Talk:Autism spectrum/Archive 17

The sources on parents noticing signs
I made this comment nearly half a year ago, now archived, about how remarkably the first citation in this featured article doesn't seem to actually support or even mention the claim it's next to. Never got a response (though a week later a very old edit of mine to Bipolar Disorder was suddenly attacked and deleted, mistakenly).

The first cited source in the intro doesn't seem to say anything about the claim it's next to - "Parents usually notice signs in the first two years of their child's life" - unless I've missed something. Surprisingly seems to have been like that since 2009 when the citation was moved from a sentence following it. That 'Management' source does refer to a "companion document" on 'Identification', cited elsewhere here about other issues, which does say "Most parents become concerned between 15 and 18 months", "most parents sense something is wrong by the time the child is 18 months old" And there is a source in the body of article saying similar things albeit in regard to any ASD..

Well I guess the Identification source should be swapped in for the Management one in the intro, but then the wording would need tweaking. Scanning through the ultimate sources, the wording of the Nature article cited in the body seems to imply parents were reporting concerns specifically of ASD but neither of the cited sources seemed to say that and in fact one specifically points out that most parents weren't initially reporting concerns that would differentiate autism - but primarily (by a long distance) delays in speech & language or other non-specific features. Some other source suggested that may be changing with the increased public awareness, but then another source pointed out a substantial proportion of parents wrongly report concerns. And then again another source pointed out a substantial proportion of early diagnoses of autism are found to be longer applied at some later age in childhood. I can only guess the wording has to be a bit noncommittal.

Eversync (talk) 18:53, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Fixed Thanks. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 11:29, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

DSM5
The DSM5 says on page 51 "Individuals with a well established DSMIV diagnosis of autistic disorder, Asperger's disorder and PPDNOSs should be given the diagnosis ASD"

Which IMO means that autism is included with ASD. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:32, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * This is saying that people who were formerly diagnosed with those conditions should now all be coded as ASD, so yes, Autism is in included with ASD, but the way it's worded makes it sound like those other diagnoses (PDD and Asperger's) still exist in the DSM 5, which they don't. —PermStrump  ( talk )  12:36, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay adjusted further. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 11:31, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Treating autism with LSD
There's nothing in this article that I can see. I've been reading about it but worry about the quality of sources. Thoughts? Anna F remote (talk) 01:48, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * We have one review from 2007  Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 01:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, good source. So, should there be mention of LSD in the article? Anna F remote (talk) 02:01, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Added here Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 02:17, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Somali autism rates in Minneapolis
hello - I would like to add the following;

According to the Minneapolis Somali Autism Spectrum Disorder Prevalence Project Community Report from 2013, The University of Minnesota estimates about 1 in 32 Somali children ages 7-9 years were identified as having ASD in Minneapolis in 2010. This is considerably higher than the CDC’s nationwide 2008 estimate of 1 in 88. Among Somali immigrant communities, high rates of autism have likewise been reported in Scandinavia and Canada. Reference https://www.autismspeaks.org/science/science-news/study-finds-high-rate-autism-among-minneapolis-somali-community Csessa2017 (talk) 02:55, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * We tend to stick with review articles rather than primary sources per WP:MEDRS. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 03:42, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Aware of autism
Sesame Street has introduced Julia, a girl muppet, with autism. Their aim is to familiarise parents and young children with autism. Stacey Gordon, Julia's puppeteer has a son with autism and is well placed to take on the job. Sesame street also has a good resource for parents, with videos, storybooks and other material that help people become aware of the autism spectrum. We might want to share this link in the article page.

Resources for parents
http://autism.sesamestreet.org/ Sesame Street and Autism
 * We need a indepedent source to show this is notable. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 03:46, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Interleukin 17-a inflammatory pathway triggered by certain kinds of maternal gut bacteria
There seems to be a significant body of recent research on this mechanism in mice, consistent with human epidemiological data. See for example,

Choi et al, Science, 'The maternal interleukin-17a pathway in mice promotes autism-like phenotypes in offspring.'

Kim et al, Nature, 'Maternal gut bacteria promote neurodevelopmental abnormalities in mouse offspring' CharlesHBennett (talk) 00:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

This might be expressed in the article by saying something like

An abnormal immune response triggered by specific types of maternal gut bacteria has been shown to cause autism-like abnormalities in mice, suggesting a similar mechanism in humans.CharlesHBennett (talk) 00:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 * We use secondary sources for content about health per WP:MEDRS; these are primary. Jytdog (talk) 06:41, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Fever Sulforaphane
I know we can't use primary, but this study may be of interest because it's gold standard, published PNAS quality, and look at the Universities involved! [] Best review I can find so far only speaks to (fever) heat shock protein response, but it does focus on sulforaphane.32cllou (talk) 18:56, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It is a small primary source. Have moved the other text to a research section. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:05, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The review does speak to potential ASD treatment with sulforaphane ..."We address the emerging role of Hsps in the neuroprotective network of redox stress responsive mechanisms and propose the potential therapeutic utility of the nutritional antioxidants sulforaphane". I provided you the research study so you'd understand the 4 metabolic improvements that may come with ingestion of sulforaphane.  Again, look at the quality of the cite.  Thank you for moving the text, but what research section (where?).32cllou (talk) 19:14, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Here Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It does not say food is treatment, just that food is associated with certain changes similar to fever. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:59, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The paper is pretty much the same old anti-oxidant/anti-inflammatory story, but now with the nuance of dose added, i.e. hormesis. Kind of interesting. Not sure how much WEIGHT we should give this but a couple of sentences seems OK, at this point in time. Jytdog (talk) 20:21, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

[] Here's another quote from a review that supports inclusion of my sentence in the intro/treatment: "several ASD-associated basic physiological pathways that can be regulated by the small molecule phytochemical sulforaphane, as an example of a druggable small molecule target for which much in vitro, pre-clinical, and clinical evidence already exists: (1) redox metabolism/oxidative stress, (2) mitochondrial dysfunction, (3) immune dysregulation/neuroinflammation, (4) febrile illness and the heat shock response, and (5) synaptic dysfunction. Furthermore, we identify the biomarkers that can be used to assess the functioning of these pathways as well as suggesting how these biomarkers could guide novel treatment strategies to correct these biochemical abnormalities in order to improve core and associated symptoms of ASD.32cllou (talk) 20:26, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I removed the colon, which allows a Magic links to happen (for a while longer - they are getting rid of that). After they get rid of it, you can do this  which generates this:.
 * The non-research sections are for actual causes, actual treatments, actual diagnosis, etc.  Stuff is that known and used in the clinic.  also describes a line of research. Jytdog (talk) 20:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks re . Ok, leave in research.  But Research should address sulforaphane (not just food).  And I disagree re fever as a factor reducing symptoms not included in the intro.32cllou (talk)
 * Are you aware that MEDRS was created because we had so many people pounding this article with pet theories about causes and treatments? Also please clarify your last sentence Jytdog (talk) 21:06, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * the focus of is the line of research about hormesis.  We need to summarize the source. Jytdog (talk) 21:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

The first word in the review title is hormesis, but that's about it. We need to summarize the source, done best from the abstract.32cllou (talk) 21:24, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

I think fever should be in the intro because the phenomenon suggests autism isn't a static condition, but malleable and potentially treatable.32cllou (talk) 21:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * See WP:NOABSTRACT generally. With regard to, you misrepresent the source. Please don't do that. Jytdog (talk) 21:37, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Research
The research section is negligble. Most of what is in the body is actually research - like almost the whole causes section. Any opposition to fixing this? Jytdog (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Only oppose if you further bury sulforaphane.32cllou (talk) 20:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That is not a valid consideration. You need to be careful not to disrupt this article with advocacy for one theory. See common mistakes with regard to pet theories. Jytdog (talk) 20:32, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it is okay to keep the cause section were it is. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 20:33, 20 October 2017 (UTC)It
 * Doc James almost the entire "causes" section is research. That section should actually be pretty short and say "we don't know but this is active field of study". That is the extent of actual "accepted knowledge" about causes. Jytdog (talk) 21:18, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Not "advocacy", but thanks. In the journal reviews you will find sulforaphane as significant and potentially beneficial as with fever response.32cllou (talk) 20:42, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The real issue is what WEIGHT to give that compared to all the other lines of research. General oerviews of research into causes/treatments would tell us that; they would be the relevant sources. Jytdog (talk) 20:58, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

We are not limited, as you imply, to general overviews of treatment for sources, rather reviews of the current research on treatment. Two such reviews find sulforaphane potentially helpful. In Research, there's low "WEIGHT"32cllou (talk) 21:07, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please have the courtesy of indenting your posts. Advocates tend to want to give great WEIGHT to the content that excites them. Instead of content driven by advocacy we follow sources in allocating WEIGHT.  That is how WP rolls and is the very heart of the WP:NPOV policy. Jytdog (talk) 21:14, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Once they get so far into the page I thought it was convention to start at the margin again.
 * The two reviews suggest sulforaphane as a potential treatment with very good efficacy, and list 4 reasons.32cllou (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2017 (UTC) IE it's not MY weight.  Cleaned up the indents32cllou (talk) 21:37, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Disputed content
Moved here until consensus can be reached; this is an FA and disrupting it this way is not OK.

versions:


 * Following a fever there is an association with a period of improved behavior. Some foods may result in similar metabolic changes as a fever.


 * Some studies found that some people with autism have a period of improved behavior following a fever. Based on the notion of hormesis -- a form of dose–response relationship in which low doses of something have a different effect than high doses -- one line of research has looked for drug candidates that can produce the same kind of mild anti-inflammatory or mild anti-oxidant effect as the body's response to a low-grade fever.


 * Following a fever there is an association with a period of improved behavior and cognition. Ingestion of cruciferous vegetables containing sulforaphane may result in similar metabolic changes as a fever.


 * Some studies found that some people with autism have a period of improved cognition and behavior following a fever. Research suggests sulforaphane found in cruciferous vegetables can produce similar anti-inflammatory or mild anti-oxidant effect as the body's response to a fever.

-- Jytdog (talk) 21:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The first version was there before our edits, and I first reverted Jytdog's edit (version listed second above) back to that edit (by DOC). But both reviews specifically discuss sulforaphane and cruciferous vegetables, not just "food", so I think version 3 is most representative of those sources.  There's almost nobody left (less than 4,000, mostly rarely, sort of active) in Wikipedia, so how can we reach an honest consensus?32cllou (talk) 22:07, 20 October 2017 (UTC0
 * Jytdog...will you accept any version other than yours (version 2 above re hormesis), which is absolutely not the thrust of the review!32cllou (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The first version was never in the article is far as I can tell, nothing about fever was mentioned until you started editing. Tornado chaser (talk) 22:30, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Version one above was the Article text before Jytdog make it about hormesis! Please see []  I see olive oil in the first cite, so foods may be better, though the primary review emphasis is on sulforaphane.  Can we just go back to the original text version...I'll stop trying to improve Wiki! Original version...Following a fever there is an association with a period of improved behavior. Some foods may result in similar metabolic changes as a fever. 32cllou (talk) 22:52, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * True, but you say "The first version was there before our edits" this is not true, the first version was added by you 4 hours ago, you don't need to stop editing, some content just needs to be discussed. Tornado chaser (talk) 22:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The first version was added today by Doc James. See "Revision as of 19:00, 20 October 2017" partly in response to my putting a sentence using that cite in the intro.  Here's what I wrote, and Doc's editing that away and creating version one.[].  be nice if we used both citations...see

32cllou (talk) 23:13, 20 October 2017 (UTC)32cllou (talk) 23:17, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, can we agree that you were the first one to add the content about fever? Tornado chaser (talk) 23:31, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes 32cllou added the first content about fever. It is an extraordinary claim that eating certain vegetables results in similar changes as a fever and therefore results in improvement.

Would like to see a blinded randomized controlled trial. Would not be that hard to do. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)


 * COI issue? One of the authors of pmid=27071792 is Paul Talalay, at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. His son Antony (Tony) Talalay is co-founder and CEO of Brassica Protection Products, the leader in sulforaphane dietary supplement ingredients. As best I can find, the clinical literature is one clinical trial on which P. Talalay was also an author. I would love to see a larger trial conducted by a different research group. David notMD (talk) 01:18, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Paul Talalay there is a bad article for you. he actually founded Brassica. Jytdog (talk) 01:32, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Here is an honest conflict of interest statement from a 2007 journal article that PT wa a co-author of: "Conflict of interest statement: P.T. and J.W.F. are unpaid consultants to Brassica Protection Products, LLC (BPP), which licenses the technology to produce broccoli sprouts from The Johns Hopkins University. P.T., J.W.F., and The Johns Hopkins University are equity owners in BPP (whose chief executive officer is Antony Talalay, son of P.T.), and their stock is subject to certain restrictions under university policy. The terms of this arrangement are being managed by The Johns Hopkins University in accordance with its conflict of interest policies." What is disturbing is that in more recent journal articles, claims from Paul Talalay are that he has no conflicts despite his son's ongoing connection to Brassica. David notMD (talk) 02:10, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The biomarker article actually says "The authors confirm that this article content has no conflict of interest." Good lord. Jytdog (talk) 02:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Cohort study of 0 - 9 year old boys
Hello, has anyone seen this article: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0141076814565942 PDF version: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0141076814565942

Part of the conclusion: "We confirmed our hypothesis that boys who undergo ritual circumcision may run a greater risk of developing ASD. This finding, and the unexpected observation of an increased risk of hyperactivity disorder among circumcised boys in non-Muslim families, need attention."

Thoughts?

Thanks! PolarYukon (talk) 08:06, 17 November 2017 (UTC)


 * No. --Tarage (talk) 08:26, 17 November 2017 (UTC)


 * A single study doesn't meet WP:MEDRS. Tornado chaser (talk) 12:08, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

paper about maternal fever
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3484245/ Is Maternal Influenza or Fever During Pregnancy Associated with Autism or Developmental Delays? Results from the CHARGE (CHildhood Autism Risks from Genetics and Environment) Study], J Autism Dev Disord., Ousseny Zerbo (corresponding author), Ana-Maria Iosif, Cheryl Walker, Sally Ozonoff, Robin L. Hansen, and Irva Hertz-Picciotto, 2013 Jan; 43(1): 25–33.


 * This study using 538 kids who on the spectrum, and a control group of 421 kids who are not, seems to indicate that untreated fever is one risk factor. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 20:17, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

This is an interesting study, but 1 study does not meet WP:MEDRS. Tornado chaser (talk) 20:22, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I very much agree, especially what looks like a retrospective study. Okay, we can do the next steps of, seeing if later articles refer back to it, and scouting for review articles on the likely cause(s) of autism.FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 19:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Autism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151119205629/https://www.autismspeaks.org/liub/what-liub to https://www.autismspeaks.org/liub/what-liub

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Osmosis video
I have removed the video File:Autism spectrum disorder video.webm. The video is not sourced per WP:MEDRS or WP:V.

Per WP:V "any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material." This video does not contain any sources, nor any means to tie sources to specific facts and claims made. Per WP:V, "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material" and "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source"

This video is not exempt from citations or sources per WP:LEAD because it is not a lead, and it does not summarise the article. You can tell this from the first minute or so of the video -- totally different base material.

This material must not be restored as-is. Editors who repeatedly restore material that fails WP:V may be blocked. -- Colin°Talk 19:29, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Music therapy
Have paraphrased to

"There is tentative evidence that music therapy may improve social interactions, verbal communication, and non-verbal communication skills. "

Thoughts?

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:05, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree, this seems fine. --BallenaBlanca &#128051; ♂ (Talk)  00:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Text
"ASD is an abbreviation for autism, replicating the scale in which we use to measure one's autism severity. "

This is not true plus the source is not sufficient. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:39, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

First sentence in the diagnosis section
I think that "Diagnosis is based on behavior, not on cause or mechanism" should read "Diagnosis is based on behavior, not on testing for biomarkers." Cause and mechanism are both abstract and, while they may be understandable, they are not directly measurable. 'Biomarkers' is the term used by clinicians, at least in the research hospital where I work, to refer to measurable values that indicate the presence or absence of some condition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willhaslett (talk • contribs) 20:06, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

More text
"Children with high-functioning autism suffer from more intense" should read "Children with high-functioning autism suffer more from intense" (switch from and more). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:9000:9D13:C200:284B:38BA:6A4E:223E (talk) 00:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Why do you think this needs to be changed? Tornado chaser (talk) 00:29, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

I don’t think cocaine and alcohol cause autism
As someone with autism, I am pretty sure that instead of causing autism, that cocaine and alcohol would do something else. I am not an expert about the causes of autism, but I am pretty sure that cocaine and alcohol would cause another disability or just result in death. Bubba2018 (talk) 01:47, 28 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The part about cocaine and alcohol is sourced, do you know of a source that says cocaine and alcohol don't cause autism? Just saying "I am pretty sure" without a reliable source to back you up is not a valid reason to change the article. Tornado chaser (talk) 02:03, 28 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Clarification: The article (as sourced) says that cocaine and alcohol use by the mother during pregnancy are "risk factors". That is to say women who use cocaine and/or alcohol during pregnancy are more likely to have children with autism. It does not mean drug use by the mother necessarily causes autism, only that mothers using EtOH/cocaine are more likely (as a group) to have children with autism.


 * Whatever the case, Reproductive Toxicology is a reliable source for the info. Is our wording of "risk factors" an appropriate wording for the source's "factors associated with"? While "risk factor" does not mean causative, would other wording be clearer/more appropriate? - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:32, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

@SummerPhDv2.0, oh! Like I said I am not an expert on the causes! No, I don’t have a source but I heard that the causes were unknown. Bubba2018 (talk) 02:28, 29 September 2018 (UTC)


 * It's a correlation. Some correlations are because one thing causes another (like smoking and lung cancer). Others are further down the line (people who use smoker's toothpaste have higher rates of lung cancer than people who use regular toothpaste, but only because they tend to be smokers). Still others are unrelated or tangential connected.


 * Causes of autism are not known. Several correlations are known. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:38, 29 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I reworded the lede “caused” to “associated with”. “Cause” is a very strong conclusion requiring strong evidence, and is not supported by the references. Ref 4 uses “results from”, which is stronger than “associated with” but is well short of “caused by”.  A key point in all reliable sources is the lack of certainty. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:31, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Medications
Are not a primary treatment "Current evidence-based pharmacotherapy options in children with ASD are very limited, and many have substantial adverse events. Clinicians should use pharmacotherapy as a part of comprehensive treatment, and judiciously weigh risks and benefits."

They are occasionally used for associated symptoms but poorly supported. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:56, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Behavioral therapy
A number of types are used and thus linking to the board category in the overview of the topic in question is perfectly appropriate. This ref for example discusses the use of CBT for associated anxiety. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 18:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I left CBT in the infobox as it has some evidence of effectiveness in older children with autism who have co-morbid anxiety. Although ABA and CBTs often overlap in theories in techniques (especially in counseling), the reason why I listed ABA and CBT seperately is because people often refer to ABA as the Early Behavioral Interventions (EBIs) - structured and naturlisric teaching interventions for young kids with autism - which is completley seperate from CBT, as it is more related to counseling. CBT (without the "s" at the end) is often used synonymously with Cognitive Therapy which is not really behavioral; it's just the branding name. ATC . Talk 21:59, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * They can be well summarized as "behavioral therapy" as the term encompases both "ABA" and "CBT" Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 05:28, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Speech therapy
"People with ASDs have deficits in social communication, and treatment by a speech-language pathologist usually is appropriate." Why was this removed? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:52, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I just mentioned the importance of services being carried out by behavior analysts, speech pathologists, special education teachers, and licenced psychologists in the treatment section. No reason to be in the infobox or lead. ATC . Talk 21:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes a speech language pathologist is typically one of the key specialists involved.
 * The 2007 Pediatrics paper says "People with ASDs have deficits in social communication, and treatment by a speech-language pathologist usually is appropriate."
 * This is greater evidence than any of the meds mentioned.
 * But sure we can mention "Early behavioral interventions" first Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 06:31, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I still do not think their is relevance to mention speech therapy in the lead because under the "speech and language therapy" category of the Pediatrics source, all the therapies listed - "DTT, verbal behavior, natural language paradigm, pivotal response training, milieu teaching" - derive from the field of behavior analysis not speech pathology. Speech therapies would include, i.e., PROMPT (Prompts for Restructuring Oral Muscular Phonetic Targets), Articulation Therapy, Kaufman Speech to Language Protocol, etc. (none of which are recommended by the AAP, Surgeon General, or US National Research Council).
 * The next two sentences following "People with ASDs have deficits in social communication, and treatment by a speech-language pathologist usually is appropriate," states: "However, traditional, low-intensity pull-out service delivery models often are ineffective, and speech-language pathologists are likely to be most effective when they train and work in close collaboration with teachers, support personnel, families, and the child's peers." What the Pediatrics source implies is that unless the speech pathologist is also a behavior analyst, speech pathologists should mainly consult and train other behavior analysts, special education teachers, and licensed psychologists when it comes to, i.e., incorporating oral motor imitation or tactile prompts into the Discrete Trials (DTT), but low-intensity speech related services (i.e., Articulation Therapy, Kaufman Speech to Language Protocol) are not beneficial enough for all the skills that need to be taught based on the intensity provided (or very few hours of traditional speech therapy). While speech therapy can be be helpful if offered on the side, they should not be the main course of treatment, and therefore, there is no relevance for it in the lead. ATC . Talk 20:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Disagree. Speech therapy is much more a core part of treatment than medications. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 21:20, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

New section
I suffer from Autism and personally I think stacking bricks is more related to OCD than Autism and also Autism more than likely is NOT caused by alcohol and drugs, because my parents didn't take any

Kieran R. Halfpenny (talk) 22:54, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * New comments actually go at the bottom, so I have moved your comment here.
 * wikipedia is based on reliable sources, not editors' personal experience, so you will need to find a reference for the fact that stacking bricks is associated more with OCD that autism, and the article doesn't say that the only cause of autism is parental substance abuse, just that this increases the likelihood that the baby will have autism. Tornado chaser (talk) 00:10, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 November 2018
I'd like to insert a traduction of a section in Wikipedia Italia, about Autistic child's emotions, because I think this is very interesting. Thanks for attention, greetings from Dr. Emidio Tribulato Emidio 1 (talk) 15:02, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Autistic child’s emotions Autistic syndrome is usually accompanied by a lot of prejudices. One of the most common is the one that would like these children not to feel, or try few, emotions. This is not absolutely true, because in these diseases we find high levels of anxiety, numerous distressing fears, often combined to anger and ire manifestations. The presence of an emotionally disturbed inner world becomes already evident from the stories and drawings that, sometimes, these children are able to build, in which prevail distressing, cruel, creepy or coprolalic themes. Mrs. Temple Grandin, a high functioning autism woman, describes her emotions in her essay "Thinking in images": "Some believe that people with autism have no emotions. I have it all right, but they are more like the emotions of a child than those of an adult ".

To implement all this:

 * It is necessary to consider children affected by autism not as children to be educated but to free themselves from the many confused emotions that upset their soul.
 * It is important that the environment in which the child lives daily, is the most serene, joyous, warm and welcoming possible.
 * It is good not to focus on the symptoms, as these are only defence tools, which will be left when the child has found the necessary serenity and a good inner balance. If we do this we will see that "they love adults who can accept all the expressions of their suffering, even those that may seem strange and unusual".
 * It is essential to listen to their soul, so that our behaviours will be in harmony with the most real and deep needs of the child and not with our contingent desires. If we consistently manage to implement this, we will realize that these children are not at all "inaccessible" to communication. "They are easily linked to adults who are able to relate to them as" a good mother ".A mother who knows how to empathize with their world, as to allow their defended, crushed and torn ego to develop its full potential ".
 * It is essential to let ourselves be joyfully involved in the games they offer at a given moment, in the way they wish (self-managed free play), without ever imposing the activities that we consider useful and important. This our behaviour will allow them to gain more trust in us and in the world we represent.


 * You need to cite reliable sources for all info you add to an article, most of this edit request has no sources to back it up and therefore cannot be added to the article, feel free to ask me if you have any questions. Tornado chaser (talk) 15:17, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * . Tornado chaser (talk) 15:17, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Unsourced essay. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 15:21, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Autistic child’s emotions
Autistic syndrome is usually accompanied by a lot of prejudices. One of the most common is the one that would like these children not to feel, or try few, emotions. This is not absolutely true, because in these diseases we find high levels of anxiety, numerous distressing fears, often combined to anger and ire manifestations. The presence of an emotionally disturbed inner world becomes already evident from the stories and drawings that, sometimes, these children are able to build, in which prevail distressing, cruel, creepy or coprolalic themes. Mrs. Temple Grandin, a high functioning autism woman, describes her emotions in her essay "Thinking in images": "Some believe that people with autism have no emotions. I have it all right, but they are more like the emotions of a child than those of an adult ".

The Anxiety
Regarding anxiety, this emotion, in mild forms of autism, is expressed above all with symptoms such as the lability of attention, hyperactivity, hyperkinesia, and the remarkable reactivity even to small frustrations. In these forms, when the child wants to make friends with peers, anxiety and inner excitement severely affect his relational skills, so, in peers relationships, as the child doesn’t have the necessary serenity to listen to another one, accepting their needs and desires, is often rejected. In severe forms of autism, although anxiety is hidden by more serious symptoms such as stereotypies, apparent apathy and indifference, it can be easily detected in unexpected, sudden and frequent mood swings and acute anguish crises, caused by minimal frustrations. Moreover, in many cases, this painful emotion manages to upset the structural organization of thought with alterations of language that can become disconnected and incoherent.

Fears
When the child deals with some particular situations, objects and tactile, visual or auditory stimuli, or when he has to face minimal changes in the world around him, fears can also manifest themselves dramatically, with screams and broken attitudes. Temple Grandin describes her fears as follows: "The problems of a person like this are further complicated by a nervous system that is often in a state of greater fear and panic". "As fear was my main emotion, it reversed into all the events that had some emotional significance". "Since puberty, I had lived constant fears and anxieties, accompanied by strong panic attacks, which occurred at different intervals, from a few weeks to several months. My life was based on avoiding situations that could trigger a panic attack"."With puberty, fear became my main emotion".

The Anger and the Ire
In these children there are frequent outbreaks of rage with consequent anger, which become evident through the aggressive manifestations against objects, other people but also toward themselves. This happens mostly when the child feels that the world outside of him shows little respect for his fears, his anxieties or his needs more real and deep. Luckily, when the environment that surrounds him becomes fully and totally respectful of his needs and desires, for example, when he constantly applies the technique of self-managed free play, with the reduction of suffering and inner disturbance, anger and ire regress, while, at the same time, all other symptoms also disappear.

The Sadness and the Joy
It is not always possible to highlight these two emotions because sometimes, and in some children, they present themselves in an excessive and abnormal way, while in other subjects or in other moments they are not always evident, as they are masked by non congruent mimic expressions. Therefore, a facial expression that is always the same, or attitudes with excessive and disgusted laughter, can hide a great sadness and anguish or, conversely, moments of true serenity and joy. Despite this, when adults, be they parents, teachers or operators, are able to listen to the deepest emotions of the child, without being distracted by his behaviour and the most superficial or extreme emotional manifestations, it is not so difficult to catch his true emotions so to behave accordingly.

The Distrust and the Mistrust
The inner world of autism children is not only greatly disturbed by anxiety, sadness, phobias and fears and the abnormal state of excitement, but is also altered due to the considerable distrust and mistrust of the world around them. This is frequently perceived as bad, treacherous, incoherent and contributing to constant agonizing frustrations. Therefore children affected by autism often find themselves alone in an environment in which they don’t feel understood and accepted, and this leads them more and more to closure.

Defences of the autistic child against negative emotions
From what we have said, it’s easy to understand that most of the symptoms present in the autistic syndrome can be traced to defences, often archaic and therefore not functional, that these children execute to avoid, alleviate or overcome their suffering, caused by intense negative emotions such as anxiety, fear, depression and considerable distrust of others and themselves. For example, these children try to avoid, through closure, people, places, objects and situations in which they are uncomfortable or can accentuate their malaise. As every change accentuates their anxieties and fears, they dislike every new experience, whether it is a new food, whether it is a different object, place or time. To reduce their sadness sometimes they resort to nervous laughter, because laughing, their sadness and anxiety diminish, while, at the same time, this mimic expression not only doesn’t offend and doesn’t hurt anyone but is also frequently accepted by others, as it is exchanged for a manifestation of joy. Another way to reduce anxiety and inner malaise is to realize repetitive behaviours, as are the stereotypes. Self-harm, as in borderline patients, can also be used to reduce confusion and inner tension, since the pain that is caused is used to distract them for a few moments from distressing experiences, allowing them to be more present at the same time. These children also try to get rid of so much inner aggression, caused by so much suffering, destroying objects and beating others.

What to do to improve their inner world
To counteract and decrease the impact that negative emotions have on the soul of these children, the main goal should be to be able to improve their inner world, diminishing the malaise that upsets them. Then, the task of adults, be they parents, therapists or educators, will be to bring serenity instead of anxiety, to give that joy that can overcome sadness, to offer security instead of insecurity, to generate trust instead of distrust. To implement all this:
 * It is necessary to consider children affected by autism not as children to be educated but to free themselves from the many confused emotions that upset their soul.
 * It is important that the environment in which the child lives daily, is the most serene, joyous, warm and welcoming possible.
 * It is good not to focus on the symptoms, as these are only defence tools, which will be left when the child has found the necessary serenity and a good inner balance. If we do this we will see that "they love adults who can accept all the expressions of their suffering, even those that may seem strange and unusual".
 * It is essential to listen to their soul, so that our behaviours will be in harmony with the most real and deep needs of the child and not with our contingent desires. If we consistently manage to implement this, we will realize that these children are not at all "inaccessible" to communication. "They are easily linked to adults who are able to relate to them as" a good mother ".A mother who knows how to empathize with their world, as to allow their defended, crushed and torn ego to develop its full potential ".13
 * It is essential to let ourselves be joyfully involved in the games they offer at a given moment, in the way they wish (self-managed free play), without ever imposing the activities that we consider useful and important. This our behaviour will allow them to gain more trust in us and in the world we represent.--Emidio 1 (talk) 17:21, 21 November 2018 (UTC)--Emidio 1 (talk) 17:21, 21 November 2018 (UTC) Emidio 1 (talk) 17:21, 21 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Same text as before, with sourcing, but this remains an essay. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 17:47, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Wrong link about MMR vaccine
The article states: "Some such as the MMR vaccine have been completely disproven[71]."

To educate myself I downloaded the linked article [71] "Prenatal stress and risk for autism" and did not find discussions about MMR vaccine (there is a single occurrence of the word 'vaccine' in *whole* article...). Either 'reference needed' or proper link should be given. (Can't do myself, since the article is locked and I'm not registered.)

Quite frankly even the apodictic tone ("completely disproven") sounds like coming from a pen of a biased ideologue rather than scientist, because to "completely" prove or disprove *anything* in life sciences is almost impossible. ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8308:13F:9000:C33:261F:C9D:F678 (talk) 18:02, 9 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The source cited does not specify the MMR vaccine theory. It seems to have been a failed attempt to address a concern in the article.


 * As for "completely disproven", though the wording isn't the best, Wikipedia does commonly use language which is not correct in the strictest sense. For example, we do say that a virus causes the flu/AIDS/etc., when that is a widely accepted hypothesis, but cannot be proven beyond any doubt. The claims attributing autism to vaccines is similarly firmly grounded with the only reliable source to the contrary being a fraudulent work which has since been retracted with its author disgraced. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 01:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

The Anxiety
Regarding anxiety, this emotion, in mild forms of autism, is expressed above all with symptoms such as the lability of attention, hyperactivity, hyperkinesia, and the remarkable reactivity even to small frustrations. In these forms, when the child wants to make friends with peers, anxiety and inner excitement severely affect his relational skills, so, in peers relationships, as the child doesn’t have the necessary serenity to listen to another one, accepting their needs and desires, is often rejected. In severe forms of autism, although anxiety is hidden by more serious symptoms such as stereotypies, apparent apathy and indifference, it can be easily detected in unexpected, sudden and frequent mood swings and acute anguish crises, caused by minimal frustrations. Moreover, in many cases, this painful emotion manages to upset the structural organization of thought with alterations of language that can become disconnected and incoherent.

Fears
When the child deals with some particular situations, objects and tactile, visual or auditory stimuli, or when he has to face minimal changes in the world around him, fears can also manifest themselves dramatically, with screams and broken attitudes. Temple Grandin describes her fears as follows: "The problems of a person like this are further complicated by a nervous system that is often in a state of greater fear and panic"."As fear was my main emotion, it reversed into all the events that had some emotional significance"."Since puberty, I had lived constant fears and anxieties, accompanied by strong panic attacks, which occurred at different intervals, from a few weeks to several months. My life was based on avoiding situations that could trigger a panic attack"."With puberty, fear became my main emotion".

The Anger and the Ire
In these children there are frequent outbreaks of rage with consequent anger, which become evident through the aggressive manifestations against objects, other people but also toward themselves. This happens mostly when the child feels that the world outside of him shows little respect for his fears, his anxieties or his needs more real and deep. Luckily, when the environment that surrounds him becomes fully and totally respectful of his needs and desires, for example, when he constantly applies the technique of self-managed free play, with the reduction of suffering and inner disturbance, anger and ire regress, while, at the same time, all other symptoms also disappear.

The Sadness and the Joy
It is not always possible to highlight these two emotions because sometimes, and in some children, they present themselves in an excessive and abnormal way, while in other subjects or in other moments they are not always evident, as they are masked by non congruent mimic expressions. Therefore, a facial expression that is always the same, or attitudes with excessive and disgusted laughter, can hide a great sadness and anguish or, conversely, moments of true serenity and joy. Despite this, when adults, be they parents, teachers or operators, are able to listen to the deepest emotions of the child, without being distracted by his behaviour and the most superficial or extreme emotional manifestations, it is not so difficult to catch his true emotions so to behave accordingly.

The Distrust and the Mistrust
The inner world of autism children is not only greatly disturbed by anxiety, sadness, phobias and fears and the abnormal state of excitement, but is also altered due to the considerable distrust and mistrust of the world around them. This is frequently perceived as bad, treacherous, incoherent and contributing to constant agonizing frustrations. Therefore children affected by autism often find themselves alone in an environment in which they don’t feel understood and accepted, and this leads them more and more to closure.

Defences of the autistic child against negative emotions
From what we have said, it’s easy to understand that most of the symptoms present in the autistic syndrome can be traced to defences, often archaic and therefore not functional, that these children execute to avoid, alleviate or overcome their suffering, caused by intense negative emotions such as anxiety, fear, depression and considerable distrust of others and themselves. For example, these children try to avoid, through closure, people, places, objects and situations in which they are uncomfortable or can accentuate their malaise. As every change accentuates their anxieties and fears, they dislike every new experience, whether it is a new food, whether it is a different object, place or time. To reduce their sadness sometimes they resort to nervous laughter, because laughing, their sadness and anxiety diminish, while, at the same time, this mimic expression not only doesn’t offend and doesn’t hurt anyone but is also frequently accepted by others, as it is exchanged for a manifestation of joy. Another way to reduce anxiety and inner malaise is to realize repetitive behaviours, as are the stereotypes. Self-harm, as in borderline patients, can also be used to reduce confusion and inner tension, since the pain that is caused is used to distract them for a few moments from distressing experiences, allowing them to be more present at the same time. These children also try to get rid of so much inner aggression, caused by so much suffering, destroying objects and beating others.

What to do to improve their inner world
To counteract and decrease the impact that negative emotions have on the soul of these children, the main goal should be to be able to improve their inner world, diminishing the malaise that upsets them. Then, the task of adults, be they parents, therapists or educators, will be to bring serenity instead of anxiety, to give that joy that can overcome sadness, to offer security instead of insecurity, to generate trust instead of distrust.

Semi-protected edit request on 21 November 2018
This is a traduction of the Italian page related to Autism, that I think should be interesting to insert. Hope that this could be useful. Greetings from Dr. Emidio Tribulato.

Suramin
I added a section about Suramin under medication but it’s gone now? Csessa2017 (talk) 02:37, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Can someone tell me why the section I added on Suramin under medications was removed? Csessa2017 (talk) 00:51, 25 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Putting a drug in the infobox implies that it is an established treatment, not just an experimental drug, and including an experimental treatment in the article at all may be WP:UNDUE if your only sources are the study itself and a news article, because the news media is generally not considered a reliable source for medical info, and wikipedia should generally cite secondary sources, not just the study itself, let me know if you have any questions, I know it can be confusing when you are new. Tornado chaser (talk) 03:43, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Would I be able to add the Suramin research under the “alternative medicine” section? Csessa2017 (talk) 03:04, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

2601:1C0:CC01:C21B:5985:DF40:C7E9:D174 (talk) 00:10, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

There should be a section on discrimination and social status of people with autism
I made a section citing some of the ways autistic people are lower in status and face discrimination and violence, but it was removed. I find it shows bias that there is a section about the cost of autistic people to society, but nothing is said about the ways autistic people struggle to achieve equality.

If my section is not cited well enough, I would love it if somebody else wrote a section on this topic that the community is willing to accept.

Ourvo (talk) 00:11, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Support. By the way, make a userpage. Benjamin (talk) 00:14, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

"A girl with autism"
What is the point being made by the photograph? That children with autism look perfectly normal?

Am I supposed to notice something that will help me recognise autism in other children in children I meet in the future? If it is meant to illustrate one of the behaviours associated with the condition, it is lost on me.

I think you should either explain the photo, or remove it.

--RobertII (talk) 14:06, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Tend to agree. Photographs are not the best way to illustrate mental conditions, unless there are specific relevant contextual elements, that are explained in the caption, as with the other two. I can't see that the image of the girl adds any value. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:27, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Agree, removed. Tornado chaser (talk) 14:33, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2019
There needs to be a section about the controversy surrounding ABA. Many autistic adults claim that all ABA ever did was teach them to repress their natural, and non-harmful behavior, like stimming. Meanwhile, there are precious few if any saying it helped. It also often uses extreme measures, like electroshock "therapy." They also say that relearning to stim had major positive effects when they started doing it again. It also had the unintended consequence of training them to not be able to say no to people, even in circumstances where the other person was clearly trying to harm them. Also, if you look at what relatively successful disabled people have to say about disability, they'll almost always say they have far more success finding ways to work with their disability instead of trying to get rid of it. I've included links to articles by autistic people and professionals discussing it below. Forgive me if I've misunderstood and I should have put the actual edits that should be made, instead of submitting a request to do so.

Seeing as there is a cost section, there should also be a benefits section. Autistic people are overrepresented in the tech, science, and math fields. Which are of course the things that all modern society is built on. There are also other benifits to being autistic, such as great memory, honesty, and out of the box thinking.

ABA related stuff

http://neurowonderful.tumblr.com/post/135286731936/2015-autism-aba-resource-masterpost https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEhlSPB9w7Y https://www.spectrumnews.org/features/deep-dive/controversy-autisms-common-therapy/ https://www.todaysparent.com/family/special-needs/is-the-most-common-therapy-for-autism-harmful-or-helpful/ https://childmind.org/article/controversy-around-applied-behavior-analysis/

Benefits related stuff https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/autism-experiment-reveals-people-in-technical-professions-are-more-likely-to-have-autistic-traits-a6719956.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11973110/Scientists-and-mathematicians-test-higher-on-autism-spectrum-says-Cambridge-University.html https://www.siliconrepublic.com/careers/autistic-workers-talent-potential-specialisterne-inspirefest https://the-art-of-autism.com/positive-aspects-of-aspergers-autism/ https://www.kennethrobersonphd.com/what-strengths-are-common-to-adults-with-aspergers/ https://theotherside.wordpress.com/autism-aspergers/good-qualities-or-aspie-advantages/ https://www.businessinsider.com/peter-thiel-aspergers-is-an-advantage-2015-4 JimJongJung (talk) 20:36, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Natureium (talk) 21:37, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You need to start with the best quality sources. The most recent Cochrane review (2018) is a good starting point if you wish the article to discuss the effectiveness of applied behavior analysis on autism in children. The full review is available at https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD009260.pub3/full . Searching Trip database and PubMed will provide a range of other sources that you may wish to evaluate, bearing in mind that WP:MEDRS limits the sources that are usable to support biomedical claims (such as effectiveness). --RexxS (talk) 00:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You need to start with the best quality sources. The most recent Cochrane review (2018) is a good starting point if you wish the article to discuss the effectiveness of applied behavior analysis on autism in children. The full review is available at https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD009260.pub3/full . Searching Trip database and PubMed will provide a range of other sources that you may wish to evaluate, bearing in mind that WP:MEDRS limits the sources that are usable to support biomedical claims (such as effectiveness). --RexxS (talk) 00:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2019
The blurb at the start of the "Society and Culture" section talks about the autistic rights movement, and the neurodivergent movement, without providing links to the Wikipedia articles on those topics. JimJongJung (talk) 01:15, 25 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I linked autism rights movement, but I don't see "neurodivergent movement" mentioned anywhere. Tornado chaser (talk) 03:06, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: – Jonesey95 (talk) 07:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Other associations
The ref says

"During childhood and adolescence, fetal growth restriction is associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, depression, internalizing and thought problems, poor social skills, and autism spectrum disorder."

And

"Fetal growth restriction in both term and preterm infants is associated with neonatal morbidities and a wide variety of behavioral and psychological diagnoses in childhood and adolescence, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, depression, internalizing and thought problems, poor social skills, and autism spectrum disorder."

So that supports fetal growth restriction.

The second ref says

"A number of studies show a link between ASD and a family history of autoimmune diseases"

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:11, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Rmaharjan7cl7yp.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Typographical error
From someone autistic (me, the diagnosis formerly known as Asperger's Syndrome) reading this article...

Under prognosis: "People in there 20s with autism have an employment rate of 58%." --Should be "their", not "there".

Please revise. Grajkovic (talk) 22:36, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Good catch. Fixed. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 00:14, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2019
In the Education section, it mentions ABA many times but makes no mention of the criticisms and controversies surrounding it. Wikipedia's own page on ABA mentions them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_behavior_analysis#Criticism JimJongJung (talk) 03:46, 18 April 2019 (UTC)


 * ❌. Edit requests are requests to make precise edits.  If you have more general suggestions, you can open a talk page section (or repurpose this one) to discuss the issue.  –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 13:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion to merge article
Hi! I'm new here... But I just want to suggest merging Autism into Autism spectrum.

I have just read a number of articles regarding Autism and Autism Spectrum Disorder. Based on my research, I am able to state that:
 * 1) According to https://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/understanding-autism-basics#1, it was previously called Autism, but it is currently called Autism Spectrum Disorder.
 * 2) According to https://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism, Autism is also known as Autism Spectrum Disorder. They are used interchangeably and refers to the same thing. Also, there are many sub-types of Autism, because it refers to a broad range of conditions. Also, Autism is a Spectrum disorder (which is why it is used interchangeably with ASD).
 * 3) According to https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/323758.php, ASD is an umbrella term, in it includes Asperger syndrome.

Thus, I conclude that Autism Spectrum Disorder and Autism refers to the same thing, just that the former is the latest version, and the latter is the older version.

BG5115 (talk) 04:34, 3 May 2019 (UTC) ^
 * "In the DSM-5, autism and less severe forms of the condition, including Asperger syndrome and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified(PDD-NOS), have been combined into the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD)." I hope that this answers your question as in the past autism was defined narrowly. Ruslik_ Zero 07:09, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Autism rights movement
Only medical claims are subject to medical sourcing requirements. The only medical claim in this section is that vaccines do not cause autism: If this claim is not well-sourced enough for you, please find a source for it rather than deleting the entire section. Otherwise someone might accuse you of POV pushing and reverting under false pretense. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 04:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)


 * These sources do not meet WP:RS either.
 * This source is not reliable http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/
 * This press release is also not suitable http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/11/prweb179444.htm
 * Neither is this self help site http://autism-help.org/points-autism-rights-movement.htm


 * This bit of text was already covered "The autism rights movement is a social movement within the context of disability rights that emphasizes the concept of neurodiversity, viewing the autism spectrum as a result of natural variations in the human brain rather than a disorder to be cured." so merged the ref up


 * Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for pointing out the problems in sourcing. I have now addressed them. If you have any more issues with sourcing in this section, please do not delete the text. Leave a template and I will fix the problem. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 07:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Manual of Style
The manual of style recommends identity first language for autism. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 18:51, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * For diseases we use a person first approach. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:00, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * That is incorrect in the case of autism. The medical manual of style has this to say:
 * Choose appropriate words when describing medical conditions and their effects on people. The words disease and disorder are not always appropriate.  Independently observed medical signs are not self-reported symptoms.  Avoid saying that people "suffer" from or are "victims" of a chronic illness or symptom, which may imply helplessness:  identifiers like survivor, affected person or individual with are alternate wordings.  Many patient groups, particularly those that have been stigmatised, prefer person-first terminology—arguing, for example, that seizures are epileptic, people are not. An example of person-first terminology would be people with epilepsy instead of epileptics. In contrast, not all medical conditions are viewed as being entirely disadvantageous by those who have them. Some groups view their condition as part of their identity (for example, some deaf and some autistic people) and reject this terminology.
 * This is in alignment with the disability manual of style. Autism is an exception to the person-first rule. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 19:34, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * This has been discussed before. You will need a RfC for such a change. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:40, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * A brief scan of the archives seems to indicate that the original discussion made no reference to guidelines or studies, and consisted mainly of anecdotes. As I have pointed out, both the medical and disability manuals of style indicate that identity-first language is preferred for autism. If we must hold a vote before we can abide by guidelines, we should do that. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 04:56, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Different people feel differently. Some people with autism prefer people-first language as they do not identify as their health condition. But regardless I have started the RfC. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:59, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 July 2019
In the section Repetitive behavior, please remove the link to "sameness". It redirects to Identity (philosophy), which is a completely different concept. 86.28.158.33 (talk) 11:35, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done, thanks! &#8209;&#8209; El Hef  ( Meep? ) 16:40, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Older sources
There are several claims about what is not known or understood about austism in the article. For example, "there is no known cure", "How this occurs is not well understood", "...it is unclear whether ASD is explained more by...", which are all backed up by sources that are a decade or more out of date. I'm not sure if these claims are still valid as stated or exactly how much has been learned in the last decade or so about this very active area of research, but if there are folks out there who are current on the latest research and could re-examine those claims, it would be well appreciated. Should those claims be treated with "As of" tags?  Sparkie82 ( t • c ) 05:51, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * We should just update the sources. Those particular statements are still true. There is no available cure for autism. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 08:48, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Screening
The screening section seems to mainly address the lack of language (and gesturing) symptoms, but should also address the lack of eye-to-eye gaze (when name is called). I was trying to find the information in the references sourced but it states you have to subscribe to the journal to read them. Although I found on the CDC's basic developmental milestones section for autism that includes "6 Months - Respond to own name." I'm purposing to add "No response to name (or eye-to-eye gaze) by 6 months" as the first bullet of the Screening section with the CDC source. Any objections? ATC. Talk 02:46, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

ASD and Intellectual Disability
ID (Intellectual Disability) and ASD share clinical characteristics which can result in confusion while diagnosing. Overlapping these two disorders, while common, can be detrimental to a person's well being. Those with ASD that hold symptoms of ID may be grouped into a co-diagnosis in which they are receiving treatment for a disorder they do not have. Likewise, those with ID that are mistaken to have ASD may be treated for symptoms of a disorder they do not have. Differentiating between these two disorders will allow clinicians to deliver or prescribe the appropriate treatments. Comorbidity between ID and ASD is very common; roughly 40% of those with ID also have ASD and roughly 70% of those with ASD also have ID. Both ASD and ID require shortfalls in communication and social awareness as defining criteria. Both ASD and ID are classified by severity; mild, moderate, severe. In addition to those three levels, ID has a fourth classification known as profound.

Defining Differences
In a study conducted in 2016 surveying 2816 cases, it was found that the top subsets that help differentiate between those with ID and ASD are, "...impaired non-verbal social behavior and lack of social reciprocity, [...] restricted interests, strict adherence to routines, stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms, and preoccupation with parts of objects". Those with ASD tend to show more deficits in non-verbal social behavior such as body language and understanding social cues. In a study done in 2008 of 336 individuals with varying levels of ID, it was found that those with ID display fewer instances of repetitive or ritualistic behaviors. It also recognized that those with ASD, when compared to those with ID, were more likely to isolate themselves and make less eye contact. When it comes to classification ID and ASD have very different guidelines. ID has a standardized assessment called the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS), this measures severity on a system built around how much support an individual will need. While ASD also classifies severity by support needed there is no standard assessment, clinicians are free to diagnose severity at their own judgment 7. Msalamah101 (talk) 01:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

RfC : How should those with the condition be referred?
How should we refer to those with this condition? We have a style guide and a manual of style that recommend slightly different things. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:27, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

1) Person with autism

 * Support we generally use person first language for health conditions. Not everyone identifies as their condition. "individual with" is supported by WP:MEDMOS Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:47, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:MEDMOS says: "Many patient groups, particularly those that have been stigmatised, prefer person-first terminology... [but] some groups view their condition as part of their identity (for example, some deaf and some autistic people) and reject [person-first] terminology". We use person first language, but with some exceptions. We do not say "individual with deafness" or "individual with blindness", and we should treat "individuals with autism" similarly. If you want to use WP:MEDMOS to defend the term "individuals with autism", you may have to do that same for "individuals with blindness" and "individuals with deafness" for full consistency of stance. WP:MEDMOS implies that we should defer to the preferences of the group. A study on group preference finds that "autistic adults and parents (albeit to a lesser extent) favored disability-first terms". --Wikiman2718 (talk) 07:49, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * support per Doc James rationale--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:56, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Support. I don't see how "autistic people" or "autistics" is an improvement. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 15:51, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * That argument is good faith status quo stonewalling. No harm done. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 02:05, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Eh? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:08, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep. I'm not accusing you of doing anything wrong, but that type of argument is classified as stonewalling per the policy I cited in my initial comment. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 18:11, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * My comment that I don't see how "autistic people" or "autistics" is an improvement is not stonewalling in any sense of the word. Furthermore, Status quo stonewalling is not a policy or a guideline. It is a supplement page, essentially an essay. My comment is also not "status quo stonewalling." I don't see "autistic people" or "autistics" as improvements. Simple. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:28, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the point that this explanatory page is trying to make is that such !Votes do not add to the discussion and should not be counted in determining consensous. But it's not my place to decide if a supplement document is enforced here. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 19:06, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:Consensus is about the strength of the arguments, but RfCs, which this was, include votes. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:36, 7 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Support this proposal per my comment here, which clearly shows that this source actually favours this option.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  22:45, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Please also read my rebuttal. The source states: "autistic adults and parents (albeit to a lesser extent) favored disability-first terms (e.g. ‘autistic’ or ‘autistic person’)." --Wikiman2718 (talk) 18:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Support we don't use adjectival forms for other conditions ("schizophrenic people", "disabled people" etc.) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:34, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

2) Autistic person

 * Support: Autism is explicitly stated to be an exception to the rule of person-first language in the disability style guide and is implied to be an exception in WP:MEDMOS. Additionally, This study finds that the term "autistic" was endorsed by 61% of autistic adults, while the term "person with autism" was endorsed by only 28% of autistic adults. We should respect the preference of the autistic community. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 05:02, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * In figure one of the source you linked, the only two results that really matter are the results for ‘person with autism’ versus ‘autistic person’ because the other results are not really relevant to how this article will be written and are not subject to the disputed terms. Unfortunately I have to say: the results show ‘person with autism’ is overall more favoured amongst those surveyed (parents, professionals, family/friends, ASD), except a slightly higher percent of individuals on the autistic spectrum preferring ‘autistic person’. I did spend a fair bit of time considering your opinion and the source. Therefore, I must oppose this option.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  22:42, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * So basically the high acceptance of the term ‘autistic’ does not mean what you claim, it could easily mean a ‘person who is autistic’ rather than ‘autistic person’ — the opposite of your POV. In other words you are misrepresenting the source, in good faith. That result of 61% is therefore meaningless to how we edit this article and resolve this dispute.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  22:55, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your interpretation. We should consider only the preference of autistics, as Wikipedia lets each group label itself. The other polls from the other groups should not be taken into account. The identity-first terminologies on which the study collects data include "autistic", "autistic person", and "is autistic". A quote from the study finds that autistics usually prefer identity-first language (here referred to as disability-first)
 * The use of person-first language was the principal point of contention among community members. Professionals reported a clear preference for the use of person-first language (e.g. ‘person with autism/Asperger’s’), while autistic adults and parents (albeit to a lesser extent) favored disability-first terms (e.g. ‘autistic’ or ‘autistic person’). This pattern of results was not wholly unexpected. Person-first language was initially championed to challenge medical and moral beliefs that define people by their disabilities, instead referring to them first as individuals and then to their disability, if necessary. In so doing, it focuses on people’s abilities and distinguishes the person from the disability (Blaska, 1993; Feldman et al., 2002; Foreman, 2005). Researchers, educators, clinicians, other health professionals and the broader public have long been schooled in the philosophy and the desirability of person-first language and so it is not surprising that very similar explanations for the use of such language were given by the professionals in our study.
 * It is notable that the study itself uses identity-first language, likely in deference to its findings. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 03:47, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd offer a slightly different interpretation of the usage. The key part of PFL is that it makes clear that the person an condition are different; so Person WITH Autism.  Autistic people don't see being autistic as an accessory, but as an intrinsic part of the self.  Being autistic has mediated every moment of their lived experience, because it affects how the world is perceived and engaged with.  In that sense person who is autistic is perfectly reasonable, although pretty clumsy wording.
 * I can understand the misunderstanding if you're not heavily involved in working to improve quality of life, and opportunity, for autistic people.
 * Random Acts of Language (talk) 16:29, 1 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Support: Autistic people like myself are rather offended by being called "Person with autism" rather than "Autistic person". For us, autism is not a condition, but part of our identity. Look no further to how other people say it in the autistic community! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 11:47, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * From time to time I see dating site profiles that mention autism and I have to say the large majority say something like and I have asperger’s or I have mild autism and similarly the people I have met in life would say similarly. I actually think it is fairly uncommon for someone to define their identity as being an autistic person. I do not believe you are speaking on behalf of autistic individuals/people with autism, rather you are giving your personal opinion.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  03:24, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Support: Autistic people have a majority preference for being described as autistic people, with major representative charities and research organisations respecting that and evolving their language to support. As autism is neurological and a lifelong developmental condition it is not a disease or illness, it's an intrinsic part of the self.
 * https://www.autism.org.uk/describingautism
 * https://www.autistica.org.uk/about-us/media-communications-guide
 * https://www.england.nhs.uk/learning-disabilities/about/get-involved/involving-people/making-information-and-the-words-we-use-accessible/#autism
 * https://ollibean.com/the-gymnastics-of-person-first-language/
 * People without autism do have an overwhelming preference for Person First Language, and tend to talk over the preferences of autistic people. That does rather tend to skew the debate.
 * 157.203.254.3 (talk) 08:35, 31 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Support: I am an autistic person involved with the autistic community (not the "autism community" which consists mainly of parents and non-autistic professionals). The majority of people are know are in support of identity-first language. In fact, the majority of disabled people I know prefer "disabled people" as well. Person-first language is taught in academic settings, but this is contrary to the experience of anyone involved in advocacy.
 * https://autisticadvocacy.org/about-asan/identity-first-language/
 * https://radicalcopyeditor.com/2017/07/03/person-centered-language/
 * https://www.thinkinclusive.us/why-person-first-language-doesnt-always-put-the-person-first/
 * The AutismSpeaks Twitter account also did a recent poll that reflects my experience: here. Not scientific, of course, but if you read the replies, you'll get a range of autistic (and non-autistic) people's responses. --anomalapropos (talk) 13:43, 1 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Support: Not much to add to the sources and discussion above, working in the autistic community it's a common complaint that professionals and non-autistic people have a preference for Person First Language, while autistic people prefer IFL. Seems reasonable to respect the community preferences.
 * Random Acts of Language (talk) 16:18, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

 * please wait for this discussion to be over--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:52, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment WP:MEDMOS quite clearly encourages using the term ‘people with autism’ whilst acknowledging some autistic affected individuals reject this description style. WP:DISMOS clearly encourages the use of the term ‘autistic person’. So these two guidelines conflict with polar opposite instructions to editors. This RfC is meaningless unless the point of this RfC is to amend one of the guidelines, which it is not. I suggest this RfC is null and void and should be scrapped and this discussion should occur on the relevant guideline talk pages with perhaps a new properly framed RfC started there .-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  19:37, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Well User:Literaturegeek we are sort of discussing which should be followed here. WP:MEDMOS is a manuel of style the other is simple a style guide. From what I understand the manual of style takes precedence. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 21:25, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I now think that this RfC could take place on this talk page so long as both manual of style talk pages are notified of this RfC. I do see that you did in fact mention the style guidelines in your original RfC question. I think I missed that in my first read of the RfC and focused on the options, my bad. I think you should repost the RfC to address the reason Redrose64 withdrew the RfC and then notify each of the manual of style’s talk pages that are subject of this RfC. I will then choose which option to support now that I realise I misread the RfC.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  21:45, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Could we compromise on some of this?
 * There's no single "correct" language here. Person-first language is offensive to some people; disability-first language is offensive to others.  I think that we need less rule-enforcing and more thoughtfulness here.  IMO we would be well-served to follow the real-world variations around this.  The general approach in the real world seems to be:
 * Parents of young children use and prefer person-first language. This is reasonable because, realistically, young children barely have any sense of identity at all.  Identity formation takes time and a certain amount of brain development, and even neurotypical three year olds are still working on the basics, like "I'm a boy (except that today, I'm a train)".  Young kids on the spectrum may not even recognize their own names.
 * Some teens and many older self-advocates prefer identity-first language. (Some don't care.)
 * However, undiagnosed people and newly diagnosed people, even if old enough to form identities, haven't had time to form a sense of identity around autism yet. You can't get a label on Monday morning and have your sense of identity reconstructed by Monday evening.
 * People with the most severe disabilities shouldn't be assumed to have any particular sense of identity (as an autistic person or otherwise).
 * I suggest, therefore, that we follow this general approach for the article: When the article talks about young children, adults with severe disabilities, and anyone in the pre-diagnosis and diagnostic stages, let's use person-first language.  When the article talks about advocacy, management, and adult life, let's use identity-first language.  This model simultaneously recognizes the personhood of the people who haven't (yet) constructed an identity around autism, and recognizes the identity of the people who have.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:01, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Because it generates editing disputes I feel we need an RfC to generate a consensus viewpoint that results in updates to the manual of style guidelines accordingly. We can’t get too distracted with pedantic political correctness stuff, it distracts from serious editing so an RfC needs to settle this once and for all and in an RfC you WAID could, perhaps, make a suggestion of how to resolve this and have it commented and voted on.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  03:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * This article is about the severe form of the condition rather than about Aspergers. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 16:35, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Classic autism is sometimes severe, sometimes not. But severity is irrelevant. What matters is the consensus opinions of how people in this group want to be addressed. We even use identity first language for blindness and deafness, as people in these groups typically prefer to be addressed this way. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 16:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * No single individual, however, get to speak for the group. And different people within the group have different opinions. It may also depend on the part of the world one is in. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not claiming to speak for the group. I've presented a study on the group's beliefs. An unless you have evidence that beliefs are different in other parts of the world, this study is the best indicator of group beliefs that is available. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 04:36, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * We have charities that use "people with autism" Etc Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 18:53, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Autism speaks has been widely condemned by the autistic community, largely because they fail to represent the views of autistics. They have said some rather terrible things about autism, and they certainly do not speak for the autistic community. As for the other two charities you mentioned, I have never heard of them. On the other hand, the Autistic Self Advocacy network, which is run by and for autistic people, uses identity first language. This is typical of the larger trend: those who try to advocate on behalf of autistics prefer person first language, while autistics themselves prefer identity first. In cases like these, Wikipedia has always let the group decide how to label itself. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 04:06, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Given that the concept of "severity" applies to diagnostic criteria, not diagnosis, I'm unclear on the relevance here. When the only difference between Autism and Aspergers was rate of childhood language acquisition, it strikes me that having two different articles confuses the issue rather than contributes.  I am conscious that there is a school of thought that continues to want to see Aspergers as different/ superior, but that doesn't reflect current understanding; either DSM5 or ICD11.
 * It's a little concerning that someone expressing such an outdated view of autism has such a desire to drive the narrative here.
 * 157.203.254.3 (talk) 08:45, 31 July 2019 (UTC)


 * In all cases that I am aware of, Wikipedia lets each group decide by consensus the words used to identify them. Members outside the group don't get an opinion. This study finds that identity first language is preferred over person first language by the majority of autistics. The "person with" terminology fails to achieve consensus in any group. Even among medical professionals, less than half endorse this terminology. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Your source does not support your position, at least the abstract (have you got the full text?). It says the preferred terms are autism and Austin spectrum disorder which I assume the respondents would use that to say ‘I am on the autism spectrum’ or ‘I have autism’ etc. I am not seeing that source saying the majority of respondents wanting identity first language such as I am an autistic man.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  17:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * We do not have mechanisms to determine who is inside or outside a group nor do we really want those. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 19:07, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Doc, how about we archive all of this and restart the RfC properly formatted this time? Otherwise this dispute will keep reading its head...-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  20:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Here is a link to the full text. From the text, the term "autistic" was endorsed by 61% of autistic adults, while the term "person with autism" was endorsed by only 28% of autistic adults. The study also polls parents, friends, family, and practitioners, but we should defer to the preference of autistics, as Wikipedia lets each group label itself. It is true that people with Asperger's syndrome tend to prefer the person first (with Asperger's), but this is only because the identity first terminology for Asperger's syndrome is "he/she is Aspergic". This is not of much importance as Asperger's is now a historical term. This discussion should be about "autistic" vs. "with autism". --Wikiman2718 (talk) 04:31, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Side note: Asperger's is a historical diagnostic category; it's not a historical identity.  Identities don't go away just because someone changes the paperwork.  "Aspie" is still some people's self-identity.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:46, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I can only read the first page of that paper and can’t see those figures and other figures.?..-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  14:58, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why that is. I can read the whole thing. Are you using the second reference, or the first? --Wikiman2718 (talk) 15:08, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Must be because I am on an iPad, will try to access a regular computer soon.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  17:35, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Perhaps this will help:
 * Identity-first language includes "He's an Autistic" [caps optional but not unusual] and "He's an autistic person".
 * Person-first language includes "He's a person with autism" and "He has autism".
 * Most people use all of these forms at different times/in different contexts. I think that the most important part of that paper is this recommendation:
 * "For these reasons, some disability researchers caution against an overly narrow, rigid and formal set of guidelines regarding the use of language, especially when such guidelines might restrict progressive dialogue relative to disability and to autism more specifically (Mackelprang, 2010). Instead, they advocate the use of terminology that is context specific, although informed by investigations such as this one. For example, disability- first language can be used to discuss autistic people and the autism community. Person-first language might be used in some contexts, especially in some healthcare contexts, or when speaking to parents.
 * "On the basis of this investigation, we believe this kind of flexibility is suitable given the wide variety of preferences among those in the autism community. The fundamental finding of this research, after all, is that there are reasonable and rational disagreements between members of the autism community as to which terms should be used to describe autism."
 * That's what I think we should be doing: using all the forms, in appropriate contexts.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:44, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * While I am not opposed to a degree of flexibility in language use, I am confused by the recommendation that person-first language by used when speaking to parents. The study clearly shows that parents prefer identity-first language over person-first. The only group that expressed a preference for identity-first language in this study was the practitioners (see polls for "autistic person" vs "person with autism" in figures 1, 2, and 3). --Wikiman2718 (talk) 04:22, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Did you consider the method for the survey? First, the survey was passed around to friends-of-friends, in a sampling method that tends to reinforce biases and privileges the first respondents (a process that we'd condemn as a violation of WP:CANVAS if you tried to do that for an RFC here).  Then they excluded all responses from people under the age of 18, or who didn't want to disclose their age, and anyone who claimed to not be residing in the UK.  Fair enough for the UK thing, since they present it as only being about UK preferences, but why not listen to the teenagers, too?  It's not the world's most definitive survey.  And, more importantly for our purposes, it's just one survey.  Other sources report other preferences.  As for what parents actually prefer, I suspect that "parent who's got a teenager on track for university and independence, and who is active in advocacy organizations" will have a different view than "parent who is still reeling from last month's visit to the pediatrician".  It would not surprise me if parents of young children and parents of adults (and near-adults) have different views.  I should also point out that I label these as "person first" and "identity first", but some people see that latter item as "disability first".  A parent who is overextended by the needs of a severely disabled child might put disability front and center, rather than either "person" or "identity".  WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:55, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * We can't expect unanimity, only consensus. Is there any reason to believe that these results don't generalize to other parts of the world, or that the study has found an incorrect result? Can you present any data which contradicts the result? If not, we should rely on the study, which is the best source of evidence we have. Its result is in line with what I have read elsewhere. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 18:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I have posted a notification of this discussion on the talk page of autism spectrum. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I have posted a notification of this discussion on the talk page of Asperger syndrome. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 19:55, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

ASD and Intellectual Disability
ID (Intellectual Disability) and ASD share clinical characteristics which can result in confusion while diagnosing. Overlapping these two disorders, while common, can be detrimental to a person's well being. Those with ASD that hold symptoms of ID may be grouped into a co-diagnosis in which they are receiving treatment for a disorder they do not have. Likewise, those with ID that are mistaken to have ASD may be treated for symptoms of a disorder they do not have. Differentiating between these two disorders will allow clinicians to deliver or prescribe the appropriate treatments. Comorbidity between ID and ASD is very common; roughly 40% of those with ID also have ASD and roughly 70% of those with ASD also have ID. Both ASD and ID require shortfalls in communication and social awareness as defining criteria. Both ASD and ID are classified by severity; mild, moderate, severe. In addition to those three levels, ID has a fourth classification known as profound.

Defining Differences
In a study conducted in 2016 surveying 2816 cases, it was found that the top subsets that help differentiate between those with ID and ASD are, "...impaired non-verbal social behavior and lack of social reciprocity, [...] restricted interests, strict adherence to routines, stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms, and preoccupation with parts of objects". Those with ASD tend to show more deficits in non-verbal social behavior such as body language and understanding social cues. In a study done in 2008 of 336 individuals with varying levels of ID, it was found that those with ID display fewer instances of repetitive or ritualistic behaviors. It also recognized that those with ASD, when compared to those with ID, were more likely to isolate themselves and make less eye contact. When it comes to classification ID and ASD have very different guidelines. ID has a standardized assessment called the Supports Intensity Scale (SIS), this measures severity on a system built around how much support an individual will need. While ASD also classifies severity by support needed there is no standard assessment, clinicians are free to diagnose severity at their own judgment 7. Msalamah101 (talk) 01:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Request in a timely manner!!!
Occupational therapists in particular aim to promote an individual's participation in their preferred occupations in a variety of environments throughout the lifespan. Occupational therapists are specially trained to assess deficits in function in order to successfully participate in meaningful activities, such as sensory integration, fine motor skills, sleep and self-care.

Will someone please add this citation to the article?--Rinadavitash (talk) 19:51, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Why add this? What does it say about autism specifically? Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:19, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Ref errors
Some refs seem to have syntax errors, can anyone fix them?--Megaman en m (talk) 20:05, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Which refs are you looking at? Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 04:24, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2019
Autism is a spectrum disorder. There is a wide range of autism and disorders related to autism. Some of these related disorders are Asperger's syndrome which is a mild form of autism, pervasive developmental disorder, not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), autistic disorder, childhood disintegrative disorder. Also, Rett Syndrome shows similar symptoms to ASD. 134.124.189.69 (talk) 18:50, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DonIago (talk) 19:12, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

"vaccine hypothesis" Reference 19.
In the second paragraph there is a bold generalized statement claiming that the "vaccine hypothesis" as being a risk in the development of autism has been disproven. This claim is substantiated by Reference 19. Reference 19 does not say that vaccines have been ruled out as a risk factor, but rather the link between the MMR vaccine and autism is unsupported. The hyperlinked text "vaccine hypothesis" takes you to the MMR vaccine and autism page. Reference 19 states however that the evidence to rule out thimerosal in causation is limited. Since the MMR vaccine is being referenced directly, the hyperlinked text "vaccine hypothesis" should more accurately read "the MMR vaccine hypothesis". Saying broadly that the "vaccine hypothesis" has been disproven is inaccurate. Saying however "that the link between the MMR vaccine and autism is unsupported" would be correct. That statement would also connect it to the hyperlinked page properly.Gray002 (talk) 06:13, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * This is all well-sourced in the article, which the lede is meant to summarize. The notion that vaccines cause autism is of course weapons-grade crankery. Alexbrn (talk) 06:31, 22 September 2019 (UTC)


 * The article cited in the body of the text says that the vaccine hypothesis has been “effectively dismissed” not “disproven” since (MMR has been the last only individual vaccine studied vis a vis autism) and the article admits that there has never been a large scale vaccinated v unvaccinated study. I have thus changed the wording to “effectively dismissed.”

“CONCLUSIONS Twenty epidemiologic studies have shown that neither thimerosal nor MMR vaccine causes autism. These studies have been performed in several countries by many different investigators who have employed a multitude of epidemiologic and statistical methods. The large size of the studied populations has afforded a level of statistical power sufficient to detect even rare associations. These studies, in concert with the biological implausibility that vaccines overwhelm a child’s immune system, have effectively dismissed the notion that vaccines cause autism. Further studies on the cause or causes of autism should focus on more-promising leads.“ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism#cite_ref-GerberOffit2009_82-1 JustinReilly (talk) 13:06, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

A comment on this article being biased
This article is biased in favour of people who seek to view autism as a "difference" rather than a "disorder", and omits information that could be perceived as upsetting people in a politically correct manner. It omits so much information about autism, particularly its history (contained in a small section near the bottom – how convenient!) and original theories regarding the origin of autism, such as on History of Asperger syndrome, relating to social isolation. I agree that Wikipedia is not a place for ideology, it is a place for facts (real facts, not convenient or doctored facts). OddWarlord (talk) 19:40, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * fwiw I see it as massively out of date, and not representative of our current understanding of how autism presents in a broad range of autistics. Most of the content is very dated, but there is some resistance to updating and reflecting current thinking.
 * I think the key would be to propose some amendments, although would observe that there is some ownership behaviour from some.
 * Random Acts of Language (talk) 15:57, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Take 2: Identity first vs person first rehashed
A [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Autism&oldid=920382146#How_should_those_with_the_condition_be_referred? discussion above] on this issue (of use of language in this article) has run for about 60 days with 5 votes for ‘identity first’ (e.g. autistic adults/children) and 5 votes for ‘person first’ (e.g. children/adults with autism) language, with both sides providing sources and policy based arguments but no consensus appears to have emerged. A solution could be to follow the sources and use the language interchangeably per what the sources say, so I suggest editors participate below in considering this proposal.

,, , , , , , ,

Support

 * Support. Neither side can agree, the sources seem roughly split down the middle, and even the autistic community is quite split on this issue. I suggest the best approach is to follow the sources and allow both terminology in the article rather than trying to enforce one view over the other. It is also in keeping with the spirit of WP:NPOV and WP:V etc.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  12:06, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * 80% of autistic people preferring IFL isn't all that compelling...
 * Random Acts of Language (talk) 14:09, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No idea where this 80% figure comes from. This study confirms what I wrote above that opinion is roughly split down the middle.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  14:27, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * fwiw I'm uncomfortable with your interpretation of the presentation of data to inform this. The questions are different, so I disagree with your characterisation of what that source says.
 * Notwithstanding that, links were provided on the page to the current position of a number of charities, my preferred source is | this survey, where the question and answer are explicit rather than implied. I do recognise that some will dismiss the voices of autistics who are able to express an opinion though.  We see it already in related discussion around whether this article is about autism, or their interpretation of autism.
 * What's interesting is that since this question kicked off, even Autism$peaks have changed their position; with a | token nod to autistic people as actually having an opinion. They've very reluctantly recognised that it might be worth keeping autistic people a bit less hostile to them.  It think their twitter and facebook polling was pretty compelling, both in terms of response numbers and commentary around it.
 * I do appreciate that medical professionals would prefer that autistic people know their place and use the terminology dictated by people without autism who know so much more about it! Lived experience is meaningless as a source of insight.
 * Random Acts of Language (talk) 13:14, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Oppose

 * It is improper to try to settle by popular vote an issue that guidelines make clear. When popular vote to overrule consensus, that is false consensus. I have already argued that guidelines are unambiguous on this issue, so if my argument is valid it is improper to hold this vote. Sorry for the vagueness— In editing from mobile. —Wikiman2718 (talk) 12:42, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * There was no consensus in favour of your interpretation of guidelines in the previous discussion.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  12:55, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I would like for my argument to be evaluated by a neutral third party. I believe that the guidelines are unambiguous on this issue, and should be followed. —Wikiman2718 (talk) 13:06, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Then post a closure request here requesting the previous discussion be closed with a summary opinion.-- Literaturegeek  |  T@1k?  13:09, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I have to go to sleep right now, but I will do that when I wake up. Thank you very much, and I apologize for having accused you of bad faith. —Wikiman2718 (talk) 13:33, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, no worries. :-)-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  13:46, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm looking at the notice board you linked to, and I think it may be a good idea if we each write statements to summarize out positions. This will make things easier for the closing admin. If I understand the situation correctly, we have three opinions. My own-- that WP:MEDMOS and the other sources support identity first language; That WP:MEDMOS supports person first language, so it doesn't matter what the other sources say; and yours, that the sources are confused and/or show split support, and so use of language should be dependent on situation. Just my personal opinion-- while your stance may be reasonable, it is a bit unpractical because it will result in continuing editor disputes over language. If you want to argue for this POV, it may be better to outline firm rules for which language should be used where.


 * The noticeboard states that it takes two to three weeks to get a formal closure, so there is no rush here. When we've all agreed we're ready, I'll make the request for a formal closure of this discussion. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 02:16, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No, that would be a bad idea and waste of time because the job of the closing admin is to review the relevant discussion on this talk page only. You will note that none of the other closing requests have such discussions.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  02:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I was proposing that the comments by made on this talk page. It is notable that I do have the right to add my own final statement to the discussion, as it is still open. I was suggesting that you do the same, but you have no obligation to do that. Since no one else appears to be interested in adding to this discussion, I will write my final comment and then submit the request. --Wikiman2718 (talk) 03:23, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh okay. I understand now. Yes, you or we could do that.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  11:39, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Discussion take 2

 * Best to simple leave it as it is until there is clear consensus to do something different. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 02:27, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps it might be beneficial to include the historical part of this Autism article in the front of the article. This will help it to be organized more chronologically. Amerenda95 (talk) 05:49, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2019
The fourth sentence in the autism article disparages people with the condition because the subject of "worsens" is the person and not the disease. I also believe using "worsens" with its detrimental and negative connotations is not an appropriate, objective descriptor for autism.

The sentence should be changed from "These signs often develop gradually, though some children with autism reach their developmental milestones at a normal pace before worsening.[15]" to "These signs often develop gradually, through some children with autism experience regression in their communication and social skills after reaching developmental milestones at a normal pace.[15]" Jeffthepianist (talk) 13:12, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done: please see Special:Diff/924355110. Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 10:19, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Worsening refers to the symptoms of the disease. We tend to user easier to understand language in the lead. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 11:07, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * That word is used in the titles of some academic papers: e.g. Dawson, G., Munson, J., Webb, S. J., Nalty, T., Abbott, R., & Toth, K. (2007). Rate of head growth decelerates and symptoms worsen in the second year of life in autism. Biological Psychiatry, 61(4), 458–464. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:23, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

EF
Executive functions article mentions this is a sign of autism, https://medium.com/the-establishment/i-thought-i-was-lazy-the-invisible-day-to-day-struggle-for-autistic-women-6268515175f3 talks about this in depth. YET it is not mentioned on this autism page. Where to put it and how?? I do not know - and there seems to be quite some arguments over autistic person V person with autism. I never heard such arguments over myopia - a condition I have, and it is life long and defines what I can do quite a lot. ANYWAY for this reason I do not want to put this info in. Can someone add it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.115.204.102 (talk) 20:30, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Cause and other changes
The text "Autism is associated with a combination of genetic and environmental factors"

was supported by the reference in question to

The text "Autism is hereditary and previous associations with environmental factors have been disproved or debunked."

Is not supported by the reference in question. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:57, 25 May 2020 (UTC)


 * This "characterized as a developmental disorder in popular culture" is also incorrect. The DSM5 is not popular culture. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 13:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The DSM should not be referenced since it's an incorrect source of information and not relevant to Autism. As an inherited genetic state it doesn't meet criteria for a disorder since it can't be acquired or gained in any other way than by birth, and to support this fact there is not one single evidenced case of anyone ever managing to become Autistic.

My text: "and previous associations with environmental factors have been disproved or debunked." is also factually correct - there is not evidence to suggest otherwise. I've moved unwelcome comments to the bottom of the page since the author seems upset if they are deleted from this page even if they are not relevant to Autism information.


 * Dangibas, article talk pages are for discussing improvements and changes to articles based on reliable sources; please provide sources backing your suggestions. Also, please sign your posts by adding four tildes ( ~ ) after them. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  16:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree, which is why since there are no reliable sources to support the claim that Autism can be caused by anything other than genetics - that statement should be removed from the Autism article. It is promoting miss-information to leave a suggestion on Wikipedia that there is any other cause for Autism - because - as you highlight by failing to provide any - there is no evidence - because it doesn't exist.

I'm not adding a cause to the page without citing anything - I'm removing a cause which shouldn't be mentioned - unless it's more clearly signposted as debunked theory / pseudoscience - then people can more easily interpret the information on the page without being misled.

I'm also going to change the racial & age stereotyped image from the Autism page and replace it with a image that showcases the fact that Autism has no age or colour. It is promoting miss-information and racial stereotypes by showing a white Autistic child. Plus the photo looks like it was lifted from an old magazine and was processed with a 386. Don't complain when I change the image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dangibas (talk • contribs) 18:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

, as I mentioned on your talk, the proper place for discussing article text is article talk. If you have recent secondary reviews that comply with WP:MEDRS, please include them here. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  15:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
 * , it is acceptable to remove posts from your own talk page (which is an implicit acknowledgement that you have read the post), but it is not acceptable to remove other people's posts from article talk. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  15:27, 25 May 2020 (UTC)