Aspies, Neanderthals, and Agency

Post Reply New Topic

Actually it's not just Europeans. Pretty much all races outside of Sub-Saharan African have Neanderthal genes.

This means, that if my genographic test results come back with very little or average neanderthal DNA, I can take the results to the doctor and tell them that I don't actually have autism I guess.

As a an evolutionary biologist a few months short of my PhD, allow me to state the following plainly:

1. All living people except for native populations in Sub-Saharan Africa are descended partially from Neanderthals
2. People in Sub-Saharan Africa have the same rates of autism as everywhere else in the world

...so we conclude:
3. Autism is not the result of Neanderthal ancestry.

Thank you. Good night.

-Fern

Greetings, sister.

Is Neanderthal DNA present in Australian Aborigines?

Good question! I did't know the answer off the top of my head, so I looked some stuff up and this was what I found:
In the Original Article, figure 1 suggests that Australia had been sampled and that there were traces (though not high amounts) of Neanderthal there. However, we needed more information than geography alone to know whether this is representative of aboriginal Australians. So I looked in the supplementary information for more detailed specimen collection data. Indeed! Yes, according to the supplementary material there was a population of "Australia aboriginal* (remote community of isolated Indigenous Australians living in Central Australia)" sampled for this study.

So to answer your question: It seems that traces of Neanderthal DNA were present in these populations as well, but in low frequency, nowhere near as much as natives of Europe, Asia or North America.

I didnt say that they werent.

The folks outside of subsaharan Africa: Europeans, Asians, Arab north africans, south sea islands, and American Indians, have some vanishingly small trace of Neanderthat genes. The Asians and southsea islanders, and probably Australian Aboriginies ALSO tend to also have traces of Denisovian DNA.

Yeah, basically any group that left sub-saharan Africa via the mainland after ~80,000 years ago had chance of coming into contact with Neanderthals across Europe and Western Asia. Thus when and for how long peoples moved through that area relate to the abundance of those genes in modern populations. Australian Aboriginals split off towards their current distribution via Europe somewhere from 75,000 to 50,000 years ago, so yeah, they don't have much Neanderthal DNA, but they have some.

BUT WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO AUTISM?

It is not "speculative" to say that Autism is associated with Neanderthal genes though. It is just wrong.
We're not talking about a case with weak support here, we're talking about the only genetic evidence on the matter pointing to the contrary. Autism rates do not go up with Neanderthal gene frequencies in human populations. Rather, autism is equally common across all races and populations worldwide, even in regions of Africa devoid of Neanderthal DNA altogether! While a correlation between autism cases and Neanderthal DNA in a population wouldn't mean for sure that one causes the other (correlation is not causation), the fact that they are not associated whatsoever does, in fact, present a strong case that Neanderthal DNA CANNOT BE THE CAUSE OF AUTISTIC TRAITS. The current data as I understand them suggest that IF (and this is a big "if") common varieties of autism can be attributed directly to some fixed gene or set of genes, they would be more likely to occur in the genome of ancestral Homo sapiens than of Neanderthal spp., as we all share Homo sapiens genes, just like all races of the world share autism.

There are actually some genetic situations shown to be associated with autism, and they are random mutations independent of Neanderthal lineage. Read here if you want to know more about fragile X (a lab in my department studies this):
https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/fragile-x-syndrome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fragile_X_syndrome

^ interesting. what about adhd and "hunter-gatherer hypotheses"? do those hypotheses have any plausibility or have they been debunked by now?

But is it more accurate to claim to be from the "Wrong Planet"?

I used to claim to be a Neanderthal simply because I was not like everyone else and at least it gave me some identity.

Who am I in world constructed around group identity? When I have never felt to be part of any group. I hate group activities because I cannot lose myself in the group as NTs seem to do.

Some of the research using fMRI shows that not only are we different for NTs (who show similar patterns on neuron connectivity), but we are generally different from each other in these patterns.

What does it matter the accuracy of our claim as long as it gives us some sense of belonging?

We could go with Pirates, Elves, Fairies, or Trolls. I think I like the Troll as long as it isn't associated with the internet.

/thread

The notion that ADHD is caused by Neanderthal DNA has same gaping problem as suggesting Autism is caused by it. It doesn't occur less often among people without Neanderthal DNA. I'd consider that idea debunked.

