Autism

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

That's a very superb article.

It reminds me, we were talking earlier about how Proteins control the expression of genes,
and more work needed to be done regarding what factors alter the expression of genes without obvious DNA cutting.

Things have progressed a lot since Dr. Mengele, I'm sad to say.

Thank you though, good read, many things I would do differently or not at all re: autism




p.s. my boy was vocal for about 40 minutes of my visit yesterday.
I always try to get him to talk/sing/make noise. He was actually being sorta loud!
Exercising his vocal cords and mouth.

I think many of these kids just have incorrect nerve connection to their mouths!!!

Could this be affected by the "neighborhoods of the brain" not lining up correctly?

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

I've taken an interest in Childhood Apraxia of Speech because of what I've seen with the autistic kids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apraxia_of_speech

Apraxia of speech (AOS) is an acquired oral motor speech disorder affecting an individual's ability to translate conscious speech plans into motor plans, which results in limited and difficult speech ability. By the definition of apraxia, AOS affects volitional (willful or purposeful) movement patterns, however AOS usually also affects automatic speech.[1]

Individuals with AOS have difficulty connecting speech messages from the brain to the mouth.[2] AOS is a loss of prior speech ability resulting from a stroke, brain injury, or progressive illness.

Developmental verbal dyspraxia (DVD), also known as childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) and developmental apraxia of speech (DAS);[3][4] is an inability to utilize motor planning to perform movements necessary for speech during a child's language learning process. Although the causes differ between AOS and DVD, the main characteristics and treatments are similar.[2][5]

Apraxia of speech (AOS) is a neurogenic communication disorder affecting the motor programming system for speech production.[6][7] Individuals with AOS demonstrate difficulty in speech production, specifically with sequencing and forming sounds. The Levelt model describes the speech production process in the following three consecutive stages: conceptualization, formulation, and articulation. According to the Levelt model, apraxia of speech would fall into the articulation region. The individual does not suffer from a language deficiency, but has difficulty in the production of language in an audible manner. Notably, this difficulty is limited to vocal speech, and does not affect signed language production. [8] The individual knows exactly what they want to say, but there is a disruption in the part of the brain that sends the signal to the muscle for the specific movement.[7] Individuals with acquired AOS demonstrate hallmark characteristics of articulation and prosody (rhythm, stress or intonation) errors.[6][7] Coexisting characteristics may include groping and effortful speech production with self-correction, difficulty initiating speech, abnormal stress, intonation and rhythm errors, and inconsistency with articulation.[9]

Wertz et al., (1984) describe the following five speech characteristics that an individual with apraxia of speech may exhibit:[9]

Effortful trial and error with groping
Groping is when the mouth searches for the position needed to create a sound. When this trial and error process occurs, sounds may be held out longer, repeated or silently voiced. In some cases, an AOS sufferer may be able to produce certain sounds on their own, easily and unconsciously, but when prompted by another to produce the same sound the patient may grope with their lips, using volitional control (conscious awareness of the attempted speech movements), while struggling to produce the sound.[7]
Self correction of errors
Patients are aware of their speech errors and can attempt to correct themselves. This can involve distorted consonants, vowels, and sound substitutions. People with AOS often have a much greater understanding of speech than they are able to express. This receptive ability allows them to attempt self correction.[10]
Abnormal rhythm, stress and intonation
Sufferers of AOS present with prosodic errors which include irregular pitch, rate, and rhythm. This impaired prosody causes their speech to be: too slow or too fast and highly segmented (many pauses). An AOS speaker also stresses syllables incorrectly and in a monotone. As a result, the speech is often described as 'robotic'. When words are produced in a monotone with equal syllabic stress, a word such as 'tectonic' may sound like 'tec-ton-ic' as opposed to 'tec-TON-ic'. These patterns occur even though the speakers are aware of the prosodic patterns that should be used.[11]
Inconsistent articulation errors on repeated speech productions of the same utterance
When producing the same utterance in different instances, a person with AOS may have difficulty using and maintaining the same articulation that was previously used for that utterance. On some days, people with AOS may have more errors, or seem to "lose" the ability to produce certain sounds for an amount of time. Articulation also becomes more difficult when a word or phrase requires an articulation adjustment, in which the lips and tongue must move in order to shift between sounds. For example, the word "baby" needs less mouth adjustment than the word "dog" requires, since producing "dog" requires two tongue/lips movements to articulate.[6]
Difficulty initiating utterances
Producing utterances becomes a difficult task in patients with AOS, which result in various speech errors. The errors in completing a speech movement gesture may increase as the length of the utterance increases. Since multisyllabic words are difficult, those with AOS use simple syllables and a limited range of consonants and vowels.[6][7]
Diagnosis[edit]

Apraxia of speech can be diagnosed by a speech language pathologist (SLP) through specific exams that measure oral mechanisms of speech. The oral mechanisms exam involves tasks such as pursing lips, blowing, licking lips, elevating the tongue, and also involves an examination of the mouth. A complete exam also involves observation of the patient eating and talking. SLPs do not agree on a specific set of characteristics that make up the apraxia of speech diagnosis,[citation needed] so any of the characteristics from the section above could be used to form a diagnosis.[2] Patients may be asked to perform other daily tasks such as reading, writing, and conversing with others. In situations involving brain damage, an MRI brain scan also helps identify damaged areas of the brain.[2]

A differential diagnosis must be used in order to rule out other similar or alternative disorders. Although disorders such as expressive aphasia, conduction aphasia, and dysarthria involve similar symptoms as apraxia of speech, the disorders must be distinguished in order to correctly treat the patients.[citation needed] While AOS involves the motor planning or processing stage of speech, aphasic disorders can involve other language processes.[12]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3033475/
J Autism Dev Disord. Author manuscript; available in PMC Apr 1, 2012.
Published in final edited form as:
J Autism Dev Disord. Apr 2011; 41(4): 405–426.
doi: 10.1007/s10803-010-1117-5
PMCID: PMC3033475
NIHMSID: NIHMS244664
The Hypothesis of Apraxia of Speech in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Lawrence D. Shriberg,a Rhea Paul,b Lois M. Black,c and Jan P. van Santenc

