Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Thimerosal-autism link rejected

Court rules against parents in fight over vaccine additive

Randolph E. Schmid Associated Press

WASHINGTON – The vaccine additive thimerosal is not to blame for autism, a special federal court ruled Friday in a long-running battle by parents convinced there is a connection between the mercury-containing preservative and autism.

“Such families must cope every day with tremendous challenges in caring for their autistic children, and all are deserving of sympathy and admiration,” special master George Hastings Jr. wrote.

But, he added, Congress designed the victim compensation program only for families whose injuries or deaths can be shown to be linked to a vaccine and that has not been done in this case.

The ruling came in the so-called vaccine court, a special branch of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims established to handle claims of injury from vaccines. It can be appealed in federal court.

The parents presented expert witnesses who argued mercury can have a variety of effects on the brain, but the ruling said none of them offered opinions on the cause of autism in the three specific cases argued. They testified that mercury can affect a number of biological processes, including abnormal metabolism in children.

Special master Denise K. Vowell noted that in order to succeed in their action, the parents would have to show “the exquisitely small amounts of mercury” that reach the brain from vaccines can produce devastating effects that far larger amounts … from other sources do not. The ruling said the parents were arguing that the effects from mercury in vaccines differ from mercury’s known effects on the brain. Vowell concluded that the parents had failed to establish that their child’s condition was caused or aggravated by mercury from vaccines.

The new ruling was welcomed by Dr. Paul Offit of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, who said the autism theory had “already had its day in science court and failed to hold up.”

On the other side of the issue, a group backing the parents’ theory charged that the vaccine court was more interested in government policy than protecting children.

“The deck is stacked against families in vaccine court. Government attorneys defend a government program, using government-funded science, before government judges,” Rebecca Estepp, of the Coalition for Vaccine Safety, said in a statement.

In reaction to the concerns of parents, thimerosal was removed from most vaccines in the United States several years ago.