Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

[xinpig]

Re: Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

I too have Asperger's. It takes alot to be able to tell who has it and who doesn't. One of my really good friends had it and I never even knew/suspected it.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

For argument's sake (And trying to reduce stereotypes), let's call it even on how intelligent the average male or female is.

For arguments sake, why don't you look at statistics on the subject?

The funny thing is, we all know what is right, we all know what is wrong, and we all know the answers to this thread, yet we still debate it anyway.

And the reason for this? Human fallacy.
Human stupidity will be the cause of its own destruction. If it's not directly, it'll be indirectly, such as being too caught up with our heads up our behinds to solve a problem that we could.

You're right, questioning assumptions is the most foolish thing ever. I mean, that's what we killed Socrates for after all. I'm just going to assume the verdict was legitimate.

[xinpig]

Re: Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

i dont understand why people act so much differently when they know that you are different. but it is human nature to fear that which is different from you

[Bynary Fission]

Re: Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

Wow.

The first IQ test was actually developed by Binet, to identify those that would have problems academically. And guess what, they worked. Extremely well at that, and they work even better today. Slavery was abolished some 50 years before the IQ test, and a test has never been constructed to show that one race is smarter than another. This was maybe, at best, practiced by some individuals that had nothing to do with the development of the test.

As for measuring intelligence, there are a whole lot of people that would disagree. They tap highly into 'something' at least, that all humans posses in different quantities that is proportional to their ability. Whether or not you want to call this intelligence doesn't change the fact that it can be measured, at least to some degree, and that it's important.

And that's nice to see you're incredibly ignorant of and ungrateful for the things advances in psychology and neuroscience has brought to society. I'm also glad you've somehow managed to clump all of psychology into the field of abnormal psychology (and well, clinical). That's quite the feat...

No, I am not. Look at my links.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:National_IQ_Lynn_Vanhanen_2006_IQ_and_Global_Inequality.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Two_Curve_Bell_with_Jobs.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sketch-4race-transparent.png

Right there is the reason that I do not trust IQ tests. When IQ tests were adjusted for blacks, then they scored more on-par with whites. An IQ of ~85-86 makes you mentally deficient. Not mentally retarded, but deficient. Yet, upon seeing the countless blacks in my schools, this is just not always the case. My 7th grade school has a black population of almost 40%. My 8th grade school had a black population of ~17% and a Hispanic population of over 70%. Yet many were average intelligence or more. So why do these tests show them 10+ points below whites? 10 points is a lot. 15 points is a whole deviation. The tests are geared towards whites. The old tests contained verbal analogies and the like because blacks would not understand them. Maybe slavery ended more than 60 years before the inception of IQ tests, but blacks were barely looked upon as even human for many more years. And since so few treated blacks with the dignity and respect they deserved, why do you think somebody who made IQ tests to measure intelligence would make it fair? Since so many were biased against blacks, making tests to "prove" that their IQ was lower than whites would only fuel the belief that they were inferior to whites. Look at my second chart. It shows that over half of African nations were mentally retarded. Most of the rest had IQs below 80. And even in other sites will show the same disparity. If the whole nation was mentally retarded, then how could they exist and advance as a society?

Given the fact that education is poor in most African nations, their IQ will naturally be much lower than the developed nations. I acknowledge this. But if almost everybody had IQs below 65, then many couldn't even learn to speak a language fluently, much less build and sustain an entire country and civilization. Think about it. If you left a bunch of kids in a room who had IQs of say, 62, and asked them to build something, could they do it? Probably not. Even without any training, many kids can build something, even if it's really bad. But if you asked them to build a hut, then asked them to memorize a bunch of hunting locations, then had them learn all the techniques for foraging and building weapons and tools, could they do it? With a LOT of special therapy and training, possibly. I am not berating them, but I am being realistic. Many African kids probably have to do such things by a young age to survive, especially in the completely undeveloped parts of Africa.

So for this reason, IQ test are NOT accurate, and are a poor measure of intelligence, in my opinion. I scored an IQ of 108 in 3rd grade. Now, five years later, I am going to graduate with my bachelors at 17. I can learn a language in under a month, based on rates I learned to speak at least some of other languages. I can learn even very difficult subjects lightning fast. Can a person with IQ of 108 easily accomplish that? Probably not. So really, in my opinion, most IQ tests are garbage for people other than whites. It applies with kids with autism. I score well on many IQ tests, but not all. Many kids I have seen with autism are not stupid. Many are mentally retarded, but not all. I have seen kids who are extremely intelligent, yet do not score well on IQ tests. IQ is only a way to get an estimate, but until they come out with a better IQ test, I don't trust them nor do I like them.

And finally, I do appreciate many of the advances that have been made. Without it, drug addicts or sociopaths could never be cured or made better. Without it, we would never understand the body-mind connection, and how the human brain works. But considering 50 years ago, kids with mental impairments, including autism, would be thrown into institutions at a young age and be treated like animals, never to be seen again...I am still skeptical of some of psychology's advances.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

While psychology makes it's mistakes, some mistakes can be damaging. Aversion therapy is an example of an abhorrent aberration that should never have been introduced in the first place. Homosexuals in some countries would be shocked upon looking at nude pictures of the same sex, and they would be chemically castrated, among other things. Also, diagnosing people with the wrong disorders can be damaging. If somebody is diagnosed with, say, ADHD, yet does not truly have it, will it matter? No. That child will be put on drugs that he doesn't need, and potentially even get therapy. Kids are being diagnosed with autism too much, in my opinion. If he's socially deficient and right-brained, does that make him autistic? No. With a few lessons in social skills, he could be completely normal socially. And for being right-brained, let him explore his full potential in the arts. A woman was diagnosed with an IQ of 55 about 50 years ago. They wanted her thrown in an institution. Guess what? Today she sings in 32 languages. Mentally retarded? I think not. So, I think we need to better understand what is being diagnosed before they made diagnoses, especially if it's something as enigmatic as autism...


P.S Sorry for the belated response, I have been very busy and I have not had time to make long posts like this.


~Bynary Fission

[atalkingcow]

Re: Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

While psychology makes it's mistakes, some mistakes can be damaging. Aversion therapy is an example of an abhorrent aberration that should never have been introduced in the first place. <b>Homosexuals in some countries would be shocked upon looking at nude pictures of the same sex, and they would be chemically castrated, among other things.</b> Also, diagnosing people with the wrong disorders can be damaging. <b><i>If somebody is diagnosed with, say, ADHD, yet does not truly have it, will it matter? No. That child will be put on drugs that he doesn't need, and potentially even get therapy.</b></i> Kids are being diagnosed with autism too much, in my opinion. If he's socially deficient and right-brained, does that make him autistic? No. With a few lessons in social skills, he could be completely normal socially. And for being right-brained, let him explore his full potential in the arts. A woman was diagnosed with an IQ of 55 about 50 years ago. They wanted her thrown in an institution. Guess what? Today she sings in 32 languages. Mentally retarded? I think not. So, I think we need to better understand what is being diagnosed before they made diagnoses, especially if it's something as enigmatic as autism...


P.S Sorry for the belated response, I have been very busy and I have not had time to make long posts like this.


~Bynary Fission

I don't quite follow what you are trying to say with the homosexuals thing...please elaborate. ^_^

As for the italic part: I strongly disagree.
When I was put on several drugs over the course of my life, to treat various "mental disorders" that I was diagnosed with... (all false btw) they had disastrous effects, including knocking me out for an entire week in 7th grade.

We (as a nation) not only over-diagnose, we over-medicate like it's going out of style, and it really needs to stop, IMO.

[Bynary Fission]

Re: Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

I don't quite follow what you are trying to say with the homosexuals thing...please elaborate. ^_^

As for the italic part: I strongly disagree.
When I was put on several drugs over the course of my life, to treat various "mental disorders" that I was diagnosed with... (all false btw) they had disastrous effects, including knocking me out for an entire week in 7th grade.

We (as a nation) not only over-diagnose, we over-medicate like it's going out of style, and it really needs to stop, IMO.

For the homosexual thing, sure.

In several countries, especially Islamic ones like Saudi Arabia, homosexuality is illegal, and even punishable by the death penalty. Psychology, in it's fashion to label everything different as some disorder, proposed various "treatments" to "cure" it, such as aversion therapy (castration, etc), counseling, and more. Psychology tries to cure everything..or well almost everything, and homosexuality for many years was thought to be a disease, and people tried various methods to try and "cure" it, many of which were very damaging to the person emotionally. So my point is, as you and me stated, psychology is flawed to a fault in several ways, and homosexuality, which is completely normal, was treated as a disease for many years because it made you a little bit different from other "normal" humans.

And for the part you disagreed with, that's fine, but you seem to have contradicted myself. I stated that children who are given false diagnoses are drugged and given therapy they don't need. This often damages them psychologically in later years. You repeated that afterwards with your own experiences. People tried to drug me, and my mom refused to let that happen...I still appreciate that act to this day greatly. Can you please elaborate specifically that you don't disagree with? It seemed a bit unclear, and I may be wrong about you contradicting yourself. Just making sure.


~Bynary Fission

[Ravia]

Re: Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

Uh excuse me, but I happen to have autism, albeit a high-functioning case, and devonin is absolutely correct. It is certainly not the same as Asperger's.

Sadly, though, because so many doctors don't know crap about the differences between them, all my life everyone except two people (my mom and myself) diagnosed me as Asperger's.

I wouldn't consider it an epidemic, because an epidemic is within a more general location. If anything, you make it sound like a pandemic, since so many more areas of the world are seeing a rise in this condition. However, it may be an epidemic in that autism isn't an infectious disease. Still, I don't condone the gross majority of misdiagnoses that are becoming commonplace in the medical world.

[JKPolk]

Re: Autism: An Epidemic of the 21st Century?

Autism is such a generic diagnosis for any early stage mental disability that it's hard to actually clarify what is and is not autism anymore.