David Kirby on HuffPo: Autism Rate Now At One Percent"
Read and comment on David Kirby's "Autism Rate Now At One Percent" at Huffington Post.
A pair of federally funded studies on autism rates is about to make news -- big news -- and it isn't good: It would appear that somewhere around one percent of all US children currently have an autism spectrum disorder. The rate is even higher among six to 11 year olds and among boys, according to data from at least one of the new studies.
If you are an expectant parent, or planning to have a child soon, you might want to sit down before absorbing these staggering statistics, recently released by the National Survey of Children's Health (NSCH), which is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the US Department of Health and Human Services.
According to data from the 2007 telephone survey of parents of nearly 82,000 US children, the odds of a child receiving an ASD diagnosis are one in 63. If it is a boy, the chances climb to a science fiction-like level of one in 38, or 2.6% of all male children in America...
I believe it's actually much higher than 1% (especially in boys) when you consider the full spectrum of autism. Just look at some of the boys in my neighborhood for a shocking sample.
Posted by: Greg | August 13, 2009 at 09:25 AM
"the rate of ASD was 40% higher in 6-11 year olds (140-per-10,000, or 1-in-71) than the current rate of 12-17 year olds (100-per-10,000, or 1-in-100). "
David made some great points about how the introduction of the Hep B vaccine for newborns may have contributed some to the increase.
And since 6-11 year olds in a 2007 study would have a birth year around 1996 - 2001, I also wanted to mention that:
In August 1997, the flu shot was first recommended for ALL pregnant women who would be in their 2nd or 3rd trimester during flu season. http://www.epi.hss.state.ak.us/bulletins/docs/b1997_35.htm
So that's another vaccine that would have been received (prenatally) by the 6-11 year old group, that most children in the 12-17 year old age group would not have received.
(prior to that change in 1997, only "Pregnant women with medical conditions that increase their risk of complications from influenza" were mentioned as a target group for the flu vaccine from 1989 - 1996.)
Posted by: CM | August 12, 2009 at 09:43 PM
So frustrating that this is not getting out there. People still don't know! Five years ago I didn't know. I thought that autism was a rare condition, had vaguely heard of the vaccine connection but thought it had been disproved. And I work in health care. I was worried about heart defects, cerebral palsy, you name it, everything but autism! I look back and think "what an idiot-- why didn't I do some research on vaccines" but the fact is I was lied to. There's more information about vaccines and autism in the mainstream now than a few years ago. But parents are still being lied to and most people are going to believe their pediatrician before they believe Jenny McCarthy or that pissed-off friend with the strange child. That is the truly horrific part.
Posted by: julie | August 12, 2009 at 04:22 PM
David wrote:
CDC officials have been analyzing the 1996 birth cohort (2004 data on 8-year-olds) for years. I asked the agency a few months ago about the slow progress in releasing the numbers and was told that the data were currently "under review." No response was given to written questions about data collected from the 1998 or 2000 cohorts (in 2006 and 2008, respectively)."
While they are answering David's reasonable request to update, long overdue, figures on the rate of autism....isn't it about time that SOMEONE on our federal government "public health oversight" committees...demanded the CDC also update their previous, blood-curdling statistic that..."1 in every 6 American child" suffers childhood development problems?
(Including...but not limited to - chronic autoimmune disorders, such as, allergies, asthma, juvenile type 1 diabetes, juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, ADD, ADHD, etc. etc)
Shouldn't CONGRESS want to know how many children are at risk of suffering childhood development problems...TODAY...is it "1 in 10"....or...."1 in 3"?
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | August 12, 2009 at 03:24 PM
More people really should be listening to Linderman Live! on Autism One Radio. We broke this story with an interview with Stephen Shore as he was leaving the meeting with ASA director Lee Grossman at the St. Charles, IL. conference. You can go to www.autismone.org and look up the archives for July 23rd 2009. admittedly, we should have ran with this harder than we did, at we not been so busy with advertising for Autism File Magazine.
The number is frieghtening but as usual, I'm sure that the national media will downplay these new figures, as mentioned by david in the article.
Posted by: curt linderman sr | August 12, 2009 at 09:58 AM
Most people don't care until it affects them, sad to say. My son is 22, 10 yrs ago people we encountered had no clue about autism & I had to tactfully educate them. Now... people come up to me & say they have a relative, friend, etc whose child has autism. Scary....
Posted by: Peggy | August 12, 2009 at 07:53 AM
Scary and very sad! It's amazing how there is more focus and attention on the Swine Flu then the autism epidemic that we have on our hands...Gee I wonder why???? Swine Flu creates scare and money all in one....Autism is scary and cost money!!!
Posted by: Carmela | August 12, 2009 at 12:13 AM
If 1in150 is every 20 min, how many now??
My math brain has shut down. Is it now 1 every 14 1/2 min. Someone young and smart please do the math.
Posted by: K Fuller Yuba City | August 11, 2009 at 09:58 PM
If you want to get the feds attention, you have to proclaim "this is a matter of national security" ...
Posted by: Harry Tembenis | August 11, 2009 at 09:35 PM
I'm sitting here thinking that if 1 in 63 children suddenly developed one of those viruses that all those "safe" vaccines are supposed to prevent, you better believe all of us parents who want further testing and research done on those vaccines would be the first ones to be blamed for it.
Posted by: Debra | August 11, 2009 at 09:12 PM
Why oh why is this not the front page headline, Arianna?
I wonder how the CDC, AAP and other deniers will spin this. The good news is so many older children have managed to recover. I suppose they will be dismissed as "misdiagnosed".
Posted by: julie | August 11, 2009 at 08:57 PM
If 1 in 38 boys were being born blind, do ya think it would cause folks to get serious about what the cause is ?
Posted by: Richard | August 11, 2009 at 07:38 PM