Re: Autism in Infants emerge during later years

February 16, 2010

The study didn't address the etiology nor causality....Interesting......Perhaps the symptoms keep getting worse as children keep getting more vaccines. But this study does not fit my son. His decline was instantaneously following his fifteen month shots with immediate loss of speech and eye contact, rag doll syndrome, staring spells. Then as the days went on he began toe-walking and OCD, SID, and APD added tot he list. We stopped further vaccination and finally found and saw Dr. Amy Holmes and instituted the beginnings of biomed when he was two. Then it slowly started to move uphill from there.

The only thing I will concede was there from birth was severe colic. We had trouble finding a formula he could tolerate once we started supplementing breast feedings. But again, the change in our son was IMMEDIATE, as if someone had flipped a switch. He talked on the morning of March 7, 2001. He pointed to his shoes and said, " Shoes; " it was his favorite word. He knew if we put on shoes we were either going outside to play or going somewhere, and he liked going places. After this day, no words for over three years, and he hated to go anywhere. I had thirty minutes to get the grocery shopping done or the meltdown would ensue.

How can anyone begin to address autism without addressing causality? There is NO family history of autism nor any other of these disorders (ADD, ADHD etc...) My sister has SEVEN healthy children, my brother has FIVE healthy children, My other brother has three healthy children. I know there has to be a reason that my son could not excrete the toxins in vaccines, but this is not his fault, and it is Machiavellian for the medical mainstream to say " Oh well... "

It cannot negate responsibility in a " civilized " society. If perhaps parents were informed before the act, i.e, " You need to know there is a subset of children who may not be able to excrete the toxins in vaccines, and these children may be biomedical and neurologically damaged by them. " Then they need to find a way to identify these child and NEVER vaccinate them. Instead they want to indiscriminately engage in infantile human experimentation and call this subset of children " acceptable losses. " And then they want to pat themselves on the back for " saving mankind. "

Psych will never want to " get it. " They are making too much money off of doping these kids.Just my opinion.Haven

February 16, 2010

So they're not suggesting here that there is no such thing as regressive autism,

are they? If so, they're full of it. I have video of my son from last March, at

17 months of age. He had PERFECT social skills, PERFECT eye contact. He had no

GI issues, no sleep issues. He had awesome receptive language skills and a

moderate speech delay (still wasn't talking, but was babbling). Two months

later, that little boy was gone. A month after that, the GI issues started, and

we've had mushy poop ever since. He still has no sleep issues.

I think it's good that they're trying to get practitioners to look at our

children earlier and earlier for signs of autism. I see how early detection is

often key with this awful disorder. But something about this just rubbed me the

wrong way. Maybe I'm just in a bad mood. It's been known to happen. LOL

>

> Â

>

> Nascent

> symptoms of autism in infants emerge during latter part of first year of

> life16. February 2010 01:52

>

> Condition is characterized by a slow decline rather than an abrupt loss

> of skills, study says

> A study of the development of autism in

> infants, comparing the behavior of the siblings of children diagnosed with

> autism

> to that of babies developing normally, has found that the nascent symptoms

> of the condition - a lack of shared eye contact, smiling and communicative

> babbling - are not present at 6 months, but emerge gradually and only

become

> apparent during the latter part of the first year of life.

> Researchers conducted the study over five years by painstakingly counting

> each instance of smiling, babbling and eye contact during examinations

until

> the children were 3. They found that by 12 months the two groups'

> development had diverged significantly. Intentional social and

communicative

> behavior among children developing normally increased while among infants

> later diagnosed with autism it

> decreased dramatically. The study is published online early and will

appear

> in the March issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Child &

> Adolescent Psychiatry.

> " This study provides an answer to when the first behavioral signs of

autism

> become evident, " said Sally Ozonoff, the study's lead author, a professor

of

> psychiatry and behavioral sciences and a researcher with the UC MIND

> Institute. " Contrary to what we used to think, the behavioral signs of

autism

> appear later in the first year of life for most children with autism.

> Most babies are born looking relatively normal in terms of their social

> abilities but then, through a process of gradual decline in social

> responsiveness, the symptoms of autism

> begin to emerge between 6 and 12 months of age. "

> Autism is

> a pervasive developmental disorder of deficits in social skills and

> communication, as well as in repetitive and restricted behaviors, with

onset

> occurring prior to age 3. Abnormal brain

> development, probably beginning prenatally, is known to be fundamental to

> the behaviors that characterize autism.

> Current estimates place the condition's incidence at between 1 in 100 and

1

> in 110 children in the United States.

> Children with a sibling already diagnosed with autism are

> known to be among those at greatest risk of developing the disorder. The

> current study included 25 high-risk children who met criteria for autism

at

> 3 years of age, matched with 25 low risk peers who were developing

normally.

> It was conducted at the MIND Institute and the University of California,

Los

> Angeles. The sole inclusion criterion for the high-risk group was having a

> sibling with autism;

> low-risk participants had to have been born after 36 weeks gestation and

> have no autistic family members.

> The children's development was evaluated at 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months

> of age using a series of widely implemented diagnostic tools, including

the

> Autism

> Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) and the Autism

> Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R). Examiners were not told which babies

> were at high- or low-risk when evaluating the participants' development.

> The researchers found that there were few discernable differences between

> the two groups at the outset but that after six months, 86 percent of the

> infants who developed autism

> showed declines in social communication that were outside the range for

> typical development. " After six months, " the study found, " the autism

> spectrum disorder group showed a rapid decline in eye contact, social

> smiling, and examiner-rated social responsiveness. " Group differences

> were significant by 12 months in eye contact and social smiling and all

> other measures by 18 months, the study found.

> The study is notable because of the accuracy and precision of its

> prospective methodology, assiduously recording exact numbers of social and

> communicative behaviors during lab visits. Previously, researchers have

> constructed evidence of autism's

> earliest manifestations by interviewing parents about when they believed

> their children's symptoms first arose or by reviewing home movies for

clues

> to when children begin exhibiting symptoms of autism.

> " Until now, research has relied on asking parents when their child

> reached developmental milestones. But that can be really difficult to

> recall, and there is a phenomenon called the " telescoping effect " where

> people usually say that they remember something happening more recently

than

> when it occurred, " Ozonoff said. In addition parents frequently will turn

> off the video camera when their children are behaving poorly - precisely

> when autistic symptoms may appear.

> Ozonoff said that the study provides a deeper understanding for parents,

> caregivers and health-care providers and for future research of the

> developmental trajectory for very young children with autism.

> " We need to be careful about how we screen, and we need to know what

> we're looking for, " Ozonoff said. " This study tells us that screening for

autism

> early in the first year of life probably is not going to be successful

> because there isn't going to be anything to notice. It also tells us that

we

> should be focusing on social behaviors in our screening, since that is

what

> declines early in life. "

> " This study also found that the loss of skills continues into the second

> and third year of life, " she said. " So it may not be adequate, as the

> American Academy of Pediatrics currently suggests, that providers screen

for

> autism

> twice before the end of the second year. Autism has

> a slow, gradual onset of symptoms, rather than a very abrupt loss of

> skills. "

> " Screening may need to continue into the third year of life, since

> symptom emergence takes place over a long time. If a child starts

exhibiting

> a declining trajectory and a sustained reduction in social communication

we

> want to refer them into therapy, especially if they are at risk, " Ozonoff

> said, " even before we might be able to make a definitive diagnosis. "

> Ozonoff said that the study does not address the etiology of autism or

> causality. In this study, the infants who participated were at high risk

due

> to having strong family histories of autism,

> suggesting that genetics

> play a major role in the later autism

> diagnoses, despite the fact that their symptoms were not apparent at

> birth.

> Source: University of California

> - - Health System

>

February 16, 2010

ï»¿

and Hilda,

I read your email but not the original post. My son is 12, non-verbal, behavioral, issues, learning issues...etc but some of the things he is doing now , I would never have imagined he would ...so I would never give up on him. I still imagine him going to college, getting a job, getting married, having kids, living independently a full life.

I am not trying to be in denial. He would not do all of the above now, but who knows, he may over come all that at some point...so have faith and hope, be patient and persevere.

I hope I am not sounding preachy...I just want you guys to never give up... have hope...Things always change..

Re: Autism in Infants emerge during later years

Hi Hilda-My son is 11 and non-verbal with lots of behavior issues! (and still in pull-ups!) Like your son, he will never live independently either and he has always had sleep issues and messy poop- still does! He's been on Clonidine and Klonopin for sleep since he was about 3. He never ever slept through the night until I got meds from our Neurologist for him. I also have 2 others on the spectrum- my younger two are higher functioning. The only difference is my oldest got all his immunizations. I know what you mean- a cure would be nice, huh? And soon!

Nascent symptoms of autism in infants emerge during latter part of first year of life16. February 2010 01:52

Condition is characterized by a slow decline rather than an abrupt loss of skills, study says

A study of the development of autism in infants, comparing the behavior of the siblings of children diagnosed with autism to that of babies developing normally, has found that the nascent symptoms of the condition - a lack of shared eye contact, smiling and communicative babbling - are not present at 6 months, but emerge gradually and only become apparent during the latter part of the first year of life.

Researchers conducted the study over five years by painstakingly counting each instance of smiling, babbling and eye contact during examinations until the children were 3. They found that by 12 months the two groups' development had diverged significantly. Intentional social and communicative behavior among children developing normally increased while among infants later diagnosed with autism it decreased dramatically. The study is published online early and will appear in the March issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry.

"This study provides an answer to when the first behavioral signs of autism become evident," said Sally Ozonoff, the study's lead author, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and a researcher with the UC MIND Institute. "Contrary to what we used to think, the behavioral signs of autism appear later in the first year of life for most children with autism. Most babies are born looking relatively normal in terms of their social abilities but then, through a process of gradual decline in social responsiveness, the symptoms of autism begin to emerge between 6 and 12 months of age."

Autism is a pervasive developmental disorder of deficits in social skills and communication, as well as in repetitive and restricted behaviors, with onset occurring prior to age 3. Abnormal brain development, probably beginning prenatally, is known to be fundamental to the behaviors that characterize autism. Current estimates place the condition's incidence at between 1 in 100 and 1 in 110 children in the United States.

Children with a sibling already diagnosed with autism are known to be among those at greatest risk of developing the disorder. The current study included 25 high-risk children who met criteria for autism at 3 years of age, matched with 25 low risk peers who were developing normally. It was conducted at the MIND Institute and the University of California, Los Angeles. The sole inclusion criterion for the high-risk group was having a sibling with autism; low-risk participants had to have been born after 36 weeks gestation and have no autistic family members.

The children's development was evaluated at 6, 12, 18, 24 and 36 months of age using a series of widely implemented diagnostic tools, including the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) and the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R). Examiners were not told which babies were at high- or low-risk when evaluating the participants' development.

The researchers found that there were few discernable differences between the two groups at the outset but that after six months, 86 percent of the infants who developed autism showed declines in social communication that were outside the range for typical development. "After six months," the study found, "the autism spectrum disorder group showed a rapid decline in eye contact, social smiling, and examiner-rated social responsiveness. " Group differences were significant by 12 months in eye contact and social smiling and all other measures by 18 months, the study found.

The study is notable because of the accuracy and precision of its prospective methodology, assiduously recording exact numbers of social and communicative behaviors during lab visits. Previously, researchers have constructed evidence of autism's earliest manifestations by interviewing parents about when they believed their children's symptoms first arose or by reviewing home movies for clues to when children begin exhibiting symptoms of autism.

"Until now, research has relied on asking parents when their child reached developmental milestones. But that can be really difficult to recall, and there is a phenomenon called the "telescoping effect" where people usually say that they remember something happening more recently than when it occurred," Ozonoff said. In addition parents frequently will turn off the video camera when their children are behaving poorly - precisely when autistic symptoms may appear.

Ozonoff said that the study provides a deeper understanding for parents, caregivers and health-care providers and for future research of the developmental trajectory for very young children with autism.

"We need to be careful about how we screen, and we need to know what we're looking for," Ozonoff said. "This study tells us that screening for autism early in the first year of life probably is not going to be successful because there isn't going to be anything to notice. It also tells us that we should be focusing on social behaviors in our screening, since that is what declines early in life."

"This study also found that the loss of skills continues into the second and third year of life," she said. "So it may not be adequate, as the American Academy of Pediatrics currently suggests, that providers screen for autism twice before the end of the second year. Autism has a slow, gradual onset of symptoms, rather than a very abrupt loss of skills."

"Screening may need to continue into the third year of life, since symptom emergence takes place over a long time. If a child starts exhibiting a declining trajectory and a sustained reduction in social communication we want to refer them into therapy, especially if they are at risk," Ozonoff said, "even before we might be able to make a definitive diagnosis."

Ozonoff said that the study does not address the etiology of autism or causality. In this study, the infants who participated were at high risk due to having strong family histories of autism, suggesting that genetics play a major role in the later autism diagnoses, despite the fact that their symptoms were not apparent at birth.

Source: University of California - - Health System

February 16, 2010

Haven, I just want to reach through the screen and smooch you right now. LOL

>

> The study didn't address the etiology nor

> causality....Interesting......Perhaps the symptoms keep getting worse as

> children keep getting more vaccines. But this study does not fit my son.

> His decline was instantaneously following his fifteen month shots with

> immediate loss of speech and eye contact, rag doll syndrome, staring

> spells. Then as the days went on he began toe-walking and OCD, SID, and APD

> added tot he list. We stopped further vaccination and finally found and saw

> Dr. Amy Holmes and instituted the beginnings of biomed when he was two.

> Then it slowly started to move uphill from there.

>

> The only thing I will concede was there from birth was severe colic. We had

> trouble finding a formula he could tolerate once we started supplementing

> breast feedings. But again, the change in our son was IMMEDIATE, as if

> someone had flipped a switch. He talked on the morning of March 7, 2001.

> He pointed to his shoes and said, " Shoes; " it was his favorite word. He

> knew if we put on shoes we were either going outside to play or going

> somewhere, and he liked going places. After this day, no words for over

> three years, and he hated to go anywhere. I had thirty minutes to get the

> grocery shopping done or the meltdown would ensue.

>

> How can anyone begin to address autism without addressing causality? There

> is NO family history of autism nor any other of these disorders (ADD, ADHD

> etc...) My sister has SEVEN healthy children, my brother has FIVE healthy

> children, My other brother has three healthy children. I know there has to

> be a reason that my son could not excrete the toxins in vaccines, but this

> is not his fault, and it is Machiavellian for the medical mainstream to say

> " Oh well... "

> It cannot negate responsibility in a " civilized " society.

>

> If perhaps parents were informed before the act, i.e, " You need to know

> there is a subset of children who may not be able to excrete the toxins in

> vaccines, and these children may be biomedical and neurologically damaged by

> them. " Then they need to find a way to identify these child and NEVER

> vaccinate them. Instead they want to indiscriminately engage in infantile

> human experimentation and call this subset of children " acceptable losses. "

> And then they want to pat themselves on the back for " saving mankind. "

>

> Psych will never want to " get it. " They are making too much money off of

> doping these kids.

>

> Just my opinion.

>

> Haven

>

February 16, 2010

ï»¿

Hi Hilda. I think you are aware that my son has a rarely diagnosed genetic condition affecting the SHANK3 gene, which is one of the genetic causes of autism. In ' case, as in most cases, it's a spontaneous mutation, not something which is inherited.

Anyway, amazing things are happening in research related to SHANK3. I don't want to be overly optimistic and say there will be a cure for anytime soon, but I have talked to several researchers who are very hopeful about developing therapeutic treatments. SHANK3 is an important gene, because of its role in synpatic structure and function. Some researchers believe it is a turnkey protein for understanding how synapses work, and it will hold the answer to understanding many other forms of autism, even in people who do not specifically have mutations of SHANK3. The answer probably won't be gene manipulation or stem cells, but in finding a drug that acts upon the molecular pathway in the proper fashion.

We are in a new era where expectations about treating genetic conditions is changing. There are whole new approaches to studying diseases (translational science) and new tools (high throughput technology) that did not even exist a few years ago. This offers the hope of a real cure for many people - not just the treatment of some of the symptoms, but the correction of the underlying pathogenic mechanism.

I would definitely encourage anyone whose child has autism to have a micro-array test, which looks for chunks of missing genetic information. If the micro-array comes back without any unusual findings, I would suggest a sequencing test, which looks for tiny "spelling errors" that a micro-array would not pick up. Sequencing is NOT being done routinely in clinical settings, but it is possible to have it done by participating in a research study.

And, if any of you have children who have been diagnosed with deletions or mutations of any synaptic gene associated with autism (neuroligin, neurexin, STX-BP1, Homer, SHANK3, etc.) please let me know. I want to start a consortium of synaptic syndromes, so we can try to accelerate some of the research.

Geraldine

Re: Autism in Infants emerge during later years

There is something to notice that first year that docs still miss - sleep issues and GI problems are there but they are not including those as things to look for... It's not ALL just development with these kids. Why are the Pysch people still not getting it??? Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 16, 2010, at 7:51 PM, <mmoyersatx (DOT) rr.com> wrote: