More Evidence of Increase in Profound Autism 578
I am Jack's username writes "The New York times has an article (no registration required) about an increase in profound autism in California of 273% between 1987 and 1998. Between 1999 and 2001 more than 6 500 cases were reported, similar to the number reported between 1970 to 1995. The increase cannot be accounted for by misdiagnosis, increased awareness, childhood immunizations, emigration, birth injuries, and genetics. Some autism experts think the actual cases to be dramatically more than reported in the UC study. See also previous discussions about high-function geek rich areas like silicon valley."
Evolution? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Evolution? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Evolution? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Evolution? (Score:5, Insightful)
If not, autism in itself is evolutionarily negative. However, it is possible that a milder expression of the same genes does have advantages, ala tech centers. Think sickle-cell anemia, where one gene gives you malaria resistantance, but two make you very sick.
Remeber, a human is a gametes way of making more gametes. Cool abilities don't count in evolution if they don't lead to more grandchildren.
Evolution redefined? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Evolution redefined? (Score:3, Insightful)
It makes it difficult for me to pay attention to uninteresting things, it made me less likely likely to have friends, it's given me some OCS-related characteristics, it made it virtually impossible to empathize with people, it's put me in situations which made me suicidal on several occasions.
And it's definately given me an excellent perspective on life, aside from the suicide. I know how the outcast feels. I've learned to recognize body language in people who go to efforts not to have any.
It's also had a hand in giving me an IQ of 134.
I've been through hell, and I've survived. I may be on Risperdal and Wellbutrin, but I wouldn't trade my needs for a normal life. Not ever.
Re:Evolution? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's only a good test if your focus is on individuals rather than genes. Even if you don't have offspring, you may promote the further expression of genes you inherit if you contribute to the survival or reproduction of other people with those genes.
Consider a small, somewhat genetically-related tribe. If this tribe produces some individuals who are less fertile but increase survival for their relatives, the genes for those individuals may continue to be expressed in future generations.
Or the geek-friendly version: even though Jim over there is a really crappy farmer, he keeps on solving hard problems about construction and weapons. Let's say he's gotten a bunch of recessives all in one place. Jim's siblings also have half-doses of some of those recessives; if he helps them do better, the recessives are more likely to propagate, even though his siblings are "normal".
A solution for slowing the spread of Autism... (Score:5, Funny)
However, it is possible that a milder expression of the same genes does have advantages, ala tech centers. Think sickle-cell anemia, where one gene gives you malaria resistantance, but two make you very sick.
So clearly, the answer to stopping the spread of this Autism is to mandate that every geek coder in Silicon Valley must mate with a supermodel who has no math or technical skills whatsoever. They must not mate with other geeks, but only with those who get paid to wear their underwear on stage. This is absolutely necessary for the survival of intelligence and technology in our country! So please models, take one for the team!
Re:Evolution? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Evolution? (Score:5, Insightful)
> an autistic individual needs lots of supervision, this is
> probably not the case.
If you believe this is an evolutionary change (and I do not) then you'd have to conclude as follows:
These children probably get lots of supervision - could be that's part of the environment that they are adapting to? Biology isn't picky about the distinction between a 'natural' environment and one that we've created - or about the distinction between a sustainable environment and an unsustainable one. When a large proportion of the population is severely autistic and can no longer provide that supervision for their offspring - evolution must either step in again - or if it can't react fast enough, there will be a population crash.
If you do believe this is an evolved adaptation then you'd have to conclude that Geeks should not be marrying other Geeks.
Personally, I'd suspect some side-effect of pollution...or a statistical error of some kind. I doubt evolution could react to a change in the environment as fast as one generation - which is as long as the geek population has surged in California.
Sickle-Cell Comparison (Score:5, Informative)
However, breed the right mix together and you get the full whammy, an individual incapable of interacting with social 'reality' at all. As of yet, there's no "niche" for the poor kids (no evolutionary advantage off getting on Maury Povich), but maybe they'd be killer ML coders had we direct-brain interfaces.
If this *is* a consequence of "geek inbreeding," it'd be interesting to consider the sociological factors that make it so widespread.
Of course, I don't think they've ruled out environmental factors yet, either. Could be another thalidomide at play.
Re:Sickle-Cell Comparison (Score:5, Informative)
If you must have a link, here's an entire organization devoted to it:
http://www.agre.org/
Re:Sickle-Cell Comparison (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Sickle-Cell Comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Since 1977, when the first autism twin study demonstrated higher concordance rates of autism among identical twins than fraternal twins, the evidence for inherited factors in autism has gained widespread recognition among researchers.
This article does state that autism does not follow the standard patterns for dominant, recessive or X-linked disorders, however.
links to geekdom? (Score:4, Funny)
Some forms of autism make one not like to be around people. I wonder if I have some of that. People who talk too much about non-geek things drive me crackers. Some people just cannot shuddup. My mom, for example, can stretch a 2-minute story into a 20-minute one by providing details that are useless to the story, but I cannot tell her off because she is my mom. She is the reader's digest in reverse.
Mild autism may be what makes a lot of geeks geeks. You never know.
Re:links to geekdom? (Score:3)
No. You don't. Talk to an autistic kid for a few minutes, and your wondering will be over. What you are describing is the way all people behave. I'm not quite sure why you think it's at all uncommon.
Take the AQ(Autism Quotient) test! (Score:3, Informative)
Interestingly enough, I received an AQ of 12 (below the average of 18), meaning I'm more well-adjusted than "normal" people. Rather amusing I thought.
Re:Evolution? (Score:5, Insightful)
The way evolution works is that there are many completely random variations and those that cause greater reproductive success are propogated.
The only way to see an "evolutionary step" (itself a misnomer) is to see some variation that causes greatly enhanced success at breeding. Needless to say, we are not seeing that here.
Re:Evolution? (Score:2)
--
Evan
Re:Evolution? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Evolution? (Score:3, Insightful)
Science is great. Cooperation is great.
--
Evan
Re:Evolution? (Score:2)
The only way to see an "evolutionary step" (itself a misnomer) is to see some variation that causes greatly enhanced success at breeding.
Worker bees don't breed (or is it the drones). Ants have similar societies. So does the borg, but that's just hypothesized, for now.
Re:Evolution? (Score:3, Funny)
Makes me wish my mouse was heavier so my right arm'd really bulk up. Boy I'd get the chicks then. In the mean time, I have to rely on cute emoticons to get them to smile.
Not evolution my friend. (Score:4, Insightful)
Evolution deposits the next generation with an advantage. Unfortunately, your great autistic math skills might not render you an advantage if you are a fully incapable of operating a normal life outside of the immediate caregiving of another human.
Autism is not evolution, it is a disorder. Straight up. Get a relative with it and you would understand. It is not pretty... nor an advantage. I would say though that it is too rare that most people think that it is the RAIN MAN. Trust me, The Rain Man is a *slight* case of autism.
Re:Evolution? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Evolution? (Score:5, Interesting)
Only a few people with autism have higher than normal iqs.
BTW, I teach preschool children with disabilites and have 4 children with the autism label, so I know a little bit about it. Please don't take your information solely from Rain Man or other popular media. Many children with autism are quite affectionate and not "screamers" etc.
Re:Evolution? (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you for pointing this out. I can't believe everyone seems to assume autism implies enhanced abilities. It does NOT. Let's just check out the definition, shall we? (Thanks, dictionary.com -- emphasis mine):
The character in Rain Man was an idiot savant. The two terms are not necessarily equal. Here's the definition:
Re:Evolution? (Score:5, Informative)
Among those with savant skills, only a few of these savant skills are actually of any practical use.
You might think it's "neat" that someone can factor 5 digit numbers instantly, but if that's all they can do and they are otherwise of low intelligence, it's hard to see how this is some beneficial mutation.
Re:Evolution? (Score:2, Interesting)
Regardless of the nature of autism, however, the nature of evolution is more relevant. Very simply said:
Step 1 - a genetic change occurs
Step 2 - that change is either beneficial or not
Step 3 - genetic change from #1 is either propagated or not, depending on #2
It remaind to be seen whether the increase in autism is genetic, environmental (unknown toxin affecting development), or some combination thereof.
IF it is genetic, it would remain to be seen if it is beneficial, and whether it will continue to be propagated.
And all THAT is moot if traditional evolutionary forces cease to propel human development. Humans have long used intellect to defeat natural processes that drive evolution in other species (for instance, we attempt to cure the sick of our species; in other species the sick become lunch for something else).
In that particular instance, going back to your point, if we come up for a 'cure' for autism, we could very well prevent further 'evolution' along autistic lines.
Or, on the other hand, I could simply be talking out of my ass again. It happens sometimes.
Thanks for reading, folks
Re:Evolution? (Score:2, Insightful)
No. (Score:2)
Since Autism is actually quite maladaptive and at the same time does not increase reproductive potential or likelihood, it is not likely that an increase in Autism is has anything to do with evolution, not to mention the fact that the time frames involved are far too short to be evolution-related in a species which reaches reproductive age as slowly as humans do -- these time frames represent maybe only one or two potential generational cycles.
Re:Evolution? (Score:2)
How did this stupid, stupid message get modded up to +5, Insightful? Are we conflating reality with X-Men, perhaps?
Re:Evolution? - hardly (Score:5, Informative)
The vast majority of autistic children and adults are NOT extrodinary like one poster said above. The basis of the behaviour problem is that they can only figure out one step of something at a time. It's not like mental retardation where they might not have a single clue what you're talking about. Autistic children probably know what you're talking about, but they have trouble communicating complex (multiple response) answers.
Examples:
Adult: What color and what is that?
Normal child: It's a blue car!
Adult: What color and what is that?
Autistic child: what is that. (statement)
They repeat from last given prompts. The have a lot of trouble voluntarily putting full sentences together. They know what they want, but many times fail to ask for it in a coherant manner. It takes excessive training to have a child first identify an object, recognize what you're asking about, and then have him put the two together. You could spend several weeks on simply "what is it?" After that, you have to have hime keep all those together, and learn to discriminate and learn that what you're asking, might not apply for everything.
Example:
Show child two toy pigs of different sizes. Ask him to point to big or little. Later, put one of the pigs in a group of three other objects, and have him show you different. He must identify that while it was (and still is) a little pig, it is now ALSO different. A normal child will easily put these concepts together after a few tries. An autistic child may never make these associations correctly.
In addition to poor communication/interactive skills, autistic children/adults can be plauged with stims (stimulatory behaviour, generally repetitive) .. Video talk, hand flapping, extreme/quick frustration and various poor calls for attention. This also includes the self-injury they might inflict. Banging your head on the concrete will get you attention.. but i wouldn't call that advanced communication.
Evolution if you mean "change" only.. but not evolution for any positive reasons. One minor positive factor (extrodinary ability) combined with enourmous disadvantages of communication doesn't seem like a really good way to evolve a society.
Re:Evolution? - hardly (Score:4, Interesting)
IT sounds like you may be working with moderately autistic children. Yes poor communication skills are part of the syndrome as well as certain ticks like flapping and attention span.
Keep in mind Bill Gates himself has aspergers which is a mild form of autism. Many mild autistic children do not have a diagnosis because they fit in so well or just appear awkward but do fine in academics. Obviously he can answer questions that are multiple response.
This is what this article on the New York times is about. 20 years ago many experts believed autism was a extremely serve disease and all who were afflicted could not read or do math and would have to spend life in mental institutions because they could not exist in the real world. We all know that is no longer true but for the most serve cases. Autism works in a scale and is not black and white. I think everyone may be autistic to a small degree and the most serve cases are the ones that are noticed.
I myself was diagnosed with autism and then aspergers as I grew older. I did have social problems and even today would crack under pressure( customer service jobs). However I never had problems answering questions that required multiple response answers. For example if you were to talk to me today, I would appear normal. In an argument with my girlfriend or doing my old customer service which I use to do then you might notice a difference. I kind of would mumble some words out loud under heavy stress or move my hands together in a certain way repetitively then stop after a second or two. I admit I use to flap when exciting as a child but stopped as I entered elementary school. I do not know why I do this.
During the tests you give the children, do they know what your asking? I scored terrible at these tests when I was 7 or 8 and was assumed retarded. Even though I got straight A's in school. As I matured I did much better not because of my knowledge or intelligence but because I could better communicate and understand what the psychologist was asking. The child might not of understood what you wanted in your pigs example. After all you wanted him/her to pick the largest pig right?
I have a 122 IQ and was in regular classes throughout school. I only had trouble with homework assignments that required alot of time because my attention span to this day is very short. I needed modifications so I could handle the load.
Re:Evolution? (Score:3, Insightful)
Evolution also doesn't work that way. You absolutely don't have genetic epidemics. Evolution is random and, especially for organisms that reproduce as slowly as people, pretty slow.
That said, my five-year-old boy with autism is the challenge of our lives, one that we attack every minute of every day. He seems to be responding well to the therapies that we have chosen, and we feel that there is a reasonable chance that he will advance to the point of attending a normal kindergarten next year (with some assistance.)
Re:Evolution? (Score:2, Insightful)
Those that suggest that the autistic shall inherit the earth can have had very little experience of working or living with the severe difficulties of the mentally impeded.
Steve
WATCH OUT (Score:5, Informative)
siri
Re:WATCH OUT (Score:5, Informative)
Brought to you by.... (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Brought to you by.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Flat5
Re:Brought to you by.... (Score:2)
Programmer ... I'm an excellent programer (Score:5, Informative)
Surely the way to chase this down is to get some clever cross-disciplinary folk on the case. Meanwhile, here's two links that don't require registration:
The Independant's version of the same story [independent.co.uk].
The BBC is bringing up the MMR "link" [bbc.co.uk].
Fat parents? (Score:2)
Re:Fat parents? (Score:3, Interesting)
On study I heard about suggested that the modern "fear of fat" - the fear of actually eating fat, not of being fat - was actually harming the development of children. Lack of fatty-acids imparing the development of brain tissue or something.
Re:Programmer ... I'm an excellent programer (Score:2)
I have a feeling you are right.
Among the autistic research community, there is evidence for environmental causes, perhaps multiple (almost all pre-natal), and genetic linkages suggesting a genetic susceptibility coupled to some stressor during pregnancy, and you get autism.
The recent rise is unattributable to changes in genetic combination, most think, so the change is almost surely environmental. But what ?
And in the mean time, what can be done to maximize quality of life for autistic children (most of whom are not gifted in intellect, but quite quite far behind their peers) ?
Re:Programmer ... I'm an excellent programer (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, I read an article once on how children (boys especially) of programmers and engineers tended to display autistic behaviors, often leading to a misdiagnosis of autism. I was interested because my own nephew, at over two years old, still had not spoken one word. The doctors were heading toward an autistic condition. But the article went on to explain how even though they tend to display these early symptoms that can last from birth to five years old, they are just fine, and tend to end up very smart bordering on genius level. The most common thread under these conditions was that they were children of programmers or engineers. My brother is a programmer, so I thought it was rather interesting. (and yes I do think my nephew (who is now 6) is quite a little genius. He could read some words at two but couldn't talk. A few months in speech therapy fixed that. He bypassed kids books by age four and has been reading encyclopedia style books on anything to do with fish, bugs, snakes or animals of any kind. At 6 he can tell you what an estuary is, knows everything about anything that lives in the deep sea, will gladly explain about any 'aquatic animals' found in a zoo, including their eating and 'reproductive' habits and sound out words like carnivorous'. His hero is Steve Erwin, Crocodile Hunter, of course.
Just search for autism engineer.
Here's a clip [uow.edu.au]
A couple of years ago the UK magazine Professional Engineering published an article entitled "Is there a bit of the Rain Man in every engineer?" linking engineers with children who have autism. Autistic children don't develop normal social relationships and they tend to wander off by themselves and play with mechanical things. The article said that engineers and autistic children shared various characteristics including strong visualisation skills, strong affinity with physical objects and being "less interested in social activities and communication.
Another [autism.org]
Simon Baron-Cohen, an autism researcher at the University of Cambridge, found that there were 2 ½ times as many engineers in the family history of people with autism.
This is orthogonal, not off-topic! (Score:5, Funny)
His overjoyed parents asked "if you can talk, why haven't you said anything before?"
He replied "Up to now, everything's been ok".
Re:Programmer ... I'm an excellent programer (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe this non-talking is a sign also?
Re:Programmer ... I'm an excellent programer (Score:3, Insightful)
1) Have you heard of something called a normal distribution? This quote has to work on averages not individual cases...
2) He stated non-crying childs tend to be really smart. He didn't imply crying babies tend to be stupid, as you have read it.
And if you don't agree, well, maybe you where misquoted your IQ
MMR "Link" (Score:5, Informative)
The following data is lifted directly from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and can be found at http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/autism/au
Epidemiologic studies have shown no relationship between MMR vaccination in children and development of autism:
* In 1997, the National Childhood Encephalopathy Study (NCES) was examined to see if there was any link between measles vaccine and neurological events. The researchers found no indication that measles vaccine contributes to the development of long-term neurological damage, including educational and behavioral deficits (Miller et al., 1997).
* A study by Gillberg and Heijbel (1998) examined the prevalence of autism in children born in Sweden from 1975-1984. There was no difference in the prevalence of autism among children born before the introduction of the MMR vaccine in Sweden and those born after the vaccine was introduced.
* In 1999, the British Committee on Safety of Medicines convened a "Working Party on MMR Vaccine" to conduct a systematic review of reports of autism, gastrointestinal disease, and similar disorders after receipt of MMR or measles/rubella vaccine. It was concluded that the available information did not support the posited associations between MMR and autism and other disorders.
* Taylor and colleagues (1999) studied 498 children with autism in the UK and found the age at which they were diagnosed was the same regardless of whether they received the MMR vaccine before or after 18 months of age or whether they were never vaccinated. Importantly, the first signs or diagnoses of autism were not more likely to occur within time periods following MMR vaccination than during other time periods. Also, there was no sudden increase in cases of autism after the introduction of MMR vaccine in the UK. Such a jump would have been expected if MMR vaccine was causing a substantial increase in autism.
* Kaye and colleagues (2001) assessed the relationship between the risk of autism among children in the UK and MMR vaccine. Among a subgroup of boys aged 2-5 years, the risk of autism increased almost 4 fold from 1988 to 1993, while MMR vaccination coverage remained constant at approximately 95% over these same years.
* Researchers in the U.S. found that among children born between 1980 and 1994 and enrolled in California kindergartens, there was a 373% relative increase in autism cases, though the relative increase in MMR vaccine coverage by the age of 24 months was only 14% (Dales et al., 2001). For more on this study, see California Data on Theory of Autism and MMR Immunization.
* Researchers in the UK (Frombonne & Chakrabarti, 2001) conducted a study to test the idea that a new form, or "new variant," of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) exists. This new variant IBD has been described as a combination of developmental regression and gastrointestinal symptoms occurring shortly after MMR immunization. Information on 96 children (95 immunized with MMR) who were born between 1992 and 1995 and were diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorder were compared with data from 2 groups of autistic patients (one group of 98 born before MMR was ever used and one group of 68 who were likely to have received MMR vaccine). No evidence was found to support a new syndrome of MMR-induced IBD/autism. For instance, the researchers found that there were no differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups with regard to when their parents first became concerned about their child's development. Similarly, the rate of developmental regression reported in the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups was not different; therefore, there was no suggestion that developmental regression had increased in frequency since MMR was introduced. Of the 96 children in the first group, no inflammatory bowel disorder was reported. Furthermore, there was no association found between developmental regression and gastrointestinal symptoms.
* Another group of researchers in the UK (Taylor et al., 2002) also examined whether MMR vaccination is associated with bowel problems and developmental regression in children with autism, looking for evidence of a "new variant" form of IBD/autism. The study included 278 cases of children with autism and 195 with atypical autism (cases with many of the features of childhood autism but not quite meeting the required criteria for that diagnosis, or with atypical features such as onset of symptoms after the age of 3 years). The cases included in this study were born between 1979 and 1998. The proportion of children with developmental regression or bowel symptoms did not change significantly from 1979 to 1988, a period which included the introduction of MMR vaccination in the UK in 1988. No significant difference was found in rates of bowel problems or regression in children who received the MMR vaccine before their parents became concerned about their development, compared with those who received it only after such concern and those who had not received the MMR vaccine. The findings provide no support for an MMR associated "new variant" form of autism and further evidence against involvement of MMR vaccine in autism.
could it be due to Air polution? (Score:4, Interesting)
what is the autism rate in other parts of the country or the world?
California air pollution (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:could it be due to Air polution? (Score:2)
Look at all the midwestern and southern states that produce coal and burn plenty of coal for power plants. Consider that CA has the most stringent requirements for motor vehicle pollution of the whole U.S. Also consider that CA has an advantage of non-polluting hydroelectric power, being a coastal state.
Re:could it be due to Air polution? (Score:2, Insightful)
by the way, the mid west is a vey windy place, unlike LA.
kuro5hin (Score:5, Informative)
Perhaps (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Perhaps (Score:2, Informative)
I don't think so. The article clearly states that they've excluded a wide array of conceivable factors. Something as obvious as a demographic shift would be very obvious. It also, in and of itself, would affect the absolute incdence, but no the overall rate of autism.
all sorts of theories (Score:2, Insightful)
Many think the leading cause for autism comes from the regiment of shots we give our kids from birth to a few years of age.
I have to admit, it's alot of shots these days, and there's clear economic motives for the makers.
Funny thing is, if you scrutinize this, they label you a wacko, or some extreme religious zealot (because of stories of a parent's kid dying because the parent refused treatment based on religion.)
Just go to the news groups and do searches for this type of stuff. It's some very interesting reading.
I refused chicken pox (not smallpox) for my first two kids. It was just becoming mandatory in schools, then when they figured out that many babies were getting deadly disentary, they backed off.
It's crazy when you take your kid in, and get 4 different shots on some occasions.
Taking the (flame)bait (Score:3, Interesting)
What economic motives are there for vaccine makers to produce a product that could cause autism?
Just FYI, most of the employees at the vaccine company I am familiar with insist on their families being inoculated with the vaccine produced by that company. They are aware of the stringent testing, QA/QC and improvements in the products made by the company. Of course, all vaccine manufacturers have to meet an extremely high standard of quality now, but it shows you the loyalty and security that these employees feel about their employer's products.
As for searching the newsgroups, I have to just laugh. What an unbiased and peer-reviewed source! (Admittedly, not all scientific publications can be regarded as unbiased
With the recent upsurge of panicked parents refusing to let their children be vaccinated, I'm (pessimistically) awaiting the return of the scourges that our grandparents used to fear
YS
Re:all sorts of theories (Score:2)
Keep in mind that we get these vaccines EVERYWHERE in the US, and this problem has been observed in CA. It seems rather odd, doesn't it, that your theory would result in increased prevalence of autism throughout the first world, which though it may be hypothesized by some, has not been proved by any means as far as I know.
Re:all sorts of theories (Score:4, Insightful)
Never mind the horrors of death by Polio(you think an autistic childs a problem - try a full body polio cripple), or Tuberculosis, or Measles - the list of truly horrible diseases that killed MILLIONS and were all but eradicated by public vaccination goes on, as do the children saved with vaccinations.
Empowered patients... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parents in the study were asked what might have caused their child's autism. Nearly half the parents in both groups said they did not know. A third blamed genetics; smaller numbers cited immunizations, birth injury or environmental factors.
So, just about half of parents are intellectually honest, then. We don't know what causes autism--there is nothing approaching a consensus among researchers, and there are few well-designed studies that even suggest a possible cause. Asking parents what caused their child's autism is like asking a non-technical person why their hard drive crashed. The answer as likely as not will be "I dunno, maybe I've got a virus?" Interesting for investigating the biases of the hapless user, but not a useful diagnosis.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I'm just surprised that nobody in the study thought to blame living near power lines--unless that's an "environmental factor".
Hypothesis: The incidence of autism is higher because children aren't being allowed to eat enough dirt. Exposure to more microorganisms when young strengthens the immune system. There exists a microbe (virus, perhaps) as-yet-uncharacterized that causes autism. (This happens sometimes with diseases. For example, most stomach ulcers are caused by the bacterium h. pylori and can often be cured with antibiotic therapy. This fact only came to light very recently, after decades of assuming that ulcers were essentially untreatable.) Children's weaker immune systems don't fight this pathogen as effectively as they used to, so they develop autism more frequently.
Solution: Feed all young children dirt.
This hypothesis actually has about as much grounding as many of the other suggested causes of autism. Based on very weak evidence, some parents have started to avoid immunizing their children, putting them at much greater risk for measles and other potentially deadly diseases. Bless the internet and its unquestioned authority on medicine.
Re:Empowered patients... (Score:2)
Re:Empowered patients... (Score:3, Informative)
Who are "we", and who told you that "we" are moving towards a consensus? Yes, until recently many vaccines contained traces of mercury as part of the preservative agent thimerosal.
The Institute of Medicine (part of the National Academy of Sciences) reported in its October 2001 report Immunization Safety Review: Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines and Neurodevelopmental Disorders that there was no correlation between thimerosal exposure and autism, ADHD, speech delays, or other developmental disorders. They did recommend that thimerosal use be eliminated as part of a campaign to reduce all exposures to mercury on principle.
UC Davis has just started (in 2001) a large-scale, controlled study to examine two thousand children. Quoting the principle investigator Isaac Pessah, "We will carry out the first comprehensive analysis anywhere of the blood levels of toxins, such as mercury, pesticides and pcbs, in children with autism, compared to children without the disorder".
Quite frankly, if the NAS has studied the issue and concluded that mercury in vaccines is not correlated with autism, and UC Davis is willing to sink $5 million into a study to characterize the effects of a wide range of environmental contaminants on the development of autism--well, that doens't sound like a consensus to me.
For a serious disorder like autism, it is always very appealling to be able to say, "Yes, that's the cause. I'm glad we can fix it, and punish the people who exposed our children to this debilitating syndrome." Unfortunately, the situation isn't that simple.
If you check the web, you'll find references that cite 1) high levels of mercury in hair samples from autistic children and 2) low levels of mercury in hair samples from autistic children as "evidence" of mercury poisoning causing autism. Still other sites (particularly those that are selling chelation therapy for autism) often suggest that there isn't a good noninvasive test for mercury levels in a child, so mercury poisoning should be diagnosed by indirect tests or through consideration of symptoms (that invariably look like autism.)
The "authorities" that assert that mercury is the cause of autism unfortunately often fall into two categories. The first group consists of doctors that believe in chelation therapy (there are no large-scale controlled studies to support this conclusion) and the second group contains lawyers who have launched large class-action suits against vaccine manufacturers.
I don't mean to imply that there are no legitimate physicians and scientists who consider mercury to be the cause of autism--I myself would not be surprised if there was some environmental cause to explain the increasing incidence. But the intellectually honest among us have to admit that there is by no means a consensus--or even a strong indication--that mercury is the major cause of the disorder.
Must be /.'s fault (Score:5, Funny)
Eureeka! (Score:2, Funny)
meaning they suffered from a brain disorder that left them unable to speak or compulsively performing repetitive motions like flapping their arms or rocking.
So this is what afflicts all of our programmers, and I thought it was because our marketing department keeps saying the product will be released next week when we are still in beta...
Gluten (Score:4, Informative)
For some unknown reason the medical/scientific community has been very resistant to studying this phenomenon.
-Peter
Stupidity warning (Score:5, Informative)
It happens that, among those few people who have this disorder, the symptoms can look like ADHD or Autism. But those persons do not have ADHD or Autism, they really have gluten intolerance! The problem is that, IIRC, this disorder is pretty difficult to diagnose, and since it's quite rare, and as a result of the confusing symptoms, most of the victims are not properly treated.
Now here comes the bullshitotherapist stupidity: blame ADHD and Autism on gluten. Et voila!
But yeah, if you suffer from this gluten problem, and you stop eating gluten altogether, the symptoms will usually go away; now the difference is that psychostimulants won't do a thing to those people: they will still have the ADHD-like symptoms. Conversely, people with real ADHD won't get any benefit from removing gluten from their diet, they'll just waste a lot of their time.
Unlikely (Score:3, Insightful)
I consider gluten an unlikely culprit. It's hardly a new item in the environment... it's present in huge quantities in almost every wheat-based product, most notably bread, and always has been. You can't account for an upswing in autism by blaming gluten; we've been swimming in the stuff for centuries, and I doubt that California has suddenly experienced a massive increase in bread consumption.
I'll take these stories more seriously when I see convincing, controlled, peer-reviewed studies that show that they're for real.
California isn't alone... (Score:3, Informative)
The evidence is becoming very persuasive that immunizations do bear a large portion of the blame. See the National Vaccine Information Center [909shot.com] for some good articles on links to this and other complications.
For our part, after reading dozens of books and talking to as many people, we made the decision not to vaccinate our now six year old. (Commence the flamebait about how we're playing with fire, yadda yadda yadda...)
Dr. Mercola [mercola.com], a naturopathic doctor out of Chicago, also has many good articles about the possible causes of austism. WARNING:
Crocuta
Reading materials (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, wait, this is
YS
Re:California isn't alone... (Score:5, Informative)
Wrong. The Wakefield study that was the first to suggest a link has come under serious methodological criticism.
The most recent study (Taylor, 1999) showed the following:
1. The authors showed that the number of ASD cases has been increasing since 1979, with no jump after the introduction of the MMR vaccine in 1988.
2. The authors found that children who were vaccinated before 18 months of age were diagnosed with autism at ages similar to children who were vaccinated after 18 months of age, indicating that the vaccination did not result in earlier expression of ASD characteristics.
3. The authors discovered that at age two, the MMR vaccination coverage among ASD cases was nearly identical to vaccination coverage of children in the same birth cohorts in the whole region, providing evidence of a lack of overall association between the ASD and the vaccination.
4. Taylor and colleagues established that the first diagnosis of autism or initial signs of behavioral regression were not more likely to occur within time periods following MMR vaccination than during other time periods. However, parental concern clustered at six months post-vaccination.
5. The results of the study were similar when cases of classical autism were analyzed separately.
See the National Vaccine Information Center [909shot.com] for some good articles on links to this and other complications.
Also note the paranoid quotes of the founder:
". . . If the State can tag, track down and force citizens against their will
to be injected with biologicals of unknown toxicity today,
there will be no limit on what individual freedoms the State can take away
in the name of the greater good tomorrow."
- Barbara Loe Fisher, Co-Founder NVIC
Wired Article... (Score:2, Redundant)
Asperger's Syndrome is considered very high functioning Autism. Where the person still has some signs of autism, but isn't as extreme as most cases.
There is a wonder in the psych community about whether or not technically inclination and/or mathematically inclination has any correlation to autism. If so, it gives an interesting window into autism.
Wired refers to Asperger's as the "Geek Syndrome." It discusses this boom of autism in California.
Here's the link to the Wired Article [wired.com] (The Geek Syndrome).
Autism (Score:2)
Bob and Sally (two puppets) are in a room. Sally has a ball. Sally puts her ball in a box, and goes outside to play. Bob takes Sally's ball out of the box, and puts it in a basket across the room. Sally comes back inside, and wants her ball. Where does she look for it first?
An autistic child doesn't recognize that what he/she knows (Bob moved the ball) is different than what Sally knows (she left it in the box, and wasn't there when Bob moved it).
Re:Autism (Score:2)
There are possible explanations (Score:5, Informative)
However, there is no shortage of theories to explain the surge in autism. There are two of them that seem to deserve some research:
- Autism is caused by mercury (thimerosal) in vaccines [mercola.com].
- Autism is caused by methylmercury in fish [mercola.com], when eaten during pregnancy.
The FDA already discourages eating some types of fish [fda.gov] during pregnancy (they even publish mercury levels in seafood [fda.gov]).Thimerosal in Vaccines (Score:3, Informative)
If this were true, in the future we should see a sharp drop in Autism cases, in children born right around now. The FDA passed down an instruction to reduce the use of thimerosal a while ago, and most manufacturers have either reformulated, or are in the process of reformulating to use other preservatives (a few never used thimerosal to begin with).
Autism is many things (Score:2, Interesting)
Some studies suggest a genetic link, others suggest environmental triggers. I suspect both will be validated at some point. Consider that autism has been around and documented for centuries - "idiot savants" - yet why a huge increase now?
Some suspect the MMR vaccine since the disease manifests around that time period.
As far as the autism spectrum goes it covers several "disorders". My son is either Asperger's or PDD-NOS (pervasive development disorder not otherwise specified) but seems normal to most people at surface glance. He is high-strung, and needs support for social situations but is extremely bright. He was reading at age 3 and doing base 2 math, multiplication and division at age 5.
In today's world he will be academically very gifted and socially completely disadvantaged. Yet the strange thing is that he is simply expressing traits my wife and I both possess more strongly than we did.
Once I starting reading the literature dealing with my son's condition it became obvious that I expressed many of these traits as a child. My wife was gifted but not as socially challenged. Once I figured things out I was able to appear mostly normal....well that's subjective I suppose.
So - my suspicion based on my experience and that of the parents around us in our support groups is one of two possibilities:
1. That autistic traits are caused by genetic and environmental factors and the environmental factors are increasing in severity....
OR
2. It is genetic and becoming more prevalent because male and female "geeks" are now allowed to co-exist. Perhaps this is nothing more than a result of women's equality allowing women and men to meet their true peers. Consider that in the "old days" women that were mentally gifted did not become doctors or computer programmers. Even 30 years ago it was not common to see female doctors or lawyers - yes they existed but compared to today where parity is finally beginning to show...
I suspect number 2 is more likely and unfortunately since evolution is currently suppressed for humanity thanks to our advances we cannot tell how this will affect our race. Our son will do well aside from some challenges socially, but do we tell him to marry someone dumb or not to have kids?
Would the parents age cause autism? (Score:5, Interesting)
Out of all the factors in the article, it didn't seem to touch too much on the age factor. I read somewhere once that older parents can lead to all sorts of abnormalities with pregnancy. Could it be age is playing a role here?
There are a lot of similiar couples/singles my wife and I know, they're slowly approaching 30's, no children yet. Compared with our parents who all had thier kids in their 20's we're a bit behind
It seems that the older we have children, the more that can go wrong. Silicon valley is a tough place to live (financially) and the burden of buying a house here and paying the bills has made alot of my friend put off having children till their 30's. It's an enviromentally prompted response to make sure we give our successive generation a strong foothold in life.
I think the answer is as simple as, people in silicon valley have children at an older age, therefore more autistic children are born as a result.
Autism Quotient test (AQ) (Score:5, Informative)
Interestingly, the test result interpretation key says: Scores over 32 are generally taken to indicate Asperger's Syndrome or high-functioning autism, with more than 34 an "extreme" score. A "normal" score, based on control groups, is about 16 (or 15 for women and between 17 and 18 for men). A group of mathematics-contest winners scored an average of 24.5. A group of scientists scored an average of 18.5 (19 for men, 17 for women), with computer scientists at about 21, physicists at 19 and those in biology or medicine at about 15.
Re:Autism Quotient test (AQ) (Score:3, Interesting)
So, er, I didn't [aagh.net]
That's based on the same code I used for the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale [aagh.net], btw.
Where we looking? (Score:3, Insightful)
Most of the theories [guesses] seem to focus on genetics or environmental factors.
I don't think it's genetics. People haven't changed that much in general and there isn't a "California" gene pool to point to--new people are moving to California and having children all the time. (I was born and raised in California and I'm still live there [here] so I'm seeing this firsthand.) And I don't think that there are enough "geeks" to account for that big of a shift even in Silicon Valley--It still takes a small army of burger flippers, gas station attendants, janitors, car washers, etc. to support a high-performance "geek."
Under environmental factors there seem to be two areas being looked at: stuff happening or being done to children such as vaccinations, and general lifestyle such as poor diet.
I think that it is environmental and probably something unnatural. My guess is some government mandated program such MTBE in the gasoline.
Is there a 'geek' syndrome? (Score:4, Interesting)
The Globe and Mail [theglobeandmail.com] (Saturday October 19, 2002) has a related article (with the title given in the subject line) in print and online [theglobeandmail.com].
They even have an "AQ" test to see where you are on the "autism spectrum".
I'm not sure I share the enthusiasm some of the quoted experts have for the idea that a number of talented people are having children with "good genes", which is causing this recent increase in autistic behaviour. Even assuming that exteme talent implies retarded social skills, I find it hard to believe that the basic talent it takes to write code, train users and invent documentation is extreme enough to warrant this kind of musing.
Add to that the skepticism I have for anything as complex as social interaction and family having a measurable genetic quality...
Good read nonetheless.
Autism is not alone. (Score:5, Interesting)
It isn't vaccines! The science doesn't stand up. If you think it's vaccines, we'll agree to disagree, okay?
I blame the chlorinated carbon molecule.
Organochlorines have been absent from the earth, in any appreciable amounts, since before the appearance of multicelled life. They are immensely stable, but nothing natural creates them - for energetic reasons, they are purely synthetic. They have unique (powerful, TOXIC) chemistry that we can "exploit but never control", in the words of Pandora's Poison [gristmagazine.com] author Shalini Ramanathan. This is an excellent book if you're interested in which feature of our 20th century lifestyle is raising disease incidences.
Most geeks including myself are midly autistic (Score:4, Interesting)
For the geeks reading this:
1.) Do you find certain social situations difficult or awkward?
2.) Do you feel out of place sometimes?
3.) Do you have bizarre certain interests that no on cares about? *computers cough cough
4.) Do you feel smart in certain area's but lack knowledge sometimes of other different area's?
5.) Do you find expressing emotions difficult even though you have them?
6.) Do you feel yourself to be somewhat clumsy ?
7.) As a kid did you feel more interested in complex things like science or weather rather then playing GI joe ?
8.) Do you find yourself to be somewhat compulsive?
Chances are you may be mildly autistic
Autism and its related aspergers syndrome is very complex. Its different then mental retardation and is hard to describe. I know because I have aspergers which is a mild variant of autism and have an IQ of 122.
I have both conditions that match autism and aspergers so I am unique. For example I can easily handle most social situations but I am clumsy and have poor eye and hand coordination. To this day I can not play a piano with two hands. The mechanism in the brain that divides the signals to my hands does not work properly. My left hand will play the rhythm of my right and my right would play the rhythms of my left. In complex situations like in relationships, I can notice my difficulties. I do not do well when women are not real direct about how they feel. Why do women do this?
As a kid I fell into the autism category but as I grew up I become less and less autistic. I use to daydream at school and go into my own world whenever the teacher wasn't looking. I no longer do this. I can do things today that I could not do a decade ago. Its weird and I can not explain it but I guess maybe my brain is re-wiring itself. I have brilliant in some area's but falter in others. Especially anything doing with 3d-space or mathematics. However I am great with logic and programming which uses the same area's of the brain.
Re:Most geeks including myself are midly autistic (Score:5, Interesting)
For the geeks reading this:
1.) Do you find certain social situations difficult or awkward?
2.) Do you feel out of place sometimes?
3.) Do you have bizarre certain interests that no on cares about? *computers cough cough
4.) Do you feel smart in certain area's but lack knowledge sometimes of other different area's?
5.) Do you find expressing emotions difficult even though you have them?
6.) Do you feel yourself to be somewhat clumsy ?
7.) As a kid did you feel more interested in complex things like science or weather rather then playing GI joe ?
8.) Do you find yourself to be somewhat compulsive?
Chances are you may be mildly autistic
Scientologists use this mechanism;
They ask you to fill in a questionnaire with questions like "do you read the dictionary for pleasure?" or "do you feel sad and cry during movies?".
Questions which 99% of people will answer YES to.
They then put you in a white room with a guy in a labcoat who marks your paper for you... then comes in and puts his hand on yours, and says "But it's ok... we can help you"
But let's analyze this:
Question 1:
Do you find certain social situations difficult or awkward?
Question 2:
Do you feel out of place sometimes?
Question 3:
Do you have bizarre certain interests that no on cares about?
Question 4:
Do you feel smart in certain area's but lack knowledge sometimes of other different area's?
This one's just classic. Let's see your options:
A. Answer No: This means you know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING. Or think you do. Which makes you a conceited idiot.
B. Answer Yes: This means that you know enough to know that you DON'T know everything. Which if anything makes you honest about where you are in the scheme of things. How many electrical engineers do you know who can tell you the best way to make duck breast in duck confit?
Question 5:
Do you find expressing emotions difficult even though you have them?
Sorry... lost the plot there. Do people have trouble expressing emotions? Sure - all the time. That's because they're emotions. Feelings cannot be easily expressed because they just *are* - they have no meaning other than how they feel. There is no referent. You're somewhere between not at all and extremely on the sad/happy/angry/jealous/upset/whatever axes. These things lend to poetry more than anything else -- which is why people have difficulty expressing them; after all, not many people can write poetry.
Question 6:
Do you feel yourself to be somewhat clumsy ?
Clumsiness is for the most part a learned skill. It's spatial awareness, observation, remembering your body's space and limits, and body-eye coordination.
Question 7:
As a kid did you feel more interested in complex things like science or weather rather then playing GI joe?
Where you a conscientious objector in the back-yard wars?
Did your playmates call you a commie?
Did they lock you up and stick a white feather in your hair?
Some people don't like playing with dolls. Sorry. And some people have an interest in complex things *and* play games. Like pretending you have super powers. Or building traps in the back yard and having your very own Indiana Jones style base called Trapmania.
Question 8:
Do you find yourself to be somewhat compulsive?
I'm a smoker. Yes.
I go on shopping sprees when the discounts are on at Macy's. Yes.
I just can't be seen dead outside the house without putting on my makeup and toenail polish. Yes.
I watch Survivor every week. Yes.
I have both conditions that match autism and aspergers so I am unique. For example I can easily handle most social situations but I am clumsy and have poor eye and hand coordination. To this day I can not play a piano with two hands. The mechanism in the brain that divides the signals to my hands does not work properly. My left hand will play the rhythm of my right and my right would play the rhythms of my left.
Congratulations. That also happens to the rest of the population the older they are when they try to learn the piano. It also applies to juggling -- there is a hump you have to get over, after which it becomes easy. But getting over that hump is the hard part.
In complex situations like in relationships, I can notice my difficulties. I do not do well when women are not real direct about how they feel. Why do women do this?
To confuse men. Try listening to a men-orientated talk radio show some time. You'll see that you are not alone.
Re:Most geeks including myself are midly autistic (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes. Because "certain" social situations are difficult and awkward. To everyone.
Do you feel out of place sometimes?
Yes. Because sometimes I am out of place. Like that time I accidentally entered the wrong toilet in the fancy restaurant...
Do you have bizarre certain interests that no on cares about? *computers cough cough
Yes. I admit freely to not liking Britney-Spears and soccer. This indicates independent choise, and not disease.
Do you feel smart in certain area's but lack knowledge sometimes of other different area's?
Certainly ! Nobody but a complete idiot would think he knew everything, and nobody but a person with severe self-image problems would think he knows nothing. In other words, every healthy person will answer "yes" to this question.
Do you find expressing emotions difficult even though you have them?
No more difficult than the average person, that is to say, sometimes very difficult indeed.
Do you feel yourself to be somewhat clumsy ?
Not really. Motorical skills are mostly about training though, maybe if I didn't like surfing and rock-climbing I'd be less coordinated. I fail to see what that's got to do with anything though.
As a kid did you feel more interested in complex things like science or weather rather then playing GI joe ?
Sure. You mean a young boy who finds the apollo-missions more interesting than killing must be mentally sick in some way ?
Chances are you may be mildly autistic
And chanses are that with your "test" 90% of the population are autistic.
Possible cause (Score:4, Informative)
Some people have found gluten-free diets successful in helping autistic children.
The whole gluten-intolerance area is *way* behind other areas of research; hopefully someday there will be more discoveries that can help both conditions (especially autism).
Rather than slashdotting a specific site, I'll just mention that a google search for "gluten intolerance" and autism has a lot of related sites and articles.
The study is CRAP! (Score:4, Informative)
The DSM-IV came out in 1994 and significantly broadened the diagnostic criteria for Autism. In my not so humble opinion, this has to have contributed directly to the 273% number the UCD study spouts.
My 3-year-old son was diagnosed with Autism last year. There are a huge number of "autistic traits" scattered through out my family. I have no doubt that if born today, I would have been diagnosed on the "autism spectrum", my father certainly would have been, as well as two of my nephews and quite likely my sister.
As it is, we were simply called "different" or "challenging" or "problematic". "Autism" was reserved for the likes of "Rainman".
The study (at least as it's being reported) is invalid. There has not been a 273% increase in Autism, there has been a 273% percent increase in the Autism cases being diagnosed.
Socialization, "intelligence", and alienation (Score:4, Interesting)
One of the implicit themes I see here that has not gotten much open discussion is that of being smarter than other people, both as a kid and afterwards. This notion seems very deeply embedded in geek culture, and is tightly bound up the sense of alienation that seems so prevalent here. For some reason, being "smarter" than other kids seems to set one in the direction of alienting narcissism.
As Jay Matthews [washingtonpost.com], a very well-spoken education columnist for the Washington Post [washingtonpost.com] puts it in a piece on college interviews [washingtonpost.com]:
This is some of this wisest advice I can imagine giving a teenager. First of all the notion of being "smarter" than other people is suspect - you have to define smart in a very narrow way to believe that. Or put another way, there sure are a lot of "dumb jerks" out there who seem to be able to accomplish many of their life goals. Are they "smart"? Who cares, they're getting what they're after.
None of this is to contest the more knowledgeable points of view on autism or Asperger's, but simply to point out that there's a pretty strong link between alienation and one-dimensional estimations of intelligence (see the work of Howard Gardner [harvard.edu] on multiple intelligences [surfaquarium.com], and to encourage everyone in this very intellectual crowd, particularly those raising children (saw a couple disturbing posts of 40+ somethings who really think they're smarter than most others) to look hard at what it means to be smart, and at the consequences of teaching a child to be a particular kind of smart.
Its Genetic (Score:4, Interesting)
If your mother's father was an Engineer, your very likly to be a geek if your male. When you throw this into a social context, you will find that most of the women who like hanging around with geeks, have a geeky father or or gradfather. This means they have the gene for this and have become conditioned to the "different" level of communication. If a geek breeds with a woman who has the gene, a geeky child is very likly. Its standard genetics and it explains why the best geeks of all time had a very short line of decendants.
Personal Experiences (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm sure there'll be a lot of comments about this one. I'd even be willing to bet that most /.ers have more symptoms of Aspergers than not.
Getting down to cases: I can only theorise based on my own internal experiences. So, here goes some facts and opinions, without attempt at analysis:
When I was about 6, I had a General Anaesthetic. It took me over 10 hours to come out of it. For much of that period I was dimly aware of external stimuli, they just weren't important. Eventually I managed to decode the face-slaps and sounds as attempts to wake me up, and thought it useful to do so. I guess (and I do mean guess) that a lot of autistic children just haven't seen a good reason to interact socially or with anything else in the Universe. Even a fingerprint can be endlessly fascinating, so why bother with the sounds that the universe (the bits that are other people) makes? They are just a distraction. You can make them go away by screaming, so why remember words? As for my own son - who's now 16 months old - I'm playing games with him with lots of mechanical toys (lots of fun to be had with swinging doors ), but also playing social-interaction games such as "pass the juice bottle" where we share a cup of juice, taking turns. And a lot of exaggerated facial grimaces for smiles, frowns and other non-verbal communications. I want to show him that things outside himself are interesting too. Because to lose speech and get too fascinated by internals is debilitating and very very not-useful, fun though it might be. You will get frustrated, and not know how to alter your environment to make it better. You will also upset people around you who care about you.
About farking time (Score:3, Insightful)
About farking time. Taco, perhaps you might want to add code to Googleize NYT links in stories?
Re:More on autism (my experiences) (Score:4, Insightful)
Austism has no connection with how you look. In some cases there may be other complications from the autistic person, such as downs, but that's a whole differnt disorder.
"It's nothing more than just an enhanced perception of life"
I can't really blame you for thinking of Rainman or other similar cases when thinking of autism, but to think that the average person is made better by this disorder is kind of ignorant. In most cases, it's not only a person's social development that is slowed/stopped/messed up. In fact, their cognative levels are supressed throughout their life.
Re:More on autism (my experiences) (Score:5, Insightful)
Please, go spend some time with autistic children. Between your comments, those about "California hypochondriacs", and about evolution(!?), I am surprised at the level of ignorance about this disease. It is a profound illness, not just lonely smart kids. Not even close.
Flat5
Re:More on autism (my experiences) (Score:5, Informative)
Or check this [jmu.edu] out. It's a list of symptoms from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [barnesandnoble.com] (commonly referred to as "The DSM IV").
Sure, a lot of us geeks fit the criteria, but one must be very careful to not confuse introversion with autism.
Re:More on autism (my experiences) (Score:3, Insightful)
Have they attempted to corrolate it at all with both parents starting families later in life?
Most of my friends (the very beginning of gen-x, born in the late 60s) started their families late. Even though we were 25 when we had our son (and I thought that was late... couple of years out of college), many just got started a year or so ago.
There's a good amount of data on chromosonal damage beginning in the thirties, including a real decline in late 30s. Add that to everyone using fertility drugs (hint: you're starting too late) and people having second and third kids in their 40s, and you've got to have more problems.
I'd expect this trend to be even stronger on the west coast where being a DINK is a class statement (and often necessary requirement to get that BMW 5 series, 5,000+ sq. foot house, clothes, etc).
*scoove*
Re:Old news. 2 nerds = autist child (Score:3, Interesting)
I have no idea what causes the problem but neither does anyone else.
Hmm...maybe not. (Score:3, Interesting)
As a result, I'm a bit socially inept. A lot of social interactions other people take for granted - especially interacting with groups of people - I picked up later. But this isn't because of some sort of neurological problem - I just didn't have a normal social life, because the other kids made it hard to have one.
Likewise, I have above-average verbal skills (don't judge by this post, please), a strong interest in politics and history, and I'm a bit self-centered in my conversation. But this can all be easily enough explained as the product of social isolation and an affinity for the written word, not Asperger's. If you like to read, history (and politics, which is really just a subset of the same) is something you're going to have an easy time learning. And as for being a bit self-centered - again, that could be the result of social isolation. Or, I could just be an asshole, that's certainly a possibility.
In the interests of intellectual honesty though, I feel the need to mention some things that I can't explain away with social/psychological factors. Asperger's suffers, if I read the definition write, tend to have mild speech problems - I had to visit a speech therapist for a while when I was seven. And my handwriting has always been very, very bad. And, as my friends and family can attest, I do seem to lack common sense.
My point, however, is it makes no sense for the tends of thousands of fine people on
Re:Autoimmunity (Score:3, Interesting)
While this is the kind of rediculous anecdote that shouldn't be given too much credence, it amazed me to find another patient of the same kidney specialist in our autism support group; with the same antibiotic program. Probably just a coincidence, but maybe not. Both syndromes are quite rare (although autism apparently becoming less so), and to find both in two kids is pretty darn unlikely, but of course possible.
thad