The_Walrus wrote:
To summarise the points I made in the last thread about this "researcher":
- She has no background in biology, so makes claims that are biologically implausible
- Her papers are all published in pay-to-publish journals, without peer review. This is generally indicative of bad science because it means she couldn't get published in a more prestigious journal (and this isn't exactly niche)
- Her "papers" don't actually contain any research
The hypothesis itself generally isn't supported by the evidence. The literature shows no relationship between autism and glysophate, or indeed glysophate and any health concerns - it is a very safe chemical unless you somehow ingest ridiculous quantities.
This. It's basically the same as saying vaccines cause Autism. I'm afraid that people actually believe in this pseudo-science crap to be honest.