Recovered autistics - Before and After videos

Post Reply New Topic

I used to think autism was genetic. My opinion changed after watching videos of clearly autistic children before biomedical treatment and very NT (normal) children after treatment. Also, I've tried some of the treatments myself and they definitely help. One kid went from autistic to mostly normal after just 20 days of anti-virals and anti-fungals. The causes haven't been conclusively proven, but I don't see how anyone can watch these videos and claim the treatments were a placebo effect. Some causes of autism may be genetic, but some clearly aren't.

http://www.autismrecoveryvideos.org

For those who don't believe autism is treatable:
How do you explain these videos?
Do you really think the children in these videos were better off being autistic?
Do you think these recovered children would ever want to be autistic again?

Are you Autistic? Would you be willing to try the treatments they offer?

Robin

I would like to know what treatments you tried?

It's my belief that some people overcome autism, but I don't believe in the biomedicals. The videos are just snippets. I wonder how the kids are 24/7. My son has changed a lot over the years and I know I could have compiled a recovery video for him as well by taping him at his worst and taping him at his best.

I know some people who give their kids handfuls of supplements a day at various times during the day....chelation....special diets. And, none of those kids are further or farther ahead than we are and we only use a multi vitamin. These parents spend $$$$$$$ on these doctors and exotic therapies. It's an industry.

I'm autistic. I've tried a few of the treatments so far and plan to try the rest soon (although its hard to get prescriptions for anti-virals and anti-fungals)

The gfcf diet, probiotics, and a low sugar diet helped alot. Antibiotics made me much worse probably because they are believed to make fungal infections worse. I hope to try Valtrex, Diflucan, and maybe chelation when I can get them.

This is all sounding very Church of Scientology to me...

Yes, I've learned that some people lie. However, I think thousands of recoveries have been reported and I highly doubt their all liars. Plus, there's good science to back it up. Researchers found an opiate-autism connection long before they knew it was the protein in wheat and dairy that caused the problem. I think the scientific evidence is extensive. The following two sites have scientific studies on autism:

http://www.autismndi.com/news/default.a ... ow=Studies
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez



I realize that too. Nothing works for everyone. Claritin greatly helps some people with allergies but doesn't help others at all. Same with Prozac for depression. It's like that with almost every treatment for almost every medical condition. If you claim that biomedical treatments don't work because you know someone they didn't help then using the same logic you would have to say that all conventional medicines are ineffective. Studies have found that anti-depressants don't help the majority of people suffering from depression (I think only 20% improve with them). It's really not relevant that a treatment doesn't help some people. What's important is that these treatments work for some autistics. Like most medical conditions, they usually test the children to find the problem before treating it. If the test for one of the causes of symptoms is negative, then treatment for that cause is not given. They run tests and then treat the causes that are found.

I think that a lot of those diagnosed with ADHD are merely reacting against a food allergy which shows results similar to true ADHD. I think it may be something similar with autism, and how popularized the asperger's diagnosis has been in the last few years (In truth, I also doubt that one in 156 actually do have asperger's). Simply, I doubt they were autistic at all.

I don't consider them liars. I just don't attribute their perceived successes to biomedicals. Personally, I consider my own son to be greatly improved without anything special biomedical treatments.

I don't think it matters whether they were really autistic (or ADHD). What matters is whether the treatments help those diagnosed with autism. If 80% of people diagnosed with autism improve with biomedical treatments, then that means 80% diagnosed with autism can recover from autistic symptoms and become normal. If these people aren't really autistic, then I think the true autism rate is only 1 in 5,000 instead of 1 in 150.

In each and every "recovery" video I've watched, the kid was still autistic, and showing autistic traits.

What do you think about this study below?


Would you say they didn't really have asthma? The point is they all have the symptoms and can't be distinguished from each other. When someone says that autism and asthma can be cured, they mean that people can go from having all the symptoms of autism (or asthma) to not having any symptoms of autism (or asthma). It's circular logic to claim that anyone who's cured didn't really have the problem. The same thing occurred with stomach ulcers. Doctors blamed the patient and said they were caused by stress, diet, etc. and it was later proven that antibiotics could cure many of them. If someone cured their ulcers with antibiotics when doctors still believed they were caused by stress, would you say they really didn't have stomach ulcers?

The videos at http://www.autismrecoveryvideos.org are different. They clearly went from autistic to NT. Anyway, some of the causes (such as mercury, viruses, and fungal infections) cause permanent damage so it shouldn't be surprising if they still have autistic traits after they've recovered. (Note: Recovered means they no longer meet the criteria for an autism diagnosis and have their diagnosis removed. It doesn't mean their cured of every autistic traits. Anyway, even NTs have autistic traits so maybe its part of their personality and not part of autism)

I agree with you. I can see signs in each of them.

I think the videos are especially damaging for those parents who tried these things and they didn't "work". I do know a lady who tried to get me to take my son to her DAN doctor. She swore this DAN doctor would cure my son. I looked into the doctor and decided she was a bit of a quack and didn't make any appt. My son talks and is social, but kind of awkward. The other lady's daughter is still nonverbal. I think the degree to which a kid gets better is a roll of the dice and not related to these supplements. If a person improves while taking them, I think it's a coincidence. To say that my son would be even better if I had given him a biomedical cocktail, I don't believe it.

One thing that I wonder about is how the parents may treat a child that they perceive to be nonresponsive as compared to a child that they are expecting changes due to biomeds. From what i saw of the videos the parents had a different tone, and demeanor to them when they were speaking to their child, and interacting as opposed to after they had began treatments. After the treatments other people around the children seemed to be treating them with more confidence, as if they believed in the kids. I don't know if what I'm saying is quite coming out right, but I know that even severely autistic kids can feel the parent's despair, and disappointment. They may not be able to express it, but they can feel it. One of the moms even said that her son wasn't supposed to be able to do this or that. It's as if she had given up on him, until she discovered that he can be recovered. I saw a child with a lot of good skills in the video before that particular child had began treatment. Skills that I work very hard at getting my autistic son to aquire. He wasn't completely nonresponsive, he just was communicating in his own way.

With that being said, I don't doubt that there are kids out there that do benefit greatly from a diet that's free from the things that they're allergic/intolerant to. If there is problems with the stomach, and other indicators of allergies then I think it's okay to pursue a diet, and lifestyle to alleviate those things that are causing the problem. I don't think that just a dx of autism warrants such treatments, though.

I agree with this, so I don't understand why now you're saying something completely different.



The problem with ADHD and such disorders is that they benefit the pharmaceutical companies in terms of billions of dollars in revenue, hence they will have nothing against misdiagnosing children for the sake of making money when they only seemed to have the disorder. There isn't a drug for autism yet, but there for anxiety issues and so on. Doctors make shedloads off of us, so of course for me the fact that these children were "cured" proves to me that these children were misdiagnosed.

Asthma however, is a different story because it can be both genetic and acquired. Someone with acquired asthma could probably become much more easily cured, while someone with genetic asthma can probably only be improved. I don't think it's much different with autism in that field.