Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 377 posts

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#31

Post by ohgr »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #18
BenFranklin100 wrote: post #11

“Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nation’s top health official, repeatedly said before taking office that vaccines cause autism, despite overwhelming scientific evidence that they do not. He has declined to disavow his statements and has continued to promote a possible link.” Having worked directly with autism researchers, I can confidently tell you that RFK is making a wild guess not ba…

Calling it a "guess" seems very generous at this point, saying it is a "lie" is more accurate I think.

Never attribute to malice what cannot be adequately explained by stupidity. And he is one stupid fuck.

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#33

Post by jsheard »

formerly_proven wrote: post #3

The criteria for diagnosing ASD today are vastly different from those that would’ve resulted in an autism diagnosis shortly after the abolishment of lobotomy, it is hardly surprising the rate keeps going up as you widen the net.

> shortly after the abolishment of lobotomy

That's an important bit of context whenever RFK Jr. talks about how conditions like Autism and ADHD weren't a thing when he was growing up - his own aunt, who may well have had one of those conditions, was dealt with by giving her a lobotomy and then hiding her away. Those are the supposedly better times he's harkening back to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_Kennedy

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#34

Post by ZeroGravitas »

ohgr wrote: post #31
SiempreViernes wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling it a "guess" seems very generous at this point, saying it is a "lie" is more accurate I think.

Never attribute to malice what cannot be adequately explained by stupidity. And he is one stupid fuck.

"Grift" might be a more appropriate term and so the more appropriate aphorism might be:

> "It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it." -Upton Sinclair"

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#35

Post by lawn »

Freak_NL wrote: post #19
lawn wrote: post #4

This is just another angle of placing people in camps. Combine this with the overzealous focus on transvestites and the so called "illegal aliens" you should see a pattern with where the Nazis began.

> transvestites The focus seems to lie on transgender people, not cross dressers.

Yeah, my bad.

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#36

Post by viraptor »

NomDePlum wrote: post #16
viraptor wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Progress of understanding.

Sorry, still not that clear to me. Are you saying that there is no direct link but rather understanding of various areas increased due to the stopping of this practice?

We understood more about various conditions and treatments, so we stopped doing harmful things like lobotomies and refined the definitions on some conditions as needed. Those are not directly related though.

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#37

Post by ohgr »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #34
ohgr wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never attribute to malice what cannot be adequately explained by stupidity. And he is one stupid fuck.

"Grift" might be a more appropriate term and so the more appropriate aphorism might be: > "It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it." -Upton Sinclair"

That's completely fair.

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#38

Post by Freak_NL »

torlok wrote: post #29
Freak_NL wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> transvestites The focus seems to lie on transgender people, not cross dressers.

I don't think there's much discern, given the outrage around the Drag Queen Story Hour.

The type of person driving this pointless cultural war would like to make it seem that this is essentially all about men dressing up as women telling children things they shouldn't know — both erasing the fact that trans men exist, and deliberately linking both drag and transgenderism to sexual perversion and implied paedophilia while lumping the two groups together.

So let's keep the words we use sensible and devoid from (intended or unintended) bigotry.

Besides, drag queens and kings usually are not transgender¹. It is a type of performance featuring a carefully crafted, over-the-top persona, not a full-time endeavour, and it is, crucially, an act. A transgender person isn't acting.

1: I would guess not more so than other groups of people.

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#39

Post by feverzsj »

BenFranklin100 wrote: post #11

“Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nation’s top health official, repeatedly said before taking office that vaccines cause autism, despite overwhelming scientific evidence that they do not. He has declined to disavow his statements and has continued to promote a possible link.” Having worked directly with autism researchers, I can confidently tell you that RFK is making a wild guess not ba…

[flagged]

Re: U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

#40

Post by croes »

Tireings wrote: post #22
ohgr wrote: post #15

Aktion T4 next? This is a dark dark road. I suspect the US will become like Germany in the next few decades where the paranoia about handing any data over is justifiably high. I hope this burns the unethical side of the tech industry to the ground. It deserves it.

I agree generally but I hope we make as much real anonymous health data available for research. Google is certified and runs the biggest medical database with (I believe without googling this) the biggest hospital operator in the USA. I have a condition which is rare enough that it doesn't get enough funding and data is missing

Didn’t they already show that these data can’t really be anonymized if it should still be useful?
Post reply on HN