help us develop a scientific scale to assist the diagnosis

Post Reply New Topic

http://rivaariellaritvo.net/aboutus.html

Here's the link to his website, which contains information regarding this study. He looks legitimate enough for me.

Apparently his highschool son is on the spectrum. I wonder if he is a member here. Did you notice on that website of Edward R. Ritvo that several members of his family are involved with autism in one way or another? I find that incredibly awesome.

I'm still not convinced though that the person we have here on WP is the real deal. If he is, we can all apologize and then we can all carry on.

I did a Google Scholar search and it came back with 50 (fifty!) articles he's published, every one about autism.
So I'm inclined to believe him.

deleted

Yes, what YowlingCat said : )

How difficult (and professional) would it have been for him to simply post the link to his site?

And, as for attitude, well, I can imagine that not a few WP members have had less than pleasant experiences with trusting the wrong person. Hey! Nobody would lie to us or take advantage...never happens.

And you've got to wonder. He comes to WP and is insulted when folks here behave like...Aspies!

I have no transgressed so my apology is not even in order. I accused him of nothing or even questioned him personally. I am fully within my rights to ask about his research methods - he made the initial offer. So, if he's offended.......too bad. He'll get over it. I thought he was rather quaint; I have no animosity whatsoever. Quite the contrary - how brave of him to post here! I do hope he has a sense of humor, which is not incongruent with his field. I do recognize and appreciate his concentrated work and efforts. I work hard too and know the sacrifices for his progress, which should be applauded. Nothing wrong with me (or others) playing with him....just trying to be socialable, which I'm admittedly not very good at due to my neurology - that's a given and Ed should by this time realize this about us, yes?

Ed, still friends? Am I still your favorite? <my daddy fixation>

Still, part of your offer for us to be subjects and your research methods, hypothesis, motives, etc. are still not clear. I do not make assumptions. Some of the others were just exerting their healthy skepticism.

Dear All:
I am a newcomer. My name is Ariella and I am the principal investigator and corresponding author on the diagnostic scale which there is so much to do about.
For the record:
1. If it wasn't for Ed Ritvo, you would not know you were Aspies. He was on DSM committee and helped defined the entity we know as AS today. He wasn't happy with the definition so he continued his research and advocacy work.
2. My father has AS so I am from both sides of the planet (irrelevant? Maybe, but a fun fact)
3. It is definitely"THE ED RITVO". No one else types so badly.
4. He may not be a typist but contact him and ask him for his CV. He has devoted his life to helping wrong planet people. Not just in research but advocating and seeing anyone who needed to be seen even if they could not pay.
5. He helped put AS and autism on the map that you called wrong planet.
6. The study is not to be done by mail. Every subject must be seen, diagnosis confirmed utilizing ADOS module 4, followed by a WASI (brief IQ test) and Constantino SRS (when a third party relative is available). It must be done systematically to be accepted as science. There is no preference or prejudice against any state (Alaska included). it simply cannot be done by mail. However, Ed has been dragging his 77 year old bones around the country collecting data. if there are enough people in Alaska, he will travel there and you will have a twofer--participating iin the research and getting to see that he is the real thing.
7. those of you who received 20 dollars and have answered by mail--sorry for the misunderstanding. enjoy the 20 dollars. We can't use the data without following our research protocol.
8. I will try in the next week to publish the protocol on the website so your questions can be answered.
PS. ed Ritvo is doing this as a public service. He is retired and is not getting paid for any of this. Neither am I. respect is in order here WP PEOPLE. You have had a life full of mishaps and misrepresentations, you can be suspicious but it is what it is. Stephen Shore is our friend. He helped us with the pilot study. Why don't you ask him about Ed? Ask Temple also!
Any questions:
[email protected]

I am reading through some of the related articles on the Ritvo site and am browsing the RAAD and have also volunteered. My one question though is whether the Ritvo team is wanting feedback and suggestions for continuing to edit and update the RAAD, because at present I am having a very difficult time answering a fair portion of the questions/statements because of the specific way in which they are worded.

I would truly like to see a broader, more neurodiverse tool be made available. But I hope the team won't just be using us as non-communicative lab rats (I don't think you will given the history and apparent philosophies stated on the site) but I would like confirmation of this.

I would like to be able to give concise, perhaps detailed feedback on each specific question/statement because, as I said, many feel as though they are worded in a non-autistically-friendly manner and is leading to confusion for myself (and perhaps for others) or a forced-choice dissatisfaction with the answers (which I don't think does any research study any good due to a drop in precision and reliability-- forcing a diverse interpretation).

Thank you.

Would love feedback! go ahead! That is the idea!! !!

This thread is a hoot! First good laugh I've had all day.

- sorry Ariella and Ed, but these guys are funny - but perhaps not NT kind of funny! And they have a serious point too: no doubt every single one of us has been ripped off at some point because we're so trusting.

I wanted to say something though about the DSMIV,specs which Ed helped to compile ...

It treats ASDs as 'illnesses', 'disorders', it pathologises a whole section of humanity who just have different and very creative, honest ways of thinking and seeing - often quite startlingly useful and profitable ways of seeing. Why not take the positives and work out how NTs can emulate them, why not make the world more equal so that we are not thought of as freaks...? The DSM IV medicalises and encourages discrimination instead of increasing acceptance and understanding.

Secondly, the DSMIV criteria are soooooo narrow, if you don't fit exactly the observer's idea of what they mean then you're not an Aspie. Note: I said 'the observer'...the criteria are ALL from the point of view of some putative 'objective' observer, they are not from the lived experience of any Aspie I know. Thus, they are invalid as far as I'm concerned. Like a scientist looking down a microscope at a protozoa in a petrie dish: how friendly is that? How is that helping to widen acceptance of Aspies as simply different?

Thirdly, the DSMIV criteria are based on 'objective' observers' observations of MALE people on the spectrum. Females present quite differently (if, indeed, males actually present in the classic DSMIV way!!). No wonder girls and women are sent away with dxs of neuroticism, depression, anxiety, hypochondria. No wonder there are 'more' males than females who are on the spectrum. Not.

You're the guy who helped put this DSMIV criteria together?? Well, thanks old fruit...YOU, yes you personally, helped make my life immeasurably more difficult and very very painful over many, many years - until I found a truly expert expert who recognised the presentation in me as a female Aspie.

...nope, DSMIV definitely doesn't work for me. Back to the drawing board Ed and Ari...you are the weakest link.

Ok, Ed - your turn.......I understand this is the cadence of NT conversation. We talk, you talk, we talk, you talk.....rinse, repeat. We've said our part - NEXT! <cue Eddie here>

Need I remind you, there are some legitimate points raised on this thread - respond accordingly. Comply.
Inquiring Aspies need to know. If you want reciprocity for your research study, you must fill in the blanks for us instead of being evasive. I admire your work, certainly. That's not in question. What I am curious about is your research methods, objectives, randomized/objective subjects, etc. This is what we're asking. And we are within our rights for asking (given that you do not compromise your study - that's mutually understood).

Now spill it.......your study shouldn't be a mystery and I have yet to find a link germane to this particular study (as opposed to your previous work). Understood?