Embedded Files
Vaccines, Tylenol, and Autism
It's time to learn how to science! (Vaccinations, Tylenol and Autism)
(Yes, I know that's not how you say it, but stay with me.)
Now that everyone is suddenly an expert in developmental science. It's important to understand how scientists figure things out.
First of all, finding out what causes autism is a super complicated thing with a million different possible things going on with a million different combinations of those things. In order to do a high-quality study on a single question, like whether vaccines or Tylenol cause autism, you have to find a way to separate out any other possible variables as well.
This takes real effort with larger numbers of people and multiple studies trying to replicate the effects.
For instance, the other day, someone was using the example of Autism rates among the Amish as a way to prove that vaccines cause autism. Their theory was that if the Amish people have lower autism rates and they don't vaccinate, then this proves that vaccines cause autism. There are problems with using this as an example. If this were one of my classes, you would know the problems. But since this isn't one of my classes, I'm gonna go ahead.
The problem is that this doesn't separate out any of the other variables that can affect autism rates. Autism rates can vary greatly between the Amish and the general population for some very big reasons. Some of these reasons could include a different and closed gene pool (given the prevailing theory that autism is mostly genetic). Other big reasons could be a much different attitude toward childhood screenings and attitudes towards seeking out a diagnosis. If their culture is different, they may not be as apt to diagnose people who have less profound versions of autism.
A more useful comparison would be autism rates among the general population between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. Interestingly enough, there is very little difference in autism rates between these groups, showing that vaccinations are unlikely to cause autism.
Now holding onto the less useful comparison of Amish people while ignoring the comparisons in the general population is called Confirmation Bias. The picture in this post is a good example of that. Exaggerating the usefulness of something because it confirms what you believe, while ignoring rather large amounts of evidence that go against it. This is what drives anti-vax movements that believe autism is caused by vaccinations.
See my video on confirmation bias here
Confirmation Bias and the Brain with Detective Pikachu
Confirmation Bias and the Brain with Detective Pikachu
Confirmation bias is one of the strongest forces for shaping the way we think and creates some pretty huge distortions between what our brain thinks is reality and actual reality
If you look at the overall trend and high-quality studies, it's pretty clear it doesn't cause autism.
One reason why the anti-vaxx movement thrives is a specific type of confirmation bias in which you can automatically ignore any study you don't like by applying the label of "Big Pharma".
The person says the studies are automatically suspect because Big Pharma is trying to protect its profits. The problem is that this ignores the studies entirely, including the fact that there could easily be ulterior motives for someone setting out to prove the connection.
This is convenient because you can again hold on to any belief you want by ignoring any study that goes against that belief. The problem is that it keeps the person from seeing reality.
Interestingly enough with the Tylenol thing another bias is added to the puzzle. Because it was announced by political figures and not scientists, such as Trump and RFK Jr., people automatically defend it based on their politics and not based on its scientific merits. RFK Jr. has shown that he has a tendency towards high confirmation bias and ignoring large swaths of scientific research.
In-group Bias means that people who share political views with Trump and RFK Jr. are automatically going to find reasons to believe it, while people against their politics will be skeptical.
Take a look at my video of this bias right here:
Ingroup and Outgroup Bias
Ingroup and Outgroup Bias
We have a tendency to see people in our group as better than they are and people in groups we dislike as worse than they are. This causes all kinds of societal problems.
The scientific evidence strongly points to the side of skepticism, and since this is a scientific question and not a political one, that's the side that one should be on until evidence tips the balance. Pointing out a smaller study that goes against larger, higher-quality ones doesn't provide proof of the connection.
One of the best studies was done in which they studied mothers who had multiple children. They found that with many of the mothers, acetaminophen was taken for some of the children but not others. With this study, they found there was no difference in autism rates between those who were exposed to it and those who were not.
Now, most people tend to think that everyone else is the biased one and that they themselves are the rational one, devoid of bias.
This is called Bias Blind Spot: I made a video of it here:
Bias Blind Spot- Why we think we are unbiased
Bias Blind Spot- Why we think we are unbiased
Our brain hides our biases from ourself. No reason to cook the books to make you feel good about yourself and then reveal you are cooking the books.
You may also like
See my video on confirmation bias here
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse