Have you encountered a physician who embodies such ineptitude that he remains oblivious to his own nonsensical ramblings?
I have recently endured such an encounter, and it proved to be an exceedingly unpleasant ordeal. I found myself embroiled in a disputatious dialogue with him, spanning an hour, while two social workers flanked me, merely because he failed to comprehend the fundamental principles of metabolism. My tolerance is tried when faced with individuals who espouse glaringly erroneous information. It's ingrained in my ethical code to perennially scrutinize authoritative figures.
One of my tenets refuses to endure the ineptitude of those in power – let alone an individual who wields a significant influence over my financial resources and medical interventions. I rue consenting to that consultation. Even prior to this encounter, I had conducted preliminary research into his credentials and they betrayed a glaring lack of substantial academic accomplishment. His graduation a handful of years ago serves as a somewhat acceptable indicator of competence. Broadly, we can anticipate that a more seasoned individual will possess greater competence, although this isn't an incontrovertible fact.
Rebuking an authority figure harbors the potential for undesirable repercussions. This transpired in my case, consequently, I was left to bear the burden of upholding my principles. He executed my disability pension renewal application with such ineptitude, he omitted any reference to my requisite for care support which he was tasked with renewing…. It appears inevitable that I will need to seek an alternative opinion from another physician.
Short greentext of my recent appointment:
>go to doctor to renew my disability pension
>doc starts his mantra about benzodiazepines being addictive
>start talking about fasting
>doc says that i might go into coma and that I have to eat carbs or ill ran out of electrolytes
>start arguing about basics of metabolism with doc while two social workers follow the conversation
>doc gets visibly irritated
>doc offers (SNRI) venlafaxin for autism because of "neuroplasticity"
>argue again that doc is completely wrong and that he is incompetent
>doc offers occupational therapy
>ask for evidence of it being effective among autistic adults
>doc mumbles something irrelevant and he couldnt give me a coherent answer
>tell doc to not touch my prescriptions and he agrees
>after appointment doc changes my prescriptions
To compound this, he even amended the dosage (to be more precise, the prescription text) in one of my prescriptions when its renewal was allocated to a different individual within the unit. Any other would have been adequate, bar him. I am not convinced by the argument that it was a mere oversight.
In an attempt to elucidate my stance further and thoroughly dismantle his assertions, I dispatched a series of three emails to him. On occasion, it proves rather challenging to coherently articulate one's arguments in a live setting.
Note: some context might be missing because I had to translate the text, my native language is Finnish and the original email is in Finnish.
First email:
"Title: Ketoacidosis is coming, are you ready?
Hi!
I promised to send an email, so here it is. Sorry for my behavior at the reception, I can't stand a doctor who can't justify neuropharmacologically the benefits of medication or give any numbers on the effect size of the treatment - let alone even an odds ratio, etc. Scaring with ketoacidosis is completely absurd, it is more related to diabetes and not to ketosis itself. Surely our ancestors thousands of years ago died because they were without food for weeks... The human species would not have survived very far. The current food culture of eating carbohydrates 5x a day is absolutely sick. Just by reading diabetes.fi you'll find: "Acid poisoning is a life-threatening condition and a completely different thing than the ketones or hunger acids formed in a healthy person when fasting. An impending acid poisoning in a diabetic is indicated by high blood sugar and at the same time ketones found in the blood."
The human body also has many mechanisms to prevent ketoacidosis during fasting/keto diet, including insulin production, gluconeogenesis, ketogenesis, ketone use, the kidneys filter out excess ketones and remove them with urine, pH level control by increasing respiratory rate/deep breathing and thus removing more carbon dioxide in exhalation. Of course, these systems can be out of order for some reason, but don't blame ketosis itself for that. No wonder there is no literature to find any numbers for the even per 100k occurrence, because this is not a very realistic possibility for healthy people (not for diabetics).
If you want to scare, you would say that venlafaxine causes seizures and vomiting blood. Much more realistic scenario and can be found in the package leaflet. The human body is not stupid. That's why there are no numbers that I asked for on the subject.
The intention is to shed a little more light on your "opinions". Of course, it is quite expected because according to your researchgate you have been involved in research related to (atherosclerotic) coronary heart disease. Probably the basic round, i.e., cholesterol = bad, and no deeper level analysis of the subject.
A friend's text on the subject:
"Atherosclerosis has three causal factors, all 'necessary but not sufficient'
(1) poor cholesterol levels (high ApoB)
(2) endothelial damage (damage in blood vessels and arteries)
(3) chronic inflammation
Atherosclerosis develops by first creating a 'fatty streak' damage on the surface of the artery where fat and lipoprotein accumulate. These develop already in childhood and slowly get worse and eventually form hard plaques. Then more and more ApoB-lipoprotein particles and fat accumulate under these plaques (and into/between the wall of the artery) over time. This narrows the artery, which may not necessarily cause any symptoms, but problems (such as death) occur when the plaque ruptures from the artery wall and blocks blood circulation to the heart.
These three causal factors I listed are essential for the development of atherosclerosis. If there are many ApoB-lipoprotein particles in the blood, more of that stuff accumulates under the plaque. There must also be some sort of damage in the artery for the fatty streak and plaque to develop. Inflammation in turn exacerbates almost every mechanism in the course of atherosclerosis disease (causes more damage to the artery, oxidizes lipoprotein particles making them more atherogenic, and thins the walls of arteries and helps plaque detachment).
Of course, I myself consider high insulin levels as the biggest risk to this in modern humans. Too bad you can't get a direct causality insulin --> endothelium damage --> cholesterol gets into the endothelium (wall of the blood vessel) --> atherosclerosis. Insulin is also anyway necessary for the function of the endothelium in general, so it could in principle be a direct proxy - although there are at least a couple of studies that say these are separate from each other and there is no causality. However, insulin is at least a proxy for things such as the inflammatory state, so I would say it is a good measure for the assessment of the risk of coronary heart disease.
Dr. Thomas N. Seynfried has an interesting theory that cancer is a metabolic disease (mitochondrion mutated and thus loses the competition to other cells in ketosis). Cancer growth can be significantly slowed down by fasting and in some cases even removed. In current treatment policy, there is a 99% failure rate to treat stage 3-4 cancer in the brain, so surely those treatment recommendations work to poison your own body with radiation and chemotherapy... Literally destroy your cells so that cancer cells are destroyed more. He has research evidence on this and he is treating those stage 3-4 "incurable" brain cancer patients. Of course, if you want to get rid of it completely, fasting + glutamine antagonist DON (6-diazo-5-oxo-L-norleucine) seems to work.
Good lecture on the subject:
Formally, I would of course put nice source references to this, but I don't feel like it right now: Sources: Dr. Peter Attia (MD), Dr. Boz (MD) & Dave Feldman
t's so absurd that you start the discussion with some kind of benzodiazepine-related mantra, I've heard the same in the public sector probably five times. GABA modulators, which increase the affinity of GABA receptors when the "natural" ones bind to that receptor. It works quite well in the sense it's supposed to, i.e., it slows everything down. And the addiction talk is gibberish. Benzodiazepines have just been demonized, even though the same effect comes from, for instance, methylphenidate, and then it's claimed that it doesn't cause addiction, this I've heard from psychiatrists' mouths – pseudoscience, the whole idea that others couldn't cause addiction. You're right in saying that SSRIs don't necessarily fall into this category, even though the DOSAGE is raised to "suit oneself," then withdrawal symptoms are terrible, even though it's claimed that it doesn't cause anything. I wrote about addiction in my Substack some time ago on how addiction is formed (https://naaras.substack.com/p/the-epidemic-of-ineffective-amphetamine). Up- and downregulation can explain most of addiction that comes with every drug that gets through the BBB (blood-brain barrier). The only part it doesn't explain is the use of the substance itself. There are indeed studies that rats will take heroin in lab conditions if they have nothing else to do. There's a good Ted talk about this, you can find it on YouTube with words like: "ted talk addiction"
Up and downregulation can explain three of four parts of addiction. Up/downregulation explains tolerance and withdrawal but it can't explain initial drug use nor repeated drug use. Here are the four parts of addiction:
Initial Drug Use: When a person first uses a drug like cocaine or amphetamines, these drugs increase dopamine levels in the brain, leading to feelings of pleasure or euphoria.
Repeated Drug Use and Tolerance: As the person continues to use the drug, the brain starts to adapt to the consistently high levels of dopamine. One way it does this is by downregulating dopamine receptors – that is, decreasing the number of receptors or their sensitivity to try to bring the system back to equilibrium. This can lead to tolerance, where the person needs to take more and more of the drug to achieve the same effect because there are fewer receptors for the dopamine to act on.
on the drug to maintain "normal" levels of dopamine. When the drug is not present, because there are fewer dopamine receptors, dopamine's effects are diminished, leading to withdrawal symptoms. These can include feelings of depression, anxiety, restlessness, and other physical and psychological discomforts.
Craving and Relapse: The discomfort of withdrawal and the memory of the drug-induced euphoria can lead to strong cravings to use the drug again. Returning to drug use can temporarily alleviate the withdrawal symptoms because the drug increases dopamine levels again. However, it also perpetuates the cycle of addiction, as the brain will continue to downregulate dopamine receptors in response to the artificially high dopamine levels.
If you want to justify stopping them with addiction, you're already making a treatment mistake by cutting them off from the person, because you can't stop them immediately due to withdrawal symptoms. If you want to apply the same logic to everything that you used, i.e., that the dose is increased, up/downregulation occurs, and withdrawal symptoms appear, then you should cut almost all medicines from people, which at least affect the brain.
Here's my explanation of why, for example, amphetamine doesn't work in treating ADHD without breaks:
"The use of amphetamines or other stimulants like methylphenidate have been an ineffective treatment for ADHD if you know even the basics of neuropharmacology.
So what is up and downregulation of receptors? Basically it means that if you take dopamine agonist (that means that it releases dopamine) your body will adapt to it by downregulating your dopamine receptors. Downregulation is basically deleting receptors or lessening their intensity. This is the building block at the molecular level for tolerance and it is present in every addiction as well. Upregulation means that you take for example medication called raclopide is an antagonist of dopamine receptors (means that it'll block the effects of dopamine) in theory should raclopide should raise the amount of dopamine receptors when your body adapts to it in order to normalize the situation.
Terms quickly explained:
Upregulation: leads to a higher amount of receptors or sensitivity
Downregulation: leads to a lower amount of receptors or sensitivity
Agonist: activates the receptor
Antagonist: blocks the receptor
So, in short, your body will get used to amphetamine in 6-8 weeks and counter its functionality. That is why nobody should ever use it daily or they'll develop tolerance.
Could anti-psychotics that are dopamine receptor antagonists make it faster to get over withdrawal symptoms of amphetamine withdrawals? Sure it'll probably feel horrible for a week or two but it is a lot better than suffering for up to 6 months due to lack of motivation."
The problem with venlafaxine and others is precisely that you're just poisoning yourself with too high serotonin levels, and that's why suicidal thoughts come and then symptoms "ease" within a month when your body counters the effect of the poison through downregulation. Of course, it's not directly nerve poison, but still poison. You don't ever want to touch the serotonin system. And you can't even control it locally, serotonin receptors are in the intestines, for example, and they have a different function there than in the brain (and even there, locally different effects). The purpose of the serotonin system is to measure your hierarchical position compared to others and adjust it according to certain parameters, e.g., how many times you've succeeded/failed in life. You're supposed to feel bad if you're doing poorly – it then gets the person to do things. It also has functions like if you're sick, you isolate yourself from others and go die somewhere else. A similar state to depression. Also, it's sensible after a fight to submit and drop serotonin levels and show that you're not a threat and if you don't do that and go for a fight again, you'll get killed. Of course, it's not optimal if a person loses their job and then the same reaction comes, but in reality, those doses of SSRIs raise serotonin levels in the brain way too much and side effects are incredibly many, because you can't get a local effect with medication
You can increase noradrenaline and adrenaline by simply taking a cold shower. According to rats, cold exposure is quite comparable to sex and other activities. Or go out for a walk, that also works.
You should indeed consider the basics of neuropharmacology first, before you start prescribing anything like this. The treatment response in these cases is really poor (number needed to treat 6) for depression, for example, and placebo and other things have a much bigger role than the actual medication, considering still that big pharma studies tilt it towards positive results, it's also good to take into account publication bias. mRNA vaccines are the biggest scam since SSRI junk. I personally would call this an international epidemic. Well, when you start complaining about source criticism and other things, here are some of them:
In short, about these too (partly text from a colleague): In layman's terms: the vaccine contains more durable modified mRNA, which stays in the cell for a very long time once it enters and possible reverse transcriptase, because it breaks several things like ORF and NMD. Due to its size and lipid solubility, it can get into every cell of yours from the bloodstream. Due to its small size (and other properties), pseudo-mRNA particles can get from the injection site (muscle) into the bloodstream and the first target is the walls of the blood vessels, i.e., the endothelium. And the particle can get through the blood-brain barrier and cause damage there.
In principle, it's better than normal viruses except that it can't replicate. It can penetrate almost every cell in your body like an infection and produce neurotoxic spike proteins. If that pseudo-mRNA infects, for example, your brain neurons (presumably in certain areas) or heart, your body can't renew them either.
For nerds, more information about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1-Methylpseudouridine
It's wise if you know pseudouridine so well that ORF does not become a problem even though it has 13 open reading frames inside it. In exactly such a situation, as well as with plasmid DNA contamination, NMD is an important mechanism, the operation of which pseudouridine prevents. And plasmid DNA contamination is due to poor enzymatic cleavage and filtration. Poly-A tails are often defective, according to EMA reports.
And when you want to start ranting about peer-reviewed and source criticism, here's a peer-reviewed study published in Cell: https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2822%2900076-9
Cell had a paper where they found vaccine mRNA from lymph nodes and spike protein from blood still 2 months after vaccination. The study ended there, so we don't know if they stay in the body even longer than 2 months afterwards.
Have you researched how much the vaccinations increase IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, and IgG4?
An increase of over 48000% (absolute values second vaccine 0.04% IgG4 immune response and then 19.27%) in IgG4 from the third vaccine after 210 days. It can be considered as desensitization therapy, but only for spike protein in this case.
And here is more peer-reviewed: https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798
A good Substack also explains what happens post 3 shots + infection, then we're already at 40%: https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/booster-caused-immune-tolerance-explains "On average, the four who had a breakthrough infection after their booster are now at 42.45% IgG4. The cohort as a whole is at 19.27%, up from just 0.04%, so the ones who haven’t had a breakthrough infection yet will end up at a similar position: A response that is entirely IgG4 dominated."
In how many other things is the current "mainstream" medicine objectively wrong? Don't read the current care instructions as some kind of Bible – figure things out yourself.
I will research the therapy form you suggested later. I haven't yet had time to read enough literature on the subject to say, other than that it probably doesn't work. The nocebo effect is already certain. So you're probably good to force me into expensive treatments and waste more societal resources. Based on statistics, less than 5% ever gain employment of those who have been on rehabilitation allowance. Current treatment methods are completely ineffective. For example, 85% of autists (high functioning) in Sweden are not in working life at all and depending on the country, we get 50-90% figures. And indeed, a current care evidence review of the benefits of therapy for autism doesn't meet my own standards - I don't even know if it exists, although there are others for other diseases/treatment methods. Reducing inflammation is often linked to the autism spectrum and that's what I'm trying to reduce with fasting/ketosis. These conventional methods don't fix anything and it's seen in the statistics.
PS. You can add this to my patient documents too, so that others can read it if necessary.
Best regards,
Noora
London conference on intelligence attendee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Conference_on_Intelligence)
Second email:
Title: Written reminder is coming, are you ready? Hi!
Here would already be more than enough to make a complaint with the help of a patient ombudsman. If necessary, I will send these same "physical" written reminders to your treatment unit. If that doesn't help, then a complaint will be sent to the regional administrative office.
You said that you would not touch my prescriptions - however, you touched them the next business day from the previous email. I already left a callback request for this and tomorrow I will resolve the issue over the phone. That renewal request was for other doctors, not for you. You don't touch my prescriptions or suggest changes to them, which may affect other doctors' stance on my medication.
You are the most incompetent doctor I have ever met. You do not understand the basics of metabolism such as gluconeogenesis. You think that people who don't eat carbohydrates go into a coma. You broke the trust relationship by touching my prescriptions.
It is irresponsible and dangerous to give you authority to decide on my care and finances (rehabilitation and care support statement)
I probably will still get an M1 referral by saying, “I'm now drinking water with 9g of salt and 6 eggs with yolks on top.” Of course, the body can filter out excess salt with the help of the kidneys…
I forgot to clarify why you are wrong about the necessity of carbohydrates for transporting electrolytes into the cell. You probably associate carbohydrates with high insulin secretion and insulin's signal to cells to take in nutrients (glucose primarily). Of course, insulin stimulates the sodium/potassium "pump" ATPase, but during fasting insulin does not go to zero and there are other electrolytes available. As an important reminder, electrolytes do not replace each other. Fasting doesn't even need to take any electrolytes because the body can regulate them mainly through the kidneys. The body can say that it has a need for sodium and make you thirsty. Potassium can be taken from other cells as needed for food. If necessary, "in an emergency" the body can also take magnesium and calcium from the skeleton for food. This does not require insulin or carbohydrates (and even if needed, the body could make them by gluconeogenesis + increasing insulin production in the pancreas).
“Insulin isn't the only mechanism for cells to take in electrolytes. Various electrolytes like sodium, potassium, and chloride have different mechanisms for cellular uptake. For instance, potassium largely enters cells through passive diffusion, while chloride can be absorbed via exchange with bicarbonate.”
At least that Estonian doctor can renew my prescription correctly there, even though I had to call twice to put a time limit on it (because in the standard care, the bible says, not for long-term use and that other drugs cannot be addicted in the same amounts, maybe in 10 years we will see some sensible line) and one more time, because I do not want to put a renewal request a week in advance (this is the recommendation) and previously the prescription was only for 15 days. There are no such problems in the private sector and I just got a direct 100 pack of Diapam, it's a completely different treatment here in the public sector (surprise).
That frightening about the dangers of benzos is the most absurd fear since the opioid crisis. The same mantra was taught to my friend, junkies come asking for benzo prescriptions for fake/other ailments etc. At least you should have a coherent line about what is addictive and what is not. And in benzos, an unpleasant effect is the deterioration of cognition - especially memory - on the other hand, mine is already poor (epi)/for genetic reasons and the risk/benefit analysis is positive at the current dose (20 mg per day).
Too bad I'm not good at manipulating, I'd rather say directly what I want and why. Supposedly should manipulate the other. Another recently graduated doctor almost neglected treatment and didn't leave a good taste from it. If a urinary tract infection had gotten to my kidneys, it would have been a hospital trip at the same time and when I just got <personal information>. My mistake was to ask for a benzo refill at the same time and then in a panic, he goes to consult his colleague about the situation with a lie... It's hard to be an autistic person because supposedly certain situations are wrong to ask certain things.
Oh yeah about Dr. Thomas Seyfried, of course it's a bit hc to give a person an antagonist to glutamine receptors, so probably heat treatment (needs to be at 40C or over and this also does damage to the body), which forces the cancer cell to "ask for help" to come out. Fasting and vitamin C on top is probably a good combo. Good video from Sseth about heat treatment and vitamin C:
Too bad these cheap and effective treatments don't have support. Here are his titles included, because source criticism was important:
“Sseth grew up in Germany and is a German Ashkenazi Jew, though he currently lives in Denmark.[1] His ancestors used to live in Tsarist Russia until they were deported.
"Sseth has ADHD, and was addicted to Ritalin before giving it up.[2]
He has an MSc (Master of Science) degree in Immunology and has published in a scientific journal.”
If you really want to help me feel better, here are some prescription suggestions that you can influence:
Piracetam 3 x 1g per day. For cognitive enhancement. It acts as a modulator to glutamate and acetylcholine by affecting ion channels and those "carrier" proteins. It might improve brain metabolism by improving (somehow, I don't know exactly) the function of ATP in phospholipids, and perhaps the mechanism of action is by increasing the fluid in the walls/membranes of these cells? And at least in rats, it increases brain oxygen consumption, so it does something there too. (requires you to write SIC! or else the pharmacist is threatened with a fine)
Piracetam is also available without prescription in many countries because it rarely has any concrete side effects compared to placebo. Of course, it's not in Finland :D
Raclopride <8 mg per day. For the upregulation of dopamine receptors on days off from methylphenidate. It also increases prolactin for some reason, but it's not a problem, it only temporarily raises it max one day a week. (requires you to write SIC! or else the pharmacist is threatened with a fine)
PREP, for the prevention of HIV in occasional use, because I am a filthy degenerate. I didn't bother to delve deeper, but here: “This review article deals with the most commonly used prep, an orally administered combination medication containing 245 mg of tenofovir disoproxil (TD) and 200 mg of emtricitabine (FTC).“ https://www.duodecimlehti.fi/duo15510
Ps. Make sure there are no interactions with my current medication (well, there's an automatic check there)
Pps. The social workers are also eyewitnesses and I can call them if necessary to testify the course of treatment.
Best regards,
Noora
Third email:
Title: Is occupational therapy effective for autistics individuals (with comorbities)?
Hi!
I promised to still write this. I will not bother anymore by email. The specialists are not any better options, usually they are as lost. They look at me like crazy talking about the benefits of fasting.
The b/c-statement was very incompetently written. Even a little more properly in patient documents (I don't know if you write yourself or dictate and then someone else writes). It only contained complaints that I refused ineffective treatments, which I would not have been able to commit to anyway, and that the ssri/snri rubbish has already been tested and the side effects are greater than the benefits and by studying neuropharmacology you already understand the problem, why they do not work based on the known mechanistic features.
You also did not explain in the b/c statement why I need treatment support at all. You should have written there e.g. "needs constant reminding in everyday life, mother helps with everyday things and reminding. Social workers support the patient's social skills, have also financially assisted and increased awareness of normal social activities". You also did not describe things like my immutable / rigid attitudes in life models, which affect the severity of this treatment / disease. Well, you'll probably learn these things during your career, but you get a little too much responsibility, because nobody really can stand being there for more than 6 months and the nursing staff is constantly changing.
It would have been easier if I could have written that statement myself. Well, I have to get a second opinion elsewhere, it's a shame I had to pay separately for your visit and b/c statement. If only I had the money to go private, but I don't want to take money out of my investments.
I would almost like to make that reminder to your unit and you (or the chief physician) would have to at least officially respond to something and apologize (according to the instructions). We'll see... Maybe I can't be bothered and need to focus on more important things than responding to you.
Does occupational therapy work on those suffering from autism spectrum disorder (including comorbidities)?
What are my own criteria for quality research evidence?
Non-treatment group vs treatment group (among autistic adults)
Non-autistic in therapy vs autistic in therapy
Unfortunately, doing a literature review independently is far too time-consuming, let alone doing a meta-analysis. Most of the literature is done on children, many lack a control group (which makes sense) and also that there is no big pharma gimmick, such as comparing treatment to other antidepressants / treatments or the like.
Luckily I found a book, where the authors have already done a literature review. "Autism and Enablement Occupational Therapy Approaches to Promote Independence for Adults with Autism" Authors: "Matt Bushell, Sandra Gasson and Ute Vann" and find the book from pages: 46-52 [1]
In principle, this book's literature review shows that by 2018 there is very little research on this in adults and there is no evidence that it would help autists to get employed. Possibly would help in social skills, but I don't feel much need for them. Anxiety in autists has not been studied. Mainly for improving social skills and problem solving
"The ASC Team conducted an extensive search of relevant literature related to the support needs of high-functioning adults and people with Asperger syndrome as well as reports on occupational therapy-type interventions being provided. Many of the interventions are focused on social skills, which is an area of significant difficulty for people on the autistic spectrum. According to Harrup (1985, cited in Cappadocia and Weiss 2011), poor social skills are related to concurrent and consequent academic under-achievement, difficulties with peer acceptance and mental health problems. Little evidence could be found of interventions involving occupational-therapy type expertise, with most studies being conducted outside the UK. Much of the support was delivered to children and young people in controlled rather than naturalistic environments and samples were in general very small. Many interventions were delivered in group settings and focused on areas such as social skills/communication, education and employment rather than activities of daily living.”
Secondly, I found another good literature review on occupational therapy for autism challenges in social situations. There too they end up with the same problem. n<15 in most and most are targeted at children. However, the problem is small n and the lack of rct's. The results, however, were positive for socializing autistic children and young adults (under 26 years) [2].
“Twenty-five articles were reviewed that provided results on the most prevalent interventions for individuals with ASD to improve socialization. From the findings, thirteen studies yielded strong evidence and support for these various interventions in improving socialization for this specific population. Ten studies showed moderate strength of results, while two showed low levels of strong evidence. Although a few studies showed insubstantial evidence, strong levels of evidence were found in other articles looking at the same interventions”
What does Kela's statistics say? Well, 4% returned to work from the recipients of Kela's rehabilitation aid (temporary pension) from 2 years → 4 years. [3] And here only depression vs non-depression mental health problem was distinguished. And if I have been on rehabilitation aid for more than 4 years already, how realistic are the chances of rehabilitating me?
Note: "Kela" refers to the Social Insurance Institution of Finland, responsible for settling benefits under national social security programs.
15% to 30% also end up on permanent disability pension by the 4-year mark. In my opinion, it would have been quite realistic to already get there. That's why I asked about it.
Conclusion:
In the light of two literature reviews and statistics from the Social Insurance Institution of Finland (Kela), this occupational therapy will not employ me, so in principle, it's an unnecessary and expensive form of treatment. Does it make sense to commit to it for years and consume a lot of public funds? I wouldn't even have the energy to commit to it, I have no more strength left in me. Marginal help in social matters, in my opinion, is not worth trying. I don't know, maybe my mind is just stuck in certain thought patterns and needs some kind of spiritual awakening. Maybe I should read Carl Jung's book called "Synchronicity", in which the concept essentially means that there are coincidences that don't feel like coincidences.
Anything else interesting?
I developed a new causality model for the onset of autism:
It can't be solely due to genetic reasons and nor does "diagnosed more" explain the whole phenomenon.
"Genes don't cause epidemics" -RFK jr
Model name: "Autism as a metabolic disease induced by pesticides & other toxins"
The amount of environmental toxins (adjuvants in vaccines and glyphosate, etc.) has increased → certain risk alleles for autism have been found (correlates with intelligence) → metabolic problems have also been found with risk alleles → risk alleles for autism also expose to environmental toxins via metabolic problems (e.g., Ethylmercury metabolism) → need for more autism diagnoses → the number of autism increases in the population [4][5][6][7]
The complexity model of the brain did not really work in explaining autism, because why would there be differences in the severity of autism, and for that, I received criticism. Previously I thought this model would work: "Autism is a negative byproduct of intelligence", but this model does not explain the effects of the environment and is therefore inappropriate.
Fortunately, GPT-4 can now correct these:
"In addressing the critique, we might first consider that "high functioning autism" is not a term solely linked to high IQ. Rather, it often refers to individuals on the autism spectrum who can function relatively independently in society, which involves a variety of skills beyond pure cognitive ability.
Next, consider that a higher IQ does not necessarily equate to greater autism severity or a higher likelihood of having autism. The relationship between IQ and autism is complex and multi-faceted. The genetic components that contribute to high IQ and those that contribute to autism might overlap, but it doesn't mean the manifestation of one leads to an increase in the other.
As for the connection to vaccines, it's crucial to note that current scientific consensus, as of my knowledge cutoff in 2021, is that vaccines do not cause autism. However, continuing with your hypothetical model, let's explore potential connections.
It's possible that individuals with higher IQs possess certain genetic variants that, while contributing to higher cognitive abilities, also render them more susceptible to environmental triggers. In this scenario, these individuals could be more likely to display symptoms of autism when exposed to certain environmental factors, but these factors would not necessarily need to be vaccines.
Another potential scenario could involve a non-linear relationship between IQ and autism. That is, perhaps certain genetic variants associated with higher IQ do increase the likelihood of autism, but only up to a point. Beyond a certain threshold, further increases in IQ may not correlate with higher rates of autism. This could be due to a variety of factors, such as differing gene expression or different environmental influences at higher IQ levels.
Lastly, perhaps the relationship between IQ and autism is mediated by other factors. For example, certain metabolic or immune system differences associated with higher IQ could interact with environmental toxins, affecting the risk of autism. In this case, vaccines could potentially be one of many environmental factors, although there's no conclusive evidence to suggest this as of 2021.”
What about other possible treatments? I found one new one worth trying. I have no idea if I have a lot of things broken in my metabolism, so it could work.
Tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4)
“The first dietary intervention is tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4) which is a cofactor vital for metabolic pathways. These pathways include the production of monoamine neurotransmitters and nitric oxide as well as the destruction of phenylalanine. Irregularity in the functioning of these pathways has been shown in those with ASD. Moreover, reports of reduced amounts of BH4 in the central nervous system of patients with ASD have been found (Klaiman et al., 2013). For example, one study reported that there is evidence of an association between ASD and metabolic pathway abnormalities (Delhey et al., 2018). Additionally, BH4 had a positive effect on oxidative damage and methylation metabolism. There was no evidence however to support that BH4 is effective in treating any autism symptoms if the patient does not have abnormalities in their metabolic systems (Delhey et al., 2018). One study of children with ASD treated with BH4 found that those children receiving BH4 showed improvements in some of the main symptoms of ASD such as social awareness, autism mannerisms, hyperactivity, and inappropriate speech (Klaiman et al., 2013). The results also showed that those in the BH4 group decreased their stereotypic behaviors such as hyperactivity and inappropriate speech (Klaiman et al., 2013). “[7]
So, indeed. Rather extended electronic correspondences – I struggle to maintain my composure when provoked to irritation by another. It's an intrinsic part of my temperament. I derive pleasure from acquiring knowledge and enlightening individuals to the fallacies in their understanding.
Blog: My recent appointment with an incompetent physician
Have you encountered a physician who embodies such ineptitude that he remains oblivious to his own nonsensical ramblings?
I have recently endured such an encounter, and it proved to be an exceedingly unpleasant ordeal. I found myself embroiled in a disputatious dialogue with him, spanning an hour, while two social workers flanked me, merely because he failed to comprehend the fundamental principles of metabolism. My tolerance is tried when faced with individuals who espouse glaringly erroneous information. It's ingrained in my ethical code to perennially scrutinize authoritative figures.
One of my tenets refuses to endure the ineptitude of those in power – let alone an individual who wields a significant influence over my financial resources and medical interventions. I rue consenting to that consultation. Even prior to this encounter, I had conducted preliminary research into his credentials and they betrayed a glaring lack of substantial academic accomplishment. His graduation a handful of years ago serves as a somewhat acceptable indicator of competence. Broadly, we can anticipate that a more seasoned individual will possess greater competence, although this isn't an incontrovertible fact.
Rebuking an authority figure harbors the potential for undesirable repercussions. This transpired in my case, consequently, I was left to bear the burden of upholding my principles. He executed my disability pension renewal application with such ineptitude, he omitted any reference to my requisite for care support which he was tasked with renewing…. It appears inevitable that I will need to seek an alternative opinion from another physician.
Short greentext of my recent appointment:
To compound this, he even amended the dosage (to be more precise, the prescription text) in one of my prescriptions when its renewal was allocated to a different individual within the unit. Any other would have been adequate, bar him. I am not convinced by the argument that it was a mere oversight.
In an attempt to elucidate my stance further and thoroughly dismantle his assertions, I dispatched a series of three emails to him. On occasion, it proves rather challenging to coherently articulate one's arguments in a live setting.
Note: some context might be missing because I had to translate the text, my native language is Finnish and the original email is in Finnish.
First email:
"Title: Ketoacidosis is coming, are you ready?
Hi!
I promised to send an email, so here it is. Sorry for my behavior at the reception, I can't stand a doctor who can't justify neuropharmacologically the benefits of medication or give any numbers on the effect size of the treatment - let alone even an odds ratio, etc. Scaring with ketoacidosis is completely absurd, it is more related to diabetes and not to ketosis itself. Surely our ancestors thousands of years ago died because they were without food for weeks... The human species would not have survived very far. The current food culture of eating carbohydrates 5x a day is absolutely sick. Just by reading diabetes.fi you'll find: "Acid poisoning is a life-threatening condition and a completely different thing than the ketones or hunger acids formed in a healthy person when fasting. An impending acid poisoning in a diabetic is indicated by high blood sugar and at the same time ketones found in the blood."
The human body also has many mechanisms to prevent ketoacidosis during fasting/keto diet, including insulin production, gluconeogenesis, ketogenesis, ketone use, the kidneys filter out excess ketones and remove them with urine, pH level control by increasing respiratory rate/deep breathing and thus removing more carbon dioxide in exhalation. Of course, these systems can be out of order for some reason, but don't blame ketosis itself for that. No wonder there is no literature to find any numbers for the even per 100k occurrence, because this is not a very realistic possibility for healthy people (not for diabetics).
If you want to scare, you would say that venlafaxine causes seizures and vomiting blood. Much more realistic scenario and can be found in the package leaflet. The human body is not stupid. That's why there are no numbers that I asked for on the subject.
The intention is to shed a little more light on your "opinions". Of course, it is quite expected because according to your researchgate you have been involved in research related to (atherosclerotic) coronary heart disease. Probably the basic round, i.e., cholesterol = bad, and no deeper level analysis of the subject.
A friend's text on the subject:
"Atherosclerosis has three causal factors, all 'necessary but not sufficient'
(1) poor cholesterol levels (high ApoB)
(2) endothelial damage (damage in blood vessels and arteries)
(3) chronic inflammation
Atherosclerosis develops by first creating a 'fatty streak' damage on the surface of the artery where fat and lipoprotein accumulate. These develop already in childhood and slowly get worse and eventually form hard plaques. Then more and more ApoB-lipoprotein particles and fat accumulate under these plaques (and into/between the wall of the artery) over time. This narrows the artery, which may not necessarily cause any symptoms, but problems (such as death) occur when the plaque ruptures from the artery wall and blocks blood circulation to the heart.
These three causal factors I listed are essential for the development of atherosclerosis. If there are many ApoB-lipoprotein particles in the blood, more of that stuff accumulates under the plaque. There must also be some sort of damage in the artery for the fatty streak and plaque to develop. Inflammation in turn exacerbates almost every mechanism in the course of atherosclerosis disease (causes more damage to the artery, oxidizes lipoprotein particles making them more atherogenic, and thins the walls of arteries and helps plaque detachment).
Of course, I myself consider high insulin levels as the biggest risk to this in modern humans. Too bad you can't get a direct causality insulin --> endothelium damage --> cholesterol gets into the endothelium (wall of the blood vessel) --> atherosclerosis. Insulin is also anyway necessary for the function of the endothelium in general, so it could in principle be a direct proxy - although there are at least a couple of studies that say these are separate from each other and there is no causality. However, insulin is at least a proxy for things such as the inflammatory state, so I would say it is a good measure for the assessment of the risk of coronary heart disease.
Dr. Thomas N. Seynfried has an interesting theory that cancer is a metabolic disease (mitochondrion mutated and thus loses the competition to other cells in ketosis). Cancer growth can be significantly slowed down by fasting and in some cases even removed. In current treatment policy, there is a 99% failure rate to treat stage 3-4 cancer in the brain, so surely those treatment recommendations work to poison your own body with radiation and chemotherapy... Literally destroy your cells so that cancer cells are destroyed more. He has research evidence on this and he is treating those stage 3-4 "incurable" brain cancer patients. Of course, if you want to get rid of it completely, fasting + glutamine antagonist DON (6-diazo-5-oxo-L-norleucine) seems to work.
Good lecture on the subject:
Formally, I would of course put nice source references to this, but I don't feel like it right now: Sources: Dr. Peter Attia (MD), Dr. Boz (MD) & Dave Feldman
t's so absurd that you start the discussion with some kind of benzodiazepine-related mantra, I've heard the same in the public sector probably five times. GABA modulators, which increase the affinity of GABA receptors when the "natural" ones bind to that receptor. It works quite well in the sense it's supposed to, i.e., it slows everything down. And the addiction talk is gibberish. Benzodiazepines have just been demonized, even though the same effect comes from, for instance, methylphenidate, and then it's claimed that it doesn't cause addiction, this I've heard from psychiatrists' mouths – pseudoscience, the whole idea that others couldn't cause addiction. You're right in saying that SSRIs don't necessarily fall into this category, even though the DOSAGE is raised to "suit oneself," then withdrawal symptoms are terrible, even though it's claimed that it doesn't cause anything. I wrote about addiction in my Substack some time ago on how addiction is formed (https://naaras.substack.com/p/the-epidemic-of-ineffective-amphetamine). Up- and downregulation can explain most of addiction that comes with every drug that gets through the BBB (blood-brain barrier). The only part it doesn't explain is the use of the substance itself. There are indeed studies that rats will take heroin in lab conditions if they have nothing else to do. There's a good Ted talk about this, you can find it on YouTube with words like: "ted talk addiction"
Up and downregulation can explain three of four parts of addiction. Up/downregulation explains tolerance and withdrawal but it can't explain initial drug use nor repeated drug use. Here are the four parts of addiction:
Initial Drug Use: When a person first uses a drug like cocaine or amphetamines, these drugs increase dopamine levels in the brain, leading to feelings of pleasure or euphoria.
Repeated Drug Use and Tolerance: As the person continues to use the drug, the brain starts to adapt to the consistently high levels of dopamine. One way it does this is by downregulating dopamine receptors – that is, decreasing the number of receptors or their sensitivity to try to bring the system back to equilibrium. This can lead to tolerance, where the person needs to take more and more of the drug to achieve the same effect because there are fewer receptors for the dopamine to act on.
on the drug to maintain "normal" levels of dopamine. When the drug is not present, because there are fewer dopamine receptors, dopamine's effects are diminished, leading to withdrawal symptoms. These can include feelings of depression, anxiety, restlessness, and other physical and psychological discomforts.
Craving and Relapse: The discomfort of withdrawal and the memory of the drug-induced euphoria can lead to strong cravings to use the drug again. Returning to drug use can temporarily alleviate the withdrawal symptoms because the drug increases dopamine levels again. However, it also perpetuates the cycle of addiction, as the brain will continue to downregulate dopamine receptors in response to the artificially high dopamine levels.
If you want to justify stopping them with addiction, you're already making a treatment mistake by cutting them off from the person, because you can't stop them immediately due to withdrawal symptoms. If you want to apply the same logic to everything that you used, i.e., that the dose is increased, up/downregulation occurs, and withdrawal symptoms appear, then you should cut almost all medicines from people, which at least affect the brain.
Here's my explanation of why, for example, amphetamine doesn't work in treating ADHD without breaks:
"The use of amphetamines or other stimulants like methylphenidate have been an ineffective treatment for ADHD if you know even the basics of neuropharmacology.
So what is up and downregulation of receptors? Basically it means that if you take dopamine agonist (that means that it releases dopamine) your body will adapt to it by downregulating your dopamine receptors. Downregulation is basically deleting receptors or lessening their intensity. This is the building block at the molecular level for tolerance and it is present in every addiction as well. Upregulation means that you take for example medication called raclopide is an antagonist of dopamine receptors (means that it'll block the effects of dopamine) in theory should raclopide should raise the amount of dopamine receptors when your body adapts to it in order to normalize the situation.
Terms quickly explained:
Upregulation: leads to a higher amount of receptors or sensitivity
Downregulation: leads to a lower amount of receptors or sensitivity
Agonist: activates the receptor
Antagonist: blocks the receptor
So, in short, your body will get used to amphetamine in 6-8 weeks and counter its functionality. That is why nobody should ever use it daily or they'll develop tolerance.
Could anti-psychotics that are dopamine receptor antagonists make it faster to get over withdrawal symptoms of amphetamine withdrawals? Sure it'll probably feel horrible for a week or two but it is a lot better than suffering for up to 6 months due to lack of motivation."
The problem with venlafaxine and others is precisely that you're just poisoning yourself with too high serotonin levels, and that's why suicidal thoughts come and then symptoms "ease" within a month when your body counters the effect of the poison through downregulation. Of course, it's not directly nerve poison, but still poison. You don't ever want to touch the serotonin system. And you can't even control it locally, serotonin receptors are in the intestines, for example, and they have a different function there than in the brain (and even there, locally different effects). The purpose of the serotonin system is to measure your hierarchical position compared to others and adjust it according to certain parameters, e.g., how many times you've succeeded/failed in life. You're supposed to feel bad if you're doing poorly – it then gets the person to do things. It also has functions like if you're sick, you isolate yourself from others and go die somewhere else. A similar state to depression. Also, it's sensible after a fight to submit and drop serotonin levels and show that you're not a threat and if you don't do that and go for a fight again, you'll get killed. Of course, it's not optimal if a person loses their job and then the same reaction comes, but in reality, those doses of SSRIs raise serotonin levels in the brain way too much and side effects are incredibly many, because you can't get a local effect with medication
You can increase noradrenaline and adrenaline by simply taking a cold shower. According to rats, cold exposure is quite comparable to sex and other activities. Or go out for a walk, that also works.
You should indeed consider the basics of neuropharmacology first, before you start prescribing anything like this. The treatment response in these cases is really poor (number needed to treat 6) for depression, for example, and placebo and other things have a much bigger role than the actual medication, considering still that big pharma studies tilt it towards positive results, it's also good to take into account publication bias. mRNA vaccines are the biggest scam since SSRI junk. I personally would call this an international epidemic. Well, when you start complaining about source criticism and other things, here are some of them:
In short, about these too (partly text from a colleague): In layman's terms: the vaccine contains more durable modified mRNA, which stays in the cell for a very long time once it enters and possible reverse transcriptase, because it breaks several things like ORF and NMD. Due to its size and lipid solubility, it can get into every cell of yours from the bloodstream. Due to its small size (and other properties), pseudo-mRNA particles can get from the injection site (muscle) into the bloodstream and the first target is the walls of the blood vessels, i.e., the endothelium. And the particle can get through the blood-brain barrier and cause damage there.
In principle, it's better than normal viruses except that it can't replicate. It can penetrate almost every cell in your body like an infection and produce neurotoxic spike proteins. If that pseudo-mRNA infects, for example, your brain neurons (presumably in certain areas) or heart, your body can't renew them either.
For nerds, more information about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1-Methylpseudouridine
It's wise if you know pseudouridine so well that ORF does not become a problem even though it has 13 open reading frames inside it. In exactly such a situation, as well as with plasmid DNA contamination, NMD is an important mechanism, the operation of which pseudouridine prevents. And plasmid DNA contamination is due to poor enzymatic cleavage and filtration. Poly-A tails are often defective, according to EMA reports.
And when you want to start ranting about peer-reviewed and source criticism, here's a peer-reviewed study published in Cell: https://www.cell.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0092-8674%2822%2900076-9
Cell had a paper where they found vaccine mRNA from lymph nodes and spike protein from blood still 2 months after vaccination. The study ended there, so we don't know if they stay in the body even longer than 2 months afterwards.
Have you researched how much the vaccinations increase IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, and IgG4?
An increase of over 48000% (absolute values second vaccine 0.04% IgG4 immune response and then 19.27%) in IgG4 from the third vaccine after 210 days. It can be considered as desensitization therapy, but only for spike protein in this case.
And here is more peer-reviewed: https://www.science.org/doi/full/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798
A good Substack also explains what happens post 3 shots + infection, then we're already at 40%: https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/booster-caused-immune-tolerance-explains "On average, the four who had a breakthrough infection after their booster are now at 42.45% IgG4. The cohort as a whole is at 19.27%, up from just 0.04%, so the ones who haven’t had a breakthrough infection yet will end up at a similar position: A response that is entirely IgG4 dominated."
In how many other things is the current "mainstream" medicine objectively wrong? Don't read the current care instructions as some kind of Bible – figure things out yourself.
I will research the therapy form you suggested later. I haven't yet had time to read enough literature on the subject to say, other than that it probably doesn't work. The nocebo effect is already certain. So you're probably good to force me into expensive treatments and waste more societal resources. Based on statistics, less than 5% ever gain employment of those who have been on rehabilitation allowance. Current treatment methods are completely ineffective. For example, 85% of autists (high functioning) in Sweden are not in working life at all and depending on the country, we get 50-90% figures. And indeed, a current care evidence review of the benefits of therapy for autism doesn't meet my own standards - I don't even know if it exists, although there are others for other diseases/treatment methods. Reducing inflammation is often linked to the autism spectrum and that's what I'm trying to reduce with fasting/ketosis. These conventional methods don't fix anything and it's seen in the statistics.
