No, not a new rock group.
Dan Olmsted is a UPI reporter who forms part of the Holy Trifecta of Media – the other two prongs being Evelyn Pringle and of course, good old honest, impartial David Kirby.
Dan Olmsted burst onto the scene with the attention getting ‘Amish Anomaly’ wherein he discovered through an exhaustive and meticulous system of asking a water purifier salesman if he knew of any, that only vaccinated Amish people are autistic.
The ‘Amish Anomaly’ caught peoples imagination – ‘if vaccines don’t cause autism then why don’t the Amish have more autistic people’? was the cry on everyones lips – conveniently brushing aside the fact that Olmsted’s system was about as much use as a chocolate fireguard – and also conveniently brushing aside the fact that the Amish have a virtually closed gene pool. But of course all right thinking people know that autism was invented by Eli Lilly in 1931 thus these facts don’t make any difference.
So it must’ve been strange for these ‘right thinking people’ when a bunch of autistic people turned up right in the same area Dan Olmsted performed his meticulous research. Only these people were found as part of a research paper summarised here.
A study of Old Order Amish children has identified the genetic mutation that causes a previously unknown disorder, with seizures that progress to autism and retardation.
How could this be? Surely a reporter as experienced as Dan Olmsted with autism couldn’t have missed this? Here’s Dan’s primary source – the water purifier salesman – again:
I’ve got to tell you, I have never seen an autistic Amish child — not one,” he said. “I would know it. I have a strong medical background. I know what autistic people are like. I have friends who have autistic children.”
And here’s the science again:
A study of Old Order Amish children has identified the genetic mutation that causes a previously unknown disorder, with seizures that progress to autism and retardation.
Huh. Something of an anomaly. Or maybe – just maybe – Dan Olmsted’s source was full of shit.
So how _could_ Dan’s source have screwed up? Maybe because he _doesn’t_ know autism as well as he thinks he does. These children were ‘secondary’ autistics: those who’s autism is a comorbidity in itself (example: in this page autism is a comorbidity of Down’s Syndrome). In the case of the children in this study, their autism was secondary to their seizures.
However, that does _not_ equate to them not being autistic any more than an autistic person with a comorbidity of asthma is not asthmatic.
This is _exactly_ why reporters words shouldn’t be enshrined as gospel truth. If Dan Olmsted had noted he’d not found a lot of autistic people amongst the Amish and left it at that or even followed it up a bit more responsibly then there would be no problem. However, as befits a good friend of SafeMinds Director Mark Blaxill, he went in with a preconceived agenda and thus found (or failed to) exactly what he wanted.
Read more at Prometheus’ place, Autism Diva’s place and Dad of Cameron’s place.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Hi Kev!
There was a rockgroup called The Third Autistic Cuckoo
which existed in a book by Douglas Adams.
Dirk Gently’s world: The Long Dark Teatime of the Soul.
Apparently they were cool old rockers.
Hi Kevin
Personally, I think that research in journalism must be done with care about autism, especially if it is going to be published in a journal of massive diffusion.
My point is the following. One thing is how the facts were presented and another what the facts are. Let me explain please.
I think that vaccines are an insult for susceptible children. Considering now non-Amish children, it seems that there is a higher number of regressive/stagnant autism than Kannerian autism than before. As Joseph pointed out, it seems that epilepsy in number is decreasing so apparently, some different kind of ASD seems to be present.
I wonder if the question was well done in this topic and I understand your position.
Perhaps the question is what kind of ASD is present in Amish or non vaccinated children vs vaccinated children?Being ASD so variable in genetics/epigenetics/ other, I think that genetic causes, like in this point, could be present without an environmental component, such as in the case of Rett, tuberous sclerosis and other.
What do you think?
MarÃa Luján
_”What do you think?”_
I think its entirely possible. I’m certianly not able to say you’re wrong. I think though that the way a lot of these journalists have got involved leaves a lot to be desired. They have a very very basic understanding of autism which is plainly incorrect and they make a whole series of assumptions which stem from their original poor understanding. I doubt Dan Olmsted even knows what ‘comorbidity’ means.
The really worrying thing is that they move straight onto pushing very worrying treatments: Olmsted is the journalist who started pushing Gold Salts as a good chelator until someone pointed out how incredibly dangerous they were.
I think that vaccines are an insult for susceptible children. Considering now non-Amish children, it seems that there is a higher number of regressive/stagnant autism than Kannerian autism than before.
It’s not so clear this is true. We don’t have any data to verify if this is the case. In the past, when a child “regressed” into autism, it’s quite possible the child might have been thought of as developing early schizophrenia.
