Getting Closer to the Causal Path of Autism

By early 2009, the Life Sciences group of The Center was able to assemble their findings into an

explicit, replicable model to explain the corollary, homeostatic relationship between the substances

in the body. Grounded on a solid foundation of the laws of physics and chemistry, the Life

Sciences group overlaid the model with numerous scientific studies. The results were amazing!

The group then used the model to identify specific causal paths for certain illnesses and disease

that result from disruptions in pairs of bodily substances. It became apparent that the model could

provide the tools medical research scientists need to find the root causes of many chronic diseases.

De-mystifying Autism

After unraveling the complexities of neurohormone disruptions associated with several

neurodevelopmental diseases, and encouraged by Dr. Miller and several of The Center’s advisors,

the Life Sciences group took on the challenge of researching the causes of autism.

© 2009 – The Center For Modeling Optimal Outcomes® LLC

Clues from renowned retired neurosurgeon and neuroscientist Russell Blaylock, M.D. regarding

the “excitotoxic” nature of two amino acid neurotransmitters (aspartate and glutamate) prompted

the group to look closely at these substances. Articles by neuroscientist Dr. Martha Herbert of

Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston regarding the possibility that autism was a disorder of

the body and not merely the mind offered another important clue.

In addition to analyzing hundreds of scientific studies regarding autism and all the disorders

encompassed within Autism Spectrum Disorder, McFaul and his team revisited the work of Dr.

Andrew Wakefield, the gastroenterologist from the UK at the center of controversy regarding

MMR vaccines.

Applying The Center’s model for homeostasis of the body’s substances uncovered a few startling

facts. First, several imbalances/disruptions in bodily processes appeared to be variables that

contribute to autism. It became obvious that these variables have to occur concurrently for a

“perfect storm” to cause the disorder. Simply, there was no one cause behind autism. Second, if

excitotoxins exist, there must also be the opposite – “inhibitotoxins.” Third, many of the studies

Blaylock referred to in his 1997 book, Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills (Health Press NA) and

many of his subsequent articles identified glutamate as a substance associated with taste and flavor

enhancement. This information lead the Life Sciences group to consider the possibility that

glutamate’s role in flavor and taste enhancement was attributed to cellular absorption.

Considerable confusion exists within different scientific disciplines with regard to the processes

used by various types of cells to “uptake” substances. Most frequently, studies refer to a process

whereby substances bind to a cell, a channel forms and it enables the substance to enter. When the

substance is needed, a “port” forms and the substance is expelled for use. During research into the

dynamics of cellular activity along with input and guidance from the group’s biology advisor, it

became apparent that various mechanisms are used by cells to receive substances. They include but

are not limited to osmosis, diffusion, phagocytosis, pinocytosis, pumps and conventional

absorption.

The issue of cellular absorption had been one of interest to The Center as part of its investigation

into the application of neuroscience in business. In lay terms, scientific literature supports the fact

that certain cells in the brain emit signals that are received by other cells; a process critical to the

formation of memory and the analysis of factors in order to make decisions. Logic dictated that

these signals emitted by cells could not be binding to other cells waiting for a channel to form that

would enable “uptake.” It was at that point in their investigation that several “dots” were

connected; i.e. the receiving cells essential for logic and memory had to be involved in a process of

absorption. Furthermore, because the firing rate of the signals would be variable during times of

stress, anger, deep thought, etc. the rate of absorption by those cells would also vary. If cellular

absorption was variable, what substances were responsible for determining this rate? Dr.

Blaylock’s work and the studies referenced in the scientific literature supported the possibility that

glutamate was involved with cellular absorption.

The Center’s Life Sciences group was faced with a major challenge – overcoming the beliefs of

nearly the entire scientific community regarding cellular absorption.

When the group identified glycine and glutamate as a homeostatic pair, things began to fall into

place. The scientific community had already identified glycine as being an inhibitory amino acid

© 2009 – The Center For Modeling Optimal Outcomes® LLC

neurotransmitter. Because medical science has been able to only identify the existence of four

amino acid neurotransmitters, aligning them into functional roles was a relatively easy task.

The Center’s research staff identified the class of G-Protein Coupled Receptors as being at least

one major class of cells for which the conventional “binding” process seemed impossible because

the substances associated with them would necessitate an instantaneous mechanism. Furthermore,

the fact that transdermal patches and medication such as nitroglycerine placed under one’s tongue

work so well provided further support for the hypothesis that some cells use absorption. Finally,

the knowledge that variable signal firing rates and variable absorption rates were essential to

maintain homeostasis (balance), all of the pieces of information were falling into place as being a

biological necessity.

Based on the use of its model, when glutamate and glycine were identified as a pair that functioned

to control the rate of cellular absorption, the group still had a few challenges; i.e. prove that some

classes of cells absorb and find out what impact an excessive level of glycine might have on cells.

Finding the Culprit

Based on Wakefield’s hypothesis involving the MMR vaccine as a possible factor in the cause of

today’s iteration of autism (but not all of the disorders with ASD), McFaul decided to look

carefully at the MMR vaccine as well as others. The results were beyond his expectations.

Since 1979 the MMR vaccine has contained hydrolyzed gelatin as a stabilizer. This fact may seem

unrelated to the problem of autism unless the process of hydrolyzation is understood (i.e.

concentration) and the fact that gelatin is a substance high in levels of glycine (approximately

21%).

Is the addition of gelatin to the MMR vaccine in 1979 (US patent 4,147,722 of April 3, 1979)

merely coincidental with the increase in the rate of autism soon thereafter? Has the addition of

hydrolyzed gelatin to some chicken pox vaccines compounded the problem?

The challenges for the medical research community are now clear! Do certain classes of cells

absorb substances? If so, the entire science of toxicology will change. If the homeostasis of

certain classes of cells associated with bodily functions are disrupted, could the outcome be

autism; i.e. the inability of some cells to absorb the critical substances necessary for the brain and

body to function normally? Can a substantial imbalance between glutamate – gelatin/glycine cause

autism by slowing or stopping the ability of certain cells to absorb substances in the brain and

elsewhere in the body?

According to William McFaul, The Center’s founder, “We are not opposed to vaccines. Science

has irrefutably proven their value. We are merely asking the medical research community to

evaluate our model for homeostasis in order to ensure the ingredients in vaccines are not disrupting

the body’s processes. We are also seeking cancer research centers willing to spend the time to

allow us to explain how the model for assessing homeostasis between substances will enable their

scientists to identify causal paths for numerous forms of cancer.”

For more information about The Center, visit their website

Life Sciences spokesperson Linda Oliver-Perrier at

www.TheCenterNJ.com or contact theirloliverperrier@TheCenterNJ.com.