Disrupted DNA and AS

[Canopus]

Does anybody know if mixed race people with two NT parents are prone to having AS? I have come across a few mixed race people with AS who have absolutely no family history of AS.

 

There doesn't seem to be anywhere near as much research into the biological aspects of mixed race people as social and cultural aspects. It is possible that long dormant genetic traits are activated when dissimilar DNA combines producing unpredictable results.

[justine1]

Does anybody know if mixed race people with two NT parents are prone to having AS? I have come across a few mixed race people with AS who have absolutely no family history of AS.

 

There doesn't seem to be anywhere near as much research into the biological aspects of mixed race people as social and cultural aspects. It is possible that long dormant genetic traits are activated when dissimilar DNA combines producing unpredictable results.

My kids are mixed race.I think its hard to say if my husband is NT or not,he would never want to accept there was anything "wrong" with him or any member of his family.His family are all abroad and I havent met most of them.His father died when he was 10 so I dont think he can eve remember much about him.

 

I also think no matter how much we search for those who may have had AS it would'nt be concrete.So for me I am taking it as just one of those things that my son has AS.

 

My brother has had three strokes,first one at age21,when it happened the doctors said it may be genetic as there were no environmental/physical reasons why it happened.So he discovered our grandfather had a stroke but I dont know how he discovered this and I dont think its definate proof.

Edited May 8, 2010 by justine1

[Tally]

There is actually very little variation in human DNA when compared to most other species, so your theory about "dissimilar" DNA in humans does not really make any sense. It's not unusual for people to have ASD with no family history, so it's inevitable that some of those cases will include mixed race people. I have never heard any evidence, in any species, that mixing dissimilar DNA can activate dormant genetic traits. It is well known that a wide gene pool leads to a more robust population.

 

I'm not really comfortable with your suggestion that mixed relationships produce disabled children.

[justine1]

There is actually very little variation in human DNA when compared to most other species, so your theory about "dissimilar" DNA in humans does not really make any sense. It's not unusual for people to have ASD with no family history, so it's inevitable that some of those cases will include mixed race people. I have never heard any evidence, in any species, that mixing dissimilar DNA can activate dormant genetic traits. It is well known that a wide gene pool leads to a more robust population.

 

I'm not really comfortable with your suggestion that mixed relationships produce disabled children.

I agree 100% with Tally

Also to add I dont think anyone is more prone to having AS,definatley not one particular group of people.It is just a "lottery" really.

Edited May 8, 2010 by justine1

[Canopus]

There is actually very little variation in human DNA when compared to most other species, so your theory about "dissimilar" DNA in humans does not really make any sense.

 

It's immaterial whether there is more or less variation in human DNA compared to that of other species. What matters is that variation does exist. A human DNA bottleneck took place tens of thousands of years ago which drastically reduced the gene pool and possibly resulted in some races being lost entirely.

 

I have never heard any evidence, in any species, that mixing dissimilar DNA can activate dormant genetic traits.

 

Do you have good knowledge of genetics and biochemistry?

 

It is well known that a wide gene pool leads to a more robust population.

 

I really would like some scientific information to back this up. The long term (like >20 generations) biological effects of race mixing are unknown due to insufficient data.

[call me jaded]

What is known is that same family marriages are detrimental. It happens quite a lot in some cultures and is evident by an 'over-representation' of certain ethnicities in disabled children stats.

 

There was also a tiny bit of research that blond hair and blue eyes is more common in children with disabilites. Interestingly my son is mixed race with blond hair and blue eyes, somewhat unusually.

[justine1]

What is known is that same family marriages are detrimental. It happens quite a lot in some cultures and is evident by an 'over-representation' of certain ethnicities in disabled children stats.

 

There was also a tiny bit of research that blond hair and blue eyes is more common in children with disabilites. Interestingly my son is mixed race with blond hair and blue eyes, somewhat unusually.

Wow,that is unusal.My youngest has lighter hair and skin than his brothers and has green eyes,overall he looks more like me.Sam who has AS is more like his dad in that he has the darker skin tone and different hair,but actually doesnt look like either of us,apparently looks like my brother in laws second son!

[Tally]

It's immaterial whether there is more or less variation in human DNA compared to that of other species. What matters is that variation does exist. A human DNA bottleneck took place tens of thousands of years ago which drastically reduced the gene pool and possibly resulted in some races being lost entirely.

