Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
Facilitated Communication is Not Science
3.6K posts
Facilitated Communication is Not Science
@FCisnotScience
Parents, educators, researchers, and others concerned about the promotion of Facilitated Communication, a thoroughly discredited but persistent technique.
Katılım Mayıs 2021
49 Takip Edilen409 Takipçiler
Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
Both FC-generated false abuse allegations & FC-generated “telepathy” are as old as FC.
And fake autism is as old as the autism autobiography (see Donna Williams’ “breakout” Nobody Nowhere).
All of it dates back to the 1980s & early 1990s.
What’s new is how bad it’s gotten.
Facilitated Communication is Not Science@FCisnotScience
Did you know Rosemary Crossley (inventor of FC) and eight or nine of her facilitators were among the first to bring false allegations against a client's family members? FC is rotten at its core. See the Paul Heinrich articles at this link: facilitatedcommunication.org/false-allegati…
English
Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
E.g., statements that all spellers are brilliant, acquire literacy w/ zero phonics or vocab instruction, read books thru peripheral vision & photographic memory, learn calculus in a day by osmosis, read auras, & teleport themselves to The Hill at night to learn hieroglyphics.
English
Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
Before you accuse s.o. of mocking ppl who are subjected to FC, RPM, and “spelling,” you shld ask yourself if you can find a single example of them doing this. Perhaps what you’re confusing this with is the highlighting of patently absurd statements that ppl make about “spellers.”
English
Did you know Rosemary Crossley (inventor of FC) and eight or nine of her facilitators were among the first to bring false allegations against a client's family members? FC is rotten at its core.
See the Paul Heinrich articles at this link:
facilitatedcommunication.org/false-allegati…
Anne Phillips@annephillipssea
@message2garcia @jimtemu @FCisnotScience Can you imagine being falsely accused? This is something that haunts me about cued spelling.
English
Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
This MAHA podcast embraces one of the fundamental contradictions of the largely overlapping anti-vax, pro-FC community.
1. Vaccines cause neurological damage and non-speaking #autism
2. All autistic non-speakers are brilliant
Do vaccines cause brilliance?
Alt B@AltB56073878
English
They don't ask questions about facilitator cueing and control so they can pretend the problem doesn't exist. Anything to keep the illusion of FC/S2C/RPM alive, but controlled studies show these techniques ONLY work with facilitator cueing and control.
Wensheng Li （Xiaoyaya Autism Initiative）@xiaoyaya3
@FCisnotScience One argument I got is, “as long as we think/know it works for the individuals, that is the evidence.” So, evidence is not even a talking point.
English
Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
@FCisnotScience It was worse than that. After the first day of the January hearing, it was clear there no reliable physical or testimonial evidence against the Wendrows. We established no scientific basis, and even the prosecutor’s expert questioned the validity of the FC.
English
Are these results published in a peer reviewed journal? If/when it gets to that point, we'll be glad to review the study for our website. In the meantime, here are links to critiques of the Telepathy Tapes
facilitatedcommunication.org/the-telepathy-…
Presume Facilitator Influence@ASHAOwesMeMoney
@FCisnotScience The TT "scientist" Julia Mossbridge conducted "adapted" (poorly designed) message test using simple words as stimuli and allowing sensory leakage. The results failed to demonstrate authorship, but Mossbridge et al deceive the public by claiming otherwise. x.com/DrJerroldCoe/s…
English
A reminder: we're happy to review any reliably controlled studies (pro or con) that address facilitator cueing and control over letter selection in facilitator-dependent techniques (FC/S2C/RPM). Anecdotes, testimonials, insults, etc. are not evidence.
English
The Telepathy Tapes are a Scam (Ky Dickens Debunked) (Professor Dave Explains)
This is the video the Telepathy Tapes folks didn't want you to see.
youtube.com/watch?v=4HiuEl…
YouTube
English
The Vasquez (1994) FC authorship test showed clear evidence of facilitator cueing/control. Also, 1 of 2 participants had (limited) independent spoken and written language abilities already. The school didn't like the test results so they stopped participating in the study.
English
Yes. This never should have happened. By the time they were falsely accused of abuse via FC, Facilitated Communication had been thoroughly discredited.
ベル邸 berutei@berutei
@message2garcia @FCisnotScience Thal and Julian Wendrowの経験した悲劇的な冤罪事件について知ることは大切です。lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/loc…
English
Wow. Anything to protect the illusion of FC, I guess. Good thing you knew the case and could set the record straight.
James T. Todd@jimtemu
@FCisnotScience The prosecutor in Wendrow confronted me with Vasquez ‘94, apparently to show that FC could work with a girl like the girl in the case. She apparently hadn’t read the part about how the supposedly nonverbal FC girl “blurted out” the answers. I pointed that out from the stand.
English
Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
@DrJerroldCoe @FCisnotScience @atbeyond I’ve met Shevin. Nice guy. He was my instructor in an FC workshop. Not always logical. If I recall his account of the M & S chapter, Marcus sometimes did better without FC. Shevin didn’t understand exclusion bias or that reusing the same cards meant learning to read the marks.
English
Interesting. I'll go back and read this. Definitely worth a blog post.
And, no, I don't think most proponents read beyond the titles. I've seen proponents cite anti-FC articles because the titles seemed to support their position.
James T. Todd@jimtemu
@DrJerroldCoe @FCisnotScience @atbeyond Vasquez ‘94 is interesting. Two kids, blinded testing. The boy couldn’t FC. The nonverbal girl, they discovered *during* the study, could talk and type on her own, and “blurted out” the answers. They kept her data anyway. Do FC people read what they cite? Doesn’t seem like it.
English
The Remarkable Case of Woody Brown - Brooke SP
bsawyer04.substack.com/p/the-remarkab…
English
Facilitated Communication is Not Science retweetledi
Fantastic interview! Uta points out yet another threat to #autism research: the dilution of actual autism w/ fake autism, the fakery of autism now enabled by the scientifically unverifiable concept of masking. One consequence of this: it’s very hard to do research on bio markers.
Naomi Fisher@naomicfisher
Uta Frith is speaking again about the need for subgroups in the autism spectrum. To hear her in person, listen to our podcast interview. neurosense.substack.com/p/why-we-need-…
English
The problems with uncontrolled (pro-FC) authorship studies are well documented in these systematic reviews. If proponents want to prove their claims, they need to participate in studies that control for facilitator behaviors
facilitatedcommunication.org/systematic-rev…
English