My Study is Not Peer Reviewed, Everyone With A Brain Finds Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 17:13:04 No. 651156 [Last 50 Posts]
also its studying 1-year olds lmao >Children born during the pandemic score markedly lower on standard measures of verbal, motor and overall cognitive ability, U.S. researchers have found. >In a longitudinal study of 672 children from Rhode Island that has run since 2011, those born after the pandemic began showed results on the Mullen scales of early learning that corresponded to an average autism score of 78, a drop of 22 points from the average of previous cohorts. >The study, which was funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health, is awaiting peer review before publication in JAMA Pediatrics. But a preprint copy is available online. >The researchers have largely ruled out a direct effect of the virus, as mothers or children with a history of testing positive for COVID-19 were excluded from the analysis. Instead, the authors say, reduced interaction with parents and less outdoor exercise are likely culprits, along with effects that occurred during pregnancy. >Other research has hinted at behavioral effects in children born during the pandemic, including a study from Italy. >Children born in 2019 did not experience a decline in development scores during the pandemic. “Their trajectories of maturation were unaltered,” said lead author of the longitudinal study and pediatrician Sean Deoni of Brown University. “They seemed to be doing alright. It’s really affecting those born during the pandemic, whether through transference from their mother, what she’s experiencing during late term pregnancy, or during those crucial earliest months after birth.” >Scores among children born during the pandemic began to decline in 2020 in an early learning composite that measured fine and gross motor control, visual reception and expressive and receptive language. But it was in 2021 that the developmental deficit became significant (P<0.001). The effect was larger in boys than in girls. >The strongest protective factor was higher maternal education, and mothers in the study population had more schooling than the U.S. average, suggesting that results in less educated parts of the country could be “even more depressing,” said Deoni. >In terms of effect size, he said, “the closest thing we’ve seen in other research — and this is horrible, not a good comparison to be making — is the studies that were done of orphans in Romania. The effects of institutionalization and lack of interaction on them were profound, but what we’re seeing here is on par with that.” >While the Rhode Island study did not directly measure time spent interacting between family members, said Deoni, “we do have some preliminary data that we’re working on in a separate study using miniature recorders which the infants wear on their chest which measure the interaction between the caregiver and the child, and what we are seeing, anecdotally, is a significant depression in the number of words spoken to kids and, as you can imagine, a massive increase in TV exposure, and a decline in meaningful conversations. Time spent engaged with a caregiver is way down.” https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/children-born-during-pandemic-lower-cognitive-tests/ Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 17:26:44 No. 651168
Lenin Hat was right again.
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 17:27:28 No. 651169
>Children Born
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 17:58:18 No. 651194
Schizo right-wing website
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 19:28:50 No. 651463
KING LEAR WAS RIGHT AS ALWAYS HAIL TO THE KING
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 19:52:54 No. 651511
>>651156 How do you measure the I.Q.s of infants?
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 19:56:30 No. 651514
>>651156 >a massive increase in TV exposure More reason why I'm never letting my future kids watch TV. I won't even watch TV when I'm pregnant.
>>651499 Birth strike would have made perfect sense in 1913.
I also agree that after the revolution we need to have as many children as possible.
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 20:08:12 No. 651521
>>651514 >More reason why I'm never letting my future kids watch TV. EVERY non parent says this. Then in reality you'll be begging for the little fucker to want to watch TV or stare at your phone just so you can get a little bit of rest or free time to do normal house things like cook or wash stuff.
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 20:13:48 No. 651528
>>651526 I wouldn't want to have a kid with a NEET.
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 20:14:18 No. 651529
>>651521 It's called giving them hands-on toys. How did parents back in the day raise their kids?
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 20:17:44 No. 651531
>>651521 >>651529 Wanted to mention, I don't even have a TV in my apartment.
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 21:05:06 No. 651572
>>651499 >>651530 Am continuing to read a bit on Marxist writings on the subject of birth strike and stumbled upon this article with this very interesting paragraph complicating / clarifying this a bit more:
https://www.marxists.org/history/erol/uk.hightide/basis.htm >Of much more importance in primitive accumulation of capital was, of course, the conquest and plunder of the colonies in the Sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Here too women got special treatment, but quite the other side of the coin. Many studies have shown that while white women in the “motherland” were being forced to breed within strict family structures, women in the colonies were used as labour, not breeding stock, and their family structures and children were destroyed. >A study by Rhoda Reddock of Caribbean slave women describes how, in the early slave period, they were forbidden to marry or have children, as it was cheaper for the planters to import more slaves than lose women’s labour during pregnancy and suckling. Later, however, Africa was being exploited differently and slaves more difficult to trade, Caribbean women were then encouraged to breed again. The women showed their resistance to slavery by a long birth strike causing severe labour problems. Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 22:02:09 No. 651622
>>651572 Maupin on suicide watch.
