Comments on: Autism Study Examines Cause of Apparent Rise in Rate

By: Joseph

Joseph — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 12:48:17 +0000

It is not a weak study, it is a rather strong study in a field that never rarely makes what people think of as strong conclusions being pushed by a press package that is not too much about the study.

It’s a very weak study. It does not produce any new data of note, for one. For example, their figure for the impact of changes in criteria is simply taken from a single Finnish study whose ascertainment methods are not comparable to the way CalDDS counts autistic children.

Also note the difference between the press release of the study and the actual conclusions of the paper. Since they did not take awareness into account, a true increase “remains unclear.”

By: Nancy Reyes

Nancy Reyes — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 19:03:43 +0000

Autism is a syndrome, not a disease. It has many causes, including the brain damage caused by whatever made the kid retarded (rubella, Fragile X syndrome, CMV etc.)

In the past, I suspect a lot of these kids were called retarded or childhood schizophrenia….but in 2000, especially after “RainMan”, parents would be ashamed to admit their kid with major behavior and cognitive problems and an IQ of 40 was “retarded”, hence the diagnosis of autism.

On the other hand, what percentage of the kids had signs their retardation and autism was present at birth? How many had fragile X syndrome? How many were “normal” then developed deterioration after vaccine or a viral illness?

I suspect chemicals and illicit drugs cause some cases, but has anyone done environmental studies?

In other words, someone needs to talk about these nuances to the press, or else we will get more anti measles vaccine hysteria.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:24:35 +0000

Where does this testosterone come from and what kind is it exactly?

By: Aileni Noyle

Aileni Noyle — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:16:25 +0000

A new study this side of the pond suggests high levels of testosterone in the foetal environment. Interesting.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 22:25:46 +0000

Mike: It is interesting that this sort of thing seems to develop the way it does in the health biz surrounding vaccines. Remember the flu vaccine/Jerry Ford/Congress debacle?

Throw in the fact that epidemiology, which is always interesting and fun of course, is a conceptually difficult science and one that is almost never exact.

TSP: Orac and Greg would hav a very boring smakdown because I doubt we disagree on much. It’s just that Orac is not well socialized.

By: The Science Pundit

The Science Pundit — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 22:04:36 +0000

I, for one, welcome the Orac/Greg smackdown!

By: mike stanton

mike stanton — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:55:21 +0000

Hi Greg,
one reason why some of us are very quick to point to the limitations in the paper is that we remember another paper from 1998 in which the lead author made statements to the press that could not be justified by the content of the paper. The result was the MMR-autism debacle which still lumbers on.

People like Rick Rollens and David Kirby are using this as evidence for an autism epidemic caused by environmental toxins. They could not do this on the basis of the paper alone. I doubt they have even read it. But they are merely taking up the points in the press release that was issued alongside the study. Th authors are as responsible for the press release as they are for the paper.

I find this irresponsible. Comments that would never pass peer review are in the public domain and the paper is taken as proof of these comments’ pertinence.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:24:52 +0000

Orac, I see your earlier comment now. Ignoring for the moment your whining about what you suppose to be my irrelevant complaining about your uncalled for ranting about how and what I should or should not blog that one of us indulged in after the other one very irrelevantly ranted about how and what I should comment about after your post, thanks very much for the links.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:17:09 +0000

Orac: “The problem with … tentative concensus”

Testosterone Spill! Aisle Five!!!!

But seriously, Orac, I’m sure you’re substantive comments on the paper are important and valid, and I’m very glad you’ve made them. I’m having some trouble with the SB back end right now, so I have not freed your comment but I will shortly. I look forward to following the additional links you’ve sent, learning everything I can about autism and vaccines, and joining the discussion full on. It will be great working with you on this.

By: Jen

Jen — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:11:10 +0000

It is obvious to this parent of two autistic boys…one vaccinated and one not, that ACETAMINOPHEN use along with the vaccines as well as prenatal use is what is triggering the spike in autism. Autistic kids are often found to be deficient in glutathione, an important antioxidant that helps the body to filter out toxins (including mercury in vaccines).

Acetaminophen is known to deplete glutathione, and when you give it to a baby before vaccinations, you are stripping them of glutathione when they need it the most-to filter out the contents of the vaccines. Look at when the spike started…it was after aspirin was linked to Reye’s Syndrome. In addition, the makers of Tylenol suffered a lot of bad publicity after some deranged individual tampered with their product, so Johnson and Johnson launched a huge marketing campaign, touting the safety of their product to reassure consumers. Tylenol use skyrocketed and continues to this day. Not only that, but there was also a lot of publicity in the 80’s surrounding reports of very high fevers and seizures in babies receiving the DPT shot, so pediatricians started recommending acetaminophen BEFORE vaccines.

Hopefully, more Americans will wake up soon and realize that we are overmedicating our children. We may not have epidemics of measles and polio anymore, but is a nation of chronically ill children that will need lifelong medical care really any better?