hate towards autism

Post Reply New Topic

help me out here.

To believe Autistic disorders are not exacerbated by environmental factors as well as certain viruses and viral immunizations or that it is somehow "normal" and not an abnormality is wasted thinking.

The article you site (if you even read it) is from 2005. That is just sloppy...try this one.
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/printe ... 0306b.html

"For many years, the most cited statistic is that autism occurs in 4.5 out of 10,000 live births."

The most recent statistics suggest 1 in 150 here in the States and 1 in 58 in England and Ireland. Those are facts, not theories.

Children show signs of autistic behavior during the first three years of life -- and can be diagnosed as early as 12-18 months by behavioral groups. Again fact.

Are you suggesting autism is linked to evolution somehow? Laughable.




I do, and you're welcome to try...but you would fail as you have failed to make your point.

Having worked with autistics including those with Fragile X Syndrome, Landau-Kleffner Syndrome, Rett Syndrome, and Williams Syndrome for nearly ten years, you'd be foolish to suggest your limited knowledge of the subject is applicable

If I didn't have autism, I'd gaurantee I wouldn't have my unique skill of analyzing people by the frequency of their voice. Nor would I be good with computers and building. I would probably be fixated on my looks and boys instead of being productive. How shallow can some people get?

I've not read the article you quote from but maybe the poster is suggesting that perceived normality changes with time, changing fashions and increased familiarity. Are they trying to say autism will be more acceptable when more people are familiar with it, know more about it, and find it normal, (just as now it is normal to talk about someone having depression or epilepsy, whereas 20 years ago it was a much more taboo subject).

Just a suggestion...

This doesn't even make sense. A toddler at 6 months? Then later (in the paragraph) at 3 months? It sounds like she is chronologically devolving, like Mork from Ork.

********************

But OP, I'm not sure who you are speaking to in the first post. I'm sorry! Who is "you" in your post? What was cited?
Also....it seems all traits are linked to evolution, as evolution shapes the majority if traits, and is thus shaped by all traits. Directly...or indirectly.

Wouldn't say 'evolution' at this point. We're not talking about new mutations, but about genetics that already exist and are being selected for or against--that is, "natural selection". I know, I'm picky; but there's an important distinction because mutation is a path towards a new species, and natural selection creates a specialized human being (that is, specialized for a technological society). Now that we've got a lot of people living and reproducing despite disability, the genes that can be expressed, passed on, and combined in new ways are becoming more and more diverse. There's nothing superior about a human whose genes are adapted to one environment as opposed to another (that's what races are--natural selection for the best possible survival and reproduction in different environments). Nothing superior, but possibly a lot more difference. If that plays out, we should see increasing neurodiversity in the world.