Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 There was Thimerasol in previous RH-Negative Shots given to mothers. Thimerasol is the preservative used in them and is also has a fairly high level of " Mercury in it " . A controversial topic but some believe that may be a factor in autism. Again, some on the list may disagree but you asked if it may play a role. Lots of information out there if you type in general searches on those topics. CP Rh-negative moms Hi all, I was at a birthday party this morning and was talking to one of the other moms about my son. She mentioned that she had read in " Mothering " magazine that 80% of autistic children have Rh-negative mothers, implicating Rho-Gam shots early in pregnancy as playing a role. I am Rh-negative. Does anyone (Cheryl?) know anything further about this?? Thanks, Donna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 Right...I'm not talking about any one cause here; I'm of the school of thought. 80%, though, is an astounding statistic; exactly what it means is obviously not yet determined. It made me wonder though -- how many RH-negative moms are on this list? Donna > There was Thimerasol in previous RH-Negative Shots given to mothers. Thimerasol is the preservative used in them and is also has a fairly high level of " Mercury in it " . A controversial topic but some believe that may be a factor in autism. Again, some on the list may disagree but you asked if it may play a role. Lots of information out there if you type in general searches on those topics. > > CP > Rh-negative moms > > > Hi all, > > I was at a birthday party this morning and was talking to one of the other moms about my son. She mentioned that she had read in " Mothering " magazine that 80% of autistic children have Rh-negative mothers, implicating Rho-Gam shots early in pregnancy as playing a role. I am Rh-negative. Does anyone (Cheryl?) know anything further about this?? > > Thanks, > Donna > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 --Original Message Follows---- From: " Donna Bond " <donnaaron@...> Hi all, >I was at a birthday party this morning and was talking to one of the other >moms about my son. She mentioned that she had read in " Mothering " magazine >that 80% of autistic children have Rh-negative mothers, implicating Rho-Gam >shots early in pregnancy as playing a role. I am Rh-negative. >Does >anyone (Cheryl?) know anything further about this?? Thanks, >Donna Hi Donna, Like Cyn, I'm not rh-negative but have other issues that could have contributed to abnormal immune reactions. The reason the vaccine is needed in the first place is due to a major genetic incompatibility issue between the mother and fetus. Cheryl .. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004 Jun 15;114(2):130-6. Obstetrical complications and subsequent schizophrenia in adolescent and young adult offsprings: is there a relationship? Boog G. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pavillon Mere et Enfant 7, Quai Moncousu, 44093 Nantes Cedex 1, France. georges.boog@... Schizophrenia is a psychiatric disease affecting around 1% of the population, the negative signs of which are correlated with inactivity of the prefrontal dorsolateral cortex, while an increased, more deeply localized, activity in the mesolimbic pathway may explain the positive signs. Several events occurring during pregnancy are likely to be involved in its genesis: hormonal supplementation by diethylstilbestrol, severe maternal denutrition, exposure to influenza virus, repeated psychological stress. From multicentric studies and meta-analyses in the psychiatric literature, the risk of schizophrenia appears to be multiplied by two if pregnancy is complicated, mainly by diabetes, ***Rhesus incompatibility, bleeding, preeclampsia, premature rupture of membranes and preterm birth. When delivery is linked to an abnormal presentation or happens via a caesarean birth for acute foetal distress, the time when the first signs of psychosis appear seems to be earlier in adolescence or in early adulthood. Cerebral imaging of schizophrenic patients shows ventriculomegaly and gray matter reduction, mainly in hippocampal volumes and in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Similar alterations in the neuronal pathways have been experimentally reproduced in rats after repeated prenatal stress and perinatal hypoxia. A region on the distal portion of chromosome 1 has shown evidence for linkage to schizophrenia. Therefore, a two factor model seems to be able to explain the onset of schizophrenia in which obstetrical complications may interact with a genetic liability and in which the consequences of hypoxic events may lie on a continuum ranging from cerebral palsy in some children to subtle cognitive and behavioural disturbances in others. PMID: 15140504 [PubMed - in process] ------------------------------------------------------------ Eur J Hum Genet. 2004 Mar;12(3):192-8. RHD maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility and schizophrenia: extending the MFG test to include multiple siblings and birth order. Kraft P, Palmer CG, Woodward AJ, Turunen JA, Minassian S, Paunio T, Lonnqvist J, Peltonen L, Sinsheimer JS. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, USA. pkraft@... Rh incompatibility disease (ie Rh hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn) has been implicated as a risk factor for schizophrenia. Here, we extend the maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility (MFG) test used in an earlier case-parent trio study that found significant evidence for an increased risk of schizophrenia in RHD MFG-incompatible children. We modify the MFG test for case-parent trios to include any number of siblings. This modified test enables us to use more of the available data from the earlier study. The increased sample size not only gives us greater power to test for MFG incompatibility but it also enables us to model the impact of previous RHD MFG-incompatible pregnancies on the relative risk of RHD MFG incompatibility in later-born siblings. This modeling is important, because RHD MFG incompatibility is a proxy for Rh incompatibility disease, and the risk of Rh incompatibility disease increases with the number of previous RHD MFG-incompatible pregnancies. The best-fitting models are consistent with the hypothesized effect that previous incompatible pregnancies increase the risk of schizophrenia due to RHD MFG incompatibility. There was significant evidence that the relative risk of schizophrenia in the second- and later-born RHD MFG-incompatible children is 1.7, consistent with earlier estimates. Our extension of the MFG test has general application to family-based studies of maternal-genotype and MFG interaction effects. PMID: 14735156 [PubMed - in process] Genet Epidemiol. 2003 Jan;24(1):1-13. Detecting genotype combinations that increase risk for disease: maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility test. Sinsheimer JS, Palmer CG, Woodward JA. Department of Human Genetics, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095-1766, USA. janet@... Biological mechanisms that involve gene-by-environment interactions have been hypothesized to explain susceptibility to complex familial disorders. Current research provides compelling evidence that one environmental factor, which acts prenatally to increase susceptibility, arises from a maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility. Because it is genetic in origin, a maternal-fetal incompatibility is one possible source of an adverse environment that can be detected in genetic analyses and precisely studied, even years after the adverse environment was present. Existing statistical models and tests for gene detection are not optimal or even appropriate for identifying maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility loci that may increase the risk for complex disorders. We describe a new test, the maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility (MFG) test, that can be used with case-parent triad data (affected individuals and their parents) to identify loci for which a maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility increases the risk for disease. The MFG test adapts a log-linear approach for case-parent triads in order to detect maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility at a candidate locus, and allows the incompatibility effects to be estimated separately from direct effects of either the maternal or the child's genotype. Through simulations of two biologically plausible maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility scenarios, we show that the type-I error rate of the MFG test is appropriate, that the estimated parameters are accurate, and that the test is powerful enough to detect a maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility of moderate effect size. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc. Publication Types: Validation Studies PMID: 12508251 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] _________________________________________________________________ Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 I read quite some time ago, that the statistic was 53%; however, I don't know if that is accurate, or if it's closer to 80%, etc. (I'll see if I can find the reference to the 53%.) I'm Rh negative; I received two RhoGAM shots; one about 3 months before my son was born, and one on the day he was born. A mercury-free RhoGAM shot was already available in Europe, but I didn't know anything about thimerosal at the time (and yes, I am confident that the mercury in thimerosal (vaccines and RhoGAM) is a MAJOR factor in autism!!!) Thimerosal is 49.6% mercury. RhoGAM is now available in both the U.S. and Europe, without mercury. At 06:47 PM 8/21/2004 -0700, you wrote: >Hi all, > >I was at a birthday party this morning and was talking to one of the other >moms about my son. She mentioned that she had read in " Mothering " >magazine that 80% of autistic children have Rh-negative mothers, >implicating Rho-Gam shots early in pregnancy as playing a role. I am >Rh-negative. Does anyone (Cheryl?) know anything further about this?? > >Thanks, >Donna > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 All auto-immune diseases are on the rise. My sister-in-law had Rho-Gam shots when pregnant. She has three daughters. One has insulin-dependent diabetes and another has lupus, both auto-immune diseases. I'm convinced that the thimerosal in the Rho-Gam shots is responsible. I'll bet if she'd had a boy, he'd be autistic. Jane On Aug 21, 2004, at 11:39 PM, CARPHM wrote: > There was Thimerasol in previous RH-Negative Shots given to mothers. > Thimerasol is the preservative used in them and is also has a fairly > high level of " Mercury in it " . A controversial topic but some believe > that may be a factor in autism. Again, some on the list may disagree > but you asked if it may play a role. Lots of information out there if > you type in general searches on those topics. > > CP > Rh-negative moms > > > Hi all, > > I was at a birthday party this