Comments on: Strategic Plan: when should I be concerned?

By: Wohin mit Autismus-Forschungs-Geldern?

Wohin mit Autismus-Forschungs-Geldern? — Sun, 02 Jan 2011 16:45:03 +0000

[...] Strategic Plan: when should I be concerned? [...]

By: Regan

Regan — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 04:15:06 +0000

Sullivan,
Thanks for these reminders to respond to the RFIs, and for helping to analyze the content of the draft strategic plan.

By: Ms. Clark

Ms. Clark — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 03:48:25 +0000

I hope many readers will take the time to email them . They can do that by clicking on the words “email them” if they have an email client thingy… it should open up a blank email form for them to fill out.

It’s good to remind the IACC that they have been overly influenced by a noisy and badly informed minority (the mercury parents) and it’s good to tell them that it’s time to put the mercury antivax parents on mute. There’s also been a push by these parents to throw caution to the wind and just DO SOMETHING TO FIX THESE KIDS They don’t want too much interference from IRBs or in looking for legitimate scientific reasons to do something in particular…

By: Sullivan

Sullivan — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 22:45:43 +0000

I like these goals a lot. This section, by nature, focuses a lot on younger people with autism. And, yet, they include a fair amount of “through the lifespan” language.

There is a lot of emphasis here on streamlining the screening and diagnostic process. If you’ve been through an ADOS or the like with your family, you realize that these are long (and expensive) tasks. Getting a good way to (a) screen and (b) diagnose faster and accurately would be great for families and researchers alike.

One thing I am not as happy with is the emphasis on “at risk”. Yes, it’s important, but I think that this implies that many or all people with autism aren’t autistic from birth. That is a whole discussion unto itself, but suffice it to say, I think there are a number of people born with autism. We should identify them as “likely to be autistic” or something similar, but I don’t think they are “at risk”. I don’t think that “at risk” need necessarily be removed, but an acknowledgment that “at risk” means more than “not yet autistic but might become autistic” would be helpful.

Did I mention that you can email them ?