Thimerosal Studies

A collection of some of the research done in the past…


History of Thimerosal


 * Invented in the 1920’s by Eli Lilly, thimerosal is 49.6% ethlymercury, a neurotoxin known to be more than a hundreds times more powerful than lead.


 * Eli Lilly’s safety testing of the product consisted of a 1930 study of 22 patients dying from mengiococcal meningitis in an Indiana hospital. Patients were injected with the solutions and followed until their death, which was within days. Because the patients died of meningitis, they were declared to show no adverse reaction to thimerosal, and the product was declared safe for use.


 * Thimerosal was then introduced for use in vaccines and in over the counter remedies as a preservative to kill bacteria in the product.


 * When the FDA was created, Thimerosal was grandfathered in and is not subjected to any additional safety testing. The 1930 study remains the only safety testing done on the substance even after being in use for 75 years.


  * Through FOIA requests and documents acquired as part of a discovery process in lawsuits against Lilly; it showed they have been warned about and have been aware of the dangers of the product since at least 1947.


 * In the 1950’s, the use of thimerosal in teething powders for infants leads to a fatal out break of Acrodynia, or “Pink’s Disease”, which is a form of mercury poisoning. This illness has many symptoms in common with Autism.


 * In 1963 Eli Lilly was forwarded an article that read in part:

 “There is another point of practical significance: does the parenteral injection of thimerosal – containing fluids cause disturbances in thimerosal-sensitive patients?” “It is known that persons that are contact sensitive to a drug may tolerate the same medications internally, but it seems advisable to use a preservative other than thimerosal for injections in thimerosal-sensitiv e people.”


 * On August 17, 1967 the Medical/Science department requested that the claim “non-toxic” on thimerosal labels be deleted in next printing run. Two weeks later the label was changed to “non-irritating to body tissues,” and the phrase ‘non-toxic’ was omitted.


* In 1972 The British Medical Journal reported cases of skin burns resulting from the chemical interaction of thimerosal and aluminum.


“Mercury is known to act as a catalyst and to cause aluminum to oxidize rapidly, with the production of heat.” The manufacturers who supply us with thimerosal have been informed.” [Thimerosal is being used in vaccines which also contain aluminum].


 * In the 1970’s, six newborns at one hospital died as a result of having a thimerosal containing antiseptic wiped on their wounds.


 * In 1982 the FDA reviewed the use of thimerosal. Their statement reads in part:


“At the cellular level, thimerosal has been found to be more toxic for human epithelial cells in vitro than mercuric chloride, mercuric nitrate, and merbromim mercurichrom)”…


 “It was found to be 35.3 times more toxic for embryonic chick heart tissue than for staphylococcus areus.” A 1950 study showed that thimerosal was no better than water in protecting mice from potential fatal streptococcal infection.”


“The Panel concludes that thimerosal is not safe for over the counter topical use because of its potential for cell damage if applied to broken skin and its allergy potential. It is not effective as a topical antimicrobial because its bacteria static action can be reversed.”


Additional language added to some Lilly labels: “As with any drug, if you are pregnant or nursing a baby, seek the advice of a health professional before using this product.”


 * The FDA orders the withdrawal of over the counter, thimerosal containing products within a 6 month period. They did not order removal from vaccines, but recommends that the issue be studied and that the incidence of neurological problems in unvaccinated populations like the Amish be compared to the vaccinated population. (22 years later no such study has yet been done). On July 19, 2005 Dr. Julie Gerberding, head of the CDC, says that such a study would be difficult to undertake because of genetic confounders.


* A Merck internal memo is obtained during discovery and disclosed that in 1991 a Merck researcher added up the amount of mercury that is in the new vaccine schedule and sounded an alarm to the company that children who are vaccinated according to the new schedule would receive amounts of mercury far above what is considered to be safe by the EPA. Merck took no action in regard to the information.


 * During the 1990’s, autism rates begin to rise dramatically. Parents complained to the health authorities that they believe that their children’s developmental disorders are related to their vaccines.


 * In 1998, a researcher at the CDC does the same math that Merck did 7 years previously. She found that children are getting as much as 125 times the EPA limit of mercury for their weight. The EPA limit is based on the ingestion of methlymercury in food by a healthy adult. Because 90% of ingested mercury is excreted in the digestive track and never enters the blood stream, even the EPA limit may be drastically lacking considering that thimerosal is injected directly into the blood stream and is not subject to the bodies natural defenses against toxic poisoning.


 * In 1999, the CDC and the American Association of Pediatrics issued a joint statement saying that although they find no “evidence of harm” from the mercury exposure that children are getting in their vaccines, they are calling on vaccine manufacturers to remove it from vaccines on a voluntary basis as a precautionary measure because “some children may” get more than the EPA limit for mercury at their 6 month visits. Manufactures begin the process in 1999, but do not remove it from all vaccines.


* No legal ban on thimerosal is issued.  No recall of the mercury laden vaccines is issued and companies continued to sell lots already manufactured.  No statement is issued to pediatricians to alert them to the symptoms of mercury poisoning. No recommendation is made to pediatricians to screen children who suffered the onset neurological impairment after vaccination for mercury toxicity.


 * In November of 1999, the CDC commissioned one of its new employees, Thomas Verstraten, to study the Vaccine Safety Datalink to find the risk of autism and other NDD’s in relation to thimerosal exposure. Verstraten’s first draft of the study found a relative risk above 7 for children who receive the highest dose of thimerosal to develop autism. In other words; these children have a more than a 600% higher chance of developing autism than children who don’t receive any thimerosal. (A relative risk of 2 is sufficient proof in U.S. courts to find for vaccine injury) Verstraten and other scientists at the CDC spent 4 years trying to change the study so that the relationship between the preservative and NDD’s is significantly reduced or eliminated. The Center for Disease Control will later describe these changes to the study as “improvements”. When the study is published in 2003, it concludes that “no consistent significant associations are found between thimerosal containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes.” By this time Thomas Verstraten, who is listed as a CDC employee on the study, had been an employee of GlaxoSmithKlein (a defendant in thimerosal law suits) for more than 2 years.


 * In 2001 Bernard et al. published their hypothesis: Autism: A Novel Form of Mercury Poisoning. It reads in part: “Exposure to mercury can cause immune, sensory, neurological, motor, and behavioral dysfunctions similar to traits defining or associated with autism, and the similarities extend to neuroanatomy, neurotransmitters, and biochemistry. Thimerosal, a preservative added to many vaccines, has become a major source of mercury in children who, within their first two years, may have received a quantity of mercury that exceeds safety guidelines. A review of medical literature and US government data suggests that: (i) many cases of idiopathic autism are induced by early mercury exposure from thimerosal; (ii) this type of autism represents an unrecognized mercurial syndrome; and (iii) genetic and non-genetic factors establish a predisposition whereby thimerosal’s adverse effects occur only in some children.”


 * In 2001 the Institute of Medicine is commissioned by the CDC to undertake a comprehensive review of all research into the thimerosal/autism connection. At their first meeting, Dr Stratton, head of the commission, when discussing what the process and product of the working group would be states that, “We said this before you got here, and I think we said this yesterday, the point of no return, the line we will not cross in public policy is to pull the vaccine, change the schedule. We could say it is time to revisit this, but we would never recommend that level. Even recommending research is recommendations for policy. We wouldn’t say compensate, we wouldn’t say pull the vaccine, we wouldn’t say stop the program”. When the transcript of the meeting is made public through a FOIA request, many interpret this to mean that no matter what they find, they will not publicly say that there is any link between the thimerosal and autism.


 * In 2001 Verstraten presents a version of his study to the IOM. He began his presentation by telling the panel that he had become an employee of Glaxo Smith Klein. Despite the conflict of interest and the drastic changes made over the course of the study, the IOM will rely heavily on the study in making their determination. Dr. Verstraten returns to Belgium and except for a letter published in Pediatrics, little is heard from him again.


 * In 2003 the Verstraten Study is published in Pediatrics with no mention of the conflict of interest of the lead researcher. Later, a private contractor would testify before congress that he was ordered to destroy the original data sets used in the 1999 version of the study that found the dramatic link between thimerosal and autism in the interest of “patient confidentiality”. The entire Vaccine Safety Datalink is eventually moved to an offshore private company and can no longer be accessed by FOIA request.


* In February of 2004, the IOM rushed to hold public hearings where researchers on both sides of the issues presented their studies. A link is neither proved nor disproved, but new research in to the mechanism of how mercury can trigger autism and NDD’s in a genetically vulnerable sub population is presented, along with case studies of successful treatment of autistic symptoms based on the new research.


* In May of 2004, the IOM issued their final conclusion on the link between Thimerosal and NDD’s. They stated that, “the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism. The committee further finds that potential biological mechanisms for vaccine-induced autism that have been generated to date are theoretical only.”  They then go on to recommending that research into a link between the two be abandoned and funds be spent on other lines of inquiry. The conclusion relies heavily on Verstraten and several other epidemiological studies that are considered to implement fatally flawed methods and to be riddled with conflict of interest by members of the autism community. Parent groups are enraged. The IOM panel disbands.


 * Later that year, Thomas Verstraten published a letter in Pediatrics in response to those who criticize his study and his conflict of interest. His letter did not address the substance of the charges made against the study and the changes that were made to it over it’s four year evolution. Instead it said that continuing to debate the validity of the 1999 study would be a “waste of scientific energy and not to the benefit of the safety of US children or of all children world wide that have the privilege of being vaccinated.” He also stated that any suggestion of impropriety on the part of himself, the CDC or GSK is an insult and accuses his critics of having “pitiable attitudes”.


 * In July of 2005, in the face of continuing criticism of the IOM findings, the head of the IOM, Dr. Harvey Fineberg, issued a letter stating that Dr. Stratton’s 2001 comments that they would not say “pull the vaccine” or “change the schedule” were taken out of context and did not suggest that the IOM decision was compromised. Dr. Fineberg has not, despite requests, offered an alternative interpretation of what her comments meant in context.


 * In March of 2005, Author David Kirby released his book, Evidence of Harm, detailing the history of thimerosal in vaccines and its relationship to autism.


 * In April of 2005 the CDC posted a notice on their web site stating that they were in the process of reviewing the book Evidence of Harm and would be responding to the book.


* In June of 2005 Robert F. Kennedy Jr. echoed the information found in the book and charged the CDC and Eli Lilly of malfeasance in covering up evidence of a causal effect between thimerosal and autism in an article published in Rolling Stone and Salon com. It was entitled “Deadly Immunity: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. investigates the government cover-up of a mercury/autism scandal”.


 * July 19, 2005. The CDC held a press conference to: communicate the importance of infants and children receiving their recommended vaccinations on time, and reassure parents that vaccines are safe. The renewed attention to the potential causal link between thimerosal, a vaccine preservative, and autism was addressed during the press conference. Vaccine safety groups were not informed of the press conference nor invited. The conference presented no new information and did not answer important questions raised in Evidence of Harm or Deadly Immunity about the conduct of the CDC the IOM or the reliability of the research that continues to be used to show no link between thimerosal and autism.


 * As of  2007 the CDC had yet to issue its response to Evidence of Harm or to Deadly Immunity.


CDC Transcript from Simpsonwood conference center in Norcross, Ga.

(Short version-Safeminds)


 SAFE MIND’s recently obtained the transcribed minutes to the Simpsonwood meeting held June 7-8, 2000 in Norcross, Georgia where the finding of the Vaccine Safety Datalink analysis of Thimerosal containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes were reviewed by a panel of experts. There were a number of additional findings not previously reported in the VSD data contained in this document.


SAFE MIND’s has summarized a number of comments made by the participants that we feel deserve special consideration. These comments will be categorized as introductory concerns related to the issue of thimerosal containing vaccines made by participants, CDC’s presentations of the VSD data, and discussion comments made after the presentations. The comments in Italics are that of SAFE MIND’s made in reference to the discussion.


Introductory comments expressed by participants.



Dr. Johnston: Page 16 comments made in reference to a prior meeting on thimerosal

 “As an aside, we found cultural differences between vaccinologist and environmental health people in that many of us in the vaccine arena have never thought about uncertainty factors before. We tend to be relatively concrete in our thinking. Probably

one of the big cultural events, at least for me, was when Dr. Clarkson repetitively pointed out to us that we just didn’t get it about uncertainty (factors), and he was actually quite right.”


 Dr. Johnston: Page 20: Referring to the mixture of both aluminum and mercury in vaccines…there is absolutely no data including animal data, about the potential for synergy, additivity or antagonism, all of which can occur in binary metal mixtures that relate and allow us to draw any conclusions from the simultaneous exposure to these two salts in vaccines.”


Dr. Clarkson: Page 21: “There is an issue that pharmacokinetics might be different too. Again this is all animal work, but the animal studies suggested, for example, a suckling animal does not eliminate methylmercury until the end of the suckling period, and there is a mechanism on the study for that. So there could be an age difference in the excretion rates.”


 Dr. Weil: Page 24: “One, up until this last discussion we have been talking about chronic exposure. I think it’s clear to me anyway that we are talking about a problem that is probably more related to bolus acute exposures, and we also need to know that the migration problems and some of the other developmental problems in the central nervous system go on for quite a period after birth. But from all of the other studies of toxic substances, the earlier you work with the central nervous system, the more likely you are to run into a sensitive period for one of these effects, so that moving from one month or one day of birth to six months of birth changes enormously the potential for toxicity. There are just a host of neurodevelopmental data that would suggest that we’ve got a serious problem. The earlier we go, the more serious the problem. The second point I could make is that in relationship to aluminum, being a nephrologist for a long time, the potential for aluminum and central nervous system toxicity was established by dialysis data. To think there isn’t some possible problem here is unreal.”


CDC’s presentation of the VSD data by Dr. Verstraeten and Dr. Rhodes.


