Better chance of giving birth to autistic baby if

Post Reply New Topic

Children are born close together
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/scie ... -risk.html

Iron deficient mothers from not taking iron supplements or metabolic conditions such as diabetes and obesity that can leave one iron deficient.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/282867.php


So I guess after 60 years of progress we are back to blaming the mother.

Until newspapers tell us the scientific credentials of their "science reporters", I give these kinds of sensationalized headlines and articles which make unverified (yes unverified) claims the finger. Usually these (often young, rookie) reporters have no scientific training at all, cannot apply critical analysis, fail to report methodology or analysis issues, they are gullible, and want to go for the big headline whether it is valid or not.

This is why the world needs geeks like (some) of us . Media distortions matter, and content is often politically biased or motivated. All the media cares about now is the bottom line, not objectivity, not integrity, and very often not fairness. The media doesn't hire scientists to report on science, because it regards science as peripheral to its bottom lines.

I quote Ben Goldacre: (author of Bad Science)
"in their choice of stories, the way they cover them, the media create a parody of science".

They are evidence abusers; they are scientifically ignorant; they are dangerous - both to their readers, to the people who are the subject of naive "research shows" articles, and to the credibility of science as a whole. In fact, the minute you read the cliched "research shows", you can be pretty sure that it probably doesn't.

I don't see this as blaming mothers so much as the ravings of a young ignorant reporter trying to curry favour with her employers at a very right wing newspaper. Their little careers matter so much more to them than the big picture of truth, believe me

It takes two to tango! I have often heard that elderly fatherhood can increase the chance of having an autistic child, with 'elderly' being seen as anything above the age of 40-45. Elderly motherhood (35+) also increases the chances of having a child with 'something', although in older women I think it's usually Down's and not AS. Statistically speaking, any child born to older parents have a higher chance of being autistic then those born to younger parents.

Blaming the father is not any more "progressive" then blaming the mother. Every child that is born, ultimately, is given genes from both the father as well as the mother, and the way in which those genes interact and blend determines how the child turns out to be. It's not an exact science but this is generally how it works.

...I'm not sure what you would expect to have in an article where the audience is the general public- most of whom do not understand the basics of research and would not know how to tell solid methodology from poor. If an article provides source and basics on logistics of the study, I consider that good enough- I can find the info on my own.


This article provided info on the study:
Researchers from Columbia University, US, studied records from more than 7,000 babies born between 1987 and 2005 in Finland. Around one third had been diagnosed with autism.
...The study controlled for the age of parents, the prior number of children and previous psychiatric disorders.
They found that babies concieved close to the birth of their brother or sister were at far greater risk of devloping autism.
...The study was published in the Journal of the American Academy of child and Adolescent Psychiatry.


Generally neither that university nor that journal tend to be too shoddy, but you could make the judgement for yourself.


In this article, ALSO, they provide sufficient information on the background of the findings they are reporting:

Rebecca J. Schmidt, assistant professor in the Department of Public Health Sciences and a researcher affiliated with the MIND Institute, says that "Iron deficiency, and its resultant anemia, is the most common nutrient deficiency, especially during pregnancy, affecting 40% to 50% of women and their infants."
...For their new study - the first to investigate a link between iron intake and risk of autism - the researchers analyzed data from mother-child pairs who were enrolled in the Northern California-based Childhood Autism Risks from Genetics and the Environment Study between 2002 and 2009. They publish their findings in the American Journal of Epidemiology.
...The maternal daily iron intake of the participants was recorded as part of the study, as were data on vitamins, nutritional supplements and breakfast cereals consumed by the mothers while pregnant or breastfeeding.

Also included is a video where [I believe] the PI discusses the findings of the study.



...what? Sometimes it makes sense because the nine months of development before a child is birthed to the world occur in the mother's body- but it's not so much "blame the mother" as "take into account the environment in which fetal development occurs". As well as a million other factors. If you want to disregard anything that would consider the fetal environment, not only would this be harmful to fetuses [in all given situations], it would also be willfully ignorant. And ridiculously overprotective of women in a completely unhelpful manner.



Of course it would be helpful to read the articles you criticize before going on a tirade against them. I'm not entirely convinced that you actually did. As someone who claims to appreciate science, even if you did, you seem to have cherry-picked nonsense here.

ASPartOfMe these were interesting, thanks. I'll be looking them up.

You are welcome

Ouch! Nothing like a personal attack on WP to start your day!! !

heh. Good joke.

This reminded of me an add-on to the theory of evolution that recently had a study showing that several phenomenas could be explained by genetic memories. As I'm sure you know, it has been suspected by some researchers for certain migratory behavior and proven to pass new instincts in ravens through generations. It has also been known that DNA can be used as a quantum computer. The new study showed a possible link between DNA's ability for computation and the process of developing new adaptive traits in evolution.
Perhaps, when more elderly creatures pass on their genes, more information is passed on. Maybe some traits, like autism, is partially caused by an overwhelming amount of information being passed on?
The study done on Ravens would support this theory since it was shown that you could teach a Raven to fear a certain human face and that the face would be recognized by that raven 3rd generation descendents with a fear response.
Kind of like Earth in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy...

My therapist told me that I have a 25% chance of having at least one child with autism.

I also heard you're more likley to have an autistic baby if you or your spouse are originally from the Planet Koosbane.

(my lame attempt at sarcasm)

It's not 'blaming the mother', it's just a scientific correlation that may eventually lead to further research or knowledge. It's a good thing as long as the research done is valid, the last point however is often questionable.