There are several things wrong with that statement.
1) "tsunami"- we are not a destructive weather pattern.
2) "young autistic men"- there are plenty of women on the autism spectrum.
3) "in our communities"- ITS EVERYONE's COMMUNITY NOT JUST AN EXCLUSIVE NT WORLD
4) "getting assaulted"- what in the world are you implying? we are not to blame if we get assaulted...
5) "assaulting others"- what in the...?


Anyways, I think the article shows how unintelligible so-called experts are when it comes to autism. The statistics and reasoning they throw out there are complete speculation. The mother convinced it was environmental- she is just making up stuff- agent orange?? come on. Her husbands work??

And science is not far behind her- it'll probably be linked to 50 million different chemicals--- if you find a large enough sample you can make the statistics say anything. Anyways, i'm sure being born NT is also linked to 50 million different chemicals, but nobody'll speak on that....

I thinks it absurd that they claim more children living by highways are born autistic...i think in general more children are born who live by highways, because it is likely to be a better populated area as opposed to a rural area in which less children are born because the population is smaller.

i think that chemicals are increasing risk for autoimmune diseases and allergies (this is backed by good research and common sense), but in my opinion autism has always been around and prevalent, just valued differently and misdiagnosed...it would be a strange world if we were all NT...

I am not sure the "whatever it takes" is the best route. that whatever it takes can take on a very violent of sadistic form...and that would not be good for the culture of human beings. Anyways, I am banking on the fact that a giant solar superstorm the likes of 1859 will cause a major power outage (including causing batteries not to work), and that will start to change things rapidly because people will see the limitations of our reliance on electricity - the production and consumption of which is the source of a lot of toxins being released into the environment.

Fear fewer people will subscribe and less money will be obtained from
reporting "Autism - We still don't know what's up with that".

Why say its experimental? Sure if one side of the guy's family has an autistic relative, and a girl's side of the family also has a autistic relative, then its obvious that the child may or may not be autistic. Its hereditary!!!

I Concur

I think the most memorable and the one that pisses me off the most was the MMR. Not for it's ridiculousness but for the fact that it was kind of like this...

"MMR may save my child's life, but it may give them autism. I'd rather let my child suffer from a terrible disease and possibly die..."

I think that's a pretty recent one. Someone noticed a correlation between the rise in obesity in the United States and a rise in autism diagnoses.

Of course, in order for that to work, the correlation would have to be observable world-wide, wherever either one has increased. That isn't the case.

That would piss me off too, bloke. Parents acting like autism is a lot worse for their children than dying some horrible death is a lot of BS

It actually happened, that's the worst part. I think it was only in the UK though, around late 90s early noughties.

I wanna assault them ... where are they???

Don't forget the internet.

Interestingly per the CDC, vaccination levels have not gone down for children in the last couple of decades.  It has been legal for decades to get a waiver in every state for vaccinations, for reasons as simple as philosophical ideology and/or religious ideology and of course for those that have valid medical reasons that cannot be vaccinated.  

The 5 percent of the nation receiving these waivers has stayed fairly consistent through time.  The world health organization (WHO) provides guidelines for community immunity per countries, and the US continues to meet those guidelines at 95%.

The recent outbreaks of communicable disease in the US have been attributed to exposure from individuals outside of the borders.  Unfortunately other countries around the world do not meet the WHO standards for community immunity, such as the UK which reports 80% immunization rates for children. The issue is much worse in other countries.

While a significant number of folks may have been listening to fears related to Wakefield's studies in the UK and the other areas in Europe over autism and vaccination, Jenny McCarthy didn't make a significant impact in the US, per actual CDC statistics.  And, the actual US studies done by Walker in the US, regarding the vaccination/autism issue never made it to peer review.

Basically the same 5 percent of waivers nationwide for vaccinations continue as consistent through the US in the last few decades.  There were those that had philosophical differences over the dangers of vaccinations in the US, well before the autism issue came about.  

Jenny doesn't have much of a following in the US per her scientific expertise; she is afterall known for her toilet humor and playboy exposure, well before any personal issue of interest in the issue with her son.  

Alex Jones and Info-Wars continues the general conpiracy theories to a larger audience, including the autism/vaccination theories, along with occasional prescence of Wakefield on his radio show.  But, it appears the same 95% of the US, that is not willing to take a chance on their child catching a communicable disease, listen to their doctors rather than Jenny, Alex, or Wakefield if they have come across his name.

Wakefield is a relative unknown in the US, per the general public, but was a very respected scientist in the UK at one point in time, receiving mainstream exposure there in the media.

The CDC and the government was not going to allow that to happen in the US; they quickly removed thirmesol from most childhood vaccines, to nip any potential of a significant proportion of the population believing that thirmesol was a real danger in vaccination.  

If I remember correctly it was a very fast reaction to Wakefield's study done in 1998, with the government's action to remove thirmesol in the year 2000.

I adore monologues - particularly those by Katie1 yup read every word - love that hers make sense all the way thru (mine are very tangental)!

Thanks that is kind, along with the other comment from MLB

I suppose the Internet and porn have been blamed as well.

http://www.demiseofguys.com/ is more interesting than
the story about blaming autism on toxic exposure. NSFW.

The internet has been blamed. It was only pointing out the correlation, and that internet addicts display some autism-like behaviors. No hypothesis was given for how the internet might cause autism, though.

I've never heard of anyone blaming porn, but that doesn't mean it hasn't happened.

Well at a TED (Technology, Entertainment and Design) conference a psy­chol­o­gist
suggested increases in intimacy issues, shyness, and other things are leading to
the demise of guys. The psychologist described some things which I won't be
surprised by if someone points out a possible correlation between the description
given and autism. The psychologist suggested some possibles causes. I think
those causes will be claimed next as the causes of autism.

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if someone tries to draw a connection between reality TV and autism.

Speaking of which on the subject of Autism being caused by toxic chemicals .... maybe the sh*t they say causes Autism ?

No, zombies are caused by the Solanum virus, not reality TV.

It's mentioned in the Zombie Survival Guide by Max Brooks.

It's spread through bodily fluids (including stagnant ones). It causes extreme fever, followed by death and later reanimation. The virus essentially shuts down psychological functions and takes over the functions of the body, causing a driving need (though, not a physiological one) for the consumption of human flesh.

No.

Nope it also happened in the states.... Wakefield got his "sources" from a health agency from California....

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/121/4/e836.full.pdf

The media coverage of the vaccine controversy in the US has been studied and peaked in the year 2003.  There was an uptick of selective non-receipt of the MMR vaccine from .77% in 1995 to 2.1% in the year 2000 before mainstream media coverage of the vaccine controversy became widely available.  

By the time media coverage became widely available in 2002 in the US, selective non-receipt of the MMR vaccine returned to the baseline of about 1 percent.  

Currently, selective non-receipt of the MMR vaccine still holds at less than 1 percent as it did in 1995.

Meanwhile in the UK rates for the MMR vaccine dropped from 92% in 1996 to 84% in 2002, and still remain in the 80's.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measles_outbreaks_in_the_2000s

Wakefield's study was not even highlighted in US mainstream media when the uptick in the US occurred in 2000. The only explanation offered by the study of the 1 percent uptick in selective non-receipt of the MMR vaccine in the year 2000, is the limited internet coverage available at the time, along with potential information from private practioners that were aware of Wakefield's study through medical journals.  

If the internet had been widely available at the time, instead of 35% coverage during the initial stages of the study from 1998 to 2000, the uptick could have been greater, in the US, but government efforts to remove thirmesol from the MMR vaccine by the time media coverage hit, apparently resolved the concern among private practioners and the public at large.  As the media coverage peaked in the US, selective non-receipt of the MMR vaccine continued to decline, per the graphs in the linked study.

Unfortunately the autism/vaccine link is still being used as an excuse by some whom refuse the vaccine for their children per philosophical concerns allowed in waivers in some states, but overall vaccination levels are actually increasing in the US, per the latest CDC numbers on vaccinations.

Interestingly some of the community pockets in the US, in the West Coast of the US, that provide the greatest number of philosophical waivers, are among anti-government grass roots areas, in alignment of philosophies of government conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones and Infowars.  

If it were not for the fraudalent autism link, the government vaccine conspiracy theories would likely continue, as there have been actual deaths linked to causes, other than autism, per brain infections, etc., often cited by government conspiracy theorists.

Unfortunately, the individuals that are choosing not to vaccinate their children by philosophical choice are risking a real threat to their child's health as well as other unvaccinated children, some of whom cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons, because of the real threat of infection from individuals traveling abroad in other countries where community (herd) immunity is not currently met.

The overall problem though, is much greater in Europe compared to the US, and Wakefield study is definitely considered as the stimulus that has taken some of those countries below standards for community immunity.

The study by Walker, in 2006, from Wakeforest University in the US, that was never peer reviewed, has been presented over and over in the "Daily Mail" without a date stamp, like the study happened yesterday in an attempt to provide evidence that Wakefield's concern per the Measle virus and GI problems in the MMR vaccine was valid.  Unfortunately, propagating the continuing autism link myth in the UK.  And also, continuing to provide ammunition for conspiracy theory sources like "Info Wars"/Alex Jones.

After seeing that article, I was informed that the "Daily Mail" is like the US version of the National Enquirer.  The article linked below from the "Daily Mail" makes the study look very convincing, until one finds out it was over 4 years old, never published in a peer reviewed journal, and publically dismissed as evidence of a danger for vaccinations, by Walker, shortly after publication in 2006.

http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2011/01/the-daily-mail-uk-continuing-sorry-contribution-to-fear-uncertainty-and-doubt-vaccine-fears.html

And finally speaking of the Zombie Apocalypse, the issue in South Florida, recently, was quite disturbing; if one hasn't heard about it, they can look it up on the internet; I don't think I can stomach talking about it right now, in detail. Two naked men on the highway, one participating in canibalism, and one gunshot by lawenforcement not significant enough to abort the activity, is about as much as I can repeat of it.

Has to be the one of most unusual/disturbing thing I have heard in the media in recent memory; the Martin/Zimmerman case will likely fade from Memory before this incident does.  The media is definitely taking advantge of the Zombie hyperbole language to attract attention to the incident.  

Interesting how culture can desensitize people to horrifying things in life. I doubt the story would have been presented that way, and instead in more of a Jeffrey Dahmer/Ted Bundy manner if it wasn't for the Zombie Apocalyse cultural interest.  

The CDC is even using Zombie Hyperbole language on the government website for disaster preparedness info.  It definitely gets people's attention.  Still surprised to see it on the CDC website, but I guess the younger generation is beginning to take hold of the government reins.  

An interesting sign of cultural change, but who knows it could save lives, if it's what it takes to get people's attention for disaster preparedness awareness

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_CDC_warning_about_zombie_apocalypse

Pardon my Pedantry, but Tsunami's are not destructive weather patterns, they are waves of water caused by the displacement of water in large bodies of water such as oceans and lakes.

I must disagree: we are in a post-Indonesia and post-Japan tsunami world, with those being fresh examples of what a tsunami is in many peoples minds. The word rings an 'overwhelming' and 'destructive' tone, and deliberately so.

Not quite. People break down 'community' to mean many different things, usually to the deliberate inclusion of some and exclusion of others (such as the black community, the LGBTQ community, the autistic community, the school community, the deaf community, etc). The fact that she is mentioning a community denotes the idea that she is referring to some definable "our", which is different than some definable "their". True, we cannot say who is "our" or who is not "ours". If her intention was not to sound exclusive, or portray a sense of "autism is not naturally a part of our community", then she should have chosen her words better,

Just imagine for a moment if she were speaking about LGBT children and her words came out:

Would that not strike a strange tone in those who feel that variation in human sexuality is natural? SHould not her words reflect that the source of the problem is the people who do the assaulting and who are the bullies- rather than identifying the presence of gay men as the source of the problem?

Not sure your point here- its probably the case that gay kids with ADHD may respond back physically- pointing this out seems oddly off topic.

I agree here, I think we know very little about autism and the brain, and human development in general, which is why it is important to avoid as much marginalizing language as possible- which is why I find her singling out "young autistic men" as counterproductive.

^WHich is why the article sickens me- it consists largely of speculation and diagnostic gossip. Yet it conveys such opinions as scientific and sophisticated, worthy of being called "news".

If her concern is for black autistic children, she should represent it as such. That is another conversation. That said, there have always been black people with communication difficulties dealing with assault- its not THEM who we need to concern ourselves with- its the bullies and the jerks who we need to deal with. Her words do not indicate that that is her focus. Her focus is on preventing autism to prevent such problems...but I say the problem is not in the autistic children, its in the people who view them as problems.

[Also, note that racial prejudice in law enforcement is not new issue for the black community- the Trayvon Martin story is an illustration of the daily struggle oft misunderstood or ignored by those who do not have to deal with it...think of the injustice of Trayvon Martin's death and zimmermans non-arrest as an "I told you so" moment to the many people who think this country is above and beyond racial prejudice. Its not an "omg" story, because it is hardly surprising...

Notice we are not saying "oh no there will be a tsunami of young black men who will be assaulted-- what should we do with these black men?", we instead say "what should we do with the mothereffers who are assaulting men based on the color of their skin?", or better yet "what should we do about changing the racist attitudes which perpetuate such assaults?"]

Many parents advocate- doesn't mean they are advocating for the right or best things. Its hard to believe, but its true.

I agree to an extent. It is not merely blame which has changed things (though popular opinions can leak into politics, which can impact policy, etc etc). BUT, it is scientifically proven fact that substances such as lead, mercury, and certain chemical agents are related to intellectual delays, respiratory illness, skin conditions, etc. The things which have drastically improved the environment are those which are scientifically backed up (such as DDT in pesticides and softening of eagle egg shells).

Furthermore, perpetuating the idea that autism is damage we inflict upon our offspring by the excessive chemicals we use, is not just addressing and environmental issue. It is using a language which categorizes autism as a defect or disorder, and instills a sense of "i did this horrible thing to my child by getting fillings, and i wish I did not do that".

Blaming the collective human activity for traceable changes in the environment, and calling on everyone to make more conscious decisions for a healthier planet is not comparable to the issue at hand. To blame human bad behavior for the resulting autistic children is not productive and does more to instill fear and guilt of autistic traits than it does to clean up our environment.

Unless people with autism are more likely to get asthma and skin cancer- I hardly believe WE are canaries with regards to the environment. Anyways, our DNA is not so distinct that we would react differently to being exposed to lead than an NT child. If autistic traits are seen to be reactive to environmental toxins, this would imply that autism does not present adaptable human traits, and thus is doomed to die out. This is a dangerous conclusion to draw...

I agree with this, schooling is a great example of culture not conforming to the needs of autistic learners- yet these issues have always existed, and instead of trying to change the children, the teaching methods were changed to accomodate greater understanding about development, memory, learning, and intelligence. Understanding the variation in learning styles which present in children (with autism, ADHD, etc..) should further change the way we approach teaching and raising children. If we are playing the blame game, the opposite could happen, where we decide those children present a "problem" for society, and if the problem feels overwhelming, many will agree that it ought to be "dealt with ASAP" before all the rest of the community pays the price...which is what i felt the article was conveying.

 
Addiction is a whole 'nother can of worms. there are changes that occur in the brain which allow us to define something as an addiction, and these changes are NOT THE SAME AS A SPECIAL INTEREST. Our SI's have to do with the way we think about things and details, not because chemicals and brain structure are changing to create a debilitating attachment (and withdrawal) from a particular reward. Please don't compare the two- they are not the same, and should not be seen as such! I do not believe we would be any more susceptible to addiction than NT people...

The conversation reminds me just how bad some areas in my locale used to stink from air pollution; at this point it's hard to believe that people actually bought houses in those areas, and put up with it for decades.  If it were not for the blame game, we might still be smelling that stuff.  

It was not the smell which put people off- it was the unhealthy consequences. Those unhealthy consequences are supported by facts, not the "blame game". I do not think autism is an unhealthy consequence, and that it will go way if we remove over-exposure to toxins..

The brain needs to be washed in a chemical bath of hormones to help shape the way neurons work together, creating more masculinized or feminized brains. Generally, the chemical bath is correlated with biological sex. When it is not, the brain may develop in such a way that the child notices their impressions, interactions, and interests in the environment seem to be more similar to a gender different from their biological sex. this accounts for some differences about queer or transgender people. Im tired of people claiming that they know some secret "rule" that if you do not conform to a binary gender code than that is unnatural, or unfit, and ought to be prevented at all costs.

Similarly, to what you are referring, there is a hypothesis that autistic traits are linked to the type of chemical bath our brains receive prenatally. Yet, where is the rule that autistic traits are defective and "shouldn't be", and therefore should be prevented?

Its like many scientists are going by some mysterious Holy Bible which determines how humans ought to behave, develop, and persist. Truth is, we only know whats the norm- and not being the norm does not necessarily equal presences of a defect.

Interesting way to put it. I agree-- as long as there is diversity in experience (including stress), there will be diversity in development, and we should just accept this as something natural, good, and human.

Sorry, that was long, just another special interest monologue.

Nah, it was enjoyable to read! Usually, either I disagree to a large extent with someone, or I agree to a large extent. But in this case I was agreeing and disagreeing to about equal extents, which was an awesome experience.

Katie1 Wrote:

Pardon my Pedantry, but Tsunami's are not destructive weather patterns, they are waves of water caused by the displacement of water in large bodies of water such as oceans and lakes.

I must disagree: we are in a post-Indonesia and post-Japan tsunami world, with those being fresh examples of what a tsunami is in many peoples minds. The word rings an 'overwhelming' and 'destructive' tone, and deliberately so.

Katie1 Wrote:

I'm not quite sure why "our communities" would not include both her and her son, who is autistic.  No reason I can see to believe that she was using the term community to exclude autistics or non-autistics; most people in the general population don't break down community to exclude anyone with a disability or disorder.  

Not quite. People break down 'community' to mean many different things, usually to the deliberate inclusion of some and exclusion of others (such as the black community, the LGBTQ community, the autistic community, the school community, the deaf community, etc). The fact that she is mentioning a community denotes the idea that she is referring to some definable "our", which is different than some definable "their". True, we cannot say who is "our" or who is not "ours". If her intention was not to sound exclusive, or portray a sense of "autism is not naturally a part of our community", then she should have chosen her words better,

Katie1 Wrote:

There is really no question that autistic's are targeted and assaulted by others at alarming rates.  The problem that has been identified is protecting them from these assaults as they move into the adult community, and ensuring they don't get in legal trouble by responding physically when provoked by others.

Just imagine for a moment if she were speaking about LGBT children and her words came out:

Quote:

"We are so many years away from having the answers, but we are far closer to a tsunami of young gay men in our communities, getting assaulted, assaulting others"

Would that not strike a strange tone in those who feel that variation in human sexuality is natural? SHould not her words reflect that the source of the problem is the people who do the assaulting and who are the bullies- rather than identifying the presence of gay men as the source of the problem?

Katie1 Wrote:

Interestingly, autistics with co-morbid symptoms of ADHD were studied as more likely to respond back physically when provoked, as is the case in ADHD when not associated with autism.

Not sure your point here- its probably the case that gay kids with ADHD may respond back physically- pointing this out seems oddly off topic.

Katie1 Wrote:

As far as her reference to male autistics rather than female autistics, she is a blogger and may not identify the same problem with female autistics, because she may not have come across many individuals labeled as a female autistic.  

In some areas of the country, such as Alabama, only 1 in 909 females are identified as having autism.  Many people do see autism as a male issue rather than a female issue.  

That's a real problem for females that are misdiagnosed or completely overlooked.  While the statement is not incorrect, it focuses on 80% of the identified issue, and disregards the other identified 20% of the issue.  Disparities in percentage, perhaps partially perpetuated by pre-conceived notions.

I agree here, I think we know very little about autism and the brain, and human development in general, which is why it is important to avoid as much marginalizing language as possible- which is why I find her singling out "young autistic men" as counterproductive.

Katie1 Wrote:

While genetics is a long time established factor in Autism, the recent research quoted in the article that suggests that environment plays a role as well, was a well respected study.  That is the only real answer that has been provided so far that the article was referring to.  

The other research quoted was presented as correlations as well as weak correlations.  And those that provided anecdotal opinions on what the environmental cause might be were not experts on the issue, they were just opinions provided by individuals in the general population interviewed, including the lady that made the comment about tsunamis who writes a blog about her personal experiences with her son who is autistic.

^WHich is why the article sickens me- it consists largely of speculation and diagnostic gossip. Yet it conveys such opinions as scientific and sophisticated, worthy of being called "news".

Katie1 Wrote:

When I first saw the comment about assaulted and assaults I was a bit taken back, too; it came across a bit too strong; but upon further analysis of what has been reported in the media lately, per the link I provided, and of course the huge general media issue of racial bias and Trayvon Martin, she may personally identify a concern for her son, particularly as a young african american autistic, that may be a stronger concern than is experienced by some others.  

If her concern is for black autistic children, she should represent it as such. That is another conversation. That said, there have always been black people with communication difficulties dealing with assault- its not THEM who we need to concern ourselves with- its the bullies and the jerks who we need to deal with. Her words do not indicate that that is her focus. Her focus is on preventing autism to prevent such problems...but I say the problem is not in the autistic children, its in the people who view them as problems.

[Also, note that racial prejudice in law enforcement is not new issue for the black community- the Trayvon Martin story is an illustration of the daily struggle oft misunderstood or ignored by those who do not have to deal with it...think of the injustice of Trayvon Martin's death and zimmermans non-arrest as an "I told you so" moment to the many people who think this country is above and beyond racial prejudice. Its not an "omg" story, because it is hardly surprising...

Notice we are not saying "oh no there will be a tsunami of young black men who will be assaulted-- what should we do with these black men?", we instead say "what should we do with the mothereffers who are assaulting men based on the color of their skin?", or better yet "what should we do about changing the racist attitudes which perpetuate such assaults?"]

Katie1 Wrote:

I don't think she said it as a general indictment against autistics; that doesn't make sense when she is advocating for her son in concern for his future.  

Many parents advocate- doesn't mean they are advocating for the right or best things. Its hard to believe, but its true.

Katie1 Wrote:

The mercury fillings in her teeth were quite a reach, but most humans attempt to seek order in life; the capriciousness of life is avoided by most, at all costs.  When articles like this come out, and general opinions are solicited most any manmade environmental issue could be implicated as a potential environmental factor in autism, but as Windy stated everyone is subjected to these environmental impacts, not just those genetically pre-disposed to autistic traits.  There are probably a thousand other disorders and/or diseases potentially impacted by similiar environmental impacts.

I live in an area that has historically had some of the highest levels of pollution in my state, and it has been blamed on everything from intellectual disabilities to miscarriages, in the last several decades.  And it's probably guilty to some degree in many cases, but the degree of guilt is almost impossible to determine.  

The good thing is that all that blame, led to political changes that have dramatically cleaned up the environment where I live.  The environment in many ways is much cleaner than it was before the whole "autism epidemic" phenomenon occurred.  Just removing lead out of gasoline, 30 years ago, has probably raised IQ points for the whle nation to some degree if that could be scientifically measured.

I agree to an extent. It is not merely blame which has changed things (though popular opinions can leak into politics, which can impact policy, etc etc). BUT, it is scientifically proven fact that substances such as lead, mercury, and certain chemical agents are related to intellectual delays, respiratory illness, skin conditions, etc. The things which have drastically improved the environment are those which are scientifically backed up (such as DDT in pesticides and softening of eagle egg shells).

Furthermore, perpetuating the idea that autism is damage we inflict upon our offspring by the excessive chemicals we use, is not just addressing and environmental issue. It is using a language which categorizes autism as a defect or disorder, and instills a sense of "i did this horrible thing to my child by getting fillings, and i wish I did not do that".

Katie1 Wrote:

The blame game is an important one, in continuing to clean up the environment.  If the whole global warming controversy, correct or not  correct, ultimately provides even cleaner air to breathe, the effort is priceless in the long run, for everyone who has only one physical body and one earthly environment to live in.

Blaming the collective human activity for traceable changes in the environment, and calling on everyone to make more conscious decisions for a healthier planet is not comparable to the issue at hand. To blame human bad behavior for the resulting autistic children is not productive and does more to instill fear and guilt of autistic traits than it does to clean up our environment.

Katie1 Wrote:

The canary in the coalmine, is not a bad analogy either.  There is the potential that many negative impacts of culture that move well beyond what we might normally consider as dangerous environmental impacts are showing up stronger in individuals predisposed to autistic traits.  

Unless people with autism are more likely to get asthma and skin cancer- I hardly believe WE are canaries with regards to the environment. Anyways, our DNA is not so distinct that we would react differently to being exposed to lead than an NT child. If autistic traits are seen to be reactive to environmental toxins, this would imply that autism does not present adaptable human traits, and thus is doomed to die out. This is a dangerous conclusion to draw...

Katie1 Wrote:

There are likely not a great deal more individuals pre-disposed to autistic traits, but the overall changes in culture may indeed provide greater challenges to some than in decades past. What may impact autistic individuals more may impact some in the rest of population less.

I agree with this, schooling is a great example of culture not conforming to the needs of autistic learners- yet these issues have always existed, and instead of trying to change the children, the teaching methods were changed to accomodate greater understanding about development, memory, learning, and intelligence. Understanding the variation in learning styles which present in children (with autism, ADHD, etc..) should further change the way we approach teaching and raising children. If we are playing the blame game, the opposite could happen, where we decide those children present a "problem" for society, and if the problem feels overwhelming, many will agree that it ought to be "dealt with ASAP" before all the rest of the community pays the price...which is what i felt the article was conveying.

Katie1 Wrote:

Internet addiction, pornography addiction, videgame addiction, and technology addiction in general are new controversial issues, and challenges that impact most in western societies, but for those already prone to narrow areas of interest and focus, it is only common sense that these areas may provide a greater challenge for some autistic individuals than those in the general population. 

 
Addiction is a whole 'nother can of worms. there are changes that occur in the brain which allow us to define something as an addiction, and these changes are NOT THE SAME AS A SPECIAL INTEREST. Our SI's have to do with the way we think about things and details, not because chemicals and brain structure are changing to create a debilitating attachment (and withdrawal) from a particular reward. Please don't compare the two- they are not the same, and should not be seen as such! I do not believe we would be any more susceptible to addiction than NT people...

Katie1 Wrote:

The conversation reminds me just how bad some areas in my locale used to stink from air pollution; at this point it's hard to believe that people actually bought houses in those areas, and put up with it for decades.  If it were not for the blame game, we might still be smelling that stuff.  

It was not the smell which put people off- it was the unhealthy consequences. Those unhealthy consequences are supported by facts, not the "blame game". I do not think autism is an unhealthy consequence, and that it will go way if we remove over-exposure to toxins..

Katie1 Wrote:

I personally think that the expression of autism in those pre-disposed to genetic traits of Autism are impacted most by the environment through prenatal/perinatal factors including hormonal balances.  Prenatal hormonal factors impact speech, motor development, and brain development in general, molding the brain in some areas of strengths and some areas of weakness.

The only thing required for this environmental influence is prenatal and perinatal stress; common to all mammals in the animal kingdom, well before any manmade pollution came along, and suggested as part of the reason autistic like traits are seen in some mammals.  

Also why, in part, there is a gender spectrum instead of rules set in stone of what is all male and all female in the mamalian animal kingdom.  Those correlations of gender spectrums and autism spectrums are certainly seen in every online autistic community.  

It appears to be a stronger issue among those diagnosed with aspergers, even when 2d/4d digit ratios are measured in studies, predictive of prenatal exposure to testosterone.  The undercurrent of gender neutrality is strong and evident as a factor in prenatal development.  I suspect that the environmental influences on autism per twins will eventually reflect more evidence in this direction of environmental influence.

The brain needs to be washed in a chemical bath of hormones to help shape the way neurons work together, creating more masculinized or feminized brains. Generally, the chemical bath is correlated with biological sex. When it is not, the brain may develop in such a way that the child notices their impressions, interactions, and interests in the environment seem to be more similar to a gender different from their biological sex. this accounts for some differences about queer or transgender people. Im tired of people claiming that they know some secret "rule" that if you do not conform to a binary gender code than that is unnatural, or unfit, and ought to be prevented at all costs.

Similarly, to what you are referring, there is a hypothesis that autistic traits are linked to the type of chemical bath our brains receive prenatally. Yet, where is the rule that autistic traits are defective and "shouldn't be", and therefore should be prevented?

Its like many scientists are going by some mysterious Holy Bible which determines how humans ought to behave, develop, and persist. Truth is, we only know whats the norm- and not being the norm does not necessarily equal presences of a defect.

Katie1 Wrote:

Interestingly, it's a natural evolutionary process of the animal kingdom, suggested as a process, in part, of controlling population, when prenatal stresses are detected in the environment.  

If that is the case, there will never be a way to eliminate autistic traits, as long as there is stress in the environment, or a way to manipulate those prenatal hormones which is pretty much well beyond the scope of current science, and would be a bit like kicking a computer to try to alter the computer.  

Interesting way to put it. I agree-- as long as there is diversity in experience (including stress), there will be diversity in development, and we should just accept this as something natural, good, and human.

Katie1 Wrote:

Sorry, that was long, just another special interest monologue.

Nah, it was enjoyable to read! Usually, either I disagree to a large extent with someone, or I agree to a large extent. But in this case I was agreeing and disagreeing to about equal extents, which was an awesome experience.

I wasn't disagreeing with destructive element of the hyperbolic metaphor Tsunami, just that a Tsuanami is not a weather pattern.

Sexual orientation is not considered a disorder or a disability while Autism is, so it's not an equivalent analogy from the perspective of the general population.  A more appropriate analogy would be a disorder or a disability if it were suddently identified at greater numbers, in a community.  Seriously unlikely that she would exclude her son from her own community in the response, though, I think.  The ADHD symptoms are part of the study that provide evidence that autistic children with ADHD symptoms are bullied more and actually bully others more 2 to 4 times higher than the general population, depending on which study one looks at.

Autistic individuals have been shown to have immune system problems co-morbid, so it is relevant in how an individual's body reacts to enviromental exposure from cultural byproducts.

RRB's do impact the ability for self care in some individuals, whom will engage in those activities as vital as feeding themselves.  Individuals with ADHD have been shown by research to be more prone to the disease of addiction than those in the general population.  And those symptoms of ADHD are common in many individuals with Autism.  

While an autistic individual may not develop the medical definition of addiction in exposure to the avenue of video games, the internet, and other new areas of IT, they are strongly rewarding activities that can intefere with everyday life functioning whether they are compulsions, obsessions, addiction or a special interest that is done to the exclusion of other vital activities in everyday life functioning.  

I'm not sure if studies have been done that actually show autistics are actually more prone to addiction.  I'll have to check that out in the future.  I suspect they may be, in general, because of the ADHD symptoms co-morbid in many, that by themselves have already been researched correlated with addiction.

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16232778

"Screen Addiction".  This guy doesn't limit the avenue of addiction to pornography, videogames, or internet blogs, just overall screen exposure as a source of dopamine, whether it is a gambling screen or a TV screen.  

One thing I know for sure is that TV doesn't cause Autism, because I had a speech delay until age 4 without a TV in the household.  

But, I do have to wonder if had spent most of my time in front of a TV set instead of interacting with family, if I would have learned to speak at age 4.  Maybe better who knows.  I can't help but to think of the guy portrayed with Aspergers in the TV show "Community", who states he was raised by the TV.  

I loved TV, and definitely remember that first dopamine hit I got, when I got my first color TV at age 16.  It was a little bit like heaven watching Johnny Carson in color.  It broke and I eventually went without one, until about age 26, but I do remember that pleasure again, and the increased pleasure as I went from little screen to bigger screen to progressively better picture, and sound as well.  It was cool because everystep felt a little better.  Same with modem speed as it gradually increased from 14.4KB to 10GB per second.  10GB still feels as slow as 14.4KB.  I wouldn't be able to go back to 14.4KB.  Not to mention how the pictures used to take minutes to fill in on the screen.  

Broadband access has definitely moved people to smaller screens.

However it was always quite colorful outside on a crystal clear blue fall day.  I guess that was everyone's special dopamine hit, before TV came along.  It's kind of sad when the real thing doesn't do it for one anymore.  

I can remember when the crystal clear blue fall day at the beach, made me so high I wanted to take a picture of it, and continue that feeling forever.  Culture is definitely designed around the next big hit of dopamine, but there is a limit to high, and eventually the next big thing is non-existant.  Then one can fall back to the feeling of the black&white TV and 14.4K modem speed regardless of the present experience.

Broad band access to porn is the height of dopamine stimulation for a non-substance source, for those that have interest in that type of thing.  Not good when all of it starts to look black & white; it becomes evidence that the brain is no longer as responsive to dopamine.  I'm not quite sure what the next big thing after that could be, unless one backs away for awhile and reboots their brain.  

The medical profession can't determine if it is addiction for sure, but it does sound a little bit like it.

My understanding is that Britain is not all happy about Dr. Sigman or Ms. Greenfields suggestions on IT.  Difficult to escape screens these days; and often required in one's area of subsistence whether it is operating a cash register at McDonalds or a Nuclear physicist.  

The children can skip some of it when they are young, but chances are sooner or later the recreational use may turn into a requirment to live.  Not likely typewriters or manual cash registers or going to comeback anytime soon.

And by the way, I did see the articles from the telegraph and the daily mail that compared symptoms of videogame addiction to aspergers.  But as far as I can see they weren't suggesting that videogame addiction was the cause of aspergers.  

Believe me it's not, there were definitely folks with aspergers scattered here and there when I was growing up well before the video game craze developed.  They were just called nerds, or in some cases the woodshop guys/vo-tech folks because they were more interested in study/making-fixing things, than people and/or sports.  

Regressive autism was not discussed in the mainstream media, or identified as such, and was not discussed in mainstream media; it was likely referred to as some type of childhood psychosis or infantile schizophrenia per the medical field in cases where it was identified.  

And when individuals with Nerd/Aspergers like symptoms broke down from the rigors of social expectations, they too were often diagnosed with an S label, whether it was Schizoid, Schizotypal, or Schizophrenia.

I suspect that may happen more, well into the future, after the DSM5 goes into effect, because some of these folks are going to be missed as having any problem at all under the age of three because they don't have any significant identified problems under the age of three  And if they do develop problems later on in adolscence, the medical records won't be there suggesting autism spectrum disorder or Aspergers in childhood.  Currently those childhood symptoms are not required for a diagnosis of Aspergers in adolescence.  

Big problem if someone has an Asperger related manic type psychosis later in adolscence, and is treated with a dopamine agonist when the overall problem may be a lack of dopamine sensitivity.  That's one for psychiatrists to figure out, but it was part of what was good about the Asperger diagnosis, the symptoms are not always evident in childhood, when compensated with other areas of strength such as academic prowess.

I wasn't disagreeing with destructive element of the hyperbolic metaphor Tsunami, just that a Tsuanami is not a weather pattern.

Sexual orientation is not considered a disorder or a disability while Autism is, so it's not an equivalent analogy from the perspective of the general population.  A more appropriate analogy would be a disorder or a disability if it were suddently identified at greater numbers, in a community.  Seriously unlikely that she would exclude her son from her own community in the response, though, I think.  The ADHD symptoms are part of the study that provide evidence that autistic children with ADHD symptoms are bullied more and actually bully others more 2 to 4 times higher than the general population, depending on which study one looks at.

That is not strictly true.  Homosexuality was in the DSM until the seventies or eighties, and there are still doctors around "treating" homosexuals with bizarre therapies intended to make them straight.  I believe one of the GOP candidates' wives was involved in a scandal over one such therapy.  Also, there are gay camps all over the state I live in now, similarly intended to make gay people straight.  

I am not saying that it's the same sort of oppression, but homosexuality is still considered a mental disorder by many people.  All forms of oppression are distinct.  But all forms of oppression also share much in common.  Many things you used to say about gay people, but had stopped saying about black people, are now eschewed regarding both groups.  (at least by some people...many people still say those things about any non-white, non-straight, non-evangelical christian)

Katie1 Wrote:

I wasn't disagreeing with destructive element of the hyperbolic metaphor Tsunami, just that a Tsuanami is not a weather pattern.

Sexual orientation is not considered a disorder or a disability while Autism is, so it's not an equivalent analogy from the perspective of the general population.  A more appropriate analogy would be a disorder or a disability if it were suddently identified at greater numbers, in a community.  Seriously unlikely that she would exclude her son from her own community in the response, though, I think.  The ADHD symptoms are part of the study that provide evidence that autistic children with ADHD symptoms are bullied more and actually bully others more 2 to 4 times higher than the general population, depending on which study one looks at.

That is not strictly true.  Homosexuality was in the DSM until the seventies or eighties, and there are still doctors around "treating" homosexuals with bizarre therapies intended to make them straight.  I believe one of the GOP candidates' wives was involved in a scandal over one such therapy.  Also, there are gay camps all over the state I live in now, similarly intended to make gay people straight.  

I am not saying that it's the same sort of oppression, but homosexuality is still considered a mental disorder by many people.  All forms of oppression are distinct.  But all forms of oppression also share much in common.  Many things you used to say about gay people, but had stopped saying about black people, are now eschewed regarding both groups.  (at least by some people...many people still say those things about any non-white, non-straight, non-evangelical christian)

The non-evangelical Christian part is key, in the issue.  One book a psychological manual put the disorder idea to rest, after scientific evidence provided information to the contrary, and another much older book is used to support opinion that often pays no mind to science.  

Unfortunately, part of society still sees homosexuality as deviant behavior as well as sinful behavior, rather than sexual orientation determined in part by nature, as seen in research, and observed in other species across the animal kingdom.

More scary for some is that sexual orientation is a spectrum, influenced by nature and environment, so some of the negative opinion is based on self-fear projected onto others as hatred.

More of the population likely has bi-sexual elements than would freely admit it, and there is no way to tell for sure by observing someone from external behavior and/or appearance.  And then there are those that are extremely masculine from physical appearance, and extremely feminine in behavior which may not indicate sexual preference at all.  And every variation possible beyond that example per gender spectrum and sexual orientation spectrum of which neither may meet expectations by others.

It's interesting because the broader autism phenotype mirrors the issue somewhat per spectrum analogy, but skills in systemization are prized in fields and areas of everyday life that require those skills, and not considered deviant behavior by most in the general population.

Sexual behavior is more of a sensitive issue for some that might move out into the broader bi-sexual phenotype of sexual orientation; it might bode well for some of those whom are uncomfortable with it to read the scientific literature, to understand that they aren't the only ones in the situation and it's part of being a member of the animal kingdom.

While there are many social aspects of religious activity that are healthy, this one aspect that some evangelical movements in Christianity refuse to budge on may eventually reduce the viability of those movements, through future generations of tolerance for differences in the sexual orientation and gender spectrums.

It's impossible for therapists or camps to attempt to repress sexuality, unless there are willing participants.  As long as there are willing participants there will be a market for the service.

Pornography is interesting in that it can take one into the bisexual zone, depending on what part of the sexual orientation spectrum they are born in, that they might not ordinarily consider as strongly had they not been provided the stimulus.  

No doubt that is fueling some of the camp visits particularly for some whom may be part of the evangelical movement whom have internet access.  And, if they have a fairly strong interest in sex, porn is almost impossible to avoid on the internet. And, easier than ever to hide from the rest of one's family or congregation, with smart phones.

I was quite impressed that an evangelical internet website was shut down recently by You Tube, that provided a video that likened homosexuality to demons released from Hell.  They forgot their usual procedure of calling the behavior a sin and instead applied it to the individual.  Only a temporary suspension, but it's not likely they will do it again.  

The internet is a powerful tool, in that in part, freedom of speech really doesn't apply on private sites.  It makes it a little harder to espouse the type of hatred that can be expressed at a funeral per public freedom of speech rights.

And quite impressive on this site, that hatred expressed at "NT's" as a group is not acceptable per the moderation team.

There is an interesting disconnect between autistic children and their parents that shines through in online autistic communities.  And while Autism is clearly understood as genetic in part; it seems that is often forgotten when it comes to parent organizations composed of autistic parents or even when some attempt to understand why they are not connecting well with either their parents or parents of other autistic children.  Not too different from research scientists suggested as "NT's", when it is a niche that those with autistic traits often excel in.  

The "NT" disconnecct has been holding back online autistic communities and self advocates for some time now, but the disconnect appears to be fading away.  Now a challenge is to accept that if there are people in the world that have similiar traits to individuals diagnosed with autism, statistically it is more likely that it is the parents and families of individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders.  

When these parents may say something in public that is missing the appropriate metaphor to describe emotions, or sounds rather blunt, there may be a good reason for it; they may not understand they have autistic traits themselves. It's easier to blame the autism for some on the mercury fillings, or whatever correlation comes up in research, but the genetic determinants have been established for over a decade now.  

Regardless of specific missions expoused by organizations supported and run by parents of autistic children, some whom may have conditions like regressive autism; the parents that some have criticized may have close to as many autistic traits as those whom are criticizing them as "NT"s.  

It's not something that can always be observed through a comment in text or even in a video or face to face contact.  People have amazing ways of adapting to life, over the course of decades.  There are likely no better allies in life for autistic individuals than parents of autistic children whom care about those children.  

If they have autistic traits, they may not be the best at expressing those feeling, but like all autistic individuals it doesn't necessarily mean they don't care.  

The bottom line is that if it were not for caring parents, many autistic individuals, would have little chance for a good life well beyond the years of childhood.  But all parents are fallible, both parents of autistic children and non-autistic children.

I had a disabled child at age 37, and had no clue I had a form of autism or any significant impairments, until well into my forties, even though I did not speak until age 4 and had problems verbally expressing myself most of my life.  

While many let me know I was different all my life, no one ever suggested I might have a form of Autism.  Aspergers was off the radar screen; it was unknown in my locale until the mid 2000's.  

There is a vague feeling of living in the twilight zone to make straight A's through college, and have no idea one lacks a type of emotional/social communicative intelligence that many share in life, regardless of grades in school.  

I always thought I had to eventually learn to talk like the other people and make all those complicated facial expressions that looked automatic, because I was supposed to be smart.  I wasn't quite sure how it was going to happen, though.

For me, I'm glad I didn't know I really had an impairment until I could no longer hold up my adaptations developed over decades of trial and error.  I moved in and out of the impaired range throughout the course of my life, and feel like I experienced nuances of emotional/social communicative intelligence as well as complete lack of it, and somehow eventually was able to match the other folks in verbal communication as well as understanding some of those complicated facial movements fairly well in my forties.

There are likely untold millions of people in the population somewhere in that twilight zone, perhaps on the edge of increasing or failing adaptations.  Walking down the Isles of Walmart with a vague feeling of living on the edge of the flock.  Belonging but not quite belonging.  

And many of them are likely parents of children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, now that it is a concern when a child does not put words together until they are four.  My pediatrician told my mother, don't worry I would talk when I got ready to.  Things have changed a great deal in the world of diagnoses and pediatricians, since then.

But, the kind sex that leads to porn is often alternate to the kind of sex that leads to more children.  Part of the reason, cited, why frequency of teenage sex is reported down, as well as teenage pregnancy.  It reduces the type of intimacy/empathy that leads to the real thing both among females and males.

Interesting though, is that autism is studied as occurring at actual higher levels of prevalance in higher concentrated population areas, along with schizophrenia.  Social stress is cited as an association.  So, another one of the many correlations associated with autism, large numbers of people.  More people not only results in more autism, but a statistically greater percentage of the prevalence of autism spectrum disorders, per those associations, studied.

Of course that methodology is limited, in that awareness is more likely among concentrated population areas where people are more aware of anomalies in the population, along with a potential increase of access to diagnosis.

The CDC study on prevalence bears this out, in that in poor rural areas of Alabama, among some of the poorest in the country (the black belt), the prevalence of ASD's, in females is only 1 in 909.

Per the first study, lower population density could play a part, but lack of resources would definitely play a part as well, if one does not have access to diagnosis, or educational resources where diagnosis is often provided for less economically advantaged individuals.

Prenatal stress and an imbalance of hormones, is cited as an association in the prevalence of autism, so if stress during pregnancy is associated with autism almost everything is associated with autism, because of all the identified causes of stress.  One could extend out those correlations out to almost anything, including the stress some women experience during pregnancy when their husbands display addictive behavior to pornography.  On the other hand, it may be a relief for others not to be pestered for sex during pregnancy.

Autistic like traits are observed throughout the animal kingdom, among social animals, as a response to social stressors.

The impairing symptoms of autism are often associated with social stressors.

So, as in almost everything in life, stress is likely at part of the core of the issue both prenatally and through the course of a lifetime.

Stress by itself can cause RRB behavior in a person that never had autistic like traits in childhood, per the common behavior one sees in stressed adults rocking back and forth in a chair to comfort themselves.  Not necessarily perceived as an impairment, because the rocking behavior is within the norm of behavior for adults and accepted as such by many, but still similar to the same rocking behavior seen in individuals diagnosed with autism, whom do it as a stimming behavior.

One often sees RRB like behavior in stressed animals as well.

For anyone concerned that autistic behaviors are going to be eliminated from the gene pool, through organizational efforts and research, it's not going to happen as long as humans are part of the animal kingdom and/or as long as stress is part of the equation.

Certain serious disorders like regressive autism, tied into actual structural anomalies of the brain, may be prevented, at some point through organizational research, but there will always be someone rocking back and forth in a seated position, somewhere in the world, as a result of stress.  

As well as individuals not accommodated as well to social interaction, per the broader autism phenotype, that includes introverted like behavior; a common genetic associated personality trait described as sitter as opposed to rover behavior in some, measured shortly after birth, at rates of close to 20% across many different species in the animal kingdom.

An interesting article below providing information on potential survival advantages of this type of innate neurocognitive based behavior.

ttp://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/opinion/sunday/26shyness.html?pagewanted=all

The inability to cope makes autistic like behaviors impairments, for others they are just another variation of behaviors normally seen throughout the animal kingdom.

And beyond this, all animals deal with different stress levels in the environment mostly based on subsistence and reproductive resources.  Those stresses likely play a part in the balance of nature, through prenatal hormonal changes evolved as adaptations to changes in the environment, per overall stress levels, resulting in changes in offspring that may or may not present an overall survival advantage for the species depending on the continuing stresses in the external environment.

Of course life and environment are one; humans are one of the few animals that appear to attempt to consciously separate the two.  A high potential of chronic stress per that attempt alone.

Humans now have adapted with huge populations through cultural adaptations approximating a hive like existance; nature can't stop humans from doing this, regardless of what they orginally evolved for: smaller social groups with almost constant interaction with the natural environment and face to face interaction.

The result is a dramatic change in how humans interact with cultural interfaces per the byproducts of modern culture, and what they become as animals, both through the course of a lifetime, and at birth.  The overall result is likely sitter/introverted orientated, as per some research that suggests that close to 50 percent of the population has introverted traits.  There is the potential of an illusion that there are more extroverted individuals, because they usually make more noise in making their prescence known.

We are what we are in large, per what is fed to our brains per the environment.  A steady diet of pornography if there were such an equivalent in the animal kingdom per a feral cat could lead to potential starvation, as a result of bypassing the requirement of searching for food, to the sometimes more powerful stimulus of reproductive instinct.  Certainly a powerful instinct, only when one or two female cats are available in a several mile radius.

Humans would like to believe, that they are not as vulnerable as others in the animal kingdom to experimentation by humans, but the unwitting experiment of free unlimited access to the endless novel stimulus of broadband pornography, is providing some interesting results in the behavior of human beings, not entirely different than what one would see in a lab experiment with monkeys, a lever, and a source of cocaine or mice with access to unlimited sugar water.

A danger of illusion, is that many humans separate themselves as empowered over their nature and the rest of nature, regardless of the reality that they face many of the same limitations of cats, rats, and monkeys, per that nature.

And Pornography, while hard to ignore, is just the tip of the iceberg in modern culture, per that overall phenomenon.  While it doesn't directly cause the innate aspect of Autism Spectrum Disorders, it is certainly a source of perceived comfort from stress much more powerful than rocking, and much more perilous in potential negative impact.  

Pornography is not inherently defined as an RRB, but it a powerful avenue of stimulus that can be used to fulfill the same compulsive needs associated with RRB like behavior, similar to videogames in either individuals diagnosed with autism or individuals that are not diagnosed with autism.  If not a DSM recognized potential of an addictive source, certainly one associated with the type of compulsion seen in RRB's.

I suppose in the 90's when the DSMIV made an editorial mistake allowing individuals the potential of being diagnosed with PDD NOS with RRB criteria alone, some psychiatrist somewhere might have diagnosed someone with PDD NOS, based on RRB's associated with either videogaming or pornography.  Technically they could have, but not a good call, as far as I can see.

What is autism and what is not autism is very subjective per how the DSM organization has defined it in the past both by intention and mistake.  Culture is such a powerful influence, that it is no wonder, that they are limiting it in the DSM5, as a disorder where symptoms must be present in early childhood.

I worked for an XO of a military base that fiercly rocked back and forth during the course of an entire department head meeting.  He was answering to a female CO of the military base, apparently something new in his life experience, that provided him as an individual a great deal of stress.  

I suppose if it was 1994, with the old editorial mistake in the DSMIV, he could have seen a psychiatrist for his rocking behavior, and got diagnosed with PDD NOS, not likely, but within the realm of technical possibility per that editorial mistake in the DSMIV, and diagnoses specific to RRB's. If so, I guess in that case one could determine the cause of Autism as working for a female CO of a military base.

Answers at times are easier to find when one looks toward nature and the animal kingdom, the rules are not nearly as complicated.  If one sees similar behavior there as exhibited by human beings, it is likely always going to be part of the human experience.