

Autism treatment: Science hijacked to support alternative therapies - tokenadult
http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/chi-autism-science-nov23,0,6519404,full.story

======
SamAtt
I don’t think it’s as black and white as this article suggests.

We don’t know what causes Autism and to the best of our knowledge it doesn’t
exist in any other species. Even if it did exist in other species it would be
almost impossible to diagnose. So there’s really no testing (other than long
term trials) that can be performed on perspective treatments. This results in
a marketplace where completely bogus treatments look no better or worse than
ones that have potential. Combine that with Parents who are desperate to help
their children and you get a very dangerous and volatile situation. That
situation is what this article tries to address.

But I’m not sure you can fault parents who try alternative treatments that are
supervised by physicians. These researchers act like their opinion should be
the last word on the findings in their report. That’s especially frustrating
when their opinion is “we don’t know what it means and have no real way to
find out”. All these parents are doing are taking an aggressive approach.

Again, I don’t support anyone who tries a treatment that isn’t supervised by a
physician but I don’t see anyone doing that here.

~~~
roc
I didn't see anything in the article that suggested the parents were at fault.

It read to me as solely faulting the 'physicians': the ones that we hope and
expect to know the difference between snake-oil and medical science; the ones
we trust to behave appropriately.

~~~
SamAtt
I read the blame differently but I don't agree that the physicians are at
fault here either. The article treats the researchers' opinion as if it was
unquestionably correct. The researchers said x wouldn't work and this person
tried it so they are ignoring science.

But the researchers are no more qualified to interpret their results than
another clinical researcher specializing in the field (the whole point of a
research paper is to present what you found not interpret it for the
audience). If someone else thinks x might work and they are backed by their
own research and a physician who makes sure it isn't dangerous than I don't
see the problem.

~~~
antipaganda
You don't see a problem with using autistic children as guinea-pigs for
experimental treatment, based on nothing more than a preliminary study? In
many of these cases, the study itself warns against using it as the basis for
any sort of treatment!

Also, there's no double-blinding. Hello placebo effect!

------
rbanffy
I see desperate parents may not make the most sensible decisions regarding the
medical care of their kids. It's sad, but expected they will try whatever
weird treatment a doctor says may possibly have a tiny chance of improving the
kid's condition.

After becoming a parent, that movie quote, "My logic is uncertain where my son
is concerned", took on a whole new meaning to me.

