Can autism get lesser?

Post Reply New Topic

Thing is, chelation works too well. That's why it's so dangerous.

Chelation depletes your blood of calcium. In addition, it may cause cirrhosis of the liver.

Also, it doesn't reverse any damage already done. Once you start showing symptoms of metal poisoning, you're done for.

Yea. Chelation removes essential minerals such as calcium along with the heavy metals. That's why doctors recommend mineral supplements in people doing chelation. It can damage the liver but so can many commonly used prescription drugs. Any good doctor would order regular liver and also kidney function tests during chelation and stop chelating as soon as a liver function test came back abnormal. For those interested in chelation, oral DMSA is safer than IV chelation. I believe the one case of death due to chelation to treat autism used the IV chelation.



I'm sure some damage is permanent but many symptoms caused by having mercury in the body will go away once the mercury is gone as evidence by the fact that children recovered from autism using chelation. Chelation is also FDA approved for treating lead poisoning. If removing the lead didn't help, the FDA never would have approved it.

Even if a million people reported that chelation worked, it would still be anecdotal and nonscientific. Medical science relies upon testing under conditions where minimal contamination is likely. Controls are introduced to see if variance is spurious and can be explained by other factors.



I am, as a Marxist, highly critical of difficulties with funding of small labs. Nonetheless, that does not justify conclusions which have not been supported by rigorous research.

Before the enlightened age of toxicity awareness, my aunt used to draw the gauge lines on thermometers of all shapes sizes and uses. Since this was looong ago, most all of them were mercury. Many would break, so much so that when we cleaned out her house (she did this work in a residential neighborhood, with acids and all sorts of great chemicals ), she had a 1/3 full 6 oz bottle of mercury that must have weighed 50 lbs ! I used to earn extra money in her shop and remember clearly playing with the little 'balls'. She'd warn us, but no more that she would have warned us if we were playing with cleaning products or running with scissors.

Point is that even though I played with mercury I was not affected, nor were my ki...waitaminute!

I guess my other point would be that despite all that mercury overload in our family (we lived next door to this toxic manufacturing facility, my dad and my mom also 'worked' there at times), I would not say that our family is glowing, nor have we been THAT much more impacted than other families. To say that mercury=autism epidemic and chelation=cure all is taking an unproven theory, applying an unproven treatment for that theory and getting un-reproducable results. I'm all for taking risks; but I need at least some solid variables to base a risk assessment on...

Not all of them were exactly quackery. The one by Grether and Croen (the SF bay area one) is peer reviewed, it's just really dumb.

If you look at the places in California with the most pollution you don't find more autistics. Actually, if you use the very rough measurement of how many autistics are in the DDS system (the agency that is supposted to care for adults AND children with various developmental disabilities in California), or if you look at the autistics in the school system via the California Dept of Education stats... there is no correlation between pollution with mercury or any other heavy metal with the number of autistics.

What there is is a correlation between access to lots of doctors and clinicians (cities) and higher rates of autism.

There's one county in California (Kern county) that is like a toxic waste dump. Practically, but it has no big cities in it, it's kind of rural. There are no more autistics there than are in the cities.

In the parts of LA that would tend to be less toxic because they are very wealthy areas, have much, much higher rates of autism than there are in the rural areas where there is a lot of exposure to pesticides. And the parts of LA that have specifically higher levels of pesticides in them (for some reason there are higher levels near some military bases) don't have more autistics.

The bombed out ghetto areas of LA that would tend to have more pollution (more factories there, less concern for the residents, environmental racism) have fewer autistics counted in the system than do the rich areas.

There is NO connection on any level anywhere between heavy metals and autism. NONE. There are frauds like the Geiers who have written lots of trash about there being a connection but there is none.

Mercury does not cause autism, and chelating mercury out does not cure autism. This is a fraud. This is a scam. This is a lie. Neither does the MMR cause autism. No way. No how. Never did. If it did then wild-type measles could cause autism, and it does not. However wild type rubella can cause autism in an embryo (about 21 days old).

You have some in your list that are not "peer reviewed" in the true sense. Med Sci Montior is a quack oriented rag with an agenda. No self respecting scientist would ever consider publishing something in it. It's quite pro conspiracy theories.

The Geier's license to practice medicine in maryland is under investigation, he might lose it. And no he's not being persecuted, he's been practicing very dangerous stuff on autistic kids and teens. He has several autistic male teens on a chemical castration drug, as well as little children and girls on the same drug and chelating some of them at the same time. He's also cut a deal with the manufacturer of this drug Lupron TM. They are big time liars. Google: geier and significant misrepresentations.

Some of the papers you cited contradict each other. But you haven't read them all. I have read most of them, and know what the major points are from the ones I haven't read.

So do autistics show how they are super poisoned by having no mercury in their hair or by having lots of mercury in their hair? Pick one.

There was a study done like in the 1970's on hair levels of heavy metals in autistic kids, they found high bismuth, I think... low mercury, when compared to non-autistic peers.

Why isn't everyone freaking about bismuth? Well it's an active ingredient pepto bismal for one thing... and doesn't cause autism. Just like mercury doesn't cause autism, but causes other symptoms not like autism.

Last edited by autism_diva on 28 Dec 2007, 4:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ooops edited wrong thing

The thing is that some people are using sham chelators and calling them chelators. The sham chelators do NOTHING but they give the parents hope and the kids change and the parents attribute it to the sham chelator.

Then they are using bogus, lying, deliberately misleading lab tests to indicate their kids' mercury levels, and chelating with utter quacks (not toxicologists) who are harming the kids with real toxic chelators. The chelators ARE toxic themselves and are made by a process that uses heavy metals. The NIMH chelation trial pushed by the quacks and their politician friends was called off in part because they found that some chelators CONTAINED lead.

You don't know what you are talking about if you think that chelation is good for autistics. You may encourage someone to harm their child.

Jeff Bradstreet said to at least two parents (according to someone who actually likes what Bradstreet does some of the time) "I ruined your kid."

I ruined your kid.

He probably ruined the kids veins with the chelator or his liver or kidneys or something else. One of the kids ended up in the hospital because of what Bradstreet did to him. The parents, according to this same woman who admires biomed, were thinking about calling "20/20" to do an investigation of Bradstreet. He's one of the biggest charlatans that DAN! has and I have no doubt that he has hurt many children with his quackery.

He's a liar.

You need to stop giving these people your support by saying that there is something beneficial in chelation for autistic kids when there is none.

Chelation is not used all the time by real toxicologists because it can stir up the lead and cause it to be deposited in the brain causing more serious problems. Sometimes toxicologists treat lead poisoning by doing nothing because it's safer.

There is no evidence that any of the autistic kids are truly lead poisoned.

There is evidence that their parents are being defrauded and lied to and that kids are being really hurt by chelation for imaginary metals.

Chelation of lead has never been shown to improve cognitive symptoms of lead poisoning, and chelation in rats has shown to damage rats' brains that aren't lead poisoned to begin with.

Last edited by autism_diva on 28 Dec 2007, 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Zendell, I suggest strongly that you pay attention to Diva. She knows what she is talking about.

Thanks for the correction on one of them, Diva - but surely you would agree that "dumb" equals "quackery" at least? In this context of course.

And I've said this on this forum before and I'll repeat it. There are two sorts of mercury - ethyl mercury and methyl mercury. Methyl mercury is the dangerous one, and we have been avoiding that for decades. Ethyl mercury is SAFE. It is after all a natural aspect of fish and breast milk. It's also the variety of mercury that is used in thiomersal. This is all about idiots who refuse to acknowledge this fact (I'm referring to the mercury militia of course) and try to grey up the mercury argument to involve methyl mercury in an issue that it has absolutely nothing to do with.

I'll just point out as well, that over usage of mineral supplements creates new problems - which adds to the danger of chelation as a concept. Not only that, but I understand that Lupron plays a role in some chelating products. Lupron - over used - chemically castrates boys. The bottom line is that chelation should NOT be done for any extended length of time. Chelation is NOT approved by the FDA for use to treat ASD's.

Define "works". What was the goal? I'm willing to bet that a majority of that 75 percent were trying to cure Autism. Well I can tell each and every one of them that it did NOT work! The child they were treating is still on the Spectrum. They have to be. If they aren't then they never were to begin with. With Autism, chelation may treat some of the symptoms, but it doesn't touch the root condition.

Besides, for 600 parents who tried it - how many haven't? I'm willing to bet that the 600 represents just 1 percent (if that) of the population with kids with an ASD. And why don't they try it? Because they know the truth - that ASD's are genetic in origin and can not be cured.

Chelation only works for those who have gut problems and associated issues with those problems.



Quite right, Plutonian_Persona. It's called natural adjustment - which applies just as much to NT's as it does to ASD people. The key to it all is acceptance of who we are. Failure to accept can be dangerous.

TPLG,

The Grether, Croen et al study (the SF area one) was no doubt influenced by quack notions, but the researchers are pretty straight up... they just made some boffo mistakes it seems. Joseph did one or two in depth blog entries about it. He contacted Grether, if I recall (one of the authors anyway). Their study just correlated autism with city dwellers, and wasn't really looking at the right timing, etc. of exposure if I recall.

You have some of the details about "species" of mercury turned around.

No chemical is SAFE unless you have the dosage. Water can kill people, salt can kill people. Cobalt is dangerous in some forms but it's in vitamin B12 (cyanocobalamin). Chlorine can kill in the gas form (depending on the dose).

But Ethyl mercury in the doses that people have received it in vaccines and in eye drops and in merthiolate (I have some of the real stuff... I put it on open wounds and everything!) is not harmful.

Lots of stuff is more "neurotoxic" than ethyl mercury per molecule.

metalic mercury is the stuff in the thermometers. If you inhale lots of that you can get really sick, but apparently livsparents aunt didn't inhale enough of it because he doesn't describe her as losing her vision or having lots of pain in her extremities. If her house was drafty that might have been enough to clear out the fumes, and she probably tried to keep the stuff in bottles with lids. I have some in a jar in my room. I think it's real. The new thermometers have something else that looks like mercury in it and this blob is a couple of years old.

You can swallow a blob of metallic mercury and it won't hurt you, it will go through you. I don't recommend this, but this is my understanding. I never heard or read of anyone being harmed by swallowing the stuff. One guy injected it into his veins and survived... the blobs of mercury showed up on xrays as I remember. I think he was trying to kill himself... didn't work.

Ethyl mercury is safer than methyl mercury, but it's methyl mercury that is in breast milk and fish.

ethyl mercury gets converted to methyl mercury in bacteria in the environment. We all have about 8 milligrams of mercury in us (in differnt forms, I think it's mostly methyl mercury). We are not toxic because of that. Mercury is everywhere and in all of our food and water (unless it's distilled, I suppose). It's supposed to be found in shocking levels in corn syrup (the people who freak about this stuff are easily shocked, though).

There has never been a correlation shown between autism and mercury exposure of any kind even though we've been around mercury for forever.

As TPLG knows, it's really dumb to keep blaming heavy metals and vaccines for autism. I'm sorry, but that's the truth. It's distracting people from the real issues of autism, which I think is a quote from livsparents.

Thanks for corrections, Diva, and the extra info. I knew about the dosage issue, but I avoided it precisely because of what you said about water, salt - it also applies to virtually everything else one consumes.

But the root point about different types of mercury stays. That's the problem with the mercury militia - as far as they are concerned, mercury is mercury. And it's not that simple.

While I don't agree fully with the idea of "ignore testimonials completely", I also don't see it as offensive at all. People who believe that generally believe that people in general are vulnerable to certain bits of fallacious reasoning. They do not exclude themselves from that. Nor do they think it's only people who actually give testimonials who aren't fully capable of discerning these things. They just generally believe there are several aspects of human instincts that aid us in a number of situations, but that produce errors in other situations, including the sort of situation they're talking about.

I think a lot of people find the idea of something being quackery offensive because it implies that they in particular are gullible or stupid or something. And I suspect there are people in the skeptic world who believe themselves less gullible or something (mostly people who want a cheap boost to their ego), but from the ones I've known (I don't fit fully and entirely into the skeptic mold myself, or sometimes I am too skeptical for the skeptics, I don't know which, but there are aspects of what they do that I like, and I know a number of them)... they're people who believe humans in general are gullible, including themselves, and that the reasoning they are employing is useful in sorting out things that intuition would (wrongly, in some cases) tell them otherwise about. And there's a lot of things that humans are designed to see in the world (such as, two events occurring next to each other have a direct causal connection, and if one of them is done with the intent of causing the other then there's even more of a causal connection in that direction, etc), that don't actually fit in with the way the world works. And that's either universal or near-universal, I've rarely known a skeptic who doesn't believe they themselves could be confused by it as well.

For what it's worth, I am happy that you are here, autism_diva. You are a good person to be on Wrong Planet.

IMO, testimonials are fine in a religious context. Most of the religions I study, however, are not dealing with life and death issues. (Exceptions, I suppose, might be Christian Science and the Jehovah's Witness policy on blood transfusions.)

However, when it comes to medical science or health issues, testimonials should always be ignored. The stakes are simply too high.

Generally speaking, testimonials are only used selectively. A sales person is not going to show a potential client (or patient) negative testimonials, only positive ones which which help her or him sell the product.

That is a common tactic, by the way, with a lot of health-related MLMs. They actually teach people how to use testimonials in order to generate lots of sales. IMO, it is highly unethical.

Suppose it depends on what the definition of 'testimonial' is.

I often tell people stories about having medical problems ignored because of certain aspects of being autistic, and how severe (and potentially life-threatening) the conditions got by the time anyone bothered treating them. I think those sorts of things are more useful than problematic, and definitely not to be ignored. But that might be different than what you're talking about.

That's your opinion. About 10% of the causes of ASD have been shown to be genetic but for the other 90% the cause is unknown. There's plenty of evidence implicating viruses and mercury which are able to cause genes to spontaneously mutate so even if genes are involved it still doesn't rule out mercury and viruses. I quoted 9 scientific peer-reviewed studies that I got from the PubMed site that show that increased mercury exposure from five separate sources all lead to higher rates of autism. I don't think the increase in autism is due to a genetic epidemic but I'm sure you "know" otherwise.