Comments on: Paul Offit on Hannah Poling and the VICP

By: Autism, Representation, and the Case of Hannah Poling

Autism, Representation, and the Case of Hannah Poling — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 04:39:38 +0000

[...] New England Journal of Medicine by Dr. Jon Poling, the father of Hannah Poling, in response to a May NEJM article by Dr. Paul Offit in which he revisits the case of Hannah Poling. Dr. Poling being the father of [...]

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:53:38 +0000

Despite the high frequency of mitochondrial dysfunction in autistic children [but see this post on the subpopulation of mitochondrial autism] studies have not established primary or secondary roles."

By: Regressive Autism and a Test for Babies

Regressive Autism and a Test for Babies — Fri, 16 May 2008 06:13:23 +0000

[...] we can put aside the issue of autism and vaccines for the moment (or to another post, like this one): It seems that defining and arguing for the specificity of “regressive autism” and of [...]

By: Annie

Annie — Thu, 15 May 2008 20:37:35 +0000

Kristina, may I hope the results of your contemplations turn into a post for further discussion? Your writings and the comments they attract have become a favorite online destination for me.

By: Annie

Annie — Thu, 15 May 2008 20:26:11 +0000

Regan,
I appreciate your perspective as I try to sort out this whole autistic-symptoms distinction. I’m obviously no neurologist myself…

As I mentioned in my first comment, my child’s diagnosis doesn’t fit the exclusionary pattern. We have the one diagnosis from the neurologist (linear nevus sebaceous syndrome) who then sent us to the developmental pediatrician who quite adamantly added the autism diagnosis, knowing full well we had this LNSS diagnosis under our belts already.

So when I hear the distinction between autistic-like symptoms and autism, it makes me wonder where kids like mine with a dual diagnosis will eventually fit into the autism discussion, the autism community, the range of services available for people with an autism diagnosis, etc.

Thanks for the conversation!

By: Regan

Regan — Thu, 15 May 2008 19:47:48 +0000

Annie,
I’m not a neurologist, but in the case of my daughter, that is exactly what it is; a set of diagnostic criteria based on observed behavior which were not able to be attributed to a particular medical cause or association. If she had met fewer criteria on the list, the diagnosis might have been PDD-NOS. The other things that I mentioned were excluded after screening.
To me “autism” is a weird diagnosis because it has been subject to changes in criteria (various DSM revisions, ICD-10 and educational categories) and observationally is able to be applied to children with divergent manifestations, as we experienced in her “autism” classroom.
If I knew a specific “cause”, I might think, and it could be well assessed that Eleanor had autistic behaviors but her underlying and predominant diagnosis might be PKU or tuberous sclerosis, etc.
Just how I see it.

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Thu, 15 May 2008 19:39:21 +0000

@Annie, I’m still contemplating your questions—”Doesn’t the collection of “something-elses” eventually BECOME the understanding of autism causation?”—–was reading Augustine earlier today, Book 3, whose general theme is how one can be so full of oneself thinking that one knows, and now know, at all.

By: Annie

Annie — Thu, 15 May 2008 19:22:47 +0000

@Sullivan — good clarification about “before age 3″. Also there’s the specific exclusion of Rett. I too would like to hear your thoughts on the big can of worms…

@Regan — thanks for your response. With the exception of Rett (which is accounted for in the DSM), though, I still don’t quite understand why one couldn’t have any of those other disorders and autism too, if indeed autism is a defined collection of symptoms that present before age 3. Does a diagnosis of autism really mean “a certain collection of autistic features presenting before age 3 whose cause we don’t know”?

I’m reminded of the quote (from Augustine maybe?): “If you think you understand, it isn’t God.”
How about this cynical recasting: “If you think you know the cause, it isn’t autism.” !!!

By: Joseph

Joseph — Thu, 15 May 2008 18:12:33 +0000

We know she suffered repeated bouts of infections and fevers, but did not regress until the vaccines. Clearly, just having infections and fevers were not sufficient to make this child regress. What has been observed clearly, clearly does not match with the thrust of the message. That is poor reasoning.

I disagree, and I apologize, but believe it is your reasoning that is poor, pD. I don’t think anyone is suggesting that infections guarantee regression in mitochondrial dysfunction. Did anyone say this? I must have missed it.

So is it remarkable that infections did not trigger Hannah’s regression? I don’t see why.

Is there evidence that vaccination triggered Hannah’s regression? Yes, there’s some circumstantial evidence. Is it a proven mechanism? No.

By: Laura

Laura — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:19:33 +0000

is there anyone who isn’t receiving big pharma money? The government receives money from big pharma via campaign and soft money donations, American Association of Pediatrics receives donations, and, here, eloquent and knowledgeable doctors like Offit are paid as “advisors” to big pharma.

I find Offit’s arguments compelling, but it would be nice if he were disinterested. Ditto for American Society of Pediatrics.