In the 1970s, approximately 1 in 2,000 children was reported to have autism.
The current official government estimate reports that 1 in 68 American children are affected with this condition.
A recent National Health Statistics Report suggests that 1 in 45 children, ages 3 through 17, have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.
There are literally thousands of articles and countless organizations that point a finger at various causes such as vaccines, GMOs, electromagnetic fields, and residential proximity to freeways.
On the surface, some of these claims seem possible, if not plausible. But correlation is not causation. Any alleged cause of autism can be supported by selectively reporting the data. So what is thought to be the newest explanation for this dramatic increase? A rather simple one: the definition of what constitutes autism has expanded to the catch-all term, autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Think of it this way: a broader diagnostic net is inevitably going to catch a higher yield of diagnoses. And the latest findings in this field, published in Nature Genetics, cast an even wider net.
ASDs are linked to behaviors such as a difficulty in communicating with others, maintaining friendships, and empathizing. This study suggests that social charm, empathy, and the ability to make friends are influenced by more than just practice and upbringing. It proposes that these traits are also affected by how many autism risk gene variants a person possesses. According to this study, the same genes involved in predisposing people to autism appear to influence social skills in the wider population. In fact, the study even suggests that the autism spectrum has no clear cut-off point.
Few would argue that the etiology of autism is solely genetic. While the the link to vaccines has been cast aside, a recent study published in Pediatrics by researchers with the World Health Organization and US Office of Population and Reproductive Health proposes yet another environmental risk that may heighten the chance of ASD: pregnancies in close succession.
Since the bygone era of ABBA and Watergate, the support and dedication for autism awareness has increased exponentially. Yet there is still no test, pre- or post-natal, that has the ability to test for autism. Genetics has come a long way in developing screens and tests that can assess the risk for a person to have a genetic disease that is associated with autism, such as Fragile X syndrome or tuberous sclerosis, but these methods are not the same as testing for autism and we still have a very long way to go.