Sunday, March 8, 2015

Genetics and sick children

Are today's children sicker than those of 30 years ago?
   To me, there is little doubt that the answer is yes.  Take a look at the obesity rates, diabetes and the increased rate of autism.  You should see some of the stuff that I read on my Facebook support groups posted by mothers of children under the age of 8. It will break your heart and I just don't think it was nearly so common when I was a child in the early-mid 1980s. I'll share 2 examples:
1.  A child complained of terrible leg pains and when the pediatrician could not find anything wrong, he/she suggested that the child was faking to get attention.  WHAT THE _____???
2. An autistic 4 year old child reacted with extreme emotion minutes after taking a mineral supplement.  The poor mother could not ask what was wrong because the child is completely non-verbal.
   What is their prognosis?  Will they be disabled for life?  Seeing sick children is the one thing that really makes my heart ache and tests my faith in God.  I just can't believe it's His plan for those kids to be disabled for life.  I still believe that although you may not be cured, you can improve with proper care and treatment.

Austism and vaccines:
This has generated a lot of controversy in recent years.  I am sure that I am not autistic so I may not be qualified to comment but here are my thoughts.  Back in the '80s, children only received about 10 vaccines and the odds of having a child diagnosed with autism were between 1/5,000-10,000.  Now, children receive more than 40 vaccines and the odds are now 1/88 or even 1/68 depending on the source.  It is known that vaccines are laced with toxic metals such as mercury and aluminum and contain many other disturbing ingredients.  That's a correlation too great to ignore though it does not necessarily mean causation.  My personal opinion is that vaccines are one of several factors responsible for the increase.  Congenital vulnerability, poor gut health and other environmental factors play a role.  For the sake of argument, let's say that vaccines are solely responsible.  If that's so, why is it that 98-99% of vaccinated children manage to escape autism but 1-2% succumb?  Genetics is the likely reason.  Some parents have reported a nearly immediate injury following the vaccinations and I saw a heart breaking documentary in which 2 healthy children became severely disabled hours after the shots.  More often however, it is a slow decline.  Some have argued that autism rates are not really increasing but rather, it is simply caught more often nowadays.  I don't buy that.  That means that 1-2% of adults are living with autism and don't know it.  I don't think so.

My personal view is that yes, some vaccines do prevent disease but the number of required shots should be reduced and spread out over a number of years rather than taken several at once.  Children should be screened for genetic risk factors and mutations before vaccination and yes, risky cases should be given the choice to opt out.  Autistic children often see very low tissue zinc along with a low Zn/Cu ratio with very high levels of toxic metals.  If any parents of children with autism are reading this, Google Amy Yasko and check out her protocol for recovery.  Hair testing may also be useful as well.

Let's shift gears to the importance of genetics as a whole.
I am about 99% sure that I have multiple serious mutations.  I believe that the cause is a combination of a congenital weakness or abnormality and other environmental factors such as prescription drug use, exposure to other toxins or an unknown food intolerance.  The big question is how well will I respond to treatment.  I will also have to ask how I was able to do so well for so long in spite of the mutations.  I believe that answer has to do with energy pathways.  When one is blocked, your system will look for another.  It won't be as efficient as the preferred pathway but it will get the job done.  That likely explains sudden collapses.  When a person suffers an energy crash, it is likely that they have been badly unbalanced for years but remain asymptomatic until the last good pathway is blocked.

"If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything."
How I wish that were true but unfortunately, genetic limitations come into play.  I had an English teacher in high school who honestly believed that anyone could be an "A" student if they wanted to.  That's naive and best and potentially hurtful at worst.  Yes, I worked hard in school but without above average intelligence, my achievements simply would not be possible.  When it comes to running, yes I believe that most HEALTHY people can FINISH a marathon with several years of training.  However, if you want to break 4 hours, a decent amount of talent is required.  Very few people could run a sub-3 no matter how hard they train.

More about congenital weaknesses:
The acne drug Accutane has been linked to numerous serious side effects.  I was among the 10-15% that had a serious negative reaction.  So why is it that 85-90% get through the treatment with little more than some dry skin?  By now, you should know the answer.

For every soldier that comes home with severe PTSD, there are at least 10 from the same unit that do not.  The one that was severely affected by the horrors of war is not necessarily "weaker" or "softer" but rather their chemistry is such that intense stress cannot be tolerated.  I believe that a genetic weakness is at least partly to blame.

Examples of strength:
Most people who eat the diet and volume of food that I do will be overweight with high cholesterol even if they did run.  I am still "paper healthy" with an ideal BMI along with good numbers in cholesterol, blood sugar and blood pressure.  Also, underneath the chemical imbalances and genetic mutations, I have a strong capacity for work at fast paces and can recover quickly from hard workouts.   Roger Bannister trained at only 30 MPW (ALL HARD) in his quest for a sub-4 Mile and managed a 3:58 on a dirt track.  That translates to at least 3:54 on a modern track with better gear.  How much better could he have done with "proper" training and more LSD?  IMO, not a whole lot.  He trained best for his genetics and chemistry and I expect that my report will show the same strength but obviously not at the same level.

Now, what about the people who can train at 80 MPW while working a demanding job amid emotional trauma yet remain on top of their game?   That is something that I have no desire to do and along with most people, would break down if I ever attempted such a stressful regimen.  This may not be a popular comment but here it is. The people who are able to live such a lifestyle are indeed very driven and admirable but may not be necessarily "tougher" or "stronger" than others, at least in terms of how the world defines those terms.  Rather, they have a favorable genetic makeup and a chemistry that is such that high stress can be tolerated.

No comments: