Frequently Asked Questions

Looking back on my childhood, I could count on one hand the number of children in my elementary school who had some form of noticeable developmental delay (in a school of roughly 300 children). That amounts to about 1-2%. I attended elementary school in the 1990’s, which is when the cases of ADHD were on the rise. Fast-forward to the 2010’s, and my very first introduction to the autism spectrum was my experience as a classroom teacher. My initial classroom was nearly 70% children with some form of developmental delay. It didn’t take more than a few days – perhaps even a few hours – in that job for the thought to enter my mind (and take up permanent residence), “Folks, this ain’t normal!” I knew that what I was witnessing was not an epidemic of genetic origin, for my training as a scientist allowed me to easily reject such an absurd notion. But the autism epidemic, as some people have called it, became deeply personal when my own son was diagnosed at age 3. Prior to his diagnosis, I suspected that some of his apparent developmental delay might be related to autism, and I began looking into causes and possible treatments. At this time, he only had a handful of words (mostly echolalia), no inclination to potty train, lined up toys, poor eye contact, no desire to socialize or express affection, and failed to meet most basic motor milestones. Understanding that there was likely an autism diagnosis in his future, and accepting right away that autism can be reversed, I got to work right away on finding interventions of dietary, orthomolecular, and biomedical origin. If you have heard of a treatment, there is a high probability that I have either used it with my son or know of other parents using it with their children. It became apparent almost immediately that he was responding very positively to the interventions. To make a long story short, after about 2 years of such intervention, his ATEC (Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist) score dropped from 115 to 16. He currently has an ATEC of 3 and would not be seen as autistic by anyone besides the trained professional. Subjectively, he has neurotypical friends, is compassionate, social, he is attending school without an aide, he is affectionate, loving, empathetic, and possesses all the traits that a parent longs for in a child and that a person needs to develop intentional relationships in life. With the regrettable lockdowns our children experienced in the year 2020, I was hearing heartbreaking stories from parents of their children in social isolation and the feeling of being trapped caring for a special needs child without access to therapies or respite of any kind. This was such a torturous period for many parents and children. I decided to become certified as a health coach to work with these parents and help them and their children live a happier life. I am not fixing broken kids. I aim to fix their broken biochemistry which is trapping their true, complete selves within a body that won’t cooperate with their desires. When a child experiences the joy that comes with feeling better, thinking clearer, and accomplishing feats they have always struggled with, their parents experience that joy even more. Because the blessing in disguise is that our children are somewhat blind to the opportunities they are being denied, whereas the parent of that child is fully aware of those denied opportunities. I have hope for every child that I am privileged to work for that their life will be enriched with every new skill they acquire and with every pain that slowly diminishes – pain they have come to accept as just part of life.

Many children on the autism spectrum develop unique talents as a compensatory mechanism for understanding a world that is confusing to their senses. Another way to describe this phenomenon is that when parts of the brain are idling, it allows other parts of the brain to pick up the slack – sometimes to the point of becoming accelerated in development. Hollywood popularized this phenomenon in the movie “Rain Man” starring Dustin Hoffman as Raymond. The late, great Bernie Rimland (known by many as the “father of biomedical treatment of autism”) was a technical adviser for the movie. Dustin Hoffmann based his performance, in part, on Rimland’s son. For reasons that aren’t fully understood, and therefore I won’t attempt to explain, these unique talents are NOT diminished when the brain is more completely awakened through dietary, orthomolecular, and/or biomedical treatments. Those formerly idling brain regions simply get put into gear and begin moving, so-to-speak, while the accelerated areas of the brain maintain their previous wired pathways and continue to develop as does the rest of the brain. What this translates to is that unique talents are preserved and will only disappear if the individual makes a conscious effort to suppress those talents, much like a person with a gambling problem will always be capable of returning to their habit if they choose to but must consciously make an effort to avoid situations that would bring about that behavior.

I believe that people are a product of both their genes and their environment. At the time of this writing, our genetic code cannot be changed and there is value in having variety in the ways people think, behave, and in the strengths and limitations those genetic differences confer on society. After all, the body would not function if all the parts were the same, and neither would life on earth. There is a strong motivation, however, for bad actors to control the discourse on what is driving the autism epidemic, and they do this in several ways. One way is controlling which scientific studies get conducted, published, and talked about. With very few exceptions, the artificial consensus is that autism is a genetic disorder, which is only increasing as a result of better diagnosis and awareness. They believe that parents (just 50 years ago) were ignorant enough to not notice their child had a serious problem when they couldn’t speak, smeared their feces on the wall, and spun in circles instead of playing with other children. The numbers speak for themselves – 1 in 5,000 children being diagnosed just 50 years ago compared to today’s numbers of 1 in 50 (as a conservative round number). A 100-fold increase cannot be explained by better diagnosis and increased awareness. Another way the discourse is controlled is by perpetuating a narrative that this extreme disability is something to be embraced. The pain that this epidemic has had on the human race is indescribable. Giving it a name that has positive connotations is a way of getting people to accept their child’s disability as not only permanent, but a good thing. I am here to tell you that this disability is neither genetic (in over 99% of cases) nor is it necessarily permanent. There is an active effort to censor any research (by blocking funding, blocking publication in prominent scientific journals, and blocking public discussion) that points to environmental etiology. We also need to have the discussion about how environment is impacted both PRE-conception (through epigenetic transmission from one generation to the next as a result of exposure to the parents and ancestors, termed “transgenerational epigenetic inheritance”), and POST-conception (through environmental exposures that alter gene expression and enzymatic processes in the affected individual as a result of direct exposure). Though we have a better understanding of how the enzymatic processes of the treated individual are affected by dietary, orthomolecular, and biomedical interventions, evidence is beginning to mount that these same treatments may also be interacting at the level of genetic expression (epigenetically) to undo some of the environmental insults that the parents and previous generations incurred and passed on to their offspring. Not only is the incidence of autism increasing exponentially, but you will find that many other previously rare diseases are increasing at similar exponential rates. For every disease on the rise, there is an “official” explanation that blames God or Nature (genetics), man’s bad habits (eating a junk diet – that is ironically only possible with a public dedication to a system that fully abandons our ancestral diet), or the progression of scientific inquiry (better diagnosis and awareness).

