Guest guest Posted October 17, 2006 Report Share Posted October 17, 2006 To make the enormous leap to people living in rainy areas tend to watch more TV so we need to research the possibility that TV watching causes autism is like saying that those in rainy areas tend to carry umbrellas more so umbrellas must cause autism. Now, I might buy that rainy areas tend to have more mold, which can stress a dysfunctional immune system. Or, perhaps it allows more toxic run-off into people's lawns and water supply which stresses the immune system. Or, maybe even staying inside more limits the body's ability to make Vitamin D. But TV watching? Puhhleeeez Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2006 Report Share Posted October 17, 2006 Oh Please , give me a break! This is such a bunch of CR--!! All four of my chilren watched an equal amount of t.v. as they were all born between 1988 and 1999. The one born in 1999 was the only one to receive 23 vaccines and the first one when he was minutes old and a premie. The other three received only 7. >From: " Ort " <doug0531@...> >Reply- >< > >Subject: TV and Autism >Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 06:56:28 -0400 > > >FYI. > >http://www.slate.com/id/2151538/nav/tap1/ > >[ Ort] > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2006 Report Share Posted October 17, 2006 I have 3 bio children and one adopted child. My bio children have watched a lot of TV. I worried about my oldest and still do because it is his favorite past time. He is perfectly fine in spite of having albinism (a genetic disorder) and he has a severe vision impairment. I have mentioned him on this list before because he is social and an honor student. My younger two boys never watched nearly the amount of TV that Zack did and still does. Our daughter who lived in an orphanage for 4 years of her life has autism and I think that it is fair to say that she did not watch much TV. Sheri LINDA ANAGNOSTAKOS <lsa5885@...> wrote: Oh Please , give me a break! This is such a bunch of CR--!! All four of my chilren watched an equal amount of t.v. as they were all born between 1988 and 1999. The one born in 1999 was the only one to receive 23 vaccines and the first one when he was minutes old and a premie. The other three received only 7. >From: " Ort " <doug0531@...> >Reply- >< > >Subject: TV and Autism >Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 06:56:28 -0400 > > >FYI. > >http://www.slate.com/id/2151538/nav/tap1/ > >[ Ort] > --------------------------------- All-new - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 I can disprove the Vit D thing too. My son has no pigment and because of that I used sunscreen on him all of the time. He was never out without it. He was a very small child and I grew concerned. I took him to a endocrinologist to check if there was a problem as one of his secondary conditions is Optic Nerve Hypoplasia and if you have that you need to be checked for Septic Optic Dysplasia which can affect many things including growth. Well I learned that Zack was Vit D deficient and so we allowed him outdoors without sunscreen a few minutes each day and upped his milk intake (which I thought would be impossible as he drinks a lot of milk) and he grew more than 6 inches in a summer. Others have posted similar stories about their children since then in the albinism groups that I belong to. The parents who said reported having issues with Vit D did not have children with autism. Although I have noticed a large amount of people who have children with autism reporting that their children have autism as well. Sheri Googahly@... wrote: To make the enormous leap to people living in rainy areas tend to watch more TV so we need to research the possibility that TV watching causes autism is like saying that those in rainy areas tend to carry umbrellas more so umbrellas must cause autism. Now, I might buy that rainy areas tend to have more mold, which can stress a dysfunctional immune system. Or, perhaps it allows more toxic run-off into people's lawns and water supply which stresses the immune system. Or, maybe even staying inside more limits the body's ability to make Vitamin D. But TV watching? Puhhleeeez Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 In a message dated 10/18/2006 4:29:46 AM Central Standard Time, eszbi5@... writes: <<Well I learned that Zack was Vit D deficient and so we allowed him outdoors without sunscreen a few minutes each day and upped his milk intake (which I thought would be impossible as he drinks a lot of milk) and he grew more than 6 inches in a summer. >> Interesting about the growth and Vitamin D. Although the growth could be mostly linked to the increase in milk intake since milk is high in arginine which boosts growth hormone. Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 , I didn't mean to offend you with my thoughts about the study's leap to judgement and apparant ignoring of the breakdowns in autism not directly related to social development. My comments were not meant against you for forwarding the study, but rather in those who jumped to the conclusion that since autism rates were higher in rainy areas, watching TV must cause autism. I can see that plopping a child in front of the TV all day could impact social development. The stimulation/therapy program we used in the early days, Son-Rise, specifically asks parents not to let children watch TV because they want real live people to be the most interesting thing in the child's life. This was not a problem for my son at that time because he'd run out of the room covering his ears if the TV was turned on. On the flipside, the program we used to address sensory issues, NACD, recommended that my son watch TV for certain amounts of time during the day (along with other forms of visual therapy) to build his maculor vision. Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 I shared this message, not because I thought it walked on all fours, and not because it brings up something that might not be a *cause*, as such, but rather an association. We all live in a culture that is too much oriented to linear causality, that A *causes* B. The idea that something with as many variables as autism is *caused* by one thing is laughable. But I have to ask the question in terms of associations and influences. How does the passivity of watching TV influence brain development? We live in a world in which televisions occupy a place of special entitlement in families, and TV is used in a variety of ways without question and without thought. What might be the reciprocal relationship between how children on the autistic spectrum of disorders process information and the relentless assault of images associated with ordinary children's TV? I offered the link for those who are willing to think a bit about forms of stimulation on children (and youth) apart from immediate influence of the immune system that can (and no doubt does) have a bearing on synaptic and neuronal functioning in the brain. The immune system isn't one thing. And influence on its functioning in any given individual can occur via a myriad of vectors. Mock the idea if you wish, Gaylen, because of the way it is framed in the article. I only offered the link to see if some new thinking on this subject might be stimulated on this list. Perhaps that shall happen. Perhaps not. Ort _____ From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Googahly@... Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 2:00 AM Subject: Re: TV and Autism To make the enormous leap to people living in rainy areas tend to watch more TV so we need to research the possibility that TV watching causes autism is like saying that those in rainy areas tend to carry umbrellas more so umbrellas must cause autism. Now, I might buy that rainy areas tend to have more mold, which can stress a dysfunctional immune system. Or, perhaps it allows more toxic run-off into people's lawns and water supply which stresses the immune system. Or, maybe even staying inside more limits the body's ability to make Vitamin D. But TV watching? Puhhleeeez Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 Awe come on Doug; you're taking all the fun out of it. Another under recognized clinical correlation is that: An addiction to breathing eventually leads to death. Your point is well taken, but I have two kids who both love Teletubbies (which makes my head hurt). One is afflicted and the other is smart as a whip, a social junkie and 3++ verbal. I'd think it unlikely a " passive " experience could generate such excitement (in both) when they are asked if they want to watch the show. I appreciate the link and am a little surprised that Cornell would also publish something this thin <see below>. http://www.johnson.cornell.edu/faculty/profiles/waldman/autpaper.html Regards, Colin's Dad " Ort " <doug0531@earthli nk.net> To Sent by: < > groups (DOT) cc com Subject RE: TV and Autism 10/18/2006 06:56 AM Please respond to groups (DOT) com I shared this message, not because I thought it walked on all fours, and not because it brings up something that might not be a *cause*, as such, but rather an association. We all live in a culture that is too much oriented to linear causality, that A *causes* B. The idea that something with as many variables as autism is *caused* by one thing is laughable. But I have to ask the question in terms of associations and influences. How does the passivity of watching TV influence brain development? We live in a world in which televisions occupy a place of special entitlement in families, and TV is used in a variety of ways without question and without thought. What might be the reciprocal relationship between how children on the autistic spectrum of disorders process information and the relentless assault of images associated with ordinary children's TV? I offered the link for those who are willing to think a bit about forms of stimulation on children (and youth) apart from immediate influence of the immune system that can (and no doubt does) have a bearing on synaptic and neuronal functioning in the brain. The immune system isn't one thing. And influence on its functioning in any given individual can occur via a myriad of vectors. Mock the idea if you wish, Gaylen, because of the way it is framed in the article. I only offered the link to see if some new thinking on this subject might be stimulated on this list. Perhaps that shall happen. Perhaps not. Ort _____ From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Googahly@... Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 2:00 AM Subject: Re: TV and Autism To make the enormous leap to people living in rainy areas tend to watch more TV so we need to research the possibility that TV watching causes autism is like saying that those in rainy areas tend to carry umbrellas more so umbrellas must cause autism. Now, I might buy that rainy areas tend to have more mold, which can stress a dysfunctional immune system. Or, perhaps it allows more toxic run-off into people's lawns and water supply which stresses the immune system. Or, maybe even staying inside more limits the body's ability to make Vitamin D. But TV watching? Puhhleeeez Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 We do no have TV, but I do agree too much of this is not good. We have lots of videos and my kids love their computer games. I try to limit this as much as possible because I am trying to get my son to connect