Page 2 of 2 [ 28 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

16 Sep 2015, 9:13 am

Girl_Kitten wrote:
It's 1-2% of the population but five times as many boys as girls. Women and girls often (though not always) show Autistic traits differently especially as we get older because of the increased social pressure and greater punishment for showing Autistic traits. There is no logical reason why boys would be that much more Autistic than girls, except for imperfect identification. Here on WP, repeated polls show a much closer to 1:1 ratio of men to women on the spectrum. While those polls aren't carefully controlled and my suffer from self-selection bias or other variables, they are still replicable and still point to a problem. If men and women are Autistic at approximately the same rate but only one woman is identified for every five men, that means that there are likely four women unidentified for every six people who are identified. It would mean that our population is roughly 3% Autistic when factoring this in, not 1-2%.

This is just one place, it is online, it is a forum, any member (not just autistic ones) can vote (it's the gender of our members, not of autistic people). All of those factors (and more) mean, even if repeatedly done on this site, the results mean nothing for actual incidence rates. If autistic girls want to find other girls with autism and they see this site has its own subforum (women's discussion) it'll obviously attract them here as opposed to other autistic sites. And women may just be slightly more likely to want to discuss their life with others like them than men. And since most people here are looking for advice (mostly to do with diagnosis) and women are more likely to have been not recognized as a kid, it may put it out of proportion.

Of the studies I've seen I don't truly think it is 1:1, even taking in those factors. I think it's more likely to be 1:2 to 1:3.



Girl_Kitten
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 29 Apr 2015
Posts: 71

16 Sep 2015, 10:53 am

iliketrees wrote:
Girl_Kitten wrote:
It's 1-2% of the population but five times as many boys as girls. Women and girls often (though not always) show Autistic traits differently especially as we get older because of the increased social pressure and greater punishment for showing Autistic traits. There is no logical reason why boys would be that much more Autistic than girls, except for imperfect identification. Here on WP, repeated polls show a much closer to 1:1 ratio of men to women on the spectrum. While those polls aren't carefully controlled and my suffer from self-selection bias or other variables, they are still replicable and still point to a problem. If men and women are Autistic at approximately the same rate but only one woman is identified for every five men, that means that there are likely four women unidentified for every six people who are identified. It would mean that our population is roughly 3% Autistic when factoring this in, not 1-2%.

This is just one place, it is online, it is a forum, any member (not just autistic ones) can vote (it's the gender of our members, not of autistic people). All of those factors (and more) mean, even if repeatedly done on this site, the results mean nothing for actual incidence rates. If autistic girls want to find other girls with autism and they see this site has its own subforum (women's discussion) it'll obviously attract them here as opposed to other autistic sites. And women may just be slightly more likely to want to discuss their life with others like them than men. And since most people here are looking for advice (mostly to do with diagnosis) and women are more likely to have been not recognized as a kid, it may put it out of proportion.

Of the studies I've seen I don't truly think it is 1:1, even taking in those factors. I think it's more likely to be 1:2 to 1:3.

I said, "those polls aren't carefully controlled and m[a]y suffer from self-selection bias or other variables, they are still replicable and still point to a problem." We are agreeing that these polls are not controlled scientific studies but they suggest that current statistics may not be accurate. Regardless of if the true ratio is 1:1 or 1:2 or 1:3, any of those ratios are far from 1:5, which means that there are many, many unidentified Autistic women and girls.



iliketrees
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,155
Location: Earth

16 Sep 2015, 10:54 am

Yes, there are. I was one of them until recently.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

16 Sep 2015, 12:34 pm

I wouldn't be surprised if the ratio of men to women with the "high-functioning" types of autism equalizes over the coming years.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

16 Sep 2015, 4:45 pm

Yeah- it may not be one-to-one, but the sex ratio could be 1:3 instead of 1:5.

But if it IS an even ratio then that would mean that autistics are bigger percent of the population than thought.

It would bump it from 1.5 percent to 2.5 percent (or that's what I just calculated on my scratch paper just now).



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

17 Sep 2015, 12:51 am

Campin_Cat wrote:
@ naturalplastic and iliketrees: Oops, you're right----I said that wrong!! I remembered hearing the "68", and thought "over half"----when, in fact, it's "ONE in 68 of all children"; BIG difference!!

BTW, NP, I wasn't talking about the "human race", though, I was talking about the U.S. population.

.

Doesn't matter which you meant. The same figure would apply.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

17 Sep 2015, 1:34 am

re: NASA being inundated with Aspies

Apparently > 50% of NASA staff have dyslexia. It has been described as a sheltered workshop for people with dyslexia. Nothing about Aspergers.



Cockroach96
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2015
Age: 29
Posts: 3,162
Location: Romania

17 Sep 2015, 2:26 am

Campin_Cat wrote:
@ naturalplastic and iliketrees: Oops, you're right----I said that wrong!! I remembered hearing the "68", and thought "over half"----when, in fact, it's "ONE in 68 of all children"; BIG difference!!

BTW, NP, I wasn't talking about the "human race", though, I was talking about the U.S. population.

I hold to "Aspies NOT being rare", though----as that's several million people. IMO, 100 would be rare.

Not all autistics are aspies. 1.5% of the world are on the spectrum, which means 105 million autistics. However, only 0,2% of the world are aspies, which means 14 million aspies.


_________________
I'm a Romanian aspie.


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 71
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

17 Sep 2015, 5:44 pm

Cockroach96 wrote:
Campin_Cat wrote:
@ naturalplastic and iliketrees: Oops, you're right----I said that wrong!! I remembered hearing the "68", and thought "over half"----when, in fact, it's "ONE in 68 of all children"; BIG difference!!

BTW, NP, I wasn't talking about the "human race", though, I was talking about the U.S. population.

I hold to "Aspies NOT being rare", though----as that's several million people. IMO, 100 would be rare.

Not all autistics are aspies. 1.5% of the world are on the spectrum, which means 105 million autistics. However, only 0,2% of the world are aspies, which means 14 million aspies.


Aspies are only "two in a thousand"? Or "point two percent"?

That would make aspies like only 13 percent of the autism spectrum.

Not that I am doubting it, but where did you get that tidbit from? Someone on WP, and I, were both wondering about what percent of the AS spectrum is aspie/HFA. I couldn't find any place on the net that broke down the AS spectrum by numbers.



Feyokien
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Dec 2014
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,303
Location: Somewhere

17 Sep 2015, 6:05 pm

Yeah I think some of us would great astronauts actually. Some of us are definitely more suited than the average individual for being able to tolerate long periods of isolation. Give me some music, movies, and books and I'd basically be doing the same thing I do on earth. Contact with the earth would be fine also, as all you'd have to do is just crunch numbers and submit reports. It's not like you'd have to be friends with the person you're communicating with on earth. It's really easy to talk in a formal professional manner, doesn't require a lot of dynamics.



LupaLuna
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2013
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,551
Location: tri-cities WA

19 Sep 2015, 6:19 pm

Putting a man on mars at this time is nothing more then just a fantasy. It currently cost about $11,000 a pound to put something into orbit. And unless that cost can be brought down to <$100 a pound. We will never put a man on mars.



catalina
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2013
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 149

19 Sep 2015, 6:43 pm

The hardest thing about going to Mars will be not seen your family again (unless they join you), to go with unknown people, who can be nice or your worst nightmare, live in a desert until you are able to create an atmosphere and environment. Some people can turn crazy with only an empty land to see.