Comment by sudosteph
2 days ago
> People who would never have survived childbirth or early childhood in previous generations are surviving nowadays at historically unprecedented rates.
I have seen studies that correlate c-section deliveries with a somehat significant increased chance of autism, so that would track. I was born by csection myself, and both myself and my mom would have died if that wasn't an option.
I've never been evaluated for and am not diagnosed with autism, but given the broadened DSM criteria, it's possible they would have tested me and labeled me with something like that if I had been a kid today. Instead they just settled on "speech disability" and put me in weekly speech therapy for all of elementary school. I'm not sure if having a permanent disability label on me from a young age would have been a good thing to be honest.
There seems to be a relationship here, as shown in this paper, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5837358/
I am skeptical of the idea that a CS itself produces any conditions for ASD. But it would make sense that those who would have otherwise died during child birth and survive are now likely to change present health demographics.
Honestly, a lot of autistic people are doing well in life, and in fact many are doing better than their neurotypical peers. Autistic traits need to be understood better because they provide better understanding of human cognition and its functionality.
In my case, I came out 2 weeks late and was little over 12lbs (~5.5kg) when I did. Apparently birth weight over 9.5 lbs is also correlated with higher rates of ASD. That would be my guess as to why c-sections show a correlation.
My First and Fifth are autistic. All births were full term.
1st 8lb. 2nd 8lb, 3rd 10.5lb, 4th and 5th 6.5lb ea (twins). None were c-section.
First 3 were home or birth center, last had to be hospital. My wife had good BMI for the start of each pregnancy.
2 replies →
it's not that a CS causes ASD but that children who have ASD are more likely to need a CS, and the availability of a CS allows more children with ASD to survive, and therefore an increase of CS births correlates with an increase of ASD
> I have seen studies that correlate c-section deliveries with a somehat significant increased chance of autism, so that would track.
I think older age of mothers are correlated with both?
As I mentioned in another reply, heavy birth weight is another stat somewhat significantly correlated with ASD diagnosis that could correlate with c-sections. Interestingly high birth weight seems to be more common in mothers in their 20s.
High birth weight is also correlated with gestational diabetes. There could be some metabolic or hormonal intersection with autism here.
It doesn't has to be a disability just because someone is different from the majority.
Majority is just the average
It's a disability if it impacts one or more major life function. Otherwise it's just an answer to a question you might not have even known you wanted to ask.
I'm sure I would've been diagnosed autistic as a kid instead of just difficult. Not sure it would've changed anything. I still would've been very strong willed and confused about why people around me say one thing but do a different thing. I think what would've been different is maybe other people's reaction to me?
> Not sure it would've changed anything.
I think the biggest benefit to diagnosis is both the parent and the child are able to draw on resources for those disabilities - learn about coping mechanisms, get advice from other autistic people, etc.
> confused about why people around me say one thing but do a different thing.
I think it importantly helps shift this confusion from the framing of "Is something wrong with me?" which a lot of young autistic people feel
1 reply →
Well sure, "disability" doesn't mean "different", it means "less able to do certain things".
Why is the word disability or illness is somehow shameful? Making people stop calling some illnesses an illness just forces doublespeak and shifting of the same meaning to a different word. "We don't call autistic people ill, we call them alternatively healthy"(c) or some other similar bullshit. I'm not normo-typical for example and have some conditions. If someone will call me ill, I would simply nod and agree because that's what truth is about me. What's the big deal? Being different from majority is a disability, and instead of shamefully hiding it behind doublespeak and twisting words, it would be better to acknowledge it and help all of us to be accommodated by the said majority.
My ADHD is not a disability or an illness.
It's a brain pattern / way of thinking which doesn't fit the avg societies expectations.
It's a disability when it hinders me lifting my life but even then you allow the narrative be written by the others.
1 reply →
a disability or illness implies the need to be cured. but for high functioning autistic people it is not clear whether they are actually having a disability or an illness that needs curing. if something doesn't need curing then it's not an illness, nor a disability. so either we don't diagnose people who don't need curing but do need an explanation for their differences as autistic, or we accept that at least some high functioning autistic people are not disabled or ill.
i mentioned before the book "Speed of Dark" by Elisabeth Moon which explores this topic.
2 replies →