The scary part to me is how the CDC chose to frame the new data. They put up a "10 things to know" (1) list to distill the data for the media and readers uninte

The scary part to me is how the CDC chose to frame the new data. They put up a "10 things to know" (1) list to distill the data for the media and readers uninterested in looking at the full study. One item in the top 10 highlights that 46% of these kids have average or above average IQ. What the CDC doesn't highlight in the top 10 is the 31% that are below! and the 23% that are 'borderline'. The glass half full (not even half) optimism dismisses the large amount of these kids who have a very serious condition. Kids that cannot speak, that wander and die, that will require lifelong treatment. Why does the CDC choose to highlight the minority with a future and not the majority that face a rough road ahead? The second issue with the Top 10 is that it only alludes to better diagnosis and awareness as a possibility for increases. It doesn't mention any other possibilities, although most in the community are aware of well-publicized studies pointing to environmental conditions that show connection. (2) 1 http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsautismdata/ http://www.cdc.gov/features/dsautismdata/ 2 http://time.com/25424/growing-evidence-that-autism-is-linked-to-pollution/ http://time.com/25424/growing-evidence-that-autism-is-linked...