100 replies to this topic

[YanaRay]

What you describe here as Asperger's is more likely to be schizoid personality disorder. Many Aspies crave human contact and relationships, do not necessarily prefer their own company all the time (maybe if they were really hurt or are more autistic or bound by rituals and fear of some types of environment etc. then they isolate completely) but they find it hard to relate to others and the communication with them, especially nonverbal, is seriously lacking. Many times I was enjoying company of others, but then I suddenly started to misinterpret their gestures, or got messages that I move in a weird way or react in an odd way, or got "caught" by lights or sounds and zoned out of a conversation completely - just not like everyone expected me to react. It just doesn't create a connection, that's it. I could NEVER tell if someone was interested in me, I just "don't get it" (despite high IQ) but still go out to meet with people, do something together... Asperger's doesn't make me a true introvert.
I know many Aspies actually desperate to get into a relationship or wanting to be popular - they just fail every time they try. You can learn a lot about reading other people and mimicking their reactions to fit in, but in a moment of stress or a new situation suddenly the Aspie-ness starts showing and people just freeze awkwardly. Some Aspies start to despise other people, some start feeling superior, some spiral straight into depression. Then there comes loneliness, not peaceful solitude.
Aspies can be good leaders and be followed by many, it's just hard to be WITH people, on the same level, without feeling like speaking a kind of a different language and getting more frustrated with every passing minute.

[Major Legend]

Well i'd actually argue that introversion and aspergers are "mutations" from the norm, it doesn't change what we want. Introverts and aspergers people need connection and love just as much as normal people, if not more. They have the same selfish thoughts as everyone else. Its like saying we eat less or don't enjoy food as much the misconception dumb extroverts label is is frustrating and part of the problem, but they will never be sophisticated enough to challenge old fashioned mainstream views.

[nowayout]

Who the hell sent the memo that it is now spelled "extravert"? It may be allowed, but it is nonstandard, and it grates.

Anyway, suggesting that normal introversion is a disorder in the autism spectrum is beyond the pale, as is the suggestion that this is something that should be medicated.

I do have the same problem, where in groups of strangers or acquaintances, or even friends I don't have all that much in common with, I tend to get drained and depersonalize. Some things that help a lot is to socialize with people I get along with really really really well. People who can talk with you about things that really passionately interest you. It helps when they are the type who are talkative and keep the conversation going, so there is less stress on you. Life is honestly too short to waste trying to keep smalltalk going with strangers or casual acquaintances who exhaust you. When you do have to do so, a bit of alcohol or coffee can often be helpful.

Edited by viveutvivas, 13 May 2012 - 09:42 PM.

[Junk Master]

Instead of alcohol, I'd suggest Propranolol. Also, avoiding places with loud noises, lights, problem is that rules out clubs.

Great post, YanaRay. Are there any sites/forums for people on the spectrum you'd suggest? Books?

[nowayout]

I think that giving people a diagnosis of Asperger's for common ordinary miscommunication is profoundly disempowering. News flash - most people have difficulty determining if someone else is interested in them - the whole genre of the romance novel and of romantic comedy is based on that. Also, I would say a majority of people have a hard time dealing with unexpected social or personal cues - the whole genre of the sitcom is based on this. Making these common daily problems into a disease makes people victims instead of empowering them as autonomous human beings. They end up interpreting everything that they do in terms of their "disease", and this profoundly warps their sense of self.

A big problem in today's culture is that people actually want to have diagnoses. For many it is a way of trying to get attention. Also, some don't have a strong enough sense of self, so they use these catch-all psychiatric "diagnoses" as off-the-shelf personalities, the way others find themselves in astrology.

Edited by viveutvivas, 14 May 2012 - 06:11 PM.

[hippocampus]

I don't believe any of these introverted and extroverted arguments.

I went through a lot of my life switching from introvert and extrovert depending on my circumstances and the people around you. I can guarantee anyone who think of themselves introverted here would be nourished by social interaction if they were consistently surrounded by an environment and people that "click" and "engage" with them on the same wave length.

The bottom line is when you are "different" and more on the intellectual, objectification (however you spell that), context, imagination spectrum you are within a much smaller percentage of people, and the chances of meeting people who click with you (including cultural + social upbringing) becomes relatively rare.

My hypothesis is people close to the autistic spectrum, or perhaps intelligent people make "significant deviations" from what they see and observe, leading them to notice, feel, analyse and think more, the introversion of being "drained" only comes from the fact we cannot get "positive experiences" from interacting with most people meaning we become bored, tired from conversations outside our own context, as they do talking to us a well.

Don't forget the average IQ of people is only 100, also look at somebody like Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, both intellectuals but also able to deal aggressively in business. It justs shows you that its all in the mindset. If your experiences somehow forged you to have a "positive" mindset about meeting and interacting with people then you are unlikely to feel drained from interaction. On the contrary when I am with people I like I feel empowered and motivated by our new observations about the world, over time i've learned to enjoy myself around people who are on the social monkey side, but they don't necessarily return the same feeling.

Of course I believe some people are more socially awkward and talented in other areas, while some people are genuinely gifted in socializing, but bear in mind most people think in terms of plot as in A to B to C to D. People with aspergers for example remember and think in detail instead of plotlines. Worth to think about why you don't get along with most people.

my 3 cents:
1. average IQ is by definition 100. So even if IQ of whole population changes, new tests/norms will be made and the average will still be 100 (read about Flynn's effect).
2. there is no correlation between extro/introversion and IQ.
3. introversion != autism

Edited by hippocampus, 14 May 2012 - 06:22 PM.

[YanaRay]

Making these common daily problems into a disease makes people victims instead of empowering them as autonomous human beings. They end up interpreting everything that they do in terms of their "disease", and this profoundly warps their sense of self.

I'm a newly diagnosed person and I'd say, actually, the diagnosis was a relief to me as there were people (healthcare professionals) suggesting I may be schizophrenic and I was seriously worried about myself. What looked like near-psychotic experiences was actually one of the coping mechanisms formed in childhood, typical for mildly autistic children, that has gone slightly out of control.

Miscommunication is just one aspect of Asperger's, insufficient to get diagnosed as an adult - the key is in the childhood experiences and feedback from others regarding school life, friends, altered sensitivity to sensory stimulation (with what some may see as typical autistic behaviour - such as rocking back and forth, hand-flapping, pressing eyes, covering ears, vomiting after being too long in a brighlty lit room), absence of role-playing play with others, obsessive and narrow interests, adherence to strange routines/rituals etc.
Many Aspies have no serious issues with communication thanks to observing people, imitating them, learning (in an intellectual, not intuitive way) how to behave in a social setting, what to say and when - it's about creating little social scripts for most occasions and that really helped me. You can re-work some situations from the past with a therapist and see how your behaviour could have been interpreted by others. I wouldn't say that diagnosis warped my sense of self, it actually changed a pretty grim vision of myself into one that is much more positive. There is a huge potential for improving my functioning - without meds - by simple training designed for people like me.

There is one book on this subject I can recommend - "The complete guide to Asperger's Syndrome" by Tony Attwood. It's written from a clinician's point of view with many examples from real life - ranging from childhood experiences to functioning in adult relationships/marriage. It also extends beyond diagnostic criteria, giving a bigger picture based on observation.

[umbillicaria]

Im telling you Hippo, they are not the same. I'm socially savvy and able to read cues but still get drained fast. I don't think introversion inherently has anything to do with cue reading although the core innie trait of needing to reflect as part of the thinking process can lead to missing cues. But that's more about being distracted.

[Major Legend]

I think I am not getting this. I don't get tired from social interactions does that mean I'm an extrovert? But I also do a lot of things that introverts enjoy such as reading, reflecting getting caught in thoughts...in fact I readily prefer them but social interaction does not "drain me"

Come they just sound like broad labels, anybody who is insecure about themselves or constantly having paranoid/negative thoughts are bound to get drained from social interaction, unless i'm secretly an extrovert and somehow I've been indoctrinated to be an introvert when I was young.

So introverts are telling me that they are socially savvy and enjoy interaction, but somehow they get tired from doing something they find easy? My guess its its tiring for introverts because they find it hard and takes a lot of willpower/mental effort, and this could be partly because of their own expectations in socializing.

I use Aspegers as an example because there are lots of people out there who leans towards the autistic spectrum and also have trouble feeling reward from social interaction. That is not much different from the problem this thread is discussing,

[Junk Master]

I don't think being drained from social interaction necessarily means one leans towards the autistic spectrum, but there's no doubt many people on the spectrum are drained from social interaction. Correlation isn't causation.

I do think we can look to this correlation to formulate testable theories about the underlying mechanism.

[umbillicaria]

Well even Jung would say it's a gradient/not a dichotomy. Also one's tendency towards extro vs intro is to some degree situational as several posters have pointed out , the most important element in a particular social interaction being your comfort level with the company and venue. But you are right, I am telling you it's possible to be a very sociable innie, be enjoying yourself immensely, and still get drained pretty fast. Frustrating!

[nowayout]

I don't believe any of these introverted and extroverted arguments.

I went through a lot of my life switching from introvert and extrovert depending on my circumstances and the people around you.

I think this is a major problem with modern psychiatry. Labels are very powerful and can be very harmful. You can easily modify most people's behavior by labeling them in some way, since many people will start interpreting everything they do and are in the context of the label. This way, in many cases, a label can take away from people their freedom to be themselves. I don't like this kind of determinism; namely that we are doomed to think or act according to our labels or diagnoses unless we get therapy or drugs. It is a way of approaching psychiatry that is profoundly disempowering to the patient. It takes away free will.

Way back when, if you had difficulty functioning in a certain environment, you were supposed to be an adult, take responsibility, and bloody well learn to function or else. And people generally succeeded in that, and it became easier and easier to do with exposure. For example, I would literally choke from the panic attacks the first few times I taught a class of 10 and now I can stand up in front of an auditorium of 200 and teach in my sleep. What I needed was not a label or diagnosis that would give me an excuse to go sit in my room and watch TV, and certainly not drugs, but simply to take responsibility and keep doing it, as I did.

People in the wild will generally act in an introverted or extroverted way with different people. But that is an action, that the person can modify. It is evil to tell someone they are an introvert or extrovert.

Edited by viveutvivas, 16 May 2012 - 10:30 PM.

[umbillicaria]

To declare yourself or someone either extro or innie does seem oppressive if you dont acknowledge the considerable nuance and personal variability behind these labels. I think some of the recent popular publications on innie-hood, like Quiet: The power of introverts in ... as mentioned in an earlier post do a graceful job over several hundred pages really cracking open the social attitudes towards and psych theories behind the innie label. I personally find this label empowering because It provides a framework for understanding some key differences in temperament. I do believe it is to some degree hard-wired. But how it manifests is mutable--hence the inspiration in starting this thread.

[Junk Master]

I've never seen a study that doesn't show personality is to a LARGE degree hard-wired. We can argue about percentages, but anyone who has owned several types of dogs can tell you it's just ridiculously homocentric to believe hard-wired instincts/behaviors/personality doesn't exist in humans.

I'd bet no one on the forum would argue intelligence has a strong genetic component, and arguments that people should just buck up and learn to be smarter would be rather unpopular.

But what if we could maximize neurogenesis/neuroplasticity by a two week course of Prozac and permanently increase our ability to learn to play music, learn languages as a result?

What about using propanolol to speed cognitive behavioral therapy? Why not use all the tools at our disposal to change the percentage of our personality we can? Isn't that more empowering?

[Major Legend]

Definitely I wouldn't troll these forums if i'm not positive about the importance of medicine to free us from the ills of yesterdays world. For selfish reasons as well, having the flexibility to choose how I develop using medicines and technology has made me a much happier/successful person than I would have been otherwise. Fortunately i'm very sensitive to any supplement or medication and i'm also anti-addiction.

I think people often mistaken temperament for hard wiring. Yes I believe strongly some attributes like intelligence are highly genetic no doubt about that, but then there are a lot of dumb people with great qualifications because they were forced to work hard to study (e.g. asians), its as much about a work ethic and methodology. Somebody who is smart will be smart no matter what, but how they apply their intelligence is nothing to do with genetics.

If personality is really so hard wired, then why do we see disadvantaged people, ugly people and disabled people readily are introverted people and geeks, or do these things. You just need to travel to the poor places to see how culture, poverty affects peoples personalities to become more humble and more negative about their own abilities. For example its been proven somewhere that richer people tend to have more apathy just because they have more power, and poor people become more irelevant in their world, and the lack of need to sympathise to survive.

The fact is if circumstances leads someone to believe or be exposed to certain things this changes them. The brain is built from the start to have its temperament but also adaptive.

Not sure about SSRI's I tried them a while ago, but they numbed my creative senses greatly (I'm an editor) I don't know if that would be good to learn music despite the neurogenesis.

Edited by Major Legend, 18 May 2012 - 03:09 AM.

[Junk Master]

The rich people example is an interesting one. Fresh in the news. Twelve studies showing rich people lack empathy. But why can't this be hardwired? I can think of many examples of how lacking empathy can help you get rich. Not to mention that the most common way of getting rich is to inherit your money.

There might be cases where power/wealthy cause people to lose empathy, but I'd argue those cases usually arise when power/wealth is achieved early in life. I do believe, as you mention, temperament is adaptive. Most figures put 40-50% of personality as adaptive.

Here's the kicker. As we are learning more about the human "connectome," we're learning changes in personality can be passed down epigenetically. So, a couple of generations of wealth can have a profound, hardwired effect, on empathy.

IMO it's these same epigenetic changes in the connectome that are leading to rise in Asperger's. The Silicon Valley is a hot bed of Asperger's because of techies marrying techies. If you are a programmer, or engineer, marrying another programmer or engineer is almost as fraught with genetic risk as marrying a distant cousin.

[Junk Master]

I like the rich people/empathy story for it's parallels to Asperger's as well. People on the Spectrum are said to lack empathy, and I've seen this first hand many times, but that doesn't mean high functioning individuals will always lack empathy. Empathy can be learned to a certain extent, but can it ever become instinctive? I'd say it can, especially if the "mindfullness" required to change begins very young, while the brain is most adaptive, but it's very, very hard-- nearly impossible later in life. A great example of a personality trait that the study of Asperger's has shed light on, and is strongly hard-wired.

[nowayout]

But what if we could maximize neurogenesis/neuroplasticity by a two week course of Prozac and permanently increase our ability to learn to play music, learn languages as a result?

That is a big "what if", based as it is on no evidence...

[Junk Master]

Not true. There are many studies showing Fluoxetine restoring brain plasticity. Much speculating this, more than serotonin reuptake inhabition, is responsible for it's anti-depressant effect.

http://www.phys.mcw.... Plasticity.pdf

http://www.sciencedi...006899305003513

[Junk Master]

Another quote--

"“It was previously known that the antidepressant fluoxetine, or Prozac, can improve plasticity and also reduce neural inhibition, but how this worked was unclear. We found that fluoxetine-mediated disinhibition permits neuronal rewiring, but it must be accompanied by an instructional cue for how the neurons should rewire themselves in a constructive, meaningful manner,” said Elly Nedivi, associate professor of neurobiology at the Picower Institute for Learning and Memory and senior author of the study in the May issue of Nature Neuroscience."

[nowayout]

Not true. There are many studies showing Fluoxetine restoring brain plasticity.

You're quoting a couple of small rat studies. It is well known that only a tiny percentage of rodent studies ever turns out to be applicable to humans. Where is the evidence for your claim that "a two week course of Prozac [can] permanently increase our ability to learn to play music, learn languages"?

By the way the second study you quote had a negative result: "Despite the ability of fluoxetine to alter brain activity and increase growth factors, it does not appear to be an effective pharmacological adjunct to functional recovery after ischemia in rats."

Edited by viveutvivas, 18 May 2012 - 06:33 PM.

[Junk Master]

Oops, wrong rat study...lol...

Sure, I understand what your saying, but given fluoxetine's ability to increase growth factors, wouldn't it be intriguing to see some human studies with adults say, learning to play piano?

What about the possibility of other drugs increasing neuroplasticity in adults? Pretty fun stuff to speculate about for a 40 year old who has never had a piano lesson.

[nowayout]

Sure it's interesting to speculate. That's pretty much the only straw left for Prozac, since as it has turned out it was never any better than placebo as an antidepressant, and its whole marketing campaign for two decades has been based on unsubstantiated speculation...

Edited by viveutvivas, 18 May 2012 - 09:15 PM.

[Junk Master]

Yes, considering how widely it was prescribed there's one heck of a lot of egg on a lot of faces!

I took Prozac for a few months many years ago, and I definitely felt something after the first couple weeks-- mildly activating, less social anxiety-- but it "pooped" out rather quickly.

I'd also be interested in seeing it's efficacy as an anti-depressant in conjunction with CBT retested. IMO long term use without some behavioral modification, therapy, even change of scenery, is little better than a placebo BUT could it still have a place in jump starting treatment, especially in PTSD?

[YanaRay]

From my experience and observation there are (at least) two very distinct types of depression. One is something like a high-voltage depression, with terrible anxiety, panic attacks, obsessive and intrusive negative thoughts, impulsive, destructive actions, insomnia, feeling of being eaten by thoughts and emotions to the point you're close to suicide - that's what my friend had and fluoxetine helped her to flatten all that, silence the thoughts and then she started recovering slowly.

The other type of depression is a low-battery type. Sleepiness, brain fog, confusion, anxiety manifesting more as freezing and mutism than panic attacks. You're slow, rigid, empty and the battery has less energy every day. You can be depersonalized, world may seem distant and dream-like. Every action seems exhausting, you want to fall asleep forever and freeze.
For this type of depression fluoxetine may be less effective. I never noticed any activating effect apart from first 3 weeks when anxiety changed from the frozen to panic type and that was a nasty feeling. Then anxiety diminished and that was the only postive effect that I got from fluoxetine - drive, motivation, energy, nothing has changed. It was good for dealing with anxiety though (placebo or not - I don't know). I tried citalopram as well, but the effect was the same, only that "activation" or transition I described earlier was milder and easier to tolerate.

The whole prescribing cascade in case of depression, in the UK at least, is a "one fits all" thing. Bupropion is not licensed here for the treatment of depression, nor tianeptine. Many people seem to be afraid of mirtazapine and tricyclics so they get stuck on SSRIs. I work in a pharmacy and it's a rare thing to see something different than citalopram, sertraline, fluoxetine or paroxetine on a script. Mirtazapine is less popular.Tricyclics are mainly given to older people and in many cases it's not for depression. There is only one person taking Valdoxan (agomelatine) in the large area we serve.

[MrSpud]

I just thought I'd jump in here. I haven't read this whole thread, just a couple posts on this page, so what i say probably will look out of place. But I think it will adress the original topic that started the thread.

I'm fairly introverted. Pretty much all of my family is introverted. My wife is very extroverted, but she is learning to control it in certain situations because if left unchecked the extroversion sometimes leads to codependent friendships that interfere with her ability to focus on her own responsibilities and/or friendships with people who aren't dependant on her interacting with them. I'm extroverted in certain instances, and have some friendships where I don't get drained from interacting with people, but my normal tendency to introversion allows me to avoid wasting a lot of time interacting with people who are into things that I have no interest in.

When I get drained from interacting with people socially, or when I choose to expend a large amount of energy to help someone or for a cause I believe in, I can "recharge" by interacting with nature. I can also build up reserves of energy ahead of time by spending time in natural settings.

[nowayout]

From my experience and observation there are (at least) two very distinct types of depression. One is something like a high-voltage depression, with terrible anxiety, panic attacks, obsessive and intrusive negative thoughts, impulsive, destructive actions, insomnia, feeling of being eaten by thoughts and emotions to the point you're close to suicide - that's what my friend had and fluoxetine helped her to flatten all that, silence the thoughts and then she started recovering slowly.

In these cases it is possible that SSRIs may give some (temporary) relief, but probably not because they "correct chemical imbalances", which has been shown to be a total myth, but rather because they act as sedatives. Other sedatives would probably work as well - indeed, there are studies showing opioids and benzos to have superior results in improving symptom of depression than SSRIs do.

[TheFountain]

Thanks for the Jung tip. I've read quite a bit of his, but not 'psychological types.' I will be interesting to read in light of some of the more modern theories/research.

I think his typology was way before its time considering it wasn't as simple as "you're either an introvert or an extravert". He discovered many sub-types as well, and even suggested that some people could shift back and forth from time to time through situational pressures.

[TheFountain]

What I find is that in social interaction it's easy to run out of GABA. GABA is like a psychological shock absorber. It makes emotions more manageable and less taxing. This is why alcohol, a GABA agonist, is used for social interaction. There are healthier ways to modulate GABA though.

Such as?

[TheFountain]

Who the hell sent the memo that it is now spelled "extravert"? It may be allowed, but it is nonstandard, and it grates.

Jung, the man who coined the term spelled it as 'extrAvert'. Just so you know.