• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Autism test and treatment potentially on horizon as scientists find hormone deficiency link

AGXStarseed

Well-Known Member
(Not written by me)

A test and possible treatment for autism could be on the horizon after scientists discovered that people and primates who are less social are deficient in a particular hormone.

Around 1.1 per cent of the people in Britain, around 695,000 are through to be on the autism spectrum, according to The National Autistic Society, and although many are able to function well, some find the condition severely debilitating.

Doctors have also struggled to accurately diagnose the condition, but now scientists at Stanford University and The University of California Davis believe that measuring levels of the hormone arginine vasopressin (AVP), which regulates blood pressure, could be the answer.

In tests on rhesus monkeys, they found that less social animals had levels of the hormone which were almost one third lower than their more gregarious peers. And a similar deficiency was found in 14 autistic boys.

Although the results are preliminary, the researchers believe their findings suggest that AVP may not only provide a test for autism, but also be a target for developing drugs to alleviate social impairment.

"Since autism affects the brain, it's really hard to access the biology of the condition to know what might be altered," said Dr Karen Parker, associate professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford and the lead author of the new study.

"Right now, the diagnosis is based on parents' reports of their children's symptoms, and on clinicians observing children in the clinic."

For the tests. the scientists measured levels of two hormones, oxytocin and vasopressin, in the monkeys' blood and in their cerebrospinal fluid, which bathes the brain.

Both hormones are peptides implicated in a variety of social roles, including parental care and bonds between mates. Some prior studies have hinted that these hormones may also be involved in autism.

Monkeys in the less social group had significantly less vasopressin in their cerebrospinal fluid than monkeys in the more social group.

These vasopressin levels accurately predicted the frequency with which individual monkeys participated in social grooming, an important social activity for rhesus monkeys.

The researchers sampled four times over four months, and showed that vasopressin levels in the fluid were stable over time.

They also compared vasopressin levels in 14 boys with autism and seven age-matched children without autism. Children with autism had lower vasopressin levels than children without autism, the study found.

Senior author Dr John Capitanio, professor of psychology at The University of California Davis said: "What we consider this to be at this point is a biomarker for low sociability.”

The research was published in the journal Science Translational Medicine.


Source: Autism test and treatment on horizon as scientists find hormone deficiency link
 
The more I think about this sorta thing the more I know it's a bunch of scientist with no clue. As if sociability is really my primary problem anyways. I have smashed a finger and skinned up my foot within an hour of getting out of bed today. Why don't they figure that out?

My guess is if the hormones they keep looking at do anything is they relax the person and help anxiety, not autism. But these "scientist", guess they forget how much anxiety is caused by having your nervous system constantly bombarded by total chaos.

If they would just simply say the hormones might reduce the effects of excess stress. I suspect the lack of socializing is the cause of the low hormones, not the other way around so the research is most likely completely flawed anyways.
 
This is nonsense because it is based on the fallacy that all autistic people are introverts who don't like socialising, which just isn't true - many autistic people are outgoing and sociable. How do they explain that?
 
"Funding"

How many autistic people does it take to change a lightbulb?

One.


(You don't get it? There's nothing to get. Who on Earth has a problem changing a lightbulb?)
 
It’s a super small test group, consisting only of boys. Scientifically, this study is rubbish. Plus, as @Progster said, this assumes that all people with autism are introverts, which just isn’t true.
 
Sounds like more rubbish and how many autistic people are involved in this research? I suspect a big fat zero as usual apart from anyone they might use to test because for a start they're looking for a "cure" which makes autism look like a disease when it isn't, also the majority of autistic people wouldn't want a supposed "cure" even if one did exist. Even if increasing the hormone really did improve socialising and I'm sceptical, it would be similar to taking a drug that tricks the body into producing more of a particular hormone so you could say that Ecstasy (MDMA) tablets are also an autism "cure" because they would definitely help many autistic people become more social on a temporary basis, but of course there's long term consequences that outweigh the positives and it's most definitely not a true "cure". Even if you made an autistic person better at socialising there's so much more to autism than just social issues, if they think that's a "cure" (and I don't agree with this word), then they're very sadly mistaken.
 
This is nonsense because it is based on the fallacy that all autistic people are introverts who don't like socialising, which just isn't true - many autistic people are outgoing and sociable. How do they explain that?

I am confused by your comment. It is clear that there are people on a vast spectrum. I continually score as half NT and half aspie. However, difficulties with social skills is one of the big factors in full on autism. How can you deny this? Just engaging on these forums, it is one huge factor of many.
 
Sounds like more rubbish and how many autistic people are involved in this research? I suspect a big fat zero as usual apart from anyone they might use to test because for a start they're looking for a "cure" which makes autism look like a disease when it isn't, also the majority of autistic people wouldn't want a supposed "cure" even if one did exist. Even if increasing the hormone really did improve socialising and I'm sceptical, it would be similar to taking a drug that tricks the body into producing more of a particular hormone so you could say that Ecstasy (MDMA) tablets are also an autism "cure" because they would definitely help many autistic people become more social on a temporary basis, but of course there's long term consequences that outweigh the positives and it's most definitely not a true "cure". Even if you made an autistic person better at socialising there's so much more to autism than just social issues, if they think that's a "cure" (and I don't agree with this word), then they're very sadly mistaken.

You are missing what this could mean. It’s not about “you” not wanting to change. It’s about many people like the ones posting always posting on these forums that desire to be socialable by ANY means. There are many. Also, the number one issue is that some parents would jump on this for their children when it becomes available. (Despite the ethical considerations...)

This is a fascinating part of science that is like any science....it can go one way of another. If a lack of a natural hormone plays a part in people’s unhappiness, than why not allow those who want it to access it. Of course this is several decades (and scientific study) away from being available. Of course there are ethics involved in every part of science.

Some people would absolutely want this. Just the fact that this has been discovered is quite interesting as it starts the road to understanding the bio chemical factors of autism. I am surprised that people with autism do not want to learn more about the bio chemistry factors in which make us different.
 
You are missing what this could mean. It’s not about “you” not wanting to change. It’s about many people like the ones posting always posting on these forums that desire to be socialable by ANY means. There are many. Also, the number one issue is that some parents would jump on this for their children when it becomes available. (Despite the ethical considerations...)

This is a fascinating part of science that is like any science....it can go one way of another. If a lack of a natural hormone plays a part in people’s unhappiness, than why not allow those who want it to access it. Of course this is several decades (and scientific study) away from being available. Of course there are ethics involved in every part of science.

Some people would absolutely want this. Just the fact that this has been discovered is quite interesting as it starts the road to understanding the bio chemical factors of autism. I am surprised that people with autism do not want to learn more about the bio chemistry factors in which make us different.
Yes and a lot of people want to take Ecstasy tablets too, but it doesn't make them good and giving children something that changes them at an age when they're probably not even able to understand is in my opinion a type of abuse. The majority of autistic people however wouldn't want a "cure" even if one was available based on a survey here.
 
I am confused by your comment. It is clear that there are people on a vast spectrum. I continually score as half NT and half aspie. However, difficulties with social skills is one of the big factors in full on autism. How can you deny this? Just engaging on these forums, it is one huge factor of many.
You are misinterpreting what I am saying. I did not say that autisitic people don't have social skills. I said that some autistics are sociable an extrovert. Having poor social skills doesn't automatically mean that one is going to be an introvert, or not seek out interaction with others or be sociable. Some autistics are extroverts and quite sociable. Sociable means "willing to talk and engage in activities with others" - one can have poor communication skills or even poor social skills, and still want to talk to or engage with others.
 
This is where my confusion comes in. Part of the diagnosis is to not have social skills. Do you mean they trained themselves to be this way? I am half NT and even I have huge social problems and sensory disorders.
This is why there is much to understand by scientists and having better diagnosis.

I see no point in discussing illegal drugs. A natural hormone that is supposed to be in the body is not the same as taking illegal drugs for a short term high. A hormone would regulate the body chemistry.

Again, I will reiterate, that it’s parents who have very difficult challenges that seek hope and change. Also, the MAJORITY of austistics have difficulties with social skills. Why not keep an open mind to science? This research is still in its infancy. I could see hormone treatments (idelivered in a less invasive way) in the youth years, when social skills are greatly wanted and needed. (Just read the threads here where people are ready to kill themselves due to lack of ability to socialize!). As an adult one could elect not to take the hormones, of course.

This also might turn into something in the future that could be used for treating sociopaths, and or repeat offenders in prison. Who knows...one has to think outside th box. They already make it mandatory for prison-released pedophiles to take a sex drive decreasing drug. That is a positive thing, despite they not wanting to take it. Hormonal treatments are common even nowadays for all kinds of problems. I am pretty sure even a few NTs would find this to be an advantage. Think of the possibilities in making business deals, etc.

I say please keep an open mind. I am constantly amazed at the negativity surrounding science on these threads. Without science, a great number of those with Aspergers would not have successful careers. Without science, we would all be dead!
 
Last edited:
I see no point in discussing illegal drugs. A natural hormone that is supposed to be in the body is not the same as taking illegal drugs for a short term high. A hormone would regulate the body chemistry.
Yes, but many drugs have a similar outcome because they trick the body into releasing more of a natural hormone, also the hormone is no longer natural if it's being introduced to the body and you will probably find that they make the hormone synthetically too, synthetic hormones can cause havoc and unwanted side effects. Unfortunately I have absolutely no choice but to take a synthetic hormone because my thyroid is virtually dead and barely producing anything, if I didn't take it I'd be virtually flat on my back, but I can tell you that the synthetic hormone replacement is totally crap compared to the original, for a start my weight almost doubled within 3 years of taking it even though I' eat very little and I have never had a weight issue before, also my energy hasn't returned leaving me in a right state, yet the doctors don't want to know despite complaining repeatedly about this and they seem to think I'm lying when I say I don't eat much by offering me a dietitian, but I REALLY DON'T EAT MUCH and I'm sick and tired of saying it! I can see various complications when introducing synthetic versions of this hormone too, I'm forced to have it or I'd barely be-able to do anything even though I'm still not close to I was before, but why introduce sometime synthetic like this when there's no actual need? Perhaps high functioning autistic people are even meant to be the way they are and are just evolved differently?
 
I already stated why there “is a need” to pursue this research. We do not even know all of the potential needs of this or where the research leads. Like all scientific study, it begins in one place, and often branches out into many directions. There is tremendous possibilities we do not even know yet.

Do you know that now they are growing chicken embryos that they have put human cells into? This sounds horrible- creating weird human chicken living things, right? It screams immoral, and unethical, right? But when you read the whys, of science, and what they are trying to research (human diseases), and that it’s illegal to experiment on human embryos, then it starts to make more sense. Please know that all research has intensive grant writing first. Things have to make sense and have potential.

This research into hormonal imbalances is just as important as when they did the research into helping people with disfunctioning thyroids, or livers, or hearts, or whatever topic one could think of. People must keep open minds. Besides, we live in a world where people do want choices. Your choices may not be my choices. I should have the right to choose what I want, just as you should.
 
Some people would absolutely want this. Just the fact that this has been discovered is quite interesting as it starts the road to understanding the bio chemical factors of autism. I am surprised that people with autism do not want to learn more about the bio chemistry factors in which make us different.

I am interested in learning about my brain and autistic brains in general, but this correlation (which is all it is, at this point) may not even exist in the vast majority of autistic people.

And nobody has proven that low vasopressin actually causes social inhibition or social difficulty. It could be entirely the other way around, with social inhibition/difficulty causing low vasopressin.....In which case, increasing the level of it in a person's brain would do absolutely nothing to change the social inhibition/difficulties, and you could not use vasopressin levels as a test for autism since anybody who was socially inhibited or had social difficulty for any reason would have low vasopressin levels.

Correlation is not causation. Why does everyone forget this?

Also, just because a person questions the methodology used or the conclusions being drawn from a study doesn't mean they think that the existance or aims of that study are bad.

And just because a person is against "curing" autism (or even simply thinks the idea is foolish and impossible) doesn't mean they are against therapies to help ameliorate our difficulties.
 
Your choices may not be my choices. I should have the right to choose what I want, just as you should.

In an ideal world, I would fully support research into a cure despite thinking it is a fool's errand -- ridiculous and impossible. (And so long as that research did not take resources away from actually helping and supporting people who are actually alive, and did not involve preventing autistic people from ever being born.)

However, we do not live in an ideal world, and if a cure was found (again, don't think this is likely but for the sake of argument) autistic people would probably not be allowed to choose even as adults. This complicates the ethical discussion....I have no simple answers about what is "right" in the circumstances as they are, but since I know that it is possible for autistic people to be happy while still being autistic, I, personally, choose to support eradication of all the things that get in the way of that happiness (one of them being lack of effective therapy/treatments for difficulties) rather than supporting getting rid of autism/autistic people.
 
In an ideal world, I would fully support research into a cure despite thinking it is a fool's errand -- ridiculous and impossible. (And so long as that research did not take resources away from actually helping and supporting people who are actually alive, and did not involve preventing autistic people from ever being born.)

However, we do not live in an ideal world, and if a cure was found (again, don't think this is likely but for the sake of argument) autistic people would probably not be allowed to choose even as adults. This complicates the ethical discussion....I have no simple answers about what is "right" in the circumstances as they are, but since I know that it is possible for autistic people to be happy while still being autistic, I, personally, choose to support eradication of all the things that get in the way of that happiness (one of them being lack of effective therapy/treatments for difficulties) rather than supporting getting rid of autism/autistic people.
The thing is higher functioning autism isn't an illness so it shouldn't be called a "cure" and even the word "treatment" makes it sound like they're trying to cure something. Virtually all our issues are caused by not fitting in, coping and complying in an NT world which is only thought of as the correct world because the majority of people are NT and we are outnumbered. It is therefore more of an attempt at modification to make us more like them than a "cure".

If they tried to make me have something like this against my will I would use force to resist if necessary because who-ever was trying to make me have it would be attempting to severely abuse me even if it was the state. How many NTs would like to be given something to make them autistic if most people were autistic in an autistic world where they didn't fit in?
 
The thing is higher functioning autism isn't an illness so it shouldn't be called a "cure" and even the word "treatment" makes it sound like they're trying to cure something.

I don't think autism is an illness/disease regardless of functioning level. It is a condition that comes with real difficulties independent of the world we live in -- however, I don't think having difficulties that the majority of people don't share automatically means you are diseased/ill. It means you are different/disabled (I don't think the two things are mutually exclusive, since a disability is a kind of difference, and I think it's stupid that disability is automatically seen as a horrible thing.)
 

New Threads

Top Bottom