![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
curable autism(s)
2008-Jul-11, Friday 10:13 amNew research from the Children's Hospital of Boston finds several new genes implicated in some forms of autism. They ran a study involving 104 Middle Eastern families (88 of which had cousin marriages, increasing the likelihood of transmission for rare mutations), looking for recessive genes that could be linked to autism diagnoses. They found that 6% of the families had DNA deletions (5 were identified) linked to autism. One of those genes was also found mutated in European and American children (especially those with autism and seizures).
In most of these "deletions", however, it wasn't the gene itself that was missing but instead it was nearby "switches" adjacent to it, suggesting the possibility that someday science could find a way to reactivate the dormant genes. The report notes:
If it's not a matter of adding new protein encoding but merely reactivating what codes are already in my body, then it still counts as "my natural self", doesn't it?
This kind of stuff strikes me as odd in the same way as gender reassignment surgery on infants. You don't like the body/mind that chance gave you, so you exchange that person for a different one. Seems really dangerous to do that sort of thing to another person, but acceptable if they choose to do it for themselves.
In most of these "deletions", however, it wasn't the gene itself that was missing but instead it was nearby "switches" adjacent to it, suggesting the possibility that someday science could find a way to reactivate the dormant genes. The report notes:
It is the refinement of these synaptic connections that is the basis of learning and memory, suggesting that autism at its heart may represent molecular defects of learning. ... The findings also support the use of behavioral therapies in autism, which expose children to a rich environment and highly repetitive activities that may help turn on the genes and strengthen synaptic connections, Morrow adds.I'm still not real keen on the idea that one person could decide for someone else whether to "change" them in such a way or not, but I still think it's fine for any person to make the decision only for their own self. Anyone who suffers deserves relief. It does make me ponder, though, what "normal" could even be in such a world. Suppose I want to reactivate some long-buried gene that would give me a fur coat like a dog or a tail like a monkey or gills in my neck like a fish?
If it's not a matter of adding new protein encoding but merely reactivating what codes are already in my body, then it still counts as "my natural self", doesn't it?
This kind of stuff strikes me as odd in the same way as gender reassignment surgery on infants. You don't like the body/mind that chance gave you, so you exchange that person for a different one. Seems really dangerous to do that sort of thing to another person, but acceptable if they choose to do it for themselves.