Abstract
In a sample of 46 children aged 4 to 7 years with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and intelligible speech, there was no statistical support for the hypothesis of concomitant Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS). Perceptual and acoustic measures of participants’ speech, prosody, and voice were compared with data from 40 typically-developing children, 13 preschool children with Speech Delay, and 15 participants aged 5 to 49 years with CAS in neurogenetic disorders. Speech Delay and Speech Errors, respectively, were modestly and substantially more prevalent in participants with ASD than reported population estimates. Double dissociations in speech, prosody, and voice impairments in ASD were interpreted as consistent with a speech attunement framework, rather than with the motor speech impairments that define CAS. Key Words: apraxia, dyspraxia, motor speech disorder, speech sound disorder

A continuing question about persons with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is whether reported diminished abilities in gross, fine, and oral motor control are causally associated with reported deficits in speech acquisition and performance. The classification term for the speech deficit in question, recently adapted by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA; 2007a, 2007b), is Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS). Medical literatures and speech literatures in other countries continue to prefer several other classificatory terms for this disorder, including dyspraxia and developmental verbal dyspraxia. “Childhood” apraxia of speech differentiates congenital and early acquired forms of apraxia of speech from adult acquired forms, but creates a nosological problem because childhood apraxia of speech generally persists into adulthood. We will use the ASHA (2007a) recommended term— CAS.

The strong form of the hypothesis in the title of this paper, hereafter, the ‘CAS-ASD’ hypothesis, is that CAS is a sufficient cause of lack of speech development in at least some children classified as nonverbal ASD. The weak form of the CAS-ASD hypothesis is that CAS contributes to the inappropriate speech, prosody, and/or voice features reported in some children and adults with verbal ASD. Although the present report addresses only the weak form of the hypotheses, the conceptual framework and implications for treatment apply to both forms of the hypothesis. Forthcoming research addresses the strong form of the hypothesis. The following sections provide (a) rationales for the CAS-ASD hypothesis, (b) an overview of idiopathic speech sound disorders, and (c) a summary of speech, prosody, and voice findings in verbal ASD.

Rationales for the CAS-ASD Hypothesis

The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Position Statement recommends the following definition of CAS:

Childhood apraxia of speech (CAS) is a neurological childhood (pediatric) speech sound disorder in which the precision and consistency of movements underlying speech are impaired in the absence of neuromuscular deficits (e.g., abnormal reflexes, abnormal tone). CAS may occur as a result of known neurological impairment, in association with complex neurobehavioral disorders of known or unknown origin, or as an idiopathic neurogenic speech sound disorder. The core impairment in planning and/or programming spatiotemporal parameters of movement sequences results in errors in speech sound production and prosody. (p. 1)

Three conceptual and empirical perspectives motivate the hypothesis that CAS may be causal to the absence of speech development in some children with ASD or in others, to perceptible differences in speech, prosody, or voice.

Motor skills
A primary rationale for the CAS-ASD hypothesis is findings indicating that persons with ASD have praxis deficits affecting imitative processes and impairing acquisition and performance of a range of motor skills. Reviews of this literature and the neural correlates of praxis findings in ASD are beyond the scope of the present report; for representative data and overviews of research during the past two decades see Dawson, Mottron, and Gernsbacher (in press); Dowell, Mahone, and Mostofsky (2009); Dziuk et al. (2007); Gernsbacher, Sauer, Geye, Schweigert, and Goldsmith (2008); Green et al. (2002); Goldman Gross and Grossman (2008); McDuffie et al. (2007); Mostofsky, Burgess, and Gidley Larson (2007); Mostofsky et al. (2006); Ozonoff et al. (2008); Page and Boucher (1998); Rogers (2009); Rogers, Bennetto, McEvoy, and Pennington (1996); Russo, Larson, and Kraus (2009); Smith and Bryson (1994); Vivanti, Nadig, Ozonoff, and Rogers (2008); and Zadikoff and Lang (2005). A parsimonious extension of the findings from studies in other motor domains is that a praxic deficit in speech may account for the failure of some children with ASD who have adequate cognitive ability and communicative intent to acquire articulate speech (the strong version of the CAS-ASD hypothesis), and for others with ASD to have atypical speech, prosody, and/or voice (the weak version of the CAS-ASD hypothesis). As reviewed in the following sections, CAS is the one subtype of speech sound disorder whose neurobehavioral substrates could account for the speech, prosody, and voice findings reported in ASD (Shriberg 2010a, 2010b). Unlike dysarthria, a class of neuromuscular speech disorders that constrains the precision of speech production, the transcoding (planning/programming) deficits that define CAS (van der Merwe, 2009) are functionally sufficient to disrupt the onset of speech and/or speech precision and stability.

A constraint on the CAS-ASD hypothesis is that many speech researchers have concluded from diverse conceptual and empirical considerations that speech is domain specific (e.g., Dewey, Roy, Square-Storer, & Hayden, 1988; Kent, 2000, 2004, 2010; McCauley, Strand, Lof, Schooling, & Frymark, 2009; Potter, Kent, & Lazarus, 2009; Smith, 2006; Weismer, 2006; Watkins, Dronkers, & Vargha-Khadem, 2002; Ziegler, 2002, 2008). The perspectives in these and other sources are that the neural substrates of apraxia of speech differ from the neural substrates posited for other motor systems and other types of apraxia (e.g., oromotor apraxia, limb apraxia, ideomotor apraxia).

A recent empirical constraint on the CAS-ASD hypothesis are results discussed in Pickett, Pullara, O’Grady, and Gordon (2009), which summarizes findings from reports of 167 individuals with nonverbal ASD who acquired speech at age 5 or older. Records indicated that these individuals learned skills including “imitating sounds, words, and phrases,” “answering simple questions,” “requesting spontaneously,” “using complete sentences,” and “speaking in spontaneous complex sentences” (p.13). Crucially for the strong version of the CAS-ASD hypothesis, however, the speech findings in Table 1 of Pickett et al. (2009) do not include information consistent with the signs of CAS described later in the present report.

