Some HBOT questions

Discuss autism diets and biomedical treatments of autism.

Moderator: ModeratorBill

Walker's Mom
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:23 am

Some HBOT questions

Postby Walker's Mom » Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:40 pm

I'm am going to a center in Atlanta the end of Sept to try some mild HBOT sessions with my son, who is 8. What kind of supplements are you instructed to give your child during this time? I am going to start off with 10 dives. If I see anything, I will have to continue at a later time.
Any bad results seen in children around this age?
Thanks for any input.

sashasmom
Posts: 1788
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 7:03 pm

Postby sashasmom » Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:02 pm

Are you going to the Hyperbaric Therapy Center? You'll love those guys, they are so nice. Some people give Vitamin E, Glutathione, and Vitamin C to help with the possibility of free radicals being released in the body. Most people give that when doing hard chamber but we did it with both. We saw a few "wows" within the first 10 dives of mild HBOT but saw more closer to 20.

We went to Miracle Mountain in May and did 40 hours of hard chamber and that is when we saw the most improvements from HBOT. Tami and Laura from this board have also went to MM (in June) and saw great things. Their kids are closer to your childs age I believe. We will be doing hard chamber from now on and mild as "maintenance".

Bad side effects that I have seen in several of the kids were they became more stimmy, OCD, and either hyper or aggressive in the beginning but it has been said that was part of a die off process and I did see these children get back to their normal behaviors within a week and we were all together for 3 1/2 weeks. Sasha started throwing up when we did chelation and HBOT at the same time so I would start off slow and take a break from chelation when doing HBOT for the first time. Activated charcoal may help mop up some of the junk that may be detoxed from HBOT.

-Crystal

LauraP
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 3:44 pm

Postby LauraP » Tue Jul 25, 2006 10:59 am

My son is 10 years old and we did 40 hard-shelled, 100% oxygen treatments at 1.5 atmospheres in Miracle Mountain (NC) in June. Here is a link to the results I observed:

http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/HB ... ssage/4549

When I started researching HBOT I thought exactly as you did ... let's start slow, mild HBOT, do 10 sessions and will continue if anything positive happens ... The more I read, the more I changed my mind. First of all, what you want is permanent new capillary growth, so that after HBOT, your child will continue to receive oxygen to areas in the brain where there was no or little oxygen before. As I understand it, permanent new capillary growth only occurs with continuous sessions (at least 5 a week), 40 to 80 sessions, of 100% oxygen at 1.5 atmospheres (in other words, hard-shelled HBOT). Here is a quote from Robert Harsoe, one of the founders of Miracle Mountain, explaining what happens during "hard" HBOT:

First comes the oxygen, which saturates the red blood cells to bring it
from an average of 97% saturation to 100%. Next comes the use of
"pressure" to create the high dosage required to reach the areas that
the red blood cell oxygen delivery system is not reaching. We need
saturation of the plasma, the cerebral and spinal fluids, in fact all
the fluids of the body to reach those areas with oxygen which are not
being reached whether caused by an injury, metal toxicity, or
whatever. Once those areas are reached with high dosage oxygen
under pressure, we begin to see reactions like cells or neurons
reacting. Doing this continuously signals the brain that continuous
oxygen is need to keep these neurons functioning and cells repairing
themselves. In turn the brain so wonderfully signals new capillary
growth to continuously feed the damaged areas by delivering oxygen
via the normal method of red blood cells as well as nutrition and
removal of toxins.


With mild HBOT, this permanent new capillary growth does not occur (at least that is the thinking today, a lot more research is needed). You do get more oxygen into tissues because some oxygen dissolves in the plasma, BUT ONLY WHILE YOU ARE IN THE CHAMBER. Once you come out of the chamber, those oxygen starved areas become starved again. That is why so many parents see good results with mild HBOT initially, but observe regressions later, once the mild HBOT sessions stop. Permanent new capillary growth also does not occur with an occassional session of "hard" HBOT. The brain needs continuous, daily "reminders" that oxygen is needed before it starts the capillary growth, that is why a minimum of 40 continuous sessions (at least 5 a week, although we did 12 per week, twice a day, 6 days a week) is recommended. Like Crystal, I decided to do the hard HBOT first, give a chance for those capillaries to grow, and maybe later continue with mild HBOT as maintenance.

Here is another quote from Robert Hartsoe:

Is mHBOT beneficial? Of course it is.

The problem? Is HDOT (high dosage oxygen therapy, or hard-shelled HBOT) better? Of course it is. And the problem
is simply, the kids are the ones getting cheated. If a child will
never have an opportunity to get HDOT but can get mHBOT, then they
are indeed very fortunate. However, if they are denied HDOT
because the parents consider mHBOT equal, they are being
cheated. Plain and simple.


I am very pleased with the results I observed with 40 sessions of hard HBOT. If monetarily possible, my son will do another 40 before considering doing mild HBOT. BTW, I did give antioxidants to my son during the 40 sessions of HBOT, but only because he was already getting them as part of his regular maintenance: vit C and E, glutathione, etc. Other mothers were not supplementing with any of these.

Good luck with HBOT!
Laura, Ian's mom

rlneub
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Postby rlneub » Tue Jul 25, 2006 6:09 pm

The problem with the theory of capillary growth in 1.3 is there is NO STUDY to show 1.3 does not have capillary growth. Just because there is not a study does not make it true that there is no growth.

Just like with MB12, there is No Study. It does not mean that MB12 does not work.

Hartsoe is a good guy and does look out for kids, but until the capillary issue is studied, I do not understand how he can make that statement. I think it is his personal belief and it may be valid, but in Jim's talking to the other docs, they see results in both hard and soft. It would seem the majority of kids do well with either treatment. But there are groups of kids needing one over the other.

In our practice we have some kids who did not respond to mild but did respond to hard. Also, we have the inverse, some kids did not respond with the 1.5 but did respond to the 1.3 at longer (2 hour session) dive times.

Blanket statements really get my goat. That is why I am responding. Many times opinions get published on the internet as fact when in reality it is more like I believe this is what is happening. At present time, we clinically see mild hbot working and regular hbot working. I advise parents to seek out hbot is whatever way they can afford. Whether hard or soft, it is a good treatment to try.

LauraP
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 3:44 pm

Postby LauraP » Tue Jul 25, 2006 8:42 pm

Rick, I agree with you, blanket statements without data to support it should not be made. I know this area is very new, and that there is very little hard core research out there.

Your office sees a lot of patients, and you probably have a large data bank to draw conclusions from. I have heard from several moms that claim that the positive results they saw with mild HBOT disappeared after the treatment stopped. I have not heard about similar regressions from hard HBOT. That was one big factor that influenced my final decision. However, as I said before, you know of a lot more cases in a more personal manner than me. Do you observe regressions in both mild and hard HBOT (assuming the child shows any gains)?

Ultimately, I completely agree with your statement to

seek out hbot is whatever way they can afford. Whether hard or soft, it is a good treatment to try
Laura, Ian's mom

rlneub
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Postby rlneub » Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:38 pm

It depends on the child and number of sessions. For some kids stopping at 40 may be too early. We have children who came in December and the gains are holding. We also have some that did not see gains until dive 30+ and the gains are slowly slipping. It seems that you need a period after seeing a gain for the change to hold.

Also time of exposure seems to have a lot to do. We get better gains from those doing 1.5 to 2 hour dives than those doing 1 hour dives.

rlneub
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Postby rlneub » Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:28 pm

From Jim Neubrander, M.D.
Through Rick

As most of you already know about me, very rarely do I take time out of my already too busy schedule to write anything to be posted on the Internet. However, there are times that I just cannot keep quiet when I see that what is being propagated as truth is far from being accurate. Tonight is such a time and I will say that I am deeply troubled by what I hear parents are being presented as facts. Therefore I will make a few comments that are pertinent. I will also say that I am not about to take the time to be exhaustive and state everything I know about the subject. Hopefully most parents will be able to see from the few things I say that there is much more to the story than what superficially appears as “the facts”.

Let me start by saying that the belief that HBOT works because of angioneogenesis (the growth of new blood vessels) is just a small part of the equation as to why HBOT works in different children. It is only one possible mechanism out of the many, only a few of which will be discussed below. If this mechanism of new blood vessel growth were the only mechanism as to why HBOT would work or not work, then the statements about new blood vessel growth shown to be present with 1.5 ata but not at 1.3 may be valid. However, such a statement is nothing more than poppycock! Rick has repeatedly asked the proponents that 1.3 does not produce the capillary growth for studies documenting these strong statements. To date we have found no such study. In fact, according to the work of at least one physician, pressures of 1.3 have shown improved blood flow. Though “unpublished”, the results of this study are no different than my findings of methyl-B12 showing efficacy clinically but not yet published! At this time Rick and I have personally monitored over 250,000 methyl-B12 injections and over 1 million doses indirectly from other clinicians and parents and there is no doubt that this “unproven therapy” really works well!

With that being said, please note that when physicians, more specifically me, are put into categories and classifications because they belong to a certain group, e.g. DAN which is stated by some in a demeaning manner, that such physicians do not know oxygen and gas laws and principles, is a cheap shot that I would expect to see in political races and not in forums dedicated to helping parents make wise choices. I am a diver trained in gas laws and who has monitored thousands of hours of therapy in HBOT chambers without incident and am appalled that such statements continue to go unchallenged by myself or by my colleagues.

