No, Half of All Children Won't Be Autistic By 2025, Despite What Your Facebook Friends May Tell You

Why did an academic at MIT recently make the absurd claim that half of all children will be autistic by 2025?

No, Half of All Children Won't Be Autistic By 2025, Despite What Your Facebook Friends May Tell You

A story that made the rounds on Facebook claimed "Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT". The research scientist in question was Stephanie Seneff, a computer scientist with no background in epidemiology, who gave a talk recently where she presented the following graph:


First things first. It doesn't take a genius to spot that this is clearly a textbook case of correlation not implying causation. As David Gorski notes in his comprehensive debunking, the similar illusory correlation between autism and organic food sales, shown below, somewhat blows Seneff's observation out of the water:

As for the headline claim that half of all children will be autistic by 2025, this claim blithely ignores the broad consensus that the increasing prevalence of autism is largely due to increasing rates of diagnosis and - as a new study has recently demonstrated changes in how autism is diagnosed. The baseless assumption that rates of autism diagnosis will continue into the stratosphere is dumbfounding. Gorski sums up the case well:

"Yes, she just extrapolates from current trends, assuming they’ll continue indefinitely! It’s almost as stupid as Julian Whitaker’s mind-blowingly idiotic extrapolation that predicted that 100% of boys will be autistic by 2031, with 100% of all girls autistic by 2041. Almost. It’s pretty close, though.

The bottom line is that the crank magnetism is strong in Dr. Seneff. She’s antivaccine and anti-GMO. She is full of Dunning-Kruger, thinking that she can transfer her computer science and artificial intelligence knowledge to knowledge of epidemiology, biochemistry, and medicine. She can’t."

The two articles linked at the beginning of this post already have over one hundred thousand Facebook shares each. I'll be interested to see how this post and Gorski's debunking compare. I'm not filled with confidence - as we've previously seen - posts debunking misinformation typically crash and burn when compared to the runaway-train speed with which misinformation can travel.

Follow Neurobonkers on TwitterFacebook, Google+, RSS or join the mailing list. Image Credit: Shutterstock.

Image Credit: Shutterstock, Stephanie Seneff, Imgur

No, the Yellowstone supervolcano is not ‘overdue’

Why mega-eruptions like the ones that covered North America in ash are the least of your worries.

Ash deposits of some of North America's largest volcanic eruptions.

Image: USGS - public domain
Strange Maps
  • The supervolcano under Yellowstone produced three massive eruptions over the past few million years.
  • Each eruption covered much of what is now the western United States in an ash layer several feet deep.
  • The last eruption was 640,000 years ago, but that doesn't mean the next eruption is overdue.
Keep reading Show less

CRISPR: Can we control it?

The potential of CRISPR technology is incredible, but the threats are too serious to ignore.

Videos
  • CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) is a revolutionary technology that gives scientists the ability to alter DNA. On the one hand, this tool could mean the elimination of certain diseases. On the other, there are concerns (both ethical and practical) about its misuse and the yet-unknown consequences of such experimentation.
  • "The technique could be misused in horrible ways," says counter-terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke. Clarke lists biological weapons as one of the potential threats, "Threats for which we don't have any known antidote." CRISPR co-inventor, biochemist Jennifer Doudna, echos the concern, recounting a nightmare involving the technology, eugenics, and a meeting with Adolf Hitler.
  • Should this kind of tool even exist? Do the positives outweigh the potential dangers? How could something like this ever be regulated, and should it be? These questions and more are considered by Doudna, Clarke, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, psychologist Steven Pinker, and physician Siddhartha Mukherjee.

Smartly dressed: Researchers develop clothes that sense movement via touch

Measuring a person's movements and poses, smart clothes could be used for athletic training, rehabilitation, or health-monitoring.

Technology & Innovation

In recent years there have been exciting breakthroughs in wearable technologies, like smartwatches that can monitor your breathing and blood oxygen levels.

Keep reading Show less
Personal Growth

Do you worry too much? Stoicism can help

How imagining the worst case scenario can help calm anxiety.

Quantcast