Unborn babies stewing in a sea of chemicals... Autism link?

[mamadadawahwah]

Just read a reuters news piece yesterday on a study done on feotuses. Here's the link:

news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050714/hl_nm/chemicals_dc

It says :

"Of the 287 chemicals we detected in umbilical-cord blood, we know that 180 cause cancer in humans or animals, 217 are toxic to the brain and nervous system, and 208 cause birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests," the report said.

Blood tests did not show how the chemicals got into the mothers' bodies, or what their effects might be on the babies.

MERCURY AND PESTICIDES

Among the chemicals found in the cord blood were methylmercury, produced by coal-fired power plants and certain industrial processes. People can breathe it in or eat it in seafood and it causes brain and nerve damage.

Also found were polyaromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, which are produced by burning gasoline and garbage and which may cause cancer; flame-retardant chemicals called polybrominated dibenzodioxins and furans; and pesticides including DDT and chlordane.

The same group analyzed the breast milk of mothers across the United States in 2003 and found varying levels of chemicals, including flame retardants known as PBDEs. This latest analysis also found PBDEs in cord blood.

I knew this all along, the question is what effect is this having? Any comments?

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

mamadadawahwah - you do like the 'strong' controversial type debates don't you

Thank you Tamum - voice of reason.

This thread was getting a tad ridiculous.

Well, thank you, GetMakosietc and you, RnB. I find all this "scientists are all fraudsters/idiots/in thrall to the government" so depressing. I also don't understand how we got from a link to a piece of apparently good science to the "epidemic" (bollocks) of researchers lying. You can't have it both ways in a single discussion without drawing careful distinctions, surely?

Newsflash expected from scientists - presumably having been given £20 million taxpayers money grant:-

"Being alive is major cause of dying eventually"

My last job was in a research department and I simply don't recognise the situation mmddww describes. I thought some of the projects were rubbish, but they were properly set up and funding was correctly obtained. No reserach is perfect, it only sets out to answer its stated question and it then leads to MORE research. I loved working there btw and had utmost respect for ALL of them (and got £10 for answering one questionnaire heh heh)

I also don't understand how we got from the original study (by scientists) to criticising scientists. I'm baffled.
I think that research like this is vitally important - and it is done by scientists.

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

I don't think Scientists lie in their research. Some may be mistaken but they don't lie.

Something that is true about research into autism is that it is still a small (but growing) area. I'm starting to read around the research into autism with a view to starting a project in a years time. I've been surprised how little has been done. It's also hard ot do as the group is very diverse, and are not the easiest group to obtain medical samples from, or test in a lab.

I truly believe that people become autistiic via different routes, so you're not even talking about the same thing when you look at an autistic group- which makes research into causes harder. yes I think there is a big group that are unable to process mercury and other heavy metals, but there will be other groups as well. The research is being done now, but it takes time.

The vitamins directive is nothing to do wiith scientists. It dates back to a bit of an admin/political cock up in the EU basically. The ban has been implemented by politicians, not scientists.

I think the title of this thread gives a clue as to what kind of 'discussion' mdwww was after.

or identifying the children at risk.

I do think health authorities are very bad at applying research (in the case of autism). I truly cannot understand why the CHAT test isn't used routinely at 18 months. No money to pay for intervention for the children it throws up?

Message withdrawn

I did see it mentioned in a paper I read- whether it was morally right to identify children at risk at 18 months and then offer them nothing. It's just so shockingly short termist. Can they not understand if they put money in early they may not have to put in so much later (not to mention prevent family breakdown blah blah blah)

Not read any of this, I thought the title of this thread is very inappropriate and insensitive particularly on the sn board.

Message withdrawn

I have an asd child and I dont find the title insensitive at all. I want to find out what caused my son's condition and thought this would be of interest to others. It makes sense, I have no doubt that the article is based on fact.

What is insensitive is a doctor telling you that your child has a potentially life long condition and providing very little help, no links to research and showing you the door.

I personally want to know everything. I dont want to be left in the dark about anything which might have caused my sons disorder.

Life is a bitch, life is hard. The title of this thread is in your face for a reason. We the public are not being told what is really going on (imo).

I personally find the story shocking rather than insensitive. Just because it is difficult to consider, dosent make it insensitive.