Yeah, I saw that as well. Regardless, I think my point stands -- I find it pretty alarming how quick the internet is to armchair-diagnose people with serious mental illness.

For example, a good friend of mine was internet-diagnosed with Schizophrenia. He believed it, and going down that rabbit hole screwed him up for a while.

Turns out that he and a long-term daily weed habit just weren't really a good mix (the paranoia led him to take it more seriously than he should have -- and the fact that "paranoia" was one of the supposed "signs" of Schizophrenia only made it more believable). He stopped smoking, and within a couple weeks saw just how ridiculous a turn things had taken.w

My point was simply that people are complex, and one single behavior isn't really enough to go around stating that a person might be X. A person can be inclined towards a certain work habit for loads of reasons.

While not directly what the OP/GP mentioned, sometimes it's worth noting that, if a person suffers from some symptom, they'll probably benefit from advice to (a group of) people who suffer said symptom. This is true regardless of whether said person is part of said group.

If Greg has issues concentrating, and someone says "I know people with autism can suffer from that, and they find stimming helps", then even if Greg is not autistic, they may be well served by that advice.

That said, they won't necessarily be well served by all advice (Ask your doctor for Ritalin!), and I'd personally rather leave it to themselves and their medical practicioner to diagnose/decide whether they're actually part of any given group.