NYTIMES: More and More Autism Cases, Yet Causes Are Much Debated

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/26/na...=all&position=

EXCERPT: No one disputes it. Cases of autism, the baffling and often
devastating neurological disorder that strikes in early childhood, are
rising sharply.

~~~~~~~

She hasn't seen The Vac Machine / Quack Machine's postings here!

Also here ... with Barrett's Parrot's flacks ... they KNOW what
doesn't cause autism ... (sure they do).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 26, 2004
More and More Autism Cases, Yet Causes Are Much Debated
By ERICA GOODE

No one disputes it. Cases of autism, the baffling and often
devastating neurological disorder that strikes in early childhood, are
rising sharply.

In California alone, the number of children receiving special services
for autism tripled from 1987 to 1998 and doubled in the four years
after that. National figures tell a similar story.

The upsurge has lent urgency to calls for more research on autism and
more government spending to educate autistic children and has inspired
federal officials, who late last year held an "autism summit" meeting
in Washington, where they presented a 10-year plan of action.

But what lies behind the increase in cases is sharply debated. To
some, the upswing has all the hallmarks of an epidemic and indicates
that autism itself is increasing rapidly.

To others, the rise can in large part be explained by increased public
awareness of autism in recent years, changes in the way the disorder
is diagnosed and the incentive of tapping into federally mandated
services for autistic children.

Neither side can prove its argument, because the types of studies that
could tease out a true increase have not been done.

But the question is crucial, experts say, because its answer has
significant implications for how federal money is spent, how afraid
parents should be and how much effort scientists should devote to
tracking down environmental factors in addition to genetic influences.

Advocacy groups, many of them founded by parents of autistic children,
have tended to line up on the side of an epidemic. And some autism
experts also believe the illness is increasing.

"To me, it's a huge public health emergency, a crisis," said Portia
Iversen, a founder of Cure Autism Now, an organization based in Los
Angeles that finances research. Ms. Iversen said she was certain that
the number of children with autism was rising sharply.

But epidemiologists cluster on the other side of the debate.

They do not rule out the possibility of a true increase in autism. But
they point to flaws in the way that the rising numbers — especially
those in California — have been presented to the public. And they say
the small size and widely varying findings of epidemiological studies
of autism make it impossible to say what is going on.

For example, Dr. Eric Fombonne, an epidemiologist and a professor of
child and adolescent psychiatry at McGill University, said most of the
increase was probably a result of diagnostic changes and statistical
anomalies.

What everyone agrees on is that autism is being diagnosed more
frequently than in the past. The disorder, which is believed to be
strongly influenced by genes, is marked by a profound impairment in
the ability to relate to other people, a delay in language
development, or repetitive behaviors.

Before the mid-1980's, most studies estimated the prevalence of autism
at fewer than 5 cases for every 10,000 children. Over the last decade,
epidemiological studies have come up with wildly disparate estimates,
from 5.2 cases per 10,000 (in a large Norwegian study) to 72.6 per
10,000 (in a small Swedish study). But the trend has been upward, with
most experts agreeing that at least 10 children out of every 10,000
are autistic.

Last year, in a review of all available studies of autism rates, Dr.
Fombonne concluded that the findings "point toward an increase in
prevalence over the last 15 years."

But predictions for the future differ along with views of what is
responsible for the increase. If autism itself is increasing rapidly,
the rates can be expected to keep rising, and with them, the
projections of how much money will be required for services.

But if most of the increase reflects more accurate diagnosis, then
rates should level off as the number of previously overlooked children
diminishes.

The different interpretations also point researchers in different
directions.

"If you accept the fact that the numbers have increased, you must seek
an environmental cause," said Mark Blaxill, of Cambridge, Mass., a
member of the board of SafeMinds, one of several advocacy groups that
view some vaccines given to toddlers as a likely cause of the increase
in autism.

Over the years, a host of other environmental factors have also been
nominated as culprits, including a variety of infections, like German
measles in pregnant mothers; the sedative drug thalidomide; the drug
Pitocin, used to induce labor; synthetic compounds like plastics and
PCB's; and food additives.

Yet so far, said Dr. Fred R. Volkmar, an autism expert and professor
of psychiatry at the Yale Child Study Center, "hard scientific
evidence to support any specific environmental cause has been
lacking."

"Many of the purported environmental causes," Dr. Volkmar went on,
"have been proposed on the basis of a single case, or a handful of
cases, and the observations have not held up in larger samples."

A number of studies, including a large Danish trial, have found no
link between autism and the so-called MMR vaccine for measles, mumps
and rubella, though some advocates remain unconvinced.

The possible role of a mercury-based vaccine preservative, thimerosal,
is still being investigated. But many investigators express skepticism
for such a connection.

For the last few years, vaccines sold in the United States for the
routine immunization of children either have not contained thimerosal
or contain only a trace, according to the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention. The agency and the American Academy of Pediatrics have
stated that no credible scientific evidence connects thimerosal with
autism or other childhood neurological disorders.

If autism itself is not increasing markedly, the role of environmental
influences diminishes. Epidemiologists say the wide variance in
estimates from the prevalence studies that do exist support the idea
that the disorder has not increased hugely.

In 2000 and 2001 alone, various published studies in the United
States, Britain and Scandinavia put autism rates per 10,000 children
at 30.8, 7.8, 12.2, 40.5, 26.1, 13.2 and 16.8. A study in Brick
Township, N.J., published in 2001, found 36 cases among 8,896 children
studied, a rate of 40.5 per 10,000.

Each study uses different methods and defines autism slightly
differently. Complicating matters further, some studies include what
are called autism spectrum disorders, a category that includes
conditions like Asperger's syndrome.

Another reason for caution, the epidemiologists say, is that the
numbers that have received the most publicity — the California
findings, for instance, reported by the state's Department of
Developmental Services — are not based on scientific studies. Instead,
such reports are simply tallies of the number of children enrolled in
state programs who carry an autism diagnosis. They do not take into
account changes in methods of diagnosis or shifts in population over
time.

Even so, the scientific support that would clinch the skeptics'
arguments is lacking.

"We don't have a lot of evidence one way or another, sadly," said Dr.
Craig Newschaffer, an associate professor of epidemiology and mental
health at Johns Hopkins University.

Dr. Newschaffer said he believed "a large chunk" of the increase was a
result of heightened public awareness and other such factors. "The
devil is in how big a chunk is that big chunk," he said.

Dr. Robert S. Byrd, an associate professor of clinical pediatrics at
the University of California at Davis, has tried to clarify the issue
by examining the California data to see whether methods of diagnosis
or other statistical anomalies could account for the increase.

Joined by colleagues at the university's MIND Institute, Dr. Byrd
scrutinized 684 children enrolled in 21 regional centers for
developmental disorders, including autism and mental retardation.
About half were born from 1983 to 1985, the other half a decade later.

The study was based on questionnaires given to the children's parents.
It concluded that the same proportion of children in each age group —
about 88 percent — met the diagnostic criteria for autism, suggesting
that changes in diagnosis did not explain the increase in cases.

The researchers also say they excluded two other possibilities: that
parents were moving to California to obtain autism services and that
some children with autism were in the past labeled as mentally
retarded.

In a report to the California Legislature in 2002, Dr. Byrd and his
colleagues concluded that "some, if not all, of the observed increase
represents a true increase in cases of autism in California."

Yet their study, which has not been published in a peer-reviewed
journal, itself became an immediate magnet for controversy.

Critics found serious flaws in it, including the small sample of
responses. They also cited a variety of other factors, including
public awareness, that were not examined in the study and so could not
be ruled out.

The Centers for Disease Control, which in 2000 began a surveillance
program to track autism cases in 18 states, may have a better chance
of deciphering the issue. Dr. Marshalyn Yeargin-Allsop, the medical
epidemiologist who is overseeing the effort, said the agency was
studying the prevalence of autism, demographic factors like race and
ethnicity, an array of possible causes of the disorder and whether
autism increases over time.

In the meantime, if the numbers keep rising, the debate over what they
mean will continue.

"When do you say some of it has to be real?" Dr. Newschaffer asked. "I
don't think anybody knows the answer to that question."

"Ilena" wrote in message
...

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/26/na...=all&position=

EXCERPT: No one disputes it. Cases of autism, the baffling and often
devastating neurological disorder that strikes in early childhood, are
rising sharply.

This is inaccurate.

On NPR this morning, there was a very good story about how hard it is to
just count people with autism. Go to
http://www.npr.org/rundowns/rundown....n-2004&prgId=3 or
www.npr.org, choose morning addition from the dropdown on top and look for
today's show.

The reality is that we don't know if it is better reporting and better
understanding of the condition or an increase in the incidence of autism.

Jeff

"Jeff"


The reality is that we don't know if it is better reporting and better
understanding of the condition or an increase in the incidence of autism.

Jeff


Oh my God ...we agree ...

However ... what does and does not cause autism has far from been
figured out ...

This despite you Quack Vac Flacks who make careers out of spreading
your Pharmaceutical Lies about this serious problem ...


~~~~~~~~~

www,BreastImplantAwareness.org

"Ilena" wrote in message
m...

(...)

However ... what does and does not cause autism has far from been
figured out ...

This despite you Quack Vac Flacks who make careers out of spreading
your Pharmaceutical Lies about this serious problem ...

Except, of curse, vaccines. There is so much evidence that vaccines do not
cause autism, and no plausable mechanism for vaccines to cause autism, that
one can conclude that autism is *NOT* caused by vaccines. Of course, like
all areas of science, this finding should be reevaluated with any new
evidence.

Your last sentence doesn't make sense. If I am incorrect, please show the
evidence. As you should know, I am willing to listen to real evidence. Plus,
I do not spread lies of any type.

Your friend,

Jeff



~~~~~~~~~

www,BreastImplantAwareness.org

"Jeff"

...

Except, of curse, vaccines.

Wrong ... and only you Quacks and Junk Science Flacks of the Vac
Machine deny the very, very plausible and possible connection ...

Plus,
I do not spread lies of any type.

Your friend,

Jeff



You are my friend because you continue to show the depths of lies that
are spread by Barrett and the rest of the Quack Team ...

Remember this charming piece of total and utter Quacking?

"there is no evidence
**that *silicon implants harm anyone"


That was YOU Jeff P Utz ... lying to the readers about the
immeasurable harm that breast implants (silicone NOT silicon) have
caused hundreds of thousands of women.

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org

"Ilena" wrote in message
m...
"Jeff"

...

Except, of curse, vaccines.

Wrong ... and only you Quacks and Junk Science Flacks of the Vac
Machine deny the very, very plausible and possible connection ...

I have invited you in the past and I will invite you again: Please show us
the evidence that vaccines cause the harm you suggest.

Jeff

garbage attacks deleted

In article ,
Ilena wrote:
"Jeff"

...

Except, of curse, vaccines.

Wrong ... and only you Quacks and Junk Science Flacks of the Vac
Machine deny the very, very plausible and possible connection ...

Superficially plausible. Once you start looking into the details, not
at all plausible.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

A theory I've seen is that autism is an engineer's disease.

If you have a few engineering genes, you figure things out yourself
instead of talking to people. Things that come to other people
instinctively, you have to learn. It leaves you in the end knowing
not only how to do everything, but understanding why it's done that
way. These people become engineers.

If you have a lot of engineering genes, you get autism. You want to
deal with only things in your own mind, and you have no interest in
dealing with other people at all.

If you get engineers to marry engineers (encouraging women to study
engineering, pick out the most effective engineers from the whole
planet and placing them all in California, encourage people to marry
people like themselves), the chances of children getting engineering
genes from both parents rises dramatically in those places that the
engineers congregate.

The US educational system started in about 1950 to find everyone
capable of being an engineer, male and female, and sending them to
college. This theory predicts autism to have ramped up in 1960 and
risen steadily since then. There'd be high concentrations in San
Jose, Seattle, Boston, Los Alamos. Non-engineering places would still
see an increase (due to everyone with engineering potential going to
college together), but not as bad. It also predicts that if you check
the parents of autistic kids, you'd find the correlation of autism to
both parents being engineers is extremely significant.

If this theory is correct, then we do indeed have a genetic epidemic
on our hands.

I don't think this qualifies as a theory in the scientific sense of
the word. Just what genes are considered "engineering genes?" None
that I know of. Are any of the candidate genes associated with
engineering skills?

Of course, one could check other countries that have selective
pressure on engineers (e.g., the former Soviet Union) and those that
don't. But that could only provide correlation, not causality. One
would have to do linkage analysis - not an easy thing to do.

(Bob Jenkins) wrote in message . com...
A theory I've seen is that autism is an engineer's disease.

If you have a few engineering genes, you figure things out yourself
instead of talking to people. Things that come to other people
instinctively, you have to learn. It leaves you in the end knowing
not only how to do everything, but understanding why it's done that
way. These people become engineers.

If you have a lot of engineering genes, you get autism. You want to
deal with only things in your own mind, and you have no interest in
dealing with other people at all.

If you get engineers to marry engineers (encouraging women to study
engineering, pick out the most effective engineers from the whole
planet and placing them all in California, encourage people to marry
people like themselves), the chances of children getting engineering
genes from both parents rises dramatically in those places that the
engineers congregate.

The US educational system started in about 1950 to find everyone
capable of being an engineer, male and female, and sending them to
college. This theory predicts autism to have ramped up in 1960 and
risen steadily since then. There'd be high concentrations in San
Jose, Seattle, Boston, Los Alamos. Non-engineering places would still
see an increase (due to everyone with engineering potential going to
college together), but not as bad. It also predicts that if you check
the parents of autistic kids, you'd find the correlation of autism to
both parents being engineers is extremely significant.

If this theory is correct, then we do indeed have a genetic epidemic
on our hands.

(Vaccine-Man) wrote in message . com...
I don't think this qualifies as a theory in the scientific sense of
the word. Just what genes are considered "engineering genes?" None
that I know of. Are any of the candidate genes associated with
engineering skills?

Engineering genes would be genes that engineers are more likely than
non-engineers to have. (My guess is that they would make it harder to
observe than to think, but any correlated gene would do.) The only
thing a theory needs to be "scientific" is to be falsifiable. Making
predictions is good too. This theory can be tested directly, by
looking for genes. It also makes predictions, so it can be tested
indirectly by checking if its predictions tend to be correct. For
example, I've heard that autism is common in California. The theory
that autism is a recessive genetic disease caused by engineering genes
predicts that autism would be much more common in San Jose than in Los
Angeles, because there is a higher concentration of engineers in San
Jose. Is that correct?