I want to be juvenile and write Stagliano and Offit sittting a tree... but Anne Daschel or Handley might get seriously jealous that I left them out.
I mean, here AoA is claiming to be autism's daily newspaper (or was that just an edgy blog?), but day after day they go after Offit like he was a hamburger and they were Wimpy. Or like they were me going after Age of Autism. What's up with that, really?
"As much as I'd like to think that 28% of the American population reads Age of Autism and visits our sponsors' sites, I can assure you that's not the case. Your message has failed. Think Shakespeare, Dr. Offit. Too much protest." writes Stagliano.
Sure, the masses may not read Age of Autism (ain't that a relief?), but they read Mercola and other natural news-type websites that promote fear of medicine and vaccines but not fear of their natural, better products. I'm sure that makes up for the difference more than adequately.
I'm not sure what you prove by making Offit the main thing you rail against. Trying to rally the troops? To what end, I wonder.
I like the anthrax bit, too. Now, not only has Stagliano managed to link the sexual abuses perpetrated by priests in the Catholic church to Offit, she's linking the image of if there's ever an anthrax attack, it will be Offit's fault no one gets vaccinated and thus dies from anthrax. I think these two images, coupled with the blog post they had to pull shows the depths that AoA will go to.