There have been a number of articles popping up in recent years about how advanced paternal age can negatively affect a child’s health. It seems at times that the aim of these pieces is to promote the idea that men have a “biological clock” just like women. Although that is the wrong way to look at it, advanced paternal age probably does have an association with higher levels of harmful mutations.
However, it is not the known mutations – which are exceedingly rare – that are the focus of most of these articles. It is psychological disorders such as schizophrenia and autism that receive the most attention. Maternal age has long been acknowledged to be a risk for a number of problems, Down syndrome being the best known, but despite the exposure of links between maternal age and a host of other problems, most of the media coverage has focused on the effects of paternal age.
In a 2007 study in California, advancing paternal and maternal age were found to independently contribute to a child’s chance for developing autism. Unlike some previous studies linking older fathers to autism, this one controlled for maternal age, which gives it added credibility.
So it has been established that there is a relationship between older fathers and autism, but why? It would be reasonable to expect older fathers to carry more mutations in their sperm, leading to more children afflicted by diseases caused by mutations, but these diseases tend to be very rare, on the order of roughly 1 in 50,000 or less, whereas autism has come to be quite common — approaching one percent. Furthermore, autism has not been tied down to one gene, and as of today remains poorly understood.
If autism is not caused by mutations, then what is it about older fathers that might contribute to its development? In general, older men are less fertile than younger men — they also do not have sex as often. This is a direct consequence of the decline of androgenic hormones that occurs as men age, which makes it more difficult for older men to impregnate their partners. A young man can often get a woman pregnant in a matter of weeks (if not minutes), whereas an older man might take considerably longer, even if he has a young partner. To get around this, the older man would be more likely to seek out fertility treatment to enable conception.
Fertility treatment increases the risk of autism four fold, which is very significant. I have not found a single study on the link between paternal age and autism that has taken that into consideration. What is probably happening is that as society increasingly delays childbearing, IVF and drugs such as clomiphene citrate (on the market since 1967) are making up for the loss of fertility that occurs with age, and this is causing an increase in the rate of autism. This also suggests an embryological rather than purely genetic cause of autism, which would make more sense given its very high incidence in comparison to diseases caused by mutations.
12 responses so far ↓
1 alphadominance // Jan 15, 2009 at 12:04 am
There is finally some acknowledgment that the mercury contained in vaccines contribute to autism as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh-nkD5LSIg&eurl=http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/04/22/head-of-cdc-admits-on-cnn-that-vaccines-can-trigger-autism.aspx&feature=player_embedded
2 Lukobe // Feb 2, 2009 at 5:37 pm
Speaking of fertility treatments, apparently that mother of octuplets already had six children: http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2009/02/octuplets-doing.html
“Suleman, 33, now has 14 below the age of eight.”
3 Lukobe // Feb 3, 2009 at 11:13 am
And she was a single, unemployed mother? What was she thinking?
4 Bill // Feb 8, 2009 at 5:12 pm
And one of her children from the first batch is autistic. Kind of a reverse application of the typical woman’s “right to choose” argument, which raises questions of a different nature.
We have been stuffing American women so full of hormones for over a generation that there are bound to be consequences for at least a half century.
Alphadominance:
It isn’t the mercury (although I, too, have my reservations about injecting it into children); it is the blasé attitude toward hormonal manipulation, which approaches East German Cold War practices.
In fact, the environmental effect of the surge in estrogen has had profound implications for not only aquatic animals, but possibly humans as well.
5 Eman // Mar 1, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Saw your following comment on the Roissy blog – “The continued effeminacy of American men will eventually be the ruin of American women, as there will eventually be nobody left to fight for them.”
You might enjoy the following article on this subject – http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/articles/MacDonald-Men.html
6 Reader // Mar 4, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Superb post, keep writing.
7 sestamibi // Mar 18, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Yes, that certainly was true for us. Our only child between us, the most beautiful boy in the world, is down on the lower end of the spectrum. He was born when we I was 47 and she was 40.
While there is clearly nothing we can do about it, let me also question why there are so many of such older parents in the first place? In my case it wasn’t my choice to wait this long, but I had to put up with years of feminist horseshit and self-centeredness in the form of “I don’t need a man”.
Until society starts putting a LOT more pressure on young women to mate and breed when nature intended it, expect this problem to get a lot worse.
8 sui // Mar 26, 2009 at 1:57 pm
So strange to read a blog where men complain about how they’re treated by women, since, of course, the reverse has become standard.
I feel like I’m totally oblivious to the modern plight of men. Would men really prefer to days when they were expected to make enough money for a family? And for it to be the woman’s job to take care of her husband and kids? I would think men would have sighed in relief to have that great burden off their backs.
Very curious.
9 Lukobe // Mar 26, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Sui, you don’t think that’s still what’s expected of men?
10 Bill // Mar 26, 2009 at 5:27 pm
Hey Sui, tell all your gal pals to quit their jobs, get off the pill and start raising babies and making house full time — without pay. Taking enough women out of the workforce would open up plenty of opportunities for men to support their families. But somehow, I’m not sure your typical female would go for that idea.
Either way, try writing a comment relevant to the post, unless that’s too much to ask.
11 americangoy // Apr 1, 2009 at 8:57 pm
Hey,
came here from Steve-o’s site.
Congratz on Kevin Forrest!
Watched the first game – amazing replays on FSC, amazing atmosphere.
I really wish football the best in this country.
Funny thing – I wasn’t into watching sports in college and in high school, as I perceived them as not for me.
I found baseball incredibly boring, basketball for tall freaks of nature and american football for fat kids.
And then I watched a football match on FSC (back when the network was young), a Sheffield Wednesday vs. someone-or-other, and… I was hooked.
Winning over the Mexican national team in the WC clinched it for me.
And of course, yes, I am an immigrant.
Cheers!
12 Tamara // Apr 30, 2009 at 9:11 pm
“Taking enough women out of the workforce would open up plenty of opportunities for men to support their families.”
It would also violate my religious beliefs as I cannot undress in front of any male other than my husband, therefore I only go to female gynecologists.
Leave a Comment