Final Answer: Mercury does not induce autism.

Page 1 of 1 [ 15 posts ] 

Helsinger
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 11 Sep 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 77

26 Sep 2007, 9:09 pm

http://health.msn.com/pregnancykids/kid ... &GT1=10412

Quote:
WEDNESDAY, Sept. 26 (HealthDay News) -- The latest study on thimerosal, a preservative used in childhood immunizations, should provide parents with reassurance that exposure to the agent will not cause neuropsychological problems later on, experts say.

"We found no consistent pattern between increasing mercury exposure from birth to seven months and performance on neuropsychological tests," concluded the study's authors in the Sept. 27 New England Journal of Medicine.

Widely used before 2000, thimerosal has been the center of controversy for some years now. Some parents of autistic children believe that the mercury contained in the preservative is responsible for their children's autism.

However, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) maintains there is no scientific evidence of such an association. And this latest CDC study did not specifically look at links between thimerosal exposure and autism. According to the study authors, a separate CDC case-control study focused on autism and mercury exposure, is currently under way.

In 1999, the U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA) concluded that children who were vaccinated according to the recommended childhood immunization schedule could be exposed to levels of mercury from the thimerosal contained in those vaccines that were higher than the maximum levels considered safe by the FDA.

In response, the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) asked vaccine manufacturers to remove thimerosal from vaccines. That move, not surprisingly, concerned many parents who wondered if the preservative was being removed because it was harmful.

In an effort to allay some of those fears, the current CDC study looked at more than 1,000 children between the ages of 7 and 10. They compared the youngsters' neuropsychological functioning with their level of thimerosal exposure.

Using information from a three-hour neuropsychological assessment or information provided by parents and teachers, the researchers measured 42 neuropsychological outcomes, including speech, language, verbal memory, fine motor coordination, achievement, behavior regulation, tics and general intellect.

They then compared those findings to levels of thimerosal exposure, based on the child's vaccination exposure prenatally, in the first month of life, and in the first seven months of life.

"Our study does not support a causal association between early exposure to mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines and immune globulins and deficits in neuropsychological functioning at the age of 7 to 10 years," concluded the study's authors.

That conclusion, however, seems to contradict some of the study's findings.



Plutonian_Persona
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 348
Location: Somewhere In The Kuiper Belt

26 Sep 2007, 9:19 pm

I hate health studies because they almost always contradict each other. For all we know, in another 6-8 months they'll be another study that says mercury does induce autism in some people.



siuan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Aug 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,270

26 Sep 2007, 9:20 pm

I think more research needs to be done.


_________________
They tell me I think too much. I tell them they don't think enough.


LostInSpace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,617
Location: Dixie

26 Sep 2007, 9:24 pm

Plutonian_Persona wrote:
I hate health studies because they almost always contradict each other. For all we know, in another 6-8 months they'll be another study that says mercury does induce autism in some people.


Possible, however there have been studies for years saying that there is not a link. The ones saying there is tend to have highly suspect methodologies and be financed by special interest groups. Also, if mercury causes autism, why hasn't the autism rate dropped since removing it from vaccines, which was done around 2001 or so?



LostInSpace
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,617
Location: Dixie

26 Sep 2007, 9:25 pm

siuan wrote:
I think more research needs to be done.


Agreed.



alex
Developer
Developer

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,216
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

26 Sep 2007, 9:54 pm

Plutonian_Persona wrote:
I hate health studies because they almost always contradict each other. For all we know, in another 6-8 months they'll be another study that says mercury does induce autism in some people.


That's not how it works. The media usually misunderstands scientists' conclusions and makes it seem that way.


_________________
I'm Alex Plank, the founder of Wrong Planet. Follow me (Alex Plank) on Blue Sky: https://bsky.app/profile/alexplank.bsky.social


AnnabelLee
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 173

27 Sep 2007, 7:58 am

OOOH, this is speaking my language. The genetic causes of autism is one of my "obsessions".

Check out Japanese and English studies. They are way ahead of us.

There is NO causational relationship; it is merely correlational. You cannot change the genes of a child after birth from mere exposure to a chemical. Further, they are basing their fears off of the damage done to the brains of fetuses whose mothers are exposed to EHTYLmercury. The mercury used in thimerosil is Methylmercury, a much weaker chemical relation. In ethylmercury, mild brain damage was suffered. How could a weaker chemical cause a far more significant disability. Also, parents panic because autism seems to 'appear' around the time the child receives their MMR shot. If your child is autistic, he/she was so at birth. It appears then because they begin missing speech and social milestones that are obvious. You cannot expect to diagnose a lack of speech development in a 4 month old.

I think this whole issue is silly. We KNOW it is genetic. I think parents just want someone/something to blame because they cannot cope with the emotions related to said diagnosis.


_________________
"All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream."


serenity
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Feb 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,377
Location: Invisibly here

27 Sep 2007, 8:22 am

AnnabelLee wrote:
OOOH, this is speaking my language. The genetic causes of autism is one of my "obsessions".

Check out Japanese and English studies. They are way ahead of us.

There is NO causational relationship; it is merely correlational. You cannot change the genes of a child after birth from mere exposure to a chemical. Further, they are basing their fears off of the damage done to the brains of fetuses whose mothers are exposed to EHTYLmercury. The mercury used in thimerosil is Methylmercury, a much weaker chemical relation. In ethylmercury, mild brain damage was suffered. How could a weaker chemical cause a far more significant disability. Also, parents panic because autism seems to 'appear' around the time the child receives their MMR shot. If your child is autistic, he/she was so at birth. It appears then because they begin missing speech and social milestones that are obvious. You cannot expect to diagnose a lack of speech development in a 4 month old.

I think this whole issue is silly. We KNOW it is genetic. I think parents just want someone/something to blame because they cannot cope with the emotions related to said diagnosis.


AMEN!
Couldn't have said it better myself.



ToadOfSteel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,157
Location: New Jersey

27 Sep 2007, 8:23 am

AnnabelLee wrote:
I think this whole issue is silly. We KNOW it is genetic. I think parents just want someone/something to blame because they cannot cope with the emotions related to said diagnosis.

QFT. I've been saying something akin to that (although slightly more expletive-laced) for some years now. It's all part of parents wanting their "perfect baby". It's all based on this NT concept that babies are these "perfect little cute things" that everyone has to play with. A few months ago, one of my cousins had a daughter. When they brought the baby over, they made everyone hold it. When it came to me, I'm like "What do I do with it", as if everyone was expecting me to *just know* what to do. What child doesn't get annoyed at all these old people (I use the term "old" loosely in this context, 99% of the world is older than the child at this point) when they come and start tweaking the child's face? I know that I, for one, got pissed at it.

Anyway, I digress. My point is, people have this concept of "babies are perfect" that is pure and utter BS. When their "perfect" baby shows signs of "defect", they look for any excuse to absolve them of any problem. Here I submit that the problem lies not with the parents, or the baby. Instead it lies with the culture that expects this "baby perfection" out of everyone...

EDIT: In retrospect, I may have been a bit too harsh. Yes, there are economic considerations too. However, given that the average incidence of autism in the general population is >1:1000 now, by the time the autistic person reaches adulthood, there should be a myriad of inexpensive support systems available. People like my brother (a full non-verbal autie) are the ones who are screwed, because 17 years ago, the diagnosis was less than 1:10,000, and systems are only starting to be set up. Last month, we had to take my brother in for a non-driver ID (at Motor Vehicle for some reason), since he's turning 18 in january 2008, and the manager said that autism and ID was one of the issues that was going to have to be resolved in "the next few years")



monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

27 Sep 2007, 9:02 am

AnnabelLee wrote:
There is NO causational relationship; it is merely correlational. You cannot change the genes of a child after birth from mere exposure to a chemical.

I think this whole issue is silly. We KNOW it is genetic. I think parents just want someone/something to blame because they cannot cope with the emotions related to said diagnosis.


Actually, while you cannot change the constitution of the genes of an individual, you can in many cases change their expression. Genes switch on and off in response to changes in diet, daylength, or exposure to disease or toxin.

We know that there is a genetic component. That is not the same thing as saying that AS is a deterministic genetic disorder. People can inherit a gene that puts them at risk for cancers, heart disease, psoriasis, or other diseases. It does not mean that these diseases are purely genetic.

And one of the leading theories about the cause of ASD is fetal exposure to testosterone and other hormones during gestation. This (hypothetical) primary cause is not genetic; while some women might have high testosterone levels because of genetics, they can also fluctuate for other reasons.



mmaestro
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Aug 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 522
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA

27 Sep 2007, 9:38 am

siuan wrote:
I think more research needs to be done.

How much more research do you think needs done, then? Keep going 'til the results match what you think they are? It doesn't work that way. If you're waiting for studies to show there's a correlation, you may be waiting a long time. Forever, perhaps.


_________________
"You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd"
-Captain Sheridan, Babylon 5

Music of the Moment: Radiohead - In Rainbows


Wolfpup
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,409
Location: Central Illinois, USA

27 Sep 2007, 1:56 pm

I think we can all probably agree that regardless of whether mercury can trigger autism, or push people "further down" the spectrum or whatever (I'd presume people that are already susceptible)....where was I... :D

okay, I think we can all agree being INJECTED with mercury probably isn't real smart regardless of it's correlation with autism.



Sedaka
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind

27 Sep 2007, 2:09 pm

SURPISE! SURPRISE!

THERE ARE NO EASY ANSWERS!


actually, im not the least bit surprised.... pretty lame scapegoat imho


_________________
Neuroscience PhD student

got free science papers?

www.pubmed.gov
www.sciencedirect.com
http://highwire.stanford.edu/lists/freeart.dtl


Sedaka
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 4,597
Location: In the recesses of my mind

27 Sep 2007, 2:10 pm

mmaestro wrote:
siuan wrote:
I think more research needs to be done.

How much more research do you think needs done, then? Keep going 'til the results match what you think they are? It doesn't work that way. If you're waiting for studies to show there's a correlation, you may be waiting a long time. Forever, perhaps.


or.... you can just get G Bush's non-global warming scientists to start working on it ASAP!

im sure they'll find it's a combinaiton of mercury and a pagan upraising too!

eidt: this post sounds extra anti-bush, considering my quotes atm.......... i dont have an agenda... i just think he's stupid, like this theory.... lol


_________________
Neuroscience PhD student

got free science papers?

www.pubmed.gov
www.sciencedirect.com
http://highwire.stanford.edu/lists/freeart.dtl


Plutonian_Persona
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 348
Location: Somewhere In The Kuiper Belt

27 Sep 2007, 2:42 pm

alex wrote:
Plutonian_Persona wrote:
I hate health studies because they almost always contradict each other. For all we know, in another 6-8 months they'll be another study that says mercury does induce autism in some people.


That's not how it works. The media usually misunderstands scientists' conclusions and makes it seem that way.


That's a very good point Alex and one that I often forget. :oops: My mom and fiancee are both nurses and most of the time they cannot stand the way that the media twists medical findings to suit their needs (i.e. higher viewership). Thanks for the friendly reminder!