It does not necessarily matter what I say, because most of you “should say” give us the science. Therefore, just a few of the multiple mechanisms that are written in the literature and show the multiple reasons HBOT may work beyond angioneogenesis include: 1) blood flow increases independent of new blood vessel growth due to the competing mechanisms of vasodilation and vasoconstriction; 2) pressure increases, not oxygen tension, decreasing inflammatory cytokines in children on the autistic spectrum shown to have neuroinflammation and GI inflammation; 3) up-regulation of key antioxidant enzymes thereby blunting the effects of the known oxidative stress that this subset of children demonstrate; 4) increased oxygenation to functioning mitochondria; 5) increased production of mitochondria; 6) indirect improvement of heme delivery of oxygen delivery to the tissues secondary to impaired production of porphyrins; 7) decrease of bacteria systemically and in the gut; 8) decrease of viral load systemically and possibly in the intestinal mucosa; 9) increased production of stem cells; 10) the possibility of oxidation to help rid the body of petrochemicals; 11) the possibility of oxidation to rid the body of mercury and heavy metals.

Because multiple mechanisms all can be operative in autism, and because no one mechanism seems to “answer all the questions” for any one child, it once again is nothing more than poppycock to propose that one mechanism is the reason to use hard chambers over soft. As was so elegantly stated by Lane Scott (to the effect of), “Use what works!” To date Rick and I have monitored thousands of dives and we can both say emphatically, and have the clinical documentation to prove it, that 1.3 works and works well for approximately 80% of children. The “magic 40 dives” is nothing more than a number that has been “iconized” and in reality no such number exists. HBOT, high pressure or low pressure, is nothing more than a treatment, one that most likely should be as ongoing as insulin, thyroid, eating, and drinking! It should also be noted that high pressure treatments have a totally different “overall mechanism of action” as does low pressure treatments and both may be necessary for a specific child in order to obtain maximum results! High pressure mechanism deals with mass action and total concentration whereas low pressure deals with time. The only error with low pressure, should there be any error, which there really is not, is that the treatments are too short. Based on gas laws and the partial pressure of oxygen, the higher the pressure and/or the higher the oxygen concentration, the shorter the treatment can be without getting into the issues of oxygen and CNS toxicity, It should be noted that high pressure treatments (which I believe in very much and have many patients ready to start sessions within a couple of weeks) in no way “pushes more oxygen across the cell membrane”. Nor does higher pressures with shorter treatment times increase cell membrane permeability – only more time allows this phenomenon to occur. Biochemical reactions are not sped up by higher concentrations because each has its own finite speed of reaction. The only thing we can change is how many dormant/idling cells we activate and how long we keep them making biochemical substrate into product. Therefore one must not confuse the overall mechanism of concentration of oxygen – extremely valuable to certain disease states – with the overall mechanism of total time of treatment – extremely valuable for maintenance and to maximize biochemical reactions and treatment times!

Based on my clinical experience and my extensive study of the subject of hyperbaric therapy, I can unequivocally state that the High Pressure – Low Pressure War is nothing more than a totally stupid mind game, often confusing parents looking to us to deliver truth. And truth it is that you should have – facts, not fallacy, fiction, finances, or ‘fricking around’ with your emotions or intelligence! Charisma does not equal truth! Strong statements do not equal truth! Personal vendettas do not lead to truth! Mental masturbation does not equal truth! Truth only comes from those of us willing to look not only at “known science” but beyond what science says to what parents see when what they see is compared by the same evaluation tools and reviewed by unbiased observers. Rick and I will give you that. We do not have all the answers but anyone who knows Rick’s dedication to the boards, and anyone who knows how much a pain in the butt I am for gathering data while allowing no other changes to be made during a clinical trial, will admit that we will give you the honest scoop, whatever it is as we find it, whether or not it is good for us or devastating to us financially! Therefore you can take this statement from both Rick and me to the bank – it is just as stupid for the tires to call the gas tank unimportant as it is for anyone to make blanket statements while criticizing others and implying what they are saying is scientific and proven when it is “selective disclosure!”

I will end this by saying, HBOT works! Hard or soft, high or low, each works for its own set of reasons. Some kids may react better to one treatment over another but most children will do well with either treatment.

dee
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:26 am

Postby dee » Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:38 am

Rick,
Thanks for posting that from Dr. N. It helped clear up a lot of questions. I have one question remaining. I know that Dr. N's protocol is usually to do one thing at a time and document for results. With this in mind, what does he think of using AIT with HBOT? I'm doing HBOT at 1.5 100% oxygen starting this month and considering using AIT with it. Do you have any experience in your practice or beliefs about doing the two together? I know there are some facilities that are having great results with the two together.
Thanks,
dee

rlneub
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Postby rlneub » Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:45 am

We do not advocate doing 2 Biomedical treatments at the same time. I do not think AIT and HBOT would apply as HBOT is a biomed treatment and the other is a therapy.

Walker's Mom
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:23 am

Postby Walker's Mom » Wed Jul 26, 2006 9:06 am

Thanks for all your replies. I have been really up in the air whether I was even going to do HBOT or not. One day I'm doing it, the next day I think not. It is really stressing me out. My son is doing very well. His main things that I would like to improve would be focus & attention, eye contact and his compliancy. That is the main one, he can be very stubborn when he does not want to do something, like bathe.

Do'C
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:25 am

Question for Dr. Neubrander

Postby Do'C » Sun Jul 30, 2006 3:14 am

"It does not necessarily matter what I say, because most of you 'should say' give us the science."

Dear Dr. Neubrander,

My question pertains ONLY to mild HBOT as it is apparently being sold to some parents of children with autism. The particular setup I'm referring to is the Vitaeris 320, which according to a manufacturer representative, has an FDA-approved maximum pressure of 4.26 PSI above ambient (~1.29 ATA at sea level). My question specifically relates ONLY to use of this equipment without supplementation of 100% O2, or more specifically, with FIO2 at 30% or less - such as being studied in Dr. Rossignol's current study.

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/gui/show/NCT00335790

The bottom line is that this mild hyperbaric enriched air therapy probably only has two possible delivery mechanisms of benefit for autism: increased oxygen tension and increased atmospheric pressure (or possibly some unknown combination of the two).

The 11 possible mechanisms you describe appear to rely on those two delivery mechanisms for benefit.

With respect only to the setup described above (~1.29 ATA and <30% FIO2), identical or greater oxygen tension can be achieved with simple home oxygen therapy (a high flow oxygen concentrator with a simple or partial rebreather mask at 6-10 lpm) without a hyperbaric chamber, for about $200/month.

The question remains as to what the effect of atmospheric pressure alone (or in combination with hyperoxia) may be, as you suggest with suppression of inflammatory cytokines in children on the autistic spectrum shown to have neuroinflammation and GI inflammation.

I was only able to locate a couple of related studies on this possible effect of pressure alone:

From 2002 - Undersea Hyperb Med. 2002 Fall;29(3):216-25.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=12670123&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_DocSum

Which suggested a possible mechanism for anti-inflammatory effect, but this small study was conducted at 2.o ATA (a significant pressure increase compared to the ~0.29 ATA increase afforded by the Vitaeris 320).

and

From 2003 - Clin Exp Immunol. 2003 Oct;134(1):57-62.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=12974755&query_hl=2&itool=pubmed_docsum

[...Increased atmospheric pressure alone does not affect stimulus-induced cytokine synthesis

Previous investigations have shown that increased atmospheric pressure can affect such cellular functions as interferon- g secretion [16] and apoptosis [17,18]. To assess the effects of increased atmospheric pressure on cytokine production, monocytemacrophages were cultured in 8.75% O2, 2.1% CO2 at 2.4 ATA (increased atmospheric pressure). We used 8.75% O2 and 2.1% CO2 so that cells at 2.4 ATA would be exposed to the equivalent of 21% O2, 5% CO2 at sea level. When compared to cells cultured in normoxia at sea level, up to 12 h of increased atmospheric pressure did not affect IL-1 b or TNF- a synthesis (data not shown)....]

Emphasis mine.

Note: [16] References the 2002 study in Undersea Hyperb Med.

So yes,"please give us the science". Is there any science you can point readers to, that supports the hypothesis that pressure alone at ~0.29 ATM above ambient provides any benefit via suppression of inflammatory cytokines in children on the autistic spectrum shown to have neuroinflammation and GI inflammation?

Otherwise, if the known benefits of hyperbaric enriched air therapy at FIO2 <30% and ~1.29 ATA are confined to increased oxygen tension, it would seem that simple O2 therapy could be more appropriate (outside of clinical research of course), especially financially.

I have no questions about hyperbaric therapy at FIO2 > 30% or pressure 1.5 ATA or greater.

Thank you.

Kenny V
Posts: 1282
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 10:22 am

Postby Kenny V » Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:26 am

Not to change the subject…, was hoping that someone may share some of the science, what I mean is don’t we have spec scans pre and post hbot (that is mild 1.3 ATA with about %24 o2 that are very impressive.???
Correct me if im wrong but I believe I read those in some of the literature.

I see as what happens on all these boards its quite hard to get info out straight without some sort of slant to them. Whatever the environment you are in you may get a different response based on the influence. Thats the nature of opinion/ strong views with touch of trying to share valuable info. When you include good science with in reason and add clinical studies you may influence the reader all the more.

With that said. I want to open up a question. In lue of some of the greater “fights” Capillary growth at only X pressure with x amount of oxygen.
Because Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is relatively new as it related to ASD we may not have all the answers Yet and because hard Hbot may have some studies that back them up, that does not make Mild hbot 1.3 ATA any less effective does it?

Let me ask one simple question that may bring some stuff to the table. Don’t we have spec scans that clearly show the effectiveness of mild Hyperbaric showing increased blood flow?
Does this qualify at all to the science behind the argument?
Now I don’t understand all the mechanisms behind Hyperbaric and wish to understand more.
Just trying to open this up for more responses.


Thanks Kenny v




Id like to post a Quote from another board
Kenny v wrote:
I don't want to speak out of turn…(I speak as just a parent) but I
believe this is relatively a new treatment as it involves treating
our ASD children. And as we all know everyone is at a different
level, each condition may be slightly different as many or doing more
than one biomedical intervention at a time. So in this point of time
it, may be hard to distinct exactly what is doing what. One thing I
can say it is exiting to hear of the many gains in language, social
engagement, gut healing, potty training etc…etc. the list goes on …
What is real neat is when you hear of the first obtained milestones
and gains that are similar to those that we have heard through other
interventions. All as I can say is healing is taking place.
As far as mHbot /Hbot, the reports are coming in daily. We don't
have big studies yet, but some info that we have is from the clinical
studies/reports thus so far. If im correct they are seeing pretty
much 80% respondent with both mHbot/ Hbot. Sounds good to me I think
that is good stuff and we will learn more about protocols as we all
have more Hyperbaric oxygen treatments under our belts.

A big key is to pool together and share this info. I think like
anything else this is going to take some time with all the views and
all the different protocols and how sensitive yet compassionate those
out there believe in what they are doing. Again I will say it is up
to us parents to become more proactive in the process as well. This
is an exiting time but only as more reports are in we can determine
where we go from here. All I can say to this group is stop firing
bullets all you guys and get with the program… lets help these kids
and many others get well.

At this point I would like to share a quote
As always my best
Kenny V


Quote:
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy (HBOT) is fast becoming one of the more
successful therapies for children with Autism. Autism is a
neurological injury whether caused by toxicity, birth injury or
unknown. Some amazing results are being obtained, especially with
young children. It is time to begin discussing this option and
learning from other parents who have tried it
End Quote:
Always Hope For Recovery

rlneub
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Postby rlneub » Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:51 am

From another board - Dr. Rossignol's replay about capillary growth and mHBOT/HBOT

Forgive me for the length of this post, but I felt compelled
to write this, given some of the recent posts on this board. A lot
of information comes up on this board stating that 1.5 atm causes
angiogenesis, or growth of new blood vessels, but that 1.3 atm does
not. However, Dr. Efrain Olszewer from South America had data
demonstrating that 1.2 atm causes angiogenesis. He had used this
pressure for peripheral atherosclerosis (claudication) and has found
growth of new arteries by using pre- and post-angiogram. Certainly,
autism is characterized by cerebral hypoperfusion (decreased blood
flow) and angiogenesis probably is one way that HBOT helps autism,
but this may not even be the primary way. The amount of cerebral
hypoperfusion in autistics compared to controls is about 8%, so a
small increase in oxygen delivery may be all that is needed to
overcome this.

Other possible mechanisms include:

1. In several recent studies, autism has been shown to be
characterized by neuroinflammation and gastrointestinal
inflammation. There are multiple studies demonstrating the
beneficial effect of HBOT in inflammation. Children with autism
have high levels of cytokines which HBOT has been shown to
decrease. Furthermore, one study in particular demonstrates that
the anti-inflammatory effect from HBOT appears to be due to the
pressure effect and not the oxygen effect (I have these references
if you want).

2. Autism is characterized by multiple problems in the immune
system, and HBOT has been shown to have beneficial effects on the
same type of problems (again, to keep this brief I am leaving out
references, but can give them upon request).

3. Several recent studies have shown abnormalities in producing and
using serotonin properly in the autistic brain. In some new
studies, HBOT has been shown to work like an anti-depressant and can
increase serotonin levels in the brain.

4. A recent study has shown that children with autism have impaired
production of porphyrin, which is necessary to make the heme in
hemoglobin that carries oxygen. This may impair the delivery of
oxygen in autism, and obviously HBOT will help.

5. HBOT recently has been shown to increase the mobilization of
stem cells from bone marrow. Other studies have shown that these
stem cells can cross into the CNS and form new brain cells. Also,
areas in the brain can make stems cells. I think this is a very
exciting finding!

6. Children with autism have increased oxidative stress and HBOT
(especially under 2.0 atm) can decrease oxidative stress through up-
regulation of antioxidant enzymes and increased antioxidant
production.

7. A good number of children with autism have overgrowth of
abnormal bacteria in their gut and several studies show that
treatment of this bacteria with antibiotics leads to improvements of
autistic symptoms. HBOT has been shown to decrease the amount of
abnormal bacteria in the gut. HBOT can also kill viruses as evident
by studies showing decreased HIV viral loads with HBOT. As you
know, viruses are one of the problems that children with autism can
have difficulty with, mainly caused by the immune dysfunction listed
above.

8. Multiple studies are beginning to reveal mitochondrial
dysfunction in autism. I am beginning to think that this may be the
major mechanism of action of HBOT in autism. Certainly, different
children may have different levels of dysfunction, which may explain
why different children respond clinically to different pressures.
HBOT increases the amount of work mitochondria can do (mitochondria
are the energy producing areas of the body) and also recently has
been shown to increase the production of mitochondria.

In my clinical experience, we have seen good results in
about 80% of children with treatment at 1.3 atm/24% oxygen. A
similar experience has been found with several other physicians
treating autistic children. However, some children do need higher
pressure. I think it is reasonable to start at 1.3 atm if that is
what someone can do/chooses, and then move up to a higher pressure
if results are not seen. It is also reasonable to start at 1.5 atm
if that is what someone can do/chooses. However to say that "you
are cheating your child" if you give 1.3 atm instead of 1.5 atm is
an inconsiderate and unnecessary statement. We have just finished a
study on 18 children with autism in which we compared 1.5 atm/100%
with 1.3 atm/24% oxygen. I am in the process of submitting this for
publication. The outcomes in the two groups were fairly similar,
however, since the numbers were small, more studies need to be done.

Respectively,

Dan Rossignol, M.D.

LauraP
Posts: 333
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 3:44 pm

Postby LauraP » Tue Aug 01, 2006 1:27 pm

I would very much like to see those references. I would appreciate it if you could e-mail them to

lprecedo@broward.edu

Thanks.
Laura, Ian's mom

Do'C
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:25 am

Postby Do'C » Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:37 pm

Laura,

Relative to pressure alone, the reference study for pressure alone is the 2002 Undersea Hyp. Med. referenced above (I confirmed this via e-mail with Dr. Rossignol). This study was at 2.0 ATA of 5 healthy patients and apparently did not demonstrate, rather it suggested as a possibility that pressure alone may be involved with anti-inlammatory effect. Read the second study for more on that - it's a free full text.

To my knowledge there is no science that demonstrates any such hypothetical effect on inflammation of pressure alone at +.29 ATM above ambient.

Dr. Rossignol said: "The amount of cerebral hypoperfusion in autistics compared to controls is about 8%, so a small increase in oxygen delivery may be all that is needed to overcome this."

This is exactly my point. Identical oxygen partial pressure delivery to 1.29 ATA with 24% O2, can be achieved easily and inexpensively without a hyperbaric chamber.

If there is some known or demonstrable effect of atmospheric pressure alone at pressures as low as .29 ATM above ambient, then hyperbarics with this setup would make sense.


Kenny,

"Because Hyperbaric oxygen therapy is relatively new as it related to ASD we may not have all the answers Yet and because hard Hbot may have some studies that back them up, that does not make Mild hbot 1.3 ATA any less effective does it?"

Lack of studies absolutely does not influence any potential actual efficacy of mild hbot at 1.29 ATA 24% O2. But asserting it's effectiveness doesn't influence it's actual efficacy either.

"Let me ask one simple question that may bring some stuff to the table. Don’t we have spec scans that clearly show the effectiveness of mild Hyperbaric showing increased blood flow? Does this qualify at all to the science behind the argument?"

The SPECT scans qualify as case study and testimonial. That's probably good enough for many parents, but there are some parents who might wonder if it's possible that proponents of mild HBOT at 1.29 ATA and 24% O2 would be showing and posting ones that tend to support those claims.

I think the SPECT scans are certainly interesting. I also think parents 'should be' saying give us the science, not just the "sciencey". Good double-blind randomized controlled trials that show how many patients exhibit the same blood flow change properties and clinical outcomes as a few case studies or testimonials should answer that question pretty quickly.

Even if benefits are shown, if those benefits are due entirely to the slight increase in oxygen, there may be far less expensive ways to achieve that small O2 increase than mild HBOT at 1.29 ATA 24% O2. There isn't much published peer-reviewed science supporting effects of pressure alone at such low pressures.

Admittedly, I'm about as skeptical as they get. That doesn't mean that mild HBOT at 1.29 ATA 24% oxygen can't have benefit for autism, it might. Good double-blind randomized controlled trials will shed more light on the subject in the future.

I also acknowledge that at that pressure and oxygen, it is probably likely to be quite safe, otherwise it would not be allowed for sale to the salons/day spa/health spa industry.

http://www.interstatedesignind.com/hype ... erapy.html
Last edited by Do'C on Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

bizymom
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2005 9:54 pm

Postby bizymom » Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:46 pm

Thought some of you on this thread might be interested in our most recent hbot experiences.

My 5 y.o. has been been doing mild hbot on and off for a few weeks now. We recently (past 2 wks) started doubling up on dives (2 back to back instead of 1 daily) and try to miss a day only when absolutely necessary. Here is what we are seeing:

- after the initial doubling up on the sessions, he came down w/a virus that included lethargy and vomiting. It lasted about 48 hrs. Can't say for sure if this was hbot related.

- his motor skills have largely improved over the course of these 2 weeks. Specifically, he is much better at dressing and undressing himself, removing shoes, scribbling, feeding himself w/utensils, brushing his teeth, pushing the grocery cart, pushing his brothers stroller, helping me put groceries in cart, riding his bike, etc. He is starting to show some interest in potty training.

Previously, he would resist these types of activities and often his hands, body, whatever would go limp. Sometime he would walk or run away. It was like he knew he had a hard time w/these activities so he avoided them. Now, he looks for opportunities to do these things and often does not want help.

We also have been using the mask consistently, whereas before, it was hit or miss depending on if he would tolerate it. Now we simply go in a few mins before bedtime, he falls asleep, and I put the mask on him.

Also, he enjoys going in now and snuggles right up to me, whereas before it was a struggle to get him in.

Some benefits we saw previous to these two weeks but since starting hbot include him being more relaxed and actually being able to sit and watch some of a baseball game w/his Dad on TV. Before, he was just in constant motion all of the time.

We've seen cognitive improvements also in terms of identifying numbers, letters, animals, etc, especially in a school or therapy setting, but because these improvements have evolved over the course of several weeks and we are involved in other interventions (chelation, etc.), I can't attribute them solely to hbot.

My opinion at this point is increasing the duration and frequency of the dives along w/using the mask have really helped our son.

Just thought I would share. I will continue to post as we see (or don't see) things occur.

Dana R.

Kenny V
Posts: 1282
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 10:22 am

Postby Kenny V » Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:00 pm

That’s great Guys
Figured I would post an update now because I had mentioned it in the past and dint do so.
Also figured it would be acceptable.
Sorry it’s a little longish but was clipped from two different posts


For those of you who don’t know, my son is now 8 years old and we have been doing biomedical intervention for 5 years. Everything less antiviral (next step), From maintain diets, full supplement regimen to chelation. We have chelated 70 rounds but stopped prior to mHbot and plan to continue in the next week or so. Here is an update that I had posted from on another biomedical board. Figured I would post here for those who are doing or seeking to do treatments.
It would be nice to hear from other parents and get updates, weather it be Hard Hbot at 1.5 ATA or mild mHbot 1.3 ATA.
It would be encouraging to hear from parents alike who are doing mild treatment. Cause to be honest with you the jury is still out on this one. Allot of healing is taking place across the board and this info should be shared as well. I hope this is encouraging to all and may give way for others to share as well.
We are all on this journey together.

Thanks
Kenny V.


Listmates I plan on doing a better update soon maybe Kim may want to chime in.
But for now for those of you who wrote. I wanted to post a quick update for all to view.
I dunno if you know but we stopped our Mb12’s and chelation to see what Hbot does.
Btw can’t wait to bring these back...

As far as what we have seen
He has definitely gained in expressive language, lots of new spontaneous things, more interested in engaging socially his eye contact has definitely stuck more......
(I can say with excitement this is gold to me) it’s like he is looking at you all the time and no longer looks through you or need to get his attention /prompted etc…
And their is a definitely stuff happening (subtle changes across the board) kinda not sure but you know something is their.
Sorta like a maturity /snapping out of it thing. Im sorry it’s hard to explain, but I think you all understand when you are on the cusp of obtaining new milestones.

What I do believe is there seems to like a greater depth to his all around well being.
Do you know what I mean?
ohh!! Couple of neat things lately like saying stuff/-asking things he never has before in greater detail. He also seems to be more independent and a “ wise guy” in a good way. He is challenging adults making his own decisions and making it clear that he gets to express his own opinions.
. He definitely has more sense of humor and I think he is almost ready to lie!! ... lol..
I can’t wait and hope thats true. Some of these changes are so subtle ya just can’t tell some times. It not as drastic as what we seen when we chelated or when we started Mb12’s with the explosions and all the ‘wows”
New things: in the last few weeks are his depths of language in asking Q’s …. Not allot but on a few occasions he has surprised us by his responses. Edit no!! (Lots of surprises lately) He seems to be more interested with social engagement outside brother sister family / strangers etc…Very opinionated and more independent. Lots of abstract thinking I must say that he is including details in his interaction that we haven’t seen before. I really believe that there is more depth to it.
I know it might not seem like much, but 2 or 3 things we have noticed lately is Joel wanting us to watch him as he puts on shows (puppets) / dance/ play. Sometimes demanding for attention. The neat thing is it is not all that scripted allot of it is definite imagination and spontaneous interaction. We even ask him and he says “its not from a book “, Not from a movie a or video, “ I made it up” I have to keep asking my wife and my other children because I cant tell anymore, what is scripted. He definitely has allot more to say lately…
Will see where we go from here…I am exited

Thanks Fur listening
Kenny v

Btw
Been doing mHbot, Joel completed 33 dives we have 10 to go.
We are doing Mild Hbot (mHbot) 1.3 ATA with concentrator and mask.
Looks like we will be finished with the forty dives 2nd week in July and upon my last visit I will be bringing home a chamber.
I am excited to where God may lead us in helping other people and be part of what he is already doing

Thanks Again
May God “Bless “ you all


Since that update we have only done about 10 dives at home, we have allot of things going right now and just getting back into chelation. In the next few weeks we will be concentrating on doing dives more consistent and will update soon.
Again Sorry so long
Kenny v
Always Hope For Recovery

Do'C
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:25 am

Postby Do'C » Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:52 am

Hi Dr. or R Neubrander,

I completely understand if you don't want to respond to my original question about equivalent oxygenation being achievable with simple oxygen therapy to the 1.29 ATA 24% FIO2 setup. It may not even be something you do, and Dr. Rossignol was kind enough to respond to me personally offline (albeit, not with anything supportive of pressure alone at .29 ATA above ambient).

However, I was interested in one of your statements.

"With that being said, please note that when physicians, more specifically me, are put into categories and classifications because they belong to a certain group, e.g. DAN which is stated by some in a demeaning manner, that such physicians do not know oxygen and gas laws and principles, is a cheap shot that I would expect to see in political races and not in forums dedicated to helping parents make wise choices."

Fair enough, but as colleagues, couldn't you encourage some of them to be more accurate?

As an example, A Florida Clinic (Dr. R and Dr. B? re: HBOT) website states:

"The oxygen level in the patient's blood-stream is raised many times above normal".

You and I both know that this is simply not true. The oxygen level in the patient's blood plasma can be raised many times, but a significant increase in total blood oxygen content to be able to use "many times above normal" in reference to "the blood-stream" requires pressures that are simply not safe, or practically unattainble. Blood-stream includes hemoglobin.

"Under normal circumstances, oxygen is transported throughout the body only by red blood cells."

Simply untrue. Plasma transports some oxygen. If they're suggesting that the .30 ml/dl O2 is insignificant, then the approximately .35 ml/dl O2 added by 24% O2 at 1.29 ATA might as well be insignificant too.

I certainly don't expect you to take responsibility or action for the ICDRC website content, and won't put you in that category, but couldn't it be beneficial for you to encourage accuracy on their part?
Do'C is a nickname, not a physician.

Do'C
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 2:25 am

Rick?

Postby Do'C » Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:57 am

Any chance for a response from Dr. N to any of my unanwered questions in this post?

Encouraging accuracy among colleagues questions.

Science questions:

So yes,"please give us the science". Is there any science you can point readers to, that supports the hypothesis that pressure alone at ~0.29 ATM above ambient provides any benefit via suppression of inflammatory cytokines in children on the autistim spectrum shown to have neuroinflammation and GI inflammation?

Otherwise, if the known benefits of hyperbaric enriched air therapy at FIO2 <30% and ~1.29 ATA are confined to increased oxygen tension, it would seem that simple O2 therapy could be more appropriate (outside of clinical research of course), especially financially.
Do'C is a nickname, not a physician.

rlneub
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 6:37 pm

Postby rlneub » Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:41 am

Do'C

Answering you just ends up in a blog dedicated to not treating autism, thus I prefer to avoid giving you information which is twisted for you, Kevin & Diva's purposes. I know if I answer, I am picked apart. I know If I don't answer, I am running scared. I know if I ignore you, then I do not have th courage to answer. So have at it!

Dr. Rossignol has a couple of studies that are in the process of being accepted for publication. When they come out, I am sure you will be more than delighted to find all the holes to show how this study does not measure up to your expectations.

Our clinic and several others are participating in a double blind study on mHBOT and when completed you can tear that up as well.

From reading your blog, the only good science is that which supports your view on autism. Any other science is BAD science and surely any parents testimonies are from the deception/brainwashing the the DAN docs foist upon those desparete parents.

Rick Neubrander


Return to “Diet and Biomedical Treatments for Autism”