It could very well become a cost/reward analysis thing since Autism is a spectrum disorder. People who are high-functioning will probably be fine without the drug, but people who are, for example, non-verbal may be more willing to take it.

I'm assuming such a drug would have drastic drawbacks in terms of how Autistic people think. Similar to other drugs that address mental state, they might not feel like themselves.

> I'm assuming such a drug would have drastic drawbacks in terms of how Autistic people think. Similar to other drugs that address mental state, they might not feel like themselves.

Knowing how I think, and how I use knowledge, I'm not sure that I'd be better at anything if a drug altered my ability to think in detail. Even if something made me non-autistic like magic, I have a lifetime of autistic knowledge that is structured differently than what a non-autistic brain would need. I could have to learn everything all over again if I were to become unable to comprehend/assemble the logical building blocks that I normally use to do everything.

So I have to assume the drug doesn't actually attempt to treat the core defining trait of autism and only attempts to treat some of the side effects.

As far as I'm aware, even though autism is a spectrum, every brain that is autistic has a particularly distinctive redistribution of connections, which is what results in basically everything. This redistribution is likely what results in the overly logical/analytical thinking (whether it's bottom-up or top-down), although I don't think anyone's been able to prove or disprove that, it's just a correlation.

Right, but we need to consider outcomes. If such a drug could help those who can't take care of themselves, take care of themselves, that's a very good outcome. An outcome for someone like you wouldn't be very good so it doesn't matter much. But for some, this could be the difference between being institutionalized forever versus living a somewhat independent life.