Posted on 02/23/2005 7:45:53 AM PST by CraigG
Hi Everyone,
I am the father of a 3 year old, recovering autistic son. We got the diagnosis at 18 months and in the time since I have dedicated myself to understanding this disorder and recovering my son from it.
I have learned that autism is really mercury poisoning. The epidemic we are seeing now is the result of the mercury preservative in vaccines. This is not to say that autism cannot occur in other ways. It can. But the explosion we are seeing today is directly linked to the increase in mercury given to our children in the early 90's. Genes do play a part but it would be impossible for it to be the only cause. There is no such thing as a "genetic epidemic." Genes don't change that fast. Some people have genes that make them susceptible to autism - they don't do as a good a job detoxing heavy metals like mercury.
The drug companies are aware of it. The FDA & CDC are too. They chose to cover it up. All of these statements can be proven. Thankfully there are some politician's that are not willing to let this coverup go on. Congressmen Dan Burton & Dave Weldon are heroically fighting for our cause. There is an excellent book coming out that will describe all of this in detail. It is called Evidence of Harm (www.evidenceofharm) by David Kirby. I had the priviledge of seeing a presentation by David Kirby last week and the evidence is staggering. I am posting my notes from David Kirby's presentation below. Then I will post a compilation of evidence compiled by another dad of an autistic son. My goal in doing all of this is to spread awareness. The drug companies responsible for this and the government agencies that let it happen are trying desperately to cover this up. This is a non-partisan issue that should not be covered up. Mercury is still in flu shots for children and rhogam shots for pregnant women. Adult vaccines contain it as well. The worst part is that because the drug companies cannot admit that mercury is causing this, they cannot use this knowledge in developing a cure.
I know this is tough to believe. I urge you to read all of the information I am presenting before you comment. Here is a post I made on a Yahoo group (ChelatingKids2) for parents of autistic children:
I strongly encourage everyone to hear this presentation. It was truly UNBELIEVABLE. If you, or someone you know, is on the fence regarding whether or not thimerisol has caused an autism epidemic I strongly advise you to see this presentation & read David's book when it becomes available. I know most of us on these lists already know that mercury in vaccines caused an autism epidemic. We've all seen individual posts highlighting a particular issue showing evidence to support this claim. But when you see a 60 page presentation that really covers the entire history it is quite different than anything we've ever seen before. The fact that David Kirby is an eloquent speaker who has spent years researching the issues and truly does present both sides makes this even more appealing - and shocking.
As I was listening to the presentation I couldn't help but view the key players at some of the drug companies, the FDA & CDC as criminals. These people either KNEW that they were poisoning our kids or they SHOULD HAVE KNOWN.
Lilly knew in the 1930's that thimerosal was toxic. Their employees that handled the product received tremendous warning of its toxicity and danger. We did not.
Mercury was known to cause the "Mad Hatter" & Pink Disease and was subsequently removed from these products. But it was not removed from vaccines. It's interesting to note that not everyone exposed to mercury filled teething rings developed Pink Disease. It was about 1 in 500 indicating that some had a genetic susceptibility to it. Sound familiar?
In the late 80's & early 90's MORE thimerosal was given to our kids. The amount of mercury our children were receiving was WAY ABOVE the safe limit as set forth by our government. But the FDA failed to do simple arithmatic and come to this conclusion. Merck did come to this conclusion in 1991 but FAILED TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. Just imagine what life would be like for us if Merck was only willing to spend a little more to produce non toxic vaccines.
The FDA was asked to determine if our children were receiving too much mercury in vaccines. So they looked at the 162.5 mcg of mercury received in the first 6 months of life and divided by 180 for the # of days in 6 months. This gave them an average of .9 mcg/day which is just above EPA limits but below FDA & CDC limits. So basically they summed it up as no big deal. But their logic is EXTREMELY flawed and they obviously knew this. Our kids received their mercury on 4 occasions, not spread over 180 days. The example David Kirby uses is great. It's safe to take 2 Tylenol's a day but it's NOT SAFE to take a whole container of Tylenol in one sitting.
Then Congress ordered the CDC to study the effect of thimerisol containing vaccines on autism in 1999. The first study, which of course was NEVER PUBLISHED, showed a relative risk of 7.6. A relative risk of 2 is considered proof of correlation in court. THIS WAS CLEAR EVIDENCE. But they repeated the study FOUR MORE TIMES until they were able to report that there was no risk. Thank god for the Freedom of Information Act. These people are on record indicating that there is a clear correlation and that they are having a hard time presenting the data in a way that produces the outcome they are looking for. One person even comments that he won't let HIS grandson get vaccinated after looking at this data. But after 5 data manipulations they had finally succeeded. They carefully selected the data they would study. They watered down the data by looking at kids in the first year of life which is way too early to ever receive a diagnosis. And they published this trash and said they would no longer look at thimerisol as a cause of autism.
They were hoping we would just go away. But that will never happen. There is so much more evidence that I haven't included in my rant (which is quickly becoming a novel in itself - sorry about that!). I can't wait for this book to come out and you'll be happy to know that David Kirby announced that it will be made into a movie.
Here is the body of evidence:
Mercury Poisoning: Proof??
Myth #15 The scientific standard for proof is a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. If you are so sure mercury causes autism, where is this study to prove it?
First, there is no double-blind, placebo-controlled study to show Thimerosal is safe. In order to do an effective double-blind, placebo-controlled study, you would need to vaccinate a group of children with Thimerosal-containing vaccines and vaccinate another group of children with Thimerosal-free vaccines using the current vaccine schedule, then follow their development over a 2-3 year period, and see which ones develop neurological issues and which do not. Obviously, this would be a challenging study to recruit children for, "Your child will be part of a study where they may receive a vaccine with a substance in it that many believe causes autism. Would you like to participate?" Given the impracticality of such a study, here are some alternative studies that could be done:
1. You could analyze the data the government maintains through its "Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System" and compare the data they already have on children who received Thimerosal-containing vaccines against children who did not receive Thimerosal in their vaccines. This study has already been done by Mark & David Geier and showed a high correlation between Thimerosal dosing and neurological disorders:
Thimerosal in Childhood Vaccines, Neurodevelopmental Disorders, and Heart Disease in the United States Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Mark Geier, M.D., Ph.D., David A. Geier Spring 2003
2. You could compare the symptoms of mercury poisoning and the symptoms of autism and see how similar they are. This study has already been done and demonstrated that the symptoms of autism and the symptoms of mercury poisoning are exactly the same:
Autism: a Novel Form of Mercury Poisoning Medical Hypothesis 2001 Sally Bernard, et. al December 2000
3. You could administer a chelating agent to remove heavy metals, including mercury, to a group of autistic children and to a group of neurotypical children and measure the amount of mercury coming out of the children to see if there are any differences. This study has already been done by Jeff Bradstreet et.al. and showed that autistic children excrete significantly more mercury than neurotypical children:
A Case-Control Study of Mercury Burden in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Volume 8, Number 3 Jeff Bradstreet, M.D., David Geier, B.A., Jerold Kartzinel, M.D., James Adams, Ph.D., Mark Geier, M.D., Ph.D. Summer 2003
4. You could inject a group of mice with Thimerosal in doses that proportionally mimic the timing and amount received according to the recommended vaccination schedule and compare these mice to a control group for neurological development. This study has already been done by Mady Hornig et al. and showed that a subset of mice with genetic detoxification impairments who received Thimerosal injections developed "autistic symptoms":
Neurotoxic Effects of Postnatal Thimerosal are Mouse Strain Dependent Molecular Psychiatry Dr. Mady Hornig, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons May 2004
5. You could compare the first baby haircuts of autistic children versus neurotypical children to see if there are any differences in the patterns of heavy metal excretion (hair is one of the ways the body excretes metals). This study has already been done and showed that autistic children demonstrated an impaired ability to excrete metals from birth:
Reduced Levels of Mercury in First Baby Haircuts of Autistic Children International Journal of Toxicology Dr. Amy S. Holmes, Mark F. Blaxill, Boyd E. Haley, Ph.D. March 14, 2003
6. You could run a trial of 31 autistic children where you chelated patients over the course of twelve months and had parents videotape their children and test urine and fecal samples for toxic metals every other month. You could then compare the children's progress and symptoms from the beginning to the end of treatment. This study was done by Dr. Rashid Buttar and he made the following statement before Congress:
Autism, the Misdiagnosis of our Future Generations Testimony, U.S. Congressional Sub-Committee Hearing Rashid A. Buttar, DO, Vice Chairman, American Board of Clinical Metal Toxicology May 6, 2004
"The Autism study consisted of 31 patients with the diagnoses of autism, autism like spectrum, and pervasive developmental delay. Inclusion criteria was simple, including an independent diagnosis of the above mentioned conditions from either a neurologist or pediatrician, and the desire of the parent to try the treatment protocol using TD-DMPS. All patients were enrolled sequentially as they presented to the clinic and only those who did not wish to participate in the TD-DMPS were not included. All 31 patients were tested for metal toxicity using four different tests: urine metal toxicity and essential minerals, hair metal toxicity and essential minerals, RBC metal toxicity, and fecal metal toxicity, all obtained from Doctor's Data Laboratory. These tests were performed at baseline, and repeated at 2 months, 4 months, 6 months, 8 months, 10 months, 12 months, and then every 4 months there after. All 31 patients showed little or no level of mercury on the initial baseline test results. Slide #37 shows an example of a baseline test result of one participant in the study showing very little mercury. Compared to the baseline results all 31 patients showed significantly higher levels of mercury as treatment continued. Slide #39 shows significantly higher mercury levels in this same study patient after two months of treatment with the TD-DMPS, with results showing approximately a 350% increase from previous baseline levels. The improvements in the patients in the study correlated with increased yield in measured mercury levels upon subsequent testing. Essentially, what was noted was that as more mercury was eliminated, the more noticeable the clinical improvements and the more dramatic the change in the patient. The manifestations of this evidence for clinical improvements included many observations but were specifically quantifiable with some patients who had no prior history of speech starting to speak at the age of 6 or 7, sometimes in full sentences. Patients also exhibited substantially improved behavior, reduction and eventual cessation of all stemming behavior, return of full eye contact, and rapid potty training, sometimes in children that were 5 or 6 but had never been successfully potty trained. Additional findings reported by parents included improvement and increase in rate of physical growth increased, as well as the child beginning to follow instructions, becoming affectionate and social with siblings or other children, seeking interaction with others, appropriate in response, and a rapid acceleration of verbal skills. The results in many of these children has been documented on video and other physicians involved with this protocol have been successfully able to reproduce the same results.
Mercury is the "spark" that causes the "fires" of Autism as well as Alzheimer's. Autism is the result of high mercury exposure early in life versus Alzheimer's is a chronic accumulation of mercury over a life time. A doctor can treat ALL the "fires" but until the "spark" is removed, there is minimal hope of complete recovery with most improvements being transient at best. However, once the process of mercury removal has been effectively started, the damage is curtailed and full recovery becomes possible..."
7. You could remove the mercury from some autistic children and not remove mercury from other autistic children and see if there was any difference in cognitive improvement over time. This is what hundreds of doctors and thousands of parents are doing every day throughout the country right now and seeing their children recover.
Myth #16 The scientific and medical communities have proven there is no correlation between Thimerosal in vaccines and autism
The argument that "there is no proof" or that "they proved there was no connection" is often made by the mainstream press and many spokespeople in the medical and regulatory community regarding the link between mercury and autism. It is important for any parent to view these statements critically and understand what is actually supporting these claims. The only science that claims to refute the connection is epidemiological science. What this means is that the science claiming to establish proof of no connection is based on statistical analysis of population data comparing vaccine data to data regarding neurological disorders. There have never been any medical studies done to establish "no proof" in the way many studies have been done in Myth #15. No analysis of Thimerosal toxicity, no safety testing of mercury, no placebo-controlled studies following children for five years after receiving mercury injections. Nothing.
Further, the actual epidemiological science that is held up of "proof" of no connection is both paltry and controversial. The totality of the "scientific evidence" demonstrating no connection is three clusters of recently released information from the medical and scientific community. Namely:
- A CDC study that appeared in Pediatrics in November of 2003 is the primary study held up as "proof" of no connection between Thimerosal and autism. This is astonishing in light of the fact that both the study itself and the author of the study said that their analysis was "inconclusive" and more research was required. The study that forms the basis for the assertion of "proof" admits it did not prove anything! Also, Pediatrics represented that the author of the study was an employee of the CDC when in fact he had become an employee of Glaxo SmithKline, a vaccine manufacturer. (See Myth #17)
- Four studies from Denmark appearing in four separate medical journals in 2002-2003 asserting that Denmark's data, where Thimerosal was removed from vaccines in 1992, demonstrates no link between Thimerosal and autism. Not only has the methodology of the "Denmark Studies" been refuted, but also it was later established that the authors of all 4 studies have an economic interest in and/or are employees of a Danish vaccine manufacturer who had recently received a big order from the United States for Thimerosal-containing vaccines. The journals did not mention this association in any of the reports. (See Myth #18)
- A study by the Institute of Medicine released in March 2004 that claimed there was no link between Thimerosal and autism. The IOM did not do any primary research, they simply reviewed the research that had already been done, focusing mostly on the aforementioned CDC and Danish studies as the basis for their conclusion. (See Myth #19)
Myth #17 The CDC did a study and proved there was no link between mercury in vaccines and autism.
In the November 2003 a study appeared in the medical journal Pediatrics titled, "Safety of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines: A Two- Phased Study of Computerized Health Maintenance Organization Databases" written by Thomas Verstraeten who had been an employee of the Center For Disease Control. By the time the study was published, he was an employee of Glaxo SmithKline, a vaccine manufacturer. It is this study, more than any other, which has formed the basis for the mainstream medical community to claim that the link between vaccines and autism has been disproven. This study is also routinely cited in the mainstream press on the autism/mercury topic as the "proof" of no connection. Here are the facts:
1. The study itself was wholly inconclusive. It never states anywhere in the study that there is no link between Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental issues. In fact, the study specifically states:
"The biological plausibility of the small doses of ethylmercury present in vaccines leading to increased risks of neurodevlopmental disorders is uncertain...For elucidating further whether a causal association exists between thimerosal exposure and nuerodevelopmental conditions, additional studies with different designs will be needed."
2. The study's own author, Thomas Verstraeten, confirmed that the study was completely inconclusive. In a letter to Pediatrics five months after the publication of the study, he writes:
"I am the first author of a recent article on a study undertaken by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to screen for a potential link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental delays. The article has been subject to heavy criticism from antivaccine lobbyists...Because I was responsible for nearly all aspects of this study, including study design, data gathering, data analysis, and writing of the article, I wish to give my opinion on these claims... Surprisingly, however, the study is being
interpreted now as negative [where `negative' implies no association was shown between Thimerosal and autism] by many, including the antivaccine lobbyists. The article does not state that we found evidence against an association, as a negative study would. It does state, on the contrary, that additional study is recommended, which is the conclusion to which a neutral study must come. Does a neutral outcome reduce the value of a study? It may make it less attractive to publishers and certainly to the press, but it in no way diminishes its scientific and public health merit. A neutral study carries a very distinct message: the investigators could neither confirm nor exclude an association, and therefore more study is required."
3. There is compelling evidence that the initial analysis by the CDC provided for a pronounced, positive correlation between exposure to Thimerosal and a wide range of neurodevelopmental issues but that data was manipulated out of the study over time to produce a neutral, inconclusive result. Here is Dr. Mark Geier discussing the study:
"this very study was the topic of secret-closed meetings between members of the CDC and other government organizations, as well as members of the vaccine manufacturers held at Simpsonwood, Georgia from 7-8 June 2000. The transcript of this meeting has been obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. This transcript reveals that the study initially found statistically significant dose-response effects between increasing doses of mercury from thimerosal- containing childhood vaccines and various types of neurodevelopmental disorders. The transcript documents that the data was real and statistically significant for many types of neurodevelopmental disorders, but that the meeting participants expressed that the data had to be `handled.' Despite, discussion about how to `handle' the data, some participants expressed concern that the work that had already been done would be obtained by others through the Freedom of Information Act. In this event, even if professional bodies expressed the opinion that there was no association between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders, it was already too late to do anything. In addition, other participants expressed that the vaccine manufacturers were in a horrible position to be able to defend any lawsuits alleging a relationship between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders, since no one would say with the available data that there was no relationship between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders."
The transcript of "Simpsonwood", if read in its entirety, is surprising in its clarity and in the explicit planning by the participants over how to "handle" the information to the outside world. One of the expert panelists, William Weild, MD, commented during Simpsonwood:
"The number of dose related relationships [thimerosal to neurological issues] are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant."
After the Simpsonwood meeting, the study's author, Thomas Vertraeten, stated to his superiors:
"I do not wish to be the advocate of the anti-vaccine lobby and sound like being convinced that thimerosal is or was harmful, but at least I feel we should use our sound scientific argumentation and not let out standards be dictated by our desire to disprove an unpleasant theory."
Some of the many documents that support the view that the initial findings of the CDC showed a high correlation between exposure to Thimerosal and a wide range of neurodevelopmental issues that were later manipulated out of the study include:
1. Analysis and Critique of the CDC's Handling of the Thimerosal Exposure Assessment Based on the Vaccine Safety Datalink Information Safe Minds October 2003
This 46-page presentation provides a detailed analysis of the mainupalitive methodology involved in removing the correlation between thimerosal and autism that the CDC data originally showed.
2. Study Misses Link Between Thimerosal and Neurodevlopmental Disorders Letter to the Editor of Pediatrics Dr. Mark Geier February 23, 2004
Dr. Geier's letter to Pediatrics provides a helpful overview of the flaws in the CDC's methodology and approach.
3. The Truth Behind the Vaccine Cover-up www.russellblaylockmd.com Russell L. Blaylock, M.D. September 4, 2004
This extensive review of the Simpsonwood transcript is juxtaposed with Dr. Balylock's expertise in nuerology to explain the transcript's contents and put them in appropriate context.
4. Immunization Safety Review Letter to the Institute of Medicine written by Safe Minds
This letter to the Institute of Medicine written by SafeMinds highlights some of the more egregious quotes from Simpsonwood.
1. Internal Email From Thomas Verstraeten of the CDC Noting the Thimerosal/Autism Link in the Data "Won't Go Away" Internal Email Correspondence at the CDC December 17, 1999
Thomas Verstareten's email, prior to the Simpsonwood meeting, laments that in his analysis the relationship between Thimerosal and a wide range of neurodevelopmental issues just "won't go away."
2. Scientific Review Of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information Simpsonwood Retreat Center June 7-8 2000
This is the actual "Simpsonwood Transcript" that SafeMinds obtained with a Freedom Of Information Act lawsuit. At 286 pages, it takes some time to get through. Russell Blaylock's report (#3 above) is a great way to capture the highlights of this transcript.
Myth #18 Denmark, which removed Thimerosal from vaccines in the early 1990s, did a study and proved there was no link between mercury in vaccines and autism.
This myth often implies that the government of Denmark was responsible for a study of Thimerosal and autism, which is not accurate. In rapid succession, four studies from Denmark were released in four separate medical journals, all purporting to disprove the thimerosal-vaccine-autism connection in some way. Specifically, The New England Journal of Medicine published in 2002, "A Population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism"; The American Journal of Preventative Medicine published in 2003, "Autism and thimerosal: lack of consistent evidence for an association"; Pediatrics published in 2003, "Thimerosal and the occurance of autism: negative ecological evidence from Danish population-based data"; and, The Journal of the American Medical Association published in 2003, "Association between thimerosal-containing vaccine and autism."
Soon after the studies were published, SafeMinds revealed that most of the Danish researchers behind all four of the studies were employees of a Danish manufacturer of vaccines, Statens Serum Institut. None of the reports noted this conflict of interest. Mothering magazine reported on SafeMind's response to one of the Danish studies (from the Journal of the American Medical Association):
"Safe Minds released an analysis of the autism registry data from Denmark that showed the rate of autism dropped sharply after removal of thimerosal from infant vaccines in that country in 1992. Their findings showed the rate of autism declined from an incidence of 1 in 500 prior to 1992 to 1 in 1,500 today. The analysis also uncovered a flaw in the methodology of Danish investigators publishing in the October issue of JAMA (Hviid et al), who utilized the same Danish registry data and concluded that autism rates in Denmark rose after thimerosal removal from vaccines. "In our review of the Danish data we identified a flaw which resulted in a substantial loss of autism case records from the registry which essentially renders the findings from the JAMA study by Hviid and colleagues invalid", said Sallie Bernard, executive director of Safe Minds. "The registry allows 10- 25% of diagnosed autism cases to be lost from its records each year. The effect of this loss is such that the records will disappear from older age groups to a much greater degree than from younger age groups in any given registry year." The Hviid findings are based on finding fewer older children in their 2000 registry cohort than younger ones. Since the older children received thimerosal vaccines and the younger ones did not, Hviid falsely concluded that thimerosal is not a factor in autism. The Safe Minds analysis shows instead that the decline is likely due to the loss of records of older children from the registry records, rather than a true decline in autism rates in the older group. Safe Minds reanalyzed the Denmark registry data and used an alternative method to avoid the record removal bias. The analysis looked at same-age children - 5-9 year olds - but from different registry years: 1992, when all of the children received thimerosal- containing vaccines, and 2002, when none of the children received vaccines with thimerosal. After adjusting for the lack of outpatient records in the 1992 registry, the analysis found a 2.3 higher number of autism cases among the 1992 thimerosal-exposed group relative to the 2002 non-exposed group. The analysis then determined an autism incidence rate for the non- thimerosal group of 1 in 1,500, while the thimerosal-exposed group had an incidence of 1 in 500, a 3-fold increase. The higher figure is comparable to the 1 in 500 incidence level for core autism recently found in England and the 1 in 250 incidence level recently calculated for the US. The thimerosal exposure level and timing in pre-1992 Denmark was comparable to that in England, while that for the US was somewhat more aggressive. "In the Hviid study in JAMA we can clearly see how the data was misinterpreted so a conclusion could be drawn to clear thimerosal from any role in autism," said Lyn Redwood, president of Safe Minds. "This misinterpretation is not surprising given the authors' employment with the manufacturer and promoter of vaccines in Denmark, Statens Serum Institut. This conflict of interest should have been stated by JAMA." Safe Minds is calling for a complete analysis of the Denmark autism registry data set by independent, unbiased epidemiologists who have no involvement in vaccine development, production, promotion, or administration." Some documents that refute the various Denmark studies include:
1. Something is Rotten In Denmark Safe Minds October 2003
This overview traces the association between all the Danish researchers to a single Danish vaccine company, Statens Serum Institut.
2. MMR and Autism In Perspective: The Denmark Story Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Volume 9, Number 3 Carol Stott, Ph.D., Mark Blaxill, Dr. Andrew Wakefield Fall 2004
These peer-reviewed analysis demonstrates that Denmark's autism rates rose after the introduction of the MMR vaccine.
3. Analysis of the Danish Autism Registry Data Base in Response to the Hviid et al Paper on Thimerosal in JAMA (October, 2003) SafeMinds Sallie Bernard October 2003
This paper specifically refutes the Danish study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
4. Danish Thimerosal-Autism study in Pediatrics: Misleading and Uninformative on Autism-Mercury Link SafeMinds Mark Blaxill September 2, 2003
This paper specifically refutes the Danish study published in Pediatrics.
Myth #19 The IOM did a study and proved there was no link between mercury in vaccines and autism.
In May 2004, the Institute of Medicine released a 216-page report titled Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism and concluded that there did not appear to be a causal link between Thimerosal and the autism epidemic. Much of their conclusion was based on the aforementioned CDC and Danish studies. There was no primary research done - this is a critical point. The IOM's conclusion was largely based on the studies discussed in Myth 18 & 19 above that are both subject The report opens with some statements that make a reader wonder if any bias is present in the minds of the authors of the study.
Soon after the report's release, Congressmen Burton and Weldon and Congresswoman Watson held a joint press conference. An excerpt from Mothering magazine on the press conference: "Unfortunately, I believe the findings announced in the May 18th IOM report are heavily biased, and unrepresentative of all the available scientific and medical research," stated Chairman Burton. "I think it is highly irresponsible for the IOM Immunization Safety Review Committee to purport definitive findings to the American public, which are based on selective scientific studies that are greatly flawed to begin with." Congresswoman Watson stated, "Just because there is not a preponderance of scientific proof, does not mean that we should discontinue investigations into the effects of mercury containing thimerosal. Unbiased researchers are continuing to produce results that challenge the IOM findings." The Congresswoman further noted that, "The IOM did not make the statement that mercury injected into the body is helpful. Mercury is mercury, and it is a neuro-toxic substance (among other bad things) - name one beneficial use in the human body." Said Congressman Weldon, "The IOM report is premature, perhaps perilously reliant on epidemiology, based on preliminary incomplete information, and may ultimately be repudiated. This report will not deter me from my commitment to seeing that this is fully investigated, nor will it put to rest the concerns of parents who believe their children were harmed by mercury-containing vaccines or the MMR vaccine." The recently released IOM report is the eighth and final in a series designed to examine the safety of vaccines that contain the mercury- based preservative, thimerosal. In their latest report, the IOM Committee concludes, "The body of epidemiological evidence favors the rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism." This statement represents a significant change from the Committee's finding in their 2001 report, which called such a causal relationship, "biologically plausible." The Committee based its final conclusions on their review of approximately 10 previously conducted epidemiological studies. Of those roughly 10 studies, 5 reported probable links between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism, yet those 5 were summarily dismissed because the Committee determined the manner in which they were conducted was flawed."
Mercury Poisoning: Proof??
Myth #15 The scientific standard for proof is a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. If you are so sure mercury causes autism, where is this study to prove it?
First, there is no double-blind, placebo-controlled study to show Thimerosal is safe. In order to do an effective double-blind, placebo-controlled study, you would need to vaccinate a group of children with Thimerosal-containing vaccines and vaccinate another group of children with Thimerosal-free vaccines using the current vaccine schedule, then follow their development over a 2-3 year period, and see which ones develop neurological issues and which do not. Obviously, this would be a challenging study to recruit children for, "Your child will be part of a study where they may receive a vaccine with a substance in it that many believe causes autism. Would you like to participate?" Given the impracticality of such a study, here are some alternative studies that could be done:
1. You could analyze the data the government maintains through its "Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System" and compare the data they already have on children who received Thimerosal-containing vaccines against children who did not receive Thimerosal in their vaccines. This study has already been done by Mark & David Geier and showed a high correlation between Thimerosal dosing and neurological disorders:
Thimerosal in Childhood Vaccines, Neurodevelopmental Disorders, and Heart Disease in the United States Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Mark Geier, M.D., Ph.D., David A. Geier Spring 2003
2. You could compare the symptoms of mercury poisoning and the symptoms of autism and see how similar they are. This study has already been done and demonstrated that the symptoms of autism and the symptoms of mercury poisoning are exactly the same:
Autism: a Novel Form of Mercury Poisoning Medical Hypothesis 2001 Sally Bernard, et. al December 2000
3. You could administer a chelating agent to remove heavy metals, including mercury, to a group of autistic children and to a group of neurotypical children and measure the amount of mercury coming out of the children to see if there are any differences. This study has already been done by Jeff Bradstreet et.al. and showed that autistic children excrete significantly more mercury than neurotypical children:
A Case-Control Study of Mercury Burden in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Volume 8, Number 3 Jeff Bradstreet, M.D., David Geier, B.A., Jerold Kartzinel, M.D., James Adams, Ph.D., Mark Geier, M.D., Ph.D. Summer 2003
4. You could inject a group of mice with Thimerosal in doses that proportionally mimic the timing and amount received according to the recommended vaccination schedule and compare these mice to a control group for neurological development. This study has already been done by Mady Hornig et al. and showed that a subset of mice with genetic detoxification impairments who received Thimerosal injections developed "autistic symptoms":
Neurotoxic Effects of Postnatal Thimerosal are Mouse Strain Dependent Molecular Psychiatry Dr. Mady Hornig, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons May 2004
5. You could compare the first baby haircuts of autistic children versus neurotypical children to see if there are any differences in the patterns of heavy metal excretion (hair is one of the ways the body excretes metals). This study has already been done and showed that autistic children demonstrated an impaired ability to excrete metals from birth:
Reduced Levels of Mercury in First Baby Haircuts of Autistic Children International Journal of Toxicology Dr. Amy S. Holmes, Mark F. Blaxill, Boyd E. Haley, Ph.D. March 14, 2003
6. You could run a trial of 31 autistic children where you chelated patients over the course of twelve months and had parents videotape their children and test urine and fecal samples for toxic metals every other month. You could then compare the children's progress and symptoms from the beginning to the end of treatment. This study was done by Dr. Rashid Buttar and he made the following statement before Congress:
Autism, the Misdiagnosis of our Future Generations Testimony, U.S. Congressional Sub-Committee Hearing Rashid A. Buttar, DO, Vice Chairman, American Board of Clinical Metal Toxicology May 6, 2004
"The Autism study consisted of 31 patients with the diagnoses of autism, autism like spectrum, and pervasive developmental delay. Inclusion criteria was simple, including an independent diagnosis of the above mentioned conditions from either a neurologist or pediatrician, and the desire of the parent to try the treatment protocol using TD-DMPS. All patients were enrolled sequentially as they presented to the clinic and only those who did not wish to participate in the TD-DMPS were not included. All 31 patients were tested for metal toxicity using four different tests: urine metal toxicity and essential minerals, hair metal toxicity and essential minerals, RBC metal toxicity, and fecal metal toxicity, all obtained from Doctor's Data Laboratory. These tests were performed at baseline, and repeated at 2 months, 4 months, 6 months, 8 months, 10 months, 12 months, and then every 4 months there after. All 31 patients showed little or no level of mercury on the initial baseline test results. Slide #37 shows an example of a baseline test result of one participant in the study showing very little mercury. Compared to the baseline results all 31 patients showed significantly higher levels of mercury as treatment continued. Slide #39 shows significantly higher mercury levels in this same study patient after two months of treatment with the TD-DMPS, with results showing approximately a 350% increase from previous baseline levels. The improvements in the patients in the study correlated with increased yield in measured mercury levels upon subsequent testing. Essentially, what was noted was that as more mercury was eliminated, the more noticeable the clinical improvements and the more dramatic the change in the patient. The manifestations of this evidence for clinical improvements included many observations but were specifically quantifiable with some patients who had no prior history of speech starting to speak at the age of 6 or 7, sometimes in full sentences. Patients also exhibited substantially improved behavior, reduction and eventual cessation of all stemming behavior, return of full eye contact, and rapid potty training, sometimes in children that were 5 or 6 but had never been successfully potty trained. Additional findings reported by parents included improvement and increase in rate of physical growth increased, as well as the child beginning to follow instructions, becoming affectionate and social with siblings or other children, seeking interaction with others, appropriate in response, and a rapid acceleration of verbal skills. The results in many of these children has been documented on video and other physicians involved with this protocol have been successfully able to reproduce the same results.
Mercury is the "spark" that causes the "fires" of Autism as well as Alzheimer's. Autism is the result of high mercury exposure early in life versus Alzheimer's is a chronic accumulation of mercury over a life time. A doctor can treat ALL the "fires" but until the "spark" is removed, there is minimal hope of complete recovery with most improvements being transient at best. However, once the process of mercury removal has been effectively started, the damage is curtailed and full recovery becomes possible..."
7. You could remove the mercury from some autistic children and not remove mercury from other autistic children and see if there was any difference in cognitive improvement over time. This is what hundreds of doctors and thousands of parents are doing every day throughout the country right now and seeing their children recover.
Myth #16 The scientific and medical communities have proven there is no correlation between Thimerosal in vaccines and autism
The argument that "there is no proof" or that "they proved there was no connection" is often made by the mainstream press and many spokespeople in the medical and regulatory community regarding the link between mercury and autism. It is important for any parent to view these statements critically and understand what is actually supporting these claims. The only science that claims to refute the connection is epidemiological science. What this means is that the science claiming to establish proof of no connection is based on statistical analysis of population data comparing vaccine data to data regarding neurological disorders. There have never been any medical studies done to establish "no proof" in the way many studies have been done in Myth #15. No analysis of Thimerosal toxicity, no safety testing of mercury, no placebo-controlled studies following children for five years after receiving mercury injections. Nothing.
Further, the actual epidemiological science that is held up of "proof" of no connection is both paltry and controversial. The totality of the "scientific evidence" demonstrating no connection is three clusters of recently released information from the medical and scientific community. Namely:
- A CDC study that appeared in Pediatrics in November of 2003 is the primary study held up as "proof" of no connection between Thimerosal and autism. This is astonishing in light of the fact that both the study itself and the author of the study said that their analysis was "inconclusive" and more research was required. The study that forms the basis for the assertion of "proof" admits it did not prove anything! Also, Pediatrics represented that the author of the study was an employee of the CDC when in fact he had become an employee of Glaxo SmithKline, a vaccine manufacturer. (See Myth #17)
- Four studies from Denmark appearing in four separate medical journals in 2002-2003 asserting that Denmark's data, where Thimerosal was removed from vaccines in 1992, demonstrates no link between Thimerosal and autism. Not only has the methodology of the "Denmark Studies" been refuted, but also it was later established that the authors of all 4 studies have an economic interest in and/or are employees of a Danish vaccine manufacturer who had recently received a big order from the United States for Thimerosal-containing vaccines. The journals did not mention this association in any of the reports. (See Myth #18)
- A study by the Institute of Medicine released in March 2004 that claimed there was no link between Thimerosal and autism. The IOM did not do any primary research, they simply reviewed the research that had already been done, focusing mostly on the aforementioned CDC and Danish studies as the basis for their conclusion. (See Myth #19)
Myth #17 The CDC did a study and proved there was no link between mercury in vaccines and autism.
In the November 2003 a study appeared in the medical journal Pediatrics titled, "Safety of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines: A Two- Phased Study of Computerized Health Maintenance Organization Databases" written by Thomas Verstraeten who had been an employee of the Center For Disease Control. By the time the study was published, he was an employee of Glaxo SmithKline, a vaccine manufacturer. It is this study, more than any other, which has formed the basis for the mainstream medical community to claim that the link between vaccines and autism has been disproven. This study is also routinely cited in the mainstream press on the autism/mercury topic as the "proof" of no connection. Here are the facts:
1. The study itself was wholly inconclusive. It never states anywhere in the study that there is no link between Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental issues. In fact, the study specifically states:
"The biological plausibility of the small doses of ethylmercury present in vaccines leading to increased risks of neurodevlopmental disorders is uncertain...For elucidating further whether a causal association exists between thimerosal exposure and nuerodevelopmental conditions, additional studies with different designs will be needed."
2. The study's own author, Thomas Verstraeten, confirmed that the study was completely inconclusive. In a letter to Pediatrics five months after the publication of the study, he writes:
"I am the first author of a recent article on a study undertaken by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to screen for a potential link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental delays. The article has been subject to heavy criticism from antivaccine lobbyists...Because I was responsible for nearly all aspects of this study, including study design, data gathering, data analysis, and writing of the article, I wish to give my opinion on these claims... Surprisingly, however, the study is being
interpreted now as negative [where `negative' implies no association was shown between Thimerosal and autism] by many, including the antivaccine lobbyists. The article does not state that we found evidence against an association, as a negative study would. It does state, on the contrary, that additional study is recommended, which is the conclusion to which a neutral study must come. Does a neutral outcome reduce the value of a study? It may make it less attractive to publishers and certainly to the press, but it in no way diminishes its scientific and public health merit. A neutral study carries a very distinct message: the investigators could neither confirm nor exclude an association, and therefore more study is required."
3. There is compelling evidence that the initial analysis by the CDC provided for a pronounced, positive correlation between exposure to Thimerosal and a wide range of neurodevelopmental issues but that data was manipulated out of the study over time to produce a neutral, inconclusive result. Here is Dr. Mark Geier discussing the study:
"this very study was the topic of secret-closed meetings between members of the CDC and other government organizations, as well as members of the vaccine manufacturers held at Simpsonwood, Georgia from 7-8 June 2000. The transcript of this meeting has been obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. This transcript reveals that the study initially found statistically significant dose-response effects between increasing doses of mercury from thimerosal- containing childhood vaccines and various types of neurodevelopmental disorders. The transcript documents that the data was real and statistically significant for many types of neurodevelopmental disorders, but that the meeting participants expressed that the data had to be `handled.' Despite, discussion about how to `handle' the data, some participants expressed concern that the work that had already been done would be obtained by others through the Freedom of Information Act. In this event, even if professional bodies expressed the opinion that there was no association between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders, it was already too late to do anything. In addition, other participants expressed that the vaccine manufacturers were in a horrible position to be able to defend any lawsuits alleging a relationship between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders, since no one would say with the available data that there was no relationship between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders."
The transcript of "Simpsonwood", if read in its entirety, is surprising in its clarity and in the explicit planning by the participants over how to "handle" the information to the outside world. One of the expert panelists, William Weild, MD, commented during Simpsonwood:
"The number of dose related relationships [thimerosal to neurological issues] are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant."
After the Simpsonwood meeting, the study's author, Thomas Vertraeten, stated to his superiors:
"I do not wish to be the advocate of the anti-vaccine lobby and sound like being convinced that thimerosal is or was harmful, but at least I feel we should use our sound scientific argumentation and not let out standards be dictated by our desire to disprove an unpleasant theory."
Some of the many documents that support the view that the initial findings of the CDC showed a high correlation between exposure to Thimerosal and a wide range of neurodevelopmental issues that were later manipulated out of the study include:
1. Analysis and Critique of the CDC's Handling of the Thimerosal Exposure Assessment Based on the Vaccine Safety Datalink Information Safe Minds October 2003
This 46-page presentation provides a detailed analysis of the mainupalitive methodology involved in removing the correlation between thimerosal and autism that the CDC data originally showed.
2. Study Misses Link Between Thimerosal and Neurodevlopmental Disorders Letter to the Editor of Pediatrics Dr. Mark Geier February 23, 2004
Dr. Geier's letter to Pediatrics provides a helpful overview of the flaws in the CDC's methodology and approach.
3. The Truth Behind the Vaccine Cover-up www.russellblaylockmd.com Russell L. Blaylock, M.D. September 4, 2004
This extensive review of the Simpsonwood transcript is juxtaposed with Dr. Balylock's expertise in nuerology to explain the transcript's contents and put them in appropriate context.
4. Immunization Safety Review Letter to the Institute of Medicine written by Safe Minds
This letter to the Institute of Medicine written by SafeMinds highlights some of the more egregious quotes from Simpsonwood.
1. Internal Email From Thomas Verstraeten of the CDC Noting the Thimerosal/Autism Link in the Data "Won't Go Away" Internal Email Correspondence at the CDC December 17, 1999
Thomas Verstareten's email, prior to the Simpsonwood meeting, laments that in his analysis the relationship between Thimerosal and a wide range of neurodevelopmental issues just "won't go away."
2. Scientific Review Of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information Simpsonwood Retreat Center June 7-8 2000
This is the actual "Simpsonwood Transcript" that SafeMinds obtained with a Freedom Of Information Act lawsuit. At 286 pages, it takes some time to get through. Russell Blaylock's report (#3 above) is a great way to capture the highlights of this transcript.
Myth #18 Denmark, which removed Thimerosal from vaccines in the early 1990s, did a study and proved there was no link between mercury in vaccines and autism.
This myth often implies that the government of Denmark was responsible for a study of Thimerosal and autism, which is not accurate. In rapid succession, four studies from Denmark were released in four separate medical journals, all purporting to disprove the thimerosal-vaccine-autism connection in some way. Specifically, The New England Journal of Medicine published in 2002, "A Population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism"; The American Journal of Preventative Medicine published in 2003, "Autism and thimerosal: lack of consistent evidence for an association"; Pediatrics published in 2003, "Thimerosal and the occurance of autism: negative ecological evidence from Danish population-based data"; and, The Journal of the American Medical Association published in 2003, "Association between thimerosal-containing vaccine and autism."
Soon after the studies were published, SafeMinds revealed that most of the Danish researchers behind all four of the studies were employees of a Danish manufacturer of vaccines, Statens Serum Institut. None of the reports noted this conflict of interest. Mothering magazine reported on SafeMind's response to one of the Danish studies (from the Journal of the American Medical Association):
"Safe Minds released an analysis of the autism registry data from Denmark that showed the rate of autism dropped sharply after removal of thimerosal from infant vaccines in that country in 1992. Their findings showed the rate of autism declined from an incidence of 1 in 500 prior to 1992 to 1 in 1,500 today. The analysis also uncovered a flaw in the methodology of Danish investigators publishing in the October issue of JAMA (Hviid et al), who utilized the same Danish registry data and concluded that autism rates in Denmark rose after thimerosal removal from vaccines. "In our review of the Danish data we identified a flaw which resulted in a substantial loss of autism case records from the registry which essentially renders the findings from the JAMA study by Hviid and colleagues invalid", said Sallie Bernard, executive director of Safe Minds. "The registry allows 10- 25% of diagnosed autism cases to be lost from its records each year. The effect of this loss is such that the records will disappear from older age groups to a much greater degree than from younger age groups in any given registry year." The Hviid findings are based on finding fewer older children in their 2000 registry cohort than younger ones. Since the older children received thimerosal vaccines and the younger ones did not, Hviid falsely concluded that thimerosal is not a factor in autism. The Safe Minds analysis shows instead that the decline is likely due to the loss of records of older children from the registry records, rather than a true decline in autism rates in the older group. Safe Minds reanalyzed the Denmark registry data and used an alternative method to avoid the record removal bias. The analysis looked at same-age children - 5-9 year olds - but from different registry years: 1992, when all of the children received thimerosal- containing vaccines, and 2002, when none of the children received vaccines with thimerosal. After adjusting for the lack of outpatient records in the 1992 registry, the analysis found a 2.3 higher number of autism cases among the 1992 thimerosal-exposed group relative to the 2002 non-exposed group. The analysis then determined an autism incidence rate for the non- thimerosal group of 1 in 1,500, while the thimerosal-exposed group had an incidence of 1 in 500, a 3-fold increase. The higher figure is comparable to the 1 in 500 incidence level for core autism recently found in England and the 1 in 250 incidence level recently calculated for the US. The thimerosal exposure level and timing in pre-1992 Denmark was comparable to that in England, while that for the US was somewhat more aggressive. "In the Hviid study in JAMA we can clearly see how the data was misinterpreted so a conclusion could be drawn to clear thimerosal from any role in autism," said Lyn Redwood, president of Safe Minds. "This misinterpretation is not surprising given the authors' employment with the manufacturer and promoter of vaccines in Denmark, Statens Serum Institut. This conflict of interest should have been stated by JAMA." Safe Minds is calling for a complete analysis of the Denmark autism registry data set by independent, unbiased epidemiologists who have no involvement in vaccine development, production, promotion, or administration." Some documents that refute the various Denmark studies include:
1. Something is Rotten In Denmark Safe Minds October 2003
This overview traces the association between all the Danish researchers to a single Danish vaccine company, Statens Serum Institut.
2. MMR and Autism In Perspective: The Denmark Story Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Volume 9, Number 3 Carol Stott, Ph.D., Mark Blaxill, Dr. Andrew Wakefield Fall 2004
These peer-reviewed analysis demonstrates that Denmark's autism rates rose after the introduction of the MMR vaccine.
3. Analysis of the Danish Autism Registry Data Base in Response to the Hviid et al Paper on Thimerosal in JAMA (October, 2003) SafeMinds Sallie Bernard October 2003
This paper specifically refutes the Danish study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
4. Danish Thimerosal-Autism study in Pediatrics: Misleading and Uninformative on Autism-Mercury Link SafeMinds Mark Blaxill September 2, 2003
This paper specifically refutes the Danish study published in Pediatrics.
Myth #19 The IOM did a study and proved there was no link between mercury in vaccines and autism.
In May 2004, the Institute of Medicine released a 216-page report titled Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism and concluded that there did not appear to be a causal link between Thimerosal and the autism epidemic. Much of their conclusion was based on the aforementioned CDC and Danish studies. There was no primary research done - this is a critical point. The IOM's conclusion was largely based on the studies discussed in Myth 18 & 19 above that are both subject The report opens with some statements that make a reader wonder if any bias is present in the minds of the authors of the study.
Soon after the report's release, Congressmen Burton and Weldon and Congresswoman Watson held a joint press conference. An excerpt from Mothering magazine on the press conference: "Unfortunately, I believe the findings announced in the May 18th IOM report are heavily biased, and unrepresentative of all the available scientific and medical research," stated Chairman Burton. "I think it is highly irresponsible for the IOM Immunization Safety Review Committee to purport definitive findings to the American public, which are based on selective scientific studies that are greatly flawed to begin with." Congresswoman Watson stated, "Just because there is not a preponderance of scientific proof, does not mean that we should discontinue investigations into the effects of mercury containing thimerosal. Unbiased researchers are continuing to produce results that challenge the IOM findings." The Congresswoman further noted that, "The IOM did not make the statement that mercury injected into the body is helpful. Mercury is mercury, and it is a neuro-toxic substance (among other bad things) - name one beneficial use in the human body." Said Congressman Weldon, "The IOM report is premature, perhaps perilously reliant on epidemiology, based on preliminary incomplete information, and may ultimately be repudiated. This report will not deter me from my commitment to seeing that this is fully investigated, nor will it put to rest the concerns of parents who believe their children were harmed by mercury-containing vaccines or the MMR vaccine." The recently released IOM report is the eighth and final in a series designed to examine the safety of vaccines that contain the mercury- based preservative, thimerosal. In their latest report, the IOM Committee concludes, "The body of epidemiological evidence favors the rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism." This statement represents a significant change from the Committee's finding in their 2001 report, which called such a causal relationship, "biologically plausible." The Committee based its final conclusions on their review of approximately 10 previously conducted epidemiological studies. Of those roughly 10 studies, 5 reported probable links between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism, yet those 5 were summarily dismissed because the Committee determined the manner in which they were conducted was flawed."
"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.