In addition, scientists are expected to publicly report their findings in peer-reviewed journals to be reviewed and critiqued by the scientific community whereas this article has received not. His evidence for treatment claims is furthermore inadequate due to the entirely subjective information provided such as “I’m determined to make a difference in your life and that of your child!”. Like other pseudoscientists, Dr Wong’s credibility resides in personal characteristics, in his qualification as a …show more content…
However, this pseudoscientific article describes Dr. Wong to have discovered entirely “new Autism cures that can save your child’s life”, similar to pseudoscientific theories. These theories usually have no connection to of previous, scientific principles.
Non-scientists usually do not employ scientific and clinical definitions of terms. Instead, pseudoscientists usually use more technical yet non-scientific terms as the technicality hide the lack of meaning of these terms. However casual and slang words are used in the NewAutism article instead of technical terms such as “in-box”.
Wong is not cautious about the use of terms used in his article, using casual language throughout such as “BS” and capital letters as a persuasive technique. Dr Wong does not specify conditions for suitable treatment with who can receive treatment or the outcomes of treatment. NewAutism article claims it is suitable for “Mom and Dad who desperately want to defeat autism”; the parents of autistic children. NewAutism’s success appears to be dependent on vague claims such as "miracle cure” and "results in only minutes". These claims appeal to autistic parent’s wishful thinking and raise false