- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Circumcision doubles risk for autism - link added MBD
Posted on 1/10/15 at 9:10 am to Upperaltiger06
Posted on 1/10/15 at 9:10 am to Upperaltiger06
So is Israel full of rain men?
0
Posted on 1/10/15 at 9:18 am to Upperaltiger06
Wtf does this have to do with autism? These studies can be a bit ridiculous
Posted on 1/10/15 at 9:23 am to tke857
Regardless of it making sense to you or not, autism and circumcision are statistically linked.
Posted on 1/10/15 at 9:39 am to Upperaltiger06
quote:
Regardless of it making sense to you or not, autism and circumcision are statistically linked.
As are murders and ice cream sales. Maybe we should consider the problems of ice cream.
This post was edited on 1/10/15 at 9:41 am
Posted on 1/10/15 at 9:48 am to Upperaltiger06
quote:
...autism and circumcision are statistically linked.
maybe not the way you want...
Circumcision Rates in the US going Down
but...
The CDC says the rate of Autism continues to increase?
And when you throw in the Jews...
being Jewish lowers your risk for Autism....
quote:
Recent numbers from the United States indicate...one in 88 have been diagnosed with a disorder falling within the autism spectrum. In Canada...1 in 94....Israel...1 out of 208...
Posted on 1/10/15 at 10:13 am to ManBearTiger
quote:
I do believe something is causing the huge increase in cases of Autism
Me too. Awareness and definitions.
Posted on 1/10/15 at 10:19 am to Upperaltiger06
quote:
Regardless of it making sense to you or not, autism and circumcision are statistically linked.
Yes. They are. But it's a meaningless fact. And most people would probably agree that rather than A (circumcision) causing B (autism) that something like C (living in an industrialized country with magnificent access to healthcare and public schools where children are brought to interact in large groups at a young age combined with increase awareness so that kids aren't just socially awkward or mentally retarded but now have a new name- ASD/autistic) is causing both A (high rate of circumcision) and B (high instance of labeling kids as "autistic/ASD").
Posted on 1/10/15 at 10:21 am to Upperaltiger06
I'll take my chances with autism over a smegma covered anteater dick
Posted on 1/10/15 at 10:24 am to ManBearTiger
Upvote
Posted on 1/10/15 at 10:25 am to Upperaltiger06
ah yes, one "study" makes a claim so it must be true.
This post was edited on 1/10/15 at 10:27 am
Posted on 1/10/15 at 10:35 am to Hopeful Doc
quote:I wouldn't say meaningless but it's also not something to get all worked up over. It's part of the scientific process. The next study that builds on this one may completely shut the theory down, it may not. Hanging your hat on one cross sectional study is unwise but totally disregarding it for no other reason is not good science either.
But it's a meaningless fact.
If you read it, they did a decent job. They are also very clear in stating their limitations and what their results do and do not mean. Blame the media and those with a poor understanding of science for hyping it up.
Posted on 1/10/15 at 10:40 am to Upperaltiger06
The first line of the conclusion of your metaanalysis:
Is a much stronger statement than the original article linked, which says something along the lines "no firm conclusions can be drawn, there is now some evidence showing that ASD instance increases with exposure to traumatic events encountered in infancy."
The problem is that I don't buy that circumcision is painful in the very vast majority (upwards of 90%) of cases. There's a study that shows kids who got some analgesia were less likely to cry and increase heart rate and respiratory rate, leading to the recommendation that analgesia should be used. But those who received analgesia in the study (referenced by AAP in the link from your first study, somewhere in the 13-15th citation where they claim that it's unacceptable to perform circumcision without analgesia and give a note. Still on mobile. Will link if that's not descriptive enough) didn't experience any signs of pain. They didn't cry during the procedure. They didn't exhibit the normal physiologic response to pain. To now jump and say "even though they don't experience physiologic response to pain, I posit that moderate to extreme pain is likely the cause of this neurophysiological phenomenon we have no better explanation for" borders on absurd without so much as controlling for/looking at all ASD in those children who received vs didn't receive any analgesia at all during circumcision. Again, the number of pitfalls in this review 1) don't support your thread title. Even a little. 2) make their observation one that's worth little more than a passing "oh" to most
quote:
These data suggest that childhood/adolescent circumcision is protective against invasive penile cancer.
Is a much stronger statement than the original article linked, which says something along the lines "no firm conclusions can be drawn, there is now some evidence showing that ASD instance increases with exposure to traumatic events encountered in infancy."
The problem is that I don't buy that circumcision is painful in the very vast majority (upwards of 90%) of cases. There's a study that shows kids who got some analgesia were less likely to cry and increase heart rate and respiratory rate, leading to the recommendation that analgesia should be used. But those who received analgesia in the study (referenced by AAP in the link from your first study, somewhere in the 13-15th citation where they claim that it's unacceptable to perform circumcision without analgesia and give a note. Still on mobile. Will link if that's not descriptive enough) didn't experience any signs of pain. They didn't cry during the procedure. They didn't exhibit the normal physiologic response to pain. To now jump and say "even though they don't experience physiologic response to pain, I posit that moderate to extreme pain is likely the cause of this neurophysiological phenomenon we have no better explanation for" borders on absurd without so much as controlling for/looking at all ASD in those children who received vs didn't receive any analgesia at all during circumcision. Again, the number of pitfalls in this review 1) don't support your thread title. Even a little. 2) make their observation one that's worth little more than a passing "oh" to most
Posted on 1/10/15 at 10:43 am to Winkface
quote:
They are also very clear in stating their limitations and what their results do and do not mean. Blame the media and those with a poor understanding of science for hyping it up.
You're right. Most of the reason I'm being as harsh as I am is because of the title of this thread and the news article linked, neither of which are supported by the study. To call it "meaningless" is too premature. It is "a correlation that no one fully understands and much more time and effort should go into its evaluation with further studies before we heed it much mind or make bold claims like 'circumcision doubles risk for autism'."
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News