Study: Special diets don't help with Autism

[n2doc]

New research refutes the controversial idea that there's a vaccine-linked digestive problem specific to autism.

Mon Jan 4, 2010 08:29 AM ET | content provided by Carla K. Johnson , Associated Press

An expert panel says there's no rigorous evidence that digestive problems are more common in children with autism compared to other children, or that special diets work, contrary to claims by celebrities and vaccine naysayers.

Painful digestive problems can trigger problem behavior in children with autism and should be treated medically, according to the panel's report published in the January issue of Pediatrics and released Monday.

"There are a lot of barriers to medical care to children with autism," said the report's lead author, Dr. Timothy Buie of Harvard Medical School. "They can be destructive and unruly in the office, or they can't sit still. The nature of their condition often prevents them from getting standard medical care."

Some pediatricians' offices "can't handle those kids," Buie said, especially if children are in pain or discomfort because of bloating or stomach cramps. Pain can set off problem behavior, further complicating diagnosis, especially if the child has trouble communicating -- as is the case for children with autism.
more:
http://news.discovery.com/human/autism-diet-treatment.html

The new report calls for more rigorous research into the prevalence of digestive problems and whether special diets might help some children.

[Don Caballero]

1. This was part of the conspiracy theory about autism that Jenny McCarthy was spreading

She claimed that her son got autism from a vaccine and that his diet reversed it. She is nuts.

[Walk away]

2. Is she still spreading that garbage. She should be in jail...

it's like screaming "fire" in a crowded auditorium for no reason. She could easily cause thousands of children to become seriously ill or even die. Why would anyone take medical advise from her?

[Don Caballero]

3. She is a disgusting person spreading disinfo to parents praying for a cure

She should definitely be in prison.

[pnwmom]

8. You might try reading the actual article. Many children with autism

have G.I. symptoms which are under-diagnosed and under-treated because of the difficulty these children have in communicating. But, as the researcher here says, these children's autism symptoms could be worse if they're in pain.

The article in the JAMA which is referenced in the OP states that the current research doesn't prove OR disprove the connection between autism and diet -- thus, more research needs to be carried out.

Celiac disease, or gluten intolerance, is one of the conditions that has been linked to autism (and also to schizophrenia). Untreated Celiac can lead to everything from G.I. symptoms to neurological symptoms (including epilepsy, which many autistics have), auto-immune diseases, and liver inflammation. This is not trivial or whacky research. Unfortunately, it is very complicated research and drug companies have no interest in funding anything that won't make them money.

[HuckleB]

11. And ABC news had JM on its show last night to "refute" this review.

Ugh. The news as entertainment leads to the news being incapable of reporting science.

[pnwmom]

18. There are plenty of well-respected researchers in the autism field, including

the leading researcher cited in the OP, who would disagree with the headline of the OP. The conclusion of his report was NOT that a link between autism and diet hadn't been proven, but that such a link had not been proven OR dis-proven; and that his study showed that previously conducted research has been inadequate to address the question.

It is not true that the autism controversy is between scientists on the one hand and people like Jennie McCarthy on the other. There are many scientists on both side of the divide, but more and more -- including a major group at Harvard -- are moving to the side that links autism to a combination of genetic and environmental and developmental factors.

Here's an article written by a physician whose autistic daughter was the first to win a claim from the Vaccine Injury Court.

http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/stories/2009/03/13/polinged_0313.html

SNIP

Fortunately, the ‘better diagnosis’ myth has been soundly debunked. In the 2009 issue of Epidemiology, two authors analyzed 1990 through 2006 California Department of Developmental Services and U.S. Census data documenting an astronomical 700 to 800 percent rise in the disorder.

These scientists concluded that only a smaller percentage of this staggering rise can be explained by means other than a true increase.

Because purely genetic diseases do not rise precipitously, the corollary to a true autism increase is clear — genes only load the gun and it is the environment that pulls the trigger. Autism is best redefined as an environmental disease with genetic susceptibilities.

We should be investing our research dollars into discovering environmental factors that we can change, not more poorly targeted genetic studies that offer no hope of early intervention. Pesticides, mercury, aluminum, several drugs, dietary factors, infectious agents and yes — vaccines — are all in the research agenda.

An inspiring new text, “Autism-Current Theories and Evidence,” has successfully navigated the minefield of autism science without touching the “third rail,” as Dr. Sanjay Gupta aptly describes the vaccine-autism debate.

Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, who has studied autism for decades, prophetically writes, “The clinical heterogeneity of this disorder, together with the inherent dynamic changes during children’s growth and development, confound static, linear models and simplistic, unilateral approaches.”

Zimmerman’s book is dense with cutting-edge science on cell biology, metabolism, oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, auto-immunity and brain pathology. That’s right — autism isn’t simply a genetic program for brain development gone awry. Dr. Martha Herbert, of Harvard Medical School, writes the final chapter defining autism in the larger framework of a multiple organ system disease with potentially reversible impairments.

SNIP

[trotsky]

19. You are spreading a falsehood AGAIN!

I caught you on this last time, too! Hannah Poling was NEVER diagnosed with autism. She had a mitochondrial disorder. If you dispute this FACT, please post her certified diagnosis of autism. Go ahead. The court documents are widely available.

If you don't, or won't, then you must quit spreading false information.

(Dr. Poling's article is also based on bogus info, but I want to focus on YOUR falsehood first.)

[pnwmom]

20. Her father, a neurologist, says she has autism. Autism is a syndrome, a collection

of symptoms. She has the syndrome, she has autism. You're the one spreading a lie, not the girl's father and not me. (You do have amazing nerve, to put forth your "diagnosis" over the neurologist who lives with her!)

I'm not disputing the fact that she ALSO has a mitochondrial disorder. That disorder is believed to have made her vulnerable to ill effects from the vaccine that then led to her autism symptoms.

Here's one link but I could give you dozens:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/conditions/03/06/vaccines.autism/index.html

ATLANTA, Georgia (CNN) -- The parents of a 9-year-old girl with autism said Thursday that their assertion that her illness was caused by childhood vaccines has been vindicated by the federal government's decision to compensate them.

"We are very pleased with the government's decision," Hannah Poling's father, Dr. Jon Poling, a neurologist in private practice in Athens, Georgia, told reporters Thursday. "It has been eight difficult and heartbreaking years since our daughter's injury."

SNIP

But within 48 hours after receiving nine routinely administered childhood vaccines in July 2000, the girl's health rapidly declined, she said.

Terry Poling said her daughter stopped eating, failed to respond to verbal stimuli and became prone to episodes of screaming and high fever.

"We knew something was wrong," said the registered nurse, who was then working as a trial attorney.

More disturbing behavior followed, including staring at lights, running in circles, looking at fans -- all symptoms of autism, she said.

SNIP

In 2002, the couple filed their case with what is known as the vaccine court, alleging that the vaccines caused her autism.

In addition, she was diagnosed with a disorder of the mitochondria, the powerhouses of the cell, Jon Poling said.

The fact that his wife also has the disorder yet displays no signs of autism suggests that his daughter's symptoms are not genetically caused, he said.

Instead, he said, Hannah's inborn mitochondrial problem may have been aggravated either by the vaccines or by the vaccine preservative thimerosal, which contains mercury, he said.

Numerous studies have shown no link between illness and the vaccines, public health officials have long contended.

In 2007, the case, which had been consolidated with other claims, was designated as a potential test case, said the Polings' lawyer, Cliff Shoemaker.

But last fall, shortly before a deadline for expert testimony to be filed, the government conceded the link between the vaccines and the girl's injury and moved the case to the damages phase, he said.

SNIP

[trotsky]

22. Nope, you are completely wrong.

And her father, while a medical expert, is NOT an expert on autism nor can he make a diagnosis, any more than a podiatrist or heart surgeon.

There was never a diagnosis of autism, only confusion by the media (and INTENTIONAL obfuscation by the anti-vax nutters).

And you are the one spreading falsehoods. End of story.

[pnwmom]

24. Sorry, trotsky. Her father knows what her "official" diagnosis was -- you don't.

You also don't seem to grasp the elementary fact that the diagnosis of autism is simply the name for a collection of symptoms. If you have the symptoms, you have the syndrome. And she clearly does.

[trotsky]

25. If you actually looked at the public court documents you would see that I am right.

But you are not interested in facts, you made that clear a very long time ago.

[pnwmom]

26. You keep saying that but you've never provided a link to any of them.

I think they're all in your head.

[trotsky]

27. I thought for sure an expert like you would have already read over them.

Rather than be fooled by the anti-vax screamers.

But here, for your benefit, is the full text of the vaccine court's decision - posted by disgraced anti-vax hero David Kirby it its entirety. Of course he was too stupid to see that it doesn't say what he thought it said, either.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/the-vaccineautism-court-_b_88558.html

The only statement regarding autism is that Hannah exhibited "features of autistic disorder." This is NOT a diagnosis of autism - because Hannah was ACTUALLY diagnosed with "an underlying mitochondrial disorder." Mitochondrial disorders often manifest themselves with MANY features of autism - but they are NOT THE SAME. If every autistic child ALSO had a mitochondrial disorder, there might be something to all of this. But almost none of them do. It is exceedingly rare.

(It should also be noted that actually GETTING one of the diseases prevented by the vaccines probably also would have triggered Hannah's symptoms. But you can't blame nature, so let's blame vaccines!)

I realize the anti-vax wackos, like young-earth creationists, global warming deniers, and FAUX news mouth breathers don't "do" nuance and can't see the distinction here, but it is significant, real, and crucial to actually understanding autism and doing something about it.

[Celebration]

4. another example of a headline being slightly off

There isn't sufficient evidence to support the idea that special diets are needed, and this report actually calls for further study.

The key works......"for now"

For now , the report states, available information doesn't support special diets for autism.

......................

The report drew praise from Rebecca Estepp of Poway, Calif., who believes a special diet is helping her autistic son. She said the paper gives pediatricians credible recommendations they've needed.

"I'm filled with hope after reading this report," said Estepp of the support group Talk About Curing Autism. "I wish this report would have come out 10 years ago when my son was diagnosed."

[pnwmom]

6. More than slightly off. The available data doesn't prove anything either way.

The research does NOT prove that diets don't help. Unfortunately, the needed research hasn't been done because it's difficult and complicated to carry out -- and there's probably not much financial backing for it, because it won't make any drug company a lot of money.

[pnwmom]

5. WRONG. Misleading title. Dr. Buie's research actually shows that the data

doesn't exist to prove either side -- that there isn't enough data to prove that the diets work OR don't work.

THAT is why they're calling for more research: the current research isn't adequate to answer the question.

[kestrel91316]

7. How could they? Autism is caused by mercury in vaccines.

Wait - you say mercury got taken out of kids' vaccines HOW long ago??

Nevermind.

[pnwmom]

9. The actual theory was that certain children with malabsorption problems,

and "leaky gut," such as those with Celiac disease, were more susceptible to damage from the mercury in vaccines. So these weren't two conflicting theories.

There is a higher incidence of Celiac among children with autism, and Celiac has been connected with other neurological problems, such as epilepsy. It's not irrational to study the effect of diet on autism. In fact, the lead researcher cited in the OP calls for further research on the topic because the existing research neither proves NOR DISPROVES a possible link between autism symptoms and diet.

[kestrel91316]

13. Vaccines are administered by injection and not orally, so that whole

theory just seems fantasy to me.

[pnwmom]

14. Yes, vaccines are, but it is the total amount of toxins that go through the

system and end up in the brain that matters, not whether they entered through the bloodstream first -- as in an injected vaccine -- or through the stomach, as in fish containing mercury.

[HuckleB]

43. Prove your assertions.

:rofl:

[HuckleB]

10. Another take on this study.

http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=1424

The key quote from the study being:

"The existence of a gastrointestinal disturbance specific to persons with ASDs (eg, “autistic enterocolitis”) has not been established."

[pnwmom]

15. True. And it hasn't been disproven either. n/t

[HuckleB]

16. The point is to prove a connection, any connection at all.

I can come up with plenty of things that science will never be able to "disprove."

[pnwmom]

17. No, the point is to do proper research so that the results mean something.

The researcher at the OP, if you read his actual JAMA article, says that the research that's been conducted so far is insufficient to prove anything one way or another, and that there is a clear need for more research in this area. In a review of the literature, the study that he thought had the best design only had a couple dozen subjects.

[HuckleB]

21. You're putting words in the mouth of the lead on this review.

:eyes:

[trotsky]

23. Keep in mind here, of course.

That what she means by "proper" research is simply research that reinforces her belief that vaccines cause autism. Anything suggesting otherwise is bogus, fake, falsified, or whatnot by big pharma, probably.

[HuckleB]

28. Alas, that does seem to be the reality.

Cheers!

:toast:

[pnwmom]

31. The OP is about special diets, not vaccines. Maybe you should read it. n/t

[trotsky]

32. But I wasn't talking about the OP. n/t

[pnwmom]

35. Then what are you doing? n/t

[trotsky]

37. What's it to you? I wasn't even talking to you. n/t

[pnwmom]

29. No, I'm not. I've just read more of his words than you have.

As the report Dr. Buie issued notes, the effect of restrictive diets on ameliorating symptoms of ASD's "have not been supported or refuted in the scientific literature."

I repeat: supported OR refuted.

http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20100104/experts-no-proof-autism-diets-help-dont-help

Jan. 4, 2010 - There's still no proof that special diets help or don't help autistic kids -- or that food allergies, food sensitivities, or gut problems cause autism, an expert panel concludes.

The panel, chaired by Harvard's Timothy Buie, MD, included 28 experts in 12 scientific disciplines, including child psychiatry, pediatric allergy, pediatric gastroenterology, and pediatric nutrition. The panel evaluated scientific evidence regarding gastrointestinal disorders in all forms of autism, collectively called autism spectrum disorder or ASD.

The experts note that many parents and medical professionals have reported improvements in autistic behaviors after dietary treatments -- but that these observations aren't based on controlled, scientific studies.

"Anecdotal reports that restricted diets may ameliorate symptoms of ASDs in some children have not been supported or refuted in the scientific literature, but these data do not address the possibility that there exists a subgroup of individuals who may respond to such diets," Buie and colleagues carefully conclude.

The panel strongly recommends that if a child with autism is on any kind of restricted diet -- due to dietary treatment, food sensitivities, or food aversions -- the child should be evaluated by a nutritionist.

Perhaps the panel's strongest statement is that gastrointestinal woes often worsen autism-related problem behaviors.

SNIP

[HuckleB]

30. Yes, you are.

Putting up more links, and more words doesn't change that.

And believe me, I've read much more on this topic than you have.

Cut the crap.

[pnwmom]

33. Then tell me what words I'm supposedly putting in Dr. Buie's mouth.

The link I just put up supported my earlier posts as to what he has said.

[HuckleB]

34. Read your words, and read what he actually said.

I think you can do that for yourself.

Goodnight.

[pnwmom]

36. I have, and you clearly are too lazy. n/t

[sketchy]

38. Thank you for your reasonable arguments

As someone on the SCD for Crohn's, I know how effective special diets can be. I've grown tired, however, of trying to convince unconvinceable people who really want to see the studies that as of yet haven't been funded and completed. And until they see those studies they will naysay and take cheap personal shots at those whose personal experience belies their positions.

I'm certainly not attempting to diminish the worth of controlled studies, and welcome them.

Just a personal thank you for your forebearance.

[trotsky]

39. Crohn's is not the same as autism.

But you knew that, I bet.

[sketchy]

40. According to proponents of the Specific Carbohydrate Diet, there is

a strong gut/brain connection.

