Discover April 2007: Understanding Autism

[Deborah]

The Answer May Lie in the Gut, Not in the Head

Major magazine does a major article about autism and biomedical causes/treatments!

We discussed the enormous number of chemicals in our environment and how little we know about chronic, low-dose, multiple exposures and their effect on diseases like autism.

But, and of course it is a very big but, they do NOT mention vaccines as one of the possible sources of these chemical exposures. So, I gave this a thumbs up, but I wish there was a thumb sideways icon.

Head over to your local library (free ad by a librarian) and read the article.

I made it the centerpiece of a display on autism. Considering that all the brouhaha about autism is supposed to be entirely the result of better diagnosis, it is interesting that a tiny rural library with a collection of under 8,000 books can put all of this on display:

DVDs: Living the Autism Maze and Autism is a World

Treating autism books: Children with Starving Brains, the Autistic Spectrum, Children with Autism, Facing Autism

Juvenile lit: Al Capone Does My Shirts and Talking to Angels

Biographies: Thinking in Pictures and the Boy Who Loved Windows

Novel: The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time

and two I find harder to classify: The Mind Tree and Evidence of Harm

Only two of the books made it into the library because of my particular interests. I bet everyone can spot which ones they are :

[aira]

Hey at least they now said there may be an elephant in the room! It's a step up from complete denial of the big one sitting right on the victims' chests...

[Empress]

I thought the article was poorly written and somewhat disappointed.

[Deborah]

Originally Posted by Empress

I thought the article was poorly written and somewhat disappointed.

Still, hundreds of thousands of people will be exposed to the concept of biomedical treatment for autism and to the idea that it can be treated and to the idea that toxic exposures are a factor. Parents and grandparents may reconsider biomedical treatments after rejecting them for being fringe stuff.

Today I'm feeling like the glass is half full. Well, maybe 1/4 full.

Anyway, it turns out the article is up on their web-site, so we can all read it for ourselves and then write letters.
http://discovermagazine.com/2007/apr...st-in-the-head

[granolamomma]

I always love when biomedical acknowledgement and treatment are given credence. But I still just can't figure out why when I read/see articles/segments that cover this, they vary rarely talk about vaccines. I just don't get it! Even if you disagree that they are a cause, I don't understand how autism+toxic exposure can be discussed without vaccines. It seems to be either an article proudly claiming MMR doesn't cause autism, or no mention at all. :

How is that objective journalism?

[Deborah]

How is that objective journalism?

Count it as evidence of the power/clout of big Pharma.

[Deborah]

Meanwhile, on the sidelines of that confusing discussion, a disparate group—immunologists, naturopaths, neuroscientists, and toxicologists—is turning up clues that are yielding novel strategies to help autistic patients. New studies are examining contributing factors ranging from vaccine reactions to atypical growth in the placenta, abnormal tissue in the gut, inflamed tissue in the brain, food allergies, and disturbed brain wave synchrony. Some clinicians are using genetic test results to recommend unconventional nutritional therapies, and others employ drugs to fight viruses and quell inflammation.

Either my eyes have gone, or the article on the web-site is not the same as the article in the magazine. There is a mention of vaccines!

[Annikate]

Originally Posted by Deborah

Either my eyes have gone, or the article on the web-site is not the same as the article in the magazine. There is a mention of vaccines!

In that case *now* I'll read it!

[Deborah]

I'm not going to link, but there are some severely hostile reactions to this article from the folks who consider themselves neurodiverse. I did a search on Discover Magazine autism and found a couple and there will probably be many more.

The main arguments seem to be:

all biomedical treatments for autism are quackery and all of the doctors and researchers mentioned in the article are quacks

chelation has killed children


Not all of the blogs are that extreme. One acknowledged that it isn't a bad idea to treat children for gut problems. But treating gut problems didn't change anything that made a child autistic.

I'm sort of weirdly fascinated by the everything can be debated game of the Internet.