Vaccines don't cause autism (duh)

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I look at it from the perspective that everyone is autistic, the question is only where on the spectrum you happen to sit. The vast majority of people sit so far to one side that it's imperceptible; let's call that the left side of the spectrum. Some people are high-functioning, still most of the way to the left, but venturing into the region far enough to the right that you can tell if you're looking for it. As you move further right, you eventually get to a non-functioning point and so on.

[FlamesAddiction]

It's also important to remember that in Canadian public schools, kids with mental disabilities were historically segregated from other students. They had special classrooms and even schools sometimes for mentally challenged kids (which included a lot of kids with autism). They even rode their own school buses. It's not that they didn't exist, it's that they weren't integrated. I remember when integration happened in Ontario, it was a big deal. Many parents were upset about it (ignorant ones). I can't remember what grade I was in (I think 5 or 6), but I remember when they shut down the "special" school in our town and the next year we had more kids with learning disabilities (including autism) in our class.

At one time, if you had any kind of developmental disorder, you were pretty much segregated and banished. The teachers and wardens would then proceed to teach them at the lowest level, or neglect them completely. A lot of the developmental problems were environmental. You saw it a lot with kids that had Down's Syndrome as well. They were pretty much all written off, but now with integrated education, many of them can be much more independent.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I look at it from the perspective that everyone is autistic, the question is only where on the spectrum you happen to sit. The vast majority of people sit so far to one side that it's imperceptible; let's call that the left side of the spectrum. Some people are high-functioning, still most of the way to the left, but venturing into the region far enough to the right that you can tell if you're looking for it. As you move further right, you eventually get to a non-functioning point and so on.

That's funny, I kind of look at it similar.

I am obviously not an expert, but as a new parent (and an "older" parent), I had some concerns when we decided to start a family and have done some passive internet research. It crossed my mind before that maybe we look at it backwards. Instead of looking for what "triggers" autism, maybe all babies are autistic and we should look at what triggers "normal" development.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I look at it from the perspective that everyone is autistic, the question is only where on the spectrum you happen to sit. The vast majority of people sit so far to one side that it's imperceptible; let's call that the left side of the spectrum. Some people are high-functioning, still most of the way to the left, but venturing into the region far enough to the right that you can tell if you're looking for it. As you move further right, you eventually get to a non-functioning point and so on.

Worth a read for you:

https://autismandoughtisms.wordpress...utism-spectum/

We are only all on the autism spectrum, if you completely redefine what is meant by the autism spectrum.

[troutman]

Neurotribes: A Better Understanding of Autism

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...ing-of-autism/

The best thing Silberman does is to put a positive spin on autism. He sees autistics as different rather than as defective. Autism is many things; autistics are actually more different from each other than from neurotypicals. Autism may just be an exaggeration of traits we all have. There is a wide spectrum, and most of us can identify some autistic-like tendencies in ourselves. Some of the characteristics that define autism are also characteristics that make people successful in a wide range of endeavors. The child who spends hours lining up his toy cars just so may grow up to apply the same degree of fixation, dedication, effort, persistence, and total concentration to solving a problem in his chosen field of work. Some autistics have unique abilities in math, art, or other areas. Temple Grandin gives her autism the credit for her ability to design humane livestock facilities; she thinks in images rather than in words and is able to “think like a cow.” She has said she would not support curing autism because “The world needs all kinds of minds.”

Autistics can be thought of as a neurodiverse tribe. Instead of making them conform to our neurotypical world, we can try to accommodate their differences and create an environment for them that will allow them to thrive and contribute to society. Silberman gives many suggestions as to how that can be accomplished. He gives numerous examples of how parents have adapted to the needs of their autistic children rather than making the children adapt to the rigid expectations of society. Sometimes a behavior initially seen as negative can be encouraged and utilized for positive accomplishments.

[photon]

We are only all on the autism spectrum, if you completely redefine what is meant by the autism spectrum.

This. The differences in my son aren't just quantitative, they're qualitative.

There's things that it's not just a matter of "hard to do x" or "doesn't want to do x", it's that he is incapable of comprehending x other than in an abstract descriptive fashion.

EDIT: I've had that book on my to-read list for a while.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Worth a read for you:

https://autismandoughtisms.wordpress...utism-spectum/

Thanks. The author does understand my point, as reflected here:

I do appreciate what people are trying to achieve when they rewrite and loosen the edges of the spectrum; they’re trying to let everyone know that autism isn’t so scary, they’re just like everyone else. They’re often trying to get people to think of autism as less like a disability, and more like difference.

That's my general mode of thought.

I think the point that my intuitive approach to the term creates equivocation over its meaning is persuasive. The overall blog post isn't terribly helpful, in so far as it says "you're wrong about your description" without providing a clear answer as to why this description doesn't cohere with the actual meaning of "autism spectrum". But it is a good point, which could be re-stated simply as follows:

1. The term "autism spectrum" has a specific, scientific meaning.
2. By speaking in those terms you're not quite describing that scientific meaning properly.
3. Because of the confusion over this condition, it's important that we not muddy the waters.
4. What you really mean to say is that people who may not be on the "autism spectrum" according to the scientific meaning of that term, often have autistic traits to a greater or lesser degree even so.

That seems like a good argument. My follow up question then relates to #4. Does an autism diagnosis (at least practically speaking) not follow from observation of a person's displaying autistic characteristics?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Thanks. The author does understand my point, as reflected here:

That's my general mode of thought.

I think the point that my intuitive approach to the term creates equivocation over its meaning is persuasive. The overall blog post isn't terribly helpful, in so far as it says "you're wrong about your description" without providing a clear answer as to why this description doesn't cohere with the actual meaning of "autism spectrum". But it is a good point, which could be re-stated simply as follows:

1. The term "autism spectrum" has a specific, scientific meaning.
2. By speaking in those terms you're not quite describing that scientific meaning properly.
3. Because of the confusion over this condition, it's important that we not muddy the waters.
4. What you really mean to say is that people who may not be on the "autism spectrum" according to the scientific meaning of that term, often have autistic traits to a greater or lesser degree even so.

That seems like a good argument. My follow up question then relates to #4. Does an autism diagnosis (at least practically speaking) not follow from observation of a person's displaying autistic characteristics?

Thanks for the reminder of why I generally ignore your posts (no offence). Your name is perfect. You pretty much try to "advance stats" every topic.

In simple terms:
- Autism is a condition
- high functioning autism is still noticeably autism
- ASD ("the spectrum!") is still categorised by a series of complex conditions, if you're on the spectrum, you have a series of complex conditions, not just "I'm naturally good at guitar!" (savantism) or "I'm very awkward in social situations!"

Your entire position plays similarly to the people who say "I don't understand diagnosed depression, I get sad too but I can overcome it!"

The issue is that it's dismissive of (if not insulting to) the people with the actual condition.

Explore the following links if you don't even know what autism is to begin with (which seems possible):

http://www.autismspeaks.ca/about-autism/what-is-autism/

http://autismcanada.org/about-autism/

To answer your question: Yes.
But like EVERY condition or disease on earth with multiple symptoms, having just one doesn't mean you have that condition or disease.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Dude, I'm not even arguing with you. I found the article useful for the point I talked about. I'm trying to have a conversation about the topic to advance my understanding of it. Why the hostility? Yes, I do understand autism, but I there's lots about it I don't know or understand fully. This attitude of yours shuts down discussions and is, in my view, terribly harmful to the advancement of understanding of topics like autism and by proxy, not good for the people who are on the spectrum who need these discussions to take place openly.

For example, after basically berating me you answered my question. So now I'm wondering, okay, then, isn't the recognition that people have autistic traits connected to the autism spectrum to some extent? For example, I've always thought that if you have Aspbergers, you exhibit certain characteristics generally described as autistic traits, but to a lesser degree than people who are... fully autistic, if that's the terminology? Isn't that the case? That's how it was explained to me by a professional in this area, unless I misunderstood her.

Anything to do with neurological disorders or mental illness (as you glibly cite depression) is really complicated and hard for even experts to understand let alone lay people, and it's completely impossible to progress the discussion if you're going to act like this. Really frustrating.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Dude, I'm not even arguing with you. I found the article useful for the point I talked about. I'm trying to have a conversation about the topic to advance my understanding of it. Why the hostility?

lol relax man, no hostility.

On simple concepts your posts seem to hit a couple paragraphs. On nuanced concepts? Lord, hold on.

I just don't have time to read a novel on the minutia of every topic every time. Nothing against you. Honestly, go to the links I gave. Explore Autism Canada and other advocate/info sites. A conversation is going to be a lot less helpful than digging into actual scientific information when you've got the type of questions you have.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

A conversation is going to be a lot less helpful than digging into actual scientific information when you've got the type of questions you have.

You're not required to engage in the discussion obviously if you're not interested, but to effectively shriek about me being wrong, tell me "this is why I mostly ignore you", accuse me of being insulting and insensitive and not even knowing what autism is, suggest that I'm engaging in sophomoric thinking akin to denying that depression is a thing, and then saying "no hostility"... gee, I wonder where I could possibly have gotten the impression that you were being hostile.

I have read those links, by the way. They're informative. Conversations are still hugely important. It seems like I'm just having the conversation with the wrong person at the moment.

[AcGold]

It's this thread, like jumping in piranha infested water. One of if not the most controversial subjects out there. Anything related to vaccines or autism leads to arguments.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You're not required to engage in the discussion obviously if you're not interested, but to effectively shriek about me being wrong, tell me "this is why I mostly ignore you", accuse me of being insulting and insensitive and not even knowing what autism is, suggest that I'm engaging in sophomoric thinking akin to denying that depression is a thing, and then saying "no hostility"... gee, I wonder where I could possibly have gotten the impression that you were being hostile.



I have read those links, by the way. They're informative. Conversations are still hugely important. It seems like I'm just having the conversation with the wrong person at the moment.

I'm sorry you were offended. Being accused of being insensitive and possibly insulting towards someone else, as well as not knowing the basics of a condition of which you're asking to have explained to you the basics, aren't hostile acts.

If you're being insensitive and you get called on it, you don't get to raise your hands and scream "hostile!" and suddenly get to be the victim.

Will mark "you should read this" as "possibly interpreted as shrieking" in my notes though. Every time I respond to you, I either get insulted or accused of being mean to you.

Is it ok to get back to autism? You can put me on ignore, I'll do the same, and we can stop being a stupid distraction.

Thanks!

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by AcGold

It's this thread, like jumping in piranha infested water. One of if not the most controversial subjects out there. Anything related to vaccines or autism leads to arguments.

Totally, but this is a problem in itself - everyone seems to agree that these are topics that need to be talked about more, to raise awareness but more importantly to advance public understanding. But that's only in principle. No one actually wants to engage in the discussion because they don't have the patience to deal with the inevitable ####storm that will ensue. Hence, discussion is stopped before it starts.

Originally Posted by troutman

Neurotribes: A Better Understanding of Autism

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...ing-of-autism/

The best thing Silberman does is to put a positive spin on autism. He sees autistics as different rather than as defective. Autism is many things; autistics are actually more different from each other than from neurotypicals. Autism may just be an exaggeration of traits we all have. There is a wide spectrum, and most of us can identify some autistic-like tendencies in ourselves. Some of the characteristics that define autism are also characteristics that make people successful in a wide range of endeavors. The child who spends hours lining up his toy cars just so may grow up to apply the same degree of fixation, dedication, effort, persistence, and total concentration to solving a problem in his chosen field of work. Some autistics have unique abilities in math, art, or other areas. Temple Grandin gives her autism the credit for her ability to design humane livestock facilities; she thinks in images rather than in words and is able to “think like a cow.” She has said she would not support curing autism because “The world needs all kinds of minds.”

Autistics can be thought of as a neurodiverse tribe. Instead of making them conform to our neurotypical world, we can try to accommodate their differences and create an environment for them that will allow them to thrive and contribute to society. Silberman gives many suggestions as to how that can be accomplished. He gives numerous examples of how parents have adapted to the needs of their autistic children rather than making the children adapt to the rigid expectations of society. Sometimes a behavior initially seen as negative can be encouraged and utilized for positive accomplishments.

Thanks for this by the way; I just bought it on Amazon.

[TomLeeMC]

So my wife and I are in a fairly heated argument concerning vaccines. I didn't want to wade thru 50+ pages of this thread for reasons why we Should vaccinate and wasnt sure a new thread is needed, could someone put it in bullet form? She has recently started Reiki(dont really know much about it but she enjoys it). It's great that she enjoys it but now after talking to the people in her Reiki circle she's all anti-vax. She says that vaccines are manufactured and brings up her point (from the book Anastasia by Vladimir Megre)

"fruits are designed to sustain man's life. More powerfully and effectively than any manufactured drugs of the present or future, these fruits are capable of counteracting and withstanding any disease of the human body."

I just don't really know where to start with her, it seems everything I say is just in one ear out the other...Also her other argument is she "feels" its not right(what a garbage argument, I know).

[Fuzz]

• because science.

[TomLeeMC]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

• because science.

tried it. hippie's dont believe in science do they? at least the real hippiest of them anyway.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by TomLeeMC

So my wife and I are in a fairly heated argument concerning vaccines. I didn't want to wade thru 50+ pages of this thread for reasons why we Should vaccinate and wasnt sure a new thread is needed, could someone put it in bullet form? She has recently started Reiki(dont really know much about it but she enjoys it). It's great that she enjoys it but now after talking to the people in her Reiki circle she's all anti-vax. She says that vaccines are manufactured and brings up her point (from the book Anastasia by Vladimir Megre)

"fruits are designed to sustain man's life. More powerfully and effectively than any manufactured drugs of the present or future, these fruits are capable of counteracting and withstanding any disease of the human body."

I just don't really know where to start with her, it seems everything I say is just in one ear out the other...Also her other argument is she "feels" its not right(what a garbage argument, I know).

I'm not sure if there's much that can be done. If she buys into Reiki, she's pretty heavily committed to pseudoscientific nonsense. Tell her she's actively putting her children at risk by not giving them their vaccines. But yeah, that's tough.

[Fuzz]

I guess "logic" isn't going to work either then. Maybe there is some sort of Aesop's Fable's type story you could make up incorporating vaccines.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I guess "logic" isn't going to work either then. Maybe there is some sort of Aesop's Fable's type story you could make up incorporating vaccines.

My favourite is the one about how no one gets polio anymore and it sure as #### isn't because we're eating more oranges.