1 in 6 US women's mercury count enough to deform fetus

[donsu]

http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=miv


-snip-


As you may know, one in six American women of child-bearing age already has enough mercury in her blood to put a developing fetus at risk. That's why pregnant women are urged not to eat many ocean and freshwater fish. Mercury also causes heart attacks among adults.

If the Clean Air Act, already in place, were simply implemented as it is supposed to be by the Environmental Protection Agency, we would be rid of over 90 percent of mercury emissions in this country by 2008. But, of course, that would cost the power industry a lot of money, and the power industry gives lots of money to politicians. So the EPA came up with a "cap and trade" system, under which power plants can avoid meaningful regulation until after 2025.

Then, the EPA, whose name is rapidly becoming a morbid joke, had the gall to put out a press release claiming its new rule will cut mercury by 70 percent in 2018. Using the EPA's own figures, it fails to do even that. We'd be lucky to get a 50 percent reduction by 2020, according to Natural Resources Defense Council.

The worse news is that "cap and trade" allows individual power plants to trade emissions credits, so while some states will have less mercury emission, other states will have enormous increases. God help you if you live near one of these future hotspots. NRDC estimates an 841 percent increase for California, 176 percent in Colorado, 241 percent in New Hampshire and 56 percent in New Jersey.
-snip-
----------------------------


we could all get up and say NO

all the women in america could get up and say STOP

or we can continue to give birth to degraded fetuses and babies.

maybe next yr. it will be 1 in 4 women who shouldn't have a baby.

[jdj]

1. where are the pro-lifers on this? n/t

[w4rma]

3. You mean, anti-choicers. I consider myself a pro-life, pro-choicer. (nt)

[jdj]

7. good point, I should say anti-abortion, but it's three more syllables, and

I'm lazy

[MountainLaurel]

14. Raking in the $$$

Many are corporate overlords and worshippers of capitalism who are making their millions poisoning their fellow man.

[w4rma]

2. Silence on this issue from the fundies. (nt)

[donsu]

4. also silence from women

and it's hard to get someone to do a mercury test. many places don't do it. so you get pregnant and hope you have a normal baby at the end of 9 mo.

hope gives crappy odds

so why are women quiet?

[bloom]

34. Men are welcome to yell about this as well.

And it is men who are more likely to get autism - (the not always visible "deformity"). Three (or more) out of four of the people who get autism are males.


And of course - it's their kids and grandkids getting it as well.

[bloom]

5. According to Molly they've put the value at $83.33 per brain-damaged child

I don't think enough people are aware of this.

(People are too busy watching the media-circus surrounding Schiavo or Micheal Jackson or whatever the next big thing is... )


Many media channels covered the rise in Autism. Most have not connected it with mercury - with the reduction of industry standards on pollution. Or the fact that women should not eat tuna because of it....

Most people don't realize that the rise in mercury/autism can be connected to Republican and industry favorable policy.

[cthrumatrix]

6. how about a congress "special session" in the middel of the night?

[bloom]

12. that's about what happened...

Is Cost-Benefit Analysis Needed?

The final hearing this term of the Energy Policy, Natural Resources, and Regulatory Affairs subcommittee of the House Committee on Government Reform was marked by cheerleading from industry representatives of White House anti-regulatory policy, stonewalling from White House regulatory czar John Graham, and completely unrelated criticism from House Democrats and their witnesses of EPA's handling of its still-developing mercury policy.

Committee Republicans focused in the Nov. 17 hearing on the White House's approach to regulatory policy -- in particular (John)Graham's use of the annual report on the cumulative costs and benefits of regulation as a vehicle for soliciting suggestions from industry for a "hit list" of regulations to be rolled back or weakened. A succession of industry groups praised the process.... <snip>

Committee Democrats, meanwhile, used the hearing not to line up witnesses with information that would counter industry cheerleading of the hit list project but, instead, to attack EPA's mishandling of pending mercury regulation. Compressed scheduling had ruled out a separate hearing on mercury, so the Democratic members essentially conducted their own one-sided hearing on mercury while the Republican members held a one-sided hearing on anti-regulatory policy.

http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/2549/1/132?TopicID=1



Costs and benefits - the B**h Admin employs John Graham who values human life at 6.1 million. This suddenly goes down to 2.3 million once you hit 70.

Then they ignored their own study:

New EPA Mercury Rule Omits Conflicting Data

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x21253

[bloom]

16. The guy who calculates the costs and benefits to society of Mercury, etc.

John D. Graham

Mr. Bottom Line

by Steve Weinberg

Quick: What's the dollar value of a human life? Of a river? John D. Graham says he knows. As the White House point man who weighs every health and environmental rule to decide if it's worth the cost, he's a bureaucrat with power over life and death.

(John) Graham's specialty is a long-established but controversial number-crunching technique called cost-benefit analysis. Its purpose is to quantify, in dollars, every cost and every benefit of a possible course of action. Because Graham has spent his entire professional life working to enshrine it (and its near cousin, risk analysis) at the center of public policy, his nomination process was highly contentious. He got thirty-seven "No" votes in the Senate -- second only to Attorney General John Ashcroft, a better-known figure appointed to a much higher-profile office. Among the letters sent to the Senate about Graham was a critique signed by fifty-one academics; they charged that he had repeatedly lowballed health and environmental benefits, used "extreme and highly disputed" economic assumptions, and issued hard-and-fast opinions on complex medical and scientific topics in which he had no training. <snip>

Recently, OIRA has been asking EPA to include an "alternative estimate" for the dollar benefits of some rules, using lower figures for the value society places on a single human life. EPA uses $6.1 million as its basic figure for one "statistical life." The alternative figures, drawn from certain economists' studies of how people value risk, start at $3.7 million. But the alternative estimate also assumes that the elderly are not willing to pay as much to protect themselves. It prices people seventy or older at 63 percent of people under seventy, or $2.3 million per elderly life. Applied to, say, air pollution -- which can be deadly to older people with vulnerable lungs -- figures like these make a rule look less valuable by an order of magnitude. <snip>

Most controversial of all was the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, which Graham founded in 1989. Under Graham as director, up to 60 percent of the center's budget came from corporations, including Dow Chemical, Exxon, General Electric, Monsanto, and Union Carbide. The center has produced hundreds of diverse publications, including articles on daily dialysis for kidney patients and public attitudes about Alzheimer's. But some of its work under Graham seemed tailored to the lobbying needs of funders. A study paid for by the American Farm Bureau Federation, for instance, said that eliminating the most toxic pesticides could disrupt the food supply and lead to 1,000 premature deaths. (The idea that Americans would die of malnutrition from lack of pest control, wrote three scientists at Consumers Union, was "not remotely credible.")

http://www.nrdc.org/onearth/03spr/graham1.asp?r=n

[bloom]

24. The human costs could be over $3.6 trillion per year - using their own #'s

compared to industry having to pay $750 million to do something about the mercury.

(That's $6.1 million per person harmed).

The EPA wanted to avoid the study which put the costs at $5 billion a year. But that was before the study came out linking autism with mercury - so I think that study was really low. The EPA wants to say the cost to the American public of having large amounts of mercury go into the environment and us is only $50 million.


Today I found out there is a power plant not so far away that puts out 1300  lbs mercury per year. The AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER ROCKPORT PLANT. I'm no expert on power plants - but I noticed there are other ones that put out a lot less. Like 120 lbs. I suppose when environmentalists say that these plants can reduce emissions by 90% - that is what the other plants have done. So I wonder what's the deal with this plant.

Looks like a protest waiting to happen.

[bloom]

32. "Misguiding Our Priorities"

Not only is cost-benefit analysis not a neutral tool; it fundamentally gets it wrong. Cost-benefit analysis does not reflect our country's values or priorities. In Lisa Heinzerling, Frank Ackerman and Rachel Massey's "Applying Cost-Benefit Analysis to Past Decisions," the authors seek to show what would have happened if cost-benefit analysis had been applied to some of our landmark environmental, health and safety regulations. They investigate the reduction of lead in gasoline, a proposed regulation that would have allowed damming in the Grand Canyon, and the regulation of occupational exposure to vinyl chloride, a chemical used in producing PVC. Their conclusion in all three cases is that cost-benefit analysis would have gotten it wrong, depriving us of some of our most important health, safety and environmental protections.

One of their most compelling examples is that of vinyl chloride. Vinyl chloride is a known carcinogen used in making PVC. In 1974, when OSHA sought to regulate vinyl chloride, substantial evidence existed about vinyl chlorides toxicity, especially its link to a rare form of liver cancer, angiosarcoma, but little was known about the safe level of exposure or how many people had or would die from angiosarcoma through exposure to vinyl chloride. At the time, there were only 13 known cases of angiosarcoma deaths from vinyl chloride exposure. Still, OSHA chose to take a precautionary stance and sought to lower the allowable exposure level to 1 ppm over an eight-hour period. Previously, industry had allowed an exposure of 200 ppm "time-weighted average" with a maximum allowable exposure of 500 ppm.

By statute, OSHA does not perform cost-benefit analysis and must enforce the most stringent policy "feasible." If it had performed CBA when determining an exposure limit for vinyl chloride with the knowledge they had at the time, CBA would have come out in favor of a much weaker standard. Heinzerling, Ackerman and Massey compared the estimated cost of compliance at the time with the estimated value of a life in order to determine how many lives OSHA would have needed to think it was saving to justify the stringent regulatory standard.

The estimated cost of compliance with the vinyl chloride regulation was thought to be $200 million per year (though it turned out to be much lower). For the value of a human life, the authors used two different estimates: the highest value of a life based on current EPA calculations and adjusted for inflation, which is $1.81 million, and the much lower value of life used in the Ford Pinto controversy that occurred around the same time, which estimated the value of a statistical life at $200,000.

Only 7,000 people worked in the vinyl chloride industry. Using the Ford Pinto value, one out of every seven workers would have had to die to justify the stringent standard. That means that 1,000 people would have had to die each year to justify OSHA's regulation. If you take into account discount rates, the picture becomes even more dismal. At a 3 percent discount rate, 200 people using the high estimate for life value or 2,000 people using the lower estimate would have had to die each year for OSHA to justify the costs. At a 10 percent discount rate, 700 people would have had to die using the former estimate and 7,000 using the lower. Thus they conclude, "using a 10 percent discount rate and the value of life estimated in the 1970s, it would be necessary to show that every worker in the industry, every year, would have died in the absence of the standard, in order to justify the regulation in cost-benefit terms."


This dramatic example adds to the overwhelming evidence that cost-benefit analysis is not only a weak tool for determining public protections, but its "impartial" calculations can have severe and damaging impacts. In no way is it a blind arbitrator, equally weighing both sides of an issue. Rather it is a political tool, weighted to favor the regulated community that does not adequately address our regulatory priorities.

http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/2749/1/134?TopicID=1
-----


Part of the upshot of all that - it that there is NOT always definitive proof of what exactly all of the health costs are.

Apparently there was a study about mercury in the form of Thimerosol having ill effects on animals way back when around 1930 when they were first making vaccines - but the drug manufacturers didn't bother to let this stop them putting it in vaccines - maybe because they didn't know what else to do. To them at the time - it was worth it. People have been kept from questioning it ever since until the 90's when so many kids were getting so many vaccines that too many were suffering from too many ill effects. Costs and benefits.

[bloom]

35. I don't think a price can be calculated

as to what the cost is to people who get autism.

But according to this estimate it looks like it might cost the US economy $100 billion/year or more - way more than enough to justify far more pollution controls than what John Graham wanted to justify (he/EPA calculated industry costs at $750 million).

http://poisonevercure.150m.com/autism_charts.htm

Cost graph at the bottom. Some interesting graphs.

also:

http://www.autism-society.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr001=nxbapt03n1.app20a&page=NewsArticle&id=6825

[earth mom]

8. Mercury is in more than fish. It's in the water, the air, and it's in

dental amalgams. It's also in infant vaccinations. The only way people will care is when if effects their families PERSONALLY. Not if it effects a friend or neighbor, mind you. Trust me, I know. When it reaches epidemic proportions and it will, then maybe, just maybe, things will change. :grr:

[bloom]

11. I think a lot of people are affected who don't know the connection.

The whole autism spectrum disorders.

Even though information about mercury - (go to any of the usual, even environmental sites) - describes the dangers of mercury being a neurotoxin, dangerous to fetuses - even those sites do not come out and say that mercury is linked to autism spectrum disorders.

It has only been since March 16th that news stories - the Texas study - came out and said mercury was linked to autism by association with coal-fired plants. There is a lot of education to be done.

[Ravenseye]

13. Thimerosol doesn't cause autism

An Institute of Medicine (IOM) committee, which issued a comprehensive report in October 2001, found no proof of a link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism, attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, speech or language delays, or other neurodevelopmental disorders.

http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10208.html?onpi_newsdoc100101

Thimerosol contains mercury, but that doesn't mean that particular application is bad. Just screaming mercury isn't enough, we need to isolate where the bad aspects of it come from, and not scare people away from other things, containing mercury, which save lives.

Environmental mercury is the big culprit here. I just wanted to point this out, because i've gotten in a number of real life discussions with people considering not vaccinating their children. The risks of non-vaccination far outweigh those of vaccination, and the mercury in thimerosol not only has been tracked to go through an infants system, but no links can be shown between it and autism.

Environmental mercury.

[bloom]

15. There is a lot of evidence that indicates the there is a link

between themiosol and autism.

I gathered some sources here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=229x958

Here are some sites:

• COALITION FOR SAFE MINDS - www.safeminds.org
• NATIONAL AUTISM ASSOCIATION - www.nationalautismassociation.org
• AUTISM RESEARCH INSTITUTE/DAN! - www.autismresearchinstitute.com
• AUTISM TODAY - www.autismtoday.com  
• AUTISM ONE - www.autismone.org
• NO MERCURY - www.nomercury.org
• GENERATION RESCUE - www.generationrescue.org
• UNLOCKING AUTISM - www.unlockingautism.org

-------

Like one lady pointed out - themiosol is injected right into the blood stream - does not go through the liver or anything. I think even if it is a different variety of mercury - it is doing damage when administered in the amounts that it has been.

It is being removed from vaccines - but people should be aware and not be getting vaccines for children when it is not necessary - and perhaps waiting on some that are.

[Ravenseye]

18. Rather than reading through every piece linked

Can you point out which study specifically points to a Thimerosol link to Autism? Studies link mercury to autism, to my knowledge, but not Thimerosol.

From what I've read the studies specifically done on Thimerosol and not blanket mercury exposure show no linkage.

There are many sites that regurgitate the same few studies and manipulate them or ignore the fact that said studies were later shown to have been bad, flawed, or wrong. Sometimes rebutted by the very researches who showed a link in the first place.

Which specific study proves a link between Thimerosol and Autism?

[bloom]

22. here's a list

http://www.autismwebsite.com/ari/vaccine/thimerosalreferences.htm

You can decide which one, if any, are good enough to satisfy you.

Here are more links:

http://www.autismwebsite.com/ari/vaccine/vaccine.htm

[Ravenseye]

23. Ok well I can post counter links to at least a few of those

Particular the work by Geier and Geier

Experts find new study by Geier & Geier on MMR and autism to be seriously flawed
http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/news/newsitem.php?id=46

I dont' have time to dig up every article or link. The point is that I am hesitant to trust any of these anti-vaccination sites because they use and mention studies that have been heavily critizied but don't make any mention of that fact and throw their references up there as fact.

[bloom]

25. Well I don't trust

the FDA or the CDC or the EPA. And I don't trust the pharmaceutical companies. And I don't think they have ever proven that it is safe. And I don't think there is any good reason to use it. I hear it costs $4 a dose to take it out and it sounds worth it to me.


I don't think there is any good reason to believe it is safe to put mercury in infants and pregnant mothers. Why would anyone want to do that?

I expect that all of the mercury is bad. People don't need it in their teeth, in their fish, in their air and they certainly don't need it injected into their bloodstream.

[Ravenseye]

26. here's the thing....ok one of the MANY things....I just don't get.

Remeber how all gasoline used to be leaded? Then people offered a choice, unleaeded and leaded? Now all gasoline is unleaded.

The unleaded gasoline cost more than the leaded. I never got that. The leaded gasoline, was unleaded gasoline that then underwent a secondary process to put lead in it.

Why did it cost less?

I agree that if they have a suitable alternative that doesn't have mercury, which it does appear they do, then why not just put it in. Four bucks a dose is nothing when you consider what they charge for some other stuff. As far as pharam making money, it would seem they could make more money by providing a 'non-themerosol' version of every vaccine. Just charge more for it. Most people would probably choose it anyway, and they'd make more money. Where's the profit of not doing it?

I don't put my trust in any particular organization, including the FDA, CDC, or EPA particularly because they tend to be politizied at the top.

I do put my trust in the number of my friends who work in the field of immunology for a number of different companies and univerisities (for some weird life luck most people I know are either teachers (#1) or immunologists/biologists (#2) pretty odd considering i haven't taken a bio class since freshman year in college)

Mercury is definately bad, there's no two ways about it and I'd never argue otherwise. We need to focus though on the environmental sources of mercury polution which is in our air, our water, and our food because that's whats hurting us.

The mercury in vaccines is negligble compared to what's in a rainbow trout I fish out of the creek, or thats in the milk I drink.

But sure, i'm on board with just not using it at all. As long as people get vaccinated. Even if thimerosol were a cause of autism, more children are saved by getting vaccinated than those that might get autism. It's sort of like asking the question "do I want my baby to have a 1 in 100,000 chance of getting autism or a 1 in a 10,000 chnace of dying before they're 10." The odds are out of my ass because I don't remember them and am too tired to look for the link, but it's something along those lines.

Vaccines help more than they hurt.
Thimerosol hasn't been adequately proven to be linked to Autism.

so just get rid of the thimerosol and use a different solution that doesn't contain mercury, and get people back to giving their kids vaccinations.

tangentally....

I don't like that my daughter was essentially forced to get a hep-b vaccination before she was 3 days old. OTherwise there would have been problems getting her into public school.

I have no problem with vaccinations for diseases that can hurt or kill her, but I see no reason to shoot up a 2 day old baby with a vaccine for a disease she essentially has no chance of contracting till she's sexually active.

[bloom]

28. One thing that bothers me

I am worried we have become a society where you have to have the money to afford organic foods, the non-toxic cleaners, the bottled water, you have to be able afford to live where the air is cleaner and so on and so forth - just to raise a healthy child.

I think it is like the war in Iraq. As long as this stuff didn't affect the policy makers, the professors, the managers, the doctors, it's like not having the draft. People didn't see all this as their problem - as long as they could avoid it for their own children.

And I think that stinks. If the safe thing to do is to take the mercury out - it should be taken out for everybody. I didn't have so much money when my children were little. We got the shots at a clinic. I would hate to think that kids who get their shots at a clinic are more likely to get autism than kids who go to a doctor in suburbia - because doctors know what the hell is going on or are at least more cautious than the ones out in the sticks or that serve the urban poor.

I am sure that the rich will always be healthier because they can afford it and it is one of the facts of life.

I think this whole health thing has caught up with the "well to do" and it is biting them back. It could very well be that it is the more well off that buy that shark fish, that buy the tuna and orange roughy and they are suffering the consequences along with everyone else. (And many wouldn't have known not to have every last vaccine that a doctor suggested).

I saw some report where someone was trying to figure what "worth" people placed on their children based on various things like whether they smoked or bought bottled water. It is quite depressing to me. I've never felt so much like our world is going to hell.

I've always been a very health conscious person. But I also believe it is the duty of the country - of those governing it- to regulate the industries i.e go back to the Clean Air Act - not the Dirty Skies Initiative, plus regulate what pharmaceutical companies can sell, keep the food supply safe, the water safe... the basics.

[Ravenseye]

37. First of all

I think we have different positions, but I just want to say thanks to you bloom for having a good few posts about this. Too many people are over-reactionary and just won't even have a civilized discourse.

I agree about too many people equating how much money they spend with whether they are good parents. It has nothing to do with that, at all. Though I think any parent that smokes around an infant is negligible.

I agree if the safe thing is to take the mercury out, which i'm not convinced of but why not, it should be for everyone. You mention the cost of the shots and goign to a clinic. I personally think that if the government is going to require children to be immunized for public schools then they should pay for it. There should be certain aspects of health care that need to be free to all and one of those is immunizations and childrens health care. If we want to be a strong society all our children need to be as healthy as possible, and not limit that to those who can afford it.

As far as organic foods I agree that theyr'e too expensive. You can occasionally find alternative sources, but in general for a family on a budget you just can't afford to shop at Whole Foods. I wonder though just how much healthier that food is as far as toxicity. The produce looks alot better though. :)

Anyway to go back to the original topic, though there have been studies that show a linkage between Thimerosol and autism, all of them have been critized by other scientists under peer review, or in other studies. There has never been a duplicated study, or supported connection between the two. Anyone who tells you otherwise is either lying or misinformed. Yet, that doesn't mean that it can't possibly be the case. If your only option is a vaccine with thimerosol in it you're better off getting the vaccine, than not. If an unsupported fear of thimerosol prevents some people from getting vaccinated and a viable alternative exists even if it costs more, it should be used. This cost should not be transfered onto the general public, and all required vaccinations in this country should be free and provided by the department of health to all who ask.

hows that?

[bloom]

42. I don't think the fear

of thimerosol is unsupported.

I think the CDC has a duty to provide vaccines that people do not have to be afraid of - and I think they should not be suggesting or requiring ANY more vaccines than are absolutely necessary. That they have been getting infants and children taking more vaccines than are necessary and useful has been part of the credibility problem.

It sounds to me like the FDA, the CDC and the EPA are too friendly with the industries that they are able to increase the profits of - protecting pharmaceutical companies - protecting the coal industries. If they want to seen as credible - that should stop for one thing.

I believe in Universal Healthcare as a goal to be working toward. I think all people should be provided with a basic level of services which would include vaccines. I think those vaccines can and should be free of thimerosol - just like the water supply should be kept free of mercury and other contaminants.

[earth mom]

17. There is STILL the possibility that mercury in the MMR causes Autism

because there is NOT ONE conclusive study-NONE of the scientists will work together on this! Vaccinations can be given to older children-why the hell is it necessary to vaccinate babies?! And just why did the pharmaceutical giants remove the thimerosol/mercury and start giving the MMR in separate jabs?!

Sorry, but you won't change my mind and I will continue to post my views so that other parents are aware of what these bastards are up to! Money is the BE END-END ALL in their world. These pharmaceutical bastards could care less about people being injured, disabled, poisoned or killed. :grr:

[Ravenseye]

21. I feel your anger, but don't share it.

I simply want to know the truth.

I support a scientific mindset, and because of that I won't argue that there isn't the possiblity of a link between Thimerosol and Autism. I simply look at the scientific studies. The only study that showed any type of link, to my knowledge, was later rebutted and shown to be flawed. The new study showed no linkage. They studied children who recieved the Thimerosol and ones who didn't and show no statistical difference in Autism rates.

Now, the aspect of vaccinating babies as opposed to older children is a separate issue. I'm not convinced of the necessity to give certain series of these vaccines to children at young ages. Here in Pennsylvania at least, it's required for a child to enter the public school system that they be vaccinated. One of these vaccinations is for Hep-B which is primarily sexually transmitted. Why is this necessary to give to a young child? The argument is that this way you get everyone before they are at risk. I question that though. Why not make it a requirement before entering middle school then?

As far as the removal of the thimerosol from vaccines, they did this because more and more people were simply refusing the vaccines because of the autism scare. When this happened and a large number of people in both Japan and Sweden refused the Pertussis shot because of Thimerosol scares there were large outbreaks of Whooping Cough, which killed a number of children and permantly damaged thousands more. The countries made the shot optional because of the scare, but after the outbreaks put the shots back into the mandatory requirement sequence. One might say that pharma has a heart and wanted more children to be protected, or one could say that it's a money issue and they were afraid they'd sell less doses by people refusing the shot entirely so they created an alternative.

As far as the MMR going in separate jabs that is a side effect issue. Using the combo shot was shown, by scientifc studies, to increase slightly the rate of fevers and convulsions in some infants to the shots. The three separate shots had less of a chance of these side effects. With my daughter we opted for the three shots. The only reason people opt for the single shot is because they get squemish at seeing their children get jabbed three times. (it is pretty violent to watch and hard to see the child cry in pain) However it's temporary pain for a reduction in the posisblity of side effects.

I'm not even going to try to convince you that big pharma is benevolent. They're a business, and they're in it for the bottom line. You have to be suspicious of their motives and I applaud you for that.

On the other hand, however, not every study done on these linkages is done by big pharma, nor in this country. If there were solid evidence showing a link it would be published, reinforced with secondary studies, and then pharma would have no choice but to change.

I think the bigger spotlight needs to be on environmental mercury and emissions from power plants, mining operations, and every other freaking industrial scum factory that pollute our environment. Those toxins have been proven to link to hot spots of autism and disease. This is precisely the reason that the clean sky act or whatever it's BS name is, is so dangerous because allowing these plants to buy and sell polution will just create more and larger hot spots.

[NickB79]

41. Actually, there is very little chance of that

There is no mercury in the MMR vaccine, as it is a live, weakened vaccine. Mercury would kill it, making it worthless. There has never been thimerosol in the MMR vaccine, despite your claims they removed it.

"why the hell is it necessary to vaccinate babies?!"

Because historically, many children died of disease before the age of 2 before vaccines became widely available.

And yes, there has been a large, conclusive study done on the possible link between MMR and autism: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7076

"Parents need have no more fears about the triple vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella. A study of more than 30,000 children in Japan should put the final nail in the coffin of the claim that the MMR vaccine is responsible for the apparent rise in autism in recent years.

The study shows that in the city of Yokohama the number of children with autism continued to rise after the MMR vaccine was replaced with single vaccines. "The findings are resoundingly negative," says Hideo Honda of the Yokohama Rehabilitation Center."

[bloom]

29. (IOM) - it is "biologically plausible" Thimerosal/vaccines caused autism

according to this by safeminds. The link you provided did not go to readable material.

------

Thimerosal is a mercury-based preservative developed by Eli Lilly back in the 1930 and has been used in as many as 50 vaccines. In the Federal Register 1982, an expert panel at FDA reviewed Thimerosal and found it toxic, caused cell death and called for its removal in over the counter products.

In 1999, the FDA stated that mercury exposure from vaccines exceeded Federal Safety Guidelines. Government officials admitted they were "asleep at the switch" when they failed to add up the cumulative exposure levels when new vaccines were added to the early infant vaccination schedule in the early1990’s.

The rate of autism a decade ago was 1 in 10,000. CDC research indicates that 1 in 150 children are autistic today

The dramatic rise in autism rates correlates with the increase in mercury doses. Thimerosal was first marketed in the mid 1930's and autism was first described as a new never before seen disorder in 1943, in children born in the 1930's.

Neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism have similar symptoms to those of mercury poisoning.

Thousands of families have reported their normally-developing children changed after receiving mercury containing vaccines and began displaying symptoms that lead to a diagnosis of autism. The symptoms of autism not only mimic those of mercury poisoning, but children with autism have been found to have 500% the amount of mercury in their bodies compared to typically-developing children.

In March, 2001, the FDA issued a statement warning pregnant women and young children not to eat fish containing high levels of mercury for fear of causing neurological problems in children. Yet, the CDC's National Immunization Program has continued to allow these same sensitive populations to be exposed to mercury from routinely administered flu shots which contain more mercury than seafood.

EPA recently closed down schools when it was discovered that air mercury levels were at 30mcg/m. (EPA's action level in the air is 1mcg/m) Yet infants injected with multiple mercury containing vaccines in the 1990s received up to 187 mcg the first 6 months of life. A typical dose received by a 2 month old who received 3 mercury vaccines was 125 times EPA's daily allowable exposure levels.

In 2001, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) stated it is "biologically plausible" that ethyl mercury Thimerosal in vaccines caused neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism.

http://www.safeminds.org/mercury/

--------------------------------

Even the author of "Evidence of Harm" said there was evidence but not proof. It seems like one of those things. Though if one of my children had been perfectly normal and there was a huge difference after getting 9 vaccines in one day - I would definitely be looking to sue someone.

I also think the gov't trying to exclude vaccines manufacturers from liability seems awfully suspicious.

[Ravenseye]

38. Lots of things are plausible

Since the rates of autism have increased this past century a number of other graphs can be shown to go right in tandem with it.

Vaccinations sure, more people are getting vaccinated, more vaccines have been developed, health in general has improved.

Plastics. Yeah plastics. There is a direct correlation between the use of household plastics and a number of disorders. Plausible? Sure. (Why? Plastics have chemicals in them that arent bonded and liquids can draw those chemicals out into the liquid itself.)

Environmental Mercury. The use of mercury in power plants and other industrial sources as our economy expanded and needed more power.

and on and on and on.

Focusing on vaccines and plausible links to autism is fine, but to ignore everything else that has happened to our environment, culture, and society in that time is reckless.

Studies repeatedly have shown no statistically relevant connection, and those that have shown one have been unrepeatable, or scientifically flawed. Still as i mentioned in another thread if a non-thimerosol option is available they should just use that so that we insure as many people are immunized as possible.

[bloom]

39. Plausibility

What you said is why this has gone on 60 years without a connection. There have been so many possible factors/changes to the environment that it has been difficult to recognize.

And I never said I was ignoring the mercury put out in the environment in a variety of ways - including what has been put in people's teeth or the 1300+ pounds a years that can be thrown into the air by a single power plant instead of having "scrubbers" installed.

A lot of people like to ignore anecdotal evidence - but I think it can be what starts people looking into something. For instance - if 50% of the mothers in a room of autistic children had been given Rho-gam shot (when a far lower % of mothers would have had a Rho-gam shot) - that suggests a study should be done (by someone NOT associated with pharmaceutical companies.) If thousands of parents notice previously healthy toddlers suddenly becoming autistic after being given vaccinations - to ignore that is criminal, IMO.

To have a series of documented coverups by the FDA. To have laws attached to "Homeland Security" bills that say that parents do not have the right to know about the dangers in vaccines...

To have people saying for years that mercury is neurological toxin - it's just finally now linked to autism - given a name.

I agree that there could be any number or all of the factors contributing to a rapid rise in the number of autistic children during the 90's. I also think it is foolish to ignore the vaccine link.

Some of the previous arguments made by people against the mercury/vaccine link included the contention that mercury has not been linked to autism. With that hurdle crossed - maybe people can make some headway into the problem.

[demnan]

9. Unfilitered on AAR

showcased this last week. You can go here and order a Mercury test if you are of child-bearing age and concerned:

https://usa.greenpeace.org/mercury/

[donsu]

43. thank you so much for this info and link

nt

[blue neen]

10. At the same time that the administration is increasing mercury emissions,

they are decreasing funding for the children who have been affected by it. Disgusting. Appalling. "Compassionate" Conservatism at it's worst.

[AlCzervik]

19. I count myself lucky, when i pregnant in 1994 i had a very

what i would call progressive and aware obgyn who warned me from the start to stay away from seafood, he gave me a whole list of fish to stay away from and said i should drink bottled water.

[bloom]

20. Mercury polluters

http://www.maps.nrdc.org:8000/mercury/default.asp


Click on dots on the map - tells you how many pounds of mercury is being spewed by who near you.

[trudyco]

27. This is good -are there organizations working against Mercury

emissions? I was really surprised to find a cement plant spewing out merucury!

[bloom]

30. One of the deals with the B**h Dirty Skies Initiative

is they want to trade mercury emissions - so as to let some industries keep polluting. (Like places that aren't polluting anyway can sell credits or something - the upshot being that there is more mercury still getting out in the environment.)

The trouble with the Clean Air Act was that industry was given so long - until 2008 - to do something. Too bad they weren't required to fix it before B**h ever took office.



Yes - it is interesting to see who is putting mercury into the environment.

Here is a SCORECARD site - rankings by state:

http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/rank-states.tcl?edf_substance_id=7439%2d97%2d6&edf_chem_name=MERCURY&type=mass&category=total_env&modifier=na&how_many=100

[bloom]

31. There seems be some discrepancy

Not a big surprise.

The SCORECARD - shows Indiana with 514 pounds of mercury released into the air -

http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/rank-states.tcl?edf_chem_name=MERCURY&edf_substance_id=7439-97-6&how_many=100&drop_down_name=Air+releases


I found this one the Scorecard website:

1) TRI may significantly underreport releases, because companies use unreliable emissions factors to estimate their releases, rather than monitor their actual emissions. Issues impacting the quality of TRI data are explained in How Reliable Are TRI Data?

2) TRI does not cover all toxic chemicals that have the potential to adversely affect human health or the environment.

3) TRI does not require reporting from many major sources of pollution releases.

4) TRI does not require companies to report the quantities of toxic chemicals used or the amounts that remain in products.

5) TRI does not provide information about the exposures people may experience as a consequence of chemical use.

SCORECARD'S SOURCE FOR TRI DATA
Scorecard's TRI data are derived from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2002 public data release (released in July 2004).
-------




while the map showed the one coal plant with 1300 pounds a year.

http://www.maps.nrdc.org:8000/mercury/default.asp

The NRDC site says of their info:

Data sources: The EPA provided a file containing state fish advisories and also supplied data on longitude and latitude of mercury sources. NRDC verified, and where necessary corrected, the mercury source locations using ESRI's StreetMap database and aerial photography from Microsoft's TerraServer-USA. Last updated on August 24, 2004.

[bloom]

51. organizations

I don't know that much about the national ones - other than the big environmental groups like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club.

http://www.greenpeace.org

http://www.sierraclub.org/cleanair/mercury/

This group has a nice site:

http://www.ewg.org/

There seem to be a multitude of sites out there.

Here are a couple more:

http://www.savethecleanairact.org/

http://www.mercurypolicy.org/

http://www.nrdc.org

Internationally:

http://www.ban.org/Ban-Hg-Wg/

http://www.ban.org


I've been looking online today some to see what local to Indiana groups are doing. The Hoosier Environmental Council, for instance. I'm sure there is someone out in CO doing something.

Some states - like California and Iowa have passed their own laws banning Themiosol from vaccines. Right now - local might be the way to go.

[Shallah Kali]

33. W. Eugene Smith's photo

http://www.masters-of-photography.com/S/smith/smith_minamata_full.html

Where are the RW fighting for the unborn now? Where are the prayer vigils and phone in campaigns? The hypocracy is mindblowing.

[WMliberal]

36. Ah cap and trade... "but the numbers look so good on paper"

The EPA made the mistake (MIHOP or LIHOP: you decide) of not capping how many permits individual plants could trade for. Never mind that Europe has done tradeable permits for decades and has examples of how to do it right and what to avoid. We're just gonna do what will cut mercury emissions on paper by 70%, but not make the worst polluters clean up AT ALL.

[bloom]

40. Krugman was writing about this about a year ago.

"During the 1990's, government regulation greatly reduced mercury emissions from medical and municipal waste incineration, leaving power plants as the main problem. In 2000, the E.P.A. determined that mercury is a hazardous substance as defined by the Clean Air Act, which requires that such substances be strictly controlled. E.P.A. staff estimated that enforcing this requirement would lead to a 90 percent reduction in power-plant mercury emissions by 2008.

A few months ago, however, the Bush administration reversed this determination and proposed a "cap and trade" system for mercury that it claimed would lead to a 70 percent reduction by 2018. Other estimates suggest that the reduction would be smaller, and take longer. <snip>

The answer is that the foxes have been put in charge of the henhouse. The head of the E.P.A.'s Office of Air and Radiation, like most key environmental appointees in the Bush administration, previously made his living representing polluting industries (which, in case you haven't guessed, are huge Republican donors). On mercury, the administration didn't just take industry views into account, it literally let the polluters write the regulations: much of the language of the administration's proposal came directly from lobbyists' memos.

E.P.A. experts normally study regulations before they are issued, but they were bypassed. According to The Los Angeles Times: "E.P.A. staffers say they were told not to undertake the normal scientific and economic studies called for under a standing executive order. . . . E.P.A. veterans say they cannot recall another instance where the agency's technical experts were cut out of developing a major regulatory proposal."

Mercury is just a particularly vivid example of what's going on in environmental protection, and public policy in general. As a devastating article in Sunday's New York Times Magazine documented, the administration's rollback of the Clean Air Act has gone beyond the polluters' wildest dreams."

See:

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/pol/mercury.htm

-----------------------------------------

I think a lot of people - knew the dangers in a intellectual sense. Nowadays - a year later - the danger has a name that many become familiar with. Austism - used to affect 1 in 50,000 (in 1950 for instance) - now people say it affects as many as 1 in 150. A lot more families are affected than ever.

[WMliberal]

44. don't need to, I did an independent study project on this in 2002

Georgia (surprising that a red state was one of the first to use a European approach) and several other states have better tradeable permit systems than the EPA's program. The EPA's program undermines most state tradeable permit programs. When the states slap a lawsuit on power plants owned by multi-state power companies, the power companies go forum shopping for YEARS. Jurisdiction is a nightmare in these cases, as if a state has higher standards than the govt, the companies can argue than it doesn't matter as per the interstate commerce clause in the constitution so it's a Federal court matter.
Even if the power companies lose the court cases in the end, it's years later and the profits they've made by continuing to pollute in the meantime more than compensate for the cost of improving. It's a win-win situation for big biz.

No wonder Dominion Power was one of *'s 10 biggest donors in 2000. :eyes:

[bloom]

45. I'm wondering if more can get done at the state level.

Course now we've gone and lost our Democratic Governor - but it seems that there may be more hope than what we can expect from the Feds.

[WMliberal]

46. Experimentation is being shifted to state level

since Washington has stepped away from it's traditional role in environmentalism. Many regulations are becoming outdated and polluters have found ways around them. Washington ignored new methods of improving the environment until the 90's.

State-level Departments of Environmental Quality have and shall continue to be the leaders in innovation, since we can expect more of the lack of insight and creativity from DC. Another reason is the now-conservative courts tending to leave these matters more and more to the states.

[bloom]

47. Brouchure that can be printed/forwarded

The National Education Association, (NEA), Learning Disabilities Association of America (LDA) and The Arc of the United States, have released a brochure that identifies mercury pollution as one of the greatest threats facing developing fetuses, infants and young children. This publication also shows parents how exposure to this potent neurotoxicant can adversely affect their child's learning potential. The brochure is available online in pdf version.


http://www.thearc.org/

http://www.ldaamerica.org/

[bloom]

48. Mercury Exposure - where is the mercury coming from?

Many sources:

http://www.mercuryexposure.org/index.php?page_id=29

[bloom]

49. For example - cleaning solvents in...

Cleaning Solvents
Ajax Powder

Comet Cleaner

 Lysol Direct

Soft Scrub

Alconox Soap

Derma Scrub

Dove Soap

Ivory Dishwashing

Liquid Joy Dishwashing

Liquid Murphy's Oil Soap

Soft Dish soap

Cidex

[bloom]

50. "Mercury on the Mind" (Autism and Alzheimer’s)

An article from that website.

http://www.mercuryexposure.org/index.php?article_id=175

Although they afflict widely different age groups, autism and Alzheimer’s disease share a common cause: mercury. Dr. Boyd Haley, professor and chair of the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky, and Dr. Bernard Rimland, founder of the Autism Research Institute, presented evidence at this year’s Doctors for Disaster Preparedness meeting that connects mercury with these diseases.

This heavy metal is highly poisonous. A Dartmouth professor studying the chemical characteristics of an organic form of mercury – dimethyl mercury – spilled two drops of it on her gloved hand. The first sign of mercury poisoning occurred four months later when her speech began to be slurred. This was followed by difficulty walking and loss of vision. She then fell into a coma and died. Another person, attempting to smelt the silver in dental amalgams he obtained (they are 35 percent silver, 50 percent mercury, and 15 percent tin, zinc, and other metals), heated them in a frying pan. The mercury vapor thus generated killed him quickly. The two other family members in the house at the time also died.

Mercury is one proton (neutron and electron) heavier than gold – the atomic number of gold is 79; mercury, 80. It is distributed throughout the earth’s crust. Unlike other metals, mercury, in its elemental state, is liquid (molten) at room temperature. And it releases a steady stream of gaseous mercury atoms that linger in the atmosphere for months (eventually falling back to earth and its oceans in an inorganic form in rain drops). Even when in a solid state, combined with other metals as an alloy, mercury atoms continually escape into the atmosphere. Once added to latex paint, put in teething powder, used in making hats, as a fungicide on seeds, as an antiseptic (Merthiolate), and as a treatment for syphilis (the cure was worse than the disease), human exposure to mercury today comes principally from three sources: dental amalgams, vaccines, and fish. <snip>

Autism was discovered in 1943, in American children, twelve years after ethyl mercury (thimerosal) was added to the pertussis vaccine. (The disease was not seen in Europe until the 1950s, after thimerosal was added to vaccines used there.) In a typical case, shortly before his 2nd birthday a normally developing, healthy boy stops communicating with others and withdraws into himself. He avoids eye contact and becomes strange and aloof. His vision becomes blurred; and he develops various motor disturbances, such as involuntary jerking of the arms and legs and walking on his toes. In addition to these manifestations, Dr. Sallie Bernard and her colleagues, in a study titled, "Autism: A Unique Type of Mercury Poisoning," describe the speech difficulties, unusual behavior (such as unprovoked crying spells and head banging), various degrees of cognitive impairment, gastrointestinal difficulties, and immune difficulties that these autistic children can have. Mercury is most likely a causative factor in other developmental disorders as well, such as delayed speech and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.<more>

[Mrs_Beastman]

52. Chimpy makes my blood boil

and the people who voted for him.

[bloom]

53. For people who want to see what the CDC has to say:

http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/dd/aic/cdc/default.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/vacsafe/concerns/autism/default.htm

http://www.cdc.gov/nip/news/iom-thim5-18-04.htm#Background
___________________________________________


I didn't see anything that convinced me that vaccines with thimerosal do NOT contribute to autism (along with the various environmental and amalgam sources of mercury).

To me - it is like expecting the tobacco industry to take responsibility for lung cancer and emphysema. They are too much caught up in it.

The good thing is that most thimerosal has been taken out of most vaccines - so now people can concentrate on other sources of mercury and heavy metals that are being pumped into the environment. (People still need to be wary of vaccines - esp. the flu vaccine).

[bloom]

54. The One in Six

Between Autism & Autism Spectrum Disorder ( 1% ?), and ADD & ADHD (5-15%) - you could get up to 1 of 6 kids affected - that upholds the 1 in 6 women with mercury content ( you could get that just with people with ADD and ADHD).

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/parenting/03/13/adhd.study/index.html

http://www.nas.org.uk/nas/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=108&a=3527

And not everyone if formally diagnosed.



There is one site that "rules out" people with mercury or other poisoning as NOT having ADD/ADHD even though they say people with mercury or lead poisoning have similar symptoms. They also say they don't know what causes ADD/ADHD.

http://www.focusas.com/AttentionalDisorders.html

But then there are a lot of sites that don't come out and say that autism is linked to mercury, also.


Link to thread about Texas study linking autism to mercury:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1318974

[Shallah Kali]

55. Nine States Sue Gov't Over Mercury Rules

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050330/ap_on_he_me/epa_mercury_2


Nine states filed a lawsuit against the federal government Tuesday, challenging new regulations they say fail to protect children and expectant mothers from dangers posed by mercury emissions from power plants.

The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., said the reductions announced earlier this month by the Environmental Protection Agency, do not go far enough to satisfy Clear Air Act requirements.

{snip}

"EPA's emissions trading plan will allow some power plants to actually increase mercury emissions, creating hot spots of mercury deposition and threatening communities," said Attorney General Peter Harvey of New Jersey, lead plaintiff in the case. "It's an anti-human health position. The EPA is putting private profit ahead of public health, and it's a mistake."

{snip}

The eight other states involved in the suit are California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York and Vermont.

---

It might be a good idea to let your state officials know you support this suit if they are part of it. If not it might be a good idea to ask them to join it.