Kelli Ann Davis doesn't get it

23 Aug

Over on Orac’s blog, a discussion is ongoing about (you guessed it) thiomersal.

One of the usual antivax canards is played beautifully by Kelli Ann Davis when she says:

So Phoenix Woman [another commenter], can you explain to me what the skull and crossbones is doing on the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) if thimerosal is not a poison

This is top notch antivax stupidity. Not only does she entirely miss the point of ‘Phoenix Woman’s’ comment (which was not that thiomersal was not a poison) she also infers that the fact that thiomersal is a poison means that its automatically going to cause damage. She conveniently forgets – or doesn’t care – that the adage ‘the dose makes the poison‘ always applies.

And of course we have the scare tactic of mentioning the skull and crossbones.

Thing is, there are plenty of other Toxic substances used routinely in medicine. Lets have a look at Warafrin – which is at one level rat poison and at another level an anticoagulant. And hey – look at that – the MSDS sheet has a skull and crossbones on it.

Common clinical indications for warfarin use are atrial fibrillation, the presence of artificial heart valves, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, antiphospholipid syndrome and, occasionally, after myocardial infarction.

And also

To this day, coumarins are used as rodenticides for controlling rats and mice in residential, industrial, and agricultural areas. Warfarin is both odorless and tasteless, and is effective when mixed with food bait, because the rodents will return to the bait and continue to feed over a period of days until a lethal dose is accumulated.

So, lets spell it out nice and slow for Kelli Ann – the dose makes the poison.

And so, lets have a look at the current dose levels of thiomersal in vaccine shall we?

For an ‘average’ person of 154 pounds, there is 6mg (miligrams) – or 6000 micrograms(µg)) of mercury occurring naturally in the body. So, roughly, a person of 25 pounds has 1mg (1000µg) of mercury (or, to put it another way, 1 pound of body mass gives us 40µg). A healthy newborn weighs on average about 7.5 pounds which gives a mercury body burden of approximately 303µg of mercury.

When we look at the FDA thimerosal content of vaccines currently mandated and add them all up we see that we get 239.2µg of mercury – way under what occurs naturally in the body of a healthy 7.5 pound newborn.

Now, this is not even a fair comparison. I have added up all the vaccines for a child of 6. Including doubling up on doses of a vaccine made by different manufacturers. Quite obviously a child won’t get a Td jab from two different manufacturers at one time. I have also included all the flu jabs – again, no one will get all flu jabs in a single flu season.

The maths is quite clear. There is more mercury existing naturally in our bodies – even those of a 7.5 pound newborn – than the combined total of every single thiomersal containing vaccine on the market.

104 Responses to “Kelli Ann Davis doesn't get it”

  1. Schwartz August 24, 2008 at 23:17 #

    A non-imus,

    In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for creating guidelines for the approval and use of drugs. The FDA requires that all approved drugs fulfill two requirements:
    1) The drug must be found to be effective against the disease for which it is seeking approval.
    2) The drug must meet safety criteria by being subject to extensive animal and controlled human testing.

    Doesn’t sound like a canard to me.

  2. Prometheus August 24, 2008 at 23:43 #

    I guess Schwartz missed my post. Or he doesn’t want to deal with what it implies.

    While correlation does not equal causation, the reverse is not true. If, for instance, exposure to thimerosal/thiomersal/mercury is not correlated with autism, then it becomes much, much harder (i.e. impossible) to claim causation.

    Let me give an example:

    If the prevalence of left-handedness goes up with an increase in pre-natal X-box use, it is possible that pre-natal X-box use causes left-handedness, but it does not prove it.

    On the other hand, if pre-natal X-box use drops to very low levels and left-handedness continues to increase, the liklihood that pre-natal X-box use causes left-handedness is essentially zero.

    No matter whether you believe:

    [1] Thimerosal has been removed from childhood vaccines.

    or

    [2] Thimerosal has been removed from childhood vaccines, but is still in some of the influenza vaccines given to children and pregnant women.

    or

    [3] Thimerosal is still present in trace amounts in childhood vaccines.

    the level of thimerosal that a child receives from vaccines is lower now – and has been lower since 2001 – than at any time since the early 1970’s.

    If thimerosal caused autism – enough so that it caused a tremendous rise in autism starting in the mid-1980’s, why didn’t the autism prevalence fall after it was removed?

    Arguing that thimerosal is still present does your argument no good – if the exposure is lower now than in the 1970’s (before the “autism epidemic”), then why hasn’t the prevalence dropped to 1970’s levels?

    Another interesting gambit I’ve seen is to say that thimerosal causes some of the autism we see today. If so, then what was it that caused the “autism epidemic”?

    You see, the failure of autism prevalence to fall when thimerosal was removed from vaccines made the whole “thimerosal-causes-autism” argument moot. Period. End. Full stop.

    Schwartz may try to score debating-club points by twisting the argument into a logical pretzel, but the data – including data from the very sources that led to the “thimerosal-causes-autism” movement in the first place – have already ended the debate. That some people are too deluded to see the facts – or are just arguing for the sake of the argument – is irrelevant.

    Time to move on…

    Prometheus

  3. Kelli Ann Davis August 25, 2008 at 01:46 #

    “Wait, that blog post was on measles. The MMR vaccine is for measles, and it has never had thimerosal. Never… not ever.

    What does thimerosal have to do with the MMR vaccine?”

    HCN:

    Nothing. If you read my original remark, I was commenting on Phoenix Woman’s remark regarding *poison* — not the MMR.

    I know the MMR doesn’t contain thimerosal.

    Duh!

    So, while I’m here, do you want to show me ONE study that demonstrates the SAFETY of injecting mercury (at any level) into a human being???

    Just one. That shouldn’t be too hard, right? After all, even a small, itty bitty dose should be okay (according to Kev) so let’s see it.

  4. HCN August 25, 2008 at 02:29 #

    Kelli Ann Davis said “So, while I’m here, do you want to show me ONE study that demonstrates the SAFETY of injecting mercury (at any level) into a human being???”

    Sure, there are a few. Listed below. Now you will now tell me what actual scientific evidence shows that the MMR is more dangerous than measles (death rate about 1 in 500), mumps and rubella… And what actual scientific evidence shows that the DTaP is worse than diphtheria, tetanus (death about 1 in 10), and pertussis (still kills over a dozen babies each year in the USA).

    Studies follow:

    Mercury Levels in Newborns and Infants after Receipt of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines
    Authors: Pichichero ME, Gentile A, Giglio N, et al
    Source: Pediatrics, February 2008; 121(2) e208-214

    Mercury, Vaccines, And Autism: One Controversy, Three Histories
    Author: Baker JP
    Source: American Journal of Public Health, February 2008;98(2): 244-253

    Continuing Increases in Autism Reported to California’s Developmental Services System: Mercury in Retrograde
    Authors: Schechter R, Grether JK
    Source: Arch Gen Psychiatry, January 2008; 65(1):19-24

    Thimerosal Disappears but Autism Remains (editorial)
    Author: Fombonne E
    Source: Arch Gen Psychiatry, January 2008; 65(1):15-16

    Early Thimerosal Exposure and Neuropsychological Outcomes at 7 to 10 Years
    Authors: Thompson WW, Price C, Goodson B, et al; Vaccine Safety Datalink Team
    Source: N Engl J Med, Sep 27, 2007; 357(13):1281-1292

    Lack of Association between Rh Status, Rh Immune Globulin in Pregnancy and Autism
    Authors: Miles JH, Takahashi TN
    Source: Am J Med Genet, May 16, 2007 [Epub ahead of print]

    Pervasive Developmental Disorders in Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Prevalence and Links with Immunizations
    Authors: Fombonne E, Zakarian R, Bennett A, Meng L, McLean-Heywood D
    Source: Pediatrics, July 2006, Vol. 118(1):e139-e150

    Thimerosal in Vaccines: Balancing the Risk of Adverse Effects with the Risk of Vaccine-Preventable Disease
    Authors: Bigham M, Copes R
    Source: Drug Safety, 2005, Vol. 28(2):89-101

    Comparison of Blood and Brain Mercury Levels in Infant Monkeys Exposed to Methylmercury or Vaccines Containing Thimerosal
    Authors: Burbacher TM, Shen DD, Liberato N, Grant KS, Cernichiari E, Clarkson T
    Source: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, April 21, 2005

    Thimerosal Exposure in Infants and Developmental Disorders: A Prospective Cohort Study in the United Kingdom Does Not Support a Causal Association
    Authors: Heron J, Golding J, ALSPAC Study Team
    Source: Pediatrics, September 2004, Vol. 114(3):577-583

    Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines and Autistic Spectrum Disorder: A Critical Review of Published Original Data
    Authors: Parker SK, Schwartz B, Todd J, Pickering LK
    Source: Pediatrics, September 2004, Vol. 114(3):793-804

    Thimerosal in Vaccines: A Regulatory Prespective WHO Consultation, Geneva, 15-16 April 2002
    Authors: Knezevic I, Griffiths E, Reigel F, Dobbelaer R
    Source: Vaccine, May 7, 2004, Vol. 22(15-16):1836-41

    The Evidence for the Safety of Thimerosal in Newborn and Infant Vaccines
    Author: Clements CJ
    Source: Vaccine, May 7, 2004, Vol. 22(15-16):1854-1861

    Safety of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines: A Two-Phased Study of Computerized Health Maintenance Organization Databases
    Authors: Verstraeten T, Davis RL, DeStefano F, et al
    Source: Pediatrics, November 2003, Vol. 112(5):1039-1048

    The Toxicology of Mercury–Current Exposures and Clinical Manifestations
    Authors: Clarkson TW, Magos L, Myers GJ
    Source: New England Journal of Medicine, October 30, 2003, Vol. 349(18):1731-7

    Association Between Thimerosal-Containing Vaccine and Autism
    Authors: Hviid A, Stellfeld M, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M
    Source: Journal of the American Medical Association, October 1, 2003, Vol. 290(13):1763-6

    Thimerosal and the Occurrence of Autism: Negative Ecological Evidence from Danish Population-Based Data
    Authors: Madsen KM, Lauritsen MB, Pedersen CB, et al
    Source: Pediatrics, Sept. 2003, Vol. 112(3 Pt 1):604-606

    Autism and Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines. Lack of Consistent Evidence for an Association
    Authors: Stehr-Green P, Tull P, Stellfeld M, Mortenson PB, Simpson D
    Source: American Journal of Preventive Medicine, August 2003, Vol. 25(2):101-6

    Impact of the Thimerosal Controversy on Hepatitis B Vaccine Coverage of Infants Born to Women of Unknown Hepatitis B Surface Antigen Status in Michigan
    Authors: Biroscak BJ, Fiore AE, Fasano N, Fineis P, Collins MP, Stoltman G
    Source: Pediatrics, June 2003, Vol. 111(6):e645-9

    Study Fails to Show a Connection Between Thimerosal and Autism
    Source: American Academy of Pediatrics, May 16, 2003

    Thimerosal and Autism?
    Authors: Nelson KB, Bauman ML
    Source: Pediatrics, March 2003, Vol. 111(3):674-9

    Vaccine Safety Policy Analysis in Three European Countries: The Case of Thimerosal
    Authors: Freed GL, Andreae MC, Cowan AE, et al
    Source: Health Policy, December 2002, Vol. 62(3):291-307

    Mercury Concentrations and Metabolism in Infants Receiving Vaccines Containing Thimerosal: A Descriptive Study
    Authors: Pichichero ME, Cernichiari E, Lopreiato J, Treanor J
    Source: The Lancet, November 30, 2002, Vol. 360:1737-1741

  5. Curly Anne August 25, 2008 at 04:49 #

    Kelli Ann,

    Can you show me just one study that shows it’s safe to eat food that contains micrograms of mercury? Do you realize that most of the food you give your child contains mercury? How dare you feed your child food that contains mercury! Do you have any studies to show that it is safe?? Did you ever give your child chicken? I knew it! Vas Aposhian says it’s got a lot of dangerous mercury in it! Oh the humanity! Colonel Sanders is a commie plot! Quick report that on AoA.

  6. Schwartz August 25, 2008 at 06:05 #

    HCN,

    You did it again. Simple searches returning studies that don’t meet the criteria:

    Your first answer: “Mercury Levels in Newborns and Infants after Receipt of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines”

    How exactly does measuring the blood level of mercury after Thimerosal injection qualify as a safety study?

    #2: “Mercury, Vaccines, And Autism: One Controversy, Three Histories”
    A history lesson. How about that. No safety trial here.

    #3: “Continuing Increases in Autism Reported to California’s Developmental Services System: Mercury in Retrograde”
    Not a safety study.

    This is not the first time you spam studies that don’t meet the criteria. I would recommend Kelli Anne not bother wasting her time on tracking down the sloppy work of inaccurate searches.

  7. Schwartz August 25, 2008 at 06:07 #

    Curly Anne,

    You do know that all forms of mercury are different right? You also might want to know that injested elemental mercury is usually fully excreted. Imagine that, someone has actually studied it.

    Can’t say the same about injected ethyl mercury though.

  8. Schwartz August 25, 2008 at 06:19 #

    Prometheus,

    I saw your post. You are arguing in the same vein as Kev and your argument is with Autism only (as clarified by Kev as well). Even your argument has a couple weaknesses, although no doubt they are far more difficult to measure:
    1) Thimerosal could be combined with other factors including environmental (comparing 1970’s to today)
    2) As PD noted above, the timing of exposure might matter
    3) The toxicity/dose graph may not be linear and low dosages could have greater effects

    Regardless, I’m not trying to convince anyone that it causes Autism.

    As I clearly stated to Kev, my argument based on Kelli Anne’s comments is that the safety of Thimerosal has not been established and a statement about unknown toxicity is not at all unscientific.

    “Arguing that thimerosal is still present does your argument no good”

    When referring to your limited scenario, you are right. However, for those claiming that Thimerosal has been removed from all vaccines it is valid.

  9. isles August 25, 2008 at 06:33 #

    Schwartz…all mouth, no ears.

    American College of Medical Toxicology: “[T]he ethylmercury component in Thimerosal is less hazardous than methylmercury. These are different compounds and should not be considered as equivalent neurotoxins. … [C]urrent literature supports the contention that childhood vaccinations do not deliver a sufficient dose to produce these neurological injuries.”

    Pichichero, 2002: “[A]mounts of mercury in the blood of infants receiving vaccines formulated with thiomersal are well below concentrations potentially associated with toxic effects.”

    Nelson, 2003: “Mercury poisoning and autism both affect the central nervous system but the specific sites of involvement in brain and the brain cell types affected are different in the two disorders as evidenced clinically and by neuropathology. Mercury also injures the peripheral nervous system and other organs that are not affected in autism. Nonspecific symptoms such as anxiety, depression, and irrational fears may occur both in mercury poisoning and in children with autism, but overall the clinical picture of mercurism – from any known form, dose, duration, or age of exposure – does not mimic that of autism. … Most important, no evidence yet brought forward indicates that children exposed to vaccines containing mercurials, or mercurials via any other route of exposure, have more autism than children with less or no exposure.”

    Magos, 2003: “[T]he input limits and corresponding blood mercury concentrations suggested for methylmercury underestimate the safe exposure range for ethylmercury.”

    Clarkson, 2003: “Given the short half-life of ethyl mercury, any risks of its damaging either the brain or kidneys would seem remote. … The known risk of infectious diseases far exceeds that of the hypothetical risk of thimerosal.”

    Bigham, 2005: “These comparisons do not mean that we should not try to reduce mercury exposure where possible but they do make clear that a <1% reduction in overall lifetime organic mercury exposure can be achieved by eliminating thiomersal from vaccines.”

    Zareba, 2007: “[T]he data showing significant kinetic differences in tissue distribution and metabolism of mercury species challenge the assumption that ethyl mercury is toxicologically identical to methyl mercury…. [T]himerosal risk assessment based on direct comparison to methyl mercury would be inaccurate unless properly adjusted for differences in the pharmacokinetics of these two forms of mercury.”

    Baker, 2008: “Much in the thimerosal debate hinges on the alleged similarity, or dissimilarity, of ethylmercury to methylmercury. The two compounds sound alike, differ by only one methylated side chain in their structure, and tend to be mentioned interchangeably in the popular press. Yet the chemical distinction is not trivial; it may be compared with that between ethanol (the form of alcohol in wine) and its highly lethal counterpart methanol. … Central to the public story of thimerosal has been a battle over the meaning of ‘mercury.’ Those in the scientific community take it as axiomatic that all forms of mercury are not created equal; in particular, there are good reasons to believe that the ethylmercury used in vaccines is very different from the methylmercury studied in environmental science. In public discourse, however, such distinctions are subsumed under a single entity, mercury, with a long and very public history. Perhaps unfairly, history has endowed mercury in all its forms with a notoriety that will not be easy to erase, as will quickly be discovered by any pediatrician trying to convince an anxious mother that a ‘trace’ of mercury in a vaccine is safe.”

    Berman, 2008: “[T]he current data do not provide support for the inference that neonatal thimerosal exposure is involved in the etiology of neurodevelopmental disorders that alter social behaviors such as autism.”

  10. isles August 25, 2008 at 06:37 #

    BTW, Kev, I forgot to mention, awesome post! I’d never seen the elemental composition table before.

  11. Schwartz August 25, 2008 at 07:05 #

    Isles,

    I’m heading to bed now, but I think some comprehension discussion is in order:

    How do you figure a monkey study meets the criteria: “do you want to show me ONE study that demonstrates the SAFETY of injecting mercury (at any level) into a human being???”

    Demonstrate = actually test safey on humans
    human = human being, not monkey

    Just glancing at the list, the Miles study on Rhogam was a joke and the Fombonne study still has serious unanswered methodology questions.

    Of course neither of them is a safety study. So they fail on all counts.

    As for the ecological data, bonus points if you know which organs the mercury naturally resides.

  12. Kev August 25, 2008 at 07:20 #

    Kelli Ann – same applies to you as Schwartz. I am not arguing universal safety. In fact, I’m pretty sure I’m on record on this blog somewhere as saying it was a good idea to take the thiomersal out of vaccines.

    Autism. Thats your fight and mine. This ‘its not safe!’ crapola is simply that. Crapola.

    So, having once again clarified that, can you begin to see how stupid it is claiming that just because something has a skull and crossbones on it its MSDS sheet means its fatal/evil/causes autism?

    Can you also begin to see that you have a massive credibility issue when you are arguing that mercury causes autism when it exists naturally in our bodies in amounts greater than what is currently in the _entire_ amount of _all_ paediatric vaccines?

    And lets be honest here. At the height of thiomersal use the total amount of thiomersal actually taken via vaccines for a 0 – 6 year old was 187µg. Slightly more than _half_ what exists in the body of a newborn.

    Now, if you or anyone else wants to start yakking on about where its stored, how its accumulated or whatever – great, be my guest. But unless you have peer reviewed evidence linking what you say to autism then I’m going to pre-emptively judge you as speculating without evidence.

  13. Sullivan August 25, 2008 at 07:47 #

    Kelli Ann,

    could you show us one study that shows that the “favorite” vaccine schedule that Generation Rescue promotes as an alternate is safe?

    You know, the one that has zero coverage for Measles, Mumps and Rubella.

    One safety study, just one.

  14. Kelli Ann Davis August 25, 2008 at 15:40 #

    “So, having once again clarified that, can you begin to see how stupid it is claiming that just because something has a skull and crossbones on it its MSDS sheet means its fatal/evil/causes autism?”

    Kev, you need to go back and look at my original comment. And while you’re there, why don’t you actually take the time to READ the MSDS. Anybody who would try and state that thimerosal is not a toxin/posion and isn’t “fatal or evil” needs a reality check.

    Fact: A skull and crossbones is the *universal symbol* for a toxic substance/poison.

    Fact: Mercury is toxin that causes neurological damage. Hence, the reason it’s called a *neurotoxin* in science literature.

    Fact: A level (or dose) for *SAFELY* injecting mercury into humans has *never* been demonstrated in any study — period.

    Fact: My son was injected with mercury via his vaccines during the mid to late 90’s.

    Fact: Shortly thereafter, we witnessed neurological regression.

    To Schwartz:

    Thanks for the backup on this post. If you read my latest piece on Age of Autism, you’ll see I tend to focus my energies in places where I can be most productive.

    Best to you.

  15. HCN August 25, 2008 at 18:19 #

    It looks like Kelli Ann just decided to blitz through without reading anything, attempting to understand anything… and definitely not wanting to answer any of our questions.

    Pity.

  16. Kev August 25, 2008 at 19:07 #

    Kelli Ann – with that one comment you sum up exactly why you are a terrible advocate for our children. You don’t listen – and you claim to represent an organisation that wants to be the voice for autism parents and autistic people. You don’t understand science – and you claim to represent an organisation that undertakes and champions research.

  17. isles August 25, 2008 at 21:24 #

    I don’t care what you want, Schwartz. I’m giving you what matters.

  18. amomamom August 25, 2008 at 21:46 #

    What do you want to bet that Kelli Ann had been feeding her child food with mercury in it in the days and months preceding his “neurological regression”? How much mercury was the kid born with in his brain, and how does that compare with the amount that remained in his brain following vaccines? Wake up call, Kelli Ann. The mercury hypothesis is dead.

  19. Sullivan August 26, 2008 at 02:09 #

    who would try and state that thimerosal is not a toxin/posion and isn’t “fatal or evil” needs a reality check.

    Fact: A skull and crossbones is the universal symbol for a toxic substance/poison.

    by this logic, we are all dead. We have all been exposed to a fatal, toxic, poison.

    Fact: my whole family (including me) are not dead.

    Does that mean that thimerosal in large doses is not fatal? No.

    What it does mean is that Amanda Peet was right. Quantity matters.

  20. Schwartz August 26, 2008 at 02:33 #

    isles,

    Then it really is a reading comprehension problem. My condolences.

  21. passionlessDrone August 26, 2008 at 17:00 #

    Hello friends –

    If we keep digging the smallest amount, we find that ‘age old addages’ like the poison is in the dose also fail to describe what happens if a poison is applied to entities in different metabolic states. For example:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15521554?ordinalpos=35&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

    Animals who were exercised showed greater effects from low doses of poison when compared to animals that were not exercised, but were given the same low dose. Same dose, different result.

    Considering we know that the metabolic state of children with autism is quite a bit different than their non diagnosed peers, applying simplistic mantras seems less than useful if our goal is to meaningfully discuss the potential impact of foreign insults on our children. However, if our goal is to have a pulpit from which to call people stupid, you can proceed, but one might consider the possibility that the impact of such an insult might not be quite what was intended.

    – pD

  22. HCN August 26, 2008 at 19:34 #

    pD said “Considering we know that the metabolic state of children with autism is quite a bit different than their non diagnosed peers, applying simplistic mantras seems less than useful if our goal is to meaningfully discuss the potential impact of foreign insults on our children.”

    So you are saying that autistic children would have a more drastic reaction to the toxins in the diseases, like the pertussis toxin? Obviously this means that it is even more important to protect them from disease!

  23. passionlessDrone August 27, 2008 at 01:43 #

    Hi HCN –

    So you are saying that autistic children would have a more drastic reaction to the toxins in the diseases, like the pertussis toxin? Obviously this means that it is even more important to protect them from disease!

    I’m saying that trying to have a serious discussion about autism and the impact of environmental insults leaves absolutely no room for age old addages. In a very similar fashion, putting an argument and conclusion you would like to hear in someone else’s mouth is a sign of willingness to run away from discussing a complicated issue.

    The chance that a child with autism would react more to the toxin of a pertussis infection than his non diagnosed peer is possible. Likewise it is possible that the child with autism would react more to the adjuvants in a vaccine than his non diagnosed peer. Likewise it is possible that some children will react differently to a pertussis infection at two months of age than at four months.

    Without more study, we won’t have an answer to these questions, and as long as the state of discussions about autism and environmental insults pivots on gross over simplifications it is likely to remain that way.

    – pD

  24. passionlessDrone August 27, 2008 at 01:52 #

    Hi HCN –

    So you are saying that autistic children would have a more drastic reaction to the toxins in the diseases, like the pertussis toxin? Obviously this means that it is even more important to protect them from disease!

    I’m saying that trying to have a serious discussion about autism and the impact of environmental insults leaves absolutely no room for age old addages. In a very similar fashion, putting an argument and conclusion you would like to hear in someone else’s mouth is a sign of willingness to run away from discussing a complicated issue. Both are great for feel good rah rah sessions, neither are useful for actual analysis.

    The chance that a child with autism would react more to the toxin of a pertussis infection than his non diagnosed peer is possible. Likewise it is possible that the child with autism would react more to the adjuvants in a vaccine than his non diagnosed peer. Likewise it is possible that some children will react differently to a pertussis infection at two months of age than at six months.

    Without more analysis, we won’t have an answer to these questions, and as long as the state of discussions about autism and environmental insults pivot on gross over simplifications, it is likely to remain that way.

    – pD

  25. passionlessDrone August 27, 2008 at 01:58 #

    Hi HCN –

    So you are saying that autistic children would have a more drastic reaction to the toxins in the diseases, like the pertussis toxin? Obviously this means that it is even more important to protect them from disease!

    I’m saying that trying to have a serious discussion about autism and the impact of environmental insults leaves absolutely no room for age old addages. In a very similar fashion, putting an argument and conclusion you would like to hear in someone else’s mouth is a sign of willingness to run away from discussing a complicated issue.

    The chance that a child with autism would react more to the toxin of a pertussis infection than his non diagnosed peer is possible. Likewise it is possible that the child with autism would react more to the adjuvants in a vaccine than his non diagnosed peer. Likewise it is possible that some children will react differently to a pertussis infection, or simulated infection at two months of age than at six months.

    Without more study, we won’t have an answer to these questions, and as long as the state of discussions about autism and environmental insults pivot on gross over simplifications, it is likely to remain that way.

    – pD

  26. passionlessDrone August 27, 2008 at 02:02 #

    Hi HCN –

    So you are saying that autistic children would have a more drastic reaction to the toxins in the diseases, like the pertussis toxin? Obviously this means that it is even more important to protect them from disease!

    I’m saying that trying to have a serious discussion about autism and the impact of environmental insults leaves absolutely no room for age old addages. In a very similar fashion, putting an argument and conclusion you would like to hear in someone else’s mouth is a sign of willingness to run away from discussing a complicated issue.

    The chance that a child with autism would react more to the toxin of a pertussis infection than his non diagnosed peer is possible. Likewise it is possible that the child with autism would react more to the adjuvants in a vaccine than his non diagnosed peer. Likewise it is possible that some children will react differently to a pertussis infection at two months of age than at four months.

    Without more study, we won’t have an answer to these questions, and as long as the state of discussions about autism and environmental insults pivot on gross over simplifications, it is likely to remain that way.

    – pD

  27. HCN August 27, 2008 at 02:43 #

    pD said “I’m saying that trying to have a serious discussion about autism and the impact of environmental insults leaves absolutely no room for age old addages.”

    Pertussis and tetanus are environmental insults. The pertussis toxin is still pretty, well, toxic. It is one reason why antibiotics do not work that well with a pertussis infection. The same goes for tetanus (there is an antitoxin made from horses).

    The diseases have been studied pretty thoroughly.

    Since the rate of pertussis is increasing (thanks in part to the efforts of SafeMinds and others), there is a real chance a child will catch it (over a dozen babies die each year from pertussis in the USA). And if you are saying that an autistic kid is more likely to be affected by the low level of toxins (with your animal study), then you would really want to make sure they avoid getting pertussis.

    You should also add diphtheria (its toxin tends to cause permanent heart and nerve damage), and tetanus (its toxin is one of the most potent by weight) to the list of things you do not want any kid getting. They tend to kill between one to two out of twenty who get the actual disease.

    These have been studied. As have the levels of thimerosal in vaccines (did you miss the list of papers I posted, they are above).

    So make up your mind… Either children (autistic or otherwise) have more to fear from the “toxins” in the DTaP or tetanolysin, tetanospasmin, pertussis toxin and diphtheria toxin. And if the DTaP is more toxic than tetanospasmin, please show us the actual factual scientific documentation.

    Factoid about tetanospasmin from the CDC Pink book chapter on tetanus just to give you some perspective: “Tetanospasmin is a neurotoxin and causes the clinical manifestations of tetanus. On the basis of weight, tetanospasmin is one of the most potent toxins known. The estimated minimum human lethal dose is 2.5 nanograms per kilogram of body weight (a nanogram is one billionth of a gram), or 175 nanograms for a 70-kg (154lb) human.”

  28. passionlessDrone August 28, 2008 at 17:41 #

    Hi HCN –

    Well, at least we’ve left behind the one liner quips, but just barely.

    Since the rate of pertussis is increasing (thanks in part to the efforts of SafeMinds and others), there is a real chance a child will catch it (over a dozen babies die each year from pertussis in the USA). And if you are saying that an autistic kid is more likely to be affected by the low level of toxins (with your animal study), then you would really want to make sure they avoid getting pertussis.

    While your first statement is technically correct, we can still see the oversimplification of inconvenient information. There are four million babies born in the US every year; the chance that one will catch pertussis and react poorly is real but exceedingly miniscule, along the lines of one in 400K; the chance that a child will be exposed to pertussis and other agents in a vaccine is upwards of 98%; and a vaccinated child, 100%.

    Likewise with the other toxins you have listed.

    So make up your mind… Either children (autistic or otherwise) have more to fear from the “toxins” in the DTaP or tetanolysin, tetanospasmin, pertussis toxin and diphtheria toxin. And if the DTaP is more toxic than tetanospasmin, please show us the actual factual scientific documentation.

    Back to the over simplifications. What is your definition of toxic? Death? And again, the likelyhood of my child encountering those toxins is very small compared to him encountering a vaccination.

    What about the things other than the bacterial toxins in the vaccine that might be a factor?

    What if it were found that delaying DTaP by a few months significantly reduced the rates of long term complications; as has been suggested by a large cohort study in Canada regarding development of asthma and the timing of the first DTAP vaccination?

    http://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(07)02379-2/abstract

    By the way, did you know that getting the DTAP can cause your child’s immune system to shift to a state promoting cytokine production of systemic inflammation (i.e., a TH2 imbalance, a similar pattern seen in autism, childhood asthma, and other immune system disorders)?

    http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=18422664

    Furthermore, the general cytokine profile of the Pa recipients was strongly Th2-skewed at 6 months, as indicated by the cytokines induced by the mitogen phytohaemagglutinin. These data demonstrate that the cytokine profile of 6-month-old infants is influenced by the type of formulation of the pertussis vaccine they received at 2, 3 and 4 months of life. Large prospective studies would be warranted to evaluate the possible long-term consequences of this early modulation of the cytokine responses in infants.

    This is something that is happening to millions of infants a year, with totally unknown consequences. How long does this change last? What if the change is persistent over two months for even one in a thousand children? Nobody knows. But what is known is that simply evaluating the toxicity of the agents we are defending ourselves with against an assumption of absence of long term consequences is a fallacious comparison that cannot lead to a valid conclusion unless we keep on repeating to ourselves simplistic mantras like ‘the poison is in the dose.’

    But again, I am completely open to the possibility that I am dead wrong here. Do you know what the implications of a TH2 shift in a generation of our infants will be? How many children may go on to develop immune system disorders as a result of such a shift?

    To really be able to gauge the risks and benifits of an increasingly aggressive vaccination schedule, we need to understand both sides of the equation; as opposed to the only the number of disease cases prevented.

    – pD

  29. María Luján August 29, 2008 at 00:25 #

    Hi pD
    I agree with all what you said, especially when every year more and more on the immune system and virus and bacteria and fungus is known and also new ways of infection and unexpected risks; for example for the DTaP.
    Another reason for Whooping Cough-Induced Brain Damage: Are Acellular Vaccines Safe?

    But again, I am completely open to the possibility that I am dead wrong here.
    Me too. But in absence of clinical data how do we know?

    Do you know what the implications of a TH2 shift in a generation of our infants will be?
    and I would add based on this

    These observations suggest that S1 subunit of Pertussis toxin directly associates with neuronal proteins such as AT2, inhibit their functions, and lead to neuronal damage. Thus, the Pertussis toxin can cause dangerous cell damage, through a mechanism that was not known, or targeted, during the designing of acellular vaccines…
    Currently, on-going studies are directed to identify which regions of the S1 are involved in interacting with mammalian receptors, and the results will help to generate better acellular vaccines that do not interact with neuronal proteins.

    .

    Do you know How many children are susceptible to this kind of potential problem with the Angiotensin II receptor AT2 receptor AND/OR have the Th2 shift at 6 months?

  30. HCN August 29, 2008 at 01:39 #

    pD said “What if it were found that delaying DTaP by a few months significantly reduced the rates of long term complications; as has been suggested by a large cohort study in Canada regarding development of asthma and the timing of the first DTAP vaccination?”

    They did that in Japan. It didn’t work:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15889991? … “An antivaccine movement developed in Japan as a consequence of increasing numbers of adverse reactions to whole-cell pertussis vaccines in the mid-1970s. After two infants died within 24 h of the vaccination from 1974 to 1975, the Japanese government temporarily suspended vaccinations. Subsequently, the public and the government witnessed the re-emergence of whooping cough, with 41 deaths in 1979. This series of unfortunate events revealed to the public that the vaccine had, in fact, been beneficial.”

  31. HCN August 29, 2008 at 02:08 #

    By the way, pD, the link to the asthma study was broken, so I found the abstract… J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2008 Mar;121(3):626-31. Epub 2008 Jan 18.
    Delay in diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus vaccination is associated with a reduced risk of childhood asthma.

    The delay was not a “few months”, it was two months. And it was not terribly conclusive, and you still have the weigh the risk and benefits considering these pertussis statistics:
    Year____Cases___Deaths
    2004____25827__ 27
    2005____25616__ 39
    2006____15632__ 16

    The death figures for 2004 through 2006 are from this slide set:
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/Slides/Pertussis10.ppt#9 … Slide 9. Of the 82 deaths from pertussis during 2004 through 2006, 69 were of infants under the age of three months, while the remaining 13 were older than three months.

    So, do you risk a probable, maybe, bit of asthma at age seven… or death from pertussis before three months? Especially since this looked at other studies (and may include the one you cited later), : Pediatrics. 2007 Nov;120(5):e1269-77.
    Is childhood vaccination associated with asthma? A meta-analysis of observational studies. …”Currently available data, based on observational studies, do not support an association, provocative or protective, between receipt of the BCG or whole-cell pertussis vaccine and risk of asthma in childhood and adolescence.”

    That was whole cell, DTP, just like the study you cited. There is no reason why the DTaP would be much different.

    Oh, and the “toxic” bit… tetanus has a death rate of one in ten. I would consider that to be pretty “toxic”. You are going to have to work harder to prove that the KNOWN toxins that are produced by the pertussis bacteria, the diphtheria bacteria and the tetanus bacteria are more toxic than the trace amounts of mercury in the DTaP vaccine.

  32. Ms. Clark August 29, 2008 at 03:44 #

    HCN,

    What are the long term “sequelae” for the surivivors of lock-jaw… tetanus? What are the “sequelae” for people who get whooping cough and cough for months on end (or end up oxygen deprived or with blood vessels blown from coughing so hard). How about the “sequelae” of getting polio? How about the psychological “sequelae” of knowing that you gave rubella to a pregnant mom and rubella killed her baby?

    The antivaccine peanut gallery with their speculations don’t speculate on that stuff for some reason. They want to speculate so that no one speculates about their own genetic contribution to their kids’ autism, I guess.

    I can’t imagine having one’s body filled with a known neurotoxin at totally unregulated levels leaves one with a healthier heart or other organs. But some people think that toxins are only toxins when THEY consider them toxins. And when you can’t sue anyone for a toxic exposure it’s not so fun to talk about it endlessly.

  33. passionlessDrone August 29, 2008 at 18:08 #

    Hi HCN –

    They did that in Japan

    I am not arguing that marginal gains cannot be made in the number of deaths caused by pertussis by earlier and more aggressive inncoluation, please try to understand this. I am arguing that we do not understand all of the risks with earlier and more advanced innoculations; up and above the risks up and above contraction of disease.

    You may not know this, but childhood ashtma rates have been skyrocketing, and there are no diagnostic shifting mechanisms by which this can be explained away.

    …”Currently available data, based on observational studies, do not support an association, provocative or protective, between receipt of the BCG or whole-cell pertussis vaccine and risk of asthma in childhood and adolescence.”

    None of the currently available data took timing of first innoculation into consideration (first paragraph of the study I posted). Yet more evidence that the dose does not always make the poison.

    There is no reason why the DTaP would be much different.

    ACK! What about the fact that the DTAP was shown to shift cytokine production to a systemic state of inflammation, but the DTP was not? Please, PLEASE tell me why you think this information is unimportant?

    You are going to have to work harder to prove that the KNOWN toxins that are produced by the pertussis bacteria, the diphtheria bacteria and the tetanus bacteria are more toxic than the trace amounts of mercury in the DTaP vaccine

    I am not arguing that point, as I’ve tried to make clear again, and again, and again. It is like playing tennis with a brick wall.

    – pD

  34. alyric August 29, 2008 at 18:56 #

    pd wrote:

    “the fact that the DTAP was shown to shift cytokine production to a systemic state of inflammation, but the DTP was not? ”

    Huh? This is a fact? Only in your imagination methinks. Somebody here might know better, but you will understand why such a bizarre statement from you does not inspire confidence.

    When the anti-vaxxers start messing with cytokines, it’s usually on a par with vaccine ‘toxins’ or ‘early’ vaccination or the latest fad in’mito’ and autism, all a load of interpretation baloney.

  35. Joseph August 29, 2008 at 19:20 #

    You may not know this, but childhood ashtma rates have been skyrocketing, and there are no diagnostic shifting mechanisms by which this can be explained away.

    I’ve actually looked into this, and rates of Asthma seem to have leveled off by about 1995. See, for example, this. What is the source of your information about skyrocketing rates, pD?

    In any case, it would not be surprising if Asthma rates do depend on such things as environmental pollution.

  36. HCN August 29, 2008 at 20:52 #

    Joseph said “I’ve actually looked into this, and rates of Asthma seem to have leveled off by about 1995. See, for example, this. What is the source of your information about skyrocketing rates, pD?”

    Hence my biggest issue with Barbara Loe Fisher’s website, if they find something to blame on vaccines it is permanently referenced. If newer data disputes that reference, the website is never updated. That is, if they provide any references in the first place (though they do have a prominent tag on top to hire a lawyer, naturally since Cliff “Subpoena Everything” Shoemaker is on their board).

    This goes along with the ignoring the relative risks of the vaccine versus the actual disease. Pertussis is a persistent bug. The vaccine for it does wear off. As does the protection for diphtheria and tetanus (hence the need for ten year boosters). So pertussis continues to float around the community, disguising itself as a nasty cold in adults, who then sniffle around an infant — who can then get the actual disease. It is deadly for infants, as illustrated by the data I listed.

    So here they go, spouting off the dangers of the teeny tiny bits of ingredients in the vaccine, while totally ignoring that the diseases have even greater risk — and the risk of getting them keeps going up as the anti-vaccine rhetoric continues to convince more new parents to delay or skip the DTaP. Pertussis rates are going up. It will not take much more of this propaganda to cause a return of diphtheria (if you doubt that, check out what happened to former Soviet satellite countries when the USSR broke up, diphtheria killed thousands).

    Stop with the tangent abstracts that have very little to do with the toxicity of spurious tiny bits of vaccine ingredients. Look at the real risks. The toxins created by the bacteria are very real, and very nasty. They phantom risks of the vaccine are nothing compared to those toxins.

  37. Schwartz August 30, 2008 at 03:58 #

    Alyric,

    I believe that pD was referring to the evidence he posted. I guess you didn’t read the links?

    “However, Pa recipients also developed a strong Th2-type cytokine response to the B. pertussis antigens, as noted previously. In addition, they induced Th2-type cytokines to the co-administrated antigen tetanus toxoïd, as well as to the food antigen beta-lactoglobulin. Furthermore, the general cytokine profile of the Pa recipients was strongly Th2-skewed at 6 months, as indicated by the cytokines induced by the mitogen phytohaemagglutinin. These data demonstrate that the cytokine profile of 6-month-old infants is influenced by the type of formulation of the pertussis vaccine they received at 2, 3 and 4 months of life. Large prospective studies would be warranted to evaluate the possible long-term consequences of this early modulation of the cytokine responses in infants.”

  38. Schwartz August 30, 2008 at 04:27 #

    Joseph,

    Those numbers are a bit misleading. The incidence of an asthma attack is not indicative of asthma diagnosis, if asthma is managed properly. I know many people who have it and actively manage it with drugs so no attacks occur. Management of asthma has significantly increased over the years.

    Additionally, Canadian data continues to show in increase in prevalence:
    http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/82-003-XIE/2008002/article/10551/findings-en.htm

    “Despite the increase in childhood asthma, the prevalence of asthma attacks decreased. In 1994/1995, about half (51%) of 0- to 11-year-olds with asthma were reported to have had an attack in the previous year; by 2000/2001, this proportion had dropped to 39% (Table 1).”

    It is certainly not decisive because diagnostic improvements most likely play a role here as well. However, you certainly can’t say it’s leveled off.

  39. Sullivan August 30, 2008 at 05:14 #

    Kev–

    gotta correct you on a point. While the site you link to:
    http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/WA/warfarin.html

    has a skull and crossbones, it is not an msds.

    similarly, the msds for thimerosal does not have a skull and crossbones–
    http://www.sciencelab.com/xMSDS-Thimerosal-9925236

    at least the few I checked. It does have a “2” in the health warning box.

    Oddly enough the msds for dmsa–a favored chelator has the same level of warning, 2.

    http://www.sciencelab.com/xMSDS-meso_2_3_Dimercaptosuccinic_Acid-9923784

  40. Kev August 30, 2008 at 08:42 #

    My bad :

    Such is the issue with relying on Google and sub-domain names. Thanks for the clarification Sully 🙂

  41. alyric August 30, 2008 at 14:51 #

    “I believe that pD was referring to the evidence he posted. I guess you didn’t read the links?”

    No such luck Schwartz baby, for my sins I did. The thing about cytokine production is that just about anything can and will produce one and I assume an immune response is definitely in the list of things that can. What pd and you assume is that this is deeply darkly mysterious and definitely no good. As I said before -beware of anti vaxxers and interpretation baloney. Even the abstract hinted that the significance, if any, needs to be verified. You should have listened to the Omnibus testimony and the debunking of the anti vaxxer cytokine rumblings (let’s not call it theorising). Those proceedings seriously, are the best for seeing where the evidence really lies and how good it is. Give it a try, they’re still there.

  42. Sullivan August 30, 2008 at 16:01 #

    Kev,

    any comment about the fact that the msds for thimerosal puts it in the same health category as dmsa?

    Notice that both are level 2: “warning: May be harmful if inhaled or absorbed”

    There are two levels higher.

    I think the whole subject of substituting “toxicity” for “can this cause autism” needs a level 1 warning: may be irritating.

  43. Schwartz August 30, 2008 at 16:46 #

    Alyric,

    It’s interesting that you disregard lab evidence in exchange for selected expert opinion in a court case (on the same level of quality as clinical anecdote). Next you’ll explain that actual toxicity experts aren’t required either.

    And sorry, but you’ll have to re-read my response. You should beware of sterotypes and broad based generalizations. I did not assume anything there was evil, nor did pD. That is your own projection.

    But unexpected immune response from the two types of antigens is certainly worth exploring as the study authors concluded: “Large prospective studies would be warranted to evaluate the possible long-term consequences of this early modulation of the cytokine responses in infants.” You read that too I assume, and disregarded it no doubt.

    Investigation here is especially important with Pertussis, since it is the component most often blamed for causing a large percentage of the vaccine damage rewards to infants historically.

  44. Schwartz August 30, 2008 at 16:56 #

    Alyric,

    There are other studies that indicate that further investigation is merited. No smoking guns, but these do support further investigation.

    From: Urinary tract diseases revealed after DTP vaccination in infants and young children: cytokine irregularities and down-regulation of cytochrome P-450 enzymes induced by the vaccine may uncover latent diseases in genetically predisposed subjects, Am J Ther. 2004 Sep-Oct;11(5):344-53

  45. alyric August 30, 2008 at 18:18 #

    In 50’s English cant, Schwartz, you are a right caution. Try reading with a little discrimination, particularly, the most likely meaning of words like ‘may’, ‘possibly’ and so on. I have no idea where your ‘evil’ comes from – on a par with the rest of your reading comprehension I suppose. And as for cytokine irregularities in genetically predisposed individuals – good grief, how underwhelming.

  46. MariaLu August 30, 2008 at 18:26 #

    alyric
    Many are studying how vaccines affect gene expression. Your privilege to dismiss the importance of.
    I can´t have that privilege.
    Vaccine. 2008 Aug 26;26(36):4686-96. Epub 2008 Jul 9. Links
    Application of quantitative gene expression analysis for pertussis vaccine safety control.Hamaguchi I, Imai J, Momose H, Kawamura M, Mizukami T, Naito S, Maeyama J, Masumi A, Kuramitsu M, Takizawa K, Kato H, Mizutani T, Horiuchi Y, Nomura N, Watanabe S, Yamaguchi K.
    Department of Safety Research on Blood and Biological Products, National Institute of Infectious Diseases, 4-7-1 Gakuen, Musashimurayama, Tokyo 208-0011, Japan.

    Although vaccines are routinely used to prevent infectious diseases, little is known about the comprehensive influences caused by vaccines. In this study, we showed, using comprehensive gene expression analysis, that pertussis vaccine affected many genes in multiple organs of vaccine-treated animals. In particular, lung was revealed to be the most suitable target to evaluate pertussis vaccine toxicity. The 13 genes identified from the analysis of vaccine-treated lung at day 1 showed a clear dendrogram corresponding to pertussis vaccine toxicity. Furthermore, quantitative analysis of these genes revealed a positive correlation between their respective expression levels and the degree of toxic effects observed in samples that had been treated with various doses of reference pertussis vaccines. The quantification of this 13 gene-set is an indicator of the vaccine toxicity-related reaction.

    Vaccine. 2008 Mar 25;26(14):1725-30. Epub 2008 Feb 13. Links
    Kinetics of asthma- and allergy-associated immune response gene expression in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from vaccinated infants after in vitro re-stimulation with vaccine antigen.Lahdenperä AI, Nilsson LJ, Regnström K.
    Division of Paediatrics, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Linköping University, 58185 Linköping, Sweden.

    The global expression of immune response genes in infants after vaccination and their role in asthma and allergy is not clearly understood. Pharmacogenomics is ideally suited to study the involved cellular responses, since the expression of thousands of genes can be assessed simultaneously. Here, array technology was used to assess the expression kinetics of immune response genes with association to asthma and allergy in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) of five healthy infants after vaccination with Infanrix-Polio+Hib. At 12h after in vitro re-stimulation of the PBMC with pertussis toxin (PT) antigen, 14 immune response pathways, 33 allergy-related and 66 asthma-related genes were found activated.

  47. Schwartz August 30, 2008 at 19:11 #

    Alyric,

    Consider that small part editorial expression if it pleases you. Kind of like most of your posts.

  48. Kelli Ann Davis August 30, 2008 at 23:03 #

    “Kev, any comment about the fact that the msds for thimerosal puts it in the same health category as dmsa?”

    Psst…Sullivan. I’m not Kev, but since this blog piece has my name on it I’m going to go ahead and comment:

    One obvious distinction:

    Mercury has NOT been demonstrated to be SAFE at any level since it’s a KNOWN neurotoxin.

    (Translation for Kev: It’s *not* safe at ANY DOSE)

    DSMA *has* an established level for safe application and it’s only when that level is exceeded that it proves to be toxic.

    (Translation for Kev: The DOSE determines toxicity which in turn implies that *there is* a dose where it isn’t considered to be toxic)

    Bottom Line for Sullivan: You’re comparing apples to oranges.

  49. alyric August 30, 2008 at 23:17 #

    “(Translation for Kev: It’s not safe at ANY DOSE)”

    Scratches head, wondering at the narrow think range of our Kel. Kel, in Offit’s first rate interview on NPR, he happened to mention that we live on planet Earth and that means we get to handle all kinds of – wait for it – “neurotoxins” – cue loud music and assorted gasps!!!. Those include mercury and aluminium (not actually a known neurotoxin and not a heavy metal either come to think of it, though it does seem to get the anti-vaxxer’s knickers in a twist). So unless you elect to shuffle off this mortal alfoil because all these metals are getting to you – and do go ahead, I wouldn’t dream of stopping you, then you might have to give some consideration to the idea of a sub-toxic dose.

  50. Kev August 31, 2008 at 00:52 #

    Kelli Ann, once more you demonstrate what a poor spokesperson you are for autism. Do you understand that mercury exists naturally in our bodies – even that of a 7.5lb newborn – in amounts greater than the sum total of all mercury containing vaccines? Can you process that? Is it getting through?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: