Shooter/ASD: perception stronger than truth- take action?

[Guest guest]

I'm trying to figure out what action can be taken/what efforts to

join in trying to prevent the push to wrongfully demonize and

implicate autism in the Cho case. I have a few ideas and am all ears

for others. One thing that won't do any good is saying the view

that " autism alone drove Cho is just stupid " . Sure it is, but that

sentiment won't change what appears to be happening.

We're between a rock and a hard place. The MIA movement is having

enough trouble getting the public to wake up about vaccines' link to

autism even when the motivation for people to listen is the welfare

of their own children. I fear we won't be able to push that view

further in time to combat what amounts to *idle* public perceptions

right now surrounding Cho, so there may be a need for another,

faster means of combatting that perception.

I read the blog in Huffington- really great points made which most

of us would probably agree with. But I'm watching the perceptions of

the " uninitiated " and what we know is not what the rest of the

public thinks it knows, unfortunately.

I pitched in in our town's anual park clean-up efforts and got a

chance to chat with neighbors I haven't seen since last Fall,

enabling me to " litmus test " the general views of the VA Tech

incident. Our kids our so young and so mild in behavior that no one

knows that they're mercury poisoned (we have reasons for not

broadcasting this here and the children are not officially on the

spectrum, so it's hard to explain to neighbors our concerns about

vaccines), so people spoke freely with me. Part of me wished they

hadn't spoken freely because it freaked me out so badly that it was

hard to put a good face on.

It appears many people -at least in that general demographic of

somewhat enviro-minded folks who would bother to clean up a park on

a Sat. morning, in our town with a high college education rate- now

believe that Cho had autism and that this in itself explains what he

did. Without an alternative explanation which can combat that

delectable sound bite which the media has apparently spun out of

control, this may remain the general public's perception. I haven't

even seen the news segment mentioning whatever-it-is that Cho's

family member may or may not have said about autism. The key thing

is that the media is picking up on it and the scary thing is that it

fits with the NIMH's and drug industry's plans to medicalize autism

in their own way for their own agenda. And without counter

explanation, the public - again, at this point, in our area- appears

to be buying it.

It's not right, it's not good, it's no logical, but there you have

it. Things that are not right and not good and not logical happen

anyway. I'm wondering what we can do about it. Of course I brought

up psychiatric drugs and their association with most school

shootings. The older people did latch onto this as a potent counter

explanation, though it's not been confirmed yet and it scares me

that the toxicology reports may be either sealed or simply not

reported upon.

Maybe in the end we won't be able to distantiate ourselves from the

possibility that Cho was vaccine injured or chemically injured.

Maybe it will turn out that he's HFA. Then we'll all be faced with

the scary task of trying to explain to people that autism in and of

itself does not lead to school shootings, having to combat all the

convenient misinformation that they've been fed. But, as case after

case and and others have pointed out, there is the

common denominator in school shootings which has nothing to do with

the preexisting mental state of the person in question, which all by

itself can drive even perfectly normal people over the edge within a

very short space of time. Of course if someone had a preexisting

issue it might drive them over the edge faster, but not necessarily.

Any action alert or effort which people here can contribute to

demand that the toxicology report in this case not be sealed could

be one way to get to the truth and, most importantly, to get the

truth out if this, in fact, is what has happened. Among other

organizations getting involved, one organization is demanding

toxicology reports be made accessible and may be warming up for an

action alert:

http://www.mindfreedom.org/kb/youth-mental-health/virginia-tech/cho-

seung-hui/

This organization is friendly to us and has some common ground in

terms of toxic theory of some mental conditions. A

consultant/colleague to this group and others is a big anti-

thimerosal activist.

Any other action alerts going on about this?

> > >

> > > I totally agree- I was being ironic by saying " help " . It's

only

> public

> > > perception that drugs " help " do anything truly pragmatic at

all.

> >

> > * Yes, like I said, in that sense illegal and legal drugs which

> act on

> > the brain have the same effect, hide your problems by letting

you

> get

> > intoxicated.

> >

> > There

> > > are thousands of unknown brain chemicals, none of which have

> been

> > > studied, many of which are being effected in completely

> unpredictable

> > > ways by these so-called " selective (my butt) seratonin re-

uptake

> > > inhibitors " for instance. But the only reason there's been any

> spin

> > > about the supposed benefits of selectively inhibiting

seratonin

> re-

> > > uptake is that they invented the pill FIRST and then decided

to

> invent

> > > the science to justify it later.

> >

> > * Exactly!! Like most things pharmaceutical, they invent the

thing

> > first and then the science. They do experiments and selectively

> choose

> > those which fit their purposes. Totally unethical, but isn't

> > " unethical " the pharmacy industry's middle name?

> >

> > Really and truly. The stuff just

> > > makes you high, each substance in a slightly different way,

and

> the

> > > feeling of being high is always a sign of one thing: drug

> spellbinding

> > > from brain cell death. You get high as your brain dies.

> >

> > * Totally. That is truly sad. Many people thinking they're being

> > helped while they're being harmed by these things. Quite

frankly,

> if

> > you have issues, like things which are making you depressed,

> wouldn't

> > it be healthier to just go to therapy, try to figure it out,

solve

> it

> > on your own... it takes a lot of strength, but because of that,

you

> > get out of the process a lot stronger! Taking drugs equals

numbing

> you

> > up, like heroin addicts who choose not to face their issues and

> numb

> > their pain by getting high.

> >

> > >Ideally I think it's

> > > probably better to go through grief in one shot and scream it

> out.

> >

> > * Once again, I agree with you. Postponing it won't be helpful

at

> all!

> > My boyfriend's grandmother died this year, and his grandfather

was

> > devastated. So what did his family do? Hired a psychiatrist to

drug

> > him into sleep and by the time of the funeral he was still so

high

> > that he didn't comprehend what was going on. And when he

> got " sober " ,

> > he realized that his wife had just been buried and he didn't

have

> time

> > to say goodbye or grieve properly. Just an example.

> >

> >

> > Btw, loved the " psycharazzi " .

> >

>