Page 5 of 8 [ 121 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

donkey
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 May 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,468
Location: ireland

23 Sep 2008, 9:09 am

isnt anime a ja[panses concept?
i have no idea what it is...some sort of animation. but it seems to be As friendly to the point of having As cult status.


_________________
a great civilisation cannot be conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within- W. Durant


rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

23 Sep 2008, 9:13 am

Danielismyname wrote:
And in relation to Asperger's Disorder from its eMedcine page:
Quote:
Race
Asperger disorder has no racial predilection.


Yeah, I've seen this claimed all over the Internet, but it is not based on anything real. Simply put, there are no prevalence studies to support this claim. I know because I've had professionals scan the literature for such studies, but they are simply not there.



Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

23 Sep 2008, 9:26 am

rdos wrote:
Yeah, I've seen this claimed all over the Internet, but it is not based on anything real. Simply put, there are no prevalence studies to support this claim. I know because I've had professionals scan the literature for such studies, but they are simply not there.


They don't offer a citation, so I'm looking at it cautiously. One could probably scour Medline/Medscape/whatever for any racial studies on ASDs, as they have all of the research studies. I can't seem to find any, not even for Autism (you'd think they'd have done such with Autism, as that's been a label for a long time). I also found [clinical] sites that state there's been no racial or ethnical studies done.

I agree with what you said regarding the prevalence of ASDs in the US and Europe; I doubt it'll raise more than what it is now, unless of course the cause of ASDs is rising.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

23 Sep 2008, 9:35 am

I don't even know how this claim could be proved. With raising levels of ASD-diagnosis and only behavioral methods to diagnose, I don't see how you could possibly compare ASD rates between cultures and races?

Unless you use a personality-approach like Aspie-quiz does. The prevalence of the personality-traits have not changed (much) over time, and nor do they seem to change as people get older. They don't have a gender-bias either. However, they seem to differ between Africans and non-Africans. It would certainly be possible to conduct a personality-trait prevalence study with Aspie-quiz comparing races in the US. I doubt that anybody would want to do it, and much less would want to publish it, as this concept is so politically incorrect.



Last edited by rdos on 23 Sep 2008, 9:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Tahitiii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2008
Age: 68
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,214
Location: USA

23 Sep 2008, 9:37 am

Have any "black" people participated in this discussion?

Call me an Aspie, but the big questions we need to ask would probably be considered
extremely rude. I can't think of a way to ask that would result in useful answers.


_________________
Occupy Everything!


rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

23 Sep 2008, 9:45 am

Yes, this is part of the problem for general acceptance for the Neanderthal theory. Not only does it connect ASDs and Neanderthals, but it also has huge implications for our understanding of races and differences between races. It also affects our views of human evolution and our "purity" and superiority over other species. Because of this I find it unlikely the theory will get acceptance in any near future.



Loborojo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,242
Location: Negombo

23 Sep 2008, 9:49 am

rdos wrote:
0_equals_true wrote:
I would expect them to be similar. However I have only got autism rates for in Japan 1989 and it is nowhere near 3.4 % or even 1%. However I don't expect this to be of the spectrum.

I seem to member an overall propensity of between 2% and 4%, which I worked out how it might have been calculated. These are still projections though, but better than nothing.


One should also remember that since DSM is based on problems and not personality-traits, prevalence of ASD diagnoses will quite likely be related to culture. If a culture is ASD-friendly, there will be fewer diagnoses. OTOH, if they use culturally unloaded screening instruments a little of this problem could be elminated, but hardly all of it.


what is DSM please and OTOH??


_________________
Your Aspie score: 152 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 48 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie


rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

23 Sep 2008, 9:52 am

Loborojo wrote:
rdos wrote:
0_equals_true wrote:
I would expect them to be similar. However I have only got autism rates for in Japan 1989 and it is nowhere near 3.4 % or even 1%. However I don't expect this to be of the spectrum.

I seem to member an overall propensity of between 2% and 4%, which I worked out how it might have been calculated. These are still projections though, but better than nothing.


One should also remember that since DSM is based on problems and not personality-traits, prevalence of ASD diagnoses will quite likely be related to culture. If a culture is ASD-friendly, there will be fewer diagnoses. OTOH, if they use culturally unloaded screening instruments a little of this problem could be elminated, but hardly all of it.


what is DSM please and OTOH??


DSM = Diagnostic Statistic Manual (it is one of the manuals for how to diagnose ASDs).
OTOH = On The Other Hand



Loborojo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,242
Location: Negombo

23 Sep 2008, 9:53 am

thanks for this :)


_________________
Your Aspie score: 152 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 48 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie


LostInSpace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,617
Location: Dixie

23 Sep 2008, 11:04 am

Ishmael wrote:
New rule: ignore what rdos says.


New rule? I've had that rule for a while. Ever since I couldn't seem to make him understand that the sample of Aspies who take his quiz online aren't necessarily representative of the Aspie population as a whole, especially regarding demographics like race. Statistics: Learn it, live it.


_________________
Not all those who wander are lost... but I generally am.


Loborojo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,242
Location: Negombo

23 Sep 2008, 11:10 am

Ishmael wrote:
O...kay...

New rule: ignore what rdos says. Did he actually say I only argue against the theory because I don't like the idea of it? Really? Really?!

Please... Buh-lie-ver! He can read, ya? Did notice how I wrote I like the concept but simply that there is no evidence but anectdotal and biased statistical? Right?

Gee, I must be getting rusty! And here I thought it was correct scientific form to question that with inconsistant evidence! Ho-hum. Guess I'll retire now...


don't retire yet, some youngsters who still know it all need an experienced person with a hand on the rudder


_________________
Your Aspie score: 152 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 48 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie


rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

23 Sep 2008, 11:49 am

LostInSpace wrote:
Ishmael wrote:
New rule: ignore what rdos says.


New rule? I've had that rule for a while. Ever since I couldn't seem to make him understand that the sample of Aspies who take his quiz online aren't necessarily representative of the Aspie population as a whole, especially regarding demographics like race. Statistics: Learn it, live it.


Yeah, very convinient to ignore things you dislike. :D

I'd think it would be elementary stastics that if you have 12% black balls in a basket, and pull balls thousands of times, you will end up with close to 12% black balls. :roll:

And if you consistently end up with 1-3%, using different links and different forum posts, you would not be likely to believe that there really were 12% black balls.

Especially not when Internet usage statistics for African Americans is in the same order as for Caucasians, Asians and American Indians.



LePetitPrince
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,464

23 Sep 2008, 12:19 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt62769.html , this is my favorite thread ever because it truly talks about a huge majority of WP community.

Now how those threads are related?

I'll tell you why:

There are 2 main types of autisnobs:

-The Evolutionist autisnobs
-The Creationist autisnobs

-The evolutionist autisnobs(I am a extreme evolutionist btw) believe that Aspies are the beginning of a new evolved human subspecies who will be the next sentient human species after millions of years. There are even extreme evolutionist autisnobs who believe that Aspies are already a new different human species and they refer it sometimes to "homoaspie" or "homoasperger" ...something like that. And there was one or tow users who believe that the origin of Aspiness is the remaining genetic traits of the Neanderthals.

Disapproving these theories aren't hard due to the fact that Aspiness is not an advantageous evolutionary trait ...communication skills is the one the most important human skills nowadays and obsession and dedication don't compensate the lack of it since many people have obsessive traits anyways, according to some surveys most aspies die single. As for the other theory saying that Aspies are already new subspecies that's total scientific error, Aspies have the same chromosome and DNA structure of the homo sapien , people with Down Syndrome or Williams Syndrome can be scientifically seen as another human subspecies because they have a slightly modified set of chromosomes than other HomoSapiens(but that's not politically correct to say so) but aspies are 100% homosapiens and can procreate with any other HomoSapien.

Stats show that aspiness is not evolutionary advantageous nor naturally selected:
Quote:
Tantam wrote:
'the table below shows the social adjustment of 46 more able adults with autism known to have needed psychiatric help:'
No contact with a friend in last year: 70%
No sexual relationship for more than one month: 78%
Unemployed: 85%
Never Married: 98%
Resident in hospital or with parents 76%


Quote:
1% according to Tantam (the dude whose criteria is in the DSM-IV-TR)
some sources say 30%

the divorce rate is over 90% in many places.

(It's well under 0% for Autism.)


So asperger can't be a result of evolution. That's why those Evolutionist autisnobs refuse the possibility that autism might be caused by external factors because they want to believe that they are a special human subspecies.

- The Creationists' beliefs are generally amusing and funny ...the only group that can beat them in that field are the "The Creationist autisnobs" , those Creationist autisnobs are like Zionist Jews , they believe that they are mysteriously chosen by God to be created in a mysterious different way for a mysterious goal of a mysterious God's cause for the whole mankind . As like all Creationists , they say "God's ways are mysterious". I say: all this BS is a mysterious snobbish crap.

That's why those creationist autisnobs can't accept or even tolerate the possibility that their autism might be caused by any other external environmental factor because they believe that the only factor that made them so "unique" and "special" is God.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

23 Sep 2008, 1:03 pm

LePetitPrince wrote:
Stats show that aspiness is not evolutionary advantageous nor naturally selected:
Quote:
Tantam wrote:
'the table below shows the social adjustment of 46 more able adults with autism known to have needed psychiatric help:'
No contact with a friend in last year: 70%
No sexual relationship for more than one month: 78%
Unemployed: 85%
Never Married: 98%
Resident in hospital or with parents 76%


Quote:
1% according to Tantam (the dude whose criteria is in the DSM-IV-TR)
some sources say 30%

the divorce rate is over 90% in many places.

(It's well under 0% for Autism.)



Your statistics are very probably totally false. :wink:

The truth is, people doing Aspie-quiz reproduce at about the same rate as NTs. They do have higher divorce statistics, but it is far from 90%.

This just shows that if you use improper methods to create your statistics, the results will be unúsable. Only surveying a psychiatric population without looking at people with similar traits will create bogus results.



Last edited by rdos on 23 Sep 2008, 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Loborojo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 1,242
Location: Negombo

23 Sep 2008, 1:04 pm

anna-banana wrote:
Ishmael wrote:
Don't worry, anna-banana, we can just become part-time jewel thieves.
Or invade North Korea. Or find Osama Bin Laden.


yeah, nowdays noble metals seem like a good investment ;p

I wouldn't know one bearded guy from another though.

sorry for going off-topic OP, I do like the theory but it seems a bit far-fetched... it might be a good material for some science-fiction novel though, I might use it one day if noone else gets the same idea :wink: .


too late, the book is out already called: The clan of the cave bear by Jean M. Auel
he got there first :(


_________________
Your Aspie score: 152 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 48 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie


rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

23 Sep 2008, 1:06 pm

Loborojo wrote:
too late, the book is out already called: The clan of the cave bear by Jean M. Auel
he got there first :(


Not really. This book does not have the same view of Neanderthal, so you can still do it "right". :D