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

Also ignoring improvements in diagnostics.

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

Now show the testing rate over the same time period!

Autism diagnosis rates. Quite a difference.

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..

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.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

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.

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).

Cool but

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.

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

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

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.

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.

....................... 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.

prevalence of cancer has increased ∞% since 0 BC

Well the cure is clearly to stop testing.

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.

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

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

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

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"

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.