"Deadly Immunity" by Robert Kennedy

Deadly Immunity
originally published on Salon.com
June 16, 2005

Download RFK's original research paper:
Tobacco Science and the Thimerosal Scandal .pdf

In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy. The agency had issued no public announcement of the session -- only private invitations to 52 attendees. There were high-level officials from the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration, the top vaccine specialist from the World Health Organization in Geneva, and representatives of every major vaccine manufacturer, including GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Wyeth and Aventis Pasteur. All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.

The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. "I was actually stunned by what I saw," Verstraeten told those assembled at Simpsonwood, citing the staggering number of earlier studies that indicate a link between thimerosal and speech delays, attention-deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism. Since 1991, when the CDC and the FDA had recommended that three additional vaccines laced with the preservative be given to extremely young infants -- in one case, within hours of birth -- the estimated number of cases of autism had increased fifteenfold, from one in every 2,500 children to one in 166 children.

Even for scientists and doctors accustomed to confronting issues of life and death, the findings were frightening. "You can play with this all you want," Dr. Bill Weil, a consultant for the American Academy of Pediatrics, told the group. The results "are statistically significant." Dr. Richard Johnston, an immunologist and pediatrician from the University of Colorado whose grandson had been born early on the morning of the meeting's first day, was even more alarmed. "My gut feeling?" he said. "Forgive this personal comment -- I do not want my grandson to get a thimerosal-containing vaccine until we know better what is going on."

But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line.

"We are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits," said Dr. Robert Brent, a pediatrician at the Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children in Delaware. "This will be a resource to our very busy plaintiff attorneys in this country." Dr. Bob Chen, head of vaccine safety for the CDC, expressed relief that "given the sensitivity of the information, we have been able to keep it out of the hands of, let's say, less responsible hands." Dr. John Clements, vaccines advisor at the World Health Organization, declared that "perhaps this study should not have been done at all." He added that "the research results have to be handled," warning that the study "will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group."

In fact, the government has proved to be far more adept at handling the damage than at protecting children's health. The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated. And to thwart the Freedom of Information Act, it handed its giant database of vaccine records over to a private company, declaring it off-limits to researchers. By the time Verstraeten finally published his study in 2003, he had gone to work for GlaxoSmithKline and reworked his data to bury the link between thimerosal and autism. (continued below)

 

Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants -- but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year. The CDC and FDA gave them a hand, buying up the tainted vaccines for export to developing countries and allowing drug companies to continue using the preservative in some American vaccines -- including several pediatric flu shots as well as tetanus boosters routinely given to 11-year-olds.

The drug companies are also getting help from powerful lawmakers in Washington. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, who has received $873,000 in contributions from the pharmaceutical industry, has been working to immunize vaccine makers from liability in 4,200 lawsuits that have been filed by the parents of injured children. On five separate occasions, Frist has tried to seal all of the government's vaccine-related documents -- including the Simpsonwood transcripts -- and shield Eli Lilly, the developer of thimerosal, from subpoenas. In 2002, the day after Frist quietly slipped a rider known as the "Eli Lilly Protection Act" into a homeland security bill, the company contributed $10,000 to his campaign and bought 5,000 copies of his book on bioterrorism. Congress repealed the measure in 2003 -- but earlier this year, Frist slipped another provision into an anti-terrorism bill that would deny compensation to children suffering from vaccine-related brain disorders. "The lawsuits are of such magnitude that they could put vaccine producers out of business and limit our capacity to deal with a biological attack by terrorists," says Andy Olsen, a legislative assistant to Frist.

Even many conservatives are shocked by the government's effort to cover up the dangers of thimerosal. Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican from Indiana, oversaw a three-year investigation of thimerosal after his grandson was diagnosed with autism. "Thimerosal used as a preservative in vaccines is directly related to the autism epidemic," his House Government Reform Committee concluded in its final report. "This epidemic in all probability may have been prevented or curtailed had the FDA not been asleep at the switch regarding a lack of safety data regarding injected thimerosal, a known neurotoxin." The FDA and other public-health agencies failed to act, the committee added, out of "institutional malfeasance for self protection" and "misplaced protectionism of the pharmaceutical industry." continued below

 

The story of how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public is a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed. I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. Privately, I was skeptical. I doubted that autism could be blamed on a single source, and I certainly understood the government's need to reassure parents that vaccinations are safe; the eradication of deadly childhood diseases depends on it. I tended to agree with skeptics like Rep. Henry Waxman, a Democrat from California, who criticized his colleagues on the House Government Reform Committee for leaping to conclusions about autism and vaccinations. "Why should we scare people about immunization," Waxman pointed out at one hearing, "until we know the facts?"

It was only after reading the Simpsonwood transcripts, studying the leading scientific research and talking with many of the nation's preeminent authorities on mercury that I became convinced that the link between thimerosal and the epidemic of childhood neurological disorders is real. Five of my own children are members of the Thimerosal Generation -- those born between 1989 and 2003 -- who received heavy doses of mercury from vaccines. "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in 25 years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." More than 500,000 kids currently suffer from autism, and pediatricians diagnose more than 40,000 new cases every year. The disease was unknown until 1943, when it was identified and diagnosed among 11 children born in the months after thimerosal was first added to baby vaccines in 1931.

Some skeptics dispute that the rise in autism is caused by thimerosal-tainted vaccinations. They argue that the increase is a result of better diagnosis -- a theory that seems questionable at best, given that most of the new cases of autism are clustered within a single generation of children. "If the epidemic is truly an artifact of poor diagnosis," scoffs Dr. Boyd Haley, one of the world's authorities on mercury toxicity, "then where are all the 20-year-old autistics?" Other researchers point out that Americans are exposed to a greater cumulative "load" of mercury than ever before, from contaminated fish to dental fillings, and suggest that thimerosal in vaccines may be only part of a much larger problem. It's a concern that certainly deserves far more attention than it has received -- but it overlooks the fact that the mercury concentrations in vaccines dwarf other sources of exposure to our children.

What is most striking is the lengths to which many of the leading detectives have gone to ignore -- and cover up -- the evidence against thimerosal. From the very beginning, the scientific case against the mercury additive has been overwhelming. The preservative, which is used to stem fungi and bacterial growth in vaccines, contains ethylmercury, a potent neurotoxin. Truckloads of studies have shown that mercury tends to accumulate in the brains of primates and other animals after they are injected with vaccines -- and that the developing brains of infants are particularly susceptible. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to much lower concentrations of ethylmercury than those given to American children still suffered brain damage years later. Russia banned thimerosal from children's vaccines 20 years ago, and Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have since followed suit.
continued below

 

You couldn't even construct a study that shows thimerosal is safe," says Haley, who heads the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky. "It's just too darn toxic. If you inject thimerosal into an animal, its brain will sicken. If you apply it to living tissue, the cells die. If you put it in a petri dish, the culture dies. Knowing these things, it would be shocking if one could inject it into an infant without causing damage."

Internal documents reveal that Eli Lilly, which first developed thimerosal, knew from the start that its product could cause damage -- and even death -- in both animals and humans. In 1930, the company tested thimerosal by administering it to 22 patients with terminal meningitis, all of whom died within weeks of being injected -- a fact Lilly didn't bother to report in its study declaring thimerosal safe. In 1935, researchers at another vaccine manufacturer, Pittman-Moore, warned Lilly that its claims about thimerosal's safety "did not check with ours." Half the dogs Pittman injected with thimerosal-based vaccines became sick, leading researchers there to declare the preservative "unsatisfactory as a serum intended for use on dogs."

In the decades that followed, the evidence against thimerosal continued to mount. During the Second World War, when the Department of Defense used the preservative in vaccines on soldiers, it required Lilly to label it "poison." In 1967, a study in Applied Microbiology found that thimerosal killed mice when added to injected vaccines. Four years later, Lilly's own studies discerned that thimerosal was "toxic to tissue cells" in concentrations as low as one part per million -- 100 times weaker than the concentration in a typical vaccine. Even so, the company continued to promote thimerosal as "nontoxic" and also incorporated it into topical disinfectants. In 1977, 10 babies at a Toronto hospital died when an antiseptic preserved with thimerosal was dabbed onto their umbilical cords.

In 1982, the FDA proposed a ban on over-the-counter products that contained thimerosal, and in 1991 the agency considered banning it from animal vaccines. But tragically, that same year, the CDC recommended that infants be injected with a series of mercury-laced vaccines. Newborns would be vaccinated for hepatitis B within 24 hours of birth, and 2-month-old infants would be immunized for haemophilus influenzae B and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis.

The drug industry knew the additional vaccines posed a danger. The same year that the CDC approved the new vaccines, Dr. Maurice Hilleman, one of the fathers of Merck's vaccine programs, warned the company that 6-month-olds who were administered the shots would suffer dangerous exposure to mercury. He recommended that thimerosal be discontinued, "especially when used on infants and children," noting that the industry knew of nontoxic alternatives. "The best way to go," he added, "is to switch to dispensing the actual vaccines without adding preservatives."

For Merck and other drug companies, however, the obstacle was money. Thimerosal enables the pharmaceutical industry to package vaccines in vials that contain multiple doses, which require additional protection because they are more easily contaminated by multiple needle entries. The larger vials cost half as much to produce as smaller, single-dose vials, making it cheaper for international agencies to distribute them to impoverished regions at risk of epidemics. Faced with this "cost consideration," Merck ignored Hilleman's warnings, and government officials continued to push more and more thimerosal-based vaccines for children. Before 1989, American preschoolers received 11 vaccinations -- for polio, diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis and measles-mumps-rubella. A decade later, thanks to federal recommendations, children were receiving a total of 22 immunizations by the time they reached first grade.

As the number of vaccines increased, the rate of autism among children exploded. During the 1990s, 40 million children were injected with thimerosal-based vaccines, receiving unprecedented levels of mercury during a period critical for brain development. Despite the well-documented dangers of thimerosal, it appears that no one bothered to add up the cumulative dose of mercury that children would receive from the mandated vaccines. "What took the FDA so long to do the calculations?" Peter Patriarca, director of viral products for the agency, asked in an e-mail to the CDC in 1999. "Why didn't CDC and the advisory bodies do these calculations when they rapidly expanded the childhood immunization schedule?"

But by that time, the damage was done. Infants who received all their vaccines, plus boosters, by the age of six months were being injected with a total of 187 micrograms of ethylmercury -- a level 40 percent greater than the EPA's limit for daily exposure to methylmercury, a related neurotoxin. Although the vaccine industry insists that ethylmercury poses little danger because it breaks down rapidly and is removed by the body, several studies -- including one published in April by the National Institutes of Health -- suggest that ethylmercury is actually more toxic to developing brains and stays in the brain longer than methylmercury. Under the expanded schedule of vaccinations, multiple shots were often administered on a single day: At two months, when the infant brain is still at a critical stage of development, children routinely received three innoculations that delivered 99 times the approved limit of mercury.

Officials responsible for childhood immunizations insist that the additional vaccines were necessary to protect infants from disease and that thimerosal is still essential in developing nations, which, they often claim, cannot afford the single-dose vials that don't require a preservative. Dr. Paul Offit, one of CDC's top vaccine advisors, told me, "I think if we really have an influenza pandemic -- and certainly we will in the next 20 years, because we always do -- there's no way on God's earth that we immunize 280 million people with single-dose vials. There has to be multidose vials."

But while public-health officials may have been well-intentioned, many of those on the CDC advisory committee who backed the additional vaccines had close ties to the industry. Dr. Sam Katz, the committee's chair, was a paid consultant for most of the major vaccine makers and was part of a team that developed the measles vaccine and brought it to licensure in 1963. Dr. Neal Halsey, another committee member, worked as a researcher for the vaccine companies and received honoraria from Abbott Labs for his research on the hepatitis B vaccine.

Indeed, in the tight circle of scientists who work on vaccines, such conflicts of interest are common. Rep. Burton says that the CDC "routinely allows scientists with blatant conflicts of interest to serve on intellectual advisory committees that make recommendations on new vaccines," even though they have "interests in the products and companies for which they are supposed to be providing unbiased oversight." The House Government Reform Committee discovered that four of the eight CDC advisors who approved guidelines for a rotavirus vaccine "had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine."

Offit, who shares a patent on one of the vaccines, acknowledged to me that he "would make money" if his vote eventually leads to a marketable product. But he dismissed my suggestion that a scientist's direct financial stake in CDC approval might bias his judgment. "It provides no conflict for me," he insists. "I have simply been informed by the process, not corrupted by it. When I sat around that table, my sole intent was trying to make recommendations that best benefited the children in this country. It's offensive to say that physicians and public-health people are in the pocket of industry and thus are making decisions that they know are unsafe for children. It's just not the way it works."

Other vaccine scientists and regulators gave me similar assurances. Like Offit, they view themselves as enlightened guardians of children's health, proud of their "partnerships" with pharmaceutical companies, immune to the seductions of personal profit, besieged by irrational activists whose anti-vaccine campaigns are endangering children's health. They are often resentful of questioning. "Science," says Offit, "is best left to scientists."
continued below

 

Still, some government officials were alarmed by the apparent conflicts of interest. In his e-mail to CDC administrators in 1999, Paul Patriarca of the FDA blasted federal regulators for failing to adequately scrutinize the danger posed by the added baby vaccines. "I'm not sure there will be an easy way out of the potential perception that the FDA, CDC and immunization-policy bodies may have been asleep at the switch re: thimerosal until now," Patriarca wrote. The close ties between regulatory officials and the pharmaceutical industry, he added, "will also raise questions about various advisory bodies regarding aggressive recommendations for use" of thimerosal in child vaccines.

If federal regulators and government scientists failed to grasp the potential risks of thimerosal over the years, no one could claim ignorance after the secret meeting at Simpsonwood. But rather than conduct more studies to test the link to autism and other forms of brain damage, the CDC placed politics over science. The agency turned its database on childhood vaccines -- which had been developed largely at taxpayer expense -- over to a private agency, America's Health Insurance Plans, ensuring that it could not be used for additional research. It also instructed the Institute of Medicine, an advisory organization that is part of the National Academy of Sciences, to produce a study debunking the link between thimerosal and brain disorders. The CDC "wants us to declare, well, that these things are pretty safe," Dr. Marie McCormick, who chaired the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee, told her fellow researchers when they first met in January 2001. "We are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect" of thimerosal exposure. According to transcripts of the meeting, the committee's chief staffer, Kathleen Stratton, predicted that the IOM would conclude that the evidence was "inadequate to accept or reject a causal relation" between thimerosal and autism. That, she added, was the result "Walt wants" -- a reference to Dr. Walter Orenstein, director of the National Immunization Program for the CDC.

For those who had devoted their lives to promoting vaccination, the revelations about thimerosal threatened to undermine everything they had worked for. "We've got a dragon by the tail here," said Dr. Michael Kaback, another committee member. "The more negative that [our] presentation is, the less likely people are to use vaccination, immunization -- and we know what the results of that will be. We are kind of caught in a trap. How we work our way out of the trap, I think is the charge."

Even in public, federal officials made it clear that their primary goal in studying thimerosal was to dispel doubts about vaccines. "Four current studies are taking place to rule out the proposed link between autism and thimerosal," Dr. Gordon Douglas, then-director of strategic planning for vaccine research at the National Institutes of Health, assured a Princeton University gathering in May 2001. "In order to undo the harmful effects of research claiming to link the [measles] vaccine to an elevated risk of autism, we need to conduct and publicize additional studies to assure parents of safety." Douglas formerly served as president of vaccinations for Merck, where he ignored warnings about thimerosal's risks.

In May of last year, the Institute of Medicine issued its final report. Its conclusion: There is no proven link between autism and thimerosal in vaccines. Rather than reviewing the large body of literature describing the toxicity of thimerosal, the report relied on four disastrously flawed epidemiological studies examining European countries, where children received much smaller doses of thimerosal than American kids. It also cited a new version of the Verstraeten study, published in the journal Pediatrics, that had been reworked to reduce the link between thimerosal and autism. The new study included children too young to have been diagnosed with autism and overlooked others who showed signs of the disease. The IOM declared the case closed and -- in a startling position for a scientific body -- recommended that no further research be conducted.

The report may have satisfied the CDC, but it convinced no one. Rep. David Weldon, a Republican physician from Florida who serves on the House Government Reform Committee, attacked the Institute of Medicine, saying it relied on a handful of studies that were "fatally flawed" by "poor design" and failed to represent "all the available scientific and medical research." CDC officials are not interested in an honest search for the truth, Weldon told me, because "an association between vaccines and autism would force them to admit that their policies irreparably damaged thousands of children. Who would want to make that conclusion about themselves?"

Under pressure from Congress and parents, the Institute of Medicine convened another panel to address continuing concerns about the Vaccine Safety Datalink data-sharing program. In February, the new panel, composed of different scientists, criticized the way the VSD had been used to study vaccine safety, and urged the CDC to make its vaccine database available to the public.

So far, though, only two scientists have managed to gain access. Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC. Since August 2002, when members of Congress pressured the agency to turn over the data, the Geiers have completed six studies that demonstrate a powerful correlation between thimerosal and neurological damage in children. One study, which compares the cumulative dose of mercury received by children born between 1981 and 1985 with those born between 1990 and 1996, found a "very significant relationship" between autism and vaccines. Another study of educational performance found that kids who received higher doses of thimerosal in vaccines were nearly three times as likely to be diagnosed with autism and more than three times as likely to suffer from speech disorders and mental retardation. Another soon-to-be-published study shows that autism rates are in decline following the recent elimination of thimerosal from most vaccines.

As the federal government worked to prevent scientists from studying vaccines, others have stepped in to study the link to autism. In April, reporter Dan Olmsted of UPI undertook one of the more interesting studies himself. Searching for children who had not been exposed to mercury in vaccines -- the kind of population that scientists typically use as a "control" in experiments -- Olmsted scoured the Amish of Lancaster County, Penn., who refuse to immunize their infants. Given the national rate of autism, Olmsted calculated that there should be 130 autistics among the Amish. He found only four. One had been exposed to high levels of mercury from a power plant. The other three -- including one child adopted from outside the Amish community -- had received their vaccines.
concluded below

 

At the state level, many officials have also conducted in-depth reviews of thimerosal. While the Institute of Medicine was busy whitewashing the risks, the Iowa Legislature was carefully combing through all of the available scientific and biological data. "After three years of review, I became convinced there was sufficient credible research to show a link between mercury and the increased incidences in autism," state Sen. Ken Veenstra, a Republican who oversaw the investigation, told the magazine Byronchild earlier this year. "The fact that Iowa's 700 percent increase in autism began in the 1990s, right after more and more vaccines were added to the children's vaccine schedules, is solid evidence alone." Last year, Iowa became the first state to ban mercury in vaccines, followed by California. Similar bans are now under consideration in 32 other states.

But instead of following suit, the FDA continues to allow manufacturers to include thimerosal in scores of over-the-counter medications as well as steroids and injected collagen. Even more alarming, the government continues to ship vaccines preserved with thimerosal to developing countries -- some of which are now experiencing a sudden explosion in autism rates. In China, where the disease was virtually unknown prior to the introduction of thimerosal by U.S. drug manufacturers in 1999, news reports indicate that there are now more than 1.8 million autistics. Although reliable numbers are hard to come by, autistic disorders also appear to be soaring in India, Argentina, Nicaragua and other developing countries that are now using thimerosal-laced vaccines. The World Health Organization continues to insist thimerosal is safe, but it promises to keep the possibility that it is linked to neurological disorders "under review."

I devoted time to study this issue because I believe that this is a moral crisis that must be addressed. If, as the evidence suggests, our public-health authorities knowingly allowed the pharmaceutical industry to poison an entire generation of American children, their actions arguably constitute one of the biggest scandals in the annals of American medicine. "The CDC is guilty of incompetence and gross negligence," says Mark Blaxill, vice president of Safe Minds, a nonprofit organization concerned about the role of mercury in medicines. "The damage caused by vaccine exposure is massive. It's bigger than asbestos, bigger than tobacco, bigger than anything you've ever seen." It's hard to calculate the damage to our country -- and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases -- if Third World nations come to believe that America's most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It's not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by America's enemies abroad. The scientists and researchers -- many of them sincere, even idealistic -- who are participating in efforts to hide the science on thimerosal claim that they are trying to advance the lofty goal of protecting children in developing nations from disease pandemics. They are badly misguided. Their failure to come clean on thimerosal will come back horribly to haunt our country and the world's poorest populations.

 

Taximom, I note the date on this is 2005, so 'last year' in this sentence would be 2004.

"Vaccine manufacturers had already begun to phase thimerosal out of injections given to American infants -- but they continued to sell off their mercury-based supplies of vaccines until last year."

Does that mean that thimerosal is no longer in any injections given to American infants? If so, there is the study. Does autism in children born after that date decrease significantly. What am I missing?

 

Good question, June.

What you are missing is that thimerosal-preserved vaccines continued to be given to American infants until their shelf life ran out--at least until 2007, as American pediatricians bought the significantly lower-priced multi-use vials instead of the newer, more expensive single-use, preservative-free vaccines.

In the second half of the decade, flu shots were more heavily marketed towards infants and children--and 90% of flu shots are thimerosal-preserved. The FluMist (which contains no thimerosal) is not recommended for babies or pregnant women, as it is a live-virus vaccine. Flu vaccines are now part of the recommended/mandated infant vaccine schedule, starting at 6 months, and there is no official recommendation to use thimerosal-free vaccines over preservative-free. In addition, the flu shot is officially recommended for women in all stages of pregnancy, despite the package insert statement that the manufacturer does NOT recommend it for pregnant women, as no safety studies exist.

In 2008, the FDA revised its advisory on pregnant women's consumption of mercury-laden fish: http://www.ewg.org/news/fda-urges-pregnant-women-consume-more-mercury-laced-seafood, saying that the benefits of eating seafood outweigh the risks, even if it contains mercury.

The latest statistics I have seen on autism rates are on children diagnosed in 2007. Not born in 2007--diagnosed, which means they would have been born in 2005 at the latest. This, too, increases the amount of mercury babies are exposed to.

We see reports like this http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20080107/thimerosal-down-but-autism-rising saying that we are not seeing autism rates going down in spite of thimerosal's removal, but they make the mistaken assumption that children were not exposed to thimerosal after 2001 or 2002, and that is OBVIOUSLY not the case.

Add up the facts that
1) thimerosal-preserved children's vaccines continued to be used until at least 2007
2) additional thimerosal-preserved vaccines were added to the recommended/mandated schedule in the form of flu shots
3) pregnant women are now being given thimerosal-preserved flu shots, and thimerosal is known to cross the placenta
4) the FDA began urging people (including pregnant women) to consume more fish, even if it contained mercury

and it is obvious that the mercury load on children has not decreased.

My daughter was nearly given a thimerosal-preserved vaccine in 2004--and I was told by both doctor and nurse that it didn't contain thimerosal. I had to insist in showing them the package insert. Incredibly, neither of them had any idea that all multi-use vaccine vials are preserved with thimerosal.

 

But still, it seems to me that that change holds the seeds of the study you are interested in. I think you could compare the rates of autism in children born prior to 2005 and given shots with thimerosal with those born after and not. You might need to exclude some kids who were otherwise exposed but there are probably enough who were not to get some good data. I know that autism takes a while to show up but about now it seems to me they could do the study without doing anything but examing records of children from the two periods. That way no child is put at risk by either not being inoculated or by being unnecessarily exposed to thimerosol. Are the groups who have concern about thimerosol doing this? I think they should be. I Hope someone is lighting a fire under them. If there is a problem it needs to be known. If there is not (at least with regard to origin of autism) then it needs to be laid to rest so the real culprit can be found. Something is a miss and we need to get creative and find it rather than just divide into two camps forever. Perhaps its something about innoculations but its not the thimerosol.

I'd also like to see some geographic studies of incidence of autism. What have they found in that regard?

 

(NM, wrong thread. I'm not getting into this one).

 

Those are good ideas--but they are only just doing epidemiological studies on data from 2007. Autism isn't really diagnosable until the age of 2.

I would also like to see updated data about other medical problems suffered by autistic kids. This study http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100520/autism-diet-gluten-100520?hub=EdmontonHome looks, at first glance, like something worthwhile--but the kids in the study were selected because they did NOT have celiac, wheat or dairy allergy, etc. So basically they tested kids in whom gluten/casein problems had already been ruled out (which is probably why they only had 22 kids in the study--and only 14 completed the study, which is also interesting).

Then you have studies like this one, released in 2009: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/709656, which claims that autistic children don't have gastro problems any more than typical kids, and that those that do are behavioral in nature anyway--but look more closely, and you will see that the data analyzed is from 1976-1997--well before most people had computers, and well before most parents had even heard of autism. Most of that time period was also before the huge jump in the number of vaccines recommended for infants and toddlers.

Most doctors during that time period assumed that an autistic child who was screaming and doubled over, and who was reluctant to move his bowels, was simply misbehaving, and it would not have occurred to them that there might be a medical issue.

 

Reasonable question.

 

This is an off-shoot of the Autism, Mercury and...Meniere's thread. Kennedy's "Deadly Immunity" was so long, I didn't think I should use that much space in that thread, as that was not where I was hoping the discussion there would go. I posted it in response to some of Wino's posts, as he seemed to be under the impression that I was misinformed.

 

Just read this article this morning. Looks like more controversy over this subject.

"Study tying vaccine to autism was fraud, report says Andrew Wakefield, colleagues altered facts about patients in their research, analysis shows"

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40930256/ns/health-mental_health

 

Saw this in the news yesterday. Maybe the same nwspin. http://www.mercurynews.com/rss/ci_17019213

In response to the low number of autisitic kids in the amish community, maybe it has something to do with less stress, less foodborne toxins (more fresh stuff), and less exposure to electronics than the rest of us. Have they done a study on the Christian Science folks that dont allow vaccennes and most medicines?
There are many chemicals that are toxic. There are many chemicals that are toxic alone, but are not when in conjunction with another chemcial or in small enough quantities to the AVERAGE person. One example is Clorine. We would NEVER drink or ingest bleach, nor do we try to inhale the fumes. However when Clorine is mixed with Sodium (NaCl) it becomes something our bodies need to survive: Salt. My point is this: Mercury is dangerous. But like many (not all) substances it can be stablized through the bonding of various atoms and molecules. Some of those combinations are still toxic, some are not. I am not a chemist, I am oversimplfying the idea somewhat to make my point.

I should be pi$$ed beyond words because Stress was likely what brought on my Vertigo. I was verbally abused at work for a couple years and the bosses knew it. I cant sue because there is "No unrefutiable evidence" that the abuse I took at work caused the stress that might have caused the MM to surface or the MAV to develop (they dont know which it is yet). Studies abound about stress making people very sick in LOTS of ways. But I cant do anything about it but watch my life change as we dont have insurance, we dont have my former income, and we know that Im "damaged" from the unbelievable amounts of abuse I endured. I still have nightmares about it. There are too many factors to point any one finger in any one direction with 100% or even 75% assurance that there is a cause. If it had been all the vacceens I have had to take over the years as a firefighter, I would imagine the one year I missed one, I wouldnt have spun into the hell that Is vertigo, it would have happened long before it.
Again I will say, vacinations can be dangerous for some there are reactions to them, but polio, measles, rubella, the flu, etc kill more and maim more than the vacceens do. Its a gamble like driving your car to work. Likely you'll be fine, but there is that chance you will die.

 

First of all, I agree with you about polio, and possibly rubella in fetuses. But while measles have severe complications for some, again, we have to look at WHY, and enough isn't yet understood about WHY. We know that the complications are in kids who have an underlying problem, but we don't know if those are the same kids who would react to vaccines, nor do we know which number of reacting kids would be larger. Ask any parent of a severely autistic kid, and they will tell you that it is quite as devastating as losing a child, as in fact, they feel that they have lost their child.

Again, I want to stress that thousands of parents have reported (and many have video footage proving this, and I've seen such footage) of the day before and the day after vaccines were given to the child. It's NOT "sometime around the time of vaccination" that the reaction occurs with those kids. It's within 24 hours of the vaccines, whether given at 12 months or 18 months or 24 months, etc.

As for the flu, same problems and more--the figure of the number of people who die from the flu are grossly inflated, and never proven by blood test. Elderly people are assumed to have had the flu when the present with pneumonia, but they could have had any viral infection, not specifically flu.And again, the flu shot has never been proven effective on elderly and pediatric patients, so there is no good reason to take it in the first place.

We never hear in the press about vaccines killing, ever, but if we look at VAERS, we can see that they have. The CDC estimates that only 1-10% of adverse effects to vaccines ever get reported to VAERS, as it is a voluntary reporting system. An equally small percentage of those cases ever go to vaccine court, as one has to have oodles of time and money to sue the government.

1297 cases of vaccine-induced brain damage have been compensated in "vaccine court." That means a minimum estimate of 129,700 cases of vaccine-induced brain damage--far higher than anyone realizes.

When we sign the paper at the pediatrician saying we have been informed of the risks of vaccines, we have not. Read the paper--it says, "possible risks include swelling, pain, and/or redness at injection site, and fever. Please call your medical care provider if other symptoms occur."

It never mentions possibilities of brain damage or death. It never mentions the possibility that it may trigger the immune system to malfunction.

Yes, it's a gamble--and with at least some of the vaccines and/or their ingredients (flu, hepatitis B, thimerosal, aluminum, etc), the risks and benefits are vastly different from what we've been led to believe. And the fact that the entire schedule has never EVER been tested for cumulative risk means there is unknown risk. 36 vaccines in the first 2 years? 65 by the time they finish school????

 

When my grandson got his first vaccines, I told his mom--ask for no mercury! Do you really think pharmacy companies have our best interest at heart? I don't think so. It is all about money. The less toxins one puts into their bodies, the better. Mercury isn't good for us, plain and simple.

I have become disillusioned with the medical profession. They treat symptoms, but don't look for the CAUSE. I have gotten more help from this board! And, I have found a good doctor that listens to me and will "rubber stamp" rx for what I want to try next.

I still have MM, but with Papajoe's help, diet changes and nystatin, I have slowed the burn. With no help from the medical community--except the writting for nystatin.

You are your own best advocate. Do not depend on big companies to do it. Their obligation is to make as big a profit as possible.

~KT

 

The same money motive seems to be what tainted the recently discredited study. The doctor had taken $600,000 in money to do the study from lawyers who wished to pursue lawsuits against the drug companies. Money is everywhere. We have to follow the science because there are no angels on either side - except the poor kids.

I think this pro/con mercury is a red herring keeping people from finding the real culprit. What if it is not mercury but the fact that some kids with a certain genetic predisposition cannot handle that many inoculations in that short a time because it over loads the immune system? The drug companies still wouldn't want the onus on them but the parents' groups would be still hanging on to mercury and not doing further studies or look backs at the data. As a result of intransigence on both sides children would continue to suffer. What if it is cell phones. What if it is a disinfectant used in doctor's offices. It's something but we aren't going to find it as long as both sides are satisfied to call each other mean and stupid.

Well meaning people on both sides are being used by financial interests. They just don't know enough about business to know it.

 

And, then I read that 80% of studies are flawed! That is huge!

June, you are right--both sides have their own goals. Who makes the most money? is an important question to always ask yourself.

 

But after a certain age we all know about human nature and we know that people are imperfect and no group is all good or all bad. Yet people still have their good and ernest side. The point imo is to get over our illusions and disillusions and get to work figuring out what is causing this awful thing so we can correct it and spare people in the future. All this being shocked to find out humans are not angels is part of our growing up and about us. We need to be about the job of figuring this out rather than just dwelling on ourselves. By we I mean the whole community.

As a patient, nothing ticks me off more than to have a dr not listen to me because he already has an opinion about a subject. I know he is not going to be able to help me no matter what his preconception is.