Aspies For Freedom

Full Version: 0.4% have 'classic' autism - 1.2% have aspergers and PDD-NOS
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
These are latest figures from the UK. These utterly contradict the claims from curebie groups that 'most' autistics are severely disabled and spend their life in institutions with no quality of life. Certainly that is the case for some, but not the majority as they like to claim.

People need to see the real statistics to be able to form valid conclusions, it is imperative in the cure debate and autism prenatal test issue as well.
Another factor is that the 0.4% is children, and there will be a percentage of them that will develop and their diagnosis may be revised to be considered 'high functioning'.

If parents could be aware of these facts, we could ultimately see less of the despicable mercy killings happening.

"Far more children than previously thought have autism, according to research to be published today.

Researchers who studied 56,946 children in south London found that almost 0.4 per cent had "classic" childhood autism and just below 1.2 per cent had autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), including Asperger's and milder forms.

Until the 1990s, the generally accepted figure in Britain was four to five cases of autism per 10,000 - 10 times lower than the rate suggested in the new study.

More recently, estimates have put the prevalence of broad spectrum ASDs at around 60 children per 10,000.

Some campaigners have talked of an "autism epidemic", but experts differ on whether the increase is due to better diagnosis or a real growth in the proportion of children with the condition.

Prof Gillian Baird, of Guy's and St Thomas's NHS Foundation Trust, London, examined rates of ASD in 56,946 children aged nine to 10.

Prof Baird and colleagues searched the special needs register for children with statements of special educational needs and records of those diagnosed as having social and communicative impairment. After screening the children identified, they concluded that there were 81 clear cases of autism and 77 cases of other ASDs.

This gave them a prevalence of 38.9 per 10,000 for autism, 77.2 per 100,000 for other ASDs and 116.1 per 10,000 for total ASDs.

ASDs cover a range of developmental disorders that impair the ability to interact socially and communicate.

They cover a spectrum from severe cases of "classic" autism which could include an inability to talk, self-mutilation and mental retardation, through to milder forms including Asperger's.

Prof Baird, whose work is published in The Lancet, said: "Prevalence of autism and related ASDs is substantially higher than previously recognised." She added: "Services in health, education, and social care will need to recognise the needs of children with some form of ASD, who constitute one per cent of the child population."

Various theories have been put forward to explain the rising number autism diagnoses, including increased exposure to pesticides, pollution and childhood vaccination.

Some doctors are diagnosing children as autistic who would previously have been said to have attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
From telegraph.co.uk
Even amongst those with a classical autism dx, the stereotype is rarely true.
Amy, do you have the link to that article?

I find it interesting. I'm sure Autism rates of dx have gone up. That's not really debatable. But before 1989 in Europe and 1994 in the US, Asperger's was nonexistant and so these kids were likely not even considered on the Autism Spectrum, so of course the rates would go up.

Plus, many high-functioning autistic adults, even if they did have a language delay as kids, were never diagnosed, so that their kids, who also end up being autistic, seem like they came from nowhere.

I'd like to know though the functioning level of PDD-NOSes, too, because some of them, despite not fulfilling the full Autistic Disorder criteria, can be almost just as impaired.

Like you, I wonder how large a portion of that 0.4% end up turning out HFA, leaving the question of: How many LFA and MFA adults are actually out there?...

Very interesting info, Amy. Thanks. :smile:

Amy Wrote:
These are latest figures from the UK. These utterly contradict the claims from curebie groups that 'most' autistics are severely disabled and spend their life in institutions with no quality of life. Certainly that is the case for some, but not the majority as they like to claim.


I guess the results of this study could be seen as good news, but not for those who are presumed to have "no quality of life".  Can we just say that about someone, without asking them?!  
And I would bet that many people in that sort of situation could have a lot more quality of life than they are having, if given half a chance.  And if they are not given that chance, is that the fault of their autism or the fault of the System?!

EDIT:
PS:  sorry, I know this is a tangent, but I do think this is important.
We shouldn't divide people into us-and-them inside autism...  The us-and-them against NTs is bad enough.  It's all just people.

I am simply commenting on the facts as they stand, and stating that the things that curebies say are wholly wrong.
They use the 'no quality of life' excuse to get more money to eradicate autism. Quality of life is of course, a personal perspective, but they would not make the same money pointing that out.
I guess when you said "Certainly that is the case for some", I thought you were referring to the whole idea.  But I guess you meant, "certainly some are severely disabled", which is different.

Misunderstanding.  Sorry.

I just think that, even if most of us were (or were considered from outside to be) severely disabled, they should still not be allowed to try to eliminate people like that from existing.  I mean (as far as I know) you probably could say that most people with Down Syndrome are severely disabled, and yet they also fight for the right to exist... I think this connection is even mentioned in your page about the prenatal test (?)

It is very possible that we agree on this and I am just having word confusions.  Apologies in advance if this is the case.
There was a story about the revision of the estimated rate of autism spectrum conditions in the weekend edition of the major newspaper in the Australian city where I live. Local experts were asked for opinions etc etc. I think this story has probably been picked up by many newspapers around the world.
Yes Natalia, I was trying to say how the curebies perceive the situation and try to manipulate the media and society in general, whilst avoiding the actual facts.

In this country there are far fewer institutions, and more severely disabled people are able to be cared for by family members as the government pays a small wage to the carer, plus allowances for the person themselves.
Getting care in the home improves quality of life overall, usually, if the same money going for a cure in the USA was given towards helping families cope at home it would help people directly.

I think that needs to be lobbied for instead of the cure-mongering Combat Autism Act. Sad

Amy Wrote:
Yes Natalia, I was trying to say how the curebies perceive the situation and try to manipulate the media and society in general, whilst avoiding the actual facts.

In this country there are far fewer institutions, and more severely disabled people are able to be cared for by family members as the government pays a small wage to the carer, plus allowances for the person themselves.
Getting care in the home improves quality of life overall, usually, if the same money going for a cure in the USA was given towards helping families cope at home it would help people directly.

I think that needs to be lobbied for instead of the cure-mongering Combat Autism Act. Sad


Well, that makes sense.  

And also the same deal for people wanting to live independently (in a home of their own not belonging to their family).  That is apparently really important to a lot of people, from what I have read.

Sorry, that was another tangent.  [/tangents]

That paragraph below the picture says the occurrence rate of ASDs is at 60/10,000 which is most similar to the CDC's 1/166. But the percentages from South London are considerably higher at 1.6/100 or 160/10,000.

According to that study the article quoted, South London seems to have hundred more cases than average per 10,000. Provided they quoted it correctly that is.
I certainly wouldn't expect an even distribution.
Reference URL's