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.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20431403 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6706a1.htm https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19268036
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.