Strollerderby

I don't want to come across as snippy in any way, but where do you live that these children are being kept behind closed doors?  We have come a long way from institutionalizing children and adults with developmental disabilities: school districts and private organizations develop and implement plans for them from diagnosis through the entirety of their lives; provide vocational training so they can lead active, fulfilling and, many times, independent lives; and work with the individual and their family to provide the best care and support possible.  More often than not, steps are taken to transition them back to their home schools for inclusion.  And, approximately 75% of the autistic children in one of our schools hold jobs in the community.

Case in point - the organization I work for recently held "graduation" ceremonies for a 12-year-old boy with autism who is, after six years in our care, transitioning to a mainstream school - and we expect he will do quite well.

We are entering a period of time when these children and adults will outlive their parents - this is brand new territory and very encouraging.  Organizations are now adapting to provide care and services to people in their 60s and 70s - no longer the 30s and 40s.

Yes, the numbers are staggering and disheartening, but understanding how far we've come just in the past 15-20 years gives one hope.  Long gone is the "institutionalized" care of the past where children were placed and forgotten.

I am disheartened to see Babble perpetuating what is essentially a conspiracy theory regarding vaccinations and autism.  Numerous epidemiological studies have universally failed to find any association between the MMR vaccine and autism.  If thimerosol was a causal or triggering factor, you would expect to see higher rates of autism when comparing vaccinated to non-vaccinated children, and countries which used the thimerosol MMR to those that used alternate versions, but no such differences have been found.  In addition, thimerosol has been absent from vaccines in Canada and Denmark since the 1990s, and in the US since 2003 - yet autism rates have not declined in response.

Parents of children with autism spectrum disorders are understandably motivated to find a cause (and eventual cure), but putting junk speculation completely unsupported by scientific evidence on the same level as the CDC's fact sheet does them a real disservice.  I've read that aliens built the pyramids at Giza, but that doesn't make it true.

Furthermore, there is some debate in the scientific community over how much of this apparent rise in autism rates is actually due to other factors like relabeling and changing definitions.  An interesting summary of the possibilities can be found at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1576829,00.html .

It's important for us to talk about these issues, but let's try to inform, not misinform.

Renee, I believe I presented both sides of the vaccination debate.  It's my opinion that the matter remains inconclusive; statistics can be manipulated to fit almost any theory, wouldn't you agree?

Dubya, My youngest son has Down syndrome, and I know first-hand about inclusion for children and adults with developmental disabilities.  I said nothing about institutionalizing, that was your word, but I also know that almost anyone who is "different", no matter the cause, tends to make people uncomfortable.  If you and people like you are actively creating an environment where this can be changed, that's wonderful.  I don't think the numbers are "disheartening" at all, but, to me, signifies the ever-changing dynamic of our society that I am thrilled to be a part of.

My bad - I was drawing (probably erroneously) on the "hidden behind closed doors" line.  We do our best to get our kids and adults out into the community in any number of ways.

Also - didn't want to come across as lecturing - mea culpa.  Although not as close as you, working in this type of environment causes some knee-jerk reactions as far as advocacy goes.

While it has certainly been suggested that vaccinations can lead to autism it is far from being a settled scientific issue (this isn't like global warming).  

One thing is certain, however, vaccination does prevent several potentially deadly diseases.  Does anyone know what the infant mortality rate was before vaccination became universal.

I emphatically do not agree that scientific results can be manipulated to fit almost any theory.  We are trying to uncover an objective truth (the cause/s for autism).  In the search, we propose a number of possible explanations (vaccines, genetic factors, autoimmune response, etc), then gather facts to examine each of these explanations.  The process of science is designed to systematically rule out explanations which are not supported by fact.  We may provisionally accept other explanations, or we may state that as yet there is no single theory that is compelling, but we are obligated to discard explanations which are not supported by the evidence.  

The crucial point here is that, even in cases where no definitive solution has been found, all theories are *not* afforded equal weight – just because there are two “sides” to a debate of fact does not mean they are equally viable, or that they should get equal time.  I may be of the opinion that the world is flat, but the evidence is certainly against me.  Should I still get equal coverage in the flat v. round earth “debate”?  In the case of autism and vaccines, the weight of evidence is solidly against any causal link, and you need more than opinion to counter that.  

Aaron,

The question of infant mortality is a bit sticky, since medical treatments for childhood diseases have advanced significantly, in addition to the rise of vaccines.  The picture is somewhat clearer if you look at individual diseases, though.

CDC has a good summary of historic rates of various diseases which are now preventable through the use of vaccines:  

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/publications/fs/gen/WhatIfStop.htm