Interesting article about "four core subtypes" of autism

Post Reply New Topic

https://www.thetransmitter.org/spectrum ... -subtypes/ - Untangling biological threads from autism’s phenotypic patchwork reveals four core subtypes. Fragment:

Why does the website hosting the article have one set of writing standards for scientists and another set for journalists?

Hmm . . . this means something . . .

The way they are dividing up autism into subtypes is a bit like dividing people up according to whether they like ham or cheese. One subtype of humanity enjoys both ham and cheese, one subtype leans towards ham, one leans towards cheese, and a smaller group hates both.

So yeah... I guess we could do all these tests to work out which subtype someone is in, and then we could, I don't know, either feed them only cheese because that's what they like, or try feeding them ham, to make them more like everyone else?

Maybe they'll get somewhere with all this subtyping eventually, but there's nothing useful yet.

Similar article: https://www.thetransmitter.org/spectrum ... es-traits/ (Four autism subtypes map onto distinct genes, traits).

Four groups (only 29% tends to have developmental delay and (or) to be broadly affected):
- “Social/behavioral” group - accounting for 37 percent of the sample,
- “Moderate challenges” (34 percent),
- “Mixed ASD with Developmental Delay” (19 percent),
- “Broadly affected” (10 percent).

I think that one of these two more popular profiles is like profile of Fritz V. described in History of Asperger syndrome and the second of them is associated with another profile which mostly co-occurs with average or high IQ among autistic individuals. Maybe these statistics differentiate between two "high-functioning" intelectually and linguistically groups of people with autism - one "stereotypical" Asperger's/HFA presentation and another less "classic" in symptomatology, more likely to be misdiagnosed as emotional issues, ADHD or learning disorders.

I am familiar with this new "four core subtypes" business and frankly it's all just new renaming horsesh**.

You can't scientifically measure anything if you constantly move around the diagnostic criteria.

Right now, many people are "on the autism spectrum" who previously would have been categorized in some other way. This is contributing to the idea that autism rates are "rising" when really we don't know if that is happening or not.

Imagine I have a starting group of 100 people with autism. Now I have a group of 20 people who had what used to be called Asperger's. They do not have that diagnosis available anymore, so we have to merge the groups. Now we have 120 people with autism. A person with microcephally (a pinhead if you are into old circus sideshows) walks in. This was previously a standalone diagnosis, but now because of how a person with microcephally behaves we will say that person is also on the spectrum. So now we have 121 people with autism. We have some kids who have been identified to have ADHD. People with ADHD share some traits with autism and with kids maybe we are not sure which disorder they actually have, so we will diagnose some of the kids with both to be safe, so these kids can get services and ADA rights. There are 15 people in this child group. So now we have 136 people with autism instead of 100.

What has changed here is that there is a different way of referring to this now singular group of people.

Since they have obvious differences from each other, there is now a need to create subgroups.

BUT THEY WERE PREVIOUSLY IN SUBGROUPS!

I think that there are two main groups of average or above-average intelligent autistic persons: one like Donald T. (case one described by Leo Kanner, for example Temple Grandin belongs to group of people with "Kannerian autism") and second like Fritz V. (case one described by Hans Asperger who named condition described by him as "autistic psychopathy").

I suppose that Donald T. (and Temple Grandin) group is "moderate challenges" group (relatively mild symptoms of "classic" autism, with higher IQ, sometimes even giftedness, better language skills, especially in adolescence and adulthood) and Fritz V. group is "social-behavioral" group (which usually has "in-built" nonverbal learning disorder among the symptoms and tends to have odd-eccentric traits (not necessarily cluster A personality disorder, like schizotypal, schizoid, paranoid, even in adulthood)).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... r_syndrome - there is a section about Fritz V.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Triplett
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_Grandin

From the article linked in the first post in this topic:

so much foofara, each and every one of us is different because our neurology has developed in different ways, leaving each of us with various and only sometimes comparable struggles but still varying degrees of struggle. So many varied genes combined are recognized in autism genetic studies, how can that possibly be recognized and categorized since the gene combinations are almost endless. Yet another attempt to put us all in a box and say "autistic people do this, are like this, do that........ categorizing neurotypicals would yield in various sections too, but with so many different sub sections as to make it equally impossible...... much like that old myers briggs so called tests, in the end, it means nothing because we truly are a spectrum and our autism is different for each of us depending on the way our neurology developed or failed to develop that gives us all (both NT and ND) the differences we experience in life every day.
the whole thing seems silly to me and completely useless and pointless.

There are conditions and profiles that only makes the social issues outcomes/certain repetitive behaviors a secondary/trickle down effect -- they're not autistic because either or none of those things are a primary or a stand alone.

Autism needs both. The problem is including conditions that only acknowledges the surface things.

Kinda more or less how or why ADHD is different from autism, and how it is distinguished from other conditions.
Kinda how there are glaring differences between OCD or tourettes from autistic RRBs.
And no one is saying these things are mutually exclusive.

This trickled down effect of social issues and dysregulation is very much more or a habit or a reaction of limitations from the wiring than the wiring itself.
But there are no current widespread diagnostic tools for that yet.



The profiling is just for the work arounds and more immediate needs, not for causes itself. Just like the attempts at support level scales.

But somehow that's the problem -- that will end up including allistics with the same profiles yet with the similar trickled down effects of their cognition as "autism".

Regardless of cognitive profiles, growing up with neglect and lack of empathy from anyone (due to an allistics' very different profile, or just due to the environment itself) can mimic autism.

And what's the most available support they'd be getting due to the vagueness and lack of labelling?
Get placeholder autism.



The only reason why I'd agree to the subtypes is for the autistics' workaround to learn and think, the strength based focus and supports that does more than learning around socialization, and more of a refined manual template for autistics to navigate by themselves.

And that's for autistics and autistics alone, and none of the blurry messy stuff around being "socially awkward" and solely relating to that particular aspect of autism.

If it were a free resource, any ND can just get it for free. They don't have to label themselves autistic and just give that support template a go.


Like -- does every alexithymia problem help and explain, let alone represent those without alexithymia? (Unfortunately, this already happened widespread at some point with unfortunate implications)

Does the usual manual for external sensory accomodations help someone with internal sensory triggers instead? (Personally, it didn't)

Is the visio-spatial stereotype help those whose weaknesses are those same domains? (Maybe the point of this categorization)

Can the asocial experience resonate with the socially driven dealing with social anxiety, loneliness and rejection, and vice versa? (Experience tells me absolutely not)

Oh, and even with the same type of autisms -- how about their respective comorbidities?

Gained Number Post Count (1).
Lose Time (n).

Lose more time here - Updates at least once a week.

Interesting we are going back to pre-2013 clusters

1.Aspergers some quirks
2.Aspergers with social deficits
3.Autism - verbal delay but high functioning as an adult with noticeable speech issues
4.Autism - verbal delay but severe issues and needs assistance with functioning

One of the reasons they dispensed with Aspergers is a lot of people in 3. end up in 2. and sometimes 1.
My daughter is probably 2.5

I would classify myself as Asperger's with quirks. Lots of quirks.

I have no idea which subtype I belong to. All I know is that as I went from toddler to child to teenager I had a stepwise decline in my ability to cope/function well within a neurotypically dominated society. I seem to straddle being very intelligent in some ways, and yet with marked deficits in other ways. I've been described as both a 'genius' and 'sub 90 IQ'. There were no delayed developmental milestones as a baby and toddler.

I've always struggled socially. Unlike those who lose friends as a result of developing a serious mental illness , I had no friends to lose. I do better online than F2F, but much of what I say on Bluesky and X/Twitter is ignored. My reach is very small. The social deficits are just a bit smaller when it comes to online interaction.