BRAINWAVES...and AUTISM.

Title for this Post:
*** An extremely Gross Simplification, of the Lower End of the HERTZ Scale. From Lowest to Higher. ***

<0 --- This is seen as "Dead" yet really only means that the Hertz Scale cannot define it anymore (!). (Switch to using another Unit Of Measurement instead.)
0 --- Unconscious, Sleeping, Coma (Not Normal Adults)
10 --- Children, "Animals" (Not Normal Adults)
15 --- Conscious, Normal Adult Awareness. Child Hearing, but not Common Adult/Human Hearing.
20 --- Normal Awareness. Lower limit of Normal Adult Hearing.
30 --- Maximum of Normal Adult Awareness. Moving Visible Muscles.
40 --- Mystics, Meditation... - i.e. NOT Normal Adults.
50 --- So-called "Gamma EEG"
>100 --- ... this leads past and above Hertz Frequencies for Light, Sound, Gamma Waves... etc. (other Books and Websites should give clarification.)

...With regards to Autism, All can access from <> Zero to 30; yet Autism is the "Brain" difficulty in accessing above 13Hz, whilst the "Body" is Naturally Conscious and above that stage. It must be "taught" and "enforced".

Greetings again to "Endymion".

However...

I see that I was correct in having reservations concerning your post. That is to say, that I myself said:

"Your Post gives me much cheer, and Thanks Again, for you seem to understand what this is about quite perfectly. :-) "

...note emphasis upon the word "QUITE".

I was indeed happy to see your Post, as you next asked about "Animals" and such...
BUT then you Re-Posted upon the Topic of MRIs and fMRIs... which are very different.

Please re-read the Posts between myself and "SeniorMoment". And, now, also have a look at this Link, back to Asperger United Magazine:

www.autism.org.uk/.../letter-brainwaves.aspx

...It seems, again, that I am *still* the only person here who understands this "Brainwaves" aspect...? And that was why I attempted this Thread.
(Um... Good Fortune to yourself and all in any case...!)

Good evening (or rather morning as it is now although I haven't yet slept). Some late night browsing on your topic of Brainwaves and Autism, as it has been on my mind since we last spoke, revealed a website I thought you may be interested in:

fcon_1000.projects.nitrc.org/indi/abide (I copied this from the URL bar so I do not understand why it hasn't created a link but, as I've said before, my computer skills are non-existent. Sorry.)

It's called the 'Autism Brain Imaging Data Exchange' (or ABIDE) and it's FULL of academic research papers and studies on fMRI and MRI data relating to ASD (and ADHD). 

If you reach the website from my poor directions, go to 'Manuscripts' and check out:

PMID:28030565 - 'Using Functional or Structural Magnetic Resonance Images and Personal Characteristic Data to Identify ADHD and Autism'

PMID 26737238 - The Predictive Power of Structural MRI in Autism Diagnosis.

There are hundreds of other up-to-date published articles and papers on the subject of Brainwaves and Autism available on this site and links to a veritable smorgasbord of information. (ABIDE II looks to be the most interesting of the two projects!) 

Happy reading! 

(I'll revisit it when I'm more awake and functional.)

To "Endymion"... Your Post gives me much cheer, and Thanks Again, for you seem to understand what this is about quite perfectly. :-)

Yes indeed, we must wait for more research... more "Official" Proof, rather. And the business of using Brainwave Function to diagnose Autism should then eventually be as clear as seeing someone short sighted as needing glasses, or someone allergic to Nylon as needing to wear cotton instead. (Including the choice for using intervention/compensation as well! I am AS, and I would not want to change. And I like my spectacles... and I was not arguing *that* upon this Thread, and that is why I thanked you!)

And, concerning both yours and my final remarks... it is as I said (in the first place). "Animals" and small children share the same Frequencies naturally, which also define ASDs.
Below 13Hertz, All are born that way. Yet 13Hertz and above must be "trained" into us...?
Specially trained Parrots and Dogs are officially confirmed to have the intellect of "A two/three year old child"... but it takes a LOT of training before anyone admits that.

Aha! I didn't realise that you meant this post in relation to ASD's still being doubted by some people, I'm assuming you mean inasmuch as comments such as "Everyone's a bit like that."(?)

Yes, I can see now why these research papers / studies are so important in that they do give validation (required for those who persist in thinking "Everyone's a bit like that.") to the investigations into physical causes for ASD's. 

You are also right in saying that I do feel and accept the 'physical cause' model as being a fact but it is perhaps more prudent to await the accumulation of evidence such as these research studies provide. Perhaps in much the same way as I accept any 'fact' that I truly believe in, ie. I try to gather as much evidence to support it as is available but try to remember to remain open-minded about where that research may lead. 'We' have after all scientifically disproved many 'facts' over time.  

Concerning your final sentence above, do you mean "non-human" cases of ASD? Has ASD been observed in other great apes or species?    

Endymion said:

Because if that is what these studies are saying, didn't we already know that?

ie. higher logical processing skills at the expense of lower social processing skills? 

(Huzzah! Thank You Kindly for Posting upon this Thread - and asking questions about it. This Thread is one of my own personal interests, a main link to myself and "Autism" in general (after being diagnosed AS)...)

...With regards to that which I Quote, then, No, not "everone" knows that. It may feel "True", yet the point of this Thread was that "Autism" ASDs are doubted by the majority: they do not exist at all, maybe, well, oh, but, this, that, and, so... That sort of thing. This fact (the Brainwaves Study) should cement "Autism" as a FACT.

With regards to the last part of the Quote, then it is different for all, and, excuse me, quite irrelevant. 

I had wanted to discuss this correctly, and I Thank You very much, for being the first to ask questions directly concerning the initial topic. (I can also add more about the "non-human" and "child" aspects also.)

I don't think I'm understanding these articles properly. Are they simply concluding that ASD uses the brain regions differently from non-ASD?

That our brains are differently connected and so results in some parts functioning more effectively and others less so?

Because if that is what these studies are saying, didn't we already know that?

ie. higher logical processing skills at the expense of lower social processing skills? 

To ElephantInTheRoom primarily.
I omitted the end of my original quotation, and did not quote the ENTIRE letter, because the rest of it broaches subjects which I did not want to discuss here (in this particular "thread").

But this is the rest of that particular paragraph:

... "Neurotypicals are "successful" beta people, while persons like me, with Asperger's syndrome, are highly beta, but will still run away very fast from a small child who decides to start throwing stones or the f-word at me."

I omitted that last part, because I I did NOT want to start to discuss the topics of "small children", or "throwing stones", or especially "the f-word".

Perhaps yet another NEW forum(s) warrants such topics:

- How children react to Autistic Adults.
- Being bullied by children because you are Autistic.
- How do AUTISTIC ADULTS react to other people (adults or children)?

Please do feel free, anyone, to start such threads, if you are interested... but I myself shall not, because it is a digression from *this* thread's topic of BRAINWAVES + AUTISM... and also it brings up far too many other points of contention. The fact that BRAINWAVES + AUTISM was constantly ignored, is, as I say, the reason for my attempting to re-introduce that EXACT topic here.

...
( To ElephantInTheRoom especially: Concerning the "highly sensitive" topic... that, too, should also warrant a "NEW thread", yet, is also not to do with "Brainwaves". I DID click the link and I did read the article, and I identified with all of it except 'being HANGRY (hungry + angry).' All of the other subjects which it suggests are very good, and if you started a new thread simply about THAT ONE ARTICLE (!)... I would wager that you might at least achieve that "Discussion Starter Achievement" award which NAS likes to hand out. I again suppose that I myself could start it, but all of this is "stressful" for me to do, and as I said, I most of all prefer to focus upon the subject of BRAINWAVES. (Alpha and Beta.) Hope you understand, and sorry to confuse/sorry to disappoint anyone (Delete As Applicable).)
やれやれ...

If this goes well, there should be a main reply concerning MRI scans about this. Thank you for posting.

Jolly well done, there, "SeniorMoment", in mentioning "MRI" scanning. (And this post addresses "fMRI" also.)
I did not want to mention it myself... for I intend to - partly - DISMISS it. I shall try to explain why.

Because MRI (and fMRI) scanners can scan a brain, I have noticed that they are very much mentioned together, concerning "possible diagnosis of Autism". The proposal in the first place (along with the "links") does NOT support this.

To read BRAINWAVES, an "EEG" machine is used, and it records Brainwave FREQUENCIES, in HERTZ (" Hertz"is a unit most commonly used for SOUND, as with tuning radios or televisions or broadcasting or UltraViolet, etc. etc.)

To read Brain ACTIVITY, an "MRI" (or an "fMRI") machine may be used. (perhaps along with many other different/new devices I do not know of)... but these do NOT detect Frequencies In Hertz.

The difference is that the First (EEG), scans what the brain is doing; and that the Last (MRI), scans what the brain is made of - or even if there IS a brain there to scan at all... (Mentally.)
...Another analogy is that an EEG sees what is being done, and an MRI scans if there is ability to DO anything at all (Physically.).

A gross simplification is that an EEG scans what is being done, and an MRI scans if the ability to do so is at all present/possible...

A most simplified analogy, is that an EEG scans what a LEG is being "asked to do", and an MRI scans whether there IS a LEG there in the first place...!

The main proposal is that Autism is identifiable by an "unusual" preponderance/predisposition/preference... towards ALPHA WAVES (below 13 Hertz)... rather than, as in an NT person, who is mostly using BETA WAVES (over 13 Hz).
An MRI/fMRI scan only detects whether such activity is occurring *at all*, rather than the Frequency of it. This is why EEGs may detect "Autistic Traits" and why an MRI might not: ..."Autism" is a Mental and social thing. It is not a Physical (Physically VISIBLE) thing.

(This is regardless of "Autistic Traits" which may be caused by certain physical disabilities - e.g. someone in a wheelchair must refuse to "walk upstairs", and yet mentally they can also be diagnosed as "Autistic" due to "inappropriate" manners or conduct.
...The MRI scan would detect the lack of legs, and the EEG scan would detect the lack of BETA-wave intent because there are no legs.)

This POST is going on too long now, and so I end it here, yet still invite questions over it.

very true....as Winston Churchill said

"It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma;"

I asked  a clinician about MRI scans. The brief answer was that the researchers would be years if not decades unravelling the evidence because almost all folks on or near the spectrum have multiple comorbidities to heavily complicate matters. Wonder what Mr Packham's 'cure' person in the USA would say to that? No doubt you can accurately pinpoint stuff, but how do you know if it is actually being of any real use with all those comorbidity interactions going on.

Neurotypicals are "successful" beta people, while persons like me, with Asperger's syndrome, are highly beta, ...".......but are we highly successful? What is your perception of what is lacking....or is it the notion of success that needs further classification....? Is success of self the act of being able to be that self in tune to the beat of the world around them?

i have been reading about something termed as Highly Sensitive People and also has a lot of synergies with ASD...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/what-mentally-strong-people-dont-do/201609/9-common-traits-highly-sensitive-people

These are highly sensitivised individual and very empathic and are of the world around them....with my ASD hat....that fits for me....I am hungrily processing the world that I don’t kind of “get”.