You must log in or # to comment.
I remember when my mum was filling out a form as part of the autism assessment, she was like “sounds a lot like my husband as well… And his dad”
I’m convinced my mom is on the spectrum and my grandparents
Didn’t we used to hide it?
Yes. This is an artifact of a destigmatization coupled with better diagnostics for evaluating ASD. More people aren’t autistic, more people are being diagnosed and receiving counseling for coping with the neurldivergence in a cold and uncaring neurotypical world.
That’s the era they want to drag us back into, even if it costs us suicide and/or substance abuse.
The source is “I made it the fuck up!”
Also ignoring improvements in diagnostics.
I mean, it says the source right there, it’s the CDC…
The organization run by a brain worm driving a human suit?
I don’t understand why you or the person I’m replying to are for some reason seeming to dispute the higher rate of autism diagnosis? It’s a fairly well-established fact, the point of contention is why the rate is higher.
Because that’snot what the graph claims, and it is definitely not what the graph implies.
The graph says that there has been a 400% increase in the prevalence of autism. That’s not true, and is unsupported by the evidence. There has been a marked increase in the effective diagnosis and therapeutic interventions, but autism was largely undiagnosed and under-reported for almost all of human history. We’re still improving and refining the diagnostic criteria, and any changes in the number of cases should not be suggested to support any causal relationship with anything.
The graph is a lie, intended to push a political narrative that undermines the credibility of actual science, all in a transparent effort to distract from powerful child rapists raping children.
The rate is higher because we can “catch” more cases with better diagnosis.
Imagine machine that is throwing 100 balls per second. Another machine that can catch 10 balls per second. You catch 10 balls.
Now newer machine can catch 20, and newer can catch 50.
Does that mean the number of thrown balls is higher? No. It just means we have machines better at caching them. The same goes for any illness, autism, schizophrenia, cancer, depression…
Some ilnesses we are better at curing, does that mean the the illness is getting weaker?
I’m aware of that. I guess my point was that the data isn’t inaccurate, but I suppose* labelling it as “prevalence” is the point of contention.
I guess it could be more accurately labeled as “observed prevalence”, which is distinct from the actual prevalence
Yeah, after deleting any data the CDC used to have that they didn’t agree with. And making up any new data they need to make their preconceived notion as perceivably supported as possible.
In this case no. It’s the fact that we’re better at diagnosing things, any disease that doesn’t have active treatments is going to be similar.
You could do reports of ED over time and that graph is going to skyrocket not because it’s more or less common but rather more people are willing to get diagnosed to seek remediation. Right around the discovery of Viagra and it’s ilk you’d see skyrocketing ED diagnoses and it’s not like dicks just suddenly stopped working.
Also, more kids are just getting diagnosed. Back when I was in school in the 90s, I was very lucky to be in a rich school district that actually taught teachers how to spot signs so they could recommend a screening, which the district would foot the bill for because they had a psychologist on staff. Now, more and more districts have people like that, and more and more teachers are taught how to spot early signs of autism (and more parents are aware of it) that kids who previously might have just been “weird kids” are actually getting diagnosed with autism.
I won’t deny a potential environmental link, but if there is one, it’s likely more linked to fossil fuels than anything. BUT that’s hard to get traction against, and it doesn’t have a magic bullet that’ll immediately “solve” the issue.
I just mean listing the source as “the CDC” currently isn’t disproving that it’s made up anymore.
It may be accurate, but not because it is from the CDC anymore.
Thought you meant Eating Disorders til the Viagra comment. Had to reread the whole thing
Yes, which happened to be the body that made it the fuck up.
deleted by creator
Number of unvaxxed kids also growing in the past 22 years. I think it proves that autism is caused by lack of vaccine.
Now show the testing rate over the same time period!
Anti-vaxxers: No.
In my country there has been a huge increase in both ADHD and autism diagnoses the last decades. At the same time in those years the methods to discover both diagnoses have improved greatly.
But you know, correlation does not equal causation…30 years ago my teacher suspected i am on som sort of spectrum and had to get tested. I remember going to some doctor and i had to clap really fast and look into a light. Believe it of not i was not diagnosed with ADHD, because i’m a really good clapper
Damn! You should get vaccinated for whatever and try again. Better luck next time?
Mandating helmets for the boys at the front is resulting in many more head injuries!
Yeah, this is like saying “skin cancer rates have increased dramatically in the past 30 years!” Well yeah, because now we have the technology to detect it earlier. That “things increased” stat ignores the complementary “but deaths decreased dramatically” stat that immediately follows it. Before, we didn’t know people had skin cancer until it was killing them. But now, with preventative screenings, public awareness campaigns, etc, people are more likely to get checked before it is a life threatening issue.
It’s the same thing. Detection models got better, so detection rates went up.
Autism diagnosis rates. Quite a difference.
Remember Covid, don’t report on things = they stop existing.
Well, get out of here with your logic and reason…
Not autism rates, detection rates is what’s up, more kids are growing up with adequate helps and therapies so they can grow to be functional adults.
It is the same story as gay infecting children’s minds.
They are selling awareness as something to be afraid of. Which is yet another layer od evil.
Not only that, but they wish really hard for us to be their tiny little scapegoats, when probably most of the autistic community hates them.
Too add to that there are more types of autism. It’s a spectrum.
Yes, trains autism, boats autism, Math autism… /j
No but for real, no two autistic individuals are ever the same.
Adequate helps and terapies - repression and psychological abuse. Great. We are functional adults, fuck you.
Uuuhhhhhh, I’m an autistic adult who can somehow function because I had heaps of help growing up, many of my friends weren’t that lucky and have a hard time just existing.
Fair point, sorry. My statement about not torturing children still stands.
Not all therapies are ABA, most are based in science and helps the kid instead of scarring him, when i was little I actually looked forward to some of them like neurofeedback.
Also: Airbus A320 Neo.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Before you get more downvotes, it’s a reference folks: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics
In hypernormalization, making SURE you know they ARE LYING and that IT DOESN’T MATTER is essential.
Because the goal is to make you believe you can’t do anything, so that you give up and demobilize that is their goal.Very well said. I will make a concerted effort to inject “hypernormalization” into my speech more often going forward. For decades I’ve been saying to friends that the reductionist obsession with “normal” (whatever the hell that means) is a cancer to modern society.
In particular it already sounds creepy when you replace usage with its verb-form, e.g. changing “all my friends are normal” to “all my friends have been normalized”. It’s common practise to use a re-encoder to normalize a “background” playlist of songs to the same dB threshold so no single song sticks out and distracts us from what we are trying to focus on while listening. Similarly, authorities of an authoritarian ilk try to normalize populations so none of them stick out and distract from the primary focus (centralization of power and money). Hypernormalization involves taking that to its logical conclusion, telling the vast majority of people “stay in your lane” - meaning “shut up and consume, and when we tell you what to buy you buy it”, AKA be “normal(ized)”).
The authorities want an homogeneous population, as they also have a limited ability to imagine the social sphere in multiple dimensions, this is why you’re seeing things like the gender binaries. At least that’s just two simulations to run. But gender as spectrum, this becomes quickly untenable for the elites to model for control, they wish the squash the real world complexity into flattened binaries or even uniformity.
Yes, I think you got it exactly right and the audio normalization analogy is correct, at least for sound nerds like us.
Hypernormalization is a dysfunctional response from elites due to their human cognitive weakness. This is why we’re not going back to “King” no single human can bear the complexity of the entire world in their skull mush. They will melt down and genocide the Kurds when it gets too hard for them to conjugate everything. This is why dictators and fascism will do a lot of damage, but have no hope whatsoever for success. They are “rebellion from cognitive weakness”, they violently lash out at complexity itself, at those things they cannot understand. They want to reduce everything to a simple narrative of us versus them and then destroy “them” so only a uniform homogeneous “us” remains. This “us” identical to the ruler, does not require the ruler to imagine “the other” instead they only rule as if everyone else was an identical copy of them. And if anyone disagrees with that, they are “other”.
From that we know the “few” cannot rule the many, but then how do we avoid the traps of design by committee, bikeshedding and the various paralysis that come from complexity beyond human cognition. Concentrations of power are too dumb to rule, but the mob and the market are also dumb and easily fooled, not to mention irresponsible and self-destructive. (The market is burning the planet, right now, it cannot see into the future). The mob is emotional and easily manipulated, often by its own emotions.
I think we need new modes of thinking more advanced than what we had in the 1700s. Something invented with at least the idea of what a computer could do.
You’ll probably want to watch the best documentary on the subject
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gr7T07WfIhM
I also recommend the following by the same author
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s
about advertising and consumerismhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6EBpLfLHCA&list=PLC4E798CAE3E10597
about how our own surplus value is used against us
you know, everest was still there before it was discovered.
Everest wasn’t murdered before it was 5 years old.
Can somebody smarter than me tell me what this is trying to say? There’s a bar for surveillance year and birth year. But, for instance, 2012 is on the graph twice with different values. What does it mean?
Edit:
I think I got it. The graph is of “Autism rates in 8 year olds over time”. And the X axis should just be year (in 2 year increments).
2012 appears once as a birth year and once as a surveillance year. The graph says that they only ever surveyed 8-year-olds, since the birth year is always 8 less than the surveillance year.
But they have 12 bars and 6 labels… it makes no sense
I see 6 labels.
I guess that means 2 surveys per year. But I’m just guessing.It’s probably a dataset that collected every 2 years, but only labeled every other bar to prevent the graph from being overcrowded.
Not a great decision, but not terrible.
Although, I’m a bit concerned for Lemmys graph comprehension skills.
Your right I can’t count i guess still makes no sense
It’s no longer number go up good season.
They were told to make a graph that increases and that’s what they did.
Bad graph, they couldn’t decide if the X axis was the birth year of the kids or the year of the test but they give the same information since it’s always 8-year-old kids being tested. Anyways, they wrote the year of the test first and second the year of birth.
Assuming the data is true (doubt it because of fucking beef jerky man), it’s not so much that autism is on the rise so much that autism rates are being diagnosed more and autism is less stigmatized than it was previously.
If I remember correctly, it fits the same overall curve of the number of reported left handed people over time after society stopped forcibly making people use their right hand. Shockingly, actually making an attempt at diagnosing people and tracking those diagnoses makes numbers go up.
Imagine the sexist fascist racist homophobe convicted Cheeto puff is also ablest, please keep adding adjectives that describe the 47th president of the Confederated States
Will this administration release data on the impact of fossil emissions on diseases like asthma?
Also heath waves death tolls
It’s been a mess out there, for sure.
deleted by creator
Oh, they will. But reliable data?
Be careful what you wish for, lol.
In other news, visibility bias has been classified as communist propaganda. Anyone who says this isn’t representative of an actual increase in the incidence rate is a communist and can safely be ignored.
Cool but
