Just as Congress has accepted the church's number of published testimonials as scientific fact, so some journalists have accepted the church's argument that its parents do the best they can for their children. This seems like a deliberate misreading of your book, which does criticize the testimonials, but not on the grounds of the child cases. I was astonished at that sentence. Zaleski also ignores my analysis of the testimonies and the reasons why they're unreliable as scientific evidence or even, in some instances, verifiable anecdotes. Some contain allusions to diagnoses by medical professionals, but no medical or hospital records, physicians' names or specific data accompany the published testimonies, so it is impossible to verify them independently.
Some testimonies contain misleading or false information.
And it has never allowed any independent researcher to study Christian Science. As I say in the book, they are testimonies of faith, of religious belief. They are not evidence. What I'd like to see is the removal of religious exemption laws from all state statutes. This special class of laws protecting faith-healers from the consequences of their actions endangers children and seems to be a clear violation of the First Amendment.