Since it was first proposed by Mark and David Geier, Lupron therapy for autism has been criticized heavily. Do a google search–if your results are like mine, the first hit is a blog post by Kathleen Seidel “Playing with Fire“. Ms. Seidel has done much to expose the questionable methods used by the Geiers to promote Lupron as a therapy for autism. Her list of Lupron links is quite valuable for anyone considering this therapy. Top amongst those is a blog post by Prometheus at the Photon in the Darkness blog, exposing the questionable science behind the supposed testosterone/mercury connection.
Lupron is a drug which shuts down sex hormone production in the body–temporarily. Because of the hormone reduction, lupron is used in the treatment of prostate cancer in men and fibroids in women. The only approved use for children is to treat “precocious puberty”–i.e. the onset of puberty too early. It is useful because it temporarily reduces hormone production.
But, that isn’t what the Geier’s proposed. They didn’t start out to treat precocious puberty. It is worth looking at the history to see how much the Geiers’ stories have changed. There appear to be three stories now.
Story one: mercury binds to testosterone making it difficult to chelate out of the brain. The science backing this up was ridiculous (unless you think your brain is a vat of boiling benzene). Seriously, I am embarrassed for the Geiers. Even in the world of alternative medicine, this was junk science.
Story two: autistic kids almost all have “precocious puberty”. Odd that no one else has ever seen this, but it gives a medical reason to prescribe Lupron (one that will pass insurance scrutiny).
But, both “story one” and “story two” seem to be in the past. Yes, there is mention of precocious puberty in the recent articles in the Chicago Tribune (‘Miracle drug’ called junk science). But, here is a paragraph worth reading:
By lowering testosterone, the Geiers said, the drug eliminates unwanted testosterone-related behaviors, such as aggression and masturbation. They recommend starting kids on Lupron as young as possible and say some may need the drug through the age of puberty and into adulthood.
Does that sound like (a) they are treating mercury poisoning or (b) they are treating precocious puberty?
Here is a quote from Anne Dachel’s rather weak defense of the Geiers:
One of the issues in the stories is the use of Lupron to treat aggression in autistic children who have high levels of testosterone. This is a huge controversy. The treatment is slammed as “unproven and potentially damaging” in the Tribune.
Does that sound like (a) they are treating mercury poisoning or (b) they are treating precocious puberty?
The Rev. Lisa Sykes, in the comments to the Tribune article wrote:
As the parent of the first child to be treated by Dr. Geier for high testosterone, a condition caused by cinically diagnosed mercury-poisoning from the theraputic use of vaccines and RhoD, I can only wait for the day the press gets it right.
Does that sound like (a) they are treating mercury poisoning or (b) they are treating precocious puberty?
Remember, this is the same Lisa Sykes whose video interview promoting Lupron talks about finding a way to get the mercury out. But, now it is “high testosterone”. Sure, she asserts (without any support) that this is caused by mercury poisoning. Anyone want to guess who “clinically diagnosed” the mercury poisoning, by the way? I know who my money is on.
Before I go too far off track, let’s bring this back to the big question–if the story is no longer “mercury poisoning” or “precocious puberty”, is Lupron being used for any other purpose than controling behavior through limiting testosterone levels? And, at 10 times the normal dosage used for precocious puberty, isn’t this a rather handed approach?
Lupron has been called a “chemical castration” drug due to the fact that it shuts down the body’s testostoerone production and has been used to control behavior in sexual predators. Lupron obviously will have profound effects on the behavior of people–children or adult, autistic or not.
If testosterone control is the real purpose for the “Lupron Protocol” (as the Geiers have named it) shouldn’t we then ask: isn’t this just a form of restraint?
Keep in mind, Lupron only works temporarily. Stop giving the Lupron shots and testosterone levels will rebound. Remember this quote from the Tribune story?
They [the Geiers] recommend starting kids on Lupron as young as possible and say some may need the drug through the age of puberty and into adulthood.
Anyone remember how the “mercury toxic” children idea was perpetuated? Since standard tests don’t show high levels of mercury, “challenge” chelation tests were used. When real toxicologists test children shown to be “mecury intoxicated” by alternative medical practitioners, the real answer is no mercury poisoning. Is the same pattern happening in the world of testosterone testing?
Let’s check the patent application the Geiers’ submitted. The first patient mentioned in the application is “child X”. Child X had serum testosterone levels of 25ng/dL. The reference range was 0-25ng/dL. In other words, the kid was within normal ranges.
How about the other patients? Child Y, for instance? Again, within normal ranges.
Child Y’s total serum testosterone was determined to be 20 ng/dL. The reference level of total serum testosterone for a male child of Child Y’s age at this laboratory was from 0-20 ng/dL.
“Child A” was slightly above normal ranges.
Laboratory analyses for androgen metabolites revealed an elevated serum total testosterone=23 ng/dL (age- and sex-adjusted LabCorp reference range=0-20 ng/dL)
Child B was higher than the reference ranges.
Laboratory analyses for androgen metabolites revealed an elevated serum testosterone=18 ng/dL (age- and sex-adjusted LabCorp reference range=0-10 ng/dL)
Now, here is one that amazes me:
Additionally, analyses of Child D’s blood androgen metabolites revealed a serum testosterone=153 ng/dL (age- and sex-adjusted LabCorp reference range=0-350 ng/dL) and serum/plasma DHEA=291 ng/dL (age- and sex-adjusted LabCorp reference range=183-383 ng/dL) within their respective reference ranges.
After extensive discussions with his parents concerning the risks, benefits, and alternative treatments available, a decision was made to place Child D on a course of LUPRON® therapy.
It doesn’t appear to matter. If a child is within the reference range, slightly above, or above, the answer is the same: treat with Lupron.
So, I again pose the question: is Lupron a chemical restraint? I will add a further question: is it being applied to children whose testosterone levels are not high?
Left Brain Right Brain 
Yates H. mother in the Autism omnibus trial:
“He also receives daily subcutaneous Lupron injections as well as Lupron intramuscular injections”
Q: What is the purpose of that ?
“The purpose of that ? Yates has high testosterone levels that were not appropriate for his age. It made sense of some of his aggressive and out-of-contol behavior. Since the Lupron injections, Yates has been a much calmer little boy, and there’s been more of a connection with Yates.”
Q: And who is the doctor that prescribed that medication ?
“That’s Dr. Mark Geier.”
With the example of the child D given above, at only 1/2 scale of the ‘normal’ range, versus the recommendations for treatment at the high end of the scale in others, it does appear that this therapy is being recommended capriciously.
To see autistic person who had bad reaction to hospital administered HALDOL, go to youtube and search for “Autistic Patient in Crisis Goes Unnoticed” Shocking.