... would you call that good news?
Like if it turns out that chelation have effects like helping children with autism to be more likely to develop speech, be more able to handle working environments, and less likely to develop depression and stuff like that, not necessarily making them "less autistic" per se or change their neurology in any way.
I personally don't think chelation have effects like that, but I find the question interesting. Something tells me that it was this question that made me modify my anti-cure philosophy abit to the one I've mentioned earlier.
I personally think it would be good news, it would mean that many children would have better potential of living productive lives as autistic.
You will see that alot of the neurodiversity supporting communities regards chelation as quackery.
I suggest that if anyone wants to argue about whether or not chelation is beneficial they should start another thread.
Someone voted no, would be nice to have some response aswell.
Might be more difficult to say that for someone who has participated in the heated debate against the theories behind chelation as a treatment.
Special intervention that is done tend to get some credit when autistic children develop, that have also been the case with interventions that was later disproved like salva chelation and secretin injection.
It's a hypothetical question, it doesn't even need to be chelation.
People supporting chelation will probably always find a new theory behind chelation anyway if an old one gets disproved. Most chelation-supporting non-trolls I've seen on the news-forums nowadays don't believe in the vaccine theory.
I guess my point is, while we might be against the seek for a cure, we shouldn't be against development of treatments that are nothing but practical help.
No, I don't think it would be good news. Too much pressure would then be brought to bear on having people take up the cure, and it could be made compulsory. How would we know about all the possible side-effects either?
I never described the effects as a cure, but I agree there would probably be pressure.
It is also abit of, "what if a controversial treatment claimed to cure or 'decrease' autism was proved to have effects of practical help?"
My question is purely hypothetical, but if it wasn't I guess you would have to have well-designed double-blind tests or some other kind of scientific proof.
Maybe you have to put his bedtime forward, like after 1 AM.
(no idea)
You can preview your messages to see if you get the quotes right.
As I understand it the "chelating agents" that are taken either orally or intravenous (injected) depending on the chelating agent is alittle magnetic and therefore absorb heavy metals in the blood before it should go out the digestive system.
Chelation is claimed to be beneficial for autistic children, treat autism and even cause recoveries. It is called an alternative treatment for autism as it is not proved to have any effect on autism.
Some biomed parent at the news forums said it isn't an alternative treatment because it is standard proseduere with lead poisoning (it is, although the chelating agents are usually different), but it is definitely alternative for "treatment of autism".
I believe Defeat Autism Now! (DAN!) and Generation Rescue are the main promoters of the alternative treatment, but something tells me that they want to prevent it from hitting mainstream.
The most important chelation agents are disodium EDTA, sodium EDTA, DMPS and DMSA. DMSA is taken orally and is the most common used as a treatment for autism. Disodium EDTA was used before but it didn't chelate mercury and caused death accidents as it was mixed up with sodium EDTA.
Chelation also has a history as an alternative treatment of cardiovascular disease especially.
Chelation treatment for actual heavy metal poisoning needs to be given within hours, not months/years of the original toxic insult. It will remove the toxins but it won't undo damage that has already occurred. Promoting chelation for anything other than this legit (and rare) condition harms both those rare people who do need it in emergencies (as it becomes associated with quackery) and those who are exposed to possibly dangerous practices.
Chelation agents can sometimes occur naturally in the environment or in our diet - and for the most part in small doses they don't have much effect. However, the ones that do (for example phytic acid in soya products) are likely to actually chelate all the essential minerals from your body - calcium, iron and zinc for example.
In short, chelation should only ever be used for people with REAL mercury poisoning as an emergency treatment. Any other use is silly at best and abuse/medical malpractice at worst.