Risky Alternative Treatments for Autism
The LA Times has an article about autism that is worth discussing here. Studies show that up to three-quarters of families with autistic children try alternative therapies to treat the condition. A recent investigation by the Chicago Tribune found that many of these treatments have not been proven successful and, more alarmingly, could actually harm the child.
The therapies often go beyond harmless New Age folly, the investigation found. Many are unproven and risky, based on flawed, preliminary or misconstrued scientific research.
Lab tests used to justify therapies are often misleading and misinterpreted. And though some parents fervently believe their children have benefited, the investigation found a trail of disappointing results from the few clinical trials conducted to evaluate the treatments objectively.
It is easy to understand the eagerness with which parents of afflicted children desire a cure. With one in one hundred U.S. children diagnosed on the autism spectrum by the age of 8, there are a lot of people searching for answers. As we’ve discussed on this site, the heartbreaking reality is that there are no answers at this point. No one knows what causes autism or what can best treat (or possibly reverse) the condition. This means there is rampant speculation and anecdotal evidence being spread amongst parents and others in the medical field, which can lead to a child participating in unproven and possibly dangerous treatments.
The article gives a few examples of the risky treatments being performed:
The investigation found children undergoing day-long infusions of a blood product that carries the risk of kidney failure and anaphylactic shock. Researchers in the field emphatically warn that the therapy should not be used to treat autism.
Children are repeatedly encased in pressurized oxygen chambers normally used after scuba diving accidents. This unproven therapy is meant to reduce inflammation that experts say is little understood and may even be beneficial.
Children undergo rounds of chelation therapy to leach heavy metals from the body, though most toxicologists say the test commonly used to measure the metals is meaningless and the treatment potentially harmful.
It is worrisome that there are vulnerable children being subjected to these sorts of alternative procedures without scientific evidence of their benefit. At best, some of these methods would do nothing; at worst, there could be serious health consequences. There is an example cited in the article of a 5-year old autistic child who died in 2005 while undergoing a chelation treatment in a doctor’s office.
Obviously, more scientific research is needed, quickly, to help stop the misinformation. Parents need treatment options that are backed by solid evidence and hold up in clinical trials. Only then can we be sure we’re not doing more harm than good.

Pretty cute, huh?