Ridiculous Autism Treatment Statements - 1
July 6, 2007 by Do'C 
Printer-Friendly Version
Foreward
This post may be the first of what turns out to be a long series of very brief posts. Here’s why.
The internet is filled with speculation and information about autism, and so-called autism ‘treatments’. Many websites contain content or statments that, upon closer examination, don’t seem to have much to do with scientific reality. I’m going to use this forum to point out some the more ridiculous of those statements.
Why? Because I think parents should expect more from doctors, than websites with shopping carts and potentially misleading information.
Part One - ICDRC Website on HBOT
Yep, we’ve pixelized the people to prevent them from the potential embarassment of being associated with riculous statements, but the picture is not what’s important here. It’s the statments about HBOT (hyperbaric oxygen therapy) on this particular webpage that deserve a closer look. Here’s what this page says (truly ridiculous statements appear in bold, the emphasis is mine):
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is an A.M.A. recognized medical treatment which enhances the body’s natural healing process by inhalation of 100% oxygen in a total body chamber where atmospheric pressure is increased and controlled. It is simply intermittent, short-term, high dose oxygen inhalation therapy. It is used for a wide variety of treatments usually as part of an overall medical care plan. The oxygen level in the patient’s blood-stream is raised many times above normal, which helps control infections and promote healing in many kinds of illness or injury.
Under normal circumstances, oxygen is transported throughout the body only by red blood cells. With HBO, oxygen is dissolved into all of the body’s fluids, the plasma, the central nervous system fluids, the lymph, and bone and can be carried to areas where circulation is diminished or blocked. In this way, extra oxygen can reach all of the damaged tissues and the body can support its own healing process. It is a simple, non-invasive and painless treatment.
The oxygen level in the patient’s bloodstream is raised many times above normal? That’s incredible! It’s also very unlikely to be true.
For the sake of discussion, lets assume we’re talking about a child with an average hemoglobin of about 13.5 mg/ml. A simplified version of the equation by which we can estimate the total whole blood oxygen content (ml/dl) is:
[Plasma O2 + O2 Bound to hemoglobin] = Total whole blood O2 content ml/dl.
More specifically for those who want the detail:
[PO2*.003 + Hb*1.34*O2Sat] = Total whole blood O2 content ml/dl.
There are some minor adjustments not directly stated in the equation, like the adjustment for the partial pressure of water vapor in the lungs, but all in all, the equation can provide a fairly accurate estimate of the amount of oxygen in the blooodstream. For example, calculating the scenario for a pediatric patient simply breathing room air using our formula, we get:
[.30 + 13.5*1.34*.98] = 18.03 ml/dl
Now lets try that same calculation for the same patient, but we’ll make the scenario breathing 100% oxygen at 2 atmospheres absolute in a rigid hyperbaric chamber (a pressure above what’s typically being delivered to autistic patients).
[4.38 + 13.5*1.34*1.00] = 22.47 ml/dl
Wait a minute… The website’s statement was that the oxygen level in the patient’s bloodstream is “raised many times above normal”? According to our calculation, it’s only been raised by about 25 percent. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think a 25 percent increase is equivalent to “many times above normal”. Put this calculation to the test with one of the popular “soft” chambers that acheives less than 1.3 atmospheres absolute pressure, and provides an inhalation environment of far less than 100% oxygen (that’s right, even an oxygen concentrator or a typical oxygen mask doesn’t deliver 100% pure oxygen), and the number is even lower - far lower.
But what about the website’s statement that “under normal circumstances, oxygen is transported throughout the body only by red blood cells”? It’s completely untrue. Oxygen is always transported throughout the body by blood plasma too. Oxygen dissolves into the blood plasma according to Henry’s Law. At 1 atmosphere absolute, the amount of oxygen from room air that dissolves into the blood plasma is small, but it is still there. If the ICDRC website were to claim that “under normal circumstances the majority of oxygen is transported throughout the body by the red blood cells”. I would say that’s true. But, take note. It’s also true that even under most clinical hyperbaric conditions (breathing 100% oxygen at greater than 1 atmosphere absolute) that the majority of oxygen is still transported throughout the body by the red blood cells.
It’s also worth mentioning that, although I didn’t consider it ridiculous with respect to scientific reality per se, Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is an A.M.A. recognized medical treatment, but NOT for autism.
36 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Important Comment Notes
Installed spam filter plugins may result in your comment being held in a moderation queue. Please consider making a copy of your comment "just in case". You can use many XHTML tags to mark up your comment if desired.
Additional information about comments and other contact can be found here
Comment by Ms. Clark — 7 July, 2007 @ 12:20 am
So I’m guessing mom and kid go in there together? And how do they know if the kid goes into a seizure while he’s in there if mom doesn’t go in, too?
Comment by laurentius-rex — 7 July, 2007 @ 3:16 am
An interesting result from my most recent blood tests.
Although my red blood cell count was on the lowest boundary of normal my mean corpuscular heamoglobin count was beyond the highest boundary which I assume means that my blood cells are rather efficient in transporting oxygen to begin with.
I only live a couple of hundred feet above sea level and I don’t think that Warwickshire is an area of abnormally high pressure.
Wait a minute, because of the toxicity of pure oxygen, don’t deep sea divers have to have increasing amounts of nitrogen or helium mixed with it because of the pressures?
Comment by daedalus2u — 7 July, 2007 @ 4:02 am
The parameter that is “important”, is not the O2 content of blood (mL/dL), rather it is the “chemical potential”, that is the chemical activity of the O2. This is measured by the partial pressure, and indeed is raised many fold by HBOT. Normal O2 partial pressure is limited by what is in air (about 0.2 atmosphere at sea level), and cannot go higher. Under 2 atm O2, it is 10 times higher than can occur in nature. That is, it is 10x higher than any human ancestor has been exposed to ever.
The O2 content of blood is a non-lineaer function of O2 pressure because of the non-lineaer association of O2 with hemoglobin. In hemoglobin-free areas, such as the plasma between the red blood cells, the O2 level is proportional to the O2 partial pressure, and would be 10x higher in 2 atm O2.
1 atm O2 will kill a mouse in a few days.
http://ajrcmb.atsjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/4/573
Why would you subject a child to a short treatment of something that will kill a mouse? Perhaps if there is a medical need, as from carbon monoxide poisoning where HBOT has been demonstrated to be beneficial.
Comment by Anonymous — 7 July, 2007 @ 6:43 am
Breaking down the premises to a conclusion makes the statement untrue. Not the conclusion. All we have proven here is that the statements are potentially invalid. HBOT may still be beneficial for autistic children. In fact, studies showing improvements can be found on the http://www.autism.com website. Try debunking those studies instead of marketing statements.
Comment by Callista — 7 July, 2007 @ 7:30 am
I’m going to play the devil’s advocate here:
Pure O2 may kill a mouse in two days; but so will Tylenol. A mouse is much smaller; and two days is much longer than anybody spends in HBOT chambers. People are aware of the risks of pure oxygen already–that’s why preemies are weaned off it as soon as possible.
This sort of therapy is so much smaller than a harmful dose… I don’t think it could actually harm anyone. After all, people breathe pressurized air all the time without any problems when they go diving or live in submarines.
The bigger problem–that parents spend time wanting to cure their autistic children instead of teaching them to live in our crazy, unpredictable world–is, i think, the real risk of HBOT.
Re. Seizures: A porthole should allow observation of the occupant of the chamber; I don’t see any in the picture, but they could be there.
Comment by Do'C — 7 July, 2007 @ 8:44 am
No one said the conclusion wasn’t true.
That’s right, and I think parents deserve better than “invalid” statements.
It may. And it may not.
It’s my blog - I’ll write about whatever I want (lame marketing statements on the websites of so-called DAN! doctors included).
Study or no study, I have written about why a very common version (mHBOT), looks more like a potential scam here.
Comment by Do'C — 7 July, 2007 @ 8:57 am
You’re probably right Callista, if you don’t count some pain in the wallet. Some popular versions of this therapy are such a smaller dose of oxygen, it probably doesn’t do much at all, if anything. My example was intended to point out the problem with the statements of that website, not HBOT. Autistic kids are not receiving HBOT at 100% O2 and 2 atmospheres absolute that I am aware of.
That’s a good point.
Comment by Do'C — 7 July, 2007 @ 9:31 am
Daedalus2u,
It would seem that all they would need to do to correct their statement would be change “oxygen level” to “partial pressure” in the first sentece I emphasized, and change the “only” to “mostly” in the second.
Comment by HBOT = Quackery — 7 July, 2007 @ 11:55 am
High Pressure Anon - Please provide pubmed links to the quackery and I’ll help debunk the HBOT horsecrap. And if I wanted to see Bernie’s face plastered all over the place I’d go to a public restroom rather than autism.com
- oh, and don’t forget the magnesium too!
This was a good post, DoC. People need to be made aware that these quacks are out for money and nothing but money.
Comment by Ms. Clark — 7 July, 2007 @ 12:08 pm
Exposing kids to HBOT could increas their risk of seizures. No one knows how bad HBOT is for autistic kids. They will be putting the kids under the dreaded “oxidative stress” that supposedly made them autistic to begin with.
Putting a kid in one of those tanks by himself sounds really stupid. Aren’t they trying to “SAVE” the toddlers and preschoolers, first? I can see how it might be ok for a 16 year old, but that one could still have seizures kindled by thte experience. Even if they have a porthole, they’d still have to have someone looking through it every minute…
It looks like an assembly line, anyway, doesn’t it? Bradstreet doesn’t have malpractice insurance or hospital privileges, if a child gets hurt in his clinic he can’t follow the kid to the hospital except as a visitor like anyone else.
Comment by Ms. Clark — 7 July, 2007 @ 12:13 pm
“Knowledge strikes its wounds upon the status quo.”
~ Jeff Bradstreet
What? How about “Ignorance fattens Bradstreet’s wallet?”
Comment by Do'C — 7 July, 2007 @ 12:53 pm
Ms. Clark,
Can you provide evidence about the term I moderated so I can repost it?
Comment by mcewen — 7 July, 2007 @ 2:45 pm
Unfortunately all to familiar, but not from first hand experience.
Best wishes
Comment by Matt — 7 July, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
I hope not! We’d have heard about the deaths by now if anyone had done this.
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity
“The maximum single exposure limits recommended in the NOAA Diving Manual are 45 minutes at 1.6 bar, 120 minutes at 1.5 bar, 150 minutes at 1.4 bar, 180 minutes at 1.3 bar and 210 minutes at 1.2 bar”
Note that in going from 1.5 to 1.6 bar (athmospheres), the exposure time dropped from 120 minutes to 45 minutes.
Anyone who has taken an enriched oxygen diving course knows your depth limit is much lower with more oxygen.
People who talk about just higher pressures of plain air neglect the effect of higher N2 concentration. Long before you get the bends the N2 will result in a “drag” or a reduced energy for a long while.
But, at least you can rest assured that your HBot experience will not cause problems with your other wacky therapies:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/x4v10k751240u7k7/
Matt
Comment by Ms. Clark — 7 July, 2007 @ 5:30 pm
Do’C…
http://ww2.doh.state.fl.us/irm00Profiling/ProfileFINRESP.asp?LicId=36219&ProfNBR=1501
“JAMES JEFFREY BRADSTREET LICENSE NUMBER: ME44408
Profession:Medical Doctor
Year Began Practicing:1/1/1979
Expiration Date:1/31/2009
Status:CLEAR/ACTIVE
Information in this profile has been verified by the practitioner.
Financial Responsibility
I have elected not to carry medical malpractice insurance, however, I agree to satisfy any adverse judgements up to the minimum amounts pursuant to s. 458.320(5)(g) 1 or 459.0085(5)(g)1, F. S. I understand that I must either post notice in the form of a “sign” prominently displayed in the reception area or provide a written statement to any person to whom medical services are being provided that I have decided not to carry medical malpractice insurance. I understand that such a sign or notice must contain the wording specified in s. 458.320(5)(g) or 459.0085(5)(g), F. S.”
Comment by Do'C — 7 July, 2007 @ 5:37 pm
Thank you Ms. Clark.
Comment by Junior — 7 July, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
Do’C said:
“You’re probably right Callista, if you don’t count some pain in the wallet.”
Quite a bit of wallet pain judging by the price list of this shiny new hbot center: http://www.birminghamhbot.com/f/Jun07PriceList.pdf
This site says current recommendations for autistic children are for “40 hour blocks” with “a cumulative of 120 hours or more”. They say their treatment costs are well below the national average.
A parent testimonial on the site says they have seen “tremendous receptive language gains” “after completing almost 80 dives”. Those language gains came at a cost of $7, 600.
Comment by Prometheus — 8 July, 2007 @ 12:32 am
Per the recommendations of “anonymous”, I looked up the “studies” of HBOT in autism listed at autism.com. What I found wasn’t too impressive. Two articles in Medical Hypotheses, one of which had a “retrospective study” of 18 children, 6 of whom received 100% oxygen at 1.5 atm (absolute) and 12 who got 24% oxygen at 1.3 atm. There were no non-treatment controls and the people who did the assessments knew that the children had received the treatment.
Although the “study” claims that there were statistically significant differences, the children were compared to themselves, before and after treatment. Since it seems that the treatments were carried out over a period of months and since other therapies were being used concomittantly, the “significance” of the findings are not very impressive.
Even if we are to accept at face value the improvements of the children involved in this “study”, the question remains - how could it possibly have any effect?
As the calculations above have amply shown, the increase in oxygen-carrying capacity at the pressures and oxygen concentrations used is trivial. For most of the children (receiving 24% oxygen at 1.3 atm), they could have gotten the same effect by breathing 30% oxygen, a concentration easily attained with a simple face mask.
In later statements, Dr. Rossignol has claimed that it “might have been” pressure effects that caused the changes. This is even more ludicrous. Except for a few air-filled compartments, the body is essentially as compressible as water, which has a bulk modulus of compression of 2.2 Gigapascals. This means that at 1.5 atm, the body compresses by only 0.007%.
So, what conceivable effect could HBOT be having?
It’s not the oxygen. It’s not the pressure. What’s left?
Prometheus
Comment by daedalus2u — 8 July, 2007 @ 7:52 am
The actual medical use of HBOT has good theoretical underpinnings. The main uses are in carbon monoxide poisoning, where CO attaches to heme and prevents O2 from attaching. This includes heme in hemoglobin, but also heme in mitochondria where O2 is actually consumed. HBOT provides higher O2 partial pressures, which displace CO from heme. Other types of poisoning where HBOT is used is poisoning by H2S, perhaps by HCN too.
In treating deep infections, those infections are by anaerobic bacteria. Those bacteria are inhibited by O2, some of them are even killed by it. HBOT is more like an antibiotic than anything else in those cases.
What is the theoretical underpinning of HBOT for autism? There isn’t one. O2 levels above “normal” are not going to make the O2 consuming pathways work any better. Is there any evidence that those pathways are disrupted in ASDs? No, there isn’t. Is there any evidence that ASD individuals have some chronic metabolic defect of reduced O2 transport? No, there isn’t.
In treating decompression sickness, the problem is the formation of bubbles of gas in the blood and tissues. The solubility of gas in fluid is proportional to the pressure. The gas that is most important in decompression sickness is nitrogen. Air is 80% N2. Conceivably one could get bubbles of O2 in the blood, but because O2 is consumed, those bubbles would rapidly shrink. What is important in decompression sickness is the difference between the pressure at which the body was loaded up with N2, and the absolute pressure at which the body is exposed, and whether gas bubbles can nucleate out. Traveling by aircraft immediately after one has dived is not a good idea because you are subjected to low atmospheric pressure in an aircraft and that can cause decompression sickness if you still have elevated blood nitrogen.