As for the idea that we as modern humans are a species constantly evolving, this is correct. (not even in contention)
That certain fixed cognitive and behavioral traits in our species were shaped by a previous "environment of evolutionary adaptiveness," (EEA) ca the Pleistocene, has a lot of good studies backing it up. We are not bacteria; we have long generation times and can't make huge steps in biological evolution that quickly. It makes sense that we have fears of spiders and snakes in higher proportion than fears of cars because the latter was not in our previous EEA.

On the other hand, where our behaviors are more plastic enable a rate of cultural evolution is astoundingly fast, and getting faster everyday: selfish meme vs. selfish gene. Case in point, the very ideas we are tossing back and forth right now.

...but I digress...



The difference is that if you say that you're not from this planet, people assume you're using it as a metaphor. Maybe someone out there might actually think you're from another planet, but the majority of people will assume you are not literally the first ever extra terrestrial in contact with humankind. In the case of the Neanderthal claim, this is not so. The majority of people on this earth actually are part Neanderthal. If you call yourself that, its not clear to everyone that you mean it metaphorically. You risk leading other people looking for real answers down an erroneous rabbit hole. You can feel however you feel about it, but feelings don't change the science that is being ignored on the matter.



Yes, I agree that people on the spectrum are different. But felling like you do or don't "belong" among Neanderthals is just that, it's a feeling-based argument. Science is telling you that being on the spectrum would not make you "belong" among actual Neanderthals.

I mean, let's face it, people like us aren't going to perfectly belong anywhere. rather than coming up with some excuse, let's just be unappollagetic about it. You know what though? It just makes us all even more unique, and I kind of like that. I don't think I'd want it any other way, given the choice (though being able to handle loud things would be great).


I like these associations a lot actually. I've always been a fan of pixies myself.


HAHA! I guess I did kind of commandeer this thread didn't I? It wasn't my intention. I just like to drop hard data into conversations that have somewhat popular but shaky givens.

I am with you about the hard data.

I am a botanist/ecologist, but have done molecular systematics and am interested in most areas of science, especially physics, but am weak on the math and feel guilty about it.

I am current using a Raspberry Pi to access the internet to write this.

I never thought anyone took the Neanderthal seriously until I had someone ask my why, so you raise a good point.

I knew that some of the racist s**theads were using it as propaganda, but didn't realise it was such a big deal.

As far as the rates of ADHD and Autism in Africa, I would guess that Europeans have dispersed their genes all across the planet to the point that there are no phenotypically pure local populations left, so that might be a confounding factor. It might be better to use archaic DNA from arch sites.

You can be a pixie and I will be a troll

The original Neanderthal hypothesis, as far as I understand, attempted to explain various "Aspie"-style aspects of neurodiverse behaviour. These have now have been lumped under the generalized ASD diagnosis. It is possible that certain traits typical of Aspies have a different genetic origin than those leading to (more severe) autism. In other words, Aspie-type traits could be of Neanderthal origin but autistic traits might not. There is insufficient data to decide.

Evidence for #2 is not very strong due to lack of studies. Again, insufficient data.

A part of the issue is really at the heart of this discussion: very often aspies/autistic people appear to have traits that have nothing to do with the diagnostic criteria, which focus on dysfunctions and disorders. Examples: higher sensitivity to external disturbances/stimuli (I usually get work done only when I am in total peace, e.g. at night), ability to walk behind NT people without them noticing (I have often been accused of creeping and scaring people), etc.

It may be that these traits have nothing to do with Neanderthals. However, I believe there are some traits that really do appear to cluster together and these would deserve further study why they do. It is highly likely that the idea advanced by rdos is not entirely correct but I believe he has found something that is worth looking into.

Don't forget "Otherkin", and "Indigo Children"( or "crystal children" now) .


Posters on WP have seriously stated that aspies/auties must be "otherkin", or are "indigo children".

I prefer the theory that autism is the result of post war CIA experiments to cross humans with bottlenosed dolphins. If you're an aspie then you must have some of flipper's DNA. And who doesnt love flipper? Trouble is that I cant seem to find the blow hole in the top of my head.

This theory stands on the results of a self-reported online quiz. It's not very convincing.

I wish I could hold my breath like a dolphin!! ! I am limited to just few minutes right now.

I remember my mother reading a book about the indigo children, but somehow she never bothered to have me tested or anything.