Faces of Autism: 2014-02-23

Saturday, March 1, 2014

Self-Injurious Behavior (SIB) in Autism - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) frequently engage in maladaptive behaviors such as aggression and rituals. The most distressing to caregivers and challenging for health care providers are self-injurious behaviors (SIB). These behaviors are classified as any type of action directed towards the self, resulting in physical injury. They are often rhythmic and repetitive and can range from mild head rubbing to severe head banging and may become life threatening. An improved understanding of the incidence and risk factorsassociated with SIB in autism is needed to develop treatment options.

A study in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders assessed 7 factors that may influence self injury in a large group of 250 children and adolescents with ASD: (a) atypical sensory processing; (b) impaired cognitive ability; (c) impaired functional communication; (d) deficits in social interaction; (e) age; (f) the need for sameness; and (g) ) compulsive or ritualistic behavior. Other factors that may influence SIB incidence such as gender and ASD severity were also assessed. A series of diagnostic tests were administered either directly to the children and adolescents or to their parents to assess: (a) autism severity; (b) cognitive and adaptive ability; (c) and receptive and expressive language; (d) repetitive behaviors; and (e) self-injury.

The results indicated that half of the children and adolescents demonstrated SIB. Atypical sensory processing was the strongest single predictor of self-injury followed by sameness, impaired cognitive ability and social functioning. Age, impaired functional communication, and ritualized behavior did not contribute significantly to self-injury. No significant effects of gender or severity of autistic symptoms were found in the study.

It appears that self-injury is highly prevalent in children and adolescents with ASD. Atypical sensory processing and the need for sameness were contributors to SIB in this study, indicating that clinicians may want to focus on these two risk factors to develop function-based treatment options for self-injury. It is critical that interventions that target the risk factors associated SIB be identified and implemented in clinical practice. Providing empirically supported behavioral interventions to children and adolescents with autism and SIB will not only impact directly on the problem behavior, but will enhance social, educational, and adaptive functioning as well. Further research is clearly needed to better understand additional contributing factors that may influence these complex behaviors in children with ASD. For example, temperament, ability to self-regulate emotions, and medication usage might contribute to increased self injury.

Duerden, E. G., Oatley, H. K., Mak-Fan, K. M., McGrath, P. A., Taylor, M. J., Szatmari, P., & Roberts, S. W. (2012). Risk factors associated with self-injurious behaviors in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42:2460–2470. DOI 10.1007/s10803-012-1497-9

Published online: 16 March 2012

Link: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10803-012-1497-9

Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD is the author of the award-winning book, A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools, published by Jessica Kingsley Publishers. He is also editor of a new Volume in the APA School Psychology Book Series, Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children and Adolescents: Evidence-Based Assessment and Intervention in Schools.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

Study finds Autism Prevalence the Same with New Diagnostic Category - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

There has been concern that the new DSM-5 category ofautism spectrum disorder (ASD), which subsumes the previous DSM-IV diagnoses of autistic disorder (autism), Asperger’s disorder, and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), will impact the prevalence of autism and affect eligibility for services. Funded in part by Autism Speaks, a new study in theJournal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry reports that the estimated prevalence of autism under the new DSM-5 criteria would decrease only to the extent that some children would receive the new diagnosis of social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SCD). The new diagnosis of SCD was created along with revised criteria for autism in the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Briefly, SCD describes individuals who have social and communication difficulties without the repetitive behaviors or restrictive interests typical of autism.

The new findings were based on detailed, in-person ASD evaluations performed during an earlier Autism Speaks study by the same investigators. In this new study, the researchers used DSM-5 criteria to re-assess the symptoms of 292 children diagnosed with autism during their earlier study. The findings suggest that a majority of individuals with a prior DSM-IV diagnosis meet DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for ASD and SCD. Overall, the researchers found that 83 percent of children who received a diagnosis of autism under the DSM-IV would still receive the diagnosis under DSM-5. The remaining 14 percent would switch to a diagnosis of SCD.

Examining the previous DSM-IV subtypes (autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified [PDD-NOS]), Yale University child psychiatrist and epidemiologist Young-Shin Kim and her colleagues found the following:

Of children previously diagnosed with PDD-NOS, 71 percent would now be diagnosed with ASD, 22 percent with SCD and 7 percent with another non-autism disorder.

Of those previously diagnosed with Asperger disorder, 91 percent would now be diagnosed with ASD, 6 percent with SCD and 3 percent with another non-autism disorder.

Of those previously diagnosed with autistic disorder, 99 percent would now be diagnosed with ASD and 1 percent with SCD.

Until proven otherwise, the treatments for ASD and SCD should remain the same or similar,” says Dr. Kim. “It’s important for children moving to a SCD diagnosis – and to their families – that they continue receiving the interventions they would have received with an autism diagnosis under the earlier DSM-IV criteria.” It is also important to note that, according to the DSM-5, individuals with a well-established DSM-IV diagnosis of autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, or PDD-NOS should be given a diagnosis of ASD. Those who have marked deficits in social communication, but whose symptoms do not currently meet the criteria for ASD, should be evaluated for social (pragmatic) communication disorder.

Kim YS, Fombonne E, Koh Y-J, Kim S-J, Cheon K-A, Leventhal B, A Comparison of DSM-IV PDD and DSM-5 ASD Prevalence in an Epidemiologic Sample, Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (2014), doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2013.12.021.

Lee A. Wilkinson, PhD, CCBT, NCSP is author of the award-winning book, A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools, published by Jessica Kingsley Publishers. He is also editor of a new Volume in the APA School Psychology Book Series, Autism Spectrum Disorder in Children and Adolescents: Evidence-Based Assessment and Intervention in Schools.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

Asperger's Syndrome Revisited - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

The deletion of Asperger’s disorder (Asperger's syndrome) as a separate diagnostic category from the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) has been widely publicized. The new DSM-5 category of autism spectrum disorder(ASD), which subsumes the previous DSM-IV diagnoses of autistic disorder (autism), Asperger’s disorder, and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), reflects the scientific consensus that symptoms of the various DSM-IV subgroups represent a single continuum of impairment that varies in level of severity and need for support.

An important feature of the DSM-5 criteria for ASD is a change from three symptom domains (triad) of social impairment, communication deficits and repetitive/restricted behaviors, interests, or activities to two domains (dyad); social/communication deficits and fixated and repetitive pattern of behaviors. Several social/communication criteria were merged to clarify diagnostic requirements and reflect research indicating that language deficits are neither universal in ASD, nor should they be considered as a defining feature of the diagnosis. The criteria also feature dimensions of severity that include current levels of language and intellectual functioning as well as greater flexibility in the criteria for age of onset and addition of symptoms not previously included in the DSM-IV such as sensory interests and aversions.

DSM-IV Criteria in Practice

Problems in applying the DSM-IV criteria were a key consideration in the decision to delete Asperger’s disorder as a separate diagnostic entity. Numerous studies indicate that it is difficult to reliably distinguish between Asperger syndrome, autism, and other disorders on the spectrum in clinical practice (Attwood, 2006; Macintosh & Dissanayake, 2006; Leekam, Libby, Wing, Gould & Gillberg, 2000; Mayes & Calhoun, 2003; Mayes, Calhoun, & Crites, 2001; Miller & Ozonoff, 2000; Ozonoff, Dawson, & McPartland, 2002; Witwer & Lecavalier, 2008). For example, children with autism who develop proficient language have very similar trajectories and later outcomes as children with Asperger disorder (Bennett et al., 2008; Howlin, 2003; Szatmari et al., 2000) and the two are indistinguishable by school-age (Macintosh & Dissanayake, 2004), adolescence (Eisenmajer, Prior, Leekam, Wing, Ong, Gould & Welham 1998; Ozonoff, South and Miller 2000) and adulthood (Howlin, 2003). Individuals with Asperger disorder also typically meet the DSM-IV communication criterion of autism, “marked impairment in the ability to initiate or sustain a conversation with others,” making it is possible for someone who meets the criteria for Asperger’s disorder to also meet the criteria for autistic disorder.

Treatment and Outcome

Another important consideration was response to treatment. Intervention research cannot predict, at the present time, which particular intervention approach works best with which individual. Likewise, data is not available on the differential responsiveness of children with Asperger’s disorder and high-functioning autism to specific interventions (Carpenter, Soorya, & Halpern, 2009). There are no empirical studies demonstrating the need for different treatments or different responses to the same treatment, and in clinical practice the same interventions are typically offered for both autism and Asperger’s disorder (Wilkinson, 2010). Treatments for impairments in pragmatic (social) language and social skills are the same for both groups.

Application of the New Criteria

It’s important to remember that in the DSM, a mental disorder is conceptualized as a clinically important collection of behavioral and psychological symptoms that causes an individual distress, disability or impairment. The objective of new DSM-5 criteria for ASD is that every individual who has significant “impairment” in social-communication and restricted and repetitive behavior or interests should meet the diagnostic criteria for ASD. Because language impairment/delay is not a necessary criterion for diagnosis, anyone who demonstrates severe and sustained impairments in social skills and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities in the presence of generally age-appropriate language acquisition and cognitive functioning, who might previously have been given a diagnosis of Asperger’s disorder, will now meet the criteria for ASD.

The new DSM-5 criteria for ASD have created significant controversy over concerns that it would exclude many individuals currently diagnosed with Asperger syndrome and PDD-NOS, and thus make it difficult for them to access services. However, recently published field trials suggest that the revisions actually increase the reliability of diagnosis, while identifying the large majority of those who would have been diagnosed under the DSM-IV-TR. Of the small numbers who were not included, most received the new diagnosis of “social communication disorder.” Moreover, the accuracy of non-spectrum classification (specificity) made by DSM-5 was better than that of DSM-IV, indicating greater effectiveness in distinguishing ASD from non-spectrum disorders such as language disorders, intellectual disability, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and anxiety disorders. It is also important to note that all individuals who have a DSM-IV diagnosis on the autism spectrum, including those with Asperger syndrome and PDD-NOS, will be able to retain an ASD diagnosis. This means that no one should “lose” their diagnosis because of the changes in diagnostic criteria. According to DSM-5, individuals with a well-established DSM-IV diagnosis of Autistic Disorder, Asperger’s Disorder, or PDD-NOS should be given a diagnosis of ASD. Those who have marked deficits in social communication, but whose symptoms do not meet the criteria for ASD, should be evaluated for Social (Pragmatic) Communication Disorder.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the DSM-5 category of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), which subsumes the current diagnoses of autistic disorder, Asperger’s disorder, and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), better describes our current understanding about the clinical presentation and course of the neurodevelopmental disorders. Conceptualizing autism as a spectrum condition rather than a categorical diagnostic entity is in keeping with the extant research suggesting that there is no clear evidence that Asperger’s disorder and high-functioning autism are different disorders. As Gillberg (2001) notes, the terms Asperger's syndrome and high-functioning autism are more likely “synonyms” than labels for different disorders. Lord (2011) also comments that although there has been much controversy about whether there should be separate diagnoses, "Most of the research has suggested that Asperger's syndrome really isn't different from other autism spectrum disorders." "The take-home message is that there really should be just a general category of autism spectrum disorder, and then clinicians should be able to describe a child's severity on these separate dimensions." Unfortunately, many individuals may have been advised (or assumed) that a diagnosis of Asperger’s disorder was separate and distinct from autistic disorder and that intervention/treatment, course, and outcome were clinically different for each disorder. While including Asperger’s Disorder under the DSM-5 category of ASD will likely continue to require a period of transition and adjustment, the proposed dimensional approach to diagnosis will likely result in more effective identification, treatment, and research for individuals on the spectrum.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

After the Diagnosis: Improving Maternal Mental Health - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

Parents worldwide often experience a range of emotions when their child is first diagnosed with autism, including shock, sadness and grief, anger, and loneliness. Mothers, in particular, appear to face unique challenges that potentially have an impact on their mental health and wellbeing. This includes high levels of psychological distress, depressive symptoms, and social isolation. Almost 40% of mothers report levels of clinically significant parenting stress and between 33% and 59% report significant depressive symptoms following a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The prevalence of psychological distress among mothers of children with ASD suggests a need for interventions that address parental mental health during the critical period after the child’s autism diagnosis and when parents are learning to navigate the complex system of autism services.

A study published in the journal Pediatrics examined whether a brief cognitive behavioral intervention, problem-solving education (PSE), decreases parenting stress and maternal depressive symptoms during the period immediately following a child’s diagnosis of ASD. A randomized clinical trial compared 6 sessions of PSE with usual care. Settings included an autism clinic and 6 community-based early intervention programs. Participants were mothers of 122 young children who recently received a diagnosis of ASD. The intervention group received PSE, a manualized cognitive behavioral intervention delivered in six 30-minute individualized sessions. The usual care group mothers received the services specified in the child’s Individualized Family Service Plan or Individualized Educational Plan which typically includes speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, and social skills training. Neither specifically includes parent-focused mental health services.

The results indicated that at a 3-month follow-up assessment, PSE mothers were significantly less likely than those serving as controls to have clinically significant parental stress (3.8% vs 29.3%). For depressive symptoms, the risk reduction in clinically significant symptoms did not reach statistical significance; however, the reduction in mean depressive symptoms was statistically significant. The findings demonstrate evidence of PSE’s short-term efficacy and potential to reduce clinically significant psychological distress during this critical juncture—when parents first learn of an ASD diagnosis and must navigate a complex service system on their child’s behalf.

The findings have implications for clinical practice. Practitioners need to be aware that parents experience a myriad of emotions when receiving a diagnosis of ASD and many go through stages of grief. Likewise, professionals working with families of children with an ASD should be aware of negative effects of stress and anxiety and assist in offering services that directly address parental needs and support maternal mental health. Strengthening maternal problem-solving skills might serve as a buffer against the negative impact of life stressors and thereby reduce parental stress and attenuate depressive symptoms in the months immediately following a child’s ASD diagnosis Future research is needed to examine the effect of intervention over a longer follow-up period and to assess whether the intervention worked differently among subgroups of mothers, which could help better identify those who are most likely to benefit from the intervention.

Improving Maternal Mental Health After a Child’s Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder: Results From a Randomized Clinical Trial. Emily Feinberg, CPNP, ScD; Marilyn Augustyn, MD; Elaine Fitzgerald, DrPH; Jenna Sandler, MPH; Zhandra Ferreira-Cesar Suarez, MPH; Ning Chen, MSc; Howard Cabral, PhD; William Beardslee, MD; Michael Silverstein, MD, MPH. JAMA Pediatrics. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.3445

Published online November 11, 2013.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

School-Based Assessment of ASD: Best Practice Guidelines - West Palm Beach Autism & Education | Examiner.com

There has been a dramatic worldwide increase in reported cases of autism over the past decade. The prevalence rates have risen steadily, from one in 150, to one in 110, and now to one in every 88 children. This represents a 78 percent increase in the number of children identified with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) over the past decade. Yet, compared to population estimates, identification rates have not kept pace in our schools. It is not unusual for children with less severe symptoms of ASD to go unidentified until well after entering school. As a result, it is critical that school-based educational support personnel (e.g., special educators, school counselors, speech/language pathologists, social workers, and school psychologists) give greater priority to case finding, screening, and assessment to ensure that children with ASD are identified and have access to the appropriate intervention services.

The primary goals of conducting an autism spectrum assessment are to determine the presence and severity of an ASD, develop interventions for intervention/treatment planning, and collect data that will help with progress monitoring. Professionals must also determine whether an ASD has been overlooked or misclassified, describe coexisting (comorbid) disorders, or identify an alternative classification. Interviews and observation schedules, together with an interdisciplinary assessment of social behavior, language and communication, adaptive behavior, motor skills, sensory issues, atypical behaviors, and cognitive functioning are recommended best practice procedures.

There are several important considerations that should inform the assessment process. First, a developmental perspective is critically important. While the core symptoms of are present during early childhood, ASD is a lifelong disability that affects the individual’s adaptive functioning from childhood through adulthood. Utilizing a developmental assessment framework provides a yardstick for understanding the severity and quality of delays or atypicality. Because ASD affects multiple developmental domains, the use of an interdisciplinary team constitutes best practice for assessment and diagnosis of ASD. A team approach is essential for establishing a developmental and psychosocial profile of the child in order to guide intervention planning. The following principles should guide the assessment process.

Children who screen positive for ASD should be referred for a comprehensive assessment. Although screening tools have utility in broadly identifying children who are at-risk for an autism spectrum condition, they are not recommended as stand alone diagnostic instruments or as a substitute for a more inclusive assessment.
Assessment should involve careful attention to the signs and symptoms consistent with ASD as well as other coexisting childhood disorders.
When a student is suspected of having an ASD, a review of his or her developmental history in areas such as speech, communication, social and play skills is an important first step in the assessment process.
A family medical history and review of psychosocial factors that may play a role in the child’s development is a significant component of the assessment process.
The integration of information from multiple sources will strengthen the reliability of the assessment results.
Evaluation of academic achievement should be included in assessment and intervention planning to address learning and behavioral concerns in the child’s overall school functioning.
Assessment procedures should be designed to assist in the development of instructional objectives and intervention strategies based on the student’s unique pattern of strengths and weaknesses.
Because impairment in communication and social reciprocity are core features of ASD, a comprehensive developmental assessment should include both domains.

A comprehensive developmental assessment approach requires the use of multiple measures including, but not limited to, verbal reports, direct observation, direct interaction and evaluation, and third-party reports. Assessment is a continuous process, rather than a series of separate actions, and procedures may overlap and take place in tandem. While specific activities of the assessment process will vary and depend on the child’s age, history, referral questions, and any previous evaluations and assessments, the following components should be included in a best practice assessment and evaluation of ASD in school-age children.

Record review
Developmental and medical history
Medical screening and/or evaluation
Parent/caregiver interview
Parent/teacher ratings of social competence
Direct child observation
Cognitive assessment
Academic assessment
Adaptive behavior assessment
Communication and language assessment

Children with ASD often demonstrate additional problems beyond those associated with the core domains. Therefore, other areas should be included in the assessment battery depending on the referral question, history, and core evaluation results. These may include:

Sensory processing
Executive function and attention
Motor skills
Family system
Coexisting behavioral/emotional problems

The above referenced principles and procedures for the assessment of school-age children with ASD are reflected in recommendations of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, American Academy of Pediatrics, and a consensus panel with representation from multiple professional societies. A detailed description of the comprehensive developmental assessment model and specific assessment tools recommended for each domain can be found in A Best Practice Guide to Assessment and Intervention for Autism and Asperger Syndrome in Schools.

If you enjoy reading my articles, you can click on "subscribe" at the top of the page to receive notice when new ones are published. You can also follow me at http://bestpracticeautism.com.

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Please Contact This Committee

SB 657 would not allow the Administrative Hearing Commission (who now conducts the due process hearings) to use contracted support services who were on previously contractors to dese. The bill also would not allow dese to contract with the administrative hearing commission.
This bill is now in this committee: http://www.senate.mo.gov/14info/comm/fina.htm
Please contact those committee members to encourage support.

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Teacher records autistic boy stuck in chair - WNEM TV 5

Teacher records autistic boy stuck in chair - WNEM TV 5

GOODRICH, MI (WNEM) -

An 11-year old autistic child gets his head stuck in a classroom chair but instead of helping, the teacher recorded it.

Officials say the teacher, Nicole Mcvey, recorded it all on her cell phone as the rest of the class stood by. The incident happened in a fifth grade classroom at Oaktree Elementary in Goodrich last November.

You can hear the teacher ask him if he wants to get tasered and then the principal comes in referring to it not being an emergency. He resigned shortly after.

At a meeting Monday night, parents

rallied behind her at the school board meeting.

Patrick Greenfelder was hired by the boy's family

as the incident has sparked so much controversy in the community.

Greenfelder says the teacher is on paid administrative leave while private tenure hearings debating her future take place.

Late last year the board voted to fire her.

Goodrich Superintendent Scott Bogner sent TV5 this statement.

Under Michigan's tenure law, that teacher has a right to a private hearing of any charges against her. The district is obligated to respect that right and will not discuss specifics of this case.

Greenfielder says the incident happened in November and the community has rallied behind teacher without seeing this video. At the Goodrich school board meeting, parents continued to stick by her.

We're told the boy was stuck in the chair for roughly ten to fifteen minutes.

His parents' attorney says they are considering a lawsuit against the school district, but they want to wait and see how the tenure hearings playout for the teacher involved.

Attorney Greenfelder has told me that the video was distributed to not just school staff, but to the friends of the principal and teacher who were not school staff. He says this is a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and contradicts the argument that this was a "teaching moment."

Sunday, February 23, 2014

Thimerosal and Autism Timeline | A Shot of Truth

CDC forced to release documents showing they knew vaccine preservative causes autism | The Refusers

The CDC has been shunning the correlations between thimerosal and neurological disorders for a very long time. Although the FDA gave a two year deadline to remove the mercury based preservative from vaccines after the neurotoxin was banned in 1999, it still remains to this day in60 percent of flu vaccines. A vaccine industry watchdog has now obtained CDC documents that show statistically significant risks of autism associated with the vaccine preservative, something the CDC denies even when confronted with their own data.

For nearly ten years, Brian Hooker has been requesting documents that are kept under tight wraps by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). His more than 100 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests have resulted in copious evidence that the vaccine preservative Thimerosal, which is still used in the flu shot that is administered to pregnant women and infants, can cause autism and other neurodevelopmental disorders.

Dr. Hooker, a PhD scientist, worked with two members of Congress to craft the letter to the CDC that recently resulted in his obtaining long-awaited data from the CDC, the significance of which is historic. According to Hooker, the data on over 400,000 infants born between 1991 and 1997, which was analyzed by CDC epidemiologist Thomas Verstraeten, MD, “proves unequivocally that in 2000, CDC officials were informed internally of the very high risk of autism, non-organic sleep disorder and speech disorder associated with Thimerosal exposure.”

Factually, thimerosal is a mercury-containing compound that is a known human carcinogen, mutagen, teratogen and immune-system disruptor at levels below 1 part-per-million, and a compound to which some humans can have an anaphylactic shock reaction. It is also a recognized reproductive and fetal toxin with no established toxicologically safe level of exposure for humans.

In November, 1997, the U.S. Congress passed the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act, requiring the study of mercury content in FDA-approved products. The review disclosed the hitherto-unrecognized levels of ethylmercury in vaccines.

In July 1999, public-health officials announced that thimerosal would be phased out of vaccines. The CDC, American Academy of Pediatrics, and FDA insisted that the measure was purely precautionary. They requested of all vaccine manufacturers to eliminate mercury from vaccines.

The requests were denied by vaccine manufacturers and continued every year thereafter.

The FDA does not require ingredients that comprise less than 1 percent of a product to be divulged on the label, so a lot more products may have thimerosal and consumers will never know.

Elevated Risk of Autism

When the results of the Verstraeten study were first reported outside the CDC in 2005, there was no evidence that anyone but Dr. Verstraeten within the CDC had known of the very high 7.6-fold elevated relative risk of autism from exposure to Thimerosal during infancy. But now, clear evidence exists. A newly-acquired abstract from 1999 titled, “Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to Thimerosal containing vaccine in first month of life” required the approval of top CDC officials prior to its presentation at the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) conference. Thimerosal, which is 50% mercury by weight, was used in most childhood vaccines and in the RhoGAM shot for pregnant women prior to the early 2000s.

The CDC maintains there is “no relationship between Thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism rates in children,” even though the data from the CDC’s own Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) database shows a very high risk. There are a number of public records to back this up, including this Congressional Record from May 1, 2003. The CDC’s refusal to acknowledge thimerosal’s risks is exemplified by a leaked statement from Dr. Marie McCormick, chair of the CDC/NIH-sponsored Immunization Safety Review at IOM. Regarding vaccination, she said in 2001, “…we are not ever going to come down that it [autism] is a true side effect…” Also of note, the former director of the CDC, which purchases $4 billion worth of vaccines annually, is now president of Merck’s vaccine division.

Toxic Effects of Thimerosal No Longer Disputed by Scientific Study

Thimerosal-Derived Ethylmercury in vaccines is now well established as a mitochondrial toxin in human brain cells.

There are dozens of scientific inquiries and studies on the adverse effects of thimerosal, including gastrointestinal abnormalities and immune system irregularities.

Thimerosal, is metabolized (converted) into the toxic and “harmful” methylmercury. And then in turn, the harmful methylmercury is metabolized (converted) into the most harmful, long-term-toxic, “inorganic” mercury that is retained in bodily tissue.

“Inorganic” mercury is the end product of mercury metabolism. Methylmercury subject groups confirm that the metabolic pathway for mercury in the human and animal body consists in the reduction/conversion of the harmful methylmercury into a more harmful “inorganic” mercury which is tissue-bound, and long-term-toxic. Hence, both the originating substance (methylmercury) and its conversion/reduction, inorganic mercury are found.

Based on published findings by Dr. Paul King, the metabolic pathway for organic mercury involves the conversion of Ethylmercury (Thimerosal) into “methylmercury” and then the further reduction of “methylmercury” into inorganic mercury.

Congress Must Act

Dr. Hooker’s fervent hope for the future: “We must ensure that this and other evidence of CDC malfeasance are presented to Congress and the public as quickly as possible. Time is of the essence. Children’s futures are at stake.” A divide within the autism community has led to some activists demanding that compensation to those with vaccine-injury claims be the top priority before Congress. Dr. Hooker maintains that prevention, “protecting our most precious resource — children’s minds,” must come first. “Our elected officials must be informed about government corruption that keeps doctors and patients in the dark about vaccine risks.”

Referring to an organization that has seen its share of controversy this past year, Dr. Hooker remarked, “It is unfortunate that SafeMinds issued a press release on my information, is accepting credit for my work and has not supported a worldwide ban on Thimerosal.”

Brian Hooker, PhD, PE, has 15 years experience in the field of bioengineering and is an associate professor at Simpson University where he specializes in biology and chemistry. His over 50 science and engineering papers have been published in internationally recognized, peer-reviewed journals. Dr. Hooker has a son, aged 16, who developed normally but then regressed into autism after receiving Thimerosal-containing vaccines.

Sources:prweb.com
preventdisease.com
ashotoftruth.org

Dave Mihalovic is a Naturopathic Doctor who specializes in vaccine research, cancer prevention and a natural approach to treatment.

Read the article

Saturday, March 1, 2014

Suggested by the author

Suggested by the author

Suggested by the author

Suggested by the author

Suggested by the author

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Sunday, February 23, 2014