CDC BS

Post Reply New Topic

I was just looking at the CDC report found here and had to stop because it has such apparent issues. First they note their data is based entirely on 8 year olds with the justification that most children are identified - "information was collected on children who were 8 years old because previous work has shown that, by this age, most children with ASD have been identified for services." What they are neglecting to mention is that research has shown ASD is usually diagnosed significantly later in girls, so much more girls would be missed by excluding those who were diagnosed after 8. Despite having a blatantly biased sample they then use it to reaffirm that "boys were 4 times as likely to be identified with ASD as girls." With such obvious methodological flaws by such a major organization it's now wonder autism research is in such a dire state, and myths about the condition are so hard to move on from.

must agree with the above post, it is a serious oversight / ignorant problem on the part of the CDC
about girls and women and the blatant allowing of an entire gender to fall between the cracks of
national diagnosis criteria. (Makes me wonder about whether this could almost be considered criminal medical neglect) .

I am reminded of the movie Casablanca, "I am shocked, shocked, that there is gambling here".

A government bureaucracy that does slipshod work, pushes an agenda, is partisan, lazy, or incompetent. I am shocked.

I agree in part they miss off a large number of teenage girls by setting the age at 8.

The problem is many with severe autism die in childhood and many autistic people leave full time education at a young age and fall off the radar.

So when you adjust the age you gain and loose people accordingly.

I guess they started at 8 and stuck with it, maybe they should use age 16 as well.

Why do all of you not get together, pool your resources, and perform your own research?

When you have several generations of people brought up around the stigma of Mental health issues are something that disgraces a family . The families make a concious effort to hide any such diagnoses .
So reporting this to the CDC or encouraging this,agency to actuatlly put these issues on record . (They would prefer to have the child die rather than report it. ) And generally girls when they are young do not draw as much attention as boys do as they maynot be as rambunctuous.
This is first hand info, based on growing up in such a family life .And having seen this in at least one other family .

I'm a researcher in this field, so I'm working on it.

GRRR…. NAMI. ,, has words mental illness in it. Phuey… ! Am not happy with Autism being a Mental Illness diagnosis
Neurological differences doesn’t feel like it should be called mental illness ,
will they next consider physical disability as a mental illness. (it can cause depression .)

Thank you!

Hooray for someone actually doing and taking the time to do the Research.

The ADDM is specifically focused on children. Age 8 is an important milestone within the context of developmental delays/disorders, as you probably know. It seems like a reasonable group to gather data on, especially since the point of the original report was to gather information that can help improve screening procedures for those who need them at that age for interventional therapies. The conclusion of the report goes: "These findings [variability in ASD incidence across sociological groups] emphasize the need for sustained efforts to reduce geographic, racial, and ethnic disparities in identification of and support for persons with ASD."

Your point about that line, "information was collected on children who were 8 years old because previous work has shown that, by this age, most children with ASD have been identified for services," is missing the context of the whole article and original report. Of those who will be diagnosed as children, most are identified for interventional therapies by the time they are 8. That's all it's saying.

So it's not a methodological flaw. The diagnosis of adults with autism (female or male) is not the concern of the group conducting the study. Only those for whom the diagnostic criteria apply during childhood are relevant to the study and its findings. Everything on that page is meant to be interpreted within the context of the ADDM's goals, which are spelled out at the top of the page you linked for that very reason.

Nowhere did I say anything about diagnosing adults. I said ASD is usually diagnosed significantly later in GIRLS. Still children, just children who are older than eight.

If the report contains no statement recognising the gender difference in diagnosis age, and the likelihood of missing out significant numbers of girls, and if it then draws conclusions about autism gender ratios, I would consider that a very serious flaw.
Even if all it is reporting is the gender ratio of those in their sample, you would expect some consideration of whether that sample is representative.

Great to hear that!

What do you think of AASPIRE?

I hope someone will start a professional association of autistic autism researchers. Seems to me it would be a good idea to have such an org, in addition to projects like AASPIRE.

Agrees with this idea … very good !