Hi all!
I have found an article titled as the subject line.
It chilled me to the core.
Guys, what do you think?
https://neurosciencenews.com/asd-molecular-network-22082/
Best regards,
Hi all!
I have found an article titled as the subject line.
It chilled me to the core.
Guys, what do you think?
https://neurosciencenews.com/asd-molecular-network-22082/
Best regards,
sorry, I haven’t read all the replies on this subject. I’m autistic, I don’t need curing, I don’t have a disease. I’m not a mouse either. I’ve just started to accept my quirky ways. I’ve seen so many of these ideas of a cure or some sort of conversion therapy. I’m me, some days are hard but I’m just happy to be me. I’m not a lab rat either. There is nothing wrong with being autistic. It’s much better than being a boring NT.
I read "About" neuroscience News, and suggest you do the same before getting overly excited about the "newfound clue"
This is an Open Source website. Anyone can submit to it. Here is an extract from their "About":
"Crowdsourcing the news is a long-time goal of this site, so please help if you can. If there is an error, we want it fixed."
This is a typical example of improper populist journalism I had made in another thread strangely enough in answer to "Sam Likes To Draw" and with certainty has no connection whatsoever with a scientific method inclusive of peer review in a proper scientific publication like Nature. But no --- instead we get a belly full of pseudo-intellectualism (BS) based on rubbish.
I think this is because they think there is a definitive link between Autism and Fragile X (Fragile X apparently does exist in mice) based on the following study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3254037/
But if you read what it actually says under the section "Diagnostic Treshold: Autistic Features versus ASD in FXS" then the correlation has a huge discrepancy in percentage. But that discrepancy is so wide it would be ridiculous and irresponsible to consider that correlation as a direct and provable cause.
If you hold ctrl and f it will open up a search bar on PC and if you search the word mice it will take you to the section where they mention other studies in mice. So that appears to be why they are making the connection. Not that it's very useful imo because afterall we are not mice. And as you implied, only humans have been diagnosed autistic.
I agree with Luna also.
Looking at the original paper the following is evident, Changes to genes expressing "Contactin-associated protein-like 2 (CNTNAP2) can cause many neurological disabilities in humans, including ASD and intellectual disability." They are looking at a subset of autistics, those with 'CNTNAP2-associated ASD'. They have produced 'knock out' mouse models for 'CNTNAP2-associated ASD', and these mice behave in 'asocial' ways - so they are claimed to mirror autism in humans. They have compared the molecular basis of the metabolic functioning of their mice brains - using mass spectrometry-based proteometabolomics - with expression from human brain organoids from autistic people and found similarities. The paper ends with, "These genes should be further studied within ASD models to determine whether they are central to ASD models and patients."
OK, the take-home message is that this is probably not relevant for the majority of autistic people, just those with a specific, and genetically 'simple', form of autism 'CNTNAP2-associated ASD'. The paper does not seem to give any information about how prevalent CNTNAP2-associated ASD is in the overall autistic population. It does not come close to suggesting a 'cure for ASD'.