab on to anything to take away the blame. It’s cathartic to suggest an outside agent – the government – pharmaceutical companies – are to blame. To put this into context, these are the same people who told the National Autistic Society in May 2012 that 74% of people caring for someone with ASD get no support and only 28% say they receive good info where to go for support and help. The 72% who get no help and information are often the ones sucked in to alternative medicines that are often harmful and very expensive and end up with an ill, frightened and traumatized child.

 If you can, tell just one parent about the vaccine scare and the truth behind it- tell them vaccines are rigorously tested and if they want to really know about vaccines they should read a book on the history of vaccines and not just do bit of Googling and call it research. The websites about vaccines seem so plausible and are pseudoscientific enough to give them a real air of credibility. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

 

This has been Tannice Pendegrass, reporting live at QED for the Pod Delusion.

References:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/27/infant-deaths-whooping-cough-epidemic

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2262534/American-parents-awarded-600-000-compensation-son-developed-autism-result-MMR-vaccine.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/08/measles-mmr-andrew-wakefield?INTCMP=SRCH

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/06/what-happened-man-mmr-panic?INTCMP=SRCH

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004407.pub3/abstract;jsessionid=C6FEF218407B0196EEDC3F533115A40B.d04t04

Demicheli V, Rivetti A, Debalini MG, Di Pietrantonj C. Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD004407. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004407.pub3.

The August SitP Tour

June 2, 2012

The folks at Edinburgh Skeptics have been organising a skeptics on the fringe festival since 2010 and have seen fit to ask me to do my talk on definitions of autism, interventions, cultural representations and Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) on August 22nd, 2012.

I’m also booked to speak at Royal Tunbridge Wells Skeptics, Brighton Skeptics and Horsham Skeptics in August and I turn 27 on the 9th, so it will be a very busy month indeed!

UPDATE:  booked at Nottingham for September 4th. 

As the information on the Skeptics on the Fringe website points visitors to this here website, I thought I’d provide a bit more information on what I’m going to be talking about and why. Dates, links and details of the upcoming August dates are at the end of the post.

Studying and working

In 2004 I was studying psychology and noticed a sign on the uni psychology noticeboard about ABA. I was learning about Skinnerian behaviourism at the time and doing a module that included Autism on the syllabus. I’d seen the film Rainman and had a few ideas about what Autism was. I was also vaguely aware of the MMR vaccines scandal but wasn’t fully aware, at that point, how bad it was or would get.

I applied to be a tutor for the child, (who I’ll call Jack, to preserve his anonymity) and started learning more about ABA. I was very lucky and, I feel, privileged to work with such a delightful, wonderful child. Jack completely confounded all my expectations about what Autism is and I loved working with him. I worked with Jack until he went to a mainstream nursery and his available one-to-one home tutoring time clashed with my lectures and seminars.

Getting skeptical

In 2008 I left Cambridge to come back to Reigate, where I still live, and embarked on a period of self-employed work as a freelance writer, editor and part-time ABA tutor. In 2011 I joined Guildford Skeptics, which I now run. It was after I started identifying as a ‘skeptic’, in around 2010, after finding the Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe and Skeptics with a K podcasts, that I started realising that some of the interventions and ‘treatments’ that many Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) children were undergoing were pseudoscientific, often actively harmful and sometimes downright dangerous. And I got angry. The list is almost endless, but treatments involve Acupuncture, Ayurvedic, Chinese Medicine, Chiropractic, Chelation*, Homeopathy, Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy* (HBOT), Holding/Hugging Therapy, Energy Medicine, Facilitated Communication,  Secretin* and Lupron*.

* Chelation, HBOT, Secretin and Lupron are the treatments I’ve chosen to focus on for my talk.

Taking action against quacks

One evening I resolved to do something about it, even if it was just raising awareness, and my idea for a three-part talk was born. The first part of my talk is about the results from 700 people who completed my autism survey. In a further post, sometime in the near future, I will present my results in full, but not before I present them live, on stage, at Horsham, Brighton, Edinburgh and Tunbridge Wells (date of the latter yet to be confirmed).

