474
Who the fuck needs an x axis anyway
(mander.xyz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2025
474 points (98.6% liked)
Science Memes
20748 readers
1575 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
....................... did they adjust the data points to go from lowest to highest
......so the chart go up?
.....
*I wrote down the data on a napkin and it makes more sense. These fuckers made a Bad Graph.
Bad Graph says: 0.75% of 8 year olds were diagnosed in 2000 versus 3.2% in 2020.
Correlation =/= causation.
How have the diagnostic criteria changed in 20 years? Autism was a stigma when I was in high school in 2000, now it's a spectrum. Are there routine screenings at pediatricians now?
Number go up, but what else go up simultaneously?
I hate it here.
I tutored a young autistic man in college and he was almost non-verbal. He could communicate through speech, but only in monosyllables and with great difficulty and stuttering. That was the only definition of autism I understood at that time, and he was considered better off than many.
A few years later when I learned about Asperger's because my sister got diagnosed with it, I went to get evaluated myself and after sitting down with me once, they said I'm not autistic.
I'm about 99% sure I would be placed on the autism spectrum today.
I don't know whether it's good or bad that the diagnostics / definition of autism seem to be broadening — that's above my pay grade. But you can't deny people who weren't considered autistic 30 years ago are today, and so to compare autism rates which measure clearly different levels of capability is pretty useless.
In order to compare rates, we would need a consistent set of diagnostic criteria.
Same guys that tarrifed an island full of penguins?
Massaging your stats to make them say what you want is basic statistics 101.
Each bar shows two years; years they surveyed the kids and the year the kids were born.
So 2000|1992, is saying that kids born in 1992 were surveyed in 2000. If you look at tmit with thtmat perspective you can see it's ordered by the year.