this isn't actually a new result. i actually believe that this is currently seen as the leading hypothesis into the cause of autism.

the article is not very well written, which is generally the case when english majors in the msm try to write about science, but what they're referencing is the broadly accepted idea that autism is essentially caused by replication errors. that is, every person with autism has a unique genetic error. therefore, it shouldn't be seen as a disease that can be cured or that even has a specific cause but rather as a condition that is the result of unique errors in translation that cannot be predicted in advance.

if they wish to hold on to some pretense of science in their nonsense, the intelligent design people would essentially have to deduce one of the following

(1) that autism is an error by the creator, and that their imaginary creator is in truth subject to massive amounts of error. that is, their god is indeed quite fallible, isn't t?
(2) that their creator has a sadistic streak, and is essentially carrying out nazi experiments on us as some kind of cruel game. hey, what happens if i put this fragment here...?

but, i just wanted to post to point out the big, big difference between genes doing what they're supposed to do and genes randomly fucking up and in some cases doing exactly the opposite of what they're supposed to do. autism is not inheritable, for that reason; obesity would be, if it could be established as genetic with any coherency of thought.

so, when i say that what genes do is regulate hormones and that things that are not regulated by hormones are not genetic, that is still very much true. yet, that assumes a relatively healthy underlying genome. sometimes, our genomes end up transmitted to us in a distorted or malfunctioning manner, or they end up breaking in the process of human reproduction. in that case, a person may have a genetic condition, but it's not being caused by what the genes actually do, it's being caused by the system not functioning properly, in itself.

autism is consequently not like tay-sachs, for example. tay-sachs is a real genetic disease, and we can identify the gene responsible for it. undoing it is a question of deleting the bad gene, and we should all look forward to the day that the bad gene is gone, forever. you can't expect an outcome like that with autism, because it's a result of errors that occur during reproduction, rather than an error that is written into a more or less correct reproduction process (translation is never 100% correct. not even close, actually. you're full of genetic mistakes yourself, too - just not in ways that have impeded your development so dramatically).

that is to say that there will never be a cure to autism and understanding that you can't cure it is intrinsically tied into understanding what it actually is.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/breakthrough-in-autism-spectrum-research-finds-genetic-wrinkles-in-dna-could-be-a-cause-1.5041584