Are autistics part Neanderthal?

Post Reply New Topic

That doesn't matter. What I would do is to correlate Aspie scores with Hn ancestry scores, and since there are participants with both high and low scores, I'd get a meaningful correlation once the sample is large enough.

Besides, the way it is setup now, with no links to forums about Neanderthal ancestry, participants that have happened to do the 23andme screening are selected more or less randomly.

The only risk is if people fill-out the field without actually having done the screening, since the sample of participants that did it is only 0.5%.

Regarding the 23andme neanderthal ancestry test, if you haven't taken the test, Slarti hasn't taken the test, and no one on this internet site has ever reported taking the test, 5 responses in a few days is suspicious, on your website. Because of the attention focused on the controversial subject in these threads at this time, that risk is probably significant at this point in time.

Anyone viewing this thread, sympathetic or against your theory, could have easily submitted 4 or 5 responses anonymously, to skew the results one way or another. It appears you encourage multiple anonymous testing, to improve the Aspie quiz on your website. Since you state you don't save IP addresses, there does not appear to be anyway of preventing this type of skew to the results. All it would take is one person doing this several times a week.

3.1 is the highest result submitted on blogs related to the test, I have seen anywhere and I have spent a great deal of time researching the issue out of interest. It is in the 98th percentile. There was a twitter site, dedicated to reporting scores, from customers of the 23andme organization, that has generated 9 responses so far.

http://twitter.com/#!/search/users/%23Iamthe1to4percent

I could see the users but not the results, maybe you have to be a twitter member to view them.

You reported a 3.1 and 3.3 result almost immediately, as your first results, while not out of the realm of possibility, it is in the 98th and 99th percentile of results from 23andme customers that have taken the test. Possible, but not likely that the 3.3 result was a real one.

While there is no harm in the question, if you see a significant drop off in responses after these threads die off, you can be pretty assured that most of what you have gotten so far has been a result of these threads. There wouldn't have been time yet for anyone to actually take the test and get the results, out of interest from viewing this thread.

If you have only got highly likely Aspie responses so far, and no neurotypical responses, that is suspicious as well, since it doesn't appear many people identifying themselves as Aspies have reported results anywhere.

I don't suspect you'll get much more than 1 real response per week, because relative to the general population only a very few have even taken the neanderthal ancestry test.. Out of 1000 aspie quiz results there may be a greater chance of getting a false result than a real result.

From reviewing the profiles of the folks that submitted the twitter results, it appears that most of them were motivated to take the test, in part, because of working in science fields.

Eight out of Nine are in science fields, so one would expect most of them to have at least some neurodiverse traits. However, they all appear to be financially successful adults, so the expense of taking the test is probably not a significant issue for them.

If that twitter thread is still alive, and you are a member of twitter and can see the scores; looking at the occupations and the scores, may be the closest thing you can find to a non-biased correlation.

I wouldn't worry about that. There are two neurotypical answers and two Aspie answers. All except the first Aspie answer was in the average range. One of the answers also comes from another forum that historically has generated many answers, so is not related to this discussion.

Even if one out five responses was a false report it leads to an unreliable result. While you might be able to use eventual substantial results to attempt to motivate a controlled study, this methodology will never be considered as a reliable result, acceptable for evidence of the Neanderthal Theory of Autism, since there is no control of the validity of the responses.

The population that has actually taken the test in the general population, is too low, to expect to gain 200 or 300 hundred unique, real results, in a niche site, such as the Aspie Quiz, in a few months.

It's not likely that more than a thousand people have shelled out the close to $100 for a relatively new test, that provides a similiar result to most of the population, that is of no real known significance, other than a fad, at this point in time.

Since the test is relatively new, in a year or so, the potential sample for results may eventually allow you to gain the substantial number of responses you are looking for.

Again, there is nothing to lose by doing it. And if nothing else, it is an interesting endeavor.

This does not stand up to reason.

That's akin to saying;

If a person's ancestry makes them autistic, then every single person with an ancestry would have autism. (Same error of logic)

Neanderthal ancestry could be the culprit for autism without that meaning everyone with neanderthal ancestry would have to be autistic. Basically, while it seems everyone has 1-4% neanderthal DNA, that doesn't mean they all have the SAME 1-4% DNA...

My inheritance down the line of NT DNA could be completely and totally different than yours, and we could have the same % of Neanderthal genes.


Clear thought people, clear thought...

some odd facts:


yoruba and san people from africa have no neanderthal genes.

yoruba's level-tone language has only 3 pitch levels.

absolute pitch is very common among autistics.

neanderthals had the foxp2 gene.

neanderthals had a hyoid bone.

absolute pitch is more common among speakers of tonal languages like chinese min nan and other eastern languages.

china and europe by and large have different neandertal-derived haplotypes.

hikikomori is very common in japan.



what could it all mean?

Yes,that is a problem. The best approach would to post Aspie Quiz to some forum discussing their test, and only use those results, as this would have lower risk of manipulation.



It all depends on what the correlation is. If the correlation is reasonably high, like 0.5 to 0.6, then a relatively small sample would do, and false results would not be a major issue. OTOH, if the correlation is in the same interval as for physical traits, a huge sample is needed, and false results would be a major factor making the result unreliable.

One problematic finding in autism research is that CNVs seems to be far more important to autism than gene mutations, and the 23andme measures mutations, not CNVs, which could mean the correlation is relatively small even if Autism is related to Neanderthal. But we don't know that until it has been researched and there is a preliminary result.

Yes, that is quite likely so. I have concluded this from Aspie Quiz results by using a very large sample. There are differences in both explained variance of the primary factors, and also differences in factor loading on items. That means it is not exactly the same traits that build-up the Asian neurodiversity phenotype as the European. Since research has also concluded that modern humans actually interbreed with archaic forms in Africa as well, it is quite possible there exists another type of neurodiversity in Africa that we don't recognize as our typical neurodiversity phenotype. These issues needs more research. Somebody from East Asia should actually compile a neurodiversity-test based on personal experience, and input from Asians. This would probably result in slightly different items compared to Aspie Quiz which was created by using input mostly from European neurodiversity.

the source of my statement was this interesting article from last year:

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/nea ... -2011.html

Interesting. John Hawks has been on the right track for quite some time now.

It doen't matter that some responses are false. Anyway, most the the questions of the aspie quiz are party subjective, so from the very beginning, it doen't make sense to attend a 100% error proff approach (as if such a thing was possible anyway) the right approach to deal with genetics and psychobiology is to use probability, a set of hints can lead to a high probability of something. To many great ideas have been dismissed for the reason that there were not 100% based on hard evidence.

Autistics are not part neanderthal. If you really believe that you are probably prejudice against autistics.

This is just another theory to make people who are not autistic look superior.

In a few months I'll have the proof. (0.5 correlation right now on the 23andme, so a relatively small sample will do)

And neurodiversity is the only reason why we have human variation to any great extent, and the driving force behind civilization. Without it, we would have remained at the stone age forever. That's not exactly inferior traits.

There is already proof that autistics share the neanderthal DNA like everyone else that is not an indigenous African.

And, it is reasonable, to suggest that the admixture between neanderthals and humans may of had some type of impact on neurodiversity. However, it's only a tiny piece of the pie of what it means to be human and what it means to be neurodiverse.

There is likely influence from other archaic influences beyond denosivans and neanderthals, that have yet to be measured beyond that of the potential influence from another archaic ancestor in Africa, that you mentioned earlier.

Neurodiversity, from the perspective of neurological differences that impact behavior in varied ways, is evident throughout the animal kingdom.

So, it is likely that all of our ancestors were neurodiverse, potentially in similiar and different ways. Whatever it means to be autistic or neurodiverse cannot be limited as caused by any one species of archaic ancestor.

It's impossible because we don't have any clear idea what the benefits or disadvantages of the contributions of neanderthals are to modern man, nor do we even have a genome of information from potential archaic ancestors, outside of neanderthals and denosivans.

It's interesting that indigenous africans don't have the neanderthal DNA, but indigenous africans are neurodiverse humans, whose neurodiverse behaviors are evidenced as significantly different among each other within the boundries of indigenous Africa, as a result of different ways of life, that worked for survival, along with the genetic differences that worked for successful adaptation.

Civilization is something that happened as a result of adaptation to the environment for survival; evolution doesn't care if the end result of civilization makes the earth inhospitable for all whom share the environment.

From that perspective, while the stone age might have been short and brutish, it is better than a potential inhospitable environment for human beings and many others species that share the planet.

It's up to debate at this point if "advancements" of what appear now as the "superorganism" of global human civilization are overall positive advancements for the fitness of the species or an increasing danger to the human species as a whole.

However, the advancements are already proven as a detriment to many other species of creatures, that have fallen to the rise of that "superorganism".

In the long run, the folks that stayed in Africa, may have made a choice for the longer term survival/fitness of the human species; only the future will tell. But between then and now, many have enjoyed the advantages from the choice to migrate out of Africa.

While likely that everyone that visits this forum has between 1 and 6 percent of neanderthal and/or Denosivan DNA variants, per the current state of science. At least 94% of what makes us genetically human is defined by the contribution of those that decided to migrate out of Africa, regardless of what specific neurodiverse trait we might not share, with all others.

One thing we all share who visit this forum, regardless of nationality, race, religion, type of neurodiversity, or influence of archaic ancestory, is modern membership as part of that "superorganism".

We are born as our distant ancestors were born, and as some modern primitive people still are, with only the potential of being part of a small group of humans, but quickly we become part of a "superorganism" that our African immigrant ancestors, tens of thousands of years ago, could have ever imagined as a result from that move out of Africa.

Or, even those ancestors that lived 60 years ago.

Well, it sounds a bit far fetched, but its a very cool idea nonetheless.
I've heard this theory before, and i have a few others of my own.

Traits that are easy to ask about in online quizzes, or are you having second thoughts about studies that suggest otherwise?:

Aspies seems to have inherited Neanderthal physical traits and Morphological Features in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Matched Case-Control Study