Autism rates may be higher than thought

Post Reply New Topic

read more on the L.A. Times website... click here

Fascinating. It will be interesting if there is the willingness to do such broad studies in other countries.

i am surprised that autism speaks has been involved:

but why then didn't they do this study in the US??

this is weird.

/is not surprised

Dr. Young Shin Kim is on the payroll of Autism Speaks (link)
Money is influence, thus I doubt the reliability of the research done.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the article states that Dr Young Shin Kim is an epidemiologist from the Yale Child Study Center that received a research grant from Autism Speaks; Autism Speaks funds all research with research grants that cover the expenses of the research. Technically Dr. Young Shin Kim is on the payroll of the Yale Child Study Center.

I found it interesting in your link how the initial results were one out of every 100 to 200 children with Autism. I wonder what happened to make the percentage go up like it did to 1 out of 38.

It does make sense though that more kids would be diagnosed if they were all screened. That doesn't happen now, but there is aa new screening test, also funded in part by Autism Speaks, that is a simple checklist that a parent or physician can do in five minutes to suggest whether further diagnosis is needed in children as young as age 1.

Current statistics estimate close to 1 in 350 people have Aspergers, but I would imagine that a much larger number of people, particularly adults with limited resources are not aware of the condition and do not have the resources required for a diagnosis.

I had the developmental delay and was able to cope for the most part, but the world wasn't nearly as stressful and complicated in te 60's, at least were I lived. I imagine there are many now in middle age having a tougher time dealing with the speed of life, and not understanding why some things are harder for them than others.

Regarding the question on why the research wasn't done in the US first, Autism Speaks funds research and collects funding on a world wide basis. It is a very complex organization.

1. All he is doing is researching how common autism is, not how horrible it is to be autistic and nothing can ever be right once your child is autistic. There's no reason to doubt his findings just based on where his money is coming from.

2. Those estimates are not the estimates I've been given and are also, as I said, estimates. This is the first study that was done that went out into the general population and assessed EVERY child for autism. That is why the results are so much higher.

3. The statistic I read said 1 in 250 people had AS (during the time when the statistics for autism were suggested to be 1 in 150). Keeping in mind that it would be rather unlikely for a case of LFA to go undiagnosed, we can see that the vast majority of autistics do not have LFA. In fact, I do believe that people with LFA (as it's shown in the media) have other mental issues (such as mental retardation) on top of being autistic. The percentage of the general populace with mental retardation is 3%. I would like to see a study of the rate of low functioning autism. I have a feeling it wouldn't be much higher than that, comparing it to the rate of autism in general. (IE there are 10,000 autistics in a particular population and 300-500 are LFA)

Hmm...

Dawson is Geraldine Dawson, a spokesperson for Autism Speaks. Doesn't mean the research is wrong, but there's Autism Speaks' investment in the data: More autistic children, more funding.

I'm not sure that I'd characterize it as sinister, either. The data may very well be true. That paragraph just stood out to me.

So Autism Speaks is like one of these "Autism Cure" societies? Let me guess they still believe in vaccines inducing autism?

I don't know which may be the link of Autism Speaks with the research. I am convinced the people with ASD, and particularly AS and female, who both tend to be much less visible, are many more than those resulting from official epidemiologiìcal statistics. The article in the NYT is here.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/09/healt ... lobal-home

Blind assumptions are not a good tact. This is one of the real problems in the latent tensions between various autism advocacy organizations. Instead of poisoning the well with an emotional ejaculation, perhaps you should actually RESEARCH what Autism Speaks does.

So I open my eyes and this is what I find
http://www.time.com/time/health/article ... 59,00.html
http://aut.zone38.net/2007/06/03/an-aut ... sm-speaks/
http://autismcrisis.blogspot.com/2008/0 ... peaks.html
http://www.cafemom.com/group/112775/for ... ism_Speaks
http://leanleft.com/2010/03/29/autism-speaks-is-wrong/
http://www.aspieweb.net/autism-speaks-and-biased-media/
http://www.autismpolicyblog.com/2010/09 ... peaks.html
http://embracingchaos.stephanieallencri ... sm-speaks/
http://www.wrongplanet.net/article371.html (This one on WP)
http://www.aspieweb.net/aspieweb-being- ... sm-speaks/
http://www.aspieweb.net/why-is-autism-speaks-so-bad/
http://autisticbfh.blogspot.com/2008/01 ... child.html (this one really annoyed me)

and the peice de resistance!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kir ... 42852.html

Remember the good old days, when Aspergers was rare and affecting three out of 10000 people. Good times.

I just heard this on the radio. I don't know exactly what to think of it. I was one of the ones who slipped under the radar because I did really well in school and did everything I was told, precisely. If you didn't pay attention to a single other thing about my life--school or otherwise--I guess you might think I was normal. On the other hand, if it's actually that diagnostically common, I'm far lower functioning than I realized.

It may be due to being around certain types of people but I believe the rate in Auckland to be higher, 1 in 20?

Oh, but dont suggest anything to these poor souls. Its wrong to diagnose others. Only doctors can do that