The Truth About Autism: Scientists Reconsider

Post Reply New Topic

The Truth About Autism: Scientists Reconsider

The YouTube clip opens with a woman facing away from the camera, rocking back and forth, flapping her hands awkwardly, and emitting an eerie hum. She then performs strange repetitive behaviors: slapping a piece of paper against a window, running a hand lengthwise over a computer keyboard, twisting the knob of a drawer. She bats a necklace with her hand and nuzzles her face against the pages of a book. And you find yourself thinking: Who's shooting this footage of the handicapped lady, and why do I always get sucked into watching the latest viral video?

But then the words "A Translation" appear on a black screen, and for the next five minutes, 27-year-old Amanda Baggs — who is autistic and doesn't speak — describes in vivid and articulate terms what's going on inside her head as she carries out these seemingly bizarre actions. In a synthesized voice generated by a software application, she explains that touching, tasting, and smelling allow her to have a "constant conversation" with her surroundings. These forms of nonverbal stimuli constitute her "native language," Baggs explains, and are no better or worse than spoken language. Yet her failure to speak is seen as a deficit, she says, while other people's failure to learn her language is seen as natural and acceptable.

And you find yourself thinking: She might have a point.

Read the Article:The Truth About Autism: Scientists Reconsider

one tiny word struck me, different. That is it, people with ASD's are just different.
I haven't read it all yet but will be printing it off for ignorant ones.
Thanks for sharing the link

What's the truth about autism?

I have to admit, that article shocked me. Not because of what was said about people with autism being intelligent (I knew that already ), but rather because the scientists and researchers described there just sounded so unintelligent. I can't believe anyone would be so stupidly stubborn in clinging onto ideas that are obviously wrong and should be well outdated by now! I don't usually anything affect me like this, and always try to understand the views of others, but there's no way I can begin to understand how scientists can still believe that we're not intelligent. I hope that article and those videos can make at least some of the so-called "experts" realise what autism is really about!

People with autism can be mentally ret*d, and they can be of any other level of intelligence; I've seen some who're mentally ret*d, and well, they are. I've also seen someone who is mentally ret*d without autism, and well, he is mentally ret*d too.

Can we handle the truth? topic

One of my stims is tactile. I love the feel of certain fabrics, maybe not like Strapples, but same Spectrum thing. This is how I connect with my world, so I can certainly fathom what Amanda Baggs is telling people.

I also detest the feel of certain things, and let others know. Maybe this is not ;socially acceptable', but this is also how I connect, communicate, converse with reality.

The difference is that Amanda is nonverbal, in the way NTs understand the term. But this is Amanda's truth. And we have to understand.

Perhaps if NTs were to start touching fabrics and really getting a feel for them they would be more accepting to people like Amanda.

Well, except for the fact that you can't tell that kind of thing by looking at an autistic person. I mean, I'm sure it happens, and there's nothing wrong with it when it does. But the research they did showed that most of those labeled that way, didn't actually test that way when given unbiased testing.

I read the report (fluid intelligence). Doctor Kanner had a similar problem with standardized testing in one of his cases, I think it was the boy who liked trains; his IQ was in the 150s I believe (or some equally high number).

It still doesn't nullify the fact that there are autistic individuals with profound mental retardation who'd die if they weren't constantly cared for (I cannot remember the statistic, but it wasn't a really low figure).

Hell, I'd probably be dead now if I wasn't cared for, and I have a high IQ on standardized tests; I'd add self-helps skills to the tier of autistic intelligence, and it's one we all seem to lack to some extent (from none at all to an impaired level of such).

I don't understand this thread.

if you click on the underlined portion of this: The Truth About Autism: Scientists Reconsider

you can read the magazine article from WIRED

Merle

Yeah, and a lot of them don't actually have "profound mental retardation", they just have severe disabilities involving self-care and communication. Very different things. I know several people who were diagnosed that way, including one friend with a previous IQ of about 10, who's now measured at 130ish because she has a communication system. She still has all the same difficulty with other things, she just communicates better and hence tests better than she used to. You can't substitute "mental retardation" for difficulties taking care of oneself, if that were true then people with severe cerebral palsy would have it too.

For instance, my tested IQ has ranged from low-average/borderline (recent) to highly gifted (childhood), but my adaptive skills test around 47 (the test only went down to 40), with my scores in individual parts of the adaptive skills test ranging from the absolute bottom of the test to just extremely low. They're not related in autistic people.

And, yes, the majority of those considered to have intellectual disabilities, don't. There wouldn't be anything wrong with them if they did, but most test very differently when they get a communication system. The statistics you're relying on are pretty old. And saying a person needs frequent or constant assistance with most or all daily living tasks (I fall into that category), has nothing to do with saying they have an intellectual disability, in autistic people those two things are separate, and I doubt the actual occurrence of intellectual disability is higher in autistic people than the general population. Nor can you tell just because people need a lot of help, or can't communicate certain things well enough to take tests well.

And, yeah, nothing would be wrong if it were true, it's just not true.

I haven't read the article, but I saw the "In My Language" video for the first time a couple of days ago, and I was fascinated by it.

About statistics and mental retardation in autistic individuals...

I recently wondered whether any statistic claiming there are/are not more/less people with MR on the autistic spectrum can be valid. Isn't there a problem with diagnoses?

First of all, I keep coming back to the argument that people don't get an ASD diagnosis for not meeting the official criteria of AS (no speech delay), but for not meeting the unofficial and unfortunately, very prevailing diagnostic criteria of average to lower intelligence either. I mean that a person who's has no speech or just very limited speech, but is of average or above average intelligence often doesn't get the diagnosis here where I live because...

Then I noticed a strange trend of different people being diagnosed depending on their place of residence. Where I live, only the severe, as in 'most noticeable', cases are diagnosed. Elsewhere, many people are diagnosed with light AS already instead of being given just some random therapy (which is good no doubt, since they deserve adequate help just as much as anybody else does).

But don't these two things alone screw up statistics about IQ scores already? So that we actually don't know but have to guess about whether there's a prevalence of any IQ numbers on the spectrum? I'm just wondering, any thought welcome.
I think IQ scores from those on the spectrum are such a complicated topic.



And, oh, anbuend, apologise the curiosity please, but can an IQ of 10 be a valid statement or is a lower IQ a guess (based on observation without even a test), do you know this by chance?

the link to this was posted in another thread earlier this week...

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt58379.html

That was a really good article. I liked the video too. I wish I was an autism researcher. Autism is fascinating and there are so many interesting things about it to study.

me too