Autism and ME/CFS

[Verity]

Literally *nobody* knows the mechanism of autism or even what it entirely is. There are no diagnostic biomarkers. No molecular classes. It’s all diagnosed on vibes, questionnaires, pain responses with lots of vague associative and descriptive studies of patterns that occur without clear cause. Until we know more *everything* is on the table. My point is not that I think vaccines cause autism. My point is that I think it’s plausible autoantibodies are involved in what causes autism. And that the way I know how to measure autoantibodies is relatively new and has not really ever been used to check for whether vaccines change them, etc. Thus, a gap in human knowledge directly at this interface I happen to specialize in. Doesn’t mean the answer is there - just unchecked and IMHO more than worth checking as much as everyone claims to already know the answer as to what does or doesn’t cause it. Every scientist I’ve ever brought this up to looks at me like some sort of demon who has broached a forbidden taboo - and that I don’t like. Many are terribly uncurious creatures.

I wasn’t trying to comment on your overall research direction. I was specifically responding to your suggestion about vaccines—not because I think people who buy into that are “demon(s),” but because we really do have some decent evidence against it, and that would need to be explained if you think vaccines may play a role.

You are still waving that problem away with comments like, “Until we know more *everything* is on the table.” Sure, that’s always technically true, but some things fit the evidence better than others, and you will get questions if you propose something that doesn’t seem to fit well.

 

[Tyler Hulett]

I wasn’t trying to comment on your overall research direction. I was specifically responding to your suggestion about vaccines—not because I think people who buy into that are “demon(s),” but because we really do have some decent evidence against it, and that would need to be explained if you think vaccines may play a role.

You are still waving that problem away with comments like, “Until we know more *everything* is on the table.” Sure, that’s always technically true, but some things fit the evidence better than others, and you will get questions if you propose something that doesn’t seem to fit well.

Oh for sure - and that wasn’t a dig at you more collaborators of mine. I’m doing early childhood immune imprinting studies with people who expect molecular mimicry is true (from viral side) that are explicitly suggesting we don’t also try to parse or get pre vs post vaccine data in addition to pre vs post virus. Seems silly to me.