Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

news.rpi.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 110 posts

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#11

Post by arkades »

cosmojg wrote: post #6
jmcgough wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful about that kind of wording. I and friends who're on the spectrum don't consider it a "mental disorder". It's simply a physiological difference, one that theoretically can be tested for.

Doesn't that reasoning apply to any disorder? Medically, a disorder is simply "a disruption of normal physical or mental functions." So, having any disorder makes one abnormal, unique, special, and possibly above average or below average, but certainly not average. "Disorder" and "special physiological difference" are synonyms.

“Disorder” is explicitly pejorative.

I’m not sure where I stand wrt the position that autism is just a non-inferior neurovariant, but let’s not pretend we don’t understand the difference between asserting it’s a value-neutral variant and a disease.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#12

Post by sidlls »

jmcgough wrote: post #5
scythe wrote: post #4

Very surprising result. I don't think I've ever heard of a blood test for a mental disorder -- at least, not one that actually works.

Be careful about that kind of wording. I and friends who're on the spectrum don't consider it a "mental disorder". It's simply a physiological difference, one that theoretically can be tested for.

I have family diagnosed with ASD (all high-functioning). They're obviously different and abnormal, and they know it. In fact that specific knowledge that they're abnormal is a source of anxiety in individuals with ASD. I think it's perfectly reasonable to call it a disorder, and they seem fine with it also.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#13

Post by amatecha »

lujim wrote: post #7
jmcgough wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful about that kind of wording. I and friends who're on the spectrum don't consider it a "mental disorder". It's simply a physiological difference, one that theoretically can be tested for.

I hear you but the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) classifies it as a mental disorder. Autism Spectrum Disorder 299.00 (F84.0)

DSM-5 also forgoes Asperger's and just includes it into autism now, which a _lot_ of people with either diagnosis tend to disagree with. There are many different ways autism and its variations present, and trying to "homogenize" them all into a single narrow label masks the complex nature of the condition (IMO).

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#14

Post by vehementi »

jahabrewer wrote: post #10
lujim wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you but the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) classifies it as a mental disorder. Autism Spectrum Disorder 299.00 (F84.0)

I wouldn't use this as a supporting argument. Didn't DSM-3 classify homosexuality as a disorder?

Really? A widely recognized reference manual is blanket discredited because it made a mistake in the past (1952-1974, not DSM-3)?

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#15

Post by lujim »

jahabrewer wrote: post #10
lujim wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you but the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) classifies it as a mental disorder. Autism Spectrum Disorder 299.00 (F84.0)

I wouldn't use this as a supporting argument. Didn't DSM-3 classify homosexuality as a disorder?

I'm not sure, but I bet you're right. It is a medical reference that will change over time as better information becomes available. It's still the definitive manual for classifying mental and personality disorders.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#16

Post by BadCookie »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #9
jmcgough wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Be careful about that kind of wording. I and friends who're on the spectrum don't consider it a "mental disorder". It's simply a physiological difference, one that theoretically can be tested for.

> Be careful about that kind of wording I have friends on the spectrum. I happen to agree that mildly autistic behaviour is more akin to a personality difference than a disorder. That said, I don't think it's fair to admonish someone for using the colloquial norm. The comment might read better if stated less as "careful, you're doing something wrong" and more in the tone of "here is another viewpoint you may find hel…

To add to your comment, I wish that high-functioning ASD people would stop ignoring the more severe end of the spectrum. If you are high-functioning, then maybe ASD just makes you quirky and different. But for the lower functioning people, ASD can profoundly affect their lives in extremely negative ways. For example, my son almost starved himself to death because of sensory difficulties. He is four years old and still cannot feed himself. For my son, ASD is not just a small difference that the world has not accepted yet. It's something that possibly could have killed him if he had had less devoted parents and/or lived in less privileged circumstances.

And my son is not even a particularly extreme case. With lots of therapy and a little luck, he may be considered high-functioning someday. Other kids might be in diapers forever, never talk, and live in a group home their entire adult lives.

So I struggle to take seriously the high-functioning people who throw fits about what language we use to describe our situation. I've had people get mad at me for saying that I have a son with autism when I apparently should have said that I have an autistic son. I'm sorry, I'm too busy keeping my son alive to care!

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#18

Post by lujim »

amatecha wrote: post #13
lujim wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you but the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) classifies it as a mental disorder. Autism Spectrum Disorder 299.00 (F84.0)

DSM-5 also forgoes Asperger's and just includes it into autism now, which a _lot_ of people with either diagnosis tend to disagree with. There are many different ways autism and its variations present, and trying to "homogenize" them all into a single narrow label masks the complex nature of the condition (IMO).

There seems to be a ton of debate on lumping and splitting various disorders in the DSM. If I remember correctly academics like to split, practicing clinicians like to lump. There is so much overlap in many conditions that psychologists and psychiatrists that actually deal directly with patients question the need to split every small permutation of symptoms into a distinct disorder. I'm not saying the DSM-5 is absolutely free of issues as I'm sure DSM-6,7,8,20 will be an improvement.

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#19

Post by [deleted] »

amatecha wrote: post #13
lujim wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you but the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) classifies it as a mental disorder. Autism Spectrum Disorder 299.00 (F84.0)

DSM-5 also forgoes Asperger's and just includes it into autism now, which a _lot_ of people with either diagnosis tend to disagree with. There are many different ways autism and its variations present, and trying to "homogenize" them all into a single narrow label masks the complex nature of the condition (IMO).

[deleted]

Re: First physiological test for autism proves high accuracy in second trial

#20

Post by smt88 »

amelius wrote: post #17

Does this also work in reverse? I.e. take supplements/drugs until the test is negative, and then be (temporarily) autism-free?

I don't know, but there's preliminary evidence that autism can be reversed by dosing children with oxytocin and by using TMS on adults.

Because those approaches are considered to be fairly low-risk, I suspect research will continue in those directions until they hit a wall of some kind.

Post reply on HN