The ontology of Autism

Post Reply New Topic

Which therefore can only be confirmed either way through the medical diagnostic process.

Wouldn't one of the schizophrenias be more statistically likely? Munchausen is extremely rare, isn't it?
Have you seen any statistics on the frequency of these among people who think they have autism?

I get a bit pissed of when people bandy about hypochondriasis and malingering.

Stupid NHS doctors accused me of hypochondria when I was kid in the 1970s because they couldn't easily explain the things I complained about. These were subsequently diagnosed by real doctors at top hospitals in New York as asthma, a congenital malformation of the upper urethra (which required surgical correction) and autism. I know my experience is not universal and there are times when these labels are used accurately, but I am still quite angry that my real difficulties were dismissed and trivialized because of the incompetence and ignorance of medical professionals. I would be very careful about presuming either of these because if you get it wrong you are likely to really harm your patient.

Nevertheless I am grateful that more accurate and professional diagnostic procedures eventually confirmed the real conditions.

You're missing the reasoning. It isn't about insult or implication.

The point is that it is statistically possible that those who don't have an official diagnosis could be 'faking it'.

Statistically, there is a probability that c.5% of users of WP who are diagnosed as autistic are misdiagnosed.
Statistically, there is a 100% possibility that every undiagnosed user of WP could have another syndrome.

I'm not disputing that the majority of undiagnosed users may be autistic. They may be.

The only potential difference between those diagnosed as autistic and those who could have another syndrome is the medical diagnosis itself.

Why would people immediately jump on the extremely rare Munchhausen syndrome?...and why should they think their 'assumption' is more valid than that individuals suspicion they have autism? It is not nice to trivalize peoples problems and essentially accuse them of faking a condition for 'sympathy' and does not really have a place here so I hate when I see things moving in the direction of that attitude here especially since this site is open to people who aren't officially diagnosed as well as non autistic individuals and people go an try and make it cliquish here...I'd say it would be more likely if someone is wrong about their suspicion of autism they'd have a Personality Disorder, Schizophrenia or Severe generalized anxiety mixed with social anxiety.

Last edited by Sweetleaf on 30 Nov 2014, 12:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

I'm not accusing.

I'm saying it is statistically possible.

Statistically it is very, very, very unlikely...that even half the self-diagnosed actually have 'munchausen syndrome' and not autism. Of course it is possible there are individuals with muncheausen syndrome(if its even real not sure its even in the recent DSM) claiming to have autism...but it is not an assumption that should just be thrown about as it can be pretty damaging to people who are really struggling with autism or something else they suspect to be autism.

But possible - and the only thing to confirm either way is the diagnostic process itself. Hence it validates itself.

PS you're reading too much into my addition of Munchausen syndrome - I put an etc at the end of the list to indicate all other possible conditions.


Therefore Aspergers isn't real?



It's not an assumption - it is a statistical possibility.


Try to see what I'm saying objectively.

Alright perhaps you meant nothing by that bit, but if I was still 'self diagnosed' rather than official and tried talkign about my suspicions and had someone say 'are you sure you don't just have Munchhausen syndrome' I would probably think they are trying to subtly accuse me of faking...even if that was not the true intent. Either way I still do not think it is an assumption to be carelessly thrown about but I am not saying you do that.

Also I guess just not sure it ever was in the DSM or if its recognized as a real mental health 'condition' in any sense these days...I don't doubt it is a real thing if there really are people who can't control attention seeking behavior like that, just a little fuzzy on the details. I mean there is that disorder where people can't help shop-lifting, and much of the time they take really pointless things.

This is a very high error rate. This is important stuff. In a six sigma world, this is nothing to be proud of.

Imagine an airline that was able to keep planes from crashing just 95% of the time. Disaster. Imagine the secret services using face recognition that was 95% effective to assign targets for drone strikes or put people in indefinite detention... Imagine automobile breaks that incorrectly read user input 5% of the time. Carnage.

Given the number of autistic people seeking professional diagnosis each year, there must be an enormous number of misdiagnosed people. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that a number of this professional misdiagnoses declare autistic people to be non-autistic.

Given the number of kids who are being professionally diagnosed and for whom critical services are dependent on that dianosis, this is an appalling error rate.

This is sophistry. You can't assign a percentage to the general idea of possibility like that. If you want to start using percentages, you are talking specific probability, not general possibility and there is not a 100% probability that every undiagnosed WP user has another syndrome. The probability of something exotic like munchausens is impossible to calculate, but it has to be very low--probably lower than the 5% error rate in professional ASD diagnosis.

It stands to reason that the error rate in self-diagnosis is higher than the error rate in professional diagnosis, but that doesn't say anything about the probability that people who erroneously self diagnose really have mucnhausens or are lying.

If you are not until you have a diagnoses, than it is not autism at all. It is money. Money, and paper.

Without money, and paper, you don't have anything.

People can fake, and fool too. If you have knowledge, money, and paper, you can be anything you want.

Psychologists cannot read minds.

If you are self diagnosed, in order to be correct about it, without using money, and paper, it would depend on the amount of studying, and research you do, and how well you know yourself. There are plenty enough people on this site who probably know more about it than the professionals.

It is important to know yourself.

If you do not have it unless a professional tells you you do, than this is not about what it is. It is about what the professional is. And what the professionals can control. It is about money. It is about a piece of paper controlling, and deciding everything. It is not about you.

5% actually seems quite low to me. Physical diseases have a higher rate of misdiagnosis than that. What's more, such misdiagnoses can result in serious injury or death.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html

You should not argue it's not valid to call yourself without and official diagnosis based on science then argue against the scientific consensuses that Autism is a lifelong condition.

For arguments sake let's say while sitting here I develop chest pains and shortness of breath. I ignore the symptoms and die. My body is found. Heart attack is suspected but it could be something else. An autopsy confirms heart attack. Since it was not confirmed, while I was having chest pains I was not having a heart attack? Taking this logic further I was not having shortness of breath and chest pains and never did since because no doctors were present so these were not diagnosed?

When we start talking about denying a condition we are getting into the realm of bullying. I don't think that is the intent here, I think it's a combination of special interest, autistic black and white thinking but the result is bullying. Why should I care? I am diagnosed now. Because that I was autistic the first 55 years of my life is being denied. And I have every right to be insulted by that.

Well said.

I could not agree with Adamantium more on this topic. You is or you ain't. There are benefits to diagnosis for most people who actually have autism, I think, but the diagnosis doesn't make you autistic.

Anyone who disagrees should never claim as Autistic another famous dead person like Einstein or Newton. They couldn't possibly be on the spectrum because they were never diagnosed.

Oversimplified and Irrelevant to my point. Some physical diseases have a higher rate of misdiagnosis, others are diagnosed with greater accuracy. Also, nit-picky point. Autism is a physical disorder: unless you believe it is some magic/spiritual disturbance in an unseen force in people, then it is a disorder of neurology involving both the central and to some degree the peripheral nervous system.

Medical diagnosis in general may well be a terribly inaccurate enterprise with low standards. I have seen stats about radiology that put misreading of scans at 3-5%. This does not make a 5% error rate in something important acceptable or somehow equivalent to "close to certain." And it doesn't justify the hagiography of professional diagnosticians that sometimes goes on around here.

NASA cancelled the space shuttle program because of a 1.5% flight failure rate.

They do deny your condition unless you have money.