Here's a quote, "'In addition to the damage to the intestine, there is a growing body of scientific evidence that lactic acid formed from fermentation in the intestine causes abnormal brain function and behavior,' which could account for the behavioral problems which often accompany intestinal disorders." (from the New England Journal of Medicine 301:249-252 and 306:1344-1348, and Breaking the Vicious Cycle by Elaine Gottschall).


This quote probably doesn't precisely answer your question, but you might find it interesting. Do you have a position on the Specific Carbohydrate Diet?

[trotsky]

41. And Saturn exerts a gravitational pull on each and every one of us.

That doesn't make astrology true.

[sketchy]

42. Some levity is EXACTLY what was missing in this thread!

Yup. I cannot argue with you about Saturn's gravitational pull and astrology fer sure.

[HuckleB]

46. Ah, but you can argue with the crap you are trying to push.

You want levity, start with the real world.

[sketchy]

47. It doesn't get any realer

than my own gut, HuckleB. I'm not sure you even know precisely what "crap" I am trying to "push" anyway. What is your position on the Specific Carbohydrate Diet? Do you even have one, or know anything about it?

Or are you too going to reference the heavens in a joking factfree reply?

[HuckleB]

48. Actually it does.

Luckily, scientists don't just follow their guts.

[HuckleB]

44. So you prefer people who deny science?

:rofl:

[sketchy]

49. If that's what you think, you did not read what I wrote in a scientific way

I asked you a direct question about the Specific Carbohydrate Diet which you failed to answer.

You may talk the talk of a scientist, but you don't really walk the walk.

[HuckleB]

51. You're not discussing science.

You're discussing anecdotes.

Try again.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/01/gut_disorders_and_autism_a_new_consensus.php

"...

A recent Cochrane review of the literature concluded:

"In the first version of this review we argued that exclusion diets are not without cost in terms of inconvenience and extra financial cost and limitations on foods of choice for the affected family member and that we could not recommend their use as a standard treatment on the basis of the limited data available. The only trial identified since the first review shows no significant difference between the intervention and control group and, again, we cannot recommend these exclusion diets as standard treatment."

And a recent randomized clinical trial of a gluten-free, casein-free diet (the most common diet autism biomed adherents recommend for autism) concluded:

"This study tested the efficacy of a gluten-free and casein-free (GFCF) diet in treating autism using a randomized, double blind repeated measures crossover design. The sample included 15 children aged 2-16 years with autism spectrum disorder. Data on autistic symptoms and urinary peptide levels were collected in the subjects' homes over the 12 weeks that they were on the diet. Group data indicated no statistically significant findings even though several parents reported improvement in their children. Although preliminary, this study demonstrates how a controlled clinical trial of the GFCF diet can be conducted, and suggests directions for future research."

...

"In summary, published reports have not established the presence of a unique gastrointestinal pathophysiology specific to ASDs."

The above statements may seem wishy-washy, but in "consensus statement speak" this is about as strong as language gets. It's a ringing denunciation of the concept of "autistic enterocolitis" as there is. Even more ringing a rebuke to Wakefield is a quote by Dr. Timothy Bule, the study's lead author, in which he pointed out (quite correctly, from my observation) that researchers and doctors have avoided discussing and studying digestive issues in autism because of their connection with Wakefield's utterly discredited research, the anti-MMR fear mongering promoted by the anti-vaccine movement, and the gross quackery associated with them. Scientists are understandably reluctant to get involved with a field so steeped in pseudoscience and quackery, lest their reputations suffer as a result or they become subjects of campaigns of demonization and harassment if they don't find the reults that the anti-vaccine biomed movement wants.

..."

[pnwmom]

54. My husband and daughter are both scientists. I have great respect

for scientists. Are you one, too?

[pnwmom]

53. Thank you sketchy. Unfortunately, the drug companies won't make any money

as a result of studies showing that foods can cause physical problems -- so the research money will always be difficult to obtain.

[HuckleB]

45. Thanks for the BS!

Pitiful as it is.

:rofl:

[HuckleB]

52. ...

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/01/gut_disorders_and_autism_a_new_consensus.php

"...

A recent Cochrane review of the literature concluded:

"In the first version of this review we argued that exclusion diets are not without cost in terms of inconvenience and extra financial cost and limitations on foods of choice for the affected family member and that we could not recommend their use as a standard treatment on the basis of the limited data available. The only trial identified since the first review shows no significant difference between the intervention and control group and, again, we cannot recommend these exclusion diets as standard treatment."

And a recent randomized clinical trial of a gluten-free, casein-free diet (the most common diet autism biomed adherents recommend for autism) concluded:

"This study tested the efficacy of a gluten-free and casein-free (GFCF) diet in treating autism using a randomized, double blind repeated measures crossover design. The sample included 15 children aged 2-16 years with autism spectrum disorder. Data on autistic symptoms and urinary peptide levels were collected in the subjects' homes over the 12 weeks that they were on the diet. Group data indicated no statistically significant findings even though several parents reported improvement in their children. Although preliminary, this study demonstrates how a controlled clinical trial of the GFCF diet can be conducted, and suggests directions for future research."

...

"In summary, published reports have not established the presence of a unique gastrointestinal pathophysiology specific to ASDs."

The above statements may seem wishy-washy, but in "consensus statement speak" this is about as strong as language gets. It's a ringing denunciation of the concept of "autistic enterocolitis" as there is. Even more ringing a rebuke to Wakefield is a quote by Dr. Timothy Bule, the study's lead author, in which he pointed out (quite correctly, from my observation) that researchers and doctors have avoided discussing and studying digestive issues in autism because of their connection with Wakefield's utterly discredited research, the anti-MMR fear mongering promoted by the anti-vaccine movement, and the gross quackery associated with them. Scientists are understandably reluctant to get involved with a field so steeped in pseudoscience and quackery, lest their reputations suffer as a result or they become subjects of campaigns of demonization and harassment if they don't find the reults that the anti-vaccine biomed movement wants.

..."

[HuckleB]

12. Recommendations for Treating GI Tract Symptoms in Children With Autism Issued

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/714532

[HuckleB]

50. More on the matter...

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/01/gut_disorders_and_autism_a_new_consensus.php

"...

A recent Cochrane review of the literature concluded:

"In the first version of this review we argued that exclusion diets are not without cost in terms of inconvenience and extra financial cost and limitations on foods of choice for the affected family member and that we could not recommend their use as a standard treatment on the basis of the limited data available. The only trial identified since the first review shows no significant difference between the intervention and control group and, again, we cannot recommend these exclusion diets as standard treatment."

And a recent randomized clinical trial of a gluten-free, casein-free diet (the most common diet autism biomed adherents recommend for autism) concluded:

"This study tested the efficacy of a gluten-free and casein-free (GFCF) diet in treating autism using a randomized, double blind repeated measures crossover design. The sample included 15 children aged 2-16 years with autism spectrum disorder. Data on autistic symptoms and urinary peptide levels were collected in the subjects' homes over the 12 weeks that they were on the diet. Group data indicated no statistically significant findings even though several parents reported improvement in their children. Although preliminary, this study demonstrates how a controlled clinical trial of the GFCF diet can be conducted, and suggests directions for future research."

...

"In summary, published reports have not established the presence of a unique gastrointestinal pathophysiology specific to ASDs."

The above statements may seem wishy-washy, but in "consensus statement speak" this is about as strong as language gets. It's a ringing denunciation of the concept of "autistic enterocolitis" as there is. Even more ringing a rebuke to Wakefield is a quote by Dr. Timothy Bule, the study's lead author, in which he pointed out (quite correctly, from my observation) that researchers and doctors have avoided discussing and studying digestive issues in autism because of their connection with Wakefield's utterly discredited research, the anti-MMR fear mongering promoted by the anti-vaccine movement, and the gross quackery associated with them. Scientists are understandably reluctant to get involved with a field so steeped in pseudoscience and quackery, lest their reputations suffer as a result or they become subjects of campaigns of demonization and harassment if they don't find the reults that the anti-vaccine biomed movement wants.

..."