Michael Pichichero's Reasoning on Mercury for Global Treaty
By Jim Thompson
Dr. Michael Pichichero is an industry scientist and he endorses a mercury-based compound called Thimerosal as a “safe” and “effective” preservative in vaccines worldwide.
In a recently published report “Perspective – Report to WHO: No New Concerns About Thimerosal” he acknowledges that his “institution has received research grants from GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur, Pfizer, Novartis, and Crucell for new vaccine and product development.” Also he states in his report that “The evidence suggests the 2008 endorsement of the use of thimerosal as a safe and effective preservative in vaccines for children worldwide should remain.”
In addition he alludes to his remote presentation to the United Nations Negotiating Committee Meeting on April 3-4, 2012 which was made for “their consideration and vote” regarding the continuation of mercury in vaccines used worldwide. And it was in that same time frame that the World Health Organization's (WHO's) Strategic Advisory Committee (SAGE) in Geneva recommended that “Thimerosal, a preservative used to prevent contamination in multidose vaccine vials, be exempted from a pending international treaty aimed at reducing global health hazards by limiting exposure to mercury.” (See WHO Weekly Epidemiological Record).
Now it is possible that this industry scientist’s reasoning is based on an unfounded presumption that mercury leaves the brain faster than mercury from fish. He states “[a] total of five studies of blood and hair mercury in children have now been published, and all show that the foundational presumption of similar pharmacokinetics between methylmercury and ethylmercury was incorrect.” But do these studies really indicate what happens in a child’s brain?
To answer that one cannot rely solely on human studies reporting reduced mercury content in blood and hair. It is also important to recognize the fact that an animal study clearly shows that Thimerosal vaccine preservative injections result in inorganic mercury levels in brain tissue in infant monkeys at higher levels and longer time frames than from exposure to mercury in fish.
So why is it important that this study reports that higher levels of the neurotoxin mercury remain in animal brain tissue from exposures to the vaccine preservative Thimerosal than from exposure to mercury in fish? Well look at what a non-industry scientist says about animal studies regarding the threat of the neurotoxin mercury in Thimerosal.
Dr. Jose G. Dorea, after a review of 30 studies concluded that “In vitro and animal studies have shown consistently that low dose of Thimerosal (or ethylmercury) is active against brain cells. Animal studies with Thimerosal at concentrations used in vaccines have demonstrated toxicity compatible with low-dose Hg exposure. Thus, from observed changes in animal behavior it is reasonable to expect biological consequences in terms of neurodevelopment in susceptible infants.”
In addition to Dr. Dorea’s review there is a list of 69 studies given on Safeminds.org that support the ban of mercury from vaccines. (See “Summary of Supportive Science Regarding Thimerosal Removal”).
So it may be that this scientific data, reporting higher levels of mercury in the brain tissue of infant monkeys from Thimerosal exposure than from mercury in fish, may have been ignored when the ill-advised decision was made to endorse the continued injection of mercury preserved vaccines into children and pregnant women worldwide.
But still, scientists know that mercury is toxic to brain cells in both animals and humans. Please write your elected members of congress and tell them to legislate a ban on the use, import, and export of mercury in vaccines.
Jim Thompson is a registered professional engineer. He and his wife Susan live and work in rural South Dakota. Their first granddaughter was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, epilepsy, verbal apraxia, motor disorder, and sensory integration disorder. Her loving memory has influenced his family’s decision to help protect children from vaccine injuries.
Hi Birgit,
He may have had a single measles vaccine - the first MMR I think became available in the US c. 1972.
John
Posted by: John Stone | March 06, 2013 at 05:43 PM
I hadn't checked comments on this article since you commented on it in January. My son reminds me of what you said about your son in your comment. I have a son born in 1966. He received over 30 mercury amalgam fillings before he was 3 years old. So when I first looked into his disabilities, I only looked at mercury exposure from amalgams.
I am now wondering if he also was affected by the MMR vaccine. He was not talking, and when he got his vaccines I didn’t notice anything immediately. Hi behavior changed only a little bit. He has a fairly high IQ. But he only learned how to talk at about three and a half. He spoke in whole sentences when he first started talking, but he had a really hard time following commands. He couldn't take "no" for an answer. I had to tell him certain things about ten or twenty or more times before it sank in.
His expressive language was much better. That's why it was so hard to figure out what was wrong, and whether anything actually was wrong. In the late 60s doctors did not look for autism. Nowadays my son would have been diagnosed as autistic.
His difficulties are mostly due to language integration. For instance he cannot understand the abstract nature of a proverb, and even though he can function independently, he is, as you say from Mars, when it comes to figuring out the day-to-day things that make it possible to get on with it. He is forty-four and has not had a fulltime job. He has been on disability for the last ten years because he often is very depressed and he cannot bring himself to look for a job, only be told after a while that they can't use him.
My son is excellent at sports. He, too, is handsome, he plays sports, and he can do certain things very well, like cook dinner, do a Rubik’s cube, do difficult Sudoku puzzles. He also happens to be very good at understanding things intuitively.
He has improved in many aspects of his life, but psychologically he is still in the realm of a 14-year-old.
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | March 06, 2013 at 05:08 PM
The article excerpted below reveals a lot about how Eli Lilly does business.
"That Lilly intentionally concealed information from physicians is not in question. How they did so is revealing of two facts. First, the company was actively pursuing a strategy of creating a shadow science to drown out noncompany-sponsored research reports on the side effects of the drug. The Zyprexa documents suggest that each time a negative study came out or was about to come out, Lilly commissioned a study intended to counter it. These results were then published and, as part of a general marketing plan, publicized and disseminated in great numbers to overcome the impact of the negative study. Thus, on 16 October 2002, Lilly manager Peter Beardsall sent an email to seven of his colleagues:
'I personally think that the time has come for a "stake in the ground" Meta-analysis of the huge pool of data surrounding the issue of diabetes and antipsychotics. The recent list of all studies relating to diabetes that are now out there is huge, and characterised by a significant weighting overall of those that do not support our position. I would like to suggest that we now urgently embark on getting a credible "landmark" paper written and published ...somewhere impactful – e.g. Lancet...Written by someone who we know to be supportive of our position, but who is also clearly independent of us and above all CREDIBLE. The core conclusions of the piece most relevant to our position should be
– any association is of minimal clinical significance due to the widely documented low levels of incidence
– diabetes is seen more often with those with schizophrenia...
– the risk of any increase in association is equivalent across anti-psychotics'"
https://doxosophia.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/the-globalization-of-pharmaceutical-damage-control.pdf
Posted by: Carol | January 30, 2013 at 06:25 PM
Hi Birgit
Really rather says it all, doesn't it?
"Yes there is a crisis not only of confidence in vaccines but to the side effects which appear in some youngsters.Both my sons had the vaccine, the eldest had the measles vaccine and then MMR was introduced and we had him innoculated 3 months after the single dose as advised by our dr,Within a week , he didnt want us to hold him, became distressed at new people and places etc .He is now 25 ,good looking, polite and well mannered-but the world is a very confusing place, he truly visited Mars with the MMr and is a native.My other son had the MMR didnt speak until he was 6 he also is a life member and Mars national,Our family doesnt now fit with normal society or the disabled world!!!!This is a lifelong membership, they are now as good as its going to get.We love them dearly and they are great to be with and soooo honest!!!Every day I meet more and more of these youngsters and most say the same thing 'child was fine until the MMR' we all cant be wrong!!!we as a family have to live with this every day , so this book is very interesting .The media only gives us one side of the DR Wakefield saga , read about people who know him. then make up your own mind."
Our stupid faith in doctors and scientists - we allow them to persuade us that the disaster is a coincidence, then we do it all over again!
Posted by: John Stone | January 30, 2013 at 03:49 PM
John Stone
Check out this review about Horton's book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/1862077649/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | January 30, 2013 at 03:05 PM
"It says the Canadian agency referenced found that it was never more than PRESUMED that ethyl mercury was safer and excreted more quickly than methyl mercury. And on the basis of that mere presumption, never confirmed, millions of children were damaged and continue to be damaged."
It is nice to see a national health agency with some integrity.
The FDA has NEVER approved nor officially tested Thimerosal. Thimerosal was grandfathered in as GRAS by the FDA at the time the FDA took over drug regulation. The FDA refuses to classify Thimerosal.
Please don't hold your breath waiting for the Rockefeller directed FDA to test the Rockefeller created Thimerosal. If Rockefeller could have replaced the second most toxic "vaccine" ingredient on this earth with the first, plutonium, today stooges such as Michael Pichichero would be telling us how a small amount of radio-activity in our brains, GI tract and body is good for us.
We have all the evidence we need to totally avoid Thimerosal, mercury and ALL "vaccinations".
Posted by: Lou | January 30, 2013 at 01:31 PM
This is on online quote about thimerosal, vran.org/health-risks/mercury-and-thimerosal-in-vaccines: "A 2007 statement on thimerosal by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) informs us that a considerable amount is known about methylmercury, the form of mercury found in fish but little is known about the ethylmercury from thimerosal. It admits that, compared to methylmercury, “By contrast, little is actually known about ethylmercury metabolism in humans, including whether it has the same potency as a neurotoxin, whether the blood concentration is ever significant and even whether it crosses the blood-brain barrier. It is presumed that the majority of ethylmercury metabolized from thimerosal is rapidly excreted in the stool.” Then the statement sums up with: “The risk, at best, can be described as theoretical"
It says the Canadian agency referenced found that it was never more than PRESUMED that ethyl mercury was safer and excreted more quickly than methyl mercury. And on the basis of that mere presumption, never confirmed, millions of children were damaged and continue to be damaged.
Posted by: cia parker | January 30, 2013 at 09:59 AM
Anyone that endorses the use of damaging Thimerosal shows they made a deal with the devil, and as the old saying goes, they always come back to collect.
Posted by: Victor Pavlovic | January 30, 2013 at 07:26 AM
It would be interesting to see this man's experience in toxicology on paper. Has someone asked for it? Where has he studied it? What patients has he worked with? Is he an expert in chelation? From where does his expertise arise? Make him show it on paper! Show the world who he is. Ask Darrell Issa to find to ask him for his credentials. He is probably way beyond his expertise and practice. And if he is, then he should be outed for it.
Posted by: billy joe | January 29, 2013 at 11:07 PM
Shame on him. What a horrible little man.
Posted by: Katie Wright | January 29, 2013 at 08:46 PM
Michael Wagnitz
Maybe relevant is the final paragraph of my article about Horton for AoA (only my second piece for the journal back in December 2008):
"It was always the strategy of the British scientific establishment and government to isolate and destroy Andrew Wakefield – to make him look as if he was standing scientifically and intellectually on his own, and to make sure when they crushed him they discredited all further opposition or dissent on the vaccination issue. In the US context Horton’s book MMR Science and Fiction would be an almost incomprehensible oddity. There is, for instance, only a single mention of thimerosal, which apparently is just another eccentric concern of Wakefield’s. In essence the alleged “vaccine crisis” of the title is entirely about Wakefield and the supposed gullibility of people who doubt official science. Horton’s book is not ultimately about scientific truth, it is about who is credible – we are being told not only is Wakefield not credible, most importantly the parents of vaccine damaged children are not credible either. And cleverly nuanced as Horton’s argument is for a liberal readership, his decision to turn on Wakefield has behind it a highly illiberal and authoritarian basis, in which the interests and voices of the patients and their families are to be finally stamped out. It is ultimately just stage management, and a stab in the back for open debate."
http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/12/smoke-and-mirrors-dr-richard-horton-and-the-wakefield-affair.html
Posted by: John Stone | January 29, 2013 at 08:16 PM
In 1985, there was a Senate hearing on the NVCIC act of 1985 (S.827). On page 39 there is a definition of an expert from someone who studied experts. It reads..." An expert is a person who avoids the small errors while sweeping on to the grand fallacy."
Perhaps they have now graducated to both making small errors and spouting grand fallacy.
Posted by: Hilary Butler | January 29, 2013 at 08:13 PM
More research recently published
J Biomed Biotechnol. 2012;2012:256965. .
Mercury disposition in suckling rats: comparative assessment following parenteral exposure to thiomersal and mercuric chloride.
Blanuša M, Orct T, Vihnanek Lazarus M, Sekovanić A, Piasek M.
SourceAnalytical Toxicology and Mineral Metabolism Unit, Institute for Medical Research and Occupational Health, Ksaverska Cesta 2, P.O. Box 291, HR-10001 Zagreb, Croatia.
Due to the facts that thiomersal-containing vaccine is still in use in many developing countries, and all forms of mercury have recognised neurotoxic, nephrotoxic, and other toxic effects, studies on disposition of ethylmercury and other mercury forms are still justified, especially at young age. Our investigation aimed at comparing mercury distribution and rate of excretion in the early period of life following exposure to either thiomersal (TM) or mercuric chloride (HgCl₂) in suckling rats. Three experimental groups were studied: control, TM, and HgCl₂, with 12 to 18 pups in each. Both forms of mercury were administered subcutaneously in equimolar quantities (0.81 μmol/kg b.w.) three times during the suckling period (on the days of birth 7, 9, and 11) to mimic the vaccination regimen in infants. After the last administration of TM or HgCl₂, total mercury retention and excretion was assessed during following six days. In TM-exposed group mercury retention was higher in the brain, enteral excretion was similar, and urinary excretion was much lower compared to HgCl₂-exposed sucklings. More research is still needed to elucidate all aspects of toxicokinetics and most harmful neurotoxic potential of various forms of mercury, especially in the earliest period of life.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22899883
Posted by: ML | January 29, 2013 at 07:44 PM
Sorry, I meant to say that the elemental mercury takes about 20 years to work its way out of the system. But while some mercury is being excreted new mercury accumulates, and the more mercury is in the system the harder it is for the body to get rid of it. What's worse, while the mercury is working its way out of the system it damages other organ systems and leaves kidney damage and other problems behind
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | January 29, 2013 at 05:33 PM
Our Pravda-like (maybe worse) media has rendered the word "expert" meaningless. We used to at least sometimes hear "but experts disagree" which was maybe often a contrived two-sided version of something more complex, or not so complex but some benefited from the manufactured doubt. Now it is "but experts agree..." or "but according to experts..." Agree or be "stupid." On the subject of injecting mercury, we are actually being told to inject the kool-aid, and don't worry, injecting it is much safer than drinking it.
Posted by: Jeannette Bishop | January 29, 2013 at 03:37 PM
Pichichero published a paper in 2001 in the Lancet. He is a professor at Rochester University, a place known for its expertise in toxicology. Throughout his paper he referred to nanomoles per liter (nmol/l) mercury as parts per billion (ppb) mercury. A microgram per liter (ug/l) is a ppb. A nmol/l of mercury needs to be multiplied by 0.2006 micgrograms per nmol to get to micrograms per liter (ppb). I wrote the editor of the Lancet and informed him that the data in this paper was off by a factor of 5 and it should be retracted. Get this. He told me the Lancet does not retract published papers. The corruption in science and medicine these days is mind boggling.
Posted by: Michael Wagnitz | January 29, 2013 at 03:08 PM
Here is an abstract of one of Pichichero's studies:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18245396
His conclusion in this study is:
The blood half-life of intramuscular ethyl mercury from thimerosal in vaccines in infants is substantially shorter than that of oral methyl mercury in adults. Increased mercury levels were detected in stools after vaccination, suggesting that the gastrointestinal tract is involved in ethyl mercury elimination. Because of the differing pharmacokinetics of ethyl and methyl mercury, exposure guidelines based on oral methyl mercury in adults may not be accurate for risk assessments in children who receive thimerosal-containing vaccines.
This statement is a "red herring." The half-life of excreting something has nothing to do with what it does in the infants body and where it goes. The only thing this statement says is that the body tries to get rid of it as fast as possible. If I remember correctly ethylmercury gets into the brain within about 15 to 20 minutes according to the Canadian scientist Graham George and others, and the Hg to which it is converted stays there and accumulates for about 20 years.
Posted by: Birgit Calhoun | January 29, 2013 at 01:23 PM
If I recall correctly, Dr. Pichichiero is neither a toxicologist nor an inorganic chemist and therefore not an expert on mercury toxicity.
Posted by: Ted Van Oosbree | January 29, 2013 at 11:52 AM
This might be interesting to all the struggling parents on here , like me . An adults account of his survival & recovery from mercury poisoning :
http://theedgeofautism.wordpress.com/2013/01/20/the-mercury-diaries-by-daniel-forsyth/
Think there might be an infringement copyright issue here too . "Edge of Autism" seems very close to "Age of Autism"
should we sue ?
Posted by: Farmer Geddon | January 29, 2013 at 07:39 AM
Pick a hick for a hero!
Organic mercury is not know for being something that exits the body, to be measured in hair and urine.
Now where was he on the day that was taught in both biochemistry and organic chemistry class in college???
With the job he has - he did have to take those classes didn't he?
Posted by: Benedetta | January 29, 2013 at 07:31 AM
"So the omission of this scientific data, showing that the vaccine preservative Thimerosal is not “safe,” may mislead “experts” into making a wrong decision by allowing its injection into children and pregnant women to continue worldwide."
With all due respect .. one doesn't deserve the respect due an "expert" .. if they can be so easily misled by the deliberate "omission of scientific data" by those who profit by defending thimerosal's "safety".
These people are more "willing dupes" .. than "experts".
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | January 29, 2013 at 06:20 AM
How do you sleep at night Dr. Michael Pichichero ?
Thanks Jim , for the information , its good to put a face to the crime .
Posted by: Farmer Geddon | January 29, 2013 at 06:11 AM