Genetics

Post Reply New Topic

First of all might I say that while you can get a good generalization or you could understand and learn all there is about Asperger's you will not learn how it effects each and every individual unless you spend a significant amount of time studying every AS case in the world. While we all have common traits AS is not the only thing that applies to a persons personality.


Do you think this is an illness or a different way of seeing the world? Consider how it would be if the 'normal' was Aspergarians and Neurotypals were the different one's. Would their "different" abilities make them 'ill' than? Are they mentally wrong? No, they are different.

A quote I like a lot: War is not about who is right or wrong, its about who is left.
Maybe I'm being nihilistic but its true, there is no right or wrong if you can see the viewpoints from another perspective, it is in how you use it or which side you choose.



And so to you it is an illness but an illness is something we can overcome. Illnesses are not permanent. So if you reach out and push your boundaries will you be cured or will you have just overcome a few obstacles?


Most people you are around maybe but not everyone is the same. Yes, granted a lot of people can use their instinct, there are NT's who still cannot or one's who choose not. Not everyone is an irrational buffoon you know. Not everyone climbs the social latter through instinct, do you think all business men act simply on impulse and how the feel about a situation? I can't even begin to comprehend what a mess our world would be if everyone was irrational and instinctual.



It sounds to me that you're upset that you differ from the world and company in which surrounds you. I'd like you to keep in mind that the company that surrounds you does not balance an analysis on the whole world.

i've mentioned this before... don't have time to post as im leaving for a field trip to the coast YAYAYAYAYA

but i feel that AS ect is a developmental disorder. it has to do with epigentic mechanisms that control gene expression... which supports why they haven't found any gene markers for autism ect... caues it's not our genes that are wrong (no DNA mutations)... but HOW the get expressed... there's a lot that goes on to make your genes get expressed.

imprinting, is something going on in between the two sets of your DNA, fighting to win the "expression" war. you have 2 sets of DNA... so two copies of every gene and sometimes one or the other version gets expressed... sometimes a combo of the two (dose effects)... i think this is a very promising area for research for figuring out what's goin on

Well, actually, Sedaka, about two months ago researchers at the University of Washington reported finding 17 genetic markers, many of which were present (although sometimes in differing combinations) in 90% of the autistic subjects they studied. It's complex, all right - but it does indeed appear to be genetic in nature.

Oh, and also, a zygote does not form from two complete sets of DNA, but rather from one-half of each parent's genetic structure. Some genetic complexes are reinforced in this merger, some suppressed, and some expressed only because nothing is there to suppress them. But there is no "war" going on during this process - rather, more of a dance.

From a cultural stand point, I think, I could make the arguement as to why this genes "defect" would persist and not die out. I believe I see it clearly. Not so sure it pertains to what the gist of this disscussion is about. If I'm wrong, I'll need an invite to mix up the puzzle, with some theroys. Man, this WP place amazes me constantly, yous guys is good.

Thanks for your replies, but a lot of you are completely flying past my intended point. The idea is this: where does mental illness fall in the theory of evolution? Okay, since some of you don't like the term mental illness, we'll use psychological disorder. It doesn't matter. Can a chipmunk be bipolar? Can a chipmunk have Asperger's syndrome? No, because a chipmunk has not reached the stage in its evolution yet where those things can be developed. If a chipmunk was depressed, it would not know how to comprehend its depression because depression conflicts with its instinct to survive. AS is the same concept, but further in that direction. People with AS might turn out to be human mark II.

When you type it to an Aspie, you can't expect that they will read into it. That's kind of stretching it. I posted as you posted back to Fuzzy or I would have seen that you changed your wording.

What you describe as above is mental illness as a result of your experiences from AS, not the AS itself - in other words, a comorbid. Most of those aren't really even considered illnesses now, but if you want to call them that, it really doesn't matter.

I still don't get what you are really after in your post. Are you trying to feel better about it by thinking it's evolutionary advancement? The truth is cockroaches, alligators and sharks succeed the best in any evolutionary event and they don't have the biggest brain or the most complex. We may succeed in the short term, but we don't stand much chance in the long run. We are too specialized and we are getting more so. Having said that, I do believe Aspies are more suited to being in a more specialized world - for the short term.

I wasn't offended by your words, I was cautioning you if you were calling it an illness to get a cure. Your words don't hold anything but their meaning to me, which is why I don't read into them. Don't read into mine because I say only what I mean. Reading emotion or judgement into my words is a waste of your time.

What I have to say here may seem inflammatory, but that is not my intention. I merely give examples and opinion that will either back up or conflict with your views in this subject:

Many animal species show depression. Jane Goodall witnessed a male chimpanzee born of an aged female (and therefore unable to make him leave her at the right time) die of depression when she died. As you say above, it conflicted with his instinct to survive, but he died anyway. Food was available - he refused it. Horses, dogs and cats get depressed. Zoo animals do. Elephants definitely.

I had a bipolar dog. Other mental illnesses are recorded in veterinarian abstracts. To examine if an animal has Asperger's, you would have to examine species who normally exist in groups, and not as solitary individuals on a normal basis. Perhaps this can be done. If it is, you'll probably see that Asperger animals do exist. Examination of homosexuality in animals in the last few decades (considered a "mental disorder" by many, not by myself) it was shown that it exists in many species. I observed a pair of homosexual bucks going at it on a nearly continual basis in the woods near my house last fall, so you can't tell me I'm wrong!

To think that we are evolutionarily superior to other species is an error I believe. Depends on the criteria. Water bears can live dehydrated for over 100 years. Amphibians can withstand freezing over winter. Beetles dominate the earth.

Where does "mental illness" fall in the theory of evolution? Everything that is here is here because it has the capacity to be here. If it didn't have the capacity to be here, it wouldn't be here. It all exists on a continuum.
Everything that fits in the definition "mental illness" (a man-made construct with lines drawn in sand that continually shift) exists within the larger continuum of evolution. Whether the "mental illness" is "useful" and thereby propagated doesn't always matter. Its enough that it isn't "lethally detrimental", and therefore deleted out of existence.

I think some of the research supporting Sedaka's observation is done on monozygotic twins. Many times one presents with Autism and the other does not, or one has ADD and the other AS and so on. That would indicate that it is not a direct DNA link since their DNA is identical, but the expression of it is not. They have done quite a bit of research with that as well.

Also, don't forget that they are starting to see more than just with autopsies. fMRIs can show the brain in action. We need much more research before they are going to be pretty sure about any of this and even that will change over time as we learn more.

In the meantime, this overwhelming attitude that we have to play society's game because we're dependent on them is puzzling. While some may be completely debilitated because of sensory issues, most dinos take care of themselves and have for years. We had to stumble about to find our way but we did. Like Fuzzy said, he will figure it out again. To accept out of the gate that you have to play societies game to get them to pay your way is disturbing. You should be looking for ways to take care of yourself that don't require social interaction. Those ways exist. Or develop just enough coping to get along when you need to and forget the rest.

This crap of they are the majority so they are right is crap. It's made up. It wasn't the same story even 100 years ago and it will change again. This is the current story. As to telling me I HAVE to play their game to be successful, sorry, I am successful and 47 so I know and you do not. No I do not need to pay attention to them and yes I can just let them go their own way. Guess what? I've been doing it for years and it's worked. So if you think I'm suddenly going to listen to some idiot shrink that has some witch doctor degree tell me about my brain that they can't even medically talk about, you'd be quite wrong. They can believe the story because it serves them well. I see them for exactly the hacks they are and they can stay where they are, I have no use for them. They don't pay my bills, they didn't get my degree and they sure as heck do not live in my house or sleep in my bed so their opinion about how I live is irrelevant. End of story. No one, not shrinks, you or one billion people standing up and all saying it at the same time is going to change my mind. I base my opinions on the reality of my life not their fear-based conjecture. I guess the biggest reason I can say that is because I used that brain I was given to figure out how to live without their help and be successful. It served me very well. That is all that matters. I owe them nothing and could care less about humanity to be honest. I won't hurt them, but I certainly don't think I'm responsible for all the outcomes of their nitwit decisions, of which there are many on a daily basis. I don't care what anyone thinks about that.

Now see here, see here!! ! Wait just a minute young lady!! ! Wuh wuh wuh... Now, listen Zanne! I was dead, and my brain absolutely did not function until they diagnosed me and I received their help, at which time I then became alive, and.. uh.. then ...uh, and then... uh....

....Ok. I guess I did function on my own until they came along. Who knew? Thanks Zanne!! !

You mean you got diagnosed and then told they had no help for you except for co-morbids. LOL They're ridiculous. I am so freaking glad I was born before they had a name for this and some mumbo jumbo psuedo doctor got their hands on me. Or, as my dh so politely puts it, don't read or listen to them, they will rot your brain. No kidding.

That's why I really like this place. None of us fell under their Jedi mind hypnosis tricks! "You need my help. You cannot function without my intervention. You are imperfect and impaired. It is I , your father, who is..er.. am your salvation."

I also love this place because I love reading the thoughts of people who actually have them.

The quote I've seen used for this is from Larry Niven's novel Ringworld. In it, the insane Pierson's puppeteer, Nessus, says, "The majority is always sane, Louis."

Context:

Pierson's puppeteers have three legs - two forelegs and one hind leg - each tipped with a small clawed hoof. They also have two flat, brainless heads, with one eye each, at the end of two long, snakeline necks. (The brain is located in a hump between the bases of the necks.) They're also cowards, by the standards of most other races - only insane puppeteers have ever left their homeworld, because sometimes (extremely rarely, but sometimes) ships disappear in hyperspace.

Nessus had kidnapped human adventurer Louis Wu, genetically-lucky human Teela Brown, and kzin diplomat Speaker-To-Animals, to explore a massive structure that was basically a million-mile-wide ring around its star, about 1 AU in raduis - the Ringworld. At one point, they were being attacked by a group of local humanoids. Nessus, unsurprisingly, was fleeing for the safety of their ship. One of the attackers got in his way. He spun - Louis thought it was to run away - then put his heads out to either side, looking back for precise aim, and kicked with that hind hoof, essentially punting his attacker's heart through his spine.

Later, Louis and Nessus were arguing over that. Nessus felt he had been in the wrong - he should have fled - but Louis was trying to point out that obviously, the evolutionary point of the puppeteer body was to enable self-defense. He held that this was how they were supposed to be, and that puppeteer society had gone off the rails someplace.

Nessus' final word on the topic, after which he refused to discuss it, was, "The majority is always sane, Louis."

As you can see, in context, it's a statement that most humans would probably disagree with...

uhuh

Like it in cultural terms? I was approaching book length. I tried, but got sidetracked pushing back the date of farming instead, again, go figure. SwampBlossom thought it was fun, too. oooo sparkly over here. What was the question again?

PREACH it, SISTER! you give them HELL, Zanne and drive the damn moneychangers out of the temple! Thank Goodness for my poverty or I would have been so naive and gullible I would have thought 'they' were right, but no one came to me to 'cure' or 'help' me because I couldn't PAY!
And anyway. . they didn't invite me to their little NT soiree anyway.

Wow, what a rant. . and after reading all the philosophy and science of this thread, THIS is what I respond with. Sheesh, you guys are gonna take away my 'intelligent Aspie' credentials, aren't ya'?

Merle

Last edited by sinsboldly on 12 May 2007, 9:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm not really sure what you're asking maldorer. even though you've defined it a couple of times.

I know i've seen the words evolution and religion and you seem to want to know where we come in.

it's a big WHY? question. you're straddling both faith and science and asking people to come up with a composite answer but i think separate answers would come from the worlds of science and faith.

as you say, maybe we are Human Mark II, scientifically.

religiously does that make us the chosen people?

Maldorer, if you want to know why, evolutionarily speaking, we exist, all I can say is - because we can. Because AS is not a lethal mutation - which only means we can survive to breeding age, and sometimes breed. That's all "evolutionary success" means - your genes endured. Evolution is just a name for a process - it doesn't "intend" anything.

Mental illness can exist for a number of reasons, some of which have nothing to do with the process of evolution. Schizophrenia, for instance, can be genetic, or it can result from actual physical damage to the brain. In either case, though, it doesn't necessarily render the patione "unfit" in a biological sense. In the wild, pre-civilization, people who heard voices were thought to be playing host to Gods or Demons. Today, we medicate them until the voices stop. In neither case does it affect the only "goal" of evolution - the ability to survive until sexual maturity.

If you want something more religious, well, name your religion and I can probably find a justification somewhere in its Holy Writ, or at least a reason to think there must be a reason.