u/Dapper_Valuable_7734

I just want to be clear: I have no problem believing what KK says about the improvements she's seen in the people she's worked with. After all, depending on the study, up to 75% of children with autism who are minimally verbal end up with functional language (Guerrera et al., 2025). So it is not surprising at all that the individual involved was able to further develop language skills. I would think that an individual in the home of a person with a background in primary education and special education would likely be well suited to provide an enriched environment and would have a better-than-average chance of seeing significant improvement.

What is in question (in my mind at least) is not the improvements that KK has noted; it's the causation behind those improvements. It's not that I doubt the improvements; I doubt her explanation. 

References
Guerrera, S., Fucà, E., Petrolo, E., De Stefano, A., Casula, L., Logrieco, M. G., Valeri, G., & Vicari, S. (2025). Exploring the clinical features of minimally verbal autistic children. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 16, 1549092. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1549092

She asks what is different in Pike's DNA that led to the crimes and led to her metabolizing the drugs differently...

Such a great example of hearing hoofbeats and thinking zebra instead of horses...

(Yes, you should consider zebras; no, this post is not about differential diagnosis)

Here is my list of unfounded conclusions that are much more likely than a variation in metabolism.

• >!My guess would be that they missed the vein and botched the injection... !<
• >!That the injection infiltrated (the fact she asked My arm feels like it’s about to bust. One spot is really throbbing." strongly suggests this. https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/tennessee-botches-another-execution-despite-earlier-warnings-from-attorneys-christa-pike-was-alive-hours-after-attempt-began!<
• >!The drugs were counterfeit... something people do not talk about enough is that all the major pharmaceutical companies ban the use of their drugs in executions, meaning that states buy through third parties: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/texas-new-details-execution-drug-underscore-closely-guarded-secret-rcna236168!<
• >!Other states have had problems: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/double-execution-tonight-ok-using-secret-experimental-drug-protocol/!<

Jumping straight to metabolic variant and DNA is just wild, and thats not even discussing the lack of evidence that her crime was related to variation in DNA. Even if we had evidence of metabolic variation, why jump straight to DNA?

In relation to her theories on ASD, this is a good example of why we need lots of research at every step; otherwise, you can jump to unfounded conclusions.

If you're curious, pentobarbitol is primarily metabolized by cytochrome P450; notably, BH4 plays no real role... https://synapse.patsnap.com/article/what-is-the-mechanism-of-pentobarbital-sodium

I could argue with some of the details, but in general, I agree with her assessment that ordinary people today are not exposed to more than folks in the past. I also want to be clear: context matters a lot; not everything on the list is a matter of concern in general. Now, I think we would need a historian/anthropologist to go in depth; it's my understanding that our pre-farming ancestors were particularly healthy compared to folks after they settled down and started farming, and were way better off than the first urban settlers.

*Also point to KK for pushing back on the anti-vax stuff.

She states that she believes this drug will actually cause autism traits... because, of course, a drug that targets dopamine, adrenaline, and norepinephrine wouldn't have any impact on ASD, lol.

Here is a (very small) study, only 8 patients; 6 of 8 saw improvements (Rothman et al., 2019). They just did another phase 2a study with 58 participants that showed efficacy as well (Yamo Pharmaceuticals, 2025).

It's not a drug I am familiar with; apparently, it ends up decreasing dopamine, adrenaline, and noradrenaline, it's already approved for pheochromocytoma (Metyrosine, n.d.).

Interestingly, I looked up the impact of a BH4 deficiency (I know, I know a “shunt”) and its impact on tyrosine hydroxylase, in mice with modified metabolism, they found that BH4 supplementation results in an increase is dopamine and a decrease in symptoms of tyrosine hydroxylase deficiency (Jung-Kc et al., 2024). I find this interesting because it is a nice example of the reality that if the problem is a lack of BH4, or in the case of KKs theory where she believes its “shunted” resulting in a deficiency, then BH4 supplementation would likely help.

Making claims about meds, especially meds that seem to work, academics do not have time or energy to drown her in cease and desist... but a big pharma company, it would even be good PR; they would get to talk about the efficacy of their med over and over.

References

Jung-Kc, K., Tristán-Noguero, A., Altankhuyag, A., Piñol Belenguer, D., Prestegård, K. S., Fernandez-Carasa, I., Colini Baldeschi, A., Sigatulina Bondarenko, M., García-Cazorla, A., Consiglio, A., & Martinez, A. (2024). Tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4) treatment stabilizes tyrosine hydroxylase: Rescue of tyrosine hydroxylase deficiency phenotypes in human neurons and in a knock-in mouse model. Journal of Inherited Metabolic Disease, 47(3), 494–508. https://doi.org/10.1002/jimd.12702

Metyrosine. (n.d.). Retrieved September 20, 2026, from https://go.drugbank.com/drugs/DB00765

Rothman, J., Bartky, E. J., & Halas, F. P. (2019). Effect of L1-79 on Core Symptoms of Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Case Series. Clinical Therapeutics, 41(10), 1972–1981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.07.022

Yamo Pharmaceuticals. (2025, May 8). Yamo Pharma Presents Statistically Significant Phase 2 Autism Results for L1-79 at INSAR 2025. GlobeNewswire News Room. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/05/08/3077235/0/en/yamo-pharma-presents-statistically-significant-phase-2-autism-results-for-l1-79-at-insar-2025.html

Lol, misspelled clinician but can't edit now...

(This is a modified version of a response I posted before; I just thought it might be nice for it to be easy to find in light of the likelihood that new folks may be on the sub)

I am a clinical person, not a biochemist or anything, but I can tell you which parts of what she says set off flags for me as a clinician. We are trained to look at research and decide if it is valuable and should inform our practice; we are supposed to use the best available information, and when we do that is the ideal, evidence-based practice. 

Let's start with how to prioritize evidence. As clinicians, we prioritize Systematic reviews, evidence synthesis/guidelines, article synopses, then Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) (I do want to mention not everything can have an RCT, so the lack of an RCT may just mean ethical standards meant it's not possible) Cohort/Correlational studies, Case studies/series, and finally expert opinion (Turner, 2026).

We also use tools, like the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice model, to grade evidence; in this case, KK documents would be graded as level 5, the lowest level possible since it is simply opinion (Tsistinas, 2026). In the Fourth edition of the JHNEBP model, it would have been graded as low quality too, but they removed grading in the fifth edition (Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Manual, 5th Edition – MSK Library Blog, 2026).

So right off the bat we see that its the lowest level, and would have been the lowest quality in the old version, at the very bottom of the kinds of data we use to make clinical choices. Next, we start to notice some of the logical fallacies on display in the paper, basic errors in how we are trained to conduct and evaluate research. 

• Post hoc ergo propter hoc: She assumes that because she started using her methods, the status of the individual she used her methods on changed due to her methods, but we cannot make that assumption; all we really know is that A happened before B. We do not know that A caused B. The truth is, her methods may work even if her theory is completely incorrect; it would not be the first time that a therapy works and the theory used to support it is bunk. My favorite example is EMDR: the therapy works well, but likely has nothing to do with cross-hemisphere stimulation and everything to do with exposure. My pet theory is that the movement of fingers, toner, tapper/etc is a mild distraction that makes it easier for people to open up and tell their stories. In the case of KK the idea that a single person started speaking has no real impact on her theory's validity. 
  • https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/post-hoc.html
• There was a joke on here a while ago about her N=1 when really it's N=0. She really doesn't have any data, because she has done no research- not correlational, and certainly not experimental. What she does do is draw a circle around a bunch of facts and tell us that it's all evidence of her theory, while ignoring everything that would suggest otherwise. The classic example is the “Texas sharpshooter” that if I take ten shots at your barn and circle the cluster of the three closest, it'll look like I am a good shot, when really anyone can hit a barn door. 
  • https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Texas-Sharpshooter-Fallacy
• Over-simplification: Her theory is incredibly complex, and she has zero evidence for any of it. The proper way to do what she is trying to do is to propose each individual piece of the theory, and then, once there is evidence to support each piece, reevaluate the data and start putting the pieces together. She has effectively created a grand theory, but has no evidence to back any of it up. The pathways she is talking about have all sorts of things that impact them, and she doesn't narrow any of it down to testable chunks. Instead, KK insists that her whole theory is right and explains a broad swath of ASD related questions. She tries to use the fact that she copied the biochemical pathways out as evidence, but that's not evidence that her theory is correct or that the various pieces fit together the way she says they fit.
  • https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Oversimplified-Cause-Fallacy

Now she has plenty of other problems too, misinterpreting data and ignoring everyone else working in the field who was actually going through peer review and sharing data. There have been many studies exploring BH4 (Frye et al., 2010, 2013; Frye & James, 2014; Richard E. Frye, 2014; Sragovich et al., 2019) that all touch on this. Discussion of ASD phenotypes start well before she published anything (McDonald, 2021; Nayar et al., 2021; Nordahl et al., n.d.; Scheerer et al., 2021; Warrier et al., 2022)

She also fails to include a methods section in her papers, so we have no idea of what she excluded or what she would have found. This is in contrast to several of the authors she has accused of plagiarism, who include search methodologies in their papers so that you can actually see what they would have found, what they excluded etc. 

She talks about realizing that comorbidities associated with ASD might be related to ASD, and that's just a basic understanding of pathophysiology: the most common comorbidities of any disease are probably linked somehow. 

The complex part is that some of her ideas might actually be beneficial; we just do not know what parts are helpful and what parts are harmful. Even if all of the techniques she suggests are helpful, it doesn't actually mean that her theory is accurate at all. 

These are just my thoughts; I am sure the bench scientists and folks who focus on the biochemistry and all can do a better job poking holes in all of the details, but this is the stuff that jumped out at me.

Also, I would implore anyone reading any of this not to contact KK with complaints or concerns; she is not open to conversation, correction, or suggestions. My interest is not in correcting her, its in helping desperate parents and family members understand that it is not their fault if her methods fail, and if her methods succeed it doesnt mean her theory is accurate.

References

Frye, R. E., DeLatorre, R., Taylor, H. B., Slattery, J., Melnyk, S., Chowdhury, N., & James, S. J. (2013). Metabolic effects of sapropterin treatment in autism spectrum disorder: A preliminary study. Translational Psychiatry, 3(3), e237. https://doi.org/10.1038/tp.2013.14 

Frye, R. E., Huffman, L. C., & Elliott, G. R. (2010). Tetrahydrobiopterin as a novel therapeutic intervention for autism. Neurotherapeutics: The Journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics, 7(3), 241–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurt.2010.05.004 

Frye, R. E., & James, S. J. (2014). Metabolic Pathology of Autism in Relation to Redox Metabolism. Biomarkers in Medicine, 8(3), 321–330. https://doi.org/10.2217/bmm.13.158 

Johns Hopkins Evidence-Based Practice Manual, 5th Edition – MSK Library Blog. (2026, January 27). https://library.mskcc.org/blog/2026/01/johns-hopkins-evidence-based-practice-manual-5th-edition/ 

McDonald, T. A. M. (2021). The Broader Autism Phenotype Constellations–Disability Matrix Paradigm: Theoretical model for autism and the broader autism phenotype. Medical Hypotheses, 146, 110456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110456 

Nayar, K., Sealock, J. M., Maltman, N., Bush, L., Cook, E. H., Davis, L. K., & Losh, M. (2021). Elevated Polygenic Burden for Autism Spectrum Disorder Is Associated With the Broad Autism Phenotype in Mothers of Individuals With Autism Spectrum Disorder. Biological Psychiatry, Novel Neurodevelopmental Disturbances and Autism Risk, 89(5), 476–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2020.08.029 

Nordahl, C. W., Andrews, D. S., Dwyer, P., Waizbard-Bartov, E., Restrepo, B., Lee, J. K., Heath, B., Saron, C., Rivera, S. M., Solomon, M., Ashwood, P., & Amaral, D. G. (n.d.). Frontiers | The Autism Phenome Project: Toward Identifying Clinically Meaningful Subgroups of Autism. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2021.786220 

Richard E. Frye, M. D. (2014). Tetrahydrobiopterin Deficiency in Autism Spectrum Disorder. North American Journal of Medicine and Science, 7(3). https://najms.com/index.php/najms/article/view/148 

Scheerer, N. E., Curcin, K., Stojanoski, B., Anagnostou, E., Nicolson, R., Kelley, E., Georgiades, S., Liu, X., & Stevenson, R. A. (2021). Exploring sensory phenotypes in autism spectrum disorder. Molecular Autism, 12(1), 67. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13229-021-00471-5 

Sragovich, S., Ziv, Y., Vaisvaser, S., Shomron, N., Hendler, T., & Gozes, I. (2019). The autism-mutated ADNP plays a key role in stress response. Translational Psychiatry, 9(1), 235. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-019-0569-4 

Tsistinas, O. (2026, September 3). Subject Guides: Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice: Searching for the Evidence. https://guides.upstate.edu/c.php?g=1023176&p=7411259 

Turner, M. (2026, August 25). UC Library Guides: Evidence-Based Practice in Health: Hierarchy of Evidence. https://canberra.libguides.com/c.php?g=599346&p=4149721 

Warrier, V., Zhang, X., Reed, P., Havdahl, A., Moore, T. M., Cliquet, F., Leblond, C. S., Rolland, T., Rosengren, A., Rowitch, D. H., Hurles, M. E., Geschwind, D. H., Børglum, A. D., Robinson, E. B., Grove, J., Martin, H. C., Bourgeron, T., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2022). Genetic correlates of phenotypic heterogeneity in autism. Nature Genetics, 54(9), 1293–1304. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-022-01072-5

Not sure if this meets the legal criteria for harassment under Wisconsin law. The threat the other person made in the comments, "coming to their door," likely meets the criteria, but her egging on "social consequences" is a problem.

I think it may be worthwhile to remind everyone on this sub that it is best not to interact/comment/post to her directly or to her pages/social media.