If you search the scientific literature, you will find many studies that implicate environmental factors in autism etiology. However, the most well-funded and widely publicized studies all examine a genetic etiology. The motive for trying to implicate genetics is almost certainly to avoid the insurmountable liability. Consider the following facts:

• Under the 1984 Bayh-Dole Act, US government scientists can collect royalties from drug companies for discoveries they make while working on taxpayer funding
• US taxpayers fund government research, while Big Pharma, the National Institutes of Health and NIH scientists keep all the profits
• As a patent holder who profits from royalties, the NIH has a significant stake in regulations that impact patents and [experimental immunotherapy] mandates, and the natural incentive is to use its influence to benefit itself rather than the public interests
• The NIH distributes $32 billion of US taxpayer funds as research grants each year.  As the largest federal grant-maker, the NIH has a monopoly on what research gets done and what doesn’t
• Scientists vying for grants also recognize that in order to get funding, they have to play by the rules, and that means doing work that supports establishment narratives on public health policy

As you can see, there is clearly a conflict of interests in ever studying whether experimental immunotherapy plays a role in the etiology of autism and the other medical epidemics that are plaguing humanity.  Furthermore, conclusive evidence of such a link would absolutely require the cooperation of federal entities responsible for oversight of public health, as they have enacted compulsory policies that would have to be lifted in order for a double-blind, longitudinal controlled study to reasonably be carried out.

No. The symptoms that collectively describe autism are manifestations of aberrant biochemical processes in the body and can be corrected with biomedical treatments, diet, and targeted supplementation. Though you will likely need an autism diagnosis to gain access to therapies that will help in the formation of new neural pathways to encourage changed behavior patterns, it is not advised that you waste time waiting for an official diagnosis to begin studying where the child can benefit from targeted nutritional practices. In fact, I often work with neurotypical siblings who present with challenges in focus and attention and caretakers who recognize the need to perform at their best so they can be fully present for the difficult journey they are on.

I work with adults and children. My approach addresses aberrant biochemical processes in the body, which responds to these interventions regardless of age. Though a young child often has a faster rate of progress and any person will have a better prognosis when initiating these interventions in earlier stages of development, there is no window of time where one must begin treatment to see improvement. Positive changes can happen at 24 months of age or 24 years of age and beyond.

My hourly rate is $60 per hour, as outlined in the Autism Health Coach Agreement document. Please note that prior to every consult, I review the client’s notes since our previous session, their current supplement regiment, any new labs, etc. Following our face-to-face discussion, I prepare a report outlining areas of progress, areas of concern, recommended changes to the supplement regiment and lifestyle changes that will help the client achieve the next step of recovery. This is all billed at my hourly rate. See the document Read Me First to get a good idea of what an intake generally costs and what a follow up generally costs.

The succinct answer is: YES. However, compared to the cost of a lifelong disability, I believe the tradeoff is worth it, and in my son’s case, I have no regrets on what I spent to get him where he is today. There is undoubtedly sacrifice involved, but the rewards for those sacrifices can be tremendous in many cases.

In objective terms, my services are fairly inexpensive in the grand scheme of things. The major costs come in the form of monthly expenses on supplements, testing that is often not covered by health insurance, and doctor visits. Many families also opt for home therapies and medical excursions that cost several thousand dollars. I am very mindful of a parent’s budget, and can tailor plans that can be done for as little as $1000 per year all the way up to an excess of $20,000 per year. Generally, the more disposable income one has, the better chance their child has at recovery, but that IS NOT ALWAYS the case, as being on a tight budget does not mean your child cannot see significant benefits nor does having limitless wealth guarantee your child will recover. The approach must be targeted and focused to your child’s specific identified biochemical challenges. I have seen a great deal of progress made on tight budgets. Realistically, most parents who make significant strides with their child spend somewhere in the middle of the two extremes I presented.

If you are new to this, that will be a difficult thing to hear, and you may not receive this message positively. But I can tell you this: RUN (don’t walk) from anyone who tells you biomed can be done for less than what I mentioned above. Unless they are offering to donate treatment to your child (doctor visits, prescriptions, supplements, testing, medical excursions, etc), they are not telling you the truth!