|
God, parents are the loving worst. Something about having a kid turns like 3/4 of people into drooling retards who have to hover over their kids 24/7 and obsess about all of the stupidest bullshit. Thank god my ex isn't an anti-vaxxer, but as soon as we had a kid she became obsessed with this stupid poo poo, like she won't let our son watch "Spongebob Squarepants" because there was a study that showed that kids have a lowered attention span immediately after watching it. Basically, kids' health decisions are too important to be left up to their idiot parents. There need to be penalties of some sort for not getting your kid vaccinated.
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 12:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:You mock them, you shame them and you make sure that your local politicians make vaccination exemptions as hard as possible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 12:56
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:That's not logic though. These diseases are very real and their transmission vectors are known. This is in contrast to the unproven (honestly I would say disproven) link between vaccines and autism. Logic built upon false premises is still logic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 13:01
|
|
|
TURN IT OFF! posted:They should be prosecuted like religious parents who don't take their child to a doctor because they want to pray the sickness away. But we tend to do a poor job of that. As a egeneral rule, the US allows people to use religion as a reason for not conforming to society, so of course it tends to drag more regressives and general denialists than it would otherwise. If we stopped with the religious exemption poo poo, I figure the regressive church would be dead in a generation. This is also a problem on the left with woo-woo crystal bullshit, but as a rule I have found the state is less receptive to their demands (if you don't have a thousand years of tradition behind you, your religious/spiritual beliefs are less valuable it seems) so it's less of a problem of them being able to negatively impact the forward progress of society.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 13:42
|
|
|
BUSH 2112 posted:God, parents are the loving worst. Something about having a kid turns like 3/4 of people into drooling retards who have to hover over their kids 24/7 and obsess about all of the stupidest bullshit. Thank god my ex isn't an anti-vaxxer, but as soon as we had a kid she became obsessed with this stupid poo poo, like she won't let our son watch "Spongebob Squarepants" because there was a study that showed that kids have a lowered attention span immediately after watching it. Basically, there's an enitre segment of the media designed to scare the poo poo out of parents and make them incredibly afraid of everything. Everyone wants to give their child the maximum advantage of everyone else's kid (natural but a huge problem) which now means that people are constantly reading articles about poorly designed research. So parents start jumping at their own shadows.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
As a side-note; new research gives "clear and direct evidence" that autism is formed as early as in the womb
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
TURN IT OFF! posted:As a side-note; new research gives "clear and direct evidence" that autism is formed as early as in the womb Saw this yesterday. Makes me sort of sad, in that it's getting obvious that autism isn't going to be generally curable. Maybe we can get a prenatal test for it eventually like we have with Downs Syndrome, but with the way things are going in this country I doubt that would solve the problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Saw this yesterday. Makes me sort of sad, in that it's getting obvious that autism isn't going to be generally curable. Maybe we can get a prenatal test for it eventually like we have with Downs Syndrome, but with the way things are going in this country I doubt that would solve the problem. Given that the prenatal Downs tests (nuchal translucency, genetic markers, etc.) are measuring obvious physical differences, it's going to be very hard to find similar screening procedures for autism if the only physical evidence is inside the developing cortex. The only hope is that there is also some kind of genetic link that at least allows a degree of risk assessment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Saw this yesterday. Makes me sort of sad, in that it's getting obvious that autism isn't going to be generally curable. Maybe we can get a prenatal test for it eventually like we have with Downs Syndrome, but with the way things are going in this country I doubt that would solve the problem. In the end, many autistic kids can lead fairly normal lives thought, given the right access to education resources and therapy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:In the end, many autistic kids can lead fairly normal lives thought, given the right access to education resources and therapy. This is definitely true. There's some mildly autistic folks in the programming industry and honestly it can be a little hard to tell. We've been having a friend over for game night for ages and he's totally normal as far as I can see. Just some initial shyness. I didn't know until someone specifically told me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
