Article: What Causes Autism?

Article: What Causes Autism?


Well, just as medications which alleviate symptoms of depression, anxiety, psychosis, tend to increase dopamine, so also do medications which alleviate symptoms of autism tend to increase dopamine. This all makes sense, since increasing available dopamine increases healthy development in a brain, while lack of dopamine leads to all types of mental stress ailments, general health problems, and impoverished brain development. So I would venture that autism, a development issue, is caused by a pregnant woman experiencing dopamine deficiency during their pregnancy, at least in some regions of their brain.

If so, then addressing the problem at its root would be to increase dopamine during pregnancy, to avoid unwanted development issues.

Of course, having more dopamine leads to improved health and development in general, while lacking dopamine means a greater vulnerability to health issues in general, and impoverished development in specific:
http://www.shrapnelreason.com/2016/01/articles-poverty-may-alter-wiring-of.html
http://www.shrapnelreason.com/2015/12/articles-stress-could-increase-risk-of.html
http://www.shrapnelreason.com/2015/09/managing-and-increasing-dopamine-can.html
http://www.shrapnelreason.com/2015/12/am-eclectic-assortment-of-articles.html
http://www.shrapnelreason.com/2015/12/a-few-more-for-eclectic-assortment-of.html


And use of cocaine during pregnancy is shown to improve fetus development:
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/24283537_Prenatal_cocaine_increases_dendritic_spine_density_in_cortical_and_subcortical_brain_regions_of_the_rat


Also, cocaine, whose effect is to increase dopamine's availability while inhibiting adrenaline's release, delivers literally the antithetical influence as schizophrenia on brain development, boosting growth in the region associated with learning and memory, and like all dopaminergics, including the "smart drug" modafinil, enhancing a brain's capabilities (which would be relevant to enhancing fetus development):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17641875
http://www.shrapnelreason.com/2016/01/articles-study-suggests-genetics-could.html


And the myth of crack babies, babies being born with issues do to their mother using crack during their pregnancy, has appropriately been debunked:
http://articles.philly.com/2013-07-22/news/40709969_1_hallam-hurt-so-called-crack-babies-funded-study
http://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/Family/2013/0725/Crack-baby-development-issues-not-side-effect-of-drug-but-poverty
http://www.businessinsider.com/crack-baby-myth-debunked-2013-7
http://www.salon.com/2013/07/23/longterm_study_debunks_myth_of_the_crack_baby/


It may well be that the very best thing for a pregnant woman to do to prevent health issues for their child, while fortifying their child's development, is put aside time to relax and smoke crack, or to take cocaine, while in their pregnancy.


But medical research cannot be relied upon to inform a public concerning this, because all scientific research, and particularly drug and health research, is egregiously biased, contrived, and unreliable, with at least (I will clarify this in another post) 60% of researchers publishing biased, and therefore False information as conclusions. And when it comes to drug research, I think virtually all conclusions are slanted (and therefore directing away from the truth). I would even say that a medical researcher is, by default, in the position of being an unreliable witness, since they, their field, and their funding providers stand to benefit from falling short of delivering real solutions (and this is a recipe for disaster in Reward-oriented mindsets, who are also sociopathic by nature, and therefore predisposed to being untruthful):
http://www.nature.com/news/over-half-of-psychology-studies-fail-reproducibility-test-1.18248

Particularly when it comes to drug and health research:
http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g7015

Which requires government license to study, and governments are not that likely to approve research which they don't like the objectives of, particularly when there is a history of such research being shut down, to go alongside with a history of such research delivering fabricated, or conniving conclusions:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/jun/13/bad-science-cocaine-study
http://www.shrapnelreason.com/2016/01/looking-at-instance-of-deliberately.html
http://www.shrapnelreason.com/2014/08/response-to-cocaine-study-bearing.html


I would put forth that 90%+ of what is read as health research is not true at all, and is either wilfully directed, or conducted by people who are sociopathic, who cannot arrive at unbiased conclusions because they have corrupted the connectivity in their brain that gives a person their perception - with the inter-connectivity between all considerations substantiating what is being what manifests truth.


Related post: Cocaine Use During Pregnancy Can Prevent Autism

Shrapnel