Folk epidemiology of autism: Difference between revisions
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
The false epidemiology of autism has caused new research for the origin of autism to suffer.<ref name="5."/> More resources are put into the research of folk epidemiologies than for the new scientific research for autism.<ref name="5."/> An example of this is illustrated in the [[vaccine controversy]].<ref name="5."/> People and groups continue to push for more research on the link between vaccines and autism.<ref name="4."/><ref name="5."/> There have been thirteen studies that properly followed the [[scientific method]] and contained large numbers of participants that failed to connect autism to the [[measles-mumps-rubella vaccine]].<ref name="4."/> There were seven well-constructed studies, which attempted to correlate autism to [[thiomersal]] in vaccines and were unsuccessful.<ref name="4."/> |
The false epidemiology of autism has caused new research for the origin of autism to suffer.<ref name="5."/> More resources are put into the research of folk epidemiologies than for the new scientific research for autism.<ref name="5."/> An example of this is illustrated in the [[vaccine controversy]].<ref name="5."/> People and groups continue to push for more research on the link between vaccines and autism.<ref name="4."/><ref name="5."/> There have been thirteen studies that properly followed the [[scientific method]] and contained large numbers of participants that failed to connect autism to the [[measles-mumps-rubella vaccine]].<ref name="4."/> There were seven well-constructed studies, which attempted to correlate autism to [[thiomersal]] in vaccines and were unsuccessful.<ref name="4."/> |
||
As a result of folk epidemiology of autism, the knowledge of scientific breakthroughs on autism are not made publicly available.<ref name="4."/><ref name="5."/><ref name="6."/> The research for the root of autism is delayed due to the small amount of money going into the new research.<ref name="4."/><ref name="5."/> Researchers have started to investigate maternal and paternal ages as the root for autism<ref name="6.">Saha, S.; A. G. Barnett A.G.; et al. Maternal Age and Paternal Age Are Associated |
As a result of folk epidemiology of autism, the knowledge of scientific breakthroughs on autism are not made publicly available.<ref name="4."/><ref name="5."/><ref name="6."/> The research for the root of autism is delayed due to the small amount of money going into the new research.<ref name="4."/><ref name="5."/> Researchers have started to investigate maternal and paternal ages as the root for autism.<ref name="6.">Saha, S.; A. G. Barnett A.G.; et al. Maternal Age and Paternal Age Are Associated |
||
With Distinct Childhood Behavioural Outcomes In A General Population Birth Cohort. Schizophrenia Research [Online] 2009, 115(2-3), pp 130-135.</ref> (see [[causes of autism]]) |
With Distinct Childhood Behavioural Outcomes In A General Population Birth Cohort. Schizophrenia Research [Online] 2009, 115(2-3), pp 130-135.</ref> (see [[causes of autism]]) The evidence found is promising, but needs to be investigated further with more monetary support and more support from the society.<ref name="6."/> |
||
==Also see== |
==Also see== |
||
Revision as of 19:29, 24 March 2010
Folk epidemiology of autism is derived from folk science, and refers to the popular beliefs about the origin of autism.[1] Using the rare occurrences or trends of autism in order to unify the complex disorder creates these epidemiologies.[1] The most popular folk epidemiologies for autism are influenced by anecdotal evidence.[1] This erroneous epidemiology has dominated over scientific evidence in society due to the miscommunication of scientific research.[2]
Background
Folk epidemiologies of autism enter into the mass media before scientific evidence can support or disclaim the beliefs.[1][3] For example, in 1998 Andrew Wakefield published an article in The Lancet containing a folk epidemiology that vaccines caused autism.[3] The anecdotal evidence for the folk epidemiology in this article entered into the mass media before the article could be retracted for the lack of scientific evidence.[1][3]
Parents
Folk epidemiology of autism is used by parents with autistic children in order to comprehend their child’s disorder.[1] The physicians' and scientific research community's lack of communication and scientific evidence on autism leaves these parents browsing alternative media in search of answers to autism.[1][2] Most of the alternative media these parents come across are biased towards folk epidemiologies.[4] With little to no exposure of scientific evidence, parents ignorantly believe the folk epidemiologies of autism.[2][4]
Researchers
The scientific researchers lack of explanation for why the studies on the origin of autism were unsuccessful, resulted in people questioning scientific evidence rather than anecdotal evidence.[5] For instance, scientific researchers are unsuccessful in clarifying the adverse effects and benefits of vaccines, causing parents to decide not to get their child vaccinated for fear of the negative side-effects.[3][5] The researchers’ neglect to be informative about their research allows folk epidemiologies to be more accepted into the society.[5]
Sources and Influences
Mass Media
It is the responsibility of the mass media to entertain its audience.[3] The mass media has become biased towards using folk epidemiology of autism in order to create better entertainment.[3] The folk epidemiology of autism provides answers unlike the scientific evidence that only has disclaimed potential causes of autism.[4][5] The constant influence from the biased mass media has resulted in people being highly aware of false epidemiologies and unaware of the scientific research.[3] The media influence has merely strengthened the acceptance of folk epidemiologies for autism.[3][5]
Public Figures
Public figures (see celebrity) address the issues of autism in a way that is easy to understand.[5] These simple explanations presented by public figures, such as Jenny McCarthy and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are a greater influence on people's decisions than the scientific research presented by scientific researchers.[5] The scientific research on autism has little influence on people’s mindset since the scientific researchers give no explanations on the subject of autism.[2][5]
Antagonists
Until the retraction of Andrew Wakefield’s article there has been little opposition towards the folk epidemiologies of autism for many reasons.[5] Most people believe and are influenced by the evidence provided by the media, which causes large controversies when people or groups disagree with the media’s evidence.[5] Paul Offit is one of the few advocates who is publicly against the folk epidemiologies of autism.[5] He believes people need to be more informed about the scientific evidence.[5] Offit wants more money to go into the new scientific research on the cause of autism.[5] (also see Program for Appropriate Technology in Health and Immunization Alliance)
Consequences
The false epidemiology of autism has caused new research for the origin of autism to suffer.[5] More resources are put into the research of folk epidemiologies than for the new scientific research for autism.[5] An example of this is illustrated in the vaccine controversy.[5] People and groups continue to push for more research on the link between vaccines and autism.[4][5] There have been thirteen studies that properly followed the scientific method and contained large numbers of participants that failed to connect autism to the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine.[4] There were seven well-constructed studies, which attempted to correlate autism to thiomersal in vaccines and were unsuccessful.[4]
As a result of folk epidemiology of autism, the knowledge of scientific breakthroughs on autism are not made publicly available.[4][5][6] The research for the root of autism is delayed due to the small amount of money going into the new research.[4][5] Researchers have started to investigate maternal and paternal ages as the root for autism.[6] (see causes of autism) The evidence found is promising, but needs to be investigated further with more monetary support and more support from the society.[6]
Also see
- Vaccine controversy
- Epidemiology of autism
- Thiomersal controversy
- MMR vaccine controversy
- Autism's False Prophets
- Measles outbreaks in the 2000s
References
- ^ a b c d e f g Moore, A.; Stilgoe, J., Experts and Anecdotes the Role of "Anecdotal Evidence" In Public Scientific Controversies. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 2009, 34 (5), 654-677.
- ^ a b c d Sharts-Hopko, N. C., ISSUES IN Pediatric Immunization. Mcn-the American Journal of Maternal-Child Nursing 2009, 34 (2), 80-88.
- ^ a b c d e f g h Taylor, B. Vaccines and the Changing Epidemiology of Autism. Child Care Health and Development [Online] 2006, 32(5), pp 511-519.
- ^ a b c d e f g h Gerber, J. S.; Offit, P. A., Vaccines and Autism: A Tale of Shifting Hypotheses. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2009, 48 (4), 456-461.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s [1]
- ^ a b c Saha, S.; A. G. Barnett A.G.; et al. Maternal Age and Paternal Age Are Associated With Distinct Childhood Behavioural Outcomes In A General Population Birth Cohort. Schizophrenia Research [Online] 2009, 115(2-3), pp 130-135.
External Links
• [2] article written by Phil Brown’s, the creator of the term Popular Epidemiology (folk epidemiology).