Autism, mercury and cover up???

judyblueeyes · Aug 21, 2005

Robert F. Kennedy Junior's completely dishonest thimerosal article

I'm referring to his scare piece in Salon and Rolling Stone, linking Autism to the Thimerosal (mercury) preservative used in vaccines. Kennedy's article has been roundly criticized by Orac (also here), Autism Diva, Blendor, Soapgun and no doubt others. I decided to hold off a detailed post until I had read the report in question. Even so, I felt Kennedy's article had gotten off to a rather inauspicious start:

In June 2000, a group of top government scientists and health officials gathered for a meeting at the isolated Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga. Convened by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the meeting was held at this Methodist retreat center, nestled in wooded farmland next to the Chattahoochee River, to ensure complete secrecy.

Note the emotive language - an "isolated" conference center "nestled in wooded farmland... to ensure complete secrecy". Sounds suspicious, yes? Well, not really. Perhaps Kennedy should have read the actual full 286 page transcript of the meeting because then he would have learned (page 257) that it was only held there because there had been a Super Comp Computer Conference at the same time and that the Simpsonwood center was the only place available in Atlanta at such short notice. He might also have noted the closeted location had "created a spirit that (the meeting) benefited from". But that would have robbed Kennedy of his sensationalist opening, I guess.

And the conspiracy mongering didn't stop there. At the end of Kennedy's first paragraph is:

All of the scientific data under discussion, CDC officials repeatedly reminded the participants, was strictly "embargoed." There would be no making photocopies of documents, no taking papers with them when they left.

Sounds shady, right? Wrong. Again, if you read the transcript you'll find the participants were actually told:

...consider it embargoed and protected until it is made public on June 21 and 22 at the ACIP. There is a plan to do that. (Page 256)

Completely different: it was only embargoed until official release later that same month. Kennedy seems intellectually dishonest in taking these non-issues and writing them up to make it sound as though there is something fishy going on.

Anyway, having set the scene to his satisfaction he launches into his sensationalist story.

The "Secret" Meeting

The experts were meeting to discuss a CDC study to evaluate if there were health risks from mercury in vaccines. Kennedy quotes scientists at the meeting agreeing that Thimerosal was responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children. He goes on to state:

But instead of taking immediate steps to alert the public and rid the vaccine supply of thimerosal, the officials and executives at Simpsonwood spent most of the next two days discussing how to cover up the damaging data. According to transcripts obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, many at the meeting were concerned about how the damaging revelations about thimerosal would affect the vaccine industry's bottom line.

(My bold.)

Wow! Serious charges that appeared to be supported by the selected quotes linked from the article. (And you'll note, he only has these thanks to the Freedom of Information Act - we should be grateful to relentless investigative reporters like Kennedy, right?) However, having read the full 286 page transcript I am honestly at a loss to understand how anyone could possibly come to that conclusion. In fact, the meeting did not conclude that thimerosal was responsible for an increase in autism and did not discuss any cover up. It did discuss possible future studies.

The actual transcript shows this was phase one of a two phase study. The second phase would be carried out if phase one gave "any hint of an association" (page 30) that needed investigating. The first day of the meeting (pages 1 to 167), consisted of presentations of the data with much questioning and discussion of: the meaning of the results; what evidence there might be (or not) for a causal link; confounding factors (ie other things that might have caused the results). This is an honest group of scientists interested in getting to the truth, not a group "discussing how to cover up the damaging data". Not even.

Then it gets interesting. On day two, the experts each get a turn giving their view on whether there is a causal link between thimerosal and autism. The participants were asked to rate the possibility of a causal link on a scale of one to six: one being a weak causal link, six strong. From page 189 to 222 you can read of one attendee after another (with just one exception) grading the likelihood of a causal relationship as being either a one or a two out of six. The mean value given by the group (page 253) was 1.8 - very little evidence for a causal link.

There was only one exception (Dr. Weil) who gave it a four. Guess which one Kennedy quoted? (No prizes.) Here are some more representative quotes I pulled from the transcript:

Part one, is there a causal association between ethylmercury and neurological effects noted in the Vaccine Study Datalink project? The answer is no. Why not? From a toxicologists (sic) viewpoint there is no dose response relationship (Page 191)

To me the increasing mercury levels in your population at one month... is so small that it would suggest to me that you have a confounder here. That this is not due to mercury. (page 213)

I gave it a value as 1. I think the strength of the associations are mostly weak and the weaker the associations, the more likely bias might explain some of this. (Page 217)

This is not designed as a study to look at the effects of these vaccines on the different outcomes, but it is using data collected for other reasons, so it is not a carefully controlled prospective cohort study to study. We are using data that was collected for other purposes. (Page 218)

Kennedy's version is totally inconsistent with the transcript. Quite honestly, only someone with a preconceived belief in a causative relationship and who was fixed in that view no matter what the evidence, would view this meeting as "discussing how to cover up the damaging data".

