"There are two simple reasons for being confident about the false nature of dyslexia. International comparisons and the fact that so called dyslexic children have no more trouble learning to read than other children, if the appropriate teaching methods are used."
Joyous piece of self-confident illogic... could even be a candidate for the Fallacy Files.
Let's spend a moment to unpick this. "International comparisons" becomes a reason for being confident about the false nature of dyslexia... because, it is argued... countries such as South Korea have literacy rates of nearly 100%. Ermmm... 'kay. What does that mean though? Dyslexic people are not a generic mass - and they can still achieve literacy... so... ermmm... not following this one. Also, dyslexia does not equal illiteracy. It varies between people and its effects can be mitigated by a range of coping stragies. Why would a near 100% literacy rate prove that dyslexia is a false condition? It no more proves that than proves that there is no such thing as long-sightedness since in countries where people where glasses to assist them with reading, they can read.
Second bit - "dyslexic children have no more trouble learning to read than other children, if the appropriate teaching methods are used". The latter element confirms that there *is* indeed something which needs to be taken into account to accommodate those with dyslexia, else all teaching methods would work equally. Let's finish off that sentence shall we? "... if the appropriate teaching methods are use, if they aren't then differences will be observed".
No argument that there are teaching methods of varying quality out there. But none of them, good or bad, proves that dyslexia is a myth as is the headline of this strangely ill-informed article. Not sure of his background in education or within special needs... but... he sure seems to want to generate a bit of publicity for himself off the back off this. *sigh*