662 WHY DO WE HAVE 90 TIMES MORE AUTISM THAN THE AMISH?

[michaelo]

Autism is a disorder of the brain that is characterized by impaired social interaction and communication, and by restricted and repetitive behavior. That much we know, much of the rest we do not know.

In 2005, journalist Dan Olmsted wrote an article for United Press International that began as follows:

Where are the autistic Amish? Here in Lancaster County, heart of Pennsylvania Dutch country, there should be well over 100 with some form of the disorder.
I have come here to find them, but so far my mission has failed, and the very few I have identified raise some very interesting questions about some widely held views on autism.
The mainstream scientific consensus says autism is a complex genetic disorder, one that has been around for millennia at roughly the same prevalence. That prevalence is now considered to be 1 in every 166 children born in the United States.
Applying that model to Lancaster County, there ought to be 130 Amish men, women and children here with Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Well over 100, in rough terms.

But they were not there! In fact, Olmsted could document only 1 full-blown case of autism among 15,000 Amish.

Why the anomaly?

Why do we suffer autism at a rate 90 times greater than the Amish?

[jollybeggar]

This is a good question and one that the medical community has been avoiding as a whole. The latest statistic that I have heard is more like 1 in 50 kids born today will have some sort of Autism spectrum Disorder (ASD)

There have been many researchers that have linked Autism to vaccinations (http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... -Boys.aspx), others that postulate it is caused by EMR (electromagnetic radiation) http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic ... utism.aspx) from cell phones and cell phone towers....The govt is telling us it is genetic, or possibly the result of pesticides and/or household chemicals

I personally believe that vaccinations have a large part in it, from the kids I have known to be autistic, that started out developing normally, and then regressed after the 18 months vaccinations. But I wonder if the cause is a combination of things.

Whatever is causing this, we really need to have an open and honest discussion, independent studies (not connected to pharmaceutical companies or the govt who have a vested interest in the outcome). We need to look at EVERYTHING and not be afraid of what we might find. And we need to do it NOW, because we are losing a whole generation of children to this disorder, and maybe, just maybe it is unnecessary. It so boggles my mind that we as a country can stand around and see our children harmed and we still cave to the special interests, and political correctness that is out there.

I for one am going to do everything in my power to protect my own children (avoid vaccines, feed them unprocessed, natural foods, avoid pesticides and herbicides, and limit cell phone use.), and push our local and federal govt to open their eyes...

Thanks Michael, for asking the hard questions!

[hickoryfan]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/conditio ... index.html

The therapy for early diagnosis of Autism....
is just doing the normal stuff babies and toddlers did before cable television, cell phones, elmo, all this other electronic crap.
today the kids are watching television almost immediately.
The parents are talking on the cell phones or watching the television.
The moms are not mixing with other moms while the toddlers mix with each other.
then there's all this corn syrup and soy crap and asphalt dust in everything.

[jollybeggar]

I agree with the fact that children are exposed to television, cell phones too early, and it certainly can be detrimental, and I agree about the diet as well, but there is other factors involved.

For instance, I find it perplexing that this article hints that raising the IQ level of these autistic children shows that they are getting better...

My friend has a son, with Asperger's syndrome. (a milder form of autism). My friend did all the latest therapy, and spent thousands of dollars on toys that would help her son learn...His IQ was very high to start with, and with a vast majority of autistic kids. But the behavior problems continued...he got a little better at eye contact, and communicating, but many other problems remained. (many autistic children have Irritable Bowel Syndrome as well)). His IQ wasn't an issue, that is why I find this article deceitful.

I have known people to have 'cured' autistic kids, via chelation therapy and diet (proves that heavy metals have a big part in autism)...google Jenny McCarthy...Her son diagnosed with ASD (autism spectrum disorder), and he has since been cured. She feels that vaccinations have had a huge part in causing his autism, but the media hushes her over it.

[AutismNewsBeat]

A better question is "What credible evidence suggests that the Amish have less autism than the general population?" The answer is "none". Mr. Olmsted admitted as much when he said "I am not a scientist or an epidemiologist. I'm just doing the best that I can." His "research" is purely anecdotal, far from exhaustive, and assumes something that is far from the truth: that autism in all of its manifestations is easily identified by a lay person. And apart from a poorly researched UPI article from four years ago, there are no other reasons to believe that the Amish are immune to autism because they don't vaccinate.

Let's look at the data.

First, the evidence for an autism "plague" is thin at best, and it's regrettable that Mr. Olmsted's claim for an epidemic went unchallenged during his interview. At one point during the show it was suggested that the rate in 2004 was 1:166, and today it is 1:91. That is demonstrably false. A 2004 CDC survey whose results will be made public this month, shows a rate of 1:100. UK researcher Dr. Lorna Wing wrote in 1999 that when we count all cases of autism (those IQ below 70, and those above 70), the rate will be close to 1:100. Mr. Olmsted knows about Dr. Wing, and he knows about the 2004 CDC study. Yet he made no effort to set the record straight. So much for journalistic integrity.

Olmsted was correct when he said autism is diagnosed on a spectrum, and that some children function very well. When autism was first included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual in 1980, the criteria were far more restrictive than today, and there was no spectrum. "Kanner's Autism", as it was known, was identified by extreme withdrawal, severe language deficits, and crippling repetitive behaviors. The known rate at the time was about 4:10,000. Today Kanner's Autism is rolled into a broader category called "Autistic Disorder" (AD) that includes higher functioning children. (Disclaimer: My 14-year-old son has an AD diagnosis). The known rate for AD today is 20:10,000, or about 1:500. In Lancaster County, with an Amish population of 25,000, we can expect 50 cases of AD in both children and adults.

However, autism is a "developmental disorder", which means children with autism continue to grow, adapt, and learn throughout their lives. Mr. Olmsted partly acknowledged that when he said "autism generally does not improve greatly, although sometimes it does." I'm not sure what "improves greatly" means, and I doubt Olmsted does either. What we can say is that over time AD children learn to adapt, and many can be mainstreamed into society. In a family-oriented culture it would be rather common practice for these children to be accommodated and accepted without the need to label and catalog. In the general population adults with autism often end up in group homes, or living with elderly parents. In Amish Country they are more likely to be put to work, and integrated into an extended family. No need for a label, no stigma, and no databases. The only mystery is why Mr. Olmsted thinks these adults would stick out.

A caller brought up Dr. Kevin Strauss, a pediatrician at the Clinic for Special Children. I spoke with Strauss in April, 2008. He told me that Mr. Olmsted didn't spend much time in Lancaster County, and that he made no effort to contact or visit the clinic prior to publication of his UPI story. If this is true, then it's easier to understand how Dan Olmsted, crusading citizen non-scientist, could miss dozens of Amish children with idiopathic autism, and dozens more adults. Either he didn't look as carefully as he wants us to believe, or he had his answer before he turned onto I-83 for the two hour drive to Lancaster County. Either way we know that Dan Olmsted, UPI reporter, is far from qualified to recognize and/or diagnose autistic disorder in children and adults. He said so himself - "I am not a scientist or an epidemiologist. I'm just doing the best that I can."

If the Amish truly have less idiopathic autism than the general population, that doesn't necessarily mean it's the vaccines. After all, we know the Amish doctrine doesn't proscribe vaccines, and that they do vaccinate. Could it be the genes? It's purely speculative, as is Mr. Olmsted's report, but geneticists have long recognized that the Amish and Mennonite populations are inbred. Researchers have identified at least 11 disorders among the Amish and Mennonites that are lethal or cause permanent disability. Affected children may live years and require extensive services. Most of these children are cared for, and die, at home. If genes can make a population susceptible to some disorders, could they also not protect against others?

It makes as much sense, if not more so, than anything Mr. Olmsted has proposed.

[Inyo]

I'm not really convinced that such a small and genetically distinct group as the Amish could be considered an indicator of comparitive disease rates in the much more culturally and genetically diverse mainstream American culture.