1 in 68

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencen ... 4205.story







Do we really believe that geographical difference or is that because they don't screen properly in Alabama? I wonder.

If getting rid of the Aspergers diagnosis was meant to reduce the increasing rates of diagnosis, that was a failure.

the powers that be, want to sweep us under the rug.

This 1 in 68 seems way too many autistics in my opinion. It would be like (note: this is just to have an idea, doesn't mean everyone will know the same quantity of autistics etc) 2 in every grade in a school, or each person knowing ~10 autistics. I can't possibly imagine that many with considerate impairment to be considered autistic; the statistics change from 3 in 1000 to 1 in 68 depending on the criteria, and I don't think being awkward or eccentric is a good one. probably more like 1 in 150. This is only opinion though.

Or maybe - just maybe - neurodiversity is simply the norm for a part of the population, as homosexuality is.

I agree. I know what I experience as an autistic person and there are not nearly that many other people having the same or even remotely similar difficulties.

Alabama will have a lower rate than new jersey, because they are rednecks. When I was in high school, it was 1 in 600. You had to have some very noticable problems to be labled anything back then. Everything now is like micro management. Everyone nowdays has very particular descriptions of how things are supposed to be. If everything is not a certain way, it stands out. There is no generalization anymore. Life is no longer easy to understand, or go unnoticed. Unless your a redneck.

There is this criteria that goes like this. Johnny is normal. He thinks, and does things like most people. Fred is not normal. He is not like Johnny. We need to figure out why Fred does not think like Johnny, lable it, try to fix it, or call it a syndrome, or illness, because most people are more like Johnny, so that is the way to be. These ideals have order, and control, but no balance. Unless your a redneck.

The statistics. The lables. The difficulties. Is mostly caused from a stigma in the majority of the population. The people who have serious difficulties, and need major help usually always get it. That is still about 1 in 600.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm just another stupid human.

I was thinking of all the chemicals in New Jersey,all those hazardous waste sites.

I have felt like I was rug lint for many years. I am comfortable under there. I have already been ground into the earth by the heels of society. How much worse than it get? Concentration camps?

i would not put it past the bastards.

1 in 68 may be an accurate estimate and maybe not. It all depends on how afflicted each one of that 1 in 68 is that determines whether or not they are ever noticed as autistic.

The article says that the number includes both diagnosed with autism and children who have symptoms of autism noted in their medical or school records but not diagnosed with autism. I think 1 in 68 is overestimate.

what about the 1 in 41 figure for boys? 1 in 189 for girls.

I agree, but like yournamehere said, I think it is going exactly to the opposite way of neurodiversity. That is, if a person is different, for instance has slight aspie traits and is eccentric, label them! Let's label everyone that is not "normal". Then lots of people that are part of natural human diversity are considered pathologic! There is this discussion in psychology, I read articles for it and it is really interesting, some psychologists saying for instance "stop pathologizing everything! Humans are diverse and shouldn't be normal", like the schizoids that are just different and okay with that and don't want "treatment" but keep being pathologized by psychology. Like, why is it everyone have to be social?
I think the diagnosis is meant for those impaired and that would use it as a tool for receiving help, not as a way of labeling everyone that is different than the norm.

I read a research that did interview and questionnaires to school age children and found the gender ratio to be 2:1 despite 6 times more boys in this same pool being selected for evaluation by teachers.
I really believe it depends on the criteria used and the extent of considering the female traits. Since there is no blood test to determine it, the prevalence depends on what they are considering autism and what method they are using for determining who has it and who doesn't.

I swear on my life. The largest and possibly only reason why I have problems in society, and possibly one of the only reasons why the way that I am really stands out, is derived from the way I am treated, understood, misunderstood, and used by narcissists, sociopaths, and their friends the co-dependant, and the apethetic. If it was not for these people, I am sure I could live my life, be good at it, and no one would want, or need to be the wiser about what is going on with me. I sought this website out because I had meltdowns, and could not deal with society because of the "treatment" I recieved from such people. Now "I" have a "problem". These are terrible people towards me. The way they behave sometimes should be illegal. Or I should just be able to pound their heads into the pavement, and get away with it.

If I actually had a diagnosis of autism, I do not believe it would be a deficiency on my part. More so a deficiency of the people who got me to that point.

This.