AGE OF AUTISM: QUITE THE COINCIDENCE
Here's the latest from Dan Olmsted.
posted by Wade Rankin at 5/31/2007 06:43:00 PM
Thursday, May 31, 2007
About Me
- Name: Wade Rankin
- Location: United States
Civil comments are always welcome. These posts are my opinions, and should be deemed as nothing but my opinions. Nothing herein should be used or relied upon as advice of a medical, legal, or technical matter.
Previous Posts
- AUTISM ONE 2007
- FINDING JOY IN TROUBLING TIMES
- BY THE SHOVEL LOAD
- THE CAN IS OPENED
- ANOTHER YEAR FOR THE RANKINS
- WE’RE FROM THE GOVERNMENT AND WE’RE HERE TO HELP Y...
- UNDERSTANDING THE BRAIN-GUT CONNECTION
- AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, A VACC...
- HEY, WAIT A MINUTE. I THOUGHT WE’RE THE ONES WHO ...
- ILLINOIS RECOGNIZES THAT PEOPLE ARE NOT CATTLE
5 Comments:
I'm sorry, but Dan should stick to finding similarities between the Kennedy and Lincoln asassinations.
He ran from a florist into a mercury factory; the other ran from the Mercury theatre INTO a flower factory.
There very well MAY be a chemical link to autism, but to continually harp on mercury mercury mercury now throughout the history of mental disorders, only makes him laughable...
Bill,
I would hardly call it a conspiracy theory. Although I see the "environmental trigger" issue as being broader than just mercury, I believe the still-emerging evidence indicates that mercury is a big part of the puzzle. Obviously, history will prove one of us wrong.
You strike me as a relatively open-minded guy; I'm just curious as to why you can be so sure that any particular environmental insult (e.g., mercury)can be ruled out. Do you really believe that genetics is the sole determinant of both whether one is autistic and how "severe" the autistic manifestations will be?
I'm definitely not ruling it out, I just think that a disservice is being done by SINGLING it out.
Olmsted and others continue to try and find mercury in particular under every rock (with this particular article he's finding flimsy connections between mercury and the 'discovery' of autism). They are also working off the premise that something made the autism numbers skyrocket. It has all been proven, short of writing it in stone and bringing it from the mount, that the vast majority of the increase is due to widening criterea and better diagnosis causing this.
Because they continually harp on 'defeated' subject matter, the real issue of whether there is an increase in severity or whether there is an environmental issue either causing autism itself or causing issues in genetics, gets left behind.
It's time to get some serious science behind the theories, we will get no where rehashing disproven things...
Bill
It's time to get some serious science behind the theories, we will get no where rehashing disproven things...
Funny, I was thinking the same thing about the extremely dubious contention that "the vast majority of the increase is due to widening criterea and better diagnosis causing this."
Agreed we have to look at the rates and what could be increasing, what diagnosis could be changing from the 80's from Mental Retardation to autism; whether regression is going up going down, severity levels. But the continual mantra of "why has the rate skyrocketed in the past 20 years...IT's THE MERCURY, IT's THE MERCURY!" is only going to be met with disbeleiving shaking heads. The mere addition of Aspergers to the DSMIV in 1994 gets us most of the way in itself.
Post a Comment
<< Home