Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Exactly, and it is not limited to a direct connection with the child. It is equally possible (and maybe even likely) that these environmental factors have affected the parents, like myself and/or husband, hence the opinion that it starts with a genetic pre-disposition or weakness.
I agree. I understand why, because of the timing you pointed out in an earlier post, parents want to blame vaccines for their childrens' autism. But that theory has been disproven. In the meantime, there are many other environmental factors that have not been explored. I'm guessing that someday a link will be found between genetics and some other environmental factor.
To be perfectly fair and playing a bit of devil's advocate:
A legal forum is about argument, not about science. Findings of fault or no fault can be legally/logically sound but scientifically incorrect (or devoid of science). What the court says about the matter isn't really proof of anything but rather a release of liability.
I agree. I understand why, because of the timing you pointed out in an earlier post, parents want to blame vaccines for their childrens' autism. But that theory has been disproven. In the meantime, there are many other environmental factors that have not been explored. I'm guessing that someday a link will be found between genetics and some other environmental factor.
There are other epigenetic factors I think will shed further light to all this. Yes this means environmental factors causing surface changes on the genome which will turn on or off certain protein expression, leading to chronic disease. There are unpublished results suggesting perhaps the increased megadosing with folate (to prevent neural tube defect) may be a cause of such epigenetic change. These results aren't published because unlike some vaccine studies, the physician-scientists involved want to make sure these findings are accurate before causing another mothers-against-vaccine hysteria.
To be perfectly fair and playing a bit of devil's advocate:
A legal forum is about argument, not about science. Findings of fault or no fault can be legally/logically sound but scientifically incorrect (or devoid of science). What the court says about the matter isn't really proof of anything but rather a release of liability.
Sometimes, scientific evidence, like criminal evidence, is not found simply because it is not looked for.
A vested interest, or competing priority, can cause a look-away effect.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
