Board index › General Discussion › General Autism Discussion

Can an aspie has low IQ/mental retardation?

Page 3 of 5 [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

31 Jan 2017, 7:10 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Those with Asperger's syndrome, in contrast, must by definition have suffered no cognitive delay during their first 3 years of life. 2 This means that they will usually have at least a “normal” IQ.

I found a copy of that opinion piece on line that included their references and the reference for the above statement was the WHO ICD-10 document here

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/GRNBOOK.pdf (I think that's it, the dates match)

I'll quote from that document now

Quote:
A lack of any clinically significant general delay in spoken or receptive language or cognitive development.
Diagnosis requires that single words should have developed by two years of age or earlier and that
communicative phrases be used by three years of age or earlier. Self-help skills, adaptive behaviour and
curiosity about the environment during the first three years should be at a level consistent with normal
intellectual development. However, motor milestones may be somewhat delayed and motor clumsiness is
usual (although not a necessary diagnostic feature). Isolated special skills, often related to abnormal
preoccupations, are common, but are not required for diagnosis.


In the opinion piece's paraphrasing of what was actually said they have misinterpreted. Perhaps for brevity, who knows. The original material does not reference intelligence at all and certainly does not place specific IQ thresholds. No diagnostic criteria mentions IQ thresholds or even mentions intelligence in general, the document this piece references does not reference intelligence either.

As always I will await a credible source that says there is an IQ threshold for AS. Think about it...your IQ is a snapshot of intelligence based on arbitrary parameters. At what point does your IQ have to be above 70? When you're 1-3? When you're diagnosed? If the former how do you diagnose any 6+ year old with AS when you can't possible know what their younger IQ score was? If the latter then your adult IQ is of little relevance as AS is a developmental disorder and adults have developed learning strategies to cope and they will alter IQ. And....yes....the diagnostic criteria specifically mentions this.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

31 Jan 2017, 8:24 pm

Chichikov wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Those with Asperger's syndrome, in contrast, must by definition have suffered no cognitive delay during their first 3 years of life. 2 This means that they will usually have at least a “normal” IQ.

I found a copy of that opinion piece on line that included their references and the reference for the above statement was the WHO ICD-10 document here

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/GRNBOOK.pdf (I think that's it, the dates match)

I'll quote from that document now

Quote:
A lack of any clinically significant general delay in spoken or receptive language or cognitive development.
Diagnosis requires that single words should have developed by two years of age or earlier and that
communicative phrases be used by three years of age or earlier. Self-help skills, adaptive behaviour and
curiosity about the environment during the first three years should be at a level consistent with normal
intellectual development. However, motor milestones may be somewhat delayed and motor clumsiness is
usual (although not a necessary diagnostic feature). Isolated special skills, often related to abnormal
preoccupations, are common, but are not required for diagnosis.


In the opinion piece's paraphrasing of what was actually said they have misinterpreted. Perhaps for brevity, who knows. The original material does not reference intelligence at all and certainly does not place specific IQ thresholds. No diagnostic criteria mentions IQ thresholds or even mentions intelligence in general, the document this piece references does not reference intelligence either.

As always I will await a credible source that says there is an IQ threshold for AS. Think about it...your IQ is a snapshot of intelligence based on arbitrary parameters. At what point does your IQ have to be above 70? When you're 1-3? When you're diagnosed? If the former how do you diagnose any 6+ year old with AS when you can't possible know what their younger IQ score was? If the latter then your adult IQ is of little relevance as AS is a developmental disorder and adults have developed learning strategies to cope and they will alter IQ. And....yes....the diagnostic criteria specifically mentions this.


this IS a credible that source that does that.

A motorcycle is commonly defined as a "two wheeled vehicle". So any four wheeled vehicle is by definition not a motorcycle. The definition of aspergers includes "not being ret*d" (to capsulize it into laymen's terms). Not being ret*d means "having an IQ above 70". So 70 is the cut off. Infants one to three were rarely classified as having aspergers because an infant that young with asperger wouldnt stand out as not NT (just like you wouldnt be able to measure their IQ that young). But three year old who couldnt talk WOULD stand out, and would classified as "autistic".



Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

31 Jan 2017, 8:39 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
this IS a credible that source that does that.

You're seriously telling me that when an article paraphrases and misinterprets some other work, that paraphrased misinterpretation is credible but the original source material is not?

naturalplastic wrote:
The definition of aspergers includes "not being ret*d"

Prove it. Why are you finding it so hard to simply prove this? All I am asking is for a clinical, medical definition of Aspergers or the diagnosis of Aspergers that claims you must have an IQ over 70, or that you are "not ret*d". If you can't do this then maybe you should start to question if what you are saying is correct.



Ganondox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,778
Location: USA

01 Feb 2017, 12:42 am

If one has mental retardation, they CANNOT be diagnosed with Aspergers as mental retardation is one form of cognitive development delay. They can technically have a tested IQ in the mentally ret*d range, but only if it's been concluded the tested IQ doesn't accurately reflect mental retardation as a diagnosis of mental retardation requires more than just an IQ test. Someone's IQ can drop after the diagnosis of aspergers though, but pretty much everything Chichikov said is nonsense as IQ is supposed to be more or less consistent across a lifetime except in cases of dementia or brain damage, other it's concluded it's not a reliable assessment of intelligence for that person.


_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes

Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html


Last edited by Ganondox on 01 Feb 2017, 12:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

wrongcitizen
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Oct 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 696

01 Feb 2017, 2:42 am

Fraser_1990 wrote:
No, all aspies are geniuses. If you're an aspie who isn't designing rocket ship engines for NASA, then you're under performing.


I have to disagree with this slightly. I know several aspies who score slightly under my IQ and some over. I'm about average, and I usually score around 148-154 on IQ tests. Also a vast majority of people with AS tend to have varied interests, and not all of them really like rocket ship engines. I know I don't, because I already have other interests that are less technical that take up more time.



Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

01 Feb 2017, 1:17 pm

Ganondox wrote:
but pretty much everything Chichikov said is nonsense

Yet no-one can prove me wrong. Funny that.



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

01 Feb 2017, 1:57 pm

Chichikov wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
but pretty much everything Chichikov said is nonsense

Yet no-one can prove me wrong. Funny that.

How about you prove that you can have Asperger's and intellectual disability?

In the meantime, this is in the Complete Guide to Asperger's:

Image



Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

01 Feb 2017, 3:45 pm

iliketrees wrote:
How about you prove that you can have Asperger's and intellectual disability?

Why are you shifting the burden of proof onto me? I'm not the one making statements, I'm not the one that is saying things that I can't prove has a basis in fact. You're the one stating you can't have AS unless you have a certain IQ however you have failed to show any evidence of that whatsoever. I warned you not to ask me to prove a negative yet that is exactly what you are doing, and I knew you would. You have failed to prove your own case so are asking me to prove a negative which simply can't be done.

The image you posted is simply yet another misinterpretation of the DSM-IV. Do you see the pattern here? How many times are you going to show me misinterpretations of the DSM? Why don't you simply show me the actual DSM-IV, you know, the one that mentions nothing about intelligence thresholds at all.



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

01 Feb 2017, 3:56 pm

Chichikov wrote:
The image you posted is simply yet another misinterpretation of the DSM-IV. Do you see the pattern here? How many times are you going to show me misinterpretations of the DSM?

I doubt the Tony Attwood would misinterpret the DSM IV. He knows how to interpret it, he's the expert, not you.

Quote:
Why don't you simply show me the actual DSM-IV


I tried that, but you wouldn't listen to me or the others so I'm going a different route.



Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

01 Feb 2017, 5:12 pm

iliketrees wrote:
I tried that

No, you quoted the DSM then said that a delay in cognitive development meant the person was a ret*d and you've hung your entire argument on that misrepresentation ever since. We'll just need to agree to disagree.



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

02 Feb 2017, 12:28 am

Chichikov wrote:
iliketrees wrote:
I tried that

No, you quoted the DSM then said that a delay in cognitive development meant the person was a ret*d and you've hung your entire argument on that misrepresentation ever since. We'll just need to agree to disagree.

It says a lot about you that you'll disagree and still think people are misinterpreting the ICD 10 or DSM IV even when they're experts in this field. Has it really not occurred to you that your interpretation is the incorrect one?



Ganondox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2011
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,778
Location: USA

02 Feb 2017, 12:39 am

Chichikov wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
but pretty much everything Chichikov said is nonsense

Yet no-one can prove me wrong. Funny that.


No, plenty of people proved you wrong, you just refused the proof because that's what you do.


_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes

Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html


Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

03 Feb 2017, 5:57 am

iliketrees wrote:
Chichikov wrote:
iliketrees wrote:
I tried that

No, you quoted the DSM then said that a delay in cognitive development meant the person was a ret*d and you've hung your entire argument on that misrepresentation ever since. We'll just need to agree to disagree.

It says a lot about you that you'll disagree and still think people are misinterpreting the ICD 10 or DSM IV even when they're experts in this field. Has it really not occurred to you that your interpretation is the incorrect one?

I'm not interpreting anything, simply pointing out that the various diagnostic criteria of AS do not mention intelligence or IQ thresholds. No single person has yet to show any evidence that the diagnostic criteria stipulates an IQ threshold. If this is such a well known thing why can no-one show any evidence of it? As for the "experts" I dare say Attwood was simplifying the clause that says if your symptoms\issues are *caused* by mental impairment then you don't have AS (obviously), but if your issues are not caused by mental impairment then it is not a bar to diagnosis. It's a subtle distinction but these things often are, that's why you need a professional to diagnose you and not someone on the internet that thinks they understand these things but don't. You need to stop turning to interpretations to try and prove your point as they are either wrong or simplified. It's a very simple task that no-one has done....show me the diagnostic criteria that mentions an IQ threshold. Do that or simply give up.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

03 Feb 2017, 12:45 pm

Chichikov wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
this IS a credible that source that does that.

You're seriously telling me that when an article paraphrases and misinterprets some other work, that paraphrased misinterpretation is credible but the original source material is not?

naturalplastic wrote:
The definition of aspergers includes "not being ret*d"

Prove it. Why are you finding it so hard to simply prove this? All I am asking is for a clinical, medical definition of Aspergers or the diagnosis of Aspergers that claims you must have an IQ over 70, or that you are "not ret*d". If you can't do this then maybe you should start to question if what you are saying is correct.

We have done just that.

Every source on the web says "no cognitive delays" . No cognative delays means "not ret*d". ret*d means "IQ below 70". Ergo they ALL in effect say that you cant have an IQ below 70 and be classified as aspergers.



Chichikov
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,151
Location: UK

03 Feb 2017, 1:05 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Every source on the web says "no cognitive delays" .


Please point out on this source where is says "no cognitive delays"

http://www.autism-society.org/dsm-iv-di ... fications/

Or this one

http://readingroom.mindspec.org/?page_i ... GwodFgYCSg

Or this one

http://www.autreat.com/dsm4-aspergers.html



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

04 Feb 2017, 11:20 am

Chichikov wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Every source on the web says "no cognitive delays" .


Please point out on this source where is says "no cognitive delays"

http://www.autism-society.org/dsm-iv-di ... fications/

Or this one

http://readingroom.mindspec.org/?page_i ... GwodFgYCSg

Or this one

http://www.autreat.com/dsm4-aspergers.html

Would "delay in cognitive development" have the same meaning as "cognitive development delay"? And then would "cognitive development delay" have the same meaning as "cognitive delay"?

I'd read all these the same:

Delay in social communication development
Social communication development delay
Social communication delay

Delay in motor development
Motor development delay
Motor delay

Delay in cognitive development
Cognitive development delay
Cognitive delay

etc