(NaturalNews) Several recent headlines about a study which concluded that mercury levels in children with autism were not significantly higher than those without have been widely distributed. Headlines reading "Mercury levels not related to autism" and "Mercury not linked with autism, study says" were at the top of many American and European newspapers and magazines in October.1
These publications quickly latched on to the implied fact that because children with autism and those without had about the same blood mercury levels, mercury cannot be the reason children are getting autism. This isn't the first time the media has been misleading in its interpretation of science.
The study they refer to is from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and was published on October 19, 2009. The study was titled Blood Mercury Concentrations in CHARGE Study Children with and without Autism and was authored by Irva Hertz-Picciotto, Peter G. Green, Lora Delwiche, Robin Hansen, Cheryl Walker, and Isaac N. Pessah. It was published through Environmental Health Perspectives and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.2
The study found that young children without autism have equivalent mercury levels in their blood when compared to children who've been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The study also included children with Down's Syndrome and other developmental disorders.
The study involved 452 children between 2 and 5 years of age and adjusted for demographic and mercury sources such as fish. Most of the children measured, regardless of mental ability, were found to have 0.28 micrograms of mercury per liter of blood or less before adjustments and 0.26mcg/L or less after adjustment.
The problem here is the methodology used and the conclusions drawn by the media versus what the actual science is proposing.
Understanding that blood mercury versus tissue mercury is not the same is the first clue. Mercury absorbed through vaccination goes directly into the blood, but quickly transfers to body tissues. Similarly, mercury absorbed through diet usually is absorbed into tissues quickly. Mercury absorbed directly through the skin travels in the same manner, spending very little time in the blood.
Mercury, when found in the blood, is usually there for one of two reasons: recent introduction or as part of the body's natural flushing system to be rid of it. Mercury, regardless of why it's in the blood, does not stay in blood for very long.
Mercury injected into the blood would have to move on to other tissues before ASD could be caused by it. Regardless of whether mercury caused the ASD, the blood levels of those with and without autism would be roughly the same. Obviously, in order for the mercury to have caused ASD, it has to have affected and damaged the nerve cells. This means it's no longer in the blood stream.
Most scientists agree that the most accurate measurement method of mercury contamination in mammals, including humans, is hair, not blood.
Now, back to the media representation of this study.
Does it seem odd to anyone that this study was done and published and grabbed up by the main stream media right about the same time that H1N1 vaccines containing Thimerosal (a mercury derivative) are being pushed on pregnant women and young children? What about the fact that recent studies, covered here on NaturalNews,3 have shown direct links between mercury and autism and between vaccines themselves and ASD? Yet these studies got little traction in the main stream.
Aaron Turpen is a professional writer living in Wyoming in the USA. His blogs cover organic/sustainable living and environmental considerations (AaronsEnvironMental.com) and the science debunking mainstream medical and proving alternatives (HiddenHealthScience.com).