article about Bumentanide as a possible cure for Autism

Page 3 of 3 [ 43 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

SoMissunderstood
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 18 Mar 2014
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 481
Location: Sydney, Australia

11 Jun 2014, 10:34 pm

B19 wrote:
If you are ever crossing the ditch to Auckland, feel very welcome to PM me, we can meet up for lunch and talk about these matters of mutual interest until the cows come home (and probably until they go out again, lol).

Here's a little study you may find interesting too, easily found on Google:

"Imaging shows low levels of GABA in autism" (2013).

It's more accessible to people who don't have much knowledge of the field (though you are obviously not one of them) so I share it with them if they are interested in learning more.

Yep, will do - I was planning to go to Rotorua in about 6 months anyway (when I can afford it) - I SERIOUSLY require one of those boiling hot sulfur spring baths you know? I have a feeling my Fibro is gonna say 'wtf is THIS'? then piss off for a few months...

When I make the arrangements, I'll pop you a PM and glad to have made your acquaintance.

There are some amazing articles on PubMed about this and I spent a few hours reading them last night.



B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

11 Jun 2014, 10:41 pm

Good one. I'll look forward to it. I love those hot mineral pools in Rotorua too, pays to check into a motel that has them on site, you can use them til late at night at no extra charge. Bliss!



ImeldaJace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 622
Location: North East USA

11 Jun 2014, 10:53 pm

Ann2011 wrote:
Well I think the study is flawed. From the get go. They are trying to create autism in rodents so they can cure it. How can they accurately do that when we don't know the cause of autism?


Rodent models for autism were not created specifically to find a cure. It is simply so that scientists can have a least some way of testing treatments (not necessarily cures), and also finding out more of the mechanism of autism and possibly even the cause of autism itself.

Mice with fragile x syndrome ( which is a mutation on the X chromosome, so researchers have an easy way of confirming that the mice actually have it) are workable models as fragile x is the biggest known cause of autism. But of course that only counts for a small percentage of the autistic population. The very best that scientists can do is to find ways the replicate in mice the behaviors and the known neurological symptoms associated with autism. The scientists know that their models are far from perfect, it is the best they can do at this point, and without mouse models, scientists would be very very limited in the type of research they could do. You can ethically do a whole lot more to mice that to humans when it comes to experiments.


_________________
"Curiosity killed the cat." Well, I'm still alive, so I guess that means I'm not a cat.


B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

11 Jun 2014, 10:55 pm

A similar study to the one cited in the OP was done in France some time ago, using ASD children (60) with similar conclusions. So non-rodent evidence does exist and, in fact, pre-existed the cited study.

You can access it on Pubmed:

"A randomized controlled trial of bumetanide in the treatment of autism in children"

Authors: Lemonnier E, et al

First Published: December 2011



wozeree
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Aug 2013
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,344

11 Jun 2014, 11:11 pm

ImeldaJace wrote:
Ann2011 wrote:
Well I think the study is flawed. From the get go. They are trying to create autism in rodents so they can cure it. How can they accurately do that when we don't know the cause of autism?


Rodent models for autism were not created specifically to find a cure. It is simply so that scientists can have a least some way of testing treatments (not necessarily cures), and also finding out more of the mechanism of autism and possibly even the cause of autism itself.

Mice with fragile x syndrome ( which is a mutation on the X chromosome, so researchers have an easy way of confirming that the mice actually have it) are workable models as fragile x is the biggest known cause of autism. But of course that only counts for a small percentage of the autistic population. The very best that scientists can do is to find ways the replicate in mice the behaviors and the known neurological symptoms associated with autism. The scientists know that their models are far from perfect, it is the best they can do at this point, and without mouse models, scientists would be very very limited in the type of research they could do. You can ethically do a whole lot more to mice that to humans when it comes to experiments.


I think the word is "legally."



ImeldaJace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jan 2014
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 622
Location: North East USA

13 Jun 2014, 2:46 pm

wozeree wrote:
ImeldaJace wrote:
Ann2011 wrote:
Well I think the study is flawed. From the get go. They are trying to create autism in rodents so they can cure it. How can they accurately do that when we don't know the cause of autism?


Rodent models for autism were not created specifically to find a cure. It is simply so that scientists can have a least some way of testing treatments (not necessarily cures), and also finding out more of the mechanism of autism and possibly even the cause of autism itself.

Mice with fragile x syndrome ( which is a mutation on the X chromosome, so researchers have an easy way of confirming that the mice actually have it) are workable models as fragile x is the biggest known cause of autism. But of course that only counts for a small percentage of the autistic population. The very best that scientists can do is to find ways the replicate in mice the behaviors and the known neurological symptoms associated with autism. The scientists know that their models are far from perfect, it is the best they can do at this point, and without mouse models, scientists would be very very limited in the type of research they could do. You can ethically do a whole lot more to mice that to humans when it comes to experiments.


I think the word is "legally."


Both words could be used in the sentence. One could very well argue that the question of ethics is the driving force behind the laws that allow more sorts of experiments to be done in mice than in humans. That is not to say that ethics is not aplicable to the treatment of animals. There are laws that restrict the kinds of experiments that can be done on animals as well. They are just not quite as strict as they are for humans.


_________________
"Curiosity killed the cat." Well, I'm still alive, so I guess that means I'm not a cat.


wblastyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 533
Location: UK

16 Jun 2014, 2:50 pm

B19 wrote:
I don't take Glutamine as a precursor to GABA. I do take some of the following.

Here is a list of established GABA boosters:

Inisotol (activates GABA)
GABA (comes in both synthetic and natural forms)
Glutamic acid
Melatonin
Thiamine
Niacinamide
Pyridoxine
Valerian root
Passionflower

In terms of psychiatric drugs, Clonazepam.

I take Inisotol/choline (with food, that's important) now as well as GABA.

Can't answer your riddle at present in any comprehensive way, though I keep working on these fascinating puzzles and hope to discover more about the pathways in due course.

So glad to have made contact with you!! !


Have you experienced any tolerance/withdrawal from gaba?

There's a supplement called phenibut, which crossed the BBB more readily than pure gaba. Its associated with tolerance and withdrawal but it may not be an issue with gaba as its milder?



B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

16 Jun 2014, 3:05 pm

I am on the same dose that I started on a few months ago, and it continues to be as effective. (I wondered about these things too, whether down regulation would occur, or tolerance/habituation would set in, though it hasn't happened). It still may do, we will see.

Can't comment about withdrawal, because I haven't stopped taking it, and it's been so good for me that I probably never will.

Sorry, I am unfamiliar with the alternative you mentioned. Could you tell me more about it?



wblastyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 533
Location: UK

16 Jun 2014, 4:11 pm

Phenibut is a supplement containing gaba with a phenyl ring attached, allowing it to cross the BBB. But from what I've read, people develop tolerance quite quickly and the withdrawal can be quite severe. I wouldn't risk it personally. GABA alone might be less harmful as it's milder.

Do you have any experience with L-Theanine? Its supposed to reduce anxiety by increasing GABA but it just made me feel weird. Although it also increases serotonin and dopamine, and antagonises glutamate.



B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

16 Jun 2014, 4:28 pm

Yes, I have experience with L-Theanine. For me the effect was minimal, compared with GABA (which was dramatic). Expressed in percentages, I would say that L-T had 10% effect, Gaba 90% on my most troubling symptom (anxiety).

L-Theanine can be very useful for some people. I have a longstanding interest in amino acids and have experimented with most of them.

Nothing, though, has ever come close to GABA for me.



B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

16 Jun 2014, 4:49 pm

The BBB is not as black and white as previously thought.

Pramod Dash from the University of Houston wrote this in an article on the bbb too - it was very surprising to me to learn that only some of the brain has the barrier... and perhaps would surprise not only most people but most doctors..(?)


Quote from Dash:
All areas of the brain do not have a blood-brain barrier. The structures located at strategic positions in the midline of the ventricular system and lack the BBB are collectively referred to as circumventricular organs (CVOs). In these non-barrier regions, the tight junctions between endothelial cells are discontinuous thus allowing entry of molecules. Many of these areas participate in hormonal control.

Areas of brain without a blood-brain barrier:

?Pituitary gland
?Median eminence
?Area postrema
?Preoptic recess
?Paraphysis
?Pineal gland
?Endothelium of choroid plexus
End of quote.

The plot just thickens and thickens....!