Guest guest Posted June 28, 2005 Report Share Posted June 28, 2005 I'm not really in the loop on the autism treatment connection, but this article sure makes it sound pretty dubious. Any comments? I will say that it's a shame that they quote a scientist who calls it " voodoo science " , since they attribute no evidence to support his name-calling, just his vague claim that you shouldn't start with the " answers " and work backwards, which seems untrue to me in the first place. The rest of the article seems quite damning, but I understand that one would have to do a lot of reading of primary research sources to actually come to a conclusion. So the article just brings one question to the fore for me: what good evidence, if any, is there for the autism treatment connection? Answer that in 100 words or less. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/25/science/25autism.html?ex=1120536000 & en=9d5af0a\ 7834de351 & ei=5070 & emc=eta1 Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.