Running head: AUTISM ETIOLOGY: GENETIC OR CAUSE-AND … · Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder...

Running head: AUTISM ETIOLOGY: GENETIC OR CAUSE-AND-EFFECT 1

Autism Etiology: Genetic or Cause-and-Effect

Richard W. Brady

University of Natural Medicine

Author Note

Richard W. Brady, Department of Natural Health Sciences Doctoral Dissertation, University

of Natural Medicine.

Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Richard W. Brady,

Department of Natural Health Sciences; University of Natural Medicine, 109 North Exchange

Place, San Dimas, California 91773. E-mail: [email protected].

AUTISM ETI0LOGY: GENETIC OR CAUSE-AND-EFFECT 2

Abstract

Based on the available research and clinical evidence, should we believe what the government

self-proclaimed experts are telling us about Autism? Mounting evidence suggests that a deeper

examination of the clinical evidence would be prudent. Searching for the truth will demand

objectivity, perseverance, and a thick skin from the researcher / investigator. In his book, Why

Your Child Is Hyperactive, Dr Benjamin Feingold states there is solid clinical evidence that

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is caused by an allergic reaction in the brain to

chemicals in food. Dr. Feingold doesn’t stop there, but adds that there is mounting evidence that

childhood-onset autism, which begins when children start eating solid food, is caused by the

same allergy. You may be asking at this point, why this information is not common knowledge.

Perhaps this evidence simply has not had time to reach the general public. Dr. Feingold

published his book in 1974. In addition to Dr. Feingold’s book, this researcher has uncovered a

tremendous amount of clinical and empirical evidence that has been suppressed and buried.

Why? According to Dr. Feingold, hundreds of billions of dollars has already been amassed from

the misery of millions of children and the heart break of their families by the food, chemical,

pharmaceutical, and medical industries and the research strongly suggests that they are being

protected by our own federal government. This researcher will present the available research

and clinical evidence so you can answer that question for yourself.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………….. 3

Statement of the problem ………………………………………………………….. 3

First Argument: Genetic testing ………………………………………………….... 13

Second Argument: Vaccine court ..............................................................................24

Third Argument: Mercury and cause-and-effect ...................................................... 27

Fourth Argument: Vaccine safety ........................................................................... 47

Fifth Argument: Brain development and neurotransmitters .................................... 53

Sixth Argument: The infrastructure and anatomy of allergies ................................. 65

Seventh Argument: Vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children ..................................... 74

Eighth Argument: Autism foundations and research .............................................. 81

Ninth Argument: Autism theories ........................................................................... 85

Tenth Argument: Male vs. female prevalence ......................................................... 89

Eleventh Argument: The febrile autistic child ......................................................... 90

Hypotheses ...................................................................................................................... 92

Results ............................................................................................................................ 94

Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 96

Summary ......................................................................................................................... 99

References ..................................................................................................................... 100

Appendices ............................................................................................................ 107-158

Tables ..................................................................................................................... 159-168

AUTISM ETIOLOGY: GENETIC OR CAUSE-AND-EFFECT 3

Autism Etiology: Genetic or Cause-and-Effect

The problem is, there is no authoritative definition, proven etiology or any widely held

accepted set of diagnostic standards for making an objective differential diagnosis of autism.

The goal of this research was to uncover and report the truth concerning autism and its

etiology. The researcher discovered during the exercise of this quest that the truth vis-à-vis,

autism, seemed to be covered up and wrapped in confusion and controversy.

The objective of this study was to review and analyze the available past and current

literature presenting “a priori” and “a posteriori” arguments supporting the cause-and-effect

etiological hypotheses for autism. “A priori” knowledge or justification is independent of

experience (for example ‘All Fathers have children’); “A posteriori” knowledge or justification

is dependent on experience or empirical evidence (for example ‘Some Fathers are married’).

Each argument will be defended by the researcher in support his hypotheses.

You the reader will serve as the acting jury. In your deliberation of the evidence presented

by the prosecution (the researcher), you will weigh and judge the validity of the arguments

presented and will from your findings formulate a judgment. Your verdict will be based on the

issues, matters and questions of fact submitted to you for decision and not on your biased

subjective opinions. Did the researcher succeed in persuading you that his hypotheses

convincingly fulfilled the purpose of the study? Keep in mind that the prosecution (the

researcher) is asking that you the jury find for the cause-and-effect clinical model while the

defense (the government) will insist that you find for the genetic clinical model.


Autism in children dates back to the early 1900s in America. The term autism has been in

use for about 100 years and comes from the Greek word “autos” meaning self. The term has

been used to describe a group of symptoms in which the center focus is the isolation of self from

social interaction and is sub-grouped within the category labeled Pervasive Developmental

Disorders (PDD) which refers to a group of five neurological disorders characterized anecdotally

by delays in the development of some basic functions including communication and socialization

skills. The first three are referred to as Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) which are

interestingly described and defined by Wikipedia online encyclopedia updated April 2, 2010 as a

spectrum of psychological conditions characterized by widespread abnormalities of social

interactions and communication as well as severely restricted interests and highly repetitive

behavior. Wikipedia (2010) online encyclopedia retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org

Wikipedia also defines autism as a disorder of neural development characterized by

impaired social interaction and communication and by restricted and repetitive behavior. It is

interesting that this definition omits the term psychological condition when describing autism,

since autism is one of three autism spectrum disorders. It is important to remember these

definitions for we will be referring back to them regularly throughout this study. The last two

ASD(s) are much rarer. PDD generalized symptoms according to Wikipedia include:

• Difficulty using and understanding language

• Difficulty relating to people, objects and events

• Difficulty make eye contact with others

• Difficulty accepting change

• Clings to the same objects such as toys to the exclusion of other objects

• Displays stereotypy or repetitive and ritualistic movements and behavior


These very same symptoms are common findings in children diagnosed with ADD and

ADHD as well.

The following definitions were retrieved from Wikipedia online encyclopedia.

Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD):

1. Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS)

is often incorrectly referred to as simply PDD. PDD refers to a group of

conditions of which PDD-NOS is a member. PDD-NOS, is considered a

diagnosis, whereas PDD is a descriptive term. PDD-NOS, is often referred

to as atypical autism and is one of three disorders known as autism spectrum

disorders (ASD). The diagnosis is determined by arbitrary and non-

standardized criteria. The psychology field is considering creating several

subclasses within PDD-NOS which is the most common PDD. Because the

symptoms of PDD-NOS are so broadly defined, it is often an arbitrary

decision when determining if a disorder should actually be classified as

PDD-NOS.

2. Autism (Autistic Disorder) is a severe affective PDD with onset usually

before three years of age with an alleged genetic and / or biological basis.

The genetic model has never been proven or even supported by independent

clinical research. It is characterized by the loss or severe impairment of

social interactive skills, lack of self restraint and self control, aggression,

poor verbal and nonverbal communication, dedication to self, compromised

cognition and coordination accompanied by volatile emotions, diminished

fine motor skills and the inability to learn language. They appear

preoccupied with certain favored objects and topics. They exhibit repetitive


ritualistic behavior (stereotypy).

3. Asperger Syndrome children display many of the same symptoms as

children with autistic disorder. However, they usually have average or above

average intelligence but they may have difficulty expressing themselves.

They often want to be social and interact with others but they don’t know

how to go about it. They may not be able to identify with the emotions of

others. They may not read facial expressions or body language very well.

Symptoms may not be apparent until they attend school necessitating

interaction with other children and teachers.

4. Rett Syndrome is defined in the Wikipedia Encyclopedia as a rare

developmental disorder presenting with normal development from birth to

about 5 months of age, however, from 5 to 48 months the head

circumference development slows and motor skills are lost accompanied by

impairment of social interaction and language. This PDD occurs

predominately in females.

