A few questions for Mr Kirby.
(All originally posted in the comments section of the above blog post)
You state that a study has recently been completed that:
showed that a few minutes of exposure with even miniscule amounts of thimerosal can damage dendritic cells, causing immune dysfunction and cytokine-induced inflammation, both of which are found in autism.
I’m aware of the study you are referring to but I am unsure of which study you draw your conclusion from that cytokine-induced inflammation is found in autism. You also fail to mention if it is a typical or rare phenomenom. Certainly it fails to appear in the diagnostic criteia for autism and a Google Scholar search for “”cytokine-induced inflammation” autism” reveals nothing. The same is also true for your claim that immune dysfunction appears in autism. You fail to state whether this is a common or rare occurance and yet again, it fails to appear in the diagnostic criteia for autism. Based on those facts, I fail to see what worth your interpretaton of this study has.
You are a staunch believer in the mercury/autism connection despite their being no symptomatic connection between merucry poisoning and autism except for that published in the oft-refuted ‘Mercury: a novel form of mercury poisoning’ paper.
Further, In the New York Times in 2005 you stated:
Because autism is usually diagnosed sometime between a child’s third and fourth birthdays and thimerosal was largely removed from childhood vaccines in 2001, the incidence of autism should fall this year.
The rates of autism did not fall that year.
A couple of months later you told blogger Citizen Cain:
if the total number of 3-5 year olds in the California DDS system has not declined by 2007, that would deal a severe blow to the autism-thimerosal hypothesis
I was puzzled enough by the discrepancy of you adding on two years to email you to ask you to clear it up. You replied to me:
Many thanks for your note. The Times misquoted me. I actually asked for a correction, but did not receive one. What I told the reporter is that we should know in the next few years.
In the interests of being thorough, I prevailed upon the two reporters for the NYT for their version of events. Reporter Gardiner Harris replied:
Prior to publication, we read the entire passage relating to this matter to Mr. Kirby. He approved it.
And reporter Anahad O’Connor said:
…we stand by that quote. David Kirby was interviewed at length, and we verified that quote and additional information with him before the article was published. He certainly did not object to that assertion at the time.
It is hard to escape the conclusion Mr Kirby, that you misled me and that you further tacked on a couple of extra years when the autism rates failed to decrease to support your original assertion. Will you now stand by your original statement that the incidence of autism should’ve fallen in 2005?
You attempted to use California DDS data to back up your continued assertion that autism rates had climbed throughout peak thimerosal useage periods and then dropped after thimerosal removal from the majority of vaccines. However, when blogger Citizen Cain pointed out you were using the data incorrectrly you conceeded:
…that total cases among 3-5 year olds, not changes in the rate of increase is the right measure.
Even a cursory glance at current and past CDDS data reveals that according to CDDS data, that cohort is still actively rising. Do you see that as another indicator that thiomersal plays no role in autism as you implied in your NYT interview?
In the course of this blog post you have made repeated mention of thimerosal still being in vaccines in the form of the flu shot. I wondered if you knew of the total mercury burden over time of mercury in vaccines?
US pre-thimerosal removal: 187.5 µg Hg.
US just flu shot: 25 µg Hg.
UK pre-thimerosal removal: 75 µg of Hg.
The US and UK have almost identical prevalence rates for autism. Given that we have very different thimerosal rates, how do you reach the conclusion that thimerosal can cause autism? Given those stats, shouldn’t US children have far more ‘full syndrome’ autism than UK children? How do you also account for the fact that even though US children are now recieving approx 7.5 times less thiomersal than they were at the height of thiomersals use the rate of autism amongst the 3 – 5 cohort is still climbing if we examine CDDS data – data that you refer to as the ‘gold standard’?
You are also a stauch proponent of the idea of there having been an epidemic of autism. You don’t base this on any science but rather what you claim to be an abscence of adults. Indeed on this very blog you asked:
But if autism is purely genetic (without an environmental “trigger”) and has always been prevalent at the same constant rate, then where are the 1-in-166 autistic 25-year-olds (those born in 1980)? Where are the 1-in-166 autistic 55-year-olds? Why can’t we find them?
You may remember that I mailed you a PDF report (http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/1095/0001881.pdf) from the Scottish government of a 2004 ‘audit’ of autism. One of the questions they asked the Health authorities, Trusts etc under the national banner was:
Research tells us that prevalence rates of autistic spectrum disorder represent an underestimate. To what extent do you consider the numbers above to be an accurate reflection of all those who live in your area?
Approaching 45% of all councils/executive/NHS Trusts questioned responded that the prevalence for adults was grossly underestimated, badly reported and that a lot of these adults exist without diagnosis. A typical response was:
Figures for adults reflect the national findings that the numbers known to services/diagnosed represent a significant underestimate of those individuals likely to be affected. For example day centre managers locally consider a number of people to be on the spectrum who have had no formal diagnosis. _(Perth & Kinross Council)_
I apologise for mentioning this here but you failed to respond to my email regarding this matter.
Thanks in advance for your comprehensive answers.
UPDATE: Mike Stanton has found yet more evidence of your ‘hidden horde’:
_Liam Byrne, the health minister, said that 6,170 children under 16 had been diagnosed in England last year, compared with 3,100 in 1997-98. The number of cases including adults rose from 4,220 to 9,170 in the same period._
_So autism diagnoses for children have nearly doubled in 8 years from 3100 to 6170. Meanwhile adult diagnoses have nearly tripled in the same period from 1120 to 3000._
UPDATE No. 2: I just remembered an interesting quote from a New Scientist feature on the autism ‘epidemic’:
This view (that there are many children today diagnosed with autism who would not have been labelled as such in the past) is difficult to substantiate, but in 2001 a team led by Helen Heussler of Nottingham University, UK, had a crack. They re-examined the data from a 1970 survey of 13,135 British children. The original survey found just five autistic children, but using modern diagnostic criteria Heussler’s team found a hidden hoard of 56. That’s over a tenfold rise in numbers, which puts the California figures in perspective. Heussler and her colleagues concluded that estimates from the early 1970s may have seriously underestimated the prevalence.
Left Brain Right Brain 
Dad,
The problem with using a strict “but for” test (i.e., but for the chelation procedure, Tariq would not have been in a position for the malpractice to occur) is that it lends itself to absurd conclusions without limit. But for the fact the Nadama family was in Pennsylvania, he would not have been treated by Dr. Kerry. By that reasoning, being in Pennsylvania caused Tariq’s death. No matter how one dresses up the situation, the proximate cause of death was the use of the wrong chelating agent.
I’m not referring to the “chelation procedure”. I’m referring to the more proximate cause of death which is the chemical process that resulted in physiological change.
“Chelation” is not the name a valid scientifcally established autism treatment (although it might be to you), it describes the chemistry.
Hi, I am sorry, here is late but
Did a comment from me disappear? It was before the last from Wade.
I am also confused by the hours included with the comments.
As you see, my skills and knowledge in blogging features are really basic.
Thank you for the patience
MarÃa Luján
In the Nadama case, I still think that we do not know enough about all the considerations of the whys, and hows to have definite conclussions. What we know for sure is that the wrong substance was used.
The way I see it is this. Treatments are not always harmless, and it’s safer to assume they are not. If you’re going to follow a treatment, you better have a damn good reason to do so and be well informed about adverse effects. Autism is not life threatening. They attempted to “cure” a way of being by using a treatment promoted by quacks and charlatans, without an iota of scientific reasoning behind that choice. It’s not surprising mistakes were made, and that the consequences are what they are.
Hi Joseph
You say
Treatments are not always harmless, and it’s safer to assume they are not. If you’re going to follow a treatment, you better have a damn good reason to do so and be well informed about adverse effects
I agree with you and I always talk again and again about responsible and informed decissions. Many times it depends on the possibilities and personal circunstances of the family to have access to enough information of enough high quality and at the right time.
You say
They attempted to “cure†a way of being by using a treatment promoted by quacks and charlatans,
In pieces:
They attempted to “cureâ€
We do not know what the boy´s parents thought about and this is why I prefer not do this kind of assumptions
a way of being
I respect this assumption from you but I think it is a generalization of what ASD is
by using a treatment promoted by quacks and charlatans,without an iota of scientific reasoning behind that choice.
it all depends on what tests were done, based on what, in what lab and why the treatment was selected. Again, I have problems with generalizations. I assure you that about chelation there is research in chemistry involved published in high-quality journals. The problem is that chelation is considered “treatment for autism” for some people. Chelation is treatment ONLY for adequately confirmed Heavy metal poisoning for me.
MarÃa Luján
Clone said
“The agent was responsible for the boy’s death, therefore chelation killed him. Is that precise enough?”
It is precise enough, but misleading all the same. Wrong chelation agent – doc should serve mega time for manslaughter and idiocy beyond belief.
There are lots better arguments than that poor kid.
For Wade – chelation, that is, pulling heavy metals – quite a lot of them necessary for life, without doing something as daft as Na EDTA is still pulling necessary heavy metals without a shred of evidence that what you are doing makes any kind of sense. Wade, can you give me a straight answer to these:
1. if autism = mercury poisoning, why don’t autistics have the necessary brain lesions – no one’s found anythng like those lesions in autistics? – and no evidence of damage from auto immune reactions either – just see the IOM report 2004.
2. if the symptoms of mercury toxicity do not in any way resemble the symptioms of autism, why do you insist that there is a link?
3. if for known cases of accidental mercury intoxication removal of the mercury, i.e.chelation does nothing to fix the damage – why do you think that chelation does all this wonderful stuff?
4. When your offspring reaches adulthood and finds out he or she has long-term liver and kidney damage from chelation as a child – who is he or she going to blame – you or your wife?
Actually, there will most likely to be other health problems as well.
Since no one has posted a link yet to the second chelation death case, here’s
First, thanks for the link, Ian. As I suspected, the “second” case had nothing whatsoever to do with autism. The child was diagnosed with lead poisoning, a diagnosis for which chelation is an approved procedure. In that case, like the Nadama case, the problem was the wrong chelating agent was used.
Alyric,
You assume too much about me. I have never maintained that autism = mercury poisoning. I certainly am of the opinion that mercury has played a role in the increased diagnosis of ASD, but that is not the same as saying that the two things are the same. I believe that autism is autism. Yet if metal toxicity has played a causative role in the development of autism, it makes sense to get rid of the metal. There is little point in reciting all of the studies that play a part in the hypothesis, as the answer I always hear is that this study does not prove the link and that study does not prove the link. The state of the inquiry is such that all of the work is reductionist in nature, and there are no studies that tie the pieces together . . . yet. The recent UC, Davis study that will go a long way toward guiding that process, but we aren’t there at the moment.
You are sadly mistaken if you believe the IOM report proves anything. It relies wholly on flawed epidemiological studies, reading far more into the only U.S. study than even its author thought proper. Why would you think that epidemiology can answer a question of biological causation? Moreover, the IOM rushed to release its report to keep from having to deal with biological studies that were in the process of publication.
Finally, you definitely assume too much about what I may or may not use as an intervention in my son’s case. Don’t worry, that’s a common error among some folks around here. I only discuss interventions in the abstract, and I never discuss what we have chosen to do with my son. That’s partly because I don’t want to have to put up with the type of crap Kev had to (you don’t think boorishness is reserved for one side of this debate, do you?), but also because speaking about individual cases is a waste of time. That chelation may be appropriate in some cases does not mean it is appropriate in all cases. One thing you may be assured of, however, is that we do consider what our son may have to say about all this when he gets older. Indeed, my fondest wish is that he has a LOT to say.
Ian: Ahem ;o)
Wade:
_”First, thanks for the link, Ian. As I suspected, the “second†case had nothing whatsoever to do with autism. The child was diagnosed with lead poisoning, a diagnosis for which chelation is an approved procedure. In that case, like the Nadama case, the problem was the wrong chelating agent was used.”_
I don’t think anyone was claiming that the second death was related to autism – I posted it in response to Sue’s implication that chelation was totally safe.
The issue of ’cause’ is tricky. The literal cause of death was indeed chelation as a process. However, its right to say that the wrong medication was used. However, its further right to say that as chelation is not established as either eficacious (or indeed safe) as a treatment for autism that had that (as of now) fallacous link not been made then Tariq would not have died from administration of _any_ chelation agent.
Frequently on here people counter the assertion that thiomersal containing vaccines are safe with questions asking where the safety tests are – where thiomersals safety record is in relation to vaccines. These same people go on to promote chelation with no problem. The cognitive disonance is staggering.
Kev: Ahem ;o)
Ian: Oops, sorry (asleep at the switch)
Another recent study on cytokines & autistic children:
J Neuroimmunol. 2006 Mar;172(1-2):198-205. Epub 2005 Dec 19.
Elevated cytokine levels in children with autism spectrum disorder.
Molloy CA, Morrow AL, Meinzen-Derr J, Schleifer K, Dienger K, Manning-Courtney P, Altaye M, Wills-Karp M.
Center for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, MLC 5041, Cincinnati, OH 45229-3039, United States; Division of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Avenue, MLC 4002, Cincinnati, OH 45229-3039, United States; Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati
College of Medicine, United States.
This study compared production of IL-2, IFN-gamma, IL-4, IL-13, IL-5 and IL-10 in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from 20 children with autism spectrum disorder to those from matched controls. Levels of all Th2 cytokines were significantly higher in cases after incubation in media alone, but the IFN-gamma/IL-13 ratio was not significantly different between cases and controls. Cases had
significantly higher IL-13/IL-10 and IFN-gamma/IL-10 than controls. Conclusion: Children with ASD had increased activation of both Th2 and Th1 arms of the adaptive immune response, with a Th2 predominance, and without the compensatory increase in the regulatory cytokine IL-10.
David H,
The similarities between this study, the Ashwood commentary you’ve posted, and the dendritic cell study, are the words cytokine and immune, which is probably why they show up on a search. The key cytokine measured in the DC study, IL-6, isn’t mentioned in the Molloy abstract anyway.
So what’s your point?
Kev wrote:
“I don’t think anyone was claiming that the second death was related to autism – I posted it in response to Sue’s implication that chelation was totally safe”.
-Well, that’s a nice twist. I believe that I had been commenting on your use of alarmism to get your point across.
You had Sue – A fallacious response to your own alarmism, which you never addressed as you drifted into baseless SIDS/anti-vaccination conversation.
Clone,
Kev started this blog off with some questions
“I’m aware of the study you are referring to but I am unsure of which study you draw your conclusion from that cytokine-induced inflammation is found in autism.”
for David Kirby about cytokines & inflammation. I found a presentation that Kirby attended that discussed cytokines & inflammation so I posted it thinking it could be why Kirby made those comments. I also said I’m not a scientist and wasn’t sure if it was relevant. The last one I posted is one that seems more recent and thought I would post it in case it was relevant. No point other than trying to be helpful.
Ayric wrote:
1. if autism = mercury poisoning, why don’t autistics have the necessary brain lesions – no one’s found anythng like those lesions in autistics? – and no evidence of damage from auto immune reactions either – just see the IOM report 2004.
2. if the symptoms of mercury toxicity do not in any way resemble the symptioms of autism, why do you insist that there is a link?
3. if for known cases of accidental mercury intoxication removal of the mercury, i.e.chelation does nothing to fix the damage – why do you think that chelation does all this wonderful stuff?
4. When your offspring reaches adulthood and finds out he or she has long-term liver and kidney damage from chelation as a child – who is he or she going to blame – you or your wife?
Those are very good questions. For more like these, check out the Mercury FABNAQ 🙂
I certainly am of the opinion that mercury has played a role in the increased diagnosis of ASD
You’re entitled to your opinion, of course. But frankly, I find your opinion to be inconsistent with the data I’ve looked at.
One thing you may be assured of, however, is that we do consider what our son may have to say about all this when he gets older. Indeed, my fondest wish is that he has a LOT to say.
I’m willing to bet he will not be too happy to be labeled mercury poisoned. I have yet to hear of a single autistic who has found this appropriate.
Frequently on here people counter the assertion that thiomersal containing vaccines are safe with questions asking where the safety tests are – where thiomersals safety record is in relation to vaccines. These same people go on to promote chelation with no problem. The cognitive disonance is staggering.
Thimerosal may or may not be safe. There are some indications that it is safe. But this is not what the debate is about. The issue is whether it has anything to do with autism. And there are good reasons to believe that it has nothing to do with autism. The cognitive disonance is staggering, you’re right about that.
Joseph,
“Thimerosal may or may not be safe. There are some indications that it is safe. But this is not what the debate is about.”
This is part of the debate as some people argue that thimerosal should not have to be removed from vaccines. They base this argument on the 5 epidemiological studies reviewed by the IOM. Orac and others took RFK Jr. to task when he criticized the CDC for failing to follow their own advice. Lisa Randall argues that if we remove thimerosal it will cast a “suspicious” cloud over the vaccine program. You say there are indications that it is safe and I can only assume you are basing that statement on more epidemiology. I argue that even if thimerosal has nothing to do with autism it still should not be in vaccines. Especially in light of some of the recent animal studies.
1. if autism = mercury poisoning, why don’t autistics have the necessary brain lesions – no one’s found anythng like those lesions in autistics? – and no evidence of damage from auto immune reactions either – just see the IOM report 2004.
Does every type of mercury poisoning result in brain lesions? Did the children who suffered from pink disease have brain lesions? Is there evidence that ethyl mercury would cause brain lesions or are you basing this on methyl mercury data?
If you search PubMed for autism + autoimmune 4 pages worth of articles appear. If you google it, there are countless more. Whether or not any of it has been formally proven, I don’t know. Certainly many clinician’s treating autistic children believe the children are suffering from autoimmunity. But it is still being studied. Are there are studies that rule out the possibility of autoimmunity in autism? If not, we will have to wait and see what is learned as more research is conducted.
if for known cases of accidental mercury intoxication removal of the mercury, i.e.chelation does nothing to fix the damage – why do you think that chelation does all this wonderful stuff?
Couldn’t mercury continue to do more damage if left in the body?
David H: The last one I posted is one that seems more recent and thought I would post it in case it was relevant. No point other than trying to be helpful.
In that case I apologize. I was under the impression you were trying to draw a connection between thimerosal effects on dendritic cells and immune irregularities in autism. Clearly I was mistaken.
David H: If you search PubMed for autism + autoimmune 4 pages worth of articles appear
I you search Pubmed for autism + water 2 pages worth of articles appear.
There may be an autoimmune component in some cases of autism. Mercury and thimerosal may trigger or exacerbate autoimmunity. By that logic all autoimmune disorders are caused by thimerosal and all autoimmunity should also cause autism. It takes more than a common word to make a connection.
Certainly many clinician’s treating autistic children believe the children are suffering from autoimmunity.
Clinicians have been looking for the pathological cause that explains autistic behavior across the board from the beginning. The’ve come up with all kinds of crazy theories. I say, good luck with that.
Hi clone
You say
There may be an autoimmune component in some cases of autism.
I think exactly so.
Mercury and thimerosal may trigger or exacerbate autoimmunity.
Agree
By that logic all autoimmune disorders are caused by thimerosal and all autoimmunity should also cause autism.
No, this is a flawed logic for me.
It takes more than a common word to make a connection
Agree
The point for me is IF a child demonstrates to be HM poisoning AND autoimmunity problems therefore you can have a connection
.Environmental Health Perspectives Supplements Volume 107, Number S5, October 1999
Neuroimmunotoxicology: Humoral Assessment of Neurotoxicity and Autoimmune Mechanisms
Hassan A.N. El-Fawal,1,2 Stacey J. Waterman,2 Anthony De Feo,1,2 and Magdy Y. Shamy3
ehponline.org/members/1999/suppl-5/767-775el-fawal/el-fawal-full.html
and references
IF both conditions have relations with autism is something to be further researched.
MarÃa Luján
These two manuscripts I consider are interesting
1-Significant association of HLA A2–DR11 with CD4 naive decrease in autistic children • SHORT SURVEY
Biomedecine & Pharmacotherapy, Volume 57, Issue 8, October 2003, Pages 372-374
Pasquale Ferrante, Marina Saresella, Franca R. Guerini, Michela Marzorati, Maria C. Musetti and Adriana Guareschi Cazzullo
2-Genetic and Immunologic Considerations in Autism
• REVIEW ARTICLE
Neurobiology of Disease, Volume 9, Issue 2, March 2002, Pages 107-125
Elena Korvatska, Judy Van de Water, Thomas F. Anders and M. Eric Gershwin
This last one is especially interesting.
MarÃa Luján
MarÃa,
Thanks for finding some relevant articles.
“IF both conditions have relations with autism is something to be further researched.”
That’s exactly the point. It is way too early to stop the research. It is very puzzling why the AAP would want to stop research into vaccines based on a handful of epidemiologic data. Hopefully their influence does not defeat the Combatting Autism bill.
Who said anything about stoppinng the research? Oh, you mean research on the possible connection between thimerosal and autism? At what point will there have been enough research to convince you?
There has been a lot of research already and most of it has been quite poor. Not for lack of interest or funding, everyone knows there are several big foundations anxious to fund thimerosal research, it’s because no one seems able to propose a well designed study to prove a connection.
What does that tell you? It tells me the mercury parents would rather rely on numerous poorly designed little studies and stitch them together to form a curtain of deception.
“IF both conditions have relations with autism is something to be further researched.â€
Still a big IF I’m afraid but there is very little evidence to suggest autism is related to heavy metal toxicity.
I searched Pubmed for Down Syndrome + autoimmune. 8 pages!
Clone
What I am talking about is how heavy metals affects ASD children, not as a cause, but as an overload.
You say
Who said anything about stoppinng the research? Oh, you mean research on the possible connection between thimerosal and autism? At what point will there have been enough research to convince you?
There has been a lot of research already and most of it has been quite poor. Not for lack of interest or funding, everyone knows there are several big foundations anxious to fund thimerosal research, it’s because no one seems able to propose a well designed study to prove a connection.
There has been no study on how Heavy metals affects autistic children because the studies done and published are focused on epidemiology , in vitro reactions, using normal cells or in animals models.
Because very little is known about ASD biochemistry, I do think that the research with this idea of comorbility instead of a cause is really scarce.
I think that the big problem is how ASD has shifted from being considered a psychiatric disorder to a neurobiologic disorder of genetic origen with environmental contribution at an individual level. The information is very fragmented, from other areas than autism itself ( immunology, virology, gastroenterology, etc) and an unified idea of what autism is ( considering the genetics/epigenetics and posnatal evolution and impact of environment in ASD children development) is lacking for me.
MarÃa Luján
“Who said anything about stoppinng the research? Oh, you mean research on the possible connection between thimerosal and autism? At what point will there have been enough research to convince you?”
The IOM said to stop the research back in 2004 and now the AAP is in favor of stopping it. Personally, I would like to see research that looks at vaccines as a whole rather than focusing on one aspect of it. There are other ingredients in vaccines, such as aluminum, (http://www.straight.com/content.cfm?id=16717) that may also be part of the problem. So children aren’t just getting mercury in their vaccine. They’re getting it in combination with aluminum, MSG, etc… . They may also be getting vaccinated with live vaccines on the same day. And what if the child is sick on this day? And what if that child is breast feeding from a mother who is eating tuna every day? How will those things impact the child? This is the type of research I would like to see. We’re not even close to having enough research to convince me. I would also like to see the study comparing a vaccinated population to an unvaccinated population and I would like to see an honest study of the VSD data.
“There has been a lot of research already and most of it has been quite poor. Not for lack of interest or funding, everyone knows there are several big foundations anxious to fund thimerosal research, it’s because no one seems able to propose a well designed study to prove a connection.”
I’m under the impression that there has been very little funding for research thus far. What big foundations are you referring to? If you’re talking about Generation Rescue, Safe Minds or NAA those would hardly qualify as a big foundation.
“I searched Pubmed for Down Syndrome + autoimmune. 8 pages!”
Point taken.
I suppose Safe Mines could afford to spend more in the field if they spent less on lobbying, GR on adverts, NAA on shirts and bumper stickers, or whatever they do.
What about CAN? What about the MIND? Autism Speaks? are they all tapped out or are they afraid of thimerosal research? There’s even NIH funding available, just ask Burbacher and Hornig.
David H: The IOM said to stop the research back in 2004 and now the AAP is in favor of stopping it.
What part of that statement is true?
clone
The problem is for me what are the questions of the research.
For me
*There must be more research on accumulative effects of environmental insult (heavy metals, chemicals exposure) in susceptible children. There is a recent report about the incredible amount of chemicals found in the blood cord of newborn in USA. Please let me know if you are interested
*There must be more research on the combination of heavy metals and non heavy metals (Al) WITH toxoids, atenuatted virus and childhood infections (streptococus, herpes, etc) or other chemicals exposure in susceptible children,.
*There must be more research about how the two points as impacts I mentioned are distributed because of genetics/epigenetics in non autistic population and in autistic
*There must be more research about how antibiotics in combination with the other points can have negative effects in susceptible children.
I think that ethical considerations and adequate management of the information is crucial because of the needed information about health status and adequate tests-non-invasive, non aggresive for the children- are very important in the design of such studies.
JMHO
MarÃa Luján
“What about CAN? What about the MIND? Autism Speaks? are they all tapped out or are they afraid of thimerosal research? There’s even NIH funding available, just ask Burbacher and Hornig.”
Up until recently, organizations like CAN, NAAR, Autism Speaks, ASA have mostly stayed away from the environmental issues. Even now, I don’t know that any of those organizations have actually funded an environmental study. The MIND institute has funded studies so that’s definitely one. Is the NIH continuing to fund Burbacher & Hornig? My guess is they’re not as Safe Minds seems to now be funding their continued research. Here is a link:
http://www.safeminds.org/research/
Here’s a quote from Safe Minds on research:
“Since its inception in 2000, Safe Minds has sponsored over one half million dollars in research related specifically to mercury and adverse neurological outcomes, including autism. This level of financial commitment establishes Safe Minds as the largest private non-profit organization funding mercury and autism related research. ”
That’s not a lot of funding in 6 years for the largest non-profit.
David H: The IOM said to stop the research back in 2004 and now the AAP is in favor of stopping it.
“What part of that statement is true?”
I think both parts are true. In the IOM ruling in 2004 they said we should be focusing on more promising avenues of research and the AAP is against the Combatting Autism bill because it includes funding for research into vaccines/autism.
“Stop the research!”
That’s a good bumper sticker.
Clone wrote:
“Stop the research!
That’s a good bumper sticker”.
– I can see Offit, members of the CDC, IOM and AAP buying them up in bulk. What a bunch of morons.
The IOM said to stop the research back in 2004 and now the AAP is in favor of stopping it. Personally, I would like to see research that looks at vaccines as a whole rather than focusing on one aspect of it. There are other ingredients in vaccines, such as aluminum, (http://www.straight.com/content.cfm?id=16717) that may also be part of the problem. So children aren’t just getting mercury in their vaccine. They’re getting it in combination with aluminum, MSG, etc… . They may also be getting vaccinated with live vaccines on the same day. And what if the child is sick on this day? And what if that child is breast feeding from a mother who is eating tuna every day? How will those things impact the child? This is the type of research I would like to see.
All of those sound like environmental triggers that could be blamed on someone. There are many other kinds you know. What do you make of differences in regional prevalence?
We’re not even close to having enough research to convince me. I would also like to see the study comparing a vaccinated population to an unvaccinated population and I would like to see an honest study of the VSD data.
Studies of children not receiving thimerosal have been done. See Hviid (2003). Studies of VSD data, VAERS data and apparent prevalence are all flawed, because obviously actual prevalence cannot be determined from them. Factors such as awareness, criteria and hype affect the data in serious ways.
Joseph wrote:
“Studies of children not receiving thimerosal have been done. See Hviid (2003). Studies of VSD data, VAERS data and apparent prevalence are all flawed, because obviously actual prevalence cannot be determined from them. Factors such as awareness, criteria and hype affect the data in serious ways”.
-Now, this is comedy. We have Joseph referencing the Danish epidemiology studies to prove a point while being critical of the VSD data and VAERS as “flawed”. Laughing my ass off!
Don’t feed the troll; this thread has been interesting and polite so far.
Hi Joseph
You say
All of those sound like environmental triggers that could be blamed on someone. There are many other kinds you know. What do you make of differences in regional prevalence?
This is a very important question. I wonder if an environmental study would demonstrate changes in Air pollution in terms of Hg and Pb, As in water or other sources. For example if we think in the enormous amount of chemicals that all of us are exposed daily imagine in the case of a pregnant woman receiving the same. I wonder
a-What kind of unnoticed sources of heavy metals are present from region to region (coal burning and others, incineration of chemical wastes)
b-What kind of pesticides (organochlorides )or chemicals are used in different agricultural zones
c-What kind of pollution has the urban zones in terms of PCBs, PAHS, fluorocarbons, furans, polybrominatedbenzodioxins-or chlorinated,PCNs,
d- use of flame retardants, garbage incinerations,plastic production wastes, car emissions and other fossil fuel combustion .Level of contamination of water
e-Kind of food consumed from region to region. Quality of the water.
g-Genetic differences (if any) considering population (amount of foreign population)
h-Kind of practice of doctors in terms of vaccinations (schedule) and use of antibiotics for childhood diseases
Please Joseph, I am not saying that this is the answer, I am wondering about differences from region to region.
Studies of children not receiving thimerosal have been done. See Hviid (2003). Studies of VSD data, VAERS data and apparent prevalence are all flawed, because obviously actual prevalence cannot be determined from them. Factors such as awareness, criteria and hype affect the data in serious ways.
Personally, I think that you will find flaws in every epidemiological study done about autism. In a multicausal and multipresentation condition like ASD, I doubt that epidemiology can confirm/deny something.
MarÃa Luján
“This is a very important question. I wonder if an environmental study would demonstrate changes in Air pollution in terms of Hg and Pb, As in water or other sources.
Maria, this is somewhat in the works in the U.S. Although any results are a LONG ways off, you can read about it Here
Dad of Cameron
Thank you very much for the link. I did not know about. I will read it carefully
Do you know about this?
http://www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2/
MarÃa Luján
Maria, Thank you.
I’m familiar with several of the EWG reports and website.
I wonder if an environmental study would demonstrate changes in Air pollution in terms of Hg and Pb, As in water or other sources. For example if we think in the enormous amount of chemicals that all of us are exposed daily imagine in the case of a pregnant woman receiving the same.
Sure, sounds plausible. But as you know, I believe regional differences are of apparent prevalence, not actual prevalence. I plan to look at some of the data that CDDS sent me. I have client characteristics per Regional Center since 1992 — that might be interesting to look at. In the meanwhile, it looks like the Regional Center with the lowest autism prevalence and the Regional Center with the highest autism prevalence don’t have any difference in actual prevalence, while the difference in apparent prevalence is equivalent to the entire ‘autism epidemic’. This basically says (1) that no region-dependent environmental triggers are in effect, and (2) that the ‘autism epidemic’ is the same phenomenon.
Hi Joseph
I will be glad to read your analysis.
You say
In the meanwhile, it looks like the Regional Center with the lowest autism prevalence and the Regional Center with the highest autism prevalence don’t have any difference in actual prevalence, while the difference in apparent prevalence is equivalent to the entire ‘autism epidemic’. This basically says (1) that no region-dependent environmental triggers are in effect, and (2) that the ‘autism epidemic’ is the same phenomenon.
Don´t you think that this is related to how you measure actual prevalence-if it is so? What is the source of the apparent vs actual?
I agree with you, regional differences are due to apparent prevalence, where the training of doctors and criteria can have some impact. The point is how for me actual and REAL prevalence of ASD is obtained regionally.
Thank you very much for your comment about my post
MarÃa Luján
Don´t you think that this is related to how you measure actual prevalence-if it is so? What is the source of the apparent vs actual?
There’s a difference in relative caseload of about 500%. If we were talking about actual prevalence, that is, autistics with the same characteristics, you’d expect there to be a difference in the relative caseload of epilepsy and mental retardation as well. Instead we find that there’s no such difference. Therefore I conclude that the difference in prevalence is not real. I’ll try to confirm with client characteristic data in one of my upcoming posts.
Hi Joseph
Thank you for your clarification.
CCDS only have information on epilepsy and MR?
I will be glad to read your analysis and I have some questions
1-How has the number of autistics with the same characteristics changed in time?
2-Again what if the environmental insult generates other situations than epilepsy and MR that are not /were not recorded in the CCDS?
MarÃa Luján
Hi Wade
OK, say you aren’t a chelationist – good for you and better for your son. If you can’t answer these fairly basic questions – OK, the chelationists can’t either.
I’ve seen this in quite a few places
“You are sadly mistaken if you believe the IOM report proves anything. It relies wholly on flawed epidemiological studies, reading far more into the only U.S. study than even its author thought proper. Why would you think that epidemiology can answer a question of biological causation? -”
if memory serves me, Melanie Phillips cited the same and it’s well, utter rubbish. The studies -all of them – were certainly not flawed – though I suppose there’s a lot of money riding on this insisten denial. Oh yeah, those biological studies the IOM was running away from – and they were?
And, yes – epidemiological data of the magnitude that says that there’s no link beween autism and thimerosal in vaccines was able to pick up a relationship where the prevalence was 1:10000 or lower http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/517392_2. Still think that epidemiology cannot point to causation? or in the case under discussion here that epidemiology can be fairly decisive that, sorry folks – no link.
Epidemiology for Dummies (includes me) http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=11342510
Alyric,
“The studies -all of them – were certainly not flawed – though I suppose there’s a lot of money riding on this insisten denial. ”
Some of this discussion was covered in this blog: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/03/the_geiers_go_dumpsterdiving_y_1.php
although that blog is so large it will be difficult to navigate. I’ll try to summarize it quickly here:
1. The US study was declared neutral by the lead author. See his letter indicating this here: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/113/4/932
A critique of the VSD study can be found here:
Click to access VSD_SafeMinds_critique.pdf
And the first generation (which found a very significant association between thimerosal & autism) of the VSD analysis performed by the CDC, which were not presented at Simpsonwood and are not critiqued above can be found here:
Click to access Generation%20Zero%20Pres.pdf
Click to access Generation%20Zero%20Syn.pdf
2. Critique of the Danish studies can be found here:
Click to access Blaxill-DenmarkAutismThimerosalPediatrics.pdf
Click to access Hviid_et_alJAMA-SafeMindsAnalysis.pdf
Click to access 20040518_AutismAuthorsNetwork.pdf
3. The Swedish study only counted cases diagnosed as inpatients, completely ignoring outpatient cases.