Based on your argument, one could also say: in 1967 there were negligible incidences of autism. Today, the CDC says it's 1 in 42 for boys. What changed? Vaccination. Do you agree with that statement? Or only your own?https://twitter.com/angryemu1/status/943673690310443008 …
-
-
Replying to @SharylAttkisson
Bad analogy. In 1967 we barely understood what autism was, much less did we have the ability to diagnose it. Even compared to 20 years ago, diagnostic ability has improved greatly
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Winflop
My bad analogy was on purpose in response to his bad analogy. However, on the other hand, even the govt agrees that diagnostic ability doesn't account for increase in autism. They say it's a real epidemic. Alarming.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SharylAttkisson
Will take your word for it but I struggle to believe it. For example, did we even know what Asperger's Syndrome was 50 years ago, much less that it's part of the spectrum, much less how to diagnose it properly? I'd never even heard of it 20 years ago...
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Winflop @SharylAttkisson
They used to call it idiot savant syndrome a century ago.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
True. (But 1/42 boys wasn't thought of as an idiot savant.)
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.