Posted on 02/23/2005 7:45:53 AM PST by CraigG
"Good info and good article...except for one thing.
The very first paragraph should have gone into the link between Thimerosal and mercury for the uninformed. Instead it flip flops between the two and the reader is left to research for himself how the two are related. Such a lengthy article should have included this information.
Other than that, a good post for a first-timer. Welcome to FR."
Thanks for the feedback. One of the parents will be bringing a website online that will present the information in an easy to view format (at least hopefully it will be!). I'll post that when it's ready.
"Cash or bearer bonds prefered I presume."
I don't think I should say how I want these people to pay for their crimes. What if it were your child that was needlessly poisoned? Better yet, what would we do if a terrorist organization had somehow gotten hold of our vaccine supply and contaminated it with one of the most toxic substances on the planet like mercury?
Please don't make this about frivilous lawsuits. I'm against that as much as anybody else is. But there is nothing frivilous about our children getting poisoned and then having it covered up.
There is no medical record of autism before Thimerosal's introduction to vaccines in the 1930s. Before World War II, when Thimerosal was only used in the U.S., autism was considered an "American Disease".
As Donald Miller, M.D., Professor of Surgery, University of Washington states:
"Autism was discovered in 1943, in American children, twelve years after ethylmercury (thimerosal) was added to the pertussis vaccine. (The disease was not seen in Europe until the 1950s, after thimerosal was added to vaccines there.)"
Autism in History: The Case of Hugh Blair of Borgue
As Donald Miller, M.D., Professor of Surgery, University of Washington states: "Autism was discovered in 1943, in American children, twelve years after ethylmercury (thimerosal) was added to the pertussis vaccine. (The disease was not seen in Europe until the 1950s, after thimerosal was added to vaccines there.)"
You're quoting a SURGEON to try to support the theory of autism being linked to thimerosal? If you had quoted a Neurodevelopmental Pediatrician, I would consider it, but autism is not the field of expertise for a Surgeon, just as myocardial infarction is not the area of expertise of a Urologist. Current scientific research is leaning toward a genetic cause to Autism (chromosome 15)
"Current scientific research is leaning toward a genetic cause to Autism (chromosome 15)"
Do you accept that we've seen an explosion in autism since the early 90's? If you do, genes alone cannot be responsible for this. Genes do not change that much in a single generation. It has never happened before in the history of man. While I agree genes do play a part, there HAS TO be an environmental factor in addition to genes.
Whether or not autism was around in the 1800's is not that relevant. No one said thimerosal is the ONLY way it can happen. My point is that thimerosal is the factor for the explosion we've seen since the early 90's.
I'll accept that there are more children being diagnosed with autism, but is this an increased incidence, or a more specific classification than had been done previously? Are the statistics that back up your statement based on DSM diagnoses? If so, what were the actual diagnoses that were available prior to the 1990's? PDD in place of autism, or specifically autism? There are many variables to consider, before you make the blanket statement about an "explosion of autism in the 90's".
Whether or not autism was around in the 1800's is not that relevant.
It certainly is relevant to my post; I was responding to post 43, where justadad2four said that "There is no medical record of autism before Thimerosal's introduction to vaccines in the 1930s" and ""Autism was discovered in 1943, in American children, twelve years after ethylmercury (thimerosal) was added to the pertussis vaccine". Providing disinformation like this decreases one's credibility.
"Current scientific research is leaning toward a genetic cause to Autism (chromosome 15)"
The rate of autism has exploded in the past 15 years. That is an undeniable fact. The cause of this cannot be genes alone. Genes don't change so radically in one generation. There must be an environmental aspect to this in addition to genes.
Like I said in post 46: the "explosion" of new autism cases could very well be due to increased awareness, different diagnostic criteria, improved tracking of the number diagnosed. Sorry; I don't subscribe to the claim that autism is the result of an injury.
Born Conservative states:
"Just because there is "no medical record" of autism prior to WWII doesn't mean it didn't exist."
Non sequitur. I didn't say autism didn't exist prior to WWII, nor was I trying to imply that. See below.
Born Conservative states:
"You're quoting a SURGEON to try to support the theory of autism being linked to thimerosal?"
It doesn't take an expert to identify a *possible* pattern - in this case a *possible* point in time when the number of persons with autism became statistically significant.
No doubt there have been instances of mercury poisoned persons throughout history. The symptoms of mercury poisoning and autism are nearly identical.
It was actually Leo Kanner, a child psychiatrist at the Johns Hopkins University, that published the paper identifying autistic children in 1943, asserting he had noticed such children since 1938.
California has autism records going back to at least the 80's using DSM diagnostic criteria and the curve illustrating new cases has an exact correlation to the increase in mercury via vaccines. You can see this slide in a presentation available for download at www.evidenceofharm.com. The book Evidence of Harm will be released on 4/1/05 and will contain this information and more.
Here is a link to an article that discusses whether or not we are seeing more autism or if it has always been here: http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20050203-030807-6482r.htm
In my opinion, the most compelling piece of evidence against thimerosal are the CDC, FDA, AAP meeting minutes obtained via FOIA. Here is a link to a 30 page summary (the entire doc is about 300 pages): http://www.mercola.com/2004/sep/22/blaylock_vaccine_coverup.htm
If you don't trust Dr. Mercola or Dr. Blaylock here is a letter sent to the CDC Director by Congressman Dave Weldon (who is also an MD):
January 15, 2004
Julie L. Gerberding, M.D., M.P.H.
Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Road, N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30333
Dear Dr. Gerberding,
I am writing to ask that you post-pone the February 9, 2004, Institute
of Medicine (IOM) Immunization Safety Review Committee meeting.
Pressing forward with this meeting at this time, I believe, will
further undermine the credibility of the Centers for Disease Control
(CDC) on matters of vaccine safety and do damage to the reputation of
the IOM. I believe the proposed date of this meeting, which you have
the ability to change, is in the best interests of no one who is
seeking the truth about a possible association between vaccines and
neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism.
Recent actions and statements by officials within the CDCs National
Immunization Program (NIP) office, the timing of the IOM meeting, and
the agenda for the IOM meeting raise serious questions about the
purpose, value and objectives of this meeting.
Presently, the NIP is engaged in what amounts to an investigation of
their own actions, which does not create an air of confidence.
The actions of the CDC regarding their November 3, 2003, article in
Pediatrics raise serious concerns about the objectivity of the CDCs top
vaccine safety officials and the value of their input on this issue.
They are the very ones driving the IOM meeting and agenda.
On the day the Pediatrics study was released, a top CDC researcher and
a coauthor of the study was quick to declare in news articles that
appeared across this nation, The final results of the study show no
statistical association between thimerosal vaccines and harmful health
outcomes in children, in particular autism and attention-deficit
disorder. Unfortunately, the study does nothing of the sort, and when
called to account eight weeks later, this CDC official was forced to
recant. When asked if the children in the study were too young to have
received an autism diagnosis, this coauthor stated that yes they were
too young. He went on to admit that the study also likely mislabeled
young autistic children as having other disabilities thus masking the
number of children with autism. There are a host of other flaws in the
study that are raised in the attached articles and letters to
Pediatrics, which I urge you to personally review.
The CDCs top vaccine officials spent four years developing this study,
and it is a seriously flawed study by their own admission. The fact
that the CDCs top vaccine safety research officials produced such a
seriously flawed study does not build confidence in the ability of the
CDC to conduct proper vaccine safety monitoring or investigations of
past decisions. Even worse, some critics have leveled serious charges
that perhaps officials within the NIP manipulated data to disprove a
theory they find objectionable. A review of the NIPs July 2000
Simpsonwood meeting, the various iterations of the Pediatrics study,
and internal e-mails appear to give support to this claim.
In his December 17, 2003, letter to Pediatrics, Dr. Neal Halsey
outlined a number of concerns about the study. Furthermore, in
extensive discussions my staff has held with the CDC, your staff made
it clear that the CDC will not hand over - to already approved
independent researchers - the raw data used by CDC in developing the
Pediatrics study. CDC is providing only limited access to the altered
data. The NIPs failure to provide the raw data for reviewing only
raises further suspicions.
It appears to me not only as a Member of Congress but also as a
physician that some officials within the CDCs NIP may be more
interested in a public relations campaign than getting to the truth
about thimerosal. At present, I have lost confidence in the ability of
officials at the CDC to give an honest evaluation of the matters at
hand. It is not just me raising these concerns about public confidence,
but also Dr. Neal Halsey who in his letter conveys his concerns about
loss of confidence in the NIP.
Further eroding the CDCs objectivity is the apparent bias in the
information shared with the public on the CDCs NIP website. A review of
the information on the website regarding possible associations between
thimerosal and autism and the MMR and autism demonstrates a clear bias
towards building confidence in the safety of vaccines rather than
providing an objective presentation of the data. The CDCs website
presents a very selective reporting of the science. The information
provided to the public generally ignores and discounts studies raising
safety concerns while focusing instead on highlighting epidemiology
studies favoring their position.
Given these concerns, the CDCs contributions to the IOM discussion
would be viewed as suspect and non-objective. Furthermore, the fact
that this meeting is being held at this time and according to the
parameters put forth by the NIP officials is disturbing. I have already
heard concerns expressed by those in the general public that the timing
of this meeting is being driven by a desire to short-circuit important
research and draw premature conclusions. If the purpose of this meeting
is to seriously consider and address these concerns, then this will not
be accomplished.
I have reviewed the research recommendations set forth in the IOMs
earlier reports on these issues. The federal government has invested
very few resources into examining these areas of research. Furthermore,
the research that has been conducted to date by the NIP seems to be
tainted by a desire to disprove a theory that they find objectionable.
Additionally, I am concerned that the agenda set forth in the meeting
is inadequate and incomplete. With respect to the MMR/autism concerns,
the IOM is dedicating one hour. Two witnesses are woefully inadequate
to update the committee on the research to date. The time set aside for
a discussion of epidemiology relating to thimerosal and autism is
heavily biased against those who have raised these concerns and will
not allow for a fair and balanced discussion of the literature. The
time set aside for a discussion of the biological mechanisms of
thimerosal and autism is inadequate to allow a full discussion of the
issue. To consider two issues of such significance in only seven hours
does not serve the public interest. To the outside observer it does not
appear to be a serious effort to examine these critical issues. Any
conclusions drawn from this meeting, including any report issued, will
be viewed as suspect given the very limited time dedicated to examining
very incomplete information.
Again, I am very concerned that the drive to conduct this meeting at
this time and force a report by this summer may not only further
undermine confidence in the CDC, but it may also harm the IOMs very
good reputation.
I ask that you give these concerns your highest consideration and that
you postpone the meeting until after additional research has been
conducted. Given the slow pace of research and lack of federal support
for this research, conducting this meeting prior to late 2004 to early
2005 is premature. The value of any such report at this time would be
very limited. We must give the research time to progress if the report
is to give meaningful insight into this matter.
Sincerely,
[signed]
Dave Weldon, M.D.
Member of Congress
Enclosures
Kanner was clear in his 1943 paper that he had never seen an autistic child prior to 1938. From his paper:
"Since 1938, there have come to our attention a number of children whose condition differs so markedly and uniquely from anything reported so far, that each case merits -- and, I hope, will eventually receive -- a detailed consideration of its fascinating peculiarities."
Bump for later reading
Wow! Welcome to FR!
I stumbled onto this post from this one.
My son, now 6y2m, was diagnosed at 3y8m as PDD-NOS (Pervasive Developmental Delays - Not Otherwise Specified). This is a mild form of autism.
When the doctors said that word, we freaked out a bit. But we read and read and read. He had diarrhea (runny stool at least) all the time, since birth. His metal levels were extreme. We found the DAN protocol. We found he probably had bowel problems due to incompletely metabolized gluten or casein.
We went with GFCF diet for 18 months. We had ABA therapy for 9 months. We did chelation for a while (pills every four hours round the clock for three days, then off for 11 days). He was taking 20+ pills with every meal (bless his heart).
He is largely recovered now. He has some residual language-processing difficulty, but otherwise is a normal boy. His stool is normal. His metal levels are not quite so high.
He did NOT get the metals from thimerosol, as we did not vaccinate him. But mom did east here share of tuna and other fish. We don't know if that's linked or not.
I'm struck by the similarity of your story and mine. Thanks for all your research and posting.
So happy to hear your great story! There is a new organization www.rescueangels.com that is dedicated to informing & helping parents get help for their mercury poisoned children.
Craig,
How do you remove the metals and test for them?
CJ
You test for them with a blood test, sometimes a hair test.
We reduced them by chelation - you give the child a chelating agent which stirs up the metals out of the cells and into the bloodstream. Then they are eliminated the usual ways. We gave our son DMSA every four hours (around the clock) for 3 days of every fourteen.
The behavioral symptoms might flare up worse during chelation, because the metals are out in the bloodstream, but that didn't happen for us.
ok next questions... where do you get a chelation agent. How much this cost, any side effects from the treatment? Who does the blood tests, a lab? insurance pay for any of this?
Thanks!
We got our DMSA from Kirkman Laboratories, somewhere in Oregon, via mail. (DMSA stands for Di-Methyl Something or Other). You need a script. See a DAN doctor.
How much this cost
Fairly expensive. It's been a while, but my best recollection was about $1.50 a dose. We gave a dose every four hours for 3 days ( 18 doses), then 11 days off, then repeat. Four of those spells = 8 weeks. Then we had him tested again. Levels were down. We waited a couple of months, then went thru another round.. Then another wait and another round, and another test.
I don't remember what the lab tests / doctor visits cost.
any side effects from the treatment?
Not in our case, alhough we were warned that, because the chelation stirs up the metal out of the tissues into the blood, we might actually see an increase in troublesome behaviors (whatever symptoms he had anyway might get worse) during the chelation weekend.
Who does the blood tests, a lab?
Ordinary hospital lab, yes.
insurance pay for any of this?
I don't know. We paid it ourselves, not having insurance (I'm self employed, so this was cheaper than buying insurance).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.