Jump to content
ACN Latitudes Forums

Recommended Posts

These are some articles showing higher estimates.

 

 

http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/tourett...il_tourette.htm

 

*The early symptoms of TS are almost always noticed first in childhood, with the average onset between the ages of 7 and 10 years. TS occurs in people from all ethnic groups; males are affected about three to four times more often than females. It is estimated that 200,000 Americans have the most severe form of TS, and as many as one in 100 exhibit milder and less complex symptoms such as chronic motor or vocal tics or transient tics of childhood.

 

*Epidemiology and clinical science. Careful epidemiological studies now estimate the prevalence of TS to be substantially higher than previously thought with a wider range of clinical severity. Furthermore, clinical studies are providing new findings regarding TS and co-existing conditions. These include subtyping studies of TS and OCD, an examination of the link between ADHD and learning problems in children with TS, a new appreciation of sensory tics, and the role of co-existing disorders in rage attacks. One of the most important and controversial areas of TS science involves the relationship between TS and autoimmune brain injury associated with group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal infections or other infectious processes. There are a number of epidemiological and clinical investigations currently underway in this intriguing area.

 

All NINDS-prepared information is in the public domain and may be freely copied. Credit to the NINDS or the NIH is appreciated.

 

Last updated April 07, 2006

********************************************************************8

http://www.brookespublishing.com/email/arc...01/may01DD2.htm

 

May 2001

Genetics

 

The National Institutes of Health officially estimate that 100,000 Americans have full-blown TS. Some genetic studies suggest that the figure may be as high as one in two hundred if those with chronic multiple tics and/or transient childhood tics are included in the count.

 

 

**************************************************************

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourette_syndrome

 

Tourette's syndrome has historically been described as a rare disorder, with about 5 to 10 people in 10,000 having TS.[10] However, multiple studies published since 2000 demonstrate that the prevalence is much higher than previously thought, and that Tourette's syndrome can no longer be considered rare. Contemporary prevalence estimates range from 1 to 3 per 1,000[28] to 10 per 1,000.[29] A large, community-based study suggested that over 19% of school-age children have tics, with almost 4% of children in regular education fulfilling the diagnostic criteria for Tourette's Syndrome. The children with tic disorders in that study were usually undiagnosed.[30] As many as 1 in 100 people may experience some form of tic disorder, which includes transient tics, chronic tics, or Tourette's Syndrome.

***********************************************************

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 164
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

**** Katie Wright zinged 'em on that one -- she called the AAP's

stance "shameful and disgraceful." And she said that whatever caused

Christian's autism, she wishes she hadn't let her doctor give him six

vaccines on one day at age 2 months. Parents need to use "common

sense," she said -- would you, an adult, want six vaccines in one

day? ******

 

 

 

The Age of Autism: Christian's mom speaks

 

http://tinyurl.com/g27cn

 

The Age of Autism: Christian's mom speaks

By Dan Olmsted

Apr. 12, 2006

 

Washington, Apr. 12 (UPI) - A small earthquake rumbled through the

autism world shortly after 7:30 a.m. on April 11, and the aftershocks

are going to be felt for a long time.

That's when Katie Wright, daughter of NBC Universal Chairman

Bob Wright, said she is concerned her young son Christian's autism

might be related to vaccines he received, that he is getting better

through treatments that include biomedical interventions, and that

it's time for parents to follow their own "common sense" when they

get their kids vaccinated.

Big deal? Yes, big deal.

It's hard to overstate the buzz circulating through the autism

community over the past few months as it became known that Katie

Wright was among those with concerns about vaccines playing a role in

her child's autism -- and that she was trying to help him recover

accordingly.

"I think it's a huge story," one autism activist e-mailed me in

February. "This child triggered a weeklong series on NBC and the most

well-funded autism organization on the planet (Autism Speaks)," not

to mention the high-profile heft of the Wrights in lobbying for more

money, more research and more awareness of a disorder that afflicts 1

in every 166 American kids.

Thousands of parents with concerns just like Katie Wright's

have been all but ostracized, as have the small but growing minority

of doctors trying to help them. I know two MDs who lost faculty

appointments shortly after I wrote about them, and I hear story after

story about pediatricians rolling their eyes when they hear vaccine-

related health concerns of any kind from parents. Many ban families

who balk from their practices.

Sitting right next to Katie Wright on "Imus in the Morning" on

MSNBC was her father, who also is vice chairman and executive officer

of GE, one of the world's biggest corporations. His comments were

understandably more general -- nobody knows what causes autism, he

said; vaccines are in the mix of possibilities that need urgent

research; as are other environmental issues, as are genetic factors.

But does anybody think he would have been there if he

vehemently objected to his daughter expressing her concerns? (For

that matter, does anybody think Katie Wright would have been there?

After all, he runs the joint.)

After Christian's diagnosis, Bob Wright and his wife, Suzanne,

founded Autism Speaks, an advocacy group. Some longtime autism

activists consider it a bit namby-pamby, but after Tuesday that

impression may be due for an update.

Regardless, what Katie Wright had to say extends a thoroughly

bad spell for the nation's health bureaucrats and medical trade

associations in their efforts to stamp out discussion of a possible

vaccine link to autism.

Major newspapers such as the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and

the Los Angeles Times, which has been the best by far on this topic,

published articles on such groups' relentless opposition to banning

thimerosal -- the mercury-based preservative some believe triggered a

huge rise in autism diagnoses in the 1990s -- from childhood

vaccinations.

Last week 22 health organizations sent a letter to every member

of the U.S. Congress putting themselves on record that such bans are

a danger to public health -- yes, banning mercury from childhood

vaccines is dangerous, keeping it in is not. Several states have

banned it anyway, including heavyweights Illinois, California and New

York.

Meanwhile, Katie Wright said, the American Academy of

Pediatrics has not endorsed a pending bill in Congress called

Combating Autism -- backed by Autism Speaks and numerous other

organizations -- which includes funding for research into possible

causes of the epidemic, not excluding vaccines. Some apparently take

that as a threat to the third rail of public-health policy: the U.S.

childhood immunization schedule.

Katie Wright zinged 'em on that one -- she called the AAP's

stance "shameful and disgraceful." And she said that whatever caused

Christian's autism, she wishes she hadn't let her doctor give him six

vaccines on one day at age 2 months. Parents need to use "common

sense," she said -- would you, an adult, want six vaccines in one

day?

Then she raised the stakes. Parents should insist that

doctors "separate the vaccines." You know, give them over several

office visits rather than all at once to minimize chances of a bad

reaction.

That doesn't sound terribly threatening to public health, does

it? Yet it's heresy -- completely contrary to the position of the

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"Use of licensed combination vaccines ... is preferred to

separate injection of their equivalent component vaccines," says the

CDC's authoritative Pink Book of vaccine-preventable diseases.

And they should all be administered "as soon as the child

becomes eligible for vaccination."

And they should contain mercury, if we say so.

By putting her foot down, Katie Wright joins thousands of other

parents putting the "father-knows-best" branch of medicine on notice

that it's not nutty to use common sense when your child's health is

at stake.

Others will differ, but that's what I call a public service

announcement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Age of Autism: Pox -- Part 1

 

By Dan Olmsted for UPI

http://tinyurl.com/qhcet

 

Children in families with problematic reactions to chickenpox

virus may be at risk for developing autism if they get that live-

virus immunization too close to other live-virus vaccines, a three-

month United Press International investigation of cases in one

northwest U.S. city suggests.

*************************************************************************

Link to post
Share on other sites

Criminal activity?

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12542539/from/RSS/

 

*****************************************

This looks pretty mainstream to be talking about increased gut permeability

 

Infant/Prevention of food allergy

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr...ent+and+...%22+

 

************************************

Infantile cobalamin deficiency........

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...l=pubmed_DocSum

Link to post
Share on other sites

George Monbiot

Tuesday May 2, 2006*

<http://www.guardian.co.uk>*http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/comment/0,,1765619,00.html

 

 

Does television cause crime? The idea that people copy the violence they

watch is debated endlessly by criminologists. But this column concerns

an odder and perhaps more interesting idea: if crime leaps out of the

box, it is not the programmes that are responsible as much as the

material in between. It proposes that violence emerges from those

blissful images of family life, purged of all darkness, that we see in

the advertisements.

