Guest guest Posted May 24, 2006 Report Share Posted May 24, 2006 My understanding is that Elaine saw enough benefit from the product to grant it " allowable " status. But since it has a tiny amount of " illegal " in it, she couldn't give it " legal " status. Contrary to what some people proclaim on this list, Elaine was understanding of the very complicated situation that ASD kids face. There are a lot of things in this supplement that many ASD kids need (and sometimes - or at least during the time she approved it - there weren't many (if any) viable alternatives for certain children with such complicated problems. Therefore, she was willing to sacrifice a " minor " SCD principle in order for the children to receive the benefit of this product that many of the kids need. Elaine was able to see the bigger picture this way. When Elaine was approached with individual cases, she was known for saying things like, " Well, these children have such a difficult situation. Sometimes you have to break a minor SCD principle so that they can receive the benefit of another treatment that they really need. " My very close friend was one of these individuals that Elaine expressed this to, but I have found on various boards that others were told similar things by Elaine. Does this mean we should disregard SCD principles whenever we wish. No! We really do need to stick as closely as possible to the " program. " " Fanatical adherance " is not a bad idea, and the closer we come to it, usually the better the results will be. However, everything needs to be balanced. Our kids are different, and due to different circumstances, some children need other things in addition to SCD. If these are treatments or supplements within the parameters of SCD . . . FANTASTIC! If they are outside of the parameters of " fanatical SCD " , then they need to be examined closely to ascertain whether the benefits outweigh the risks. When those benefits do - in fact - outweigh the risks and a major infraction of SCD is not being compromised, Elaine was able to concede that the treatment, supplement, etc. should possibly be pursued. The " allowable " Brain Child supplement is a tangible example of Elaine's flexibility and willingness to let go of " fanatical adherance " when deemed necessary. So while her writings are filled with " fanatical adherance " , remember that this is because it addressed everyone at the same time. You, however, are an individual with an individual case. When it came to examining people individually, Elaine saw that sometimes MINOR adjustments to " fanatical adherance " might be necessary. It is unfortunate that we have lost her now. It would be wonderful to still benefit from her insight to us as individuals. But we must carry on, keeping in mind all these things as we choose which path is the right one for our own specific circumstances. Jeni Lynn mom to Margeaux, 6 yr. (ADD, gastrointestinal problems, heavy metal toxicity) , 4 yr. (risk for ADD, gastrointestinal problems, heavy metal toxicity) Elle, 20 mo. (eczema, leaky gut, heavy metal toxicity) SCD 5 months and all on the " allowable " version of Brain Child supplements > > My daughter is currently taking Brainchild Ultra-Sensitive vitamins > and minerals. This is on the allowed list on the Pecan Bread > website. However, it contains xanthan gum which is illegal. Was this > an oversite; has the product changed since last reviewed; or was this > an exception made? > > I appreciate information from anyone who has some background on this! > > Theresa Trout > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 24, 2006 Report Share Posted May 24, 2006 ....yet another really great, informative, pragmatic post today. THANK YOU. Your e-mail, by the way, echoes what we were told at an evening session at last month's DAN Conference in Washington D.C. Debbie - Mom of Simon, ASD - 9yrs. old At 10:06 AM 5/24/2006, you wrote: >My understanding is that Elaine saw enough benefit from the product to >grant it " allowable " status. But since it has a tiny amount >of " illegal " in it, she couldn't give it " legal " status. > >Contrary to what some people proclaim on this list, Elaine was >understanding of the very complicated situation that ASD kids face. >There are a lot of things in this supplement that many ASD kids need >(and sometimes - or at least during the time she approved it - there >weren't many (if any) viable alternatives for certain children with >such complicated problems. Therefore, she was willing to sacrifice >a " minor " SCD principle in order for the children to receive the >benefit of this product that many of the kids need. Elaine was able >to see the bigger picture this way. > >When Elaine was approached with individual