Do Toxics Cause Autism?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/opinion/25kristof.html?scp=16&sq=environmental%20toxicology&st=cse

Although the author of “Do Toxics Cause Autism”, Nicholas D. Kristof, does not explicitly state his opinion on whether or not toxins cause abnormalities, his blunt tone and colloquial make his stance apparent. Those that he agrees with, he defends by shooting down any sort of attack that can be made to the author’s ethos—such as saying; “the author is not a granola-munching crank”, and “in public health, we in the press have more often been lap dogs than watchdogs”. Aside from the occasional bias that is shown in the article, Kristof does a good job of showing both sides of the argument, and then supporting his own—“There are genetic components to autism (identical twins are more likely to share autism than fraternal twins), but genetics explains only about one-quarter of autism cases…studies have found that disproportionate shares of children develop autism after they are exposed in the womb to medications such as thalidomide (a sedative), misoprostol (ulcer medicine) and valproic acid (anticonvulsant)…11 percent were autistic”. Kristof also built up the credibility of this article by using multiple, published resources, such as: an article from the Environmental Health Perspectives, a quote from a professor of toxicology at the Bloomberg School of Public Health at John Hopkins University, an article by the professor of pediatrics at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York and chairman of the school’s department of preventive medicine, etc. These established resources add effect to the mentioning of a common public opinion—that sensationalizing risks can be dangerous to public health. By bringing up the example of mercury in vaccines being eventually disproven and contrasting the effects of an unreliable study set to play via the mass media on an impressionable public. Although it may seem like an attack to society (and how it believes what is put in the media and takes it to an extreme as to how vaccinations in America were significantly lowered after the “scare”), Kristof makes the proposal to use media in useful—accurate—ways; ways that will increase awareness to the effects of mercury, lead, tobacco, and asbestos (dangers that have been studied and scientifically proven). Overall, I agree with this article in that media should be used to raise awareness to environmental toxin dangers, but should not be used as candy to the public. It should only be used as a source to spread proven facts with support provided by established research.