1/3rd of people diagnosed with ASD are non-verbal.
56% would have an IQ below 85, 83% would have a other developmental, neurologic, chromosomal, and genetic conditions, with down syndrome, fragile X syndrome and tuberous sclerosis accounting for about 10% of these.
Overall this varies based on how many things you tack into the ASD, with PDD-NOS being thrown out of the DSM in 2013 it would take probably another decade if the needle moved.
Your statistics don't support your claim. Non-verbal people can use toilets. People with an IQ less than 85% can learn to use toilets. 'Developmental, neurologic, chromosonal and genetic conditions, includes ADHD and dyslexia, neither of which prevents the autonomous use of toilets.
Also, all three of these studies were conducted either before or shortly after the release of the DSM V, and explicitly use the DSM VI diagnostic criteria for autism.:
"Although new diagnostic criteria became available in 2013, the children under surveillance in 2014 would have grown up primarily under the DSM-IV-TR definitions for ASD, which are prioritized in this report."
You seem to be arguing that the relaxed criteria of the DSM V is invalid because the studies on people diagnosed with the stricter methods suggest a more severe condition. This is circular reasoning.
14% of the population have an IQ below 85. It's low, but not to the point of being a disability.
> 83% would have a other developmental, neurologic, chromosomal, and genetic conditions
What qualifies as a "condition" for the purpose of that statistic? What's the percentage for the general population? Frankly, if you actually include all genetic conditions, I'd be surprised if much less than 100% of the general population have one.
Also, all three of these studies were conducted either before or shortly after the release of the DSM V, and explicitly use the DSM VI diagnostic criteria for autism.:
"Although new diagnostic criteria became available in 2013, the children under surveillance in 2014 would have grown up primarily under the DSM-IV-TR definitions for ASD, which are prioritized in this report."
You seem to be arguing that the relaxed criteria of the DSM V is invalid because the studies on people diagnosed with the stricter methods suggest a more severe condition. This is circular reasoning.