Why was autism formerly only a wealthy disease?

Page 2 of 2 [ 18 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

08 Jul 2013, 12:06 am

Could also support the hygiene hypothesis and a number of other things. I don't think diagnosis alone can explain this. If these idiot savants were visible and being studied, it's not like they were hidden. I'm curious if he was just studying residents of asylums.

We observe the same thing today in rural areas in rich countries -- and in differences between countries. I'm curious why South Korea has such a high autism rate (twice as high as the U.S.) while Cambodia has hardly any. One thing I do recall from my visits there (to take the LSAT this time :)) is one of the cleaning ladies in the hotel I where I was staying complained that "Chinese people are soooo dirty." And when I visited China, Chinese people seemed about like Americans. So maybe South Korea is excessively hygienic vs. the U.S. and other nations with lower autism rates while Cambodia is more like the environment in which our ancestors grew up and has little or no autism.



the_grand_autismo
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 96

08 Jul 2013, 12:37 am

Wealthy people were the only people for whom people with disabilities could be nurtured enough to gain savant skills. Even NT or non-disabled poor people would not have the opportunity to be experts at the violin, chess, mathematics, etc. Heck, poor people got a very spotty education back then-- this is still when there was a sizable population in the US who couldn't read. (1) I'm sure there were probably a few "idiots" from the lower classes who were very good at whistling or something but nobody was going to write about that, especially since scientists of the time were pretty unconcerned about what the poor were up to. In fact, scientists of the period (i.e. Francis Galton) were busy making theories as to why the lower classes were inherently inferior to the wealthy classes, so no wonder they thought only the wealthy could have savants whereas the poor had only "idiots".

If you actually read the article, a guy named George Grabham disagrees with the whole savantism being more prevalent in the wealthy theory in 1875.

Quote:
I am quite unable to agree with this view; my experience of many of these idiot "savans" proving them to have sprung from parents in humble circumstances, and leading me to believe them to have resulted in many instances from hereditary insanity.


(1) This website puts the rate of illiteracy at about 12% for whites and 80% for blacks in 1870s America: http://nces.ed.gov/naal/lit_history.asp