Talk:National Autistic Society

Controversies

the silence on pseudoscience is false. the NAS very much takes a strong stance against GcMAF, MMS, and CEASE. they also very much support legislation where necessary to combat ineffective and dangerous treatments. this is not silence. the only evidence of silence and sole focus of this section, is for whatever reason, a lack of support for Dalmayne's petition. this is not silence, it is false to say otherwise.

the 'endorsing of questionable treatments' section seems to be taking a line informed by a view on autism and possible treatments that is itself controversial. dunno know enough about autism rights movement to have any strong opinion beyond there is a clear bias that makes any information contained within unreliable. this bias is more strident on the ABA and ARM pages btw, but i lack the knowledge and familiarity with the subject to say much more than that.

this page is a more manageable prospect and an easier fix AMassiveGay (talk) 14:40, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

"All of these films have featured a white/white-passing person."

?????????????????? --Gangster Computer God (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

"It also has suggested that biomedical approaches (which almost universally lack scientific backing) could be effective with a doctors' supervision" I have no idea what this means, but I think it's probably referring to actual medical treatments for autism (such as antipsychotic medication, whose basis is very well established). Gangster Computer God (talk) 20:54, 14 May 2021 (UTC)