cases, she was known for >saying things like, " Well, these children have such a difficult >situation. Sometimes you have to break a minor SCD principle so that >they can receive the benefit of another treatment that they really >need. " My very close friend was one of these individuals that Elaine >expressed this to, but I have found on various boards that others were >told similar things by Elaine. > >Does this mean we should disregard SCD principles whenever we wish. >No! We really do need to stick as closely as possible to >the " program. " " Fanatical adherance " is not a bad idea, and the >closer we come to it, usually the better the results will be. >However, everything needs to be balanced. Our kids are different, and >due to different circumstances, some children need other things in >addition to SCD. If these are treatments or supplements within the >parameters of SCD . . . FANTASTIC! If they are outside of the >parameters of " fanatical SCD " , then they need to be examined closely >to ascertain whether the benefits outweigh the risks. When those >benefits do - in fact - outweigh the risks and a major infraction of >SCD is not being compromised, Elaine was able to concede that the >treatment, supplement, etc. should possibly be pursued. >The " allowable " Brain Child supplement is a tangible example of >Elaine's flexibility and willingness to let go of " fanatical >adherance " when deemed necessary. > >So while her writings are filled with " fanatical adherance " , remember >that this is because it addressed everyone at the same time. You, >however, are an individual with an individual case. When it came to >examining people individually, Elaine saw that sometimes MINOR >adjustments to " fanatical adherance " might be necessary. > >It is unfortunate that we have lost her now. It would be wonderful to >still benefit from her insight to us as individuals. But we must >carry on, keeping in mind all these things as we choose which path is >the right one for our own specific circumstances. > >Jeni Lynn >mom to Margeaux, 6 yr. (ADD, gastrointestinal problems, heavy metal >toxicity) >, 4 yr. (risk for ADD, gastrointestinal problems, heavy metal >toxicity) >Elle, 20 mo. (eczema, leaky gut, heavy metal toxicity) >SCD 5 months and all on the " allowable " version of Brain Child >supplements > > > > > > > > My daughter is currently taking Brainchild Ultra-Sensitive vitamins > > and minerals. This is on the allowed list on the Pecan Bread > > website. However, it contains xanthan gum which is illegal. Was >this > > an oversite; has the product changed since last reviewed; or was >this > > an exception made? > > > > I appreciate information from anyone who has some background on this! > > > > Theresa Trout > > > > > > > > > >For information on the Specific Carbohydrate Diet, please read the book >_Breaking the Vicious Cycle_ by Elaine Gottschall and read the following >websites: >http://www.breakingtheviciouscycle.info >and >http://www.pecanbread.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 24, 2006 Report Share Posted May 24, 2006 I remember having the opportunity to speak with Lang (hope I'm remembering that name correctly) of Brainchild, at the DAN conference that was held in Portland, Oregon a couple of years ago. I was working the Pecanbread table... and we were right across from Brainchild's booth. He explained to me the great lengths they had gone to find a form of xanthan gum that was (if I remember correctly) a pharmaceutical grade... and that would not cause problems with SCD. That was still at the point where Elaine was not convinced it should be allowed.... but I know they had a chance to talk this over at length, sometime after the conference.... and it was at that point that Elaine agreed that the " ultra-sensitive " versions of Brainchild would probably be okay. As with everything, she always included the comment that if you don't see the results you were hoping for from SCD... to try pulling whatever the supplement is for a while, with the trace illegals.... and see if it makes any difference. That's just common sense... and yes, Elaine did have plenty of common sense and flexibility... though sometimes it took a lot of information and back-and-forth discussion to get down to her flexibility! Patti, mom to Katera Supplements/Vitamins My daughter is currently taking Brainchild Ultra-Sensitive vitamins and minerals. This is on the allowed list on the Pecan Bread website. However, it contains xanthan gum which is illegal. Was this an oversite; has the product changed since last reviewed; or was this an exception made? I appreciate information from anyone who has some background on this! Theresa Trout 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.