Scandals - Ethylmercury Shmethylmercury

[Guest guest]

Mon, 06 Feb 2006 19:44:14 -0900

" Sandy Gottstein " <sandymintz

Scandals - Ethylmercury Shmethylmercury

 

 

 

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Scandals/2006/Feb_6/Scandal76.htm

 

Scandals - 02/06/06

 

Ethylmercury Shmethylmercury

 

I just finished reading David Kirby's thoughtful, well-written and

compelling book, Evidence of Harm. Anyone who hasn't gotten their

hands on this book should order the updated paperback version as soon

as it is published, sometime this month.

 

Unless you have been on Mars for the past few years, you are aware of

a huge controversy surrounding the use of thimerosal in vaccines and

the possibility that it has been a cause of autism. In his book,

Kirby provides a detailed and riveting account of the controversy.

 

Mercury is a known neurotoxin, often said to be the second most toxic

substance on the planet.

 

One of the weirdest aspects of this battle has been the fact that the

" experts " have put themselves in the ridiculous position of saying

pregnant women and children should not eat certain mercury-tainted

fish or use mercury thermometers, but it is okay to inject mercury

directly into the bodies of babies.

 

All this because ethylmercury (the form of mercury found in

thimerosal) and methylmercury are different.

 

Of course taking this position is absurd. In the absence of proof

that ethylmercury is safe, the assumption should be that it might be

unsafe. One could go so far as to say that in all likelihood, merely

because it is mercury, it probably IS unsafe and should be treated as

such.

 

In fact, " mercury in any form is toxic " . So why was any mercury in

any form ever allowed in vaccines?

 

The FDA, as reported in the Federal Register, even declared thimerosal

to be unsafe in 1982, calling for its removal in over-the-counter

products. Why didn't they do the same for vaccines, which unlike the

topical products removed are injected directly into the body?

 

Meanwhile, more recently (2004), the Institute of Medicine (IOM)

attempted to close the book on this issue, in spite of compelling

biological evidence that thimerosal is likely involved. Why would

they use epidemiological data which in the case of their autism data

did not include any comparisons to children exposed to zero mercury in

vaccines? Why did they do this when it contradicted their own earlier

worrisome (and until recently secret) data that did include such

comparisons? And why did they use this suspect epidemiological data

to trump solid biological evidence?

 

How could they so cavalierly dismiss evidence that not only implicated

thimerosal in autism, but explained how thimerosal could damage some

children and not others?

 

Moreover, if they were so enamored with epidemiological studies, why

didn't the " experts " insist that studies comparing the vaccinated to

the never vaccinated be conducted? (Instead they lumped those with

allegedly zero exposure to thimerosal with those with as much as 37.5

micrograms.)

 

Even if the evidence against there being a relationship, however, was

as strong as the IOM contended, there was still no reason to

discourage research into this area, as the IOM so callously did.

After all, little is ever " proved " in science. Evidence, more or less

strong or weak, is usually simply presented which supports or

contradicts a hypothesis. Even under the best of circumstances, one

might never be able to say with absolute certainty that the mercury in

thimerosal causes autism. That doesn't mean, however, that evidence

does not exist.

 

Or that it doesn't cause autism.

 

But there is evidence. And plenty of it.

 

Aside from Kirby's outstanding book outlining the evidence both for

and against thimerosal being linked to vaccines, among the growing

number of studies and reports confirming a possible link are the

following:

 

Children with autism appear to be unable to rid their bodies of the

mercury that they are exposed to. (Deth et al, Holmes et al)

 

Some populations that have not been exposed to vaccines experience

little, if any, autism. (Olmsted 1, 2)

 

Thimerosal has been shown to be toxic to brain cells. (Haley)

 

Mice injected with thimerosal develop autism-like symptoms. (Hornig)

 

Some children who have mercury chelated (chemically bound and removed)

from their bodies show a reduction in autism symptoms. (Rimland)

 

" Children with autism excrete more mercury than controls. " (Bradstreet

via Congressman Dave Weldon)

 

Coincident with the decline in thimerosal use in vaccinations for

infants and children, the incidence of autism appears to be declining

as well, at least in California. (safeMinds)

 

One of the most frustrating aspects to all this is how often an

" instant " study is published purporting to vindicate thimerosal. Any

such " study " , coming right on the heels of a study demonstrating an

adverse thimerosal effect, should be met with skepticism. In an

earlier column I examined one of them and found the arguments to be

seriously flawed.

 

There is something mercury-contaminated fishy about all this.

 

A lot is riding on the so-called experts convincing the public that

the mercury in thimerosal is safe. Little things like " confidence " in

the immunization program and liability for damage caused.

 

Beyond the clamor, though, about vaccines and autism lies a broader,

even more ominous question. When something this obvious is fought so

hard by the " experts " , what does it say about the other

vaccine-associated side effects they fight so hard to discredit, like

the relationship between vaccines and SIDS, to name just one?* What

does it say about their credibility in these other crucial areas?

 

Whether or not other vaccine-associated adverse effects are similarly

being ignored and dismissed, with the autism issue at least, there are

just too many parents convinced that vaccines played a role. And they

simply cannot be made to go away.

 

More and more, the science is suggesting they may be right. No matter

what the " experts " say.

 

*If you are interested in learning more about the vast array of

possible vaccine side effects and why many of us remain concerned,

despite " expert " protestations to the contrary,

 

by Sandy Gottstein (Mintz)

 

" Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. " - Wendell Phillips

(1811-1884), paraphrasing John Philpot Curran (1808)

 

Sandy Gottstein (aka Mintz) is the publisher of the website

" Vaccination News " , and writer of the columns " Scandals " and " Out of

Control " .

 

Past Scandals and Out of Control.

 

©Copyright 2006 by Sandy Gottstein. . This content

may be copied in full ONLY with copyright, contact, creation,

authorship, and information intact (including all links), without

specific permission, and ONLY when used in a not-for-profit format. If

any other use is desired, permission in writing from Sandy Gottstein

is required.