That has nothing to do with autism. He’s never even insinuated that neurodivergent people need nature and “farming” to recover.
Interesting opinion in the article though. I’m pretty interested in his full idea/plan with mental health treatment. I recovered from a lifetime battle with alcohol at a men’s spiritual recovery center which operates on similar principles. So I have a unique view into that.
Again tho, completely unrelated to his investigation into the causes of autism. Why are you conflating the two things?
I wasn’t trying to conflate the two things. I was providing a source on where the “farms” came from, and clarified that they were meant to help “drug addicts” (not minimizing your experience- just reinforcing that the wording is already not great from a lens of treating maladaptive substance use, in addition to being completely inappropriate for people who take prescribed medications.)
I neither agreed not disagreed, though I do find it problematic to be enrolling people who are neurodivergent into any kind of list for any reason without their expressed consent and ability to withdraw that consent at any times. If the reason is purely investigation/research as you say, then I believe that it should be under the same rigor and ethics considerations as any other research.
The farms were for those addicted to dangerous drugs like antidepressants.
That has nothing to do with autism. He’s never even insinuated that neurodivergent people need nature and “farming” to recover.
Interesting opinion in the article though. I’m pretty interested in his full idea/plan with mental health treatment. I recovered from a lifetime battle with alcohol at a men’s spiritual recovery center which operates on similar principles. So I have a unique view into that.
Again tho, completely unrelated to his investigation into the causes of autism. Why are you conflating the two things?
I wasn’t trying to conflate the two things. I was providing a source on where the “farms” came from, and clarified that they were meant to help “drug addicts” (not minimizing your experience- just reinforcing that the wording is already not great from a lens of treating maladaptive substance use, in addition to being completely inappropriate for people who take prescribed medications.)
I neither agreed not disagreed, though I do find it problematic to be enrolling people who are neurodivergent into any kind of list for any reason without their expressed consent and ability to withdraw that consent at any times. If the reason is purely investigation/research as you say, then I believe that it should be under the same rigor and ethics considerations as any other research.