morning and was talking to one of the > other moms about my son. She mentioned that she had read in > " Mothering " magazine that 80% of autistic children have Rh-negative > mothers, implicating Rho-Gam shots early in pregnancy as playing a > role. I am Rh-negative. Does anyone (Cheryl?) know anything further > about this?? > > Thanks, > Donna > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 <<<I read quite some time ago, that the statistic was 53%; however, I don't know if that is accurate, or if it's closer to 80%, etc. <<< I did a Google search last night; unfortunately, I forget what keywords I used, so I can't give the link, but I found the reference, and you're right, the statistic is actually 53%. The mom at the party probably got confused with another statistic referenced in the same article...still, even 53% is pretty darned high. Thanks to Cyn and Cheryl for posting those abstracts! Donna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 > > Right...I'm not talking about any one cause here; I'm of the > school of thought. 80%, though, is an astounding statistic; exactly > what it means is obviously not yet determined. It made me wonder > though -- how many RH-negative moms are on this list? > Donna > I'm RH neg and both my boys are RH positive. With (), I got 3 Rhogams-1 in 1st trimester, the standard one at 28 wks, and one postpartum. What really fumes me is that there is another brand (not RhoGam, I think Bay-Rho) that has never had thimerosol in it. But, of course, its more expensive so was rarely used here in the US. Always about the money. I chose to get only the post-partum RhoGam with my second pregnancy. The one given at 28 wks is simply a preventitive measure in the rare event that you have some trauma to the placenta or uterus that causes the two blood systems to mix during pregnancy. I monitored my antibodies before and throughout my pregnancy and they were never positive, so it wasn't a concern. There's a big misconception that you HAVE to have the shot at 28 wks, but the important one is the post partum, since any blood mixing is going to occur at birth, not during a normal, uneventful pregnancy. But, of course, all OBs want to cover their butts of any and all liabilty issues. I switched to a private midwife about the time my OB was getting really militant about the Rho Gam......sure wish I took that option with my first pregnancy! I do think mercury affected my first son. He was clearly born with issues. 3 rhogams, I ate tons of fish (esp. tuna) while pregnant, and I have a mouthful of amalgams. I do think that they were phasing out thimerosol by the time he was vaxed, tho. Live and learn. Becky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2004 Report Share Posted August 22, 2004 How old is your son? I thought they took the mercury out of Rho-Gham long before they took it out of vaccines. Jane On Aug 22, 2004, at 5:27 PM, & Becky wrote: > > > >> >> Right...I'm not talking about any one cause here; I'm of the >> school of thought. 80%, though, is an astounding statistic; exactly >> what it means is obviously not yet determined. It made me wonder >> though -- how many RH-negative moms are on this list? >> Donna >> > > > I'm RH neg and both my boys are RH positive. With > (), I > got 3 Rhogams-1 in 1st trimester, the standard one at 28 wks, and one > postpartum. What really fumes me is that there is another brand (not > RhoGam, I think Bay-Rho) that has never had thimerosol in it. But, of > course, its more expensive so was rarely used here in the US. Always > about > the money. > > I chose to get only the post-partum RhoGam with my second > pregnancy. > The one given at 28 wks is simply a preventitive measure in the rare > event > that you have some trauma to the placenta or uterus that causes the two > blood systems to mix during pregnancy. I monitored my antibodies > before and > throughout my pregnancy and they were never positive, so it wasn't a > concern. There's a big misconception that you HAVE to have the shot > at 28 > wks, but the important one is the post partum, since any blood mixing > is > going to occur at birth, not during a normal, uneventful pregnancy. > But, of > course, all OBs want to cover their butts of any and all liabilty > issues. I > switched to a private midwife about the time my OB was getting really > militant about the Rho Gam......sure wish I took that option with my > first > pregnancy! > > I do think mercury affected my first son. He was clearly born > with > issues. 3 rhogams, I ate tons of fish (esp. tuna) while pregnant, and > I > have a mouthful of amalgams. > I do think that they were phasing out thimerosol by the time he was > vaxed, > tho. Live and learn. > > > Becky > > > > > > Responsibility for the content of this message lies strictly with > the original author(s), and is not necessarily endorsed by or the > opinion of the Research Institute. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2004 Report Share Posted August 23, 2004 Becky, The reason the shot is given before hand is to prevent sensitization. Once the mother has developed antibodies.......it's too late and it's completely Irreversable. ----Original Message Follows---- From: " & Becky " <beckeric@...