DD and I were just discussing knee jerk research. Not to put this study down in the least. We need more studies like it. But, somebody.......... and make those somebodies professionals..... will ignore the disclaimer that more research needs to be done and start buying it as fact.

There are other things to cloud the picture. What if the children were sired by older men, because men with mild autism are likely to be less socially comfortable and marry later?

It had been assumed for too many years that genetic errors caused by mutations were always the fault of older mothers, since their eggs were in existance since the mother's inception. It's refreshing to see that at least researchers are looking to the possibility that the other half of the gene pool could be responsible for some problems.

I have worked several times with autistic children in the course of my career. I suspected autism once in a child who was in hospital for another illness. She was just a tiny baby, but something about her just didn't "feel" right. There was no desire on its part to have any sort of close human contact. I think, years later she was finally diagnosed with it.

I wish they wouldn't publish this kind of stuff until they knew something for sure or at least after years of testing. I get so tired of all the maybes and what ifs you see in the papers. Most of the headlines these days say, There may be a devastating storm,blah blah blah,or Scientists say that possibly in 200 years we will turn into jelly,or researchers have found that cats might be responsible for the rise in house prices. Doesn't anyone know anything for sure these days? and if not,I don't want to hear about it.

Actually I don't think it's possible to know anything "for sure" these days, but I also am tired of pseudo-scientific studies that pretend that they do. As soon as I heard this one, I also heard disclaimers about the source and about the size of the sample. Just another "scare" to get our knickers in a twist.

As an aside, how old was Larry King when he fathered a couple of totally ordinary kids?

Other than saying that this might make some prospective trophy wives think twice before they start out on life's journey with some rich old geezer, I have to agree with Marda & Pidge.

It seems like everyday there's another study purporting to "prove" that one thing or another causes a dreaded medical condition or disease. These usually are "disproved" with great fanfare sometime later.

It all seems to me to be like the little boy who cried wolf too many times. Sometimes I think it's no wonder that science is under attack when there's so much media coverage about "facts" that are masquerading as science.

Fact is accepted fiction

Actually the total sample was much larger than the article linked indicated according to the one linked below.
It has long been suspected that autism was linked to older parents. But, this study seems to implicate only older fathers, not mothers.
The study is thought to be worthy because it included every Israeli registering for the draft during some specified period. And since all but the Orthodox must register, that is a significant number of the total population of Israel.
Statistical analysis was applied and the results viewed with a look at socio economic variations and other factors, a confidence factor of 95% was realized.
I have an autistic grandson and avidly read all I can about the disorder and what may cause it. There is little doubt that autism is genetic in nature, and I can't help but wonder about my great grandchildren.
I read this study with great interst and consider the possibility that the chances of having an autistic child increase dramatically with the age of the father very exciting. It gives hope that there might be a way to lessen the probability of concieving a child with such a disability.
Pooh-pooing this study, an idea of prevention in it's infancy, seems a little like ignoring the fact that most peptic ulcers can be cured with antibiotics, or that breast cancer can be caused by HRT.
Linda C

Here is a link that might be useful: A more scientific article

I think the problem with people's reactions to so many studies is not the fault of the scientists, but the fault of the media, who want to have their daily health miracle story, so every small step along a lengthy research road is taken out of context and reported as only the headline element. It is treated by the media as though it's the final word on the subject, but anyone reading carefully realises that the scientists consider it simply another stepping stone along that long road.

I don't think anybody poo pooed the study, and the fact that somebody is on to something. They are on to something and it's exciting. But, it's just a statistic at this point until the results can be repeated. That's one of the most valuable tools of using the scientific method. Results must be repeatable. Until it is, we guess at the meaning of the numbers and extrapolate and it's a theory. This sample was taken on one ethnicity and it did not go on to see what percent of the fathers could/might have any form of autism....it just simply looked at age. What if.........and it could happen...........it is then found that a high percentage of the older fathers implicated also have the disease? Given it's assumed to be genetic and btw no gene for it has yet been mapped.... What if in other ethnic populations the same results do not occur? What if a lot of things. This is a spring board for further research and that's about it. Perhaps that great breakthrough.

It's not the alpha and omega. That's what the poo pooing is all about.

I probably didn't express myself very well. I was trying to say that it's the media who turn these things into the alpha and the omega, with their "miracle cure" stories.

Didn't mean anyone here was rubbishing the study, just the reporting of it.

I understand, sara. When I find a subject that seems interesting, reported by, say USA Today I like to look further for more info.
I believe the study is a good one and the info valid, but because of the way it was reported, it seemed a little sensationalized. It sort of seems to have gained a little of the aura of those much forwarded emails about say, the Toilet Seat Spider, or new information that antiperspirants cause breast cancer.
I don't believe this in in that same genre.
Linda C

Linda, I was intrigued by this particular bit of research because it was within a certain group. The possibility of a recessive gene was not mentioned in the news report. A Jewish friend has a son that is mentally retarded. His problem seems to be caused by such a recessive gene that seems to occur within that group. The condition even has a name, but I can't remember what it is.

Has this research been done in other groups? If the same results show, then, possibly they have found a reason for some of the cases. Of course, any work done must first come after proper diagnosis. Misdiagnosis is a constant problem.

Sometimes I think that some of the autisic children get that way because Mom just won't shut her mouth long enough to give the child some peace. It's easier just to tune people out.

Genetics is a fascinating field. It's one of those things that I wish had been around when I was going to college.

Children don't "get that way"...they are born that way. That's what a genetic disorder is...not something aquired, but innate.
People in Israel are a fairly wide variety of ethnicity, from northern European to eastern european to southern European and certainly middle eastern.
I know of quite a few autistic people and any mis diagnosis came on the side of missing a diagnosis of autism at an early enough age to get some meaningful therapy.
And you can bet there will be lots of looking at the statistics of the ages of the father when an autistic person was born.
Statistics can't prove what causes anything, but just suggest the probability of something occurring in a given circumstances. Then the scientists go to work to find out why.
Years ago it was thought that "infantile paralysis" was caused by getting tired and chilled and swimming was the worst offender. And that "childbed fever" had nothing to do with attending Dr's who didn't wash their hands between patients, and that smoking would help you keep your figure. Statistics encouraged scientists to look further.

One thing I have not heard any further studies about was the disproportunatly large number of childhood cancers in children living very near power lines. Never heard if anyone discovered why and if the study was continuing.
Anyone know?
Linda C

Linda, here's a link to a New Scientist article from last year which gives an update on various research - the results are more than a little inconclusive.

Here is a link that might be useful: New Scientist: childhood leukaemia and power lines

Sounds like a definite maybe....or positivly perhaps.
But...I would still avoid living under a power line.
Linda C

Even as late a the 60's and into the seventies people were still "blaming" the mother for mental illnesses that we now know are brain disorders.

Aggie if your remark about autism maybe being the mother's fault wasn't just flippant, I'd like to suggest you read up on it...it simply is not true and never was and perpetuating that myth is a grave disservice to people with autism everywhere.

If it was flippant, I'd like to suggest that mental illness and the ignorance and stigma that surrounds it is hardly something to make jokes about.

Sheila, I think I was just more or less thinking out loud. I have known a couple of children that had mothers that talked constantly. These children, I'm sure were not truly autistic, but for that particular time of their lives they simply did not react to anyone in anyway that could be considered "normal". It's speculation I know, but for these children, I wondered if it was a defense mechanism to shut out the blah, blah, blah, most of which was criticism about behavior.

pb, you're either autistic or not. It is not a defence mechan ism. The poor kids you speak of sound as though they were just tuning things ouoit in self-defence.

This was so extremely rare 40 years ago.

The statistics that were just released [1 in ~104 now?], were extra high in New Jersey. They had 1 out of 94 births. These are terrifing numbers. In ~5 years it will be 1 in 40....

WHAT IS THE BIG PICTURE? the context of change?

It seems somehow correlated .....with metropolitan density, or tank farms or modernity, Electricity, or?
Does being poor, or rural, or uneducated help?

How do we try to think creatively and brainstorm possibilities? What isn't being considered?

KEEP the PUBLIC INFORMED on AUTISM DISTRIBUTION.
Gee, WE ALL need to to see statistical MAPS, publicly posted, NOW, and as updated, 2x per year. Pennsylvania has one. It's denser towards the east,too.
How do the autism statistics MAP, worldwide? How do they chart through TIME? If we can all see the hot, and the low spots, the where and when, people can see correlations.

Even if it is embarrasing, people will know something about local conditions, and possible factors.

Large groups are more efficient at getting to right answers.

The cause has got to be part of, what seems to be a great modern gift,or boon, otherwise the rate, wouldn't be increasing so rapidly.

EXPOSURE? Maybe, but to what?

Drugs? OTCs?
Cockroaches? Changes in bug populations?
Changes in Microbe disdributions?

Frankenfoods? Boy, now that we're eating them in unknown mixes every day, they are going to be hard to test for. But, areas of the world that modern agri- hasn't reached, would then stand right out on a MAP!

Overlays of chemicals seem like a possibility.

One thing it might be, is the legally mandated flameproofing, on mattresses and baby clothes and pjs. Aren't all fireproofing agents, strongly carcinogenic? Although a lot of it will come out with fabric softener, [3 capfulls into the wash cyle,] mattresses can't be stuffed in the washer.
Dry cleaning chemicals?
Coatings?
Mercury was sloppily used, for centuries, by the vat/ton, to swing lighthouse lamps around. That sure messes up the baseline for measurements of what we think was a pristine sea, a hundred + years ago.

What are the known teratrogenics?
Carcinogens change cells too....

Family genes, and old dads, have been around for eons, so they couldn't be the the main drivers in the increase. Something could be nudging them?

It IS something common, though, or, a common combo, and ~recent.

Concerns, and new creative, even wacky, theories, are very helpful at this, beginning, stage.

Congress is now funding new research. Sure hope it includes distribution maps, especially interactive ones, with a related comment option.

How about a 'Possibilities of the Causes of Autism" Thread? It might help.

It would be terrible if some one has an idea out there, that would be helpful for research, and nobody else sees it.

Hope this is a a springboard for ideas.

Sorry, i do seem to be a bit,...

I read in last months issue of "Working Mothers" that they are tossing around the "too much tv" theory. Makes sense to me. How many of us over the age of 50 got to sit in front of the tv for hours on end? Then if the kids arent watching tv they are playing video games. Too much visual stimulation for young brains...imho of course.

It's a subject one should feel intensely about. Hello Florey. I think your idea of distribution maps for any disease or condition is a wonderful opportunity for research in the future. What a tool the internet is for just this purpose. See my thread on the backyard bird count. It's amazing what a vast sea of information can say when the input comes from everywhere in great numbers.

Austism is usually diagnosable in very young children, still as toddlers often. I don't see how too much tv could have had a devastating effect at such a young age.

I've heard something about the innoculations given to young children having something in them to prolong the life of the innoculant...sorry I don't remember what the substance was. (I'm thinking mercury but surely not!) Anyway, Don Imus's wife was on his program talking about it and urging that parents ask their pediatrician to specify that the shots not contain whatever the additive was...no proof it was the culprit but urging that studies needed to be done. Only one manufacturer was providing the unadulterated shots.

Scary and so sad. I wonder too if the diagnosis of autism is just more thorough and reported more often nowadays ...especially if the rate is not thought to be as high among the poor, rural or uneducated. Maybe those children are just not being identified as they see doctors less often. josh

I read it usually wasnt diagnosed until around 3 yrs of age...plenty of time for too much visual stimulation. I also wondered about too much iron in infant diets. Its added in everything from formula to cereal. Im all for keeping an open mind to any and all possible causes.

I'm not very good at googling but I finally found info and there is some question re mercury being used in vaccines. josh

Here is a link that might be useful: Mercury in vaccines

My grandson was not "diagnosed" until he was a little over 3...but the disorder was plainly present at 18 months and perhaps before.
I took several semesters of work in college intended toward being a speech therapist. I am looking at my 50th reunion in a couple of years. We worked with autistic children. I know more than a couple of people who are decidedly "odd" and standoffish, with strange obsessions, who I now feel are mildly autistic. I know another man that I have known since he was a toddler, severly autistic, institutionalized. He is 51.
I am not sure that the incidence is much more than it was, but we are getting better at diagnosing it.
Linda C

I'm a frequent reader here, although I've never posted at this forum. But this discussion reminded me of a very interesting study I read about--probably 20 years ago. The findings were that children with autism are more likely than children in the general population to have a mother that cannot "bring a story to a logical conclusion"--ie. they talk on an on from one thought to another without ever tying the thoughts together. I worked in the field of developmental disabilities for over 20 years, and have met such mothers (I don't know why it was just the mothers, and of course we're not talking about all mothers of children with autism). The theory was that autism is a spectrum of genetic disorders that comprises everything from disorganized thoughts to what we typically call "autism." So perhaps those mothers who wouldn't stop talking were not responsible for creating an autistic child, but instead have the genes that found a greater expression in their child.

I have a grandson who has been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, an autistic disorder. In the last few years, I can see myself as a teenager in him. I have always known that I wasn't like other people, but didn't know why. Looking back now, I think my father was probably affected and his mother before him. I used to think that mercury had something to do with autism, but have read enough studies to dispute that. I think that it is definitely genetic, at least in our family. I am one of the lucky one, like my father was. I have succeeded in life although there have been many trials.

Hi, It would be interesting to talk to older OTs, Drs, Nurses, and others that worked years ago, with popuations that might have incuded People with autism. We could get a feeling for the accuracy of the number of cases, to augment checking records. Diagnosis is probably much easier now that autism is a familiar concept.
Josh, although rural areas have fewer people, I have no idea whether poor, or uneducated or other categories, of folks, have more or fewer cases per capita. It is just curiousity about variables that we don't have enough info on.
Aspartame (nutra sweet] and MSG have some bad effects on brain cells. Young people consume them in large amounts, especially girls, in drinks. What if there's a prenatal build up ?
Some intersting ideas are showing up. That's great.

Holy Cow ! There was a BBC headline a while back, on checking for pesticides exceeding limits in foods, tested in England. Out of 43 overages, 17 were in oats, so I did a little checking. Most oats grown in North America are grown with pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, and, most oat seeds are genetically modified to grow in a herbicide treated field.

If you google "herbicide oats", The PAN website comes up. It lists what herbicides are used on each crop. and all known side effects. Almost all of them include side effects of CELLULAR & DEVELOPMENTAL DAMAGE, and NEUROTOXICITY. Huh !

That's tantamount to a smoking gun !

It's time for foods, to be tested off the shelf, in this country, to see what foods are coming in over legal pesticides limits.

Oats, cotton, rice, corn, and wheat, are the crops that use the most herbicide. Those are the starter food baby cereals, and and cotton is the most used, 'natural' choice for baby clothes.

Maybe, some nice consumer lab will test for pesticides, especially herbicides, in foods.

We haven't heard much of a peep, out of the FDA in years, on food safety, but that would be nice, too.

Please, someone do mouse studies. Feed them baby foods, then look for cellular anomalies. Or, would that be too cruel to the baby meeces?

Could this, save the fullness of life, of 1 in 94, in New Jersey?

Maybe it is, too expensive, or too difficult, to grow oats without these chemicals. We ought to to have more of a say though, about whether we want farmers to grow foods in a form that is not damaging to people. And I'd like to hear from the farmers on this too. Just where do the costs and the benefits meet ? What doesn't the average person know?

I thought most exposure to herbicides came from playing on a treated lawn, guess not. Maybe Grandpa got too much in his porrige, too, while trying to lower his cholesterol.

See what you come up with, for oats and herbicide, or other grains and pesticides.

What are you thinking? What are your ideas? It's wonderful to see the variety of ideas and experience, so far. love, florey :]

I buy oats (my breakfast every day) at the local Co-Op from the bulk bin - Organic Rolled Oats are 69 cents a pound. Healthier and cheaper than Pre-packaged oats - and no package to go into the landfill.

A huge new 5 year longitudinal, international study has just come out. A lot of genetic vulnerabilities showed up. Has any one seen, or read about it? It was mentioned on CNN.

It seemed to reflect some of the family concerns that you have just been mentioning.

The incidence was ~1 in 400 or 500.

That still may leave some room, for chromosomes being nudged out of sequence. There are a lot of modern [including industrialization, and WWII], environmental factors, that could still, be stressing genes.

Europe doesn't like genetically modified foods and won't sell them. But, dang, I'm still curious about oats and CELL DAMAGING herbicides, and those in other baby foods.

It's great that a big step of progress, in information, is taking place.

Well, here's more dogged, overexcited, wacky, possibilities.
(I'm not only embarrassed, but thinking about asbergers now]. I think i kinda hijacked the thread, and i'm sorry. It took seeing, the way i blunder around in print to realize that i'm not communicating well. I do apologize, and have cut back. But, which is lonelier, to go ahead and make a fool of yourself, or to be afraid to try to communicate? The problem is that i'm most likely to write on the days that i'm least likly to commnicate well. so..o thank you for your patience.

How about the gel stuff, in disposable diapers. Maybe, after a year's use, enuogh gets on the skin to affect cell developement, and then, use, in the brain.

What about molds or germs that come home on things from the store.? Some clothing, and other fabrics, as well as kitty litters and ventilation systems, are sickening, without being allergenic.

Again, food safety - so many things in food, these days have a teratrogenic [cell DNA changing] effect.

Cells are affected at an incresing rate. What is affecting these cells?

I tend toward genetics and/or immunizations. My StepGS was "delivered" to us at the age of nine with a diagnosis of Asperger's. Did months and months of research. He doesn't have it, but my DS (now 21 Y/O) definitely does/did, and probably so do I. DS had three years of pre-school special ed and thrived, he is now in college for mechanical engineering. He definitely did not have modern gel diapers, exposure to many food preservatives, or anything like that. My youngest DD was perfectly healthy until 9 months old, had her first vaccination. That night she had the first of many febrile seizures that she eventually out-grew. In my mind, it was not just coincidence.

Well, News out of California links autism and pesticides.

The pesticides were airborne, from use on some veggies, and on cotton.
The last paragraph in the linked article, lists the crops, and the chemicals used.

There were clusters of autism, in children living around these fields.

Most pesticides cause DNA changes on a cellular level. It is not surprising to find direct links.

Although these two, are shown to be strongly linked to autism, it is likely that others - bug killers, weed killers, and fungicides [all are pesticides damaging to formative cells] are harming those that are most susceptible. The ones that are already sick, and the yet unborn,
These are chemicals produced to cause death in lower organisms, that are more resilient than we are. We should avoid these chemicals, especially when combined on our plates.

DO NOT USE PESTICIDES IN THE HOUSE or the YARD,
If, you have affected kids in the neighborhood, or young women who could get pregnant, or family members....
They are grossly overused, and these two especially, should be taken out of use immediately.
Of course we will be probably be buying food and clothing with this on it for years, while it is being used up. Grrr

Consider organic vegetables, especially those mentioned in the last paragraph of the article.
We still need to eat our veggies. Lettuce grows well in cool weather and in some shade- I'm putting some in today, and may try a windowbox.

Does anyone have a list of those vegetables, with the most and least, pesticide residues?

Washing veggies when you get them home, reduces some anti-ripening agents, and waiting a day or two helps weaken some fungicides, but who wants tired veggies? There is probably no way to get this nasty stuff off . But ANY ides would be appreciated.

Going completely organic is very [ too] expensive, and very hard.
Meats, fish, poultry and, especially dairy, are a good place to go organic. Who knows what hormones and antibiotics added there do, when mixed with the toxins we eat.

Although this is disgusting news, it does give hope, a path for action and discovery, and the information to protect ourselves.

Good Luck, florey - Keep those updates coming.

Here is a link that might be useful: autism and pesticides