[Stu Peppock]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

Hi, helper. I've been watching this thread and keeping out of it, because these people are just wacko. But I might be able to help you out a little bit. I hope it's okay if I jump in?

This is going to be a long post. I'm sorry. I hope that you read it carefully.

And if you didn't make false claims, and would politely quote where I did say that, I would appreciate that.
What you did, is called a straw man.

Okay, I think what's being referred to here is your quoting of Mr. Brasil, where he linked a list of symptoms of severe autism, including such behaviors as self-injury and muteness that Mitza highlighted. You wrote in response,

And the general view of autism isn't somebody who throw's hissy fits or is a spoiled brat.
Most people simply view that as being a spoiled brat, including me.

Given the context of your words there, it looks like you're saying that the symptoms of severe autism aren't autistic, but rather being a spoiled brat. Can you see how that was interpreted?

And you might be able to connect this to your own experiences, because I have a feeling that some people have seen your own behavior as you describe-- as being a spoiled brat-- because they didn't understand autism. Don't make the same mistake. Don't interpet others' different autism as being a spoiled brat.

Now, the odds are that you made your comments not just in response to Mitza or Brasil, but in response to the entirety of this thread. That's clear to me. But these Landover wackos, they're twisted, they don't see things like that, they only see what's right in front of their noses.

Okay, let's get to a few other details. They're not that important, but maybe I have an autistic streak as well-- I like to see things clean and correct

Such as dyslexia.

Dyslexia is a different disorder than autism. It is highly comorbid with autism. That just means that a lot of people with autism have dyslexia-- comorbid means illnesses that go together. But not everyone with autism has dyslexia, and not everyone with dyslexia has autism, so they get their own entries in the DSM.

It's important to understand how these illnesses in the DSM work. When it comes to these kinds of illnesses, any biological basis is poorly understood. So the diagnostic categories aren't the same as they are for something like heart disease. Instead, they're a bunch of doctors getting together and trying to figure out how to categorize things. They'll make mistakes until they actually know what's going on.

This lack of knowledge means that a lot of illnesses are misdiagnosed-- but that's not the best word, because the errors may lie with the theoreticians, in the DSM, rather than with the diagnosticians. So you'll see people saying things like, "Dyslexia is often misdiagnosed as autism." Or "Autism is often misdiagnosed as ADHD," which is what your link was saying. The people saying that have arguments, but there's not really enough evidence yet to say that they're right or they're wrong. Someday, maybe, we can be more sure.

The diagnoses for autism changed recently. Asperger's used to be a different diagnosis, but recently, psychiatrists decided that it's similar enough in nature to autism to roll them all into one diagnosis, that exists on a spectrum-- just as you can have really bad heart disease, or really minor heart disease that you don't much have to worry about. Now, Asperger's is considered a mild version of autism. So Asperger's is a subset of autism.

My "foolish" claims, are what the definition of "dyslexia" and "ADHD" say.

The actual definitions for these terms, as they're used medically, is in the DSM. It's a big book. It's a complicated book. But if you want to use the definitions correctly, I'd recommend reading it. Unfortunately, it's also an expensive book, but you can find a copy on Pirate Bay if you want.

Don't just read the entries for the disorders. Read the beginning of the book as well. That will help you understand the limitations of these definitions, ways that the words should and shouldn't be used.

Having a mental disorder that impairs daily functioning.

Be careful. Your own experience is evidence of some things-- for example, what an experience of autism can look like. But it's not evidence for many claims. Just as we wouldn't expect someone in a coma to be an expert on comas, just as we wouldn't expect someone with schizophrenia to be an expert on schizophrenia, having autism does not imply much understanding of autism.

Want evidence?

I think you may want to read that article again. It does not say that autism is ADHD. Here is a line from its subheading:

Behaviors associated with autism spectrum disorder can look a lot like ADHD.

That doesn't say they're the same thing. That says that there are similarities. It's very different.

Okay, let me just say something else. I'm not religious. It sounds like you are. That's cool.

When these Landover people read the bible, it's as if they don't bother using their brain. They just read it all like a vacuum cleaner sucks up dirt, without saying, "Is this something I should believe? Maybe not?"

A lot of the people here, in this thread, are mixing up good ideas with bad ideas. I'm surprised at how much knowledge some of them have of autism. At the same time, they mix it up with this ridiculous idea of mental illness as possession.

What I'm saying is, don't be like them. Don't turn your mind into a vaccuum cleaner that can only only hear everything that somebody says or nothing that somebody says. Instead, try to separate what they're saying into the useful bits and the useless bits, and deal with those in different ways. That's how we can learn even from wackos like these.

[AsksDumbQuestions]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

...

enough with this crap. autism is a human disorder with an intention of craziness not craps like spoiled brat, adhd, dylesexia etc. etc. stop with this non-sence and call them people.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

autism is a human disorder with an intention of craziness

If you can show us one piece of evidence to support this claim, I'll eat my hat.

[Hondie]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

If you can show us one piece of evidence to support this claim, I'll eat my hat.

***Unnecessary image of a sick underage person removed***
I've linked a picture of an infant with autism. As you can see, the eyes are very clearly deformed. Now, if autism was a choice, as you so eloquently put it, this infant would look completely normal.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

[links to a post containing one or two points of interest]

The first of which is this "spectrum" thing. As a matter of convenience in some countries a variety of characteristics were combined into a single continuum essentially for administrative reasons but also because a different kind of statistical analysis then becomes possible. Analysis of responses to sound, for instance, where language is not available. But an alternative approach would be to regard language as the "spectrum" with human responses as "fixed" so that individuals were seen as communicating here, or there, on the language continuum but as equals in all other respects.

The language continuum begins with vibration, develops into sound (the difference between sound and vibration being that vibration requires contact and sound does not) and from there on to music and language which are regarded as equivalent. There is a musical range to language which provides the emotional context for speech and although music has a greater tonal range the various pitch classes convey the same information whether combined in language, as vocal inflections, or in music, as musical intervals. In this way persons not having language are not disadvantaged.

Upon analysis it transpires that not everyone sees the world in the same way and there are two quite distinct perspectives. In one, sometimes thought of as autism, there's a diminished perception of "other" but that does not imply an obsessional self interest. Narcissists have an exaggerated perception of self which amounts to disregard for others but narcissism and autism do not lie on any common spectrum as is blindingly obvious when you hear either of them attempting communication. Similarly for the Asperger syndrome. What emerges is a perspective where "self" interacts in a sea of input from external sources requiring complex systems to label and interrelate all the data. That may result in shutting off the external world OR focussing on single issues, akin to linear programming in other contexts, but neither response is any sort of autism.

Whether using language (Shakespeare) or music (Mozart) there can not possibly be any diminished perception of "other" and even though a simplified system can place them on your putative spectrum I would suggest the more comprehensive model outlined above.

None of this is new. God understood all of the symptoms described by psychiatrists. And from the historical record we have a reasonable portfolio of behaviours addressed by God which aligns very well with what the devil-denying professions declare to be autism. Or narcissism or Asperger's or psychopathy or hyper-vigilance or oblivion. Jesus never mentioned any of these. Words were available to Him but the maker of the universe not only identified demons. He also cast out demons. And when He did that the symptoms disappeared. Atheistic crackpots may be able to communicate with such demon possessed individuals or with others on their "spectrum" using gongs & piccolos but they never effect a cure. Why should they? It's not the individual they see as impaired but the spectrum of communication. It's too narrow, they insinuate. Broaden it. Well, JESUS DID EFFECT A CURE. He stated the cause, He addressed the cause as stated, the demons departed.

How do you explain that?

[Stu Peppock]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

The first of which is this "spectrum" thing.

Thank you for your thoughts. I'm going to argue against them. I find it difficult to identify your precise thesis and the arguments you're using to support that thesis, so I apologize in advance-- my inability to understand may mean that I act pedantically, and ignore the underlying reason for why you're saying what you're saying, because I simply don't understand.

I'm also going to ask for evidence for some of your claims. I fully encourage you to ask for evidence of my claims as well. I'll try my best to provide it, but it may not always be possible; my thoughts are based on the integration of a lot of different sources.

As a matter of convenience

Evidence please.

The decision to split or merge diagnoses may, in some sense, be seen as one of convenience, in that every instance of disease is unique, and that it is convenient to group diseases into certain categories into order to guide treatment; actually treating all patients as completely unique would mean that any knowledge or experience was useless.

But the precise ways in which psychiatrists decide to split or merge diagnoses shouldn't necessarily (or frequently) be seen as toward a more immediate convenience of, I don't know, filling out insurance forms.

Remember, mental illness-- that is, behavioral health-- is not an advanced science. We do not know the etiology of autism spectrum, depression, or even schizophrenia. (C.f. traumatic brain injury.) Our interventions are haphazard and work on small portions of the affected populations.

The decision by authors of the DSM is toward the larger, end convenience of trying to understand etiology and treatment meaningfully, and to thus group disorders on the basis of similar symptoms and cormorbidity.

Let's think for a second about more physical diseases. Shortness of breath is a symptom of many illnesses. Emphysema and congestive heart failure are two. Yet the etiology of these two diseases is entirely dissimilar, and treatments for each are dissimilar. Physicians started to notice the difference on the basis of comorbid symptoms (AM headaches vs. PM edema, e.g.) Eventually, this distinction, and advances in anatomy and physiology, allowed physicians to distinguish between these two diseases and tailor treatments to each. We don't give diuretics to people with emphysema.

(And, to be clear and emphasize the complexities, there are also treatments to address shortness of breath that are shared between etiologies; and yes, treatments depend on severity, sometimes of symptoms and sometimes of less obvious measures, and one good treatment may be contraindicated on the basis of where, on a continuum, a particular sufferer lies.)

Mental illness is still in Galen's stage. We can't image the heart. We can't measure arterial blood gases. All that we can see is shortness of breath-- something that, like emphysema or CHF, exists on a continuum as well. The diagnosticians are trying to take the first steps to the classification of mental illness. These are not the last steps. I do not expect the etiology of any mental illness to be understood in my lifetime, although I do expect future revisions of the DSM.

in some countries

To be clear: the DSM is the most used diagnostic manual for mental illness in the world. It is not limited to the United States. Its focus on US American illness is unfortunate; mental illness can take a variety of forms depending on cultural factors. I would love to see it treat mental illness more internationally.

Additionally, psychiatry, and science in general, is not practiced at the same level in all nations (cultures). There is a reason why there is such a huge difference in the success of acupuncture trials in China when compared to trials in the USA. I do not believe that it is because acupuncture is more effective in the Eastern hemisphere.

it should also be said that while the DSM reflects the positions, arguments, and evidence of many of the most expert, it does not reflect a consensus. That is due to the difficulty and youth of the field. On issues for which there is worldwide psychiatric consensus, the DSM reflects that consensus. On issues for which there is not-- which is the vast majority of issues-- there is no consensus for the DSM to reflect.

Analysis of responses to sound, for instance, where language is not available.

I believe you're referring to a specific study. I would be surprised if rolling Asperger's into ASD is necessary to the study, but I would appreciate a link or DOI for the study to which you probably refer.

But an alternative approach would be to regard language as the "spectrum" with human responses as "fixed"

Too simple.

Autism, even if currently labelled a spectrum, probably does not lie along a single dimension. Language, and ability with it, definitely does not lie along a single dimension.

so that individuals were seen as communicating here, or there, on the language continuum but as equals in all other respects.

"Equals in other respects" worries me. Don't let your fear of stigmatizing anyone interfere with the conclusions you reach. Look for hard honest truth first, then decide whether people are equals, in whichever arena you wish to measure equality. Most misconceptions of mental illness I encounter are somewhere rooted in someone's desire to destigmatize mental illness.

As a developmental disorder, autism's impact on language has broad effects. Any treatment for autism can just as easily be seen as mitigation of its effects on development. Just as any illiterate person will rapidly find themselves unequal in many arenas, so will any person with communication difficulties.

What emerges is a perspective where "self" interacts in a sea of input from external sources requiring complex systems to label and interrelate all the data. That may result in shutting off the external world OR focussing on single issues, akin to linear programming in other contexts

Not "or"-- "and/or." You have a complicated framework for understanding autism. It is not the only framework used. It depends on a complicated framework for understanding human thought in general that is likewise very personal, supported more by introspection than by objective evidence. Determine whether the existing evidence is sufficient to support that framework. If not, maintain an appropriate level of uncertainty in it.

but neither response is any sort of autism.

Both responses are symptoms of autism, a disease without an etiology that can only be understood in terms of its symptoms. Autism isn't a real thing. It's a label invented by doctors to understand a set of related symptoms, currently, in order to guide research into the causes and treatment of those symptoms.

I would suggest the more comprehensive model outlined above.

No, the evidence is not sufficient for a model that comprehensive.

I propose a simple litmus test for assigning authority when reading about psychiatry. If the author fails to communicate uncertainty, the author is a hack. We will not fully understand psychiatry until we fully understand human thought.

[AsksDumbQuestions]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

If you can show us one piece of evidence to support this claim, I'll eat my hat.

:/

Being gay isn't autism but lust for love of the same sex because of some ethical reasons it can maybe a lone shark who found a friend but instead being friends forever they fall in love with each other because womens might have rejected him and both of them or their not social at all and the only social thing here is both of them trust each other and have fun by doing some sort of boys night or friends night and they both fell in love with each other. I guess someone will try to salt it out but what I'm saying is true if you are so desperate for love. trust me.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

:/

Being gay isn't autism but lust for love of the same sex because of some ethical reasons it can maybe a lone shark who found a friend but instead being friends forever they fall in love with each other because womens might have rejected him and both of them or their not social at all and the only social thing here is both of them trust each other and have fun by doing some sort of boys night or friends night and they both fell in love with each other. I guess someone will try to salt it out but what I'm saying is true if you are so desperate for love. trust me.

I love how even you abandoned that foolish claim! It was, you must admit, pretty retarded. Nevertheless, you've made yet another baseless, ridiculous claim that cannot be supported with any Biblical application whatsoever.

If you read this research, you'll see being gay is not an advancement of autism, it is an advancement of liberal parenting. Liberal parenting is the sinful practice of raising children to reject, mock, and horrify the Lord thy God. Autism is simply the new fad. It's "the new black" as they say in fashion. Or, "the new gay" as they say in New York City.

[MitzaLizalor]

HERE IS EVIDENCE, PLENTY MORE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST

Autism isn't a real thing. It's a label invented by doctors

As far as I'm aware no doctor describes autism as a disease so I'll just disregard your paragraphs about diseases. Concerning responses to sound however, which could be measured at the millisecond level for the full duration of interactions with any person.—.square-dance callers need to do this for example.—.that is just a way of measuring responses. Of course a square-dance caller uses language but in a different environment, such as a non-vocal techno rave, a programmer could adjust whatever was running in real time (or program on-the-fly) according to the responses of revellers as appropriate. Performers who could not do this would not put on a very good show. Doctors would probably expect a quantitative analysis which could be provided by mathematicians if they were A) the square-dance caller and B) interested.

Obviously, although a Christian may understand what physicians claim, where claims contradict the Creator of the universe.—.Jesus.—.they are dismissed out of hand. There are things not described by Jesus but the symptoms associated with autism do get some coverage and I am happy to provide evidence for you.





.EVIDENCE
..Not everything is demons. Multiple categories are mentioned here:

1. Sickness
2. Disease
3. Torment
4. Lunacy
5. Palsy

It follows that people knew what these things were whether they had medical training or not. If they could not be distinguished there would not be distinct words for them. But there is another category. DEMON POSSESSION. For centuries the blind leaders of secularism have declared that there is no such thing but they are wrong. Or lying. When Jesus healed someone of a disease they got better, pronto. Same for sicknesses, palsies, lunacies and torments. Jesus knew what He was doing and knew the actual causes of all these. He also knew the cause of other symptoms (you mentioned symptoms so I'll stick with the word) to be devils. If the cause was not devils then when Jesus removed them nothing would happen. But that is not the case. When devils are removed the demoniac ceases to be possessed and this phenomenon is recorded as distinct from the maladies listed, above.

MATTHEW 4 . KJV . look up
23 Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
24 And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatick, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.

.EVIDENCE
..Symptoms are also rather distinct, such as of leprosy compared to the palsy. Jesus recognised those along with fever, all were cured instantly, and later another distinct group comprising many persons turned up. These were all demon possessed. That is not ignorant-speak for disease, torment, lunacy, palsy, fever or sickness because all these are addressed separately. Devils produce symptoms, devils can be cast out; when they are cast out the symptoms disappear.

MATTHEW 8 . KJV . look up
2-3 Behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed..
5-8 When Jesus was entered into Capernaum, there came unto him a centurion, beseeching him, and saying, Lord, my servant lieth at home sick of the palsy, grievously tormented. And Jesus saith unto him, I will come and heal him. The centurion answered and said, Lord, I am not worthy that thou shouldest come under my roof: but speak the word only, and my servant shall be healed..
13 And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour.
14-15 When Jesus was come into Peter's house, he saw his wife's mother laid, and sick of a fever. And he touched her hand, and the fever left her: and she arose, and ministered unto them.
16 When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick.

.EVIDENCE
..I have established that Jesus knew, as we know, the difference between ill-health and demonic possession. You will now be wondering, "what are the characteristics of demons?" That is the right question. For a start we can see that they have impaired perceptions of self and other. Say if I have hydatids for some reason I just want to get rid of it. I don't want to give it to your dog. The dog wouldn't like it, you wouldn't like it, and I don't want to give it to you either. I have a balanced concept of self and other. Demons do not have this. For example they do not care whether a farmer loses his livelihood.

MATTHEW 8 . KJV . look up
28b-29 There met [Jesus] two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way. And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?
30-31 And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine.
32 And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.

This level of insensitivity could derive from just being nasty and wanting to torment pigs for no reason. It didn't actually do the demons much good either. Yes, they got to possess something else but not for very long! Demon possessed pigs can move pretty swiftly resulting in drowning in this historical example so the devils were actually no better off than if they just been cast out in the first place. That lack of forward planning together with disregard for the farmer is the same thing that happens when autistic demons get hold of any human, earning them a place on your spectrum but Jesus made them and Jesus disagrees. It's demons.





.EVIDENCE
..How can we identify devils? Obviously there are blind devils, deaf and dumb devils, epileptic devils, devils of same sex attraction, devils who want to do witchcraft or make people atheists or heretics but they are just showing off really and many such are identified by doctors as autistic. Jesus never did that.

MATTHEW 12 . KJV . look up
22 Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw.
23a And all the people were amazed..

.EVIDENCE
..Also on your spectrum you would place the impaired perception of self. More interested in drawing attention from the external world, gauging what actions will get the most interest, perhaps gleaning their thoughts from subtle nuances: all of a sudden THWACK .the demon crunches its victim's head into the rock or hurls it into the fire or tries to drown it. No regard for "self" here, the consciousness is focused externally for maximum impact. Sure, the secular physician will say that such behaviours can result from other causes than "autism" even claiming that "epilepsy" is some sort of disorder. But we are considering the autism here and Jesus is very straightforward. The cause is not lunacy, not epilepsy, not hydatids: THE CAUSE IS DEVILS! The remedy is to remove them. Not brain surgery, not bottles of dexies, not chloroform. Exorcism. Did it work? Check out this piece of evidence:

MATTHEW 17 . KJV . look up
14b-15 There came to him a certain man, kneeling down to him, and saying, Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water..
18 And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour.

Jesus has commanded us to cast out devils. Are you suggesting Jesus was mistaken? Or that He left us without the means to distinguish demons from illness? That would be a very big claim. So far I've seen very small evidence from you and mostly from secularist medical sources which obviously we reject outright. That doesn't mean we haven't read the stuff. I know what they claim but do I see the symptoms removed? No. I don't. Jesus ALWAYS removes the symptoms because Jesus knows the cause. Now you will be thinking, "Yeah, ignorant 1st century peasants what would they know?" and they know more than you because they could distinguish devils from disease. If you want to suggest Jesus was pandering to uneducated buffoons then I can address that immediately for you.





.MORE EVIDENCE
..Luke writes very well, is educated, trained as a physician and includes a variety of medical references so if anyone "knew" there were no demons this would be the guy.
But I'm not going to quote Luke on the subject directly, rather his record of a superior authority. Not just well educated. Not just a doctor. Someone who shared human experience for a short time. Someone who became perfect. If Luke did not dispute these facts why should I?

LUKE 13 . KJV . look up
There came certain of the Pharisees, saying unto [Jesus], Get thee out, and depart hence: for Herod will kill thee. And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected. Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come when ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

The distinction is there. Devils. Jesus casts them out. Cures are something different. Since I doubt anyone thinks autism is a disease the "cures" aspect is irrelevant. All that remains is is devils. If this were some innate characteristic, like red hair or having six fingers, there is no remedy. But there is a remedy, therefore the medical profession so-called is wrong. As wrong as anyone ever was. Why should afflicted wretches suffer under medical ignorance when deliverance is available? I submit that they should not and that the reality of lies taught as fact should be exposed by every expedient. The world has suffered long enough.





1. or techno programmer
2. Colossians 4:14
3. You can read Luke here if you're interested in the details
4. And here

[Stu Peppock]

Re: HERE IS EVIDENCE, PLENTY MORE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST

As far as I'm aware no doctor describes autism as a disease so I'll just disregard your paragraphs about diseases.

You may need to meet more doctors.

From Dorland's Pocket Medical Dictionary, a disease is

any deviation from or interruption of the normal structure or function of any body part, organ, or system that is manifested by a characteristic set of symptoms and signs and whose etiology, pathology, and prognosis may be known or unknown.

Autism is most definitely a deviation from the normal function of the central nervous system manifested by a characteristic set of symptoms and signs.

There are plenty of other definitions, many of which are more specific, but this general use of disease as synonymous with illness is common.

You mention this off-hand, but you wouldn't have mentioned it if it didn't at all matter to you. I think that when specific words elicit strong reactions, that's a good indication that we ought to look at what baggage we're attaching to those words-- that is, why it matters whether someone uses the word "disease" in a sense more general than you would prefer.

Jackie Scully writes,

At first sight, the answer to “What is a disease?” is straightforward.... But a look through any medical dictionary soon shows that articulating a satisfactory definition of disease is surprisingly difficult.....

Why is it important to know what a disease or disability is? ...Subtly, it is important to define disease because of contemporary biomedicine's power to intervene not just in people's health status but also in domains of their biology where the effects are morally, and economically, problematic. For example: Is someone with a genetic predisposition to a disease already ill? I may be asymptomatic but the diagnosis certainly makes a difference, not just to my future but also to my present. With a predisposition I am not actually sick (although an insurance company or employer may consider me to be), but neither am I quite the same person as I was before: getting the diagnosis may be one of the most traumatic events of my life, and may place major psychological and ethical burdens on me. So am I well, or ill? Or what?

My take on this is, let's get rid of the baggage around these words. Let's allow a word like "disease" to be free of unnecessary corollaries like "unwhole," "contagious," "frail." These are true in some instances of illness, but not in all. I fear that by socially-motivated application of labels like "disease," we reinforce these false corollaries, when we should instead work toward a more nuanced understanding of health and illness.

Concerning responses to sound however, which could be measured at the millisecond level for the full duration of interactions with any person.—.square-dance callers need to do this for example.—.that is just a way of measuring responses. Of course a square-dance caller uses language but in a different environment, such as a non-vocal techno rave, a programmer could adjust whatever was running in real time (or program on-the-fly) according to the responses of revellers as appropriate. Performers who could not do this would not put on a very good show. Doctors would probably expect a quantitative analysis which could be provided by mathematicians if they were A) the square-dance caller and B) interested.

Okay. Doesn't sound like you're referring to some research in particular. But it sounds like you have an idea for a study, one that you think would be useful. Have you considered pursuing the study yourself? I have a suspicion that you work with people with autism. It may not be as difficult as you believe to set something like this up. If you know any experienced researchers or doctors (you suggest you know at least one), they would probably be able to help you avoid some of the most common traps.

Of course, without a lot of investment, it would be difficult to make it very professional; there would probably be a lot of sources of bias. However, even a poor study can be important, if it prompts further research.

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

Research of the type you suggest would be carried out at universities and published in relevant journals, none of which cover demons, the actual cause. Neither do any of them regard autism as a disease. Quoting from a dictionary is not equivalent to the current state of neurological research, much of which requires new investigative techniques to be developed as new technology becomes available. None of it supports demonic influence. All of it contradicts Jesus, declaring Him to be a liar and more importantly categorising The Holy Ghost as either non-existent or an outright fraud. Why would I engage with material intended to blast children, infants and even susceptible adults to an eternity of suffering? Of torture? You have not even mentioned demons despite my posting fairly detailed evidence for their existence. Until you accept that, how can you determine whether demons are (or are not) the cause of autism? This is a FUNDAMENTAL message to us from the Creator of all that there is, whether we can observe it or not, and you ignore this most critical element? The Bible is clear:

MATTHEW 12 . KJV . look up
30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

What sort of a tree are you? Why are you seeking to prevent autistic demoniacs from the exorcism so critical for their deliverance? Yes, these are just like the gays, bleating "it's so who I am, don't try to change me," and would even get laws passed to make exorcism illegal for all I know. You have not responded to any of the evidence I presented. Why, you probably don't even regard Hindus or cannibals as demon possessed despite all the horrors their cultures have unleashed upon the world. Jesus came to set us free.—.well, those ordained for eternal life Acts 13:48 at any rate.—.and you desire to compound a lifetime of demonic occupation with an eternity of destruction, torment and despair?

What tree would produce fruit like that?

[AsksDumbQuestions]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

Sorry, Maybe I should see American news for a change and also you people needs to see Asian news. Maybe we'll find different knowledge. I don't live in America okay and after I watched that feminist news and video leaks it triggers me how dumb some peoples are and how resilient feminist are.

Gay Agenda Asians are better than Gay Agenda Americans

I like the part where it triggers.

[Cranky Old Man]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

you people needs to see Asian news

Why would we want to see repeats over and over again about rice?

[AsksDumbQuestions]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

Why would we want to see repeats over and over again about rice?

About Gay people fighting to be free as Gay in SE Asia or The entire Asia countries.

Can you read the title?

[Gang Member Maxwell]

Re: Autism - the New Gay

honestly piffle [INAPPROPRIATE EUPHEMISM FOR COLORED FOLK REMOVED BY MODERATOR]