SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
ScienceDaily summarizes a new study (paywalled) published a few days ago in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.
It is the first study to find a link between autistic traits and the creative thinking processes.
People with high levels of autistic traits are more likely to produce unusually creative ideas, new research confirms. While they found that people with high autistic traits produced fewer responses when generating alternative solutions to a problem - known as 'divergent thinking' - the responses they did produce were more original and creative.
The research...looked at people who may not have a diagnosis of autism but who have high levels of behaviours and thought processes typically associated with the condition. This builds on previous research suggesting there may be advantages to having some traits associated with autism without necessarily meeting criteria for diagnosis.
People with high autistic traits...are typically considered to be more rigid in their thinking, so the fact that the ideas they have are more unusual or rare is surprising. This difference may have positive implications for creative problem solving.
They might not run through things in the same way as someone without these traits would to get the typical ideas, but go directly to less common ones. In other words, the associative or memory-based route to being able to think of different ideas is impaired, whereas the specific ability to produce unusual responses is relatively unimpaired or superior.
Original Submission
(Score: 5, Interesting) by bradley13 on Tuesday August 18 2015, @06:26PM
Do note that, in the interests of increasing the number of people who are sick, deserving of special treatment, or whatever, the definition of autism has been hugely expanded. It now encompasses not only Aspergers, other things including "subthreshold autism". That last refers to people who have no autistic symptoms beyond being serious introverts ("social difficulties"). I'll raise my hand: I'd much rather converse with my computer than with most humans. Does that make me abnormal? Probably. Do I want to be counted towards some pseudo-researcher's pseudo-results? Screw 'em.
One hundred times as many people are autistic now, as compared to 40 years ago [blogspot.com]. This kind of massive redefinition of the term makes the entire discussion laughable.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Francis on Tuesday August 18 2015, @06:46PM
It's a little more complicated than that. The main driver of the increase in frequency is that there's more awareness of the condition than there was in the past. These people are probably not any more common than they used to be, but because of increased access to accommodations that came in the early '90s with the ADA, there was a lot more reason to have children tested for things like this.
There has been some expansion of the term that contributed to this, but if you look at your graphic, the biggest jump was about the time that the ADA was enacted into law.
There are more people being diagnosed now and there's probably something else going on, but expansion is definitely an issue. I'm not sure where those more mild cases should go, but in a lot of those cases there they do have things in common with autistic individuals, just not enough to warrant classification.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Tuesday August 18 2015, @07:23PM
there's more awareness of the condition than there was in the past.
Increased awareness all too often means stretching definitions to fit people with no particular problems, such that just about any one can be considered "ill".
This tendency is common in psychology, unlike just about any other field of medicine. Perfectly normal kids are labeled with border line ADHD and fed Ritalin to stifle their creativity and make them fit the mold. Introverts (and geeks) are labeled as borderline autistic or depressed.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Tuesday August 18 2015, @07:27PM
Autism spectrum isn't a mental illness at the high functioning end, in the same way running a temperature of 98.8 isn't an illness.
That doesn't mean that the diagnostic criteria don't apply.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday August 18 2015, @08:00PM
Yeah, thanks for proving my point.
But it seems you forgot the last word of the formal definition: It is officially Autism Spectrum Disorder, a definition that has expanded over the years to include everyone [nymag.com].
Meanwhile, from the world of real medicine, my expanding girth as I age apparently has me fitting within the current definitions of pregnancy spectrum disorder.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday August 18 2015, @08:10PM
Nope, you're just being a dumbass. Autism spectrum hits about 1/70 people. That's a lot, but "everyone" is just you bullshitting to pretend your fake-ass non-point sounds less fake.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Tuesday August 18 2015, @07:55PM
Ritalin doesn't stifle creativity. I'm not sure where you got the idea that it does that, because it doesn't. What it does do is stimulate areas of the brain so that you have control over them. All the creativity in the world doesn't do you a lick of good if you can't get anything completed because you're constantly being distracted by various things.
ADHD is a known quantity, it shows up in brain scans and in common behavior patterns. It's been in the DSM since the beginning and earlier than that to the beginning of the profession. The name and exact definitions have changed over the years, but it's been there from the start. It's documented in literature going back to the ancient Greeks.
Borderline conditions are usually ones that are just a mild impairment, those people usually don't get diagnosed and if they do get diagnosed they don't get much treatment as it's not needed.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Tuesday August 18 2015, @08:16PM
Yeah, but NO.
http://www.add-adhd.org/ritalin.html [add-adhd.org]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Tuesday August 18 2015, @08:42PM
And how precisely does this relate to anything that I've said? That was written by a bureaucrat that isn't even a doctor. Yes, they probably are being over-prescribed a bit, but the letter is talking about people who are going shopping for prescriptions. Not people who have legitimate diagnoses for the medication.
You're level of ignorance is similar to the anti-vaxxers. The level of over-diagnosis isn't anywhere near as large as people would have you believe. It's largely the result of better monitoring, better access to healthcare and changing social norms. It's no longer acceptable to blame the student for poor performance, there's a lot more consideration being paid to whether or not there's a real learning disorder or similar causing the problems.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 18 2015, @10:52PM
I have an autism-spectrum disorder (Non-Verbal Learning Disorder) and I'm always being blamed for everything that occurs to me.
Struggling to keep up with the work? Work harder. Not quite grasping what's written? Just work harder. Burnout? Don't be lazy.
The university disabilities office, having had an occupational therapist read my evaluation and tell them that written material is close to useless for me, presented me with written notes. If I'd been blind, they'd have bought me text-to-speech software and a laptop. If I'd have been in a wheelchair, they'd have built ramps into every room I had classes in. For certain conditions, they'd even have filmed my lecturers and given them to me on disc.
I had one physics tutor start shouting at me in my tutorial, about how I had to take responsibility for my actions when I didn't understand what was presented in front of me.
When I was at school, my mother and stepfather beat the hell out of me because the teacher thought I was lazy and refused to help me in maths.
Blame the student can be as strong as ever, even with a diagnosis.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Tuesday August 18 2015, @10:35PM
psychology is not a medical field. the mean is psychiatry, not psychology.
(Score: 2) by gnuman on Tuesday August 18 2015, @10:00PM
The main driver of the increase in frequency is that there's more awareness of the condition than there was in the past.
CITATION NEEDED!
This is like saying, the main driver of cancer is awareness of the disease. On the contrary, it is not. The main driver of cancer is that people live longer. In the past, before advanced imaging techniques, it was still possible to diagnose cancer. You know, at the autopsy! But it remains that most people think that increase in cancer rates is due to awareness instead of longevity driven mostly by antibiotics - people tend not to die from bacterial infections anymore.
Autism is NOT something that's been driven by awareness. It is NOT something that magically started happening because people become "aware" of it. Let me give you an example from modern times about autism. Take the Somali population. Autism does not exist in Somalia for all intends and purposes. The rate is near 0. They also have little access to modern medicines like oral antibiotics. Now, because of war, Somalis have fled their nation and settled in the other nations. Somehow, the autism rate of resettled Somalis is running at more than 3% rate! That's an epidemic.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/17/health/study-links-autism-and-somalis-in-minneapolis.html?_r=0 [nytimes.com]
So, this is clearly NOT genetic. This is clearly NOT related to "awareness". This is something that appeared in last 50 years. And what has appeared in last 50 years that is used more in developed nations than poor nations without doctors?
http://cogentbenger.com/autism/ [cogentbenger.com]
http://treatautism.ca/2011/12/08/the-nature-of-things-autism-enigma/ [treatautism.ca]
http://www.cbc.ca/natureofthings/episodes/autism-enigma [www.cbc.ca]
See this if you have any beliefs that Autism is something not real or that it is somehow genetic. This explains why there was no Autism 100 years ago.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 18 2015, @10:43PM
Actually, when you speak of the social 'sciences' and their constant need to redefine what qualifies as a mental illness or similar, awareness does play a part. The social 'sciences' are filled with subjectivity, so they can't really be compared to other fields.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 18 2015, @10:44PM
I'm sorry, but citation needed applies to you.
But I don't mean "Show me some supporting evidence," I mean "Show me supporting peer-reviewed medical research that outright states your position."
You appear to have carefully picked your evidence to support your position, and discarded all else: you have engaged in no research.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Tuesday August 18 2015, @10:48PM
Wow, are you seriously suggesting that a lack of a diagnosis is the same thing as a lack of a case? Because that's a huge problem. A lot of marginal cases were never diagnosed because the child wasn't quite stupid enough to require testing, they had a marginal IQ, but since it was slightly too high, they wouldn't have qualified for a diagnosis. But, for all practical purposes those kids had autism, they just weren't quite diagnosable as having autism. The least severe cases might not even have been tested in the first place.
Prior to recently, nobody really bothered to look into such cases at all, as there wasn't anything that could be done about it.
As far as the citations go, those are hardly reliable citations to be making. You've got a couple of news programs with no details and a link to a site that provides "natural health care." Doesn't exactly make me have much confidence in the source.
Take a look at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140703125851.htm [sciencedaily.com]
(Score: 2) by gnuman on Wednesday August 19 2015, @05:52AM
My links were about one specific program that you should watch. If you want some real research, there is plenty, but gut flora is "icky" so much less research happens there. It's not like sexy gene sequencing.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gut-bacteria-may-play-a-role-in-autism/ [scientificamerican.com]
http://www.nature.com/news/bacterium-can-reverse-autism-like-behaviour-in-mice-1.14308 [nature.com]
http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20130703/lower-bacteria-levels-in-gut-may-be-tied-to-autism-in-kids [webmd.com]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Glida7/autism_and_bacteria [wikipedia.org] - look at some references there
And YES, I'm saying that Autism almost did not exist in the past before *oral* antibiotics. While there maybe genetic reasons for some autism cases, it is by far overshadowed by the environmental reason.
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Wednesday August 19 2015, @06:48AM
Earliest documented treatment for autism-like disorder dates back to the late 1780's, the term "autism" itself is roughly 100 years old, the use of the term in its modern sense is roughly 70 years old (this use was introduced by Hans Asperger - the first westener who described the syndrome (in 1944) that later would be named after him).
Take a look at Leo Kanner (of "kanner's syndrome"-fame) if you want an explanation of the whole mess surrounding what should be called "autism".
tl;dr
* autism is docemented since more than 200 years
* asperger syndrome for more than 70 year
* both american and german psychiatrists used the term "autism" in the early 1940s.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by FatPhil on Tuesday August 18 2015, @07:45PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by patella.whack on Tuesday August 18 2015, @09:39PM
Regarding autism, number 6 applies. Here's a brief summary of some bullet points from the article to read while I go see my doctor and get a briefcase full of meds.
1) Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder: DSM 5 will turn temper tantrums into a mental disorder- a puzzling decision based on the work of only one research group.
2) Normal grief will become Major Depressive Disorder, thus medicalizing and trivializing our expectable and necessary emotional reactions
3) The everyday forgetting characteristic of old age will now be misdiagnosed as Minor Neurocognitive Disorder
4) DSM 5 will likely trigger a fad of Adult Attention Deficit Disorder leading to widespread misuse of stimulant drugs
5) Excessive eating 12 times in 3 months is no longer just a manifestation of gluttony...DSM 5 has instead turned it into a psychiatric illness called Binge Eating Disorder.
*6) The changes in the DSM 5 definition of Autism will result in lowered rates- 10% according to estimates by the DSM 5 work group, perhaps 50% according to outside research groups. This reduction can be seen as beneficial in the sense that the diagnosis of Autism will be more accurate and specific- but advocates understandably fear a disruption in needed school services.
7) First time substance abusers will be lumped in definitionally in with hard core addicts
8) DSM 5 has created a slippery slope by introducing the concept of Behavioral Addictions that eventually can spread to make a mental disorder of everything we like to do a lot. Watch out for careless overdiagnosis of internet and sex addiction and the development of lucrative treatment programs to exploit these new markets.
9) DSM 5 obscures the already fuzzy boundary been Generalized Anxiety Disorder and the worries of everyday life
10) DSM 5 has opened the gate even further to the already existing problem of misdiagnosis of PTSD in forensic settings.
(Score: 2) by albert on Wednesday August 19 2015, @04:14AM
This has been obvious from the moment they removed homosexuality, an issue that affects people much more than Asperger's (now mild autism spectrum) or ADHD. The APA is happy to ignore the fact that many people homosexuality suffer greatly, even to the point of suicide, and that something which occurs in 1% to 3% of the population is very literally abnormal. Political correctness takes priority.
(Score: 2) by inertnet on Tuesday August 18 2015, @10:13PM
serious introverts ("social difficulties")
I'm starting to wonder what disorder I'm counted in, for staying in the same marriage until I die.
(disclaimer: some sarcasm was applied)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 19 2015, @03:02PM
Redefining autism is a good way to obscure any trend in former autism, so if some factors increased of decreased autism in the last decades, it gets more difficult to ascertain.
Redefinition of words is very 1984esque.