Board index › General Discussion › Autism Politics, Activism, and Media Representation

Sweeping studies vindicate genetic theory of autism

Page 1 of 1 [ 7 posts ] 

Previous topic | Next topic

blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

08 Jun 2011, 4:16 pm

Just read this article, stating that multiple, large scale genetic studies have shown strong correlation between autism and specific genetic traits:

http://www.labspaces.net/111244/Sweepin ... _of_autism


Unfortunately it does not even refer to a "spectrum" so it is unclear from the article whether they mean strictly autism in the classical sense or to all spectrum disorders.



Mack27
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 382
Location: near Boston Massachusetts USA

08 Jun 2011, 4:29 pm

Thank you for the link. The part about extra copies of a gene being associated with autism and the absence of the same gene being related to William's syndrome is fascinating.



Tantricbadass
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 23 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 88

08 Jun 2011, 7:14 pm

Listen, autism to me doesn't sound like it covers as many symtoms as the spectrum claims to be.I think obviously we need to divide disorders and get rid of the concept of autism.Autism should may be a symptom, but not a classification of disorders.I don't see as many correlations to different autism disorders to lap everyone together.That's why there no direct autism trait, it would be many different traits that makes someone who is considered to be on the spectrum.Aspergers needs categories(I like the 8 sub categories that are named after individuals who had it because I sounded exactly like one of them) and the rest of the spectrum should be divided as well.



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

08 Jun 2011, 9:31 pm

Tantricbadass wrote:
Listen, autism to me doesn't sound like it covers as many symtoms as the spectrum claims to be.I think obviously we need to divide disorders and get rid of the concept of autism.Autism should may be a symptom, but not a classification of disorders.I don't see as many correlations to different autism disorders to lap everyone together.That's why there no direct autism trait, it would be many different traits that makes someone who is considered to be on the spectrum.Aspergers needs categories(I like the 8 sub categories that are named after individuals who had it because I sounded exactly like one of them) and the rest of the spectrum should be divided as well.


That's a valid point. the idea that there is autism-aspergers spectrum is sort of analogous to just saying that some kids are weird/difficult.



DeaconBlues
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,661
Location: Earth, mostly

08 Jun 2011, 10:53 pm

Quote:
A gene network analysis in the third paper, by a team headed by Dennis Vitkup of Columbia University, suggests further that despite the genetic diversity of autism, the myriad of genome regions identified by the microarray scans are not all functionally independent, and in many cases appear to perturb a common molecular network. The implicated network is primarily related to synapse development, axon targeting and neuron mobility.

So, while there may be a number of genetic complexes involved, the net effect is on the same neonatal development. Interesting...


_________________
Sodium is a metal that reacts explosively when exposed to water. Chlorine is a gas that'll kill you dead in moments. Together they make my fries taste good.


Mack27
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 382
Location: near Boston Massachusetts USA

08 Jun 2011, 11:19 pm

Tantricbadass wrote:
Listen, autism to me doesn't sound like it covers as many symtoms as the spectrum claims to be.I think obviously we need to divide disorders and get rid of the concept of autism.Autism should may be a symptom, but not a classification of disorders.I don't see as many correlations to different autism disorders to lap everyone together.That's why there no direct autism trait, it would be many different traits that makes someone who is considered to be on the spectrum.Aspergers needs categories(I like the 8 sub categories that are named after individuals who had it because I sounded exactly like one of them) and the rest of the spectrum should be divided as well.


This thinking mirrors my own. 2 people with similar symptoms labelled as autistic could be the way they are for completely different reasons. Especially if one has a family history of autism and the other doesn't.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

09 Jun 2011, 7:29 am

There has been millions of dollars and many thousands of genetic studies, but no single gene has been identified as an “autism” gene. There are lots of “hotspots,” but the studies are not consistent.

The truth is that, while genetics is almost certainly a causative factor in autism, any useful treatments based on genetics are a long way off. Meanwhile, however, we do know a few things:

- Mainly through twin studies and family history we know autism has a genetic component.

- If autism runs in your family, you have an increased risk of having a child with autism.

-If you already have one child with autism, you have an increased risk of having another child with autism.

-The genes associated with autism are complex -- and a genetic inclination toward autism "may" require an unknown environmental "trigger" to cause symptoms.