 

Let me begin, in constructing this strange argument, with a paper

published in the latest edition of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent

Medicine. It provides empirical support for the contention that children

who watch more television eat more of the foods it advertises. "Each

hour increase in television viewing," it found, "was associated with an

additional 167 kilocalories per day." Most of these extra calories were

contained in junk foods: fizzy drinks, crisps, biscuits, sweets, burgers

and chicken nuggets. Watching television, the paper reported, "is also

inversely associated with intake of fruit and vegetables".

 

There is no longer any serious debate about what a TV diet does to your

body. A government survey published last month shows that the proportion

of children in English secondary schools who are clinically obese has

almost doubled in 10 years. Today, 27% of girls and 24% of boys between

11 and 15 years old suffer from this condition, which means they are far

more likely to contract diabetes and to die before the age of 50. But

the more interesting question is what this diet might do to your mind.

There are now scores of studies suggesting that it hurts the brain as

much as it hurts the heart and the pancreas. Among the many proposed

associations is a link between bad food and violent or antisocial behaviour.

 

The most spectacular results were those reported in the Journal of

Nutritional and Environmental Medicine in 1997. The researchers had

conducted a double-blind, controlled experiment in a jail for chronic

offenders aged between 13 and 17. Many of the boys there were deficient

in certain nutrients. They consumed, on average, only 63% of the iron,

42% of the magnesium, 39% of the zinc, 39% of the vitamin B12 and 34% of

the folate in the US government's recommended daily allowance. The

researchers treated half the inmates with capsules containing the

missing nutrients, and half with placebos. They also counselled all the

prisoners in the trial about improving their diets. The number of

violent incidents caused by inmates in the control group (those taking

the placebos) fell by 56%, and in the experimental group by 80%. But

among the inmates in the placebo group who refused to improve their

diets, there was no reduction. The researchers also wired their subjects

to an electroencephalograph to record brainwave patterns, and found a

major decrease in abnormalities after 13 weeks on supplements.

 

A similar paper, published in 2002 in the British Journal of Psychiatry,

found that among young adult prisoners given supplements of the

vitamins, minerals and fatty acids in which they were deficient,

disciplinary offences fell by 26% in the experimental group, and not at

all in the control group. Researchers in Finland found that all 68 of

the violent offenders they tested during another study suffered from

reactive hypoglycaemia: an abnormal tolerance of glucose caused by an

excessive consumption of sugar, carbohydrates and stimulants such as

caffeine.

 

In March this year the lead author of the 2002 report, Bernard Gesch,

told the Ecologist magazine that "having a bad diet is now a better

predictor of future violence than past violent behaviour ... Likewise, a

diagnosis of psychopathy, generally perceived as being a better

predictor than a criminal past, is still miles behind what you can

predict just from looking at what a person eats."

 

Why should a link between diet and behaviour be surprising? Quite aside

from the physiological effects of eating too much sugar (apparent to

anyone who has attended a children's party), the brain, whose function

depends on precise biochemical processes, can't work properly with

insufficient raw materials. The most important of these appear to be

unsaturated fatty acids (especially the omega 3 types), zinc, magnesium,

iron, folate and the B vitamins, which happen to be those in which the

prisoners in the 1997 study were most deficient.

 

A report published at the end of last year by the pressure group Sustain

explained what appear to be clear links between deteriorating diets and

the growth of depression, behavioural problems, Alzheimer's and other

forms of mental illness. Sixty per cent of the dry weight of the brain

is fat, which is "unique in the body for being predominantly composed of

highly unsaturated fatty acids". Zinc and magnesium affect both its

metabolism of lipids and its production of neurotransmitters - the

chemicals which permit the nerve cells to communicate with each other.

 

The more junk you eat, the less room you have for foods which contain

the chemicals the brain needs. This is not to suggest that food

advertisers are solely responsible for the decline in the nutrients we

consume. As Graham Harvey's new book We Want Real Food shows, industrial

farming, dependent on artificial fertilisers, has greatly reduced the

mineral content of vegetables, while the quality of meat and milk has

also declined. Nor do these findings suggest that a poor diet is the

sole cause of crime and antisocial behaviour. But the studies I have

read suggest that any government that claims to take crime seriously

should start hitting the advertisers.

 

Instead, our government sits back while the television regulator, Ofcom,

canoodles with the food industry. While drawing up its plans to control

junk food adverts, Ofcom held 29 meetings with food producers and

advertisers and just four with health and consumer groups. The results

can be seen in the consultation document it published. It proposes to do

nothing about adverts among programmes made for children over nine and

nothing about the adverts the younger children watch most often. Which?

reports that the most popular ITV programmes among two- to

nine-year-olds are Dancing on Ice, Coronation Street and Emmerdale, but

Ofcom plans to regulate only the programmes made specifically for the

under-nines. It claims that tougher rules would cost the industry too

much. To sustain the share values of the commercial broadcasters, Ofcom

is prepared to sacrifice the physical and psychological wellbeing of our

children.

 

At the European level, the collusion is even more obvious. Last week,

Viviane Reding, the European media commissioner, spoke to a group of

broadcasters about her plans to allow product placement in European TV

programmes (this means that the advertisers would be allowed to promote

their wares during, rather than just between, the programmes). She

complained that her proposal had been attacked by the European

parliament. "You have to fight if you want to keep it," she told the TV

executives. "I would like to make it very clear that I need your support

in this."

 

I spent much of last week trying to discover whether the Home Office is

taking the research into the links between diet and crime seriously. In

the past, it has insisted that further studies are needed, while failing

to fund them. First my request was met with incredulity, then I was

stonewalled. Tough on crime. To ###### with the causes of crime.

 

www.monbiot.com <http://www.monbiot.com>

 

*

 

The material in this post is distributed without

profit to those who have expressed a prior interest

in receiving the included information for research

and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html

http://oregon.uoregon.edu/~csundt/documents.htm

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this email

for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain

permission from the copyright owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These are links that the Dear Teresa Binstock provided to the ASD bd.

 

* * * *

 

May 3, 2006

http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/est..._pesticide.html

*

Infant pesticide exposure*

*Organophosphates may be more dangerous to small children than

previously believed.*

 

Some infants may be far more vulnerable to organophosphate pesticides

than previously believed, according to a paper published in

/Pharmacogenetics and Genomics/ (*2006*, /16/, 183-190

<http://www.jpharmacogenetics.com/pt/re/pharmgen/abstract.01213011-200603000-00004.htm;jsessionid=E7uZJj6opqZVKKwd9WrO2r5n0ym9lTtBoZRrAiRDybipQHo16giD%21-1551178825%21-949856144%219001%21-1>).

 

The new study "raises the question of whether current standards for safe

levels of pesticide exposure are sufficiently protective of a vulnerable

population," says Nina Holland, an adjunct professor of environmental

health sciences at the University of California, Berkeley, and coauthor

of the paper.

 

Current U.S. EPA standards require an extra 10-fold safety factor to

protect children

<http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/kidpesticide.htm> compared

with adults. But the new study shows that some newborns may be 65 to 130

times more sensitive to these pesticides than some adults, a level of

susceptibility 26 to 50 times higher than previously believed.

 

Of the 130 Latina women who participated in the study with their

newborns, more than 40% worked in agriculture during their pregnancies.

The Berkeley researchers measured levels of paraoxonase 1, an enzyme

that breaks down the toxic metabolites of organophosphates, as a marker

for pesticide susceptibility.

 

*

 

Body Burden Case Study: *Organochlorine Pesticides*

<http://www.chemicalbodyburden.org/cs_organochl.htm>

 

Chemical body burden is the build-up of synthetic chemicals and heavy

metals in our bodies, which can have negative health effects as

discussed in this web *...*

www.chemicalbodyburden.org/cs_organochl.htm - 20k -

<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&hs=of1&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=related:www.chemicalbodyburden.org/cs_organochl.htm>

 

 

 

*ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES*

<http://www.scorecard.org/about/txt/organochlorine_pesticides.html>

*Organochlorine pesticides* are man-made organic chemicals. *...* Many

*organochlorine* *pesticides* are extremely persistent in the

environment and in people's *...*

www.scorecard.org/about/txt/*organochlorine*_*pesticides*.html - 19k -

<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&hs=of1&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=related:www.scorecard.org/about/txt/organochlorine_pesticides.html>

 

 

 

*ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES*

<http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=EDF-175>

 

Chemical Profile for *ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES* (CAS Number:

EDF-175). Human Health Hazards; Hazard Rankings; Chemical Use

Profile *...*

www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=EDF-175

- 25k -

<http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&hs=of1&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&q=related:www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl%3Fedf_substance_id%3DEDF-175>

 

 

*

[PDF]* CDC's Third National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental

*...*

<http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/pdf/factsheet_organochlorine.pdf>

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat -

*Organochlorine pesticides* were introduced in the 1940s and persist in

the *...* *Organochlorine pesticides* can produce reproductive and

neurologic effects in *...*

www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/pdf/factsheet_*organochlorine*.pdf -

 

*

[PDF]* A Closer Look at *Organochlorine Pesticides*

<http://www.akaction.org/fact_sheets/Organochlorine_Pesticide_Fact_Sheet.pdf>

 

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat -

*Organochlorine pesticides* are insecticides composed. primarily of

carbon, hydrogen, and chlorine *...* Infants are also exposed when

*organochlorine pesticides* *...*

www.akaction.org/fact_sheets/Organochlorine_Pesticide_Fact_Sheet.pdf -

 

 

 

Chemical fact sheet: *Organochlorine* - The Breast Cancer Fund

<http://www.breastcancerfund.org/site/pp.asp?c=kwKXLdPaE&b=84567> The

Breast Cancer Fund's fact sheet on *organochlorine pesticides*. The

Breast Cancer Fund is the only national non-profit organization whose

sole focus is to *...*

www.breastcancerfund.org/site/pp.asp?c=kwKXLdPaE&b=84567 - 33k -

 

 

Environmental Health Perspectives: Acceleration of autoimmunity by *...*

<http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CYP/is_3_113/ai_n13559721>

Acceleration of autoimmunity by *organochlorine pesticides* in [F.sub.1]

mice *...* Three *organochlorine pesticides* with estrogenic effects

were administered *...*

www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0CYP/is_3_113/ai_n13559721 - 25k

 

*

 

The material in this post is distributed without

profit to those who have expressed a prior interest

in receiving the included information for research

and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html

http://oregon.uoregon.edu/~csundt/documents.htm

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this email

for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain

permission from the copyright owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Doctors Against Research?

By David Kirby on the Huffington Post blog.

 

http://tinyurl.com/j3qum

 

Here's the bad news: If you are a pregnant woman reading this, there

is a 1-in-166 chance that your child will develop autism, according

to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. If it's a boy, the

odds are about 1-in-80; twin boys, half that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13140004/

 

 

Mercury study could affect Duke plants

 

By John Downey

Charlotte Business Journal

Updated: 7:00 p.m. CT June 4, 2006

 

A federal researcher's unpublished study lurks at the center of a dispute between the state Environmental Management Commission and its critics over reducing mercury emissions from North Carolina's coal-fired power plants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.jaapa.com/issues/j20060501/arti.../letter0506.htm

 

 

More debate about vaccines and autism

 

To the Editor:

 

On behalf of SafeMinds, the largest non-profit organization supporting

research into mercury and neurological outcomes, we applaud the authors

of "Vaccines, thimerosol, and neurodevelopmental outcomes" (CSAC Special

Report, /JAAPA, /January 2006, page 16) for investigating

thimerosal-containing vaccines (TCVs). We agree that, "inaccurate

information has been promulgated to the general population and

clinicians alike." Unfortunately, the article contains errors which are

addressed in this correspondence and have been grouped into the

following categories: effectiveness and safety, comparative toxicity,

exposure guidelines, past and current exposures, and Institute of

Medicine (IOM) concerns. (Our original unabridged response with full

citations is available at www.safeminds.org <http://www.safeminds.org>.)

 

*Thimerosal Effectiveness and Safety.* The authors erroneously stated,

"thimerosal kills bacteria and effectively prevents bacterial

contamination" and "before thimerosal was introduced as a vaccine

preservative, data were available providing evidence that it is both

safe and effective." A 1975 FDA panel reviewed evidence dating back to

1928 and issued reports in 1980 and 1982 concluding, "thimerosal was no

better than water in protecting mice from potential fatal streptococcal

infections."^1 In 1948, it was found to be ineffective as a

"disinfectant, germicide and antiseptic."^2 In 1981, its use in TCVs

resulted in clusters of Group A streptococcus infections.^3 In 2004,

Chiron, the manufacturer of Fluvirin, a TCV, was forced to close one of

its plants because it was contaminated with Serratia marcescens.^4

Moreover, because "no clinical studies were found that formally

evaluated the safety of thimerosal prior to its initial marketing", the

FDA nominated thimerosal for evaluation by the National Toxicology

Program.^5 Demonstrating FDA concerns regarding a lack of safety data, a

1935 study found that thimerosal was "35.3 times more toxic for

embryonic chick heart tissue than for Staphylococcus aureus".^6

 

*Comparative Toxicities.* The authors also err in stating, "data

indicate that methylmercury is more toxic than ethylmercury." Only one

relevant side-by-side comparison of ethyl and methylmercury exists and

ethylmercury was found to be more harmful. The 2005 NIH-funded study

compared brain mercury levels in infant primates exposed to equal parts

of: 1) injected thimerosal and 2) ingested methylmercury.^7 The

thimerosal metabolite, ethylmercury, rapidly converted to inorganic

mercury (the toxic form). Ethylmercury-exposed primate brains contained

twice as much inorganic mercury compared to methylmercury-exposed

primates. Microgliosis and neuroinflammation was observed in primate

brain tissue^8 and in tissue of autistic brains.^9 Additionally,

thimerosal has more potent immune-altering properties than

methylmercury.^10

 

*Mercury Exposure Guidelines.* The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

guideline does not "recommend that no more than of 0.1 mcg/kg of

methylmercury be injected daily in special population groups including

neonates, infants, children, and pregnant women." The EPA guideline

suggests that, on average, it is probably safe for an adult to ingest up

to 0.1 mcg/kg/day of methylmercury in food. The 10-fold safety factor in

the guideline is because of uncertainty in the assumptions about

inter-individual variability and fetal brain sensitivity.^11 A few large

bolus exposures administered to infants has a different physiological

effect than many small doses administered daily. Intermittent large

exposures of mercury, a cumulative neurotoxin, are more likely to put

children at risk for deficits in language, attention, and memory.^12

There are no guidelines issued by any entity that identify a safe bolus

dose of mercury by any route of administration for a fetus, neonate,

infant or child.

 

*Past and Current Mercury Exposures.* At least two studies documented

blood mercury levels in infants following administration of TCVs that

exceed the CDC adult toxic exposure limits of >10mcg/L (50 nmol/L).^13 A

mercury blood level of 20.55 nmol/L was observed five days after a 37.5

mcg exposure from two TCVs.^14 Another study observed a level of 23.6

mcg/L after a 12.5 mcg exposure from one TCV.^15 Infants may have

routinely experienced peak blood mercury levels of 48.3 nmol/L;^16 well

above the presumed safety threshold of 29.0 nmol/L. Throughout 1990's

and beyond, most infants had 62.5 mcg exposures from three TCVs at the

two-month visit.

 

Depending on the manufacturer, the influenza TCV given to infants and

pregnant women contains either 2,000 or 50,000 parts per billion (ppb)

of mercury. EPA requires liquid waste exceeding 250 ppb to be sent to a

special hazardous waste landfill. Drinking water cannot exceed 2 ppb.

 

*Institute of Medicine.* In 2001, the IOM concluded that the evidence

was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between

thimerosal exposure from childhood vaccines and neurodevelopmental

disorders and found the hypothesis to be biologically plausible. It also

recommended using thimerosal-free vaccines.^17

 

In 2004, the IOM panel focused solely on autism, leaving the 2001

conclusions on neurodevelopmental effects intact. The 2004 autism review

ignored pre-publication data from clinical studies and instead relied on

published epidemiological studies; in particular, the Hviid Demark

study.^18 Many methodological flaws have been cited in that Denmark and

the U.S. had different vaccine schedules and thimerosal exposure levels,

and many children in one age cohort were "lost" between observation

periods impairing use of trend analysis techniques and introducing

bias.^19 The study also claimed that Danish autism rates increased after

TCVs were discontinued in 1992 but simultaneously, official autism

counts shifted from only including hospital cases to also including

outpatient cases. The authors conceded that the association may be

spurious. A study of this caliber is unsuited for formulating national

public health policy or sufficient to exonerate a potent neurotoxin.

 

Much of the rest of the developed world has discontinued use of TCVs.

Russia banned it 20 years ago and now, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Austria,

Netherlands, Japan and the United Kingdom have followed suit. Earlier

this year, the European Parliament passed a resolution calling for an

investigation of the health impact of ethylmercury in vaccines "with a

view to restriction of such use and a total ban." In the U.S., a 1999

Joint Statement issued by leading health organizations stated,

"thimerosal-containing vaccines should be removed as soon as possible."

Seven years later, thimerosal is still in U.S. vaccines and with the new

influenza recommendations, the cumulative dose per body weight to the

fetus and to children is approaching maximum 1990's exposure levels.

 

SafeMinds seeks to end the adverse health effects caused by the

unnecessary use of mercury in medicines. Failure to discontinue

prescribing TCVs to infants and pregnant women here and in the

developing world exposes the most vulnerable among us to needless risk

for neurological damage. We encourage the AAPA to communicate new

scientific findings on behalf of its members and their patients.

 

Respectfully,

 

Vicky Debold, RN, PhD

SafeMinds

Research Committee

 

Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN

President

SafeMinds

 

*REFERENCES*

 

1. Engley FB. Evaluation of mercurial compounds as antiseptics. /Annals

of the New York Academy of Sciences./ 1950;53:197-206.

2. Morton HE, North LL, and Engley FB. The bacteriostatic and

bactericidal actions of some mercurial compounds on hemolytic

streptococci. /JAMA./ 1948;136(1):37-41.

3. Bernier RH, Frank JA Jr., Nolan TF Jr. (1981). Abscesses complicating

DPT vaccination. /American Journal of Diseases of Children./ 135:826-828.

4. Smith S. Safety fears cut vaccine for flu. Priority urged for the

aged, frail. /Boston Globe./ (October 6, 2004). Available at:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_sc...for_flu?mode=PF

. Accessed February 2, 2006.

5. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Biologics Evaluation.

Thimerosal [54-64-8] Nomination to the National Toxicology Program.

Review of the Literature. (April 2001). Available at

http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/Chem_B.../Thimerosal.pdf

. Accessed February 2, 2006.

6. Salle AJ and Lazarus AS. A comparison of the resistance of bacteria

and embryonic tissue to germicidal substances. I. Merthiolate.

/Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine./

1935;32:665-667.

7. Burbacher TM, Shen DD, Liberato N, et al. Comparison of blood and

brain mercury levels I infant monkeys exposed to methylmercury or

vaccines containing thimerosal. /Environmental Health Perspectives./

2005;113(8):1015-1021.

8. Charleston J, Body R, Bolerder R, et al. Changes in the number of

astrocytes and microglia in the thalamus of the monkey Macaca

Fascicularis following long-term subclinical methylmercury exposure.

/Neurotoxicology./ 1996;17:127-138.

9. Vargas DL, Nascimbene C, Krishnan C, et al. Neuroglial activation and

neuroinflammation in the brain of patients with autism. /Annals of

Neurology./ 2005;57(1):67-81.

10. Havarinasab S, Haggqvist B, Bjorn B, et al. 2005. Immunosuppressive

and autoimmune effects of thimerosal in mice. /Toxicol Appl Pharmacol./

204:109-121.

11. National Academy of Sciences. (2000). Toxicological Effects of

Methylmercury. Committee on the Toxicological Effects of Mercury,

National Research Council, National Academy Press: Washington, DC.

12. Grandjean P, Weihe P, White RF, et al. Cognitive performance of

children prenatally exposed to "safe" levels of methylmercury.

/Environmental Research./ 1998;77(2):165-172.

13. Belson MG, Schier JG and Patel MM. Case definitions for chemical

poisoning. /MMWR./ 2005;54(RR-1):1-25.

14. Pichichero ME, Cernichiari E, Lopreiato J, et al. Mercury

concentrations and metabolism in infants receiving vaccines containing

thimerosal: a descriptive study. /Lancet./ 2002;360:1737-41.

15. Stajich GV, Lopez GP, Harry SW, et al. Iatrogenic exposure to

mercury after Hepatitis B vaccination in preterm infants. /J

Pediatrics./ 2000;135(5):679-81.

16. Halsey N, Goldman L. Mercury in infants given vaccines containing

thimerosal. Correspondence. /Lancet./ 2003;361(9358):698-699.

17. Immunization Safety Review Committee. Immunization Safety Review:

Vaccines and Autism. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences; 2001.

18. Hviid A, Stellfeld M, Wohlfahrt J, et al. Association between

thimerosal-containing vaccine and autism. /JAMA./ 2003;290(13):1763-1766.

19. Bernard S. Analysis of the Danish Autism Registry database in

response to Hviid et al. paper on thimerosal in /JAMA./ (October, 2003).

Available at

http://www.safeminds.org/research/docs/Hvi...ndsAnalysis.pdf

Accessed February 2, 2006.

 

 

/*

The authors respond:*/

 

We appreciate Dr. Debold and Ms. Redwood taking the time to respond to

our article on "Vaccines, thimerosol, and neurodevelopmental

outcomes."^1 SafeMinds has been on the vanguard in educating the public

on what SafeMinds believe to be the unsafe use of mercury-based

preservatives in childhood vaccinations. We appreciate and share

SafeMinds' interest in protecting children from disease and harm.

However, we disagree with their assessment that thimerosal and its

metabolite, ethylmercury, are the causative agents in autism spectrum

disorders (ASD). Although we value Debold's and Redwood's thoughtful

response to our article we do not find their arguments compelling. We

support the findings of Hviid et al,^2 the Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention, and the Institute of Medicine. These and other

compelling data find the harms attributed to thimerosal to be unproven.

While Debold and Redwood extensively critique the studies used by the

IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee for its 2001 and 2004

reports,^3,4 the studies used to support SafeMinds' position appear less

rigorous and less methodologically sound. We find it much more likely

that other yet unidentified genetic or environmental insults, along with

better surveillance and recognition of ASDs, are behind the increasing

prevalence of autism. We are most compelled by the fact that

vaccinations are very effective at preventing several debilitating and

life-threatening childhood diseases. On balance, we believe the proven

benefits of vaccinations for our children far outweigh the risks.

Despite the unproven risks associated with thimerosal, we support the

joint statement of June 2000 by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the

American Academy of Family Physicians, the Advisory Committee on

Immunization Practices, and the Public Health Service encouraging the

removal of thimerosal from vaccines.^5 Ultimately, it is parents'

responsibility to discuss their child's immunizations with their health

care provider, and physician assistants should be fully prepared to

address any concerns parents might have about vaccine safety.

 

*REFERENCES*

 

1. Herman L, Gerbert D, Larson L, et al. CSAC Special Report. Vaccines,

thimerosal, and neurodevelopmental outcomes. /JAAPA/. 2006;19(1):16,18-19.

2. Hviid A, Stellfeld M, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M. Association between

thimerosal-containing vaccine and autism. /JAMA./ 2003;290(13):1763-1766.

3. Immunization Safety Review Committee, Board on Health Promotion and

Disease Prevention. /Immunization Safety Review: Thimerosal-Containing

Vaccines and Neurodevelopmental Disorders. /Stratton K, Gable A,

McCormick M, eds. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2001.

4. Immunization Safety Review Committee, Board on Health Promotion and

Disease Prevention. /Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism./

Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004.

5. Joint statement concerning removal of thimerosal from vaccines. The

AmericanAcademy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics,

Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and United States Public

Health Service. Approved June 22, 2000.

 

*

 

The material in this post is distributed without

profit to those who have expressed a prior interest

in receiving the included information for research

and educational purposes. For more information go to:

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html

http://oregon.uoregon.edu/~csundt/documents.htm

If you wish to use copyrighted material from this email

for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain

permission from the copyright owner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-...0,1845578.story

 

Wonder pill. Really.

As D's benefits become clearer, we're urged to get more -- much more -- of it.

By Chris Woolston, Special to The Times

June 12, 2006

 

 

EVEN the most brazen snake-oil salesman might blush at trying to sell the public on a pill to ease aches and pains, strengthen bones, slow down cancer and prevent diseases as varied as Type 1 diabetes, multiple sclerosis and schizophrenia.

 

But these claims aren't the frothy hyperbole of a sideshow huckster. A growing number of serious scientists are quite willing to speculate that a single compound may be able to accomplish all of these feats — and possibly more. They're not talking about a new miracle drug, but a common nutrient: vitamin D, "the sunshine vitamin."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...