Quite possibly. Certainly there is only one subspecies of humans remaining, so considerable genetic diversity has already been lost.

 

Do you have good knowledge of genetics and biochemistry?

No, probably only slightly more than the average person. How about you present some scientific evidence that suggests that mixing dissimilar DNA can activate long dormant genetic traits?

 

I really would like some scientific information to back this up. The long term (like >20 generations) biological effects of race mixing are unknown due to insufficient data.

You need scientific evidence that inbreeding causes problems and that genetic diversity leads to a healthier population? That should not be difficult.

Much animal behaviour is designed to prevent inbreeding. Why would that characteristic have been selected for if it weren't beneficial?

You could see Stephen J. O'Brien's work on the cheetah.

National Zoo scientists' work from 1979 on the consequences of inbreeding in zoo animal populations.

National Zoo, National Cancer Institute and University of Minnesota's work comparing the Serengeti Plains lions with those geographically isolated in the Ngorongoro crater and also the small remnant population of Asian lions.

[baddad]

Wow,that is unusal.My youngest has lighter hair and skin than his brothers and has green eyes,overall he looks more like me.Sam who has AS is more like his dad in that he has the darker skin tone and different hair,but actually doesnt look like either of us,apparently looks like my brother in laws second son!

 

When I was working in aussie as an ice-cream man (??? I kid you not!) I used to visit an aboriginal 'shanty' town. Saw a small aborigine boy who was black as a coalman's hat but had bright red hair! Made me giggle for days - it was just sooooo unexpected. Looked great though!

 

L&P

 

BD

[justine1]

When I was working in aussie as an ice-cream man (??? I kid you not!) I used to visit an aboriginal 'shanty' town. Saw a small aborigine boy who was black as a coalman's hat but had bright red hair! Made me giggle for days - it was just sooooo unexpected. Looked great though!

 

L&P

 

BD

Ice cream man Anyway...my eldest son had a boy in his reception and yr 1 class that is mixed race with red curly hair,his mum is from Nepal and dad Jamacian.My ex used to think they dyed the boys hair cause neither of them had red hair

[call me jaded]

Mr Whippy. Thanks for that.

[baddad]

Mr Whippy. Thanks for that.

 

 

It all got a bit confusing 'cos the aussies couldn't understand my non-rising-dipthong English. They wanted Oice Craimes and Nointy Noines but I only had Ice Creams and Ninety Nines!

I was ALMOST the local Farmer's stores Father Christmas, but luckily some bar work came in and I was able to knock them back

My career as a 'woine' waiter came to an abrupt end when I spilled a pint of Guinness down the back of the girlfriend of an Aussie rules fullback...

 

 

 

[KezT]

I'm a bit confused by your belief that mixed race = "disrupted" DNA

 

as you have said, we all came from a single racial stock originally, so in that sense we are all "mixed" race now (except maybe a few Africans, but I doubt it). which also rather disrupts your assertation that there are no long term studies of "mixing" the races

 

In fact, the concept of race is very new, whereas the movement of humansacross racial bounderies is very old. read some descriptions of the population on London in Shakespearesv time for example - black, brown and yellow faces very common enough to be barely commented upon, and mixed race marriages perfectly normal. hence Othello (which is about suspician, not race, in case you haven't read it). My historical expertise is the middle ages, when there was also lots of Middle Eastern immigrants, many had already been here foor generations. there was also trade with China, and therefore Asian faces were not unknown (hence gunpowder, cannons and all those lovely middle ages wars). If you go right back to classical Rome the races were even more mixed, as the empire spread from Egypt, accross half the northern hemisphere - and anyone could become a citizen if they fulfilled the criteria - including slaves, or foot soldiers from other races.

 

Finally, in your OP you said there is no family history of AS, but hardly anyone has a family history of something that was only "invented" in the 1980's! such things are not recorded on family trees, and most AS people in previous generations would have been considered "odd" "eccentric" "unemotional/cold" or other such things which would not have been passed on anecdotally as, say, a physical disability would have been (oh yes, great uncle John, he only had one leg is more interesting that, great uncle John didn't have many friends).

 

I find your question both misconceived and offensive TBH.

 

edited to add: meant to say - re your question about diverse DNA and robust health I have just one word for you: Dogs!

 

mongrels are always healthier, longer lived and usually better temprement than pedigrees!

Edited May 9, 2010 by KezT

[chris54]

It is the belief of some researchers that we all, all humans, are descended from the children of one woman.

 

It has also recently be found, that when humans moved out of what is now Africa, they encountered a sub species that they interbred with. It is believed by some researchers, that the only 100% pure human DNA is that of people from Africa, that all other people on the planet have 2% DNA from this sub species that later die out.

 

 

[justine1]

It is the belief of some researchers that we all, all humans, are descended from the children of one woman.

 

It has also recently be found, that when humans moved out of what is now Africa, they encountered a sub species that they interbred with. It is believed by some researchers, that the only 100% pure human DNA is that of people from Africa, that all other people on the planet have 2% DNA from this sub species that later die out.

You are 100% correct Chris

There was a programme on exactly this on BBC2 last year,a Brit women went all over the world to discover were humans come from.I think whether you believe in Evolution or any religious beliefs it all points to Africa.

 

Also to add most black british people came from "the islands"(Jamaica,Trinidad and tobago and Bahamas) the same applies to those in america.On the plantations in these countries its well known that the owners would rape or even have a mistress with whom they had mixed race children,these children would then marry or have children with other mixed race children and so their children were often of a darker skin tone.I dont really like referring to my children as mixed race or even worse the horrible language used here "half cast."To me my children are black because thats what their father is,but this is just my opinion.

[Canopus]

There was a programme on exactly this on BBC2 last year,a Brit women went all over the world to discover were humans come from.I think whether you believe in Evolution or any religious beliefs it all points to Africa.

 

I would be careful of taking popular science programmes as gospel.

 

The out of Africa theory actually originated in the mid to late 19th century as a product of Darwinism.

 

It has also recently be found, that when humans moved out of what is now Africa, they encountered a sub species that they interbred with. It is believed by some researchers, that the only 100% pure human DNA is that of people from Africa, that all other people on the planet have 2% DNA from this sub species that later die out.

 

It is very unlikely that the modern day African race is identical to any races that existed 50,000 years ago due to genetic mutations.

[justine1]

I would be careful of taking popular science programmes as gospel.

 

The out of Africa theory actually originated in the mid to late 19th century as a product of Darwinism.

 

 

 

It is very unlikely that the modern day African race is identical to any races that existed 50,000 years ago due to genetic mutations.

No its not only from darwinism,I am religious and in the bible it is very clear that people came from Africa.Wont start lecturing though!I personally feel that thats where we all originate from but everyone can have there own belief.

 

As for African race,there are tribes that have not been affected by "mutations"(which is a horrible very offensive word)as you put it.They dont have any links to the outside world and are identical to their ancestors in every aspect from DNA to lifestyle.

 

Have you even travelled furthur than Europe????

[Tally]

I actually don't see genetic mutations as an offensive term. It is not just connected with the evolution of species. Today we see genetic mutations occurring in bacteria, which is why antibiotics need to be changed as bacteria become resistant to it. Genetic mutations can result in conditions such as cystic fibrosis, sickle-cell anaemia and albinism, so they are know to occur in humans and many animals as well as bacteria.

 

If you look at the theory of evolution (whether you believe it or not), it does not see genetic mutations as a bad thing, as the beneficial ones are retained by the species in order to make them more successful.

 

If evolution is true, then there probably would be genetic differences in humans living today to those who lives 50,000 years ago, even in small populations who had been isolated from outside influence. However, our species Homo sapiens has existed for about 500,000 years ago, that is how far back you would have to go in order to find humans that are different enough that we would not have been able to produce fertile offspring with them.

 

But even if genetic mutations have occurred, it is no less "pure" human DNA that people are carrying if you are talking about who they are descended from.

[justine1]

I actually don't see genetic mutations as an offensive term. It is not just connected with the evolution of species. Today we see genetic mutations occurring in bacteria, which is why antibiotics need to be changed as bacteria become resistant to it. Genetic mutations can result in conditions such as cystic fibrosis, sickle-cell anaemia and albinism, so they are know to occur in humans and many animals as well as bacteria.

 

If you look at the theory of evolution (whether you believe it or not), it does not see genetic mutations as a bad thing, as the beneficial ones are retained by the species in order to make them more successful.

