VtWForum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: Autism  (Read 4987 times)

Nunleft

  • Worst Thief ever.
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 966
  • Nunleft
Autism
« on: June 14, 2010, 07:02:31 AM »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1285349/Autism-blood-test-available-years.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

as in the link, there will be an Autism test available in 3 years (apparently.) What are your views on this? With changes to Autism occurring in 2012 with Aspergers Syndrome being merged with it, for one example of changes.

So Autism Testing whats your take...Any offensive comments with be removed/ thread locked.

NunLeftStanding
« Last Edit: June 14, 2010, 07:06:30 AM by NunForWorse|CotE »
Logged


"It's a Cool Story, Bro. I needs something else... It needs more..."-Nunleft

Ken

  • Administrator
  • Baron
  • ******
  • Posts: 4152
    • Ken's Website
Re: Autism
« Reply #1 on: June 14, 2010, 07:22:19 AM »

Well on a general inspection, seems to me that it's a good thing. Improving upon being able to detect such disorders means one step closer to being able to mend them.
Logged

Vaulisel

  • Moderator
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Fashionista
Re: Autism
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2010, 07:34:34 AM »

Well on a general inspection, seems to me that it's a good thing. Improving upon being able to detect such disorders means one step closer to being able to mend them.
It certainly is good, considered in a general way. However, the media often jumps the gun when a paper such as this is published. 15-20% detection rates are, bluntly put, not good enough, and there isn't necessarily a linear relationship between additional time/money invested and improvement of that figure.

Assume 1000 children. The article states that 10 of these will have autism. The test has a 20% chance of detecting autism if it is present. So two of the autistic children will be picked up as autistic. However, such tests even when they make it to use in common medical practice, usually have a significant chance of a false positive, say 5%. This means that there are 50 normal children picked up as autistic. As such, there is about a 4% that a positive test for autism indicates autism.

Naturally, these are arbitrary figures, but they are by no means uncommon ones to find in medical diagnoses. They serve to demonstrate how much further the technique must come before it can be definitively claimed to be a reliable method of detecting autism.
Logged

Nunleft

  • Worst Thief ever.
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 966
  • Nunleft
Re: Autism
« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2010, 07:44:32 AM »

I think that this is a Bad thing, I have VERY mild aspergers (i don't mind saying it, but it hinders my communication a little.) If i tested positive to this test (since stated about the merging.) for my mild disorder I would have to go through more crap than i do, which at the moment is minor. But there was this one movie where genetic testing was taken to the extreme so that only "perfect" people could succeed in life.

On a Minor point, since when is Autism/Aspergers a bad thing?

NunForYou
Logged


"It's a Cool Story, Bro. I needs something else... It needs more..."-Nunleft

Vaulisel

  • Moderator
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Fashionista
Re: Autism
« Reply #4 on: June 14, 2010, 07:46:19 AM »

If you'd read the article you'd linked, you'd realise that it addressed the concerns you felt the need to raise. It's all a "the more you know" thing. Knowledge begets informed decisions, which is the next best thing to wise ones.

Also, any complaint that contains "There was this one movie..." is a bit on the weak side.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2010, 07:50:48 AM by Vaulisel »
Logged

Nunleft

  • Worst Thief ever.
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 966
  • Nunleft
Re: Autism
« Reply #5 on: June 14, 2010, 07:51:59 AM »

I know
If you'd read the article you'd linked, you'd realise that it addressed the concerns you felt the need to raise.

Whilst it is very important that research continues, it is also crucial that those living with the condition have access to appropriate advice and information, as the right support at the right time can make an enormous difference to people's lives.'

Many people have Autism/Aspergers without knowing it are successful people (some say Bill Gates has Aspergers) so why does the tests even need to be there?
Logged


"It's a Cool Story, Bro. I needs something else... It needs more..."-Nunleft

Vaulisel

  • Moderator
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Fashionista
Re: Autism
« Reply #6 on: June 14, 2010, 07:56:38 AM »

For the sake of people who are not you or Bill Gates. Are you seriously trying to say that people who are severely impaired by autism because it wasn't picked up and addressed promptly should have to just suck it up because you think that your guardians might be incapable of deciding that you don't need excessive treatment for a mild disorder? How extraordinarily selfish.
Logged

Nunleft

  • Worst Thief ever.
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 966
  • Nunleft
Re: Autism
« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2010, 08:09:38 AM »

IM not being selfish here (oddly enough it is a trait of Austism/Aspergers) What Im saying is the whole area is a Spectrum thing. and that a large amount of people have aspergers/Autism without acknowledging it. Here is an article with various famous people who are suspected of having asperbergers/austim: http://www.disabled-world.com/artman/publish/article_2086.shtml even Mr Spock from Star Trek Original Series had it (http://www.inthelight.co.nz/spirit/aspergerpeople.htm ) look at those names if they were diagnosed would they have had the success they had or would they be seen alternatively

Nunleft
Logged


"It's a Cool Story, Bro. I needs something else... It needs more..."-Nunleft

Vaulisel

  • Moderator
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 1169
  • Fashionista
Re: Autism
« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2010, 08:16:43 AM »

I don't know what you think the word "diagnose" means, but what it doesn't mean is "condemn to life as an invalid". Your argument that screening for autism is bad is based one hundred percent on the idea that being informed about your options is a terrible idea, and it's better for everyone to be ignorant and have some succeed greatly and some suffer terribly their whole lives rather than have everyone informed and have some succeed greatly and others lead normal, productive lives. I don't follow how your logic shows any concern for those for whom autism is potentially debilitating.

I have plenty of much more minor genetic defects than autism, but I know what they are and they're all well in hand, so NOONE CARES. Any negative ideas about those who have autism and related conditions only exist BECAUSE people are left undiagnosed and end up suffering because of it.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2010, 08:18:35 AM by Vaulisel »
Logged

Nunleft

  • Worst Thief ever.
  • Baron
  • *****
  • Posts: 966
  • Nunleft
Re: Autism
« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2010, 08:29:09 AM »

your right I am not the best equipped to argue this, and I cant argue that well. I know when Im mostly beat, However there are some people who have major problems with the who area: " men with Autism more likely to rape women and girls," linking it with a flu vaccine causing many parents not to give their children the vaccine.

So I shall back out and admit I cant not argue it against a skilled debater

NunLeftAlive
Logged


"It's a Cool Story, Bro. I needs something else... It needs more..."-Nunleft
Pages: [1] 2 3