LOGICAL COMPARISONS, PLEASE.

I have just blocked somebody on here who made the nonsensical statement that the Cancer Research Foundation must be involved in eugenics and that saying curing autism is eugenics is ridiculous.

Let us be clear about something. Cancer is an umbrella term for numerous types of diseases, such as lymphoma and mesothelioma, just to name a couple, and kills hundreds of thousands, if not millions, every year. Autism is not a deadly condition. Yes, people can die with it, but that is due to not appreciating danger, such as jumping into water when they can't swim, or suicide due to social ostracism, but that does not make autism deadly. Cancer kills by having blood vessels that feed neoplasms that rob the body of nutrients. Autism doesn't kill people in the same sense.

Genes may be responsible for cancer but so too are environmental factors. That can be a reason advanced as to why some people may smoke a packet of cigarettes a day and live to be 96 and die of old age, and another may start smoking and have emphysema within six months. And you don't have to have smoked to have contracted mesothelioma, all you need is exposure to asbestos fibres!

Autistic people can have different sensations of pain, in that they may have a ruptured spleen and not experience a great deal of pain, or stub their toe and be in agony, but that's a difference, not something to cure.

Comparing cancer to autism and asking if the cancer research foundation is engaged in eugenics is ridiculous. And let us not forget that Hitler was all about creating a master race, and so was Alfred Rosenberg, and a society without cancer is a society without some suffering, but a society without autism is also based upon creating a dominant type of human being, yet also one without the special gifts of autism.