From Health magazine
To say there’s a big debate over autism is an understatement. More than 5,000 families have filed court claims blaming vaccine makers for their children’s autism symptoms—including serious language delays, poor social skills, and repetitive movements—yet the research to date repeatedly shows no connection between vaccines and autism. A recent court decision added fuel to the fire by awarding compensation to the family of a young girl who developed autism symptoms after being vaccinated. What’s the real story? Health asked leading autism researchers to help us figure it out.
Q: Why does there seem to be a sudden epidemic of autism?
A: Epidemic may be the wrong word. In the mid-1970s the reported rate of autism was 21 in 10,000 children, or 1 in 470. Today it’s 65 to 67 per 10,000, or 1 in 150—about a threefold increase in 30 years. While any uptick in these numbers is worrisome, scientists aren’t calling that an epidemic. Many experts believe the actual rise in autism cases (additions to the amount typically seen in the general population) is quite small. The surge in diagnoses, they say, is largely due to a broader understanding of what qualifies as autism, greater awareness of the disorder, and the increased availability of services for children with autism symptoms.
To better understand that argument, consider this: Many children who are classified as autistic today would have been diagnosed with speech disorders or mental retardation 30 years ago. Indeed, as the number of children with autism has climbed, the number diagnosed with mental retardation has dropped. “These factors could explain all of the increase in autism cases,” says autism expert Eric Fombonne, MD, head of the department of psychiatry at Montreal Children’s Hospital.
Next page: The theory behind vaccines causing autism
Comments (5)
To the author – This article is outdated and should be updated as you have some misleading information in it. The huge UC Davis study published a month or two ago showed that there *is* indeed an increase in sheer numbers of autistic cases – not just better diagnosing or whatnot. They also concluded that the cause is NOT merely genetic, that something else is actually causing these numbers to be “off the charts”… (ie – if it really were just genetic, you would not see the increases we are actually seeing.)
One of the theories behind the vaccine link that you did not mention is the idea that there is a cumulative effect of all the vaccine shots on a baby’s body. This has NOT been studied and until it is, the case is far from closed.
Consider it like this – we are giving kids 36 shots before kindergarten. Each one contains a bunch of stuff in it that is bad for the body and the brain -formaldehyde, aluminum, mercury, anti-freeze, etc. Then, you’re wondering if all this toxicity in the shots could be playing a role in causing autism.
So what do they do? They do a study comparing kids who got 20 shots vs kids who got 19 and they find no difference in the rates of autism in each group. Would YOU conclude that these vaccines are safe, based on that kind of study? No. You’d want to see a group of kids that hadn’t had any shots and you’d want to see that compared to kids who followed the full schedule. THAT would tell you if there was any effect of the schedule on kids’ brains.
It’s be like comparing a group of people who drank 14 beers to those who drank 13 and seeing if there is any difference in their driving impairment. And when you found no difference – (a whole lot of impairment going on) would you conclude that the drinking had nothing to do with the impairment for driving since removing that one beer had no effect on the outcomes? NO. Of course not.
But this is how these studies were structured… and so their results are meaningless if you suspect it’s not just ONE shot, but the whole regimen of shots. If you thought it was that ONE beer causing the whole problem, then yea, that theory would have to be thrown out…but if you think it’s “having a whole lot of beer” that’s causing the impairment, then this study does nothing to address that.
This article is completely inaccurate. Before 1980, the autism rate was 2-5 people per 10,000. The rate today is closer to 200-300 people per 10,000. This means between 1980 and 2005 there was a about a 100-150% times increase. Hello! That is an epidemic. Also, the definitions of what qualifies for autism have TIGHTENED not gotten broader. I question the person who wrote this article and the funding or motivation behind it. Pediatricians and doctors get paid to vaccinate your children. Pharmaceutical companies woo them with gifts, free samples, and dinners. Doctors are exposed to the pharmeceutical companies while in the womb (med school) and the relationship is a marriage to their practices. Take everything with a grain of salt and follow the money. I watched my son develope autism after he received his MMR. I watched him lose his mind and his personality. Vaccines have been linked to SIDS, ADD/ADHD, neurological diseases, allergies and asthma. Read “Changing the Course of Autism” by Jepson and “What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Children’s Vaccinations” by Stephanie Cave. Once youre child gets this “Disease” you find out how trusting you were and how many lies are being told. Do not be a sheeple, your children depend on you.
Do not delete this article, that is censorship. Likewise, I will truly know your motivation for writing this article.
Dear Cassie,
Thanks for sharing your story and shedding some light. Best wishes to you and your family.
Many questionable sources say “the belief that mercury causes autism” has long ben discredited”.
Yet no one cites such studies. I have read many that prove these is such a cause. Being expert in statistics, one notices the overstatement in
such above statements. There are dozens of variables, few of which are controlled. Money talks
and drug makers have the money. Their apologists often clearlly make untrue statements; e.g. “there is not now mercury in shots”, but others say there
are only “trace amounts”, Trace amounts can kill you! Dont accept the propaganda.
i was born in the 60’s when not much was known or “labeled” about this. i could subscribe to some of the symptoms myself. autism is not a bad thing, not violent nor detrimental. maybe we need to look at it from a different perspective,angle.since it is growing exponentially maybe it has to do with human evolution? social interactioning on a more cerebral plane , less small talk, knowing and emphatic feelings. the spoken word has become so perverted, so contrived anyway. maybe god has a hand in this? for the word was with god before it was given to man.i do not mean this as in a punnishing way ,for i believe god’s ways are only love.keep the faith,sincerely christopher munz.