new discovery of how autistic brains different

Post Reply New Topic

I managed to miss the negativity but that means nothing.

I know John Elder Robison is involved in research involving mapping autistic brains and doing magnetic things to affect brain function. There's an Autism Talks episode about it, and I think what's described in that video about autistic thinking correlates to what this article says about autistic brain structure.

Some believe there are structural differences and the problem is acceptance in society, rather than structural problems in the brain that can result in disability. I have read where people point to the fact that brain scans don't show that anything is structurally wrong and use it to back up the opinion that Autism is just a different way of thinking and not a disabling condition caused by structural problems in the brain.

Up until this point there were hypotheses as to what those stuctural issues were. This study shows a difference in brain structure but it also shows a problem in brain structure that can affect speech. It would be interesting to see if there was a correlation in the severity of problems, in the 75% as opposed to the 25%. I'm not sure if they have that kind of data, though, for correlation.

The overwhelming majority of people believe that Autistic people think in a different way and it is caused by a neurological problem in the brain; without the evidence, I think it has been clear to most people, from their individual perceptions of the condition.

Conversely, though, since the study showed 25%, don't have the measured structural difference in the brain, there could be a percentage of people diagnosed with Autism, with no significant structural difference in the brain than can be measured.

This finding may be important, in that some of those people that are diagnosed with Autism, that believe there is no problem with their brain, may be correct in assuming that.

It is obvious with developmental delays that there are problems with the brain, when excluding environmental factors. Do people that don't have developmental delays have structural differences in their brain that can be measured? I would be interested in seeing a study like that. That in itself could be at the core of differences of opinion on how people view their experience of Autism.

The difference in having no problem with speech and having problems with speech makes a world of difference in life, and the way a person views it. I don't see how a person with no problem with speech could possibly understand the difference it makes.

Some take offense at the term "Autism Speaks", because they can speak for themselves better than NT's. When I couldn't organize my speech into coherent communication as a young person, it was extremely difficult for me to understand why people didn't understand me.

For me when I heard the term "Autism Speaks", I immediately thought, yea that's what I've been struggling with my whole life, and noone else could understand why I was so quiet; I hid the fact that I had to write down the simplest of things to be able to coherently communicate anything more than factoids and a couple of sentences.

The study helps me to understand why I may have had the problem I had. But, I'm not sure it applies to everyone with Autism. The evidence seems to suggest this.

I just want to clarify:

Are you suggesting the neurological difference is due to speech difficulties?

And if so, what kind of difficulties?

No, just that the structural difference noted in this study may be a cause of speech difficulties in Autism; the study also relates a connection to emotion. Not all people with Autism have developmental delays. And in the case of Aspergers, one is not put in that category if they have a developmental delay.

There is no direct evidence from the study that those that have the issue with RNA have speech delays, just a correlation with speech at this point. Again, I think it would be interesting to study that.

I don't think we have the technology to measure the source of all neurological difference or problems, and am not sure we ever will. If someone diagnosed with Autism has the opinion that there is nothing structurally wrong with their brain, at this point, there still is no test for people alive, to indicate what the difference or problem might be.

But, if they had a developmental delay, there was obviously a structural issue with the brain at some point, but still no direct evidence that it is a result of the issues found in this study.

The DSMV is moving away from a requirement for a developmental delay and is instead focusing on communication/social impairments.

As to why some have developmental delays and some don't makes the issue of Autism a complicated one, along with all the other factors. But, it does make a huge difference in how some are able to function in the world.

I'm not sure what "developmental delay" is supposed to mean in the AS criteria but as far as I can tell, social skills are typically developmentally delayed in people on the autistic spectrum with any diagnosis, and is generally considered the core deficit.

I know there are other issues, such as delays in being able to learn and use self-help skills, and this is explicitly pointed out as something that most people diagnosed with AS experience despite the criteria saying that it's supposed to exclude things like this. Executive function difficulties that are common with autistic people are also a developmental delay.

I can't imagine what someone who fits the criteria for AS but actually really has no developmental delays would be like.

I think I am struggling with this issue because of my own preconceived notions.

The brain and its countless neural pathways are largely determined, in structure by genetic factors as yet unknown but also, partly due to the experiences of early childhood. It has been proven in childhood abuse cases of extreme neglect that some neural pathways never develop or develop very poorly in severly neglacted infants and that they can have essentially missed their chance at building them past a certain age. We already know that there are many factors that determine the map of each individual mind.

Knowing that, why does it seem to be a great mystery that the autistic brain is wired differently? To my mind it is a logical conclusion. A certain percentage of the population is going to deviate from the norm in EVERYTHING. With the millions perhaps billions of connections in our brains it is a safe assumption that no two brains are exactly alike. We can watch electrical activity in an active brain to see what is going on in which region and where it is not. We can measure levels of neurotransmitters and determine which individuals have too much, too little or just the right amount. Why is money and research going into confirming that which can already be safely assumed from data already present?

Knowledge is usually a good thing but, in the case of autism, is learning where each individual wire may or may not have gone wrong going to assist the condition in any way? Are we any closer to changing the structure of the brain in order to cure developmental conditions? I think all this type of research is very interesting but I think more good would be done in figuring out how to correct the things we already can measure and identify with some surity. There are common deficits in vitamin levels and neurotransmitters - that seems like a more productive line of study. trying to activate less active regions of the brain seems like a productive direction as well.

That's something I don't know a lot about, do you have any materials I can read on that? Cheers.

Aspergers isn't normally screened in early childhood, because normal milestones are met in early development. However this doesn't mean there may be some level of social impairment, just not effective criteria to screen it at this point. In developmental delay I am referring to major milestones missed like not be able to put words together until age 4.

The new criteria in the DSMV talks about impairments rather than developmental delay, and for those with Aspergers the syndrome often is not diagnosed until after early childhood when the social deficits become more apparent. The term impairments in the new criteria cover the impairment seen in social deficits as well as the impairment that those have in not meeting major developmental milestones. This way people with a current diagnosis of Aspergers fit in to the new criteria.

The current criteria for Aspergers in the DSMIV:

D. There is no clinically significant general delay in language (e.g., single words used by age 2 years, communicative phrases used by age 3 years).

E. There is no clinically significant delay in cognitive development or in the development of age-appropriate self-help skills, adaptive behavior (other than in social interaction), and curiosity about the environment in childhood.

I really need to learn to save this stuff if I'm gonna comment on it, aren't I?

I've just recently learned that people have 'Favorite' files thousands of links long... all neatly stored in a beautiful collapsable file system. Not to mention - they also save content to their own harddrives and/or external devices. I've always been of the mind that that was what search engines were for. (I may need to reevaluate my executive function... )

I read it and or watched it somewhere. I can dig some of it up again. Gimme some time.

Right, particular developmental milestones are met, so children are not diagnosed until other things become apparent. This does not mean a lack of developmental delays, but rather a lack of delays to particular milestones.

Also, criteria D. actually describes a possible mild speech delay, while criteria E. is pretty widely known to be untrue - Tony Attwood wrote in the Complete Guide:



For what it's worth, I definitely had delays with age-appropriate self-help skills and adaptive behavior. I can't remember clearly enough to say about curiosity about the environment. But the above paragraph pretty well matches what I was like growing up.

The DSM-IV also says about ADHD:



And yet it's now known that a significant number of autistic people have ADHD as a comorbid.

Some of the criteria are wrong.

Last edited by Verdandi on 28 May 2011, 8:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

My feeling is there is a spectrum of neurodiversity among the whole population, and much of it may not be influenced by anything structurally abnormal in the brain. However it doesn't mean that the brains work very differently depending on the environment they were exposed to.

The topic study, though goes beyond neural pathways into an element that is not considered normal and can be measured through the scientific method. In understanding what is abnormal in the function of the brain, it is possible that some types of new intervention may be developed as a result of the study. This has been the case with other neurological problems like epilepsy. Brain scans were the key there to pin point some of the problems causing the epilepsy.

Well, I'm just curious about vitamin and neuotransmitter stuff. They don't seem like popular discussion topics here.

Yes, I agree and I think this is part of the reason they are changing the wording in the Autism spectrum criteria, in the DSMV.

Also they are changing the wording for ADHD in the proposed DSMV:

Right, and both are much needed changes. While neither new criteria are perfect, both are a vast improvement over the DSM-IV, I think

Thank you for clarifying your thoughts.

For Moog.. and anyone else interested...

In Utero suspect:

Vitamin D Deficiency

A dietary suspect but the important part in this first article is the recommendation of screening for all autistic kids. My daughter was dx'd here and they have a slew of clinical trials in the works.

B12 Deficiency - CHOP
B12 Malabsorption
Omega 3 and Vitamin E

My daughter also does not eat meat so I've gone looking. I've always been careful to try and diversify her diet within the framework of her 'preferred menu' but I supplement none the less. I've done so for myself for a long time because, while I do eat meat, I only do so sparcely. I've supplemented my B vitamins for decades. If vitamin deficiencies are present, they are easy to check for and correct. I think this should be in the front line of screening. Can they screen mothers for vitamin deficiency during pregnancy and correct it? Yes. Can they cure autism with vitamins - no. Can they improve functioning for some kids - maybe. Worth checking out.

Seratonin/Melatonin

Melatonin Deficiency
Oxytocin Deficiency

I can attest to the effeciency of melatonin supplementation on a kid with AD/ADHD. The information on oxytocin is just fascinating and, if it pans out, it could be a cheap easy fix that could improve social impairments. I fear that this is dead in the water because cheap easy fixes have few corporate sponsors. Companies can't make money on cheap easy fixes.

And just cool...

All you ever wanted to know about Neurotransmitters

Happy reading.

Thanks Draelynn

I've been supplementing with a melatonin herb recently, and it really did the business, but it suddenly didn't work tonight.