Is self-diagnosis reliable?

Post Reply New Topic

So just to make sure I'm understanding the just of what you're saying, the Scientific Method isn't set in stone. There are many ways to use it. Although it's not perfect, it helps us move in the right direction?

Mostly the just of what I was saying as a reply to an earlier post (there was earlier discussion on whether Asperger's may not be scientific) was whether something is scientific doesn't have as much to do with whether it's been proven, since Science can change with new evidence, but rather if it's "falsifiable". Since many aspects of Asperger's in the scientific community, not layman community, are falsifiable and in peer-review journals, then I would think it's scientific, even if it can change with new evidence (which is the point of falsification).

AS is a part of science as it's observing the behaviour of how one object interacts with other objects and itself in its dimension. It's no different than how a T-cell interacts with a virus.

Moving on,

Sometimes accurate if you read and study enough, and I don't just mean looking at the diagnostic criteria and going through some subjective list someone posted and applying it to yourself; read the clinical textbooks, as they describe it in far greater depth and also how they [the symptoms] actually manifest.

Professional diagnosis is said to be higher than 90% accurate (current figure).

How do you define whether or not something is falsifiable? You can't figure out a way to falsify something until after you have already applied logical reasoning and come up with something that you can predict and test to see if it is true. It doesn't suddenly become science one you figured out a way to make a prediction and somebody attempted to falsify it, it was science the entire time you were applying a systematic process to increase knowledge.

Science is the systematic knowledge of facts or truths arranged in a manner allowing for the establishment of general principles. Anybody can make predictions about anything and then falsify those predictions, a peer review journal or a peer review by other layman, the important thing is somebody pays attention and checks for mistakes. You might want to research just what role peer-review journals have in different fields and how much politics and bad science is involved in certain ones. Many are ways to monetize knowledge, you have to pay to get something published in it and you have to pay to get access to the journal. Lots of flash in the pan crazy new theories that were "Published in Scientiferotic Americana Monthapalooza!!" to sell a book and hock your fad "cure" to unsuspecting patients.

Human beings are Human beings and do Human things. They always have and my inductive reasoning predicts they always will. This is not falsifiable because it is a tautology, but it is science and sound reasoning.

I wonder, how do they calculate that? It's not as if g-d comes down and says "you got that one that right, got that one wrong."

Probably draw a set number of people from the diagnosed population and then have them reassessed by a panel of professionals.

Is there a thread or study about self-diagnosis which has been tested against official diagnosis of Asperger's? Seems the question "Is self-diagnosis reliable?" is being answered by opinions rather than observed data. To do this study "official diagnosis" would need to define the nature of the official ie specialist or not.

What is the any anecdotal evidence? Those who have self-diagnosed and then been officially validated or not? Maybe the evidence is that self-diagnosis of Asperger's is reliable, regardless of who it offends.

I might point out that from the dawn of time to about twenty years ago the reliability of official diagnosis of Asperger's was a complete, abismal, total, unforgivable failure. There wasn't one because it did not even have one. Society and the medical profession was quite happy with our place in it as fools and outcasts. You got it? THE LONG OVERALL RECORD OF OFFICIAL DIAGNOSIS HAS BEEN INDEFENSIBLE FAILURE. So please have some consideration for the older people who's lives have been destroyed and out of frustration are saying "I'll do it myself."

Last edited by flamingshorts on 09 Jun 2009, 12:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

An anecdote:

Self-diagnosed then diagnosed. So accurate in my case.

There's one.

It depends on the individual whether or not it will be reliable. If the person is a skeptic, and isn't just looking to jump on something so they can say they have it, then they will almost always be correct if they do conclude that they have it. If the person is a hypochondriac who is constantly thinking they have this or that, there is a good chance they will be wrong. For myself, I am normally very skeptical about such things, but when presented with the information, and after talking with other aspies, there was absolutely no room for doubt.

Hmm, self-referential, though; errors possible in the original sample, corrected by a process that is also produces errors. The false positives would presumably approach a stable value, but false negatives can't be determined by that process at all (won't be present to be re-evaluated). A lack of control group problem, I suppose.

Thankyou Danielismyname.
Sample size is a bit small (only one) but so far so good.

^ Peer review layman science in action folks, isn't it a marvel?

Me-too.

No, but that there are several false positives from Dr's and several Accurate self diagnoses.


I don't understand that question?


Who said anything about questionnaires? I did several interviews with my family about myself now and myself as a child. My sisters and mum who i grew up with agree with my conclusion. My sister has a degree in early childhood education and aims to become a child psychologist and spent a lot of time with me discussing this and getting out her text books as we researched. I took some stupid questionnaires but take them with a HUGE grain of salt. It's information i know about myself, information i've discussed at length with my family. ?Keen observation ( ;P ) and self analysis of me as a child and me as an adult. I'm not pulling this out of my behind to show to everyone. Few people IRL and even relatively few in internet land know about my self discovery past "i don't do well socially" like i said to my mum, if i wanted this for the sake of self labeling, i would introduce myself as Emma the Aspie.


Naturally if one had use for a professional diagnosis, one would want to go to a specialist in the correct area.


I don't say ANYTHING to people, i don't go around discussing this unless i have a reason to explain my behavior or feelings on a matter. If i explain that i do specify i'm self diagnosed, but only on the initial exposure, if i talk about it thereafter i don't specify. Do diagnosed people specify "I have neurologist diagnosed Aspergers"?

Personally it's about self discovery, a means of healing from what i went through growing up, a means of coping and giving myself a break for the things in which i still find difficulty. Mostly, i'm learning about this for my daughters sake because it is her that needs the coping help right here and now, i am an adult now and i've found ways to cope or manage.

But i can't say it doesn't feel liberating to finally understand myself after so many years of wondering what was wrong with ME as a person that i went through all i did, i was the only common denominator so i was starting to conclude that i was one of those people who is horrible to be around, is a completely self centered a-hole and i just didn't see it because i was so self centered... i didn't believe that about myself, i know noone else who knows me believes that about me, but i just couldn't understand any other reason why.

It's not for you to try to call this faux because i haven't spoken to a completel stranger about myself and my life. Who knows me best, me and my family, or them and their medical degree? Don't get me wrong, diagnosis has a very important place, for some it is necessary and if i was able i probably would just out of sheer curiosity about what they'd tell me, but i can't and that's fine by me because like i said, its self discovery that matters to me for me at this point.

I do understand that wariness with which self diagnosis is approached, i think we are in the minority who have looked in depth enough at it because reaching any conclusion. But to group all of it under one "charade" banner is unfair.

What mental illnesses have symptoms so similar that they mimic some aspects of AS? I know schizophrenia and AS both have the flat effect and the social anxiety symptoms. Can you think of other examples?

Spot on! Beautifully explained! : )

Hallelujah!