This is a question that's been bugging me ever since 9-year-old Hannah Poling's family received a settlement from the Vaccine Court. Evidently the combination of an underlying mitochondrial disorder and an unsually large number of vaccines led to "autism-like features" for which, it was agreed, the Polings should be compensated.
Just yesterday, David Kirby wrote this in the Age of Autism blog:
...Dr. Julie Gerberding and others took to the airwaves to proclaim that Hannah’s case was, 1) Extremely rare, 2) An inherited, genetic condition that would have lead to regressive encephalopathy anyway, and 3) Without any bearing on the etiology of ASD or any relationship whatsoever to the court’s other cases of autism (which Hannah did not have, we were falsely told: She just had “autism like features.”)