Obviously, this is a key piece of research, because a) mercury is known potent neurotoxin; b) parents of autistic children have been, for many years, telling anyone who would listen that their kids withdrew from the world after receiving a shot containing mercury; and c) the US government has been claiming, over and over, that mercury in vaccines has absolutely no connection to autism.
Here are three quotes from this 2012 mercury study:
“The authors used a public use data set to investigate associations between the receipt of thimerosal-containing vaccines and immune globulins [antibodies] early in life and neuropsychological outcomes assessed at 7-10 years.”
“There was a small, but statistically significant association between early thimerosal exposure and the presence of tics in boys.”
“This finding should be interpreted with caution due to limitations in the measurement of tics and the limited biological plausibility regarding a causal relationship.”
Tics? Yes, this is a recognized sign of neurological damage.
So the mercury study shows there IS, in fact, a connection between childhood vaccines and neurological damage.
The kicker, the disclaimer is found in the third quote, which is a transparent cover story.
“Limitations in the measurement of tics”? “Limited biological plausibility regarding a causal relationship”?
Think about it. The authors knew, in advance of doing the study, that their research would offer no way to actually measure the number, duration, or strength of the tics in young children.
Therefore, to use that “flaw” to discount the connection between tics and neurological damage was their backup plan all along.
“Hey, if we find a significant statistical connection between tics and brain damage in children, we’ll just say we couldn’t measure the tics—and that’ll muddy the conclusion.”
Likewise for “biological plausibility”. The authors also knew, before they started the study, that the exact, step-by-step, causal sequence by which mercury disables and damages various parts of the brain can be chewed on and argued, by “experts,” for the next hundred years—and never resolve “the causal connection” between mercury in vaccines and brain damage.
This is their trump card.
Therefore, their conclusion was a cover-up of the naked fact that they DID discover a significant association between mercury in vaccines and neurological damage.
That makes the study a fraud on its face.
Given whistleblower Thompson’s track record of cooking, twisting, and burying vital data in vaccine research, it also opens the door to a further investigation of this mercury study.
Were vital data omitted? Was the true picture of mercury-caused autism far worse than the authors admitted?