71–80 of 110 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Choosing the normal in this case would mean the most common among the population would it not?
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…
How do you know this, having not experienced neurotypical thinking?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you give the test to everyone, your results are: ~4.9% incorrectly diagnosed with autism (0.05 x .983) ~1.5% correctly diagnosed with autism (0.88 x 0.017) Thus, 76% of those diagnosed would be diagnosed incorrectly.
That's true in a statistical sense. Or it's possible that the human-observers are less accurate about autism than this brain scan. It's unclear if those who have the odd brain structure but aren't diagnosed are entirely asymptomatic. Also they may be non-autistic in spite of this brain pattern, but nonetheless have a genetic predisposition to pass it on. Big step.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree with slapping a diagnosis on anything either, but I think it could be a reasonable tool for people who are in the process of being diagnosed, or looking to better understand their character traits combined while going through the sometimes complicated process of being diagnosed.
Good points. I always upvote thoughtful responses even if I generally disagree with the overall theme. As is typically the case, I’m probably wrong and will end up, over time, holding opinions opposed to my present collection, so I try not to stifle divergent opinions.
Very surprising result. I don't think I've ever heard of a blood test for a mental disorder -- at least, not one that actually works.
Be careful about that kind of wording. I and friends who're on the spectrum don't consider it a "mental disorder". It's simply a physiological difference, one that theoretically can be tested for.
If you lack the capability to simulate the mental state of another human being based on observation, you're deficient in a key aspect of what we consider to be a normal functioning mind.
This is not a judgement on your character! Don't confuse the two. We don't think people with Down's or any other disorder are bad, or unworthy of a good life and plenty of opportunities to succeed.
But it is a disorder, especially for those who are much more profoundly impacted than yourself, and if it can be addressed with treatment or prevented entirely during pregnancy, it should be.
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…
> The difference in thinking is magnificent How do you know this, having not experienced neurotypical thinking?
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
If this test becomes widespread, I'd love to take it. I bet many of us in the tech industry have some sort of autism markers. It is a spectrum, after all.
I doubt most (vast majority) have more than a statistically meaningless set of any hypothetical autism markers. A predilection for technology, math or science and social immaturity are commonly identified items techies use to contend they "may" be on the spectrum, but the reality is even mild autism includes so much more abnormality than that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To add to your comment, I wish that high-functioning ASD people would stop ignoring the more severe end of the spectrum. If you are high-functioning, then maybe ASD just makes you quirky and different. But for the lower functioning people, ASD can profoundly affect their lives in extremely negative ways. For example, my son almost starved himself to death because of sensory difficulties. He is four years old and stil…
Absolutely. One of the biggest problems in autism advocacy is high-functioning people (like me) and (the guardians of) low-functioning people constantly talking past each other. Some people are perfectly happy as they are and don't want to be changed, some people are desperately unhappy and could really benefit from treatment or even a "cure". The spectrum is far too broad for a single approach to work. > I've had pe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hear you but the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) classifies it as a mental disorder. Autism Spectrum Disorder 299.00 (F84.0)
I wouldn't use this as a supporting argument. Didn't DSM-3 classify homosexuality as a disorder?