Letter from Mark Blaxill and Dr. Boyd Haley to Lancet

Infant stool eliminates vaccinal mercury slowly suggesting high retention in tissue

To the editor,

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 50^th 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

References:

1. Pichichero ME, Cernichiari E, Lopreiato J, Treanor J. Mercury concentrations and metabolism in infants receiving vaccines containing thiomersal: a descriptive study. Lancet. 2002;360(9347):1737-1741
2. Holmes AS, Blaxill MF, Haley BE. Reduced levels of mercury in first baby haircuts of autistic children. Int J Toxic. 2003;111(4):277-285
3. Bernard S, Enayati A, Redwood L, Roger H, Binstock T. Autism: a novel form of mercury poisoning. Med Hypotheses. 2001;56:462-471
4. Clarkson TW. The three modern faces of mercury. Environ Health Perspect. 2002;110 Suppl 1:11-23
5. Chou C, Studies on the use of soybean food in infant feeding in China and the development of formula 5410. Food Nutr Bull. 1983;5(1) :10-11 http://www.unu.edu/unupress/food/8F051e/8F051E00.htm#Contents

Dr. Haley's comments on the governement's refusal to study vaccinated vs non-vaccinated populations

I want to pass on Dr. Haley's opinion about the studies the government uses and their refusal to examine vaccinated vs non-vaccinated populations.

The attempt by the CDC and AAP to promote the concept that thimerosal containing vaccines is safe for all but those with “underlying mitochondrial disorder” is similar to the previous attempt to label autism as a genetic disorder. This attempt is geared to place research funds into areas other than looking at vaccines in general and thimerosal in specific as the cause for the recent increase in autism.

We need to push for academic funding to do an epidemiological study not controlled by the CDC or AAP on the diseases and illnesses between the vaccinated and non-vaccinated populations. The CDC and AAP refuse to do this for reasons unknown, but most likely fear of the facts that may be found which may even involve more than autism causation---like whether or not the flu vaccines work, or any possible relationship between early vaccines and asthma rates.

However, it appears as if no governmental agency or body can understand the importance of the vaccinated versus non-vaccinated study to the welfare of our children and the overall cost of encompassing medical treatments in the USA. However, in my opinion, the CDC is impeding this due to the fear of a handful of bureaucrats who played an important role in implementing the CDC mandated vaccine program. In my opinion, the AAP does not support such a study due to the implications that forcing patients to follow the CDC mandate through pediatric programs has caused a major epidemic in our children and the loss of financial benefits presented by a forced well baby visits system.

What I am proposing, along with many others, regarding the study of vaccinated versus non-vaccinated populations represents straight-forward scientific logic. The fact that the major medical agencies and associations refuse to do this and insist on spending millions on genetic or mitochondrial disorder research suggests a force is working hard to prevent such a study----perhaps because they already know the answer. I would hardily promise to quite hammering vaccines if a reliable USA located academic institution was assigned the task to evaluate the vaccinated versus non-vaccinated populations and found no harmful effects of our vaccination program. The recent report from Manitoba, Canada on an approximate 5% versus 16% asthma rate on adolescents receiving thimerosal containing DPT at 4 months versus 2 months of age, respectively, tells us that there is a lot about the various aspects of the mandated vaccine program that science does not understand at this time. A comprehensive study of the vaccinated versus the non-vaccinated followed by the design of global monitoring of identified “vaccine risk factors” would provide the basis of implementing a much safer vaccine program.

Everyone should be aware of the fact that most of the epidemiological studies routinely quoted by the CDC, AAP and others as showing no connection between vaccines with thimerosal and autism were funded by the CDC, done by non-USA citizens, mostly done in Europe by individuals involved in producing thimerosal containing vaccines and on populations where the autism rate was more than 13 times less than in the USA. Interestingly, three of the epidemiological studies most quoted by pediatricians as proving thimerosal safety actually showed that thimerosal removal lead to an increase in autism, in one this increase was about 20 fold. To report that decreasing exposure to a potent neurotoxin like thimerosal decreased any specific neurological disease is ridiculous. Perhaps this is why the countries where the data was collected (Denmark, Sweden, England) and the reports filed have not followed the conclusion of the authors and still maintain thimerosal removal from pediatric vaccines. In my opinion, only our CDC and AAP give any scientific credence to the obviously low quality epidemiological studies done by these Danish, Swedish and English researchers who had obvious vested interests in the outcome. Again, this begs the question why our government does not fund a major epidemiological study on vaccinated versus non-vaccinated American children done by a prestigious American university!

I can only imagine the embarrassment to some professional groups when the American public finally find out that the autism epidemic was brought to light through considerable efforts by the mothers and fathers of autistic children, and not the government agencies or medical organizations that should have been in the forefront of recognizing this disaster. Where was the CDC, AAP, AMA, our neurological associations, etc. when the epidemic was in its early stages? I was involved in the autism issue starting in 1998 because of parents of autistic children, and what I distinctly remember was a flat denial by many of our aforementioned medical groups that an autism epidemic even existed. The very fact that we are having the CDC, who in my opinion caused the autistic epidemic through their mandated vaccine program which was not evaluated for safety, still involved in determining the cause of the autism epidemic is a failure of our government and our national medical programs. During the upcoming elections we have the opportunity to use our voting privileges to elect officials that will push for a complete evaluation of our national vaccine program. I strongly suggest that making foundation research based on vaccinated versus non-vaccinated populations regarding the autism/vaccine safety concern a major campaign issue.

Boyd Haley