Is AS caused by teaching children to read at too young an age?

A parent who's eldest son has AS has serious doubts that it is genetic in origin as nobody else in the family has it. She thinks that it is caused by teaching children reading, maths, and academic subjects at too young an age. Her theory is that the human brain of a baby is very 'plastic' but hardens with age. If academics are taught at a very young age then the brain is shaped and wired towards this often at the detriment of people skills. If academics are not taught then the brain will shape and wire itself towards people skills. In other words, teach academics and the child will be able to read a book but struggle to read people. Do not teach academics and the child will be able to read people but will not be able to read a book until later in life.

Her eldest son was pushed with academics at a young age and he could read and do simple sums whilst at nursery – something not taught until reception class – but he rarely interacted with the other children and chose to play with toys alone. His three younger siblings were not pushed academically at a young age but were academically average and have grown up neurotypical.

There is some anecdotal evidence that AS (in Britain at least) is more common in middle class areas where parents value academic education, want their children to do well academically, and have plenty of books in the house, than in lower class areas where parents just prefer their children to muddle along and do not value academic education or have many books at home.

  • Getting back to first principles, then do you think that the upbringing of a child throughout the first three years of their life can permanently shape their personality and outlook for the rest of their life?

    People definitely are shaped by the society and community that they live in although I'm not quite sure at what age the shaping occurs at. For example, the tea that most British people drink is black tea with milk because it's the tea they encounter other British people drinking. There are also certain gender stereotypes and norms entrenched into the culture of society.   

  • Hi Arran,

    Just to clarify; we can't yet be certain of a genetic cause for all types of autism, as there are instances where injury has caused autistic traits to appear. I do not believe that it would be helpful to differentiate between those who's traits have a genetic cause and those with an environmental cause.

    I hope that by suggesting a '...genetic cause for high functioning autism...' that you are taking into account the potential for epigenetics to have an impact. Epigenetics is a fascinating area, it may prove useful to investigate this in relation to ASCs.

    On the other aspects, I agree with your opinion that non life-threatening conditions are seen as less important. Rightly or wrongly, I feel that this is the case for many conditions. I'm afraid that I do not have suitable advice regarding NHS services in this regard.

  • There are times when I wonder whether the NAS knows much about high-functioning AS considering that their original purpose was for people with traditional Kanner autism or at the more extreme end of the spectrum, and this is still the case as it's what brings in the public money.

    I know for sure that a genetic cause of high-functioning AS - and indeed ALL forms of ASD - just like the colour of one's eyes suits the NHS just fine because it is an institution that is only interested in conditions if they are life threatening. Anything that is not life threatening is just seen as a whim.

  • While I think that the original point is probably without merit (however there is potential for an environmental cause for ASC behaviours if, for example, a child were prevented from any form of socialisation in early life, e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23352169

    ), I do think that there has been an interesting article posted regarding heritability.

    Here is another:

    https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2040-2392-5-5

    However, after reading a few papers, I have found that the genes selected as indicating autism are different between each paper. It is also worth bearing in mind, as has been previously stated, most current studies on ASC have been onthose with severe austim (as this is the easiest to diagnose):

    http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(14)01167-3/abstract

    As such there may not be an easily identifiable genetic ‘cause’. Dominant and recessive as definitions are misleading, as in many cases the ‘recessive’ gene is still expressed along-side the ‘dominant’.

    Regarding an environmental cause, I have seen no evidence that this is the case. My experiencec is that everyone is different; some children will learn reading and writing very quickly, and be willing to do so in their free-time, some will not. In my case, despite the best efforts of my parents, I wasn’t able to read until I was 6.

    Additionally, surely a more likely ‘cause’ for an increase in ASC cases is an adjustment of diagnsotic criteria, availability of diagnosis (i.e. the variety, and even professional awareness, of diagnoses simply wasn’t available until recently), public awareness of the condition (i.e. liklihood of diagnosis).

    Until the diagnostic criteria is singly defined and boundries set for condition types, I feel that simply looking at the ‘number’ (or factor of population) diagnosed with this condition will be misleading.

