Search This Blog

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

Science or bunk: How to tell the difference

Have been frustrated (again) recently by some peoples inability to understand that an open mind is fine as long as it exists in tandem with critical thought. When it comes to Autism and an open mind, without capacity for critique you may be lead down paths that are not only expensive and ineffective, but potentially dangerous. People sometimes accuse me of being closed minded because I refuse to entertain certain treatment perspectives for Harri. What they do not understand is that I have read about many models and treatments. I am familiar with the bio medical model, the vaccines causes ASD hypothesis, the leaky gut theory, homeopathic principles, the Gluten free diets, the Cassein Free diets, the dairy free too. I am aware of all the ancedotes by parents who claim after utilising certain detoxification rituals their children improved and started to speak. I know there are heaps of parents within the ASD community who spend a fortune on vitamins and other pills and potions in an effort to'cure' or at least improve their beloved childs Autistic symptoms. So yeah I read and understand a bit about these things.

So why not try them?  I don't because I also look at the independent research that tells me these results that parents claim to see cannot be replicated. Replication is the hallmark of good science. No replication? Then we have a problem. But I concede it is so hard to know which products to try or not, which treatment models to trust. It can be overwhelming. I have included the link below to give people some ideas of how to consider critically whether something may be legitimate or shonky when thinking about a treatment option for your child. Or even yourself. Enjoy.

Science or bunk: How to tell the difference

8 comments:

  1. Sharon, thank you for this. I can well understand why people try all kinds of treatments, especially dietary and detoxication treatments. I have fallen into that rut myself in the past.

    It's an interesting thing that happens. I *do* feel better when I simplify my diet -- when I remove dairy and gluten, refined sugar and bread. I have more energy, I'm calmer, and my body just feels better.

    But sometimes, I catch myself thinking that somehow I'm going to heal my auditory condition in this way, as though there is a perfectly typical hearing system in there that just needs to be uncovered. Of course, it's nonsense. I think that it's fine to simplify one's diet if it makes you feel better, because feeling good makes autism easier to handle than feeling like crap; our coping mechanisms are better and we get more functional. But that would be true for anyone who removes foods from a diet that don't work for them. You're not curing or ameliorating anything. You're just removing unnecessary obstacles to optimal functioning *with the neurology you were born with.*

    ReplyDelete
  2. A site I've found very useful is
    http://www.researchautism.net/pages/autism_treatments_therapies_interventions/
    which provides a comprehensive list of treatments. Click on 'Alphabetic list' for a brief description and on 'Interventions Under Evaluation' for an at-a-glance rating.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for the info bbsmum.

    Rachel I agree 100%. If your child has allergies or an intolerance to a food or drink then of course you should eliminate that from their diet. And determining that when a child is not communicating well is difficult. I certainly see the sense in exploring food limiting if your child exhibits issues with digestion, rashes, diarrhea etc. But to modify a childs diet in the hope of curing Autism seems to me to misunderstand it. I know there are some in the medical community who promote the whole gut/brain thing, but that Autism is not the same one my child has. He eats for Australia, no GI issues, and is Autistic through and through.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh bbsmum there's a blog called Molecular Autism that is worth a look.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great site, lots of info - thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Amen. Thank you for the sites and links.

    ReplyDelete
  7. As critical as I am of science, I have always looked to it as a guide. That, and my pocketbook.

    Maybe my pocketbook, first.

    I am the ULTIMATE realist, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Realism is good. I'm a big fan of science, not so much of how badly some people can mangle it. It's just a really neat system for coming to sound conclusions. Problem is there is too much confirmation bias around, and sloppy application. And people with ulterior motives, and...I could go on. Science is good, people are not always so good. Pocket books are good too.

    ReplyDelete