Denial: How Refusing to Face the Facts about Our Autism Epidemic Hurts Children, Families, and Our Future

by Mark Blaxill, Dan Olmsted

Even as the autism rate soars and the cost to our nation climbs well into the billions, a dangerous new idea is taking There simply is no autism epidemic.The question is Is autism ancient, a genetic variation that demands acceptance and celebration? Or is it new and disabling, triggered by something in the environment that is damaging more children every day?Authors Mark Blaxill and Dan Olmsted believe autism is new, that the real rate is rising dramatically, and that those affected are injured and disabled, not merely “neurodiverse.” They call the refusal to acknowledge this reality Autism Epidemic Denial. This epidemic denial blocks the urgent need to confront and stop the epidemic and endangers our kids, our country, and our future.The key to stopping the epidemic, they say, is to stop lying about its history and start asking "who profits?" People who deny that autism is new have self-interested motives, such as ending research that might pinpoint responsibility—and, most threateningly, liability for this man-made epidemic.Using ground-breaking research, the authors definitively debunk best-selling claims that autism is nothing new—and nothing to worry about.

Genres: Health, Neuroscience, Medical, Autistic Spectrum Disorder, Nonfiction

226 pages, Kindle Edition

Published July 25, 2017

Reviews

[Carolyn Kost · Rating 3 out of 5]

In view of the CDC's recent increase in the estimate of autism’s prevalence by 15%, to 1 in 59 children, this is a timely book in which the authors of this book set out to convincingly explode the myths promoted by three categories of autism deniers:
1. The claim that the rise in the number of cases is due to better and more all-encompassing diagnosis; that autism is substituted for what used to be called retardation, that ASD is substituted for what used to be termed eccentric, and that people who should have had the diagnosis were overlooked. There were extensive studies of the developmentally disabled before then and none described autism; there were simply no cases of autism prior to 1930. Period. Moreover, the UC Davis MIND Institute asserted in 2009: "the 7 to 8-fold increase in the number of children born in CA with autism since 1990 cannot be explained by either changes in how the condition is diagnosed or counted--and the trend shows no sign of abating;" and urged shifting the search for the cause from genetics to chemicals and microbes in the environment.

2. The claim that autism has always existed but that it is mild and "neurodiverse" individuals are useful to society. This misunderstands the disorder. Autistic traits are not Autistic Disorder, which entails significant problems with communication, restricted interests, and social isolation before the third birthday.

3. The claim made by promoters of autistic individuals as "troubled but talented" and feature them performing as savants.

Olmsted (who passed away suddenly after submitting the manuscript) and Blaxill present evidence as to why these claims are wrong, but a clearer definition of the disorder really helps those who don't understand what we mean by autism, as opposed to ASD or traits: "At its very essence regressive autism is about a child losing all the skills and abilities...necessary to lead a fulfilling independent life. These children lose their speech, gross motor function and even the ability to eat and sleep like normal human beings. Some lucky children regain all the lost skills, but most do not. Regressive autism is a catastrophic loss for the child, the child's traumatized family and our country. It costs a lot to have regressive autism. Additionally, the majority of these children have epilepsy, serious GI and immune diseases and most remain profoundly disabled all their lives." --Katie Wright, daughter of Autism Speaks founders.

Claims about the role of chemicals in the emergence of autism appear in other works by these authors, but this book is squarely focused on the epidemic.

This epidemic is a tragedy in every way that steals potential and resources from individuals, families, and the entire society, because we are about to face an enormous drain on the economy. Hucksters will arise who will call this some kind of spiritual blessing (or curse), say it can be cured by Disney or diet or homeopathy or prayer or avoiding vaccines or some special device or remedy. They are preying on the desperate and despairing and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Not a great book, but it does what it set out to do: debunk the deniers of the autism epidemic.
What a crime that 1 in 59 children has autism, yet the 1 in 400 who have gender dysphoria get all the media attention. If the autism lobby were as strong and sexually titillating as the transgender one, they might actually get the services they need.

[A L · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is amazing. It tells the truth about the autism epidemic and how the environment plays a role in causing this medical tragedy. It also talks about how romanticizing autism and denying the epidemic is doing harm to American children. If we don't address this crisis head on, then we will not be prepared for the tsunami of kids who will need to be cared for when their parents die.

[Sharon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pharma and its minions are trying to confuse the fact that autism was nonexistent before vaccination. The meteoric rise in the number of vaccines in the Childhood Schedule reflects an identical rise of autism cases. These kids are not better diagnosed, nor have they always been in society. This book clearly explains how these two rationales are false. Vaccines cause autism. If you think otherwise, read this book. It provides solid evidence that vaccines are unarguably the predominant cause of autism. Real autism isn't "cute and quirky"; it is almost unfathomably tragic and heartbreaking. Affected kids are often violent and self-harming. What happens when these kids are adults and outweigh their parents? Vaccines cause neurological harm with every injection.

[Hannah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Admittedly, the first half is a bit of a slog, as the authors work through case studies amd historical research into mental health, but it's a much-needed slog and worthwhile, as it builds the case for the second half of the book. Also, they manage to shred Silberman's Neurotribes arguments. Definitely glad that I convinced my librarian to order a copy. 💜

[Christine · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very difficult to read. I really had to push my way through it. Maybe if I had read the other two books they the authors kept referencing, I would have had an easier time. I don't want to economically support the other authors though.

[Julie · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was just ok. I agree with some of the points but it had too much of a negative, conspiracy tone. I wish more energy was put into solutions rather than bashing others.