Utahs alarming autism rate

[natasa778]

I'll bet every one of us went to school with at least one, and probably several, kids who were considered odd. We all could see they were socially inept at some level or another. They were often bullied and called nerds or dweebs or geeks or losers or goodness knows what else. Some of the more severe cases were classified as "retarded" or whatever was the PC label of our generation, and placed in special classes. Very few, if any, of those people were diagnosed as having autism spectrum illnesses. Now society understands more about this kind of disorder and many people with autism spectrum disorders get appropriate treatment, and hopefully less social abuse.

I have taught or tutored several boys in the past couple of years with Asperger Syndrome. They are all functional human beings and will be able to get jobs and raise families, although it will probably be harder for them than most. People like this have always been out there, they just weren't diagnosed.

It's easy for me to see that the diagnosis rate has increased hugely, especially of the less severely affected people. Does that explain the entire increase?

And how many kids did you know at school who were drooling, rocking back and forth, unable to speak, climbing the walls, hitting and spitting. Were they all really misdiagnosed (the answer is a simple NO, because the rates of MR and other 'misdiagnoses' have stayed more or less the same over the decade, ie have not fallen). Were all those kids in special schools? (again records show that wasn't the case).

What you describe is Asperger's or a very mild end of the spectrum. Those previously missed cases could account for the some of the increase, but in no way explain all of it. Quality studies are clear on that, ie taking into account milder and moderate/severe forms.

Bottom line is that you in no way could EVER miss a moderately affected child (let alone a severe one), for the simple reason that such a child could never go through educational system unaided. And better diagnosis of mild cases simply does not account for the increase. Go figure.

 

[Wayne]

I've driven through and around a lot of large American cities, and have found Salt Lake City to consistently be the city that makes me the most ill. Don't know why but I wouldn't be surprised if something particularly toxic in the area was the reason.

 

[SilverbladeTE]

http://tinyurl.com/6lmgj42


So if we crack autism, we'll wipe out the UK deficit in less than 4 years :innocent1:

UK cost 34 billion?
much easier and cheaper to euthanize them then, hm? *said in an oblique way to provoke thought, not literal statement of personal belief!*

our governments aren't much on spending money honestly or effectively and lately have the morality of reptiles (hell, that's an insult to rattlesnakes)
sorry to be so negative but I call a turd a turd, and the assault on the disabled in recent years (and other stuff) is a return to a dark horror
many of our political leades are turds, evil squishy ones at that
I don't think it's a coincidence, the tax "burden" to the corporations etc is more a concern to them than almost anything, which results in killing vast numbers, happened before, so it WILL happen again

 

[alex3619]

The burden of chronic disease is huge. For most of the last century and into this one the primary focus has been on acute disease. Most of the money and talent went into heart attacks and cancer. Not much was left for chronic disease. Now countries are paying for that, one way or another. Not funding research into chronic disease that is proportional to the problem is economic blundering ... and every government does it. I don't know of any place except possibly Japan that takes a rational approach to chronic disease. The only way to reduce the burden over time is research, but governments often pass the buck and say its not really their responsibility, then have the nerve to complain the costs are too high. This is due to choices we have made as societies and governments, and the only solution is improved research focus including funding. They kind of understand that with respect to Alzheimers, probably because the forward projections are scary.

In the UK they are scapegoating the disabled. Who will be next? The old? Rather than address the problem, they are using expensive and ineffective measures to save costs. Spend a gold doubloon to save a penny is how I put it. This isn't economic rationalism. Its economic vandalism.

There have been something like 13 investigated suicides of the disabled due to ATOS activity in the UK from what I have read, and claims are as high as 32 a month dying. I don't know if this is correct, but its something to keep an eye on. What happens if we put a dollar value to each life? When you take services from the disabled that help, what happens to cost burdens on other government departments? My guess is the costs go up.

Just last night a study was announced in Australia on treating homeless men (on TV news). They paid for private medical services (no waiting lists) and the like for immediate treatment. The outcome was a saving to the country of $3000 per person, despite the cost of private treatments, and they also had a high success rate. Large numbers of homeless men are now in housing and many now have jobs. This is spending money to save money, and it can work if properly focussed.

Bye, Alex