Facebook Pixel

Comment Reply

Joanna cites four articles to make her case. I'm going to take them in order, with proper citations and commentary. Perhaps Joanna will learn something about science writing.

Citation #1:
Ratajczak HV (2011) Theoretical aspects of autism: causes--a review. J Immunotoxicol. 2011 Jan-Mar;8(1):68-79.

Ratajczak's article isn't "research", but a literature review.

A literature review, in science, can be an important contribution to understanding a topic. A good literature reivew is a critical and in-depth evaluation of previous research on a given topic. Typically, It is a summary and synopsis of a particular scientific question.

War Ratajczak's article well-done as a literature review? No. As David Gorski MD wrote at Science-Based Medicine,

"http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/anti-vaccine-propaganda-from-sharyl-attkisson-of-cbs-news-2/

The rest of Dr. Ratajczak’s article is a greatest hits collection of anti-vaccine hypotheses, speculations, ideas, ... mixed with the occasional–and I do mean occasional–grain of scientifically supportable hypotheses regarding autism. The vast majority of what is discussed, however, is pure vaccine pseudoscience. The scientifically unsupported idea that mercury in vaccines causes autism? It’s there. The work of the tag team of Geier père et fils, the same team who came up with the idea of chemical castration as a treatment of autism that “works” because according to them testosterone binds mercury, making it easier to chelate? Copiously cited. True, Ratajczak doesn’t specifically cite the Geiers’ unethical clinical trial testing Lupron as a treatment for “precocious puberty” and autism, but she does cite the “scientific” basis that the Geiers used to justify that trial, as well as a lot of the Geiers’ usual execrable studies linking mercury in vaccines with autism. Mitochondrial dysfunction, which has been co-opted by the anti-vaccine movement as an “explanation” for how vaccines supposedly cause autism? It’s there too. She even cites David Ayoub, who is known for thinking that black helicopters are watching him. In other words, her review is 95% pseudoscientific garbage, maybe 5% reasonable science. On second thought, I’m clearly being generous."

So the Ratajczak article, as a literature reivew, is rubbish....

People with autism deserve better writing on the subject of causation. EmpowHer needs to find a writer who actually understands the subject, rather than parroting worn-out ant-vaccination talking points.

September 11, 2011 - 11:34am

Reply

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
By submitting this form, you agree to EmpowHER's terms of service and privacy policy