So, you supposed champions of autistic minorities...

[AGXStarseed]

(Not written by me. Some of this article talks about the discredited link between Autism and Vaccines. Under AspieCentral's rules, I would like to inform you to keep the discussion away from that particular topic).


So, you supposed champions of autistic minorities, why aren’t you commenting on the new autism prevalence report?



One of the first things I check when I see a new study on autism prevalence is how the prevalence varies among racial and ethnic sub populations. In the U.S., this usually means comparing autism rates among Caucasians to that among African Americans and Hispanics (the most reported minority groups). I am especially interested given that in the past year the groups that promote the failed notion that autism is a vaccine-induced-epidemic have tried to position themselves as champions of the African American community.

So with the new autism prevalence study out, I decided to check on what these various “champions” are saying. I look specifically because the reported autism prevalence estimate is slightly lower among African Americans and much lower among Hispanics.



In case you want the conclusion–few of these groups seem to have even read the new study, and none of them have anything to say about the disparities among racial/ethnic communities.

And this is a shame. Under diagnosis means under-served autistics. It means autistics likely getting the wrong supports.

Here’s a non scientific survey of various groups and their reactions to the new autism prevalence study:

The Age of Autism blog has New Estimate 1 in 45 American Children Have Autism. There’s no evidence that whoever put this article up actually bothered to read the CDC report. Much less comment on the racial disparity reported.


This should shock Americans for two reasons. One, the sheer epidemic numbers of this life and demographic landscape altering diagnosis is appalling and unacceptable. Two, the CDC continues to prove its inability to keep track of American medical conditions and provide any measure of protection. Like school shootings, autism has continued to rage across the nation unabated. Cui bono? Not families. Not the children, many of whom are now young adults.


The article is just listed as “Posted by Age of Autism” but the wording is very characteristic of Kim Stagliano. Likening autism to schoo shootings that continue “to rage across the nation unabated” is very much in her style. It’s not a style I appreciate. My child is not like a school shooting, thank you very much Age of Autism, and you are doing zero to help and much to harm my child’s chances for a better life with your stigmatizing approach.

Focus for Health (formerly Focus Vaccines), the organization that funded the Brian Hooker “reanalysis” of the CDC data and the media campaign to try to create a controversy around the so-called link between the MMR and autism in African American boys? They have a confusing article “Do vaccines cause autism?” which doesn’t address the question of race/ethnicity at all.

“Dr. Bob” Sears, who recently claimed to speak for all autistic students in California posted a link to a TACA (Talk about Curing Autism) blog article. TACA gives little indication that they read he CDC study beyond the one number, and doesn’t address racial/ethnic disparities at all. The TACA article is titled Autism is now 1 in 45 – will anyone listen?. Hey, Lisa Akerman–Autism is STILL under diagnosed in the Hispanic community. When will you listen? And, “Dr. Bob”, gee thanks for cutting and pasting a link to someone else’s blog post. That’s going to make a change in our community. And by “our” I don’t include you.

Andrew Wakefield’s “Autism Media Channel” copied a link to an NBC article about the new study. Nothing more. Wakefield and his Autism Media Channel were the primary force in promoting the supposed controversy about the MMR vaccine and African American boys. Well, the autism prevalence is slightly lower in African Americans, Wakefield. And much lower in Hispanics. Do you care?

The self-named (and inaccurately named) National Vaccine Information Center is another group that only put a link to someone else on their facebook page. And, you guessed it, nothing about race/ethinic groups.

I don’t see anything on the Generation Rescue blog, but a short blurb on their Facebook page that, again, looks like they didn’t even read the study. Much less comment on under served communities.

OK, basically nothing so far. Let’s look at some of the smaller players in the vaccines-cause-autism arena. Like the “Thinking Mom’s Revolution”. Nothing on their Facebook page or their blog that I can see about the new prevalence numbers. So, naturally, nothing about under served communities. They do have a few FB posts asking people to take a survey (because an online survey only advertised to a skewed demographic is accurate, right?). The survey is calling asking if people want a congressional hearing on vaccines.

—
By Matt Carey


SOURCE: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/20...mmenting-on-the-new-autism-prevalence-report/

 

[dragonwolf]

I don't entirely understand the purpose of Matt's rant on this other than to complain about a known A$ type group. The differences in rates can be easily attributed to access to diagnosis centers and money for a diagnosis.

Hispanics tend to be among the poorest, while blacks fall somewhere in between (skewed toward the lower end). I'm not sure what "non-Hispanic other" is, except maybe primarily Asian, Indian, Native American, etc., in which case, you're looking at a fair number of rather affluent people (the tech sectors have a high percentage of Indian and Asian immigrants, who make quite a chunk of change because of the work they do).

More affluence means the more subtle forms of Autism are picked up, while lower affluence means only the more obvious cases are.

Add the numbers in that charge and average them up, and you get 2.185%, which rounds to 2.2%, which is...(drumroll)...1 in 45.

So...yeah....

 

[MEDL86]

I stopped reading at

new autism prevalence report?

The reason is, people who base their arguments on false positives, in this case, apparently, the "growing epidemic of autism", conveniently ignore the fact that autism is still a relatively new diagnosis, despite the fact that the concept of autism has been around for decades, the active diagnosis of individuals with autism has only just recently took off. So, of course it looks like a "growing epidemic", because people are finally being identified as autistic, the actual number of people who are autistic hasn't changed drastically, only the knowledge that they have autism has.

 

[dragonwolf]

I stopped reading at

The reason is, people who base their arguments on false positives, in this case, apparently, the "growing epidemic of autism", conveniently ignore the fact that autism is still a relatively new diagnosis, despite the fact that the concept of autism has been around for decades, the active diagnosis of individuals with autism has only just recently took off. So, of course it looks like a "growing epidemic", because people are finally being identified as autistic, the actual number of people who are autistic hasn't changed drastically, only the knowledge that they have autism has.

Then, there's also the question of whether the other disorders, like Asperger's or PDD-NOS were counted in the previous versions of that report. If they weren't then it invalidates any assumptions made about the change in said number except that they're now rolled into that number, most likely (because it's now all "Autism").