Where can I find geeks?

he's a poet and i he didn't know it..

I have two autistic children, one profound with grand mal seizures, as well. Our family has participated over the years in various blood tests and correlations were found. Remember that correlations are not cause, though. But they were statistically significant results, just the same. Both my wife and I are geeks, so to speak, but compatible ones.

Regarding genes, when we were first to have children we went through genetic counceling at the local university hospital (OSHU.) At the time (early-mid '80's), there was no real understanding of autism as having genetic factors -- it was thought to be 'random' more or less.

Also at that time, most of the serious 'brains' -- those medical researchers who were the better in their classes and well sought after

-- refused to enter into the field of autism. It simply didn't pay. When I spoke with one, whom I knew and was very excellent, researcher working in the field of schizophrenia, I asked, "Why am I not finding good research reports in autism? They conclude things that cannot be shown by the earlier part of the reports, they are few and far between, and frankly read like trash? Where are the good researchers in autism at, right now?" He said, "Look. If you can command any choice, you want to work in a field where you can get staff and money and tools. So that you have a good chance to make progress within some reasonable time frame. There is no money in autism. It's as simple as that. No one goes into it, if they have other good options

-- unless there is a personal reason, of course."

That's changed, of course. There is money there now. So a lot more is being done and some of the really good people are making the choice to enter the field, now. Results are piling up.

You can look at the October 21st, 2006, issue of Science News, page

Jon

Jim, it is likely (and this has been known to be the likely case for as many decades as I've been aware of the subject) that autism will be a collection of quite different maladies. Something like what 'consumption' was in the 1800's -- relatively unrelated causes having similar manifestations. Autism will turn out to be like that, I'm sure. Some of it may really be related to things like an inability to metabolize and remove mercury. Once that genetic component is teased out, those with autism and appropriate evidence linking them can be then removed from the data set leaving fewer to study in order to find out those reasons.

The man who was the example for the movie, "Rain Man," had very pronounced brain deformities not only visible with an MRI or PET scan, but even quite obvious in an early CAT scan. My daughter has had detailed MRIs done and there is nothing at all visible that seems awry in that sense. Since my oldest had hydrocephalus and since I've spent some time studying the anatomy of the brain and studying MRIs because of that, I can personally assure you that MRI resonances we looked at seemed quite normal in Athena. I don't need to trust another opinion, that much, anymore.

Yet she exhibited eye-aversion before she could even lift her own head and is, after decades of working as a volunteer in various school and summer programs for children with autism, squarely the middle of a certain class of "true-bred autistics" (my phrasing here.)

There is an entire list of behaviors and if the score is above a certain value, the designation is often assigned. In addition, a psychologist or psychiatrist may be needed to get a medical diagnosis. But they also work from evaluating the weight of behaviors. There is no medical diagnosis here, in a stricter sense. So the classification sweeps many into the group without really knowing what the underlying cause may be.

I grant that mercury stabilized medicine may be one such cause. And in the case of my daughter, it is possible -- since we'd lost her early records and the doctor just decided to give her another course, just in case. It's possible that this may have been the double-dose that would definitely push her over the top, if she were sensitive to the issue. On the other hand, as I said earlier, she exhibited eye aversion -- so pronounced that even my wife, this being our 2nd child and neither of us even having heard of autism let alone knowing what it may look like -- at 3 months of age and well before that double course of shots that may have taken place. So I can't really lay it squarely there. Also, my wife and I have very similar genetic backgrounds -- after researching it, close to what 1st cousins would amount to. So our daughter may have gotten a dose from both of us.

In the medical blood testing that we volunteered for, my own blood rated the highest probability in terms of the five of us. I carried combinations of genes that showed a 90-times higher rate of autism -- that would be, in me, not in my children. My daughter's blood (and she _is_ profoundly autistic) showed combinations that correlated out at about 37-times higher rates. My wife was around the same figure as my daughter's. For what all that may mean. Again, correlation is not cause. But it's something to check into.

The mirror neuron situation that is developing is an interesting one, too. But I don't believe it will explain all of autism, either. Just some of it, perhaps. When you work closely with many hundreds of autistic children as I have, and not just the few each year one gets in a self-contained classroom (which I have also been long a part of), you gain some measure of ability to sub-pocket these kids. I know instantly when another is "of Athena's breed," so to speak. And there are a variety of other classes, spanning all the way back to what can only be considered a part of the "normal spectrum" of people, generally.

Another has come from some detailed cellular analysis, slice by slice, counting neurons and types, in preserved brains from adults and children with autism who have died. There was such a report in Scientific American a few years ago by a lady (I don't remember her name) and she found only 1 part per thousand of the expected neuron type in an area of the brain associated with sound processing. Since then, other such studies have also found something similar in other brains. The cases I've seen on this topic are few, though, and it is hard to draw broad conclusions from these results. But it poses questions.

There used to be an apocryphal story told to me by teachers, that these profoundly autistic children were almost always the product of high IQ parents. I didn't place much in that, thinking it was merely a way of trying to make me "feel nice," or something. However, since those days, there actually _have_ been studies trying to see if there is such a correlation and those studies I've had a chance to read say that the fact is there actually _is_ a very strong correlation there. This suggests to me, if it turns out it's not just science bandwagon crap, that this may relate to genetic factors which modify styles of thinking brought to untenable excess (a 'double dose' so to speak, from both parents.) But I'm cautious about that kind of thinking, mostly because it appeals to emotions and the desire for parents to find some silver lining in the situation and therefore it is way too easy to put out there.

With the articles in Scientific American, particularly the one on mirror neurons (and the underlying article in Science and other similar periodicals over the last year and a half on the subject), some very interesting questions are posed about how we perceive conscious thought and the potential differences between various selections within human subpopulations about thinking modalities. They idea of templating in conscious thinking has the potential to explain a lot more about all of us and what consciousness actually is than I'd earlier imagined. So this is worth a lot of deeper thinking.

There is a lot to learn. But luckily there is also, finally, a lot more money moving into the research areas now, for autism. And that is attracting the better minds. I expect a lot more progress over the near term.

But I think the issue is close to settled, in the sense that there is a genetic component for some subset of the current group of people lumped into the designation of autism. But I also believe that in other cases, it can be physical/external that acts on sensitivities. And still others, perhaps a 'random' event.

Jon

Or it may be the vaccines themselves. For example, why does every child get the same dose? Perhaps we should start off with a 1/16th dose and then double it until the required protection is obtained. Not saying it is possible or required, but this may be a disease of cleanliness, like polio.

... I think he's from the CIA

:-)

I think daria has a penis.

Just because you're a pompous ass doesn't mean you qualify to be a geek....

"Lord, I apologize for that there... Be with the starvin' pygmies down in New Guinea. Amen"

;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)

...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | |

I don't think it is a disease of cleanliness. The US is not only pretty good about that issue, but it's also the case that there has been a significant rise in incidence (in terms of %, not absolute numbers.) We aren't suddenly giving vaccines to a larger percent of children, for example. If anything, that's been on a very slight decline.

In any case, it doesn't make any sense to me to imagine it as a cleanliness issue. I just don't see it.

I don't have an explanation for the rise. Partly, it may be about identification. This means that it is in the news and people are more aware of it. So there may be an attendant willingness to place the label where it wasn't placed, before. But that's not enough by itself.

When my daughter was diagnosed by a psychiatrist, in early 1987, the incidence of the diagnosis in the US was about 1:4000. Oregon's own figures were close to this ratio, as well. Girls were about 1:16000, by the way. Today, in Oregon, the figure is about 1:150. In California, it's about 1:250, if I recall. These changes include many more profoundly autistic children, too, so it isn't just a shift to identifying a lot more of the less involved children.

I also don't know how the girl:boy ratio has shifted. The reason this may be interesting though is that a 1:4 incidence (which fits the earlier figures I had been informed about in 1986-1988) is suggestive of a sex-linked subfactor -- that perhaps one of the reasons for the expression of autism is sex-linked, but not all of them. As early as the 1970's, it's been known that there appears to be some sex-linked relationship between what we measure in IQ scores (whatever that may be -- and yes, there is a great deal of debate about that.) The means are slightly distinct, though I don't think significantly so. But it is the distributions about the mean within male vs female populations that is dramatic. Putting the vague idea that a few factors relating to intelligence may be found on the x chromosome together with the observation about the parents of children with autism and the fact that girls are/were significantly less common than boys, there may be some connection posed there. No idea, but my mind does wonder onto questions like this. [Color blindness, for example, is sex-linked. Pattern baldness is sex-influenced.]

Now, a year ago, I had been reading peer-reviewed reports on global warming and came across a geological report from Colorado. The researcher had been examining layers and, in the process of his report, had included a nice chart listing time along one axis and noting various concentrations of metals along the other. Mercury was one of these and I noticed that there was spike in the data with the note "Mount St. Helens" and an arrow pointing to it. I thought.. hmm. Mercury... Mount St. Helens... That eruption was May of 1980. Dust was literally covering everything around here, including my car. (Portland Oregon area) And my daughter was born in 1984. Could be, I thought. Maybe. Why does Oregon have the highest rate in the US, now? Could it be related? Frankly, I've no idea. But the thought is there, now.

In southern Oregon, one of the largest (either #1 or #2) mercury mine during the late 1800's and early 1900's was Black Butte. This is located some 50 miles south east of Eugene. Dorena Lake, nearby, is so polluted with mercury that no one dares eat the fish that live there. Is there a correlation of autism in that area going back many years? I don't know. I don't know if anyone has tried to check on it.

But I think if people want to show the mercury correlations, the studies need to include areas such as Black Butte or the areas where Mt. Saint Helens' dust settled substantially. It's difficult, because mobility in the US is very high and tracking people would be expensive. But that's a possible approach to making a link.

I still am NOT one to buy into the vaccine preservative thing. I don't think it correlates well with use in the field and recognized incidences of autism. But I accept that it may represent a small sub-portion, because those with an inability to metabolize and remove mercury may certainly have their brain development affected. And they have already identified genes associated with this kind of metabolism and shown that not all people are equally endowed with that ability. Early tests for safety might very well not have spotted this. But I don't think it accounts for a large part of the situation, even though some professionals in the field of autism whom I regularly converse with do really feel this is a very significant part of the problem.

Jon

Aside from the fact that you cannot seem to avoid a chance at some kind of personal reference, what do you think about the articles I mentioned?

I suppose I'll just have to live with the fact that it seems you won't focus on the meat of what I say... and instead deal only in knee-jerk emotional responses.

Oh, well.

Jon

It depends - are you the "Morality Police" setting up a sting by pretending to be a girl?

Thanks, Rich

But are we being much more aggressive with cleaning chemicals instead of soap, water and scrub brushes?

How does the rate in N America compare to say New Guinea?

Mmm . . . this could be interesting. What if one Internet vigilante group posing as an underage girl was met by another vigilante group posing as an underage boy?

Those ABC expose shows are generating some good parody material.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----

----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Ah. Other way, in other words... Hmm. I don't think there is a correlation, but this is just my instinct. Certainly, not in Oregon where I believe that we've actually improved things somewhat. And the rates here are the highest in the US, despite it being a beautiful wonderland by comparison with most of the rest of the US.

Jon

FWIW, my dad was in the US Army Medical Corps, not working for any private company or advocating any particular economic interest. Part of his career was devoted to developing vaccines for some of the world's nastiest killers. Prior to that he was a pediatrician, reflecting his life-long interest in and special concern for the welfare of children.

He and I discussed the mercury-autism question at length.

His take--by which I mean his concerned, carefully considered, expert conclusion after studying the best available information on the issue--was that if there was a causality, it was at levels too low to be detected with present data (c. 2001). OTOH, there were known, much greater hazards of not using it. That is, from a risk/benefit point of view, it was the best preservative available, needed to protect people from being injected with vaccines contaminated with live pathogens.

He was frustrated by the mercury-flap, concerned that inferior preservatives would be substituted due to political pressure rather than scientific data, and that vaccines would be less safe as a result.

Vaccines are very safe overall, but many types can produce rare, horrible reactions in a very few people. For example, there _may_ be about a 1-in-a-million risk of the meningitis vaccine causing Guillain-Barre syndrome, which is about 1/10th the risk of getting a nasty case of meningitis.[1]

Best wishes, James Arthur