_____________________
Many attribute the increase in the rate of ASDs to children's being exposed to significant quantities of thimerosal, a mercury-based compound that has been used since the 1930s as a preservative in certain vaccines and pharmaceutical products to prevent bacterial and fungal contamination.What Chuck bases this on is information he obtained from two websites, The National Autism Association (NAA) and the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs (CoMeD). That's as far as his "research" apparently went on this topic.
Chuck, like many others in this camp, seem to be convinced that the spike in Autism cases we saw in the 1990s was the result of the preservative - thimerosal - a mercury-based compound. Here is what Chuck has to say about thimerosal:
Since 2001 in the U.S., no new vaccine licensed by the Food and Drug Administration for use in children has contained thimerosal, except for ones to prevent influenza. Nevertheless, the CDC [Centers for Disease Control] continues to recommend some routine vaccines with "trace amounts of thimerosal" for children younger than 6.A reasonably intelligent person might be wondering why Chuck would find it necessary to tell his reader who posed the question...:
Chuck, I keep hearing conflicting reports that certain vaccines are dangerous and even can cause autism in children. What do you know? – Cheryl M., Charlotte, N.C....about a material that is no longer used.
Here is what the CDC states, according to Chuck:
According to the CDC's website, however, "to date, the studies continue to show that vaccines are not associated with ASDs. ... The most recent and rigorous scientific research does not support the argument that thimerosal-containing vaccines are harmful. ... Is thimerosal in vaccines safe? Yes."So if thimerosal is no longer used and if it is used it is "safe," why is Chuck bringing this issue back up? You will have to ask him on that, all I can do is speculate as to his reasoning.
What I can reasonably speculate on is this: Chuck and his anti-vaccine cohorts do not trust the CDC. Not only that, they don't trust "the nation's bastion of authoritative health advice" - the Institute of Medicine.
They don't trust them, but they do trust those who agree with them. Guys like Dr. Boyd Haley - the one who the NAA attributes the claim that "recent studies have confirmed the association between the use of thimerosal and autism has moved from "biologically plausible" to a "biological certainty." (see previous post)
Let's look at what Chuck says in his C-Force article.
Nevertheless, the CDC [Centers for Disease Control] continues to recommend some routine vaccines with "trace amounts of thimerosal" for children younger than 6.Here is what the FDA - the agency with authority over vaccines - says about thimerosal:
Thimerosal has been removed from or reduced to trace amounts in all vaccines routinely recommended for children 6 years of age and younger, with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine (see Table 1). A preservative-free version of the inactivated influenza vaccine (contains trace amounts of thimerosal) is available in limited supply at this time for use in infants, children and pregnant women. Some vaccines such as Td, which is indicated for older children (≥ 7 years of age) and adults, are also now available in formulations that are free of thimerosal or contain only trace amounts. Vaccines with trace amounts of thimerosal contain 1 microgram or less of mercury per dose.If you are interested in this topic, you should spend time looking at Table 1. Of the 30 different manufactured vaccines on the list, only 5 contain trace amounts of thimerosal, four of those are for Seasonal Trivalent Influenza (for which three manufactures do not use thimerosal) and one is for Tetanus "which is indicated for older children (≥ 7 years of age) and adults."
Had Chuck done his own research he would have been able to accurately report this which would have allowed him to correctly inform his reader that one; vaccines are safe, and two; she and other concerned parents can request thimerosal-free vaccines.
My question is why Chuck, the NAA, and CoMeD continue to present vaccines as a likely culprit for autism? Since January 2003 thimerosal has been out of the vaccines we routinely give children.
There is little current data that I could easily find showing the trend of autism over time. What I did find looks at California and is based on how California schools must report.
 |
| Source |
 |
| Source |
If you look at these graphs you will see an increase in Autism since 2002. The California data is based on "The disability categories and enrollment breakdown in California for individuals (newborn through twenty-two years of age)." One would assume that as time progressed from 2002, more and more children entering into California Schools would have received vaccines without thimerosal. Even factoring in new autism cases in 7 & 8 year olds - who may have received thimerosal - the number of children vaccinated without it would far exceed this group. Even accounting for a lag in time from thimerosal vaccination to diagnosis, there would be a dip in the number of cases around 2007 as five year olds entered the school system who were vaccinated after 2002.
No matter how you look at it, these two graphs show an increase in the number of autism cases after thimerosal was removed. Interesting... So how come Chuck and his fellow anti-vaccine folks still want to tie thimerosal to autism?
You will notice I used two different data sources (albeit they most likely used the same data) to show an increase in autism since 2002. You see, Chuck and company believe that a
Here is what Chuck wrote:
The deliberate avoidance and falsification of medical data to support CDC bias is heinous enough, but the fact that such information is manipulated to practice medicine on our nation's children is monstrous malpractice and even premeditated malevolence. I agree wholeheartedly with Lisa Sykes, president of CoMeD, who summarized the CDC cover-up: "This type of malfeasance should not be tolerated by those who are entrusted with our children's health and well-being."Cover-up? Wow, that's a pretty strong accusation to make. I bet Chuck must have some real powerful evidence to show this. He must have come across a smoking gun that would unequivocally show that the CDC "ignored certain data and misled the medical community and public by insinuating that thimerosal in vaccines does not increase the risk of autism."
Exhibit A "Chuck's smoking gun"
...the Coalition for Mercury-free Drugs exposed a federal cover-up between the CDC and vaccine researchers. Despite the fact that the CDC received an email from CoMeD in 2002 that revealed a causal relationship between the removal of thimerosal from vaccines and a decline in the rate of autism, the CDC encouraged the publication of a study in Pediatrics...
Almost inconceivably, the study in Pediatrics actually purported that autism rates increased after thimerosal was removed.
...one coauthor, from Aarhus University, Denmark, was aware of the omission and alerted CDC officials in a 2002 email, stating, 'Attached I send you the short and long manuscript about Thimerosal and autism in Denmark ... I need to tell you that the figures do not include the latest data from 2001 ... but the incidence and prevalence are still decreasing in 2001.'Exhibit B "The Actual Pediatrics Publication"
Thimerosal and the Occurrence of Autism: Negative Ecological Evidence From Danish Population-Based Data (1) Note: This publication is copyrighted and may not be available online. According to this paper:
The incidence of autism remained fairly constant during the period of use of thimerosal in Denmark, and the rise in incidence beginning in 1991 continued even in the group of children born after the discontinuation of thimerosal.This was shown with the following graph:
Notice that vertical line at year 1992? Here is what the authors conclude:
The discontinuation of thimerosal-containing vaccines in Denmark in 1992 was followed by an increase in the incidence of autism. Our ecological data do not support a correlation between thimerosal-containing vaccines and the incidence of autism.Denmark removed thimerosal from its vaccines in 1992, 10 years before the United States. Notice how the graph shows an increase in autism for all age groups. If thimerosal was the culprit, there would be a downward trend. There wasn't one seen in Denmark and there isn't one seen in the United States after 2002.
Notice, however, that there is a dip in the 5-6 and 7-9 age groups. That dip takes place a full 7 years after the thimerosal was removed.
Cue music....
Enter Exhibit C "The Email"
Chuck went to CoMeD's website and found this:
Documents obtained via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show that CDC officials were aware of Danish data indicating a connection between removing Thimerosal (49.55% mercury) and a decline in autism rates. Despite this knowledge, these officials allowed a 2003 article to be published in Pediatrics that excluded this information, misrepresented the decline as an increase, and led to the mistaken conclusion that Thimerosal in vaccines does not cause autism.And what is this "knowledge" that the CDC officials were aware of:
One coauthor, from Aarhus University, Denmark, was aware of the omission and alerted CDC officials in a 2002 email, stating "Attached I send you the short and long manuscript about Thimerosal and autism in Denmark … I need to tell you that the figures do not include the latest data from 2001 … but the incidence and prevalence are still decreasing in 2001"You can read the email on CoMeD's website. Why is this an issue for CoMeD and Chuck?
Nevertheless, in the final draft version of the publication submitted to Pediatrics, the data from 2001 showing a decline in autism was not mentioned. Ignoring this omission, the CDC continued to endorse the article and, in a December 10, 2002 recommendation letter to the editor of Pediatrics, encouraged expedited review and publication of the article. The misleading Danish article was published by Pediatrics in 2003.I am unsure if any of the the CoMed folks or Chuck bothered to ask the email writer or the authors why that 2001 information was not relevant to the conclusion. It's an interesting bit of data because it begs the question as to what may be causing that decline in 2001. It also begs the question why there is a decline in Denmark but not in California. What it does not do is give any additional information to the paper's conclusion:
The discontinuation of thimerosal-containing vaccines in Denmark in 1992 was followed by an increase in the incidence of autism.A decline in 2001, even one starting in 1999, would have nothing whatsoever to do with the removal of thimerosal. That decline is nine years after removal, so diagnosis of children with Autism would have taken place during that time frame and there would be no connection to thimerosal in children born after 1992. If thimerosal was the culprit, there would be a decrease as less children developed autism. That's not what the graph shows, and including this smoking gun email data does not change that.
But...
Yeah, I know. In 1994 they changed the way autism is diagnosed.
The increase in the incidence of autism from 1990 on may be attributable to more attention being drawn to the syndrome of autism and to a change in the diagnostic criteria from the ICD-8 to the ICD-10 in 1994.
So if more children were diagnosed with autism because of this change, you would still see a decrease over time (5 years) as less children developed autism if thimerosal was a factor. In addition, the data from California shows Autism on the rise after it was removed from united States vaccines.
So what's behind all this? Possibly nothing more than an increase in attention as the author's state. That's not universally shared, however:
A study by researchers at the UC Davis M.I.N.D. Institute has found that the seven- to eight-fold increase in the number children born in California with autism since 1990 cannot be explained by either changes in how the condition is diagnosed or counted — and the trend shows no sign of abating.So what's the cause of this increase? Here is what the UC Davis M.I.N.D. folks think:
Published in the January 2009 issue of the journal Epidemiology, results from the study also suggest that research should shift from genetics to the host of chemicals and infectious microbes in the environment that are likely at the root of changes in the neurodevelopment of California’s children.
“It’s time to start looking for the environmental culprits responsible for the remarkable increase in the rate of autism in California,” said UC Davis M.I.N.D. Institute researcher Irva Hertz-Picciotto, a professor of environmental and occupational health and epidemiology and an internationally respected autism researcher.One "environmental culprit" we can stop looking at? Thimerosal and vaccines.
As Dale Gribble might say.
Vaccines don't kill people, Chuck Norris does!
A less scientific- but informative - blog on this topic can be found here
.
No comments:
Post a Comment