A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Kids Health
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

HP: Outstanding Thread on Autism / Mercury Debate ...



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 28th 05, 07:26 PM
Ilena Rose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default HP: Outstanding Thread on Autism / Mercury Debate ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/theblo....html#comments

Note from Ilena: Several of the sock puppets who signed stupid names
like "junk science hater" came from one gmail account ... an apparent
quackwatch inspired poster, ever afraid to put a name with his
accusations.

~~~~~~~~~

Jay Gordon

Excellent Comments from Readers
Firstly, there are no medical interventions without side effects and
adverse consequences.

Secondly, I cannot post my (undocumented) impressions and experiences
without fierce response from those who disagree.

I’d like to give a little of my space to these people with honest
disagreements. This is a very important debate because it exposes the
medical and pharmaceutical industries’ newest “old” problems.

Bill writes: “The peer reviewed studies find no mercury/autism link
yet suggest some more study. A few anti-inoculators plus some lawyers
claim there is a link. Which side does the science fall on?”

The science falls on the side of looking harder at the connection
vaccines and possible harm. The benefits of vaccines are rarely
questioned. With so many “vaccinable” diseases on the wane and with
the advent of many vaccines against less serious illnesses, we have to
look harder at risk/benefit analyses.

Peter writes: “Are you going to hold the Kennedy's and the Kirby's of
the world accountable when there are outbreaks of pertussis because
vaccination rates have fallen because of fear mongering? Shouldn't the
anti-vaccination crowd have a little culpability for the fact that we
even have to think about whooping cough?”

Pertussis is probably not a disease that can be eliminated with
vaccinations in the way that smallpox was and polio will soon be.
There is too large a "reservoir" for the illness in adolescents and
adults and immunity wears off too quickly. But there is plenty of
validity to Peter’s argument: Yes, I accept responsibility for
counseling at least hesitation in giving vaccines. I think that the
risk of most vaccines outweighs the risk of the illness. If this
position were universally adapted we would have more pertussis. This
responsibility should stop anyone from uniformly condemning
vaccination. To the best of my knowledge, neither Kirby nor Kennedy is
“anti-vaccine” and neither am I.

Boyd writes: “Thanks for providing me with an undreamt-of experience-
check it out- here we have an allopathic trained physician publicly
doing something other than arrogantly defending practices/substances
that harm rather than heal.

Thought I would never see the day what with Big Pharma seeming to own
the medical arts now. Please accept my compliments for restoring a
little credibility to your profession, so badly needed.”

You’re welcome.

Orac writes: “Ah, Dr. Gordon is back, he who makes such blanket
statements that all pharmaceutical company-sponsored trials should be
disregarded and who makes insinuations against any investigator who
accepts pharma funding while on the other hand denying that he has
done so.”

Yes, I think I’ve done just that so let me clarify my position:
Research funded by the manufacturer of the product being studied is
not as valuable as research funded by an independent entity.

Orac continues: “Please, Dr. Gordon. Point out to me one or two of the
"specious arguments" In these pieces or arguments based on a "desire
to ignore the facts."

I'll wait.

I suspect I'll wait a long time, though.”

Evidence can be presented on all sides of the vaccine debate. All that
I ask is that the facts that support a link between vaccines and harm
to children be studied and studied hard. They have not been. Very few
dispute that removing mercury from vaccines was the correct thing to
do. Now, let’s look harder at why it was correct.

JB, MD writes: “I used to live in an area where there are a lot of
well to do white parents who wouldn't dream of feeding their children
anything but organic vegetables. There was an outbreak of a
preventable childhood illness in a pre-school in the area. An
unvaccinated infant got the disease from her older, unvaccinated
sibling. The infant died.”

No honest scientist disputes this possibility. When we stop giving
certain vaccines more children might contract these dangerous
diseases. But, it’s possible that to prevent the one death Dr. B
cites, countless children might have suffered adverse vaccine outcomes
including autism and death. No specifics from either of us, just
speculation.

The comments continue for far longer than my original little post
deserves.

Orac continues to dispute the fact that autism rates have risen
tremendously and that autistic adults are fewer in number than they
should be if this were a genetic phenomenon.

“Genetics may load the gun, but environment pulls the trigger.”
Vaccines and other environmental stimuli have triggered this epidemic
of autism and other developmental diseases of childhood.

JNG, MD





Comments
Dr Jay writes:
All that I ask is that the facts that support a
link between vaccines and harm to children be
studied and studied hard. They have not been.


Listen up, doc: YES. THEY. HAVE. Like most of the people in the
anti-vacc crowd, you simply do not accept the results.

The fact is that these links have been studied and studied and
studied. They've been studied by Big Pharma and by independent groups.
They've been studied by American groups and by foreign groups. They
have been studied and studied and the results are always the same: no
increased incidence of autism in the variable group. None.

The problem, Dr. Gordon, is that you have a NON-FALSIFIABLE
hypothesis. In other words, you refuse to admit the possibility that
your theory could be wrong. Therefore any study that shows a different
result is not good enough, or biased, or crooked, or fabricated.

The science has been done. Why you and others won't accept the results
and move on is simply astounding. You all claim to have the interest
of the affected children in mind, but here you are blowing all the
research money to cover ground that has been covered.

Let's start focusing on new treatments and/or new potential causes and
stop clubbing this dead horse.

Posted by: Tired of Jay Gordon's Nonsense at July 26, 2005 02:36 AM

"Pertussis is probably not a disease that can be eliminated with
vaccinations in the way that smallpox was and polio will soon be.
There is too large a "reservoir" for the illness in adolescents and
adults and immunity wears off too quickly. But there is plenty of
validity to Peter’s argument: Yes, I accept responsibility for
counseling at least hesitation in giving vaccines. I think that the
risk of most vaccines outweighs the risk of the illness. If this
position were universally adapted we would have more pertussis. This
responsibility should stop anyone from uniformly condemning
vaccination. To the best of my knowledge, neither Kirby nor Kennedy is
“anti-vaccine” and neither am I."

The risk of vaccination outweighing the risk of disease may hold true
on an individual basis. But for many of these diseases that is based
upon the assumption that the population immunity remains high. There
is something to be said about those sharing in the benefits should
share in the risks. To my knowledge smallpox is the only disease that
has been completely eliminated in the world. Polio is still endemic in
many nations to the point that stopping the vaccination of Americans
would seem dangerous.

I would not consider you anti-vaccination. I do believe you are not
skeptical enough when considering the positions of Kennedy and Kirby.
Kennedy's Salon article is a very poor source of information. It was
deliberately inflammatory without being truthful. As far as his
posting on this blog he conflates the arguments regarding thimerasol
with those in britain about MMR vaccine without even seeming to
understand that they are different hypothesis. The vitriol found in
that post was disturbing. IMO, he is a member of the fear-mongering
anti-vaccination crowd. Unfortunately, Kennedy and Kirby are
uninterested in dialogue, they just post and run. to your credit you
are willing to dialogue.

Posted by: Peter L at July 26, 2005 07:37 AM

Well first of all you get props for being one of the lonely few
bloggers here that actually responds to comments. You are a brave and
honest man.

I do want to point out though that "The science falls on the side of
looking harder at the connection vaccines and possible harm." does not
imply that there is a link or that one may be found with thimiserol.
But I have never come down against more study.

My problem on this issue is not that this is an area that bears
investigation. It is in people who assert facts not backed up by good
scientific evidence. For Example Mr. Kennedy's assertion that there is
a cover up comes from whole cloth. We can assume that he is a lawyer
out for a payday because while he is unelectable he desires the
spotlight. The peer reviewed studies have not found a link between
thimiserol and autism. The PR studies have not found a link between
MMR and autism. Part of the problem is that coincidentally autism
onset/detection occurs at about the time that infant/toddler
innoculations happen. Also for the first several years kids go to the
doctors office for shots more than for wellness checkups (they are
done at the time of the shot). So something is noticed at the time of
the shot. First guess is to blame the shot and that has been studied a
lot in recent times. This guess does not seem to be panning out
though. There are two other theories that I read recently though...
one proposes an intestinal connection (a hig percentage of autism
victims have intestinal problems could be causal rather than
symptomatic) and 25% of autistics have elevated blood seritonin
levels.

Posted by: bill at July 26, 2005 08:40 AM

Orac,

-----I am curious. Could you tell me how many of the bloggers, study
authors and journalists you cite that you maintain a communication
with? Just curious, anything, distribution of a private list serve,
common distribution lists, phone calls, emails, maybe an occasional
meeting, anything akin to these? Further, I would like to know how so
many of your "safe-thimerosal" bloggers and journalists manage to
paraphrase each other so quickly? If I didn't respect your
intellectual honesty, I would suspect that you are reading from the
same script. Well, perhaps not a script, perhaps talking points?

-----In your bio you state that you are an academically appointed
surgeon. Tell me how does a surgeon manage to find the time to wander
so far from his own field? The implication is that, as a “Academic
Surgeon,” you would have very little time for this. There must be
research, patient procedures, continuing education and you have
mentioned a wife in the past. Where do you find the time? You must be
an expert on time management.

-----So what drives Orac? Is it the defense of the uneducated masses?
No I don't think so, you don't come across as that noble. May I quote
you? "[b]ut when the preponderance of evidence fails to find a link
(as it does in the case of thimerosal and autism), we have to conclude
that it is highly unlikely that there is a link." Now who decides on
the validity of that evidence?... it must be you. So we know that you
have a more than healthy ego, and a belief in your own abilities.

-----Orac, it's obvious that you are intelligent, educated and
well-informed. Can you tell us how many times in history the
established medical profession has been wrong? Come on, you can tell
me, this kind of answer is right there for you...

-----Guess I'll have to continue working on what drives Orac.

-----But just to let you know, I am watching and every blog gets me
closer.

-----Oh, and the distribution list...


Posted by: Will O. at July 26, 2005 01:00 PM

Studied and studied hard? I don't think so. As far as I know there
have been no epidemiological studies of Americans kids with data
publicly available for replication that have ruled out a link between
mercury in vaccines and autism.

Dr. Verstraeten, whose CDC study is often cited for the proposition
that no link exists, takes a different view of his own work. He thinks
that his work is inconclusive and that more studies are needed.

There has been no study that compares autism rates among the general
population with populations, such as the Amish, who refuse vaccines.

Is it too much to ask for several large, well designed,
epidemiological studies of American kids, conducted by independent and
respected researchers with data made publically available so that the
results can be replicated?

If no link exists, the only harm in conducting a few additional
studies is the cost. While I want every dollar of autism research
money to be well spent, it seems that many of us who might directly
benefit from well spent research dollars are in favor of additional
research into a possible link.

I fail to see why additional studies are so frightening to some.


Posted by: dwight Meredith at July 26, 2005 04:04 PM

To the anonymous "Tired:"

Why is thimerosal sacred beyond the sanctity of any other drug or
additive that had to prove its safety? And when did epidemiological
statistics, which rely solely on arbitrary input parameters for
validity, become the ending point for scientific inquiry rather than
an aid in determining the specifics of clinical and laboratory
studies? You may disagree with the studies by James and Hornig, and
you may choose to ignore the part of the Brubacher study that
discusses the true danger of ethylmercury, but that doesn't make them
go away. Obviously the traditional double-blind trial is out of the
question. ("Now Mrs. Jones, we can vaccinate your child after you sign
this consent form in which you acknowledge that you're aware we might
inject little Jimmy with a known neurotoxin that some researchers link
to the development of autism.") Falsification is nonetheless possible.
Conduct clinical surveys to see if Dr. James is right or wrong in her
observations about glutothione deficiencies in autistic children.
Conduct animal experiments to determine whether a glutothione
deficiency truly hinders the body's natural ability to get rid of
heavy metals like mercury. Although there may not be an adequate
animal model for autism, scientists can still determine more
generalized effects of thimerosal on susceptible animals. And while
you're at it, conduct clinical studies on the impact of biomedical
treatments many parents use to correct the damage done by thimerosal.

The problem isn't an unwillingness to "admit the possibility that
[the] theory could be wrong" on the part of Dr. Gordon and the rest of
us who think the evidence of a link is strong enough for further
study. Indeed, the fact that we are calling for more study indicates
we want to know if we're right or if we're wrong. The problem is that
thimerosal defenders don't wish to acknowledge that a product so
dangerous it carries a skull and crossbones on the label should be
treated in the same manner as any other foreign substance we put into
our bodies. Instead, whenever one of the defender’s arguments gets
shot down (remember Dr. Offitt's advice that ethylmercury really isn't
that harmful), another spurious argument arises. This week, it's
nonsense about the theory not being falsifiable. The theory is most
certainly falsifiable. The fact that vaccine manufacturers aren't
trying to refute the theory with clinical or animal studies speaks
volumes.

This horse is far from dead; he's running full speed.


Posted by: Wade Rankin at July 26, 2005 04:28 PM

Wade,

I am heartened by the fact that sane minds run this country and your
little fringe group and their bogus science will never get any real
traction. An RFK Jr article in a music magazine is your high water
mark. Enjoy it.

You can show all kinds of things in a test tube, Wade. But if you
can't show them in human studies, they are non-predictive.
Furthermore, there have been a variety of studies that have compared
the medical records of children who receieved thimerisal and those
that did not. These studies have been done in numerous countries,
covering literally hundreds of thousands of children. If your theory
were true, you would expect to see a higher rate of autism in the
thimerisal group than in the non-thimerisal group. Unfortunately (or,
as the case may be: FORTUNATELY) there is no higher incidence of
autism in the thimerisal group(s).

But none of this matters to you because, as I said, you have a
non-falsifiable hypothesis. You can't admit the possibility that you
are wrong, therefore you will cling to any number of imperfect and
non-controlled lab studies in an effort to prove your phantom
epidemic. Sad, really.

Your side of the argument, as fictional and scientifically slam dunked
as it is, still deserves a better representative than the kooks you
have trotted out on this and other websites. Your refusal to accept
any legitimate studies completely undermines your argument.

COMPLETELY.

Posted by: Good luck, Wade at July 26, 2005 06:18 PM

Maybe those of you who think vaccines are God's gift to mankind can
explain to me how my children could have contracted Hepatitis B,
Tetanus, Polio, or Pertussis. I can't think of a way. I was vaccinated
as a child and still got Measles and Mumps. Why do people feel they
need to defend huge pharmaceuticul companies. Maybe you are the same
people who defend tobacco companies.

Posted by: dougc at July 26, 2005 08:00 PM

Hey "Good luck Wade" -

You spelled thimerosal wrong 4 times on your post... Do you think it
might be possible that you haven't done your homework on this topic?

Tune in to "Meet the Press" with Tim Russert on August 7th. David
Kirby (author of Evidence of Harm) will be on debating Feinberg of the
IOM.




Posted by: MercurycausesAutism at July 26, 2005 08:56 PM


Dr. Gordon may have some legitimate points,but he's certainlt
handicapped by the stridency(not to mention the conspiratorial bent)
of his audience.
This reminds me of the Laaetrile boomlet of a few decdes ago,where the
big drug companies were accused of suppressing cancer cures for $.(Via
an FDA plot).

Posted by: colin at July 26, 2005 10:42 PM

Forget Arianna's complaining, but Tim Russert is the toughest
interview on TV. Kirby is toast. He will be slammed with facts and
figures and quotes that he will stumble to defend, then Russert will
turn to Feinberg and give him a softball like, "Dr. Kirby raises some
troubling questions. Why shouldn't we believe him?" Oh it is going to
be so great. I actually think it will go a long way to shutting down
this debate once and for all.

Posted by: Junk Science Hater at July 26, 2005 11:14 PM

I have seen children who developed seizure disorders and other
neurological problems at exactly the same time they WOULD HAVE
received vaccines. Except, they received no shots.

Not every neurological disorder is caused by vaccination, mercury or
the MMR. But some are.

Thanks for all your comments. Some are a little rude, though.

Jay Gordon, MD, FAAP, IBCLC, FABM

Posted by: Jay Gordon at July 26, 2005 11:45 PM

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medi...p?newsid=28072

This is about a gene regulating serotonin that has been found to be
different in some families with multiple boys with autism (good
families to study for genes related to autism).

"...Interestingly, drugs that target these intracellular pathways, the
p38 MAPK and the PKG pathways, have been investigated in a number of
disorders unrelated to autism, such as inflammation and cancer.
Targeting these pathways might offer a new alternative for treating
autism with medications.

"This is a potential therapeutic area that we hadn't envisioned
before," Blakely said.

Based on these findings, Blakely and Sutcliffe predict that there will
one day be a way to test autistic children for these gene variants,
similar to the testing done for cystic fibrosis, a disease linked to a
single gene but triggered by many different mutations.

"Autism has such a high genetic risk, but these new findings suggest
that there may be many variants of individual genes at work," Blakely
said.

With such genetic testing, said Sutcliffe, "you might be able to
predict which kids would respond positively to particular SSRI
medications."

"We now have concrete evidence in our families that the SERT gene is a
risk factor in autism," Blakely said. "Perhaps more importantly, we
also have new pathways that could have some therapeutic end points,
and that, to us, is really good news."

The studies were supported by the National Institutes of Health, the
National Alliance for Autism Research, and

Vanderbilt's Kennedy Center,

Center for Human Genetics Research, Center for Molecular Neuroscience
and the General Clinical Research Center. "


I had to laugh when I saw who funded the study. Not only does the
Kennedy Krieger institute study autism (named after President JFK),
but Vanderbilt's Kennedy Center (likewise named after JFK) does, too?

And neither are pointing the finger at thimerosal? What kind of
heinous conspiracy is this?

What next? Will "Special Olympics" will deny the autism-thimerosal
link?

http://www.specialolympics.org/Speci...hriver+Bio.htm

Posted by: Credenza at July 27, 2005 01:58 AM

My comments from yesterday weren't posted. I suspect that my language,
while temperate by misc.health.alternative standards, was what got me
in trouble. However, it's a subject that simply enrages me. I'm sorry
to see that RFK, Jr. -- no doubt a fine environmental lawyer -- has
gotten himself sucked in by this, um, anti-science group of people. A
quick google of a certain other name will quickly show you that this
person has a rather long history of making unsubstantiated claims
about vaccination. A quick google of orac's name will show a 10 year
history, at least, of fighting the good fight.

That being said, there is plenty of data about the safety of
vaccinations and it is an ongoing activity. Quite simply the benefits
out weigh the risks and ALL of the available data shows no correlation
between autism (diabetes, MS) and vaccination. See the end of this
post for some recent references or hit Medline yourself.

For whatever reason there is a weird desire to link vaccines with
autism. Various causal mechanisms have been proposed by the, uh,
lack-of-supporting-data people. Thimerosol, live attenuated measles
(by the way, no thimerosol in live vaccines), and combination
injections have all been claimed to be THE CAUSE at various times.
These people wear blinders and are absolutely unwilling to consider
any other hypothesis about the cause or incidence of autism. It's
really common for these, um, people with strong alternate views about
a single issue to deny the existence of extensive, published research
that disproves their cherished beliefs or else explain it away as a
massive conspiracy.

dougc: Although vaccination is not 100% protective, you probably
weren't vaccinated against mumps or rubella which is why you
contracted both diseases. Measles vaccination began in 1957, rubella
around 1972, mumps in the late 70s or 80s, and chickenpox in the early
90s. I was born in 1959 and in the early 60s we had an outbreak of
rubella at our school. It was a mild illness for us kids, but one of
the moms on our block was pregnant at the time and her baby was born
blind and deaf.

Your kids do have a risk of tetanus. It's not a common disease, but
it's soil borne, does occur in the U.S. and is generally fatal. I've
seen it and it's an ugly death. Your kids may also be exposed to
hepatitis B. Asymptomatic carriage of hep B through "vertical
transmission" (mother to child) is common in Asian immigrants and
should one of your children have a sexual relationship with a carrier,
they are at risk. I have one woman in my practice who apparently got
the disease through unknown exposure from a sibling adopted from
Korea. Polio will probably be eradicated world-wide in your lifetime
although it still exists only a plane ride away in Africa. Ask your
mom or dad how they feel about polio. Pertussis outbreaks still occur
throughout the U.S. and my comments of a few days ago mentioned a
death due to pertussis in a very high income area where I used to
live.

1) Giffin R, Stratton K, Chalk R. Childhood vaccine finance and safety
issues. Health Aff. 2004;23:98-111.
2) Institute of Medicine. Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and
Autism. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004.
3) Institute of Medicine. IOM immunization safety review. Available
at: http://www.iom.edu/project.asp?id=4705 Accessed July 11, 2005.

Posted by: J Bean at July 27, 2005 01:53 PM

"Orac" aka David H. Gorski's 'insolence' is anything but respectful.


He insults brave and clearheaded Dr. Gordon as well as parents who
watched their offspring change from perfectly healthy to perfectly
harmed, post 'safe' vaccinations.


He is a member of the very dubious and oft discredited
'quackwatch.com' disinformation team.


http://www.ratbags.com/posse/whoarewe.htm#Gorski


Their unlicensed leader, Stephen Barrett, has written absolute
industry nonsense in regards to the complex Multiple Chemical
Sensitivity issue and has been described in court as "biased and
unworthy of credibility" by 3 Appeals Judges.


This "Posse" fills usenet and blogs ... typically hiding like cowards
.... with industry backed propaganda, with no accountability, other
than Gorski's mocking 'egg on his face.'


One of the best articles I've ever read was in the Wall Street Journal
on July 25th, entitled "Common Industrial Chemicals In Tiny Doses
Raise Health Issue" ... I will be happy to provide this article for
any with no access. One excerpt:


"Using advanced lab techniques, scientists have found that with some
chemicals, traces as minute as mere parts per trillion have biological
effects."


Gorski lists several insurers on his 'professional' webpage that might
well have a stake in mercury poisoning and MCS denials. The mercury in
vaccines issue and its professional deniers is tangential to the
breast implant damages cover-up, which I have been involved with for a
decade.


Bravo to Robert Kennedy and Dr. Jay Gordon and all those who refuse to
be silenced.

www.BreastImplantAwareness.org

Posted by: Ilena Rose at July 27, 2005 02:36 PM

Credenza is so busy enjoying what he/she(sorry, it is certainly okay
by me if you want to use an alias, but it's just so hard to tell
gender that way) perceives to be refuting evidence being connected to
the Kennedy name, that he/she misses an important point in the cited
article:

“While debate still rages over the 'cause' of autism, mounting
evidence suggests that genetic factors play a major role in the
disease. Two recent studies led by James Sutcliffe, Ph.D., and Randy
Blakely, Ph.D., investigators with the Vanderbilt Center for Molecular
Neuroscience and the Vanderbilt Kennedy Center for Research on Human
Development, suggest that multiple rare mutations within a single gene
may increase risk for autism.”

Maybe I’m missing something, but is there anyone who has espoused the
idea that thimerosal would trigger autism if there was not a genetic
risk involved? Indeed, the existence of genetic susceptibility
underlies the whole theory. I, for one, would be happy if the specific
gene(s) can be identified with some degree of certainty as it would
make further study of the possible role of thimerosal easier.

Although I must reserve judgment until reading the Vanderbilt study
for myself, but I kind of doubt that anti-depressants are the answer.
Although it involves a different class of drug, recent studies at
U.C.L.A. on the impact of Risperdal on autism show that it may help
alleviate some behavioral problems, but it has no more efficacy than a
placebo in improving language skills and social relatedness, the
hallmarks of autistic disorders. In other words, Risperdal treats some
of the symptoms, but is not terribly effective on the underlying
condition. And over time the receptors on which Risperdal has an
effect will eventually build up a resistance making the drug
ineffective. Again, I have not yet read the Vanderbilt study, but
based on the news reports I’ve been seeing, there is no reason to
suspect it will provide a cure. That being said, the Vanderbilt study
can only provide more clues to the final answers. Regardless of what
you may think of us, Credenza, most of us welcome any study that sheds
light rather than casts shadows, no matter what the source of the
study’s funding may be.

Posted by: Wade Rankin at July 27, 2005 03:21 PM

Credenza-

Thanks for the article and the analysis but I don't see anything about
thimerosal referenced anywhere in this article.

Most of us who are anti-thimerosal agree that there is a genetic
component to all of this. How do you know that there won't be a study
done later that comes out to say that due to the "gene variants"
described in your link, children who are identified with this gene
problem are at particular risk of damage from thimerosal in
vaccines...

I'm not saying that this WILL happen, I'm just saying that the article
that you reference is really not particularly relevant to this
discussion (that being thimerosal in vaccines/autism).

Posted by: MercurycausesAutism at July 27, 2005 04:15 PM

Doug C writes:"Maybe those of you who think vaccines are God's gift to
mankind can explain to me how my children could have contracted
Hepatitis B, Tetanus, Polio, or Pertussis. I can't think of a way."

hepB-there are still 70000 new cases every year(mostly of unvaccinated
young adults and adolescents). Hopefully it won't happen to your
children, but unprotected sex and drug experimentation are not unheard
of among teens.

tetanus-the clostridia responsible for producing the tetanus toxin is
ubiquitous in soil. Hopefully, they will never step on a rusty
nail-but it has been known to happen. This is also one of the few
vaccinations that high population immunity will not protect your
children. It is also essentially 100% protective.

polio-perhaps your children will get the opportunity to travel. Some
of the most interesting places in the world still have endemic polio.
It is also possible that they could be exposed to an immigrant from
one of these countries.

Pertussis- there has been a recent increase of whooping cough from
4000 to 11000 cases in children in the US. It can be a devastating
disease to children and if vaccination rates fall it is sure to have a
rapid increase in occurence. This vaccine is only about 85% effective
but vaccination will decrease the severity of the disease.




Posted by: Peter L at July 27, 2005 05:21 PM

FAO: Online Editor - this got zapped from the previous Jay Gordon
thread - if there's a particular reason I'd appreciate an email
pointing out my error/breach of terms. Thanks.

Dr Gordon, I've highlighted these statements of yours as they are the
ones I'm personally having some trouble with. I mean no disrespect as
you seem to be genuinely trying to walk a middle line but as the
parent of a classicaly autistic little girl and someone who's very
concerned about worldwide attitudes to autism and funding into good
solid interventions I'm hoping you can provide me with some
clarification.

Whenever I read something by medical people I always try and evaluate
it as critically as I can. I'm not trained in this discipline but I
have to employ a set of logical steps in my reasoning proceses - I'm
sure you'd agree as a scientist yourself that this is a valid
approach?

"There are far fewer adults with autism than there "should be.""


I'm assuming your first point has to do with the Boyd/Kirby assertion
that there aren't enough adult autistics to disuade from the autism
'epidemic' theory. I'm interested in the numbers in this. Exactly how
many would be enough? And what source do you use to draw such a
conculsion?

"The increase in autism has very little to do with better diagnosis."


This statement puts you at odds with a large section of your
contemporaries. And I have to say, they are a lot more convincing than
you.

First we have to be sure that there actually is such an increase in
autism that your point is even valid. There are several studies that
disagree that autism is at 'epidemic' status.

Eric Fombonne, MD, FRCPsych, of the Institute of Psychiatry at King's
College, London says that in order for us to think in terms of
epidemic or substantial raising in prevelance we ned to take 4 factors
into account (article in entirety is he
http://www.ont-autism.uoguelph.ca/fo...revalence.html) one of
which touches on diagnosis:

"...[D]oes this increase reflect a broadening of the concept of ASD
with more inclusive diagnostic criteria and improved methods of case
finding in population surveys? It is generally agreed that the
definition of autism has been broadened over the last decades,
particularly at the less severe end of the spectrum. These major
changes occurred in nosology from the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, Third Edition (DSM-III) in 1980 to the
DSM-Revised Third Edition in 1987 and the DSM, Fourth Edition in 1994.
Kanner's infantile autism was replaced in 1980 by the concept of
pervasive developmental disorder. Among the pervasive developmental
disorders, pervasive developmental disorder–not otherwise specified
(or atypical autism) has now become the most widely used ASD
diagnosis, and Asperger disorder emerged as a new diagnostic category
in the 1990s. Unless comparisons also control rigorously for changing
case definitions, interpretation of differences in prevalence rates
over time and across surveys will be virtually impossible."

The other three factors for those interested a

1) The quality of current estimates
2) Whether the prevalence of ASD has increased over time
3) Differences in methods for case finding can account for a huge
proportion of the variability of prevalence estimates between surveys

Please give Dr Fombonne's paper a thorough read as I'm sure I haven't
done it justice.

Now, even if we sweep aside Dr Fombonne's very well documented and
valid concerns we next encounter the possible cause of such a large
increase. You say (and you fail to back up your opinion with any
sources) that it has 'very little to do with better diagnosis'. This
puts you at odds with a vast number of scientific papers including:

"Variation in the administrative prevalence of ASD is associated with
education-related spending, which may be associated with
better-trained educational staff who can recognize the problem, and
more and better trained in-school specialists who can provide
screening. It is also associated with the availability of health care
resources. Increased access to pediatricians and school-based health
centers may lead to improved recognition of ASD. Interstate
variability in the identification of ASD should be taken into account
when interpreting the results of prevalence studies based on
administrative data and the associated system characteristics taken
into account by policy makers working to improve the recognition of
ASD."

David S. Mandell, ScD; Raymond Palmer, PhD
(http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/con...ract/159/3/266)

"The incidence of research-identified autism increased in Olmsted
County from 1976 to 1997, with the increase occurring among young
children after the introduction of broader, more precise diagnostic
criteria, increased availability of services, and increased awareness
of autism. Although it is possible that unidentified environmental
factors have contributed to an increase in autism, the timing of the
increase suggests that it may be due to improved awareness, changes in
diagnostic criteria, and availability of services, leading to
identification of previously unrecognized young children with autism."

William J. Barbaresi, MD; Slavica K. Katusic, MD; Robert C. Colligan,
PhD; Amy L. Weaver, MS; Steven J. Jacobsen, MD, PhD
(http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/159/1/37)

"federal and state administrative changes in policy and law favoring
better identification and reporting of autism are likely contributing
factors to the prevalence increases and may imply that autism spectrum
disorder has been underdiagnosed in the past."

James G. Gurney, PhD; Melissa S. Fritz, MPH; Kirsten K. Ness, MPH;
Phillip Sievers, MA; Craig J. Newschaffer, PhD; Elsa G. Shapiro, PhD
(http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/con...ract/157/7/622)

No one's disputing there's been a rise Dr Gordon, but is it enough of
a rise to start referring to it in such terms as 'epidemic'? And in
either case, where is your source to back up your statement that the
increase has 'very little to do with better diagnosis'?

"The attacks on David Kirby and Robert Kennedy Jr. are, in large measure, based on specious reasoning and desire to ignore facts."


This is quite possibly the most curious statement of all. *Desire* to
ignore facts? Who *desires* to ignore facts? And what are these facts?

Here's a fact about David Kirby: often in these Huffington Post
threads a few people use the argument that people like me are in the
pay of Big Pharma solely because we disagree what caused our childrens
autism and we are loth to see the whole of autism backed down into a
biomedical corner.

Imagine the outcry if it turned out I was an employee of Glaxo or
Merck or whomever. I'd be denounced and shunned. And yet, the
impartiality of David Kirby is just as flawed as anyone who blogs for
Merck. Why? Because his research is quite obviously funded by
SafeMinds and the NAA. SafeMinds used to be listed as the owners of
the domain evidenceofharm.com and the Director of the NAA, Wendy
Fournier is the web designer who designed and built the website
evidenceofharm.com. Anyone expecting an impartial and well rounded
read from Evidence of Harm would be seriously misled. Its a one sided
hatchet piece.

Here's a fact about RFK Jr. His articles in Salon/Rolling Stone were
essentially supplied to him by Lujene Clarke. Ms Clarke is the
co-owner of the website nomercury.org which I think tells you all you
need to know about her beliefs. She (and a rising number of people on
the Evidence of Harm email list) believe that the *sole* cause of
autism is mercury. Just absorb that Dr Gordon - the *sole* cause. And
RFK Jr swallowed that hook, line and sinker. Ms Clarke asked me once:

"If it is genetic, how many of your ancestors (or those of your wife
and her family) are “autistic” or suffer from severe
neurodevelopmental disorders"

And when I answered that to the best of my knwledge, three were, her
response was:

"It appears that I may have been mistaken. In your case, it seems
apparent from reading your reply there is a history of serious
psychiatric illness in your family. My apologies, I would not have
attempted to engage in rational discussion had I known you were
affected."

In fact, Ms Clarke was so hostile and openly abusive that I had to
close that thread on my site completely.

The larger point I'm trying to make here Dr Gordon is that *everyone*
in these discssions who is related to an autistic is tainted in some
way and cannot ever hope to be truly impartial. What we *must* do then
in these situations is rely on the science. Thats why it puzzles me so
much that such an obviously intelligent man as yourself seems content
to make blanket statements without anything to back them up.

The stakes are very very high in this 'game' Dr Gordon. If the likes
of Lujene Clarke have her way, mercury as a diagnosis for autism will
become enshrined in the laws of your country and shortly after that
the Western world. *If* mercury is the cause of autism then you'll
have no argument from me but at the moment the science doesn't come
close to supporting that conclusion and people such as David Kirby
continue to make money from concerned parents and political hopefulls
such as RFK Jr throw about wild (and frequently innaccurate - have you
seen how many corrections his original pieces have had to undergo?)
hyperbolic statements that seem designed to create a groundswell of
support for him should he decide to ever run for high office.

We should never proceed with wild assumptions without science to back
them up. To do so would truly be failing a whole generation.

Posted by: Kev at July 27, 2005 06:06 PM

"... there are still 70000 new cases every year(mostly of unvaccinated
young adults and adolescents). Hopefully it won't happen to your
children, but unprotected sex and drug experimentation are not unheard
of among teens."

I don't doubt your figures, Peter. But why do we have to give a Hep-B
shot to infants who are just hours old. Why can we not wait until they
are old enough to have a better developed immune system? My older kids
(autism-free, thank God) got their Hep-B shots as teenagers. At the
very least, the schedule needs to be adjusted. (Incidentally, Dr.
Gordon's web site has a very balanced discussion on the issue on
vaccines and the schedule.)

Posted by: Wade Rankin at July 27, 2005 11:13 PM

Credenza will remain gender neutral.
You know, on the internet, no one knows you're a side table.

I shared one piece of new research on genes. That particular gene
controls an aspect of the usage of serotonin in the body, and
emphasizes that atypical serotonin system present during the brain's
prenatal development will cause unusual brain wiring. That's how I
understood it.

So far when scientists do things like EEGs and MEGs and my personal
favorite, Diffusion Tensor Imaging, they find that people with autism
have a certain kind of brain wiring, possibly a particular kind of way
that the different parts of the brain are connected to each other.

There's an interesting new paper by A. Bertone and colleagues,
published in "BRAIN", that describes:
" the firstdemonstration of concurrent enhanced and decreased
performance in autism on the same visuo-spatial static
task, wherein the only factor dichotomizing performance was the neural
complexity required to discriminate grating orientation.

The ability of persons with autism was found to be superior for
identifying the orientation of simple, luminance-defined (or
first-order) gratings but inferior for complex, texture-defined (or
second-order) gratings. Using a flicker contrast sensitivity task, we
demonstrated that this finding is probably not due to abnormal
information processing at a sub-cortical level (magnocellular and
parvocellular functioning).

Together, these findings are interpreted as a clear indication of
altered low-level perceptual information processing in autism, and
confirm that the deficits and assets observed in autistic visual
perception are contingent on the complexity of the neural network
required to process a given type of visual stimulus. We suggest that
atypical neural connectivity, resulting in enhanced lateral
inhibition, may account for both enhanced and decreased low-level
information processing in autism."

The mercury parents can talk about glutathione and mcgs of mercury, up
to a point, but I never see them talk about the magnocellular pathways
or any neuroanatomy in autism. Which is a shame.

What the Bertone paper is saying is that there are two visual
pathways, the magno- and parvo-cellular pathways.

The magnocellular pathway goes to a certain part of the Lateral
Geniculate Nucleus[LGN]of the thalamus, and then on to the striate
cortex [perhaps Dr. Gordon will correct me here if I'm getting it
wrong] The magnocellular pathway registers movement and the
parvocellular pathway [which has it's own part of the LGN] registers
color and sharp detail.

The paper says that those systems are working OK in the autistics they
studied, but that there was something different about the connectivity
of the brain. What they are saying about about luminence defined
grating and texture defined grating is about the thing that they had
the autistics look at, namely a circle made of stripes. That striped
circle that was presented with the stripes going either vertically or
horizontally on a computer montior, and the subject pushed a button to
say which way the stripes were going.

The subjects took longer to tell if the stripes were vertical or
horizontal in the texture defined grating, as opposed to the one with
a more obviously different light-dark contrast in the stripes.

They found that there was a difference between the way autistic
subjects responded from the way Fragile X subjects responded.

If I'm reading this correctly, Bertone, et al., are speculating that
because there is increased local connectivity at the level of the
cortical mini-columns there is better "edge detection", basically.
They even speculate that there could be better "edge detection" in the
auditory system allowing autistics to have a better chance at having
"perfect pitch", which they do have more often than typical people.

Bertone, et al are emphasizing autistic gifts as much as the deficits.

How thimerosal at birth and later is going to change the density of
the proximity of cortical minicolumns, I have no idea. I'm pretty sure
those guys are set long before birth.

There are many papers out there that show that there are many genes
likely to be involved in autism. One is found more often in kids who
regress, according to a new study. The ones who regress, the ones most
likely to have parents who think that vaccines caused their child's
autism- are about 20% of all autistic kids.

Lenny Schafer in his online newsletter, quoted a mom who had a child
who was not vaccinated but regressed.

"We did not vaccinate our 3 year old son, who is on the spectrum. I
also know of another mother who did not vaccinate, and am working with
a mom, an expert with homeopathy, who has several clients who did not
vaccinate. We quietly say to each other "it is not just vaccines..."
...."

http://lists.envirolink.org/pipermai...14/000373.html

So far, none of the genes that they are mentioning are coding for
glutathione or are involved in detoxifying anything. There's a recent
one that's getting attention that has to do with Purkinje cells in the
cerebellum (which there have been found to be fewer of in some
autistics). Someone else is excited about "von Economo" neurons, then
there are the highly vaunted "mirror neurons" which might be different
in autism.

20% of autistics are thought to have hyperserotoninemia, which is why
they think SSRIs might be good for some of them to regulate serotonin.

There have been some tragic consequences of giving antipsychotics to
autistics, but that's not to say that it is 100% always a bad idea.
It's possible to have autism and schizophrenia, it's just rare.

I seriously doubt any research will turn up any genes that interact
specifically with thimerosal, or mercury of any type, to produce
autism.

I'd love to get Mr. Kennedy's view of the coritical minicolumns
discussed by Cassanova or the issue of brain overgrowth as discussed
by E. Courchesne. Kennedy became such an expert in thimerosal so
quickly, maybe he can become an expert in neurophysiology and
biopsychology, too, in a few weeks time. That would be cool to see. I
don't think he ought to look to Lujene Clark for tutoring in this,
however.


Posted by: Credenza at July 28, 2005 04:38 AM

Mama Mia! I smell Danger! The Pair of Nines certainly has a lot of
names.

Posted by: Juan T. at July 28, 2005 06:58 AM



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
THE REAL SCIENTIFIC TRUTH OF AMALGAM LadyLollipop Kids Health 48 April 3rd 05 11:18 AM
Mercury in Air Pollution: A Link to Autism? Roman Bystrianyk Kids Health 3 March 22nd 05 08:30 PM
Mercury in Air Pollution: A Link to Autism? Roman Bystrianyk Pregnancy 3 March 22nd 05 08:30 PM
The Not-So-Crackpot Autism Theory Ilena Rose Kids Health 31 February 12th 05 02:43 AM
Another child killed in kincare Kane General 39 February 12th 04 07:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.