Now now, that's just a misrepresentation of reality.  At first glance, the summarized views of mainstream doctors and parents put forth above seem contrasting and different.  In actually, the both pretty much state the SAME EXACT purpose:

"We are in the process of figuring out the underlying and sole cause of Autism.  In the meantime, here are methods of how to deal with the present." 

If anything, that was just a cheap shot, especially considering how the author made a broad generalization that is in no way substantiated by any solid evidence.  ALL physicians prescribe drugs to treat Autism? 

Please, if anybody truly cares for their child, they would not resort to lies and misconstrued tactics in order to discover the ultimate cure. 

Very bad generalization, first of all...second of all, as drung888 said, the doctors' line and parents' line are essentially the same things, but you've worded it to depict them rather differently - the one difference is that you as parents have the chance to implement lifestyle changes to your child to experiment with what could improve his cognitive abilities in the context of autism.  The doctor does not and should not suggest what kinds of interventions to try based on anything other than medical evidence, therefore when medical evidence is weak, there is little that he or she can - and should do.  In other words, the doctor can be a source of information, but don't expect much more...and information, if you know how to sift through the good and the bad and undestand how to interpret it (which many people do not), can be easily found nowadays.  Because anyone can write anything on the internet, regulated websites that are upheld to standards by multiple groups within a community of experts are the most reliable and accessible.

I would disagree with prescribing drugs to handle the situation if there is no medical support for it, but to be honest, I don't know much about prescribing for autism - in fact, I have never heard of anyone prescribing for it so I trust that you've done your research before claiming that doctors, seemingly arbitrarily, prescribe.  But from what I do know, I would disagree with drug treatments. It has nothing to do with drugs being bad, but prescribing in the hopes of a drug doing good is not good enough...there has to be at least some significant support or logic to back it up...i.e. he or she should be able to defend the prescription order with facts.  At this point, there probably just aren't enough facts....that's researchers jobs, and yes, unfortunately research takes a time and funding.  Sometimes it pays off, and sometimes it doesn't...it could take 5 years, 10 years, or like you said, 25 years. 

By the way, you don't use "anecdotal evidence" to link autism to vaccines.  You look at statistical analysis.  The number of people who were vaccinated...the number of people among those vaccinated who became autistic, type of vaccine administered.  The number of people who weren't vaccinated but became autistic anyways.  Standard deviations...confidence intervals.  Only when statistical significance is shown, then a link can be established.  "Anecdotal evidence" is not only a weak way of establishing correlation, it's also biased.

"Overwhelming anectodal evidence"  LOL.  In the UK at one time there was 'overwhelming anecdotal evidence' that being an older female and possessing a black cat meant you were a witch. That caused a lot of suffering, people were even put to death from that and more 'evidence' that they were indeed engaged in the black arts.   You don't want to go back to those days of superstition do you?  It isn't helpful and is possibly harmful; you don't know how many children might have responded to the various interventions they might have learned about from the medical establishment but have been persuaded that this is the wrong path and the right one is the one dictated by 'overwhelming anecdotal evidence'.  Instead of setting up one group in opposition to the other, it could have been suggested that there are many avenues to explore in the treatment of this mysterious disorder. 

Its easy to manipulate people's emotions, but in my opinion, its not really an ethical thing to do when it concerns lives.  If there is solid evidence, the results will show in proper scientific research and those results will be able to be duplicated time and again.