Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Gadfly's musings on the election results
Obama has been re-elected. As far as a presidential administration's policies and actions on autism and what it means for autistic people, had it been Romney we'd be singing the Who song with the lyrics, "meet the new boss, same as the old boss." In this case I guess we'll be saying the cliche, "same shit different day."
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
ASAN supporters think autism is awesome
The autism self-advocacy network is at it again demonstrating in Washington, D.C. against autism speaks. Their gripes are nothing new. They are pissed that there are no autistics on the board of autism speaks. They are forgetting John Robison's appointment to their scientific advisory committee in spite of the fact he's a high school dropout with no knowledge of science.They are pissed that so much of autism speaks' money goes to scientific research and not to so-called community funded services. Also, their claim (with no evidence whatsoever) that autism speaks primarily engages in "preventative research". This is in spite of funding of brainwave studies and even the half million grant the Mottron group received to study how well autistics can find an embedded figure and other extremely useful projects such as the studies showing that autistics have different reactions to optical illusions than neurotypicals.
The above-linked article also lauds ASAN's efforts to find jobs for persons with autism. I'm not sure what this is comprised of other than ASAN's partnership with Freddie Mac to help secure internships(which may or may not be paid employment) for extremely high functioning people with autism who live in the Washington, D.C. area. Again, as I've mentioned in a previous blog post, it's interesting neurodiversity proponents would partner with a company that has cost the federal government about 170 billion bucks and probably was a major factor in creating the worst economy we've had since the great depression.
What was new was that some of ASAN's supporters were waving placards declaring that autism is awesome and that autistic people are perfect the way they are.
I'm not sure what is so awesome and perfect about being fired from multiple jobs, not being able to make a living, not being able to find a significant other, having motor coordination problems, and being a bedwetter as a child (as apparently a number of persons on the spectrum seem to be from the traffic my post on bedwetting has received). However, I have it good compared to most persons on the spectrum. There are others who can't speak, who self-injure themselves, have intellectual impairments and die in accidental drownings and traffic deaths. I'm not sure what is so great about autism. I wish these ASAN supporters would be more specific. It is quite clear to me what is bad about autism. I don't see anything great or awesome about it.
The article also quotes one ASAN supporter as stating:
The only people [who] can really speak to the autistic experience are autistic people. It is important that people understand what we want and need,”
Again, ASAN seems to want to speak for all autistic persons. I wish they'd let me speak for myself at least once in a while.
The above-linked article also lauds ASAN's efforts to find jobs for persons with autism. I'm not sure what this is comprised of other than ASAN's partnership with Freddie Mac to help secure internships(which may or may not be paid employment) for extremely high functioning people with autism who live in the Washington, D.C. area. Again, as I've mentioned in a previous blog post, it's interesting neurodiversity proponents would partner with a company that has cost the federal government about 170 billion bucks and probably was a major factor in creating the worst economy we've had since the great depression.
What was new was that some of ASAN's supporters were waving placards declaring that autism is awesome and that autistic people are perfect the way they are.
I'm not sure what is so awesome and perfect about being fired from multiple jobs, not being able to make a living, not being able to find a significant other, having motor coordination problems, and being a bedwetter as a child (as apparently a number of persons on the spectrum seem to be from the traffic my post on bedwetting has received). However, I have it good compared to most persons on the spectrum. There are others who can't speak, who self-injure themselves, have intellectual impairments and die in accidental drownings and traffic deaths. I'm not sure what is so great about autism. I wish these ASAN supporters would be more specific. It is quite clear to me what is bad about autism. I don't see anything great or awesome about it.
The article also quotes one ASAN supporter as stating:
The only people [who] can really speak to the autistic experience are autistic people. It is important that people understand what we want and need,”
Again, ASAN seems to want to speak for all autistic persons. I wish they'd let me speak for myself at least once in a while.
Monday, October 29, 2012
Gadfly mentioned in New York Magazine
There's an interesting article that just came out in New York magazine. A well-written article, it makes a number of valid points about the number of people being diagnosed with Asperger's for trivial reasons as well as self-diagnosis.
About four months ago or so, I was contacted by the author, Ben Wallace, who was interested in interviewing me. He asked me about my opinion of Simon Baron-Cohen and I explained why I was not exactly enamored of a number of the good professor's ideas. These included his notion that because autism has stayed in the population in spite of the fact that most autistics never have children suggests autism has some sort of genetic evolutionary advantage. Also, his offensive (at least to me) essay in which he wrote that high functioning autism should not be regarded as a disability.
In addition to his one sentence mention of my belief that Baron-Cohen does not understand the rudiments of genetics, he also wrote about the stories of Craig Newmark's and Bram Cohen's self-diagnosis which I originally wrote about in my blog.
Unfortunately, no context was really given for my observations of professor Baron-Cohen's possible ignorance of genetic principles. So, I will briefly present it here. Genetic mutations can occur spontaneously for a variety of reasons without being inherited. There is at least some research that suggests that a number of mutations associated with autism are de novo, i.e. can occur spontaneously. Thus, these are not inherited so autism could conceivably stay in the population without either autistics producing their own offspring or due to an evolutionary advantage.
I suppose I'm being a bit irrational about my enthusiasm about a one sentence mention in a national magazine, but I guess it may be part of my autism.
About four months ago or so, I was contacted by the author, Ben Wallace, who was interested in interviewing me. He asked me about my opinion of Simon Baron-Cohen and I explained why I was not exactly enamored of a number of the good professor's ideas. These included his notion that because autism has stayed in the population in spite of the fact that most autistics never have children suggests autism has some sort of genetic evolutionary advantage. Also, his offensive (at least to me) essay in which he wrote that high functioning autism should not be regarded as a disability.
In addition to his one sentence mention of my belief that Baron-Cohen does not understand the rudiments of genetics, he also wrote about the stories of Craig Newmark's and Bram Cohen's self-diagnosis which I originally wrote about in my blog.
Unfortunately, no context was really given for my observations of professor Baron-Cohen's possible ignorance of genetic principles. So, I will briefly present it here. Genetic mutations can occur spontaneously for a variety of reasons without being inherited. There is at least some research that suggests that a number of mutations associated with autism are de novo, i.e. can occur spontaneously. Thus, these are not inherited so autism could conceivably stay in the population without either autistics producing their own offspring or due to an evolutionary advantage.
I suppose I'm being a bit irrational about my enthusiasm about a one sentence mention in a national magazine, but I guess it may be part of my autism.
Friday, October 26, 2012
Picking Temple Grandin's Brain: Anything new?
That most famous of autism icons, Temple Grandin, (whom I like to call Temperamental Grandiose just for fun), is in the news once again . A research group in Utah has done a variety of studies on her brain in addition to giving her various tests. They used three controls who were matched for age, sex and hand dominance to draw a comparison between Grandin's brain and a typical brain.
One of the findings was an increased brain volume in comparisons to controls. However, this is probably nothing new as Courchesne's group and I think a variety of other researchers has found enlarged brains in those with autism.
Grandin's lateral ventricles, which hold the brain's cerebrospinal fluid, are skewed, the left one being much larger than the right.
Her amygdala, the area of the brain responsible for anger and rage responses and suppressing sexual desire, is enlarged in both hemispheres. (I wonder if this might explain her stated desire for celibacy :))
The researchers also found a higher volume of white matter on the left side of her brain as well as enhanced white matter connections in various parts of her brain.
Among the most interesting of the findings (at least to me) were weak and compromised connections in the left frontal gyrus, which includes Broca's area for speech. She was also found to have impaired connections in the right fusiform gyrus which is the area for face recognition. This has relevance as one of the symptoms of autism (which occurred in both Grandin and myself) is a speech delay or language impairment prior to age 36 months. Also, many autistics, myself included, have problems recognizing others' faces.
I remember reading someplace else (I'm not sure if it was Thinking in Pictures or an article she wrote) that many years ago, Grandin had an MRI scan showing abnormalities of certain parts of the cerebellar vermis that I had when I underwent a scan by Eric Courchesne's research group many years ago. These were not mentioned in this study.
The knowledgeable neuroscience blogger, The Neurocritic, has given his take on the study . He writes about another talented autistic savant, a 63-year-old man with extraordinary musical abilities, perfect pitch, as well as in several languages and art. Similarly to Grandin, he also had an enlarged amygdala on both sides of his brain. Unlike Grandin, he was not terribly successful educationally and professionally and was only able to obtain employment as a dishwasher. So, one has to wonder how the similarities in brain findings of the opposite sex, though like in age (Grandin was also 63 at the time of her scans) relate to someone who had different gifts than Grandin but was not able to utilize his gifts in order to garner gainful employment.
Interestingly, one study showed a positive correlation of increased amygdala size and greater sized social networkings in neurotypical college students. Neurocritic also mentions another study in which researchers suggested there was a correlation between amygdala size and number of Facebook friends college students had.
The increase in amygdala size among autistics is nothing new, as the Neurocritic cites two studies in the above-linked blog post where researchers found this in other persons with autism (most likely Joe Blow regular auties without Grandin's and the dishwasher's savant skills).
Brain studies have shown enlarged amygdala's in persons with anxiety disorders and even right wing political beliefs. So what to make of Grandin's enlarged area of this brain nucleus?
Impairments in Broca's area have also been found in mirror neuron studies of autism as well as Courchesne's now year-old study showing the increased number of neurons in this area.
Fewer and smaller neurons in regular non-savant autistics in the fusiform gyrus in autistics were found in yet another study.
Also, the fact that three controls may not be enough to tell us anything may be germane.
Anything new here elucidating on the autistic brain or Grandin's so-called savant skills? I don't think so.
One of the findings was an increased brain volume in comparisons to controls. However, this is probably nothing new as Courchesne's group and I think a variety of other researchers has found enlarged brains in those with autism.
Grandin's lateral ventricles, which hold the brain's cerebrospinal fluid, are skewed, the left one being much larger than the right.
Her amygdala, the area of the brain responsible for anger and rage responses and suppressing sexual desire, is enlarged in both hemispheres. (I wonder if this might explain her stated desire for celibacy :))
The researchers also found a higher volume of white matter on the left side of her brain as well as enhanced white matter connections in various parts of her brain.
Among the most interesting of the findings (at least to me) were weak and compromised connections in the left frontal gyrus, which includes Broca's area for speech. She was also found to have impaired connections in the right fusiform gyrus which is the area for face recognition. This has relevance as one of the symptoms of autism (which occurred in both Grandin and myself) is a speech delay or language impairment prior to age 36 months. Also, many autistics, myself included, have problems recognizing others' faces.
I remember reading someplace else (I'm not sure if it was Thinking in Pictures or an article she wrote) that many years ago, Grandin had an MRI scan showing abnormalities of certain parts of the cerebellar vermis that I had when I underwent a scan by Eric Courchesne's research group many years ago. These were not mentioned in this study.
The knowledgeable neuroscience blogger, The Neurocritic, has given his take on the study . He writes about another talented autistic savant, a 63-year-old man with extraordinary musical abilities, perfect pitch, as well as in several languages and art. Similarly to Grandin, he also had an enlarged amygdala on both sides of his brain. Unlike Grandin, he was not terribly successful educationally and professionally and was only able to obtain employment as a dishwasher. So, one has to wonder how the similarities in brain findings of the opposite sex, though like in age (Grandin was also 63 at the time of her scans) relate to someone who had different gifts than Grandin but was not able to utilize his gifts in order to garner gainful employment.
Interestingly, one study showed a positive correlation of increased amygdala size and greater sized social networkings in neurotypical college students. Neurocritic also mentions another study in which researchers suggested there was a correlation between amygdala size and number of Facebook friends college students had.
The increase in amygdala size among autistics is nothing new, as the Neurocritic cites two studies in the above-linked blog post where researchers found this in other persons with autism (most likely Joe Blow regular auties without Grandin's and the dishwasher's savant skills).
Brain studies have shown enlarged amygdala's in persons with anxiety disorders and even right wing political beliefs. So what to make of Grandin's enlarged area of this brain nucleus?
Impairments in Broca's area have also been found in mirror neuron studies of autism as well as Courchesne's now year-old study showing the increased number of neurons in this area.
Fewer and smaller neurons in regular non-savant autistics in the fusiform gyrus in autistics were found in yet another study.
Also, the fact that three controls may not be enough to tell us anything may be germane.
Anything new here elucidating on the autistic brain or Grandin's so-called savant skills? I don't think so.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
John Robison's interesting autism employment proposals
As regular readers of this blog know, I've been unemployed for about five and a half years. I had to leave the workplace because my autistic disability made it so difficult.
Therefore, I was intrigued to read some interesting ideas of John Robison's on how to solve or at least mitigate this problem.
Robinson proposes giving employers tax credits for hiring persons with disabilities. I'm not sure if this is just ASD's or all disabilities. He calls this a work disability credit. It entails giving employers between a 30 to 60% tax credit for hiring a disabled person depending on how extensively the person is disabled. Interestingly, he ties this in with Social Security Disability stating that the person unable to work and on SSDI could be evaluated for this program and be eligible for the work disability credit instead.
I see a number of problems with this. Robison, unlike myself, has never had to apply for disability. I doubt very much he has any understanding of what the process entails. What would be the eligibility criteria for evaluating people for this program? Would it be identical to SSDI evaluations? If the answer is yes, then merely having a legitimate diagnosis of autism or Asperger's wouldn't qualify people for these tax credits. They would have to prove they were incapable of performing any type of "substantial and gainful" employment, meaning a job that pays like about $1000 a month or more.
Proving one can't perform substantial and gainful employment is no easy task. At the time I applied for disability I had worked with the limitations albeit with great difficulties, so I didn't have a terribly good case and after a four and a half year fight, I was unable to collect. I was also told that if I couldn't be a medical transcriptionist, that I could perform work as a janitor or a washing machine loader in a dry cleaners by the person who testified against me for the government at my administrative law hearing. I know this is not the case, but I have no way of proving it in an administrative hearing or any other type of court of law.
In the case of other persons, the government does turn down probably close to 70% of people who apply for Disability. If you want to continue the fight, you have to retain a lawyer who, if they successfully get you the Disability money, keeps 25% of what you would have gotten retroactively.
My lawyer would not take my case to federal district court as he felt I had little chance of winning. Another law firm also declined to take my case and I gave up. Not long after that, I found out my lawyer had another autistic client whose case he lost in district court. One friend on the spectrum applied for it when he had never worked and was denied. Another person with autism I know was able to get it but it took her and her mother seven years of litigation. They had to give their attorney 25% retroactively. So, there is no guarantee the person would be able to get the credit, in fact the odds would be stacked against them. Also, how would the prospective employer feel about sharing the employment credit with an attorney?
So basically what Robison is proposing is another system in which tax dollars are used for litigation and people have to be frustrated in having to duke it out in the courts with the government whether or not they'd be eligible for this tax credit. Also, since Robison's plan does not involve a flat percentage but rather a sliding scale, a fight could take place for someone rated at 30% who feels the only way they can get a job is to be rated at 60%. So with all the years that SSDI litigation goes on would be exacerbated with Robison's plan.
Also, would the employer want this tax credit if the autistic person's behavior were too appalling (at least from their point of view) to employ them?
What does this do about the problem that most persons on the spectrum would not have the ability to receive the training to do skilled work? How would they be more marketable if the only jobs they could get were menial ones?
Robison claims this would prevent employers from sending the jobs overseas to let's say India where labor costs are substantially cheaper But he presents no cost-benefit analysis to show this might be the case.
Another issue I have with Robison's plan is he claims that this would help the self-esteem of those on the spectrum (or possibly other disabilities). I don't believe this would be the case. I don't understand what the difference is between someone having to collect disability and work when they have to take a way back door entrance. Also, the stigma and resentment among fellow non-handicaped employees that those on the spectrum would receive because they are being subsidized. I can certainly speak for myself if no one else on the spectrum. This plan, if this were the only way I could be employed, would certainly not raise my self-esteem.
This is also assuming Robison's proposal could get through congress. This is iffy as the deficit is already incredibly large due to all the wars and other things the federal goverment spends money on.
In summary, Robison's plan would jam the courts, raise taxes and/or increase the deficit, not address the issues of autistics lack of social and employment skills, and probably do nothing to raise at least a number of autistic person's self-esteem. Is this plan workable or feasible? I don't believe so.
Again, I want to emphasize there is no simple, quick fix solution to the employment problems of autistics without a cure or some sort of treatment which currently does not exist.
Robinson proposes giving employers tax credits for hiring persons with disabilities. I'm not sure if this is just ASD's or all disabilities. He calls this a work disability credit. It entails giving employers between a 30 to 60% tax credit for hiring a disabled person depending on how extensively the person is disabled. Interestingly, he ties this in with Social Security Disability stating that the person unable to work and on SSDI could be evaluated for this program and be eligible for the work disability credit instead.
I see a number of problems with this. Robison, unlike myself, has never had to apply for disability. I doubt very much he has any understanding of what the process entails. What would be the eligibility criteria for evaluating people for this program? Would it be identical to SSDI evaluations? If the answer is yes, then merely having a legitimate diagnosis of autism or Asperger's wouldn't qualify people for these tax credits. They would have to prove they were incapable of performing any type of "substantial and gainful" employment, meaning a job that pays like about $1000 a month or more.
Proving one can't perform substantial and gainful employment is no easy task. At the time I applied for disability I had worked with the limitations albeit with great difficulties, so I didn't have a terribly good case and after a four and a half year fight, I was unable to collect. I was also told that if I couldn't be a medical transcriptionist, that I could perform work as a janitor or a washing machine loader in a dry cleaners by the person who testified against me for the government at my administrative law hearing. I know this is not the case, but I have no way of proving it in an administrative hearing or any other type of court of law.
In the case of other persons, the government does turn down probably close to 70% of people who apply for Disability. If you want to continue the fight, you have to retain a lawyer who, if they successfully get you the Disability money, keeps 25% of what you would have gotten retroactively.
My lawyer would not take my case to federal district court as he felt I had little chance of winning. Another law firm also declined to take my case and I gave up. Not long after that, I found out my lawyer had another autistic client whose case he lost in district court. One friend on the spectrum applied for it when he had never worked and was denied. Another person with autism I know was able to get it but it took her and her mother seven years of litigation. They had to give their attorney 25% retroactively. So, there is no guarantee the person would be able to get the credit, in fact the odds would be stacked against them. Also, how would the prospective employer feel about sharing the employment credit with an attorney?
So basically what Robison is proposing is another system in which tax dollars are used for litigation and people have to be frustrated in having to duke it out in the courts with the government whether or not they'd be eligible for this tax credit. Also, since Robison's plan does not involve a flat percentage but rather a sliding scale, a fight could take place for someone rated at 30% who feels the only way they can get a job is to be rated at 60%. So with all the years that SSDI litigation goes on would be exacerbated with Robison's plan.
Also, would the employer want this tax credit if the autistic person's behavior were too appalling (at least from their point of view) to employ them?
What does this do about the problem that most persons on the spectrum would not have the ability to receive the training to do skilled work? How would they be more marketable if the only jobs they could get were menial ones?
Robison claims this would prevent employers from sending the jobs overseas to let's say India where labor costs are substantially cheaper But he presents no cost-benefit analysis to show this might be the case.
Another issue I have with Robison's plan is he claims that this would help the self-esteem of those on the spectrum (or possibly other disabilities). I don't believe this would be the case. I don't understand what the difference is between someone having to collect disability and work when they have to take a way back door entrance. Also, the stigma and resentment among fellow non-handicaped employees that those on the spectrum would receive because they are being subsidized. I can certainly speak for myself if no one else on the spectrum. This plan, if this were the only way I could be employed, would certainly not raise my self-esteem.
This is also assuming Robison's proposal could get through congress. This is iffy as the deficit is already incredibly large due to all the wars and other things the federal goverment spends money on.
In summary, Robison's plan would jam the courts, raise taxes and/or increase the deficit, not address the issues of autistics lack of social and employment skills, and probably do nothing to raise at least a number of autistic person's self-esteem. Is this plan workable or feasible? I don't believe so.
Again, I want to emphasize there is no simple, quick fix solution to the employment problems of autistics without a cure or some sort of treatment which currently does not exist.
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Melanie Yergeau violates my human rights as well as others with autism
I was interested to read a post on Harold Doherty's blog about an article in the Michigan Daily written about neurodiversity activist and ASAN member Melanie Yergeau.
The article in question starts off with the very offensive title Autism as an identity, not a disease.
It starts off with the usual neurodiverse spiel that all the stuff about autism being a bad thing is wrong. Ms. Yergeau is a college English professor. Also mentioned is the fact Ms. Yergeau is married. Though the article alleges that she was in special education programs during her childhood, for some reason, she wasn't diagnosed with autism until age 22. What her diagnosis was as a child I'm not sure.
In the article, the autistic English professor alleges that during the time she was in college, she was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital. The article neglects to give even an alleged reason for professor Yergeau's commitment. I'm pretty sure that in most jurisdictions involuntary commitment can only be done without due process for a period of a few days. Legally, it can only be done if there is medical evidence that the individual in question poses a danger to themselves or others. I'm curious to what the reason was for her incarceration. A link is given to a blog post she wrote on this subject. Interestingly, it appears to have been deleted for some reason. Elyse Bruce, author of the Midnight in Chicago blog, recently wrote a post on the subject of Melanie's psych hold in which she too seems to question the credibility of Yergeau's statements. Apparently a number of MY's allies seemed to have been alleging the only reason for her hold was autism and not her being a danger to herself or others. As Ms. Bruce correctly points out, mental health professionals who violate this law and place holds on people for trivial reasons can be subject to losing their licenses or accreditation or opening themselves up to lawsuits. So, I have to wonder about the validity of anything Ms. Yergeau says. I guess the reason for her alleged hold will remain a mystery for the time being.
In addition to stating that autism is not an illness but an alternative way of being, she makes the following statement culled from the article:
To the members of ASAN, atypical neurological difference ought to be embraced and celebrated. Society needs to change, rather than the individuals, the members say. Having autism is a difference, to be sure, but it’s not inferior to any other notion of mental development, no less valued than the color of one’s skin or one’s sex.
So, in other words, Ms. Yergeau thinks it's a good thing that I'm crippled and sick, that I can't work, can't get things done during the day and have to spend a good portion of my time twiddling (self-stimulation). She takes joy in my fine motor and handwriting impairment and my lack of social contacts and celibacy. She takes joy in my suffering as a bedwetter as a child, in my attendance of special ed schools and all of the suffering that's occurred in my life.
However, I have it good compared to most of those on the spectrum. Ms. Yergeau goes even further in celebrating and taking joy in the fact that possibly a third or more of all autistics may be almost completely nonverbal. The fact that severely autistic children bite themselves and bang their heads into walls. Not to mention the problems with elopements and accidental deaths that occur from drowning and other causes.
Despite this fact, Yergeau has taken upon herself to speak for all of us:
Autistic people don’t consider autism to be a disease. So why should the rest of the world?
So, all autistic people don't consider autism to be a disease? Ms. Yergeau, if you happen to read this, why didn't you consult me? As an autistic person, I certainly disagree. I very much consider autism to be a disease.
About the only good thing I can say about this article is it does not repeat the oft cited dictum that the definition of neurodiversity is the pursuit of human rights for those on the autistic spectrum and that those of us who wish a cure and oppose neurodiversity are trying to violate the autistic's human rights. I'm thankful the author gives a more honest approach and correctly states that neurodiversity is more about claiming autism is just a different way of being rather than a disease, illness or even disability as Ari Ne'eman once said.
However, what about my human rights? What about my right to have my own opinion and not having someone with the low credibility that Ms. Yergeau has put words in my mouth. What about my right to obtain a cure if one is available? What about my right to publicly express my opinion and not have these hate mongers harass me or write libelous things about me? What about my right not to have persons, like Yergenau, who are so mildly affected they can get married and be college professors trivialize my disability as well as others even more severely afflicted than I am?
Ms. Yergeau, you're violating my human rights as well as at least some other persons on the autism spectrum and I don't like it.
The article in question starts off with the very offensive title Autism as an identity, not a disease.
It starts off with the usual neurodiverse spiel that all the stuff about autism being a bad thing is wrong. Ms. Yergeau is a college English professor. Also mentioned is the fact Ms. Yergeau is married. Though the article alleges that she was in special education programs during her childhood, for some reason, she wasn't diagnosed with autism until age 22. What her diagnosis was as a child I'm not sure.
In the article, the autistic English professor alleges that during the time she was in college, she was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital. The article neglects to give even an alleged reason for professor Yergeau's commitment. I'm pretty sure that in most jurisdictions involuntary commitment can only be done without due process for a period of a few days. Legally, it can only be done if there is medical evidence that the individual in question poses a danger to themselves or others. I'm curious to what the reason was for her incarceration. A link is given to a blog post she wrote on this subject. Interestingly, it appears to have been deleted for some reason. Elyse Bruce, author of the Midnight in Chicago blog, recently wrote a post on the subject of Melanie's psych hold in which she too seems to question the credibility of Yergeau's statements. Apparently a number of MY's allies seemed to have been alleging the only reason for her hold was autism and not her being a danger to herself or others. As Ms. Bruce correctly points out, mental health professionals who violate this law and place holds on people for trivial reasons can be subject to losing their licenses or accreditation or opening themselves up to lawsuits. So, I have to wonder about the validity of anything Ms. Yergeau says. I guess the reason for her alleged hold will remain a mystery for the time being.
In addition to stating that autism is not an illness but an alternative way of being, she makes the following statement culled from the article:
To the members of ASAN, atypical neurological difference ought to be embraced and celebrated. Society needs to change, rather than the individuals, the members say. Having autism is a difference, to be sure, but it’s not inferior to any other notion of mental development, no less valued than the color of one’s skin or one’s sex.
So, in other words, Ms. Yergeau thinks it's a good thing that I'm crippled and sick, that I can't work, can't get things done during the day and have to spend a good portion of my time twiddling (self-stimulation). She takes joy in my fine motor and handwriting impairment and my lack of social contacts and celibacy. She takes joy in my suffering as a bedwetter as a child, in my attendance of special ed schools and all of the suffering that's occurred in my life.
However, I have it good compared to most of those on the spectrum. Ms. Yergeau goes even further in celebrating and taking joy in the fact that possibly a third or more of all autistics may be almost completely nonverbal. The fact that severely autistic children bite themselves and bang their heads into walls. Not to mention the problems with elopements and accidental deaths that occur from drowning and other causes.
Despite this fact, Yergeau has taken upon herself to speak for all of us:
Autistic people don’t consider autism to be a disease. So why should the rest of the world?
So, all autistic people don't consider autism to be a disease? Ms. Yergeau, if you happen to read this, why didn't you consult me? As an autistic person, I certainly disagree. I very much consider autism to be a disease.
About the only good thing I can say about this article is it does not repeat the oft cited dictum that the definition of neurodiversity is the pursuit of human rights for those on the autistic spectrum and that those of us who wish a cure and oppose neurodiversity are trying to violate the autistic's human rights. I'm thankful the author gives a more honest approach and correctly states that neurodiversity is more about claiming autism is just a different way of being rather than a disease, illness or even disability as Ari Ne'eman once said.
However, what about my human rights? What about my right to have my own opinion and not having someone with the low credibility that Ms. Yergeau has put words in my mouth. What about my right to obtain a cure if one is available? What about my right to publicly express my opinion and not have these hate mongers harass me or write libelous things about me? What about my right not to have persons, like Yergenau, who are so mildly affected they can get married and be college professors trivialize my disability as well as others even more severely afflicted than I am?
Ms. Yergeau, you're violating my human rights as well as at least some other persons on the autism spectrum and I don't like it.
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
autism reversal? Interesting science from Switzerland
I was interested to recently read about research that the media is implying could lead the way to finding drugs that can reverse or maybe cure autism.The above-linked article states that genetic mutations for certain proteins called neuroligins can cause autism. These are proteins that are necessary for synaptic transmission between neurons, or, to put it more simply, communication between brain cells. If this communication is disrupted, various problems could result. These might be described as autism.
The researchers inserted so-called "knock in" mutated genes in mice that lead to various motor impairments and lack of social behavior which could be considered an animal model for autism. They also used "knock out" mice (mice who have had the gene for neuroligin-3 knocked out) as well. The brains had abnormal synaptic connections and an excessive number of glutamate (a neurotransmitter-substance that communicates between brain cells) receptor
What was most interesting is that when the researchers inserted neuroligin proteins in the brain, they were able to reverse this process and the brains of the mice normalized and their autistic symptoms disappeared. Roche pharmaceuticals, who apparently hopes to develop a drug to conquer autism, collaborated with these researchers in Switzerland.
Intrigued by this research, I emailed Peter Scheiffele, one of the authors of this study, asking him to send me a .pdf file. Dr. Scheiffele kindly sent me a copy of his study.
My lack of training as a scientist limited my understanding of the paper, but I believe I got the gist of it. Though it might hold promise for some persons with autism at some point, it seems to me the media may be hyping this study prematurely.
Various genes have been implicated in autism. Most cases of autism are probably polygenetic, i.e. involving interactions of several genes rather than just one. Also, environmental factors may contribute as well, interacting with the genes. The neuroligin mutation is just a single genetic mutation existing on the X chromosome and not on any of the other chromosomes. Genes on autosomes (the non sex chromosomes) have been found to be implicated in autism, so the neuroligin mutations are probably just a small percentage of possible casual factors for autism. Also, the authors only studied the neuroligin-3 protein (NL3). neuroligin-4 (NL4) has also been implicated in autism. There may be a number of X chromosome linked( including Fragile X) etiologies for autism. Females have two X chromosomes and males have one (their second sex chromosome is the Y chromosome) so this may be one of the reasons there's a 4:1 ratio of male autistics to females. If all autisms were caused by an X-linked mutation, it's likely the ratio of males to females would be much higher or autistic females would be nonexistent. Hemophilia and pattern baldness are examples of x-linked genetic conditions that are probably nearly non-existent in females. So, it is unlikely this research could be applied to all forms of autism.
The authors stated that in their mice models synaptic transmission was altered in in somatosensory cortex and hippocampus. They went on to say that the subcellular localization in living creatures of the NL3 protein was unknown.
For reasons not entirely clear to me, they only focused on the cerebellum and not on any other areas of the brain. Their rationale was that this was because one study had shown cerebellar activation was altered in autistic individuals and cerebellar lesions in animal models resulted in changes reminiscent of autism. This is in spite of the fact that other areas of the brain, i.e. the frontal lobes and limbic system (including the amygdala) have also been implicated in autism.
Whether or not these mice who normally are incapable of speaking and modeling language, fine motor and other possible symptoms of autism are a valid animal model is questionable to me.
In addition to finding glutamatergic synapses altered, they also found GABAergic synapses were altered. GABA (along with norepinephrine) is one of the neurotransmitters that are used in cerebellar purkinje cells, which have been implicated in some autopsies of postmortem autistic brains (granular cells not being found to be as affected if I'm remembering correctly). Interestingly, GABA is the neurotransmitter implicated in the lack of inhibition that Dr. Manuel Casanova has found in his work showing abnormal minicolumns in the postmortem brains of some autistic adults.
They also found increased synaptic connections in the wiring of the cerebellar network.
The rats were tested in a climbing ladder task and the mice with the NLG knock out mice were impaired.
As mentioned before, the next phase of the experiment was to reinsert the neuroligin proteins into the mice brains. These mice's brains were apparently restored to their normal synaptic functioning levels and the excess synapses were pruned. Whether this can ever be used as a legitimate autism treatment or prevention I don't know.
What was noteworthy was that the abnormal synaptic pathophysiology of the NLG affected mice paralleled what has been found in fragile x mice and a mutation called Tsc2 which I'd never heard of.
At the end of the article the authors implied this research showed that the structural differences in the brains of persons with autism could be reversed after the brain has completely developed.
I tried my best to give a take on this study with my limited education and knowledge, I apologize in advance for whatever factual errors or other problems there might be in this post; however, I do have an intense interest in this research, though perhaps a lack of ability to fully grasp it.
I can't help hoping that research like this might someday be used to treat, prevent and even perhaps cure autism at some point in time, but I can't help thinking the ballyhoo of this study is just more media hype.
Addendum: I've now downloaded the FTP program I'd used in the past on Windows XP on Windows 7 and figured out how to use it. I uploaded the .pdf of the paper to my stories website and tried to link to it on this post. However, it did not seem to load for some reason, not sure why. I'll see if I can provide a link to the paper at some point.
The researchers inserted so-called "knock in" mutated genes in mice that lead to various motor impairments and lack of social behavior which could be considered an animal model for autism. They also used "knock out" mice (mice who have had the gene for neuroligin-3 knocked out) as well. The brains had abnormal synaptic connections and an excessive number of glutamate (a neurotransmitter-substance that communicates between brain cells) receptor
What was most interesting is that when the researchers inserted neuroligin proteins in the brain, they were able to reverse this process and the brains of the mice normalized and their autistic symptoms disappeared. Roche pharmaceuticals, who apparently hopes to develop a drug to conquer autism, collaborated with these researchers in Switzerland.
Intrigued by this research, I emailed Peter Scheiffele, one of the authors of this study, asking him to send me a .pdf file. Dr. Scheiffele kindly sent me a copy of his study.
My lack of training as a scientist limited my understanding of the paper, but I believe I got the gist of it. Though it might hold promise for some persons with autism at some point, it seems to me the media may be hyping this study prematurely.
Various genes have been implicated in autism. Most cases of autism are probably polygenetic, i.e. involving interactions of several genes rather than just one. Also, environmental factors may contribute as well, interacting with the genes. The neuroligin mutation is just a single genetic mutation existing on the X chromosome and not on any of the other chromosomes. Genes on autosomes (the non sex chromosomes) have been found to be implicated in autism, so the neuroligin mutations are probably just a small percentage of possible casual factors for autism. Also, the authors only studied the neuroligin-3 protein (NL3). neuroligin-4 (NL4) has also been implicated in autism. There may be a number of X chromosome linked( including Fragile X) etiologies for autism. Females have two X chromosomes and males have one (their second sex chromosome is the Y chromosome) so this may be one of the reasons there's a 4:1 ratio of male autistics to females. If all autisms were caused by an X-linked mutation, it's likely the ratio of males to females would be much higher or autistic females would be nonexistent. Hemophilia and pattern baldness are examples of x-linked genetic conditions that are probably nearly non-existent in females. So, it is unlikely this research could be applied to all forms of autism.
The authors stated that in their mice models synaptic transmission was altered in in somatosensory cortex and hippocampus. They went on to say that the subcellular localization in living creatures of the NL3 protein was unknown.
For reasons not entirely clear to me, they only focused on the cerebellum and not on any other areas of the brain. Their rationale was that this was because one study had shown cerebellar activation was altered in autistic individuals and cerebellar lesions in animal models resulted in changes reminiscent of autism. This is in spite of the fact that other areas of the brain, i.e. the frontal lobes and limbic system (including the amygdala) have also been implicated in autism.
Whether or not these mice who normally are incapable of speaking and modeling language, fine motor and other possible symptoms of autism are a valid animal model is questionable to me.
In addition to finding glutamatergic synapses altered, they also found GABAergic synapses were altered. GABA (along with norepinephrine) is one of the neurotransmitters that are used in cerebellar purkinje cells, which have been implicated in some autopsies of postmortem autistic brains (granular cells not being found to be as affected if I'm remembering correctly). Interestingly, GABA is the neurotransmitter implicated in the lack of inhibition that Dr. Manuel Casanova has found in his work showing abnormal minicolumns in the postmortem brains of some autistic adults.
They also found increased synaptic connections in the wiring of the cerebellar network.
The rats were tested in a climbing ladder task and the mice with the NLG knock out mice were impaired.
As mentioned before, the next phase of the experiment was to reinsert the neuroligin proteins into the mice brains. These mice's brains were apparently restored to their normal synaptic functioning levels and the excess synapses were pruned. Whether this can ever be used as a legitimate autism treatment or prevention I don't know.
What was noteworthy was that the abnormal synaptic pathophysiology of the NLG affected mice paralleled what has been found in fragile x mice and a mutation called Tsc2 which I'd never heard of.
At the end of the article the authors implied this research showed that the structural differences in the brains of persons with autism could be reversed after the brain has completely developed.
I tried my best to give a take on this study with my limited education and knowledge, I apologize in advance for whatever factual errors or other problems there might be in this post; however, I do have an intense interest in this research, though perhaps a lack of ability to fully grasp it.
I can't help hoping that research like this might someday be used to treat, prevent and even perhaps cure autism at some point in time, but I can't help thinking the ballyhoo of this study is just more media hype.
Addendum: I've now downloaded the FTP program I'd used in the past on Windows XP on Windows 7 and figured out how to use it. I uploaded the .pdf of the paper to my stories website and tried to link to it on this post. However, it did not seem to load for some reason, not sure why. I'll see if I can provide a link to the paper at some point.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
