The last survey was 3 years ago, so according to this, the rate is up 25% in 3 years!
What the heck is going on? Is this because more kids are getting identified? Or the definition is being broadened? Or is it really that much more common these days?
I’ll see your 25% and raise you 78%!
Didn’t Penn and Teller already deal with this? That a lot of things that are autism didn’t use to called autism and they made a change about how these diseases were categorized?
That may have seemed snarky. It was not meant that way. I’m really asking.
These articles are misleading.
We’ve expanded what conditions we consider to be part of the autism spectrum disorder, we’ve come to recognize more types of behaviors as conditions, and we’re much more vigilant about diagnosing kids with problems.
If you applied today’s criteria for what constitutes a disorder as part of the autism spectrum and applied it to historical cases, there’d be no increase in autism. There is no real growth in any conditions or diseases here.
But has the criteria changed that much since 2009?
Part of it’s because we’re eliminating the stigma of the diagnosis, so more doctors, parents and teachers are willing to recommend testing.
Part of it’s because we’re getting better at teaching parents the warning signs and asking them pointed questions at well-baby exams, so we’re missing fewer diagnoses.
Part of it’s because things that used to have other names - “retarded”, “developmentally delayed”, “freak” - are now diagnosed (sometimes) as autism.
Part of it’s because once upon a time, you had to be pretty darn impaired to be diagnosed with autism, and the rubrics have been changed to include kids with less impairment.
According to whomever wrote the copy on WBBM News Radio this morning, these kinds of factors account for about half the increase. The other half…we don’t have a freaking clue.
Parents are also more vigilant about their children’s well-being than they used to be, so they will take them to the doctor over concerns that may have been ignored or downplayed in the past. This is motivated by multiple things. First, there’s less stigma associated with mental/developmental labels, so there’s less fear about getting your child’s “quirkiness” examined. Second, you can’t turn on the TV or radio now without hearing about autism. You’d have to be living in a cave to not know anything about it. So autism has become another thing parents have learned to look out for when bringing up baby. You see some hyperviligance with this, but the upshot is that more kids with issues get help (presumably).
I also wonder if schools are providing services that they didn’t in the past. Like, I don’t think my elementary school had a psychologist or social worker or anything like that. So if a kid was more than just a little quirky and the teacher recommended he or she be tested, but the parents weren’t able to afford to take the kid to the doctor, then the kid would be left undiagnosed. I’m not a parent or involved in schools, so maybe I’m wrong. But it seems to me that schools today tend to be staffed with professionals who are able to help parents in this area.
How aware of the symptoms of autism were you a few years ago?
When you have famous playboy bunny anti-vaxers, news stories about autism you have more people who know it’s symptoms.
Remember that autism is a spectrum disorder, so you can be lightly effected or massively debilitation.
The individuals on the extreme end probably have functional issues that would encourage parents to look into the causes.
For those kids who are on the other side get brushed off as dumb or bad kids unless one of their teachers or parents know the signs.
Because of the antivax hysteria bullshit, there’s actually been extensive study on the issue, and there is no reason to think, whatsoever, that there is an actual increase in autism disorders. Hundreds of different studies have looked at the data in every way you can imagine - all of these articles are simply bad reporting. Bad reporting that fuels the anti-vax movement and actually gives people diseases for real.
See I would have thought that since 2009 the Anti-Vax bullshit was on the decline as well meaning uninformed people went from hearing about it and giving it the benefit of the doubt to learning more and understanding it’s nonsense.
There’s been anti-vaccine nutcases since vaccines existed and probably always will be but that thimerosal hysteria seemed to have peaked long before 2009.
Knowledge of the symptoms of autism is additive though, the people who knew about it last year mostly all still know about it this year.
We’re (the general public) still wrestling with the phenomenological observation that there’s an apparent increase in autism without taking the next logical step to read about the search for the mechanistic cause. So far no demonstrable mechanistic cause has emerged, and that is not as satisfying as fretting over the phenomenon. The anti-vax movement does have its roots in the days immediately after Jenner’s vaccination discovery, but the modern anti-vax phenomenon is largely confined to some in the college educated middle class. They have grossly overestimated the depth of their college education, and that has led to hubris, where they challenge the validity of research done by people with far more education and experience in the subject. It is a form of tribalism fueled by a deep distrust of scientific institutions, modern medicine and government.
