@Autistrain @actuallyautistic @neurodiversity Was the study conducted by allistics by any chance?

Lifelong nature lover & autistic.

@sentient_water

I read it yesterday and don't remember clearly. To do some sarcasm, I could answer “I assume”.

@actuallyautistic @neurodiversity

@Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity This isn't the one I'm talking about but it illustrates the same point.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/01/140131130630.htm

@Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity Found this other one too. Where the fact that we have more neurons in our prefrontal cortex is still pathologized!

https://www.spectrumnews.org/news/autism-brains-have-too-many-neurons-study-suggests/

@sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

It really isn't.

Brain development comes in two phases.

From birth through childhood, the amount of neurons people have increases steadily, forming pathways based on our experiences and sensations.

But from puberty to maturity, the number of neurons decreases through a process called synaptic pruning, where the pathways get trimmed down in order to get rid of 'cross wiring' and synaptic 'dead ends'.

@sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

Having more neurons, therefore, doesn't make you smarter.

It's less like having more RAM and more (but not exactly) like having the RAM connected with multiple cables, so that your RAM keeps getting conflicting or fragmented inputs because the signals don't all take the same route and don't all arrive when they're expected to.

@sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

I'm sorry in advance at the sheer nastiness of this response, but I threw out my back earlier today and it hurts enough that I feel nauseous, so I'm in a terrible mood:

Oh, gee, a medical study by medical doctors medicalises things? Golly how absolutely awful.

Damn experts and their narrow field of focus! When the fire safety inspector wrote a report on my apartment block it said absolutely nothing about my interior decorating choices! 😒

@sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

Again, I'm sorry, but this is unavoidable. If a group of neurologists does research into autism, they're going to focus on the neurological aspects of autism.

And that's going to involve a lot of medical jargon, because they're doctors (and/or professors) of medicine.

@robrecht
The point is that there's a very consistent pattern in autism research of *assuming* autistic differences are deficits, or somehow automatically wrong.

@petercrosbie put together a great piece about this here a few years ago:
https://www.autism-advantage.com/autistics-less-biased.-researchers.html

@sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

@robrecht
There's a very recent paper here showing how this keeps happening in verbal fluency research, and how looking at it in terms of #monotropism (or just generally identifying and questioning implicit assumptions) allows for completely different interpretations of the same data.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/aur.3071
@petercrosbie @sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

@ferrous @petercrosbie @sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

Thing is, Fergus...

This actually kinda highlights my issue.

Most medical autism research is focussed on ASD, the diagnosable mental health disorder that occurs in some autists.

Monotropism is a theory (with it's own flaws) regarding the autistic neurotype, including those for whom it doesn't lead to a disorder...

And...

@ferrous @petercrosbie @sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

I understand why people who identify with the autistic neurotype are not best pleased with the way medical research pathologises autism, I really do. I don't like it either.

But at the same time... A lot of the time they /aren't/ pathologising autism the neurotype, they're pathologising ASD, the mental disorder, which legitimately is a pathology.

This distinction is important to me because...

@robrecht @ferrous @petercrosbie @sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity I'm not sure how adding the word "disorder" to something actually makes it a disorder.

If someone frames my love of computers as "specific routine and becomes disturbed at the slightest change" and says "hah, disorder!", is it now fair to frame it as a pathology?

@mnl @ferrous @petercrosbie @sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

Good question. The answer, really, is 'it depends'. If you do actually become disturbed at the slightest change in a way that causes you discomfort and affects you even when you don't want it to and you wish it didn't, but you have no way to prevent it, then yes, that's what constitutes a disorder.

And...

@mnl @ferrous @petercrosbie @sentient_water @Aerliss @Autistrain @neurodiversity

A large part of the issue there, then, isn't that that's what psychology/psychiatry considers a disorder, but the perception that having a disorder is some kind of personal failing.

And that's not a perception that is caused by psychologists and psychiatrists, but by the general public as a whole.