Parents 1, Scientists 0

An article in the newest issue of Nature shows that a gaggle of ill-informed, whiny parents can trump any number of scientists who know what they're talking about: Autism study panned by critics (Nature 453, 259 (2008)).

Here's the gist of the article: Many people believe that trace mercury from vaccinations is the reason for their children's autism. The problem with that? It's a theory that's been scientifically discredited. Nonetheless, many parents still believe it to be true, trusting their own beliefs over numerous scientific studies to the contrary. The result of this paradigm: a new clinical study has received preliminary permission to proceed, despite the fact that many experts in the field believe "the trial will put children at risk for what is certain to be no medical gain." Parents 1, Scientists 0.

The proposed study intends to introduce chelating agents into affected children as a way to scavenge and remove trace mercury from the body. The method is already used to treat people with substantial heavy metal poisoning, but has noted side effects in that the chelating agents can also remove essential metals (calcium, zinc, etc.) from the body. This treatment has been documented to lead to cardiac arrest in humans, cognitive problems in rats, and other serious ill-effects.

Is this clinical trial, then, justifiable when scientific evidence shows that mercury in vaccines isn't responsible for childhood autism and that chelating agent therapy has potentially serious negative side effects? The trial is currently seeking ethics approval...let's hope that the committee sides with informed scientists opposing the study and not parents trusting their intuition and nothing else.