A 2003 paper in the International Journal of Toxicology suggests the answer is yes. A Baton Rouge doctor named Amy Holmes, who herself had an autistic child, wondered if mercury was involved. She tested the hair of a series of autistic children from her practice and found, to her surprise, that they had less mercury in their hair than other children. Then she and two other scientists did a well-controlled comparison of normal and autistic children that confirmed her original observation. These are the data in the 2003 paper. Here is its abstract:
Reported rates of autism have increased sharply in the United States and the United Kingdom. One possible factor underlying these increases is increased exposure to mercury through thimerosal-containing vaccines, but vaccine exposures need to be evaluated in the context of cumulative exposures during gestation and early infancy. Differential rates of postnatal mercury elimination may explain why similar gestational and infant exposures produce variable neurological effects. First baby haircut samples were obtained from 94 children diagnosed with autism using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM IV) criteria and 45 age- and gender-matched controls. Information on diet, dental amalgam fillings, vaccine history, Rho D immunoglobulin administration, and autism symptom severity was collected through a maternal survey questionnaire and clinical observation. Hair mercury levels in the autistic group were 0.47 ppm versus 3.63 ppm in controls, a significant difference. The mothers in the autistic group had significantly higher levels of mercury exposure through Rho D immunoglobulin injections and amalgam fillings than control mothers. Within the autistic group, hair mercury levels varied significantly across mildly, moderately, and severely autistic children, with mean group levels of 0.79, 0.46, and 0.21 ppm, respectively. Hair mercury levels among controls were significantly correlated with the number of the mothers’ amalgam fillings and their fish consumption as well as exposure to mercury through childhood vaccines, correlations that were absent in the autistic group. Hair excretion patterns among autistic infants were significantly reduced relative to control. These data cast doubt on the efficacy of traditional hair analysis as a measure of total mercury exposure in a subset of the population. In light of the biological plausibility of mercury’s role in neurodevelopmental disorders, the present study provides further insight into one possible mechanism by which early mercury exposures could increase the risk of autism.
The abstract omits the most important piece of information: There was little or no overlap between the hair mercury of the control and autistic groups. (It is hard to tell exactly, the data are badly plotted.) Given the size of the two groups, this is highly persuasive. The abstract also omits the basic conclusion: In autistic children, a mechanism that gets rid of mercury is broken. As a result, they get poisoned by levels of environmental mercury that would otherwise be safe.
Holmes started treating autistic children by (a) giving them a compound that tends to bind to mercury and form a compound that is excreted and (b) reducing their mercury exposure. The results of this treatment have been very impressive. As children get older, it becomes less effective. Here are details:
We currently have over 500 autistic patients under treatment with DMSA ranging in age from 1 to 24 years old. In general, we do not expect to see any behavioral, language, or social improvements until at least some of the CNS mercury has been removed. As of 1/15/01, we had 85 patients who had finished DMSA alone and had completed at least 4 months of DMSA + lipoic acid. The results of treatment in these patients are presented below:
n = 85 Improvement (%)
Age Number Marked Moderate Slight None
1-5 40 35 39 15 11
6-12 25 4 28 52 16
13-17 16 0 6 68 26
18+ 4 0 0 25 75Once lipoic acid is added, we usually track mercury excretion via tests of fecal mercury. We have noticed a large dependence of excretion on age of patient with the younger patients excreting much more mercury than the older patients. We think this difference in rapidity of excretion may explain the differences in response between the various age groups.
We have 6 patients, all 1 to 2 years of age who are finished with treatment by measurements of urinary and fecal mercury excretion. These 6 patients are “normal” by parent reports and repeat psychological testing. We have no children over the age of 2 who are finished with treatment. The rapidity of excretion seems to decrease markedly with each additional year of age. There are several children, mostly in the younger age groups, who have made remarkable progress to the point of being able to be mainstreamed in school, but who are still have some “oddities” of behavior — none of these children have completed treatment yet.
Unfortunately I cannot find later results. An undated announcement says “due to health reasons, Dr. Amy Holmes is no longer able to continue in her practice.” Miscellaneous comments by Holmes. SafeMinds, a Cambridge, MA nonprofit devoted to this issue.
Addendum. A new TV series (Eli Stone, rated B+ by Entertainment Weekly) will consider this issue. According to the NY Times TV reporter, “Reams of scientific studies by the leading American health authorities have failed to establish a causal link between the [mercury-containing] preservative and autism.”
A quick google search brought these up:
https://autismdiva.blogspot.com/2005/12/dr-amy-holmes-was-just-trying-to-help.html
https://autismdiva.blogspot.com/2007/08/dr-amy-holmes-and-mikes-story.html
Haven’t had time to read either the original docs too deeply myself, nor these links.
Hair analysis is inconclusive.
Thy a live blood cell anaysis.
I guarantee a different result.
Please stop this propaganda.
Why is the focus always only on thimerosal?
Included on this list of chemical concerns should also be formaldehyde, M.S.G., aluminum, Butylated hydroxytoluene or B.H.T. and many others.
Don’t let the mainstream media and pharma spin doctors lull you into only focusing on the thimerosal.
Remember these corporations would no doubt lose everything if a connection is made between the preservatives and the world wide vaccine programs.
I saw my 5yr old son’s live blood analysis taking place.
I saw live candida yeast in his blood.
I saw the heavy metals as well.
Where do you think it came from?
Leaky gut syndrome comes from the M.M.R jab.
Frankly Seth, I’m stunned. Shocked. That you’d even find the topic worthy of consideration much less come to these conclusions. This tired old argument is what I expect from wild-eyed curebies -not you- and it causes me to question the caliber of the content you’ve been publishing. I am sad and disappointed. Or maybe that’s just my mercury poisoning talking…Odd how mercury poisoning seems to run in families. Perhaps you’ll tackle that next.
Kathleen, do you have an alternative explanation of the data of Holmes et al.?
As for “tired old argument” I haven’t seen anyone else say how persuasive the Holmes et al. data are. Even their abstract fails to make this clear.
Seth, I lean towards the mercury-autism link, but only lean, because the data seems contradictory.
When I mentioned this article/study to a statistician friend of mine (he had just blogged about this) his response was that since the mercury was removed, we haven’t seen any changes in the rate of autism, therefore it couldn’t have been the mercury. I still haven’t been able to find a way around that argument.
I would suggest that some children are more susceptible than others, and the vaccinations might send them over then edge.
I would also suggest that the rise has a lot to do with the essential fatty acid imbalances (Omega-6 vs. Omega 3) that have been increasing significantly over the past couple of decades. A book I read 10 years ago predicted a rise in autism, ADD, MS, Alzheimer’s and other nervous system issues as a result.
And as to your commenters who just can’t bare the thought of someone bringing this issue up again, get a life. You speak as if all of these questions have always been dealt with purely dispassionately and scientifically. Your willful ignorance of the politicization of science and public health does not speak well of your intellectual capacity.
The idea that mercury could have been a cause of the rise of autism was not unreasonable, and while the question seems to have been answered at this point, it was not always so clear. It would be wonderful if you could save your passion for helping to figure out what’s happening, rather than getting your rocks off by reacting so indignantly.
Speaking as the parent of an autistic child, Seth and Charles will just have to get over their continued outrage that people should be outraged that this study is still being discussed as viable.
You would both do well to read the following:
1) Prometheus Part II
2) Autism Street
3) Not Mercury
4) Autism Diva
The above authors and scientists are also parents of autistic kids. We share an opinion that it might be good for our kids if people would move on, actually LEARN about the science involved instead of regurgitating abstracts like they think they know what they’re talking about and hey – maybe some of that good old research money might start going to ways that will improve the lives of our kids. Y’know – education, housing for autistic adults, silly little things like that.
Charles,
“I haven’t been able to find a way around that argument.” I suggest you look at
https://www.jpands.org/vol11no1/geier.pdf
which shows that the autism rate HAS started to fall, exactly when you would expect from the mercury/autism hypothesis.
Kev,
Thanks for the links. I read the comments of Autism Diva before my post. I’ve now read the rest. They don’t make any good points. For example, Prometheus gives three possible explanations — explanations he or she thinks are plausible — for the Holmes et all findings. Here is one of them:
With no supporting data. This is like saying “then a miracle happens” or “I just don’t believe it”. It isn’t persuasive.
Seth: Thanks for the .pdf. Interesting stuff.
And I think your excerpt above, “…but it is my persona; favorite,” perfectly illustrates why people might be generally skeptical. I’m no longer shocked when I read various scientific studies in which the conclusions aren’t at all supported by the data because it happens so often.
If you’re relying on JPANDS papers for good science then I understand why you are having a problem. Good luck, but don’t expect people not to take issue with you when you express your dissatisfaction with their criticism of your credulousness.
Kev’s right – JPANDS gives a bad name to junk science.
A recent paper (Gundacker et al , 2007) shows that genuine poor Hg excretors have elevated hair mercury levels. Hair reflects blood mercury level, so if you can’t excrete it, the mercury builds up in the blood and the hair.
Hair has high levels of cysteine (a sulfur-containing amino acid), that draws out and retains blood mercury. That’s why we use hair mercury levels to track long term exposure. But hair also attracts and hold on to environmental mercury, which makes hair mercury levels in urban environments unreliable.
Kev & Autism News Beat,
Do you have an alternative explanation for the very clear declines in autism rates shown in the JPANDS paper?
There were a few quarters in late 2004 and early 2005 when the Calif. numbers seemed to trend downwards, but it didn’t last. Over the longer term, case loads are not going down. Figure 3 in the Geier’s non-peer reviewed article tracks CDDS numbers. Look at the data point for the third quarter of 2002. It’s a huge out-lier, due to a programming error that was discovered in July 2002, in addition to changes to the reporting system effected in the same month, that added a large number of clients that had previously gone unrecorded. The hugely inflated number and subsequent “decline” is an anomaly that the Geiers passed off as real. A legitimate journal would have caught the deception.
The Geiers presented the data point like any other. It is inconceivable that any honest, skeptical researcher could look at that data and not wonder about the outlier. The answer is readily available on the CDDS website.
It is obvious that the Geiers deliberately used skewed data to further their agenda. That’s not science.
Blood Levels of Mercury Are Related to Diagnosis of Autism: A Reanalysis of an Important Data Set
M. Catherine DeSoto, PhD
Department of Psychology, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa, cathy.desoto@uni.edu
Robert T. Hitlan, PhD
Department of Psychology, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa
The question of what is leading to the apparent increase in autism is of great importance. Like the link between aspirin and heart attack, even a small effect can have major health implications. If there is any link between autism and mercury, it is absolutely crucial that the first reports of the question are not falsely stating that no link occurs. We have reanalyzed the data set originally reported by Ip et al. in 2004 and have found that the original p value was in error and that a significant relation does exist between the blood levels of mercury and diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorder. Moreover, the hair sample analysis results offer some support for the idea that persons with autism may be less efficient and more variable at eliminating mercury from the blood.
The article by DeSoto and Hitlan is here:
Journal of Child Neurology, Vol. 22, No. 11, 1308-1311 (2007)
Hi,
I’m a student at a college in New England majoring in Psychology. For my Research Methods class I need to do a study and I chose to do Mercury causing Autism. I have a few questions that I would be very greatful if anyone would answer them and maybe give me an idea of how you feel about the subject. Thank you for taking the time.
1. Do you personally know anyone that has Autism?
2. Do you know a lot of information about Autism? Would you consider yourself an expert?
3. Do you believe mercury causes Autism?
4. Do you believe that thimerosal has made Autism increase?
5. Why do you think that the rate of Autism is at 1 out of 150 children?
6. Why do you believe that that number varies from state to state?
Is it the environment?
The mercury in the environment?
7. Do you believe that testing childrens’ hair is an accurate test of mercury causing Autism?
There was this guy see.
He wasn’t very bright and he reached his adult life without ever having learned “the facts”.
Somehow, it gets to be his wedding day.
While he is walking down the isle, his father tugs his sleeve and says,
“Son, when you get to the hotel room…Call me”
Hours later he gets to the hotel room with his beautiful blushing bride and he calls his father,
“Dad, we are the hotel, what do I do?”
“O.K. Son, listen up, take off your clothes and get in the bed, then she should take off her clothes and get in the bed, if not help her. Then either way, ah, call me”
A few moments later…
“Dad we took off our clothes and we are in the bed, what do I do?”
O.K. Son, listen up. Move real close to her and she should move real close to you, and then… Ah, call me.”
A few moments later…
“DAD! WE TOOK OFF OUR CLOTHES, GOT IN THE BED AND MOVED REAL CLOSE, WHAT DO I DO???”
“O.K. Son, Listen up, this is the most important part. Stick the long part of your body into the place where she goes to the bathroom.”
A few moments later…
“Dad, I’ve got my foot in the toilet, what do I do?”
Ues, but not everthing black and white, something is gray
Miranda