"Too much Testosterone as cause of Autism?"

Post Reply New Topic

Read:
http://health.msn.com/pregnancykids/kid ... 052&page=1

This is a theory that has been around thanks to Simon Baron-Cohen since likely before my son was diagnosed with Autism in July 2003, it was featured in the Newsweek magazine too I believe that year. It's a rotating theory that well despite they are supposed to be doing 'prenatal' studies, haven't seen any concrete results yet.

There IS one MAJOR problem with the testosterone theory. Apparantly, some PRIMARY sex characteristics are affected by testosterone. So girls can't be so heavily exposed early. The brief period when kids, at least males, are given MORE testosterone is too brief. As for later? I think that is too late, and would adversly affect women. They probably wouldn't be able to have kids!

There IS an alternate theory though. This is my own, but based on scientific fact. ALL tissue could be testosterone or estrogen resistant. It COULD, if it was in the brain, affect the relative growth of parts of the brain.

Steve

Its just a mother's opinion piece.

When someone says stuff like;

"Out of all that, maybe five to 10 genetic mutations are involved in autism."

I think, 'Wow, they know something that no one else knows. To bad it's BS'.

Wikipedia says this about the testosterone theory;

"Baron-Cohen claims to have based his ideas on a study on a small group of infants he did in 2000, but according to Harvard researchers the study lacked critical controls, has never been replicated and the results were not published in a peer-reviewed journal, and there is a large body of literature which contradicts Baron-Cohen's ideas."

In the world of science that means Baron-Cohen's ideas are considered crap.

The over abundance of testosterone may be just another co-morbidity. I did not
have the same type of muscular development that Harrison had, but did have the
same coordination and dexterity problems. It seems some in the medical community
are confusing causes with effects and vise-versa.

Not exactly. He is a leading autism researcher and his Autism Research Centre at Cambridge is doing a lot of work. Here is what wikipedia has to say (if you look at the page on him and not the testosterone theory page):


In a major program of research, summarized in his 2005 book "Prenatal Testosterone in Mind" (MIT Press), with his doctoral students Svetlana Lutchmaya, Rebecca Knickmeyer, Bonnie Auyeung, and Emma Chapman, he demonstrated that foetal testosterone (FT) levels (measured in the amniotic fluid) inversely predict social behaviour (e.g., eye contact at 12 months old), language development (e.g., vocabulary size at 24 months old), quality of social relationships at 4 years old, and empathy at 8 years old. FT levels also positively predict systemizing at 8 years old. A single biological mechanism (FT) thus appears to influence both empathy and systemizing, in opposite ways. He is currently testing if autism is associated with elevated FT. This link remains to be fully tested. (See also Sexual differentiation.)

His theory is controversial, which is probably why somebody wrote the above negative information. I didn't check the page itself to see if the original had a proper citation, i.e. that the person who wrote that knew what they were talking about.

Balderdash.

there's nothing in my post that's not fact, or that can be argued, except the use of the word "leading".

i'm not saying i agree with the theory, am I?

so back up your balderdash.

Aylissa, I havent followed Baron-Cohen's research too much and havent read his book, but as far as I know none of his own work on this subject has been peer reviewed. I know in his book he summarizes peer reviewed data from others but his own work hasn't been. Nor has anyone been able to replicate his findings. This means his data is unuseable until replicated and peer reviewed.

I find your sig interesting. Is that how the question was worded, because apsie's read things literally, and the way that question is asked, the something could be a rock or whatever and Ive always had a hard time knowing if rocks are rude or polite. You'd think they would know to say someone and not something in the question.

Somehow I don't remember mentioning an opinion of my own on the theory that needed to be 'debated'.

Outside of the controversial testosterone factor, I found the article very good

Okay, what's wrong with that. I have always enjoyed the same thing...venturing out and exploring, seeing new things, going where I haven't been...etc. I'm glad I'm an adult now and I can do this without an adult running after me and making me go back.



makes perfect sense. I thought everyone thought that way!



Why is it that everyone is so obsessed with getting boys involved with sports. Yes, it promotes good fitness, and yes, they can be fun for some to play, but sports are not for everyone. Each individual has different interests, be it with sports or something else. The world is wide and far reaching, and there is plenty of other hobbies and interests to enjoy besides sports. Why can't NT's be comfortable with that!



This was written like it is a bad thing. I guess NT's have a hard time understanding that someone would actually enjoy being left alone once in solitude every once in a while. I'm comfortable with that simply because I find other humans to be so unpredictable and erratic...It's more stressful to try and figure them out, so I'm happier just not trying to!

I read the other article I found at the link at the bottom titled "Autism, What's sex got to do with it" and I found this line. It seems as though at least ONE NT out there knows how we think!! !

Sorry, I wasn't saying I was debating what you said. I'm sorry if I implied otherwise. Lately I just don't seem to be quoting the most appropiate areas, etc...