3 ms·
We know many cases are genetic but don't have a definitive genetic test. Heritibility is not hard to determine even if no specific genes are known. Mendel did
by goldenkey 9y ago
We know many cases are genetic but don't have a definitive genetic test.
Heritibility is not hard to determine even if no specific genes are known. Mendel did this with plants even before chromosomes were discovered. So we can say simple things like the odds of offspring having autism - which isn't based on a specific gene but rather the dominance/recessiveness of the underlying genetic factors computed by census/survey/sampling data.
So yes, there is a genetic disease that causes neurological changes, autism - but it isn't correct to label all inward children as having that gene. Symptomatic diseases can have multiple disparate genetic causes - and we usually separate these into different diseases even if the symptoms are extremely similar.
- AstralStorm 9y agoThe percentages are confounded by the environment both social and physical fostered by parents. And we don't have enough separated twin studies...
- goldenkey 9y agoYou're right. I was just trying to tell OP that the heritibility evidence we have is not from knowing the exact genes that cause autism. It is moreso from epidemiological stats.