In Defense of the "Autism Diet"

Share This Story

By Holly Bortfeld | TACA

The GFCFSF diet, known as the “Autism Diet” has been around for many years and has helped many people with ASD improve their lives, health and functioning. The following are my reasons to defend the diet.

The diet has proof to back it up - Research by Dr. Harumi Jyonouchi shows that 91% of people with ASD who were put on a strict GFCFSF diet improved. Jyonouchi’s papers say that ASD children have an aberrant immune response to the dietary proteins found in gluten, casein and soy. This peer-reviewed research merely backs up what parents have been saying for more than 10 years. Countless parents report that the diet is dramatically beneficial for their child. The most common comment we hear from parents is that their child “came out of the fog” when we started the diet. Many parents report that their children began to talk or increased their speech with the diet as well. Although this is anecdotal evidence, the preponderance of is it massive and consistent, and deserves a trial by families.

While we would like to have more double-blind studies to back up the diet, the truth is that it’s a very hard thing to study and make sure compliance was 100% in both groups without putting each in a controlled environment. Most parents would not allow this. The few recent studies that have been done were designed to fail as they didn’t run for the full 4 month trial period (most just a mere few weeks), although parents report that 4 months is the turning point. Additionally, those trials still allowed soy and unlimited high-sugar foods.

Diet improves health – ASD children usually self-limit their diet to a handful of things – usually all gluten and casein, and many times light-colored foods only. The typical ASD child can be down to a menu of chicken nuggets, French fries or chips, bananas, milk and yogurt. Parents report that their children “refuse all other foods” leading to poor nutrition. The sensory defensiveness that many ASD kids exhibit is vastly heightened before the diet and texture becomes a roadblock to healthy eating as well. Once they are on the diet however, they expand their food choices to include more healthy choices, thus improving their nutrition.

Diet improves the symptoms of autism – Common problems in ASD such as sleep issues, tantrums, challenging behaviors including self-injury and safety awareness are commonly reduced when the diet is implemented. Before the diet, my son like most ASD children rarely slept through the night. A child, not to mention parents, functioning on 2-3 hours of sleep chronically, sets them up for a cornucopia of dangers. Sleep deprivation is linked to immune system problems and increased behavioral issues. For parents this can mean car accidents, missed work and increased illness, all causing a cyclical problem in the home for everyone. Most parents report a reduction in behaviors, especially self-injury, elopement, dangerous climbing, recurrent ear infections, rashes and other medical conditions once their children are on the diet. According to the Autism Research Institute’s Parent Ratings of Biomedical Interventions, diet is consistently in the top interventions for efficacy.

Diet enhances therapies – Before the diet my son had a 1:1 in-home 40-hour-a-week program. The problem was that he didn’t seem to know they were there. Once we implemented the diet, it was as if he woke up and said “Oh, you want me to do this? Sure, why didn’t you say so?”. Once he was fully on the diet, he was finally able to attend to the therapists at both his in-home program and his in-clinic OT and speech therapists. Until that happened, I felt like we were wasting our money on the therapies. Our behavioralist, who had been working with ASD kids for 20 years at that point had set out a “realistic” time table the average child at my son’s functioning level would take to accomplish the goals we set for him. Once the diet was on board, however, my son flew through the goals and we were rewriting new ones monthly instead of semi-annually, which is what all of the professionals normally did. After a few years of witnessing children who were on the diet for themselves, all of the autism specialists we visited no longer accepted patients who weren’t on the diet. Their reasoning was that if they only had a limited amount of time to see children, they would rather spend 2 years with a child who will progress 4 years worth of development, than a child who will progress 4 months worth of development in the same time period.

Diet can negate the need for psychotropic medications – We have heard hundreds, if not thousands, of parents over the last decade tell the same story: “the doctor/school/therapist suggested medication to control the behaviors, but we opted for diet and they stopped suggesting medication since my son has responded so well to a simple change of food!”. While this is anecdotal, it is a proven issue when it comes to gluten-induced seizures. I have had many doctors and parents tell me about children who had seizures and the removal of gluten stopped them, thus making that child’s seizure medication unnecessary.

Maybe the question we should be asking when it comes to diet and autism is “Why not?”

The most common reason I hear against the diet is because they want their kids to eat the same foods as their peers sitting next to them in the school cafeteria. The problem with that is that school food is typically poor quality, low nutrition, high fat, sugar- and corn-syrup filled junk food that plays a part in our national obesity epidemic. As parents, I would hope that we would strive for better, not just the same substandard food the public schools serve.

Another myth worth debunking is that the diet is too expensive. The diet is only as expensive as you make it. Any diet, even the traditional American wheat and milk-based diet, is expensive if you buy a lot of pre-made foods. TACA has a great article on doing the diet on a budget and our “GFCFSF Diet on Food Stamps” article will be out soon.

Share This Story

`
reishi9154's picture

I think there is a lot of value to the GFCF diet. I have read many, many accounts of kids who were nonverbal before the diet and able to speak after, who made enormous leaps and bounds. But like most treatments for autism, it is not one size fits all. If you've met one person with autism, you've met one person with autism.

The etiology of autism is not the same for every person, in my opinion. This means the treatment won't be either. Many researchers believe the gut is strongly connected to the brain, so if the body has a negative reaction to something, of course it will affect behavior.

There are other nutritional interventions which can help, some of which are listed on this article http://www.aspergerssociety.org/articles/27v.htm . Omega 3s is one such thing, that I have used and have benefited from. Follow your instincts as a parent, you know your child better than anyone else.

Mister's picture

I believe in the importance and effectiveness of dietary intervention, but found the number of 91% achieving improvement, higher than realistic.

The Autism Research Institute regularly publishes results of parent surveys regarding effectiveness of biomedical intervention. The survey results published February 2008 show 66% effectiveness with this diet . The highest number, 69%, was achieved with the Special Carbohydrate Diet.

http://www.autism.com/treatable/form34qr.htm

I have also found that not 4 months, but rather 6 months to a year is required to determine whether or not the diet will be beneficial.

I would hate to mislead families who expect more, and give up too soon or don't try other types of dietary intervention, to find the right match for their child.

tacanow229's picture

Actually the numbers on the ARI site are for GFCF alone, while Jyonouchi's research shows 91% for GFCF plus soy-free. Please read her papers at the TACA site here: http://gfcf-diet.tacanow.org/dietary-research-in-asd.htm

The 4 months clock starts ticking once the child is totally GFCFSF and over my 11 years of helping families on the diet , I have seen it to be the average successful time for the trial for the majority of families. For those that it took longer, normally it was due to other allergens they were still giving.

Holly

Mister's picture

I participated in the survey myself, and being GFCF plus soy-free, we entered those results under the GFCF category as most parents do who are GFCF plus soy-free. They do not have a separate category, thus it is inclusive and does not represent a category of those who are "GFCF alone".

As a representative of TACA, you know how heavily it is stressed that parents who are GFCF, also avoid soy due to its ability to break down into smaller chains that mimic gluten and casein proteins.

It's rare for families to be "GFCF alone" as you say. It's more typical than not, to avoid soy while GFCF.

I think its dangerous to suggest a 91% success rate, when most families report 66%. Or to suggest 4 months is the turning point when parents should try the diet for a year minimum. Doing otherwise will cause families to become discouraged about dietary intervention in general and not remain dedicated to the diet that could change their lives for the better.

SeekingTheTruth's picture

Why do we need statistics and persnickity "evidence" to convince us of the most inherent human notion - that "we are what we eat."

ALL children need adequate nutrition for optimal health , especially those physiologically ill who aim to heal and improve their well being.

Autism Diets are food -focused healing interventions, i.e. "nutritional intervention" (have you read "Nourishing Hope?") - whether GFCF, GFCFSF, SCD, BED, LOD, or any other set of initials.

To "do diet " simply means that one is making proactive food choices with the intent of helping their child's body to heal.

For children with autism (or anyone), going from NOT paying attention to food (i.e. the Standard American Diet), TO paying attention (i.e. any healing Autism Diet - omission of problematic foods + addition of nutrition) should practically and scientifically correlate to 100% likelihood of improvement in physical health.

When you argue for lessening these numbers, you are stripping people of common sense hope - and HOPE is the greatest factor for recovery and improved well being for children. Doing something with food is always better than doing nothing.

Survey's aside - I argue that diet is 100% helpful and always worth trying.

Can you, or anyone prove otherwise? Can anyone prove that when you increase the quality of inputs into a system (the body) that they system would NOT operate better to some degree? I think not.

Every child should follow a healing and nutritious diet - no doubt about that. For how long? Until...period. Healing can take time - but when a child is ill, why be so eager to return to a diet known to be deleterious to human health (SAD)?

If you don't believe that diet and nutrition matters for autism, then you haven't read Nourishing Hope for Autism - it's essential.

Good luck.

Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter

OV Social

 

randomness