"Trial and error" is the main name of the game in mental health treatments. Human variability in our reactions to drugs/biologics is never uniform and sometimes quite divergent. Then, we try to do brains.

I'm still considering getting diagnosed (or not) despite having a now early 20s son on the spectrum and seeing all the flashing red light parallels. If I did this, the trick would be to find a therapist who knows what to do with people on the spectrum. And if i research that too much, it won't work. PubMed is a blessing for research ...just not for research on oneself!

Man I took my kids off location sharing when they got their first phones at 12. Shit is creepy.

Just communicate!

Well, N=2 but my son and I both experienced this first hand.

That said, having (admittedly long ago) worked in pharma/biotech I agree that without proper controls/constraints, it is a rather broad statement to make, regardless of how intuitive it is.

Well one thing to consider is that for people on the spectrum, CBT and other such therapies are not nearly as effective.

This crate has NO HONOR!

I get your intention, but it's not the case here.

Unless you are white, male, CIS-het, and an evangelical Xian, they are coming for you to. You're just a bit further down the list.

This is very real. You can read it here: https://www.project2025.org. You can google multiple right wing websites commenting on it for yourself.

Or you can watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYwqpx6lp_s

Believe people when they tell you who they are.

This bullshit just infuriations me. Nearly every country ALREADY HAS LAWS that prevent minors from buying vapes (and cigarettes, etc.) Just enforce the damn rules rather than turn two pack a day people back to two pack a day people and then have to pay for their cancer treatment.

Jesus these fucks are dumb.

More upvoting of posts.

I know that sounds a bit dumb/lame, but when I first got here and every post had like 5 upvotes, maybe 20 and then maybe once a week you'd see one with more than 100, it was jarring. Made the place feel empty and without interaction. Which it's really not, but that was my and I think perhaps a lot of peoples' first impression.

This exact thing happened to my Pilates teacher of a decade. We used to joke about all the woo. Then she somehow discovered Josh Rogan and things began to go downhill. What if Trump is right about this one thing? Aren't there two sides to everything? When covid hit she went completely down the rabbit hole, antivax, global conspiracies, the works. Just about everything in that article.

I considered her a good friend. She was the only one who brought flowers to my house when my mother died. I haven't seen her since early in covid, after the first lockdowns.

And I read another article about this same phenomena about two years go, which of course my google fu is too weak this morning to find. But the anecdotal point here is that this is not the first time people have noted this phenomenon.

You've gotten downvoted, and you'll probably get some more downvotes. But you you took the time to write a thoughtful post, and you made a good point.

But ultimately I feel your point is wrong. Defederating from such an instance isn't the equivalent of dehumanizing people you disagree with. Rather, it's limiting the (potential) scope of harm people with bad intentions can cause.

I get you'd like to see "both sides" or have a fuller picture, but there is enough evidence already that there really isn't any possible "good" reason for their speech, and we should do what we can to limit its reach.