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?
Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
21–30 of 85 posts
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#22This 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?
This is the same kind of thoughtful question as "why are there so many more left-handed/gay/trans people than x years ago" - because social factors have changed visibility of these traits, not because they didn't exist.
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
Corrected, thanks.
Correlation does not Imply Causation : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_cau... Edit: Add; White Noise : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_noise Pink Noise : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_noise Red (Brownian) Noise : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_noise Purple Noise : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_noise Grey Noise : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_noise
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#24Autism 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 sm…
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Though, what's more likely is that a child with mild ASD is more obviously autistic under stress, which leads to diagnosis earlier.
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
2. It is easier for children of poorer people to get an autism diagnosis now than it was 50 years ago, so even severe cases might not have shown up in the stats if the child was born to a poor family.
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#27If 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…
This is the kind of "research" that leads to CNN headlines like "TV is turning your child autistic!", and other such scare stories for frightened and confused parents that lead to more bullshit salves and treatments that only harm autistics even more (as if we're not getting shit on enough already).
And if it's not intended as a joke, that's even worse.
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#28Earlier 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?
We're much better at diagnosing it than we used to be.
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#29Autism 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 sm…
All it tells me is that the standard for evidence in economics is much lower than the standard of evidence in medicine or sociology. This paper has some problems that run very deep in established methodology, so while it might be good faith, it's also useless.
Re: Does watching television trigger autism? (2007)
#30Autism 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 sm…
All it tells me is that the standard for evidence in economics is much lower than the standard of evidence in medicine or sociology. This paper has some problems that run very deep in established methodology, so while it might be good faith, it's also useless.
Conclusion: the standard for evidence in economics is much lower than the standard of evidence in medicine or sociology.