Page 11 of 12 [ 183 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next


How would you describe your body build?
Tall and broad 20%  20%  [ 41 ]
Tall and narrow 25%  25%  [ 53 ]
Medium 21%  21%  [ 44 ]
Short and broad 19%  19%  [ 40 ]
Short and narrow 12%  12%  [ 26 ]
Other 3%  3%  [ 6 ]
Total votes : 210

DemocraticSocialistHun
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 144
Location: NE Ohio, United Snakes of Neoconservatism

08 Jun 2012, 8:52 am

aghogday wrote:
Autism Spectrum Disorders is a term invented to describe behaviors and symptoms in human beings. The criteria and definition of the disorders has changed greatly over the last few decades as those that determine that human construct have defined and described it differently over that period of time.


"Autism Spectrum Disorder" is a term invented by confused people who further confuse issues. Their constantly changing definitions are all unmoored concepts as bizarre as believing in changlings.

aghogday wrote:
There are hundreds of types of neurologies identified in human beings


Aspie Quiz has only identified two species of humans -- neurodivergent and neurotypical.

aghogday wrote:
That is not actual identification of the physiology associated with neurology in either measure of behavior.


I don't know where you get this. It is contrary to almost if not every study -- although it is true that scans are done only on a minority of patients.

aghogday wrote:
The term neurotypical is only useful to distinguish actual autism diagnosed individuals and individuals that are not diagnosed with autism; it is a limited subcultural term, that has no actual definition in a dictionary. There is no evidence of typical neurology among human beings, only unremarkable findings on brain scans, that are are also evident in many individuals with autism spectrum disorders.


I use RDOS's definition.

aghogday wrote:
The ideology that there are two human species has no evidentiary support anywhere in science. In fact, the issue is not even debated in science. There are thousands of disorders that exist, many personality differences, as well as physical differences, but at the end of the day there is proven reproductive compatibility among all groups of human beings existing on the planet.


See Aspie-Quiz

aghogday wrote:
If you are hoping a correlation is shown with neanderthal DNA and what the Aspie Quiz measures as neurodiversity, I'm not sure why you bring up the Middle East. It is an area where the admixture event is most likely evidenced as occuring. Archaic Neanderthal DNA is measured among individuals in those middle eastern countries per close to the same levels as it is measured anywhere in Northern Europe.

http://discovermagazine.com/2011/may/25-homo-sapiens-meet-new-astounding-family/article_view?b_start:int=3&-C=

Quote:
The likeliest place for human-Neanderthal romance was the Middle East, where bones of both humans and Neanderthals have been found. “Modern humans appeared in the Middle East before 100,000 years ago, and Neanderthals were there at least 60,000 years ago—providing a likely 30,000-year window of opportunity for interbreeding before Neanderthals disappeared,” Pääbo says.


Except the genes for neanderthal-type behaviors has been stamped out over the last few hundred years.

aghogday wrote:
The Aspie quiz is a great tool for measuring what it defines, but it has measured nothing of significance in any middle eastern country or in any African Subsarahan country because the test cannot be used there without a language translation.

An attempt of an extrapolation from the different self-reporting identifying ethnic groups in other English speaking countries through limited internet access provides no evidence of significance among what individuals in the middle east and Subsarahan African countries might score if actually provided the opportunity to take a quiz that was translated in their language.

If there is no actual attempt to translate and actually administer the quiz in those countries, there is no potential that any information regarding results from the quiz in those countries will ever be determined.


The is no translation because interest is lacking, indicating that there probably isn't anything to measure. Plus it should be self-evident that Islamofascists are even less tolerant of neurodiversity than western psychiatry.

aghogday wrote:
And, if there is no interest to adapt to the standards of the peer review process, there is little potential that the hypothesis will ever be tested among those with the potential resources to test it. There might not be a good chance that someone would fund the research but some chance is better than little chance.


Adaptation that requires academic dishonesty (political correctness) isn't an option.


aghogday wrote:
I like to keep an open mind and usually check facts before I present them. In checking the statement on the 2 species of humans, I ran across a Department head, from the University of Florida that has written a couple novels expressing his ideology that there are two distinct species of man, one of whom which has unusual systemization, creative, organizational, and out of the box thinking abilities. He relates that species as 2 percent of the population.

Some of his ideology sounds similar to some of the ideology that you have expressed in the discussion. And, reminiscent of the ideologies of RDOS's Neanderthal theory of Autism.


No doubt those who would get high neurodivergent scores on Aspie-Quiz.



aghogday wrote:
The quote linked below, focuses on the skills associated with systemization, creativity, organization, and out of the box thinking, in describing the two species theory. I never heard of the author before, but he seems to have a similar view expressed in the Neanderthal Theory of Autism, in a completely different context, with similar described characteristics of human beings. He restricts his ideology to a genetic perspective rather than a cultural one, like RDOS is attempting to do.

Quote:
Now, there’s another important distinction to make here. A3 is NOT the same as high IQ. A high IQ means that people are able to remember a lot of facts. People who can remember a lot of facts are considered SMART. Society believes that anyone who is quote ‘smart’, must be able to understand systems. They think that given enough schooling, ANYONE can learn to understand systems. It’s a LIE. And because of society’s blindness to this principle and unwillingness to deal with it, our culture is set up to fail. Our whole process of government get’s this wrong. Elections are set up as competitions. This favors strong A2 people who are street smart, who can manipulate Single Sentence Logic and emotion. When they get elected and need to organize things, they don’t even know where to begin. People appointed to leadership positions are also selected because they are loyal and can keep others in line. It’s all A2. A3 in our society usually comes with statements like creativity, organized, and ‘out of the box thinker’.


http://a3society.org/Two%20Human%20Species
[/quote]

No doubt Aspie (neurodivergent) talents, although RDOS doesn't try to measure these hard-to-measure talents.


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


DemocraticSocialistHun
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 144
Location: NE Ohio, United Snakes of Neoconservatism

08 Jun 2012, 1:18 pm

aghogday wrote:


A mix of truth and fiction. The A2 is assumed to be less developed than A3. Actually, A2 (neurotypical, eusocial) developed after A3. In order to gain eusociality and the ability to learn from and teach others much has been lost, like the ability to invent solutions in the first place. A2 spreads inventions (and rather reluctantly, at least at first), not create them.

John Hawks, Gregory Cochran, Henry Harpending, and many others point out that human evolution is accelerating.

Apparently the evolutionary path may turn out to be a dead-end. A2s (neurotypicals) are destroying the environment. What humans are doing now will only work in the short-run. Hopefully the crises will trigger an evolutionary change that saves humanity. Odds are even if humanity doesn't destroy itself, the hierarchies will destroy themselves (and probably take most people with them).

Eugenicists aren't going to identify A3s and promote them, they will pathologize them as autistics and try to turn them into A2s. The best thing they can do is find another line of work where they will not engage in any form of meddling or hubris.


_________________
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: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

08 Jun 2012, 7:34 pm

DemocraticSocialistHun wrote:
aghogday wrote:
That is not actual identification of the physiology associated with neurology in either measure of behavior.


I don't know where you get this. It is contrary to almost if not every study -- although it is true that scans are done only on a minority of patients.

aghogday wrote:
If you are hoping a correlation is shown with neanderthal DNA and what the Aspie Quiz measures as neurodiversity, I'm not sure why you bring up the Middle East. It is an area where the admixture event is most likely evidenced as occuring. Archaic Neanderthal DNA is measured among individuals in those middle eastern countries per close to the same levels as it is measured anywhere in Northern Europe.

http://discovermagazine.com/2011/may/25-homo-sapiens-meet-new-astounding-family/article_view?b_start:int=3&-C=

Quote:
The likeliest place for human-Neanderthal romance was the Middle East, where bones of both humans and Neanderthals have been found. “Modern humans appeared in the Middle East before 100,000 years ago, and Neanderthals were there at least 60,000 years ago—providing a likely 30,000-year window of opportunity for interbreeding before Neanderthals disappeared,” Pääbo says.


Except the genes for neanderthal-type behaviors has been stamped out over the last few hundred years.

aghogday wrote:
The Aspie quiz is a great tool for measuring what it defines, but it has measured nothing of significance in any middle eastern country or in any African Subsarahan country because the test cannot be used there without a language translation.

An attempt of an extrapolation from the different self-reporting identifying ethnic groups in other English speaking countries through limited internet access provides no evidence of significance among what individuals in the middle east and Subsarahan African countries might score if actually provided the opportunity to take a quiz that was translated in their language.

If there is no actual attempt to translate and actually administer the quiz in those countries, there is no potential that any information regarding results from the quiz in those countries will ever be determined.


The is no translation because interest is lacking, indicating that there probably isn't anything to measure. Plus it should be self-evident that Islamofascists are even less tolerant of neurodiversity than western psychiatry.

aghogday wrote:
And, if there is no interest to adapt to the standards of the peer review process, there is little potential that the hypothesis will ever be tested among those with the potential resources to test it. There might not be a good chance that someone would fund the research but some chance is better than little chance.


Adaptation that requires academic dishonesty (political correctness) isn't an option.


There are definitely brains scans that show a number of differences among some individuals with autism spectrum disorders, but not consistently and in some cases the scans are completely unremarkable, particularly among males with Aspergers syndrome.

Interestingly the extreme male brain does not show up on MRI Scans for males, with aspergers, but it does for females. The brains of males with aspergers are actually similiar as compared to control groups of non-aspergers males. The brains of Asperger males and females are similiar, per the study.

There we have an actual research study that provides evidence for the results in behavioral measures of Brain Sex ID provided in informal poll results from testing here, that showed much of the same results with neutral results for both females and males overall, in the behavioral tests.

http://sfari.org/news-and-opinion/in-brief/2012/cognition-and-behavior-asperger-brains-similar-across-sexes

It would be interesting to see a similiar study between male and female individuals with autism disorder. Brain scans already show abnormal brain growth among males with regressive autism that it is not measured significantly in females with regressive autism.

There was no significant difference in abnormal brain growth among individuals with Autism disorder/aspergers syndrome, without regressive autism.

Psychology attempts to provide consistent measurement of behavior, but biology doesn't play by consistent rules.

There is evidence that archaic neanderthal DNA exists in individuals in Middle east at close to the same levels that it is exists in Northern Europe. There is no empirical evidence, that any of it has been stamped out in the last several hundred years. If one wants to get empirical data from the Aspie Quiz, in that area of the world, it is going to require concerted effort for change, to administer the test in that area.

The idea that a culture in the middle east that has a great deal of disadain for the West, hasn't asked for a translation of the aspie quiz, is nothing more than a potential indication that they have never heard about it, or would not consider delving into something promoted by the west, and certainly wouldn't know what the heck the word "Aspie" meant, considering the general cultural divide, and difference in language. No language translation of the word Aspie, means for all practical intents and purposes, that it is not a part of the reality of that culture.

The Aspie quiz relies on data from the aspie quiz for what is and what isn't defined as neurodiversity. And what is suggested to be related to neanderthal behavior.

The lack of interest idea has no empirical basis for different ethnic groups, because the quiz is provided in limited areas of the internet, applicable to different interests among different demographics.

If one does not come across the quiz, on the internet, or doesn't know what it means, it never was a part of an individual's reality. That's not a lack of interest, it's a lack of knowledge that the aspie quiz exists. And of course, there are a thousand other reasons, why a person might decide not to take the test if they came across it, other than what would necessarily be reflective of what their results on the test might be.

The only way someone could even work interest into the equation is if someone were to approach an actual group of individuals, fully explain the test to all of the individuals in a manner that they could understand, and then get a response of interest as to whether or not someone wanted to take the test.

But even at that point, all one would have is evidence of lack of interest in taking the test, not evidence of anything associated with potential test results. The only way to arrive at that empirical data is for someone to actually take the test.

The data based on interest, would have to be thrown out, if there was any hope of it passing through the peer review process, because it is not empirically based data. The geographic data, based on extrapolation from other countries, is not empircal based data, as well, because in part it is based on this notion of interest as directly associated with potential results of the test, which, again is not empirically based methodology.

When I was suggesting two forms of the test, I was suggesting that he keep his special interest in this test as is, called the Aspie Quiz, and develop a similar test, perhaps called the neurodiversity quiz, that would be acceptable for the peer review process. All that would mean is deleting anything that is not empirically based in nature. I can only offer limited suggestions; I'm sure there are others familar with the peer review process, that could look at the test and the methodology, and provide specific reccommendations, within a day or two.

Most of the questions would likely meet that standard, but it is not reasonable that the stuff based on opinion, like this interest idea, would meet peer review process. I'm no expert, or a scientist, but there are gaping holes, that can be found per the interest aspect of the test, simply because of the limitations in the availability and accessibility of the test.

The quiz overall is a good measure, it wouldn't hurt to move in a more empirically based direction, through the peer review process, to actually potentially find out what individuals in areas like Amish Country and Uganda might score. Sometimes thinking out of the box can restrict one from getting results from within the box. Both areas have their merit. Moreever, it can be very difficult for some individuals with autism spectrum disorders, to move out of their own box, whether it is generally out of the box or in their box thinking. My suggestions come from another box.

I'm not a creative person, I just move from different parts of the hive mixing honey, to get different results. I couldn't do that without the accommodative assistance provided by the hive, in computer technology, and tools like google. Not all individuals diagnosed with autism are inherently creative.

Some are great systemizers that are terrible in some areas of organization and planning. Some are not creative at all and rarely think out of the box. Some are more likely to notice details. And some others appear to live completely within a world of their own, that is dramatically different from any world that one has heard described. And some are certainly part of a specialized aspect of the hive.

The internet provides a rare opportunity for those different minds to meet. It is not particualrly advantageous to discount any input, there are always potential jewels to be found within the rough of minds.

The A3's as identified from the post I provided before, sounds like the type of strengths in autism that you and RDOS describe, but it has never been the type that I as an individual have lived. Systemization, patterns, sensory experience, and details is my way of thinking.

Organization, creativity, and thinking out of the box, have never been strengths for me. There would likely be no roads or bridges, if my type of thinking was prevalent in society, or those animal housings that temple grandhin designs. Fortunately my wife has the organization, planning, and thinking out of the box abilities. But, I can fill out the paper work. If someone can read my handwriting. :)

The so called A3's and/or the systemizers are as much to blame in the grandscheme of culure for the benefits and the problems of culture as anyone else. Nuclear technology did not come from a non-systemizing mind, nor did many of the technological innovations that are destroying the environment. Culture has long past reached the point where humans in any identified group were actually measured signifcantly in control of it.

Most everyone autistic or non-autistic is part of a cultural hive, either wittingly or unwittingly. The global hive has no intended purpose or soul; it exists. It is much like nature, and that's not surpising, because it is an extension of it. From a distance from the planet it looks like organization, and even a hive of lights, but the reality is a spreading wave. Culture is evolving rapidly, in it's many complex parts, and humans, in part, are keeping up with it, through the process of neuroplasticity.

Humans, overall, are evolving in one lifetime through the process of neuroplasticity, much more than any inherent tweak from environment.

That in part is why heterogenous societies have so much conflict. In essence while connected to a hive in so many cultural ways, overall, humans are still tribal animals. This definitely applies to individuals self-reported as autistic, as evidenced on this internet site; it might not be a football team that subgroups align themselves for a tribal/territorial cause, but certainly seen in aspects like "NT", Autism Supremacy,"Evil" Autism Speaks, Neurodiversity, and even an attempt to separate some into another species, which doesn't appear to be as much a concern in the US, as it does in Europe, where homogenity is losing it's hold.

The likelyhood is that general human nature, and that inherent tribal/territorial aspect that really hasn't changed much for anyone, that competes for resources, would be the bear swatting at the hive, that eventually causes a hive, that humans are not inherently evolved for well, to lose the illusion of organization, that is transient, at most.

It doesn't take much. The US is probably under the greatest of illusions of countries. 9/11 was just a tickle of the effect of the bear. It's been over 10 years, and mostly forgotten, because some don't have much of a memory of that type of conflict on our soil, or anywhere else, for that matter.

There are too many destructive elements in the world, among those attractive elements in the honey comb, to keep the bear from swatting harder at the hive. Whether or not the bear has mostly "neurodiverse" traits from the aspie quiz, is not going to make much difference, when tribe, territory, and resources are at stake.

Considering there are 7 Billion humans not all connected to the hive, they are likely going to be around quite a bit longer, barring a bear whose influence moves well past the hive.

The ones that are currently the least advantaged through the cultural by-products of the hive, may be the ones most likely to adapt. Places where there is less perceived honey for bears.

Those whom are rovers are more likely to migrate than those whom are sitters. Overall we can probably thank the Rovers more for the hive than the sitters. But there is an overall advantage for both natures, seen throughout the animal kingdom. Sometimes it's hard to know in the long term whether it was the right decision to stay and go. Sitters and Rovers provide alternative scenarios.

Hard to say whether the indigenous Subsarahan folks that made the decision to stay made the best choice overall in the long-term, per the scale of tribe. On the scale of species both choices were likely the best. On the scale of nature, many species no longer exist, in part, because of the decision to go, including Neanderthals, from the evidence as it exists.



DemocraticSocialistHun
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 144
Location: NE Ohio, United Snakes of Neoconservatism

09 Jun 2012, 12:56 pm

aghogday wrote:
There is evidence that archaic neanderthal DNA exists in individuals in Middle east at close to the same levels that it is exists in Northern Europe. There is no empirical evidence, that any of it has been stamped out in the last several hundred years. If one wants to get empirical data from the Aspie Quiz, in that area of the world, it is going to require concerted effort for change, to administer the test in that area.


It is unlikely the genes for Aspie communication and courtship rituals has survived in (at least most of) the Middle East. Granted hard evidence may be absent, other than the fact that the Middle East is a place of social turmoil and few economic successes, despite rich supplies of valuable economic resources.

aghogday wrote:
The quiz overall is a good measure, it wouldn't hurt to move in a more empirically based direction, through the peer review process, to actually potentially find out what individuals in areas like Amish Country and Uganda might score. Sometimes thinking out of the box can restrict one from getting results from within the box. Both areas have their merit. Moreever, it can be very difficult for some individuals with autism spectrum disorders, to move out of their own box, whether it is generally out of the box or in their box thinking. My suggestions come from another box.


It would be nice to have data on the Amish and Sub-Sahara Africa, but the available information seems fairly solid already.

aghogday wrote:
Some are great systemizers that are terrible in some areas of organization and planning. Some are not creative at all and rarely think out of the box. Some are more likely to notice details. And some others appear to live completely within a world of their own, that is dramatically different from any world that one has heard described. And some are certainly part of a specialized aspect of the hive.


A lot of the trouble is from following bad advice of biased race hygiene researchers and their ilk and/or the parents' innate intolerance for neurodiversity.

aghogday wrote:
The so called A3's and/or the systemizers are as much to blame in the grandscheme of culure for the benefits and the problems of culture as anyone else. Nuclear technology did not come from a non-systemizing mind, nor did many of the technological innovations that are destroying the environment. Culture has long past reached the point where humans in any identified group were actually measured signifcantly in control of it.


It is the overbreeding of A2s and their misuse of A3 inventions that are the problem.

aghogday wrote:
That in part is why heterogenous societies have so much conflict. In essence while connected to a hive in so many cultural ways, overall, humans are still tribal animals. This definitely applies to individuals self-reported as autistic, as evidenced on this internet site; it might not be a football team that subgroups align themselves for a tribal/territorial cause, but certainly seen in aspects like "NT", Autism Supremacy,"Evil" Autism Speaks, Neurodiversity, and even an attempt to separate some into another species, which doesn't appear to be as much a concern in the US, as it does in Europe, where homogenity is losing it's hold.


Neurodivergents are not tribal by nature, at least like NTs anyway. That doesn't mean that some don't occasionally gain awareness of what is going on and being done to them.

aghogday wrote:
There are too many destructive elements in the world, among those attractive elements in the honey comb, to keep the bear from swatting harder at the hive. Whether or not the bear has mostly "neurodiverse" traits from the aspie quiz, is not going to make much difference, when tribe, territory, and resources are at stake.


NTs did 9/11. Neurodivergents are too marginalized and I doubt have the innate qualities that would enable them to gain the skills to engage in terrorism.


_________________
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: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

09 Jun 2012, 11:02 pm

DemocraticSocialistHun wrote:
aghogday wrote:
There is evidence that archaic neanderthal DNA exists in individuals in Middle east at close to the same levels that it is exists in Northern Europe. There is no empirical evidence, that any of it has been stamped out in the last several hundred years. If one wants to get empirical data from the Aspie Quiz, in that area of the world, it is going to require concerted effort for change, to administer the test in that area.


It is unlikely the genes for Aspie communication and courtship rituals has survived in (at least most of) the Middle East. Granted hard evidence may be absent, other than the fact that the Middle East is a place of social turmoil and few economic successes, despite rich supplies of valuable economic resources.

aghogday wrote:
The quiz overall is a good measure, it wouldn't hurt to move in a more empirically based direction, through the peer review process, to actually potentially find out what individuals in areas like Amish Country and Uganda might score. Sometimes thinking out of the box can restrict one from getting results from within the box. Both areas have their merit. Moreever, it can be very difficult for some individuals with autism spectrum disorders, to move out of their own box, whether it is generally out of the box or in their box thinking. My suggestions come from another box.


It would be nice to have data on the Amish and Sub-Sahara Africa, but the available information seems fairly solid already.

aghogday wrote:
Some are great systemizers that are terrible in some areas of organization and planning. Some are not creative at all and rarely think out of the box. Some are more likely to notice details. And some others appear to live completely within a world of their own, that is dramatically different from any world that one has heard described. And some are certainly part of a specialized aspect of the hive.


A lot of the trouble is from following bad advice of biased race hygiene researchers and their ilk and/or the parents' innate intolerance for neurodiversity.

aghogday wrote:
The so called A3's and/or the systemizers are as much to blame in the grandscheme of culure for the benefits and the problems of culture as anyone else. Nuclear technology did not come from a non-systemizing mind, nor did many of the technological innovations that are destroying the environment. Culture has long past reached the point where humans in any identified group were actually measured signifcantly in control of it.


It is the overbreeding of A2s and their misuse of A3 inventions that are the problem.

aghogday wrote:
That in part is why heterogenous societies have so much conflict. In essence while connected to a hive in so many cultural ways, overall, humans are still tribal animals. This definitely applies to individuals self-reported as autistic, as evidenced on this internet site; it might not be a football team that subgroups align themselves for a tribal/territorial cause, but certainly seen in aspects like "NT", Autism Supremacy,"Evil" Autism Speaks, Neurodiversity, and even an attempt to separate some into another species, which doesn't appear to be as much a concern in the US, as it does in Europe, where homogenity is losing it's hold.


Neurodivergents are not tribal by nature, at least like NTs anyway. That doesn't mean that some don't occasionally gain awareness of what is going on and being done to them.

aghogday wrote:
There are too many destructive elements in the world, among those attractive elements in the honey comb, to keep the bear from swatting harder at the hive. Whether or not the bear has mostly "neurodiverse" traits from the aspie quiz, is not going to make much difference, when tribe, territory, and resources are at stake.


NTs did 9/11. Neurodivergents are too marginalized and I doubt have the innate qualities that would enable them to gain the skills to engage in terrorism.


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.

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

There is the potential though, to move in another direction to obtain valuable information on potential cultural differences and the level of neurodiversity traits defined and measured in the Aspie Quiz, among the different cultures.

Right now the results of the test are extremely limited in reach to actual populations beyond online autistic communities. That is likely where most people first hear about it, since doctors don't use it as a screening tool, and the term Aspie is an invention of the online autistic community. Autistic online communties are an extremely limited demographic, among those that exist in the world.

Overall while internet access is available per many western developed countries, the current accessible avenue for the aspie quiz, the language translations are limited almost entirely to Northern Europe and the US, which represents only a small limited sample of the heterogenity of peoples and cultures across the world.

If the quiz was peer reviewed as a scientific screening tool, to identify a new measure of human traits associated with neurodiversity, those limitations could change, through the multitude of additional resources that would become available.

The world of research science is certainly not limited to those limited in traits currently defined as neurodiverse in the Aspie Quiz. And there are individuals diagnosed with autism in those fields that might be interested in using the quiz for research, that have specifically made it known that they are behind the ideology of neurodiveristy

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.

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. :)

I've already found that there are many who don't have much faith in research science, but I keep in mind that it is a field that is one of those niche's for individuals that are likely of what the aspies quiz defines as neurodiverse in inclination. That's another demographic that could be measured by the reseach itself, if the quiz was peer reviewed.



nooms
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2012
Gender: Female
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 you're 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 you're 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 you're 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: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

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 you're 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 you're 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 you're 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: 24 Apr 2012
Gender: Female
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: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

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: 26 Nov 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 144
Location: NE Ohio, United Snakes of Neoconservatism

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: 22 Apr 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,088
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 ASD level 1 on the 10th of April, 2014
Rediagnosed with ASD level 2 on the 4th of May, 2019
Thanks to Olympiadis for my fantastic avatar!


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

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: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

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: 30 May 2010
Gender: Male
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: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,873
Location: temperate zone

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: 26 Nov 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 144
Location: NE Ohio, United Snakes of Neoconservatism

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/