The Age of Autism: 'Amish bill' introduced

In article , Bob
wrote:

On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 08:32:14 -0700, (Jason Johnson)
wrote:


bob,
Thanks so much for staying on topic and NOT trying to
change the subject by discussing sodium or three dollar words for
rain water.

The sodium (which I, among others, brought in) was not to change the
subject, but was to help make the point that one must consider the
specific chemical. I must have missed the rain water.


You made this statement in your post:
"Above I asked if you had checked PubMed for info on autism re the
Minamata Bay spill. You did not reply! I did check, and got zero hits."

I read an article about the Minamata Bay spill and have not yet visited
the PubMed site due to time factors--I am helping a neighbor remodel
her bathroom. I may visit the site when I have some more free time.
I was told by someone (it might have been you) that the site does NOT
discuss autism in regard to the children that ate the contaminated
fish. Is that true or false?

Not sure what site you refer to. I simply asked if you had checked
this on PubMed. I assume you use PubMed as your primary search engine
for medical stuff; you quote it below. (I did a simple search, and got
zero.) But the Nelson and Bauman article I referred to and quoted did
discuss it some; there is no connection. Have you read this article??
If not... It will answer a lot of questions. (And perhaps raise some.)


That's the only question that I have that I
have not yet found the answer to in regard to the Minamata Bay spill.

Several posters keep repeating that there are "safe"
forms of mercury and aluminum.

That's not quite the point. The real point is that any consideration
must deal with the specific chemical -- and the amount. Amount is
critical. Any chemical can be hazardous, at high enough dose. And any
chemical can be safe at low enough dose. (This is not entirely
accepted re causing cancer, but is otherwise widely accepted.)


I agree with this statement that you made
in your post:
"As to the (quite natural) temptation to make generalizations... I can
make a stronger one... The purpose of thimerosal in a vaccine is to
serve as a preservative. Warning flag. Preservatives are toxic. That
is the point. Preservatives kill things, inhibit their growth etc;
that is their point. So we should never use preservatives, because
they are toxic. ??]"

I know that thimerosal is a preservative which is the reason that it is
used in vaccines. The drug companies that make vaccines should develop
or find a preservative that is MUCH safer than mercury or known poisons.

Except that there is no real reason to believe that the preservatives
are a problem, at the levels used. Unless you look at the level, there
can not be a meaningful discussion. (And one of the issues here is
that when one does look at the level, there is, marginally, some
concern about thimerosal -- though no evidence against it.)


If it is possible to make vaccines whichout the use of preservatives--that
would be a good thing since preservatives are toxic.

That is in effect what is being done. I think the argument is that
with modern technologies, we _may_ get by without preservatives in
these vaccines (but that in itself is a new risk -- which needs to be
weighed). I have no opinion on the wisdom of that at this point, but I
presume there was a major debate among experts at the time.

This was raised before.

For a perspective on removing the thimerosal, thus operating without
preservtive, see:
http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t041005e.html

Question: table salt is
used as a preservative in regard to meat (eg salted hams)--why don't they
use sodium chloride in vaccines?

Interesting question. Note that we are now back to toxic forms of
sodium. Here, sodium chloride is being used as a toxic agent. That is,
you are suggesting one might add enough NaCl to be toxic to bacteria
in the vaccine, but not to the "patient" (the injectee ??). That is
logically no different than what is done with thimerosal. If it makes
sense for NaCl, it makes sense for thimerosal -- IF the data supports
it; the logic is the same.

Why not NaCl? Not sure. As an educated guess, I suspect that the
amount of NaCl needed for effective preservation is high enough that
the vaccine agent is damaged.


Back to the subject of "safe" forms of mercury: Please comment on this
article since a "safe" form of mercury is mentioned:


I can't comment on it from just this. Not obvious it is relevant. (I
looked for the article; seems to not be available to me.)


My comment:
I don't believe that any forms or types of mercury or aluminum are "SAFE".

Then you didn't learn the lesson from the sodium discussion.

Are you saying you are afraid to be around aluminum foil??


You seem to still miss the most basic idea... that one must consider
amount and type.


They may not cause harm in every person but the above PubMed report
clearly shows that some people develop medical problems when exposed to
"safe" forms of mercury or aluminum. Have you read any research studies
that have been done
related to the Alzheimer disease. I read one study which indicated that
medical researchers examined and done tests on the brains of dozens of
people that died and they all had confirmed cases of Alzheimer disease.
They found out that those brains contained high levels of alumninum. The
brains of dead people that did NOT have Alzheimer disease did NOT have
high levels of aluminum. That led me to believe that at least some people
(that eventually develop Alzheimer disease) retain aluminum from products
such as vaccines and antacids. Do you agree or disagree with me?


That is the wrong question.

The question is causation, and there is an extensive literature which
fails to show causation.

In any case, vaccine contribution is negligible -- compared to what
one just gets by normal eating.


It's
possible that they have a defective gene that makes it difficult or
impossible for them to proccess aluminum.


That is a testable hypothesis. I have no idea what is known about it.
As I understand it, there is no evidence to suggest it. You could just
as well suggest that re sodium.

But vaccine Al is a negligible part of one's Al consumption.


If I failed to answer your other questions, please repeat them in your
next post. Since I don't have a background in science, I sometimes make
generalizations and conclusions that later turn out to be incorrect.


I think the non-scientist faces two general problems with such issues.
One is getting lost in a morass of confusing and contradictory
information. The other is setting priorities. [Confession: Scientists
face those problems, too. But we/they are trained to deal with them.
Not that we always do it well, but at least we try to. Science overall
works better than any individual scientist, because there is much
openness and correction going on.]

As to the first point, it is easy to find "a paper" that says most
anything. Lots of people do lots of little things, with diverse
results. This is particularly true when the story is very incomplete.
Over time, a consensus emerges, about which things are relevant and
important. Many individual papers fall by the wayside. Occasionally,
it is because they are wrong. But more often, they were not wrong, but
merely not as "important" in the final picture. Animal studies and
cell studies yield all sorts of clues, many of which turn out to not
hold in real humans -- which are frustratingly complex, and we are not
supposed to do lab expts on them! It can really be confusing to try to
follow individual papers. Note that the article I suggested above is
an overview of the thimerosal issue -- and the first thing I asked
about it was whether anyone knew of any relevant things it missed.

As to priorities... Let’s use the Hg/autism as an example. I certainly
sympathize with the general notion of reducing exposure to Hg. All my
specific comments notwithstanding, it is not something we generally
consider "good". However... At least by this point, it is quite clear
that there is little if any connection of Hg with autism. (As you read
the story of the FDA decision re thimerosal, one point is that they
felt the story was perhaps ambiguous at the time of the original
decision, but evidence since makes it even more clear there is not a
problem.

Now, does that mean there is not some exotic special case still
involved? No, but the numbers must be quite small. May still be worth
some attention, but hardly a major concern now. In fact, much is being
done to look for causes, both genetic and environmental. Over time,
this info will develop. Complex answers, involving more than one cause
interacting, are harder to find, but will emerge in due course. The
point is not that it is all completely settled, but that the data says
it is not a simple high priority problem.

Further, if we are concerned about Hg... It is my understanding that
the major source is fish, and indirectly from power plant emissions.
This is a political issue. The current (US) administration chose to
not make a major step in reducing Hg emissions. As a matter of
priorities, this is where anti-Hg attention should be directed, not at
vaccines. That requires looking at the numbers, and seeing which is
more important.

Ok, this is getting long! If we continue, let's try to trim it to some
selected points, or start new threads.

bob

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bob,
This is the best report that I have read related to defective genes:
My comments are at the end of the article.

http://www.news-medical.net/?id=19225

Different genes may be responsible for causing autism in boys and girls
Medical Research News
Published: Thursday, 3-Aug-2006

In the on-going search to find the cause of Autistic Spectrum Disorders, the
latest research says different genes may be responsible for causing autism
in boys than in girls, and the discovery may help explain why the condition
is more common in boys.
Researchers at the University of Washington also say that other genes may
play a role in the early onset and late onset forms of autism.
The researchers say they have found evidence for two genetic subtypes of
autism, male versus female and early versus late onset and this may help
scientists understand autism at a molecular level and find ways to prevent
it.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, autism is
very common among U.S. children and as many as 1 in every 175 have the
disorder.

This equates to at least 300,000 U.S. schoolchildren with some form of
autism, a condition characterised by problems with learning, socializing and
behaviour issues.

For the study the researchers examined the DNA of 169 families with at least
two siblings who met the strict criteria for autism.
They also scanned the DNA of 54 other families that had members with autism
and other forms of the disorder, such as Asperger syndrome.
They found strong evidence for an autism gene on chromosome 7 and "less, but
still compelling evidence" for genes on chromosomes 3, 4 and 11.
Gerard Schellenberg, a professor of medicine at the University of Washington
who led the study says it is highly unlikely that there is only one gene
responsible for autism and there may be 4 to 6 major genes and 20 to 30
others that might contribute to autism to a lesser degree.
Schellenberg says because autism is rarer in females, it may take more risk
genes for a female to have autism and there also is the possibility that
there might be a biological difference in autism for females versus males.

The researchers were looking for genes that might put children at higher
risk of autism so they could begin early treatment or possibly in future
find a way to prevent the condition.

Geraldine Dawson, the director of the UW's Autism Center and co-author of
the study, says once susceptibility genes are discovered infants can be
screened to identify those at risk early in life.

Early identification can lead to early intervention, which could be more
effective, says Dawson.
The study is published in the journal Molecular Genetics.

END

My comments:

Thanks for your excellent post. I would appreciate your comments about my
theory related to the cause of autism and Alzheimer Disease.

I believe that children that develop autism are born with defective genes
that makes it impossible for them to process mercury. Some of the mercury
is stored in the brains of those children that develop autism.

I believe that people that develop Alzheimer Disease are born with
defective genes that makes it impossible for them to process aluminum. Som
of the Al is stored in the brains of those people that develop Alzheimer
Disease. The brains of elderly people that had confirmed cases of
Alzheimer Disease were examined after they died and medical experts
determined that those brains contained high levels of Al.

To be honest, I have never read a research study that involved testing the
brains of people that had confirmed cases of autism--after they died.

This is one of the reports that indicates that mercury plays a role in the
develop of autism:

Source: EIR website

Heavy Metal Toxicity
Another finding in autistic children is a higher level of heavy metals
than normal. One source of mercury exposure in early life is through
vaccinations. Thimerosal is a preservative used in many vaccinations to
prevent contamination. Thimerosal is 49.6% mercury by weight. Shockingly
in 1999 the American Food and Drug Administration released a report
stating that children who received thimerosal containing vaccinations at
multiple visits may be exposed to more mercury than is recommended by
federal guidelines. In fact, children may have been receiving 100 times
the 0.1 micrograms per kilogram of daily exposure considered safe by most
authorities worldwide. This report has, however, resulted in positive
action being taken. Following the publication of the report, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Centers for Disease Control
(CDC) recommended that thimerosal be removed from all vaccines given to
children. A study of 2 US government databases in March 2006 shows that in
the 4 years following the recommended removal of thimerosal from childrens
vaccines, exposure of children to this toxin was reduced to almost zero,
and most importantly, new cases of autism actually began to decrease.

Mercury is a known neurotoxin and could be especially harmful to the
developing brains of young children. Mercury also disrupts biochemistry
and can result in dysfunction of multiple enzyme systems and damage to
cell membranes and many proteins involved in all bodily functions. As can
be said for the MMR vaccine, increases in vaccinations correlate well with
increases in incidence of ASD's.

In a paper published in the journal Neurotoxicology by The Coalition for
Safe Minds in 2001, the authors seek to determine the levels of mercury
that could be expected upon hair analysis, based upon the amounts of
mercury in vaccines routinely given to infants and children.(12). The
paper predicts, based upon a proven model, that giving children all the
usual vaccinations, using thimerosal containing vaccines would result in a
hair concentration of greater than 1ppm (parts per million) of mercury for
up to 365 days with various peaks during that period. 1ppm is the safe
limit set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Research at the
UCLA Medical Center in California has also shown that Thimerosal (when
bound to human albumin protein) triggers an immune system reaction in
autistic children, resulting in the production of antibodies (17). This
indicates a possible autoimmune reaction as the immune system could react
against any of the child's own tissues that happen to have Thimerosal
bound to them.

Obviously children are exposed to mercury from other sources as well so
their actual mercury levels could be expected to be even higher than this.
The paper notes that:

"exposure to low levels of mercury during critical stages of development
has been associated with neurological disorders in children, including
ADD, learning difficulties, and speech delays, the predicted hair Hg
(mercury) concentration resulting from childhood immunizations is cause
for concern."

A paper published in March 2006 in Environmental Health Perspectives would
seem to shed more light on the mechanisms by which thimerosal can damage a
childs health. Researchers at University of California, Davis, have found
that in mice at least, thimerosal can disrupt the immune system. This
large, well funded study for the university's MIND Institute and the
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences is sure to be an
important indicator of where future research should be focused. The
researchers in this study looked at dendritic cells which can be described
as messengers within the immune system. These cells take up invaders such
as bacteria, viruses and other antigens such as vaccine ingredients and
process them. They then migrate to the lymph nodes to present their
information to other immune cells, which can activate a systemic immune
response. The research shows that these dendritic cells, especially the
normal biochemical signals they process, are highly sensitive to
thimerosal. With low concentrations of thimerosal, an inflammatory
response occurs and with higher concentrations the cell is actually
killed. These reactions could lead to any number of unwanted, and
uncontrolled, effects within the immune system.

Autistic children often show signs of immunological dysfunction with
allergies, gut disorders and frequent infections being common. The effects
of thimerosal on the immune system, that this study demonstrates, provides
one possible explanation of why this is the case.

Of course, mercury is not the only heavy metal that can cause health
problems and vaccinations are not the only source of exposure to mercury.
Other possible sources of heavy metal exposure are contaminated food and
water supplies. Fish is particularly associated with contamination as
oceanic pollution becomes more concentrated as it moves up the food chain
to predatory fish..