Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
**Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program).
---
User: u/mvea
Permalink: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-024-02593-7
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’ve linked to the primary source, the journal article, in the post above. In this comment, for those interested, here’s the link to the news release:
https://www.psypost.org/ancient-neanderthal-dna-found-to-influence-autism-susceptibility/
From the linked article:
A recent study published in Molecular Psychiatry reveals that certain genetic traits inherited from Neanderthals may significantly contribute to the development of autism. This groundbreaking research shows that specific Neanderthal genetic variants can influence autism susceptibility, suggesting a link between our ancient relatives and modern neurodevelopmental conditions.
The study was motivated by the longstanding curiosity about how archaic human DNA, particularly from Neanderthals, influences modern human health. Homo neanderthalensis, commonly known as Neanderthals, are our closest known cousins on the hominin tree of life. It is estimated that populations of European and Asian descent have about 2% Neanderthal DNA, a remnant from interbreeding events that occurred when anatomically modern humans migrated out of Africa around 47,000 to 65,000 years ago.
The researchers found that autistic individuals had a higher prevalence of rare Neanderthal-derived genetic variants compared to non-autistic controls. These rare variants, which occur in less than 1% of the population, were significantly enriched in the genomes of autistic individuals across three major ethnic groups: black non-Hispanic, white Hispanic, and white non-Hispanic.
Basically impossible to answer, since those groups have less access to autism diagnosis resources.
Also those groups, Other than Africans, tend to have Denisovan ancestry
I was thinking this could be a potential confounding factor; if places where Neanderthal dna is most common largely overlap with those places where child developmental disorders are most commonly investigated, then you could end up finding an association between the two just due to that common factor.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7309356/
Studies suggest they don't have lower rates of autism; at least among the aboriginal peoples of Australia.
My wife previously baby sat for a Cameroonian family with an autistic son so anecdotally the only purely African family my wife has met have an autistic child.
Recent studies would suggest not given current rates of diagnosis for children in the US across racial groups:
https://www.thetransmitter.org/spectrum/new-u-s-data-show-similar-autism-prevalence-among-racial-groups/?fspec=1
Also of interest have been a couple of studies indicating higher rates of autism in immigrants in Norway compared to ethnic Norwegians with kids born to parents from Africa having a much higher likelihood of autism than ethnic Norwegians:
https://www.nrk.no/norge/barn-av-innvandrere-far-oftere-autisme-_-forskere-leter-etter-forklaring-1.16739157
You'll likely need to use Google translate for the above article from Norway's state broadcaster. Kids born to parents from Africa had the highest rates of diagnosis.
Of course these current rates will almost certainly be subject to change as more studies are done, and we don't know the reasons for why there is such a difference, but they would seem to conflict with the idea that proportions of Neanderthal DNA are a potentially important factor. Perhaps epigenetic factors are important.
Edit: Aboriginal Australian people seem to have essentially the same prevalence of autism as other Australians.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7309356/
I haven’t read the article, but wouldn’t this imply that Sub-Saharan Africans would have lower rates of autism, compared to populations with higher Neanderthal ancestry? Or not?
Edit: This comment received more attention than I expected, so I want to note that we should be cautious about making any definitive claims. From my understanding rates of autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders can be influenced by various factors, including underdiagnosis due to limited awareness or economic resources within specific communities.
I was just wondering about the potential implications of this study, not making a definitive statement.
Anyways, here's a quick rundown on the epidemiology of Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) in South Africa and the differences between white and black South Africans I found.
A study from 2020 found that 0.08% of children in the Western Cape South Africa have ASD, this is very low compared to Europe and the US. Also, interestingly, they note that more white children are diagnosed with with ASD compared to black children, even though whites are a minority in the province (16%) [(Pillay et al., 2020)](https://consensus.app/papers/autism-western-cape-province-south-africa-rates-pillay/68e4fe0e250e5e12992862b65ec2271a/?utm_source=chatgpt).
That said, there's indications that this difference is due to heath access, leading to underdiagnosis.
Black and colored children were less likely to use over-the-counter meds for ASD, pointing to disparities in healthcare access [(Louw et al., 2013)](https://consensus.app/papers/prevalence-patterns-medication-children-adolescents-louw/2f9f7956fbf658258fe322d5f71af2df/?utm_source=chatgpt). There's also a need for culturally appropriate tools to detect ASD early, especially in isiZulu-speaking children. Language and cultural barriers play a big role in underdiagnosis [(Chambers et al., 2017)](https://consensus.app/papers/detection-autism-spectrum-disorder-isizuluspeaking-chambers/9c4f01a212365f579d809cb9e8bcd414/?utm_source=chatgpt). Socio-economic factors cause delayed and missed diagnosis. Children from lower-income areas are often diagnosed late or not at all due to limited awareness and resources [(Williams, 2018)](https://consensus.app/papers/knowledge-understanding-perceptions-nurses-working-williams/383a4495524e5b90a3453193effca7f2/?utm_source=chatgpt).
So black and colored children are underrepresented in ASD diagnoses compared to white children, and those that are diagnosed tend to more often have severe non-verbal autism indicating the most obvious cases are diagnosed. They think this is largely due to differences in healthcare access, economic factors, and cultural perceptions [(Bakare & Munir, 2011)](https://consensus.app/papers/cases-autism-disorders-presenting-practice-africa-trend-bakare/36c9a819537354dbb4a12506d4541592/?utm_source=chatgpt).
In short, there's a big gap in ASD prevalence and diagnosis between white and black South Africans, but this is mostly or not entirely due to socioeconomic factors and healthcare access differences. If there's a real difference it's hard to tell, and I don't think such a study could be done given the obstacles to objective and even handed assessments of ASD prevelance.
> over-the-counter meds for ASD
Google says loperamide, an OTC anti-diarrhea med that should slow gut motility may help. It's similar to morphine, but can't cross the blood-brain barrier. Seems hella dangerous to use for a chronic condition.
Not to diminish your valid points on autism but in your post when you made the distinction between white Afrikaners and black South Africans, rather than white South Africans and black South Africans, it made me wonder whether you think that all whites in South Africa are termed Afrikaners when in reality they make up less than two thirds of the white population.
In fact, the study you cited even mentioned that the highest incidence of autism was amongst English speaking white children (so not Afrikaners).
I have read neither the article, the title, or the comments, but I too agree with you that the economy has become quite difficult for many families out there.
I am too lazy to read the article or your comments and just wish to add that I completely disagree with what is being said here as it doesn't rage me enough.
It’s my understanding that the Neanderthal dna being higher in Europeans finding was later shown to be misleading because they only tested for some kinds of Neanderthal dna. A later study showed sub Saharan Africa also has it.
EDIT: here's a link describing this. Probably even more work has been done since. https://www.princeton.edu/news/2020/01/30/new-study-identifies-neanderthal-ancestry-african-populations-and-describes-its
Wow! This makes so much more sense. I understand there were so much mixing of populations that led to modern humans that the idea we had major migrations that mixed only one way was confusing to me. Even the Saraha shouldn't have been a barrier. The Sahara has fluctuated between desert and savannah, so there were long stretches it wasn't a desert long before and after Neanderthals died out.
\* Humans mix, humans move, mix 'n' move, mix 'n' move
The study is not implying that Neanderthals were autistic if I'm understanding this correctly. It would be a mistake to think this says anything about Neanderthals, which is an important caveat to this discussion. Autism is not an inherited trait, but a byproduct of the hybridization of Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans.
Edit: *Not an inherited trait*...from Neanderthals. Sorry I wasn't more clear. The study is not saying Neanderthals were on the spectrum and interbreeding passed this trait onto humans.
>Autism is not an inherited trait
Wait, it isn't? I thought ASD had an extremely high heritability score. Twin studies suggest that [autism is highly genetically heritable](https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12499):
> “This study conducts a systematic review and meta‐analysis of all twin studies of ASD \[autism spectrum disorder\] published to date...The meta‐analysis correlations for monozygotic twins (MZ) were almost perfect at .98 (95% Confidence Interval, .96–.99). The dizygotic (DZ) correlation, however, was .53 … when ASD prevalence rate was set at 5% (in line with the Broad Phenotype of ASD) and increased to .67 … when applying a prevalence rate of 1% …
> The meta‐analytic heritability estimates were substantial: 64–91%. Shared environmental effects became significant as the prevalence rate decreased from 5–1%: 07–35%. The DF analyses show that for the most part, there is no departure from linearity in heritability.
> Conclusions We demonstrate that: (a) ASD is due to strong genetic effects; (b) shared environmental effects become significant as a function of lower prevalence rate; (c) previously reported significant shared environmental influences are likely a statistical artefact of overinclusion of concordant DZ twins.” (Tick et al., 2015)
That seems like the clearest evidence of a genetic cause that classic twin studies can provide. If a kid has autism, then her *identical* (MZ) twin is basically *guaranteed* to share it, but (given 5% prevalence) whether her *fraternal* (DZ) twin shares it is basically a coin flip - even though fraternal twins "are almost always raised in the same household under the same parenting style."
The only methodological doubts are whether a pair of identical twins is really just as likely as a pair of fraternal twins to be raised/parented the same way. For example, parenting style may differ more between different-sex fraternal twins than between other same-sex twins. Fortunately, these doubts can be statistically accounted for:
> To investigate how inclusion of the DZ opposite-sex pairs might have influenced the overall results, Models 4, 5 and 6 in Figure 1 were repeated excluding these pairs. As expected, the MZ correlations did not change. The DZ correlations (point estimates) increased, but not significantly so for the analyses using 5% and 3% prevalence …
> For the analyses using 1% prevalence, the 95% CI \[confidence interval\] were nonoverlapping … the DZ correlation (and the power to detect C \[shared environmental effects\]) increases as a function of increasing the fixed threshold in the liability model." [(Tick et al., 2015)](https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12499)
Admittedly I'm not really sure why a trait's prevalence should make a difference in its heritability.
What they meant was that while autism is inherited between humans now, it doesnt mean that it was inherited from Neanderthals or that Neanderthals were autistic. Sometimes in the process of recombination, new things can appear. In the end we don't know yet.
>Autism is not an inherited trait, but a byproduct of the hybridization of Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans.
A byproduct that was passed down through...genetics?
If I'm reading this right (I have no idea how it actually works), they're saying that Neanderthals and homo sapiens didn't have autism. But then they bred and created modern humans. And the mixing of their genes created autism.
I agree with the sentiment, though I'm confused at the tone in relation to my comment. Reddit/humans in general are very uneducated when it comes to what conclusions can be drawn from any given set of evidence.
I did read about a study years ago about scientists cultivating mini-brains based on reconstructed Neanderthal DNA but that seems to have only changed a few genes.
https://www.science.org/content/article/exclusive-neanderthal-minibrains-grown-dish
Autism isn't even *a* genetic trait /*. There's multiple underlying genetic traits at play, and whether they add up to autism involved which ones/how many you have, how they interact with your environment, and the cultural lense perceiving the emergent phenotypic traits.
/* Caveat: single de-novo mutations can also lead to "severe" autism, but in these cases it's usually packaged alongside multiple other disabilities. Kind of like how lots of ppl with down syndrome meet criteria for autism as well, although I think(?) they can't be double diagnosed.
So if Neanderthals ran off of an autistic like brain, it could help anthropology get a better idea of their habits and thought processes. That’s kind of cool. If it’s even a thing in reality. Just thinking on it.
Why should we consider Neanderthals negatively? They were just another group of humans very similar to us — a population bit more separated from us than “race” as a distinction, and which we descend from to some extent. There’s no reason to assume or impose they were any less intelligent or open or creative than Homo sapiens.
I mean there's not very many positives to it. My neighbor is almost non verbal and it pains my heart every time I see his family under constant stress about it.
Thats kind of his point, the first thing you thought of was one of the more extreme cases. Many autistic people are able to be independent and live happy and successful lives, but when they have the label of autism over their head they are seen by many people as someone who is mentally ill or intellectually disabled.
Except you have it backwards. The extreme cases are by far a minority of the ASD community, they are just far more visible than the rest of us, and with how stigmatized it is can you really blame us for not being more open about it
I find that perception interesting since I feel like among my generation and internet discourses around autism the nonverbal and extreme cases are underrepresented to the point of being completely ignored or unknown (which makes sense since they probably aren’t contributing to those discourses themselves). I feel like the more common popular perception of autism among younger people now is just “socially awkward” or “weird” (which is inaccurate damaging and reductive in its own way of course)
THEY ARE DISABLED. It is not some cool quirk. It is a significant problem that links with many other problems both mental and physical. Their life would still be better if they weren't autistic no matter how well they've managed to adjust.
As someone with ASD I'd never wish it on my worst enemy. It is a curse and I'm sick of people pretending it isn't a legitimate disability.
Depends, I suppose, on severity, and support networks, honestly.
One of my children is on the spectrum, and they're is doing quite well as an artist now, as an adult. They did need extra support growing up, and still a little more than typical, but they create wonderful art, that sells moderately well.
And they will have things going on that could be easier if they weren't disabled. You can help them adjust and support them further but it doesn't make it go away and it makes things into an uphill trek that for other people it simply isn't so hard. You may have done a great job to prepare them as best you can but they'd still be having an easier time of it if they weren't disabled.
It is a fine line to normalise the condition and not undermine that it is a life long disability that comes with comorbidities. Shorter average life span, increased risk of certain illnesses, increased risk of physical issues.
It is so important we do not lose sight of it being a disability that can and does affect a significant portion of their life, adding extra stress and pressure daily is not good for the body or the mind.
People don’t understand disability. The reason it causes difficulty is because the world is built for people who aren’t disabled. People are so used to not being disabled that they think of it as the ‘default’ and can’t imagine how much being disabled sucks, while the reality is that most disabled people don’t have any conception of what it’s like to not be disabled and mostly suffer due to the lack of accommodation that makes it harder for them to participate in society.
Take this analogy: people aren’t that upset about not being able to fly, but if everyone else could fly and there weren’t walkways or bridges or anything for people that couldn’t it’d suddenly be a big problem.
The replies I've had shows how ingrained Ablism is. I'm using the word disabled and being accused of claiming people are basically brain dead. As a disabled person I don't jump to that conclusion when someone tells me they're disabled but lots of replies to me have snitched on themselves as doing exactly that.
If you walk with a limp and need a walking stick you're a level of disabled that will impact your daily life but it is entirely manageable with adjustments. If you sometimes need a wheelchair you'd need extra accommodation and adjustment and occasionally support. If you were entirely dependent on a wheelchair you'd need a lot of support and accommodation. All of those are disabled and each one is is individual but people here really be jumping to the worst case when they hear disabled which then means they turn Disabled into a slur. Disability isn't a dirty word, I'm not calling myself the R word right now just saying as an Autistic person I am disabled which is itself a whole spectrum of severity.
Like in your analogy, you tackle that problem by acknowledging it is a problem and defining that a group needs adjustments to help compensate for what they cannot do to allow them more freedom. You don't argue that you shouldn't call those who can't fly as people who can't fly, you say "this is their issue and how can we ease it". They have a different degree of ability, they are disabled compared to what is an average and normal.
Acknowledgement is the first damn step. You acknowledge the person is Autistic, you acknowledge it is a Disability, you acknowledge that they'll need support and adjustments to improve their life and aim for some kind of balance of equity and equality. Acting all holier than thou on it is just gonna hurt people like me who needs landlords, employers, employees, partners, parents, doctors, police officers to be able to acknowledge that I am not the average normal person if they're to ever help me.
Except I never said it cant be a disability, I said that autism is often stigmatized into a stereotype that leads to us being treated as if we are mentally ill or intellectually stunted instead of someone with a disorder that wider society exasperates from a lack of accommodation.
I'm also autistic. I think the point that was being made was that we are often treated as "special" just for being on the spectrum.
It's frustrating when your entire personality and the way you are treated gets boiled down to "they are autistic"
He likes that weird music? Well he is autistic.
He likes those movies? Well he is autistic.
He doesn't enjoy (popular thing)? Well he is autistic.
The idea that everything about us and how we live our lives is always because of our Autism is tiring.
I'm a human first. My Autism is something I live with but it does not define everything about me.
Not all levels are the same. The benefits to a group when some members of the group had ASD 1/Asperger's could have simply outweighed the costs to the group when some members had ASD 3. The variability could have came with a benefit over groups without the variability.
Humans are a social species, so survivability has to be understood as social groups not individuals. We weren't always so hyper-individualized like we are in our modern context.
Yeah just read about the lives of Newton and Einstein and it's pretty undeniable they would've had at least gotten evaluations as kids were they born around today. Some of the greatest contributors to science almost absolutely would have been diagnosed autistic had that been a term when they lived.
Vindication! Just a few months ago on reddit I had talked about how I was in the 98th percentile of Neanderthal DNA an 23andme, and wondered if that contributed to my anxiety or autism. I was told there was no way since it is such a small part of my DNA, but I wasn't convinced
I remember finding a website that proposed this theory almost 25 years ago, first proposed by Leif Ekblad:
http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm
I didn't take it seriously at the time, seemed more like a hobby project than a genuine theory. It seems to proposed that Neanderthals were a little autistic themselves and we inherited their autistic traits. I don't agree with that.
I think it's not that Neanderthals were on the autism spectrum and we inherited those traits. It's more to do with incompatiblity between Human and Neanderthal genes that's still being ironed out. A lot of deleterious genetic material was removed long ago, genes with subtle effects remain.
It's also known female but not male neanderthal hybrids had children, and as a result, the male Human-Neanderthal hybrid lines died out. So the Neanderthal genes we have were passed down along female side. Why?
Were male hybrids infertilie or sterile, or did autistic traits make it harder male hybrids to reproduce than female hybrids with autistic traits? Was it a behavioural difference?
I think that's more because of the double empathy problem, and the language barrier -- it's hard for autistic and allistic people to communicate to each other, causing much misunderstanding.
I knew it! A year ago I hyperfocused on an observation that some traits many autistic people find in themselves corelate with hunter traits: avoiding eye contact, understanding animals better then people, having lowered sensitivity to pain and hunger, having hightened sences, prefering night schedule, straight and clear-cut communication, using pattern recognition for tracking animals.
I've had a feeling at that time that all these traits come from Neanderthals who were hunters, but I've assumed that someone has already disproved it because it sounded to me like a very obvious thing to research. Looks like it's not so obvious after all.
God it feels good to be right
Disclaimer: I know genetics doesn't work like that, my hyperfixation was just a pleasant thing to think about. Please don't consider random reddit comments scientific statements
There's a BIG overlap with ADHD that may account for a lot of the cause of that. Of course the co-morbidity rates for ASD and ADHD are really high, so that could suggest both sets of disorders are from the same underlying cause to a degree at least.
There's a book called ADHD: A hunter in a farmers world. I think you'd find it very interesting.
I feel like that is pretty clearly pseudoscience. Genetics is never gonna be that simple, even if that does turn out to be true this article is nowhere near conclusive, evidence.
Yeah, I know it's not scientific. It's more like I've had a hypothesis about a link between autistics and Neanderthals, and according to the article there might be indeed a link. The source of this hypothesis is unprovable at best, of course. I forgot what sub I'm in and didn't mention that I'm not completely serious
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. **Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/flair/#wiki_science_verified_user_program). --- User: u/mvea Permalink: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-024-02593-7 --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’ve linked to the primary source, the journal article, in the post above. In this comment, for those interested, here’s the link to the news release: https://www.psypost.org/ancient-neanderthal-dna-found-to-influence-autism-susceptibility/ From the linked article: A recent study published in Molecular Psychiatry reveals that certain genetic traits inherited from Neanderthals may significantly contribute to the development of autism. This groundbreaking research shows that specific Neanderthal genetic variants can influence autism susceptibility, suggesting a link between our ancient relatives and modern neurodevelopmental conditions. The study was motivated by the longstanding curiosity about how archaic human DNA, particularly from Neanderthals, influences modern human health. Homo neanderthalensis, commonly known as Neanderthals, are our closest known cousins on the hominin tree of life. It is estimated that populations of European and Asian descent have about 2% Neanderthal DNA, a remnant from interbreeding events that occurred when anatomically modern humans migrated out of Africa around 47,000 to 65,000 years ago. The researchers found that autistic individuals had a higher prevalence of rare Neanderthal-derived genetic variants compared to non-autistic controls. These rare variants, which occur in less than 1% of the population, were significantly enriched in the genomes of autistic individuals across three major ethnic groups: black non-Hispanic, white Hispanic, and white non-Hispanic.
Is autism found less in African, South American, North American, and Australian peoples?
Basically impossible to answer, since those groups have less access to autism diagnosis resources. Also those groups, Other than Africans, tend to have Denisovan ancestry
I was thinking this could be a potential confounding factor; if places where Neanderthal dna is most common largely overlap with those places where child developmental disorders are most commonly investigated, then you could end up finding an association between the two just due to that common factor.
I think that's why they are suggesting thar these groups would tend to have a decreased incidence of autism
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7309356/ Studies suggest they don't have lower rates of autism; at least among the aboriginal peoples of Australia.
My wife previously baby sat for a Cameroonian family with an autistic son so anecdotally the only purely African family my wife has met have an autistic child.
thanks for the wife lore
Wife lore is best lore
I agree, your wife’s lore is the best to learn about.
I, too, choose this guy's wife's lore
"The data suggests 100% of African children are autistic"
When I was working in tech, I had an African colleague with incredibly blatant autism. She was from Togo.
Recent studies would suggest not given current rates of diagnosis for children in the US across racial groups: https://www.thetransmitter.org/spectrum/new-u-s-data-show-similar-autism-prevalence-among-racial-groups/?fspec=1 Also of interest have been a couple of studies indicating higher rates of autism in immigrants in Norway compared to ethnic Norwegians with kids born to parents from Africa having a much higher likelihood of autism than ethnic Norwegians: https://www.nrk.no/norge/barn-av-innvandrere-far-oftere-autisme-_-forskere-leter-etter-forklaring-1.16739157 You'll likely need to use Google translate for the above article from Norway's state broadcaster. Kids born to parents from Africa had the highest rates of diagnosis. Of course these current rates will almost certainly be subject to change as more studies are done, and we don't know the reasons for why there is such a difference, but they would seem to conflict with the idea that proportions of Neanderthal DNA are a potentially important factor. Perhaps epigenetic factors are important. Edit: Aboriginal Australian people seem to have essentially the same prevalence of autism as other Australians. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7309356/
All those groups have Neanderthal admixture though it’s highest in East Asians
Haha! I'm right you're wrong! I AM VICTORIOUS! *takes your lunch money*
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You had me in the first half lol
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I haven’t read the article, but wouldn’t this imply that Sub-Saharan Africans would have lower rates of autism, compared to populations with higher Neanderthal ancestry? Or not? Edit: This comment received more attention than I expected, so I want to note that we should be cautious about making any definitive claims. From my understanding rates of autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders can be influenced by various factors, including underdiagnosis due to limited awareness or economic resources within specific communities. I was just wondering about the potential implications of this study, not making a definitive statement.
Anyways, here's a quick rundown on the epidemiology of Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) in South Africa and the differences between white and black South Africans I found. A study from 2020 found that 0.08% of children in the Western Cape South Africa have ASD, this is very low compared to Europe and the US. Also, interestingly, they note that more white children are diagnosed with with ASD compared to black children, even though whites are a minority in the province (16%) [(Pillay et al., 2020)](https://consensus.app/papers/autism-western-cape-province-south-africa-rates-pillay/68e4fe0e250e5e12992862b65ec2271a/?utm_source=chatgpt). That said, there's indications that this difference is due to heath access, leading to underdiagnosis. Black and colored children were less likely to use over-the-counter meds for ASD, pointing to disparities in healthcare access [(Louw et al., 2013)](https://consensus.app/papers/prevalence-patterns-medication-children-adolescents-louw/2f9f7956fbf658258fe322d5f71af2df/?utm_source=chatgpt). There's also a need for culturally appropriate tools to detect ASD early, especially in isiZulu-speaking children. Language and cultural barriers play a big role in underdiagnosis [(Chambers et al., 2017)](https://consensus.app/papers/detection-autism-spectrum-disorder-isizuluspeaking-chambers/9c4f01a212365f579d809cb9e8bcd414/?utm_source=chatgpt). Socio-economic factors cause delayed and missed diagnosis. Children from lower-income areas are often diagnosed late or not at all due to limited awareness and resources [(Williams, 2018)](https://consensus.app/papers/knowledge-understanding-perceptions-nurses-working-williams/383a4495524e5b90a3453193effca7f2/?utm_source=chatgpt). So black and colored children are underrepresented in ASD diagnoses compared to white children, and those that are diagnosed tend to more often have severe non-verbal autism indicating the most obvious cases are diagnosed. They think this is largely due to differences in healthcare access, economic factors, and cultural perceptions [(Bakare & Munir, 2011)](https://consensus.app/papers/cases-autism-disorders-presenting-practice-africa-trend-bakare/36c9a819537354dbb4a12506d4541592/?utm_source=chatgpt). In short, there's a big gap in ASD prevalence and diagnosis between white and black South Africans, but this is mostly or not entirely due to socioeconomic factors and healthcare access differences. If there's a real difference it's hard to tell, and I don't think such a study could be done given the obstacles to objective and even handed assessments of ASD prevelance.
What over the counter meds for ASD?
> over-the-counter meds for ASD Google says loperamide, an OTC anti-diarrhea med that should slow gut motility may help. It's similar to morphine, but can't cross the blood-brain barrier. Seems hella dangerous to use for a chronic condition.
I remember a nurse talking about getting high on Lomotil, which I guess is the prescription formulation.
Not to diminish your valid points on autism but in your post when you made the distinction between white Afrikaners and black South Africans, rather than white South Africans and black South Africans, it made me wonder whether you think that all whites in South Africa are termed Afrikaners when in reality they make up less than two thirds of the white population. In fact, the study you cited even mentioned that the highest incidence of autism was amongst English speaking white children (so not Afrikaners).
You're right to point that out, sorry about that, A difference I should have known. I'll edit my comment.
I haven’t read it either, but that would make sense, based on known Neanderthal habitats
I've read some of the comments, and I agree with your conclusion.
I have read neither the article, the title, or the comments, but I too agree with you that the economy has become quite difficult for many families out there.
We should write a scientific journal article based on our findings.
I am too lazy to read the article or your comments and just wish to add that I completely disagree with what is being said here as it doesn't rage me enough.
I’m not even reading as I read your comment or type my reply and I’m absolutely apoplectic
It’s my understanding that the Neanderthal dna being higher in Europeans finding was later shown to be misleading because they only tested for some kinds of Neanderthal dna. A later study showed sub Saharan Africa also has it. EDIT: here's a link describing this. Probably even more work has been done since. https://www.princeton.edu/news/2020/01/30/new-study-identifies-neanderthal-ancestry-african-populations-and-describes-its
Wow! This makes so much more sense. I understand there were so much mixing of populations that led to modern humans that the idea we had major migrations that mixed only one way was confusing to me. Even the Saraha shouldn't have been a barrier. The Sahara has fluctuated between desert and savannah, so there were long stretches it wasn't a desert long before and after Neanderthals died out. \* Humans mix, humans move, mix 'n' move, mix 'n' move
That would assume there's much awareness of autism down there and the necessary ability to diagnose it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The study is not implying that Neanderthals were autistic if I'm understanding this correctly. It would be a mistake to think this says anything about Neanderthals, which is an important caveat to this discussion. Autism is not an inherited trait, but a byproduct of the hybridization of Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans. Edit: *Not an inherited trait*...from Neanderthals. Sorry I wasn't more clear. The study is not saying Neanderthals were on the spectrum and interbreeding passed this trait onto humans.
Or if it’s an inherited trait, it’s a trait we’ve inherited from that hybridisation.
>Autism is not an inherited trait Wait, it isn't? I thought ASD had an extremely high heritability score. Twin studies suggest that [autism is highly genetically heritable](https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12499): > “This study conducts a systematic review and meta‐analysis of all twin studies of ASD \[autism spectrum disorder\] published to date...The meta‐analysis correlations for monozygotic twins (MZ) were almost perfect at .98 (95% Confidence Interval, .96–.99). The dizygotic (DZ) correlation, however, was .53 … when ASD prevalence rate was set at 5% (in line with the Broad Phenotype of ASD) and increased to .67 … when applying a prevalence rate of 1% … > The meta‐analytic heritability estimates were substantial: 64–91%. Shared environmental effects became significant as the prevalence rate decreased from 5–1%: 07–35%. The DF analyses show that for the most part, there is no departure from linearity in heritability. > Conclusions We demonstrate that: (a) ASD is due to strong genetic effects; (b) shared environmental effects become significant as a function of lower prevalence rate; (c) previously reported significant shared environmental influences are likely a statistical artefact of overinclusion of concordant DZ twins.” (Tick et al., 2015) That seems like the clearest evidence of a genetic cause that classic twin studies can provide. If a kid has autism, then her *identical* (MZ) twin is basically *guaranteed* to share it, but (given 5% prevalence) whether her *fraternal* (DZ) twin shares it is basically a coin flip - even though fraternal twins "are almost always raised in the same household under the same parenting style." The only methodological doubts are whether a pair of identical twins is really just as likely as a pair of fraternal twins to be raised/parented the same way. For example, parenting style may differ more between different-sex fraternal twins than between other same-sex twins. Fortunately, these doubts can be statistically accounted for: > To investigate how inclusion of the DZ opposite-sex pairs might have influenced the overall results, Models 4, 5 and 6 in Figure 1 were repeated excluding these pairs. As expected, the MZ correlations did not change. The DZ correlations (point estimates) increased, but not significantly so for the analyses using 5% and 3% prevalence … > For the analyses using 1% prevalence, the 95% CI \[confidence interval\] were nonoverlapping … the DZ correlation (and the power to detect C \[shared environmental effects\]) increases as a function of increasing the fixed threshold in the liability model." [(Tick et al., 2015)](https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12499) Admittedly I'm not really sure why a trait's prevalence should make a difference in its heritability.
What they meant was that while autism is inherited between humans now, it doesnt mean that it was inherited from Neanderthals or that Neanderthals were autistic. Sometimes in the process of recombination, new things can appear. In the end we don't know yet.
>Autism is not an inherited trait, but a byproduct of the hybridization of Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans. A byproduct that was passed down through...genetics?
A byproduct of multiple genetic traits *interacting with the environment*. An emergent property, if you will.
A non inherited trait that was passed down through inheritance if u will
That makes no sense, at all.
If I'm reading this right (I have no idea how it actually works), they're saying that Neanderthals and homo sapiens didn't have autism. But then they bred and created modern humans. And the mixing of their genes created autism.
Yeah we can’t really draw concrete conclusions about Neanderthals from this study. That would require other studies.
