Aspies For Freedom

http://biz.yahoo .com/prnews/041101/nem072_1.html


Monday November 1, 2:48 pm ET
Calls for Public Health Officials to Declare Autism a National Emergency

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Nov. 1 /PRNewswire/ -- In a new and compelling review of four decades of autism surveys from around the world, Mark Blaxill, a Director of SafeMinds and the parent of a child diagnosed with autism, provides conclusive proof that the reported increase in autism rates in the United States and the United Kingdom is very real. Publishing in the newest issue of the respected, peer-reviewed journal, Public Health Reports, Blaxill persuasively contradicts the repeated (and unfounded) speculations of a small group of influential autism experts. These experts have promoted the erroneous view that the dramatic reported rise in the rates of autism in these two countries is a result of changing diagnostic standards and better reporting of cases.

"We simply must face the reality that the exploding rate of autism is a major and unprecedented environmental crisis affecting hundreds of thousands of families," said Blaxill. "It is long past time for public health authorities in both countries to accept this tragic fact and to devote the necessary attention and resources to investigating the root causes of the autism epidemic."

In his new study, a comprehensive and detailed review of over fifty autism prevalence surveys from around the world, Blaxill identifies all the potential sources of survey bias and error in these surveys and demonstrates that none of these is sufficient to explain a meaningful part of the increasing autism rates reported in 19 published surveys of American and British children. "A handful of autism researchers have failed the autism community by neglecting to sound the alarm over the sharp increases in autism rates in the last 10-15 years. They have distorted the facts and deceived their fellow scientists by encouraging the comforting, but incorrect belief that the autism epidemic is not real," said Blaxill. "If we saw this kind of increase in a disability as a consequence of an infectious disease, the CDC would have long ago declared a national emergency. It's time for our public health officials move out of the denial phase and start acting responsibly. Our children's futures depend on it."

Blaxill's analysis demonstrated that real rates of autistic disorder have risen from less than 3 per 10,000 in the United States to well over 30 per 10,000, with a similar increase in cases on the broader autistic spectrum. Rates in the United Kingdom have risen a bit less sharply, but the rate of autistic spectrum disorders has reached over 60 per 10,000 there as well. "No matter how you look at the data, the truth is inescapable. Autism is a public health emergency that must have an environmental cause. It's time we started doing something about it," concluded Blaxill.

    CONTACT:
     Joe Giganti, 703-928-9695
     Joe@VeritasMediaGroup .com

I think they're over-reacting.

I think it's more USA propaganda to boost support for organisations like CAN and to back up what doctors are already doing by deliberatly mis-diagnosing patients with Autism so they don't get sued for damaging the brains of kids by giving unproperly tested medicines. This looks more like a money saving exersize to me.

But autism has always been part of humanity, so what are we talking about here?

This to me is just confrimation that the DSM method needs firming up, as an "autism" which is genetic cannot possibly be the same as an "autism" which has an environmental cause!

I know this is an unpopular topic among Aspies, but isn't it time to face up to the fact that being strongly autistic is just a different outlook (or differently wired brain, if you prefer; a purely genetic issue) and needn't have any assosciated morbidities, whereas the medical focus on morbidities is wrongly labelling as "autistic" many who do not have this different wiring?

Gwyn, I dont exactly understand your point? Do you mean that comorbids can look like autism in some people?

There are numerous other medical 'conditions' disorders that can have autistic-like traits/behaviors that are genetic/metabolic based, etc. So honestly, instead of assuming the person simply has autism, standardize testing for other medical conditions to rule things out a little bit better so we can get those ones that have 'comorbid' issues and such get the proper help for what they need and also help avoid misdiagnosis issues.

This is getting to be a real struggle!

Autism is a term that was in use well before Kanner and Asperger are supposed to have independantly (?) coined the phrase (so it was no coincidence; they were borrowing aspects of something that was already described) and refered to one aspect of temperament. Temperament is that part of our personalities which is inate, and cannot be changed (other than through brain damage). It is genetically determined (with all the usual caveates about variable gene expression).

Now pay attention Amy (as I will say this only once...well actually I expect I'll have to keep repeating it and it still won't sink in ) this is the basis of the Chandler & Macleod test, which is based on the studies of  Doncaster Humm, and Guy Wadsworth back in the early part of the previous century (before Kanner and Asperger) who's work was based in turn on the systematic classification developed by Aaron Rosanoff (who's papers I'm still looking for so if anyone can help, It'd be much appreciated!).

He apparently was the guy who first broke down temperament into some major categories (which have a number of sub-categories) namely; Hysteroid, Manic, Depressive, Paranoid, Epileptoid and of course Autisitic, all of which are modified by the "Normal" component.

If you've read the C&M thread you'll know what characterises autism by this definition, and it (amasingly?) fits with today's clinical understanding, and it can be measured. Life isn't quite that simple though, and most of those who reported their results also had the E component, and if we look at the popular notion of Aspies (like Roy on Coronation Street) the E component is also a good fit (as, to a lesser extent, is Depressive). Are these clinically related? It may be so, but as far as I'm aware, no one is studying this. What isn't inherent in this classification is any mention of synesthesia, motor skill deficiencies, or any of the other morbidities that the DSM usess to "define" AS. The DSM doesn't even measure "autism" as such, which is absurd.

It started with autism as an aspect of personality, then Kanner noted subjects who were strongly autisitic who had other problems (and there may well be a clinical connection of some kind, but maybe only due to incompatibilities between the "autism" genes, and others, a kind of hybridisation problem; not everyone who is strongly autisitic has these morbidities, and I suspect those who do are in a minority) but now the focus is on the "problems" with complete diregard for our differently wired brains, which only serves to confuse the issues. I find it hard to believe that such ineptitude among scientists isn't deliberate!

Look at what's happened to Aspergers papers; it was fundamentally about a bunch of boys of above average intelligence who lacked an instinctive facility for picking up non-verbal communications. Being a good scientist, Hans Asperger also noted the other morbidities they had (they were in an institution after all) but it wasn't the central issue. So what does the DSM do? It concentrates on an ever widening collection of morbidities and on lowering IQs, so we now have the ridiculous situation of diagnosed Aspies who are instinctively sociable, and have the same level of skills and drives as NTs (and are therefore, by any rational definition, NTs; it's worth recalling here that NT stands for NeuroTypical. The AS brain is not inherently dysfunctional, and is in many ways superior; it is not a damaged NT brain, they are measurable different!). You'll note too that the trolls are apt to latch onto the negative aspects of Aspergers papers, to the exclusion of the high IQ and lack of instinctive social skills, and insist that us sick Aspies are a burden on society and need to work harder at becoming NT. They are of course reinforced in their quest by the misdiagnosed and the politically correct all-inclusive types; there's a pattern here Amy, and it's undermining any attempt we make to assert our own definitions and seek freedon from discrimination. I hope Bonnie is taking note too; none of this is accidental, it's a deliberate attempt at preventing empowerment, and as long as we accept without question anyone who turns up claiming to be Aspies, then we can forget about making any meaningful progress.

Back to the question; yes Amy, whilst most(?) currently described as "autisitic" probably are, according to the classic definition, it's equally clear that some are not, and they are all over the various sites. Once you understand the original definition of autism it becomes quite easy to spot; there are some ways auties just don't think, and some that NTs don't, and vice versa, so with care it soon becomes fairly clear who's who. Humans being so complex, there's a lot of grey area, and most can't be categorised with certainty, but a minority are absolutely evident. It's worth noting that, while not all the obvious NTs are trolls, I've yet to encounter a troll that wasn't obviously non-autie!

I expect a lot of you are frothing at the mouth by now, and about to castigate me for being devisive? Don't waste your time, I'm not interested; what we have now is bad science, pure and simple, and it'll remain a major obstacle to progress until we get the various medical establishments to acknowledge this. Wrong diagnoses help no one!

What is your hidden agenda? I believe that you are forming the foundations of hideous edifice. Any one on the spectrum that "Uncle Aspies" like you dont like will be diagnosed as a brain damaged NT. I know the plantation mentality of getting a free disability check every month appeals to you. But the fact is the majority of us are not disabled. We find that the majority of life's difficulties comes from NTs being ignorant.

Not sure I get your point here ASman; are you objecting to getting legitimate diagnoses?

No Just Mish's concern with it. Her motives are suspect

OK, ta!

ASMan, Mish - I think you 2 need to stop this petty bickering.
I probably dont speak for just myself when I say I'm starting to get annoyed by it.

You both make valid points so stop arguing about it.  I agree that AS itself is more of a difference but I also think the comorbids have to be properly identified.  Thats why I want a proper assessment - because I have 'disabling' comorbids that can be treated.

I really dotn se why you are both arguing about it.

wolf


We are arguing about for one reason only. Mish stated that she is not a member of AFF nor does she agree with it's goals . The lastest  example is the minority status.

She is welcome on IRC #chatautism, and #asparents. But Why is in #aff all the time

Mish did state that she feels that she wishes to contribute to issues under discussion on this site she is free to do so. Not all people who join the site agree with all the issues, maybe some, but not others.