aghogday
KATiE MiA
Joined: Nov 26, 2010
Posts: 4812
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Sweetleaf wrote: | | aghogday wrote: | | Sweetleaf wrote: | | aghogday wrote: |
Thanks, even though the DSMV refers to autism spectrum disorder as a nuerodevelopmental disorder of childhood, on the main disorder page, they still categorize it under PDD, on the page you provided for general classifications. That's good to know. |
Wait what....they do not have autism under PDD NOS......somehow I am getting the feeling you don't know much about what (insert disorder) NOS actually means.
what PDD NOS implies in the DSM is someone has enough symptoms for a PDD or Autism Spectrum disorder (if those terms do in fact mean the same thing) however they don't have exact symptoms for a 'specific' one so its PDD NOS(not otherwise specified). |
It was just a typo, I'm diagnosed with PDD NOS, so I'm fully aware of what it means. I just provided the criteria for it, a couple of posts ago. I was diagnosed with Aspergers first, but when the psychiatrist found out I had a language delay I was put into the diagnostic category of PDD NOS.
The term Autism is used to mean different things in different contexts. One of those contexts is to describe all five Autism Spectrum Disorders. When it is used this way it is being used the same way as the term Autism Spectrum Disorders and Pervasive Developmental Disorders are used to date, interchangeabley per the Wiki article I provided.
But, per the DSMV website, as linked they are proposing a revision that will drop the Pervasive Developmental Disorders classification since there will no longer be more than one disorder, and replace it with Autism Spectrum Disorder as a classification that describes the one remaining disorder of Autism Spectrum Disorder.
The Autism Spectrum Disorder classification will then fall under the category of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, among many other disorders, not associated with Autism Spectrum Disorder, per that link
It clearly states Pervasive Developmental Disorders on the page that OJani provided, from the DSMV, that I was referring to, in the link above as quoted here below. This appears to be a description of the changes that are being made to historical classifications.
| Quote: | Pervasive Developmental Disorders
A 09 Autism Spectrum Disorder |
This is the link again, that pertains to neurodevelopmental disorders:.
http://www.dsm5.org/proposedrevision/Pages/NeurodevelopmentalDisorders.aspx
| Quote: | Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Please find below a list of disorders that are currently proposed for the diagnostic category, Neurodevelopmental Disorders. This category contains diagnoses that were listed in DSM-IV under the chapters of Disorders Usually First Diagnosed in Infancy, Childhood, or Adolescence and Anxiety Disorders. The Neurodevelopmental Disorders; ADHD and Disruptive Behaviors Disorders; Child and Adolescent Disorders; and Anxiety, Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum, Posttraumatic, and Dissociative Disorders Work Groups have been responsible for addressing these disorders |
| Quote: | A 00-01 Intellectual Developmental Disorders
A 00 Intellectual Developmental Disorder
A 01 Intellectual or Global Developmental Delay Not Elsewhere Classified
A 02-08 Communication Disorders
A 02 Language Impairment
A 03 Late Language Emergence
A 04 Specific Language Impairment
A 05 Social Communication Disorder
A 06 Speech Sound Disorder
A 07 Childhood Onset Fluency Disorder
A 08 Voice Disorder
A 09 Autism Spectrum Disorder
A 09 Autism Spectrum Disorder
A 10-11 Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
A 10 Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
A 11 Other Specified Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
A 12-15 Learning Disorders
A 12 Learning Disorder
A 13 Dyslexia
A 14 Dyscalculia
A 15 Disorder of Written Expression
A 16 Motor Disorders
A 16 Developmental Coordination Disorder
A 17 Stereotypic Movement Disorder
A 18 Tourette's Disorder
A 19 Chronic Motor or Vocal Tic Disorder
A 20 Provisional Tic Disorder
A 21 Substance-Induced (indicate substance) Tic Disorder
A 21 Unspecified Tic Disorder
A 22 Tic Disorder Due to a General Medical Condition |
|
But where does it say they are dropping the term PDD? I thought you said they where putting autism and aspergers under Autism spectrum disorder....and leaving the others under PDD, maybe I read wrong. But yeah where does it say they are dropping that classification. |
Yes, it appears that you have either misread what I wrote or I didn't explain it clearly.
If this explanation doesn't make it clear, ask me again, I have no problem with making another effort at clear communication.
Aspergers, PDD NOS, Autism Disorder, and Childhood Disintegrative Disorder, from the The DSMIV listing of five pervasive developmental disorders otherwise known as Autism Spectrum Disorders, will become one Disorder, Autism Spectrum Disorder, under the proposed revised DSMV criteria for those previously diagnosed with those 4 disorders, that meet the new DSMV criteria as finalized for the one disorder of Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Rett's Disorder, per current DSMV revised criteria, retains a separate diagnosis outside of the new classification of the single disorder, Autism Spectrum Disorder
PDD Pervasive Developmental Disorders is an umbrella term that means the same thing as the term ASD Autism Spectrum Disorders, currently used in the nomenclature of the DSMIV. Currently both terms are synonymous umbrella terms that cover all five disorders.
The revised classification criteria hierachy above, from the DSMV, indicates that the DSMV will no longer use the nomenclature of Pervasive Developmental Disorders to classify the one disorder of Autism Spectrum Disorder. Instead it will be referred to under one singular classification of the same term, Autism Spectrum Disorder.
The ICD10 is not changing and will continue to use the nomenclature of Pervasive Developmental Disorders to describe all five autism spectrum disorders, as they are currently classified in the ICD10, that Ojani linked to in the previous post.
Pervasive Developmental Disorders and Autism Spectrum Disorders, plural, will still be used used as synonymous umbrella terms for the five disorders, for those that look to either the ICD10 and the Gillberg diagnostic criteria, as the standard to diagnose the current five disorders, as umbrella terms that describe the current five disorders.
The DSMV is not finalized yet, so this is still subject to change.
As to why the DSMV has decided not to use the term Pervasive Develomental disorders (PDD) in the DSMV to describe the one disorder of Autism Spectrum Disorder that is left, is pretty much common sense, as far as I can see, although the DSMV website offers no specific justification, in dropping the the PDD nomenclature, from the proposed hierachy of classifications as provided in the link.
It would not be logical to use the term (PDD) Pervasive Developmental Disorders in it's commonly used plural form to describe a single disorder. Autism Spectrum Disorder in it's singular form will be used by no other diagnostic criteria except for the DSMV.
As you might imagine, it would be extremely confusing if the DSMV continued to use the nomenclature of Pervasive Developmental Disorders as a category to describe one disorder, autism spectrum disorder, while the people that use the ICD10, and gillberg criteria continue to use the nomenclature of Pervasive Developmental Disorders in it's plural form to describe five disorders.
This change, in the DSMV if finalized, will at least provide some clarity in distinguishing the new difference among the commonly used diagnostic criteria standards for the five Autism Spectrum Disorders/Pervasive Developmental Disorders (under the ICD10/Gillberg) that will continue to be used in some countries vs. the one Autism Spectrum disorder, classified under the DSMV, that will be the most commonly used diagnostic criteria standard in the US, as the DSMIV currently is used. |
|
| Back to top |
|
aghogday
KATiE MiA
Joined: Nov 26, 2010
Posts: 4812
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
This link may help provide a better understanding as to the overall proposed organizational structure of the DSMV, and will show details that provide conclusive evidence that the DSMV, proposed organizational structure does not use the current umbrella term PDD Pervasive developmental Disorders, under this new organizational structure to identify the new one disorder of Autism Spectrum Disorder.
This is the complete proposed organizational structure of the new DSMV, Autism Spectrum Disorder is under the first category, Neurodevelopmental Disorders.
http://www.dsm5.org/proposedrevision/Pages/proposed-dsm5-organizational-structure-and-disorder-names.aspx
| Quote: | Proposed DSM-5 Organizational Structure and Disorder Names
One of the most noticeable changes to this Web site concerns the structural organization of DSM-5. Rather than listing the diagnostic categories according to their placement in DSM-IV, we present here the revised chapter organization for DSM-5.
This restructured organization is designed to better reflect scientific advances in our understanding of psychiatric disorders, as well as to make diagnosis easier and more clinician-friendly.
For instance, all of the chapters are organized in a developmental lifespan fashion, starting with Neurodevelopmental Disorders, which often are diagnosed in infancy and early childhood, and progressing through diagnostic areas more commonly diagnosed in adulthood, such as Sleep-Wake Disorders.
Within each diagnostic category, the individual disorders are similarly arranged such that those typically diagnosed in childhood are listed first. This revised chapter ordering also makes a greater attempt to closely situate diagnostic areas that seem to be related to one another, such as creating a specific category for Bipolar and Related Disorders and placing it immediately after Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders. |
| Quote: | Proposed DSM-5 Organizational Structure
Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders
Bipolar and Related Disorders
Depressive Disorders
Anxiety Disorders
Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders
Trauma- and Stressor-Related Disorders
Dissociative Disorders
Somatic Symptom Disorders
Feeding and Eating Disorders
Elimination Disorders
Sleep-Wake Disorders
Sexual Dysfunctions
Gender Dysphoria
Disruptive, Impulse Control, and Conduct Disorders
Substance Use and Addictive Disorders
Neurocognitive Disorders
Personality Disorders
Paraphilias
Other Disorders |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
slasher666
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Joined: Nov 29, 2010
Age: 18
Posts: 53
Location: Pickering, ON
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 4:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I was diagnosed with high-functioning autism when I was 3-and-a-half, but my psychiatrist diagnosed me with Asperger's when I was 15. Yesterday I did the second half of my assessment to see how high-functioning I was. Since I was diagnosed with autism when I was little, I will always have that diagnosis. I like to think of myself as having Asperger's because it's more specific and it shows how high-functioning I am, but I'm more likely to qualify for social services if I'm registered with the provincial government as having autism. I feel sorry for anyone who lost their diagnosis with their new assessment and won't qualify for services. Most people don't seem to realize that high-functioning doesn't mean low needs. I am very high-functioning but still need a lot of help with school work and certain life skills. |
|
| Back to top |
|
OddDuckNash99
Hypercoaster
Joined: Nov 16, 2006
Posts: 2527
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cyberdad wrote: | | But I think you are simplifying these conditions into discrete separate categories when all evidence points to the fact that people can move their diagnosis from into the other. There is high likely hood the genetics behind the disorder is the same but the manifestations may represent multiple types (the current manifestations i.e. PDD, autism, Apergers, Retts etc) based on the way the genes are switched on or off in the individual when they are born and during their development. |
I disagree that the genetics are the same. I think that there are probably a few common "autism genes," but I have a feeling that each subtype IS different genetically in some way. I just learned about alternative phenotype genetics in my bipolar textbook, and I really support this. I think that different phenotypes most likely have different genotypes overall, with some shared genetics to give major symptoms. This is why I'm such a proponent of studying AS vs. HFA. I want to see if these different phenotypes ARE genetically/neurologically different. While I agree that early intervention can change the phenotype of autism's severity, I think this is more due to the brain's natural plasticity more so than a dramatic change in gene function. Acquiring language seems to be much more a factor of plasticity than the product of different proteins being made or not.
_________________
Helinger: Now, what do you see, John?
Nash: Recognition...
Helinger: Well, try seeing accomplishment!
Nash: Is there a difference? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dillogic
boom bang pow
Joined: Nov 25, 2011
Posts: 3489
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
One thing of note:
All of the symptoms listed in the proposed changes are equally as valid for Asperger's and Autism.
Isn't that the point? |
|
| Back to top |
|
OJani
a brat
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
Age: 40
Posts: 2322
Location: Budapest, Hungary, Europe
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:19 am Post subject: Re: Not autistic under DSM 5! |
|
|
| Verdandi wrote: | | OJani wrote: |
Asperger's is not 'autism', technically speaking. |
It's not the diagnosis of autism, but it's been presented as a form of autism since Lorna Wing started promoting it as a new diagnosis. |
I wouldn't say that it's not autism or someone having it isn't autistic. I thought 'technically' means 'per the diagnostic criteria' (language issue?). The criteria (both DSM and ICD) does not mention 'autism' or 'autistic'. My point was, the same is true for PDD-NOS, which sometimes get unrecognized as a form of 'autism' (see Sweatleaf's post), for it 'only' being a PDD, not 'autism'.
We know that 'PDDs' and 'ASDs' are used interchangeably, and some know that Asperger himself referred to the disorder named after him 'Autistic Psychopathy'. But it's not in the criteria, for the time being. It seems it will be so in the DSM-V, though there will be no more 'Asperger's syndrome' in it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sora
away away
Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Age: 25
Posts: 5650
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:21 am Post subject: Re: Not autistic under DSM 5! |
|
|
| Verdandi wrote: | | Tuttle wrote: | | Verdandi wrote: | | OJani wrote: |
Asperger's is not 'autism', technically speaking. |
It's not the diagnosis of autism, but it's been presented as a form of autism since Lorna Wing started promoting it as a new diagnosis. |
I'd say its been presented as a form of autism since Asperger used the words "autistic psychopathy".
The word autistic was used in Asperger's work as well as Kanner's, and every of the early papers I've read looking at both their work has referred to both of them as forms of autism. |
I agree with this, but I think Hans Asperger made a point of claiming that he had identified a completely different condition from the one Kanner identified.
I could be mistaken in my recollection, however. |
I read a paper in which Asperger compared his disorder with Kanner's disorder.
He wrote that the disorder are extremely similar concerning their details but that they must be different disorders (he also includes a mocking? essay on how to tell infantile autism apart from all kinds of common disorder that can mimic autistic behaviours), but - he's basically making fun of Kanner all the way from what I can tell.
As for the direct comparison between the "Asperger-type" and the "Kanner-type" and why they're different disorders according to Hans Asperger:
- that infantile autism is a condition close to psychosis or a full psychosis, possibly identical to infantile schizophrenia
- that AS isn't a psychosis and that the children with it are highly abnormal, limited in their ability to participate socially/in communication and restricted by their interests, but very original in their behaviour/thinking
- that children with AS usually have to a superficially excellent speech very early on (however, I know that can't be the full story because he'd described major language deficits and language delays in his original paper) but just like children with Kanner-type they don't use it for communicational means and don't answer (to being talked to, when asked a question...)
- children with AS are far more developed personality-wise than children with infantile autism, therefore, children with AS generally develop major/severe "conflicts" for which they are brought to professional attention (from his original paper, I think he refers to the fact that young children with AS usually live with their families (not in institutes) and so automatically participate in some sort of social life, even get send to kindergarten or school (until they are kicked out, sometimes even during their first day/send to see a mental health professional) at which they fail quite vividly)
- AS generally seems to be a heritability condition, children are born with it (Kanner-type isn't?)
- children with AS are not as abnormal/disordered/defective (no idea which one he means) as children with Kanner-type
Conclusion of what the differences come down to:
- in detail, the autistic symptoms are coinciding, but children with the Asperger-type generally have a different level when it comes to developing personality and intellect/intelligence
- Kanner claims that the cause of his disorder is "a mystery", Asperger writes that he refrains from commenting on that
I believe that paper is to be taken with "a grain of salt" considering the amount of sarcasm and the amount of no-you're-wrong that he directs at Kanner/Kanner's disorder. I also never read Kanner's paper so I can't tell whether Kanner really claimed all these things that Asperger says he or his students claimed.
_________________
Autism + ADHD
++++ no spell check when posting from my IPAD ++++
______
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. Terry Pratchett |
|
| Back to top |
|
TPE2
Phoenix
Joined: Oct 21, 2008
Posts: 1490
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:45 am Post subject: Re: Not autistic under DSM 5! |
|
|
| OJani wrote: | | The criteria (both DSM and ICD) does not mention 'autism' or 'autistic'. My point was, the same is true for PDD-NOS, which sometimes get unrecognized as a form of 'autism' (see Sweatleaf's post), for it 'only' being a PDD, not 'autism'. |
Well, technically, the ICD criteria mentions 'autism" several times. |
|
| Back to top |
|
OJani
a brat
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
Age: 40
Posts: 2322
Location: Budapest, Hungary, Europe
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 9:02 am Post subject: Re: Not autistic under DSM 5! |
|
|
| TPE2 wrote: | | OJani wrote: | | The criteria (both DSM and ICD) does not mention 'autism' or 'autistic'. My point was, the same is true for PDD-NOS, which sometimes get unrecognized as a form of 'autism' (see Sweatleaf's post), for it 'only' being a PDD, not 'autism'. |
Well, technically, the ICD criteria mentions 'autism" several times. |
But DSM doesn't.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
OJani
a brat
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
Age: 40
Posts: 2322
Location: Budapest, Hungary, Europe
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:48 pm Post subject: Re: Not autistic under DSM 5! |
|
|
| TPE2 wrote: | | OJani wrote: | | The criteria (both DSM and ICD) does not mention 'autism' or 'autistic'. My point was, the same is true for PDD-NOS, which sometimes get unrecognized as a form of 'autism' (see Sweatleaf's post), for it 'only' being a PDD, not 'autism'. |
Well, technically, the ICD criteria mentions 'autism" several times. |
All right, I didn't say "technically" in the incriminated sentence. I was obviously oblivious, though. I always end up floundering, there's no excuse for it, referring to ADHD or ASD won't do. (I knew the ICD criteria uses references to autism, as some of the criteria is the same for both.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
Verdandi
Miss Kitty Fantastico
Joined: Dec 08, 2010
Posts: 10355
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:52 pm Post subject: Re: Not autistic under DSM 5! |
|
|
| OJani wrote: | | Verdandi wrote: | | OJani wrote: |
Asperger's is not 'autism', technically speaking. |
It's not the diagnosis of autism, but it's been presented as a form of autism since Lorna Wing started promoting it as a new diagnosis. |
I wouldn't say that it's not autism or someone having it isn't autistic. I thought 'technically' means 'per the diagnostic criteria' (language issue?). The criteria (both DSM and ICD) does not mention 'autism' or 'autistic'. My point was, the same is true for PDD-NOS, which sometimes get unrecognized as a form of 'autism' (see Sweatleaf's post), for it 'only' being a PDD, not 'autism'.
We know that 'PDDs' and 'ASDs' are used interchangeably, and some know that Asperger himself referred to the disorder named after him 'Autistic Psychopathy'. But it's not in the criteria, for the time being. It seems it will be so in the DSM-V, though there will be no more 'Asperger's syndrome' in it. |
The criteria by themselves, no, but if you read the full entry in the DSM-IV, it's clear that AS is presented as a form of autism in which speech is not strictly delayed.
For that matter, PDD-NOS mentions autism a handful of times in its very short text entry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
OJani
a brat
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
Age: 40
Posts: 2322
Location: Budapest, Hungary, Europe
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:09 pm Post subject: Re: Not autistic under DSM 5! |
|
|
| Verdandi wrote: | | OJani wrote: | | Verdandi wrote: | | OJani wrote: |
Asperger's is not 'autism', technically speaking. |
It's not the diagnosis of autism, but it's been presented as a form of autism since Lorna Wing started promoting it as a new diagnosis. |
I wouldn't say that it's not autism or someone having it isn't autistic. I thought 'technically' means 'per the diagnostic criteria' (language issue?). The criteria (both DSM and ICD) does not mention 'autism' or 'autistic'. My point was, the same is true for PDD-NOS, which sometimes get unrecognized as a form of 'autism' (see Sweatleaf's post), for it 'only' being a PDD, not 'autism'.
We know that 'PDDs' and 'ASDs' are used interchangeably, and some know that Asperger himself referred to the disorder named after him 'Autistic Psychopathy'. But it's not in the criteria, for the time being. It seems it will be so in the DSM-V, though there will be no more 'Asperger's syndrome' in it. |
The criteria by themselves, no, but if you read the full entry in the DSM-IV, it's clear that AS is presented as a form of autism in which speech is not strictly delayed.
For that matter, PDD-NOS mentions autism a handful of times in its very short text entry. |
Thanks, I guess I will leave it at there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
btbnnyr
Rabbit In Cat's Clothing
Joined: May 19, 2011
Posts: 3226
Location: Lost Angleles Carmen Santiago
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sora wrote: | Conclusion of what the differences come down to:
- in detail, the autistic symptoms are coinciding, but children with the Asperger-type generally have a different level when it comes to developing personality and intellect/intelligence |
I think that Asperger's autistic children showed more personality and intelligence because they had more communication instinct and abilities to show more personality and intelligence. After his initial paper, he probably picked the ones that showed more personality and intelligence as truly autistic children to study and ignored the ones who showed less personality and intelligence, those being the "infantile psychosis" children that he thought that Kanner was studying. A Kanner's autistic child who is non-communicative and cannot speak due to mouth motor problems and cannot write or even point due to hand motor problems is not going to show much personality and intelligence, but in modern times, once you teach the child to type, then you may see the personality and intelligence that the child was not able to show before learning to type. Communication abilities and development of these or barriers against these, e.g. motor problems, really eggsplain away a lot of the differences, IMO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
cyberdad
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 22, 2011
Age: 45
Posts: 1707
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| slasher666 wrote: | | I was diagnosed with high-functioning autism when I was 3-and-a-half, but my psychiatrist diagnosed me with Asperger's when I was 15. Yesterday I did the second half of my assessment to see how high-functioning I was. Since I was diagnosed with autism when I was little, I will always have that diagnosis. I like to think of myself as having Asperger's because it's more specific and it shows how high-functioning I am, but I'm more likely to qualify for social services if I'm registered with the provincial government as having autism. I feel sorry for anyone who lost their diagnosis with their new assessment and won't qualify for services. Most people don't seem to realize that high-functioning doesn't mean low needs. I am very high-functioning but still need a lot of help with school work and certain life skills. |
I think it's currently a question of economics. Your government and mine only have a limited funding in their kitty bag for funding early intervention and education programs. The current funding in Australia is largely geared toward "low functioning" kids. Whatever is left is then divided up to more higher functioning kids. Kids with higher functioning Aspergers get the least amount funding as they are deemed the least "in need".
Ironically the best results for funding are for kids on the borderline who benefit most from early intervention. From a purely economic point of view the more kids they can get from "dependent" on aides or parents to become "independent" will alleviate the so called "burden" on social services. |
|
| Back to top |
|
cyberdad
Phoenix
Joined: Feb 22, 2011
Age: 45
Posts: 1707
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| OddDuckNash99 wrote: | | cyberdad wrote: | | But I think you are simplifying these conditions into discrete separate categories when all evidence points to the fact that people can move their diagnosis from into the other. There is high likely hood the genetics behind the disorder is the same but the manifestations may represent multiple types (the current manifestations i.e. PDD, autism, Apergers, Retts etc) based on the way the genes are switched on or off in the individual when they are born and during their development. |
I disagree that the genetics are the same. I think that there are probably a few common "autism genes," but I have a feeling that each subtype IS different genetically in some way. I just learned about alternative phenotype genetics in my bipolar textbook, and I really support this. I think that different phenotypes most likely have different genotypes overall, with some shared genetics to give major symptoms. This is why I'm such a proponent of studying AS vs. HFA. I want to see if these different phenotypes ARE genetically/neurologically different. While I agree that early intervention can change the phenotype of autism's severity, I think this is more due to the brain's natural plasticity more so than a dramatic change in gene function. Acquiring language seems to be much more a factor of plasticity than the product of different proteins being made or not. |
You say each "subtype" of developmental disorders under the PDD umbrella is different genetically but then contradict yourself by stating the it's "more due to the brains natural plasticity" than dramatic change in the gene function?
Here's a little genetics 101 for you. Phenotypic plasticity is very common in the biological world. We know how to identify polymorphic manifestations controlled by variation in the expression of single genes or loci. It gets far more complex when you are dealing with the brain, not just because it's the most complex organ in the body but because it has the greatest number of networks to other organs via nueral feedback networks and blood vessel connections.
Neuropsychologists have barely scraped the surface in understanding how the brain exactly works, so not surprisingly the genetics of the brain is poorly understood. Add to this the dimension of developmental changes in the brain from utero and we have a lot to understand about gene-brain development interaction.
I am only saying this to you for your own education, avoid making categorical statements in your thesis dissertation that each (man made) discrete ASD category is "genetically" different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
