I took Demi to a birthday party yesterday for a boy from her class. I'm very used to Demi being the only "special" child at parties. As usual, several parents were hanging out while the kids jumped around (one of the blow up jumping places).
I started talking to one parent whom I didn't recognize. She asked me what I did and I explained it in a very summarized form, mentioning that I had gotten into supplements because Demi had special needs. She asked many more questions about Demi and then revealed that her own daughter (who was at the party) had been diagnosed with autism, her son had Asperger's, and her other daughter had ADHD. Wow! A triple whammy!
It seems no matter where I go, I run into people who either have or know someone fairly close who has an autistic child (or perhaps ADHD, PDD-NOS, etc.). I'm fairly certain that mom's groups when I was young didn't spend their time discussing which medications work best for their child or how the IEP process works at this school or that. Does anyone else see that??
I've recently started an "internet radio show" on Blog Talk Radio. Tomorrow, I'm excited to be talking to Anjellica Guthrie, organizer of our local Autism, Coaching, and Education (ACE) group, who has finally RECOVERED her child from autism. She's amazing!
The show is at 11:00am (EST). Just visit http://www.BlogTalkRadio.com/ZeoliteWellness at that time and you'll be able to listen to the information and even call in to ask questions. The show will also be recorded and will be available at the same address after the fact, but you won't be able to ask questions. Through all of her work with her son, Anjellica is a wealth of information!
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Too Many Supplements!
Gosh, it sure gets old pulling out all the bottles and getting out all the pills, juice, and drops to give Demi every morning and night. It really only takes a couple of minutes (plus the numerous reminders until she gets it all down), but it seems like such a chore. I'm thinking I'm not alone in this (?).
But, even though it seems laborious at times, I've never considered not doing it, because I believe it's helping her. If anything, I'm just more motivated to read more stuff to figure out something that might help her get further. Most things I've tried have made a difference at first, which eventually led to a plateau. A few things (like GABA, for us) didn't seem to make a difference. But each advance to a plateau is progress forward - which is definitely going in the right direction!
I just wish she came with instructions on what exactly works best with her body in what amounts. Alas, that book has yet to be written. I'll be able to write it after the fact when it won't do any good.
But, even though it seems laborious at times, I've never considered not doing it, because I believe it's helping her. If anything, I'm just more motivated to read more stuff to figure out something that might help her get further. Most things I've tried have made a difference at first, which eventually led to a plateau. A few things (like GABA, for us) didn't seem to make a difference. But each advance to a plateau is progress forward - which is definitely going in the right direction!
I just wish she came with instructions on what exactly works best with her body in what amounts. Alas, that book has yet to be written. I'll be able to write it after the fact when it won't do any good.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Kindergarten Birthday Party
Just took Demi to a birthday party today. The usual crowd of parents stuck around with the kids, some drop them off and come back later. Today, I really would have liked to have dropped Demi off, because I had to do something with Dana (she played with a friend for the duration). But, since she doesn't act like a "normal" 6yo, I'm afraid to leave her without close supervision.
Last month, I started Demi on a number of new supplements - namely digestive enzymes, probiotics, and GABA. Honestly, I haven't noticed much change, so I'm wondering if I should continue. At the party today, one of the parents who volunteers occasionally in the classroom, so she's familiar with Demi (the parents who know her always make a point of telling me nice things about Demi), mentioned today that, although Demi is usually rather quiet, last Thursday, she had rattled off an entire conversation, taking great interest in this family's new dog.
So, hmmm, are the supplements increasing her language skills? Given the nature of the conversation about the dog (is it a girl or a boy?, what color is it?, what's it's name?, etc), I'm thinking that's not the case. Those are questions that Demi asks her speech therapist ad nauseum, even though she already knows all the answers.
But it was nice to hear that she was interacting nicely with an adult and the adult seemed to understand everything she was saying. That's a step forward. Maybe the additional supplements are working after all.
Last month, I started Demi on a number of new supplements - namely digestive enzymes, probiotics, and GABA. Honestly, I haven't noticed much change, so I'm wondering if I should continue. At the party today, one of the parents who volunteers occasionally in the classroom, so she's familiar with Demi (the parents who know her always make a point of telling me nice things about Demi), mentioned today that, although Demi is usually rather quiet, last Thursday, she had rattled off an entire conversation, taking great interest in this family's new dog.
