Hi Keira, Thank you so much for reading and your fantastic and detailed comments. I think that warrants its own publication instead of remaining buried under my own story!

Just a couple comments in reply...

I took the study author's statement "People with schizophrenia had no increased rate of overall creative professions compared with controls, but an increased rate in the subgroup of artistic occupations" and wrapped that into an overall summary saying "...people with schizophrenia and bipolar disorders (and their closest relatives without known conditions) were more likely to work in creative occupations such as the arts...". I think next time, I will more liberally use the author's own words as inserted quotes. But at times I have to make my own summary statement which inherently struggles for precision! I haven't figured this out, so I appreciate you pointing it out.

Your criticism if the author's use of "suggested" may be misplaced. Suggested is the standard word used in academic literature for interpreting data and applying it to the hypothesis. That is because in science, the best you can do is to "suggest" that the data supports or fails to support a hypothesis within a certain amount of uncertainty - which is always present...

And thank you for sharing your own experience with autism and creativity! That is fascinating, the segregation of your literal verbal communication from the creativity you show elsewhere.

And I apologize for using the word madness. I did feel uncomfortable using it, but hoped that using it in the context of a piece featuring poetry, and emphasizing the genius of people suffering various mental conditions, would mitigate the baggage of the word. That was my hope. If I've failed, please let me know.

Again, thank you so much for reading and supporting and most important, for your thoughts - those I value most.

Best, SD