Children with autism have elevated le...

Children with autism have elevated levels of steroid hormones in the womb

There are 34 comments on the EurekAlert! story from Jun 3, 2014, titled Children with autism have elevated levels of steroid hormones in the womb. In it, EurekAlert! reports that:

Scientists from the University of Cambridge and the Statens Serum Institute in Copenhagen, Denmark have discovered that children who later develop autism are exposed to elevated levels of steroid hormones in the womb.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EurekAlert!.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#22 Jun 8, 2014
The only one jumping to conclusions and exaggerates is Ross Coe. He still cannot prove vaccines had any thing to do with any thing. What's funny is he's so bad, he cant even understand the Japan study. What a riot, if Ross Coe truly believes the Japan study is faulty due to giving single vaccines of the MMR, he just proved Wakefield wrong! BAWAHAHAHAHA! Aside from that, no where does it state that single vaccines where ever given on the same day; the mumps was voluntary for starters. And as he accuses others, it is Ross Coe who just 'assumes' what the Japan vaccine schedule is, then or now! Only in the minds of anti vaxxers do they outright make stuff up and then believe that bogus misinfo.

His comments are evidence of him desperately trying to create a vaccine link (since there is none) and using the same tactic of attacking others hoping to deflect the obvious: He's got zilch which includes working brain cells.
friend a huge STOOGE

Winnipeg, Canada

#23 Jun 8, 2014
friend wrote:
The only one jumping to conclusions and exaggerates is Ross Coe. He still cannot prove vaccines had any thing to do with any thing. What's funny is he's so bad, he cant even understand the Japan study. What a riot, if Ross Coe truly believes the Japan study is faulty due to giving single vaccines of the MMR, he just proved Wakefield wrong! BAWAHAHAHAHA! Aside from that, no where does it state that single vaccines where ever given on the same day; the mumps was voluntary for starters. And as he accuses others, it is Ross Coe who just 'assumes' what the Japan vaccine schedule is, then or now! Only in the minds of anti vaxxers do they outright make stuff up and then believe that bogus misinfo.
His comments are evidence of him desperately trying to create a vaccine link (since there is none) and using the same tactic of attacking others hoping to deflect the obvious: He's got zilch which includes working brain cells.
That Japan study is not new and has been used by the baby killers for a long time to con parents. It is trash and fraudulent based on what it doesn't tell us. How I prove Wakefield wrong, only a loon like friend would know. Shows how she has nothing to offer byt rants and nonsense.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#24 Jun 8, 2014
It's newer than Wakefield's known trash. Obviously Ross Coe knows very little about Wakefake not to understand how he dissed him in his own comments. A study such as this will always threaten anti vaxxer quacks, and as shown here, they'll resort to scare tactics and name calling when they're unsuccessful in offering valid info.
However the point was people have offered links, and every time you fail at discrediting them. The only thing you've ever proved is you're the one who behaves like your a juvenile.
You've been debunked, again.
friend PHARMA TROLL

Winnipeg, Canada

#25 Jun 8, 2014
friend wrote:
It's newer than Wakefield's known trash. Obviously Ross Coe knows very little about Wakefake not to understand how he dissed him in his own comments. A study such as this will always threaten anti vaxxer quacks, and as shown here, they'll resort to scare tactics and name calling when they're unsuccessful in offering valid info.
However the point was people have offered links, and every time you fail at discrediting them. The only thing you've ever proved is you're the one who behaves like your a juvenile.
You've been debunked, again.
Blah blah and nonsense from the troll

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#26 Jun 8, 2014
Bummer for the debunked anti vaxxer, name-call all you want. It's clear you're out numbered, no one believes you and no one agree's with you.
ric99

Market Rasen, UK

#27 Jun 9, 2014
I'm fully aware that 'causation does not mean correlation', but Ross Coe doesn't seem to understand that there cannot be cause and effect without there being a strong correlation between the suggested cause and the known effect.

The UC Davis study conclusively shows that there is a very strong correlation between boys with enlarged brains from birth and those same boys later regressing into autism, regardless of whether they were vaccinated or not.

