Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

news.rpi.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 110 posts

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#91

Post by hhh »

keithnz wrote: post #83
hhh wrote: post #27

This is quite interesting. Being on the spectrum myself, and many of my friends being so as well, it is very important how different everyone on the spectrum truly is. For high functioning people like myself I see Autism more akin to a mental super-power that can be crippled by small things. The difference in thinking is magnificent, and it aids in my success in most things that I do, but is an absolute disaster when…

my son ( 7 ) is like this, his brain lets him do interesting things, like from early on, you could hand him some paper and ask him to write things, then you could rotate the paper any way you like and he'd just carry on writing so it was fine when rotated back to normal. But he has a ton of trouble with socializing and has never made a friend, he is also a super realist. He doesn't like to pretend to be anything but…

It's quite interesting the differences. I wish you and your son the best of times in the future.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#92

Post by spiritcat »

keithnz wrote: post #83
hhh wrote: post #27

This is quite interesting. Being on the spectrum myself, and many of my friends being so as well, it is very important how different everyone on the spectrum truly is. For high functioning people like myself I see Autism more akin to a mental super-power that can be crippled by small things. The difference in thinking is magnificent, and it aids in my success in most things that I do, but is an absolute disaster when…

my son ( 7 ) is like this, his brain lets him do interesting things, like from early on, you could hand him some paper and ask him to write things, then you could rotate the paper any way you like and he'd just carry on writing so it was fine when rotated back to normal. But he has a ton of trouble with socializing and has never made a friend, he is also a super realist. He doesn't like to pretend to be anything but…

I like this kid.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#93

Post by Jarwain »

samatman wrote: post #57
hhh wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was more for the aesthetic of the sentence, but if you have a spectrum including 'normalcy' that is infinite width and infinite height, with x being ability (a combined measurement of communication ability, sensitivities, etc) and y being level of function, it is possible to include 'normalcy' as it is defined at the farthest top right corner. This could even have more dimensions to it, represented as 0-1 on each.…

This is wrong twice I'm afraid. First: a graph with two infinite dimensions doesn't have a top right point, it has a top right extent. Second: when graphing, you don't get to pick what the normal is. That's a property of the graph. It is not the (impossible) property you've described.

I feel like two different definitions of 'normal' are at odds here. 'Normal' in the context of a graph, and 'normal' to mean typical or usual

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#94

Post by BadCookie »

amelius wrote: post #23

> Hahn said the difference between the original accuracy rate and that of the new study can likely be attributed to several factors, the most important being that two of the metabolites were unavailable in the second dataset. Each of the two metabolites had been strong indicators in the previous study. Another issue could be overfitting.

It sounds like they were using leave-one-out cross validation. My machine learning is a bit rusty, but I don't think that overfitting is the issue.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#95

Post by sanotehu »

Amygaz wrote: post #84
amelius wrote: post #17

Does this also work in reverse? I.e. take supplements/drugs until the test is negative, and then be (temporarily) autism-free?

If you mean it in the sense that one could cheat the results and not be diagnosed, then absolutely. Most of their metabolites could linked to dietary deficiency. We did have a metabolite panel done and my kid would have been a false negative. As a parent of kid with Autism I experienced it first hand. However, instead of doing like many parents (including those with neurotypicals) we did not cave-in, but build a lot…

Out of interest, what was your parenting style like? Was it just a matter of clear expectations and consistent rewards and punishments?

Did you have a source for all this or did you work it out by yourself?

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#96

Post by krageon »

hhh wrote: post #27

This is quite interesting. Being on the spectrum myself, and many of my friends being so as well, it is very important how different everyone on the spectrum truly is. For high functioning people like myself I see Autism more akin to a mental super-power that can be crippled by small things. The difference in thinking is magnificent, and it aids in my success in most things that I do, but is an absolute disaster when…

A resting heart rate of 100 bpm? That is definitely not normal. Is that also anxiety related?

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#97

Post by krageon »

red75prime wrote: post #88
fwip wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, but I care more about what a person with autism says than somebody who simply knows one.

Many people with autism don't have enough communication skills to do that.

You are correct because your statement doesn't quantify it in any meaningful way, which is the least useful kind of correct. For example, I can also say that "many people with autism do have enough communication skills to do that". We both understand how a lot of readers will interpret these two statements if made in isolation, even though that is wrong. They can both be true at the same time (and in this case I'd say they are), which is why it's not a useful statement to make. They appear to contradict, but don't actually do so because they don't claim anything of value.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#98

Post by krageon »

jacquesm wrote: post #69
vehementi wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? A widely recognized reference manual is blanket discredited because it made a mistake in the past (1952-1974, not DSM-3)?

That makes it a book in which some statements are social reflections rather than statements rooted in good science, which makes other such statements somewhat suspect. It doesn't mean you should reject the whole thing out of hand but it might be a good idea to try to figure out how much of it is todays bias rather than good science in cases where that is warranted.

I'd contend that the most useful ground state for most of us, being people with no knowledge in the field whatsoever, is to assume that the DSM is broadly correct. From there you can, given some evidence, conclude that parts might not be.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#99

Post by jvln »

krageon wrote: post #96
hhh wrote: post #27

This is quite interesting. Being on the spectrum myself, and many of my friends being so as well, it is very important how different everyone on the spectrum truly is. For high functioning people like myself I see Autism more akin to a mental super-power that can be crippled by small things. The difference in thinking is magnificent, and it aids in my success in most things that I do, but is an absolute disaster when…

A resting heart rate of 100 bpm? That is definitely not normal. Is that also anxiety related?

it is definitely not resting. It must be while walking. 138 is around the 5 flour by using stairs.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#100

Post by antihero »

aussieguy1234 wrote: post #76
core-questions wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The difference in thinking is magnificent How do you know this, having not experienced neurotypical thinking?

Its obvious, based on interactions with others, asking how they think and its well documented in research

Same with ADHD too.
Post reply on HN