Helium is used as a substitute inert gas instead of N2 because helium has a much lower solubility in tissue fluids, aqueous and lipid. It is thought that nitrogen narcosis is due to N2 dissolving in the lipid membranes of cells, and modifying the behavior of neurotransmitter receptors that are imbedded in those membranes too.
Comment by laurentius-rex — 9 July, 2007 @ 4:40 am
Am I not still correct in believing that the proportion of Oxgen has to be reduced the deeper one dives because of its toxicity at higher pressures? I thought this was one reason it is diluted with Helium because pure oxygen at high pressure would be fatal.
Comment by Changer — 9 July, 2007 @ 10:46 pm
I think it would be much more effective to help autistic kids get their PADI certification and take them deep sea diving. Fish! LOOSE fish! Fish not in a zoo or shiny glass box! And quality time with their parents in relaxing tropical atmospheres.
Two atmospheres (~60 foot BSL, IIRC? (I did my certification 15 years ago and let it lapse the next summer) is well-within the range of beginner divers, if I’m understanding all the figures and whatnot above. And you can just go to dangerous cutrate dive companies who don’t do their oxygen mix properly to get pure O2, right?
Oh. They only like SCIENTIFIC dangerous people. *shrugs* It was just a thought.
Comment by O2 addicts all or us — 3 December, 2007 @ 9:53 am
So DoC… your science is wrong… the oxygen levels are raised many times the normal levels and that is why HBOT is used for non healing wounds, burns, skin flaps etc… this can also be measured using transcutanious oxymetry. Why will this healing not work in the brain. Have you another therapy that will repair the brain. Have you any more good science that shows breathing O2 will kill you… you can die from drinking too much water, but it aint easy… do you know any one who has died from O2 overdose? Are you addicted to O2… I am and everyone I know that walks the earth is also… in fact you go to jail for keeping O2 from anyone… think about it
And even worse is that you do not offer anything better to help the children… ranting and raving and misleading parents is irresponsible and sophomoric.
Comment by Do'C — 3 December, 2007 @ 7:53 pm
Sorry addict, my calculations about O2 levels in the bloodstream are correct. Your statement (and the ICDRC website’s) would have been accurate if it had read blood plasma instead. With HBOT, the O2 increase achieved in the plasma is many times normal levels, and when circulation has been physically impaired, such as with the case of something like a myocutaneous free flap graft, that plasma O2 may be the only thing reaching ischemic tissue until neovascularization occurs.
I’ve read about some perfusion abnormalities, but there seems to be question about whether it is causal or a feature in autism. Is autism an ongoing state of cerebral hypoxia/ischemia?
Please detail the “repairs” of the brain specific to autism that HBOT or mHBOT effects - please include appropriate supporting science.
Did someone claim breathing O2 will kill you? If they did, ask them for the supporting science so you’ll know what pressures and concentrations to avoid - O2 is a potent cytotoxin after all.
And your point is?
Not personally.
I’m actually addicted to low CO2 levels - but the O2 is a great perk.
Can you point out exactly what is misleading and provide the appropriate corrections and scientific support? I’m happy to correct actual errors.
Comment by Prometheus — 3 December, 2007 @ 8:50 pm
O2 addict….
You really ought to take a look at the science of hyperbaric oxygen. Don’t just repeat what the HBOT promoters are telling you - actually look at the facts.
[1] “…the oxygen levels are raised many times the normal levels and that is why HBOT is used for non healing wounds, burns, skin flaps etc…”
Well, this is what happens when you are in a real HBOT chamber, at many atmospheres pressure, with an oxygen tent over the non-healing superficial wound. You’ll notice, however, that HBOT is not effective at healing wounds or infections that are not close to the surface.
Truth is, O2 Addict, that the hemoglobin in the blood can carry much more oxygen than can dissolve in the blood plasma (that’s why we need the red cells; they carry the hemoglobin). It takes over 9 atmospheres pressure of 100% oxygen (pure oxygen) to dissolve enough oxygen in the blood to match the amount of oxygen carried by hemoglobin when you’re breathing air at sea level pressure (1 atmosphere).
The thing is, hemoglobin is pretty much saturated with oxygen when we’re breathing air (21% oxygen) at sea level pressure (1 atmosphere), so the additional oxygen and pressure don’t make much of an improvement in the oxygen content of the blood until you get well above the pressure that the “soft chambers” can reach.
And before you ask, the reason that people with lung problems are given extra oxgen is to overcome the increased diffusion barrier that most lung diseases (e.g. emphysema, bronchitis, pneumonia) create. The extra oxygen drives more oxygen toward the blood, allowing the hemoglobin to “fill up” completely.
Don’t take my word for it - check any physiology text.
At the usual “soft chamber” pressures (1.3 to 1.5 atmospheres), even pure oxygen will result in a trivial (about 15%) increase in the amount of oxygen carried by the blood.
(BTW, I cover this in my blog: http://photoninthedarkness.com/?p=127)
[2] “Why will this healing not work in the brain.[sic]”
That would be because the brain is buried beneath skin, bone, and tissue and the oxygen can’t diffuse to the brain in any significant amount. That’s why we can’t take people with terminal lung disease and keep them alive in a hyperbaric chamber - the oxygen won’t diffuse across the skin fast enough. The surface area of the lung is many, many times the surface area of our skin.
The reason that hyperbaric oxygen works (not all the time, but often enough to make it worth a try) on non-healing skin wounds is that the infection/inflammation/etc. of the wound has reduced the blood flow to the area, preventing adequate (or any) healing. Note that the blood flow is inadequate, not absent.
Hyperbaric oxygen causes enough oxygen to diffuse across the thin layer of skin and tissue (often no skin or tissue - the wounds are most often open to the air) and provide enough additional oxygen to allow healing. Once healing has occurred, the oxygen demand is less and the inflammation is reduced, improving blood flow.
As I said above, this won’t work for deep tissues, like the brain.
[3] “Have you any more good science that shows breathing O2 will kill you…?”
Yes. Oxygen is actually pretty toxic at elevated concentrations and pressures. This isn’t a new idea - divers have known this for decades. You can start your Google PhD in oxygen toxicity here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_toxicity
[4] “And even worse is that you do not offer anything better to help the children… ranting and raving and misleading parents is irresponsible and sophomoric.”
Good advice - you should read it and heed it.
It’s no shame to be ignorant about human physiology, but it’s nothing you would want to parade in public, either. Like you did here.
Prometheus
Comment by daedalus2u — 4 December, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
Read the opening sentence of this
http://ajrcmb.atsjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/4/573
“Mice exposed to 100% O2 die after 3 or 4 d with diffuse alveolar damage and alveolar edema.”
That is at one atmosphere, not even hyperbaric.
In fact, O2 is the most toxic substance known, even more toxic than mercury. Breathing an inert gas with one part per quadrillion O2 is rapidly fatal. Even homeopathic O2 is rapidly fatal, that is O2 diluted with inert helium beyond where there are any molecules of O2 remaining.
Comment by O2 addicts all or us — 5 December, 2007 @ 8:03 am
Hello DoC
DoC wrote:
Sorry addict, my calculations about O2 levels in the bloodstream are correct. Your statement (and the ICDRC website’s) would have been accurate if it had read blood plasma instead. With HBOT, the O2 increase achieved in the plasma is many times normal levels, and when circulation has been physically impaired, such as with the case of something like a myocutaneous free flap graft, that plasma O2 may be the only thing reaching ischemic tissue until neovascularization occurs.
We Agree
DoC wrote:
I’ve read about some perfusion abnormalities, but there seems to be question about whether it is causal or a feature in autism. Is autism an ongoing state of cerebral hypoxia/ischemia?
Yes, read this from Dr. Rossignol… page 2
http://www.drneubrander.com/Files/Rossignol%20HBOT%20pathophysiology%20autism%202006.pdf
DoC wrote:
Please detail the “repairs” of the brain specific to autism that HBOT or mHBOT effects - please include appropriate supporting science.
Sure, Dr Rossignol has done research in this area amoung others… there are other studies if you would like them
you can die from drinking too much water, but it aint easy…
DoC wrote:
And your point is?
My point is that like drinking too much water to kill yourself it is very difficult to kill with too much oxygen. That is why we do not hear of death from too much O2. However it can be done with increased pressure for extended periods… but it is very difficult to do accidently.
do you know any one who has died from O2 overdose?
DoC wrote:
Not personally.
Either do I and I have not even heard of a death from O@ toxicity.
Are you addicted to O2… I am and everyone I know that walks the earth is also… in fact you go to jail for keeping O2 from anyone… think about it
DoC wrote:
I’m actually addicted to low CO2 levels - but the O2 is a great perk.
I do not understand this. You are not suggesting that you can live on CO2 alone without oxygen are you? You probably will not live for more than 10 minutes w/o O2… and if you do you may have brain damage… I am not suggesting that you or anyone try.
And even worse is that you do not offer anything better to help the children… ranting and raving and misleading parents is irresponsible and sophomoric.
DoC wrote:
Can you point out exactly what is misleading and provide the appropriate corrections and scientific support? I’m happy to correct actual errors.
Yes, please read Dr. Rossignols study.
Kind Regards,
O2
Comment by Do'C — 5 December, 2007 @ 7:48 pm
Rossignol’s hypothesis is a long way from answering, “Is autism an ongoing state of cerebral hypoxia/ischemia?”. I’ve exchanged several e-mails with him in the past, and although I find his work pretty unconvincing, I do give him credit for indirectly acknowledging potential sources of error in his work. Ask him about the blood O2 levels delivered by mask alone and how they compare to the pseudo hyperbaric chambers. Ask him for science about the actual effects of a mere .25 ATA increase in pressure alone (he’s big on the supposed “pressure effect” you know).
Feel free to cite whatever you find compelling. Please be specific autism, and try to avoid citations from journals that are pay-to-publish and not peer-reviewed (like Med. Hypotheses).
What in the world does this have to do with autism, or blood oxygen levels?
Okay.
Of course not. I was merely referring to typical respiratory drive (you might compare it to an addiction of sorts) being influenced by high C02 levels in the blood. C02 goes up, respiratory drive increases (to rid the body of C02), and the O2 comes along with it.
I would not suggest it either.
I read it months ago. It’s lacking, the measurements and methodology leave a lot to be desired, it’s not peer-reviewed, it contains factual error, and it’s HYPOTHESIS. It also does not point out anything misleading in my post, nor does it present any corrections with scientific support.
Comment by O2 addicts all or us — 7 December, 2007 @ 8:43 am
So what do you suggest that parents do to help their children?
HBOT is successful in treating TBI, CP, near drowning and other hypoxic/ Ischemic events. My point about the difficulty to unintentionally hurt someone with too much O2 was HBOT is a relatively safe procedure with very few and temporary side effects. This is not deep diving. 16 feet is fairly shallow with few risks and there is both anecdotal and clinical evidence that in some cases Autism is ameliorated.
In Britain there are HBOT clinics around the country set up to treat MS. This has been going on for more than a decade. There is good evidence that it helps to arrest and or slow down the progression of the disease. It is non-profit and only costs clients about $20 per treatment. Do you think it advisable to try HBOT if the cost is $20 per session?
Are you dead set against HBOT?
Take care,
O2
Comment by Do'C — 7 December, 2007 @ 1:29 pm
Help them do what?
Implied relative safety does not equal efficacy. There is anecdotal “evidence” for just about anything.
Argument from popularity, equivocation with MS, and argument from low price? - weak.
Absolutely not. I was treated with real HBOT following reattachment of a severed limb.
Comment by O2 addicts all or us — 7 December, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
You say: Help them do what?
You honestly do not know? This is the Autism Street place and we are discussing HBOT to help children with Autism.
OK - Help them improve the quality of life for thier children.
Have you seen the PET Scans of brains before and after HBOT?
Comment by Do'C — 7 December, 2007 @ 6:32 pm
To help children with autism do what?
So your question is not what I suggest parents do to help their children, but rather what I suggest would help parents to improve the quality of the children’s lives? If I am following you correctly (and I might not be), and you’d like an answer, I’ll need to know how you define “quality of life”.
Nope, but I might be interested. Please provide references to published, peer-reviewed studies of hyperbaric oxygen therapy that feature before and after PET Scan images.
Comment by Prometheus — 8 December, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
O2 Addict places a great deal of faith in the changes in PET (and SPECT) scans of people - including autistic children - after HBOT (real HBOT, in some cases).
The problem with reading blood flow “scans” is that they don’t tell you if the increased blow flow is beneficial or not.
Right now, I’m sure that O2 Addict - with his/her rather simplistic view of physiology - is thinking, “More blood flow is good, right? How could more blood flow not be good?”
Well, increasing the blood flow to a part of the brain is only helpful if that part of the brain needs more blood flow than it was getting previously. If it doesn’t need more blood flow, then it doesn’t help a bit.
In fact, it might even be detrimental if the increased blood flow comes at the expense of another part of the brain.
There’s also the question of whether this is simply reactive hyperemia - an increase in blood flow caused by injury or inflammation induced by the HBOT.
The problem O2 Addict fails to realize is that Dr. Rossignol’s studies are nothing more than an open-label trial of a treatment without any controls.
There is no way to tell if the children in his studies have gotten any benefit from HBOT because there is no way to know how much improvement these children would have experienced in the absence of HBOT therapy.
Dr. Rossignol - and all the others who point to PET, SPECT and fMRI scans showing “increased blood flow” have yet to connect this increased blood flow with any improvement in their subjects.
They have also failed to show that the “increased blood flow” is not a sign of injury.
Prometheus
Comment by systole — 4 January, 2008 @ 1:54 pm
Greetings, i am working at an HBO treatment center in Turkey.
We are doing a daily HBOT sessions for 8 autistic kids. HBOT has very strict safety guidelines, and one can say it is safe. Kids go to 1.4 ATA and stay there 60 minutes with parental accompaniment. There is a 5 minute break without masks. We have never observed negative oxygen effects on those children for months.
On the other side, children are taken to HBOT treatment after a detailed and clear discussion with parents about risks and benefits of HBOT on autism. They do searches over the internet. Even on our website, it is stated that this treatment is still experimental and no clear data available about the outcomes. It is the wish of the families to continue the treatment, because some of them observe behavioral improvements.
Since it is cheap and no harm, it is good to give it a try IMHO.
Comment by Prometheus — 4 January, 2008 @ 4:34 pm
Systole,
I assume that you have data supporting your assertion that daily HBOT (if 1.4 atm can be considered “hyperbaric”) is “safe”?
Or are you just assuming that it is?
It was long assumed that professional divers who stayed within the dive tables and never had symptoms of decompression sickness were “safe”. Then someone thought to investigate this assumption.
At least one study found EEG, BAEP and VEP changes in divers compared to controls.
(Link)
The point is not to compare the pressure exposures of these divers to the autistic children undergoing HBOT, but to point out that the effects of repetitive exposure to pressure may be cumulative and may be greater than assumed.
On the other hand, it is also likely that this “therapy” is both useless and safe.
Prometheus
Comment by mama7 — 1 July, 2009 @ 4:26 am
lots of studies and those brain scans here. My son is recieving HBOT and has improved after only 10 sessions.
Comment by Chris — 2 July, 2009 @ 10:07 am
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes is not data. Perhaps he improved because he sees being put into a small claustrophobic environment as punishment.