Imagine being the parent of a young child who is not acting normally and being told by your doctor that your child has autism, that there is no known cause, and there is no known treatment except, perhaps, some behavioral therapy. That is exactly what Jackson's parents were told as their 22-month-old son regressed into the non-verbal psychic prison of social withdrawal, disconnection, and repetitive behaviors typical of autism.
While we don't have all the answers, and more research is needed to identify and validate the causes and treatment of autism, there are new signs of hope. A study just published in The Journal of the American Medical Association by researchers from the University of California, Davis called "Mitochondrial Dysfunction in Autism" (i) discovered a profound and serious biological underpinning of autism -- an acquired loss of the ability to produce energy in the cells, damage to mitochondria (the energy factories in your cells), and an increase in oxidative stress (the same chemical reaction that causes cars to rust, apples to turn brown, fat to become rancid, and skin to wrinkle). These disturbances in energy metabolism were not due to genetic mutations, which is often seen in mitochondrial problems, but a condition the children studied acquired in utero or after birth.
Bottom line, if brain cells cannot produce enough energy, and there is too much oxidative stress, then neurons don't fire, connections aren't made and the lights don't go on for these children. In fact, this problem of energy loss is found in most chronic disease and aging -- from diabetes to heart disease to dementia. Brain function and neurodevelopment in particular are highly dependent on energy.
This is exactly the problem, I documented and found in Jackson when I first saw him. He had a profound loss of energy in his cells (particularly his brain cells), and indicators of severe oxidative stress. This is the same problem many other researchers have found in similar studies. (ii) Despite the evidence, most physicians don't test for mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress or other myriad factors commonly found in autistic children.
Let's look more closely at what this new study in The Journal of the American Medical Association tells us about mitochondrial dysfunction, and how this may lead us to new methods of treatment -- methods similar to the ones I used to help reverse Jackson's autism.
Autism: Brain Disorder or Body-Based Biological Illness?
The big debate (iii) that ranges in autism circles is about whether or not autism is a fixed, irreversible brain-based genetic disorder, or a systemic, reversible body-based biological condition that has identifiable causes, measurable abnormalities, and treatable dysfunctions. In other words is autism a life sentence or a reversible condition?
Many studies have illuminated the causes and possible treatments for autism, but mainstream physicians or scientists ignore most of this data. This new study, breaks new ground because it was published in one of the world's major medical journals.
In it researchers from UC Davis examined children two to five years of age from the Childhood Autism Risk From Genes and Environment (CHARGE) study in California -- a population-based, case-control investigation with confirmed autism cases and age-matched, genetically unrelated, typically developing controls, that was launched in 2003 and is still ongoing. What they discovered was the aforementioned mitochondrial dysfunction that lead to problems with energy. Interestingly, these abnormalities were not found in neurons on a brain biopsy but from examining white blood cells called lymphocytes. This means the energy deficit was a systemic problem -- not one residing solely in the brain.
This study forces the question: How do children acquire energy deficits that affect their whole system, not just the brain?
The causes of mitochondrial dysfunction are well known, specifically as it relates to metabolism and the brain, and I have documented them in my books "UtraMetabolism" and "The UltraMind Solution." They include environmental toxins (iv) -- mercury, lead and persistent organic pollutants(v) -- latent infections, gluten and allergens (which trigger inflammation) sugar and processed foods,(vi) a nutrient-depleted diet(vii) and nutritional deficiencies.(viii) These are all potentially treatable and reversible causes of mitochondrial dysfunction that have been clearly documented.
I found all these problems in Jackson, and over a period of two years we slowly unraveled and treated the underlying causes of his energy loss which included gut inflammation, mercury, and nutrient deficiencies. Over time, the tests for his mitochondrial function and oxidative stress (as well as levels of inflammation and nutrient status) all normalized. When they became normal, so did Jackson. He went from full-blown regressive autism to a normal, bright beautiful six-year-old boy.
What it Means if Autism Can be Reversed
This is just one story, but if autism can be reversed in one child, if there is any possibility of effective treatments or a potential cure, it forces us to ask critical questions: How did this happen? Can it happen in other children? What were the biological patterns found and how were they treated?
The emotional and financial costs of autism for families and societies is staggering. Now one in five -- or 20 percent -- of children have some neurodevelopmental disorder. How can we sidestep our scientific and moral obligation and sit back and accept the limited resources allocated by the National Institutes of Health ($5.1 billion for cancer, but only $141 million for autism) and society as a whole.
Most neurodevelopmental disorders have common roots. But looking at only one aspect of such conditions will not solve the problem of autism. Current autism research is based on an outdated approach -- one that is something like blind men examining the proverbial elephant. Each researcher works in his or her own silo examining different factors and coming to different conclusions. Research that integrates, synthesizes and examines all the data on causes and potential treatments is practically non-existent.
The mitochondrial dysfunction identified in the JAMA study I've been talking about is ultimately only one downstream symptom of many upstream causes. Other researchers have found systemic inflammation,(ix) brain inflammation,(x) gut inflammation,(xi) elevated levels of toxins and metals, gluten and casein antibodies,(xii) nutrient deficiencies including omega-3 fats,(xiii) vitamin D,(xiv) zinc, and magnesium, and collections of metabolic dysfunction related to quirky genes that make it difficult to perform chemical reactions essential for health in the body such as methylation and sulfation.(xv)
The take home message here is that the answer to autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders will not be found in one of these factors, but in all of them taken together in varying degrees in each individual. There is no such thing as "autism." Rather there are "autisms" -- different patterns of biological dysfunction unique to each child that result in multiple insults to the brain that all manifest with symptoms we call autism.
Future research must synthesize current data and design relevant whole systems research studies that don't focus on a single factor, but examine all the factors together. Then we must apply these findings in a comprehensive fashion, as is being done by many practitioners today who work in parallel -- rather than in collaboration with -- conventional approaches and often achieve remarkable results.
To close, I'd like to share Jackson's story, as told by his father. I have documented this case report in a peer reviewed published paper which you can read if you are interested in the details of the case.(xvi) It is called "Autism: Is it All in the Head?" and it can be found at http://drhyman.com.
But more important than my paper is Jackson's story and his beautiful smile.
WATCH:
What do you think about a comprehensive approach to autism treatment? Do you think autism is "all in the head" or a systemic disorder that can be reversed? Do you have an autism story to share yourself? Please leave your thoughts or your story by adding a comment below.
To your good health,
Mark Hyman, MD
References
(i) Giulivi, C., Zhang, Y.F., Omanska-Klusek, A., et al. 2010. Mitochondrial dysfunction in autism. JAMA. 304(21):2389-96.
(ii) Haas, R.H. 2010. Autism and mitochondrial disease. Dev Disabil Res Rev. 16(2):144-53.
(iii) Herbert, M. 2005. Autism: A brain disorder or a disorder that affects the brain. Clinical Neuropsychiatry 2(6): 354-379
(iv) Landrigan, P.J. 2010. What causes autism? Exploring the environmental contribution. Curr Opin Pediatr. 22(2): 219-25. Review.
(v) Kern, J.K., Geier, D.A., Adams, J.B., et al. 2010. Toxicity biomarkers in autism spectrum disorder: A blinded study of urinary porphyrins. Pediatr Int. Jul 4 Epub ahead of print.
(vi) Feillet-Coudray, C., Sutra, T., Fouret, G., et al. 2009. Oxidative stress in rats fed a high-fat high-sucrose diet and preventive effect of polyphenols: Involvement of mitochondrial and NAD(P)H oxidase systems. Free Radic Biol Med. 46(5): 624-32.
