31–40 of 65 posts
vice.com is not a reputable source of medical advice. There's a lot that is still not understood about autism. We don't need to get our pitchforks out while the science tries to figure this stuff out.
US universities are just on a mission to torch their reputations, it would seem
This is basically selling a treatment while it's still in clinical trials- how is that not illegal?
Horrific. Autism is about neural difference not deficiency . The problem is neurotypical societies pathologising and disabling neurodivergent people. What this article discusses is analogous to treatment for homosexuality. Shame on you, Duke university.
Not everyone on the autism spectrum can even function, let alone function in society. Not everyone who is neurodivergent can function in society.
Some can, sure. But for those that cannot, a treatment that works would be a god-send.
Seems like the worst kind of predatory business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like with ADHD, the benefit of a diagnosis is usually more 1-on-1 time with a teacher, which leads to better scholastic outcomes regardless of if the underlying issue is truly present.
> Like with ADHD, the benefit of a diagnosis is usually more 1-on-1 time with a teacher Funny, they wanted to put me on Ritalin, not give me more 1-on-1 time.
I'm glad I didn't get diagnosed until I was an adult. It means I don't have to worry about my parents subjecting me to shit like this and applied behavior analysis (ABA) therapy.
That's interesting, can you elaborate on your qualms with ABA? After my sister's belated diagnosis around 1990 (it was still quite rare compared to the present) my mom became an ABA practitioner (eventually getting a PhD). Sister went from completely non-verbal to speaking well, which was remarkable considering that there were professionals saying she'd always need to live in an institution. As best I can tell ABA ma…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So what, deprive these kids of the possibility of choosing something? Why not give them the choice? Let them become adults, and if they want to later inflict neurological damage upon themselves, then fine. But don't neglect them treatment.
Autistic people also often have capabilities that neurotypical people don't. So treating them would also be denying them opportunities. I think any treatment would have to be taken on a case by case basis. This particular one sounds like it doesn't work anyway.
Give the kids the treatment. If they want to choose later in life to blind themselves, fine, they’re adults. Don’t make them part of a crusade that they didn’t consent to.
I say this as somebody who had several major surgeries as a child to save my eyesight.
Horrific. Autism is about neural difference not deficiency . The problem is neurotypical societies pathologising and disabling neurodivergent people. What this article discusses is analogous to treatment for homosexuality. Shame on you, Duke university.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is basically selling a treatment while it's still in clinical trials- how is that not illegal?
I was also confused about this. The article doesn't discuss any regulatory approval process. Does this treatment somehow fall under one of the categories where that is not required?
[1]https://www.fda.gov/news-events/public-health-focus/expanded...
Horrific. Autism is about neural difference not deficiency . The problem is neurotypical societies pathologising and disabling neurodivergent people. What this article discusses is analogous to treatment for homosexuality. Shame on you, Duke university.
What a load of nonsense, autism is a horrible thing that should be entirely eliminated if possible. An autist probably will never be a salesman, for instance, we should make that not the case if we can because otherwise those opportunitues will stay off limits because of some peoples birth. Then there are the more severe cases where people cant speak and care for themselves. Thats not a society issue, thats a birth d…