Well this is an interesting study….what does everyone else think?

[Sunflower8848]

https://www.madinamerica.com/2017/08/virtual-autism-explain-rising-asd-diagnoses/

Autism has existed long before electronic screens have.

I think it's a complete load of bull shit. In 1975 I went to school with kids who would be diagnosed with autism now, it was barely heard of then and those kids were just considered odd balls or loners. Fortunately now we know better and that is why diagnosis is going up and up as awareness goes up and up. Still though surprising numbers of teachers have very little clue.

As for being on a screen causing autism - what a load of absolute nonsense. If a doctor can't tell the difference between a child with autism and a child who spends too much time on screen then I would despair. Honestly we all know how addictive screen time can be - but I have a child with a diagnosis of Aspergers syndrome and he doesn't understand or think in the way an NT child does - no matter how long that NT child spent on a screen.

Romania is not somewhere I'd be going to look for the latest and best research on autism and as for the French father story - well do you know the views on autism in France? They are very far behind.
If the father had autistic traits and the child did, then what the father has done won't have cured the child. It will just have taught him how to behave more like an NT child. I spent a lot of time playing, reading etc with my child and as a result he could blend in at school - until he couldn't. He didn't get diagnosed until secondary age when the difference in emotional development really starts to show.

They keep talking about autistic 'symptoms' and I don't even understand that. Autism isn't a disease or an illness. My son doesn't have 'symptoms' he just processes the world in a different way to NT people. Honestly it's a complete load of twattish twaddle which encourages people to think ASD is just poor parenting. It's just bollox.

It is really not "interesting" at all.

France (where the study authors are based) is often considered quite lacking in autism knowledge, with a strong attachment still to discredited psychogenic theories of autism (aka mother blame/refrigerator mother/Bettelheim).

There is plentiful good current autism research so not sure why you're focused on an article from 7 years ago.

It's a very odd study. Surely the rise in diagnosis is due to better understanding and ability to diagnose?

I wasn't diagnosed as autistic as a child, nobody ever even suggested it as far as I know. There was a stigma against these things so when it was suggested my brother might have ADHD my mother refused to cooperate with that.

I'm now in the process of getting diagnosed. In retrospect there were so many signs that were ignored until I began putting the peices together myself. My son is also in the process of getting diagnosed in the hopes that he won't have struggle like I had to.

My suspected asd and adhd 4 year old has never even used a tablet. He watches tv a few tomes a week. I call bullshit tbh just another way of blaming parents

That article is horribly offensive. Talking about a child with ‘severe’ autism being ‘completely recovered’ .

we’re definitely living lives that are incompatible with generations of evolution. Screen time, being indoors, sitting still in class etc are only highlighting natural differences. We are living lives where problems with impulse control, social issues, sensory needs are more observable.

but autistic people have always existed, will always exist. Our framework of what it means to be autistic has expanded - rather overstimulated being wrongly put in the club - we now understand why these kids are more likely to get overstimulated.

again, the article is shit. Its tone is abhorrent. Don’t spread nonsense. It’s harmful to do so.

What a load of shit.

I'm autistic and was pretty much raised without screens. The same applies to all my autistic relatives.

Makes a nice change from blaming 'the mother' which was the medical view for a very long time. Never heard 'the father' mentioned in this respect.

Nah seems like bollocks, I've been an avid user of screens since I was a young child when I got a Super Nintendo for Christmas, never displayed any autistic traits. Reducing screen time is likely to be beneficial for most children if they are displaying challenging behavior, whether they are autistic or not.

I don't think it causes autism, but I do think that too much screen time for children is damaging.

Oh Fuck Off.

I'm absolutely sick to fuck of this shit.

What do you think op? It's interesting in they way it cites complete bullshit. I'm an autistic and didn't have screens until my 20's, I wrote my ancient dissertation on a typewriter... my eldest two were also born before prominent use of screens and definitely before Broadband but both again are autistics.

How quaint.

That surely explains why DD displayed traits of autism as a baby/toddler when we didn't even have mobile phones or a laptop in our house until she started school.

Also why I showed traits of autism all my life (though they weren't recognised until much much later). I'm a child of the 70s, there wasn't much in the way of screens about.

Sorry (not sorry), no I don't think it's an interesting study, it's talking rubbish.

It’s not an interesting study, it’s a news article that cites another new article, a book written in 2011 and a study from 2015 that shows a correlation between the increase in screens used in homes and the rise in autism diagnosis. Do you know what else has increased in prevalence and also in more advanced countries? The number of people who are left handed!

The only thing it really confirms is that early intervention can make a difference, which is already known.

I think this study raises many valid points. Some people will disagree.

This is not autism. It is not in any diagnostic criteria.

Virtual autism is something invented to “explain” attachment to electronic devices.

Once again this is not autism. This is fiction