The unknown is exciting. As a species we seem innately curious about seeing whats over the next hill, beyond the next valley, what happens if we heat this liquid to its boiling point, etc etc. But fairly obviously, we quickly realised that if we didn’t exert some level of control over the things we were curious enough about to examine closely then the results were arbitrary and meaningless.
“Hey, look at that!” we exclaimed to ourselves, “we’ve just invented the scientific method. How cool are we?”.
Unfortunately, as well as being logical, nuanced creatures capable of appreciating such things as the pathos in satire we’re also reactionary and blinkered. As someone recently remarked:
Too many people on all sides of the debate(s) seem to wear blinders that prevent them from acknowledging how little we all know.
A statement I fully support. However, there are certain things that we need to be certain about when we treat autistic children.
Is chelation safe? Here’s Wade again, quoting a commenter called Random John:
At any rate, it’s still pretty unclear why chelation therapy seems to be successful for some children, but not for others. The polarity of the thimerosal and chelation debates does not seem to cover the ground necessary to understand what’s really going on.
Which is very true. Unfortunately, its yet another example of shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted. To worry about these things after you’re already treating an autistic child with something like chelation is quite simply stupid. If there are people who are concerned about what effects chelation may or may not have on autistic children then basic medical principles need to be applied: first, do no harm.
That means you need to conduct safety trials before using something that has the following warning on it:
The use of this drug [EDTA] in any particular patient is recommended only when the severity of the clinical condition justifies the aggressive measure associated with this type of therapy.
Recently such people as Dr. Mary Jean Brown, Chief of the Lead Poisoning Prevention Branch of the Centers for Disease Control claimed that if chelators were used properly then they’d be safe. I take extreme issue with this viewpoint.
Chelation is essentially a chemical process – it alters the chemical composition of the body. Bearing that in mind, consider the following:
This review focuses on recent advances in the in vivo study of the whole brain in idiopathic autism…..Diffuse abnormalities of brain chemical concentrations, are…found. Abnormalities of ….brain chemistry…are evident by early childhood….
So, the brains of autistic people are chemically different then the brains of non-autistics. Given that fact, is it a) stupid or b) clever to use a process that alters the chemical composition of the person and which has never undergone any safety trials in regards to autism?
There’s a whole bunch of people here who need to take a drastic step backwards and do some basic safety trials on what is, irrespective of their beliefs, a poorly understood and potentially dangerous/fatal process.
Left Brain Right Brain 
As a point of clarification, the second quote you attribute to me was originally posted on Random John’s fine blog.
I don’t necessarily disagree with what you have written here, Kev, but I don’t believe it’s quite as simple as you make it out to be. I would welcome clinical trials to assess both the safety and efficacy of various forms of chelation for autistic patients. But those trials need to account for the unique clinical situation of every autistic child included in the study, so we can determine the “whys.” Obviously, our present understanding is imperfect as to just who will benefit and who may be at risk for particular complications. Nevertheless, even with that imperfect understanding, the ultimate decision of whether “the severity of the clinical condition justifies the aggressive measure associated with this type of therapy” must be made by the parents and the treating physician.
Finally, it bears repeating that the specific risk that apparently caused the death of Abubakar Tariq Nadama would still be present even if a trial revealed IV-EDTA to be 100% safe when properly administered. The risk of improper administration — the risk of poor doctoring if you will — is present in ANY medical procedure.
Before I get roasted over a spit, let me repeat what I have said elsewhere. I am not advocating any particular protocol — particularly chelation — for any individual child. Before any intervention is used, parents need to do their research and make an informed decision after weighing the potential benefits against the possible risks.
For argument’s sake, let’s suppose that chelators do have an effect on behavior and it has nothing to do with moving mercury. From what I’ve heard these agents are all immune suppressors and it has been suggested that autism may be linked to an over active immune system. If that is the case would it be a good idea to use chemicals to alter immune response on a trial and error basis?
Is it reasonable to trust parents to weigh the benefits and risks of DIY chemotherapy?
“Is it reasonable to trust parents to weigh the benefits and risks of DIY chemotherapy?”
Oh please. Don’t start with the “all parents are too dumb to understand science” lecture. Who should we trust, the government???? Medical bureaucracies??? A medical degree didn’t endow Roy Kerry with enough wisdom to understand what he was doing. Properly educated parents are the only ones who can be trusted with the decision in the end, because they’re the ones who presumably give a damn about their child’s interest. Obviously, there’s an issue as to whether judgment is properly exercised, and that’s an issue of education. But that issue arises anew with any treatment regardless of a connection to autism.
I wasn’t lecturing and I would never say any parent is too dumb to understand the science. I’m also not asking anyone to trust anyone else.
Would you consider yourself to be a “properly educated parent?” Do you feel you understand the science well enough to trust yourself with administering chemicals to a child?
I think the key phrase there is “Properly educated”. The rhetoric of “act now or it’ll be too late and your child will be a useless pile of pathology” is ingrained in a lot of the autism tortures/treatments. They don’t give anyone TIME to research anything, without of course “risking their child’s future”.
Ignoring, of course, all the autistics who grew up to do OK without any of the miracle cures of today.
The key point here is that the therapies offered to parents have moved away from the vitamin-type treatments, which are generally regarded as safe, to more and more exotic and potentially dangerous treatments. Kassiane, you are completely correct, it is because of the “act now” philosophy. Contrarily enough this is also coupled with an fanatical adherence to a particular hypothesis about autism, which, for instance, encourages a child to be chelated for years and years, because autism MUST be caused by mercury poisoning.
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Autism-Mercury/message/160275
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Autism-Mercury/message/160057
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Autism-Mercury/message/159549
Scary stuff, isn’t it?
Jennifer
Jennifer,
Why don’t you speak up on the boards that you copy messages from if you find these messages soooo “scary”. Don’t be such a wuss…
-Sue M.
Creatine…. the yahoo autism = mercury crowd pushes creatine now?
In my High School, my peers and I had some discussion about using this (legally) as we were wrestlers.
Everyone we spoke to, spoke against it. A friend got sick using it (the right way). Another wrestler died, in my State, because of it. These were teenagers in very good health.
Now they push it on the pre-schoolers as anti-viral?
Jonathan
(Trying to check his anger)
Sue M,
I have seen no evidence that the board you refer to is open to debate…
Well, you might be correct there. It doesn’t change the fact that it is considered somewhat tacky (in my opinion) to post messages from other groups without the authors knowledge. I can justify it when the person is using their own blog site as a means to get their message out. In other words if someone wants to quote from Wade’s blog, Kev’s blog, Autism Diva’s blog, J.B.’s blog, etc… I can see it… but from an E-MAIL sent by a person to a specific group of which the person is a member. It seems to reek of trolling. I would be interested in hearing what you all have to say on that though.
-Sue M.
Jennifer did not post a message; she posted a link.
That group is open to the public. It is a public place. Jennifer was well within informal rules of behavior on the net.
Ok. That is good to know. Linking is ok, but copying a post is not… Still seems somewhat trollish to me, but it is good to know…
-Sue M.
Sue – not to get sidetracked but trolling in the original Usenet meannig of the phrase (which is where it originated) means posting something with no intention to do anything other than annoy everyone else. Rough translation of troll would be ‘attention whore’. I don’t think anyone here, regardless of position, could be said to be whoring for attention.
e.g. if someone joined this thread and simply posted abuse then that would be trolling for a reaction. Jennifers certainly not doing that. In fact, posting a link to an open debate is sometimes the best way to get a point made – it means one can go and read the whole thing in context.
Thanks Kev and Johnathan.
The autism-mercury yahoo group is completely public. It’ stated right there in the intro. You don’t need to be a member to read the posts, and all who post there are certainly advised of that fact.
And thanks Sue, for agreeing that the autism-mercury yahoo group is not open to debate. If I posted a contrary opinion there, I’d just get tons of hate mail. I don’t need that, I’m a polite and shy person – but I do have my own opinions.
Basically, everything everyone ever said on autism-mercury is available on onibasu.com, too.
You can see how Sally Bernard was part of the early group, and that it was founded by Lyn Redwood. You can sort of track the point where Sally started to become “Sallie”, too, which is very interesting. Andy Cutler shows up really early on and says that Sally sent him, if I remember correctly. It’s interesting.
Autism-mercury regularly has posts that are very scary. “My child hasn’t eaten in 3 days and is running a fever and won’t respond to his name. Is this a ‘healing crisis”? Should I give him some more vitamin A, or maybe increase his b12, add another enema? twice daily magnetic clay baths?”
That sort of thing. Then people sort of vote on whether or not to increase this or that supplement or order up a new set of tests from Doctor’s Data.
Part of the quacks’ bag of tricks is to get people to not trust regular doctors. Looks like it has worked well on some people. Corretta Scott King died after hauling her poor sick body to Mexico to die in a quack doctor’s clinic, I’m sure she believed she couldn’t trust an oncologist, but could trust a lying thieving fake chiropractor on the lamb from the law in the US.
Orac just blogged on the dangers of EDTA. It’s very good reading. Unfortunately, it’s not being read by the “well-eductated” mercury parents.
Now, Mady Hornig is going to give mice some gold salts to see if it chelates Hg and cures them of “autism”. Before she reports on what this does to them (it might kill them), I predict that parents will take it as a good sign and start demanding that their kid get the dangerous gold salts injections. They won’t read anything negative about gold-salts, and feel like they are “well educated” in autism biomed. And, of course, more innocent children may die. But at least the parents got to excersize their “insight” and that’s what matters.
Standard of care means nothing to these people and the almighty dollar means everything to the quacks.
belief cannot be scientifically tested …
[first do no harm is much overlooked in contemporary
medicinepharmaceuticalswonder cure industry. it was never very popular with certain kinds of faith healers to begin with.]… ::thinking:: …
How the hell can MICE be “autistic”? Or any kind of animal for that matter? (Never mind cats — they all act like that; it’s normal for them.)
andrea
Andrea wrote:
“How the hell can MICE be “autisticâ€? Or any kind of animal for that matter? (Never mind cats—they all act like that; it’s normal for them.)”
-For clarification, I don’t believe that Mady Hornig ever called the mice “autistic”. Someone will correct me if I am wrong here. This is Ms. Clarks (and probably others) way of twisting the study to influence others. You can read the study for yourself here:
http://www.generationrescue.org/evidence_reports2.html
-If you do find reference to “autistic” mice please let us all know.
-Sue M.
From your link Sue:
_”Features reminiscent of those observed in autism occurred in the mice of the genetically sensitive strain.”_
“First do no harm” also needs to be applied in the standard medical community. When it comes to oh, say, thimerosal (mercury) in vaccines, some care needs to be taken to First Do No Harm.
Certainly, I would agree with Kev that more tests, studies, ways to test for immune dysfunction, autoimmunity issues, etc. need to be addressed. I have no issues with that at all.
Ms. Clark wrote:
“Looks like it has worked well on some people. Corretta Scott King died after hauling her poor sick body to Mexico to die in a quack doctor’s clinic…”
-I guess that I shouldn’t be surprised that Ms. Clark would bring this up to bolster her opinion. I would hope that others would note that Corretta Scott King suffered a stroke and heart attack in August and then was diagnosed with TERMINAL ovarian cancer in the States before making her way anywhere. Let her rest in peace…
-Sue M.
Kev wrote:
“Features reminiscent of those observed in autism occurred in the mice of the genetically sensitive strain.â€
-Different from “autistic” mice, isn’t it?
-Sue M.
_”First do no harm” also needs to be applied in the standard medical community. When it comes to oh, say, thimerosal (mercury) in vaccines, some care needs to be taken to First Do No Harm. “_
I was just _waiting_ for someone to say this. For about the millionth time Sue, I don’t think anyone here has a problem with thiomersal being removed from vaccines. I certainly don’t.
Please, just for once, abandon the misdirection tactics and address the point thats being made.
Mady Hornig chronically overdosed her SJL thim mice, known to respond to mercury with autoimmue problems. She then watched them to see if she could find what she thought were the mousey equivalents of autism.
Even though she defined some things that have a very shallow appearance of something LIKE some aspects of autism in some people… she didn’t find that the mice became any more “autistic”. She was looking for symptoms of autism in the mice, there’s no way around that.
Now, she will give them a different neurotoxin (gold salts), as a cure to the first doses (chronically overdosed AGAIN?) of a neutoxin. Calcium is a neurotoxin, everything is a neurotoxin I suppose, depending on the dose. Gold definitely kicks in the immune response, just like mercury does.
Perfectly pointless torture for little miceys, but hey, it’s all for the greater glory of Columbia university and the NAA. We don’t know if she’ll run them through her behavioral autism tests, or just look at their little micey brains. Hopefully she’ll examine more than 3 mouse brains this time, and spare us the info on how the mice got peripheral nerve damage and ended up chewing on their feet (natural mousey response to peripheral nerve damage from mercury.. something you don’t see in autism, for some reason, maybe because there’s no mercury poisoning?)
Hornig is being disengenous by not being in the open about her being a mercury mom, died in the wool, and having a gifted autistic child (speaks several languages?). Hornig is married to or in a relationship with one of the other authors on the Rain Mouse study, too. That person might even be the father of that child, though certainly would seem to be some kind of father figure to the child.
_”Different from “autistic†mice, isn’t it?”_
In the literal sense that the actual wording is different, yes. In the sense that the underlying meaning is the same, no.
Her study is attempting to draw a link between mice who have ‘features reminicsent of those observed in autism’ and the thiomersal that she claims has ‘intensified’ the damage resulting in these ‘features reminicsent of those observed in autism’.
In the intent of her words there’s no appreciable difference at all. What were these ‘features reminicsent of those observed in autism’ ? Please list them and show their equivalents in the diagnostic criteria for autism.
Kev wrote:
“I was just waiting for someone to say this”.
-If you were waiting for someone to say this then address it in your post. Have the sense to acknowledge that this is a two way street. Medical science is not perfect. I acknowledge that you have the sense to say that you encourage thimerosal to be completely removed from vaccines (duh!)…
Kev wrote:
“Please, just for once, abandon the misdirection tactics and address the point thats being made”.
-I did when I wrote this:
“Certainly, I would agree with Kev that more tests, studies, ways to test for immune dysfunction, autoimmunity issues, etc. need to be addressed. I have no issues with that at all”. I will further say that I am all for more safety tests done on chelation treatments…
-Sue M.
Kev wrote:
“Her study is attempting to draw a link between mice who have ‘features reminicsent of those observed in autism’ and the thiomersal that she claims has ‘intensified’ the damage resulting in these ‘features reminicsent of those observed in autism’”.
-So, if she completely took out any reference to autism would that have satisfied you? In other words, if she just did the study (as it stands) and gave the results of which she saw (behaviors of the mice, etc), without reference to “autism” it seems that this would be ok with you? Providing of course that you accepted her methodology for doing so. Your issue seems to be with the fact that she associates the behaviors that she saw with features of autism. Am I reading you correctly? If so, I can accept that. Time to look into the reasons why these autoimmune sensitive mice reacted so badly to the thimerosal injections (without reference to autism).
-Sue M.
But Sue, I thought you said something like, movies over science?
And since that yahoo forum is open (thanks Jennifer, it did scare me) I’ll go ahead and copy/paste a scary bit:
“I even switched to plastic(Hulda Clarke approved) utensils for eating and cutting food.”
Then she launches into her use of saunas (spelled incorrectly of course). When does this nonsense stop?
wade wrote, “Who should we trust, the government???? Medical bureaucracies??? A medical degree didn’t endow Roy Kerry with enough wisdom to understand what he was doing. Properly educated parents are the only ones who can be trusted with the decision in the end, because they’re the ones who presumably give a damn about their child’s interest.”
Nice rant. I’d suggest that steering clear of doctors who will chelate for autism-improvement purposes will sharply decrease one’s chance of dealing with an incompetent MD.
Ms. Clark wrote:
“Mady Hornig chronically overdosed her SJL thim mice, known to respond to mercury with autoimmue problems”.
-Thank you, Ms. Clark. The point being that possibly some children with genetic history of autoimmune problems might be at greater risk of damage from thimerosal containing vacc’s, right? What am I missing?
-Sue M.
btw, trying to squeeze anything relevant out of the Hornig paper is futile. The entire experiment was based upon faulty design. Prometheus and others have handed Mady her tail back, albeit a bit chewed-on.
We can all take turns at wordsmithing comments into something cute, but at the end of the day Ms. Clark is right: zero times anything is still zero.
BC wrote:
“The entire experiment was based upon faulty design. Prometheus and others have handed Mady her tail back, albeit a bit chewed-on”.
-So, Prometheus and others showed that the autoimmune sensitive mice DID NOT react any differently than the control mice? Did they publish their work?
-Sue M.
No children in the US now or EVER have been dosed at the rate that Mady Hornig dosed her mice. You’d have to give the babies shots of thimerosal every 3 days or something to match the
CHRONIC
overdosing that Hornig did without any comment to the effect “oh, by the way, we did chronically overdose these mice and that doesn’t map on to the way babies EVER got exposed to thimerosal, but hey, at least this way we can cause peripheral nerve damage in them and imply later that when the mice chew on themselves that THAT is just like autism, too.”
The woman’s and her lab’s paper is so bad its laughable.
I mentioned Coretta Scott King because she was suckered by a quack just like all the mercury parents have been suckered by the prominent DAN! docs. Just like the family in Nevada was suckered by Jang into paying her for heinously reckless advice.
But keep defending the quacks, Sue, says a lot about you.
Coretta Scott King could have spared herself the stress of traveling to Mexico. It’s tragic that she didn’t die in peace at home since she was dying. I didn’t imply that the clinic killed her, unless the travel sped up her death. The guy who runs the clinic in Mexico is as bad as Hulda Clark (no relation). Hulda is a popular with the EoHarm gang from what I can tell. Her zapper has been promoted on the autism-mercury group as a treatment for autism, because the autism or some aspect of it is really caused by parasites. Never mind that no one names the “parasites”…
Just about anything can be or has been said to “treat” autism, which makes the “autism is treatable” slogan just hysterical. What doesn’t “treat” autism? In China there’s a folk cure for autism that contains mercury.
So, Sue, are you ready to state that you are against all vaccines for everyone? Are you a hypocrite if you won’t admit in detail what you think of vaccines? Are you letting the team down if you act like you are ashamed of your beliefs? Just wondering.
If Mady Hornig wasn’t looking for and reporting symptoms of autism in her mice, why would she choose to inject thimerosal in to autoimmune prone/ mercury sensitive mice? I could see where a toxicologist might wake up one day and decide to see how different strains react to thimerosal but Hornig was already investigating the effects of Borna virus infection in various strains of mice, including SJL, so what would possess her to inject them with thimerosal? Or should I say who possessed her?
Could it be a group of parents, with the mission statement to prove a connection between autism and thimerosal, came to her with some much needed funding and asked her to inject mice with thimerosal?
Should her SJL mice be dosed with thimerosal followed by gold salts, will the results be made public even if their autoimmune conditions are exacerbated? Will there be a group of SJL mice receiving only gold salts and one getting saline alone? Should be interesting
“So, Prometheus and others showed that the autoimmune sensitive mice DID NOT react any differently than the control mice? Did they publish their work?”
They don’t have to Sue, it’s all there in her crummy paper, she says that there was no affect on the behavior of the damaged mice that is like the autism she was looking for. She found brain damage that is not similar to the brains of autistics.
Let’s see you defend the Hornig paper point by point, Sue. Tell us why it means anything? Tell us why we should get excited over the “go for the gold” Liz Bert memorial mice. For those of you who haven’t seen it, “go for the gold” is NAA expression.
A group of scientists wrote a critical letter to the editor of the journal that published the Hornig study, it pointed out some severe flaws in the paper. The editor, apparently not liking to be criticized didn’t publish that letter. I saw a copy of the letter and I know who signed it.
Anyone with half a brain can see that the Hornig study proves nothing, all you have to do is read it carefully. Prometheus added information about the peripheral nerve damage that she reported casually, not in peer reviewed literature, was likely caused by the chronic overdosing of the mice.
It’s a disgusting abuse of mice, and she’s doing it again. Where’s PETA when you need them?
Sue M said: The point being that possibly some children with genetic history of autoimmune problems might be at greater risk of damage from thimerosal containing vacc’s, right? What am I missing?
Let’s make two lists. First we’ll list all of the things Sue M. is missing and and then we’ll list all of the substances that will trigger autoimmunity in SJL mice. Which list will be shorter? Hmmm….
-Denny Crane!
Ms. Clark wrote:
“No children in the US now or EVER have been dosed at the rate that Mady Hornig dosed her mice”.
-Ok, you might be right. That certainly doesn’t negate the fact that certain mice were damaged by thimerosal containing vacc’s, does it? More research needs to be done.
Ms. Clark wrote:
“But keep defending the quacks, Sue, says a lot about you”.
-Ms. Clark, please indicate for me where I have defended the quacks by stating this:
“I guess that I shouldn’t be surprised that Ms. Clark would bring this up to bolster her opinion. I would hope that others would note that Corretta Scott King suffered a stroke and heart attack in August and then was diagnosed with TERMINAL ovarian cancer in the States before making her way anywhere. Let her rest in peace…”
-From what I can tell, I didn’t. Please advise.
Ms. Clark wrote:
“Hulda is a popular with the EoHarm gang from what I can tell”.
-What this tells me is that you have NO IDEA about what is popular with the “EoHarm gang”. I can’t say for certain, but I don’t EVER remember her name mentioned there… Maybe once or twice in passing?? Seriously, you lessen your arguments by making such over the top comments like that.
-Sue M.
Clone wrote:
“Could it be a group of parents, with the mission statement to prove a connection between autism and thimerosal, came to her with some much needed funding and asked her to inject mice with thimerosal”?
-Oh yes, here’s the conspiracy theory about the conspiracy theorists… Sure, clone…
-Sue M.
_”If you were waiting for someone to say this then address it in your post. Have the sense to acknowledge that this is a two way street.”_
You miss the point Sue. I didn’t think I neede to repeat myself. My belief that its a good thing mercury isn’t in most vaccines anymore has been repeated ad nauseam. By me. You’ve read it and commented on it before also. You brought it up as a sort of ‘yeah? well they did it too!’ point.
_”Medical science is not perfect.”_
In this instance Sue, medical science is not only imperfect but being wilfully abused. Anyone who tells you that they know chelation is safe for the treatment of autism is either stupid or a liar. The reasons are documented above – we know autistic people have different chemical compositions than non-autistic people. We know chelation alters that chemical makeup. What we don’t know is what effect that may have. It may do nothing and it may do something. It may seem to do nothing but 10 years down the line cause sever problems. The point is _nobody knows_ .
If you’re chelating someone because they’re autistic you’re playing russian roulette. It really is that simple.
_”So, if she completely took out any reference to autism would that have satisfied you?”_
No, its a terrible study. Flawed in both design and execution. All that removing any allusion to autism would’ev done would’ve made the whole paper slightly more honest.
Sue M. “More research needs to be done”
Again Sue, I can’t imagine where anyone would or could disagree with that statement. To say otherwise might sound something like:
“Well, we know what causes autism and we don’t need to waste any more time or research dollars on genetics and all of that other stuff.”
Why would a parent of a child with autism say something like that?
Maybe if we list some of the things you like to repeat here and aren’t under dispute you can drop them:
Mercury is a neurotoxin – Agreed
More research is needed- Agreed
The Jury is still out- Agreed
Mercury shouldn’t be in vaccines- Agreed
I’m sure I’ve missed a few so feel free add on any of your faves. Now seeing how we agree on several issues, are you willing to list where we disagree?
I wrote:
“More research needs to be doneâ€
Clone wrote:
“Again Sue, I can’t imagine where anyone would or could disagree with that statement”.
-Really? It seems that the IOM did in 2004…
http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2004/504_iom.html
-Sue M.
I pointed out that Mrs King was very sick, so sick that many people wouldn’t have thought it was a good idea to travel. I pointed out that she was lured out of the comfort of her home by promises of a crook who says he can cure cancer. And you say that it’s rude of me to point out that she was preyed on by a thieving liar?
I took that as your way of taking the heat off the thieving liar by sort of implying that since he didn’t kill an otherwise healthy woman, he can’t be blamed.
Next I expect Wade to jump in and say that I’m a AfricanAmericanophobe, because Mrs King was African American. Or that I’m a white-man-o-phobe because the quack is a white man, or maybe I’m a sexist because he, the quack, is a man, or maybe Wade and Sue M. will say I’m a self-hating womanophobe because Mrs. KIng was a woman.
Maybe I’m just a narrow minded agist who is implying somethiing because Mrs. King was elderly?? Maybe Mrs. King’s hairdresser was a pinko-tree-hugging-vegan, maybe that’s where I get my anger over the fact that she, Mrs King, not the hairdresser, was tricked by a creep running a clinic in Mexico. Oh, maybe I just have some deep seated fear of Mexico. Maybe my deepseated fear of Mexico is really a displaced rage against Swedes. Maybe Kirby makes me sick because I was once harmed by one of his vaccum cleaners?
For the record, this photo was linked to on the EoHarm list, it seen as a “sign” that Jesus was behind Mr. Kirby as I remember. I don’t think that that can be inferred from this photograph. Not sure if posting this is offensive to people of various and sundry religions. If it is, I apologize now, before I am accused of being a bigot against Buddhists or Baptists by Wade and Sue M.
Whatever, lets not get too angry over the death of innocent children at the hands of quacks, ok?
That certainly doesn’t negate the fact that certain mice were damaged by thimerosal containing vacc’s, does it? More research needs to be done.
So if my study says that drinking 5 gallons of water a day is unsafe, does that mean we have to do research to see if 8 glasses of water a day is unsafe? It’s apples to oranges.
“Could it be a group of parents, with the mission statement to prove a connection between autism and thimerosal, came to her with some much needed funding and asked her to inject mice with thimerosal�
-Oh yes, here’s the conspiracy theory about the conspiracy theorists… Sure, clone…
But it’s completely ignored by you, Sue. You can’t possibly fathom that Buttar and Bradstreet may have conflicts of interest with their research because they sell products that “treat” autism. Or that the Geiers might fudge their research because they’re (bad) expert witnesses in vaccine court. Or that SafeMinds (a group founded by a woman named Lyn Redwood who just happens to be a plantiff in a thimerosal lawsuit) might be funding this research in part because there’s a potential long-term pot of gold?
Why are those theories less plausible than “drug companies put out an intentionally dangerous product and the government was complicit in covering it up and protecting them”?
One “conspiracy” involves only a small number of people. Another would need complicity from far more.
Sue M: “Oh yes, here’s the conspiracy theory about the conspiracy theorists… Sure, clone”
How is that a conspiracy theory? Did Hornig one day decide to inject mice with thimerosal and go to Safeminds for funding or the other way around?
“Really? It seems that the IOM did in 2004…
Oh, sorry, I should have realized that when you say “research” you mean “mercury research”
Well, since I’m not a part of the IOM committee and I do think more research is required, can we add this to the Agree or Disagree list?
How about this one: Does thimerosal cause autism?
If you said “more research is required” you haven’t answered in the affirmative.
Wow, Ms. Clark, you are so twisted. I can’t help but laugh at you. Seriously, laughing out loud. Keep up the good work, though, you MUST be smart enough to realize that when you get this twisted you look foolish…
-Sue M.
Mousey wrote:
“So if my study says that drinking 5 gallons of water a day is unsafe, does that mean we have to do research to see if 8 glasses of water a day is unsafe? It’s apples to oranges”.
-How about this for a study, Mouse. You take those 8 glasses of water and add a pinch of mercury to each one for good measure (as seen by Clone’s e-mail we are all in agreement that mercury is a neurotoxin). The come back to me in a few weeks/months and we will discuss it. Note to mouse: Please don’t do this (especially since you’re a mouse), It’s only an example…
Mouse wrote:
‘But it’s completely ignored by you, Sue”.
-No, not ignored mouse. I just don’t believe it for various reasons. You can believe what you want and I can have my own opinions. That’s what makes the world go round…
-Sue M.
Sue-
Say it with me. “Dose makes the poison.”
Understand? Nobody argues that mercury can be a neurotoxin. The question is whether the amount of mercury in thimerosal caused the damage suggested by the anti-merc crowd.
‘But it’s completely ignored by you, Sueâ€.
-No, not ignored mouse. I just don’t believe it for various reasons. You can believe what you want and I can have my own opinions. That’s what makes the world go round…
What are those reasons?
Yes, mercury is a neuotoxin, but not at all doses, and not in all forms. Only SAFE MINDS-supported researcher Boyd (mad child disease) Haley says it is. He also gets money for promoting the idea that mercury causes Alzheimers which is widely ignored by people who really want to know what causes Alzheimer’s. If humans’ or any particular human couldn’t cope with mercury at any dose, that person wouldn’t stand a chance on this planet. Even if you chelated that person, they’d be exposed to mercury again in no time. That’s what ubiquitous means.
Parents have been soaking their kids in epsom salts to do soemthing or other for them, besides soothing their aching muscles…and according to the autism mercury bunch lots of epsom salts has… guess what…. mercury in it! No, really. Maybe it all has mercury in it.
This is apparently why the DAN! organization is shifting attention away from vaccines and on to the environment. Of course, that means starting all over with new lawyers and new corporations to sue. The only thing the mercury parents and their hired PR people and lawyers can do is get more shrill about insisting that they have “evidence” if only the illuminati at the IOM weren’t conspiring against them.
Twisted describes Kerry and his thinking when he decided to put EDTA into a little boy. Twisted describes the whole mercury parent “support system” that aided the Nadamas in making that tragic choice to see Kerry.
When the parents of babies and children who die of these quack treatments, or of vaccine preventable diseases because their kids were not vaccinated according to advice from antivaxers and anti-thimerosalers figure out that they’ve been misled, they will be enraged. One can only hope that they are able to organize and get to the media the way the mercury parents have. Of course, it will help if they have a billionare among them, like the SAFE MINDS gang has.
Mouse wrote:
“Say it with me. Dose makes the poison.
Understand? Nobody argues that mercury can be a neurotoxin. The question is whether the amount of mercury in thimerosal caused the damage suggested by the anti-merc crowd”.
– Say it with me, mousey… how the hell do you know what damage is done with what dose? You don’t. Understand? You speak as if you have this knowledge beyond anyone else here about the amount of mercury (via thimerosal) which COULD possibly damage babies. If you do have this knowledge, feel free to give us your credentials.
-Sue M.
Sue,
You misunderstood (again).
Anonimouse said:
“The question is whether the amount of mercury in thimerosal caused the damage suggested by the anti-merc crowdâ€.
That is the question. To answer it properly, one needs to first show damage and then demonstrate how thimerosal (at vaccine levels) is able to cause same damage. So now, please tell us about the damage found in babies and then we can talk about how thimerosal might cause it.