Reply #21: If they (and you) can't take this kind of "mocking", as you call it... [View All]

[Brotherjohn]

... then I guess that explains why they never actually published the study in a peer-reviewed journal. Let me tell you, they can be a LOT more harsh (and this paper wouldn't have made it through, as written, anyway).

But please, give me a break. I can't criticize a paper, reported on in the media, HERE, on a DISCUSSION BOARD... without actually getting a grant, starting my own lab, and conducting research on the subject?!

Please.

This is a DISCUSSION BOARD and I'm discussing. What you're suggesting is I have to enter these guys' field and publish to discuss it. While, yes, I do have a PhD, and it is in physiology, and I do have some experience with autism... no, I really don't have the time to do that.

I guess I'd better shut up then. :sarcasm:

I have proposed a couple of alternative explanations. But that is not the point. The point is their study makes claims it does not back up, it goes way beyond the contention that there is a correlation, it chooses a possible target for this correlation out of the blue (with no clinical/physiological basis to start with)... and it remains focused in on it's pre-conceived conclusion like a laser. In short, it violates the scientific method.

If this study can't survive debate about it on a DU discussion board, then I don't know how they expect it to be received in the field.