The Myth of Autism
Page 15
Some feel autism has never been described as a mercury-induced disease simply because the disorder must arise from a mode of mercury administration that has not been studied before. In fact, mercury (Hg)—its symptoms, methods of detection, negative effects, etc.—has been studied for many, many years. There is no support for the link between mercury in vaccines and autism in past literature.1
In 1999, family physicians, pediatricians, federal health officials, and vaccine manufacturers stated that because any potential risk from mercury is of concern, and the elimination of exposure to mercury in the form of thimerosal from vaccines is feasible, thimerosal should be removed from vaccines as soon as possible. However, there remains no convincing evidence of harm caused by low levels of thimerosal in vaccines.
This theory does not account for the children who have never had any vaccinations or “heavy metal” exposure.
NOTE: If vaccines were connected, between the decrease in thimeresol and decreased vaccine “exposure” (the number of children not being vaccinated), there would have been some decrease (not current increase) in California (much less other parts of the country and the world). High metal levels are not being found by academy-accepted accredited laboratories (university-level children’s hospitals).
Chelation Therapy
Skeptics have consistently criticized the lack of adequate controls in studies purporting to demonstrate the effectiveness of chelation. Critics of the therapy in the American Medical Association (AMA) and the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) claim that there is no good scientific evidence supporting the extravagant claims of advocates. Defenders of the therapy claim that the medical establishment has engaged in a half century of deceit and conspiracy to suppress chelation because of fear it would cut into the profits made by drug therapy and surgery.
Most human chelators are a form of protein containing thiols, also called sulfhydryls, meaning a sulfur and hydrogen compound. Sulfa drugs are known to be deadly for people who are intolerant. (“Autistic” individuals are noted to have sulfur issues.) Most of the drug versions are synthetic molecules, molecules created by man and not naturally found in humans. There is the possibility of the body’s not being able to metabolize such compounds, resulting in allergic reactions, autoimmune reactions, redistribution of mercury, and other dysfunctions. The bottom line will be your body’s ability to expel the chelating agent along with accumulated mercury. If your liver and kidneys are not able to push out the chelator, you have a problem. If your body cannot excrete the chelating agent, it will need to metabolize the material, breaking it down to its constituent parts. The mercury gathered by the chelator will be dispersed into your body again, rapidly, as a large dose. Such a rapid redistribution can magnify your mercury toxicity problems.
CNS toxicity (of chelation): Dr. Haley, PhD, has shown that EDTA can cause release of mercury in a form a hundred times more toxic to the brain. Severe damage to the brain tubulins can occur, resulting in Alzheimer’s-like dementia.
Hair Analysis
The AMA’s Current Policy on Hair Analysis—Adopted in 1984 and Reaffirmed in 1994 is, “The AMA opposes chemical analysis of the hair as a determinant of the need for medical therapy and supports informing the American public and appropriate governmental agencies of this unproven practice and its potential for health care fraud.” (Hair analysis: A potential for medical abuse. Policy number H 175. 995, Sub. Res. 67, I-84; Reaffirmed by CLRPD Rep. 3—I-94).
In 1999, researchers from the California Department of Health located nine laboratories and sent identical samples to six of them. The reported mineral levels, the alleged significance of the findings, and the recommendations made in the reports differed widely from one to another. The researchers concluded that the procedure is still unreliable and recommended that government agencies act vigorously to protect consumers (Hair analysis: A potential for medical abuse. Policy number H-175.995, Sub. Res. 67, I-84; Reaffirmed by CLRPD Rep. 3—I-94).
Even if hair mineral content were measurable with 100 percent accuracy, it makes no difference because the results are not useful for measuring the body’s nutritional status.
Should you encounter a practitioner who claims otherwise, run for the nearest exit!
DMSA
DMSA is approved for the treatment of lead poisoning, and it can also remove essential minerals such as calcium and iron. Thus DMSA has potentially serious side effects for developing children.
To put things in perspective, a trial funded by the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) was halted because an October 2006 online study in Environmental Health Perspectives examined the impact of DMSA on rodents, showing direct neurotoxicity from the DMSA. Because of potential dangers to test subjects (120 autistic children aged four to ten) as implied by the studies on rodents, the proposed “experiment” was canceled (see why below), along with the recognition that it never should have been proposed in the first place.
A lot of research is being done that proposes to counter false ideas, false concepts, rather than focus, as the case should be, on finding answers. In this way the “multiple misdirections” proposed and being done are not just benign, but rather have slowed down coming to a constructive, correct focus for parents and their children.
In the experiment, after undergoing three weeks of chelation therapy with oral DMSA, what surprised the researchers was that animals that were not lead poisoned showed “lasting emotional and cognitive problems” after undergoing chelation therapy with DMSA. The researchers did not know the reason for this. However, they speculated that DMSA might have caused the non–lead poisoned rats to lose essential nutritional minerals since there was no lead to bind to the drug.
There are two other chelation compounds commonly known as EDTA: disodium EDTA and calcium disodium EDTA; the former can be dangerous because it removes calcium from the blood.
Given the Academy of Pediatrics’ recognized position against the risks and dangers of chelation, even for indications of known toxins such as lead, no parent should allow a child to undergo chelation without a university or children’s medical center documenting the need.
In a recent conversation with a lady and her husband supposedly “in the know” I was told there were now “thirty-seven kinds of autism.” Not forty, not twenty-five, but thirty-seven. This is the most illogical, ridiculous rationale I can ever believe could circulate. We do not have thirty-seven (or any other number) forms of autism. We maybe have one form that Dr. Kanner described, and then multiple variations (twenty, forty, thirty-seven, or more) of a “complex immune, complex viral” illness that one can now talk about as NIDS, and explain logically, with good science and medical reasoning, not via the “myth of autism.”
While as physicians we are taught to think of an illness as mild, moderate, or severe, autism and related psychiatric disorders were not defined or thought of that way.
What has happened to common sense?
A list not necessarily in order of treatments that are common in the autism community:
Purine metabolism
Phenol metabolism
ABA
Anticonvulsants—EEGs
Steroids
Megavitamins
LDN (low dose naltrexone)
Secretin
Enzymes
Probiotics
Special diets
Chelation therapy
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy
Stem cell therapy
Electroconvulsive therapy
Religious interventions
Educational interventions
Sensory integration
Vitamin B6 and magnesium
Vitamin A—cod liver oil
Essential fatty acids
Casein-free diet
Gluten-free diet
Cognitive/Behavioral therapy
DMG
Melatonin
Homeopathy
Auditory integration training
Ritalin (or other stimulant medication)
/>
Risperdal or Abilify
Seroquel
Pepcid
Buspar
Intravenous immunoglobulin
Inderal
Play therapy
Vision therapy
Sound therapies
Neurofeedback
Besides outright toxicity from “natural” agents, I learned an agent being extensively recommended to help with sleep, melatonin, was in fact probably worse than a prescription sleeping medication (something I would not recommend), as melatonin had the potential to play with multiple hormones in boys (some in girls). That means it is not safe to use regularly, and if used at all, should be treated like a sleeping pill, perhaps used once or twice a week, never on a regular basis.
As noted before, not only are these agents usually not specific, but with most not being pharmaceutically clean, there is more chance of creating harm, than of helping (even if a theoretically good product to begin with).
As noted, many “natural” agents are quite toxic, and especially with children, anything megadosed is not going to be safe. Replacing a deficit (if real) can be appropriate, but overdoing that usually will result in harm. Again, the key is first a recognition a child is ill, but being ill means the medical world, pediatricians, and other pediatric specialists can and must look at applying agents to help a child (or adult) win a medical battle they have been losing, but not by using agents that are likely to result in harm. If we recognize a child is not “damaged” mysteriously to begin with, agents that have high potential to damage the development of a normal brain (i.e., antipsychotics) become unacceptable.
I cannot stress strongly enough that supportive, appropriate use of medications has never resulted in the potential harmful effects currently being seen on NeuroSPECTs of children who have been doing supplements, chelation, HBOT, and such.
I have been saying for years that you can probably do one hundred or more things that might seem to help these children, in lieu of how dysfunctional their bodies are metabolically, but unless you’re doing something that you can sustain in a healthy way, a healthy manner for that child, it is rare to see initial gains continue, and more than likely harm may occur over time.
If we raise expectations, recognize this is a disease, and bring these children back to pediatrics, then expectations will rise, and parents have a right to expect that we will truly “do no harm.”
I am still working with a patient that first came over from England, not as an infant, but as an eighteen-year-old. He had completed high school with accommodations, essentially working at about a third- or fourth-grade level. But because he grew up in England, and although academics were not helping or supportive, this was an era when what is called the “DAN protocol” or “biomedical” was not commonly accepted, and so this mother had never administered megadosages of vitamins or supplements, chelation, HBOT, etc. The mother did try to watch his diet, but that was essentially all she did. This child’s response to therapy at age eighteen was easier for me than children I was seeing here in the United States who unfortunately had undergone massive supplements, chelation, hyperbaric oxygen, and other related “therapies.” This has been confirmed by NeuroSPECT scans showing not only were the areas of dysfunction not being corrected but areas always previously normal on scans were now under- or, more often, overstimulated, which was confirmed by NeuroSPECT scan.
Recently, I have begun to give mothers and fathers a guarantee that their child can not really have “autism,” as the term is being used today. Recently, as noted, numbers of affected children in this country are routinely being quoted as 1:110, or 1:91. Main theories still remain focused on a mysterious genetic/developmental disorder, but it is now safe to say that in the history of written medicine, back to at least the middle ages, there is no record of any developmental/genetic disorder remotely coming close to a 1 percent number. When parents ask what really does strike 1 percent or more of a population, my response is, a massive flu epidemic, the bubonic plague, STDs, maybe. The point is, anything affecting 1 percent of a population is going to be a serious disease or medical illness.
When a mother is empowered and believes her child has the possibility to be healthy, she can begin to respond far more appropriately, as she normally would, to a child that is being good, a child that is misbehaving, a child that is happy, a child that doesn’t feel good. I remind mothers that while they didn’t plan on all of this when they were younger, they will, unlike many parents, be able to look back and know they had a chance to really help their child have a productive and ultimately healthy life—what more can any parent (or doctor) ask for? It would just be nice to make the battle easier, simpler, but either way they have a right to be proud of themselves for choosing a fight that is difficult but that can be won. For not accepting many educated voices saying they must accept and must give in to “reality.” For not seeking pathways in desperation that might be harmful. Ironically, the first lesson in pediatrics at medical school at UCLA was “listen to the mothers.”
How often does this emotional turmoil and dysfunction create family conflicts in the attempt to care for these children? How often do families wind up splitting apart, making attempts at unified care even harder if not impossible? Again the key comes to how mothers and father are asked to perceive their child. It’s hard to live in a world where multiple experts will support that if this happens to your child, you can do your best, but it is unlikely you are ever going to have a normal parenthood or a normal child. We owe parents the truth, the knowledge that yes this is bad, yes this could be very difficult, but as parents, they can fight against a disease that their child has a chance to win. Mothers and fathers come in to my practice ecstatic after they hear their child first say “I love you” or they put their shoes on for the first time. Why shouldn’t parents have the right to know they have a right to expect that from their child? Especially when there is no objective evidence showing or confirming permanent damage to their child’s brain!
The understanding of the true nature of this illness has certainly helped hold many families together—and thankfully even when it’s a belated recognition, can help separated parents work together on their child. Like a child with diabetes there is a need for proper diet control. Like a child with cancer, a chronic viral illness, or an autoimmune disease, there is a need for supportive medication and an ongoing need to maintain therapy.
Just like any other disease, I believe it should become negligent not to take part, support the medical care of a child, whether parents are together or separated. Like a child with any other serious illness, the standardization of therapy and the diagnosis is critically necessary to assure expected consistency from household to household for a child.
9
THE ROLE OF ALLERGENS AND DIET
LONG AGO I INCORPORATED DIET ELIMINATION as part of my pediatric practice. In particular, I would often caution against the use of dairy products. While common sense and good clinicians were aware that dairy (the number 1 allergen in the world) could lead to or add to congestion, this was not “proven” and was contrary to the conventional wisdom at the time. Fortunately, my training at LAC-USC included the teachings of an allergist who strongly believed in food elimination. But I did have parents leaving the practice because other doctors were telling them that there was nothing wrong with dairy products and they felt I was misguided. I had also been influenced very heavily by Dr. Frank Oski, a leading pediatric hematologist, who later became chief of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins Hospital. He was lecturing that dairy products could cause iron deficiency in children and that could then impact their growth and development.
Today, there is plenty of information in the medical literature about the dangers of dairy products and of milk protein. But we still do not have the technology to know of all possible forms of allergic reactions to milk or dairy products. My disillusionment with modern medicine stems from the concept that if it cannot be measured, it must be a psychiatric problem or not real—rather t
han an acknowledgment that we do not have the tools to measure the problem.
I usually begin with blood testing to determine allergies/sensitivities that could possibly trigger the immune system to react. Most children with autism/NIDS (and all of its labels) present with routine sensitivities to dairy, whole grains, nuts, tropical fruits, and often berries. While often confirmed on testing, these are common allergens in any child or adult with an overly reactive immune system. We deal with local environmental factors as indicated (allergens like pollen, grass, pollution). As noted under prevention, I remain a strong proponent of judicious use of inhalers to both block reactions and control inflammation. Frequently these children will appear allergic to a large number of foods, not necessarily because they are allergic to everything being tested, but rather because their immune systems are so dysfunctional, so overactive, that they react to almost everything. This reaction may or may not occur as asthma, a rash, or hives. It’s clear now that all negative foods, impurities in many nonpharmaceutical grade supplements, sometimes even different fillers in generic medications, can contribute to or accentuate this immune mediated, abnormal “shutdown” of blood flow in the brain that affects the language and social skills areas of the brain and central nervous system function. While accentuating the negative shutdown (think of a rise and fall in alertness, zoniness in a child—often day to day, sometimes hour to hour), as noted it is now known and well studied in the pediatric epileptic literature that immune activation can directly lead to a greater propensity for seizures (the immune system attacks, and therefore activates, foci in the brain).