1. Epidemiology

2. Genetics

3. Vaccines

4. Intelligence

5. Facilitated Communication

6. Autism rights movement
    Anti-cure perspective 

7. Diagnostic complications

8. References

Diagnoses of autism have become more frequent since the 1980s, which has led to various controversies about both the cause of autism and the nature of the diagnoses themselves. Whether autism has mainly a genetic or developmental cause, and the degree of coincidence between autism and intellectual disability, are all matters of current scientific controversy as well as inquiry.

Epidemiology

Most recent reviews of epidemiology estimate a prevalence of one to two cases per 1,000 people for autism, and about six per 1,000 for ASD;^[2] because of inadequate data, these numbers may underestimate the true prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD).^[3] ASD averages a 4.3:1 male-to-female ratio. The number of children on the autism spectrum has increased dramatically since the 1980s, at least partly due to changes in diagnostic practice; it is unclear whether prevalence has actually increased;^[2] and as-yet-unidentified environmental risk factors cannot be ruled out.^[4] The risk of autism is associated with several prenatal factors, including advanced parental age and diabetes in the mother during pregnancy.^[5] ASD is associated with several genetic disorders^[6] and epilepsy.^[7] Autism is also associated with intellectual disability.^[8]

Genetics

The role of genetic influence on ASD has been heavily researched over the past few years. ASD is considered to have polygenic traits since there is not a single risk factor, but multiple ones.^[9]

Multiple twin and family studies have been conducted in order to observe any genetic influence in diagnosing ASD. The chance of both twins having ASD was significantly higher in identical twins than fraternal twins, concluding that ASD is heritable.^[10] A reoccurring finding is that de novo (new mutation) copy number variants are a primary cause of ASD - they alter synaptic functions; germ line mutations can produce de novo CNVs.^[11] These mutations can only be passed on to offspring; this explains the phenomenon that occurs when the child has symptoms of ASD, but the parents have no symptoms or history of ASD. De novo variants differ from person to person i.e one variant can cause ASD in one person, whereas another person would need multiple variants to cause the same disorder.^[10] Loss of function variants occur in 16-18% of ASD diagnoses, which is nearly double the normal population.^[9] These loss of function variants reduce function in the protein neurexin, which connects neurons at the synapse and is important for neurological development; deletion mutations of neurexin are also very common in people with autism, as well as other neurological disorders like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and ADHD.^[12]

Gut microbiome has a relation to ASD. Excessive Clostridia spp. was found in children with ASD and gastrointestinal difficulties; Clostridia spp produces propionic acid which is impaired or in excess in people with ASD^[13] Specifically, C. tetani and C. histolyticum are two species of this bacteria that affect people with ASD. C. tetani produces tetanus neurotoxin in the intestinal tract; C. histolyticum is a toxin producer that is abundant in people diagnosed with ASD.^[14] Both of these could contribute to neurological symptoms.

There is also controversy over the Nature vs. Nurture debate. According to family studies, genetic and environmental factors have an equal influence on risk of ASD.^[10]

Vaccines

The idea of a link between vaccines and autism has been extensively investigated and shown to be false.^[15] The scientific consensus is that there is no relationship, causal or otherwise, between vaccines and incidence of autism,^[16][17][18] and vaccine ingredients do not cause autism.^[19]

Nevertheless, the anti-vaccination movement continues to promote myths, conspiracy theories and misinformation linking the two.^[20] A developing tactic appears to be the "promotion of irrelevant research [as] an active aggregation of several questionable or peripherally related research studies in an attempt to justify the science underlying a questionable claim."^[21]

Intelligence

The percentage of autistic individuals who also meet criteria for intellectual disability has been reported as anywhere from 25% to 70%, a wide variation illustrating the difficulty of assessing autistic intelligence.^[22] For PDD-NOS the association with intellectual disability is much weaker.^[8] The diagnosis of Asperger's excludes clinically significant delays in mental or cognitive skills.^[23]

A 2007 study suggested that Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPM), a test of abstract reasoning, may be a better indicator of intelligence for autistic children than the more commonly used Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). Researchers suspected that the WISC relied too heavily on language to be an accurate measure of intelligence for autistic individuals. Their study revealed that the neurotypical children scored similarly on both tests, but the autistic children fared far better on the RPM than on the WISC. The RPM measures abstract, general and fluid reasoning, an ability autistic individuals have been presumed to lack.^[24] A 2008 study found a similar effect, but to a much lesser degree and only for individuals with IQs less than 85 on the Wechsler scales.^[25]

Facilitated Communication

Facilitated communication gained immediate attention and was used by many hopeful parents of individuals with autism when it was first introduced during the early 1990s by Douglas Biklen, a professor at Syracuse University.^[26] However, controversies shortly arose after several reports of sexual abuse were made by individuals using the keyboard.^[27] There became a heightened concern regarding who was actually typing the messages – the individual with autism or the facilitator?

Similar studies were conducted starting in 1993 that argued facilitated communication was an ineffective technique. One reason was that autistic individuals were not able to communicate any better than they would have independently.^[28] Another reason was because facilitators’ seemed to have an influence on the messages being typed by individuals with autism.^[28] In 1994, the American Psychological Association officially announced that there was “no scientifically demonstrated support for its efficacy." ^[29]

A recent study done in 2014 examined the role of facilitators in eleven cases where children have been using facilitated communication for more than one year. They agreed that facilitated communication was not valid because the children with autism performed better on test questions only when the facilitator was also aware of the questions.^[30] If the facilitator did not know the test questions or the keyboard was out of sight, those with autism were not able to answer the questions either, suggesting that facilitators unconsciously play a role in the messages being typed.^[30] Much of the empirical research done during the early 1990s up to now argue that facilitated communication is an invalid alternative communication method for autistic people.

Despite what the scientific community claims, there are still many people using facilitated communication. In fact, Syracuse University still offers a program called Institute on Communication and Inclusion that trains facilitators to use this technique, what they now call supported typing.^[26] They claim that new methods such as video-eye tracking, linguistics analysis, evidence of speech before and during typing, and message passing have demonstrated that it is the individual with autism doing the typing, not the facilitator.^[26]

A study done in 2014 stated that the changes made to facilitated communication since its introduction, such as the use of multiple facilitators for one individual, has made this technique more valid such that some individuals with autism have been able to type with zero support.^[31] In 2012, the Autism National Committee announced a position statement that approves the use of facilitated communication as it “has already proven to be profoundly beneficial in the lives of many people by opening the doors to reliable, trusted, and respected symbolic communication for the first time."^[32]

Autism rights movement

The autism rights movement (ARM) is a social movement that encourages autistic people, their caregivers and society to adopt a position of neurodiversity, accepting autism as a variation in functioning rather than a mental disorder to be cured.^[34] The ARM advocates a variety of goals including a greater acceptance of autistic behaviors;^[35] therapies that teach autistic individuals coping skills rather than therapies focused on imitating behaviors of neurotypical peers;^[36] the creation of social networks and events that allow autistic people to socialize on their own terms;^[37] and the recognition of the Autistic community as a minority group.^[38]

Autism rights or neurodiversity advocates believe that the autism spectrum is genetic and should be accepted as a natural expression of the human genome. This perspective is distinct from two other likewise distinct views: (1) the mainstream perspective that autism is caused by a genetic defect and should be addressed by targeting the autism gene(s) and (2) the perspective that autism is caused by environmental factors like vaccines and pollution and could be cured by addressing environmental causes.^[34]

Anti-cure perspective

"Curing" or "treating" autism is a controversial and politicized issue. Doctors and scientists are not sure of the cause(s) of autism yet many organizations like Autism Research Institute and Autism Speaks advocate researching a cure. Members of the various autism rights organizations view autism as a way of life rather than as a disease and thus advocate acceptance over a search for a cure.^[39] Some advocates believe that common therapies for the behavioral and language differences associated with autism, like applied behavior analysis, are not only misguided but also unethical.^[40]

The "anti-cure perspective" endorsed by the movement is a view that autism is not a disorder, but a normal occurrence—an alternate variation in brain wiring or a less common expression of the human genome.^[39] Advocates of this perspective believe that autism is a unique way of being that should be validated, supported and appreciated rather than shunned, discriminated against or eliminated.^[39][41] They believe quirks and uniqueness of autistic individuals should be tolerated as the differences of any minority group should be tolerated and that efforts to eliminate autism should not be compared, for example, to curing cancer but instead to the antiquated notion of curing left-handedness.^[39][42] The ARM is a part of the larger disability rights movement, and as such acknowledges the social model of disability.^[43] Within the model, struggles faced by autistic people are viewed as discrimination on the part of society rather than deficiencies on the part of autistic people.

John Elder Robison was a discussant for the Autism Social, Legal, and Ethical Research Special Interest Group at the 2014 International Meeting for Autism Research (IMFAR). He ended up taking the group to task, stating that the autism science community is headed for disaster if it does not change course on several factors – and noting for context the larger size of the US autistic community in proportion to other minority groups such as Jewish or Native American communities.

Robison asserted that autistic people need to be the ones providing oversight and governance for autism research. He condemned the use of words like "cure". He pointed out that researchers' explicit or implicit efforts to eradicate autistic people are a formula for disaster and need to stop. He also affirmed that memoirs and narratives written by autistic people are more trustworthy than writing about autism by nonautistics.^[44]

Diagnostic complications

Although the 2013 fifth revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) has more specificity, it also has reports of more limited sensitivity. Owing to the changes to the DSM and the lessening of sensitivity, there is the possibility that individuals who were diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) using the fourth revision (DSM-IV-TR) will not receive the same diagnosis with the DSM-5.

From the 933 individuals that were evaluated, 39 percent of the samples that were diagnosed with an ASD using the DSM-IV-TR criteria did not meet the DSM-5 criteria for that disorder.{{MEDRS|date=May 2015}}^[45] Essentially, the DSM-5 criteria no longer classified them with having ASD, deeming them without a diagnosis. It was likely that individuals that exhibited higher cognitive functioning and had other disorders, such as Asperger's or pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), were completely excluded from the criteria. Also, it is more probable that younger children who do not exhibit the entirety of the symptoms and characteristics of ASD are more at risk of being excluded by the new criteria since they could have Asperger's as Asperger's disorder does not usually show symptoms until later in childhood. Because the onset age is different in Asperger's from autism, grouping together the disorders does not typically allow or distinguish the differentiating ages of onset, which is problematic in diagnosing. It is evident, through the various studies, that the number of people being diagnosed will be significantly diminished as well, which is prominently due to the DSM-5's new criteria.^[45]

References

• Women's National Anti-Suffrage League
• Womens National Basketball Association
• Women's National Basketball Association Coach of the Year Award
• Women's National Basketball Association Draft
• Women's National Basketball Association Finals
• Women's National Basketball Association Most Improved Player Award
• Women's National Basketball Association Rookie of the Year Award
• Women's National Cricket League
• Women's National Invitation Tournament
• Women's National Loyal League
• Womens national loyal league
• Women's National Soccer League
• Women's National Team
• Women'sNet
• Women Soldiers
• Women's Olympic Football Tournament
• Women's One-day International
• Women's one-day international cricket
• Women (song)
• Women's ordination
• Women's Organization for National Prohibition Reform
• Women's Pacific Tri-Nations
• Women's Pan-American Volleyball Cup
• Women's Park of Borujerd
• Womens Party