Autism Theory

[peaceful_mama]

*please move if you think it belongs somewhere else*

I had this odd thought on the way home from DS's kindy registration and my talk with his teacher (see super long post)

Does anyone think that maybe our huge amount of "SPD", other "sensory stuff" and "processing issues" and children with autism....

Could be somehow related to our increasing rate of induced births (less time in the womb for brain development?) and exposure to the drugs used in induction? Or to pain drugs used during birth?

My DS1 (who I posted about) was an induced birth 3 days prior to edd, cytotec, pitocin, stadol used during the birth. (he was also vaccinated to 6 months and at about 2.5 did get one MMR at insistence of DH.....neither of the other two are vaxed at all)

My other children (who do not have SN of any sort) were a drug-free hospital birth and a home waterbirth.

Genetics include mine (unknown, adopted) and DH (no known factors)

Coincidence?

[Kristine233]

IMO no. My Autistic son was over a week over due and looking back we know he was Autistic from birth. There are a lot of genetic things related to Autism (or similar) in my family tree as well.

IMO, and this is strictly my opinion, other things can mimic Autism... including drug reactions and vax reactions.

[dinahx]

IMO Aluminum & Mercury (from vaxes but also fillings, environment) plus lack of genetic resistance to these clear neurotoxins makes a lot more sense than method of birth. Remember, these heavy metals accumulate up the food chain & down generations also. IMO we will never disprove this until aluminum & mercury testing becomes routine, like lead testing.

[sbgrace]

I don't think it has much if anything to do with birth. That's because fraternal twins share no more risk of both having autism than any other sibling pair (who would have had different births). Identical twins, on the other hand, almost always both are on the spectrum if one is though they can be in different places on that spectrum. This indicates genetics plays a huge role but environment pulls in somehow though as a mom w/twins I will say the early environmental impacts on twins are often very similar as well. I can't see one getting shots and another not or one breastfeeding and another not or whatever. Autism is clearly complex. They've got some ideas of the causes of some though..if you search medical journals you can see the associated DNA causes and how that might play out in environment too. For example if the affected gene has to do with glutamate processing diet is going to play some role.

Anyway, if birth was playing a big role I'd expect to see some increased risk in incidence for a fraternal twin vs. other siblings.

[lovebug]

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by sbgrace

Anyway, if birth was playing a big role I'd expect to see some increased risk in incidence for a fraternal twin vs. other siblings.

Not necessarily. How a person reacts to trauma/stress is highly subjective, this includes neonates, and fetuses. No two people, whether they are fraternal or even identical twins will have a will have the same emotional/psychic experience to their birth because we are all unique.

To the OP, I think your hypothesis is a possible reason for some kids on the spectrum.

[Lollybrat]

There have been some researchers who theorize that there may be a connection between the use of pitocin in labor and autism spectrum disorders. You can google "pitocin and autism" and find a bunch of stuff.

My son has ASD and was born in an induced labor using pitocin (2 weeks late and DS was starting to show signs of fetal distress). But I really don't know if there is a connection. I do believe that DS was born with autism and that it has a genetic link in both my and DH's families. (I am also adopted, but searched for my birthparents years ago.)

Even if there is a connection between pitocin/induced labor and autism, it's kind of a "chicken and egg" question at this point: Does having an induced labor raise the risk of the baby having autism, or if there something about the fetus with autism that increases the chances of needing an induction?

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by peaceful_mama

Could be somehow related to our increasing rate of induced births (less time in the womb for brain development?) and exposure to the drugs used in induction? Or to pain drugs used during birth?

No.

My DD with PDD-NOS was not induced and was not preterm.

My gifted/talented/athletic DD was induced.

[StephandOwen]

Who knows. DS was induced 9 days before his due date (born exactly 1 week before his due date). Pitocin, cytotec, epidural were all used. Whether one/any/all of them had any affect on ds.... I have no idea.

[lovermont]

I think I find that people consider an issue that is on the rise (adhd, autism, etc) and make a connection to external forces that could contribute to those issues (birth issues, pollution, vaxes, etc) and the thing is... we don't know. It is interesting that these things are on the rise (and adhd, I know, is on the spectrum) but it's complex, like a pp said and I don't think it will be X means Y.
The other thought to throw into the mix is that there is discussion around if adhd/autism/etc is being diagnosed more readily than in the past.

Of interest: my bil has autism and none of his three siblings do. He's the second child. All 4 children were born via c-section from '83-'93. In contrast, dh has a full scholarship and stipend to Brown to get his phd. So who knows?

I do think there is a difference between kids born with autism (as my bil was and some pp have mentioned) and those that seem to "become" autistic. Makes me think they are two different diagnosis and the behaviors falling under the autism "umbrella" is very large....

[sbgrace]

Originally Posted by Mirzam

Not necessarily. How a person reacts to trauma/stress is highly subjective, this includes neonates, and fetuses. No two people, whether they are fraternal or even identical twins will have a will have the same emotional/psychic experience to their birth because we are all unique.

To the OP, I think your hypothesis is a possible reason for some kids on the spectrum.

I would expect there to be some statistical increase between those who shared the exact same pregnancy and birth vs. those siblings who didn't if birth was a huge impact. It just doesn't make sense that the stats are exactly the same if this theory is a factor for many/most. Add to that we know the genetics more and more and it doesn't seem it's going in this direction to me.

[peaceful_mama]

Of *course* genetics plays a part....whether it is a particular gene(s)? or something about the genetics of a person that makes them more susceptible to environmental triggers. Which I think it's possible both of the above could be true.

you can't have something as prevalent as autism is now and not have more than one cause.

Another night possibly I'll google pitocin and autism....it'll be an interesting read. Again, another thing that like vaccines is steadily increasing....along with the autism rate.

Again, I don't think there's ONE cause I just wondered if anyone had heard of any possible connection between any of this "stuff" and the rise in autism.

And of course it doesn't happen to *every* person--back to the possibility that certain people have something about their genetics that make them more susceptible to drugs, chemicals, whatever from the environment.

[dinahx]

Or some people have something in their genes that makes them RESISTANT to thing that are inherently toxic. I find genetic resistance, as a concept, to be much less blame the victimy that genetic susceptibility, just sayin.

[slsurface]

I don't think that it can be blamed on any one factor. My son had a perfectly natural birth, I took absolutely no medications while preggo, and maintained an organic diet - yet he still has SPD. More than likely it is a very complex combination of issues. Some of the top factors that I think are likely include:

1) Increased use of heavy metals and synthetic fertilizers since the 1940s. These have permeated the environment and are common in the water and food supply throughout the world. These compounds can affect our children in two ways. First. these accumulate in the fat deposits in the body and the body taps fat deposits while "building" baby. The brain is mainly composed of fat molecules and is very susceptible to these chemical compounds. Second, there is a strong likelihood that these compounds have also affected us on the cellular/genetic level. We are just now learning the ill effects of PVC, for example - a plastic that is everywhere, even our water pipes. Many other plastics have been recently found to be estrogen inhibitors or mimics as well. These compounds may be causing genetic abnormalities to occur in our eggs/sperm, thus affecting our children.

2) Our lifestyle increasingly demands that children have to be put in daycare and school situations and younger ages. There is an unrealistic, IMO, expectation that even 2 year olds have the ability to self-regulate, sit down, and be quite. We put unreasonable demands on our children. Those that can conform to these demands are "normal", whereas those who have more difficulties with regulation are "abnormal". This brings increased awareness of the wide spectrum of behavior and neurology in the population. Looking at my own SPD son, I think that he would appear perfectly "normal" if we were living on a farm and he was doing hard work every day. He is just not wired for a classroom setting. So what I'm trying to say is that there is inherently a level of genetic diversity in the population - but our social expectations limit which individuals are considered neurotypical. Thus, autism and SPD appear on the rise because we keep narrowing the definition of "normal".

3) It is possible that a whole suite of medical interventions and treatments, as well as nutritional issues during pregnancy could also exacerbate the problem as well. This could include everything from early and repeated vax to drugs given to a mother while preggo, or foods with artificial flavors and colors. These factors may not actually cause the problem, but may act as a trigger that activates a genetic predisposition. My own personal theory is that ultrasounds are a potential trigger. These cause localized heat and potential cellular damage. Unfortunately, I was not informed of the dangers with DS1 - who received numerous ultrasounds. He has SPD and I do tend to wonder if the repeated ultrasounds exacerbated the genetic potential.

It sucks, because we will probably never have an answer. And it makes me sick to think about how we, as a society, continue to pump toxic poisons into the environment and our bodies. I think things are likely to get much worse unless we make some major changes in our civilization.

[RobinM78]

So I have a kind of out-there theory as the result of reading up more on neuro-diversity. From listening to Temple Grandin and other advocacy groups we know that autism is an important trait to exist in society. Many of our gains have come from autistic individuals (such as Einstein) and it's a pretty good assumption that we wouldn't have iPhones, Google, etc. without autism. Of course we don't want everyone to have autism but having a few individuals with autism helps society advance. We need people who are more interested in 'things' than people.
Simon Baron-Cohen's research tends to suggest that autism runs higher in high-tech areas - Silicon Valley, etc. and there's plenty of research that shows parents (and particularly mothers) who are engineers, etc have a higher chance of having autistic children. We also know that because of the epigenome changes in overall genetics can happen rather quickly - and there have been quite interesting studies linking environmental changes to significant changes in subsequent generations (there was one study a while back about the effects that famine in the 30s had in women of lower generations. I'd love to get my hands on this again).
At any rate, what could be happening is that we're living in an increasingly high-tech world and this is our genes taking it to make sure we have the capacity for it.

But on the other hand I also believe that autism is the result of many environmental issues combining with genes - metabolic, toxicity or any type of 'damage' has the effect of rewiring the brain. My son's been a strong responder to biomedical so I really can't deny this side.

Anyway, this is a very interesting topic indeed!

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by RobinM78

Many of our gains have come from autistic individuals (such as Einstein) and it's a pretty good assumption that we wouldn't have iPhones, Google, etc. without autism. Of course we don't want everyone to have autism but having a few individuals with autism helps society advance.

I like your post!

I agree that it's a interplay between genes and environment. My DH is a brilliant aerospace engineer, and our DD with autism is very like him, but the traits got taken one step too far so that it is very difficult for her to function. I think that an exisiting trait got mixed with something from the environment and intensified in less than good way.

If we can get her figured out, she may have a lot to contribute to society.

I also think that people with the autism code in their genes are more successful in our techie society than they would have been in the past, and therefore more likely to find each (and pass on their genes), more likely to get their kids dx'ed, more likely to get services for their kids. This trait that could have made someone unsuccessful in the past now *can* make someone successful.

[savithny]

Originally Posted by RobinM78

Simon Baron-Cohen's research tends to suggest that autism runs higher in high-tech areas - Silicon Valley, etc. and there's plenty of research that shows parents (and particularly mothers) who are engineers, etc have a higher chance of having autistic children.
But on the other hand I also believe that autism is the result of many environmental issues combining with genes - metabolic, toxicity or any type of 'damage' has the effect of rewiring the brain. My son's been a strong responder to biomedical so I really can't deny this side.

Anyway, this is a very interesting topic indeed!

Up until very recently, women were much less likely to go to college, and were discouraged from studying hard sciences and math when they did so. People married earlier in life, to people they *met* earlier in life, and were more likely to marry someone based on living in the same neighborhood or attending the same church rather than being in the same classes in college.

I think there's definitely something to the idea that we are *breeding* for spectrum issues. In the "old days," an engineer type with a few SPD or spectrum traits would probably marry a non-engineer type and have children with a sprinkling of his traits. Women who now become engineers in the past would not have had that opportunity and would not have married engineer types either, keeping the "engineer genes" to one parent or the other in any given couple.

Now its far more usual for geeks to marry each other and the kids to get such traits from both sides.

[AllyRae]

I've always thought that my ds's autism and spd was triggered by his 53 hour induction birth, the epidural (the last part of my induction) and his vacuum extraction. If I could go back in time, I would have wanted him to be a c-section to avoid all of that (he was never going to be a natural birth...various reasons for that.)

[lovermont]

Originally Posted by RobinM78

So I have a kind of out-there theory as the result of reading up more on neuro-diversity. From listening to Temple Grandin and other advocacy groups we know that autism is an important trait to exist in society. Many of our gains have come from autistic individuals (such as Einstein) and it's a pretty good assumption that we wouldn't have iPhones, Google, etc. without autism. Of course we don't want everyone to have autism but having a few individuals with autism helps society advance. We need people who are more interested in 'things' than people.
Anyway, this is a very interesting topic indeed!

Yes, this is interesting. I've seen info on this before and think it's fascinating... but also frustrating. I just don't see any way that my bil has an extraordinary gift, as I've read some others do. And sadly, he's very very frustrated. He wants to drive (like his brothers), go to college (the same one one of his brothers went to), get married (my sister, like his sister married me), and get a job... and yet he can't. There's no way. It's so frustrating. So when I read things like this it adds to that frustration, because it's just not the case for everyone (or even most on the spectrum? Maybe we just feel like it's a lot because those are the people we hear about in the media?).

And then to read what others posted after this post is also interesting and explains more why not *every* person on the spectrum would have these abilities.

[Linda on the move]

Originally Posted by lovermont

There's no way. It's so frustrating. So when I read things like this it adds to that frustration, because it's just not the case for everyone (or even most on the spectrum? Maybe we just feel like it's a lot because those are the people we hear about in the media?).

I totally get where you are coming from. The thing I find frustrating are stories of how mothers "cured" their child's autism because they always make me feel like I was supposed to "fix" my DD. I've done everything I can for her, I've done my best. She isn't "normal" and I don't see "normal" as a reasonable goal for her. It's really hard to say if she is doing as well as possible. I don't know if she does as well as she does because of the things I've gotten right, or if she could be doing even better if I had gotten more things right.

I've no way to evaluate my parenting. If I were just going by how she is doing, I'd consider myself a complete failure because she is barely functioning, but may be I'm doing a stellar job and that is why she is functioning at all. I just don't know. My other child is thriving, but I sometimes wonder if I'm really just not the best parent for a SN kid. I really don't have a clue what I'm doing most of the time.