What do you know about genetics?
October 4, 2007 by Kristina Chew, PhD
Filed under Health
Studies that indicate that autism is genetic are often roundly decried by those who believe that autism is caused by vaccines, or thimerasol, or other environmental, “extra-genetic” factors. Remarks such as “there can’t be a genetic epidemic” and “what is causing genes to mutate” are frequently offered. On the other hand, such statements suggest that more education in genetics and its terminology would be helpful in understanding why it is highly unlikely that some single “autism gene” can be found, and even some one factor that is causing genes to “mutate.”
Epidemiologist and biotech consultant Dr. Hsien-Hsien Lei notes how a recent article on cancer risk in the LA Times confused the terms “gene” and “gene mutation”l the newspaper then offered this correction:
Genetics: An article on cancer risk in Monday’s Health section referred in some places to the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes as increasing the risk for some types of cancer. The genes themselves are not responsible; certain mutations of those genes are what increase the risk of the disease.
The BRCA1 mutation is one of two gene mutations (the other is BRCA2) associated with an increased risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, as Dr. Lei further explains:
More than 1,000 mutations have been identified in the BRCA1 gene alone. People don’t test positive for THE mutation in the BRCA genes thus implying that there is only one. They test positive for A mutation or perhaps even MORE THAN ONE mutation. Also, there are different types of genetic tests for BRCA1 and BRCA2 – full sequencing of the genes, multisite testing, or single site testing. A person may have one or more mutations in his/her BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes but not all of the mutations, if any, lead to an increased risk of breast and/or ovarian cancer.
Another question and answer session about BRCA genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility. Further, a recent podcast on Pure Prevention seeks to educate women about the environmental causes of breast cancer.
Dr. Lei asks “What level of understanding should we have in order to fully take advantage of the genome revolution?” In view of the fact that a prenatal genetic test might someday be developed for autism and continued advances in the study of autism genetics, I prefer to know more than less about genetics, and more, therefore, about Charlie, and about autism.
I don’t know. I would find it interesting to see that kind of structure, and I’d be all for knowing some things if it might mean something in terms of preparation or understanding. However, I would try not to make judgments about abortion or genetic modification, and if people were going to do that kind of thing, I think it might have to be withheld until we really understand what we are doing in a moral sense, as opposed to just a genetic sense.
Cliff
I’d also be in favor of the genetic exploration, though my concern would have more to do with well-meant attempts to develop drug therapies based on necessarily incomplete research and the social-services/insurance tendency to force treatments on people. I’d be quite happy to have prenatal tests available. It seems to me that determining the morality of abortion decisions should rest solely with the women who have the responsibility for bearing and (usually) raising the children.
I know NOTHING about genetics, but I do know that my autistic son has some general traits that mimic my husband. Although not, “autistic” my husband has eccentric social skills and I only wonder what he was like as a young child. He describes his thought process as a million thoughts a second. He processes reading in pictures, not words. He catches things Jon is seeing that I would never notice. I definitely think there is some genetic link…