5. Childhood Disintegrative Disorder (CDD) is similar to Rett syndrome in

that the children begin to develop normally, however from about age 2 to

age 10, children are increasingly less willing to interact and communicate

with others. At the same time, they develop repetitive movements and

obsessive behaviors and interests. They progressively lose motor skills

leading to disability. CDD is the rarest and most severe PDD.


Let’s pause here for a moment. Can we identify any other disorders which display these

same characteristics, specifically, difficulty using verbal or non-verbal communication to interact

effectively with others?

• Symptoms of Inebriation: The state of being intoxicated by consumption

of alcohol or other substance to a degree that mental and physical function is

noticeably impaired. Common symptoms may include a breakdown in

communication skills, slurred speech, impaired balance, poor coordination,

loss of fine motor movements, flushed face, reddened eyes, reduced

inhibition, hiccups, and uncharacteristic behavior such as aggressiveness or

reclusion. Drunkenness from alcohol can result in a wide range of emotions,

ranging from anger, sadness, and depression to euphoria, lightheartedness and

joviality. Addiction researcher Griffith Edwards, MD (1994), points out that

intoxication with alcohol is a “chemically induced mental disorder". Dr

Edwards was born in India and received his M.D. from Oxford University.

So, we have established up to this point that it is not only very possible but very easy to

chemically induce a mental disorder or at least to create symptoms mimicking a neurological-

developmental disorder. Let’s look at another example:

•••• Symptoms of Heat Exhaustion and Heat Stroke: The functioning of a person's

cooling system is, under normal conditions, regulated by the brain’s

hypothalamus which is normally under the healthy working brain’s control

maintaining homeostasis. When the brain loses that control, blood temperature

can rise to dangerous levels and hyperthermia may ensue. Excessive and

prolonged heat applied to the body can adversely affect internal organs and their


function for extended periods. The body will attempt to dissipate heat by dilating

blood vessels to accommodate the increase in blood flow that results when the

blood temperature is elevated above 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit causing the heart to

pump out more blood. The vasculature responsible for organ perfusion will

constrict. The blood capillary circuits just beneath the skin are filled causing the

blood to flow closer to the skin’s surface in an attempt to transfer excessive heat

from the blood through the skin to the outside of the body. The body will attempt to

use evaporation of perspiration to cool the skin which is inefficient in the presence

of high humidity leading to dehydration and higher blood temperatures. Blood

supply to the gastrointestinal tract will be retarded which frequently results in leaky

gut syndrome characterized by excessive gut wall permeability to undigested or

partially digested food, especially proteins which may result in allergies or free

access to the systemic environment by other residents in the gut such as bacterial

released toxins and microbes themselves encouraging a pre-inflammatory condition

process that can result in compromised organ function and even irreversible

damage, especially organs highly perfused with blood including the heart, liver,

kidneys, lungs, brain and the blood itself. Symptoms of heat exhaustion can occur

even when the blood temperature is normal including headache, mental confusion

and dizziness. As the blood temperature rises and approaches 104 to 106 degrees

Fahrenheit, mental symptoms resulting from heatstroke become one of

aggressiveness, combativeness, staggering, an unstable gait and weird and bizarre

behavior patterns. So in effect we have a condition which was externally or

environmentally induced. These strange and bizarre behavior patterns, impairment


of verbal and non-verbal communication skills including slurred speech, loss of

balance, hallucinations, confusion, agitation, disorientation, seizures, combative and

aggressive behavior sound familiar because they are in part, the same symptoms and

characteristics observed in autism. Was this genetic or cause-and-effect?

What if there were other toxins that have the ability to cause other areas of the brain to give

up control to their invasion. Because the brain controls the organs and their function and is

responsible for the Central Nervous System (CNS) functions of receiving, organizing and

transmitting information for the entire body, in theory if we could disrupt one or more of these

CNS functions, we could artificially produce negative developmental-like symptoms of

neuromuscular impairment, cognitive, reasoning and communication deficits. This researcher’s

cause-and-effect theory is based upon these reasonable and rational assumptions.

Other neurological disorders (ND) include Alzheimer’s Disease, Attention Deficit Disorder

(ADD) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are not included as a PDD but are

relevant to this research including some that are associated with ADHD for example, Tourette

syndrome (Gilles de la tourette syndrome) which is an inherited neuropsychiatric disorder

characterized by multiple physical (motor) tics and at least one vocal (phonic) tic, but again is

not a member of the PDDs but rather is a member of a spectrum of tic disorders that is

sometimes misdiagnosed as ADHD or Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD).

Before we get into the specific numbers and statistics of autism, we need to clarify a couple

of terms that will be used in this study to measure the occurrence of the disease. “Prevalence”

describes the number of existing disease cases in a defined population during a specific time

period. This is the total number of people who currently have a specified disease, condition or

disorder. “Incidence” describes the number of new cases of a disease in a defined population


over a specific period of time. This is the annual number of people who currently have a new

case of a particular disease, condition or disorder. It is very important to keep these two

definitions in mind when listening to or reading statistical reports concerning autism because the

reporting entities often confuse the two terms. A disease that is chronic or has no cure for

example will have a high prevalence but could have a low incidence. A disease that is acute or

self- limiting, and of short duration may have a high incidence but will have a very low

prevalence.

According to the Autism Society in Bethesda, Maryland, one percent of American children between

the ages of 3 to 17 have been diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). The reported prevalence

by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is 1 in 110 children with a reported range of 1

in 80 to 1 in 240 children. It is estimated that 1.5 million Americans currently have been diagnosed

with autism and the rate of autism incidence is nearly 20 percent annually and still rising.

Autism is the fastest-growing developmental disability in America and has now reached

epidemic proportions. The term epidemic is a subjective observation, but considering the current

incidence rate, autism qualifies. Again, according to the CDC, four million babies are born in America

annually and twenty-four thousand of them will be diagnosed with an ASD and who knows how many cases

of autism are out there that never are diagnosed. The annual cost to America is sixty-billion dollars with a

projected annual cost of $200 to $400 billion in 10 years. The cost of autism over the lifespan for one individual is

3.2 million dollars.

The CDC statistical reports indicate that boys appear to be four times more likely to acquire

the disorders than girls, but girls generally have more severe symptoms than boys. According to

a 2006 study, 1 in 70 boys at that time in America had an autism diagnosis compared to only one

in 315 girls. The CDC conducted these autism studies in 2002 and again in 2006 with ten


communities participating in both studies. The studies show: There was a fifty-seven percent increase

in the number of children diagnosed from 2002 to 2006. This study revealed also that only 41% of the children

diagnosed with an ASD had cognitive deficits, dispelling the myth that all children with autism are

intellectually challenged and/or disabled. The CDC now estimates that 673,000 children

currently have an ASD in America. The study was published in Pediatrics, The American

Academy of Pediatrics official journal, on 05 October 2009. In this 2007 National Survey of Children’s

Health, 78,037 parents with children ages 3 to 17 were interviewed. Each set of parents were questioned if they had

ever been told by a medical professional that their child had an ASD. The survey results showed that 110 in 10,000

(673,000) answered that they had. Retrieved from

http://autismaspergerssyndrome.suite101.com/article.cfm/national_autism_awareness

According to the CDC, fifty-one to ninety-one percent of children with an ASD or some developmental

concern have been recorded before three years of age. Studies have shown that about one third of parents of

children with an ASD noticed a problem before their child’s first birthday, and 80% saw problems by 24 months.

Individuals with an ASD had average medical expenditures that exceeded those without an ASD. On average,

medical expenditures for individuals with an ASD were 4.1 to 6.2 times greater than for those without an ASD.

Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the population of the United States in 2009 was a

little over three hundred and seven million. See table 1. Children under the age of 5 in 2008,

was 6.9%. That means that roughly ninety-three percent are non targets for autism. Does

genetics recognize age groups? What is it about this particular age group that makes them so

susceptible to autism and other neurological aberrations at such a high rate?

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in (1980) published that in the

United States, 1 in 10,000 children were diagnosed as having autism. Today, the CDC reports

the prevalence of autism is 1 in 110 children up from 1 in 150 just a year ago. Does this sound


genetic to you? Independent researchers on the average have reported that they found 1 in 43 for

autism and 1 in 14 for ADHD. This is really a sobering statistic. What has occurred between

1980 and today which we can attribute these explosive numbers to? The federal government

argues that it is due to better technology and reporting systems. Is that even a rational statement?

Records from the 1940s through the early 1960s reveal that only the socioeconomic classes

who could afford to pay for vaccinations received them. Isn’t it interesting that autism during

that time period was observed only in these populations? Auto-Immune Disorders before this

time were uncommon. Disorders, such as Rheumatoid Arthritis, Amyotrophic lateral Sclerosis

(ALS) and Multiple Sclerosis became household words after this time period. It was during the

following decades (1970s and 1980s) that vaccinations became universal in America due to

federal vaccine implementation programs with the objective of coercing the states to implement

forced vaccinations under the guise of protecting American children. Surely, they had statistics

from the 1940s and 1950s and could see the relationship between giving vaccines and cases of

autism that resulted. So, why encourage more autism cases by vaccinating more children. It was

during this time period that the number of mandated vaccines progressively increased from 8 in

1980 to 22 in 2000. Today, 30+ vaccines are administered before the age of 18 months. Autism

today is an equal opportunity destroyer of children’s lives for it is observed currently in all

socioeconomic classes. Was this genetic, or cause-and-effect?

After all this time, are we any closer to identifying the real etiology of autism? Autism is

frequently defined in the literature as a psychological and developmental disorder of genetic

etiology by the scientific and medical communities. There is however, solid clinical evidence

that the scientific and medical experts are choosing to disregard. This researcher has a theorem

that autism is a cause-and-effect phenomenon, not a genetic anomaly. This hypothesis deserves


very serious consideration and close examination by our researchers, clinicians, our regulatory

agencies and the American public. It appears that our bureaucrats and their federally funded

scientific community are determined to make autism what they want it to be. Why are they

ignoring convincing data that challenges the genetic model?

The term “autism” was coined by Eugen Bleuler, a Swiss psychiatrist in 1911 who

mistakenly used the term to describe a group of symptoms of schizophrenia which unfortunately

linked autism and schizophrenia until the 1960s. The treatment protocols for autism in the 1960s

and 1970s by the so called experts of that time period consisted of the archaic and the bizarre

including d-Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD), electric shock, and behavior modification using

pain and punishment. If the child wasn’t emotionally scarred before the treatment they certainly

were after the treatment. Nowadays it appears that the federally underwritten medical and

scientific communities have added to their ignorance and incompetence, conspiracy as well.

You have to wonder, what is their schema? You decide.

Arguments for the prosecution:

First argument: Genetic Testing:

In the vast majority of cases in which a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder has been

made, no cause is apparent. In a few cases, biologic causes have been held responsible although

none have been shown to be unique to autism. Even though US government agencies are

steadfast in their argument that the genetic clinical model is responsible for autism, that claim is

not supported by current genetic testing or clinical evidence. However, an induced cause-and-

effect alternative genetic model could provide some missing answers and a working theory.


Defense of First Argument:

Currently, the most frequently used genetic testing modalities for autism spectrum disorders

are “karyotyping”, which examines a sample of cells for abnormalities, and “Fragile X

Syndrome”, a condition that can cause developmental problems and alleged as a leading genetic

cause of autism spectrum disorders by the self proclaimed experts. However, the tests have

proven to be complete failures for identifying a genetic basis for autism. The vast majority of the

test results come up negative for autism even when the tests have been ordered after a diagnosis

of autism has already been documented by the clinician.

The genetic test known as G-banded karyotype testing is effective only 2% of the time for finding

abnormalities and even these were only sometimes associated with autism spectrum disorders. The fragile X testing

found abnormalities in about 0.5%. The CMA test found abnormalities in about 7%. You may view at:

http://wellness.blogs.time.com/2010/03/16/toward-a-more-effective-genetic-test-for-

autism/?xid=rss-blogs#ixzz0vNeiduER

The changes to the genetic information that the government is claiming to be the cause of

autism are not genetic changes in terms of heredity, but are polymorphisms not cellular

mutations. These changes to the genetic information do not result in any significant alteration in

the gene message received by the cell and are not passed down. These changes are common in all

individuals over the course of one’s life time and are referred to by geneticists as Neutral Gene

Variations or Variants and result in insignificant changes in the DNA sequence and do not

typically result in morbidity. These cause-and-effect induced changes are acquired and are not

genetic in terms of a hereditary mechanism.


In an article written by Nancy Shute for US News and World Report on the new genetic test

for autism described in the journal Pediatrics which is the professional journal of the American

Academy of Pediatrics dated 15 March 2010, she wrote that the genetic test was hailed by

federal authorities as the test which would finally prove at last that autism is genetic without

question, but has turned out to be a dud. The test raises more questions than it provides answers.

The test has identified more children with genetic abnormalities associated with autism, but it fails to identify the

cause of 90 percent or more of autism cases.

Another genetic test called chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) also hailed by the

government experts to be three times more accurate than the karyotyping process and “Fragile X

Syndrome” turns out to be totally ineffective as well due to only 7% of autistic patients actually

exhibiting the abnormalities that CMA looks for that are sometimes associated with ASD. Despite these

statistics, the researchers associated with the project still insist that genetics are responsible for

autism, without proof of course. Retrieved from http://autism.about.com/b/2010/03/15/new-

improved-genetic-testing-for-autism.htm

Today the diagnosis of autism most often will be based on criteria from a book called

the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th, Edition because there is no

biological test for autism. This manual is published by the American Psychiatric Association.

The position of the federal government and their researchers is that autism is a genetic disorder

resulting in developmental deficits. If that is true, why is a manual of mental disorders being

used to diagnose a genetic disorder? Surely if the disorder is genetic in origin, genetic testing

would show that, but it doesn’t. So, instead the government creeps through the back door using a

diagnosis of mental and developmental abnormalities in an attempt to prove their genetic theory.


That way of thinking is like saying because a person has a thorn in their hand and as a result,

the hand swells and develops symptoms of pain, inflammation and erythema, that it must be due

to genetically induced rheumatoid arthritis, ignoring the thorn and any toxins that were actually

responsible for the symptoms. Simply because developmental disorders may be observable does

not prove genetic etiology or even predisposition. It is obvious that based on the poor

performance of all the described testing used that the cause of autism must be something other

than genetics.

Still another test that is referred to as a screening test for autism by the experts is no test at

all, but a subjective questionnaire. Developers of the Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (CHAT)

states on the questionnaire it should not be used as a diagnostic instrument. Autism Screening

Questionnaire is yet another subjective so-called screening test for autism. Both of these are

totally based on how an 18 month and older responds to verbal commands and other

observations by the parent or care giver. Is this even reasonable? Speaking from personal

experience as having raised two boys and currently having an 18 month old grandson, trying to

get them to be still for five seconds at 18 months was and is very difficult and to get them to

respond on command is a major undertaking. While this researcher will agree that gross deficits

may be observable at that age, to call these screening tests for autism is analogous to towing an

airplane on the ground and calling it a flight test.

What the dependable research clearly does indicate however, is, that if genetics is involved

in causing autism it is not hereditary. It is cause-and-effect. You may be thinking at this point,

what is this researcher talking about? How do you have a genetic disorder that is not hereditary

and even more perplexing, how do you have a cause-and-effect result that is genetic? Isn’t the


cause-and-effect and genetic models at extreme opposite ends on the same spectrum? The

answer is, not if the cause-and-effect results in the transmutation of the genes. The researcher is

not suggesting that all cases of ASD can be traced back to this particular category of cause-and-

effect process. However, the unbiased review of the clinical evidence clearly indicates that the

cause-and-effect hypotheses could easily answer many questions that currently can’t reasonably

be answered by the genetic model.

Genes are the units in living organisms that describe biochemically who and what they are.

Genes are the Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) segments that carry the genetic information. In the

cell, DNA is organized into long strands forming chromosomes which duplicate themselves

before the cell divides and is a single strand of coiled DNA which carries countless genes.

Genes determine everything from an organism’s cell structure and metabolism to its ability to

produce progeny.

A class of chemicals that are specifically designed to mutate genes does exist. They are

referred to as cytotoxic drugs or mutagenic agents. A good working definition of a cytotoxic

substance is any agent that has a toxic effect on living cells. In chemotherapy it’s commonly

used to mean a drug that kills and/or inhibits the proliferation of cancerous cells. They are

characteristically referred to as antineoplastic drugs. The problem is that these agents do not

discriminate between cancerous and healthy cells. Typically, chemotherapeutic drugs have their

efficacy and therapeutic effect by penetrating the cell and attacking the DNA then breaking off

the chromosomes. If the cell is allowed to divide, it emerges as an atypical, mutated cell (a

mutagen). Unfortunately, these agents also interfere with the DNA of healthy cells. This


disruption changes the DNA in such a way that the cell may be killed or prevented from growing

or dividing. See Appendix F: Chemotherapeutic Drugs. These agents have a very high affinity

for fast growing cells like embryonic and hair cells which is why patients on certain chemo-

drugs lose their hair and why chemotherapy should not be given to pregnant women. See

Appendix E: Normal Fetal & Brain Development.

In this research, the terms pharmaceuticals, drugs and chemicals are used interchangeably.

The researcher investigated pharmaceuticals including chemotherapeutic drugs which are

cytotoxic agents, as a possible source of drug-induced autism. The results of this research

uncovered that 250,000,000 pounds of drugs (chemicals) are flushed down the toilet each year

that ends up in our water supply.

Drugs taken orally are absorbed at different rates and amounts but typically only a small

percentage of the administered oral dose is absorbed and only a small portion of that unchanged

drug actually reaches the systemic circulation which will transport the drug to its target. Their

metabolites and that portion that was not metabolized will be excreted primarily in the urine and

feces. Excretion can also to a lesser extent occur through perspiration and via the lungs.

However, when a drug is administered parenterally (outside the alimentary canal) by

intravenous, intramuscular or subcutaneous injection, a higher bioavailabilty resulting in a higher

blood concentration occurs by avoiding first-pass metabolism in the liver and the absorption

process that takes place when a drug is taken orally. A drug’s bioavailabilty is that portion of

unchanged drug that reaches the systemic circulation. A drug that is administered by intravenous

administration (IV) for example, will be 100% bioavailable, so more of the drug is available at a

higher concentration in the blood. If taken by mouth the drug first must be liberated from its


formulation (capsule, tablet and/or matrix), then it has to travel to the area of the intestinal tract

where it can be absorbed, then it has to be distributed and metabolized in the body and lastly it

must be cleared from the blood and tissues and excreted from the body. Typically after

absorption through the intestinal wall into the blood a drug goes directly to the liver through the

portal vein system and is metabolized there before reaching its target organ or tissue. Most

orally administered drugs have low bioavailability values even if the drug is well absorbed.

Because a drug is well absorbed does not imply that it has a high degree of bioavailability. The

bioavailability of any drug is the fraction of the unchanged administered dose that is available at

the site of action.

Cytotoxic chemo-drugs are some of the most toxic chemicals known to exist and are too

toxic to be manufactured by human hands necessitating that robots be employed to manufacture

the active ingredients in isolated rooms equipped for this purpose in order to protect their

employees and reduce liability. These agents are more toxic than the banned polychlorinated

biphenyls (PCBs) which were a class of organic compounds that were extensively utilized in the

application of dielectric fluids in transformers, capacitors, and coolants. Due to

PCB's toxicity and classification as a persistent organic pollutant, PCB production was banned

by the United States Congress in 1979 and by the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic

Pollutants in 2001, however cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents continue to be extensively

prescribed and administered in America and around the world today.

Once the manufacturing process is completed, these agents are packaged mostly in thick

amber glass vials, sealed and shipped to hospitals and oncology pharmacies. Oncology

Pharmacists are required by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to


protect themselves from accidental exposure to these agents by wearing specially designed

gowns and gloves when preparing these drugs for administration behind a glass shield in an

appropriate clean-room and safety cabinet or Laminar Flow hood. A clean-room is a controlled

entry room with a HEPA (High Efficiency Particulate Air) filtered air handling system operating

under positive pressure. Class II Type B Vertical Flow Biological Safety Cabinets (BSC or

Hoods) are required when manipulating or handling these cytotoxic agents and other hazardous

drugs in any facility that prepares these carcinogenic agents for administration such as

laboratories, hospitals, oncology pharmacies and oncology impact centers. The BSC and

Laminar Flow hood is designed with its own HEPA filter system on board to facilitate the

removal of organisms and aerosol particulates 0.3 microns in size with an efficiency of 99.99%

and re-circulates the air through the HEPA filter to eliminate the release of contaminants into the

work environment thereby exposing the Pharmacist or other worker to these dangerous drugs. A

micron, short for micrometer, is a unit of measurement equal to one millionth of a meter. A

micron is actually 0.000039 of an inch. To give you a baseline for comparison, in a piston

driven engine, the critical size is 5 to 20 microns. Contaminants in this range are larger than the

finest tolerances in your engine, but too small for full flow oil filters to remove them. See

Appendix G: Particle Size Contaminants.

The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) published its Instruction in the

mid 1980s concerning the handling and administration of cytotoxic drugs. In this Directive

Number STD 01-23-001 under the Title of Guidelines for Cytotoxic (Antineoplastic) Drugs,

OSHA laid out the steps and precautions that health care providers and managers should follow

to protect themselves, their employees and patients from contact exposure with these toxic

agents. OSHA sent these guidelines to hospitals and clinics describing the risks and hazards


involved in handling cytotoxic drugs. These guidelines were updated in 2006 by the American

Society of Health-System Pharmacists and provided health care providers with contemporary

guidelines resulting in a better understanding of the real risks associated with handling of toxic

agents. This researcher has included the OSHA archived document to clearly show that the

problems associated with cytotoxic agents did not originate in the twenty-first century. The

1980s was the time period in which we began to see a rise in autism cases in America. You may

view this OSHA Archive Document and the ASHP article at

http://www.ashp.org/DocLibrary/Policy/Compounding/H D_Massoomi.aspxhttp://63.234.227.130/pls/o

shaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=DIRECTIVES&p_i d=1702

OSHA today in their Technical Manual Chapter 2, Section VI, Controlling Occupational

Exposure to Hazardous Drugs, offers written instructions to assist health care workers handling

cytotoxic drugs stating that health care worker must wear special gloves and gowns and must use

a splash shield to reduce the risk of exposure. You may view this manual at

http://63.234.227.130/dts/osta/otm/otm_vi/otm_vi_2.html

OSHA has stated in separate regulations that there are no safe exposure levels to cytotoxic

(antineoplastic) drugs. After administration of these agents, the IV tubing and IV bag that

contained the drug and all the protective clothing are disposed of as a residual chemo. If the

patient’s body fluids come into contact with bed clothing or the floor, OSHA guidelines state that

protective clothing as described above must be worn before attempting to clean up the body

fluids to protect the person from exposure to the drug. The bed clothing must also be treated as

contaminated hazardous material. The problem isn’t a lack of written guidelines but regulatory

authority to enforce safety practices with fines or sanctions other than a “General Duty”


regulation to warn an employer concerning guideline violations. OSHA citations of health care

institutions under the General Duty regulation are virtually fictional.

It is common for chemo drugs to show up in the urine of Oncology Pharmacists because

once a surface is exposed to the agent it can remain contaminated for an extended period. The

U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirms that chemo residues continues

to contaminate work spaces where it’s used, and in some cases persists and continues to be found

in the urine of those who handle it, even though good aseptic technique and safety precautions

were employed.

The first generation chemotherapeutic agents are powerful toxins, and evolved from the lethal mustard gas

employed in World War I. They have been classified as hazardous by OSHA since the mid-1980s. These hazardous

drugs are known carcinogens and teratogens, causing cancer, miscarriages, birth defects or other serious health

problems. Retrieved from

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2012327665_chemo11.html

When a patient receiving chemotherapeutic treatment is discharged from a hospital as an

inpatient or is released from an impact center as an ambulatory care outpatient after receiving

their IV chemo they use the bathroom either at the facility or at home. The drugs both

metabolized and unchanged goes down the toilet and will pass through the water treatment plant

unaltered or be concentrated and deposited in the sludge which will be dried, sold and used as

fertilizer. If the patient uses a septic system the drugs will eradicate the crucial and necessary

bacteria in the septic system and if the patient is on a well, anyone who lives or visits there will

drink and even bathe in the patient’s chemo-drugs.


OSHA is an agency of the US Department of Labor and has published comprehensive

regulations and instructions concerning the safe handling of hazardous drugs including cytotoxic

agents. This researcher can confirm that this information is absolutely accurate for he practiced

as an oncology Pharmacist for four years, mixing and preparing chemotherapeutic agents for

administration to patients.

The doses for many of these agents are in the parts per trillion-range. Parts-per notation is

often used in the measure of dilutions or concentrations, measuring the loads of dissolved solutes

(minerals and pollutants) in water. It represents relative proportions in measured quantities.

These proportions are reported in parts-per-million (10–6), parts-per-billion (10–9) and parts-per-

trillion (10–12). One part per million for example, indicates a relative proportion of one part per

million parts examined. One part per trillion is a proportion equivalent to one-twentieth of a

drop of water diluted into an Olympic size swimming pool.

An Olympic swimming pool is 50 meters in length, 25 meters in width and 2 meters in

depth, where 1 Liter = 1,000 milliliters ~ 1 US Quart. 1 meter = 3.2808300 feet. Olympic

pools holds 2,500,000 Liters calculated 25m x 50m x 2m = 2,500m3 1L = 0.001m3 2,500 x 1000

= 2,500,000L or approximately 660,430 gallons of water. There are 4 quarts to 1 gallon. These

quantities are so small that for all practical purposes by most people they would be considered to

be negligible.

The very best incinerators can only guarantee destruction in the parts per thousand-range. In

court, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has never testified that any hazardous waste

incinerator operates at the required destruction and removal efficiency required by law which is

the percent of hazardous waste that are successfully reduced to harmless emissions. This value is


set at 99.9999% which is one part per million, but in reality it is only 99.9% to 99.99% efficient,

which means that the amounts of hazardous and toxic materials released is 100 to 1,000 times

what the EPA routinely states in their public announcements. Incinerator smoke stacks release

unchanged toxic drugs into the air for all to breathe. The attempted incineration of these

cytotoxic and hazardous drugs is an exercise in futility. The white emissions observed from

these stacks are a mixture of drug (chemical) particles and steam.

Exposure to these chemo-toxic agents can be determined by testing the urine of Pharmacists

and others who may have been exposed for damage to their DNA. The first studies proving that

these agents damage chromosomes were done in 1979. Cancer prevalence predicted by the

Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program at the National Cancer Institute

(NCI) will be 1 in 3 women and 1 in 2 men by 2050. That is an incomprehensible statistic.

Second argument: Vaccine Court.

This researcher uncovered that the U.S. Government has been settling cases of vaccine-

induced autism since 1991. More than 5,500 claims have been filed by families seeking

compensation for children believed to have been injured by the measles and other vaccines. The

fact that cases have been settled out of court carries along with it a strong inference that the U.S.

Government also must believe in the cause-and-effect clinical model, don’t you think? If they

didn’t they would have simply proven their case by producing indisputable clinical evidence they

are always claiming they have, proving the cause-and-effect model to be a bogus model and in

doing so would have invalidated the claims filed by the families of autistic children. After all,

how can you sue if the cause is genetic, right? However, that isn’t what took place at all.


Defense of the Second Argument:

Jane Akre, a former Florida journalist and current editor-in-chief of InjuryBoard.com is the

author of an article written on 10 September 2008 for The Injury Board National News desk,

describing how vaccine makers are shielded from autism liability lawsuits. In her article she

exposes how the federal government misuses the legislative and judicial branches to protect big

business from injured Americans instead of protecting Americans from big business. Her article

can be viewed at http://news.injuryboard.com/vaccine-makers-shielded-from-autism-liability-

lawsuit.aspx?googleid=247200

Jane Akre describes in yet another autism case how leaked documents from the settlement of

an autism claim in 2008 uncovered that federal health officials conceded that a 9-year-old

Georgia girl was injured by childhood vaccines. Retrieved from

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23519029/

David Kirby on 25 February 2008 who is an author and journalist wrote an article for the

Huffington Post entitled, “Government Concedes Vaccine-Autism Case in Federal Court – Now

What?” In the article (Kirby, 2008) reports that “after years of insisting there is no evidence to

link vaccines with the onset of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the US government has quietly

conceded a vaccine-autism case in the Court of Federal Claims.” The unprecedented concession was

filed on 09 November 2008. The claim, one of 4,900 autism cases currently pending in Federal "Vaccine Court,"

was conceded by US Assistant Attorney General Peter Keisler and other Justice Department officials, on behalf of

the Department of Health and Human Services, the "defendant" in all Vaccine Court cases. “The doctors

conceded that the child was healthy and developing normally until her 18-month well-baby visit,

when she received vaccinations against nine different diseases all at once (two contained


Thimerosal).” Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/government-

concedes-vacci_b_88323.html

In an article written for Neurology Today by Fallik (2008), Volume 8(11); pp 1-8,

concerning Jon S. Poling, MD, Ph.D. an Athens, Georgia neurologist who filed a lawsuit against

the Department of health and Human Services in 2002 on behalf of his daughter Hannah.

Hannah in 2000 was 18 months old and at that time was normal. At that time she received five

routine shots against nine infectious diseases. “According to her parents, two days later, Hannah

had a fever, screamed incessantly and could not walk. At 33 months old Hannah was diagnosed

with autism and later discovered by muscle biopsy that she had a mitochondrial dysfunction.”

Dr. Poling described the case in the February 2006 paper in the Journal of Child Neurology. Dr.

Poling stated that he believed that the stress of those vaccines aggravated his daughter's

underlying problems. The HHS Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation reviewed the child's

medical records. “In November 2007 the Department of Justice issued a concession awarding a

yet-to-be determined compensation to the family. There were no courtroom proceedings or

public hearings. The documents from that case have not been released, citing privacy issues.”

The common thread that typically appears in the researched definition from government and

government funded entities is that autism is a lifelong developmental and neurological disorder

of genetic origin. All of the hundreds of the most common neurological disorders listed by the

National Institutes of Health (NIH) have specific diagnostic criteria. Autism has no

such standard, rule, or test on which a judgment or decision can be based. It appears that if a

behavior disorder is not identifiable it is branded a Pervasive Developmental Disorder in which


autism is grouped. There is no objective standard for diagnosing this disorder because the

experts and government researchers can’t agree on what the definition of autism is.

The Age of Autism daily web newspaper reported on yet another case in which the

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was ruled against in the Vaccine Court which

was created in 1986 by congress. In Los Angeles on 23 February 2009, Jenny McCarthy and Jim

Carrey’s non-profit organization announced the US Government had once again conceded that

vaccines cause autism. The announcement concerned the court case of Bailey Banks vs. HHS

which was reported on the Huffington Post. The ruling states, “The Court found that Bailey

would not have suffered this delay but for the administration of the MMR vaccine…a proximate

sequence of cause and effect leading inexorably from vaccination to PDD [Autism].” The ruling

stated the injuries were due to cause-and-effect, not genetics. Please review this case at:

http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/02/government-again-concedes-vaccines-cause-autism.html

Third Argument: Mercury and Cause-and-Effect.

There is an ongoing heated debate between the government, environmentalists and the

private sector on the controversial topic of mercury and its role and contribution to the

neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s disease and Autism.

Defense of the Third Argument:

Mercury comes from the Greek word hydraargyrum meaning liquid or water silver.

Mercury (Hg) is a proven neurotoxin and is all around us as the result of natural and man-made

emissions and deposition in the air we breathe, in the water we drink and in the food we eat

mostly as mercuric sulfide. Half of the atmospheric emissions of mercury come from natural


sources such as volcanoes and the other fifty percent comes from man. Of that fifty percent, 65%

comes from stationary combustion of fossil fuels such as coal fueled power plants, refineries, turbines, kilns and

ovens and municipal solid waste combustors to produce electricity and thermal energy and as a manufacturing

byproduct producing greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide (C02), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N20).

11% comes from gold production, 6.8% comes from non-ferrous metal production, 3.0% comes from waste disposal

producing landfill gases such as methane and dimethylmercury, 3.0% comes from caustic soda production, 1.4%

comes from pig iron and steel production, 1.1% comes from mercury production, mainly for batteries and 2.0% from

other miscellaneous sources including the improper disposal of products through incineration and land-fills. It is

impossible to avoid chronic contact with this mobile poison and equally impractical to believe

that it can be contained. For example, studies performed by professional research groups on

landfills, provides irrefutable evidence that mercury cannot be broken down into a harmless

form. The following formula is commonly used by the EPA to determine atmospheric

emissions:

Emissions (tons/year) = activity level (quantity of fuel combusted) X emission factor (tons

emitted per gal, ton, cubic feet etc.)

Environmental mercury can be transformed into an even more toxic organic form by

microbial action where it finds its way into the human body where once again it is partially

converted, this time into an inorganic form and deposited in target organs and systems. This

progression from environmental mercury to consumption and deposition in man can be depicted

by the general process: N-Hg CH3Hg Hg++ permanent deposition

α partially excreted β

N-Hg = natural (environmental Hg); CH3Hg = methyl (organic Hg); Hg++ = inorganic Hg


α = microbial conversion of N-Hg in the environment to organic mercury (CH3Hg) resulting in

its deposition in food sources and water

β = after ingestion and absorption, a portion of CH3Hg loses its methyl group (CH3) to form

inorganic divalent mercury (Hg++) and deposits in target organs. Some organic mercury is not

demethylated to inorganic mercury and exerts toxic effects to the surrounding tissues and is

eventually excreted mainly in the feces.

At room temperature, elemental inorganic (Hg) is found in liquid form, and easily vaporizes

and is well absorbed when inhaled. Because it is lipid soluble it is easily absorbed by the lungs

and enters the bloodstream and red blood cells. Some is then oxidized to an inorganic divalent

mercuric form in the red blood cells. Red blood cells are the most common type of blood cell

and the primary method of delivering oxygen to body tissues by means of the continuous flow of

blood throughout the circulatory system. This changed divalent form of mercury (Hg++) has

similar properties to methyl-mercury (CH3Hg) in that both forms alter the flux of ions across

nerve terminal membranes. Organic mercury is successful in passing through the blood-brain

barrier which is located at the base of the brain where it is partially ionized (oxidized) by the

peroxidase-catalase pathway and remains there trapped as inorganic mercury and continues to

persist and results in central nervous system toxicity. Ingestion of elemental mercury is not very

well absorbed (~ 10%) and has limited lipid solubility, but its protracted elimination results in

chronic exposure and consequential CNS toxicity.

In a study conducted by Dr Thomas Burbacher (2005) at the University of Washington

funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Dr Burbacher used methyl-mercury found in fish and

ethyl-mercury found in vaccines and administered them to infant primates, half receiving the fish containing the


methyl-mercury using a feeding tube, as if they were eating fish and the other half received injections of ethyl-

mercury representing the childhood vaccine schedule. The scientific literature commonly will describe

methyl-mercury as the form of mercury which remains in the bloodstream longer and crosses the

blood-brain barrier more readily. Dr Burbacher confirmed that in his study. However, he also

found that organic methyl-mercury has a natural transport mechanism to wash into the brain, and wash out of the

brain. The biological half-life of organic methyl-mercury (CH3Hg) and ethyl-mercury (-Ch2Hg)

in the brain is about 30 days without subsequent exposure. Dr Burbacher also discovered that

compared to Ch3Hg, -Ch2Hg is much more unstable and in the brain converts to inorganic mercury very quickly.

The half life of inorganic mercury in the brain is around 20 years. So, if you have inorganic mercury in

your brain it is considered permanent. It doesn’t wash out of the brain the way methyl-mercury

does. The half-life of a substance is the time necessary for the concentration to decrease by one-

half and is often related to its duration of action.

Dr Burbacher was also successful in quantifying the comparison of amounts of both entities

documenting that the vaccine-exposed monkeys had up to 4 times more inorganic mercury deposits in their brain

than the methyl-mercury exposed monkeys. And in fact, half of the methyl-mercury exposed monkeys had no

inorganic deposits at all. See Table 3.

The problem, according to Dr Burbacher, is that regulators trying to assess the potential harm of

Thimerosal containing vaccines (TCVs) used methyl-mercury, a widely studied compound, as a benchmark

for mercury exposure, rather than the little-known compound called ethyl-mercury used in TCVs and the study

showed that methyl-mercury is unlikely to be a suitable reference for evaluating ethyl-mercury toxicity. In the

study, Dr Burbacher proved that Thimerosal is distributed in the brain much more readily that methyl-mercury.

His research sought to determine whether federal safety limits for methyl-mercury exposure are a suitable reference

for assessing the effects of ethyl-mercury found in Thimerosal containing vaccines (TCVs). His research revealed


significant differences between methyl-mercury and ethyl-mercury metabolism. Participants in the study

included:

1. Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, School of Public

Health and Community Medicine 2.Washington National Primate Research Center

3.Center on Human Development and Disability 4.University of Washington School of

Pharmacy 5. Department of Environmental Medicine, University of Rochester School of

Medicine, Rochester, New York, USA.

The following was quoted in an article written by Fisher (2005) entitled Vaccine Additive

Linked to Autism for the Oakland Tribune:

The study, being published today (as described above by Dr Burbacher) in Environmental

Health Perspectives, a peer-reviewed publication of the National Institutes of Health, also

chides health officials for abandoning an earlier recommendation that the preservative

Thimerosal be completely phased out and further studies conducted and it fuels the

debate over the federal government's aggressive vaccination plan that subjects infants to a

battery of shots some of which contain aluminum and other potentially harmful

compounds in their first weeks of life. We're talking about a low-level delivery of a toxin

given to a baby on the first day of its life, said mercury expert Dr Boyd Haley, chairman

of the chemistry department at the University of Kentucky who was not involved in the

study. What's needed is a total study of the sensibility of the vaccine program. Why

would you want to vaccinate a baby on the first day of its life (para. 2-5)?


Microbial methylation of environmental mercury results in the formation of organic methyl-

mercury and finally organic dimethyl-mercury. This end methyl transfer reaction product is so

toxic that a very small amount in contact with the skin is enough to cause death. Absorption of

doses as low as 0.1 milliliter has proven fatal. It passes through latex, PVC, and neoprene in a

matter of seconds. As a reference, 5 milliliters is equal to one teaspoonful.

In a well known case involving Karen Wetterhahn, a professor of chemistry on 14 August

1996 at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire, the professor who specialized in toxic metal

exposure was conducting a study how mercury ions interact with DNA repair proteins and was

using dimethylmercury as a standard reference material for mercury Nuclear Magnetic

Resonance (NMR) measurements. A few drops somehow found their way onto the professor’s

protective gloves and penetrated through to the skin. Symptoms were initially innocuous, but a

short six months later, tests showed that the poisoning was permanent and irreversible. In

January 1997 she was hospitalized and subsequently went into a coma and died the next June.

Before she died she stated that she had spilled a few drops from the tip of the pipette she was

using onto her hand which was protected by a latex glove. Tests conducted after her death

revealed that dimethyl-mercury penetration through latex gloves can occur within 15 seconds

after initial contact. Five months after exposure she began to develop serious neurological

symptoms such as loss of balance and slurred speech. Blood test in the hospital showed a blood

mercury level of 4,000 micrograms per liter which is 80 times the toxic threshold. Her urinary

mercury content rose to 234 micrograms per liter from its normal range of 1 to 5 micrograms per

liter.


The urinary toxic level is considered to be 50 micrograms per liter. She was given aggressive

chelation therapy, but her condition continued to decay rapidly resulting in coma, three weeks

after her symptoms first appeared. One of her students described the coma this way. “She was

thrashing about tears rolling down her cheeks and the physicians made the statement that her

brain at that point could not even register pain.” You may review this case at

http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/dimethylmercury/dmmh.htm

In 1865 two English laboratory assistants died after helping to synthesize dimethyl-mercury

for the first time. In 1972 the death of a Czech chemist was documented after synthesizing

dimethyl-mercury. It crosses the blood brain barrier easily by complexing with cysteine.

Dimethylmercury has no practical applications except as a reference toxin in the field of

toxicology. It has been discovered today at certain landfills.

In 2003 the Washington State Department of Ecology commissioned Frontier Geosciences,

Inc., to determine dimethylmercury levels at eight Washington State landfills. Frontier

Geosciences, Inc. is a research and analytical laboratory specializing in the analysis of persistent

bio-accumulative toxins (PBTs) in the environment. The study on this anthropogenic toxic trace

metal revealed substantial toxic levels at all eight sites sampled. The measurements included

1.total mercury 2.dimethyl-mercury 3.methane 4.carbon dioxide. Analysis revealed Dimethyl-

mercury to be 57.6% of the total measured results. Retrieved from

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/mercury/documents/Mercury_landfill_gas.pdf

In an article written for the journal Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, the results of a study that

was originally conducted in 1995 and written for the issue entitled Mercury as a Global

Pollutant, showed the results of dimethylmercury and dimethylmercury-sulfide of microbial


origin in the biogeochemical cycle of mercury. In this 1995 study, the anerobic transformation

of methyl-mercury in axenic cultures of Desulfovibrio desulfuricans strains is compared to that

in anoxic marine sediments contaminated by mercury of industrial origin. Methyl-mercury was

added to cultures of D. desulfuricans strain and incubated at 28 degrees Celsius (82.4 degrees

Fahrenheit) for two weeks. The results showed significant amounts of dimethylmercury and

meta-cinnabar was produced. These two mercury compounds were formed from the slow

decomposition of the intermediate dimethylmercury-sulfide. Retrieved from

http://www.springerlink.com/content/u468l4070g18g392/

Chronic organic mercury exposure results in permanent inorganic mercury deposits in target

organs including the brain, liver and immune system confirmed by toxicological research and

analysis. Mercury poisoning results from chronic mercury exposure to natural mercury deposits

(mercuric sulfide), dental amalgams which is the major source of inorganic mercury exposure in

the general population, vaccines containing the mercury preservative Thimerosal and any of its

other forms such as soluble mercury in the form of mercuric chloride, methyl-mercury, elemental

mercury vapors inhalation, and the ingestion of mercury contaminated food and drink.

In an article written by Sandborgh-Englund et al. (1998) it was demonstrated that the Hg

plasma and blood levels of 12 healthy individuals significantly increased 32 % within 48 hours

after amalgam removal with no increase in urinary excretion observed. Sixty days after the

amalgam removal the mercury levels in the blood, plasma and urine declined to approximately

60% of pre-amalgam removal levels. Seven of the subjects were followed up to three years to

determine the half lives of Hg in the plasma and urine. In plasma, the calculated half-life was

estimated at median 88 days (range, 21 to 121) and in the urine, a median half-life of 46 days


(range, 35 to 67). The study concluded that amalgam removal can result in significant increases

in Hg levels in biological fluids.

Dan R. Laks, MD, Ph.D. in his master’s thesis, Laks (2008) stated that “A review of the

scientific literature presents compelling evidence that mercury exposure and deposition are

linked to neurodegenerative disease, particularly Alzheimer’s Disease and Autism” (p. 2). Dr

Laks goes on to say that the latest studies indicate that as global mercury deposition increases,

the incidence of the most closely associated neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s

Disease and Autism increase as well. I have included here a link to Dr Laks Master’s Thesis.

http://www.toxcenter.de/buecher/tox-info/amalgam/hg-schaeden-am-nerven-engl.pdf

Geier and Geier (2006) in a clinical study:

Illustrated that autistic children who had elevated androgen blood levels and mercury

levels, showed marked improvement after mercury chelation treatments and injections of

Leuprolide acetate at a dose of 50 micrograms per kilogram of body weight based on that

which was observed by Tanaka et al., employed to treat precocious puberty by reducing

androgen levels. The pituitary gland secrets the androgen-regulating hormone luteinizing

hormone and is a primary target organ for mercury deposition resulting in elevated levels

of this hormone.

Mark R. Geier is a MD with a Ph.D. in genetics from George Washington University. He

was board certified by the American Board of Medical Genetics as a genetic counselor in 1987.

In 1996, Dr. Geier was certified a Diplomate of the American Board of Forensic Medicine and a

Diplomate of the American Board of Forensic Examiners. He has been a Fellow of

the American College of Epidemiology since 2007. He is a Fellow of the American College of


Medical Genetics. Dr Geier has been qualified as an expert witness in Federal Court and has

been accepted as an expert witness in approximately 100 hearings for parents seeking

compensation from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for vaccine injuries to

their children. As a professional witness he has testified in more than 90 vaccine cases, in

support of the view that there is a clear link between Thimerosal and autism, and that public

health officials are guilty of trying to cover it up. Dr Geier is a self employed independent

researcher.

If one goes to the home page for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) website at

http://www.nih.gov and follows the links under autism you will find that no etiology is listed for

autism. However, NIH does list treatment plans. It is very puzzling that NIH would list

treatment plans for a disorder that has no scientific proof of cause. It is analogous to removing

an airplane engine without first diagnosing proof of cause of an engine failure or malfunction.

