To Ashley Reynolds and KOMU,
Thank you for delving into one of the most controversial areas of medicine and pediatrics with an open mind and a fair voice for individuals to share their stories. Autism is probably the most
complex neurobehavioral developmental disorder we will ever know on such a grand scale in our society. Dysfunction in the immune system, the gut and within critical hepato-renal detoxification enzyme pathways are making this an enigma for medicine and science. Focusing on one variable in such a multi-variate problem is in large part why its understanding is so elusive.
In a small but ever growing population of people, vaccines can have deleterious effects. There are small populations for which many seemingly innocuous insults to others are, in these individuals, quite deleterious. An average medical student can name one of the classic examples of such subpopulation susceptibility; xeroderma pigmentosa, in which individuals who have a genetic impairment that prevents correction of DNA damage suffered by ultraviolet light.
Miniscule amounts of UV light in these individuals leads to skin cancer. So too it is with autism, miniscule amounts of heavy metals are in many instances creating the initial havoc that leads to this derailment of development. Global intra-body increased half-life of heavy metals appears to exist in these children because one or a couple of a many genes involved in methylation and/or sulfation are poorly functioning.
Mercury and aluminum in vaccines are implicated in potentiating the derangement in this subpopulation, in addition to ambient heavy metals and other toxins in the environment. Its the heavy metals that medical science controls that are really the most important, simply be the fact that they are controllable exposures. Those who have the funds and research capabilites to prove this association definitively have yet to investigate the connection thoroughly in the
susceptible population for obvious legal and ethical ramifications of ignoring mothers for 20 years on this issue. Recall that for the first 20 years of autism being a named syndrome, the mothers were blamed for being the causative factor, that was when medical students were lucky to ever see an autistic child during their training.
Now that the epidemic is upon us, medical professionals need to pull our collective head out of the sand that keeps getting piled up by the last great American industry (pharmaceuticals) and start doing the brave science that will help these children. In many ways this could re-instill confidence by pursuing safer vaccinations and in particular safer vaccination protocols. The current protocols have NEVER be tested against lighter schedules even using the same vaccines (decreased boosters, more age appropriate timing of vaccines, etc). This comparison will lead to saving money in healthcare as a direct result of decreased vaccine purchasing and administration as well as indirectly through decreased incidence of side effects, speech delay being the most obvious and easiest to test as a safety indicator against the current ever burgeoning protocols.
Last month the New England Journal of Medicine published a paper by Amanna, Carlson and Slifka that indicates the duration of coverage of many vaccines exceeds the life span of the study population, by centuries in a longitudinal regression analysis of titer decay rates. This is good science to say we need to cut back on early life vaccinations. One shot may be all many children may need for coverage until much later in life on many of these childhood diseases. Boosters are likely causing much more harm than good for the profit of vaccine corporations.
The hypothesis that there really is a connection between vaccines and speech delays as well as an acceleration of autistic behaviors in a subpopulation that is susceptible to immunodysfunction and high heavy metal half-lives is a valid one that needs urgent study. The CDC and the FDA will be the last "watchdogs" to protect that science, for it is the very hypothesis that will prove a connection once the appropriate at risk population is selected. Thank you for protecting
the collective conversation and thought that can lead to such a hypothesis through investigating the stories of those like the Weinmasters who have legitimate concerns that this hypothesis may be correct, as do I.
Edward F. Fogarty, M.D.
Chairman of Radiology at the University of North Dakota School of