Gaaaah! Whats ahppening with Autism?

Post Reply New Topic

I hope it keeps rising.
Then we'll outnumber them.

NTs, your days of complacency are coming to a close...

Are spectrum people being diagnosed more? Definitely.
Is is also possible that the rate of spectrum conditions if actually increasing? Sure.

Yep, I was called both of these. These labels hurt. They are pretty descriptive of my condition, but I know alot of people interpret these labels to mean that I'm that way by choice, but I'm not.

as i said it was an unreliable source

YEAH, I know. As I recall, they said something like 40%. As I said, in theory, it should be dropping a LOT! NOT because things are getting better, but because there are more people that fit the current criteria, and most of them are smarter.

Steve

Hopefully, it'll get some aspiring scientists curious, and we'll actually have some intelligent people gaining expertise in the fields. I have to tell you, as soon as it hit me I might be an Aspergean, I could tell you more about the human brain than you wanted to know after the first month, and I even considered changing my major to reflect this sharp turn in interests.

Ha ha ha ha ha that is too funny

The words only set fails to define those who think in pictures.

The idea of putting people with an IQ of 70 on the same spectrum with a lot of IQ 140 folks, says lazy science.

One file drawer has been over used.

We are something else, which word only thinkers will never understand, look how they group us.

We need to self define, for only we can see it.

We do but we have been conditioned to hand our power over to 'authorities' and they make it necessary to do that because they hold all the keys to the doors.

Yeah, I like the AS definition that says average to above IQ, etc.... Still, one wonders how it can really be split up. How would YOU do it?

BTW I don't know if you could really say I think in pictures, per se, although it IS kind of close. I certainly don't think only in words though.

Steve

Well, I have a theory that I've posted a couple times. There appears to be a link between autism and Rh- blood. Rh- women have been able to procreate freely (in the developed world, anyway) only since 1968 when Rhogam was developed. Rhogam prevents the woman from becoming Rh sensitized and having her offspring at risk for hemolytic disease (and dying). So if there is indeed a link between Rh- blood and autism, the ability of Rh- women to freely reproduce and have their offspring survive, in the past 2 generations or so, has dramatically altered the genepool by flooding it with autistic-related genes. In other words, in the past 39 years, there probably have been more autistic related genes put in the genepool than at any other time in human history...

Oh really? I have Rh- blood.

Yeah, I think you're on to something here.

I think what maybe what needs to happen is there needs to be a sort of shift in the way people relate to each other in general, so that people are aware that there is alot of neurological diversity out there. So then when two people meet, they will think to themselves "this person's brain might not work exactly like mine, so I'll with-hold judgements against this person until I get to know them and see how their brain works".

Instead of the way it is now: whenever two people meet they just assume the other is NT.

I don't know how that can happen though.

Thats very interesting Apatura.

Of course other things are on the rise as well. Infantile and juvenile diabetes are survivable now, when earlier in time they were fatal before the reproductive stage was reached. Likewise, some other genetic related diseases are becoming more common.

On the other hand, I think hemophilia has drastically dropped. A lot of them caught HIV/AIDS/Hepatitis/died before blood donations were screened properly. A terrible injustice.

Yeah, someone thought A was the key, and I DID call attention to the fact that, though A was NOT comparatively prominent or even meaningful, but that RH- WAS quite common. I am AB+. but you NEVER know! RH- can not have RH+, but RH+ CAN have RH-! In fact, that is REALLY what Apatura is talking about. RH- people could ALWAYS have kids. It is just that there was a chance they could miscarry if their child was RH+, and an even bigger chance they couldn't have a second RH+ kid because of antibodies developed from blood mixing after the first child. So two RH- people could have TONS of kids, and an RH+ RH- couple MIGHT have problems. TODAY, they are just more careful, and have ways to prevent problems outside of care.

ALSO, apparently there is no AB gene. I'm AB because I have an A and a B gene.

Steve

I think I read somewhere the other day that the number was now up to 1 in 156. I wouldn't be surprised if the number kept going up once every sixth months or so.

well i can tell that you wouldn't wanna live in england, it's 1 in 103 here