Interview with Peter Bell of Autism Speaks

Post Reply New Topic

Okay... since "nevermind" was too obtuse for you...

I give up. I'm not going to argue with you anymore. I shouldn't have bothered in the first place. Got it?

Well I gotta go to bed and I will sleep on it and see if I can help out summarising your point if any in the morning. It seems a little muddled right now.
It "seems" like you are saying that Autism is caused through pre-existing genes are suddenly switched on by forces yet unknown and we are not sure what causes this in the body whether it is a random occurance in pregnancy of the mother or whatever. Suddenly enough of these genes come active and you have an Autistic child but if these unknown forces don't you have a non-autistic child with Autistic genes latent.

Then again that can't be the case because that WOULD be semantics and I have already covered this in previous posts in this threads and you were still calling BS.

I honestly think you are just not making yourself at all clear and that is not actually our fault that you can not summarise what is readily apparent to you.
Again I am keen to know and trying my hardest to decipher what you are trying desperately to communicate.

Rossc, stop. As I indicated twice, I'm done talking with you here. Please don't post your own erroneous views of what I've said. Thanks.

Oh, and unless you and Magneto are the same person, I didn't say "BS" to anything you posted.

Actually, I'm being unfair to you. Though, if you can't keep yourself and Magneto straight (as in, in reply to whose post I said "B.S."), perhaps you can forgive me for conflating the discussion with him and your later post to me. Anyway, nevermind means it's pointless for me to engage in the discussion, no matter who is replying at the moment.

I do get what you are saying, Mysty, on the interaction theory, more or less, and also why it wouldn't exactly fit into a post or two. And, even if it did ... would you really want to invest the time? Seriously, I get there myself all the time on these forums. There are other things in life to attend to beyond endless debate and while debate can be fun and enlightening, there is a point at which it does not make sense to continue.

Just remember that many of our members don't let go so easily. We can ask them to, but if they will ... I haven't had much success with it, personally.

So, to everyone: point to take: choosing not to post further does not mean one concedes defeat, or does not have good arguments, and so on, and so on. It just means they've recognized that they are happier not continuing in the discussion.

I think we've all gone as far as we're going to go on this discussion.

I think it varies. In my family it seems to be a prevalent sort of gene which seems to be present in about 1/3 of people (on one side). it presents as a sort of low-grade aspergers and all people with it have a similar presentation. i dont know if environment is involved- to me it just looks like the luck of the draw as to who gets the gene and who doesnt.

But there may be some sorts of autism where the gene can be turned on or off....

You do DW? Great. Can you Pm it in really, really small sound bytes. I am obviously too silly to have a clue. It is not through lack of trying or being obtuse. I WANT to know. It may open up a whole new perspective and a new area top explore or factors to consider.

As I say, being enlightened on a significant point may be the difference between going "Oh I get it our grandchildren are safe" to "Ugh....I see badder days ahead for all people on the spectrum."

See what I mean and why it ISN'T a matter of no importance to me

Hey, I'm sort of seeing where she is going with the interaction theory, but I haven't tried to fit that into every other point people here have been debating ... I guess, I've kind of decided I don't need to. At least, not this hour, not today. Moving on.

One word to add: Epigenetics.

My knowledge of and understanding of epigentics is one of the things that goes into how I understand the stuff I've seen on autism and genetics. Till this morning, though, I hadn't consciously thought to put together epigenetics and autism.

Epigenetics is a big part of the picture of the interaction between genes and the environment. So, look up epigentics, as a subject of it's own, as well as epigentics and autism. The little bit of reading I was able to do this morning included the idea that epigentics could be why something with such a strong genetic component as autism seems to have is apparently increasing.

I think instead of calling for a "cure" a better term would be "workaround".

The bs thing was in an answer to a post by me. I didn't mind though.

No, I said it first to Magneto first. And in my reply to you, it was not a reference to what you posted. Rather, a reference back to what I had been replying to earlier in the discussion.

The important thing I guess is it was a nice thing to say (irrespective of recipient) and that no one was affronted.

Autism speaks is evil.

But I think People with Autsim should be able to help themselves to grow and have a good quality of life, but not be completely different.

OK then. I guess I hadn't read all of the discussion that accurately.

Where do i begin? This man's idea that "quality of life" means "ease of life" or "normalcy of life"? His son does have a relationship- to his parents and relatives. Just because he communicates differently doesn't mean his capacity for love is affected. He talks about giving his son a voice; his son HAS a voice, it's just different from his. Instead of talking about what he thinks his son wants for himself, he should find out. He thinks there can be no "fulfillment" in life without his kind of social interaction, and openly admitted he wanted his son to be like everyone else. How about all the NT's who are homeschooled, have no friends, don't date, and can't play sports? I love how he says "OUR community"- i didn't get the memo that he's apparently an honorary Autie now. I also love being referred to as one of "these people." He shouldn't have brought up other illnesses people may have in addition to the autism, though, because those weren't necessarily caused by the autism and have their own unrelated effects on a person's quality of life.
And how can there be a cure for autism that doesn't change how an autistic person "relates to others"? Isn't that the whole point- socially, they'll relate 'better'?
I recently read a blog by Perla Messina, and she claimed that autistic people have a whole new dimension they perceive things through, plus other hypotheses, and frankly most of it was radical and way over my head. But even if she and those who agree with her are exaggerating, this interview still makes it so clear that Autism Speaks still responds to autism as it was perceived in the 20th century, and they really need to learn more about it, confirm things with people who actually have it, and get with the times. Autism is a whole spectrum, not a synonym for mental retardation and limited communication capacity. So many new discoveries have been made about its nature.
As for this Peter Bell, i hate to think in stereotypes, but here is my amateur profile: He is a good-looking, confident, materially successful type A extrovert who cannot comprehend the nature of his son's existence. To him, conformity and social interaction are a pleasure and an addiction, and he cannot believe that his son doesn't need them the way he does. So he clings to Autism Speaks ideology, because it allows him to believe that the son he envisioned for himself is still in there somewhere, trapped. And this bleeds into his natural feelings of wanting to protect his child and enrich his life. He also wants to succeed vicariously through his son, as many parents do, so instead of pushing him to go out for the football team, he pushes for him to be cured.
I am sure the Bell family have had their share of difficulty caused by our society's reaction to autism and the lack of convenient, efficient ways of dealing with 'disabilities' in general. I am sure that they love their son. But i think the use to which they put their love is misguided and fueled by ego and narrow-mindedness, and they should try harder to communicate with their son and find out how he really feels. Just because he can't speak through language, doesn't mean there are no ways to 'talk' to him, especially for his parents.