Are autistics part Neanderthal?

Post Reply New Topic

This is unrelated, but I love your Pierre Josheph Proudhon reference in your signature quote.

thank you

Everybody with any European ancestors is likely to be descended from Neaderthals.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_2.htm


[/quote]


This is the best post in the entire thread. I always learn so much from your comments. I did not know cromagnons had bigger brains than Neanderthals. That's a major blow to the theory I'm promoting.


And I did however know that brain size shrunk with the advent of agriculture. It makes sense that as humans became more gracile, less brain mass was needed to control a smaller body. The real question is whether brain mass shrunk relative to body mass because if it did it suggests a loss of intelligence which would make sense because with agriculture you have so much food, that even less intelligent people can survive.

On the other hand, the quality of the food agriculture brings is inferior so brain size might have shrunk because of malnutrition rather than evolution. Over the 20th century we've seen brain size, intelligence and height explode as people get better and better nutrition.

The data linked, shows the population wide genome average to be about 2.5 percent with a range of 1 to 4 percent.

I disagree on any potential final verdict from the limited data, so far, that has been provided by the Neanderthal genome study and the neanderthal ancestory test that you link to.

There are forums where people list their actual results; they vary as one would expect a bell curve to vary. Most all of the reports are between 2.2 and 2.8. 3.1 is considered at the 98th percentile.

It's interesting, as some on those forums suggest that their body build is a result of scoring 3.0 as opposed to 2.5.

The link you presented provides a racial/geographical graph that is of some significance of how race and geography affects this number.

It presents evidence that the number is lower in African Americans, as one might generally expect if the current admixture theory is correct as compared to Europeans at the highest rate.

However as stated, and evidenced earlier, in another post, all human beings have mixed with each other, so one wouldn't expect a zero percent result from many humans.

If geography and race makes a difference in neanderthal ancestory, there could be other unknown factors specifically related to autism, in association with race and geography, that have nothing directly to do with neanderthal ancestory.

In general, autism rates increase as one moves away from the equator; this is a significant statistic in both latin american countries and African countries, but no one has a clear answer why.

This kind of thing is almost impossible to sort out when we are talking about a range of 1 to 4 percent of genetic material. One could do a hundred tests between control groups and autistics and come up with heads or tails results leaning below the average or above the average for the two groups, under .05 percent.

For instance, one study with autistics at 2.6 percent and non-autistics at 2.4 percent. The opposite result in another study and so on; normal expected random results between any two select groups in the population.

Even if there was a consistent .05 percent difference attributed to autistics, it would be almost impossible to know whether or not the specific correlating factor of neanderthal ancestory, had anything directly to do with the autism. There are too many unrelated/unknown factors that aren't understood well at this point in time.

The same thing could be expected if one tested a group of indivduals who smoked opposed to those that didn't smoke. It's going to be fairly hard to ensure that there is equal racial and recent geographical immigration influence in any select human group with a disorder or specific behavior in the general population.

As the authors state in the article, although the graph shows a higher association between European Neanderthal ancestory than East Asian/South Asia Neanderthal ancestory, they aren't certain that those results are valid.

As limited as the current data is, one would probably be as likely to link an association between smoking and neanderthal ancestory, using a three percent range of DNA shared by the general population.

To go one step further, say the results show that overall, Autistic individuals score .05 percent lower than non-autistic individuals.

What if there was a significant DNA variant in the understood 1 to 4 percent genetic material of the neanderthal shared genome, that causes all cases of Autism that hasn't been identified? It could be a rare, less than .01 percent element, of the identified 1 to 4 percent.

In that case, it wouldn't matter if one scored 2.0 or 3.0, if that rare element wasn't included.

And, it's still one that scientists are looking for in 100% of the modern human genome, that doesn't appear to exist.

This makes it almost entirely impossible to ever provide a certain verdict one way or another, in testing the current data, with the link you presented, if Neanderthal ancestory is of specific significance to the condition of autism.

It's a small data set; there is little understood of the specific impacts to modern human beings.

There is an hypothesis of an immune system benefit for the general population.

There are two known modern mutations associated with "normal" archaic Neanderthal DNA, with a 1 in 100 association to Autism: AUTS2 and CADPS2.

These mutations are also loosely associated with alcoholism and mental retardation. However the non-mutated versions of the DNA, are common in the general population. Mutated versions of the similiar archaic DNA, haven't been identified in the Neanderthal genome.

The $99 test provides no details in identifying specific Neanderthal DNA variants, and provides a disclaimer that there is little understanding of the benefits or disadvantages of possessing neanderthal DNA.

Considering what is known at this point of time, I don't see much to be gained by a serious study, other than a potential association, that currently would not be of much more significance than the guy that reported his muscular build was a result of scoring 3.0 as opposed to 2.5.

The evidence so far suggests that some people who are not diagnosed as autistic, do score high on the scale of neanderthal heritage. They appear to be the only ones taking the test and reporting their results.

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/12/the-age-of-neanderthal-personal-genomics-begins.html

And finally per epigenetics, regardless of the presence of DNA, the environmental impact could be the factor in some cases that makes the difference on the expression of the phenotype. That's a relatively new area of study, that scientists are just stepping into, related to autism.

If the cranial capacity of Cro-Magnon man is not relevant, neither is the cranial capacity of modern man, as far as any relationship to autism.

From the available evidence it appears that Cro-magnon Man adapted to the environment with a larger cranial capacity, on average, than either modern man or neanderthals, but Cro-Magnon Man, was also on average, more robust than modern man.

If you can refute evidence that wiki provided, please provided peer reviewed research. There are a great many paleoanthropologists in the world who have different opinions on the subject.

The samples of both neanderthal man and Cro-Magnon man, both obviously, pale in comparison to what we have now with modern man. Per the link I provided, there are selected geographical areas of the world, now, where cranial capacity equals or exceeds that of archaic man.

And, there are measured cranial capacities in modern humans up to 2200cc.

My point is, that the average cranial capacity of Neanderthals is a non-issue with Autism, and abnormal brain growth that is noted in some cases.

Their cranial capacities were a result of the environment they adapted to, as are modern humans, as they exist in different areas of the world.

Actually, I would expect it to be zero percent in indigenous populations in Central and South Africa. In Morocco and Egypt, the percentage should be relatively high, comparable to Eurasian Neanderthal admixture percentages. From there, I'd expect to find a gradual decline towards the central continent.

I mean, the sickle-cell allele is very rare or absent in most Eurasian countries, and this is basically the reverse case.

With respect to the test which measures how much Neanderthal DNA you have, one could simply go to one of those forums where people post their Neanderthal scores and ask them to take some autism questionnaire. If a few dozen or so people participate, a statistically significant correlation between Neanderthal DNA and autism quotients might emerge. Of course correlation doesn't prove causation, but it would still be a pretty strong bit of evidence.

The research that has been done to date, suggests zero percent in indigenous populations of Sub Saharan Africa. Some articles have generalized the statement to Neanderthal DNA "out of Africa", a much broader expanse of geography, that has resulted in some confusion, and not indicative of the actual research.

Your analysis seems to be in alignment with current research.

Sorry, poor choice of words on my part, instead of "not many", a relatively small percentage, would have been better wording. Indigenous Africans constitute, roughly, about ten percent of the world's population.

It easier to find Indigenous Africans with Autism, than it is to find autistic individuals that report they have taken the available test for Neanderthal DNA.

I've been interested in this topic for months and can remember coming across one autistic person that reported taking the test, but can't find the source again. The results for that one person were unremarkable, if I remember them correctly.

These public forums scattered on the internet, have a handful of general responses; not enough participation for anything of significance to be learned, even if one could talk all of them into participating.

As the test becomes more popular, better sources will likely become available

The best source, at this time, would probably be on the restricted forums, on the actual site that provides the Neanderthal DNA test; not sure though, if the organization would allow it because of privacy concerns or consider it as a valid area of research.

I'm guessing probably not, mostly because of the privacy concerns. All of the members of their forums appear to be paying customers.

If not, it doesn't appear to be a feasible endeavor at this time.

As much as the idea has been kicked around here, and other places on the internet, I'm surprised no one here has reported taking the DNA test. I wouldn't expect many people to spend close to $100 for the test, but at least, maybe, one person.

People are diagnosed with autism in those indigenous areas of Africa, where research suggests there is zero Neanderthal DNA, so there is stronger evidence against an association with Neanderthal DNA as a cause for Autism, than for it, available at this point in time.

There is actually a charitable Center for Autism In Uganda that treats these indigenous children whom have been diagnosed with Autism. It's taken along time to recognize the issue in these indigenous countries in Africa, but it is a reality.

So, here is evidence that Neanderthal DNA is not associated at all, with some cases of autism, if the researchers are indeed correct that Neanderthal DNA does not exist in indigenous Africans.

http://www.komocentre.org/about-us.html

Not yet, because nobody have done a study on autistics, but when that happens, we will have.



That is not the way to do it. The Neanderthal heritage test uses PCA (Principal Components Analysis) over all their SNPs to provide factor loadings to estimate Neanderthal heritage. That means they don't use a few Neanderthal SNPs we know are related to them, but everything that might be. All we need is another (behaviorally based) test that measures neurodiversity traits in the general population, that also uses PCA to score neurodiversity. We have such a test: Aspie Quiz. If you let 100-200 people do both the Neanderthal test and Aspie Quiz, you will have the material needed, and the correlation will be large, not in the range mentioned above. That the figures of Neanderthal heritage is in the range of only a few percent doesn't matter in this regard when you use a large set of SNPs which translates to many sites.



The Neanderthal theory doesn't group people according to "diagnosed" and "not diagnosed", but rather proposes that certain traits involved in ASD are of Neanderthal origin. Therefore, to what extent diagnosed ASD is related to Neanderthal heritage is not a relevant issue. The only relevant issue in that regard is that diagnosed ASD does correlate with Neanderthal heritage to about the same extent it correlates to genetics.

Y'all are talking about 'one'. Who's going to do that? Someone who cares should do that.

Sickle-cell allele carries with it pros and cons. The cons are universal in all locations, the benefit is regional. It is not expected to find this allele in high concentrations in any region where it is only a detriment.

If the correlation between an admixture of Ht dna and a more robust a beneficial Neuro diverse population is true, and has both pros and cons as one would expect, this admixture likely does not have regional biased preference, and should be seen in all populations to some degree. With higher concentrations near the original admixture(s). If however the admixture provided limited benefit or minimal advantage, one would expect to find its expansion from the original admixture to be more gradual and limited, potentially finding populations separated by geography with no trace whatsoever. --- Basically, any gene inherited into the species with dramatic advantage should been seen to fairly rapidly spread, and as the advantage of the gene is less, the rate of its spread will be lessened.

In this case however, we are discussing not just a single gene, but the inheritance of a full set of 23 chromosomes...at least in theory. Attempting to explain how one would expect to see such a complicated inclusion of genetic material spread in the species based on a model of a single gene seems more than slight folly.

These are very different discussions. This is not the reverse case.

The OPs question is fairly easy to answer. Per research, autistics, excluding Subsaharan indigenous Africans, are suggested to share between 1 to 4 percent, neanderthal ancestory; same for smokers, epileptics, and everyone else in the world other than the subsaharan Africans.

Your theory suggests that there is a direct relationship between Neanderthal ancestory and neurodiverse traits.

At this point in time there is no significant association with the neanderthal genome and autism, other than the couple of loose associations between mutations of the normal Auts2 and Cadps2 shared in the general population, that Neanderthals happen to share an archaic version of shared in the general population.

ASD's per clinical diagnosis, have many co-morbids that occur in greater frequency with ASD's, than in the general population, including ADHD, bi-polar disorder, mental retardation, immune system problems, gut problems, the list goes on..; you capture statistics on a few of these co-morbids, in the Aspie Quiz.

Since the Aspie quiz measures traits associated with autism, it also measures co-morbids related to Autism as well, directly or indirectly, that exist at greater frequencies than the general population.

Since there is little known about the benefits or disadvantages of possessing neanderthal dna, if you were to measure a significant correlation between neanderthal ancestory and autistic traits, the actual significance of the neanderthal ancestory could be with any co-morbid associated with autism that occurs in greater frequency than the general population, currently not understood as associated with shared Neanderthal DNA variants.

The research done in Sweden and the US that measured at least one autistic trait out into close to thirty percent of the population, also identified a greater likelyhood among those individuals to develop co-morbid mental health problems, than the general population, in proportion to the number of autistic traits they possess.

The propensity to develop some mental health problems could be associated with Neanderthal DNA rather than autistic traits. No one knows for sure. A loose association with Bi-polar has been suggested, as well as schizophrenia.

It could be a higher level of immune system problems, suggested higher among autistics, that are common to the general population as well, or any other number of co-morbids; again no one knows for sure if any of these co-morbids are related to neanderthal ancestory.

So, since the average is already been identified as 2.5:

Say, you come up with a number of 3.0., which would be pretty amazing considering it's reflective of the 95th percentile of tests administered so far.

What have you associated? Immune system problems are associated with archaic ancestory? Mental Health problems are associated with archaic ancestory? Autistic traits are associated with archaic ancestory? Lung Doublets are associated with archaic ancestory? Etc.?

I think the addition of the question on the neanderthal DNA test to the Aspie Quiz is an excellent addition, because if you do find a significant correlation, like 3.0, to the individuals that score highly on the test, it raises interesting questions.

Unfortunately, it would not provide any definitive evidence of causation between autistic traits and neanderthal ancestory, so it's not a final verdict on your theory, but it's a start that might lead to significant evidence, if not for autistic traits, potentially a co-morbid associated with autistic traits.

The Aspie Quiz provides a wealth of data. You've been seriously working on this project for some time now, and many do appreciate the value of the Aspie Quiz.

Since it is not designed as a diagnostic tool to test for autism, the marketing folks over at the neanderthal ancestory testing organization, might go for it as a novelty, that their customers might be interested in and not take offense to, per suggesting they have a neurological disorder, instead a phenotype potentially associated with neanderthal heritage. I see that in this scenario as a potential advantage over an actual diagnostic tool.

I'm not a marketing expert, but if you know one within your social network, I suggest you contact them, and talk about the potential advantages to the company that sells the test, might gain by offering the aspie quiz in their forums associated with neanderthal ancestory.

With the assistance of a marketing expert, if you word an email to the company in a way where they see an advantage for themselves, and a real interest to their customers, they just might go for the idea.

The data would likely be taken much more seriously, if gathered in a third party restricted environment, that the testing organization provides. It's a great opportunity that I think is worth pursuing.

As long as the users over at the testing organization can maintain their anonymous status, you might provide additional questions tailored to that group, such as questions covering the range of co-morbids understood associated with neurodiverse traits you consider relative, and all other associations, so far, that have been suggested to be related to neanderthal ancestory.

If you think this might be a good idea, I sincerely wish you success, and would be fascinated by the results.

I agree that the sickle-cell gene mutation is only beneficial in regions with malaria risk. The risk of sickle-cell disease is not that high that it would constitute a great reproductive disadvantage in other regions, but I can see that the immunological benefits of the inherited Neanderthal DNA should apply everywhere, so there should be a stronger selection for these traits.

I'm only comparing this insofar that there is limited gene transfer between human populations on different continents, and some indigenous populations have had little to no genetic exchange with the outside world for very long stretches of time. So no matter how beneficial a trait is, it will take a lot more interbreeding to spread it throughout all human populations.

Last edited by CrazyCatLord on 29 Jan 2012, 4:33 pm, edited 3 times in total.

The thing is that almost all human diversity is related to neurodiversity, and if neurodiversity largely relates to Neanderthal ancestry, it means that almost all human diversity can be related to Neanderthal interbreeding. I think that is an attractive option, as human diversity is clearly higher than it is in many other species, and if this is because of hybridization quite recently with a closely related species, it makes sense that humans are more diverse than expected, and it was not some "magic mutation" that caused this.

Because neurodiversity explains over 70% of human diversity, the arguments with co morbidity are really not very interesting. All co morbidity is related to neurodiversity / Neanderthal heritage, which makes it uninteresting which type of co morbidity causes ASDs and other neuropsychiatric conditions. In the end, it is still Neanderthal inheritance. Also, remember, that Aspie Quiz tested 1,500 different traits before settling for the 150 most relevant, and most of these 1,500 traits have at least a weak correlation to neurodiversity.

We are definitely not talking about a single / a few mutations, but the consequences of importing an whole genome. We expect to see traits of all kinds.