—snip—
One of the challenges with this style of study is that it is difficult to account for every aspect of life which might affect the probability of developing autism, such as family history.
It means the study cannot say that autism is caused by traffic pollution, merely that there could be a link between the two.
Sophia Xiang Sun, from the University of Cambridge’s autism research centre, argued that cutting pollution would be a good idea anyway.
—snip—
“Their study of more than 500 children said those exposed to high levels of pollution were three times more likely to have autism than children who grew up with cleaner air.”
The above statement reflects the stupidity of modern science that relies on mere statistics and correllation, disregarding that correllation is not causation.
Correllation only proves you can draw your own line connecting the dots of two data points occurring in the same time-context. It proves zilch about cause.
Another study could find that among the same 500 surveyed, among those who experiences high levels of pollution, they/their parents also ate more often at MacDonalds, and they/their parents often watched more hours of TV, and they/their parents ate more white bread, or more red meat. What would ANY such statistical correllations prove? Zilch.
And academica blames everyone outside of academia for the low standing that science has in the public mind today, when it is they who have brought that low standing on to science by their scientific absurdities.
Maybe women in areas with less traffic congestion went outside more often during their pregnancy and gave their fetus the necessary vitamin D.
Maybe women in areas with less traffic congestion went outside more often during their pregnancy and gave their fetus the necessary vitamin D.