PaulB wrote:
I know that this is heretical around here, but I've always believed that Asperger's is not genetic. Like cancer, I think that there is a genetic predisposition that can be passed on, but I do not think that Asperger's itself is inherited. That's why it shows up in families, but skips many generations sometimes. I think that ultimately it is conditions in the womb that determine if a person has Asperger's or not. If Asperger's were truly genetic, then couplings of two people with Asperger's would end up with Asperger's children because of the recessive genetics. But many times the coupling comes up with NT children, which should not be the case. Just something to think about.
PaulB, mate, you seem to have things mixed up. If autism is recessive gene(s), just because 2 Aspergers parents have children, does not guarantee Aspergers children. That's not how recessive genes work. Its simply more likely that they will be, and that's a proven statistic. If there is an autistic parent, the probability is higher that there will be an autistic child. If a child is autistic, then the siblings have a higher probability of also having autism. The point you're trying to prove, I think, is that its not always ENTIRELY genetic. I think, it can be though, but its generally not.
04 Oct 2005, 10:03 am