(vii) Dufault, R., Schnoll, R., Lukiw, W.J., et al. 2009. Mercury exposure, nutritional deficiencies, and metabolic disruptions may affect learning in children. Behav Brain Funct. 27(5): 44.
(viii) Ames, B.N. 2004. A role for supplements in optimizing health: the metabolic tune-up. Arch Biochem Biophys. 423(1): 227-34. Review.
(ix) Careaga, M., Van de Water, J., and P. Ashwood. 2010. Immune dysfunction in autism: a pathway to treatment. Neurotherapeutics. 7(3): 283-92. Review.
(x) Li X., Chauhan, A., Sheikh, A.M., Patil, S., et al. 2009. Elevated immune response in the brain of autistic patients. J Neuroimmunol. 207(1-2): 111-6. Jan 20 Epub ahead of print.
(xi) Ashwood, P., Anthony, A., Torrente, F., and A.J. Wakefield. 2004. Spontaneous mucosal lymphocyte cytokine profiles in children with autism and gastrointestinal symptoms: mucosal immune activation and reduced counter regulatory interleukin-10. J Clin Immunol. 24(6): 664-73.
(xii) Jyonouchi, H., Sun, S., and N. Itokazu. 2002. Innate immunity associated with inflammatory responses and cytokine production against common dietary proteins in patients with autism spectrum disorder. Neuropsychobiology. 46(2): 76-84.
(xiii) Bell, J.G., MacKinlay, E.E., Dick, J.R., et al. 2004. Essential fatty acids and phospholipase A2 in autistic spectrum disorders. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids. 71(4): 201-4.
(xiv) Cannell, J.J. 2008. Autism and vitamin D. Med Hypotheses. 70(4): 750-9.
(xv) James, S.J., Melnyk, S., Jernigan, S., et al. 2006. Metabolic endophenotype and related genotypes are associated with oxidative stress in children with autism. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 141B(8): 947-56.
(xvi) Hyman, M.A. 2008. Autism: is it all in the head? Altern Ther Health Med. 14(6): 12-5.
Mark Hyman, M.D. is a practicing physician, founder of The UltraWellness Center, a four-time New York Times bestselling author, and an international leader in the field of Functional Medicine. You can follow him on Twitter, connect with him on LinkedIn, watch his videos on YouTube, become a fan on Facebook, and subscribe to his newsletter.
Follow Mark Hyman, MD on Twitter: www.twitter.com/markhymanmd
Ralph James Savarese: The Silver Trumpet of Freedom
Dr. Harold Koplewicz: Why Are People So Divided When It Comes To Children's Mental Health?
Autism is Treatable : Autism Research Institute
Autism Research - Wiley Online Library
One child does not make a cure...
http://www.biblehealth.com/acne/skin-and-acne.html
A Few Impertinent questions about Autism, Freudianism and Materialism
http//30145.myauthorsite.com/
Can't say about Autism but after listening to you on your YouTube 'UltraWellness' channel
I certainly like your Functional Medicine approach. All of humanity can be better off with a holistic view of things.
Modern medicine is excellent at diagnosis.
Prevention, diet-nutrition and healthy life styles have been practiced by many Traditional Knowledge Systems around the world and I am glad you are incorporating those.
Count me as a fan... Thank you.
My son, 6 years old, has autism (unofficially diagnosed). The tests that you ran on "Sam", are these something that our pediatrician can do on our son? Or are these tests being done in a study somewhere? We have seen improvement with behavior and communication with all of therapies is has received, but I am a firm believer in nutrition and food affecting the body. He seems to have similiar issues as "Sam" as far as bowels and such. Please advise.
~
Merry Christmas everyone.
~
~
I posted this below, but wasn't sure if you would see it or not so I figured I would repost it here above in case you needed to discuss it futher so it would be easier.
I google searched your link and I believe I was able to find the link you were using for Landrigan's paper:
http://www.kedu.us/Ask%20the%20Doctor/Exploring%20the%20environmental%20contribution%20autism.pdf
Is that correct?
If so, that is most certainly not Landrigan's actual article, but a summary of his article. You are a very intelligent individual so surely you are aware that that is not the actual paper written by Landrigan, but a summary written by someone else.
In fact, the line you pulled as "conclusions" comes from the section titled "Key Points by Patrick Murphy". Perhaps you just made a mistake, but the fact that you put someone else's conclusions forward as Landrigan's will certainly make me question any future summaries you give of anyone's position, especially since such a conclusion doesn't actually fit with what Landrigan actually wrote. I would suggest in the future to actually read the source material than simply reading a summary of that source material.
Yes, that's fine.
"Is that correct?"
No, that is not the link I provided at the end of my posts over the last three days. I am a bit mystified why this is unclear to you. I carefully provided the link to you and even explained to you, twice, where I found the link and how you could access it as well. By the way, I always provide references for direct quotes from articles, studies, scientific papers, or from individuals (so that anyone can verify any quotes I provide for themselves). That said, the new link you cite above does appear to link to the same document that I found.
Of couse that is not the actual article by Philip Landrigan MD MSc, “What causes autism? Exploring the environmental contribution” published by Current Opinion in Pediatrics: April 2010, Volume 22, Issue 2, p 219–225.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20087185
http://journals.lww.com/co-pediatrics/Abstract/2010/04000/What_causes_autism__Exploring_the_environmental.17.aspx
I could not find a copy of the actual paper on line accessable by others except for the link that I found and then provided; which was www.kedu.us/.../ Exploring%20the%20environmental%20contribution%20autism.PDF
The review of the paper is titled from the top: “What causes autism? Exploring the environmental contribution.” Current Opinion in Pediatrics. January 16, 2010. Philip J Landrigan, MD. From the Department of Community and Preventive Medicine, Children's Environmental Health Center, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, USA.”
The sentence, “Most cases of autism are linked to environmental exposures to toxic chemicals” is located under the section of the review title “CONCLUSIONS.” There is no way I could know that this sentence is not contained in the actual paper by Landrigan.
So then it is correct. Why do you need a paragraph telling me that I'm not clear on what you are saying?
"I could not find a copy of the actual paper on line accessable by others except for the link that I found and then provided; which was www.kedu.u s/.../ Exploring% 20the%20en vironmenta l%20contri bution%20a utism.PDF"
But the link you provided is not the actual paper, but instead a summary of the paper, something that is certainly not clear within your writings up until now. My impression was certainly that you were quoting directly from the Current Opinion in Pediatrics paper, which turned out to not be the case.
"Now, while I obviously could tell this wasn't the actual paper, it certainly seemed to be an authentic academic summary of the actual paper."
Yet nowhere did you indicate such. It certainly appeared that you were implying that these were the words of Dr. Landrigan. As far as I can discern the summary was written by Patrick Murphy, who, by a google search appears to be a chiropractor (not exactly a vaccine expert or academic).
"And the link seemed to be from a reputable "edu" source."
edu is reputable when it is the last 3 digits of an http address. This server is www.kedu.us which is a Christian radio station.
I have noticed for some time that on some weekends there seems to be problems with the moderation process. Others have noticed this as well, and commented on it before (including Sheldon). I don't know why it happens (is moderation more automated on the weekend?). But, they need to address the problem.
Just so it won't get buried.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/hxwhite/no-link-found-between-vac_n_715090_61041516.html
3 months ago - toxins + genetics (epigenetic)
Again your enlightenment of expertise is old news.
The medical consensus in autism etiology has shifted significantly in the last 10-20 years. More another day.
Blaming the vaccines is like blaming the boogyman. It is honestly the same thing. Pls don't vaccinate and see, if your child has inherited the gene combination, he or she WILL be affected sooner or later, unless you put them in a bubble perhaps ( not a guarantee either). Other parents are paying the price in the forms of ALLLLLL kinds of other horrible chronic conditions and we all are paying the price by dying from or experiencing some horrible disease in our own life time.
If you cannot get this well known to every scientist fact about genes and environment, then there is about 200 yrs gap between the scientists and the ave joe of this country, and I am very sorry this is the case. Scientific education must be mandatory so such things won't happen in the future. This is a very sad understanding for me...this is truly sad.
I am glad someone here finally thanked modern medicine & scientists & acknowledged their great work. That's a breakthrough.
I think we ARE inheriting effects of past exposures, but the inheritance could actually be a greater body pollution burden couldn't it? Possibly an inheritance of pollutants that overexcite the immune system or part of the immune system? We are seeing increasing rates of autoimmunity, allergies, multiple chemical sensitivities. When such conditions are triggered in an infant, how does that affect their development?
If you spend any significant amount of time in a chat group that focuses on autism-biomedical issues, it becomes clear that immune dysfunction is either a very frequent co-morbid condition with autism or it is part of the pathology. When you talk with parents of children dealing with "lesser" conditions such as ADHD, and you learn that their child also has food intolerance, allergies... you begin to wonder how much the overall epidemic of developmental delay or disability among our children is simply a downstream effect of an increase in immune misprogramming.
On a simpler level, when you remove some of the offending foods, environmental allergies, etc. and your child's cognitive function improves you learn that this is not a static condition written in the genes.
My comment to Sara's post was removed. I said nothing that wasn't true so I conclude there may be an orchestrated effort on the opposing side flagging our comments as has become past practice. I have revised my comment, so, in hope fairness is in play, here it is;
The fraud behind many peer reviewed studies & journals has been exposed. That, coupled with the great number of child victims with neurological disorders where vaccines have been the catalyst makes evident & obvious what's going on. Yes, there are other toxins that equate in the mix delivered by air, food & water but vaccines are the biggest culprit. All the links in the world will not cover up the growing numbers of victims because of ignorance and/or greed behind vaccines. All the spin people use who are duped or those who represent those with vested interests will not be able to continue the cover up.
Anyone can do the proper research instead of buying the bull & they can begin by looking up, "Faked studies and paid doctors to put their names on them."
Also see;
"Proof That Vaccines Didn't Save Us"
http://genesgreenbook.com/content/proof-vaccines-didnt-save-us
These facts can be found coming from many credible sources & can't be denied any longer. It's time we used common sense & logic to stop this madness instead of parroting what we've been fed.
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/7/62/
http://www.jaacap.com/article/S0890-8567%2810%2900391-6/abstract
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajmg.b.31094/full
and the web is FULL of similar legitimate articles for those who care for real 'facts'.
I disagree. History is replete with examples where vaccines (needles!) were the cause of all sorts of issues, even back when smallpox vaccination became mandatory.
...but they certainly add a lot of fuel to the fire.
Is this again your attempt to:
"I have only been trying to bring some comfort or closure"
And many of us here have displayed a stronger grasp of the "scientific understanding" then you. Your expertise is hate filled and old, you have just become dull.
http://ezinearticles.com/?Corrupted-Research---Exposing-the-Peer-Review-Process&id=808798
My son was fine at age three because i had suspicions about vaccination - - I gave in to pressure from people like you and between 3 and 3 1/2 i allowed him to have the MMR and DTP/h - after which my talking, playful diplomat to be baby boy was a head banging, screamin, wordless and eye-contact-less ball of agonised terror; a year and a half later we have reversed the regression and he is slowly recovering. I know what I see and I have the science to back it - I do not need specious, corrupt review papers to back me up. 87% of science reviews of vaccines were unusable by you as they came down AGAINST vaccines - the bulk of which do not contain Thimerosal since 1997/8.
Love and Compassion
Toby
pls go through all the links I have provided and more.
You have asserted time and time again that ‘thimerosal was removed from most pediatric vaccines in the period between 2000 and 2003 [which is true], yet autism rates continue to rise.’ This proves that thimerosal is not the cause of autism.
OK. That’s fine. I’ll stipulate that the TCVs administered to ~40+ million infants from the date of birth up to the age of 18 months during the decade of 1990 to 2000 did not contribute to the cause of any cases of autism. I will stipulate that it is, say, PBDEs that are implicated as being the non-genetic causal agent involved in the etiology and pathogenesis of autism. Or, for that matter, any combination of widely-dispersed in the environment, toxic, xenobiotic chemicals and substances that are found on page 10 of this document. http://www.iceh.org/pdfs/LDDI/LDDIStatement.pdf
However, I am unclear about something. Do you believe that the prevalence of autism is rising or not? And I mean the “real” prevalence of autism, not just the observed or reported prevalence of autism.
I ask, because over the last two years you (and Dyson and Josephius) have repeatedly asserted that autism rates are not ‘really’ rising. This seems in conflict with the assertion you have frequently made that: autism rates are increasing, and thimerosal use in vaccines is decreasing, thus thimerosal can’t be the cause of autism.
In addition, your assertion that autism rates are not ‘really’ rising seems in conflict with the statement you have made several times that increasing maternal and paternal age causes autism. Well if that is true, then increasing maternal and paternal age is increasing the prevalence of autism.
In other words, how do you reconcile the assertion that increasing maternal and paternal age causes autism with the assertion that autism rates are not rising.
I ask this question sincerely.
That's not true. I have not said that at any time. I think the major (by far) contributor to the increase is related to changes in diagnostic criteria and diagnostic methodology, public awareness, and identification/treatment infrastructure. I do think there is a measurable increase in cases attributed to various factors, including the steady increase of parental age when children are born.
The evidence as to the magnitude of any such rise is unclear. I know you will quote the UC David MIND institute, but when one looks at all the data, much of the increase in prevalence is accounted for by other non-chemical mechanisms. That isn't to say that a real increase doesn't exist. The problem is that folks on your side of the argument, like HX, continue to assert that there is a dramatic rise in prevalence and that a large part of it is due to vaccines.
"This seems in conflict with the assertion you have frequently made that: autism rates are increasing, and thimerosal use in vaccines is decreasing, thus thimerosal can’t be the cause of autism. "
It isn't. Because there are non-environmental factors that contribute to the increase. Therefore, you can have an increase in the rate due to things like diagnostic substitution, increased awareness and suveillance, etc. But, if thimerosal was actually contributing to the disease itself, removing it should stabilize the rise, if it was a key factor in the increase in the first place.
1) Thank you for responding about your position on the issue of the prevalence of autism (sincerely). Although I rather strongly disagree with a few of your assumptions about my position on the topic, I appreciate your response (as always).
2) "The evidence as to the magnitude of any such rise is unclear."
I think there is significant evidence of a --real-- increase. Not simply an --observed-- increase due to “broadened diagnostic criteria,” “diagnostic substitution,” “increased awareness,” “better diagnosing” or some other hypothesis. However, you are correct, the exact percentage of the actual increase is not determined.
3) "I know you will quote the UC Davis MIND Institute."
I will quote a lot more medical scientists than those at the MIND Institute. More tomorrow.
4) In response to my statement that, "This seems in conflict with the assertion you have frequently made that: autism rates are increasing, and thimerosal use in vaccines is decreasing, thus thimerosal can’t be the cause of autism. "
You stated, "It isn't. Because there are non-environmental factors that contribute to the increase (things like diagnostic substitution, increased awareness and suveillance, etc.)"
But, you have stated before (correct me if I am wrong) that autism rates are static. Yet, you also have stated that increasing maternal and paternal age causes autism. If your assertion is true (and I agree that it is), then autism rates CAN increase. This contradicts your past assertions (and Orac's) that autism rates are static.