Skeptics and scientists: Autism article in GD.

Should we be hopeful, skeptical, or a little of both?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2895646

...and the original article:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Story?id=4311223&page=1

I hope it brings more understanding to the problem.

Which means its an anti-vax woo. If they haven't brought in vaccines yet they will.
Someone keep an eye on that thread would you? I'll chip in here. But yeah. Thimerosol and adjuvents being neurotoxic to people WILL be brought in.

and the article is actually pretty interesting.

I'm sure you can guess who. She hasn't made an appearance in Health for months. Wonder if she's softened her anti-vax stance. Maybe had a close brush with an issue personally - that often wakes people up.

I put her back on ignore but had to log out after seeing cosmik debris respond. That could get interesting, even more than Mr. Mercury, if I am curious enough to log out and read it. Off the meds maybe? :rofl:

Did you know that my knowledge of science is "not very good". This from an accountant who has probably had zip biology class in her entire life

She probably had one in high school. :rofl:

I think I broke the chew toy before anyone else got to play with it.

That's especially embarrassing after I lectured trotsky about the catch and release policy.

But I couldn't resist the urge to fillet that *&^%$#@!

Please forgive me.

It doesn't seem to suffer the same setbacks as facilitated communication, as it seems that the only facilitator is the computer as opposed to a human being. In other words, there's no filter. The only potential problem I can see is the years of therapy that it apparently takes to get someone to that level, but other than that this seems really cool.

They seem to be using one patient as an example. But autism spectrum disorders are not consistent in severity or symptoms.

My hope springs from the new understanding of autism that this case brings.

I'd like to know exactly what is meant by "typing and spelling out words". Too many of those messages sound like things many people would expect to hear from an autistic person. This sounds too much like facilitated communication for me to accept it uncritically.

One thing that really bugs me about that GD thread is that people raising doubts get accused of calling the parents liars. They seem to believe that anyone who disagrees with them is simply being malicious. :banghead:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/04/12/autism-scoc.html



Oral Motor Apraxia: http://www.google.com/search?as_epq=oral+motor+apraxia&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

This makes it sound like her speech problem may be an issue of physical motor control. If that's true then I'm less skeptical about this particular story, but I'm skeptical about it having many implications for autism in general.

It needs to be noted that not all 'autistic' people are the same; and that there appears to be a subgroup who can communicate far better in writing than face-to-face with other people. See the fascinating books by Donna Williams, for example.

I co-authored a paper a few years ago on a woman diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, but in fact with more serious communication problems than that diagnosis usually implies, who had great difficulty in ordinary conversations and in understanding instructions, but who wrote really impressive poetry. If anyone wants the reference please pm me - nothing mysterious about it, but I'd rather not post my real name on the board, just in case.