PS. You can add this to my patient documents too, so that others can read it if necessary.
Best regards,
Noora
London conference on intelligence attendee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Conference_on_Intelligence)
Second email:
Title: Written reminder is coming, are you ready? Hi!
Here would already be more than enough to make a complaint with the help of a patient ombudsman. If necessary, I will send these same "physical" written reminders to your treatment unit. If that doesn't help, then a complaint will be sent to the regional administrative office.
You said that you would not touch my prescriptions - however, you touched them the next business day from the previous email. I already left a callback request for this and tomorrow I will resolve the issue over the phone. That renewal request was for other doctors, not for you. You don't touch my prescriptions or suggest changes to them, which may affect other doctors' stance on my medication.
You are the most incompetent doctor I have ever met. You do not understand the basics of metabolism such as gluconeogenesis. You think that people who don't eat carbohydrates go into a coma. You broke the trust relationship by touching my prescriptions.
It is irresponsible and dangerous to give you authority to decide on my care and finances (rehabilitation and care support statement)
I probably will still get an M1 referral by saying, “I'm now drinking water with 9g of salt and 6 eggs with yolks on top.” Of course, the body can filter out excess salt with the help of the kidneys…
I forgot to clarify why you are wrong about the necessity of carbohydrates for transporting electrolytes into the cell. You probably associate carbohydrates with high insulin secretion and insulin's signal to cells to take in nutrients (glucose primarily). Of course, insulin stimulates the sodium/potassium "pump" ATPase, but during fasting insulin does not go to zero and there are other electrolytes available. As an important reminder, electrolytes do not replace each other. Fasting doesn't even need to take any electrolytes because the body can regulate them mainly through the kidneys. The body can say that it has a need for sodium and make you thirsty. Potassium can be taken from other cells as needed for food. If necessary, "in an emergency" the body can also take magnesium and calcium from the skeleton for food. This does not require insulin or carbohydrates (and even if needed, the body could make them by gluconeogenesis + increasing insulin production in the pancreas).
“Insulin isn't the only mechanism for cells to take in electrolytes. Various electrolytes like sodium, potassium, and chloride have different mechanisms for cellular uptake. For instance, potassium largely enters cells through passive diffusion, while chloride can be absorbed via exchange with bicarbonate.”
At least that Estonian doctor can renew my prescription correctly there, even though I had to call twice to put a time limit on it (because in the standard care, the bible says, not for long-term use and that other drugs cannot be addicted in the same amounts, maybe in 10 years we will see some sensible line) and one more time, because I do not want to put a renewal request a week in advance (this is the recommendation) and previously the prescription was only for 15 days. There are no such problems in the private sector and I just got a direct 100 pack of Diapam, it's a completely different treatment here in the public sector (surprise).
That frightening about the dangers of benzos is the most absurd fear since the opioid crisis. The same mantra was taught to my friend, junkies come asking for benzo prescriptions for fake/other ailments etc. At least you should have a coherent line about what is addictive and what is not. And in benzos, an unpleasant effect is the deterioration of cognition - especially memory - on the other hand, mine is already poor (epi)/for genetic reasons and the risk/benefit analysis is positive at the current dose (20 mg per day).
Too bad I'm not good at manipulating, I'd rather say directly what I want and why. Supposedly should manipulate the other. Another recently graduated doctor almost neglected treatment and didn't leave a good taste from it. If a urinary tract infection had gotten to my kidneys, it would have been a hospital trip at the same time and when I just got <personal information>. My mistake was to ask for a benzo refill at the same time and then in a panic, he goes to consult his colleague about the situation with a lie... It's hard to be an autistic person because supposedly certain situations are wrong to ask certain things.
Oh yeah about Dr. Thomas Seyfried, of course it's a bit hc to give a person an antagonist to glutamine receptors, so probably heat treatment (needs to be at 40C or over and this also does damage to the body), which forces the cancer cell to "ask for help" to come out. Fasting and vitamin C on top is probably a good combo. Good video from Sseth about heat treatment and vitamin C:
Too bad these cheap and effective treatments don't have support. Here are his titles included, because source criticism was important:
“Sseth grew up in Germany and is a German Ashkenazi Jew, though he currently lives in Denmark.[1] His ancestors used to live in Tsarist Russia until they were deported.
"Sseth has ADHD, and was addicted to Ritalin before giving it up.[2]
He has an MSc (Master of Science) degree in Immunology and has published in a scientific journal.”
Source: https://youtube.fandom.com/wiki/SsethTzeentach
If you really want to help me feel better, here are some prescription suggestions that you can influence:
Piracetam 3 x 1g per day. For cognitive enhancement. It acts as a modulator to glutamate and acetylcholine by affecting ion channels and those "carrier" proteins. It might improve brain metabolism by improving (somehow, I don't know exactly) the function of ATP in phospholipids, and perhaps the mechanism of action is by increasing the fluid in the walls/membranes of these cells? And at least in rats, it increases brain oxygen consumption, so it does something there too. (requires you to write SIC! or else the pharmacist is threatened with a fine)
Piracetam is also available without prescription in many countries because it rarely has any concrete side effects compared to placebo. Of course, it's not in Finland :D
Raclopride <8 mg per day. For the upregulation of dopamine receptors on days off from methylphenidate. It also increases prolactin for some reason, but it's not a problem, it only temporarily raises it max one day a week. (requires you to write SIC! or else the pharmacist is threatened with a fine)
PREP, for the prevention of HIV in occasional use, because I am a filthy degenerate. I didn't bother to delve deeper, but here: “This review article deals with the most commonly used prep, an orally administered combination medication containing 245 mg of tenofovir disoproxil (TD) and 200 mg of emtricitabine (FTC).“ https://www.duodecimlehti.fi/duo15510
Ps. Make sure there are no interactions with my current medication (well, there's an automatic check there)
Pps. The social workers are also eyewitnesses and I can call them if necessary to testify the course of treatment.
Best regards,
Noora
Third email:
Title: Is occupational therapy effective for autistics individuals (with comorbities)?
Hi!
I promised to still write this. I will not bother anymore by email. The specialists are not any better options, usually they are as lost. They look at me like crazy talking about the benefits of fasting.
The b/c-statement was very incompetently written. Even a little more properly in patient documents (I don't know if you write yourself or dictate and then someone else writes). It only contained complaints that I refused ineffective treatments, which I would not have been able to commit to anyway, and that the ssri/snri rubbish has already been tested and the side effects are greater than the benefits and by studying neuropharmacology you already understand the problem, why they do not work based on the known mechanistic features.
You also did not explain in the b/c statement why I need treatment support at all. You should have written there e.g. "needs constant reminding in everyday life, mother helps with everyday things and reminding. Social workers support the patient's social skills, have also financially assisted and increased awareness of normal social activities". You also did not describe things like my immutable / rigid attitudes in life models, which affect the severity of this treatment / disease. Well, you'll probably learn these things during your career, but you get a little too much responsibility, because nobody really can stand being there for more than 6 months and the nursing staff is constantly changing.
It would have been easier if I could have written that statement myself. Well, I have to get a second opinion elsewhere, it's a shame I had to pay separately for your visit and b/c statement. If only I had the money to go private, but I don't want to take money out of my investments.
I would almost like to make that reminder to your unit and you (or the chief physician) would have to at least officially respond to something and apologize (according to the instructions). We'll see... Maybe I can't be bothered and need to focus on more important things than responding to you.
Does occupational therapy work on those suffering from autism spectrum disorder (including comorbidities)?
What are my own criteria for quality research evidence?
