>>16634135
>It's not a condition you idiot. It's a symptom.
No one calls it a symptom. It's a diagnostic unit which means the medical community assumes it being an actual condition.
>This is like saying it's ridiculous to say someone who needs glasses to drive and someone who's been blind since birth have the same impairment
I don't think the analogy makes much sense here, actually. If Asperger's was needing glasses, then severe autism would be being blind, having no legs, having both asthma and high blood pressure. More importantly, the disruption of any key neurological process may give rise to autistic behavior. Diagnoses based on superficial behavioral similarities are meaningless. Autism in psychiatry would be akin to a hypothetical cough-and-sneeze syndrome in medicine. That alone won't tell you if you suffer from an allergy, a cold, lung cancer or tuberculosis.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/sci/

Thread:

Dow we have an overdiagnosis epidemic?