Genomics
A second rationale for the CAS-ASD hypothesis is based on the possibility of common genetic origins. Whereas numerous candidate genes and regions of interest for autism spectrum disorders have been reported, the widely-studied FOXP2 transcription gene is the only gene to date associated with CAS. The origins of both disorders are viewed as strongly heritable and both involve cognitive-linguistic impairments, suggesting the possibility of genes common to both disorders (e.g., Poot et al., 2010; Vernes et al., 2008).

A constraint on the likelihood of inherited or sporadic genetic comorbidity of CAS and ASD is the wide differences in their reported prevalences, with idiopathic CAS estimated at approximately .1% (Shriberg & Kwiatkowski, 1994) and ASD reportedly at approximately 1% (Rice, 2009), a 10-fold increased risk. Unless a more highly prevalent subtype of CAS than the idiopathic form is posited for either or both nonverbal and verbal ASD, comorbid ASD and CAS would be expected to be extremely rare (i.e., 1/100,000, multiplying the individual probabilities of each disorder).

Phenotypic similarity
A third rationale is based on findings reviewed presently indicating that the speech, prosody, and voice characteristics of some children with low and high verbal ASD reportedly are similar to those found in children and adults with apraxia of speech. The validity of this claim for the CAS-ASD hypothesis, the most testable of the three rationales reviewed, requires close examination of the ASD-speech literature, in particular, findings for prosody and voice characteristics. A constraint, however, is that literature findings to date are heterogeneous and lack the conceptual organization needed for comparative analyses. Peppé, McCann, Gibbon, O’Hare, and Rutherford (2007) provide a useful perspective on the precedent speech literature in ASD:

In the research literature, numerous adjectives are used to describe atypical expressive prosody in autism, for example, dull, wooden, singsong, robotic, stilted, overprecise, and bizarre (Baltaxe & Simmons, 1985; Fay & Schuler, 1980); terms that perhaps reflect perceived characteristics of autism more than acoustic features. The fact that adjectives with opposite meanings, such as monotonous and exaggerated (Baron-Cohen & Staunton, 1994), can be used to describe this atypicality suggests a wide variation in either the perception of atypical expressive prosody or in the prosody itself. (p. 1016)

The following overview of idiopathic speech sound disorders attempts to redress this situation. The goal of this tutorial is to introduce terms and concepts needed for efficient review of the ASD-speech literature. The system described in the next section is also used later to organize findings from the present study.

A tutorial on Idiopathic Speech Sound Disorders (SSD)

The cover term Speech Sound Disorders (SSD) was adopted by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association in 2005 to replace both the early 20th century term functional articulation disorders, and the term used for the same clinical entity from approximately 1980 to 2005, phonology disorders of unknown origin. There is no current professional consensus, however, on nomenclature for subtypes of SSD (i.e., excluding disorders of known origin, such as those due to cleft palate, Down syndrome, deafness, traumatic brain injury, or other frank cognitive, structural, sensory, motor or affective disorder). The nosology in Table 1, from a system termed the Speech Disorders Classification System (SDCS: Shriberg et al., 2010a), has evolved for genomic and other descriptive-explanatory research in SSD of currently unknown origin. As indicated, the speech classification terms and concepts in Table 1 are needed to organize both the literature review in Table 2 and findings from the present study. Technical information on perceptual and acoustic procedures used to classify participants’ speech status using the SDCS in a software environment is available elsewhere (Shriberg et al., 2010b; see also http://www.waisman.wisc.edu/phonology/).

Table 1
Table 1
Definitions and descriptive statistics for six subtypes of speech sound disorders in the Speech Disorders Classification System (SDCS).
Table 2
Table 2
Prevalence estimates and descriptive findings for subtypes of speech sound disorders in studies of speakers with verbal Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). Studies are ordered chronologically within each set of findings.
Speech Delay
Speech Delay (SD) is the SDCS classification term for 3 to 9 year-old children with mildly to severely reduced intelligibility due to age-inappropriate speech sound deletions, substitutions, and distortions. As indicated in Table 1, children with SD generally do not have notable impairments in prosody or voice, an important differential diagnostic sign between SD and CAS discussed below. Relative to typically-developing children, however, children with SD have higher rates of language impairment, lowered intelligibility, and are at greater risk for reading impairment. Two American English population estimates of speech sound disorders using similar definitions and methods (Campbell et al., 2003; Shriberg, Tomblin, & McSweeny, 1999) report approximately similar point prevalence population estimates (15.6%, 15.2%, respectively) at 3 years of age (interpolated finding in Shriberg et al., 1999) and similar estimates (3.8%) at 6 years of age. A third large British English epidemiological study, also using the SDCS definition of SD, reported a population estimate at 8 years of age of 3.8% (Wren, Roulstone, Miller, Emond, & Peters, 2009).

Speech Errors
Speech Errors (SE) is the SDCS term for 6 to 9 year-old children whose speech impairment is limited to distortions of one or two English sounds or sound classes: the sibilants /s/ and /z/ and the rhotic consonant /r/ and/or the stressed and unstressed rhotic vowels (as in “bird” and “sister,” respectively). Elementary-school American English children with SE are typically not provided speech services because, as shown in Table 1, SE is generally not associated with prosody-voice impairment, language disorder, or intelligibility deficits and children with SE are not at risk for reading impairment (Shriberg, 2010b; Wren et al., 2009). Using definitions and methods for SE classification adapted from the SDCS, the Wren et al. (2009) epidemiologic study reported a point prevalence of SE at 8 years of age of 7.9%.

Persistent Speech Disorders (PSD)
Persistent Speech Disorder (PSD) is the SDCS term for speech disorders that persist past 9 years of age and for some speakers, for a lifetime. By 9 years of age, most children with histories of either SD or SE have normalized speech production, but a percentage of adolescents and adults continue to misarticulate. Children with prior SD may continue to have speech sound deletions, substitutions, and/or distortions, and children with prior SE may have persistent sibilant and/or rhotic distortions. As shown in Table 1, depending on whether such speakers have histories of SD or SE, they also may have persistent impairments in language, intelligibility, and/or reading. Flipsen’s (1999) review of survey and epidemiology studies, which also used the SD and SE classification constructs to organize the literature, yielded an estimated prevalence rate for PSD of 2.4%–3.9%.

