The puzzle that is the cause of Autism is one of the
internet’s favorite conundrums. In fact a google search into “what causes
autism” will turn up 120 million hits. Glyphosate is a popular choice amongst
the pseudoscience “elite”, so are GMOs, vaccines, high fructose corn syrup and antibiotics (yet
they strangely never mention the strong correlation between the increase in
autism and the increase in organic food sales). More reliable sources have attempted
to link the increase in autism to gestational diabetes, induced/augmented labor, pesticides and pollution. In fact, a 2012 report
cited that a billion dollars was spent between 2002-2012 to find the cause of
autism.
The rise of the autism epidemic, which the CDC states is characterized by a 30 percent increase in just
the last few years alone, is one of the most talked about public health issues
among both scientists and pseudoscientists alike. But what if the conversation
is moot? The rise, and we here at ACSH have spoken about this before, might not be a change
in autism prevalence but a change in the way we talk about autism.
One change is that historically autism was a
neurological, developmental disorder unto itself, but in the early 1990s it
changed to a spectrum of disorders (Autism Spectrum disorder or ASD). This
change brought with it an expanding list of symptoms and a more subtle
classifications of autistic behaviors, which led to more types of behavioral
profiles being classified as autistic. Another change in the way we talk about
autism is the classification that as an epidemic which brings with it a
connotation that there is a single, possibly environmental cause. Referring to
autism as an epidemic leads one to think of it in the same class of diseases as
Malaria: if we can stop the Plasmodium parasite, we can stop the spread
of Malaria, becomes if we can stop GMOs, pollution, induced labor or whatever
we can stop the spread of autism.
The idea that the autism epidemic is an epiphenomenon
rather than a real one is not new, but now it has data from two recent studies
to back it up. The most recent study
conducted in Sweden and published in the British Medical Journal
examined a large volume of data from both a twin study and the Swedish national
patient registry and compared autism phenotypes vs. autism diagnoses over a ten
year period. They found that although the number of ASD diagnoses increased
over that period, the number of people with actual autism phenotypes remained
stable.
A similar study in Denmark from earlier this year, published in JAMA
Pediatrics, found that more than 60 percent of the increase of ASD
diagnoses can be attributed to reporting practices and not actual increases in
patients with ASD. Taken together, these two two studies suggest that autism
rates, either defined as classical autism or ASD, have probably remained
unchanged despite what you may see on your facebook or twitter feed.
ACSH’s Nicholas Staropoli adds, “The focus we as a
society give to autism is great because it truly is a debilitating disorder;
however, our energy and efforts are misplaced as we are spending too much time
looking for causes in all the wrong places. Our hope at ACSH is that these two
studies can refocus researchers away from the epidemic discussion, which leads
us towards looking for environmental causes, and instead use that billion
dollars towards finding the real cause or causes of ASD, the most likely of
which are genetic.”
No comments:
Post a Comment