'Give more autistic children prozac' ...

'Give more autistic children prozac' says expert

There are 134 comments on the Daily Mail story from Sep 21, 2007, titled 'Give more autistic children prozac' says expert. In it, Daily Mail reports that:

“It really should be considered as part of an overall treatment package.”

Comments More autistic children in the UK should be given drugs like Prozac to control their symptoms, an expert said today. via Daily Mail

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Daily Mail.

Dogen3

Fishers, IN

#61 Oct 2, 2007
friend wrote:
as for chelating. not all kids had vaccines that had thimerosal in them, so the idea of chelating wouldn't be as main stream as one may think.
Actually chelation is 100% mainstream. It was used quite a bit in the 60's & 70's... more for lead than mercury but ultimately for both. What is not mainstream is its use for autism. Frankly I think thimerosal is a drop in the bucket and would not matter a hill of beans if someone did not have some sort of sensivity to mercury, and other heavy metals, which a number of kids with autism seem to have.

Quackwatch is not a good MEDICAL site. Entertainment - yes. Medical information - no thanks. It has been rediculed by many including some medical organizations. Would you go there for medical information if you needed it? Of course not. There are a thousand other sites that are more respected. Want a good medical horror story, then I guess it would be a good place to do some rubbernecking.
friend wrote:
I also believe personally, autism is something you are. if there even was hope for a cure- all these kids/ adults would be thrown into shock and still continually need therapies to adjust.
I used to think this way. I just don't feel it is supported by the research literature any more. That is my opinion from what I have read... not a fact. Most kids do get better (vs. untreated peers) with assertive treatment. Not all, but most show significant improvement in ATEC scores. Few (maybe 10-20%) get to what I would call 'Recovery'(no longer meeting diagnostic criteria for ASD).

It is a matter of philosophical direction. If you child is in an accident who would you take him to: a hospital described as a good mainstream hospital or a one described as a "cutting-edge" hospital? Hopefully you would consider his injuries. Lets say the mainstream hospital could certainly save his life but he would be very disabled. The cutting edge hospital might be able to give him a good recovery but there is also a small chance he could die. How do you choose?

One thing you are COMPLETELY right about is often TO MUCH hope is given when it can be unrealistic. Improvement is NOT cure and never will be. I just want my son to be the best he can be. I am happy at the progress that has shocked many. He is NOT cured. He is not recovered. But he is happy and healthy. Happy enough to just come in and give me a zirburt (sp?) when pretending to give me a kiss on my cheek. He has been bringing home A's on his tests... not bad for a kid we thought would never be able to go to a mainstream school.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#62 Oct 2, 2007
chelating has been around for years, and of course we're speaking in terms of it's relationship to autism. as for chelating itself, would matter if you had autism or not. if you have heavy metal poisoning, you do need chelation.

quack watch is not a medical site- it's a parent's sites that offers things just like any other site out there, attempting to shed light any many area's a parent deals with. of course this site and many others are rediculed, but the information there can be just as valuable as any site to be added reading to other sites ones may seek.
Ivar

Brønnøysund, Norway

#63 Oct 3, 2007
Almost all autistic learn to make more appropriate behavior in their childhood, whether receiving chelation, neuro acupuncture, secretin (DAN! treatment that has already been disproved by double-blind tests), homeopathy or no alternative treatment at all. You can honestly not base their manners on what biomed treatments they have received.

The marketting of unproven biomed treatments for autism is just too ruthless, the families with autism is a very vulnerable group and shouldn't be taken advantage of like that.
Dogen3

Fishers, IN

#64 Oct 3, 2007
Ivar wrote:
DAN! treatment that has already been disproved by double-blind tests.
Citation please.
Dogen3

Fishers, IN

#65 Oct 3, 2007
friend wrote:
quack watch is not a medical site- it's a parent's sites that offers things just like any other site out there, attempting to shed light any many area's a parent deals with. of course this site and many others are rediculed, but the information there can be just as valuable as any site to be added reading to other sites ones may seek.
If you like quackwatch and understand its bias then by all means use it. Do understand that they will continue to banter against treatment even as they become main stream. Often, if you read the stories carefully you can see how people often make their own problems and project them on other people. You have to look cloesly as all accounts of this nature are completely one sided.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#66 Oct 3, 2007
Dogen3 wrote:
<quoted text>
If you like quackwatch and understand its bias then by all means use it. Do understand that they will continue to banter against treatment even as they become main stream. Often, if you read the stories carefully you can see how people often make their own problems and project them on other people. You have to look cloesly as all accounts of this nature are completely one sided.
almost all sites are one sides and offer their own view points and opinions. DAN sites are that way, for or against vaccine sites are that way, and so on. none of these sites should be excluded no matter what their views are. some of the sites quackwatch lists as not good research sites, I myself can direct a person to out right lies and how they mislead parents with non truth.

there are many people and sites that disagree with treatment options and make their points about them, all parents should see both sides. this site offers their experience nd another side.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#67 Oct 3, 2007
Ivar wrote:
Almost all autistic learn to make more appropriate behavior in their childhood, whether receiving chelation, neuro acupuncture, secretin (DAN! treatment that has already been disproved by double-blind tests), homeopathy or no alternative treatment at all. You can honestly not base their manners on what biomed treatments they have received.
The marketting of unproven biomed treatments for autism is just too ruthless, the families with autism is a very vulnerable group and shouldn't be taken advantage of like that.
this is some what very true. as children mature, they all progress on their own bases and time frames. one can not determine that one single thing affected that. it could had been a combination of treatments- maturing- a child just 'clicking' at their own time (as my son did) I met a parent whose child had no major intervention, and at age 14 he started to talk as if he always had. but off course, he still had autism.
the marketing also is a big issue, and there are many things out there that attempt to take advantage of parents. this should be a fact all parents run into and hardly arguable.
Dogen3

Indianapolis, IN

#68 Oct 3, 2007
friend wrote:
<quoted text>
almost all sites are one sides and offer their own view points and opinions. DAN sites are that way, for or against vaccine sites are that way, and so on. none of these sites should be excluded no matter what their views are. some of the sites quackwatch lists as not good research sites, I myself can direct a person to out right lies and how they mislead parents with non truth.
there are many people and sites that disagree with treatment options and make their points about them, all parents should see both sides. this site offers their experience nd another side.
Looking for a balance of views is good and I would never suggest censorship of websites. That said I don't go to aryannation.com for information or to quackwatch. Neither claims to be balanced. But this IS why I spend an inordinate amount of time reading research. If you know how to read research it is hard to hide the truth. I have at least a couple of thousand hard copies of published research article laying around my house or in boxes in my garage. This is how I can speak with a certain amount of confidence about what the research says..... not just about what the public spin in the lay press is (which is frequently extreemly misleading).

Sites with onesided opinions (including some DAN sites) do not personally interest me, even when I agree with the opinions. Most of the banter on BOTH sides of autism opinion is largely banter. DAN has proposed a mechanism for the disorder and treatment based on that mechanism. They have a researchable theory BUT not enough research to draw any certain conclusions.

Recently there have been news stories about Glutathione mechanisms and gut brain connections by institustions that have no relationship with DAN. Of course this is 20 years behind DAN but at least it gives the opportunity to put parts of that theory to the test. Research is where useful truth come from. Not from opinions.... yours, mine or Stephen Barrett's.
Dogen3

Indianapolis, IN

#69 Oct 3, 2007
friend wrote:
<quoted text>
as children mature, they all progress on their own bases and time frames. one can not determine that one single thing affected that. it could had been a combination of treatments- maturing- a child just 'clicking' at their own time
All very true. But also why anecdotal information is not really useful. Studies can account for multiple variables, our personal stories (however well intentioned) cannot.
Ivar

Brønnøysund, Norway

#70 Oct 3, 2007
Studies can also be unreliable, therefore I'm more interested in the historical facts. Exactly where did an alternative theory and/or treatment come from?

A theory can sound logical, references can be impressive, laboratory people might find exactly what people want to hear, it is easy to get fooled, and you have maybe not read this first hit I got by google when searching secretin+double-blind:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez...

... I first heard that secretin has gone through a double-blind test through:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch...
Dogen3

Indianapolis, IN

#71 Oct 3, 2007
Ivar wrote:
Studies can also be unreliable, therefore I'm more interested in the historical facts. Exactly where did an alternative theory and/or treatment come from?
A theory can sound logical, references can be impressive, laboratory people might find exactly what people want to hear, it is easy to get fooled, and you have maybe not read this first hit I got by google when searching secretin+double-blind:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez...
... I first heard that secretin has gone through a double-blind test through:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch...
Studies are not unreliable as they are subject to peer review. Any problems with the study comes out quickly.

That said, secretin does nothing for Autism. Several studies were done, but this one was the killer. The older one you quote had some issues (but seems to have got the correct conclusion). I don't know any DAN Doc's that are still using secretin, though I am sure some are. When searching the DAN site references to secretin are mostly dated 1999 and before.

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/medline/pmid;1603...

Sometimes there are some good interviews on YouTube. YouTube appeals to emotion may be entertaining but are not science.
Ivar

Stavanger, Norway

#72 Oct 4, 2007
Doing something with autism and helping autistic individuals is not necessarily the same thing.

I havewn't looked much into these studies, but it seems like it is mainly that french lab and Great Plains lab who do the tests. Even though there are higher mercury levels from some individuals with autism, it doesn't mean that such a complex theory as mercury being a contributing factor to autism being true.
Dogen3

Fishers, IN

#73 Oct 4, 2007
Nearly any lab in the U.S. can check for urine Hg levels. Most Doctors use local labs in their practice. Researchers, who need a lot of specific data and usually multiple tests run are going to contract with a lab known for producing research quality data.

As a fact, I don't know that mercury actually is a contributing factor in autism or not. I only know that it has NOT been conclusively disproven. High mercury levels could be as much an EFFECT of autism (not being able to remove it as effectively) as a cause (trigger).
Anthon

Baltic, CT

#74 Nov 28, 2007
Do you know which medical orgs criticise Quackwatch?
Marc Rosen

Oakdale, NY

#75 Nov 28, 2007
As an autistic adult, I must protest the use of ANY SSRI or antidepressant in minors. It's already proven that doing so will cause severe depression and suicidality. I've already had enough years of therapy and suicide attempts thanks to those damn pills, and I'll be damned before I stand idly by and watch other kids suffer like I did not too long ago!
MAJOR Mal

Australia

#76 Nov 28, 2007
"They should accept them as they are."

If a child has a toxic overload, healthcare professionals should also accept them as they are.

But many don't.
Denise Price

Nashville, TN

#77 Jan 11, 2008
I HAVE A SON WITH AUTISM,AND PROZAC MADE HIM WORSE.I WAS USING IT FOR HIS ANXIETY.AFTER TWO WEEKS HE STARTED TO HAVE AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIORS.HURTING HIMSELF AND OTHER.

GOD BLESS OUR CHILDREN

“God loves to heal people”

Since: Nov 07

Oxford, UK

#78 Jan 11, 2008
Denise Price wrote:
I HAVE A SON WITH AUTISM,AND PROZAC MADE HIM WORSE.I WAS USING IT FOR HIS ANXIETY.AFTER TWO WEEKS HE STARTED TO HAVE AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIORS.HURTING HIMSELF AND OTHER.
GOD BLESS OUR CHILDREN
Prozac does zero for autistic children. Look at the side effects warnings which are printed on the leaflet. Prozac causes depression. It's a bad drug and should be banned.
ben

Christchurch, New Zealand

#82 Nov 25, 2011
Ridiculous! Seems SSRIs are touted as a panacea for all incurable ills based on little or no meaningful research. It is frankly disgusting how modern SSRIs are used off label in areas that were never approved. The same goes for anti-psychotics in depression.
It seems now that any ailment that does not have a cure, can be dubiously linked to a lack of serotonin.
Any research is likely to have large bias as it is almost certain it would have been paid for by Big Pharma.

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#83 Nov 25, 2011
It take you a while to locate this very old article?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Health Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Gay 'Conversion Therapy' Often Begins at Home, ... 2 hr Imprtnrd 1
News Chaney: Two Mississippi hospitals end Medicare ... 5 hr Elder Care 37
News Pregnancy Symptoms - 12 Very Early Symptoms of ... (Jun '07) 11 hr alexis sheilds 7,352
Exercise Thu Athena Chapman 1
News Cafeteria Employee At UK Hospital Diagnosed Wit... Wed Hal 3
Morgellons (Sep '17) Wed NNHHH 3
Buy Herbal Incense Online (Feb '14) Wed herbalguy 12