Autism debate split from 2016 Presidential debate thread

[The Wizard Joseph]

Why am I wasting my time trying to reason with this paranoid toolkit?

So far most of your "reasoning" consists of agreeing with me and as far as I can tell not even reading what I write.

Your inability to make a clear, cogent point is not my problem. 

I could say the same of your inability to read. Im still trying to figure out how you got depopulation conspiracy theories from what I wrote.

...  ...   ....  ... 

Oh boy, did you just really? It's one thing to accuse Nigel of not thoroughly reading your "intellectual" spam links. Maybe she didn't, but she's not obligated to swallow your shit either way. It's QUITE another to imply inability. Your mask has slipped again and it's getting old, real old.

Don't you have a Republican party to go take over or something? Go help them if that's the future you're committed to. If you wish to Lap up your masters' rotten shit and post about how amazing it is, fine by me. If you wish to again insult Nigel's person consider instead just eating another fistful of "Red Pills" so you can go cuck yourself.

The reason I say this is, I stated what I believed, twice. Then she somehow got Alex Jones depopulation theories from it. Which again, aside from the word "depopulation" appearing Im struggling to figure out. Im noticing a pattern of people just insulting me and not actually engaging with my ideas(LOL WHAT IDEAS AMIRITE?!!11 Like subscribe uptoke). Which by all means I dont mind, Im not going anywhere either way.

I can see that you're not going anywhere. THAT has been evident since you proclaimed your support for Donald Trump while wearing a "vote for Stein" button on your outdated, disingenuous Ron Paul uniform.

You're obviously very confused.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Oh damn I just realized you mean *literally* poisoning us.

Really? Like, deliberately because of reasons, or like, environmental toxicity as a byproduct of rampant, virtually unchecked corporate capitalism with no incentive for environmental responsibility?

If the latter, I can absolutely get behind that.

Latter. Also now that you have reached the startling conclusion that you agree with me, please read these previous two threads and notice all the times I pointed out that you agree with me. What in the fuck was this argument even over.

Ain't nobody got time for that.  Your difficulties with creating clear written communication do not in any way translate to a homework project for me. And don't go congratulating yourself on me "agreeing" with you; I agree about a specific aspect, which is that unchecked capitalism is destroying our ecological system. I in no means agree that Trump, Stein, or any of the alternative candidates will be in any way effective at changing that.

LOL Artificially high drug prices.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36248

Requesting this post back to the election thread. Also this thread should be renamed "You just keep fucking that horse"

Good luck with that. 

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

Oh damn I just realized you mean *literally* poisoning us.

Really? Like, deliberately because of reasons, or like, environmental toxicity as a byproduct of rampant, virtually unchecked corporate capitalism with no incentive for environmental responsibility?

If the latter, I can absolutely get behind that.

Latter. Also now that you have reached the startling conclusion that you agree with me, please read these previous two threads and notice all the times I pointed out that you agree with me. What in the fuck was this argument even over.

Ain't nobody got time for that.  Your difficulties with creating clear written communication do not in any way translate to a homework project for me. And don't go congratulating yourself on me "agreeing" with you; I agree about a specific aspect, which is that unchecked capitalism is destroying our ecological system. I in no means agree that Trump, Stein, or any of the alternative candidates will be in any way effective at changing that.

I never said they would. In fact I said the opposite. Nor am I congratulating myself on you agreeing with me, since I havent swayed your opinion at all.

A lot of this is true, and some of it I would need to check on.
I would however say that the outcome of this election and any subsequent ones will have no bearing on the outcome of this.
We are living on a planet with 7 billion people, in all likelyhood in 30 years from now, we'll be living in one with 2 billion people and that has NOTHING to do with infertility rates, its just basic supply and demand and centralisation of risk.

I don't believe anyone in power will be in a position to set policy on this, they will have policy thrust upon them. So lets enjoy this election cycle for the meaningless spectacle of shitty candidates that it is.

Depopulation doesnt really do much for me either, its mostly rich people horseshit. But you say 30 years from now like we have 30 years. Look at the autism rate of 2016 vs 1986. Look at how drastic the fertility rates are changing. Look at the already evident effects of global warming. Passivity is not an option.

The president doesnt really matter, although Trump will win, it is written in the stars. What matters is the GOP being hijacked by Anime Nazis. Everything under heaven is in utter chaos; the situation is excellent. The reigns of power are free to grab, you dont have to be a spectator.

By the way Faust had absolutely no problem understanding what Im saying.

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

Overall the mental state of the world's people is better than it has ever been in history. Thanks to medication, education, and mass communication, fatuousness and ignorance and  deranged thinking are at an all time low.

And the most pressing mental problem remaining in this modern world isn't autism, it's wingnuts and social justice warriors; I wish they'd just kill each other off already.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Oh damn I just realized you mean *literally* poisoning us.

Really? Like, deliberately because of reasons, or like, environmental toxicity as a byproduct of rampant, virtually unchecked corporate capitalism with no incentive for environmental responsibility?

If the latter, I can absolutely get behind that.

Latter. Also now that you have reached the startling conclusion that you agree with me, please read these previous two threads and notice all the times I pointed out that you agree with me. What in the fuck was this argument even over.

Ain't nobody got time for that.  Your difficulties with creating clear written communication do not in any way translate to a homework project for me. And don't go congratulating yourself on me "agreeing" with you; I agree about a specific aspect, which is that unchecked capitalism is destroying our ecological system. I in no means agree that Trump, Stein, or any of the alternative candidates will be in any way effective at changing that.

I never said they would. In fact I said the opposite. Nor am I congratulating myself on you agreeing with me, since I havent swayed your opinion at all.

A lot of this is true, and some of it I would need to check on.
I would however say that the outcome of this election and any subsequent ones will have no bearing on the outcome of this.
We are living on a planet with 7 billion people, in all likelyhood in 30 years from now, we'll be living in one with 2 billion people and that has NOTHING to do with infertility rates, its just basic supply and demand and centralisation of risk.

I don't believe anyone in power will be in a position to set policy on this, they will have policy thrust upon them. So lets enjoy this election cycle for the meaningless spectacle of shitty candidates that it is.

Depopulation doesnt really do much for me either, its mostly rich people horseshit. But you say 30 years from now like we have 30 years. Look at the autism rate of 2016 vs 1986. Look at how drastic the fertility rates are changing. Look at the already evident effects of global warming. Passivity is not an option.

The president doesnt really matter, although Trump will win, it is written in the stars. What matters is the GOP being hijacked by Anime Nazis. Everything under heaven is in utter chaos; the situation is excellent. The reigns of power are free to grab, you dont have to be a spectator.

By the way Faust had absolutely no problem understanding what Im saying.

Good for you. No doubt he tried a bit harder; perhaps he is still under the impression that you have something to say that is worth reading.

[Faust]

Don't drag me into this autism thing guys, its a topic I know little to nothing about. In the other thread I didn't so much agree that ecological policy needs to be the driving point of the candidates, rather that the conditions in the world will thrust the policy upon them as the ecological toilet bowl eventually completely blocks.

Apart from autism, there are severe side effects coming about of a lot of the materials  used in manufacturing, and a lot of the hazardous gasses we thought we had beaten, had merely been locked in polar ice, and are now coming back to haunt us.

The autism thing bothers me, but you also mentioned infertility, and this may make me a bad guy, but I dont think an infertility epidemic would be a bad thing, if it was temporary, and had no other side effects.

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

The autism thing bothers me, but you also mentioned infertility, and this may make me a bad guy, but I dont think an infertility epidemic would be a bad thing, if it was temporary, and had no other side effects.

There already is one. It wont be temporary. It does have other side effects.

http://ispub.com/IJU/2/1/7519

Subsequent studies have confirmed and strengthened Skakkebaek's findings. A survey of 1,350 sperm donors in Paris found a decline in sperm counts by around 2% each year over the past 23 years, with younger men having the poorest-quality semen (1, 5 and 6). In another study at the University of Helsinki led by Jarkko Farjarinen, testicular tissue was examined at post-mortem from 528 middle-aged Finnish men who died suddenly in either 1981 or 1991 (11). Among the men who died in 1981, 56.4% had normal, healthy sperm production. By 1991, however, this figure had dropped dramatically to 26.9%. The average weight of the men's testes decreased over the decade, while the proportion of useless fibrous testicular tissue increased. Adamopoulos et al (12) in Athens examined 23,850 men between 1977 to 1993 (17 years) and found similar results to Farjarinen (11).
In Edinburgh a recent study by Irwin (2) saw a 25% decrease in sperm count over 20 years, the results are shown in table 1 below. The worrying thing about this downward trend is that a sperm count less than 20 million sperms per ml is interpreted as being infertile, if this downward trend of counts were to continue then values less than this will be the average in the next millennium.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3739152/

In the latest study on young Finnish men,18 an increasing tendency of the percentage of men having sperm concentrations below 40 million ml−1 was observed. In the latest birth cohort, 43% of men had sperm concentration below the limit of 40 million ml−1,18 which has been associated with decreased fertility via increasing time to pregnancy.25 In a more recent study, below the sperm concentration of 55 million ml−1, time to pregnancy was observed to increase with decreasing sperm concentrations.26 This suggests that an increasing percentage of Finnish men may suffer of reduced fertility in the future.18 In Denmark, Norway and Germany also, a notable proportion of young men have semen concentrations below 40 or 55 million ml−1.17,23

Semen quality in young Finnish men is not good and causes concern for andrologists. An increasing need for assisted reproduction techniques, such as sperm microinjection and insemination by donor sperm has been reported in Finland over the last few years.27

Go to:
Conclusion
Finnish men had high sperm concentrations in studies published during the last decades. However, according to most recent studies on young men published in 2011, sperm concentrations have declined in Finland, unrelated to lifestyle, age or abstinence time. Follow-up of new cohorts of young Finnish men is needed to study whether such a trend will continue.

Each subsequent generation is worse:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26789272

The current study examined semen parameters of young adult men from 2003 to 2013 at an urban U.S. sperm bank. Semen parameters were analyzed before and after cryopreservation for a total of 9425 specimens from 489 individuals. Demographic information was obtained from a social and medical history questionnaire. Following 2-3 days abstinence, the specimens were collected at the laboratory and assessed by uniform technicians and techniques. The data were analyzed using generalized linear regression after adjustment for age, days of abstinence, for repeated samples, as well as by the Cochran-Armitage trend test. The within variability was accounted for by the repeated measures model. All p values were two-sided with p < 0.05 considered significant. There was a significant decline in sperm concentration (-3.55, 95% CI -4.87, -2.23; p < 0.001), total motility (-1.23, 95% CI -1.65, -0.82; p < 0.001), total count (-10.75, 95% CI -15.95, -5.54; p < 0.001) and total motile count (-9.43, 95% CI -13.14, -5.73; p < 0.001). There was no significant change in semen volume (0.03, 95% CI -0.02, 0.09; p = 0.2). The post-thaw total motility significantly (-2.30, 95% CI -2.72, -1.87; p < 0.001) decreased with time. Importantly, demographic and lifestyle factors were stable or improved over the study period. There was a decline in age (p(trend) = 0.003) and alcohol use (p(trend) = 0.005) and an increase in college GPA (Grade Point Average) (p(trend) = 0.02). BMI (p(trend) = 0.73), educational attainment (p(trend) = 0.2), race/ethnicity (p(trend) = 0.53), and lifestyle habits (weekly exercise, p(trend) = 0.21; smoking, p(trend) = 0.99; marital status, p(trend) = 0.85) remained constant. Uniform technicians and techniques over the study period make measurement bias unlikely. This report demonstrates a decline in semen quality among young adult men in the Boston area who were attending or completed a college education during the past 10 years, and requires further study.

This is because it is most likely caused by Endocrine Disrupting chemicals in the enviorment:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3845732/ <-read this whole thing

This paper has reviewed the existing evidence regarding ED and the rising rates of human infertility. Although the number of ED mentioned is not comprehensive, an adequate amount of data has accumulated demonstrating that EDs may have deleterious effects on human reproduction via numerous mechanisms. ED may be blamed for the rising incidence of human reproductive disorders, and may also explain some idiopathic infertility cases, both in men and women.

Its important to restate that these endocrine disruptors bioaccumulate. We dont have to just deal with the effects of the current plastics/cosmetics/pesticides/whatever the fuck else in use, but all the EDs that have been made in the past. All the years worth of plastic in landfills leeching into the soil. All the xenoestrogenic makeup that has washed down the drain to accumulate in the environment. Its not inconceivable if this trend continues that we could see a majority of people born infertile. More disturbing is, its important to remember that this is all based on exposure. Even perfectly healthy people who become exposed to these substances would see the same effects. The future is a world of inedible fish, undrinkable water, soil that sprouts poison food. An largely uninhabitable earth.

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

Good for you. No doubt he tried a bit harder; perhaps he is still under the impression that you have something to say that is worth reading.

