This item was emailed to this blog.-AR
I find it interesting that in the report(s) concerning mercury and autism no mention was made of the fact that thimerisol contains ethyl mercury not methyl mercury. This leads me to believe that either a poor job of research was done, or the researcher had a bias ingrained that vaccines cause autism and chose not to give information that challenged that belief.
As a parent it is comforting if you can find something, ANYTHING, to blame for your childs conditons or illness. Unfortunately too often the only thing to blame is your childs own genes.
As for the epidemic? Better and much more inclusive diagnostic criteria. The majority of kids now diagnosed with autism 50 yrs ago would have been considered extremely shy and/or backwards/slow, etc. Now they are diagnosed as autistic.
PFL
4 comments:
Hi Nerdymom -
Your first link, when read, should give you shivers.
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/thimerosalqa.htm
"What is known about prenatal exposures to ethyl mercury?
There is minimal modern research to address whether or not ethyl mercury may be passed from a mother to her fetus before birth. As a precaution, DHHS and product manufacturers are working to reduce or eliminate thimerosal from products that may be given to pregnant women, such as Rho (D) Immune Globulin. Also, thimerosal-free versions of several adult vaccines are available for use.
Are the current mercury guidelines appropriate for assessing thimerosal exposure?
Methyl mercury guidelines assess a child's risk based on a continuing daily mercury exposure. As mentioned above, there are several important differences between methyl mercury exposure and thimerosal exposure. More research is needed to determine if the guidelines for methyl mercury exposure are also appropriate guidelines for thimerosal."
At the very least, we can agree that they are admitting they don't have a clue as to how to gauge exposure guidelines to thimerosal, and that there is very little research on passing of this chemical from mother to fetus. Yet, in the same breath, we are to take as fact that it is safe at these levels. Why? Solely based on the results of epidemiology studies?
Where is the clinical study showing that X level of this substance doesn't kill neurons, doesn't induce abnormal immune response, or doesnt create oxidative stress? Answer: It doens't exist.
These compounds were given to infants for years at increasing levels, yet they were very poorly studied. Why does this bother so few people?
"Danish children were thimerosal-free by 1995. Autism prevalence in Denmark has risen in exactly the same fashion as in the United States and the United Kingdom. http://www.autism-watch.org/general/thio.shtml
"
The Denmark study is a clear case of poor methodology and dodgy conclusions then shouted out by people as proof of something. Unfortunately, during the timeframe of the study, the definition of autism changed drastically in Denmark so that an increase in prevalance was guaranteed. In fact, the authors make such an admission in the paper.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/112/3/604
"Only very few incidence studies of autism have been made, and we found similar incidence rates and the same trend of increasing rates of autism in our study compared with studies conducted in other countries.14,15 The increase in the incidence of autism from 1990 on may be attributable to more attention being drawn to the syndrome of autism and to a change in the diagnostic criteria from the ICD-8 to the ICD-10 in 1994. Also, outpatient activities were included in the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register in 1995 and because many patients with autism in former years have been treated as outpatients this may exaggerate the incidence rates, simply because a number of patients attending the child psychiatric treatment system before 1995 were recorded for the first time, and thereby counted as new cases in the incidence rates.
" (my empahsis)
You seem to be in favor of the better diagnosis explanation of the epidemic; if that's true, how can we simultaneously accept the conclusions of the Denmark study when the authors admit that such diagnostic shifts could result in a skewing of their data? If more inclusive diagnosis is responsible for the upsurge we are observing, the Denmark study tells us nothing; if not, we have an epidemic. You cannot have it both ways.
Also of interest from the conclusions:
"Our data cannot, of course, exclude the possibility that thimerosal at doses larger than used in Denmark may lead to neurodevelopmental damage. "
Children in Denmark were receiving much, much less thierosal than their American counterparts.
Take care!
- pD
Ethyl - methyl Not the same ????
Give the little woman a cigar
You are right, but you are wrong,
about which one is worse. NIH
study by Burbacher found that
ethyl not methyl goes up into
the brain of primates by two
and a half times that of fish
mercury. Then when in the brain
it not methyl turns into inorganic
mercury the most dangerous, and
stays there causing neuron cell death. Now Did the CDC trumpet this info no they capitalized on the part of the study where ethyl goes out of the body quicker than does methyl. Now that sounds good for the CDC, and that is what they put in their press release. Conveniently leaving out the part
about the two and a half times up take in the brain of primates.
Now lets destroy the fact that it leaves the body quicker. You see these children that have autism most cannot excrete murcury.
they have low to very low
glutathion which is the bodys way to rid of heavy metals first
babys hair cuts showed this.
So to say it leaves the body quicker means absolutely nothing to children who cannot excrete heavy metals. You see I have a mercury toxic child not autistic with labs to prove it. As far as the Denmark study is concerned they
the CDC had Anders Hivid to bald
face lie to the IOM and say the
autism rate went up, we now know
that statment was not true Thank
you FOIA act this was taken from a Email, from Denmark to CDC
But more importantly, a review of e-mails exchanged between the Danish researchers and the CDC reveals that the statement "From 1991 until 2000 the incidence increased and continued to rise after the removal of thimerosal from vaccines, including increases among children born after the discontinuation of thimerosal" may not have been true.
In an e-mail on 11/13/2002 at 09:24, "co-author" Marlene B. Lauritsen informed Drs. Madsen, Thorsen and Schendel of the CDC:
"But the incidence and prevalence are still decreasing in 2001".
The sentences, before and after that unequivocal statement, were blackened with a magic marker before they were released through the Freedom of Information Act. (Exhibit II) So now you know
how they operate, like terrorist..
Children in Denmark were receiving much, much less thierosal than their American counterparts.
Children born in the US after 2002 are receiving less thimerosal than children born before 2002.
You know the rest.
Lots of fibbing going on in vaccine science nowadays to protect an industry which we actually need to protect from over-litigation in the instance of bioweapons from terrorists. The great catch 22 of imperfect vaccines that are necessary in a litigation filled world.
Post a Comment