Board index › General Discussion › General Autism Discussion

My craziest idea yet: female hormone supplements

Page 3 of 4 [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

nessa238
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,908
Location: UK

26 Feb 2013, 8:50 pm

Verdandi wrote:
Thank you for that study - I was unaware of it, but it is interesting. I think I was misunderstood, however:

DerStadtShutz seemed to be talking about the notion that environmental estrogen (caused by birth control pill usage, etc) is feminizing men and causing sterility. I asked for a citation of this particular claim, and compared it to the notion that vaccines cause autism, which has not been validated to my knowledge.


I think vaccines can cause brain damage though:-

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases ... 99503.html

"There are currently over 5,000 vaccine court cases pending that claim autism as a result of vaccine injury. To date, with the exception of the concession of Hannah Poling 's case, none of these claims have been successful. "The NVICP appears to favor cases without any reference to autism," Fournier added. "The message is clear, if you want to receive financial support for the long-term medical care of your loved one injured by vaccines, submit a claim for brain damage, or residual seizure disorder – but leave autism out of it." "

They'll accept a brain damage claim, just not specifically autism - this will be because autism is still too much of an unknown quantity for anything to be certain re cause or even if two autistic people have the same condition and they don't want every child who has gone through a vaccination programme who also happens to have autism to put in a claim! Unsurprisingly!

I got the above info via this link:-

http://www.foodsmatter.com/asd_autism/a ... mr_oc.html

Which has this bombshell!:-

"Dr Ellen Grant – Mitochondrial dysfunction in pill mothers and ASD

Dr Ellen Grant, a founder member of the BSEM and a long time campaigner against the contraceptive pill gave an impassioned talk linking the use of the contraceptive pill and the resulting progesterone dominance and endocrine disruption to the massive rise in autism and related conditions – up between 1987 and 1998, in California, by 300% in comparison to rises of around 3% in cerebral palsy, epilepsy and mental retardation during the same period. Today an estimated 25% of children need ‘special needs treatment’ while one in 64 has autistic spectrum disorders.

In 1972 only 10% of single women were using oral contraceptives before their first pregnancy but by 1981 that figure had risen to 95%. Progestins act like progesterones leading to mitochondrial damage in women; ASD is a mitochondrial gene dysfunction.
Since children inherit their maternal DNA, hormonal disruption and mitochondrial gene dysfunction caused by oral contraceptives can be transferred to the child.

Over the subsequent 20 years, the rising rate of autism was matched by the rising rate of breast cancer in younger women and the rate of lung cancer in older women taking HRT. In each case, excessive progesterone was implicated.

For children born through IVF treatment the situation is made worse as the mothers are given added progesterone both to prevent miscarriage and to control labour.

For a more detailed exposition of Dr Grant’s ideas, see her website at www.harmfromhormones.co.uk"

It certainly makes you think!



DerStadtschutz
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2011
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,467

26 Feb 2013, 8:53 pm

First of all, just because I don't have a link to a study doesn't mean it's not true. Secondly, this is hardly "conspiracy theorizing" or "panic mongering." I never said there was a conspiracy to turn men into vaginas, but because nobody's doing that on purpose doesn't mean it isn't happening.

http://www.bagitmovie.com/

Also, just because something is found on the internet, that doesn't mean it's true, so even if I did have a link, how would you determine whether or not a study was even done and the link I gave you wasn't pure bs anyway? I must just be weird around here because I seem to be the only one who doesn't have his bookmarks full of links to "studies."

Also, wtf is "environmental" estrogen? And what, stuff that's in our water supply or part of the "environment," which includes EVERYTHING, by the way, because EARTH is the environment, doesn't affect us now?

I think it's also very important to note that at the time in which galileo proposed the earth revolved around the sun, he'd be hard pressed to find literature on the subject. Why? Because it wasn't a widely accepted view at the time. You seem to be operating on the assumption that if something is bad, we'd have heard about it being bad... yet look at how long it took for the government and tobacco companies to finally admit tobacco is bad for you. If you can acknowledge those two things, then surely you can see how there might be some validity to what I'm saying whether I have links to studies or discussions about it or not.

And despite what all our plastic trash does to us or our environment, bottled water is a HUGE f*****g racket anyway. They take water away from community water supplies(yes, they take water from the same places people get their tap water), bottle it, and then sell it back to the people whose water they essentially stole for like hundreds of times more than it would cost had you just gotten it from your tap.



nessa238
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,908
Location: UK

26 Feb 2013, 8:58 pm

DerStadtschutz wrote:
First of all, just because I don't have a link to a study doesn't mean it's not true. Secondly, this is hardly "conspiracy theorizing" or "panic mongering." I never said there was a conspiracy to turn men into vaginas, but because nobody's doing that on purpose doesn't mean it isn't happening.

http://www.bagitmovie.com/

Also, just because something is found on the internet, that doesn't mean it's true, so even if I did have a link, how would you determine whether or not a study was even done and the link I gave you wasn't pure bs anyway? I must just be weird around here because I seem to be the only one who doesn't have his bookmarks full of links to "studies."

Also, wtf is "environmental" estrogen? And what, stuff that's in our water supply or part of the "environment," which includes EVERYTHING, by the way, because EARTH is the environment, doesn't affect us now?

I think it's also very important to note that at the time in which galileo proposed the earth revolved around the sun, he'd be hard pressed to find literature on the subject. Why? Because it wasn't a widely accepted view at the time. You seem to be operating on the assumption that if something is bad, we'd have heard about it being bad... yet look at how long it took for the government and tobacco companies to finally admit tobacco is bad for you. If you can acknowledge those two things, then surely you can see how there might be some validity to what I'm saying whether I have links to studies or discussions about it or not.


There is another explanation for high rates of infertility - population self-regulation.



Nonperson
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,258

26 Feb 2013, 11:21 pm

I have plenty of female hormones...

The "extreme male brain" theory has been debunked. If I recall correctly, there was a study showing both male and female aspies had more androgynous brains (someone still have the link?)

No offense, but you seem really obsessed with finding a cure and might be better served by learning to live the best life you can the way you are. I'm not saying I know the secret to doing that, either, but the chances of a cure are slim to none and anything presented as one could easily do more harm than good.



Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

26 Feb 2013, 11:37 pm

Nonperson wrote:
I have plenty of female hormones...

The "extreme male brain" theory has been debunked. If I recall correctly, there was a study showing both male and female aspies had more androgynous brains (someone still have the link?)

No offense, but you seem really obsessed with finding a cure and might be better served by learning to live the best life you can the way you are. I'm not saying I know the secret to doing that, either, but the chances of a cure are slim to none and anything presented as one could easily do more harm than good.


1. I think you're right.

2. I don't need to be lectured on how I live my life. My actual life off Wrong Planet is full of realistic and workable steps towards positive improvement that don't involve "cures."

I actually believe there is currently a viable cure for autism. I know what it is, but I cannot currently afford it, or set aside time for it, so I'm more-or-less doing what you suggest: figuring out ways to live a good life now, through little things like diet, therapy, activities, and other things that probably will not include female hormones. :lol: Perhaps in 2-3 years when I have money and fewer immediate obligations, I can undertake the long-term solution.

It's likely the information about this "cure" will go mainstream within the next year when the results of a clinical study being undertaken in Sacramento are published.



Verdandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,275
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)

27 Feb 2013, 12:00 am

DerStadtschutz wrote:
First of all, just because I don't have a link to a study doesn't mean it's not true. Secondly, this is hardly "conspiracy theorizing" or "panic mongering." I never said there was a conspiracy to turn men into vaginas, but because nobody's doing that on purpose doesn't mean it isn't happening.


You know, I didn't say that it's not happening because you do not have a link to a study.

I said I do not believe it is happening because I have repeatedly researched this topic and found literally nothing to validate it. Everything I can find is either on alternative medicine sites or someplace like "beyond top secret" which is to say it's full of conspiracy theories. That film doesn't have any proof, but proposes that it might be causing such problems.

However, my request was not hostile, and if you actually had something to offer I would indeed have read it and possibly changed my views. As it is, you became defensive and linked a documentary that only has opinions based on a few empirical bits.

Quote:
Also, just because something is found on the internet, that doesn't mean it's true, so even if I did have a link, how would you determine whether or not a study was even done and the link I gave you wasn't pure bs anyway? I must just be weird around here because I seem to be the only one who doesn't have his bookmarks full of links to "studies."


A lot of information on the internet is true, and a lot is false. This can often be determined by such factors as who is providing the information and whether it can be verified elsewhere. If you find something on pubmed, odds are good that it has a much stronger empirical backing than something found on a site known for promoting quackery (I can't think of any offhand, but they do exist).

Quote:
Also, wtf is "environmental" estrogen? And what, stuff that's in our water supply or part of the "environment," which includes EVERYTHING, by the way, because EARTH is the environment, doesn't affect us now?


This has literally nothing to do with my question.

Quote:
I think it's also very important to note that at the time in which galileo proposed the earth revolved around the sun, he'd be hard pressed to find literature on the subject. Why? Because it wasn't a widely accepted view at the time. You seem to be operating on the assumption that if something is bad, we'd have heard about it being bad... yet look at how long it took for the government and tobacco companies to finally admit tobacco is bad for you. If you can acknowledge those two things, then surely you can see how there might be some validity to what I'm saying whether I have links to studies or discussions about it or not.


Galileo in fact did not have convincing evidence for his claim, and this was reflected in his behavior in trying to get others to accept his ideas, and likely contributed to his troubles. Pointing him out is kind of irrelevant, though. I mean cherry picking him because his unsubstantiated guesswork turned out to be true is probably meaningful, but what about all of the scientists and researchers who made bold claims that turned out to be false? Why is this matter comparable to Galileo and not to Pons & Fleischmann?

I am not operating on the assumption that if something is bad we'd have heard about it being bad. If I operated on such an assumption, I wouldn't even attempt to research such claims because I'd already have my answer. I operate on the assumption that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. No evidence, then the claim is not yet demonstrated to be true.

However, I do not believe claims that something is really bad and causes real problems just because someone says it is so. I also do not believe claims that something is perfectly harmless just because someone says it is so. I am skeptical, and given your response, my skepticism on this particular thing remains unabated.

I do not doubt that plastics are not good for the environment, and I have done enough research on plastics to know it is not perfectly safe, and can be quite harmful. However, whether it is harmful in the manner you propose is something that does not appear to be established in any kind of empirical fashion, and I am not likely to accept that it is until such time as there is evidence.

For comparison to this discussion with you, Tyri0n hinted at a possible cure being researched in Sacramento, and it took me less than ten seconds to find something that could match what he was referring to. If I argued and thought and functioned the way you seem to think, I would have simply told Tyri0n that there's no evidence of any kind of potential cure.



Last edited by Verdandi on 27 Feb 2013, 12:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

Verdandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,275
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)

27 Feb 2013, 12:03 am

Tyri0n wrote:
It's likely the information about this "cure" will go mainstream within the next year when the results of a clinical study being undertaken in Sacramento are published.


Is this the use of umbilical cord blood stem cells? Involving a Dr. Michael Chez?



Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

27 Feb 2013, 12:22 am

Verdandi wrote:
Tyri0n wrote:
It's likely the information about this "cure" will go mainstream within the next year when the results of a clinical study being undertaken in Sacramento are published.


Is this the use of umbilical cord blood stem cells? Involving a Dr. Michael Chez?


