• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Autism risk may increase if child's mother has high DDT exposure, study finds

1. Scare tactic. fox news only uses Autism for fear and to hatemonger. don't use them for reliable info on autism. what else you use them for does not matter to me and is none of may business.

2. look at the wording of the article. heres a randomly pulled line... "To do the study, Brown partnered with researchers in Finland, a country with a universal health care system that tracks diagnoses, such as autism, in all people living there. The researchers identified 778 cases of children diagnosed with autism who were born from 1987 to 2005, then matched those individuals with controls — that is, children who were born during that same period but did not have an autism diagnosis."

what does free health care have to do with the choice of country the researchers that tested came from. that's like saying to do a study on obesity, we chose the US because of their creation of fast food.

3. we really dont know what causes this. yes everyone focuses on the mothers, but there was a study done where dna in sperm is broken down by the testies, edited, and re-pieced together https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180726162746.htm (clearing my search history after this) there

4. meet the micromort. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromort its the unit of risk defined as one-in-a-million chance of death. what are the odds the stuff in the air, and the marketing the was pro this, which now anti this substance was a biporduct of something being done without people knowledge or not. My birth mom or grandmother did not use DDT or DDT based products, not did dad/grandpa, so how do I have it. studies like this while may or may not have basis are not able to prove its not a coincidence.

conclusion: things have a chance to do things. but its not the source. if a study is not done in a way where there is little doubt then its just that "i have a theory I am going to publish" and the media and public skew that intent to their own needs.

p.s. id say the same thing for any "news network" who posted this.
 
MitchM said:
1. Scare tactic. fox news only uses Autism for fear and to hatemonger. don't use them for reliable info on autism. what else you use them for does not matter to me and is none of may business.

2. look at the wording of the article. heres a randomly pulled line... "To do the study, Brown partnered with researchers in Finland, a country with a universal health care system that tracks diagnoses, such as autism, in all people living there. The researchers identified 778 cases of children diagnosed with autism who were born from 1987 to 2005, then matched those individuals with controls — that is, children who were born during that same period but did not have an autism diagnosis."

what does free health care have to do with the choice of country the researchers that tested came from. that's like saying to do a study on obesity, we chose the US because of their creation of fast food.

3. we really dont know what causes this. yes everyone focuses on the mothers, but there was a study done where dna in sperm is broken down by the testies, edited, and re-pieced together https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180726162746.htm (clearing my search history after this) there

4. meet the micromort. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromort its the unit of risk defined as one-in-a-million chance of death. what are the odds the stuff in the air, and the marketing the was pro this, which now anti this substance was a biporduct of something being done without people knowledge or not. My birth mom or grandmother did not use DDT or DDT based products, not did dad/grandpa, so how do I have it. studies like this while may or may not have basis are not able to prove its not a coincidence.

conclusion: things have a chance to do things. but its not the source. if a study is not done in a way where there is little doubt then its just that "i have a theory I am going to publish" and the media and public skew that intent to their own needs.

p.s. id say the same thing for any "news network" who posted this.
Click to expand...
 
As far as I know, both the US and Finland formally banned DDT around 1972. Yet the parents of children born before 1987 to 2005 certainly could have been exposed to DDT prior to it being banned.

I do know that both my mother and father (both smokers as well) were routinely exposed to DDT. So was my NT brother and I as a young child while living on the island of Guam in the late 50s.

Personally I've posted a few times how I believe it's usually a mistake to take statistics of one nation and apply them to another. And like most stories of this nature, there doesn't seem to be anything conclusive.
 
Judge said:
As far as I know, both the US and Finland formally banned DDT around 1972. Yet the parents of children born before 1987 to 2005 certainly could have been exposed to DDT prior to it being banned.

I do know that both my mother and father (both smokers as well) were routinely exposed to DDT. So was my NT brother and I as a young child while living on the island of Guam in the late 50s.

Personally I've posted a few times how I believe it's usually a mistake to take statistics of one nation and apply them to another. And like most stories of this nature, there doesn't seem to be anything conclusive.
Click to expand...
Interesting point, it didn't mention the age of the autistic people in the study. In that case interesting you are ASD but your brother isn't. Yeah, the origins of autism remain a mystery.
 
Butterfly88 said:
Interesting point, it didn't mention the age of the autistic people in the study. In that case interesting you are ASD but your brother isn't. Yeah, the origins of autism remain a mystery.
Click to expand...

Frankly I'm inclined to believe that autism itself predates DDT. ;)
 
DDT stays in the soil for years and doesn’t break down easily. Farms plant in the same fields and food crop plants take it up years after. Another toxin still in the soil from pesticides is arsenic. They have thought about planting marijuana to suck up the toxins because it sucks it up better than any plant. I was sprayed directly as an infant with DDT because my mother from another state did not know to close the window when they sounded the alarm for the mosquito spraying truck. I have an autistic grandson. But I read lack of folic acid or too much folic acid at certain fetal defelopment stages affects the genes that would cause autism from prenatal vitamins. Folic acid is high in the vitamin to prevent neural tube defect but can cause autism, so they say.That makes more sense because doctors started forcing mothers to take them around the 1970’s. It said folic acid from food wouldn’t cause it but artificial vitamins could. It isn’t know artificially added phosphoric acid added to canned milk products doesn’t clear form the kidneys like naturally occurring minerals. If we read all these articles we will drive ourselves crazy. Their tests are flawed. Let’s not forget nuclear testing and scud missles near California during desert storm. There is no way to know. But yep, Fox gets their ratings from fear. The fearmongering is just for dollars. Needless to say where I live now kids played behind behind the mosquito truck. I wonder if it is more due to petrochemicals, or drugs and prescriptions. Past generations didn’t take medicine much. But I give up.
 
DDT: A Case Study in Scientific Fraud:
http://www.jpands.org/vol9no3/edwards.pdf

...presented without comment, I've have no idea whether this comes from a trustworthy source

Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2006/07/06/bald-eagle-ddt-myth-still-flying-high.html

...presented without comment, I've have no idea whether this comes from a trustworthy source

100 Things You Should Know About DDT
https://junkscience.com/1999/07/100-things-you-should-know-about-ddt/

...presented without comment, I've have no idea whether this comes from a trustworthy source
 
Last edited:
Butterfly88 said:
Multiple news sources posted about this study, I just picked the Fox News one. Scientific American has a similar article along with Medscape. Here's the Scientific American one if you are interested, the Medscape one requires a subscription.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...-pregnancies-can-mdash-and-cant-mdash-reveal/
Click to expand...

right and as I stated, those are my thoughts (besides point 1) for any news source. not this is not a valid study (thought the study its self is behind a pay wall interestingly enough.)

I'm also not against the idea that something like this is not possible, I'f ANYTHING i think it shows that what happens to a woman and infants in the womb is critical to the child's future and being around / ingesting these man made substances causes things to change. Look at the study's about led and what it related to. you asked my opinion and i gave it.

what i like about the Scientific american article is its more scientific not scaremongering and fearful also why i loved reading Scientific American Mind and have stacks of them of every one i got when it came out once i discovered it.

I know my post may have came off as angry and not finding a different article source like you did was an issue but i just see people so often throwing up stuff like this in peoples faces to push there own agenda rather then "lets see whats causing this so that it can be prevented".

Regardless thanks for sharing this. it is always interesting to see the studies that get published and sorry in hindsight for the rather intense reply.
 
I've been saying this for years here as a likely factor, probably the main factor in the increase in autism cases. And posting pictures like this, kids playing in DDT spray, some of which I vaguely remember from earliest childhood. Note, 'increase' not 'start' of autism. Autism has always occurred as a result of various mischance or natural mutations. Exposure to such toxins can cause the genetic mutations that lead to autism. Thereafter the autistic person can pass on the mutation hereditarily, but hereditary reasons alone do not explain the increase.

Even exposure to modern insecticides (for pregnant women) has been proven to increase autism risk (about 12%) and DDT was much, much worse, mutating/wiping out many animals and birds as another side effect.

12.png


The dangers were first made public by Rachel Carson's seminal book 'Silent Spring' which described the environmental disaster but did not address the unknown autism connection yet.

nyt-headline_0.jpg
 
Tom said:
I've been saying this for years here as a likely factor, probably the main factor in the increase in autism cases. And posting pictures like this, kids playing in DDT spray, some of which I vaguely remember from earliest childhood. Note, 'increase' not 'start' of autism. Autism has always occurred as a result of various mischance or natural mutations. Exposure to such toxins can cause the genetic mutations that lead to autism. Thereafter the autistic person can pass on the mutation hereditarily, but hereditary reasons alone do not explain the increase.

Even exposure to modern insecticides (for pregnant women) has been proven to increase autism risk (about 12%) and DDT was much, much worse, mutating/wiping out many animals and birds as another side effect.

View attachment 46480

The dangers were first made public by Rachel Carson's seminal book 'Silent Spring' which described the environmental disaster but did not address the unknown autism connection yet.

View attachment 46481
Click to expand...
I'm certain all these chemicals are dangerous, I just never thought of them to increase autism. I had not heard of Rachel Carson, interesting.
 
Regarding the OP and the study... the news coverage is complete crap. Why Finland, other than they have kept blood serum records for this long? Does Finland still use DDT? If not, why did they think this was a viable study group? How big was the control group? What was the rate of incident to the general population? What was the rate of incident for higher DDT blood serum? How high is "high"? What was the study methodology? Is it valid? etc.

I get the click-bait headline "DDT CAUSES AUTISM!!!!" is just how the news works these days, but the rest of the reporting... even in so-called scientific new organizations... is complete crap. Without knowing more about the study, background, methods, etc. there is no reason to place an validity on these stories.

In short, DDT does not "cause autism", nor based on the reporting of this study can we even conclude that "DDT linked to autism".

In shorter, what a giant load of BS.

In shortest, ignore this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom