[url]http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/29/no-peta-cow-milk-does-not-cause-autism.html[/url]
[img]http://cdn.thedailybeast.com/content/dailybeast/articles/2014/05/29/no-peta-cow-milk-does-not-cause-autism/jcr:content/image.crop.800.500.jpg/1401427896633.cached.jpg[/img]
The group that brought you animal-fur horror stories has just launched a campaign claiming cow’s milk causes autism. Hold on to your Cheerios, this one needs explaining.
PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) earned its chops over the last few decades by raising public awareness about the cruelty of wearing animal fur. Using hard-hitting, obnoxious photos of fur-covered celebrities, they drove home their point—and changed the way many people think about wearing that mink in the process.
It is unsettling, therefore, to see them adopt the same take-no-prisoners approach to pushing an eccentric theory linking milk consumption to autism.
Their “Got Autism?” campaign features an aerial photo of a frowning string of Cheerios in a bowl of cereal. In the ad, they cite an article published by several Norwegian scientists in the journal Nutritional Neuroscience. The article, published in 2002 no less, was not the lead article in that particular volume. That honor went to “The Development of Food Preferences in Cats: The New Direction.”
The autism article described 20 children with well-characterized autism, 10 of whom went on a gluten- and casein (the protein in cow’s milk)-free diet and 10 of whom went about their business as usual. At the end of a year, the two groups were retested and the group on the restricted diet appeared to have improved, as evidenced by demonstrating fewer traits of autism, more than the kids on no particular diet. Other aspects of their autism, including language skills, were unchanged.
This study was one of many by the same research group that presents a thoughtful, not-nutty, biologically plausible way to link sensitivity to some ingested foods with a wide variety of symptoms. Lots of kids have food allergies; even more kids have parents who think they have food allergies. For example, I was an itchy kid and was placed for a few months on a diet without milk or chocolate; I continued to itch and flunked the test. I suspect I am not in the minority of children of worried parents to have been “experimented” on.
“Not only are they putting early maybe-science out there as fact and giving unwarranted hope to countless parents, but they are interfering with the way science happens.”
The topic of diet, specifically as it relates to gluten, casein, and autism, was the subject of a study released in the Journal of Child Neurology this April. After a thorough review, the authors recommended trying the dietary intervention only in children who exhibited other, more standard evidence of food sensitivity and allergy.
The drive to find the cause and cure of autism rivals the urgency and poignancy to find the cause and cure of cancer. And so, as with cancer, anything with a hint of possible truth is grabbed and trumpeted as the next big thing. Milk as a cause of or worsener of autism will have to join the long list of other putative causes. From refrigerator moms who apparently “chilled” their children into autism with a cold demeanor to the evil powers of shampoo and unfiltered water, many of the wildest theories were long ago abandoned. It’s vaccines, antibiotics, and the age of fathers that seem to rule the rhetoric today.
Given the vast uncertainty and the fiercely emotional context, it is difficult to dismiss any theory without proper study—and that’s what is exasperating about the PETA misstep. Not only are they putting early maybe-science out there as fact and giving unwarranted hope to countless parents, but they are interfering with the way science happens.
There probably is a small subset of children whose autism would improve—slightly—with changes in diet. But by sticking their nose into the issue, PETA has only served to marginalize serious researchers who might uncover useful information and place the topic into the hands of charlatans and faith healers, those who use family desperation as an opportunity to turn a buck.
Being part of PETA gives you Autism or at-least severe retardation.
[t]http://www.qayyumofwoking.webspace.virginmedia.com/HorsellVillageHall/images/Building/fullsize/empty%20hall.JPG[/t]
Pictured: a meeting of people who were suprised by this news.
[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;45191930]Being part of PETA gives you Autism or at-least severe retardation.[/QUOTE]
Honestly with their worldview, you're going to be socially stinted if literally you seek to fear nearly every facet of society.
From fabric, to clothing, to furniture, to diet, etcetc
Can we please fine PETA out the ass every time and force them to do a campaign saying there isn't a link to autism? Shit like this shouldn't be acceptable.
[QUOTE=darkrei9n;45191984]Can we please fine PETA out the ass every time and force them to do a campaign saying there isn't a link to autism? Shit like this shouldn't be acceptable.[/QUOTE]
But muh freedom of speech?
[QUOTE=maxumym;45191948][t]http://www.qayyumofwoking.webspace.virginmedia.com/HorsellVillageHall/images/Building/fullsize/empty%20hall.JPG[/t]
Pictured: a meeting of people who were suprised by this news.[/QUOTE]
a meeting of sane people you mean
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;45192018]But muh freedom of speech?[/QUOTE]
except telling complete total bullshit isn't really freedom of speech
[QUOTE=darkrei9n;45191984]Can we please fine PETA out the ass every time and force them to do a campaign saying there isn't a link to autism? Shit like this shouldn't be acceptable.[/QUOTE]
No, because that's censorship and that same fine could be applied to shut genuine people/companies up.
[QUOTE=ChickenLegGuy;45192027]except telling complete total bullshit isn't really freedom of speech[/QUOTE]
It is provided you understand there'll be consequences for it, but the fact remains is that they'll cry the free speech card if they're restrained from talking shit in the hope that somebody's going to believe it.
Welp, I guess I have lots of Autism then.
This is appalling.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;45192065]This is appalling.[/QUOTE]
no this is PETA :v:
[QUOTE=Thomo_UK;45191930]Being part of PETA gives you Autism or at-least severe retardation.[/QUOTE]
Don't insult people with Autism or forms of retardation by associating them with such a silly organisation. Ableism isn't cool.
[QUOTE=FPtje;45192034]No, because that's censorship and that same fine could be applied to shut genuine people/companies up.[/QUOTE]
Not really, there's a point where it becomes libel, slander, or defamation. They're publishing false statements, through the use of written words or images, with the explicit purpose of damaging the reputation of a legitimate business. That is the definition of libel. As long as that's what they get fined for, it doesn't constitute a "slippery slope".
Seriously, they might as well prone mass extention of the human race at this point
That or life in caves, with no clothes and a diet of sand and rocks.
Or maybe not rocks no, it might contain life on or inside it, so I guess a diet of air and happy thoughts would do it.
How they are allowed to exist is beyond me.
[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;45192172]Seriously, they might as well prone mass extention of the human race at this point
That or life in caves, with no clothes and a diet of sand and rocks.
Or maybe not rocks no, it might contain life on or inside it, so I guess a diet of air and happy thoughts would do it.[/QUOTE]
At least none of them have actually started espousing breatharianism yet. Though I doubt they'd last long enough to do so.
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;45192042]It is provided you understand there'll be consequences for it, but the fact remains is that they'll cry the free speech card if they're restrained from talking shit in the hope that somebody's going to believe it.[/QUOTE]
I'd hope it would be hard to fight a fine for "gross medical misinformation" if your only defense is that it's ~an opinion~. It's based on a decade old study where a multitude of things were removed from children's diets and they vaguely improved in only a few aspects of their autism in the end. It probably proved more about the sugar in milk/cereal than anything, and taking it as a 'cause' of anything is blaming a straw placed atop an already broken camel.
Peta does this shit because it gets them support and donations out the ass, which we already know is totally put to good use
[QUOTE=dai;45192191]it's hard to fight a fine for gross misinformation regarding medical issues if your only defense is that it's ~an opinion~. It's based on a decade old study where a multitude of things were removed from children's diets and they vaguely improved in only a few aspects of their autism in the end. It probably proved more about the sugar in milk/cereal than anything to do, and taking it as a 'cause' of anything is blaming a straw placed atop an already broken camel[/QUOTE]
Point taken, I forgot about the gross misinformation clause. But truth be told wouldn't they still cry the suppression card?
PETA has been pushing this campaign for almost a month already, this isn't new at all. In fact, I just dug up an old post I made criticizing them about their statement.
[QUOTE=Lordgeorge16;44977283]I must have super ultra giga autism then, considering I've only been drinking milk and water since the day I was born.
No wait, I was tested negative as a child. Fuck off PETA.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;45192205]Point taken, I forgot about the gross misinformation clause. But truth be told wouldn't they still cry the suppression card?[/QUOTE]
as much as anyone ever does, just with more ridiculous celebrity cameos
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;45192176]How they are allowed to exist is beyond me.[/QUOTE]
I'd rather they existed because they're great to read up on for a good laugh
PETA was protesting our yearly Ribfest. Most ribfest goers ignored them, but several ate ribs, pulled pork, chicken, etc around them while saying things like "MMMM SO GOOD" and "Now [I]this[/I] is going to put some meat on my bones". Was pretty funny.
Also I find it very odd that PETA is against using animals and their bodies for any purpose, but is totally ok using women and their bodies to get their message across (as shown by the protesters, who were all women, being in PETA's typical barely-clothed state). PETA seems to have more respect for pigs than it does for women and that sickens me.
OP, quote only a part of the article, using these tags
[quoREMOVETHISte][/quote]
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;45192326]PETA was protesting our yearly Ribfest. Most ribfest goers ignored them, but several ate ribs, pulled pork, chicken, etc around them while saying things like "MMMM SO GOOD" and "Now [I]this[/I] is going to put some meat on my bones". Was pretty funny.
Also I find it very odd that PETA is against using animals and their bodies for any purpose, but is totally ok using women and their bodies to get their message across (as shown by the protesters, who were all women, being in PETA's typical barely-clothed state). PETA seems to have more respect for pigs than it does for women and that sickens me.[/QUOTE]
Look, PETA are hypocrites, and could care less even if you point it out to them, remember that their founder was using experimental diabetes drugs tested on animals to keep herself alive.
[QUOTE=maxumym;45191948][t]http://www.qayyumofwoking.webspace.virginmedia.com/HorsellVillageHall/images/Building/fullsize/empty%20hall.JPG[/t]
Pictured: a meeting of people who were suprised by this news.[/QUOTE]
i have a feeling you didn't think this joke through
Because one study with 20 kids definitively proves that milk causes autism.
The shitty thing is, people are dumb enough that this claim will probably get serious traction. The anti-vaxxers are proof enough of that. Once a few PETA representatives get to spread their bullshit on Oprah or The View, a whole bunch of kids are going to be stuck eating their Cinnamon Toast Crunch without milk. Bummer.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
