Jump to content

Talk:Autism spectrum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by HalloHelloHalloHello (talk | contribs) at 09:33, 5 August 2020 (Biased sentence: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleAutism spectrum is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 24, 2005.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 31, 2004Peer reviewReviewed
August 3, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
August 10, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
December 17, 2006Featured article reviewDemoted
July 24, 2007Good article nomineeListed
July 30, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
August 14, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Template:Active editnotice


Doc James edit war in prevention section

Ah, the edit-warrior Doc James is in his element again!

Rubella vaccination does n o t prevent autism.

Rubella vaccination prevents congenital rubella syndrome, Doc James. And that congenital rubella syndrome can look like autism spectrum disorder and in some papers is called "atypical autism" is correct, yes. (It is pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified, to be precise)

The sentence as it stands is gibberish.

If you would care to dig deeper and look at the literature, which I know is a very difficult thing for you to do, since you have been reverting careful edits in the field of my expertise (you deleted the page of antimicrobial resistance for example, remember) since 2013, you will see, that the statement in your reference (no 125) quotes a modelling paper (i.e. a math paper), which then quotes a paper from 1971 ! Chess S. Autism in children with congenital rubella. J Autism Child Schizophr. 1971 Jan-Mar;1(1):33-47. PMID: 5172438 DOI:10.1007/bf01537741.

I am, like you presumably, all for vaccination including MMR, and I think t h i s is where the wind of your stubborn persistence of this ONE sentence section (which is conflicting with WP:MOS btw) is blowing from, but this sentence is a poorly phrased overreach.--Wuerzele (talk) 14:56, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The sentence is not "gibberish" at all. As far as I can see, it's a perfectly well-formed and grammatically correct sentence. Whether or nor it is adequately supported by that 2015 Lambert et. al. source, of course, is another question. But, as an expert in the field, you are probably better placed than most to properly judge. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:23, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a complete layperson and I had no trouble parsing it. If that helps. Millahnna (talk) 17:10, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies just seeing this now. References says "In fact, rubella is and should be considered a vaccine-preventable cause of autism." Reference is a Lancet review article on Rubella published in 2015.[1] Qualifies per WP:MEDRS, relatively recent. Exactly what is the issue? We do not generally interrogate our sources and determine ourselves whether or not they got it "right" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:29, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Um- there's no cause for autism so rubella vaccines neither prevent nor don't prevent autism. what was the final decision on taking out the incorrect reference?

Kizemet (talk) 01:48, 31 July 2020 (UTC)kizemet[reply]

Autistic adults can’t live independently?!

“Not many autistic adults are able to live independently, though some are successful.” This is not at all true. With such a wide spectrum range a great many autistic adults live independently. I believe we need to strike this sentence or quantify it properly. “Not many” is much too vague. MereCat-K (talk) 04:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At best, without a reliable source such a sentence reads as original research. However, I see the sentence is sourced, and I'd be curious to know what the source itself says. DonIago (talk) 19:51, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello everyone. It’s not “can’t”, it’s “refuse”, because they didn’t get used. 138.229.19.202 (talk) 14:45, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I attempted to fix this but my change was continually reverted by James. The article cited clearly states: 50.8% of respondents had outcomes in the fair to good range. Which is a MAJORITY. The article is clearly misleading - it's own referenced text is contradicting itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dangibas (talkcontribs) 18:06, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would support outright removing the sentence - the citation disagrees with it and I genuinely don't think it contributes anything worthwhile. I would consider "some autistic adults are unable to live independently" to be fair and accurate, at a compromise. JustLucas (they/them) (talk) 19:40, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any reason not to go for that wording so have implemented it. Others should feel free to change it further or to continue discussion, but I don't think the original wording is supported by that citation. JustLucas (they/them) (talk) 19:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on the new DSM-5 Criteria & ICD-11 criteria it is depending on the support required by the person diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Condition. There are adults with an Autism Condition who thrive well in independence < and others who require either permanent or temporary supported or residential care settings, some of these may have an additional intellectual disability or have global learning difficulties however not always. They are agencies in the United Kingdom for example who offer supported living for adults with Autism or earlier diagnosis as Aspergers Syndrome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thejournals12 (talkcontribs) 21:21, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Autism Speaks

Autism Speaks should absolutely be removed from this article. Not sure about y'all, but any "autism awareness charity" that treats autistic people like shit and talks about how we would be better off dead does not have the well-being of autistic people at heart.

Autism Speaks has advocated for giving children bleach enemas.

As a metaphor, the nazis were a "Jewish awareness group".

Yup, removed them. Not sure if it will stay, but I hope it does.--Historyday01 (talk) 23:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
is a valid charity and can not be altered due to personal opinions. if other charities required they can be listed. Wikipedia is a fact-checker not a personal opinion Ramage — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thejournals12 (talkcontribs) 21:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 July 2020

Concern surrounding the new definitions of Autism Spectrum Condition to DSM5 criteria involving sensory impairment as a characteristic and the redefinition of what is considered severe is now based on the amount of support needed and how severe those symptoms are, which relate to the support. Not having the update information could cause many people problems.[1]

Template:TheJournels12 (talk) 21:08, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:07, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

prognosis: added source

I added a line and sourced an autistic mother's website about the reasoning why many adult autistics push back on "cure" language as its incredibly important since many disability organizations have addressed why that language is violent and ableist-- and its considered hateful. I am missing something for my reference in the bibliography for 163-- I can't quite figure out exactly what I'm missing/brain exhausted- will come back but if anyone is really good at the references- could they help fix it.

I can return with more sources if needed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kizemet (talkcontribs) 02:20, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Biased sentence

"Controversies surround other proposed environmental causes; for example, the vaccine hypothesis, which has been disproven" Why is this included On the Earth page we dont see the equivalent sentence "Controversies surrounds the shape of the earth, weather it is a globe or flat"

The sentence should be changed to "It has been proven vaccines do not cause autism!

That reads better and makes much more sense.

--HalloHelloHalloHello (talk) 09:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]