I read the first page and a half or so, and it seems perfectly fine. Is it not reasonable that autism *could* be a case of environment activating genes? I mean, I read that for years we thought a certain gene caused the likelihood of Alzheimers to rise, but then a study that looked at related populations in America and Nigeria found that it was actually a case of (to quote this article) "The gene loads the gun, and the environment pulls the trigger."
One thing of noticed about this forum is that any article that supports "the other side" is instantly and unconditionally dismissed as being discriminatorily motivated. That attitude must end.
Besides from that, barring some hypothetical AFF publication, Discover is the last magazine you should think of boycotting, due to its quality, realism, and scientific content. If you find Discover boycott-worthy, good luck finding anything better. By the way, since most magazine content is written by freelance writers and/or a shifting population of staff writers, it is unfair to extend an article's perceived anti-autistic position to the magazine itself.
Have the authors disclosed where they get funded?
There is a "Contributors" section in the beginning of every issue. Assuming this is not a staff journalist, you can look there for a blurb on the author's background.
Other than that, for this particular article, it is safe to assume the author was paid by the magazine itself.
In the article, there is no difference made between coincidence and cause.
Where? How? Are you referring to
“What we’ve got here is a far more comprehensive set of characteristics for autism,” says Herbert, “one that can include behavior, cognition, sensorimotor, gut, immune, brain, and endocrine abnormalities. These are ongoing problems, and they’re not confined just to the brain. I can’t think of it as a coincidence anymore that so many autistic kids have a history of food and airborne allergies, or 20 or 30 ear infections, or eczema, or chronic diarrhea.”
It sounds perfectly reasonable that there is a possibility that autism and the above problems are somehow related; to presume otherwise is unscientific.