8 ms·

Problem is there is autism like (maybe) Einstein or Tesla and then there is autism where the child can't communicate or adapt to any form of human social intera

by api 10y ago

Problem is there is autism like (maybe) Einstein or Tesla and then there is autism where the child can't communicate or adapt to any form of human social interaction or contact. The former is neurodiversity, the latter a debilitating disease. These are not the same thing and need different terms.

rntz 10y ago
Is there any evidence that they have different underlying causes or are otherwise fundamentally distinct rather than one simply being an extreme case of the other? (Honest question; I'm not familiar with the literature here.) Or, even if they were in some sense fundamentally the same, is your argument that their effects are so practically different that they ought to be called by distinct names anyway?
- mercer 10y ago
  Asperger's used to be classified separately but is now considered part of the autism spectrum. That said, I don't think this was done primarily because of a consensus over there being just one 'fundamental type' of autism. As I understand it, there isn't even a consensus on any theory of what autism fundamentally is. Some theories try to explain the social issues as a lack of Theory Of mind, but these theories don't cover the many other symptoms typical of autism. One more recent theory ('Intense Worlds') does present a 'fundamental' explanation for all/most symptoms, but AFAIK it's not well-accepted or supported by evidence (yet), and the fact that it explains so much is also considered a drawback (too vague / overfitting / whatever the term is). > Or, even if they were in some sense fundamentally the same, is your argument that their effects are so practically different that they ought to be called by distinct names anyway? I've noticed that there seems to be a movement in treatment approach that focuses on treating individual symptoms without focusing too much on the overarching 'labels'. In my experience it's been a very nice, down to earth approach, and it strikes me as more measurable too. This approach strikes me as particularly useful for autism because there's so much variation between different autists and the particular symptoms they exhibit.
wbl 10y ago
They are the same thing, just as someone with a slight sniffle and someone with a sinus infection can both have a cold, and there are lots of places in between. We've also gotten a lot better at treatment: a significant fraction of children with large language delays end up living independently.
kosma 10y ago
The recent developments of DSM-5 and ICD-11 show the opposite: decades of research failed to show any scientifically valid distinction between functional and non-functional autism. That's why they are being conflated into a single "autism spectrum disorder" category.
- bbarn 10y ago
  Those books exist as a method for billing insurance. The DSM only recently (1983) stopped considering homosexuality a diagnosis. As a result we're hearing the phrase "somewhere on the spectrum" for any number of behaviors we don't see fitting the norm, and the reality of autism is not this "beautiful mind" scenario for many, but instead a crippling illness like the AP mentions. They are definitely not the same thing to the people who live with them. The article is completely centered around the media image that autism creates geniuses, and that's a dangerous, misleading idea at best. The reality of living with it is usually much more ugly. Children who often become grown adults who can't make connections between cause and effect violently lashing out, throwing feces, biting care givers, screaming, screaming, and more screaming. We should absolutely keep looking for ways to prevent and try to treat/cure it, and not act like everything is fine and great and accept it as diversity, for the sake of those who can't live normally.
  - throwaway876543 10y ago
    As someone who falls in the "Beautiful Mind" end of the spectrum I find it insulting and abhorrent that people would do anything OTHER than cure us if they could. Beneath superficial success and contribution, my life is a nonstop Munchian scream. I find it less insulting when people say everyone on the spectrum should be exterminated, than when people say some of us should be allowed to continue existing because our particular end of the spectrum happens to write pretty code / invent pretty theorems / etc.
    - euyyn 10y ago
      On the other hand, I've met high-functioning autists that feel offended at the idea that people want to cure them. My cousin is on the "very crippled side" of the spectrum, so I'd give anything for a cure. So I guess if the person can understand the concept, it should be their own call.

by api 10y ago

rntz 10y ago

Is there any evidence that they have different underlying causes or are otherwise fundamentally distinct rather than one simply being an extreme case of the other? (Honest question; I'm not familiar with the literature here.) Or, even if they were in some sense fundamentally the same, is your argument that their effects are so practically different that they ought to be called by distinct names anyway?

mercer 10y ago
Asperger's used to be classified separately but is now considered part of the autism spectrum. That said, I don't think this was done primarily because of a consensus over there being just one 'fundamental type' of autism. As I understand it, there isn't even a consensus on any theory of what autism fundamentally is. Some theories try to explain the social issues as a lack of Theory Of mind, but these theories don't cover the many other symptoms typical of autism. One more recent theory ('Intense Worlds') does present a 'fundamental' explanation for all/most symptoms, but AFAIK it's not well-accepted or supported by evidence (yet), and the fact that it explains so much is also considered a drawback (too vague / overfitting / whatever the term is). > Or, even if they were in some sense fundamentally the same, is your argument that their effects are so practically different that they ought to be called by distinct names anyway? I've noticed that there seems to be a movement in treatment approach that focuses on treating individual symptoms without focusing too much on the overarching 'labels'. In my experience it's been a very nice, down to earth approach, and it strikes me as more measurable too. This approach strikes me as particularly useful for autism because there's so much variation between different autists and the particular symptoms they exhibit.

wbl 10y ago

They are the same thing, just as someone with a slight sniffle and someone with a sinus infection can both have a cold, and there are lots of places in between. We've also gotten a lot better at treatment: a significant fraction of children with large language delays end up living independently.

kosma 10y ago

The recent developments of DSM-5 and ICD-11 show the opposite: decades of research failed to show any scientifically valid distinction between functional and non-functional autism. That's why they are being conflated into a single "autism spectrum disorder" category.

bbarn 10y ago
Those books exist as a method for billing insurance. The DSM only recently (1983) stopped considering homosexuality a diagnosis. As a result we're hearing the phrase "somewhere on the spectrum" for any number of behaviors we don't see fitting the norm, and the reality of autism is not this "beautiful mind" scenario for many, but instead a crippling illness like the AP mentions. They are definitely not the same thing to the people who live with them. The article is completely centered around the media image that autism creates geniuses, and that's a dangerous, misleading idea at best. The reality of living with it is usually much more ugly. Children who often become grown adults who can't make connections between cause and effect violently lashing out, throwing feces, biting care givers, screaming, screaming, and more screaming. We should absolutely keep looking for ways to prevent and try to treat/cure it, and not act like everything is fine and great and accept it as diversity, for the sake of those who can't live normally.
- throwaway876543 10y ago
  As someone who falls in the "Beautiful Mind" end of the spectrum I find it insulting and abhorrent that people would do anything OTHER than cure us if they could. Beneath superficial success and contribution, my life is a nonstop Munchian scream. I find it less insulting when people say everyone on the spectrum should be exterminated, than when people say some of us should be allowed to continue existing because our particular end of the spectrum happens to write pretty code / invent pretty theorems / etc.
  - euyyn 10y ago
    On the other hand, I've met high-functioning autists that feel offended at the idea that people want to cure them. My cousin is on the "very crippled side" of the spectrum, so I'd give anything for a cure. So I guess if the person can understand the concept, it should be their own call.