There has recently been lots of hysterical commentary linking thimerosal, a mercury-based ingredient in childhood vaccines, with the increase in incidents of childhood autism. Robert Kennedy Jr. and Imus (in the Morning) have been two of the more vocal of these maniacal accusers. But, working against this frenzy have been numerous scientific studies pooh-poohing such a relationship. (See the NY Times Article published today.) To me, there are two possible explanations for this autism phenomenon: 1) The increased incidents of childhood autism are a function of our increased sensitivity to the symptoms of this malady (and the increased services offered to autism sufferers) and/or 2) some environmental substance that seems to be disturbing the genetic construction of these autistic children … possibly through their parents. Now, if this substance is not thimerosal, what chemicals are now so rife that they might be candidates for such genetic disturbance? Two candidates come immediately to mind – alcohol and designer drugs. However, alcohol has been around for eons whereas the increased popularity of designer drugs seems to coincide much more closely with the perceived growth of childhood autism.
How should we go about proving or debunking such a relationship? First, we must get around the political incorrectness of such a theory. Second, we need to probe the incidents of childhood autism in developed countries where designer drug use is much lower than in the United States (if there are any) to see if such a relationship might exist. And finally, if the previous results suggest, we need to investigate the history of designer drug use by the parents of autistic children and then perform statistical relationships between each of these drug-use patterns and the possible autism among their issue.
I think that such a study is very much worth the social disruption that it might cause. After all, our children are our future.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment