A study published in Nature – International Journal of Science confirms that individuals with extra copies of chromosome 21, as found in individuals with Down syndrome, have genes that block certain types of cancer growth. This may have far-reaching implications in the therapies we use to treat cancer.

Most types of cancer are rare in individuals with Down syndrome and they are shown to have a far lower mortality rate than those in the general population.

Late cancer researcher Judah Folkman, MD, who founded the Vascular Biology Program at Children’s Hospital Boston, first proposed that these individuals may benefit from an extra gene that blocks angiogenesis (or the development of certain blood vessels that create an environment for cancer growth), as they are also less likely to develop other diseases related to this same type of growth, such as macular degeneration.

This study confirms Dr. Folkman’s theory and provides new insight for the development of specific, targeted treatments. The research proved that the same cells in both mice and humans followed the same type of angiogenesis suppression, meaning they might point to a new and exciting type of cancer therapy.

NACD has been dedicated over the last several decades to addressing issues that impact children and adults with Down syndrome. We seek to change public opinion as well as the opinions of parents and professionals about their potential. Studies like this just confirm what we have always known—that these individuals have many undiscovered gifts to offer and uncover.

References

1. Kwan-Hyuck Baek, Alexander Zaslavsky, Ryan C. Lynch, Carmella Britt, Yoshiaki Okada, Richard J. Siarey, M. William Lensch, In-Hyun Park, Sam S. Yoon, Takashi Minami, Julie R. Korenberg, Judah Folkman, George Q. Daley, William C. Aird, Zygmunt Galdzicki & Sandra Ryeom. Down’s syndrome suppression of tumour growth and the role of the calcineurin inhibitor DSCR1. Nature, 2009; DOI: 10.1038/nature08062
2. Children’s Hospital Boston. “Why Do People With Down Syndrome Have Less Cancer? Research In Mice And Human Stem Cells Suggests New Therapeutic Targets.” ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090520140359.htm (accessed June 18, 2018).

The post NACD Science Corner Vol. 14 – Why Do People with Down Syndrome Have Less Cancer? appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

A newly published study explored the effects of reading to your child versus having them use other media, such as watching a cartoon or listening to an audiobook.

“In a single generation, the explosion of screen-based media has transformed the experience of childhood, from TV and videos, to an unlimited range of content available at any time via portable devices that can be challenging to monitor,” said Dr. John S. Hutton, one of the authors of the study. “The emergence of these technologies has far outpaced our ability to quantify its effects on child development, human relationships, learning and health, fueling controversies among parents, educators and clinical providers…” Hutton is a researcher and pediatrician at the Cincinnati Children’s Hospital where he studies the processes of learning how to read.

In the study, 27 children, each around age 4, were observed in an FMRI machine. They were given the stories three different ways: audio only; the illustrated pages of a storybook with an audio voiceover; and an animated cartoon.

Using only audio, the language parts of the brain were activated, but there was less overall interaction. There was evidence the children were not fully understanding the information.

With the cartoons (animated images with audio), there was a lot of brain activity and perception, but not a lot of interconnectivity between the various types of processing. “The language network was working to keep up with the story,” says Hutton. “Our interpretation was that the animation was doing all the work for the child. They were expending the most energy just figuring out what it means.” Comprehension of the story was found to be the least effective when viewing the cartoons.

When shown illustrations along with being read the story, instead of only paying attention to the words, the children’s comprehension of the story was helped by the illustrations. “Give them a picture and they have a cookie to work with,” he explains. “With animation it’s all dumped on them all at once and they don’t have to do any of the work.”

In the illustrated book version of the test, researchers noted better connectivity between all the brain networks: visual, imagery, language and more.

Reading to children seems to have the added effect of stimulating their imagination more as they attempt to “fill in the blanks” between the audio and the simple illustrations. If their language and auditory processing development is not yet developed or is falling behind, it may be that reading to them using a book with illustrations will help them keep up and comprehend better.

The overall implication of the study appears to show that for kids who have a hard time keeping up with the auditory and visual information coming in with an animated cartoon, may be helped by using the illustrations to form a better mental picture of what they are reading and hearing. Not to mention the physical and emotional bond that is formed by reading to your child.

While it’s not always possible to read to your child and certain cartoons can be stimulating and also educational, mixing in some one-on-one reading time using books with illustrations can be an effective way to build your child’s visual and auditory processing.

Sources

NPR.org – Learning & Tech – What’s Going On In Your Child’s Brain When You Read Them A Story? by Anya Kamenetz – May 24, 2018

Assessment of Screen-Based Media Use in Children: Development and Psychometric Refinement of the ScreenQ – John Hutton, Jonathan Dudley,Tzipi Horowitz-Kraus, Thomas DeWitt, Scott Holland

The post NACD Science Corner Vol. 13 – Is Reading to Your Child Better Than Using Other Media? appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

A study out of Simon Frazer University indicates that cognitive-motor function begins to decline at the age of 24.

In this study the researchers analyzed the data derived from 3,305 players, ranging in age from 16 to 44, of a complex computer game called Starcraft 2. According to Joe Thompson, the lead investigator of the study, “After around 24 years of age, players show slowing in a measure of cognitive speed that is known to be important for performance.”

The decline in cognitive performance in the 20s, as demonstrated in the Simon Frazer University study, is similar to the results of NACD’s Simply Smarter Project that evaluated the short-term and working memories of 7125 individuals, ranging in age from 4 to 84. Read more about the project results here. As demonstrated by NACD’s data, both short-term and working memory develop into our 20s and then begin to decline in our middle to late 20s.

Fortunately Bob Doman and NACD’s work over more than 47 years has demonstrated that the development of short-term and working memory can be accelerated, and with specific targeted developmental intervention, retained and even advanced past the point at which it would typically decline. Neuroplasticity has shown that you can continue to improve your brain function at any age.

Even if you use it, you lose it, unless you use very targeted intervention!

More Resources

NACD’s Simply Smarter Program – Work on your processing, cognition and working memory skills!

Get Started with NACD – How to get started with the NACD Program

The post NACD Science Corner Vol. 12 – Brain Function Begins to Decline Over the Age of 24 appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

A 2012 study of child prodigies conducted by Joanne Ruthsatz and Jourdan B. Urbach found that all the children studied tested in the 99th percentile for working memory.

Each of the child prodigies tested at what was considered a moderately elevated intelligence and exhibited high scores relative to their attention to detail. But the most exciting results were the working memory, with each child testing in the 99th percentile.

This study helps confirm Bob Doman’s and NACD’s 40 years of experience of addressing and developing working memory in children. Having helped develop working memory in many thousands of special needs and “typical” children, NACD has had firsthand knowledge of just how key this vital function is to every aspect of a child’s ability to learn, think, and perform.

NACD’s experience also suggests that the elevated intelligence and attention to detail exhibited in these children is at least in part a reflection of the benefits of their superior working memory.

NACD has been at the forefront of understanding the tremendous importance of working memory and developing tools to aid in its development. The NACD Foundation Simply Smarter Project has been an attempt to heighten awareness of the importance of this essential neurological building block and to bring tools to the world to help take advantage of neuroplasticity and help everyone build their working memory.

Related Links

• Simply Smarter
• NACD’s Simply Smarter Project
• NACD Cognition Coach Apps

The post NACD Science Corner Vol. 11 – Study Links Child Prodigies & Working Memory appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

Researchers at the University of Montreal and its affiliated Saint-Justine Mother and Child University Hospital reported that each weekly hour of TV watched by 2.5- to 4.5-year olds had statistically significant effect correlation to athletic ability and waist size by the second and fourth grade, respectively, for those children. Parents of 1,314 children reported how many weekly hours of television their children watched at ages 2.5 and 4.5 years. Trained examiners measured distance performed on the standing long jump test for each child by the second grade, and then measured the waist circumferences of the children during the fourth grade. After controlling for other potential child and family variables, the research found a 1 centimeter decrease in the standing long jump for about every 3 hours of weekly television watched at 2.5 years of age; and they found fourth graders had about a 1-millimeter increase of the waistline for every 2 hours they had increased weekly television watching from 2.5 years of age to 4.5 years.

The researchers reported increased exposure to fast food commercials targeted for children is one way that watching television likely contributes to increased fat storage. The effects of these advertisements on children’s food choices and future dietary lifestyle have been documented in earlier research (Borzekowski & Robinson, 2001; Miller et al., 2008).

NACD understands that television is a powerful educational tool. Children can and will learn things they are exposed to on the TV. Therefore, besides limiting the amount of time children are exposed to television, NACD strongly encourages parents to turn on appropriate educational shows when their children are going to watch TV.

Sources

1. Borzekowski, D.G., & Robinson, T.N. (2001) The 30-second effect: An experiment revealing the impact of television commercials on food preferences of preschoolers. Journal of American Diet Association, 101, 42-46.
2. Fitzpatrick, C., Pagani, L., & Barneb, T. A. (2012). Early childhood television viewing predicts explosive leg strength and waist circumference by middle childhood. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 9, 87. http://www.ijbnpa.org/content/9/1/87.
3. Miller, S., et al. (2008). Association between television viewing and poor diet quality in young children. International Journal of Pediatric Obesity, 3, 168-176.

The post Science Corner Vol. 10 – How Watching Television Can Affect Your Child’s Health appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

A recent research article published in The Journal of Family Psychology reported the use of guilt-inducing parenting causes distress and anger that is still measurable the next day. Guilt-inducing parenting is when a parent tries to impact a child’s behavior by trying to make them feel guilty. An example might be when a child won’t eat his dinner and the parent says, “I work all day long in order to buy that food for you, and you are just going to waste it?” Other examples would include any manner in which the parent displays he/she is ashamed of a child’s bad behavior. The study was conducted with 152 children in the first grade by using a diary questionnaire filled out every day for a week by both the mother and father. Although the research demonstrates that there are ill-effects of guilt-inducing parenting from either the mother or father, the effects from the father appear to be especially bad on the child. The report also describes that guilt-inducing parenting is more typical for parents who are exhausted or undergoing distress themselves.

When a child engages in inappropriate behavior, what could a parent do instead? The parent should give the child a consequence and consistently give the child the consequence every time the child misbehaves. Indeed, the study reported that such direct limit-setting parenting does not have the long-lasting negative effects that guilt-inducing parenting has. There is no need to have a long discussion with the child about the behavior beyond what not to do and why the behavior is inappropriate, because any discussion beyond that can be self-defeating and possibly turns the behavior into a negative attention-getting behavior. Meanwhile, the parents should define clear, concise expectations and provide positive reinforcement for good behavior. Look for your child doing what is good, and praise your child for that. Overall, NACD emphasizes creating a positive environment, which is defined by four positive responses to every negative response the child receives.

To learn more about how you can establish a positive environment in your home, please read our article here.

Source

Parent induces guilt, child shows distress (2013). AlphaGalileo Foundation. Academy of Finland. http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=129647&CultureCode=en

The post Science Corner Vol. 9 – Evidence That Sending a Child on a Guilt Trip Has Long-Lasting, Negative Effects appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

Researchers from the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing reported that children who ate breakfast more often had significantly higher IQ scores on the full scale, verbal, and performance tests. The study included 1,269 six-year-old children. After controlling for seven potential sociodemographic variables, the study found children who ate breakfast on a near-daily basis scored 4.6 points higher on the total IQ test, 5.58 points higher on the verbal, and 2.50 points higher on the performance part compared to children who frequently skipped eating their breakfast. Therefore, eating breakfast every morning appears to have immediate vital implications for the cognitive function of children. This research adds to other research reporting long-term implications such as smoking, alcohol use, and infrequent exercise all being associated with a lifestyle of not eating breakfast regularly.

The researchers also report that breakfast eating has nutritional and social aspects that both likely play a role. Children commonly eat breakfast with their parents, which allows for some additional one-on-one interaction during the day. NACD understands that it’s these times of one-on-one interaction with an adult that are vital to expanding a child’s cognitive abilities. Furthermore, breakfast literally means to “break a fast” of not eating all night long, and this is important to refuel the brain. However, NACD stresses that it is not just eating breakfast that is important; what your child eats is perhaps even more important!

Eating breakfasts high in sugar and artificial sugars, such as Pop-Tarts or Captain Crunch, are usually detrimental for a child’s cognitive function. Therefore, aim for breakfasts high in protein, such as eggs, nuts, and lean meats, with plenty of fruits and vegetables. Be wary of dairy, wheat, and other grains, which are common sources of food sensitivities. Food sensitivities may be a problem for your child if three or more of the following apply to your child: sometimes congested; history of ear infections; frequent ups and downs in behavior; poor attention span at times; night or morning coughing spells; variable hearing that is sometimes good and sometimes poor; post-nasal drip; headaches; digestive issues; or periods of restlessness.

For more information on food sensitivities please read our article here.

Source

• Can breakfast make kids smarter? (2013) Science in Action. University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing. http://www.nursing.upenn.edu/sia/Pages/Can-Breakfast-Make-tiids-Smarter.aspx

The post Science Corner Vol. 8 – Be Smart About Breakfast appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

The Tucson Children’s Assessment of Sleep Apnea Study was published this year in the journal SLEEP [1]. In this study of 263 youth, sleep study and neurobehavioral data was collected twice, five years apart. Twenty-one of the children had persistent sleep apnea throughout the entire study. These children were six times more likely to have behavioral problems when compared to children with no sleep issues. Parent-reported behavioral problems were significantly higher for the children with sleep apnea; these observed problems included hyperactivity, attention deficits, aggressiveness, poorer communication, lower social competency, diminished self-care, and compromised adaptive skills. The study also reported an association between sleep apnea and lower academic function. The children with persistent sleep apnea were three times more likely to have learning problems and seven times more likely to have grades of C or lower than youth who never had sleep apnea. This study and others [2] conclude that children with sleeping issues may develop learning problems, disruptive behaviors, and other ADHD symptoms if sleeping issues are left untreated.

The National Association for Child Development has known that sleeping issues affect the global development of a child, due largely to a lack of adequate oxygen being delivered to the brain during sleep. Sleep apnea is a breathing problem in which the airflow is limited and obstructed during sleep, resulting in less oxygen to the brain [3]. The importance of oxygen for the brain cannot be overstated. The brain uses about three times as much oxygen as muscles in the body do, and brain function and performance are directly linked to oxygen availability [4]. NACD highly recommends that parents with a child experiencing any symptoms of sleep apnea, such as snoring, take the child to a doctor to be evaluated. It is also a good idea to frequently check the child’s oxygen saturation level. A quick, easy, inexpensive way to track oxygen saturation levels at home is with a pulse oximeter.

To find out more about sleep apnea, including common symptoms and treatments used by doctors, please read our article here.


To find out more about the importance of oxygen for the brain, please read our article here.

To find out more about pulse oximeters, please read our article here.

Sources

1. Perfect, M.M., et al. (2013). Risk of behavioral and adaptive functioning difficulties in youth with previous and current sleep disordered breathing. SLEEP, 36(4), 517-525.
2. Beebe, D.W., et al. (2010). The association between sleep disordered breathing, academic grades, and cognitive and behavioral functioning among overweight subjects during middle to late childhood. SLEEP, 33, 1447-1456.
3. Riggs, S. (2012). Sleeping and breathing problems. NACD Journal, 25(3).
4. Joo, E.Y. (2010). Reduced brain gray matter concentration in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. SLEEP, 33, 235-41.

The post Science Corner Vol. 7 – Sleep Apnea and Its Association to Behavior, Learning Problems and ADHD appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

Historically, it has not been considered a “realistic” goal in the mainstream world for a child with autism to ever lose their diagnosis, let alone lose all the symptoms of Autism Spectrum Disorder and move completely into the non-autistic range of normal social interaction and communication. Although much recent research has documented individuals with ASD losing their diagnosis, there has been much debate as to whether these outcomes were perhaps due to misdiagnosis in the first place. The assumption is that there still must be significant residual autistic impairments in these individuals. However, a study was published in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, reporting “the existence of a cohort who had clear autism at a young age and no longer demonstrated any significant autistic impairments.” This is the first research article of its kind, and it reported such a so-called “optimal outcome” for 34 of the individuals participating in the study!

This is definitely a step in the right direction for the research literature on autism; but the researchers still noted that “the possible presence of subtle limitations or differences in social behavior, social cognition, communication, or executive functions; the biology of remediable autism; the course of improvement; and the necessary and sufficient conditions, including treatment, for such improvement,” still remain unknown to the research world of autism.

In contrast, NACD has been documenting hundreds of these so-called “optimal outcomes” over the last 40+ years, during our extensive experience of working closely with children and adults on the spectrum. These “optimal outcomes” are not new to us; and through our clinical perspective we already understand there is not “a” program that will achieve these goals. That is why NACD utilizes over 1,000 methodologies of treatment that may be used to assist any given individual, and why it is so important to work closely with each individual as a whole person.

Please click here to read more about NACD’s perspective on children labeled with autism.

Sources

Fein, D., et al. (2013). Optimal outcome in individuals with a history of autism. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(2), 195-205. doi:10.1111/jcpp.12037.

The post Science Corner Vol. 6 – Optimal Outcome for a Diagnosis of Autism appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.

Anxiety disorders are supposedly the 
most common mental health issue 
today for adolescents, with one
 national study of more than 10,000 
adolescents finding that about 31%
 qualified for an anxiety disorder at 
least at one point in their lives 
(Merikangas et al., 2010). 
Prescriptions given to children for 
these anxiety disorders are
antidepressants that include selective
 serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) most frequently, followed by serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and rarely benzodiazepines. In other words, we could eventually have one third of our children drugged with antidepressants for anxiety alone if all parents wanted to continuously screen their children for an anxiety disorder and get an “appropriate” prescription.

The obvious question is why is the prevalence of anxiety disorders so high? First of all, anxiety is an emotion we all occasionally experience. Infants and toddlers are commonly apprehensive of strangers, young children are commonly fearful of new situations and any adult negativity, and adolescents are anxious about rejection from friends or crushes, the test they did not adequately study for, as well as any and all issues that threaten their self-images and so on (Beesdo et al., 2009). Every child will exhibit anxiety towards certain things or will behave anxiously for periods of time, and this is normal, especially if there are new stressors in the child’s environment, such as starting a new school, conflicts at home, bullying, having a fight with a best friend, or a dreaded math test coming up. Frequently, what might occur is a teacher will notice a child has been acting anxious for a couple of weeks, the teacher will tell the parent the child has anxiety, the parent will go to doctor and tell her the teacher thought the child was showing signs of anxiety, and then the doctor will write a prescription for an anxiety disorder. This would explain the research that indicates only 20% of adolescents with a current anxiety disorder diagnosis will even retain the diagnosis (Wittchen et al., 2000). Of course, the child most likely does not have an “anxiety disorder;” and moreover, medicating the child does nothing to actually address the developmental issues or neurological disorganization or the environmental/social/academic stressors that are the source of the anxiety in the first place.

For some children, anxiety issues are the reflection of neurological disorganization. In such cases, the level of neurological organization is such that the child has not yet established a strong delineation between the two hemispheres of the brain. When there is such delineation, a dominant hemisphere is established, which assists in logical and analytical thought and helps keep emotional activity of the subdominant hemisphere in check. If a dominant hemisphere is not firmly established, then the child often functions subdominant or emotionally, such as anxiously, rather than with reason. A further aspect of neurodevelopment affecting anxiety is poor auditory working memory. If working memory is weak, the child does not have the capacity to think through and resolve issues, and therefore, tends to ruminate over issues again and again, each time heightening their level of anxiety.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors given to children and adolescents with anxiety include fluoxetine, sertaline, and citalopram; and common side effects include abdominal pain, nausea, headaches, and drowsiness (Birmaher et al., 2003). Furthermore, the US Food and Drug Administration issued a black box warning on SSRIs that describes the risk of suicidal ideation for patients 25 years of age or younger (Emslie et al., 2006). Fluvoxamine, paroxetine, and escitalopram may even be less safe versions of SSRIs used to treat anxiety (Siegel & Dickstein, 2012). The serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor known as venlafaxine is also prescribed to youth with anxiety. Side effects include asthenia (bodily weakness), pain (e.g., headache, abdominal pain), fatigue, and even anorexia (Rynn et al., 2007). Finally, benzodiazepines are sometimes prescribed, despite research that shows they are no more effective than a placebo in reducing anxiety symptoms (Simeon et al., 1992). Moreover, there is a high risk for patients to develop an addiction to benzodiazepines, and pediatric patients are especially vulnerable to disinhibition and aggression caused by benzodiazepines (Mancini et al., 2005). On the other hand, non-drug intervention has the most evidence as effective treatment for anxiety, has the most long-lasting effects, and does not have any of the side effects associated with drugs (Siegel & Dickstein, 2012).

In conclusion, it is normal for all children and adolescents to experience some level of anxiety for periods of time; and in fact, lack of anxiety may be cause for even greater concern for some. Be cautious in having your child labeled with an anxiety disorder due to anxious behavior for only a short time period. If your child does appear to be experiencing persistent and uncontrollable anxious behavior, carefully investigate any relationship or academic issues, or possible social causes, such as bullying, negative teachers, aides, therapists, and so on. Also explore neurodevelopmental issues, such as neurological disorganization or weak working memory. Whenever possible, look for and treat the cause of the anxiety and do not resort to prescription drugs until other avenues have been exhausted.

Sources

• Beesdo, K., et al. (2009). Common and distinct amygdala function perturbations in depressed vs anxious adolescents. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 66, 275-285.
• Birmaher, B., et al. (2003). Fluoxetine for the treatment of childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 42, 415-423.
• Emslie, G., et al. (2006). Treatment for Adolescents with Depression Study (TADS): safety results. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 45, 1440-1455.
• Mancini, C., et al. (2005). Emerging treatments for child and adolescent social phobia: a review. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol, 15, 589-607
• Merikangas, K.R., et al. (2010). Lifetime prevalence of mental disorders in US adolescents: results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication – Adolescent Supplement (NCS-A). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 49, 980-989.
• Rynn, M.A., et al. (2007). Efficacy and safety of extended-release venlafaxine in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder in children and adolescents: two placebo-controlled trials. Am J Psychiatry, 164, 290-300.
• Siegel, R.S., & Dickstein, D.P. (2012). Anxiety in adolescents: Update on its diagnosis and treatment for primary care providers. Adolescent Health, Medicine and Thereapeutics, 3, 1- 16.
• Simeon, J.G., et al. (1992) Clinical, cognitive, and neurophysiological effects of alprazolam in children and adolescents with overanxious and avoidant disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry, 31, 29-33.
• Wittchen, H.U., et al. (2000). The waxing and waning of mental disorders: evaluating the stability of syndromes of mental disorders in the population. Compr Psychiatry, 41, 122-132.

The post Science Corner Vol. 5 – Anxiety appeared first on NACD International | The National Association for Child Development.