The Thimoserol (Mercury) and Autism Link
I recently read an article from the Boston Globe written by a pediatrician concerning what he thought was a bogus connection between autism and the thimoserol found in many vaccines. His concern was over the numbers of parents who are now refusing to administer vaccines to their children and in doing so were opting for other methods of protecting their children over "herd immunity". In reply to his article, a neuorpharmacologist from Northeastern University who is doing research into the molecular causes of autism replied that there is indeed hard scientific evidence demonstrating a link between autism and thimoserol exposure through vaccination. He summed up his findings with the following:
1. Thiol (sulfur) metabolism is widely recognized as the primary target of mercury (i.e. Thimerosal) neurotoxicity.
2. Autistic children exhibit profound abnormalities in thiol metabolites
3. Concentrations of thimerosal produced by vaccination inhibit methylation activity of the enzyme methionine synthase.
4. Autistic children exhibit impaired methylation activity (Dr. James study).
5. Thiol metabolism plays a key role in inflammation and oxidative stress (e.g. maintaining glutathione levels).
6. Autistic children exhibit neuroinflammation and oxidative stress (Vargas et al. Ann Neurol. 2005 Jan;57(1):67-81)
7. Mercury and other heavy metals cause neuroinflammation (e.g. activation of microglia).
8. Thimerosal causes significantly greater accumulation of inorganic mercury in the brain than does methylmercury. (Burbacher et al. Environ Health Perspect. 2005 Aug;113(8):1015-21)
Ergo, there is indeed substantial scientific evidence of a link between Thimerosal and autism.
Furthermore, and more importantly:
Treatment of autistic children with regimens that:
1. Remove heavy metals (e.g. chelation)
2. Augment levels of glutathione (e.g. GSH or N-acetylcysteine)
3. Support methylation activity (e.g. methyl B12 (not just B12), folinic acid)
4. Reduce neuroinflammation (PPAR-acting agents )
....bring about clinical improvement in a large proportion of children with autism.
What the articles against freedom from vaccination boil down to for the most part is a desire for draconian action on the part of the state to force parents to vaccinate their children irrespective of the desires of the parents to protect individual children from the possible harmful effects they may suffer. Scare tactics alongside fervent declarations concerning the safety of vaccines are commonly employed in order to get compliance. Those who question the connection between vaccines and various disorders are put off with the notion that what they are experiencing couldn't possibly be caused by vaccines and that their observations are not scientific. Autism is caused by something else: it can't possibly be the vaccines!
What is lacking from the pro-vaccine side is the lack of questions: Why are so many children getting sick?
The argument the vaccinators put forward is that the increases in autism are the artifacts of increased awareness and better diagnosis. In short, we had autism before, but it wasn't being diagnosed. However, this is a testable hypothesis and the hypothesis has proven false. Autism spectrum disorders have been rising. Mercury is a potent neurotoxin and the idea that it can be administered safely to infants at what can be 15 times the EPA limits of toxicity in vaccines is, well, just plain stupid. Autism is an environmentally caused condition. However the integration of science and commerce dictates that we ignore the single most probable cause of a preventable condition and furthermore that we attempt to coerce everyone into compliance with it. So some children end up unable to function in society. That is the price we are supposed to pay for herd immunity.
It is clear who the winners are with this sort of program.
Oh, and btw, I think it is highly interesting that Big Pharma has persuaded Congress to protect them from further lawsuits caused by vaccine damage. If vaccines were so safe, would the bottom line need such safeguards?