How I understand neurodiversity...

Post Reply New Topic

Can you link the article? That's something I have never heard before.

I oversimplified what I said earlier lol but a copy of what I wrote before 3/4 way down autism explanation:

Ive copied an artice from Dr. Manuel Casanova a neurologist who has researched autism, his view on ND. The link to the original article is here also.

https://corticalchauvinism.com/2013/06/ ... oundation/

Neurodiversity is a movement that offers a perspective about autism that differs from that espoused by the medical profession. The ideology seems rooted in the anti-psychiatry movement ( see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-psychiatry ) that claimed that many psychiatric disorders were constructs of the medical profession but otherwise fell within the normal range of human behaviors.

The offshoot of the antipsychiatry movement, neurodiversity, claims that autism falls within the normal variability intervals of the human genome/connectome (the blueprint of white matter connectivity). The term is attributed to an Australian sociologist by the name of Judy Singer, herself diagnosed within the spectrum and also having a child on the spectrum. Neurodiversity had initially the good intention of avoiding terms with negative connotations (e.g., disorder, disability) that prejudged and demeaned affected individuals. The use of negative terms pathologized autism and ultimately insulted the sensitivities of many autistic individuals who clearly understood the nuances of medical verbiage. Self-advocacy groups, primarily from within the Aspie community, took advantage of the popularity of the neurodiversity movement in order to challenge the conventional thinking that autism needed to be cured. In effect, many high functioning autistic individuals, such as Temple Grandin, do not regret being autistic and, in fact, consider it a gift. This has lead to endless philosophising as to whether we should try to “cure” autism or better focus our efforts on acceptance and accommodations (http://conversations.psu.edu/episodes/temple_grandin/ ).

The neurodiversity movement calls into question whether higher functioning autistic individuals are representative of the autistic population at large. Would proponents of neurodiversity feel the same way if riddled with seizures, self-injurious behaviors, or tremendously diminished cognitive processing? Would they try to find a cure if suffering with any of the aforementioned handicaps? Curiously, some people from within the neurodiversity movement would hold steadfast to their beliefs. According to some neurodiversity proponents autism is caused by outside (environmental) exigencies and taking them out of the picture would promote a cure for autism.

It is difficult to argue with people who base their opinion on philosophical perspectives and know very little about brain functioning.Most of their arguments shift the onus of a scientific debate to discussing the meaning of words rather than facts. These arguments portray wishful thinking rather than the analysis of available evidence. Overall, neurodiversity flies in the face of present day scientific knowledge that firmly places autism within the spectrum of neurodevelopmental conditions.

Curiously some of the evidence in favor of neurodiversity has been provided by my own work (see http://bit.ly/1bitCvg ). I have argued in several articles that there is a ratio of short to long connections joining different parts of the cortex that help define cognitive styles. At one end of the spectrum you have people with supernumerary short connections at the expense of longer ones who show an “autistic cognitive style”. The latter is manifested as being quite concrete and mentally inflexible but excelling at functions that can be performed within a given brain parcellation (embedded block design, finding Waldo within a picture). At the other tail end of the connectivity spectrum we have people that manifest supernumerary long connections at the expense of shorter ones. These people usually exhibit a cognitive style characteristic of dyslexics/attention deficit disorders. They excel at synthesizing and are the prototype of the absent-minded professor; they see the forest but loose sight of the tree. These observations are meant to help explain differences in cognitive or thinking styles, that is, the way people perceive or remember information. This is what many people within the neurodiversity movement try to defend. They are clearly satisfied with their way of thinking and see attempts at changing the same as menticide (mental genocide). However understandable is their feeling of being threatened nobody is trying to change the way they think. Divergent thinkers always add to society and probably account for its advancement (see Thomas West, “Thinking Like Einstein).
Let me go back to the subject of pathology. Some of the early neuroimaging series of autistic individuals uncovered significant portions of the brain as having unidentified bright objects or UBO’s in their scans. It is now known that UBO’s represent a migratory defect where large cluster of cells become arrested and never reach their final destinations. Higher resolution studies using postmortem material have shown that these islands of malpositioned cells are found in some 75% of patients. (Wegiel et al., 2012) (figure 1). If considered alone, the presence of single cells may actually cloud the boundary between the gray and white matter making the same indistinct (figure 2). When quantitative methods are applied this abnormality may be present in all autistic patients.

Figure 1. (Double click on the picture for a larger image). It is said that one picture is worth a thousand words.The different panels (taken from Wegiel et al., 2010) illustrate cross sections of brain tissue in different autistic individuals. Each one illustrate how islands of migrating neurons (heterotopias) fail to reach their final destination and settle midstream. This is akin to having a hernia (i.e., a protrusion of an organ where it should not be). The findings are of importance for many reasons. First, these cell clusters are seen in all brain regions (e.g. frontal lobe in panel a, cerebellum in panel f) and clearly illustrate a disorder of neuronal migration. Although the final result may be an insidious malformation of the cortex (e.g., abnormally constructed cortical modules or minicolumns) and differences in brain connectivity, they are still the result of pathology. There are no grey boundaries here between normal and abnormal. These clusters and resultant malformations are clearly abnormal. Second, all of the previously described abnormalities occur during brain development, while cells are migrating to form the cerebral cortex. They are thus present and hardwired by the time a patient is born. Although postnatal event could, under certain circumstances, trigger expression of symptoms, the underlying defect is present from birth. Third, proposed causative insults should be able to explain the presence of this pathology. In this regard, mercury, could be excluded from the potential list of inciting agents. The pathology of mercury is well known and does not explain observed findings in the brains of autistic individuals (see https://corticalchauvinism.wordpress.co ... t-mercury/ ). Lastly, these findings are of importance because of their explanatory powers. Their presence along with resultant cortical malformations can easily explain the presence of multifocal seizures and sensory abnormalities in autism. The fact that these abnormalities differ by location and severity also help explain the clinical heterogeneity of autism.


Figure 2. Computer generated binary images each black dot representing the position of cells cells within the cerebral cortex. The upper panel is that of a neurotypical individual and the one at the bottom for a person within the autism spectrum. The sigmoid function generated by a computer demarcates the boundary in-between the grey and white matter of the brain. The white matter immediately beneath the cortex of autistic individuals contain many more neurons than that of neurotypicals.

I think neurodiversity arose from the need of humans to believe themselves to be special. Several people have often used the quote that we think of ourselves as fallen angels rather than risen apes. For me that seems to be a human right. I also believe in many of the positive aspects of neurodiversity. However, I do not believe in the minority faction of neurodiversity bent on imposing their ideas over those of others, especially when they are based on a shaky scientific foundation. In the last few paragraphs I have tried to illustrate a clear-cut migrational abnormality for neurons in autism. This is something that anybody postulating a cause for autism will have to explain, be it mercury, immunological abnormalities, high oxidative load, or gene mutations. Valid arguments have to incorporate scientific knowledge (just ask the Dalai Lama about his conviction in neuroscience).

In a future blog I will talk about how we can put all of these findings together and what may be causing them.

The author of that blog article mentioning anti-psychiatry in relation to ND shows how biased and ill informed he is about ND.

I meant the scientific article not a blog rant but thanks, I've found some like this:
https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/ ... 034/254005
and I understand this is what the author's real research is about.
Currently reading, this I find worth my time.

Okay, I also read dr Casanova's blog article, apart from connecting neurodiversity with antipsychiatry, he agrees with a lot of ND postulates:

So, while his wording may not be caucious enough to satisfy everyone's sensitivities, he's not a proponent of curing people from not making eye contact and he supports recognition of autistic people as valid persons - he defends searching for cure for extreme sensory issues and seizures in severe autism.

Thanks for the link magz obviously goes into greater detail.

Looked him up on wikipeadia was'nt aware the poor bloke received murder threats from ND activists (see link) probably explains his angry tone. I suspect their just harmless but sick internet nerds but this type of behaviour makes ND look more of a cult everyday.

Maybe the silly criminals thought they could bury the truth forever under a pile of PC BS, so people carry on believing vaccines, big pharma, alien / divine intervention to save humanity from itself lol.

Turns out Autism is just another pathology like everything else, not a natural difference.

They never considered that scientists would find out in the end with international co-operation, advancing computing power, increased funding across the world due to increased Prevalence of ASD.

I guess thats where identity politics leads in the end, thats why its very poisonous mixing disability with identity politics.

Very sad also for all mental health research. These scientists are working to help us with our genuine problems and are being hindered by a minority of cult like selfish but otherwise very undisabled functioning individuals.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Casanova

Hope this link proves of interest to you Magz:

https://medium.com/@Oolong/what-neurodi ... 1b1bd18ae0

Just to clarify I support opportunity and better rights for autistic people especially in the workplace.

What I don’t support is the creeping “groupthink” that comes from identity politics, that solidifies a policy that is not always in the interest of the individual.

We see this happening with the bullying of those outside this site who want a cure, or talk of the difficulties associated with bring up a severely autistic child.

I don’t support this man`s political views but he`s spot on with what he says about ASD.:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLv8SB1YP0M

The dangers of "groupthink"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink#Prevention

I watched your video,I personaly think that disability and identity are not mutualy exclusive.I think autism is both disability and identity.
I don't understand all this political infighting that goes on in autistic culture,cure vs. pride.I don't understand any of that stuff.I have felt very disabled by autism yet I don't indentify with neurotypicals and I don't understand why there has to be so much conflict within the politics of autism

A big reason is that so much is unknown and subjective compared with other conditions. Add the tribalism of this era

It is either a crippling curse or a superpower. If you are autistic your difficulties are completely the result of you being a person with autism or the totally the result of NT society's ableism. If you give a hint of having views or even understanding the other side you are either a traitor to the cause or ignored because so many will not have a clue of where you are coming from. Kind of like with Trump.

Yes, its sad if you want to get really basic about it, it’s because I believe neurodiversity steals from us, and encroaches on our rights in two main ways: -

1. It steals the voice of those most disabled and in pain, like silencing a drowning man. They often whitewash autism (see link), you`ll often hear phrases by them in the public space like autism is a gift, autism is a superpower, autism is a natural difference, autism is not a disability.

This is nearly always said without discriminating on life quality or functionality. Most that say these things are always on the highest functioning end, or are not even autistic. Steve Silverman (a NT) said on a UK documentary recently “autism should not be cured”, not even bothering to discriminate between severe and Asperger’s, just “autism should not be cured”. Because being the highest functioning part of the group, they have taken over the discourse so the general public receive a very misleading picture of what autism is.

This is far from harmless as this misinformation & false news feeds into decision makers that has a potential direct negative effect on those most in need.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... ing-autism


A true picture of autism needs to be given, from severe to most functioning end - that’s all.

2. With the simple equation of Identity politics = identity protection = anti cure = anti direct research & new medical treatments, they steal a potential future of new treatments that can potentially help us. To those that commit suicide each year with Asperger’s or the severest cases with a life expectancy of 36-40, that’s life & death as simple as that.

Basically, like most people I believe that someone can believe in whatever they like just don’t bother me or those I love or care about.

If you want to believe the Earth is flat that’s fine just don’t try banning satellite photos of Earth because you find them offensive.

If your religion bans alcohol good for you and your liver just don’t stop me having a pint.

If you don’t think autism is a disability and you don’t want to be cured good for you, just don’t pretend to talk for me or all of us, please stop using “WE” when referring to "all autistics don’t want a cure".

The tragedy is all the other stuff like workplace opportunities / rights and better care can be achieved without these two problems, until then the movement will remain divided.

I view your Jeremiad mission here differently from you, as an attempt to paint all AS people with a very black and white brush, as if AS people were a homogenous group.

AS people are a heterogenous group. We differ in our strengths and talents, in our weaknesses. We are individuals.

Neurodiversity centrally addresses that one fact: WE ARE INDIVIDUALS, though AS is a common feature. You seem to be coming from the reverse, that we are all hopelessly damaged people, of little merit.

It's your right to disagree with neurodiversity. But do it for the right reasons, as a statement of your feelings and self perception, not as a projection onto others.

It's your choice to be antagonistic to nuerodiverse realities, but not to distort facts: AS people are a wonderfully varied group of people with differing strengths and weaknesses. To deny this is to poison the well, and for what personal purpose?

I would like to suggest to you that you broaden out your reading beyond the strict confines you have posted on WP. There are some very good disability scholars and journals, that take a more broad based approach than yours to date.
The biggest one, Disability Quarterly, has some very thoughtful commentary such as this:

Vol 30, No 1 (2010) > Robertson
Neurodiversity, Quality of Life, and Autistic Adults: Shifting Research and Professional Focuses onto Real-Life Challenges Scott Michael Robertson Penn State University College of Information Sciences and Technology E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

This article examines challenges to the quality of life experienced by autistic adults.1 The author, who is an autistic researcher, first shares how a neurodiversity perspective offers an important alternative to the deficit model of autism. Whereas the deficit model portrays autistic people as ill, broken, and in need of fixing, the neurodiversity perspective portrays it as a form of human diversity with associated strengths and difficulties. The article's discussion then shifts to presenting Schalock's (2000) quality of life framework as a neurodiversity-compatible lens through which domains of quality of life can be viewed. The article analyzes in detail these core domains in relation to the lives of autistic adults. The author suggests that a collaborative approach between professionals/researchers and autistic adults is needed to develop meaningful solutions to these challenges, and he presents possibilities for collaboration.
Shifting Perspectives on Autism

A deficit model has largely dominated most professional and academic discourse on autism over the last century. This deficit model presents autistic people2 as individuals severely limited by a disordered neurology that causes major impairments in their cognition and ability to interact with the surrounding social and physical world. Under the deficit model, autistic people are portrayed as broken humans who are ill and require fixing to enable them to function normally in society. In contrast, non-autistic people are viewed as neurologically healthy and psychologically well.

This deficit-focused view of autistic people has largely ignored their cognitive strengths, their diverse way of being, and their gifts and talents. Many academic studies of autism present a limited or token discussion of the strengths, gifts, and talents of autistic people, or they leave them out entirely. Very few studies of autism present it as a form of human diversity akin to other societal forms of diversity (e.g. ethnicity, nationality, gender, etc.). Academic studies adopting the deficit model have sometimes even characterized relative strengths of autistic people as deficits. For example, De Martino, Harrison, Knafo, Bird, & Dolan (2008) emphasize how a greater reliance on rational thinking by autistic people leads to impaired social interaction, but they largely ignore the potential advantages of strengths in rational thinking. Despite these inherent flaws in the model, many professionals and academics have continued to accept the deficit model of autism as a given, without critically questioning its foundation and premises.

However, this situation may be changing as widespread acceptance of the deficit model has recently begun to erode and as neurodiversity, an alternative perspective, has gained traction in many fields and disciplines. A growing number of academic publications from several scholarly communities has examined autism and autistic people from the neurodiversity perspective (Biklen, Attfield, Bissonnette, Blackman, Burke, et al., 2005; Baker, 2006; Davidson, 2007; Savareese, 2007; Osteen, 2007; Robertson, 2007; Ne'eman, 2007; Fenton & Krahn, 2007; Glannon, 2007; Bumiller, 2008; Clarke & Ameron, 2008; Rocque, 2008; Robertson & Ne'eman, 2008; Broderick & Ne'eman, 2008; Wilson, 2008; Bound, 2008; Ortega, 2009; Pollack, 2009).

In contrast to the deficit model, the neurodiversity perspective describes the neurology and personhood of autistic people through the lens of human diversity. This understanding of neurological-developmental disability has been influenced by societal diversity in ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, handedness, and sexual orientation.

Autistic people are viewed under the neurodiversity model as individuals who possess a blend of cognitive strengths and weaknesses in the following core domains:

Language, Communication, and Social Interaction
Sensory Processing (environmental input)
Motor Skill Execution (environmental output)
Goal-oriented and Reflexive Thinking, Planning, and Self-Regulation

Although relative strengths and difficulties in these core domains remain specific to the individual, numerous commonalities exist. For instance, many autistic people have key strengths that include detailed thinking, expansive long-term memories, a comfort with rules and guidelines, and an affinity for analyzing complex patterns in the social and physical worlds. Likewise, many autistic people have key difficulties in managing several simultaneous tasks, understanding social nuances, filtering competing sensory stimuli, and planning tasks of daily living. Professionals and academic researchers who adopt the neurodiversity perspective on autism often specifically emphasize the strengths, gifts, and talents of autistic people in an effort to establish a balance of focus in the academic and professional literature.

Another important facet of the neurodiversity perspective is its recognition that difficulties experienced by autistic people are always contextual. The neurodiversity perspective contends that living in a society designed for non-autistic people contributes to, and exacerbates, many of the daily living challenges that autistic people experience. This parallels the adversity encountered by the left-handed population decades ago when few tools were designed for left-handed persons and most attitudes favored right-handedness as inherently superior. Sensory demands, social ambiguities, and information complexities are among the barriers that the modern 21st century presents to autistic people.

(end of quote)

I firmly believe that seeing the big picture will help expand and support the lives and well being of AS people. Seeing a deficit reductionist model of negativity won't. I'm tired of the efforts made to denigrate AS people and their potential, and on a support site like Wrong Planet, it seems to me that jeremiadic efforts unbalances by any positivity are a poor fit for what Alex envisioned and created.

If this was something going on in my head then the autistic community wouldnt be divided.

There wouldnt be such thing as an anti neurodiversity pushback by many.

This is common knowledge, i posted plenty of links showing this in the past, anyone can find them if they choose to.

Of course im aware that not all "autistic" people are broken, (im one of them). Like i said i support opportunities and better provisions, just not the "groupthink" policy of anti cure and seperate identity.

The ND movement can carry on with its "doublethink" disability / natural difference "groupthink" pathway, of ignoring scientific evidence and those at the most disabled end, just expect this to peek soon and not get very far.

No, it's not just in your head. The Aspergian, in his blog, identified and summed up the various anti-neurodiversity groups very well, and the Dark web group has been more active over the past months, with some recognisable contributors:


What is the Neurodiversity Movement?

The neurodiversity movement is not a social club or political ideology. It maintains that certain neurological conditions are genetic variations and are not “diseases,” though they are usually disabilities. These conditions cannot be separated from a person’s thoughts or core self. It is how they are wired.

The neurodiversity movement seeks to humanize individuals who are “neurodivergent” (ND)—meaning they diverge from the neurological majority—to call attention to their support needs and to promote awareness and acceptance of how their needs and behaviors differ and how best to accommodate them and position them to self-advocate.

While it would seem that such a movement would be hard to fault, there have been detractors. For the purpose of this article, they will be referred to as “The Usual Suspects.”
The Usual Suspects

1. The genetics/cure lobby, the recipients of a substantial percentage of the trillions of dollars spent on autism. This includes pharmaceutical companies, genetics researchers, corporate lobbyists, and investors.

2. The applied behavior analysis (ABA) lobby, those promoting the primary “therapy” that is pushed as being needed to treat autism—not traits or specific areas of need, but the whole autistic person. Behavioural therapy has been deemed abusive by the neurodiversity community.

3. The “severe” autism lobby, those promoting a false dichotomy of “mild” and “severe” autism, which primarily leans on the falsehood that non-speaking autistics are severely intellectually disabled. They dehumanize non-speakers by perpetuating misinformed assumptions about their competence and by positing that those with intellectual disability are incapable of self-advocacy or are less human.

4. The anti-neurodiversity movement, many of whose members have been called the “Autistic Dark Web,” a troupe of people who are mostly regarded as trolls and are most visible on Twitter. These people claim that the #ActuallyAutistic/Neurodiversity Movement is full of “social justice warriors” from the far left who want to turn autism into an issue of “identity politics.”

Im afraid the science and millions of others say otherwise, severe autism comes with some severe outcomes like a very miserable life & early death. Im sure some are intelligent but a subnormal iq is often the case. In fact many millions would give a less respectful answer to the idea that severe autism was not life destroying and should be considered a natural difference, which is why it will never happen.

I guess alot of semantics, verbal gymnastics and "doublethink" has to go into ND justifying severe autism as a "natural difference", maybe that explains why they are so reluctant to refer to them, giving vague solutions to the issue.

I pedict ND mov will peek with employment opportunities and greater awareness, which in itself a good thing. There just isnt the appitite among science and gov for the more extreame view of "natural difference".

1.Autism costs alot of money and resources and its natural for gov to counter that with research and prevention.

2. Its anti science, its practically proven that autism is a pathology (see prev links from multiple sources) its a matter of time before science provides a consensus on the pathalogical cause. Common sense says so too. A non talking adult is not natural just as a non walking one.

3.Many autistic people dont want it so theres a counter force

4 it opens the door to a whole load of issues of abnormal / bad behaviour being justified by different wiring, whether sexual deviancy on children or sociopathic / criminal behaviour.

5. Severe autism

6. Classic "doublethink" something being a disability & not being a disability.

Unfortunatly ND suffers a classic case of "groupthink" unable to see outside the bubble. Read the wiki links and see the issue

Ive pretty much said all i need to say for now no doubt ill be "shot" banned for not "conforming" but thats the way it goes. Read and learn

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink