- checking login information
The Health Policy Cause
628,318 people care about Health Policy
Loading...The Irish Twins Theory of Autism: Does Having Closely-Spaced Pregnancies Increase the Odds?
From personal experience, I’m not able to offer up any evidence about the latest theory of what causes autism. I have only one child, our 13 1/12 year old son Charlie and (just to be up front about everything), I have been pregnant exactly one time, with Charlie—and a just-published study in Pediatrics suggests that closely-spaced pregnancies are ‘associated with increased odds of autism in California sibling births.’
But if you have ‘Irish twins‘—children born in the same calendar year or within twelve months of each other—does that mean you’re more likely to have an autistic child?
In the study, researchers from Columbia University examined the records of pairs of first- and second-born siblings born in California from 1992 to 2002. Records from the California Department of Developmental Services were consulted regarding autism diagnoses. From reviewing the records of 660,000 second-born children, and considering the time they were born relative to the first child and whether or not they had an autism diagnosis, researchers found that ’children born after shorter intervals between pregnancies are at increased risk of developing autism,’ with ‘the highest risk’ associated with pregnancies less than one year apart.
More specifically, as noted in today’s Wall Street Journal:
The study found that second children who were conceived less than 12 months after the first child’s birth were three times more likely to be diagnosed with autism than children spaced further apart. Second children conceived less than two years after the first had almost twice the odds of receiving an autism diagnosis.
So should parents thinking of having a second child wait?
A caveat about the study’s results from the Wall Street Journal:
The actual number of autism cases seen in the study was less than 1%, with 3,137 cases out of the 662,730 second-born children that were in the study.
Currently, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1 in 110 children in the US have an autism spectrum disorder (autism, Asperger’s Syndrome, Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified/PDD-NOS).
As with any of the many theories out there about ‘what causes autism,’ this new study seems to apply in a few and maybe even some cases, and not at all in others. As a parent, I really do wish that the mass media would note this point, rather than blaring (as does MSNBC) Autism Risk Rises in Closely Spaced Pregnancies or (as does ABC) Shorter Gap Between Pregnancies Linked to Increased Autism Risk.
Highways, TV, cell phones, alcohol and you name it (um, vaccines…..) have all been mentioned as ’causes of autism’ and by the time my son is 21, and 31, and 41, I’m sure many more will be. Perhaps we might learn someday to focus equally on finding and training more teachers, therapists, aides, respite workers, and other staff to help teach kids like my son, to help support him and so many others throughout their lives?
Read more: health policy
Photo by madgerly.
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
Recent Comments from Causes
Good for her! So glad the airline stood behind her.
It's all about the money ...
Because no evidence exists does not mean it was not there. For how many years did archeologists say the…
meet our writers
48 comments
+ add your ownIf you seek to find something chances are you will!
My sister and I are Irish twins and we aren't autistic.
A hypothesis attempts to explain, in scientific reductive terms, the mechanism by which something in nature is occurring. A good hypothesis needs to falsifiable.
ie. "God is great because she loves me" is not a good hypothesis because (a) it doesn't attempt to explain how the love materialises from God to me (b) and it can't be proved that God doesn't love me.
Ms Chew I think you need to do some basic reading about scientific language. Look up what constitutes evidence, study what is the difference between an idea, a hypothesis and a theory.
Your experience (whatever that might be) is not evidence. It's an isolated example. In short, a theory is a proven hypothesis not someone's latest idea.
Agree with Catalina D.
label irish is insulting; I guess needs more studies
I agree with Gus K.
My four daughters were born in four years (not recommended) and none are autistic.
We lived on a farm and they grew up with farm-fresh milk, meat, vegetables, and spring water.
More research needs to be done on the relationship with today's antibiotic laced meats and poultry; vegetables grown with herbicides and persticides (and don't get me started on GMO foods!!); food additives in packaged foods and restaurant foods; our less than pristine water sources that are full of chemicals in order to make them potable.
And of course, the eating habits of the parents prior to and during pregnancy (dad is being targeted as having an impact on this as well). I think that research on all of the above would be a good start to finding out the cause of increased autism.
Noted
It's naive to think that the fact that there is no autism in your family with closely-spaced kids, or that a first-born in your family with autism proves anything whatsoever. All the scientists are saying is that there's an increased RISK. Most kids conceived within a year of their elder sibling's birth will not be autistic, and your own experience doesn't have any bearing on that. I don't know whether the study's findings are valid or not, but you should be aware that the scientific method looks at statistical relationships, not a handful of personal accounts.
Needs more study.
login to add your comment
use your care2 login
add your comment
20