[WS:] That is the problem. You need to show that higher levels on the independent variable (pesticide exposure) lead to a higher probability of ADHD diagnosis (the dependent variable.) Showing that certain conditions on the DV are associated with certain conditions on the IV does not quite do it, because it doe not exclude possible spuriousness. For example if 70% of a population has condition A and 20% of the population has condition B, then you would expect that 70% of the subpopulation that has B would also have A - if these two conditions were independent. For example, in a population of 1,000 the number of Bs is 200, of which 140 (70%) would have A and only 60 would not. To establish a causes connection between A and B you would need to show that the subpopulation with A is more likely to have B than subpopulation where A is absent, say, 20% vs 10%.
It is quite possible that people who are more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD (mostly lower socio economic strata) also are more likely to be exposed to pesticides (as they cannot afford more expensive organic food,) which may produce statistical correlations but not necessarily causality.
As to my larger point - liberal application of the ADHD label - I d not think that the main driving force behind it is pig pharma pushing Ritalin, but rather the fundamentally fucked up education system in the US. To make a long story short, every kid age 6 to 18 is legally required to go though a college-bound curriculum, whether he has any interest in it or not. Not only that, every kid is required to take repeated tests how well he or she absorbs that curriculum. There is no other alternative (unless your parents can spare $k a year to enroll you in an 'alternative' school.) So if you happen to be a kid who has no desire or necessary to learn Shakespeare and Algebra II, but you are required to sit in classroom (on the pain of your old folks being dragged before a truancy court) - you will show all the symptoms that the DSM IV associates with ADHD - which is a perfectly normal reaction.
So labeling such kids with an ADHD label may be a desirable alternative to admitting the fundamental failure of one size fits all educational system. This can be desirable not just to school administrators, but also to pie in the sky liberals who imagine that they can reduce social inequality by merely offering 'educational opportunity' and consequently oppose the idea of two different tracks vocational and college-bound.
Wojtek
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Sean Andrews <cultstud76 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I see what you're saying about the ADHD label, but I don't think your
> conclusion follows.
>
> The study is of the higher percentage of pesticides in urine of kids
> who have been diagnosed with the label. If it was purely an issue of
> the label being too liberally applied, there should be no marked
> variation in the label among the population in question.
> Additionally, most children may be exposed to pesticides, but the
> study is saying that there is more pesticides in the urine of some
> than others.
>
> I am all for accepting this study's conclusion skeptically, but I
> don't see how starting from skepticism of the ADHD label gets you to
> disregard the observation that *variations* in that label correlate to
> apparent *variations* in pesticide exposure. Unless pesticide levels
> in their urine are also somehow subjective (i.e. their kidneys are
> just ADHD as well?)
>
> I also don't see who this helps in terms of politics and
> administration--unless the technocratic capitalist answer to the
> problem is: if you can't afford to eat organic, you should buy your
> kids Ritalin. In that case, it is hardly a problem of the study
> itself, but the perverted logic which interprets its findings.
>
> s
>
> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 09:12, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > [WS:] To play a devil's advocate, does not this correlations between
> > pesticides and ADHD have something to do with the rather liberal
> application
> > of the ADHD label? I mean, most children are exposed to pesticides, so
> the
> > more of them are also labeled ADHD, the gretaer the correlation between
> the
> > two - by definition.
> >
> > I understand that ADHD has a neurobiological basis, but finding that
> > requires rather extensive and expensive testing, so many diagnoses are
> based
> > on subjective evaluations of the behavior - and for political and
> > administrative reasons the ADHD label is applied rather liberally.
> >
> > Wojtek
> >
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>