My Photo
Buy Your Copy Now!
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 12/2003

« Recipe for Life | Recette de la Vie for Haiti and anywhere Oral Rehydration Therapy (ORT) Is Needed | Main | Mr Handley Continues To Make Statements That Are Not Supported by Evidence »

Tuesday, November 16, 2010



I have to admit -- as I wrote at LBRB -- I'm grateful to Mr. Handley for giving us such a excellent example of why people shouldn't listen to him, and -- for featuring his rant without editorial input or verification -- Age of Autism.

Science Mom

The comments are as frighteningly delusional as J.B.'s meandering through the irrational. It is hard to believe that these could be real people, parents, no less.


Comic conceit is the best.


Let this be a lesson to you,and everybody else to be really specific,and consistent about every comment you post,even if you because there are flakes out there,reading every careless comment posted in haste,and will try to trip you up,or in this case,try to snare someone else in a trap created by a very sick mind.

It's no wonder so many of these antivax parents have autistic children.The stuff they dream up,like this,is obviously the product of a very sick mind.There are syndromes like 22q11.2 deletion,where the parent can have a condition like schizophrenia,and the child can have both immune problems,and autism.

These parents started out frustrated that no doctor was competent or smart enough to find out what was wrong with their very sick children.So they bought into the antivax woo,eventually becoming so hardcore,that they dismissed all of the advances in the last ten years, linking autism,regression,and immune disease,with any number of genetic syndromes,22q11.2, which it looks like I have,is only one.

Handley and the rest at AoA are too far gone to listen to science or reason.The scary thing is,they have raised a generation of kids who are as,or more whacked out as they are.


Why don't I get the domain,

I don't believe Mr. Handley to be a man of integrity enough to actually follow through on his offers.


It is odd the Handley has placed the onus onto Bonnie.

If she doesn't know Sullivan is, or isn't close enough to him to make such a request, then she can't offer him up to the inevitable scrutiny and derision that will occur. I'm sure we are all aware of what else may be possible.

If she does know, then that will be taken as an implicit admissal that Sullivan in ordinately involved with the Offit family. Indeed, at least one commentator has deemed Sullivan to be employed by Offit. Accusations of paid-for pharma shilling and marital affairs are not to be unexpected from JB's supporters.

Handley has swung the responsibility right around to place the onus (and the expense, effort and -let's be honest- danger) onto someone else.

Science Mom

@ Dedj, Handley is frustrated with Sullivan and wants to out him to either pursue one of his empty legal actions against him or use him as a target for his rabid, frothing AoA mob to harass him. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

I still cannot fathom the comments there, if I didn't know better, I would think it was parody.


I'm starting to think this whole thing is Handley's weird way of endorsing LB/RB and expressing his admiration for Sullivan. If you think about it, what was the gist of his thesis about Sullivan?

- Too knowledgable.
- Too compassionate.
- Too thorough a fact-checker.
- Too diligent about being informed before most people.
- Too focused and determined.

Indeed, via email Handley said he found Sullivan's post "thought-provoking."

I contend that Handley has a man-crush on Sullivan :)


Roger says: "The scary thing is,they have raised a generation of kids who are as,or more whacked out as they are."

Sorry but I take offense at your comment. If someone calls my autistic child "wacked out" I will punch him in the face. Plus it's nobody's fault when he/she is born with an intellectual disability. I do feel sorry for some AoA parents that are buying into the woo, it doesn't mean they're bad people.

JB Handley on the other hand I don't forgive because he is consistently rude, always focused on destroying people's reputations and careers, and is not humble enough to acknowledge his mistakes in public.

Theodore Van Oosbree

At least Handley uses his real name.

David N. Brown

As long as (allegedly?) Mr. Oosbree is here, maybe he would care to comment on a post at AoA:

Mr.Handley has made a prima facie case. Let Sullivan produce him/herself or stand comdemned.
Posted by: Theodore Van Oosbree | November 17, 2010 at 12:57 PM

Let's see if I have this right. According to you, if something is said about a person, it is to be presumed to be true unless the person produces evidence to the contrary. So, by that reasoning, if I say JB Handley is Bigfoot, then he IS Bigfoot until and unless he offers proof that he isn't. Or would it be Bigfoot that has to come in from the woods just to prove he isn't JB Handley?

Liz Ditz

My response to Leila

Hi Leila, thanks for the comment.

I want you to know that "whacked out" is Roger's point of view, not mine.

But I very rarely censor or moderate comments.

My point of view is that people with autism are whole people.

I cannot speak for Roger, but I do think that being raised by parents who view the child as damaged and in need of "repair" or "recovery", and who regard autism symptoms as disgusting cannot be good for a child's self-concept.

Leia's response to me (via email)

Hi Liz,

I understand, and I'm not asking you to censor his comment, but I had to make that point because it's important to remind people to be careful with the way we approach mental disorders, especially regarding children. I agree some of the parents have disorders of their own, and JB Handley would certainly benefit from some kind of treatment, but leave his innocent child out of it...

Take care,


Liz Ditz

David, I believe (based on the email address) that Theodore Van Oosbree is who he says he is.

In this comment, Mr. Van Oosbree

At least Handley uses his real name.

is implying that there is something wrong with Sullivan using a pseudonym. As I said above (and at the one comment at Age of Autism that was let through moderation) Sullivan does so to protect the privacy of his family, including his minor children.

Further, Van Oosbree has forgotten that the tradition of strongly-held opinions voiced by pseudonymous writers has a long and honorable tradition in our country.

...The political debate that led to the American Revolution and the ratification of the United States Constitution was waged under pseudonyms, published not only in newspapers throughout the colonies, but in pamphlets that were widely circulated.

In "The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution," Harvard University historian Bernard Bailyn estimates that more than four hundred pamphlets discussing America’s grievances against the Crown were published in the colonies between 1750 and 1776. Publication continued through the Revolution. By the time the War of Independence ended in 1783, the number of pamphlets had grown to fifteen hundred.

Often published under pseudonyms and circulated by hand from one patriot to the next, these pamphlets constituted a true underground medium. "It was in this form - as pamphlets - that much of the most important and characteristic writing of the American Revolution appeared," writes Bailyn.

I also find it amusing that Van Oosbree objects to Sullivan's pseudonym, but that most of the comments at the Age of Autism article referenced above are pseudonymous.


"Mr.Handley has made a prima facie case."

A prima facie case is, by definition, self-evident.

There's nothing in Handley's thesis that could lead any reasonable person to conclude that Sullivan is Bonnie Offit. It reads like a joke, frankly.

In other words, no rebuttal is required in this case, because the argument didn't establish anything to begin with (except that Sullivan is knowledgable, and so forth.)

BTW, the biggest coward is he who sends his lawyers to silence dissenting blogs.


I happened to read that ridiculous post. Well anything at AoA is ridiculous but that was downright insane. It is a sign of incompetence that in order to prop up your side in a debate (not that this is really much of a lucid debate on their part) the person needs to resort to ad hominem attacks. I guess you must be doing something right Liz to make them so angry though. Good job.


Mr.Handley has made a prima facie case...that he's an A$$H0LE. He has provided far more evidence in his little rant of that case than he did about anything else. Plus we countless other examples of his holishness.

As a matter of fact, although my lawyers are discouraging it, I would like to publish details of irrefutable circumstantial conjecture that JB is actually, none other than Harry Dunne (or Lloyd Christmas depending which one is the latter). If he can prove that he is not, I will give him back his ability to think...


Mr. Van Oosbree,

How do you know that JB Handley has not posted with a 'nym elsewhere?

He used to use a 'nym when commenting on Orac's old blog years ago (one that Mr. Handley cybersquatted on!). How do we know that some of the more mocking anti-vax comments, like from "Smarter Than You", are not really Mr. Handley?


By Autism News Beat at Age of Autism

My Bonnie blogs over at Left Brain
My Bonnie blogs both day and night
My Bonnie researches the science
In order to get the facts right

The comments to this entry are closed.


What I'm Tweeting

    follow me on Twitter