"Subpoenaed"

Quote for today: Ian Lipkin

“But technology is like a car with a lot of horsepower. If you point it in the wrong direction, you can run people over.”

-Ian Lipkin

JRC Hidden Camera Footage?

Comparative minicolumnar morphometry of three distinguished scientists

I thought this was interesting but I haven't had the chance to read the full article.

Autism, Vol. 11, No. 6, 557-569 (2007)DOI: 10.1177/1362361307083261
The National Autistic Society, SAGE Publications
Comparative minicolumnar morphometry of three distinguished scientists
Manuel F. Casanova University of Louisville, USA,
Andrew E. Switala University of Louisville, USA
Juan Trippe University of Louisville, USA
Michael Fitzgerald Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

It has been suggested that the cell minicolumn is the smallest module capable of information processing within the brain. In this case series, photomicrographs of six regions of interests (Brodmann areas 4, 9, 17, 21, 22, and 40) were analyzed by computerized image analysis for minicolumnar morphometry in the brains of three distinguished scientists and six normative controls. Overall, there were significant differences (p < 0.001) between the comparison groups in both minicolumnar width (CW) and mean cell spacing (MCS). Although our scientists did not exhibit deficits in communication or interpersonal skills, the resultant minicolumnar phenotype bears similarity to that described for both autism and Asperger's syndrome. Computer modeling has shown that smaller columns account for discrimination among signals during information processing. A minicolumnar phenotype that provides for discrimination and/or focused attention may help explain the savant abilities observed in some autistic people and the intellectually gifted.
Key Words: creativity • minicolumns • neocortex • neuropathology

Uncanny Predictions

I see that psychics told Jenny McCarthy that she would have a daughter.

“For so long I have had psychics say they see me with a daughter,” McCarthy said. “I now know what they are talking about.”

I guess the psychics should have been more specific in their predictions so Jenny could have known that the daughter wouldn't be her own biological daughter but rather the daughter of boyfriend Jim Carey. Looking back, it all makes sense.

No word as to the number of psychics who predicted her son would be autistic, then not.

On the subject of predictions, it seems that somewhere in the neighborhood of 20% of children diagnosed with autism go on to pass as neurotypical.

Fein, whose work is funded by the U.S. National Institute of Child Health and Development, is on the forefront of research that suggests 20 per cent of children diagnosed with autism may recover. While some examples are more dramatic than others, her work gives hope to the families of children who fear the diagnosis.

Go figure.

"I think the most responsible thing to do is to tell parents, 'When they're two, we don't know what they'll look like when they're seven'," said Fein in an interview from Connecticut.

That does sound like the responsible thing to do. It's also another way of saying that it's irresponsible to tell parents that they can expect their child will end up in an institution or any other prediction concerning development and outcome.

Let's leave the predictions to the professionals. Most doctors aren't psychic.

Live Each Day Like It's Your Last

The problem with living each day as if it's your last is that it probably won't be.

Mercury Madness: It’s Time for a Reality Check

I read a very interesting article today and I learned a few things about environmental mercury distribution that I didn't know before.
Harold M. Koenig, M.D. responds to some common myths that I've heard many times from mercury activists but I never really gave them much thought. I don't recall the specific number 630,000, but I have heard similar statements which I've always accepted as fact.

The CDC Report represents merely the latest scientific information which should put to rest the oft-repeated claim by almost every Mercury advocacy group that 630,000 American babies are born each year with elevated levels of Mercury in their blood that puts them at risk for brain damage and other negative neurological and developmental effects. This statement cannot be substantiated by medicine, science or mathematics…but advocacy groups continue to perpetrate the myth because it is an effective scare tactic which plays on the fears and emotions of women and families.
Ironically, the "630,000 myth" came about as the result of very misleading analysis of the 1999-2000 CDC NHANES report data which indicated that 8% of women of childbearing age (16-49) exhibited blood Mercury level concentrations above what the EPA called "safe." With over four million live births annually in the U.S., Mercury opponents and some government agency personnel extrapolated that 320,000 babies are born "at risk." This number was revised upward to 630,000 as a result of "new" information about maternal cord blood that was not new at all, but actually double-counting on the part of the EPA. The EPA’s reference dose is the most stringent in the world and does not represent a "bright line" in which anyone exceeding the RfD would be at risk.
What is the truth about the Mercury exposure in America’s children? The CDC survey mentioned above not only looked at women’s blood; it also conducted blood Mercury measurements for children ages 1-5 years. The 1999-2000 survey revealed seven out of 705 (less than 1%) children with blood Mercury above the EPA's "safe" Mercury dose (the RfD that is at least a factor of 10 less than the level at which effects might be seen), while the 2001-2002 survey found only four out of 872 (less than 0.5%) children exceeding the RfD. It is important to note that even the highest Mercury level measured in this four-year CDC study retains a safety cushion of more than 500% below the lowest exposure level of concern. Since EPA's "safe" Mercury dose is far below the level where harm has ever been documented, a reasonable person could safely conclude that no U.S. children are being dangerously exposed to Mercury that could lead to brain or developmental damage. That is not to say that Mercury exposure does not pose risk. It does, but it is a matter of the level of exposure.
The bottom line is that no U.S. women or children are being exposed to unsafe levels of Mercury through fish consumption.

How many times have I heard this one.

An Example of "Mercury Madness"

Can one gram of Mercury contaminate a 20-acre lake as claimed by the PIRG? Obviously, different measurements can mean vastly different things depending upon how they can be interpreted, but test results and measurements can be misinterpreted in an effort to spread fear among consumers. PIRG states (without attribution) that "a gram of Mercury, about a drop, deposited in a mid-sized Wisconsin lake over the course of a year was enough to contaminate the lake’s fish." Certainly this would be alarming if it was based on fact. Trouble is, it’s just not true, and the science behind the issue needs to overtake the emotional (and political) hysteria before a generation of Americans is deprived of the well-documented health benefits of eating fish, the main dietary source of Methylmercury in trace amounts.

This statement – which has become the "gold standard" for a host of environmental activist groups – is yet another example of bastardizing science to forward a political agenda.
Someone might want to ask Ed Swain, Ph.D., of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency what the facts really are. It was Dr. Swain who made an effort to determine the rate of Mercury deposition in his State. He did a series of tests on several Minnesota lakes and authored an article of his findings entitled, "Increasing Rate of Atmospheric Mercury Deposition in Midcontinental North America," which appeared in Science magazine on August 7, 1992.
Dr. Swain determined that in Minnesota, the rate of atmospheric deposition – primarily from rain – was approximately one gram of Mercury per year for a 20 acre lake. He did NOT claim that one gram of elemental Mercury can contaminate a 20 acre lake. Interestingly, his study had absolutely nothing to do with the effects of Mercury contamination in fish. His conclusions did include some nuggets that activist groups probably don’t want you to know:
• Mercury deposited from natural sources accounts for 25 to 30% of all Mercury.

• Mercury deposition is a global problem. (Computer models run by U.S. EPA and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) show that 60-80% of the Mercury that deposits in the United States comes from non-US and natural sources.)

• It is the soluble – not the elemental – form of Mercury that is the focus of concern. Soluble Mercury, through a complex transformation, rises in the atmosphere and returns in rain, converting to Methylmercury that might be absorbed by fish in Minnesota lakes. Only about 5% of Mercury converts to Methylmercury...and even that is subject to variability.

• Methylmercury’s effect on fish depends on several variables including types and sizes of fish and reproduction rates, among others.

Good to know.

I do believe we should do everything in our powers to limit exposure to mercury and other environmental toxins but we should also do what we can to limit our exposure to irrational fear and the stress that it brings.

Thank you Dr. Koenig for the reality check