 Dr. Verstraeten: Page 31: “ It is sort of interesting that when I first came to the CDC as a NIS officer a year ago only, I didn’t really know what I wanted to do, but one of the things I knew I didn’t want to do was studies that had to do with toxicology or environmental health. Because I thought it was too much confounding and it’s very hard to prove anything in those studies. Now it turns out that other people also thought that this study was not the right thing to do, so what I will present to you is the study that nobody thought we should do.”

 Page 1 of 5- 1/24/2004


Dr. Verstraeten: Page 40: “…we have found statistically significant relationships between the exposures and outcomes for these different exposures and outcomes. First, for two months of age, an unspecified developmental delay, which has its own specific ICD9 code. Exposure at three months of age, Tics. Exposure at six months of age, an attention deficit disorder. Exposure at one, three and six months of age, language and speech delays which are two separate ICD9 codes. Exposure at one, three and six months of age, the entire category of neurodevelopmental delays, which includes all of these plus a number of other disorders.”


Dr. Verstraeten: Page 42: “But one thing that is for sure, there is certainly an under-ascertainment of all of these because some of the children are just not old enough to be diagnosed. So the crude incidence rates are probably much lower that what you would expect because the cohort is still very young.”


Dr. Verstraten: Page 44: “Now for speech delays, which is the largest single disorder in this category of neurologic delays. The results are a suggestion of a trend with a small dip. The overall test for trend is highly statistically significant above one.”


 Dr. Verstraten: Page 45: “What this represents is the overall category of developmental delays, of which I have excluded speech delays because of the impression we had was some of the calculations were driven by this speech group, which was making up about half of this category. After excluding this speech group, the trend is also apparent in this group and the test for trend is also significant for this category excluding speech.”


 Dr Verstraeten: Page 68: “However, among prematures that becomes significant and we get relative risks up to two and three, whereby the ones that got more thimerosal are at a higher risk than the ones who got the combination vaccine.”

 Dr. Weil: Page 75: “I think that what you are saying is in term of chronic exposure. I think that the alternative scenario is that this is repeated acute exposures, and like many repeated acute exposures, if you consider a dose of 25 micrograms on one day, then you are above threshold. At least we think you are, and then you do that over and over to a series of neurons where the toxic effect may be the same set of neurons or the same set of neurologic processes, it is conceivable that the more mercury you get, the more effect you are going to get.”


Dr. Verstraeten: Page 78: “Then the last slide I wanted to show, there was a question of if there was any way from this data that we could estimate what would happen in the future if there is Thimerosal-free HepB and Thimerosalfree haemophilus influenza vaccine and only DTP has Thimerosal.” Page 79 “The second column would be the same scenario but now at six months. Assuming they have received two additional DTPs, so between three and six months of age they have increased their ethylmercury amounts by 50 micrograms. If I do in this current cohort with all its limitations, because there is also the HepB that exists in this cohort*, I can’t really take it out. It is significant for this one disorder which is language delay and it is quite high. Together with that, speech or language delay which is a combination of these two disorders, also becomes significant.” * Dr. Verstraeten could not determine which children got HepB at birth in some cases so it was difficult to back the birth dose of Hep B out of the data.


 Dr. Davis: Page 88: “Now one might imagine that [relative risk of 1.018] would just disappear once we actually confirmed these diagnoses from chart review, but in fact it did not. You see if the diagnosis was mentioned in the chart, the relative risk increases ever so slightly.”

 Dr. Rhodes: Page 93: “I think I had two purposes in mind going through the analyses I’ve done. One was a very quick verification that there wasn’t some crucial missing statement in 4,000 lines of programming, and there wasn’t. Tom’s programming was perfectly clear. I also wanted to try to take a different look at the data because I think sometimes we make choices in our analyses. We conceptualize the problem very quickly and then everything else kind of depends on those initial choices and we don’t always go down other pathways…I think we will see that I will approach the data analysis in somewhat of a different way, and I will talk about what some of the results are when I look at the data in somewhat of a different fashion.”

 Page 2 of 5- 1/24/2004


Dr. Rhodes; Page 99: When you take the three month classification and see what happens to these kids a little later on…even seven to fourteen days later, you can see that there has been substantial movement from zero and the 12.5 mcg group. For example, after seven days at NCK, fully 27% of the zero group has received some sort of vaccination the next seven days and 42% have received some vaccination in the next 14 days. This finding would argue that the proposed thimerosal cohort study involving neurodevelopmental testing should classify exposure by actual exposures the first year of life and not just on the first three months of life.


 Dr. Rhodes: Page 104: “I am not advocating totally throwing them [the low mercury exposure group] away and never considering them in any analysis, but at least for now let’s think if we can establish if there are differences in this group of 37 to 75, then in a sense we really don’t need them.”


Dr. Rhodes: Page 105: “The other thing that happens at NCK is that even a year or two years after the policy change has been made and all kids are supposedly receiving the combination, there is an odd, small group of kids that supposedly receives separate DTP and Hib (note: with more thimerosal) and an unusually high percentage of those kids are outcomes.”


Dr. Rhodes Page 106 “For example, if 1,500 kids were receiving one vaccine combination in that month of birth and 20 were receiving some other, I have removed the 20 completely from the analyses.


Dr Rhodes: Page 107. “So you can push, I can pull. But there has been substantial movement from this very highly significant result down to a fairly marginal result.”

Dr. Rhodes recommends excluding the lowest exposure cases, claiming that the fact that their exposures were low suggested family behavior that made them unusual. The low rate of outcomes in this group, of course, added significance. He also suggests excluding some cases that had unusually high exposures and outcomes at the same time, as any high exposure, high outcome group would support the signal.


Dr. Verstraeten: Page 142: “But if I can have the next slide, here instead of the proportional hazard model, we did a logistic regression model. I didn’t use person time here and it’s a bit tough to define exactly the control group. However, if I do it for all ages and not looking at different years, and this is for speech, the outcome is almost identical to the proportional hazard model, which suggests to me that it is not a question of bringing the diagnosis forward, but it is really the overall number that drives this estimate.”


 Dr. Chen: Page 151: “One of the reasons that led me personally to not be so quick to dismiss the findings was that on his own Tom independently picked three different outcomes that he did not think could be associated with mercury (conjunctivitis, diarrhea and injury)and three out of three had a different pattern across different exposure levels as compared to the ones that again on a priority basis we picked as biologically plausible to be due to mercury exposure.”


 Dr Brent: Page 161: “Wasn’t true that if you looked at the population that had 25 micrograms you had a certain risk and when you got to 75 micrograms you had a higher risk.”

 Dr. Verstraeten: Page 161: “Yes, absolutely, but these are all at the same time. Measured at the same age at least.”


 Dr. Brent: Page 161: “I understand that, but they are different exposures.”

 Dr. Verstraeten: Page 161: “Yes”.

 Page 3 of 5- 1/24/2004

 Dr. Brent: Page 161: “What is your explanation? What explanations would you give for that?”

 Dr. Verstraeten: Page 161: “Personally, I have three hypotheses. My first hypotheses is it parental bias. The children that are more likely to be vaccinated are more likely to be picked up and diagnosed. Second hypothesis, I don’t know. There is a bias that I have not recognized, and nobody has yet told me about it. Third hypothesis. It’s true, it’s Thimerosal. Those are my hypotheses.”


 Dr. Brent: Page 161: “If its true, which or what mechanisms would explain the finding with?”


 Dr. Verstraeten: Page 162: “You are asking for biological plausibility?”

 Dr. Brent: Page 162: “Well, yes”

 Dr. Verstraeten: Page 162: “When I saw this, and I went back through the literature, I was actually stunned by what I saw because I thought it is plausible. First of all there is the Faeroe study, which I think people have dismissed too easily, and there is a new article in the same Journal that was presented here, the Journal of Pediatrics, where they have looked at PCB. They have looked at other contaminants in seafood and they have adjusted for that, and still mercury comes out. That is one point. Another point is that in many of the studies with animals, it turned out that there is quite a different result depending on the dose of mercury. Depending on the route of exposure and depending on the age at which the animals were exposed. Now, I don’t know how much you can extrapolate that from animals to humans, but that tells me mercury at one month of age is not the same as mercury at three months, at 12 months, prenatal mercury, later mercury. There is a whole range of plausible outcomes from mercury. On top of that, I think that we cannot so easily compare the U.S. population to Faeroe or Seychelles populations. We have different mean levels of exposure. We are comparing high to high in the Seychelles, high to high in the Faeroe and low to low in the U.S., so I am not sure how easily you can transpose one finding to another one. So basically to me that leaves all the options open, and that means I can not exclude such a possible effect.”


Discussion comments made by participants after the presentations.


 Dr. Johnson: Page 198: “This association leads me to favor a recommendation that infants up to two years old not be immunized with Thimerosal containing vaccines if suitable alternative preparations are available. I do not believe the diagnoses justifies compensation in the Vaccine Compensation Program at this point. I deal with causality, it seems pretty clear to be that the data are not sufficient one way or the other. My gut feeling? It worries me enough. Forgive this personal comment, but I got called out a eight o’clock for an emergency call and my daughter-in-law delivered a son by C-Section. Our first male in the line of the next generation, and I do not want that grandson to get a Thimerosal containing vaccine until we know better what is going on. It will probably take a long time. In the meantime, and I know there are probably implications for this internationally, but in the meantime I think I want that grandson to only be given Thimerosal-free vaccines.”


 Dr. Weil: Page 207: “ The number of dose related relationships are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant. The positive relationships are those that one might expect from the Faroe Islands studies. They are also related to those data we do have on experimental animal data and similar to the neurodevelopmental tox data on other substances, so that I think you can’t accept that this is out of the ordinary. It isn’t out of the ordinary. The Seychelles Island studies and somebody said the Faeroe Islands studies both, were chronic exposures. We are not talking necessarily about chronic exposure. We are talking about a series of acute exposures and at one point in time that exposure is much greater on one day than any of the Seychelles Islands. The increased incidence of neurobehavioral problems in children in the past few decades is probably real…I work in the school system where my effort is entirely in special education and I have to say that the number of kids getting help in special education is growing nationally and state by state at a rate we have not seen before.

 Page 4 of 5- 1/24/2004

 Dr. Weil: Page 208: “The rise in the frequency of neurobehavioral disorders whether it is ascertainment or real, is not too bad. It is much too graphic. We don’t see that kind of genetic change in 30 years.”

 Dr. Brent: Page 229: “The medical legal findings in this study, causal or not, are horrendous and therefore, it is important that the suggested epidemiological, pharmacokinetic, and animal studies be performed. If an allegation was made that a child’s neurobehavioral findings were caused by Thimerosal containing vaccines, you could readily find a junk scientist who would support the claim with “a reasonable degree of certainty”. But you will not find a scientist with any integrity who would say the reverse with the data that is available. And that is true. So we are in a bad position from the standpoint of defending any lawsuits if they were initiated and I am concerned.”

 Dr. Clements: Page 247: “I am really concerned that we have taken off like a boat going down one arm of the mangrove swamp at high speed, when in fact there was not enough discussion really early on about which way the boat should go at all. And I really want to risk offending everyone in the room by saying that perhaps this study should not have been done at all, because the outcome of it could have, to some extent, been predicted, and we have all reached this point now where we are left hanging, even though I hear the majority of consultants say to the Board that they are not convinced there is a causality direct link between Thimerosal and various neurological outcomes. I know how we handle it from here is extremely problematic. The ACIP is going to depend on comments from this group in order to move forward into policy, and I have been advised that whatever I say should not move into the policy area because that is not the point of this meeting. But nonetheless, we know from many experiences in history that the pure scientist has done research because of pure science. But that pure science has resulted in splitting the atom or some other process which is completely beyond the power of the scientists who did the research to control it. And what we have here is people who have, for every best reason in the world, pursued a direction of research. But there is now the point at which the research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work that has been done and through the freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in ways beyond them control of this group. And I am very concerned about that as I suspect it is already too late to do anything regardless of any professional body and what they say…”

 Dr. Bernier: Page 113: “We have asked you to keep this information confidential. We do have a plan for discussing these data at the upcoming meeting of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices on June 21 and June 22. At that time CDC plans to make a public release of this information, so I think it would serve all of our interests best if we could continue to consider these data. The ACIP work group will be considering also. If we could consider these data in a certain protected environment. So we are asking people who have a great job protecting this information up until now, to continue to do that until the time of the ACIP meeting. So too basically consider this embargoed information. That would help all of us to use the machinery that we have in place for considering these data and for arriving at policy recommendations.”

 Page 5 of 5- 1/24/2004


 Among the growing number of studies and reports confirming a possible link are the following: 


“A study released showing reduced autism diagnoses coincide with the reduction of mercury-containing vaccines given to children. The study, conducted by Mark Geier, M.D. and David Geier and published in the peer-reviewed Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, shows reduced autism rates since the removal of mercury from most childhood vaccines. These findings bolster voluminous studies and data confirming that increased use of mercury-containing vaccines in the 1980’s and 1990’s led to an epidemic of neurological disorders among American children.”



Children with autism appear to be unable to rid their bodies of the mercury that they are exposed to.  (Deth et al, Holmes et al

Some populations that have not been exposed to vaccines experience little, if any, autism. (Olmsted 1, 2)  

Thimerosal has been shown to be toxic to brain cells. (Haley

Mice injected with thimerosal develop autism-like symptoms. (Hornig

Some children who have mercury chelated (chemically bound and removed) from their bodies show a reduction in autism symptoms. (Rimland

“Children with autism excrete more mercury than controls.” (Bradstreet via Congressman Dave Weldon

Coincident with the decline in thimerosal use in vaccinations for infants and children, the incidence of autism appears to be declining as well, at least in California.  (safeMinds)   


Affidavit Of Boyd E. Haley. Professor And Chair. Department Of Chemistry. University Of Kentucky : Thimerosal Containing Vaccines and Neurodevelopment Outcomes

 Dr. Haley’s website for more information on Thimerosal and vaccines: 


Alan E. Moses November 21, 2006

“Mercury and man have had a very long relationship. The uses for this liquid metal are many. From medicine, mining, agriculture, dentistry to pollution from the burning of fossil fuels the uses have been boundless. Most of us remember the Madhatter from Alice in Wonderland as this was a common reference to the use of mercury in forming felt hats in the 1800’s. Most of these hat makers were known to be somewhat eccentric from exposure to the mercury. As the term “A night with Venus leads to a life with mercury.”

That was an often used term during the American Civil War as mercury was used to treat venereal diseases contracted from the brothels that soldiers frequented.

As dental care became more widely available the use of mercury in amalgams was used to stop the spread of tooth decay. This is generally 50% mercury and studies suggest that these amalgams release mercury continuously into our systems. Due to mercury being a very good antibacterial the uses in paint, contact lens solutions and cleaning supplies became widespread. Blood pressure gauges thermometers and thermostats are just some of the other uses we found for this amazing liquid metal.

As time has progressed and more became known there was a realization that there was a serious problem that was developing. Mercury not only is a very affective antibacterial it is also extremely dangerous to humans and destroys brain cells and disrupts neurotransmitters. Ironically it is that many of the disorders that seem to have become more prevalent in today’s world are in fact problems with the incorrect functioning of neurotransmitters. Yet the government refuses to put the association together for fear of lawsuits that would arise as mercury is everywhere. Human exposure has been massive to say the least.

One thing that must be noted is that mercury levels can’t be obtained from simple blood tests as it binds to fatty tissues in the body and brain therefore it is not on the move as other metals or toxins are in the bloodstream. It has been found that only by introducing treatments that rid the body of mercury can it be determined the amount you may have been carrying. This is done with analysis of levels expelled through the urine.

Thimerosal Lab Studies

 1. Induces DNA Breaks, Caspase-3 Activation, Membrane Damage, and Cell Death in Cultured Human Neurons and Fibroblasts. Baskin DS, et al. Toxicol Sci 2003; 74: 361–368.

 2. Inhibits methionine synthase in neuroblastoma cells (=>prevents normal growth?) Deth RC et al. Molecular Psychiatry 2004:9:358-70.

 3. Neurotoxic Effects of Postnatal Thimerosal are Mouse Strain Dependant (genetic basis for different human responses?). Hornig M, et al. Molecular Psychiatry 2004:9:833-5.

 4. Neurotoxicity is associated with glutathione (= major intracellular defense vs. Hg) depletion in cultured human cells. James SJ., et al. Neurotoxicology 2005; 26:1-8.

 5. Neurotoxicity (neurons, astrocytes and microglia) in 6 specific regions of monkey CNS following low-level thimerosal exposure.


 Conclusions of IOM Report Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines and Neurodevelopmental Disorders. October 1, 2001:

The committee concludes that although the hypothesis that exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines could be associated with neurodevelopmental disorders is not established and rests on indirect and incomplete information, primarily from analogies with methylmercury and levels of maximum mercury exposure from vaccines given in children, the hypothesis is biologically plausible. The committee also concludes that the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between thimerosal exposures from childhood vaccines and the neurodevelopmental disorders of autism, ADHD, and speech or language delay.




Early Downward Trends in Neurodevelopmental Disorders Following Removal of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines. Volume 11, Number 1, Spring 2006 of the peer-reviewed Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.


Study Links Mercury from the Thimerosal in Vaccines with Autism and Other Neurodevelopmental Disorders. Study in the Journal of the Neurological Sciences [1], the official journal of the World Federation of Neurology [2], links mercury from the Thimerosal in vaccines with autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders.

Read the abstract online  here :

Thimerosal exposure in infants and neurodevelopmental disorders: An assessment of computerized medical records in the Vaccine Safety Datalink. 




The study evaluated possible associations between neurodevelopmental disorders (NDs) and exposure to mercury (Hg) from Thimerosalcontaining vaccines (TCVs) by examining the automated Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). A total of 278,624 subjects were identified in birth cohorts from 1990–1996 that had received their first oral polio vaccination by 3 months of age in the VSD. The birth cohort prevalence rate of medically diagnosed International Classification of Disease, 9th revision (ICD-9) specific NDs and control outcomes were calculated. Exposures to Hg from TCVs were calculated by birth cohort for specific exposure windows from birth-7 months and birth-13 months of age. Poisson regression analysis was used to model the association between the prevalence of outcomes and Hg doses from TCVs. Consistent significantly increased rate ratios were observed for autism, autism spectrum disorders, tics, attention deficit disorder, and emotional disturbances with Hg exposure from TCVs. By contrast, none of the control outcomes had significantly increased rate ratios with Hg exposure from TCVs. Routine childhood vaccination should be continued to help reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with infectious diseases, but efforts should be undertaken to remove Hg from vaccines. Additional studies should be conducted to further evaluate the relationship between Hg exposure and NDs.




Study links vaccines containing mercury with autism By Roman Bystrianyk



Maternal amalgam dental fillings as the source of mercury exposure in developing fetus and newborn.

Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (2008) 18, 326–331; doi:10.1038/sj.jes.7500606; published online 12 September 2007.




Top of page

Dental amalgam is a mercury-based filling containing approximately 50% of metallic mercury (Hg0). Human placenta does not represent a real barrier to the transport of Hg0; hence, fetal exposure occurs as a result of maternal exposure to Hg, with possible subsequent neurodevelopmental disabilities in infants. This study represents a substudy of the international NIH-funded project “Early Childhood Development and polychlorinated biphenyls Exposure in Slovakia”. The main aim of this analysis was to assess the relationship between maternal dental amalgam fillings and exposure of the developing fetus to Hg. The study subjects were mother–child pairs (N=99). Questionnaires were administered after delivery, and chemical analyses of Hg were performed in the samples of maternal and cord blood using atomic absorption spectrometry with amalgamation technique. The median values of Hg concentrations were 0.63  g/l (range 0.14–2.9  g/l) and 0.80  g/l (range 0.15–2.54  g/l) for maternal and cord blood, respectively. None of the cord blood Hg concentrations reached the level considered to be hazardous for neurodevelopmental effects in children exposed to Hg in utero (EPA reference dose for Hg of 5.8  g/l in cord blood). A strong positive correlation between maternal and cord blood Hg levels was found ( =0.79; P<0.001). Levels of Hg in the cord blood were significantly associated with the number of maternal amalgam fillings ( =0.46, P<0.001) and with the number of years since the last filling ( =- 0.37, P<0.001); these associations remained significant after adjustment for maternal age and education. Dental amalgam fillings in girls and women of reproductive age should be used with caution, to avoid increased prenatal Hg exposure.



It should also be noted that it is a misnomer to say “removal of thimerosal” since they are not removing anything. They just plan to stop adding it to future vaccines once they use up existing stocks, which entails millions of doses. And, incredibly, the government allows them to do it. 

Even more incredibly, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Practice similarly endorse this insane policy. In fact, they specifically state that children should continue to receive the thimerosal-containing vaccines until new thimerosal-free vaccines can be manufactured at the will of the manufacturers. Are they afraid that there will be a sudden diphtheria epidemic in America or tetanus epidemic? 
The most obvious solution was to use only single-dose vials, which requires no preservative. So why don’t they use them? 
Oh, they exclaim, it would add to the cost of the vaccine. Of course, we are only talking about a few dollars per vaccine at most, certainly worth the health of your child’s brain and future. They could use some of the hundreds of millions of dollars they waste on vaccine promotion every year to cover these costs for the poor. Then, that would cut into some “fat cat’s” budget and we can’t have that. 


…Therefore, what they are admitting is that we have a form of mercury that has been used in vaccines since the 1930s and no one has bothered to study its effects on biological systems, especially the brain of infants. Their defense throughout this conference is “We just don’t know the effects of ethylmercury.” As a solution, they resort to studies on methylmercury, because there are thousands of studies on this form of mercury. The major source of this form is seafood consumption. 

It takes them a while to get the two forms of mercury straight, since for several pages of the report they say methylmercury is in thimerosal rather than ethylmercury.


… First, what is a vaccinologist? Do you go to school to learn to be one? How many years of residency training are required to be a vaccinologist? Are there board exams? 
It’s a stupid term used to describe people who are obsessed with vaccines, not that they actually study the effects of the vaccines, as we shall see throughout this meeting. 
Most important is the admission by Dr. Johnson that he and his fellow “vaccinologists” are so blinded by their obsession with forcing vaccines on society that they never even considered that there might be factors involved that could greatly affect human health, the so-called “uncertainties.” 
Further, he and his fellow “vaccinologists” like to think in concrete terms. That is, they are very narrow in their thinking and wear blinders that prevent them from seeing the numerous problems occurring with large numbers of vaccination in infants and children. Their goal in life is to vaccinate as many people as possible with an ever-growing number of vaccines. 


… if these outside groups had not become involved, these “vaccinologists” would have continued to add more and more mercury-containing vaccines to the list of required vaccines. Only when the problem became so obvious — that is of epidemic proportion (close to that now) and the legal profession became involved — would they have even noticed there was a problem. This is a recurring theme in the government’s regulatory agencies, as witnessed with fluoride, aspartame, MSG, dioxin and pesticides issues. 
It is also interesting that Dr. Johnson did admit that the greatest risk was among low birth weight infants and premature infants. Now why would that be if there existed such a large margin of safety with mercury used in vaccines? Could just a few pounds of body weight make such a dramatic difference? 
In fact, it does but it also means that normal birth weight children, especially those near the low range of normal birth weight, are also in greater danger. It also would mean that children receiving doses of mercury higher than the 72 ug in this study would be at high risk as well because their dose, based on body weight, would be comparable to that of the low birth weight child receiving the lower dose. 
This was never even considered by these “vaccinologist experts” who decide policy for your children.


… The data is convincing enough that the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Practice, as well as the regulatory agencies and the CDC along with these organizations all recommend its removal as quickly as possible because of concerns of adverse effects of mercury on brain development, but not for the children in the developing countries.


It also needs to be appreciated that children in developing countries are at a much greater risk of complications from vaccinations and from mercury toxicity than children in developed countries. This is because of poor nutrition, concomitant parasitic and bacterial infections and a high incidence of low birth weight in these children. 
..Aluminum and mercury are often simultaneously administered to infants, both at the same site and at different sites.” Also on page 20, he states, “However, we also learned that there is absolutely no data, including animal data, about the potential for synergy, additively or antagonism, all of which can occur in binary metal mixtures … ” 




…In fact, we know that aluminum is a significant neurotoxin and that it shares many common mechanisms with mercury as a neurotoxin. For example: 
• They are both toxic to neuronal neurotubules.  
• Interfere with antioxidant enzymes.  
• Poison DNA repair enzymes.  
• Interfere with mitochondrial energy production.  
• Block the glutamate reuptake proteins (GLT-1 and GLAST).  
• Bind to DNA.  
• Interfere with neuronal membrane function. 
Toxins that share toxic mechanisms are almost always additive and frequently synergistic in their toxicity…. significant number of studies have shown that both of these metals play a significant role in all of the neurodegenerative disorders. It is also important to remember, both of these metals accumulate in the brain and spinal cord. This makes them accumulative toxins and therefore much more dangerous than rapidly excreted toxins. 

Dr. Brent makes the statement that he knows of no known genetic susceptibility data on mercury and, therefore, assumes there is a fixed threshold of toxicity. That is, that everyone is susceptible to the same dose of mercury and there are no genetically hypersensitive groups of people. 
In fact, a recent study found just such a genetic susceptibility in mice. In this study, they found mice susceptible to autoimmunity developed neurotoxic effects to their hippocampus, including excitotoxicity, not seen in other strains of mice. They even hypothesize that the same may be true in humans, since familial autoimmunity increases the likelihood of autism in offspring. (Hornig M, Chian D, Lipkin WI. Neurotoxic effects of postnatal thimerosal are mouse strain dependent. Mol Psychiatry 2004; (in press). 


…They simply covered this study up, declared that thimerosal is of no concern and continued the unaltered policy. That is, they can suggest the pharmaceutical manufacturers of vaccines remove the thimerosal but not making it mandatory or examining the vaccine to make sure they have removed it. 


Let’s take a small peak at just how much we can trust the pharmaceutical manufacturers to do the right thing. Several reports of major violations of vaccine manufacturing policy that have been cited by the regulatory agencies have surfaced. This includes obtaining plasma donations without taking adequate histories on donors as to disease exposures and previous health problems, poor record keeping on these donors, improper procedures and improper handing of specimens. 





…Contamination of vaccines is a major concern in this country as well, as these regulatory violations make plain. It is also important to note that no fines were given, just warnings. 


Dr. Loren Koller, pathologist and immunotoxicologist at the College of Veterinary Medicine, Oregon State University, is to be congratulated in that he recognized that more is involved in the vaccine effects than just ethylmercury. (page 192). 


He mentions aluminum and even the viral agents being used as other possibilities. This is especially important in the face of Dr. RK Gherardi’s identification of macrophagic myofascitis, a condition causing profound weakness and multiple neurological syndromes, one of which closely resembled multiple sclerosis. Both human studies and animal studies have shown a strong causal relationship to the aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate used as a vaccine adjuvants. 


Here are some of the neurological problems seen with the use of aluminum hydroxide and aluminum phosphate in vaccines. In two children (ages 3 and 5), doctors at the All Children’s Hospital in St. Petersburg, Fla., described chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction, urinary retention and other findings indicative of a generalized loss of autonomic nervous system function (diffuse dysautonomia). 
The 3-year-old had developmental delay and hypotonia (loss of muscle tone). A biopsy of the children’s vaccine injection site disclosed elevated aluminum levels. 


In a study of some 92 patients suffering from this emerging syndrome, eight developed a full-blown demyelinating CNS disorder (multiple sclerosis). (Authier FJ, Cherin P, et al. Central nervous system disease in patients with macrophagic myofasciitis. Brain 2001; 124: 974-983.) This included sensory and motor symptoms, visual loss, bladder dysfunction, cerebellar signs (loss of balance and coordination),cognitive (thinking) and behavioral disorders. 

Dr. Gherardi, the French physician who first described the condition in 1998, has collected more than 200 proven cases. One-third of these develop an autoimmune disease, such as multiple sclerosis. Of critical importance is his finding that, even in the absence of obvious autoimmune disease, there is evidence of chronic immune stimulation caused by the injected aluminum, known to be a very powerful immune adjuvant.

The reason this is so important is that there is overwhelming evidence that chronic immune activation in the brain (activation of microglial cells in the brain) is a major cause of damage in numerous degenerative brain disorders, from multiple sclerosis to the classic neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s and ALS). 
In fact, I have presented evidence that chronic immune activation of CNS microglia is a major cause of autism, attention deficit disorder and Gulf War Syndrome. 

Dr. Gherardi emphasizes that once the aluminum is injected into the muscle, the immune activation persists for years. In addition, we must consider the effect of the aluminum that travels to the brain itself. Numerous studies have shown harmful effects when aluminum accumulates in the brain. 

A growing amount of evidence points to high brain aluminum levels as a major contributor to Alzheimer’s disease and possibly Parkinson’s disease and ALS (Lou Gehrig’s disease). This may also explain the tenfold increase in Alzheimer’s disease in those receiving the flu vaccine five years in a row (Dr. Hugh Fudenberg, in press, Journal of Clinical Investigation). 

It is also interesting to note that a recent study found that aluminum phosphate produced three times the blood level of aluminum, as did aluminum hydroxide. (Flarend RE, hem SL, et al. In vivo absorption of aluminum-containing vaccine adjuvants using 26 Al. Vaccine 1997; 15: 1314-1318.) 



…Dr. Rapin notes that a study in California found a 300 percent increase in autism following the introduction of certain vaccines. She quickly attributes this to better physician recognition. Two things are critical to note at this point. 

1. Dr. Rapin makes this assertion or better physician recognition without any data at all, just her wishful thinking. If someone pointing out the dangers of vaccines were to do that, she would scream “junk science.” 

2. Dr. Weil, on page 207, attacks this reasoning when he says, “The number of dose-related relationships are linear and statistically significant. You can play with this all you want. They are linear. They are statistically significant.” In other words, how can you argue with results that show a strong dose/response relationship between the dose of mercury and neurodevelopmental outcomes? The higher the mercury levels in the children, the greater the number of neurological problems. 

He continues by saying that the increase in neurobehavioral problems is probably real. He tells them that he works in a school system with special education programs and “I have to say the number of kids getting help in special education is growing nationally and state by state at a rate not seen before. So there is some kind of increase.


…Dr. Johnson seems to be impressed by the findings as well. He says on page 199, “This association leads me to favor a recommendation that infants up to two-years-old not be immunized with thimerosal containing vaccines if suitable alternative preparations are available.” 

Incredibly, he quickly adds, “I do not believe the diagnosis justified compensation in the Vaccine Compensation Program at this point.” It is interesting to note that one of our experts in attendance is Dr. Vito Caserta, the Chief Officer for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. 




mercury, even in low concentrations, is known to impair energy production by mitochondrial enzymes. The brain has one of the highest metabolic rates of any organ and impairment of its energy supply, especially during development, can have devastating consequences. In addition, mercury, even in lower concentrations, is known to damage DNA and impair DNA repair enzymes, which again, plays a vital role in brain development. 

Mercury is known to impair neurotubule stability, even in very low concentrations. Neurotubules are absolutely essential to normal brain cell function. Mercury activates microglial cells, which increases excitotoxicity and brain free radical production as well as lipid peroxidation, central mechanisms in brain injury. 


In addition, even in doses below that which can cause obvious cell injury, mercury impairs the glutamate transport system, which in turn triggers excitotoxicity, a central mechanism in autism and other neurological disorders. Ironically, aluminum also paralyzes this system. 


… they discuss how to control this information so that it will not get out and, if it does, how to control the damage. On page 248, Dr. Clements has this to say: 
“But there is now the point at which the research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work has been done and through the freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group. And I am very concerned about that as I suspect that it is already too late to do anything regardless of any professional body and what they say.” 
In other words, he wants this information kept not only from the public but also from other scientists and pediatricians until they can be properly counseled. In the next statement, Dr. Clements spills the beans as to why he is determined that no outsider get hold of this damaging information. 
“My mandate as I sit here in this group is to make sure at the end of the day that 100,000,000 are immunized with DTP, Hepatitis B and if possible Hib, this year, next year and for many years to come, and that will have to be with thimerosal-containing vaccines unless a miracle occurs and an alternative is found quickly and is tried and found to be safe.” 
This top secret meeting was held to discuss a study done by Dr. Thomas Verstraeten and his co-workers using Vaccine Safety Datalink data as a project collaboration between the CDC’s National Immunization Program (NIP) and four HMOs. The study examined the records of 110,000 children. Within the limits of the data, they did a very thorough study and found the following: 
• Exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines at one month was associated significantly with the misery and unhappiness disorder that was dose-related. That is, the higher the child’s exposure to thimerosal the higher the incidence of the disorder. This disorder is characterized by a baby that cries uncontrollably and is fretful more so than is seen in normal babies.  
• Found a nearly significant increased risk of ADD with 12.5ug exposure at one month. 
• With exposure at 3 months, they found an increasing risk of neurodevelopmental disorder with increasing exposure to thimerosal. This was statistically significant. This included speech disorders. 
It is important to remember that the control group was not children without thimerosal exposure, but rather those at 12.5ug exposure. This means that there is a significant likelihood that even more neurodevelopmental problems would have been seen had they used a real control population. No one disagreed that these findings were significant and troubling. 


Yet when the final study was published in the journal Pediatrics, Dr. Verstraeten and co-workers reported no consistent associations were found between thimerosal-containing vaccine exposure and neurodevelopmental problems. In addition, he listed himself as an employee of the CDC, not disclosing the fact that at the time the article was accepted, he worked for GlaxoSmithKline, a vaccine manufacturing company. 
So how did they do this bit of prestidigitation? They simply added another HMO to the data, the Harvard Pilgrimage. Rep. Weldon noted in his letter to the CDC director that this HMO had been in receivership by the state of Massachusetts because its records were in shambles. Yet, this study was able to make the embarrassing data from his previous study disappear. 

Attempts by Weldon to force the CDC to release the data to an independent researcher, Dr. Mark Geier, a researcher with impeccable credentials and widely published in peer-reviewed journals, have failed repeatedly.  


 President Bush’s Executive Order 10789 was put into place that protects a

vaccine producer from being sued for any well proven injury injecting this poison has caused. 
Thimerosal was nearly eliminated in many countries 20 years ago. In 1977, a Russian study found that adults exposed to ethylmercury, the form of mercury in thimerosal, suffered brain damage years later. Studies on thimerosal poisoning also describe tubular necrosis and nervous system injury, including obtundation, coma and death. As a result of these findings, Russia banned thimerosal from children’s vaccines in 1980. Denmark, Austria, Japan, Great Britain and all the Scandinavian countries have also banned the preservative for children. Most adult vaccines throughout Europe still contain thimerosal. In America this so-called “preservative” is approved to continue to be used up until the year 2010.




Infant stool eliminates vaccinal mercury slowly suggesting high retention in tissue

In a study in The Lancet, Pichichero et al 1 argued that ethylmercury administered to infants through vaccines is eliminated rapidly from the blood and effectively excreted in stool. Our analysis of this data, combined with a more recent analysis2 of mercury excretion in baby hair suggests a more worrisome interpretation, one that offers support for the hypothesis3 linking early mercury exposures with autism. 

Our calculations suggest that Pichichero et al. overstated the significance of their excretion findings. Although their data support a rapid rate of ethylmercury elimination from blood, instead of similarly rapid stool elimination, their findings demonstrate slow stool excretion in many infants, suggesting that significant amounts of ethylmercury from vaccines may be retained in infant tissue. 

Most methyl mercury is eliminated from the body through stool and ethyl mercury from vaccines most likely follows the same path. Both mercury species must pass out of the blood to allow excretion in feces or (in lesser amounts) hair. 4 Nevertheless elimination from blood also allows for mercury transport into tissue, without prompt excretion. Our analysis of mercury excretion in autistic and control baby hair demonstrated that, although mercury was excreted at high rates in hair of normal infants, hair of autistic infants contained very little mercury, only 0.47 mcg/g versus 3.63 mcg/g in controls. This finding raises the possibility of increased mercury retention in the tissue of autistic infants, who also had higher rates of prenatal mercury exposure. 

Pichichero et al provide data specific to infant mercury excretion through feces. They measured mercury concentrations in stool of 22 normal infants exposed to thimerosal in vaccines, ages two and six months, and found a range of 23-141 nanograms of mercury per gram of stool (dry weight). The authors interpreted these levels, mere parts per billion, as positive evidence of mercury elimination. 

But these mercury concentrations are extremely low, not nearly enough to allow rapid excretion. Infant dry weight stool volumes have been measured at between 1-3 grams per kilogram (kg) per day.5 Based on the 50th percentile weight progression from 3.5-8 kg in the zero-six month period, infant stool volumes may be expected to range from 6-18 grams (dry weight) per day. Taking the stool concentration range for mercury from Pichichero et al, we calculated the time required for an infant to excrete the ethylmercury (187.5 mcg) that U.S. infants received by six months of age during the 1990s.

Stool Hg concentration Daily Hg excretion Days to excrete 187.5 mcg

(ng/g) (mcg/day) (days)

Minimum: 23 0.14-0.41 457-1,339

Maximum: 140 0.84-2.52 74-223

In the case of maximum excretion, early vaccine exposures are eliminated within the time period of exposure, but for those children with stool concentrations at the low end of the range, the infant elimination rate rises to nearly four years. For autistic infants, with evidence of reduced excretion in hair and additional fetal exposures2 (from maternal amalgam filling, fish consumption and Rho D immunoglobulin injections) these excretion times were likely far longer. 

Our analysis contradicts the optimism expressed by Pichichero et al and suggests that low mercury excretion rates in some infants may underlie the link between mercury exposures and autism.

Mark F. Blaxill 
Director, Safe Minds

Boyd E. Haley, PhD  Professor of Chemistry and Department Chairman  University of Kentucky



ALL Thimerosal Vaccine In The 1990s Had Mercury MORE TOXIC Than Hazardous Waste


From AUTISMconnectThe Dots

Please review the following post from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and consider the following. Every thimerosal containing vaccine which was administered during the 1990’s (a large number of the total mandatory vaccine protocol) contained levels of mercury which were hundreds of times more toxic than hazardous waste according to the EPA’s own website.

This is a federal law that applies to all states:

“If mercury levels in a waste exceed the Toxicity Characteristic Leach Test (TCLP) level of 0.2 mg/L for mercury, then the waste is identified as a hazardous waste based on the toxicity characteristic”.



Journal of American Medical Association 1948 publication on thimerosal


Dr. Morton of the Department of Bacteriology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Dr. North of the Philadelphia General Hospital, and Mr. Engley of Camp Detrick under a grant from the Council of Pharmacy and Chemistry, American Medical Association have published an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association** evaluating the use of mercurials in medicine (Bacteriostatic & Bactericidal Actions of Some Mercurial Compounds1a.pdf in Adobe Acrobat Format). This article, “The Bacteriostatic and Bactericidal Action of Some Mercurial Compounds on Hemolytic Streptococci: In Vivo and In Vitro Studies” reports that “Mercurial compounds have been employed as disinfectants since the beginning of bacteriology. Indeed, for a long period mercurial compounds, such as bichloride of mercury, headed the list of chemical which were thought to be effective in the killing of microorganisms.”
The authors reported, “…the label on a bottle of ‘Solution Merthiolate [Thimerosal], 1 : 1,000, Stainless’ purchased…states that it is ‘a stable, stainless, organic mercury compound of high germicidal value, particularly in serum and other protein media.’ ” The authors stated in their article regarding this claim, “It [Thimerosal] is not highly germicidal and especially does not possess high germicidal value in the presence of
serum and other protein mediums. The loss of antibacterial activity of mercurials
in the presence of serum proves their incompatibility with serum.”
In addition, the authors commented regarding the toxicity of Thimerosal, “The comparative in vitro studies of mercurochrome, metaphen and merthiolate
[Thimerosal] on embryonic tissue cells and bacterial cells by Salle and Lazarus [Proceedings of the Society of Experimental Biology & Medicine, February 1935] cannot be ignored. These investigators found that metaphen, merthiolate [Thimerosal], and mercurochrome were 12, 35 and 262 times respectively more toxic for embryonic tissue cells than for Staphylococcus aureus. Nye [Journal of the American Medical Association, January 1937] and Welch [from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Journal of Immunology 1939] also found the same three mercurial compounds more toxic for leukocytes than for bacterial cells. Not only is there a direct toxic action of the mercurial compounds on the cellular and humoral components of the animal body, but there is also the possibility of sensitization.”

It should be noted that Mr. Engley has subsequently published in the Annals
of the New York Academy of Sciences## an article, “Evaluation of Mercurials
as Antiseptics” in which he declared regarding mercurial compounds such as
Thimerosal, “…mercurials are ineffective in vivo and may be more toxic for
tissue cells than bacterial cells, as shown in mice (Nungester and Kempf, 1942) (Sarber, 1942) (Spaulding and Bondi, 1947) tissue culture (Salle and Catlin, 1947) and embryonic eggs (Witlin, 1942) (Green and Kirkeland, 1944), and with leucocytes (Welch and Hunter, 1940).”

It is clear from this research supported by a grant from the American Medical Association that Thimerosal is neither efficacious nor safe, and should be removed as a preservative in prescription biologics and pharmaceutical products, as well as from topical over-the-counter products such as Butt-Balm that have Thimerosal present in their formulations as an active ingredient.

** It should be noted that this article was published in the January 1948 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.



** It should be noted that this article was published in 1950 in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.


 Thimerosal and Vaccine Risks by Neal A. Halsey, M.D.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: