Yeah I call them Easter eggs 😄. Usually in footnotes but sometimes in captions. I think a lot of people miss them but people also seem to be catching on to the pattern:-)
I do not for one minute think Tylenol causes autism. But what Dr. Geschwind's analysis doesn't actually do is get around the dangers that something might trigger autism if a pregnant woman takes it. Yes, you need a gene and the gene needs triggering. Not everyone with the gene develops autism, apparently. And per the doctor, that trigger happens in early fetal development.
I have celiac disease, which you can't get without having a particular gene/gene-set. But I developed the symptoms at age 70, after years of cheerfully eating real sour dough bread and dim sum. Now those are verboten. No one knows what triggered it. (I got it about 20 years after getting diabetes, so I was actually eating LESS stuff with gluten because such stuff has carbs.)
I'm guessing that there are a fair number of genetic-needs-trigger diseases that could benefit from further research. But that would be pure research, the kind universities do. And guess what is being throttled.
Celiac disease is also on the uprise, partly due to better diagnosis, partly due to changes in the gluten in our wheat, and partly due to not knowing what triggers its gene. Research IS now being done on treatments, approaches that let us gluten-deprived get back to cheaper food. But that's because the "on the rise" means it isn't a dreaded "orphan disease." There is profit in sight for treatment, now
I had to move my comment but I think you read it...
I wrote this on my phone, which seems to be a bad idea because comments don't thread properly there sometimes...
Thanks, Susan. It's a shame that such a wonderful thing as bread can make us ill.
I don't think that Geschwind is suggesting that nothing can trigger it. He's saying there is no indication that vaccines or acetaminophen do.
Part of the mystery is finding out what does trigger what they call a mutation in non inherited autism.
Overall, my understanding of pregnancy, which I only observed once in my life close up and obviously not as the person who gave birth, is that it's best to stay as organic as possible.
Avoid chemicals, including acetaminophen. But that's easy for me to say. I don't have to lug around a kid in my gut for 9 months.
The point many are making is that a high fever is way often more dangerous to the fetus than random unproven chemicals. My point was simply that Dr G does say that certain things taken in early pregnancy MIGHT cause autism, as a trigger, but no evidence at all that those triggers happen post birth. And I do agree that yes, things should be screened for danger to the fetus. Some that come to mind are NSAIDs, opioids, thalidomide.
And I think one of the worst was getting Rubella (german measles) which could be a real problem if people able to become pregnant have not had the MMR vaccine because….autism scares.
I’ve lugged around two for 9 months each. Back aches are only the tip of the iceberg.
Thanks, Susan. I don’t like to wade too deeply into prenatal care for obvious reasons. I’ll let the women handle it. Men could never carry a child to term. We’re big babies.
heh, when I hit 90 I plan on easing myself back into gluten. (right now I get violently nauseated if I eat it). I figure if it has long term effects, I won’t really care.
So happy the medical community agrees that people are born autistic, just like they are born left handed or gay. Too bad their default mode is "developing a a cure". It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was classified as mental disorder and we know how that went. Having been born (seven decades ago) with all three of the aforementioned genetic gifts, I am weary of medical experts trying to "cure" people like me instead of helping us navigate systems that were not designed for us.
I can always understand that kind of concern, but I think this researcher is interested in helping, not hurting. He's not trying to "cure" anyone.
He's trying to look into whether there are therapeutic procedures for parts of the autistic spectrum that make daily life challenging for some folks before they are born. It's all prenatal.
He's a clinical psychologist (I think) in addition to a genes researcher. It's reasonable to assume a great deal of empathy on his part.
I don't get any sense from his work that implies disdain towards anyone in the autism spectrum.
Keep in mind that it was peer reviewed research by Evelyn Hooker that forced the psychiatric profession to remove homosexuality from its DSM manual and ultimately debunked that nonsense.
Peer reviewed science has come a long way since the 1940s.
I'm not expert, but I have to think almost everyone lies somewhere on the spectrum, even when it barely registers.
A bigger danger, in my view, is that maga warriors will get hold of CRISPR and other DNA technologies and try to turn everyone into a Stepford Wife or Handmaid's Tale Commander.
"Close up of the head of a penis". 😂😂
An outstanding column...I laughed and I learned a ton. Lotsa work went into this, and we're all grateful. Thank you, Charles!
I forgot to mention that I'm glad someone is reading my captions and footnotes. :-)
😂😂. It’s like finding hidden treasure.
Yeah I call them Easter eggs 😄. Usually in footnotes but sometimes in captions. I think a lot of people miss them but people also seem to be catching on to the pattern:-)
Thank you, Susan. I'm always a bit reluctant to tackle medical stuff but I didn't think there was much to really dispute here.
Mr. Geffen and I have met. I can't remember where. Getting old is so cool.
I will edit one thing. People don't have autism. They are autistic. I don't have insanity. I'm just insane.
Both caused by, as far as anyone knows, biology.
I didn't know anyone actually believes the bobby Brainworm version.
I do not for one minute think Tylenol causes autism. But what Dr. Geschwind's analysis doesn't actually do is get around the dangers that something might trigger autism if a pregnant woman takes it. Yes, you need a gene and the gene needs triggering. Not everyone with the gene develops autism, apparently. And per the doctor, that trigger happens in early fetal development.
I have celiac disease, which you can't get without having a particular gene/gene-set. But I developed the symptoms at age 70, after years of cheerfully eating real sour dough bread and dim sum. Now those are verboten. No one knows what triggered it. (I got it about 20 years after getting diabetes, so I was actually eating LESS stuff with gluten because such stuff has carbs.)
I'm guessing that there are a fair number of genetic-needs-trigger diseases that could benefit from further research. But that would be pure research, the kind universities do. And guess what is being throttled.
Celiac disease is also on the uprise, partly due to better diagnosis, partly due to changes in the gluten in our wheat, and partly due to not knowing what triggers its gene. Research IS now being done on treatments, approaches that let us gluten-deprived get back to cheaper food. But that's because the "on the rise" means it isn't a dreaded "orphan disease." There is profit in sight for treatment, now
I had to move my comment but I think you read it...
I wrote this on my phone, which seems to be a bad idea because comments don't thread properly there sometimes...
Thanks, Susan. It's a shame that such a wonderful thing as bread can make us ill.
I don't think that Geschwind is suggesting that nothing can trigger it. He's saying there is no indication that vaccines or acetaminophen do.
Part of the mystery is finding out what does trigger what they call a mutation in non inherited autism.
Overall, my understanding of pregnancy, which I only observed once in my life close up and obviously not as the person who gave birth, is that it's best to stay as organic as possible.
Avoid chemicals, including acetaminophen. But that's easy for me to say. I don't have to lug around a kid in my gut for 9 months.
The point many are making is that a high fever is way often more dangerous to the fetus than random unproven chemicals. My point was simply that Dr G does say that certain things taken in early pregnancy MIGHT cause autism, as a trigger, but no evidence at all that those triggers happen post birth. And I do agree that yes, things should be screened for danger to the fetus. Some that come to mind are NSAIDs, opioids, thalidomide.
And I think one of the worst was getting Rubella (german measles) which could be a real problem if people able to become pregnant have not had the MMR vaccine because….autism scares.
I’ve lugged around two for 9 months each. Back aches are only the tip of the iceberg.
Thanks, Susan. I don’t like to wade too deeply into prenatal care for obvious reasons. I’ll let the women handle it. Men could never carry a child to term. We’re big babies.
Also, I hope you become the beneficiary of said research. I hope it's still being funded somewhere.
heh, when I hit 90 I plan on easing myself back into gluten. (right now I get violently nauseated if I eat it). I figure if it has long term effects, I won’t really care.
So happy the medical community agrees that people are born autistic, just like they are born left handed or gay. Too bad their default mode is "developing a a cure". It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was classified as mental disorder and we know how that went. Having been born (seven decades ago) with all three of the aforementioned genetic gifts, I am weary of medical experts trying to "cure" people like me instead of helping us navigate systems that were not designed for us.
So, your preference is for RFK Jr. and Trump to manage how science responds to folks on the spectrum?
OMG, not in the least! Sorry I was not clear enough; i am very happy that pharmacists and doctors are actually not buying what the gov. is selling.
But can you understand the autistics’ trepidation when the gov. is coming after you and the scientists want to fix you?
I can always understand that kind of concern, but I think this researcher is interested in helping, not hurting. He's not trying to "cure" anyone.
He's trying to look into whether there are therapeutic procedures for parts of the autistic spectrum that make daily life challenging for some folks before they are born. It's all prenatal.
He's a clinical psychologist (I think) in addition to a genes researcher. It's reasonable to assume a great deal of empathy on his part.
I don't get any sense from his work that implies disdain towards anyone in the autism spectrum.
Keep in mind that it was peer reviewed research by Evelyn Hooker that forced the psychiatric profession to remove homosexuality from its DSM manual and ultimately debunked that nonsense.
Peer reviewed science has come a long way since the 1940s.
I'm not expert, but I have to think almost everyone lies somewhere on the spectrum, even when it barely registers.
A bigger danger, in my view, is that maga warriors will get hold of CRISPR and other DNA technologies and try to turn everyone into a Stepford Wife or Handmaid's Tale Commander.