From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Pontifex Maximus)
Subject: Re: Scientists baffled by increase in autism
Date: 20 Oct 2002 23:53:23 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Oct 2002 06:53:24 GMT
Remember the birthing method of "Dr. Frederick Leboyer"?*
"being touched and caressed, being massaged
is food for the infant, food as necessary
as minerals, vitamins and proteins"
> "Lisa Gardner" wrote:
> > No, I am saying that there is an attitude in the
> > world that emotions 'get in the way'.
> > This attitude is leading to infants that don't
> > have that troublesome characteristic, emotions,
> > around for anyone to deal with.
> Sounds like LaMarckism.
It sounds more like Lisa is expressing early infant trauma,
pre-verbal. An infant needs to form an attachment that nurtures
full emotional development, not repression. So "Natural Selection"
has less to do with it, probably, than simply warmth withheld at
a critical juncture of earliest brain development. Or, maybe, weird
little entities are incarnating at exponential rates, in order to
experience Earth Therapy .
> > I have also heard someone else propose that so-called
> > autistic people are in reality - at least the high
> > functioning ones- *more* emotional than are other
> > people, including being more empathic than others.
> > When they are dropped into this world, it is so
> > overwhelming for them, that they just 'close up'
> > completely and don't allow themselves to feel
> > *anything at all*.
> The diagnosis of autism these days is applied to a
> spectrum of behaviors, with no particular feature
> that is present in all individuals. Thus a person
> who displays enough behaviors that fit on the
> spectrum gets that diagnosis, regardless of whether
> the ones people typically think of as "autistic" are
> present or not.
> There are people with a complete normal range of
> emotional responses but who don't conform to a
> number of other so-called "normal" social behaviors
> expected of infants and some of their expected
> developmental mileposts are delayed, who are
> diagnosed as "autistic".
> The diagnosis is much broader than it used to be,
> so that, despite the UC finding that changes in
> diagnostic criteria alone dont account for all of
> it, I think these changes account for a considerable
> amount of it.
* The birthing method of "Dr. Frederick Leboyer"?
"This is not a method of childbirth preparation but an approach
to birth that centers on the responses and needs of the baby.
LeBoyer advocates dimly lit, quiet, warm birthing rooms to help
ease the baby's transition from the uterus to the outside world.
"He also stresses the importance of placing the baby on the
mother's abdomen after birth, waiting until the umbilical
cord has stopped pulsing before it is cut, and giving the
baby a warm, gentle bath after birth. Classes in this method
are not taught, but if you are interested in this technique,
you can read, Birth Without Violence by Frederick LeBoyer's, MD."
"Indrid" wrote: [From: Overview of Autism by Stephen M. Edelson, Ph.D.]
Major characteristics: http://www.autism.org/overview.html
"The Brain Development Laboratory in the Psychology
Department at Penn State University studies the
development of spatial perception, action planning,
and memory in early infancy. Our goal is to
understand how rapid development in the infant
brain relates to changes in babies' understanding
of the physical world in the first year of life."
Neurodevelopment in Preterm and Term Newborns --
Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Spectroscopy Studies
"For every person in the world to reach present
U.S. levels of consumption with existing technology
would require four more planet Earths."
THE FUTURE OF LIFE
by Edward O. Wilson
"We are innately inclined to ignore any distant
possibility not yet requiring examination.
It is a hardwired part of our Paleolithic heritage."
"The human brain evidently evolved
to commit itself emotionally only
to a small piece of geography." - E.O.W.
"The pattern of human population
growth in the 20th century was
more bacterial than primate." - E.O.W.
"Do we invent our moral absolutes
in order to make society workable?
Or are these enduring principles
expressed to us by some transcendent
orGodlike authority? Efforts to resolve
this conundrum have perplexed, sometimes
inflamed, our best minds for centuries, but
the natural sciences are telling us more and
more about the choices we make and our reasons
for making them." -- Edward O. Wilson
"As cognitive scientists have focused on the nature
of the mind, they have come to characterize it not
just as a physical entity, the brain at work, but
more specifically as a flood of scenarios. Whether
set in the past, present, or future, whether based
on reality or entirely fictive, these free-running
narratives are all churned out with equal facility.
The present is constructed from the avalanche of
sensations that pour into the wakened brain.
Working at a furious pace, the brain summons
memories to screen and make sense of the incoming
chaos. Only a minute part of the information is
selected for higher-order processing. From that
part, small segments are enlisted through symbolic
imagery to create the white-hot core of enlisted
activity we call the conscious mind."
[From: "The Future Of Life" by Edward O. Wilson]
Genome to the Proteome: Basic Science
[...] The genome is an organism's complete
set of DNA. Genomes vary widely in size:
the smallest known genome for a free-living
organism (a bacterium) contains about
600,000 DNA base pairs, while human and
mouse genomes have some 3 billion.
Except for mature red blood cells, all human
cells contain a complete genome. [...]
Although genes get a lot of attention, it's
the proteins that perform most life functions
and even make up the majority of cellular
structures. Proteins are large, complex
molecules made up of smaller subunits called
amino acids. Chemical properties that
distinguish the 20 different amino acids cause
the protein chains to fold up into specific
three-dimensional structures that define their
particular functions in the cell.
What Does the Draft Human Genome Sequence Tell Us?
[Last modified: Monday, May 06, 2002 ]
By the Numbers
 The human genome contains 3164.7 million chemical nucleotide
bases (A, C, T, and G).
 The average gene consists of 3000 bases, but sizes vary
greatly, with the largest known human gene being dystrophin
at 2.4 million bases.
 The total number of genes is estimated at 30,000 to 35,000
much lower than previous estimates of 80,000 to 140,000 that
had been based on extrapolations from gene-rich areas as
opposed to a composite of gene-rich and gene-poor areas.
 Almost all (99.9%) nucleotide bases are exactly the same in
 The functions are unknown for over 50% of discovered genes.
WEST NILE MYSTERY
How did it get here?
The C.I.A. would like to know.
by RICHARD PRESTON
The Global Positioning System:
Assessing National Policies
National Alliance for the Mentally Ill
"DON'T FREAK OUT, but THE WORLD COULD END ANY SECOND NOW!!"