The rise in autism is very steep, and is getting steeper

The rise in autism -- the quietest apocalypse?

Autism began to exponentially grow circa the mid 1970’s. There are numerous reasons that caused this rise. Changes in diagnostic practices, awareness, and other ‘social factors’ have played a significant part.

There have been numerous scientific studies into this. Most all I have read claim that anywhere between 30-60% of the rise can be accounted for by social factors.

However, that still leaves a large portion of the rise up to an actual increase. How much of the rise is ‘real’ is uncertain to the scientific community, but I did some math this morning and came across something that really concerns me.

I put the data points in excel from the autism studies provided by the Center for Disease control.
The equation for the exponential growth curve is y=1E-106e^0.1193x with an R^2=0.9992
You can write this as (1*10^(-106))e^(.1193*x) in a scientific calculator
By plugging in the year where X is, you get how many kids have autism per year.

For example, the graph says that in 2001 it was reported 1 in 250 kids had autism
By plugging in 2001 where X is, we get 0.0047.
0.004 goes into 1 250 times, so that means 1 in 250 kids have autism in that year.

Let’s plug in other years and see what we get
2001: 0.004, or 1/250 kids
2005: 0.007, or 1 in 143 kids
2010: 0.013, or 1 in 77 kids
2020: 0.045, or 1 in 22 kids
2030: 0.150, or 1 in 6 kids
2040: 0.495, or 1 in 2 kids
2050: 1.633, or for every 1 neurotypical kid there will be 1.633 autistic
2060: 5.386, or for every 1 neurotypical kid there will be 5.386 autistic
2070: 17.76, or for every 1 neurotypical kid there will be 17.76 autistic
2080: 58.55, or for every 1 neurotypical kid there will be 58.55 autistic
2090: 193.05, or for every 1 neurotypical kid there will be 193.05 autistic
2100: 636.49, or for every 1 neurotypical kid there will be 636.49 autistic

How much of this is real? The increase is going up so fast. Something has to give, and soon.

In a worst case scenario – if these numbers arn’t lying – then in a matter of a single generation our species will change dramatically.

Since some of the side effects of ultrasound exposure are likened to symptoms seen in autism, is it possible that ultrasound could be a contributor?  There have been multiple studies bringing this up.

Reckless overuse of ultrasound during pregnancy


Obstetric practices in NZ follow close on the heels of those in larger countries like the USA. Most women in NZ now have at least 4 ultrasound scans during their pregnancy with at least 2 of these being performed in the first trimester. In NZ most women access fully subsidized pregnancy/maternity care and those who pay privately for obstetric care still have their (usually much greater number of) scans publicly subsidized. The continuing increase in ultrasound scanning is greatly increasing the cost of maternity care to the NZ taxpayer with no commensurate improvement in outcomes. Like the rest of the developed world, where ultrasound is readily available, we are seeing an increase in autistic spectrum disorders and also things like tongue and lip tie. More regulation, research and consumer education is urgently needed. We hope the USA will lead the charge to ensure the safety of this overused technology.

A comment from the petition at

I find it curious that the industry behind ultrasound promotes such overuse of the technology despite warnings whispered.  It either speaks of poor education, or grand, widespread incompetence.

It is costing taxpayer money in subsidized systems.  Tons of it.  For no reason.

I agree, Brenda.  There is a lot of work to do.

Prenatal sonography – the urgent need for more research and better regulation

Prenatal sonography – the urgent need for more research and better regulation


Despite ultrasound being utilized in nearly every modern pregnancy, its safety is highly questionable.  Many parents are told that ultrasound is completely safe, but this is not science fact.  The unfortunate truth is that no sonographer or doctor knows what ultrasound exposure will do to your baby — they can’t, no scientist fully understands yet.

This petition was written as an attempt to raise awareness of this issue and to gather people together.  Shortcomings in safety regulation are just one part of a greater combination of problems with obstetrical care.  It seems like women are losing control of their pregnancies more and more, and money seems to lead modern practice more than conservative methods to ensure patient safety.  Practitioners receive more pay in exchange for encouraging patients to receive more treatments than absolutely necessary.

Today was a landmark day for our petition.  We raised nearing 500 signatures in a single day.  Thank you, everybody.  If you have not, please sign and share:

Have you heard of

Have you heard of

Independent researcher, Duke alumni, and career engineer Mrs. Parrish Hirasaki has been investigating the connection between ultrasound and the rise in autism for years, now.

Her website is meticulously organized, very readable, and clearly presents scientific evidence supporting the possibility that ultrasound could be linked to negative health effects.

Because epidemiology is untenable, this is possible.  More research is needed.

Sign this petition to vie for sonogram safety!

Sign this petition to vie for sonogram safety!

Please sign this petition to vie for changes to ensure prenatal ultrasound is safe in clinical practice.

Numerous potentially harmful side effects of fetal-US exposure have been found, but more research is needed to investigate risks associated with practice.  Scientists cannot perform epidemiology because practitioners are not required to collect detailed data about their scans.

Also, did you know that there are no regulations requiring ultrasound equipment be maintained and properly calibrated?

These issues need to be addressed urgently for the safety of our kids.