The "Paid" Cover-up

But it gets worse. Kennedy continues:

The CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to conduct a new study to whitewash the risks of thimerosal, ordering researchers to "rule out" the chemical's link to autism. It withheld Verstraeten's findings, even though they had been slated for immediate publication, and told other scientists that his original data had been "lost" and could not be replicated.

(My bold.)

I have searched Kennedy's article including the "Thimerosal resource guide" page provided by Salon and I have not found one shred of evidence that the CDC paid the Institute of Medicine to "whitewash" any thimerosal / autism link. It's certainly a very serious accusation that I am not prepared to take on Kennedy's say-so (especially considering the dishonesty in the bits of his article I have been able to check).

I presume he's referring to Institute of Medicine reports of 2001 or 2004 that stated that there is no link between mercury and autism. I guess it would be too much for Kennedy to show what is actually wrong with these studies, rather than making wild accusations of a cover-up. And too much to show what is wrong with this comprehensive review of the literature in 2004 that also failed to find a link. I guess so.

Old Fallacies

The article goes on to repeat the old "links to vaccine industry" ad Hominem that both Orac and I have debunked before, and also quotes the (flawed) studies by the Geiers (ditto). I won't labor the point - you know Kennedy is using fallacious reasoning.

When I first read Kennedy's piece, I was shocked that there had apparently been some kind of cover up about thimerosal. It seemed I would have to re-examine my previous views on the subject as all good skeptics should when new evidence appears. And that was even though I have full knowledge of studies in Denmark and Canada that show autism rates increasing even though thimerosal has been banned in those countries for years. Even though I knew this, the article still sounded convincing. So I can well understand people reading this article and believing it and being livid with the vaccination industry, the CDC and everyone else involved.

But I now know Kennedy's article is a shockingly dishonest piece of crap from beginning to end. Dishonest and manipulative. He starts with sensationalist language to imply there is something wrong going on, softening up his readers for what comes next. The scene set he, frankly, lies about what happened at the meeting. (Either that or he didn't read the transcript - your call.) And in the absence of evidence to back up his claim, I suggest Kennedy also made up the bit about the Institute of Medicine whitewashing any embarrassing results. Kennedy wrote his alarmist piece in the knowledge that very few people (in reality - virtually zero) would bother to read the lengthy transcript to find out what actually happened. It's nothing short of shameful from someone who I had previously believed to have the highest integrity. My only question is, why? Perhaps he's just losing it, I don't know.

So does thimerosal in vaccines cause autism? Honestly, I have no idea although I doubt it - the increasing incidence of autism in Canada and Denmark despite bans of thimerosal would appear to falsify a causative link. But I do know that this piece of garbage from Kennedy has not advanced our knowledge. In fact it has probably put us back, as focus will be placed back on thimerosal rather than on looking for what really causes autism.

judyblueeyes · Aug 21, 2005

Sorry- new here. The above should be linked to the author. Here is the link (if I do it right) http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2682208

judyblueeyes · Aug 21, 2005

trying again http://oracknows.blogspot.com/2005/06/saloncom-flushes-its-credibility-down.html

LydiaNN · Aug 21, 2005

The surgeon takes Kennedy to task for using "emotive" language, and then goes on to lambast Kennedy's article as a "shockingly dishonest piece of crap". Right. Just so long as we're keeping our emotions out of it, Doc. He is certainly entitled to his opinion, but in reality, he was pulling bits and pieces of the transcript out to make his points, which is the very thing he claims makes Kennedy's piece so unbelievable. Hello, kettle? This is the pot....

barbara44 · Aug 21, 2005

The IOM has criticized Kennedy's article as well. Here's Kennedy's response:

http://www.salon.com/news/letters/2005/06/22/iom_thimerosal/index1.html

And if anyone's interested, here's a 65 page report on thimerosal/autism by RFK Jr.

http://www.robertfkennedyjr.com/docs/AutismHgPolitics_6_23.pdf

judyblueeyes · Aug 25, 2005

Autistic 5-year-old dies during chelation.

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has reported that a 5-year-old boy went into cardiac arrest and died during chelation therapy for alleged lead and mercury toxicity. [Hasch M. Autistic boy, 5, dies after disputed therapy. Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Aug 26, 2005] http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/regional/s_367277.html

Chelation therapy for autism is a fraud. The state police and county coroner are investigating the boy's death.

LydiaNN · Aug 25, 2005

Autistic 5-year-old dies during chelation.
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review has reported that a 5-year-old boy went into cardiac arrest and died during chelation therapy for alleged lead and mercury toxicity. [Hasch M. Autistic boy, 5, dies after disputed therapy. Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Aug 26, 2005] http://pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/trib/regional/s_367277.html
Chelation therapy for autism is a fraud. The state police and county coroner are investigating the boy's death.

I read this. Tragic.

barbara44 · Aug 26, 2005

terrible. i heard it was an allergic reaction to the drug. the IV-EDTA is used for lead removal-which is FDA approved.

but this is why i used homeodetox on my child, rather than IV chelation therapy.

now if only all those deaths caused by vaccination would receive as much attention, we'd be getting somewhere.

http://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/

barbara44 · Aug 26, 2005

1. Between 1990-2000, 186 reported deaths from Ritalin:

http://www.ritalindeath.com/

2. Children's deaths from vaccines, as recorded by the CDC:

(Keep in mind that, according to the FDA, only 10 percent of vaccine reactions/deaths are reported, so the number is probably much higher)

Chickenpox vaccine 1995-1998:

Between March 17, 1995 and July 25, 1998, 6580 adverse events -

including 14 deaths - were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events

Reporting System in association with varicella vaccination---

Pediatric News 33(3):12, 1999.

For DPT vaccine 12,504 reports VAERS reports with 144 deaths per year

(1990-1993)

"In a year-long investigation of the Vaccine Adverse Reaction

Reporting System (VAERS) operated by the Food and Drug

Administration, NVIC/DPT analyzed VAERS computer discs used by the

FDA to store data on reports of deaths and injuries following DPT

vaccination. A total of 54,072 reports of adverse events following

vaccination were listed in a 39-month period from July 1990 to

November 1993 with 12,504 reports being associated with DPT vaccine,

including 471 deaths."Campaign Against Fraudulent Medical Research

(CAFMR)

MMR vaccine VAERS reports 7 deaths per year (1990-1994):

"From July 1990 thro' April 1994, 5799 ADRs following MMR vaccination

were reported to US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS);

including 3063 cases requiring emergency medical treatment, 616

hospitalisations, 309 who did not recover, 54 children left disabled

and 30 deaths."--- John P Heptonstall

For OPV vaccine there were VAERS reports of 108 deaths per year over

a 5 year period.

"We commissioned an OPV Vaccine Report and started making all kinds

of other inquires. The OPV Vaccine report that we received was a

shocking report. It covered a recent period a little less than 5

years and the following is the summary for that period: The number of

Vaccine Associated events that occurred: 13,641 ..The number of

events resulting in death 540"--The Polio Connection of America &

Polio vaccine victims: http://village.ios.com/~w1066/poliov6.html

For Hep b vaccine there were VAERS reports of 54 deaths per year

(1990-98)

"The total 24,775 VAERS hepatitis B reports from July 1990 to October

31, 1998 show 439 deaths and 9673 serious reactions involving

emergency room visits, hospitalization, disablement or death."--

Michael Belkin http://www.whale.to/vaccines/belkin1.html

"Since July 1990, 17,497 cases of hospitalizations, injuries and

deaths in America following hepatitis B vaccination have been

reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) of the

U.S. government. This figure includes 146 deaths in individuals after

receiving only hepatitis B vaccine without any other vaccines,

including 73 deaths in children under 14 years old. In 1996 alone

there were 872 serious adverse events in children under 14 years old

reported to VAERS. 658 of those injuries were following hepatitis B

vaccination in combination with other vaccinations and 214 of these

injuries were after hepatitis B vaccination alone. In these children

under 14 years old, there were 35 deaths after hepatitis B

vaccination in combination and 13 deaths after hepatitis B

vaccination alone, for a total of 48 deaths. Compare these statistics

with the total number of hepatitis B cases nationwide reported that

same year (1996) in children under 14, just 279, and the conclusion

is obvious that the risks of hepatitis B vaccination far outweigh its

benefits."---Incao's Hepatitis B Vaccination Testimony

"If adverse drug reactions were tabulated as a cause of death, this would be

between the fourth leading and sixth cause of death In the United States."

Sources: Centers for Disease Control Fastats estimated 2000 causes of death;

To Err Human, National Institute of Medicine, 1999; Bates et al., Incidence

of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events. JAMA 274:29, 1995;

Porter. Jick, Drug-related deaths among medical inpatients. JAMA

237:879-281, 1977."

http://www.drugintel.com/pharma/cause_of_death.htm

barbara44 · Aug 27, 2005

Autism and Chelation: Where is the Science?

Nearly four years ago, the Institute of Medicine recommended

research into chelation therapy and autism. But that never happened,

and now a little boy in Pennsylvania is dead.

The heartrending tragedy of Abubakar Tariq Nadama, an autistic five-

year-old who died while undergoing chelation this week, is one of

the saddest chapters in the very sad saga of autism in America.

But even as the grieving immigrant mother makes funeral arrangements

for her beloved boy, opponents of the theory that drew the family to

America (the theory that mercury triggers autism, and removing it

through chelation may improve symptoms) are holding his death up as

proof that the idea is bogus. They claim that the use of chelation

to treat autism is foolishly dangerous, and should be shut down at

once.

Some people have come perilously close to exploiting this tragedy to

further their own political or personal agendas. Some blame the

boy's death on his mother, who has been labeled as reckless

and "desperate." Others blame the Pennsylvania doctor -- and any

autism doctor willing to try chelation (the use of certain chemicals

to remove heavy metals from the body) - for the tragedy. Some fault

me, for writing a book that dared to include the topic of chelation

and autism within its pages.

It's time to take a deep breath and look at the facts.

First of all, only an autopsy will reveal the actual cause of death,

and I think it is prudent to wait before jumping to any conclusions

about the general safety of chelation and autism. That said, the boy

did die while undergoing the procedure, and it's possible the

controversial treatment is what killed him.

But here is where things get more complicated. Abubakar was given a

substance known as EDTA, and he was receiving it intravenously. EDTA

is used mostly (and legally, I might add) for the treatment of lead

poisoning. EDTA is not typically used in mercury cases, and it is

not clear why it was used to treat autism here.

In fact, I am unaware of any autistic child who's been chelated with

EDTA, nor am I familiar with any autism cases where IV chelation was

employed. The chelation methods I have written about (I do not, and

cannot recommend treatments, for the record, I only report on them)

were either oral or trans-dermal, and they used substances that are

significantly different than EDTA.

Furthermore, I cannot find any reference in the medical literature

about any patient dying from chelation. (Please post them if you

have them).

Does chelation therapy work? We just don't know. Could it be

dangerous, even deadly, for children with autism? Perhaps, but

there's no hard science available one way or the other. And if

chelation does improve symptoms, what are the best agents, at what

doses and timing, and through which route of administration? No one

can say, of course, because no one has bothered to study these

questions in double-blinded trials.

Which brings us back to the IOM recommendation of 2001. The

committee assigned to look into thimerosal (the mercury containing

vaccine preservative) noted that some autism practitioners

report "clinical improvements following chelation." And though the

committee said that chelation "is not a benign treatment," it

nonetheless recommended "careful, rigorous, and scientific

investigations of chelation when used in children with

neurodevelopmental disorders, especially autism."

That report was issued on October 1, 2001, nearly four years ago.

But few paid attention to the recommendation, and no one did the

hard science on chelation. This left parents and doctors flying half-

blind in pursuit of chelation -- not out of "desperation," but out

of strong evidence their children had suffered from mercury exposure.

Just think, if the government had listened to the very IOM report it

commissioned back in 2001, we might know a lot more about chelation

and autism than we know today. If clinical trials had gotten

underway then, we would know with certainty whether chelation could

heal, or kill.

If hard scientific proof had been uncovered that chelation was 100-

percent worthless in the treatment of autism, no parent or doctor

would still be pursuing the therapy today. If evidence had surfaced

in clinical trials that children could be harmed or even killed by

chelation, no one would be using it today. The doctor in

Pennsylvania would have halted chelation therapy long ago, and this

poor grieving family would never have crossed the ocean from the UK

in pursuit of its false promise.

But what if the opposite were true? What if the "rigorous science"

recommended by the IOM had yielded proof that chelation can indeed

help some kids -- provided that it's done with the safest agents, at

the safest doses, and through the safest routes of administration

(not to mention in combination with other therapies)?

Either way, if America had done its scientific homework, as

recommended by its top science professors, Abubakar might still be

alive today.

If chelation is quackery that kills, let's outlaw it today. But if

it can be done safely, with demonstrated clinical benefit to some

autistic patients at a minimum of risk, then it should be approved

by the FDA for the treatment of autism.

Does chelation in autism kill or cure? Only hard science will answer

that question. What a shame we have wasted four long years not

finding out.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/autism-and-chelation-

whe_b_6286.html

LydiaNN · Aug 27, 2005

Thank you, barbara, for posting these stories.

amy7902 · Sep 11, 2005

Well, why do some kids get autism and some don't? They all get the shots. Do vaccines even still have thimerosol in them? Is this still a problem today?

Well I have heard in addition to the mercury toxicity one or both parents have an auto- immune disorder. You can ask why some get autism and some don't. I worked with mercury toxic patients. Some were really sick others mildly sick and the range of mercury varied no correlation? It effects everyone differently. I did see children with "autism" improve when the mercury was taken out by DMPS chelation. The other chelation is EDTA which is used for lead toxicity and is much more dangerous. I don't know the facts of the child that died. I only saw progress with the patients treated for "autism"

Amy