Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You portray people as always having the same level of autism its just because of the improved detection that the numbers are through the roof. Your sick in the head if you believe that,
You are sick to believe that trying to figure out why the increase in autism is a silly thing to study. You only feel that way because of politics which makes you sick also.I'm not the one calling someone "sick in the head".
It's weird that you think that you are a mind reader.Weird that someone who feigns concern for the supposed increase in autism would criticize someone else as being "sick in the head."
We were talking about the increased rate of diagnosis. This is a scientific/medical issue and the underlying cause for the increase is well understood. It has nothing to do with politics. It is about facts. Knock it off with the "sickness" stuff, now.You are sick to believe that trying to figure out why the increase in autism is a silly thing to study. You only feel that way because of politics which makes you sick also.
Up until nearly the mid 90s for the most part only level 3 autism was diagnosed as autism. Level 1 kids were diagnosed as having behavioral problems, hyperactive, educationally handicapped etc. These days however I personally think they've gone too far in the other direction and set the bar too low for what qualifies as autism.I'm all for that, in 1980, 1 in 1000 children had autism. Today it's 1 in 44 children with autism, a 241% increase in 45 years.
No it isn't. I've been aware of the scientific response to this trope about "increased autism rates" for many years. Long before COVID happened.That is something you made up on the fly.
Again, not true. At some point in the past I have gone over materials explaining how the diagnosis of ASD has changed over the years. I do not have that material at my fingertips as it is not something that impacts me personally, nor is it my field. I also don't spend my time debunking autism/vaccine conspiracies generally.It's a fact you haven't look into it at all.
You can knock off the personal insults or I can press one of those special buttons under your posts. We both have choices to make. I have chosen restraint so far and only ask that you start to chose restraint. Argue the post/data/idea, not me.I can't knock off something that I believe is true especially after you calling the study silly.
This is exactly what I mean. What compassion do I lack? For the suckers who have fallen for the vaccine/autism conspiracies, or for those who propagate them. I have only disdain for the latter like Kennedy and Bigtree.It shows how empty your heart is no compassion no nothing.
Autism causation is a scientific topic. My agenda is therefore based on science. I don't really care which political "side" has aligned with the scientifically wrong position. I will go after them regardless.You run on a pure politic agenda.
This is a very sad, and incorrect view of the world, and me. And I make one final plea for you to stop characterizing me or anyone else on "politics", particularly w/o evidence.Hate Republicans and Love democrats no matter what. I know your type all to well.
That is something you made up on the fly. It's a fact you haven't look into it at all.
Is there no real increase in autism rates, then?
Awareness and changing criteria probably account for the bulk of the rise in prevalence, but biological factors might also contribute, says Durkin. For example, having older parents, particularly an older father, may boost the risk of autism. Children born prematurely also are at increased risk of autism, and more premature infants survive now than ever before.
Again, not true. At some point in the past I have gone over materials explaining how the diagnosis of ASD has changed over the years. I do not have that material at my fingertips as it is not something that impacts me personally, nor is it my field. I also don't spend my time debunking autism/vaccine conspiracies generally.
I find that hard to believe, because you think it's silly to even study autism.No it isn't. I've been aware of the scientific response to this trope about "increased autism rates" for many years. Long before COVID happened.
Again, not true. At some point in the past I have gone over materials explaining how the diagnosis of ASD has changed over the years. I do not have that material at my fingertips as it is not something that impacts me personally, nor is it my field. I also don't spend my time debunking autism/vaccine conspiracies generally.
You can knock off the personal insults or I can press one of those special buttons under your posts. We both have choices to make. I have chosen restraint so far and only ask that you start to chose restraint. Argue the post/data/idea, not me.
This is exactly what I mean. What compassion do I lack? For the suckers who have fallen for the vaccine/autism conspiracies, or for those who propagate them. I have only disdain for the latter like Kennedy and Bigtree.
Autism causation is a scientific topic. My agenda is therefore based on science. I don't really care which political "side" has aligned with the scientifically wrong position. I will go after them regardless.
This is a very sad, and incorrect view of the world, and me. And I make one final plea for you to stop characterizing me or anyone else on "politics", particularly w/o evidence.
I can't find anywhere where Hans said it was silly to study autism.I find that hard to believe, because you think it's silly to even study autism.
Since you said mate, you should of known the studies on autism mostly started in Europe in the 60's and 70's. The first diagnosis happened in the 40's.It's not rocket surgery, mate. Awareness and changes in how autism and how it's diagnosed "account for the bulk" of the rise. But don't worry, there are other factors.
Source: The Real Reasons Autism Rates Are Up in the U.S.
Think of the children, ban old dudes from having kids.
Your not looking in the right spot.I can't find anywhere where Hans said it was silly to study autism.
@sanderabeer was correct. I haven't said "don't study autism". What I did say was that the re-re-re-examination of the conspiratorial "vaccines caused increased autism" claim is a waste of time, money, and credibility. The non-connection between vaccines and autism have been conclusively demonstrated. Doing another study or report isn't going to find a connection unless they lie or manipulate data. Autism is a complex developmental disorder primarily from in utero development.Your not looking in the right spot.
You can pretend you weren't referring the study of autism as being silly. But your words revealed your motive for even mentioning the study. Because you think it's silly. You wouldn't have mentioned it if you didn't.@sanderabeer was correct. I haven't said "don't study autism". What I did say was that the re-re-re-examination of the conspiratorial "vaccines caused increased autism" claim is a waste of time, money, and credibility. The non-connection between vaccines and autism have been conclusively demonstrated. Doing another study or report isn't going to find a connection unless they lie or manipulate data. Autism is a complex developmental disorder primarily from in utero development.
Since you said mate, you should of known the studies on autism mostly started in Europe in the 60's and 70's. The first diagnosis happened in the 40's.
Your not looking in the right spot.
You can pretend you weren't referring the study of autism as being silly. But your words revealed your motive for even mentioning the study. Because you think it's silly. You wouldn't have mentioned it if you didn't.
I will agree you didn't say don't study autism but I am correct in that you think it's silly to do so.
I wasn't. I was clearly talking about pointless vaccine-autism studies.You can pretend you weren't referring the study of autism as being silly.
Robert Kennedy is a major anti-science jerk who is destructive to public health. The only difference between a year ago when he was a "Democrat" and now when he is a "Republican" is that as Sec of HHS he is far more dangerous because he has actual power.But your words revealed your motive for even mentioning the study. Because you think it's silly. You wouldn't have mentioned it if you didn't.
I will agree you didn't say don't study autism but I am correct in that you think it's silly to do so.
You keep adding words, now it's vaccine-autism.I wasn't. I was clearly talking about pointless vaccine-autism studies.
Robert Kennedy is a major anti-science jerk who is destructive to public health. The only difference between a year ago when he was a "Democrat" and now when he is a "Republican" is that as Sec of HHS he is far more dangerous because he has actual power.
My conversation is with him, don't need to quote anything I've already read it.You're free to quote him and actually support your claim.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?