Orac, whose blog has done much to rebut vaccine conspiracy theories published in the mainstream media, expresses hope (via Childs) that a new study showing the likelihood of autism increases with the age of the father will add to the weight of evidence showing that autism is genetic, rather than caused by vaccines.
Of course, Orac is presuming that litigation-driven theories and for-hire-expert testimony have any basis in rationality or science. We have known for nearly twenty years that “sudden acceleration” is much more likely to occur to elderly, new, or very short drivers, and demonstrating conclusively that it is purely a function of pedal misapplication, yet we still see lawsuits (and verdicts!) today alleging that (apparently age-discriminating) magnetic interference with defective cruise control causes accidents (e.g., Aug. 7).
3 Comments
I am not sure I understand you, Ted, on the sudden acceleration point. If I can show a statistical association between some factor F and some outcome O, I have “demonstrated conclusively” that every instance of O is caused entirely by F?
I ask because I have some briefs I’m writing where this inferential principle, if valid, could come in awfully handy.
The study failed to control for paternal social skills deficit as a mild version of the disorder. It could account for having a child late in life.
One easy way to do so would be to provide the rate of autism in siblings born when the father was younger, especially older half-siblings from another mother. Maternal depression is another potential risk factor. The half sibling study would attenuate that factor. Use older siblings as a control group.
Was it the father’s wierdness accounting for both the late birth and autism, or just his age?
PN: I am guilty of using shorthand for a well-documented plaintiffs’ attorney fraud, but in the case of sudden acceleration, there was no evidence supporting the cruise control failure hypothesis (which still has never been replicated), while all evidence pointed to pedal misapplication.
SC: My first thought upon seeing the study was the same thing: could it perhaps be a function of social ineptitude, rather than aging sperm? (I believe Slate made the same point.) Either way for purposes of the vaccine controversy, however, that points to a genetic answer.