I am confused , I am not sure anymore what is "HFA/AS''

Post Reply New Topic

After reading and reading and reading of many Autism/AS-related contradicted articles I am now not sure if autism is genetic ....it might be just a range of personality/environmental-caused personality disorders and we are all living an illusion.

After reading this and reading that and watching these recovery videos , I started doubting about everything.
LFA can be probably genetic since we can obviously observe the severe symptoms of this condition...but it might just be mental retardation with shyness character,who knows?

As for AS/HFA , I am not sure anymore about these 2 conditions anymore .....these conditions are only diagnosed by psychiatries . You know what? in my opinion , psychiatry is a *pseudo-science* ...I don't really believe in this branch of profession as real science. Here an example how much psychiatry can be inaccurate:

And oh , don't let me start how much the pharmaceutical industry benefits from psychiatric labels.

Another example:it's 100% proven that Schizophrenia is JUST a pseudo-scientific psychiatric diagnoses , its concept is scientifically meaningless. It groups together a whole range of different problems under one label; it also assumes that there's a clear dividing line between those of us who are sane and those of us who are mad, and recent research has shown that both these assumptions are false! In at least 50%, possibly two thirds of cases, Schizophrenic patients had suffered major traumatic life events in childhood!


Unfortunately so far.....,I am saying so far,...the AS/HFA appears to be a similar case!

I want to see REAL scientific evidences for the AS/HFA diagnoses , that proves the EXISTENCE of HFA as a biological/genetic disorder: brain scans , blood tests,DNA tests...something tangible ,like in the case of Down's Syndrome, Diabetes...etc. NOt just some psychiatric assessment and quizzes and BS!

I am diagnosed as HFA (not self-dxed!) but still I am starting even to doubt about myself and the nature of my 'difference':
-Yes, I had a speech delay till age 5 and difficult language development till age 10 but it might be just a speech delay.
-Yes, I have poor eye contact but I might be just so shy with people
-I wasn't used to respond to my first name when i was 2-4 years old but I might just be a stupid kid then.
-I have very weak empathy toward others...but I might just be a jerk.
-I am obsessive but so many NTs can be obsessive (ie. Facebook fans)
-I twist with my fingers when I am alone like if I am typing on air ....but it might just be a stupid habit
-I hate crowdy places ...but It might just a matter of preference.
-I was always a loner but I might just have some Schizoid personality disorder for a some reason, maybe because the war then? maybe because my shortness? maybe because of my Abdominal migraine(which is a real brain disorder that can be seen in scans)? I am not sure anymore.

No one knows sh*** , and everyone who claims here that HFA/AS is 100% surely organic is lying to others and to himself!! Where are the f- proofs?
There's no proof that we are born biologically 'different' than others . Hell , if you look at the symptoms list of HFA/AS , they are all personality traits that everyone in the word has at least 2 or 3 of them , the AS in is much worse than HFA's list in this case since Speech delay is rare among people....but still none of the symptoms are really organic like in Down Syndrome and William syndrome where you can obviously see the abnormal physical/facial traits and even the unusual set of chromosomes!

So my dears , my whole point is: that WE (yes,me and you) might just be psychologically disturbed ,extremly shy or loser weirdos or low self-esteemed people that we are in denial about their true personality and labeled with a pseudo-scientific label! There's million of reasons that can make someone socially inept.

For now, I won't tell anyone in the world IRL (coworkers, friends...etc) about my HFA dx and what I know about it till the day when a real scientific test proves that the very existence of HFA/AS (maybe won't never happen if it's just a psychiatric lie ) as a brain condition , otherwise I ll keep my mouth shut up. They think that I am just extremly shy and extremly socially awkward person with some weirdo habits (maybe they are right).In fact, this is much better than defining myself with 'psychiatry' label that really isn't scientifically proved so far.

As for you my dear users ,I recommend that you should stop using the AS/HFA label as equivalent of 'different kind' of humans since there's nothing scientific that prove the organic existence of these labels.


I believed for many years before that being 'muslim' was something different...a title blessed by God , this is how I was raised , this is how I was taught , till i found out that all religions are just BS myths and Islam in specific is a bloody madman's creation BS inspired by a mad Arabic pagan religion and others . What proves that I am not living a similar delusional illusion now with the autistic label? nothing.



Ok , I am confused....

Last edited by LePetitPrince on 07 Feb 2008, 3:18 pm, edited 9 times in total.

Autistics tend to have bigger brains.
I'd be a skeptic to someone who told me that wasn't genetic.

I'm also skeptic about psychiatry, as well, and I don't think Asperger's is... "strong" enough to warrant the label of impaired.

I've had entirely bad experiences with psychiatrists/psychologists, but even still I think there's something to what they're doing. This stuff is complex, and not always as easy to figure out as "oh, she's got a broken arm".

And they HAVE found differences in how people's brains operate with different things. This stuff also pretty clearly runs in families. My OCD and AS isn't something I can just get over, and even if you want to say it's all just a collection of symptoms given a label...well yeah, that's the point of labeling it.

At any rate, I no longer think I'm a freak, and I'm not exactly rushing back to thinking that way.

^^ Define 'freak'.

From what Michelle Dawson has said, indeed "HFA/AS" would be pseudoscientific.

However, if you group "autistic" people in one group, and autistic people without particular language delays or odd development in language (AS) in another, then you get two really consistent groups of strengths.

The strengths in "HFA" and "LFA" are indistinguishable from each other and not at all affected by what's normally considered functioning level.

(This is mentioned in a lot of her writing and the research team she works with, Mottron et al., on patterns of autistic cognitive strengths.)

So according to her, there may be two kinds of autistic people, but it's not functioning level that divides them.

Autistics tend to have bigger brains which may be due to inflammation, possibly as part of the brain's defense against an infection.

I'd be a skeptic to someone who told me that wasn't environmental.

From an article on WebMD from the Annals of Neurology:
"Scientists from Johns Hopkins considered 11 people with autism and 12 matched people without autism who had died from a variety of causes...Brain autopsies were done on those who had died...They found an unusual type and amount of chronic inflammation in the brains of those with autism...it is also possible that the brain problem is a direct effect of some ongoing environmental damage and that the inflammation is part of the brain's defense - much like a fever is part of the body's fight against infections, and not part of the problem. Either way, the brain inflammation is an important new clue as the search for autism solutions must continue to press forward."

http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/autism-inflammation

One of my colleagues at school was always used to tell me : 'your head is huge!' and a girl was always used to draw me with a big head (like Tweety) ...but it might be just because I am short and my body tiny so my head appears 'huge'.

They diagnosed me as everything under the sun and except an Aspy...

Autistics usually are more in their own world, usually 9 out of 10 have a language delay, and usually have more problems with self help skills, and usually have only a below or average IQ.

Aspergers usually are known as little professors, 9 out or 10 have no language delay, usually have an average or above average IQ, usually misdiagnosed the most due to the fact they have an high IQ, and due to the fact they had no language delay.

I hope that helps alittle...

^^ not at all. I know the psychiatric 'difference' between AS and Autism. This is not the point of my thread.

Sometimes a speech delay is just a speech delay. Maybe that's most of the time? I have often wondered if there really is such a thing as autism, if indeed I have any such thing. I had a speech delay myself, not talking until I was four years old. But are my difficulties with socializing and my minimal facial expression traits of this questionable idea of autism? Indeed there has to be an objective way of establishing autism. Just noting behavioral traits doesn't cut it.

I *suspect* the autistic spectrum overall has a basis in objective reality, possibly a combination of genetic and environmental causative factors.

But otherwise i agree its largely a pseudoscience, at least for the moment - and AS is very probably no more 'real' than 'schitzophrenia' and a host of other psychiatric constructs. I commented on another thread that the autistic subset of AS criteria might be a social construct with its origins in a quaint 'little professor' stereotype from 30s austria or perhaps 80s england (as someone else pointed out)

There are a number of ways to say that AS is a clinical problem. First, even if it was simply maladaptive behavior, it could qualify for a personality disorder. As long as mind/brain monism holds, the difference between disease and health is pure arbitrary classification, so saying it isn't scientific is ignoring the role of definitions in science.

However, inasmuch as AS seems to be heritable (adoption studies would be an excellent way of determining it), a genetic component seems likely. Also, inasmuch as symptoms show up very early, social conditioning seems unlikely.

Your point about schizophrenia is invalid. It is well known that conditions like schizophrenia represent a classification of a variety of maladaptive behaviors and thought processes in varying severity, but it too has a genetic component, as relatives are frequently afflicted with the comparatively mild schizotypal disorder.

I personally do not see any difference between an individual's condition and who they are, inasmuch as the condition is ego-syntonic, like many symptoms in AS, but this does not demonstrate that calling it a disease is bad science. Definitions are just ways of categorizing symptoms and can only be useful or not useful rather than right or wrong.

I see no problem... Gillberg wrote a good book about "the genetics of the autistic syndromes" and postulates that the autism diagnosis covers many different conditions that all effect the same final common pathway in the brain... different causes, same behavioural syndrome.
"Treatment" wise the same paedagogic approaches are good for all with the diagnosis "autism". Which is why such a grouping has some validity.

10% of autism can be traced to a specific cause: fragile X syndrome, neurofibromatosis ect. 90% are idiopathic, meaning no known cause.
There is very, very solid evidence that autism is largely genetic in origin (90%) - the same goes for AS. Consensus is that many and varying genes produce autism susceptibility, which in essence means that different groups og genes can cause autism in different individuals. Some specific loci are strongly associated with ASD (autism spectrum disorders). But there are huge pieces of the puzzle missing. Some think there is a strong epigenetic component involved.

The multiple gene theory fits with the spectrum idea - different gene combinations/number of autism assosiated genes giving varying phenotypes / degrees of autism.

Brain size: there is a fast growth in the cerebellum - too many cells - for a window of time in the "autistic" brain. This levels off. But head average circumferance is larger. A significantly larger number of people with ASD have webbed toes, immune problems, higher serotinin levels ect. ect. So there are measurable traits.

Everyone: there is no doubt. ASD are genetic in origin.

You are asking too much. Not that long ago, scientists didn't know many illnesses are caused by tiny creatures they cannot see.
And if they guessed, it would not help much anyway.
In psychiatry, we are just in such pre-microscope age.



Labels are not inherently bad. The trouble is, people tend to confuse group with an example,
such as that all autistics must be exactly like the extremely autistic child they have seen on TV.



Why to tell anyone even if proven?
Also do not forget you may be misdiagnosed. It happens in easier areas than psychiatry.

PET scanning in ASDs

There's your proof. And it can explain why "autism" has so many manifestations, and why they're different from individual to individual.