A CONTROVERSIAL treatment for dyslexia and other learning difficulties is under fire from experts who believe it makes exaggerated claims based on flawed research.

The Dyslexia, Dyspraxia and Attention Deficit Treatment Centre (DDAT) is a private company that boasts of remarkable successes by using simple physical exercises with children suffering from poor reading skills, lack of co-ordination and “underachieving”.

It is one of a number of unusual treatments for dyslexia, including fish oils and special spectacles, that have sprung up because there is so much uncertainty surrounding the problem and its causes.

Thousands of parents concerned about their children’s reading skills and school performance have paid DDAT up to £1,500 for treatment, which includes exercises such as balancing on wobble boards, walking downstairs backwards and juggling with bean bags. Tens of thousands of others contacted the company, which is expanding rapidly, after it featured on the television programme Tonight with Trevor McDonald last year.

It billed the treatment as a “revolutionary breakthrough” that could benefit huge numbers of children. Some 4% of people are severely dyslexic and another 6% have moderate or mild symptoms.

DDAT is now promoting itself using a study published this month in the journal Dyslexia that claims DDAT’s methods are “effective . . . in improving cognitive skills and literacy performance”. The article, however, has ignited intense argument in academic circles.

“A number of people including myself are very concerned about it,” said Dr John Rack, head of research at the Dyslexia Institute. “It is going well beyond the data.” Professor Maggie Snowling, an international expert, said: “There are no grounds to recommend it in any way. I don’t think it should have been published.”

Even the founder of the company, Wynford Dore, admits the research will “ruffle feathers”, although he says it “is only controversial with those who haven’t studied it”.

Dore — a veteran entrepreneur with nine current directorships, and many past ones — made a fortune about four years ago when he sold a company that made fire-resistant paint. He said that in the past year more than 10,000 children had enrolled on the DDAT course which, assuming a typical payment of £1,500, would give an annual turnover of £15m.

The idea that exercise can help dyslexic and dyspraxic children is not new, but experts are divided over its worth. Dore, who owns 70% of DDAT (the rest is owned by Roy Rutherford, a GP involved in the research and treatment) has pushed claims for it further than before. On its website DDAT says that in most cases it is “getting rid of” patients’ symptoms. It claims “virtually everyone seems to benefit to a significant degree”.

Snowling, a professor at York University, denies the new research backs these claims. She has prepared a “damning critique”, arguing that the study failed to follow standard scientific procedures. In addition, she believes the results do not show improved reading: “There is absolutely no evidence that this treatment had any effect on literacy at all.”

She added: “You can certainly improve a person’s confidence, but £1,500 is a lot of money to spend on increasing your kid’s confidence. What about sending them trampolining once a week instead?”

To critics Dore points to his satisfied customers, from individuals to teachers. Bedford Education Action Zone, for example, found “significantly positive results” from one pilot study. Another scheme at Balsall Common primary school in Kenilworth, Warwickshire, prompted the head teacher Trevor Davies to say: “To begin with I was very sceptical. I thought it was completely off the wall, but it isn’t. It works.”

But the DDAT regime did not work for Joanna Oakley of Sutton Coldfield. She spent about £1,000 on a course lasting about a year for her daughter Olivia, 12, and found the resulting improvement was “absolutely nothing whatsoever”. She believes that it “wasn’t at all worth it”.

Nor did it work for Helen Westwell, of London, whose son Oscar, 7, spent time on the course. “It’s nothing that could not be published free on the internet.”

Even the researchers have reservations. Professor Rod Nicolson, a co-author of the study, admits that “you can’t tell” exactly whether DDAT “reaches parts of the brain that other methods do not reach”. If parents make an effort to help their children, he admits, all sorts of different treatments “may have a beneficial effect”.

That said, Nicolson and his co-authors believe the research shows a distinct trend that at least some people benefit from the exercise regime. He believes traditional treatments do not work well and that other avenues must be explored.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• The bright side of this winter rain
• Story behind the picture: Snow Leopard, 2008
• Times Charity Appeal: The Place2Be