Nope. Association is not causation. The only association is the preconceived assumption. Large epidemiology studies show there is no link.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @eileeniorio
Since days of John Snow and Cholera we’ve used epidemiology to tease out causes of illness. How we differentiate true cause from availability bias. Maybe epidemiologist/researcher could explain better
@GidMK@glenpyle ?Not sure where you hear that ASD is not medical. ICD 299.03 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Worth noting as well that the increased rates of autism are largely due to changes in diagnostic criteria, the 'true' prevalence of autism hasn't increased in ~20 years at leasthttps://medium.com/the-method/there-is-no-autism-epidemic-85974967d1de …
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
We're literally talking about the label
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
It's not in the prevalence stats. And we aren't disagreeing, you are just incorrect
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Well, I can't look into the future, but as of today there has been no apparent increase in the rates of autism that can't be explained by a broadening of diagnostic criteria, similar to what we've recently seen with hypertension
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
It's like the people who talk nonsense about autism rates from the 70s, when the diagnosis of autism wasn't even formalized! It's incomparable as a crude rate
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.