UC Denver Takes Part In Largest Autism Risk Factor Study

Post Reply New Topic

I'd like to know your opinions on this study:

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/health/ ... etail.html

My main question is, do you think this is the best use of research funding? Do you think there are aspects of autism that should be researched? What are the key questions, in your opinion?

Thanks everyone

I read the news article which was very brief.


If the condition is truly a spectrum disorder then it might be worth while looking at the same sample types in both autistic and asperger's subjects, as well as in other degrees or manifestations of the spectrum disorder. There maybe possible correlations indicating the cause of degree of "impairment".

In my opinion it is crucial to attempt to ascertain the cause/s as therapy etc. whilst essential cannot be addressed in an informed manner if the root cause/s are not ascertained.

People with severe impairment wouldn't benefit as much as those with milder forms of ASD .... this is in regard to therapies.
To assist individuals and their families the most beneficial use of funds is to endeavour to establish the casue/s. Then it is possible to proceed in an informed manner regarding, preventative intervention, therapies etc.

What an absolute waste of money! What do they truly expect to accomplish taking hair samples and drawing blood from children
ages 2 through 5...little kids don't like going to doctor's offices and now, they want to poke and prod them.

The money for such "Research" would be better spent on early intervention treatment program to prepare these children for
later school years.

Scientists and Researchers have already proven that "chelation" diets are of no benefit to children with Autism.

I think they have too wide of a range. They're not concentrating on just one or two possible causes; they're doing everything. And in such a way, they're not going to be able to spend as much time or detail on one or two.

It also bothers me that they listed immunization records as something they want to collect. That myth should be dead and gone by now, but when studies like this - conducted by a university - happen, people see that and immediately react. Plus, if they see that many children reacted negatively to the shots, I'm afraid they won't think it's because of the autism; they'll think it caused the autism.

It also speaks badly of them that they mention that they think autism is more than one condition, and that there's actually several sub categories. Of course there is; it's a spectrum. The explanation of rises in dxs with trying to find what causes it? Unlikely to be related, since the newer studies show it's just as prevelant now as it was before. It appears to me that they didn't do much research, and that's poor of them.

Overall, I'm unimpressed.

Thanks Zsasza, that's pretty much what I thought, but I didn't want to spout my opinions right away. I wanted to see what others thought of this. The newspaper article almost makes it sound like the study has a not-so-hidden agenda by including the stuff about vaccinations/immunizations. I agree that the research funding would be better spent trying to find ways to help people cope with real life, and in finding the most effective ways of teaching people tolerance.

hello to all