what do u think CAUSES autism

Post Reply New Topic

Have read that before. That seems to be the proximate cause of autism. Our synapses dont get pruned so our brains get cluttered like toys in the attic.

But what is it that causes that?

I personally think it's deeply psychological. Everyone is born with a different personality, most of which are considered "normal", depending on how you define "normal". So that would explain why it appears so early in development while at the same time explaining why it continues throughout life. It also explains why some people improve and others don't, and why some people have severe autism and others have high-functioning autism.

I suppose you could call it genetic then, since our personalities are inherent. It's up to how you use the word "genetic".

"Clues to what caused the pruning defect were also found in the patients’ brains; the autistic children’s brain cells were filled with old and damaged parts and were very deficient in a degradation pathway known as “autophagy.” Cells use autophagy (a term from the Greek for self-eating) to degrade their own components".

“What’s remarkable about the findings,” said Dr. Sulzer, “is that hundreds of genes have been linked to autism, but almost all of our human subjects had overactive mTOR and decreased autophagy, and all appear to have a lack of normal synaptic pruning. This says that many, perhaps the majority, of genes may converge onto this mTOR/autophagy pathway, the same way that many tributaries all lead into the Mississippi River. Overactive mTOR and reduced autophagy, by blocking normal synaptic pruning that may underlie learning appropriate behavior, may be a unifying feature of autism.”
http://newsroom.cumc.columbia.edu/blog/2014/08/21/children-autism-extra-synapses-brain/

I have read this before too, and believe it to be true, but still, it's the problem, and not the cause. Futhermore, your brain is constantly breaking synapses with age, and it can make new connections. There is also the question of how much you can handle, and why some can handle more than others. Perhaps, and I say just perhaps a "normal" brain knows how much it can handle, and regulates accordingly. So a very intelligent person can seem just as "normal" as a really... Lets say, less intelligent one.

I would also like to add that as far as I know, fasting is the only way for your body to expel, or actually eat deteriorated cells. Anything in your body that does not work right, or does not belong there goes first, before starvation. Your body knows what to do. Almost no one in modern times does this, and modern medicine does not recommend it, as far as I have ever known.

http://www.dos-and-donts-autism.com/autism-causes.html
I just wrote this article on the causes of autism. Interested to hear people's thoughts on it.

Genetics

Did you read the article?

No my bad. Let me properly scour the thread. I just gave my answer without reading anything

No worries darling!
I'm the queen of not thinking before responding, only for me the thought process usually comes about 48 hours later..

It's my area of study so VERY interested in reactions to my article:
http://www.dos-and-donts-autism.com/autism-causes.html

Cute kitties!

Cats (and pets) are good therapy and a lifeline for people with ASDs.

Being stunningly attractive, highly intelligent, and incredibly talented!

Hey, if the NTs can come up with their own stupid theories, so can we.

> What Do U Think CAUSES Autism

Well that's certainly what caused mine. (I'm not so sure about everybody else's...)

I read your article.

I would agree that some aspects are environmental but not quite in the sense I understand from your article, e.g: That a genetic disposition is exaggerated by environmental factors and environmental trauma.

Rather isn't it the case that in the right environment with the right support and accommodations autism could affect an individual very differently than it might in an environment lacking in support and accommodation. HFA appears fairly relative in that sense.

Maybe the conclusion is the same though, emphasis and focus should be put on altering the environment to mitigate any drawbacks of autism and accentuate any benefits.

I certainly agree with you about removing the "d" from asd.

Ha ha ha

Wow that's so cool that you are this passionate about it. This whole website is beautiful and so professional. I'm impressed that you wrote a book given that you work, it looks like, as a full time nanny. I worked as a full time nanny for many years and it didn't leave me much time to even be a student, so my hat is really off to you for tackling such an unwieldy project as writing and publishing a book, and even for the level of professionalism you reached on your website.

I'm going to be honest about your article: I think it needs some work. Here's the thing: it reads like people are already on board with you. What I mean is that you don't lead the reader to understand your point of view by presenting a logically valid argument, you just start right out with assertions that may or may not be true.

For instance, I haven't heard of anyone being called autistic due to having genetic markers for autism. However, your very first sentence is that "we could describe people as autistic ... when they have a genetic predisposition towards autism." I don't think that we could describe people that way, I just don't think that's how it's done. My understanding is that the diagnostic process for autism is about observation and evaluation -- that there are traits with statistical inference to a higher probability of autism, but that prior to rigorous, and lengthy testing and, in fact, prior to a person reaching a particular age (at least here in California) an autism label is withheld.

In another example, the traits you singled out to describe common traits of autism are neither necessary nor sufficient for autism, so that's another point where I don't see your logic and thus don't 'buy in' to your argument. It looks like this is meant to be a persuasive essay so that point of not buying in to me is an important reader experience to reflect back to you. I'm definitely NOT trying to discount your work or intelligence, though. Please know that I don't at all mean to insult or demean you but instead to offer feedback in case it is useful.

I think that for it to be persuasive you need to focus more on stating objective facts that lead to logical conclusions.

That said, I'm autistic, so I read things differently than normal people.

Genetics and natural selection. Until very recently, having hyper sensory awareness would have been a survival advantage for food, shelter, and protection. In many traditional cultures, someone really aware to the point of being nonverbal would have been revered as a shaman and allowed to live alone in a temple.