1/2 of US babies ASD by 2025, Glyphosate, & a 2h Autism One

Post Reply New Topic

In my experience its the anxiety that causes much of the digestive discomfort, mellowing the anxiety helps the digestive discomfort I experience.

Hmm interesting.

It's quite easy to trick people who know nothing about something into thinking that you do know something about it.

This "researcher" is suggesting the biologically implausible, promoting discredited hypotheses, and mangling statistics. She does is not "incredibly well versed".

I appreciate that this is your special interest, but you haven't contributed anything here that wasn't debunked in the last thread you posted. If some new information comes to light then I'm sure those of us who understand biology will happily talk through its merits with you, but frankly this two hour video is worth no more than your "funny feelings".

Did you listen to the presentation? Feel free to point out any errors & your sources of correct info. What's implausible? What hypotheses have been discredited? Sources?

It's an interest - an interest in sharing what I've learned and done so that others may benefit from it. Nothing was ever debunked in any thread I've posted. I'm still waiting for your "debunking." There's a massive difference between not believing something and actually debunking something via proof that it is false or fabricated. Again, see my signature.

She made the classic error of thinking that correlation proves causation. Her graph shows a correlated increase of glyphosphate use and autism diagnosis but this is not evidence that the former caused the latter. Correlation gives good jumping-off points where research can be done, but is not in itself evidence.

She also over-extrapolated her data, assuming that the current increase in autism diagnoses will continue at precisely the same rate. There is no justification for that assumption.

She also proposed a mechanism for how glyphosphate could cause autism but there is not evidence that this mechanism actually happens the way she thinks it does.

It would make her case a little (little!!) stronger if she could correlate glyphosphate use and autism diagnosis with more than just one variable (time). For instance if she could also look at the variable of demographics and see if autism clusters in populations where glyphosphate exposure is highest (the farm workers who actually use it?). But even that would just be a piece of additional data, not actual proof. She dabbles in doing just that by showing that Americans have higher glyphosphate exposure (and presumably higher autism diagnostic rate?) than Europeans. But then she doesn't address the confounding variable of different health care systems and how that affects diagnostic rate. Of course this would also be a confounder in looking at farm workers (highest glyphosphate exposure?) since they are likely getting different health care than Silicon Valley tech workers (another demographic with documented high autism diagnostic rate).

Teasing apart confounding variables is difficult but it must be done. She doesn't even try. She plows on ahead as if confounding variables don't exist.