Possible changes coming to autism diagnosis

[sanantone]

In another thread about ADHD, I mentioned that researchers found a genetic link between ADHD and high functioning autism and that high functioning autism might be a different disorder from low functioning autism. I came across this video today about a proposal to create four categories of autism rather than treating it as a spectrum. Some researchers want to go further and completely split the conditions into different disorders. Of course, they won't go back to diagnosing people with Asperger's. 

In my opinion, the social/behavioral category might not actually be autism. However, I don't want to step on anyone's toes, and the autism community has warned against completely separating diagnoses because people can fall into more than one category. 

https://youtu.be/GqBzVuW2cnM

[NotJoeBiden]

Considering autism, and all diagnosis in general, are just a term referring to as series of symptoms and signs, I am not surprised the diagnosis might be updated for higher resolution given many neurodivergent people who require less support tend to not get diagnosed despite potentially benefitting from such.

That being said, as of current, Autism and other forms of neurodivergence exist on a spectrum, and as such we see all different types.

[soba]

What kind of benefits do patients get from these endless diagnoses? Better access to big pharma's products?

I see this development as another aspect of the aggressive medical marketing behind the autism diagnosis. Medical facts are highly tangible when there is a lot of money involved. The Sackler family wasn't the only player in this racket.

[sanantone]

What kind of benefits do patients get from these endless diagnoses? Better access to big pharma's products?

I see this development as another aspect of the aggressive medical marketing behind the autism diagnosis. Medical facts are highly tangible when there is a lot of money involved. The Sackler family wasn't the only player in this racket.

Autism is normally treated with therapy, so how would big pharma be involved? There are criticisms of the behavior analysis industry, which doesn't prescribe medications. The pharmaceutical industry is more relevant to ADHD.

[wow]

What kind of benefits do patients get from these endless diagnoses?

Benefits: Knowing one's diagnosis helps a person access appropriate therapy (for autism, like Sanantone said, it's usually non-pharmacological) and learn skills that help them function--hold down a job, build better social relationships, succeed in school, learn healthy alternatives to self-harming behaviors, tolerate a more varied diet (tolerating only a few types of food is fairly common in autism and it's not healthy for obvious reasons), avoid meltdowns in public/at work/at all, etc.

Not being diagnosed means continuing to struggle with such things, which can contribute to poverty, poor physical health, and poor mental health.

[NotJoeBiden]

What kind of benefits do patients get from these endless diagnoses? Better access to big pharma's products?

I see this development as another aspect of the aggressive medical marketing behind the autism diagnosis. Medical facts are highly tangible when there is a lot of money involved. The Sackler family wasn't the only player in this racket.

How would a new diagnosis for those on the Autism spectrum who require little to no intervention benefit Big Pharma, especially when there are not medications for treating even more severe forms of Autism?

Please explain.

[soba]

What kind of benefits do patients get from these endless diagnoses? Better access to big pharma's products?

I see this development as another aspect of the aggressive medical marketing behind the autism diagnosis. Medical facts are highly tangible when there is a lot of money involved. The Sackler family wasn't the only player in this racket.

How would a new diagnosis for those on the Autism spectrum who require little to no intervention benefit Big Pharma, especially when there are not medications for treating even more severe forms of Autism?

Please explain.

1/2 of all children with autism are on some kind of psychoactive drug according to Wikipedia. 

A widening of the autism diagnosis will obviously bring in more patients to Big Pharma and other health care businesses. This may or may not be helpful for these individuals. To deny that the health care industry has an economic incentive to diagnose as many as possible is naive. 

If there is no need for intervention, why is there a need for diagnosis?

[NotJoeBiden]

1/2 of all children with autism are on some kind of psychoactive drug according to Wikipedia. 

Yes, for secondary symptoms like anxiety and depression, which are diagnosed independent of Autism. They are just more prevalent in individuals with Autism. There is not a drug for Autism. This is in study that Wikipedia referenced for this stat.

If there is no need for intervention, why is there a need for diagnosis?

Therapy and accommodations as stated above.

[sanantone]

What kind of benefits do patients get from these endless diagnoses? Better access to big pharma's products?

I see this development as another aspect of the aggressive medical marketing behind the autism diagnosis. Medical facts are highly tangible when there is a lot of money involved. The Sackler family wasn't the only player in this racket.

How would a new diagnosis for those on the Autism spectrum who require little to no intervention benefit Big Pharma, especially when there are not medications for treating even more severe forms of Autism?

Please explain.

1/2 of all children with autism are on some kind of psychoactive drug according to Wikipedia. 

A widening of the autism diagnosis will obviously bring in more patients to Big Pharma and other health care businesses. This may or may not be helpful for these individuals. To deny that the health care industry has an economic incentive to diagnose as many as possible is naive. 

If there is no need for intervention, why is there a need for diagnosis?

As stated in the video, there is a group of individuals with autism who have a high prevalence of ADHD and anxiety diagnoses. ADHD and autism can be contributors to anxiety; that's why it's important to treat those conditions.

Before the autism diagnosis existed, the condition was thought to be childhood schizophrenia, which actually leads to more pharmacological interventions. Today, the main intervention for autism is ABA therapy.

[soba]

My view is that highly functioning individual that don't need much interventions (i.e. formal therapy, medication) can get it from outside the health care industry, i.e. by mentors, parents or teachers at school. A diagnosis should not be needed in these cases. There will be some stigma associated with a medical diagnosis and it might prove to create problems in the future with e.g. employment.

My concern is that the health care industry is taking over and pathologizing every bit of human variation. Excessive treatment with psychoactive drugs is a potential public health issue.