After spending some time with an individual that has autism, I feel like there's an underlying process to 'normal' cognition that spans a gamut from Schizophrenia to Autism. A shaky metaphor to the neurology might be how equivalent logic circuits can be made from corollary gates. It's as if one condition skews toward signal powered gates vs source powered gates. I.e. more concrete vs 'out there'... Just a quick thought.
Autism and Evolution
41–50 of 91 posts
Re: Autism and Evolution
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
(not the person you're replying to) The implication seems to be that the parents also exhibit traits of the autism spectrum, so it's hardly surprising that their kids would do the same.
If it's that, without finer detail, it's also a weak argument. I behave like my mother in many things; doesn't mean I was genetically predisposed to, as plenty of behavior is acquired from the parents.
If you're saying it could be the autistic behavior is learned rather than genetic, then I agree, you'd need a twin study to rule that out conclusively. However, when people say "the autism epidemic is environmental" they usually mean vaccines or chemicals or something, not "learned from the parents."
Despite the quantity of autism research, most of it is quite bad and not that helpful on questions like this.
Re: Autism and Evolution
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give more details on the "some of them are obviously inherited, because the kids are so much like the parents" part? Kids everywhere are so much like their parents, so the reasoning, as written, is nonsense.
Families with one autistic child do have an increased risk of having a second child with the disorder. There are some evidence that hints to genetic factors. For example, we know that boys are at much higher risk than girls, but we don't know why. Similarly, we know that older parents are more likely to have autistic children—but again, we don't know why. See https://www.verywell.com/autism-4014759
This could just as well apply to environmental factors though, siblings probably share those.
Also the boy/girl factor could be explained by different behaviors, so different exposures.
Not saying I know anything about this, or that this is the case, just that the increased family risk and boy/girl risk doesn't mean it is genetics.
Re: Autism and Evolution
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
(not the person you're replying to) The implication seems to be that the parents also exhibit traits of the autism spectrum, so it's hardly surprising that their kids would do the same.
If it's that, without finer detail, it's also a weak argument. I behave like my mother in many things; doesn't mean I was genetically predisposed to, as plenty of behavior is acquired from the parents.
Also you share lots of environmental factors with your mother, like living in the same house, using the same car etc.
Re: Autism and Evolution
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give more details on the "some of them are obviously inherited, because the kids are so much like the parents" part? Kids everywhere are so much like their parents, so the reasoning, as written, is nonsense.
Kids often share autistic traits with their parents. The parents are either diagnosable themselves or very nearly so. My son is the third or fourth generation to be likely-diagnosable, for example. Currently-middle-aged parents without intellectual disability had almost zero chance of being diagnosed as children, because when we were kids autism was defined such that you usually had to be nonverbal or intellectually…
To clarify, I'm not trying to argue definitively that these traits are all genetic vs. acquired by watching one's parents. Perhaps it's some mix, though mostly-genetic seems likely to me. I _am_ trying to say that often the traits run in families, which argues against external causes such as vaccines and chemicals.
Re: Autism and Evolution
#46I don't quite buy that autism will be shown to be genetic. I think it's an environmental factor. The rate of increase in autism is pretty much exponential: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111102/full/479022a/box/1.ht... Now that's a very scary chart if you start to project that curve into the future. Here's another one. Not saying this is the cause, but it is a cause for concern. We have many similar patterns of envi…
Simple TED talk explaining what we know and what we know doesn't cause Autism. From 2014.
Takeaway: it's a mix of both genetics and environment.
https://www.ted.com/talks/wendy_chung_autism_what_we_know_an...
Re: Autism and Evolution
#47Re: Autism and Evolution
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's that, without finer detail, it's also a weak argument. I behave like my mother in many things; doesn't mean I was genetically predisposed to, as plenty of behavior is acquired from the parents.
Also you share lots of environmental factors with your mother, like living in the same house, using the same car etc.
autism isn't adult-acquired though (literally by definition, DSM specifies that it must be present in childhood). So you'd need parent and child to share environmental factors during their respective infancies.
Re: Autism and Evolution
#49I don't quite buy that autism will be shown to be genetic. I think it's an environmental factor. The rate of increase in autism is pretty much exponential: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111102/full/479022a/box/1.ht... Now that's a very scary chart if you start to project that curve into the future. Here's another one. Not saying this is the cause, but it is a cause for concern. We have many similar patterns of envi…
I'd strongly recommend you listen to Steve Silberman, Neurotribes author, on Fresh Air:
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/09/02/43674237...
(Audio controls in the left margin.)
He addresses that a fair bit, mentioning that autism is one of the most heritable conditions, and talking a lot about the history of the diagnosis and how it was artificially narrow for a long time.
Personally, my bet is that we'll come to see a lot of autism diagnosis as part of a broader pattern of medicalization of deviance from the norm. And that even the forms we eventually decide are harmful have for nerds the same relationship that sickle-cell anemia does to malaria resistance: a trait that is useful in small doses but can be harmful in large ones.
If there is an actual increase, I'd bet on it being due to stronger assortative mating that has come as mate choice has less to do with geographic factors and more with education and workplace.
Re: Autism and Evolution
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since this thread is about evolution, we might even say that the evolutionary pressures we currently face in the developed world actually favor mild variants of ASD. It might be because some ASD traits help people become more successful in the information economy. Asperger's people often thrive in well-paid occupations such as programming and data analysis where spontaneous social interaction is widely acknowledged t…
I have not seen any evidence that Asperger Syndrome or mild autism leads to well-paid occupations. For sure, there is some anecdotal evidence (which I find unconvincing), but I haven't come across anything more solid, like a research paper or study. If you've seen something along those lines, please post a link. I do believe that children with Asperger Syndrome often see the symptoms grow less severe as they age. Per…
Even Asperger thought that his patient/students had unusual gifts as well as issues. In an attempt to keep the then-new Nazi regime from closing down his school (and later, eliminating "defective" children), he suggested they might make excellent codebreakers. Steve Silberman covers that well later in this audio interview with Terry Gross, and presumably in his book as well:
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/09/02/43674237...