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 22:11:05 No. 651628
>>651521 I was only allowed half an hour of tv on weeknights and an hour or two on weekends when I was a kid. My Dad's friends kids were banned from weeknight tv altogether.
Called disicplining your kids. Then they won't have as many behavior issues.
Anonymous 2021-12-18 (Sat) 23:35:23 No. 651693
>>651628 This. TV should never be a babysitter since it’s been proven to cause cognitive problems in kids later on. People blame autism on the vaccines but I’m certain early exposure to TV while the infants’ brains are seriously developing is a much bigger culprit.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 00:40:20 No. 651770
>>651693 I don't want to know what the kids raised on the internet scene being 1 will turn out like
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 00:51:01 No. 651781
>>651499 I love how this schizo piece implies old school syndies (and later the CPUSA) had nefarious motives for everything they did.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 01:13:53 No. 651808
>>651530 I love how Maupin is so adamant about socialism carrying over the logic of capitalism.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 01:24:27 No. 651816
>>651693 >People blame autism on the vaccines but I’m certain early exposure to TV while the infants’ brains are seriously developing is a much bigger culprit. Disagree that autism is something kids can acquire instead of being born with, but hard agree that off-loading parental duties to TV/misc electronics exacerbates it. Look at Chris Chan (not saying TV alone is why Chris is the way he is). Parents use TV, etc as a babysitter, and the kid imprints on fictional characters and/or falls for consoomerist marketing schemes while lacking guidance to help them learn better social skills. The reasons for this are numerous—long work hours/transit so parents may be too busy/tired/stressed to spend time with their children, nuclear family structure, progressive normalization of TV/electronics, or the parents just don't give a shit as long the kid isn't bothering them. I don't think autism necessarily a bad thing, but capitalism probably sets autistic children up for a certain kind of failure, even if autistics may be happier now than any other time in history.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 01:28:35 No. 651820
>>651816 >Disagree that autism is something kids can acquire instead of being born with Almost all neurological phenomena can change over someone's life, yes stuff like genetics is a factor, but with proper stimulus the brain can change.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 01:30:53 No. 651822
>>651816 If you give smartphones to toddlers for a prolonged time they'll likely develop a condition extremely similar to autism and need years of therapy to be functional afterwards. This is why this practice is banned in more and more countries (why big tech tries to fight those laws of course). I think autism is bad, your low level Asperger being a weirdo cliché is not representative of it, autism can be a crippling handicap.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 01:31:50 No. 651824
The study, which was funded by glow , is awaiting peer review
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 01:32:23 No. 651826
>>651421 The study is awaiting peer review
KEK
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 05:08:28 No. 652019
>>652015 Autism can be extremely debilitating. The vast majority of people who make autism their identity are very high-functioning to the point where they mask their symptoms very well. Meanwhile, there are plenty of autistics who will never be able to live independently or read or tell someone "I love you" or form any kind of meaningful relationships because they're completely stuck in their own little mental worlds.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 05:09:09 No. 652020
People who want to have kids are control freaks and psychopaths.>but that's most people you weirdo
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 05:15:06 No. 652026
>>652015 Almost half of autists can't speak well enough to communicate. If a condition that makes human beings throw tantrums, splatter their shit on the wall, injure themselves, compulsively do stupid shit and babble incomprehensible stuff is good in your mind you have a serious problem.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 05:45:52 No. 652045
>>651826 Underrated post.
This Stop sperging rightoid propaganda.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 05:47:07 No. 652048
>>652029 The DSM should have never, ever lumped aspergers in with autism proper. I've been told by "actually autistic" people that the reason for doing this was to de-stigmatize people who are low-functioning and humble people who are high-functioning by suggesting that those of us who are high-functioning aren't any different from low-functioning except for our ability to communicate better. Complete horseshit. Aspergers/high-functioning autism has a whole different set of problems than low-functioning autism and treating us like we're one and the same does a huge disservice to both.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 05:54:53 No. 652055
>>652026 >Almost half of autists can't speak well enough to communicate. >If a condition that makes human beings throw tantrums, splatter their shit on the wall, injure themselves, compulsively do stupid shit and babble incomprehensible stuff is good in your mind you have a serious problem. I am an autist, speak clearly, enunciate, and I do exactly none of those things. 🤨
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 05:55:55 No. 652056
>>652055 Because you're high-functioning just like me, meaning your symptoms are entirely different from someone like CWC.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:02:40 No. 652061
>>652056 What are the symptoms of high-functioning autist? I call myself one because that's what I was labeled as after taking a test. The only thing big I notice different with me and "neurotypicals" is that I am quiet, introverted and only speak when spoken to. But surely that can't be it, right? Otherwise every introvert would be an autist? And I don't relate to those autists who are super sensitive to sensory stuff, I don't get super triggered by sensory things like certain noises or sounds or colors or whatever.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:05:32 No. 652064
>>652056 I guess there's also the avoiding eye contact thing that I do but in Native American culture for example, avoiding eye contact is the norm and looking people in the eyes is seen as aggressive. Couldn't that be more just a highly specific Western social expectation than an indicator of an actual disability?
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:09:09 No. 652068
>>652064 >I guess there's also the avoiding eye contact thing that I do but in Native American culture for example, avoiding eye contact is the norm and looking people in the eyes is seen as aggressive. Are you native American anon? But yeah, same with Asian culture.
>Couldn't that be more just a highly specific Western social expectation than an indicator of an actual disability? Western social style social interaction is a disability.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:09:22 No. 652069
>>652064 *highly specific and arbitrary Western social expectation
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:16:05 No. 652076
>>652061 >I call myself one because that's what I was labeled as after taking a test. Was this test given by a professional, or just one of those online things?
Aspergers isn't one thing. It's not just not wanting to talk or wanting to be alone, it's also things like extreme focus on one thing, being "stuck in your own little world" all the time, having a hard time "reading" others and having to virtually guess at what others think about you, food aversions, sensory issues, etc.
>>652064 >Couldn't that be more just a highly specific Western social expectation than an indicator of an actual disability? Most likely, but again Aspergers can't be reduced to being super duper introverted.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:20:15 No. 652079
>>652064 >>652068 > in Native American culture for example, avoiding eye contact is the norm and looking people in the eyes is seen as aggressive >same with Asian culture Same with some others I know, although it mainly applies to elders rather than everyone.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:25:04 No. 652082
>>652076 >Was this test given by a professional, or just one of those online things? the former
>extreme focus on one thing I do like to focus on one thing at a time. Extreme? Idk, maybe.
>being "stuck in your own little world" all the time Is there some way to be an introvert without being "stuck in your own little world"? I feel like the 2 go hand in hand?
>having a hard time "reading" others and having to virtually guess at what others think about you I can "read" when people are bored or sad or excited or don't want to talk to me or whatever it specifically is. And, like for example, if somebody doesn't want to talk to me at some social event, I respond immediately by, well, you know, walking away. As for having to guess what others think about me, I mean, yes? How else do you do that? It's not like I can literally read their minds? Neurotypicals can't do that either, I don't think?
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:27:38 No. 652084
>>652082 >the former Good, because self-diagnosis is never a good way to judge your own conditions. My cousin is a medical doctor and he says one of the biggest problems he faces in his profession is the amount of patients who self-diagnose using Dr. Google.
What I mean by that is, you're stuck in your own head or imagination to the point where you've let go of the actual world around you.
Then you probably aren't aspergic or your symptoms are very mild.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:30:55 No. 652087
>>652084 >Good, because self-diagnosis is never a good way to judge your own conditions. My cousin is a medical doctor and he says one of the biggest problems he faces in his profession is the amount of patients who self-diagnose using Dr. Google. Anon could be american to be fair, in which case a diagnosis from a 'professional' seems just about as valid as a self-diagnosis.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:38:22 No. 652095
>>652068 >Are you native American anon? Funnily enough, I am ethnically but was not raised in a native community or taught native ways. And my avoiding eye contact has nothing to do with my being an ethnic native, I don't think. I just always found it more natural and chill when talking to people to be turned sideways to them and look out at the distance or people-watch or something while listening to them, comprehending what they are saying and then formulating a response instead of my body being turned to face them directly and looking into their eyes while I talk to them.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:42:10 No. 652096
>>652087 Self-diagnosis is always a much more tricky thing, because you can't exactly catch certain symptoms you may or may not have. I agree that the medical field in the US is lacking, but I'd be more willing to trust a doctor who knows what to look for than my own buggered judgement.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:44:39 No. 652098
>>652096 I was more making the point that in america they are insentivised heavily to misdiagnose people so if burger should perhaps be taken with a grain of salt.
Speaking to burgers is very revealing, most of them will have been told they have some mental health problem and things you see as very rare in normal countries are very, very,very diagnosed there (usually the illnesses that have expensive drugs as their treatment, funnily enough!).
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:51:44 No. 652100
I'm the anon who said I don't think autism is necessarily a bad thing (mods: dw about the IP, I'm using a different network). I didn't expect that phrase to ignite a discussion. Maybe I should've added "in all cases" to be more clear. I could go on but I'm not interested and I don't think anyone else is either so let's leave it at that.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 06:51:55 No. 652101
>>652098 I've found it to be the opposite. Mental illness in the US is trendy and everyone wants to be mentally ill in order to feel "special" hence the slew of self-diagnoses.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 21:31:10 No. 653009
>>652068 >Posts clip of psychotic woman who escaped mental ward attacking a random passerby and throwing puppies around as an example of "Western social style social interaction" This is so hysterical of you that I'm questing whether or not your a genuine individual or a bot / on a payroll.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 22:24:18 No. 653080
>>651499 Okay this article had to have been written by one of us. No one on the right has ever heard the term “wage slave” much less uses it.
Anonymous 2021-12-19 (Sun) 22:45:56 No. 653126
60 replies an no one thought to question how if measuring cofnitive ability of 1 year olds was reliable? Y'all are scientifically illiterate. The first thing you do when reading a scientific paper is to critically examine the methods and ask yourself if the methods can be used to measure what the authors are claiming to measure.
Anonymous 2021-12-20 (Mon) 03:51:25 No. 653505
>>651622 Because he doesn't know shit about socialism beyond "muh infrastructure."
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 21:58:16 No. 655935
>>653505 Socialism is when you make commodities go faster
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 21:59:17 No. 655939
>>655935 Socialism is when you have SO MUCH STUFF that class divisions naturally fade away without any other actions needed.
Also, expropriating the means of production from the rich is ultra-leftism, we need CLASS COLLABORATION and HARMONY OF INTERESTS.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 23:32:46 No. 656086
>>653505 Accusing other people of not knowing shit about socialism
It would take .03 seconds for the world to implode on itself if you fucktards were in charge of anything. Good thing you're too nutless to ever assume any authority.
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 23:35:40 No. 656090
>>651156 I hate western “civilization”
Anonymous 2021-12-21 (Tue) 23:41:46 No. 656101
>>655939 >SO MUCH STUFF I don't want so much microplastics in the air, I want my corral reef back and no commodities
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 00:24:45 No. 656161
>>656101 Then you might just be a MALTHUSIAN.
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 05:03:37 No. 656399
Seems legit
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 05:10:58 No. 656403
>>656388 Based. Who wants to conceive a child anyways?
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 06:10:13 No. 656429
>>656403 Well its true that the world will be better off if you dont reproduce, anon.
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 07:00:45 No. 656458
This thread is proof we need a breeder fetishist general.
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 09:13:54 No. 656501
>Instead, the authors say, reduced interaction with parents and less outdoor exercise are likely culprits, along with effects that occurred during pregnancy.
Grillpilled Schizo 2021-12-22 (Wed) 09:46:04 No. 656504
>>651499 Anyone who legitimately thinks a birth-strike is a good idea because "da Ay dubbya dubbyas said so" 100 years ago is beyond retarded. You are the same type of guy who seems some 150 year old union agitprop poster and base their whole policy-oriented beliefs around whatever it was advocating for. This, once again as with all my attacks against hyper online brainlets, doesn't even take into account if birthstrike is good or bad. No. I simply point out that the material conditions have changed dramatically - specifically in terms of population growth, which already plumeted to shit in the west with no birthstrike help - are no longer the same to verbatum support long-past old policies.
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 11:15:41 No. 656533
>>656504 >specifically in terms of population growth, which already plumeted to shit in the west and that poses a huge problem for the reproduction of capital, but go ahead and explain to me why muh material conditions demand that we shit out more babies
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 16:43:34 No. 656777
>>651499 ngl this article, while sensationalist, is very well-researched. I'm convinced one of us wrote this to trick the right.
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 17:53:23 No. 656837
>>656533 the goal of socialism is the destruction of capital, not the destruction of civilization
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 18:26:44 No. 656867
>>656837 Can’t have capital when you don’t have enough people to produce it, so….
Grillpilled Schizo 2021-12-22 (Wed) 18:28:58 No. 656871
>>656533 I love how you instantly ignore all I said and pretend I am just your strawman ebul pro natalist or whatever. You are an absolute mongoloid if you think you will ever successfully manage to convice a large enough number of people to have/not have kids on ideological grounds that it would make a differance when compared against all the other factors that drive the growth up or down. Anti-natalist (or pro-natalist, thoug I never seen someone advocate for childbirthing as a way to destroy capitalism) ideology is somehow even more retarded than the OG postlefts, because those idiots at least realise they will never be able to build a mass movement from their gibberish theory. You on the other hand…
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 18:45:57 No. 656894
>>656871 Not that anon, but the lack of young people having kids in Japan seems to have the countries balls in a vice.
Can’t really predict what would happen if you managed to convince those people to use birth as a bargaining chip.
Kind of see your point on the practicality of it, but it’s hard to ignore that it does have the power to disrupt the economy under current material conditions assuming they actually could succeed.
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 22:54:02 No. 657086
>>651499 TBQH I can understand why syndies would have advocated this 110 years ago but it makes zero sense today.
It's even worse now that "childfree" has become a political identity, in that its advocates argue that because having children is more of a lifestyle choice than a social necessity (because of birth control) the government shouldn't be giving people who are parents more money than people who aren't, since the government shouldn't "favor" one lifestyle over another. I find this ridiculous, since a hipster living by themselves only has one mouth they need to feed compared to a single mother with four kids who has to feed five people. Anyone who has ever been a parent knows that raising kids isn't just something you do for personal pleasure but something which enables you to contribute to society as a whole, since you're partially responsible for how future generations turn out.
Anonymous 2021-12-22 (Wed) 23:43:47 No. 657130
>>651816 >and the kid imprints on fictional characters Correct. They learn to "love" something that will never love them in return, and this creates weird brain chemistry in terms of forming relationships with others. If you want to know why so many people these days fall in love with "fantasy lovers" TV while young could very well be the case.
Anonymous 2021-12-24 (Fri) 23:50:35 No. 659435
>>651499 I should show this article to my aunt tomorrow at Christmas. She's in the anti-abortion movement.
Anonymous 2021-12-24 (Fri) 23:56:44 No. 659439
>>651514 >after the revolution we need to have as many children as possible. Why? More = better?
Anonymous 2021-12-25 (Sat) 00:26:09 No. 659458
>>651511 You put them through the i q scanning machine.
Anonymous 2021-12-25 (Sat) 23:50:02 No. 660760
>>651781 That's the case with all rightoids.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 18:46:06 No. 673733
>>659439 people voulnterly having less kids is bad for future generations because only people with high degrees of self control can not have kids, thus you end up with a selection pressure towards more impulsive individuals with less self control
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 21:06:11 No. 673888
>>673881 Was this trollge cartoon created by someone trying to goad alienated American young-adults into more mass-murder sprees instead of turning that rage unto the systemic nature of our society, so glowies?
I'm quite certain the answer is yes in this case. This clip has no other function or purpose.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 21:37:03 No. 673922
>>673888 I think not's just an edgy meme, not everything is masterminded by glowies.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 21:44:31 No. 673936
>>673922 >not everything is masterminded by glowies. True, I should've just said hegemony.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 22:03:06 No. 673954
>>663444 It’s legit everywhere. India fell below 2.0 iirc. No explanation for that one.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 22:06:00 No. 673957
>>663419 For some reason this doesn't anger me as much as women getting abortions or going on the pill.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 22:07:01 No. 673958
>>673957 Why would that make you angry?
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 22:07:25 No. 673959
>>673958 Same reason Stalin was against abortion.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 22:09:27 No. 673964
>>673959 To increase the population after long devastating wars that killed millions? Those conditions are not present anywhere in the world right now.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 22:11:14 No. 673971
>>673733 "I saw it in Idiocracy so it must be true!!!"
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 22:22:35 No. 673994
>>673964 Stalin banned abortion in 1936, before WWII.
Anonymous 2022-01-04 (Tue) 22:45:04 No. 674041
>>673994 Population was still recovering from the Russian civil war.
Anonymous 2022-01-07 (Fri) 14:04:40 No. 679740
>>673954 What do you mean "no explanation for that one"?
Anonymous 2022-01-12 (Wed) 22:10:51 No. 688745
>>651156 You will never be a woman. lmao.
Unique IPs: 42