Autism "cure"= good thing

Post Reply New Topic

If it wasn't for the work of Bernard Rimland and others in the 60's, who actually started doing peer reviewed research on the potential causal factors of Autism per biological origin, the prevention and potential cure of autism could still be recognized as different parents and/or psychotherapy, per the "refrigerator mother theory", that was originally propagated by Kanner's paper, " Autistic disturbances of affective contact".

There are still substantial unfortunate remnants of that approach in some countries in Europe.

The medical definition of cure has also evolved over time as medical technology has evolved to the point where there is the potential of cures for disease and/or disorder beyond communicable diseases. It is modernly defined as the end of a medical condition; where the term condition covers physical disease, disorder or syndromes as well as psychological disease,disorder or syndromes many of which do not have clear causal factors where cure is defined as a partial goal in ending a medical condition, in some cases, as described further in the link. Cure is often described as a general goal to be pursued, for the potential to end almost any described medical condition as modern medical technology continues to advance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cure

The medical condition of autism currently has no clearly defined underlying causal factors other than rare genetic disorders such as fragile X syndrome. The number of potential causal factors grow with every day of research.

Shortly after Bernard Rimland and others work ended the "Refrigerator Theory of Autism", genetics was determined as a major influence, but environmental factors were also pursued, which eventually led, in part, to the vaccine controversies that continue today. Where relatively few still believe a cure would simply be a matter of altering the schedules of vaccines and/or their ingredients.

One of the biggest problems in determining definitive causal factors underlying autism spectrum disorders, for any potential of ending those described medical conditions that could be medically defined as cure, is that the definition of autism continues to expand, expand further, shrink from editorial error, and scheduled to shrink again in the near future per DSM5 standards. The autism spectrum is now scheduled to be defined as a mandatory combination of observed behavioral impairments with the new criteria in the DSM5, no longer listing developmental delays where biological neuro-developmental factors are more clearly at play. The only criterion element, a new one, with a clear biological determining factor of some kind is sensory processing issues, as an optional criterion element to be met.

From a medical condition perspective with this new diagnostic criteria, ending the medical condition is ending the combination of required mandatory and optional criteria symptoms combining together resulting in limits and impairments in everyday functioning.

This results in a very complex potential for what might be defined as cure, from a technical medical standpoint, not unlike the current general search for many other disorders, disease, or syndromes, both physical and psychological.

The term cure per medical research is unavoidable as it is used as a medical term in medical research for all attempts to end medical conditions spanning all disorder/disease/syndromes.

Stopping the general public from using the term cure for any defined medical definition, is probably as likely as stopping Big pharma from dominating commercial TV and other media sources with cures for old medical conditions and newly identified medical conditions increasing as time goes by, many of which end with the commercial identification of the potential side effect of death.

The only way to personally escape the continuous feedback from culture to be cured for almost everything imaginable, is to avoid and/or attempt to ignore the overriding cultural message, as the commercial expressed and perceived need for cures of all kinds grows larger and larger as medical technology and media technology advances.

There is the potential to convince charitable autism organizations that control their marketing efforts to quit using the word, but impossible at this point to remove the term from common cultural use for any disorder/disease/syndrome or otherwise described medical condition.

Modern Medical Technology and Research killed the "Refrigerator Mother Theory", but it's created an overwhelming message of cure that is going to keep growing as long as there is profit and promise in medical research and potential cures for every medical condition imaginable.

A cure for the common cold could be argued as a bad thing, as exposure to germs is what creates a mature immune system and for some could keep the immune system from attacking one's own systems. But, the quick fix instant gratification culture, is not going to stop the pursuit from making even relatively minor discomforts for some a major investment of research for those that will pay to avoid the discomfort for a promise of cure.

Cures are so far past what they used to mean, that anti-depressants are provided as a first line of defense/offense by some general physicians to cure almost everything associated with stress, otherwise known as life. These medications do save lives and do harm lives; it's the price to pay to be part of a medical culture where there is benefit and risk in almost every treatment/cure for the potential of reducing human dis-comfort, or what the medical profession often terms as dis-ease.

Whether one agrees with whether or not a cure for autism is a good thing, culture in general, already has it's mind made up, if it exceeds the standard of discomfort, in anyone.

I think there are a lot of treatment possibilities in progress right now. Some of them look promising.

I asked my wife to review what I said and your response to it. Neither one of us could understand why you posted what you originally did in response to my post, especially the attitude displayed. Hearing now that you have a son who doesn't speak, your view and your post become so much clearer to me, as do your motivations. I apologize if I came across as a dick to you. I understand where you are coming from better now and, had I known that, I would have made a much different post from my original response.

Treatment, as a word, is so much better than the term cure. A cure, to me, says that my autism is no longer a part of me, that it'll have been removed. It's been a part of me for so long that I've come to terms with it as a part of me and don't wish to see that happen. But, treatment to mitigate some of the more annoying issues, that's more than understandable and perfectly reasonable. How many of us here have learned to do things differently than others, think things through or pass them through a couple more filters before speaking? Isn't that nothing more than self treatment of symptoms? I keep some transformers on me to fiddle with so when I talk to others I don't look stupid flapping my arms around. Wouldn't that be a treatment that's led to the mitigation of symptoms?

I hope that one day you can find the treatment that is right for your son. I hope that he'll be able to look at you and tell you that he loves you and thanks you for all you've done for him. Good luck, man.

I personally have learned to accept the way I am. After my diagnosis, I really wanted to prove that I didn't have aspergers, I had developed a negative view of autism. My sister attended school with someone who has classic autism he was somewhat mentally deficient, in general I equated autism with being ret*d. I got over the negative and doubtful view of my diagnosis after reading all the good parts of aspergers that I really did not consider or realize. I really don't think a cure needs to exist for me, and I don't want one, but I do think people who want to be more normal should have an option to do what they want in life.

There are children/people with Autism who have absolutely no cognitive function. They sit in the corner and makes noises, shred paper, rock back and forth, all day. Many children with Autism even have life threatening epilepsy that can be traced to their Autism. I don't understand why people are opposed to a cure, don't these people deserve a cure.

i would agree

I'm sure someone will be along shortly to argue against it.

I've yet to see anyone flat out state a curs would be purely bad. Rather, I see many, like myself, who would object to a cure for themselves, yet agree that there are many people who could benefit from such a thing.

Please go back and reread my posts. I feel I've been quite clear.

Yes I think you are right. And I suppose if I think about your solution and compare it with what might come along that sort of solution might well be better. Perhaps there will be drugs to come that stop arm flapping (just to use as an example) but they might have nasty side effects, and so your simple and elegant solution is just a lot lot better.
We use PECS with my son and so the teaching of the use of PECS and making the PECS available for him as a tool to communicate I guess is a treatment for communication problems.


Thank you.
As a parent my objective is just to see him have a good life he enjoys and that he can develop skills and capabilities to be able to cope with things and be independant as much as he can be. Thats what I'm working towards (with both my children), and thats all the reward I will need

The term cure is not accurate, one can say a cure can be defined that way all they want but that does not really make it accurate. According to you anything that has a benefit can be defined as a cure, but that's not a fact its an opinion.

I think what he's saying there is it can be used as a metaphor. And people do very often use it as a metaphor in communication that is understood as valid between two or more people. I don't think he is suggesting that it can be used to define anything of benefit to help people with challenges with autism in a literal sense of the term cure which by modern definition would be ending a medical condition per the neurodevelopmental neurological aspect of the disorder. That's not even possible when the underlying causes of the medical condition are not known. Since Autism is technically measured at this point in time by behavioral impairments, the only thing that can technically currently be measured as ended through treatment in the medical condition is the behavioral impairments. Autism is not measured as a different way of thinking in the DSMIV or 5, it is measured as a different way of behaving.

Technically, currently, if a young adult were to become behaviorally addicted to playing video games all day long for years and avoid social interaction with people, regardless if they started with what might be considered typical social interaction abilities, with the limited requirements currently required for a DSMIV diagnosis for Asperger's and the current lack of requirement for the symptoms to occur in early childhood, the restricted interest in playing video games could meet the requirement for RRB's and obviously there is the potential that it could interfere with getting a job in life as significantly impairing a major life area of functioning. If the person lost most interest or even opportunity in interacting with flesh and blood individuals, that could potentially tick two of the social interaction boxes currently required to meet an asperger's diagnosis. If the diagnosing professional has no access to how that individual interacted with others before the behavioral addiction all they have to go by is current behavior.

On the other hand if that individual went on, for example, to sell auto parts where there was an all encompassing interest on auto-parts, was very successful at it, because they had memorized every auto part in the store, even if they were not particularly interested in social interaction to gain relationships, that currently describes millions of individuals in the general population without a diagnosis that might actually have more neurological neurodevelopmental symptoms associated with an autism spectrum disorder than the individual that developed a behavioral addiction. The difference is the special interest is in work, and it not usually considered a problem compared to an all encompassing behavioral addiction in playing video games,

By the way, there is no current behavioral addiction for a diagnosis, I use that term because my understanding is it has been included in the new DSM5 as a diagnosis. There will potentially be some new individuals that might have previously been diagnosed with Asperger's that will now be diagnosed as having a behavioral addiction.

The general disease of addiction that so far as been confined to substance abuse, in the DSMIV can be strongly associated with the development of deficits in social communication with others, however, the substance abuse is at times identified as the causal factor for that, not a neurodevelopmental disorder.

And in the case where behavioral addiction may be associated with playing videogames the underlying causal factor of addiction could also potentially be associated with the development of deficits in social communication with others, potentially not identified as strongly before the behavioral addiction started.

Newer research is already identifying the move away from flesh and blood social interaction, to a reduction in empathy and social interaction skills in people without any recognized neurodevelopmental issues in early childhood. However, there is some evidence that it is a result of a behavioral addiction in some rather than any actual neurodevelopmental disorder. But, addiction has been shown to result in structural changes in the brain, so in effect it is in some ways proof that while the differences in the neurodevelopment of the brain may result in changes in behavior including social communication behaviors, some behavioral addictions can potentially result in changes in the brain that also result in changes in social communication behaviors.

Part of the therapy for autism spectrum disorders, is exposure to the social environment and education/therapy to develop social skills. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if a person stops interacting with flesh and blood people, that their social interaction skills are going to be impacted to some degree overtime, regardless of neurology.

The implications of potential positive and negative "benefits" in changes in behavior and the newer cultural influences that impact that are obvious. And if a person were to never gain a diagnosis, or lose a diagnosis, because of exposure to and adaptation to a different environment, that would not technically be a cure for the underlying causal factors for a neurodevelopmental neurological disorder, but some would likely use the term as a metaphor to describe that the person was prevented from ending up with a medical diagnosis of a condition describing behavioral impairments or loss of a medical diagnosis of a condition describing behavioral impairments.

Door to door screening of Amish children resulted in preliminary results in a study done in 2 counties in amish country of 1 in 271 incidence of autism spectrum disorders in children ages 3 to 17, and 1 in 38 for children ages 7 to 12 in a population wide scan in South Korea. Some people continue to point to vaccinations as a causal factor of this disparity, however the 800LB gorilla sitting in the room is culture, much different culture, and much different modern day motivations for social behavior as well as the actual experience of social interaction.

Some have already identified a move to Amish country as a preventative measure to avoid autism. But technically it is the same basic human neurology starting out at birth in all it's variation moving to an earlier time in cultural history and in a much different environment. The reduction of stress is sometimes metaphorically described as one of the best "cures" to avoid a visit with the doctor, as stress related illness is considered the overall biggest factor for a visit to a doctor, in adulthood.

So the age old metaphor continues, "an ounce of a prevention" is sometimes considered the best "cure" for "disease and/or potentially some disorders". A lot of stuff falls under the metaphorical usage of the word cure, that is well beyond the technical medical dictionary. It's pretty hard to control the usage of metaphors that people use to describe their experience in life, obviously the ones people take offense to, as well.

I wasn't referring to you specifically, but I have seen many on here who are openly against the development of a cure. A cure isn't just needed for the profoundly affected either, those of us more "functional" want a cure too. You don't have to take the cure, but it should still be available.

I would argue that the statement that there are children and adults (why did you separate "children" and "people" into two categories? Children are people) with autism who have absolutely no cognitive function is completely unfounded. Having completely no cognitive function is known as death, or perhaps specifically brain death. Minimal function usually means being comatose. Autistic people, whatever their outward appearance have cognitive function. It doesn't help to state what other people's inner life must be just on the basis of stereotypical portrayals (sitting in a corner rocking back and forth all day).

I also find it frustrating that whenever this topic comes up, people feel the need to create a demographic of autistic people who supposedly will never ever be able to speak or advocate for themselves, and then present themselves as some sort of spokesperson for that population, because they can never - by definition - be part of any such conversation.

If you want a cure, then by all means say so. There's no need to create fictitious populations with features that are not in fact associated with any presentation or severity of autism to lend one's argument gravity. It would be more than sufficient to say that there are autistic people who want a cure. Carly Fleischmann, for example, has been quite clear that she would like to be normal, and she is one of those who - before she learned to type - you would have dismissed as "having absolutely no cognitive function." That is to say that referencing her own statements would strengthen your argument far more effectively than what you did post.

This isn't some fictitious population, there are people who are so profoundly autistic who really cannot do anything other then sit around flapping hands, rocking, making noises, and what not. I have seen these people.

I did not say that such autistic people do not exist. I said that "autistic people with absolutely no cognitive function" do not exist, and that was the specific claim that I responded to.

I mentioned Carly Fleischmann in my post - she is one of those who previously didn't do anything other than sitting around, stimming, making noises, having meltdowns, etc., but when she learned to type, she demonstrated that she was fully cognitive and aware - that is, the exact opposite of what you claimed.

In other words, whatever you are trying to say you meant now, what you said in your previous post refers to people who simply do not exist.

I understand that yes, technically if someone has zero cognitive function they are either dead or brain dead. I should have said they seem to lack any meaningful cognitive function.

You are right though if I had met Carly before it was discovered she could type, I would have assumed she had no meaningful cognitive function.