EBD Blog

Over on Countering Age of Autism, Kim Wombles has an extended post about research on facilitated communication. She’s not just gathered together the evidence that is familiar to those who have followed the science, but also engaged in discussion in the comments section of the post. Take a look at Facilitated Communication: A Review of the Literature. While you’re there, check many of her other sensible and clear posts.

Trine Tsouderos and Patricia Callahan, the Chicago Tribune reporters who have provided exemplary examinations of unsupported therapies for Autism, continued their series of stories on the topic with a piece entitled “Autism: Kids Put At Risk” in the Los Angeles Times. In this briefer (though still well-researched) article they devote most of the coverage to examining the physicians who prescribe chelation, hyperbaric oxygen therapy, anti-testorsterone drugs, mega-doses of vitamins, and many other unproven regimens and other doctors who have serious doubts about the consequences, including the safety, of such therapies.

Read “Autism: Kids Put At Risk.” See the related articles “On shaky ground with alternative treatments to autism,” “Four autism treatments that worry physicians,” “Chelation based on faulty premise,” and “Autism therapies can get undeserved credit.” Also, see related EBD Blog posts about the investigative journalism of these writers: Dangerous therapy and Baseless, risky therapies for Autism

Writing for MSNBC, Brian Alexander provided a thorough examination of the history and devastating consequences of some facilitated communication (FC). After making quick reference to the case of Rom Houben that has been in the news recently, in “Dark shadows loom over ‘facilitated’ talk: Opening minds or telling tales? Michigan family torn apart by abuse claims,” describes the wrenching effects of facilitated accusations of sexual abuse on the family of Aislinn Wendrow.

On Nov. 27, 2007, just a few days after returning to school from Thanksgiving break, 14-year-old Aislinn Wendrow created a shock wave by saying her father had “banged” her. Aislinn didn’t say it, exactly; she typed it on the keyboard of a digital device with the help of Cynthia Scarsella, her facilitator and an employee of Michigan’s Walled Lake school district.

The Wendrows’ story is not news; the charges against the parents were dropped in September 2008. Mr. Alexander intertwines the story of the Wendrow family’s nightmare with FC with the story of how FC was developed, adopted, challenged and found wanting, and yet is still being promoted. It’s an example of good journalism.

Link to “Dark shadows loom over ‘facilitated’ talk.” For more about the case of Mr. Houben, see “Deserving a careful test” on Spedpro. For more about the case of the Wendrows, see L. L. Brasier’s “Parents cleared in sex case file suit: Our autistic kids suffered, they say” from the Freep.

Writing in the Chicago (IL, US) Tribune under the headline “Autism treatments: Risky alternative therapies have little basis in science” Trine Tsouderos and Patricia Callahan reported about the background and myriad problems with many treatments used as therapy for children with Autism. They expose the lack of evidentiary support for therapies ranging from mega-doses of vitamins to chelation and show the relationships between practitioners of these therapies and a couple of organizations well-known among those who follow Autism.

The Tribune found children undergoing daylong infusions of a blood product that carries the risk of kidney failure and anaphylactic shock. Researchers in the field emphatically warn that the therapy should not be used to treat autism.

Children are repeatedly encased in pressurized oxygen chambers normally used after scuba diving accidents, at a cost of thousands of dollars. This unproven therapy is meant to reduce inflammation that experts say is little understood and may even be beneficial.

Children undergo rounds of chelation therapy to leach heavy metals from the body, though most toxicologists say the test commonly used to measure the metals is meaningless and the treatment potentially harmful.

Reporters Tsouderos and Callahan conducted interviews with an impressive array of advocates for the therapies (including representatives of Autism One, Autism Research Institute, and Defeat Autism Now) and doubters (mostly serious scientists). They combed through the weak and barely related research that many of the advocates use as well as the evidence showing limited or no benefits of the therapies.

All in all, these reporters deserve kudos for the unflinching thoroughness of their reporting. I encourage readers to read, reread, and disseminate the article. Here’s a link to “Autism treatments: Risky alternative therapies have little basis in science.” Flash of the electrons to Liz Ditz, whose Twitter post about this article alerted me to it.

The National Autism Center released the report of its National Standards Project. The project was designed to identify interventions that are or are not beneficial for individuals with Autism or Autism Spectrum Disorder and it presents known therapies in three categories: established, emerging, unestablished (including a subsection on “ineffective/harmful treatments”).

In summary, the National Standards Project, a primary initiative of the National Autism Center, seeks to:

• describe the age, diagnosis, and skills/behaviors targeted for improvement associated with treatment options
• identify the limitations of the current body of research on autism treatment
• offer recommendations for engaging in evidence-based practice for ASD

Continue reading ‘National Standards Project’

As happens when I see words such as “breakthrough” and “miracle,” my skeptackles arise when I find “landmark” used to refer to new research. In my Occamistic view, studies don’t qualify as breakthroughs or landmarks until they have been closely vetted and, yes, replicated. So it was when I heard of a landmark study announced by the same folks this morning who had just announced one in October 2008.
Continue reading ‘CoMed’s landmarks multiply’

According to a story on a CBS (US) television station, a controversial therapy may yield miraculous results. As a reporter for the CBS, Dr. Holly Phillips covered the use of hyperbaric oxgen chambers as a treatment for Autism. She told the story of a family who sought treatment from a New Jersey (US) doctor; the doctor, James A. Neubrander, MD, treated the child with vitamins and oxygen delivered at high pressure. Despite substantial reasons not to cover it, and Dr. Phillips notes them, the popular press continues to report stories such as the one in my lead.
Continue reading ‘Miracle or mistake?’

As most folks who’ve been around the block a few times know, old bologna seems to get resurrected every so often. Secretin as a therapy for Autism illustrates this. Even though some of us watched it closely in the 1990s, and found it wanting, there is apparently a resurgence of interest in the use of secretin to reduce—if not eliminate—the problems associated with Autism.
Continue reading ‘Revisiting secretin’

Liz Ditz, who often writes about Learning Disabilities and, therefore, has developed a good nose for bologna, posts entries once in a while about Autism. She has a keeper in After McCarthy: Autism quackery on the rise. There’s a reference to Leelo’s mother and, for those of you who know about Liz’s site already, here’s a link to take the direct jump to “the adventures of leelo and his potty-mouthed mom.”