This.
I was following the DSM back in the day and many thought; as did I, lumping them together created funding for Aspies that otherwise didn't exist. When science screws up, it gets back on track eventually as long as it's still science - if it does not, then it is no longer science. I've been tracking the topic for 20 years; before the fads or most psychologists even knew about Aspergers (or forgot about in school; back when rates were estimated to be 1 in 100k in the late 90s.)
With more information from this move I must say I am surprised it's only about a decade before the push back has begun. That said, I have spent more than 10 years arguing against all this stuff; as parents fished around for excuses for their brats to get special treatment; often instead of therapy (or the easier therapy: drugs.)
Before the DSM, there was a huge study showing genetic correlation with Aspergers and this tracks with my family. It's not causal; however, when you show zero correlation that IS proof, or causal disproof. That is what happened with Autism. Therefore, the two do not share a common cause and do not belong together. This did come up at the time, but didn't convince the politics of the committee. Besides it also being far too broad and everything that broad after a decade of study should be split into more detail...or what was all that work discovering?
Furthermore, mercury exposure is a real problem and the symptoms in children are nearly the same as classic Autism and today's broad Autism would fit even more. This has been proven out in my family, as a high functioning classic autistic who would bash his head against the wall etc. had a rapid growth spurt and afterwards lost nearly all symptoms. Some think it was therapy; which is ridiculous, for starters, because there was none going on for at least a year before the growth spurt. You don't just "get over" real autism; but this kid did...because his textbook autism disappeared it wasn't really autism. Not that treatment wasn't useful when the symptoms were present; and the diagnosis is still good because having developed under those conditions, he is still not normal but also not an aspie; we lack proper therapy to train his brain to be fully recovered from his childhood experience and once proper diagnosis exists that can be done...in a generation or two...
Also, I have a relative labeled as an Aspie Autistic who had a head injury as an infant - the behavior is more aligned with that (or mild BPD) but it doesn't get special treatment so the mother shopped around for an autistic diagnosis and found one.