Monday, February 25, 2008


7 comments:

M. G. Tarquini said...

This is an excellent article. Do you think it will lead to widespread testing for Mt markers before vaccination? There's a lot of important information here for researchers to chew on. First a disease has to be defined, then there's the search for the cause and after that hope for a cure. This could be really landmark, on a number of different levels.

Thanks for sharing.

Kim Stagliano said...

We hope so! That's all anyone wants - safe vaccines for all. SAFE. And maybe not so many all at one time. And maybe a little later in an infants' life. And maybe for the really dreaded dealy illnesses and more choice to parents for the more inconvenient but not deadly (in the US) illnesses. Oh, and maybe no more mercury at all or aluminum? Santa? Are you listening?

My girls see a top neurometabolic geneticist (what, dear readers, you though we only danced around maypoles and ate eye of newt around here?) and he said that my girls do indeed have unusual metabolic markers that while subtle, appear in all three and hence, may be related to this "thing" that is calles autism for lack of a better term. Perhaps there will be newborn testing, like for PKU and other metabolic conditions? A Mom can hope.

Amanda said...

I will watch and wait with interest!

Michelle O'Neil said...

Love your graphic Kim. I posted about this today.

Robin said...

I think the picture says it all!

I am waiting for the next developments (but not holding my breath).

M. G. Tarquini said...

he said that my girls do indeed have unusual metabolic markers that while subtle, appear in all three

Then routine checking for those markers before they received vaccines could have saved your girls a lot of heartache.

They need to test all kids with an autism diagnosis and start running the numbers. Things could happen quickly, if a consistent correlation were found.

Are you or your husband considering getting tested for those markers? the article defines the Mt which seems to be responsible as sporadic, but it may turn out that it's an obscure recessive gene, or like the markers for different cancers, the kind of thing that may or may not get expressed.

Armed with this new knowledge, if I had a baby today, I'd pester for this test and consider the results before making the decision whether to vaccinate.

Kim Stagliano said...

The hope is that this case will set a precendent and medicine will listen. However, AP refused to run the story. Yes they did. Refused. Meanwhile, they ran a story a month ago proclaiming a "Breakthrough!" that was really that a genetic snip was found that might be responsible for 1% of autism. HEre, they have a clear cut case of a vaccine/autism connection/injury and they are not reporting it. I know that from a very deep throat inside source. It's most disheartening.