Compel Doctors To Review ALL Previous DXs
Sorenna wrote:
http://www.healthdame.com/2009/04/new-autism-gene-found-patient-group-played-critical-role/
http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/i ... UC20090428
http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNews/i ... UC20090428
To clarify this research, it is referring to variations in the region of at chromosome 5 that are more common in (but not pervasive to) people with ASDs than to people without. If you test two people and one has these anomalies and the other does not, the one with the anomaly is statistically less than 20% more likely to have an ASD than the person without.
This means that the person testing negative for these variations has a 1 in 100 chance of having an ASD, compared to the person testing positive who has a 1.19 in 100 chance of having an ASD (estimated on a conservative 1% prevalence rate).
So in people without the variation, 100 for every thousand would have an ASD, while for those with the variation, 881 out of every thousand would not.
Quote:
Here are two aources. Of course, it means nothing, really, I know that. But I still want to be tested. If I do NOT have the gene at all, it means I do not have it.
No it does not mean anything like that at all.
Quote:
If I have the gene, it still does not mean I have it. It means I have a propensity toward it.
However, I want to be tested to learn if it is "autism" or another neurotoxin.
However, I want to be tested to learn if it is "autism" or another neurotoxin.
There is no way to use this information to arrive at any such conclusion.
There is research identifying other traits with increased likelihood of ASD, for instance digit ratio. There does seem to be common thematic misconceptions about genetic information whereby if we discovered people with ASDs had blue eyes 25% more often than people without, we would consider this less "scientific" and less significant than if we found that people with ASDs have variations in chromosome 5 less than 20% more often than people without. This is not in my view a realistic conception of genetic information. Being genetic does not make it more scientific than other empirical observation, just more subject to mechanical error (such as cross-contamination).
richardbenson
Xfractor Card #351

Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,553
Location: Leave only a footprint behind
psychiatrists push drugs. there not even concernd with your welfare because another dude will take your place to get your perscription. im pretty shure i have some underlying psycotic disorder triggerd by extreme amounts of distress, and im shure if i ever get hospitilized again theyll say i have psycosis nos and force me to take pills. and if i dont they'll title 36 me or whateva and say i cant make any judgements and throw me before a judge ultimatley forcing me to do anything they wish. wich is why im trying like a mother to stay clean
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Doctors orders |
04 May 2025, 3:14 pm |
DOJ will investigate doctors - trans care to minors |
24 Apr 2025, 8:42 pm |