Question on fetal testosterone and autism

Post Reply New Topic

There is a connection between testosterone and autistic traits.

In a paper titled "Fetal testosterone and autistic traits," it says this:

Paper: http://www.autismresearchcentre.com/doc ... al_BJP.pdf

The 2d:4d ratio is the ratio between the 2nd digit (index finger) and the 4th digit (ring finger) . This ratio is (on average) different between males and females, and depends on level of fetal testosterone. Non-autistic males have a low ratio, meaning their 2nd and 4th digits are closer together in length than for females, who have a higher ratio. But, autistics have a lower ratio than non-autistics. This is one piece of evidence suggesting there is a link between autism and fetal testosterone levels.

This is also part of the sex differences in autism, with males on average producing something like 17-20 times as much testosterone as females.

The paper also says this:


Can someone summarize: the ethical issues in manipulating fetal testosterone levels, and how it would be done in the first place?

Are you asking what the ethical issue is? Seems obvious that it would be unfair and illegal to the unborn child to have it's development altered for experimentation. It's basically treating the fetus as a lab rat, as the fetus is not able to consent.

Ethical issues? Such as not having any idea what side effects it would have to inject a fetus with hormones? : | Maybe that's why.


Apart from that, what the article suggests sound quite feasible. The ratio and testosterone level is known from some diseases and various other... quirks, like lesbianism.

Regulating and correcting abnormal fetal testosterone levels to prevent Autism doesn't seem wrong to me. Obviously, intentionally causing abnormal testosterone levels for experimental purposes would be wrong.

I agree with you morally, but I don't think it lines up with the law (in the US; I don't know about other countries). With our current laws, fetuses don't really have any rights. They are considered a part of the mother's body. So, wouldn't it be up to the mother to consent?
Still, before they could do a clinical trial, they would need much more evidence than they currently have to show that manipulating fetal hormones could reduce the risk of autism.

No one has found out what causes autism I do not see how manipulating the feal horomones could reduce the rish of autism?

I don't really know exactly how the law would apply; I just assumed it was illegal to experiment on anyone who cannot give consent.

Isn't that the point of this thread?
To summarize the tread, some experiments have suggested that high testosterone levels in the womb may lead to a higher instance of autism spectrum disorders.

By extension, it might be suggested that, by testing the hormone levels in the wombs of pregnant women and adjusting the hormones to normal levels, autism could be prevented.
Personally, I don't think this is a good idea since, as previous posters have already said, manipulating fetal hormones could have all sorts of crazy side effects, not to mention the effects that trying to prevent autism would have on beneficial neurodiversity. Either way, this is completely hypothetical since they don't have enough evidence to show that manipulating fetal hormone levels would affect the occurrence of autism or related conditions. That is what I was trying to say above.

I suppose I like this theory better then the vaccine caused autims theory.

Even if it was decided that there is enough evidence for a causal link, and it was guaranteed that it is safe and that there would be no side effects, I guess they still wouldn't try it in humans. I wonder if they've done it in rats.

they would probably use chimps to establish a baseline, but first they would have to determine what causes autistic behaviors in the chimps. You'd have to screw with them to "give" them autism and then you'd have to screw with them to "fix" it. I wonder if anyone considers that manipulating a being into having a disease or disorder so you can experiment with cures could have adverse affects. I mean, you had to tamper with the rat or chimp at the cellular level to "infect" them with autism, cancer, diabetes, etc. Wouldn't your "cure" be based on the new biology of the subject being tested and not the DNA of the disorder itself? I mean, you can cure a mutation but does that necessarily mean that your "cure" will work for those whose genes were not manipulated in that way?

Did that make sense? I have a feeling it didn't.

Makes sense.

I know this thread is a few days old but I felt compelled to add my own observations to it. My immediate family is either Asperger's, or at the least shows the traits. The females in my family, including my mother, also suffer from high testosterone levels. Each successive sibling (I am 2 of 6) shows more traits than the previous one, culminating with my youngest sibling who is the one who was obvious enough to have a diagnosis, which then revealed to the rest of us exactly why we were all so different. I wonder if there is any way to ask my mother to go back through her medical records and see how her testosterone levels correlate to her pregnancies, and to the severity of our Asperger's traits. There could be some sort of genetic predisposition to autism that is then triggered by high fetal testosterone. It would also be interesting to see data from women who suffer from PCOS, as that often is caused by or causes high testosterone, and the ratio of affected children of these women.