The Neanderthal theory of Autism

Post Reply New Topic

One parent has dark brown eyes, the other has light blue eyes. One possible combination in the offspring might be hazel eyes with a blue tint. The blue allele is attempting to express itself but get's somewhat squashed by the dark brown allele. Same thing happens if you take light blue paint and mix it with just a little dark brown. It doesn't take much of the brown to change the blue to dark brown. Sometimes, both genes appear to show dominance even if one is blue and one isn't, thus, resulting in hazel. We don't know for sure what makes a gene dominant or reccessive. Blue eyes might be capable of dominancy in some circumstances. There's still plenty about genetics science hasn't figured out.

Ok, So as of the past week it has now been proved that people outside of Africa have 1-4% Neanderthal DNA. There is still more work to be done on this research and they need a bigger sample group but it is certainly very interesting and I'm sure more research will be done.

Re: Blue eyes - as far as I remember blue eyes originate from a genetic mutation many years back and is believed to have originated from one common ancestor(maybe blue eyes weren't so recessive then?). This was somewhere in Eastern Europe and may have been more recent than the Neanderthals. The fact that blue eyes have managed to survive and spread so far is put down to their uniqueness way back when they were less common therefore more attractive. Anyway anyone interested can research this . Here's a start:

I can't post a link so search under 'Genetic mutation makes those brown eyes blue' and 'Geneticists Uncover the Origin of Blue Eyes'

With the new study it is now clearly possible to both prove and disprove the Neanderthal theory. All it costs is a lot of money. To disprove it 48,000 dollars would do. All that is needed is to create a full genomic sequence for an Aspie, and make sure the DNA correlates the same with Neanderthal as the already analysed french individual. Of course, if this is not the result, there is a high probability that the theory is correct. To really prove it it would require to sequence more than one individual (I'll say five Aspies and five NTs). That would cost 480,000 dollars.

So, if some really wealthy Aspie want to "kill-off" the theory as soon as possible, just donate 48,000 dollars for the procedure.

I'm pretty sure somebody will do this in the near future, and I would prefer if it was an Aspie, and not an NT. There is also the race against genocide against autistics to factor-in. The current genetic autism research, which is really poorly done, threatens to start a genocide on autistic traits. I think it would be an advantage if there is research that can link common personality-traits to the Hn genome before the genocide-tests are ready.

pandd:

there is an article somewhere on this site concerning blue eyes, I think it talked about having found the time of the genetic mutation.

re: Spencer Wells I'm not clear yet on what the article means by no DNA in Africa, modern Africans, whatever. It seems like they meant the interbreeding took place before the migration out of Africa then that group left, it would only affect the y chromosomal Adam stuff if a hominid group existed outside africa and interbred with that group that left I guess. I'm really curious now to see if the interbreeding may have been a reason for the migration itself, one article I read said that homo sapiens might have very possibly had a role in the extinction of the neanderthals.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7886477.stm (the last part of the article)

it says at that point (this article was written before the current findings suggesting the 1-4%) they'd mapped 60% of the genome, 3 billion characters, over three years. I don't know the genetic science behind autism but if such mapping is going on and autism can be correlated definitively to a gene then it seems like this theory is proveable or disproveable.