I'm thinking about buying this book, does anybody know if it's any good?

Autism is a developmental and neurological disorder that is very debilitating with autistic people vastly less likely to be employed, have children, and have an overall lower life span.

that is explaining the rising sun by the heat on earth.

i dont deny possible physiological differences in so called autists, but from there to make them the explanation as a cause... not at all evident even if possible if you want to believe it.

It is the cause, there's a strong genetic basis behind autism. If you want to make things up, then please don't post.

>make things up,
>he thinks we can live without making things up

our minds complete the world we live in. we'd die otherwise. science is just a hardened version of that. its goal is not to reach facts but to organize society by providing a coherent picture in which people can believe so they can act, as you show by your conviction.

>so called autists
Are you talking about internet autists or people with real autism? People with real autism do have different cell migration and development, while people with the expanded to include internet sperging autism definition of the disease have more failed socialization. They're not more creative for having failed socialization; usually failed socialization results in rigid and intractable repetitive behavior and a lack of creativity. If they had creativity, they wouldn't fit the looser definition which is generally built on their ability to systematize rather than their ability to work without a system (which is usually nearly nil).

You're spouting lies. Don't lie to me. Are you autistic? You have no idea how difficult this condition makes our lives, and for every pseudoscience spouting retard like yourself it makes it more difficult to get funding for researching cures. Don't post again.

>They're not more creative

yes i know what you mean i hesitated to use that word. what i mean is not conscious creativity but the innate pattern perception of the mind which is needed to adapt to the world, to learn language gestures etc. and you can quote all your physiological facts, they will never prove by themselves anything, only by the imposed interpretation guided by society's goals.

>lies

i truly hate when i see people that have been brainwashed to acquire that identity as autists. you are crippling yourself. the worst part is that your legs re perfectly fine.

Would you tell a paraplegic that his legs work perfectly fine? How about you go tell that to all the autistic people living in their parents homes still in middle age because they're unable to be hired or hold a job, knowing full well that once their parents die they'll be homeless.

Don't reply to me, you and everything you represent is disgusting.

>what i mean is not conscious creativity but the innate pattern perception of the mind which is needed to adapt to the world, to learn language gestures etc. and you can quote all your physiological facts, they will never prove by themselves anything, only by the imposed interpretation guided by society's goals.
They don't have better pattern perception in general. They also are not good at understanding social or linguistic cues, and are generally worse at it than a schizophrenic who might see more patterns and cues than there are, but who can still see at least as many as normals. Their ability to systemize is often rigid, so it doesn't mean they can work out two patterns in a set of object that has three potential patterns: it means they can only work out one pattern in a set of objects that has three potential patterns, and that one pattern might not be optimal or correct but it will be rigid and they will be adverse to recognizing others. I don't know why you're pretending that they present differently, have a better outcome than they do, or have language skills/acquisition above the norm, or indeed, have no physiological diagnoses and signs. You might as well say having a cold gives everyone superhuman strength or telekinesis.

i wouldnt tell that to a paraplegic but i would tell that to someone whose legs are tied and is convinced he is paraplegic. that is what autists are.

you are disgusted at the fact that i could be right and your whole view is a lie, you are afraid to look below your waist for maybe you do have legs to walk. afraid to leave your crutches.

maybe others are not so just ignore what i say if you cant read it.

>They don't have better pattern perception in general.

thats the core of the thing. maybe they dont manifest it but that doesnt mean they dont have it. its like a plant in a closed box. if it doesnt bloom it is not because it is sick or doesnt have life, it simply lacks the right conditions to manifest it. all your descriptions just show your interpretation of it but dont explain it.

>thats the core of the thing. maybe they dont manifest it but that doesnt mean they dont have it. its like a plant in a closed box. if it doesnt bloom it is not because it is sick or doesnt have life, it simply lacks the right conditions to manifest it. all your descriptions just show your interpretation of it but dont explain it.
I'm sure they're also just not using the telekinesis they developed when they got a cold. The other user's right, you really want to redefine a disease to fit your ideology, which will do nothing for the people who actually suffer from it. Your bullshit isn't going to make them verbal. It just makes you seem like an ass.

>when people don't even know what autism is
My school was next to a specialized school for autistic children and for other mental disabilities. I actually met those people and don't worry, literally nobody on Veeky Forums is an actual autist.

yeah wathever, you can believe your ideology is facts. i am fine by recognizing mine is an ideology for w cant live without such. you dont agree with it? fine i dont need other people validating it and if your interpretations allows you to keep living with your parents fine suit yourself.

i had that vision once but i had to change it so i could live that rotting life as a human pet,. and it works for me. thats all i need for now i can write, enjoy poetry, merge with nature and so many other things that a family life blocks.

leave that*

>it's about our egos
No, man, you're a dick because you'd choose your ideology over realizing that people with autism are disabled and not verbal wonders. They're disabled precisely because they've never shown ability past the age of three to do any of the things you claim they're great at. You're as much a self centred dick as someone who says to a terminal cancer patient that it's just their bad vibes not a real disease affecting them.

>disabled precisely because they've never shown ability

that is the decisive point. how does one choose to explain that. if one is just fatalistic and accepts it then any explanation would do to keep things as they are. but if you try another perspective with the goal of change you can see that it is possible.

i dont deny the mainstream interpretations i just see that there are other options for those who dont want to conform to what they are given. let others choose otherwise, dont impose your choice just because you cant see other or dont want to take them.

>that is the decisive point. how does one choose to explain that. if one is just fatalistic and accepts it then any explanation would do to keep things as they are. but if you try another perspective with the goal of change you can see that it is possible.
Well, if you choose to lie or live in opposite land, then no autism wouldn't follow that course, but whatever lie you come up with or indeed, the opposite case you did present. Your definition of autism means that all those people who are non-verbal, who lost language at three, they're really either just faking it, or don't have autism but the opposite of "autism" under your definition. I don't think they're lying and I don't think your definition meshes with any definition of autism. I don't think a change of perspective is going to make the family that lives with someone who will never be able to communicate with them, rarely recognize their friends or family, rarely be continent, or able to feed themselves is going to make their adult child suddenly super good at language or able to crack Enigma. A change of perspective isn't going to cure autism for them. You're arrogant enough you think anyone would think saying that isn't a dick move, and I'm hoping you get a change of perspective via a stroke tbph.

>communicate

do you even know what communication is? there is no such thing as no communication. that so called lack of communication is communication itself. which is the answer to previous communication.
and it is actually only strokes that change your perspectives for these things re no matter of 'faking' or 'lying'.

By your definition of communication, my kitchen table has been talking to me since before I was born. You're trying to reframe what is the diagnostic criterion which makes them least likely to succeed in life and makes their lives and their carer's lives incredibly frustrating as just as miscommunication. It's not and their inability to communicate their needs or realize their needs is why they need constant care. Or should we assume when people used abandon them to die that what those people with autism was really trying to communicate was a death wish?
>it is actually only strokes
God, you're retarded. You can change the shape and size of your brain, and your perspective both in terms of spatial awareness and color sensing in six month of intensive study. I'm just hoping you get a stroke so that someone can tell you it's really your left side of your body communicating with your right for the first time, and not the two divorcing communication with each other.

>my kitchen table

maybe our inability to truly exchange ideas here is due to the fact that you pay attention to dead man-made things while i am making reference to living beings. which ones do you compare humans with? maybe not the table but the tree was indeed communicating.
but ok, if all you have is your science jargon mixed with cheap insults i guess were not going anywhere here...

>maybe our inability to truly exchange ideas here is due to the fact that you pay attention to dead man-made things while i am making reference to living beings. which ones do you compare humans with? maybe not the table but the tree was indeed communicating.
So you don't think the rock has Buddha-nature? Interesting perspective, considering the dead are as able to make sounds as an autistic person. Does air passing over their vocal cords communicate more or less than when it happens in a non-verbal person with autism? Does the Lazarus reflex communicate less or more than hand flapping?

>the rock
>the dead

who says a rock is dead? who says a dead organism is not still part of the cycle of life? maybe i should've said inert or something like that, for man made things are if not dead, then simply static, stagnate, out of touch with the life cycle. that is what i meant. for death is part of the larger life movement. maybe autism and such things are the manifestation of humans taken out of that life movement.

that air passing in non verbal people is taking place in a behavioral context. communication is based on behavior in context. language is just a tool inside that game not the game itself.

>who says a dead organism is not still part of the cycle of life?
>you pay attention to dead man-made things while i am making reference to living beings. which ones do you compare humans with? maybe not the table but the tree was indeed communicating.
You say so.
>inert
You don't mean that either.

You know, if you weren't a dick trying to reframe a disability to make your feels more comfortable about it, you'd probably see the obvious way to stop being a dick is to accept that maybe it's a dick move to maintain disabled people who are disabled by their inability to communicate are really great communicators. It's the equivalent dick move as if I'd told you you were so smart and should really treat those patients instead of the people who actually cope with the reality of the disease day to day.

>communication is based on behavior in context
And in the context of the same thing happening in brain dead people, we're supposed to assume that they're not communicating because they show what difference? Because you'll accept the diagnostic signs of brain death but not autism? Lulz. Why not be a dick to the dead people instead and say they're really communicating, it would damage less living human beings, unlike your autism claim which would affect their treatment negatively if applied? Why be a dick to the people who aren't braindead? If you have to be a dick in some context, why not go with the dead communicate, rather than the people known to lack communication? You'd save some people's last words at the guillotine if you went with the dead can communicate, but if you go with autists are actually better communicators, you're removing their basis for disability and altering the type of care they receive to that of someone who can communicate.

>dead man-made things

is a dead organism a man made thing?
and yeah i know inert aint the right word either.

and whats with all the dick here and there. once again, if your interpretation works for you, fine, but that doesnt make it the only possible one.

and if you are comparing brain dead with autism to prove your point then i guess we are off the fields of possible discussion here. and its not 'my' definition of communication, maybe you wanna give a glimpse to the last century of research on it that isnt purely scietistic.

>is a dead organism a man made thing?
>and yeah i know inert aint the right word either.
You know humans make other humans?
>and whats with all the dick here and there. once again, if your interpretation works for you, fine, but that doesnt make it the only possible one.
It's not about it working for me, it's about what it does to people with autism. The idea they can communicate, when they can't, has led to all kinds of bad practices and pseudoscience which has damaged them and their families and cost millions. You're a dick because you can't see that cost, and think you can swan into complex issues and spitball ideas like "what if it's not a disease" without consequence to those people. You'd take airing your airyfairy ill advised unresearched and contrary to all good sense and medical science views over actually understanding their problems, so, yeah, you're a self obsessed dick who's pet idea deserves to be shot down before you're a self obsessed dick near someone who will suffer as a result of your callousness.

>and if you are comparing brain dead with autism to prove your point then i guess we are off the fields of possible discussion here
I'm comparing your definition of being a good communicator with people who also show communication as you defined it. Your definitions are shit, and that's why when braindead people perform actions similar to what you view as communication from people with autism, your definition fails. It's not because the braindead people or people with autism are communicating, it's because your definition is so bad as to include involuntary motion as voluntary communication. It's not anyone else's definition of communication which rendered that result.

And you are a complete dick and weasel who shouldn't be left near vulnerable populations because your perspective on them is damaging and could present an immediate danger to their care and safety. Some places have guidelines or laws against leaving people who make your argument care for people with autism since the communication letter boards fiasco.

>since the communication letter boards fiasco.
Is that the one where all the spergers "claimed" rape and abuse, when it was the facilitators moving their fingers to type out the letters?

Dude you are absolutely spot on in your analysis

>when it was the facilitators moving their fingers to type out the letters?
Yeah. Half the time the patient wasn't looking at the screen or board they were using but still they wanted to believe that people with severe autism typed at a 9th Grade level when they were six. I think the rape and abuse incidences were probably rarer than other miscommunication by the operators though. I mean, if you type
>DADDY ANALLY RAPED ME
it gets more attention than
>COULD YOU PLEASE POUR ME A REFRESHING GLASS OF WATER
but neither of those sentences would likely come from someone with severe autism.

>consequence to those people.
the life they live is enough a consequence to justify another perspective that can allow change, not just passive acceptance. enduring suffering and justifying it with some jargon is not better than trying a new perspective open to those whod want to try it.

>voluntary
you think consciousness is all there is? if it is so then it is pointless to continue this.

and of course there are laws, for what matters is social order and revealing this would take off half the working people or the human pets they keep at home to be able to endure the shit they take everyday.

>>DADDY ANALLY RAPED ME
>it gets more attention than
>>COULD YOU PLEASE POUR ME A REFRESHING GLASS OF WATER
That's so fucked up when you think about it that way. I knew about the abuse claims, but I never thought about how _all_ the messages were false.

>the life they live is enough a consequence to justify another perspective that can allow change, not just passive acceptance. enduring suffering and justifying it with some jargon is not better than trying a new perspective open to those whod want to try it.
It does not allow for change. It allows for more suffering. See above.
>you think consciousness is all there is? if it is so then it is pointless to continue this.
You're the one trying to rule out the braindead as somehow distinct from the autistic communication, and if you wanted a way to do that, consciousness might be a factor. You're now more limited in the ways you can claim they're not the same thing, even though they're not.
>and of course there are laws, for what matters is social order and revealing this would take off half the working people or the human pets they keep at home to be able to endure the shit they take everyday.
The laws are there so that people don't get falsely accused of rape or abuse by people selling pseudoscience and claiming that people with autism are really trying to communicate by putting words in their mouth. You're the kind of sick fuck who probably would have split up a family who cared more about their child than you did, and because it would protect your precious ideology over the child's needs. People aren't keeping them as human pets, and your characterization of people who care for family members with autism and the people who have autism here is frankly disgusting and disturbing.

Mother of god, just stop posting. You have no idea what autism is, your vague pseudointellectual wanking is honestly disgusting.

>muh mentally I'll people are all secret genious

how the fuck do people just smile on demand? I have the male version of bitch face

perfect!

MMMM YESS QUITE PUNGENT MY DEAR

Love me some Aesop fables. If I ever have kids, I'm reading then over and over to them every night.

>>but all there is to it is just being friends with a girl and if you both really like each other than you get married or whatever

>be friend with girl
>like her enough to date her
>ask her out
>she rejects me, "ugh user I thought you were my friiiiiiieeeeeeenddddddd"
>drop her because I figured the basis of a lasting romantic relationship would be built on friendship
>get made out as the "evil sex-seeking nice guy"
Great advice guy. 10/10

>cure for autism
user...I...

Thanks, OP. That is exactly what I needed.

NO!
Read How to win friends and influence people. The initial part of the book helps a lot with women. The best of all lessons is how to make/let them talk about what they like. They feel good doing it if you listen with attention and you don't have the task of bringing up themes for conversations.

Penguins
Puffins
Cormorants
Ducks
Gannets

There are people researching things that will lead to cures, and there are things like Transcranial Magnretic Stimulation.

Nice
Idiots in this thread haven't really understood that internal belief alters perception
>autism
A high-functioning autist (hello) who receives diagnosis has become more likely to blame his struggles on his "condition" R E G A R D L E S S of his capability or innate ability...

When in reality a diagnosis, especially for basically untreatable "disorders" just hinders a person's esteem and image...

Same logic as the captialism/schizo link..maybe I havent explained well

>pua
>redpill
I want you to stop right now and find the nearest mirror. Look at yourself. You want love no? You don't get that by trying to trick people or be someone you're not. Just talk to people and be friendly and see if you enjoy each other's company. Just be honest with people. Fuck.

>just

No it helps them understand themselves better. Whether they have a diagnosis or not if they actually have the condition then they're going to be just as impaired as if they have no clue what's wrong with them.

You're posting this in an autistic thread faggot, they can't JUST talk to people and be friendly they have trouble understanding social affordances, opportunities, body language, tone and verbal cues. Take your Normanchad tier advice to /adv/

>A high-functioning autist (hello) who receives diagnosis has become more likely to blame his struggles on his "condition" R E G A R D L E S S of his capability or innate ability.
That's different to autism usually, and the people arguing for a spectrum I think are really doing a disservice to those with the non-Asperger's type (which is a pretty bad diagnostic set), and to those with what used be autism proper. The expansion of the diagnosis was made mostly because otherwise it would cut off payment and other supports to those living with the more functioning diagnosis and who would not qualify for any other disability support: the diagnosis is now a "catch-all" with very hazy parameters and it's because otherwise all the people who got diagnosed as "high functioning"/their parents would no longer receive support if they kept it divorced from autism where the disability is obvious. That crowds services for highly dependent people with autism with a lot of people who probably have a slightly different problem. Most "high functioning autism" doesn't have the physical indications or signs that autism itself does. About all they share is social awkwardness and a few other traits, which is a vast understatement for those on the end of the scale where we have more physical proof of a problem. Most "high functioning" have something closer to attachment issues or social issues, and there's a chance they aren't genetic problems so much as environmental issues.
But if you bring that up, everyone assumes that you're blaming their mother and cutting off her funding, so autism it is.

Sorry, in the first sentence I mean with the Asperger's type, not non-Asperger's. What used be autism proper is the non-Asperger's type, and I think both of them are being squeezed into inadequate services because the distinction has been collapsed.

No youre wrong. Yes, everyone knows diagnostic procedures in psychiatry can be hazy at times so its possible for some people to slip through thr cracks but there's no solution for that currently and in order to receive an autism diagnosis you have to meet almost all the criteria.

Just because people with Aspergers aren't intellectually impaired doesn't they still don't have a developmental disorder. Autism has always been on a wide spectrum, it affects your braingrowth and development, people with Aspergers aren't any less real autistics than low-functioning autistics. Some people with Aspergers may be intelligent but are very disabled and are unable to work, others are able to adapt and function reasonably well. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be diagnosed so they can learn about themselves, it affects you your whole life and doesn't go away.

Your hypothesis is wrong, that isn't why the diagnosis was changed. Autism is a spectrum phenotype under the influence of many different genes and is more of a continuum.

Man that shit is annoying. Firstly, there is nothing wrong about wanting sex so the criticism doesn't make sense. Then people like that would probably retort that "well, if sex is what you wanted why did you pretend to be her friend", but guess what idiots? Friendship and sex are not mutually exclusive. You can be friends AND have sex.

Asperger's doesn't exist any more, it was collapsed into the autism diagnosis which the APA explicitly called a "catch-all diagnosis" as I outlined. They even had a press release about it because it was such a big deal for people who were, or who were parents of, previously diagnosed with Asperger's.
It was done to prevent those who by any other diagnostic method would now be considered capable of work or living without support from having to work or live without support, and to maintain their diagnosis despite not meeting criteria as they now stand. It's to grandfather in those who are receiving support despite their functioning being not that different from any norm.

See The APA literally said that is why the diagnoses were being combined. You can also read Allen Frances or Robert Spitzer, the authors of the DSM III-IV, who claim the diagnostic inflation in the disease is now making it impossible to tell normal from disorder.

>Veeky Forums is supposedly full of autists
>every thread that has anything to do with autism is full of people saying autism doesn't even exist

wew

No a diagnosis helps the person not get so depressed thinking they are a failure not understanding why they don't like the same things most people like or feel the same way most people feel.

TAKE YOUR THOMAS SZASZ NONSENSE BACK TO THE 1960'S WHERE IT BELONGS. BEING SOCIALLY AND COMMUNICATIVELY DISABLED IN AN INTENSELY SOCIAL SPECIES LIKE HUMANS IS JUST AS DEBILITATING AS NOT HAVING A LEG. AUTISM IS A NEURODEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER THAT AFFECTS THEM ON EVEN ON A MICROBEHAVIORAL LEVEL, THERE HAVE BEEN BEHAVIORAL ANALYSES DONE THAT CAN DISTINGUISHE BETWEEN AUTISTIC MOVEMENTS AND NON AUTISTIC MOVEMENTS. IT APPEARS AS EARLY AS INFANCY AND REFLECTS ABNORMAL BRAIN DEVELOPMENT. THERE HAVE BEEN RECENT STUDIES DONE THAT PROPOSE A POTENTIAL ENDOPHENOTYPE OF AUTISM THAT DEVELOPS WORSE THAN NEUROTYPICAL INDIVIDUALS FROM CHILDHOOD ONWARDS, NO MATTER THEIR IQ OR WHETHER THEY HAD A LANGUAGE DELAY OR NOT SO THEY HAVE INHERENT NEUROLOGICAL LIMITS THAT NEUROTYPICAL PEOPLE DON'T.

LOOK AT THE EMPLOYMENT RATES AND GRADUATION RATES AND RATES OF MORTALITY (DONT FORGET THAT HAVING A RICH SOCIAL NETWORK STRONGLY CORRELATES WITH LIFE EXPECTANCY) AND RATES OF SUICIDE FOR PEOPLE WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA (WHICH ALSO GREATLY AFFECTS SOCIAL FUNCTIONING) AND AUTISM. YOU ARE AN IDEOLOGUE WITH A COMPLETE LACK OF EMPATHY FOR THESE PEOPLE THAT YOU WANT TO ""HELP"".

Don't use schizophrenia as an example against Szasz tier thought. They have you on that one because one of the great mysteries of Western psychiatry is why schizophrenia has a much worse outcome when treated in the West than when treated or not treated anywhere else by non-modern practices. Autism doesn't have that same problem, and its outcome doesn't vary as much as schizophrenia's (unless you include high functioning Asperger's diagnoses, in which case they make the others on average seem better).

Yes Asperger's was changed to Autism Spectrum Disorder. Everyone knows psychiatry is nebulous and that there's no way to 100% tell with current scientific methods if someone has a disorder or not. They still have to go through and meet all the diagnostic criterion but that does mean people who dont have the disorder can receive a diagnosis. However autism has always been on a spectrum phenotype and just because someone is higher-functioning (which is a bit of a misnomer since I know autistic people with PhDs who are still unable to work because they get fired or aren't able to be hired due to social dysfunction) doesn't mean they're not autistic, it just means theyre not disabled anymore. However the vast majority (up to around 90%) are.

>completely normal would be fine if they weren't diagnosed

No schizotypy is more about a broad or general neurocognitive synaptic integrative impairment, rather than a specific set of symptoms like delusions or hallucinations. In the diathesis stress model perfect storms of enviromental and developmental stressors (which is where western society comes into the picture) can cause the individual to slip or decompensate into overt psychotic states.

ITT: sick people, ugly minds, stupid people, autistic faggots, scientism nerdist hierophants, muh broken mind materialists, idealist dorks and generally awful people all of whom should be gassed mercilessly

hell ya im in the top 32% of autists, ballin out of control son

and (you)

>They still have to go through and meet all the diagnostic criterion
No they don't, that is why I said it was to grandfather them in. You also told me I was flat wrong about what you now concede, and have gone from
>doesn't need to meet all criteria
to
>does need to meet all criteria

> However autism has always been on a spectrum phenotype
You don't know what your words mean. I know you're trying to convince me you know what you're on about but flipflopping and then using words you don't understand with confidence makes me think you care more about validation than science.

>since I know autistic people with PhDs who are still unable to work because they get fired or aren't able to be hired due to social dysfunction) doesn't mean they're not autistic,
It might well mean they're not autistic. That does not mean they don't have social problems, but addressing the social problems as autism does not really address the problem if they have something else. Most of those who fit the Asperger's criteria would not fit the autism criteria without the APA issuing a catch-all, but it doesn't mean they don't have problems, it just means they don't have what used be recognized as autism. It makes it harder to treat what they do have aptly, and it makes it harder to treat those who have autism (as it was) properly too.
This worry that if they didn't have autism then nobody would recognize they still have problems is why the APA grandfathered them in to the new diagnosis. It's not because they care to find out what their actual problem is, it's because it was much easier than investigating what could cause their problems and explaining to people that maybe their kid didn't have the disability they're now attached to. That's ultimately cruel to those who are "high functioning" because they'll never make a genetic study (they'd compromise results), they'll never address their problems as distinct from autism with genetic studies behind it, and they'll never tailor care to those who have social problems without autism. Most of those who are high functioning are so disparate from the cluster who used be called autistic that there's no reason to believe they could be helped by services designed for the latter.
Asperger's diagnostic set was very different to autism's, to the point he thought he was seeing a unique type of the disease, distinct from the others and requiring different care to the others. Now that distinction is gone because if they don't keep up the diagnosis they get very angry people calling them about how they/their kid still has problems and nobody will label or treat it. Getting the wrong label and wrong treatment is more palatable than that, and costs less money.

>No schizotypy is more about a broad or general neurocognitive synaptic integrative impairment, rather than a specific set of symptoms like delusions or hallucinations. In the diathesis stress model perfect storms of enviromental and developmental stressors (which is where western society comes into the picture) can cause the individual to slip or decompensate into overt psychotic states.
Schizotypy is not schizophrenia, and is more related to psychosis (schizophrenic or otherwise) than schizophrenia itself (which has non psychotic types). Schizophrenia in more environmentally disordered development doesn't account for the disparity of outcomes between treatments, and you'll find that more of the nonWestern patients often have greater environmental stresses. They still get better and get better faster.

>Asperger's diagnostic set was very different to autism's, to the point he thought he was seeing a unique type of the disease, distinct from the others and requiring different care to the others.

Wow so you're saying that early pioneers especially in medicine get things wrong?

>Wow so you're saying that early pioneers especially in medicine get things wrong?
I'm saying he was probably more right than the APA is now. The bit he was wrong about, they're running with now.

Schizotypy is on a continuum with schizophrenia. Many schizotypal people remain compensated to the point where they never developed clinically significant psychotic symptoms.

To get diagnosed with Asperger's in the first place or ASD you had to meet the relevant diagnostic criteria. Asperger's was never as different or distinctive from autism as youre making it seem. As I said, autism has always been on a continuum. Most of those who fit the Asperger's diagnosis would fit Autism SPECTRUM diagnosis. You're simply wrong.

They still have to go through and meet all the diagnostic criterion
No they don't, that is why I said it was to grandfather them in. You also told me I was flat wrong about what you now concede, and have gone from
>doesn't need to meet all criteria
to
>does need to meet all criteria

I'm saying they had to meet the relevant criteria in the DSM for the original diagnosis which still fits the current ASD diagnosis.

>You don't know what your words mean.
I know exactly what they mean.

>it might well mean they're not autistic
Wrong. Some autistic people are able to better compensate socially.

>Most of those who fit the Asperger's criteria would not fit the autism criteria without the APA issuing a catch-all
Wrong

>Most of those who are high functioning are so disparate from the cluster who used be called autistic that there's no reason to believe they could be helped by services designed for the latter.
Incorrect

Schizotypy=/=schizotypal personality disorder =/=schizophrenia

(It also isn't schizoaffective disorder, though that is closer to schizotypy and schizophrenia than schizotypal)

The continuum you're referring to also includes dementia and bipolar and even normal traits such as creativity and introversion.

>To get diagnosed with Asperger's in the first place or ASD you had to meet the relevant diagnostic criteria.
To get diagnosed with Asperger's you need to be seeing a doctor who doesn't know diagnostic criteria have changed. You had to meet a different set of criteria which have now been eliminated or collapsed into the new criteria. If you were diagnosed under the old system, you automatically met criteria for ASD if you had Asperger's as your previous diagnosis even if none of your symptoms fit under the new collapsed definition. That is how the APA grandfathered in those diagnoses, and I doubt they lied in a public press release or to their members when they informed the public and registered psychiatrists of the changes.

>I'm saying they had to meet the relevant criteria in the DSM for the original diagnosis which still fits the current ASD diagnosis.
No they don't. The authors of the DSM III and IV had different definitions and the DSM5 definition is different again, which is why it caused such consternation. The reason why they had to issue a statement saying the changed criteria which people now did not meet would be expanded to include anyone diagnosed under previous criteria as a catch-all. It doesn't include anyone now diagnosed with those same criteria, because they're too late and they will have to meet the new and different criteria or not get treatment.
>I know exactly what they mean.
There is no spectrum "phenotype" and your use of the phrase suggests you don't know what at least one of those words mean.
>Wrong. Some autistic people are able to better compensate socially.
This is in response to a discussion on those who are not able to compensate socially potentially having a different aetiology. If anything, providing some that can compensate socially would mean those that can't, those under discussion, would have social problems which are more urgent than the ones you wish to talk about. You're providing support for my point while saying "Wrong". Discourse doesn't work that way
>>Most of those who fit the Asperger's criteria would not fit the autism criteria without the APA issuing a catch-all
>Wrong
Good to know you think the APA is wrong.

>>Most of those who are high functioning are so disparate from the cluster who used be called autistic that there's no reason to believe they could be helped by services designed for the latter.
>Incorrect
The services designed for the latter are also similar to those given to paraplegics and others unable to care for personal needs, and for someone who is high functioning would represent pointless intervention the same as if you offered those services to anyone else able to feed themselves or flush a toilet.

what if you tried it a couple times and it blew asshole every time? whats that called, rotten grapes?
can i get 22