reply to post by Pardon?
I keep calling you a quack because you are one.
That's obvious to everyone.
You really are saying that autism has only been around for 80 years or so? Really and you expect people to take you seriously? Leo Kanner was a very
good scientist and he certainly paved the way in the acknowledgement and understanding of autism but to say there was none before that beggars belief.
Kanner didn't coin the word autism (his work forms the basis of modern autism study). Autism was being used in European psychiatry decades before
that. In fact the earliest printed version of it is in a German paper by Eugen Bleuler in 1911, twenty years before it even existed according to you.
Selective and agenda-led history at its finest and if anyone needed any further proof, you know and understand very little about what autism actually
is let alone its aetiology.
Typical of quacks you like to pigeon-hole a particle disorder rather than accept that the likes of autism are extremely complex. You like to
pigeon-hole these as it makes it easy to apply your "cure".
Everything's so simple in the mind of a quack, "There are a few genetic factors in cases that are similar to autism, like Rhetts and fragile x.
However, as these conditions have their own names, that in itself tells us that these cases are not autism." Brilliant deduction, absolutely first
I've already stated that the APOE4 gene is not related to autism yet, without proof, you still maintain it is.
Just because there is some significance with this gene in Alzheimer's you automatically think there has to be a link to autism.
You're wrong again.
Essentially what you are getting at is trying to say that autism is only autism if there's mercury involved isn't it?
Children who have behavioural development problems who have no mercury inside them can't be autistic according to you?
Am I correct in that assumption?
Let's say I am, what do you call this immense substrate of patients? Do you have a name for it?
Do you actually care about them (I'd guess you don't as you can't chelate them).
Which brings me to your test....
Have you any idea how unethical and unscientific (actually medieval!) your proposed test is?
Again, you're living in a total self-delusional fantasy world.
What was described in 1911 and, I believe, before that by Kraepolin was also known as childhood schizophrenia. Kanner knew this was different than
autism or he would have related the two. This also gave us the word "crapola" to describe Kraepolin's work. The behavior of autistics is so
bizarre that it could never be missed by anyone. You and the other liars from Neurodiversity have been presenting these same untrue arguments for
ages and I already refuted all of them a long time ago. Yes, we had Mad Hatter's Disease which everyone knows was mercury poisoning and it was
similar to Alzheimer's since it happened to adults. Autism happens to babies but the damage to the brain is identical, tangles of dead nerves.
You can state that the APO-E4 is not related to autism until you're blue in the face but that won't make it true. We know it's true since studies
showed that 99% of autistic kids had the APO-E4 over ten years ago. The fact that we gain improvement in 75% of people who try chelation and that we
gain imp[rovement in over 90% of cases who try methyl B-12 also confirm this. Lots of people quit on chelation without doing enough rounds to allow
it to produce results. Results can be painfully slow in older children as I can attest to. There are also many "quack" doctors who practice
chelation the wrong way. They don't use ALA and they use dosing schedules that hurt the patients or the really idiotic doctors use EDTA. I'll run
out of characters before I can cover this subject in detail. What you should glean here is that decent people work towards curing victims and liars
present nonsense that prevents people from learning how to cure victims. You are presenting nonsense. Please go away and present your nonsense to
retards who want to "celebrate the joy of autism".