Autism speaks is wrong, you can't cure whats not messed up.

Post Reply New Topic

I suppose they better get on coming up with the technology to harvest peoples genes to replace other peoples 'bad' genes with.

Ha!

Then make the necessary changes in neurology. Nothing bad about that.


Since you cannot decide, please stop saying cure would be so terrible and dangerous.


Stop declaring the treatments to be risky.

There aren't any others besides non-verbal and words/phrases.


I didn't say you are some successful person. You're sticking up for the successful though. Promoting their interests. They likely can't have a working treatment that is at the same time dangerous. Disability was forced on them to begin with.

Neurotypical isn't a real term in psychology. It was invented by a few prideful aspies years back. What is this normal neurology you mention? I took a psychology class. I been to college. Don't try to browbeat me intellectually. I said there are many aspects of neurology/genetics. There can be different combinations of them. Not all aspects have to be altered to change only one of them. What is so complicated about that? Not all pieces of the genome and of the brain have to be modified to solve one problem.


The point was that children don't tend to know what is in their best interest. Not that children would be warped enough to think that impairment is great.



I wasn't portraying you in particular.


You're not going to change society. I'd be beyond surprised if you did. And individuals do have aspirations besides just being treated nicely by others. It's only natural.



Did you really receive no influence from this widespread fringe anti-cure movement largely confined to the internet until recently? The terms and phrases you use, and the ideas are very similar to what the leaders of this movement have been uttering. If the standard is so ridiculous, why should the lucky ones be allowed to live up to it? The goal is to abolish mental disability.

Considering the mild things you referred to as your problems, I wouldn't be surprised if you had lots of ability. Allow cure to be devised and administered. That's how.


It's the truth. It was started by a bunch of aspies many years ago who were prideful of their vast intelligence. Then it grew into this movement to keep all autism from being changed. Low-functioning members of the spectrum don't like being disabled. Period. You have no evidence. All of this anti-cure rhetoric, this propaganda, was repeated until it spread to the level it's at now. The majority of autistics aren't on forums like this, and have not consented to you controlling them through keeping them away from cure.

And again BS...how am I promoting their interests by saying cures should not be forced on people who don't want it? you are really making no sense and it seems you're intent on painting me as some terrible person just for having different opinions than you.

Implying that there definitely will be negative and dangerous consequences in carrying out a cure, and implying that it will be forced, is undermining it. The successful ones who don't need cure don't want others to get the abilities they have. They have nothing to gain through cure. You're speaking in favor of what they want, which is for cure not to occur. You're basically accusing me of being some creep who wants to force some terrible dangerous procedure on others who are scared of it. If you don't want cure for whatever reason, it's not going to be forced on you. There isn't some horde that is going to come forcing dangerous treatments on you. I just don't want others to withdraw support for the goal of cure.

It is likely there will be risks involved just like with any other medical treatment....and I was not implying it will be forced, just that it would be bad if it is forced.

And I'm not trying to accuse you of any of that I am saying it could be dangerous and shouldn't be forced, not that you personally would force it. I don't trust the system to not force it on people, so that is more where any of my suspicions are directed. I'm all for a cure for people who want it, but since there is not one yet so its still questionable if there could be one I just think some of the resources should be directed elsewhere as in improving lives of people with autism....but maybe they do divide some of their resources into that I don't really know for sure.

To my understanding Autism Speaks is really about helping (or aiming to help) cognitively impaired children who are disabled by severe Autism, and their families.
Children like my son, 6, non-verbal and in a diaper.

As the OP is neither a child, nor cognitively impaired (if he has Autism I take him at his word) I don't really know what he is on about.

And what reason should I side with the extremists on the pro-cure side over the extremists on the anti-cure side? I think I prefer a more neutral approach.........If there is a cure I don't want it, people who do want/need it should have every right to have it. However I am not very good with sticking to hypothetical situations and so far a cure being available is a hypothetical situation. So since there is no cure currently it would make sense to use other approaches to help people with autism they can still work on a cure for all I care, but I think it would be irresponsible if that is what all funding for autism or whatever goes into.

and what standard exactly are you talking about, I am not 'lucky' in any way so I certainly am not speaking for anyone I view as lucky just expressing my personal opinion on these matters. Also I am well aware that is what the goal is....but I don't see why you cannot accept that some people with this mental disability do not wish to be cured even if a cure is created its not up to you to decide for anyone else.

Depends whether you are talking 'cure' or 'treatment'.
Example: I have genetics that lead me to have Asthma. I take Flixotide - problem gone. No-one needed to mess with my genes. I have not been cured of Asthma, but I have been treated successfully.

Have you heard of the drug STX209? It seems to help some people with Fragile X, and its being trialled for Autism. It will be released in about 2yrs I believe. Fragile X is small time business, the obvious goal you can see is to find an effective drug that treats Autism.

I do think the "worse than blcks" argument is a bit silly of a statement and noone outright hates us, merely belittles us.

Does Autism Speaks have any interest in Aspies? It seems like they are focused on curing profound mute autism, which is fine with me.

As for societies treatment, i agree a bit. I wish society would simply leave my quirks alone. I tire of my parents telling me to quit with my nervous tics and of society looking at me like an outsider (though honetly, id prefer to be an outsider to the current society)

Hmm and what if its not fine with people with classic autism, should it just be forced?

Autism Speaks wants to wipe out all types of autism through abortion and forced cures. I'll never support an organization that believes in the abortion or forced curing of any autistic spectrum disorders. I also refuse to support an organization made up of ex schoolyard bullies who think that people on the spectrum don't have any feelings.

There is nothing you say here that has any basis in fact. It is at most an urban internet myth. The facts are Autism Speaks is currently funding research to help people across the spectrum. The research they fund is detailed on their website that anyone can look at themselves if they don't believe what I am saying. The organization's goals and research have nothing to do with abortion or forced cure of any autism spectrum disorder.

Autism Speaks has no authority over requiring or forcing anyone to choose a treatment that is chosen for any medical disorder. That is entirely between the physician and the patient..

And as far as abortion goes and a woman's right to selective abortion, that is entirely a legal rights issue that Autism Speaks has absolutely no control over. The choice is fully one of the individual whom is pregnant, based on their legal rights to have an abortion.

No one from autism speaks has suggested that people on the spectrum don't have any feelings, that was a theory at one time proposed by Samuel Baron Cohen, that has nothing to do with the Autism Speaks organization. He is has since retracted part of that theory, in regard to people with Aspergers syndrome.

Not everyone is cut out to endure a pregnancy, have children, or in a financial circumstance that they can provide proper care for a child; some are fully aware of these factors and they take appropriate action not to have children, whether it is through abstinence, birth control or abortion. The bottom line though, regardless if the action is abstinence or abortion is no possibility of a child on the spectrum. People already have that legal right, so they exercise if it is the right choice for them.

The Canadian government and the United States government through the laws of both countries support the legal right of women to choose to abort any fetus that women choose to abort per the parameters of abortion laws, including pregnancies that genetic counselors already provide familial risks on for disorders including autism. If one doesn't want to support that right, the only way to effect change is to fight the laws of their government.

Charitable organizations including Autism Speaks have nothing to do with these abortion laws that provide these legal rights of choice to women. It is the government political organizations and the voters that are fully responsible for these laws providing women the right to make a legal choice for abortion. And ultimately it is a women's personal choice of responsibility, per each unique woman that makes this personal decision.

As far as I'm aware these are complete falsehoods.