I’ve now done my talk twice – at Guildford and at Hackney and I’ve had some good feedback from some ASD people and from some representatives from HiPHackney, an  independent forum for parents and carers of children with disabilities in Hackney:

Hackney skeptics tweeted: I gather lots of you were here for the first time and were coming more for autism than skepticism? Hip Hackney tweeted: through the ASD grapevine locally. We run a forum for parents of kids with disabilities; a couple of parents saw your poster. Hip Hackney tweeted: yes but maybe not for the last time! ASD parents need skeptics! Well done for spreading awareness through evidence. Hip Hackney tweeted: @HackneySitp @tannice_ yes massive thanks to Tannice. She did an amazing job dealing with all us obsessive ASD parents. Well done all. HipHackney tweeted: in reply to @RDGrainger (how did the skeptics talk go?) just fab - she did a great job - all about the evidence really. Some treatments for ASD are nothing more than child abuse...

Image has Alt Text or click here to read the tweets pictured above.

If you represent a charity or organisation for children with disabilities or a specific group for Autism, please do get in contact as I have further plans afoot. Watch this space and, if you can, come along to see my talk on any of these dates:

Talk dates

August 2, Tunbridge Wells, The Grey Lady

August 13, Horsham, The Tanner’s Arms

August 14, Brighton, Caroline of Brunswick (ticketed event)

August 22: Edinburgh Skeptics on the Fringe, Banshee Labyrinth 

September 4: Nottingham Skeptics, Fellows Morton and Clayton (details not on website as yet)

Cervical screening and the quest for informed consent

March 20, 2012

Cancer screening – a mini rant that turned into a big one.

I must declare an interest and a bias here. My father’s had prostate cancer (not found through screening, admittedly) and I had surgery to remove pre-cancerous cells on my cervix last year. My very first screening for cervical cancer found dangerous cells that, had I left them, could have meant I went the same way as Jade Goody.

Four days ago, Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust released this press release,

Leading national charity calls for urgent action in approach to anniversary as ‘Jade Goody effect’ goes into reverse

Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust is calling for urgent action in the approach to the anniversary of Jade Goody’s death as latest figures show the dramatic surge in numbers taking up a life-saving test she is said to have inspired has not been maintained.

Three years on Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust says the so-called “Jade Goody effect”, when cervical screening rates rose for the first time in a decade, has all but disappeared.

Every three hours a woman in the UK is diagnosed with cervical cancer and every day it claims three lives – yet the disease is preventable. The UK’s NHS cervical screening programmes save around 5,000 lives every year but recent figures show one in five women overall fail to attend with figures worse for those under 35 with one in three not taking up their invitation.

 

So you can imagine my surprise when today I read in the Independent (after a tweet from @mgtmccartney, the writer of the  piece, lead me to it) this article: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/why-im-saying-no-to-a-smear-7577967.html

“The NHS persists in sending me red-ink letters despite my written declaration to opt out. I’m made to feel a risk-taker in not having cervical screening – yet I’d also be taking my chances if I had it done.”

I agree with her points – the NHS shouldn’t be sending her letters if she’s decided to opt out. But really, a red ink letter? So what? To defend herself against my accusation of being irresponsible, she said

I think this is over-stating things. We are autonomous beings – a letter penned in red ink can be easily shredded and forgotten about. It might annoy, but for some women, it could save their life. No one is saying you have to have it.

“That potential for good has to be weighed against the risks of treatment. It’s known that having a cervical biopsy – which is done to get more information about the degree of abnormality – raises the risk of pre-term birth in later pregnancies. “

– this is also true. Women should be told the consequences of having a biopsy done and I’d NEVER argue against informed consent. Unfortunately the tweets that were sent out afterwards from the writer, including me, seemed to say that I was opposing women getting the info they need – that’s not true.

“I weighed up my personal risk factors for cervical screening (for example, smoking is a risk factor), threw in my own priorities – and decided not to have it.”

This is fine and dandy – for her. But smoking is not the only risk factor for cervical cancer. (From NHS website):

“Changes in the cells of the cervix are often caused by the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV), which also causes genital warts. There are more than 100 different types of HPV. Some types are high risk and some types are low risk. HPV-16 and HPV-18 are considered to be high risk for cervical cancer.”

Margaret McCartney goes on –

“Most information sent to us, as potential participants, doesn’t make clear that it’s a personal choice, and a balance of pros and cons.”

– Again, I absolutely agree that information should always be given, but that information should also be balanced with the risks of cervical cancer. I was given lots of information when after the results of my screening came back. In fact, the NHS website says your doctor will discuss this with you:

“If any changes are found, your GP will discuss with you whether to wait and see if the changes go away on their own or whether you need treatment […] In the UK, it is estimated that 8 out of 10 people are infected with HPV at some point during their lifetime. For most people, the virus goes away without treatment and does not cause any harm. […] If your results show abnormal cells, you will be sent for screening every six months to monitor the cells. You will only be given treatment if the cells do not go back to normal. If your results indicate more serious cell changes such as these you will have a colposcopy to investigate further. A colposcopy is a procedure where the surface of the lining of the cervix is closely examined.”

– none of these procedures cause any harm to the cervix. The colposcopy is simply an instrument to have a good look at the cervix. It’s true that a biopsy will sometimes be done during the colposcopy, but you’ll be told about this before it happens.

Many women don’t take up their invitation for cervical screening and I think the reasons they don’t are probably not because of their fears about the health impact. This article, from June 2011, says that up to a fifth of UK women don’t attend their cervical screening test at all.

“About 1,000 women die of cervical cancer in the UK annually.”

“But experts estimate screening saves at least 4,500 lives a year in England alone.”

“The research, released to mark Cervical Screening Awareness Week, appears to suggest that many of those who have missed or delayed appointments for cervical cancer screening are doing so because of inconvenience, embarrassment or worry about taking time off work.”

Encouraging people not to even go (after all, the initial screening test won’t lead to the harm that Margaret McCartney talks about) is, to my mind, irresponsible. There’s no harm in having the information available that might lead to your death. Margaret argues that we should be informed better – I agree and take this to its logical conclusion – we should be informed about the risks of NOT doing anything about the pre-cancerous cells that lurk in our lady parts. After all – if we don’t know they’re there, then we’re not informed at all!

Margaret McCartney provides no evidence that women aren’t being informed about the pros and cons of these procedures – she includes information about those who are given info on a separate test and refuse it – prostate cancer – which is another post entirely – in fact I could write a book about that (with help from my expert mother who strived to learn all she could about my Dad’s cancer and treatment). I was talked all the way through my procedure and gave my informed consent to what might mean I have a difficulty pregnancy or even pre-term birth. Obviously, my experience doesn’t speak for all patients, but there’s little evidence here that women aren’t being informed. But they can’t be informed if they don’t even go!

I agree 100% that information about the risks of a biopsy should be given, but a female doctor writing in a national paper about not even bothering to have the initial information about whether she’d even need further treatment seems to me, irresponsible.

Her very profession puts her in a position of authority – perhaps meaning that women will take her advice as read and not even look into it – it’s a sad fact that people often don’t read a whole article, especially if they’re on their way somewhere or get bored half way through (not a comment on the piece – it’s very well written!). Without seeing the nuance (which there is in the piece) the message is – doctor says not to bother.

As one of the commenters on the article says:

As a doctor you are in a very informed position and can make such decisions with more accuracy, to glibly put that responsibility on people without your training is perhaps optimistic.

It’s yet another excuse for someone who’s frightened, embarrassed or just too busy to have a smear not to bother at all. Now who’s uninformed?

%d bloggers like this: