American Professor Couple Identify Major Cause of Autism

Post Reply New Topic

The research isn't bollocks. However, the reporting of it in the popular press most certainly is. I don't know how much of that is the researchers' fault. At this point nobody holds journalists to account for poor scientific reporting.

At this point, there's not much doubt that some common mouse models for autism are dependent on gut bacteria. The issue is that most people don't understand just how limited the implications of that are.

For me, I like to think about what I have read. I like to put things through my "bulls*t logic test" Often times, things I have read don't pass the test.

The quoted examples of research in one of the earlier responses express similar things. A few things stick out to me that don't allow me to buy into the researchers findings as it relates to ASD... 1) (this is an oldie but a goodie) Correlation does not equal causation. 2)- "ASD Like Behaviors" Why be so specific in all of your other data but not list what characteristics were observed with the MIA associated birth vs. the birth with the antibody blockade? Furthermore, what single behavioral characteristic is solely attributed to ASD? What SOCIAL and/or COMMUNICATIVE deficits did the mice display? 3) If it only applies to only a "subset of ASD individuals" then how can it be the cause for all?

I would give the research more credence if it was not so general in nature when it comes to linking it to ASD.

and to come full circle on my original post... The title of the Article was Korean-American Professor Couple Identify Major Cause of Autism


I say question everything no matter how quick you found it on the internet.

Many women who are pregnant make frequent doctor visits. Couldn't this be checked, at least for correlation/no correlation, by a study that researches viral infections, while pregnant, in mothers of asd individuals?
Also, there are said to be many things that could turn on the many different genes thought to be responsible for autism. Maybe bacteria could be one of the triggers for a certain genetic combination. I'm not saying it is. I'm saying it could be, and so could just about anything else.

For me, the testosterone levels in utero hypothesis makes the most sense.

Aren't major media groups and publishers subject to editorial accuracy? In this respect prior to publishing of media reports on scientific manuscripts the editor must receive approval from the primary author that the news article does not "distort" their research. At least this applies to major news outlets. This explains why Oxford Uni recently had a problem with some of their researchers using news media to promote their findings making claims that exaggerated the practical implications of the findings.

The researchers in most cases don't mind the publicity as it only helps their cause in attracting future money from funding bodies

I think that in the age of clickbait, there is less editorial accountability in "scientific" media reporting. Most popular media outlets report studies by making claims far more extensive in their headlines than the experimenters do, even the experimenters who push their own one-off findings onto the media as personal PR.

My mother actually did have a virus when she was pregnant with me. However her cousin has HFA and she had another cousin on the spectrum as well.

I agree but the prevalence of this lack of accountability is probably a function of the news source. There's been a conflation of online news sources and most are not (as you say) as accountable as the larger news media.

The link to the article that appeared in Nature Journal of Science... Click Here for Nature Journal of Science article


For your own discernment and points of reference.

Please cite your sources determining that the implications of gut bacteria on ASD are limited.

Like a broken record: It’s been my real life experience that most people don’t understand just how critical the implications of gut bacteria on ASD symptoms is.

Not this crap again. Oh yeah, mice are autistic because some like to bury marbles in their bedding. Whatever.

I know this is false for the following reason. My brother is NT as it gets, and he and I had the same mother within 2 years of each other, ate the same diet in the same house, and were subjected to the same kinds of intestinal bacteria. If this crap is true, then tell me why a low functioning person with classic autism cant be made fully NT by antibiotics and a gluten/casein pseudoscience diet? Because thats the only form of success I'd accept to prove this, and the treatment success rate would have to be a high one. If this did in fact work, then the parents of low functioning autistic kids would be lining up for it.

Hey also there Pretty Carp, did you culture your fecal bacteria, isolate particular species believed to cause autism, and prove it through Kochs Postulates? Just curious. Because as a scientist I dont accept anecdotal evidence as the gospel.

Oh yes the Autism Speaks hate group. Thats all I need to see.

I don’t know what the scientific criteria are for disgnosing autistic behaviour in mice. Some have been mentioned in some articles I’ve read in the past, though, so they do exist. You would have to contact a research scientist involved in this sort of thing and ask them if you want to know.

In your example, the mother’s gut bacteria has ample time to change over a period of 2 years between births. She could have had an infection and/or taken antibiotics etc.

AFAIK ASD brain structuring is triggered by some gut bacteria or another during fetal development, so there’s still the “hard wired” component to ASD. Add specific antibiotics/probiotics and it’s treatable (I’ve been doing it for over 4 years) but it isn’t curable as the brain cannot be completely rewired to the “NT map” of connectivity.

No. I’ve been transparent about that from the very first post I made about this 4 years ago. I wasn’t conducting a medical study - I was saving my own life from the personal hell of depression, anxiety, and the most amplified ASD symptoms of my entire life. Also, as stated countless times, I’d be more than happy to participate in a lab study in the name of science.

Whatever the validity of the research, anecdotal evidence of individual cases doesn't provide much information one way or the other. If the argument being presented is of a largely statistical nature then individual examples don't, in themselves, have much statistical significance.

The study linked directly claimed to have a cure. "a cure for autism." So no backing your way out of that one. ASD isnt' curable you might be able to cure certain symptoms but all of them oh please. That's just ridiculous. And that bacteria thing is BS eitherway.