with people all the time and these things certainly do not do that. Jerri Ort wrote: > I shared this message, not because I thought it walked on all fours, and not > because it brings up something that might not be a *cause*, as such, but > rather an association. We all live in a culture that is too much oriented > to linear causality, that A *causes* B. The idea that something with as > many variables as autism is *caused* by one thing is laughable. But I have > to ask the question in terms of associations and influences. How does the > passivity of watching TV influence brain development? We live in a world in > which televisions occupy a place of special entitlement in families, and TV > is used in a variety of ways without question and without thought. What > might be the reciprocal relationship between how children on the autistic > spectrum of disorders process information and the relentless assault of > images associated with ordinary children's TV? > > > > I offered the link for those who are willing to think a bit about forms of > stimulation on children (and youth) apart from immediate influence of the > immune system that can (and no doubt does) have a bearing on synaptic and > neuronal functioning in the brain. > > > > The immune system isn't one thing. And influence on its functioning in any > given individual can occur via a myriad of vectors. Mock the idea if you > wish, Gaylen, because of the way it is framed in the article. I only > offered the link to see if some new thinking on this subject might be > stimulated on this list. Perhaps that shall happen. Perhaps not. > > > > Ort > > > > > > _____ > > From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of > Googahly@... > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 2:00 AM > > Subject: Re: TV and Autism > > > > To make the enormous leap to people living in rainy areas tend to watch more > > TV so we need to research the possibility that TV watching causes autism is > like saying that those in rainy areas tend to carry umbrellas more so > umbrellas > must cause autism. Now, I might buy that rainy areas tend to have more mold, > > which can stress a dysfunctional immune system. Or, perhaps it allows more > toxic run-off into people's lawns and water supply which stresses the immune > > system. Or, maybe even staying inside more limits the body's ability to make > > Vitamin D. But TV watching? Puhhleeeez > Gaylen > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 TV may have negative impacts, it may not, but the bottom line to me is that research and funding should be directed to more plausible medical oriented relationships that would actually improve treatment and outcome, instead of wasting time and energy on researching Television viewing and its impact on ASD, to me this is just something that doesn't warrant research funds at this current stage of medical cluelessness... Re: TV and Autism To make the enormous leap to people living in rainy areas tend to watch more TV so we need to research the possibility that TV watching causes autism is like saying that those in rainy areas tend to carry umbrellas more so umbrellas must cause autism. Now, I might buy that rainy areas tend to have more mold, which can stress a dysfunctional immune system. Or, perhaps it allows more toxic run-off into people's lawns and water supply which stresses the immune system. Or, maybe even staying inside more limits the body's ability to make Vitamin D. But TV watching? Puhhleeeez Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 Do they think that there is a problem with your son's macular vision? When Zack was small we used a video game called Carts to help him with tracking. Zack has no macula or fovea reflex. I am kind of surprised that TV would be a good way to improve fine vision as television is two dimensional and watching too much TV instead of exploring the world can lead to children to have visual perception problems of course it is not the only reason but it is suspected that television replaces some of the things that did to teach ourselves to see. Vision is actually a learned skill. One thing that has helped my daughter to make eye contact with me is when I put stickers on my face. loves stickers and so she becomes interested in my face when I have them on there. If you do this don't forget to remove them before you leave the house because people will look at you funny. LOL I forgot one day and it was not until I got home that I realized that I had a sticker on my forehead. LOL Sheri Googahly@... wrote: , I didn't mean to offend you with my thoughts about the study's leap to judgement and apparant ignoring of the breakdowns in autism not directly related to social development. My comments were not meant against you for forwarding the study, but rather in those who jumped to the conclusion that since autism rates were higher in rainy areas, watching TV must cause autism. I can see that plopping a child in front of the TV all day could impact social development. The stimulation/therapy program we used in the early days, Son-Rise, specifically asks parents not to let children watch TV because they want real live people to be the most interesting thing in the child's life. This was not a problem for my son at that time because he'd run out of the room covering his ears if the TV was turned on. On the flipside, the program we used to address sensory issues, NACD, recommended that my son watch TV for certain amounts of time during the day (along with other forms of visual therapy) to build his maculor vision. Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 I remember my cousin's son didn't like the swing at all as an infant. She took a bunch of stickers and stuck them on the bottom of the seat and would lay him under the swinging swing. He LOVED watching the stickers go back and forth. Go figure. (and this is a NT kid...now 20...lol). Sharon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 A TV/autism link is complete bunk!!! My HFA son hates TV and never really liked it as a child (although we didn't have TV when he was a baby because we live in an area that requires cable and we didn't get it until the kids were older). Finally, now that he's 12 he's beginning to watch it and finally enjoy a few shows. I'm actually thankful for this because I think it can help (even if just minimally) with some social skills, observing emotion, stories, etc... On Oct 17, 2006, at 8:21 PM, LINDA ANAGNOSTAKOS wrote: > Oh Please , give me a break! This is such a bunch of CR--!! All four > of my > chilren watched an equal amount of t.v. as they were all born between > 1988 > and 1999. The one born in 1999 was the only one to receive 23 vaccines > and > the first one when he was minutes old and a premie. The other three > received > only 7. > > >> From: " Ort " <doug0531@...> >> Reply- >> < > >> Subject: TV and Autism >> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 06:56:28 -0400 >> >> >> FYI. >> >> http://www.slate.com/id/2151538/nav/tap1/ >> >> [ Ort] >> > > > > > Responsibility for the content of this message lies strictly with > the original author(s), and is not necessarily endorsed by or the > opinion of the Research Institute, the Parent Coalition, or > the list moderator(s). > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 <<I forgot one day and it was not until I got home that I realized that I had a sticker on my forehead.>> LOL! And what makes something like that even worse is when not one person says a WORD about it all day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 Right On! K. Fischer wrote: > TV may have negative impacts, it may not, but the bottom line to me is > that research and funding should be directed to more plausible medical > oriented relationships that would actually improve treatment and > outcome, instead of wasting time and energy on researching Television > viewing and its impact on ASD, to me this is just something that doesn't > warrant research funds at this current stage of medical cluelessness... > > > > Re: TV and Autism > > To make the enormous leap to people living in rainy areas tend to watch > more > > TV so we need to research the possibility that TV watching causes autism > is > like saying that those in rainy areas tend to carry umbrellas more so > umbrellas > must cause autism. Now, I might buy that rainy areas tend to have more > mold, > > which can stress a dysfunctional immune system. Or, perhaps it allows > more > toxic run-off into people's lawns and water supply which stresses the > immune > > system. Or, maybe even staying inside more limits the body's ability to > make > > Vitamin D. But TV watching? Puhhleeeez > Gaylen > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 Yep... I did that with a Chiquita banana sticker once (I put it on my forehead to entertain my kids)... nobody said a thing! I went all over the place that day! Caroline > From: princesspeach <donnaaron@...> > Reply-< > > Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 20:31:52 +0000 > < > > Subject: Re: TV and Autism > > <<I forgot > one day and it was not until I got home that I realized that I had a > sticker on > my forehead.>> > > LOL! And what makes something like that even worse is when not one > person says a WORD about it all day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 There is a sense in which I agree with Jerri and , and there is another sense in which I take serious objection. " Medical oriented relationships " are but one group of relationships that are associated with autism. Some months ago I had a series of conversations with Kathy on. As most on this list know, she directs the Northern New York clinic. We discussed what might augment the protocol to more comprehensively address autism in families. If I remember correctly, she suggested that the protocol may well answer about sixty percent of the issue. We then gave thought to what might comprise the other forty percent. We were not trying to be hard and fast about sixty-forty numbers. But let us, for the moment, allow that the protocol covers two-thirds to three-quarters of the issue. First, I believe that understanding how the immune system works is crucial to the future of understanding autism. Ninety percent of the value of this list for me is postings on research from Doris and Steve and a few others. A disclaimer, before people get all in a bunch. There is a lot of value on this list concerning the day-to-day how-tos of dealing with autistic children, etc. And there are mothers on this list whose intelligence and courage is a rock for list members who live daily with autism. I learn courage from them, but I am here mainly to listen to how people blend good science with practical interventions. Second, I believe that good, hard science is at the heart of understanding why autism is affecting the North American population now in ways that it was not known to, say, thirty years ago. Third, science research is always guided by a well-framed theory. Claims to the contrary notwithstanding, we are in the infancy of understanding the human immune system. Some of the questions now being asked are on the micro level, concerning cell activity and gene functioning. It is important to remember that neither cells nor genes function in a vacuum. Genes function in relationships with one another and with the environment. This process is reciprocal and recursive and dynamic. There is nothing inside any gene that makes that gene do just one thing. Gene life, like all life, is about relationship systems. I believe that real progress in how genes function vis a vis autism will occur when the relationship systems of genes are better understood. That means that the most useful answers will come from questions, not only on micro-level concerns, but macro as well. The immune system functions in a dance between myriad small activities and some larger ones. Fourth, to expand one's field of vision a bit, I suggest that part of the " dance " in a family experiencing autism has to do with how anxiety is regulated *between* family members and not just by (say) the autistic child himself. Families are, by definition, complex emotional relationship systems. That means that how one person expresses this or that symptom is connected to how others in the family are functioning toward that child and with one another. Regardless of what percentage one would like to place on this dimension, I believe that this is one of the major variables present in all families with a symptomatic child, regardless of whether the symptoms are autism-related or not. Fifth, I envision the immune system, not merely as a property located in one person, but as a process that spans family relationship systems, probably across generations. I ways for which we still have limited vocabulary and only partial knowledge, I envision immune functioning between family members as dynamically connected. Reciprocal emotional influence is a given in families. So also is immune functioning, I think. Sixth, how TV functions within this wider picture is not clear, but it might perhaps be one variable that deserves someone's attention. Anecdotal stories that suggest no impact at all are not science. Not enough is known to know what to include in a comprehensive picture and what not to. Seventh, I suggest that a comment attributed to Marcel Proust might have something to say to this matter: " The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes. " I think of this list has having two foci. Both are important, but in different ways. One is about the day-to-day navigation through life with an autistic child. The other is about funding and studies and science. For the family with an autistic child, perhaps those parents can only see the former. But for the next generation of families whose autistic children are as yet unborn, the future is with the latter. Jm2c Ort _____ From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Jerri Gann Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 6:12 PM Subject: Re: TV and Autism Right On! K. Fischer wrote: > TV may have negative impacts, it may not, but the bottom line to me is > that research and funding should be directed to more plausible medical > oriented relationships that would actually improve treatment and > outcome, instead of wasting time and energy on researching Television > viewing and its impact on ASD, to me this is just something that doesn't > warrant research funds at this current stage of medical cluelessness... > > > > RE: TV and Autism > > I shared this message, not because I thought it walked on all fours, and > not > because it brings up something that might not be a *cause*, as such, but > rather an association. We all live in a culture that is too much > oriented > to linear causality, that A *causes* B. The idea that something with as > many variables as autism is *caused* by one thing is laughable. But I > have > to ask the question in terms of associations and influences. How does > the > passivity of watching TV influence brain development? We live in a world > in > which televisions occupy a place of special entitlement in families, and > TV > is used in a variety of ways without question and without thought. What > might be the reciprocal relationship between how children on the > autistic > spectrum of disorders process information and the relentless assault of > images associated with ordinary children's TV? > > I offered the link for those who are willing to think a bit about forms > of > stimulation on children (and youth) apart from immediate influence of > the > immune system that can (and no doubt does) have a bearing on synaptic > and > neuronal functioning in the brain. > > The immune system isn't one thing. And influence on its functioning in > any > given individual can occur via a myriad of vectors. Mock the idea if you > wish, Gaylen, because of the way it is framed in the article. I only > offered the link to see if some new thinking on this subject might be > stimulated on this list. Perhaps that shall happen. Perhaps not. > > Ort > [ Ort] //snip// Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2006 Report Share Posted October 18, 2006 Interesting post . I'm not certain that Television has a whole lot to do with causing autism in the first instance, and I do believe that the researchers in this " TV causes Autism research have approached this the wrong way around " . Many Children with autism, or NIDs may take an over pervasive reliance on television for input for many reasons - its not a person, it can be repetitive (videos), it feeds a possibly over active visual system (as apposed to auditory/verbal stimuli) - parents can use it to " baby sit' a restless child so that can get something done in the house,,,etc. Looking at the growth penetration of cable TV and co-relating that with the incidence of autism is however ludicrous (I worked in cable TV and TV audience research for many years - including in the US). Firstly, television audience research viewing data for children under 5 is very poor, it is not available by county (the smallest unit is by television viewing area determined by VHS transmitter coverage - there were about 212 of these in the US last I knew). The point is however that kids with NIDs are NOT served well by watching too much television, nor things that they might over preseverate or develop stims on. So behaps has a point about too much of the wrong television doesn't serve Autistic kids too well. --- Ort <doug0531@...> wrote: > There is a sense in which I agree with Jerri and , and there is > another > sense in which I take serious objection. > > > > " Medical oriented relationships " are but one group of relationships > that are > associated with autism. Some months ago I had a series of > conversations > with Kathy on. As most on this list know, she directs the > Northern > New York clinic. We discussed what might augment the > protocol to > more comprehensively address autism in families. If I remember > correctly, > she suggested that the protocol may well answer about sixty percent > of the > issue. We then gave thought to what might comprise the other forty > percent. > We were not trying to be hard and fast about sixty-forty numbers. > But let > us, for the moment, allow that the protocol covers two-thirds > to > three-quarters of the issue. > > > > First, I believe that understanding how the immune system works is > crucial > to the future of understanding autism. Ninety percent of the value > of this > list for me is postings on research from Doris and Steve and a > few > others. > > > > A disclaimer, before people get all in a bunch. There > is a lot > of value on this list concerning the day-to-day how-tos of dealing > with > autistic > > children, etc. And there are mothers on this list whose > intelligence and > courage is a rock for list members who live daily with autism. I > learn > > courage from them, but I am here mainly to listen to how people > blend good > science with practical interventions. > > > > Second, I believe that good, hard science is at the heart of > understanding > why autism is affecting the North American population now in ways > that it > was not known to, say, thirty years ago. > > > > Third, science research is always guided by a well-framed theory. > Claims to > the contrary notwithstanding, we are in the infancy of understanding > the > human immune system. Some of the questions now being asked are on > the micro > level, concerning cell activity and gene functioning. It is > important to > remember that neither cells nor genes function in a vacuum. Genes > function > in relationships with one another and with the environment. This > process is > reciprocal and recursive and dynamic. There is nothing inside any > gene that > makes that gene do just one thing. Gene life, like all life, is > about > relationship systems. I believe that real progress in how genes > function > vis a vis autism will occur when the relationship systems of genes > are > better understood. That means that the most useful answers will > come from > questions, not only on micro-level concerns, but macro as well. The > immune > system functions in a dance between myriad small activities and some > larger > ones. > > > > Fourth, to expand one's field of vision a bit, I suggest that part > of the > " dance " in a family experiencing autism has to do with how anxiety > is > regulated *between* family members and not just by (say) the > autistic child > himself. Families are, by definition, complex emotional > relationship > systems. That means that how one person expresses this or that > symptom is > connected to how others in the family are functioning toward that > child and > with one another. Regardless of what percentage one would like to > place on > this dimension, I believe that this is one of the major variables > present in > all families with a symptomatic child, regardless of whether the > symptoms > are autism-related or not. > > > > Fifth, I envision the immune system, not merely as a property > located in one > person, but as a process that spans family relationship systems, > probably > across generations. I ways for which we still have limited > vocabulary and > only partial knowledge, I envision immune functioning between family > members > as dynamically connected. Reciprocal emotional influence is a given > in > families. So also is immune functioning, I think. > > > > Sixth, how TV functions within this wider picture is not clear, but > it might > perhaps be one variable that deserves someone's attention. > Anecdotal > stories that suggest no impact at all are not science. Not enough > is known > to know what to include in a comprehensive picture and what not to. > > > > Seventh, I suggest that a comment attributed to Marcel Proust might > have > something to say to this matter: > > > > " The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes > but in > having new eyes. " > > > > I think of this list has having two foci. Both are important, but > in > different ways. One is about the day-to-day navigation through life > with an > autistic child. The other is about funding and studies and science. > For > the family with an autistic child, perhaps those parents can only > see the > former. But for the next generation of families whose autistic > children are > as yet unborn, the future is with the latter. > > > > Jm2c > > > > Ort > > > > _____ > > From: [mailto: ] On Behalf > Of Jerri > Gann > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 6:12 PM > > Subject: Re: TV and Autism > > > > Right On! > K. Fischer wrote: > > TV may have negative impacts, it may not, but the bottom line to > me is > > that research and funding should be directed to more plausible > medical > > oriented relationships that would actually improve treatment and > > outcome, instead of wasting time and energy on researching > Television > > viewing and its impact on ASD, to me this is just something that > doesn't > > warrant research funds at this current stage of medical > cluelessness... > > > > > > > > RE: TV and Autism > > > > I shared this message, not because I thought it walked on all > fours, and > > not > > because it brings up something that might not be a *cause*, as > such, but > > rather an association. We all live in a culture that is too much > > oriented > > to linear causality, that A *causes* B. The idea that something > with as > > many variables as autism is *caused* by one thing is laughable. > But I > > have > > to ask the question in terms of associations and influences. How > does > > the > > passivity of watching TV influence brain development? We live in a > world > > in > > which televisions occupy a place of special entitlement in > families, and > > TV > > is used in a variety of ways without question and without thought. > What > > might be the reciprocal relationship between how children on the > > autistic > > spectrum of disorders process information and the relentless > assault of > > images associated with ordinary children's TV? > > > > I offered the link for those who are willing to think a bit about > forms > > of > > stimulation on children (and youth) apart from immediate influence > of > > the > > immune system that can (and no doubt does) have a bearing on > synaptic > > and > > neuronal functioning in the brain. > > > > The immune system isn't one thing. And influence on its > functioning in > > any > > given individual can occur via a myriad of vectors. Mock the idea > if you > > wish, Gaylen, because of the way it is framed in the article. I > only > > offered the link to see if some new thinking on this subject might > be > > stimulated on this list. Perhaps that shall happen. Perhaps not. > > > > Ort > > > [ Ort] //snip// > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2006 Report Share Posted October 19, 2006 Correction - the reference to VHS should be VHF - meaning over the air broadcast TV channels 1-12 --- rmwilson <rmwilson@...> wrote: > Interesting post . > I'm not certain that Television has a whole lot to do with causing > autism in the first instance, and I do believe that the researchers > in this " TV causes Autism research have approached this the wrong > way around " . Many Children with autism, or NIDs may take an over > pervasive reliance on television for input for many reasons - its > not a person, it can be repetitive (videos), it feeds a possibly > over active visual system (as apposed to auditory/verbal stimuli) - > parents can use it to " baby sit' a restless child so that can get > something done in the house,,,etc. > Looking at the growth penetration of cable TV and co-relating that > with the incidence of autism is however ludicrous (I worked in cable > TV and TV audience research for many years - including in the US). > Firstly, television audience research viewing data for children > under 5 is very poor, it is not available by county (the smallest > unit is by television viewing area determined by VHS transmitter > coverage - there were about 212 of these in the US last I knew). The > point is however that kids with NIDs are NOT served well by watching > too much television, nor things that they might over preseverate or > develop stims on. > So behaps has a point about too much of the wrong television > doesn't serve Autistic kids too well. > > > > --- Ort <doug0531@...> wrote: > > > There is a sense in which I agree with Jerri and , and there > is > > another > > sense in which I take serious objection. > > > > > > > > " Medical oriented relationships " are but one group of > relationships > > that are > > associated with autism. Some months ago I had a series of > > conversations > > with Kathy on. As most on this list know, she directs the > > Northern > > New York clinic. We discussed what might augment the > > protocol to > > more comprehensively address autism in families. If I remember > > correctly, > > she suggested that the protocol may well answer about sixty > percent > > of the > > issue. We then gave thought to what might comprise the other > forty > > percent. > > We were not trying to be hard and fast about sixty-forty numbers. > > > But let > > us, for the moment, allow that the protocol covers > two-thirds > > to > > three-quarters of the issue. > > > > > > > > First, I believe that understanding how the immune system works > is > > crucial > > to the future of understanding autism. Ninety percent of the > value > > of this > > list for me is postings on research from Doris and Steve and > a > > few > > others. > > > > > > > > A disclaimer, before people get all in a bunch. > There > > is a lot > > of value on this list concerning the day-to-day how-tos of > dealing > > with > > autistic > > > > children, etc. And there are mothers on this list whose > > intelligence and > > courage is a rock for list members who live daily with autism. I > > learn > > > > courage from them, but I am here mainly to listen to how people > > blend good > > science with practical interventions. > > > > > > > > Second, I believe that good, hard science is at the heart of > > understanding > > why autism is affecting the North American population now in ways > > that it > > was not known to, say, thirty years ago. > > > > > > > > Third, science research is always guided by a well-framed theory. > > > Claims to > > the contrary notwithstanding, we are in the infancy of > understanding > > the > > human immune system. Some of the questions now being asked are > on > > the micro > > level, concerning cell activity and gene functioning. It is > > important to > > remember that neither cells nor genes function in a vacuum. > Genes > > function > > in relationships with one another and with the environment. This > > process is > > reciprocal and recursive and dynamic. There is nothing inside > any > > gene that > > makes that gene do just one thing. Gene life, like all life, is > > about > > relationship systems. I believe that real progress in how genes > > function > > vis a vis autism will occur when the relationship systems of > genes > > are > > better understood. That means that the most useful answers will > > come from > > questions, not only on micro-level concerns, but macro as well. > The > > immune > > system functions in a dance between myriad small activities and > some > > larger > > ones. > > > > > > > > Fourth, to expand one's field of vision a bit, I suggest that > part > > of the > > " dance " in a family experiencing autism has to do with how > anxiety > > is > > regulated *between* family members and not just by (say) the > > autistic child > > himself. Families are, by definition, complex emotional > > relationship > > systems. That means that how one person expresses this or that > > symptom is > > connected to how others in the family are functioning toward that > > child and > > with one another. Regardless of what percentage one would like > to > > place on > > this dimension, I believe that this is one of the major variables > > present in > > all families with a symptomatic child, regardless of whether the > > symptoms > > are autism-related or not. > > > > > > > > Fifth, I envision the immune system, not merely as a property > > located in one > > person, but as a process that spans family relationship systems, > > probably > > across generations. I ways for which we still have limited > > vocabulary and > > only partial knowledge, I envision immune functioning between > family > > members > > as dynamically connected. Reciprocal emotional influence is a > given > > in > > families. So also is immune functioning, I think. > > > > > > > > Sixth, how TV functions within this wider picture is not clear, > but > > it might > > perhaps be one variable that deserves someone's attention. > > Anecdotal > > stories that suggest no impact at all are not science. Not > enough > > is known > > to know what to include in a comprehensive picture and what not > to. > > > > > > > > Seventh, I suggest that a comment attributed to Marcel Proust > might > > have > > something to say to this matter: > > > > > > > > " The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new > landscapes > > but in > > having new eyes. " > > > > > > > > I think of this list has having two foci. Both are important, > but > > in > > different ways. One is about the day-to-day navigation through > life > > with an > > autistic child. The other is about funding and studies and > science. > > For > > the family with an autistic child, perhaps those parents can only > > see the > > former. But for the next generation of families whose autistic > > children are > > as yet unborn, the future is with the latter. > > > > > > > > Jm2c > > > > > > > > Ort > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: [mailto: ] On > Behalf > > Of Jerri > > Gann > > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 6:12 PM > > > > Subject: Re: TV and Autism > > > > > > > > Right On! > > K. Fischer wrote: > > > TV may have negative impacts, it may not, but the bottom line > to > > me is > > > that research and funding should be directed to more plausible > > medical > > > oriented relationships that would actually improve treatment > and > > > outcome, instead of wasting time and energy on researching > > Television > > > viewing and its impact on ASD, to me this is just something > that > > doesn't > > > warrant research funds at this current stage of medical > > cluelessness... > > > > > > > > > > > > RE: TV and Autism > > > > > > I shared this message, not because I thought it walked on all > > fours, and > > > not > > > because it brings up something that might not be a *cause*, as > > such, but > > > rather an association. We all live in a culture that is too > much > > > oriented > > > to linear causality, that A *causes* B. The idea that something > > with as > > > many variables as autism is *caused* by one thing is laughable. > > But I > > > have > > > to ask the question in terms of associations and influences. > How > > does > > > the > > > passivity of watching TV influence brain development? We live in > a > > world > > > in > > > which televisions occupy a place of special entitlement in > > families, and > > > TV > > > is used in a variety of ways without question and without > thought. > > What > > > might be the reciprocal relationship between how children on > the > > > autistic > > > spectrum of disorders process information and the relentless > > assault of > > > images associated with ordinary children's TV? > > > > > > I offered the link for those who are willing to think a bit > about > > forms > > > of > > > stimulation on children (and youth) apart from immediate > influence > > of > > > the > > > immune system that can (and no doubt does) have a bearing on > > synaptic > > > and > > > neuronal functioning in the brain. > > > > > > The immune system isn't one thing. And influence on its > > functioning in > > > any > > > given individual can occur via a myriad of vectors. Mock the > idea > > if you > > > wish, Gaylen, because of the way it is framed in the article. I > > only > > > offered the link to see if some new thinking on this subject > might > > be > > > stimulated on this list. Perhaps that shall happen. Perhaps > not. > > > > > > Ort > > > > > [ Ort] //snip// > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.