As Joseph pointed out, it seems that epilepsy in number is decreasing so apparently, some different kind of ASD seems to be present.
The different kind of ASD interpretation, as I’ve said, is convoluted, unnecessary and probably wrong. The same effect would of course be observed by simply moving up the diagnostic threshold.
BTW, I’ve found some unexpected results in the regional data. I should post about that pretty soon.
Joseph
I said
As Joseph pointed out, it seems that epilepsy in number is decreasing
After this I gave my own personal interpretation of what you analyzed.
so apparently, some different kind of ASD seems to be present.
Sorry if it seemed to you that was YOURS. It was not my intention.
You say
as I’ve said, is convoluted, unnecessary and probably wrong.
I am not so sure to be so definite about… 🙂 but I respect your analysis. I avoid the word wrong every time I analyze because
how are we sure what is right in this field?
I have my opinion and you, yours. Perhaps one of them is right, perhaps none.
Sincerely
MarÃa Luján
Hi Joseph
It seems from these published reports that the relative amount of regressive vs early onset is near at least 50 %.
Autism. 2005 Dec;9(5):461-86.
Parental report of the early development of children with regressive autism: the delays-plus-regression phenotype.
Ozonoff S, Williams BJ, Landa R.
University of California-Davis, CA 95817, USA. sally.ozonoff@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu
Most children with autism demonstrate developmental abnormalities in their first year, whereas others display regression after mostly normal development. Few studies have examined the early development of the latter group. This study developed a retrospective measure, the Early Development Questionnaire (EDQ), to collect specific, parent-reported information about development in the first 18 months. Based on their EDQ scores, 60 children with autism between the ages of 3 and 9 were divided into three groups: an early onset group (n = 29), a definite regression group (n = 23), and a heterogeneous mixed group (n = 8). Significant differences in early social development were found between the early onset and regression groups. However, over 50 percent of the children who experienced a regression demonstrated some early social deficits during the first year of life, long before regression and the apparent onset of autism. This group, tentatively labeled ‘delays-plus-regression’, deserves further study.
Am J Med Genet A. 2005 Jun 1;135(2):171-80.
Essential versus complex autism: definition of fundamental prognostic subtypes.
Miles JH, Takahashi TN, Bagby S, Sahota PK, Vaslow DF, Wang CH, Hillman RE, Farmer JE.
The Children’s Hospital at the University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, Missouri 65212, USA. milesjh@missouri.edu
Am J Med Genet. 2002 Dec 1;113(3):231-7.
Autism, regression, and the broader autism phenotype.
Lainhart JE, Ozonoff S, Coon H, Krasny L, Dinh E, Nice J, McMahon W.
MarÃa Luján
Maria,
The Miles JH et al. 2005 study you cite (which is larger N=233, than the Ozonoff N=60) shows a combined percentage of more like 39% for essential and complex.
Dad of Cameron
Thank you for the clarification. I wonder, as always, why is the true relative amount considering even higher populations. Obviously 233 is better than 60 and therefore more related to the true relative proportion. I will search for other examples of the variation of the relative proportion. I remember that I read near 80 % for regressive/stagnant autism but it was 1/2 manuscripts and I can not find them easily .
I think that this is a first approach to the identification of subroups in autism: regressive versus early onset. I think more effort should be done to identify metabolic roots, immune contributions and purely genetic causes to have a real representative study with a higher number of patients.
IF some kind of environmental contribution is collaborating in the proportion of different subgroups more than in the total number How are we going to detect if there are no enough information about? If we do not know even the kind of subgroups?
What do you think?
MarÃa Luján
About diagnostic subgroups and different criteria:
Are pervasive developmental disorders and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder distinct disorders? • ARTICLE
Brain and Development, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 28 February 2006,
Junri Hattori, Tatsuya Ogino, Kiyoko Abiru, Kousuke Nakano, Makio Oka and Yoko Ohtsuka
Therefore even ADHD can be considered part of the spectrum, following some very recent literature. I wonder if we include in the spectrum also ADHD what is the overall situation.
However, I maintain my idea that the information you can obtain is limited because of confounding factors, criteria and diagnosis changes.
MArÃa Luján
You know Maria, if you’re more interested in etiologies (which I think you are) compared to Joseph’s apparent cognitive/behavioral and epidemiological view (and I realize the inherent relatedness of the two), some scientists may disagree with regression vs. early onset as the first step in identifying subgroups – the earlier and possibly more important distinctions being essential or complex autism, and genetic differentiation between essential autism and neurotypicality. Obviously, the distinctions between essential autism and neurotypicality would require understanding of regressive onset within the essential group, which is what I think you’re trying to say anyway.
Hi Dad of Cameron
Yes, this is what I am trying to say. I know that the early onset vs regression can be an “apparent ” only distinction. It has been pointed out that the manifestations are more EVIDENT at the time considered with regression when regressive autism is mentioned.
REally the situation is confusing because we know so little about biochemistry of ASD children. Personally I think that ASD children are different from birth, BUT in some children the symptomatology is evident since birth and in others there are apparent triggers- for calling somewhat- that make more evident the symptoms. As you know there are so considered anecdotal reports of abrupt changes in behavior and physical health after antibiotics, vaccines and childhood diseases. Somewhat there are no clear discussion of the issue at the level of published literature, because I read still the controversy and the use of early onset vs regressive distinction.
When you say
more important distinctions being essential or complex autism, and genetic differentiation between essential autism and neurotypicality.
I agree. The same about primary or secondary autism, that some authors mention in terms of identification.
In fact I am interested in all because I think that the lack of a clear identification of subgroups in ASD makes very confusing the study at the level of epidemiology and cognitive/behavioral. Because we can not go back in time I return to my common question, how can we compare to obtain definite conclussions?What do you think?
I have no problems to say that I try to order in my mind all these data that seem very confunding at first sight.Thank you for your help.
MarÃa Luján
Regarding “early onset” vs. “regression,” why do people always talk about them as if they are totally separate? I’m supposedly “regressive” (although I hate that term) but I was also different from birth.
,em>Regarding “early onset†vs. “regression,†why do people always talk about them as if they are totally separate? I’m supposedly “regressive†(although I hate that term) but I was also different from birth.
Hi Ballastexistenz,
I think the “why” is probably best explained by the desire of some to understand possible environmental influence, but I could be wrong. I’m not convinced they are necessarily separate.
Yes, this is what I am trying to say. I know that the early onset vs regression can be an “apparent †only distinction.
Maria,
“Apparent” being the key word here.
It seems from these published reports that the relative amount of regressive vs early onset is near at least 50 %.
It’s error-prone to put percentages on the characteristics of autistics. As you know, they change a lot depending on what group you look at. Also, it would seem that the prevalence of childhood schizophrenia is basically zero today. Any idea how that condition was finally cured?
Hi Joseph
As you know, medicine researchers in general try to reduce data to percentages to make comparisons. The validity of these studies in ASD I think deserves consideration… but it is the published literature available. What I think I can not is to obtain conclussions as for sure from these reports.
Given the amount of confounding variables and facts that are not known in ASD, this tendency includes the overuse of labeling in my opinion and the need to find also differences that are called with some basis in order to be clear…and finally are even more confusing when more evidence is considered in time.
About schizophrenia I found these recent manuscripts, and they are also an example of how percentages are used commonly in this field of neurodevelopmental problems
J Neural Transm Suppl. 2005;(69):121-41. Related Articles, Links
Schizophrenia and related disorders in children and adolescents.
Remschmidt H, Theisen FM.
Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Philipps-University, Marburg, Germany. remschm@med.uni-marburg.de
This paper reviews the concept and recent studies on childhood and adolescent psychoses with special reference to schizophrenia. After a short historical introduction, the definition, classification, and epidemiology of child- and adolescent-onset psychoses are described, pointing out that some early-onset psychotic states seem to be related to schizophrenia (such as infantile catatonia) and others not (such as desintegrative disorder). The frequency of childhood schizophrenia is less than 1 in 10,000 children, but there is a remarkable increase in frequency between 13 and 18 years of age. Currently, schizophrenia is diagnosed according to ICD-10 and DSM-IV criteria. The differential diagnosis includes autism, desintegrative disorder, multiplex complex developmental disorder (MCDD) respectively multiple developmental impairment (MDI), affective psychoses, Asperger syndrome, drug-induced psychosis and psychotic states caused by organic disorders. With regard to etiology, there is strong evidence for the importance of genetic factors and for neurointegrative deficits preceding the onset of the disorder. Treatment is based upon a multimodal approach including antipsychotic medication (mainly by atypical neuroleptics), psychotherapeutic measures, family-oriented measures, and specific measures of rehabilitation applied in about 30% of the patients after completion of inpatient treatment. The long-term course of childhood- and adolescent-onset schizophrenia is worse than in adulthood schizophrenia, and the patients with manifestation of the disorder below the age of 14 have a very poor prognosis.
J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2005 Jun;15(3):395-402. Related Articles, Links
Childhood-onset schizotypal disorder: a follow-up study and comparison with childhood-onset schizophrenia.
Asarnow JR.
UCLA Neuropsychiatric Institute, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA. JAsarnow@mednet.ucla.edu
OBJECTIVE: This paper presents results from the UCLA Follow-Up Study of Childhood-Onset Schizophrenia (SZ) Spectrum Disorders. METHOD: We assessed 12 children with schizotypal personality disorder (SPD) and 18 children with schizophrenia 1-7 years following initial project intake. RESULTS: There was significant continuity between SZ spectrum disorders in childhood and adolescence. Although not all children who presented initially with SZ spectrum disorders continued to meet criteria for SZ spectrum disorder as they progressed through the follow-up period, rates of SZ spectrum disorders ranged from 75% to 92% across the 3 follow-up years for children initially presenting with SPD, and from 78% to 89% for children initially presenting with SZ. CONCLUSION: The most common clinical outcome for children with SPD was continuing SPD, supporting the hypothesis of continuity between childhood and later SPD. However, 25% of the SPD sample developed more severe SZ spectrum disorders (schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder), also supporting the hypothesis that SPD represents a risk or precursor state for more severe SZ spectrum disorders.
Don´t you think that the diferencial diagnosis has a role in schizophrenia decrease
“The differential diagnosis includes autism, desintegrative disorder, multiplex complex developmental disorder (MCDD) respectively multiple developmental impairment (MDI), affective psychoses, Asperger syndrome, drug-induced psychosis and psychotic states caused by organic disorders.”
Again, I wonder what is the difference in MCDD and MDI for example.
MArÃa Luján
The frequency of childhood schizophrenia is less than 1 in 10,000 children, but there is a remarkable increase in frequency between 13 and 18 years of age.
Prevalence numbers on schizophrenia, as with any other spectrum disorder that was in vogue at one time, need to be taken with a grain of salt. It would be important to note when this was measured and how.
The apparent prevalence of schizophrenia has been on the decline in recent years.There are those who think this drop is real. See this for example.
Hi Joseph
Thank you very much for the link. It deserves a careful reading. I did not know about.
I knew about these other manuscripts
1-Petersen et al
2-Theisen et al
3-Sanders et al
4-Fatemi et al
5-J Neural Transm. 2004 Jul;111(7):891-902
Bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and other psychotic disorders in adults with childhood onset AD/HD and/or autism spectrum disorders.
Stahlberg O, Soderstrom H, Rastam M, Gillberg C.
Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Goteborg University, Sweden.
6-Biol Psychiatry. 2004 May 15;55(10):989-94.
Pervasive developmental disorder and childhood-onset schizophrenia: comorbid disorder or a phenotypic variant of a very early onset illness?
Sporn AL, Addington AM, Gogtay N, Ordonez AE, Gornick M, Clasen L, Greenstein D, Tossell JW, Gochman P, Lenane M, Sharp WS, Straub RE, Rapoport JL.
Child Psychiatry Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, USA.
Well, Kevin, thank you very much for the information you provided in the forum to generte short links. I hope now my posts will be shorter and with more short links. 🙂
MarÃa Luján
“No, not a new rock group”
He’s a lead guitarist and may have his own band for all we know.
http://www.lorettalynch.com/news-archive.shtml
Loretta will be graced once again with the guitar talents of the mighty Dan Olmsted.
Unfortunately Maria the forum software and the blog software operate differently. To get all manner of HTML, including links, on this blog click on the ‘Textile available’ link just above the box where you enter your comment :o)
David Kirby is a 4 man rock band. Don’t ask me how.
!http://www.davidkirbyrocks.com/David%20Kirby%20Rocks%20Images/Whois-banner.jpg!
I know, images probably don’t work here…but I wanted to see anyway.
Kevin, feel free to delete the image, it’s too wide…
But funny ;o)
The thing I got from just briefly glancing at the Amish seizure/autism study is that those kids brains were “wired” to have seizures from long before birth… they had some brain cells in totally the wrong place. At first I thought they had dissected some of the brains of these kids because they had died… they had brain tissue photographs… and you just don’t go take samples of brain tissue for the fun of it…
But some of the kids had had parts of their brain “resected” in order to try to stop the seizures, and while in their doing resection they took some samples, or examined what they needed to remove anyway…
I have to go look at it better, but the changes in those cells don’t look like something that came on with the timing of the regression, not at all.
I will stand corrected, if someone has already read it and figured that out.
David Kirby as a rock band is very odd. 🙂
Full Disclosure: I’ve never been a part of a rock band. I did take ballet lessons when I was a kid… I was really lousy even though my mom taught ballet to kids. Too clumsy.
I have an awful singing voice and can’t play any musical instruments. I’ve also never performed brain surgery and my nose is the one I was born with.