If Not Vaccines, Then WHAT Causes Autism? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 325 Old 05-23-2011, 08:23 AM - Thread Starter
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,944
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)

So, do we know what causes autism? Not yet. What are some of your thoughts?

 

Although I do believe vaccines can contribute to some cases of autism, how do we explain autism in the unvaccinated? Is autism only genetic, and not caused by anything else?

 

I would like to look at the rapid increase in autism, I guess within the last 20+ years. What has changed in our lives, and does it relate to the rise in autism?

 

Ok, here are some points I would like to learn more about. Are any of these responsible for autism? Maybe a combination, mixed with a genetic predisposition, and *poof* we have case of autism?

 

  • Vaccines
  • GMO food
  • Toxins in our food and environment
  • Electromagnetic wave disturbances
  • Ultrasounds
  • Drugs used during labor
  • Drugs used during pregnancy and/or breastfeeding
  • Genetics

 

What else can we add to the list? I want to be clear--I don't think there are any wrong answers here. Since we don't really know yet, how can we say that any one of these does Not cause autism? A true scientific thinker should never close his/her mind.

 

Look at how much has changed in the last 20+ years, and how these changes correspond with the rise in autism.

It is my opinion that some people can be more sensitive than others, and in such individuals, autism is the result. This explains why there are cases of autism in the unvaccinated.

cocoanib likes this.

 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#2 of 325 Old 05-23-2011, 07:14 PM
 
ma2two's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

I like your list. I would add Lyme disease to it.

 

Many of the exposures are very difficult to avoid. Vaccines are easy to avoid, and often the last straw. Most, but not all kids can avoid autism if not vaccinated. 

 

I think vaccines contribute to all cases of autism, except of course in the unvaccinated. But let's not forget about an "unvaccinated" child whose mother got vaccinated during pregnancy. Also, many toxic exposures affect more than one generation. So a mother's vaccines during childhood could hurt her baby. So even in the unvaccinated, vaccines could actually be playing a role.

ma2two is offline  
#3 of 325 Old 05-23-2011, 07:49 PM - Thread Starter
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,944
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)

Brilliant Ma2two, I totally agree!

 

I would also like to add to the list, and clarify a few of the points.

 

On the whole subject of toxins, we should investigate:

  • Mercury in fillings
  • Fluoride in water supply
  • Aluminum in vaccines, food, packaging

 

How do these toxins effect each other? Could the mercury in a mother's fillings react with fluoride (and other chemicals) in the water supply? That could be a reason why an unvaccinated child develops autism. Or, could the aluminum in vaccines react with the fluoride and other chemicals in the water? What about reactions between medications and vaccines? 

 

The questions and combinations are endless! The only way to get to the bottom of this is to do the research. How can you say that vaccines certainly do Not cause autism? It has not been proven OR disproven. And, why is the medical establishment so quick to dismiss vaccines as a possible cause? We should be trying our hardest to find out the causes of autism, even if it means looking into areas that make us uncomfortable. The truth is out there somewhere, and I am willing to look at ANY possibility.

 


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#4 of 325 Old 05-23-2011, 09:21 PM
 
member234098's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Behind you.
Posts: 3,348
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I agree.

 

The combination of genetic predispositions and toxins in our environment, including the ones that are injected, are probably responsible for the rise in autism.  In the past, I know that there has been vaccine damage in my family. Therefore I am in the best position to who decide if my child is going to take any chances with vaccines.

member234098 is offline  
#5 of 325 Old 05-23-2011, 11:39 PM
 
DariusMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: I've been in the lowlands too long
Posts: 2,418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

A bit off topic because you're asking what *causes* autism and I can't answer that (nor, i think, can anyone else!).

 

But one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet as a reason for the supposed increase in autism is the changing criteria for what constitutes autism (change in the DSM) + growing awareness on the part of teachers, parents, and health care professionals of autism spectrum behaviors. Children who were once viewed as simply weird, quirky, or difficult are now receiving an actual diagnosis. So maybe the DSM is causing autism! wink1.gif

DariusMom is offline  
#6 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 12:19 AM
 
ma2two's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by DariusMom View Post

But one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet as a reason for the supposed increase in autism is the changing criteria for what constitutes autism (change in the DSM) + growing awareness on the part of teachers, parents, and health care professionals of autism spectrum behaviors. Children who were once viewed as simply weird, quirky, or difficult are now receiving an actual diagnosis. So maybe the DSM is causing autism! wink1.gif

 

Nope.

 

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/autism-and-environment
 

 

ma2two is offline  
#7 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 01:16 AM
 
MittensKittens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 3,058
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

A friend who works with autistic folks (art therapy) is convinced that hypoxia during birth can lead to autism. Does anyone know whether this is correct?

Mommel likes this.

I'm Olivia. I blog about physiological childbirth, homebirth, and unassisted homebirth!
MittensKittens is offline  
#8 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 01:42 AM
 
babygirlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My dd has autism. She is unvaxed. Her first 2 years she never had gluten, had very little dairy, her environment was sanitary no pets were allowed in and she had air purifiers fans humidifiers, mattress wrap for SIDS, etc. The pop-up caught my eye and I thought I would put in.. I was induced for days and despite doctors saying she'd be just fine her lungs were not developed yet and had to have oxygen and meds for a few weeks. I also recall her not getting oxygen when I finally got her out. It's a bit blurry but seemed I was breathing wrong (trying to do my rehearsed breathing) and she wasn't getting oxygen and next thing I knew an oxygen mask was put on me (I felt fine?) and I was cut to get her out faster. We haven't been able to afford the fragile x genetic condition which causes some autism (2k for the one the dr wants) so I can't rule that out. But I knew it wasn't time for her to be born when they induced me. She wouldn't even do a practice breath on ultrasound. She worried them a lot at check ups which I did twice a week. I just knew in my heart it was the wrong time but the dr scared me bad and I had no support system. When I got her home she very often stopped breathing,huge long hard 2 inch boogers clogged her pathway completely several times a day and she didn't  know how to breath out of her mouth. (most likely from the feeding tubes I am guessing) Very scary. I  never slept so I could save her little life all day and night long.

 

It's always been in the back of my mind it was an oxygen thing but I don't know. I do have mercury fillings and I have drunk water though the tap. No one in my family has autism. I never got any vaccinations during pregnancy. I did get the rho gam shot though. I took metformin the whole pregnancy (was terrified I'd lose her). I drank out of alluminum cans occasionally but wouldn't cook with it. I took vitamins and essential oils (that mom version of fish oil without the fish). I had at least 4 ultrasounds. Hmm what else?

babygirlie is offline  
#9 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 02:02 AM
 
essnce629's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 479
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

What about older men and women having babies? Hasn't there already been several studies that show that having children later in life is linked to an increase risk of having a child with autism? There was even a study that showed that older men having children with younger women had a higher incidence of having a child with autism compared to older men having kids with an older woman.

 

Maternal and paternal age and risk of autism spectrum disorders. 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17404129

 

Advancing paternal age and autism.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16953005

 

Advanced parental age and the risk of autism spectrum disorder.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18945690

 

 

I think Terbutaline use during pregnancy is also a risk factor and something that should be studied more especially with all the multiple births (and therefore premature births) nowadays.

 

Neuroinflammation and behavioral abnormalities after neonatal terbutaline treatment in rats:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17400887

 

beta2-adrenergic receptor activation and genetic polymorphisms in autism: data from dizygotic twins.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16417856

 

Air pollution--  since living close to a freeway while pregnant increases your risk of having child with autism.

 

Residential Proximity to Freeways and Autism in the CHARGE study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21156395

Mommel likes this.

Latia (Birth & Postpartum Doula and Infant Nanny)
Mom to Conner (8/19/03) and Parker (5/23/09)::::
essnce629 is offline  
#10 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 02:24 AM
 
EarthRootsStarSoul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)

Autism is hella genetic.  My mom, brother, and one sister are autistic.  Me, my dad, and other sister have AS.  I suspect my mom's mom is autistic.  I suspect my three year old son has AS (never vaccinated).  Not a single one of us is diagnosed.  The seeming rise in autism is better screening and diagnosis. 


bellyhair.giftreehugger.gif     coolshine.gif      greenthumb.gif     read.gif
EarthRootsStarSoul is offline  
#11 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 04:37 AM
 
ShaggyDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Autism screening (which basically didn't happen before 20 years ago, and couldn't happen before 30 years ago) is the single largest and least scary factor, which is the the clear and undeniable source of the "autism epidemic",

 

We found Autism a lot more often when we started looking for it.  Shocking!  Call the press!

 

Autism was not in the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of Mental Disorders) until 1980, so it is un-shocking that there were very few cases of diagnosed Autism until 1980, and the few cases that were diagnosed were in individuals who were lower functioning.   In 1994 (17 years ago) the DSM included Asperger's, Rett's, and PDD-NOS, guess what happened after those were introduced?  EPIDEMIC!!! Children all over were diagnosed with these newly diagnosable conditions.  The simple answer is that, well, not many specialists could diagnose them before then.  You know what, in May 2013, Asperger's, PDD-NOS, and Autistic Disorder will be replaced in the DSM with "Autistic Spectrum Disorder" and I think we will see an EPIDEMIC!!!! of children who get an Autistic Spectrum disorder, 100% more kids than get that specific diagnosis than today!!!

 

So how is it possible that all of these kids had no diagnosis before the DSM contained diagnostic criteria for Autism?  Where were these kids hiding?  Where are all these Autistic adults?   Well, they are simply undiagnosed.

http://autismus.posterous.com/600000-adults-in-uk-could-have-undiagnosed-au

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-05/uol-aw050411.php

ShaggyDaddy is offline  
#12 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 04:52 AM
 
Peppermint Poppies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: I come from a land downunder
Posts: 861
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post

So, do we know what causes autism? Not yet. What are some of your thoughts?

 

Although I do believe vaccines can contribute to some cases of autism, how do we explain autism in the unvaccinated? Is autism only genetic, and not caused by anything else?

 

I would like to look at the rapid increase in autism, I guess within the last 20+ years. What has changed in our lives, and does it relate to the rise in autism?

 

Ok, here are some points I would like to learn more about. Are any of these responsible for autism? Maybe a combination, mixed with a genetic predisposition, and *poof* we have case of autism?

 

  • Vaccines
  • GMO food
  • Toxins in our food and environment
  • Electromagnetic wave disturbances
  • Ultrasounds
  • Drugs used during labor
  • Drugs used during pregnancy and/or breastfeeding
  • Genetics

 

What else can we add to the list? I want to be clear--I don't think there are any wrong answers here. Since we don't really know yet, how can we say that any one of these does Not cause autism? A true scientific thinker should never close his/her mind.

 

Look at how much has changed in the last 20+ years, and how these changes correspond with the rise in autism.

It is my opinion that some people can be more sensitive than others, and in such individuals, autism is the result. This explains why there are cases of autism in the unvaccinated.


Wow, I thought we, as a society, had moved beyond blaming the mother for her child's autism.

 

Do you have a child with autism, OP?   I do.    And it is almost certainly genetic. I did not cause his autism by the ultrasounds I had during pregnancy, the drugs I used during pregnancy and birth, the food I ate and fed him, my breastfeeding relationship with him, or the vaccines I provided him with.

 

orangewallflower and Eyelet like this.

Mothering my 4yo DS and 1yo DD
I knit : I sew : I read : I craft : and I very occasionally and irregularly blog
Peppermint Poppies is offline  
#13 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 06:41 AM
 
DariusMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: I've been in the lowlands too long
Posts: 2,418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by EarthRootsStarSoul View Post

Autism is hella genetic.  My mom, brother, and one sister are autistic.  Me, my dad, and other sister have AS.  I suspect my mom's mom is autistic.  I suspect my three year old son has AS (never vaccinated).  Not a single one of us is diagnosed.  The seeming rise in autism is better screening and diagnosis. 



 



Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaggyDaddy View Post

Autism screening (which basically didn't happen before 20 years ago, and couldn't happen before 30 years ago) is the single largest and least scary factor, which is the the clear and undeniable source of the "autism epidemic",

 

We found Autism a lot more often when we started looking for it.  Shocking!  Call the press!

 

Autism was not in the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of Mental Disorders) until 1980, so it is un-shocking that there were very few cases of diagnosed Autism until 1980, and the few cases that were diagnosed were in individuals who were lower functioning.   In 1994 (17 years ago) the DSM included Asperger's, Rett's, and PDD-NOS, guess what happened after those were introduced?  EPIDEMIC!!! Children all over were diagnosed with these newly diagnosable conditions.  The simple answer is that, well, not many specialists could diagnose them before then.  You know what, in May 2013, Asperger's, PDD-NOS, and Autistic Disorder will be replaced in the DSM with "Autistic Spectrum Disorder" and I think we will see an EPIDEMIC!!!! of children who get an Autistic Spectrum disorder, 100% more kids than get that specific diagnosis than today!!!

 

So how is it possible that all of these kids had no diagnosis before the DSM contained diagnostic criteria for Autism?  Where were these kids hiding?  Where are all these Autistic adults?   Well, they are simply undiagnosed.

http://autismus.posterous.com/600000-adults-in-uk-could-have-undiagnosed-au

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-05/uol-aw050411.php



All this!



Quote:
Originally Posted by Peppermint Poppies View Post




Wow, I thought we, as a society, had moved beyond blaming the mother for her child's autism.

 

Do you have a child with autism, OP?   I do.    And it is almost certainly genetic. I did not cause his autism by the ultrasounds I had during pregnancy, the drugs I used during pregnancy and birth, the food I ate and fed him, my breastfeeding relationship with him, or the vaccines I provided him with.

 

Exactly. Let's always blame the mom for whatever is wrong . . .. if only she'd eaten all organic, her child wouldn't have autism!  [insert eye roll]

 

Better screening, more awareness = more autism.
 

 

DariusMom is offline  
#14 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 06:45 AM
 
columbusmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Running
Posts: 3,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DariusMom View Post

A bit off topic because you're asking what *causes* autism and I can't answer that (nor, i think, can anyone else!).

 

But one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet as a reason for the supposed increase in autism is the changing criteria for what constitutes autism (change in the DSM) + growing awareness on the part of teachers, parents, and health care professionals of autism spectrum behaviors. Children who were once viewed as simply weird, quirky, or difficult are now receiving an actual diagnosis. So maybe the DSM is causing autism! wink1.gif


I think this is an important point!
 

 


Wife to DH(15 years)and Mama to: Jacob(5/02)kid.gifribbonpurple.gif, and Alina(7/07)energy.gifI luxlove.gifbellyhair.gif
columbusmomma is offline  
#15 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 06:54 AM - Thread Starter
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,944
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)

Hold on people.......all I want is to lay out any Possibilities........what is wrong with doing studies and asking questions? Did I say these factors definitely cause autism? No, I did not say that at ALL......But why should you be afraid to explore any and every possibility? You don't want to explore any possibility that might be viewed as the "mother's fault", so then I guess we can't open that topic of conversation at all? That is unacceptable.

 

And, how are environmental toxins the "mother's fault"?!? Is fluoride in the water "mother's fault"?!?  Electromagnetic pollution the "mother's fault"?!?  Can we be adults here, and try to look at any cause that might be possible? Any and every? Jeez, I was never trying to offend anybody here, and if you took it that way, well then I am sorry. But, as a scientific thinking individual, I am very interested in any study that might explore possible links.

 

 


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#16 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 06:58 AM - Thread Starter
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,944
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)

Babygirlie, thank you for sharing your story with us. You understood that my question was not about blame, but about hope. About finding answers. Your oxygen theory is very interesting, and it makes a lot of sense. If the brain is deprived of oxygen, could autism be a result?

 

And, great job helping your sweet little girl. I can't imagine how hard it must have been in the beginning. You sound like a wonderful mom!


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#17 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 07:03 AM - Thread Starter
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,944
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peppermint Poppies View Post


Wow, I thought we, as a society, had moved beyond blaming the mother for her child's autism.

 

Do you have a child with autism, OP?   I do.    And it is almost certainly genetic. I did not cause his autism by the ultrasounds I had during pregnancy, the drugs I used during pregnancy and birth, the food I ate and fed him, my breastfeeding relationship with him, or the vaccines I provided him with.

 



You say this with such certainty, but you don't know for sure, do you? Have scientists researched this at all?  I'm not putting the blame on you, or anybody else, but if ultrasounds, drugs, bad food, vaccines, etc, did cause autism, wouldn't you like to know about it? Instead of covering your eyes and ears, and denying there might be a link somewhere? You won't even entertain the possibility that there may be a link. Maybe there is no link, but the only way to know for sure is to start the research!!

 


 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#18 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 07:31 AM
 
Annie Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I think the face of autism and the understanding of what comprises it has changed greatly. I remember in elementary school (so this is the mid 70s, maybe very early 80s, as I can't recall what grade I was in) we were shown a film about an autistic boy. The boy spent much of his time spinning plates and flapping his arms. He was really in his own world. Fast forward to today. I have a friend whose brother is autistic, but this man has nothing in common with that child in the film, nor ever has. If he were born 30 years earlier, he would simply be a quirky guy with an amazing memory for numbers and musical patterns, an unusual penchant for rule, a kind of bossy nature, and not the greatest social skills.

 

I do think the definition has expanded so much, to include such a range, that it is bound to have an effect on the numbers. I read the study cited upthread that says it's not the new DSM guidelines, but I'm just not convinced. I'd like to see how they conducted that study. If their study is valid and done in an unbiased manner, and replicatable by other studies, then wow, we really DO need to look at environmental and genetic factors a little more closely. Clearly, there are factors other than just the DSM, and they should be looked at, and I think they are. 

 

I also think that as a culture we LOVE to DSM everything. I kinda think that, just like people are born with differing athletic abilities (for example), they are also born with different thinking abilities. I mentioned my friend's brother. His grasp of patterns is really amazing and maybe in a different setting than he's currently in would be extremely useful. Maybe if we, as a society, learned to accept and see the value in differences rather than pathologizing them, we'd be farther ahead as a collective.

 

Just think about people like Alan Turing. He almost certainly was on the spectrum, but without him WWII may have turned out quite differently.

Mommel and MamaofLiam like this.
Annie Mac is offline  
#19 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 07:35 AM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DariusMom View Post

 

But one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet as a reason for the supposed increase in autism is the changing criteria for what constitutes autism (change in the DSM) + growing awareness on the part of teachers, parents, and health care professionals of autism spectrum behaviors. Children who were once viewed as simply weird, quirky, or difficult are now receiving an actual diagnosis. So maybe the DSM is causing autism! wink1.gif


But if this is the case, and if there is a growing awareness of autism, why aren't we seeing more adults being diagnosed with autism today? Why does it seem to be mostly in children?

Mommel likes this.

Loving WAHM to my two little handsome DS's, '08 and '12, and loving wife to DH, '07love.gif

SilverMoon010 is offline  
#20 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 07:42 AM
 
Annie Mac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post


But if this is the case, and if there is a growing awareness of autism, why aren't we seeing more adults being diagnosed with autism today? Why does it seem to be mostly in children?



Maybe because the adults have already figured out ways to deal with it, have found some sort of niche and are functioning in the world. Maybe they don't see the need to go get diagnosed as an adult. Whereas children are more on the radar, being in school and expected to conform to a certain model of learning and behaving, and they have just more supervision generally. That might be one reason.

Mommel likes this.
Annie Mac is offline  
#21 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 07:55 AM
 
ShaggyDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post

Hold on people.......all I want is to lay out any Possibilities........what is wrong with doing studies and asking questions? Did I say these factors definitely cause autism? No, I did not say that at ALL......But why should you be afraid to explore any and every possibility? You don't want to explore any possibility that might be viewed as the "mother's fault", so then I guess we can't open that topic of conversation at all? That is unacceptable.

 

And, how are environmental toxins the "mother's fault"?!? Is fluoride in the water "mother's fault"?!?  Electromagnetic pollution the "mother's fault"?!?  Can we be adults here, and try to look at any cause that might be possible? Any and every? Jeez, I was never trying to offend anybody here, and if you took it that way, well then I am sorry. But, as a scientific thinking individual, I am very interested in any study that might explore possible links.

 

 



When you presuppose (without evidence) that Autistics are damaged by poison/injury/electricity/magic, you must also assume that Autism is damage.  Following this line of thinking is by very definition declaring Autistics unwhole and unnatural.  The known evidence does not support this. 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110427171517.htm

http://www.gwu.edu/explore/mediaroom/gwinthenews/researchspotlight/gwresearchersrevealfirstautismcandidategenethatdemonstratessensitivitytosexhormones

 

Assuming Autism is damage and using that as the starting point for the national discussion is offensive to Autistic people, and it is the reason why quack and hate organizations such as DAN! and Autism Speaks are never EVER endorsed by adult Autistics.  Think about that; a national organization with millions and millions in capitol and they have not found a single adult spokesperson, why?  Autism is a childhood disorder, yet we know the individual is affected for life, how can that be true?  The truth is, it is a lot harder to be an Autistic kid than it is to be an Autistic adult.  The same can be said about a wide variety of personality types and physical and emotional conditions.

 

Autism as "damage" is an easy sell to a parent of an uncontrollable 4 year-old with language delays, but much less so to adults who have caught up, surpassed, or side-stepped the typical developmental path.  Individuals with Asperger's syndrome, for instance have a higher than average incidence of above average IQ.  Can you name a poison or injury that can increase my IQ?  Because if you can, you are going to be so. very. rich.

 

Autistics are different.  Not better, not worse.  They are not sick or damaged or victims of tragedy.  As we become more and more aware of how different we are from each other, it is up to us as a species to accept and work with these differences, instead of villifying them and working (in vain as the evidence suggests) to *correct* them.

