Misinformation about autism is very common. Claims of a cure for autism are constantly presented to families of autistic individuals. There are various treatment models found within both the educational and clinical settings. Yet, there is only one treatment approach that has prevailed over time and is effective for all persons, autistic or not. That treatment model is an educational program that is suitable to a student’s developmental level of performance. For adults, that treatment model refers to a vocational program that is suitable to the individual’s developmental level of functioning.

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Educational Act (IDEA) Act of 1990, students with a handicap are guaranteed an “appropriate education” in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE), which is generally considered to be as normal an educational setting as possible. As a result of this legislation, autistic children have generally been placed in a mainstreamed classroom and pulled out for whatever supplementary services were needed. Depending on the child’s needs, he or she could be placed up to 100% of the school day in a mainstreamed or a special education setting or any combination of the two.

There is an increasing trend, however, among the advocates for autistic children, to segregate these children into small, highly structured and controlled academic settings that are almost free from auditory and visual stimulation. All instruction is broken down into manageable segments. Information is presented in tiny units and the child’s response is immediately sought. A classic stimulus-response approach is used to maximize learning. Each unit of information is mastered before another is presented. A fundamental behavior such as putting hands on the tabletop, for example, must be mastered before the child is required to perform any other tasks, or before more information is presented. The long-term effects of this type of treatment as well as the ability of the child to transfer this to a broader context continue to be evaluated.

Autistic individuals must be taught how to communicate and interact with others. This is not a simple task, and it involves the entire family as well as other professionals. Parents of an autistic child or adult must continually educate themselves about new treatments and keep an open mind. Some treatments may be appropriate for some individuals but not for others. Many treatments have yet to be scientifically proven. Treatment decisions should always be made individually after a thorough assessment and based on what is suitable for that child and his or her family.

It is important to remember, despite some recent denials, that autism is virtually a lifelong condition. Treatment will change as the individual develops. Families must beware of treatment programs that give false hope of a cure. Acceptance of the condition in a family member is a very critical, foundational component of any treatment program and is understandably quite difficult.

Several medications have been tried or are under current scrutiny for the treatment of autism. No medication has consistently proven to be of benefit in closely controlled clinical trials. In the past, a piece on a television news show prompted a great deal of interest in the hormone secretin as a treatment for autism. An autistic child with chronic gastrointestinal complaints showed dramatic improvement following some routine testing performed by a gastroenterologist during which a small dose of secretin was administered. The family and their physicians felt that the secretin may have resulted in the improvement in the symptoms of autism. Many physicians began prescribing secretin, which can be costly for their autistic patients. However, studies published appear to completely refute the claim that secretin treatment benefits autistic patients. This example underscores the importance of good clinical trials in determining whether a drug will help patients with autism.

Autism At A Glance

• Autism is characterized by impaired development in social interaction, communication, and behavior.
• The degree of autism varies from mild to severe.
• Severely afflicted patients can appear to have a profound intellectual disability.
• The cause of autism is unknown.
• The optimal treatment of autism involves an educational or vocational program that is suited to the developmental level of the child or adult, respectively.

Since autism was first added to the psychiatric literature fifty years ago, there have been numerous studies and theories about its cause. Researchers still have not reached agreement regarding its specific causes. First, it must be recognized that autism is a set of a wide variety of symptoms and may have many causes. This concept is not unusual in medicine. For instance, the set of symptoms that we perceive of as a “cold” can be caused by literally hundreds of different viruses, bacteria, and even our own immune system. Autism is, undoubtedly, a biologically-based disorder. In the past, some researchers had suggested that autism was the result of poor attachment skills on the part of the mother. This belief has caused a great deal of unnecessary pain and guilt on the part of the parents of autistic children, when in fact, the inability of the individual with autism to interact appropriately is one of the key symptoms of this developmental disorder.

In support of a biological theory of autism, several known neurological disorders are associated with autistic features. Autism is one of the symptoms of these disorders. These conditions include tuberous sclerosis (an inherited disorder), the fragile X syndrome, cerebral dysgenesis (abnormal development of the brain), Rett syndrome, and some of the inborn errors of metabolism (biochemical defects). Autism, in short, seems to be the end result or “final common pathway” of numerous disorders that affect brain development. In general, however, when clinicians make the diagnosis of autism, they are excluding the known causes of autistic behaviors. However, as the knowledge of conditions that cause autism advances, fewer and fewer cases will be thought of as being “pure” autism and more individuals will be identified as having autism due to specific causes.

There is a strong association between autism and seizures. This association works in two ways: First, many patients (20% to 30%) with autism develop seizures. Second, patients with seizures, which are probably due to other causes, may develop autistic-like behaviors. One special and often misunderstood association between autism and seizures is the Landau-Kleffner Syndrome. This syndrome is also known as acquired epileptic aphasia. Some children with epilepsy develop a sudden loss of language skills–especially receptive language (the ability to understand). Many often also develop the symptoms of autism.

These children often, but not always, have a characteristic pattern of electrical brain activity seen on EEG (electroencephalogram) during deep sleep called electrographic status epilepticus during sleep (ESES). The usual age of onset of language loss or regression is around four years of age, which makes the Landau-Kleffner syndrome distinguishable from autism on these grounds, in that autism usually is first exhibited in younger children. However, in recent years, some children (very, very few) who did not exhibit overt (observable) seizures were found to have Landau-Kleffner syndrome.

The importance of these findings is that, although rare, the Landau-Kleffner syndrome can resolve spontaneously and in some cases can be treatable with prednisone, a steroid medication related to cortisone. This association between the Landau-Kleffner syndrome and autism has led many clinicians and families to search for the typical EEG pattern (ESES) in autistic individuals. This unusual EEG pattern is seen only in deep sleep, which usually requires prolonged recordings of up to 12 hours. Many, many autistic children and adults will display some abnormalities on their sleep EEG, but probably very few have true Landau-Kleffner syndrome that will respond to treatment.

It must also be noted that prednisone, in the very high doses used to treat Landau-Kleffner syndrome, almost invariably produces side effects, which may include weight gain, high blood pressure, diabetes, growth failure, stomach ulcers, irritability, destruction of the hip joint, and susceptibility to infectious disease (suppressed immune system). While most of these side effects are reversible, some of the complications of high dose prednisone therapy can be irreversible and even fatal.

Other treatments ranging from common anticonvulsant therapy to surgery have been proposed and are being tried for Landau-Kleffner syndrome. It is difficult to evaluate the true effects of any treatment for Landau-Kleffner syndrome due to the high rate of spontaneous resolution of symptoms (remission).

Like many people in London on that bleak February day in 1998, biochemist Nicholas Chadwick was eager to hear what the scientists would say. The Royal Free Hospital, where he was a graduate student in the lab of gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield, had called a press conference to unveil the results of a new study. With flashbulbs popping, Wakefield stepped up to the bank of microphones: he and his colleagues, he said, had discovered a new syndrome that they believed was triggered by the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine. In eight of the 12 children in their study, being published that day in the respected journal The Lancet, they had found severe intestinal inflammation, with the symptoms striking six days, on average, after the children received the MMR. But hospitals don’t hold elaborate press conferences for studies of gut problems. The reason for all the hoopla was that nine of the children in the study also had autism, and the tragic disease had seized them between one and 14 days after their MMR jab. The vaccine, Wakefield suggested, had damaged the intestine—in particular, the measles part had caused serious inflammation—allowing harmful proteins to leak from the gut into the bloodstream and from there to the brain, where they damaged neurons in a way that triggered autism. Although in their paper the scientists noted that “we did not prove an association” between the MMR and autism, Wakefield was adamant. “It’s a moral issue for me,” he said, “and I can’t support the continued use of [the MMR] until this issue has been resolved.”

That’s strange, thought Chadwick. For months he had been extracting genetic material from children’s gut biopsies, looking for evidence of measles from the MMR. That was the crucial first link in the chain of argument connecting the MMR to autism: the measles virus infects the gut, causing inflammation and leakage, then gut leakage lets neurotoxin compounds into the blood and brain. Yet Chadwick kept coming up empty-handed. “There were a few cases of false positives, [but] essentially all the samples tested were negative,” he later told a judicial hearing. When he explained the negative results, he told NEWSWEEK, Wakefield “tended to shrug his shoulders. Even in lab meetings he would only talk about data that supported his hypothesis. Once he had his theory, he stuck to it no matter what.” Chadwick was more disappointed than upset, figuring little would come from the Lancet study. “Not many people thought [Wakefield] would be taken that seriously,” Chadwick recalls. “We thought most people would see the Lancet paper for what it was—a very preliminary collection of [only 12] case reports. How wrong we were.”

The next day, headlines in the British press screamed, DOCTORS LINK AUTISM TO MMR VACCINE AND BAN THREE-IN-ONE JAB, URGE DOCTORS AFTER NEW FEARS. That was mild compared with what followed. Hysteria over childhood vaccinations built to such a crescendo that Wakefield’s nuanced warning—that it was specifically the triple vaccine, not single-disease vaccines (even measles), that posed a threat—was drowned out. In 2001, Prime Minister Tony Blair and his wife, Cherie, refused to say whether their son, then 19 months old, had received the MMR; rumors swirled that they had gone to France so the child could receive the measles vaccine alone. In 2003, a docudrama about Wakefield ran on British TV, depicting him as having his files stolen and his phone tapped by evil pharmaceutical companies intent on protecting their vaccines. As one reviewer described the show: “The MMR vaccine is coming to get our kids.”

vaccines (of which U.S. health officials recommend 35 by age 6) started a backlash in the United States, too, fueled in no small part by the fact that the incidence of autism was rising for reasons scientists could not fully explain. In California, for instance, the incidence of autism had risen from 6.2 per 10,000 births in 1990 to 42.5 in 2001. Groups of parents began refusing vaccines for their children. Within a few years of Wakefield’s announcement, rates of MMR vaccinations in Britain fell from 92 percent to below 80 percent. Although there was no comparable nationwide decrease in the United States, pockets of resistance to vaccination appeared throughout the country, laying the groundwork for a sevenfold increase in measles outbreaks. Looking back from the perspective of 11 years, the panic seems both inevitable and inexplicable. Inevitable, because legitimate scientists publishing in respected journals produced evidence of a link between vaccines and autism, and because the press as well as politicians and even public-health officials stoked the mounting hysteria. Inexplicable because, by the early 2000s, scientific support for that link had evaporated as completely as the red dot on a baby’s vaccinated thigh.

Scientists and government officials who defended the safety of childhood vaccines were not shy about attributing the fears to the science illiteracy of the public and the fear mongering of the press. In truth, however, after Wakefield’s announcement there was a steady drumbeat of studies—not from kooks in basement labs but from real scientists working at real institutions and publishing in real, peer-reviewed journals—that backed him up. In 2002, pathologist John O’Leary of Coombe Women’s Hospital in Dublin reported that he had found RNA from the measles virus in 7 percent of normal children—but in 82 percent of those with autism, suggesting that some children are unable to clear the vaccinated virus from their systems, resulting in autism. That same year, a Utah State University biologist reported finding high levels of antibodies against the measles virus in the blood and spinal fluid of autistic children; the MMR, he postulated, had triggered a hyper immune response that attacked the children’s brains. In 2003, gastroenterologist Arthur Krigsman, then at New York University School of Medicine, reported finding what Wakefield had: that the guts of 40 autistic children were severely inflamed, lending support to the idea that leaks allowed pernicious compounds to make a beeline for the brain.

But these studies and others supporting the link between autism and the MMR were nothing compared with an extraordinary step that had been taken by the U.S. government and by one of the country’s leading medical organizations. On July 7, 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the U.S. Public Health Service issued a warning about the preservative in many vaccines. Called thimerosal, it contains 49.6 percent ethyl mercury by weight and had been used in vaccines since the 1930s, including the diphtheria/tetanus/pertussis (DTP) and Haemophilus influenzae (Hib) vaccines (but not the MMR). The experts tried to be reassuring, saying in a statement there are “no data or evidence of any harm” from thimerosal. But, they continued, children’s cumulative exposure to mercury from vaccines “exceeds one of the federal safety guidelines” for mercury. (By 2003, most childhood vaccines did not contain thimerosal, though flu vaccines still did.) The AAP statement did not mention autism

What is Rett Syndrome

Rett syndrome is a relatively rare condition that almost exclusively affects females. It occurs in one out of every 10,000 to 15,000 people.

Rett syndrome is part of a category of disorders known as pervasive developmental disorders (PDD), which are more commonly known as autism spectrum disorders. All of these disorders are characterized by varying degrees of:

• Impairment in communication skills and social interactions
• Restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped patterns of behavior.

Symptoms of Rett Syndrome

People who develop Rett syndrome initially go through a period of normal development that lasts between 6 and 18 months. After that, autism-like symptoms begin to appear. The little girl’s mental and social development regresses — she no longer responds to her parents and pulls away from any social contact. If she has been talking, she stops; she cannot control her feet; she wrings her hands. Some of the problems associated with Rett syndrome can be treated. Physical, occupational, and speech therapy can help with problems of coordination, movement, and speech.

Causes of Rett Syndrome

Scientists have discovered that a mutation in the sequence of a single gene can cause Rett syndrome. This discovery may help doctors slow or stop the progression of the syndrome. It may also lead to methods of screening for Rett syndrome. This would enable doctors to treat — and thus improve the quality of life of — these children much sooner.