[Referring to the prevalence of autism]
The prevalence in NH and a couple of other places is infinity. We had no autism in 1993. They must not have counted those oddball adults who diagnosed themselves when it became in vogue as an excuse for their eccentricities.
25 comments
Hmm. Well, I'm slightly autistic (we're talking a very light form of Asperger's, here), and yes, there certainly was autism before 1993. Those babies and children were just hidden from the world for a very long time and the diagnosis was only really formalized relatively recently.
To be fair, he's not saying that autism didn't exist prior to 1993. He's just saying that it didn't exist in New Hampshire back then. It is true that the statistics show no cases receiving treatment that year, but, you know, the three kinds of lies - lies, damn lies, and...
Of course, from zero, any increase is infinite, hence John best's gem that "The prevalence in NH and a couple of other places is infinity". At first glance, I thought he was trying to say that the entire population of New Hampshire is autistic.
So let's just follow his argument to its logical conclusion, and declare that any condition not known to primordial man - let's be sure not to exclude cancer or heart disease - is nothing more than a figment of the sufferer's imagination and simply an attempt on their part to burrow their way into taxpayer's pockets.
Ionakana has it right -- the major hole in this guy's logic is that he is assuming that because there are no diagnosed cases in the literature, that means that it didn't exist. Which, of course, is silly. By that criteria, any condition that is not recognized and diagnosed doesn't exist. So if you're sick and don't go to a doctor and get him to officially report what's wrong with you to the state statistic people, then you're not sick.
No, the really stupid thing is that he DOESN'T assume that - he recognises it, because he says "They must not have counted those oddball adults..."
The stupid thing is that having acknowledged that "none reported" =/= "none existing", he then completely ignores that.
That's funny. One of my students (I work with autistic children/young adults in a residence) is 21. I'm no mathematician, but I'm pretty sure she was born before 1993, and she was diagnosed well before that as well.
I guess she's just 'weird' and 'eccentric'?
Autism has existed for decades; the reason why there's so much attention to it now is because there's so much more knowledge about it.
And yes, cases of autism are rising. Why? Those with autistic disorders have gone from being freaks to being accepted, and so now are actually finding lovers.
Actually, the term autism was first coined in 1912 by Dr. Hans Bleuler although the condition didn't come to be defined as we know it until some time in the 40's.
There are plenty who believe the cause of autism to be modern vaccinations for childhood diseases. While the jury is still out on the effects of certain vaccine preservatives (i.e. thimerosal), it is general accepted that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks.
Not everyone feels the same, and fundamentalists always seem to lead the way when it comes to irrational fears of anything scientific. This is no different.
@Rosie
http://snipurl.com/qr23
This may give you a better idea about this guy...
Oh, him . This is another one who could fill their own site.
Yes, just like homosexuality didn't exist before the 1980's when the AIDS epidemic struck. Just because people don't recognize it, or talk about it that much, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.