Grrrr, vaccine ARE connected with autism. >.< That's a

Post Reply New Topic

I'll read the rest later, but I had to respond here.

I have helped him address the frustrations he, himself, has encountered. If he didn't care, I wouldn't care, but he DOES care. He wants to be an inventor, and he NEEDS people to buy into his ideas. He has created games for years, but until he learned to listen to the input of the NT kids around him, he could never get them interested in playing them with him. Now that he listens and understands them better, his games have taken off. And he LOVES that. It is very affirming to him, to have them WANT to play what he has invented.

So, with my child, this IS part of helping him channel and develop his talents. He can't do want he wants to do in this world without being able to connect beyond himself. I did NOTHING to create those desires. He was born to be an inventor, I swear, but at age 10 he has already figured out that his ideas don't go where he would like them to if he cannot get others to listen to them.

Unless you are willing to spend a lot of time reading my posts on the parent board, don't judge my parenting. You know nothing about it.

and neither am I. My primary knowledge of them come from their website, which I can only look at small parts of at a time, before I start feeling ill. It's the things that are missing, on that site, hat you need to look for. (?) A good word about an adult autistic? I think not. These are the people primarily funding the "cure" research. They frighten parents into giving them money for that. They spend half on that research, and the rest is fed back into the organisation. Some time back, I was pointed at a PDF of their 2006 Form 990 report (for their charity status). It made quite interesting reading - including the $57,317 spent hiring a private jet for "entertainers" (bottom of page 10), and how much money they sink into fund raising events that lose money. It also says what research projects they fund.


Except that, once again, I cannot separate the two - the use of the word "cure" and the implication, from the use of that word in conjunction with essentially genetic autism, that you are thereby defining the word "eugenics"

eugenic:

A. adj. Pertaining or adapted to the production of fine offspring, esp. in the human race.

B. n. in pl. [after analogy of economics, politics, etc.] The science which has this for its object.

Last edited by lau on 18 Mar 2008, 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I never heard that said towards me, or have I said it to someone else. You are confusing me with others. Geez, I was only trying to understand where EVERYEONE was coming from. At the core, MY POSITION IS THE SAME AS YOURS on the underlying issue. I am very sorry that you missed that.



No, I do NOT want you to be normal. But I DO want you to be heard. I am sorry that you cannot see that distinction. I have said, I admit, "if you want to be heard on this, you will have to do it a different way," and that way, is admittedly, NT. Sorry, it's reality, from what I can see. I wish that you could be heard and understood as you are everywhere, but I am more pragmatic than that. I will adapt when I need to in order to succeed with the messages I want to send. I was only trying to explain that concept to you. I am not like LeKiwi or BeachDude, but I DO see value in understanding them and making a connection with them, REGARDLESS of the fact that I do not, often, agree with them. You are WRONG to assume that my effort to bridge that gap makes us all the same. It does NOT. There is a lot more diversity of thought than Pepperfire v. everyone else.



I am there right now. You choose to completely NOT see what I am trying to accomplish in these posts, and you are continuing to make arguments in your posts to me that have NOTHING to do with me or anything I have written. You just judged me solely because I had the gall to try to understand two people you disagree with. You are not speaking to me most of the time at all, but to your PRECONCEIVED notion of who I must be. Turn around is fair play? Not really. It's just war.



I cannot believe that you can for one second think that I do not know this. I have never said anything to indicate I hold such thoughts.




I am only sad that YOU do not get anything out of it. I DO listen to people who are like my son, but they cannot be the ONLY people I listen to. My love and acceptance must encompass ALL. You are refusing to allow me that.

It is perfectly fine if you do not want me in the middle of your war with LeKiwi and BeachDude. I am sorry I ever stepped in. Go back and read my first posts in this thread, where I simply stated my opinion and did not try to broker peace.

The thing is, I hate seeing people go back and forth when the only problem is an inability or unwillingess to understand each other. That is what I felt I was seeing. All I tried to do was explain to you what was being said to you by others, so that you could understand it. You could have told me to stay out of it, I would have listened. But you choose not to listen to ME well enough to understand that this was my goal. LeKiwi picked it up.

I am frustrated that you continue to believe I think things that I do not think, that I have written things I have not written, and that I act in a way I do not act. You get mad when I try to point that out, and say I need to understand you. Guess what? I DO. But I still have every right to try to get YOU to understand ME. You obviously do not, given what you have written in this last post. You can't have it one way. Yes, this is "your" forum, but I am not trying to change you. I am only trying to defend myself and others you have read incorrectly. Prejudice anywhere remains exactly that: prejudice. It is no more right for a group of whites to say bad things about African Americans when that group of whites is alone, than it is when they are in a mixed environment. Therefore, inappropriate negative views by you towards NT's deserve to be challenged, regardless of the forum. Judging me wrongly remains judging me wrongly, no matter what world that judgement is made in, and I have every right to speak against it. Yet you would deny me that. Interesting.

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 18 Mar 2008, 7:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

You know, that's the most Aspie thing you've said to me since we started talking.

I assume you mean "pedanticism" as in attention to details and rules.

I've told you, everyone here has told you that the use of the word "cure" in reference to aspieness is akin to "eradicate". This means that this board would cease to exist or cease to have need to exist, because none of us would exist. We would all have been "cured". And if you don't, MANY of us find it painfully, distressingly, horrifically offensive.

and, no matter what anyone says, no matter how verbose we are, you continue to use the word "cure" as if it were a possibility. Armed with this knowledge, continuing to use the word "cure" is an outright denial of every Aspie and Auties existence.

I told you using the word cure for this reason, is akin to supporting eugenics, you accused me of flaming you.

Look, I'm here because I'm an aspie. I'm so sick and tired of having to pretend that I'm not what I am. And the most important part of that statement is that this is what I am.

Asperger's is not something I've got. It's my genetic state. It's the only part of me that has ever made sense and you repeatedly telling me, here, especially, that you want me dead, isn't particularly tasteful.

DW, I can only listen to you when you make sense. The second you side with trolls who are only here to make fun of us or support someone who despite all sorts of input to the contrary refuses to listen to reason, then how else am I supposed to "get you".

I'm here because I can be aspie here. Not because I need to be convinced of the fact that I'm different and that I need to behave differently.

The FACT is that THIS is the only place where I can be 100% aspie and if asking LeKiwi and BeachDude to stop trying to kill me is unreasonable, then sobeit.

If you think this is a "me against the world" then hey, you finally get it.

I'm Aspie and the more that I meet people who in their ultimate ignorance are going to go out of their way to support the "eradicate autism" faction, then the more I feel like getting militant about it.

Your son at 10 years old KNOWS why he is the way he is. Your job is to give him to the tools to help him make it to adulthood without feeling like he's broken... BACKING someone who wants to kill him as if they have a valid point, whether you want to accept it or not...

Is freaking scary.

I'm sorry if that concept bothers you, but I'm not letting go of the concept NOR am I going to pretend that I have to let go of my aspieness in order to succeed.

I am 42. I have finally gotten to the point in my life where I can speak the truth and BE who I am without pretending for you or anyone else that I have a hope in H*ll of ever being anything more or better than what I am.

And that is all I'm asking for.

If that's huffy or too pedantic or too persnickity for you, then that's where it lies.

You are not the problem; don't become it by supporting the twits who think that the GFCF diet is a cure. Realize how important it will be to your son, as it is to us now, that suggesting there might be a cure when there is none, is akin to wishing we were dead. And you MAY already know that, but jumping in and saying that I should listen to where those people are coming from because they have a valid point doesn't help me to think that you disagree with them. Even though I know you do.

While it is the opinion of many here that that is the goal of those posters, I did not read them that way. Yes, those people exist, but LeKiwi is not one of them, based on what I have read. I don't back ANYONE who actually believes that preventing certain children from being born, because they may be on the spectrum, is the right thing to do. But I do try to understand those who believe there is something in the middle because, gee wiz, no one has actually proved that there is not (while I follow the Aspie logic on this, it is NOT the same as scientific proof to an NT like me - it's just really good logic). Until they do, those theories need to be allowed some level of acceptance. Well, maybe not by you, but by me, and the least you can do is allow me THAT. I don't follow any of those theories, but as long as they are not harmful in the here and now, I allow for them. Which is pretty darn narrow when you think about it, lol, what I find harmless enough in the here and now to allow for.

Yes, we are posting in an Aspie forum at the moment, but you admit that you would talk the same to anyone. So, do you want to be effective, do you want to be heard beyond these walls, do you want to make a difference? Or do you want to be able to speak your mind in your own style? It's one or the other. Except when you are venting to release your frustrations, of course - and this is the perfect place for that. Just don't destroy others here in the process, please, OK?

I accept how you feel, I do, and I understand it, but that doesn't mean I can't argue differently, does it? At the end of the day, we'll either bridge a few gaps or we won't, but it won't be for the lack of trying. And, well, we've probably gone far enough with all that for now. I'll always enjoy reading you, and sometimes I'll still want to change your mind on certain things, and so it will be.

And I need to be off. Not only for that work deadline, but now the kids are home, and my daughter (the NT one, that you don't here much about around here) wants my company.

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 18 Mar 2008, 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I feel an analogy coming on...

LeKiwi, I believe, is beginning to realise that some of us are very thin-skinned. When she uses the word "cure" in a way that she feels happy with, but hasn't realised how sensitised some of us are to its implications... as we see them.

DW_a_mom, I feel you have got yourself embroiled in the whole game just a bit "out of phase" with the central problem.

Anyway, my analogy...

In a predominantly black bar, in some ghetto-like area somewhere, three guys (?) are arguing. One (LeKiwi) is trying to get across the point that she's perfectly happy with being black, but can see the merit in some research being done to decrease the melanin content of skin and modify facial features towards a more caucasian format. She's quite confused that the other two (myself and PF) find this just a tad disturbing. Then this lone white dude (DW) ambles in, thinks the argument is a bit out of hand, and tries to say that everybody should just accept everyone else's stance as perfectly valid, and that of course, white is the best colour to be, if you want to get on in the world.

Last edited by lau on 18 Mar 2008, 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Oh, Iau, that HURTS! I was laughing until I got to that last line ... is that really what you read from me? Well, I promise to think about it.

And I ain't no white dude (to use the anaology). More like mulato several generations diluted. I definitely have some Aspie genes, just not "enough" to BE Aspie. How else do you think my son came it much more affected than anyone in either family? Combining, of course.

Last edited by DW_a_mom on 18 Mar 2008, 7:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It was not intended to be hurtful.

No, I doubt you meant it to be, but given how I wish to be, it is. And that is OK. I can learn something. Fair?

And I really am leaving now ... dinner, kids, all that.

DW... G-d, woman I like you, but...

How can I get you to "get" this without actually shaking you.

I'm an aspie, no matter how much I would like to be able to explain this to you as an NT, no matter how well I can physically pretend to be an NT, I can only ever explain this and hope to get you to get this as an aspie. And I, like many Aspies who have come to terms with the FACT (it's not just speculation, it's genome mapping, it's real science) that Aspergers and ASDs are GENETIC.

That fact alone tells us that the ONLY possible "cure" is GENETIC.

ERGO and this isn't just some fuzzy gray area, (which my husband says I never see), it's black and white. If the only cure is genetic, then it's going to take scientists mucking with our genes in utero OR deleting those genes altogether.

Supporting the very idea that there may be some other way to "cure" us, here, is simply insulting, out there in the "real world", it's DOWNRIGHT dangerous.

I don't know how I can get you to understand that there is no gray area on this; no matter how badly you might want there to be one. C'mon, you know this, you must understand this.

You can't change genes once they've become. You just can't. And supporting the hope that maybe, just maybe there really is a cure requires messing with those genes in utero or deleting them altogether.

You may think this a gray area, like the fuzzy space that exists somewhere between awake and sleep, but science says there is no fuzzy space; and until someone, anyone... please oh, please show me something anything that says that it can be done some other way, then Yippee, all the power to them. But, NOTHING, absolutely nothing to date says there is any other way. In fact, everything says there is no other way.

That is the sad, unfortunate FACT of the matter.

And pretending that it's not so, is just as bad as forcing an aspie to think he needs to be something he isn't in order to succeed.

There isn't any maybe, so pretending that there may be one, or hoping for one, needlessly diverts money away from where it needs to be: on finding real treatments and tools that are effective and work for Aspies: not for NTs. Out there in the real world, it's dangerous, in here, it's just plain insulting.

Does that help explain where this pointy little aspie head of mine is coming from any?

and LeKiwi and DW, when you get back, if those two last posts of mine and Lau's don't quite explain it... Then there is no hope for you guys to ever understand where we're coming from.

And, fwiw, I'm sorry, dreadfully apologetic, that I lumped the two of you with the troll; beachdude. So, I take back any reference I made that put you anywhere near his league.

The gray area is the fact that there may be environmental factors aggrevating the condition, making what may have been mild and almost imperceptible into an actual disability for some. Or the conditions that are not autism but look a heck of a lot like autism, and may be environmentally generated. No environmental factor has been proven, nor disproven, and research into this area is not eithout merit (I am NOT talking about mercury - that is bunk). OK, you do not see that as a gray area, it is something that you would define differently, but this is the gray area of which I speak. This is the area in which it is valid to do research, and the margins in which "treatment" can be discussed. The mimic cases, that are not actually autism, might even be "curable."

The reality is that while we know autism is genetic, it has not been proven that it is EXCLUSIVELY genetic. While I understand the Aspie logic that it can only be genetic, and all else is just a mimic, that isn't the reality of how the diagnosis is applied to people. The diagnosis is based on SYMPTONS, and not genetics, so the two remain interchangeable to the extent that both acutal genetic, and symptomatic mimic, conditions may exist. Gray area. You don't know to what extent there are mimic conditions that are being diagnosed as autism; it is impossible to know that, because the genetic factors have not been fully identified. Maybe those still should not be "cured," to the extend they create Aspies and not extremely affected Autistics, but the information is needed before that call can be made, and I do not see the quest for that information as invalid the way you do.

Take this example: my son cannot write. It is literally painful for him, and he is having similar difficulty learning to type. All the brilliant information in his mind cannot make it comfortably to paper. What if it turned out this was not caused by the Aspergers, but was environmental? Neither my Aspie husband nor my Aspie father ever had this trait, and I do not have it, so why does my son have it? What if we could separate out this small piece of his condition, one that frustrates and stresses him endlessly, and discover that it isn't wired into his brain at all, that something else caused it? After all, this was a child who started to write when he was 3. And then got tangled in it. Can you tell me with absolute certainty this is a cormid or condition of his Aspergers? We THINK it is, but we do not KNOW it is. What if it is not? Isn't this a gray area? Knowing precisely which aspects are genetic, and which are not? I see it as one.

Or suggest a different term than "gray" for all of the above. I am adaptable. Sort of. I can TRY to remmber to use something else.

I understand your position on the overall issue. I totally agree with you in the broad picture. But, then, I look at individual details. Then I become less certain that EVERYTHING is part of the broad picture. The above is how I reconcile it all. I accept that it probably won't fly with you, and I respect that. I actually agree with your analysis, but as a matter of opinion, not of knowledge, and on a broad, but perhaps not sympton by sympton basis. And it is my nature to see fuzzy edges on EVERYTHING, so this is not going to be any different. Shoot, I can find fuzzy edges on ANYTHING. I don't "do" black and white" only one fact fits unless it's a math equation. I don't need to sell you on my fuzz, just keep you from hating me for allowing myself to see, maybe, not impossibly, albeit unlikely, something you think is as much a fantasy as the Easter Bunny. I won't mention it any further.

Apology accepted - just please remember I'm not trolling!! I just have a slightly different opinion, though not a totally opposite one!!

Look, I can see that this affects you deeply as an issue. But can I just point out again - I have Aspergers!! I always have had and always will do. Why would I want to eradicate myself? Or the only other people in the world who can actually relate to things the way I relate to them, and see things the way I see them?! That'd be more than a little counter-productive, wouldn't it?

I can see where you're coming from and I agree, eugenics is horrendous and certainly not the way to go about things. I can see why you're worried about the way a 'cure' could go down that road, given current evidence, and you could well be justified in that fear - perhaps I'm just naive, or overly optimistic - but what my thoughts come down to are the 'grey area' that DW has outlined above. That the exact causes aren't yet known, and there is the chance that there are other things causing a syndrome very, very similar TO 'true' autism/AS that are triggered by environmental causes, and who am I to deny someone who could and would want to benefit from treatment using that knowledge from getting it? I don't believe 'true' autism, if you want to call it that, is particularly strongly influenced by environmental factors. But there are things with some people that just don't add up and don't fit the basic profile. If they can be treated and life made easier for those people with them by finding out what the exact causes of autism and this as-yet-unnamed, theoretical-other-disorder are, then how can we deny them that?

I don't know all the answers, and I can understand where you're coming from and see your viewpoint. Maybe I just have too much faith in human nature. I just don't want to see those of us who are struggling with some of these strange comorbids that seem to be surfacing more in the younger AS generation be denied treatments for them by denying people the right to search for that cause, and therefore the treatment.

If you get what I'm saying?

I don't see the point in this arguing - I don't think you're a bad person at all and I can see what you're saying, just please try and understand where I'm coming from without prejudging me and assuming I think certain things; you keep muddling me up with other people!!

There's the murky thinking again. A loose phrase "that cause" where it is not clear what cause you mean. I've kept the most recent occurrence of the word "cause" in the above.

You pretty much admit that the cause of autism is genetic, say you wish for people to search for the cause (genetic), and treat it (eugenics).

If what you actually meant was the cause of the comorbids, maybe that would be more acceptable. The chances are that they are mostly still genetic, so that would still amount to eugenics, but of a maybe more acceptable type (although I'm not too sure of that).

Now, if it should transpire that there were a comorbid effect which was exacerbated by an environmental factor, that might qualify for treatment - for example, by just removing that environmental factor. However, that approach doesn't seem to satisfy your requirements, as the "cause" itself (genetics again) hasn't been treated.

You want to treat the cause of my occasional bouts of depression?

Find some way to educate the other 99.4% of the human race about the value of autistics. That's the cause of my depressions - not my AS, but the way the rest of the bleeding world treats me because I have AS.

Treatments for ADD and ADHD are also quite well-known - the problem then comes in children being diagnosed as ADD when they're merely curious and active. In these cases, Ritalin and similar drugs can actually have the opposite effect of that intended, causing the subject to become more active.

But when vaccines have been pretty definitively cleared as suspected causes of ASD, on both the "live vaccine" and thimerosal fronts, please stop scrambling around, trying to find some other way you can blame the vaccines. In the world of science, when we do not find a cause for an effect, rather than continuing to poke at the first suspected cause, we move on, and investigate further possibilities. You, LeKiwi, seem unwilling to move on.