Does AS exist?

Post Reply New Topic

So, the title probably made the thread appear more controversial than what I'd want it to be. I got to say, it is clear that there are people out there that have the traits designed in the diagnosis criteria, They were diagnosed as Aspies because they fullfill that criteria, there are also people out there that read about the traits and recognize themselves. Etc.

The question is, does AS really exists as a brain condition/setup, a gene or something like that, which we could actually recognize without trying to find some traits in a guide that reads like "At least 2/4/3 of the following:" ?

Of course it exists.. nerrr

One problem is that we are so different.

Does it?

Is it more than an attempt from normal people to invent a common tag for people who match that list of "symptoms"?

We dont just crap on and on for no reason

I think it's likely in the future that the notion of the "autism spectrum" will be obsolete and no longer used. Since we are grouped together by symptoms, the groups will change if/when science determines actual causes.

Yes. Well, in so much as there are many traits of it which vary from person to person, but can still be defined by a variety of common traits, too.
By my understanding, that's the way 'spectrum-conditions' work.
Just try to think of it as a broad category rather than a singular, easily definable condition.

There's many who state that it doesn't exist, insofar that it's Autism, and perhaps recognizing less severely affected cases of such; there's studies and research to back this up.

It should be noted that the diagnostic concept of Asperger's was added to promote research into the condition, and to see if it's worth keeping it as separate from Autism. People around here will probably remember how Childhood Autism was moved back into Infantile Autism, for when they did studies, the two conditions were the same thing in severity and outcome (Childhood Autism would be seen as "severe" Asperger's today).

To answer your question, they just found out that it's nearly unique to each individual based on physiological evidence, but they're all closely related; kinda like the overt manifestations of the disorders, i.e., similar symptoms, but they differ from person to person in various ways.

"Daniel's Autism" would describe me, just as "[insert name here] Autism" would describe someone else. We share a common theme, but how that theme was painted is a little different [or an entirely different colour].

Do you mean that like a common cause? Or an essentially common cause, with variations?

I think the test so far say there is no identifiable common cause. Yet?

Personally I think there will be several causes that are sometimes extremely diverse, sometimes the same in how they appear to the outside.

2 people whose ASDs look strikingly similar may have very differently caused ASDs.

That one has at least become obvious by now. A person with an ASD that looks the same as another person's ASD may actually have an identifiable chromosomal cause while the other person doesn't have that.

Quick lets all copyright our own Autism, so we can be remembered in the future and create a system of calling people different austisms which will infact anoy a lot of them as there is no clear formula for names.

So, AS could be a description of a symptom, rather than the cause of the condition - kinda like how a fever is a symptom of multiple conditions? So the cause of each of our problems may not have the same root, but the same effect.

If by 'exist' you mean...identifiable by a particular chromosome like with downsyndrome...then no. I hope it is identified eventually. I do beleive it is genetic...obviously runs in my family. In my case, I can only have faith that it does exist. I have studied mental disorders for most of my life. I seem to have bits and peices of all sorts of nasty disorders. Since learning about Asperger's, I am quite releived to find a diagnosis which contains all of those peices. It is nice to know that what I have is not really so bad.

aethra-

I almost think it's like that, but in a different way. For me, it's like thinking you have a headache, then a stomach problem, then lets say you feel a little "weak." These are the "symptoms" of a bigger problem, each has it's cause, maybe they cause each other, like a chain reaction, or maybe they manifest each other when parts of the body begin to have problems. I don't know, but when you describe a "flu," all these problems present themselves.

OK, now, before I read about AS, I thought I was "depressed" in a way, I did not understand the world, and never seemed to "fit." Well, thought that suited, and never thought much bout that, didn't even think I should be "treated" for it, cos well-why couldn't I fix it myself, you know? Anyway, there were times I'd be running like a son of a gun, I'd have a "mission" of some sort, that, well, could be described as a "manic" phase-this "thing" my mind was on HAD to be finished, and I expended much in the way of effort to get "it" done. So I figured I possibly had a funny case of manic depression, or was "bipolar," wouldn't have been such a far stretch cos my grandmother was. (Am starting to wonder if "manic depression" is actually a symptom of asperger's with a name and ignorance of the other signs of AS. Hm.) Ok, now what about my emotions? I was depressed for much of my life, and always wondered how I could be so different-I did not cry, did not laugh, did not "know" how to interact "naturally" and well, had to "think" about everything. I figured "something" in my head was missing, possibly I was a "sociopath," as a TON of stuff really didn't move me at the time. Then I had things that did move me, to extreme anger. Hm, wonder if I'm insane? Being alone in your thoughts for long periods of time can cause this line of thought...

Anyway, when I discovered AS, I was pretty frickin amazed. Every one of my "explanations" for myself over the years was rationalization, a way to live the next day without having to constantly wonder (which usually failed-I always "wondered"). Now, AS is known to me, well, everything is clear. I've only listed some of the things off top of my head, but the way this "fits" my life story is enough for me. I was "hesitant" at first, in assigning my "wierdness" to AS, didn't wanna get too hopeful. Also, seemed like the "perfect" excuse for many of my "unsavory" traits. However, I've come to accept it as part of me, and have become aware of many of the things that HAVE to be fixed, and also many of the things I should be cultivating.

Personally, AS is like my signature says. It doesn't have to be a "true disease" or syndrome, or be "real," it's already done it's magic in me, and I feel TOO GOOD. I always felt the freak, and now, well, I don't. If they decided AS isn't real, wouldn't bug me, I've learned who I am, and that I'm "acceptable." That's been my problem throughout my entire life-feeling as if I was unacceptable, despite many people's attempts to sway my thoughts otherwise.

Does it matter? People with these traits really do exist. And really are different from most people. And there are people with these traits who really do have difficulties with things that are easy for most people.

I don't think there's any absolute difference between NTs and autisms. I think there's a lot of variation and they blend into each other. But that doesn't make the differences less real, or the experiences of these people who are different less real. And that doesn't change that understanding oneself as autistic or aspie helps one understand oneself and how one differs from others.

For understanding others, too. Like, for me, is my friend S really autistic/aspie? I don't know. I don't care. What does matter is that thinking about him on those terms, helps me understand some of his behaviors; it helps me understand that his seeming self-centeredness isn't narcissim, or lack of caring, but just something innate in how he sees the world, and his relationship with it. (Unfortunately, it's easier to put into words what it isn't than what it is.)

It's real enough to be a very useful concept.

That's the best way to look at it, "It's real enough to be a useful concept."

Rest of the post I agree with as well.

If we say it's not identifiable, then we move backwards in time and erase the progress made since 1991, when it was added to the DSM IV. Not a good thing.

It's so new and we're contemplating it's extinction?

It's quite simple, really. We make discoveries, attempt to explain unusual behavior in order to assist person through greater understanding, tolerance and appreciation. Otherwise, a person with autistic-like behaviors is deemed less than human and intolerable to most people. Sad, but true. Just look at what we did to kids with autism in the past.

Higher functioning wasn't even considered. This person (AS) was psychotic or disturbed and placed into an institution.

The question should not even be considered. If you are diagnosed with Aspergers/HFA or have a family member diagnosed, then you realize the importance of it as a Diagnostic Category in the Manuel. You realize the importance of the label.

Yes, in my mind, it has to exist for my son. Otherwise, he would never be understood properly.
Thank goodness I understand so I can advocate for him.

equinn