Say Anything Blog

Thanks for that info, doc. Did you know this about our current administration:

MERCURY RISK OVERSTATED, HOUSE PANEL SAYS

Dangers of toxic mercury pollution in the environment have been overstated, according to a House Resources Committee report issued in anticipation of new regulatory proposals from the Bush administration. The report, written by aides to the committee’s majority Republicans, also said no link between mercury from coal-burning power plants and levels of mercury in fish has been scientifically established. "After an exhaustive review of all the science surrounding the mercury debate, it is clear that some special-interest groups are crying wolf," said panel Chairman Richard Pombo (R-CA). The report comes in advance of changes to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s regulations governing mercury from coal-burning power plants, expected by March 15…

 PAO > Policy News Updates >

The Environmental Protection Agency released its first mercury rule, which will mandate the use of a cap-and-trade system to control mercury emissions from power plants. EPA’s mercury plan formally rescinds a Clinton administration regulatory determination calling on EPA to require the installation of maximum achievable control technologies for mercury on nearly all of the nation’s 1,300 power plants. Instead, utilities will be allowed to either install emission control technologies or purchase credits that essentially allow them to do nothing. …The rule is almost certain to be challenged in court by critics of the Bush administration’s regulatory decisions. Many members of Congress are also critical, with 29 senators on record this year encouraging EPA to take a different regulatory route. Eleven moderate House Republicans formally criticized the mercury ruling in a letter to acting EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, arguing the plan does not go far enough to protect public health and the environment…

PAO > Policy News Updates >

Thanks for that info, doc. Did you know this about our current administration:

What about it?

Alot of this ‘data’ is put out by a group that is entirely convinced of this thimerosal-autism linkage.  Studies in the Netherlands that removed it in 1992 did not see decreased autism rates, but instead the trends matched what was seen in other countries that continued to have thimerosal in their vaccinations.  This is most likely due to increased awareness of the syndrome and diagnosis of it rather than a real increased incidence.  A hundred years ago, autism was not even a defined disease.  Does that mean it didn’t exist back then?  I don’t think so.

 Please don’t fall into the trap of believing these people.  Virtually no peer-reviewed journal has shown any real link here. 

Actually, there is some peer reviewed data just coming out that shows that rates of autism have declined as thimerosal has been removed from vaccines.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=38784

Now, as "Say Anything’s resident statistician," I’m pretty much obliged to note that we’re trying to get a handle on something that happens to fewer than 1000 children per year, and to get a statistically decent answer to "does mercury hurt us?" really requires sample sizes in the tens or even hundreds of thousands.  This, in turn, almost inevitably confounds the data with extra variables--requiring yet larger samples.

In other words, there are any number of things which really do matter that can never be caught in a standard medical study.

Those who believe that mercury, specifically mercury in thimerosal in vaccines, causes autism need to explain a few things.

<ol><li>Why does autism often run in families?</li>

<li>Why does it affect boys far more than it does girls?<li>

<li>Why is it that in areas where pregnant women are exposed to high levels of mercury there is not also an increased rate of occurance of autism?</li>

<li>Why has the rate of autism diagnosis not fallen since the discontinuation of thimerosal use in childhood vaccinations?</li>

<li>Why is the rising rate of autism diagnosis attributed to mercury/thimerosal/vaccinations rather than the fact that there is an increased awareness of the condition and better healthcare availble to the general population?</li>

<li>Autism was first described before widespread childhood vaccinations and before thimerosal was used in those vaccines, how is that reconciled with the claim that mercury causes autism?</li></ol>

I could go on and on. I’ve done a lot of research on autism and possible causes and I find the arguments for mercury as the cause unconvincing. Valuable time and research dollars have been wasted trying to find a link between thimerosal/vaccines/mercury and autism. 

Samantha, there is indication that autism rates have fallen rather dramatically as thimerosal has been removed from vaccines--see the link I provide above. 

Regarding your other questions,  the quick & easy answer to your questions is that most advocates only said that mercury/thimerosal was one cause, not the cause, and that thimerosal is metabolized differently than other sources of mercury. 

Many states advise pregnant women and children not to eat fish caught in local waters.

A few cans of tuna a week can cause birth defects or  spontaneous abortion.