Try 1 month for 99¢

It’s now been almost three years since I wrote a column in The Capital Times about our ignoring of safety data concerning the use of the neurotoxin aluminum in vaccines. At that time there were no studies examining its use in childhood vaccines and the explosion in autism affecting our children. This has since changed.

In November, a group of scientists from the University of British Columbia published a paper in the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry titled “Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?

Aluminum is used as an adjuvant in vaccines to provoke a strong immune response to the vaccine antigen. Aluminum-containing vaccines are administered at birth and again at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 18 months of age in the U.S. As both a neurotoxin and immune stimulator, aluminum is especially problematic when considering neuro-immune diseases such as autism. Aluminum vaccine adjuvants have been linked to a variety of adult autoimmune disorders such as Gulf War syndrome, yet newborns and infants are being exposed to much higher levels than adults. This is especially problematic when weight and blood volumes of infants are considered.

The authors of the above mentioned study looked at rates of autism in the U.S., United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Sweden, Finland and Iceland. They found the highest autism rate in the UK, where aluminum is administered at birth and again at one month of age. The next highest rate was in the U.S., where aluminum is administered at birth and again at two months of age. The lowest rates were in Iceland and Finland, where aluminum is not used until three months of age. The rates of autism in Iceland and Finland is 12:10,000 as opposed to a rate of 110:10,000 in the U.S., an almost ten-fold difference. The rate in the UK is even worse at 157:10,000. This correlation has to be hard to ignore even for the most strident vaccine defenders.

As Madison as it gets: Get Cap Times' highlights sent daily to your inbox

Autism in Wisconsin is occurring at epidemic levels. Isn’t it time our highly paid researchers stopped wasting precious time and money on genetics, epidemiology and useless brain scans and immediately start researching the most obvious environmental causes? Common sense should tell us there is no such thing as a genetic epidemic.

Michael Wagnitz of Madison is a clinical metals chemist.

Subscribe to Breaking News

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.