"diet that were designed to show this diet did not work. If you just look at their conclusions, it says it doesnt work. If you read the entire paper, when you see HOW the study was conducted, it is obvious that it could only lead to this result."

Again I used the study as an example, not the definitive word. I'd ask that you supply specific examples of how the study was bent to lead to a conclusion. But more importantly, I believe that beyond this one study, can you provide evidence that the scientific consensus is that B12 has efficacy? That would be huge, and yes someone would profit.

"if you try it and you see significant improvement in your child, what is the harm"

I tend not to try medical interventions just for kicks. For a moment let's say we are not talking about B12 but Chemical X. And you read online some reports that Chemical X just might alleviate chronic pain. Do you go out and buy Chemical X on this information? I doubt you do. But that is the argument you are making for B12.

I would not spend my hard earned money on a lark and crossed fingers. The harm first is a financial harm. I want to pay for something that is shown through rigor and mountains of strong data to have an effect. That's why I pay for things like Tylenol and Lipitor.

Beyond financial, there is a psychological harm. Placing your emotional hope into something that does not produce results can be devastating. Seeking ineffective cure after ineffective cure takes a huge emotional toll.

Harm also comes from the "just give it a shot" mentality. B12 might be harmless. But in what dosages, for what period of exposure? For what age groups? Etc.. When you purchase a drug that has been approved by the FDA after countless tests - you get a very specific and detailed list of the intended effects as well as the possible side effects. You also get highly detailed information on recommended dose and cautions. Do you get any of that when purchasing B12? If not, I'd demand it. Otherwise B12 is a big black hole of unknowns and I'm not willing to risk my child's health on big black holes.

I ask you to please take a look at the website "What's the Harm" http://whatstheharm.net/whatisthis.html

Thank you so much everyone...Ur feedback is very helpful. We are going to see dr gannage soon for the injections...

"if no one benefits enough, there is not even someone to start the study."

There are millions of studies being conducted this minute where there is no evidence that someone "benefits enough". Science does not first find a benefit and only then start a study. When developing penicillin there was a very tentative observation that it could play a role in preventing infection. But that was one observation under one set of conditions. So really no evidence that someone "benefits enough". Lucky for all of us it turned out that after a ton of research, penicillin proved effective. Out of the the thousands of scientific medical studies, very very few make it to the state where they show benefit to "enough" people. In other words, the system starts with a very wide funnel and through rigor whittles down ideas to find truth. We don't discard things willy nilly if "no one benefits enough".

@A MyAutismTeam Member. I appreciate your point of view and would like to comment further. I have a BS in Biology and minor in Chemistry and have been interested in science all my life. Your concern about double blind studies is understandable. Many companies pay for all kinds of studies and data is manipulated. And my citation from Autism Speaks was meant as an example and a place to start rather than the definative last word.

Although some studies can be paid for and manipulated, I do not think that means throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Do you trust the studies that help your medical professional make decisions for your health every day? Do you trust the studies that helped NASA put a satellite into orbit around Pluto? Every single scientific paper since the dawn of civilization contains bias and human error and on and on. However, over time a consensus begins to form as the data is honed. Bias and bribery are not the domain of double blind studies. They are a human fact. One that scientists have full confidence is weeded out as more and more data is looked at and more and more varied experiments are conducted.

I have trust in the piles of studies that have been looking desperately for a meaningful effect from B12 and have failed to find it. In fact, your comment on greed and corporate control is applicable here. Would it not be in someone's financial interest to corrupt studies in favor of B12 just as much as against B12? I can imagine a scenario where B12 distributors have as much vested interest in attempting to influence the science as others.

Science works because it is cumulative. It works because it is one of the only human systems designed to root out bias and seek observable, repeatable, significant truth. If this was not the case, we would not be able to use the internet to have this discussion ;)

I'd ask why as the first thing. Are there a large number of strong studies suggesting B12 will help with whatever you are trying to help? Also please talk to a number of medical professionals before deciding to treat your child.

Autism Speaks has a summary of a single study that would give me pause in terms of deciding to apply this treatment.

"However, the efficacy of methyl B12 to treat symptoms of autism and reduce oxidative stress has not been tested in controlled clinical trials"

Ask a lot of questions like
1. Has the FDA approved this treatment, and if not why not?
2. What do the trials say in terms of dose response? What are the expected outcomes?

Please be highly skeptical and take a hard look at medical or "natural" interventions for autism. There is a ton of nonsense science out there and folks ready to take your money and sell you false hope