Autism Cases on the Rise:Study Shows Increase Is Real, Not Just Due to Changes in Diagnosis Criteria

[PA Democrat]

<snip>

Many researchers have believed that the continuous increase in autism cases over the last decade -- particularly the huge increase seen in California -- isn't real, but can be explained by "artifacts."

Among these artifacts are the recent broadening of the diagnostic criteria for autism and greatly increased diagnosis of autism at younger ages. Both these factors could make it seem like there are more autism cases than there were before.

These artifacts do explain part of the rise in autism cases, shows a rigorous study by Irva Hertz-Picciotto, PhD, MPH, chief of the division of environmental and occupational health at the University of California, Davis.

But even taken together, they don't explain even half of the huge increase in cases.

http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20090108/autism-cases-rise

[trotsky]

1. Despite the elimination of thimerosal in all mandatory childhood vaccines.

So science was right, and the anti-vaxers were wrong. Again.

[KittyWampus]

10. Your conclusion would only be sounder if autism rates were lowered. It might be a case

of even more toxins in the environment.

BTW, I'm just pointing this out.

When it comes to thimeresol as autism trigger, I have no dog in that fight.

[trotsky]

13. Can you read?

Autism rates continued to rise AFTER thimerosal was eliminated. *IF* the rates had decreased, that would have meant thimerosal WAS associated with increase autism rates. Do you understand?

[elias7]

2. say goodbye to the vaccine theory

thimerosal was removed from vaccines in 2001. These data are from 2007. Autism is still rising.

From the same site:

http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20080107/thimerosal-down-but-autism-rising

[eilen]

3. I never bought the canard that the rates were steady

that autism just was not diagnosed correctly and that it was dt vaccines. My generation (gen Xers) all received the vaccines. I went to public schools and lived in regular neighborhoods (suburban to city to rural) where we kids went everywhere on our bikes, cut through everyone's yards and knew who all the neighbors were--there were no secret closet undiagnosed autistic kids hiding out under the guise of CP or MR. We might see one autism case but Down's Syndrome was more common. After more mothers went to work and the likely rise in takeout and convenience foods, we started seeing a higher increase of ADD kids or ADDH kids (I was in high school by then). I was born in 1965, at the start of it, my parents divorced in 1971/72, first on the block. My mother and stepfather were "living in sin" by 1974 and both were working full time by 1976 and then both lost jobs (real estate) and got new jobs but added part-time jobs on top of that.

[pnwmom]

5. What you aren't factoring in is that the sheer number of vaccines (and exposure to

mercury) was much higher in the 80's, when my children were born, then it was in the 60's, when you were born. You did NOT receive all the vaccines that they did. I had three children and each subsequent child had more infantile vaccines than the previous one.

It's even worse now. If the effect of thimerosal is cumulative, as is likely, then even more children might have been affected if it hadn't been eliminated.

My daughter, who was the oldest, had no children with autism in her class. Her brother, who was 5 years younger, had a couple. The next brother, 5 years later, had several. Something is clearly "going on" and I think it is a combination of factors. It might be even worse today if thimerosal was still part of the equation.

[eilen]

18. I joined the Navy in the 1980's

and received every vaccine known to mankind.

[pnwmom]

21. I'm sure you did! But you didn't receive them all as an infant, fortunately.

And I'm sure anyone joining today gets to have even more vaccines.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

36. maybe its the increased and more intense rate of vaccination period

vaccines have an effect on the body.

The number of vaccines given to babies and small children has been
greatly increased in number and frequency.

Babies often get a fever after getting vaccinated, perhaps that is because the
vaccine is having multiple effects.

Maybe thimerosol just worsens the effect, or maybe it coincides with the increase
and frequency of vaccination schedules.

But there is no proof that vaccines, or the increased number of vaccines isn't
related to the increase in autism.

No one knows - but someone better find out so we can prevent unnecessary damage to our
children.

[trotsky]

37. The one thing that actually has a statistical foundation

is the amount of time spent watching TV as an infant or toddler. Rather than chase down every wild hare that the anti-vax luddites think they see, how about we investigate something with a hint of evidence behind it?

but someone better find out so we can prevent unnecessary damage to our children

Of course you realize that many autistic adults would take GREAT offense to your insinuation that they are somehow "damaged." There were autistic people LONG before we began vaccination, you know.

[pnwmom]

4. Those who are drawing the conclusion that thimerosal is proven safe are wrong.

There is a subset of children, such as children with mitochondrial disorders (and possibly those with malabsorption disorders, such as Celiac), who ARE likely at higher risk of autism if they are exposed to thimerosal. In the case of children with mitochondrial disorders, this has already been acknowledged at the federal level by the vaccine injury case won by the 9 year old girl. But this study wasn't designed to measure that.

And the study cannot tell us what the rate would be if mercury had NOT been eliminated from the vaccines; it could have been even higher.

I think it is most likely that there isn't a SINGLE cause of autism in every child, just as there isn't a single cause of allergies in every child, and that -- as is the case with allergies -- exposure to multiple environmental factors, combined with various genetic factors -- might be involved in eliciting the syndrome. Until those at risk from the mercury in the vaccines can be identified, the only way to assure their safety is to eliminate the unnecessary exposure for all children.

From the article at the OP:

Bernard is far less concerned about what the data do not show than about what they do show: autism rates are still going up.

"This tells us that because autism is steadily increasing, there is an environmental source," she says. "You cannot use this data to rule out thimerosal as a factor. What you can say is there may be -- and probably are -- other environmental triggers that play a role. It is probable that exposure to these other factors may be increasing."

If thimerosal does play a role in autism, it isn't a big one, says Gary W. Goldstein, MD, president and CEO of Baltimore's Kennedy Krieger Institute.

"The thimerosal is pretty much gone now, and autism rates are still going up," Goldstein tells WebMD. "It just is not the case that thimerosal in vaccines is the primary cause for the increase in autism. Could there be 5% of children more susceptible to autism and the thimerosal just tipped them over the edge? Yes, but this study did not address that question."

[KittyWampus]

8. when it comes to vaccines, some people can't grasp that they ARE potentially harmful

That some people are essentially "allergic" to them and the effects can lead to life long health issues or even death.

IMO, the number of children adversely effected by vaccination is due to both the higher number of vaccines given and also the fact all of our immune systems are being taxed to the maximum.

An infant's immune system isn't just potentially at risk from a vaccine, it's also under assault from toxins in our food, water and air supply, housing materials, cleaning materials.

Yet another round of vaccinations for a young infant might just be the one thing that pushes that little one's immune system over the edge.

The ideal situation would be developing blood/DNA tests that can be done for each individual child before vaccination to determine if any given vaccine will cause a negative reaction.

Then there's the whole issue of the sheer QUANTITY of vaccines given now to very young infants.

[pnwmom]

11. Yes, the quantity of vaccines went up with each of my three children.

And even my first received several more than I did.

I think it would be better if parents resisted the urging to have multiple vaccines at once. If the vaccines were more spread out, immediate reactions from a particular vaccine would be easier to identify and the baby would also be less stressed by not having too many vaccines at once.

[trotsky]

12. That's not the point - but nice try changing the subject.

Clearly thimerosal was NOT the causal factor for the rise in autism. Now can the anti-vaxers acknowledge that? You don't seem to be willing.

I think it is most likely that there isn't a SINGLE cause of autism in every child, just as there isn't a single cause of allergies in every child, and that -- as is the case with allergies -- exposure to multiple environmental factors, combined with various genetic factors -- might be involved in eliciting the syndrome.

That right there is a friggin' HUGE backtrack from what's been the anti-vax party line for years. Especially the acknowledgment of genetic factors - that had formerly been taboo. It's wonderful to see.

Until those at risk from the mercury in the vaccines can be identified, the only way to assure their safety is to eliminate the unnecessary exposure for all children.

Which is what was already done - why are you repeating the lie that the mandatory vaccines still have thimerosal?

[KittyWampus]

14. you have a very warped view of people who've children adversely effected by vaccines.

Parents who have had children vaccinated are not "anti-vaxers". Hello, they had their children vaccinated. And then their children developed problems as a result.

The FACT is vaccinations have adverse effects on some children.

So this topic goes far beyond whether thimersol/mercury are in vaccines or not.

[trotsky]

15. And you change the subject too?

Ah well. Figures.

The FACT is vaccinations have adverse effects on some children.

Yup. Measles, mumps, rubella, polio, and various other diseases did too. Funny, that. No treatment is ever going to be 100% safe. Aspirin can kill.

And I pointed out how mistaken you are about your autism rate assertion.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

38. well said. The "anti vaxers" HAD their children vaccinated

often the logical people are hounded out of this forum, but thankfully you didn't let them hound you
out.

There's a higher frequency of autism than in the past - it could be due to
the increase in number and frequency of vaccines given to babies and small children.

It could be due to the preservative in vaccines.

It could be due to some other particle in the many many vaccines.

It could be due to other toxins in our environment.

We don't know, but the drug companies sure as hell don't want us to question
their precious money makers.

And google Bush or Rumsfeld + vaccines.

[pnwmom]

20. Why do you insist on lumping together all people who have expressed any

concerns about thimerosal? I've never taken the position you refer to as the "anti vax party line."

My position has been consistent all along. I disagree with people who insist that thimerosal has been proven completely safe. Yes, the vast majority of infants have not suffered from serious side effects of the vaccines, and the vaccines are proven effective in eliminating serious childhood diseases. That's why my own children received almost all of them. (With the exception of the older version of the pertussis vaccine, to which my family appears to be genetically susceptible. I am the last person to deny that genetic factors could affect a child's vulnerability to a vaccine.)

The fact that this study shows that autism rates are still increasing doesn't prove that it was wise in the past to unnecessarily use a form of mercury as a preservative in infant vaccines. Until the use of mercury was banned, children were receiving higher and higher combined doses (because of the increasing number of mandatory vaccines) even though the research didn't exist to prove that the higher exposure was safe. Until the exposure risk could be better quantified, and unless and until all the children who are at heightened risk could be identified, the prudent thing to do was to eliminate its use.

I did not "repeat the lie that the mandatory vaccines still have thimerosal." In the sentence you quoted, I had in mind the thimerosal that remains in the flu vaccines, which are not mandatory but are still recommended for children; as well as the use of thimerosal in other countries.

This is what I also said (and the meaning should be obvious even to you):

"And the study cannot tell us what the rate would be if mercury had NOT been eliminated from the vaccines; it could have been even higher." Clearly, I was acknowledging that thimerosal has been removed.

[trotsky]

23. There is a real group of profit- and fame-seeking individuals

who are responsible for putting out most of the vaccine information. They are the anti-vaxers. You'll find them at NVIC and other less-than-reputable websites. I blame them for the confusion and misinformation that you and other DUers have.

The fact that this study shows that autism rates are still increasing doesn't prove that it was wise in the past to unnecessarily use a form of mercury as a preservative in infant vaccines.

However doesn't prove it was wise to remove a cheap and very effective preservative, either - especially since removing the one thing anti-vaxers harped and harped about for years ended up causing absolutely no reduction in autism rates - nor even a stabilization of them.

In the sentence you quoted, I had in mind the thimerosal that remains in the flu vaccines, which are not mandatory but are still recommended for children; as well as the use of thimerosal in other countries.

Your sentence was:

Until those at risk from the mercury in the vaccines can be identified, the only way to assure their safety is to eliminate the unnecessary exposure for all children.

Flu vaccines are already available in a thimerosal-free version that any parent can request. Or they can go with the new vaccine Flumist that is applied to the nasal passages. You are confusing the issue with these kinds of blanket statements - again, I do not blame you personally as this is a very common tactic by the anti-vax sites. You are also confused about the dose-response relationship, which is again a big tool of the anti-vaxers used to peddle their misinformation. I am sorry you have been misled.

[pnwmom]

24. How am I confused about the dose-response relationship? n/t

[trotsky]

25. The fact that you have to ask indicates the confusion.

Check the basic definition on wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dose-response_relationship) and tell me how you think it applies to thimerosal. In particular, how it pertains to the theory that thimerosal is a toxin that causes autism in some individuals. Explain what reducing the amount of thimerosal that a population is exposed to, should do to the incidence of autism in that population if the theory is true.

[pnwmom]

29. I'm more familiar with OSHA regulations that pertain to various chemicals.

And the "dose" is an essential part of the equation.

Your theory, on the other hand, isn't even backed by any references.

From the Wikipedia article you cite:

"This article does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed. (January 2008)"

On the other hand, I don't view it as contradicting anything I've said. We don't know what the dose-relationship response might be because the FDA refused to make its massive database available to qualified researchers.

"The first point along the graph where a response above zero is reached is usually referred to as a threshold-dose. For most beneficial or recreational drugs, the desired effects are found at doses slightly greater than the threshold dose. At higher doses still, undesired side effects appear and grow stronger as the dose increases. The stronger a particular substance is, the steeper this curve will be."

[trotsky]

33. Wow - talk about grasping at straws!

I grabbed Wikipedia because it was the first hit on Google! Oh man, the dose-response relationship is not MY theory - it is THE operative theory of how poisons and drugs affect our bodies. And you can only nitpick Wikipedia's standard disclaimer? :rofl:

On the other hand, I don't view it as contradicting anything I've said.

Yes, as a matter of fact it does. Denying it doesn't help. The basic summary is that just about any substance will affect certain people before others. Some might be sensitive to a very low dose, others very high. We might not know what the entire curve looks like for some substances, BUT we do know that the curve is consistent - and the smaller the dose, the fewer people affected. At this point with vaccination, the only children who receive thimerosal are those whose parents or guardians A) get them a flu shot and B) don't opt for Flumist or a thimerosal-free version. The overall dose given to children has MARKEDLY dropped - for children who do not get the flu shot it is now ZERO.

HOWEVER, autism rates have continued to rise. The massive drop in thimerosal dosage created NO reduction in autism rates. That right there is damn strong proof that thimerosal never had much if anything to do with it in the first place.

Now if you still can't understand, there's really not much else I can say. This is all very basic stuff.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

39. there's a group who profits hugely off of vaccines alright, namely Big Pharma

and they work for vaccine manufacturers and others OWN stock in the manufacturers.

There are some who desperately seek to stop people from speaking up against the
overdose of vaccines forced upon us.

All in the name of profit.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

6. There are many causes for the behaviors found in the autism spectrum

including malabsorption of vitamins and minerals as well as food allergies and yeast infections to a buildup of toxins in the body. I know that each autism case we see here at the clinic is treated as a unique case rather than giving a "one size fits all" treatment. Progress is monitored not only by observation of behavior but also through periodic testing to make sure the body is functioning properly.

[pnwmom]

9. Your approach sounds ideal to me. I don't know why so many people seem to expect

there to be a single cause of autism.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

26. The doctor I work for uses D.A.N. protocol

when treating autistic patients. To quote from her letter to parents of autistic children:

"After working with autistic children since 1999, I am personally convinced that is it an end-stage of a multitude of different possible toxic exposures in a child who has a genetic or congenital lack of resistant to toxins. We do live in a toxic world! Anyone who says that one factor and only one--mercury is the one being touted loudly and publicly right now--causes autism and therefore can provide a simple cure is not someone to whom you should be listening." The letter goes on for several pages, explaining different theories of what causes autism and detailing the approach we take to helping these children.

[pnwmom]

30. That sounds similar to what an allergist told me about my allergies.

I know this analogy is simplified, but what he said was to think of my allergies as a "bucket." All my small allergies were contributing to the bucket. Even though none of them were extreme, I had so many that my bucket was full. So the key to relief of my symptoms was to reduce exposure to individual allergies wherever I could.

[eilen]

19. I concur

Take a gander at Nina Planck's book, Real Food.

I think a case could be made for brain and autoimmune disease being directly related to our diets over the past 50 years.

[pnwmom]

22. All the information we're learning now about gluten sensitivity and Celiac

disease supports that.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

27. I recommend that people have a food sensitivy profile test

the one we run consists of getting blood drawn, and tells the sensitivity to 93 different foods. It is amazing what a person can be sensitive to! A lot of folks are fine except for one or two foods--often yeast is a culprit. Some patients are sensitive to whey but not casein, while others have gluten sensitivity and are fine with milk. Others might be fine with everything except bananas.

[pnwmom]

31. Do you test for anti-gliadin antibodies as well as the more modern Celiac test?

Many people with gluten sensitivity (reactivity that doesn't necessarily cause damage to the villi of the upper intestine) respond to the anti-gliadin tests, but not to the anti-endomysial test. Some of these people are having problems such as neurological, liver, lower bowel symptoms and GERD -- but not classic Celiac.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

32. yes we do

We do an IgG test--not a scratch test, but a blood test. Realize I'm the bookkeeper at the office, and am not a medical professional, so I'm not quite sure of all the terminology.

[sinkingfeeling]

7. Why wouldn't we be seeing more? With all of the chemicals and fake stuff in our air, food, and water

I would predict huge increases any disease/illness of the human body. Toads are disappearing, birds and bee populations are way down, fish are dying.

[varkam]

16. One of the problems is that the paper misses some huge artifacts...

Here's a take on the paper from a doc I read regularaly:

The key to putting this study into context is the phrase “other artifacts”. This study did not control for all possible artifacts resulting in higher diagnosis rates. Specifically, it did not address surveillance, which is likely the dominant factor. It also did not control for shifting diagnosis. In other words, 20 years ago a child may have been diagnosed with a non-specific speech disorder, and today they would be diagnosed with autism, so-called diagnostic substitution as was found by Bishop in 2008.

Another factor is that physicians, teachers, and parents have increased awareness not only of the symptoms but of the autistic label. How many parents who notice that their child is socially withdrawn are going to seek out services or medical attention?

This study did nothing to assess these potentially huge factors. So what this study really did was account for 10% of the increase in autism diagnosis. But it did not show anything about the other 90%, nor rule out the leading contenders for diagnostic artifact. I will add it to my list of references on this question, but it certainly does not overturn all the prior studies listed.

Link

So, in other words, maybenotsomuch. In addition, it is really kind a loser for the "mercury militia" in that as thimerosal was phased out of vaccines this study tends to support the hypothesis that there really is no connection between thimerosal and autism.

[pnwmom]

17. It doesn't support or disprove the hypothesis that there "really is no connection

between thimerosal and autism."


As the OP says, this study was not designed to answer the question of whether there is a subset of children (including children with mitochondrial disorders and malabsorption disorders) who ARE adversely affected by mercury in vaccines.

[varkam]

28. Well...

I said tend to, seeing as how thimerosal was phased out, you would expect to see a drop in autism rates if that hypothesis were true - which hasn't been seen since 2001 (which is when it was removed from mandatory childhood vaccines).

Furthermore, I never addressed the issue of specific sub-populations.

The main point of my post was focused on the fact that there are some artifacts that the study did not examine that might be able to explain a good portion of the remaining variance.

[Celebration]

34. then, by this logic

autism cases went up not because autism is rising, but because this study did not take into consideration certain artefacts. In that case, autism is not rising, but could be declining.

If autism is declining (which is the exact opposite of what this study says, but what you say *could* be true), then maybe it is due to thimerosal being taken out of children's vaccines.

Just to show that we can get almost any answer we want using this logic.......

Autism is rising (study), or not (didn't take artefacts into account).

In any case, whether the study's conclusions are correct or not, clearly there is no useful information here on the cause of autism.

[varkam]

35. Except that my proposition has more than mere speculation to support it.

I find it unclear when you say that autism rose because the study failed to take into account certain artifacts. I'm pretty sure you don't mean to say that the study had an influence on epidemiological data - but I'm not exactly sure what your meaning is.

It's a reasonable inference to make that as the number of diagnoses of autism increases, so do the number of cases of autism. Generally, there is a 1:1 comparison there. What the hypothesis is is that the number of "true" cases of autism has remained fairly static - that it has not actually risen or declined. Just our methods of detecting it have grown more sophisticated.

If thimerosal were, in fact, a culprit then you would expect to see at least a shift in the slope of diagnoses, given that it has been phased out of vaccines. That has not occurred.

Methinks you would have to do some pretty hard backpedaling and hand waving to try to support the proposition that the number of true cases of autism has been declining since thimerosal was phased out, especially considering that the shift in diagnostic criteria and surveillance have been going since pre-2001.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

40. the number and frequency of vaccinations has increased hugely

and it could be the high concentration, or just some other nasty shit that is in
vaccines.

Theres alot of nasty stuff in them.

[Celebration]

41. trying to relate this study to thimerosal in any way

Just doesn't work. This study does not look at possible causes.

[varkam]

42. I never said that the study did look at possible causes.

The study does address autism incidence, and it has long been one of the canards of the "mercury militia" that there is an epidemic of autism that points to some environmental cause (of which thimerosal was singled out, though that hypothesis has fallen into disrepute).

That being said, even though this study does not examine cause, per se, that does not mean that it is totally out of left field to use this study to examine what impact - if any - it will have on the debate.

[Celebration]

43. What it tries to do

is to measure the extent of the problem, and whether that problem is getting worse, better, or staying the same. That may be helpful in figuring out the number of resources to use to try to combat the problem.

As for causes, I would have to guess that there are a multitude of different causes, some which may be increasing in society and some which may be decreasing in society. If that is the case, then it is impossible to use incidence over time as any sort of indicator as to what is or isn't one of the causes.

Good grief--we can't even agree if the study on incidence is valid or not. And frankly, I have no idea or opinion on that.

[varkam]

44. .

What it tries to do is to measure the extent of the problem, and whether that problem is getting worse, better, or staying the same. That may be helpful in figuring out the number of resources to use to try to combat the problem.

I agree. I don't think that I wrote anywhere that the study looks at anything other than incidence.

As for causes, I would have to guess that there are a multitude of different causes, some which may be increasing in society and some which may be decreasing in society. If that is the case, then it is impossible to use incidence over time as any sort of indicator as to what is or isn't one of the causes.

I would agree - which makes the whole thimerosal and vaccine nonsense, by extension, even sillier. It's a whole field of swapping correlation for causation and post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies while looking for societal trends that line of with the incidence data. You can, however, rule out causes (or at least major ones) by looking at epidemiological data. As I wrote, if thimerosal really were the big bad autism boogey-man that people made it out to be, then one would expect to see at least a shift in the slope of the line representing diagnoses since it was phased out of vaccines in 2001 - but this has not occurred.

Good grief--we can't even agree if the study on incidence is valid or not. And frankly, I have no idea or opinion on that.

I would tend to think that if it left out the surveillance artifact, then my guess would be notsomuch.