Autism is genetic

[jonesonscam]

The National Autistic Society has just said something pretty significant: Autism is genetic. Not “possibly genetic”. Not “we’re not really sure what causes it”.

After reviewing 83 research papers, the NAS is now stating definitively that autism is genetic. You’re born autistic and you’re autistic for life. Most autistic people are autistic because of genes they inherited from their parents.

I think this matters enormously because for decades, autism has been surrounded by nonsense about vaccines, parenting, mothers doing something wrong, pregnancy, diet and a million other things.

It has left parents blaming themselves, and autistic people being told that something caused them to be autistic that could somehow have been prevented.

There isn't an “autism gene”. Thousands of genes are involved, and genetics is complicated. But the basic message is now remarkably clear: autism isn't something that happened to someone. It's something they were born with.

That matters because when we stop looking for something to blame, we can start looking at what actually matters: understanding autistic people, supporting them properly, and making a society that works for them.

This all feels like a pretty important shift.

The likely cause of my autism is a brain condition I have. Almost every person has autism. Many adults such as myself were diagnosed with autism first. There's a known genetic link for this condition but it can also be random which is likely my case

Almost every person has autism?

Well there's also the fact that the diagnosis criterion have changed multiple times and are now completely different - in the late 60s and 70s Autism wasn't even diagnosable as a stand alone disorder, it was still under childhood psychosis in the icd 8. The ICD 9 made it a stand alone childhood disorder, but it wasn't until an update to the icd 9 that adults could even be diagnosed with autism, and not until 2015 that the criteria were similar to those used now.

The criteria keep changing - see all the drama around Uta Frith, one of the researchers who coined the "spectrum" concept in the 1970s (and she has been consistently active ever since and never stopped publishing, despite some people who clearly don't actually have access to research journals trying to claim she's of touch) daring to say perhaps the diagnosis criteria are now too broad and should be redivided into separate but related conditions.

Who used AI, and why would it be a problem?

I think she means almost everyone with her neurological condition.

And?
Im not autistic not all parents of autistic children are.

I personally think as does my DD’s specialist that autism is actually a symptom not a condition this is is a symptom in many conditions, yes many genetic but also possibly environmental factors too

I agree. We’re currently playing a waiting game with one of my grandchildren. Are they autistic or showing the result of trauma they unfortunately experienced in life. None of the diagnosticians want to make a decision just yet.

Yes, sorry, I hadn't read your following post about your son's chromosomal disorder.

Obviously chromosomal disorders are genetic but not inherited (or they can be, but often aren't).

I think this thread is a bit weird because some posters are saying that it's genetic because anecdotally lots of parents recognise traits in themselves or older family members after their children are diagnosed. That's obviously not what something being genetic means though, or at least only tangentially and partially.

I thought it has been widely known for sometime?

It's the reason my brother and his wife decided not to have children, because they didn't want to pass it on.

I can recall this theory being all the rage on autism forums 30 years ago.

It runs through both sides of my family and both my kids are ND. I suspect I am too but have not pursued it. I have never thought it wasn’t genetic.

Can you post a link to where this information has been written - I’ve searched the NAS website and cannot find it.
Interestingly though, I did find non-scientific nonsense about ‘non binary’ and ‘assigned sex at birth’. So forgive my scepticism about how thorough any scientific research carried out by NAS is, when they think people can be no sex, and that one’s sex is ‘assigned’ at birth. 😂

I can trace the tism in my family all the way to Jedediah Buxton (1707-1772) so this is absolutely no surprise to me. It’s not a new thing, it’s not vaccine damage, it’s a variation of the normal human condition, and can manifest in lots of ways, not just the non-verbal rocking type.

Also, It’s not that ‘we are all a bit autistic’, but more that if your friends and family include several neurodiverse people, it’s likely that you may be too.

https://www.autism.org.uk/blog/autism-is-genetic-and-why-this-information-matters-now?fbclid=IwdGRleAUYv1pwZG9mAWZkaWQWUOmx9kUgulW3jtXwm8AA6G9Kz5VHlWV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkCjY2Mjg1NjgzNzkAAR4mfUBPP2xf0croilsBHVto7JfCMi-QrNlp8fY982w7A5_6c1CgET8QyO1WJQ_aem_mzA0Oi5WBciNMdkNXscxtg

Your DD’s specialist doesn’t recognise autism as a diagnosable condition in itself?

I’d get a new one.

Agreed. It's highly genetic.

I don't think anyone seriously doubted that there are chromosomal markers for autism or that it can run in families.

There's no straight line between DNA and a person's characteristics. Advances in epigenetics have shown that environmental factors can influence gene expression.

i think if they link the studies showing the genes that cause autism that would help.
I have autism in my family and have always though that it may be genetic.
My sister was diagnosed in adulthood after her child was diagnosed because when the reading the report she thought shit thats me! When she showed me the report i thought ,not only is that you it our mum and our uncle!

This. Hence things like maternal and paternal age can impact, as can things that happen whilst a baby is in the womb.

They also seem confused about ‘thousands of genes are involved’; there are thousands of genes that can each result in autistic symptoms. That doesn’t mean that thousands of genes are required - a change to a single gene can be enough.

And 83 research papers is nothing!

It does feel very like they have just noticed the sky is blue but don’t understand why.

Thank you - I’d have liked to see the links to the research that the writer talks about. Saying that autism is genetic is stating the obvious though - our genes determine most lifelong states that exist from conception, which is what Autism is.

^^ yep, this

i come from a family of wildly neurodivergent people going back several generations, ranging from the mildly quirky maskers to the self taught mathematical geniuses, to the eccentric professors, to the incredibly-gifted-but-unable-to understand-money artists. To us it’s just normal life!

There’s a wonderful book by Charles Darwin’s granddaughter called Period Piece, about her childhood and her memories of her Darwin relatives. They are almost all (the author included) so clearly what would be called neurodivergent in modern terminology but would have been called ‘eccentric’ in the 1870s.

The studies to identify the array of genes which might interact to form an autistic profile were shut down because of fears of eugenics.

Some chromosomal conditions have incredibly high correlation with autism, but where there's no chromosomal mutation there are a lot of unknowns.

Oh look, the image which suggests that autism doesn’t sit on one spectrum but on a whole series of spectrums - in this example eight are suggested. Each of which everyone sits on and for which there is no cut-off point between ‘autistic’ and ‘not autistic’. I never understand how people think image doesn’t back up the very idea that ‘we are all on the spectrum’.