The Cellar

The Cellar (
-   Parenting (
-   -   My Kid is a Damn Nutter (

Clodfobble 08-07-2009 04:01 PM


Originally Posted by OnyxCougar
Clod, regarding the allergy tests, have all of you in your family gotten this testing? I am interested whether or not perhaps these sensitivities and allergies are present in sibling/parents.

It's been shown that siblings and parents are more likely to have allergies (and other immune disorders) in general, as well as more likely to have digestive disorders. Colon cancer, specifically, runs very commonly in families with autism--I've had two direct relatives die of it--and they also think in a lot of cases that people who die of colon cancer may have actually been undiagnosed celiacs.

But as for whether we've been allergy tested, no, we haven't bothered with it. A doctor has to order the IgG test out of a specific lab, and most GPs and other family doctors would rather refer you to an allergist than commit to some lab they've never heard of. And allergists are always focused on IgE sensitivities, because digestion is simply not their expertise. The allergist we saw for my daughter at the beginning of the year told me, "Well, whatever you think she's reacting to, just take her off of it." He basically refused to do any significant testing on her. My kids' doctor isn't going to make non-autistic adults patients just to order some tests for us. Usually, to get an IgG test ordered, you have to go to an osteopath or a naturopath, because they're the ones who buy into the whole digestion-is-crucially-important concept of health. So we'd have to go find a whole new doctor to visit, and of course pay for the test out of pocket (insurance doesn't like this sort of broad shotgun testing without "reasonable" medical cause.) Not worth the effort, since we're obviously not having inexplicably recurring diarrhea, so whatever sensitivities we may have can't be that bad. :)

Clodfobble 08-16-2009 06:57 PM

Well thank God that's over.

Last month when we reviewed Minifob's initial lab tests, you may recall that they showed a bacterial as well as a fungal infection in his digestive tract. So he was prescribed first an antibiotic, to be followed by an antifungal. But fungus is a fighter, and a standard course of antifungal drugs is 21 days, so add that to the 10 days of antibiotics and we've just now finished going through those two medications.

On the antibiotic, he was great. Moderate improvement in all areas. Hooray! Then, we started the antifungal, and he was immediately nasty. This was okay, because it's expected: part of fungus being a fighter is that it immediately and aggressively spores outward if something is killing the colony. So when treating any fungus (skin rash, vaginal yeast infection, whatever,) the symptoms will get a little worse before they get better. But he didn't get better. There were a few random tolerable moments, but for the most part he was hyperactive, emotionally unstable and generally defiant for basically the entirety of the last three weeks. Plus, his language went down the toilet. It was pulling teeth just to get him to use nouns, forget about the complete sentences and spontaneous speech he had been tossing about with ease before we started this treatment. This was, as you can imagine, incredibly demoralizing for me, as he basically lost everything we'd gained over the last three or four months.

But Friday night was the last dose of the antifungal, and today he's back! Happy, polite, and talking up a storm. I wouldn't say he's better than he was before we did the antifungal though, at least not yet, and that's a bit of a problem. I'm pretty sure they're going to tell me that the fact that he never "broke through" and got better while on the antifungal means that he still has a lingering fungal infection. But at the very least they can't tell me that until we go in for our next followup appointment, so I'm safe for another 2 and a half weeks... and in the meantime I have a good kid again, just in time for Flint and Pooka to meet him!

And in Minifobette's news, her initial appointment has been scheduled for September 29, so in the meantime we're left to continue experimenting on our own. One thing we've discovered is Undertoad may have been indirectly right about the calcium gummies--just a few days after her random burst of speech, most of the gains were lost again. So I was left floundering with this new data, until a few days ago when I accidentally forgot to add the new calcium supplement (a pure powder) to my most recent batch of waffles, where I had started sneaking it in so we had one less vitamin to deal with at night. Minfob's just been getting the powder mixed in with the rest of his vitamins until we can use up this calcium-less batch, but I hadn't managed to get Minifobette started on anything yet--and suddenly her language is making huge gains again. Based on this, my best guess is it would seem she has a problem with calcium itself. Online searching brings up a few anecdotes of autistic kids who were unable to process excess calcium, and buildup can cause a host of health problems, including things like kidney stones. So we're just going to keep her off of all calcium supplements for awhile, and hope that her little dairy-free bones don't start snapping like twigs if we happen to be wrong. :)

Undertoad 08-16-2009 08:43 PM

:::kicks Flint in his stupid balls:::

:::exits thread again:::

monster 08-16-2009 09:17 PM

[aside] Do other people have smart balls? I find that idea scary and yet a little enthralling at the same time [/aside]

Pie 08-16-2009 10:04 PM

Monnie, for some guys, it's the only brains they got. </snark>

Clod, hopefully they'll test her for serum calcium levels too. Do your kids get daily sunlight? Vit. D3 is crucial for calcium usage in the body.

Two steps forward, one step back. But still, it's progress! :thumb:

Clodfobble 08-16-2009 10:19 PM


Originally Posted by Pie
Clod, hopefully they'll test her for serum calcium levels too. Do your kids get daily sunlight? Vit. D3 is crucial for calcium usage in the body.

They do go outside pretty much everyday, and usually upwards of 30 minutes (although a decent amount of that is in the shade...) But insufficient presence/production of Vitamin D is one of the more common problems, so they may have us supplement it after they've tested her levels, I don't know.

OnyxCougar 08-19-2009 08:36 AM


Clod, just so you know, being on a Gluten free diet, or even trying to eat healthy foods, is now considered a mental illness.


Eating disorder charities are reporting a rise in the number of people suffering from a serious psychological condition characterised by an obsession with healthy eating.

The condition, orthorexia nervosa, affects equal numbers of men and women, but sufferers tend to be aged over 30, middle-class and well-educated.

The condition was named by a Californian doctor, Steven Bratman, in 1997, and is described as a "fixation on righteous eating". Until a few years ago, there were so few sufferers that doctors usually included them under the catch-all label of "Ednos" – eating disorders not otherwise recognised. Now, experts say, orthorexics take up such a significant proportion of the Ednos group that they should be treated separately.

"I am definitely seeing significantly more orthorexics than just a few years ago," said Ursula Philpot, chair of the British Dietetic Association's mental health group. "Other eating disorders focus on quantity of food but orthorexics can be overweight or look normal. They are solely concerned with the quality of the food they put in their bodies, refining and restricting their diets according to their personal understanding of which foods are truly 'pure'."

Orthorexics commonly have rigid rules around eating. Refusing to touch sugar, salt, caffeine, alcohol, wheat, gluten, yeast, soya, corn and dairy foods is just the start of their diet restrictions. Any foods that have come into contact with pesticides, herbicides or contain artificial additives are also out.

The obsession about which foods are "good" and which are "bad" means orthorexics can end up malnourished. Their dietary restrictions commonly cause sufferers to feel proud of their "virtuous" behaviour even if it means that eating becomes so stressful their personal relationships can come under pressure and they become socially isolated.

"The issues underlying orthorexia are often the same as anorexia and the two conditions can overlap but orthorexia is very definitely a distinct disorder," said Philpot. "Those most susceptible are middle-class, well-educated people who read about food scares in the papers, research them on the internet, and have the time and money to source what they believe to be purer alternatives."

Deanne Jade, founder of the National Centre for Eating Disorders, said: "There is a fine line between people who think they are taking care of themselves by manipulating their diet and those who have orthorexia. I see people around me who have no idea they have this disorder. I see it in my practice and I see it among my friends and colleagues."

Jade believes the condition is on the increase because "modern society has lost its way with food". She said: "It's everywhere, from the people who think it's normal if their friends stop eating entire food groups, to the trainers in the gym who [promote] certain foods to enhance performance, to the proliferation of nutritionists, dieticians and naturopaths [who believe in curing problems through entirely natural methods such as sunlight and massage].

"And just look in the bookshops – all the diets that advise eating according to your blood type or metabolic rate. This is all grist for the mill to those looking for proof to confirm or encourage their anxieties around food."

monster 08-19-2009 09:45 AM

Your source is a Guardian Article? With a couple of quotes and a term coined 12 years ago. As far as I can see, it does not suggest that being on a gluten free diet or trying to eat healthily is a mental illness, just that there is a term for people who do obsess about eating healthily to the point where it causes harm.

Clodfobble 08-19-2009 09:47 AM

I'm pretty sure OC was rolling her virtual eyes at it, not actually agreeing with the article. :)

monster 08-19-2009 09:49 AM

oh, ok, sorry, it looked to me like she was mocking you. mybad. still a very bizarre interpretation to take from that article.

OnyxCougar 08-19-2009 04:41 PM

I wouldn't mock Clod. I'm actually outraged that these fucks that are poisoning us are trying to say that those of us who want to make our own food choices FFS are mentally ill. Well fuck them. Assholes!!!

DanaC 08-19-2009 06:09 PM

That's clearly not what they're saying Onyx. Healthy eating is one thing; obsessing about restrictive diets to the point of self harm is something entirely different. And, I am confused as to how 'these fucks' are poisoning us ?

Aliantha 08-19-2009 06:33 PM

I can understand what Oc's point is somewhat. A lot of people who just make certain choices without even obsessing over them are viewed critically by some members of society.

I know a lot of people around me think my choice to eat organic food as much as possible, and to minimize additives and keep to a whole food diet as much as possible think I'm obsessive, but I don't think that's the case.

When it comes down to it, most of us have pretty crap diets and have far too many preservatives and additives in our food and it's becoming a big problem when you look at the increasing numbers of people dying from bowel cancers and other conditions brought on by a diet high in sugar, salt and preservatives, not to mention highly processed foods with no fibre what so ever hardly.

I don't think the article was actually criticizing people who make alternative food choices though.

Clodfobble 08-19-2009 06:44 PM


Originally Posted by DanaC
Healthy eating is one thing; obsessing about restrictive diets to the point of self harm is something entirely different.

Sure, but the question is, is self-harm really so likely that it warrants a scare article? From a nutritional standpoint, it is much, much easier to become malnourished by avoiding all meat than by avoiding


sugar, salt, caffeine, alcohol, wheat, gluten, yeast, soya, corn and dairy... pesticides, herbicides or... artificial additives
I personally know several people who avoid all of the above. (There are indications that soy and corn can pose similar problems to gluten and casein for some developmentally-delayed kids, and in some cases may actually have a much larger effect than the first two.) Most of them started the diet as a treatment for their kids, but they have ended up taking the whole family along for the ride, and everyone is healthier for it. Of course you can become malnourished following any diet, but this article seems to indicate that it's likely to happen when you restrict the above things, and that just isn't the case. Where is the medical classification for an unhealthy fixation on eating only crap food? Lots of people suffer from that.

Aliantha 08-19-2009 06:51 PM

I think it depends what perspective you read the article from. I didn't actually see it as a scare article so much as an 'oh, so there's a new lable for people who make themselves sick over food' type of article. Mind you, I know nothing about the publication, so I'm taking what's written there at face value.

I think there are people out there who do make themselves sick because they restrict their diet so much (without informing themselves properly) and I can definitely see how it can be socially isolating. No more dinner and drinks with friends, no going to your friends house for a BBQ etc.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:23 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.