Just about every one of our patients “do the diet”. It’s different for each child. Parents are asked to avoid the foods that test in the highest range of immunoglobulin-4 (that’s I-g-G ‘four’) levels.
That is considered ‘kooky’ by medical establishment standards. I have treated several patients under the age of 7 years, lately, who were taking Zoloft, Prozac, Vyvanse, and Intunive in combination and pretty high doses, prescribed by prominent local neurologists. That, apparently, is not kooky.
The ‘diet’ is considered risky by medical establishment standards. Those are the standards that do not require testing of thyroid, lipid, vitamin, iron and other important parameters associated with autism. Checking levels is, apparently, kooky. Treating vitamin and mineral deficiencies in patients with ASD is, somehow, even kookier.
The experience of thousands of families is this: when children avoid those foods to which they are most reactive, there is an improvement in ‘brain fog’, communication, bowel movements (and, often toilet training), and aggression.
I know this to be true for two reasons. One, ‘The Diet’ – whatever it may be for each individual patient – is a pain in the ass for the family. The parents follow it because they see improvement. Two, when children transgress there is a price to be paid – in regression, yeast, sleep, hyperactivity and other behaviors.
The conventional wisdom is that IgG-4 food allergy testing is useless. That was the declaration made by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), 7 years ago. The paper was entitled, Testing for IgG4 against foods is not recommended as a diagnostic tool.
It is clear that, if the problem being investigated does not include the core signs and symptoms of autism, such testing may be irrelevant.
After appropriate laboratory testing, observable results may take up to 2-3 months. Embarking upon the child’s specific diet is often challenging, but rewarding. Knowing that the results are accurate is verified when ‘fog’ lifts, there is faster processing, or less anxiety.
Skeptics frequently point out that diets are ‘dangerous’, due to vitamin and other deficiencies. Close measurement of somatic and laboratory parameters assures grandma (and others) that this protocol results in positive nitrogen balance by promoting health and preventing illness. As a result, appetite often improves and food choices become even more varied.
At a recent medical conference, one of the presenters expressed a lack of confidence about the IgG-4 food allergy findings. Those statements were challenged, and it was clear that the participants who encourage such dietary restrictions consistently observe significant positive results.
The Physician’s Desk Reference, the text that doctors use to check medications, contains ~1000 pages. There is not one mention of a treatment for speech apraxia, or eye contact. Physicians don’t seem to get it – if conventional medicine admittedly has little to offer by way of tangible treatment for their affected offspring, parents will search elsewhere.
There isn’t one ‘best’ diet. There are many reports of improvement with GAPS, FODMAPS, GF/CF, and others. Plus, there may be no value to applying the results to other conditions, such as asthma or eczema. However, imagine a parent NOT trying the Feingold diet to treat their ADHD child before giving strong, addictive medicines that carry many side effects.
Finding a diet that improves a child’s health, and gives the family some relief and hope, is not kooky. After assuring nutritional balance, it really doesn’t matter which one, as long as parents see that it is working.