Amish getting fined?

[JohnH]

1800 Amish from a door-to-door survey with two survey tools, neither designed for Amish and no evidence that a translator was provided relying on self reporting from parents.

Why is a translator needed? Amish people who are old enough to have children speak English, as a general rule.

The rate of incidence of autism is generally established using surveying techniques. For that matter, so is the vaccination rate.

Vaccination rate is determined by data from Immuninet, not self reporting. Maybe you did not know that because you didn’t know that it exists.

Surveying techniques are simply not objective, full stop.

Perhaps you could tell the public health worker I visited with in Holmes County he’s wrong, then. Part of his job was to determine the vaccination rate.

Somehow I don’t think “Immuninet” lists which Anabaptist sect someone is or isn’t a part of.

[JohnH]

u

I know. He was “stuck off” for fraudulent research . If such an article has been published, I would LOVE to read it. My suspicion is that no such article exists, because I cannot conceive of anyone who would publish an article from a known fraud.

Let's stick to the well-published facts, then. Amish have a far lower incidence of autism (which you handwaved away by claiming that the official, well-researched rate of autism in the general population is somehow not reliable), and they also have a far lower rate of vaccination.

Are you disputing these facts?

It is not a fact, and it is not well published . The increase in autism is almost entirely due to shifting diagnostic criteria, and the lower rate can surely be attributed to the FACT That autism is largely a subjective diagnosis and there is no objective study that follows children chosen at random from Amish communities. If you know of such a study that consistently applies criteria rather then relying on self reporting, please cite it. “Everyone knows “ simply does not count

Okay, so sometimes you like science and sometimes you don’t. Either we agree to use widely recognised diagnostic criteria, or we don’t. How do you pick and choose?

The amount of nonverbal autism (which isn’t exactly a squishy definition) is far higher than it used to be. Profound autism has also increased.

The obvious question is why this hasn’t happened amongst Amish people.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Why is a translator needed? Amish people who are old enough to have children speak English, as a general rule.

The rate of incidence of autism is generally established using surveying techniques. For that matter, so is the vaccination rate.

Vaccination rate is determined by data from Immuninet, not self reporting. Maybe you did not know that because you didn’t know that it exists.

Surveying techniques are simply not objective, full stop.

Perhaps you could tell the public health worker I visited with in Holmes County he’s wrong, then. Part of his job was to determine the vaccination rate.

Somehow I don’t think “Immuninet” lists which Anabaptist sect someone is or isn’t a part of.

It is used to determine rates for the population by place of residence. No, it does not list religion.

I am surprised that you could have a productive visit with such a person, considering your attitude.

[Judas Maccabeus]

u

Let's stick to the well-published facts, then. Amish have a far lower incidence of autism (which you handwaved away by claiming that the official, well-researched rate of autism in the general population is somehow not reliable), and they also have a far lower rate of vaccination.

Are you disputing these facts?

It is not a fact, and it is not well published . The increase in autism is almost entirely due to shifting diagnostic criteria, and the lower rate can surely be attributed to the FACT That autism is largely a subjective diagnosis and there is no objective study that follows children chosen at random from Amish communities. If you know of such a study that consistently applies criteria rather then relying on self reporting, please cite it. “Everyone knows “ simply does not count

Okay, so sometimes you like science and sometimes you don’t. Either we agree to use widely recognised diagnostic criteria, or we don’t. How do you pick and choose?

The amount of nonverbal autism (which isn’t exactly a squishy definition) is far higher than it used to be. Profound autism has also increased.

The obvious question is why this hasn’t happened amongst Amish people.

The point is, that the criteria has changed. This makes the statistics useless. The “label “ has also changed. When have you met anyone who is “ Mentally Retarded” in the past 50 years. They were largely institutionalized, I had at least two friends that had siblings that were in such places.


You can believe anything you want. The person who caused it has gone on record.

[barnhart]

You can believe anything you want...

Even if there is good data about lower autism rates in Amish populations, it proves nothing about the cause. Maybe early exposure to horse manure is prophylactic, maybe it's lack of exposure to fire retardant chemicals in upholstery, maybe all that apple butter and marshmallow cream is good for you, or more likely lack of exposure to fried foods. Has anyone studied rates of occurrence of autism in birth order, maybe it occurs less frequently after the first six children...

[JohnH]

You can believe anything you want...

Even if there is good data about lower autism rates in Amish populations, it proves nothing about the cause.

Perhaps you should have read my earlier post, then (emphasis mine):

Whilst we can’t prove causation, it is true that the Amish vaccinate at a low rate (around 15%) and have an extremely low autism rate (under 0.05%, vs 2.7% for non-Amish).

[JohnH]

It is used to determine rates for the population by place of residence. No, it does not list religion.

I am surprised that you could have a productive visit with such a person, considering your attitude.

Right, and the state doesn't (yet) keep data on what religion people are by their address, so finding out Amish vaccination rates requires a survey, or other entirely-valid statistical sampling techniques that are very commonly used in public health research.

The research so far shows two things, which the current consensus in public health does not dispute:

- That Amish vaccinate at a very, very low rate. (Hence why I met a public-health worker at all who was busy trying to run a program to get people to vaccinate more.)
- The Amish have autism a much lower rate. (This is also studied by researchers who want to identify potential causes of autism.)

Of course, the two could be unrelated.

[JohnH]

I am surprised that you could have a productive visit with such a person, considering your attitude.

I had a pleasant visit (from my part) with him, which mostly consisted of him ranting and raving to me about how ignorant and backwards both the plain and non-plain populations in Holmes County were, and how he definitely wasn't going to be able to get the COVID vaccination targets the grant that funded him was aiming for. I invited him to visit the academic conference in Millersburg I was attending which had public-health workers and other people present whom I offered could help him understand the plain community a little better, which he was not familiar with.

We also had a conversation that was pleasant (from my end) about Appalachian cultural differences that lead them not to trust outsiders or government beyond a very local level, and I referred him to good resources to try to learn a bit more about that.

He seemed grateful for the conversation and was less agitated at the end than the beginning. I would invite you to try such conversational techniques as well.

[Judas Maccabeus]

It is used to determine rates for the population by place of residence. No, it does not list religion.

I am surprised that you could have a productive visit with such a person, considering your attitude.

Right, and the state doesn't (yet) keep data on what religion people are by their address, so finding out Amish vaccination rates requires a survey, or other entirely-valid statistical sampling techniques that are very commonly used in public health research.

The research so far shows two things, which the current consensus in public health does not dispute:

- That Amish vaccinate at a very, very low rate. (Hence why I met a public-health worker at all who was busy trying to run a program to get people to vaccinate more.)
- The Amish have autism a much lower rate. (This is also studied by researchers who want to identify potential causes of autism.)

Of course, the two could be unrelated.

Evidence for the second is thin at best, and possibly absent, the methodology simply is so poor, it proves exactly nothing.

[Judas Maccabeus]

You can believe anything you want...

Even if there is good data about lower autism rates in Amish populations, it proves nothing about the cause. Maybe early exposure to horse manure is prophylactic, maybe it's lack of exposure to fire retardant chemicals in upholstery, maybe all that apple butter and marshmallow cream is good for you, or more likely lack of exposure to fried foods. Has anyone studied rates of occurrence of autism in birth order, maybe it occurs less frequently after the first six children...

If you postulate that it is environmental, genetic or has something to do with child rearing practices, you might have a goldmine of possibility.

In my wife’s great nephew I suspect, but can, in no wise prove,child rearing practices. They simply will never say NO to their son. The outcome is predictable.