• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Autism traits could be 'edited' out genetic trial suggests

While they're at it, might as well eliminate all genetic "disorders". And also, it's not good for people to be over or under weight, they can fix the genes for that. And let's make sure nobody is too tall or too short, it'll be more comfortable for everyone, right? And IQ, let's get rid of low IQ. Hey you know what - everyone likes blonde hair, blue eyes, pink skin, Nordic features. Everyone who can afford it will be perfect.

It's a very slippery slope. No, we can't have this. It'll be a disaster.
 
Not to mention that there is still a lot we need to learn about our own genetics; we're still wrestling with the idea of "Junk" DNA. How would "editing" out Autism affect the individual? What else might be impacted? What traits would be expressed now that the Autistic traits were "edited" out? How will the structure, connectivity, and stability of neurons be affected? Autism isn't a Lego brick you can just remove and replace with another, its a network that might consist of hundreds of modifier genes (or more, we're still looking for more candidate genes) that may be dependent on each other.
 
Iamnotarabot said:
Thinking autism should be eradicated is thinking that diversity of mind should be eradicated,it reminds me of a not so distant past.
Click to expand...
Temple Grandin said it best "The world needs all kinds of different minds." She should know; she is autistic.
 
Shamar said:
Temple Grandin said it best "The world needs all kinds of different minds." She should know; she is autistic.
Click to expand...

Yes I have seen this quote, I should read more about her work, I think the real challenge is to deal with non functionning kid but you know, I always come back to that example in France we have a guy who is autistic and he was non verbal as a kid, all the institutions and so called expert said to his mother that she should give up her son and let them do their job ( lock the kid in a institution and over medicate him).

His mother never gave up and now he is an actor and wrote couple of books about his history, he looks fantastic and realy you have no clue that the guy is autistic if he doesnt tell you about it.

I talk about that because I think that the general public think to some degree autism is only "low functionning" autism, they have no idea of the spectrum, and exemples like that make us wonder if there is an actual difference between the low and hight functionning autism...maybe non verbal kid just experienced something traumatizing that other didnt have to face as a baby, and we know that sensory overload can be traumatizing right?
 
If they get rid of our repetitive behavior, there goes a million job opportunities that involve repetition. After my stims are gone, leaving me no way to deal with sensory input, body language will still mean very little to me.

Suiseiseki said:
Reading about the American Civil War as much as I do doesn't make things happy, it's not a fun life, and I know most people with autsim aren't happy with it.
Click to expand...

If it doesn't make you happy, how are you even interested? Any of my so-called special interests, i.e. just interests that get my natural intense focus, are interesting because learning about them makes me happy.

Smiley said:
While they're at it, might as well eliminate all genetic "disorders". And also, it's not good for people to be over or under weight, they can fix the genes for that. And let's make sure nobody is too tall or too short, it'll be more comfortable for everyone, right? And IQ, let's get rid of low IQ. Hey you know what - everyone likes blonde hair, blue eyes, pink skin, Nordic features. Everyone who can afford it will be perfect.

It's a very slippery slope. No, we can't have this. It'll be a disaster.
Click to expand...

Iamnotarabot said:
the general public think to some degree autism is only "low functionning" autism, they have no idea of the spectrum, and exemples like that make us wonder if there is an actual difference between the low and hight functionning autism
Click to expand...

We have to include people with low motoric abilities. Eliminate functioning labels. They're all about the ability to "pass" for neurotypical anyway. Communication can be done in many ways.
 
Instead why don't they spend their time figuring out what causes all these crazy people to shoot people and edit that out of DNA? Now that seems like something that would actually be good to get rid of. With so many other issues in the world and with so many gifts that can come with neurodiversity figuring out how to eradicate autism seems like a big waste of time.
 
I think that messing around with genetics, in general, is dangerous. Think about this question for a second "Who know more about the book? the person who reads it or the person who wrote it?". I think we all know the answer to that one. Whether or not you believe in creation or evolution. The fact is. We as human beings did not write or engineer the genetic (DNA) code. What makes us think that we can master the very thing that created us. I have a feeling that if we keep this up that there are gonna be some serious repercussions to this. Who knows, we might create some kind of monster that will destroy us.
 
Iamnotarabot said:
I talk about that because I think that the general public think to some degree autism is only "low functionning" autism, they have no idea of the spectrum, and exemples like that make us wonder if there is an actual difference between the low and hight functionning autism.
Click to expand...
I suspect that 80%-90% of public perception of autism come from the movie Rain Man.
 
There are just some things that should not be tampered or messed with. I do not agree with the so called “cure” for autism as in potential diseases and mutations that may be involved.
Also all they got out of this study by far was fixing repetitive and jumping behavior in autistic people.....not all people who are autistic jump around and not all have repetitive behavior. What about the ones who have social issues like many of us, there’s apparently not a “cure” for that.
Finding that so called “cure” would have been already too late for the millions of older adults who have struggled early in their lives and what would be the point of it now if there ever was one. What point would it be if the person was different than he or she was before?
I believe that we are who we are by how god made us.
As a few have said why can’t we find a cure for the hate and violence??? Maybe then humanity can be more tolerable
 
Last edited:
This is cruelty to animals and it should be banned, I'd like to see the "scientists" be strapped down and have the tests done to them to see how they like it, it's totally wrong. Then look at all the wasted money going into this that could be spent improving the lives of people with autism instead or towards other good causes. :mad:

Editing genes is also dangerous and it's unlikely to remove autism anyway. In this case they only talk of reducing repetitive behaviour which I'm sceptical about and it will most probably cause other issues when messing with nature like this, and why should they remove autism even if they could, especially higher functioning autism? It's NOT something they should be trying to cure, it's NOT an illness. Also repetitive behaviour definitely isn't a big deal, it's not harming anyone and if someone wants to be repetitive then so what? Stopping it could potentially also reduce special talents even if it did succeed in "achieving" this which I'm sceptical, plus humans are very different to mice and were all the mice diagnosed autistic because surely they'd have to be to make this test even very slightly believable?
 
Last edited:
Ultimately, they'll find a way to diagnose us in the womb, and then they will "cure" autism in the same way they "cured" downs syndrome: de facto compulsory abortion. The death cure. A long time ago a UK poster on Wrong Planet said that when she got pregnant that the doctors ordered her to have a "therapeutic abortion" and she had to fight tooth and nail to keep her baby.

If the scientists create a "perfect" human species, what's to say that nature will find a loophole and suddenly there will be a disease that wipes humans out? Nature abhors a vacuum. Scientists have faced this before-they created a "super wheat" that needs human help to survive, then a wheat rust popped up in Africa and now they say that if it got into the US wheat would suddenly disappear and flour would cost its weight in gold. At least there are still some older wheats around, einkorn is being cultivated again, for example.

Perfection does not exist in nature, and if all possible genetic "problems" are excised from our genome there would be some VERY nasty blowback. I'd hate for, say, homosexuality to be edited out only for the geneticists to find out that it actually filled such an important natural function that humanity is screwed without it.
 
It makes me wonder if it isn't the culture that is the problem. People are bombarded with unrealistic expectations of what is considered "normal" (e.g. Photoshopped supermodels, getting married in your 20's, success in a career), and I would hypothesize that this is what is contributing to the rise of mental illnesses (at least in America). So instead of accepting someone who may have social quirks, yet might have incredible gifts that can benefit mankind, pressure is applied on the unconventional person to fit into a society that cannot, or will not, adapt, and that will lead to projects such as this.

While it is easy (and lazy) to blame the individual, I think that society's harmful pursuit of unrealistic perfection and the profiteering off of those insecurities by pharmaceutical companies needs to be thoroughly discussed. Is the individual the problem, or is it a system that profits from the consumption of medication the problem? I think it is the latter.
 
This seems similar to cochlear implants and the reactions from the deaf community. I am not deaf, but I was involved in the deaf community when it was new and the reaction was very similar to the reactions here. The deaf community is rich and vibrant, the language is beautiful and my perception of the reactions was “there was nothing wrong so piss off hearing people and stop trying to change us.”

To me it seems like it would have to be a pretty big negative to muck around with something like this. Ive seen people near me affected by rare cancers or genetic diseases that are fatal. I am really excited about this research for things like that.

I have a son who could be given a provisional diagnosis of autism (ie mostly fits, but kinda doesn’t) with some large language delays. IF this were available now i dont think we would do it. I would like things to be easier for him but what else would it do....
 
GrownupGirl said:
I'm so sick of this CRAP! People need to wake up, stop playing god, and stop trying to create a "perfect" human being, humans can't be perfect and they never will be because HUM\NS ARE SCUM...wanting to basically just kill anyone they see unworthy sick of it sicksicksick of IT!

  • OMG MY KID ISNT PERFECT booihoohoowahwahcrycry I GUESS ILL KILL THEM then my life will be good! :mad:
Click to expand...
oregano said:
Ultimately, they'll find a way to diagnose us in the womb, and then they will "cure" autism in the same way they "cured" downs syndrome: de facto compulsory abortion. The death cure. A long time ago a UK poster on Wrong Planet said that when she got pregnant that the doctors ordered her to have a "therapeutic abortion" and she had to fight tooth and nail to keep her baby.

If the scientists create a "perfect" human species, what's to say that nature will find a loophole and suddenly there will be a disease that wipes humans out? Nature abhors a vacuum. Scientists have faced this before-they created a "super wheat" that needs human help to survive, then a wheat rust popped up in Africa and now they say that if it got into the US wheat would suddenly disappear and flour would cost its weight in gold. At least there are still some older wheats around, einkorn is being cultivated again, for example.

Perfection does not exist in nature, and if all possible genetic "problems" are excised from our genome there would be some VERY nasty blowback. I'd hate for, say, homosexuality to be edited out only for the geneticists to find out that it actually filled such an important natural function that humanity is screwed without it.
Click to expand...
My reply is relevant to both of you. If this kind of thing happened then Hitler might as well of won WW2. A key belief of Nazism was to create a super race, their perception of it was completely wrong, but in Nazi Germany autistic and "handicapped" people were often put to death (murdered). If Nazism was in control now and they found a way of testing for autism in unborn babies it would be mandatory law to abort, it's terrible that many unborn babies with Downs Syndrome are already being aborted. Well in my opinion they should use the correct word, it's "killed" and it's murder, they're human beings that were alive. Many Down Syndrome people have healthy productive and happy lives, some can even drive for instance, but now many are wrongfully denied an existence, but even if they're severely impaired, it's not for us to say whether they live or die.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom