If Asperger's is Genetic...

Post Reply New Topic

The problem with the metals view,

Where we did have a known problem, Tetra Ethel Lead, it affected the whole population.

Within that group it was clear that cities showed stronger results. The lower than expected IQ scores grouped with the highest exposure levels.

If it was Mercury, those who were exposed, through work, those who were fish eaters, would have the highest autism rates.

Where there were massive Mercury toxic levels, Japan had a group, autism was not listed in the observed results.

Where the ground water contains Lead, mental retardation is reported, where it contains Mercury, Autism is not reported.

If it was metals, identical twins would have 100%, they don't.

There are also no 100% autistic families, so the genetic link seems weak.

It is a one in a hundred possible combination of genetics. While it does run higher in some family lines, it is hit and miss over extended families and generations.

It also appears in families with no history of autism.

Also, being something only recently studied, we do not have a background, and Autism could well be a half dozen things lumped together, as the dianostic critera is broad, and LFA with a development age of five is lumped with HFA with an IQ of 140.

The best I have heard is twenty two sites on the DNA with various patterns of binding, some of which might be related to autism.

Study of the Human Genome is new, the task complex, and a Nobel Prize waits for whoever figures out the patterns of Epigenetic binding, and their resulting outcomes.

Why? Is an ultimate question we may never have an answer for.

Study should continue, but as the traits are spread over a larger group, Broader Autism Phenotype, where the traits blend into the general population, it has shown a survival value over time.

Curing autism is like curing technology, it only afflicts some, they are not good at group sports involving a ball, but they do produce some things useful to all.

The differance in thought and perception has survived because that thought and perception has lead to the whole group surviving. Nature only keeps what works.

Not exactly, we breathe/eat mercury everyday, it's even in our water. our body has a natural chemical that flushes the mercury out. It's called glutathione.
Glutathione has been scientifically been proven (google it there's a lot of information surprisingly) to be deficient at severe levels in autistic people.
The metal stays in the body for years and decades even, if someone normal got poisoned the body would flush it out in a few weeks, with the exception of rare cases of extreme poisoning. The glutathione deficiency is a genetic inheritence.

This explains why people who are barely exposed to metals can be poisoned whilst people who eat fish daily and have amalgam fillings can't.

Anybody can publish a scientific study that says anything they like. Publishing it in a reputable, peer-reviewed journal is another matter.

Well, myself and a friend were diagnosed with Aspergers almost within months of each other.

Where would I have learned to function on my own? My mother was and still is a very emotionally and mentally unstable person who believes that everyone is out to get her on some level. She can't handle conflict so she takes it out on her kids and anyone else who is stupid enough to present themselves as an easy target.

I made a personal choice not to allow her or anyone else to influence me in anyway and now I'm a far more stable person. Wouldn't it make more sense to inherit her schizophrenic tenancies than Aspergers?

Or for that matter, what about alcoholism? Addiction and alcoholism are marketed as inherited traits and yet I'm not an alcoholic. Is it because I didn't inherit alcoholism, or is it because I made a choice not to spend what little money I have on booze?

It's the same with people with Aspergers. If you want something badly enough you can decide not to let fear and anxiety control you.

I had to decide not to let these "Traits" get in my way if I was going to get away from an emotionally and physically abusive environment. I had to decide to try to at least pretend to blend in and play by the rules of society if I was going to hold down a job, live in my own apartment and afford some nice things in my life.



Right. Because the child chooses for himself and doesn't allow people to tell him that it's his genes that make up who he is and not his actions.

I guess you consider alcoholism a positive thing then. Again, I'm sure glad I didn't inherit that trait from my family. And at least they've isolated the genes responsible for addiction, so that I can see how DNA is responsible for these things.

Again. Show me the gene or the sequence of genes that tells me I have Asperger's and I would logically be required to amend my emotional response.

Even Mr. Spock had to deal with the emotions of his shipmates.

Inheritance carries no value judgement. That's what she was trying to get across to you. An inherited trait can be either good, bad or neither depending on the effect (or not) that it has on your life. Earlier you seemed to be saying that if people said something was inherited, they were therefore saying it was bad. She was merely showing you an example where somebody can say "I inherited X" and have that inheritance be either good or neutral.

Research into the genes that cause autism- and therefore also Aspergers Syndrome- is ongoing. This is very controversial because many people are justifiably concerned that identifying the responsible genes will lead to abortion of fetuses carrying those genes. Once the genes are identified (they likely eventually will be) you can get a blood test to see if you carry those genes.

I can see that you're quite adept at making logical fallacies. How does bringing up one negative inherited trait prove your point? I can bring up a hundred positive, inherited traits. How can you use that as an argument to prove that all inherited traits are negative? It isn't logical in the least.

They have not found the gene or sequence of genes that causes autism or asperger's. This does not prove that it does not exist. It took them years of research to isolate the MeCP2 gene mutation that causes Rett Syndrome. Genetics are incredibly complex, and we haven't even hit the tip of the iceberg when it comes to decoding human genetics. Your argument holds no water.

I know my Asperger's most certainly has a connection to genetics, with 9 people on the spectrum on my father's side, and many other people showing symptoms. Also, all three of my children are on the spectrum. In no way do I consider it a negative.

Thing about all this is, how can anyone say that twenty, fifty, one hundred years from now AS
traits will not be more suited to the environment than they are now? Every now and then you get some self deluding bunch of alpha loons who can convince their NT herd to go and cull another self referential heard run by another bunch of self deluding alpha's . Maybe it's time to try something else, seeing they don't get along with each other so well.

Maybe they need a group of individuals outside the herd to explain this facet of their behavior to them.

Maybe that group outside the herd is better suited to long term survival on this planet?

Who are they to tell us our genes are less worthy than theirs.

Me? I put ballpits everywhere for LFA's and Down's syndrome kids, make big parks for them with lakes, so they can sit and enjoy feeding the ducks, after we'd cleared some space for them to be able to do this.

I believe that it is somehow genetic, even though neither of my parents have it. My mother's cousin has a lot of traits, & I think I remember someone saying a cousin I went to school with in middle school but never knew well, had autism, but I don't know enough about the rest of my family to know whether any of them do or not.

I guess you would really benefit from some remedial reading and comprehension tutoring....that or you just love the construction and abuse of straw men. After all, you've built and bashed more than your fair share in this thread.

Wow, unnecessary much?

Your first point:

My response:



Your second point.



Since your point was that it was illogical to believe that an inherited trait is negative I presented two traits that the majority would probably consider negative. I never said that all inherited traits are negative.



Congratulations. I'll let you in on a secret. I don't consider my traits negative either. If you and I were the only two people in the world, you would be justified in implying that none of my views are based on logic.

I'm glad your situation and the environment you have grown up in was enough that your logic makes sense to you. But let me tell you how my environment has shaped my logic.

The people who insisted I get diagnosed considered my traits quite negative. So negative in fact that they needed a diagnosis so that anytime I did something that was negative in their eyes they could blame the Aspergers and if I did something positive they could take the credit for their "influence" on me.

Since the diagnosis I have faced discrimination from teachers, staff members, coworkers. Anyone who knew I had the diagnosis because it was on my permanent record or because my aunt had to run her mouth about it to everyone, wouldn't give me the time of day because of all of the negative publicity surrounding anyone who has any kind of disability no matter how tangible it was.

So you and I can consider these traits positive all we want but eventually you have to deal with those people who will use the fact that they are "symptoms" of a "disorder" to try and stop you. That is the logical conclusion I come to based on my very real experiences, not something some shrink looking to write a book told me.

Getting back to the point of my argument:

Asperger's itself is not a disorder. Credited doctors have made it quite clear that Aspergers is a collection of symptoms.

So lets say for the sake of argument that you do inherit one or two traits from your family members. That still leaves a chunk of symptoms that can be attributed to the environment.

No, children are not blank slates. Not all behaviors are learned. But there are other factors besides learned behavior. I will consider the possibility that something happens to the fetus during pregnancy or exposure to certain elements after birth because there are a number of proven factors that can cause any number of things to happen to a child's development.

Exposure to stachybotrys and other toxic molds can have devastating consequences on an otherwise healthy brain. A few people have brought up the mercury theory.

I mean, heck, let me go ahead and quote my favorite movie: "There's not Gene for Fate."

You can have the genetic profile of a proathlete but if a car hits and cripples you, I'm willing to bit that you didn't inherit that from your parents. I'm going to go ahead and assume that your environment, which puts lousier drivers on the road every year, has made it rather difficult to play sports.

Differences in identical twins aren't rock solid indications something isn't genetic. The twins echnage substances, and one may leach stuff from the other, or leach more nutrients for it self from the placenta.The differences in twins may or may not be on genetic weaknesses. You can't overgeneralize, that all autisms are mercury caused. Autism its a syndrome, meaning many reasons can get you end up with it. Mercury, is maybe, or maybe not, one of the causes.

And of course, efforts to reduce mercury poisoning its a good thing regardless its link to autism, we know that mercury isn't good for us.

I don't know who pissed in your Kellog's (tm) Frosted a**hole morning but I don't feel like I've bashed anyone exactly. Unless of course someone was being blatantly rude to me or attacking as opposed to debating.

I've respected everyone's point of view, but that doesn't mean mine is going to change suddenly just because other people don't agree with me. That's kinda the nature of a debate. Two sides with opposing viewpoints discuss a subject and others make up their minds who they agree with.

I do not claim you have bashed any person. In case you were unaware, bashing a strawman refers to the fallacious technique of ignoring what someone has argued, setting up some lesser (or absurd) argument in place of what has been argued, and proceeding to argue against that rather than what has been argued.


Actually the nature of good debate is that each party actually addresses and responds to the points raised by the other party, rather than constructing some alternative argument that no one has made and taking swipes at that while ignoring the points actually made by others. Hence my conclusion that you either need serious reading and comprehension remedial classes, or you have a distinct fetish for the construction and bashing of strawmen. There is nothing respectful about ignoring the point someone else is making and instead arguing against some absurd point that they did not make.

Having seen this

I am now however, more inclined toward the need for remdial reading and comprehension assistance. Anyone with adequate comprehension skills would have understood that the point being made by that particular poster was that your article implies that if something is inherited then it is necessarily a negative thing. If you do not understand that this is what your own article implies, that would indicate a further need for remedial communication assistance.


Because of the stigma some people attach to disability. Such people are often actually disabled themselves in some respect. One way in which such people contribute to such stigma and themselves enact discrimination is to claim that they themselves are not disabled, (they are merely different), and to claim that they do not wish to be associated with disability in essence because of exactly the kind of disciminatory and bigoted stigma they are themselves guilty of perpetuating. I can think of one person involved in this thread who appears to manifests exactly this kind of behavior. It's difficult for me to sympathize with that person in respect of being discriminated against, because they apparently do not actually care about discrimination per say, and are happy to perpetuate and add to discrimination provided they themselves are not subject to it.

Not in my case, not in the case of others I know in RL who are diagnosed with AS. There is simply no way my nephew's traits (which were observable from very early childhood and are discontinuous with the traits of his parents, and with his environment) can be explained by environment. A number of people in my family share a set of such and similar traits but we did not share early childhood environment, parents, upbringing or any other vector of transmission other than biological inheritance.

Not everybody is very good at debate, though. It takes time. It took me a while to learn how to even be coherent with an argument, and I still make my posts way too long and put so many sidetracks that I derail myself half the time, let alone the other people. Looking back at what I wrote about my opinions in high school, I can't believe I used so many fallacies... most likely I'll look back at this in ten years and think to myself, "Wow, did I suck at this!"

Um, point being, you can't really expect everybody you talk to to be an expert at debating, and it's probably easier just to point out the illogical part and go on.

The one thing that is important about all of this, though, is that debating anything, especially on the internet, goes nowhere if people start attacking people instead of arguments. On the other hand, if everybody goes into it with the idea that they're going to compare opinions, learn what the other guy thinks, and refine their own ideas, then chances are everybody gets good out of it.