Slashdot Mirror
Scientific Brain Linked to Autism
squoozer writes "The BBC is reporting that a leading scientist in area of Developmental Psychopathology, Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, is indicating that there is good chance that there is a scientific basis to the observed phenomenon that children with highly analytical parents are more likely to be autistic. He believes the genes which make someone analytical may also impair their social and communication skills. A weakness in these areas is the key characteristic of autism."
There used to be reports of higher rates of Autist kids in the region around silicon valley back during the dotcom boom.
perpetually dwelling in the -1 pits
This reminds me of a really good article in Wired from maybe 2002 or so, about how autism rates were skyrocketing in Silicon Valley, far too much to be just coinidence, better diagnosis, etc.
Anyone else remember it? It doesn't seem to be on their website (tried searching "autism" and "autistic"). It came with a quiz and everything. Anyone? Anyone?
Andrew Lenahan http://www.starblind.com/
A while back, NASA conducted a fifteen year anniversary study on the savant known as Kim Peek. Peek was born with a strange brain deformity known as macrocephaly which results in the two hemispheres of the brain being linked due to a pocket of water at the base of the brain.
Now, there has been a lot of speculation about how neurons work and what makes someone autistic. I once had a lengthy conversation with James Olds of George Mason's Krasnow Institute and asked him about Peek. Olds explained to me that it's very mysterious how savants develop. I asked him if Peek had an abnormally large cortex but he dismissed this, citing that elephants are not geniuses. He also gave me an anecdotal story of a Harvard football player that injured his shoulder blade as the star quarter back. When they x-rayed him, they also found out that his head was mostly filled with water and the result was a severe lack of brain tissue. However, he was a 4.0 grade point average student. I asked Dr. Olds if Peek's neurons might be more densely populated but he also dismissed this saying that neurons are huge on nutrient consumption and if they grow too closely together, they will kill each other.
Anyone care to take a stab at this? Can anyone speculate on this?
My work here is dung.
Thinking about this, Asperger's Syndrome is defined as "characterized by severe and sustained impairment in social interaction, development of restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, and activities." Give the link that is being suggested by this article, could it entirely be possible that Asperger's Syndrome comes from parents who lack some degree of social sensitivity on a genetic basis? Combine both parents, and you get someone who exhibits Asperger's Syndrome-like behaviour?
Smarty-pants couples (of the truly sharp, science-minded variety) having kids is only recently useful (or even likely), in the primate-history scheme of things. Just shows that it takes natural selection a while to catch up with the fact that we're not very far removed from small, pack-like groups living hand to mouth in primitive, hostile circumstances and not living much past 30 years old. Wait... that sounds like my neighborhood!
That being said, a close friend is an occupational therapist with a lot of experience in helping out kids experiencing the full spectrum of autistic characteristics. She's indicated that a somewhat unscientific review of those kids' parents (hundreds of which she's met and gotten to know) would completely resonate with the findings mentioned in the article. She and her husband, both sharp, analytical people, just gave birth - and not without some trepidation. Just in case, they watched re-runs of "Pimp My Ride" before conceiving.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
This is a lot of work, but IME is well worth it. See the conference papers at my website for more on one person's experience of autism...
Those genes linked with autism may be (and probably are, methinks) bad for the survival chances of an individual, but still better for society. Even if early autistics were much worse off when it came to spreading their genes, their respective societies probably benefited from their tendencies to analyze and reprocude things like fire, tools, etc.
It's refreshing to hear that what I have suspected now has a little more weight... that there is a connection between those who are more actively analytical and autism. That said, to be an idiot-savant is quite rare, where most autistic forms make a person mostly or completely incapable of unassisted living with nothing else that would otherwise be interesting or novel about them. (Is that too insensitive a way to put it?)
In any case, like so many other slashdotters, I suspect my analytical disconnection (my own handicap in it's own way) has always been a hinderance in terms of social skills and adaptation. I have learned, however, that I can compensate to a degree (though not completely by any stretch) by reaching out to the more emotional part of myself and allow it to do some of the thinking for me. This results in at least a mildly child-like acclimation, but I believe it's a start for most as I have found myself growing quite a bit through such exercises. As for the rest of the balance, I have found that learning how to transmit the impression of confidence, competence and wisdom, while trying not to appear arrogant and superior, makes up for anything else. I have found that most people are really very shallow and don't require much illusion to be convinced... just dress the dress, walk the walk, talk the talk and the people are believers.
Easier said than done, of course -- it takes a lot of practice and a great many episodes in life where you closely identify with Data from ST:TNG.
In other words, it can be helpful and interesting to scramble up some statistics on a question for a study omelette, but we have certainly destroyed some information in the process. Ex post facto attempts to opine about the original materials will leave us with egg on the face.
Elsewhere on Wikipedia, Einstein is on record for doubting whether the Almighty throws dice with the universe. Allow me to second that from the standpoint of refusing to fret. Do what you consider Destiny would have you do with respect to your reproduction; rejoice in any outcome.
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
Early human tool development stayed stagnant for an amazingly long time. Could it be that the same genes that cause autism today also spawned technological innovations like Clovis points. The genes may have been a mutation so rare that until human populations increased sufficiently it would be missing entirely for generations. Perhaps the rise of civilization itself is the result of the genes remaining present in the populations in Sumeria, the Indus Valley, and China which simultaneously (compared to the rest of human history) developed.
Professor Baron Cohen is also the cousin of Sascha Baron Cohen, AKA. Ali G.
Actually according to this article, you are correct.
I think that this is exactly the parent's point, that techies don't know how to relate to "regular people." For instance, with men the biggest single area of common interest seems to be sports, yet it's not mentioned at all in your conversation starters. I love sitting down and watching a good (American) football game or even Cricket. But for me, there are a lot more interesting things to do than to read the sports section daily or to memorize stats like how the Yankees pitching staff does against lefty batters or by how many points the AFC has beaten the NFC in the superbowl. The only reason I even think about these things is to have conversation starters with people who don't/won't talk about AMD vs Intel, the latest MAME release, why Linux will/won't take over the desktop, or my latest microcontroller project. Superbowl? Yeah, I'll watch it intently and really enjoy it, but after a month I'll forget the final score and I'll forget at least one team that played in time for Superbowl XLI.
Now, f*cking with people while your talking sounds fun and shows a degree of sophistication in your knowledge and analysis of the meta-level of a conversation, which most people are not even aware of, but you gotta admit that it may not be the best strategy to "win friends and influence people" in social situations!
ACHTUNG! Das computermachine ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist nicht fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen.