My review of Robert Sapolsky's book "Behave" is in next week's Spectator. A sad victim of the Replication Crisis:https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/07/can-good-and-bad-behaviour-be-explained-by-biology/ …
-
And if no one is studying prenatal alcohol (I suggest studying adopted kids/adults),how can one base theory on science? Must study this!
There are some adoption data on FAS: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/135/2/264.full …, http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/132/4/e980.short …, http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/5/e1178 …. Thankfully, not so common.
-
-
1st says missed diagnosis rate 80+%! 2nd-literature review!? 3rd 71 kids and only 5 years after adoption!(problems arise later).No studies!
-
How you can say "not so common" based on those three studies (totalling 227 kids) seems strange. Science?
-
Be less presumptuous and read more carefully. You need prevalence rates, not absolute counts. FAS is your hobbyhorse, not mine.
-
Lots of papers specifically on that question. Here's a recent one arguing for a high-end of the range number. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19731384
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.