“There was no autism diagnosed before 1930.”

Post Reply New Topic

Well, that and childhood psychosis later on. Nowadays, childhood-onset psychosis is considered extremely rare, but that wasn't the case in the 1950s. They didn't keep good epidemiological numbers, but there were enough kids diagnosed with various forms of psychosis to fill entire special schools with just kids who lived in easy commute distance, which certainly isn't true now. And whereas nowadays psychosis is only diagnosed in kids who can communicate well enough to report clear hallucinations and delusions, back then, if a kid acted weird enough, they were assumed to be experiencing hallucinations and delusions even if they didn't have the verbal skills to express such experiences.

Also, unless antibiotics and poor diet can cause a previously NT adult to turn autistic, they can't explain the increased autism rates, since the rate of autism is the same in adults as in children:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaps ... act/211276

I'm willing to bet kids with severe digestive issues (comorbid to autism) or with extremely limited food choices were a lot more likely to fail to thrive, become sick and pass away early on.

Different social circumstances and understandings would have lead to very different understandings. My great-grandmother for example was a reclusive weirdo her whole life who died in an asylum after a mental breakdown in her 40s but she wasn't autistic by the understandings of the time even if she's got descendents who are, even if it's likely she's part of the line so to speak.

I don't think diets or antibiotics are significantly contributing to there being more kids with autism, at least based on what I've seen while reading about it.

Last edited by funeralxempire on 12 Mar 2022, 5:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It's caused typically in infancy/childhood, not adulthood. I've been sharing the details of that here on these forums for the last decade.

Have you read the book 'Neurotribes' by Steve Silberman?

I read it earlier this year and found it fascinating. It talks about the history of diagnosing autism, and how in the early 1900s (1920s, 30s, etc.), children who were autistic were likely diagnosed with all sorts of incorrect labels and terribly misunderstood, and often their parents were encouraged or forced to hand them over to live in institutions, where their standard of living was horrendous. I hate to think of so many children misunderstood and mistreated, and their parents sometimes given little say in the matter.

Anyone else read that book and have thoughts on it?

Yep, have read it & currently see it on shelf across room.
Right now the ME/CFS is kicking my butt and I don't have any thoughts to present beyond that the book was quite informative.

Just now went and picked it up. Don't know what kind of paper they used but book is rather lighter than expected for a 500 page book. Definitely not claycoated paper.

Guess I would describe the book as a history of the paid-professionals' knowledge and understanding/misunderstanding of autism.

So, explain why the prevalence of autism in adults is the same as in children, then, if it's caused by things that are happening more to children now than children in earlier generations.