Autism Vox

13 opinions for Not 1 in 166: It’s 1 in 150

• Hilda
  Feb 8, 2007 at 4:42 pm

  I’m glad to see the rate go up - I look around and see so much better reporting, better understanding, of what kids are going through and how to help them. Kids like my son who struggle and can’t quite make it completely mainstreamed without extra help are given that extra help, and so learn and grow instead of giving up, withdrawing, and failing. Kids who in the past might have been written off as unteachable are instead being taught and learning so much. It’s fantastic.
  Hilda

• Leila
  Feb 8, 2007 at 4:44 pm

  I still find it hard to believe this number. I mean, come on.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Feb 8, 2007 at 4:52 pm

  I’m here in NJ and I can believe it—a friend said if it’s 1 in 100 here, it’s 1 in 60 for boys (that’s an extremely unofficial estimate, I must underline). The awareness here is huge—-some of that has to do with the well-established schools (like Alpine and PCDI). Lots of families have been coming here for the services, esp. the schools.

• Hilda
  Feb 8, 2007 at 5:07 pm

  There are at least four kids (three boys and one girl) in my Ds12’s school with Asperger’s or HFA - I don’t know how many others there are who aren’t mainstreamed. So minimum 4 in a school of 700 - yup, if there is one more I don’t know about that would get us higher than 1 in 150. Feels plausible and helpful.

• Hilda
  Feb 8, 2007 at 5:08 pm

  Oh, and those four are all kids who need enough services that they have an educational diagnosis of autism - I’m not counting kids who don’t have the autism box checked.

• Another Voice
  Feb 9, 2007 at 1:14 am

  I have downloaded the Community report from the CDC web site. I think that the report is useful in many respects, but it seems out of date.

  The results shown are numbers from the 2000 and 2002 survey, these are dated. Do they have more recent numbers? Maybe something for 2005 or even 2006?

  The prevalence rates for both the 2000 and 2002 survey (page 18) are 1 in 150 for both survey years. So their rate is not going up, it is just significantly higher than the 1 in 166 I have been laboring under.

  They say in the report that these statistics should be used to help plan for services in the future and I think that is good, if we actually do something with the plan. Also, I would rather see us plan for 1 in 150 as opposed to 1 in 166. But with all that has gone on with autism awareness between 2002 and today, what if we should really be planning for 1 in 125 or 1 in 100? I am not aware of any business that would use 2002 data to plan for 2008 and beyond, why should the government?

  I hope I am reading the report correctly, if I have missed something please let me know.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Feb 9, 2007 at 1:42 am

  Yes, you’re reading it correctly (and not being an epidemiologist, am afraid I do not know how long it generally takes to do htese sorts of studies)—–the rate is 1 in 101 here in New Jersey and I don’t think some would be surprised if the prevalence rate is more like (as an offhand example) 1 in 90 or 80 or….. I like the CDC’s making the point that what we need to be doing with these figures is to start planning and preparing now for all the children who will be tomorrow’s adults.

  This may sound cliché, but I am thinking here is yet another case of our human discoveries and understanding lagging behind the actual reality of things.

• David N. Andrews MEd
  Feb 9, 2007 at 4:03 am

  The 1-in-100 (actually 0.91%) figure I know of has been going round some 10 or so years.

• Kristina Chew, PhD
  Feb 9, 2007 at 5:59 pm

  So this “announcement” is a sort of pseudo-event….

• Autism Vox » 6 Autism Bills to go to NJ State Assembly
  Feb 13, 2007 at 2:33 pm

  […] In the wake of the CDC’s announcement last Thursday that the prevalence rate for autism in children in New Jersey is 1 in 194, six measures that “would propel New Jersey to the forefront of the autism crisis by adding millions of dollars for research and a slew of services lasting a lifetime ” are to be introduced in New Jersey’s State Assembly as early as next week. As reported in today’s Bergen Record, Assembly Speaker Joseph J. Roberts, D-Camden, “spearheaded” work on the bills back in the early fall of 2006. The legislation includes: […]

• Social Networks and the Increase in Autism
  Aug 5, 2007 at 5:07 am

  […] such as this be a reason to account for the increase in the prevalence rate of autism, which is now 1 in 150 in the US, and 1 in 94 among children in the state where I live, New Jersey? That is, after one […]

• Getting the Facts Straight in Louder Than Words
  Dec 21, 2007 at 12:30 pm

  […] above in which she recounts how, in 2004 or 2005, she researched autism on Google. However, the figures from the CDC that McCarthy cites—that 1 out of 150 children has autism and that 1 in 94 boys is […]

• Autism Numbers in Malaysia
  Apr 27, 2008 at 3:31 pm

  […] that 1 in 625 Malaysian children is autistic, which would be a much lower prevalence rate than the 1 in 150 figure among children in the US. But some think otherwise: If this were to be taken as a standard […]

Have an opinion? Leave a comment:

• Use this area to discover new blogs and content in the b5media network.
• Beauty & Style
• Business
• Entertainment
• Health & Wellness
• Lifestyles
• Music
• Sports
• Team Blogs
• Technology
• Travel & Culture

• Social Web
• E-mail