 

Up until a few hundred years ago, left-handed people were damaged, defective, unclean, tragedy cases that could be taught through strict and cruel repetition how to appear normal.  Please consider that, before we repeat history again.

ShaggyDaddy is offline  
#22 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 08:00 AM
 
ShaggyDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:

Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post


But if this is the case, and if there is a growing awareness of autism, why aren't we seeing more adults being diagnosed with autism today? Why does it seem to be mostly in children?



Nobody in their right mind is stumbling to seek after a highly stigmatized and personally dangerous diagnosis as the "emotionless" "trapped" sociopath that the media would have us believe Autistics are.

 

savithny, Sanveann and Mommel like this.
ShaggyDaddy is offline  
#23 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 08:05 AM
 
treeoflife3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: tennessee/kentucky
Posts: 1,513
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

while I have no opinion on whether the rise has to do with more toxins in the environment or simply a diagnosing issue... I don't think seeking to find if things like certain drugs and ultrasounds during pregnancy or GMO foods are really mom blaming.  Honestly, I'd just as soon blame the powers that be who allow these things to happen without adequate research first on their safety.  I mean, it isn't really the mom's fault if she can't afford all organic food... and it also isn't her fault that sometimes the only option is between organic and GMO and a non organic but natural option isn't always available.  It isn't the mom's fault if she needed ultrasounds to check on her baby, or heck if she was just excited and wanted to see her baby lots... that blame I think goes to the people who push ultrasounds although there haven't been decent studies on safety and the use isn't regulated to be sure it is within safety standards.

 

As mothers, I don't think we are powerless, but we are still only able to do as well as what we are given.  researching the safety and effects of any of these things shouldn't make moms with autistic children feel it is their fault, rather I think it should make them feel we need to hold people in more powerful positions more accountable so that we might protect children better in the future.  I think ultimately this is less about blaming people and more about giving people a chance at being healthier and safer, assuming any of these things listed do in fact cause autism or at the very least, make it more likely where it might have already occurred anyway.

purslaine and peainthepod like this.
treeoflife3 is offline  
#24 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 08:10 AM
 
GoBecGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post


But if this is the case, and if there is a growing awareness of autism, why aren't we seeing more adults being diagnosed with autism today? Why does it seem to be mostly in children?



My father was dx Aspergers as an adult.  My DP has decided he'd rather not have the formal diagnosis.  People don't drag adults to doctors saying "what's WRONG with him!?" the same way they do with kids.  Adults can decide or not if they want to get a dx for the milder end of the autistic spectrum.  Many decide not to.  They prefer to stay odd/eccentric/awkward/antisocial, none of which are seen as a disability.

 

My dad, aunt, granddad, gran, great uncles, great grandparents and any number of my extended cousins have autistic traits, many are dx, many are dx-able but not dx, many are not quite "out there" enough for a dx.

 

I had ultrasounds, i ate junk, i have mercury fillings (i had one replaced DURING pregnancy), use flouride toothpaste, i use allopathic medicines, the whole uncrunchy shebang, and i vaccinate my kids.  Neither of them are autistic.  Go figure.

GoBecGo is offline  
#25 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 08:11 AM
 
GoBecGo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,596
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaggyDaddy View Post



 



When you presuppose (without evidence) that Autistics are damaged by poison/injury/electricity/magic, you must also assume that Autism is damage.  Following this line of thinking is by very definition declaring Autistics unwhole and unnatural.  The known evidence does not support this. 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110427171517.htm

http://www.gwu.edu/explore/mediaroom/gwinthenews/researchspotlight/gwresearchersrevealfirstautismcandidategenethatdemonstratessensitivitytosexhormones

 

Assuming Autism is damage and using that as the starting point for the national discussion is offensive to Autistic people, and it is the reason why quack and hate organizations such as DAN! and Autism Speaks are never EVER endorsed by adult Autistics.  Think about that; a national organization with millions and millions in capitol and they have not found a single adult spokesperson, why?  Autism is a childhood disorder, yet we know the individual is affected for life, how can that be true?  The truth is, it is a lot harder to be an Autistic kid than it is to be an Autistic adult.  The same can be said about a wide variety of personality types and physical and emotional conditions.

 

Autism as "damage" is an easy sell to a parent of an uncontrollable 4 year-old with language delays, but much less so to adults who have caught up, surpassed, or side-stepped the typical developmental path.  Individuals with Asperger's syndrome, for instance have a higher than average incidence of above average IQ.  Can you name a poison or injury that can increase my IQ?  Because if you can, you are going to be so. very. rich.

 

Autistics are different.  Not better, not worse.  They are not sick or damaged or victims of tragedy.  As we become more and more aware of how different we are from each other, it is up to us as a species to accept and work with these differences, instead of villifying them and working (in vain as the evidence suggests) to *correct* them.

 

Up until a few hundred years ago, left-handed people were damaged, defective, unclean, tragedy cases that could be taught through strict and cruel repetition how to appear normal.  Please consider that, before we repeat history again.


I just loved this post, you summed up my feelings so eloquently.  Autistic is NOT broken.

 

GoBecGo is offline  
#26 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 08:16 AM
 
elmh23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Where it's hot!
Posts: 9,359
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaggyDaddy View Post

Autism screening (which basically didn't happen before 20 years ago, and couldn't happen before 30 years ago) is the single largest and least scary factor, which is the the clear and undeniable source of the "autism epidemic",

 

We found Autism a lot more often when we started looking for it.  Shocking!  Call the press!

 

Autism was not in the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of Mental Disorders) until 1980, so it is un-shocking that there were very few cases of diagnosed Autism until 1980, and the few cases that were diagnosed were in individuals who were lower functioning.   In 1994 (17 years ago) the DSM included Asperger's, Rett's, and PDD-NOS, guess what happened after those were introduced?  EPIDEMIC!!! Children all over were diagnosed with these newly diagnosable conditions.  The simple answer is that, well, not many specialists could diagnose them before then.  You know what, in May 2013, Asperger's, PDD-NOS, and Autistic Disorder will be replaced in the DSM with "Autistic Spectrum Disorder" and I think we will see an EPIDEMIC!!!! of children who get an Autistic Spectrum disorder, 100% more kids than get that specific diagnosis than today!!!

 

So how is it possible that all of these kids had no diagnosis before the DSM contained diagnostic criteria for Autism?  Where were these kids hiding?  Where are all these Autistic adults?   Well, they are simply undiagnosed.

http://autismus.posterous.com/600000-adults-in-uk-could-have-undiagnosed-au

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-05/uol-aw050411.php




Yup!  I'm pretty sure my 66-year-old father-in-law could be diagnosed with Asperger's.  And from listening to stories, he father probably could have as well.  Same with my 60-year-old father.  They're just living their lives, socially awkward, really smart guys.


Mama of three.
 
elmh23 is offline  
#27 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 08:26 AM
 
Lollybrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

The problem with the question “What causes autism?” is that it treats autism as a single entity.  But autism is not a single disorder.  It is an umbrella term used to describe several different disorders with similar presentations and overlapping symptoms.  We will not be able to identify the different causes of autism until science is able to differentiate between the various types of autism.  I’m not talking about the differences between Asperger’s Syndrome and classic autism, although that is part of it.  I mean the fact that autism presents so differently even among individuals with the same diagnostic code.

 

Important questions which need to be answered include:

 

  • Why do some children have signs of autism from birth (often realized in retrospect) while others have a clear history of regression?
  • Why do up to 50% of children with autism have GI issues?  How are these children with GI issues different from those without?
  • Why do a small, but significant, percentage of individuals with autism have microscope chromosome anomalies (microdeletion or microduplication)?  What affect do these small changes in the chromosomes have?
  • Why do approximately 10% of individuals with autism have savant-level (not necessarily prodigious) skills?  What does this tell us about brain development?
  • Why are some individuals severely affected by their autistic symptoms while others are mildly affected?

 

…and so on.  We cannot hope to understand what leads to autism until we understand what autism really is and right now medical science is nowhere near there.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaggyDaddy View Post

 

Autism was not in the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of Mental Disorders) until 1980, so it is un-shocking that there were very few cases of diagnosed Autism until 1980, and the few cases that were diagnosed were in individuals who were lower functioning.   In 1994 (17 years ago) the DSM included Asperger's, Rett's, and PDD-NOS, guess what happened after those were introduced?  EPIDEMIC!!! Children all over were diagnosed with these newly diagnosable conditions.  The simple answer is that, well, not many specialists could diagnose them before then.  You know what, in May 2013, Asperger's, PDD-NOS, and Autistic Disorder will be replaced in the DSM with "Autistic Spectrum Disorder" and I think we will see an EPIDEMIC!!!! of children who get an Autistic Spectrum disorder, 100% more kids than get that specific diagnosis than today!!!



This is very true.

 

30 years ago, my son would not have had an autism diagnosis, because he is verbal and is not cognitively impaired and such children were not diagnosed with autism back then.  Maybe he would have had a diagnosis of language disorder or of Minimal Brain Dysfunction (MBD is now called ADHD).  In school, he would not have received the extra support and therapies that he is entitled to now.  His teachers would have considered him bright, but uncooperative.  So he would have been considered a “discipline problem” by his teachers and a “weird kid” by his classmates.   

 

Autism is not something my son has; it is a part of who he is. Autism presents him with many challenges, but it has also given him amazing gifts and a unique perspective on the world.  My goal is not to "cure" my child, but to help him learn to function and participate in the community as well as to help me better understand his native culture.

loraxc and LynnS6 like this.

Lolly
Mom to an amazing little guy, age 9 (Autism, Hyperlexia, Dyspraxia, Albinism, Chromosome Microdeletion)

Lollybrat is offline  
#28 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 08:27 AM
Banned
 
SneakyPie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Somewhere around here . . .
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Vaccinations don't cause autism -- neither the ingredients nor the preservatives.  That has been firmly established for a long time.

Fluoride doesn't either.  Established for a long time.

 

Saying that science keeps it mind open and doesn't discount POSSIBILITIES is true.  But science also doesn't need to waste its time "researching" avenues that have already been exhaustively explored and shown to be fruitless.  Just because a few upset moms on the internet, who are not actually scientists, are worried about something, doesn't mean that new research is needed.  It just means those worried moms haven't done careful reading of the available, conclusive, completed research.

orangewallflower and Mommel like this.
SneakyPie is offline  
#29 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 08:39 AM
 
SilverMoon010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakyPie View Post

Just because a few upset moms on the internet, who are not actually scientists, are worried about something, doesn't mean that new research is needed.  It just means those worried moms haven't done careful reading of the available, conclusive, completed research.


Since when does a mom have to be a scientist to know her child well enough to know that something has changed with the child after a vaccination?  I didn't know you needed a degree in order to know your children.  I don't think a mom would be considered "worried" when she chooses to avoid substances that are injected into her child that have the ability to cause harm, AND guess what, even the inserts list a ton of side effects. I call that making an educated decision based on facts of the potential harm vaccines can cause, not simply just being a worried parent.  Come on now. Let's be real and a little less judgmental please.

 

And your damn right, if it involves my child, I want ALL the research in the world done about how safe it is and I don't want them to STOP researching.

kathymuggle likes this.

Loving WAHM to my two little handsome DS's, '08 and '12, and loving wife to DH, '07love.gif

SilverMoon010 is offline  
#30 of 325 Old 05-24-2011, 09:00 AM
 
ShaggyDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,966
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverMoon010 View Post

 

 


Since when does a mom have to be a scientist to know her child well enough to know that something has changed with the child after a vaccination?  I didn't know you needed a degree in order to know your children.  I don't think a mom would be considered "worried" when she chooses to avoid substances that are injected into her child that have the ability to cause harm, AND guess what, even the inserts list a ton of side effects. I call that making an educated decision based on facts of the potential harm vaccines can cause, not simply just being a worried parent.  Come on now. Let's be real. BTW, it's more than a "few."



A prophecy declared as truth when it is actually false may sufficiently influence people, either through fear or logical confusion, so that their reactions ultimately fulfill the once-false prophecy.  Parents often have a hard time seeing Autism, especially in younger or first children, but when criminals (like Mr. Andrew Wakefield - who is no longer a Doctor) falsify evidence of vaccines causing Autism.  Then Celebrities use their status to promote this junk science; such as Jenny McCarthy (who knew her son was different before the vaccine, yet still blamed the vaccine for causing Autism, and later admitted her son is not autistic at all), it all just creeps into our subconscious. 

 

Of course parents of Autistic children are going to notice Autism when they are looking for it.. Just like specialists started noticing Autism when they started looking for it.

 

There are a lot of problems with vaccines, there are a lot of issues that make the choice to delay or decline them one that rests with the parents.  But Autism just isn't one of the risks.  It was a deception that has been proven false, a lie with clear financial motive.

 

What If a criminal like Andrew Wakefield had been working on an alternative to latex paint instead of an alternative to the MMR (which he holds a patent for).  He could just as easily published a similarly falsified study about latex paint and Autism and first world parents who have Autistic children would have said "Oh my god, you know what, that day when danny was chewing on the trim piece on the doorway?  After that he was totally Autistic!!!"

 

ShaggyDaddy is offline  
Closed Thread

Tags
Vaccinations , Autism

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off