Thanks for your comments. I think it is important that these topics be discussed openly. My daughter is 2 years old, and she defies most of the theories about autism. I have no doubt that autism has a genetic base. But genetic mutations do not cause an epidemic in just one generation. It takes many generations. So obviously there are other factors beyond genetics. What they are, no body knows. Some say it is vaccines, but in our case that was clearly not the case. Others say it is due to dairy intake, and again that is not the case for us. However, I would not tell other parents to throw out those theories because we have a kid who does not fit that profile. My mother had lung cancer, but she never smoked a cigarette in her life. Does it mean smoking does not cause lung cancer? I also know people who eat burgers and fries every day for lunch (plus who knows what for dinner), but are skinny and have no cholestrol issues. Does that mean eating fries and burgers everday does not cause weight and cholestrol problems? I know it does for me; one bowl of ice-cream and I can almost feel my weight being added to!

Even the top autism researchers don’t have an answer to what causes autism. Until there is an answer, all options should be open.

We can debate at length about whether TV causes autism. I don’t know if it does. But what I do know is that TV is not good for anyone, autism or not, especially kids. No parent has every looked back and regretted not letting their children watch more TV. I find it irresponsbile when people say watching TV is a good thing for autistic kids (see articles on about.com).

Once a link has been shown between TV and autism, it would be unwise to ignore it while the debate rages on, especially since there is nothing to lose even if that theory is proven to be wrong.

Most medical professionals in the field of autism work to earn an income. They don’t go home to face an autistic child. The few medical professionals that do have autistic children are the ones who pioneered the alternative therapies and bio-interventions. I truly believe these are the people who will find the ultimate answer. The 9-5 professionals do not have a vested interest or a sense of urgency to solve this problem.

Waldman’s work was inspired by a personal experience, and as far as I know he did not receive any external funding for this work. That should be applauded. Surprisingly, I have heard many negative comments because his work was not funded by NSF/NIH. That seems backwards to me. I know NSF and NIH very well, and I have received funding from them, and I also serve as their panelist. There are thousands (possibly millions) of useless papers written from NSF/NIH funding cluttering up our databases.

What puzzles me is why so many people are taking this study as a personal attack. Autism is wide open territory, and no one knows much about it. If we clamp down on every person who comes up with a potential theory, we are not helping anything.

OK, I will get off my soap box.

All parents should be alerted that there could be a link between TV and autism, however weak that link may be. The American Academy of Pediatrics says children under age 2 should not watch any TV at all. They probably did not have autism in mind, but I find that connection way too close for comfort.

I am not taking any more chances. My kid is not going to spend any more time in front of the TV.

If the study is proven wrong ten years from now, I am not going to worry about all that TV time I have lost. But on the other hand, what if the study is proven to be correct? Are you ready to face that?

Although TV has not been proven to cause autism, no one in their right mind would claim that TV is a good thing for kids. It is like smoking or drinking. Even if you don’t believe they can cause cancer or heart desease, you can’t claim that smoking and drinking are good for you. I can get along with those who question the validity of this Cornell study, but what I find irresponsible is when they say TV is a good thing for autistic kids. That can cause great harm.

Thanks very much for sharing your obeservations and experiences here—are the children from Nigeria all of the same age? I gather from the Wall Street Journal article that featured Waldman’s thesis (I posted on it http://www.autismvox.com/tv-mom-strikes-again-slates-eastbrook-defends-waldmans-tvautism-study/#comment-532928 I have taught the Preschool Program for Children with Disabilities for 23 years. I have had children from all levels of the autism spectrum. While teaching in Houston, we had several children from the same village in Nigeria with autism - genetic? Where I can support Waldman is that I see more children with communication disorders whose parents have used the TV as a babysitter. These children are talked 'at' not with. Then they wonder why the children start talking when they enter my class. I also think a certain amount of ADHD can be contributed to the fact that so much of the programs are such a fast pace that it affects the child's ability to focus on an activity for an extended period of time. We have also seen an enormous amount of children that are diagnosed, correctly or not, with ADHD. I have taught the Preschool Program for Children with Disabilities for 23 years. I have had children from all levels of the autism spectrum. While teaching in Houston, we had several children from the same village in Nigeria with autism – genetic? Where I can support Waldman is that I see more children with communication disorders whose parents have used the TV as a babysitter. These children are talked ‘at’ not with. Then they wonder why the children start talking when they enter my class. I also think a certain amount of ADHD can be contributed to the fact that so much of the programs are such a fast pace that it affects the child’s ability to focus on an activity for an extended period of time. We have also seen an enormous amount of children that are diagnosed, correctly or not, with ADHD.