The Problematic Obsession with ‘Curing’ Autism
nymag.com
nymag.com
Is it rocking in one spot because you're stressed and overstimulated right now, or is it rocking in one spot because you're stressed and overstimulated by most things and will therefore never learn to communicate?
Is it stimming by hand-flapping or is it stimming to the point you need a helmet to prevent traumatic brain injury?
Trick question, of course; they're all autism. My point is that unless we can nail down what exactly we want to cure, we'll continue to talk past each other, apparently ignoring the fact one side is talking about Temple Grandin and the other side is talking about people who are so disabled they drive their parents to such quackery as facilitated communication.
http://archive.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/783-this-...
There are a large number of recent (2013-2015 range) medical journal articles in respected publications such as Cell that confirm this. Autism is largely about the cerebellum: what happens when cerebellar cells aren't present at all (severe disability, as in Dandy-Walker Variant, aka "autism"), and what happens when they're present but not wired up properly (unusual personalities, aka the condition formerly known as "Asperger Syndrome"). It's not really that simple of course but those are both real conditions that we don't bother distinguishing right now.
This is what should be in the newspaper: that autism is really a collection of things that should be called Cerebellar Dysmorphic Disorder. Everything else is clearer when people aren't just arguing about abstract terms with no morphological basis. (Wonder why some people with autism are able to have intense debates while others can't talk at all? If you have an arbitrarily-shaped Dandy-Walker cyst that has displaced 30% your cerebellum, it's unlikely anyone else will have the exact same symptoms, but you might not be able to do a lot of things.)
The upshot is that anyone with severe deficits and an autism diagnosis should get an MRI of their brain to image the cerebellum.
This is a topic I take really seriously. E-mail me at greenspan at post.harvard.edu with any questions. I'm not a doctor but these views have been run by many MDs and MD/PhDs and I'm happy to point people to journal research if helpful.
Medical research has plenty of mistakes, bad science and fraud. It doesn't matter if it's published in Cell, there's a good chance that what you described is going to be considered wrong someday, if anything just because it's so recent (2013-2015).
Don't forget The Lancet was also a respected publication in 1998. The prestige of a journal doesn't imply the research published in it is more correct.
I'm especially grateful for any useful insights into what may be. Not to overthink it but to prepare for the outcome.
Your comment gives me another opportunity for my own study to help my son if the outcome is so. Again, thank you.
As an edit, we are not simply assuming this is the case but actually in collaboration with health professionals, who have referred us successively towards this point. I didn't make it clear that I'm not actually doing a 'DIY diagnosis', which is wrong when it comes to issues like this.