 

If evolution is true, then there probably would be genetic differences in humans living today to those who lives 50,000 years ago, even in small populations who had been isolated from outside influence. However, our species Homo sapiens has existed for about 500,000 years ago, that is how far back you would have to go in order to find humans that are different enough that we would not have been able to produce fertile offspring with them.

 

But even if genetic mutations have occurred, it is no less "pure" human DNA that people are carrying if you are talking about who they are descended from.

Yes I agree with you Tally I know what you mean in your last line,in that my childrens father is african and therefore have a very direct genetic tie to africa,so as you say there DNA is no less pure than their fathers.

But I do agree with Chris(maybe not the wording 100% pure)but it is "less of a mixture" if that makes sense

 

Just to clear things I wasnt saying Canopus is being offensive I just feel that when you talking about people mutation seems such a horrid word!Bacteria mutation sounds fine,but not DNA,I know I cant change that wording as its what scientists use but I do think its offensive for them to use it,they may all be intellectually superior to me but it doesnt make everything they say right!

[baddad]

Bio diversity is a completely natural and logical evolutionary process; that's not 'mutation' it's experimentation, and whether you put it down to God or Mo' nature it makes perfect sense to 'adapt' to your environment. I think the word 'mutation' does have potentially offensive overtones, not because of the meaning of the word itself but because of the negative meaning some idiots attach to it. Something like 'retarded' has the same power to offend, because the actual meaning of the word - delayed - has been superceded by the meaning of the offensive words it was originally introduced, politically, to combat.

 

I don't think the belief that human evolution began in Africa arises as a result of taking 'popular tv programmes as gospel' - it's fairly well established from archeological records too (although, of course, 'Africa' at the time or the notion of boundaries wasn't even a consideration). And contrary to the idea that Darwinism introduced the concept of a single evolutionary path it introduced the absolutely ludicrous notion that alternative cultures implied radical differences rather than perfectly sensible (from a genetic POV) local variations and adaptations. There's absolutely no difference, in that respect, between one of Darwin's finch's beaks (adapted depending on available food resources) and the negroe's wider, flatter nose which is more efficient in a hot climate (or our own little pointy things that fair better in our climate!), but that important point of Darwinism tended to get overlooked by Victorian society because it was so damn smug about it's superiority it never bothered looking.

 

Funny you mention 'Sickle Cell Anaemia' Tally, 'cos i've always felt in some ways that this correlates to autism and ASD's. The 'sickle cell' mutation is actually a hugely positive and advantageous one, because it increases immunity to malaria - a big, big, advantage in the countries concerned. The problems came, though, when this 'mutation' became so widespread as a result of its success that it became commonplace, and children started being born with the mutated gene from both parents. It's only when both parents have the positive sickle cell mutation that it can become problematic for the child - i.e. it's a 'single dose' vaccine'! (yes, I know it's not a vaccine, but that's to emphasise a point). I have often thought that ASD's probably - where genetics are a factor (there is evidence that it does arise spontaneously too) - involves a 'pinch' from both sides of the family, and that it's this 'double dose' that can sometimes mean the difference between having a few traits or a number of traits or a lot of traits or a definable and quantifiable 'disorder' that becomes disabling.

 

Anyhoo - back to the original question. Wasn't it 'Blue Mink' who sang: 'what we need is a great big melting pot'? I wouldn't go that far, because I think difference is wonderful and, from a survivalists point of view, hugely practical and beneficial. Wouldn't it be great, though, if the world stopped making idiotic judgements about the possible 'differences' and concentrated on the inherent samenesses?

 

L&P

 

BD

 

 

[baranigirl]

wow what a lot of interesting debates there!

 

Have always believed it is the luck of the draw for kids with disabilities unless they have been proven scientifically to be genetic and not even considered a mixed race thing as I believe the DNA pot was the same at the start!

 

My brother was blond with dark eyes as a child, he is half turkish and half irish! He had a tourettes like condition during his teens and his second son has ADHD and is being assessed for ASD

 

My sister is half English and half Canadian (was South African but Dad is now Canadian) and she is married to an african American and they have 3 mixed race kids, both the boys had developmental problems with swallowing and speech as youngsters and their dd is severely dyslexic.

 

I am as far as I know 100% English, but as I was adopted as a baby (as my brother was also) I have no real genetic family history to follow