Dear America, You Are Being Bamboozled Again About Autism and Genes
By Teresa Conrick
It’s happening again. The onslaught of studies and articles to try and persuade you, dear citizen of the USA, that AUTISM is a genetic ONLY disorder. Why, you may ask? Well, it could be that the back-to school flu vaccines are right around the corner, and your money and your health are about to be bamboozled, but my bet is that a book on the SCIENCE of Thimerosal, that darn mercury preservative in vaccines (especially flu shots), is coming out in 12 days. Did I mention that Robert F. Kennedy is the author and it’s all about the science and the studies, showing how toxic Thimerosal is and the damage it can cause, even in small doses? He is the same passionate Kennedy that is fighting for many other environmental causes. His involvement appears to come with a price as the media (and those who are paying them) are trying to dismiss his research on the dangers, as well as try to paint him as a mercury betrayer. He won’t budge (good for him!), which leads us to their Plan A, unfolding as the days go by, to try and annihilate his book and the research.
The article I want to share about a new gene study has these bizarre quotes:
The source of autism in children is in majority the result of the desire of parents with defective genes to have children. The study included the contribution of environmental causes of autism and found that genetics trumps any environmental cause for autism. The study was based on the genetic analysis of over 1.6 million Swedish families and compared 3,000 people with autism with a group that did not have autism that was the same size.
As you keep reading in disbelief on how ridiculous it sounds, you then see the glowing, neon message:
This discovery that included the National Institutes of Health in the United States and several experts from U. S. universities brings into serious doubt previous claims that vaccinations or any environmental source caused autism. The 2010 U. S. Court ruling that the use of thimerosal in vaccines was a cause of autism is now suspect of being invalid. Likewise the books that claim vaccinations caused autism are now considered to be less than factual…..In light of the facts produced by this new research, one must seriously consider how flagrantly greedy or desperately needy people that have autistic children may have been.
“SERIOUS DOUBT?….that vaccinations or ANY environmental source?….U.S. Court ruling invalid on thimerosal causing autism?....BOOKS that claim that vaccinations caused autism are now less than factual?..... flagrantly greedy?
What a crock! Where the heck did this come from?
There are many, many studies showing that TOXINS are involved in autism. Whether they come in a pesticide:
“Pesticides linked to autistic disorders” Mon, 23 Jun 2014 12:33:00 EST
The main findings of the study were that living near (within about 1.25km distance) to where pesticides were used at any point during pregnancy (compared to no exposure) was associated with a 60% higher risk of the child having ASD.
Or in a vaccine (with Thimerosal):
“Hepatitis B vaccination of male neonates and autism diagnosis, NHIS 1997-2002.”
Boys vaccinated as neonates had threefold greater odds for autism diagnosis compared to boys never vaccinated or vaccinated after the first month of life.
The fact that this study, Population-Based Autism Genetics and Environment Study [press release thus far] is completely denying ANY ENVIRONMENTAL OR TOXIC EXPOSURE is very odd and suspect. Here is that press release and a narrative that appears to add a flavor of “autism is common and NOTHING environmental can cause it.” Thomas Insel Director, National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and Chair of the IACC (Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee) got his happy remarks in about this curious study. It was interesting to see that he signed off on it -- “This study was supported by NIMH Grants MH057881 and MH097849” -- and seems to be fixated on genes-only research:
Published in the July 20 issue of the journal "Nature Genetics," the study found that about 52 percent of autism was traced to common genes and rarely inherited variations, with spontaneous mutations contributing a modest 2.6 percent of the total risk. The research team — from the Population-Based-Autism Genetics and Environment Study (PAGES) Consortium — used data from Sweden's universal health registry to compare roughly 3,000 subjects, including autistic individuals and a control group. The largest study of its kind to date, the team also showed that inheritability outweighs environmental risk… autism geneticists can now see the forest for the trees," said Thomas R. Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). "Knowing the nature of the genetic risk will help focus the search for clues to the molecular roots of the disorder."
Molecular roots? Honestly, Dr. Insel should be more interested in the MICROBIOME and its roots to autism but I’ll save that for another time.
Here also is an oxymoron pattern that needs to be pointed out:
…the study found that about 52 percent of autism was traced to common genes and rarely inherited variations,……. the team also showed that inheritability outweighs environmental risk.
Which is it? Plus, it should be noted that this study was done in SWEDEN. There are many differences between Sweden and the USA, as far as both genetics and the environmental factors of each country, like food, Vit D, sun exposure, vaccinations, heavy metal exposures and pesticides. In the 1990’s, where a big chunk of the birth cohorts in this study were used, Sweden “mandated a fifty percent reduction in the use of agricultural pesticides…”, the results of a comparison of genes in differing countries and cultures seems obtuse.
And, what about the other 46% or so of autism that this study does not address?
I write a lot about my daughter, Megan, and her regression into autism, during her second year of life. She has these past years, shown increased serum IgE and development of antinuclear antibodies. An autoimmune process has been shown:
…. Studies in humans document similar findings, where chronic exposure to low doses of elemental mercury or mercuric salt results in excessive T cell activation, increased serum IgE, and development of antinuclear antibodies [21 22 23 24 25 26]. The sensitizing effects of thimerosal in man are well documented. Furthermore, the incidence of allergy and autoimmunity in the population of autistic patients is also considerably higher than in control populations. A number of immunological abnormalities are found associated with autism, including T cell dysfunction, TH1/TH2 imbalance, development of autoantibodies, selective IgA deficiency, and high IgE titres [27 28 29 30].
My family for GENERATIONS, has no autism. We do though have family exposure to mercury both in parental and grandparent generations. Where is the research on that? Right here, showing that ancestors of those afflicted by mercurial exposure, Acrodynia, also can be affected by mercury:
“ANCESTRY OF PINK DISEASE (INFANTILE ACRODYNIA) IDENTIFIED AS A RISK FACTOR FOR AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS”
Pink disease (infantile acrodynia) was especially prevalent in the first half of the 20th century. Primarily attributed to exposure to mercury (Hg) commonly found in teething powders, the condition was developed by approximately 1 in 500 exposed children. The differential risk factor was identified as an idiosyncratic sensitivity to Hg. Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) have also been postulated to be produced by Hg. Analogous to the pink disease experience, Hg exposure is widespread yet only a fraction of exposed children develop an ASD, suggesting sensitivity to Hg may also be present in children with an ASD. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that individuals with a known hypersensitivity to Hg (pink disease survivors) may be more likely to have descendants with an ASD…..The results showed the prevalence rate of ASD among the grandchildren of pink disease survivors (1 in 25) to be significantly higher than the comparable general population prevalence rate (1 in 160). The results support the hypothesis that Hg sensitivity may be a heritable/genetic risk factor for ASD.
That is a very good example of studying how an environmental influence, mercury, can be studied as a heritable/genetic risk factor.
The lead researcher from the above “genes only-no environmental risk” study:
"Our group in Pittsburgh is working to develop a model that predicts the genetic risk for a family based on a myriad of small effects. Such a score could provide clinical benefit to families," Roeder said.
Small effects and clinical benefits? Millions of dollars and years later, we will still be waiting.
Teresa Conrick is Contributing Editor to Age of Autism.
I think we should look beyond their bluster of trumpeting this study as vindication of their autism is genetic position, and really consider what it means to them and how truly ‘satisfied’ they are with it. For this, a little reflection is in order. Judging by their past research into autism it appears that they have indeed been searching for solutions towards treating and preventing autism (and even if they do not rethink vaccines). I consider that they are doing this not so much out of virtue, but essentially as a ‘get off the hook’ desperation move in response to their vaccination-autism quagmire.
At one point we were hearing of research into drugs for treating autism, but each of those studies proved fruitless. It now appears that they have essentially abandoned this avenue. Then there is all their genetic research into autism, in which we have been constantly bombarded with claims of gene mutations of some kind or another accounting for autism, and if only in a minority of cases. Indeed the promising aspect of discovering gene mutations that explains autism is that they offer something substantive. We can learn things from mutated genes, such as whether these genes becoming mutated as a result of environmental factors. If this were the case, this knowledge would go along way in helping to prevent autism. We can also screen for mutated genes, which is also beneficial for early intervention strategies.
Yet, now we have this study that is described as surprising the researchers in demonstrating how little genetic mutations account for autism, and common genes variations offer a better explanation. I interpret ‘surprising’ to mean disappointed. If it’s variation in common genes that we all possess, not errant mutated genes that can be readily detected, that causes autism, then this would represent a huge step back from understanding the genetics behind autism. Essentially, from a genetic standpoint, there appears to be no ‘rhyme or reason’ to autism development. The situation is all the more hopeless for vaccine backers, and there seems to be little options for escape from the mess they have created.
I interpret the lashing out at parents with ‘bad genes’ for creating autism as indicative of this frustration. Little if any answers are forthcoming for autism where genes are concerned, and the venting is just mere deflection.
Posted by: Greg | July 24, 2014 at 08:11 AM
Thanks as always Teresa!
re the "2010 U. S. court ruling:"
The Poling compensation amount was announced in the media in 2010 (their case was conceded in 2008 I believe). Could that possibly be what is meant by the reference? Maybe the editors count on readers not going past one or two paragraphs (just one assuming the eugenics-like language was overlooked) anyway (and/or they are desperate to find someone who will write this stuff).
Posted by: Jeannette Bishop | July 24, 2014 at 03:52 AM
Wait a minute...
"The 2010 U. S. Court ruling that the use of thimerosal in vaccines *was* a cause of autism is now suspect of being invalid."
Teresa, you did not misquote. I went to the Examiner article and copy/pasted from that.
The author, Paul Hamaker, from the Birmingham Science Examine, apparently did not do his homework. He mistakenly says that
1) a 2010 U.S. Court ruling was that thimerosal WAS a cause of autism
and
2) that ruling is now suspect of being invalid.
Can anybody find where a 2010 U.S. Court actually ruled that thimerosal is a cause of autism?
Is there something that perhaps he knows about that we don't?
And does he really believe "genetic mutations" have nothing to do with environment? And how does he explain that all of these "genetic mutations" suddenly appeared at the same time, with autism rates skyrocketing from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 68 within 2 generations?
How horrifying to see a supposed science writer suggesting eugenics.
Posted by: Taximom5 | July 23, 2014 at 06:34 PM
Great article Teresa cant wait to read the book..
MMR RIP
Posted by: angus files | July 23, 2014 at 05:49 PM
@John Stone
I agree completely about the correlation vs causation inversion. Funny how the Dorit Reiss's of the world never seem to notice when captured scientists deliberately employ this trick to bolster politically-appropriated "science."
I haven't read this paper yet, but I doubt this is anything more than deliberately isolated statistical noise. They failed to find any strong associations with SNPs so they greatly expanded the number of variables in play by looking at common gene variants. Given the mathematical combinatorics at play, this all but ensures you will find some "combination" of variables (gene variants) that correlate quite strongly with some feature (in this case ASD). This is not science, it's just statistical dredging.
And, devoid of a requirement to demonstrate--much less hypothesize--how this dredged up genetic combination might actually cause ASD, they are given free reign to engage of proof by narrative, made even easier in this case by the multifactorial biological role that common gene variants play.
Posted by: XerxesOnXanax | July 23, 2014 at 03:34 PM
Bob,
In addition, we should consider that in Europe autism tends to be more the higher-functioning Asperger's type, and that overall, the rate of autism in Sweden (or other Scandinavian countries) is a fraction of what we have here now. Sweden has always been in the forefront of responsible measures to reduce exposure to dangerous industrial chemicals: I lived there in 1999, and was surprised that you could swim in the Baltic across a field from a subway station in Stockholm: in the middle of the city, yet the water was considered clean enough for the public to swim in. Of course they give far fewer vaccines than we do. Who in their right mind would give as many as we do? They stopped giving the pertussis vaccine entirely for seventeen years, beginning in 1979, being more proactive than most countries in responding to the many cases of children being killed or brain-damaged by the pertussis vaccine.
Posted by: cia parker | July 23, 2014 at 01:36 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjj0xVM4x1I
Bruce Lipton on genes and the environment.
Posted by: Holly | July 23, 2014 at 12:58 PM
Wow twisted science works every time! Take the children that have autism present the collection of genes that make them vulnerable to environmental assaults and viola you have the cause of autism! YUP YUP YUP now lets be sure and not have any pregnancy with boys either, knowing that you have a much greater chance of having a child with autism. Those damn male genes they just make for greedy parents. Hell while we are at it we might as well rid ourselves of all those genetics traits that make an arrogant assh*&%! write something like this! Oh wait, you know we first should investigate and make sure he does not have any of the suspected genes that might just cause autism. I cannot believe anyone would even go here, it is Eugenics with a capital E!
Posted by: NORA | July 23, 2014 at 12:39 PM
"The source of autism in children is in majority the result of the desire of parents with defective genes to have children....In light of the facts produced by this new research, one must seriously consider how flagrantly greedy...people that have autistic children may have been."
???
Sieg effing heil.
Posted by: Carol | July 23, 2014 at 12:06 PM
@ Eileen
"Males are more genetically prone to autism than females."
Recent "60 Minutes" segment: "Sex Matters: Drugs can affect men and women differently
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sex-matters-drugs-can-affect-sexes-differently/
"Ambien, Zolpidem, is now the only prescription drug in the country with a different suggested dose for men and women. But we've discovered it is far from an isolated example of differences between the sexes we never imagined. More and more, scientists are realizing that the differences are dangerously understudied and that pervasively and fundamentally, sex matters."
"Take aspirin. Low-dose aspirin lowers the risk of heart attacks in healthy men; but in healthy women, turns out it doesn't though it does protect women against stroke. And drugs are just the beginning. Sex differences have been found in pain receptors, liver enzymes, even the wiring of the brain."
Apparently, a "one size fits all vaccine" makes no allowance for "gender differences" .. which according to this CBS report .. affect men and women differently .. such as .... "pain receptors, liver enzymes, even the wiring of the brain"
Posted by: BoB Moffitt | July 23, 2014 at 10:44 AM
Males are more genetically prone to autism than females. Males have higher (aerobic) metabolic needs than females, which is related to the fact that females don’t compete with males in sports like track and swimming.
Some families have higher aerobic metabolism. My children with and without autism were all champions at track. My third (non-autistic) son ran a 4 minute, 13 second mile at the age of 16, a high-school record that lasted several years here in Massachusetts. His autistic brother, Conrad, was phenomenal in Special Olympics at snow-shoeing!
My first two sons suffered trauma and anoxia at birth. Conrad’s resuscitation took several minutes. Our family, my husband and I also, have high aerobic metabolism. I cannot go into a steam bath without feeling like I will suffocate. Do we have bad genes, or just genes that make us more vulnerable to anoxic and toxic insults?
Posted by: Eileen Nicole Simon | July 23, 2014 at 08:29 AM
The most fundamental piece of bad faith is to confuse association with cause. It is surely a circular exercise: you identify which genetic variations in a population are most commonly associated with autism and then imply that those variations caused the autism (without any model of how they do it). An intelligent question might be why those people with those variations might be more vulnerable to autism. We might even locate the answer in something Francis Collins, now head of the NIH, and then head of the human genome project told Congress in 2006:
"But genes alone do not tell the whole story. Recent increases in chronic diseases like diabetes, childhood asthma, obesity or autism cannot be due to major shifts in the human gene pool as those changes take much more time to occur. They must be due to changes in the environment, including diet and physical activity, which may produce disease in genetically predisposed persons. Therefore, GEI will also invest in innovative new technologies/sensors to measure environmental toxins, dietary intake and physical activity, and using new tools of genomics, proteomics, and understanding metabolism rates to determine an individual's biological response to those influences."
http://www.genome.gov/18016846
So, here we are eight years on doing studies which Collins admitted were a waste of space.
Posted by: John Stone | July 23, 2014 at 08:07 AM
Teresa writes:
"it should be noted that this study was done in SWEDEN. There are many differences between Sweden and the USA, as far as both genetics and the environmental factors of each country, like food, Vit D, sun exposure, vaccinations, heavy metal exposures and pesticides. In the 1990’s, where a big chunk of the birth cohorts in this study were used, Sweden “mandated a fifty percent reduction in the use of agricultural pesticides…”, the results of a comparison of genes in differing countries and cultures seems obtuse."
I think it justified to suspect ANY research pertaining to autism's link with vaccines that originates in a European country. In fact .. before we accept ANY "genetic" research from Sweden .. the very first question Sweden's "scientists" must answer is why they have not recommended and approved the same over-loaded vaccine schedule as in the USA? Are they worried about the "environmental" assault on "genes" of Sweden's children?
Having said that .. our only hope lies in the emerging science of "epigenetics" .. which will prove far more efficient identifying the "molecular roots" of the problem .. particularly .. "what environmental exposures cause genes to mutate .. or .. turn on and off".
As epigenetic science continues to improve .. it will prove to be a critical weapon .. much like .. DNA has proven critical to providing justice for innocent men/women who had been "proven guilty" by juries of their peers over the decades.
Until that day arrives .. we should consider broadly applied "genetic research" with the same jaundiced eye we consider "epidemiological studies" .. which are notorious for being easily manipulated to reach a pre-determined conclusion .. which is why the tobacco industry used them successfully for decades to deny any link between "cigarettes and cancer".
Posted by: BoB Moffitt | July 23, 2014 at 07:33 AM
The "Autism gene" showed up in 50 states at the same in 1991 and placed tens of thousands of Autistic children into the school systems by 1996.
Also in 1991, eight doses of harmless mercury vaccines were also added to the infant schedule by age one, with a prostitute hep b vaccine given to all on the day of birth.
We all know...
Using tobacco science, three pack a day smokers have about the same lung cancer rates as four pack a day smokers which makes smoking harmless.
Autism rates for children with 32 vaccines are about the same for those with 30 / therefore the "product liability free" vaccine industry has been proven to be free of harm.
Posted by: cmo | July 23, 2014 at 07:23 AM