behavior.[iii]
Other comparisons are also informative: the rate of breast feeding was 81 percent in the control group, but only 45 percent in those with ADD. Recurrent ear infections (otitis) relapsing more than 10 times since birth occurred in 30 percent of the ADD children but only 9 percent of the controls. Asthma was also seen in 32 percent of the ADD kids and only 9 percent of the controls. The ADD kids also had more headaches and stomach-aches, practically non-existent in the control group.
With this in mind, it is not surprising that a double blind study found a significant gain in reading comprehension within a year of individualized nutrient supplementation for a group of 20 learning disabled children. The seventeen children who stayed on the supplement program were able to enter mainstream classes within a year and a half. A sub-group of 12 children stayed on vitamins for a full two years, during which their test scores rose 7+ points while those on placebo dropped by over 6 points. For those who stopped taking nutrients, it took almost 2 years for academic performance to decline back to baseline. The good news is the benefits are long-lasting. The bad news is that it is hard for people to appreciate just how powerful the nutrient therapy actually is.
Herbal treatments for ADD are also gaining credibility. St. John’s Wort is one of these and it probably will be scientifically proven and accepted before long. However, it also causes sunburn, an adverse effect that I think will curtail its use. Vinpocetine is another herbal brain stimulant that holds promise, based on its popularity as a “smart pill” for adults. In use for over 400 years in Europe in the form of vincamine, derived from the periwinkle plant, it has become the most popular of the smart pills in Hungary. Over 100 research studies document the claim that it increases the rate at which brain cells produce ATP, and increases the utilization of glucose and oxygen in the brain. The only
adverse effect I have seen with it is headache
due to dilatation of cerebral blood vessels.
Another recent study found a significant improvement in 10 of 11 ADD children
treated with combination American ginseng (Panax quinquefolia) and Ginkgo biloba
extracts. Over 90 percent of the subjects
showed a reduction in at least 3 out of 7 ADD symptoms. The ginseng product performed
as well all by itself in almost 80 percent
(11 of 14) of another group of children.[iv] Ginseng works in part by increasing acetylcholine neurotransmitter production. A similar effect is associated with the use of deanol (DMAE or dimethylaminoethanol), which was first used for ADD by Dr. Leon Oettinger in 1958[v] and was confirmed in 1960 by Dr. Stanley Geller, who conducted a double-blind study in 75 children, who were given 50 mg doses, twice a day.[vi] Improved puzzle solving ability, and organization of activity were observed. Additional confirmation was provided by Coleman et al in 1976.[vii] Deanol is an important and safe orthomolecular therapy and it deserves to be used much more than it is. It is my first choice for the treatment of ADD, certainly preferred to amphetamines and Ritalin.
Other factors in ADD, such as allergy and low blood sugar remain controversial, mostly because the have been presented as causative factors. The neurologic injury that causes ADD is undoubtedly aggravated by allergy and low blood sugar and these should rightfully be treated. But they are not likely the cause of the disorder. Nevertheless, treating allergy and balancing the diet can make a huge difference. Just ask the mothers and fathers of the Feingold Association how they feel about food additives, salicylates, and allergy. The same goes for parents who find that sugar is a trigger for hyperactivity: would you have them believe an egghead statistic over their own first-hand, day-to-day experience? The New England Journal apparently would. Their recent study on the effects of sugar was thumbs down: no significant effect of sugar on child behavior! This study, by Dr. Wolraich et al, was designed so that the average dose of sugar was about 2/3 pound (300 grams) a day. There was no comparison group at a truly low sugar intake, under 100 mg per day. I wrote to them about this but my rebuttal was rejected. I called the editor; he assured me that the other critics also felt that the study should be repeated— but with a higher dose of sugar!