Evidence of Pathological Markers in 92% of ASD made simple

Post Reply New Topic

We all know neurology is a complex subject to many, basically I found on YouTube a very simple cartoon that explains a pathological marker found in over 92% of ASD cases in the Cerebral Cortex. I have included other links that explain things in more depth.

Cartoon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0u7ynQ5kgk

More in depth article:

https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/ ... 034/254005

Article with possible treatment directions:

https://www.ncsautism.org/blog/2019/2/2 ... ral-cortex

Are the data in those cartoons vetted by any real-world professional institution?

The cartoon was made by McMaster University, the developmental Neuroscience Lab.

https://mdprogram.mcmaster.ca/

The middle link was from separate research

The last link was from this man a neuroscientist who actually studied ASD brains:-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Casanova

So yes about as good as it gets in terms of credibility

Cool! I'll view them, then...

The Wikipedia link worries me. It's linked to a troll which both Wikipedia and Wrong Planet had to ban on numerous occasions, whose real name is Yuval Levental, and Casanova was in cohorts with him. Probably still is.

Most links on WP claim to be factual but are more usually opinions, even from "scientific" sources. Cherry picking the ones that support one's personal view is allowed here, though it isn't very persuasive if you start out with a mindset and don't weigh it with other views and evidence.

Who cares about Yuval levental he's a nobody, the links were all credible scientific sources.

Casanova Is an award winning neuroscientist, i included him because i liked the simplistic explanation along with the cartoon.

Also may i add the presentation of physical evidence from multiple credible establishments rather than just an opinion.

Depends on what you mean by "cohorts", he met him for research? A university is not going to risk their reputation on a electrical engineer college drop out.

Wrong Planet is a support forum, first and foremost and always, so an anti-neurodiversity stance which is aggressively presented as adamant fact to push a defectiveness story of AS can be offensive to many members.

Depends on if people want a diversity of opinion and scientific facts or an echo chamber?

Since when did presenting medical evidence research FACT from a leading University become offensive?

It becomes offensive when/if a multiply banned member keeps returning under sock accounts. Which is against the rules. Your facts are yours. They aren't written in stone.

There is a diversity of opinion on this subject. Currently testing for ASD is done by psychologist and psychiatrist and is very extensive and IMO equally subjective. If there was a means of detecting ASD in individuals at a very early age using scientific tools to measure micro column densities (comparing ASD and NT micro column density), then that would be an important finding. Because therapy could be applied while the brain is in the growth and development stage where it would be most effective.

But the second part using therapeutic intervention such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), to alter the brain structures in ASD individuals seems rather problematic. From my perspective this approach is vary nonselective. It is a scattershot application rather than precise targeting. The results of those ASD individuals that were subjected to TMS therapy in the past produced a mixed bag of results. There are significant milestones that need to be achieved before someone could make a claim a breakthrough in this area.

But again I only have a cursory knowledge of this subject.

Ok cool you don't want Yuval levental coming back, I get that.

Im a married aspie with a kid living in the rainy UK, (so is my ip address that you can check) , I believe he lives in sunny California, we share the same English language, with small differences but I can usually tell something written by a brit to something written by one of your nationals most of the time so im not him in disguise. I don't know much about him other than the basics anyway and didn't know he used to be on WP.



Onto the subject matter, it does look a very convincing marker and the "shower curtain" of short circuit messages would explain a lot of ASD issues and prompt a lot of questions:-

Does this marker cause other mental health problems too?

How can you id this on a living patent?

If thin mini collumns lead to ASD what would abnormally wide mini collumns cause?

Can this lead to potential treatment in the future, stem cells maybe?

Don't know much about TMS there`s nothing in the UK, ive seen a few documentaries of a lady in NY doing it with the famous case of the man who suddenly drove home after & felt strange new emotions he never felt before.

The last of three links that you cited has a side by side comparison of mini columns between NTs and Autistics. But these are from individuals that died. It seems that one of the methods that scientist are using is positron emission tomography (PET) and radioactive dyes. But the results are very low resolution. Here is a link. Study calls into question chemical messenger’s role in autism

I suspect not. From my perspective I do not view Aspergers and High Functioning Autistics as a disability. It is a different brain structure. It has certain strengths and certain weaknesses. Within the first few years after birth, the brain structure is formed.



Years ago, they subjected individuals with mental health issues with electric shock treatment. From my perspective they were very ineffective because they applied the electric shock over the entire brain. Specific regions were not targeted. It was a barbaric treatment and not effective. TMS is a slightly different approach. It subjects the brain to changing magnetic field. From my perspective, this is a little better approach because I feel the brain stores information electro-magnetically, in a manner somewhat similar to the earliest computers that used magnetic core memory. But again the changing magnetic fields are not focused into specific brain regions with any fidelity. Therefore some of the results reported are very short lived and somewhat subjective.