PDD, Asperger, and Geek Syndrome?

brainWaves asks "Recently I found out I have some Pervasive Developmental Disorders, especially Asperger disorder or a 'PDD-Not Otherwise Specified' (PDD-NOS). Doing some research on the web pointed me to some Wired pages, like the Autism-Spectrum Quotient, or AQ (where I scored 35, average being about 16). At the end of the test, there is a link to a 6 pages article entitled The Geek Syndrome which basically discusses the Asperger Syndrome, relating it to geeks. The article is somewhat old, but in a recent news, autism in California has increased 100%. Do 'geeks' have a higher tendency toward conditions like PDD/Asperger? I saw a lot of me in the Wired article, and was wondering if others on Slashdot have the same problem in their life, or if they have been diagnosed with a PDD?" Note that Asperger Syndrome is not the same as ADHD but methods useful for coping with one may be useful in coping with the other. Also, please don't take an internet test seriously when attempting to diagnose any kind of mental instability. Instead, if you are worried about such results, share them with your family doctor.

Comments

Don't take it too seriously.

[Hallow]

I scored a 40, which would be consistent with my Myers-Briggs personality type - INTP(introverted, intuitive, thinking, perceiving). It would seem this "tool", if you could even call it that, is biased against particular personality types. I certainly wouldn't consider my personality type to be a disorder. ;) You might actually find more relevance in taking the MBTI (Myers-Briggs Type Inventory).

My experience...

[singularity]

I work with a few students diagnosed as suffering from Asperger's Syndrome.

If you suffered from it, more than likely you would know it by now. The symptoms are not as obvious as autism, but they are not far off. The students I have dealt with were all diagnosed in early to mid childhood.

I have seen Asperger's described as a "workable form of autism." I would agree that is pretty close to the mark. Note that the people that suffer from this have to work to do a lot of tasks you and I probably see as normal.

Note also that most DSM diagnoses require the patient to have lifestyle problems as a result of certain mental problems. "Depression" is not DSM diagnosable until you start getting into problems where you do not do previously pleasurable activites and so on. If you feel sad but do not let it get in the way, it is not diagnosible. What that means is that a condition that does not manifest itself as hinderance from a "normal lifestyle" is not valid reasoning for a diagnosis.

This is a long way of saying that if you are living a relaticely healthy life right now, you are not going to be diagnosed as sufferring from "Asperger's Syndrome". I find that people that seek things out like that most of the time do it to brag about, or use an excuse for other problems (laziness, not wanting to socialize, etc.) If you were having actual socialization problems on the level of Asperger's, you would have seeked out professional help a long time ago.

Re:My experience...

[grunthos]

If you suffered from it, more than likely you would know it by now. ... The students I have dealt with were all diagnosed in early to mid childhood.

Not necessarily. My daughter is 17 and only got diagnosed 2 years ago. We always knew she was different, but didn't really know why. It didn't become a problem until high school age as the pressure (academic and social) increased. We struggled through quite a bit getting the proper diagnosis and care for her. There can be many intermingled things that muddy the diagnosis.

Asperger's has a set of components including sensory integration dysfunction, language processing issues, rigid thinking patterns and social issues, the extent of which vary in each person. It also can come along with other disorders like obsessive-compulsive disorder, ADD/ADHD, and clinical depression. Sorting through these and figuring out which thing is contributing to which symptom can take a long time to sort out.

And it can all be dependent on adequate availability of child and youth mental health resources in your area. In many parts of the country, there is a shortage of teen-specific mental health help, which really can have much different needs than either younger children or adults. Heck, it's tough enough being a teenager without Aspergers or OCD or ADHD.

Once you have a good diagnosis, you can then know what kind of coping skills will help. The coping skills for ADHD and OCD and sensory integration disfunction are not all the same.

Interestingly, once a family member has been accurately diagnosed with Asperger's, you start to recognize small pieces of the constituent parts in other family members.

Welcome to the Pathology du Jour!

[occamboy]

I've done a lot of research on the whole spectrum autism area recently. (By way of background, I've worked in the medical field for some years - I've authored papers, run clinical trials, and so forth).

Here's a short synopsis of what I've found, through reading journal articles and books, and interviewing psychologists:

Autism is a real disease, terrible and sad. However, it is wildly overdiagnosed in youngsters.

Aspergers syndrome is probably also a real disease, related in some ways to autism. It is also wildly overdiagnosed in youngsters. It also seems to get pinned on nerds. But people with real Asperger's aren't simply nerds - they have profound and obvious problems.

There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that there is an autism spectrum (beyond the narrow spectrum of those that truly have a serious, serious disease). The best evidence indicates that the "autism spectrum" is simply a speculation by a few psychologists that people who are shy and introspective are somehow related to people who have a profound problem.

PDD-NOS is an interesting diagnosis developed by the folks that are pushing the idea of a wide spectrum of autism. The diagnosis is very arbitrary - yes there are criteria, but these are very subjective. Applied to young children, it has little if any no prognostic value.

Finally, there does not seem to exist even one controlled scientific study that demonstrates that the outcomes of any of these conditions can be changed - even if they do exist. All treatments are purely speculative.

Commentary time - I know I'll get modded down, but this might actually be useful for someone:

What's interesting is that for all of the loud chatter from the spectrum autism crowd, they totally avoid doing scientific studies. They do studies, but never controlled ones, which are the basis of science and medicine.

As far as I can tell, autism and its "spectrum" have become the "next big thing" in psychology, following in the footsteps of lobotomies, electroconvulsive therapy, repressed memories, and ADHD. Like its predecessors, the "autism spectrum" has no basis in science, and will likely, over time, go the way of other medical diagnoses and procedures that are based on speculation rather than science.

Re:Yeah, right.

[gmhowell]

Sounds interesting. Also sounds like you're speaking from ignorance (the correct definition, meaning you just don't know or have incomplete knowledge. No offense intended). The bulk of excessive medications lies not with physicians, but rather, with adamant patients. First is the problem that most people can't accept that if they sit on their ass, eat improperly, don't excercise, etc, they aren't going to be 100% every minute of every day. They want every little inconvenience taken care of with a 'magic pill'. It was much easier to take FenPhen than to diet and excercise. Second, the changes to allow pharmaceutical advertising to the lay public was a bad thing. I'm not sure I need to explain that. The final problem is when the media print every BS study printed, be it in the New England Journal, or Bob and Frank's uber-elite medical college journal and poetry annual.

What this leads to is a group of patients who, far from just saying 'gimmie', practically demand the medication. If a doc counsels against it, or suggests something natural (diet, excercise, etc.) the patient gets pissed and goes somewhere else. (And files a complaint with the insurance company, state regulatory boards, malpractice atty. etc.)

Doctors, as a group, don't get much money or other largesse from pharmaceutical companies. It was possible, in the past, to do okay, but if your physician was getting anything in reimbursements or gifts from pharmaceutical companies that would make a significant change in his normal salary, he probably was/is a quack.

Seriously, I've been in and around medicine and physicians for 30 years. I've known hundreds of doctors. Been exposed to dozens of hospitals. When I hear comments like this, I think to myself 'show me the proof'.

You've got part of the problem figured out ('gimme') But that is only one sign of top to bottom problems with health care and health care delivery in the US. (As an aside, socialized medicine is not the answer, as many of the problems I see are not solved in European countries and Canada. If I haven't deleted it, I had a ~ten page writing on the broad topic of problems with the medical industry in the US that I never quite finished.)

Oh, and to be a little bit on point, I think the first comment I replied to was referring to an individual experience. Perhaps I read too quickly?

A few thoughts

[jd]

First, I'm diagnosed Aspergers, so I've done some studying on the subject.

First, don't take a diagnosis as being necessarily correct. Self-diagnosis is rarely accurate and autistic-related conditions are so poorly-understood that most psychs are not equipt to diagnose it properly, either.

In other words, validate any diagnosis, before trusting to it. Go to your local bookshop and check the DSM-IV - the manual psychs use for diagnosis - and verify that you meet the criteria. DON'T DO THIS FIRST! It's almost impossible for a person to not find themselves in the manual, somewhere. Remember that the DSM uses technical terms, so if you're even vaguely unsure how a term is intended to be used, check with your psych.

Second, even if you do meet all the criteria, there is an enormous overlap between different conditions, and there is also a risk of certain personality types creating the illusion of meeting a specific diagnosis. There is no easy way to tell these possibilities apart. Psychs generally do this by experimenting on you - trying different treatments, noting the reaction, and then re-moulding the diagnosis to fit the treatment that works.

IMHO, this is a hack-and-slash method, and not one I trust much. So far, though, no cause for Aspergers is known and no neurological tests exist. Given that a possible side-effect for a number of the treatments is "death", I really do strongly recommend making sure your psych knows exactly what they're doing, and that you don't isolate the first time you try these remedies.

Third, here is a short list of typical traits exhibited by Asperger people. I've tried to avoid the over-generalizing I've seen elsewhere, but this is NOT to be taken as a diagnostic tool, but rather as a quick reality-check if you and your psych disagree on a diagnosis.

• Recognition of facial expressions and body-language is difficult to impossible. This one seems to be fairly universal, and most "therapies" that exist for Asperger people concentrate on this.
• A classic symptom of the entire "autistic spectrum" (and one of the reasons it's considered a spectrum) is a phenominal level of sensory data and especially visual data. (I don't know why visual in particular, but it's the one that gets repeatedly documented in case studies.) Autistic people don't like crowds, not because they don't like people (they often do), but because they become super-saturated with data and reflexivly retreat to a more tolerable level. For a better description of this specific symptom, I recommend the book "Somebody, Somewhere". It's the second in a series, but ignore the ones before and after.
• Asperger people think "visually". They picture things in their mind, and respond to those pictures. (Again, note the emphasis on visual data, even if this is in the mind.) If they cannot picture things, or if the picture is self-conflicting, an Aspergers person will typically not respond well.
• Asperger people will tend to resemble bipolar people, with two exceptions. First, the mood swings won't fit any of the bipolar patterns. Bipolar people will have (roughly) oscillating moods. The median can be anywhere, so don't assume that a person isn't bipolar if they never show mania, or never show depression. The key is that oscillation. Asperger people will (often) also have larger mood-swings than normal, but these won't (necessarily) be periodic. They can be completely random, and that's one clue as to whether it's an autistic or bipolar phenomina.
• Asperger people are often pattern-oriented. Anything that disrupts routine will produce a feeling of panic. (The routine can be "change", but that change will typically be at a constant rate, or have some constant component. The problem is not change, per se, but the "failure" of -some- constant, at -some- level.) On the other hand, anything that involves patterned thinking (eg: programming in a re-usable style, cooking/baking/brewing, architecture, etc) are all