    Additionally, of the genes involved, I would be extremely surprised if there was a modern human on Earth that wasn’t in posession of all of the route 66 genes (or those in the previously posted example) as they appear largely vital to development. To simplify; the studies are unlikely to find ‘missing’ genes, but instead ‘under or over-expressed’ ones. Ergo racial 'immunity' is extremely unlikely.

  • [quote user="NAS13026"]An example of DNA based research specifically targeting those with Aspergers, rather than classic autism...

    onlinelibrary.wiley.com/.../quote]

    That looks like an interesting article as it focuses on high-functioning AS rather than traditional Kanner autism.

    "While most neuroimaging and behavioral studies of ASC focus on the higher-functioning end of the autism spectrum (high-functioning autism and/or Asperger syndrome (AS)), the large-scale genetic studies have primarily investigated the lower-functioning end, focusing on classic autism. In this study, we address this important gap in literature, by reporting two genetic association studies."

    I have informed my local AS support group about it. They are quite open minded to the causes of AS. There are still many questions to answer if AS is genetic. Is it hereditary? Is it caused by a recessive gene that only occasionally surfaces? Is it a mutation?

    Also, the NAS is adamant and insistent that ASD, including high-functioning AS, affects people equally of all races although I and some other people from the high-functioning AS community have reservations about this.

    community.autism.org.uk/.../asd-people-foreign-backgrounds

    If high-functioning AS is genetic then it could end up that certain races may not have any of the genes that result in the condition so are therefore immune to it.

    [quote]There are currently, and have previously been, other similar studies. You mentiooend the NAS. The NAS links to this specific page concerning genetic research into ASD...

    geneticliteracyproject.org/.../quote]

    The article is a bit too simplistic. I dislike the reference to prodigies as it is a term that lacks a precise definition. Many so called child prodigies in music and mathematics are 'hot housed' by their parents.

  • NAS13026 said:
    What is the issue BTW, you keep changing it. Now apparently the issue is the "teaching of academic stuff" at a very young age of around 3 years old. Can you provide some evidence for this claim other than the experiences of one solitary person? There are reckoned to be around 700,000 autistic people in the UK so if you wish to prove some sort of trends you need to provide more evidence for your theory than one solitary example which, as I've already stated, is countered by the opposing solitary example of my own experience.

    Traditional Kanner autism is a mature and well documented subject backed up by a body of research spanning nearly 70 years but it only represents a small corner of ASD. In contrast, high-functioning AS is a subject that has only existed in mainstream psychology in English speaking countries for about 25 years and what is currently known about it is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many unanswered questions about high-functioning AS. The exact cause of the condition is just one of them. I'm not aware of anybody with an official diagnosis of high-functioning AS who has submitted a DNA sample for analysis to determine whether there are any specific genetic markers prevalent in people with the condition. Has the NAS had any involvement in such a project? It's no good analysing thousands of samples of DNA from people with traditional Kanner autism then extrapolating the findings to people with high-functioning AS.

  • laddie49 said:
    No idea Arran  but the link posted by BIMOG lists a huge number of research projects about genetic links to autism dating back to 2003 and through to 2016.

    It's just a Google search. I am focusing on the higher-functioning end of AS which could be caused by different factors than traditional Kanner autism.

    Have there been any families where one sibling has high-functioning AS and another sibling has traditional Kanner autism?

    laddie49 said:
    Arran, both you and Recombinantsocks on another thread have introduced WW2  into discussions without explaining what you mean.

    I find that slightly disturbing.

    I find it very disturbing but probably in a way that's different from what you are thinking. It's a recent research finding that I'm looking at in more detail. I may or may not post it here because there is a guilt by association factor.

  • Arran, both you and Recombinantsocks on another thread have introduced WW2  into discussions without explaining what you mean.

    I find that slightly disturbing.

    Unless you are prepared to elaborate exactly why it is relevant to this forum I suggest you refrain from making those comments.

    Laddie.

  • Martian Tom and Ferret,

    You clearly have strong and clear views. How about enlightening us with your reasons for such views.

    What do you know we don't?

    Laddie.

  • I was sorry to hear about your loss Tom.

    Laddie.

  • No idea Arran  but the link posted by BIMOG lists a huge number of research projects about genetic links to autism dating back to 2003 and through to 2016.

    Have a look and let us know what springs to mind.

    Laddie.

  • laddie49 said:
    When the experts have done their work and come to some kind of consensus which has been peer reviewed and published I have no doubt the NAS will publish the results.

    Who exactly are these so called experts and how have they got their hand on the DNA of people with AS?

    As a researcher of AS I find it has a very chequered history and it is possible that people with AS (regardless of what causes it) are the victims of WW2 era politics.

  • NAS13026 said:
    As for putting pressure on children to acheive there was once an examination called the "Eleven Plus" which  was a standard part of the British education system until the very early 1970s. If a child passed that single exam it determined whether that child progressed to a grammar school, for academic study, which then opened the route to university and a well paid middle class job. Failure to pass the exam (and there were no re-sits) consigned a child to a secondary school and a second class education, where they learned the basic practical skills they'd need to be able to perform as unskilled labourers and factory fodder. So, if a single exam at age eleven exam that determined a child's entire future as an adult wasn't a big incentive to push children academically then I don't know what is.

    It's a weak counterargument. The 11 plus is taken at the age of 11 so most of the teaching and studying for it would have taken place in years 5 and 6. If you read the OP then the issue is teaching academic stuff at a very young age of around 3 years old. There were also many LEAs during the 1970s and 80s that did not operate the 11 plus exam.

  • It seems there is a lot of research going on indeed BIMOG. Thanks for the link.

    I think it is wrong to come to a firm conclusion either way based on one or two case studies.

    When the experts have done their work and come to some kind of consensus which has been peer reviewed and published I have no doubt the NAS will publish the results.

    Laddie.

  • NAS13026 said:
    If it were a result of nuture then all siblings in a family, who were raised in the same manner, would be on the spectrum.

    Read the OP. The siblings were not all raised in the same manner.

    The refrigerator mother theory in its original form is discredited but what has happened in reality since then is that nuture has been almost entirely cut out of the equation as a cause of ASD. Remember that the refrigerator mother theory in its heyday applied only to more traditional Kanner autism and not high-functioning AS. It centred on overprotective parents rather than overeducating parents.  

  • Hi BIMOG,

    ASC is a spectrum condition as I understand it and when I first researched my own symptoms I read that up until approx 10years ago most experts believed in the nurture option. Since then I have read some papers on the Research Autism website (before it was absorbed into the NAS) that were looking at a genetic diagnosis option but they were inconclusive.

    My experience is that there is a distinct heritability relationship with ASC but again influenced by nurture in the early years of development.

    I may be wrong if there is fresh research which has proved this one way or the other but I am not aware of it.

    Laddie.

  • Has it actually been proven that AS is genetic? Take into account that a genetic test for AS will work for people of all ages and is capable of rendering psychological tests, which are what is used at the moment, obsolete. 

  • Hi BIMOG

    Have you considered that both might have an influence on the outcome of whether a child develops ASC? ie genetic/inherited and environment/nurture (or lack of it).

    Laddie.

  • The fundamental question is whether it is nature or nurture?

    Has AS amongst children in Britain risen at a rate since 1970 faster than possible if it was genetic? I'm intrigued as to how AS failed to be co-discovered in the 1970s and 80s from a parent's and teacher's perspective of observed behavioural traits which could not have been explained at the time using existing knowledge of psychology. There doesn't seem to be reports of AS behavioural traits in popular educational magazines of the 1970s and 80s, which could imply it was a much rarer condition back then.

    There have been many changes to the education system since the late 1980s with the introduction of the National Curriculum, SATS, etc. As a result of the changes an increasing number of parents have placed emphasis on their child's academic prowess in a way that most parents of bygone decades never would have. Before the late 1980s there was none of this obsession with academic standards and league tables, so most parents just wanted their children to muddle along at primary school and the early years of secondary school and be happy.

    This point is illustrated by the way that Britain is totally awash with primary school level books for English, mathematics, and science for children to use at home. Books which practically did not exist in the 1970s and 80s.

  • NAS9920 said:
    utter twaddle.

    I disagree. It's an interesting, albeit unproven, theory that deserves attention.

    Has the NAS done any serious research into the cause of AS?