Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Is the prevalence of difficult child new or just diagnosed more?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marguerite" data-source="post: 234123" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>Our doctors in Australia (notably at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Sydney) say they find that diet helps about 30&#37; of people with an autism diagnosis. They are a reputable research group (unlike others I've known) so I do trust their work's accuracy.</p><p></p><p>That isn't to say that dietary sensitivities CAUSES autism; just that for some people, modifying the diet can make it easier for them to manage some symptoms. Also, for some people there can be a correlation (not necessarily a causative one) that gives a link between autism and other dietary problems. Sometimes the anxiety often associated with autism can lead to GI tract problems related to gastric hypersecretion, for example.</p><p></p><p>The mercury debate still goes on and probably will for some time. It is part of human nature to want something to blame. The mother I mentioned in my earlier post is convinced that her daughter's problems have been either caused or made worse by immuisation. When she told me the story, I can understand why - the child already had a history of seizures and should never have been immunised. The problem in this case, though, is more likely to be simply trying to trigger an immune response in a vulnerable child with already-compromised health, rather than a blanket problem with preservatives in immunisations.</p><p></p><p>This thread isn't (shouldn't be) about whether or not immunisations are good or bad, at fault or not. However, there are some very contentious issues being raised and we have to respect that the need to lay blame somewhere is a factor in how heated the topic can get.</p><p></p><p>It does seem, looking back over all the responses, that views are mixed on this. Certainly there does seem to be a perception that there are more problem kids than in past generations. Whether this is actually borne out in numbers or not, would take a detailed epidemiological study. And if is, why? It could be more awareness, it could be better description or broader diagnostic criteria, it could be better health standards in our respective countries with an increased involvement of the various education systems, in diagnosing children who in past generations would simply have been labelled as"bad" or "retarded".</p><p></p><p>There may be other factors, we can all guess this or claim that, but until someone does the spadework and actually applies measurements, all we can do is discuss.</p><p></p><p>Mind you, discussion is always worthwhile, because without it, the studies never would get done.</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 234123, member: 1991"] Our doctors in Australia (notably at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Sydney) say they find that diet helps about 30% of people with an autism diagnosis. They are a reputable research group (unlike others I've known) so I do trust their work's accuracy. That isn't to say that dietary sensitivities CAUSES autism; just that for some people, modifying the diet can make it easier for them to manage some symptoms. Also, for some people there can be a correlation (not necessarily a causative one) that gives a link between autism and other dietary problems. Sometimes the anxiety often associated with autism can lead to GI tract problems related to gastric hypersecretion, for example. The mercury debate still goes on and probably will for some time. It is part of human nature to want something to blame. The mother I mentioned in my earlier post is convinced that her daughter's problems have been either caused or made worse by immuisation. When she told me the story, I can understand why - the child already had a history of seizures and should never have been immunised. The problem in this case, though, is more likely to be simply trying to trigger an immune response in a vulnerable child with already-compromised health, rather than a blanket problem with preservatives in immunisations. This thread isn't (shouldn't be) about whether or not immunisations are good or bad, at fault or not. However, there are some very contentious issues being raised and we have to respect that the need to lay blame somewhere is a factor in how heated the topic can get. It does seem, looking back over all the responses, that views are mixed on this. Certainly there does seem to be a perception that there are more problem kids than in past generations. Whether this is actually borne out in numbers or not, would take a detailed epidemiological study. And if is, why? It could be more awareness, it could be better description or broader diagnostic criteria, it could be better health standards in our respective countries with an increased involvement of the various education systems, in diagnosing children who in past generations would simply have been labelled as"bad" or "retarded". There may be other factors, we can all guess this or claim that, but until someone does the spadework and actually applies measurements, all we can do is discuss. Mind you, discussion is always worthwhile, because without it, the studies never would get done. Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Is the prevalence of difficult child new or just diagnosed more?
Top