Guest guest Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 , The following is the email I posted to the NPR in response to this article: http://www.npr.org/contact/ Title: Re: Cause of autism narrowed to " 100 " genes >After reading this on your Internet page: >http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283, >I am bemused that anyone would attempt to >ascribe any " causeless " disorder to " 100 or more genes. " > >Since the rise of " autism " has far outstripped the >rate at which a genetic mutation can spread, to >continue to attribute the cause to genes is something >that only a geneticist who has not studied the increase >in incidence rate from the 1970s to the 2000s would do. > >I suggest that Dr. Sebat should read Dr. Lathe's 2006 >book, " Autism, Brain, and Environment, " which should >help him understand that " autism " is NOT " genetic " but >rather environmental with genetic susceptibility >variability. > >However, I do partly agree with Dr. Sebat when he says, > " ... it does mean we should start looking for exposures >that might be " prepartum also. > >To that end, I offer, Thimerosal in Rho(D) products >given to Rh-negative pregnant women up until about 2001 >and the reality that though no more than 15% of pregnant >women are RH negative, these are the mothers of about >50% of the children diagnised with DSM " autism " during >the period from mid-1980s until all Thimerosal-preserved >doses expired. > >Moreover, though Thimerosal-preserved Rho(D) products >were phased out in the US by 2001, " coincidentally, " >the US healthcare establishment began recommending >Thimerosal-preserved flu shots for pregnant women >at about the same time as Thimerosal-preserved Rho(D) >products reached their expiration date and, in 2002, >the CDC formalized the recommendation allowing >Thimerosal-preserved flu shots to be given to pregnant >women. > >Thus, the prepartum " smoking gun " of which Dr. Sebat >should be speaking has been found. > >Moreover, tellingly neither the Rho(D) products or the >Thimerosal-containing flu shots have been proven safe >for the developing child in appropriate reproductive >toxicity studies -- another sad commentary on the >state of " healthcare " and " medicine " in the USA today. > >If you and Dr. Sebat will check, the reproductive tox >studies conducted in rats found not only adverse effects >on the developing pups but found that the effects >presisted in the pups and affected their reproductive >capabilities. > >After all Thimeorsal is a known HUMAM TERATOGEN, mutagen >and carcinogen at levels below 1 ppm -- so no one >should be surprised by its reproductive effects. > >Hopefully, you will not only publish this post but also >ask Dr. Sebat to study the available small-scale >reproductive tox studies in rats, chichen eggs, and ... >and exlain why Thimerosal cannot be a major prepartum > " cause " of the harm of which he speaks. > >As to the " preconceptional " exposures, the mercury >from the vaccines and dental mercury amalgam fillings >the mother has may be a contributing factor since >the half-life for the " tissue-bound mercury " in >humans is about 2 decades and, in exposures studies, >the developing fetus has been shown to be a " sink " >for the mercury species present in the mother. > >Respectfully, > >Dr. King >http://www.dr-king.com > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ At 21:33 3/15/07 -0400, christine wrote: > >http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283 > >Health & Science >Cause of Autism Narrowed Down to 100 Genes > >by Jon Hamilton > > " There may in fact be many genes -- I would speculate 100 or more -- that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism. " > Sebat, Geneticist, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory > > > >All Things Considered, March 15, 2007 & middot; A new study links autism to subtle changes in a wide range of genes. The finding, published in the journal Science, suggests that autism has many causes, and that whatever triggers autism usually occurs long before birth. > >The study, led by Sebat, a geneticist at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, examined the genes of 264 families. Some families had members with autism, others did not. > >Sebat says the goal was to compare the genes of autistic children with the genes of their parents. > > " By comparing the two, " he says, " we could find a mutation in the child that was not inherited from either parent. " > >It turned out that children with autism were much more likely than other kids to have these " spontaneous " mutations. The mutations affected bits of genetic code that tend to appear more than once, like duplicate copies of certain pages of a book. > >In many children with autism, some of the duplicates were deleted. > >For example, Sebat says one child in the study was missing a copy of the gene for oxytocin a hormone that seems to influence social behavior. > > " That child has one copy of oxytocin instead of the normal two copies, " Sebat says, " and that may have resulted in the corresponding decrease in the levels of oxytocin. " > >It's a change that could have affected normal social development. > >But Sebat says that in other children with autism, the deletions affected other genes. > > " There may in fact be many genes I would speculate 100 or more -- that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism, " Sebat says. > >That's many more than researchers have found involved in inherited autism. > >Sebat's research is causing a lot of excitement among autism researchers, including Ezra Susser, an epidemiologist at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute. > > " It changes our thinking about what kind of genetic causes are important, " he says, " and knowing that changes our thinking about what kinds of environmental causes are important. Because I think everybody believes that there is an interplay of genes and environment in most diseases, and that would be true for autism, too. " > >The sort of mutations found in the study tend to occur in eggs or sperm before conception or in the earliest stages of an embryo's development, Susser says. > >The finding suggests that things such as exposure to vaccines after birth probably aren't the main causes of autism. > >Susser also says the study suggests a new direction for researchers seeking the causes of autism. > > " It doesn't mean that we should stop looking for [early-life] exposures, " he says. " It does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. But it does mean we should start looking for exposures that might be preconceptional also. " > >Susser has already shown that older fathers are more likely to have genetic mutations in their sperm, and more likely to have a child who is autistic. He says scientists need to ask whether a parent's exposure to certain chemicals has a similar effect. > >In the meantime, Sebat says, the new research offers at least one practical application. Parents who already have a child with autism could undergo genetic tests to see what sort of mutations are present. If the mutations are spontaneous, rather than inherited, future children would have no special risk for autism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 I think these folks are missing the mark with their studies, because what can appear to be genetic changes or anomlies, can be epigenetic in nature. For example, their theories do not adequately explain how the mercury vapor from my many mercury-containing dental amalgams may have contributed to the neurological disorders some of my children are afflicted with. I have also learned, in recent years, that various thimerosal-containing vaccines which I have had over the years, can be genotoxic and mutagenic. Millions of others have also had these vaccines over the years. Is anyone actually studying the mutagenicity and genotoxicity of vaccines which are available these days? I somehow doubt it, because many of these vaccines are OK'd by the FDA without this sort of testing being done. It doesn't take a sleuth to find that out. All one needs to do is, find an FDA label for a vaccine, and sure enough, somewhere cerca midway, there will be some mention made that the vaccine has not been evaluated to genotoxicity, mutagenicity, and potential to impair fertility. Gardasil, which is currently being promoted as a vaccine to ward off one type of cancer, has not been evaluated regarding its ability to potentially cause or contribute to causing other cancers. Did I rush out to make sure my daughter got this vaccine when she turned 11? Hell, no ! I would want to see this vaccine studied for several more years, before even thinking about subjecting my daughter to it, if at all! Aasa christine <christine@...> wrote: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283Health & ScienceCause of Autism Narrowed Down to 100 Genesby Jon Hamilton “There may in fact be many genes -- I would speculate 100 or more -- that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism.” Sebat, Geneticist, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory All Things Considered, March 15, 2007 · A new study links autism to subtle changes in a wide range of genes. The finding, published in the journal Science, suggests that autism has many causes, and that whatever triggers autism usually occurs long before birth.The study, led by Sebat, a geneticist at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, examined the genes of 264 families. Some families had members with autism, others did not.Sebat says the goal was to compare the genes of autistic children with the genes of their parents."By comparing the two," he says, "we could find a mutation in the child that was not inherited from either parent."It turned out that children with autism were much more likely than other kids to have these "spontaneous" mutations. The mutations affected bits of genetic code that tend to appear more than once, like duplicate copies of certain pages of a book.In many children with autism, some of the duplicates were deleted.For example, Sebat says one child in the study was missing a copy of the gene for oxytocin – a hormone that seems to influence social behavior."That child has one copy of oxytocin instead of the normal two copies," Sebat says, "and that may have resulted in the corresponding decrease in the levels of oxytocin."It's a change that could have affected normal social development.But Sebat says that in other children with autism, the deletions affected other genes."There may in fact be many genes — I would speculate 100 or more — that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism," Sebat says.That's many more than researchers have found involved in inherited autism.Sebat's research is causing a lot of excitement among autism researchers, including Ezra Susser, an epidemiologist at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute."It changes our thinking about what kind of genetic causes are important," he says, "and knowing that changes our thinking about what kinds of environmental causes are important. Because I think everybody believes that there is an interplay of genes and environment in most diseases, and that would be true for autism, too."The sort of mutations found in the study tend to occur in eggs or sperm before conception or in the earliest stages of an embryo's development, Susser says.The finding suggests that things such as exposure to vaccines after birth probably aren't the main causes of autism.Susser also says the study suggests a new direction for researchers seeking the causes of autism."It doesn't mean that we should stop looking for [early-life] exposures," he says. "It does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. But it does mean we should start looking for exposures that might be preconceptional also."Susser has already shown that older fathers are more likely to have genetic mutations in their sperm, and more likely to have a child who is autistic. He says scientists need to ask whether a parent's exposure to certain chemicals has a similar effect.In the meantime, Sebat says, the new research offers at least one practical application. Parents who already have a child with autism could undergo genetic tests to see what sort of mutations are present. If the mutations are spontaneous, rather than inherited, future children would have no special risk for autism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Thanks for taking the time to write them a response. On 3/15/07 11:19 PM, " G. King " <drking@...> wrote: , The following is the email I posted to the NPR in response to this article: http://www.npr.org/contact/ Title: Re: Cause of autism narrowed to " 100 " genes >After reading this on your Internet page: >http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283, >I am bemused that anyone would attempt to >ascribe any " causeless " disorder to " 100 or more genes. " > >Since the rise of " autism " has far outstripped the >rate at which a genetic mutation can spread, to >continue to attribute the cause to genes is something >that only a geneticist who has not studied the increase >in incidence rate from the 1970s to the 2000s would do. > >I suggest that Dr. Sebat should read Dr. Lathe's 2006 >book, " Autism, Brain, and Environment, " which should >help him understand that " autism " is NOT " genetic " but >rather environmental with genetic susceptibility >variability. > >However, I do partly agree with Dr. Sebat when he says, > " ... it does mean we should start looking for exposures >that might be " prepartum also. > >To that end, I offer, Thimerosal in Rho(D) products >given to Rh-negative pregnant women up until about 2001 >and the reality that though no more than 15% of pregnant >women are RH negative, these are the mothers of about >50% of the children diagnised with DSM " autism " during >the period from mid-1980s until all Thimerosal-preserved >doses expired. > >Moreover, though Thimerosal-preserved Rho(D) products >were phased out in the US by 2001, " coincidentally, " >the US healthcare establishment began recommending >Thimerosal-preserved flu shots for pregnant women >at about the same time as Thimerosal-preserved Rho(D) >products reached their expiration date and, in 2002, >the CDC formalized the recommendation allowing >Thimerosal-preserved flu shots to be given to pregnant >women. > >Thus, the prepartum " smoking gun " of which Dr. Sebat >should be speaking has been found. > >Moreover, tellingly neither the Rho(D) products or the >Thimerosal-containing flu shots have been proven safe >for the developing child