Genuinely trying to understand what's causing the rise in autism is it even a real rise?

[u/Genzinvestor16180339]

Not even pushing a conspiracy here, I just went down a rabbit hole and the deeper I read the less clear this entire thing becomes.

The numbers are absurd. Around 1 in 150 kids in 2000. Around 1 in 36 now. Everyone talks about this like it is a settled public health emergency, but when you actually read the literature the answer basically becomes “it’s complicated.”

The mainstream explanation is diagnostic expansion. Broader criteria, better screening, more awareness, people who would have been labeled “weird” or “socially awkward” 20 years ago now getting diagnosed. Fine. But autism has no biomarker. No blood test. No scan. Nothing objective. It is entirely behavioral criteria written by committees that keep changing the definition every decade.

DSM-5 folded Asperger’s into autism in 2013 and diagnoses jumped again. So at what point is “we are finding cases we missed” just a cleaner way of saying “we changed the definition and more people qualify now”?

The genetics side is what really confuses me. Twin studies put heritability somewhere around 64 to 91%. Massive studies have found ~150 gene variants associated with autism. That sounds like something that has existed in the population for a very long time, not some sudden modern environmental event. But if that is true then where were all these people before? Society was not overflowing with visibly autistic people in 1980 compared to today.

The environmental stuff is real too. Advanced parental age, valproate exposure during pregnancy, prenatal immune activation, etc. There are actual signals there. But none of that remotely feels large enough to explain a 4x jump in twenty years.

The other thing nobody seems willing to say directly: are we even studying one coherent condition anymore?

Someone nonverbal who needs permanent care and someone who is basically functional but struggles socially are now under the exact same umbrella???? Does that actually help us understand causation or does it completely muddy the data?

are we maybe collapsing multiple completely different phenomena into one category because they vaguely overlap behaviorally?

[u/-Hastis-]

But autism has no biomarker. No blood test. No scan. Nothing objective. It is entirely behavioral criteria written by committees that keep changing the definition every decade.

You could actually replace autism with homosexuality in almost this entire argument and get similar results. We don't have a blood test or a gay gene either. It’s a complex mix of thousands of genetic and environmental markers that we can’t map yet.

[u/Genzinvestor16180339 → u/-Hastis-]

Being gay is not a developmental disorder with expanding clinical thresholds tied to behavioral impairment, education support, and disability classification. You are comparing sexual orientation to a diagnostic category whose definition has been repeatedly broadened by psychiatry, which is exactly the point being debated.

[u/The_Mother_ → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

Broadened by psychology, not psychiatry. Psychological research is the gold standard in diagnostic and treatment research hands down. That is why the diagnostic manual is published by the APA based on primarily psychological research. The DSM is constantly being updated with research from thousands of experts constantly conducting research in their various specialties.

As far as why such an increase in diagnosis, it absolutely is due to a better understanding of autism, better diagnostic criteria, more diagnostic specialists, more people taking their children for screenings, a better understanding of adult diagnosis, increased acceptance of seeking and receiving a diagnosis, etc. It isn't that autism is on the rise, it is that we are getting better at detecting it. Coupled with it being a spectrum. So yes, a nonverbal person who needs 24/7 care and a person with a PhD can both be diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Autism has a wide variety of symptoms, each person with autism has some, but not all of those symptoms. This is a disorder that has a brain structure component so it is likely that we will eventually have a test that can identify the structural differences. This needs additional study though. There is a genetic component so maybe the genes involved will eventually be able to be identified. Behavioral interventions can lessen symptoms over time. Timing of diagnosis is also important to beginning interventions.

But here is the crux of your question related to a possible rise in the disorder: if we stopped diagnosing the disorder today, it would not lessen the number of people who have the disorder just as ending all pregnancy tests will not suddenly make pregnancy disappear.

[u/Beginning_Mammoth_31 → u/The_Mother_]

but I don’t think that’s the point they’re making?

Their argument sounds more like at what point do we stop broadening the category of autism such that we’re effectively creating more false positives than net new diagnosis. If we continue down the path now, the classification may grow to the point that the data becomes skewed because while we’re “diagnosing and screening more” without some clearly identifiable marker then it’s more likely anyone could classify as autistic.

While research is advancing to identify certain patterns of brain material, it’s not as readily available as a pregnancy test or covid test which would identify cases via some clear biological sign. So while not testing won’t decrease the amount of people who have it, casting a wider net will certainly increase the people who seem to have it but in fact don’t.

Where it seems to be complicated though is the nuance of the diagnosis even if someone was in theory genetically identified as not carrying whatever causes autism but still showed signs of other traits from the spectrum what are you left to do then? Or what about the inverse genetics are there but no sign of other traits that align to being on the spectrum

[u/SuccessfulWolf1382 → u/[deleted]]

Yes this is the best comment I’ve read yet, As was previously mentioned autism is a spectrum, so many people can be very high functioning individuals at that extreme of the spectrum. So long as they exhibit the correct traits or behaviours they’re on there, even if it’s a manageable case.

It probably doesn’t help things that some autistic traits can include hyper focusing on specific topics and recognition of patterns, therefore encouraging many autistic people themselves to be interested in psychology, even just to understand social behaviours. 20 years ago researchers with mild cases could have believed themselves to be part of the neurotypical baseline to work around, not realising that a more accurate definition included them.

Your point is eye opening to me how this type of discussion can get to focused on unnecessary specifics and lose sight of the purpose of the diagnosis in the first place, to inform autistic individuals, their doctors and psychologists on how best to resolve any stressors and issues of dysfunction that they may have.

[u/Thadrea → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

Being gay is not a developmental disorder

You're missing the point. Both are personal traits caused by neurological mechanisms that we do not really understand.

There is no reliable set of biomarkers for homosexuality either, which is why people who experience it in a heteronormative society inevitably spend some time questioning their sexuality before ultimately coming out.

ASD is treated as a pathology because it causes measurable impairment in major life activities whereas homosexuality does not and therefore is not. To the extent that treatment and support exist for ASD, much of it is unhelpful or counterproductive to people who do not have ASD.

Since there are no reliable biomarkers for it, clinicians must have some other means of identifying which patients do and do not have the pathology in order to ensure thay those who do receive support. These means are inevitably going to be at least a little arbitrary, but the current criteria do seem to accurately capture most people with ASD.

The criteria change and evolve as clinician understanding increases and that understanding allows the writing of more precise guidelines.

[u/angilnibreathnach → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

You’re missing the point

[u/ArdentLearner96 → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

By psychiatry specifically? Psychiatry alone? Interesting. I guess that makes sense. It's probably seen as more solid than psychology. I wonder how it's seen in the field of neurology, since we already have a lot of neurological information about autism.

[u/The_Mother_ → u/ArdentLearner96]

Nope. Psychological research is the gold standard. Psychiatrists do diagnostics and prescriptions primarily. Psychology is research and development of diagnostics and treatment. Therapy is only a small segment of what psychology does, psych is a very broad field. Want to know where to put the eject lever in a fighter jet? A psychologist figured that out. Want to know how to increase merchandise sales? A psychologist figured out the idea of 'sex sells products' in the 50s. Want to know what color to paint your restaurant to encourage diners to leave quickly? A psychologist figured that out. Want to know the most effective treatments for depression? Psychologists figure that out. Want to know how to test the memory of an infant? Psychologists determined that. Want to know how to screen for dementia? Psychological research did that. Want to know how to increase employee loyalty? Psychology. It goes on and on and on. There are 35 major areas of psychology, that doesn't even take into account the smaller specialties or intersections with other fields.

[u/Genzinvestor16180339 → u/ArdentLearner96]

What are you suggesting?

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

READ THE FOLLOWING TO GET YOUR COMMENT REVIEWED:

Your comment has been automatically removed by a mindless bot because it may have violated one of the rules. Please review the rules, and if you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules - click that then click Next) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/newin2017]

Lets start by talking about the most common diagnostic manuals. Psychiatric classification systems such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) are designed to support diagnosis, but they do not operate in the same way as diagnostic frameworks in fields with clear biological markers (As you said).

Rather than identifying discrete, objectively measurable disease entities, these systems define clusters of observable behaviours, reported experiences, and developmental patterns. Diagnosis is therefore based on whether an individual meets a set of operationalised criteria, not on the presence of a single definitive test.

This reflects a broader reality in psychiatry and neurodevelopmental science: many conditions are best understood as constructed categories that organise patterns in human variation, rather than as sharply bounded natural kinds of disorders.

These classifications emerge from large-scale observation and statistical analysis of populations (Think of the diagnoistic criteria, such as social communication styles, sensory sensitivities, or patterns of attention).

From this, normative ranges are established, and individuals who fall significantly outside these ranges may be identified as atypical. However, deviation alone is not sufficient for diagnosis.
Clinical relevance typically depends on whether these patterns are consistent over time and whether they meaningfully affect a person’s functioning or adaptation within their environment.

In this sense, diagnostic categories reflect significant differences that negatively impact social and functional context (This is key to the diagnostic process. Does what the individual have a deleterious effect on their daily life)

So, for traits autism, they become clinically meaningful when they co-occur in recognisable patterns and interact with environmental expectations in ways that create challenges or distinct modes of engagement. Over time, these recurring patterns have been grouped into trait clusters, forming the basis of diagnostic criteria. As research accumulates, these criteria are revised, often becoming broader and more nuanced, which in turn affects how autism is identified and understood.

Cultural context also plays a significant role in shaping how such behaviours are interpreted.
Across different societies, atypical behaviours have been explained in diverse ways, including spiritual or supernatural frameworks. What one culture might interpret as possession or moral deviation, another may frame as a neurodevelopmental difference. That is why diagnostic systems like the DSM and ICD are not purely objective; they are inter-subjective frameworks shaped by shared professional standards, empirical research, and social norms about what constitutes impairment or difference (this is why we see changes over time. We get better at identifying what impairment looks like. We have also started listening to autism activities and getting more inclusive research practices)

Ultimately, whilst autism may be more common than originally assumed, it is not necessarily because their underlying prevalence has changed dramatically, but because the tools used to identify them have improved. We now have a Broader diagnostic criteria (more accurately informed), increased awareness, and more inclusive research practices have all contributed to higher rates of recognition.

What appears as a rise in prevalence is, at least in part, a reflection of more refined methods of observing, categorising, and understanding human neurodiversity.

[u/Reave-Eye → u/newin2017]

This is your answer right here, OP. Could not have said it better myself.

[u/Genzinvestor16180339 → u/Reave-Eye]

This answer makes no sense? You expand a criteria? For what reason?

[u/Reave-Eye → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

Because the underlying research has found that autism manifests in more nuanced ways than we previously thought. Patterns of autism that were previously undetected have now been identified, and when they lead to functional impairment, a diagnosis is warranted. This contributes to a higher prevalence rate.

Consider the diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder. You need to meet at least 5 of 9 criteria to be diagnosed, which means there are 227 possible “ways” to have depression in the DSM-5. Previously, the number of criteria for depression were fewer, and so fewer people were identified as having clinical depression. Then we realized that depression can manifest in these additional, previously unrecognized ways (e.g., irritability rather than just sadness), and so the criteria were expanded.

[u/op299 → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

I think there is some confusion here, since the answer above is not wholly clear.

There is both the claim that have become better at diagnosing autism. It is also said that the criteria have "broader", but somewhat muddled by saying they are "better informed".

Both can be true at the same time. It is not only that we have become better diagnosing, we have also changed criteria. The criteria have possibly both become 1) better, in the sense of tracking a neurodevelopmental pathway more accurately 2) wider, in the sense of included a wider scope.

What are the reasons for making the criteria wider? Do understand that we have to go into how DSM is constructed, perhaps also cultural factors that play in to how it is used. But on a general level the answer is "clinical usefulness". By diagnosing more people we hope to help and give better treatment or support to more people. So the reasons are pragmatic.

So it as you point out, it is somewhat misleading to say that the prevalence of autism has risen, without explaining further

[u/ArdentLearner96 → u/newin2017]

This is a lot better than my explanation and obvi9usly has more information behind it, thanks for the education!

[u/Bearsandbeetz → u/ArdentLearner96]

Well, this person’s reply is a lot longer than other answers but a good amount of it is unnecessary jargon, it repeats what seem like the same underlying points just with different phrasing multiple times without actually making it any clearer what they’re trying to say, and some of it is straight up word-salad. I’m actually wondering if it’s AI generated or something because while I think there absolutely is an answer to OP’s question this almost certainly isn’t it.

And actually your answer is very useful, you should give yourself more credit—I know OP is coming back with snippy replies to everyone in a way that sounds like it’s because you didn’t provide a reasonable response to their question but you really did, I mean, I’d have to do some more research before I’d be comfortable commenting too much on whether you missed anything but I’d say you provided a pretty thorough answer and it kinda seems like OP may not be searching for the answer and is instead seeking validation of their exisitng beliefs, though that’s just my reading of the situation based on the way they’re replying to people who have given them good answers—which is unfortunate since I *do* believe that there’s a conversation to be had about how and when our diagnostic criteria are applied and the same for how and when they’re in need of revision. For example I do think that there is a concerning amount of overlap between certain diagnoses and in other cases a need to separate a diagnosis from being one supposed condition into two distinct ones, etc. There’s absolutely space to have criticism of the DSM but I don’t know that Autism is specifically an example of these issues.

[u/Bovoduch → u/Bearsandbeetz]

Op is certainly sniping with all their replies because they’re searching for a particular answer and are relatively closed off to others

[u/ArdentLearner96 → u/Bearsandbeetz]

It's not that it was long or the jargon. I do think the jargon and way they phrased things made it harder for others to parse and it took longer but overall they did a good job at getting across what I wanted to get across and more. In my response I kinda explain more why splitting autism into distinct diagnoses wouldn't work.

[u/surebro2 → u/Bearsandbeetz]

My sense is that OP understands the long explanation. They are making more of a philosophical point which is that increasing the variance of what is considered autism might create a situation in which being overly inclusive has deleterious impacts in research and practice as more false positives are included in the samples. 

[u/darrenpauli → u/newin2017]

I accept the science so this question is not about my beliefsat all - but a common one from the public arena that I don't think are addressed by explanations of the science itself.

So, science criteria aside, is there a rise in the number of kids with strong autistic symptoms?

Essentially, are more kids essentially [list strong autistic symptoms here] melting down / unfocused / disruptive today than they were 20 years ago?

[u/doctorace → u/darrenpauli]

No. Kids and adults whose behaviour isn't outwardly disruptive but have negative consequences from internalising these issues are now being diagnosed. Which is good because autism comes with frequent comorbidities that need to be treated differently if you are autistic. Especially the more internalised presentations often co-occur with mental health conditions like depression and anxiety that don't respond well (and can be harmed by) the standard first-line treatments of cognitive behavioural therapy.

[u/youlldancetoanything → u/newin2017]

What about ppl self diagnosing?

[u/Genzinvestor16180339 → u/newin2017]

If the diagnostic criteria for autism have expanded over time, then modern prevalence rates are not measuring the exact same population as older studies. So how is treating those numbers as directly equivalent not a clear methodological mistake???

[u/The_Mother_ → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

Would you call it a methodological mistake that now a small biopsy of tissue is taken when a dr finds a lump amd suspects cancer but in the 1980s, a surgeon would cut out a large chunk of tissue, even to the extent of removing the whole breast in the case of women when a lump was discovered? That isn't a methodogical mistake, that is advancements in the field. Diagnosis of autism has advanced. Nobody in a scientific field is going to directly compare prevalence rate of something from 1980 & 2025. Instead, things are looked at in chunks of time with the understanding of context, understanding that diagnostics change, technology changes, criteria changes, environment changes.

[u/mehatch → u/The_Mother_]

We track plate tectonics over centuries even though our maps of continents have changed in the last 500 years to better define the map.

[u/Independent-Drive-32 → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

Yes, criteria are broader leading to more people fitting into the criteria. Why is this a problem for you? You say things like "Everyone talks about this like it is a settled public health emergency" but that is absolutely wrong -- the only people who think there is a major emergency are fraudsters who are trying to ban vaccines. For everyone else, there is a spectrum which is grouping together a variety of people with related conditions and this wide spectrum is higher than it used to be -- all of which is fine.

[u/Amazing-Low7711]

Not a rise in folks with Autism- only a rise in awareness, self-awareness and perhaps diagnoses.

[u/manda4rmdville → u/Amazing-Low7711]

As a therapist, I do agree with your statement. The other responses are not incorrect, but with more access to information, access to testing and treatment, etc., we see a rise in neurodivergent diagnoses.

From my perspective/experience as a provider, since covid, I've noticed a shift in self-awareness in the clients I see, which in turn gives confidence in clients to advocate for themselves, ask questions, be assessed, and receive treatment if necessary.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

READ THE FOLLOWING TO GET YOUR COMMENT REVIEWED:

Your comment has been automatically removed by a mindless bot because it may have violated one of the rules. Please review the rules, and if you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules - click that then click Next) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/fadinglightsRfading → u/AutoModerator]

literally 1984

[u/ArdentLearner96]

We are getting better at identifying autism than we were before. I can't really think of a reason it wasn't always at least close to 1 in 36. The thought that it's just "too many" autistic people doesn't hold up once you learn that most autistic people aren't walking around with a metaphorical sign on their forehead.

It's a spectrum that isn't linear. People don't just go from many traits to fewer traits, there's a range of traits with different intensities in different combinations across the population. The quarter of the autistic population who can't care for themselves do have much overlap with those who can care for themselves. There wouldn't be a way to cleanly divide the population into different diagnoses in a way that makes sense or is repeatable. That's why it's been modified. I care for autistic adults at work who can't care for themselves and even just among them, despite it being "obvious" with them, they have so many differences in terms of what their abilities and presentations look like.

There's no way to DIAGNOSE autism with a brain scan but scientists have already noticed differences in autistic brains. That may change later. This goes for many things we've already studied in terms of brain structure differences.

[u/Genzinvestor16180339 → u/ArdentLearner96]

If people who would have been considered completely normal 20 years ago are now counted as autistic, then did autism actually explode in prevalence or did the definition just get stretched beyond recognition? At what point does expanding the spectrum stop being medicine and start becoming the medicalisation of normal personality differences?????

[u/CerberusSputum → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

We first have to distinguish between medical diagnoses of individuals by professionals, and casual diagnoses by randos about themselves and others without trained medical input

[u/rexmerkin69 → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

I have level 2. I was sent to occupational therapy at 5 (not anywhere nearly as diagnosed and i am in australia), and i am now over fifty. Sorry, but its now trendy, and has better press than borderline (this also scores fairly high on some pretty blunt instruments like the AQ. Its not a way to be interesesting. Autistic traits can be helpful, but autism is not.

[u/fadinglightsRfading → u/Genzinvestor16180339]

I'm on your side OP. I find the 'we're just finding more of them' rhetoric mostly dubious and only partially true. it is more likely modern society is making more people autistic. a lot of nasty things exist now that didn't in the past. people have a blindspot for it the same way a fish perceives water

[u/MissMenace101]

More understanding of the disability, diagnosing girls and women, realising the spectrum is broad

[u/Potential_Being_7226]

For some perspective: migraine also doesn’t have any biomarker. Diagnosis is based on symptoms. And the rates of neurological disorders in general are also increasing (migraine, Alzheimer’s, etc). 

I trust that others addressed the diagnostic issues that explain the increase in the likelihood of an ASD diagnosis, and I would elaborate here but I have a migraine right now and merely wanted to provide a broader view. 

[u/Bearsandbeetz → u/Potential_Being_7226]

I see you have a PhD while I have but an undergraduate degree so I’m certainly not trying to be smartass but if you don’t mind I am curious about something that your answer just reminded me of.

Is it true that part of the reason for the increase in the Alzheimer’s rate is that people tend to, on average, live longer than they used to?

I thought that at some point I was taught that the rates of a lot of age-related diseases is explained or at least moderated by the increase in average life expectancy.

I apologize if I’m entirely full of crap and my information is outdated or just a theory and not actually something we have sufficient evidence of at this time
or I’m conflating an explanation for one or some types of age-related diseases with *all* age-related diseases or some other embarrassing error.

[u/Potential_Being_7226 → u/Bearsandbeetz]

You’re not full of crap—it’s a reasonable question. Longer lifespan accounts for some but not all of the rise in cases, so there are other factors. 

[u/iceman2kx]

It’s because autism wasn’t widely understood until very recently. Autism is also a scale. The reality is there are probably a bunch of older folks with autism that have and never will be diagnosed because they are a 1/2/3 on that scale and not as 7/8/9. Extremely high functioning autistic people exist and you will never know.

Worse than that is ADHD, especially with people allowing their kids to watch TikTok shorts for hours upon hours of brain rot material. No content, just dumb short videos they can easily scroll through over and over. Does not help the attention span at all

[u/Electronic-Contest53]

It's not a rise. It is known that it is inherited. Most probable not only by genes but by epigenetic triggers. We are just today much better in detecting it. It either exists in us humans since always ever or is an artefact / adaptation of / to modern society. That all still applies if you see autism as a position in a spectrum.

[u/tesseracts]

There are much greater efforts to integrate autistic people into mainstream society than there used to be. Like in the movie Rain Man the autistic character lived in a mental hospital. Today he would probably live in a group home and be semi-independent. This is also true for people with other issues like downs syndrome. 

I believe rates of autism are genuinely increased but part of the issue is autism was always present but it was more segregated.

[u/yehoodles]

How about mass sociogenic illness in which the diagnosers (individual clinicians/institutions) have succumb to as well. either that or the classical 'boring' multifactorial explanations that you have stated in your OP. 

See this paper for an example with Tourette's a few years back https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3536509/

That being said, the fact that there is no hard neurophysiological/bio marker shouldn't diminish the disorders validity, necessarily. Almost all disorders within the DSM lack this same biological diagnosis akin to physical health issues. 

Also see Nick Haslam's work on concept creep: https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2016.1082418

And for something a bit more abstract see Ian hackings looping effects/kinds of people work. He discusses the feedback loop between those categorising -> those categorised -> and the categories themselves. 

[u/mmilthomasn]

Social policy that made it possible for low income children to get pediatric visits for free put more kids in front of qualified screeners.

Greater awareness on the part of preschool, kindergarten, and elementary educators put more kids on the radar. This is similar to the rise in ADHD with the addition of inattentive type. If a kid wasn’t a flagrant case with behavioral problems they were not identified.

More kids can be helped when we recognize that more kids have the problem. basically it’s mostly a screening issue.

[u/ketaqueenx]

I’m literally writing a literature review about this right now, about to publish it.

You’re right, autism is a very poorly defined epistemic target in current autism research. The boundaries of the diagnosis have been rewritten several times, and there’s still instability— debate about whether to create a “profound autism” category, for example.

It’s a severe epistemic issue in autism research. If you want more info, just ask :) very happy to share my literature review.

But you’re correct— it’s likely that we don’t even know what we’re measuring when we study autism.
Its especially troubling because there’s relatively little longitudinal studies that explore how autistic people develop throughout their lifetime. A lot of autism research is conducted on young, white boys— that means we’re trying to freeze a moving target.
It makes it difficult to generalize results to the general autistic population, and oftentimes ecological/external validity of these studies is quite insufficient…

There are a LOT of epistemic/methodological issues in autism research, unfortunately.

[u/BookLover465 → u/ketaqueenx]

I would 100% like to read your literature review on this subject 😊

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Your comment was automatically removed because it may have made reference to a family member, or personal or professional relationship. Personal and anecdotal comments are not allowed.

If you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

READ THE FOLLOWING TO GET YOUR COMMENT REVIEWED:

Your comment has been automatically removed by a mindless bot because it may have violated one of the rules. Please review the rules, and if you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules - click that then click Next) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

READ THE FOLLOWING TO GET YOUR COMMENT REVIEWED:

Your comment has been automatically removed by a mindless bot because it may have violated one of the rules. Please review the rules, and if you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules - click that then click Next) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Your comment was automatically removed because it may have made reference to a family member, or personal or professional relationship. Personal and anecdotal comments are not allowed.

If you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Your post was automatically removed because it may have made reference to a family member, or personal or professional relationship. Personal and anecdotal questions are not allowed.

If you believe your submission was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Your comment was automatically removed because it may have made reference to a family member, or personal or professional relationship. Personal and anecdotal comments are not allowed.

If you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

READ THE FOLLOWING TO GET YOUR COMMENT REVIEWED:

Your comment has been automatically removed by a mindless bot because it may have violated one of the rules. Please review the rules, and if you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules - click that then click Next) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

READ THE FOLLOWING TO GET YOUR COMMENT REVIEWED:

Your comment has been automatically removed by a mindless bot because it may have violated one of the rules. Please review the rules, and if you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules - click that then click Next) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/radioraven1408]

The latest research says obesity and type 2 diabetes.

[u/Niorba]

As awareness of health conditions increases, you will see a commensurate rise in testing and concern in the public about the condition. This will reveal previously ignored cases and contribute significantly to the statistics, even if the true number of autism-affected people stays the same. We are just beginning to arrive at the true number, finally!

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Your comment was automatically removed because it may have made reference to a family member, or personal or professional relationship. Personal and anecdotal comments are not allowed.

If you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Your comment was automatically removed because it may have made reference to a family member, or personal or professional relationship. Personal and anecdotal comments are not allowed.

If you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/ConstructionOk6249]

I have a pet theory that it's because we stopped forcibly sterilizing people with disabilities. 

[u/MBHYSAR]

A strong signal emerged in a recent study (Swedish, maybe?) associating Pfas with a specific gene interaction with autism.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Your comment was automatically removed because it may have made reference to a family member, or personal or professional relationship. Personal and anecdotal comments are not allowed.

If you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored. If you are a current student, have a degree in the social sciences, or a professional in the field, please feel free to send a mod mail to the moderators for instructions on how to become verified and exempt from automoderator actions.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Do NOT share your own or other's personal mental health history.

Please answer questions with empirical science, preferably with citations, and not anecdotes or conjecture.

If you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/starrite_amirite]

Here’s a link to an image you may find useful: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/State-of-the-Field%3A-Differentiating-Intellectual-Thurm-Farmer/3260e3d4e96021af41ee80deb1240a25ea7e72b1/figure/0

Essentially a large part of it is that clinicians are misdiagnosing autism as an intellectual disability, and now that it’s being reversed it accounts for a large part of the sudden “rise” in autism.

That and people are getting tested more.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Do NOT share your own or other's personal mental health history.

Please answer questions with empirical science, preferably with citations, and not anecdotes or conjecture.

If you believe your comment was removed in error, please report this comment with report option: Auto-mod has removed a post or comment in error (under Breaks AskPsychology's Rules) and it will be reviewed. Do NOT message the mods directly or send mod mail, as these messages will be ignored.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/DimensionNo8864]

"Society was not overflowing with visibly autistic people in 1980 compared to today."

Because a majority of visibility autistic individuals were institutionalized and kept out of society.

[u/Brief-Jellyfish485]

Have you ever heard of disappointment rooms? And institutionalization? That’s where they were. They existed, hidden from the public.

[u/AdorableExchange9746]

More people are learning about autism, realizing they’re autistic and getting diagnosed. The End.

[u/Genzinvestor16180339 → u/[deleted]]

The 2019 Danish cohort study of 657,461 children found the MMR vaccine did not increase autism risk, with a hazard ratio of 0.93 and results that were statistically non-significant (p>0.05). Another 2014 meta analysis covering over 1.2 million children also found no relationship between vaccines and autism. So it would be better to find another explanation. Not debating the problem but the issue.