A very interesting theory indeed...

[pleasehelp]

http://www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm

 

One of the many things in this article which gave me food for thought was the 'Rhesus factor'. I am an O neg person as are most of my family and ESPECIALLY all the ones we now have a very good idea are or were on the spectrum and we are certain in our case that autism is unquestionably passed on genetically in our family-at the very least a lot of food for thought in there even if some of it might not turn out to be the case; its only theorizing for now but science may give us more answers in time

[Bullet]

Could just be a coincidence I suppose. Both myself and Tom are o negative. But then my younger son Jacob is as well.

[moira199]

I am O RH Neg and have a brother who is mildly autistic. I have no doubt that the condition is genetic but I don't know how the Rh factor affects things

 

Moira

[TheNeil]

I have no idea about blood types (me?...Err red) but I'm pretty sure that in some cases genetics does play a big part in ASDs. I'm dx AS, my father, with the benefit of hindsight, definitely had AS tendancies (tactless, didn't socialise, fixation on certain subjects, emotionally 'limited' etc.) and his mother (my grandmother) was very much the same (brilliant with numbers/patterns, emotionally 'cold', 'direct' etc.)

[onlycrazygal]

im rhesus negative, so is my mother and brother.......i suspect both of my boys will be too .....

interesting ......

hugs,

paula

[phoebe]

WE are both rh -ve as were both my parents and at least one of the in-laws

[butterfingersbimbo]

my mum was rhesus negative.....i'm b positive......dont know what els is....?

[Lucas]

It is interesting; isn't O-Negative supposed to be the most common blood type anyway?

[Canopus]

This article is politically incorrect although possibly factually correct. I enquired here if AS is more common in some races than others and the reply was that it affects all races equally. My real world findings say this isn't the case.

[baddad]

This article is politically incorrect although possibly factually correct. I enquired here if AS is more common in some races than others and the reply was that it affects all races equally. My real world findings say this isn't the case.

 

Hi Canopus -

 

I'm not sure how a real world study could work, because there are so many variables in terms of knowledge/understanding/social responses/access to medical professionals etc, but i think the 'universal incidence' talked about is from studies based in western countries looking at all ethic groups living within those countries and the levels of incidence per head within those groups. Additionally, some third world studies have been undertaken by western teams using the same assessment criteria they would use at home, and when these are applied to the indiginous population the figures tend to meet predicted results.

Personally, I believe that there would be fluctuations from country to country that weren't simply down to cultural differences and access to professionals, because I believe that external factors (lifestyle/foodstuffs/pollutants/medical treatments etc) can all have an impact at a more 'local' level. While the actual 'incidence' might remain the same, these factors would have an impact on effective diagnosis - particularly where the dx was (in NT terms) 'borderline' - no matter how consistent the other elements of the dx process proved to be...

 

L&P

 

BD

[Bullet]

It is interesting; isn't O-Negative supposed to be the most common blood type anyway?

 

I had a quick look and only seven percent of the British and American populations are o negative. However, donors with o negative blood are able to donate their blood to people with other blood types, so it's very much in demand. An o negative person must receive a transfusion from another o negative person, though.

Just had another look and the o group as a whole (meaning both positive and negative) makes up about 46% of the population, so I think that's where the idea that it's a common blood type comes from.

 

Here's a link to some data on blood types.

 

http://www.craigmedical.com/blood_typing_facts.htm

Edited November 3, 2006 by Bullet

[butterfingersbimbo]

whoosh!!! thats just all gone right over my head

[Nic m]

hi,

I am O neg blood group as are my sister and brother Hayley is A+.My friend and her husband are both 0neg as are all their children with no asd in their family.very interesting though.

Nicola

[oracle]

Well we are ALL O Positive in this house and that is the most common blood type.

 

Oracle

[jomica]

I'm O Rh negative, but neither my husband nor three sons are.

[noogsy]

i gave blood twice so i have a card....

one of my friends made me do it

she said it was a good thing to do .

i went

i gave

i passed out.

i came to

i was sick

i passed out again.

my friend phoned my hubbya bit like in the bodyguard

he came for me

and carried me home.

i have been phoned for my blood

and i went to the hospital

and gave blood to a poor burns victim man

so it was a good thing to do.

i will read what is on my card A rh D NEG

its a rarish type

but i told them i would give when they really really need me lol

cos i dont like the passing out bit....lol

my babe has O(like his dad hes common) and the NEG( from me im rare)

so louis is o negative....

Edited November 3, 2006 by noogsy

[darky]

i am o resus neg, thats the universal blood type isnt it? im sure mine can be given to anyone, but i cant recieve other than my own. when my eldest was born i had to have an injection to protect other pregnancies.

[Jericho]

I'm A-neg but my husband and 2 boys are all A-pos. All 3 of them are somewhere on the autistic spectrum.

[pleasehelp]

This article is politically incorrect although possibly factually correct. I enquired here if AS is more common in some races than others and the reply was that it affects all races equally. My real world findings say this isn't the case.

 

I have to agree that the article can probably be viewed as being somewhat politically incorrect that's for sure. I think maybe the 'Neanderthal' link theory might well be wrong in itself but I do think some of the points made are nevertheless valid especially regarding the way in which some of our own 'autistic behaviours' do bare some correlation to those of earlier man who had in his/her various environments required a quite different range of 'skills' than those required to survive in modern society. Indeed modern society itself is a relatively new thing in terms of the development of human beings. It is for this reason along with the fact that there does appear to be an undoubted genetic factor in the passing along of 'autistic traits' I personally believe that evolution does certainly play a part in the appearance of autistic individuals today and how they can appear so socially different in behaviour to a so-called neuro-typical person. While I think the Neanderthal theory may be barking slightly up the wrong tree the idea that autism is carried in genes is most likely right though it would take some serious detective work on the part of geneticists to prove conclusively which genes are responsible and where they have originated from. Just to turn the political incorrectness thing on its head slightly, if it DID turn out that the roots of autism lie in our anthropological ancestry and in fact it is relative to a link to a certain race or sub-species of human then we would in fact have a very powerful defense of our rights already enshrined in the laws certainly in this country because if there is some 'race factor' involved one might argue that it is as racist to discriminate against someone with autism as it is to discriminate against someone because they are from Africa or China for example. Now that really WOULD set the cat amongst the pigeons if we could all 'do' our LEAs and schools for that lol