@tinlou45,

In your mother's day, autism was not a recognized diagnosis. There is still no medical test for autism, or more properly Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). As recently as 5 years ago the diagnosis of ASD was not standardized nor was it being universally taught in medical schools.

More importantly, in your grandmother's or great-grand-mother's day, it was unusual for children to be born more closely than 36 months. This was because children were breast-fed for between 2 and 2.5 years. If you add in 9 months for gestation you have 2.9 to 3.4 years. Not far off the 36 months specified in the study. This is because breast-feeding suppresses fertility. But the subject in incredibly complex --- it isn't just breast-feeding, but having baby close, actually suckling at the nipple (versus express and bottle-feed) and also involves the introduction of solid food (which used to be delayed up to as long as age 3.

More "modern" women seldom can meet all the criteria that are associated with keeping the birth cycle in sync with what their body is prepared for. Women work and even stay-at-home moms often express milk for bottle-feeding as a matter of convenience. Here is a place to do a little reading:

http://www.kellymom.com/bf/normal/fertility.html

We do know that more "primitive" societies, in which women follow a more "natural" cycle of child-rearing, having children about every 3-4 years and suckling them as long as age 5, there are far fewer premature births and far less occurrences of ASD.

It is the job of scientists to study every factor that could be involved, and to publish the results of those studies for the benefit of both scientists and interested lay people. Science does this until an understanding can be achieved that encompasses all known data.

In the end, it will almost certainly be found that there are a number of contributing factors to ASD. Heredity and environmental factors both likely play a role.

I know of many families that have only one child and that child is autistic. What does that say? It certainly contradicts this study.

You are an idiot, it doesn't contradict the study at all, all the study is saying is that children that are born/conceived within the first 2-3 years of the previous pregnancy are more likely than the previous child to have autism. It is not saying that those that only have one child can't get autism.

"In the end, it will almost certainly be found that there are a number of contributing factors to ASD. Heredity and environmental factors both likely play a role."

I really do think that's what will be found out in the end myself. It's not like there's only one cause of cancer, heart disease, and so many other things. I don't know why so many want to attack one or two things as a cause.

This can't be! - It's the vaccine / Twinkie combination! Jenny told me so - it must be true!

This will never be believed by the Vaccine Heads, even if proven beyond a doubt. They then would have to just accept that it's "nature" causing the problem, which means that they wouldn't have anybody to sue. "They" would be "responsible", which is just NOT acceptable.

Maybe having kids within 2 years of each other, as is popular today, is the real "culprit".

"Vaccine Heads" LOL!!

I've met up with more than my fair share the last few days. Completely set in their minds, they are!

I really wish the sources that be would stop releasing and reporting on such nonsensical data until more aggressive research with conclusive results is obtained. This kind of reporting is an addition to the problem and really not helpful at all. Reminds me of grasping at straws. Findings that do absolutely nothing to further the conclusions of the cause or causes of a disease should never be released to the public or reported on by the media.

This is one of those instances. I come from a family with 7 children all born close together. My son has 3 children all 1 year apart. No autism in any. My family line is full of close births and no autism. These findings are inconclusive, have minimal if any effect on the cause of autism and frankly speaking just stupid.

If it's found out that this study doesn't hold water, will the authors be attacked by medicine for diverting attention away from the real cause? Will there licenses be stripped away? Will they be blamed for single child families when many women would have had multiple children?

The timing of the announcement of this study is suspect.

I'm sure they are just looking at common links between kids diagnosed with autism. Just like smoking while pregnant. It can cause stillbirths, low birthweight or asthma, but there is no guarantee that it will. My mom smoked while pregnant with me and my siblings and none of the bad effects apply to us. But I'm sure that it did affect other babies and so it is safer to quit smoking. There is no guarantee that your baby will survive or not have medical issues even if you do everything right. Our cells can just go haywire sometimes.

If it's found out that this study doesn't hold water, will the authors be attacked by medicine for diverting attention away from the real cause?

No, because science is the only thing that corrects itself. Any good scientist will recognize the dead-end, pick up the pieces and move on. How many religionists and conspiracy theorists do you know that do this?

No, because science is the only thing that corrects itself.

But the scienTISTS who are wrong do not admit they are wrong. It is only years/decades/centuries later after the "believers" die off is science allowed to change. It's called a paradigm shift.

Any good scientist will recognize the dead-end, pick up the pieces and move on.

That's opinion and speculation.

How many religionists and conspiracy theorists do you know that do this?

Scientism is the religious belief in science. It assumes that science is the only source of knowledge because the world is completely quantifiable and materialistic.

Scientism is the religious belief in science. It assumes that science is the only source of knowledge because the world is completely quantifiable and materialistic.

Other sources of knowledge?

The "Vaccine Heads" must be scientist then. Because it sounds like you are describing them.

People that say that they were born close to their siblings or that they knew a family that had children close together yet no one had ASD are just the same as the people who say that their child had a shot and then within a month they started showing symptoms. This is anecdotal evidence and is not science.

For science you need to do a study like they have done here. Look at the numbers. It shows that there is some kind of connection. Just as when they look at the numbers like this and ASD compared to vaccinated and non vaccinated children, it clearly shows that there is no difference in the ASD rate.

This is just a story, not the entire study in this article. Even in this article they said that it might not have anything to do physically with being so close together. It could be other factors, that also affect people that have children so close together. Maybe it is because the mother is not getting as much sleep with the second child because she is up with the first child. So the lack of sleep causes an issue. So in this case it is not that she had the second child so fast, just that she did not get as much sleep as she should have. Or it could be because she is missing some neutrients because she is breast feeding. So if she did not breastfeed then it would not be a problem. That is what further studies are for.

They will look at this study and try to figure it out. They even did some of that in this study. Where they take age, and other things into consideration. So they compare only children to 20-25 year olds, because maybe older people have the children closer together, and that it could be a factor of age instead of the closeness. So they compare the rates for 20-25 year olds to 35-40 year olds and if the rates are the same, then it is not because of the age of the mother, otherwise the 35-40 year old rate would be higher.

I have great uncles with Aspergers, a cousin with Aspergers, my identical sister's son has it and so does my youngest son. There is a huge family history and I waited 6 years in between my 1st and 2nd. This story is a big load of you know what... As the genetics are teased apart the answers will be known. Remember Jenny Mc Carthy " She cured her son and it was all because of the vaccines". Tell me another lie and another story....

Why is it always the mother's fault?

Maybe it is because the mother is not getting as much sleep with the second child because she is up with the first child. So the lack of sleep causes an issue. So in this case it is not that she had the second child so fast, just that she did not get as much sleep as she should have. Or it could be because she is missing some neutrients because she is breast feeding. So if she did not breastfeed then it would not be a problem.

You mention the word "mother" or "she" over 7 times!! I don't think you even realized that you did it. But in our society, it is easier to blame the mother than actually find a true cause for it. Oh the mother ate bad, she got herself pregnant too quickly after having her first child, she didn't have enough vitamins, she didn't drink enough milk, she didn't get enough sleep, she drank too much water, blah, blah!!! (I even saw an article on MSNBC News several weeks ago stating that ADHD is more prevalent in moms who ate fruits and vegetables!! And that breast cancer is more prominent in overweight women [MSNBC, too].) 1 out of every 150 babies are born with this disease and we don't know what causes it, but we can build space stations in outer space and grow body parts from stem cells! I'm not buying it!

I don't know if vaccines cause Autism, I do know that current medical literature states that vaccines do not cause Autism. But do you realize the implications if the medical field stated that vaccines can not be ruled out as a cause of Autism. Then NO parent would want their child immunized, and we'd have outbreaks of diseases that have been since eradicated! And the state of our health care system today cannot support outbreaks of Polio, Rubella, Cholera, etc.

Anyone have the paper for this study?
Also what was the researchers hypnosis?

Most of us would not just gather this type of information without some other study attached.

Reason and Logic,

This so-called "paper" is being proclaimed and announced on every news station- as if it were a fact!!! It's NO coincidence to me that the medical establishment has called the vaccination-link paper (officially) a "fraud" this week. Propaganda wants to shift the focus off of the "vaccination theory," or any other "environmental factors" (such as, hormones in the meat we eat, pesticides in/on fruit, who knows what chemicals/carcinogens are involved in the products/plastics that we use every day.)

reason and logic: Why do you think the researchers were hypnotised, or are you implying they are trying to hypnotise the world into believing them?

If having children close together was the primary cause of autism as this article implies then over 10% of the adults over 60 would have it. It is possible, I suppose, that having children close together could magnify the effects of all the food additives most people consume today but even if that is true the actual cause is still the food additives not having children close together.

I remember in the 60's and 70's the reccomended spacing of children for those who wanted several was two close together wait 5-6 years then two more close together.

Melanie-1357883 wrote "Why is it always the mother's fault?"

Because men have very little influence in the development of a baby, let along any say in whether a baby is brought to term. If there are environmental factors, such as ingestion, those are the choices of the mother.

Autism spectrum "disorders" affects roughly 10 males for every 1 female. I can't believe the article does not mention the sex link.

My point in stating that "it's always the mother's fault,"is that it is easier for the medical community, or the CDC, or the FDA or whatever bureaucratic agency to blame the mother than to actually "find a cause and a cure." Obviously, as a mother, I (and only I) carry my baby for 9 months- I understand that responsibility. But is it my fault if there are way more hormones injected into my chicken (and milk) than the chicken my mom and grandmother ate? Is it the mother's fault if there are pesticides in her salad? Let me get this straight, if you are a pregnant woman- you should not eat meat, fish, fruits, vegetables or drink milk. A pregnant woman should only be breathing pure oxygen with no carcinogens and eating cardboard and her prenatal vitamins. Give me a break!! So, I'm not just talking about "indigestion" here Vincent. I'm talking about true science- not the blame game.

Your little stories don't contradict the study at all.

It only said the risk increases when there's a smaller gap between pregnancies. That doesn't mean your second or third kid will definitely have autism. Unless you're living in a perfect world, every child conceived will have some risk of being on the autism spectrum. The same applies for nearly any disorder with a genetic factor.

Decades ago there was very little (if any) research on autism. Meaning almost no information was available to doctors or the general public. We're past the whole "refrigerator mother" thing, but we're still looking at things that might increase autism risk.

But is it my fault if there are way more hormones injected into my chicken (and milk) than the chicken my mom and grandmother ate? Is it the mother's fault if there are pesticides in her salad? Let me get this straight, if you are a pregnant woman- you should not eat meat, fish, fruits, vegetables or drink milk.

Melanie, yes it is. You are the only one who can truely control what food is put in your mouth. If you don't like the content of the food available in the grocery store, do what your grandmother did and GROW YOUR OWN. You choose where to live, what to consume, and through these choices, what your body is exposed to.

Besides, all this article is saying, is there seems to be a higher instance of ASD occurring in closely spaced pregancies, and this might be due to the average time frame the body requires to recover optimal nutritional levels after pregnancy. The next step is to try to identify if there are specific nutrients or chemicals in the body that play a larger role than others. Scientist have now narrowed the study group for this line of research by determining a subgroup of the population with higher risk. It is possible for nutritional levels are partially responsible in first time pregnancies also, but that the condition is more prevalent in close pregnancies. In no way do they claim this will guarentee a child will have ASD, or that this is the only way ASD occurs, but if you don't identify all the major risk factors you can't find the true cause. It is possible to have the genetic risk for a disease, and never develop it if the right environmental factors aren't present as well.

I do grow (most) of our family's produce. But unfortunately Unconcerned Parent, I do not have time to raise/slaughter cattle, and chickens. I work full-time.

Actually animals like cattle, and chickens don't take that much time on a daily basis, especially if you grass feed, and free range the chickens. I know plenty of people who work full time while raising animals, and gardens. And for added income they sell the extra to their neighbors who want more variety, or don't have the land for everything they want to raise. Within a 10 square mile radius I know where to buy beef, chickens, eggs, pork, lamb, milk (either cow or goat), honey, and fresh vegetables. And, as an added bonus, there are not 1 buy 2 butchers as well. Like I said, your choices of where and how to live are up to you, it is just a matter of matching your environment to your priorities.

I know a lot of people, too! As a matter of fact I think I have a few cousins that live in the mountains somewhere just like the people you described above. But, I myself, live here in the real world, not the little house on the prairie. Do you work full time, or are you too busy telling other people how they should work?

I'm not telling anyone how or where to work, just that it is possible to live the life you choose. You decide your priorities. I'm just suggesting everyone should take responsibility for their choices, instead of blaming everyone else for your being forced to eat unhealthy food. People have become acustomed to blaming others for their problems instead of taking responsibility and living what they preach.

By the way, I don't live in a "little house on the prairie". I live in an area with a population exceeding 200,000. Small town - yes, but my family chose to move here from a major metropolitan area because it fit the way we wanted to live. That was our decision to make, how you live, and what you eat is yours.

Concerned....although totally off topic...I had to giggle....in a good way! : )

200,000 is a small town...wonder what we would call where I live...Pop. 232? And yes...I am talking 232 people total!

I do agree with all that you say about choices and priorities!!

But do you work (outside of your home) full-time?

I'm not blaming anyone for the food I eat. I, and I alone eat it. I'm just saying that those of us who work 40+ hours a week do not have time to raise cattle and farm 20 acres (nor do homemakers). I just wish government would STOP allowing hormones and other unhealthy chemicals to enter into our commercial food chain.

I have no problem growing tomatoes, lettuce, chicken, etc for my family. But I don't have time to churn butter or pasteurize milk.

I hear you Melanie...for some it is difficult, myself included! Although I will also say that I personally know a family with 5 children, oldest 12, both work full time and they do raise cows, and chickens and grow their own garden and can a lot, although she does work at the school so full time is left to one's interpretation! Although I still wonder how they do it!

Actually I do. Several of the families I mentioned earlier are two income families also. My family gets up early enough to take care of the animals before work/school, and take care of them before dinner in the evening. I also volunteer at my children's schools, take my kids to soccer and basketball practice, music lessons and various other activities. and serve on the school board. I don't think I am unique either. I have several friends with larger families who manage to accomplish much more than I do. It all comes back to setting your priorities, and working together as a family to get things done. Do I always have a perfect house? NO! Am I often tired? YES! But I have wonderful kids, and an incredible husband, so in my mind I have everything I could wish for.

Judy, I need a proofreader! I accidentally doubled the population. I should read 100,000. (I have always hated the stupid number keys at the top! I usually hit the wrong one.) Our area feels much smaller than it is because most of the area is actually rural, with about 8 towns close together(within 15 to 20 miles) with farmland connecting them. The largest town has a population of about 25,000. We consider the entire county to be our community because we are so interconnected. I work in one, my husband works in another, and Parents live in a third. I have lived in towns like yours as a kid, so I understand your amusement.

Doggie, that looked at large numbers...at statistics. You are citing one family that you knew....that is meaningless.

Anecdotal evidence generally is not regarded as scientific evidence in the science community.

A lot more studies need to be done that include the life styles of the parents before a conclusion can be reached. It is very possible that in this part of California where the study took place there is a lot of illegal drug use in adults. Another thing, what about the mother's prenatal health care. Did she take vitamins? How was the mother's general health? Do relatives of the parents have autistic children. These aspects would have a lot more impact on the health of the baby than would the spacing of the children.

Spacing of the pregnancy can certainly affect the health of the Mother's body. Pregnancy changes the chemical make-up of the body, and it takes time for the body to go back to normal levels. If a second pregnancy occurs while the body is still altered from it's normal state, then the environment in which the second fetus grows will be altered as well.

No, no one is saying don't try. Just don't be stupid when you try. I mean come on, the findings addressed here are simply not applicable. Mainly because I could probably apply them to many existing diseases. Sorry, the results make no difference in the onset or cause of the disease.

"No" answers are often as valuable as yes answers.

""No" answers are often as valuable as yes answers."

That is correct-the one basic quality of any scientific theory is that it can be negated. If it cannot, it is not scientific.

realist, patterns and correlations over large populations are not meaningless. They suggest new avenues of research. Many diseases are caused my multiple factors. If we can identify common risk factors it can help zero in on causes and triggers. If increasing the mothers health before conception will help reduce the chance of the child having ASD than people who have a family history of ASD might be able to decrease the risk to their child.

I never said they were meaningless. My point is...they are too broad.

Then why has it been okay for years until now.......before children began to get that large number of immunizations that they get today , which is compounded by the quality of food manufactured no wonder.....lets give thought to Autism.....My grandmother and many women in her era had ten children not one had Autism there have been second borns for decades an it was never a problem until now.....I believe the rise is immunizations. We have looked into the matter because my five year old born five years later then my second born girl twins....was showing signs of Autism which ended up being sensory and speech......mislabeling is horrific.......but during initially being suggested that he had Austim we changed or food water and immunizations for the children which have made a significant change for them all....also kids Chelate....which is no longer sold works for those that manifest signs or have Autism.....the purpose of Chelation is to remove the metals from your body......but I doubt you'll see new articles about because it points to the mercury in immunizations surprise surprise the drug industry....food manufactures and even water cleaning plants(water has heavy metals and etc.) now this is a study that would be beneficial....instead of playing around with the God given common sense we have.

Then why hasn't there been a decrease in the number of ASD cases coresponding to the removal of thimerisol from vaccines 10 years ago?

Ditto.. Our first born, now 10 yrs ago, was the Autistic child, marked by adverse reactions to something controversial at a age of 18 mts. Our 2nd born (separated by 18 mts) is normal albeit has been having asthma issues.

The comment 'And while the increased three-fold risk for second-borns may sound high at first, parents need to remember that the overall risk of autism is low, said Dr. Rita Cantor". WHAT? It's now 1 in 100 being diagnosed. Autism is more of an issue today than Chicken Pox, Measles, Whooping Cough, and more, all rolled up.

How can a comfort zone for parents be found in todays medicine? Who do you listen to? The doctor who has the degree and expertise, but will never have to buy office supplies, or parents who see things happen first hand, but are being painted as lunatics by the media. Good luck with that one.

Big Mike, Yank - Right on.

Our firstborn has Autism. Our 2nd born (4.5 years later) does not.

I also do not consider a 1% risk your child may have Autism all that low. Winning the lottery would be considered a low risk versus the comparison of who has Autism. 1 in 100 births having Autism??? Kinda high risk when you look at the big picture, in my opinion. 6 grandchildren in my mom's family and 2 have Autism....

My grandson is six years spaced from his older sibling. He's autistic (fortunately, not as severely as others.) Most of the other "studies" and their results have not applied to him, either. (I just saw the listings of so many more studies in the next posts, yeah--no.)

I still think it's a combination of things that cause autism. (I personally think it's in the food chain somewhere, maybe fertilizers, and some factor in the parents' genes--one reacting to the other. This is just my thought on it and no proof. We have a number of "new" fertilizers in our environment that weren't around 50 or 60 years ago. Since their advent, we've seen a rise in autism, slowly but surely. That's all I've got on it, and again, just my thoughts. Maybe I should do a "study.")

As my grandson's parents say, as well all advocacy groups, "When you've seen one autistic child, you've seen one autistic child. They are all different."

I would like to chip in a bit on this. My wife is a PhD research psychologist and we have good friends who are prominent clinical researchers in ASD, so I get to sit in on a lot of conversations and feel pretty free to ask "stupid" questions. So I have a few observations based on that background:

1) There is not nearly enough emphasis being given to the issue of finger-pointing and blame. The vast majority of parents love their children and wish nothing but the very best for them. These parents tend to self-question when they have a child diagnosed with ASD. They ask, "Was it something I did? Was it something in MTY genes?", etc. My daughter had a child with Tetrology of Fallot (a set of four heart birth defects.) They constantly asked themselves if it was a defect in their genes or perhaps something they did just before or during the pregnancy. It is very difficult to convince them that it isn't their fault. Not enough attention is paid to the mental health of parents during diagnosis. They need to be told directly and often that it is not their fault!

2) We have known for decades that in more "primitive" societies, there is a "normal" birth cycle. In the normal birth cycle a woman becomes pregnant, then breast-feeds for as long as five years. Breast-feeding, having the child suckle at the breast, having the child close 24 hours a day, and delaying the introduction of solid foods until as late as age 3 all seem to contribute to extremely low rates of ASD. This seems to be because these factors suppress fertility for around 24-30 months. If you add in 9 months for gestation, that gives you a spacing of around 33-39 months. This is why the scientists were looking at a spacing of 36 months. they were taking something that seemed to be the case in life and seeing if California medical records bore it out.

3) ASD is a "spectrum" disorder. That means that there is an extremely wide variation in the symptoms and severity, though all seem definitely tied together. To say that 1 in 100 (actually about 1 in 110) is misleading in that since it is a spectrum disorder, the diagnosis varies from so mild as to require no specific treatment all the way up to very profound dysfunction.

4) There is no medical test for ASD. Period. And symptoms do not usually manifest themselves until around 18-36 months of age. This is a period that also sees dramatic changes in the normal child --- neurological, hormonal, social, and environmental. So there is a lot going on in and around the child at the same time the symptoms tend to show up.

5) Anecdotal stories (I knew a woman ...) do not help. First, anecdotal stories are almost always incomplete compared to medical records. For example, you might not know about the miscarriages or abortions that preceded a birth of a child with or without ASD. And second, anecdotal stories are almost always used to support a single point of view. This is because they are a subjective measure, not an objective measure. The ideal way to measure things is to use data that meets certain criteria for rigor, but were collected for different reasons, so that the collection of the data is separated from the analysis and thus separated from subjective bias.

6) And you have to look at why these studies are being conducted and communicated. Science seeks to test every theory and if a theory stands, then others seek to replicate the results (usually with slight twists.) Eventually what is being sought is a theory that encompasses all known data and can be replicated. The initial aims of autism studies right now are pretty modest. The major foci are to develop better diagnostic tools, and if possible medical tests as well as developing early interventions that can help ameliorate the symptoms so that children develop to their potential.

7) Where we are with ASD now is pretty much where we were with Down Syndrome about 40 years ago. Early aggressive interventions and improved diagnostic and treatment regimes have meant that many Down children are leading near-normal lives with huge improvements in quality of life over what we used to see with immediate surrender and warehousing of Down children.

8) The human brain is incredibly complex. One person's brain is still more complex than all the programs running in all the computers that exist and have ever existed combined. To think that every connection in every human brain will be the same or that the variation will not yield some abnormalities is just absurd. A certain level of dysfunction is simply going to occur. It is our job as a society to see that these people have the best shot possible at being productive members of our society. This is the obligation of the functional to the dysfunctional. This is the obligation of parents to their children.

Thank you. As a mother of a five year old son with low functioning autism, who was vaccinated and was born in a family that we now know has genetic tendencies for ASDs, 23 months after his neuortypical brother and 3 1/2 years before his other neurotypical brother... oh, and displayed jaundice for the first week too (last week's story). I thank you for chipping in. Can't tell you how many times in the last 3 years my husband has told me it is not my fault. And how many anecdotal stories I am told on a daily basis to support 'bad' science. I completely agree with everything you menioned here. To say 1:110 is misleading, but so very necessary as we know, for the research to be funded. Thanks, again.

Kerry and Chris, in my statements, I meant in no way that parents are at fault, if that's the way you took it. I personally think it's some sort of environmental factor(s) of a more recent timeline that is affecting our children. Why it doesn't affect everyone is as much as puzzle as why it affects 1 in a 110. It may be a recessive gene that lets in some piece of information that messes with our works, but I will be the first to say that it's just my guess.

The reason behind my saying that it is a recent factor in that, although there probably has been autism for centuries, it is now almost rampant throughout the US. The numbers diagnosed grow everyday. I'm sure, that in the past (prior to the 60s), most of the people who would now have an ASD diagnosis were probably institutionalized or hidden away. Mainstreaming was just "not done." I know that sounds cruel, but that's the way it was. (I remember the horror stories of such things, and I still get cold chills about it.) But if the numbers of children then were as high as they are now, we would have whole cities exclusively full of ASD people. Therefore, I believe there is some recent advent that has precipitated the explosion of numbers. And as with any other thing, some folks are just more susceptible. (My genes dictate that I'm more susceptible to particular forms of arthritis.) It's not our fault, it just is.

I don't know what can or will be done, but I sincerely hope that the light at the end of the tunnel is not turned off because of lack of funding. This is a very important health issue that can not be ignored.

yankeegirl1, you forgot vaccines, mercury-laced tooth fillings, living too close to electrical transformers/plants, too much fast food in our diets, President Obama (I put him in there because, every day, I hear that more and more things are his direct fault, so why not this), and Big Blue Meanies.

Like I said, it's all trial and error. If they don't do studies, they have no ability to rule things in or out.

Well said RHJ -- sure -- some weird thing could cause some of this stuff -- if you don't study it, you never find the cause. I don't have a problem with speculation and trial and error. The problem is when attention gets diverted to a falsely reported cause, rather than maintaining it's a hypothesis until PROVEN otherwise.

RHJ...they have done studies on vaccines...1000's of them proving it is not "the cause". As a mother with a child who has PDD...I believe it is genetic or environmental!

WHAT is THE CAUSE of AUTISM? I

I am a master's level pediatric RN (and parent) with a special interest in autism and the emerging field of medicine called Children's Environmental Health.

There is increasing consensus between the medical scientists who actually study the etiology of autism that autism is the result of a highly complex interaction between genetics and "environmental" factors.

They also increasingly believe that there are different 'kinds' of autism (even within the DSM-IV "autistic disorder" 299.00 diagnosis) and thus possibly multiple causes of autism. It is increasingly believed that full-diagnosis autism is certainly not solely a genetic disorder (as was thought by some in the past). With regard to autism, more than one epidemiologist has stated…

"Genetics loads the Gun. Environment pulls the Trigger."

Importantly, the medical scientists who actually study the etiology of autism (such as those at Harvard, Columbia, Johns Hopkins, Mount Sinai School of Medicine in NYC, and the University of California MIND Institute) increasingly suspect that the cause of autism is linked to prenatal and postnatal exposure to toxic industrial chemicals and substances.

Toxic chemicals and substances including methylmercury (many fish species), ethylmercury (many vaccines in the past, flu vaccines now), lead, cadium, organophosphate pesticides, brominated flame retardants, PBDEs (polybrominated diphenyl ethers), PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls), and other complex persistent and highly neurotoxic man-made industrial chemicals.

One prominent autism expert and neurologist has recently defined autism as "an environmental disease with genetic susceptibilities."

Judy, my list was actually written with a lot sarcasm laced fully within; my apologies for not indicating that more clearly. I thought my listing President Obama and Big Blue Meanies were indicative, but apparently not clearly enough.

I am definitely not one of the vaccine demonizers, especially in the area of autism causation.

WHAT is THE CAUSE of AUTISM? II

"One in six American children have a developmental problem ... Over the past century, increasing evidence has emerged linking chronic, low-level exposure to environmental influences and industrial pollutants with many of the most prevalent and disabling learning and behavioral problems in children.”

"The findings from some of the most thoroughly studied and widely dispersed environmental toxicants indicate that exposure to exceedingly low levels are risk factors for the “new morbidities” of childhood -- intellectual impairments, behavioral problems, asthma and preterm birth."

“Exposures to established environmental toxicants -- such as lead, tobacco, PCBs and mercury -- have consistently been linked with higher rates of intellectual impairment or behavioral problems, such as conduct disorder and ADHD. .... Children’s developing brains are more vulnerable to certain toxicants and pollutants than adults. The central nervous systems of the fetus and young child, which are undergoing rapid changes, are particularly vulnerable to some toxicants. The fetus is a recipient of toxicants through placental transfer. In some cases, such as mercury, the fetus is exposed to a larger dose than the mother.”

-Bruce P. Lanphear, MD, MPH.

Professor of Pediatrics, Professor of Children's Environmental Health; Cincinnati Children's Hospital, University of Cincinnati Medical Center.

Don't forget every can has BPA in the lining. All processed food has corn syrup or corn starch (Atrazine).

WHAT is THE CAUSE of AUTISM? III

“ASD likely encompasses several disorders with distinct etiologies and pathologies that converge on a common set of behavioral diagnostic criteria.”

“We know that autism prevalence continues to increase dramatically clearly implicating environmental factors in autism risk.”

“It is likely that constellations of epigenetic and environmental factors are contributing to the increasing prevalence of ASD, a rise that cannot be fully accounted for by changes in diagnostic criteria.”

“…. Genetics alone cannot account for the majority of autism cases currently being diagnosed.”

-Isaac N. Pessah, PhD.

Professor of Toxicology, Department of Molecular Biosciences, University of California at Davis. Director, Children’s Center for Environmental Health and Disease Prevention, University of California MIND Institute.

WHAT is THE CAUSE of AUTISM? IV

“Do Toxins Cause Autism?” NY Times. February 24, 2010. By Nicholas D. Kristof

(Google this article! It is easy to find.).

“Autism was first identified in 1943 in an obscure medical journal. Since then it has become a frighteningly common affliction, with the CDC reporting recently that ASDs now affect almost 1% of all children in the United States.”

[The CDC's most recent statistics released in Dec 2009 show that on average 1 in 110 kids in America have an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). 1 in 70 of our boys! Autism is now more common than childhood cancer, juvenile diabetes and pediatric AIDS combined!!!]

“Yet they constitute a huge national health burden, and suspicions are growing that one culprit may be chemicals in the environment. An article in a forthcoming issue of a peer-reviewed medical journal, Current Opinion in Pediatrics, makes this explicit.”

“The article [states] that the ‘likelihood is high’ that many chemicals ‘have potential to cause injury to the developing brain and to produce neurodevelopmental disorders.’”*

“It adds that the “likelihood is high” that many chemicals “have potential to cause injury to the developing brain and to produce neurodevelopmental disorders.”

“The author is not a granola-munching crank but [the famous] Dr. Philip J. Landrigan, Professor of Pediatrics at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. While his article is full of cautionary language, Dr. Landrigan told me that he is increasingly confident that autism and other ailments are, in part, the result of the impact of environmental chemicals on the brain as it is being formed.”

“The crux of this is brain development,” he said. “If babies are exposed in the womb or shortly after birth to chemicals that interfere with brain development, the consequences last a lifetime.”

“Concern about toxins in the environment used to be a fringe view. But alarm has moved into the medical mainstream. Toxicologists, endocrinologists and oncologists seem to be the most concerned.”

----------------------------

*Landrigan PJ. “What causes autism? Exploring the environmental contribution.” Curr Opin Pediatr. 2010 Apr;22(2):219-25.

John in Cali, thanks so much for your posts-very informative and helpful. I love that you are someone who actually works with this type of data regularly and can share some actual expertise.

I spent a lot of time last week, on another thread, trying to point out that it will most likely be found out not to be just one, individual cause and that the toxins in the air and the additives to our food should could and should definitely be considered suspect.

Like I pointed out then, I have a 14-yr-old girl myself, and many girlfriends who could share the same experiences regarding their children, who sure did develop a lot quicker than any previous generation I've witnessed. This has been the case for both boys and girls I've seen. I truly believe that the hormones we've all been pumped with through our food and drink, the chemicals released from basically everywhere around us, and the caused genetic changes/mutations they have cause are going to be found out to cause for a lot of things-good and bad.

"Children are not little adults. Their organ systems, particularly the nervous system, are forming and are thus more susceptible to the effects of chemicals."

"The development of the human brain and the CNS begins in utero and continues through adolescence, following a precise and delicate step-by-step sequence involving complex neurobiological processes including the formation of the neural tube, cell proliferation, differentiation, migration and selection, synapse formation, development of neurochemical systems, cell pruning; and myelination."

"The long and complex development of the brain and nervous system leaves it susceptible to the adverse effects of chemical exposures. Even minor changes in the structure or function of the nervous system can have profound consequences for neurological, behavioral and related body functions."

"Scientific Consensus Statement on Environmental Agents Associated with Neurodevelopmental Disorders." February 20, 2008.

If you are a parent, please "google" the preceding paper (available in PDF). It is not too long.

This paper was authored by some of the most famous medical scientists in the United States who are investigating Children's Environmental Health including Philippe Grandjean MD at Harvard and the renowned Philip Landrigan MD at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in NYC.

RHJ...my apologies! I do agree with you on the toxins, growth hormones amongst many other chemicals in our environment!

Judy, it's all good. :-)

I just truly can't believe that so many are so willing to scream "It's the vaccines!!!!!!" which have actually proven to be so life saving and yet don't even want to look elsewhere to things we're all exposed to pretty much constantly and throughout our lives, like those hormones and chemicals I suggested.

I really do believe that trying to blame any one thing as a cause for anything is extremely short-sighted, except willful and rampant ignorance being a cause for outright stupidity as that I feel will always be true.

RHJ... You are welcome! We have to find the cause of this (!), so that effective prevention and treatment strategies can be formulated.

Fortunately, many national, NIH/NIEHS funded studies are now underway. For example, the CHARGE study (Childhood Autism Risks from Genetics and the Environment); the EARLI study (Early Autism Risk Longitudinal Investigation); and the huge National Children's Study (NCS).

I suspect that much more will be known about the causes(s) of autism in 10 to 20 years after these studies are completed. I wish we were there now.

In the meanwhile, eat healthy, live healthy, be well.

John in Cali, I do hope they continue working on studies and cause and effect relationships, otherwise there really is no hope for finding out anything.

You do all of the same, and continue your good work and research. It's good to know that there are still many out there, like many I'm witnessing here including the two us, that want the answers and aren't going to settle on one thing and will continue to search until the answer(s) is/are found!

RHJ

Like I pointed out then, I have a 14-yr-old girl myself, and many girlfriends who could share the same experiences regarding their children, who sure did develop a lot quicker than any previous generation I've witnessed.

Interesting point. Have a dear friend who came to US from Thailand. She had very small chest when she moved here. Five years later she is a C-cup and no she didn't have surgery and no she hasn't gained weight. She is still as petite as when she moved here. She tells people all the time that she didn't have big boobs until a few years after coming here. Has always made me wonder about all the chemicals we consume.

What makes me worried and sad is that chemical companies and other industries will never allow laws to be passed to limit or prevent the use of chemicals. They will lobby to prevent public service campaigns (like pharmaceutical companies do with breastfeeding), and they will lobby politicians with millions of dollars to keep laws from being passed. Just finding what causes Autism isn't enough. I mean, let's face it, cancer is the same way (genetic factors that are influenced by the environment), and there's still cancer-causing chemicals out there. The only way to make change is to hurt these chemical companies where it counts, their profits, and try to buy only organic, etc.

One prominent autism expert and neurologist has recently defined autism as "an environmental disease with genetic susceptibilities."

This is probably the single most sensable thing that has been posted here on the subject.

I wonder about the effect of parasites from indoor pets. Parasites which are known to migrate to the brain. Could it be a two step effect, a shot reducing the immune system allowing the attack of some parasite or bacteria/virus. I mean, a pregnant woman is not supposed to be exposed to a cat, but after the child is born it is OK? Doctors might want to expand the scope of their "Statistical studies". (most toddlers crawl around on the floor with the household pet) My grand parents never allowed animals in the house, is it possible they knew something I don't?

Then why has it been okay for years until now.......before children began to get that large number of immunizations that they get today , which is compounded by the quality of food manufactured no wonder.....lets give thought to Autism.....My grandmother and many women in her era had ten children not one had Autism there have been second borns for decades an it was never a problem until now.....I believe the rise is immunizations. We have looked into the matter because my five year old born five years later then my second born girl twins....was showing signs of Autism which ended up being sensory and speech......mislabeling is horrific.......but during initially being suggested that he had Austim we changed or food water and immunizations for the children which have made a significant change for them all....also kids Chelate....which is no longer sold works for those that manifest signs or have Autism.....the purpose of Chelation is to remove the metals from your body......but I doubt you'll see new articles about because it points to the mercury in immunizations surprise surprise the drug industry....food manufactures and even water cleaning plants(water has heavy metals and etc.) now this is a study that would be beneficial....instead of playing around with the God given common sense we have.

No, it wasn't. The authors' names for both studies are readily available (for the study reported in this article they're listed in this very article).

BillyBoy, they wouldn't be considered so useless to you had any one of those four of your children been diagnosed with something incurable, don't you think?

Just because you and I were fortunate enough to be born with healthy, "normal" children, it does not mean we should wish for the money spent on research to be eliminated so those other parents are given no hopes.

Oops, I meant you and I were "blessed with healthy.....".

My apologies.

Once again, agreed RHJ -- just because one person has seen healthy kids, or their neighbor has healthy kids, doesn't establish a rule.

You are a lucky man.

So, they're not looking for causes or cures, just excuses?????????

Hmmmmmmm..............

They may be looking for excuses that take the spotlight off of vaccines.

God bless America, I will refuse to enter that debate.

The main "spotlight" on that has been dimmed by a considerable degree if not nearly extinguished at this point.

I agree -- it's considerate and healthy to space kids for such a reason. I don't know that it has anything to do with rate of autism/retardation. That's why you do the studies.

this crap has been studied to death.the high rate of autism is man made. these so called researchers all know it, and won't admit it.

yes there was autism years ago, but not at the high rate it is at today, and doesn't just come about from misdiagnosis. this isn't just a high rate for the hell of it. a high rate of anything when it comes to these types of unfortunate circumstances is usually man made. anyone saying differently is mistaken, dumb,or blind as a bat..

God Bless America.....until a bunch of people get off the vaccine band wagon the scientist will not have time to do other research...they debunked the vaccine theory until the cows came home...move on already!! And yes, I have a child afflicted!

until a bunch of people get off the vaccine band wagon the scientist will not have time to do other research

Really???? How is that?

Because they are waisting time repeating the same studies to prove it is not the vaccines alone...yet some people keep pushing for them to find a link there...a waste of time..move on and find the cause!!!

Then why has it been okay for years until now.......before children began to get that large number of immunizations that they get today , which is compounded by the quality of food manufactured no wonder.....lets give thought to Autism.....My grandmother and many women in her era had ten children not one had Autism there have been second borns for decades an it was never a problem until now.....I believe the rise is immunizations. We have looked into the matter because my five year old born five years later then my second born girl twins....was showing signs of Autism which ended up being sensory and speech......mislabeling is horrific.......but during initially being suggested that he had Austim we changed or food water and immunizations for the children which have made a significant change for them all....also kids Chelate....which is no longer sold works for those that manifest signs or have Autism.....the purpose of Chelation is to remove the metals from your body......but I doubt you'll see new articles about because it points to the mercury in immunizations surprise surprise the drug industry....food manufactures and even water cleaning plants(water has heavy metals and etc.) now this is a study that would be beneficial....instead of playing around with the God given common sense we have.

In case you missed it, vaccinations do NOT cause autism.

Then why has it been okay for years until now.......before children began to get that large number of immunizations that they get today , which is compounded by the quality of food manufactured no wonder.....lets give thought to Autism.....My grandmother and many women in her era had ten children not one had Autism there have been second borns for decades an it was never a problem until now.....I believe the rise is immunizations. We have looked into the matter because my five year old born five years later then my second born girl twins....was showing signs of Autism which ended up being sensory and speech......mislabeling is horrific.......but during initially being suggested that he had Austim we changed or food water and immunizations for the children which have made a significant change for them all....also kids Chelate....which is no longer sold works for those that manifest signs or have Autism.....the purpose of Chelation is to remove the metals from your body......but I doubt you'll see new articles about because it points to the mercury in immunizations surprise surprise the drug industry....food manufactures and even water cleaning plants(water has heavy metals and etc.) now this is a study that would be beneficial....instead of playing around with the God given common sense we have.

If the common thread of those that have posted is the I know of......it should start to shine a light.......Although be it ASD was present the questions is why has it been okay for years until now. Prior to children receiving the large number of immunizations that they get today , which is compounded by the quality of food manufactured no wonder.....lets give thought to Autism.....My grandmother and many women in her era had ten children not one had Autism there have been second borns for decades and it was never a problem until now.....I believe the rise is due immunizations and food. We have looked into the matter because my five year old born five years later then my second born girl twins....was showing signs of Autism which ended up being sensory and speech......mislabeling is horrific.......but during the time when ASD was initially being suggested that he had Autism we changed or food water and immunizations for the children which have made a significant change for them all....also kids Chelate....which is no longer sold works for those that manifest signs or have Autism.....the purpose of Chelation is to remove the metals from your body......but I doubt you'll see new articles about because it points to the mercury in immunizations surprise……. surprise the drug industry....food manufactures and even water cleaning plants(water has heavy metals and etc.). Studies are beneficial and this is a study that would be beneficial....instead of playing around with the God given common sense we have.

The gentleman that chipped in and made very many valid points, but never really dove in like many "professionals" (spouses) seldom did topics crucial points make sense to this study. Studies are crucial and very necessary but until those that can help....drug companies and food manufactures actually care about the effects that the preservatives used for shelf life so these industries can continue to rack in their profits and save, like propylene glycol (in just about everything) or mercury in immunizations studies can not truly be affective. Try removing these factors from those being studied that have genetic tendencies…. if you think about it the tendency is there adding factors that amplify/aggravate would do what??? Then implement the spacing I’m sure the study would be much different.

So, is it Diet? Genetics? Vaccines? They need to do the studies to determine the difference. MAYBE it's vaccines. I can tell you this, however, with certainty. If they hadn't vaccinated polio, a lot of kids would still get polio. In Europe where the cases of mumps/measles/rubella are higher, they don't vaccinate as well as in the U.S. Those are facts. Right now the link to Autism and vaccinations is guess work. Again -- it COULD be vaccinations, but you have to establish cause and effect. It hasn't been done yet.

(sarcasm on) Well thank you so much for sending us all to the one, true source-UPI!

Let's all look no further than where we've been directed to by the all-knowing NzYme!!

I will now trust no other research, done by anyone, because you've given us all the definitive answer: No Amish children have been documented as having autism, so it must be vaccines. Let's stop vaccinating all children, everywhere. Thanks, NzYme! (sarcasm off)

The guy who said that it was the vaccines was found to be lying. Yes its true there is no evidence supporting the vaccination theory.

NzYme, how do you know it isn't the Internet that is causing the rise in autism? The Amish don't use that, either.

LMAO @Dan-451372!

*YAWN* It is NOT vaccines. Get a grip.

If the common thread of those that have posted is the I know of......it should start to shine a light.......Although be it ASD was present the questions is why has it been okay for years until now. Prior to children receiving the large number of immunizations that they get today , which is compounded by the quality of food manufactured no wonder.....lets give thought to Autism.....My grandmother and many women in her era had ten children not one had Autism there have been second borns for decades and it was never a problem until now.....I believe the rise is due immunizations and food. We have looked into the matter because my five year old born five years later then my second born girl twins....was showing signs of Autism which ended up being sensory and speech......mislabeling is horrific.......but during the time when ASD was initially being suggested that he had Autism we changed or food water and immunizations for the children which have made a significant change for them all....also kids Chelate....which is no longer sold works for those that manifest signs or have Autism.....the purpose of Chelation is to remove the metals from your body......but I doubt you'll see new articles about because it points to the mercury in immunizations surprise……. surprise the drug industry....food manufactures and even water cleaning plants(water has heavy metals and etc.). Studies are beneficial and this is a study that would be beneficial....instead of playing around with the God given common sense we have.

The gentleman that chipped in and made very many valid points, but never really dove in like many "professionals" (spouses) seldom did topics crucial points make sense to this study. Studies are crucial and very necessary but until those that can help....drug companies and food manufactures actually care about the effects that the preservatives used for shelf life so these industries can continue to rack in their profits and save, like propylene glycol (in just about everything) or mercury in immunizations studies can not truly be affective. Try removing these factors from those being studied that have genetic tendencies…. if you think about it the tendency is there adding factors that amplify/aggravate would do what??? Then implement the spacing I’m sure the study would be much different.

annoying to copy and paste the same thing repetitively!

Genetics. It requires genetics plus environment.

It is also not a guarantee. Not every family with closely spaced children will be affected. The study merely pointed out that there MAY be an increased risk of autism. Obviously more work needs to be done in this area.

The Duggar's you referenced are also very well off; they make a fair amount of money off their show. Michelle probably consumes a diet full of good nutrients while pregnant and breastfeeding. Not all women who have children so close have access to the same nutritious foods that she has access too. The article theorized that the mother may be deficient, as it can take a few years to build up reserves again. I wonder how socio-economic status fits in here. Some parents have one kid after another with no means to afford them. State aid does not provide for a balanced diet for the mother.

If the common thread of those that have posted is the I know of......it should start to shine a light.......Although be it ASD was present the questions is why has it been okay for years until now. Prior to children receiving the large number of immunizations that they get today , which is compounded by the quality of food manufactured no wonder.....lets give thought to Autism.....My grandmother and many women in her era had ten children not one had Autism there have been second borns for decades and it was never a problem until now.....I believe the rise is due immunizations and food. We have looked into the matter because my five year old born five years later then my second born girl twins....was showing signs of Autism which ended up being sensory and speech......mislabeling is horrific.......but during the time when ASD was initially being suggested that he had Autism we changed or food water and immunizations for the children which have made a significant change for them all....also kids Chelate....which is no longer sold works for those that manifest signs or have Autism.....the purpose of Chelation is to remove the metals from your body......but I doubt you'll see new articles about because it points to the mercury in immunizations surprise……. surprise the drug industry....food manufactures and even water cleaning plants(water has heavy metals and etc.). Studies are beneficial and this is a study that would be beneficial....instead of playing around with the God given common sense we have.

The gentleman that chipped in and made very many valid points, but never really dove in like many "professionals" (spouses) seldom did topics crucial points make sense to this study. Studies are crucial and very necessary but until those that can help....drug companies and food manufactures actually care about the effects that the preservatives used for shelf life so these industries can continue to rack in their profits and save, like propylene glycol (in just about everything) or mercury in immunizations studies can not truly be affective. Try removing these factors from those being studied that have genetic tendencies…. if you think about it the tendency is there adding factors that amplify/aggravate would do what??? Then implement the spacing I’m sure the study would be much different.

Linda, you understand that the article only looked at parents of multiple children, right? They did not look at one child households.

Case in point .........If the common thread of those that have posted is the I know of......it should start to shine a light.......Although be it ASD was present the questions is why has it been okay for years until now. Prior to children receiving the large number of immunizations that they get today , which is compounded by the quality of food manufactured no wonder.....lets give thought to Autism.....My grandmother and many women in her era had ten children not one had Autism there have been second borns for decades and it was never a problem until now.....I believe the rise is due immunizations and food. We have looked into the matter because my five year old born five years later then my second born girl twins....was showing signs of Autism which ended up being sensory and speech......mislabeling is horrific.......but during the time when ASD was initially being suggested that he had Autism we changed or food water and immunizations for the children which have made a significant change for them all....also kids Chelate....which is no longer sold works for those that manifest signs or have Autism.....the purpose of Chelation is to remove the metals from your body......but I doubt you'll see new articles about because it points to the mercury in immunizations surprise……. surprise the drug industry....food manufactures and even water cleaning plants(water has heavy metals and etc.). Studies are beneficial and this is a study that would be beneficial....instead of playing around with the God given common sense we have.

The gentleman that chipped in and made very many valid points, but never really dove in like many "professionals" (spouses) seldom did topics crucial points make sense to this study. Studies are crucial and very necessary but until those that can help....drug companies and food manufactures actually care about the effects that the preservatives used for shelf life so these industries can continue to rack in their profits and save, like propylene glycol (in just about everything) or mercury in immunizations studies can not truly be affective. Try removing these factors from those being studied that have genetic tendencies…. if you think about it the tendency is there adding factors that amplify/aggravate would do what??? Then implement the spacing I’m sure the study would be much different.

it does matter and with our help they can help our future generations. have you ever thought about your water supply? did you drink city water or well water? this is a problem that should be looked at at all angles. i do not spend much time trying to understand it i just try to find my way of teaching her that NOBODY could do. she was in school at one year and at 16 they still couldn't work with her. i know about ait and not many people know about it. it has done miracles in communication for the autism and deaf people. for seven years i have know about this but not many professionals know of this. that says alot. good luck in our never ending love of our children and understanding of who they are.

sorry...but thats kind of sick!