Motor Speech Disorder (MSD)
The fourth classification entity for speakers with idiopathic SSD, Motor Speech Disorder (MSD), includes speakers of all ages whose significant intelligibility deficits are associated with motor speech impairment. As shown in Table 1, MSD subsumes three subclassifications. MSD-Apraxia of Speech (MSD-AOS) is the same clinical entity as Childhood Apraxia of Speech (CAS), a term that the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association adopted in 2007 to replace the prior terms Developmental Apraxia of Speech and Developmental Verbal Dyspraxia (the latter term continues to be used in medical contexts and in most other countries). As indicated previously, CAS will be the reference term for this classification in the present paper.

The core feature of both congenital and acquired apraxia of speech is a deficit in the planning/programming processes that transcode linguistic representations to the articulatory movements for speech. Motor Speech Disorder-Dysarthria (MSD-DYS), the second subclassification of MSD, is itself, a cover term for several subtypes of neuromuscular deficits (e.g., spastic dysarthria, ataxic dysarthria, hyperkinetic dysarthria) in the production of speech sounds (Duffy, 2005). Motor Speech Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified (MSD-NOS) is a recently proposed classification entity (Shriberg et al., 2010a) for speech signs that are not specific for apraxia or dysarthria and for speakers who have signs of motor speech involvement, but do not meet inclusionary criteria for either CAS (i.e., MSD-AOS) or MSD-DYS.

As indicated in Table 1, each of the three MSD classifications is characterized by deletions, substitutions, and distortions of sounds. Unlike SD, SE, and PSD, however, each MSD classification is also characterized by significant and persistent deficits in prosody and voice features. Speakers with MSD likely have concomitant language disorder, typically have significant intelligibility deficits, and generally are at increased risk for reading impairment. As cited previously, based on clinical referrals to one University speech clinic in a moderate-sized city, a preliminary estimate placed the population prevalence of CAS at .1% (Shriberg & Kwiatkowski, 1994). Several published and unpublished sources internationally indicate false positive rates for CAS of 80 to 90%, reflecting the lack of consensus on the inclusionary and exclusionary criteria for this disorder, especially as suspected in toddlers, preschool, and early elementary age children. There are no available prevalence estimates for MSD-DYS or MSD-NOS, although many researchers suggest that subclinical dysarthria and delays in maturation of sensorimotor systems subserving speech (i.e., MSD-NOS) may account for a substantial proportion of idiopathic speech sound disorders.

Prevalence Estimates and Speech, Prosody, and Voice Findings in Verbal ASD

The considerable body of research on the language characteristics of speakers with ASD (see Smith, 2007; Tager-Flusberg, 2009; Tager-Flusberg, Paul, & Lord, 2005 for reviews) has reported extensive heterogeneity of expressive ability among children with verbal ASD, ranging from children with only single word or simple word combinations to children with precocious levels of vocabulary and sentence structure. Tager-Flusberg and Joseph (2003) have proposed a system for classifying subtypes of language development within speakers with ASD, with other investigators raising validity issues about the system (e.g., Eigsti, Bennetto, & Dadlani, 2007; Whitehouse, Barry, & Bishop, 2007).

In contrast to the widespread intense interest in the language abilities of children with ASD, few studies have focused on the speech abilities of children, adolescents, and adults with ASD. Table 2 includes a summary of prevalence estimates for subtypes of speech sound disorders and speech, prosody, and voice impairment findings in speakers with verbal ASD. The entries in Table 2 do not include questionnaire data or single case study observations. Only information on productive speech, prosody, and voice behaviors is included, not studies of speech perception or comprehension in ASD; for reviews of the latter domains see Diehl, Bennetto, Watson, Gunlogson, and McDonough (2008); Diehl, Watson, Bennetto, McDonough, and Gunlogson (2009); McCann and Peppé (2003); and Paul, Augustyn, Klin, and Volkmar (2005). The format and content in Table 2 is the first to organize prevalence and descriptive findings using the SDCS classifications described in Table 1.

As shown in the top section of Table 2, three studies have estimated the prevalence of subtypes of speech impairment in ASD, each using definitions of one or more subtypes of speech impairment consistent with the subtypes in Table 1. Impairment consistent with Speech Delay (SD) occurred in 12% of the 3 to 9 year-old children with ASD studied by Cleland, Gibbon, Peppé, O’Hare, and Rutherford (2010). Rapin, Dunn, Allen, Stevens, and Fein (2009) reported SD and Speech Errors (SE) in 24% of participants with ASD during this age period. Cleland et al. also reported that 33% of the children with ASD studied had either SE or Persistent Speech Disorder (PSD). Shriberg, Paul, et al. (2001) reported that 33% of adolescents and adult study participants had PSD. Thus, although each of the subtypes of speech impairment in Table 1 have been reported in ASD, few between-study comparisons are possible due to differences in the age groups studied. Among the 11 studies in Table 2 in which the data could be interpreted as absence of support or support for SD in ASD (indicated by “X”), four have reported absence of support for SD and seven have reported support for SD in ASD. Velleman et al. (2010) is the only study series to date supporting speech impairment consistent with the SDCS term Motor Speech Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified. Although frank CAS was not observed in their studies, the findings Velleman and colleagues report using an array of perceptual and acoustic indices are consistent with MSD-NOS.

The remaining entries in Table 2 organize findings in the ASD literature using the Prosody (Phrasing, Rate, Stress) and Voice (Pitch, Loudness, Laryngeal Quality, Resonance) domains in the SDCS. The most well-studied prosody domain is Stress, with the 16 studies in Table 2 reporting impairments in participants’ with ASD ability to produce correct contrastive, emphatic, sentential, syntactic, and syllable stress (for reviews, see McCann & Peppé, 2003; McCann, Peppé, Gibbon, O’Hare, & Rutherford, 2008; Paul, Augustyn, et al., 2005; Paul, Bianchi, Augustyn, Klin, & Volkmar, 2008; Peppé et al., 2007). As shown in Table 2, impairments have been reported in at least one published study of ASD for each of the other 6 prosody and voice domains.

Go to:
Statement of Purpose
The primary goal of the present study was to assess the weak version of the CAS-ASD hypothesis—the hypothesis that concomitant CAS may be a sufficient causal explanation for at least some of the speech, prosody, and voice impairments reported in ASD. A secondary goal of the study was to estimate in a sample of verbal young children with ASD the prevalence of the two primary forms of speech impairment of unknown origin: Speech Delay and Speech Errors.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

I wanted to point out that two conditions common to autism, Apraxia of Speech and Spatial Neglect, are directly linked in many cases with the advent of stroke.
I was shocked to find this out yesterday.


I guess TED already asked this in 2012:
http://www.ted.com/conversations/125...d_by_a_mi.html
Could autism be caused by a mild stroke while in the womb or during infancy?

Doctors have tried to talk about it: http://www.vaccineriskawareness.com/...s-and-Children

Doctor Says Vaccines Cause Micro Vascular Strokes In Babies and Children

Dr. Andrew Moulden, from Canada, has been a practising physician for 21 years. He and other doctors have completed research that has proved a causal link between vaccination and micro vascular strokes. He presented his research to various medical journals and organisations, but none would review it, publish it or comment on his research.

Frustrated, and wanting parents to know about this important research, Dr. Moulden decided to get involved in government and see if he could change the system from the inside.

Here's what he discovered about vaccines:

Dr. Moulden says the shots cause our body's own immune systems to hyper-react as large white blood cells naturally rush to attack the foreign particles injected into our bloodstream. The white blood cells are too big to enter, so they surround tiny capillaries where the foreign particles land, clog and collapse the capillaries.

This cuts off pathways for the smaller red blood cells to carry oxygen to the organs near those capillaries that contain the foreign particles. When the particles float near the brain, this lack of blood supply can lead to autism, SIDS and many other diagnosed illnesses in both children and adults.

Our immune systems will continue fighting the particles leading to long-term or chronic illness. Different organs are affected depending on where the particles are, which leads to different symptoms and 'disease' names, but the basic causes are the same and before this discovery were unknown.

The main cause of the problem is the additives in the vaccines. The purpose of the additives is to generate a faster response from white blood cells. This works perfectly - white blood cells rush to the site of the introduced foreign matter - and that is the source of the problem. The white blood cells block the capillaries and also collapse them, trying to destroy the foreign matter.

Dr. Moulden has been appointed to the Scientific Advisory Board for the First Annual World Congress on Vaccinology in Guangzhou, China, December 1- 5, 2008, where, he is to present to a group of 10,000 experts from around the world.

(From NewsBlaze, by Alan Gray, 27 September 2008).

To contact Dr. Andrew Moulden, see his political website, www.justgetusin.com or call him on (705) 498-6284.
VAERS Report of Stroke after Vaccination

A 1 year old boy was given DTaP, IPV and PNC vaccines.

Vaccines were given on 10/7/03 pm child developed fever next day and increased sleepiness. Mother called PMD's office at night of 10/8/03 and was given fever monitoring, testing instructions. Next time parent called on 10/12/03. Mother was informing us that pt was not moving a lot and had weakness of his L arm. Pt was taken to hospital ER and diagnosed with L hemiparesis. MRI of the head revealed R middle cerebral arthey ischemic stroke. He was admitted to the hospital inpatient floor. Extensive blood work up was done including coagulation studies, protein C, S, factor V Leida was negative. Etiology of this event is unclear. Child was started on anticoagulants during hospital stay. Currently is on no medications. The hospital records received on 3/23/04 states stroke.

Case number: 211555

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

(I got more interested in stroke etc. when I realized I had vasculitis symptoms, and it's an autoimmune disorder to boot)

(I've often wondered if ASD kids have strokes and why the Drs only medicate the symptoms and not treat the underlying cause)

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Chili's Is Fundraising For A Notoriously Anti-Vaccine Charity

Paul Szoldra, provided by


Published 8:17 pm, Thursday, April 3, 2014

In honor of National Autism Awareness Month, Chili's is planning to donate 10% of customers' checks on April 7 to the National Autism Association, a charity with controversial views about vaccinations.

More than 1,200 Chili's restaurants will participate in the fundraiser for the group, which writes vaccinations can trigger or exacerbate autism in "some, if not many, children" on its website.

...

NAA dodges a direct yes or no position about vaccines on its website FAQ, writing that it "cannot make this decision for any parent, but we are happy to provide sources of information to anyone in need. We recommend visiting http://nvic.org."

That link goes to the National Vaccine Information Center, which journalist Michael Specter characterizes in his book "Denialism" as " ... an organization that, based on its name, certainly sounds like a federal agency. Actually, it's just the opposite: The NVIC is the most powerful anti-vaccine organization in America, and its relationship with the U.S. government consists almost entirely of opposing federal efforts aimed at vaccinating children."

Further, NAA sponsors "Age of Autism," a website which has the text "Yes, Vaccines Cause Autism" on its masthead.

____________________________

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

I am having an argument in my Autism Support Group with a lady who is pro vaccine.
it's really annoying. I've told her all kinds of **** and she is like DENY DENY

i even told her about military, and just DENY DENY

Fn B lol

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

There is now a nurse in the pro-vaccine debate, and she has called names in the argument, such as "fringe", and she uses the word "anecdotal" constantly.

I ripped her a freaking new one, without actually getting mad, I put on my methodical Tesla hat for once and cleaned her house for her.



I said asking a nurse about vaccine injury is like asking the police dept for info on police brutality. and she got super pissed.

[Hervé]

Gardasil: Child Abuse by Big Pharma

by Gary Null, PhD, and Nancy Ashley

From the Townsend Letter February/March 2014

Page 1, 2
Gardasil, the human papilloma­virus vaccine produced by Merck, was brought to market in 2006 with great fanfare, widely proclaimed as the first ever anticancer vaccine. Having gained a strong foothold due to fast-tracking by the FDA and rushed to market ahead of completed safety studies and ahead of its competitor, Gardasil was already an entrenched, recommended vaccine by the time it was approved.1 Merck created a market for Gardasil out of thin air with deceptive and dishonest advertising, and thereby planted fear in the mind of consumers: fear of an unknown health crisis, an invisible time bomb waiting to explode and harm women everywhere.2 When criticized for its aggressive marketing, Merck countered that it was performing a public service by raising awareness about the human papillomavirus and wasn't selling anything.3 Really? This lie became public as Merck was caught lobbying the 50 states for mandatory Gardasil vaccination prior to FDA approval.4 The fact is that there was never a need for Gardasil in the first place: regular Pap testing had already lowered the incidence of cervical cancer by 80% in the US to a few thousand cases a year, and the vast majority of all HPV infections resolve of their own accord.5 But by lining the coffers of such groups as Women in Government (WIG), National Foundation for Women Legislators (NFWL), National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL), and, of course, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Merck was able to influence legislation such that almost immediately after the vaccine was approved, it was part of the vaccine schedule recommended for all girls.6 If it hadn't been for Governor Rick Perry's blatantly self-serving blunder of trying to mandate Gardasil for school attendance in Texas in the face of huge conflict of interest and a $50 million contribution to his presidential campaign, Gardasil might have gone even further.7

There is something deeply wrong with a giant pharmaceutical company spending hundreds of millions of dollars to manipulate women and influence legislation in order to generate a revenue stream of billions of dollars a year for itself at the expense of a gullible public. Because what is wrong with Gardasil isn't just that it is unnecessary. Gardasil is possibly the most dangerous vaccine on the market, with the potential to injure, maim, or even kill the children who receive it. The program of coercion to vaccinate every 11- to 26-year-old girl with Gardasil is relentless. This vaccine is given not just in doctor's offices, where doctors have been known to "fire" noncompliant patients, but in schools and colleges, where the pressure on girls and their parents to conform can be extreme. These institutions all have quotas – sometimes including financial rewards – and they are anxious to prove high rates of compliance.8 But there is no informed consent prior to vaccination, so most of these girls and their parents have no idea what they are risking by agreeing to vaccination with Gardasil. While Merck, the FDA, the CDC and the medical establishment all deny that there have been serious, life-altering adverse events associated with Gardasil, the fact is that compared with the mandated vaccines which are given with greater frequency, Gardasil still has the most adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) of any vaccine. And since reporting of adverse events is not mandatory in the US (although outbreaks of so-called vaccine-preventable illness are), it is likely that only 10% even get reported!9

And what of the victims of Merck's war on cervical cancer? Alexis Wolf was a normal seventh-grader in 2007. She had type 1 diabetes, but had successfully learned how to give herself insulin shots and eventually graduated to an insulin pump, which she also mastered easily. Alexis made the honor roll for the first time that year, and was rewarded with a trip to Germany over the summer to visit her grandparents. Her endocrinologist believed that the diabetes was under control and thought that Alexis would be perfectly capable of making the trip on her own and managing her diabetes herself. To make sure everything was in order prior to travel, Alexis' doctor recommended that she receive her first Gardasil vaccine.

The trip went well, but Alexis seemed different to her mother when she returned, perhaps a bit distant. Alexis received her second Gardasil vaccine after coming home, and shortly thereafter her personality changed entirely. For a relatively shy girl, Alexis immediately became very gregarious, hugging everyone all the time. But she also became agitated and troubled, and started having difficulty keeping food down. It reached the point where she threw up a number of times a day, which is especially dangerous for a diabetic. There began a series of appointments with many, many doctors: the GP, the endocrinologist, the cardiologist, the gastroenterologist, and numerous different diagnostic tests. But nothing they did or recommended seemed to help. Alexis was struggling to get through her days, usually carrying a bucket with her at all times just in case. She had terrible insomnia, was eating excessively, and was falling further and further behind in school.

In January 2008, Alexis received her third Gardasil shot – within 2 weeks she was in the hospital. Her behavior had worsened to the point where she was considered bipolar and she was put on a series of antipsychotic medications. Her mother didn't believe that this was a psychological problem. She knew that something else had to be wrong, knew that there had to be some medical explanation for what was going on. After weeks and months in and out of different hospitals with no improvement and her condition growing more desperate, Alexis at long last was seen by a doctor who recognized that she was having seizures – something that all the previous doctors had overlooked. This led to more tests – EEGs, MRI imaging, and spinal taps – and finally a conclusion that seemed to make sense: encephalitis, traumatic brain injury, and seizure disorder. But why? Alexis's mother had an additional conclusion which was so crystal clear in hindsight – her daughter was normal before she received the Gardasil vaccine and had worsened with each one. The Gardasil vaccine had left Alexis with brain damage.

We spoke with Tracy Wolf, Alexis's mother, about their ordeal. While maintaining a cheerful optimism, Tracy admitted that she could never have foreseen how their lives would change completely. After Alexis's seizure disorder was identified and she was put on antiseizure medication, her physical symptoms improved to a certain extent, but she was completely altered. Alexis has deteriorated from being a normal child to one who is only functioning at a fourth-grade level. Forced to enter special education instead of rejoining her previous class, Alexis became enormously frustrated and school became an ordeal for everyone. When Alexis turned 18, Tracy finally gave up and pulled her out of school, realizing that it really could not offer Alexis anything but misery. The stress on their family has been enormous. The pressure caused the Wolfs' marriage to dissolve, and Tracy is now raising both daughters by herself, with their father living in a different state. Alexis needs almost constant supervision, and Tracy can only leave her alone for short periods of time. They have applied for special services that could possibly be helpful, but the waiting list is long. Alexis doesn't understand why things are so different, why her little sister is learning to drive but she can't.10

Unlike with other types of injuries, a vaccine victim cannot simply sue the company responsible for the problem. Since 1986, all cases of vaccine injury must be brought to the Office of Special Masters at the US Court of Federal Claims, commonly called the vaccine court. This court was established to create a nonadversarial situation in which children injured by vaccines could receive compensation. But the Department of Health and Human Services has completely distorted the intent of this legislation, and turned it into a highly adversarial proceeding. Injuries listed on a table are supposed to be automatically compensated, but a lot of injuries have been removed from the table over the years, and new vaccines, such as Gardasil, are listed with no specific injuries attributable to them. So the burden is on the victim to prove causation because there is no presumption of any injury.

In conversation with William Ronan, a lawyer retained by Alexis's family, he shared that his law firm currently is handling 12 to 15 Gardasil cases that are being evaluated and another 6 cases already filed in the vaccine court. Interestingly, out of all the types of Gardasil-related injuries, the cases that Ronan represents all fall into two main categories: autoimmune and neurological. When the injuries are neurological, doctors frequently can't put their finger on what is wrong, and end up sending the girls to a psychiatrist. Ronan maintains that it is impossible for all of these girls suddenly to have developed mental problems or simply to be imagining that they have been harmed since receiving the Gardasil vaccine. While not antivaccine himself, he has seen too many girls have serious adverse reactions to Gardasil. He runs a two-person law firm in Kansas City, and without advertising, has received at least 20 to 30 calls regarding Gardasil injuries. Ronan believes that his experience is just the tip of the iceberg – anyone actually advertising legal services for Gardasil victims would be inundated with a huge number of cases.

The work is slow going. Evidence of harm caused by vaccines is crucial, but there aren't a lot of published medical studies about safety to back up this claim. Those that exist are funded by the manufacturer and tend to be overly favorable. Possibly the strongest argument against Merck, according to Ronan, is its failure to warn girls of the risk involved when getting the Gardasil vaccine. Merck clearly knew that this drug could cause neurological dysfunction, yet did not adequately address this in the product insert. Also, it is well known that girls who already have an HPV infection are more likely to be harmed by the vaccine, but the manufacture does not make this clear and does not recommend testing. Ronan summed up his view of vaccinating young girls with Gardasil:

The real issue is: what is the benefit of this vaccine? Do the benefits outweigh the risks? There is a risk of a seizure disorder or an autoimmune disorder versus the benefit that it might reduce cervical cancer. But Gardasil doesn't eliminate the need for regular Pap testing, which is already safe, and there isn't good evidence that it prevents cervical cancer. In evaluating risk and benefit, when all the facts are known it becomes a pretty easy decision – the vaccine is more dangerous than any benefit. Unfortunately, medical professionals tend to read and listen to information provided by the manufacturers, which doesn't adequately present the risks involved, so they actually aren't sufficiently informed to advise their patients.

Ronan's own daughter had to fight off an aggressive attempt by her doctor to get the Gardasil vaccine, so he understands the pressure that girls are under to just go along instead of asking questions.11

We interviewed Dr. Meryl Nass, board-certified internal medicine practitioner and vaccine specialist, who agrees that Gardasil was rushed to market without adequate safety testing. Three years after approval for girls, the company likewise received approval to vaccinate boys age 9 and above with no new studies and very little data to justify this action. Regarding Gardasil's adverse effects, Nass said:

Children don't usually die suddenly when they are healthy but there are certainly lots of teenage girls who have died elatively suddenly after Gardasil or developed severe neurologic reactions. Therefore, if you are going to try to balance safety and efficacy when you prescribe something like a vaccine, you have to know how effective it's going to be. Does this really prevent cervical cancer in young women? And does it prevent it in women who have already been exposed to these viruses? … So I don't know how other doctors prescribe something like Gardasil … Basically, they make an assumption that since the FDA has licensed it … the manufacturer would only market something that's safe, doctors go ahead and prescribe. And what they may not be aware of is that it is extremely hard to link a side effect to a vaccine, for many reasons. Getting a judgment against a manufacturer is very difficult and it has become more difficult due to some recent litigation that reduced manufacturer liability for vaccines in general.12

Gardasil's doctrine is already so entrenched after only six years that it is a formidable task to challenge the official story that this vaccine is safe and effective, because the truth is too unsettling. The remarkable claims of Gardasil's benefits to women in the war on cancer are full of holes and not supported by the science, even that science funded by Merck itself. It is important to deconstruct the falsehoods and half-truths that masquerade as facts about Gardasil.

[...]

Full article: http://www.townsendletter.com/FebMar...dasil0214.html

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Amzer Zo, thank you, I forgot about the Gardasil, that should be all the evidence people need, but they still believe lies.

I had two women in there thank me for trying to tell what they believe is the truth.
I tried to be real fair and honest, pointed out what's insane etc. about public beliefs and the law.

And pointed out that doctors and nurses are trained to ADMINISTER a vaccine but can't explain how they work.
I asked also whose fault it was that doctors didn't notice that our kids were being overdosed on Tylenol in 2005-2010.
I said "if you didn't notice something like that you wouldn't notice something like vaccine injury either".

The nurse mentioned Rotavirus as being the only dangerous one she'd heard about, and I was like, Wow, that's the one they gave my son, on the wrong date.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Is anyone else on the ASD spectrum or with GWS having issues with liver pain the day after heavy exercise?

I hiked 5 hours yesterday, and this morning while walking on flat road, my liver started hurting so bad, for a minute or two.
I ignored it and it went away.

Very concerned about stress disorder.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

p.s. i figured it out, i think

this pain is probably normal for anyone with NAFLD, which is a serious disease but treatable by exercising.

apparently good exercise helps the body produce liver enzymes n stuff, who would have guessed???

(non alcoholic fatty liver disease -- strikes anyone who eats corn or is prone to diabetes)

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

YOu guys would not believe the hostile bitches in the email group.

They got their panties in a wad because a few of us were outraged that Chili's restaurant cancelled the charity event with NAA (national autism association) because of the organization's open-mindedness toward vaccine injury awareness.

i have asked to be unsubscribed from that email group.
they are horrible. lol

[Fairy Friend]

you keep fighting I am convinced that these vaccinations are what took my grandson down and the doctor was a vaccine nut gave him more than he should have actually needed because he was on the line and being late in the vaccines because we held off. But she convinced my daughter that he would not be allowed in school if she did not do that and manipulated her and my son in law. A real bully.
My grandson took a little nose dive a while back he had an ear infection and they had to give him antibiotics. And we noticed a decline, a regression. Instead of direct eye contact he started glancing and not direct eye contact, his fine motor skills went down a little and words suddenly disappeared again where he would say dog ruff ruff now he would wait for you to say dog and just say woof. And not name the animal but say what the animal says. But we do the best we can right?

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Posted by Fairy Friend (here)
you keep fighting I am convinced that these vaccinations are what took my grandson down and the doctor was a vaccine nut gave him more than he should have actually needed because he was on the line and being late in the vaccines because we held off. But she convinced my daughter that he would not be allowed in school if she did not do that and manipulated her and my son in law. A real bully.
My grandson took a little nose dive a while back he had an ear infection and they had to give him antibiotics. And we noticed a decline, a regression. Instead of direct eye contact he started glancing and not direct eye contact, his fine motor skills went down a little and words suddenly disappeared again where he would say dog ruff ruff now he would wait for you to say dog and just say woof. And not name the animal but say what the animal says. But we do the best we can right?

thanks for this.
although it's heartbreaking, i like it when people are honest and detailed.
i hope you guys see improvement.

my guy has a lot of trouble forming words.
i can tell he is thinking of something complicated but the words just get stuck.

not sure if it's physical or related to self confidence/mental health or what.

i feel horrible.

[Fairy Friend]

I am starting to wish that I had a lot and a lot of money. I could spend 100 million dollars and I would start a foundation that ran a battery of tests on these kids. From top to bottom starting with non invasive of course and most likely to be true. Instead of thinking around with all this crap nonsense.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Posted by Fairy Friend (here)
I am starting to wish that I had a lot and a lot of money. I could spend 100 million dollars and I would start a foundation that ran a battery of tests on these kids. From top to bottom starting with non invasive of course and most likely to be true. Instead of thinking around with all this crap nonsense.

Thank God for people like you guys!

The AutismKing group I am leaving, it's like a zombie army of yuppie b*tches who live to report you on their cell phone.

I would love a change, even in fantasy land, lol

[Agape]

Hi Tesla .. just a small point .. it's observational point , I'd have to search for references and how many studies have been done on the topic and what were the results ..autism and allergies ..

It's not going to heal the genetic causes but avoidance of allergens can alleviate many severe reactions , physical and mental, just when you are uncertain of any immediate cause .
One basic problem with our 'instinctive brain' ( the limbic cortex ) when in stress or evolution ( both are stress ) is the way it reacts to sensory stimuli and pain receptor metabolites - the whole chain of small irritating disturbances that are happening everywhere around you though no where in particular .

Much has been discussed about food allergens and balanced non-chemical diet , from your own experience you may also know and find out how some seemingly innocent ( non harmful ) products , whether they're plant or animal origin can cause disturbing reaction and it can be determined only individually what each particular person finds difficult to handle .
Though own tastes and wastes seem to offer good guidance and I don't believe in forcing people ( especially not children ) to foods they dislike just because they're labeled 'healthy' .

From non food allergies my point is this ...

try to avoid woollen cloth , if possible all of them ..if not, they should be used over cotton shirts , avoid direct skin exposure to them over long time.

The only healthy wearables in fact is either pure organic cotton ( it does not have to be bought and sold under that label, there is plenty of pure organic cotton from China that is cheap and still of high quality ) or silk, pure silk has some amazing and almost miraculous healing properties and is cooling and calming for the system ( it tends to be expensive in the west but it can be found now n then in off sale ) .

and then I'd advice to be careful with artificial materials and fabrics , and mixtures, it really depends .
There are some modern ultra light materials that let the air through and are non allergenic , happy and healthy but plenty of the old polyesters and what's in the cloth shops till now is not .

Beware of feathers .. unless they undergo thorough cleansing process, they tend to hosts parasites . Feather duvets are out of use these days but they're still not exception .

I'd not advice even hemp or other coarse materials, especially for a kid , even if they're labeled healthy , they're still irritating .

On top of that , use the 'baby cloth washing liquid' for soft fabrics , and wash them just often as possible . If you feel they've been sweated they should be changed asap .


Long time exposure ( hours at times ) to anything that causes allergy and irritation makes the kids ( even adults but children are more sensitive and often find hard to determine the cause even for themselves ) very nerd , and remember the way they react to touches and physical contact , it's one of the most sensitive gates to the body .

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

Thanks for this. Very good advice.

My sister has a metal allergy and a bee sting allergy, for example.

I hated wool as a kid and had severe asthma.

Agape you are 100% right.

[Hervé]

I haven't seen it, but it has a 100% on both Rotten Tomatoes (based on 11 reviews) and Metacritic (based on 4 reviews) ratings...

Best Kept Secret (film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Best Kept Secret

Directed by Samantha Buck
Produced by Danielle Di Giacomo
Music by Brian Satz
Cinematography Nara Garber
Editing by Francisco Bello, Matt Posorske
Release dates: May 4, 2013
Running time 85 minutes
Country United States
Language English

Best Kept Secret is a 2013 documentary film that was directed by Samantha Buck and produced by Danielle DiGiacomo[1]. The film aired as part of POV on PBS and focuses on a special education teacher who must find her students a place in the real world as they prepare to leave the public school system.

[Tesla_WTC_Solution]

That looks worth watching!!!

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=nQYuT69gAH4

http://www.pbs.org/pov/bestkeptsecret/

Synopsis

At a public school in Newark, N.J., the staff answers the phone by saying, "You've reached John F. Kennedy High School, Newark's best-kept secret." JFK provides an exceptional environment for students with special-education needs. In Best Kept Secret, Janet Mino, who has taught a class of young men for four years, is on an urgent mission. She races against the clock as graduation approaches for her severely autistic minority students. Once they graduate and leave the security of this nurturing place, their options for living independently will be few. Mino must help them find the means to support themselves before they "age out" of the system. (90 minutes)