Specific neurons that secrete oxytocin in the brain are disrupted in a mouse model of autism, neuroscientists have found. Stimulating these neurons restored social behaviors in these mice. These findings could help to develop new ways to treat autism.

[u/mvea]

https://www.riken.jp/en/news_pubs/research_news/rr/20250207_1/index.html

[u/bigasssuperstar]

Scientists' presumptions that what looks like autism in their judgment of mouse behaviour is the same thing as what they think looks like autism in human behaviour is still stuck in the idea that what makes humans autistic can be understood from analysis of behaviour by non-autistic people.

IOW, they think they understand human autism; they think mouse autism is that, too; they think helping mouse autism will help autistic humans. But I don't believe they understand human autism at the start of that chain.

I don't question the methods they're using to test their hypotheses, but this is so many steps removed from autistic adults and what they say about their experience of the world that I don't trust it to be applicable to human autism.

[u/vinkker → u/bigasssuperstar]

[...] the idea that what makes humans autistic can be understood from analysis of behaviour by non-autistic people.

[...] I don't believe they understand human autism at the start of that

So all scientists, especially working on anything autism related, are non-autistic people? Wouldn't people more concerned than others about a certain topic not be more likely working in fields related to what they are concerned/affected personally? Are non-autistic people unable to get feedback from people with autism? Regardless, aren't autistic people more in STEM fields than any other ones anyway?

In a lot of ways, we classify things based on the symptoms first and then follow the trails to figure out the causes. We say someone has autism based on their behaviour because it deviates away from what we would expect in respect to socialization (amongst other things, of course); autistic people have a more difficult time (bare in mine, it's a spectrum). Non-autistic people are well capable of perceiving who would have signs of autism and understanding what might be the differences and they can interact with autistic people and compare..

Thinking it is steps removed from 'real' autistic adults is far-fetched.

[u/bigasssuperstar → u/vinkker]

Please see the other replies to people who misread that as an assertion that no autistic people were involved.

An example from the same field: Psychiatric research into homosexuality, studying men who were diagnosed homosexual by psychiatrists, certainly involved gay scientists. It didn't make their studies make more sense - the psychiatric definition of the disorder of homosexuality was baked into the work from conception.