Nearly every point made in the ‘scientific’ piece “Is There Really an Autism Epidemic?” by Hal Arkowitz and Scott O. Lilienfeld is flawed in some way. The article by two authors, both with PhDs in psychology, was published in Scientific American in 2012 and is teeming with ignorance, misleading claims, and, most prominently, statements that are just plain wrong. Irrefutably false, incorrect. As the sister of an intelligent, compassionate brother on the autism spectrum, I found the premise of this article and the authors’ apparent attitude towards autism offensive and unnerving, and I believe this piece is a prime example of the importance of autism awareness, especially awareness of harmful, hurtful stereotypes.  

There is something wrong with each and every sentence of Arkowitz and Lillienfeld’s third paragraph, a futile attempt at providing background information on autism, following its introductory statement.

Sentence #1: “Autism is a severe disorder that first appears in infancy.”
Offenses: inaccuracy, spreading of stereotypes

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is, as the name implies, a spectrum, meaning there are many subtypes within the broad classification of what it means to be autistic. Each individual on the spectrum has varying abilities and challenges, and to claim that the disorder is definitively severe is misleading. The stereotype that any individual with autism has a severe disability may increase bullying and lower self-confidence for those on the spectrum.  

A diagnosis can be made when a child is as young as 18 months; however, most evident signs of autism tend to appear between ages two and three.

Sentence #2: “Individuals with autism are characterized by problems in language, social bonding and imagination.”
Offenses: inaccuracy, spreading of stereotypes, overgeneralization
    
Individuals with autism are individuals. While problems with language and social bonding are common with those on the spectrum, these traits are not criteria for and do not define what it means to be autistic. But imagination? This is a gross misconception. Individuals with autism commonly pursue and achieve great success in creative professions such as creative writing, art, and inventive engineering. It is believed that Albert Einstein had Asperger's Syndrome, a high-functioning type of autism.
    
Sentence #3: “All suffer from serious communication deficits, and some are mute.”
Offenses: inaccuracy, overgeneralization

Almost any sentence about individuals with autism that starts with “all” is bound to be a misleading generalization. Although most people with autism do have communication deficits, a significant quantity would not be classified as “serious.” Since autism is such a broad spectrum, it is incorrect to say that all who are diagnosed have any particular challenge.

Sentence #4: “They do not establish close relationships with others, preferring to remain in their own mental worlds.”
Offenses: spreading of stereotypes, overgeneralization

This is a common autism stereotype spread most often by those who barely even know what autism is. The authors of this article are both professors of psychology; they should know better. While there is validity to this statement for some individuals on the spectrum, many people with autism do establish close relationships with their peers, in some cases more so than neurotypical individuals. It can be difficult to obtain statistical evidence on these tendencies because they are not quantifiably measured in most cases; however, autism research does not show a direct correlation between autism and lack of empathy or emotions. Some individuals with autism struggle with expressing emotions, but this is way different than not feeling them. My brother with autism is much more social than I am. He has a very close relationship with our family, he often spends time with friends outside of school, and he is almost always eager to meet new people. He, along with a significant number of those with autism, does not fit this stereotype, which is presented as a fact in this article.

Sentence #5: “They engage in highly stereotyped and repetitive activities, exhibiting a marked aversion to change.”
Offenses: spreading of stereotypes, overgeneralization
  
At this point, the flaws are obvious. Once again, a stereotype is presented as a fact, and a diverse group of people is over-generalized based on their diagnosis. Ascribing generalizations can have deleterious effects on those described, which may be a factor in why individuals with autism have a higher rate of a depression than their neurotypical peers.

Sentence #6: “About two thirds of autistic individuals are mentally retarded.”
Offenses: inaccuracy, spreading of stereotypes, overgeneralization, offensive language, ignorance
  
First and foremost, never use the r-word when referring to someone with autism or any intellectual disability— in fact, never use the r-word. Period. It’s extremely offensive, which is why the “Spread the Word to End the Word” campaign was founded in 2009 to discourage this insult and encourage people to make a pledge to never use this derogatory language. For two high-achieving professors of psychology to use the r-word in this context is inexcusable and shows blatant ignorance.
    
The r-word is also inaccurate, as proven time and time again by individuals with autism. Architectural artist Stephen Wiltshire was diagnosed with severe autism at the age of three. He has gained national recognition for his ability to draw intricate depictions of landscapes such as New York, Mexico City, and London from memory after only viewing them once. This is just one example.

Sentence #7: “For reasons that are unknown, most are male.”
Offenses: This statement is true; however, I’m so offended at this point I will not take what these authors say seriously.  
    
This article is not only harmful because it has incorrect information; it is harmful because of the stereotypes it spreads. But it gets worse. The authors state that “vaccines would seem to make a plausible candidate for the source of the [autism] epidemic.” First of all, autism is not an epidemic, which is defined as “a widespread occurrence of an infectious disease in a community at a particular time” (Oxford Dictionary). Autism is not infectious, nor is it a disease. Therefore, it is not an epidemic. It’s that simple. However, using this term is very harmful to the autism community. The word “epidemic” has an ominous sort of aspect, and even when said with no validity, it is an initiation of fear. Claiming that autism is an epidemic wrongly gives the term “autism” and the spectrum in its entirety such a negative connotation that many could start to associate it with legitimate, contagious epidemics. Examples of such include Ebola and the plague. Not autism.     

Arkowitz and Lillienfeld’s article “Is There an Autism Epidemic?” is the most inaccurate, inconsiderate, cringe-worthy, and, quite frankly, dumb article about autism I have ever read. It’s writing like this that makes autism awareness and fact-checking, especially of stereotypes, so important. The thought that some readers likely have read this flawed piece of writing and blindly believed it is unnerving.

The spread of dangerous misinformation on autism has continued with a vengeance over the past few years, and one of the most prominent sources raises a number of issues that should not be overlooked.  

One of Donald Trump’s major and most convincing tactics with numerous matters throughout his campaign is spreading fear. This is what he has and continues to produce with his publicized support of the claim that vaccines lead to autism. Not only does this have absolutely no scientific evidence and to suggest such shows blatant ignorance, but the negative attention could lead to serious consequences for the autism community.
    
The claim linking autism to vaccines is not new. For well over a decade, the topic has come and gone, but as of late, it has reignited. Although a multitude of studies have proven this claim has no evidence to support it, the misconception continues to have an impact. The time and money necessary to conduct research on this misconception could be used in ways that benefit those with autism. Instead, Trump works towards making people afraid of what he calls an epidemic.

Recently, diagnosed cases of autism have become more prevalent, undoubtedly in part because of an increase in awareness and early recognition. The increase in overall cases of the disorder may not be as sizable as we are led to believe. When Trump says that the rate of autism is rapidly rising, he either fails to mention or fails to understand that new research and development of the spectrum has allowed for more cases to be diagnosed.

Trump has encouraged people to fear autism as a result of vaccines, raising numerous issues not limited to the autism community. If our nation develops and maintains a fear of vaccines, a decrease in vaccination will occur in our children. Consequently, the likelihood of a disease outbreak will increase.

As our president, we are bound to hear Trump. While many might not take what he says seriously or agree with it, he has such a large and widespread influence that as a nation, despite how divided, we will hear him. Given his position of power, his erroneous claims or expansion of such will inevitably be heard. However, we do not have to listen.

Whether the ideas are his own or those of someone on his team, we should not listen to Trump’s claims without contemplating the legitimacy of the message. Hearing and knowing of his claims may do no harm, but it is when we listen and believe them without questioning Trump’s motives or correctness that problems occur. The dangerous idea of a correlation between vaccines and autism is just one example of this. We will hear what Trump has to say, but it is important that we adequately inform ourselves before we listen and believe him.

The next time you read information about autism, please fact-check and keep in mind that individuals on the spectrum are just that: individuals on a spectrum. Unfortunately, meer inaccuracy has and will continue to lead to stereotypes, overgeneralizations, hurtful comments and behavior, and more. Even when the source appears truthworthy— such as two professors of psychology or the president of the United States— question it.