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

Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

nber.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 85 posts

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#11

Post by skim_milk »

metamuas wrote: post #2

Proximity to freeways increases autism risk, study finds [0]. Having a mother who lived within 1,000 feet of a freeway while pregnant doubles a child's odds of having autism [1]. Basically, white noise can cause autism. People are screwing up their kids at an exponential rate [2]. [0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20210609042055/https://www.latim... [1]: https://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20101217/fast-lane-t...…

I could see how living next to a major road or having a noisy environment could disturb a child's sleep at night. Perhaps it is the role of noisy cars that disturb the sleep that triggers these changes?

I was a strange child that could only sleep if mother turned on a hair dryer next to me some nights. This is materially different from highways - I briefly got to experience what it was like living next to a noisy road and I would argue it would be more likely that it is the role of noisy cars, screeching tires, horns, and pollution that is at play in these studies, not the white noise of highways. Would children that lived in windy forests with no sound isolation having to listen to the noise of the trees fare the same?

Most autistic people are sensitive to stimuli - sensitivity being nearly completely genetic determined and little to do with environment. I wonder if it this greater sensitivity being triggered by highways and disturbs sleep that impairs brain development.

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#12

Post by xypage »

kstenerud wrote: post #6

If you're going to post joke research, please don't do it about autism. It's already bad enough as it is with all the quackery going around.

I don't think it's joke research, I think they chose an effect that might have positive correlation and proved that, then showed at least one environmental factor that could explain it and how you could find correlation there too. They say themselves at the end that they aren't trying to say it's conclusive evidence in any direction, I believe they're just trying to generally indicate that there does seem to be some sort of environmental factor, and that it's likely possible to discover (or at least get set on the path towards) the true cause via this sort of analysis

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#13

Post by metamuas »

sascha_sl wrote: post #9

This is a hilariously bad line of reasoning and basically a signal for me to take econ researchers less seriously.

"Diagnoses of autism have risen dramatically over the past few decades, from an estimated one in 2500 children thirty years ago to one in 150 today." is one of the first lines of the article. If you are so smart, and only you are so smart, what environmental factor has increased that rapidly?

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#14

Post by sascha_sl »

metamuas wrote: post #8
kstenerud wrote: post #6

If you're going to post joke research, please don't do it about autism. It's already bad enough as it is with all the quackery going around.

Precipitation means the kids stay inside and are more likely to watch television[0]. This was influenced by another paper about the link between precipitation and autism[1]. Why do you think it is joke research? Why did you criticize before looking into it? [0]: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=989648 [1]: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/articlepdf/3...

They're both written by the same people, econ professors that are helplessly out of their field.

They're assuming a lot of things here:

* Rain means children watch televsion, no rain means they do not. This is a harsh oversimplification of how parents work.

* Cable TV was correlated to increased autism diagnosis. But what else is correlated to Cable TV? Wealth. And what's correlated to wealth? Getting your kid diagnosed properly in the country where healthcare is not easily affordable maybe? If you think that's a stretch, well, the entire paper is argued on this sort of thin ice.

* Autism isn't generally considered to have "a trigger", but some circumstances like stress can make it more obvious how a someone with autism is different. Autism is one of these things that aren't objectively measured, but often are diagnosed as a result of how annoyed parents are.

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#15

Post by jat850 »

metamuas wrote: post #13
sascha_sl wrote: post #9

This is a hilariously bad line of reasoning and basically a signal for me to take econ researchers less seriously.

"Diagnoses of autism have risen dramatically over the past few decades, from an estimated one in 2500 children thirty years ago to one in 150 today." is one of the first lines of the article. If you are so smart, and only you are so smart, what environmental factor has increased that rapidly?

Why not diagnosis over environment?

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#17

Post by danamit »

Autism seem to be a politicized issue by looking at the replies.

As far as I can tell the paper is nothing but honest truth seeking, you know a study doesn't equal truth, the article itself doesn't say it is a confirmed hypothesis. And while correlation doesn't mean causation, when you see a correlation, the first thing you do is you investigate if it is a causation too. The most logical thing to do and thanks God smart people did that with lead and many other toxic chemicals that affected society in the past.

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#18

Post by melony »

skim_milk wrote: post #11
metamuas wrote: post #2

Proximity to freeways increases autism risk, study finds [0]. Having a mother who lived within 1,000 feet of a freeway while pregnant doubles a child's odds of having autism [1]. Basically, white noise can cause autism. People are screwing up their kids at an exponential rate [2]. [0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20210609042055/https://www.latim... [1]: https://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20101217/fast-lane-t...…

I could see how living next to a major road or having a noisy environment could disturb a child's sleep at night. Perhaps it is the role of noisy cars that disturb the sleep that triggers these changes? I was a strange child that could only sleep if mother turned on a hair dryer next to me some nights. This is materially different from highways - I briefly got to experience what it was like living next to a noisy roa…

More likely would be tire particulates.

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#19

Post by sterlind »

sascha_sl wrote: post #14
metamuas wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Precipitation means the kids stay inside and are more likely to watch television[0]. This was influenced by another paper about the link between precipitation and autism[1]. Why do you think it is joke research? Why did you criticize before looking into it? [0]: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=989648 [1]: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/articlepdf/3...

They're both written by the same people, econ professors that are helplessly out of their field. They're assuming a lot of things here: * Rain means children watch televsion, no rain means they do not. This is a harsh oversimplification of how parents work. * Cable TV was correlated to increased autism diagnosis. But what else is correlated to Cable TV? Wealth. And what's correlated to wealth? Getting your kid diagno…

N=1, but I grew up without cable TV (only one movie on the weekend), and I'm autistic. very so as a little kid.

my parents were both mildly on the spectrum, I apparently got a double dose. hooray for assortative mating!

Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)

#20

Post by danamit »

jat850 wrote: post #15
metamuas wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Diagnoses of autism have risen dramatically over the past few decades, from an estimated one in 2500 children thirty years ago to one in 150 today." is one of the first lines of the article. If you are so smart, and only you are so smart, what environmental factor has increased that rapidly?

Why not diagnosis over environment?

While it can be argued for other things like ADHD, I doubt it can be argued for cases of severe autism.
Post reply on HN