The Great Autism Rip-off?
May 31, 2008 by Kristina Chew, PhD
Filed under Health
The great autism rip-off is a story in the May 31st Daily Mail about the numerous alternative medicine/biomedical treatments that parents of autistic children turn to—-and how this has become a “huge industry” that “feeds on parents desperate to cure their children.” The Daily Mail cites an article in the Journal Of Developmental And Behavioural Paediatrics that notes that a third of parents of autistic children have tried such unproven treatments, and that 1 in 10 has used what is, according to experts, “‘a potentially harmful approach’.”
I’ve related our experience trying some biomedical treatments in an earlier post. We thought we saw effects of an often immediate type but none were lasting and it was truly education that has made the difference for Charlie.
When it comes to parents trying to help their children, sometimes the feelings of the heart can influence the decisions of the head more than a lot. Caveat emptor, caveat.
The method for determining whether there is a connection between autism and vaccines is a comparison between the rate of autism of the vaccinated population with the rate of autism of the unvaccinated population. The has never been done. Until it is done the claim that vaccines and autism are or are not related is just a shouting match.
It’s not the only method Ed, even assuming it would be ethical and logistically possible. Not only would it only give you the two rates, but wouldn’t account for confounders. For you to claim it is the only way is basically an attempt to blot out data you can’t accept.
Like it or not, other ways have been tried, and they’ve overwhelmingly came up negative, or neutral at best. Lump it, or show why they’re wrong. You don’t get to dazzle us by swinging your dick around here. It doesn’t work.
Pony up an explanation for why Thompson and the like are wrong. Anything else is just noise amongst the shouting.
Sod it, don’t bother. I’ve just remembered who you are.
Dedj,
I am not sure what I said that left you revertin to ad hominum attacks to make your argument. I didn’t know I had that kind of influence on you.
There are ANOVA methods for picking statistical inferences out of data when there are other factors involved. Even with these methods, running a stastical test starts with the basics, in this case it is a comparison of the vaccinated population and the unvaccinated population. As for the ethics, I am assuming that you mean that we can’t make people not be vaccinated just to gather the statistics. Be at ease. Two percent of the population in the US refuses to have their children vaccinated. This base is more than large enough to collect the statistics for such an experiment.
This experiment is essential to know the truth about whether there is a connection between autism and vaccines. The experiment has never been done. I stand by what I said before. The experiment should be done.
But you did mention that there are other ways to prove that there is no connection between autism and vaccines. Perhaps you would like to elaborate. Tell us how it is done and who has already done it. Maybe you can even provide a reference.
Ad hominem’s are logical fallacies used in place of reasoned arguement. It is not an ad hominem to point out that you are blotting out existing data you don’t like, using superflous matters of personal taste.
You can call for the experiment all you like. It does not negate the existence of the previous research done on this. It is your fault that you cannot accept anything less than the top tier of the hierachy of evidence, not anyone elses.
“But you did mention that there are other ways to prove that there is no connection between autism and vaccines”
Actually, I didn’t. Such a thing would likely be extremely difficult, if possible at all. What I did suggest was that there are other methods to investigate the connection, which have been rather famously done before. Your refusal to accept this, or provide any form of rebuttal, does not change the fact of their existance.
I think this has run its course. See you around.
That is twice you mentioned “the existence of the previous research done on this”. I called for the experiment because it is an essential piece of research that has not been done. If you know of research that proves the existence or non-existence of a connection between autism and vaccines, (not autism MMR, not autism mercury, not autism DPT, but autism vaccines) cite it. If you can’t, then what are you convinced of?
“If you know of research that proves the existence or non-existence of a connection between autism and vaccines,”
My theory is that autism rates have increased and this increase is due to the rise in ocean piracy. Now, before you are convinced I’m wrong, please provide reference to research that either proves the existence or non-existence of a connection between the rise in piracy and the rise in autism connection. If you can’t, then why would you dismiss my theory?