One has to remember that the media is also focused on capturing and retaining consumers, which means using the lowest denominator to pander to the reader’s emotions. They present facts as part of a story, blurring the line between subjective narration and objective description of a subject or event. Even the LA Times, Chicago Tribune, NY Times and Washington Post run articles that grab attention and create emotional reaction that lead to sales, and write with a slant that keeps the reader’s attention. Who wants to read a dull, dry summary of what the scientific literature says, when you can read about a mother’s angry, frustrated, helpless heartbreak as she watches her child slide into autistic catatonia? Deliberate scientific probabilities provides no solace for her, but blaming someone, something, anything provides for a more satisfying catharsis.
Let’s face it: science is boring, tedious and tests the patience of the best scientists. The general public has even less time, patience, inclination or interest in fact-checking what the media presents, so they accept without much question or context what they read. Learning to build context requires diligence and critical thinking skills, things that are not often taught well in school or practiced in many adult lives. Thus, many will read the current articles and not do what the OP has done: ask for context and a reality check. They will instead react with recreational outrage, assume that reaction represents reality and be satisfied with their stagnant, limited knowledge of the subject.
I agree with all of this, and it reminded me of an article I read recently. I googled a little and found it again - from the LA Times: Discovering Autism: Unraveling an Epidemic. Basically, the point of the article is that the autism “epidemic” is largely due to greater awareness and diagnostic substitution (i.e. a kid is called autistic, whereas in the past they didn’t have a label or had a different diagnosis). Also, the article makes the point that autism rates go up fastest in areas where there’s already large numbers of kids diagnosed as autistic, but studies show that the main factor this is correlated with is their parents knowledge about autism. This is pretty logical - as parents become more educated about autism, and are more aware that there are other autistic kids in their circle of friends, community, or school, they are more likely to take their own kids in for evaluation if they’re “quirky”. Also, in a kind of perverse way, some parents are almost encouraged to grab onto the label of autism even when it might not be appropriate, as without an “official” diagnosis their quirky kid can’t get funding and extra support in school. So if your kid is borderline, there’s an incentive to “doctor-shop” to find someone who will diagnose your kid with autism, so that you can get them the help they need in school.
Quotes from the article:
About doctor shopping.
I was listening to a radio program about two months ago about Aspies in love. The young woman being interviewed had discovered she was autistic when she was 20 (a couple of years ago). According to her, but not in so many words, she doctor-shopped for a diagnosis. She went to multiple doctors, asking them to diagnose her with Asperger’s, and she didn’t stop until she found one willing to give her this diagnosis. Neal Conan isn’t a tough interviewer, so he didn’t grill her the way I wanted him too. But I “heard” millions of autistic adults rolling their eyes all across the nation. Here she was, a co-author on a book about having autism, and all but one of the doctors she had been to didn’t think she even had it. And yet here she was, speaking on behalf of autistic people. If I were autistic, I would be kind of pissed off.
I do think that the numbers may be slightly inflated because of behavior like this. I think doctors try to diagnose accurately, but I’m imagining that some are pressured to give diagnoses that they aren’t 100% certain about, but don’t worry too much because the upside to getting a diagnosis overshadows the downside of a misdiagnosis.
While certainly a possibility, do we really have any way of knowing that for sure? Last I checked, time travel was still in its preliminary stage of development. 
There are other possibilities that could be combining with ones mentioned already. For instance:
Study: Autism risk higher in children of obese mothers
I expect it’s some combination of factors like awareness, better diagnosis, and some amount of actual increases in autism rates.
More diagnosis is I think the reason, my mate who was always considered “special” would today be diagnosed with Aspergers, meh statistics are always fun to manipulate.
The articles are misleading because they fail to point out that the data was only collected in 14 cities, and wasn’t intended to be used to estimate the US-wide rates.
And granted that the classic severe autism hasn’t risen. I can guarentee that a lot of it is that doctors either automaticly equate social issues and spoken language delay with autism. Asperger’s and PDD-NOS and spoken language issues are so much more complicated then just social issues and spoken language delays.
The diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum will be changing next year so you can expect a dramatic decrease that I’m sure the nutters will attribute to fewer people exposing their children to high fructose corn syrup or supersecret new ingredients in vaccines.
My daughter will more than likely no longer be on the spectrum, and will only be labeled with sensory processing disorder. The only reason why the label matters is because often the therapies approved for autism are not covered for sensory processing disorder. I had a child psychiatrist tell me he didn’t even believe in SPD.