in appropriate reproductive >toxicity studies -- another sad commentary on the >state of " healthcare " and " medicine " in the USA today. > >If you and Dr. Sebat will check, the reproductive tox >studies conducted in rats found not only adverse effects >on the developing pups but found that the effects >presisted in the pups and affected their reproductive >capabilities. > >After all Thimeorsal is a known HUMAM TERATOGEN, mutagen >and carcinogen at levels below 1 ppm -- so no one >should be surprised by its reproductive effects. > >Hopefully, you will not only publish this post but also >ask Dr. Sebat to study the available small-scale >reproductive tox studies in rats, chichen eggs, and ... >and exlain why Thimerosal cannot be a major prepartum > " cause " of the harm of which he speaks. > >As to the " preconceptional " exposures, the mercury >from the vaccines and dental mercury amalgam fillings >the mother has may be a contributing factor since >the half-life for the " tissue-bound mercury " in >humans is about 2 decades and, in exposures studies, >the developing fetus has been shown to be a " sink " >for the mercury species present in the mother. > >Respectfully, > >Dr. King >http://www.dr-king.com > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ At 21:33 3/15/07 -0400, christine wrote: > >http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283 > >Health & Science >Cause of Autism Narrowed Down to 100 Genes > >by Jon Hamilton > > " There may in fact be many genes -- I would speculate 100 or more -- that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism. " > Sebat, Geneticist, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory > > > >All Things Considered, March 15, 2007 & middot; A new study links autism to subtle changes in a wide range of genes. The finding, published in the journal Science, suggests that autism has many causes, and that whatever triggers autism usually occurs long before birth. > >The study, led by Sebat, a geneticist at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, examined the genes of 264 families. Some families had members with autism, others did not. > >Sebat says the goal was to compare the genes of autistic children with the genes of their parents. > > " By comparing the two, " he says, " we could find a mutation in the child that was not inherited from either parent. " > >It turned out that children with autism were much more likely than other kids to have these " spontaneous " mutations. The mutations affected bits of genetic code that tend to appear more than once, like duplicate copies of certain pages of a book. > >In many children with autism, some of the duplicates were deleted. > >For example, Sebat says one child in the study was missing a copy of the gene for oxytocin a hormone that seems to influence social behavior. > > " That child has one copy of oxytocin instead of the normal two copies, " Sebat says, " and that may have resulted in the corresponding decrease in the levels of oxytocin. " > >It's a change that could have affected normal social development. > >But Sebat says that in other children with autism, the deletions affected other genes. > > " There may in fact be many genes I would speculate 100 or more -- that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism, " Sebat says. > >That's many more than researchers have found involved in inherited autism. > >Sebat's research is causing a lot of excitement among autism researchers, including Ezra Susser, an epidemiologist at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute. > > " It changes our thinking about what kind of genetic causes are important, " he says, " and knowing that changes our thinking about what kinds of environmental causes are important. Because I think everybody believes that there is an interplay of genes and environment in most diseases, and that would be true for autism, too. " > >The sort of mutations found in the study tend to occur in eggs or sperm before conception or in the earliest stages of an embryo's development, Susser says. > >The finding suggests that things such as exposure to vaccines after birth probably aren't the main causes of autism. > >Susser also says the study suggests a new direction for researchers seeking the causes of autism. > > " It doesn't mean that we should stop looking for [early-life] exposures, " he says. " It does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. But it does mean we should start looking for exposures that might be preconceptional also. " > >Susser has already shown that older fathers are more likely to have genetic mutations in their sperm, and more likely to have a child who is autistic. He says scientists need to ask whether a parent's exposure to certain chemicals has a similar effect. > >In the meantime, Sebat says, the new research offers at least one practical application. Parents who already have a child with autism could undergo genetic tests to see what sort of mutations are present. If the mutations are spontaneous, rather than inherited, future children would have no special risk for autism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Thanks, Dr. King, for your comments, especially for your reference to Dr. Lathe's explanation as to why the genetic susceptibility hypothesis is insufficient to explain genetics as the primary causal factor in autism. A few comments about this report - I have not yet read the study yet. Sebat " speculates " that there may be 100 genes or more - this is not a finding of this study or any study. He also states that the gene associated with oxytocin was deleted in " one " child. This hardly constitutes a breakthrough, merely an interesting but isolated finding. In another report about this study it was noted that non-heritable " spontaneous " gene mutations were found in only 10% of the study subjects. Since there were only 264 subjects in the study and some were controls who did not have an autism diagnosis it appears that the gene mutations were found in less than 20 individuals, and that most of the individuals with autism –90%– did not have the spontaneous gene deletions found. That hardly constitutes a genetic breakthrough but suggests an area of potential research only. As Dr. King points out prenatal exposure to toxins like thimerosal (shown to cause DNA breaks) is a good area to look at - including pre-natal thimerosal exposure. A most interesting finding of this study is that the gene mutations identified were dispersed throughout the genome and were widely variable and were not inherited, contradicting the widely held view that autism is a highly heritable disorder. Apparently the conventional wisdom imparted by geneticists for years is not supported by Sebat's findings. Dr. Susser seems to claim that his Israeli study showed that mutations in father's sperm is associated with autism. It may be that the sperm of older men is more likely to have genetic mutations than the sperm of younger men, but as far as I know the " old father " Israeli study merely looked at whether older fathers were more likely to have children with autism and concluded that this was the case. The study did not look at why this happened - it did not look at sperm. The " old father " study was conducted on data collected in the 1980's in a population with far lower prevalence of autism that we have reported today, and only 7 or so fathers over 40 had children with autism, calling into questions the statistical significance of the study. It is a hypothesis only that the old fathers in Israel had children with autism because their sperm was mutated. Also, it seems that Dr. Susser has gone out of his way, as is the custom among most scientists, to use this Sebat study to dismiss the vaccine link, because it is a post-natal exposure. I see no good basis to make such a gratuitous statement. Even Susser states in the very same interview that the finding " does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. " So why does the finding support the idea that we should dismiss the vaccine hypothesis? Exposure to potent toxins from vaccines is a known exposure that occurs very early in life. Would Dr. Susser look for other more speculative and unmeasurable early life exposures based on the findings of this study? Why not look at the one known exposure to a toxin that disrupts DNA methylaton and is genotoxic? Using this gene study to argue for dismissal of the vaccine hypothesis makes no sense – once again thrown into the pr mix is an unsupported dismissal of the vaccine hypothesis. Finally, the claim by Sebat that this work provides a practical application of testing parents for mutations is wildly speculative and completely irresponsible. There are very few mutations that are known to contribute to autism so how practical would it be to identify mutations that are identified as spontaneous as ruling out autism susceptibility. Sebat's statements makes no sense and, by suggesting that we are close to helpful genetic tests in this area, is dangerous. This report makes very little sense in many respects, and continues the pattern of geneticists making assertions about their work that is completely speculative, consisting of leaps in fact and logic, and which are very misleading to the public. Very revealing is the finding contained in Sebat's work that the mutations associated with the children with autism, even if present in only 10% of study subjects, are NOT INHERITED. So autism is not a highly heritable disorder. My interpretation of these findings, based on this report and the Newday report only, is that it provides more support for the increasingly strong argument that autism is not genetic. RJK On Mar 15, 2007, at 11:19 PM, G. King wrote: , The following is the email I posted to the NPR in response to this article: http://www.npr.org/contact/ Title: Re: Cause of autism narrowed to " 100 " genes > After reading this on your Internet page: > http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283, > I am bemused that anyone would attempt to > ascribe any " causeless " disorder to " 100 or more genes. " > > Since the rise of " autism " has far outstripped the > rate at which a genetic mutation can spread, to > continue to attribute the cause to genes is something > that only a geneticist who has not studied the increase > in incidence rate from the 1970s to the 2000s would do. > > I suggest that Dr. Sebat should read Dr. Lathe's 2006 > book, " Autism, Brain, and Environment, " which should > help him understand that " autism " is NOT " genetic " but > rather environmental with genetic susceptibility > variability. > > However, I do partly agree with Dr. Sebat when he says, > " ... it does mean we should start looking for exposures > that might be " prepartum also. > > To that end, I offer, Thimerosal in Rho(D) products > given to Rh-negative pregnant women up until about 2001 > and the reality that though no more than 15% of pregnant > women are RH negative, these are the mothers of about > 50% of the children diagnised with DSM " autism " during > the period from mid-1980s until all Thimerosal-preserved > doses expired. > > Moreover, though Thimerosal-preserved Rho(D) products > were phased out in the US by 2001, " coincidentally, " > the US healthcare establishment began recommending > Thimerosal-preserved flu shots for pregnant women > at about the same time as Thimerosal-preserved Rho(D) > products reached their expiration date and, in 2002, > the CDC formalized the recommendation allowing > Thimerosal-preserved flu shots to be given to pregnant > women. > > Thus, the prepartum " smoking gun " of which Dr. Sebat > should be speaking has been found. > > Moreover, tellingly neither the Rho(D) products or the > Thimerosal-containing flu shots have been proven safe > for the developing child in appropriate reproductive > toxicity studies -- another sad commentary on the > state of " healthcare " and " medicine " in the USA today. > > If you and Dr. Sebat will check, the reproductive tox > studies conducted in rats found not only adverse effects > on the developing pups but found that the effects > presisted in the pups and affected their reproductive > capabilities. > > After all Thimeorsal is a known HUMAM TERATOGEN, mutagen > and carcinogen at levels below 1 ppm -- so no one > should be surprised by its reproductive effects. > > Hopefully, you will not only publish this post but also > ask Dr. Sebat to study the available small-scale > reproductive tox studies in rats, chichen eggs, and ... > and exlain why Thimerosal cannot be a major prepartum > " cause " of the harm of which he speaks. > > As to the " preconceptional " exposures, the mercury > from the vaccines and dental mercury amalgam fillings > the mother has may be a contributing factor since > the half-life for the " tissue-bound mercury " in > humans is about 2 decades and, in exposures studies, > the developing fetus has been shown to be a " sink " > for the mercury species present in the mother. > > Respectfully, > > Dr. King > http://www.dr-king.com > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ At 21:33 3/15/07 -0400, christine wrote: > > http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283 > > Health & Science > Cause of Autism Narrowed Down to 100 Genes > > by Jon Hamilton > > " There may in fact be many genes -- I would speculate 100 or more -- > that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism. " > Sebat, Geneticist, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory > > > > All Things Considered, March 15, 2007 & middot; A new study links > autism to subtle changes in a wide range of genes. The finding, published in the journal Science, suggests that autism has many causes, and that whatever triggers autism usually occurs long before birth. > > The study, led by Sebat, a geneticist at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, examined the genes of 264 families. Some families had members with autism, others did not. > > Sebat says the goal was to compare the genes of autistic children with > the genes of their parents. > > " By comparing the two, " he says, " we could find a mutation in the child that was not inherited from either parent. " > > It turned out that children with autism were much more likely than > other kids to have these " spontaneous " mutations. The mutations affected bits of genetic code that tend to appear more than once, like duplicate copies of certain pages of a book. > > In many children with autism, some of the duplicates were deleted. > > For example, Sebat says one child in the study was missing a copy of > the gene for oxytocin a hormone that seems to influence social behavior. > > " That child has one copy of oxytocin instead of the normal two copies, " Sebat says, " and that may have resulted in the corresponding decrease in the levels of oxytocin. " > > It's a change that could have affected normal social development. > > But Sebat says that in other children with autism, the deletions > affected other genes. > > " There may in fact be many genes I would speculate 100 or more -- > that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism, " Sebat says. > > That's many more than researchers have found involved in inherited > autism. > > Sebat's research is causing a lot of excitement among autism > researchers, including Ezra Susser, an epidemiologist at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute. > > " It changes our thinking about what kind of genetic causes are > important, " he says, " and knowing that changes our thinking about what kinds of environmental causes are important. Because I think everybody believes that there is an interplay of genes and environment in most diseases, and that would be true for autism, too. " > > The sort of mutations found in the study tend to occur in eggs or sperm before conception or in the earliest stages of an embryo's development, Susser says. > > The finding suggests that things such as exposure to vaccines after > birth probably aren't the main causes of autism. > > Susser also says the study suggests a new direction for researchers seeking the causes of autism. > > " It doesn't mean that we should stop looking for [early-life] > exposures, " he says. " It does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. But it does mean we should start looking for exposures that might be preconceptional also. " > > Susser has already shown that older fathers are more likely to have genetic mutations in their sperm, and more likely to have a child who is autistic. He says scientists need to ask whether a parent's exposure to certain chemicals has a similar effect. > > In the meantime, Sebat says, the new research offers at least one practical application. Parents who already have a child with autism could undergo genetic tests to see what sort of mutations are present. If the mutations are spontaneous, rather than inherited, future children would have no special risk for autism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 "Spontaneous mutation". Of 100 Genes? On a consistent basis? To explain an epidemic of mercury poisoning with an overlay of autoimmune disease and immune complications? Is this all you got? Is this the evidentiary equivalent of Elmer Fudd with a popgun? Except the level of dishonesty and make-work stupidity is not humorous. NPR story http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283Health & ScienceCause of Autism Narrowed Down to 100 Genesby Jon Hamilton “There may in fact be many genes -- I would speculate 100 or more -- that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism.” Sebat, Geneticist, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory All Things Considered, March 15, 2007 · A new study links autism to subtle changes in a wide range of genes. The finding, published in the journal Science, suggests that autism has many causes, and that whatever triggers autism usually occurs long before birth.The study, led by Sebat, a geneticist at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, examined the genes of 264 families. Some families had members with autism, others did not.Sebat says the goal was to compare the genes of autistic children with the genes of their parents."By comparing the two," he says, "we could find a mutation in the child that was not inherited from either parent."It turned out that children with autism were much more likely than other kids to have these "spontaneous" mutations. The mutations affected bits of genetic code that tend to appear more than once, like duplicate copies of certain pages of a book.In many children with autism, some of the duplicates were deleted.For example, Sebat says one child in the study was missing a copy of the gene for oxytocin – a hormone that seems to influence social behavior."That child has one copy of oxytocin instead of the normal two copies," Sebat says, "and that may have resulted in the corresponding decrease in the levels of oxytocin."It's a change that could have affected normal social development.But Sebat says that in other children with autism, the deletions affected other genes."There may in fact be many genes — I would speculate 100 or more — that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism," Sebat says.That's many more than researchers have found involved in inherited autism.Sebat's research is causing a lot of excitement among autism researchers, including Ezra Susser, an epidemiologist at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute."It changes our thinking about what kind of genetic causes are important," he says, "and knowing that changes our thinking about what kinds of environmental causes are important. Because I think everybody believes that there is an interplay of genes and environment in most diseases, and that would be true for autism, too."The sort of mutations found in the study tend to occur in eggs or sperm before conception or in the earliest stages of an embryo's development, Susser says.The finding suggests that things such as exposure to vaccines after birth probably aren't the main causes of autism.Susser also says the study suggests a new direction for researchers seeking the causes of autism."It doesn't mean that we should stop looking for [early-life] exposures," he says. "It does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. But it does mean we should start looking for exposures that might be preconceptional also."Susser has already shown that older fathers are more likely to have genetic mutations in their sperm, and more likely to have a child who is autistic. He says scientists need to ask whether a parent's exposure to certain chemicals has a similar effect.In the meantime, Sebat says, the new research offers at least one practical application. Parents who already have a child with autism could undergo genetic tests to see what sort of mutations are present. If the mutations are spontaneous, rather than inherited, future children would have no special risk for autism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 What a testament to this group that while few on this list have relevant scientific experience, virtually everyone on this list is more scientifically versed on this issue than those posing as the experts. Truth trumps dishonesty everytime. Re: NPR story I think these folks are missing the mark with their studies, because what can appear to be genetic changes or anomlies, can be epigenetic in nature. For example, their theories do not adequately explain how the mercury vapor from my many mercury-containing dental amalgams may have contributed to the neurological disorders some of my children are afflicted with. I have also learned, in recent years, that various thimerosal-containing vaccines which I have had over the years, can be genotoxic and mutagenic. Millions of others have also had these vaccines over the years. Is anyone actually studying the mutagenicity and genotoxicity of vaccines which are available these days? I somehow doubt it, because many of these vaccines are OK'd by the FDA without this sort of testing being done. It doesn't take a sleuth to find that out. All one needs to do is, find an FDA label for a vaccine, and sure enough, somewhere cerca midway, there will be some mention made that the vaccine has not been evaluated to genotoxicity, mutagenicity, and potential to impair fertility. Gardasil, which is currently being promoted as a vaccine to ward off one type of cancer, has not been evaluated regarding its ability to potentially cause or contribute to causing other cancers. Did I rush out to make sure my daughter got this vaccine when she turned 11? Hell, no ! I would want to see this vaccine studied for several more years, before even thinking about subjecting my daughter to it, if at all! Aasa christine <christinelighthousestudios (DOT) info> wrote: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283Health & ScienceCause of Autism Narrowed Down to 100 Genesby Jon Hamilton “There may in fact be many genes -- I would speculate 100 or more -- that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism.” Sebat, Geneticist, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory All Things Considered, March 15, 2007 · A new study links autism to subtle changes in a wide range of genes. The finding, published in the journal Science, suggests that autism has many causes, and that whatever triggers autism usually occurs long before birth.The study, led by Sebat, a geneticist at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, examined the genes of 264 families. Some families had members with autism, others did not.Sebat says the goal was to compare the genes of autistic children with the genes of their parents."By comparing the two," he says, "we could find a mutation in the child that was not inherited from either parent."It turned out that children with autism were much more likely than other kids to have these "spontaneous" mutations. The mutations affected bits of genetic code that tend to appear more than once, like duplicate copies of certain pages of a book.In many children with autism, some of the duplicates were deleted.For example, Sebat says one child in the study was missing a copy of the gene for oxytocin – a hormone that seems to influence social behavior."That child has one copy of oxytocin instead of the normal two copies," Sebat says, "and that may have resulted in the corresponding decrease in the levels of oxytocin."It's a change that could have affected normal social development.But Sebat says that in other children with autism, the deletions affected other genes."There may in fact be many genes — I would speculate 100 or more — that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism," Sebat says.That's many more than researchers have found involved in inherited autism.Sebat's research is causing a lot of excitement among autism researchers, including Ezra Susser, an epidemiologist at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute."It changes our thinking about what kind of genetic causes are important," he says, "and knowing that changes our thinking about what kinds of environmental causes are important. Because I think everybody believes that there is an interplay of genes and environment in most diseases, and that would be true for autism, too."The sort of mutations found in the study tend to occur in eggs or sperm before conception or in the earliest stages of an embryo's development, Susser says.The finding suggests that things such as exposure to vaccines after birth probably aren't the main causes of autism.Susser also says the study suggests a new direction for researchers seeking the causes of autism."It doesn't mean that we should stop looking for [early-life] exposures," he says. "It does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. But it does mean we should start looking for exposures that might be preconceptional also."Susser has already shown that older fathers are more likely to have genetic mutations in their sperm, and more likely to have a child who is autistic. He says scientists need to ask whether a parent's exposure to certain chemicals has a similar effect.In the meantime, Sebat says, the new research offers at least one practical application. Parents who already have a child with autism could undergo genetic tests to see what sort of mutations are present. If the mutations are spontaneous, rather than inherited, future children would have no special risk for autism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 This all strikes me as being fundamentally dishonest. This research could actually provide some rational conclusions/approaches for further research- instead it is being used to mislead. That is sad. Re: NPR story Thanks, Dr. King, for your comments, especially for your reference to Dr. Lathe's explanation as to why the genetic susceptibility hypothesis is insufficient to explain genetics as the primary causal factor in autism. A few comments about this report - I have not yet read the study yet. Sebat " speculates " that there may be 100 genes or more - this is not a finding of this study or any study. He also states that the gene associated with oxytocin was deleted in " one " child. This hardly constitutes a breakthrough, merely an interesting but isolated finding. In another report about this study it was noted that non-heritable " spontaneous " gene mutations were found in only 10% of the study subjects. Since there were only 264 subjects in the study and some were controls who did not have an autism diagnosis it appears that the gene mutations were found in less than 20 individuals, and that most of the individuals with autism –90%– did not have the spontaneous gene deletions found. That hardly constitutes a genetic breakthrough but suggests an area of potential research only. As Dr. King points out prenatal exposure to toxins like thimerosal (shown to cause DNA breaks) is a good area to look at - including pre-natal thimerosal exposure. A most interesting finding of this study is that the gene mutations identified were dispersed throughout the genome and were widely variable and were not inherited, contradicting the widely held view that autism is a highly heritable disorder. Apparently the conventional wisdom imparted by geneticists for years is not supported by Sebat's findings. Dr. Susser seems to claim that his Israeli study showed that mutations in father's sperm is associated with autism. It may be that the sperm of older men is more likely to have genetic mutations than the sperm of younger men, but as far as I know the " old father " Israeli study merely looked at whether older fathers were more likely to have children with autism and concluded that this was the case. The study did not look at why this happened - it did not look at sperm. The " old father " study was conducted on data collected in the 1980's in a population with far lower prevalence of autism that we have reported today, and only 7 or so fathers over 40 had children with autism, calling into questions the statistical significance of the study. It is a hypothesis only that the old fathers in Israel had children with autism because their sperm was mutated. Also, it seems that Dr. Susser has gone out of his way, as is the custom among most scientists, to use this Sebat study to dismiss the vaccine link, because it is a post-natal exposure. I see no good basis to make such a gratuitous statement. Even Susser states in the very same interview that the finding " does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. " So why does the finding support the idea that we should dismiss the vaccine hypothesis? Exposure to potent toxins from vaccines is a known exposure that occurs very early in life. Would Dr. Susser look for other more speculative and unmeasurable early life exposures based on the findings of this study? Why not look at the one known exposure to a toxin that disrupts DNA methylaton and is genotoxic? Using this gene study to argue for dismissal of the vaccine hypothesis makes no sense – once again thrown into the pr mix is an unsupported dismissal of the vaccine hypothesis. Finally, the claim by Sebat that this work provides a practical application of testing parents for mutations is wildly speculative and completely irresponsible. There are very few mutations that are known to contribute to autism so how practical would it be to identify mutations that are identified as spontaneous as ruling out autism susceptibility. Sebat's statements makes no sense and, by suggesting that we are close to helpful genetic tests in this area, is dangerous. This report makes very little sense in many respects, and continues the pattern of geneticists making assertions about their work that is completely speculative, consisting of leaps in fact and logic, and which are very misleading to the public. Very revealing is the finding contained in Sebat's work that the mutations associated with the children with autism, even if present in only 10% of study subjects, are NOT INHERITED. So autism is not a highly heritable disorder. My interpretation of these findings, based on this report and the Newday report only, is that it provides more support for the increasingly strong argument that autism is not genetic. RJK On Mar 15, 2007, at 11:19 PM, G. King wrote: , The following is the email I posted to the NPR in response to this article: http://www.npr.org/contact/ Title: Re: Cause of autism narrowed to " 100 " genes > After reading this on your Internet page: > http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283, > I am bemused that anyone would attempt to > ascribe any " causeless " disorder to " 100 or more genes. " > > Since the rise of " autism " has far outstripped the > rate at which a genetic mutation can spread, to > continue to attribute the cause to genes is something > that only a geneticist who has not studied the increase > in incidence rate from the 1970s to the 2000s would do. > > I suggest that Dr. Sebat should read Dr. Lathe's 2006 > book, " Autism, Brain, and Environment, " which should > help him understand that " autism " is NOT " genetic " but > rather environmental with genetic susceptibility > variability. > > However, I do partly agree with Dr. Sebat when he says, > " ... it does mean we should start looking for exposures > that might be " prepartum also. > > To that end, I offer, Thimerosal in Rho(D) products > given to Rh-negative pregnant women up until about 2001 > and the reality that though no more than 15% of pregnant > women are RH negative, these are the mothers of about > 50% of the children diagnised with DSM " autism " during > the period from mid-1980s until all Thimerosal-preserved > doses expired. > > Moreover, though Thimerosal-preserved Rho(D) products > were phased out in the US by 2001, " coincidentally, " > the US healthcare establishment began recommending > Thimerosal-preserved flu shots for pregnant women > at about the same time as Thimerosal-preserved Rho(D) > products reached their expiration date and, in 2002, > the CDC formalized the recommendation allowing > Thimerosal-preserved flu shots to be given to pregnant > women. > > Thus, the prepartum " smoking gun " of which Dr. Sebat > should be speaking has been found. > > Moreover, tellingly neither the Rho(D) products or the > Thimerosal-containing flu shots have been proven safe > for the developing child in appropriate reproductive > toxicity studies -- another sad commentary on the > state of " healthcare " and " medicine " in the USA today. > > If you and Dr. Sebat will check, the reproductive tox > studies conducted in rats found not only adverse effects > on the developing pups but found that the effects > presisted in the pups and affected their reproductive > capabilities. > > After all Thimeorsal is a known HUMAM TERATOGEN, mutagen > and carcinogen at levels below 1 ppm -- so no one > should be surprised by its reproductive effects. > > Hopefully, you will not only publish this post but also > ask Dr. Sebat to study the available small-scale > reproductive tox studies in rats, chichen eggs, and ... > and exlain why Thimerosal cannot be a major prepartum > " cause " of the harm of which he speaks. > > As to the " preconceptional " exposures, the mercury > from the vaccines and dental mercury amalgam fillings > the mother has may be a contributing factor since > the half-life for the " tissue-bound mercury " in > humans is about 2 decades and, in exposures studies, > the developing fetus has been shown to be a " sink " > for the mercury species present in the mother. > > Respectfully, > > Dr. King > http://www.dr-king.com > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ At 21:33 3/15/07 -0400, christine wrote: > > http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8926283 > > Health & Science > Cause of Autism Narrowed Down to 100 Genes > > by Jon Hamilton > > " There may in fact be many genes -- I would speculate 100 or more -- > that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism. " > Sebat, Geneticist, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory > > > > All Things Considered, March 15, 2007 & middot; A new study links > autism to subtle changes in a wide range of genes. The finding, published in the journal Science, suggests that autism has many causes, and that whatever triggers autism usually occurs long before birth. > > The study, led by Sebat, a geneticist at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York, examined the genes of 264 families. Some families had members with autism, others did not. > > Sebat says the goal was to compare the genes of autistic children with > the genes of their parents. > > " By comparing the two, " he says, " we could find a mutation in the child that was not inherited from either parent. " > > It turned out that children with autism were much more likely than > other kids to have these " spontaneous " mutations. The mutations affected bits of genetic code that tend to appear more than once, like duplicate copies of certain pages of a book. > > In many children with autism, some of the duplicates were deleted. > > For example, Sebat says one child in the study was missing a copy of > the gene for oxytocin a hormone that seems to influence social behavior. > > " That child has one copy of oxytocin instead of the normal two copies, " Sebat says, " and that may have resulted in the corresponding decrease in the levels of oxytocin. " > > It's a change that could have affected normal social development. > > But Sebat says that in other children with autism, the deletions > affected other genes. > > " There may in fact be many genes I would speculate 100 or more -- > that play some role in cognitive development, and when they are altered, could cause autism, " Sebat says. > > That's many more than researchers have found involved in inherited > autism. > > Sebat's research is causing a lot of excitement among autism > researchers, including Ezra Susser, an epidemiologist at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University and the New York State Psychiatric Institute. > > " It changes our thinking about what kind of genetic causes are > important, " he says, " and knowing that changes our thinking about what kinds of environmental causes are important. Because I think everybody believes that there is an interplay of genes and environment in most diseases, and that would be true for autism, too. " > > The sort of mutations found in the study tend to occur in eggs or sperm before conception or in the earliest stages of an embryo's development, Susser says. > > The finding suggests that things such as exposure to vaccines after > birth probably aren't the main causes of autism. > > Susser also says the study suggests a new direction for researchers seeking the causes of autism. > > " It doesn't mean that we should stop looking for [early-life] > exposures, " he says. " It does not mean that we should stop looking for early life exposures. But it does mean we should start looking for exposures that might be preconceptional also. " > > Susser has already shown that older fathers are more likely to have genetic mutations in their sperm, and more likely to have a child who is autistic. He says scientists need to ask whether a parent's exposure to certain chemicals has a similar effect. > > In the meantime, Sebat says, the new research offers at least one practical application. Parents who already have a child with autism could undergo genetic tests to see what sort of mutations are present. If the mutations are spontaneous, rather than inherited, future children would have no special risk for autism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 compare this to a recent report which (coincidentally) also talks about mutations on a similar number of newly discovered cancer genes.... http://www.guardian.co.uk/genes/article/0,,2028720,00.html " The number and patterns of these mutations are an archaeological signature of something that has happened to that cancer in the past, something that has been implicated in its causation, " ... " This must be telling us something about previous exposures, perhaps to environmental chemicals and also abnormalities of DNA repair in these cancers. " > > " Spontaneous mutation " . Of 100 Genes? On a consistent basis? > > To explain an epidemic of mercury poisoning with an overlay of autoimmune disease and immune complications? > > Is this all you got? > > Is this the evidentiary equivalent of Elmer Fudd with a popgun? > > Except the level of dishonesty and make-work stupidity is not humorous. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2008 Report Share Posted January 21, 2008 lotusgirl23 wrote: > Hi All- > > I just heard a story on NPR's All Things Considered discussing > Chandler Burr's 'The Perfect Scent'. You can listen to it here: > http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18238465 I > believe he likens the Natural Perfume movement to trying to build a > skyscraper using thatch & mud! I believe the challenges in using > naturals only heightens the art and alchemy. I guess the perfect > scent is such a subjective thing. Synthetics producing a headache > with a side of nausea-not so perfect for me... > Hi Jen Most of us *shrug shoulders* just don't like synthetics. We find the naturals rich and luscious. For him to compare a liquid art to a brick-and-mortar building (which is a rehash of his article in Oprah magazine some months ago) shows a lack of understand or willingness to accept the spectrum of participants in the perfumery industry. Some recent quotes - an older quotes that I can't take the time to look up - always paint natural perfumers or our customers are religious fanatics. I don't know why he keeps harping on this. He really equates our love of natural aromatics with spirituality and religion: > For the simplest reason: They don’t want to frighten off customers. > Customers can frighten in three ways. First, they’re “all naturals” > freaks who think that synthetics are “bad” in some theological way. > But religious people are not logical, and the all-natural people are > deeply, fervently religious, and I have no more to say to them than I > do to any other theocratic fundamentalists. If naturals are simply > spiritually better, then my empirical position is worthless and I am > wrong by definition. That’s the way religious truth works. In my view, > however, religious fanaticism sucks, and it is no more logical to > build a perfume today only of natural materials than it is to build a > building today only out of mud, wood, and thatch. I replied to the comment on the blog he was quoted in above by a little snark - that perhaps there are Holy Rollers among those who adore synthetic aromatics (Burr). Such silliness. > Anya- I had just come in from clearing the ice and snow from my walk > yesterday to find your posting on enfleurage. My seed catalogs and > your talk of jasmine and gardenia remind me spring will indeed > arrive. My garden is sleeping so peacefully, six foot plants right > now sound like crazy talk! > We're having a relatively warm winter here in Miami. Everything is budding out, and I have to take care to protect them if a frost or chill threatens. Dream of the fragrant harvest, wherever you are, and make plans for an enfleurage and distillation season ahead. -- Sincerely, Anya Anya's Garden http://AnyasGarden.com - perfumes, aromatics, classes, consultation Natural Perfumers Guild http://NaturalPerfumersGuild.com 1400 member Natural Perfumery group - / Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 > > Hi All- > > I just heard a story on NPR's All Things Considered discussing > Chandler Burr's 'The Perfect Scent'. You can listen to it here: > http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18238465 I > believe he likens the Natural Perfume movement to trying to build a > skyscraper using thatch & mud! I believe the challenges in using > naturals only heightens the art and alchemy. I guess the perfect > scent is such a subjective thing. Synthetics producing a headache > with a side of nausea-not so perfect for me... > Hi, I thought the comparison of natural perfumery to architecture was interesting. Architects love working with natural materials, but the cost of doing so is often prohibitive. We'd rather use real hardwood instead of veneer on mdf, granite instead of plastic laminate, linen wall covering instead of vinyl, marble floors instead of epoxy terrazzo, limestone instead of precast, wool carpet instead of nylon, glass instead of plexi, and the list goes on... Many cheap synthetic copies of traditional materials have now proven to be dangerously toxic, not to mention ugly. Anyway,that's my defense of natural perfumery through the architecture metaphor! - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.