4 ms·

We were lucky enough that one of the first interventions we ever tried for him besides OT basically cured him. I can tell you that many, many parent in the onli

by newobj 14y ago

We were lucky enough that one of the first interventions we ever tried for him besides OT basically cured him. I can tell you that many, many parent in the online communities we're members of will tell you the "talked after MB12 shot" story. So, no action we took was on the basis of a comprehensive and wide-ranging scientific study of studies... rather finding a D.A.N. doctor who knew just what to do. What tipped the balance was that this is one of the least interventive things possible. Really THE least. Everything he takes can be had over the counter. We did it blind at the time because I had no clue about 677T and only found about it later. To honestly answer your question, as I mentioned below, I'm getting the feeling (again, armchair, lay person only, but been living in communities real and online for a few years now) that autism is an overly or perhaps entirely umbrella term that's really capturing a number of diseases with similar pathologies. One of which would be 677T/1298C mutation, specifically homozygous or compound hetero. The good news is that it seems easy to treat. I know not every autistic kid out there has the same root cause, but being the parent of one, and going to his (old) school, and seeing so many poor beautiful kids impacted that it just crushes my heart to pieces, and their poor parents trying so hard to fight through it all and get them help... I really have no choice but to be an advocate for getting your kid screened. It's a simple blood draw, find out their 677 and 1298 status. And if they're anything, even heterozygous, immediately get them on MB12/L5MTHF. I fear for other parents, esp. those of vax injured kids, the road could be much harder, with chelation possibly being necessary etc (which is obiously fairly interventive and HIGHLY controversial). But if there's any chance that part of the solution could be such a low hanging fruit, I have to get the word out as much as I can.

Roboprog 14y ago
I would have to agree about autism being a catch-all to describe a set of symptoms, but having multiple possible causes. Alas, the B12 shots seemed to have rather small effects on our daughter. That said, I think the diet and vitamin regime that we were on 2 years ago (diet is hard to enforce at school) worked better than the drugs that the neurologist has been trying.
danielweber 14y ago
I'm glad your child got better. But you are falling for post hoc ergo propter hoc. If this cure is so incredibly quick and awesome, it would be amazingly irresponsible for its proponents to not run a double-blind test. Otherwise we just get into dueling anecdotes, like http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-autism-therapy-lawsuit-20100304,0,5271734.story http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-autism-therapy-l...
- newobj 14y ago
  Did I say you can cure autism with B12 shots? I don't think so. I said my son was diagnosed as autistic, showed marked improvement within 24 hours of MB12/L5MTHF injections, and after the fact we came to discover homozygous 677T mutation, for which MB12/L5MTHF would have been the primary course of treatment had we not already embarked upon that path. My post is more about how something with a very specific root cause, e.g. methylation problems, was diagnosing as autism (across multiple doctors, naturopaths, pediatricians, etc), and how it may be the case that some subset of autistic kids could be in a similar boat. From that study itself "However, detailed data analysis suggests that methyl B12 may alleviate symptoms of autism in a subgroup of children, possibly by reducing oxidative stress." What I'm a proponent of is genetic screening (a simple blood draw + lab work) for an autistic child to look for 677T/1298C mutation. That's a known problem with a known treatment and I don't think there's anything irresponsible in advocating for that. Autism is such a wide-net term that I would have a hard time inferring any meaning from a study that simply categorizes the subject(s) in a binary autistic/not autistic manner. e.g. which ones were vax injured, which ones have gut issues, heavy metals, yeast overgrowth, genetic conditions, etc. Many children imaginably require a multi-pronged approach so to try just one particular approach against an unqualified set of subjects seems bound to disappoint.

by newobj 14y ago

Roboprog 14y ago

I would have to agree about autism being a catch-all to describe a set of symptoms, but having multiple possible causes. Alas, the B12 shots seemed to have rather small effects on our daughter. That said, I think the diet and vitamin regime that we were on 2 years ago (diet is hard to enforce at school) worked better than the drugs that the neurologist has been trying.

danielweber 14y ago

I'm glad your child got better. But you are falling for post hoc ergo propter hoc. If this cure is so incredibly quick and awesome, it would be amazingly irresponsible for its proponents to not run a double-blind test. Otherwise we just get into dueling anecdotes, like http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-autism-therapy-lawsuit-20100304,0,5271734.story http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/ct-met-autism-therapy-l...

newobj 14y ago
Did I say you can cure autism with B12 shots? I don't think so. I said my son was diagnosed as autistic, showed marked improvement within 24 hours of MB12/L5MTHF injections, and after the fact we came to discover homozygous 677T mutation, for which MB12/L5MTHF would have been the primary course of treatment had we not already embarked upon that path. My post is more about how something with a very specific root cause, e.g. methylation problems, was diagnosing as autism (across multiple doctors, naturopaths, pediatricians, etc), and how it may be the case that some subset of autistic kids could be in a similar boat. From that study itself "However, detailed data analysis suggests that methyl B12 may alleviate symptoms of autism in a subgroup of children, possibly by reducing oxidative stress." What I'm a proponent of is genetic screening (a simple blood draw + lab work) for an autistic child to look for 677T/1298C mutation. That's a known problem with a known treatment and I don't think there's anything irresponsible in advocating for that. Autism is such a wide-net term that I would have a hard time inferring any meaning from a study that simply categorizes the subject(s) in a binary autistic/not autistic manner. e.g. which ones were vax injured, which ones have gut issues, heavy metals, yeast overgrowth, genetic conditions, etc. Many children imaginably require a multi-pronged approach so to try just one particular approach against an unqualified set of subjects seems bound to disappoint.