This is certainly probably the “biggest” story about MS at the moment. This isn’t the first I’ve heard of this – the last time was about any chronological disease by birth month. I’m pretty skeptical about this as a whole and my initial suspicion was that they had too small of a sampling size. The sampling size is bigger than I thought at 25,000 people but is that enough to be statistically relevant. I guess I need to pull the journal article and see what it has to say but best case scenario this smacks of post hoc ergo propter hoc to me. You can read the WebMD article here: Birth Month Tied to Multiple Sclerosis Risk.
Update: Here is the previous post I couldn’t think of: What’s My Sign