Who the fuck needs an x axis anyway

Assuming the data is true (doubt it because of fucking beef jerky man), it's not so much that autism is on the rise so much that autism rates are being diagnosed more and autism is less stigmatized than it was previously.

If I remember correctly, it fits the same overall curve of the number of reported left handed people over time after society stopped forcibly making people use their right hand. Shockingly, actually making an attempt at diagnosing people and tracking those diagnoses makes numbers go up.
Imagine the sexist fascist racist homophobe convicted Cheeto puff is also ablest, please keep adding adjectives that describe the 47th president of the Confederated States

Well the cure is clearly to stop testing.

Instances of autism have skyrocketed since the discovery of autism and effective testing for it.
Clearly these tests are causing the autism. It's a conspiracy by Big Autist to make the world a quieter and more curious place. The railway companies are in on it too.
- I think you just predicted the next South Park plot.
- Autism tests cause autism, got it, let's roll boys, we have more science to ban

I remember when my mum was filling out a form as part of the autism assessment, she was like "sounds a lot like my husband as well... And his dad"

I'm convinced my mom is on the spectrum and my grandparents

Didn't we used to hide it?

Yes. This is an artifact of a destigmatization coupled with better diagnostics for evaluating ASD. More people aren't autistic, more people are being diagnosed and receiving counseling for coping with the neurldivergence in a cold and uncaring neurotypical world.
That's the era they want to drag us back into, even if it costs us suicide and/or substance abuse.

maybe that's why they were elected lol

/s

The source is "I made it the fuck up!"

Also ignoring improvements in diagnostics.

I mean, it says the source right there, it's the CDC...
- The organization run by a brain worm driving a human suit?
- Yeah, after deleting any data the CDC used to have that they didn't agree with. And making up any new data they need to make their preconceived notion as perceivably supported as possible.
- Yes, which happened to be the body that made it the fuck up.

Number of unvaxxed kids also growing in the past 22 years. I think it proves that autism is caused by lack of vaccine.

taps the chart

If they could read or do comparisonal analysis or could formulate higher-functional abstraction in their frontal lobes, this would really make them think.

Now show the testing rate over the same time period!

Anti-vaxxers: No.

Autism diagnosis rates. Quite a difference.

Remember Covid, don't report on things = they stop existing.
Well, get out of here with your logic and reason...

In my country there has been a huge increase in both ADHD and autism diagnoses the last decades. At the same time in those years the methods to discover both diagnoses have improved greatly.
But you know, correlation does not equal causation..

Mandating helmets for the boys at the front is resulting in many more head injuries!
Yeah, this is like saying “skin cancer rates have increased dramatically in the past 30 years!” Well yeah, because now we have the technology to detect it earlier. That “things increased” stat ignores the complementary “but deaths decreased dramatically” stat that immediately follows it. Before, we didn’t know people had skin cancer until it was killing them. But now, with preventative screenings, public awareness campaigns, etc, people are more likely to get checked before it is a life threatening issue.
It’s the same thing. Detection models got better, so detection rates went up.

Not autism rates, detection rates is what's up, more kids are growing up with adequate helps and therapies so they can grow to be functional adults.

It is the same story as gay infecting children's minds.
They are selling awareness as something to be afraid of. Which is yet another layer od evil.
- Not only that, but they wish really hard for us to be their tiny little scapegoats, when probably most of the autistic community hates them.
Too add to that there are more types of autism. It's a spectrum.
- Yes, trains autism, boats autism, Math autism... /j
  No but for real, no two autistic individuals are ever the same.
Adequate helps and terapies - repression and psychological abuse. Great. We are functional adults, fuck you.
- Uuuhhhhhh, I'm an autistic adult who can somehow function because I had heaps of help growing up, many of my friends weren't that lucky and have a hard time just existing.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Before you get more downvotes, it's a reference folks: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damned_lies,_and_statistics
In hypernormalization, making SURE you know they ARE LYING and that IT DOESN'T MATTER is essential.
Because the goal is to make you believe you can't do anything, so that you give up and demobilize that is their goal.
- Very well said. I will make a concerted effort to inject "hypernormalization" into my speech more often going forward. For decades I've been saying to friends that the reductionist obsession with "normal" (whatever the hell that means) is a cancer to modern society.
  In particular it already sounds creepy when you replace usage with its verb-form, e.g. changing "all my friends are normal" to "all my friends have been normalized". It's common practise to use a re-encoder to normalize a "background" playlist of songs to the same dB threshold so no single song sticks out and distracts us from what we are trying to focus on while listening. Similarly, authorities of an authoritarian ilk try to normalize populations so none of them stick out and distract from the primary focus (centralization of power and money). Hypernormalization involves taking that to its logical conclusion, telling the vast majority of people "stay in your lane" - meaning "shut up and consume, and when we tell you what to buy you buy it", AKA be "normal(ized)").

you know, everest was still there before it was discovered.

Everest wasn't murdered before it was 5 years old.

Can somebody smarter than me tell me what this is trying to say? There’s a bar for surveillance year and birth year. But, for instance, 2012 is on the graph twice with different values. What does it mean?

Edit:

I think I got it. The graph is of “Autism rates in 8 year olds over time”. And the X axis should just be year (in 2 year increments).

2012 appears once as a birth year and once as a surveillance year. The graph says that they only ever surveyed 8-year-olds, since the birth year is always 8 less than the surveillance year.
- But they have 12 bars and 6 labels... it makes no sense
It's no longer number go up good season.
Bad graph, they couldn’t decide if the X axis was the birth year of the kids or the year of the test but they give the same information since it’s always 8-year-old kids being tested. Anyways, they wrote the year of the test first and second the year of birth.
They were told to make a graph that increases and that's what they did.

Autism is a spectrum., same as gender ideology. Whether you like it or not, it's true.
We're better at diagnosis
Preconceived notions about such things aren't as prevalent, until recently for political reasons

I'm a woman in my 40s who is probably autistic, but back then I was the wrong demographic and "too well behaved" to even consider diagnosis. I'm a typical example people think of when thinking about under diagnosis.
On the other hand, I work with people who have severe learning disabilities who also evaded diagnosis, or were diagnosed well into adulthood as diagnosis is difficult in someone so impaired. In another time, they would have been labelled with a grossly offensive term and just left. Better treatment of disabled people is probably another reason we see rising rates of diagnosis.
They're basically banking on people still thinking, autism is "intellectual disability, but quirkier and more difficult", while I have met "more severe" cases who did not had the ID part, they just were lucky to avoid the diagnosis for long, and thus people didn't pretend they're "too dumb to even learn to count to 10".
spectrum
Our species broadly doesn't think in terms of spectrums or nuance.
I burned years of my life trying to make arguments from reason and explain how there can be simultaneous truths or that issues are not black-and-white. It has NEVER stuck, not with friends, not with family, not with strangers on the internet.
People's minds largely do not work that way. We all HAVE to digest this and mourn it and let it pass through us so we can stop trying to argue with these blockheads in ways they can't even grasp. We can change them if we tell them stories about feelings, if we make them feel validated or heard, we can change them with careful, patient one-on-one care like a parent telling a child bedtime stories... but this takes a level of energy, empathy and patience that few of us have. Some do, I give massive respect to those who have dedicated their lives to this kind of outreach. I wish we had more.
- This is precisely what 'leader scientists' did when folks in power plopped them before crowds and radio and TV and such for a long time.
  ...It kinda worked.
  But we're in the algorithmic attention era now. We are past that era.

Will this administration release data on the impact of fossil emissions on diseases like asthma?

Oh, they will. But reliable data?
Be careful what you wish for, lol.
Also heath waves death tolls
- It’s been a mess out there, for sure.

In other news, visibility bias has been classified as communist propaganda. Anyone who says this isn't representative of an actual increase in the incidence rate is a communist and can safely be ignored.

This graph will live forever, in intro classes, as an example of how not to do things.

Im confused, it's got both axis labeled and seems pretty easy to read.
Maybe points off for having the labels on the outside rim of the graphic.
Doesn't change the fact that classification of autism also changed over those years, but the graph itself is okay.
- What? The line of best fit doesn't even touch the data.

Cool but

There is an 𝑥 axis and it's not too hard to comprehend, although I'd prefer the dividing character to be newline rather than "|", or only show the surveillance year.

Also, the "trendline" is sus, an actual trendline cannot always be above data.

I honestly don't know why they even list the birth year. It explicitly states "8 Year Olds", we can do the math.
The years are either out of order or overlapping.
- No, it's "surveillance year | birth year" and only every other value is listed. It would be nicer with a numerical value but it's fine.
- But they aren't from what I can see. They're surveillance/birth year pairs in ascending order.

That line of best fit doesn't even match the data. How can it start above the data and then finish above the data but still be line of best fit. Not that that's the only problem with this graph of course.

I think it's just a trendline, not a line of best fit.
Sorry, it's actually a "best fits our narrative" line. I can see how you might have been confused.

prevalence of cancer has increased ∞% since 0 BC

Oh god!

When people say autism they think of the nonverbal kind not the model train kind.

Also remember that we only had diagnostic tools for adult autism beginning in the 1980s.

The rise of autism diagnosis does not necessarily equal a rise in autism.

That's definitely something an autist would say!!! We found them, boys!!!

....................... did they adjust the data points to go from lowest to highest

......so the chart go up?

.....

*I wrote down the data on a napkin and it makes more sense. These fuckers made a Bad Graph.

I guess we found the answer to "Is math invented or discovered?"
- Bad Graph says: 0.75% of 8 year olds were diagnosed in 2000 versus 3.2% in 2020.
  Correlation =/= causation.
  How have the diagnostic criteria changed in 20 years? Autism was a stigma when I was in high school in 2000, now it's a spectrum. Are there routine screenings at pediatricians now?
  Number go up, but what else go up simultaneously?
  I hate it here.
- Same guys that tarrifed an island full of penguins?
Massaging your stats to make them say what you want is basic statistics 101.
Each bar shows two years; years they surveyed the kids and the year the kids were born.
So 2000|1992, is saying that kids born in 1992 were surveyed in 2000. If you look at tmit with thtmat perspective you can see it's ordered by the year.

Military spending also increased from 2000-2022, ergo military spending causes autism.

10 out of a 1000 to 30ish out of a 1000 doesn’t even seem like a massive increase, especially if it’s really due to something like a pain medication that is taken by a huge population. Which it’s not as it’s more related to improvements in diagnosing.

I guess they are just hoping people see bar go up and therefore bad.

It looks nepotism put a failson in charge of this graph.

That's like saying we have more cancer now than in the past.

Sure, that might be true in certain scenarios (we're very good at creating new ways to give ourselves cancer).

The truth is that we're living longer, increasing the risk and likelihood of cancer, and we've gotten a LOT better at finding and diagnosing cancer and specific types.

Yeah Autism rates are going up in all groups because people are getting diagnoses. This is partly about better awareness but also partly about money - there is an incentive to expand the diagnosis, diagnose more people and treat more people, which somewhat muddies the water. Autistic Spectrum Disorder first appeared in the American DSM in 2012, unifying 5 existing conditions into one, and then it moved into the international ICD in 2018 (going live in 2022). It is no wonder awareness has gone up, and infrastructure for diagnosis has rolled out.

We're not seeing an increase in Autism, we're seeing an increase in the diagnosis of autism. This graph just shows how stupid and dumbed down the CDC and the White House is under this cretinous president.

It's probably more than just better diagnosis.
"Advanced Parental Age" has a significant body of work behind it, and people are having kids quite a bit older than they used to, because... you know... gestures broadly at how fucked up the world is
- My daughter's autistic and we were 39 (wife) and 42 (me) when we had her. OTOH, we were two years older and my son isn't autistic.
we're seeing an increase in the diagnosis of autism.
Absolutely.
We're not seeing an increase in Autism
Not sure about that. It can be both.
- Sure, it's possible, but I'm not sure there's data to support the idea of increasing rates of autism. The increase in diagnosis rates is way too strong of a confounder

Absolute nonsense graph. Buckle up, this shit is going to get way worse.

I think the x axis is "year of measurement | year of birth" since they are 8 years apart. Very unconventional and it would need an explanation but it's not bad to have both pieces of information handy in this context

Can anyone decipher the graph for me?

The line went up which usually good. The very best. We have the best lines in this great country. But Bobby said this isn't a good line so I said, I told them, we need to find out why the line is bad. And I've got people on it who say don't take Tylenol. So that's all that needs to be said. Don't. Take. Tylenol.
When they collected the data in 2000, about seven 8 year olds out of 1000 had autism. Those children were born in 1992.
When they collected the data in 2002, about six 8 year olds out of 1000 had autism. Those children were born in 1994. This information was not labelled on the x axis.
When they collected the data in 2004, about eight 8 year olds out of 1000 had autism. Those children were born in 1996.
When they collected the data in 2006, about nine 8 year olds out of 1000 had autism. Those children were born in 1998. This information was not labelled on the x axis.
When they collected the data in 2008, about eleven 8 year olds out of 1000 had autism. Those children were born in 2000.
... I'm too lazy to continue but ...
When they collected the data in 2020, about twenty seven 8 year olds out of 1000 had autism. Those children were born in 2012.
When they collected the data in 2022, about thirty two 8 year olds out of 1000 had autism. Those children were born in 2014. This information was not labelled on the x axis.
I'm not positive i'm reading it right, but that's what I think they were trying to convey with this (terribly labeled) graph.
eta: yeah, rereading the subtitle, those numbers and years make sense
- Any clue why there are 2 bars per year grouping?
  I thought it was maybe number of cases in each year, but 2000 at the beginning of the graph and when 2000 appears later don't match.

HMMMMM

Most magats are autists but not all autists are magats?
- It’s hard to speculate, but the cdc should take a look at this strong correlation!!

What's wrong with the x-Axis?

Main problem is that its not really an axis at all.
- Maybe what's important is the axis we made along the way
if you look at it for 1s it looks scary (if you're afraid of autism ig). if you look at it for 2s it doesn't make any fucking sense like, at all
I think it’s birth cohorts
- I think it's just the number of diagnoses made in that particular year. But it doesn't matter because we know this graph is made up anyway. It's a Trump administration putting it out, I bet not one of them knows how to get excel to output a bar chart, so instead it's just random rectangles they've drawn.

The axis makes sense with the label, they just didn't label every data point.

r/DataIsBlursed

Guarantee you the people afraid of autism has no idea what it even is, other than "bad"

There's a vast number of conservative parents who have said they would support abortion in cases of fetal abnormalities like "autism" because they're not pro-life or informed about anything, they're just scared. They're scared of hardships, they're scared of emotional labor, they're scared of the social stigmas around having to care for someone with special needs, they're scared they won't love a child who isn't normal, and will be judged for it.
- It's not possible to diagnose an autism until the age of about four or five at the earliest so I'm not sure how they're planning to do that

For some reason, that doesn't look like a GPT-generated graph, which means... sadly... that someone had to make that thing.... and somebody had to approve it.

What do you bet it's not even based on real data and it's just some random rectangles that they drew.
- They also could have just grabbed any graph off of google images and relabeled it. That was a apparently a popular shortcut in corporations when someone had to present to their bosses.

I believe the data through 2016, but the last 3 bars are faked. The increase per bin is 5 higher than the previous.

It might be because DSM-V was released in 2013.

Just as the microplastics are getting into everything!

A nice dose of synthetic hormones!

Dude...

"8 year olds, dude." - Walter Sobchak

You said it, maing.

Original: https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/1970231219255468377

Please tell me this is fake

Diagnosis has improved and perhaps been used too soon in some cases. Its always been here but environmental changes of some kind have increased it slightly. Most likely medical culprit is NSAIDs. Not trumps scapegoat of the moment. The other brand was however shown to cause people to lose empathy with sustained use in some studies.

Population size has also experienced dramatic growth... ffs.

Not trying to defend this drivel, but the metric is clearly normalized “per 1000 births”
- Ah, thanks I missed that.
That actually doesn't matter. The stats are per Capita.

Who's gonna make all the technology, music, art, etc, after we've finally cured autism? We might have to start re-autisming people.

OK there are not 2 bars per year. 2nd last is 2020, last 2022.

It's not clear why everyone is mad at the chart. It does show an increase. Though, this is about autism diagnoseses, which can be influenced by kickback bribes for diagnoseses.

There is a sharper (exponential) increase since 2012, even though pharma corruption solutions existed many years before then, afaik. Some explanation for the acceleration is needed. Its not tylenol or any new vaccines.

Er, did you look at all the dates on the x axis? Because that shit makes no sense whatsoever.
- It took me a while to understand the graph too. All of the information needed is included in OP image. Posting what may be Trump/RFK propaganda that may or not be based on lies and non data, just to attack it for not being the absolute clearest graph is posting Trump propaganda. Graph would be clearer if they omitted birth years. OK.
  Posting this is still equivalent to "sun goes up sun goes down. ain't nobody understand that" manipulation that reinforces people's lack of understanding to trust the speaker on anything and everything.
My diagnosis is in that spike. I got diagnosed late because it took that long to get away from my autism denying parent and enough time living on my own to start wondering about my "weird habits", especially after starting to meet others "like me".
It stopped being a disability in my mind and started being more like a superpower, and eventually out was just who I was and y'all can just deal with it. Of course I leaned boundaries and social graces because we live in a society, but how I view myself and other people definitely changed
So I think it has a lot to do with how this generation and previous ones changed how they handle autism.
Autism diagnosis is can also be increased by just better recognition of the disease. You think anyone was going around giving out autism diagnosis in the 90s come on.
An increase in diagnosis rates does not indicate an underlying increase in the condition.
Er, did you look at all the dates on the x axis? Because that shit makes no sense whatsoever.