Naked Science Forum

Life Sciences => Physiology & Medicine => Topic started by: tkadm30 on 21/07/2017 10:22:53

Title: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 21/07/2017 10:22:53
I would like your input on the concept of neurodiversity. To me, neurodiversity is a progressive movement to unify neurological variations in the human genome.

What do you think?

Read more: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/my-life-aspergers/201310/what-is-neurodiversity 
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: evan_au on 21/07/2017 12:48:57
If the "Autistic Spectrum" were known in the 1600s, Isaac Newton would have been on it.
And yet he provided significant advances in science and mathematics, and served his government in several important roles.

I think it is important to recognize how different personality styles enrich society.
But if one day we manage to understand the causes of these behaviors, I think the more disabling extremes should be curtailed.

My wife is a school teacher, and schools are now trying to integrate far more diverse behaviors into the mainstream schoolroom. This is certainly a challenge for teachers, but they are developing techniques like a quiet area where kids can go when things get too much for them.

But there is also far more medication of children in the classroom for behavioural issues; one wonders about the long-term impact of childhood medication.
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 21/07/2017 20:27:16
...one wonders about the long-term impact of childhood medication.

In my opinion, the effect of drugging kids with amphetamines for ADHD, a common variation of human behavior, is certainly problematic and risky. http://www.pvmhmr.org/3-adhd/article/60755-risks-of-adhd-medication

Secondly, since modern psychiatry diagnosis is not based on any objective testing, it is far too easy for psychiatrists to declare someone mentally ill according to its own perception. I think we need to recognize the fabrication of mental diseases like ADHD as a hostile takeover of the neurodiversity of human behavior by psychiatry.
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: evan_au on 22/07/2017 02:26:45
In the USA, something only becomes a psychological condition when it is documented in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), which is updated periodically. The latest edition (DSM-5) was published in 2013.

Apparently, autism spectrum disorders were documented in DSM-4.

In response to comments that DSM seems to be turning every mental characteristic into a disease, I heard a comment that in the USA, you cannot get financial assistance for any type of intervention by psychologists until it is a category in DSM.
- Of course, pharmaceutical companies are eager to jump on this bandwagon, developing and selling drugs for anything listed in the DSM.
 
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnostic_and_Statistical_Manual_of_Mental_Disorders
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: RD on 22/07/2017 02:46:20
...one wonders about the long-term impact of childhood medication.
In my opinion, the effect of drugging kids with amphetamines for ADHD ...

In the UK, the little darlings given government-issue generic-ritalin are not neurodiverse, they're delinquent.
They don't have Attention Deficit Disorder, they have parental-deficit-disorder:  they lack 1 or 2 parents worthy of the name.
That the diagnoses of ADD/ADHD are far higher in deprived-neighborhoods gives the game away.

Other forms of intervention for their behavioral problems, (foster-care, social-work, parenting-lessons, rehab for substance-abusing parents), are all much more expensive than throwing <1 a day of generic-ritalin at the little buggers.

Ritalin would be a huge money-saver if it worked : if it kept kids from being expelled from school / kept yoofs away from the dole-queue & kept them away from jail,  (the latter >35K p.a. per person).  But, in reality, dosing them with speed doesn't work & is counter-productive, e.g. for some the Ritalin prescription is a drug-dealer starter-kit, and in others causes OCD (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5314844/)-Tourettes (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4737687/) by overclocking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overclocking) their computer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_theory_of_mind).
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: puppypower on 22/07/2017 12:18:20
I would like your input on the concept of neurodiversity. To me, neurodiversity is a progressive movement to unify neurological variations in the human genome.

What do you think?

Read more: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/my-life-aspergers/201310/what-is-neurodiversity 

I believe that there is some natural neurodiversity, but most of what we see is artificial neurodiversity. This is created by media driven culture and by the progressive movement, in particular. The foundation  for the artificial neurodiversity is connected to the emotional centric training stemming from the progressive movement.

Emotions are useful in their realm of natural applications; human interaction. However, this training can be damaging if extrapolated beyond that into areas emotions are not optimized for. Each emotion generates neuro-chemicals in the brain. There is a physical affect that can impact perception and thought.The goal of emotional centric training is to optimized the chemicals generated; happy and safe feelings. 

This optimization can be done with reality, as well as with fiction and fantasy. You can go to  movies and feel happy. Fake news makes some people happy. Teachings like moral choices are relative and all POV are equally valid is a way to make all people feel better about their choices and their opinions. Some will even revise history or change recorded reality to make people feel better.

This is not rational, yet it can optimize our emotions. Although these example can optimized feelings, it can create repression in terms of other aspects of the mind, better suited to reality; reason. This can cause other problems and obsessions that look like natural neurodiversity since they appear to be optimized in terms of feelings.
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 22/07/2017 12:47:43
I believe that there is some natural neurodiversity, but most of what we see is artificial neurodiversity. This is created by media driven culture and by the progressive movement, in particular. The foundation  for the artificial neurodiversity is connected to the emotional centric training stemming from the progressive movement.

If autism or ADHD is a natural human variation just like homosexuality, I think there should be no such thing as "artificial neurodiversity". Also, the neurological variations in the human genome are independent from our emotions.

See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21311979

Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: Bored chemist on 22/07/2017 18:08:44
...one wonders about the long-term impact of childhood medication.
In my opinion, the effect of drugging kids with amphetamines for ADHD ...

In the UK, the little darlings given government-issue generic-ritalin are not neurodiverse, they're delinquent.
They don't have Attention Deficit Disorder, they have parental-deficit-disorder:  they lack 1 or 2 parents worthy of the name.
That the diagnoses of ADD/ADHD are far higher in deprived-neighborhoods gives the game away.
Well, I'm sure that would be news to my nephew, and to his parents (not to mention his older sister).

The geographical correlation with deprived areas  is, sadly, well documented for a lot of diseases.
It's understood that poverty reduces life choices and that in turn affects health.
Why would ADD be an exception.
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: puppypower on 23/07/2017 20:57:19
I would like your input on the concept of neurodiversity. To me, neurodiversity is a progressive movement to unify neurological variations in the human genome.

What do you think?

Read more: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/my-life-aspergers/201310/what-is-neurodiversity 

I went back to see how neurodiversity is defined. People come up with fancy terms that cater to emotions. Sometimes  the term not be consist with what you would expect it to mean in a literal sense. My reading indicated that the term appears to be mostly connected to autism, although it is also extrapolated to ADD. At face value, I assumed it was a term used to describe the spectrum of variation in humans personality and propensities. I did not expect it to a niche term. This confusion may be why it could be seen as controversial.

The question I would ask is, wouldn't the differences between male and female be the cornerstone of neurodiversity, since a considerable amount of genes are connected to the biology of sexually. Yet, we also also taught that sexual identity is learned and subject to choice and that these differences are not connected to neurodiversity, which we should accept and love. It is almost like there is a dual standard built into the term.

It appears to come back to emotional thinking, where the end game is an optimized emotional feeling. As an example of this, it is sort of like the wife asking if she looks fat in her new dress? She is not looking for an objective opinion. She would prefer you alter your perception of reality in a way to makes her feel good. This schema appears to be extrapolated deeper and deeper into culture and reality to where we need an alternate reality, of dual standards, to make everyone feel better.
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 24/07/2017 09:48:54
. The question I would ask is, wouldn't the differences between male and female be the cornerstone of neurodiversity, since a considerable amount of genes are connected to the biology of sexually. Yet, we also also taught that sexual identity is learned and subject to choice and that these differences are not connected to neurodiversity, which we should accept and love. It is almost like there is a dual standard built into the term.

Yes. I believe homosexuality is natural neurodiversity, although sexual orientation seems under control by free will. Also, it seem neurodiversity is independent from our genetic code; The human genome is the legacy of humanity, we should attempt to preserve neurodiversity and protect our identity from transhumanism.
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: Bored chemist on 24/07/2017 11:43:23
Redefining what is and what isn't included in the term "neurodiversity" won't help to reduce controversy.
Part of the problem is (as was always the case with psychology) trying to say what is "normal".
A hundred years ago left-handedness was seen as "not normal" and " a problem that needs correction".
50 years ago homosexuality was regarded as "not normal" and was illegal.

Today there's debate about whether or not schizophrenia is just " a different outlook". It's not a view I agree with, but I can see the point of those putting it forward.
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: puppypower on 24/07/2017 12:02:56
. The question I would ask is, wouldn't the differences between male and female be the cornerstone of neurodiversity, since a considerable amount of genes are connected to the biology of sexually. Yet, we also also taught that sexual identity is learned and subject to choice and that these differences are not connected to neurodiversity, which we should accept and love. It is almost like there is a dual standard built into the term.

Yes. I believe homosexuality is natural neurodiversity, although sexual orientation seems under control by free will. Also, it seem neurodiversity is independent from our genetic code; The human genome is the legacy of humanity, we should attempt to preserve neurodiversity and protect our identity from transhumanism.

 If we can choose sexual orientation; male or female, than homosexuality can be chosen, since it is a sexual orientation. The way you phrased it appears to be an artifact of political science that appeases emotions with dual standards. The number of genes that defines male or female far exceeds that of homosexuality, therefore this is more fundamental in terms of neurodiversity. Political science ignores the gene count to compete for the female and homosexual vote with an emotional appeasement.

A few other potential examples that should be included in neurodiversity are connected to the stages of life; toddler, child, adolescent, adult and old age. At each stage the same human can behave and perceive, differently. These stages all use the same DNA, but not all the same genes at the same time. There appears to be feedback loop, where the maturity level of the body, triggers the genetic parallels for each stage of neurodiversity. For example, when the body reaches sexual maturity the upper brain follows the lower brain (hormones). 

My belief is consciousness can alter genetics through epigenetic changes. Epigenetic change does not change the gene sequence, but rather it adds addendum to genetic processes which can alter the output genetic expression. For example, culture values youth in terms of marketing, such that many people can appear to act younger than the body would suggest. This suggests neurodiversity can also be connected to epigenetic changes through willpower and choice; education.

Beyond male and female and stages of life, there is another fundamental layer of natural neurodiversity. This is connected to the four psychological functions; emotions, sensations, intuitions and intellect. These can each be used to orientate a person's mind and personality to the environment.

We each have all four functions, but different people use them in different order, to create natural range of neurodiversity. Typically half will be conscious and half will be more unconscious. For example, one difference between political orientations, which can appear as neurodiversity, can be traced to which of the four functions is dominant. The progressive uses emotions first. If it feels right, than it is allowable even if not rational. Intellect first, will seek rational first thereby restricting willpower in terms of emotional based neurodiverse expression. Politics can pander to each orientating function to create what appears to be a natural fit.

 
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: Bored chemist on 24/07/2017 14:02:06
The progressive uses emotions first. If it feels right, than it is allowable even if not rational.
You seem to have that the wrong way round (assuming that you are identifying Progressive with Left wing).

More importantly, can you offer any actual support for these 4 axes?
Are they not all inseparably  interrelated parts  of the same thing?
Where's the research?

Or, do you believe it because it "feels right" and you allow it even though it's not rational to do so in the absence of evidence?
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: puppypower on 26/07/2017 13:41:27
The progressive uses emotions first. If it feels right, than it is allowable even if not rational.
You seem to have that the wrong way round (assuming that you are identifying Progressive with Left wing).

More importantly, can you offer any actual support for these 4 axes?
Are they not all inseparably  interrelated parts  of the same thing?
Where's the research?

Or, do you believe it because it "feels right" and you allow it even though it's not rational to do so in the absence of evidence?

The four psychological functions each deal with reality in different ways. The dominant function will most  impact how we perceive reality by setting the foundation for perception. The order of the other three functions, will then flavor this base. The four functions are sensual, emotional, intuition and intellect. Someone whose dominant function is sensory, orients themselves based on input data that impinges upon their five sensors. Such a person would not be good at abstraction, since abstractions can't be seen, felt, tasted, touches or heard.  They would not be able to fully consider a concert like God. They tend to live in the present based on real time sensory input data. They may prefer a life based on sensory stimulus. The other three functions are still in affect ,but will be less dominant, and will favor this foundation based on their order of secondary dominance.

Someone who is emotional dominant will use emotional tones to judge reality. Emotions will come from sensory input, education and imagination. Emotion first is typically how the mother deals with her baby. The baby can't reason and is like little animal controlled by impulses. The mother accepts these things and gauges the state of her baby, based on how the her baby makes her feel during any situation.

A certain sound may result in a feeling of concern. Body language, like smiling, can make her feel happy. Emotions provide a way to translate a complex natural language that may not be rational. She may attempt to manipulate the reality situation of her baby, so its feedback is mostly positive feeling; proactive to its needs. Things like shame and guilt are ways to use emotions to lead behavior down social lines, that may not be rational, but which attempt to maintain optimized emotions for the parents and even culture. Children are not yet rational, so emotions first can help lead behavior, even when the foundation is irrational. The other three functions will tweak this base. The emotional sensual; 1 and 2, may be a person who is all about comfort or risk; feel sensory reality.

Intuition is based on extrapolating experience even when logic, emotions and sensory data can be lacking. For example, the carpenter may find themselves in a unique situation during a rehab project. The solution may not yet exist and/or may not be obvious to sensory data, logic or emotions. This type of person is well suited for abstractions and proactive thinking, but may have more of a problem living in the now; smelling the roses. The prophets of old may have been intuition dominant. However, since there are three other functions, the combination of numbers 2,3,4 dominance can tweak this foundation.

The intellect dominant uses logic and reason to orientate themselves to reality. This is often based on culturally learned foundations called laws and theories. It tends to avoid emotions when orientating itself, so this type of person can seem cold to the emotional dominant. For example, the idea of health care for all makes us feel warm and fuzzy. This ideal may be as far as the emotional dominant will think. The intellect dominant will extrapolate this idea, with logic, to see where it goes. It may conclude this will cost a fortune and may not be feasible. The excessive cost can lead to negative emotional consequences such as a struggling economy and loss of the middle class. Based on the order of the three other functions, this cold reasoning can be modified.

 
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: Bored chemist on 26/07/2017 15:00:26
Where's the research?

Or, do you believe it because it "feels right" and you allow it even though it's not rational to do so in the absence of evidence?
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 30/07/2017 14:25:17
Since schizophrenia or ADHD is not curable, why bother treating a misbehavior with dangerous drugs? I think it's fair to say that human neurodiversity is poorly understood by doctors and scientists.  We need people to accept that human behavior is determined by our genetic code and is independent from our brain. 
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 01/03/2019 21:01:09
Anyone knows a peer-reviewed and open access paper on human neurodiversity?

Thank you.

tk

Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: evan_au on 01/03/2019 21:39:42
Quote
schizophrenia or ADHD is not curable...  We need people to accept that human behavior is determined by our genetic code and is independent from our brain.
It is estimated that schizophrenia is 80% linked to genetics.
However, it is not the only factor, and factors like infection during pregnancy and allergies may also play a part.

These environmental and genetic factors do affect the gut, immune system and brain of sufferers. Some of the symptoms may be treatable after symptoms appear.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia#Environment
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 15/03/2019 21:06:03
Quote
schizophrenia or ADHD is not curable...  We need people to accept that human behavior is determined by our genetic code and is independent from our brain.
It is estimated that schizophrenia is 80% linked to genetics.
However, it is not the only factor, and factors like infection during pregnancy and allergies may also play a part.

These environmental and genetic factors do affect the gut, immune system and brain of sufferers. Some of the symptoms may be treatable after symptoms appear.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia#Environment

Nice thread hijack attempt @evan_au but please try to stay on topic next time. ;)

Thank you.

tk
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: evan_au on 15/03/2019 21:21:54
Quote from: tkadm30
We need people to accept that human behavior is determined by our genetic code and is independent from our brain....
...Nice thread hijack attempt...
You obviously don't believe that brains are constructed from a genetic code and influenced by our environment? And that brains don't affect behavior?

Please define what you think does define our behaviour, apart from genetics and environment.
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 15/03/2019 21:27:54
Quote from: tkadm30
We need people to accept that human behavior is determined by our genetic code and is independent from our brain....
...Nice thread hijack attempt...
You obviously don't believe that brains are constructed from a genetic code and influenced by our environment? And that brains don't affect behavior?

Please define what you think does define our behaviour, apart from genetics and environment.

lol.... okay but lets not confuse brain (neurology, etc) and consciousness (theology, etc). :)
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: tkadm30 on 15/03/2019 21:44:48
Please define what you think does define our behaviour, apart from genetics and environment.

i think human behavior is mostly influenced from our cognitive thinking skills. The human genome has nothing to do with how someone can learn (and train) to become better at thinking in order to self-improve his/her own neurosecurity.

Labeling someone with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder because of a few DNA variations is soft-eugenics agaisnt human populations with unspecified neurological variations and/or brain dynamics in the (peer-reviewed) human genome.

Thank you.

tk
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: Kryptid on 15/03/2019 23:45:31
i think human behavior is mostly influenced from our cognitive thinking skills.

Which is influenced by environment and genetics.

Labeling someone with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder because of a few DNA variations is soft-eugenics agaisnt human populations with unspecified neurological variations and/or brain dynamics in the (peer-reviewed) human genome.

What does "soft eugenics" mean?
Title: Re: Why is neurodiversity a controversial subject?
Post by: evan_au on 16/03/2019 01:20:42
Quote from: tkadm30
The human genome has nothing to do with how someone can learn (and train) to become better at thinking in order to self-improve his/her own neurosecurity.
It is good that you work at self-improvement and better thinking - it's part of what makes us human.

The ability to learn new concepts as teens and adults is called "brain plasticity", and (surprise!) it is influenced by our human genome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity

Quote
Labeling someone with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder because of a few DNA variations is soft-eugenics agaisnt human populations with unspecified neurological variations and/or brain dynamics in the (peer-reviewed) human genome.
The original (peer reviewed) human genome was a composite of about 7 people.

Since then, there have been many projects that have:
- Tried to understand parts of this genome
- collected full DNA sequences from more people (probably approaching a million, in the next year or so)
- Collected partial DNA sequences (SNPs) from far more people (eg 23 and Me, Ancestry.com, etc)
- Some of these have been peer-reviewed, but most have not (nobody has written a peer-reviewed paper about my SNPs, although it may have been one small input into a peer-reviewed paper)

In reality, although the "Reference" human genome has been sequenced and studied extensively, we still don't know what large parts of it actually do.

So in fact, some of the subtle effects that have (say) 1% contribution to a characteristic can only be discovered by correlating the genomes and characteristics of many people in a Genome-Wide Association Study. Hence efforts like the "Million Genomes Project".
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genome-wide_association_study

But having a gene with a 1% contribution to a condition like schizophrenia does not dictate that you will get schizophrenia. Since we can't actually control genomes with any reliability today, it is best to focus on things that you can control - for example, if you have a family (or personal) history of schizophrenia, stay away from marijuana.

Interpreting what an individual mutation does in an individual person is very difficult, due to "incomplete penetrance", ie just because you have a particular mutation, it does not mean that you will exhibit the symptoms of that disease at a given time (and perhaps, not ever).
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penetrance
https://after-on.com/episodes/016