Monday, October 29, 2012

Gadfly mentioned in New York Magazine

There's an interesting article that just came out in New York magazine.  A well-written article, it makes a number of valid points about the number of people being diagnosed with Asperger's for trivial reasons as well as self-diagnosis.

About four months ago or so, I was contacted by the author, Ben Wallace, who was interested in interviewing me.  He asked me about my opinion of Simon Baron-Cohen and I explained why I was not exactly enamored of a number of the good professor's ideas.  These included his notion that because autism has stayed in the population in spite of the fact that most autistics never have children suggests autism has some sort of genetic evolutionary advantage.    Also, his offensive (at least to me) essay in which he wrote that high functioning autism should not be regarded as a disability.

In addition to his one sentence mention of my belief  that Baron-Cohen does not understand the rudiments of genetics, he also wrote about the stories of Craig Newmark's and Bram Cohen's self-diagnosis which I originally wrote about in my blog.
Unfortunately, no context was really given for my observations of professor Baron-Cohen's possible ignorance of genetic principles.  So, I will briefly present it here.  Genetic mutations can occur spontaneously for a variety of reasons without being inherited.  There is at least some research that suggests that a number of mutations associated with autism are de novo, i.e. can occur spontaneously.  Thus, these are not inherited so autism could conceivably stay in the population without either autistics producing their own offspring or due to an evolutionary advantage.

I suppose I'm being a bit irrational about my enthusiasm about a one sentence mention in a national magazine, but I guess it may be part of my autism. 

Friday, October 26, 2012

Picking Temple Grandin's Brain: Anything new?

That most famous of autism icons, Temple Grandin, (whom I like to call Temperamental Grandiose just for fun), is in the news once again . A research group in Utah has done a variety of studies on her brain in addition to giving her various tests. They used three controls who were matched for age, sex and hand dominance to draw a comparison between Grandin's brain and a typical brain.

One of the findings was an increased brain volume in comparisons to controls.  However, this is probably nothing new as Courchesne's group and I think a variety of other researchers has found enlarged brains in those with autism.

Grandin's lateral ventricles, which hold the brain's cerebrospinal fluid, are skewed, the left one being much larger than the right.

Her amygdala, the area of the brain responsible for anger and rage responses and suppressing sexual desire, is enlarged in both hemispheres.  (I wonder if this might explain her stated desire for celibacy :)) 

The researchers also found a higher volume of white matter on the left side of her brain as well as enhanced white matter connections in various parts of her brain.

Among the most interesting of the findings (at least to me) were weak and compromised connections in the left frontal gyrus, which includes Broca's area for speech.  She was also found to have impaired connections in the right fusiform gyrus which is the area for face recognition.  This has relevance as one of the symptoms of autism (which occurred in both Grandin and myself) is a speech delay or language impairment prior to age 36 months.  Also, many autistics, myself included, have problems recognizing others' faces. 

I remember reading someplace else (I'm not sure if it was Thinking in Pictures or an article she wrote) that many years ago, Grandin had an MRI scan showing abnormalities of certain parts of the cerebellar vermis that I had when I underwent a scan by Eric Courchesne's research group many years ago.  These were not mentioned in this study.  

The knowledgeable neuroscience blogger, The Neurocritic, has given his take on the study . He writes about another talented autistic savant, a 63-year-old man with extraordinary musical abilities, perfect pitch,  as well as in several languages and art.  Similarly to Grandin, he also had an enlarged amygdala on both sides of his brain.  Unlike Grandin, he was not terribly successful educationally and professionally and was only able to obtain employment as a dishwasher.  So, one has to wonder how the similarities in brain findings of the opposite sex, though like in age (Grandin was also 63 at the time of her scans) relate to someone who had different gifts than Grandin but was not able to utilize his gifts in order to garner gainful employment.

Interestingly, one study showed a positive correlation of increased amygdala size and greater sized social networkings in neurotypical college students. Neurocritic also mentions another study in which researchers suggested there was a correlation between amygdala size and number of Facebook friends college students had. 

The increase in amygdala size among autistics is nothing new, as the Neurocritic cites two studies in the above-linked blog post where researchers found this in other persons with autism (most likely Joe Blow regular auties without Grandin's and the dishwasher's savant skills).

Brain studies have shown enlarged amygdala's in persons with anxiety disorders and even right wing political beliefs.  So what to make of Grandin's enlarged area of this brain nucleus?

Impairments in Broca's area have also been found in mirror neuron studies of autism as well as Courchesne's now year-old study showing the increased number of neurons in this area.

  Fewer and smaller neurons in regular non-savant autistics in the fusiform gyrus in autistics were found in yet another study. 

Also, the fact that three controls may not be enough to tell us anything may be germane. 

Anything new here elucidating on the autistic brain or Grandin's so-called savant skills?  I don't think so. 

Sunday, October 14, 2012

John Robison's interesting autism employment proposals

As regular readers of this blog know, I've been unemployed for about five and a half years.  I had to leave the workplace because my autistic disability made it so difficult.  Therefore, I was intrigued to read some interesting ideas of John Robison's on how to solve or at least mitigate this problem.

Robinson proposes giving employers tax credits for hiring persons with disabilities.  I'm not sure if this is just ASD's or all disabilities.  He calls this a work disability credit.  It entails giving employers between a 30 to 60% tax credit for hiring a disabled person depending on how extensively the person is disabled.  Interestingly, he ties this in with Social Security Disability stating that the person unable to work and on SSDI could be evaluated for this program and be eligible for the work disability credit instead.

I see a number of problems with this.  Robison, unlike myself, has never had to apply for disability.  I doubt very much he has any understanding of what the process entails.  What would be the eligibility criteria for evaluating people for this program?  Would it be identical to SSDI evaluations?  If the answer is yes, then merely having a legitimate diagnosis of autism or Asperger's wouldn't qualify people for these tax credits.  They would have to prove they were incapable of performing any type of "substantial and gainful" employment, meaning a job that pays like about $1000 a month or more.

Proving one can't perform substantial and gainful employment is no easy task.  At the time I applied for disability I had worked with the limitations albeit with great difficulties, so I didn't have a terribly good case and after a four and a half year fight, I was unable to collect.  I was also told that if I couldn't be a medical transcriptionist, that I could perform work as a janitor or a washing machine loader in a dry cleaners by the person who testified against me for the government at my administrative law hearing.  I know this is not the case, but I have no way of proving it in an administrative hearing or any other type of court of law.  

In the case of other persons, the government does turn down probably close to 70% of people who apply for Disability.  If you want to continue the fight, you have to retain a lawyer who, if they successfully get you the Disability money, keeps 25% of what you would have gotten retroactively.

My lawyer would not take my case to federal district court as he felt I had little chance of winning.  Another law firm also declined to take my case and I gave up.  Not long after that, I found  out my lawyer had another autistic client whose case he lost in district court.   One friend on the spectrum applied for it when he had never worked and was denied.  Another person with autism I know was able to get it but it took her and her mother seven years of litigation.  They had to give their attorney 25% retroactively. So, there is no guarantee the person would be able to get the credit, in fact the odds would be stacked against them.  Also, how would the prospective employer feel about sharing the employment credit with an attorney? 

So basically what Robison is proposing is another system in which tax dollars are used for litigation and people have to be frustrated in having to duke it out in the courts with the government whether or not they'd be eligible for this tax credit.  Also, since Robison's plan does not involve a flat percentage but rather a sliding scale, a fight could take place for someone rated at 30% who feels the only way they can get a job is to be rated at 60%.  So with all the years that SSDI litigation goes on would be exacerbated with Robison's plan.

Also, would the employer want this tax credit if the autistic person's behavior were too appalling (at least from their point of view) to employ them?

What does this do about the problem that most persons on the spectrum would not have the ability to receive the training to do skilled work?  How would they be more marketable if  the only jobs they could get were menial ones?

Robison claims this would prevent employers from sending the jobs overseas to let's say India where labor costs are substantially cheaper  But he presents no cost-benefit analysis to show this might be the case.

Another issue I have with Robison's plan is he claims that this would help the self-esteem of those on the spectrum (or possibly other disabilities).  I don't believe this would be the case.  I don't understand what the difference is between someone having to collect disability and work when they have to take a way back door entrance.  Also, the stigma and resentment among fellow non-handicaped employees that those on the spectrum would receive because they are being subsidized.  I can certainly speak for myself if no one else on the spectrum.  This plan, if this were the only way I could be employed, would certainly not raise my self-esteem.

This is also assuming Robison's proposal could get through congress.  This is iffy as the deficit is already incredibly large due to all the wars and other things the federal goverment spends money on.

In summary, Robison's plan would jam the courts, raise taxes and/or increase the deficit, not address the issues of autistics lack of social and employment skills, and probably do nothing to raise at least a number of autistic person's self-esteem.  Is this plan workable or feasible?  I don't believe so.

Again, I want to emphasize there is no simple, quick fix solution to the employment problems of autistics without a cure or some sort of treatment which currently does not exist.