The researcher can personally testify to the accuracy of the analogy being a licensed pilot

himself. In the medical world, this is called shot-gun therapy. This is like unloading a shot gun

into a dark room hoping you will actually hit something, and then if you by accident actually do

hit something you claim therapeutic success and declare this as a protocol or standing treatment

plan for the disorder for all to follow. This is hardly scientific or even rational. Treating

symptoms in the name of expediency is not good medicine. Establishing the cause and then

designing specific treatment plans is good medicine but it is not considered very good business

or effective politics when the desired goal is huge profits instead of quality patient care or

something other than the truth.

It is interesting that on the same web page the NIH states that there is no link between

autism and vaccines or any ingredient found in vaccines when their own research on mercury


indicates that it causes neurological damage. Here in part is the National Institute of

Environmental Health Sciences–National Institutes of Health (NIEHS-NIH, 2007) statement

concerning mercury. Retrieved from http://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/impacts/mercury.cfm I

am quoting here. “Mercury is a naturally occurring metallic element that is extremely toxic to

the brain, kidneys, and developing fetus.” “Numerous studies have shown that methyl-mercury

is a developmental neurotoxin that readily passes through the placenta and damages the fetal

nervous system.” We could stop right here and claim that our hypotheses, that autism is a

cause-and- effect disorder and not of genetic origin has theoretically been confirmed by NIH’s

own statements. The webpage goes on to state that the results of studies funded jointly by the

NIEHS and the European Commission’s Climate Research Program have shown evidence of a

link between mercury and developmental deficits. However, let’s continue with the direct

quotes from the NIH. “Cognitive tests performed on seven-year-old Faroe Islands children,

whose mothers’ diets of fish and whale blubber exposed them to high levels of methyl-mercury

during her pregnancy, revealed significant impairments in language, attention, and memory.”

“The researchers also noted similar cognitive deficits in these children when tested at 14 years of

age.” “These studies have provided regulatory agencies with evidence of the developmental

effects of mercury at environmentally relevant doses.” On the very same website the NIH makes

the following contradictory statement concerning the link between autism and vaccines after

already stating there is a link between mercury, brain damage and developmental deficits.

“There is no conclusive scientific evidence that any part of a vaccine or combination of vaccines

causes autism.” I ask you, how much evidence do they need? Retrieved from

http://www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/asd.cfm


These two contradictory statements by the NIH are incongruous. When government

agencies, pharmaceutical companies and vaccine manufacturers are questioned about this, their

response is always that vaccines that contain mercury based preservatives contain ethyl-mercury,

not methyl-mercury which they insist is totally different and safer. Well, we have already in this

study proven that to be untrue, but let’s take a closer look and test that theory even further.

Mercury in any form is a neurotoxin to humans. Due to the health effects of mercury

exposure, industrial and commercial uses are regulated in many countries. The World Health

Organization, OSHA, and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health ( NIOSH) all

treat mercury as an occupational hazard, and have established specific occupational exposure

limits. Environmental releases and disposal of mercury are regulated in the U.S. primarily by

the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Organic mercury can be subdivided into aryl and short and long chain alkyl compounds.

The short chain alkyl-organic mercury is known as methyl-mercury, which we have already

discussed here and has a high affinity for the Central Nervous System (CNS), kidneys, liver,

hair, pituitary and skin. The aryl and long chained alkyl organic mercury after being absorbed

are converted to their inorganic forms and cause acute and chronic activity similar to inorganic

mercuric salts. Inorganic mercury can be subdivided into inorganic elemental mercury and

mercuric salts. The inorganic elemental mercury causes the most devastating neurological

toxicity which we have also already discussed. Inorganic mercuric salts can also be subdivided

into acute and sub-acute or chronic activity. The acute form results in severe corrosive

gastroenteritis (inflammation of the stomach and intestines), and acute tubular necrosis (ATN)

characterized by their ability to kill tubular cells and one of the most common causes of acute


renal failure (ARF). The sub-acute or chronic form results in gastrointestinal, neurologic and

renal dysfunction.

Methyl-mercury has a past use as a fungicide. Ethyl-mercury also has a history for the

same use and in fact Ethyl-mercuric Chloride was banned long ago as a fungicide

because it was so toxic, but it is currently used to make thimerosal, the mercury based

preservative found in vaccines. Ethyl-mercury deposits two to four times the inorganic

mercury in the brains of primates compared to equal doses of organic methyl-mercury as

again we have already shown to be true. It is a scientific fact that inorganic mercury has

been identified as the primary neurotoxic agent in primate studies. Retrieved from

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/ethyl_vs_methyl.html The National Vaccine Advisory

Committee Sponsored Workshop on Thimerosal Vaccines Day One - Volume I August

11th, 1999.

A second study was presented at the same workshop showing that adult male and

female rats were administered five daily doses of equimolar concentrations of ethyl-

mercury or methyl-mercury by gavage and tissue distribution, neurotoxicity, and

nephrotoxicity assessed. This was a Magos study in 1985 in the Archives of Toxicology.

The key points of that paper were that neurotoxicity of methyl-mercury and ethyl-

mercury were similar, although higher levels of inorganic mercury were seen in the

brains of ethyl-mercury-treated rats consistent with what has been stated about its

metabolism and renal damage which was greater in the ethyl-mercury treated rats.

Retrieved from http://www.whale.to/vaccines/ethyl_vs_methyl.html


The statement that ethyl-mercury is different and safer than methyl-mercury by the

government, pharmaceutical and vaccine manufacturers is a blatant lie levied at the American

people unless you can convince yourself to believe, that they didn’t know any better.

In an open letter to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), Stoller (2008), K Paul

Stoller, MD delivered his hard hitting address by quoting, "Diet, injections, and injunctions will

combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the

authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become

psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because

the government will tell them that they are so." Bertrand Russell: (The Impact of Science on

Society, p. 50, 1953).

Dr Stoller continued from his open letter to the AAP by stating:

As a pediatrician, who has been a fellow of the AAP for two decades, I find the AAP’s

approach to the autism epidemic to be deeply disturbing. Not only have they allowed the

myth of better diagnosing (as the reason for all the notice given to affected children) to be

perpetuated, but when they were put on notice at the CDC’s Simpson-wood meeting in

2000, that the mercury in the preservative Thimerosal was causing speech delays and

learning disabilities, they obfuscated and hide that information. They never made good on

their 1999 pledge to have Thimerosal eliminated from vaccines and almost a decade later

joined in the protest against a fictitious TV show (Eli Stone) because it was critical of

mercury being in vaccine. Out of 132 million doses of the worthless flu vaccine for the

2007-2008 flu season eight million doses are Thimerosal free. That means 94% contain

the full amount of Thimerosal. Dr Stoller continues, the very Federal agencies that


should have been sounding the alarm bell about environmental pollution creating future

generations of mentally disabled citizens did less than remain silent because they have

become arms of the very corporations that profit from selling and distributing poisons.

Just look who sits on the FDA's Scientific Advisory Boards. The conflicts of interest are

so glaring as to suggest that the FDA has become a trade arm of big pharma.

Nevertheless, the hand writing is on the wall as the US government has quietly conceded

a vaccine-autism case in the Court of Federal Claims. Pediatricians will no longer be

able to hide behind the skirts of “Standard of Care” if they are giving autistic children

heavy-metal laden vaccines. That is only one step away from giving vaccines and

making normal children autistic. The AAP should proactively be bringing in risk

management specialists and be proactive towards how this could affect pediatricians in

civil litigation for following the CDC recommendations on vaccinations after a diagnosis

of any type of neurodevelopmental delay in a child. This is what they are afraid of and

this is what the law of attraction will bring in upon the AAP a

Running head: AUTISM ETIOLOGY: GENETIC OR CAUSE-AND … · Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder...

Documents

Transcript of Running head: AUTISM ETIOLOGY: GENETIC OR CAUSE-AND … · Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder...