Archive | Mercury RSS feed for this section

Pediatrics Letter – More Misrepresentation

10 May

On the 5th May a Letter from Kenneth P Stoller appeared in Pediatrics.

UW-Madison researcher Paul Shattuck concludes that special education figures being used are “faulty and do not substantiate such a claim” (that there is an autism epidemic). Paul Shattuck seems to be saying that all the reported autistic children have always been here, they were just called something else.

Shattuck makes no such conclusion. In a clarifying comment on Scienceblogs, Paul Shattuck stated:

Unfortunately, the media and some advocacy groups have distorted what my article was all about. I was quite explicit in the article that A) my work does not prove or disprove the existence of an epidemic and I think that is still an open issue….My number one goal was to raise awareness about the limitations of the special ed. data.

As a pediatrician, who has been in practice for over two decades, I find it more than a little insulting as well as disturbing to have someone say that these children were always there.

Several pediatricians do not find it insulting. Suniti Chakrabarti for example – who diagnosed my own daughter – co-authored a paper with Eric Fombonne which confirned a high but stable prevalence for autism. There are also several interesting studies that indicate that ASD has historically been very underdiagnosed.

In 2004, an ‘autism audit‘ was performed in Scotland. One of the questions the audit asked was how accurate they thought the prevalence rate estimates were for their area. 45% of authorities who responded made a point of noting that they felt diagnosis for adults was very underrepresented. For example, Perth and Kinross council stated

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.

Also, in a New Scientist piece last year, the findings of the University of Nottingham were reported. The team reexamined data from the 1970’s which resulted in five diagnosis. Using modern diagnostic criteria, the team found 56 cases, a ten-fold increase.

Lastly, earlier this year, Health Minister Liam Byrne reported figures that demonstrated 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.

The idea of ‘insult’ is irrelevant to the substantiation of a case. And yet again, Shattuck made no claim that ‘these children were always there’. Such purposefully misleading statements entirely invalidate Stoller’s case.

As a scientist, I find the current approach to the autism epidemic – “The Emperor’s New Clothes” approach – to be deeply disturbing.

Appeals to authority do not make one automatically correct. I’m sure there are several people who could say that ‘as scientists’ they question the idea of there being an epidemic of autism at all. That wouldn’t automatically make them right either. What does lend their viewpoint some weight as the fact that the science supports their opinions.

For years the vaccine division at the CDC and others have said the reason for the dramatic increase in autism is due to “better diagnosing” and “greater awareness.””They have encouraged those like Paul Shattuck to manufacture uncertainty.

This is quite simply yet more purposefully misleading rubbish. This study was funded largely by the Autistic Society of America. Paul Shattuck has also stated his affiliations with the CDC quite clearly:

As for the $540,000 from the CDC…it’s not entirely clear what they are talking about. I certainly don’t have a grant that big from anyone. They are probably talking about the autism surveillance grant that our center received from the CDC…a proposal which I helped prepare but am not listed as a co-investigator and am not funded from….I do have a small grant for about $12,000 from the CDC to investigate racial and socioeconomic disparities in the timing of autism diagnosis and service utilization.

Why Stoller indulges in such flagrant misrepresentation is not apparent. I am forced to conclude in the absence of a good reason, that Stoller has nothing to fall back on other than annoyance that Shattuck’s conclusions did not meet his beliefs and thus he felt it necessary to resort to distortion and spin.

There are no studies that have found the previously undiagnosed or misdiagnosed autistic individuals among older Americans. They simply aren’t there.

Mr Stoller is once again making assumptions. I have found no studies in PubMed that even attempt to pose this question, let alone answer it. How Stoller concludes there are none when no studies have sought an answer to this question is bewildering. I would like to suggest Mr Stoller examines the evidence from the three UK sources I quote from above. The US and the UK have a near identical autism prevalence. It seems reasonable that older patterns of prevalence might follow suit.

Now, the increase of autism has been linked to the increase in mercury exposure through fish and industrial sources, amalgam and additionally, through increased parenteral exposure to ethylmercurithiosalicate.

Its also been linked to alien invasion and plastic cups. Surely a scientist understand the concept of correlation not equaling causation?

A recent study, using infant Macaca fascicularis primates exposed to injected ethylmercury or those exposed to equal amounts of ingested methylmercury, showed that ethylmercuy was retained twice as much inorganic mercury in their brains in comparison to the methylmercury exposed primates.(Burbacher T, et al. Comparison of blood and brain mercury levels in infant monkeys exposed to methylmercury or vaccines containing thimerosal. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2005 Aug:113(8):1015-21.)These primates were exposed to mercury levels at a rate equal to what children in the United States received via standard childhood vaccines from 1991- 2003.

What’s not often discussed about the Burbacher study is the interesting point that the group did not use thiomersal containing vaccines. They used non-thiomersal containing vaccines and then added thiomersal to them. It is difficult to know how this fresh preparation compares with vaccine formulas when thimerosal is part of the manufacturing process and may have suffered some degradation to inorganic Hg in the vials before administration.

Cysteine and glutathione synthesis are crucial for mercury detoxification, and are reduced in autistic children, possibly due to epigenetic polymorphisms.

The Deth paper made no such claim. The basic gist of the Deth paper is that various toxins, including thimerosal, affect methionine synthase activity (a process that helps in building proteins) and that this can adversely affect children. In short, the Deth paper alleges that thimerosal causes methionine synthase dysfunction (MSD). However, autism and MSD are entirely dissimilar.

Therefore, autistic children have 20% lower levels of cysteine and 54% lower levels of glutathione, which adversely affect their ability to detoxify and excrete metals like mercury. (James, S.J. et al.: Metabolic biomarkers of increased oxidative stress and impaired methylation capacity in children with autism. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 80, 1611-1617 2004).This leads to a higher concentration of free mercury in blood, which then transfers into tissues and increases the half-life of mercury in the body, as compared to children with normal levels of cysteine and glutathione. As was shown by Bradstreet et al (Bradstreet, J et al.: A case control study of mercury burden in children with autistic spectrum disorders. J. Am. Phys. Surg. 8, 76-79 2003) in a study involving 221 autistic children, vaccinated autistic children showed about 6 fold elevation of urinary mercury than normal controls after appropriate mobilization with the chelating agent DMSA.

And so we get down to it – Bradstreet and JAPANDS. A man who recommends exorcism and a journal who don’t publish errata or retractions. Great. Next!

Stoller then goes on to describe a whole host of things thiomersal apparently does without ever stating the fact that none of these things appear in the diagnostic criteria for autism.

This is an unconscionable oversight failure at best, at worse it is an example that we have left consensus reality to be created by the liars, thieves, cheats, killers, and the PR junk scientists they employ.

Quite a statement from someone who has actively misled people regarding Paul Shattucks connections with the CDC. I would put forward the idea that a PR junk scientist is one who isn’t even able to research the simplest of facts and instead concentrates solely on misrepresentation and spin. As for killers, its my opinion that Dr Roy Kerry is a great example of a DAN! protocol follower.

We are living in a time where an incredible overplay and lies and self-aggrandizing behavior and non-science is the norm.

Stoller has no argument from me there. He would seem to me to be living embodiment of that statement. He cites studies from people like Burbacher who’s ‘science’is funded by SafeMinds – a group whos mission statement is to establish a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. He cites people like Deth who are listed as expert witnesses for the prosecution in the omnibus proceedings against vaccine manufacturers.

Is it stretch to realize that by putting our heads in the sand about the autism epidemic we have made it possible for the groundwork to be put in place for Marshal Law?

Er, yes. Yes it is.

No something easy to contemplate? Then ask why haven’t pediatricians come forward to demand the end of the use of ethylmercurithiosalicate once and for all, and to advocate for the treatment of these children before it is too late?

Simple: they realise that the science doesn’t support your beliefs Mr Stoller. They understand the massive societal benefits of vaccination – a benefit being well demonstrated now that vaccine uptake is falling thanks to your scare mongering as Mumps epidemics sweep your country and measles epidemics resulting in 12% hospitalisation and at least one death so far sweep mine.

Stoller declares no conflicts of interest and yet in his signature he describes himself as a member of the International Hyperbaric Medical Association. This treament is a favourite of DAN! practitioners – people who profit by ‘treating’ autism – and yet there have been no published randomized controlled trials for low-pressure hyperbaric oxygen therapy as an autism treatment yet. Only one paper exists in Pub Med relating to HBOT and autism which blogger Dad of Cameron found at least one significant error in.

Mr Stoller establishes once more his propensity to bend or totally shatter facts by claiming no conflict of interest when it is clear he supports a therapy being widely utilised for profit on autistic children. Throughout this whole letter he willfully and (one must assume) knowingly misrepresents people like Paul Shattuck, relationships between people and institutions. He quite clearly has little knowledge of the limitations of the science he quotes as backing up his beliefs and then goes on to rage about ‘PR junk scientists’ whilst he promotes the use of a very expensive treatment with no established – or even reliably investigated- appreciable effect on autistic children.

Of Rashid Buttar and Stephen Hawking

23 Apr

I was recently sent the following link (thank you JNB ;o) ) which announces the creation of the ‘Cutler Hawking Project’. At first I suspected the formation of some soft rock combo but a quick glance at the site in question soon alleviated my doubts.

The majority of people need very strong evidence before they start believing in non-mainstream treatments, and this is the reason why we decided to contact Stephen Hawking to convince him to try Andy Cutler’s chelation protocol – so he can serve as an example. Confining him to a wheelchair since his mid 20’s, Mr. Hawking is a brilliant and famous English physicist who is suffering tragically from Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, a disease caused by chronic mercury poisoning. Now 63, he can only speak with the help of a computer voice synthesizer.

Oh, it gets better.

The reason why we selected Mr. Hawking is because of his very unique situation. If we convince a man of his mega-stature in the scientific community to try Andy Cutler’s protocol and he subsequently recovers from such debility, that would convince even the biggest of skeptics. Because Mr. Hawking has been confined to a wheelchair for such a long time, and since he is so famous, no doctor could come up with another reasonable excuse for his recovery, and no doctor could write it off as a faked illness, as it would be too obvious that the mercury amalgam & vaccine issue is real and that Andy Cutler’s mercury chelation protocol really works. Mr. Hawking would be living proof! There is no other person in the world that could make a stronger case! It makes a dynamic difference when you see a celebrity talk about a certain treatment, and see that person get out of the wheelchair after 35 years and walk again, and we believe that news channels would report on this “miracle” worldwide!

OK, so here’s a group of people who believe first and foremost that a whole range of things are caused by mercury poisoning – autism, bad backs, and apparently Motor Neurone Disease has now joined that elite group. Lucky lucky Professor Hawking. Why lucky? Because chelation will cure him!!! Yay!!!!!

Except…neither Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, nor indeed any other forum of neurone disease is caused by mercury poisoning. The official line is:

The cause of ALS is not known, and scientists do not yet know why ALS strikes some people and not others…in searching for the cause of ALS, researchers have also studied environmental factors such as exposure to toxic or infectious agents. Other research has examined the possible role of dietary deficiency or trauma. However, as of yet, there is insufficient evidence to implicate these factors as causes of ALS…Future research may show that many factors, including a genetic predisposition, are involved in the development of ALS.

Sounds strangely familiar doesn’t it?

And so we’re presented with the mental picture of some fairly odd people attempting to bother a sick old man just so they can try and persuade him to undergo some therapy. Nice.

And yet, it’s still not as bad as another treatment I heard about. Apparently Dr Rashid Buttar, adored by mercury boys and girls all over the world, the man who can cure cancer and reverse old age as well as cure autism with skin cream recommends another intriguing treatment for young kids – and this time, he’s not confining it to autistic kids: oh no, this ones good for _everyone_ :

Have any of your tried, or even heard anything about, doing urine shots to help the immune system? I don’t know much about it yet, but I know you use your child’s own urine, and filter it with special filters, before injecting it into their hip. I’ve heard really good things about it from a friend who tried it.

No, its not a joke. The answers came thick and fast:

I only know this was described to me to be a procedure used by Dr. Buttar about a year ago when my son was his patient, but the nurse said it would require an extended stay near the clinic and we live in Texas. We never tried it and moved on to another doctor.

Leslie, Chelatingkids2.

I’ll bet you did Leslie.

This was recommended by Dr. Buttar’s office for my NT son who has tons of allergies. I believe Dr. Imam in NY does it. It sounded too “out there” for us so we are currently sticking with justchelation for him.

Sangeeta, Chelatingkids2

Yeah, just chelation. That’s not ‘out there’ at all.

My grandson went through this beginning in October. It was a once a week treatment for 10 weeks. Before he began, he had lots of allergy problems that would often advance into sinus infection and ear infections. It’s almost April and he has not had one problem since. The only thing that I see is an occasional stuffy nose that lasts only a very short time.

andreagrammy.

Just in case you think you read it wrong, you didn’t. Rashid Buttar and others recommend taking some of the childs urine, filtering it and then injecting it back into them. This is apparently good for the immune system. Yummy.

Autism Becomes A Political/Legal Football

17 Apr

In the most recent edition of the Schafer Mercury Report, editor Lenny Schafer has a fascinating response to a letter writer. Its not really necessary to reproduce the letter, but Schafer’s response is a gem:

Myself and other autism activists believe there is enough evidence to support a causative relationship between mercury and autism in a court of law, in front of a jury, where standards of evidence are different than that of the narrow focus of scientific findings. And if you can convince a jury, you can convince the public. Since public health by definition is political, legal standards are even more so appropriate. The profound conflicts of interest amongst those who order, perform and draw conclusions from most of the no-connection evidence as alibis for vaccines, renders such evidence as tampered and thus, less than useless. The defenders of mercurated vaccines are in trouble and attempt to hide their malfeasance behind lab standards.

I mean _wow!_

This is a de facto admission that the scientific evidence to support an autism/mercury connection is very weak:

…. where standards of evidence are different than that of the narrow focus of scientific findings.

By ‘different’ Schafer really means ‘lesser’. I mean call me naive here but I was under the impression that the debate with the mercury militia on one side and the AAP, CDC, UK Gvmt, NHS, and ourselves – autistic advocates – were having was a _scientific_ debate. How silly was I? According to Schafer:

Since public health by definition is political, legal standards are even more so appropriate

Public health is by definition political? Really? Only if you can only see one thing at a time maybe. Widen the lens a little bit and I think every medical research scientist, patient and doctor/nurse might see public health as something a little bit more than a simply political process.

This is a debate at its core about what it means to be autistic. What causes people to be autistic. How in God’s name can that be political beyond the kind of infantile number crunching the Generation ‘6000% increase’ Rescue go in for? The people who have politicised this debate are the ones who employ media manipulation specialists such as Fenton Communications.

But hey – lets not worry about that – lets not worry about the *fact* that learning more about autism is a core scientific responsibility. Turning it into a manipulated football to kick about at the whim of a lawyer is much more realistic.

Schafer is absolutely right that scientific standards are greater than legal ones. Stronger, more stringent, demanding of _actual_ evidence. Maybe Schafer could remind me: was it science or a jury that discovered electricity? Was it science or a jury that discovered penicillin? Science or a jury that took men to the moon? Science or a jury that discovered our place in the stars? Our place in nature? Our place in the future?

But then again:

…if you can convince a jury, you can convince the public…

Because y’know, science is _hard_ . Stick instead to trial lawyers so we can let the sort of people who got OJ Simpson cleared, or the Birmingham Six banged up to sort out the tricky concept of autism. Great idea.

_”The profound conflicts of interest amongst those who order, perform and draw conclusions from most of the no-connection evidence as alibis for vaccines, renders such evidence as tampered and thus, less than useless.”_

Yeah, its all a big conspiracy. Like the one that saw SafeMinds purchase the domain evidenceofharm.com or the one that saw Wendy Fournier of the NAA build Kirby a website, like the one that had Richard Deth listed as an expert witness without his knowledge, or the one that tried to smear Paul Shattuck, or the one that had the Chair of the NAA working for thiomersal lawyers Waters and Kraus, or the one that saw Andrew Wakefield allegedly filing a patent for a rival vaccine to MMR *before* he published his paper, or the one that had Kirby add on two years to his statement regarding when the thiomersal connection would be in trouble, or the one that saw RFK Jr talking about the results of a study from the Geiers several months before it was published, or the one where the Geiers started patenting Lupron therapy, or the one where Generation Rescue placed words in the mouths of scientists.

Its true that your scientific case is very weak Mr Schafer. Without that science, so is your legal one.

The John Best Junior Thread

13 Apr

For some time now, John (aka ForeSam to the uninitiated) has been crying that he’s been banned from this blog and been using that ban as an excuse. I’ve decided to call his bluff.

For this thread, and this thread only, John will be free to argue, debate, insult, rage, pontificate and generally be the John Best we know and love.

In this thread will be discussing the following:

1) John’s belief that Eli Lilly invented autism in 1931. John says autism did not exist before Jan 1st 1931.
2) John’s belief that all autism is mercury poisoning from thiomersal in vaccines.
3) John’s belief that there was no autism in China prior to 1999. John says autism did not exist in China until Jan 1st 1999.
4) John’s role as speaker at mercury militia marches and his position with Generation Rescue
5) John’s opinion on homosexuality, which he believes is ‘a perversion’, and his subsequent opinion of David Kirby.
6) John’s belief that as an adult male, fist fighting with his eight year old autistic son is a sign of good parenting.
7) John’s belief that there has been an epidemic of autism.
8) John’s belief that because Dan Olmsted didn’t find any autistic Amish, this proves thiomersal causes autism.
9) John’s belief that it is acceptable to state that women he disagree’s with should be ‘horsewhipped’
10) John’s belief that phoning people he disagree’s with at their homes to abuse with them is acceptable.
11) John’s belief that the word ‘muslim’ is interchangable with the word ‘terrorist’.

Go for it. Either now, or wait for the man himself to defend himself. Just remember that John is typical member of the thiomersal/autim connection. I of course am open to correction on that from other believers of the thiomersal/autism connection along with an explanation of why.

Also remember John is a fully ‘paid up’ Generation Rescue Rescue Angel and his views on _all_ the above should be taken as representative of that organisation, unless of course, anyone from that org would like to deny John’s involvement with them on record.

CDDS Data, Flu Vaccines And Likely Predictions

12 Apr

So, now that the cases of autism are _still_ not falling (see Joseph and Interverbal) and we long passed David Kirby’s self imposed deadline of 2005 for rates to fall and are fast approaching his new goalpost shifted deadline of 2007 what can we expect from the mercury militia?

Well, excuses as to why that might be of course. Re-alignments of data and misleading impressions. For example, Rick ‘Train Wrecks’ Rollens gave the Schafer Mercury Report an exclusive. Well – there was a whole lot of guff before the actual figures. These were quoted as:

Between April 2002 and April 2003 there were 3,595 persons added to the system. Between April 2003 and April 2004 there were 3,088 persons added to the system. Between April 2004 and April 2005 there were 3,015 persons added to the system. Between April 2005 and April 2006 there were 2,869 persons added to the system.

But, as ever, we can disregard Rollens as he hasn’t isolated the 3 – 5 year old cohort. He counted everyone.

In case you couldn’t tell, I rolled my eyes then.

For a slightly more honest approach (key word: slightly) we turn to David Kirby who posted the following on EoH:

2004 545 -4.72%, 2005 524 -3.85%

Which is the percentage change year on year. However, Kirby tucked his bombshell in the previous paragraph:

It is too early to read a whole lot into these numbers, especially quarter to quarter, and obviously, *a drop in the net gain this quarter (instead of an increase of 6) would have been more supportive of the thimerosal theory*.

EoH

Which is quite a statement. No wonder Rollens is fighting to distance himself from it. I also notice Lenny Schafer didn’t quote Kirby in the SAR.

However Kirby then goes on to tell everyone:

But yearly trends for 3-5 year olds are down…

Which is not true. Yearly trends are still rising. To put it plainly there is a continuing increase in the amount of autistic 3 – 5 year olds entering the CDDS reporting system. What these figures show (except this new quarter) is a less than 1% decrease in the rate of increase year on year. And David Kirby _knows_ this is misleading. In an email exchange with blogger Citizen Cain, Kirby:

…conceded that total cases among 3-5 year olds, *not changes in the rate of increase* is the right measure.

Citizen Cain

More misleading dishonesty Mr Kirby?

So, what can we expect from the mercury militia clinging desperately to the CDDS figures?

So, there’s the misleading conclusions and re-alignments of data. What about the excuses?

Well the biggie will be one that’s touched on by Kirby in his EoH post:

keep in mind that most of these kids are 4 and 5 years old, born between 2000 and the first quarter of 2002 (someone correct me if I got that wrong) and it is impossible to know exactly what thimerosal exposure rates were during that period in California, except to assume that they started to come down, perhaps gradually

Aha – the first emergence of what I shall take honour in calling the Great Backpedal Argument of 2006. In the GBA, mercury militia members will start to claim that rates are not falling because all the thiomersal still sitting on shelves to be used up. Its a _great_ argument as it can’t be proven or disproven – you just have to believe. Sounds familiar eh? Then of course, there’s the compounding factor of the flu vaccine. Except that the flu vaccine is not mandatory, not enforceable and as vaccine uptake is falling generally thanks to the mercury militia I would imagine flu vaccine uptake (and thus thiomersal exposure from this source) is at an all time low.

So back to all the thiomersal containing mainstream vaccines sitting on shelves up and down the country.

According to studies, the shelf life of thiomersal containing vaccines such as DTaP is between 5 – 9 months. Somebody remind me again – how long ago was it that thiomersal containing vaccines were halted for mainstream use? I forget.

And if you do come across some thiomersal containing vaccines, maybe you could send some to Safe Minds Executive Director Sallie Bernard. It seems that they were in very short supply as far back ago as June 2001:

A group of university-based researchers needs several vials of the older DTaP vaccine formulations which contained thimerosal for a legitimate research study. If anyone knows an MD who might have some of these vaccines or knows where to get them, please email me privately. Thank you. Sallie Bernard, Executive Director, Safe Minds.

Onibasu.

Makes you wonder why Ms Bernard didn’t simply wander into any GP’s office and buy some thiomersal containing vaccine off the shelves almost collapsing under the weight of the stuff.

If it was in short enough supply for Ms Bernard to require the help of people finding some back in 2001, how plentiful is the supply going to be either than or now? I’ll wager ‘not very’.

No Nonsense from Joseph

11 Apr

Its that time of year again – quarterly release from CDDS.

Joseph was very quick off the mark with an analysis. I’m going to quote the main points, shut off comments here and point you straight to the source:

As we can see, CDDS autism caseload continues to have strong growth. There’s an unexpected increase in the caseload growth this quarter (what’s usually referred to as “New Cases” by mistake). The prior tendency was for population growth to stabilize. Annual growth (calculated against the corresponding quarter the year before) has dropped a bit, but it still has a long way to go before it matches population growth in the state of California, about 1%, as would be expected in the long run. There is strong growth in the 3-5 age range, which suggests there is no drop in administrative incidence.

Just as a reminder, the 3 – 5 cohort is the cohort that David Kirby agreed was the only one worth measuring.

Despite law changes (Lanterman Act, 2003) specifically aimed at decreasing caseload growth, it’s clear administrative prevalence will continue to increase for a long time to come, perhaps one more decade. Trends in the 3-5 age range do not support an incidence drop following removal of thimerosal from vaccines. I recommend Dr. Geier’s paper be renamed to “Upward Trends in Neurological Disorders Remain Strong Following Removal of Thimerosal from Vaccines” if the paper is to be salvaged in any way.

Indeed.

Meanwhile over on the EoH group, poster Lynn asked if anyone had analysed the new stats yet. From the ringing silence, I guess we can assume they have.

You can comment on this story over at Joseph’s blog.

Upcoming Autism Conference

7 Apr

The Fifth Annual Meeting for Autism Research will shortly be going ahead in Montreal. There’s a few very interesting papers being discussed. Here’s a few abstracts:

No Autism Amongst Inuits From Northern Quebec?

_E. Fombonne, J. Morel, J. Macarthur_

*Background* : Autism has been found in most populations where it has been investigated. We have preliminary evidence that autism does not exist in the Inuit population of Northern Quebec

*Methods* : The authors know extensively the Inuit population (N=12,000) of Northern Quebec. They have been responsible for more than 15 years for pediatric care and special education in the 14 villages of this huge territory. There is a universal free health care and educational system, with repeated periodic medical examinations from birth onwards, compulsory attendance to school, and excellent medical/educational tracking record system for each child

*Results* : No case of autism was ever reported in an Inuit child in this population in the last 15 years. A computer search of discharge medical and psychiatric diagnoses failed to identify an ICD-9 diagnosis suggestive of autism or one of its variant. No case was referred for psychiatric evaluation or special educational assessment that would be consistent with autistic developmental impairments. In order to develop a full epidemiological enquiry, we have conducted a pilot study in 2 villages that demonstrated the feasibility of this planned investigation.

*Conclusion* : Autism appears to not exist amongst Inuits from Northern Quebec. If confirmed, it would have significant implications for the genetic understanding of autism. In addition, as Inuits are exposed through their fish-eating practices to high pre- and post-natal levels of mercury, it would also suggest that high mercury exposure in itself does not increase the risk of autism.

A STUDY OF MERCURY LEVELS IN YOUNG CHILDREN WITH AUTISM USING LABORATORY ANALYSIS OF HAIR SAMPLES

_P. G. Williams, J. Hersh, L. L. Sears_

Autism is a developmental disability characterized by severe, pervasive deficits in social interaction, communication and range of interests and activities. The neurobiologic basis of autism is well accepted, although the specific etiology is unknown. It has been theorized that autism may result from a combination of predisposing genes and environmental factors. While autism has a known association with some environmental factors such as rubella and valproic acid exposure in utero, other proposed environmental mechanisms such as mercury toxicity or other heavy metal exposure have limited research support. Despite this fact, interventions including oral chelation therapy are being used to treat autism after hair, blood or urine samples are analyzed by specialty laboratories. Controls and standards for these laboratories are often unclear with minimal data supporting differences in lab values for children with autism and typically developing children.

Hair samples were obtained from 14 children with autism and 16 controls between the ages of 2 and 6 years. These *samples were then sent to Doctors Data Lab* where mercury levels were reported. *The autism and control groups did not differ significantly in age or gender distribution*. Analysis of hair sample data by t-tests for equality of means and equal variance yielded *no significant difference in mercury levels for the two groups*. Despite the small sample size, results raise questions about the usefulness of evaluation for mercury exposure using hair samples, and about claims of mercury toxicity in children with autism.

BLOOD METAL CONCENTRATIONS IN THE CHARGE STUDY

_I. Hertz-Picciotto, P. G. Green, L. A. Croen, R. Hansen, P. Krakowiak_

*Background* : Adverse effects on neurodevelopment have been observed for lead and mercury. Previous reports of associations between body burdens of mercury and autism have been inconsistent or come from studies lacking rigorous quantitation of metals.

*Objectives* : To determine if blood levels of metals differ between children with versus without autism.

*Methods* : The CHARGE Study has been enrolling a population-based sample of 2-5 year old children with autism (AU), children with developmental delay (DD), and general population (GP) controls frequency matched on age, sex, and geographic region. Venous blood samples were drawn and metals were measured by inductively coupled plasma/mass spectrometry. Metals determinations were completed on 380 total children (261 AU, 40 DD, 79 GP). The AU cases were further divided into regressive (n=101) and early onset (n=119). ANOVA with unequal variances was used to compare means across groups.

*Results* : No significant difference in blood mercury was observed between the AU children (mercury mean±SD: 0.50±1.15 micrograms/dl) and either DD (0.41±0.51 micrograms/dl) or GP (0.51±0.74 micrograms/dl) children. Blood lead values were similar across AU, DD, and GP children (1.38, 1.30, 1.41 micrograms/dl, respectively). Similarly, children with a regressive trajectory versus early onset did not differ in their concentrations of circulating metals.

*Conclusions* : In 2-5 year olds, neither mercury nor lead concentration in peripheral blood of children with autism differs, on average, with that measured in population-based controls. Sponsors: NIEHS, EPA, M.I.N.D. Institute

M.I.N.D? Oh dear, what _will_ Rick Rollens have to say about that> _Thats_ not the result he paid to get!

In the meantime lets all look forward to the full release of these and the many other papers that will be presented.

*Update* Just noticed Autism Street has a similar post up.

Autism ‘Epidemic’ Groups Turn To Misrepresentation

5 Apr

Following publication of the Shattuck paper casting doubt on the evidence for an autism epidemic:

The mean administrative prevalence of autism in US special education among children ages 6 to 11 in 1994 was only 0.6 per 1000, less than one-fifth of the lowest CDC estimate from Atlanta (based on surveillance data from 1996). Therefore, special education counts of children with autism in the early 1990s were dramatic underestimates of population prevalence and really had nowhere to go but up. This finding highlights the inappropriateness of using special education trends to make declarations about an epidemic of autism, as has been common in recent media and advocacy reports.

Source.

The usual suspects have begun to trot out the usual ploys to try and misrepresent and obscure. The National Autism Association write:

A study published today in Pediatrics, “The Contribution of Diagnostic Substitution to the Growing Administrative Prevalence of Autism in US Special Education,” suggests that autism diagnoses haven’t actually risen over the past two decades, despite *growing and credible scientific evidence to the contrary*. In addition to the study’s *weak methods and erroneous conclusions*, questions have now arisen over possible *failure to disclose conflicts of interest* and *recent findings that data from previous autism projects with which current study author Paul Shattuck has been associated were fabricated*.

So first lets tackle the ‘growing and credible scientific evidence to the contrary’. Where is it? Where does it exist? Note that NAA totally fail to name, or even _reference_ this ‘growing evidence’.

They also mention ‘weak methods and erroneous conclusions’ yet again failing to illustrate what these ‘weak methods’ are or why they are weak. As far as erroneous conclusions go, that seems to be NAA double-speak for ‘things we disagree with but can’t back up’.

But what about ‘failure to disclose conflicts of interest’? NAA say:

Although the article states that Dr. Shattuck has indicated he has no financial relationships relevant to the article, NAA has learned that he was a Merck Scholar Pre-doctoral Trainee from 1999-2003, and in 2003-2004 he successfully applied for $530,000 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

Somebody remind me again – what year is this? 2003? 1999? Or is it 2006? two years after Dr Shattuck had *an alleged* financial relationship with Merck.

UPDATE: Orac Provides the following: _”Oooh, Shattuck received money from the evil Merck to support his training! Except that the Merck we’re talking about seems to be not the evil drug company but rather a nonprofit organization, the John Merck Fund, which supports research into a variety of areas, particularly developmental disabilities.”_

By comparison, Wendy Fournier, president of the NAA has an ongoing, established financial relationship with David Kirby – author of Evidence of Harm – as does Safe Minds. Claire Bothwell, Chair of the NAA, works(worked?) for Waters and Kraus, lawyers who solicit thimerosal plaintiffs over the internet.

Lastly, what about ‘recent findings that data from previous autism projects with which current study author Paul Shattuck has been associated were fabricated’? Sounds damning, until you read on:

Although he was not personally implicated, Dr. Shattuck’s former research partner, a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin’s Waisman Center, was recently disciplined by the Health and Human Services Office of Research Integrity for scientific misconduct due to fabrication of data. Dr. Shattuck and others published several articles and delivered scientific presentations using data from the project in question

So someone that Shattuck once quoted got themselves in trouble. Thats hardly what I’d call

…with which current study author Paul Shattuck has been associated…

There’s also no indication that these studies Shattuck referenced, or the presentations he made which referenced them had _anything at all_ to do with autism.

The press release goes on to say:

Given the rocky history of the CDC and the autism community, failing to mention the author’s ties to this agency is a glaring omission that requires an explanation,” commented NAA board chair Claire Bothwell. “Clearly, the CDC has a vested interest in deflecting attention from the possibility that children injured by mercury-containing vaccines ended up with autism diagnoses which fueled autism rates off the charts

First of a message to the NAA, Safe Minds, Generation rescue etc – *you are not the autism community* . You represent a small subset of parents. Thats it. What you have is a good PR campaign and a few pet journalists.

Secondly, its clearly the case that several anti-vaccine groups such as NAA, SafeMinds etc are beginning to get very very jumpy and have a vested interest in deflecting attention away from the increasing evidence that there has been _no epidemic of autism_ and that autism is not caused by thiomersal in vaccines. Autism rates are not ‘off the charts’ – the charts were simply never big enough to start with.

These groups need to stop politicising the issues, need to stop painting themselves as ‘the autism community’ and need to stop this pointless and utterly transparent attack on any credible science that undermines their isolationist position.

A Few Questions For David Kirby

28 Mar

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.

Lenny Schafer’s Cognitive Dissonance

27 Mar

Another day, another Schafer Mercury Report.

Lenny has a dig at the recently published Afzal et al paper ‘Absence of detectable measles virus genome sequence in blood of autistic children who have had their MMR vaccination during the routine childhood immunization schedule of UK’:

It is hard to understand why the authors claim that their study of MMR virus in the blood “failed to substantiate” the reports by Andrew Wakefield, and by now any other researchers — that they found the MMR virus in gut biopsy samples from autistic children.It is obviously far easier to collect blood samples than to collect biopsy samples from the GI tract, which is an invasive procedure with risks. If blood were a suitable source to look for the MMR virus, Wakefield would have used blood in his study

I have no doubt it _is_ hard for Mr Scahfer to understand. It was hard for me to understand too. So I asked someone.

…measles is a lymphotropic virus, even more so for the vaccine strain which has been selected to exploit the CD46 cellular receptor. If there is a persistent MV infection the most logical place to detect it is in cells that it is most adept at infecting. Lymphocytes

Lymphocytes are a type of blood cell. Of course, given that, Lenny’s question re: Wakefield becomes unintentionally hilarious:

If blood were a suitable source to look for the MMR virus, Wakefield would have used blood in his study

Only if it occurred to him Lenny, only if it occurred to him.

Simple translation: Yes, this new study does not replicate Wakefield examining the gut. This is because there’s no need to. Blood cells are more likely to show infection than the gut. If Wakefield or Bradstreet wanted to make a special case for the gut then they failed to do so.

Interestingly, Afzal et al approached both Wakefield and Bradstreet to collect samples of the tissue they collected but they never responded to the request:

The groups of investigators that either had access to original autism specimens or investigated them later for measles virus detection were invited to take part in the study but failed to respond. Similarly, it was not possible to obtain clinical specimens of autism cases from these investigators for independent investigations.

Cynic that I am, I have to wonder why. Too busy to ask a research assistant to locate, package up and send off some samples? Or maybe too worried about what a decent scientist would reveal.

Amusingly, Lenny next attacks Parental Perspectives on the Causes of an Autism Spectrum Disorder in their
Children which recently reported that a low percentage of parents blamed their childs autism on vaccines:

This immense undertaking involved collecting questionnaires from a grand total of 41 parents! It is remarkable that as many as 16 of the respondents said vaccines are a cause of autism. How many questionnaires were given to parents who simply discarded them, knowing that a survey conducted by a University Department of Medical Genetics has little interest in learning what parents think about the role of vaccines in causing autism?

Can anyone remind me again how many kids were involved in the original Wakefield paper? Was it 41? No? 20? No?

Twelve?

Twelve.

Lets also not forget that another recent study looked at what treatment options parents were pursuing. Only 7% were pursuing detoxification (chelation etc). That was from a total of 552 returns.

Lenny seems disturbed that he is part of a minority. I’d advise him to get used to that feeling. As decent science like Afzal et al continues to refute the poor science that precedes it, people like Lenny will become more and more isolated.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →