FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   PreferencesPreferences   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Forum index » Medicine forums » nursing
Autism: It's not ancient, it's new.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 6 [77 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Author Message
Jason
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 29 Apr 2005
Posts: 1119

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:44 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

In article <1152673893.879215.63560@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
"cathyb" <cathybeesley@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

Jeff wrote:
Quote:
"cathyb" <cathybeesley@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:1152666687.958216.148380@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
(...)

You wouldn't think so. Furthermore, Jason seems to have been saying
that since there is so much mercury from other sources, one wouldn't
expect the rates of autism in the population to decrease on the removal
of thimerosal from vaccines even if the mercury/autism theory were fact
instead of unsupported theory.

Which is to say that it is an insignificant factor in mercury exposure,
at least until major factors have been removed. If thimerosal makes *no
difference* to autism rates, then the benefits of using the
preservative outweigh the disadvantages (which appear to be none) in
that situation.

Don't get me wrong. The tiny bit of mercury in vaccines has never been shown
to do any harm at the doses used. In the US and other developed countries,
it seems like it would be a lot better if all forms of mercury were removed
from the vaccines. Other preservatives can be used, and there is a
theoretical risk of having mercury in vaccines. Clearly, the benefits of the
vaccine with thimerasol clearly outweigh the tiny risks of the vaccines,
but, I think vaccines would be a bit safer if they didn't have mercury in
them.

So, personally, I would prefer that mercury were removed from all vaccines.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



All other things being equal, why not? And, of course, it more or less
has been. It seems, however, that the anti-vac crowd just move on to
finding another reason to try and deny kids vaccination. MMR/autism,
MMR/SIDS. The lack of evidence doesn't bother them, but the worry with
all the scaremongering is rates of vaccination. And that's a worry for
the vaccinated and unvaccinated alike.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathy,
I am not part of the anti-vac crowd. I hope that the anti-vac crowd does NOT
deny kids vaccinations. If so, they would lose lots of members. I hope
they evolve into the anti-dental fillings crowd. I hope they succeed in
removing mercury from dental fillings. Once they win that battle, the next
battle will be much more difficult--keeping fish from becoming
contaminated with mercury.
I can only hope so since my agenda is protecting children from mercury and
other heavy metals. I am in favor of vaccines and would prefer they do not
contain mercury. Even Jeff seems to believe that it would be a good thing
if mercury was removed from vaccines.
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Back to top
cathyb
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 06 Jun 2005
Posts: 365

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 3:53 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

Mark Probert wrote:
Quote:
Jeff wrote:
"Mark Probert" <markprobert@lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
news:QtYsg.508$W%2.191@fe09.lga...
Bryan Heit wrote:
Autism has been defined clinically at least as far back as 1951:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14838158&query_hl=44&itool=pubmed_docsum
Unfortunately, pubmed only goes back that far so we cannot readily look
back farther for older references. Unfortunately, I do not have ready
access to databases which go back farther from my lab. Given that the
word "autism" is used in the title, you can guarantee that it was defined
pre-1951.

Bryan
Leo Kanner first describe Autism as a separate disorder in the early
1940's.

http://www.bestbehaviour.ca/briefhistory.htm

John Down first described Down Syndrome in the mid 1800s. Yet people had it
before he described it. Ditto Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases. And
people even had AIDS before it was described. And Thomas Edison and Albert
Einstein are both believed to have ADHD before it became popular.

So a disease can exist, even if it has not been described.

Some people will find that strange.

Speaking of autism, I read an excellent book about it: Curious Incident of
the Dog in the Night-Time, by Mark Haddon. Excellent book.

I usually catch up on reading in the summer and this year my list is
soooooooo long it cannot bear another entry.

That one is worth squeezing onto your list regardless; chuck something
else off. Honest.

It's an excellent story and told from the viewpoint of the autistic
child; I'd love to know how accurate the portrayal is.

Cheers,

Cathy
Back to top
Rich
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 585

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 5:13 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"cathyb" <cathybeesley@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:1152676405.690474.303230@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Quote:
Mark Probert wrote:
Jeff wrote:
"Mark Probert" <markprobert@lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
news:QtYsg.508$W%2.191@fe09.lga...
Bryan Heit wrote:
Autism has been defined clinically at least as far back as 1951:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14838158&query_hl=44&itool=pubmed_docsum
Unfortunately, pubmed only goes back that far so we cannot readily
look
back farther for older references. Unfortunately, I do not have
ready
access to databases which go back farther from my lab. Given that
the
word "autism" is used in the title, you can guarantee that it was
defined
pre-1951.

Bryan
Leo Kanner first describe Autism as a separate disorder in the early
1940's.

http://www.bestbehaviour.ca/briefhistory.htm

John Down first described Down Syndrome in the mid 1800s. Yet people
had it
before he described it. Ditto Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases. And
people even had AIDS before it was described. And Thomas Edison and
Albert
Einstein are both believed to have ADHD before it became popular.

So a disease can exist, even if it has not been described.

Some people will find that strange.

Speaking of autism, I read an excellent book about it: Curious Incident
of
the Dog in the Night-Time, by Mark Haddon. Excellent book.

I usually catch up on reading in the summer and this year my list is
soooooooo long it cannot bear another entry.

That one is worth squeezing onto your list regardless; chuck something
else off. Honest.

It's an excellent story and told from the viewpoint of the autistic
child; I'd love to know how accurate the portrayal is.


I agree. Aside from being a window into the mind of an autistic child, it is
a really good read. It's a murder who-done-it with a surprise ending, and
the action never boggs down. Highly recommended.

--Rich
Back to top
HCN
medicine forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 139

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:18 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname@ratbags.com> wrote in message
news:cbo8b2dku3lh8r702rl67u6u2a5s53u1h0@4ax.com...
Quote:
"HCN" <hcn@nospam.com> wrote:


"john" <sc@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:zKadnfSe_YVzey7ZnZ2dnUVZ8smdnZ2d@bt.com...
this is one of the main lies to hide the vaccine
connection.http://www.whale.to/a/autism_diagnosis.html

"So the first lie to remember today is this: autism is ancient. It's not
ancient, it's new." ------Mark Blaxill, MBA



So havind a Masters in Business Administration makes him an expert in the
history of neurology?

I've got a business school postgraduate qualification, but it would
never occur to me to think that it had any relevance outside an
office. Also, the MBA is always a coursework masters, never a research
degree.


Oh, crud... I have noticed AGAIN that having a degree in aerospace
engineering does not qualify me as a decent TYPIST!

"havind" ? oh, erg.


Quote:

He is "Not Even Wrong":
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1582344787

That is a really good book.


Quote:

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
Back to top
HCN
medicine forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 139

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:20 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xZYsg.6704$PE1.2685@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Quote:

"cathyb" <cathybeesley@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:1152668633.690432.86590@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
(...)

Cathy,
I knew someone would make that point. You won the prize Cathy.
The first step is to start removing mercury from our environment.
The anti-vac crowd wants to start the process by removing mercury
from vaccines. They have won that battle. I hope that their next
step is to remove it from dental fillings. They have not yet won
that battle. I hope they eventually remove it from fish. I hope they
succeed in removing mercury and other heavy metals from our
environment. Mercury and heavy metal poisoning are known medical
problems. The experts at FDA agrees with me related to this issue.
Jason

You seem to be confusing mercury with its various salts and mercury
poisoning with autism. There is no evidence to suggest that
ethylmercury from any source is a risk factor for autism. The anti-vac
crowd has succeeded in selling its lies to the public and pointlessly
removing a useful preservative from our vaccines by suggesting that
either mercury poisoning or autism result from its use.

As a by-the-by, if thimerosal were actually implicated in autism, one
would expect to see some sort of reduction in cases, however small, no
matter the mercury load from other sources. This has not happened, as
shown by the Quebec study and others.

If ethylmercury were a cause of autism, you would also expect to see a
rise in the rates of autism when a new vaccine was introduced, followed by
a plateu. If one compares the introduction of new vaccines with the rates
of autism over time, no such rise followed by a plateu exists. So the data
support the conclusion that ethylmercury does NOT cause autism.

Jeff

Which makes the claim that the MMR is to blaim even more rediculous. The
MMR introduced into the UK in 1988 (the subject of Wakefield's paper in
1998) is the same vaccine introduced in the USA in the early 1970's.

So did autism increase spectacularly in the USA during the time of Disco?
Back to top
JohnDoe
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 14 Jun 2005
Posts: 364

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:17 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

Jason Johnson wrote:

Quote:
In article <1152673893.879215.63560@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
"cathyb" <cathybeesley@optusnet.com.au> wrote:

Jeff wrote:
"cathyb" <cathybeesley@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:1152666687.958216.148380@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
(...)

You wouldn't think so. Furthermore, Jason seems to have been saying
that since there is so much mercury from other sources, one wouldn't
expect the rates of autism in the population to decrease on the removal
of thimerosal from vaccines even if the mercury/autism theory were fact
instead of unsupported theory.

Which is to say that it is an insignificant factor in mercury exposure,
at least until major factors have been removed. If thimerosal makes *no
difference* to autism rates, then the benefits of using the
preservative outweigh the disadvantages (which appear to be none) in
that situation.

Don't get me wrong. The tiny bit of mercury in vaccines has never been shown
to do any harm at the doses used. In the US and other developed countries,
it seems like it would be a lot better if all forms of mercury were removed
from the vaccines. Other preservatives can be used, and there is a
theoretical risk of having mercury in vaccines. Clearly, the benefits of the
vaccine with thimerasol clearly outweigh the tiny risks of the vaccines,
but, I think vaccines would be a bit safer if they didn't have mercury in
them.

So, personally, I would prefer that mercury were removed from all vaccines.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


All other things being equal, why not? And, of course, it more or less
has been. It seems, however, that the anti-vac crowd just move on to
finding another reason to try and deny kids vaccination. MMR/autism,
MMR/SIDS. The lack of evidence doesn't bother them, but the worry with
all the scaremongering is rates of vaccination. And that's a worry for
the vaccinated and unvaccinated alike.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cathy,
I am not part of the anti-vac crowd. I hope that the anti-vac crowd does NOT
deny kids vaccinations.

But they do.

Quote:
If so, they would lose lots of members.

No, they won't. They oppose vaccines which have never and vaccines that
no longer contain any mercury in any form whatsoever. They want vaccines
banned, period. There is a reason why these people are referred to as
insane.

Quote:
I hope they evolve into the anti-dental fillings crowd.
I hope they succeed in removing mercury from dental fillings.

I don't think they will. They couldn't care less about mercury in any
form from any source. They're agenda is to have vaccines banned. The
thimerosal-autism scare is only a means to an end for them, nothing
more. Just look at their resistance against the cervical cancer vaccine
- there it's 'promoting sexual promiscuity'. Or look at the Yurko case -
there vaccines were said to cause shaken baby syndrome.

Quote:
Once they win that battle, the next battle will be much more difficult
--keeping fish from becoming contaminated with mercury.

At least you seem sincere about removing any possible exposure to
mercury from all sources. And not just mercury, all other heavy metals.
Which makes you an order of magnitude more honest than the anti-vac crowd.

Quote:
I can only hope so since my agenda is protecting children from mercury and
other heavy metals. I am in favor of vaccines and would prefer they do not
contain mercury. Even Jeff seems to believe that it would be a good thing
if mercury was removed from vaccines.

But not (as far as I can tell) because he sees a thimerosal-autism link,
but to err on the side of caution. And maybe to remove an argument from
the arsenal of the anti-vac crowd.

Quote:
Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Back to top
john
medicine forum addict


Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 92

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:20 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"vernon" <there@there> wrote in message
news:44b418a2$0$23438$88260bb3@news-taz.teranews.com...
Quote:



No one needs to know a thing about neurology to recognize or be around the
autistic.

That is, unless you are inferring that autism is secretive disease that a
Doctor must "discover" and thus treat.


Doctors cause it, so they like to keep it as secret as possible

hence their great circus trying to prevent anyone seeing that
Back to top
HCN
medicine forum Guru Wannabe


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 139

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:23 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"john" <sc@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:sfCdneCPOdM-PynZRVnyrQ@bt.com...
Quote:

"vernon" <there@there> wrote in message
news:44b418a2$0$23438$88260bb3@news-taz.teranews.com...



No one needs to know a thing about neurology to recognize or be around
the autistic.

That is, unless you are inferring that autism is secretive disease that a
Doctor must "discover" and thus treat.


Doctors cause it, so they like to keep it as secret as possible

hence their great circus trying to prevent anyone seeing that


Evidence?

Okay... What we really want to see is evidence of your bum being burned by
"satanic black lines".

But you must have a great circus trying to prevent anyone seeing that. (I
love CTRL-C and CTRL-V !)
Back to top
john
medicine forum addict


Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 92

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:56 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"HCN" <hcn@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MoadnelKbpvxPinZnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Quote:



Evidence?

You can't see with pharma blinkers

Quote:

Okay... What we really want to see is evidence of your bum being burned by
"satanic black lines".


You just want to see a photo of my bum

google 'male butts'
Back to top
john
medicine forum addict


Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 92

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:59 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

In the debate on whether or not the increase in Autism is real, there is
something that has been forgotten. The people who pontificate on these
things are "medical" ~~* experts*~~ , who by and large, are rotated in
their jobs, and rarely have more than a decade in any specific area.
However, the people who can really answer these questions are people
like my husband, who spent the whole of his working life, until retirement,
in the school system.
He has also had 15 more years to sit back, watch and listen.
When I read the original article to him, his comments were revealing.
Along the lines of... "In my first three decades as a teacher, any autistic
spectrum disorder was such a novelty, that it was the major focus of
discussion at both regional and national conventions.
If the increase in Autism isn't real, but simply recognises that
medical people then, were too stupid to diagnose what was in front of their
eyes, then why did we not see it then? Were we stupid too? And where are
all these adults who should be walking around with autistic spectrum
disorders, that we never saw as kids?
And why is it that autism spectrum disorders are SO common now, that
rather than talk about them with interest at conventions, teachers are
exhausted off their feet. They are more likely to share desperation tactics
about how to try to devise workable systems in classrooms where two or
three of these children spend their time disrupting everyone else's lives
and thinking?"
As far as he is concerned, he can look back, and see a time when
teaching was very straightforward. Autism in actuality was so rare, that
the children got excellent care in his school. Why? Because there was only
likely ever, to be one, in any school, if that. Far more likely, was the
problem of highly bright children, held back by a system which took away
their self initiative and imagination. But at least Teacher aide could be
diverted when needed to provide the support that the rare autistic child
needed, when they needed it.
Now, there are so many autistic children, or children with behavioural
problems almost identical to autism, that Teacher Aides are just about
needed for normal children, let alone Autistic spectrum children.
If the medical profession honestly thinks that the "increase" in autism
is an artifact produced by historical diagnostic ignorance, they should
think again.
Because in the minds of people who DO remember a time when Autism was
something you checked in the dictionary as to how to spell the word, such a
statement isn't just ludicrous; it also raises questions, and these
questions are:
What have doctors got to hide, that they want to try to persuade people
that a "real" increase (that we as long term teachers see as a "real"
increase,) was actually a result of their own stupidity?
Are doctors trying to tell us, that we, as teachers, were also so
stupid that we didn't see "autism" then, but do now?
What does such an "explanation" show about their new-found intelligence
today? ---[Hilary Butler. Letter BMJ 2005
Back to top
john
medicine forum addict


Joined: 03 Jun 2006
Posts: 92

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:00 am    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

As a pediatrician, who has been in practice for over two decades, I find it
more than a little insulting as well as disturbing to have someone say that
these children were always there. ..... For years the vaccine division at
the CDC and others have said the reason for the dramatic increase in autism
is due to "better diagnosing" and "greater awareness." They have encouraged
those like Paul Shattuck to manufacture uncertainty. .... There are no
studies that have found the previously undiagnosed or misdiagnosed autistic
individuals among older Americans. They simply aren't there. We need to
address the real reason for the alarming autism rate. No more secrets or
truth-spinning. This is not a faux epidemiological epidemic, nor an
infectious epidemic, nor a genetic epidemic (as there are no genetic
epidemics). That leaves an epidemic linked to some sort of exposure.
[Schafer Autism Report--Pediatrics article May 2006] The Obfuscation of The
Iatrogenic Autism Epidemic
Back to top
Jeff
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 1313

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:24 pm    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"john" <sc@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:sfCdneCPOdM-PynZRVnyrQ@bt.com...
Quote:

"vernon" <there@there> wrote in message
news:44b418a2$0$23438$88260bb3@news-taz.teranews.com...



No one needs to know a thing about neurology to recognize or be around
the autistic.

That is, unless you are inferring that autism is secretive disease that a
Doctor must "discover" and thus treat.


Doctors cause it, so they like to keep it as secret as possible

Doctora don't cause it. The disease has a genetic basis as well as
environment basis. However, there is very little good evidence that doctors
cause autism and much good evidence that they don't.

Jeff

Quote:
hence their great circus trying to prevent anyone seeing that
Back to top
Jeff
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 1313

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:26 pm    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"john" <sc@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:lsKdnVFEE7mDNinZRVnyjw@bt.com...
Quote:

"HCN" <hcn@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MoadnelKbpvxPinZnZ2dnUVZ_vqdnZ2d@comcast.com...



Evidence?

You can't see with pharma blinkers

Incorrect. You can't produce evidence, so you say people are pharmashills.

If I am a pharmashill, some pharmaceutical companies owe me a big check.

Quote:

Okay... What we really want to see is evidence of your bum being burned
by "satanic black lines".


You just want to see a photo of my bum

google 'male butts'

Well, that might find the intelligent part of you body, but, that is more
than I want to know.

Jeff
Back to top
Jeff
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 1313

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:29 pm    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"JohnDoe" <none@ofyourbusiness.com> wrote in message
news:44b4a20c$0$2016$ba620dc5@text.nova.planet.nl...
(...)

Quote:
No, they won't. They oppose vaccines which have never and vaccines that no
longer contain any mercury in any form whatsoever. They want vaccines
banned, period. There is a reason why these people are referred to as
insane.

I don't think they are insane. Misled, certainly. But not insane.

People don't necessarily think logically about some things. Medicine and
vaccines are clearly two areas where people don't think logically.

Quote:
I hope they evolve into the anti-dental fillings crowd. I hope they
succeed in removing mercury from dental fillings.

I don't think they will. They couldn't care less about mercury in any form
from any source. They're agenda is to have vaccines banned. The
thimerosal-autism scare is only a means to an end for them, nothing more.
Just look at their resistance against the cervical cancer vaccine - there
it's 'promoting sexual promiscuity'. Or look at the Yurko case - there
vaccines were said to cause shaken baby syndrome.

This points to an inability to examine evidence and think.

Jeff

Quote:
Once they win that battle, the next battle will be much more difficult
--keeping fish from becoming contaminated with mercury.

At least you seem sincere about removing any possible exposure to mercury
from all sources. And not just mercury, all other heavy metals. Which
makes you an order of magnitude more honest than the anti-vac crowd.

I can only hope so since my agenda is protecting children from mercury
and
other heavy metals. I am in favor of vaccines and would prefer they do
not
contain mercury. Even Jeff seems to believe that it would be a good thing
if mercury was removed from vaccines.

But not (as far as I can tell) because he sees a thimerosal-autism link,
but to err on the side of caution. And maybe to remove an argument from
the arsenal of the anti-vac crowd.

Jason
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Back to top
Jeff
medicine forum Guru


Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 1313

PostPosted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:32 pm    Post subject: Re: Autism: It's not ancient, it's new. Reply with quote

"Rich" <joshew@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Xx%sg.14176$MF6.6346@tornado.socal.rr.com...
Quote:

"cathyb" <cathybeesley@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:1152676405.690474.303230@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Mark Probert wrote:
Jeff wrote:
"Mark Probert" <markprobert@lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
news:QtYsg.508$W%2.191@fe09.lga...
Bryan Heit wrote:
Autism has been defined clinically at least as far back as 1951:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14838158&query_hl=44&itool=pubmed_docsum
Unfortunately, pubmed only goes back that far so we cannot readily
look
back farther for older references. Unfortunately, I do not have
ready
access to databases which go back farther from my lab. Given that
the
word "autism" is used in the title, you can guarantee that it was
defined
pre-1951.

Bryan
Leo Kanner first describe Autism as a separate disorder in the early
1940's.

http://www.bestbehaviour.ca/briefhistory.htm

John Down first described Down Syndrome in the mid 1800s. Yet people
had it
before he described it. Ditto Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases.
And
people even had AIDS before it was described. And Thomas Edison and
Albert
Einstein are both believed to have ADHD before it became popular.

So a disease can exist, even if it has not been described.

Some people will find that strange.

Speaking of autism, I read an excellent book about it: Curious
Incident of
the Dog in the Night-Time, by Mark Haddon. Excellent book.

I usually catch up on reading in the summer and this year my list is
soooooooo long it cannot bear another entry.

That one is worth squeezing onto your list regardless; chuck something
else off. Honest.

It's an excellent story and told from the viewpoint of the autistic
child; I'd love to know how accurate the portrayal is.


I agree. Aside from being a window into the mind of an autistic child, it
is a really good read. It's a murder who-done-it with a surprise ending,
and the action never boggs down. Highly recommended.

I think it is a fairly accurate portrayal. I could read a book about a
scientist's or pediatrician's or techer's life and tell yo uhow accurate a
portrayal it is. Unfortunately, autistic people have difficulty putting
themselves in the shoes of someone else, so it is hard for an autistic
person to say how accurate it is.

Jeff
Quote:
--Rich
Back to top
Google

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 6 [77 Posts] Goto page:  Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
The time now is Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:28 pm | All times are GMT
Forum index » Medicine forums » nursing
Jump to:  

Similar Topics
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
No new posts Vaccinations & Autism & Breast Implants & Genetics ..... BreastImplantAwareness.or nursing 15 Sat Jul 15, 2006 7:23 pm
No new posts Vaccinations & Autism & Breast Implants & Genetics ... BreastImplantAwareness.or nursing 0 Sat Jul 15, 2006 1:48 am
No new posts Fombonne's autism research is dangerously inaccurate john nursing 18 Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:38 am
No new posts AUTISM: THE EVOLUTION OF A DISEASE by Bryan Jepson, MD john nursing 38 Tue Jul 11, 2006 3:26 pm
No new posts Vaccine autism evidence overwhelming john hepatitis 0 Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:22 pm

Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
Other DeniX Solutions sites: email marketing campaigns , electronics forum, Science forum, Unix/Linux blog, Unix/Linux documentation, Unix/Linux forums


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.0251s ][ Queries: 16 (0.0024s) ][ GZIP on - Debug on ]