On the other hand, the NEJM published study conclusively shows that there is zero correlation between date of regression and vaccination times, or indeed whether vaccination even occurred. That does not mean that some kids don't regress shortly after vaccination, but the regression rate at this time is no different from the regression rates before vaccination, a long time after vaccination, or even for kids who never get vaccinated. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that vaccination is NOT a cause of regressive autism.
DUH from friend

Winnipeg, Canada

#28 Jun 9, 2014
friend wrote:
Bummer for the debunked anti vaxxer, name-call all you want. It's clear you're out numbered, no one believes you and no one agree's with you.
Its only you and ricDUH, two bozo's. I couldn't care less what you two think. You both embarrass yourselves with each post and show how little you know and understand.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#29 Jun 9, 2014
If that were the case, you wouldn't be the one who has so many big red X's.
Sorry, you're debunked even on that, again.
TRASH SCIENCE

Winnipeg, Canada

#30 Jun 10, 2014
ric99 wrote:
I'm fully aware that 'causation does not mean correlation', but Ross Coe doesn't seem to understand that there cannot be cause and effect without there being a strong correlation between the suggested cause and the known effect.
The UC Davis study conclusively shows that there is a very strong correlation between boys with enlarged brains from birth and those same boys later regressing into autism, regardless of whether they were vaccinated or not.
On the other hand, the NEJM published study conclusively shows that there is zero correlation between date of regression and vaccination times, or indeed whether vaccination even occurred. That does not mean that some kids don't regress shortly after vaccination, but the regression rate at this time is no different from the regression rates before vaccination, a long time after vaccination, or even for kids who never get vaccinated. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that vaccination is NOT a cause of regressive autism.
Conclusion means nothing. Its not proof
TRASH SCIENCE

Winnipeg, Canada

#31 Jun 10, 2014
friend wrote:
If that were the case, you wouldn't be the one who has so many big red X's.
Sorry, you're debunked even on that, again.
so duh
ric99

Lincoln, UK

#32 Jun 11, 2014
Ross Coe's understanding of science is zero. The results of scientific studies constitute the proof. The conclusions are an expression in words of what the results (usually in numbers) are telling the researchers. In the case of the two studies in question, the results of both tell us that vaccines do not cause autism, whether Ross Coe likes it or not.
ricDUH99

Winnipeg, Canada

#33 Jun 11, 2014
ric99 wrote:
Ross Coe's understanding of science is zero. The results of scientific studies constitute the proof. The conclusions are an expression in words of what the results (usually in numbers) are telling the researchers. In the case of the two studies in question, the results of both tell us that vaccines do not cause autism, whether Ross Coe likes it or not.
I guess a 15 year old who has never understood research and science would think science is direct, exact, and trustworthy . That's why he's a member of the MORON fraternity.
ric99

Lincoln, UK

#34 Jun 12, 2014
When Ross Coe refers to science that is not "direct, exact, and trustworthy", he must be referring to Wakefield's debunked paper. He has no evidence whatsoever that studies such as the NEJM published study or the UC Davis study are not "direct, exact, and trustworthy", otherwise he would have posted such evidence.

Ross Coe has been debunked again, and has yet again demonstrated his total lack of understanding of real science.
ricDUH99

Winnipeg, Canada

#35 Jun 12, 2014
ric99 wrote:
When Ross Coe refers to science that is not "direct, exact, and trustworthy", he must be referring to Wakefield's debunked paper. He has no evidence whatsoever that studies such as the NEJM published study or the UC Davis study are not "direct, exact, and trustworthy", otherwise he would have posted such evidence.
Ross Coe has been debunked again, and has yet again demonstrated his total lack of understanding of real science.
What a imbecile

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Autism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Mokena couple fight to keep fence they say prot... (Aug '12) Thu Flynner 107
Would you date someone who has Asperger's Syndr... (Nov '12) Jun 20 aussie213 15
News This autistic boy's poem will surprise you Jun 17 friend 2
News GABA system dysfunction in autism and related d... Jun 13 CDC Rep 1
News 7 things about vaccines and autism that the mov... Jun 13 Anonymous 11
News Researchers awarded $2.4M NIH grant to study le... Jun 12 friend 6
hospitals Jun 2 Sangelia 1
More from around the web