Just What Did That Thimerosal-Autism Study Say, Anyway?
I was rightly chided a couple of weeks ago by a commenter for believing the headlines of medical news reports. The subject of the post in question was how honey compared to over-the-counter cough syrup in providing relief. What the research actually says is that there's no significant difference between honey and cough syrup in relieving coughs. What the headlines all said was that honey is better than cough syrup, and that's what I went with, too.
And you know what? If honey works as well as the bottle of chemicals I have to drive to the drug store and pay ten dollars for, I'm not that uncomfortable with saying it is better. But it's also true, as the commenter pointed out, that that's not an accurate depiction of the study's conclusion.
I've been thinking about that when looking at all the headlines about a recent study out of California regarding the thimerosal in vaccines. Here are some I've seen: "Mercury-vaccine link to autism disproven: study" (Reuters); "Thimerosal Does Not Cause Autism" (Slashdot); "Vaccines pose no risk for autism, research shows" (San Jose Mercury News); "Study Finds Vaccine Preservative Is Not Linked to Risks of Autism" (NY Times); "Research Reaffirms: No Vaccine-Autism Link" (ABC News).
These headlines make it sound as though this study definitively proved that thimerosal, and maybe vaccines entirely, flatly do not cause autism. But did it? You can look at the study on the site of the Archives of General Psychiatry and judge for yourself. I'll quote the conclusion from the abstract here, though:
"The DDS data do not show any recent decrease in autism in California despite the exclusion of more than trace levels of thimerosal from nearly all childhood vaccines. The DDS data do not support the hypothesis that exposure to thimerosal during childhood is a primary cause of autism."
I don't know about you, but far from being a definitive statement and a flat denial of connections, this conclusion leaves me with lots of questions, including:
- Is "not supporting" a hypothesis the same as disproving it?
- Does disproving a thimerosal connection also disprove a vaccine connection? Isn't there other stuff in vaccines that has been thought to cause autism?
- When multiple vaccinations with trace levels of thimerosal are given at the same time or in close sequence, does it ever add up to a significant level?
- If thimerosal is not a "primary" cause, could it still be a factor? Could it be a primary cause for some children but not most?
Those seem like important questions to me, but maybe not as important as this one: Is it possible to have a conversation about vaccines anymore that isn't reduced to black and white? It seems impossible to challenge vaccines at all without being branded an "anti-vaccine crazy," but I think there are legitimate concerns over the number of vaccines children get, the schedule on which they get them, and the possibility that some children may have reactions to something in the vaccines that causes neurological chaos.
That doesn't mean you have to ban all vaccines. But you don't have to ban all conversation and concern, either. The question of autism and vaccines doesn't have to be all or nothing, but that seems to be the only way it ever gets discussed. It's the way headlines get written, anyway. And the consequences are a lot greater than a face-off between honey and cough syrup.
What do you think of the latest research? Did it convince you of anything? Share your thoughts in the comments.
Photo: Mike Simons/Getty Images
What do I think of the latest research? It’s pure crap. Did it convince you of aanything? Yes, there really IS a conspiracy to keep Americans ill from cradle to grave.
Here is my take on the headlines and the blatherheads that midlessly repeat the headlines they read without ever actually reading the study, itself…
Did ANYBODY actually READ this study?
The study period was, actually, BEFORE California mandated the PARTIAL removal of mercury from vaccines administered to pregnant women and babies under 3 years old.
“In addition to analyzing the prevalence of autism by birth year, the researchers also examined the rate among children age 3 to 5 based on quarterly reports issued by the Department of Developmental Services. Prevalence increased each quarter from January 1995 (0.6 per 1,000 live births) through March 2007 (4.1 per 1,000 live births), including after 2004, when the researchers estimate that exposure to thimerosal during infancy and early childhood declined. Over the same time period, the rate of all developmental disabilities increased but at a slower rate, from 5.4 to 9.5 per 1,000 live births”
The period January 1995 – March 2007, including only children 3 – 5 years old.
Since California implemented its law in July of 2006, NONE of the children considered in this study actually are known to have received low mercury vaccines! The oldest child post-California law change was only 8 months old!!!
This study is a farce. The researchers never even validated mercury exposure for this study “researchers ESTIMATE that exposure to thimerosal during infancy and early childhood declined.” THIS is SCIENCE?! Give me a break.
California’s children (3 and under) are still likely to receive about 10 mcg of mercury through their vaccines by the time the reach one year of age, and get to share another 20 mcg with their RH- mothers. California children over age 3 still get full-mercury shots. It is very difficult to study the effects of a poison with any real results, until you have a control group that is entirely free of exposure.
Even so, if you believe simply removing the mercury will suddenly make vaccines “safe,” you must not have considered some of the many other toxins and common ellergens being injected into our kids: aluminum (another neurotoxin), ammonia, dyes, formaldehyde, lactose, msg, egg, phenol, polysorbate, urea, acetate, yeast, soy, and tissue from monkeys, mice, chicken, human, and cows.
Our world is already toxic enough, why mainline poison?
It is really disturbing for me to see the headlines claiming that this study proves there is no link between vaccines and autism. In fact, the research is on mercury and autism – and it doesn’t even do a good job at disproving the connection there.
While there may be significant health issues caused by mercury injections – The vaccine itself could be the trigger; vaccines are designed to elicit an immunological response with the adjuvant and antigens – maybe these adjuvants (including aluminum) are causing the increases in autism and autoimmune diseases that we are seeing in the last 20 years. We need to put resources into researching if it is in fact the vaccines and creating safer vaccine schedules – Thimerosol is a red herring.
No, what disturbs ME is that people continue to be suspicious of scientific research and believe their little conspiracy theories despite the fact that there are NO studies that support them. And yes, if studies do not support a hypothesis, then you should not believe it until proven otherwise. THAT is science. The burden of proof is on the people who claim there is a CLEAR link between autism and vaccination.
Speaking as a person with Asperger’s Syndrome (a condition on the autistic spectrum), the last two comments offend the hell out of me. To use the suffering of people like myself to advance your own agenda. Leave me out of it.
I can understand why you want to think this is the case, though. Illness and mental conditions can cause a lot of suffering, and to be told that doctors don’t really have that clear an idea of how the brain works or how autism happens isn’t exactly comforting. It feels much better, in a perverse sort of way, to believe that there is a clear cause of it, and to lay blame at the feet of the government or the health care system. People like explanations for things, and the fact that science as of yet has not been able to deliver one makes them suspicious. So they make up their own. As fallacious and disingenuous as it is, it’s perfectly natural to feel this way.
That doesn’t stop it from pissing me off, though.
There is no safe level of mercury. It is the most toxic element in the universe next to plutonium. So yeah lets inject our most fragile suspects our children. The sad part of this is that the ones that are set up to protect our children are totally aware of the dangers and have been. They say tell a big enough lie and the people will believe you. Research done by experts in the field have more than proven the link but so you don’t go around telling the world how offended you are open your eyes unless your part of the scam too that wants to have us viewed as people that use rabbits foot and eye of newt. See for yourself http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2005/06/16/thimerosal/index.html
Canada removed thimerosal from it’s vaccines almost 10 years ago and has no measurable difference in autism rates from the US. Wake up people, that’s not what’s causing it. People want something to blame and will grasp at any crackpot theories. Might as well say that it was aliens who gave me cancer. “You can’t prove it’s not!”
Thimerosal has never been “removed from vaccines.” It’s 49.6% ethylmercury by weight, and is still used in vaccine production.
For most vaccines Thimerosal chemically removed before shipping. However U-Kentucky chemistry professor Boyd Haley, PhD has stated that Thimerosal can bind to the vaccine’s antigen. Read his IOM presentation here: http://www.iom.edu/?id=7536
And in 2007-08 at least 94% of injected influenza vaccines contained 25 micrograms of ethylmercury, or 50,000 parts per billion. The EPA limit for ingested water is 4 ppb. Studies from UC-Davis show that at 1-40 ppb Thimerosal can damage dendrites and interfere with calcium channels, thus damaging immune systems.
The CDC has withheld and reworked data showing that autism rates increased along with higher levels of Thimerosal exposure. Read an analysis by the advocacy group Safeminds:
http://www.safeminds.org/Generation%20Zero%20Pres.pdf
Also read “What Did The CDC Know And When Did They Know It?” by Mark Blaxill for the Age of Autism blog.
http://www.ageofautism.com/2007/12/what-did-the-cd.html
Regarding mercury and vaccines, the jury is not out — the Special Masters have not rendered their legal decision yet. Read the expert testimony for the U.S. Court of Federal Claims Vaccine Program/Office of Special Masters’ Omnibus Autism Proceeding.
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/omnibus-autism-proceeding
Ethylmercury is not the same as methylmercury. The EPA limit is on the former, not the latter.
Your links to a bunch of conspiracy sites is hardly convincing.
But here is something that people don’t seem to grasp. Even if vaccines did cause autism, they would still be worth it for the lives they save. Alive with autism is better than many orders of magnitude of people dead.
I wonder if Ms. Mauro believes that everyone who is acquitted in a criminal trial is probably guilty because the jury only rules that they are “not guilty” rather than “innocent”.
* Is “not supporting” a hypothesis the same as disproving it?
Yes. When one examines a claim and finds no supporting evidence, one discards the claim.
* Does disproving a thimerosal connection also disprove a vaccine connection? Isn’t there other stuff in vaccines that has been thought to cause autism?
Those have been dealt with in other studies.
* When multiple vaccinations with trace levels of thimerosal are given at the same time or in close sequence, does it ever add up to a significant level?
No. “Up to trace levels” means “less than we can detect”.
* If thimerosal is not a “primary” cause, could it still be a factor? Could it be a primary cause for some children but not most?
The point of this research is that thimerosal had no statistically significant causal effect on population autism rates. It still might affect some people, but not enough to alter population characteristics.
I think this debate will go on forever… there will always be naysayers. I for one am not convinced that there is a link between Autism and thimersoal, but ultimately it does not matter, my son has Autism and I have to deal with that. The why? question is interesting but doesn’t help me or him cope with daily life.