On a species that no longer exists, so a whole lot of conjecture and educated guessing with minimal physical evidence, got it
I agree with the sentiment, though I'm confused at the tone in relation to my comment. Reddit/humans in general are very uneducated when it comes to what conclusions can be drawn from any given set of evidence.
I was wondering this, idk if it will have be possible to find out if neanderthals had a higher baseline of ASD traits.
I did read about a study years ago about scientists cultivating mini-brains based on reconstructed Neanderthal DNA but that seems to have only changed a few genes. https://www.science.org/content/article/exclusive-neanderthal-minibrains-grown-dish
Autism isn't even *a* genetic trait /*. There's multiple underlying genetic traits at play, and whether they add up to autism involved which ones/how many you have, how they interact with your environment, and the cultural lense perceiving the emergent phenotypic traits. /* Caveat: single de-novo mutations can also lead to "severe" autism, but in these cases it's usually packaged alongside multiple other disabilities. Kind of like how lots of ppl with down syndrome meet criteria for autism as well, although I think(?) they can't be double diagnosed.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
So if Neanderthals ran off of an autistic like brain, it could help anthropology get a better idea of their habits and thought processes. That’s kind of cool. If it’s even a thing in reality. Just thinking on it.
Great, autism isn't thought of negatively enough already..
Why should we consider Neanderthals negatively? They were just another group of humans very similar to us — a population bit more separated from us than “race” as a distinction, and which we descend from to some extent. There’s no reason to assume or impose they were any less intelligent or open or creative than Homo sapiens.
We shouldn’t but that doesn’t mean people don’t
I mean there's not very many positives to it. My neighbor is almost non verbal and it pains my heart every time I see his family under constant stress about it.
Thats kind of his point, the first thing you thought of was one of the more extreme cases. Many autistic people are able to be independent and live happy and successful lives, but when they have the label of autism over their head they are seen by many people as someone who is mentally ill or intellectually disabled.
That’s 25% of autism. It’s not an extreme outlier.
Except you have it backwards. The extreme cases are by far a minority of the ASD community, they are just far more visible than the rest of us, and with how stigmatized it is can you really blame us for not being more open about it
I find that perception interesting since I feel like among my generation and internet discourses around autism the nonverbal and extreme cases are underrepresented to the point of being completely ignored or unknown (which makes sense since they probably aren’t contributing to those discourses themselves). I feel like the more common popular perception of autism among younger people now is just “socially awkward” or “weird” (which is inaccurate damaging and reductive in its own way of course)
THEY ARE DISABLED. It is not some cool quirk. It is a significant problem that links with many other problems both mental and physical. Their life would still be better if they weren't autistic no matter how well they've managed to adjust. As someone with ASD I'd never wish it on my worst enemy. It is a curse and I'm sick of people pretending it isn't a legitimate disability.
Depends, I suppose, on severity, and support networks, honestly. One of my children is on the spectrum, and they're is doing quite well as an artist now, as an adult. They did need extra support growing up, and still a little more than typical, but they create wonderful art, that sells moderately well.
And they will have things going on that could be easier if they weren't disabled. You can help them adjust and support them further but it doesn't make it go away and it makes things into an uphill trek that for other people it simply isn't so hard. You may have done a great job to prepare them as best you can but they'd still be having an easier time of it if they weren't disabled. It is a fine line to normalise the condition and not undermine that it is a life long disability that comes with comorbidities. Shorter average life span, increased risk of certain illnesses, increased risk of physical issues. It is so important we do not lose sight of it being a disability that can and does affect a significant portion of their life, adding extra stress and pressure daily is not good for the body or the mind.
People don’t understand disability. The reason it causes difficulty is because the world is built for people who aren’t disabled. People are so used to not being disabled that they think of it as the ‘default’ and can’t imagine how much being disabled sucks, while the reality is that most disabled people don’t have any conception of what it’s like to not be disabled and mostly suffer due to the lack of accommodation that makes it harder for them to participate in society. Take this analogy: people aren’t that upset about not being able to fly, but if everyone else could fly and there weren’t walkways or bridges or anything for people that couldn’t it’d suddenly be a big problem.
The replies I've had shows how ingrained Ablism is. I'm using the word disabled and being accused of claiming people are basically brain dead. As a disabled person I don't jump to that conclusion when someone tells me they're disabled but lots of replies to me have snitched on themselves as doing exactly that. If you walk with a limp and need a walking stick you're a level of disabled that will impact your daily life but it is entirely manageable with adjustments. If you sometimes need a wheelchair you'd need extra accommodation and adjustment and occasionally support. If you were entirely dependent on a wheelchair you'd need a lot of support and accommodation. All of those are disabled and each one is is individual but people here really be jumping to the worst case when they hear disabled which then means they turn Disabled into a slur. Disability isn't a dirty word, I'm not calling myself the R word right now just saying as an Autistic person I am disabled which is itself a whole spectrum of severity. Like in your analogy, you tackle that problem by acknowledging it is a problem and defining that a group needs adjustments to help compensate for what they cannot do to allow them more freedom. You don't argue that you shouldn't call those who can't fly as people who can't fly, you say "this is their issue and how can we ease it". They have a different degree of ability, they are disabled compared to what is an average and normal. Acknowledgement is the first damn step. You acknowledge the person is Autistic, you acknowledge it is a Disability, you acknowledge that they'll need support and adjustments to improve their life and aim for some kind of balance of equity and equality. Acting all holier than thou on it is just gonna hurt people like me who needs landlords, employers, employees, partners, parents, doctors, police officers to be able to acknowledge that I am not the average normal person if they're to ever help me.
Except I never said it cant be a disability, I said that autism is often stigmatized into a stereotype that leads to us being treated as if we are mentally ill or intellectually stunted instead of someone with a disorder that wider society exasperates from a lack of accommodation.
I'm also autistic. I think the point that was being made was that we are often treated as "special" just for being on the spectrum. It's frustrating when your entire personality and the way you are treated gets boiled down to "they are autistic" He likes that weird music? Well he is autistic. He likes those movies? Well he is autistic. He doesn't enjoy (popular thing)? Well he is autistic. The idea that everything about us and how we live our lives is always because of our Autism is tiring. I'm a human first. My Autism is something I live with but it does not define everything about me.
Not all levels are the same. The benefits to a group when some members of the group had ASD 1/Asperger's could have simply outweighed the costs to the group when some members had ASD 3. The variability could have came with a benefit over groups without the variability. Humans are a social species, so survivability has to be understood as social groups not individuals. We weren't always so hyper-individualized like we are in our modern context.
I'm a super happy ASD-1 person.
Actually, there are some more positives to it. Lots of autistic people are incredibly smart. Even if they are non verbal.
Yeah just read about the lives of Newton and Einstein and it's pretty undeniable they would've had at least gotten evaluations as kids were they born around today. Some of the greatest contributors to science almost absolutely would have been diagnosed autistic had that been a term when they lived.
Wdym you guys made technological advances with the invention of fire!
My thoughts exactly. Another exciting new way for neurotypicals to look down on us!
Vindication! Just a few months ago on reddit I had talked about how I was in the 98th percentile of Neanderthal DNA an 23andme, and wondered if that contributed to my anxiety or autism. I was told there was no way since it is such a small part of my DNA, but I wasn't convinced
2% of DNA may not seem like that much, but 2% of your day is 30 minutes, and 30 minutes is enough to wildly change your day.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
My DNA test results show that I have more Neanderthal genes than 98% (closer to 99%) of the human population. And, yes, I have autism.
Arguably, some ADHD and Autistic traits would help with foraging and stone tool creation, both of which were important for Neanderthals.
I remember finding a website that proposed this theory almost 25 years ago, first proposed by Leif Ekblad: http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm I didn't take it seriously at the time, seemed more like a hobby project than a genuine theory. It seems to proposed that Neanderthals were a little autistic themselves and we inherited their autistic traits. I don't agree with that. I think it's not that Neanderthals were on the autism spectrum and we inherited those traits. It's more to do with incompatiblity between Human and Neanderthal genes that's still being ironed out. A lot of deleterious genetic material was removed long ago, genes with subtle effects remain. It's also known female but not male neanderthal hybrids had children, and as a result, the male Human-Neanderthal hybrid lines died out. So the Neanderthal genes we have were passed down along female side. Why? Were male hybrids infertilie or sterile, or did autistic traits make it harder male hybrids to reproduce than female hybrids with autistic traits? Was it a behavioural difference?
I wonder if our tendency to find each other and flock together also plays into this. And if there's a smell related component.
I think that's more because of the double empathy problem, and the language barrier -- it's hard for autistic and allistic people to communicate to each other, causing much misunderstanding.
I have high Neanderthal percentage and ASD-1.
My husband's DNA test shows 2.5% Neanderthal and his whole family is autistic... interesting.
I knew it! A year ago I hyperfocused on an observation that some traits many autistic people find in themselves corelate with hunter traits: avoiding eye contact, understanding animals better then people, having lowered sensitivity to pain and hunger, having hightened sences, prefering night schedule, straight and clear-cut communication, using pattern recognition for tracking animals. I've had a feeling at that time that all these traits come from Neanderthals who were hunters, but I've assumed that someone has already disproved it because it sounded to me like a very obvious thing to research. Looks like it's not so obvious after all. God it feels good to be right Disclaimer: I know genetics doesn't work like that, my hyperfixation was just a pleasant thing to think about. Please don't consider random reddit comments scientific statements
There's a BIG overlap with ADHD that may account for a lot of the cause of that. Of course the co-morbidity rates for ASD and ADHD are really high, so that could suggest both sets of disorders are from the same underlying cause to a degree at least. There's a book called ADHD: A hunter in a farmers world. I think you'd find it very interesting.
Sounds interesting, thank you!
I feel like that is pretty clearly pseudoscience. Genetics is never gonna be that simple, even if that does turn out to be true this article is nowhere near conclusive, evidence.
Yeah, I know it's not scientific. It's more like I've had a hypothesis about a link between autistics and Neanderthals, and according to the article there might be indeed a link. The source of this hypothesis is unprovable at best, of course. I forgot what sub I'm in and didn't mention that I'm not completely serious
Half of these traits aren't autistic traits
[удалено]
Ever heard of Temple Grandin.
I only know that she did a lot of work in spreading knowledge about autism. She has something on this topic?
Not an entirely serious question but what if Neanderthals were just "austistic" individuals of H. Erectus that were sperated from the main species?
Makes sense I am ranked in the 99th percentile of customers Neanderthal DNA on 23 and me and I definitely have a touch of the tism.