Thimerosal Not Linked To Autism: Study
5 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // January 7th, 2008 // 4:06 pm
Autism cases continued to increase in California after the mercury-containing preservative thimerosal was eliminated from most childhood vaccines, suggesting the ingredient isn’t a primary cause of autism, according to a report in the latest issue of Archives of General Psychiatry.
Researchers at the California Department of Public Health studied the prevalence of children with autism in California from 1995 through March 2007, noting that thimerosal was eliminated from most vaccines by 2001. They used data from the California Department of Developmental Services, which administers a statewide system of centers that serve individuals with autism and other developmental problems. What did they find?
“The estimated prevalence of autism for children at each year of age from 3 to 12 years increased throughout the study period,†the authors write. For every 1,000 children born in 1993, 0.3 had autism at age 3, compared with 1.3 per 1,000 births in 2003. The highest estimated prevalence - 4.5 cases per 1,000 births - was reached in 2006 for children born in 2000. In other words, the rate of autism increased even after thimerosal was removed from the equation. (For more detail, here’s a chart).
“Although insufficient time has passed to calculate the prevalence of autism for children 6 years and older born after 2000, the prevalence at ages 3 to 5 years has increased monotonically for each birth year since 1999, during which period exposure to thimerosal has been reduced,†the researchers asserted.
In addition to analyzing the prevalence of autism by birth year, the researchers also examined the rate among children age 3 to 5 based on quarterly reports issued by the Department of Developmental Services. Prevalence increased each quarter from January 1995 (0.6 per 1,000 live births) through March 2007 (4.1 per 1,000 live births), including after 2004, when the researchers estimate that exposure to thimerosal during infancy and early childhood declined. Over the same time period, the rate of all developmental disabilities increased but at a slower rate, from 5.4 to 9.5 per 1,000 live births.
The bottom line - the authors say the data doesn’t support the hypothesis that exposure to thimerosal during childhood is a primary cause of autism. And this is an accompanying editorial in support of vaccination.
Colleen Eaton
To state that removing Thimersol has done nothing to lower the autism rate based on data from the California State Development Department is misleading and flawed. How many children born from 1995 to the present were never properly diagnosed by their pediatricians so were never referred to the department of developmental services and are therefore not in the database? Pediatricians did not start accurately diagnosing Autism until recently. What if the number of cases of children born is far greater than the number actually diagnosed and referred? That would mean there is a possibility that the numbers have come down since Thimersol was withdrawn in 2001.
My son was born in September 1995. I thought he was “normal”. In 2003 a neuro-pyschologist diagnosed my son with High Functioning Autism. He was never referred to the regional center and it is not in their database. How many more children are out there like my son?
Perhaps a researcher would be smart enough to look at the data of the Department of Education regarding the number of special ed students with autism or autistic-like symptoms. You might find a more accurate picture of how many children born from 1995 to 2001 have autism versus after 2001. But, keep in mind, this number will be deflated as well since school psychologists avoid diagnosing autism like the plague due to budget concerns for educating special ed students.
Colleen Eaton
Tustin, CA
Nathan
Colleen,What’s the point of revising the research methods?
It sounds like reguardless of what the numbers say, you are not going to believe them unless they tell you what you want to hear.
Cathy Kurz
Simply because thimersol was banned in manufacturing vaccines in 2001, does NOT mean it was not administered to children in the millions of unexpired vaccines. In fact, unexpired vaccines with thimersol, are still being given to unknowing little ones TODAY ! Every parent must ask their Doctors to check the ingredients of each shot before using it.If any more information is needed in this area, please check with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. New York , who has alerted many people to this ONGOING problem. I work in the health care field and know this to be true.
bob bishop
Yes, the FDA did ban thiomersol in the ’90’s; however, as usually happens, big pharma ignored the ban. They continued to produce childhood vaccines with thiomersol as well as the flu vaccine for adults.
More egregious, they continue to produce them with aluminum in them as well.
Is there anyone on the planet who doesn’t know that heavy metals are neurotoxic.
As a pharmacist responsible for ordering and evaluating these vaccines, I can testify this to be a sad fact.
This study as well as others are only published in order to further line the pockets of big pharma whose motto is “profits before health”.
Craig
I have had the privilege to work with Autistic Students of varying ages since 1993. During that time I have had the opportunity to live outside of the US in a less developed country. I lived in The Bahamas in an area where Health care is not as readily available. I worked with children, and adults with Autism while living there. Most of those students had never received childhood vaccines, as they were from Haiti a third world country. I decided at that time that Vaccines are not a major factor in the incidence of Autism. How is it that an Island where most do not have access to these vaccines the Children are still Autistic? How can we say that it is” the cause” if the rate for Autism is just as high? How many parents are refusing to vaccinate their children creating false hope, and leaving their child exposed to deadly disease that they should never have to worry about? Canadian researchers have duplicated these results in their own studies. It is time to start spending more time and money on other areas of research.