zlacker

Autism's confusing cousins

submitted by Anon84+(OP) on 2025-12-06 11:18:40 | 221 points 237 comments
[view article] [source] [go to bottom]

NOTE: showing posts with links only show all posts
4. ricard+L7[view] [source] 2025-12-06 12:50:10
>>Anon84+(OP)
I enjoyed reading that. My daughter had recently been diagnosed with "social anxiety" but had suspected it was autism.

Somewhat related, "Health Secretary Wes Streeting is launching an independent review into rising demand for mental health, ADHD and autism services in England." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce8q26q2r75o

Working in IT I've came across lots of extremely smart people with their quirks and eccentricity (not exclusive to smart people of course), I guess there's just a higher proportion of _quirky_ smart people in IT. A lot of the time it just seems to be introversion- it seems lack of interaction with society has to be justified.

◧◩
13. RobotT+S9[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 13:08:37
>>ricard+L7
It's worth noting the UK already commissioned a review that was published this year, that showed ADHD is in fact under-recognised here[0]. I can only assume they're commissioning a new one because that one gave the "wrong" answer.

For a long time ADHD was ignored or dismissed in the UK as an "americanitis", so it's no surprise that there's a backlog of people who weren't diagnosed in childhood.

[0] https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/report-of-the-independe...

◧◩◪
31. alexfo+Bc[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 13:30:40
>>RobotT+S9
Also the NHS ADHD/ASD services are completely overrun. Waiting lists for children can be more than 5 years long.

In order to cope with this the NHS has spun out much of the ADHD/ASD assessments through the Right To Choose program (well, in England at least, Scotland/Wales/NI are on their own), which means that private companies are being paid by the NHS to make up the shortfall. Ref: https://adhduk.co.uk/right-to-choose/

Some people say some of the private companies are too lenient with their diagnoses. Some people say that the NHS is too strict with their diagnoses. I'm sure the real answer is somewhere in the middle.

As you say, the sharp rise in diagnoses is probably more due to people become more aware, with less stigma attached, and having better access to assessment.

Shit like _Rain Man_ almost 30 years ago or, more recently stuff like _The Good Doctor_ really don't help though, as those just reinforce the negative stereotypes of Autism.

ADHD also has a strong genetic component with heritability around 75% according to various studies. My parents (undiagnosed but one definitely ADD+ASD) have 1/4 children diagnosed (and another 2/4 almost certainly undiagnosed, one neurotypical), and 6/10 grandchildren diagnosed (the other 4 are neurotypical).

Who knows, in 20 years time mainstream schools could have switched from 20% SEND and 80% neurotypical to 80% SEND and 20% neurotypical.

◧◩◪
48. tibors+uf[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 13:57:37
>>MarkMa+3e
You should also think before you call people stupid. If you google autism test, you'll find this:

https://www.clinical-partners.co.uk/for-adults/autism-and-as...

"I prefer to do things on my own, rather than with others."

"I prefer doing things the same way - for instance my morning routine or trip to the supermarket"

"I find myself becoming strongly absorbed in something – even obsessional"

These are all questions everybody living in a modern society can relate to.

Of course autism is a real condition, but modern society somewhat requires people to be machine like and that can easily look like someone is on the spectrum.

◧◩
54. Second+5g[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 14:02:58
>>H8cril+ya
That is fascinating, I have seen the schizophrenia model of having "trapped priors" before.

I figured that this is probably something Scott Alexander has written about, and lo and behold: https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/12/11/diametrical-model-of-a...

58. d-lisp+ug[view] [source] 2025-12-06 14:06:24
>>Anon84+(OP)
Eye contact makes me very uncomfortable.”

“I suck at small talk.”

“I have rigid routines.”

“I hyper-focus on my hobbies.”

“I am always fidgeting.”

“Social interaction exhausts me.”

“I really bad at making friends.”

“I don’t fit in; people find me weird.”

I never considered it althought I'm ticking all the buttons (bad gear ? [0])

[0] https://youtube.com/@audiopilz?si=g6iGJK3ygnCWESWW

60. Noaidi+Hg[view] [source] 2025-12-06 14:08:14
>>Anon84+(OP)
As some on with Schizoaffective Disorder, OCD, and Panic Disoder, I know why people want to have an Autism diagnosis. It is because people with Autism are more studied, get more assistance, and are get more sympathy from the general public.

Someone with Autism can act out and people will be like "That's OK, he has Autism". But when I act out, there is no understanding.

What is missing in the article is there does exist overlap in these condiations, not only symptomatically, but also genetically. As far as genetics, just take a look at the calcium channel gene CACNA1C:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31805042/

I would probably had an Asperger's diagnosis when I was a kid, but most of my Autism was beaten out of my by my older brother's and kids in school. I mean, I was so deep into astronomy when I was 10 and I would not let go if it even though everyone teased me about it and I talked about it all the time anyway.

I am in my early 60's now, homeless, living in a Minivan, driving around, researching my genetics obsessively to the point where I communicate with some leading specialists in the United States, but still no one cares.

So yeah, do I wish I could say I had clinical Asperger's? Yes. Yes. Only so I can be accepted for my neurodivergence.

◧◩
62. Noaidi+6h[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 14:11:44
>>H8cril+ya
> BTW, there's research that shows that schizotypy (schizotypal/schizophrenia) is sort of the opposite of autism.

And I disagree with that. There is a wide overlap of symptoms in all mood disorders. People with ASD show many traits of the negative symptoms of schizophrenia. This paper might change your mind:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8931527/

77. tezza+9i[view] [source] 2025-12-06 14:22:00
>>Anon84+(OP)
While this topic is here

Also see specialisms WITHIN Autism that are different to the mainstream Autism

The one I know most about is

PDA: Pathological Demand Avoidance [1]

PDA presents differently and needs very different strategies to mainstream Autism.

Main signs… kids under 12 attend school. However they explode at home or in private. At school the PDAers are masking (pretending to fit in) which is draining. When they get home the pent up frustration is released (explosively). So the family at home see a very different kid to the one that school/extended family witness. If this is an A-Ha! lightbulb moment for you or your child, see the questionnaire at the PDA Society[1]

[1] https://www.pdasociety.org.uk/what-is-pda/

◧◩
107. f13f1f+Qr[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 15:41:55
>>conart+7i
They are useful if they are understood properly. For example different "similar" groups respond to different treatments differently. Social phobia responds very well to exposure therapy, anti-social personality disorder does not. If you are able to follow the distinctions you are able to leverage more effective treatments. I don't think they have any use outside of psychological treatment though. This is a great video on a good way of breaking down how personality disorders in general are broken down and function and are separated. https://youtu.be/4mgifm3ftl8
◧◩◪
118. neom+1P[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 18:47:05
>>coldte+Vf
Given we're long evolved, and also tribal based animals, and that culture is an evolutionary pressure feedback mechanism, and prediction is fundamentally useful to our reality, different "thinking styles" (ways to predict/understand outcomes) are useful, aannnd, tribally we used people for their usefulness, I often wonder if "faulty" is the correct lens. That is to say, If prediction variation was useful to tribes, having both 'trust the model' and 'trust the senses' type people, I suppose framing these as disorders rather than trade offs is probably the wrong lens entirely. Society/culture/reality is so narrow and predictable these days, faulty in what context, you know? If you breed 20 generations of "best night watchers", in the jungle at night looking down, quiet, still, dark... you'd probably be selecting for specific traits, and creating new traits, retinal rod density and sensitivity, faster dark adaptation/contrast etc, attention/vigilance traits, pattern detection, anxiety adjacent traits in hypervigilance, prob something about circadian rhythm tolerance etc etc. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/40886135_Not_By_Gen...)
133. zzzeek+WU[view] [source] 2025-12-06 19:32:20
>>Anon84+(OP)
the agenda being pushed with the recent spate of articles to the effect of "people are saying they're autistic when they're really not, and should be classified differently" I think has mostly to do with RFKs overarching claim that people who are autistic are all suffering a horrible, debilitating disease, where in his words verbatim: “These are kids who will never pay taxes, they’ll never hold a job, they’ll never play baseball, they’ll never write a poem, they’ll never go on a date” [1] , which from there goes into his bigger goal which is to create a "database" of autistic people [2], for which no valid reason has ever been given. By redefining "autism" to be only those who we've decided are those severely disabled who "will never pay taxes or hold a job", then creating a catalog of exactly who these people are, the final step is quite obvious if you've studied the treatment of autistic people in Nazi Germany [3].

So I'm going to flag these posts for now because the goal in the current US climate is pure eugenics. RFK is at his core a eugenicist, as are all high-level anti-vaxxers. Anti-vaxxers seek to blame the diseased for their disease, on such factors as "poor diet", "lack of exercise", or in the case of autism, "having your child vaccinated", against all scientific consensus, and would prefer people suffer and die of horrible and completely preventable diseases like measles and polio since they somehow "deserve it". Governments like the current one have plenty of plans for people they deem unworthy.

[1] https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5256614-autism-communi...

[2] https://www.npr.org/2025/05/08/nx-s1-5391310/kennedy-autism-...

[3] https://mjhnyc.org/blog/autism-and-disability-in-nazi-vienna...

◧◩
181. cess11+o51[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 21:10:50
>>H8cril+ya
What's your interpretation of this study?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6982569/

◧◩
185. vantas+J91[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-06 21:52:14
>>autoex+731
> For a while tourette syndrome was all the rage and the platform was filled with kids faking tics.

Kind of like all those kids in Le Roy, NY who began experiencing involuntary tics. IIRC, it was interesting that it was mostly girls who were affected by the "craze".

https://www.npr.org/2012/03/10/148372536/the-curious-case-of...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
220. jeltz+Vr1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-07 00:24:38
>>kelsey+Rf1
No. Both definitions are correct. Don't tell people to recheck without first doing so yourself.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/normative

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
230. dimal+Aw1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-12-07 01:10:15
>>nis0s+0b1
That tend to hold "on average" for a population but often don't hold for the individual within a population. This is the ecological fallacy [0], just one of the fallacies underlying psychiatry.

My argument isn't that psychiatric symptoms don't exist or aren't real and there is no real underlying phenomenon. My argument is simply that we've drawn the lines between the units of study too high up and we should be more granular. This level of nosology was chosen in 1952. Do you really think they got it 100% right almost 75 years ago? And what is the mechanism for defining and maintaining these categories? A bunch of committees get together every few years and decide on them, then they tell us all what's "true". Bullshit. What are the odds that a committee will define itself out of existence? Pretty slim. [1]

I have traits that could be considered as autism, ADHD, obsessive compulsive personality disorder, PTSD, bipolar II, social anxiety disorder, and probably a dozen more disorders. But by quantizing the disorder at the current level, by necessity, the other traits are cropped out of view. Relevant information is lost and irrelevant information is blurred together. And the level of overlap between disorders is absurd. They cannot possibly be "real" because the lines between them aren't even distinct.

The useful unit to study is the individual trait, not the cluster of traits that is different in each individual. The traits are more granular and map more closely map to underlying biology anyway. The current model is akin to what the geocentric model was in astronomy. It's outdated, wrong, and holding us back from a more accurate, detailed view.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_fallacy

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law

[go to top]