A PREVIOUS REPORT showed an increase of 273 percent in the number of reported autism cases in California between 1987 and 1998.
"It is astounding to see a threefold increase in autism with no explanation," said Dr. Robert Byrd, an epidemiologist who led the study. "There's a number of things that need to be answered. We need to rethink the possible causes of autism."
posted on October 20, 2002 10:11:32 AM new
LindaK, that is a huge jump. Without seeing the actual study, and parameters, I'll jump in and make some uninformed speculations.
1. A component of vaccines have been discussed for approximately 10 years as being a possible cause of autism. I do remember a big push in the mid 80s, at least in Texas, to get kids vaccinated. That was also when I started having to have MR titres drawn, to prove I was immune.
2. Related to 1, some possible bad batches, due to increased demand. (Something like what happened with the latex gloves and poor refining leading to increased latex allergy seen about the same time.)
3. Unknown virus
4, Increased knowledge on practioner's part, leading to increased diagnosis.
You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on October 20, 2002 10:31:01 AM new
snowy - I haven't read the study...just saw this article a couple of days ago. But when Dr. Bernard Rimland, director of the Autism Research Institute in San Diego, said the UC Davis study dramatically undercounted autism cases. Makes one wonder.
quoting Dr. Rimland.... "I certainly am pleased that they finally acknowledge that there is an increase," Rimland said. "However, the numbers they gave are nonsense. They're kind of minimizing it."
[I always appreciate reading your 'take' on medical issues, really.]
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 20, 2002 10:32 AM ]
posted on October 20, 2002 11:22:57 AM new
It would be interesting to see if other states show such jumps in diagnosed cases in the same time frame. If not, that would have to include speculation as to environmental factors. I don't know if we'll see such studies done, since public health departments are not apt to *splurge* their hard won dollars.
As to what Dr. Rimland stated, that is why I would like to see the parameters that were used. If the diagnosed cases had truly jumped much higher, well, eek!
You have the right to an informed opinion -Harlan Ellison
posted on October 20, 2002 03:07:04 PM new
I'll jump in here with my two centums as well. And I haven't done the research either, but it strikes me that this falls into a phenomena without a name that is ongoing throughout the USA.
Typically, illnesses are reported voluntarily and many doctors do not report illnesses to information banks when they can help it, siteing patient confidentiality. The fear is that the data might be used to stigmatize the person later on (very real concern, BTW) or that the information might be released to the general public (as in banks selling your medical records for both fun and profit).
Then, someone in authority comes up and says to others in authority, "Say, we NEED to have a database on this disease. Right now, we have no way of knowing how widespread the problem really is. Let us make it mandatory that doctors and hospitals must report all cases of this disease to our databank."
Is it such a surprise, then, that we see a tremendous jump in reported cases of whichever disease that it is? Is it also a surprise that our national media, woefully inadequate on rigid standards of reporting excellence anymore, leave this important bit of information absent from their news reports? It's pure sensationalism when they do this and its plain wrong to deceive the public in this way, but hey - that's the First Amendment for ya!
Ed. For arrogance to not run this through a spelling checker first
[ edited by Borillar on Oct 20, 2002 03:11 PM ]
posted on October 20, 2002 09:24:37 PM new
Wired Magazine had an interesting article about this about a year ago.If I can find a link to it I'll put it up. It covered the re-definition of autism, and discussed in detail the concept of high functioning autistic people. It proposed the theory that many of the tech world's most successful programmers and engineers may indeed be high functioning autistics. The researchers written about proposed the idea that if that is the case, many of these people have moved to California for work, marry each other, and have kids, thus increasing the number of autistic children. It's interesting to note that the years mentioned in this recent study almost exactly mirror the rise of the tech industry in California....geeks marry geeks, and have lots of little geeks!
posted on October 21, 2002 11:09:56 PM new
I spoke with a special educator the other day about this subject. She agreed the problem is epidemic. No suggested explanation aside from the obvious (underreporting, possible environmental factors, etc.).
posted on October 22, 2002 06:11:15 AM new
As well as the other mentioned factors, women are having children later in life (of course, Men too!). Likely be another determining factor.
A lot of variables ~ as Borillar states ~ detection & reporting being the largest. We have advanced in leaps & bounds both medically and scientifically in those 11 years.
posted on October 22, 2002 06:35:03 AM new
zoomin - Always good to see you here.
One thing I found so interesting in profe51's article is that there appear to be 'pockets' where more autistic children have been born....mostly in high tech areas. And not just in CA. So maybe this will turn out to be gene related.
posted on October 22, 2002 07:10:50 PM new
Good to see you too LindaK
uh-oh...
there appear to be 'pockets' where more autistic children have been born....mostly in high tech areas
So perhaps eBaYing and posting to AW can be hazardous to our future off-spring?
sliding my chair just a little further away from my DELL.....
[ edited by Borillar on Oct 20, 2002 03:11 PM ]