Besides, if people are so terrified of having a child who's autistic then they shouldn't be parents in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:In the end, many autistic kids can lead fairly normal lives thought, given the right access to education resources and therapy. And lots don't too. A parent should have all the testing possibel ahead of time to ensure their child is not a boat anchor around their neck for the rest of their lives. Autism is not a bad as Down's in many cases (particularly that children with Down's are born more often than not to older women) but the solution is going to be screening to end the problem. If we can get poeple to be as reasonable as the Ashkenazi has been with Tay-Sachs (i.e. genetic screening and adopting instead of concieving if at least one person has the defective gene) that would be optimal, but there are enough "God's Will/Just World" style morons out there that we can't really be certain of that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Besides, if people are so terrified of having a child who's autistic then they shouldn't be parents in the first place. I think we can link part of it to the poor social safety net. Having a special needs child is a good way to sink out of the middle class, as well as ruin any chance your other children have of a normal life. We need to socialize the burden a bit more, rather than playing just world and FYGM with it. Part of that is going to be preventing these kinds of pregnancies in the first place, but we also have to actually support the unlucky people who have special needs much better than we've been doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
/\/\ Truth. A special needs child is all but guaranteed to bankrupt you in your lifetime, unless you are solidly in the upper class. Once they're adults, and age out of the special ed system, you are poo poo out of luck. mdemone posted:Given that the prenatal Downs tests (nuchal translucency, genetic markers, etc.) are measuring obvious physical differences, it's going to be very hard to find similar screening procedures for autism if the only physical evidence is inside the developing cortex. The only hope is that there is also some kind of genetic link that at least allows a degree of risk assessment. This is in my professional wheelhouse (genetic testing/research). Downs is easy to test for because it is genetically simple: Trisomy 21. Three copies of chromosome 21. An entire extra chromosome. We can use a variety of tissues (amniotic fluid, chorionic villi, hell, we can even filter the fetus' cells out of Mom's circulating blood), and a variety of testing procedures, at a range of gestational ages. Nuchal translucency (just like running a triple screen or a quad screen on Mom's blood) is just a screen that can tell you if that fetus has a greater likely hood of having Downs, or another genetic anomaly. It's helpful information for Mom to have when considering whether or not to pursue invasive testing, because there is always small risk to the pregnancy. As it stands now, there have been dozens of genes across the genome that have been shown to have some association with autistic spectrum disorders, but no direct causal link has been established, nor do I think it will. We don't know how they all work together to cause "autism'. My pet theory, with no evidence or anything--just my thoughts--is that there isn't more actual autism now than there was in generations past, just now we have a diagnosis. We have a name now for what used to be just that weird kid in the back of class.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
AlistairCookie posted:Truth. A special needs child is all but guaranteed to bankrupt you in your lifetime, unless you are solidly in the upper class. Once they're adults, and age out of the special ed system, you are poo poo out of luck. I've been seeing all this around me for some time, and I have no idea how nobody's burnt poo poo down over it. And you're right that adulthood is the real issue. Your options are to institutionalize your child, knowing that they have a life of phsyical and sexual abuse just waiting for them, or try to keep them at home and understand that you'll be living hand to mouth for the rest of their lives. I've got an older gaming buddy (50ish) who's younger brother has Downs. Parents were older, had an oops kid and were too dumb/traditional to worry about testing and an abortion. Now, you have 70 years olds taking care of a sick guy (Downs is hell on the rest of you-- piles of physical issues on top of the mental ones) when one of them dies in a car accident. How is a single mother supposed to take care of her very sick adult kid on a single SS check? This is the kind of thing that creates huge intergenerational issues, in that you quickly get brothers taking care of their sick sibling and killing any chance their own children have of normalcy. And we're too loving stupid as society to either fund the 10 cent solution (testing + abortion) or the hundred dollar one after you fail that (full time and responsible care of the infirm) Getting back to the main point, I can see exactly why parents get suckered into being anti-vaxx. We tell people they are SOL if they have a special needs kid, and then have hucksters telling them how this basic stuff will turn their kids autistic. While I think we need to punish the stupid parents because you've reached criminal neglect well befor you get to this point, the real criminals are the idiot celebs and woo-woos who push this poo poo in the media. It's like we've reached the point were the 1st ammendment passes into just general fraud.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Antivaxxers are pretty robust in the UK and Europe though. I mean Wakefield is British. There's a lot more to this than the failure of the American health care system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
Some interesting work on the causes of autism has been conducted by Simon Baron Cohen and colleagues. Citing a range of studies including research on fetal exposure to testosterone in the womb as well as the large disparities between the numbers of male vs female autistics, Baron Cohen has theorized that it is a hay wiring of the process of developmental masculinization of the brain. The idea is not without controversy as it strongly implicates the existence of neuro cognitive sexual dimorphism, which is anathema in many circles, particularly among social constructivists. That said, it would greatly confound any direct linkages because it involves not just the individuals genetics but also maternal effects governed by the mothers genetic makeup. Some further reading: *A short treatise on amniotic fluid studies *a paper published in the edited volume Evolutionary Cognitive Neuroscience, 2007 on the assortive mating theory of autism (I think that's the title) coauthored by Baron Cohen *a news piece from nature which also airs some of the criticisms of the theory
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I've been seeing all this around me for some time, and I have no idea how nobody's burnt poo poo down over it. And you're right that adulthood is the real issue. Your options are to institutionalize your child, knowing that they have a life of phsyical and sexual abuse just waiting for them, or try to keep them at home and understand that you'll be living hand to mouth for the rest of their lives. I don't know how prevalent they are outside of California, but Independent Living Programs are a great option for disabled adults. Most of the parents still have a time commitment to their child as far as advocating and coordinating with the program, but their children are able to become financially independent through a combination of Social Security disability benefits, housing assistance, and limited work depending on how functional they are. I know even here though that the waiting lists can take years to get through, and the demand far outstrips the availability.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:...Baron Cohen has theorized that it is a hay wiring of the process of developmental masculinization of the brain. The idea is not without controversy as it strongly implicates the existence of neuro cognitive sexual dimorphism, which is anathema in many circles, particularly among social constructivists. Am I to understand that neurological dimorphism is not well-established? I was under the impression that we had a variety of known dimorphic properties in the brain. Or do you mean that these properties are not generally viewed as valid behavioral factors by socio/psych researchers?
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Am I to understand that neurological dimorphism is not well-established? I was under the impression that we had a variety of known dimorphic properties in the brain. Or do you mean that these properties are not generally viewed as valid behavioral factors by socio/psych researchers? It seems to me that depending on the researcher you're looking at it can be either, both or neither. Some deny any difference, some play up neuroplasticity to such a degree that it ultimately leaves any sort of dimorphism or even innate ability totally mutable (I don't know that I'd agree to that extent, I think neuro plasticity works within constraints). Myself I have felt convinced of the existence of dimorphism with regards to the brain for some time, but have encountered resistance enough to at least acknowledge that many people still disagree. I was a little surprised to see a neuroscientist named Gina Rippon recently endorsing a strict, social constructivist position on the matter, stating there is no difference at all between male and female brains. I think you can find other neuroscientists who would disagree, but if nothing else it seems unsettled within even neuro research communities. What to make of that, who knows. Like any field of science you have personalities with strident opinions. Pasko Rakic held out on adult neuro genesis way longer than was tenable, but that's how it goes I suppose. Sometimes you don't see consensus settle until another generation of researchers come along, and my own opinions notwithstanding I don't know how solid of a consensus there is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 09:39
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:Pasko Rakic held out on adult neuro genesis way longer than was tenable, but that's how it goes I suppose. What do you mean by this? Adult neurogenesis is a well established phenomenon in a substantial number of organisms at this point. Not sure how that's related to sexual dimorphism, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 10:18
|
|
|
I expect Yiggy means that Rakic refused to believe in it until well past the discovery of solid evidence for it. Just as many other neuro folks did; neurogenesis was one of those things that Everyone Knows Is Silly, until all of a sudden it was staring us in the face.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 13:12
|
|
|
Ah, right, that makes sense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 13:33
|
|
|
