CLAIM TWO:
The Autism Epidemic is Real
Similar to Claim #1, Olmsted states that the autism epidemic is real and that excessive vaccinations are the culprit. He goes on to state those denying the severity of this epidemic detract from the efforts that could be put into determining why the prevalence of ASD has increased recently. Olmsted goes on to state that since the rise in autism is real, the cause can only be environmental, so all research efforts should be focused on this aspect of autism prevalence.
He later states that autism is the defining disorder of our age and is connected to as well as essentially the result of the terrible state of health care in America, the suppression of free speech, and the rise of political correctness.
He later states that autism is the defining disorder of our age and is connected to as well as essentially the result of the terrible state of health care in America, the suppression of free speech, and the rise of political correctness.
Debunking This Claim:
Olmsted states that the cause of increased numbers of autism must be the result of an environmental factor; however, according to an article, no sound scientific evidence indicates that the increasing number of diagnosed cases of ASD arises from anything other than both increased testing and purposely broadened diagnostic criteria. Yet, the rise in diagnosed cases can be, and has been, misconstrued as an increase in the prevalence of the disorder.
The general public may not have the means to access scientific literature, which can lead them to determine their beliefs on health issues based on "scientific" websites found on the internet such as Age of Autism, which actually does not provide very sound scientific support. Thus, the public may not be aware of the changing diagnostic criteria when it comes to diagnosing ASD and may misinterpret the rising number of diagnoses as a cause for concern.
An article published in the International Journal of Epidemiology, sought to address the rising concerns for increased autism prevalence rates by conducting a study over 7,000 individuals with autism to determine the extent to which the increased prevalence of autism in California has been affected by diagnostics. Researchers found that the odds of an individual acquiring a diagnosis of autism were increased at times when the practices for diagnosing autism changed, and this accounted for 1/4 of the observed increase in prevalence in California between the years of 1992 and 2005. Similarly, a study in JAMA Pediatrics found that changes in reporting practices accounted for most of the 60% increase in the observed prevalence of ASD in Denmark between the years of 1980 to 1991. Thus, reporting and diagnostic practices have had an influence in this observed increase in prevalence of autism.
Thus, though there may be an increase in prevalence of ASD, that does not necessarily entail environmental factors such as increased vaccinations are contributing to this observed increase in prevalence. As we've all heard, correlation does not mean causation! Over the past few years, as these sources have stated, the diagnostic criteria for autism has shifted, which can affect the amount of individuals diagnosed with the disorder due to altered parameters and definitions. If you observe an increase in diagnoses for any disorder, it is important to always take into consideration the diagnostic criteria as well as the amount of testing being conducted, important factors that can help to alleviate misconceptions on an observed increased prevalence.
The general public may not have the means to access scientific literature, which can lead them to determine their beliefs on health issues based on "scientific" websites found on the internet such as Age of Autism, which actually does not provide very sound scientific support. Thus, the public may not be aware of the changing diagnostic criteria when it comes to diagnosing ASD and may misinterpret the rising number of diagnoses as a cause for concern.
An article published in the International Journal of Epidemiology, sought to address the rising concerns for increased autism prevalence rates by conducting a study over 7,000 individuals with autism to determine the extent to which the increased prevalence of autism in California has been affected by diagnostics. Researchers found that the odds of an individual acquiring a diagnosis of autism were increased at times when the practices for diagnosing autism changed, and this accounted for 1/4 of the observed increase in prevalence in California between the years of 1992 and 2005. Similarly, a study in JAMA Pediatrics found that changes in reporting practices accounted for most of the 60% increase in the observed prevalence of ASD in Denmark between the years of 1980 to 1991. Thus, reporting and diagnostic practices have had an influence in this observed increase in prevalence of autism.
Thus, though there may be an increase in prevalence of ASD, that does not necessarily entail environmental factors such as increased vaccinations are contributing to this observed increase in prevalence. As we've all heard, correlation does not mean causation! Over the past few years, as these sources have stated, the diagnostic criteria for autism has shifted, which can affect the amount of individuals diagnosed with the disorder due to altered parameters and definitions. If you observe an increase in diagnoses for any disorder, it is important to always take into consideration the diagnostic criteria as well as the amount of testing being conducted, important factors that can help to alleviate misconceptions on an observed increased prevalence.