The makers of antipsychotic drugs Risperdal and Invega are facing a series of lawsuits after boys taking the drugs grew breasts as large as ‘D’ cups.

The patients who were prescribed the antipsychotics for conditions ranging from attention deficit disorder to Tourette syndrome and disruptive behavior, experienced quick weight gain and breast growth to the tune of a size 38D, in some cases, the lawsuits say.

Because of the weight gain, the boys’ lawyer says their doctors may have overlooked the seriousness of the breast growth. Now many of the boys will require surgical breast removal.

The lawsuits accuse the manufacturers of Risperdal and Invega of negligence and fraud and say that the companies did too little to make people aware of the drugs’ potential side effects.

Risperdal is approved by the Food and Drug Administration to treat autism in addition to schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Invega, a similar drug, is approved for the treatment of schizophrenia…
To read more click here.

Risperdal is also indicated in rapid weight gain and the development of diabetes. For more detailed information, see A Word of Caution About the Use of Risperidone.

“In 1998, Andrew Wakefield, a gastroenterologist at London’s Royal Free Hospital, published a study in the prestigious medical journal Lancet that linked the triple Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine with autism and bowel disorders in children. The study — and Wakefield’s subsequent public statements that parents should refuse the vaccines — sparked a public health panic that led vaccination rates in Britain to plunge.

Wakefield’s study has since been discredited, and the MMR vaccine deemed to be safe. But now medical authorities in the U.K. have also ruled that the manner in which Wakefield carried out his research was unethical. In a ruling on Jan. 28, The General Medical Council, which registers and regulates doctors in the U.K., ruled that Wakefield acted “dishonestly and irresponsibly” during his research and with “callous disregard” for the children involved in his study.”

…

“The panel also criticized Wakefield for failing to disclose that, while carrying out the research, he was being paid by lawyers acting for parents who believed their children had been harmed by the MMR jab.

The panel’s ruling follows a refutation of Wakefield’s research from the scientific community. Ten of 13 authors in the Lancet study have since renounced the study’s conclusions. The Lancet has said it should not have published the study in the first place, and various other studies have failed to corroborate Wakefield’s hypothesis.”

Dubai Healthcare City
Al Razi Bldg, Block “A”, Suite 2005
Dubai, UAE

View Larger Map

Working hours: 8:30 am to 6:00 pm
Home-based therapy available from 8:30 am to 6:30 pm
Established in the United States since 2001, operating in the UAE since January, 2007

Services Offered:

• Psychological Testing and Services (including diagnostic testing)
• ABA treatment/Discrete Trial Therapy
• School Shadowing
• Inclusion/Mainstream School Support Services
• Floortime
• TEACHH
• Social Skills Training
• Social Skills/Play Groups
• Speech Therapy and Assessment
• Occupational Therapy & Assessment
• Parent Training Workshops
• Professional Training Workshops
• Parent Support and Education Groups
• Professional Support Groups

How should parents contact Stepping Stones if they are seeking your services in regards to a child suspected of autism or other ASD disorder? What is the recommended process?

They should contact our office at 04-363-5433 and ask to speak with someone regarding services (Operations Manager, Clinical Assistant and/or Clinical Director-at least one of these individuals can be available). Then such individuals go over services offered and schedule an initial consultation process.

This is a free consultation once it takes place. Once this process is scheduled, clinical staff meet with parent to review entire services, discuss research that supports the field, discuss how Stepping Stones provides clinically qualified staff and discusses staff training process as well as history of Stepping Stones and the number of years we’ve been in the field.

Furthermore they answer questions the parents may have and then recommend an assessment to begin this process Comprehensive assessment includes: Psych Assessment, Behavioral Assessment, Speech Assessment and Occupational Therapy assessment. Once the assessment is scheduled and completed, the family meets with the clinicians/evaluators and reviews the detailed assessment report and goals and objectives then makes treatment recommendations based on assessment outcomes. At this time services are ready to commence.

How should parents contact you if they are seeking services for a child who has already been diagnosed with autism? What treatment options do you offer?

The process noted above would be completed, however the Psychological portion of the assessment may not be necessary if the diagnosis has already been given and provided it’s given from a reliable source where actual testing measures were used to assess the client. Then treatment services would be ready to commence of which can be a combination of all services noted in question #5.

I hope this information has been useful. Please also note that the Clinical Director and founder (myself) of all 5 branches (US & Dubai) is based in Dubai and possesses over 18 years of experience in the field of autism and is a Clinical Psychologist that is also Board Certified Behavior Analyst trained. Therefore, she is able to offer her expertise in Dubai on an ongoing basis. We provide services to over 400 families and have over 200 staff worldwide offer quality services to the Autism population and such staff are extensively trained in ABA and receive certification prior to working with clients and in addition they are educationally qualified (bachelor’s and master’s level staff).

Information provided by:

Vivian David-Nicolas, PsyD
Clinical Director
Stepping Stones Center for Autistic Spectrum Disorders, Inc.

Article Reprinted from the National Austistic Society, UK. Original source here.

This web page has been written to provide information on a particular intervention/approach and any research connected with it, not as a recommendation. The outcome of any approach will depend on the needs of the individual, which vary greatly, and the appropriate application of the intervention. An intervention that may help one individual may not be effective for another. It would therefore not be appropriate for the NAS to recommend any one particular practice or therapy.

This web page has been written to provide information on a particular intervention/approach and any research connected with it, not as a recommendation. The outcome of any approach will depend on the needs of the individual, which vary greatly, and the appropriate application of the intervention. An intervention that may help one individual may not be effective for another. It would therefore not be appropriate for the NAS to recommend any one particular practice or therapy.

What is Auditory Integration Training?

Dr Guy Bérard (now retired) was an ear, nose and throat specialist, in Annecy, France, who invented and developed an auditory training device. Dr Bérard began developing this in the early 1980s, when he learned that he himself was becoming deaf. He conceived of the idea of developing an electronic machine that would exercise the entire hearing apparatus – the ear drum, the small bones in the ear, the cochlear membrane, etc as a form of physical therapy, in a manner somewhat similar to that in which deteriorating joints and muscles can be rejuvenated by physical therapy and exercise. This technique was used with many of Dr Bérard’s patients, some of whom had autism, and many others with a variety of auditory difficulties. In relation to autism, Bérard thought that sound sensitivity and consequent behavioural disturbance could result from distortions in hearing. Dr Bérard states that “Auditory Integration Training cannot be called a cure for autism, but many (people) benefit greatly from the treatment.” (Bérard, 1997).

Bérard believed that AIT would bring about a re-education of the hearing process (Sinha et al, 2004). However Mudford and Cullen (2005) argue that Bérard’s justification for using AIT with autism was scientifically tenuous at best. They report that AIT sparked controversy within the communication sciences’ professional community. Critics argued that there was no scientific evidence for the type of hearing abnormalities in autism reported by Bérard. It is also considered that AIT is theoretically inconsistent with knowledge about structures and mechanisms of the ear (Mudford and Cullen, 2005).

The device consists of a machine containing a number of electronic elements, including a variety of auditory filters, which makes the sound emanating from the machine modifiable to be appropriate for the individual person, in accordance with their auditory sensitivities and deficiencies as determined by audiometric testing. The treatment comprises thirty-minute sessions twice a day for ten days. In use, the child/adult sits before the machine, wearing earphones, while specially selected music is played into the machine. The machine filters and amplifies the music as necessary and feeds the resulting modified music to each ear independently. The volume is set as loud as is possible without discomfort. However Audiokinetrons and other auditory integration devices are subject to U.S. import ban due to exceeding maximum allowable exposure to sound pressure levels specified by the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration. (Mudford and Cullen, 2005).

The late Dr Bernard Rimland (from the Autism Research Institute in America) was in touch with a number of parents of children with autism who had taken their children to be treated by Dr Bérard. The mother of one of these children has written a book about the experience. (Stehli, 1992).

Research into AIT

An initial pilot project conducted by Drs. Rimland and Edelson at Portland State University in 1990 offered some interesting results and so a second study was undertaken which examined several specific issues of the AIT procedure.

Another research project carried out at The Autism Research Institute in Sydney (Bettison 1996) indicated that although Auditory Training (AT) did lead to a significant improvement in sound sensitivity in general, a structured listening (SL) programme led to about the same amount of improvement. (The structured listening programme was a simplified version of the AT procedure, and omitted the input of the special equipment used in AT). Bettison stresses however, that her results do not prove that AT and SL were the actual cause of the childrens improvements, nor, if the interventions were beneficial, which aspects were having the beneficial effect. She concludes that both SL and AT appear to help in reducing sound sensitivity in many, but not all, children with autism who are sound sensitive.

Mudford and Cullen (2005), Romanczyk at al (2004), Sinha et al (2004), and Simpson et al (2005) provide overviews and critiques of research studies on AIT to date. Romanczyk et al (2004) report that studies have produced mixed results regarding the efficacy of AIT as an intervention for people with autism. In particular Simpson et al (2005) state “few studies have convincingly produced scientific evidence that AIT is indeed responsible for reported changes in behaviour and functioning.” (p. 186). Sinha et al (2004) conclude that there is no clear evidence yet for AITs effect.

Mudford and Cullen (2005), Romanczyk et al (2004), and Sinha et al (2004) raise concerns regarding limitations of research findings including flaws that they argue limit interpretation of the data, questions regarding clinical significance, lack of replicability, and small sample size. Romanczyk et al (2004) also cite reports of negative side effects which they argue raise ethical questions concerning the use of this procedure with people with autism. AIT is one of the more expensive treatment options for people with autism (Simpson et al, 2005). Furthermore as Simpson et al (2005) point out AIT uses equipment capable of producing sounds at decibels that may be harmful to a persons auditory system, and therefore it is important that the intervention only occur under the direction of a trained AIT specialist.

Romanczyk et al (2004) conclude that the nonstandardised and unregulated manner in which AIT is practised may place those seeking this treatment at risk. Romanczyk et al (2004) and Sinha et al (2004) call for methodological changes for future research to ensure validity and replicability. In particular it is argued that research concerning the efficacy of AIT should identify and evaluate target behaviours using direct observation and behaviour checklists (Simpson et al, 2005). Sinha et al (2004) conclude that more research is needed to inform decision making about this therapy for individuals with autism spectrum disorders. However Mudford and Cullen (2005) came to the conclusion that future research efforts might better be placed studying potential treatments other than AIT. They categorically state: “Finally, our unambiguous recommendation for families considering purchasing AIT: There is no good evidence that AIT will change behaviour beneficially. No independent studies have shown that AIT has positive effects on behaviour of children or adults with autism.” (Mudford and Cullen, 2005, p. 361). Romanczyk et al (2004) recommend that if efficacy is validated standardised delivery and practice for AIT should be executed.