Blogs and Stories
An Autism Epidemic?
Helen H. Richardson, The Denver Post / Zuma Press
One in 100 American kids has some form of autism, according to new findings—a dramatic jump from two years ago. Barbara Kantrowitz on what's behind the alarming numbers.
The statistics appear to tell an alarming story: 1 of every 100 American children has an autism spectrum disorder, according to newly released results from two federally funded research studies.
Just two years ago, the government estimate was 1 in 150—and the new findings have some worried that we are in the midst of an unprecedented autism epidemic. But a growing awareness of the disorder and a broadening in the official definition make such a claim hard to prove.
Just two years ago, the government estimate was 1 in 150—and the new findings have some worried that we are in the midst of an unprecedented autism epidemic.
Until about 20 years ago, the devastating diagnosis of autism applied only to the most severe cases, people who were largely incapable of normal social interaction and were often institutionalized. But starting in the late 1980s, the official definition expanded to include a spectrum of conditions, from classic autism to milder forms, such as Asperger’s syndrome. The range of people considered to have autism now includes not only the most severely disabled but also many others whose impairments do not prevent them from getting jobs, going to college, even getting married. At the same time, growing awareness of autism by parents, teachers, and doctors means the disorder is recognized more often, and that also adds to the numbers.
All these changes make it impossible to compare present rates with those of a generation ago, so no one can say with certainty that the prevalence of autism has increased. But even with a standard definition, it has been difficult for researchers to figure out exactly how widespread autism is now. Numbers change as surveys become increasingly sophisticated.
The gold standard at the moment is a Centers for Disease Control surveillance study of 8-year-olds who have received the diagnosis of autism at 11 sites around the country. Although complete results aren’t expected until later this year, the CDC released preliminary numbers at the same time as another study was published this week in the journal Pediatrics. The methodology of that study was very different; researchers from the Health Resources and Services Administration conducted a telephone survey of 78,000 parents of children age 3 to 17, asking whether they had ever been told that their children had an autism spectrum disorder.
Both the CDC and Pediatrics results are noteworthy because these two dissimilar studies came up with essentially the same number—1 in 100. That finding roughly conforms to autism rates reported in other industrialized countries, which means the 1 in 100 could be the most accurate figure so far. Defining the extent of the problem would be a huge step forward.
But even if 1 in 100 holds up, it doesn’t answer the question of whether more people have autism now than in the past, as many advocates believe. “The concern here is that buried in these numbers is a true increase,” said Dr. Thomas Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health, at a press conference last week. And if there is an increase, what’s behind it? Scientists don’t know what causes autism, although research is ongoing into possible environmental hazards or genetic explanations.
Even without evidence of an increase, there are clearly a lot of children who need help. “We’re going to have to think very hard about what we’re going to do for the 1 in 100,” Insel said, adding that the Obama administration is making autism research a priority.
10 Power Food Combos
Divya Gugnani is the CEO and founder of BehindtheBurner.com, an emerging culinary media brand that creates expert-based content about food, wine, mixology, and nutrition.
How Obama Wins in 2012
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono.
The White House Mystery Drug
Barbara Kantrowitz is a contributing editor at Newsweek and co-author of The Menopause Book (Workman Publishing, 2009).
8 Diseases Scarier Than Swine Flu
Barbara Kantrowitz is a contributing editor at Newsweek and co-author of The Menopause Book (Workman Publishing, 2009).
'I Don't Have a Dad'
Barbara Kantrowitz is a contributing editor at Newsweek and co-author of The Menopause Book (Workman Publishing, 2009).
Elspeth Reeve is a writer living in New York. She has written for Time, New York, and The New Republic.
johnnyapplecd
This is for all the conspiracy science deniers that are surely going to post below me: IT'S NOT THIMEROSAL, JERKS.
For those who don't already know, thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative used in many vaccines (though it has now been removed from most vaccines administered in the U.S. due to widespread irrational fear, including my own at one point) that was once thought to perhaps cause some cases of autism.
This theory has been utterly disproven, causation cannot be shown. However, there are thousands of people (including some very prominent celebrities) who believe that the scientists who came up with this conclusion are all part of some vast Big Pharma conspiracy to keep using thimerosal since it is the cheapest option.
Sounds plausible, but it's wrong. There's no debate in the scientific community--it's been settled.
No links here, do the internet research and see the truth, the way I did. Specifically, look for the court case that was supposed to end the argument, and remember that posters below may have been victims of a false campaign which they are now emotionally wrapped up in due to the involvment of their afflicted child.
Wait for it.....
rurube
and you are qualified to make this statment why? because you did some internet research? rich...
newswoman
I believe it may be environmental (chemical pesticides) or something pregnant women are taking during their pregnancies. I don't think it is because it is diagnosed more. Something is happening. I never knew children with autism when I was young and bearing my children, but I know some now.
exploora
Even if this is not true, and something like a vaccination does jolt a child, it might still be possible teach them over again, so they can normalize. Assuming a person is something, could leave them that way.
xlntcat
The science wasn't paid for or influence by the pharmacy companes, The body of evidence is prolific. If there is a relationship between vacines and autism, it could lie the pharceutical coctail of vacines now being administered which is currently being investigated but will be difficult to isolate as causation.
The increase in over diagnosis of autism skews the numbers. Children are being labeled autistic by physicians who are not trained and qualified to identiy the disorder and parents trying to find an answer often push for the diagnosis. Since information gathering relies heavily on parental report due to the lack of communication skills of very young children, the data is easily manipulated for multiple reasons including a belief by some that the child diagnosed autistic will received broader services and there is a greater stigma attached to retardation than there is to autism.
One highly relevant confounding variable of the recect telephone survey is that 40% of the parents interviewed reported that there child had been diagnosed as autistic but was no longer had autism. That does happen. Autism doesn't spontaneously remit and no known cure exists. IQ is static across time and varies only with the margin of error in repeated tests with the identical criteria.
nortonclybourn
The original claim made in Lancet has been withdrawn. No correlation has been found. When the thimerisol bit was discredited, there was a shift to blame multiple vaccinations.
There is a correlation between the rate of autism and the age of the father. Reichenberg "In fathers who were 40 years or older, the risk for autism was almost six times higher than in the offspring of fathers who were younger than 30 years of age."
my3sons
I don't believe in a conspiracy but maybe laziness or looking the other way. There has to be an explanation of why there are so many kids that are not well. Ask yourself this question: When you were growing up how many kids with autism did you know? I did not know a single kid with either autism or behavior like autism if the argument would be that he or she were simply not diagnosed. My nephew developed facial tics and in researching it I discovered that about 20% of kids have ticks. Why? I keep thinking about that lead scare we had about a year ago. Maybe that was just one whistle blower that opened his mouth and spoke up. How many "poison" toys or baby foods have we been giving to our children? We have no one to protect us. The government is just reactive, apologizing when a huge issue comes out. Autism, ADD, ADHD, facial and vocal tics, nut, wheat, dairy allergies. I am 42 and did not see any of it while growing up.
westsider
I'm 38, so not too far away from your experience growing up. But as you'll recall, when we were kids, disabled students were not mainstreamed. They were picked up in their short buses and sent to "special education" schools or walled off in some obscure location of the regular school. They didn't sit in our classes, and they didn't join us at recess. It was also common for autistic children in the 70s to be institutionalized, something that really doesn't happen as much. So, comparing the number of autistic children you see today vs. the 70s doesn't work. It is a much different world today than it was then. As the article also points out, children with Aspergers and other mild forms of autism are now included in the count, when those basically went undiagnosed in the 70s. That weird kid in class who never seemed able to sit still, would make occasional strange noises, and had no friends. He'd be labeled as being on the spectrum now. Then, he was just a weirdo. That isn't to say that our children are not all exposed to a huge amount of chemicals and radiations that we didn't face, but we have to understand the true, base number of cases before we can start talking about what, if any, increase in autism is occurring. (By the way, we were probably exposed to a lot more lead than children now, even with contaminated toys from China. Leaded gas wasn't phased out of the system until the late 70s and lead remained in much of the paint used in houses.)
newswoman
Why blame China? What about atomic bomb testing, above ground, which put strontium 90 in the air?
puarau
Aloha johnnyapplecd: You frequently ask what people are smoking as a pretext to your posts. Have you heard about folks smoking "White Russian" for autism? I heard it is a strain frequently used by cancer patients. I am doing a little research on vaccines and autism, any leads beside your aforementioned. Sincerely Yours.
johnnyapplecd
ha! this is a great post, and I only wish it was actually for me. I once saw a TDB poster named JohnnyAppleSeed, perhaps you are thinking of him. You are going to think that one of us copied the other, or that we are the same person, but I swear it ain't so.
Well, I PRESUME he didn't copy me, and I definitely didn't copy him, so here's to happy coincidences.
As to folks smoking whatever for autism, no, I hadn't heard of that, but then, I'm no kind of researcher, just someone who jumped on to the thimerosal bandwagon early on and was shocked to find out how wrong I was. It took quite a bit of seeing the same evidence over and over again before I was able to admit it, though.
I must have been smoking something. Cheers.
Cymatic
If it was vaccines, it would be easy to find a causal relationship through statistical data in the same way that scientists showed the relationship between smoking and cancer.
Here is an excellent video on vaccines - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW1IEqKuf6s&feature=video_response
This is a personal issue for me as both my grandfather and my mother suffered terribly from Polio. Dr. Jonas Salk is a hero in my family. My generation will never have to deal with this disease because of the vaccines. This disease swept through cities affecting large swaths of the population. My grandfather and mother actually were infected in seperate outbreaks. Yet, somehow there are those in our generation who, living almost completely free of infectious diseases are ready to throw the baby out to save the bathwater. Even if the autism data were correct, which it provably isn't, it would still be worth it.
Reading over my great grandmother's correspodance letters it was shocking how many of them concerned people she knew dying from diseases that are unheard of today. A letter would mention her great uncle passing away along with two daughters... how many of us have written these kinds of letters? That's right - none of us!
Granite
Once again, a lot of people have an opinion, but no one has an autistic child.
The parents are just trying to find answers. If it was your kid, you too would leave no stone unturned in the quest for answers.
TwainsYankee
I don't see how that matters. Does having an autistic child make a link with vaccines more or less true?
mclaubr1
When I grew up in the 50s and 60s, the environmental contaminants were everywhere...coke dust from the nearby steel mill, lead paint, preservatives, plastics, asbestos, you name it. I don't remember children in the neighborhood that exhibited autistic behavior. And my exposure to these contaminents did not affect my children. Fast forward to today and in our extended family, we have two beautiful children who are profoundly affected. The baby was perfectly fine until after the "shots." Statistics aside, there is something wrong that is very specific. A greater effort is needed to find it.
tankertodd
Remember that correlation is not causation. Best of luck finding the answers!
finderj
In all likelihood, there are a number of causal factors for autism.
And frequent misdiagnoses.
Ever heard of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder? Mimics a lot of the specific observational items for autism.
As to whether vaccines are a factor...well, I had my children vaccinated. But with only one vaccine at a time, over a longer period of time. My GP was ok with it. I was lucky to have a doctor who agreed with me that taking my time was better for my kids, who are all happy and healthy.
lmeyer101
I cannot believe this comment -- you are saying that I have a child in the autistic spectrum because I drank during pregnancy !!! Unbelievably stupid comment!!!!! What you are implying is that parents of autistic children are at fault - that we somehow "gave" it to our kids by drinking or vaccinating -- that is sooo low! You should thank the lord that your kids are healthy - and don't point a finger for you have no right!!
xlntcat
No one said that! But anyone who drinks during pregnancy does so knowing that the risks inflecting Fetal Alcohol Syndrome which far more dibilitating that even moderate autism. The woman who takes that risk with her unborn child is responsible just like the woman who brings a child into the world addicted to cocaine or heroin. Denial does nothing to help the situation.
splinter
Ditto on spreading out vaccination. Did it with both of my kids. Sure it put them six months behind on the vaccination schedule, but it also did not expose them to multiple shots per visit.
xlntcat
It is a good idea since the verdict on the safety of the cocktail of vacines is still out.
TwainsYankee
My Children had all their vaccines as directed and they don't have autism. Whats your point?
SchellingOut
Autism, like ADHD, is a constellation of symptoms, several of which -- e.g., "impaired communication," "lack of empathy" -- are eye-of-the-beholder judgments. The expanded diagnosis criteria, as noted above, have resulted in an "epidemic." I'm convinced my husband's entire family -- all engineers and computer geeks -- have Asperger's, but not one has a diagnosis, because of their age. If they were 8 now, they'd surely be labeled on the autism spectrum. Like many things that used to be normal, or at least on the fringes of normal (like the weird kid in third grade who wiggled and picked his nose and generally annoyed the heck out of everyone), we have medicalized behaviors and given them a label. Of course it's no wonder that fewer Black and Hispanic kids are given this diagnosis -- their parents don't believe their behavior is a result of a medical condition, so they aren't seeking medical treatment for it. This is a diagnosis of the insured and (relatively) educated and well off. As for all the anti-vaxers out there -- they are playing Russian roulette with their kids wellbeing. Pertussis, measles, even H1N1 can be deadly -- and not vaccinating your kids puts other people at risk. How selfish!
TwainsYankee
Well said.
tankertodd
Another DB article where there's a sensational headline and then an article where the writer walks back from same headline.
Coincidentally my wife today told a board-certified psychiatrist that she thought she had Asperger's. The trained professional assured her she didn't. According to the methodologies cited above, she would have fallen in the group with Autism. The more you talk about a disease, the more people who have it. Human nature. Never mind that many autistics are functioning, so it's not like this is a life-or-death epidemic. Millions die from malaria - that's an epidemic. Some kids die from preventable diseases by not taking vaccines because the parents are worried about autism. Darwin works in strange ways.
TwainsYankee
EXACTLY!
exploora
I think once that change happens, there needs to be something that is designed to help, not something scary and over dramatic obviously. It is too bad people think it is ok to be incredibly negative to people they assume to have something, that sets them up to react to something negative, and appear worse than they really are. I would suspect a lot of kids are reacting to a frightening time we are living in. I know it is not that simple, but I think a depersonalized society does not help this problem at all.
exploora
I saw a picture, of what appeared to be a teenager, having her hand held when another teenager was helping her write.
These are interventions that could be done right when the problem happens, instead of some teacher freaking out, that the child can't write, possibly someone needs to gently hold the child's hand and write or print with him or her, and not just freak out for twelve years until someone, possibly a volunteer might wonder what if I held this person's hand and wrote with them.
We are so set up to expect quick everything, including quick learning and quick diagnosis, and if the diagnosis is wrong, what a tragedy.
xlntcat
What's your point. How does some other person manipulating the motor skills of an adolescent equate to an intervention?
exploora
Because it is a sensory or co-ordination problem that might be the only way they will learn to write, and then obviously you let go of the pen, and encourage them until they get the task down pact. You don't go freaking out, going on and on that the kid can't write. Especially if it might not be even true. That is the tragedy. We want quick everything, prepackaged every thing, quality control to do the degree where even children, if they are outliers beyond the quality lines, are spit out with a dx, that possibly will limit their opportunities for life.
exploora
You don't think we could all appear autistic if we did not have the training we all have, starting with potty training, speaking, writing, being nice to each other, etc.
If some problem with auditory processing, or visual processing occurs, and the stimulus overwhelms the person, and the person shuts down, that might be when, the person could,needs to be taught, I stress gently, to not shut down.
Education, social, human development, all that stuff, we take for granted.
You know it is very amazing what we learn to do very quickly. And that might be where the missing link is. During that time period.
The answer might be lying in social interaction related to learning to cope with whatever is making a person shut down, and this might be a lot harder to sell than a pill a person could buy.
xlntcat
You over simplify to the extreme. When one child in a family has a ligimate diagnoses of autism, your social interaction theory would have to apply to the other children or the twin that doesn't have the diagnosis. That hasn't been the found to be the case.
Autism correlates with mulitiple Axis one mental and emotional disorders as well as Axis III physiological disorders that can't possibly be aided by or explained by a social interaction theory.
exploora
You mis understood what I said. I am not talking about ignoring autism, I am talking about not freaking out over it, and develop programs that are able to go around it, similar to the way Helen Keller was taught, and that case was considered radical and impossible too. Dxing a child, and then leaving him/her with social limitations only adds to the problem. Though it may be more convenient to everyone else.
exploora
That is how Helen Keller was taught, building on a strength, it is a quiet a radical thing to do. Of course she would always blind and deaf, so that is known, what is known, is how far a person can develop if they are given opportunities designed to work around the limitation what ever it may be.
Obviously screaming at someone with sensory issues, is probably the worst thing they can do, but might be fine if it is a student who has no sensory issues and needs to have limits set on his behaviour.
This is a huge issue, integrating verses developing on your own. It seems, in severe cases, a person is better off on their own, cause they can't learn the other way.
Even Einstein was in many ways self taught, and did better, much better that way. Of course he had formal training too, but being an outlier could be a curse, but could also be a gift.
Maybe we as humans need to be more humble for the sake of the planet, and disabilities are a great humbler, even for the people watching.
Just like that "new" ring around Saturn. That ring has always been there, we just have the tools to see it now.
Outrage
It is quite clear thimerosal is not a primary cause of autism. Once widely used, it has been nearly discontinued from child vaccines in the U.S. since 2001. However, new cases of autism are clearly as prevalent as ever. Given all the environmental pollutants and the dramatic changes to virtually every aspect of infant care in the last 50 years, it seems odd to persist in blaming one factor that continually shows no correlation with autism.
LeeConary
"Barbara Kantrowitz Investigates the Alarming New Numbers"? People, this blog does not constitute an investigation.
ghudson68
This had me wondering exactly what these numbers are based on.
http://www.newsy.com/videos/autism_on_the_rise
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.