Autistic traits 'spread widely'

Post Reply New Topic

It seems autistic traits / aspergers may be more widespread than people generally think:

Article on BBC website:

Full article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7841808.stm

If that study is true then it means that we can blame society a large amount for the problems in our life.

Last edited by Kangoogle on 21 Jan 2009, 2:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Maybe someday I won't be considered on the spectrum anymore since I'm mild.

traits or symptoms labeled as autism can have explainations or causes that are not related to autism.

a person whose traits or symptoms are a direct result of autism isn't any less autisic if someone else shows similar traits or symptoms that are not related to autism.



to blame is always a choice and it's also a matter of choice where the blame should be placed. generally, if you look at the thing that you consider to be worthy of the blame, you can go one step deeper and find something else to blame. so really, anyone can blame anyone for anything. what is never clear is when it is actually justified.

it is true that most of he problems that autistics have are a direct result of how they respond to the world or how the world responds to them.

We shall overcome.

If one end of the spectrum begins at nt, one would expect folks with only a trait or two on that end. I can see what I assumed were AS traits in myself that I now realize my otherwise very nt mom has. I also assume that I got my AS from my dad, who almost certainly had it, as did his father. Not sure about Shayne's statement that they are no less autistic just because an nt has them--perhaps these just make them human traits that some folks have, period. Nature doesn't care what we call something or how we categorize it; it exists, however we want to interpret it.

NB: According to one of the researchers who was involved in this study, "...drawing a dividing line between those with autism and the rest of the population involves taking an arbitrary decision."

This makes it quite stickier when you try to wipe out autistics via abortion. Where do you draw the line? At 51% autistic? There is an arbitrary cut-off point between autistic and non-autistic in the current classification scheme. There is no fundamental difference, but a continuum of traits. A spectrum. The world is not divided in "NT's" and "Aspies/Auties." People are people, and people are not all alike.

i've thought about this, i've met people with aspergers who have appeared normal and had normal lives yet they would fall under the spectrum meaning they'd be aborted if the plan to wipe us out took place, people want perfection and power but no NT out there who falls into those categories thinks those with any autism spectrum disorder have the potential to.

something about the article that's got on my nerves is this:

why the hell does everyone think we need to be stupid because we have disorders? it's a stereotype that's starting to really p*ss me off

Is there a specific set of genetic markers for autism? And if so, basing abortion decisions on such a set of markets might abort the next Isaac Newton who was probably an Aspie.

Abortion should be a last resort for saving a woman's life. Birth control is preferable.

ruveyn

i would suggest making the cut-off 101%. if you are more autistic than you are a human being then you don't deserve the right to live.

*pictures a rainbow squirrel saying: Follow me*