Unfortunately, doing a literature review independently is far too time-consuming, let alone doing a meta-analysis. Most of the literature is done on children, many lack a control group (which makes sense) and also that there is no big pharma gimmick, such as comparing treatment to other antidepressants / treatments or the like.
Luckily I found a book, where the authors have already done a literature review. "Autism and Enablement Occupational Therapy Approaches to Promote Independence for Adults with Autism" Authors: "Matt Bushell, Sandra Gasson and Ute Vann" and find the book from pages: 46-52 [1]
In principle, this book's literature review shows that by 2018 there is very little research on this in adults and there is no evidence that it would help autists to get employed. Possibly would help in social skills, but I don't feel much need for them. Anxiety in autists has not been studied. Mainly for improving social skills and problem solving
"The ASC Team conducted an extensive search of relevant literature related to the support needs of high-functioning adults and people with Asperger syndrome as well as reports on occupational therapy-type interventions being provided. Many of the interventions are focused on social skills, which is an area of significant difficulty for people on the autistic spectrum. According to Harrup (1985, cited in Cappadocia and Weiss 2011), poor social skills are related to concurrent and consequent academic under-achievement, difficulties with peer acceptance and mental health problems. Little evidence could be found of interventions involving occupational-therapy type expertise, with most studies being conducted outside the UK. Much of the support was delivered to children and young people in controlled rather than naturalistic environments and samples were in general very small. Many interventions were delivered in group settings and focused on areas such as social skills/communication, education and employment rather than activities of daily living.”
Secondly, I found another good literature review on occupational therapy for autism challenges in social situations. There too they end up with the same problem. n<15 in most and most are targeted at children. However, the problem is small n and the lack of rct's. The results, however, were positive for socializing autistic children and young adults (under 26 years) [2].
“Twenty-five articles were reviewed that provided results on the most prevalent interventions for individuals with ASD to improve socialization. From the findings, thirteen studies yielded strong evidence and support for these various interventions in improving socialization for this specific population. Ten studies showed moderate strength of results, while two showed low levels of strong evidence. Although a few studies showed insubstantial evidence, strong levels of evidence were found in other articles looking at the same interventions”
What does Kela's statistics say? Well, 4% returned to work from the recipients of Kela's rehabilitation aid (temporary pension) from 2 years → 4 years. [3] And here only depression vs non-depression mental health problem was distinguished. And if I have been on rehabilitation aid for more than 4 years already, how realistic are the chances of rehabilitating me?
Note: "Kela" refers to the Social Insurance Institution of Finland, responsible for settling benefits under national social security programs.
15% to 30% also end up on permanent disability pension by the 4-year mark. In my opinion, it would have been quite realistic to already get there. That's why I asked about it.
Conclusion:
In the light of two literature reviews and statistics from the Social Insurance Institution of Finland (Kela), this occupational therapy will not employ me, so in principle, it's an unnecessary and expensive form of treatment. Does it make sense to commit to it for years and consume a lot of public funds? I wouldn't even have the energy to commit to it, I have no more strength left in me. Marginal help in social matters, in my opinion, is not worth trying. I don't know, maybe my mind is just stuck in certain thought patterns and needs some kind of spiritual awakening. Maybe I should read Carl Jung's book called "Synchronicity", in which the concept essentially means that there are coincidences that don't feel like coincidences.
Anything else interesting?
I developed a new causality model for the onset of autism:
It can't be solely due to genetic reasons and nor does "diagnosed more" explain the whole phenomenon.
"Genes don't cause epidemics" -RFK jr
Model name: "Autism as a metabolic disease induced by pesticides & other toxins"
The amount of environmental toxins (adjuvants in vaccines and glyphosate, etc.) has increased → certain risk alleles for autism have been found (correlates with intelligence) → metabolic problems have also been found with risk alleles → risk alleles for autism also expose to environmental toxins via metabolic problems (e.g., Ethylmercury metabolism) → need for more autism diagnoses → the number of autism increases in the population [4][5][6][7]
The complexity model of the brain did not really work in explaining autism, because why would there be differences in the severity of autism, and for that, I received criticism. Previously I thought this model would work: "Autism is a negative byproduct of intelligence", but this model does not explain the effects of the environment and is therefore inappropriate.
Fortunately, GPT-4 can now correct these:
"In addressing the critique, we might first consider that "high functioning autism" is not a term solely linked to high IQ. Rather, it often refers to individuals on the autism spectrum who can function relatively independently in society, which involves a variety of skills beyond pure cognitive ability.
Next, consider that a higher IQ does not necessarily equate to greater autism severity or a higher likelihood of having autism. The relationship between IQ and autism is complex and multi-faceted. The genetic components that contribute to high IQ and those that contribute to autism might overlap, but it doesn't mean the manifestation of one leads to an increase in the other.
As for the connection to vaccines, it's crucial to note that current scientific consensus, as of my knowledge cutoff in 2021, is that vaccines do not cause autism. However, continuing with your hypothetical model, let's explore potential connections.
It's possible that individuals with higher IQs possess certain genetic variants that, while contributing to higher cognitive abilities, also render them more susceptible to environmental triggers. In this scenario, these individuals could be more likely to display symptoms of autism when exposed to certain environmental factors, but these factors would not necessarily need to be vaccines.
Another potential scenario could involve a non-linear relationship between IQ and autism. That is, perhaps certain genetic variants associated with higher IQ do increase the likelihood of autism, but only up to a point. Beyond a certain threshold, further increases in IQ may not correlate with higher rates of autism. This could be due to a variety of factors, such as differing gene expression or different environmental influences at higher IQ levels.
Lastly, perhaps the relationship between IQ and autism is mediated by other factors. For example, certain metabolic or immune system differences associated with higher IQ could interact with environmental toxins, affecting the risk of autism. In this case, vaccines could potentially be one of many environmental factors, although there's no conclusive evidence to suggest this as of 2021.”
What about other possible treatments? I found one new one worth trying. I have no idea if I have a lot of things broken in my metabolism, so it could work.
Tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4)
“The first dietary intervention is tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4) which is a cofactor vital for metabolic pathways. These pathways include the production of monoamine neurotransmitters and nitric oxide as well as the destruction of phenylalanine. Irregularity in the functioning of these pathways has been shown in those with ASD. Moreover, reports of reduced amounts of BH4 in the central nervous system of patients with ASD have been found (Klaiman et al., 2013). For example, one study reported that there is evidence of an association between ASD and metabolic pathway abnormalities (Delhey et al., 2018). Additionally, BH4 had a positive effect on oxidative damage and methylation metabolism. There was no evidence however to support that BH4 is effective in treating any autism symptoms if the patient does not have abnormalities in their metabolic systems (Delhey et al., 2018). One study of children with ASD treated with BH4 found that those children receiving BH4 showed improvements in some of the main symptoms of ASD such as social awareness, autism mannerisms, hyperactivity, and inappropriate speech (Klaiman et al., 2013). The results also showed that those in the BH4 group decreased their stereotypic behaviors such as hyperactivity and inappropriate speech (Klaiman et al., 2013). “[7]
Best regards,
Noora
Sources cited:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B072WC8XDK/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0
https://scholarworks.iupui.edu/bitstream/handle/1805/32817/RSR%20-%20Final.pdf?sequence=1
https://helda.helsinki.fi/server/api/core/bitstreams/deb1f237-2849-423c-8595-ee9ccd356f0a/content
https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1006618
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3944636/
https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2145&context=honors
So, indeed. Rather extended electronic correspondences – I struggle to maintain my composure when provoked to irritation by another. It's an intrinsic part of my temperament. I derive pleasure from acquiring knowledge and enlightening individuals to the fallacies in their understanding.
What is your perspective?