Does TV cause autism?
Monday July 28, 2008
Categories: Technology
Gregg Easterbrook reports on a new Cornell study suggesting a link between TV watching in the very young and autism. Excerpt: The researchers studied autism incidence in California, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington state. They found that as cable television became...
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
Recent Posts
About Crunchy Con
Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.
Subscribe
Archives
Blogs Worth Reading
- Front Porch Republic
- The American Conservative
- Patrick Deneen
- Conventional Folly
- The American Scene
- First Things
- Andrew Sullivan
- The Plank
- Eunomia
- Get Religion
- Postmodern Conservative
- Alex Massie
- The Corner
- Contentions
- Sharon Astyk
- Barry Ritholtz
- The Oil Drum
- Mere Comments
- First Principles (ISI)
- Brian Kaller
Nonsense. The two children in our family with autistic spectrum disorders were the ones with the least exposure to television.
Ditto to "djrakowski." This is more of the same old **** that blames the parents of autistic children for their children's autism. It's a polite version of the mentality that Michael Savage expressed. There are probably good reasons to not have a TV or at least limit its use but preventing autism isn't one of them.
Do a web search on Autism Gene - there is evidence for a strong genetic component.
Were I to make a guess about how TV watching enters into it, I'd suggest that a baby that is plonked in front of the TV instead of interacting with people is not developing social skills.
I agree completely with djrawkowski and Roberto Rivera.
That being said, our daughter with autism couldn't care less about cable TV. But she (along with any number of other autistic kids we've observed) obsessively seeks out videos and DVDs, replaying the same scenes over and over as a self-stimulatory behavior. It could be that autistic kids are even more likely to seek out the visual stimulation of TV, rather than TV being the cause. After all, TV provides them with rich visual imagery and makes no social demands - what's not to like?
I watched a shameful amount of television from the time I was an infant (sorry mom, its true!) and I do not have this disorder. In fact, I took that Autism assessment quiz you wrote about recently, and I scored a 13, making me slightly more empathetic than the average woman! ;)
I doubt there is a magic bullet answer to Autism. It probably has a lot to do with genetics combined with something environmental. But TV alone cannot possibly be the culprit.
Related to autism or not, I am constantly amazed by the fact that virtually no one follows the recommendation of the AAP regarding television for toddlers. Nothing makes me feel more like a freak than admitting that our three year-old doesn't watch television (or videos or whatever). Other mothers always ask how I get anything done without the television to distract my kid! I have yet to meet another family in real life that follows these guidelines.
(The non-health related upside, if you're on the fence about banning TV for your very small children, is that your kids don't get marketed to as much as most people's do. It's really nice to be able to go to the store and serenly pass by all the Dora- and Thomas-related merchandise without my children even noticing, much less pestering me for stuff.)
One study (unless the results are dramatic, like everybody dies) is not that convincing of an argument. It all depends on how they interpreted the data.
I would agree that if you are not interacting with people, you are not going to get social skills. My twin toddler cousins are never around other kids and when they see other kids they act like the new kids are aliens.
What I think:
TV doesn't cause LEGITIMATE autism, but it probably contributes to the ADD-ish social problems misdiagnosed as autism. My amateur theory is that many "disorders" are simply the result of inadequate formation during those first few years of a child's life, either because they are spending far too much time in front of the TV (a most unnatural form of stimulation if you think about it), and far too little time interacting with parents (being read to, played with, and so on). I’m not saying that all behavior problems are cause by bad parenting, but this study does have a point about the TV…
Do a web search on Autism Gene - there is evidence for a strong genetic component.
Indeed. I scored 35 or so on the "are you autistic" test that Rd linked to. No surprise: I regard my son -- who is autistic -- as me only more so.
There are many intriguing theories about the rise of autism (apart from better diagnosis and detection, of course): Simon Baron Cohen (Borat's cousin), one of the leading autism researchers in the world, has suggested that changes in mating and marriage patterns may have made matches between people with the genetic predisposition more likely to meet and marry.
In any case, TV had nothing to do with my tendencies because we didn't have one when I was a kid and in any case I didn't understand English! Yet I manifested traits that would have prompted me to be diagnosed as having some kind of autism spectrum disorder when I was a young child.
This study is the biggest bunch of crap I've ever read. As if television could account for actual physical differences in brain structure! Did it ever occur to anyone that areas in which cable TV became prevalent early on have a higher-than-average annual rainfall, so there's less to do outside? And we all know that rain can contain toxic chemicals, including particulate mercury from coal-fired power plants. In fact, a much more convincing study shows that the rate of autism increases inversely to the distance a child lives from a power plant.
The author of this article states: "[N]umerous studies have failed to show any definitive link between autism and vaccines, while the autism rise has continued since worrisome compounds in vaccines were banned."
The head of the CDC, Dr. Julie Gerbreding, recently admitted that most of the CDC's research into a possible connection between autism and vaccines "was shoddily done and politically compromised." Not to mention that the "worrisome compounds" have never been banned outright; they were removed voluntarily, whenever Big Pharma felt like it, and the most worrisome of all, thimerosal, is still present in most of the influenza vaccines that are currently used. Of course, thimerosal was banned from animal vaccines in 1990....
Clint,
I don't think this study is "a bunch of crap." Is it that hard to fathom that the kind of visual stimulation the television produces can affect the way a child's brain develops? I'm not scientist, but it seems obvious to me that televion could be harmful during those first few years when a child's brain is developing. Don't you remember how certain cartoons caused seizures in young children?
Based on what I've read, heard, and experienced, I suspect genes play by far the biggest role in ASD, especially more pronounced forms like autism and AS (seems like environment could play a bigger role in ADD though; our media saturated, multi-tasking culture is negatively effecting the brains of adults, so I can't even imagine the effect it is having on the developing brains of children). So I would think the reason for the low incidence of ASD among the Amish is that they are such a close, closed community, the majority of them being descendents of about 200 people.
But of course there are plenty of other reasons to keep young kids away from the t.v; we've probably underestimated the damage it is doing and the imprint it is leaving, and the things it is robbing our children of.
TV for children is likely not helpful. No question. Good for you if your kids don't watch TV, reading is 10 times better.
However, it's been omnipresent in people's homes since way before the large outbreak of autism and was used as a "babysitter" since the 1950's, before the big autism boom was seen. Dr. Waldman is a Cornell economics professor who has this topic as a quirky hobby. He should not be honored with the designation of "researcher", as it's a slam towards those for whom this field of research is their legit day job. He has no qualifications or publications in health, biology, neurology or child development. This study was published in an economics journal. No one else (including me) wants to champion TV for kids, but no one else has seen TV causing autism.
His connections from TV to autism are tenuous at best. His assumption follows that since certain areas are more predisposed to rain, they should then get more TV time so probably, yada yada yada... One internet wag used his logic to suggest that he had proven that people with Autism cause rain in their locale. He has no results showing causation.
He also suggests that constantly watching the screen engages the child and forces the children to view an object that does not interact, thereby stunting their natural tendency to interact. He does not similarly attack baby mobiles hanging above the crib, though many children are similarly enthralled, but who have soley visible interaction with these objects. Mobiles are probably as prevalent as TVs.
For those of us who deliberately did not expose their infants to TV, who took the kid out even in bad weather, it's frankly insulting. He is several orders of magnitude more conscientious than Dr. Weiner/Savage (damned by faint praise) , but his desire to see his pet theory through has blinded him to the effect of his research. Given that there a couple hundred chemicals now in existence that kids are commonly exposed to that did not exist in the 1950's, I think he at least needs to take some basic coursework in toxicology before he is considered a legit scientist in autism. He is muddying the waters at best, and insulting (though admittedly well-meaning) at worst.
Part of the reason why we never had the TV on much for my daughter was that she never seemed interested in it, especially compared to kids who grew up to be neurotypical. I see now that her lack of engagement in it was an early sign of her autism.
My eldest son, the one with full blown Asperger's had zero access to TV until he was almost 4--by which time he was already showing full symptoms. Upshot: unlikely in the extreme.
Who dredged this stupid study up? One of the major causes of autism is older paternal age. http://themalebiologicalclock.blogspot.com/ Unfortunately this fact is kept under the radar and has been for over 50 years. Early childhood schizophrenia has been renamed autism as is attributable in non-familial cases to fathers over 33. Mothers who had older fathers when they were conceived have a greater chance of having children with genetic disorders like fragile X and other types of non-familial autism. http://www.schizophreniaforum.org/for/curr/Malaspina/default.asp
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/beware-the-male-menopause/3259776530
http://themalebiologicalclock.blogspot.com/
Autism is not caused by TV. This study was discredited long ago. Older paternal age is a major cause of non-familial autism. Women who had older fathers when they were conceived have a higher chance of having children with genetic disorder due to their fathers sperm carrying defective DNA. Read the male biological clock blogspot for details.
This was done by an economics professor who really didn't know anything about autism. It was not taken seriously in the autism community.
Why wasn't this study published in any peer reviewed journals. I am guessing it used junk science and wouldn't stand up to any statistical analysis. Strange also that it is buried on the business schools website.
"Good for you if your kids don't watch TV, reading is 10 times better."
Most two-year-olds can't read.
For a variety of reasons, most of them relating to my Osteogenesis Imperfecta, I watched a great deal of TV when I was little. I did score a bit high on that AQ test, 27, so I almost thought it possible. (I'm reasonably certain I do not have Asperger's, that score is high enough to be convincing for me) Although judging by the comments here it likely means nothing.
Still what if autism is a combination? Like there's a gene and a trigger. So for some the trigger is TV and for others it's something else. Just hypothesizing.
obsessively seeks out videos and DVDs, replaying the same scenes over and over as a self-stimulatory behavior. It could be that autistic kids are even more likely to seek out the visual stimulation of TV, rather than TV being the cause. After all, TV provides them with rich visual imagery and makes no social demands - what's not to like?
Posted by: Baton Rouge Reader | July 28, 2008 4:42 PM
Bingo. And it's exactly the way our two behave as well. The suggestion that TV causes autism seems to be a misunderstanding of the nature of autism.
This is a "study" which came out over a year ago, and is essentially an exercise in magical thinking. It's like suggesting that rise in autism cases is directly connected to catalytic converters, or the rise of Chinese capitalism. Because both happened at more or less the same time, they must be related.
Of course, there's no proof that TV and autism are NOT related - and that's a serious problem for parents. Because there's no proof that anything at all DOESN'T cause autism, and if parents took all of the suggestions seriously they'd live without... let's see... cable TV, wifi, cell phones, dog shampoo, electric power lines... and dozens of other ordinary household devices and products which, like TV, have been "associated" with autism.
It's hard not to "believe," and I supposed beliefnet is a good place to post "beliefs" - but honestly, that's all it is.
Thanks,
Lisa Rudy (www.autism.about.com)
I'll start out by stating that I am not a fan of TV, and my kids are limited to a movie on Friday night. Sometimes I let them watch TV when it is raining and they are all climbing the walls, but by and large I don't like them watching much. They watch a heckuva lot less than I did, growing up in the '70s.
My oldest daughter had a lot of autism behaviors as a toddler. She was in Early Intervention from age 8 months to 3 years, and then was in special ed from ages 3-5 at which point she was deemed "pretty normal." She spent her toddler years being evaluated by neuropsychologists, neurologists, neurodevelopmental specialists, etc.. We do have a lot of Asberger's types in the family tree. Now, at age 8, she is a normal but somewhat quirky kid who is freaky smart.
Anyway, she was the one who NEVER watched TV, who was held, stimulated, etc.. constantly. I did everything the way you were supposed to with her, even down to making my own organic baby food and not using a microwave while I was pregnant.
The other two, well, I was known to have a glass of wine from time to time while pregnant, I ate soft cheeses, they were planted in front of Dora the Explorer at times so I could get something done, and they were so neurotypical it was ridiculous.
I will say, however, that my oldest was the one who would be completely MESMERIZED by TV, whereas the other two would watch a bit and then wander away looking for me. So it could be a chicken/egg thing -- do toddlers with autistic tendencies get that way from watching TV, or do they watch more TV because they love it so very much and are also so very hard for parents to deal with, what with the bizarre behavior and meltdowns over stuff like lumps in their yogurt, noises, etc....
Some anecdata -- my nephew, born in the mid-eighties, has a pretty severe case of autism. TV factored largely in his babyhood. I remember that he loved "wheel of fortune," and would say "wheel" in this squeaky baby voice and smile and laugh about it before he withdrew into his quiet world. I would have no way to know if there is causal link -- I do know that later I found it sad that his mom used the television as a minder for him when he was a school aged kid -- it seemed to isolate him even further.
This study is so incredible misguided that it should not even be displayed on a computer screen, let alone printed using real paper.
This "new Cornell study" is not a study at all but a chance observation made by people not in the sciences.
- Other comments have said it better but you should "WAKE UP!" and smell the coffee.
Thank you Rod Dreber for picking this up again. I've been circulating the following letter for some time now:
Since there is a epidemic of autism, there has to be an environmental trigger: genetics cannot cause an epidemic. Our current focus on vaccines seems to discourage thought about other possible triggers. There is convincing evidence that vaccines do not cause autism. Why not look elsewhere?
A major environmental trigger has already been identified. Michael Waldman's research (2006)[1] has proven that autism is strongly correlated with early childhood exposure to television. Such exposure, like autism, has risen dramatically in recent years. These results do not prove that TV causes autism, but that early exposure to TV seriously increases the risk of autism.
In scientific terms, Waldman's research is highly convincing. Nevertheless is has been ignored or dismissed. Our culture is so enamored of television and the computer that it resists the accumulating evidence that early over-exposure leads to behavioral problems in children. Parents of autistic children dread feeling blamed and so resist the possibility that their use of television, DVDs, or computer games may inadvertently have triggered autism.
Both the public and many researchers have been misled by the evidence that autism is correlated with genetic factors. In fact the genetic evidence shows that genetic factors may predispose an infant to autism, but that genetic factors alone do not cause autism. For example, when one genetically identical twin is autistic, the other may not be autistic.
Research on autism is often flawed by mechanistic assumptions about the brain. It is now well-established that biological structures are not mechanisms but dynamic systems. Unlike mechanisms, dynamic systems organize themselves with extensive input from the environment. These issues, and their implications for autism, are explained more fully in my on-line article in Dynamical Psychology (2004)[2].
Meanwhile, Waldman's results cannot be dismissed. Their scientific and statistical validity is clear.
(My own scientific experience was as a molecular biologist at Duke University, M.I.T., and the M.R.C. Laboratories in Cambridge, England.)
Sincerely,
Maxson J. McDowell PhD, LMSW, LP
(1) www.johnson.cornell.edu/faculty/profiles/wald...
(2) www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/2004/Autism04.htm
This guy needs an enema...
Waldman's research also shows a strong correlation between autism and rain. I remain unconvinced.
I don't believe the correlation is in the TV watching and causation of autism, but in the level of the child's absorption in electronic media and the presence of the disability called autism. If your child is engaged with the screen at the exclusion of important sounds like their mother's voice, at mealtimes and in the presence of other children and toys, then it is a good indication of the need for further assessment. The video is not the culprit at this point but the indicator.
The video becomes the culprit when parents allow their children, any child autistic or not, to get locked into the visuals for hours as a babysitter to the exclusion of social interaction, learning to ask and wait for stimulation and rewards and learn the routines and social aspects of play. Anyone can be guilty of this in this day and age when we rely on electronic screen media so much.
For some time now, it has been observed that children with autism gravitate towards electronic screen media for entertainment and engagement and learn, through their natural inclination for visual and repetitive stimuli and very selective cues in their environment, to imitate full sentences and songs, practice vocal intonation, and sometimes use these utterances and mannerisms in other situations either appropriately or not so appropriately but always with some meaning. There are of course other children who want nothing to do with the screen media as they are much too anxious to attend. A recent research survey investigated preferences of children with autism when allowed access to various stimuli including media, and found that video (TV or DVD) was highly preferred over books and playing outside. These media were used both appropriately with attention and for entertainment as well as for repetitive stimuli rewinding to repeat and play soundbites or scrolling credits. If your child engages with the media in this way it should be red flag immediately. The results of the survey support the creation of videos and computer software programs that use still and video examples to exploit this visual learning style. These resources investigated in the 80s and created in the 1990's continue to be refined today. Today we know through experience and published research that children with autism and other developmental disabilities can learn to spell, read and other independent living skills and acquire social skills better through watching a video example of the skill than by being taught by a live caregiver/teacher. This is most likely because the live environment is filled with so many distractions for children with autism; so much going on around the lesson that they get distracted all the way to the glare in the teacher's glasses. That is not to say they should be separated from people, but that we should use their natural preference for visual example in this flat format as part of their learning medium and as a springboard for learning in the real world, giving them many opportunities to use the skill learned in a wide variety of ways.
The citation for finding that study is:
Shane, H., & Albert, P. (2008 September). Electronic Screen Media for Persons with Autism Spectrum Disorders: Results of a Survey. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
38(8),1499-1508. Retrieved August 20, 2008
Alan Turing :Autism Revisited
Alan Turing 1912-1954 was a WWII hero, father of the computer before his time. The biography as described in The Enigma by Andrew Hodges is also unknowingly an Autism blueprint. See how autism once worked absently on its own.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Alan's Driving- My Einstein Driving
Autism Revisited- quotes from Autism's blueprint The Enigma by Andrew Hodges the biography of Alan Turing 1912-1954, father of the computer. His biography is Autism's blueprint older autistic (mostly) followed.
Page 395 Autism and driving.
"I might suddenly go mad and crash" he told Don Bailey rather dramatically. He had not done well with the car at Princeton (a 31 Ford V8) and probably tended to daydream with mathematical thoughts in a dangerous way. He preferred in any case to use his own steam," (a motorized bike)
From Rich Shull
"Daydreaming with mathematical thoughts" is probably right on the money meaning he was using picture thoughts to think with EVEN while driving. I have learned to JUST DRIVE and keep optic vision on while driving and I use Projection thoughts If I need to picture think while driving. Projection thoughts are a wonderful go between thought of Autism and normal thoughts. If Alan was in a more of a car culture like we are in the United States, I am sure he would have developed the projection thoughts probably after a few accidents. Indeed our Autistic drivers usually honed this autistic thought style after our 3rd or 4th crash. Then we never had trouble driving again as we knew to keep our optic vision on and distraction to a minimum.
Now here is the Kicker we make GREAT STUNT DRIVERS. Who else could figure the angles and speed of the cars approaching you in a crash scenario? Then figure the laws of physics to make the least of the impending crash or miss it all together? We can, autistic drivers knowing all the picture thoughts can be perfect stunt divers. It is like Einstein driving a car.
Here is my story. I was traveling down US 33 in Lancaster Ohio and a driver running a red light at Collins Road is directly in my path as (he/she) was continuing their course. I was in the passing lane heading toward Lancaster. I figured out WHEN the other diver would finally "see me" (via Years of diving experience) and then I figured they would just scream Oh **** and slam on the brakes in a panic and wait for the cash.
Well, Via Autism thoughts I figured out the stopping distance of their car with full brakes and I figured the crash point if I did nothing and then figured via the laws of Physics- I could do better by stepping on the GAS not the brakes. As I did that I would power threw the crash, If we hit lots of the crash energy would be knocked away most of the crash force would be harmlessly expelled, plus my tires would grip much better under full throttle. As it was I MISSED the event by a few millimeters. Normal emotional based drivers would have also screamed Oh **** and did nothing and indeed by default end up with the worst possible crash, as all the energy of the crash would have been concentrated in the crash zone with major injures to both parties for sure. After the crash my rear axle thumped a bit that was a small price to pay considering a real crash was just missed.
After the crash I finally did have a few emotions and a bit of build up and let down but they were after thoughts. My point is emotionless Autistic thoughts did WONDERS in allowing the same Einstein thought that makes us savants and inventors and allows us to keep us out of the crash as well. Years earlier when my 62 Pontiac featured on the front page of this blog lost all of her brakes going down hill I was able to use Autism Picture thoughts and emotionless thoughts to "read" the page from the driver eduction manual and do the stuff you do when you loose the brakes. (and they say picture thought doesn't work) I missed a crash then to. The entire student body was surrounding me saying "Good Driving" when I finally got her stopped! They seen me FLY off the hill going into Lancaster High School then when I was driving in circles to rub off some speed and then when they heard the motor roaring as I down shifted to eat up some speed it was all a signal of trouble with a capital T. I think a normal driver wood have again just panicked and crashed. As you can see Luella is still in one scratch free piece and indeed a beautiful classic car these days. Then it was just an old car and of course my autistic obsession.
If Alan would have drove more he would have got good at it like we did. Granted a 31 Ford was a chore to drive in its own right Luella at least had power steering and brakes when they worked. Many modern autistic people being brought up in the modern era have no business driving I'm sorry to say as they never had the insight developed to understand the basic autism fact of OPTIC and Brain Generated vision. Not only that few of them have developed our best picture based thoughts so they have no clue how to do normal thoughts and our natural ones That indeed makes us zombies to modern autism and also to Rain Man's curse and lackluster ways. So much for progress.
When I help new young autistic drivers of today I MUST stress the point and make them learn we NEED to step on the brakes and not just touch the pedal. Once that issue is resolved and we discuss optic and brain generated vision we do OK with some practice. It seems we naturally don't press hard enough on the brakes, perhaps that is related to our pain tolerance. Otherwise we need to sit with the car idling and listen to all the noise it makes that you never hear like the fluid flowing in the power steering the vacuum in the brake booster and the noise of the valves etc. Many finally learn for the first time in their life via that experience we indeed hear more than you do. I joke with them not to complain of the noise, their compliant will never be heard! Rich Shull
Posted by Pre Rain Man Autism at 8:49 AM
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.