I'm not sure these people are not being overly pre...

2008-10-06T02:12:00.000-07:00

I'm not sure these people are not being overly presumptuous, which happens everyday in the medical "sciences". The genes that create autism have not been found yet, and I was under the impression that in science when the cause of something has not been determined it is still an open question.

The closest study I have read found a gene to question in 1% of autistic persons. I doubt that counts as a gene that causes autism in most people's book.

Also, the discussion of genes in the media gives a very misleading picture of what genetic expression is actually like. It is not the case that a problem with genes must have something to do with heritability; genes can be damaged by environmental factors.

Also whether genes are expressed or not is not at all straightforward and it is not as simple as saying that there are genes for autism, as it is possible that transcription factors (as just one example) that control gene expression are part of the equation.

In my opinion (and I keep pretty current on the autism research) Baren-Cohen has developed a particular ideological bias about autism, and I am concerned that his work now is partly an exercise in confirmation bias. Perhaps he will end up being correct about the causes of autism, but for now I am not as easily persuaded as he.

Comments on Want to be a free thinker but still a nice person: Autism genes can add up to genius

I'm not sure these people are not being overly pre...