Does anyone have social anxiety disorder?

Post Reply New Topic

That's what I thought I had before I figured out the asperger's.

I was told I had social anxiety before I got my Asperger's diagnosis. I do suffer from panic in certain circumstances, mostly predictable but not always. It's particularly annoying when it jumps on me unexpectedly.

But not as annoying as job interviews, which have become increasingly more intimidating for me in recent years. Panicking at an interview really makes it difficult.

Think I have social anxiety or social phobia. I presume it is easier to diagnose than Aspergers.

What makes me doubt I have social anxiety is that it is compounded with a poor social compass, I find human interactions perplexing. Added to that my brain has always been wired around interests, almost a zeal for it, interests come before friending or making friends. Often making a friend would come secondary to sharing an interest, almost hunting friends with common interests. Also my emotions are decentered, I find it difficult to handle emotions or speak in an emotional way with people (it works both ways), even with close relatives. I avoid it altogether or put it at the back of the mind, which is wrong and can lead to a negave spiral.

So I am not too sure if that added appendage swings me to Aspergers or Social Anxiety. I honestly don't know, what I do know is that there is something not right at all. Being anxious, sometimes with a change of heart beats, in simple human interaction is not normal! I felt nearly physically ill when I once had an interview, I just wanted it to finish and go.

No offense, but unless you actually have social anxiety, you can't possibly state that it doesn't exist. I have it, and I get panic attacks that make me feel like I'm dying inside, and start hyperventilating just stepping into a crowded store. And that's just without talking to people; if I have to communicate, the anxiety gets even worse. Can you imagine having to live with that? Well, I have to.

You probably meant no harm, but your post came across as incredibly ignorant and uninformed. Read a book on social anxiety, and then maybe you'll know what you're talking about.

I think the question isn’t so much about whether it’s “real,” but whether it’s basic or secondary.
I would think that the basic issue has something to do with social instincts or a herd instinct.
The basic difference leads to problems interacting, which leads to a secondary issue of social anxiety. The seconary issue would be more or less severe, depending on personal experience.
Does that work?

This one got me thinking (always a danger). I’ve started a new thread on a related topic:
“I’m backward. Not slow. I'm coming from the other side.”
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt74868.html

I have it.

I do. I was taking something for it for a while, but it severely hindered my ability to write, so I stopped taking it and started forcing myself to not panic so much. It worked pretty well until rather recently.

Saying that mild depression and social anxiety aren't real are no different than saying that Aspergers isn't real. They are all neurological disorders. What would you say if I told you Aspergers wasn't real? You would say that you know it is because you have it. Well guess what? I have both social anxiety and mild derpression, and let me tell you, they are definately real and completely legitimate. And uncontrolable. It has nothing to do with responsibility. Responsibility is totally and completely irrelevant. Nobody wants to be like that. People in the old days didn't "have it" because it wasn't discovered and given a name yet, not because it doesn't exist. If it was all about making money, doctors would have tried to make me, and other people, take medicine for it. You seemed to have looked past that point. Probably because it proves you wrong. Yeah, of course there are some people who try to make money off of the medicine, but people do that with everything. It seems you are the one "pathologized" by your experience at the pharmacy. (which I might add sounds fake anyway. People wouldn't have, and especially leave, such papers out for people to see. That would ruin their "plan".)

By the way: "Pathologize" isn't a word. You're probably thinking of "paralogize".

Last edited by TutuFairy on 22 Aug 2008, 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Have you ever thought that maybe just the people are changing? You seriously sound so ignorant I can hardly believe it. Of course it wasn't a problem then. People "valued" it. People have changed and look down on it now, so it's alot harder to deal with because people are shunned for it. So they seek professional help. (And I doubt that it was ever really "valued")

Oh, okay. People just happen to be that way. Dude, seriously. People happen to be that way for a reason! Their brains work differently. They call that difference Social anxiety, or Depression, or whatever. That's what disorders are. A difference in the brain that causes people to act a different way than then norm.

I love that bold sentence by the way. It's just so...ignorant. I'm sorry to be being so mean, but everything you are saying is kind of offensive, and just wrong.

according to my psychologist...yes

I might, the only symptoms i have really are sweating and my body jolts a little. I sweat right under my eyes.. its SO embarrasing. I take this medication for hyperhydrosis so it helps and i dont sweat as much, and for some reason that medication gets rid of the bags under my eyes too.

I do. Or did.

Does an Asperger's diagnosis supersede a social anxiety disorder diagnosis?

pathologize is a word
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pathologize

I know what im talking about. I can link you the articles showing that chemical imbalance is a lot a hooey. And no it does "prove me wrong". Let me explain how mental disorders come into existance. The big pharma says,"hey we need a new market for our drug. They then go
to the apa, who are a bunch of racist classist sexist ageist athiest men,which gets 3/4 of its funding from big pharma, who then sit together in a room and vote random behavioral and emotional traits into a disease. Nothing is proven. Big pharma then goes, with thier obediant think tanks and government agencies to promote the heck out it and convince people they have a disease and need for a drug.

And no personal responsiblity is not irrelavant. To many people think they can swallow a magic pill rather than excercise proper self care in terms of eating the right diet, learning stress management and not forcing themselves into stressfull life styles, having the proper philosophical outlook, and getting checked for chronic medical conditions like hypothyroid.

If you think the standard american diet and the standard american lifestyle are normal states of affair you need to think again.

Sometimes things like depression can symptons of something else such allegeries, nutrient defencies, toxic build ups, and certain cronic medical conditions, but again these things are controllable.

You also cant have a disease that does not exist in other countries. For example: up till recent years the people of japan never had any real concept of depression. They didnt have a word for it, because the japanese diet and culture were well suited to mental wellbeing. It was only
until the us pharamacueitical companies decided they were going to convince the japanase that they had a disease they most assuradly did not have, and even invented a word.

and dont go around calling people ignorant because they have a differing view than your own.

as for the paper detailing the invention of s.a.d it took hours on of researching, not stumbling across it at the pharmacy

Wow. Seriously? Seriously? Wow.

No, it compounds it.

As for the individuals questioning the legitimacy of SA, well...that's an amusing assumption considering you're on a forum for a condition whose recent explosion has caused it to be called into question. I would agree that both are being over- and misdiagnosed, but they are real.

That's a pretty slippery slope you're standing on. You're effectively saying that depression didn't exist in Japan until some doctor cooked up the concept and spread it like a meme. The problem is that your theory relies entirely on the assumption that in every single diagnosed case, the person diagnosed would be otherwise perfectly well-adjusted if it hadn't been for the diagnosis. In order to be true, it also demands that completely well-adjusted, functioning individuals (or people who believe they are) would walk into a psychiatrist's office and ask, "I'm totally fine, but check me out, just in case."

You're confusing pattern recognition with propaganda.