Where are the autistic adults in their 30s and older? - Page 3

[heathergirl67]

Originally Posted by caned & able

So what was the alternative diagnoses that doctors came up with before for the parents whose children had autism?

The book, Son-Rise, was published in 1976. Autism was diagnosed in the 1960s. And Bettleheim recognized autism in the 1960s wanted to blame his He decided on the cause of autism in 1967, in the Empty Fortress:....

Autistic people were commonly misdiagnosed as having mental retardation or schizophrenia. Although it had been "discovered" by the mid-1900's it wasn't well understood. It wasn't until the 1980's that the DSM recognized autism as it's own disorder and not as a subtype of schizophrenia. The diagnostic criteria was very different back then, too. Every single one of symptoms had to be met and there was not an understanding of autism being a spectrum disorder. It wasn't until 1994 that the diagnostic criteria changed to what it is today, which acknowledges that some types of autism are different than others.

[duckmom]

Originally Posted by heathergirl67

I've found that it's usually a good idea to try to find the facts, rather than trusting someone's opinion. Here's the testimony of a scientist who worked with Wakefield on the study in question: ftp://autism.uscfc.uscourts.gov/auti.../day10-cor.pdf

It's taken from the autism omnibus trial. Dr. Chadwick did the testing of the samples Wakefield took from the autistic children. Dr. Chadwick found that none of the samples showed that any of the children had measles in their guts. Wakefield put in the report that the tests had come out positive. Dr. Chadwick reminded him that that wasn't true. No change. So Dr. Chadwick petitioned to have his name removed from the paper, as he knew the statements therein were lies. Here's a portion of his testimony:

Darn it! It won't let me copy. It's on the link I included. His entire testimony is on pages 1-22.

But Wakefield's retracted paper in the Lancet didn't argue that the children all had measles in their guts. He published case studies suggesting a possible link between enterocolitis (and pervasive developmental disorder) and the MMR vaccine. Have you actually read the paper?

http://vaccines.procon.org/sourcefil...ncet-paper.pdf

http://www.wesupportandywakefield.co...-Wakefield.pdf

Mercola has a lengthy interview with Wakefield posted on his site.

Wakefield is arguably trying to make book sales and salvage his career, but I agree that it's a good idea to try to find the facts...

[heathergirl67]

Originally Posted by duckmom

But Wakefield's retracted paper in the Lancet didn't argue that the children all had measles in their guts. He published case studies suggesting a possible link between enterocolitis (and pervasive developmental disorder) and the MMR vaccine. Have you actually read the paper?

http://vaccines.procon.org/sourcefil...ncet-paper.pdf

http://www.wesupportandywakefield.co...-Wakefield.pdf

Mercola has a lengthy interview with Wakefield posted on his site.

Wakefield is arguably trying to make book sales and salvage his career, but I agree that it's a good idea to try to find the facts...

I have read it. His paper, although flawed, is not especially remarkable. It never identifies autism as being related to anything. It's his comments afterwards that do. His whole theory about chronic enterocolitis is that when the MMR vaccine is given to children with leaky gut it travels through the bloodstream into the brain. As proof he cites his study, where he claims that measles antibodies were found in the guts of his test case children. The scientist he was working with, who did the testing, said that none of the specimens ever showed proof of measles.

[caned & able]

If the diagnosis changed in 1994, how is it that someone would have been diagnosed 30+ years ago?

It is my understanding that the same trick was done with polio, i.e., the definition of the disease being manipulated when the vaccine was developed.

[heathergirl67]

Originally Posted by caned & able

If the diagnosis changed in 1994, how is it that someone would have been diagnosed 30+ years ago?

It is my understanding that the same trick was done with polio, i.e., the definition of the disease being manipulated when the vaccine was developed.

Some people met the much stricter definition of autism in the 1960's. I wouldn't really consider this a "trick." I think it's appropriate to change diagnostic standards when you have more knowledge of the disorder. Kind of like how homosexuality used to be considered a mental illness. It would be shameful if the medical community still considered it a mental illness because we now know it's not.

Initially, the "classic" definition of autism required that the symptoms be in the presence of normal, or apparently normal, intelligence. So back then anyone who was autistic and also MR/DD would only receive a diagnosis of mental retardation. Later on, the prevailing view was that all autistic people were mentally retarded, so people who had apparently normal intelligence would get some other kind of diagnosis, like childhood schizophrenia. Now it is recognized that autism can occur in combination with any kind of IQ, so that means more people get an autism diagnosis than before.