Accepting Autism is Like a Traffic Jam

Post Reply New Topic

Woot!! !

Which is probably why a 2001 study from the University of Tokyo found that areas with 'optimally fluoridated' water apparently had higher levels of some cancers. They stopped short of claiming causation, but concluded that the possibility that fluoride increases cancer risk requires further consideration.

Regression analysis of cancer incidence rates and water fluoride

Fluoridated water has no dental benefits for adults with fully formed teeth. It can interfere with thyroid function.

I thought that was pretty amazing. The guy from TAS was pretty bold in saying that Best and friend(s) were trying to sneak back in with another one or two of his blogs (trying to get them added).

That surprises you, Diva?

Every so often I'll take a look and see who's talking about my sites/domains. I just found this post.

I had no idea that blog bothered people so much. I think it's offensive, but if I deleted everything I thought was offensive I'd be very busy Anyway, I put up a "contact us" page. If you see any other sites/blogs like that, just send a note. As much as I'd like to, I don't always review them beyond the first paragraph or two. I would rather rely on the "voting public" to determine ranking.

It would be nice to see WrongPlanet.net in the listing.

I actually sent an invitation to WrongPlanet.net to list the site, but didn't receive a response. As I've said before, I think Asperger's should be removed from the "autism spectrum", and be considered it's own unique label. However, most of the world still looks as Asperger's as a form of autism. I think it would make an awesome addition to the list.

TAS

This site isn't only for people with Asperger's dxes anyway.

Even if Asperger's is separate from the usually-diagnosed autism (and if it is, then so were Kanner's original patients, given that a few of them could today be diagnosed with Asperger's), it doesn't mean it has to be removed from the spectrum any more than Rett's does just because it's a unique form of autism, or PDD-NOS for that matter. Why is autism-with-early-and-more-typical-speech (i.e. Asperger's) special among all the other forms it can take?

I disagree on the spectrum thing.

Either folks have to stop using the word "autism" and start using correct labels for the individual, or we need to start breaking out the different pieces of the spectrum and dissolve it all together. It causes confusion, which in turn causes problems.

For instance, whenever I go to a forum and I read someone talking about the bad side of autism, some aspie always pops up with some discrimination rant, and then starts talking about how wonderful autism is.

Do you have any idea how angry those words make the caregivers of low functioning autistics?

Asperger's is special because aspies can lead productive lives without assistance. Most others on the spectrum can't. That alone is reason enough.

well, actually, it was philogiston interacting with aether caused by friction from the crystal spheres that hold the planets in space. Lysenko proved this genetically back in the 30s, and results go back to Piltdown Man in the primitive English countryside

I have a dilema; I work at a drug company. I could ask, but then I'd have to reveal my condition.

Thimerosol is not to blame. Most of us had certain but overlooked symptoms in infancy, before 20 shots. Correlation between getting the shots and presenting the symptoms does not imply causation.

Even if "they" did it, I would like to thank them for making me who I am.

I still can't believe you get 20 shots or whatever it is!!

Absolutely ridiculous...

I hear you, TopAutismSites. The problems with labels are really horrible for those with LFA, their caregivers, and others on the spectrum. And yes, normally it's an Aspie out on a rant about how wonderful their AS is, hiding behind the blanket term of "autistic," and treating AS as being of equity to LFA.

I'm an Aspie myself, and I can't justify that kind of behaviour. Hell, in the past I even did do that kind of stuff, for which I am now ashamed.

All in all, I support that kind of action, actively trying to make such a positive change. I think it's amoral and unjustifiable, and the people who do it seriously misrepresent those with low functioning autism. In fact, I know of a thread on another forum that would probably interest you.

http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/showthr ... ?tid=11489

Anyways, I fully back using correct labels, as it prevents a great deal of confusion, and makes it no longer justifiable in any measure for Aspies to speak over LFAs to talk about the joys of Autism in the name of advocacy.

I agree; I know how unbearable LFA can be. Asperger's is bearable, it's ok, you learn to deal with it and if you're anything like me you pass as 'normal' without really thinking about it - it can be a good thing rather than bad.

BUT.

If you're like that - like I am - you can't say 'autism is ok, look, whee, look at me, woohoo, I'm normalish!' because that's just heartbreaking for those with/those who live with those who have LFA. You need to distinguish between the two - 'Asperger's syndrome FOR ME is ok, whee, look at me, I'm normalish'. I don't think differentiating entirely would be helpful as they are all the same spectrum and roughly the same disorder (just to different 'strengths'), but when these 'aspies' go around shouting the joy of it from the rooftops you definitely need to keep that distinction clear, because for some people it most certainly is hell.

This whole 'we don't need a cure' thing is just rubbish - how about we make it a choice, so that those who rightly want one can have it, and those who don't feel they need or want it don't have to. There are huge differences in capabilities and quality of life along the one spectrum; you can't ignore one in favour of the other.

I'm absolutely with you on the fact that As and Kanner's autism cannot be thought of as the same or similar in many cases.

However, a problem I see with labels like HFA and LFA. What is LFA and what HFA in essentials? Does a child (or adult) have to do and be certain things to be LFA or HFA (or just 'medium autistic')? As long as the terms are not officially printed down in the ICD/DSM there can't be any real definitions. (No doubt, a print wouldn't make them any right and correct, just officially recognised). Maybe it's the autism in me, but I hate using terms that aren't exactly defined. People use the terms different. Is it about mental retardation and IQs, self-help skills, being non-verbal or verbal, being able to communicate, having severe routines?

Because I wouldn't know what to call a boy that is not quite autistic (it would be pdd or pdd-nos, where I life it's a-typical autism) non-verbal, no mental retardation and very intelligent, lacking in self-help skills, can go to kindergarten and so on. And that's the example I'm thinking about the whole time.

And saying there are official HFA and LFA (and maybe finally MFA) diagnoses would be fatal to children and adults everywhere in the spectrum, because governments could refuse help and restrict money for therapies that are needed very much by pointing out that a LFA may be MFA or HFA. It's hard to get therapies even for young children that are already unofficially labelled as severely autistic. Government just refuses.

Can't we stick to autism spectrum that ranges from mild to severe and adding to that additional disorders and disabilities?


Uhm, just for the record, I do know teenagers that will need assistance in later life although they have Asperger's. There are enough people with AS that also need assistance, it's just an overall better outcome, not a guarantee.

Exactly why I think you can really only say "Speaking for myself..." with regards to your experiences. Yes, I have AS, but I also cope very well and live a 'normal' life with my quirks alongside - how could I be expected to speak on behalf of someone who can't hold down a job, or doesn't have friends, or is far more 'low-functioning' than I am?

...I can't, exactly. So we need to be clear on the point that it is a spectrum and everyone is at a different place along it. We all have things in common - hence the syndrome - but there will always be someone better or worse off with it than yourself.

This kind of issue has sparked quite a bit of heated debates and controversy. The person who originally posted this thread, in fact, has a son diagnosed LFA, and people with AS go onto his blog constantly to defend "Autism," which for them is AS, and to Fore Sam it's LFA. It really explains a lot about why Fore is so offended and agressive when it comes to Aspies on his blog accusing him of everything from child abuse to Nazism. Especially when the Aspies get self-righteous and talk down on him for wanting his son to be able to live his own life, not in an institution, or a group home, but actually living to the same standard as any other person. In essence, a cure.

And so the problems just snowball.

Distinction between the two is definitely important.

Sora;
I agree. There is a definite problem. Another problem is, I don't know how it can be resolved.
I think possibly a thorough, individual-based system might work okay, though it'd probably have a high cost for upkeep, and there are probably factors not yet considered which may adversely affect it's effectiveness.

It's a lot more complicated than that, as are the supposedly "simple" distinctions on the spectrum.

The funny thing is, I know one person who uses "We don't need a cure" to say exactly what you're saying. That autistic people don't need a cure if we don't want one, but if we want one we should of course be able to get one.

And as for the rest of what everyone's saying, I feel like I'm between a rock and a hard place because it's really easy in some sense to say that autism is wonderful, that autism is horrible, that autism is different for each person in terms of its wonderfulness or horribleness or combination thereof and that therefore we should only ever speak for ourselves and never, say, organize politically together to accomplish specific goals that apply to autistic people in general (while all the while there are large organizations of primarily parents that are making political decisions for all of us no matter what any of us say)... because while all those things sound different from each other, they all hinge on the idea that the main problem is whether something called "autism" is good or bad for you in a medical sense, and that's not what my beliefs on autism are about and I know no way of stating them in a short period of time so I can't other than to say they're different than this and not accounted for in the debates I'm seeing here.

So instead of frustrating myself trying to post it I'm just going to register my opinion as "different than this" and point out that I don't know how to say it in words and probably wouldn't have the energy to type it if I did.