Back On Track Members

Sensitivities and Intolerances

We have learned a lot about working with the whole range of developmental problems (from ADHD, LD, APD, GDD, & FTT to ASD). When we can reduce the environmental factors to which the child is reacting, the normal developmental process re-engages and attempts to proceed normally. As long as you continue to control those factors to which your child reacts, the developmental process continues to advance.

Having the suspect genetic markers seems to mean a susceptibility (an extra level of sensitivity or intolerance) with respect to factors in the environment. As far as I can tell, there is no genetic marker about sensitivity to wheat or gluten or mercury or whatever. Those genetic markers simply indicate more sensitivity to something.

Recent research is showing us that having a certain genetic marker does not define how our body manifests that marker. Responses to environmental factors seems to determine how that particular gene manifests. So, different people with the same genetic marker can manifest differently based on the environmental factors to which the person has contact.

All of us are sensitive to certain things in our environment. Thirty years ago, I discovered that I reacted badly to deodorant ‘soap’ and I would get a rash if I used any of them. So, I stopped using them and the rashes stopped. Some of us are more susceptible to insect bites or stings than others. We all have things to which we are sensitive. Maybe with more research we will learn more about the ranges of sensitivity.

For me, the important thing is to focus on that sensitivity and not on the object of that sensitivity. It would not be a useful discussion for me to blame deodorant ‘soap’ for all the rashes in the world. It is simply practical that if I react to this kind of soap, I need to stay away from it. I think that is practical advice for everyone.

The same goes for certain materials. For instance, in his old age, my father-in-law became sensitive to plastics and rubber. So, whenever he received medical attention, we had to make sure he was not touched by medical staff with latex or rubber gloves or he would break out in a rash. We had to make sure the blanket and clothes he used was cotton or he would get a rash.

But, our reactions to environmental factors are not limited to rashes. We can react emotionally, behaviorally, mentally, and in our natural processes (such as the developmental process itself).

I certainly don’t know the mechanism by which each body decides to react (or not) to a specific environmental factor. I’m convinced that it will not be detected in a petri dish. For me, the direction we need to be looking in our research is not about mercury or wheat (for instance), it is about the mechanisms our bodies use to identify to which factor we are going to be sensitive. I suspect these target factors are not hard-wired for us.

In my experience, when we identify the factors to which a child is reacting and we remove those factors from the child’s environment, the child starts having an immediate burst of new developmental tasks being accomplished. In these cases, there is clear evidence that the child’s developmental process gets unstuck and starts progressing.

This is most clear for children diagnosed with Failure To Thrive (FTT). We have often worked with 3, 4, and 5 year-old children who have not yet started to walk. Some FTT children are still infants who cannot yet hold up their heads. Others have progressed in some areas, but scoot around on the floor without trying to stand or walk.

“Scooters” are usually quite dramatic in their response to getting their environment ‘cleaned up.’ They are usually up and walking within a few days. So, it is clear to us that after years of no improvement from modern medical interventions, that determining the child’s menu of sensitivities and isolating the child from those factors to which the child is sensitive is the key to getting the developmental process back on track. Ongoing work with these children shows that they catch-up in other areas of their development in addition to these gross motor improvements.

Also, when these children encounter new environmental factors to which they are sensitive (but not discovered in their initial assessment) they can quickly regress back to scooting instead of walking. But when we identify the new ‘offending’ environmental factor and eliminate it, the child is back on track again within a day or so.

GFCF and Fiengold approaches are on the right track, but (in my opinion) are using the wrong tools to accomplish the task of cleaning the child’s environment. We have seen cases where children were reacting to some of the things on the approved diet, so the program did not work for them. Each child has a unique menu of things to which the child reacts. The best approach to achieve a good result from trying to clean the child’s environment is an individual assessment to determine each child’s menu of environmental factors to which the child reacts.

I suspect that new advances in understanding problems in the developmental process may be focused around these sensitivities. But, the key to those advances will be testing to determine what the child is sensitive to (reacting to) and cleaning those things from the child’s environment. This is the starting place for the Get My Child Back On Track™ program.