Oh I see, its not that you cant read what i wrote its that you didnt even try. Which is my fault for some reason. That would explain this entire thread. Thank you for your honesty

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

I didnt link to the "other" effects:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2706654/

The neuroendocrine pathways regulating reproductive behavior are similarly organized and affected by steroid hormones. In rats, lordosis is a reflexive receptive posture made by the female in response to male mounting and is a hallmark indication of sexual receptivity. Whereas circulating estrogens play an essential role in stimulating lordosis in females (Davidson and Bloch, 1969; Lisk, 1969; Komisaruk and Diakow, 1973; Pfaff, 1999; Pfaff and Sakuma, 1979), males rarely display lordosis behavior even after estrogen administration in adulthood (Yamanouchi and Aria, 1976). However, neonatal steroid hormone manipulation can retain in the capacity to evoke lordosis in males, and suppress proceptive behavioral displays by females, indicating that sex-specific behaviors are also organized by steroid hormones in the perinatal period (Gerall, 1967; Gorski, 1963, 1985; Grady et al., 1965; Sodersten, 1978; Patisaul et al., 2009a; Whalen and Nadler, 1963; Whales et al., 1986). Thus, aberrant organization of sex specific neuroendocrine circuits can have profound and permanent effects on sex specific reproductive physiology and behavior. Consequently, the organization of neuroendocrine pathways is considered to be particularly vulnerable to endocrine disruption. Most examples detailed within this review result from endocrine disruption of the neuroendocrine system.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Good for you. No doubt he tried a bit harder; perhaps he is still under the impression that you have something to say that is worth reading.

Oh I see, its not that you cant read what i wrote its that you didnt even try. Which is my fault for some reason. That would explain this entire thread. Thank you for your honesty

Yeah, ever since I realized you're not too bright and have a fondness for conspiracy theories and baseless rhetoric borrowed from right-wing propaganda, I pretty much just skim your posts for something to make fun of.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I didnt link to the "other" effects:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2706654/

The neuroendocrine pathways regulating reproductive behavior are similarly organized and affected by steroid hormones. In rats, lordosis is a reflexive receptive posture made by the female in response to male mounting and is a hallmark indication of sexual receptivity. Whereas circulating estrogens play an essential role in stimulating lordosis in females (Davidson and Bloch, 1969; Lisk, 1969; Komisaruk and Diakow, 1973; Pfaff, 1999; Pfaff and Sakuma, 1979), males rarely display lordosis behavior even after estrogen administration in adulthood (Yamanouchi and Aria, 1976). However, neonatal steroid hormone manipulation can retain in the capacity to evoke lordosis in males, and suppress proceptive behavioral displays by females, indicating that sex-specific behaviors are also organized by steroid hormones in the perinatal period (Gerall, 1967; Gorski, 1963, 1985; Grady et al., 1965; Sodersten, 1978; Patisaul et al., 2009a; Whalen and Nadler, 1963; Whales et al., 1986). Thus, aberrant organization of sex specific neuroendocrine circuits can have profound and permanent effects on sex specific reproductive physiology and behavior. Consequently, the organization of neuroendocrine pathways is considered to be particularly vulnerable to endocrine disruption. Most examples detailed within this review result from endocrine disruption of the neuroendocrine system.

What's your point?

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

Good for you. No doubt he tried a bit harder; perhaps he is still under the impression that you have something to say that is worth reading.

Oh I see, its not that you cant read what i wrote its that you didnt even try. Which is my fault for some reason. That would explain this entire thread. Thank you for your honesty

Yeah, ever since I realized you're not too bright and have a fondness for conspiracy theories and baseless rhetoric borrowed from right-wing propaganda, I pretty much just skim your posts for something to make fun of.

For someone convinced that I have nothing worth saying you sure are putting a lot of effort into proving it. And for someone who doesnt see any point in engaging in my ideas this sure is a three page thread of you engaging with my ideas, poorly. On purpose of course, because youre better than me.

What's your point?

I wasnt responding to you but rather was adding to my previous post at faust.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Good for you. No doubt he tried a bit harder; perhaps he is still under the impression that you have something to say that is worth reading.

Oh I see, its not that you cant read what i wrote its that you didnt even try. Which is my fault for some reason. That would explain this entire thread. Thank you for your honesty

Yeah, ever since I realized you're not too bright and have a fondness for conspiracy theories and baseless rhetoric borrowed from right-wing propaganda, I pretty much just skim your posts for something to make fun of.

For someone convinced that I have nothing worth saying you sure are putting a lot of effort into proving it. And for someone who doesnt see any point in engaging in my ideas this sure is a three page thread of you engaging with my ideas, poorly. On purpose of course, because youre better than me.

What's your point?

I wasnt responding to you but rather was adding to my previous post at faust.

What's that you say?

[Junkenstein]

Total aside - I'm very disappointed with the title of this thread.

Surely something like "ITT - Autism" would be more appropriate.

[xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed)]

Total aside - I'm very disappointed with the title of this thread.

Surely something like "ITT - Autism" would be more appropriate.

Seconding.