Tasty_Crayon posted:Edit: As for the rise in autisim cases... I would bet all my money on the fact that heeeey, science finds reasons and puts new labels on things as it progresses. 500 years ago you wouldn't have been called autistic because no one had named it yet. You would have been called the village idiot. AlistairCookie posted:My pet theory, with no evidence or anything--just my thoughts--is that there isn't more actual autism now than there was in generations past, just now we have a diagnosis. We have a name now for what used to be just that weird kid in the back of class. Hell, diabetes has apparently been identified since 1500 BCE in Egypt, but they only started coming up with treatments in the CE 1500s (it was a death sentence before then), and Insulin is only in the last 100 years. Ghost of Reagan Past posted:What's the problem with chicken pox vaccine? It's an annoying disease to kids, devastating to adults, and there's no reason to not get the vaccine now that it's available. Sure, it's not deadly but there's no downside, unless you think not getting chicken pox is bad. It's been a long time since I had chicken pox (pre-vaccine), but I remember it sucking pretty badly and I just don't know why we should really protest vaccinating kids against it.  buddy. The vaccine came out a loving week after I caught Chicken Pox, and my parents were pissed about that. They work in the medical field and they're both super pro-vaccination, so I got every other vaccine.I actually got Shingles a little while ago, but caught it in time so I could start on Valacyclovir which is amazing. (500 MG, three times a day, they don't gently caress around) My dad said that it was loving hell when he got shingles, and that he wished he had had Valacyclovir back then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Given that the prenatal Downs tests (nuchal translucency, genetic markers, etc.) are measuring obvious physical differences, it's going to be very hard to find similar screening procedures for autism if the only physical evidence is inside the developing cortex. The only hope is that there is also some kind of genetic link that at least allows a degree of risk assessment. Actually the newest tests take blood from the mother which contains enough fetal blood cells that have snuck in they can test that blood. You can do it exceedingly early, and this new technology will apply to a lot of different blood tests. My wife got the test in her first trimester. Edit:I misinterpreted your post I thought you were saying something else, never mind greatn fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Mar 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
greatn posted:Actually the newest tests take blood from the mother which contains enough fetal blood cells that have snuck in they can test that blood. You can do it exceedingly early, and this new technology will apply to a lot of different blood tests. My wife got the test in her first trimester. Oh right, I forgot about that one. My wife just gave birth last August but we chose to bet on the nuchal+genetic probabilities, which showed us really long odds against Downs, rather than shell out for the fetal-blood test (which obviously isn't covered by insurance). I know a guy who had the fetal-blood test done on his wife as a paternity check, after it came to light that she'd been loving around during the conception window. Only a couple thousand bucks, too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Unfortunate It's weird to me that you lot get the chickenpox vaccine as part of your childhood set in the US. Is that standard? It's definitely not in the childhood vaccination programme in the UK.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
CottonWolf posted:It's weird to me that you lot get the chickenpox vaccine as part of your childhood set in the US. Is that standard? It's definitely not in the childhood vaccination programme in the UK. It wasn't standard when I was in the age range and i'm 26 now. I think its like gardasil? Suggested but not pushed hard?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
greatn posted:Actually the newest tests take blood from the mother which contains enough fetal blood cells that have snuck in they can test that blood. You can do it exceedingly early, and this new technology will apply to a lot of different blood tests. My wife got the test in her first trimester. That's the fetal circulating DNA test. It's super expensive and not in wide use yet as far as I know; our hospital offers it but it's a send out totally out of pocket. I don't think any health plans cover it when the triple screen is so cheap. Even with a positive feta circulating DNA test they still move on to chorionic villus sampling/amniocentisis since those are considered the definitive tests.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:It seems to me that depending on the researcher you're looking at it can be either, both or neither. Some deny any difference, some play up neuroplasticity to such a degree that it ultimately leaves any sort of dimorphism or even innate ability totally mutable (I don't know that I'd agree to that extent, I think neuro plasticity works within constraints). Myself I have felt convinced of the existence of dimorphism with regards to the brain for some time, but have encountered resistance enough to at least acknowledge that many people still disagree. I was a little surprised to see a neuroscientist named Gina Rippon recently endorsing a strict, social constructivist position on the matter, stating there is no difference at all between male and female brains. I think you can find other neuroscientists who would disagree, but if nothing else it seems unsettled within even neuro research communities. What to make of that, who knows. Like any field of science you have personalities with strident opinions. Pasko Rakic held out on adult neuro genesis way longer than was tenable, but that's how it goes I suppose. Sometimes you don't see consensus settle until another generation of researchers come along, and my own opinions notwithstanding I don't know how solid of a consensus there is. The problem with the brain is that it's a ridiculously complex organ that we just flat out don't understand very well. Neuroplasticity is, in fact, a thing in that that's how we learn. The brain literally rewires itself to adapt to what you've learned over your life, for better or for worse, and that's how things like habits and skills form. Certain neural pathways get reinforced, which is why repetition is such a good learning tool, while others get ignored and eventually discarded. It's how you forget or your skills rust. Neuroplasticity, however, does not mean that anybody can become anything or learn anything. There are limits that you have based on particular traits of your brain, which is why studying IQ exists. There are people that just plain have smarter brains than others. Meanwhile there are people who have certain parts of their brains that are better. I'm sure we've all met somebody that was clumsy as hell but otherwise brilliant or a person who struggled with basic math but was a walking dictionary. While there are some proven differences in male and female brains they're actually pretty minor, overall. There are trends but they are just that; trends. The average difference can't predict anything about individuals and because of how the brain works it's entirely possible that the differences are ultimately learned. Boys and girls tend to be taught differently, socialized differently, and exposed to different information, which affects how the brain wires itself and what pathways are stronger. That, of course, goes back to the nature/nurture debate that is still raging. It isn't an easy problem to solve because, again, the brain is a monstrously complex thing that we just don't understand yet. Which is, I think, why anti-vaxxers get so obsessed with "but this affects the brain!" Nobody has really proven that it doesn't so they decided to believe that it does. Which, of course, leads to "well nobody has actually proven that this doesn't happen so I'm going to be safe and..."
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Besides, if people are so terrified of having a child who's autistic then they shouldn't be parents in the first place. There is a huge difference between "ready to have a child" and "able to deal with raising a developmentally challenged child". You can luck out an end up with an autistic child who is can be characterized like "Sheldon" from BBT but most likely you're going end up with what ends up being a massive burden (emotionally, financially, socially, even physically). One of my best friends has an autistic brother. He's basically a 2 year old. He's around 30ish years old, about 250lbs, and if he gets upset he is more than capable of killing people. He will never be able to live on his own and once his parents are dead he will live with one of his siblings or in a home. He can sort of work but it's taken a lot of time and effort to teach him to just put on the right uniform and wait for the Melwood bus to pick him up. One time there was a new driver who forgot or didn't know to pick him up. He stood outside for 10 hours waiting for the bus since the next step in his routine was "bus picks me up, I wait, then I get to work". That didn't happen so there was nothing to do but wait. He poo poo himself while standing out in the sun for 10 hours. This is easily the reality that parents will face when their child is autistic. It's not just awkward obsessions with computers, trains, or being shy. Please don't pretend that people are either less ready or should be treated badly for being scared of having such a life for their child.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
From all the research I've done it appears that vaccines are good - and actually, not getting a vaccine isn't just bad for the one person who doesn't in fact get the vaccine, it can potential be bad for others (germs etc.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
 Well that's an... interesting argument Trump.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
ShutteredIn posted:
How can such an utter moron have made so much money?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
PT6A posted:How can such an utter moron have made so much money? Luck and a massive headstart courtesy of daddy dearest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
PT6A posted:How can such an utter moron have made so much money? Aristocracy is a hell of a thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
PT6A posted:How can such an utter moron have made so much money? Starting with more.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
PT6A posted:How can such an utter moron have made so much money? Meritocracy and the American Dream. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
PT6A posted:How can such an utter moron have made so much money? Shrewd business acumen
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
http://www.policymic.com/articles/86363/croatia-has-ended-the-anti-vaccine-debate-by-doing-what-the-u-s-won-t Looks like Croatia got it right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2014 22:10
|
|