Federico wrote:
Effects Of Obesity On The Brain: First Evidence Of Sex-Related Differences In The Brain's White Matter Structure

The research team at the Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences in Leipzig, together with the Department of Endocrinology, University Clinic Leipzig, Integrated Research and Treatment Center Adiposity Diseases Leipzig and the University College London have shown a gender-dependent relationship between being overweight and brain structure in the brain's white matter. (PLoS ONE, April 11, 2011.)

In view of what I recently reported in the thread "The Cognitive Brain" about the effects on brain structure of obesity, and the presence of a sexual dimorphism in these effects, a paper entitled "Parental Gender Affects Fetal Programming Of Disease Risk To Next Generation" and presented at The Endocrine Society's 93rd Annual Meeting in Boston by the study's principal investigator, Amanda Drake, MD, PhD, a senior clinical fellow at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland raises some very interesting questions about the role of stress-induced rise -- during the fetal life -- in the level of glucocorticoids, on low birth weight and the future development of diabetes.

And I quote:

"...research showed that although birth weight is reduced in the offspring of male or female rats that were exposed to dexamethasone during fetal development, this effect was more pronounced in the offspring of male rats exposed to excess glucocorticoids during development in the womb.

Additionally, although birth weight was reduced in the second generation of rats, the genes that were affected differed from those seen in their parents, Drake said. In the first generation, glucocorticoid overexposure in the womb affected genes in the liver of the fetus and in the placenta. This increased the likelihood of the baby rats having a low birth weight and increased their risk of developing diabetes and heart disease in later life, she said.

However, the genes affected in the second generation depended on whether the mother or the father had been exposed to glucocorticoids while developing in the womb, the authors reported. These affected genes that could produce adverse health effects included genes important in growth and the transport of nutrients across the placenta."

I personally find these data particularly pregnant in view of the long (and sometimes acrimonious) discussions with Mr.Samsa on environment-linked stress and changes in genes regulation by epigenetic mechanisms, which could be transmitted to next generation, and be responsible for various disorders such as low birth weight, diabetes, and heart disease.

Some time ago I wrote in this thread that, according to Neuroscientists, the origin of Music goes back into the prehistory of humankind, and that probably it predates the origin of language and of such vital activities like farming, indicating that learning how to make musical sounds must have conveyed some evolutionary advantage through time.
In view of this, it is very interesting that, in a research done by Daniela Perania et al at the San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy, in collaboration with Cluster of Excellence “Languages of Emotion,” Freie Universität Berlin, Germany, and the Max-Planck-Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Science, Leipzig, Germany, and published in PNAS under the title "Functional specializations for music processing in the human newborn brain", it as been found that (I quote):

"....the infant brain shows a hemispheric specialization in processing music as early as the first postnatal hours. Results also indicate that the neural architecture underlying music processing in newborns is sensitive to changes in tonal key as well as to differences in consonance and dissonance."

These extraordinary findings show that (I quote):
".....a neuronal architecture serving the processing of music is already present at birth. Right-lateralized auditory cortex activity was observed for the processing of original music, indicating that neonates already show a right-hemispheric predominance for the processing of musical information. Our data show that the newborn’s brain is sensitive to changes in the tonal key of music and to differences in the sensory dissonance of musical signals. Such structural manipulations activated the inferior frontolateral cortex, and thus possibly Broca’s area, which becomes fundamentally important for the learning of language during later stages of development.
Finally, the activity changes within limbic structures suggest that newborns engage neural resources of emotional processing in response to musical stimuli".

The fundamental role of music in human brain development and particularly in the origin of speech is once more confirmed.

To emphasize once more the extraordinary role music has upon the human brain and its development from birth,
I wish to relate the results of a research pursued by Särkämö T et al at the Cognitive Brain Research Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Helsinki, Finland, and recently published in Brain under the title
"Music listening enhances cognitive recovery and mood after middle cerebral artery stroke."

I quote:
"This single-blind, randomized, and controlled trial was designed to determine whether everyday music listening can facilitate the recovery of cognitive functions and mood after stroke. In the acute recovery phase, 60 patients with a left or right hemisphere middle cerebral artery (MCA) stroke were randomly assigned to a music group, a language group, or a control group. During the following two months, the music and language groups listened daily to self-selected music or audio books, respectively, while the control group received no listening material.

....Results showed that recovery in the domains of verbal memory and focused attention improved significantly more in the music group than in the language and control groups. The music group also experienced less depressed and confused mood than the control group. These findings demonstrate for the first time that music listening during the early post-stroke stage can enhance cognitive recovery and prevent negative mood."

In this ever growing effort to demonstrate the multiple beneficial effects of music, all we need now is a demonstration that exposing dairy cows to classical music greatly increases the yield of milk.
Wait a minute: It has already been done

It has been known for some time that meditation, and in particular the type known as Shamata which, like other forms of mindfulness meditation, it entails learning how to observe what's going on in one's mind and body without judging, and while maintaining focus on one's breathing or a chanted mantra, may have some profound and lasting effects on the human brain.
In a recent study published in the on-line journal NeuroImage and reported in ScienceBlog, Eileen Luders, a visiting assistant professor at the UCLA Laboratory of Neuro Imaging and colleagues, using a type of brain imaging known as diffusion tensor imaging, or DTI, found that the differences between meditators and controls are not confined to a particular core region of the brain but involve large-scale networks that include the frontal, temporal, parietal and occipital lobes and the anterior corpus callosum, as well as limbic structures and the brain stem.
....The results suggest that long-term meditators have white-matter fibers that are either more numerous, more dense or more insulated throughout the brain....They also found that the normal age-related decline of white-matter tissue is considerably reduced in active meditation practitioners".....<<It is possible that actively meditating, especially over a long period of time, can induce changes on a micro-anatomical level >> said Luders, herself a meditator.
....As a consequence, she said, the robustness of fiber connections in meditators may increase and possibly lead to the macroscopic effects seen by DTI."[/quote]

From these conclusions derives the intriguing title for the paper found in ScienceBlog:
"Is Meditation the Push-Up for the Brain?"

In what might be considered a huge advance towards finding ways to restore to health a diseased brain,
in the online July 13 issue of Nature, it has been reported the results of a study conducted by researchers from the Stanford University School of Medicine which describes a new way to create human neurons in a lab dish.

"The addition of two particular gene snippets to a skin cell’s usual genetic material is enough to turn that cell into a fully functional neuron.
The new capability to essentially grow neurons from scratch is a big step for neuroscience research, which has been stymied by the lack of human neurons for study. Unlike skin cells or blood cells, neurons are not something that’s easy for a living human to donate for research.
<<A major problem in neurobiology has been the lack of a good human model,>> said senior author Gerald Crabtree, MD, professor of pathology and of developmental biology. <<Neurons aren’t like blood. They’re not something people want to give up.>>

Generating neurons from easily accessible cells, such as skin cells, makes possible new ways to study neuronal development, model disease processes and test treatments.
It also helps advance the effort, still in its infancy, to replace damaged or dead neurons with new ones."

It's quite some time since I had something interesting to report in this thread. And now voilà two pieces of, IMO, interesting news.

The first one has been reported by the Scientific American and is entitled "Too Hard for Science? Simulating the Human Brain".

Written by Charles Q. Choi, a frequent contributor to Scientific American, it suggests that although supercomputers may soon approach the brain’s power, much is unknown about how it works.
For this report he interviewed Luis Bettencourt, a research scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory and professor at the Santa Fe Institute who explains that...... <<the human brain has approximately 100 billion neurons with roughly one quadrillion (one million billion) connections wiring these cells together, with each connection or synapse typically firing at about 10 times per second. Nevertheless, the most advanced computers to date are now almost powerful enough to model it......>>
......the much greater challenge with simulating the human brain lies in how much remains unknown about how it works. <<It’s clear we don’t have a model or theory of anything similar to what humans can do....>> he says.

Supercomputers may soon approach the brain’s power, but much is unknown about how it works. In "Too Hard for Science?" Mr.Choi interviewed scientists about ideas they would love to explore.
Luis Bettencourt, a research scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory and professor at the Santa Fe Institute, had this to say: << The brain is the most powerful computer we know of, and understanding it is one of the ultimate challenges in science.... It’s what makes humans special. We want to know what it does and how it works.>>

....<<The human brain has approximately 100 billion neurons with roughly one quadrillion (one million billion) connections wiring these cells together, with each connection or synapse typically firing at about 10 times per second. Nevertheless, the most advanced computers to date are now almost powerful enough to model it....>> Bettencourt explains.

Still, the much greater challenge with simulating the human brain lies in how much remains unknown about how it works. <<It’s clear we don’t have a model or theory of anything similar to what humans can do >> Bettencourt says. <<If we ask the best computer algorithms to look at natural objects or images to identify them, they approach a success rate of 70 to 90 percent. That may sound good, but if you’re crossing streets and you only have a 90 percent chance of identifying a car, you won’t live long.>>

The ability to simulate a human brain also raises many of the moral and ethical questions that surround artificial intelligence. <<There’s the issue you have of creating artificial life or consciousness, or a human brain that is designed to serve you >> Bettencourt says. <<There’s also the fact that you might conceivably make it go faster and more powerful than our brains, for the usual sci-fi scenario of them taking over.>>

The second piece of information concerns the discovery by [i]Reut Avinun1 et al., researchers at the Department of Neurobiology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, of the role of Avpr1a, a receptor of the neurotransmiter arginine vasopressine, in children's altruistic behavior. The discovery reported in PLoS is entitled "AVPR1A Variant Associated with Preschoolers' Lower Altruistic Behavior".

I will only cite part of the conclusion which says:

"An accumulating body of research shows AVP's role in social and affiliative behaviors across a diversity of species [16]. The current investigation extends the evidence for the role of AVPR1A in humans by linking it to social behavior in early childhood. Further research is needed in order to unravel the mechanisms behind AVP's involvement in human social behavior and clarify the role of this neuropeptide's interaction with the dopaminergic system."

Federico wrote:
THE COGNITIVE BRAIN

".........The increasing numbers of people surviving to a healthy old age have made us aware that humans show individual differences in how their mental abilities fare with time. Finding the sources of such differential cognitive performances during ageing is now a research priority. Though studies are incomplete, several factors may be protective of mental ability level—namely, being free of chronic disease, living in a complex and intellectually stimulating environment, having a flexible personality in midlife, living with a partner of high ability, maintaining speed of information processing, being satisfied with life in middle age......."

Unabashedly I quote myself to introduce a very interesting article entitled Verbal and non-verbal intelligence changes in the teenage brain
It reports data obtained by Cathy Price et al. with a study conducted at the Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging at UCL (University College London) and the Centre for Educational Neuroscience.

Quote:

".... The researchers tested 33 healthy adolescents in 2004 when they were between the ages of 12 and 16 years. They then repeated the tests four years later when the same subjects were between 15 and 20 years old. On both occasions, the researchers took structural brains scans of the subjects using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The researchers measured each subject's verbal IQ, which includes measurements of language, arithmetic, general knowledge and memory, and their non-verbal IQ, such as identifying the missing elements of a picture or solving visual puzzles. Comparing the 2008 and 2004 scores, some subjects had improved their performance relative to people of a similar age by as much as 20 points on the standardised IQ scale; in other cases, however, performance had fallen by a similar amount....."

"....Scientists believe the findings show that intellectual ability, especially in early years, is not as fixed as many psychologists had thought but subject to wide variations that may be the result of outside influences such as upbringing or education...."

"....Researchers also scanned their brains using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and found some had experienced significant structural changes......Decreases or increases in the density of gray matter in a region associated with speech corresponded with better or worse verbal test scores. Similar changes were noted in the area of the brain tied to hand movement among students whose performance IQ scores had shifted....."

"....The result offers the first direct evidence that intelligence can change after early childhood and provides new hope for boosting the brain's abilities....."

Federico wrote:

New reports also emphasize that humans hold no copyright on sonic brilliance, and that a number of nonhuman animals produce what can rightly be called music. Recent in-depth analyses of the songs sung by birds and humpback whales show that, even when their vocal apparatus would allow them to do otherwise, the animals converge on the same acoustic and aesthetic choices and abide by the same laws of song composition as those preferred by human musicians, and human ears, everywhere.

Too bad what they converge on can't be anything very specific then, as human cultures have very divergent musics.

Singing birds often pitch their songs to the same scale as Western music which may explain at least in part why people find them so attractive. Birds, also, make music much like people. "When birds compose songs they often use the same rhythmic variations, pitch relationships, permutations and combinations of notes as human composers,"

An online acquaintance of mine that has studied bird songs using electronic pitch measuring and his well-trained pitch perception disagrees with this. It's a myth spread by some composers who have trained themselves to perceive bird song as if it were in 12-tone equal temperament, and then worked with that. This acquaintance phrased his findings as: "the only bird song that is in western scales is Messiaen's transcriptions." (Of course, some birds do increase their song repertoire by listening to sounds in their environment, and some have apparently started imitating call tones from cell phones, but that's a relatively modern vector of spread for musical content.)

There's, I think, a lot of miscognition going on when we listen to bird song - we simply force what we hear to fit into the molds of western music. I bet a pelog musician, a chopi musician, a raga player, a maqam player or a slendro musician all would parse bird song in ways that conform to their musical tradition.

Brain Chemistry Directly Altered By Parasite

A remarkable discovery that may qualify as a watershed in the understanding and treatment of Neurological disorders like Schizophenia and Parkinson's Disease has been made by a research group from the University of Leeds which has shown that infection by the brain parasite Toxoplasma gondii, found in 10-20 per cent of the UK's population, directly affects the production of dopamine, a key chemical messenger in the brain.

As reported in the Medical News Today, the findings are the first to demonstrate that a parasite found in the brain of mammals can affect dopamine levels.

Whilst the work has been carried out with rodents, lead investigator Dr Glenn McConkey of the University's Faculty of Biological Sciences, believes that the findings could ultimately shed new light on treating human neurological disorders that are dopamine-related such as schizophrenia, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and Parkinson's disease.

This reminds me of another surprising discovery made by two Australian researchers who found that human stomach ulcers are caused by the Helicobacter Pylori.

67% More Prefrontal Brain Neurons In Children With Autism

As I mentioned in a previous Post of this Thread:
"Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are associated with a remarkable combination of cognitive strengths and difficulties. The same individual may struggle to express or understand speech, while demonstrating amazingly good memory for routes, or fantastic understanding of mechanical systems. In some cases, special abilities are so pronounced that savant skills or ‘islands of genius’ may be considered to be present."
It was hypothesized that this geniality might be related to changes in specialized brain areas.

Now, as indicated in the title of this post (citation): "A small study found that male children with autism had larger brain weights and 67% more prefrontal brain neurons than children without autism, scientists from the NIH-UCSD School of Medicine Autism Center of Excellence, La Jolla, Calif., reported in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association). The small preliminary study compared 7 children with autism to 6 healthy controls - they were aged from 2 to 16 years."

"....The PFC (prefrontal cortex) plays a key part in communication, cognitive development, and higher-order social development."

"....Because cortical neurons are generated in prenatal, not postnatal life, pathological overabundance of neurons indicates early developmental disturbances in molecular and genetic mechanisms that govern proliferation, cell cycle regulation, and apoptosis."

Federico wrote:
As I mentioned in a previous Post of this Thread:
"Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are associated with a remarkable combination of cognitive strengths and difficulties. The same individual may struggle to express or understand speech, while demonstrating amazingly good memory for routes, or fantastic understanding of mechanical systems. In some cases, special abilities are so pronounced that savant skills or ‘islands of genius’ may be considered to be present."

The majority of autists, however, do not have any signs whatsoever of extraordinary mental capabilities. A very large number simply lack this often touted idiot-savant trait.

Also, still waiting for comments on my previous post in this thread - would be interesting to hear some kind of indication that you're actually engaging with possible objections to some of the stuff you're posting.

Zwaarddijk wrote:
The majority of autists, however, do not have any signs whatsoever of extraordinary mental capabilities. A very large number simply lack this often touted idiot-savant trait.

Also, still waiting for comments on my previous post in this thread - would be interesting to hear some kind of indication that you're actually engaging with possible objections to some of the stuff you're posting.

I have written some cases with ASD show savant skills. Actually about 10%.
As for the second part of your comment my answer will be: Look at my activity since I joined this Forum. It shows at the very least some interest and understanding of what I'm writing about.
Besides, since when in this Forum you have to disclose your credentials before making a comment on an interesting paper?
And if I tell you I'm a famous Neuroscientist in disguise would that satisfy you?

Federico wrote:

Zwaarddijk wrote:
The majority of autists, however, do not have any signs whatsoever of extraordinary mental capabilities. A very large number simply lack this often touted idiot-savant trait.

Also, still waiting for comments on my previous post in this thread - would be interesting to hear some kind of indication that you're actually engaging with possible objections to some of the stuff you're posting.

I have written some cases with ASD show savant skills. Actually about 10%.
As for the second part of your comment my answer will be: Look at my activity since I joined this Forum. It shows at the very least some interest and understanding of what I'm writing about.
Besides, since when in this Forum you have to disclose your credentials before making a comment on an interesting paper?
And if I tell you I'm a famous Neuroscientist in disguise would that satisfy you?

You don't need to disclose anything, but it would be of some interest to see whether those objections have been considered whatsoever.

If music is different all across the globe, any research that deduces things from its sameness is mistaken. Can you deny this?

Zwaarddijk wrote:

If music is different all across the globe, any research that deduces things from its sameness is mistaken. Can you deny this?

Although I'm an average music lover and connaisseur, I certainly am not an expert musicologue. Therefore, I am in no position to
debunk assertions made by well acllaimed experts.
In keping open the Cognitive Brain Thread to which I refer news, comments, and discoveries recently published on this subject by the scientific press, I consider my role, with my background in Neuroendocrinology and Neuropharmacology, as a purveyor of significant progress in this area.

Federico wrote:

Zwaarddijk wrote:

If music is different all across the globe, any research that deduces things from its sameness is mistaken. Can you deny this?

Although I'm an average music lover and connaisseur, I certainly am not an expert musicologue. Therefore, I am in no position to
debunk assertions made by well acllaimed experts.

They seem to be well acclaimed in the field of neurology - but their musicological credentials are lacking.
Terribly so, even.

Just to keep lively the discussion about the cognitive capacity of people with ASD, Lizzie Buchen, a freelance writer based in San Francisco, has written an essay for Nature News entitled "Scientists and autism: When geeks meet" where she exposes (and I quote) her theory that the leaders of the tech world actually have an autism spectrum disorder (ASD), which can range from the profound social, language and behavioural problems that are characteristic of autistic disorder, to the milder Asperger's syndrome. But according to an idea that is creeping into the popular psyche, they and many others in professions such as science and engineering may display some of the characteristics of autism, and have an increased risk of having children with the full-blown disorder.

The roots of this idea can largely be traced to psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen at the University of Cambridge, UK. According to a theory he has been building over the past 15 years, the parents of autistic children, and the children themselves, have an aptitude for understanding and analysing predictable, rule-based systems — think machines, mathematics or computer programs. And the genes that endow parents with minds suited to technical tasks, he hypothesizes, could lead to autism when passed on to their children, especially when combined with a dose of similar genes from a like-minded mate.

Now I know where my problem is, in my reptilian brain. Not my fault, then.

Francis J Dunne, whom I quoted in my Thread Psychiatry the Ashenputtel of Medical Disciplines gives a rather grim evaluation of the so called scientific way Psychiatrists approach diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders, and concludes by writing:

"..... it is through neuropharmacological research that the mechanisms of action of various drugs used in neurology and psychiatry have been identified and helped to develop an understanding of biological substrates underlying the aetiology of psychiatric disorders..."

And this is sorely needed for establishing with a reasonable degree of certainty the diagnosis in particularly challenging mental disorders such as Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD).

Recently, an important step towards developing a rapid, inexpensive diagnostic method for autism has been taken by Uppsala University, among other universities. Through advanced mass spectrometry the researchers managed to capture promising biomarkers from a tiny blood sample.The study has just been published in the prestigious journal Nature Translational Psychiatry.

"Researchers at Berzelii Centre and the Science for Life Laboratory in Uppsala, in collaboration with colleagues at Linnaeus University in Sweden and the Faculty of Medicine in Tehran, Iran, have discovered some promising biomarkers.

To identify potential biomarkers (peptides or proteins), the researchers performed a detailed protein analysis of blood plasma from children with ASD compared with a control group. Using advanced mass spectrometric methods, they succeeded in identifying peptides consisting of fragments of a protein whose natural function is in the immune system, the complement factor C3 protein.

The hope is that this new set of biomarkers ultimately will lead to a reliable blood-based diagnostic tool."

I just arrived on this forum and I am already annoyed of your excessive reproduction of original material. It is not conducive to discussion.

Nature only publishes new and shocking findings. Dr. Ioannidis has demonstrated many times that most headline findings are false. Time may be better spent discussion findings that have actually been replicated.

Most studies have shown that the idiot-savant syndrome occurs in a very small minority of ASD cases, I would say 10% is hopeful at best.

The post on biomarkers of ASD is the last lost, so I will comment...

The idea of identifying biomarkers for any "ailment" is certainly exciting if only because of the ability to design a tangible measurement protocol to release us from cognitive or psychosocial theories. But, again biomarkers even in established behavioural medicine fields (e.g., biomarkers for cardiovascular disease) have trouble replicating findings. Many variables are at play and it is naive to think one experimental procedure can uncover an effect.

I think scientist need to expand their ideas of what makes a good measurement methodology. Loosely, it seems reasonable to assume that most interactions (effects) are moderated or mediated (very different concepts) by a third factor, if not by another fourth factor. Cognitive psychologists have tried to drive this point home for some time now. All the mental schemas and ideas presented in theory of mind clearly point to multifactorial solutions to most scientific questions.

Biochemists and physicists seems to always try to measure biomolecules and particle matter in isolation, yet most of their finding seem demonstrate that the behaviour of one particle is dependent on its interaction with another...

Right now I am particularly stuck between Dr. Mumby's (and predecessors') idea of the hippocampus and Gray & McNaughton's conceptualization, yet both are rooted in thorough and sound animal research.

P.s. I posted off topic due to the already large collection of somewhat off-topic posts

Anyhow, I am looking forward to discussing with you all/one

Federico wrote:
Recently, an important step towards developing a rapid, inexpensive diagnostic method for autism has been taken by Uppsala University, among other universities. Through advanced mass spectrometry the researchers managed to capture promising biomarkers from a tiny blood sample. The study has just been published in the prestigious journal Nature Translational Psychiatry.

"Researchers at Berzelii Centre and the Science for Life Laboratory in Uppsala, in collaboration with colleagues at Linnaeus University in Sweden and the Faculty of Medicine in Tehran, Iran, have discovered some promising biomarkers.

The hope is that this new set of biomarkers ultimately will lead to a reliable blood-based diagnostic tool."

As if to give me support in my crusade for better instruments to identify and more efficiently treat complex mental disorders such as ASD, a couple of articles have been published which are certain to raise quite a row.

The first one is entitled New high in U.S. autism rates inspires renewed debate. I quote:

"About one in 88 children in the United States has autism or a related disorder, the highest estimate to date and one that is sure to revive a national argument over how the condition is diagnosed and treated.
The estimate released on Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention represents an overall increase of about 25 percent since the last analysis in 2006 and a near-doubling of the rate reported in 2002....

.......The reported spike in the prevalence of autism and related disorders raised questions about whether it is real or an artifact of greater awareness that has led parents, teachers, and even health-care providers to see symptoms of autism in children who would not have received the diagnosis a generation ago.
If it is real, that suggests that some change in the environment might be responsible. In recent years suspicion has focused on everything from mercury, a known neurotoxin, in air and food, to the increasing age of new mothers and fathers.

There is a good possibility that much of the reported increase in the prevalence of autism is illusory, however. When asked about this during the news conference, CDC's Frieden pointed out that "doctors have gotten better at diagnosing the condition and communities have gotten better at providing services, so I think we can say it is possible that the increase is the result of better detection."

The second one is entitled France's autism treatment 'shame

Hugh Schofield who writes for BBC News, explains (I quote):

"In many countries the standard way of treating autistic children is with behavioural therapy - stimulating and rewarding them to develop the skills they need to function in society - but France still puts its faith in psychoanalysis. And an increasing number of parents are now demanding change. For autism campaigners, it is one of the most serious health scandals of our times.
How for decades France turned its back on the latest scientific thinking, and treated autism as a form of psychosis.
How as a result tens of thousands of children were misdiagnosed - or not diagnosed at all - and consigned to lives of misery.

....to this day in its approach to autism, the French medical establishment continues to believe in the powers of psychiatry and psychoanalysis - long after the rest of the world has switched to alternative methods of treatment.

.....The row over autism in France has festered unreported for years. But recently it has become public. Independent associations have been created, lobbying for a move away from psychoanalysis and psychiatry, and over to the "behaviourist" treatments that prevail elsewhere.

.....The behaviourist approach to autism was developed in the 1970s and 80s in the US and Canada, and it is now the norm in most of the world.
Under the so-called ABA method (Applied Behavioural Analysis), autism is treated as primarily an educational - rather than a medical - problem.
With a set of rewards (which can be granted or withheld) - and with plenty of individual attention - children can learn to function in society, and be much less of a burden on their families.

....The blame .... lies with a medical establishment that remains fixated with Freud.
"Today everyone knows that autism is a neuro-developmental problem. It is not a psychosis or mental disorder," says Muhamed Sajidi, president of the association Conquer Autism.
"But in France it is the psychiatrists - heavily influenced by Freudian psychoanalysis - who remain in charge. And they have shut themselves off from all the changes in our knowledge of autism.

......"The whole idea was that it was la faute à maman (the mother's fault). It was the 'refrigerator mum', or there was some problem with the family dynamic," says Lepenuizic.
"They thought that if the child was failing to communicate with the outside world, it was because of some trauma in the womb or in very early life. There was a family malfunction, and we had to cure it!

.....The fundamental problem...... is that the psychiatric profession is resisting calls for change, because the fewer patients there are, the less they earn.
"They have a financial interest in institutionalising autistic children......."
..... "The state pays. The child doesn't get any better - but who cares? It's being looked after by the state, and the doctors are making a lot of money. Why would they change the system?"

What better example for the necessity of a gold standard which would identify flawlessly the autistic child from another with a simple behavioral problem.