Aspies For Freedom

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1179...index.html

Brain Overgrowth Linked With Autism

A U.S. study suggested that brain overgrowth in 1-year-old children might contribute to the onset of autistic characteristics.

That finding by researchers at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill's Neurodevelopmental Disorders Research Center supported concurrent research that has found brain overgrowth in autistic children as young as 2 years.

The lead investigator of the study, Dr. Joseph Piven, said behavioral studies of infants at high risk for autism suggest the onset of most behavioral symptoms defining autism also occur at about age one.

One reason these findings are important is because early post-natal onset raises the possibility that there may be a window for early treatment and prevention that could be identified by future studies, Piven said.

Piven cautioned, however, that while the study seems to suggest a link between brain overgrowth and autism, there are many variants of autism among children, so the ways in which autistic children develop and are affected by brain growth can vary greatly.

The study was presented in Boca Raton, Fla., during this week's annual meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

Source: United Press International

*beep* this is erkolos speaking

So those who are the most autistic are those who have had the most brain overgrowth? Maybe?

Someone said we often have big heads.

By "brain overgrowth", did they mean in actual physical size/weight, or in number of neurons and synapse connections?  There's a relevant difference.

As for the 'brain over-growth'

Not everyone in my family with a big head is autistic, and not everyone who is autistic has a big head. One of my sons had a CT scan done when he was four months old because of deafness and his large head. The scan showed large black areas where there should have been brain tissue. We were told that he would have some intellectual impairment at least, but it would not be possible to predict how badly he would be affected. The next scan some months later showed normal brain tissue. He has an IQ of 154.

I would think that this theory is yet another 'grasping at straws' idea. If you know what you are looking for, it is perfectly easy to notice differences in children from birth - but, you have to see babies as real, whole people and want to interact with them.

I have had so much experience of people treating their offspring as irritating dolls until they sit up, start to speak and walk and start appearing more 'normal' (i.e. more like an adult) at around a year.

I sometimes feel like the only person prepared to have a conversation with people even if they cannot speak my language. Just because someone hasn't the muscular strength and control to speak in grammatically correct sentences doesn't mean that they cannot understand me, or I them.

I think it started with my youngest sister; I was twelve when she was born. I was unable to understand why people could sit around talking to each other and ignoring her - so I used to talk to her all the time. She said her first word - hello - at three months. She was on my uncle's lap, and I was sitting on the floor talking to her and ignoring the general conversation around the room. I had been saying "hello" to her for about half an hour (aspie perserveration! ) and waiting for her excited kick, wriggle, grin and gasp after each hello. When she finally said it back to me my uncle nearly dropped her in surprise!

I naturally took this approach with my own new-born children - and noticed straight away that my eldest wouldn't make eye-contact. Of course, at the time, I didn't realise the significence of that and just used to joke that he was more interested in listening to the guardian angel over my shoulder than to me!

That is actual my personal pet theory. Neuro pathways overcrowding and resisting the natural "pruning" processes jumbling the signals, etc.

Well, people do know for sure that Einstein had a bigger than normal brain.

Anyone else think this is another "grasping at straws" kind of thing?

I think this idea has more weight than other ideas--which I'd rather not bring up because I've ranted enough about those--but still, I remain skeptical that this could be the "entire cause."

I heard smaller... or at least lighter.

Personally I don't take all of these theories seriously, actually none.

Well, what I can say is that both of my aspie sons have had head circumferences in the 95th percentile even though the rest of them (weight, height) was in the 5th percentile. In other words, there is a huge discrepency in head size and body size on their charts.

I have a terrible time finding hats (other than soft knitted ones) that don't pinch my head and give me a headache.

And this is another thing: I had terrible, persistent migraines and headaches as a child....and come to think of it, my 7 yo aspie often complains that his head hurts. I wonder whether many meltdowns, including those of non-verbal auties, might be caused by severe haedaches. Also, whether the headaches, larger head circumference, and brain overgrowth, could be at all interelated.

What's your personal theory, Erkolos?  What do you think is the cause for autism?

Just curious.

I still think autism is genetically determined ie: children are born with it.

I agree with tenaciouscj that it is genetic, but just don't care about what the genes supposedly triggers.

Still, how would you explain Aspies who have a proportionally normal/smallish head, as there are apparently some of them around.

They are aspies with normal/smallish heads, punctum finalé. As I said I don't take this brain overgrowth theory anymore seriously than mercury poisoning theory.

agreed Marieke - the genetic differences must impact on development.