Lancet Report: Momentum builds toward breaking up of ASD

Post Reply New Topic

If the VCE ATAR score represents intelligence, then my smartphone is the most intelligent creature on the face of the planet, because it has far superior memory abilities than any human on the entire face of the planet. A person's ability to memorize a bunch of useless facts and mini-procedures has an excessively high influence on the VCE ATAR score (not the only influence, but an excessive influence). The VCE ATAR score is a poor measure of intelligence, even worse than using IQ to measure intelligence. The VCE curriculum is a far cry from something that produces smart students.

Based on what? your opinion? are you comparing your smartphone to a teenager?
Please use some lateral thinking.

Do you even know how a person with ID presents?? it's pretty final, especially when a paediatrician does the assessment.

Student A: Member of MENSA scores 99 on ATAR
Student B: autistic kid classified as ID in primary school scores 99.94 on ATAR

Have you done university entrance exams? I have. I also tutor high school students trying to get into university. All of the questions require mastery of all levels of Blooms Taxonomy (google it if you don't know about Blooms) from recognition and recall to higher level comprehension skills that require application of knowledge in assessments like written essays.

The idea that a child could score 99,94 based on memorising alone is impossible,

It's wrong because it's not what Alex said. Again and again, Alex says "ABC", and these neurotypicals respond as if Alex said "XYZ", as if these NT's can't understand English whenever Alex says it in plain and simple terms. Too many NT's fill in the blanks (meaning they fill in their lack of understanding) with pseudo-random ideas pulled out of their own brains. Many NT's attribute their own pseudo-random ideas to people like Alex, even though Alex didn't say it. In other words, they put words in Alex's mouth instead of trying to understand what he actually said.

Heck, his choice of wording is not even complicated, but many NT's still interpret as if it's like some kind Native American dream ceremony where people puff a pipe and then imagine something new. Sure, Native American rituals are great. I love them. I'm all for them. Great stuff. I love Native Americans. But it's inappropriate to use Native American rituals when trying to interpret the plain English words of someone like Alex or other speakers.


That's not what I said. Not at all. Now I'm a victim of the same thing that I mentioned above. Alex, or myself, or someone else says "ABC", and the neurotypicals respond as if we said "XYZ".

I think I know what you are trying to say. NTs do fill in the blanks because that's how we roll. Many people on the spectrum take what's said as verbatim/literal without detecting/interpreting the underlying meaning. It's not such a problem on chat boards (like this one) as auties can process what I write in their own time and detect underlying intent etc...

So back to NTs. When we speak to other NTs we are assessing both the information presented + the underlying intent behind the words. So when somebody says something that insinuates something controversial (without being direct) we tend to also factor the double meaning when we process the information. i.e. fill in the gaps.

What will vary from person to person is how we respond. Most of the time we only acknowledge the literal words spoken to the other person and file away the double-speak (unsaid component) away for future use.

Yes, I think that's a good description of the difference between NT and autistic communication. It also serves as the explanation for why many NT's frequently fail to communicate successfully with other NT's, especially when discussing problems. The issue of unsuccessful communication becomes even worse when NT's and autistic people try to communicate.

I'm sorry for delivering this bad news to you, and I didn't want to make you feel bad, but I believe it's fair if you share the blame with me 50/50, because I did warn everyone in advance about my habit of describing the unpleasant aspects of reality. I did warn everyone that I'm a rotter. Did you notice? That's my name. Rotter.

I think its fair to say that everyone has challenges discussing problems as communicating the underlying issue is hard for everyone. NT or neurodiverse.



Don't sweat on it buddy. Many on this forum think I'm a rotter too

I've seen people on the spectrum do this too. They will read into things that are not there and misinterpret what is written. I also seen them trying to project and make assumptions. I think this is just human behavior.

Yes I agree, I'm sure many people on the spectrum are quite capable of doing exactly the same....fill in the gaps. Not wanting to go too outside the scope of this thread but human perception is inexact, our brains only pick up a portion of the data in the environment so we fill in the gaps with the rest.

The figures I quoted are scientific fact I’m afraid

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6706a1.htm

The problem is some people get so wrapped up in identity politics they forget why these scientific facts are published and why they are important.

If you read my comment again you’ll see I wrote approx 50% below av IQ and 30% ID two different figures.

I also stated your unlikely to have profound autism as it’s unlikely you would be able to write and respond to comments on here, in other words your IQ is probably not at ID level.

