help us develop a scientific scale to assist the diagnosis

Post Reply New Topic

Well, regardless of whether Mme Ari and Dr Ed are who they say they are, I think Mme Ari has shown us all we need to know in her last couple of postings at least.

It makes me wonder just how much they really, really understand and know about people on the spectrum if she can write so...what? Defensively, attackingly even, patronisingly, condescendingly, accusatorily, dismissively...in fact, so darned unprofessionally? In all their 'years' of hanging around Aspies you'd have thought they'd gained some idea of how to approach HFA/AS folks, surely?

And we are supposed to be soooo thankful for a bit of 'free advocacy'...? What, the poor, misguided loons can't organise and advocate for themselves? She's using her precious time and money to 'help' us? From whom does she take her remit? Did we ask her? What sort of power trip is this?

She clearly has no idea of the numbers of her colleagues whose same sort of condescension, arrogance and extremely hurtful pronouncements many of us have had to endure over the years. Mme Ari is simply demonstrating - quite adequately, thank you - the sort of attitudes towards us that are actually behind all the cr*p that we are forced to suck up IRL from her colleagues.

Is this what she says to all her hapless 'patients' who dare to gainsay her: go and get social skills classes??

Despite all that, I think I find Mme Ari's accusation that there are some/many people here masquerading as AS almost more offensive. Is this pot calling kettle black? Or just another way to try and spark fights amongst the forum members here? Divide and rule?

I'm so surprised Tony Attwood lent his name to all this, I really am.

(or maybe that's Toni - with a little heart-shaped dot over the 'i' - at the beauty salon she professes not to go to in favor of getting her hands mucky around us...?)



PS - I just took the RAADS test at their website. A lot of the questions are to do with physical sensitivity though not with emotional/psychological sensitivity. This is a big feature of AS....no wonder they got upset here, they don't seem to have factored that one in. Duh. (my score= 149 of poss 234 - well over their 77 threshold). I much prefer rdos's tests, he asks much more relevant questions and the right 'quirky' ones about how it actually feels.

She sure hung around for a bit after posting that last one too-at least a good 5 minutes after posting. I assume to see what kind of reaction she would get. Maybe this is the research? Go onto a forum and stir up some crap with people, insult them, degrade them, then study their reactions to it? It seems to be the only idea that makes any sense for this kind of behavior after studying ASDs for so incredibly long... or was it not actually working with them and studying from afar? I mean, if they were really doing so much, somebody here would have heard of them instead of being skeptical.

Asking respect from us is one thing, but DEMANDING it after hurling insults our way is a whole different thing. It just doesn't make any sense, and I still don't really see how they are actually helping anyone. Everyone was denied a chance to participate in it, then insulted for not understanding what they are trying to do... and we never did get a clear explanation on here for it. Instead they send us to websites to play seek and find. Granted, I'm sure it isn't hard to find once you get there, but I have much trouble navigating an unfamiliar site and get overwhelmed when trying to find something like that sometimes... not sure I'm the only one that felt like we were given a fishing pole to go find it ourselves rather than them actually just clearly explaining.

Oh, heeheehee. I am really lol'ing on this thread full of aspie wannabes. Folks, I don't know who the hell "diagnosed" some of you with AS, but you've clearly got emotional issues that are far more serious than AS would ever be. I don't know these Ritvos, never heard of them until this thread. I googled Ed Ritvo and the phone number he cited in his OP, and a lot of credible info came up. I grew more and more shocked with each post that followed, because I couldn't believe the sarcastic, antagonistic s**t I was reading. Looked a lot more like an NT gangbang than a bunch of helpless, naive aspies defending themselves. I'm not impressed with the way the Ritvos have gone about this, either. They should have gone through Alex and avoided all this drama, but I still commend them for trying. Guess they've learned a lesson about WP, as have I. But I thank you ALL for the laughs.

It might have been better to post those finding earlier.

There's something odd about their response though, a bit too much, like we all have to feel so guilty now. I'd expect something different from people who've worked with other people as they would be supposed to have. Especially if you've worked with Aspies. Odd.

^Their emotional responses surprised me a little, too. But whether or not it was professional behavior on their part, I do understand why they were offended. Some of those early responses to Ed Ritvo were really hateful and unnecessary, so I can certainly understand why the woman (I'm assuming she's his wife) got pissed off. Yeah, they goofed by not introducing and explaining their call for volunteers in a more organized fashion, but holy crap...

THE RITVO FAMILY WAS SENT HERE TO SAVE US - BE GRATEFUL! Oh, and we'll give you $20 too (manicure money?)

Since we're analyzing them to bits, a diagnositic crisis has occurred. Unless Ari has supernatural diagnostic powers (I think not) there is NO WAY she can know from a cursory post that one if 'faking' the condition. I am certain in her profession, like all analogous professions, she has encountered those who fake symptoms, for whatever misguided reason(s). But certainly she cannot 'know' this about us or anyone, for that matter, without clear systemic diagnostic criteria. Aspergers is often misdiagnosed and comorbidity is nearly expected. So I do not understand this implication (re:'fake' Aspies) - ILLOGICAL. This does make me question empircal rationale, even motive. How, then, is their subsequent research NOT bias?

I am a scientist and this way of thinking is not even a concept for me or I would not be in the field. I could look at a flask of purple liquid and say, 'oh, that's potassium permanganate' but I'm just guessing. Just because a solution happens to be purple does not 'prove' the species. Point taken, super-diagnostician with mystical powers? What are you (not) thinking? I'll remind you of the scientific method right now.

Seems like these guys are not interested in getting their questionnarie evaluated in a large population study. I sent proposals both on their site and to Ed privately, but no response. Does anybody know about the usage conditions of the questions? Are they for general research use or are they copyrighthed? If it really is a multi-institution initiative, they should be for general use, and I can evaluate them anyway (should be fun ).