tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.comments2024-01-01T07:10:00.118-08:00Autism Causes .infoUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-24888890493219317682018-01-12T07:46:51.775-08:002018-01-12T07:46:51.775-08:00Can I just say what a relief to uncover somebody t...Can I just say what a relief to uncover somebody that actually knows what they're discussing over the internet.<br /><br />You definitely realize how to bring an issue to light and make it important.<br />A lot more people really need to look at this and understand this <br />side of your story. I was surprised you're not more popular since you surely possess the gift.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-6323563624838851872017-05-26T06:46:50.199-07:002017-05-26T06:46:50.199-07:00This comment has been hidden from the blog.Shilpahttp://www.gurgaonfairy.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-53570990538740056182017-05-06T23:11:15.371-07:002017-05-06T23:11:15.371-07:00This is a wonderful post. I enjoyed the informatio...This is a wonderful post. I enjoyed the information lot. I will bookmark this page. Thanks for sharing this information. <br /><a href="http://www.barney4.com" rel="nofollow">barney</a> | <a href="http://www.abcya4.com" rel="nofollow">abcya</a> <br />starfallhttp://www.starfall2games.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-51794035098592507482016-10-15T13:38:57.887-07:002016-10-15T13:38:57.887-07:00This publish truly made my day. You can not imagin...This publish truly made my day. You can not imagine simply how so much time I had spent for this information!<br />Thank you!<br />hammadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14767935961354316400noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-45145709223152132922016-09-21T23:52:39.593-07:002016-09-21T23:52:39.593-07:00This comment has been hidden from the blog.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08667817201466131873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-70093373970815245302015-04-22T03:03:53.405-07:002015-04-22T03:03:53.405-07:00Good excellent work you have done here keep it up....Good excellent work you have done here keep it up.Accredited GED Onlinehttp://www.stanleyhighschool.com/counselor/ged-online.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-74428431152663376932013-03-17T22:33:18.539-07:002013-03-17T22:33:18.539-07:00Hey Robin! I am simply impressed. You have done am...Hey Robin! I am simply impressed. You have done amazing articles here. I will definitely follow your path of blogging from now on. I have autistic niece and nephew. They are just awesome. They always show pure emotions. Just love them. So with the help of my sister Sarah, We decided to create a blog and share our experiences on it. <br /><br />Our article is, http://autismsd.com/<br /><br />Please like our Facebook page and help us grow more.<br />http://www.facebook.com/pages/Autism-Autism-Spectrum-Disorder/350242585063628<br /> <br />Thank you for being you and keep us educated.<br />Kylie White Autismhttp://autismsd.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-14412423641405169212013-02-11T07:48:47.231-08:002013-02-11T07:48:47.231-08:00By the way, I appreciate your point about taunts a...By the way, I appreciate your point about taunts and jibes but that was only in the context of the extremely conceited, contemptuous and insolent first commenter to whom I replied with hopefully a deal less conceit and attitude but hopefully a bit better humour. In any case it's only words which one should learn to get used to! Especially if you're studying autism research in which half the people accuse the other half of being liars and vice versa. Personally I think it's just human nature to be at least slightly thick.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-56616106164904800462013-02-11T07:36:16.439-08:002013-02-11T07:36:16.439-08:00Robin P Clarke writes: Thanks Anon (Feb 2013) for ...Robin P Clarke writes: Thanks Anon (Feb 2013) for your question of “those famous names in science who have praised you and the associated citations”. I should first mention that I don’t myself consider it very important whether something is said by a “famous” person or otherwise – better to ask whether the evidence and reasoning are sound, which can be far from the case even with some Nobel winners and the like. However, since you ask (and many others presume…). If you look at the top right of each page here you will see links to the comments from:<br />1) HJ Eysenck, the most-cited-ever scientist (at least then), widely considered the leading expert on intelligence (with the antiinnatia theory being just as much IQ theory as autism theory). <br />2) Bernard Rimland, arguably the most influential person in autism research history. He pioneered the modern view of autism as a biological condition, though as is the nature of things in certain quarters his name is carefully avoided mention of and it is pretended that certain more convenient people in London were the pioneers instead. There’s a lot of such falsification of what happens in research. <br /><br />In addition there are similarly positive letters from Prof David Horrobin who was famous as a stern critic of mindless medical orthodoxy. A measure of Horrobin’s stature was the revolting deceitful “obituary” that the BMJ chose to publish immediately after his wife became a widow (so the BMJ liars couldn’t be sued for libel), and which they were forced to retract after a deluge of complaints. The same BMJ liars are right now on the losing side of a libel action from “fraudster” Andrew Wakefield following the similarly deceitful articles they published last year. By comparison any “ad hom” content of this website is very mild. <br /><br />However, I have to wonder why you ask this question. A competent scientist thinks for themselves (unlike a sheep), judges things on the merits of their evidence and reasoning rather than the fame or status of their author. It is the experience of many scientists that the most honest, competent researchers get horribly vilified (as did Horrobin and Wakefield for just two of many examples) while charlatans get promoted as supposedly great “evidence-based” expert geniuses. There’s also the malign Matthew Effect. (P.S.: There’s something wrong with this website on my computer which makes it very difficult for me to post/ manage the comments here, I’ve only managed this now via a lot of fiddling around with spare computer parts.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-49539616171349050402013-02-11T07:35:16.731-08:002013-02-11T07:35:16.731-08:00Robin P Clarke writes: Thanks Anon (Feb 2013) for ...Robin P Clarke writes: Thanks Anon (Feb 2013) for your question of “those famous names in science who have praised you and the associated citations”. I should first mention that I don’t myself consider it very important whether something is said by a “famous” person or otherwise – better to ask whether the evidence and reasoning are sound, which can be far from the case even with some Nobel winners and the like. However, since you ask (and many others presume…). If you look at the top right of each page here you will see links to the comments from:<br />1) HJ Eysenck, the most-cited-ever scientist (at least then), widely considered the leading expert on intelligence (with the antiinnatia theory being just as much IQ theory as autism theory). <br />2) Bernard Rimland, arguably the most influential person in autism research history. He pioneered the modern view of autism as a biological condition, though as is the nature of things in certain quarters his name is carefully avoided mention of and it is pretended that certain more convenient people in London were the pioneers instead. There’s a lot of such falsification of what happens in research. <br /><br />In addition there are similarly positive letters from Prof David Horrobin who was famous as a stern critic of mindless medical orthodoxy. A measure of Horrobin’s stature was the revolting deceitful “obituary” that the BMJ chose to publish immediately after his wife became a widow (so the BMJ liars couldn’t be sued for libel), and which they were forced to retract after a deluge of complaints. The same BMJ liars are right now on the losing side of a libel action from “fraudster” Andrew Wakefield following the similarly deceitful articles they published last year. By comparison any “ad hom” content of this website is very mild. <br /><br />However, I have to wonder why you ask this question. A competent scientist thinks for themselves (unlike a sheep), judges things on the merits of their evidence and reasoning rather than the fame or status of their author. It is the experience of many scientists that the most honest, competent researchers get horribly vilified (as did Horrobin and Wakefield for just two of many examples) while charlatans get promoted as supposedly great “evidence-based” expert geniuses. There’s also the malign Matthew Effect. (P.S.: There’s something wrong with this website on my computer which makes it very difficult for me to post/ manage the comments here, I’ve only managed this now via a lot of fiddling around with spare computer parts.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-87506365212539232702013-02-10T20:12:05.736-08:002013-02-10T20:12:05.736-08:00I'd also like to mention that I'm not the ...I'd also like to mention that I'm not the person with whom you were debating previously, since there doesn't appear to be any way to distinguish between users without accounts here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-10232095306224575982013-02-10T20:09:08.662-08:002013-02-10T20:09:08.662-08:00Just out of curiosity, because I happen to be invo...Just out of curiosity, because I happen to be involved in an extensive literature review of material concerning autism for my dissertation, I would like if without acerbic commentary or name calling you could provide me with those famous names in science who have praised you and the associated citations? I don't mean to be offensive but I hope you do realise that neither you nor those on the other side of the argument are helping third parties absorb literature by seasoning it liberally with taunts and jibes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-26248227746893153412012-12-02T05:52:04.425-08:002012-12-02T05:52:04.425-08:00you're a complete and utter quack, you areyou're a complete and utter quack, you areAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-81300124207915128202012-01-11T17:26:40.371-08:002012-01-11T17:26:40.371-08:00Do you mean summary of this post? That would be t...Do you mean summary of this post? That would be that the FDA insists that the seriously harmful amalgam is harmless, while insisting on banning use of the seriously harmLESS osr#1 which is the best thing for curing that harm. Which is hypocritical.Robin P Clarkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03395391589008969720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-27860976024188196312012-01-11T15:54:54.856-08:002012-01-11T15:54:54.856-08:00Is there a summary?Is there a summary?Rahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10283377760818709537noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-52272848065270110192011-07-16T07:45:25.580-07:002011-07-16T07:45:25.580-07:00Anonymous said...
"A broken clock is righ...Anonymous said...<br /> "A broken clock is right twice a day... but nobody in their right mind will suggest that as far as checking the time goes, a broken clock will do the job just fine. For every scientific "heretic" that history has proven right, there's a dozen that were, in fact, plain wrong."<br /><br />Indeed. I never suggested otherwise (though the precise ratio seems unclear). But so what? It appears you are attributing a straw man to me here. Namely the elementary fallacy that "great geniuses are ignored therefore ignored ideas must be (or probably are) works of great genius". But I said nothing of the sort. I merely challenged the converse fallacy that (relatively) ignored ideas can be rightly judged on that basis to be worthless. The historical evidence I have cited proves that that is a seriously unhinged notion. Have you cited any evidence yourself?<br /><br /> "The occurrence that prominent geniuses have been misunderstood and ignored in the past, just as you perceive yourself to be, is completely irrelevant to the question of your ideas' worth."<br /><br />I perceive myself to be ignored? What evidence? Several of the most famous names in science have highly praised my work and accepted it for publication, and yet "I perceive myself to be ignored"? I merely said that a handful of usually anonymous people express (with a lot of sneering) that fallacy stated at top of this reply. <br /><br />The relevance that you deny away here is that that historical evidence disproves that fallacy mentioned above.<br /><br /> "Work more on finding compelling evidence to prove your theories and presenting it in a way that conforms to the standards of science,"<br /><br />I have been, thanks!<br /><br />"and less on defending your huge, bruised ego with childish rants."<br /><br />What huge bruised ego would that be? What evidence? I don't include any bio information or picture of my ugly/handsome face, I don't even indicate my gender here or anywhere. Isn't that a small enough ego for you? <br /><br />"Childish rants"? I can't quite follow your reasoning there. It looks like you may be suffering from SED (Salieri's Envy Disorder, hopefully to be included in DSM-V...). <br /><br />You put the word genius in quotes. On what evidence do you say there's no such thing? Oh of course, suffering from SED again....Robin P Clarkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03395391589008969720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-31856296635386758212011-07-16T05:25:31.178-07:002011-07-16T05:25:31.178-07:00A broken clock is right twice a day... but nobody ...A broken clock is right twice a day... but nobody in their right mind will suggest that as far as checking the time goes, a broken clock will do the job just fine. For every scientific "heretic" that history has proven right, there's a dozen that were, in fact, plain wrong.<br /><br />The occurrence that prominent geniuses have been misunderstood and ignored in the past, just as you perceive yourself to be, is completely irrelevant to the question of your ideas' worth.<br /><br />Work more on finding compelling evidence to prove your theories and presenting it in a way that conforms to the standards of science, and less on defending your huge, bruised ego with childish rants.<br /><br />Making up random numbers on the spot doesn't help your case either. The relationship between general intelligence, "genius", creativity and latent inhibition -as well as how latent inhibition is determined genetically- isn't completely understood yet.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-49949501282366261532011-02-23T10:19:20.445-08:002011-02-23T10:19:20.445-08:00Some people--generally sloppy media people--are cl...Some people--generally sloppy media people--are claiming there has been an increase of about 500 times; their "increase" numbers there are indeed inflated by ignoring that the earlier numbers were of "autism" while the later ones were of "ASD" in general. But meanwhile the numbers diagnosed with more strictly-defined "autism" have also seemingly increased. <br /><br />I haven't discussed that increase on this website because I present my discussion of the question in my (forthcoming) update review itself. Various bits of evidence lead me to conclude therein that there certainly has been an increase of about tenfold. Even establishment people such as Irva Hertz-Picciotto now accept the reality of an increase. <br /><br />I can't copy out the whole of my case to here, but you can see this chart linked here of a change of ratio, which exactly coincides (in time and magnitude) with the "increase" curve: <br /><a href="http://www.autismcauses.info/2009/03/age-of-onset-graph.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.autismcauses.info/2009/03/age-of-onset-graph.html</a>.<br />That change of ratio cannot be explained away as due to diagnosis or awareness. <br /><br />Meanwhile there's a "huge backlog" of diagnoses right now in the UK, as Polley Tommey video linked up top here explains - that it is taking up to nine years to get a diagnosis because the official system is swamped (....by this imaginary increase?). <br /><br />And meanwhile Fragile X cases have become about a ten times smaller part of the whole. Why would that be? An obvious answer is that other causes have increased tenfold.<br /><br />Your theory of how genes and environment interact is an interesting and credible one. Is it possible you could expand on it evidentially? Or perhaps even work up a publishable study of it? Some of the groups interested in environmental factors could be interested in chasing up the concept.<br /><br />Re your last sentence about government-funded studies, you might want to bear in mind my comments at: <a href="http://www.autismcauses.info/2010/07/hertz-picciotto-et-al-2010-re-blood.html" rel="nofollow"><br />http://www.autismcauses.info/2010/07/hertz-picciotto-et-al-2010-re-blood.html</a>.Robin P Clarkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03395391589008969720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-68332798297034862882011-01-18T01:47:51.610-08:002011-01-18T01:47:51.610-08:00"A prophet is despised in his own country, an..."A prophet is despised in his own country, and in his own house, and among his own kindred." - Mark 6:4, Matthew 13:57, Luke 4:24.Robin P Clarkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03395391589008969720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-6822148622076501642011-01-18T01:36:30.023-08:002011-01-18T01:36:30.023-08:00"Everyone else" has been wrong before, a..."Everyone else" has been wrong before, at various times in history. Clicking on the link above at "just let others do your thinking for you instead?" will take you to some of them. Part of the reason why "everyone" is so easily wrong is that 99.9999999% of people are content to just assume the opposite, and that if the "~leading expert~" Prof Barely-Conning says or doesn't say something, then there's no reason why they too should not accept that as the end of the matter. Especially as every reasonable person can ignore such exceptionals as Rimland and Eysenck on the solid grounds that they are dead and hence already proven duds.<br />99% of being a significantly creative genius is a lack of something in the brain (caused by antiinnatia). That something being the innatons producing conformity to conventional wisdom and conformity to one's own prior notions. The "sheep-brained gene" and "pig-headed gene" so to speak.Robin P Clarkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03395391589008969720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-27377674261205432742011-01-17T22:00:54.313-08:002011-01-17T22:00:54.313-08:00I think you better tell people how brilliant and a...I think you better tell people how brilliant and awesome you are some more...<br /><br />"Robin is a dazzling talent and a genius"<br /><br />-Robins mom.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-67706043947883716342010-10-18T12:40:36.258-07:002010-10-18T12:40:36.258-07:00Jonathan, Thanks for your comments but as a mercur...Jonathan, Thanks for your comments but as a mercury-poisoned person myself I have to limit my activities (as per AHC book p71) and so I'm just limiting myself currently to saying that MMR wasn't a noticeable cause of the increase. In my less intensive moments I'm crawling through Paul Offit's indecent book and have got to page 58 where he does a bungled job of attempting to gloss over his preference for not telling the public the whole truth -- need I say more. <br /><br />But doesn't Offit give a fine summary of the MMR thesis here (page 20-21)?: "He proposed that after MMR vaccine was injected into the arm, the measles vaccine virus traveled to the intestine and caused infection and inflammation. Harmful proteins, now able to pass through a damaged intestine, entered the bloodstream and eventually the brain, causing autism." <br /><br />You say his findings have been replicated rather than debunked, but doesn't it depend which thesis the findings of you are referring to? The MMR claims were reviewed in the recent Omnibus Autism Proceedings judgement and while I wouldn't credit it with absolute impartiality it did seem to give quite good rationales for dismissing key planks of the case. For instance Unigenetics' tests being bunk. <br /><br />However, the problem is that with allegations and counter-allegations like this, an outside observer is forced to either leaps of faith or to remain agnostic as I do. The fact that Wakefield's enemies acted disgracefully does not have a logical implication that his own side was therefore morally or factually sound or honest. <br /><br />His MMR epidemiology was certainly rubbish (but then it seems so was most other contributers' anyway, indeed I'm not sure why they bother having courses on the subject!). I do suspect however that he has made a genuinely important discovery of an autism-bowel link, but as the forces of darkness have to character-assassinate him for the MMR "crime", they have to lie about that discovery too. I guess.<br /><br />There's plenty evidence that autism is not an "illness" and has multiple causes. But of course those causes do include illnesses such as infections.<br /><br />I thought the recovered children were due to mercury-removal chelation inspired by DAN/ARI/Safeminds/BoydHaley and unrelated to AW's studies. <br /><br />Last I heard of Autism File was that the forces of darkness have bullied newsagents into not stocking it. In accordance with the abovementioned page 58 of Saint Paul Offit's autism bible I guess.Robin P Clarkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03395391589008969720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-62329807951781586472010-10-18T10:46:50.327-07:002010-10-18T10:46:50.327-07:00Good article - and useful too. However, I suggest...Good article - and useful too. However, I suggest you get hold of the book "Callous Disregard" by Andrew Wakefield to learn the true story of the MMR controversy. Incidentally, his findings have not been debunked, as the Big Pharma propagandists claim, they've been replicated in at least 7 different independent studies. It's not quite accurate to say Wakefield had a 'hypothesis'. What he found was data that suggested an association between measles virus, mumps virus, the MMR vaccine and Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Autism. All he did was suggest that MMR might not be entirely safe and more research was needed. Since then, other doctors have conducted more research - not enough to provide a viable hypothesis - but interesting nonetheless. There is now more evidence to show a link between Inflammatory Bowel Syndrome and Autism. In other words, the evidence is accruing that autism is not a genetic brain disorder but an illness caused by infection. Progress is slow because medical academia - controlled as it is by Big Pharma - refuses to provide grant funding for this line of research. Over 95% of the autism-related research grants go to geneticists or psychologists.<br />The 'recovered children' you refer to are a result of the independent research triggered by Andrew Wakefield's studies. You can find more info about them from the Autism File (autismfile.com)Jonathan Gemshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12023837124249480202noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-66600439266387094232010-10-07T00:10:38.006-07:002010-10-07T00:10:38.006-07:00Thanks for your comment. But I find it difficult ...Thanks for your comment. But I find it difficult to understand without guessing. Could you perhaps check a dictionary or translator and try to write it again? Could you tell me what your site or your articles are that I could link to? Cheers.Robin P Clarkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03395391589008969720noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3473669599815076150.post-11021401775960371372010-10-06T17:19:09.683-07:002010-10-06T17:19:09.683-07:00I find you record surely attractive, and I am inte...I find you record surely attractive, and I am interested to around make clear thispost on my site. if you serene drink others list inform adjacent to it? possibly we could exchange articlesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com