Why isn't OCD or asthma a fad, but apparently AS/HFA is?

Post Reply New Topic

Something we all may want to consider is forums with OCD actually do say that OCD is not a disease nor illness, not the patient's fault, not a personality problem, although I haven't heard them say "OCD is the next step of human evolution." However, most threads in the social skills section here ask about help, and only a few talk about how neurotypicals aren't rationale.

Something I've found interesting is a lot of books accuse Thomas Jefferson and Bill Gates of having OCD, and others.

I just don't understand how a few who say "Asperger's is the next step of human evolution" ruin it for all those who want to learn how to talk to people and have the bare minimum level of friendship and deal with sensory issues?

I certainly remember when Asthma WAS the newest hottest fad/disease in the 1980's/1990's. It was just expected for children to have it and I remember when a mother tried to tell me that it was usual for children to have it - like it was the mumps or measles or something.

So they were brushing it off as something not to care much about?

goodness no! Asthma is definately something to care about! But the attitude was that asthma was very common and it wasn't a rare thing to have asthma. Now it seems it is far more common than it was when I was a child, but then, I might have been ignorant of the prevelence.

It's not a fad until Jack Nicholson's character has it.

That's very interesting. Do you have a source for this fact? Not saying I don't believe it but I'd like to reference this if true. My skepticism is based on my own belief that someone with Down Syndrome would not be better in a social situation than myself as someone on the spectrum. And that in no way is meant to sound like I am underestimating or dismissing someone with Down's. Maybe it's because I may have superior cognitive abilities so I have used this advantage to learn my way through social situations (which for the most part today I avoid anyway). Also, is this likely to hold true in most/all comparisons between someone with Down's and someone with an autism spectrum disorder, or does it depend on how severe your case of autism is? In the study you reference, is the person with Down's far superior to the person with AS/HFA in picking up on social situations, or is it only a slight advantage?

I think it's a fad in the media because it's interesting. It's not like having breathing problems like with asthma or random pointless obsessiveness like OCD. It often comes with great abilities and major expertise in our obsessions. It makes for interesting characters.

One of the key differences between asthma / down's syndrome and AS / autism is that while with the first two a series of clinical signs exist which can be detected either by a doctor with ease using things like a lung function meter, their ears, eyes or other simple tools. For AS and autism it is not possible at a typical hospital to detect the condition by any means other than talking to the subject, asking them questions and seeing how they behave.

While it is likely that at some point in the future that brain scans such as PET or fMRI (NMR) will have improved to the point that AS and autism can be measured by machine on a routine basis, this day is many years away.

As long as the AS or autism DX is based on the softer methods of having to talk to the person and get them to do tasks like ask "is this photo of the face of an angry, upset or happy person" it will be more in danger of being viewed as a fad.

Probably because people with OCD and asthma don't go around screaming to the world that they have it, as well as what someone else said, claiming that it's the next best thing to genius (or thereabouts).

People with OCD tend to hide their obsessions and compulsions due to feelings of social stigmatizing (it's a very covert disorder unless it's really bad at a specific point in time).

Schizoid PD is more prevalent than AS, and it's a similar disorder in many ways; you don't hear of it at all.

I would venture to guess - no, I would bet the farm - that the overwhelming preponderance of autistic people over about 35 or so, who grew up before the name Asperger's Syndrome even existed, went to extreme lengths to hide their autistic tendencies (as well as whatever else made them seem different.) Most of us had no idea why we didn't fit in and just couldn't seem to get with the program. Even today, in the age of autistic visibility, it is a fairly small percentage of older autistic people who trumpet their condition, except maybe in forums like this, despite the incredible sense of relief and affirmation that comes with finally having your decades-long struggles make sense. It makes sense that younger people, many of whom grew up knowing about their differences and having peers that are familiar with autism at least to some extent, would not feel the same need to hide their tendencies - it is no longer required for survival as it was not all that long ago.

Not a fad but a new thing, and very often diagnosed nowadays. AS causes, among other "problems", the "sufferer" to develop independent thought and ideas, as well as face great difficulties conforming to the herd. These were not a problem till this century, when a global herd has suddenly become an urgent necessity and these people must be quckly diagnosed and kept away from society.

melissa17b,

I doubt most people with AS care too much about social stigmatizing due to how they behave, even though they're bullied for it; a lack of social and emotional insight being big parts of the disorder. Those with OCD are normal in this aspect, and turning a light switch on and off over and over again is weird social behaviour (so they'll do their best to hide it).

It's funny when you combine the two.

At least in days of yore, social stigmatising usually was accompanied by incessant bullying, often involving physical violence that would today carry criminal charges in many places. Even autistic people oblivious to and unconcerned about their position amongst their peers would still be inclined to make the behavioural adaptations required to reduce the triggers for these more barbaric reactions from peers. Adaptating to survive does not require caring what others think, only wanting to prevent, or at least minimise, unprovoked attacks.

Social and emotional deficits certainly make it harder for autistic people to understand why they are being picked on and what they can do to stop it, but I don't believe that most autistic people are indifferent to being bullied and wouldn't take steps to stop it if they could.

Last edited by melissa17b on 13 Sep 2009, 7:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

I have OCD and it's a bastard even when on medication that helps. Without medication, it's the nineth level of hell. I think things only become a fad when people think there's positives to being labeled something. No one thinks having to turn around a certain number of times before you walk forward, or continually stepping on cracks in the pavement is cool. The myth of Aspie superpowers, however, appeals.

It's annoying because fads damage the people who genuinly do suffer problems because of such things.

It is not a myth that there are autistic people with abilities that are seen by most people as exceptional. Anyone who believes that all Aspies have such abilities is, of course, misinformed.

There are not too many aspects of my life that are not coloured somehow by my pronounced unevenness in abilities.

RE: Fad status of AS

In my opinion, the problem is not with us, but with the world. Right now, teachers don't want to DISCIPLINE kids under their care, and they wonder why kids won't behave in school.

For generations, educators knew that kids have lots of energy and need an outlet for it. That's what recess was for. Boys need it more than girls on a typical basis.

Well, we eliminate "rough housing" from the playground for fear of lawsuits and bullying (because teachers are too lazy to distinguish the difference between play and fighting. Eventually we sanitize "recess" to the point that kids don't get an outlet for all that energy.

So, the kids (mostly boys) can't sit still in class, and they seek an answer. Rather than the obvious one (let the boys go out and get it out of their system), they turn to drugs. To administer drugs, they need a diagnosis. Psychiatrists come along and slap ADHD on practically ever kids referred to them so they can dope the kid up so he behaves in school.

Never mind how much SUGAR kids are fed today (which impacts their energy and attention span).

So, ADHD, and other "disorders" were handed out without a legitimate basis because it was an easy way to shift the blame of educators not enforcing discipline in the classroom.

Certainly, there were kids who really had ADHD, but how many were misdiagnosed just so they could put pills down their mouths to make them behave as desired?

NOW....

You could say the same thing about AS, BUT to my knowledge, AS is still largely unknown in the USA. I doubt it's being handed out as a "catch all" disorder, and if you are an adult with AS, you probably struggled for years with the symptoms but you were "normal" enough that nobody thought you had an obvious problem. Adults with AS are not seeking to fit into a "fad" because AS does not bring positive social status. Adult diagnosis serves little beneficial purpose but to POSSIBLY open options for state assistance for those who can't get or hold employment because of their condition.