受影响和未受影响的兄弟姐妹纯合运行的插图
信用： 智障与单纯性自闭症的纯合性增加有关

一般认为，近交对复杂的动物有一些负面的生物学影响。 隐性疾病是最直接的。 隐性疾病越罕见，该疾病的患者就越来越多地成为亲戚之间配对的产物（其原因很简单，因为以纯合子以有害方式表达的极其罕见的等位基因不太可能在纯合子中聚集在一起。无关的人）。 但是，当涉及到近亲个体的性状时，大多数人都不会想到隐性疾病， 电影中的男孩 拯救 通常是更吸引人的形象（与某些演员声称的小男孩没有任何条件相反）。

有些人对近亲繁殖诸如智力之类的特质所产生的后果感到好奇。 这里的科学文献有些混乱。 但是，如果两个具有平均智力的人结对并成为其堂兄，那么他们的后代智商似乎将比其他情况低0-5点，这一切似乎都是平等的。 这就是说，我的意思是，您在文献中可以找到的研究建议，在校正其他变量时，表型水平上的近亲抑郁大于0（有效果）但小于5（不是） 这 大，小于特征值标准偏差的1/3）。 据推测，对于近亲繁殖的更高水平，后果将更加可怕。

在 下面的链接 我暗示了一个 争议 在 “神经多样性运动”。 一个基本的问题是，患有阿斯伯格综合症和功能自闭症的人被指控将自己的担忧超出了众多智障自闭症患者（其中一些是非语言性的，并且表现出严重的认知缺陷）的关注。争取“权利”。 这里的权利被理解为美国黑人，妇女和同性恋者所主张的权利，在法律面前被认为是平等的，并在社会中被赋予相同的价值。 作为一个深层的哲学问题，我从根本上怀疑权利。 作为保守派，我对过多的身份认同团体对各种权利的推动持怀疑态度。 社会公认的权利是宝贵的，并且因过于自由地分配而被贬低和贬低。

My 在下面发布 对无神论者和自闭症者造成了一些困惑。 我想快速清除一些与我隐式想到的模型有关的问题。 简而言之，我对宗教认知科学家的工作深信不疑（请参阅 宗教解释 和 在我们相信的神那个 在大多数人看来，相信神灵是合理的。 因此，当您凭直觉相信该信念不可动摇时，并不能由此得出结论。 这解释了整个社会无神论水平的变化以及一生中观点的转变。 但是，这也解释了为什么在前现代社会中，对于超自然实体的接受是无效或默认位置，即使不一定是普遍的。

但是，相信神是直觉的思想的基础是什么？ 为了将很多结果简化为几句话，人类生活在其他演员，特工的宇宙中，我们对此非常关注。 此外，我们可以构思出摆在我们面前的代理。 换句话说，超自然叙事的合理性源于我们倾向于用社会存在和代理人来填充宇宙的取向。 对于这种表型为何具有适应性，有很多进化的心理学模型，但这与我们无关。 关键是 宗教信仰和系统将这些直觉和冲动作为原子，利用它们可以建立更复杂的文化观念。

高龄母亲和父亲年龄对自闭症风险的独立和依赖贡献:

关于自闭症和父母年龄的报告对于母亲、父亲或两者是否会导致风险增加产生了相互矛盾的结果。我们分析了加州 10 年出生队列中父母年龄的限制层，以确定来自父母双方的独立或依赖效应。加州发展服务部记录中的自闭症病例与州出生档案（1990-1999 年）相关联。仅包含具有父母年龄和教育程度完整数据的单胎出生（n=4,947,935，病例=12,159）。在多变量逻辑回归模型中，无论父亲年龄如何，母亲年龄的增长都会单调增加自闭症的风险。与25-29岁母亲相比，40岁以上母亲的调整优势比（aOR）为1.51（95% CI：1.35-1.70），与<25岁母亲相比，aOR=1.77（95% CI） CI，1.56-2.00）。相比之下，自闭症风险与父亲年龄增长相关，主要在 <30 岁的母亲中：与 1.59 岁以上的父亲与 95-1.37 岁的父亲相比，aOR=1.85（40% CI，25-29）。然而，在 >30 岁的母亲中，1.13 岁以上父亲与 95-1.01 岁父亲的 aOR 为 1.27（40% CI，25-29），几乎与 <25 岁父亲的 aOR 相同。根据对父母年龄影响的异质性的首次检查，似乎在整个育龄期内，女性生出患有自闭症的孩子的风险都会增加，而当母亲 <30 岁时，父亲的年龄会增加患自闭症的风险，但当母亲年龄小于 30 岁时，影响不大。 XNUMX岁以上。 我们还计算出，近十年来，延迟生育的趋势导致加州自闭症诊断增加了约 4.6%。

我们 每日科学 了解更多详情。

Geographic distribution of autism in California: a retrospective birth cohort analysis:

Prenatal environmental exposures are among the risk factors being explored for associations with autism. We applied a new procedure combining multiple scan cluster detection tests to identify geographically defined areas of increased autism incidence. This procedure can serve as a first hypothesis-generating step aimed at localized environmental exposures, but would not be useful for assessing widely distributed exposures, such as household products, nor for exposures from nonpoint sources, such as traffic.

Geocoded mothers’ residences on 2,453,717 California birth records, 1996-2000, were analyzed including 9,900 autism cases recorded in the California Department of Developmental Services (DDS) database through February 2006 which were matched to their corresponding birth records. We analyzed each of the 21 DDS Regional Center (RC) catchment areas separately because of the wide variation in diagnostic practices. Ten clusters of increased autism risk were identified in eight RC regions, and one Potential Cluster in each of two other RC regions.

After determination of clusters, multiple mixed Poisson regression models were fit to assess differences in known demographic autism risk factors between the births within and outside areas of elevated autism incidence, independent of case status.

Adjusted for other covariates, the majority of areas of autism clustering were characterized by high parental education, e.g. relative risks >4 for college-graduate vs. nonhigh-school graduate parents. This geographic association possibly occurs because RCs do not actively conduct case finding and parents with lower education are, for various reasons, less likely to successfully seek services.

更多来自 每日科学:

However, the researchers said that in this investigation the clusters probably are not correlated with specific environmental pollutants or other “exposures.” Rather, they correlate to areas where residents are more educated.
“What we found with these clusters was that they correlated with neighborhoods of high education or neighborhoods that were near a major treatment center for autism,” said senior author Irva Hertz-Picciotto, a professor of public health sciences and a researcher with the UC Davis MIND Institute.

“In the U.S., the children of older, white and highly educated parents are more likely to receive a diagnosis of autism or autism spectrum disorder. For this reason, the clusters we found are probably not a result of a common environmental exposure. Instead, the differences in education, age and ethnicity of parents comparing births in the cluster versus those outside the cluster were striking enough to explain the clusters of autism cases,” Hertz-Picciotto said.

...

Van Meter said that the increased risk of autism in these areas is roughly a doubling of the incidence of autism over the incidence in the surrounding zone. For example, for the cluster area located in the service zone of the San Diego Regional Center, the autism incidence was 61.2 per 10,000 births and, in the rest of the Regional Center service zone, 27.1 per 10,000 births. For the Harbor Regional Center the incidence was 103.4 and 57.8, respectively. Van Meter added that it is important to remember that most of the children with autism were not born in the cluster areas.

In Southern California, the areas of increased incidence were located within these Regional Center service zones:

1. The Westside Regional Center, headquartered in Culver City, Calif., which serves the communities of western Los Angeles County, including the cities of Culver City, Inglewood and Santa Monica;

2. The Harbor Regional Center, headquartered in Torrance, Calif., which serves southern Los Angeles County, including the cities of Bellflower, Harbor, Long Beach and Torrance;

3. The North Los Angeles County Regional Center, headquartered in Van Nuys, Calif., which serves the San Fernando and Antelope valleys — two clusters were located in this regional center’s service zone.

4. The South Central Los Angeles Regional Center, headquartered in Los Angeles, which serves the communities of Compton and Gardena;

5. The Regional Center of Orange County, headquartered in Santa Ana, Calif., which serves the residents of Orange County; and

6. The Regional Center of San Diego County, headquartered in San Diego, which serves people living in Imperial and San Diego counties.

In Northern California, the areas of increased incidence were located within these regional centers’ service zones:

7. The Golden Gate Regional Center, headquartered in San Francisco, which serves Marin and San Mateo counties and the City and County of San Francisco. Two clusters were located within the Golden Gate Regional Center’s service zone; and

8. The San Andreas Regional Center, headquartered in Campbell, Calif., which serves Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Monterey and San Benito counties.

Two areas of increased incidence were located in Central California regional centers’ service zones:

9. The Central Valley Regional Center, headquartered in Fresno, Calif., which serves Fresno, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced and Tulare counties; and

10. The Valley Mountain Regional Center, headquartered in Stockton, Calif., which serves Amador, Calaveras, San Joaquin, Stanislaus and Tuolumne counties.

Might want to revisit an old Wired 片， The Greek Syndrome, from the early aughts.

泰勒考恩 和 威尔金森 在讨论泰勒的最新著作时， 创造自己的经济, 在最近的 Bloggingheads.tv 中。泰勒提到，他相信存在着多种多样的“认知概况”，而自闭症谱系过度简化了这一现实的一个方面，并使之病态化。泰勒似乎认为，人类认知模式的一个特征对于信息处理和收集来说可能不太理想，那就是倾向于构建故事或叙述（因为一般故事弧可能会扭曲人们对事实的看法）。让我印象深刻的是一个我至今为止从未深入思考过的个人数据： 直到 13 岁之前，我从来没有在布置的功课之外读过小说。 唯一的例外是希腊神话（例如， 伊利亚特）。当然，我确实读了很多书，但都是非小说类的。在后来的几年里，我开始明白这是不典型的。当我开始读小说时，几乎所有的小说都是科幻小说、奇幻小说或历史小说。直到今天，我对传统主流小说的兴趣已经减弱。我怀疑该博客的大量读者都可以讲述类似的经历。

我可能想对威尔和泰勒的对话日志提出异议的一点是，专业化对大多数人来说是一种净收益，因为他们可以找到能够利用他们的优势并满足他们的偏好的特定职业利基。在某种程度上，这肯定是正确的，但为了避免过分强调，我认为对于那些处于认知谱“尾部”的人来说，专业化的成本与收益要大得多；无论是书呆子还是艺术。对于一个更关注具体人际动态的模态人类来说，我怀疑工作中的“上下班打卡”可能不会令人不满意，因为工作只是社交之间的时间。