Why is a "cure" so controversial?

[Full Steam]

I've thought about this a lot and veered from one side to the other, and now I'm in the middle.

It seems to me that both sides could meet in the middle though.

In the red corner we have neurodiversity people who are against a cure.
A cure means spotting and aborting autistic fetus's because autism is a brain difference. We are all of the same brain, and you can't change your brain.

In the blue corner we have the cure people.
This includes the much quieter autistics who want a cure and probably most parents and doctors.
They see autism as being detrimental to well being and making life much harder for autistics. Because we are outside the normal range, we need help to bring us back to "normal".

The first thing to understand is that both sides have points.

That may be uncomfortable, but they do, and if we want progress it's essential to see the other side.

The second thing is that no one seems to be defining "cure".

Neurodiversity thinks; If i'm not autistic any more then I'm NT and I won't think like I do now, so I'm no longer me. Help me with my problems and change society.

Cure people just want all this stuff gone.

But if we defined a cure as taking ones autism sub-clinical we would think just like we do now, but we would not get diagnosed autistic.

We would still be neurodiverse as we will not think like NTs.

The trouble with the term autism is that it means different things to different people. To me it's how my brain is and if you think like me you're autistic regardless of psychological diagnosis.

To the medical world it's diagnostic criteria.

For example, if I could adjust my diet, supplementation and nutrition and reduce my sensory issues to within "normal" range I'd no longer hit the criteria, therefore I'd be cured.

I would accept this treatment if available, but I'd still be autistic be MY definition.

 

[Ambi]

I think when people discuss a "cure", they often don't understand what that means. So I think it's good to distinguish between "treatment" and "cure". A true cure would mean that you would no longer have to do anything at all to decrease symptoms of ASD. Treatment would be anything that could be used to keep the symptoms down or to help you better deal with them. So if you were able to reduce certain issues via diet and supplementation, then you would have found an effective treatment, but not a cure - so you would still have ASD. That would be the medical understanding - for example, people with diabetes who take medicines to keep their blood sugar in control are still diabetics. However, going back to the autism example, to the layperson, your effective treatment would probably be called a "cure", only because they don't know any better. They sometimes do this with something like diabetes, too - I know from my past work in a medical office. You couldn't simply ask people if they had diabetes (or some other type of issue) - because they sometimes would just say "no" - then you would find out they were on the medication. But in their opinion, as long as the medicine was controlling their blood sugar, they didn't have diabetes.

 

[Full Steam]

I think when people discuss a "cure", they often don't understand what that means. So I think it's good to distinguish between "treatment" and "cure". A true cure would mean that you would no longer have to do anything at all to decrease symptoms of ASD. Treatment would be anything that could be used to keep the symptoms down or to help you better deal with them. So if you were able to reduce certain issues via diet and supplementation, then you would have found an effective treatment, but not a cure - so you would still have ASD. That would be the medical understanding - for example, people with diabetes who take medicines to keep their blood sugar in control are still diabetics. However, going back to the autism example, to the layperson, your effective treatment would probably be called a "cure", only because they don't know any better. They sometimes do this with something like diabetes, too - I know from my past work in a medical office. You couldn't simply ask people if they had diabetes (or some other type of issue) - because they sometimes would just say "no" - then you would find out they were on the medication. But in their opinion, as long as the medicine was controlling their blood sugar, they didn't have diabetes.

Ok, bad analogy.

What if my sensory issues could be cured by an injection permanently?

I still would, and then would be permanently sub-clinical.

 

[Ambi]

Ok, bad analogy.

What if my sensory issues could be cured by an injection permanently?

I still would, and then would be permanently sub-clinical.

Would it just be the sensory issues - or all neurological differences, communication issues, that whole "feeling like an alien" thing, not intuitively understanding/learning social cues/norms, difficulty with reading facial expressions, etc. - a cure for anything and everything that would be out of the statistical normal range?

I hope I am not getting this thread off topic or missing the point of the post - I just want to first be sure I can properly picture what you mean.

As for me.....it's like I want to have my cake and eat it to. I wouldn't want to give up the invaluable ways in which being an Aspie has molded me and the insights and experiences I think I have had from it......but at the same time, I would love to be able to cruise through certain issues more intuitively rather than have to screw up for decades blindly before coming to piece things together that seem very basic to other people. I would like to have less anxiety and sensory issues. So....I want both. I want the richness of both. I want the complexity of both. I want the ease of.....both. I honestly feel that being an Aspie has helped me a lot spiritually, but I think being cured would help me out in a worldly sense.

 

[Full Steam]

Would it just be the sensory issues - or all neurological differences, communication issues, that whole "feeling like an alien" thing, not intuitively understanding/learning social cues/norms, difficulty with reading facial expressions, etc. - a cure for anything and everything that would be out of the statistical normal range?

I hope I am not getting this thread off topic or missing the point of the post - I just want to first be sure I can properly picture what you mean.

As for me.....it's like I want to have my cake and eat it to. I wouldn't want to give up the invaluable ways in which being an Aspie has molded me and the insights and experiences I think I have had from it......but at the same time, I would love to be able to cruise through certain issues more intuitively rather than have to screw up for decades blindly before coming to piece things together that seem very basic to other people. I would like to have less anxiety and sensory issues. So....I want both. I want the richness of both. I want the complexity of both. I want the ease of.....both. I honestly feel that being an Aspie has helped me a lot spiritually, but I think being cured would help me out in a worldly sense.

No, what I mean is that for me, I would only need a single element reducing so that it is no longer negatively affecting my life. At which point I would no longer get an official diagnosis.

That would be enough to "cure" me in the eyes of the medical profession.

The element you list I would not want curing, and can't be cured as that's our basic nature (brain shape).

I'm thinking;

Sensory issue.
Eye contact ( I think there's a chemical at work here)
Reduces meltdown/shutdown.
Better ability to understand spoken words.
Less anxiety/depression
Less stress caused by changes.

 

[InfinityRose]

I've thought about this a lot and veered from one side to the other, and now I'm in the middle.

It seems to me that both sides could meet in the middle though.

In the red corner we have neurodiversity people who are against a cure.
A cure means spotting and aborting autistic fetus's because autism is a brain difference. We are all of the same brain, and you can't change your brain.

In the blue corner we have the cure people.
This includes the much quieter autistics who want a cure and probably most parents and doctors.
They see autism as being detrimental to well being and making life much harder for autistics. Because we are outside the normal range, we need help to bring us back to "normal".

The first thing to understand is that both sides have points.

That may be uncomfortable, but they do, and if we want progress it's essential to see the other side.

The second thing is that no one seems to be defining "cure".

Neurodiversity thinks; If i'm not autistic any more then I'm NT and I won't think like I do now, so I'm no longer me. Help me with my problems and change society.

Cure people just want all this stuff gone.

But if we defined a cure as taking ones autism sub-clinical we would think just like we do now, but we would not get diagnosed autistic.

We would still be neurodiverse as we will not think like NTs.

The trouble with the term autism is that it means different things to different people. To me it's how my brain is and if you think like me you're autistic regardless of psychological diagnosis.

To the medical world it's diagnostic criteria.

For example, if I could adjust my diet, supplementation and nutrition and reduce my sensory issues to within "normal" range I'd no longer hit the criteria, therefore I'd be cured.

I would accept this treatment if available, but I'd still be autistic be MY definition.

I think a cure is so controversial because it makes many aspies and auties feel like that there is something wrong with who they are, and that they need to be "fixed." Personally, it's something I'm kind of on the fence about. I think if there was some way to get rid of the more negative aspects of autism while still keeping the good, that would be ideal. It would definitely be a bad idea to completely wipe out autism altogether, though.

There are many people who have helped shape the world the way it is today who are autistic or suspected of being autistic. It would be a shame if we never got another Albert Einstein, Mozart, or Temple Grandin, I think.

 

[Crossbreed]

I believe that Asperger's is a base, hereditary neurology that healthy people are born with, analogous to being left-handed. (It does not need to be cured.)

I believe that [a type of medicine that is not allowed to be discussed here] was introduced (in the 1980s) that is essentially an allergen to us.¹ That allergen is a source of neo-natal brain injury (of varying degrees) to our ND children,² that NT children have exhibited an immunity to.

Being a central nervous system injury, there is no cure to be had, though some may make a full or partial recovery over time, on their own [toward just having Asperger's]. (It is also the likely mechanism for Savantism, which amounts to being a beneficial CNS injury, but a CNS injury, nonetheless.³)

We can, however, take preventative action, once we do confirm that allergen. This will not put an end to Asperger's, but it will greatly reduce the incidence of regressive autism and other severe co-morbid conditions. (Regressive autism still occurred prior to the advent of [said medicine],⁴ but not in such overwhelming numbers. The sources of those CNS injuries were never isolated.)

¹As I write this, there is a company in the process of developing hypo-allergenic forms of [this medicine]. There is no down side to that preventative measure.

²And, possibly to gifted children, who exhibit similar sensitivities.

³See The "Acquired" Savant - Wisconsin Medical Society

⁴Like Susie Wing, etc.

 

[Voltaic]

My opinion is, we are sitting on the high-horse of being high functioning, and yelling that we are fine. We forget about those on a other end of the spectrum, which is a concept that most like. By consequence of there being a spectrum, there are those on the very far end of being autistic. Some can't talk, understand, move smoothly, or think at the level of one their age, and can't live on their own.
A cure for Autism? As you guys said, we having defined curse, it Is a throw around word to describe a complicated situation. For me, when I hear all this, I think back to what the doctors told me where to limit my expectations. All of this might not go away, but what they try to do is make the problems more manageable. I would latch on to that type of definition, not to curse it, but to make problems more manageable. Autistic brains are wired differently, we may not be able to solve it completely and make them nt, but we could make their lives better.
If it a cure before birth, then it gets a bit more complicated for me. I am not sure how or even if they can do prebirth diagnoses, but if they Can, is it a 'yes or no' thing, or is it, 'he has autism, but it won't be debilitating, or, he has Autism that will restrict him to a vegetable state? Or even a vaccine kind of thing against autism, where everyone before birth will revive it?

I don't think he should 'vaccine or 'cure' Everyone before birth to prevent it entirely, if we have effective early warning signs before birth. If we can detect how sever it can be, I would only support a pre birth cure if there are high chances it is debilitated them.

If the cure is an effective therapy, then bring it on! Because no amount of talking isn't going to change my personality enough where I would be considered full nt.

My problem is with a literal curse, is we are starving humanity some of the possible minds that have in the past has changed humanity for the better. Guys like Einstein, and Newton are speculated to have a forum of autism. We bring skills to the table that no other type of person Can, and along with that comes the problems of autism that we may struggle with. I have even heard the argument that autism is a possible step In evaluation, more suited for the modern world than nts, if all humans were high functioning spectrum. My problem, is that if we all out cure Autism, that we are committing a type of genocide on a small but albiet influential culture of people. We have our problems, but our gifts that we can give to humanity may or may not make up for the pain we feel. Would it be worth it to you? The pain we feel from the bad aspects, vs the benifate we can provide for society.

 

[Voltaic]

My opinion is, we are sitting on the high-horse of being high functioning, and yelling that we are fine. We forget about those on a other end of the spectrum, which is a concept that most like. By consequence of there being a spectrum, there are those on the very far end of being autistic. Some can't talk, understand, move smoothly, or think at the level of one their age, and can't live on their own.
A cure for Autism? As you guys said, we having defined curse, it Is a throw around word to describe a complicated situation. For me, when I hear all this, I think back to what the doctors told me where to limit my expectations. All of this might not go away, but what they try to do is make the problems more manageable. I would latch on to that type of definition, not to cure it, but to make problems more manageable. Autistic brains are wired differently, we may not be able to solve it completely and make them nt, but we could make their lives better.
If it a cure before birth, then it gets a bit more complicated for me. I am not sure how or even if they can do prebirth diagnoses, but if they Can, is it a 'yes or no' thing, or is it, 'he has autism, but it won't be debilitating, or, he has Autism that will restrict him to a vegetable state? Or even a vaccine kind of thing against autism, where everyone before birth will revive it?

I don't think he should 'vaccine or 'cure' Everyone before birth to prevent it entirely, if we have effective early warning signs before birth. If we can detect how sever it can be, I would only support a pre birth cure if there are high chances it is debilitated them.

If the cure is an effective therapy, then bring it on! Because no amount of talking isn't going to change my personality enough where I would be considered full nt.

My problem is with a literal cure, is we are starving humanity some of the possible minds that have in the past has changed humanity for the better. Guys like Einstein, and Newton are speculated to have a forum of autism. We bring skills to the table that no other type of person Can, and along with that comes the problems of autism that we may struggle with. I have even heard the argument that autism is a possible step In evaluation, more suited for the modern world than nts, if all humans were high functioning spectrum. My problem, is that if we all out cure Autism, that we are committing a type of genocide on a small but albiet influential culture of people. We have our problems, but our gifts that we can give to humanity may or may not make up for the pain we feel. Would it be worth it to you? The pain we feel from the bad aspects, vs the benifate we can provide for society? Not just a rhetoricle question to prove a point.

 

[Shiznown]

I do not seek a cure, but I seek to be more "evolved". I like thinking different, but I would like to be enhanced so to speak. Smarter, stronger, ect. I think stem cells are the way of the future and should be pursued. I think that companies should pursue stem cells and the government should take a hands off approach in order to drive down the cost. I have often thought about things like this and if/when mankind will evolve and what their mindset would be and if their brains would be anything like ours. I think about my mindset as a child and how it changed as an adult and wonder how it could change if it could develop more.

 

[Ragnahawk]

No, what I mean is that for me, I would only need a single element reducing so that it is no longer negatively affecting my life. At which point I would no longer get an official diagnosis.

That would be enough to "cure" me in the eyes of the medical profession.

The element you list I would not want curing, and can't be cured as that's our basic nature (brain shape).

I'm thinking;

Sensory issue.
Eye contact ( I think there's a chemical at work here)
Reduces meltdown/shutdown.
Better ability to understand spoken words.
Less anxiety/depression
Less stress caused by changes.

Stimming
Sun Glasses
Walk Away
Marijuana
Move to a country that worships or properly understands autism.
^

My solutions. Now if I had symptoms like, the color red causes me to have seizures... Yeah I'd want some medicine or something. Since I'm not dying, and I can speak words/write... I feel fine.

 

[Ragnahawk]

Also I think Marijuana cures problems with speaking. The thing that I want.

 

[pjcnet]

What is considered normal? Well it's usually whatever the majority are, if more people were on the high end of the autistic spectrum then NTs would be the ones that they'd be talking about "curing". It can be taken to the extreme, if you were a cannibal, then if you were amongst mainly cannibals it would be considered normal and if you weren't then unless you joined them you'd be an outsider (probably dinner lol). Why don't they ask NTs whether they'd like to be "cured", a revolutionary new treatment that makes them autistic, they'd increase in intellect, especially in a special interest, do you think they'd go for it? lol!

Certain support is fine if it helps improve less wanted traits, but a cure, well even though I can see both sides, it's still definite a no from me.

I believe that Asperger's is a base, hereditary neurology that healthy people are born with, analogous to being left-handed. (It does not need to be cured.)

I believe that a type of medicine (that is not allowed to be discussed here) was introduced (in the 1980s) that is essentially an allergen to us.* That allergen is a source of neo-natal brain injury (of varying degrees) to our ND children,** that NT children have exhibited an immunity to.

Being a central nervous system injury, there is no cure to be had, though some may make a full or partial recovery over time, on their own [toward just having Asperger's]. (It is also the likely mechanism for Savantism, which amounts to being a beneficial CNS injury, but a CNS injury, nonetheless.)

We can, however, take preventative action, once we do confirm that allergen. This will not put an end to Asperger's, but it will greatly reduce the incidence of regressive autism and other severe co-morbid conditions. (Regressive autism still occurred prior to the advent of said medicine, but not in such overwhelming numbers. The sources of those CNS injuries were never isolated.)

*As I write this, there is a company in the process of developing hypo-allergenic forms of this medicine. There is no down side to that preventative measure.

**And, possibly to gifted children, who exhibit similar sensitivities.

Well here's an interesting article - please click here, although it probably deserves it's own thread to discuss it any further.

 

[kay]

I'm sorta certain even without the whole autistic thing I still would be nowhere near typical and yet I still cringe at the idea of a cure. It would be nice to get rid of the bigger problems, like sensory issues. Fixing that is no different that fixing all the things NTs get/want fixed, too. I'd like to get rid of migraines too, as any NT would. However, there is a big difference between that and being made "normal". Not wanting to go there. I don't need to look at your eyeballs or have dozens of friends or be able to engage in the really insipid conversation I heard yesterday between two women at the bank. I'll also keep my healthy immaturity, looking younger than I am, my tendency to get interested in things no one else likes, and the rest of my "oddness". I'm sitting here rocking and plucking at the nail on my left big toe. Not hurting anyone, so I'll keep that. My meltdowns hurt me so I can lose those just fine.

 

[Crossbreed]

...here's an interesting article - please click here, although it probably deserves it's own thread to discuss it any further.

Gifteds have the same kind of allergy tendency.

 

[dragoncat16]

Allergies have arisen and increased in the last century because of the way we keep our houses much more clean than in previous eras. The immune system is "bored" and needs something to do, and allergies are the result.

Diagnosed cases of autism have increased because it was discovered last century and there is more awareness among professionals now, not because there has been an actual increase.

Perhaps people on the spectrum have more allergies because the houses in which they are raised tend to be cleaner.

Is there a cure for red hair or blue eyes? Autism makes our brains different from those of other people, just like hair or eye colour, but is that necessarily a bad thing?

Other people have different experiences than I do, of course. For myself, I like being smarter and more capable than others around me, even if they get jealous and act like jerks to me. I like being able to solve any problem that I encounter. I like being able to hear sounds that others can't hear, even though it hurts sometimes. I like being able to see patterns in everything and do arithmetic in my head. I like being able to focus on what I am doing, to the exclusion of everything else, and to work efficiently without needing breaks for coffee or empty small talk with colleagues. I like the fact that I am capable of entering my own world and imagining entire detailed scenarios. I wouldn't change all of that, nor do I think that my parents should have been forewarned about my ASD and given the opportunity to get rid of me before I was born. In fact, the only thing I don't like about my life is the way I am treated by others.

Therefore, the cure, in my case, would be to get rid of all the noisy, cruel, and unintelligent NTs in the world. Is there a pill for that?

 

[AO1501]

I have no interest in a 'cure', because I am who I am, and I play a part in the world that only I can play as the person I am.

In that regard I am very lucky, I know. But the very characteristics of Aspergers that I have are the strengths I use every day to do what I am paid to do - and do extraordinarily well (I am told, in my performance reviews). If anything about me were to be 'fixed' I would no longer have those perceived weaknesses, such as social isolation or sensory sensitivity, which I also use to help focus on what I need to do.

Yet many years ago, as a child, if anyone had asked my mother if I needed to be fixed, and if it was OK for them to go ahead and try and repair me, she would have said to do it, with no thought to what was inside my head, and what these things that she saw within my behaviours and reactions as disabilities and faults would lead me to become capable of doing.

The problem with 'a cure' in the context of what we know of such things, is that no-one will be asking the victim - the autistic person. Choices will be made by parents, carers, guardians, who see the whole thing from the outside, not the inside. And, worryingly, in some parts of the world they will also be getting their advice from medical professionals not always motivated by genuine best interest.

Yes, I know there are those on the spectrum who have far poorer levels of function, but it is still not possible to tell what these individuals may be capable of with the right support and environment in which to grow. And for sure, until someone thinks to try, no-one is asking these people what they think and truly want.

We may have moved a long way along from the eugenics movement's belief that the cure was forced sterilisation and euthanising of social defectives, but as Asperger himself advocated, we need to think about how to develop the strengths those with autism spectrum disorders have, rather than 'cure' them of their perceived deficits.

 

[onlything]

I've thought about this a lot and veered from one side to the other, and now I'm in the middle.

It seems to me that both sides could meet in the middle though.

In the red corner we have neurodiversity people who are against a cure.
A cure means spotting and aborting autistic fetus's because autism is a brain difference. We are all of the same brain, and you can't change your brain.

In the blue corner we have the cure people.
This includes the much quieter autistics who want a cure and probably most parents and doctors.
They see autism as being detrimental to well being and making life much harder for autistics. Because we are outside the normal range, we need help to bring us back to "normal".

The first thing to understand is that both sides have points.

That may be uncomfortable, but they do, and if we want progress it's essential to see the other side.

The second thing is that no one seems to be defining "cure".

Neurodiversity thinks; If i'm not autistic any more then I'm NT and I won't think like I do now, so I'm no longer me. Help me with my problems and change society.

Cure people just want all this stuff gone.

But if we defined a cure as taking ones autism sub-clinical we would think just like we do now, but we would not get diagnosed autistic.

We would still be neurodiverse as we will not think like NTs.

The trouble with the term autism is that it means different things to different people. To me it's how my brain is and if you think like me you're autistic regardless of psychological diagnosis.

To the medical world it's diagnostic criteria.

For example, if I could adjust my diet, supplementation and nutrition and reduce my sensory issues to within "normal" range I'd no longer hit the criteria, therefore I'd be cured.

I would accept this treatment if available, but I'd still be autistic be MY definition.

I can see your point and I'm not exactly against or for the 'cure'. If people want it and if one day something resembling it exists, that's fine, let them.

What I am against are negative connotations connected to the word 'cure'. It seems to suggest that all autistics are like life-long ill people, mentally impaired and as such, need to be 'cured'. Like we are 'less human'.

I think that a true 'cure' would not be as closely connected to diets and medications as some think(though lessening the negative impact would definitely be gladly seen and welcome)... but more to acceptance and understanding of other people. Seeing that there are differences and that we are, in fact, just different. Not less, not weird, not freaks. Just different.

 

[Judge]

I wish to be thought of as a person- not an illness.

So no, you can't "cure" me.

 

[AO1501]

....

To address the specific and actual question you asked, 'Why is a "cure" so controversial', the answer is rather more simple that what 'we' think, or 'they' think, or who is on a high horse and who is not. It far more obvious, and not at all an easy balance of choice.

Every "cure" so far has been a sham. Eugenics and euthanasia (both very drastic, but both scientifically proposed and used); supplement treatments which cost huge sums, were scientifically unsupported and ineffective; hugging/holding therapies which caused behavioural changes that were often highly detrimental to the subject; and mercury purging, which was driven by greedy protagonists making lots of money, but with no scientific basis.

Given that the causes of autism are not known and autism itself is still poorly understood, a cure (if there was to be such a thing) can't be known either. Yet, at least. And given also that the 'cures' already proposed and used have varied from appallingly self-interested at best, to immoral and murderous at worst, it should surely be unsurprising that possible 'cures' are controversial.