health
About those experts
Just a little more on Guidepost Two …
Not all experts are created equal, by the way. We had a bad experience with a dentist about ten years ago. This dentist came very highly recommended, supposedly someone who could handle challenging cases.
We started taking Sam to the dentist as a toddler, back when we lived in California. The dentist that cared for Mark and me had a nice, chairside manner and Sam warmed to her right away. He was always very cooperative. We didn’t have any trouble after we moved to Texas, either, until he turned 12 and it was time for that last set of baby teeth to fall out. Only they didn’t.
For some reason, the roots didn’t decay enough behind the permanent teeth and they got stuck. He had a little trouble cooperating with the pediatric dentist, who, for some reason, did not want to pull them out. She referred us to another dentist.
He examined Sam and told us he would have to be sedated in order for him to extract them. He had an anesthesiologist partner that came in on a fairly regular basis, so it could all be in the office.
The experience was still traumatic for Sam. He hated being sedated.
And when we went back to the dentist for a regular check-up, he didn’t actually do anything except ask Sam to open his mouth. No cleaning, scraping, x-rays, nothing. I didn’t get charged for that, but I got charged for the office visit.
And it went like that, every three months until after a year, I realized this guy had no intention of ever treating Sam while conscious. He started talking to me about making another appointment to sedate him for a cleaning.
We walked out the door and never came back.
I had to sweet talk my own dentist to take Sam on. He reluctantly agreed, and we started with a cleaning with one of the hygienists working in the office. It went off without a hitch. She went slowly and let Sam ask a lot of questions. His first few scrapings weren’t with the scaler, she used the ultrasonic tool instead. Eventually, he graduated to the scraper.
We got sealants on his teeth, and he had no trouble tolerating that. He’s had excellent oral hygiene. He’s never needed fillings and the dentist said that since he got through his teen years without a problem, he may go the rest of his life without ever needing one.
When he was 18, we had his wisdom teeth pulled. He was a little nervous, but he was ready for the sedation. When he woke up in the oral surgeon’s recovery room, he said, “Am I done? That wasn’t so bad.”
Yes, Sam, you’re done.
Lend your experience
Some of the best help a parent can get is from another, more experienced parent.
If you are like me, one of those more experienced parents, you might think you don’t have time to help. But you do.
There is some training involved, but it’s fun and chances are, you’ll learn a thing or two that helps your family. And then you pay it forward by providing support to another family — usually on the phone, or through e-mail.
If you’re ready to help, mark your calendar for Sept. 25, because that’s the next time Texas Parent to Parent will be in Dallas for parent volunteer training.
Here’s a little from their press release:
“We believe that support from other parents is the best way to assist a family on the journey of raising a child with special health care needs. The sharing of joy, frustration, and hope with another parent is one of the most powerful experiences a parent can receive. We’re looking for a few parents who are ready to share their time and their experience.
Do you know a family who would like to attend? Who are the parents who have made a difference in your life? Who has helped you along on your family’s journey?”
Call 1-866-896-6001 … and pass this on.
The theory of self-reference
I’ve often wondered why we don’t hear much about the possibility that artificial hormones play a role in the rise of autism rates.
I couldn’t tolerate birth control pills and wrote about the experience, in relation to Sam’s autism, in my book. To me, hormones could explain why, until recently, autism was in first-born males four out of five times. It could explain why the uptick in recent years. It could explain why more girls now, and not just boys. It could explain why a recent university study found more occurrences among the wealthy
Like being rich causes autism. No one believes any chicken laid that egg. But it is well-known that the wealthy have better access to birth control options.
Yet, people keeping beating that vaccination horse, even though it’s been looked at rigorously for the past decade and no one has found a solid link. And lately, Vitamin D deficiency is all the rage.
I’m skeptical any causation theory if the proponent follows their theory with a “treatment” protocol, or hopes to file a class action lawsuit. Yeah, right. I’m not buying it.
From the theory of self-reference — in other words, no scientific basis whatsoever — I still want to ask, why aren’t we looking at the effect of artificial hormones?
Nature and Nurture
We’ve come a long way since Bernard Rimland shredded BrunoBettleheim’s theories that refrigerator moms caused the autism in their children. Or not far at all, depending on your point of view.
In this summer’s Columbia magazine, I read about a promising study in Norway that is tracking 110,000 people over their entire lives. A mother-and-child cohort will gather data that could be used to test dozens of theories for autism’s causes. In addition to chronicling every illness, immunization and medical treatment, they will be tracking gastrointestinal problems, too.
The world will likely get another pass at testing the persistent thought that autism is linked to vaccinations, although more than a decade of study has yet to link the two conclusively. In my opinion, very little work has been done to examine the stomach problems our kids have.
I’m not certain Sam’s gut problems, even though they began at about 18 months old, came first and the autism came second. He had autism problems from the start. But it’s about time some serious research got done in this area. With the last doctor I mentioned this concern about his gut I got — as usual — a blank stare.
Evaluating health information on the web
(First published 10/26/09)
Sam often asks me to sit with him as he does his homework with his online classes. He is taking Introduction to the Internet, and as Sam says after completing every lesson, “I learn something every day in that class.” It’s been fruitful for me, too.
A special section of his textbook discusses health and fitness websites. Many people go to find information there, but few have shown either the inclination or the skills to check out the robustness of those sites.
If you are a parent of a child with autism looking for more information on the web, here is your $100-tip-of-the-day, straight from Sam: look for accreditation.
The Medical Library Association publishes the Top 100 medical websites through CAPHIS, Consumer and Patient Health Information Section. These folks are serious about hunting up quality information: researchers and professionals often depend on them to ferret it out.
Two other nonprofit groups offer the health equivalent of a Good Housekeeping seal of approval – URAC, Utilization Review Accreditation Commission and HON, Health On the Net Foundation. Look for those seals to see whether the website has been independently reviewed for the quality of its information.
And here’s my tip to continue the chase, based on years of investigative journalism:
If you’re a fan of a particular website and its information, and it doesn’t appear on CAPHIS Top 100 and it doesn’t have the accreditation, you can use your own critical thinking skills to evaluate the information. Some things to watch out for: sponsors and ads on the site, attribution of claims made, authority and credentials of those in charge of the content.
If red flags are flying in your head, then run its content through this little rubric:
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/signs.html
Quackwatch is one of CAPHIS’ Top 100 sites and can let you know whether you’re seeing some bad science.