Re: paging our resident geneticist ..

[Guest guest]

helen_foisy wrote:

> Bill, notwithstanding the phase " autism epidemic " being subject to

> debate in some circles, what do you think about this one? Always look

> forward to reading your POV. - Helen

>

> A macroepigenetic approach to identify factors responsible for the

> autism epidemic in the United States Dufault, Walter J Lukiw,

> Raquel Crider, Roseanne Schnoll, Wallinga and Deth

>

> http://www.clinicalepigeneticsjournal.com/content/4/1/6/abstract

>

> full article here:

> http://www.clinicalepigeneticsjournal.com/content/pdf/1868-7083-4-6.pdf

Hi Helen -

IMHO:

This paper presents an interesting *hypothesis* connecting certain

food-chain elements with the rising *numbers* of autism cases in the

USA. From literature review, the situation in the USA is contrasted

with that in Italy to illustrate the plausibility of the hypothesis.

There is no original work presented and thus no *test* of the hypothesis

- which therefor remains unproven.

The authors' main model emphasizes contamination of high-fructose foods

by heavy metals, especially mercury, as an *environmental* cause of

autism. It differs from the now discredited mercury-in-vaccines model

in suggesting a " macro " source of contamination - a nation's entire (but

varying) food chain over long times.

Very complex, and *highly speculative*, their model might be attacked at

numerous technical points.

However, I was struck particularly by Table 1, on which rests their

whole thesis: the rising incidence ( " epidemic " ) of autism in the USA.

Ignoring the obvious (no *objective* test for autism) the table shows

increasing *numbers* but the data is discussed as *percentages*.

Numerators without denominators. Without knowing the base population's

size, the percentages are meaningless.

There are other problems with Table 1, its scope and interpretation.

The entire paper suggests a biased agenda. It appears to be fairly

competent, ...if too selective as to facts and presentation. Easy to

attack - if one were so inclined. I'm not.

The authors are right at least about possible " macro " considerations in

the epidemiology of *any* disease - not just " autism " . Obesity, anyone?

Salmonella?

- Bill ...AS, ...retired clinical/research geneticist

--

WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm

[Guest guest]

Bill,

thanks for your comments from your learned perspective. I love this group! For

so many reasons

On your latter point, yes, reading the article brought to mind some of the

recent studies on " obesogens " in the environment and food supply .. more or less

the same contaminants that are implicated in many " modern ills. " Here's a link

with sources that describes some of the studies:

http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.120-a62

Thank you also for your replies to two previous queries of mine. I'll just add

the archive links here so you will know what I am referring to:

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/aspires-relationships/message/17805

and

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/aspires-relationships/message/17891

Acknowledged and in agreement.

I injured my hand so typing is slow and I'm sorry I'm not acknowledging some

posts as quick as I should.

- Helen

> > Bill, notwithstanding the phase " autism epidemic " being subject to

> > debate in some circles, what do you think about this one? Always look

> > forward to reading your POV. - Helen

> >

> > A macroepigenetic approach to identify factors responsible for the

> > autism epidemic in the United States Dufault, Walter J Lukiw,

> > Raquel Crider, Roseanne Schnoll, Wallinga and Deth

> >

> > http://www.clinicalepigeneticsjournal.com/content/4/1/6/abstract

> >

> > full article here:

> > http://www.clinicalepigeneticsjournal.com/content/pdf/1868-7083-4-6.pdf

>

> Hi Helen -

>

> IMHO:

>

> This paper presents an interesting *hypothesis* connecting certain

> food-chain elements with the rising *numbers* of autism cases in the

> USA. From literature review, the situation in the USA is contrasted

> with that in Italy to illustrate the plausibility of the hypothesis.

> There is no original work presented and thus no *test* of the hypothesis

> - which therefor remains unproven.

>

> The authors' main model emphasizes contamination of high-fructose foods

> by heavy metals, especially mercury, as an *environmental* cause of

> autism. It differs from the now discredited mercury-in-vaccines model

> in suggesting a " macro " source of contamination - a nation's entire (but

> varying) food chain over long times.

>

> Very complex, and *highly speculative*, their model might be attacked at

> numerous technical points.

>

> However, I was struck particularly by Table 1, on which rests their

> whole thesis: the rising incidence ( " epidemic " ) of autism in the USA.

> Ignoring the obvious (no *objective* test for autism) the table shows

> increasing *numbers* but the data is discussed as *percentages*.

> Numerators without denominators. Without knowing the base population's

> size, the percentages are meaningless.

>

> There are other problems with Table 1, its scope and interpretation.

>

> The entire paper suggests a biased agenda. It appears to be fairly

> competent, ...if too selective as to facts and presentation. Easy to

> attack - if one were so inclined. I'm not.

>

> The authors are right at least about possible " macro " considerations in

> the epidemiology of *any* disease - not just " autism " . Obesity, anyone?

> Salmonella?

>

> - Bill ...AS, ...retired clinical/research geneticist

>

> --

> WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

> http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm

>