This quote is from an article on MSNBC.com. It's from February 2005, so some of you may have already read it, but I first noticed it today.
Dr. Joseph Buxbaum heads up the Autism Genome Project at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine. Buxbaum says he expects major progress in identifying the genes associated with autism in the next decade.
“I think within ten years we'll have found the genes of major affect and most of the genes of minor affect,” said Buxbaum. “That will then lead to reasonable targets for drug interventions. It will lead to much better diagnosis and certainly earlier diagnosis.”
Buxbaum says there could be a prenatal test within 10 years.
“If we get to the point where we have 10 genes that predict risk to some significant degree, then there is a prenatal test,” he said.
Full article here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7013251
This certainly makes it clear what the goal of autism research is...
So he is admitting an ultimate goal. I posted earleir about the finding of another genetic marker for autism on chromosome 17, another step further for them.
Thats a good page Bonnie, I have found that things we have written on this site, and others, come up well on google for prenatal testing, depending on exact search terms of course, but if someone was searching for info on a prenatal test we have an excellent chance of coming up high.
That is essential to get our viewpoint across.
:smile:
Pretty close to my own estimates of 10-15 years for an accurate pre-natal test.
Let's take a generous statistic of 1 in 25 having the genes (and therefore the ability to pass on autistic traits), then we say 1 in 100 actually being fully on the spectrum.
let's take 10,000 couples - 90% of them abort after a postive screening.
that's 9000 couples who won't be having autistic kids, and only 1000 who will.
so, in each generation from one to the next, the total autistic population becomes only 1 10th of what it was.
if we have 100,000 in one generation, we have 100,00 in the next, then 1000, then 100, then 10. A very drastic reduction indeed.
Personally I think that we can expect a test within two years, and that to be tested and then being used extensively within another two years after that.
In other words less than five years til it is being used daily around the world.
I base that on my on research into the companies/labs that are currently working on such a test.
In other words less than five years til it is being used daily around the world.
Not necessarily, not all countries are as backward thinking as some supposedly devloped countries would have us believe. I don't honestly think you'd see the eugenics progamme being recived in somewhere like India with quite the same enthusiasm and there are some whose cultues simply wouldn't allow it - it's certaintly frowned upon in our own devloping culture
I'd have said that the test in just around the corner and will probably be with us in the next few months and will be put into practice as soon as possible and thus open the doors to 'cure' everything else that makes people different. I think the figure of ten years was given so they can secure funding for the project for that long and no-one will notice too much if the funding is spent on other related schemes. Given the amount of money being generated by the ignorant masses it isn't unreasonable to suggest that those involved with the research side of things are going to milk this for everything it's got.
The 10 year estimate sounds much like the
sea rise of 6 inches in 100 years drivel spouted by so called environmental experts with someone elses salary in their back pocket. Anyone living in a coastal town can see that it's gone up by this much in the last 2 years, I digress.
I think there is another reason for the 10 year lable to have been applied to this, I think the scientist and doctors who stand to gain from cashing in on this hunt for a 'cure' don't want persons such as ourselves getting in there way so by convincing people that it won't be happening for a long time they can take the pressure out of any arguments so as to swing the lethargic opinions of those who would be aginst such a thing in their favour. It's done all the time, why should the cure for Autism be any different?
Brightman said " I don't honestly think you'd see the eugenics progamme being recived in somewhere like India with quite the same enthusiasm and there are some whose cultues simply wouldn't allow it - it's certaintly frowned upon in our own devloping culture"
Actually I am certain that it would be readily accepted in India. There are great strives in the culture there to have the best children possible, and sons are regarded as very important to the family's heritage and prosperity.
Do you remember a post by Tali some weeks ago about how within her culture eugenics is practiced to ensure the prettiest and most intelligent children and it is a cultural norm?
Yes, I had thought of the caste system there but I was also thinking along the lines of economic growth and that India may be more likely to publish and accept the pros as well as the cons of Autism and the idea of bleaching natural creative talent out of their workforce as being somewhat backwards. I've only really developed this idea from a couple Indians I know and from speaking to them about what is know about Autism in India. I can't remember exactly what was said but the gist of it was that they were shocked by what is being planned as a cure for Autistics and they couldn't imagine such a thing being tolerated in India. I know thats a very small minority of people to form an opinion of how something might be accepted in their home culture but it was all I had to go on really :?
I base that on my on research into the companies/labs that are currently working on such a test.
Can you tell more about that?
Well google is great for searching for info on this kind of thing.
Look up anyone that CAN is funding and find out what type of work they do, also most labs/companies make press releases every so often on the type of thing they are currently working on. Some of those press releases have been posted in this forum too.
Did you see the response from the writer of the recent msnbc article? He felt that it would be under five years, and he is a professor in bioethics. I will try and find the article and his comment for you.
The thrid post down is his response -
http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/phpBB2/v...php?t=1445
Hi Worsel, on the autism wiki we have a list of famous people who have, had, or likely had autism/AS.
You could contribute to the page if you like. I have not heard the Vernon Smith example before.
http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/wiki
Here's a link to a news article from the New Scientist web site about the work being done at the Autism Genome Project of the Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics in Oxford, UK.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/dn7597
Prof Simon Baron-Cohen, of the Autism Research Centre at the University of Cambridge, UK is quoted in the article from a press conference in London. It sounds like he is getting very excited about autism gene research too.
Quote from article
Previous studies with just a few hundred families have reported linkages on chromosomes 2, 7, 16 and 17. The Autism Genome Project is expected to produce a broad picture of the chromosome regions involved by the end of 2005. The authors will then turn to 2000 other families with just one autistic child in an effort to uncover the specific genes within those regions.
Those specific genes, says Baron-Cohen, may underlie the intriguing differences in the development and structure of autistic brains. Children with autism have been shown to have larger brains than average.
Functional imaging studies have also shown that autistic minds show decreased activity and connectivity in areas of the so-called “social brain” - regions important for language, face recognition and emotion.
I didn't realise that there is an "Autism Genome Project". I guess that's separate from the "Human Genome Project" :evil:
Its been running for a while, did you see the post from a member whose family took some of her hair and sent it into the project for testing without her permission! :evil:
I guess that might have been legal if the member was still a minor. It's a disgusting infringement of the member's rights though. A story like that certainly says a lot about the parents' attitude towards their aspie offspring.
I've got to wonder what it is that these families think they will get from cooperating with this testing? If they would like genetic testing to be available, they probably haven't figured out that they would probably be advised to not have kids at all by the experts. If a family already has more than one kid with and ASD diagnosis I would think their chances of conceiving a child without any autism genes must be nil. I don't know of any genetic study that is researching the positives of autism, so if these parents think they will be able to tell if a foetus is destined to be either a gifted eccentric or a disabled autist, they are fooling themselves.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if many families that have a member with an autism diagnosis actually have some undiagnosed genetic syndrome running in the family. Such families wouldn't need genetic testing, what they would need is a proper medical diagnosis from a competent medico.
If the parents want to help the scientists to find out what causes autism, I don't really think genetic studies are going to further scientific knowledge any further than thorough conventional research and a proper scientific background knowledge of brain development could do anyway. The answers to lots of questions have already been written in journal articles and academic books that are gathering dust on medical library shelves. If the parents want answers they only need to pull their heads out of their own arses and read some real books, and stop wasting their time listening to MMR frausters and thimoseral crackpots. If these families are curious about what autism actually is they could just ask their own offspring about their experiences and ideas. It ain't rocket science!