You miss the point, it didn’t cover general excretion of mercury at all for any group. It only covered blood half life. Therefore, unless you are redefining excretion to be leaving the blood instead of the more general definition of leaving the body in general, the the study did not address it at all for any group.

So saying:

“Basically, this study refutes the idea that autistic kids are poor excretors of mercury”

Simply isn’t true.

Yes…and?

“Nope, the study doesn’t even mention the issue.”

I disagree. Unless you have some kind of evidence that autistic kids excrete mercury in any way differently than any other child I’d say it covers it admirably.

“They did not address how quickly the substance left the body”

Correct, I meant to write blood.

http://pediatrics.aappublicati.....121/2/e208

It seems to be a well done study.

“Basically, this study refutes the idea that autistic kids are poor excretors of mercury”

Nope, the study doesn’t even mention the issue. As a matter of fact this :

“Anyway, here’s this new paper that demonstrates that thiomersal is very quickly eliminated from the body.”

isn’t true either. From page e214 of the study :

“Second, our measurements are unable to determine the fate of the mercury after it leaves the blood, because our sampling was limited to blood, urine, and stool, and we did not collect 24-hour samples; therefore the data do not allow any conclusions about the proportion of administered ethyl mercury that is ultimately excreted in stools or the time course of that excretion”

Or in other words, they measured the half life of the 3.2% (page e211) of the ethyl mercury that entered the blood stream. They did not address how quickly the substance left the body.

True however the opposite is not necessarily true. Just because it leaves the bloodstream doesn’t mean it has left the body.

If you think it is true then please explain how a substance can go straight from the bloodstream to the outside of the body without first passing through some other system of the body.

“this study was to test the idea that kids couldn’t excrete ethyl mercury from vaccine”

Since neither of us have read the actual study I think that comment is premature.

If its leaving the body MJ I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest its leaving the bloodstream.

“If the hypothesis is that a subset of children have an issue”

Thats not even a hypothesis, its an opinion. No, as far as I see it, this study was to test the idea that kids couldn’t excrete ethyl mercury from vaccines. Its obvious that the results of this study were that they can and it is. If anybody wants to do blue sky science I would guess that it’d be up to them to fund it themselves.

I have heard the one that it is related to it not leaving the body but it does not follow that it stays in the bloodstream.

If that were the case then this entire hypothesis could have been put to bed long along by simple blood tests.

As to there being “no scientifically valid” reason to test ASD kids, wouldn’t that be the whole point? If the hypothesis is that a subset of children have an issue, it would be imperative to test the the subset against the population as a whole to confirm/refute the hypothesis.

Anything less won’t answer the question. Which I suspect is the reason why this is still an issue.

Its not a theory MJ, its a hypothesis. And no, its not, this study is supposed to (and has helped to) refute the idea that ethyl mercury from vaccines stays in the bloodstream causing harm.

There’s no especial reason – certainly no scientifically valid one – to single out ASD kids.

“Basically, this study refutes the idea that autistic kids are poor excretors of mercury.”

and

“A proviso of this study would seem to be that it was done on NT kids rather than ASD kids but there’s no real scientifically valid reason to use ASD kids particularly anyway.”

So the study is supposed to put the rest the theory that a subset of the population has issues with mercury by testing the population as a whole? That logically doesn’t work.

Follow this up with a clear statement by Dr. Minshew that vaccines don’t cause autism
http://gmwm.autistics.org/?p=141

It isn’t like the last few weeks were going well either, with the Baltimore case and other new information.

Thank god. Maybe we are getting to or past the peak in the hysteria.