simulated Asperger's

Post Reply New Topic

Given that asbegers may be composed of amny parts that by themselves are not aspergers...
Is it possible to simply be born with those various triats and as a result seem to have it?

probably

I'd have to say yes on this, because I am always questioning myself. I've been doing a lot of research and reading, trying to determine what it is that makes me who I am. I've seen two doctors, and both of them agree that I have AS (no official diagnosis though), but I am not confident in their opinions, my mothers, or my own.

What I am confident with however is that I have A LOT of traits that lead to what appears to be AS. I am also confident with this one main thing: it doesn't matter what I have, what matters are the symptoms that hinder me.

For anyone who is wondering about their own state: please remember, it doesn't matter what label you have, because they can't "cure" it anyways. All they can do is give you therapy of some kind for the symptoms.

I do not really understand the question?

A tomato-plant is made up of parts that by themselves are not a tomato-plant...is it possible for a plant to have all the traits of a tomato plant and as a result seem to have it?

Not really, only a tomato-plant has all the traits of a tomato-plant (for instance the absence of non-tomato-plant traits is an important tomato-plant trait).

If one has all the traits of Asperger's then one has Asperger's.

I totally think so. I was diagnosed back in 1998 with "possible aspergers." However, the older I get, the more I think I just don't have it. I have some sort of anxiety disorder, definitely, and might even be on the spectrum somewhere. But there are many AS symptoms that just don't fit me. So to answer your question, yes.

Monarch and Viceroy butterfly. looks identical but different biology.

Biology is not determinative in AS diagnosis. The causes of AS are unknown, so the condition is defined by effects, whatever their cause.
Certain principals are supposed and these are consistent with the observations of those the description is intended to describe (life-long duration with developmental onset for instance). But there is no premise of a necessary common-etiological pathway. It is not unlikely that more than one etiological pathway can and does produce instances of autistic spectrum conditions.

Your view is a tad oversimplified.

AS is a syndrome, aka a constellation of symptoms that suggest an (often poorly understood) underlying difference. The diagnosis of AS differs from one person to another, with the diagnosis made by checking X number of boxes next to a fairly broad set of symptoms. A person doesn't need to fulfil all the set out criteria to be diagnosed with AS, merely a sufficiently large subset.

This means that there are degrees and variations. There is no definitive set of symptoms that you can ascribe to anyone with AS. What's more is there are differing criteria used to diagnose AS, DSM-IV, ICD-10 etc.

After all there are cherry tomato plants, roma tomatos and your average garden variety tomato (excuse the pun).

I think that this raise a more deep question of what is really AS:

In other words, AS is "a neurological condition who produce some symptoms" or is the symptoms themselves?

TPE2, AS is a neurological condition. You could suggest it is a non-existent condition, but not a non-neurological condition, because being neurological is by definition a trait of AS.

unwishingfulthinking, I chose tomato-plants because they are varied, while being tomato-plants.

It might be that there are things that can mimic AS, or even that there are no real incidents of AS (I personally doubt the latter), but whatever the case the identity of AS is by definition of AS a neurologically based condition.

Certainly, it is currently believed the condition causes a cluster of a minimum number of observable traits from within a wider group of traits. But by definition of AS (whether or not AS exists in reality, which I am very confident it does) is always a neurological condition, manifesting in early development, and of life-long duration, because that is the identity of the concept/s described by the phrase.

AS is known by the symptoms.
No common cause (specific neurological defect) for the symptoms is known.

I'm always wondering about whether or not I actually have it or if it's caused by something else (I'm not saying what that something else is, but trust me... it would cause it).

Arguments for it
Can't look people in the eye
No social skills
I hardly ever talk
Very detail oriented (weak central coherence)
High visual acuity
Hyperacusis
Hyperosmia
IQ score "scatter"... verbal is significantly higher than perceptual
Can't stand being touched
I get very obsessive about my interests (you can't talk to me when I'm writing something)

Arguments against it
I have a theory of mind. The characters in my stories are so incredibly developed that I've actually been called a liar by my writing profs (well, not directly a liar, but they're skeptical)
I'm a good liar and can be very manipulative
I have good balance and coordination (though not so much lately... when I was a kid I did gymnastics and I still dance)
No delay in language development
I understand and create metaphor/innuendo too easily

I realize that no one fits the criteria perfectly, but just the little things I miss make me really wonder.

I've been officially diagnosed... and I've had other doctors throw out that diagnosis (a neuropsychologist diagnosed me and psychiatrists have thrown out the diagnosis... I think its obvious which one I'm going to believe... a doctor who actually knows about the brain or a drug dealer?), so I really have no idea. My dad agrees with it. My mom thinks I'm a drama queen.

I think he means when is AS not AS? It's when it looks like AS but isn't attributed to the biological cause of AS, which is most likely alleles in a specific phenotype.



Here is an interesting link:
http://www.autism-help.org/autism-herit ... arents.htm

Imma haveta say YES on this. I think you can exhibit some, many or perhaps even all the traits yet not have Asperger's.
Actually, this defines me even more than my diagnosis: I am a regular guy with many traits of Asperger's but I think I'm gonna throw out the diagnosis all together.

This is why Dr. House doesn't have aspergers. Some traits, yes. But on the spectrum?

That's a stretch.

I think that so called "normal" people could become socially withdrawn/less likely to interact if they were in an environment where they were bullied/victimised.

Put this person in a friendlier more understanding setting and they can join in, chat and function better.

I don't think that this would be AS. I think that the AS person would still have some issues interacting even in a very friendly setting.

Are there different kinds of social withdrawal?

Voluntary and involuntary?

Or is it more complicated than that?