2007-04-26
14:45:40
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Alex
2
in
Health
➔ Mental Health
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17453057&itool=pubmed_DocSum
The paternal age distribution of the AGRE fathers, whose first child is autistic differs significantly from that of the 'control' sample (P=0.005). A 2 goodness-of-fit test with 2 degrees of freedom was conducted using percents in the 'control' group age categories to calculate the expected values in the AGRE sample. The shift toward higher paternal ages in those with an affected first-born is seen most dramatically in the group of AGRE fathers who are 30–39 years inclusive, which is 54.7% of the distribution compared with the 41.9 % that is expected. We interpret this shifted age distribution to provide support for the recently reported finding by Reichenberg and co-workers that autism risk is associated with advancing paternal age.
2007-04-27
16:18:51 ·
update #1
Autism and genetics. A decade of research
S. L. Smalley, R. F. Asarnow and M. A. Spence
Department of Psychiatry, UCLA School of Medicine 90024.
The last ten years of research on the genetics of infantile autism were critically reviewed. Epidemiologic findings have shown that autism is a rare disorder with a prevalence of two to five per 10,000, a male-female ratio of 3:1, and an association with mental retardation (66% to 75% of autistic subjects have full-scale IQ scores [70]). Autism is familial, as reflected in an empiric sibling recurrence risk of 3% and pooled monozygotic and dizygotic concordance rates of 64% and 9%, respectively, which are much greater than the population prevalence of 0.02% to 0.05%. Genetic heterogeneity is pronounced with potential genetic subgroups, including autosomal recessive inheritance, X-linked inheritance, and sporadic chromosomal anomalies.
2007-04-27
17:02:29 ·
update #2
I think the word "epidemic" is an exageration, but there has been a significant increase, even when figuring in different diagnositic techniques & such.
To know how to reduce it, when need to know the causes.
Genetics is a major factor, but they aren't sure which genes are responsible. We are far a way from genetics counseling to let people know their risks ahead of time.
There are theories about toxins, but these are so far just theories. But we have many other reasons to clean up our environment even if pollutants aren't to blame.
Many people suspect vaccinations. I think every kid needs to be vaccinated, but the schedule it too aggressive. I would suggest vaccinating kids when they are a bit older than the government suggests. But there is no way of knowing for sure if vaccinations cause autism. It is already pretty clear thimerosal (a preservative they used to use in all vaccines) is not to blame.
But there is one sure fire way to reduce your risk of having an autistic child. DO NOT WAIT UNTIL YOUR LATE 30s TO HAVE KIDS.
A man older than 35 is just about twice as likely to have an autistic child than an man in his 20s. In this 40s, the risks are FIVE TIMES GREATER than in his 20s. And in his 50's the risk is NINE TIMES GREATER than in his 20s. I've even heard it suggested for a man to freeze his sperm in his 20s if he hasn't found "Ms Right" or if they want to wait.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/04/AR2006090400513_pf.html
There is a new study that the age of both parents are major factors, but I am more familar with the study that focuses on the age of the father.
2007-04-27 16:16:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Smart Kat 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Autism wasn't completely understood until the 1990s.
I was diagnosed with a very slight case of autism in the 8th grade.
What I've learned about autism is that there is no real answer to what causes it. Autism is either genetic or caused by mercury (older concept). Genetics is currently far beyond what humans are capable of controlling. We've just touched the tip of the iceberg on genetics.
The best thing now is to donate money and wait a decade or so of research to happen and then ask your question again.
2007-04-26 21:55:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I truly believe tha the reason for this increase is our environment, diet and lack of nutriton. Oh yeah we eat but not good foods, not enough of them and too much of the good tasting zero nutrtional value fast-quick foods. We don't know the damage that the mercury in the immunizations we took or gave children from 1925-1982, or some other element in the immunization shots given during that period. We are just realizing the damage that could be contributed to this, and yes generally in a form of a neurological disorder, like autism, multple sclerosis etc. So now what do we do to decrease or reduce it, Allow the research scientist that are working none stop to get a pinpoint on something so concrete similar in each case to bring it to the frontline.
2007-04-26 22:02:23
·
answer #3
·
answered by Bubbles 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
America needs to re-evaluate the ingredients and compounds in vaccinations and immunizations. If you do a little research you will see that regions and countries that do not mandate certain vaccines have less cases of things like autism, downs, ADHD, and similar. Japan did a study on this a little while ago. You will be shocked when you read about these things, especially if you are a parent. So this is my idea, and it is an idea of many scientists as well. I hope you get to do a little reading on it. Good luck.
2007-04-26 21:55:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Research. I am totally blown away with the statistics. And that doctors really aren't sure what's causing it. I heard it could be vaccines given to babies during their 1st year. It could be something the mother used during pregnancy, it could be the hormones being injected into the cattle that end up on people's dinner plate, or something in baby formula, there is a list of possibilities. Its sad and its scary. When my daughter was born nearly 12 years ago, the biggest scare was SIDS, now new parents have another serious condition to worry about. Last I heard, its one in 166 kids will have autisms. A few years ago, it was something like 1 in 2,000. What the h*ll is happening? And what will the statistics be in 5 years? And what is going to happen when these kids grow up? Who's going to be there to care for them when their parents pass away? Right now, nobody wants to think about the future of these kids, is all about the Here and Now. But they will grow up, and they will need assistance and who is going to be there for them? Are we going to count on our gov't to feed, clothe and shelter them?
2007-04-26 22:21:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by NightOwl 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Huh? Since when has there been an epidemic of autism?
Maybe there has been an increase in recorded cases, but that's not an epidemic.
The causes? Who knows. Better records; bad diet; environmental factors; etc etc.
2007-04-26 21:50:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Silver 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I guess people carrying the genes for autism don't breed? (I'm autistic so don't slap me)
2007-04-26 22:27:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by aspergerskitty 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
research and the money to pay for it.
2007-04-26 21:48:47
·
answer #8
·
answered by essentiallysolo 7
·
1⤊
0⤋