/bio/ - Biology

nigger

>>16
Depends. Even if we assume autism is genetic, the gene could be epigenetically silenced.
If it becomes an environment and gene sharing effect, then it's even worse. I don't know of a model to calculate that.

Sorry, Pepe the Cat

I am autistic, I feel this is not genetical. as in, it's not just genetical. And if it's illness, then it is kind of eugenics. Because the way people think isn't illness, if it was it'd be on new level of the genocidist. It is very fallacious to assume that because someone has ability to concentrate, it is genetical. Genetical illness.
what?
There are illnesses from viruses. there are illnesses from bacteria or cancer
but what the hell is genetical mental illness that has no relevant records but some pseudo psychology nonsense?

For eons, philosophers and therapists both were hacks who milked money from others. Including about autism which is extremely abstract.

If going by solely the trait of inability to concentrate, there are so many different mental disorders that can be recalled which makes all of this defining sketchy. At the end it is more about whether individiual fits in politically or can sustain himself, whether he has family, whether no one cares, whether you have relevance to the community, these things define whether you're autistic or not.

Sexual reproduction is important, without any care it cannot be taken unseriously. It might affect offspring greatly, without randomness factor or what.

Genetics get all messed up, as they bopth have different functions. Unhappy marriage, for example, might create autim.
That's what I think.