It’s just a label. You would still be you. And you don’t need a label to explain anything. You are proof that you are what you are.
Thr only value in a diagnosis is possible improved treatment and accommodation options. For adults that usually isn’t an issue. Good doctors will treat the symptoms either way. And there aren’t much in the way of accommodations for lvl 1 autism.
When the wacko who thinks Autism makes you less than human is in control of the department of health and is openly making lists of people with diagnoses, maybe it’s more than “just a label”.
To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first, and label whatever you hit as target.
RFK, doesn’t teally know much about autism. He seems to think lvl 3 is the only autism. So yeah, it’s just a label. And different people define it differently.
Perfectly reasonable. Thankfully, so far he has just been talk. With any luck we can get through his time there without him managing to do the things we fear most.
That info would be valuable if you knew that the method used to identify autism of the patient in question was exactly the same as the one used in studies that show CBT is less effective. But since there is a lot of variance in how autism is diagnosed, it isn’t something you want to use to exclude CBT as an option. A good doctor knows this, and doesn’t let the label make decisions.
Well, N=2 but my son and I both experienced this first hand.
That said, having (admittedly long ago) worked in pharma/biotech I agree that without proper controls/constraints, it is a rather broad statement to make, regardless of how intuitive it is.
And even when studies determine a therapy doesn’t work, there is often a percentage it did work for. When they don’t really understand the cause, nor why a treatment helps in some cases, the treatment shouldn’t be ruled out, just lower on the priority list. A lot of current medicine is just trial and error without detailed understanding.
“Trial and error” is the main name of the game in mental health treatments. Human variability in our reactions to drugs/biologics is never uniform and sometimes quite divergent. Then, we try to do brains.
I’m still considering getting diagnosed (or not) despite having a now early 20s son on the spectrum and seeing all the flashing red light parallels. If I did this, the trick would be to find a therapist who knows what to do with people on the spectrum. And if i research that too much, it won’t work. PubMed is a blessing for research …just not for research on oneself!
It’s just a label. You would still be you. And you don’t need a label to explain anything. You are proof that you are what you are. Thr only value in a diagnosis is possible improved treatment and accommodation options. For adults that usually isn’t an issue. Good doctors will treat the symptoms either way. And there aren’t much in the way of accommodations for lvl 1 autism.
When the wacko who thinks Autism makes you less than human is in control of the department of health and is openly making lists of people with diagnoses, maybe it’s more than “just a label”.
It’s also a target.
To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first, and label whatever you hit as target. RFK, doesn’t teally know much about autism. He seems to think lvl 3 is the only autism. So yeah, it’s just a label. And different people define it differently.
Yeah I wouldn’t want that label either with RFK Jr. wanting to make an autism registry
Perfectly reasonable. Thankfully, so far he has just been talk. With any luck we can get through his time there without him managing to do the things we fear most.
Well one thing to consider is that for people on the spectrum, CBT and other such therapies are not nearly as effective.
That info would be valuable if you knew that the method used to identify autism of the patient in question was exactly the same as the one used in studies that show CBT is less effective. But since there is a lot of variance in how autism is diagnosed, it isn’t something you want to use to exclude CBT as an option. A good doctor knows this, and doesn’t let the label make decisions.
Well, N=2 but my son and I both experienced this first hand.
That said, having (admittedly long ago) worked in pharma/biotech I agree that without proper controls/constraints, it is a rather broad statement to make, regardless of how intuitive it is.
And even when studies determine a therapy doesn’t work, there is often a percentage it did work for. When they don’t really understand the cause, nor why a treatment helps in some cases, the treatment shouldn’t be ruled out, just lower on the priority list. A lot of current medicine is just trial and error without detailed understanding.
“Trial and error” is the main name of the game in mental health treatments. Human variability in our reactions to drugs/biologics is never uniform and sometimes quite divergent. Then, we try to do brains.
I’m still considering getting diagnosed (or not) despite having a now early 20s son on the spectrum and seeing all the flashing red light parallels. If I did this, the trick would be to find a therapist who knows what to do with people on the spectrum. And if i research that too much, it won’t work. PubMed is a blessing for research …just not for research on oneself!