3.) We know what mercury poisoning looks like, from decades of sad experience.
4.) Autism looks nothing like mercury poisoning.

We also know, via exceptionally thorough and independent longitudinal studies, that extensive prenatal and postnatal exposure to mercury is not associated with an increased risk for ASD. The most recent paper that I’ve seen from this work [Neurotoxicology. 2009 May;30(3):338-49] affirms that if you do enough tests of neurodevelopmental outcomes, some will seem significant (this should also be true if you did a sufficient number of tests of, say, macaque reflexes), but that “no consistent pattern of associations emerged to support a causal relationship.” (Sometimes mercury seems to improve the outcome.)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19442817

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17029020

“1.) Autism is a neurological condition.
2.) Mercury causes neurological harm to developing brains.
Both of these statements are scientific and irrefutable.”

To these I’d like to add two more facts that are also “scientific and irrefutable”:

3.) We know what mercury poisoning looks like, from decades of sad experience.

4.) Autism looks nothing like mercury poisoning.

What Eric S. has done is try to connect – by physical proximity – two “facts” that are true but unrelated.

Prometheus

1.) Autism is a neurological condition.

2.) Mercury causes neurological harm to developing brains.

3.) Many fish contain mercury.

4.) Therefore eating certain kinds of fish causes autism.

Remember this, especially with the dwindling size of the bluefin tuna populations.

Indeed, there are a number of known risk factors that can cause neurological harm. The conditions that arise from these are not seen as being variations of autism, yet by the logic that Eric obviously means yet somehow failed to make clear (a trick that means he can deny he said anything of the sort when it all goes pear-shaped and still convince himself he’s not a liar or dishonest) all of these sources of neurological harm must therefore be able to cause autism.

2.) can be replaced with any single known cause of neurological harm and it would still work, yet Wernickes Dementia is not autism. Parkinsons disease is not autism. Stroke is not autism. Traumatic brain injury is not autism. Diabetic encephalopathy is not autism. etc etc.

1) Autism is a neurological condition.

2) Mothers who dope, smoke and drink cause harm to developing brains.

Can I draw a conclusion from these two statements? I’d hope not.

BTW, your #2 requires a caveat that “mercury in sufficient doses” causes neurological harm. Every fetus is exposed to some mercury, and always has since humans exist.

Let’s try another syllogism:

1) Eric S. is an anti-vaxer.

2) Many snake-oil salesmen and con artists are anti-vaxers.

See what I mean?

Perhaps you’ll provide some form of arguement next visit. Or maybe crack open a entry level book on neurology.

2.) Mercury causes neurological harm to developing brains.

Both of these statements are scientific and irrefutable.

How come the control numbers kept changing? Was that due to massaging the data? From A “Made for Court” Study?:

This study raises more red flags than a Kremlin May Day parade in the old Soviet Union. It appears that control subjects were added post hoc and that unproductive reflexes were dropped from the data. One of the authors – the “anchor” author – has been implicated in research and ethical misconduct and is awaiting adjudication. Other authors have significant personal conflicts of interest.

Why should we read about science from a newspaper, especially one with the (lack of) reputation like the Daily Mail? And that article does not even mention Wakefield, and there is a separate group that opposes pet vaccines. How did you miss that?

Do you know how to make a veterinarian very angry? Get your dog homeopathic vaccines, and then bring them into a real vet when they have parvovirus and die...

Just to put in my two pence worth regarding homoeopathy. Never have I been so frustrated after losing five out of nine infected Lhasa Apso puppies from two different litters with diagnostically confirmed parvovirus. The breeder had vaccinated them, as per the instructions, using a homoeopathic vaccination that was recommended by other breeders and bought from a large company in London.

Such meaningless suffering and death due to exploitation of a breeder’s ignorance leaves me aghast. The ludicrous idea that homoeopathy plays a part in canine vaccination makes me quite ill.