Autism rates double in Utah
POSTED BY: Bytemite
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 06:01
VIEWED: 3477
PAGE 2 of 4
I wasn't trying to correct you. Just adding to your observations that 3-5 demonstrate social and language issues, which can turn into behavioural problems later on. I wasn't trying to debate or disagree.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Several things
1. Say it with maps. If you have incidence maps you can correlate data much better. The smoking cancer link was reallyproved with maps. Counties with tobacco use had lung cancer, those without did not have anywhere near as much, and the higher the tobacco use, the higher the cancer risk.
2. Autism is overdiagnosed. If the diagnosis increases, there may be an increase in problem, or may not. Again, see maps.
3. Chemistry: we currently acknowledge basically four different levels of activity for stable non radioactive chemicals: inert, reactive, bioactive and bioavailable.
Fluorine is a highly corrosive gas, so its not inert. It also has a high weight, so it changed the properties of any molecule it binds to.
In WWI, it was used as a chemical weapon, because when inhaled in high quanities it could kill people. In WWII the Nazis tried other variations, but with little success. It took a while to figure out that the deaths in WWI Were due to the formation of corrosive acids, which just doesn't happen at toxic levels in the environment becuase of the lower concentrations. I don't know if they used Cholorfluorocarbons in WWII, but I know we used them in Korea, and then again in Vietnam. CFCs are the bioactive form of Chilorine and Fluorine halogen gasses. Always be wary of spin. We did not use them in Korea to "defoliate." we wanted to depopulate, and the Koreans compained because cholobenzene products were getting into their drinking water, and Korean civilians were gettin sick and dying. Vietnamese still get sick and die regularly from "Agent Orange" which is a messy mix of CFCs. while I'm at it, here's another thing that doesn't exist: "Chemical dispersant." That's a spin term for industrial solvent. "Corexit" is also not a chemical, it's a brew of chemicals, primarily CFCs. This is an industrial solvent, and a chemical weapon. It's much simpler to view them as a class then as a chemical, because you get many CFC products from a simple reaction, and while they have slightly different properties, they are toxic to living things becauce they displace hydrogen in biological systems, causing mulitple failures. CFC results from a reaction will very widely in their vaporization volitility, how lethal they are, and at what densities they are considered tk be toxic. The major concern with Fracking is the use of CFCs, which end up in the drinking water, CFCs are also widely used by the oil and gas industry and by the US military, as weapons and also as industrial solvents, for cleaning purposes. Since the oil and gas industry and military bases are exempt for land and water regulations, and CFCs can be toxic at one part per billion, you don't want to be anywhere near either one, or in the watershed of anyone using, disposing of, or storing CFCs. If you use them in household products like dust removers or paint removers, you might want to rethink that, but remember they are highly toxic, you can't simply put them in the trash or drinking water.
Whatever number I was on, I think it was 3. So
4. Genetics.
It's not that I deny the existence of genetics, I've studied the field for a long time. It's that each human being has around 33,000 genes. There's not yet any clewr way to tell what genetic flaws you do or do not have, my sister was born with neurofibromatosis caused by CFC toxicity. She does not carry the gene for the disease, the affected tissues do, due to a stem cell mutation, but she would not pass it on.
The next problem is that those who identyify others as flawed and typically themselves as not cannot possibky know either, but one thing is for sure: given the size of the human genome and the laws of probability, no one can be genetically perfect. Statistics would would tend to favor the idea that all humans possessed and equal number of flawed genes of equal impact, some are more noticeable than others. That said, even the worst flaws aree not automatically passed on, a friend of mine was born with a very serious heart condition, like his sister, brother and fat
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I've been reading, still interesting, Magons, Happy, Riona. Haven't had much to say because I've mostly been absorbing.
DT: Possibly true about chlorinated VOCs being more likely to kill them, but then, exposure during fetal development didn't kill your sister right away. It did, however, potentially make her sensitive to later exposures.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
On the other hand, while I kinda do like my fluoride theory because of the suspicious time-line, I can't fully discount regional factors in this development.
Which is to say, inbreeding. Because SERIOUSLY. Historical polygamy made just about everyone related to each other.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I wasn't trying to correct you. Just adding to your observations that 3-5 demonstrate social and language issues, which can turn into behavioural problems later on. I wasn't trying to debate or disagree.
Oh, shiny!
Had my first case with a hardcore special interest. A little boy (4 years) who just wants to swing (on his belly, not sitting up) all day. He seems quite gifted physically (coordination, balance and musculature) but he's the most nonverbal I've worked with yet.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Byte, I think that everyone, no matter their opinion on genetics, can agree that inbreeding is a problem for people's health etc.
DT, though we don't agree about everything here, I see that we both agree about overdiagnosis being a problem and that there are yucky chemicals in our environment, food etc. that are a problem and that those could be one of the culprits. I like your mapping suggestion, sounds like a clear way to figure it out.
Happy, sometimes "special interests" and "not wanting changes in routine" are chalked up to Aspergers, which, among other things, I feel is too often diagnosed. I have a neighbor with aspergers and she definitely has it, I've known her since she was born and as soon as she was about two we knew that something was different. She's 18 now, finishing her first year of college and doing well scholastically, as she always has. She lacks the ability to form what most people would consider to be meaningful relationships, has never had a friendship beyond what most people would consider to be casual, sharing some common interests but that's it, without any sort of emotional connection. She's living at school this year, visiting her parents on the weekends. her first roommate left (which I don't actually blame on F because the roommate was a pain in the arse). The current roommate and her seem fine, but there doesn't seem to be any connection between her and mostpeople. I think she loves her parents, her grandma too, but noone else and her way of loving is a little different than mine, but hey, I think that everyone loves a little differently anyways. But yeah, she definitely has aspergers. But too many people are chunked into a diagnosis when they're too little to really be for sure, F didn't get the current diagnosis until she was about 7 or 8 or 9, I actually helped, oddly enough, though it was in a sideways and unintentional way. Kind of funny eh?, long story.
Fortunately she does better at forming relationships online, I think it takes conventional socialization out of the equation. She did make one close friend online once, a boy whom she met later when they went on vacation to his state. But that friendship didn't last.
But yeah, autism is often overdiagnosed. As are other things, I don't believe in diagnosing unless there is a legitimate issue going on, a noticeable difference that needs agknowledged.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Who spotted the pattern?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I was snarking, Byte - autistics and people in the Asperger's spectrum are quite often acutely aware of "patterns". Hence the snark wondering who it was that noticed the rise in autism rates...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME