Page 1 of 1 [ 4 posts ] 

NeantHumain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2004
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,837
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

18 Jul 2008, 4:22 pm

If Asperger's syndrome was sex linked, it would be caused by mutation(s) on the X chromosome.



Malsane
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 216
Location: Iowa, USA

18 Jul 2008, 11:17 pm

sartresue wrote:

Chain links topic

I always have this image of links in a chain.

You asked the question, malsane. What are the ramifications of such a discovery? There is the concern of designer baby selection, so any discovery should be to enhance the lives of men and women, not to eradicate Autistics.
I don't think I understand how that relates.

I think I read somewhere that they've discovered lots of different genes that lead to autism. That would mean it's not sex-linked, right?



pandd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,430

23 Jul 2008, 3:38 am

I was led to understand that in the very low functioning end of autism, females become more common. One hypothesis I encountered pointed out the degree of cognitive/mental dysfunction in diagnosed female Kanner autistics might indicate sex/gender difference in regards to socialisation. Because females as a population do have brains that can be demonstrated to perform better at social tasks, it takes a greater level of damage to to achieve the same outcome in terms of measuring performance on social tasks. Females ends up not being diagnosed as much because social dysfunction is used to measure impairment, and diagnostic criteria are male focused.

I find it not unlikely that autism occurs at similar rates in both gender/sex populations, but because diagnostic models concentrate on symptom clusters drawn from research on a disproportionately diagnosed population, and because diagnosticians tend to measure impairment in females relative to males with autism rather than relative to their gender/sex peers, females in the mid to high functioning range are under-diagnosed. This is not dissimilar to the kind of skewing that can/would occur when an adult is evaluated by comparing the skill/competency/impairment profile against children rather than their age-peers. Since females perform better at social tasks as a population, there is no reason to suppose that this would not apply to autistic females, so really diagnosticians do need to more readily compare potentially autistic females social/communication skills/performance to their gender/sex peers (neurotypical females) rather than comparing them to male autistics when evaluating impairment in this skill/competency set.



Malsane
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 216
Location: Iowa, USA

24 Jul 2008, 12:31 am

Ah, thank you. You explained that very well. Before I was wondering why females don't get diagnosed more, because I figured the standards are higher for females than they are for males, so a female failing at social interactions would stick out more. But I think you're right. I have been branded very masculine because my social skills are not up to NT par. People always think I'm just a tomboy, or even transgendered. But if females are being graded on the male scale, even a female below average social skills may still be considered 'normal' on the male scale. I get it now!