0
16

[–] ExcraMernaise1488 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago 

"[The autism rate] has come up from 1 in 10,000 in 1970 -- so that is already an incredibly alarming change," stated Dr. Seneff during a recent interview with Next News Network. "I got worried eight years ago when I was seeing it rising, and people were saying, 'Oh, it's just more reporting, more diagnosis' -- that's a way to hide the evidence."

This is bullshit and ignorant of the facts. Asperger Syndrome wasn't even identified until 1981, and it took ten more years for a good translation of Hans Aspergers work establishing autism as a condition to come out in English, because until that point his work was considered tainted since it was done under the Third Reich. Of course the diagnosis rate of autism is gonna go up when you go from a few specialists knowing about it in the 1970s from the German/Austrian original material to 20 years later and today where there's actual research available and entries in the DSM for any English language doctor. Autism in 1970 was called "infantile schizophrenia" in the English world and confused a lot of different concepts that we don't associate with it today. The definitions of the two eras are incommensurate and not comparable apples to oranges like this quack wants to do

0
9

[–] Acetylsalicylin 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

The first thing I thought when I opened the link was "Huh, whats Natural News? Is this any sort of peer-reviewed scientific publication? Whats the deal with this place."

So before I read the article, I went to their "About Us" page.

Natural News is a science-based natural health advocacy organization led by activist-turned-scientist Mike Adams, the Health Ranger.

The key mission of Natural News is to empower consumers with factual information about the synthetic chemicals, heavy metals, hormone disruptors and other chemicals found in foods, medicines, personal care products, children's toys and other items.

Natural News covers holistic health, nutritional therapies, consciousness and spirituality, permaculture , organics, animal rights, environmental health, food and superfoods , and performance nutrition.

The site strongly criticizes drugs-and-surgery medicine, vaccines, corporate corruption, animal testing, the use of humans for medical experiments, the chemical contamination of foods, heavy metals in consumer products, factory farming and government corruption.

First of all, if you keep having to tell us how science-based you are, you probably aren't science-based.

Secondly, "activist-turned-scientist" sounds like a nice way of saying "I have a conclusion and now Im going to find data to support it even if I have to fabricate it". Activists have agendas, scientists don't. You cant have it both ways.

Consciousness and spirituality? WTF is permaculture?

Criticizes drugs-and-surgery medicine? Lets go back to eating roots and dying of every small disease or broken bone, I guess. Radishes heal broken arms, right?

Criticizes vaccines... okay, I dont need to read any further... Im not going to read an article about autism from a site that strongly criticizes vaccines, obviously they are pushing an agenda (in case I hadnt figured that out before), so they are not an unbiased source. Is it even necessary at this point to read the article?

BUT WAIT Ill give it at least a LITTLE benefit of the doubt and see if I can find any actual relevant publications in respectable journals - maybe there actually is a study involved that I can look at the abstract for?

So I google the name of the doctor that the original article cites.

And here is one of the first results:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/31/oh-no-gmos-are-going-to-make-everyone-autistic/

Seneff, it turns out, is an MIT scientist, but she is not a scientist with any expertise in autism, epidemiology, or, for that matter, any relevant scientific discipline that would give her the background knowledge and skill set to take on analyzing the epidemiological literature regarding autism. Indeed, she is in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at MIT

So excuse me if I just dismiss this shit out of hand. In the words of the immortal @tobasoft, "nigga please with this bullshit."

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] Acetylsalicylin 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Youre not wrong. Peer-reviewed doesn't automatically equate to reputable. "Peer-reviewed" publications have published some pretty funny shit when they have failed to live up to any sort of standards. Lets just pretend that we live in a better world for the sake of the wording of my post and next time Ill just say "reputable", and then we can instead pretend that they are all reputable when even that doesnt necessarily apply.

0
2

[–] the_canceler 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

A while ago, someone on my Facebook shared an article from Natural News (Ebola fear-mongering, good to see how that turned out in America). I was hella skeptical, so I looked it up and I found some beautiful information on this Mike Adams dude. He claims to have healed himself of type II diabetes through all-natural remedies. Not only is he paranoid of "hurr hurr big pharma big gummint", he's an AIDS denialist and a 9/11 truther. This is all information easily pulled from Wikipedia (properly sourced).

0
0

[–] okokay 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

On the MIT bio page for Stephanie Seneff it says she also has a degree in bio physics and has 'focused her research interests back towards biology. She is concentrating mainly on the relationship between nutrition and health.' Bio page: http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/

There are links to reports on her page concerning the connection between glyphosate and illness which I have to yet to read thoroughly.

0
0

[–] Acetylsalicylin 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

So what we have here is a computer scientist interested in artificial intelligence who thinks she can switch her expertise to medicine, biology, and epidemiology. Let’s just put it this way. An undergraduate degree in biophysics in 1968 does not qualify one to do this sort of research, and, as I discussed in her foray into autism and vaccine epidemiology, it really does show. Badly. The paper was so embarrassingly incompetent that I’m surprised any journal was willing to publish it.

From that link I provided. You should check it out.

0
6

[–] tobasoft 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

nigga please with this bullshit.

0
3

[–] Morbo 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

So more fuel to feed the fear behind all things autism. While there are many people with autism who are low-functioning and research should continue on to understand autism better, autists are not "broken" humans. The idea that autism is only bad is a very narrow-minded way of thinking. Many of the great things we have in this world today come from people with autism spectrum and all their non-conforming ways of getting through life. High-functioning autists are not easily recognized by even trained medical specialists. Aspergers in particular is hard to pin down in diagnosis and require lots of testing and investigation to discover. ASD is getting diagnosed more because we have improved our methods of identifying it. And these advancements in diagnosis have often come because of autists in the first place. Can't we just revel in this new world of increased brain genetics diversity instead of demonizing those who are different? Just because someone is less adept at social norms and rules doesn't make them a "broken" human or worse, something non-human. I'm tired of society thinking less of ASD/AS people just because we don't keep up with the Kardashians or (don't) look you in the eye when we (are forced to) small talk with you. We're still very much people and should be treated as such.

0
0

[–] haunted_backlog 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Pseudoscience causes autism.