The Broader Amish Autism Phenotype vs. The Autistic Matrix

Post Reply New Topic

Technically speaking, the Autism Spectrum is a spectrum of diagnosed disorders.

Individuals that have significant traits/symptoms of Autism that do not meet the required diagnostic criteria, are often described on a Broader Autism Phenotype, BAP.

The new DSM5 criteria, will soon require symptoms working together to limit and impair one in everyday life functioning. Some people that have all the other observed criterion elements that do not meet this criterion element, are not diagnosed on the spectrum, but never the less are on a Broader Autism Phenotype.

There are a few tests online to measure the BAP.

Simon Baron Cohen, measures it with his AQ test, somewhere in the range of 10 to 15%, in the general population.

Interestingly, the author of the Aspie Quiz, has suggested in discussion on this website that he has data to support a similar finding from his Quiz. Neither are diagnostic tools; however, both measure similar Autistic traits.

According to DSM5 guidelines a person starting off in life with symptoms of Autism who could be referred to as being on a Broader Autism Phenotype at that point, later in life may more fully manifest the symptoms when they no longer can adapt to social demands in their social environment.

At that point in time, they may be diagnosed with an actual disorder, depending on assessment of a Professional.

Sometimes it is the limits and impairments in everyday life functioning, coming as a result, in part, in no longer being able to adapt to one's social environment that make the difference, in a Broader Autism Phenotype or a Diagnosis on the Autism Spectrum.

This was my general analogy made for a potential correlation with the Amish way of life and the much lower prevalence of ASD, in the study of the two Amish counties I linked.

My thought was perhaps that some of the individuals remain on what might be described as a BAP in that culture, because they continue to adapt to the total Social Demands, which might be more difficult if they lived in "greater" society, leading to an actual diagnosis on the spectrum.

At least for me, "Agri" Culture is not something I believe I was inherently cut out for; however, I was curious to see how others felt about that way of life, as opposed to essentially one behind a screen, in an "Autistic Matrix".

I think there are many people that are busy doing "hands on" work in the larger world of motor coordination skills and visual spatial skills, that could probably meet the current diagnostic criteria, but do not meet the stereotype of "Geek" or "Nerd" often associated with Asperger's syndrome or the areas of border that meet that Broader Autism Phenotype.

Some of those people might be better oriented toward "Agri" Culture than some others. I'm not sure how many of those voices exist on this website.

It seems likely to me, that in the coming decades the diagnosed Autism Spectrum will shrink, as a result of the new DSM5 criteria.

The BAP may become much larger, as a result of more restrictive criteria and overall increasing demands in Society in what is generally becoming an "Autistic Matrix" way of life for more people in the general population, as time goes on.

It is a place where more people may share a life behind a screen as it becomes THE way of life, for almost everyone in our culture.

When I watch the two videos I linked earlier in the thread at the same time, it is like vicariously living in those two dimensions of culture, which at the same time is one life behind a screen, in what for me has become my "Autistic Matrix", more than ever.

I'm not sure that the people that stay true to their "completely" Amish way of life, could even imagine a way of life like that.

I can put my self in a distant place in my memory, where I too, could not imagine it either.

It was disturbing to me, as a youngster, to watch the Twilight Zone TV show, where Roddy McDowell was trapped inside his house in a virtual human zoo, with other "creatures" peering in at him.

I find myself, at times now, living vicariously in a screen on a phone that is 4 inches in size.

It is a mind altering experience for me, that I only just started taking part in that I could not fully imagine before.

It may only be a matter of time where a "retina display" is actually placed on the retina, in a time and place where a 4 inch screen is only a faded memory, of what is viewed as "nostalgia".

That would have been an interesting "Twilight Zone" show when I was a youngster; however, I am not sure that at that point in time, anyone could have actually imagined it.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIZ04AGTjHc[/youtube]

I believe that Aghogday is suggesting that someone can have some form (I'm not clear on what exactly he believes this is) of "autism", but not meet DSM-5 requirements.

In this thread (ITT), it's much harder to follow that, because the arguement is mixed with references to the "Amish", which is a catchy phrase, and distracts from what really are two seperate arguements by Aghogday.

Ag, I hope you arn't offended I put my understanding of what you're saying here.

No problem, my response may have been too long to stay within reasonable parameters of the question. Thank you.

Rather than provide any fuller details on the BAP, here is a link below that not only links a quiz to measure the characteristics that make what is described as the BAP, but also the results of people on this site, in where they fit on the BAP, per assessment of the test.

The BAP is not a form of Autism, it is a measure of Autistic traits, without any official diagnosis of actual disorder.

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt113406.html

It is almost a given that anyone that scores in the high range of the Aspie area or Autism area of the Aspie Quiz/AQ test is also on the BAP.

Those links are provided here for anyone interested in taking the Quiz/Test:

rdos.net/eng/Aspie-quiz.php

http://aq.server8.org/

And what would you think of Aspies* to group together in Aspie-owned and/or affilated buildings and employers? Could that be part of the "Matrix" concept you're describing?

* Or individuals with BAP, to use your prefered terms.

Yes, most definitely, both for those that might be diagnosed on a spectrum, those that are on a broader autism phenotype, and additionally for those outside what some might describe as a broader autism phenotype, "captured" by the "Autistic Matrix", as people continue to become more connected by machine interface rather than flesh and blood reciprocal social communication.

All that is required is the machine interface for social communication.

My point earlier in this thread on "Info-farm-ology', was in recognition that the "Autistic Matrix" could also be in-"corporated" into what you describe as "Aspie Acres".

Per that person who remarked earlier, visualizing "I-PADs" and "Farm LIving " would be a "place to be" described more specifically by that person as "TOTALLY AWESOME".

By "machine interface", you mean online social communication like e-mail, text, WrongPlanet, Facebook?

Yes, as an adaptive means for social communication, which does not require flesh and blood interaction. That could also include phones and other methods of communication outside of flesh and blood reciprocal social communication. Additionally, the technological devices that make adaptation possilbe for people who might be motor development or visually spatially challenged to take fuller part in life.

A described "Autistic Matrix", has great potential in value in helping people adapt; however, there is also potential for helping people not to adapt, in some cases.

It is hard to make any black and white judgement of cost and benefit, overall, per what one might describe as an "Autistic Matrix".

The farm machinery could be part of it too. Any Technological item, which lends adaptation for identified challenges or enhancing recognized strengths, could be part of an "Autistic Matrix".

After reviewing the information here, and in the other threads associated with interest or non-interest in an "Aspie Acre" way of life, I am inclined to think that there are factors such as the ones I have identified with motor development, visual spatial issues, and reciprocal social communication, which may make a "physical"/social way of life reported in Amish Culture more difficult for some than others.

In relation to what was suggested earlier in the thread specific to an isolated gene pool, those people with greater difficulties with motor development, visual spatial abilities, reciprocal social communication, etc., if there are specific genetic factors of origin to those traits, may have been to some degree selected out of the population in failure to reproduce.

Perhaps some were not successful in the way of life there. and as was described earlier in the thread potentially "shunned" for not meeting expectations of the social roles that exist there and that are actually now much more limited in variety as there are not all the other options that exist in modern culture.

Everything experienced man made in the environment are byproducts of human collective intelligence that are testament to a powerful will to survive that is shared by most creatures that exist as we speak.

One can view a product of millions of years of evolution, in adaptation to adversity, in the total results of human culture.

Creatures that adapt to adversity continue to survive and potentially contribute to the long term existence of their species.

That factor of extreme adversity is evident in some of the greatest achievements in mankind, and are seen in the highest levels of personal achievement in close to half the individuals that have risen to lead the country, in biographies of some of the Presidents that are extreme enough in report of adversity where some are hard to believe.

However, it is probably nothing compared to what their ancestors faced to afford them that opportunity of existence.

While there are likely issues of modern culture that make it more difficult to adapt to than in the past, for some people over the course of the lifespan, it is still a gift provided through adversity and an incredible will to survive from literally millions of ancestors.

There may be more people assessed on a spectrum in the "Autistic Matrix", than the Broader Amish Autism Phenotype because of all the newer byproducts of collective human intelligence and culture providing avenues of adaptation that did not exist before.

So in Summary, perhaps it is the lack of cultural diversity in Amish Counties, that in effect are preventative factors of adaptation for some people potentially on a spectrum to survive and reproduce, or generally speaking to thrive in one lifetime, in Amish Culture.

At least for me, if I try to place myself in both places of culture, this is the one I am glad to be born into, more so than anytime or any place in recorded human history or what has been described about pre-history through the artifacts left behind.

Maybe that is because it is the only one I have adapted to, but I do not think my inherent issues of difficulty would have made an Amish Way of life or similar a viable one for me.

I continue to be a card carrying member of the "Autistic Matrix".

You can see it in terms of lower, or at least more concrete, social expectations. You can also see it (as I do) in terms of a culture that is, for all its relative homogenity and rigidity, in some ways basically more tolerant. As a kid, I was seen as precocious, backward, and annoying; a child who behaved as my son does would have been seen as spirited and energetic. In the rural south where he was born, he was seen as "all boy." In 2013 in the east on the outskirts of a major metropolitan area, we both have serious deficits. I'm autistic and should simply be given up on; he has ADHD and needs to be heavily medicated, posthaste.

I think what we need is to move (though that's just not viable right now). I had the kids up to a park near Mercer over the weekend (another 50 miles from Pittsburgh and very near the Amish country). I discovered, to my delight, that other parents found the children delightful and that I had no problems interacting with the folks at the park.

Sometimes I think the spikes in all sorts of diagnoses of relatively mild behavior and PDD syndromes has to do with the rise of a fast-paced, convenience-seeking society that, for all it is superficiall tolerant of things like race, religion, and sexual orientation (in theory, at least), really has no tolerance for the effort and personal inconvenience involved in getting to know someone and accepting quirks and needs and other divergencies.

Reminds me of The Giver, and bothers the s**t out of me, to be quite frank.

A BAAP community averts this by slowing down the pace of life and valuing the less socially graceful for other skills they may possess. A TAM community averts it by quasi-eliminating diversity, allowing people to isolate themselves into relatively homogenous pockets.

Either would serve, according to preference. Me, I'll take the BAAP farming commune. To the extent that, if Hubby weren't deeply in love with his technology, I'd consider becoming a convert Mennonite (because I like buttoning my clothing instead of using straight pins, and although I would love to rely on it less have family spread over too much of this continent to give up my car altogether).

As per Aghogday's BAP theory, one would expect a higher number, even a "cluster", of ASD diagnosises near areas with cultural traits that would include non-acceptance of BAP traits, but would also attract those with BAP traits.

Aghogday, just to make it clear, your "Amish" and "Matrix" concepts don't directly relate to the existance or non-existance of the Broader Autistic Phenotype, is that correct?

I think more than a few readers of this thread seem to have mixed them.

I wonder how gender roles and gender expectations might play into this.

While there is certainly a patriarchal element in Amish Counties, it is not a commercialized one where sex sells. Even though there is that potential uncomfortable restriction in roles per the patriarchal element, there is not the same "Barbie" idealism that is placed in larger society.

That thought comes from a place of personal perspective as I am almost one hundred percent sure that my Maternal Grandmother was one of very few women of her time, that could reasonably be identified as a female diagnosed on a spectrum from a distance, in behavior and the androgyny that is often associated in both males and females diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome.

My grandmother picked the cotton fields as a youth to help support her younger sisters after her mother died, and went on to wait tables for 12 hours a day to support her children for years. She also was one of the first women in her town to wear pants working at an Auto Parts store.

She reminds me of Temple Grandin in many ways. I looked at her as a stoic figure of strength and vulnerability at the same time.

She played Basketball, so there were no difficulties in motor development or visual spatial skills of significance (litmus test, if you will), but she would have likely met many of the characteristics in the DSMIV, which actually neither include the motor development issues or visual spatial skills difficulties as part of that actual ASD diagnostic criteria.

I apologize Agent Palpatine; I overlooked your question when I made my last comment.

The BAP is very much an integral part, at least to date, as the criteria for a DSMIV diagnosis is so loosely described, currently, that almost anyone, depending on environmental stress and other factors, might be diagnosed, or misdiagnosed with that current criteria, with the highest weighted factor of awareness, desire, need or affordability of diagnosis actually resulting or not resulting in a diagnosis for many people.

There is no question at this point in time that there is a Broader Autism Phenotype, where there are substantial percentages of people in the General population with characteristic traits of Autism where they do not either meet, desire, have accessibility to, or can afford, a DSMIV diagnosis.

Perhaps the percentage is not as high as 10 to 15%, if everyone was assessed but it is almost a given that the BAP is close to 10% per the estimates from assessment that have been done to date.

The issue of "fuzzy border" on the BAP in who is or is not diagnosed, out of that potential 10 to 15% of individuals in the general population assessed with Autistic characteristics will likely come into better focus in the future, with DSM5 criteria, as the common element of disorder becomes a clearer one, per reciprocal social communication.

In other words, people who do not have substantial difficulty in the back and forth flow of effective non-verbal/verbal social communication, will likely not be diagnosed under DSM5 guidelines, whereas technically they could be diagnosed with only difficulties in social interaction and RRBI's, with no substantial difficulty in social communication, under DSMIV criteria.

For current purposes of the screens that have been done using DSMIV diagnostic tools, I do not see them as much more effective than the AQ or Aspie Quiz tests, which currently assess about 10 to 15% of the population in the ASD range of "Autistic Characteristics" without diagnosis.

This is the BAP as defined by Simon Baron Cohen, per his AQ test, and "Aspie traits" as described by the author of the Aspie Quiz.

The BAP is a generalized group of traits that can be measured in a population demographic to screen a propensity for those that "might" meet diagnostic criteria, if they are substantially clinically impaired in the loosely described behavioral impairments in DSMIV criteria.

Per the most recent research, I linked earlier in the thread, assessing an effective DSM5 diagnostic tool, vs. an ineffective DSMIV diagnostic tool that misdiagnosed close to 90% of children's medical records with an ASD diagnosis, it is already a given, I think, that while not amplified by the DSM5 work group member that conducted the study, the level of increased restrictions in the DSM5 criteria is in the "fine print" of her research amplified by critical assessment in the "CrackingtheEnigma" website article I linked to, earlier in this thread.

However, regardless of how small the diagnosed spectrum gets in the future as a result of these greater restriction in DSM5 criteria are, the tools that assess "Autistic traits", currently in the general population will not likely change.

I use the example often, but my spouse scores 32, in the range of "Autistic traits", in the AQ test and has absolutely no problem with reciprocal social communication as that applies to the communication part.

My spouse is highly emotional and highly communicative in reciprocal social communication, given an opportunity, but has substantial difficulties with symptoms associated with Social Anxiety, OCD, and a relatively mild form of Epilepsy. My spouse is more often the one that gets upset when other people do not reciprocate social communication, particularly me.

On the other hand, I score in the 40's, now on the AQ test, and likely 40's on the AQ test, when I was in my early 20's.

At some midpoint between early 20's and now, when I was working with the public among literally hundreds of people a day for close to two decades, forced to socially adapt per reciprocal social communication, I probably scored lower than my spouse does now, on the AQ test.

I did not talk much and adapted by listening a lot and giving short answers when I had to, but people saw me as attentive instead of lacking reciprocal social communication skills.

Much of my social communication was in effect echolalia, which for practical purposes in dealing with the people I had to deal with was sufficient for success, until I was pushed into leadership positions for being the "reliable one".

How you doing? with no answer back from the other person and Thank you and a smile from me, regardless if they said something or not, was 95% of what was required as a task I performed with little error.

I was very predictable to other people, and was often considered the nicest person they ever met. After all, who else would say thank you to another person when THEY were supposed to say thank you other than a person oriented to echolalia as a form of communication.

Most people have no idea what echolalia is, even me at that point in time, so their expressed thought was most often wow this person is just "too nice".

Human Algorithms are the nicest of people at times.

I figured that was my job, and had a hard time understanding why my fellow employees had such a difficult time at it.

Not likely I would have lasted never making it into the social circles of the "political environment" of the workplace, with a lack of the "complex" social skills required for that, which included the complex "malice - cious" stuff, unless people needed my computers skills, which at that time were in demand.

That is not the case now where most everyone in the general population has the proficiencies they did not have at that time.

I had a hyperlexic language delay until age 4, and had difficulty with spoken language my entire life. I could understand almost anything but putting it into coherent spoken language or even written language before typing, was extremely hard.

There is no telling how many people are adapting the same way I did as we speak now. Some successfully; some not successfully depending on if they could find an "environmental work niche", like I did.

In summary, the AQ test at this point, and the loosely structured DSMIV diagnostic tools that are used in comparative ways across populations, measure something, but do not clearly measure something.

I would rather default my analysis at this point in time to the BAP, which generally exist among all social animal populations at similar percentages, until the DSM5 diagnostic criteria is put into effect actually measuring one common condition, per reciprocal social communication impairments, which are required in diagnostic guidelines at the time of diagnosis.

Up until this point, there are probably thousands of individuals, with characteristics like my spouse, who identify as "Actually Autistic" assessing themselves with the AQ test like my spouse did, and not necessarily meeting a diagnosis, per DSM5 guidelines.

And on the other hand, thousands of individuals with substantial impairment in reciprocal communication using echolalia/human algorithm memes as a tool for survival, that is working well enough, where a diagnosis of anything is nowhere on their radar.

There is no way at this point in time, that I can see it as a clear issue, but I do see it becoming much clearer in the distant future as far as who might or might not receive an actual diagnosis of ASD.

In effect, the difficulties my spouse has had through the full course of the lifespan, per social issues, has been substantially more socially "disabling" than mine because my spouse is so sensitive to the reciprocal communication of others, in triggering potential negative emotions, whereas for me I most often generated a positive response of emotional contagion with others, that I could share and enjoy, that came as a result of my consistently con-science-ious behaviors directed toward others.

That word con - scient- ious is one key to success for a person adapting with substantial difficulties with reciprocal social communication with others, as it basically means the "science" of avoiding cons (negative things in life or human conflicts).

Whereas written earlier, malicious is an adjective of emotional negative intent of malice toward others that I rarely share in any form of reciprocal communication.

Not everyone has to pay as much attention in avoiding con-flict as a person with inherent difficulties in verbal/nonverbal language and social communication.

That results in some very nice people who make it part of their goal to survive in daily life, on a moment-to-moment basis, that they can never fully take for granted.

Per my signature line, that is how I survived in life: the Science that is the study of Kindness toward others, and patterns of similarities or what I describe more specifically in that signature line as the "Science of Kindology".

It also reasonably could be described as unconditional compassion/love, for others that come because of successful adaptation to a social environment. In my case using an adaptive tool of simple echolalia, and later a keyboard and a screen.

I live in what I describe as an "Autistic Matrix", per the design of others, and compliance from me. However, an Autistic Algorithm best describes my type of "human being", if one wants to use two words to describe my experience on the spectrum, which has taken me decades to find the words to describe what sets me apart from most other people, other than a vague sense of separation in life experience as a Social Animal.

However, for most of my life, I have felt extremely connected to the emotional energies of others, but not affected much by the complexity of changes in their facial expressions.

Often I see people smiling and making eye contact with others while they talk. I cannot imagine being able to talk, smile, and make eye contact at the same time. It takes my entire con - scient- ious effort just to say something.

However, the emotion in my eyes when listening to people comes through as sincere to others, back when I did not have vision problems/immune system issues, which has since blunted my instinctual reaction in that area of social communication.

I have never had any significant problem looking people in the eye when listening to them. I more often make them uneasy because I do not break an intense stare of focus in gathering every bit of communication about them through their eyes that I can, as I do not often get it through other areas of facial expression.

People do some cool things with their faces that is like a circus act in comparison to what I can imagine my face doing, other than making intense eye contact in listening and baring teeth when appropriately observed as desired.

My sister who is also diagnosed on the spectrum rarely does the facial expressions either. She does not do the con-scient-ious baring of teeth either.

I can remember when I first saw a video of myself talking to someone else, and the intense focus of my eyes, made me uncomfortable. I had no idea what I looked like when I was talking to someone until I was close to 30 years old. In addition, I had no idea how to regulate that after that point either, as it was the only way I could substantially get enough information from them to understand them.

I have not historically been shy, as far as avoiding people; I just cannot adequately do the back and forth part of flesh and blood reciprocal social communication, when it goes beyond responding with a monologue of analysis or an algorithm of how you doing, thank you or you are welcome.

It is much easier for me to do that in writing, because I have adequate time to analyze written communication.

None of the difficulties I have may apply to a person that had no problems speaking or understanding and making those complex facial expressions that go beyond the eyes.

For me that is Autism. If my spouse wanted to personally identify with "Autistic" specific to social anxiety and OCD, I would be 100% behind it.

I found it very hard to be part of any social circle, past a few one on one contacts in life, because the equation of algorithm goes up exponentially as people are added in to it.

Alternately, my spouse had the same level if not greater difficulty because of the oversensitivity to understanding those subtle non-verbal behaviors of others sometimes bordering on what I observe as paranoia, because I am not receiving all that information that my spouse is.

I have upset more people in my life for not getting angry, when anger is directed at me, than any other actual reciprocal social communication understood from me.

There are many ironies about Autism when one takes a detailed look at it, as far as who is or who is not really connected to what is going on in their environment.

When I see a person that never reacts by getting mad and personally attacking other people for their emotional outbursts, I often suspect there could be an element of that broader autism phenotype involved.

It can come from a place absent in the emotion of malice but more fully mindful in awareness and focused in the activity of the science of defeating conflict (con-scient-ious-ness) with "reasons" or no reaction at all.

KATiA MiA: Kind Autistics Taking Everything Mindful in Awareness (Autistic Love and the Science of Kindology. An ideological first identity).

My own personal formula of Autistic Adaptation to the social environment, that I have seen others like me share in my life experiences, before there was any label for me or them.

I more identify with Autism as the adaptation that comes with it for me, rather than any label of diagnostic criteria. That is the part I have been fully aware of as long as I can remember. However, only recently able to more concisely describe it in words, that I am sure may still be difficult for others to understand, as that itself is the core of my difficulty, reciprocal social communication.

It is a science and intense study that remains a lifelong one for me, every moment of every day, where communication with others is at play.

The only thing that likely separates me from potential "psychopathy" is the motor skills difficulties, behavior generally fitting within the social norm, usually not fully appropriate for the social norms of communication, and extreme sensitivity to the flesh and blood emotional contagion of others when someone else is experiencing emotional or physical pain. Along with a strict code of moral behavior reinforced by my mother. Take out the mother element, extreme emotional contagion, and motor skills difficulties, and I might have been a criminal.

Take out the extreme sensitivity to emotional contagion and motor skills difficulties only and I might have made a good law enforcement officer like my father, Doctor, Nurse, Fire fighter or Judge.

It is interesting to me how certain neurodevelopmental impairments, neurological "over-sensitivities", and factors of the "moral" environment, at least in part, can result in assessed "good" deeds instead of assessed "bad" deeds.

