Are you saying that if the NHS simply told affected children not to eat wheat or dairy, then autism would vanish overnight?

Admittedly, your post doesn’t seem that certain about it, but the benefits of a GFCF (gluten free casein free) diet are, at best, entirely speculative and anecdotal so far. The conclusion that the NSA present (Milward et al’s, 2008) is that ” a GFCF diet cannot be recommended as a standard treatment for autism due to the limited data available.”
Autism Speaks also admit that “Neither the hypothesis nor the effectiveness of this dietary intervention has been demonstrated in scientific studies to date.”

It is only right that this be studied further (as indeed it is being), but in the already volatile and medically inept climate surrounding autism, it is dangerous to propose unverified ‘cures’ .

After all, vaccines have been blamed, thimerosal has been blamed, and many other harmless (even beneficial) factors are coming under fire. It is reckless to start pointing fingers without evidence. After all, a GFCF diet could be very dangerous if not followed correctly – as the NAS points out, “Hediger et al (2008) identified reduced bone cortical thickness for boys with autism but particularly for those on a casein-free diet.”

Even if this diet were to be proved effective, it is obviously only effective in some cases – otherwise, even the small trials of 15 and 20 people would have had significant results. EVEN IF it worked, therefore, it would be no ‘wonder cure’, and would have to be controlled and adminstered much better than the generally ill-informed audience this article targets.

When you make claim about ‘the best science mind in the UK’, bear in mind that science has many disciplines. I’m sure Stephen Hawking, to name only one, may rank higher in most people’s minds than Simon Baron Cohen.
Also, claiming that ‘research [pounds and dollars] are wasted’ sets off alarm bells to ANY scientifically-minded person – even the most frivolous-seeming research can have massive benefits…
I searched for SB Cohen (Google ‘Simon Baron Cohen mating) and found this:
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/baron-cohen05/baron-cohen05_index.html
I’m not sure what you’ve heard, but he doesn’t mention breast-size there, instead examining behaviour and possible genetic links to autism. I don’t agree with his conclusions so far, but it doesn’t seem like money squandered. Furthermore, he admits that his work will be controversial, so you can hardly cite him as THE scientific authority on autism.

I’m not sure where you heard that he studied breast size, but if you google ‘simon baron cohen breast size’, the first hit makes no mention of him doing that kind of work, and nor does the second hit (www.hollywoodbackwash.com/victoria-beckham-reduces-breast-size-to-34b). In fact, I can’t find ANY mention of it, although I await your correction.

So, if you are giving tips on how to avoid looking foolish, then let me reciprocate:

1. Parrent. Parrent!??!?!??!?!?!?!

2. Don’t treat all of science as one field. One can’t really nominated a single ‘best science mind in the UK’, but if you’re going to, then make sure they’re someone REALLY groundbreaking, or are at least supported by the scientific consensus.

3. Don’t ridicule legitimate, useful, research… And, perhaps even more importantly, don’t ridicule research that doesn’t seem to exist…

- The Well-Vaccinated Colonel Molerat

creationism ,,, very funny ,, always a good one if you don’t have a clue about the subject…
Guess what Diet is being studdied in the UK funded by Autism speaks and Even the NAS will give you advice on it, last week they told me , “it doesn’t work for everyone”. they helpfully sent me some leaflets

so serously stay away from autism , you are just making your self look foolish,
stick to debunking claims that high powered microwave devices won’t harm you if live right under one.

http://www.viddler.com/explore/ziggy/videos/1/