Jenny McCarthy's son doesn't have autism after all!

Post Reply New Topic

According to a new article in Time magazine, Jenny McCarthy's son was misdiagnosed with autism and really suffers from Landau-Kleffner syndrome, which is a rare childhood neurological disorder that can result in speech impairment and possible long-term neurological damage! This means that Jenny's son doesn't really have autism after all! I guess Jenny wasted all of her time making an ass of herself for saying that vaccines caused her son's "autism" which he never really had at all!

See what happens when a diagnosis is made without the proper training and experience?


... all this from a soft-core porn star.

Had she taken her son to the proper medical authorities right away, she would not have misdiagnosed her son, and he would have received the proper treatment much sooner.

Okay, I just found out that the Time magazine article source that I got about Jenny McCarthy and her son's misdiagnosis of autism was from a Hollywood celebrity news website that is actually 3 1/2 years old, and that's how old that Time mag article was about Jenny and her son too! I still stand by about what I think about Jenny from my original post, btw!

yet another creative and imaginative lets burn Jenny McCarthy at the stake post

The reason why you should never buy a diagnoses a doctor gives your child without giving them their child's medical history first. The doctor shouldn't label someone right when they walk in the room without going over their history first and ruling out the other parts first. The doctor who first saw Evan was rocking in the corner when he told Jenny "I'm sorry but your son is autistic" and if she were anything like my mother, she would not have bought it and would take him to other doctors instead to make sure she wasn't being too proud or to make sure the doctor was correct.

Ahhh! So I wasn't alone thinking all of this when I read the article after all? Good to know!

I can only say... DUH

this.

McCarthy denies the rumour.so she made patronizing remarks 5 years ago.can we get over that.the only interview i have seen of mccarthy she sais nothing bad about autism.joan behar mocked aspergers and jenny stood up for us.

this mccarthy thing is a witch hunt.Mary Tudor is no longer queen of england

FWIW, that's an old article and it was grossly mis-quoted. Evan was actually diagnosed, by UCLA which is a leader in autism diagnosis. Think what you want about Jenny's character, or how she went about trying to get help for her son. But she has always been an advocate for the autism community and has brought a lot of awareness abut the disorder that might not have been there.

And whether vaccines do or don't cause autism, allergies or the like, I agree with Ms. McCarthy, the metal preservatives can't be good for us, and I prefer not to get them for myself.

Nothing new with the accounting for Landau Kleffner Syndrome, albeit it's no surprise that she's harangued the mainstream media for these uncorroborated claims. No single thing will provoke a halt to her adamance to stop her fervent proponency of Dr Andrew Wakefield's "discredited" MMR vaccination and autistic enterocolitis hypotheses, the notion of environmental toxicants (mercury, formaldehyde, ethylene glycol, MSG, aluminum hydroxide) implemented in other vaccines (Influenza, Meningococcal e.t.c.) causing regressive autism spectrum disorders (whether both of these theories are true or not); and utmost disreputably, her disparaging and overwhelmingly negative medical and sociological depiction of autistic people.

I had to laugh at this post. She's doing it to herself, she's trying to advocate "facts" that don't actually exist in an attempt to further her own viewpoints about vaccines. She's not a health care professional, nor does she actually have any health care professionals backing up her claims, just the opposite actually, the MMR myth has been debunked to such a degree it's not even funny anymore, yet she continues to make a fool of herself by repeating the since debunked myth as "fact". If continually fighting her nonsensical spewage in an attempt to actually educate people to the facts of the matter, is to be considered "burning her at the stake", then perhaps we should re-evaluate what we as a society consider acceptable truth, because people are disproven every day on topics just like the MMR myth, the more people advocate their falsities, the more people will work to disprove them and put them on display as an unreliable source of facts. If what she has been claiming had been even remotely true, it wouldn't even be considered "burning her at the stake", but that's not the case, she's wrong and we all know it. Jenny McCarthy is influential enough to sway public opinion to her favor, and that's dangerous when it comes to public health, is it any wonder to you that people would want the real facts out there? Is it any wonder to you that producing those real facts would invariably make Jenny McCarthy look like a fool because of her position on the subject? Again, she does it to herself.

the witch hunt part was a figure of speech meaning that we are being to hard on this poor woman.im not sayibg its a real witch hunt

I understand that it was a figure of speech, whether or not you had meant it literally is not the issue and is wholly irrelevant. The point is, we're honestly not being too hard on her, she herself brings on this kind of scrutiny when she advocates falsities, and her persistence in doing so is what makes her a target to such a magnitude. If she had minimal influence it wouldn't be an issue, but her influence is rather heavy so it is. There has already been at least one outbreak because of a lack of vaccination, that's not something that kids should have to go through because of society's stupidity, certainly not because people choose to believe someone like Jenny McCarthy about a topic that she knows literally less than nothing about. Ignorance abounds and in this case, it has serious consequences for kids who don't have a choice in the matter but to go along with what others choose to believe. It's ultimately up to their parents whether or not they're vaccinated and if they get sick because those parents believed some b.s. spewage by someone on tv with influence, then that is a problem, not just for those kids, but also for other kids who are exposed as a result. Let me be clearer on this:
A parent hears about something that could have potentially harmful effects on their kids, it's going to be their first instinct to keep their kids away from it, period. Having people out there that spread lies about something as serious as vaccination contamination spells out serious problems for kids, especially when their parents know as much as said "advocate" (which is, in this case, literally nothing) about the topic/problem. Parents go into panic mode with stuff like that, they don't have the time to look up every little detail, and even if they had that kind of time, they're going to go with caution first i.e. not vaccinate their kids. And where do these parents hear about these wild ideas? Their T.V. where else? Do you see my point?
Are we being too hard on people like Jenny McCarthy? Not even close. When the potential exists for kids to suffer as a result of ignorance, we cannot be proactive enough in scrutinizing those who perpetuate said ignorance by using parents fears to do so.

^^^^^thank you for wording this in a way that is articulate... when dealing with idiocy of the kind that McCarthy spews, I am reduced to a stream of invective and profanity.

lol I don't blame you, it's a bit of a bad situation and it can make anyone upset to that point. I can't stand the idea that kids could be hurt as a result of society's ignorance and stupidity (as I'm sure most can't).