That said, the Criminal, the assessed psychopath, the Doctor, the Law Enforcement Officer, and the Nurse could all share Autistic Traits and be part of the assessed Broader Autism Phenotype, when it comes to taking Mr. Cohen's AQ test.

Mr. Cohen drives some of the angry people that don't like him because he says they have empathy problems to further empathy of anger, with his polite and always compassionate and caring demeanor with others, both in written and flesh and blood communication that he is known for in never expressing malice, personally, toward others.

He too, likely has his place on a similar BAP that many others do, along with the androgyny that often comes with it, and the unlined faces of the same type of smile and twinkle of eye lasting through a lifetime for some.

With a common element of the focused attention to the Science of eliminating conflicts.

Con-Scient-ious-ness. Four syllables that basically mean the same thing as:

KATiE MiA: Kind Autistics Taking in Everything Mindful in Awareness, Autistic Love and the Science of Kindology.

If only I could learn to use fewer words to communicate, I might produce more effective reciprocal social communication.

However, I never made this specific "A-Ha" moment of understanding until I responded to your question, in typed and written detail, which I could observe and speak at the same time.

Another day another complex Algorithm in monologue of communication for me, and likely only me.

The reciprocal communication difficulty that I cannot seem to escape. Even if I understand it in ex-cruciating detail for others that might attempt to read those details.

I guess one positive thing, this go around is, this is not a thread someone else started.

A "Mono-blogue", might be the "Cave" I should "kindly" remain in. However, I too, am still a social animal, if not odd than most.

There are probably many people on a broader autism phenotype spending their times on Mono-Blogs, Blogging to themselves, in observed written communication as an increasing larger structure of building in words. Effectively, in what may result as an RRBI of Autistic Communication.

Addition-ally, resulting at times, in more stately mansions of words.

This is an interesting part too, of the modern version of the "Autistic Matrix", which existed before in "Autistic" Diaries or "Auto" Biographies.

My "Autistic Matrix" at one point in time was sensations, sharing emotional flesh and blood contagion, and pictures later changing into words as adaptation to visual loss, now changing back into sounds pictures and even videos, in an avenue of adaptation provided by a Google Blogger format for talking to myself.

Wait a minute, this is getting seriously weird. As a matter of logic, are you saying that AS is to be determined solely based upon one's reaction to their environment? Meaning someone might go from being on the Spectrum to off of it and back again? But that they'd have the observable physical characteristics [phenotype] the whole time while ping-ponging off and on the Spectrum?

If what you're saying is true, the DSM-5 is looking more and more like a complete train-wreck to me.

Autism is defined by behavioral impairment alone in the DSM5 criteria. The National Institute of Mental Health, NIMH director, Tom Insel, is directing government research to a model of "Brain Disorder" rather than "Mental Disorder".

Effectively speaking per the DSM5 directed research by those on the Committee, the DSMIV criteria was a train wreck. It remains to be seen what will happen with DSM5 criteria, but it is still highly subjective because the criteria is based on behavioral impairment.

Causal factors are not part of the Criteria, beyond the tidy description of "neurodevelopmental disorder" without any test for neurological difference, in actual neurological physiology.

The DSM5 identifies social stress in the environment as causation for symptoms fully manifesting later in life. This is the loophole that allows adults to be diagnosed later in life. Autism will still be diagnosed, overall, early in childhood

There is no actual diagnosis of BAP, it is just a collection of autistic traits that don't fully meet criteria for an actual diagnosis, that can be measured by online tests.

It seems likely that there are a considerable number of people on that broader autism phenotype not "officially" diagnosed or potentially diagnosable that identify with the term Autistic. While not an official diagnosis, I think it is a reasonably appropriate adjective to describe autistic traits in a person whether or not they meet actual diagnostic criteria or not.

People are already using the term that way as part of their freedom of speech. I don't see any problem with that as long as they don't attempt to suggest those individuals more seriously impacted who are officially diagnosed don't have a real challenge in life. If they do, they are also exercising their freedom speech. I support that, in that regard, even if I disagree with the opinion.