Autism (questions / cause, not support)

[quote the raven]

5 hours ago, Jonny Vegas said:

 

When anti vaxxers talk about the MMR vaccine for example and its supposed links to autism there were many things I took into account when my son was due his. The fact the MMR vaccine had been issued in the UK for over 30 years by then, the numerous studies conducted showing no proven link between the vaccine and autism, the possibility that some of the children with autistic symptoms may be more likely to have developed them from parents sitting them infront of an iPad for 12 hours a day rather than a vaccine.

 

Wow. Ok first off point one mmr seeing as two kids at my sons asd specialist school got measles last year I’d say not having the mmr made no difference to them. 
 

Secondly as one of the many people here that have a child with asd that requires 24 hour care I assure you it’s not because I sat him in front of an iPad for 12 hours. There’s a topic just down from this with people really struggling and that comment is way outa line. 

Edited April 21, 2020 by quote the raven

[Rey_Piste]

2 hours ago, quote the raven said:

Wow. Ok first off point one mmr seeing as two kids at my sons asd specialist school got measles last year I’d say not having the mmr made no difference to them.

That one study about the jab being a cause of autism did so much harm. The only reason that cases of children getting diagnosed is down to the increase in testing for it. That and now it's a spectrum of severity, when it used to only be the most severe cases, were noted. I'm fairly certain most of us grew up with the one "weird" kid in our class at school and if they were going through the education system now they would be on the spectrum to some extent. 

Taking this back on track I would be sceptical of a vaccine that hasn't gone through rigorous medical studies. Especially for a virus that can affect people twice, due to mutations of the virus.

[Hannibal Scorch]

8 hours ago, Jonny Vegas said:

The possibility that some of the children with autistic symptoms may be more likely to have developed them from parents sitting them infront of an iPad for 12 hours a day rather than a vaccine.

 

I must have missed this study. Please share this with me as it sounds riveting 

[Jonny Vegas]

6 hours ago, quote the raven said:

Wow. Ok first off point one mmr seeing as two kids at my sons asd specialist school got measles last year I’d say not having the mmr made no difference to them. 
 

Secondly as one of the many people here that have a child with asd that requires 24 hour care I assure you it’s not because I sat him in front of an iPad for 12 hours. There’s a topic just down from this with people really struggling and that comment is way outa line. 

I'm sorry for your situation but please be clear I didn't say all children with autism were sat infront of on iPad, if you interpeted it that way and it caused offence or upset then again I'm sorry.

My understanding is that autism is a very wide spectrum ranging from those with relatively minor additional needs to those who require much more support.

I stand by my point however that there are studies into whether early and/or prolonged exposure to digital screens such as iPad's increase the likelihood of symptoms attributed to autism and those studies do appear to have identified links. 

I've simplified things by saying iPad when in fact video games, TV, tablets etc have all been linked to symptoms or behaviours.

I will post some links for Hannibal Scorch seeing as he's asked for them.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5849631/

https://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20061019/tv-implicated-in-autism-rise

https://durablehuman.com/virtual-autism-new-threat-toddlers-too-much-screen-time/

 

[Devon Malcolm]

7 minutes ago, Jonny Vegas said:

I will post some links for Hannibal Scorch seeing as he's asked for them.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5849631/

https://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20061019/tv-implicated-in-autism-rise

https://durablehuman.com/virtual-autism-new-threat-toddlers-too-much-screen-time/

You see, I can pretty much dismiss those links without even having to read them because I can tell by the URL of the latter two that these are studies that still treating autism as a condition or a disability. Autism is a difference. It is not directly treatable. It's not a mental health 'issue'. That's it.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Devon Malcolm

[quote the raven]

10 minutes ago, Jonny Vegas said:

I'm sorry for your situation but please be clear I didn't say all children with autism were sat infront of on iPad, if you interpeted it that way and it caused offence or upset then again I'm sorry.

 

 

I will snip this part and say thanks. The rest I will pass on 

[Hannibal Scorch]

2 hours ago, Jonny Vegas said:

I stand by my point however that there are studies into whether early and/or prolonged exposure to digital screens such as iPad's increase the likelihood of symptoms attributed to autism and those studies do appear to have identified links. 

I've simplified things by saying iPad when in fact video games, TV, tablets etc have all been linked to symptoms or behaviours.

Who conducted these studies, Andrew Wakefield?

You either have Autism or you don't/ Staring at an IPad for a few hours a day doesn't give you it.

[Jonny Vegas]

34 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Who conducted these studies, Andrew Wakefield?

You either have Autism or you don't/ Staring at an IPad for a few hours a day doesn't give you it.

First the studies didn't exist, now they weren't conducted by reputable people.

One was conducted by Cornell University, an Ivy League school. 

I'm not saying I know better than you or anyone else because I don't. I think dismissing the research and findings from apparently reputable studies is a bit far though.

[Devon Malcolm]

13 minutes ago, Jonny Vegas said:

First the studies didn't exist, now they weren't conducted by reputable people.

One was conducted by Cornell University, an Ivy League school. 

I'm not saying I know better than you or anyone else because I don't. I think dismissing the research and findings from apparently reputable studies is a bit far though.

Suggesting that autism is 'caused' by anything completely nullifies anything that may be written in those studies from the outset. It's not too far. In fact, it's only a sidestep from the 'vaccines cause autism' shit.

Just because one of the links cited an Ivy League university study doesn't carry nearly the weight you think. Because nobody who is a complete arsebrain ever went to Ivy League colleges or Oxbridge, did they.

https://www.spectrumnews.org/news/majority-of-autism-risk-resides-in-genes-multinational-study-suggests/

This was a study of two million children, one of the largest studies of autism ever conducted. It concludes that genetic factors in over 80% of those cases were present. Not an overdose of Waffle the Wonder Dog.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Devon Malcolm

[Jonny Vegas]

Once again for clarity never once did I say everyone with autism was caused by it. Neither do the studies. The study you quoted found that 81% of the 2 million who took part were believed to have autism due to genetics. That leaves 19% that the condition wasn't attributed to genetics and that's nearly 400,000 of the 2 million. That quite clearly instantly indicates there may be other causes, one of which those studies believe may be early and or over exposure to tablets, TV, video games, etc. It also indicates the "you either have it or you don't" idea is incorrect.

We could argue back and forth forever and it's only detracting from the topic so I say lets draw a line underneath it.

[Chest Rockwell]

@Jonny Vegas I don't think you read the article that Devon linked because they did account for a large proportion of the other 19%, and also clearly stated that environmental factors were not one of them.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Chest Rockwell

[Hannibal Scorch]

32 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

This was a study of two million children, one of the largest studies of autism ever conducted. It concludes that genetic factors in over 80% of those cases were present. Not an overdose of Waffle the Wonder Dog.

It can lead, I believe to some bleeding from the ear if you have to watch the title sequence on repeat too often (My son's new game is to give us a card of what he wants to watch, but in reality he just wants to watch the first minute or so on repeat). Thankfully the mum in it is FINE!

@Jonny Vegas I know you want to draw a line under it, but I think you should take this as an education from people who are either Autistic, On the Spectrum or have kids that are either of those. I was ignorant to it until my son showed signs and eventually was diagnosed. Rain Man it turns out isn't a documentry and there is a famous saying If you meet one person with Autism you have met one person with Autism. Rather then make outlandish claims and then try and shut it down when questioned, you could use this as a chance to actually understand the reality.

Edited April 21, 2020 by Hannibal Scorch

[SuperBacon]

No Waffle slander here thanks. Put some respect on his name.

[KingofSports]

On 4/21/2020 at 3:39 PM, Devon Malcolm said:

 In fact, it's only a sidestep from the 'vaccines cause autism' shit.

 

..and I was tasked with calculating/approximating staffing levels required (within the relevant Govt. Department), to deal with potential claims, resulting from Wakefield's study. As far as I know, I got that pretty much spot-on. However, the whole thing was a farce. In the 18 months or so, I personally spent dealing with vaccine damage claims there were a handful of payments (probably under 5), but none in respect of MMR. It was never accepted as a possibility by Departmental medical advisers. That said, we still had to go through the motions (collecting 'evidence' etc.) in the full knowledge that it was a complete waste of time. Fucking soul-destroying nonsense.

[quote the raven]

13 minutes ago, KingofSports said:

..and I was tasked with calculating/approximating staffing levels required (within the relevant Govt. Department), to deal with potential claims, resulting from Wakefield's study. As far as I know, I got that pretty much spot-on. However, the whole thing was a farce. In the 18 months or so, I personally spent dealing with vaccine damage claims there were a handful of payments (probably under 5), but none in respect of MMR. It was never accepted as a possibility by Departmental medical advisers. That said, we still had to go through the motions (collecting 'evidence' etc.) in the full knowledge that it was a complete waste of time. Fucking soul-destroying nonsense.

Sadly a lot of parents want someone or something to blame. A lot of times parents refuse to even accept a diagnosis. I’ve had chats with dads on the schools behalf who have a very hard time coming to terms with it.