Scientific Link to Autism Identified

JACKSON, N.J., Nov. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- During its research into the application of neuroscience in business, a New Jersey based think tank, The Center for Modeling Optimal Outcomes®, LLC (The Center) made an inadvertent and amazing discovery.

The Center examined the neuroscientific dynamics of logic and emotion in decision making while researching neuroscience in business. They found unique corollary relationships between various brain chemicals (neurohormones, neurotransmitters, etc.). This apparent pattern led to a new path of research for the team outside of business. By looking at extensive scientific literature they discovered a cascade of hormones that emanate from the brain (hypothalamus). This same pattern of correlations was again apparent throughout the cascade. The group added a research biologist and started to test the pattern on genes (proteins). It remained consistent. The Center then called upon advisors from chemistry and physics to see if the pattern would apply in physical sciences.

Highlights from the full article (page 2)

Through the application of their model, it became apparent that autism is an outcome of several variables that, when the homeostatic relationship of each one is disrupted, a "perfect storm" scenario results in autism. The application of the model identified several of the variables that account for why boys have a 4 to 1 ratio of instances over girls as well as why not every boy is affected.


While the scientific community will have to validate The Center's findings, the model for assessing homeostatic relationships indicates the "trigger" behind autism is an imbalance between a pair of amino acid neurotransmitters; glutamate and glycine.

Autism was one of most difficult illnesses The Center had attempted to analyze. If it hadn't been for so many parents insisting that vaccines were responsible for the condition, we might never have found the fact that the stabilizer in MMR and a few other vaccines is hydrolyzed gelatin; a substance that is approximately 21% glycine. It appears that, based on readily verifiable science, the use of that form of glycine triggers an imbalance between the amino acid neurotransmitters responsible for the absorption rate of certain classes of cells throughout the body.

Full article: Date:18/11/2009
Scientific Link to Autism Identified (oup was able to formulate a scientifical...)

Wooow

So, it's this glycine that they think is respsonsible for the link? Do all MMR vaccines have glycine in them or can you get one that doesn't contain it?

:

---

OMG finally. I wonder which other vaccines have it??

---

My first thought too......

From the article, it sounds like another theory which they haven't yet proven. Nice story, but i will be more interested when they test their 'model' and publish it in a peer review journal.

Without publication in a peer reviewed journal, this article is meaningless. Anyone can post something on the web anytime they like, and that doesn't make it science.

If hydrolysed gelatin (whatever that is - can a chemist comment on that?) in vaccines is responsible for autism, then all of the research looking for a connection between vaccines and autism would show a statistically significant link (ie more kids who are vaccinated would have autism).

In fact no such link has been found, even though extensive studies, of literally hundreds of thousands of children, have been made to check this and to allay the fears of parents. If you vaccinate your child, they are no more likely to have autism than if you don't vaccinate your child. The only thing that changes is that an unvaccinated child is more likely to catch a serious illness.

All the pseudo-science in the world (and given that this result has not been published in any journal, it appears, let alone a high-ranking peer-reviewed journal it does seem like it isn't actual science at all) won't find a link between two things if the link does not exist...

I would love for researchers to understand the causes of autism as much as the next person. All this chasing of disproven connections between vaccinations and autism makes me angry because it is such a massive waste of resources that could go into actually treating people with autism or into research that is more likely to produce results and find a prevention or cure for the condition.

As others have said, articles like this mean nothing until published in a peer review journal.

The terminology used makes it sound more chemical/technical/scary, but hydrolyzed gelatine is just another name for normal everyday gelatine - the same stuff you make jelly with. It is used as a filler in a heap of things, from antacids to make-up and as a thickener in jams, lollies etc. It is food additive number E441. Glycine is a by-product of gelatine and is used as an artificial sweetener and is present in vitamin tablets, sports drinks and analgesics.

I would assume that if it were the Gelatine in the vaccinations causing autism that there would be a similar trend of higher autism rates in babies that have regular antacid medication for reflux and in babies born to mothers who consumed vitamins during the pregnancy.

Speaking as a chemist, this report doesn't appear to hold much water. But the writer is to be congratulated on making it sound fancy, it does have a wow factor.

I read it as lysine wtf?

In any case my theory is one of a 'perfect storm' variety...just not sure of the components!

Can i even be bothered to roll my eyes.....nope.

Another crazed cry of "oh my god it's the VACCINES" from the ill-educated.

Non-scientific, hopelessly flawed and utterly meaningless.

Here is a link to wiki so everyone can read about glycine.

:

---

Can i even be bothered to roll my eyes.....nope.

Another crazed cry of "oh my god it's the VACCINES" from the ill-educated.

Non-scientific, hopelessly flawed and utterly meaningless.

Here is a link to wiki so everyone can read about glycine.

---

I think I love you Paradise Lost!!! You say it like it is!! I'm so Y.A.W.N about all these "scientific" papers too.

I don't get from that article that the author is ill educated... Nor do I think that those that consider there may be a link between autisim and MMR are ill educated. I am one of those - & ill educated I am not!

I find this an interesting article & could never be so **** sure that I would discount it. It's interesting to read, to file & wait and see what comes from it.

Having a child who reacted severely to MMR & is now on the autistic spectrum I find all information interesting... Thankyou for sharing it. :hug:

A person can be very well educated in some areas, and very intelligent, and still not know a lot about how research works. And without that knowledge, it is hard (impossible?) to assess the value of different pieces of research.

Even knowing how research works, unless you are a specialist in that area (this means years and years of doing it professionally, not hours and hours of reading online), you can't evaluate the research done. This is true in all scientific disciplines, not just autism research or vaccination research.

This is why it is so important for laypeople or even relative laypeople (ie specialists in related areas) to rely on the peer-review process. In other words: research that has been published in peer-reviewed journals of the highest rank (high impact factor), and that has been confirmed by many subsequent studies, can be trusted. Research that has not been so published and so confirmed is a lot harder to trust and sometimes is downright wrong. An example of the latter is the original piece of research linking MMR to autism that has since been retracted by most of its authors and disproven as thoroughly as possible in the years since it was published.

I understand Tenar what you are saying. I have a thorough knowledge of how research works & is published...

My response was to Paradise Losts comment:"Another crazed cry of "oh my god it's the VACCINES" from the ill-educated."

I also have enough knowledge & personal experience to know that all the research in the world doesn't always uncover the answers... My own health issues being one... The deaths of my babies being another... The curious case of my daughters severe reaction & subsequent behavioural change after vaccination being another!

If we only look scientifically I don't believe we will always find the answers we need. For we need to look with all our senses and couple this with science!

I just think we need to be careful to label as Paradise did those who scream it's the vaccines as "ill educated". When perhaps their reasons do not stem from that at all... :hug:

Anyone else seeing the irony in posting about the legitimacy of the paper in question - then posting a link to Wiki? Wiki is the poorest source for quality information. ANYONE can post changes on Wiki, regardless of qualifications (usually lacking...).

I'm in the camp of 'interesting stats paper - but not in the slightest is it a) pure science, or b) peer reviewed (a vital process in ALL valued hypothesis)'.

It would be marvellous if this hypothesis was formed from more that literature, but instead was able to be repeated in tests. Well - results achieved in a single test would be a start - the whole article (from what I can gather) was based on statistics from a whole bunch of other studies that were looking at other things.

To me, it reminds me of how every 6 months someone else re-runs the stats & red wine flops from being good for you, then bad for you - depending on the study aims, sample size, sample quality, etc.

Potentially exciting - YES! Definitive answer - Not even close.

wiki is at least referenced. Obviously the ability to read critically is required with wiki, as with this dubious study.

Actually I believe I've read somewhere that people who don't vaccinate their kids tend to be more educated than the average. I don't actually find that surprising, strangely enough.

Wikipedia is, in my experience, an excellent source of information for anything science-based, especially stuff like the link that Paradise Lost posted, which is not at all contraversial or new information . I like that. I think it's evidence of the basic goodness of humans. There are more people out there making correct edits and adding correct information than there are editing it to include falsehoods.

Thankyou Tenar - I guess that's because it takes an enormous amount of time, effort and skill to wade through the huge amount of information there is. :hug:

I think Paradise that nobody is disputing that this study is lacking in obvious areas. That is very very obvious. Just not that those that have a leaning towards the belief that perhaps vaccination may contribute to autisim are ill educated... That was my point. :hug:

And its due to this kind of verbal diarohea that I refuse to read anything about autisum/aspergease.

I find that trying to find the reason or finding someone to blame for my son being autistic will take away to much energy that I can put into helping him. Dwelling on the what if's and who and why's isnt going to help the situation now.

I know of kids who have never been immunised and are on the spectrum....so who can be blamed then?