Does watching TV cause Autism ?

autismtwo said:

James Poterba is President of the National Bureau of Economic Research. He is also the Mitsui Professor of Economics at M.I.T.

Quote"They find that it is, and that this correlation cannot be explained simply by the fact that both cable subscriptions and autism rates were rising over the study period, since communities where subscription rates grew faster experienced faster growth in autism rates as well"

http://www.nber.org/bah/winter07/w12632.html

Electron cathode ray brainwashing delta signal via light cones of the eye to the brain.

Which country watches the most TV and which country has the most autism.

http://www.icare4autism.org/news/2010/09/autism-action-a-global-perspective/

http://www.aneki.com/watch_tv.html

I have not watched TV in the last 5 years, as I knew it was effecting my condition. My parents had the biggest TV in the street as well, growing up. So maybe TV size maybe a correlation as well.

Absolute nonsense!  I watched no more or less TV than my immediate school friends and yet they are extremely sociable and I am the shy one with Autism.  

Autism is most likely genetic in cause, due to faulty genes within families being passed down.  It is probably no coincidence that I have an elderly uncle with suspected Autism, uncles who were alcoholics, a grandmother who suffered from depression and anxiety, and a parent who has nervous issues.  

Can I endorse ScorpionXo17's last line - without autism we most probably wouldn't be as technologically advanced as we are as a species.

This may seem strange to some correspondents and particularly many parents, observing something so destructive to individuals' lives, but I do think there's something more going on.

The focus thing (along with perseverance and obsession) enables some people to examine the minutae of evidence that leads to scientific breakthroughs, which is the only way we can keep pace with the ever changing environmental limitations.

The cost seems to be an unhappy conflict with social expectations. But have those social expectations got more rigid with modern media and lifestyles? In Victorian England eccentricity seems to have been much more acceptable. Not wahing as regularly, or not dressing to fashion, or not eating the same things didn't lead to such pressures as we have now.

Are neurotypicals obsessing about aspies and making things far worse than they need be?

When puzzled about these things I like to re-read Arthur C Clarke's "Childhood's End" a classic sci fi story written in the mid 1950s.

Who's got the right ideas about the future?

autismtwo said:

I suppose we can all agree that the social and living environment has changed in the last 60 years and has had some affect on the Autism Condition. What the article was saying to me, was that with 1 in 50 with autism there has to be an environmental trigger(on the weak gene) as the numbers are too high, if it was purely birth genetics regardless of environment,, then the human genome is in serious trouble long-term.

There are all sorts of reasons why the incidence rate might be 1 in 50 in a give place.

For example the incidence rate is known to be higher in Silicon Valley, and Cambridge (UK).

Both those places don't get a huge amount of rainfall.

They do both have a high density of high-tech industries, though.

Also, why do you say "the human genome is in serious trouble long-term"?

If the majority of the population were on the autistic spectrum then society would be set up for people on the spectrum and we wouldn't have nearly half the issues we do.

I don't see Autism as a disease, or a problem, I see it as a difference, and a benefit to society as a whole.

Without Autism we most probably wouldn't be as technologically advanced as we are as a species.

I suppose we can all agree that the social and living environment has changed in the last 60 years and has had some affect on the Autism Condition. What the article was saying to me, was that with 1 in 50 with autism there has to be an environmental trigger(on the weak gene) as the numbers are too high, if it was purely birth genetics regardless of environment,, then the human genome is in serious trouble long-term.

Ah, I guess the fact there were few TVs around before 1950 accounts for the then lower incidence of reported autism?

It is important to look at other variables when trying to link two phenomena not logically connected. Lots of phenomena have significantly increased in the timescale autism has, why just pick TV? TV might affect people more than some of the others, but I cannot see any scientific connection between TV watching and autism.

A link has been made between car exhaust fumes and autism. There has been a steady increase in the number of cars and other vehicles. I think it is a bit more complex though than people watching telly!

Their basic hypothesis is that in areas where it rains more, kids stay in doors more, and so watch TV more, and this 'correlates' with higher rates of autism.

Could it not simply be that in such areas the parents of those kids are also more likely to (a) stay indoors, (b) watch more TV, (c) therefore seen more of the increasing coverage of autism on TV, (d) therefore be more more likely to spot autistic traits in their children, and so (e) be more likely to seek diagnosis.

Also note that his study was carried out by economists, not epidemiologists.

Also note the really important sentence hidden away in the middle of this report:

"If watching more television is associated with higher rates of autism in the data, this does not prove that television is an autism trigger."

Once again, correlation does not imply causality!

quote"

Despite the growing interest in autism, its causes are not well understood. It is widely accepted that genetics or biology plays an important role in the development of autism. However, many in the medical community believe that the increasing prevalence of autism points to a role for an environmental "trigger" that is becoming more common over time. Yet there is little consensus as to what the trigger (or triggers) might be.

With the recent explosion in television programming and videos aimed at very young children, exposure to electronic media may be one possible trigger. One study found that on a typical day, four out of five children aged 6 months to 6 years old use screen media (TV, videos and DVDs, computers, and video games), for an average of two hours per day. While similar statistics for earlier periods are hard to come by, it seems likely that young children are spending more time in front of the television today than they did in the past. "

http://www.nber.org/bah/winter07/w12632.html

The link on my original posting, answers a lot of these questions.

I am just the messager.., never doing that job again. lol  

This question confuses me. No-one develops Autism as a child or adult. You're born with it. If watching TV did cause Autism, then wouldn't more of the population have it?

I'm with Scorpion0x17 on this one Autismtwo. This does seem like a load of nonsense that hasn't even had much research done into it.

And - "Staring at TV may be linked to rigid thinking and rigid movement factor in a rigid parenting family upbringing."

What does rigid thinking and movement factor etc have to do with autism?

Tons of scientific respected research all indicates that autism is primarily genetic, and is -triggered- by enviornmental factors that either increase the persons ability to interact with society or make their 'symptoms' worsen.

autismtwo said:

[quote][/quote]

Again, if TV caused Autism then a hell of lot more people would have Autism!

1 in 50

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/50-american-kids-autism-latest-figures-article-1.1302872

Remember, it is only an open discussion Scorpion.

And what is the incidence rate of TV watching amongst children in the US?

Close to 1 in 1.

You are allowed to think about things outwith your spectrum.

Sure, being open minded and thinking outside the box is a good thing.

But not when you come up with unscientific, illogical, rubbish.

Scorpion0x17 said:

Again, if TV caused Autism then a hell of lot more people would have Autism!

1 in 50

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/50-american-kids-autism-latest-figures-article-1.1302872

Remember, it is only an open discussion Scorpion. You are allowed to think about things outwith your spectrum.

autismtwo said:

Staring at TV may be linked to rigid thinking and rigid movement factor in a rigid parenting family upbringing.

I appreciate your views, but the scientific jury is still out on this one.

For someone that claims to think logically you come with some utter rubbish sometimes, 'two.

Again, if TV caused Autism then a hell of lot more people would have Autism!

Staring at TV may be linked to rigid thinking and rigid movement factor in a rigid parenting family upbringing.

I appreciate your views, but the scientific jury is still out on this one.

No.

Stranger and Hope are right. TV does influence your eyesight and thinking process to a degree, but it does the same for everyone, it doesn't trigger autism. The images its showing may contain bright colours or flashing motions that can cause someone with autism to become upset, as can the varying volumes on tv shows and adverts, but I highly doubt it causes autism.

Also, countries that watch the most TV are often the ones with more money as a whole, and have better healthcare and methods of diagnosis than poorer countries, so you'remore likely to be diagnosed in a wealthier country, common sense.

Also, something else they may have overlooked, theres been a lot of awareness campaigns on mental health over the past few years on TV, which has lead to many more becoming aware of it and thus getting themselves or their loved ones diagnosed.

This thread makes no sense at all. Why would doing something cause a developmental disorder?

 Hope @ Nobody knows what causes Autism, not so black and white TV.

You are born with Autism. It is not caused by childhood events!. The evidence is conclusive.