IQ is quite important in terms of life outcome especially if it falls below a certain threshold.

Most people understand this even those in the ND movement who are only too happy to quote their own high IQ half the time it seems

Some trivia:

-=-- IQ is a score for how you do on IQ tests, nothing more.
-=- -People with high IQs can also be, for many practical purposes, not very bright.

-=-- Academic skill tests do not necessarily measure IQ.
-=- -For instance older SAT tests did, newer versions don't.
-=- -This affects what College Preparatory Tests American Mensa will or will not accept.
-=- -Some academic tests I've taken seem to have been testing my memory.

-=-- It appears Australian Mensa does not accept VCE scores to satisfy entrance criteria.
-=- -Perhaps they don't think there is a strong enough correlation to IQ?

-=-- "Nearly 50% of autistic people have an IQ below average"  
-=- -"average" is between the top and bottom halves of the general population, as well.

Personal speculation: I would expect there to be some loose correlation between IQ and Autism severity  that is, how severely the individual is impaired by their Autism. If "Nearly 50% of autistic people have an IQ below average" then that suggests Autistics might have roughly the same IQ distribution as the general population, which would suggest that Autism does not cause either higher or lower IQs. But, might a higher IQ possibly correlate with someone's ability to cope with and mask their Autism? Of course, there would be many other factors so I would expect only a loose correlation between IQ and Autism severity. Surely some Autistics with a high IQ would still be severely impaired, and some Autistics with a lower IQ might still manage their way through life wonderfully. And this is just my personal speculation.

Official figures from the CDC broken down:-

Figures from the CDC:-

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6706a1.htm

25% were in the borderline below average range (IQ 71–85), and 44% had IQ scores in the average to above average range

So according to official stats the majority of autistic people or 56 % - had below average IQ broken down into:-

25% - below average 71-85
31% - Intellectually disabled 70 or below

Leaving:-

44% - average or above on IQ



By average I mean among the population as a whole where the average is between 85 - 115. An average or mean is just adding up everything & dividing by sample size which gives a poor picture which is why the CDC breaks the figures down into groups to give a better picture.

25% - below average 71-85
31% - Intellectually disabled 70 or below

The above shows a good picture of partly why some autistic people struggle and others do well in my opinion. There is evidence the 25% splits in two in adulthood half join the ID group the others the average range 85-115.



That is true up to a point, especially within average range where different strengths & weaknesses are not taken into account, however where ID is present its fairly accurate determining need and intellectual disability. If an adult can’t answer the easiest questions on an IQ test where communication problems have already been taken into account, it’s unlikely they are a hidden genius.

ID is a serious condition, preventing people from looking after themselves in almost any daily capacity, many are unable to self-advocate or take part in any discussions on here or anywhere for example.

Which is why IQ if it falls below a critical threshold matters & becomes a pathology, it’s certainly not discriminatory to discuss this.

Possibly selection bias?

Might higher IQ Autistics slip through the cracks undiscovered?

Maybe in respect to borderline figures these are 8 year olds:

25% - below average 71-85

However it seems there is a rough 50/50 split in adulthood that may account for this (see link) this 25% splits in two, half join the ID group the rest the NT average range.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4876598/

The amazing thing is IQ range seems to remain constant from childhood to adulthood among autistic people tested.

I think the DSM is a mess anyway no longer meets peoples needs

What this debate about re-creating subgroups (again) in DSM or ICD11 for ASD is about how to seperate individuals diagnosed with autism who function normally in society and those who are unable to function normally in society.

The current ASD spectrum 1-3 in DSM is based on severity which probably suffices for this purpose.

In the case of ICD11 I think it does collapse Aspergers so we say goodbye to that label forever.

Seems to me that so-called "profound autism" should be called "profound complex developmental disability" or something like that, because it entails not just severity of autism per se but also other developmental disabilities such as intellectual disability, severe language impairment, motor dyspraxia, etc. -- all of which are distinct from autism per se, although they are more common among autistic people than among the general population.

Obviously an autistic person with intellectual disability, language impairment, and motor dyspraxia, as well as autism, is much more disabled than a person with just autism.

I agree with the need for a distinct category, but I think "profound autism" is the wrong name for it, given that the severity of their disability entails much more than just autism.

IMO they should be thought of not as having a distinct kind of autism, but as having severe all-around developmental disability, of which their autism is just one factor.

These days "intellectual disability" is defined not just as low IQ score, but as a combination of low IQ score and low "adaptive functioning," e.g. according to the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales.