(1) Coincidence. One rose over some time period, and the other also rose over the same period, despite being completely unrelated. (The world murder rate has been going down, and atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have been going up. This is a negative correlation.)
(2) A causes B. (Cigarette smokers display lung cancer at elevated rates)
(3) B causes A. (Cigarette smokers display lung cancer at elevated rates)
(4) Root cause. Some other phenomenon causes both A and B. (Children in homes containing books display intelligence at elevated rates)
This should be obvious, but arguing against option (2) doesn't mean arguing for option (3).
But I'm pretty sure the comment was referring to "Children in homes containing books display intelligence at elevated rates" not the overall article.
Note: Tay-Sachs is something that happens to Jews, and Jews are concentrated in New York.
Does the zip code connection satisfy your demand of "in this context"?
Though I think your Tay-Sachs example is one that arguably does not.