Page 2 of 2 [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

carlos55
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

Joined: 5 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 146
Location: uk

28 Nov 2019, 9:46 am

AsPartOfMe wrote:
This is why the question raised in the other thread about comorbids is so important. If epilepsy, depression, anxiety, stomach issues, executive dysfunctions, OCD and all the other conditions now considered common comorbids are actually autistic symptoms then autism is the horrible disease ND opponents claim it is. If the ND supporters are correct and these are not autistic traits then mental illness co morbids probably have a lot to do with being a minority. The physical ones would be related also because mental distress can cause physical illness.


Im sorry to have to break it to you but all autistic people need to read more things written by scientists who have actually studied post mortem brains under a microscope and less from so called "social justice warriors", who wear rose tinted glasses and dont know what their talking about, or worse are spreading their own self serving agenda.

The scientific consensus among scientists in laymans terms is autism is the malformation of the brain caused by neuronal migration problems caused by as yet unknown environmental / genetic causes.

Under examination autistic brains are peppered with dead neurons that never reached their ultimate destination, one of the main effects among others of this, is a malformed cerebal cortex that leeks signals causing many of the main sensory overload associated with the condition.

Of course its a spectrum of severity or damage / malformation just a question of how bad.

Regarding co morbids and chicken and egg senario of what came first.

They say you can tell a persons character by the company they keep, well in autism thats especially true being co morbid with an alphabet soup of negative brain conditions ocd, adhd, anxiety, depression, bi polar , schizophrenia and others

Autism itself is co morbid in down syndrome in 1 in 5 cases.

At the end of the day i beleive people are welcome to beleive what they like provided they dont impose their beliefs on others.

One of the biggest issues with extreamist religions is they attempt to dictate on others like what women should wear, alcohol, sexuality and what people should do which is morally wrong.

Wanting to be cured or not is a personal thing (if it ever happens )and they have no right to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.



carlos55
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

Joined: 5 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 146
Location: uk

28 Nov 2019, 4:35 pm

I foolishly left out epilepsy on the subject of co morbids.

Epilepsy is no minor condition and effects 30% of us and can kill just on its own or via falls and accidents.

Can also cause brain damage as i know someone with epilepsy whos damage showed on an mri scan and has serious memory problems from it.

Compare that to lung cancer risk through smoking 15-30% depending on light to heavy use and you can see why our average lifespan is so lowered from autism.

Also why demanding an end to research is immoral.



CockneyRebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 103,413
Location: Hanging out with my fellow Sweet Peas at Stalag 13

02 Dec 2019, 12:48 pm

ASAN is my favourite organization because they have the same belief about a cure that I have. I don't wish to be cured and I think it's great that spectrumites who don't wish to be cured has an organization that stands behind them. I support ASAN. The way that I see it is that there are autism organizations for those who do wish to be cured.


_________________
Schultz

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=26&start=645


carlos55
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

Joined: 5 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 146
Location: uk

02 Dec 2019, 3:30 pm

I’m for free choice if a cure is ever was found, you don’t want to be cured in principal good for you, just don’t be cured if one was ever found, really simple, not so hard a decision is it?, to not walk to your doctors, go in and say put me down for the new autism treatment xyz!

Or to say to your doctor im not interested.

But what about others that do?

A fear that a cure would be forced upon you is a straw man argument and an entirely different debate.

ASAN & other like them pretend they speak for all autistics which is false as they only speak for themselves and their supporters.

They also dictate & try to impose their will on those of us (there are many) who want to be cured in principal, we don’t impose our will on those that don’t want to be cured that`s the difference.

Also, a failure to distinguish between severity of symptoms in saying they don’t want a cure in principal is offensive to those who have it really bad & betrays lack of empathy in others.



Whale_Tuune
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 27 Apr 2018
Age: 20
Gender: Female
Posts: 100
Location: Narnia

02 Dec 2019, 4:41 pm

I'm not above critiquing ASAN either (obviously) but how is the fear of forced treatment unrealistic? If Autism is badly stigmatized enough, a cure could be forced on some, or doctors could be dishonest with patients in order to coerce them into taking their drugs. Big Pharma has a death grip on modern medicine, and forced/coercive medical treatment for fiscal gain is absolutely a thing.

Also, many of those who would get "treated" would likely be children or nonverbal and may not be able to advocate for themselves. Yes, I agree that a cure should be developed for those that want it, but in the current political climate and current medical system in the US (most of us on WP are based here I think), I don't think it's a "strawman" concern that bringing pharmaceuticals into the picture could corrupt medical practices and be a gateway to human rights violations.


_________________
AQ: 36 (last I checked :p)


carlos55
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

Joined: 5 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 146
Location: uk

03 Dec 2019, 11:16 am

whale_tuune wrote:
I'm not above critiquing ASAN either (obviously) but how is the fear of forced treatment unrealistic? If Autism is badly stigmatized enough, a cure could be forced on some, or doctors could be dishonest with patients in order to coerce them into taking their drugs. Big Pharma has a death grip on modern medicine, and forced/coercive medical treatment for fiscal gain is absolutely a thing.

Also, many of those who would get "treated" would likely be children or nonverbal and may not be able to advocate for themselves. Yes, I agree that a cure should be developed for those that want it, but in the current political climate and current medical system in the US (most of us on WP are based here I think), I don't think it's a "strawman" concern that bringing pharmaceuticals into the picture could corrupt medical practices and be a gateway to human rights violations.


Everything you have just said is a classic strawman position. The discusion was about someones right to be cured in principal if they want to and should not have that right dennied to them by a vocal minority for whatever reason that suits them.

Everything else is a seperate discussion, there is no autism cure, there has never been any official announcements of what would happen if there was. So presenting such a reason to refute a cure in principal is strawman.

Of course your welcome to your opinion and fears rightly or wrongly based, but the bottom line was ASAN trying to impose their will on others that suit them and pretending falsly to talk for the whole community which is wrong.

https://examples.yourdictionary.com/str ... mples.html



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 19,989
Location: Long Island, New York

03 Dec 2019, 2:31 pm

I would prefer a perfect world where people who want a cure can get it and people who do not want a cure do not get any repercussions beyond the traits/symptoms they chose to have.

But I also think that if there is a cure people who refuse to have it are going to face repercussions. I think a cure won’t be mandatory but the repercussions will make it so it might as well be mandatory. I am thinking either no insurance or much higher rates, employment discrimination and no benefits or accommodations because nobody is going to want spend money to help people who chose to be that way.

Of course children or fetuses will have no choice in the matter, the decision will be up to the parents who even if they are pro ND will face the the same bad choices plus possibly being ostracized.

If I am right, which is the lesser of two evils people wanting a cure not getting it or people who don’t want a cure facing a choice between near total exclusion or caving in and taking a cure they abhor? Damm if I know, lets hope it never comes to that.


_________________
Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person. - Sara Luterman


carlos55
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

Joined: 5 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 146
Location: uk

04 Dec 2019, 10:59 am

Its unlikely they'll be a total cure in our lifetime, what you'll have is varrious treatments to many of the symptoms like sensory problems and axiety.

Of course getting there with these require the goal of cure even if its not realistic.

As far as fetuses are concerned it will just be presented as a positive in ensuring normal brain development as opposed to curing anything, a bit like folic acid.

I do sympathise with those that criticise the US healthcare system though as this non autism article explains very corrupt.

https://thesaker.is/the-oligarch-takeov ... an-crisis/