I am autistic and I have a university qualification in Autism.

Polly Wrongie Tommy DOES NOT SPEAK FOR ME.

Is she autistic? If the answer is NO, then she should shut up and allow AUTISTICS to speak for ourselves. We are quite able you know.

Just because I am autistic it does not mean I am not articulate and intelligent. Autism is NOT INTELLECTUAL impairement. I live and breathe the spectrum as do ALL my children…we KNOW what we want and we don’t want HER talking for us. Simple as.

All the work that the NAS did? Then she takes credit…

In MY opinion Polly Tommy is attention seeking, inappropriate, overwhelming and manipulative, possibly seeing this mission as a cash cow. Oops maybe she should look at DSM1V? Just a thought.

I have informed the PM of my thoughts as I am a person with Autism as they like to call us in academic papers.

Take a running jump Polly, go find another cause to champion and leave Autism to the AUTISTICS! Please

Keep up the good work Mike….Andrew Wakefield…phah, he calls himself a DOCTOR? As a member of the medical profession I am disgusted. Maybe he should check out DSM1V to, Oppositional Defiance Disorder is ringing a few bells …anyone else agree? Like I it is just my humble opinion, thank you for allowing me to voice it here.

you concur with Ms Tommey’s beliefs about autism and assert that she is positively affecting the lives of autistic children. Because I do not concur I challenge that assertion. Are the ideas espoused in the Autism File right or wrong. Where is the evidence? The testimonial of a business associate of Ms Tommey’s whose company contributes articles to the Autism File and profits from selling to people who read and believe the Autism File is not enough to change my mind.

You ask about food. I refer you to the recent report in Pediatrics One of the problems with getting clinicians to take GI problems seriously has been the association with unproven theories of autism to do with opioid excess or autistic enterocolitis that are promoted in the Autism File. The strength of this report is that it takes GI issues seriously while honestly appraising the evidence within the framework of mainstream science and medicine. It offers support for the position that medical problems in the autistic population should be treated with the same degree of care as in the neurotypical population. It is particularly good at warning clinicians that behavioural problems and sleep issues in non-verbal autistics may be a sign of medical problems and that these should be investigated thoroughly and not dismissed as behavioural manifestations of autism.

Here is its list of conclusions.

1. Individuals with ASDs whose families report gastrointestinal symptoms warrant a thorough gastrointestinal evaluation.

2. All of the common gastrointestinal conditions encountered by individuals with typical neurologic development are also present in individuals with ASDs.

3. The communication impairments characteristic of ASDs may lead to unusual presentations of gastrointestinal disorders, including sleep disturbances and problem behaviors.

4. Caregivers and health care professionals should be alert to the presentation of atypical signs of common gastrointestinal disorders in patients with ASDs.

5. If a person with an ASD is on a restricted diet, professional supervision can help to identify and treat nutritional inadequacy.

6. Integrating behavioral and biomedical approaches can be advantageous in conceptualizing the role of pain as a setting event for problem behavior, facilitating diagnosis, and addressing residual pain symptoms to enhance quality of life.

7. Genetic assays should be included as part of the data to be collected in research protocols.

8. At present, there are inadequate data to establish a causal role for intestinal inflammation, increased intestinal permeability, immunologic abnormalities, or food allergies in ASDs.

You were so far off base that it was difficult to work out what you thought you were getting at.

Funnily enough, you’ve actually done it again, although I was expecting yet another high volume low content response. Nothing else is clear. That was the point.

Stop expecting people to take you as correct without evidence. Do not demand that we do not question your assertions. You are as fallible as the rest of us. To demand that you be beyond question is sheer arrogance.

Not even remotely close. The second statement is so far departed from what can be reasonably inferred from what I wrote, I had to take time to work out if you were being serious.

You have no right to demand that we must accept your conclusions as valid merely on the basis that you percieve your observations as valid.

Testimony is one thing. It’s not in and as of itself evidence that what you ‘testify’ happened is what actually happened.

That you cannot understand this distinction does not speak well for your ability to appropriately understand this conversation.

You can claim what you want. But you can’t use the fact that you are making that claim as the evidence for it.

Please endevour to post coherently and on topic next time, thank you. I for one am not willing to spend any more time having to trawl through your gawd-awful half-cocked posts.

ev?i?dence
1) that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.
2) something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign:

tes·ti·mo·ni·al (t?s’t?-m?’n?-?l)
1) A statement in support of a particular truth, fact, or claim.

Have you watched this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqiyND3RLW4

Are you or anyone able to DISprove the causal relationship between Ms. Tommey’s intentions/actions and the positive effect on mothers and children around the world?

Let’s not nit pick about linguistics while real world solutions remain at arm’s length.

Hey Dedj…what do you mean by “It is not evidence that the processes you THINK are involved actually were” ?

Let me take a stab…are you talking about the placebo effect? Are you saying… “that if you THINK something’s going to happen, and it DOES, you can’t say you’re thinking caused it to happen” Is that what you mean?

No one says that thinking is causally related to outcomes, however, intention is, and positive thinking stems from intention, and positive intention is never not worthwhile.

Such nonsense is used to discount the validity of parents personal experiences, their own scientifically valid observations of actions and outcomes – that’s insulting.

These “arguments” are really embarrassing. People are just trying to help themselves, and be helpful to others. What I keep reading here is “don’t bother trying,” “don’t believe that healthier is possible.” That’s depressing, not accurate, and contrary to human instinctual behavior of growth, healing – life itself.

Enough of this.

All it is evidence for, is that it’s a testimonial.

It is not evidence that the processes you THINK are involved actually were.

Mike asked you for evidence. You best present some.