Thanks for the reply
I think there is a lot of evidence that autism is largely genetic (sibling and twin studies have confirmed this) and while there is probably some kind of environmental component in addition, evidence is showing more and more that whatever that may be occurs in utero.
A couple examples:
"The symptoms of autism may not be obvious until a child is a toddler, but the disorder itself appears to begin well before birth.
Brain tissue taken from children who died and also happened to have autism revealed patches of disorganization in the cortex, a thin sheet of cells that's critical for learning and memory, researchers report in the New England Journal of Medicine. Tissue samples from children without autism didn't have those characteristic patches.
Organization of the cortex begins in the second trimester of pregnancy. "So something must have gone wrong at or before that time," says Eric Courchesne, an author of the paper and director of the Autism Center of Excellence at the University of California, San Diego." http://www.npr.org/sections/health-s...ts-in-the-womb
Another interesting study:
"Researchers at the Yale School of Medicine have figured out how to measure an infant’s risk of developing autism by looking for abnormalities in his/her placenta at birth, allowing for earlier diagnosis and treatment for the developmental disorder. The findings are reported in the April 25 online issue of Biological Psychiatry.
Senior author Dr. Harvey Kliman, research scientist in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences at the Yale School of Medicine, and research collaborators at the MIND Institute at the University of California, Davis, have found that abnormal placental folds and abnormal cell growths called trophoblast inclusions are key markers to identify newborns who are at risk for autism.
Kliman and his team examined 117 placentas from infants of at-risk families, those with one or more previous children with autism. These families were participating in a study called Markers of Autism Risk in Babies – Learning Early Signs. Kliman compared these at-risk placentas to 100 control placentas collected by the UC Davis researchers from the same geographic area.
The at-risk placentas had as many as 15 trophoblast inclusions, while none of the control placentas had more than two trophoblast inclusions. Kliman said a placenta with four or more trophoblast inclusions conservatively predicts an infant with a 96.7% probability of being at risk for autism." http://news.yale.edu/2013/04/25/auti...rmal-placentas
There is also the evidence that many children with autism have larger than average heads from infancy (don't have time to look for the actual study right now).
The eye gazing study is another small piece of the puzzle (although that started at 2 months vs infancy, it is still interesting)
My opinion is that these studies in combination with the already published vaccines/autism studies shows definitively in my mind that vaccines are not
the cause of autism.