A recent post here on LeftBrainRightBrain discusses a new alternative therapy for autism: fecal transplants. Yes, you read that correctly, fecal transplants. The concept is simple, if poorly thought out: assume that autism is related to the “gut-brain” connection. If a child’s intestines have the wrong bacteria, why not replace them with bacteria from a non-autistic individual? The procedures involved take a couple of paths. One can collect “healthy” fecal matter, store it in a bucket for a week and then, using a cake-decorating funnel, transplant the fecal matter to the autistic child. Alternatively, one can obtain a naso-gastro tube from a veterinary supply house and transplant the fecal matter through that route.
In case you are wondering: (A) I did not make that up and (B) I am certainly not recommending anyone do this.
In my experience, most times when someone is critical of a “therapy”, you can count on a number of set responses. Number one automatic response is usually, “you are anti-cure”.
It’s a dodge. A diversion. A way to avoid the very serious question of safety.
Safety is a very important discuss that should be led by the biomed community. Unfortunately many of their most vocal proponents avoid the discussion. Labeling people “anti-cure” is a short and effective. It’s easy. It is not a way to live up to the responsibility that the leaders of the biomed community have to themselves, other parents and, most importantly, the autistic children involved.
Take fecal-transplants. It isn’t an autism cure. The risks of illness by “transplanting” feces into the stomach or intestines of a child should be obvious to all. Kev has expressed outrage at this practice. That isn’t anti-cure.
It really is well past time for the biomed leadership to actually lead. It is very rare that any theory, any “treatment” gets a critical review by them.
It is time for them to stop hiding behind the false-shield of the word “cure”.
Left Brain Right Brain 
It is very rare that any theory, any “treatment” gets a critical review by them.
Except for the theories that autism is largely genetic, has always been with us, and that autistic children continue to develop and show improvement, albeit at their own pace.
Once your therapies are being lifted from Two Girls One Cup, it’s time to question your science.
@Elyse: exactly!
I am accused of being “anti-cure” and “keeping parents from treating their children” quite often. These accusations are – of course – ludicrous.
For one, I am not “anti-cure” because there is no cure to be against. If there were a cure for autism, I’d be willing to consider it and then decide whether I’m “pro” or “anti”. Until that time, being “anti-cure” is as nonsensical as being “anti-leprechaun”; I don’t see any evidence that either exist.
As far as “keeping parents from treating their children”, that’s even more ludicrous. I’m not the one making threats of violence or murder – that’s the “pro-cure” side. I’m also not standing in the doorway of DAN! doctors barring the way. I’m not even filing lawsuits against people who disagree with me; that – again – is the “pro-cure” side’s tactic.
What I am doing is providing information and analysis for parents who are considering trying some of the “cures” on their children. If this convinces some of them to not try the “cure”, then that is their action, not mine. If someone can point to an error in my information or analysis (and support that claim with data), I am happy to correct that error. Too bad the “pro-cure” side isn’t willing to even consider that they might be mistaken.
Prometheus
I believe the most fitting reply to this “cure” would be, “Why not just eat…?”
Prometheus — it occurs to me (and I know this is not a novel thought) that what’s really going on when they scream “you’re anti-cure!” is that they are reacting to a threat against a deeply held belief — that the treatment works. They are incapable of responding rationally if their belief is challenged, which is why they take any criticism as a direct, personal attack. This is precisely the same as the way many (not all) religious individuals react when someone declares that they are atheists. They are responding so viscerally to the perceived attack on their faith that they are unable to step back a moment and realize that their beliefs are unfounded.
Few of the “curebies” realize that they are essentially acting on faith. The same is true, ironically, of the religiously faithful, who even though they use the word “faith” to describe their belief, can’t seem to accept the premise that it’s not a proven fact.
So, once again, we see that a great deal of alt-med is basically just superstition.
I’m still waiting for “Smarter Than You” to step up with his long-overdue “proof” that will have us all running away with our tails between our legs. What was all that about?