The Geiers try to patent chemical castration as an autism treatment

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...tent_chemi.php

http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/art...atent-medicine

Where are the cries of outrage?

I cannot wait until Geier has to justify this before a judge, when his
expertise is challenged.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Dr. Mengele all over again.

Wow.. the first link was pure journalism genius. A real masterpiece.
Certainly very centered and non-biased. I didn't get the feeling that
the author had any preconceived ideas or personal feelings on the story
at all!

The second link didn't work.

Now with the sarcasm out of the way, would you happen to have a link to
the story from someone that has actually done some investigative
journalism? I can't imagine that you'd think anyone would take such a
piece of journalistic crap seriously.

Perhaps you don't hear the cries of outrage because you're too busy
beating your pro-medical-establishment drum so loudly.

Max.

Mark Probert wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...tent_chemi.php

http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/art...atent-medicine

Where are the cries of outrage?

I cannot wait until Geier has to justify this before a judge, when his
expertise is challenged.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Dr. Mengele all over again.

"Max C." wrote in message
ups.com...
Wow.. the first link was pure journalism genius. A real masterpiece.
Certainly very centered and non-biased. I didn't get the feeling that
the author had any preconceived ideas or personal feelings on the story
at all!

That's Mark prmoting Orac a KNOWN AND PROVEN LIAR.

Who backs up Mark every LIE.

The second link didn't work.

Now with the sarcasm out of the way, would you happen to have a link to
the story from someone that has actually done some investigative
journalism? I can't imagine that you'd think anyone would take such a
piece of journalistic crap seriously.

Perhaps you don't hear the cries of outrage because you're too busy
beating your pro-medical-establishment drum so loudly.

Max.

Mark Probert wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...tent_chemi.php

http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/art...atent-medicine

Where are the cries of outrage?

I cannot wait until Geier has to justify this before a judge, when his
expertise is challenged.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Dr. Mengele all over again.

Poor Mark.

In the Matter of Mark Probert (Admitted as Mark S. Probert), a
Suspended Attorney, Respondent.
Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District, Petitioner.

92-02731

SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT

183 A.D.2d 282; 590 N.Y.S.2d 747

November 9, 1992, Decided

PRIOR HISTORY: [***1]

Disciplinary proceedings instituted by the Grievance Committee for the
Tenth Judicial District. Respondent was admitted to the Bar on
February 15, 1978, at a term of the Appellate Division of the Supreme
Court in the Second Judicial Department, under the name Mark S.
Probert.

DISPOSITION: Ordered that the petitioner's motion to impose discipline
upon the respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is
granted; and it is further,

HEADNOTES: Attorney and Client - Disciplinary Proceedings

Respondent attorney, who is charged with 22 counts of failing to
cooperate with investigations of alleged misconduct by the Grievance
Committee, and who has failed to answer or appear, is disbarred.

COUNSEL:

Frank A. Finnerty, Jr., Westbury (Muriel L. Gennosa of counsel), for
petitioner.

JUDGES: Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Bracken, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ.,
concur.

Ordered that the petitioner's motion to impose discipline upon the
respondent based upon his failure to appear or answer is granted; and
it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary Law § 90, effective immediately,
the respondent, Mark Probert, is disbarred and his name is stricken
from the roll of attorneys and counselors-at-law; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent shall continue to comply with this Court's
rules governing the conduct of disbarred, suspended and resigned
attorneys (22 NYCRR 691.10); and it is further,

Ordered that pursuant to Judiciary [***2] Law § 90, the respondent,
Mark Probert, is commanded to continue to desist and refrain (1) from
practicing law in any form, either as principal or as agent, clerk or
employee of another, (2) from appearing as an attorney or
counselor-at-law before any court, Judge, Justice, board, commission
or other public authority, (3) from giving to another an opinion as to
the law or its application or any advice in relation thereto, and (4)
from holding himself out in any way as an attorney and
counselor-at-law.

OPINIONBY: Per Curiam.

OPINION: [*282]

[**747] By decision and order of this Court dated September 29,
1989, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law until the
further order of this Court based upon his failure to cooperate with
the Grievance Committee. By further order of this Court dated June 4,
1992, the Grievance Committee was authorized to institute and
prosecute a disciplinary proceeding [*283] against the respondent
and the Honorable Moses M. Weinstein was appointed as Special Referee.

[**748] A notice of petition and petition was personally served upon
the respondent on July 2, 1992. No answer was forthcoming. The
petitioner now moves to hold the [***3] respondent in default. The
motion was personally served upon the respondent on August 14, 1992.
The respondent has failed to submit any papers in response to the
default motion.

The charges involve 22 counts of the respondent's failure to cooperate
with the Grievance Committee in its investigations into complaints of
professional misconduct.

The charges, if established, would require the imposition of a
disciplinary sanction against the respondent. Since the respondent has
chosen not to appear or answer in these proceedings, the charges must
be deemed established. The petitioner's motion to hold the respondent
in default and impose discipline is, therefore, granted. Accordingly,
the respondent is disbarred and his name is stricken from the roll of
attorneys and counselors-at-law, effective immediately

"Max C." wrote in message
ups.com...
Wow.. the first link was pure journalism genius. A real masterpiece.
Certainly very centered and non-biased. I didn't get the feeling that
the author had any preconceived ideas or personal feelings on the story
at all!

This link gives all the details and works for me
http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/art...atent-medicine

This is medical and scientific madness, both! It is shaky hypothesis upon
shaky hypothesis upon shaky hypothesis.

The starting hypothesis, that mercury has anything to do with autism is
extremely shaky at best (it itself requires a second hypothesis to explain
why autistuc kids have LESS mercury in their hair than normal kids in one
study that was expected to show the reverse ). Then there is the weird
one that the kids were poisoned by mercury in vaccines in infancy, but
despite never being shown to have persistent mercury, they can be helped by
chelation at a much later age when the reversal of any damage is unlikely
and mercury levels would be much lower anyway.

If chelation worked as well as they previously claimed, why the need to be
mucking around with these kid's hormones? Such major tinkering with methods
can mean that they ain't working too well, but the claimants are not
prepared to either abandon them or to reexamine their original hypothesis.


Peter Moran

www.cancerwatcher.com


Now with the sarcasm out of the way, would you happen to have a link to
the story from someone that has actually done some investigative
journalism? I can't imagine that you'd think anyone would take such a
piece of journalistic crap seriously.

Perhaps you don't hear the cries of outrage because you're too busy
beating your pro-medical-establishment drum so loudly.

Max.

Mark Probert wrote:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/20...tent_chemi.php

http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/art...atent-medicine

Where are the cries of outrage?

I cannot wait until Geier has to justify this before a judge, when his
expertise is challenged.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Dr. Mengele all over again.

Peter Moran wrote:
This link gives all the details and works for me
http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/art...atent-medicine

Thanks. That's the link that wasn't working before, but it seems fine
now. I'll have a read over it and come back with opinions.

This is medical and scientific madness, both! It is shaky hypothesis upon
shaky hypothesis upon shaky hypothesis.

The starting hypothesis, that mercury has anything to do with autism is
extremely shaky at best (it itself requires a second hypothesis to explain
why autistuc kids have LESS mercury in their hair than normal kids in one
study that was expected to show the reverse ).

I'm not sure why anyone would expect to find MORE mercury in the hair
of autistic children. That's the exact opposite of what *I* would
expect. If there's mercury in the hair, that means the body is
effectively eliminating it.

Since so many pro-medical visitors here seem to think their own
personal experiences justify their positions, I'm going to give mine.
I grew up with an autistic child. I met him in the second grade and we
graduated high school together. Now, as an adult, I know 2 autistic
children. The commonality the parents of these three children have
expressed is that signs of autism didn't set in until immediately after
a bout of vaccinations. One of the children was 6 months old and in
very good physical health. Very alert. Very playful. Very observant.
She was developing normally. Her parents said that they knew
something was wrong before they left the doctor's office. She wouldn't
stop screaming. Within days after her scheduled vaccinations, her
entire life changed. If you've seen autistic children, you know what
I'm talking about.

I realize that this is personal experience and so has no meaning in the
context of any debate here, but others have felt obliged to tell their
personal stories, so that's what I'm doing.

Personally, I'm outraged that there hasn't been a large scale, publicly
funded study on this issue. I hope the one currently being requested
actually makes it to fruition.

Then there is the weird
one that the kids were poisoned by mercury in vaccines in infancy, but
despite never being shown to have persistent mercury, they can be helped by
chelation at a much later age when the reversal of any damage is unlikely
and mercury levels would be much lower anyway.

I agree with you on this one to a certain extent. I would certainly
hope that proper animal tests have been done to prove the safety of
such extreme measures. I would also hope that some tests have been run
to identify that there *is* in fact mercury in the brains of these
children. Is there even such a test available?

If chelation worked as well as they previously claimed, why the need to be
mucking around with these kid's hormones? Such major tinkering with methods
can mean that they ain't working too well, but the claimants are not
prepared to either abandon them or to reexamine their original hypothesis.

At the risk of sounding cruel, I can tell you from my own experience
that the breeding abilities of autistic children is the last thing on
their parents' minds. Were I to have one of these children, I can tell
you that I would gladly give up their ability to produce offspring if
it meant that they could lead an otherwise normal life. That being
said, I would personally want a ton of study on the efficacy of the
proposed treatment. AND, even if the data was clear cut, I would
probably wait until several others had tried it before I tried it on my
own children.

Here's the thing, though... let's forget about what actually *CAUSED*
the autism for a second. My question is, what is medical science
actually DOING to improve the lives of autistic children? For the 2
children I currently know, the answer is, according to their parents,
"Nothing." That's why they've started to seek out alternative
therapies... and they say they've seen remarkable results. A simple
adjustment of diet has allowed their children to focus better and
actually have meaningful conversations. They're still far from what
you and I would consider "normal" but also far from what they once
were.

Max.

I'm not sure why anyone would expect to find MORE mercury in the hair
of autistic children. That's the exact opposite of what *I* would
expect. If there's mercury in the hair, that means the body is
effectively eliminating it.


The research I have done does exactly indicate that those with a
decreased ability to detoxify mercury (and other heavy metals) are the
one that are more likely to succumb to a variety of neurodevelopmental
disorders. The factors may be in part genetic, but in large part
appear to be environmental and dietary. Concentrations of
intracellular glutathione would be one of those key nutrients that vary
based upon a large number of factors. Here is one study that looked at
NAC to decrease mercury's toxic effects.

And thank you Max for having a post that does not contain name-calling.
That is an ability that seems a virtual impossibility for the vast
majority.

http://www.healthsentinel.com/org_ne...n t_list_item

Roman Bystrianyk, "Thimerosal neurotoxicity and protection with
N-Acetylcysteine supplementation", Health Sentinel, January 3, 2005,

In the 1930s, Eli Lily developed Thimerosal as a preservative and it
was widely used in vaccines. Until the removal of Thimerosal, which
contains 49.9% ethyl mercury by weight, from most pediatric vaccines in
2001, the source of the largest human exposure to mercury in the US was
in children under 18 months of age undergoing routine childhood
immunization schedules. Before 2001, a child may have received a
cumulative dose of over 200 µg/kg (micrograms per kilogram) in the
first 18 months of life.

Although Thimerosal has been removed from most childhood vaccines, it
is still present in the flu vaccine, which is given to pregnant women,
the elderly, and children. Also, many vaccines given to children in
developing countries still contain Thimerosal.

In the 2005 issue of NeuroToxicology, the authors of a study examine
the toxicity of Thimerosal within the body including neurons. They
examine the neurotoxic mechanisms, how the body detoxifies mercury, and
the use of N-Acetylcysteine, or NAC for short, in facilitating the
detoxification pathway within the body.

Glutathione, a tripeptide composed of cysteine, glutamate, and glycine,
is manufactured in the liver and also in the brain. Normally, the
concentrations of glutathione in the cells are quite high providing for
detoxification of a variety of heavy metals including mercury. However,
when this essential antioxidant is depleted the excess mercury can bind
to internal cellular proteins leading to toxic damage. Studies have
shown that, "low micromolar concentrations of Thimerosal induced DNA
strand breaks, caspase-3 activation, membrane damage and cell death."

Although the brain can produce glutathione, it can only manufacture
this from its immediate precursor cysteine. The liver, on the other
hand, is able through a long series of biochemical steps to create
glutathione from methionine. Methionine is an essential amino acid that
supplies the body with sulfur and methyl groups. The liver uses a
number of enzyme systems along with various B vitamins to produce
glutathione. The liver then exports the glutathione to the blood that
then is broken down to cystine. Cystine crosses the blood-brain barrier
to be used by the brain to make glutathione. Thus, the brain is reliant
on the liver to manufacture chemicals to keep it free from toxins.

The brain contains neurons and other cells called astrocytes.
Astrocytes use the cystine that crosses the blood-brain barrier to make
glutathione. The astrocytes then export the glutathione to the space
between the cells where it is broken down to cysteine. The neurons take
up the cysteine and manufacture glutathione. This complex series of
biochemical events is what is necessary to keep the brain free from
heavy metal damage.

The authors first examined the level of Thimerosal that would cause
toxic damage to cells. They found that the higher the concentration of
Thimerosal the greater the number of cells that were killed although
the nerve cell response occurred with only a 3 hour exposure, whereas
the other cell line required a 48 hour exposure demonstrating that
nerve cells are more sensitive to Thimerosal toxicity. "In both cell
lines, a progressive increase in cytotoxicity (decrease in viability)
was observed when Thimerosal dose was progressively doubled from 2.5
µmol/L [micromoles per liter] to 5, 10, and 20 µmol/L. Viability was
reduced more than 50% in both cell lines with exposure to 10 µmol/L
Thimerosal and less than 10% of cells survived a dose of 20 µmol/L."

The authors then pretreated cells with NAC before adding a dose of 15
µmol/L Thimerosal. They found that, "Thimerosal alone induced more
than a 6-fold decrease in viability", and that NAC, "provided
significant protection against cell death". The authors note,
"Thimerosal induces oxidative stress and apoptosis by activating
mitochondrial cell death pathways. A subsequent study using cultured
human neuron and fibroblast cell lines similarly showed that low
micromolar concentrations of Thimerosal induced DNA strand breaks,
caspase-3 activation, membrane damage and cell death."

The authors conclude that, "numerous clinical studies have
demonstrated the efficacy of NAC in increasing intracellular
glutathione levels and reducing oxidative stress in humans. Since
cytotoxicity with both ethyl- and methyl- mercury have been shown to be
mediated by glutathione depletion, dietary supplements that increase
intracellular glutathione could be envisioned as an effective
intervention to reduce previous or anticipated exposure to mercury.
This approach would be especially valuable in the elderly and in
pregnant women receiving Rho D immunoglobulin shots, and individuals
who regularly consume mercury-containing fish."

SOURCE: NeuroToxicology, Vol. 26, 2005, pp. 1-8

"Roman Bystrianyk" wrote in message
ups.com...
I'm not sure why anyone would expect to find MORE mercury in the hair
of autistic children. That's the exact opposite of what *I* would
expect. If there's mercury in the hair, that means the body is
effectively eliminating it.


The research I have done does exactly indicate that those with a
decreased ability to detoxify mercury (and other heavy metals) are the
one that are more likely to succumb to a variety of neurodevelopmental
disorders. The factors may be in part genetic, but in large part
appear to be environmental and dietary. Concentrations of
intracellular glutathione would be one of those key nutrients that vary
based upon a large number of factors. Here is one study that looked at
NAC to decrease mercury's toxic effects.

And thank you Max for having a post that does not contain name-calling.
That is an ability that seems a virtual impossibility for the vast
majority.

http://www.healthsentinel.com/org_ne...n t_list_item

Roman Bystrianyk, "Thimerosal neurotoxicity and protection with
N-Acetylcysteine supplementation", Health Sentinel, January 3, 2005,

In the 1930s, Eli Lily developed Thimerosal as a preservative and it
was widely used in vaccines. Until the removal of Thimerosal, which
contains 49.9% ethyl mercury by weight, from most pediatric vaccines in
2001, the source of the largest human exposure to mercury in the US was
in children under 18 months of age undergoing routine childhood
immunization schedules. Before 2001, a child may have received a
cumulative dose of over 200 µg/kg (micrograms per kilogram) in the
first 18 months of life.

Although Thimerosal has been removed from most childhood vaccines, it
is still present in the flu vaccine, which is given to pregnant women,
the elderly, and children. Also, many vaccines given to children in
developing countries still contain Thimerosal.

In the 2005 issue of NeuroToxicology, the authors of a study examine
the toxicity of Thimerosal within the body including neurons. They
examine the neurotoxic mechanisms, how the body detoxifies mercury, and
the use of N-Acetylcysteine, or NAC for short, in facilitating the
detoxification pathway within the body.

Glutathione, a tripeptide composed of cysteine, glutamate, and glycine,
is manufactured in the liver and also in the brain. Normally, the
concentrations of glutathione in the cells are quite high providing for
detoxification of a variety of heavy metals including mercury. However,
when this essential antioxidant is depleted the excess mercury can bind
to internal cellular proteins leading to toxic damage. Studies have
shown that, "low micromolar concentrations of Thimerosal induced DNA
strand breaks, caspase-3 activation, membrane damage and cell death."

Although the brain can produce glutathione, it can only manufacture
this from its immediate precursor cysteine. The liver, on the other
hand, is able through a long series of biochemical steps to create
glutathione from methionine. Methionine is an essential amino acid that
supplies the body with sulfur and methyl groups. The liver uses a
number of enzyme systems along with various B vitamins to produce
glutathione. The liver then exports the glutathione to the blood that
then is broken down to cystine. Cystine crosses the blood-brain barrier
to be used by the brain to make glutathione. Thus, the brain is reliant
on the liver to manufacture chemicals to keep it free from toxins.

The brain contains neurons and other cells called astrocytes.
Astrocytes use the cystine that crosses the blood-brain barrier to make
glutathione. The astrocytes then export the glutathione to the space
between the cells where it is broken down to cysteine. The neurons take
up the cysteine and manufacture glutathione. This complex series of
biochemical events is what is necessary to keep the brain free from
heavy metal damage.

The authors first examined the level of Thimerosal that would cause
toxic damage to cells. They found that the higher the concentration of
Thimerosal the greater the number of cells that were killed although
the nerve cell response occurred with only a 3 hour exposure, whereas
the other cell line required a 48 hour exposure demonstrating that
nerve cells are more sensitive to Thimerosal toxicity. "In both cell
lines, a progressive increase in cytotoxicity (decrease in viability)
was observed when Thimerosal dose was progressively doubled from 2.5
µmol/L [micromoles per liter] to 5, 10, and 20 µmol/L. Viability was
reduced more than 50% in both cell lines with exposure to 10 µmol/L
Thimerosal and less than 10% of cells survived a dose of 20 µmol/L."

The authors then pretreated cells with NAC before adding a dose of 15
µmol/L Thimerosal. They found that, "Thimerosal alone induced more
than a 6-fold decrease in viability", and that NAC, "provided
significant protection against cell death". The authors note,
"Thimerosal induces oxidative stress and apoptosis by activating
mitochondrial cell death pathways. A subsequent study using cultured
human neuron and fibroblast cell lines similarly showed that low
micromolar concentrations of Thimerosal induced DNA strand breaks,
caspase-3 activation, membrane damage and cell death."

The authors conclude that, "numerous clinical studies have
demonstrated the efficacy of NAC in increasing intracellular
glutathione levels and reducing oxidative stress in humans. Since
cytotoxicity with both ethyl- and methyl- mercury have been shown to be
mediated by glutathione depletion, dietary supplements that increase
intracellular glutathione could be envisioned as an effective
intervention to reduce previous or anticipated exposure to mercury.
This approach would be especially valuable in the elderly and in
pregnant women receiving Rho D immunoglobulin shots, and individuals
who regularly consume mercury-containing fish."

SOURCE: NeuroToxicology, Vol. 26, 2005, pp. 1-8

http://www.altcorp.com/dentalinforma....htm#DETECTION

http://www.autisticsociety.org/autism-article38.html

"Peter Moran" wrote:


"Max C." wrote in message
oups.com...
Wow.. the first link was pure journalism genius. A real masterpiece.
Certainly very centered and non-biased. I didn't get the feeling that
the author had any preconceived ideas or personal feelings on the story
at all!

This link gives all the details and works for me
http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/art...atent-medicine

This is medical and scientific madness, both! It is shaky hypothesis upon
shaky hypothesis upon shaky hypothesis.

The starting hypothesis, that mercury has anything to do with autism is
extremely shaky at best (it itself requires a second hypothesis to explain
why autistuc kids have LESS mercury in their hair than normal kids in one
study that was expected to show the reverse ).

Ex-Professor Boyd Haley (blessed be his seed) explained that
somewhere. Apparently, if you have a lot of mercury in your body it
gets trapped and can't get into the hair, so low hair readings
indicate high mercury levels. Unless you find high mercury levels in
hair, when it means high levels in the body. Unless you sell chelation
to "cure" autism, in which case the hair analysis is just an invoice
line item and doesn't mean anything at all because the kid definitely
needs chelation.

snip
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

"Max C." wrote:

Peter Moran wrote:
This link gives all the details and works for me
http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/art...atent-medicine

Thanks. That's the link that wasn't working before, but it seems fine
now. I'll have a read over it and come back with opinions.

This is medical and scientific madness, both! It is shaky hypothesis upon
shaky hypothesis upon shaky hypothesis.

The starting hypothesis, that mercury has anything to do with autism is
extremely shaky at best (it itself requires a second hypothesis to explain
why autistuc kids have LESS mercury in their hair than normal kids in one
study that was expected to show the reverse ).

I'm not sure why anyone would expect to find MORE mercury in the hair
of autistic children. That's the exact opposite of what *I* would
expect. If there's mercury in the hair, that means the body is
effectively eliminating it.

Since so many pro-medical visitors here seem to think their own
personal experiences justify their positions, I'm going to give mine.
I grew up with an autistic child. I met him in the second grade and we
graduated high school together. Now, as an adult, I know 2 autistic
children. The commonality the parents of these three children have
expressed is that signs of autism didn't set in until immediately after
a bout of vaccinations. One of the children was 6 months old and in
very good physical health. Very alert. Very playful. Very observant.
She was developing normally. Her parents said that they knew
something was wrong before they left the doctor's office. She wouldn't
stop screaming. Within days after her scheduled vaccinations, her
entire life changed. If you've seen autistic children, you know what
I'm talking about.

I realize that this is personal experience and so has no meaning in the
context of any debate here, but others have felt obliged to tell their
personal stories, so that's what I'm doing.

Personally, I'm outraged that there hasn't been a large scale, publicly
funded study on this issue. I hope the one currently being requested
actually makes it to fruition.

There have been several, involving literally millions of children.
There is no connection except in the diseased minds of
anti-vaccination liars and in the minds of people deceived by those
liars.


Then there is the weird
one that the kids were poisoned by mercury in vaccines in infancy, but
despite never being shown to have persistent mercury, they can be helped by
chelation at a much later age when the reversal of any damage is unlikely
and mercury levels would be much lower anyway.

I agree with you on this one to a certain extent. I would certainly
hope that proper animal tests have been done to prove the safety of
such extreme measures. I would also hope that some tests have been run
to identify that there *is* in fact mercury in the brains of these
children. Is there even such a test available?

If chelation worked as well as they previously claimed, why the need to be
mucking around with these kid's hormones? Such major tinkering with methods
can mean that they ain't working too well, but the claimants are not
prepared to either abandon them or to reexamine their original hypothesis.

At the risk of sounding cruel, I can tell you from my own experience
that the breeding abilities of autistic children is the last thing on
their parents' minds. Were I to have one of these children, I can tell
you that I would gladly give up their ability to produce offspring if
it meant that they could lead an otherwise normal life. That being
said, I would personally want a ton of study on the efficacy of the
proposed treatment. AND, even if the data was clear cut, I would
probably wait until several others had tried it before I tried it on my
own children.

Here's the thing, though... let's forget about what actually *CAUSED*
the autism for a second. My question is, what is medical science
actually DOING to improve the lives of autistic children? For the 2
children I currently know, the answer is, according to their parents,
"Nothing." That's why they've started to seek out alternative
therapies... and they say they've seen remarkable results. A simple
adjustment of diet has allowed their children to focus better and
actually have meaningful conversations. They're still far from what
you and I would consider "normal" but also far from what they once
were.

Max.
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

"Roman Bystrianyk" wrote in message
ups.com...
I'm not sure why anyone would expect to find MORE mercury in the hair
of autistic children. That's the exact opposite of what *I* would
expect. If there's mercury in the hair, that means the body is
effectively eliminating it.

**********************
PM Actually the the study on the first hair cuts of autistic children was
performed because Haley himself and Safeminds expected it to show larger
quantities of mercury in the hair of autistic children. I have
documentation of this expectation somewhere.

The theory that they cannot excrete mercury was produced in retrospect to
try and explain this awkward fact.

This other study seems to show that autistic children can eliminate mercury
in the hair. This is actually what you would expect. It is not an
excretory process, it is simple physicochemistry, as would be the
inevitable elimination in the urine and sweat. Are you aware of any direct
evidence that autistic children cannot eliminate mercury? This is
hypothesis number two of the sequence of unproven and unlikely ones.
1: J Child Neurol. 2004 Jun;19(6):431-4. Related Articles, Links


Mercury exposure in children with autistic spectrum disorder: case-control
study.

Ip P, Wong V, Ho M, Lee J, Wong W.

Division of Neurodevelopmental Paediatrics, The University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong.

Although mercury has been proven to be a neurotoxicant, there is a lack of
data to evaluate the causal relationship between mercury and autism. We aim
to see if there is increased mercury exposure in children with autistic
spectrum disorder. We performed a cross-sectional cohort study over a
5-month period in 2000 to compare the hair and blood mercury levels of
children with autistic spectrum disorder (n = 82; mean age 7.2 years) and a
control group of normal children (n = 55; mean age 7.8 years). There was no
difference in the mean mercury levels. The mean blood mercury levels of the
autistic and control groups were 19.53 and 17.68 nmol/L, respectively (P =
..15), and the mean hair mercury levels of the autistic and control groups
were 2.26 and 2.07 ppm, respectively (P = .79). Thus, the results from our
cohort study with similar environmental mercury exposure indicate that there
is no causal relationship between mercury as an environmental neurotoxin and
autism.

Peter Moran



The research I have done does exactly indicate that those with a
decreased ability to detoxify mercury (and other heavy metals) are the
one that are more likely to succumb to a variety of neurodevelopmental
disorders. The factors may be in part genetic, but in large part
appear to be environmental and dietary. Concentrations of
intracellular glutathione would be one of those key nutrients that vary
based upon a large number of factors. Here is one study that looked at
NAC to decrease mercury's toxic effects.

And thank you Max for having a post that does not contain name-calling.
That is an ability that seems a virtual impossibility for the vast
majority.

http://www.healthsentinel.com/org_ne...n t_list_item

Roman Bystrianyk, "Thimerosal neurotoxicity and protection with
N-Acetylcysteine supplementation", Health Sentinel, January 3, 2005,

In the 1930s, Eli Lily developed Thimerosal as a preservative and it
was widely used in vaccines. Until the removal of Thimerosal, which
contains 49.9% ethyl mercury by weight, from most pediatric vaccines in
2001, the source of the largest human exposure to mercury in the US was
in children under 18 months of age undergoing routine childhood
immunization schedules. Before 2001, a child may have received a
cumulative dose of over 200 µg/kg (micrograms per kilogram) in the
first 18 months of life.

Although Thimerosal has been removed from most childhood vaccines, it
is still present in the flu vaccine, which is given to pregnant women,
the elderly, and children. Also, many vaccines given to children in
developing countries still contain Thimerosal.

In the 2005 issue of NeuroToxicology, the authors of a study examine
the toxicity of Thimerosal within the body including neurons. They
examine the neurotoxic mechanisms, how the body detoxifies mercury, and
the use of N-Acetylcysteine, or NAC for short, in facilitating the
detoxification pathway within the body.

Glutathione, a tripeptide composed of cysteine, glutamate, and glycine,
is manufactured in the liver and also in the brain. Normally, the
concentrations of glutathione in the cells are quite high providing for
detoxification of a variety of heavy metals including mercury. However,
when this essential antioxidant is depleted the excess mercury can bind
to internal cellular proteins leading to toxic damage. Studies have
shown that, "low micromolar concentrations of Thimerosal induced DNA
strand breaks, caspase-3 activation, membrane damage and cell death."

Although the brain can produce glutathione, it can only manufacture
this from its immediate precursor cysteine. The liver, on the other
hand, is able through a long series of biochemical steps to create
glutathione from methionine. Methionine is an essential amino acid that
supplies the body with sulfur and methyl groups. The liver uses a
number of enzyme systems along with various B vitamins to produce
glutathione. The liver then exports the glutathione to the blood that
then is broken down to cystine. Cystine crosses the blood-brain barrier
to be used by the brain to make glutathione. Thus, the brain is reliant
on the liver to manufacture chemicals to keep it free from toxins.

The brain contains neurons and other cells called astrocytes.
Astrocytes use the cystine that crosses the blood-brain barrier to make
glutathione. The astrocytes then export the glutathione to the space
between the cells where it is broken down to cysteine. The neurons take
up the cysteine and manufacture glutathione. This complex series of
biochemical events is what is necessary to keep the brain free from
heavy metal damage.

The authors first examined the level of Thimerosal that would cause
toxic damage to cells. They found that the higher the concentration of
Thimerosal the greater the number of cells that were killed although
the nerve cell response occurred with only a 3 hour exposure, whereas
the other cell line required a 48 hour exposure demonstrating that
nerve cells are more sensitive to Thimerosal toxicity. "In both cell
lines, a progressive increase in cytotoxicity (decrease in viability)
was observed when Thimerosal dose was progressively doubled from 2.5
µmol/L [micromoles per liter] to 5, 10, and 20 µmol/L. Viability was
reduced more than 50% in both cell lines with exposure to 10 µmol/L
Thimerosal and less than 10% of cells survived a dose of 20 µmol/L."

The authors then pretreated cells with NAC before adding a dose of 15
µmol/L Thimerosal. They found that, "Thimerosal alone induced more
than a 6-fold decrease in viability", and that NAC, "provided
significant protection against cell death". The authors note,
"Thimerosal induces oxidative stress and apoptosis by activating
mitochondrial cell death pathways. A subsequent study using cultured
human neuron and fibroblast cell lines similarly showed that low
micromolar concentrations of Thimerosal induced DNA strand breaks,
caspase-3 activation, membrane damage and cell death."

The authors conclude that, "numerous clinical studies have
demonstrated the efficacy of NAC in increasing intracellular
glutathione levels and reducing oxidative stress in humans. Since
cytotoxicity with both ethyl- and methyl- mercury have been shown to be
mediated by glutathione depletion, dietary supplements that increase
intracellular glutathione could be envisioned as an effective
intervention to reduce previous or anticipated exposure to mercury.
This approach would be especially valuable in the elderly and in
pregnant women receiving Rho D immunoglobulin shots, and individuals
who regularly consume mercury-containing fish."

SOURCE: NeuroToxicology, Vol. 26, 2005, pp. 1-8