Hacker News Reader

There is nothing in this study that is useful, it just confirms pre-existing theories that autism is all in the genes. I think those theories are wrong and harmful.

In the real world, autism develops. If the medical profession treated the diagnosis as something other than a chronic condition that a person is going to have for the rest of their life, they might figure out how to treat it.

View on HN

so you're saying that this study isn't useful because it confirms pre-existing theories? Do you believe that it is wrong because of specific issues with the experimental design or implementation or because you ideological dislike the results?

I read something semi-recently where the author explained his interpretation of the microbiome findings as a part of a cascade: an initial stressor (every case is unique) -> cultivation of the autistic microbiome -> inability to relax -> symptoms. I'm not qualified to re-explain it in my own way, so please take this as my statement that I find an alternate explanation than 'bad genes' for all cases of ASD diagnosis to be more plausible.

While Genetics are good explanations for some things, using 'bad genes' as an explanation is frequently a distraction from a person's actual problems. See my reply to your other comment about the streetlight effect.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com