Are autistics part Neanderthal?



Page 12 of 13 [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next


How would you describe your body build?
Tall and broad 20%  20%  [ 41 ]
Tall and narrow 25%  25%  [ 53 ]
Medium 21%  21%  [ 43 ]
Short and broad 19%  19%  [ 40 ]
Short and narrow 12%  12%  [ 26 ]
Other 3%  3%  [ 6 ]
Total votes : 209

nooms
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: Apr 24, 2012
Posts: 8

10 Jun 2012, 5:10 am

i always end up thinking what if....
so here i go,
what if "part neanderthals" are always atracted by others with neanderthal traits?
what if by cross breeding between part neanderthals you could get almost full neanderthals?
what if those "crosbreds with high neanderthal percentage" are known as aspergers because their parents where atrected to each other through these special neanderthal traits (like innovativity, not caring for what the majority thinks, or feeling like youre on the wrong planet)

i myself come from a long lineage of "other worldly people" who end up getting themselves in trouble by doing things that are either socially uneccapteble or became acceptable after their time,
all of my family also matures rather late (in their twenty's) and never get verry tall....
i am a descent of irish, english, dutch, friesian, polish, russian, and basque origin with some yewish and romani/ traveller genes although there might be some i do not yet know about.
these are (almost) all types of people that have high percentages of neanderthal genes (according to some genetic discovery's).
theres also a lot of fysical traits in my family that point towards neanderthal heritage,
like red hair, short and broad appearance, weighing more than docters estimate (like me i am at a healthy weight and skinny looking at 80 kilo's wich is strange since i am only 1.68 meters tall)
we also share a family dental problem being an overbite of te upper jaw making oure chins verry small, this upperbite normally is only on the front teeth with us the whole upper jaw is bigger than the lower jaw.making oure chins rather small
we also all share (at least some) autistic traits with some officially diagnosed with add and or aspergers.
then theres hair, we are rather hairy, wich is not always good when youre a female,
i am going to use myself as an example my hair (yes the stuff on my head not going in detail on the rest) is completly un handelable and i have to choose short or dreadlocks or will have a giant birdsnest on my head i chose dreadlocks, ending up with 85 rather thick dreadlocks and a lot off people asking is that all youre own hair and yes it is, before dreadlocks i had to get horse combs because they were the only ones that would not break...

so here i go again,
what if my verry great great grand parent (about 30-500000 years ago) where neanderthal hybrids lets say 50/50 percent human/ neanderthal and they had kids one of these kids met a 75 percent neanderthal because he was atraccted to his neanderthal traits, and so on, can it be that in some familys and or tribes who only breed with others with neanderthal traits the percentage of neanderthal genes could be way higher then test results so far show?

if i had the money i would get my own dna tested straight away.

and just for the record, i see being catagorized as a neanderthal as a compliment and do not want to hurt any ones feelings,
also my english is not perfect (i myself am dutch) but its worth the try and i think that if you read the misspelled words out loud you should be able to understand.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Nov 25, 2010
Posts: 6635

10 Jun 2012, 6:39 am

nooms wrote:
i always end up thinking what if....
so here i go,
what if "part neanderthals" are always atracted by others with neanderthal traits?
what if by cross breeding between part neanderthals you could get almost full neanderthals?
what if those "crosbreds with high neanderthal percentage" are known as aspergers because their parents where atrected to each other through these special neanderthal traits (like innovativity, not caring for what the majority thinks, or feeling like youre on the wrong planet)

i myself come from a long lineage of "other worldly people" who end up getting themselves in trouble by doing things that are either socially uneccapteble or became acceptable after their time,
all of my family also matures rather late (in their twenty's) and never get verry tall....
i am a descent of irish, english, dutch, friesian, polish, russian, and basque origin with some yewish and romani/ traveller genes although there might be some i do not yet know about.
these are (almost) all types of people that have high percentages of neanderthal genes (according to some genetic discovery's).
theres also a lot of fysical traits in my family that point towards neanderthal heritage,
like red hair, short and broad appearance, weighing more than docters estimate (like me i am at a healthy weight and skinny looking at 80 kilo's wich is strange since i am only 1.68 meters tall)
we also share a family dental problem being an overbite of te upper jaw making oure chins verry small, this upperbite normally is only on the front teeth with us the whole upper jaw is bigger than the lower jaw.making oure chins rather small
we also all share (at least some) autistic traits with some officially diagnosed with add and or aspergers.
then theres hair, we are rather hairy, wich is not always good when youre a female,
i am going to use myself as an example my hair (yes the stuff on my head not going in detail on the rest) is completly un handelable and i have to choose short or dreadlocks or will have a giant birdsnest on my head i chose dreadlocks, ending up with 85 rather thick dreadlocks and a lot off people asking is that all youre own hair and yes it is, before dreadlocks i had to get horse combs because they were the only ones that would not break...

so here i go again,
what if my verry great great grand parent (about 30-500000 years ago) where neanderthal hybrids lets say 50/50 percent human/ neanderthal and they had kids one of these kids met a 75 percent neanderthal because he was atraccted to his neanderthal traits, and so on, can it be that in some familys and or tribes who only breed with others with neanderthal traits the percentage of neanderthal genes could be way higher then test results so far show?

if i had the money i would get my own dna tested straight away.

and just for the record, i see being catagorized as a neanderthal as a compliment and do not want to hurt any ones feelings,
also my english is not perfect (i myself am dutch) but its worth the try and i think that if you read the misspelled words out loud you should be able to understand.


There is actually estimates available per the 23andme organization but they are based on estimates from ancestory per the samples that have actually been done. They run as cheap as under a hundred dollars. There are forums on the internet that report those results for different countries in northern europe, and the area you mention are among some of the highest estimates, but the statistical range is rather small anywhere from 2.0 percent to 3.3. There is currently no known function for any of that archaic DNA, but some go for the estimate, just for fun. It would be impossible to score any higher than close to 4.0, because the highest estimates are based on samples that have already been taken.

What would almost be almost entirely impossible is if you turned up with little to no archaic DNA in those tests, per your geograhical location, and description of your general traits.

Obviously you are adapted to a cold weather environment, per physical characteristics that you mention. So were Neanderthals, and so were Eskimos. All whom share Archaic Neanderthal DNA. Close to 7 billion humans are suspected to share it. So you are definitely not alone.

There is a great deal of human variation that is a result of adaptation to the environment, through hundreds of thousands of years. Red hair is uncommon, in the Subsarahan, but it does present itself from time to time in albinos, of whom those are from these countries, where archaic Neanderthal DNA is suspected as close to zero. In otherwords it's not likely a trait specific, just to neanderthal heritage.

Actually as a female with Aspergers, per studied correlation, it is likely that your 2d/4d ratio is low on your right hand. What this would indicate is a potential greater exposure to prenatal testosterone. A recent study showed this trait stronger among Asperger females than males. The brains of Aspergers females were actually studied as similar to Male asperger brains. But the brains of Aspergers males were similar to control groups.

The exposure to prenatal testosterone for a female, could result in characteristics of a greater propensity toward bone density, proportion of a greater percentage of muscle than fat, that can provide a decieving weight per expectations in a female.

If you aren't familiar with 2d/4d ratio, on your right hand measure your index finger from the crease of the palm by millimeters and divide a similar measurement of your ring finger. Divide the ring finger measurement into the index finger measurement to arrive at the ratio. Normal measurement for females is about .97 and above. My sister and I both measure at .93 which is low for a male, and extremely low for a female. She is diagnosed with Aspergers, and I was diagnosed with PDD NOS, in adulthood, due to a speech delay in childhood.

Many of your characteristics both behavioral and physical could be associated with that factor of prenatal exposure to testosterone. As to why this happens, it is suspected to be caused in some because of stress in pregnancy.

Autitistic like traits are seen in the animal kingdom, and similar prenatal stress conditions are suspected, as associated with the condition. It's definitely not the whole picture of the causation pie, for Aspergers, but the physical characteristics in females are strongly correlated. Particulary the one about being a deceivingly higher than expected weight for a female that is both skinny and broad. Definitely a potential indicator of higher than normal levels of testosterone in development.

My grandfather's ancestry was from the black Forest of Germany, as a native of northern Europe so I'm not too far removed from where you live, per ancestry. Our family is also very hairy, and maintain an unusual youthful appearance well into middle age. Both my father his twin brother, my cousin, and grandfather all have/had characteristics associated wtih Aspergers. Everyone of one of us unique, but Aspergers is an uncommon condition. :)



nooms
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: Apr 24, 2012
Posts: 8

10 Jun 2012, 7:55 am

the testosteron bit is indeed partly true but then again people with higher neanderthal dna percentage might get more female ofspring with higher testosteron levels,
in my family high testosteron levels are present in most females and most females do not fit the gender typing of "normal society"
but then again i must say most dutch do not fit the gender typing (but this might be due to early feminism)
the dutch are a strange breed anyway... :P

i know about autistic traits in animals and personally know some dogs who get horribly confused if you change any normal daily routine i have also studied animal caretaking with my special intrest being animal behaviour, this might be why i tend to analyse humans in a way that is more appropriate for animals with terms as breeding and so on.
although i do think of humans as a verry strange type of animal.
i esspecially find male dominating behavioures verry intressting because they are so utterly useless in this day and age and point to certain behaviours being caused by genes rather then upbringing.

i am indeed not familiar with the 2d/4d ratio and will look into this,
about the stress during pregnancy this could indeed be true my mom has not been a verry socially acceptable character either resulting in doctors being absolute idiots in a lot of cases....

since i am such a mix of eurasian "genotypes" i must have forgotten some but it is quite funny to see how one half came down from russia toward "the low lands" and one came from the celts scandinavia and ireland.

about the bones and weight issue, i do indeed have rather big bones that do not break (ok if hit by a car they might) i have been hospitalised by some rather strange accidents with doctors being verry suprised i fell from a balcony 2nd floor landed on my feet dislocated my knee but resulting in bruises only, i did see my leg bone bend during the landing though (i do have a joint condition called hypermobilitysyndrome witch might have something to do with this).

although i am broad in shoulders and hips my waist is verry tiny and not male like,
i do have a big head (although the dreadlocks do a good job at hiding it) with a slightly sloping forhead and receiding chin,
i can most definitly not fit hats not even when i had short hair, this is again assosiated with aspergers as well as neanderthal.

the young appearance i do indeed recognise, if i do not wear make up i have to prove i am older then sixteen to get cigarretes i am now 24...
the same in my mom she is 62 when people guess her age they say 42.

i am one of those people who love uniqueness, in almost(apart from racism) any way shape or form but then again i live in one of the most mixed population country's in the world, its a shame most people are scared of what they don't know, most of the times i am scared about what i do know...

the one thing i can't seem to find in any of these (half) scientific studies is that both neanderthals and autistic people seem to connect with animals in a different way,
about neanderthals offcourse we can not be sure how they treated pets but dog (wolf like) skeletons have been found with neanderthal remains.

in autism it seems there is more of a equality between pet and "owner" (i hate that word) and they seem to try to work together, this might be why autism dogs can make such a big difference, but then again this might have to do with dogs avoiding eye contact and not judging you....
autism is indeed a rare but often mis diagnosed condition it took me fifteen years of therapists saying it was a traumatic youth before someone thought outside the book and started asking about sensory issues, turns out hearing bats and turning of pain are not comepletly normal... :P
but then again who is to say what is normal...



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Nov 25, 2010
Posts: 6635

10 Jun 2012, 5:35 pm

nooms wrote:
the testosteron bit is indeed partly true but then again people with higher neanderthal dna percentage might get more female ofspring with higher testosteron levels,
in my family high testosteron levels are present in most females and most females do not fit the gender typing of "normal society"
but then again i must say most dutch do not fit the gender typing (but this might be due to early feminism)
the dutch are a strange breed anyway... :P

i know about autistic traits in animals and personally know some dogs who get horribly confused if you change any normal daily routine i have also studied animal caretaking with my special intrest being animal behaviour, this might be why i tend to analyse humans in a way that is more appropriate for animals with terms as breeding and so on.
although i do think of humans as a verry strange type of animal.
i esspecially find male dominating behavioures verry intressting because they are so utterly useless in this day and age and point to certain behaviours being caused by genes rather then upbringing.

i am indeed not familiar with the 2d/4d ratio and will look into this,
about the stress during pregnancy this could indeed be true my mom has not been a verry socially acceptable character either resulting in doctors being absolute idiots in a lot of cases....

since i am such a mix of eurasian "genotypes" i must have forgotten some but it is quite funny to see how one half came down from russia toward "the low lands" and one came from the celts scandinavia and ireland.

about the bones and weight issue, i do indeed have rather big bones that do not break (ok if hit by a car they might) i have been hospitalised by some rather strange accidents with doctors being verry suprised i fell from a balcony 2nd floor landed on my feet dislocated my knee but resulting in bruises only, i did see my leg bone bend during the landing though (i do have a joint condition called hypermobilitysyndrome witch might have something to do with this).

although i am broad in shoulders and hips my waist is verry tiny and not male like,
i do have a big head (although the dreadlocks do a good job at hiding it) with a slightly sloping forhead and receiding chin,
i can most definitly not fit hats not even when i had short hair, this is again assosiated with aspergers as well as neanderthal.

the young appearance i do indeed recognise, if i do not wear make up i have to prove i am older then sixteen to get cigarretes i am now 24...
the same in my mom she is 62 when people guess her age they say 42.

i am one of those people who love uniqueness, in almost(apart from racism) any way shape or form but then again i live in one of the most mixed population country's in the world, its a shame most people are scared of what they don't know, most of the times i am scared about what i do know...

the one thing i can't seem to find in any of these (half) scientific studies is that both neanderthals and autistic people seem to connect with animals in a different way,
about neanderthals offcourse we can not be sure how they treated pets but dog (wolf like) skeletons have been found with neanderthal remains.

in autism it seems there is more of a equality between pet and "owner" (i hate that word) and they seem to try to work together, this might be why autism dogs can make such a big difference, but then again this might have to do with dogs avoiding eye contact and not judging you....
autism is indeed a rare but often mis diagnosed condition it took me fifteen years of therapists saying it was a traumatic youth before someone thought outside the book and started asking about sensory issues, turns out hearing bats and turning of pain are not comepletly normal... :P
but then again who is to say what is normal...


Larger heads are correlated with northern latitudes as an environmental adaptation to retain heat. There is abnormal brain growth that was studied recently in children with ASD's. In that study the majority of the phenomenon was associated with male children with regressive autism as opposed to children with other forms of autism and as opposed to non-ASD children in a control group. The abnormal brain growth was not associated wih females with regressive autism.

There is evidence that neanderthals have average cranial sizes larger than modern human beings, however larger cranial capacity is correlated with robust physicality. The neanderthals were much more robust than modern human beings, on average. Beyond this averages for cranial capacity for neanderthals is taken from a small region of geography as opposed to averages from human beings taken world-wide. There are geographical regions in the world where average brain capacities of modern man are studied as exceeding reported averages for neanderthals.

Interestingly, Wiki reports that Cro-Magnon man, that mixed with neanderthals, while not as robust, was much taller on average, and skulls were measured with brain capacities that measure approximately 1600cc, about 100cc greater than Neanderthal Man, on average. The archaelogical record is limited so the statistics change as time goes on and more evidence is discovered.

Beyond that, per intelligence, while cranial capacity is slightly correlated with standard IQ scores, it is not required for genius per historical examples of Anatole France measured with a 1000cc brain and Lord Byron with a measure of a 2200cc brain, both measured post mortem, not through any type of estimate.

And per example of Einstein who was measured with a below average, post mortem brain size. The physical structure of his brain was anamalous, though; his unusual intellectual abilities and weaknesses were in part, attributed to those anamolies.

Interestingly it appears that some individuals, particularly female individuals with Aspergers syndrome personify inanimate objects moreso than the general population, to the point of a newly identified condition where some actually marry an inanimate object, like a landmark, per example of the Eiffel Tower.

Although, self reported, there are many threads here on personfication of inanimate objects, where there are unusual levels of attachment/personification to inanimate objects. There are anecdotal reports of bonding more with animals than humans, and there are also many reports of bonding better with objects than human beings. There are a variety of potential explanations for this, some potentially related to life/cultural experience. And these issues are of course, seen in the general population, in what is considered normal levels and unusual levels.

Humans are primates, so they definitely display many of the other dominant innate behaviors seen among other social primates. Hormone levels have been studied as associated with the phenomenon, particularly testosterone. There are some individuals that are not comfortable unless they are in a dominant position and there are some that are not comfortable when they are forced into a dominant position.

It is applicable to females as well to some degree. What is hard per culture, is that many people, are pushed into areas, that are in opposition to their innate propensities toward dominance. It can create a great deal of discomfort, for those that find themselves in roles that aren't in compliance with their nature. Seems like this would be common sense by studying the animals kingdom, but complex studies have been done to provide evidence for it. Culture sets humans apart from other primates, as much or more than any innate tendency.

The power of culture, and the ability of it to provide illusion, to me, is most evident, in the fact that so many human beings refuse to believe that they are animals, and will really get upset if one suggests that they are just another animal on the face of the planet.

Perhaps it is harder for some autistic individuals to see this illusion. It does, I think, make a difference in how one may look at the rest of the animal kingdom, and what strength of empathy may present itself. This too though, is not limited to people with ASD's. And autistic like traits are certainly not limited to those with autism disorders, as mentioned earlier in the discussion, studied out into approximatley 30% of the population in the US and Sweden.



DemocraticSocialistHun
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: Nov 26, 2005
Posts: 127
Location: NE Ohio, Union of Congressional Corporatist Republics

10 Jun 2012, 7:38 pm

aghogday wrote:
There is no reliable information per any Neurodiveristy traits as defined in the Aspie Quiz, in the middle east or Subsarahan Africa, per the fact that the interest element in the Aspie Quiz cannot be reliably measured per anything associated specific to the scores of the test, per limited accessibility of the online quiz. And moreover, due to the fact that the test is not made available per translation or accessibility in those actual indigenous populations.

At this point in time there is only evidence that refutes a Neanderthal Theory of Autism, per the actual hard data that exists per the Children of Indigenous Somalians diagnosed at high rates of autism in the US and Sweden, as related to the current data that there is little Neanderthal archaic DNA that exists in the populations of the Subsarahan.

So the data as it exists indicates there is no specific relationship between archaic Neanderthal DNA and autism disorder, that does not exist anywhere else in the world, given the control group of children of Indigenous Somalians already available in the US and Sweden.

If one is going to suggest that it was neurodiversity that was being measured and not autism disorder, there is no indication of that in the actual title of the theory. At this point it is a commonly known fact that children of Indigenous Somalians born in the US and Sweden have high rates of Autism.

Basically it boils down to one statement that solidly refutes the genetic aspect of the theory, per the scientific data as it currently exists, in relation to the title of the theory.

Children of Indigenous Somalians, a demographic of Subsarahan Africans measured as having little to no Archaic Neanderthal DNA are diagnosed with Autism at high levels both in the US and Sweden.


The only reasonable thing to conclude is that emotional abuse or neglect at a very early age alone can cause an autism spectrum diagnosis.

aghogday wrote:
There is no evidence of abuse, nor is there evidence that abuse causes autism disorder, so the data stands solidly as is.


If it isn't physical or sexual abuse, they don't look for it. They miss most of the emotional abuse, of that you can be sure, even when neurotypical children are involved.

aghogday wrote:
I'm not knocking the potential that Neanderthals have contributed to the human condition as it currenly stands, perhaps some of the behavioral traits measured in the aspie quiz, but there is too much evidence against the notion that it is specific to autism, that is a term for a diagnosed disorder noted in all populations, studied so far.


Rather, what isn't specific to neurodiversity is the invalidation and ridicule neurodivergents are subjected to. I'm betting even neurotypicals get emotionally abused in some countries. Or maybe it is neurotypcial parents and neurodivergent babies not being able to connect in countries such as America vs neglect in countries such as Somalia.

aghogday wrote:
The only way to find any association of the traits per individuals in areas with low to no measured archaic DNA, is to actually test those individuals. It's been done per actual autism disorder, and the results are confirmed as positive, but it hasn't been done for the traits measured in the Aspie quiz. Sorry for the redundancy, but I sincerely think there is the real potential that could change in the future, if the quiz was tweaked and peer reviewed. :)


Actual autism "disorder" is what is confusing. It has environmental components. While granted the irrefutable proof you desire is still lacking, this is most likely how you get autistic Somalians.


_________________
40 acres, a mule, and 40,000 years worth of interest
http://matthewlisraelisaterrorist.blogspot.com/
http://mixedstateecodepression73.wordpress.com/


StarTrekker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Apr 22, 2012
Posts: 1765
Location: Starship Voyager, somewhere in the Delta quadrant

11 Jun 2012, 12:06 am

To my knowledge, neanderthals were not slaughtered by humans... humans evolved from them. Evolution does not count as slaughtering. If neanderthals were so smart, they would have found a way to communicate; even basic animals with only instinctive lower brain functions, like frogs and fish, can communicate. Methinks your theory needs a little work.


_________________
"Survival is insufficient" - Seven of Nine
Diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder on the 10th of April, 2014
Thanks to Olympiadis for my fantastic avatar!


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Nov 25, 2010
Posts: 6635

11 Jun 2012, 1:38 am

DemocraticSocialistHun wrote:
aghogday wrote:
There is no reliable information per any Neurodiveristy traits as defined in the Aspie Quiz, in the middle east or Subsarahan Africa, per the fact that the interest element in the Aspie Quiz cannot be reliably measured per anything associated specific to the scores of the test, per limited accessibility of the online quiz. And moreover, due to the fact that the test is not made available per translation or accessibility in those actual indigenous populations.

At this point in time there is only evidence that refutes a Neanderthal Theory of Autism, per the actual hard data that exists per the Children of Indigenous Somalians diagnosed at high rates of autism in the US and Sweden, as related to the current data that there is little Neanderthal archaic DNA that exists in the populations of the Subsarahan.

So the data as it exists indicates there is no specific relationship between archaic Neanderthal DNA and autism disorder, that does not exist anywhere else in the world, given the control group of children of Indigenous Somalians already available in the US and Sweden.

If one is going to suggest that it was neurodiversity that was being measured and not autism disorder, there is no indication of that in the actual title of the theory. At this point it is a commonly known fact that children of Indigenous Somalians born in the US and Sweden have high rates of Autism.

Basically it boils down to one statement that solidly refutes the genetic aspect of the theory, per the scientific data as it currently exists, in relation to the title of the theory.

Children of Indigenous Somalians, a demographic of Subsarahan Africans measured as having little to no Archaic Neanderthal DNA are diagnosed with Autism at high levels both in the US and Sweden.


The only reasonable thing to conclude is that emotional abuse or neglect at a very early age alone can cause an autism spectrum diagnosis.

aghogday wrote:
There is no evidence of abuse, nor is there evidence that abuse causes autism disorder, so the data stands solidly as is.


If it isn't physical or sexual abuse, they don't look for it. They miss most of the emotional abuse, of that you can be sure, even when neurotypical children are involved.

aghogday wrote:
I'm not knocking the potential that Neanderthals have contributed to the human condition as it currenly stands, perhaps some of the behavioral traits measured in the aspie quiz, but there is too much evidence against the notion that it is specific to autism, that is a term for a diagnosed disorder noted in all populations, studied so far.


Rather, what isn't specific to neurodiversity is the invalidation and ridicule neurodivergents are subjected to. I'm betting even neurotypicals get emotionally abused in some countries. Or maybe it is neurotypcial parents and neurodivergent babies not being able to connect in countries such as America vs neglect in countries such as Somalia.

aghogday wrote:
The only way to find any association of the traits per individuals in areas with low to no measured archaic DNA, is to actually test those individuals. It's been done per actual autism disorder, and the results are confirmed as positive, but it hasn't been done for the traits measured in the Aspie quiz. Sorry for the redundancy, but I sincerely think there is the real potential that could change in the future, if the quiz was tweaked and peer reviewed. :)


Actual autism "disorder" is what is confusing. It has environmental components. While granted the irrefutable proof you desire is still lacking, this is most likely how you get autistic Somalians.


In someways, at least for what is currently identified as Asperger Sydrome, the DSM5 has somewhat resigned itself to the idea that culture, in part influences the disorder, per the statements that symptoms are present in early childhood, but may not fully present themselves until social demands exceed ability. So, in effect if social demands are never exceeded there is never technically a disorder.

What are those social demands? I don't think anyone fully understands it, but there appear to be some hints.

Abuse in a child is not going to cause the abnormal brain growth seen specific to males with regressive autism, that lose their ability to speak, so we can likely mark that one of the list of disorders heavily influenced by the social environment of face to face human interaction.

On the other hand we know that many of the autistic like behavioral impairments associated with autism disorder are seen in children that are abused through social isolation in childhood. The same is true for primates, studied isolated from their parents. There is the potential that these children can adapt, but many are left psychologically/emotionally scarred for life, particularly vulnerable to the disease of addiction.

The refrigerator parent theory has been refuted as the cause of autism, however it would not be reasonable to suggest that abuse either emotional, sexual, or physical would not influence autism like behavioral impairments. Emotional detachment in the parent-child relationship, would likely be considered a form of emotional abuse, depending on severity of the issue, per factors associated with social isolation.

While there is evidence of child abuse among Somali families, there is no evidence at this point in time that child abuse is being misdiagnosed as autism spectrum disorders seen in this subgroup of individuals, including regressive autism.

The Aspie quiz measures a more extensive list of behaviors than the DSMIV, but regardless of attempts to isolate the cultural environment out of it, is entirely impossible to do. The same applies to the DSMIV.

The fact of the matter is, even though the refrigerator mother hypothesis of autism, has been refuted as the cause, there is no way to determine how much parental influence, loving or detached, impacts the behavioral impairments associated with autism. Loving influence is not likely detrimental.

I'm not sure you understand how well trained professionals that interact with children are in spotting abuse in children, in the US. It is not so much a fear now that the abuse will be missed, but if abuse will be identified that does not exist.

There are many signs associated with potential abuse of children, that has little to do with autism, that can be spotted by a trained clinician. There is certainly the potential for misdiagnosis of autism, but the statistical odds that that child abuse is being misdiagnosed as autism disorder in two separate countries, where rates of autism are highest among the same demographic is extremely unlikely.

There is no question that autism disorder including the developmental issues associated in brain growth and regressive autism exists in children of Somalians in the US and Sweden. The thing that is being questioned by science is why are the rates higher than other demographics in the US and Sweden. Various ideas have been entertained, but there isn't much evidence to support them..

Beyond this, there is an autism centre in Uganda that is specifically set up for children with autism, some of which are severely impacted with autism spectrum disorders like regressive autism. These are indigenous children living in Subsarhan Africa. There is no question of whether or not Autism Spectrum Disorders do exist, among the indigenous Subsarahan populations, but instead a question of what the actual prevalence is due to lack of awareness and access to appropriate medical care and diagnosis.

There are many people now speculating that technology influences the development of autistic like behaviors, and some hard evidence per videogaming addiction in China that point to behavioral problems in social communication as well as actual structural differences in the brain, that are damaging. This type of research is new, but it adds to the list of environmental factors associated with Autistic like behavioral impairments.

I personally can't dismiss the possibility that environment may be the major causation involved in some cases of autism spectrum disorders, particularly in light of the recent twin studies that suggest that there is a significant environmental influence, that wasn't understood before.

Autism continues to become more complex of an issue as time goes by. I'm guessing RDOS isn't likely to change his direction out of the disorder arena, per his nomenclature, but as long as it stay as is, it's going to be focused on the potential of whether or not somone is going to develop an ASD, per the nomenclature of the Quiz, and any suggestion that Neanderthals are the cause of autism, isn't going to gain much traction with the data that shows autism does exist among Subsaharan Africans who have been studied as a demographic with little to no archaic Neanderthal DNA. Very few are going to buy the idea that they all suffering the effects of abuse and are misdiagnosed with autism. Particularly among those diagnosed with Regressive Autism.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Nov 25, 2010
Posts: 6635

11 Jun 2012, 2:21 am

StarTrekker wrote:
To my knowledge, neanderthals were not slaughtered by humans... humans evolved from them. Evolution does not count as slaughtering. If neanderthals were so smart, they would have found a way to communicate; even basic animals with only instinctive lower brain functions, like frogs and fish, can communicate. Methinks your theory needs a little work.


There is no evidence that Neanderthals were slaughtered by Homosapiens, but there is evidence that Homosapiens migrating out of Africa existed in much greater numbers than Neanderthals and outcompeted them for resources, per those greater numbers. The most recent research suggests that an admixture event occurred between the two classified species of hominids, and we retain a small percentage of that archaic Neanderthal DNA that to this point has no definitive functionality, although there is speculation that there may be important areas of functionality per immune system advantage, yet to be proven.

There is no suggestion that Neanderthals were slaughtered in this thread or theories as such talked about in this thread that I am aware of. There is actually though, a theory that was mentioned, if I remember correctly, called the Neanderthal Predation Theory that suggests that Neanderthals were the aggressor toward homosapiens. It wasn't discussed in detail though.

I don't think anyone has suggested that neanderthals can't communicate at all; the Neanderthal Theory of Autism suggests that autistic behavior which does include what is defined in neuropychology as impairments in social communication was normal in Neanderthals, and should be viewed as normal behavior in modern humans that possess those traits, because they were preserved in the population, per survival advantage.

It's a bit confusing because the author suggests that there is not a survival benefit in classic autism that happens in a sporadic manner, while there is in the "higher functioning" areas of individuals with autistic traits. The scientific community views all the disorders as impairing ones, so science is not in agreement with the theory.

Neanderthals appear to have contributed to the evolution of modern homosapiens through the admixture event, however there is no evidence that modern homosapiens evolved directly from Neanderthals. It is suggested that both homosapiens and neanderthals had a common hominid ancestor in Africa at some point.



applebiter
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: May 30, 2010
Posts: 3

11 Jun 2012, 8:33 pm

aghogday wrote:

Per links above the CADPS2 and AUTS2 gene mutations associated with autism have an extremely low correlation with Autism if any.

The AUTS2 mutation has been identified associated with only 1 group of twins, and is not considered an autism succeptibility gene.

The CADPS2 mutation was found inclusive as associated with autism in the most recent study and per that study the mutation is not considered an autism succeptibility gene.

The normal expression of these genes are common in human beings as well as other animals. The normal genes are what is associated with archaic Neanderthal gene variants. Neither of these two mutations are seen in Archaic Neanderthal DNA.

There is no direct evidenced connection between Autism and archaic neanderthal DNA.

The only current suggested connection between archaic Neanderthal DNA/Denosivan DNA is possible immune system advantage. However, there is no definitive link.


Thanks for that, aghogday!



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Aug 26, 2010
Posts: 8245
Location: mid atlantic coast usa

11 Jun 2012, 8:55 pm

StarTrekker wrote:
To my knowledge, neanderthals were not slaughtered by humans... humans evolved from them. Evolution does not count as slaughtering. If neanderthals were so smart, they would have found a way to communicate; even basic animals with only instinctive lower brain functions, like frogs and fish, can communicate. Methinks your theory needs a little work.


That assumption that Neanderthals evolved into moderns is outmoded. They were almost certainly dead ends, but dead ends that may have left a legacy.

There were several types of archaic hominids. Neanderthals were the species that lived in europe and in western asia.

They stayed neanderthal throughout their 200 thousand year tenure.

They did not evolve (indeed if anything they seemed to have become more neanderthal rather more modern with time) then they suddenly vanished from the archealogical record in europe around 37 thousand years BP, and were as suddenly replaced by the anatomoical moderns. The latter were intruders who evolved elsewhere.

Neanderthals werent necessarily "slaughtered" by anatomical moderns. But they were outcompeteed somehow and were driven to extinction. But they have left a genetic trace in the former range (europe or western asia). Living people in those areas sometimes have a trace of Neanderthal DNA.
But they did not "evolve into anatomical moderns".



DemocraticSocialistHun
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: Nov 26, 2005
Posts: 127
Location: NE Ohio, Union of Congressional Corporatist Republics

18 Jun 2012, 12:09 pm

aghogday wrote:
Abuse in a child is not going to cause the abnormal brain growth seen specific to males with regressive autism, that lose their ability to speak, so we can likely mark that one of the list of disorders heavily influenced by the social environment of face to face human interaction.


Really? Just because most "researchers" refuse to look into the obvious?

Parental Abuse May Damage Children's Brain Thomas Idiculla, PhD
http://agapepartners.org/articles/72/1/ ... Page1.html

Mother's stress harms foetus, research shows | Science | The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/ ... eandhealth

Poverty poisons the brain
http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/02/18 ... the-brain/

aghogday wrote:
On the other hand we know that many of the autistic like behavioral impairments associated with autism disorder are seen in children that are abused through social isolation in childhood. The same is true for primates, studied isolated from their parents. There is the potential that these children can adapt, but many are left psychologically/emotionally scarred for life, particularly vulnerable to the disease of addiction.


Not autistic-like, but autistic.

From "DSM Diagnosing for Money and Power, Summary of the Critique of the DSM, offered by Zur Institute for Psychologists, MFTs, SWs"
http://www.zurinstitute.com/dsmcritique.html

Quote:
The DSM tends to ignore contextual factors in the development of symptoms and disorders. Some professionals have suggested a replacement of current diagnostic labels with descriptors such as "the consequences of poverty," "the consequences of violence," "the effects of homelessness and racism" or "the damage done by interpersonal discriminatory treatment." The DSM provides an axis on which "psychosocial stressors" can be listed, but in reality, Axes I and II are the focus of diagnosis and treatment.

The DSM focuses almost exclusively on individual pathology to the dangerous minimization of social and environmental factors such as poverty, racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, ageism, violence, etc. This limiting focus has serious ramifications:

Therapists, who uncritically follow the DSM medical model, are likely to place undue emphasis on individual emotional problems as causal factors rather than opening to the larger possibility that the individual is symptomatic due to familial, political or societal system dysfunctions.

Social psychologists call such exclusion of social factors and excessive focus on individual pathology the "fundamental attribution error."

The focus on individual pathology leads to individual based treatment, suggesting that the DSM markets the concept of individually and biologically based social discomfort.

The DSM tends to pathologize several groups whose civil rights have historically been marginalized in the culture at large. The bias is clear in regard to race, social class, age, physical disability, gender and sexual orientation. Symptoms are a call for corrected balance. Rather than labeling the symptoms of a sick society, when appropriate, the client is too often diagnosed and medicated to adapt to the disease of the system.



aghogday wrote:
The refrigerator parent theory has been refuted as the cause of autism, however it would not be reasonable to suggest that abuse either emotional, sexual, or physical would not influence autism like behavioral impairments. Emotional detachment in the parent-child relationship, would likely be considered a form of emotional abuse, depending on severity of the issue, per factors associated with social isolation.


The refrigerator parent theory was far too close to the truth.

aghogday wrote:
While there is evidence of child abuse among Somali families, there is no evidence at this point in time that child abuse is being misdiagnosed as autism spectrum disorders seen in this subgroup of individuals, including regressive autism.


Those following the DSM do not, as a rule look for social context. See above.

aghogday wrote:
The Aspie quiz measures a more extensive list of behaviors than the DSMIV, but regardless of attempts to isolate the cultural environment out of it, is entirely impossible to do. The same applies to the DSMIV.


The Aspie-quiz does a better job of doing so, while the DSM ignores culture's influence and pathologizes.

aghogday wrote:
I'm not sure you understand how well trained professionals that interact with children are in spotting abuse in children, in the US. It is not so much a fear now that the abuse will be missed, but if abuse will be identified that does not exist.


More likely both and incompetence and brainwashing is causing both missed abuse and identification of non-existent abuse.

aghogday wrote:
There are many signs associated with potential abuse of children, that has little to do with autism, that can be spotted by a trained clinician.


Those having to do with autism are missed.

aghogday wrote:
There is no question that autism disorder including the developmental issues associated in brain growth and regressive autism exists in children of Somalians in the US and Sweden. The thing that is being questioned by science is why are the rates higher than other demographics in the US and Sweden. Various ideas have been entertained, but there isn't much evidence to support them..


You and researchers ignore a scientific approach to the question: "What causes 'developmental issues associated in brain growth in regressive autism'"? Assuming that social factors are not important is bias, prejudice, incompetence and quackery, not honest scientific medical research.

When you * A S S U M E *, you make an ASS of U and ME.

aghogday wrote:
I personally can't dismiss the possibility that environment may be the major causation involved in some cases of autism spectrum disorders, particularly in light of the recent twin studies that suggest that there is a significant environmental influence, that wasn't understood before.


Finally, we are, as Bush 43 would say, "making progress."

aghogday wrote:
Autism continues to become more complex of an issue as time goes by. I'm guessing RDOS isn't likely to change his direction out of the disorder arena, per his nomenclature, but as long as it stay as is, it's going to be focused on the potential of whether or not somone is going to develop an ASD, per the nomenclature of the Quiz, and any suggestion that Neanderthals are the cause of autism, isn't going to gain much traction with the data that shows autism does exist among Subsaharan Africans who have been studied as a demographic with little to no archaic Neanderthal DNA. Very few are going to buy the idea that they all suffering the effects of abuse and are misdiagnosed with autism. Particularly among those diagnosed with Regressive Autism.


What needs to be done is separate two definitions of "autism", one being a form of complex post-traumatic stress battery that begins at an early age and the neurodiversity stuff. By creating an 11th environmental section, RDOS has done what he can.


_________________
40 acres, a mule, and 40,000 years worth of interest
http://matthewlisraelisaterrorist.blogspot.com/
http://mixedstateecodepression73.wordpress.com/


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: Nov 25, 2010
Posts: 6635

19 Jun 2012, 3:43 am

DemocraticSocialistHun wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Abuse in a child is not going to cause the abnormal brain growth seen specific to males with regressive autism, that lose their ability to speak, so we can likely mark that one of the list of disorders heavily influenced by the social environment of face to face human interaction.


Really? Just because most "researchers" refuse to look into the obvious?

Parental Abuse May Damage Children's Brain Thomas Idiculla, PhD
http://agapepartners.org/articles/72/1/ ... Page1.html

Mother's stress harms foetus, research shows | Science | The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/ ... eandhealth

Poverty poisons the brain
http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/02/18 ... the-brain/


aghogday wrote:
On the other hand we know that many of the autistic like behavioral impairments associated with autism disorder are seen in children that are abused through social isolation in childhood. The same is true for primates, studied isolated from their parents. There is the potential that these children can adapt, but many are left psychologically/emotionally scarred for life, particularly vulnerable to the disease of addiction.


Not autistic-like, but autistic.

From "DSM Diagnosing for Money and Power, Summary of the Critique of the DSM, offered by Zur Institute for Psychologists, MFTs, SWs"
http://www.zurinstitute.com/dsmcritique.html

Quote:
The DSM tends to ignore contextual factors in the development of symptoms and disorders. Some professionals have suggested a replacement of current diagnostic labels with descriptors such as "the consequences of poverty," "the consequences of violence," "the effects of homelessness and racism" or "the damage done by interpersonal discriminatory treatment." The DSM provides an axis on which "psychosocial stressors" can be listed, but in reality, Axes I and II are the focus of diagnosis and treatment.

The DSM focuses almost exclusively on individual pathology to the dangerous minimization of social and environmental factors such as poverty, racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, ageism, violence, etc. This limiting focus has serious ramifications:

Therapists, who uncritically follow the DSM medical model, are likely to place undue emphasis on individual emotional problems as causal factors rather than opening to the larger possibility that the individual is symptomatic due to familial, political or societal system dysfunctions.

Social psychologists call such exclusion of social factors and excessive focus on individual pathology the "fundamental attribution error."

The focus on individual pathology leads to individual based treatment, suggesting that the DSM markets the concept of individually and biologically based social discomfort.

The DSM tends to pathologize several groups whose civil rights have historically been marginalized in the culture at large. The bias is clear in regard to race, social class, age, physical disability, gender and sexual orientation. Symptoms are a call for corrected balance. Rather than labeling the symptoms of a sick society, when appropriate, the client is too often diagnosed and medicated to adapt to the disease of the system.



aghogday wrote:
The refrigerator parent theory has been refuted as the cause of autism, however it would not be reasonable to suggest that abuse either emotional, sexual, or physical would not influence autism like behavioral impairments. Emotional detachment in the parent-child relationship, would likely be considered a form of emotional abuse, depending on severity of the issue, per factors associated with social isolation.


The refrigerator parent theory was far too close to the truth.

aghogday wrote:
While there is evidence of child abuse among Somali families, there is no evidence at this point in time that child abuse is being misdiagnosed as autism spectrum disorders seen in this subgroup of individuals, including regressive autism.


Those following the DSM do not, as a rule look for social context. See above.

aghogday wrote:
The Aspie quiz measures a more extensive list of behaviors than the DSMIV, but regardless of attempts to isolate the cultural environment out of it, is entirely impossible to do. The same applies to the DSMIV.


The Aspie-quiz does a better job of doing so, while the DSM ignores culture's influence and pathologizes.

aghogday wrote:
I'm not sure you understand how well trained professionals that interact with children are in spotting abuse in children, in the US. It is not so much a fear now that the abuse will be missed, but if abuse will be identified that does not exist.


More likely both and incompetence and brainwashing is causing both missed abuse and identification of non-existent abuse.

aghogday wrote:
There are many signs associated with potential abuse of children, that has little to do with autism, that can be spotted by a trained clinician.


Those having to do with autism are missed.

aghogday wrote:
There is no question that autism disorder including the developmental issues associated in brain growth and regressive autism exists in children of Somalians in the US and Sweden. The thing that is being questioned by science is why are the rates higher than other demographics in the US and Sweden. Various ideas have been entertained, but there isn't much evidence to support them..


You and researchers ignore a scientific approach to the question: "What causes 'developmental issues associated in brain growth in regressive autism'"? Assuming that social factors are not important is bias, prejudice, incompetence and quackery, not honest scientific medical research.

When you * A S S U M E *, you make an ASS of U and ME.

aghogday wrote:
I personally can't dismiss the possibility that environment may be the major causation involved in some cases of autism spectrum disorders, particularly in light of the recent twin studies that suggest that there is a significant environmental influence, that wasn't understood before.


Finally, we are, as Bush 43 would say, "making progress."

aghogday wrote:
Autism continues to become more complex of an issue as time goes by. I'm guessing RDOS isn't likely to change his direction out of the disorder arena, per his nomenclature, but as long as it stay as is, it's going to be focused on the potential of whether or not somone is going to develop an ASD, per the nomenclature of the Quiz, and any suggestion that Neanderthals are the cause of autism, isn't going to gain much traction with the data that shows autism does exist among Subsaharan Africans who have been studied as a demographic with little to no archaic Neanderthal DNA. Very few are going to buy the idea that they all suffering the effects of abuse and are misdiagnosed with autism. Particularly among those diagnosed with Regressive Autism.


What needs to be done is separate two definitions of "autism", one being a form of complex post-traumatic stress battery that begins at an early age and the neurodiversity stuff. By creating an 11th environmental section, RDOS has done what he can.


Abnormal brain growth is not brain injury. There is a substantial amount of evidence though that non-substance environmental influences can cause brain damage that is associated with autistic-like behaviors, including and beyond the resources you list. I agree with your links, and think it is possible that prenatal stress is associated with regressive autism, but that is not part of the post-natal environmental influences associated with child abuse, that I was addressing, specific to child abuse and abnormal brain growth associated with regressive autism.

Interesting, many of your thoughts about autism reflect some of my thoughts on the issue, but in discussing the same issues with RDOS, in discussions here, his responses were more in alignment with the genetic causation of autism associated with archaic neanderthal DNA, than environmental or cultural ones, of which child abuse is a part of. He associated genetic mutations, related to archaic neanderthal DNA, as the cause for classic autism, if I remember correctly.

While we can separate aspects of Neurodiversity from Autism Spectrum Disorder, the field of psychology defines, and for all practical intents and purposes owns, the term Autism Spectrum Disorder. The term Aspergers may end up as a sub-clinical term for those outside of the the diagnosis of the DSM-5 classification for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

While I agree that the Aspie Quiz does not and cannot completely separate itself from cultural influence, RDOS suggested words to the effect that it was his intention to exclude cultural factors from the quiz to the best of his ability, per discussion here on this website.

If RDOS suspected Classic Autism was not associated with genetics and archaic Neanderthal DNA, there would have been no logical reason to title the theory the Neanderthal theory of Autism.

As I've suggested many times before, considering classic autism is not part of the registration process for the Aspie Quiz, Neurodiversity might have been better nomenclature to stick with than terms defined and owned by the field of psychology.



jamieevren1210
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: May 24, 2011
Posts: 2342
Location: 221b Baker St... (OKAY! Taipei!! Grunt)

19 Jun 2012, 6:34 am

Although I have 1/8-1/16 Turkic blood, I am Asian. And I've seen plenty of purer east Asians with ASDs. I'm not trying to say that the Neanderthal theory is totally BS, but it contradicts itself according to your description.


_________________
Will be off the internet for some time. I'm challenging myself to stop any unnecessary Internet activity. Just to let you know...


nooms
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: Apr 24, 2012
Posts: 8

20 Jun 2012, 7:07 am

asians share the neanderthal genes with europeans so asd in asians actually supports the theory,

i did find some intresting earlier hominids though from even befor heidelberg,
these fossils shook the world of anthroplogy just by being in the right place but way older then expected.
the homo antecessor was found in spain and expected to be ither neanderthal (23000-40000 years old) or heidelberg
it turned out 1.2 million years old (see wikipedia for information)
homo georgicus (some say homo erectus georgicus) was found in georgia, and turned out to be 1.8 million years old,
some say the two specimens might be from the same species,
this means there was either a earlier wave out of afrika, or different ancestors evolved in different places,


i think that all early hominids mixed and "races" (i hate that word but cant think of a less racist description) are different mixes.
for example it could be (i have no evidence so its a theory) that a chinese is a mix of homo erectus pekinensis with neanderthal and some homo georgicus,or someone from flores island a mix between erectus and even possibly floresiensis.
a european might be neanderthal/ antecessor/ erectus and so on with the slight mix differences making up the different physical appearances.
although some physical traits are adaptive evolution,



nooms
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: Apr 24, 2012
Posts: 8

27 Jun 2012, 1:46 pm

i can not post links but theres this video on youtube called Neanderthals and Neurodiversity [Draft 10]
i know its long but it is verry intresting,
its this discussion in a video.. :D



Display posts from previous:  Sort by  


Page 12 of 13 [ 183 posts ] Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
Jump to: