Autism rates double in Utah by Bytemite

The number of Autistic children has been increasing for some time and I've heard of every reasoning from Vaccines to Television. The TV reasoning intrigues me, research has shown that watching television before 2 years of age can have a negative impact on development, but Autism via TV could turn out to be psuedo science same as the vaccination theory.

I wonder if we aren't just noticing Autism more nowadays. It's good that we are, so that we can initiate behavioral therapy or adjust their curriculum as needed. Another thing to consider is that Autism is becoming a broader diagnoses, absorbing some other related developmental disorders such as Aspergers.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 10:06 AM

Oh, there are a number of possible factors for autism, I don't mean to discount any of them. I'm sure the causes of autism will vary between people and places. (And I have my doubts about autism and vaccines, though vaccines have their dangers)

It's just eight years ago in Utah, we started fluoridating the water, and over the last six years we've seen autism rates double? Okay, correlation isn't causation, but I find that mighty suspicious.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 11:08 AM

It's a reasonable suspicion I think, with the data all being highly localized. I wasn't criticizing that. You're right, correlation isn't causation. There's a fair number who think the television becoming part of our daily lives carries the strongest correlation with the first recorded cases of Autism and it's rise in numbers. Much like your fluoride in Utah, it's a significant change that correlates.

The vaccine theory gets on my nerves because it is a persistent hoax shown to be perpetrated by a dishonest scientist taking money from an attorney with their own anti-vaccination agenda (I'm grossly paraphrasing from listenings to NPR and some articles I've read on the subject).

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 5:12 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

I have some theories on the matter, some of which our friend DT won't like.

Theory 1: There are some genetic links with autism. I believe that our gene pool is getting worse and worse over time. For instance when I was little I got sick a lot. If I'd lived back in the day I probably would have died from one of the sicknesses or another by the time I was five or six, people died so easily back then from infections/flu/etc. Now we have antibiotics (thankfully) so I lived to adulthood, as do most children in this country. I'm choosing not to have children, partly because I don't want any of my problematic genes to pass down, of which there are a few. But most people, questionable genes or not, who make it to adulthood choose to have children. Fortunately we live in a society in which most people make it to adulthood and can live their lives, but the increase in people with differences means that our society needs to evolve to handle that, because face it, there are more and more of us.

Theory 2: We've got so many rutted up artificial chemicals in everything these days, our food, our water, our air, our soil. We have more of that stuff than we've ever had before, which fits in with what Byte was posting about, the floride in the water supply. Having all that stuff in our food and water can't be good for us, especially for kids. Sure kids are really resilliant, but too much is too much.

Theory 3. I think autism encompasses more things than it used to, it includes more differences than it used to. Its definition has changed since the 40s when it was first cemented as a concept/diagnostic category. Did autism exist before it was classified? I believe it did, its just that people called it different things, labels change over time. Right now autism includes a lot of things/conditions. I would also venture to say that now adays autism is overdiagnosed. If I were growing up now adays I'd probably end up getting tagged with an autism diagnosis, even though I know I don't have autism. When I was little, as now, I like routine, I don't do well with change. I have systems and methods for doing things and, though I can deviate from them if necessary most of the time, I prefer to stick with them because I see them as the way I do things. I'm very passionate, I've always had "special interests", I care about things intensely. When I was little (3 and 4, I grew out of it after that) I didn't like playing with the children in my preschool class except for my best friend, my mother and the teacher had to make a rule that I was only allowed to play with Kayla for part of the time so I'd branch out to play with the other kids. They also had to make a rule that I was only allowed to play with the little horses for a certain amount of time since they were my favorite, that and pretends of course, pretends are still one of my favorite things to do, though obviously they're much more complex now, centered around plot twists and charactor development etc. The point is that I'm so glad I didn't get saddled with an autism diagnosis, the last thing I need is something else "wrong" with me. :)

So yeah, those are my theories, controversial? Maybe, but this is what I think.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 5:26 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Interesting, Byte. We've had flouride in our water since the 70's, but I believe the increase in diagnosing ASD began a lot later than that. Still, environmental factors have yet to be comprehensively ruled out.

I do think that at least part of the increase is down to diagnosing. It used to be that only the 'autism' part was diagnosed, not he autism spectrum. Which meant you had to be very severe to get a diagnosis, not able to go to mainstream school. Diagnosing those who do not have those severe traits but fit within the spectrum has opened up the flood gates so to speak. The amount of children within my circle who have been diagnosed with ASD has reached double digits, and I'm not convinced that if I had gotten my son tested he would also sit within that spectrum. Of those children, one was struggling in mainstream school and has probably since gone on to a different type of education. He'll probably struggle to hold down a job, relationships etc. Of the others, they were on the whole 'normal' (I hate to use that word) kids with behavioural or social issues. They struggle with school, but you sense that they will be okay. They have had various degrees of intervention, from zilch to additional schooling support. I went to school with kids like these. they weren't diagnosed, they were considered naughty or anti social. So I'd say part of the increase is about the spectrum that is now diagnosed.

It doesn't seem to be the full story, anecdotally at least. Teachers and maternal and child health nurses who have been in their profession for a long time say they notice an increase in certain characteristics amongst children. Is it environment? Parenting style? So there has to be some other explanation for this - happening pretty universally in most western nations.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 5:59 PM

I'm speaking primarily from personal experiences so like Fruede, my knowledge may not be as accurate outside of my 'case studies' as it were.

Autism is a developmental disorder that primarily seems to affect language and socialization. They say the eye contact difficulty is common, but oddly enough I haven't encountered that. 'Course, I'm pretty positive and easygoing, probably not 'threatening' enough to set their amygdala into overdrive. There's lots of sensory stuff involved too. The repetitive actions and odd behaviors (such as always walking on tip toes) are often methods of coping with over or under stimulation.

I don't have enough experience or knowledge to really grok how 'special interest' play into Autism. They do seem common but I don't really see it as a negative thing and it's not a behavior I've had reason to modify yet. Of course, I haven't come across a violent and/or socially unacceptable special interest yet. They can make for handy teaching tools though and occasionally offer excellent motivators to reinforce our target behaviors. Ex: One 3 year old client had a fascination with sticks so I employed 'sticks' (usually a drink straw) as motivators for doing our verbal learning activities. I also used his interest in 'sticks' to teach him to discriminate between 'stick,' 'straw' and 'wand' verbally.

The little ones I work with (3-5 year olds) don't play well together. They would much rather play alone and only seem to interact with other children when they want something the other child has (usually by taking it.) We're working on the concept of sharing, but when they are mostly nonverbal it can be difficult to tell if I'm really getting through. Well, not difficult as much as it takes longer. Of course, another common diagnoses for trouble sharing is '3-5 years old.'

I've got a little helper right now during play time, one of the little girls in the special needs class is trying to help my client play and she's quite patient with him. He's learning to play with me, and I'd really like for the skills to transfer when interacting with other children. 'Play' is a very important and often underrated part of a child's development and these kids need to learn how to interact with more than just their therapist.

I seem to have forgotten where I was going with all of that... Anyway, there are many behaviors and symptoms common to Autism that can also be observed in those who are not Autistic, or not observed in those that Autistic. I do think it's quite possible (probable even) that Autism is over diagnosed. Fortunately the behavioral therapy we offer is beneficial whether they are autistic or not. I do worry when over diagnoses leads to over medication though.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 6:04 PM

Quote:
It doesn't seem to be the full story, anecdotally at least. Teachers and maternal and child health nurses who have been in their profession for a long time say they notice an increase in certain characteristics amongst children. Is it environment? Parenting style? So there has to be some other explanation for this - happening pretty universally in most western nations.

This is why the Television theory intrigues me. It hasn't been debunked or tested much to my knowledge, but there is a massive (though quite possibly meaningless) correlation.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 6:19 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Happy, the behavioural stuff probably causes difficulties later on, when kids are at school. I think it probably has a lot to do with feelings of frustration, but the diagnosed children I know who have had intervention have had it because of the behaviour - lashing out, running away, withdrawing. Getting a diagnosis is the only way some teachers will rethink their interventions, other than constant punishment.

The full blown autism where kids basically just stop communicating at about 3 is another matter all together. very difficult.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 6:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Happy, the behavioural stuff probably causes difficulties later on, when kids are at school. I think it probably has a lot to do with feelings of frustration, but the diagnosed children I know who have had intervention have had it because of the behaviour - lashing out, running away, withdrawing. Getting a diagnosis is the only way some teachers will rethink their interventions, other than constant punishment.

The full blown autism where kids basically just stop communicating at about 3 is another matter all together. very difficult.

Not sure if I follow, my tired mind might not be interpreting this right, but I get the feeling I'm being corrected, only I don't see anything I disagree with or that disagrees with my posts (leastaways how I mean for my post to be interpreted).

You are quite right about many of the teachers though. Unfortunately, this can occasionally cut both ways. Because many teachers don't know enough about developmental disorders to address special needs children in the regular classroom, they sometimes go too easy on the child, confusing 'compliance' with 'comprehension' and the kid gets away with whatever they want and learns next to nothing.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 8, 2011 6:43 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

I wasn't trying to correct you. Just adding to your observations that 3-5 demonstrate social and language issues, which can turn into behavioural problems later on. I wasn't trying to debate or disagree.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 11:32 AM

DREAMTROVE

Several things

1. Say it with maps. If you have incidence maps you can correlate data much better. The smoking cancer link was reallyproved with maps. Counties with tobacco use had lung cancer, those without did not have anywhere near as much, and the higher the tobacco use, the higher the cancer risk.

2. Autism is overdiagnosed. If the diagnosis increases, there may be an increase in problem, or may not. Again, see maps.

3. Chemistry: we currently acknowledge basically four different levels of activity for stable non radioactive chemicals: inert, reactive, bioactive and bioavailable.

Fluorine is a highly corrosive gas, so its not inert. It also has a high weight, so it changed the properties of any molecule it binds to.

In WWI, it was used as a chemical weapon, because when inhaled in high quanities it could kill people. In WWII the Nazis tried other variations, but with little success. It took a while to figure out that the deaths in WWI Were due to the formation of corrosive acids, which just doesn't happen at toxic levels in the environment becuase of the lower concentrations. I don't know if they used Cholorfluorocarbons in WWII, but I know we used them in Korea, and then again in Vietnam. CFCs are the bioactive form of Chilorine and Fluorine halogen gasses. Always be wary of spin. We did not use them in Korea to "defoliate." we wanted to depopulate, and the Koreans compained because cholobenzene products were getting into their drinking water, and Korean civilians were gettin sick and dying. Vietnamese still get sick and die regularly from "Agent Orange" which is a messy mix of CFCs. while I'm at it, here's another thing that doesn't exist: "Chemical dispersant." That's a spin term for industrial solvent. "Corexit" is also not a chemical, it's a brew of chemicals, primarily CFCs. This is an industrial solvent, and a chemical weapon. It's much simpler to view them as a class then as a chemical, because you get many CFC products from a simple reaction, and while they have slightly different properties, they are toxic to living things becauce they displace hydrogen in biological systems, causing mulitple failures. CFC results from a reaction will very widely in their vaporization volitility, how lethal they are, and at what densities they are considered tk be toxic. The major concern with Fracking is the use of CFCs, which end up in the drinking water, CFCs are also widely used by the oil and gas industry and by the US military, as weapons and also as industrial solvents, for cleaning purposes. Since the oil and gas industry and military bases are exempt for land and water regulations, and CFCs can be toxic at one part per billion, you don't want to be anywhere near either one, or in the watershed of anyone using, disposing of, or storing CFCs. If you use them in household products like dust removers or paint removers, you might want to rethink that, but remember they are highly toxic, you can't simply put them in the trash or drinking water.

Whatever number I was on, I think it was 3. So

4. Genetics.

It's not that I deny the existence of genetics, I've studied the field for a long time. It's that each human being has around 33,000 genes. There's not yet any clewr way to tell what genetic flaws you do or do not have, my sister was born with neurofibromatosis caused by CFC toxicity. She does not carry the gene for the disease, the affected tissues do, due to a stem cell mutation, but she would not pass it on.

The next problem is that those who identyify others as flawed and typically themselves as not cannot possibky know either, but one thing is for sure: given the size of the human genome and the laws of probability, no one can be genetically perfect. Statistics would would tend to favor the idea that all humans possessed and equal number of flawed genes of equal impact, some are more noticeable than others. That said, even the worst flaws aree not automatically passed on, a friend of mine was born with a very serious heart condition, like his sister, brother and father. However, his son does not have the disease. I would think that a condition that requires surgery at birth to survive would be considered pretty serious. You might not know that someone carried that gene. Multiply that thout 33,000 times. Are you really going to worry about whether or not someone has strong liver genes, kidney genes, what their natural blood oxygen transport rate is, what mtDNA family they're from?

Ironically, of course, those most concerned with this are our wealthies families which have a long history of inbreeding due to "strategic marriages."

Finally, autisim is too loosely defined for their to be a gene for it. The condition needs to result from a set of neurochemical conditions, and probably some sort of psychological stimulus or lack thereof.

Each one of our genes codes for a single protein. There generally is no gene for a complex condition. Sometimes there are large chromosomal problems like trisomy 21, the resulting population correct me if I'm wrong, are sterile anyway, but the thing which hurts their mental abilities IIRC is an extra gene for GABA, making them oversedated, which results in their inability to record memories at a normal rate. This is ironically the easiest problem to fix, and the least of their problems healthwise. But all of their problems come from having an extra chromasome.

A lot of neurochemistry is fairly easy to correct for someone who knows what they're doing, so i would hardly consider it when choosing a mate. Downs Syndrome and Prader Willi are chromosomal, so, though they are "genetic in the greater sense, they are not caused by a flaw in the genome, but rather a chromosome count. PW is fatal in rats and mice within hours, but in humans it takes a couple decades.

Finally, the idea of drugging our own children, which probably even the Nazis would have thought was insane, has undoubtedly affected the rates of all mental illnesses, since the easiest way to create a chemical imbalance is drug use, not genetics. Drug related imbalances are about a hundred times stronger in raw NT levels than psychological trauma, and can relate in desensitization homeostatis, which amounts to receptor loss, which is rather dificult to correct, though not as bad as brain cell loss.

My first suspect here would be overdiagnosis, and my second would be overmedication. My guess is that CFCs would be more likely to just kill them than to give them developmental issues.
That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 12:13 PM

I've been reading, still interesting, Magons, Happy, Riona. Haven't had much to say because I've mostly been absorbing.

DT: Possibly true about chlorinated VOCs being more likely to kill them, but then, exposure during fetal development didn't kill your sister right away. It did, however, potentially make her sensitive to later exposures.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 12:33 PM

On the other hand, while I kinda do like my fluoride theory because of the suspicious time-line, I can't fully discount regional factors in this development.

Which is to say, inbreeding. Because SERIOUSLY. Historical polygamy made just about everyone related to each other.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 2:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I wasn't trying to correct you. Just adding to your observations that 3-5 demonstrate social and language issues, which can turn into behavioural problems later on. I wasn't trying to debate or disagree.

Oh, shiny!

Had my first case with a hardcore special interest. A little boy (4 years) who just wants to swing (on his belly, not sitting up) all day. He seems quite gifted physically (coordination, balance and musculature) but he's the most nonverbal I've worked with yet.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 9, 2011 2:39 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

Byte, I think that everyone, no matter their opinion on genetics, can agree that inbreeding is a problem for people's health etc.

DT, though we don't agree about everything here, I see that we both agree about overdiagnosis being a problem and that there are yucky chemicals in our environment, food etc. that are a problem and that those could be one of the culprits. I like your mapping suggestion, sounds like a clear way to figure it out.

Happy, sometimes "special interests" and "not wanting changes in routine" are chalked up to Aspergers, which, among other things, I feel is too often diagnosed. I have a neighbor with aspergers and she definitely has it, I've known her since she was born and as soon as she was about two we knew that something was different. She's 18 now, finishing her first year of college and doing well scholastically, as she always has. She lacks the ability to form what most people would consider to be meaningful relationships, has never had a friendship beyond what most people would consider to be casual, sharing some common interests but that's it, without any sort of emotional connection. She's living at school this year, visiting her parents on the weekends. her first roommate left (which I don't actually blame on F because the roommate was a pain in the arse). The current roommate and her seem fine, but there doesn't seem to be any connection between her and mostpeople. I think she loves her parents, her grandma too, but noone else and her way of loving is a little different than mine, but hey, I think that everyone loves a little differently anyways. But yeah, she definitely has aspergers. But too many people are chunked into a diagnosis when they're too little to really be for sure, F didn't get the current diagnosis until she was about 7 or 8 or 9, I actually helped, oddly enough, though it was in a sideways and unintentional way. Kind of funny eh?, long story.
Fortunately she does better at forming relationships online, I think it takes conventional socialization out of the equation. She did make one close friend online once, a boy whom she met later when they went on vacation to his state. But that friendship didn't last.

But yeah, autism is often overdiagnosed. As are other things, I don't believe in diagnosing unless there is a legitimate issue going on, a noticeable difference that needs agknowledged.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 10, 2011 5:16 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Who spotted the pattern?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 10, 2011 5:35 PM

Hmm?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 1:43 AM

KWICKO

I was snarking, Byte - autistics and people in the Asperger's spectrum are quite often acutely aware of "patterns". Hence the snark wondering who it was that noticed the rise in autism rates...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 4:11 AM

Ah.

I just assumed the Mormon church discovered it while tagging the tykes before their release back into the wild.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 4:42 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Byte, I would like to address your comment

Quote:
Let's see, largest population concentration in the state along the Wasatch Front, notable change in an environmental factor that bioaccumulates in parents, passes the blood-brain barrier, and bonds to fat cells in the brain. Gee, I dunno.

Fluoride? What's with the focus on "fluoride"?

"Fluoride" is a singly-charged negative ion, like the "chloride" in sodium chloride (table salt). The charged compounds which make up various salts- sodium, potassium, magnesium (positively charged) and chloride, carbonate, fluoride (negatively charged) dissolve in water (which has a positively charged end and a negatively charged end) but not fat (which doesn't have any localized charges).

"Fluoride" actually binds to CALCIUM, not fat, to create the insoluble salt calcium fluoride. (The emergency treatment for fluoride exposure is calcium.)

FluorINE is the element... pure fluorine, which exists (unstably) as a gas consisting of two fluorine molecules (F2).

Perhaps the concern that pops up is because of the fluorine in antidepressants? That is a different form of fluorine, called fluorocarbon. That is where fluorine is chemically bonded to carbon, not a free-floating ion. That is a very strong bond. There are a lot of uses of fluorocarbons... in refrigerants (Freon), non-stick coatings (Teflon, Stainmaster carpets, Scotchguard, microwave popcorn bags etc) and in other medications. The basic chemical used to make Teflon is perfluorooctanic acid (PFOA), and is found in the blood and fat of most Americans.

Just as an aside... as a chemist, I refuse to store or heat foods in plastic.

DT: The problem with using a map is that the diagnosis rate varies from practitioner to practitioner, county to county, state to state, and nation to nation. There have been at least three large surveys in the past ten years trying to answer the question whether the increase in autism is due to an increased incidence or more sensitive detection... the latest in S Korea. Every survey turns up even more kids with autism than the one before.

Until there is a definitive test for autism - a blood test, for example- there will be confounding variations in results.

To go back to some really original work: About 12 years ago, scientists sought to answer the question whether autism was caused before or after birth. So they went back to a treasure trove of neonatal blood samples (maintained by a horrible state "government") and tested for the most likely neurodevelopmental chemicals they could think of, and found that kids with MR and autism had elevated levels of four peptides, especially VIP (vasoactive intestinal peptide).

I don't understand why those results haven't been followed up... perhaps kids with autism retain higher levels of VIP, and a blood test could be developed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 4:58 AM

You have to remember that fluorine is rarely going to spend much time as JUST fluorine, and will have a tendency to convert to the ionic form. Fluorine atoms are going to loosely bind to any molecule that they're part of, and it's also going to tend to be towards the outside of that molecule. Fluoride ions, such as from the compounds used in water fluoridation, will also strip hydrogen in organic molecules, and if those organic molecules are ones you need and use that are inside you, it can make a mess.

Subnote: you seem to be assuming that any fluoride ingested orally will simply immediately bind to the calcium in tooth enamel. I find that somewhat optimistic.

This is just the first results that I got when I googled, just a quick read of the summary will show that fluoride is taken up in organic molecules.

Now these fluoride levels are of course no where near the much lower levels introduced during water fluoridation for a community, but I'm troubled by the fact that this can occur at all. What's more, humans and their evolution in salt-rich environments may very well increase the uptake.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20658207/PMC349898/

Fluoride will get into proteins in the brain, and bind to fat cells (which may also be in the brain). It'll also oxidize the hell out of stuff.

You're a chemist, and you've taken O-chem (I haven't), and I'll bow to that. I'm an environmental scientist, with my degree cross-field between geology, pollution control, and water chemistry. You have a better idea of what's toxic and what ain't, why, and how much, but I do know a few things, and I see enough here to concern me. Perhaps it is true that just about ANYTHING can concern me, but considering the volume of study produced on the subject of fluoride toxicity, I think this subject might actually be significant. It's also true that there's a large volume of study showing that fluoride is safe for human consumption, themselves based on some ancient and poorly controlled studies from the 1960s that started off widespread fluoride use in dentistry. If I question why we so casually ingest poison every day, and question the interest to add even more of that poison to the environment, I'd like to think I have sufficient reason.

I applaud you for not microwaving in plastic containers, though, an issue that I feel is very similar.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 5:37 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

83 Cases of Autism Associated with Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensated in Federal Vaccine Court
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/83-cases-of-autism-associated-
with-childhood-vaccine-injury-compensated-in-federal-vaccine-court-121570673.html

It's illegal to sue vaccine companies when they injure or kill you. Isn't that special?

So your (borrowed) taxdollars pay the vaccine injury bills.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 6:02 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
You have to remember that fluorine is rarely going to spend much time as JUST fluorine, and will have a tendency to convert to the ionic form.

Have not forgotten. In fact, I ASSUME that it is in its ionic form. That's why it's called fluorIDE.

Quote:
Fluoride the ion, used in water fluoridation, is going to loosely bind to any molecule that it's part of, and it's also going to tend to be towards the outside of that molecule. It'll also strip hydrogen in organic molecules, and if those organic molecules are ones you need and use that are inside you, it can make a mess.

Er... no. "Fluoride" is already associated with a positively charged ion, which is how they put it into the water. Think of "fluoride" as negatively charged ion looking for an attractive positively charged partner. Why would it "want" to change its current partner for one that is less available? (In this case, hydrogen bonded to a molecule). There are plenty positively charged ions to be attracted to.

Quote:
Subnote: you seem to be assuming that any fluoride ingested orally will simply immediately bind to the calcium in tooth enamel. I find that somewhat optimistic.

No, I'm not. I assume that it will float around until finds some calcium or magnesium or other metal to bind to.

If ingested or absorbed in sufficient quantities, it CAN bind with enough calcium to interfere with muscle activity (calcium release causes muscle contraction) and stop the heart... and other muscles, of course.

Quote:
I also note you need both calcium and sodium for your nervous system, and that fluoride combining to any significant degree with either could be bad in a way that I don't think I need to elaborate on.

Sodium fluoride is fully soluble, so sodium remains available.

Also, you have to look at relative amounts. The human body contains four or five POUNDS of calcium. The water contains micrograms.

Quote:
This is just the first results that I got when I googled, just a quick read of the summary will show that fluoride is taken up in organic molecules. Now these fluoride levels are of course no where near the much lower levels introduced during water fluoridation for a community, but the fact that this can occur at all is a deep concern for me. What's more, humans and their evolution in salt-rich environments may very well increase the uptake.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20658207/PMC349898/

Fluoride will get into proteins in the brain, and bind to fat cells (which may also be in the brain).

Now, this is where you lose me. I did a quick google search and came up with zip. Furthermore, I don't see any chemical logic behind it. If fluoride binds with brain tissue and fat, why not chloride? And why the brain? Why not fat in the abdomen?

Quote:
It'll also oxidize the hell out of stuff.

As fluoIRNE, yes, it will oxidize stuff. As hydrofluoric acid, it will etch glass and give you very painful acid burns. If you expose enough of your skin, your may absorb enough to bind up all of your soluble calcium and stop your heart.

Quote:

You're a chemist, and you've taken O-chem (I haven't), and I'll bow to that. I'm an environmental scientist, with my degree cross-field between geology, pollution control, and water chemistry. You may have a better idea of what's toxic and what ain't, why, and how much, but I do know a few things, and I see enough here to concern me. Perhaps it is true that just about ANYTHING can concern me, but considering the volume of study produced on the subject of fluoride toxicity, I think this subject might actually be significant. It's also true that there's a large volume of study showing that fluoride is safe for human consumption, themselves based on some ancient and poorly controlled studies from the 1960s that started off widespread fluoride use in dentistry. If I question why we so casually ingest poison every day, and question the interest to add even more of that poison to the environment, I'd like to think I have sufficient reason.

In some places of China, India and Australia, fluoride occurs naturally in very high concentrations. There is evidence of dental and skeletal fluorisis, but as far as I know no increased rates of autism.

Fluoride exists in water naturally in many parts of the world. I see no reason to add it to water where it doesn't exist. OTOH, maybe its just me but I see no reason to be particularly concerned about it either, as long as it is below roughly 05 ppm.

I'm not saying that "natural" is always safe, after all, uranium is "natural" and so is aflatoxin. But I just haven't seen a great deal of toxicity associated with low levels of fluoride. I'm always willing to learn, but as of this moment I'm not seeing a big concern.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 6:33 AM

Quote:
Er... no. "Fluoride" is already associated with a positively charged ion, which is how they put it into the water. Think of "fluoride" as negatively charged ion looking for an attractive positively charged partner. Why would it "want" to change its current partner for one that is less available? (In this case, hydrogen bonded to a molecule). There are plenty positively charged ions to be attracted to.

I edited that part to make more sense.

But, still, sure it can break up organic molecules. Imagine it's dissolved in water, which is H20, but spends most of it's time as H+ and OH-. Throw in something like fluoride into the water, you bind up the loose hydrogen, and the solution becomes more basic, right?

The human body is mostly water, so it's easy to transfer that analogy over. Now throw in human organic chemicals in the mix, sometimes and often loosely bound by Van Der Waals forces and protein folding odds and ends bonding. Stuff doesn't become inert just because it's in an ionic form or because it's already bonded to other stuff.

Throw in an unnecessary and strongly electronegative ion, and that seems like a problem to me.

Quote:
Now, this is where you lose me. I did a quick google search and came up with zip. Furthermore, I don't see any chemical logic behind it. If fluoride binds with brain tissue and fat, why not chloride? And why the brain? Why not fat in the abdomen?

It's not so much that it's preferentially in the brain, it'll bind to fat cells just about everywhere. Particularly in the liver, because it IS technically a toxin and some of it does get slated for removal. But it CAN end up in the brain because it CAN bypass the blood brain barrier. Looking at rats given fluoride you'll find fluoride bonded to lipids all over, and you'll also find it affected the somatic size of certain organs, including the brain.

The reason it binds to fat cells has to do with proteins in the cellular membrane. Particularly Adenylate Cyclase, though I imagine there are others. I can't say I fully understand the mechanisms, as I said I'm not a chemist in the pure sense, but I've read some studies on this and this appears to be what's going on. Your Teflon binds to fat cells and can be found in the blood, why does it seem so surprising that fluoride ions can have similarly destructive effects?

I imagine chloride DOES bind as well, though there's less study on that because chloridation of water is not such a hot button issue. But if you want to ask me if I think chloride in water and chlorinated solvents can have unexpected results on the brain as well, then yes, I think they do. There's a number of military bases in the vicinity of where I live, and they have fairly significant chlorinated solvent plumes. And when some of those plumes volatilize into a building, as happened recently, it can have wide varying and unexpected effects (especially considering the normal expression of symptoms due to exposure to this kind of chemical), including brain cancer.

Quote:
In some places of China, India and Australia, fluoride occurs naturally in very high concentrations. There is evidence of dental and skeletal fluorisis, but as far as I know no increased rates of autism.

I actually found an article that some researchers did comparing a naturally fluoridated area with a non-fluoridated area in China and how children did on IQ tests. I'd have to find it again, but there was a correlation. I acknowledge that doesn't necessarily mean autistic, some people with autism are very intelligent and do well on IQ tests, but it could mean an increased incidence of lower functioning autism.

I do wonder at the mechanisms of the autism disorder. If it's a matter of the brain tissue being affected somewhere, the brain is a complicated organ, and there are a number of things that could contribute to the condition, and autism does have a broad range of symptoms that aren't always easy to narrow down to a specific cause in all cases. Your vip proteins, for example, perhaps indicate an issue with correctly absorbing nutrients, which might then suggest nutrient starvation in the brain. Maybe fluoride effects, as I have proposed. Maybe developmental reactions to television. Perhaps autism is case dependent, and any number of factors could be a potential cause of autism.

But I do still think that introducing fluoride eight years ago, and having a subsequent doubling of autism rates over a six year period shortly afterward is suspicious.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:15 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I imagine chloride DOES bind as well, though there's less study on that because chloridation of water is not such a hot button issue.

Chloride in the diet mostly comes from salt, not chlorination.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:29 AM

Yeah. Though municipal water is chlorinated (thanks for the spelling correction) in order to sterilize it.

I think in regards to chloride we can both at least agree that chlorinated solvents are a concern, and that when we consume salt, biologically speaking it's more the metals we need than it is the halogens. We might require salts, with halogens, but that's not to say the halogens are good for us.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:28 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

My dad and I both love salt, we crave it.

The only thing I know about negative ions is that they are what I experience when I go streaming and play in waterfalls and they feel really good, especially if the water is extra cold so I have to breathe in more deeply, thus injesting the negative ions. Its like this amazing natural high, who needs street drugs when you've got Aniana gorge falls.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:35 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Some people (my hubby, his brother and at least one of his nieces) are salt-sweaters... they sweat way more salt than average. And they crave it too. Maybe you're a salt-sweater?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 11, 2011 7:47 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

That sounds like some sort of zombie or alien creature from one of those low-grade horror film. :)))
I don't know if I am, maybe, that would explain why I love salt so much.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 12, 2011 2:44 AM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I've been reading, still interesting, Magons, Happy, Riona. Haven't had much to say because I've mostly been absorbing.

DT: Possibly true about chlorinated VOCs being more likely to kill them, but then, exposure during fetal development didn't kill your sister right away. It did, however, potentially make her sensitive to later exposures.

We are considering this possibility, but they do kill many infants before and after birth. This has been documented in Vietnam, where CFCs as a WMD have been most widely used.

Sig

The variations in diagnosis will be random, and will appear as signal noise on the map. That's easy to filter out. In vietnam, infant cancer maps show a very clear adherence to the borders of particular watersheds where Agent Orange was used. It demonstrates a clear relation to the water contamination. Similarly, the lung cancer maps mimic the smoking maps. Those maps both have signal noise, because diagnosis rates differ based on the quality of local hospitals, etc.

Fluoride is used to create CFCs. By itself, it's probably relatively harmless to humans, but not completely, overall, I'm not worried. I think it's either dumb or evil to use chemical weapons in your own drinking water, but CFCs already formed are much more dangerous I agree.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 12, 2011 4:05 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I do wonder at the mechanisms of the autism disorder.

You and a bunch of people!

Quote:
If it's a matter of the brain tissue being affected somewhere, the brain is a complicated organ, and there are a number of things that could contribute to the condition, and autism does have a broad range of symptoms that aren't always easy to narrow down to a specific cause in all cases. Your vip proteins, for example, perhaps indicate an issue with correctly absorbing nutrients, which might then suggest nutrient starvation in the brain.

Here's an interesting thought: Because of the "blood-brain barrier", the hormones and peptides on one side of the barrier don't "see" what same the hormones and peptides are doing. For example, the immune system is NOT supposed to be active in the brain. If you have white blood cells in the brain, you've got a big problem!

So rather than having two entirely novel signaling systems, the body uses the same hormones and peptides in different ways, with different receptors and different effects depending in which side of the bbb it's on. Calcinuerin, for example, promotes synaptic growth in the brain but is part of the immune response in the body. Phosphatidyl serine is a neurotransmitter in the brain, but in the body it's a "flag" for the macrophages to pick up a piece of garbage. VIP is a smooth muscle relaxer in th gut, but in the brain it appears to play a big role in circadian rhythm. Anyway, I think you get the point.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 12, 2011 4:13 AM

Huh! Okay, yeah, that's also potential mechanism.

I read a really interesting article once about how deregulation of the circadian rhythm can play a big role in dementia and the comatose. There was a guy, he was going around injecting electrodes in the skulls of people in persistent vegetative states in the area that governing this, as well as areas governing the process of waking up from sleep.

Some of them woke up. What's more! Some of them, despite their initial accident and subsequent coma having resulted in extreme losses of brain tissue to the point where their doctors considered their brains partially slurrified, actually woke up with their memories intact, personalities intact, and able to communicate!

http://discover.coverleaf.com/discovermagazine/201103?pg=71#pg71

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 12, 2011 12:16 PM

Beir bua agus beannacht

That's interesting Byte.

I respect DT's knowledge of chemicals and what they can do, he knows a lot about the subject.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 13, 2011 12:59 AM

KRISTENHE

Studies from various countries are indicating that autism rates among children might be greater than current estimates. A study from South Korea is being released which contends that it is more common than most think. The study found that more children really had autism than were diagnosed with autism among the general population. The study implies that several children are not diagnosed, though they have an autism disorder.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 13, 2011 4:06 AM

I looked up your cite. http://www.news24.com/SciTech/News/Autism-may-be-under-diagnosed-study
-20110509

The study was funded by Autism Speaks, and when I look at the wikipedia entry on the organization, it's an advocacy group with a powerful lobby that raises grant money for research into the condition.

The article itself calls out the probability of changes in diagnosis style being a contributor to increasing rates of autism diagnosis. It also suggested that the study may pre-select with parents who have concerns about their children's behaviour, which would skew diagnosis higher.

You may want to look at the claim of underdiagnosis with some caution, particularly when using more recent diagnostic measures. There's an element of both schools and pharmaceutical industry that get some benefit from false positives, which the broadened criteria can provide.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, May 13, 2011 6:44 AM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
Originally posted by RionaEire:
That's interesting Byte.

I respect DT's knowledge of chemicals and what they can do, he knows a lot about the subject.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

Thanks, and I respect Sig's, and also PR's. Things that cross the blood brain barrier usually do so in an incomplete form. No question about it that CFCs do, but the lighter weight CFCs, the ones that are found more in vapors, tend to cross the BBB easier. I know for a fact that methylene chloride (DCM) and tetrachloroethylene do. I think tetrachloroethylene may break down into DCM in a way that I'm less sure about tri- TCE, though I'd put it up there in the same category of toxicity.

ETA: Correction, CFCs used in WWI, reaction causes DNA mutation, so yeah, lots of those exposed would have gotten cancer and died months later, but no one was paying attention to that effect.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 16, 2011 8:01 PM