01 Feb 2009, 3:53 am
My point with the FOXP2 gene, which I forgot to make (thanks for reminding me) - some non-verbal individuals with autism may have a point mutation in this gene, or in this group of genes. My point isn't that this may one day be fixable, my point is that an error in this gene in chromosome 7 may be an explanation for why they aren't able to speak. But they can still think.
And, as Nan and I believe, animals can also think, though they may not be able to verbalize their thoughts (possibly also due to differences in the FOXP2 gene).
And before someone wrongly suggests that I am stating that non-verbal people with autism and animals are one in the same, ...noooo, I am not.
(As for myself, I would not be offended in the least to be called an animal.)
01 Feb 2009, 5:53 am
This, I hope never happens. But it's most likely to happen. And from this perspective and with human history as the pattern has been so far, this will happen.
Step one:
Only volunteers will take the treatment.
Step two:
A black market for the treatment of severely autistic opens. (This should take about 3 months after step one has started.) Parents what wants normal children goes to other countries and force their children to be treated.
Step three:
The new NT-children comes home, plays football, hang out with friends, go to parties etc. These cases are observed by the news and they interview these new NT. The NTs that likes their new selves tells the world how happy they are that they are "cured". NTs that thinks like Naturella and dalurker starts to call for an all-out treatment for severely autistic.
Step four:
A compromise is reached, this say that parents will choose for their children. (Assumingly) 70-80% of all severely autistic children will be treated before they've grown up, thanks to pressure from society and family.
Step five:
People will start to pressure for an all-out treatment of the autistic that's still not "cured", the government will see the positive in this movement due to the economic benefits of working citizen. The public now see autism as a disease that can be cured. Pressure rise against the others on the spectrum to have the treatment so they becomes "normal".
Step six:
Everyone diagnosed autism will be encouraged to take the treatment against their "sickness" (including their parents and family to increase pressure) since it will make it easier for them to adapt to society. The increased lack of understanding and fellow autistic will isolate the few that are left.
Step seven:
NT: "sh**, we might have made a mistake in this matter... Embarassed "
The only autistic left: "I told you so... Mad "
Anyone recognize this...? Rolling Eyes
NTs are (as a rule) as kindhearted as they are stupid, and lack the ability to think all the way. But they are very good at acting surprised (and becoming angry) when all of it goes down the drain ('cause "nobody told them/they didn't think this might happen..."). Laughing
_________________
Silver Wolf
...Silvervarg ...Silvervarg ...Silvervarg. *tsk tsk*
I'm afraid that you did not take your scenario down the road foreseen by certain non-autistics.
Given the world population of 6,757,612,380, and the estimated 1/140 individuals with autism,
we arrive at 48,268,660 people who would be converted to partying, social football players.
Assuming they will all of course make football player salaries, we will now have
roughly 50 million new millionaire football players!
Using Inventor's estimate, we mayeven have 1,689,403,095 new millionaire football players!! ! And their parents will be sooooooo proud!
Tears of joy will create rivers of gold, a cleansing wind will whisk gray dullness off the shine of the world,
clouds will part, sun will shine warmly, birds will sing a beautiful chorus, and everything will be
lollipops and rainbows, and jujubee highways, and unicorn trees.
Silvervarg, how could you arrive at a bad conclusion from your own scenario?! Back to the
thinking tank for you, young man!
(I myself cannot wait to be converted into a social, partying, millionaire football player in the land of
social, partying, millionaire football players! What are we waiting for?!? Nirvana awaits!! !! !!
)Ohh, crap... I miscalulated...
Step one:
Everyone takes the treatment.
Step two:
Everybody becomes happy.
There we are... now its right.
Yeah, but I don't argue to make them change their minds, I hope to change the minds of those who thinks in the same way that reads this afterwards.
They simply gives me a reason to rephrase myself so that more people might understand.
(And what can I say? I like the way they make themselvs look stupid.
)Becouse they don't want us to be right, and say whatever comes to their minds in order to do this.
And I know that it's not working, but don't blame them, they do their best.
01 Feb 2009, 1:08 pm
Okay, dalurker, now I'll take a stab at it...
Are you sitting comfortably, in a position where you can easily access your keyboard and see your monitor clearly? Not yet? Okay, I'll wait... ... ... Ready now? Good. Now, open a new tab in your browser (for Firefox, that's Ctrl-T - can't recall the keystroke combo for IE, but it's not hard to find out). In the address bar of this tab, type in dictionary.com. Now, in the search bar at that site, enter the word "analogy". Read the entry. It will be good for you - education is always good.
Now that you've finished your reading (you have finished, haven't you? You didn't just skip to this paragraph without reading the definitions first?), I can point out to you that Silvervarq was using an analogy - that your claim that nonverbal autistics must be miserable due to their inability to speak is analogous to claiming that since dogs can't talk, they must not be happy either.
This may come as a shock, my child, but for some of us, verbal communication is not the be-all and end-all of existence - or in more modern parlance, it ain't all that. My daughter may not be terribly verbal (her vocabulary is on the order of 80-100 words) - but within that limited vocabulary, and using appropriate echolalia, she is perfectly capable of communicating her wishes (holding up the toy catalog, and saying, "Morgana, guitar? Careful, scissors!" tells me plainly that she wants me to cut out the picture of the guitar, one of her current perseverations), preferences ("Sandwich, purple!" - she prefers grape jelly to strawberry, or "red"), and present desire in televised entertainment (she has a number of episodes of Yo Gabba Gabba! on the DVR - singing "Party In My Tummy" means she wants to see the episode "Eat", holding her toy guitar behind her head means she wants the one that includes Bones from the Aquabats playing his guitar behind his head, etc).
Thus, just as animals can use nonverbal communications to indicate their desires and feelings, so can nonverbal persons. The analogy holds - my daughter does not have any decrease in her quality of life due solely to her lack of speech, just as my dog is not rendered "miserable" by her inability to talk.
(Oh, and Nan, I agree that animals are often easier to communicate with than humans, once you learn their nonverbal modes - because animals rarely bother trying to lie, and will only do so to avoid trouble for themselves. If your dog is acting shifty, or your cat is pointedly avoiding a certain area, you know they've done something naughty... Many humans, however [and I'm thinking particularly of my first wife here] seem to lie recreationally.)
01 Feb 2009, 1:27 pm
Are you sitting comfortably, in a position where you can easily access your keyboard and see your monitor clearly? Not yet? Okay, I'll wait... ... ... Ready now? Good. Now, open a new tab in your browser (for Firefox, that's Ctrl-T - can't recall the keystroke combo for IE, but it's not hard to find out). In the address bar of this tab, type in dictionary.com. Now, in the search bar at that site, enter the word "analogy". Read the entry. It will be good for you - education is always good.
Now that you've finished your reading (you have finished, haven't you? You didn't just skip to this paragraph without reading the definitions first?), I can point out to you that Silvervarq was using an analogy - that your claim that nonverbal autistics must be miserable due to their inability to speak is analogous to claiming that since dogs can't talk, they must not be happy either.
This may come as a shock, my child, but for some of us, verbal communication is not the be-all and end-all of existence - or in more modern parlance, it ain't all that. My daughter may not be terribly verbal (her vocabulary is on the order of 80-100 words) - but within that limited vocabulary, and using appropriate echolalia, she is perfectly capable of communicating her wishes (holding up the toy catalog, and saying, "Morgana, guitar? Careful, scissors!" tells me plainly that she wants me to cut out the picture of the guitar, one of her current perseverations), preferences ("Sandwich, purple!" - she prefers grape jelly to strawberry, or "red"), and present desire in televised entertainment (she has a number of episodes of Yo Gabba Gabba! on the DVR - singing "Party In My Tummy" means she wants to see the episode "Eat", holding her toy guitar behind her head means she wants the one that includes Bones from the Aquabats playing his guitar behind his head, etc).
Thus, just as animals can use nonverbal communications to indicate their desires and feelings, so can nonverbal persons. The analogy holds - my daughter does not have any decrease in her quality of life due solely to her lack of speech, just as my dog is not rendered "miserable" by her inability to talk.
(Oh, and Nan, I agree that animals are often easier to communicate with than humans, once you learn their nonverbal modes - because animals rarely bother trying to lie, and will only do so to avoid trouble for themselves. If your dog is acting shifty, or your cat is pointedly avoiding a certain area, you know they've done something naughty...
Many humans, however [and I'm thinking particularly of my first wife here] seem to lie recreationally.)Well, it is great, you have established some sort of language with your daughter just as the guy in the post above learned to talk to cats. Nice. The only problem - who is going to take care of your daughter after you die? Or.. are you going to outlive her?
I am sorry to bring up that gloomy fact, but I afraid your whole posts somehow assumes that you are able to be the substitute of the rest of the society for your child. How long that is going to last? and how many more people in this society will be willing to learn to interact with her on HER TERM?
Please, do not give me the noncence like those given by previous guys about changing the world. I am not here for a hallucinating -fantacy session. I would only seriously treat the post of the people who sound real (and not phony)
And, I would really cut short that "my child" crap, ok?
Last edited by Naturella on 01 Feb 2009, 1:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
01 Feb 2009, 1:46 pm
01 Feb 2009, 2:07 pm
Take DNA, there is no way to reprogram every cell, and if there was, it would most likely cause death.
since when DNA is a cell?Reprogramming a cell would require changing both the nuclear and mitochondrial DNA. Doing the identical changes to all cells would be difficult, though maybe not impossible, with suitable nanotechnology. It would still be risky, I would imagine.
Why would you not understand that?
Don't quit your day job.
01 Feb 2009, 2:14 pm
Are you sitting comfortably, in a position where you can easily access your keyboard and see your monitor clearly? Not yet? Okay, I'll wait... ... ... Ready now? Good. Now, open a new tab in your browser (for Firefox, that's Ctrl-T - can't recall the keystroke combo for IE, but it's not hard to find out). In the address bar of this tab, type in dictionary.com. Now, in the search bar at that site, enter the word "analogy". Read the entry. It will be good for you - education is always good.
Now that you've finished your reading (you have finished, haven't you? You didn't just skip to this paragraph without reading the definitions first?), I can point out to you that Silvervarq was using an analogy - that your claim that nonverbal autistics must be miserable due to their inability to speak is analogous to claiming that since dogs can't talk, they must not be happy either.
This may come as a shock, my child, but for some of us, verbal communication is not the be-all and end-all of existence - or in more modern parlance, it ain't all that. My daughter may not be terribly verbal (her vocabulary is on the order of 80-100 words) - but within that limited vocabulary, and using appropriate echolalia, she is perfectly capable of communicating her wishes (holding up the toy catalog, and saying, "Morgana, guitar? Careful, scissors!" tells me plainly that she wants me to cut out the picture of the guitar, one of her current perseverations), preferences ("Sandwich, purple!" - she prefers grape jelly to strawberry, or "red"), and present desire in televised entertainment (she has a number of episodes of Yo Gabba Gabba! on the DVR - singing "Party In My Tummy" means she wants to see the episode "Eat", holding her toy guitar behind her head means she wants the one that includes Bones from the Aquabats playing his guitar behind his head, etc).
Thus, just as animals can use nonverbal communications to indicate their desires and feelings, so can nonverbal persons. The analogy holds - my daughter does not have any decrease in her quality of life due solely to her lack of speech, just as my dog is not rendered "miserable" by her inability to talk.
(Oh, and Nan, I agree that animals are often easier to communicate with than humans, once you learn their nonverbal modes - because animals rarely bother trying to lie, and will only do so to avoid trouble for themselves. If your dog is acting shifty, or your cat is pointedly avoiding a certain area, you know they've done something naughty...
Many humans, however [and I'm thinking particularly of my first wife here] seem to lie recreationally.)Deacon, I don't care what Silvervarg was using. The analogy was not valid or relevant. And I think it was reflective of his sick ideas about autism. I think it would be miserable for autistics to be without language as they would lack ability to communicate with other people from their own species. Dogs, who don't have speech, don't need speech to communicate with other dogs-other members of their own species. Judging by your condescending demeanor, I am very sure you aren't somebody who actually discounts the importance of verbal language.
Communication isn't all about communicating wants. There's no way that verbal language isn't indispensable to sufficient communication. What about what your daughter will want when she gets older and grows up? How will she then be content with being impaired in language/communication? Who else is going to understand her limited form of communication that you now understand? After she grows up, what will she think about not being able to do the many things that adults get to do, if it turns out that she won't be able to?
01 Feb 2009, 2:44 pm
dalurker and Naturella, do you both feel that the two boys who are the subject of this topic should be taken to Mexico to have a doctor there squirt some stem cells into their brains? A simple yes or no would be sufficient.
01 Feb 2009, 3:02 pm
This seems pretty pointless to me.
The whole point of this gigantic post was to say that everything is relative and that the reason for disagreement in arguiments of the sides stems from the difference of their initial assumptions. Great discovery!
So, yes, we do have different assumptions.
Daluker and I assume that people have to live in this world of people. And that you cannot change society at will and that one of the basic skills for every person - is efficient interaction with others. Otherwise - one is socially impaired.
We also assume, what every possible human science assumes : that language (a system of abstact symbols) is what distinguishes a person from an animal. That this ability to embark on this level of abstraction - is called intellect.
We also asume, what most psychologist assume - that a person vitally need to be part of the society. That a person needs to identify himself with a group and communicate with that group.
We aslo assume what common and practical sence assume - that a person need to be able so support himself.
Others deny this well-established assumtions and sink into anarchy and absordity. They question the assumptions above without clearly giving any alternative assumption, without suggesting alternative solutions to the cure.
By the way The field of this absurd argument is called sofistics. You can prove basically everything, all depending on the initial assumptions.
This, however HAS NO PRACTICAL PURPOSE.
And therefore sofistic debates, like those that we have just heard - is a mere rubbish and BS. Because, the only "constructive" suggestion , or solution offered by our opponents were "we should edit the world". The crazyness of this idea need not to be proved to my mind. Those, who want to excercise in pointless sofistics - are wellcome, though.
Behold! The president of the Bullshiters!
You are wrong.
Her conclution was NOT that we have different assumptions and there for is argueing.
It was that you (or we) won't change your (ours) point of view. And since you are talking from your own perpective whiles we try to see it from the childs view, you are the selfish ones, and thus wrong .
This is not a fact that appiles on humans, only individuals.
This is not correct, deaf people, unable to speak with words becouse they've never heard the sounds are still humans. (Ok, we are all animals, that's a fact, since we are primates.)
(Abstract:
which can only be experienced through thought, unreal, abstruse.)
This too is incorrect: Nothing based on assumtions can ever be proven. To prove something you'll need evidence.
Oh yes, let's not forget that the worlds societys is exacly the same as the ones that was founded 10 000 years ago... 'Cous... change the world, well... it's crazy... right? Just ask Jesus/Ghandi/Ceasar/Alexander II/Saladin/Scipio/Attilla/Ghengis Khan/Buddha/Mohamed etc. I mean, they where just individuals, what could they possibly do to effect the world?
= Shit, what will I say now...?
Oh my... you're right! Let's insert a screwdriver in her head and correct those pesky nervs.
Or we'll make sure that society has a good understanding for different individuals.
Again, deaf people, are they constantly unhappy becouse they don't know how to speak with 99,999% of the world population?
Most people understands what someone wants if they point at something...
It will suck, just as it did for me when I understod that I couldn't grow wings and fly away from home (yes, that was my highest dream for many years). But she'll still enjoy the things she can do.
This is still not the same thing thou.
01 Feb 2009, 3:51 pm
Again, deaf people, are they constantly unhappy becouse they don't know how to speak with 99,999% of the world population?
I don't know. I guess they are.
That's not enough to communicate sufficiently. Nobody wants to be reduced to the indignity of only being able to point to things to communicate.
It will suck, just as it did for me when I understod that I couldn't grow wings and fly away from home (yes, that was my highest dream for many years). But she'll still enjoy the things she can do.
This is still not the same thing thou.
Having wings isn't a cherished capability of people, and nobody has them. Intelligence and basic abilities are cherished capabilities that people don't get an equal share of. What makes you think she'll enjoy a limited amount of abilities? Who are you to say what is an acceptable level of ability that someone ought to be content with? If some people aren't able to learn to do something , nobody should be able to. What makes you think she won't yearn for the things that you and others can do with minimal effort?
01 Feb 2009, 3:55 pm
Naturella, you ask for practical advice. This is the best I can offer, and I hope you find it helpful:
I see that you want a cure for autism to be found. I'm not sure if you have a child with autism that you are trying to help, but that is what I am assuming (I apologize if I am making a wrong assumption here).
There is a lot of pseudoscience on autism circulating. There are also a lot of unethical practitioners who know how desperate you are for a cure, and will take advantage of you [and possibly harm your child(ren)] if you are not careful.
In order for you to discern quackery from real science, you must be able to determine whether or not a scientific study has been conducted appropriately. You must also understand the basic science (statistics, biology, biochemistry, cell biology, genetics, etc.) background behind the research. You will also have to understand neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, and neurology.
If you find a cure that you think is promising, why don't you bring the link or the information back to us and ask us to help you determine its validity? We will be able to assist you!
For example, let's say you see that a practitioner is about to conduct a study on children, wherein he wants to explore the possibility of "waking up" existing pleuripotent neural progenitor cells that are lying dormant in their brains by injecting their carotid arteries with a proto-oncogene activator. He states that he believes that this will open new communication channels in the brain via new fasiculi formation between the temporal lobes and the cerebrum. He states that he has tried this in mice, and the results look "promising". You could come to us and ask if this is a good idea.
I would then caution you to not do it. Why? Because a single pleuripotent neural progenitor cell has the potential to produce so many cells "on awakening" that they could fill the skulls of over 40 million humans without stopping. So if you turn one on - you had better know how to also turn it back off. What is uncontrollable cell growth the definition of? Cancer. These stem cell treatments and progenitor cell activations could well lead to brain cancers of all sorts. You may not know that, but someone here probably would. Alternately, if you don't trust us, you could consult a trusted neurologist (pick one with no vested interest in the treatment).
But you don't want to subject your kids to unproven treatments!
What if you bring to us a study that has gone through all of the appropriate clinical trials, has been on the market for a number of years, and has been proven "safe and effective"? We could examine the data and let you know our opinion on whether or not it is truly safe. Why would you want to know if a product or procedure that has been "proven safe and effective" is truly safe? Because many companies fudge the documents that they submit to the regulatory agencies (hiding pertinent facts, etc.). When dealing with the brain, there is very little room for error. With the brain, one must err on the side of caution, unless a medical emergency necessitates some sort of immediate action.
You may not like autism, but what you could end up with may be many times worse.
You may want to put your time, money and support behind a "cure", but again, you may want to consult us first to examine the researchers/research projects you wish to support.
Why would we want to help you? Because we have autism/Asperger's (again, not my distinction), and are concerned about people with autism/Asperger's. If we knew of a "treatment" that could actually help its recipients, that would not in any way harm its recipients, and we could see that the recipients were actually happy to have received the treatment, and the recipients stated unequivocally that they received actual measurable benefits from the treatment that they would not renounce, we would let you know. We would not deny anyone with autism or Asperger's who have wanted such a treatment the opportunity to receive it.
At present, no such thing exists. In the pipeline: no legitimate such thing exists in the near future. 30 years out? Who can say with certainty. Science is expanding rapidly, and the data correlating esemplastic capability of computers improves continually.
I am 50 years old. I doubt a "cure" will happen in my lifetime. Having said that, it will surely happen. I hope that for those who want it, a "cure" will be found. I also hope that ethics will keep pace with science. I can only look back on what has happened historically. Therefore, even this eternal optimist is pessimistic on that front.
Best wishes to you Naturella, and to your child(ren).
(For the record, just so you know where I stand on this issue, I am happy in my own skin, and do not wish to be "cured". And I started life as what someone might define as low-to-mid-functioning autistic. I started school in "special education" classes.)
________________________
separately:
Silvervarg: much better! Glad you now see the light! 
01 Feb 2009, 3:58 pm
Nope. I doubt there is any evidence backing up such a treatment at this time.
01 Feb 2009, 4:04 pm
01 Feb 2009, 4:21 pm
01 Feb 2009, 4:27 pm
01 Feb 2009, 4:56 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| How can I save money? |
19 Oct 2024, 2:16 am |
| Looking for old autistic guide website I forgot. |
14 Oct 2024, 4:45 pm |
| This is the way the World shall end.., |
02 Nov 2024, 6:30 am |
| Hello World |
31 Dec 1969, 7:00 pm Guest
|
