• Replies 21 replies
  • Subscribers 84 subscribers
  • Views 723 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

Not paracetamol - Neanderthal?!?! (Don't tell the US president)

Phased

My social media feed just alerted me to this study from 2024 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-024-02593-7

According to this, it's not that autistic people have more Neanderthal DNA than neurotypicals just that unique brain related DNA found in Neanderthals is more common in autistic people.

The study reckons this explains and correlates with differences in social cognition and visual processing in autistic people as carry overs from the neurodiversity of early humans.

The study, as so many do, says that "more research is necessary".

So what do we think?

Another example of 2 plus 2 making 42 from eager scientists?

OK, if the evidence is good maybe that helps explain what's occurring and maybe where things come from?

And, possibly, so what??

I'm off to light the camp fire for dinner... meanwhile, thoughts anyone?

:-)

  • This is fascinating, yet I would be highly suspicious of reaching conclusions due to the limited availability of clinical data, especially as it’s in the US. The study makes this limitation abundantly clear, so I agree that “more research is necessary”.

    I would be interested to understand more about this point:

    Hybridization in non-human species is recognized as a destabilizing event with the potential to promote compensatory adaptation in other regions of the genome and, ultimately, speciation in some lineages [40]. Therefore, there is an additional possibility that Homo sapiens specific variants that evolved after Neanderthal introgression may nevertheless be in influenced by these earlier events.

    Separately from this study, there is an ongoing argument around classifying non-Homo Sapiens as humans, e.g., should we call Neanderthals humans or are they a different species. So is the study alluding to Neanderthals not being human? If yes, that may have negative connotations if it is being linked to autism. I prefer to think of Neanderthals being human, especially since it is suggested that we contain DNA from multiple types of yet to be identified ancestor.

    My DNA has been analysed and in common with most people of European heritage, I have around 2% Neanderthal DNA. Some of this means I am likely to be a better sprinter than long distance runner— correct— well, it was at one time! 

    Can I join you at the camp fire?