Just when we were trying to get used to the autism rates of 1 in 100 kids, the American Academy of Pediatrics found that the parent-reported autism rate in US is one in every 91 children, including one in 58 boys.
Autism rates are rising faster than the water levels after global warming. Only five years ago 1 in 10 000 kids were diagnosed with autism. And (as in the case of global warming) scientists are bickering over the issue: do we have real rise in autism or the cases of this spectrum disorder were always somewhere out there and we just now decided to recognize it.
Before you jump at me – I am not trying to undermine autism. I take it very seriously. The cases in the severe part of the autism spectrum are real tragedies and even the mild cases take a great tall on the family emotionally and financially. So let’s talk about it.
Officially, according to Centers for Disease Control , 1 in 150 eight-year-olds in the US had an autism. All children in the studies were eight-years-old because previous research has shown that most children with an autism have been identified by this age by some type of evaluation.
Encouraging study came up yesterday. It shows that certain types of behavioral therapy focused on social interaction and communication may have very positive effect in the mild cases of Autism when caught at early age. Such treatments though are expensive and can cost up to $50,000 a year.
The states are already overwhelmed by the cost of screenings, special education, transportation and therapy costs related to Autism Spectrum Disorders. Harvard School of Public Health study shows that caring for all people with autism over their lifetimes costs an estimated $35 billion societal cost per year. The number most likely underestimates the true costs because it does not include alternative therapies and family out-of-pocket expenses that are difficult to measure. To compare: societal cost for anxiety is estimated at around $47 billion.
There are many controversies surrounding the causes and the diagnosis of autism. A slightly geeky kid and a mentally disabled kid can both be diagnosed as autistic. The disorder has so many different faces it is hard to understand why they all go under a same label.
Early diagnostic is encouraged, but there is a very thin line between a boy in his “terrible two” and a boy with a mild autism. A regular kid can be labeled unnecessary for life and an autistic kid may not get attention he or she needs, because the symptoms at early age are easy to confuse with regular behaviors typical for toddlers.
The cost of autism is rising. More and more families each year have to deal with a loved one diagnosed with autism. And as the science gives us mostly confusion on the issue, the rising Autism rates may turn the disorder into a national disaster.
December 1st, 2009 at 4:50 am
I think it’s overblown. (read - Big Pharma)
December 1st, 2009 at 7:08 am
My guess is that autism isn’t any more frequent nowadays, just diagnosed more often. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing — in generations past, I’m sure many autistic people went untreated and were possibly institutionalized improperly. As long as doctors are honestly diagnosing this, and not simply pushing more prescription drugs, it’s probably a good thing from a treatment perspective that we’re recognizing autism more consistently.
On a related note, more anecdotal evidence is piling up that medical marijuana can be effective in treating behavioral problems with kids stemming from disorders such as autism and ADHD:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/11/marijuana-and-autism.html
This is obviously controversial, and many people would consider it improper to give a child marijuana. But if it helps the child live a more normal life, and a doctor agrees it is proper, is it really all that worse than giving a kid high-strength amphetamines and other stimulants?
December 1st, 2009 at 8:12 am
Rhy, I agree. There is plenty of research that pushes marijuana as cure for autism.
With the diagnosis for autism being more often - my worry is - it is possible kids that are normal get labeled at early age with autism - and after that it may become a self-fulfilling diagnosis. Once you label the kid the label sticks to kid’s file. The kid gets isolated with a wrong crowd in special-ed and so it goes from there. Also kid’s of immigrants are more likely to get labeled as language barrier gets confused with language developmental delay.
December 1st, 2009 at 8:25 am
Yeah that is absolutely a legitimate concern Ellie. I think part of the problem is that we tend to think of disorders in black & white terms — you are either autistic or “normal”, with nothing in between. In reality, there is a whole continuum of childhood behavior and brain chemistry, and it’s not really fair to separate kids who are close together in that continuum simply because one has been diagnosed by a doctor and one hasn’t.
I think the idea of putting children in “special classes” and such should be based on the child’s actual best interests, and not purely on some official medical diagnosis. Some children who are diagnosed with Aspberger’s or Autism can (and do) function well in a normal classroom, and some children who have no diagnosed disorder are impossible to control in a classroom setting.
December 1st, 2009 at 8:55 am
Uh Oh!!!
Rhayader + Medical Marijuana = 500 post thread.
Annnnnd their off!!
December 1st, 2009 at 9:00 am
Hah, hey now, I made it clear that it was a parenthetical aside, and I’ve been discussing aspects of the topic beyond the medical MJ. But you know me, I had to at least mention it.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:03 am
“Once you label the kid the label sticks to kid’s file. ”
This is happening with my son who was diagnosed with mild autism when he was about 5 simply because of an eating/oral impedement.
He wont/cant til this day swallow certain consistencies or tolerate celluloid textures like grape skins, lettuce, tomatoe skin etc…
In my last meeting with his teachers I was wondering why they were suggesting certain classes for areas he wasnt acceling in. (hes 14 now)These suggestions were never made in middle and elementary for some reason but it dawned on me that this diagnosis was made ten years ago and is still folowing him, so we discussed getting this removed from his records as he has no learning disabilities.
His ambition is to be a fighter pilot but without even inquiring I’m going to bet that any hint of aurism will automatically disqualify him.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:04 am
WOW!! What an injustice to our individuals with autism!! When you misconstrue the truth, youa terrible misservice to individuals with autism and those who love and care for them! Shameful really!!
First, the rate of autism five years ago was 1 in 166. I know,as my son was diagnosed then. Pretty big stretch from 1 in 10,000 wouldn’t you agree?! Trust me, it is not something a parent easily forgets.
Secondly, the latest rates were always 1 in 91, at least just prior to the 1 in 150 rate. You can thank the media for the misinformation of 1 in 100. They apparently decided to round it up in order to simplify it. Unfortunately, those not closely related to, connected with or affected by autism are blindly mislead when the media takes such liberties.
That leaves the largest injustice served up to our loved ones wtih autism and those who truly care about them. Obtaining a dx of autism is NO SIMPLE matter!! As a matter of fact, quite the opposite is true! In order to give an autism dx, the medical professional must carry a very specialized license. First problem is not enough qualified autism diastaticans exist. The criteria to be able to diagnosis as well as the actual criteria for the diagnosis is very stringentand complex!! The waiting lists to even see such a professional are EXTREMELY long!!!! Meanwhile, our precious loved ones lose precious time, very precious time!
So you see, when this type of blatant, misleading information is circulated for others with very little to no actual knoweldge of autism to read and sadly believe, you tragically set back our advocaty efforts by YEARS!! Thanks for that!! WOW!!! What our loved ones really need is acknowledgement and support.
And yes, the numbers are climbing by leaps and bounds!! As not only the parent of a child with autism, but also as an educator in special education, the numbers are REAL, they are ACCURATE, they are DANGERS and they have been sharply climbing for the last decade.
As someone who is directly affectsed and truly cares, I really have better things to do than damage control! So please, if you don’t have first hand knowledge and are unwilling to take the time to justify your information, just leave well enough alone!!
Autism already is a national disater and you’re not helping!
December 1st, 2009 at 9:05 am
And no, hes not smoking any weed til hes of age
December 1st, 2009 at 9:14 am
Lin.
Feeling a little touchy ?
I think the author covered her butt fairly well, justifiably and honestly with links to reputable sources without having to be as complex and detailed as you.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:19 am
The difference between a boy in his “terrible twos” and an autistic toddler is a very thin line? I don’t know how many autistic two year olds you’ve seen, but trust me, it’s not a thin line, it’s a canyon. Be careful of your comparisons, please. As the parent of a child with autism I can assure you that there is a clear difference between misbehaving and autism. Blanket statements like this don’t help anyone.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:25 am
Yeah Lin, I agree with Micky, I don’t think Ellie was being prejudicial or intellectually dishonest — her tone was respectful and curious. The topic shouldn’t be considered out of bounds simply because autism can be a painful reality. In fact, that truth should increase discussion and debate, not tamp it down.
And no, hes not smoking any weed til hes of age
Yeah that’s your call obviously Mick, and it sounds like your son is well-behaved and can do very well in normal classrooms. I’d certainly want to avoid giving my child any unnecessary medications.
Still though, if a doctor and parents truly think it’s the best option, I don’t see why prescribing pot to a minor would be more of a problem than, say, Ritalin or Adderall.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:47 am
Lin, Dana, I am too a parent of autistic child and I stated I do not want to undermine Autism.
I just stated few themes for discussion on the topic, and I appreciate your participation in the discussion. I understand the emotions on the subject. As for the numbers 5 years ago / as the numbers today / - they are conflicting. They used to range from 1:10 000 - the one that I remembered as affected parent to 1:166 - the one you remember - to 1:91 today. A lot of questions - not many answers.
December 1st, 2009 at 9:55 am
Dana.
Theres different degrees of autism so yes there can be confusion between what is just a normal kid acting up and one that is accurately diagnosed.
Its you whos making the blanket statement that theres absolutely no way to be subjected to any confusion.
——————————-
“Still though, if a doctor and parents truly think it’s the best option, I don’t see why prescribing pot to a minor would be more of a problem than, say, Ritalin or Adderall.”
If its going to be prescribed after testing proves it viable then of course he can have it.
Whats kinda spooky is that as much as he knows how knowledgeable I am on the subject and what I go thru with my clients clients, I can spot that glitter in his eye when the topic comes up.
If I told him he had to smoke pot to help with his eating disorder he’d be so overjoyed he’d probably crap himself. He’ll wait til he’s of age, because he knows me.
He knows my feelings about weed but he also knows how I operate.
So far when I hear that pot can be of some help in curing or helping those with autism I go a little skeptic because one of the underlying symptoms of autism is ADD(HD).
Pot can either increase focus and drive attention spans or retard them so I dont know exctly how one would go about determining criteria or what qualifies one as a candidate for pot therapy.
December 1st, 2009 at 10:15 am
This is already a disaster. Insurance companies should sue pharmaceuticals companies and CDC for allowing to poison our kids!
December 1st, 2009 at 10:41 am
I can spot that glitter in his eye when the topic comes up.
Yeah that seems about right — 14 was about when I started to get curious about it. For me, it was an obsession with The Beatles that led to my interest — but as pervasive as the marijuana culture is, it’s pretty much inevitable that teenagers will be introduced to the idea that smoking pot is fun and acceptable. That theme is everywhere — movies, TV, music, video games, the internet, etc.
And like I said, I’d never question your parental discretion when it comes to that sort of stuff. Only you and your wife know what’s best for your son. And yeah, I tend to agree that pot can affect different people very differently — some get very relaxed by it, others get unbearably anxious and paranoid. Of course the same could be said about stimulant medications for childhood behavioral problems, so I don’t think that rules it out as something doctors should be able to consider.
At any rate, it’s an interesting topic of discussion, since we are still developing our scientific understanding of the brain and the mind. The debates over things like autism, ADHD, and really any mental illness or disorder are obviously very dependent on our developing understanding of the human brain.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:34 am
“This is already a disaster. Insurance companies should sue pharmaceuticals companies and CDC for allowing to poison our kids!”
And people wonder why medicine and insurance is getting so expensive.
I dont know how you got to this issue but since you’re there.
Lots of prescriptions are are a crap shoot.
Thats why its called a “prcatice” and not an exact science.
One of the approachs to my alcoholism (15 years ago) was to treat what was supposedly underlying bi polar and depression symptoms. I went thru 5 pyschotropic drugs before we found one that worked. Prozac effected my weenies function so we eliminated that choice immediately, the last one was Paxil which sent me into a suicidal frenzy that got me locked up in the looney bin for two weeks.
I could of sued especially after seeing the ambulance chaser ads on TV but didnt because I realize that wasnt going to help me or anyone else when it comes right down to it.
Its not a malicious practice, just one that doesnt have exact determinations in what will work for who and its people like Anna that drive the cost up for everyone when you want to go sue those who are no doubt trying to make a profit but really can only do so with a product that works.
The amount of money pharma is loosing due to hit and miss research is already costing us enough without someone adding to it.
The lesson learned will not come from them losing any amount of money based on a one time pay out to a disgruntled plaintiff but rather is learned more by the millions lost when its found out its not a viable product that can remain on shelves for a duration bringing in steady revenues.
Anna. If someone suffered irreversible damage due to a neglegent prescrition you should maybe set your sights on the doc or if during testing side effectd were ignored then you go after the pharma company.
But just because the cures arent arriving at your desired pace or you’re on some spiritual healing agenda is hardly a justification.
The majority of kids having positive results from todays innovative medications are definately worth the few unfortunate instances
December 1st, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Lin, Dana…thank you! I have 2 grandchildren with Autism…one has been 90% mainstreamed…his sister suffers all the neurological deficits and likely won’t be. It is an excruciatingly painful diagnosis, and there is no respite for the parents. People are unkind in stores, at playgrounds, etc…thinking your child is ill behaved. While it is hell, we wouldn’t trade these 2 for all the tea in China. We pray daily for a cure…or at least hope of a cure.
No one understands unless they live it.
December 1st, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Actually there is an instrument that is incredibly useful for detecting autism in children as young as 18 months. It’s called the M-CHAT.
I too, like you, Ellie, thought that “there is a very thin line between a boy in his “terrible two” and a boy with a mild autism.”
There’s not! The line is actually thick, obvious, and unmistakeably.
The M-CHAT raises red flags in areas of development such as pointing, looking in the direction of someone else’s point, looking at what somebody else is looking at, sharing something that interest them (could be as simple as handing an adult a toy–that’s it!), looking towards a caregiver when faced with an unfamiliar situation, etc. Things like that.
If autism WAS diagnosed based on ANYTHING that resembled “terrible twos”, my son who is 4 years old and has still never handed me a toy or book but has learned to point after about $50,000 out of pocket therapy expenses, would STILL not have a diagnosis, as he is quite pleasant, very smiley, quite happy, and does not tantrum.
The what-autism-is-perceived-to-be (tantruming, defiance, misbehavior)line may be thin but the actual DIAGNOSIS (social detachment, lack of (or abnormal communication), repetetive behaviors)line is THICK and unmistakable. AND obvious.
DSM-IV Doctors Diagnostic manual, diagnosis for autism will reveal that to be diagnosed with autism, no matter what the severity level, the developmental deficits are very severe in nature, even if of the “mildest” type.
December 2nd, 2009 at 12:32 am
“The kid gets isolated with a wrong crowd in special-ed and so it goes from there.”
special-ed is the most abused form of education there is. if you have a child that needs special-ed i HIGHLY suggest you do whatever you can to seek private education, even if it means asking the local school board to pay for it under threat of a lawsuit.
with exceptions i am sure, special-ed is often where the trouble-makers are dumped, so you end up with the really sick children mixed in with children with social problems, like violent children.
this does not work well for either group … just look what happened to Rhayader the druggie loser
December 2nd, 2009 at 12:37 am
not to scare parents out there, but only a few years ago one teacher was locking a special-ed child in a supply closet in illinois … unsupervised mind you.
December 2nd, 2009 at 1:24 am
We had no crack babies in my elementle school so when the special ed class came in to quietly sup water from our classroom water fountain they were polite and the real deal. Today because of the dumbing down and mixing up of America and the elimination of middle class values you do hear horrible stories of badly behaving child like monsters being dumped not only into any kind of holding tank a school board can find including the group homes and mini-stripmall institutions. some of these big 15 year old bruisers, even the females from abused and destructive child raising homes take out the adults supervising them. I don’t know if crack babies have a propensity to adhd and bipolar illnesses, or whether the meds lex luther them up, but it seems there are more and more of them.
December 2nd, 2009 at 6:57 am
My son is also autistic. I have talked with parents who are using “hash” for their kids with autism. These kids are eating a bb size amount not smoking it. I would give my son cow dung if I thought it would keep him from hurting himself and others. I guess you just have to live it on a daily basis to truely know.
December 2nd, 2009 at 8:39 am
@Brian: Just FYI, the “crack baby” phenomenon has turned out to be largely a myth. There was no dramatic rise in birth defects following the onset of crack. I would certainly never approve of a pregnant mother smoking crack, but the big picture social narrative of “crack babies” was based on fear, not on fact.
My son is also autistic. I have talked with parents who are using “hash” for their kids with autism.
Yeah, similar to the video I linked to above in comment #2. Like you said, no possible beneficial treatment should be ruled out when families are dealing with real pain and suffering. To criminalize behavior that parents and doctors feel is helpful to a child is, well, criminal.
December 2nd, 2009 at 9:47 am
There is a problem with this report as written. “Only five years ago 1 in 10 000 kids were diagnosed with autism.” This is simply not true. The 1 in 10,000 prevalance rate dates from the mid 70’s. By the late 80’s it was up to 3-4 in 10,000. In 1996, the CDC conducted the Brick Study, which came up with 6.7 in 1,000. In 1999, the CDC conducted a study at 6 sites in the US and came up with 1 in 167, which mirrors Brick. Then in 2002 the CDC conducted a follow up study at 14 sites in the US and came up with 1 in 150. Finally, last year a phone survey was done which gave us the most recent numbers of 1 in 91.
You mention casually the CDC only counting 8 yo’s, without going into exactly what the ramifications of that are. Specifically, it is done as you mention, because by that time you have most of the autistic kids diagnosed, although that was not the case in Atlanta in 1999, when the CDC found 18% of autistic kids (presumedly at the higher end of functioning) were undiagnosed by both the medical professionals and the schools professionals until the CDC did the study.
The significance of this little tidbit, however, is that most people do not realise the time delay it gives to the numbers as reported. So when Brick found 1 in 167 kids were autistic, that was for children born in 1988, NOT overall. Likewise, the 1999 and 2002 studies were for kids born in 1991 and 1994 respectively. This was compounded by the fact that the CDC did not publish the 2002 study until 2007, leading many people to believe it was a current number, when actually that data was at least a decade old at that point. Even people who are in the business of scientific research fail to appreciate that little fact.
The most recent number, by contrast was for ALL children regardless of birth cohort. Unfortunately, it is not a scientific study, as it was simply a phone survey without any attempt to verify the diagnosis, or even if there was a child there at all, disabled, autistic or otherwise. So we truly have to take the 1 in 91 figure with a grain of salt.
The big jump in autism occured at a point between Burd’s work (mid 80’s using school age children, i.e. born prior to 1982) and Brick (children born in 1988. The jump was at least 1000%, possibly as much as 2200%. This is corroborated by the data M.I.N.D. collated from the CA Regional Centers, which found that about 80% of ALL autistic people served in CA since the Regional Centers were set up in 1971 were born after 1990 and about 90% were born after 1980.
I am not trying to belittle the “autism epidemic”, which I believe is indeed very real, or to diminish the crisis we are facing as a country as the population spike ages into majority, which I believe will bankrupt States’ Medicaid and DHHR budgets as they are forced to place more and more into residential settings. What I am saying is that we are mistaken to believe that the increase is a current phenom, when in reality it occured 2 decades ago and we are just now catching on to it as a nation. By focusing on the last couple years, we will miss completely the triggering occurances, looking for environmental toxins that we were exposed to in the last couple years. We need to be looking at what was different in the very late 80’s from the very late 70’s to see why we have had this increase.