Yes. Similar methods have been successful overseas on a smaller scale, so I'm pretty confident it will work here too. I think one of these cases (involving NVLD) is due to be published soon as well. BUT this may only a viable treatment for certain cases of autism.



Last edited by Tyri0n on 27 Feb 2013, 12:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

Verdandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,275
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)

27 Feb 2013, 12:24 am

Tyri0n wrote:
Verdandi wrote:
Tyri0n wrote:
It's likely the information about this "cure" will go mainstream within the next year when the results of a clinical study being undertaken in Sacramento are published.


Is this the use of umbilical cord blood stem cells? Involving a Dr. Michael Chez?


Yes. Similar methods have been successful overseas on a smaller scale, so I'm pretty confident it will work here too. I think one of these cases (involving NVLD) is due to be published soon as well.


This is quite interesting. I'll keep my eye on it, or at least try to remember to do so.



Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

27 Feb 2013, 12:31 am

Verdandi wrote:
Tyri0n wrote:
Verdandi wrote:
Tyri0n wrote:
It's likely the information about this "cure" will go mainstream within the next year when the results of a clinical study being undertaken in Sacramento are published.


Is this the use of umbilical cord blood stem cells? Involving a Dr. Michael Chez?


Yes. Similar methods have been successful overseas on a smaller scale, so I'm pretty confident it will work here too. I think one of these cases (involving NVLD) is due to be published soon as well.


This is quite interesting. I'll keep my eye on it, or at least try to remember to do so.


There's an interesting book on the theory behind it. I haven't had a chance to read it yet, however, though I saw it at my school library, so it's on my to-do list:

http://www.amazon.com/Infectious-Behavi ... ors+autism

This all hits close to home, especially the possible connections to food allergies.



nessa238
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,908
Location: UK

27 Feb 2013, 6:58 am

Why, when I've posted evidence for a convincing link between sex hormones and autism, does everyone ignore it?

Is it that it's me posting it or is it just not interesting information?

there's definitely a link between autism and the sex hormones not working properly/not being produced in the right quantities in my opinion

I sometimes feel I dont' think about things in a sufficiently mainstream way for people to relate

It's all there though ie the connection between genes linked to autism and those for production and regulation of hormones like progesterone

it would tie in with the suggested increased likelihood of people having variant sexuality/transgender too

Sex hormones and autism are definitely linked in my opinion so experimenting with them would be a logical way of testing out the theory

Progesterone has worked very well for me

Males should test themselves with the male equivalent

But more generally I get sick of my opinions being ignored or overlooked on this board

I'm as intelligent as anyone on here, possibly more so and I resent being cut out of things when I am contributing relevant stuff to the conversation

it's all more about who you are than what you've got to say on here as with most discussion boards though



Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

27 Feb 2013, 9:47 am

nessa238 wrote:
Why, when I've posted evidence for a convincing link between sex hormones and autism, does everyone ignore it?

Is it that it's me posting it or is it just not interesting information?

there's definitely a link between autism and the sex hormones not working properly/not being produced in the right quantities in my opinion

I sometimes feel I dont' think about things in a sufficiently mainstream way for people to relate

It's all there though ie the connection between genes linked to autism and those for production and regulation of hormones like progesterone

it would tie in with the suggested increased likelihood of people having variant sexuality/transgender too

Sex hormones and autism are definitely linked in my opinion so experimenting with them would be a logical way of testing out the theory

Progesterone has worked very well for me

Males should test themselves with the male equivalent

But more generally I get sick of my opinions being ignored or overlooked on this board

I'm as intelligent as anyone on here, possibly more so and I resent being cut out of things when I am contributing relevant stuff to the conversation

it's all more about who you are than what you've got to say on here as with most discussion boards though


I didn't ignore it. The main reason I made this thread is to test these ideas. Thank you very much for your contributions. :)



nessa238
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,908
Location: UK

27 Feb 2013, 12:45 pm

Tyri0n wrote:
nessa238 wrote:
Why, when I've posted evidence for a convincing link between sex hormones and autism, does everyone ignore it?

Is it that it's me posting it or is it just not interesting information?

there's definitely a link between autism and the sex hormones not working properly/not being produced in the right quantities in my opinion

I sometimes feel I dont' think about things in a sufficiently mainstream way for people to relate

It's all there though ie the connection between genes linked to autism and those for production and regulation of hormones like progesterone

it would tie in with the suggested increased likelihood of people having variant sexuality/transgender too

Sex hormones and autism are definitely linked in my opinion so experimenting with them would be a logical way of testing out the theory

Progesterone has worked very well for me

Males should test themselves with the male equivalent

But more generally I get sick of my opinions being ignored or overlooked on this board

I'm as intelligent as anyone on here, possibly more so and I resent being cut out of things when I am contributing relevant stuff to the conversation

it's all more about who you are than what you've got to say on here as with most discussion boards though


I didn't ignore it. The main reason I made this thread is to test these ideas. Thank you very much for your contributions. :)


Ok, I just often feel overlooked



Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

27 Feb 2013, 12:49 pm

nessa238 wrote:
Tyri0n wrote:
nessa238 wrote:
Why, when I've posted evidence for a convincing link between sex hormones and autism, does everyone ignore it?

Is it that it's me posting it or is it just not interesting information?

there's definitely a link between autism and the sex hormones not working properly/not being produced in the right quantities in my opinion

I sometimes feel I dont' think about things in a sufficiently mainstream way for people to relate

It's all there though ie the connection between genes linked to autism and those for production and regulation of hormones like progesterone

it would tie in with the suggested increased likelihood of people having variant sexuality/transgender too

Sex hormones and autism are definitely linked in my opinion so experimenting with them would be a logical way of testing out the theory

Progesterone has worked very well for me

Males should test themselves with the male equivalent

But more generally I get sick of my opinions being ignored or overlooked on this board

I'm as intelligent as anyone on here, possibly more so and I resent being cut out of things when I am contributing relevant stuff to the conversation

it's all more about who you are than what you've got to say on here as with most discussion boards though


I didn't ignore it. The main reason I made this thread is to test these ideas. Thank you very much for your contributions. :)


Ok, I just often feel overlooked


Sorry :) :) :) :)



nessa238
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,908
Location: UK

27 Feb 2013, 12:57 pm

Tyri0n wrote:
nessa238 wrote:
Tyri0n wrote:
nessa238 wrote:
Why, when I've posted evidence for a convincing link between sex hormones and autism, does everyone ignore it?

Is it that it's me posting it or is it just not interesting information?

there's definitely a link between autism and the sex hormones not working properly/not being produced in the right quantities in my opinion

I sometimes feel I dont' think about things in a sufficiently mainstream way for people to relate

It's all there though ie the connection between genes linked to autism and those for production and regulation of hormones like progesterone

it would tie in with the suggested increased likelihood of people having variant sexuality/transgender too

Sex hormones and autism are definitely linked in my opinion so experimenting with them would be a logical way of testing out the theory

Progesterone has worked very well for me

Males should test themselves with the male equivalent

But more generally I get sick of my opinions being ignored or overlooked on this board

I'm as intelligent as anyone on here, possibly more so and I resent being cut out of things when I am contributing relevant stuff to the conversation

it's all more about who you are than what you've got to say on here as with most discussion boards though


I didn't ignore it. The main reason I made this thread is to test these ideas. Thank you very much for your contributions. :)


Ok, I just often feel overlooked


Sorry :) :) :) :)


It's ok :)

I seem to see my posts like a school essay that I want a gold star for lol



Tyri0n
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,879
Location: Douchebag Capital of the World (aka Washington D.C.)

27 Feb 2013, 1:02 pm

nessa238 wrote:
Verdandi wrote:
DerStadtschutz wrote:
Wow, what a TERRIBLE idea. There's already evidence that males are getting way too much estrogen already, simply because it's in the water supply thanks to birth control, and it's actually causing some males to be born sterile. We are already way over feminized. The last thing we need is to be taking female hormones... Are you insane?


Citation needed. I've researched this several times and it seems about as credible as vaccines causing autism.


https://gene.sfari.org/GeneDetail/CYP11B1

"Genetic association has been found between the CYP11B1 gene and both autism and Asperger syndrome (Chakrabarti et al., 2009).

This gene encodes a member of the cytochrome P450 superfamily of enzymes participating in the conversion of progesterone to cortisol in the adrenal cortex."

https://imfar.confex.com/imfar/2009/web ... r5033.html

Background:
Although epidemiologists and toxicologists have started to investigate several chemicals as potential autism risk factors, it is still unclear what chemicals should be studied in this regard. A more objective and comprehensive approach to screening and prioritizing chemicals would be useful in designing future studies. This work should be informed by the most recent findings in the genetics of autism.
Objectives:
This analysis was an effort to find and demonstrate a way to cast a relatively wide net to identify chemicals that might merit further investigation as potential risk factors in autism, drawing upon the full range of genetic findings and a wide range of literature on gene-chemical interactions.
Methods:
The Comparative Toxicogenomics Database (CTD, http://ctd.mdibl.org) and AutDB (http://www.mindspec.org) were selected as relatively comprehensive, powerful tools for this type of analysis. The AutDB was used to identify 142 genes (as of late 2008) studied in autism, of which 122 genes were found to have reported chemical interaction data in the CTD. These interactions often consist of observed changes in gene expression in rodents exposed to various levels of the studied chemical substance. The chemical-gene interactions, GO terms, and pathways associated with these genes in the CTD were analyzed, and chemicals were manually classified as xenobiotics, medications, nutrients, and endogenous substances. Chemicals were prioritized based on number of reported interactions.
Results:
The genes MET, PTEN, ADRB2, and TH each had more than 30 interacting chemicals identified in the CTD, and 120 chemicals were reported to interact with PON1. Other genes, such as MECP2, TSC2, RELN, UBE3A, and GABRB3, showed interaction reports for only 4-14 chemicals each in the CTD. For many genes, such as EN2, SHANK3, FMR1, NLGN3, and NRXN1, the CTD contains interaction reports for only 1-2 chemicals so far.
Over 600 chemical substances were identified as interacting with any of the 122 autism candidate genes, of which 498 had unique CAS numbers.
Xenobiotics (or closely related substances) identified as interacting with autism candidate genes included the following (# of genes in parentheses): Carbon Tetrachloride (33), tert-Butylhydroperoxide (19), sodium arsenite (17), Lipopolysaccharides (11), Paraquat (10), nickel sulfate (9), Hydrogen Peroxide (9), arsenic trioxide (8), Benzene (7), Benzo(a)pyrene (7), Ethanol (7), Tobacco Smoke Pollution (4), Arsenic (4), Chlorpyrifos (4), Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (4), and bisphenol A (4). Other chemicals previously implicated in autism or related conditions are also identified by this analysis, such as mercury compounds, lead, cocaine, fipronil, endosulfan, and phthalates.
Top substances related to dietary nutrients: Pirinixic acid (27 genes), Zinc, Resveratrol, Flavonoids, and Dietary Fats.
Top medications: Acetaminophen (49 genes), Tamoxifen, Diethylstilbestrol, Valproic Acid, and Celecoxib.
Top endogenous (or closely related) substances interacting with numerous autism candidate genes: Progesterone (37 genes), Estradiol, Ethinyl Estradiol, Corticosterone, and Thyroxine.
Conclusions:
As bioinformatics databases grow, they can inform prioritization of candidate environmental risk factors.


I'm curious as to whether taking any of those hormones would be useful for a man. I don't exactly want to lose muscle tone or look like a woman, but being more sensitive to social situations would be nice.