4 ms·

>one in 42 boys...38 in S.Korea Are we calling every socially awkward kid autistic or did we, as humanity, finally "done did" the genepool?

by KON_Air 10y ago

maldusiecle 10y ago
Leaving aside the tastelessness of phrasing the question this way, you may be underestimating the prevalence of mental health disorders in general. This is the NIMH's page on the prevalence of schizophrenia in the general population, for instance: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/schizophrenia.shtml http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/schizop... It sounds like the prevalence of autism spectrum disorders is a bit over double that, but as the article notes, that includes "functional" autists whose symptoms may be hardly noticeable to those around them.
- hyperpape 10y ago
  This is the point I was going to make. Lifetime incidence of mood disorders appears to be over 10% as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_disorder#Epidemiology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_disorder#Epidemiology. Since the rate of autism diagnosis has increased, I'd also like to hear more about the predictive accuracy of some of those statistics. When you read that only 50% of autistic children in the US graduate high school, you have to read that in the context of rapidly increasing diagnosis. Does that mean that the kids that are currently being diagnosed still have only a 50% chance of graduating?
- KON_Air 10y ago
  Let me rephrase it, are we diagnosing these disorders wrongly or are we heading towards a human population which has more people with disorders then not? Because 1 in 38 or 42 are scary numbers.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    If the consequence is an effective remedy, what's bad about recognizing certain behavioral tendencies? It doesn't have to be the case that population genetics are the thing driving the change.
  - GrumpyYoungMan 10y ago
    I don't think that's a meaningful question. One could go back a couple of centuries, before germ and virus theory was developed, and ask the same thing about physical illnesses. It would be more accurate IMO to say that we're getting a better understanding of traits and characteristics of the human mind, some of which we currently have reason to believe are disorders, and are getting better at detecting those traits/characteristics.

>one in 42 boys...38 in S.Korea Are we calling every socially awkward kid autistic or did we, as humanity, finally "done did" the genepool?

by KON_Air 10y ago

>one in 42 boys...38 in S.Korea Are we calling every socially awkward kid autistic or did we, as humanity, finally "done did" the genepool?

maldusiecle 10y ago

Leaving aside the tastelessness of phrasing the question this way, you may be underestimating the prevalence of mental health disorders in general. This is the NIMH's page on the prevalence of schizophrenia in the general population, for instance: http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/schizophrenia.shtml http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/schizop... It sounds like the prevalence of autism spectrum disorders is a bit over double that, but as the article notes, that includes "functional" autists whose symptoms may be hardly noticeable to those around them.

hyperpape 10y ago
This is the point I was going to make. Lifetime incidence of mood disorders appears to be over 10% as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_disorder#Epidemiology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_disorder#Epidemiology. Since the rate of autism diagnosis has increased, I'd also like to hear more about the predictive accuracy of some of those statistics. When you read that only 50% of autistic children in the US graduate high school, you have to read that in the context of rapidly increasing diagnosis. Does that mean that the kids that are currently being diagnosed still have only a 50% chance of graduating?
KON_Air 10y ago
Let me rephrase it, are we diagnosing these disorders wrongly or are we heading towards a human population which has more people with disorders then not? Because 1 in 38 or 42 are scary numbers.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  If the consequence is an effective remedy, what's bad about recognizing certain behavioral tendencies? It doesn't have to be the case that population genetics are the thing driving the change.
- GrumpyYoungMan 10y ago
  I don't think that's a meaningful question. One could go back a couple of centuries, before germ and virus theory was developed, and ask the same thing about physical illnesses. It would be more accurate IMO to say that we're getting a better understanding of traits and characteristics of the human mind, some of which we currently have reason to believe are disorders, and are getting better at detecting those traits/characteristics.