Mothering Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070208/ap_on_he_me/autism_prevalence" target="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070208/...ism_prevalence</a><br><br>
So many children...so many families touched by autism. In our family alone, a family with no diagnosed history of autism, both my son and my sister's son (StephandOwen is my sister) were diagnosed with autism. What is happening to our children's generation?!?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,163 Posts
interesting reading.<br><br>
i kind of think a lot of why more children are dx'd earlier and with special needs is that parents are more aware<br><br>
i do know that we are more technologically attuned and because of that, can learn more about why our children do this or that, which make us more proactive at doc office to get testing done when we have suspicions. .. .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I think that even with the worst diagnostic procedures, it is very unlikely that misdiagnosis would lead to a jump from 1 in 1000 children a few decades ago to 1 in 150 children now. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/greensad.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="greensad"> I have no doubt that misdiagnosis plays a bit of a role, but there are just so many "what ifs" now... I mean, there are neurotoxins in vaccines--vaccines WE were given as children too...what did that do to our eggs? There are neurotoxins in the air we breathe, the plastic toys we played with, the food we eat...what role do those play? What about epidurals (which have a variant of cocaine in it) or pitocin--almost 80% of births now have pitocin involved... At this point, we just don't know. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/greensad.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="greensad"><br><br>
And 1 in 150 doesn't even begin to cover the number of children who are misdiagnosed (and just labeled as the "bad kid" or the "deviant kid") or just slip through the cracks... It took 2 years for Brandon to be diagnosed--because I was an ABA specialist in a school for autism before Brandon was born, I knew the signs when he was very young, and after a few months, sought help, only to be told I was a "nervous first time mother"--if I didn't know what I was talking about, I would have accepted that and let it go. Luckily I knew the signs and found help and got him the early intervention his former ped didn't want us to get (he told us to wait until Brandon was 3 to get any speech therapy when he completely stopped speaking for a year). So, I can see how some children just never get diagnosed...<br><br><br>
Ooooh, and HI BETTYANN!!!! We have to get our kiddos together again soon--bust out of this arctic cold!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,627 Posts
I read a news article about this and was very confused. It looks like they went through school and medical records and tried to "guess" who was autistic. I don't see how this can be considered accurate, since actual children were not examined and doctors were not interviewed. It sounds like a teacher could write "Mary Sue has trouble relating to other children" and this gets counted as Autism spectrum.<br><br>
Please correct me if I misunderstood. It sounded like scare-mongering. Not that I doubt autism is seriously on the rise or that more funding is needed for research. Just that this particular "study" didn't seem very sound.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,939 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>ledzepplon</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7257936"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I read a news article about this and was very confused. It looks like they went through school and medical records and tried to "guess" who was autistic. I don't see how this can be considered accurate, since actual children were not examined and doctors were not interviewed. It sounds like a teacher could write "Mary Sue has trouble relating to other children" and this gets counted as Autism spectrum.<br><br>
Please correct me if I misunderstood. It sounded like scare-mongering. Not that I doubt autism is seriously on the rise or that more funding is needed for research. Just that this particular "study" didn't seem very sound.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
That's what makes it interesting (to me). I don't personally think that autistics are a greater percentage of the population than before, although we could be--maybe autistic genes are being passed on more. But more and more people are being labeled as autistic. More and more people are self-identifying as autistic. Regardless of whether there is any objective standard of who is autistic and who isn't, identified-autistic people are increasing in number. And there's power in numbers...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,353 Posts
Ally, I know, there are two right now in my family too. DS1 and one of my cousins (though they are in the process of changing my cousins diagnosis, he may not actually have an ASD). And I would not be suprised if my nephew aquires an ASD diagnosis in the future. He definately has sensory issues, and I see in him some characteristics that I see in ds, just to a lesser degree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
What do they concider under autism umbrella?<br><br>
For example here dysfasia is not cataloqued under autism but I heard that in USA it is. True or false?<br><br>
We know so much more about different types of disorders now that we knew about 30 years ago. For example Sensory problems are very new thingy. Same with many others.<br><br>
I recently talked with a teacher who was retiring. She had been teacher over 30 years and she told me that 'back then' these children were just problem kids and sevear cases were put to care somewhere.<br><br>
Also family structure has changed. When 'back then' people became parent very young, today it isn't uncommon to start a family when you are near/or even over 40 years old. For example there are studies linking 'old' first time fathers & autistic kids. It is clear that sperm of 20 years old is much better quality than sperm of 40 years old.<br><br>
And then there is ofcourse the pollution..think just how much crap we get from the air/food/households products etc..it does have an effect to our genetic material.<br><br><br>
Autism Risk Rises With Age Of Father<br>
Large Study Finds Strong Correlation<br><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/04/AR2006090400513.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...090400513.html</a><br><br>
Autism father effect<br>
- Calcutta study finds possible cause<br><a href="http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070125/asp/frontpage/story_7308461.asp" target="_blank">http://www.telegraphindia.com/107012...ry_7308461.asp</a><br><br>
SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS -- Mercury released primarily from coal-fired power plants may be contributing to an increase in the number of cases of autism, a Texas researcher said on Wednesday.<br><a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0317-05.htm" target="_blank">http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0317-05.htm</a><br><br>
(NewsTarget) A recent study by the California Department of Health Services indicates that industrial air pollutants may increase the risk of autism by 50 percent in young children and unborn babies. The report was published online in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives..<br><a href="http://www.newstarget.com/019470.html" target="_blank">http://www.newstarget.com/019470.html</a>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>kxsiven</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7262433"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">What do they concider under autism umbrella?<br><br>
For example here dysfasia is not cataloqued under autism but I heard that in USA it is. True or false?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
False. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/lol.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="lol">: Dyspraxia, in the US, is considered Sensory Processing Disorder (if you're talking about the motor planning dyspraxia...there's another kind and I don't know where that falls).<br><br>
The US uses the DSM-IV classifications, so I would imagine any country that uses the DSM-IV would have the same umbrella...<br><br>
-Autism<br>
-PDD-NOS<br>
-Aspergers<br>
-Rhett's<br><br>
And I believe there is one other one as well...<br><br>
In the future, Sensory Processing Disorder (including Dyspraxia, underresponsiveness, hyperresponsiveness, sensory seeking, auditory processing disorder, etc.) may be put on the spectrum as well...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,186 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>AllyRae</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7266583"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">-Autism<br>
-PDD-NOS<br>
-Aspergers<br>
-Rhett's<br><br>
And I believe there is one other one as well...</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Fragile X syndrome. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,848 Posts
I can't speak about this study.<br>
But I can say that the study that came out a couple years ago and discussed the rise in Autism.. was not due to better DX......<br><br><a href="http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:c5jQKmKV0AEJ:www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/news/mindepi_study.html+mIND+INSTITUTE+%2B+DIAGNOSIS&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us" target="_blank">http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:...lnk&cd=1&gl=us</a><br><br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">Speculation about the increase in autism in California has led some to try to explain it away as a statistical issue or with other factors that artificially inflated the numbers," said UC Davis pediatric epidemiologist Robert S. Byrd, who is the principal investigator on the study. "Instead, we found that autism is on the rise in the state and we still do not know why. The results of this study are, without a doubt, sobering."<br><br>
Key findings of the study are that:<br><br>
• The observed increase in autism cases cannot be explained by a loosening in the criteria used to make the diagnosis.<br></td>
</tr></table></div>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,939 Posts
I don't see how anyone can definitively say that the difference is not because of different diagnoses given that there is no universal standard of who is autistic and who isn't (let alone trying to differentiate autism from AS from PDD-NOS...). It's all so fluid; how can there be any accounting of real increases in the autistic population as opposed to increases in diagnoses?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
Um. my poor english failing me...<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/redface.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Embarrassment"><br><br>
The word in english is of course dysphasia, not dysfasia. I know it is different from dyspraxia and I was curious specifically just about dysphasia. 100x<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/redface.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="Embarrassment">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,075 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Brigianna</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7269381"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I don't see how anyone can definitively say that the difference is not because of different diagnoses given that there is no universal standard of who is autistic and who isn't (let alone trying to differentiate autism from AS from PDD-NOS...). It's all so fluid; how can there be any accounting of real increases in the autistic population as opposed to increases in diagnoses?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
If it was just an increase in diagnoses as opposed to increase in autistic population, wouldn't there be an increase in adult diagnoses, not just kids?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,939 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>mom2x</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7270522"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">If it was just an increase in diagnoses as opposed to increase in autistic population, wouldn't there be an increase in adult diagnoses, not just kids?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Most autistic adults have no reason to get themselves diagnosed, even those who know that they are autistic. And even if they do want to, it's much harder to be diagnosed as an adult. The diagnostic standards are based on children. It is possible that more children actually are being born with autistic traits, but I wouldn't assume so based on these studies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,848 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Brigianna</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7269381"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I don't see how anyone can definitively say that the difference is not because of different diagnoses given that there is no universal standard of who is autistic and who isn't (let alone trying to differentiate autism from AS from PDD-NOS...). It's all so fluid; how can there be any accounting of real increases in the autistic population as opposed to increases in diagnoses?</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<br>
my understanding on the MIND report (out of UC DAVIS) is that the increase in autism of those cases who would have not been missed in the 60,70s and 80's.. as in RAINMAN... the cases that would have been defined as such back then and now those have increased.<br><br>
you can go to the link and in fact if you email the MIND institute they will email you back .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,939 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Tracy</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7286787"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">my understanding on the MIND report (out of UC DAVIS) is that the increase in autism of those cases who would have not been missed in the 60,70s and 80's.. as in RAINMAN... the cases that would have been defined as such back then and now those have increased.<br><br>
you can go to the link and in fact if you email the MIND institute they will email you back .</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
I understand that that's what they're asserting, but I really don't see how they can know that. There never have been any clear, unambiguous criteria for diagnosing autism. Many autistics in the past were simply labeled "retarded" with no further investigation. And of course others were diagnosed with things like Childhood Schizophrenia and Non-Verbal Learning Disability, and others were regarded only as quirky or eccentric. Until the medical community gets its act together in determining who gets labeled what (or, as I would prefer, recognizes the futility of such an undertaking and gives up), I’m not likely to be convinced by whatever claims they make about these statistics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,190 Posts
There actually are clear diagnostic criteria (see <a href="http://web.syr.edu/~rjkopp/data/dsm_criteria.html" target="_blank">here</a> for DSM-IV description and diagnostic criteria), but that doesn't address the problem of correct intervention and support. And there's always the issue of missed or delayed diagnosis, or just plain wrong diagnosis. But I think the medical community is TRYING to "get it together" about this. Diagnosis is only so useful, but in the sense that it provides a common language and a direction to go for help, it's worth having.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,939 Posts
Is that clear to you? Perhaps it's only my warped autistic mind that sees it as vague, general, and arbitrary. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/wink1.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="wink1"> (aside from the fact that it describes autism as a disorder, which is highly insulting to many autistic people, but that's another day's topic). Even if it were a clear standard, it would only be apparent to someone who was looking for it. A few years ago, autism wouldn't have been on most parents'/teachers'/doctors' radar.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
Autism gene breakthrough hailed<br><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>
Scientists have found new autism genes by scanning the largest collection of families with multiple cases of autism ever assembled.<br>
The monumental task of studying the 1,200 families took more than 120 scientists from more than 50 institutions across 19 countries.<br><br>
The work, described in Nature Genetics, implicates a region of chromosome 11 and a specific gene called neurexin 1.<br><br>
Experts say the findings should help with finding new autism treatments....<br><br>
whole story here ; <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6369347.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6369347.stm</a>
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top