I haven't seen anything about maternal obesity being linked, but meta-anyalysis can link anything.

As for naraht, I hope he was just being inarticulate.

ETA: http://www2.cfpc.ca/local/user/files....2011-2583.pdf

Found this study which does show and increased risk for obese mothers to have a child with developmental disorders. The questions remains, why?

Okay, thanks. I knew I read it somewhere. That would be a great research study for someone who is interested in developmental disorders.

No. I'm comparing two situations where the genetic component is *far* too complex for it to make rational sense to think about a prenatal test and yet there are those of which I am *definitely not* a supporter where they talk about a "cure" as being able to do a prenatal test in order to do an abortion.

Please point out *any* posting I've made in this thread or any other which is opposed to anyone in any position on the Kinsey scale. Note, I do oppose the use of the Kinsey scale as I think using a single dimensional measure for sexuality is considerably to simplistic.

So you are speaking in general and used homosexuality only because there are people (not you) who consider homosexuality a possibly detectable and preventable disease or disorder. You were drawing a comparison and homosexuality is the "disorder" that you found relevant for this discussion based on the debate over whether this is merely about "difference" (instead of disease and disorder) and whether anything should be done to attempt to reduce the likelihood of particular "differences".

I hope I cleared that up for you.

There are people out there that want Homosexuality (or anywhere other than Heterosexuality) diagnosed prenatally by finding a gay gene to as part of a Cure for Homosexuality, despite both the considerably research that it is not a single gene and the fact that many people (including myself) find that sort of effort to Cure it repugnant.



There are people out there that want Autism (or anywhere other than Neurotypicality) diagnosed prenatally by finding a autism gene to as part of a Cure for Autism, despite both the considerably research that it is not a single gene and the fact that some people (including myself) find that sort of effort to Cure it repugnant. (and I'd like to see some become many!)

Does *that* clear it up?

In that case, I think this post sums up your point regarding homosexuality.

This, but even the "closer to difference" isn't necessarily out of the "disorder" range in my mind. I see it as more of a "disorder" that's well-managed and worked around.

I say that based on my experience as the father of a son with Asperger's. His is really fairly mild, but there are still days that we worry about how he'll do when he's older and (we hope) on his own. We've seen a similar dynamic with the sons of others—even when they're doing well and it's a matter of navigating "differences," there can still be significant challenges.

My son has Asperger's Syndrome and is at the higher functioning end of the spectrum. He had a horrible time in school since he was "different." He was bullied continually and would get himself into trouble when he would respond inappropriately toward the bully. Life got better when he was 16. When he graduated high school he went to the local community college that had an autism support group. I began to see a lot of growth in him at that time.

He transferred to a 4 year university 12 hours from home, moved into the dorm with a group of other roommates, became active on the housing councils and this year is the President of one council. He has had a couple of girlfriends, is a member of the debating team and best of all--------GRADUATES IN 5 MORE WEEKS!

DaffyKD

Congrats to your son, and its great to see he's doing so well and has successfully adapted to college life.

That warms my heart, DaffyKD, and I hope MysticCat's son will enjoy such success and independence.

The people in my family with Asperger's are doing extremely well professionally and personally. They are socially awkward (as are many people depending on the environment) and have a difficult time feeling comfortable in one-on-one conversations. But, once they are comfortable, or if they are able to complete tasks without having to be face-to-face, they do quite well.

My family members with autism in their 20s will never live on their own. One of them keeps talking about getting an apartment and getting married. We know he will never be able to get his own apartment and he will only be able to live in an "assisted living" type of apartment. His mom may pay for that or she may feel as though paying for that (and making sure he's getting the appropriate amount of assistance) may be more trouble than it is worth. I don't foresee him ever being in a consensual romantic relationship. I have seen him awkwardly attempt to flirt with a woman. He has a very loud, very deep voice and a "tongue is too big for his mouth" speech impediment. Therefore, everyone in the room heard him when he told the young woman to sit on his lap. Needless to say, she didn't find that tempting. If he ever gets in a relationship or gets married it would be with a woman who also has some disorder. I don't even know whether that is possible--perhaps it could happen if he lives in an assisted living apartment building.

Yay! Congrats to him and to you!! I see a big celebration coming.

Life for our son improved markedly when he hit high school. He likes his school, has made friends—some of whom don't know he's on the spectrum, while others don't care—and is doing well overall. His school has great support for kids on the spectrum, coordinated by an awesome resource teacher that the kids love, and overall it's generally a fairly low key, live-and-let-live kind of place. Fingers crossed.

The issue with autism speaks as a charity came up today. My husband got an email last week saying a portion of every customer's bill on Monday at a restaurant (can't remember if it was Chili's or Applebee's) was going to benefit Autism Speaks. Because of this, my husband decided to eat lunch there on Monday. Then he got another email Sunday night saying the event was canceled because of customer complaints. My husband ate somewhere else Monday, but did go to this particular restaurant today. He asked the manager about it. The manager said that customers didn't have a problem with the cause, but rather the charity Autism Speaks because of their poor financial record (such a low percentage of the money raised goes to the actual cause.) The restaurant is looking at other organizations that benefit autism and plan to do a % night later this month.

I also heard that a lot of customers got mad at Chili's for picking AS as the recipient because of their support of anti-vaccination research.

People shouldn't be mad about research even if they don't like it. They should reserve their anger for when results are skewed to suit the needs of the research sponsor. If there were lots of research done on this issue and it became more clear that the vaccinations weren't the problem (which they probably are not), then it would put that issue to bed. I have a gripe with the number of vaccinations kids are asked to take and the phenomenal number of preservatives in them. Doing studies on priority of need of certain vaccines and how to clean them up to make them more tolerable would be research well worth hearing about. Because maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't read anything so far that makes me believe injecting an infant with all those chemicals is a good idea.

I'm not anti-vaccination (haven't read much about the topic, honestly), but I think that any and all possible causes should be researched. If vaccinations are a possible cause, then why not look into it?

It's BEEN looked into and it most likely is not the cause.

The vaccination schedule has actually been studied extensively. Infants may get more shots now, but the actual antigen load is less now than it was when they got the first shots back when vaccines where first introduced. The main problem with these arguments is that people don't know anything about immunology. Vaccines have been studied more than any other drug out there. They are safe for the vast majority of patients who don't have a contraindication such as an immunodeficiency or an allergy that precludes immunization. They have been proven conclusively not to cause autism, and just like every other injectable medication, like antibiotics, have preservatives to improve their shelf life. No one throws a fit when their child gets a penicillin shot. Same preservatives. The trusty Big Pharma argument commonly used is a ridiculous argument as well since vaccines make very little money for pharmaceutical companies with many getting out of the business. The production of MMR and other major vaccines is a public service.

The reason people get angry about the constant focus on vaccines is because previously eradicated diseases are on the rise, killing and maiming innocent people including babies that are too young to be vaccinated. It also takes the focus off of efforts to find the real causes of autism. But everyone is a doctor now days, and because they have webMD and eat organic, they know better than their pediatricians.

/soapbox

Yes, because science.

Thank you for the medical soapbox, AOII Angel.

An informed society is a healthy society. This has nothing to do with autism but I know people whose lives were saved because they educated themselves on health issues and were able to tell nurses and doctors what medications they were taking that would have a negative reaction to other medications the nurses insisted on giving them. One nurse, despite the fact that my family member and doctor had agreed that particular medications should not be mixed, tried hiding the medication under other pills assuming the patient was oblivious enough to just throw all the pills in her mouth---I was in the hospital room shocked a nurse would attempt that and glad when my family member called the nurse out.

However this doesn't mean everyone is a doctor or nurse. Being informed helps doctors and nurses do what they do effectively but doesn't replace what they do. Long gone are the days when people were not required to be educated and trained to be a medical doctor, and anyone with a needle and knife could work on your body.

Agree with all of this. Many of these charities have obscene overhead and spend very little donated money on the things people are donating money for.

Congratulations!

I completely agree with you. Being educated and informed is one thing. I tell my patients all the time to research their conditions, but the information you find on the Internet in no way replaces the medical knowledge of your physician. It is there to help guide patients for discussions with their doctors. Having family with you at the hospital is always advisable. Mistakes do happen, and patients and their families need to be their own advocates. As a physician, I have had a pharmacy give me wrong doses of 3 medications. If I didn't know better, I would have overdosed. (I called their district manager to complain as well as lodging a complaint with the state medical board.) When I am in the hospital, my husband or mother stays with me the whole time. If I don't like a medical opinion, I seek a second opinion from another expert in the field, because they know the science better than I do. Lastly, if I decide to do something against medical advise, I don't advertise it to others as THE thing to do. It's not responsible. I don't have outcomes data on MY choice. I decided that the risks were okay and that it wasn't worthwhile to continue with treatment. That doesn't mean that MY choice is right for others. If I swayed someone because of my position and they decided not to get treated ONLY because I didn't, and subsequently died, I wouldn't be able to live with myself. People don't consider their choices.

Chili's wasn't supporting AS. They were supporting the National Autism Association. It's a different organization.

Congrats! Way to go, to both of you!

You're giving me hope. We plan on pulling my kid with an ASD out of public school and sending him to community college at the first opportunity.

The reason the Chili's event was cancelled was related to the org it was to benefit -- National Autism Association -- which has been known for promoting misleading anti-vaccination (and autism-causation) information.

Though not my favorite org, in all fairness, the focus of research funded by Autism Speaks has not been anti-vaccination. The daughter of the founders of AS (Katie Wright -- whose son has autism), however, is quite involved with conspiracy theory, causation misinformation, pseudoscience, and kooky treatments.

Autism Speaks has offended quite a few members of the autism community (including parents). A public service announcement they released several years ago -- I Am Autism -- was pulled back -- it really is quite offensive (but apparently intended to be effective in fund-raising):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mycxSJ3-_Q


The problem with the internet and media in general is that people form impressions about issues based on sound bites and things that dippy celebs like Jenny McCarthy say. There truly isn't credible information supporting that the number of vaccines in the routine childhood schedule is harmful or to blame for autism, and there is not a "phenomenal number of preservatives" in routine childhood vaccines.

Unfortunately, since the potential causes of autism are so complex and the presentations so varied, autism is a condition vulnerable to plenty of misinformation, conspiracy theory, and quackery.

I remember that PSA and thinking it was on the effed up side.

And Wakefield has given new life to *all* of these. :mad::mad::mad:

Last week it was paternal obesity (maternal obesity found to have a weak association):

Pediatrics. 2014 Apr 7. [Epub ahead of print]
Parental Obesity and Risk of Autism Spectrum Disorder.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24709932

Sadly, although Wakefield has been de-licensed, debunked, and exposed in about every way possible, kooky groups promoting him as the brave maverick who fell victim to a global conspiracy try to keep his junk afloat.

Funnily enough, the same kooky people -- who promote Wakefield and are convinced that Big Pharma and the CDC are conspiring to cover participation in creating an autism "epidemic" -- also promote Big Quacka and Big Herba, and demand no safety or efficacy data of either, as long as the treatment is advertised as a "cure."

And unfortunately, a lot of children with autism have endured risky, invasive, and painful treatments because of these people. For no good reason.

:mad: (agree)

At the time I was trying to imagine my young adolescent son watching this ad, and hearing that he would surely cause his parents to divorce, file for bankruptcy, and cause his family embarrassment whenever they were in public. Basically that he would destroy the lives of all around him.

Just made me sick. :(

Slight lane swerve, but I had never heard of Autism Speaks until these 2 Canadian women got stabbed / slashed during the Tinker Bell Half Marathon weekend. They were running for that charity:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01...n_4631997.html


http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/20...land_trip.html

---------------------------------------------
This documentary, "Pink Ribbons, Inc." should be required viewing for people, before they decide to get into bed with a charity:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_Ribbons,_Inc.