Wild ass speculation/discussion thread on autism - no connection to actual studies!

[hedgehog]

OK -

1. We know that some aspects of a person's inheritance are a result of multiple gene combinations - for example, inherit a gene for blue eyes, and you'll have blue eyes, except if you also inherit a gene for brown eyes, in which case the brown eye pigment covers the blue. But you could pass the gene for blue eyes and have blue eyed children. Blood types follow a similar pattern - you start out with so many empty boxes so to speak, and what gets expressed depends on how many boxes get filled.

2. I have long thought that I ans some of my children are somewhere on the autistic spectrum. I've also seen other kids like this. I always thought that they weren't recognized as being on the spectrum because they were functional. Who takes a functional kid to the doctor?

3. I recently found out that many of the characteristics I was thinking of as autism are also considered characteristics of introversion.

4. So, let's posit that there are a series of gene sites that may or may not be filled by genes A, B, C, D, E, F. Let's say the bulk of the population carries none of these genes; they're ****** and this is considered the baseline norm. So you could also have people who are A*CDE*, *BCD**, A*C*D** etc.

5. Maybe, what we call autism is what happens when someone has say at least 4 out of six of the genes, or A plus any two others, etc.

6. This would explain why some people seem to have some aspects of autism, but not others. It also explains why some autistics are functional , and others are not.

7. Let us also postulate that, for example, that people with ABC*** are very good at math and engineering. If you collect a lot of these people in one area, say Silicon Valley, maybe their kids end up as AABBCC*** and that is what causes autism.

[enlightenment]

1. Why does everybody want to be autistic?

I'm not trying to be rude, but more and more I'm seeing things like this - exercises in taking some aspect of what for centuries has simply been part of the human range of thought and behavior and turning it into a condition.

Under your scenario, practically everyone could position themselves somewhere on the "spectrum". What's the point?

[hedgehog]

4. Right now I hear references to an autism gene; what I am suggesting is that if we take a closer look

we will find a set of autism genes. By looking at the variants of "normal " people, we may find clues to the autism puzzle. There are many, many people with autism who are perfectly functional and perfectly happy. There are also many who are unable to function. We may find that by moderating the expression of these genes, we can allow these people to become functional.

[enlightenment]

7. My question is not whether or not

there is a gene or genes - but why more and more often there is a tendency to assign human behavior and traits (such as introversion) to this spectrum.

If an individual is perfectly functional and perfectly happy, why should it be assumed that they are something other than perfectly 'normal'? And if they are normal, why categorize them as some variety of autistic?

The autistic spectrum seems to be getting wider and wider - at what point does it encompass every variation in human behavior?

I don't disagree that looking at it from the perspective of gene therapy may prove useful for individuals who are not functional - but I find it problematic to go at it from the perspective that every variety of human behavior is in some way a manifestation of autism. I have had students tell me that because they have a higher than average IQ, they are autistic. I have had people tell me that because they function best when they keep detailed lists, they are autistic. Others who have a gift for maths or language are autistic.

Frankly, it's starting to look like everyone wants to be autistic because - somehow - it means they are special in some way. Why?

[hedgehog]

8. Some of us feel different than others - for example introverts in a world of extroverts.

When the only explanation offered is the autism spectrum, it becomes the default answer. It's not necessarily a question of morbidity. Think of it as being similar to realizing you are gay in a straight world. There's nothing wrong with being gay and it shouldn't interfere with functioning. But if you don't realize you're gay, you could end up very distressed and unhappy trying to behave straight. Realizing that you are "this" not "that" brings everything into perspective.

In the case of autism, maybe what we need to do is tease apart the particular characteristic that prevents functioning. For example, introverts are functional, people good with numbers are functional, so what is it exactly that makes some autistics non-functional? Is being an introvert somehow related to autism? Are certain genes shared?

[murielm99]

2. Wild ass speculation is what

if often referred to as brainstorming. It can lead to further study and discovery.

Autistics, diagnosed or not, often have brilliant coping mechanisms. They can contribute a lot to communities of all types.

[MineralMan]

3. That's possible, but it will take some genetic research

to demonstrate it. Interesting hypothesis, though.

I'm sure someone has already worked on a genetic hypothesis for the autism spectrum, too. A google search might turn up some research that's already been done.

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. #7 tries to explain an environmentally-correlated condition as having a genetic cause.

It's a rationalization.

Both environmental and genetic factors are at work. Given that, it's reasonable to look at the environmental factors in Silicon Valley before blaming it on a geek gene.

[hedgehog]

6. True that. OTOH, I can trace certain chronic illnesses in my family line

that have been hitting harder and earlier with each generation - genetics + environment working together!

[Warpy]

9. Wildly speculative it is, but there might be some truth in there.

I've often thought there might be an overlap between Asperger's and extreme introversion. Googling it will get you a lot of speculative articles linking them and quite a few trying to disprove them.

However, AFAIK, there hasn't been a spike in autism in Siilcon Valley or among MIT students or among any other cohort of math and science whizzes.

[SheilaT]

10. I have two sons.

The older one has Asperger's. Both of his parents are something of loners. We can both spend lots of time by ourselves, quite happily. One of the reasons it took us so long to figure out the son has Asperger's, is that he just seemed to have our loner traits a bit more strongly.

Son number two is very gregarious and outgoing, and is doing stand-up comedy.

Two sons, same parents. I actually think that genetics is quite wonderful.

And actually, rates of autism are unusually high in Silicon Valley. I've been reading about this for some years now.

[RagAss]

11. Maybe Silicon Valley workers don't get enough vitamin D from the sun, working indoors all day.

Maybe that deficiency during pregnancy is passed along to the child.

[Odin2005]

12. I'm an Aspie and an extrovert (ENTJ Jungian type).

People wrongly equate extroversion with being a social butterfly, but that is wrong. According to Carl Jung the main difference between Extroverts and Introverts is that Extros tend to focus on the "outer world" of raw facts, theories, events, and situations in themselves as objective things in themselves while Intros are more comfortable ruminating over the subjective impression those things have on their minds. Jung himself uses Darwin and Kant as examples of extroverted and introverted thinking types, respectively, and Darwin was no social butterfly.

IMO the underlying source of Autistic social difficulties is our sensory quirkiness. We tend to see the detail while missing the big picture, which makes understanding subtle nonverbal signals very difficult.