EDIT: I question the value of the resource because its science is skimpy and because a resource I do respect, ASAN, also seems to question it.
When I googled for more information, this information bothered me (red bits are the things I noticed) from
Sfari.org:
"The Markrams describe autism as a constant state of feeling “hungover and jetlagged” and say that it is characterized by extreme fear reactions.
Indeed,
they frame all of the ‘capabilities’ [of autism] as problematic symptoms that need to be tempered before an individual can function meaningfully and demonstrate enhanced abilities.By contrast, other models, such as the ‘enhanced perceptual functioning’ model, describe genuine skills and
superior abilities seen in autism10, 11. [10, 11 are specific citations to peer-reviewed literature].
So how does the intense world theory affect autism treatment? In their publications,
the researchers state that their claims “have to be substantiated in systematic and controlled experiments on human subjects” before others make any predictions regarding treatment
2.
However,
in contrast to this expressed caution, in the popular press the Markrams call for a dramatic change in the way that clinicians and researchers treat children with autism.
In one such
interview they said, “In the early phase of the child’s life, repetition is a response to extreme fear. The autist perceives, feels and fears too much. Let them have their routines,
no computers, television, no sharp colors, no surprises. It’s the opposite of what parents are told to do. We actually think if you could develop a filtered environment in the early phase of life you could end up with an incredible genius child without many of the sensory challenges.”
This is a worrying throwback to the days when researchers implausibly linked parental inaction to autism severity ("cold mother"--
A4.). What’s more, this type of statement at once creates anxiety about having missed the window of opportunity, and unreasonably high expectations. We also note a
concern raised by
Ari Ne’eman,
president of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, that we should not link the worth of a child with autism to whether he or she has special abilities.
Until researchers have tested the theory appropriately, we urge caution. We need to verify this theory before it can shape our perception and treatment of autism. Once this is done, we may well find ourselves with an intensely interesting proposal. For now, we remain intensely worried.
Anna Remington is lecturer in cognitive science at the Centre for Research in Autism and Education at the Institute of Education in London. Uta Frith is emeritus professor of cognitive neuroscience at University College London."
EDIT: End of quoted material from sfari.org.
I agree with the neurologists Remington and Frith. Markram's work is not science if it's an anecdotal expression built on wishfully rethinking Henry Markram's own childhood. And based on the gap between what's in the popular press and what the science says, it smacks of hucksterism of the worst kind: a lot of religious people, and in particular those who don't learn critical thinking in theological studies, get taken in when the name of their God is invoked.
EDIT: In other words, the initial claims for Markram's "intense world" position is anecdotal and personal and is being marketed without any empirical support to a group that is unlikely to question it because the resource was introduced under the color of being a Christian. Christianity is not an excuse for bad science.