So, hmmm, are the supplements increasing her language skills? Given the nature of the conversation about the dog (is it a girl or a boy?, what color is it?, what's it's name?, etc), I'm thinking that's not the case. Those are questions that Demi asks her speech therapist ad nauseum, even though she already knows all the answers.
But it was nice to hear that she was interacting nicely with an adult and the adult seemed to understand everything she was saying. That's a step forward. Maybe the additional supplements are working after all.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Autism Study and Comments from Boyd Haley
Although Demi does not have autism, I follow the comments, research, and supplements closely because I believe many of the treatments for autism can potentially help Demi. Many kids with KS also have a diagnosis of autism, which further validates similarities between the two.
I found these comments from Boyd Haley interesting:
RESPONSE TO 2008 R. SCHECHTER AND J. GRETHER PUBLICATION "CONTINUING INCREASES IN AUTISM REPORTED TO CALIFORNIA'S DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES SYSTEM" WHICH ADDRESSES CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DATA ON EVALUATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIMEROSAL AND AUTISM8
January 2008
by Boyd Haley, Professor of Chemistry,University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
We should all consider that there are two top priorities in thevaccine/autism issue every American should be concerned with. We need to develop a safe vaccination program, and we need to find the causeof autism and eliminate it if possible. I have been a strong proponent of investigating thimerosal as the casual agent for autism spectrum disorders based on the biological science that shows thimerosal to be incredibly toxic, especially to infants. I know of nothing remotely as toxic as thimerosal that numerous infants would be exposed to before 3 to 4 years of age. Below I present several comments regarding this issue and the 2008 Schechter-Grether study that I think are relevant. Mainly, while the Schechter-Grether study appears to be a well done study it suffers from the fatal flaw of assuming that thimerosal was removed to safe levels in vaccines by 2002. They also cut a fine edge as to time when a significant drop in autism rates would be expected. Further, no study exists that proves our vaccine schedule alone is safe, let alone the current one that still exposes infants to thimerosal, a concern they do not address. The alarming concern is that these authors seem more involved at providing material saying thimerosal is safe than they are concernedwith the obvious fact, openly presented in their own data on autism rates, which strongly indicated that increased rates of autism started with the CDC mandated vaccine program. References to support the comments are readily available in many recent publications.
1. Autism was not a known, described illness until about 1941-3, 8 to 10 years after the introduction of thimerosal and similar organicthiol-mercury compounds in biological mixtures used in medicine and other areas. This argues against autism being a genetic illness.
2. In 1977, 10 of 13 infants treated in a single hospital bytopical application of thimerosal for umbilical cord infections died of mercury toxicity. This same topical was used on adolescents without obvious ill effects which strongly supports the concept that infants are very susceptible to thimerosal toxicity.
3. The recent increase (starting about 1990) of autism spectrum disorders correlated well with the advent of the CDC mandated vaccine program which increased thimerosal exposures with increased vaccinations. Due to its toxicity, thimerosal would have to be suspect for causing autism.
4. As expected by science, extensive searching for a genetic cause of autism has not turned up a significant find that would explain the recent increased rate in autism. The latest genetic find, at best, might explain 0.5% of autism causation. Most agree that a genetic predisposition is likely (like those that lead to low glutathione levels), but that a toxic exposure is absolutely needed. Consider also, that this increased toxic exposure would have had to occur in all 50 states at about the same time as all states have reported similar increases in autism rates. Only something like the government recommended vaccine program fits this need for a time dependent, uniform exposure of a toxin throughout all the states.
5. In the Schechter-Grether study it is implied or assumed that all thimerosal containing vaccines were gone by the end of 2002 due to their expiration dates. I don't think this is a valid assumption. I have talked to mothers who asked to see the vaccine inserts as late as 2004 and found thimerosal present as a preservative in infant vaccines being used in certain clinics. Also, in 2004 the influenza vaccine was recommended by the CDC for infants 6 months of age and older. It would appear as if a thimerosal free vaccine time-frame would be very hard to identify, if one ever existed. I have read that the average age of autism diagnosis is near 44 months of age. Therefore, while it does seem reasonable to expect a decrease in autism after 4 to 5 years of complete thimerosal removal, assuming a consistent diagnostic protocol was used, it appears this has not been accomplished. This means the Schechter-Grether study is likely somewhat premature in reaching the conclusions reported in that enough time has not passed for the expected decrease to occur and that they were quite optimistic in identifying the dates of thimerosal reduction and underestimate exposures occurring between 2002-4.
6. If, indeed, the complete removal of thimerosal from vaccines was not followed in an appropriate time by a decrease in autism then this would be solid proof that thimerosal was not causal for autism. However, thimerosal has not been completely removed from vaccines and thimerosal used at the original levels in the manufacturing of these vaccines with "trace" amounts left in the vaccines when bottled. I don't know what level "trace" is since it is not a term used in science to describe an actual amount. Some called the 12.5 microgramsmercury in the older vaccines a "trace" amount. Bottom line, the infants are still getting some level of thimerosal, a "trace" amount that is free and an amount of ethylmercury that is bound to the proteins that induce the immune response. If vaccines are causing autism and it appears this is a strong possibility based on the California data and, if removing thimerosal added as a preservative really does not reduce the autism rate then the causation is much more complex.
Consider the possibilities that:
A. Autism may be caused by a thimerosal modified protein that sets off an immune response or causes some other biological reaction that can cascade with injurious effects. Since the vaccines are manufactured with thimerosal present in abundance it is quite likely that any cysteine containing proteins would be modified with ethylmercury. Removal of most of the free thimerosal (or just not adding it) would not decrease the level of any toxic modified protein produced during the vaccines production that might be causal. Removing the thimerosal added as a preservative would not decrease the amount of this ethylmercury modified protein in those vaccines with "trace" thimerosal levels.B. That autism could be caused in susceptible individuals by very low thimerosal or ethylmercury modified protein exposures due to their genetic susceptibility or other factors (general health, gender). In this scenario the higher thimerosal exposures are not required and the induction of autism is not thimerosal concentration dependent at the old and new thimerosal vaccine levels, but just requires a significant exposure level that is met by the vaccines containing the lower"trace" amounts of thimerosal and past thimerosal levels in vaccine production processes. Bottom line, if genetic susceptibility is involved then causation of autism may not increase linearly with increased thimerosal exposure. Causation may only require low thimerosal exposure or exposure to modified proteins. It is possible that the reduction of thimerosal as in the "trace" was just not enough to produce a safe vaccine. Not all toxins work like alcohol and the old "dose makes the toxin" is not always correct. As long as they are used, the mere use of "trace" thimerosal in vaccines along with higher levels in the flu vaccine will always prevent a conclusive answer to thimerosal's involvement in autism causation. What should be studied is the "no exposure" versus the "exposed" populations with regard to autism rates.
7. If indeed autism is rare among the non-vaccinated Amish populations, as reported by Dan Olmstead, I find it an amazingly oversight that the CDC and others responsible for infant health do not fund a study in this area. This study could go both ways, if theAmish have autism rates identical with the rest of the population the argument would be over---neither vaccines nor thimerosal would be causal for autism, and I personally would argue in this direction. If, however, the autism rates in the Amish are exceptionally low then vaccines would have to be considered as a prime suspect in causation with the presence of the highly toxic thimerosal the main suspect. If the results in the 2008 Schechter-Grether study hold up with time, and complete removal of thimerosal does not cause a drop in autism rates and the autism rates in non-vaccinated populations are low then something else in the vaccines would have to be considered the major causation factor for autism. However, without doing the non-vaccinated population studies there cannot be a conclusive statement either way about either vaccines or thimerosal as being causal for autism. The steadfast refusal of the CDC and others to support such studies being done is part of the reason that many parents, scientists and physicians have severe doubts about the sincerity of their efforts to resolve this issue. This is how I think, when I review a paper submitted for publication I always ask why an obvious experiment wasn't done. The study of non-vaccinated populations is a very obvious experiment that the CDC and its supporters appear to refuse to consider. This makes me suspicious that this knowledge exists and is being suppressed because knowledge of the rate among the non-vaccinated population would answer many questions.
Finally, the Schechter-Grether study may be good news to the vaccine manufacturers and those who recommended and use the mandated vaccine program as it serves as manufactured uncertainty about the thimerosal involvement in autism causation. However, it presents a major concern to the parents and families of infants since it implies that our vaccines, even with most of the free thimerosal removed, may not be safe and that our CDC does not have a clue about what to do make them safe. Common sense would lead most to attack finding the cause of autism instead of trying to prove something besides thimerosal is causal. The major question is "are our vaccines causing autism"---only comparing the non-vaccinated to the vaccinated will answer this question. Common sense would have lead to this comparison being done first and being done 10-15 years ago. In the recent past I have recommended that parents vaccinate their children with thimerosal free vaccines as I considered them safe. If Schechter-Grether are correct, and vaccines, but not thimerosal, correlate with increased autism rates, then I am in error assuming vaccines are now safer with regards to autism risk than they were 2000.
©Copyright 2008 by Vaccination News, A Non-Profit Corporation. AllRights Reserved. This content may be copied in full ONLY withcopyright, contact, creation, authorship, and information intact(including all links), without specific permission, and ONLY when usedin a not-for-profit format. If any other use is desired, permission inwriting from Sandy Gottstein is required.
I found these comments from Boyd Haley interesting:
RESPONSE TO 2008 R. SCHECHTER AND J. GRETHER PUBLICATION "CONTINUING INCREASES IN AUTISM REPORTED TO CALIFORNIA'S DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES SYSTEM" WHICH ADDRESSES CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DATA ON EVALUATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THIMEROSAL AND AUTISM8
January 2008
by Boyd Haley, Professor of Chemistry,University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY
We should all consider that there are two top priorities in thevaccine/autism issue every American should be concerned with. We need to develop a safe vaccination program, and we need to find the causeof autism and eliminate it if possible. I have been a strong proponent of investigating thimerosal as the casual agent for autism spectrum disorders based on the biological science that shows thimerosal to be incredibly toxic, especially to infants. I know of nothing remotely as toxic as thimerosal that numerous infants would be exposed to before 3 to 4 years of age. Below I present several comments regarding this issue and the 2008 Schechter-Grether study that I think are relevant. Mainly, while the Schechter-Grether study appears to be a well done study it suffers from the fatal flaw of assuming that thimerosal was removed to safe levels in vaccines by 2002. They also cut a fine edge as to time when a significant drop in autism rates would be expected. Further, no study exists that proves our vaccine schedule alone is safe, let alone the current one that still exposes infants to thimerosal, a concern they do not address. The alarming concern is that these authors seem more involved at providing material saying thimerosal is safe than they are concernedwith the obvious fact, openly presented in their own data on autism rates, which strongly indicated that increased rates of autism started with the CDC mandated vaccine program. References to support the comments are readily available in many recent publications.
1. Autism was not a known, described illness until about 1941-3, 8 to 10 years after the introduction of thimerosal and similar organicthiol-mercury compounds in biological mixtures used in medicine and other areas. This argues against autism being a genetic illness.
2. In 1977, 10 of 13 infants treated in a single hospital bytopical application of thimerosal for umbilical cord infections died of mercury toxicity. This same topical was used on adolescents without obvious ill effects which strongly supports the concept that infants are very susceptible to thimerosal toxicity.
3. The recent increase (starting about 1990) of autism spectrum disorders correlated well with the advent of the CDC mandated vaccine program which increased thimerosal exposures with increased vaccinations. Due to its toxicity, thimerosal would have to be suspect for causing autism.
4. As expected by science, extensive searching for a genetic cause of autism has not turned up a significant find that would explain the recent increased rate in autism. The latest genetic find, at best, might explain 0.5% of autism causation. Most agree that a genetic predisposition is likely (like those that lead to low glutathione levels), but that a toxic exposure is absolutely needed. Consider also, that this increased toxic exposure would have had to occur in all 50 states at about the same time as all states have reported similar increases in autism rates. Only something like the government recommended vaccine program fits this need for a time dependent, uniform exposure of a toxin throughout all the states.
5. In the Schechter-Grether study it is implied or assumed that all thimerosal containing vaccines were gone by the end of 2002 due to their expiration dates. I don't think this is a valid assumption. I have talked to mothers who asked to see the vaccine inserts as late as 2004 and found thimerosal present as a preservative in infant vaccines being used in certain clinics. Also, in 2004 the influenza vaccine was recommended by the CDC for infants 6 months of age and older. It would appear as if a thimerosal free vaccine time-frame would be very hard to identify, if one ever existed. I have read that the average age of autism diagnosis is near 44 months of age. Therefore, while it does seem reasonable to expect a decrease in autism after 4 to 5 years of complete thimerosal removal, assuming a consistent diagnostic protocol was used, it appears this has not been accomplished. This means the Schechter-Grether study is likely somewhat premature in reaching the conclusions reported in that enough time has not passed for the expected decrease to occur and that they were quite optimistic in identifying the dates of thimerosal reduction and underestimate exposures occurring between 2002-4.
6. If, indeed, the complete removal of thimerosal from vaccines was not followed in an appropriate time by a decrease in autism then this would be solid proof that thimerosal was not causal for autism. However, thimerosal has not been completely removed from vaccines and thimerosal used at the original levels in the manufacturing of these vaccines with "trace" amounts left in the vaccines when bottled. I don't know what level "trace" is since it is not a term used in science to describe an actual amount. Some called the 12.5 microgramsmercury in the older vaccines a "trace" amount. Bottom line, the infants are still getting some level of thimerosal, a "trace" amount that is free and an amount of ethylmercury that is bound to the proteins that induce the immune response. If vaccines are causing autism and it appears this is a strong possibility based on the California data and, if removing thimerosal added as a preservative really does not reduce the autism rate then the causation is much more complex.
Consider the possibilities that:
A. Autism may be caused by a thimerosal modified protein that sets off an immune response or causes some other biological reaction that can cascade with injurious effects. Since the vaccines are manufactured with thimerosal present in abundance it is quite likely that any cysteine containing proteins would be modified with ethylmercury. Removal of most of the free thimerosal (or just not adding it) would not decrease the level of any toxic modified protein produced during the vaccines production that might be causal. Removing the thimerosal added as a preservative would not decrease the amount of this ethylmercury modified protein in those vaccines with "trace" thimerosal levels.B. That autism could be caused in susceptible individuals by very low thimerosal or ethylmercury modified protein exposures due to their genetic susceptibility or other factors (general health, gender). In this scenario the higher thimerosal exposures are not required and the induction of autism is not thimerosal concentration dependent at the old and new thimerosal vaccine levels, but just requires a significant exposure level that is met by the vaccines containing the lower"trace" amounts of thimerosal and past thimerosal levels in vaccine production processes. Bottom line, if genetic susceptibility is involved then causation of autism may not increase linearly with increased thimerosal exposure. Causation may only require low thimerosal exposure or exposure to modified proteins. It is possible that the reduction of thimerosal as in the "trace" was just not enough to produce a safe vaccine. Not all toxins work like alcohol and the old "dose makes the toxin" is not always correct. As long as they are used, the mere use of "trace" thimerosal in vaccines along with higher levels in the flu vaccine will always prevent a conclusive answer to thimerosal's involvement in autism causation. What should be studied is the "no exposure" versus the "exposed" populations with regard to autism rates.
7. If indeed autism is rare among the non-vaccinated Amish populations, as reported by Dan Olmstead, I find it an amazingly oversight that the CDC and others responsible for infant health do not fund a study in this area. This study could go both ways, if theAmish have autism rates identical with the rest of the population the argument would be over---neither vaccines nor thimerosal would be causal for autism, and I personally would argue in this direction. If, however, the autism rates in the Amish are exceptionally low then vaccines would have to be considered as a prime suspect in causation with the presence of the highly toxic thimerosal the main suspect. If the results in the 2008 Schechter-Grether study hold up with time, and complete removal of thimerosal does not cause a drop in autism rates and the autism rates in non-vaccinated populations are low then something else in the vaccines would have to be considered the major causation factor for autism. However, without doing the non-vaccinated population studies there cannot be a conclusive statement either way about either vaccines or thimerosal as being causal for autism. The steadfast refusal of the CDC and others to support such studies being done is part of the reason that many parents, scientists and physicians have severe doubts about the sincerity of their efforts to resolve this issue. This is how I think, when I review a paper submitted for publication I always ask why an obvious experiment wasn't done. The study of non-vaccinated populations is a very obvious experiment that the CDC and its supporters appear to refuse to consider. This makes me suspicious that this knowledge exists and is being suppressed because knowledge of the rate among the non-vaccinated population would answer many questions.
Finally, the Schechter-Grether study may be good news to the vaccine manufacturers and those who recommended and use the mandated vaccine program as it serves as manufactured uncertainty about the thimerosal involvement in autism causation. However, it presents a major concern to the parents and families of infants since it implies that our vaccines, even with most of the free thimerosal removed, may not be safe and that our CDC does not have a clue about what to do make them safe. Common sense would lead most to attack finding the cause of autism instead of trying to prove something besides thimerosal is causal. The major question is "are our vaccines causing autism"---only comparing the non-vaccinated to the vaccinated will answer this question. Common sense would have lead to this comparison being done first and being done 10-15 years ago. In the recent past I have recommended that parents vaccinate their children with thimerosal free vaccines as I considered them safe. If Schechter-Grether are correct, and vaccines, but not thimerosal, correlate with increased autism rates, then I am in error assuming vaccines are now safer with regards to autism risk than they were 2000.
©Copyright 2008 by Vaccination News, A Non-Profit Corporation. AllRights Reserved. This content may be copied in full ONLY withcopyright, contact, creation, authorship, and information intact(including all links), without specific permission, and ONLY when usedin a not-for-profit format. If any other use is desired, permission inwriting from Sandy Gottstein is required.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Update: Serious Health Issues
When I went back to check when I had last updated about my aunt's serious health condition, I could only find something back in August '06. Did I never give any other updates?? Anyway, here goes.
Diagnosed with serious health condition in July (lungs), started NCD in August, surgery in September (never measured before surgery), followed by radiation and chemo and such things that might treat a serious health condition. She took NCD on and off as she could remember it. She eventually healed from the surgery, suffered through the treatments and was pronounced serious-health-condition-free in April '07. Yea! Celebration!
However, the joy was not to last. Less than two months later, her next check up revealed that it had returned. :( This time, however, because of the difficult time she had had with previous treatments, they told her there was very little they could do for her. After numerous tests, they finally told her that she could undergo another difficult surgery to remove it, but there was a chance, if it was in a certain place, that they would not be able to do anything.
So, last October, she elected for the surgery as the only recourse against the serious health condition invading her body. Unfortunately, they discovered that it was in such a place that they could do nothing to help, so they sewed her back up. She has slowly been healing from that ordeal. In late November '07, she decided, since she had no other recourse, that she would give NCD another try, so she started taking it more regularly, trying diligently to take 15 drops at least 3 times/day.
In early December, I called to see how she was doing, only to find that she was out Christmas shopping for the second day in a row and was feeling great. She had told her husband once, while in the process of taking her drops of Natural Cellular Defense, that she wasn't sure if it was the NCD or not, but she sure felt more energetic.
Earlier this week, I spoke to her again. She reported that she had come down with a cold a couple of weeks ago, so she stopped taking the NCD. Once her cold was mostly gone, she resumed the NCD and immediately felt peppier. She says now that she really thinks it's doing something for her. And we're still praying for her miracle.
She doctors have told her officially that she has about 6 months left. We have a family reunion scheduled in June. We're planning a Miracle Celebration that weekend for her because she WILL still be there to celebrate!
Diagnosed with serious health condition in July (lungs), started NCD in August, surgery in September (never measured before surgery), followed by radiation and chemo and such things that might treat a serious health condition. She took NCD on and off as she could remember it. She eventually healed from the surgery, suffered through the treatments and was pronounced serious-health-condition-free in April '07. Yea! Celebration!
However, the joy was not to last. Less than two months later, her next check up revealed that it had returned. :( This time, however, because of the difficult time she had had with previous treatments, they told her there was very little they could do for her. After numerous tests, they finally told her that she could undergo another difficult surgery to remove it, but there was a chance, if it was in a certain place, that they would not be able to do anything.
So, last October, she elected for the surgery as the only recourse against the serious health condition invading her body. Unfortunately, they discovered that it was in such a place that they could do nothing to help, so they sewed her back up. She has slowly been healing from that ordeal. In late November '07, she decided, since she had no other recourse, that she would give NCD another try, so she started taking it more regularly, trying diligently to take 15 drops at least 3 times/day.
In early December, I called to see how she was doing, only to find that she was out Christmas shopping for the second day in a row and was feeling great. She had told her husband once, while in the process of taking her drops of Natural Cellular Defense, that she wasn't sure if it was the NCD or not, but she sure felt more energetic.
Earlier this week, I spoke to her again. She reported that she had come down with a cold a couple of weeks ago, so she stopped taking the NCD. Once her cold was mostly gone, she resumed the NCD and immediately felt peppier. She says now that she really thinks it's doing something for her. And we're still praying for her miracle.
She doctors have told her officially that she has about 6 months left. We have a family reunion scheduled in June. We're planning a Miracle Celebration that weekend for her because she WILL still be there to celebrate!
Saturday, January 05, 2008
Demi's Progress
I'm so proud of Demi's progress in school!
When school let out for Christmas break, Demi's special ed teacher gave us a list of things to work on, including working with coins, counting, writing, and reading. She gave us three new readers to work through, two with new words and a third review one.
Just about each day of Christmas break, we worked at least a little bit each day on homework. We're making progress on the coins - she knows all of the coin amounts, but she had trouble identifying them. Writing is a struggle. She can pretty much do all the numbers and capital letters (with a couple of exceptions) and we're starting on the lower case letters. Her progress in reading is the easiest to measure, since each reader has a definitive test before moving on to the next. After finishing the 10th reader, she has about 30 words and can sound out countless more.
Over Christmas, we saw Demi's grandmother (a 3rd grade teacher in SD) and a cousin (a kindergarten teacher in CO). Both of them said that Demi was way ahead of the kindergarten classes they knew. Their kindergartners were still working on letters and wouldn't get to blending sounds into words until the spring. (I believe that's a function of GA's preK program and an excellent school district.) I was so proud of Demi when she could read each of them a story from her reader! She's working so hard!
I remember a year or so ago when I heard about another Kabuki child reading in kindergarten. I was so surprised, amazed, and encouraged. I feel the same way with Demi. That's what makes me continue the regimen that she has. Anything I can do to help her body and mind function better will help.
When school let out for Christmas break, Demi's special ed teacher gave us a list of things to work on, including working with coins, counting, writing, and reading. She gave us three new readers to work through, two with new words and a third review one.
Just about each day of Christmas break, we worked at least a little bit each day on homework. We're making progress on the coins - she knows all of the coin amounts, but she had trouble identifying them. Writing is a struggle. She can pretty much do all the numbers and capital letters (with a couple of exceptions) and we're starting on the lower case letters. Her progress in reading is the easiest to measure, since each reader has a definitive test before moving on to the next. After finishing the 10th reader, she has about 30 words and can sound out countless more.
Over Christmas, we saw Demi's grandmother (a 3rd grade teacher in SD) and a cousin (a kindergarten teacher in CO). Both of them said that Demi was way ahead of the kindergarten classes they knew. Their kindergartners were still working on letters and wouldn't get to blending sounds into words until the spring. (I believe that's a function of GA's preK program and an excellent school district.) I was so proud of Demi when she could read each of them a story from her reader! She's working so hard!
I remember a year or so ago when I heard about another Kabuki child reading in kindergarten. I was so surprised, amazed, and encouraged. I feel the same way with Demi. That's what makes me continue the regimen that she has. Anything I can do to help her body and mind function better will help.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)