The autism spectrum is now so broad that anyone could have the condition, an expert who pioneered research into the condition Prof Dame Uta Frith said.

Prof Dame Uta Frith, an emeritus professor in cognitive development at University College London, said autism had become a “catch-all diagnosis” for a range of conditions and that “anyone of any age or intelligence level can be diagnosed with autism if they meet certain criteria”. Dame Uta was one of the architects of the “autism spectrum” in the 1960s and 70s which was devised to include the “not-so-typical cases” But she now argues this has become “too broad”, having previously said it was so inclusive it was “completely meaningless”.

In a new essay, Dame Uta has warned that autism has become a part of “popular culture” and that there is an “almost magnetic attraction” to being labelled with the condition. Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), as it is medically known, is a condition that affects how people communicate and understand others, as well as how they think, learn and respond to stimuli such as sounds and light.

More than 270,000 are waiting for an NHS autism assessment, with demand for a diagnosis surging since the pandemic. Writing in the Psychological Medicine journal, Dame Uta said the definition has now widened to include people with milder traits and warned that social media had “spread simplified or misleading ideas”.

The 85-year-old said: “Autism wasn’t always defined this way – a sort of catch-all diagnosis for a huge variety of conditions. “When it was first identified in the 1940s, it referred to a small group of children with severe difficulties in social interaction, communication and behaviour,” she said.

“Over time, the definition has widened to include people with milder traits and no language or learning problems. “Today, anyone of any age or intelligence level can be diagnosed with autism if they meet certain criteria.”

Dame Uta said it was “no longer just a medical term – it has become part of popular culture. Social media, films and online communities have helped people share experiences, but they have also spread simplified or misleading ideas.”

She said the introduction of the “idea of ‘neurodiversity'” means that people are encouraged to see autism as a “difference rather than a disorder. While this helps reduce stigma, it also creates tension: if autism is not a disorder, why use a medical diagnosis?”

The German-born developmental psychologist suggested the rise in diagnosed cases could be caused by a “desire for inclusion” and a reliance on patients self-reporting symptoms. In addition, there has been an acceptance of “masking”, a term used to describe people with autism suppressing traits of the condition to blend in, which she rejects as being a unique feature of autism.

She said these had “all led to a lowering of the diagnostic threshold”, while numbers had also been boosted by people self-diagnosing and “a search for identity”. Dame Uta said that the “shift from a precise clinical into a vague, culturally amplified identity category” had generated “massive demand” for assessments in teenagers and adults “with an almost magnetic attraction” to the autism label. She called for “greater precision” in diagnosing the condition, along with a “fresh attempt” to pinpoint the cause of distress experienced by many late-diagnosed cases.

“For example, specific therapies could address sensory issues and could prevent burnout,” the essay suggested. “There are ways to reduce the symptoms of anxiety disorder and depression. There are also ways to build resilience in the face of significant social stress. None of these approaches are likely to be appropriate for early diagnosed cases, where different types of support are needed. Splitting up the spectrum would ultimately prevent misdiagnosis.”

The intervention comes after research by Princeton University published in the Nature Genetics journal last month suggested there were four subtypes of autism. From a group of 5,000 people with autism, the researchers were able to identify four distinct categories.

Those with “social and behavioural challenges”, which affected 37 per cent of the group, included those with higher rates of ADHD and anxiety but no significant developmental delays.

Those with “mixed ASD and developmental delays”, meaning they had higher rates of language and intellectual impairments, affected 19 per cent of the group.

A third group with “moderate challenges” with mild symptoms across most categories affected 34 per cent.

A fourth group comprising the remaining 10 per cent, were “broadly affected” and had severe behavioural and development difficulties.

The Telegraph Tuesday August 4, 2026