Squid,

I am sending you  this link because I believe  that it applies to the article that you asked me to read, the "Defeat Autism Now": Mercury Detoxification and consensus.

I have some concerns about the article:

1. The study is totally empirical and not based on scientific methodology.

2. The organization, DAN, by its very name, implies, that we can defeat autism now or that we will try to defeat now. I do not believe that we have the scientific data as to the etiology or the etiologies of this horrible syndrome.

3. To imply that there are similar symptoms between mercury poisoning and autism may be true, but that does not necessarily mean that they are the same. It is an hypothesis, not proof.

4.  Many, (I believe 17) of the physicians in the symposium have autistic children. I think that these folks may be somewhat biased and willing to grasp at something that looks possible, NOW!. This is totally understandable, as we all hope that there is magic treatment that will heal our little boy, Leelo. However, after reading many more scientific papers, I am not encouraged  that we can put our hopes on chelation and food supplements.

5. On page eight, they say that no outcome papers have been published. The problem with that is that there is nothing that the scientific community can look and contest or agree with the conclusions being made.

6. The majority of physicians in this symposium are already using chelation and supplements. They are bypassing the scientific method and acting as if they have facts when in fact it is still an hypothesis. This is hardly an unbiased group.

7.They also said: " Such divergence in the details of the therapy among practitioners makes  comparison of their outcome impossible". In medicine as well as in dentistry great efforts are made to come to a consensus on the widely regarded methodologies and a standard of treatment is usually held up as the "gold standard" for that procedure or treatment.

8. Now the scary parts:

    a. Page 10: DSMA can cause bone marrow suppression and is potentially hepatotoxic.

    b. Page 12: We are talking about some potential serious side effects.

    c. Disclaimers: check out #3,4 and #6. They are all disturbing, but #6 is downright scary!

    d. Disclaimers for  parents: #2 concerns me.

Summary:

This paper is not a scientific symposium, but more of a consensus on how they should proceed in with a treatment model that is only based on a hypothesis and not on scientific fact.

I honestly feel the risks are too high.

 

Love,

 

Your Father-In-Law