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

21–30 of 110 posts

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

#21

Post by smt88 »

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.

My sister is on the spectrum, and she agrees with the idea that autism is a mental disorder. What she disagrees with is calling anyone on the spectrum "disordered". So she'd agree with you that most autistic people shouldn't be labeled that way, but disagree that no autistic people should be.

Even at her low end of the spectrum, it can cause a lot of distress and pain. I guess it just depends on a person's particular case and the circumstances of their life.

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

#22

Post by smt88 »

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.

Is that the psychiatric definition of disorder?

My understanding is that it has to be disagreeable to the person who has it or put others at risk (in extreme instances).

So for example, someone with synesthesia might be considered disordered only if it prevents them from being happy or taking care of themselves, while many people with synesthesia seem to enjoy it.

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

#23

Post by amelius »

> Hahn said the difference between the original accuracy rate and that of the new study can likely be attributed to several factors, the most important being that two of the metabolites were unavailable in the second dataset. Each of the two metabolites had been strong indicators in the previous study.

Another issue could be overfitting.

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

#26

Post by sidlls »

bcatanzaro wrote: post #24

If this test becomes widespread, I'd love to take it. I bet many of us in the tech industry have some sort of autism markers. It is a spectrum, after all.

I doubt most (vast majority) have more than a statistically meaningless set of any hypothetical autism markers. A predilection for technology, math or science and social immaturity are commonly identified items techies use to contend they "may" be on the spectrum, but the reality is even mild autism includes so much more abnormality than that.

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

#27

Post by hhh »

This is quite interesting. Being on the spectrum myself, and many of my friends being so as well, it is very important how different everyone on the spectrum truly is. For high functioning people like myself I see Autism more akin to a mental super-power that can be crippled by small things. The difference in thinking is magnificent, and it aids in my success in most things that I do, but is an absolute disaster when it comes to socializing with people near me. In a town of 300 people, there aren't really any tech nerds or otherwise. Which makes socializing awkward since technology and game are a massive portion of my life. Even to just go to the doctor the interaction is anxiety inducing that my heart rate can raise by a good amount. (I've seen 133 on a bad day, when normally I hang out around 100.) Having to rely on analysis of people and memory of what people think is acceptable is absolutely exhausting.

Having a clear test for autism is wonderful, but the spectrum is of infinite width and infinite height.

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

#28

Post by [deleted] »

hhh wrote: post #27

This is quite interesting. Being on the spectrum myself, and many of my friends being so as well, it is very important how different everyone on the spectrum truly is. For high functioning people like myself I see Autism more akin to a mental super-power that can be crippled by small things. The difference in thinking is magnificent, and it aids in my success in most things that I do, but is an absolute disaster when…

[deleted]

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

#29

Post by throwawaymath »

arkades wrote: post #11
cosmojg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, "disorder" is explicitly clinical. The words "retarded", "dumb", and "stupid" are pejorative.

Calling autism a disorder is an accurate paychiatric description, not a value judgement designed to insult a person's identity. An insult can be targeted at a person's autism, but not simply by describing it according to clinical terminology.

I sympathize with people who don't believe autism should be considered a disorder, but that doesn't mean discussion needs to be encumbered by walking on eggshells. In particular, admonishing someone for using established clinical terminology is unproductive.

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

#30

Post by gowld »

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?

No particular reason to thing so, until an experiment indicates the direction of cause and effect.

If you want to remove your autism today, you can try transcranial magnetic stimulation.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sister-the-edge-auti...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcranial_magnetic_stimulat...

Post reply on HN