The LA Times reports on a study based on Israeli draft records:
Men over 40 are nearly six times as likely to have an autistic child as those under 30, according to a new study that provides support for the role of genetics in the development of the disabling mental disorder.
If this is true,          why didn't we know this before now? This would be a huge effect,          gigantic compared to what is normally seen in epidemiological studies of          unexplained diseases, and it's not all that difficult to assemble this          data.
       
        I've been complaining for years that the public health establishment          hasn't taken autism seriously. It's roughly about as prevalent as AIDS,          and nobody has had any idea how to avoid autism (whereas avoiding AIDS          is very, very simple), but the government and the press don't care 5% as          much.
       
        P.S. Gregg Easterbrook offers a novel theory for the presumed increase          in autism: television. I          don't know how plausible that sounds, but he's absolutely right that we          need more research into causes. Perhaps his theory could be tested using          data from white South Africans, since they didn't get TV until 1976, but          had modern healthcare (e.g., the heart transplant was pioneered in South          Africa in 1967).
My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer
 
 
 
 Posts
Posts
 
 
 
 
 
 
1 comment:
I know this post is a year old, but I just wanted to say: I suspect it's not older fathers that are linked to autism, but older *mothers*.
Post a Comment