I don’t understand your complaint. The conclusion of the paper says this: “By embryogenesis, the biological bases of two subtypes of ASD social and brain develo

I don’t understand your complaint. The conclusion of the paper says this: “By embryogenesis, the biological bases of two subtypes of ASD social and brain development—profound autism and mild autism—are already present and measurable and involve dysregulated cell proliferation and accelerated neurogenesis and growth.” It is correct to describe that as “established that brain overgrowth begins in the womb”. It seems you have an issue with that the researchers reached this conclusion from experiments with what you call “some odd organoid derived from blood cells”. I’m not an expert so I wouldn’t know if that is a valid way to make the conclusion but once they do it seems the summary in the article is correct. What do you feel is wrong with the article and what do you feel is flaky with the research?