• su25@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    7 months ago

    discussion on whether it actually works or not aside, i thought we’ve kinda agreed that ethically its wrong to treat neurodivergence as a disease to be cured. it’s a cool scientific innovation, if only in mice, but i’m hoping that the chinese state and party spend more time deliberating the ethical question of this technology.

  • Addfwyn@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t want to totally downplay the incredible work the researchers are doing, but it’s a long way off from any kind of actual treatments coming from this.

    A lot of research is successful on mice that doesn’t actually end up resulting in human treatments for any number of reasons. Even if it could be leveraged into a treatment for humans, we are looking at years and years of further trials and research. Not even mentioning the immense degree of complexity that scientists would be working with.

    Still, the work done by China in all sectors, including biology and genetics, never ceases to impress. Even if an autism cure is not viable, the research could be extremely important for other things.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      For sure, there’s quite a ways to go from trials with mice to human trial. And very much agree that the progress China is making in all STEM areas is very impressive.

    • doccitrus@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Also, to be clear, there’s no accepted notion of ‘autism for mice’ (or any other non-human animal), even if describing animals as autistic can sometimes be arguably useful. So ‘works in mice’ is a phrase that does a lot of work here.

  • homonmain@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    7 months ago

    I joined an autistm support group and one of the other participants signed up for a medical trial to ‘cure’ or rather, lessen the effects of autism(something about a zap to rewires the brain done over a few weeks). We talked about the ethics of it for a bit but did end up agreeing that sometimes, being autistic sucks and it’s alienating. To wake up one day, neurotypical and able to pick up on social cues or maintain friendships would be so freeing.

    I personally have accepted that my autism is as much of me as my soul so I’m not interested in a ‘cure’, but talking over the woes with other autistic people and hearing relief even at the chance to have it taken away, really changed my worldview.

    Side note, we also talked about what a ‘cure’ would even mean because at what point does our being start and our autism end? I’m still skeptic but I hope things work out for that person.

  • JucheStalin@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Paywall so I can’t read the article. Presupposing a problem with neurodivergence is pretty gross. If this treatment eliminates neurodivergence in the child, I completely oppose it. If it only helps prevent lifelong disabilities like nonverbal development, then there could be some benefit.

  • ButtigiegMineralMap@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 months ago

    I think it should be 100% voluntary, the last thing I want to hear is people saying that Autism is a disease to be eradicated, I know plenty of people who have it and don’t consider it a disability in any sense. There are admittedly some that I know that don’t like it and the feelings and anxiety that comes with it. I can’t speak to it personally bc I don’t have it but from what I gather (from personal bias admittedly) it’s not something like Polio or Covid or Cancer in which a cure or breakthrough is more important. Just my 2 cents

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      I agree with that, neurodivergence shouldn’t be seen as a negative. It’s good to have options available for people, but we should also try to structure society in a way that’s as accommodating as possible without people feeling forced to change how their minds work to fit in.

  • ShiningWing@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    Man, it really sucks to find out that even on this site, there’s still people who get upvotes for saying that people like me are something to be “cured”

  • albigu@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    Commenting again just to say I hate how medical science reporting often doesn’t even cite the name of the researchers. Not only is this very disrespectful towards the people who put in a lot of work into the research (and usually even publishing their results for the world to see), but it also makes it incredibly hard to verify the facts of the story.

    Naming them only as “Chinese scientists” is just insulting. And now all search results have been poisoned by people only citing what’s in the SCMP article.

    • this is true for so many fields, in both science and art, the mass of people doing the bulk of the work get no recognition 😐


      also

      Li Dali, a professor of Life Sciences at East China Normal University, who is not an author on the paper […]

      Researcher Chen Jin and his student Zhu Junjie at ShanghaiTech University, who are not authors on the paper […]

  • albigu@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    A sad development, I’ll now become an ultra-left reactionary maoist and hate on Xi specifically for hating autistic people.

  • Comprehensive49@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 months ago

    For milder forms of autism, treatment should be left up to the person and definitely isn’t necessary.

    However, I also know people who have extremely severe forms of autism, which are debilitating and require 24/7 care, for which such a treatment would be a godsend.

  • sweeney@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Told myself I wouldn’t ever comment, just lurk, but I feel compelled to say that I personally support this, as an autistic person. Autism is debilitating for me. I would gladly welcome a reprieve from the hell it causes me.

  • doccitrus@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    This kind of thing is really interesting for what it might teach us about autism and the human brain more generally, but when it comes to the practical applications I just don’t see a future where it doesn’t present a ton of problems. Even when you make it ‘voluntary’, eugenics is dangerous and closely allied with exterminationist sentiment, thinking, and practice.

    And it seriously risks, at a minimum, deeply undermining struggles to accommodate rather than erase disabilities. Admittedly this is a step beyond the technical capability, but if a society develops an expectation that some major human variation (be that autism, deafness, blindness, or whatever) be cured rather than accommodated wherever it is a ‘problem’, where does that leave people (or parents) who refuse the cure for themselves (or for their children)? I can easily imagine arguments like ‘if you don’t want problems, just administer the cure! you’re being selfish’, ‘this creates an unnecessary burden’, etc.