What effects would a "cure for autism" have?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't agree with Admiral Crunch. Perhaps I misunderstand, but if he's speaking of our general tendency toward seemingly unrelated illness, that is not a presentation of our social skills difficulties.

It depends on what the cure is. As there's no such thing, and as there never will be, you can essentially make up a definition.

So let's do that.

Definition 1: a way to (essentially magically) transform anyone on the spectrum into an NT without changing anything else, and without affecting what has already been learned.

Already-obtained knowledge related to special interests would not be immediately lost, but further learning would not occur as interest would be lost. A sudden interest in socializing, combined with inability to spend any length of time alone, would occur without immediate social skills gains to facilitate the new needs. This would result in depression. Perception of the world would change quite dramatically. Things that were painful would become fun (e.g., parties), while things that were fun (e.g., private study) or neutral (e.g., babies crying) would become painful. This would result in disorientation and confusion. The person would become more aware of their own appearance (probably off-putting) and reputation (probably negative). This would result in lowered self-esteem. Friends and acquaintances would be put off by sudden changes and loss of interest in areas of previously intense focus. This would result in loss of some friends, furthering the isolation and depression.

I wouldn't want this one. It would be really hard to adjust, and you might never manage.

Definition 2: Bringing all areas of disability up to the average for NTs without altering any areas of greater ability.

The person retains intense interest in special interests, without need for socialization. However, the person gains the ability to socialize at an average level whenever that desire should arise, and the person gains the ability to socialize for long periods of time. The person gains the ability to see themselves as others see them, lowering self-esteem slightly (but not so much as if the person now required social contact). Friends and family are proud. Motor issues improve. Tolerance for routine remains high, but tolerance for novelty is raised. (And you no longer get sick of a routine that you still feel compelled to continue with because it's a routine.) Executive function improves, improving efficiency. (But what about the times when I only learn things because I got sidetracked? This has a silver lining for me, although overall I wouldn't be sad to see large improvements.) The person's senses become normal-- well, no, that would mean losing the tolerance for certain "unpleasant" sensations. Okay, so the person is no longer upset by sounds or sights or smells or whatever that NTs aren't.

Sounds interesting. And I can see why many parents claim to want that for their children. Problem is, it's logically impossible. Like... how do you find the time to maintain social skills and friendships along with special interests? How can you lose the hypersensitivity (so it doesn't get on your nerves) without losing the hypersensitivity (so you can still hear things other people miss)? Same goes for hypo. Aside from the fact that this sounds not just like a free lunch, but like a free lunch served to you by fairies, it's inherently contradictory.

Definition 3: Gene therapy.

Does nothing for anyone who shows symptoms (these people already being developed to some degree). Does nothing for environmental causes. Is not logically impossible, but fails to work.

Definition 4: Essentially magic ability to switch voluntarily between NT and Aspie/Autie/Pervie.

Person is invited to a party and can switch on "NT Mode," only to switch back to default mode when alone (preventing loneliness) or when reading (causing increased comprehension of certain details).

No question, I would like this, except that I don't like its social implications.

Definition 5: What we're stuck with. Learning to live as well as you can, coping with weaknesses and using strengths.

You already know what this looks like. It's sometimes expensive to provide, but has two huge benefits over cures 1-4. First, it actually exists. Second, it's available to the general population with costs that aren't nearly as great. And it has a final advantage over basically every other therapy: it has the potential to result in a happy, functional human being.

I pick this one.

To give a more serious answer: I think some of us might be happier, but the world would be poorer for it.

I've been attacking ASD as a mathematical problem; that's just who I am. Plus, I'm not the same as other aspies (who is?) who have more problems with executive function. I primarily need help in the social area, so my plan for a "cure" is biased on what I personally need.


Science is clear: all diseases are defined specifically as deviation from the norm. If you stop being different, the disease is cured. This is not that attractive of an idea philosophically -- I don't like being called abnormal -- but it's really the only definition that truly can exist.

Consider deafness: most children with hearing problems born today are given cochlear implants. These are micro-computers that substitute as replacements for malfunctioning inner-ear valves. They're not perfect (and they certainly don't give super-power hearing), but they do bring the child's hearing ability closer to what is considered "good enough" by society. Thus, deafness is cured.

So... my question is: why don't we have a cochlear implant for autism?


Magical transformations like this won't happen until we learn to rewire the human brain. I give that 50 years, give or take.


You're right about this being contradictory. And even then, it'd really take the same technology as above.


As you wrote, somatic cellular genetic therapy isn't realistic now or anytime soon, so this shouldn't be considered a possibility. (A more likely system put in place would be genetic screening, allowing for selective abortion against autistic embryos, as is done in 90% of the cases of TriG/Down's syndrome today. I really don't like this possibility!)


THIS is what I'm looking for!


Hey, people use each other all the time. Quid pro quo: that's the basis for transactional analysis. If we could gain this power via computational means, why is it any different than what NTs have via natural brain power? How is a mathematical genius any less of a genius because math illiterate people can use a calculator? And why should we be punished just because we're not social geniuses?

This is the way to the real cure, in my humble opinion. And it's what I am dedicating my life to.


I would agree that this should be the default method of treatment. But we've tried it; the efficacy is not good enough.

Let's be honest: like deaf people, we are never going to be accepted by wider society as we are. But we're not aliens! prick us do we not bleed? Tickle us do we not laugh?
All we really need is a boost, a fighting chance to compete with our peers. Cochlear implants give that to deaf people. We need our own cochlear implant! Should that become realistically available, reviewing the above options should become much easier.

If you're going to cure something, cure meat.

Alcohol can be pretty wonderful, so long as it is taken in optimal doses. As soon as you take too much alcohol everything starts going wrong.

I don't promote regularly taking any drug (unless it's a medication) but there are certain 'experiences' that people can have which better prepare them for life.

As far as I'm concerned I'm diagnosed because there's a problem and I personally would rather not be socially inept.

You said that on my post too. You're too funny

Doesn't the Deaf Community have even more rabid anti-curebie sentiments than we do?

The norm for what? Do six-foot-tall, D-cup, hourglass-shaped women with symmetrical, overly-feminine features have a disease? It's stupid to want a cure for a difference; the difference has to be a problem.

The end of Asperger's Syndrome and a sharp decline in scientific and technological originality.

ruveyn

ditto

Wait, there's a problem with meat? Or am I missing some obvious joke?

You're missing an obvious joke. "Curing" is a type of culinary thingymabob that they do to meat.

Speaking of missing obvious jokes...I have stared at your signature the entire time since I signed up here, not getting it, and only JUST stopped thinking "nonverbal what???" and figured out what was so funny!

I'm sorry! That's so annoying when that happens! If you'd asked me, I would've been happy to explain. dying said that in response to a thread about an uninformed shrink saying (among other things) that we could never understand or use any nonverbal cues.

(I have the same issue with the grammar, personally, but it was still epic enough to sig-quote.)

I wonder if one would lose the advantages there can be to it, eg. more than average memory, perfect pitch, the ability to focus and get very smart on a topic, etc.?
Also, would it change people's attitude towards you if they are used to look upon you in a special (biased) way? Eg. would people stop bullying you, or would they continue out of mere habit?

No reason to be sorry--my being dense is not your problem!

The poor medical knowledge of some of the people in this thread is astounding.

And here I thought I knew nothing about neuroscience. Some of the people who've posted in this topic make even the mentally stunted man-child from Flowers for Algernon look like a genius by comparison.