So many misconceptions in this writeup.
Here's one: even if it were genetic, there could be triggering environmental factors that trigger the onset of autism (I'm just giving a hypothetical example, not making a claim here).
Here's one: even if it were genetic, there could be triggering environmental factors that trigger the onset of autism (I'm just giving a hypothetical example, not making a claim here).
> Prior to the study, 83% of participants had "severe" autism. Two years later, only 17% were rated as severe, 39% as mild or moderate, and incredibly, 44% were below the cut-off for mild ASD.
Incredible! Sure, there could be a genetic component to what flourishes, or ever seeded, in one's microflora, but there's definitely some external complexities involved here.
> We note that due to the open-label nature of this initial trial, all of the assessments are subject to placebo effect, however the long-term improvements we observed here are promising.
It just says they behaved better, that's not recovering from severe autism at all... They didn't magically acquire language from a fecal transplant. Misleading
What happened here is simple: the autistic kids got better at masking in order to placate the researchers who were shoving poop up their butts. In the hope of making it stop.
Yeah the research is still preliminary but it's still pretty strong evidence that it's a research direction worth exploring.
what seems more plausible to me would be ~<<poop helped something, something made life easier, autistic life is less obvious and disruptive to non-autistics when life is easier>>
> We note that due to the open-label nature of this initial trial, all of the assessments are subject to placebo effect, however the long-term improvements we observed here are promising.
I think it's overly dismissive to summarise a drop in these behaviours as just "less obvious and disruptive to non-autistics". I can't imagine slamming your head into stuff is pleasant regardless of whether you have autism.
This is poor quality evidence of anything.
Environment makes certain traits visible - eg noise and smell sensory issues, even social settings. Put me in a forest and i will be indistinguishable from a neuro-prevalent - no social pressure, no noise, no smells. Actually the neuro-prevalent might be suffering for the lack of those i suppose
Male homosexuality is believed to have a small genetic component but is also linked to birth order. One theory is that in utero testosterone from older brothers can affect the sexuality of a younger brother.
I disagree that it makes no sense for environmental factors to lead to the onset of autism, on the basis that environmental factors can make someone gay or schizophrenic. That is to say, they can influence a personality and a mind in complicated ways that don't seem intuitive.
It’s a bit loke saying fish don’t develop aquism unless they are facing non-acquatic environment. Kinda crude comparison but you get then idea.
How do you detect schizophrenia in the 400 people in the non-smoker category? The answer is that you can't. They don't have schizophrenia. This is what it means for something to have an environmental trigger.
I get that you're making a point about ableism and environment, but in order to do so you're confusing two things: the onset of autism (at a very early age or even before birth and triggered by who knows what), and the occurrence of any specific symptom of autism (at any age and triggered by things we generally understand).