Talk:Autism spectrum

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Autism
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Autism

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Many of these questions have been raised in the scientific and popular literature, and are summarized here for ease of reference.

The main points of this FAQ can be summarized as:

Many common ideas about autism have been researched and either confirmed or refuted.
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view requires that minority views not be given undue emphasis.
Therefore it is against Wikipedia policy for views without scientific support, such as the belief that autism is caused by vaccination, to be presented as a controversy in a science article like autism.

Q1: Why doesn't this article discuss the association between vaccination and autism?

A1: This association has been researched, and is mentioned in the page - specifically with some variant of the statement "there is no convincing evidence that vaccination causes autism and an association between the two is considered biologically implausible". Despite strong feelings by parents and advocates, to the point of leaving children unvaccinated against serious, sometimes deadly diseases, there is simply no scientific evidence to demonstrate a link between the two. Among the organizations that have reviewed the evidence between vaccination and autism are the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (United States), Institute of Medicine (United States), National Institutes of Health (United States), American Medical Association, the Cochrane Collaboration (British/international), British Medical Association (Britain), National Health Service (United Kingdom), Health Canada (Canada) and the World Health Organization (international). The scientific community took this issue seriously, investigated the hypothesis, designed and published many studies involving millions of children, and they all converged on a lack of association between autism and vaccination. Given the large number of children involved, the statistical power of these studies was such that any association, even an extremely weak one, would have been revealed. Continuing to press the issue causes unnecessary anguish for parents and places their children, and other children at risk of deadly diseases (that disproportionately harm the unvaccinated).^[1]^[2]^[3]

Q2: Why doesn't this article discuss the association between thiomersal, aluminum, squalene, toxins in vaccines?

A2: Thiomersal has also been investigated and no association is found between the two. Vaccines are heavily reviewed for safety beforehand, and since they are given to millions of people each year, even rare complications or problems should become readily apparent. The amount of these additives in each vaccine is minuscule, and not associated with significant side effects in the doses given. Though many parents have advocated for and claimed harm from these additives, without a plausible reason to expect harm, or demonstrated association between autism and vaccination, following these avenues wastes scarce research resources that could be better put to use investigating more promising avenues of research or determining treatments or quality-of-life improving interventions for the good of parents and children. Specifically regarding "toxins", these substances are often unnamed and only vaguely alluded to - a practice that results in moving the goalposts. Once it is demonstrated that an ingredient is not in fact harmful, advocates will insist that their real concern is with another ingredient. This cycle perpetuates indefinitely, since the assumption is generally a priori that vaccines are harmful, and no possible level of evidence is sufficient to convince the advocate otherwise.

Q3: Why doesn't this article discuss X treatment for autism?

A3: For one thing, X may be discussed in the autism therapies section. Though Wikipedia is not paper and each article can theoretically expand indefinitely, in practice articles have restrictions in length due to reader fatigue. Accordingly, the main interventions for autism are dealt with in summary style while minor or unproven interventions are left to the sub-article.

Q4: My child was helped by Y; I would like to include a section discussing Y, so other parents can similarly help their children.

A4: Wikipedia is not a soapbox; despite how important or effective an intervention may seem to be, ultimately it must be verified in reliable, secondary sources that meet the guidelines for medical articles. Personal testimonials, in addition to generally being considered unreliable in scientific research, are primary sources and can only be synthesized through inappropriate original research. If the intervention is genuinely helpful for large numbers of people, it is worth discussing it with a researcher, so it can be studied, researched, published and replicated. When that happens, Wikipedia can report the results as scientific consensus indicates the intervention is ethical, effective, widely-used and widely accepted. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball and can not be used to predict or promote promising interventions that lack evidence of efficacy. Without extensive testing, Wikipedia runs the risk of promoting theories and interventions that are either invalid (the Refrigerator mother hypothesis), disproven (secretin and facilitated communication),^[4] or dangerous (chelation therapy, which resulted in the death of a child in 2005).^[5]

Q5: Why doesn't this article discuss Z cause of autism? Particularly since there is this study discussing it!

A5: No ultimate cause has been found for autism. All indications are that it is a primarily genetic condition with a complex etiology that has to date eluded discovery. With thousands of articles published every year on autism, it is very easy to find at least one article supporting nearly any theory. Accordingly, we must limit the page to only the most well-supported theories, as demonstrated in the most recent, reliable, high-impact factor sources as a proxy for what is most accepted within the community.

Q6: Why does/doesn't the article use the disease-based/person-first terminology? It is disrespectful because it presents people-with-autism as flawed.

A6: This aspect of autism is controversial within the autistic community. Many consider autism to be a type of neurological difference rather than a deficit. Accordingly, there is no one preferred terminology. This article uses the terms found in the specific references.

Q7: Why doesn't the article emphasize the savant-like abilities of autistic children in math/memory/pattern recognition/etc.? This shows that autistic children aren't just disabled.

A7: Savant syndrome is still pretty rare, and nonrepresentative of most of those on the autistic spectrum. Research has indicated that most autistic children actually have average math skills.^[6]

Q8: Why doesn't the article mention maternal antibody related autism or commercial products in development to test for maternal antibodies?

A8: There are no secondary independent third-party reviews compliant with Wikipedia's medical sourcing policies to indicate maternal antibodies are a proven or significant cause of autism, and commercial products in testing and development phase are unproven. See sample discussions here, and conditions under which maternal antibody-related posts to this talk page may be rolled back or otherwise reverted by any editor.

References

^ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2008). "Outbreak of measles--San Diego, California, January-February 2008" (Full free text). MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 57 (8): 203–206. PMID 18305451.
^ Parker, A. A.; Staggs, W.; Dayan, G. H.; Ortega-Sánchez, I. R.; Rota, P. A.; Lowe, L.; Boardman, P.; Teclaw, R.; Graves, C.; Lebaron, C. W. (2006). "Implications of a 2005 Measles Outbreak in Indiana for Sustained Elimination of Measles in the United States". New England Journal of Medicine. 355 (5): 447–455. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa060775. PMID 16885548.
^ Glanz, J. M.; McClure, D. L.; Magid, D. J.; Daley, M. F.; France, E. K.; Salmon, D. A.; Hambidge, S. J. (2009). "Parental Refusal of Pertussis Vaccination is Associated with an Increased Risk of Pertussis Infection in Children". Pediatrics. 123 (6): 1446–1451. doi:10.1542/peds.2008-2150. PMID 19482753.
^ Williams, K.; Wray, J. A.; Wheeler, D. M. (2012). Williams, Katrina (ed.). "Intravenous secretin for autism spectrum disorders (ASD)". The Cochrane Library. 4: CD003495. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003495.pub3. PMID 22513913.
^ Brown, M. J.; Willis, T.; Omalu, B.; Leiker, R. (2006). "Deaths Resulting from Hypocalcemia After Administration of Edetate Disodium: 2003-2005" (Full free text). Pediatrics. 118 (2): e534. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-0858. PMID 16882789.
^ Chiang, H. -M.; Lin, Y. -H. (2007). "Mathematical ability of students with Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism: A review of literature" (Full free text). Autism. 11 (6): 547–56. doi:10.1177/1362361307083259. PMID 17947290.

Past discussions

For further information, see the numerous past discussions on these topics in the archives of Talk:Autism:

Splinter skills math (discussed at Talk:Asperger syndrome)

External links

Sciencebasedmedicine.org discussion of vaccines and autism.
Quackwatch misconceptions about vaccination.

Autism spectrum is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 24, 2005.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 31, 2004	Peer review	Reviewed
August 3, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
August 10, 2005	Featured article candidate	Promoted
December 17, 2006	Featured article review	Demoted
July 24, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
July 30, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
August 14, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
October 16, 2021	Featured article review	Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.

Copied pages:
Merged Autism (oldid, history) → Autism spectrum (diff) on 10:15, 15 May 2022 Copied Autism (oldid, history) → Classic autism (diff) on 02:04, 25 June 2022

Medicine: Genetics / Neurology

	Medicine portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
	This redirect is supported by the Medical genetics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This redirect is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article was selected on the Medicine portal as one of Wikipedia's best articles related to Medicine.

Disability

Autism spectrum is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles

Autism

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all aspects of autism and autistic culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutismWikipedia:WikiProject AutismTemplate:WikiProject AutismAutism articles

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Autism spectrum.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Other talk page banners

This redirect is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Marshall R. Childs (November 4, 2005). "Lessons from Asperger's syndrome". Daily Yomiuri.
Adriana Gamondes (June 24, 2010). "Part II: The Tipping Point: Questions about Autism, History, Race and Melanin". Age of Autism.
Banaji, Mahzarin R (December 2010). "Presidential Column: Wikipedia is the Encyclopedia that Anybody Can Edit. But Have You?". Association for Psychological Science.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 27 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aclark00 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Pmmuab77.

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10	Archive 11	Archive 12
Archive 13	Archive 14	Archive 15
Archive 16	Archive 17	Archive 18
Archive 19

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by .

Wiki Education assignment: Addressing Misinformation in Special Education

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 January 2022 and 29 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): TGBTG2022 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Spantalian76.

Huh?

This bot, [sigmabot III], has been deleting the conversations on this talk page for no apparent reason. Can anybody please explain why? These conversations are still relevant. Krystal Kalb (talk) 01:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's called archiving. It's to prevent talk pages from growing too long and being filled with old conversations that have not been active within a certain threshold. The discussions are still present, you just need to look in one of the currently 19 archives listed in the banners at the top of the page. See WP:ARCHIVE for more of the technical info on why it's necessary, particularly on busy pages. Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is currently very confusing, though, partly due to the ongoing merge process: Talk:Autism spectrum/Archive 4#Proposed outline has the main outline of what we wanted to do to the Autism spectrum page, which I believe has since become the autism page? Oolong (talk) 21:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why are we making classic autism the focus of this article?

Why not just make it about autism spectrum disorder, which is the current classification under which all the now-discontinued diagnoses (from before the current DSM-5 and ICD-11) would now fall under? It doesn't make sense that this encyclopedia's main article about autism would specifically focus on this one functioning label. ASD would be a better focus. Or rather, separate the articles for ASD and Kanner syndrome; they're two different things. HaiFire3344 (talk) 03:10, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The primary discussion on this, as well as the broader plan for updating the content in all autism related articles is being discussed at Talk:Autism spectrum and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Autism#General taxonomy of autism-related articles.

Short version, a lot of the autism articles haven't been properly updated in quite some time, with some still basing their text on the DSM-4 and DSM-4-TR. There's an ongoing merge between this article and Autism spectrum as part of that process, but these things take time. Sideswipe9th (talk) 03:17, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok then, hopefully this whole "Kanner autism, or classic autism" thing on the Autism page is temporary, because the things focusing on Kanner should really go on the page that already exists for it. In fact, I think this page should've been merged with that page instead, and the autism spectrum page should've been kept or something. HaiFire3344 (talk) 03:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IMO it would be more useful to approach this article historically, using the word itself as the anchor. DSM or ICD categories aren't the be all and end all. They are simply how interest groups have come to have their say, often under pressure from pharma, professional, and other interests. 'Autism' in 2022 usually means something very different to users than what it meant in 2002, 1992, or 1982, and it becomes hopelessly confusing to get all tangled up in assumptions that there is some entity or disorder called 'autism' that is somehow now permanent. Personally, I'd be totally blunt about it: "'Autism' is a word..." and then go on to evidence its changing scope of meanings as Bleuler gives way to Kanner and on to the DSMs and the rise of ASD. IMO, it's impossible to statically define the noun 'autism', since there is no such entity or syndrome in the world. 'Autistic' is fine as an adjective or adverb since they can characterise behaviors. But you'll never solve 'Autism' as a noun. Under close scrutiny, it may become a battle with those who feel that severely challenged individuals have in recent years been robbed of recognition by articulate, succesful, albeit socially awkward achievers (and clinicians who seek a more attractive client base, or simply dissolves for uncertain meaning. Sledgehamming (talk) 16:19, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I personally interpret "autism" as just being short for "autism spectrum disorder" (and "autistic" as describing someone of that neurotype or traits associated with it), but since it can be ambiguous, I guess an article that discusses the word in general and its history would be a good solution. However, shouldn't there also be an article specifically for autism spectrum disorder? HaiFire3344 (talk) 18:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are missing parts here

Autism is way more than just stacking objects and developing slowly and there are many other types not just kanner syndrom. Eg. Aspergers syndrome Ehvgwyv (talk) 17:34, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Asperger Syndrome is mentioned in the third paragraph of the lead and several times throughout the article, so I'm not sure I'm following your concern here. DonIago (talk) 20:43, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ehvgwyv:, that is exactly what the (admittedly, very slow-moving) merge is trying to address. We're currently cutting down this article to be only about Kanner, and reworking the autism spectrum article to be essentially what it sounds like you were hoping to find. After that, we have to rename the articles. It's a whole thing. If you'd like to help with it, that would be greatly appreciated. --Xurizuri (talk) 13:47, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this article is going to only be about Kanner, what will be the point of the already existing Low-functioning autism article then? Will that be merged with the Autism article? HaiFire3344 (talk) 01:54, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those two should be merged. It was sloppy that they ever existed alongside each other!

Note that this Talk page is now attached to an article which (if I'm not mistaken) mainly consists of material from what was the autism spectrum entry. Classic autism now covers the two entries you were talking about. Oolong (talk) 07:40, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion lost after merge

I'm not sure how best to deal with the fact that when the merge finally went ahead, 'Autism' emerged as the title used for the main autism article, rather than 'autism spectrum' (which is fine) - but all the discussion about all the work that still needs to be done on the entry is now tucked away at Talk:Autism spectrum/Archive 4 and a bit at Talk:Autism spectrum/Archive 3 - shouldn't there at least be prominent links to the most relevant Talk pages for this entry? And shouldn't the discussion about the old autism entry now be archived?

Thanks! Oolong (talk) 07:47, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Autism spectrum which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2008). "Outbreak of measles--San Diego, California, January-February 2008" (Full free text). MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report. 57 (8): 203–206. PMID 18305451.

[2] Parker, A. A.; Staggs, W.; Dayan, G. H.; Ortega-Sánchez, I. R.; Rota, P. A.; Lowe, L.; Boardman, P.; Teclaw, R.; Graves, C.; Lebaron, C. W. (2006). "Implications of a 2005 Measles Outbreak in Indiana for Sustained Elimination of Measles in the United States". New England Journal of Medicine. 355 (5): 447–455. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa060775. PMID 16885548.

[3] Glanz, J. M.; McClure, D. L.; Magid, D. J.; Daley, M. F.; France, E. K.; Salmon, D. A.; Hambidge, S. J. (2009). "Parental Refusal of Pertussis Vaccination is Associated with an Increased Risk of Pertussis Infection in Children". Pediatrics. 123 (6): 1446–1451. doi:10.1542/peds.2008-2150. PMID 19482753.

[4] Williams, K.; Wray, J. A.; Wheeler, D. M. (2012). Williams, Katrina (ed.). "Intravenous secretin for autism spectrum disorders (ASD)". The Cochrane Library. 4: CD003495. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003495.pub3. PMID 22513913.

[5] Brown, M. J.; Willis, T.; Omalu, B.; Leiker, R. (2006). "Deaths Resulting from Hypocalcemia After Administration of Edetate Disodium: 2003-2005" (Full free text). Pediatrics. 118 (2): e534. doi:10.1542/peds.2006-0858. PMID 16882789.

[6] Chiang, H. -M.; Lin, Y. -H. (2007). "Mathematical ability of students with Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism: A review of literature" (Full free text). Autism. 11 (6): 547–56. doi:10.1177/1362361307083259. PMID 17947290.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]