> I'm RH neg and both my boys are RH positive. With (), I got 3 Rhogams-1 in 1st trimester, the standard one at 28 wks, and one postpartum. What really fumes me is that there is another brand (not RhoGam, I think Bay-Rho) that has never had thimerosol in it. But, of course, its more expensive so was rarely used here in the US. Always about the money. I chose to get only the post-partum RhoGam with my second pregnancy. The one given at 28 wks is simply a preventitive measure in the rare event that you have some trauma to the placenta or uterus that causes the two blood systems to mix during pregnancy. I monitored my antibodies before and throughout my pregnancy and they were never positive, so it wasn't a concern. There's a big misconception that you HAVE to have the shot at 28 wks, but the important one is the post partum, since any blood mixing is going to occur at birth, not during a normal, uneventful pregnancy. But, of course, all OBs want to cover their butts of any and all liabilty issues. I switched to a private midwife about the time my OB was getting really militant about the Rho Gam......sure wish I took that option with my first pregnancy! I do think mercury affected my first son. He was clearly born with issues. 3 rhogams, I ate tons of fish (esp. tuna) while pregnant, and I have a mouthful of amalgams. I do think that they were phasing out thimerosol by the time he was vaxed, tho. Live and learn. Becky _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2004 Report Share Posted August 23, 2004 I'm also RH negative. I wonder how common this is among mothers in general though. Gaylen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2004 Report Share Posted August 23, 2004 > All auto-immune diseases are on the rise. My sister-in-law had Rho-Gam > shots when pregnant. She has three daughters. One has > insulin-dependent diabetes and another has lupus, both auto- immune > diseases. I'm convinced that the thimerosal in the Rho-Gam shots is > responsible. I'll bet if she'd had a boy, he'd be autistic. > Jane Jane, With the incompatibility issues there's an increased risk of cell transfer in addition to any type of immune scewing. With a male child you have an additional factor due to the male chromosome. The maternal immune system, genetic and non-genetic factors all play a role in how the immune system functions/malfunctions. I've been looking at some interesting research on neural stem cells and how foreign cells can take up residency in the brain after an insult like hypoxia/ischemia. Also recent publications on stem cells in amniotic fluid. I'm sure we'd all like to have something specific we can contribute these problems to....unfortunately it's likely to be much more complicated and involve multiple factors. Cheryl Zhou L, Yoshimura Y, Huang Y, Suzuki R, Yokoyama M, Okabe M, Shimamura M. Two independent pathways of maternal cell transmission to offspring: through placenta during pregnancy and by breast-feeding after birth. Immunology. 2000 Dec;101(4):570-80. PMID: 11122462 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Wan W, Shimizu S, Ikawa H, Sugiyama K, Yamaguchi N. Maternal cell traffic bounds for immune modulation: tracking maternal H-2 alleles in spleens of baby mice by DNA fingerprinting. Immunology. 2002 Oct;107(2):261-7. PMID: 12383206 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] van Rood JJ, Claas F. Related Articles, Links Both self and non-inherited maternal HLA antigens influence the immune response. Immunol Today. 2000 Jun;21(6):269-73. Review. PMID: 10825738 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Harney S, Newton J, Milicic A, Brown MA, Wordsworth BP. Non-inherited maternal HLA alleles are associated with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2003 Jan;42(1):171-4. PMID: 12509632 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Pani MA, Van Autreve J, Van der Auwera BJ, Gorus FK, Badenhoop K. Non-transmitted maternal HLA DQ2 or DQ8 alleles and risk of Type I diabetes in offspring: the importance of foetal or post partum exposure to diabetogenic molecules. Diabetologia. 2002 Sep;45(9):1340-3. Epub 2002 Jul 06. PMID: 12242468 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Farina A, Sekizawa A, Rizzo N, Concu M, Banzola I, Carinci P, Simonazzi G, Okai T. Cell-free fetal DNA (SRY locus) concentration in maternal plasma is directly correlated to the time elapsed from the onset of preeclampsia to the collection of blood. Prenat Diagn. 2004 Apr;24(4):293-7. PMID: 15065105 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003 Aug;14(2):123-9. Biological implications of bi-directional fetomaternal cell traffic: a summary of a National Institute of Child Health and Human Development-sponsored conference. Bianchi DW, Romero R. Division of Genetics, Tufts-New England Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, USA. OBJECTIVE: The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) held a workshop on 27-28 July 2000 to bring together investigators working in the field of fetomaternal cellular and nucleic acid trafficking with the hope that this would stimulate further research into the biological implications of such phenomena. METHODS: Invited speakers from all over the world presented their latest (unpublished) data. The conference proceedings were delayed until the present time to allow independent publication of the primary data. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Bi-directional fetomaternal trafficking of cells and nucleic acids during pregnancy is now well established, through the use of molecular techniques including conventional and real-time polymerase chain reaction, as well as fluorescence in situ hybridization. In addition, human leukocyte antigen (HLA) is deposited in the skin of pregnant women. Fetomaternal trafficking is increased in some complications of pregnancy, such as pre-eclampsia, polyhydramnios, polymorphic eruption of pregnancy, preterm labor and specific fetal chromosome aneuploidies. Maternal cells and nucleic acids have been documented in umbilical cord blood and in autopsy tissue of non-transfused neonates. Fetal cells persist postpartum and may be associated with the development of disorders such as scleroderma, lichen planus, lupus and thyroid disease. The extent of fetomaternal trafficking may be affected by three generational HLA relationships. Thus, the consequences of pregnancy extend beyond gestation. Publication Types: Consensus Development Conference Consensus Development Conference, NIH Review PMID: 14629094 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Hum Reprod. 2004 Aug 6 [Epub ahead of print] Fetal cell-free DNA circulates in the plasma of pregnant mice: relevance for animal models of fetomaternal trafficking. Khosrotehrani K, Wataganara T, Bianchi DW, KL. Division of Genetics, Departments of Pediatrics and Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tufts-New England Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. BACKGROUND: Cell-free fetal DNA (fDNA) can be detected in maternal plasma throughout human pregnancy and is rapidly cleared after delivery. fDNA measurement has clinical application in many complications of pregnancy. Our aim was to determine if fDNA could be detected in maternal plasma during pregnancy in a mouse model system. We then compared the levels of fDNA during pregnancies in which the mother and fetus were either congenic or allogenic. METHODS: C57BL/6J (H-2() or DBA/2J (H-2(d)) wild-type female mice were mated to C57BL/6J mice transgenic for the enhanced green fluorescent protein (gfp) and sacrificed while pregnant. C57BL/6J female mice that had previously given birth to three to six litters after mating with transgenic males were sacrificed after delivery. We used real-time quantitative PCR amplification to detect and measure gfp sequences in maternal plasma. RESULTS: fDNA was consistently detected in maternal plasma during pregnancy and was always absent after delivery [median 211 genome equivalents (GE)/ml vs 0 GE/ml, respectively, P=0.0001]. The level of fDNA was higher in allogenic matings compared to congenic matings (median 167 GE/ml/GFP + fetus vs 81 GE/ml/GFP + fetus, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: fDNA sequences can be reliably detected in maternal plasma during murine pregnancy. Our data lends further support to the use of nonhuman species to investigate the mechanisms involved in fetomaternal trafficking. PMID: 15298977 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2004 Report Share Posted August 23, 2004 > I'm also RH negative. I wonder how common this is among mothers in general > though. My understanding is that Rh-negative blood is relatively rare -- or at least far less common in the general population than Rh-positive. Rh-negative is a recessive trait. My parents are both Rh-neg and they once told me how unusual it was for two spouses to be Rh-negative. Donna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 23, 2004 Report Share Posted August 23, 2004 Boy is that depressing. One thing you can do is test for the MTHFR mutation. Those who have it are more likely to be sensitive to vaccine/thimerosal insult. Jane On Aug 23, 2004, at 11:41 AM, Darnley wrote: > PRESS RELEASE - FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > > August 12, 2004 > > Health Advocacy in the Public Interest (HAPI) > > Contact: Dawn Winkler 970-641-7413 > > Vaccines Are Not Mercury Free > ====THREAD TRUNCATED===== Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2004 Report Share Posted August 25, 2004 My mom was pos. and my dad was neg.. My sister and I are both negative. My mom had one miscarriage inbetween. Barb --- donnaaron1 <donnaaron@...> wrote: > > > I'm also RH negative. I wonder how common this is > among mothers in > general > > though. > > > My understanding is that Rh-negative blood is > relatively rare -- or at > least far less common in the general population than > Rh-positive. > Rh-negative is a recessive trait. My parents are > both Rh-neg and they > once told me how unusual it was for two spouses to > be Rh-negative. > > Donna > > > > ===== Barb Katsaros barbkatsaros@... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2004 Report Share Posted August 26, 2004 I Googled the percentages of Rh neg. in the general population, and came up with 16%. So if moms with Rh neg are 53% of the “autistic moms” population, that’s compelling, don’t you think? A very simplistic comment on a very complex issue, I know, but it still is something to think about, for me anyway, who suffer from insomnia now, too, as well as CFS, Rh negativity, so I am up in the middle of the night trying to catch up on my emails! LOL Re: Rh-negative moms > I'm also RH negative. I wonder how common this is among mothers in general > though. My understanding is that Rh-negative blood is relatively rare -- or at least far less common in the general population than Rh-positive. Rh-negative is a recessive trait. My parents are both Rh-neg and they once told me how unusual it was for two spouses to be Rh-negative. Donna Responsibility for the content of this message lies strictly with the original author(s), and is not necessarily endorsed by or the opinion of the Research Institute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2004 Report Share Posted August 26, 2004 It is of interest, but begs the question - what about the other almost half of the moms that are not RH negative? Also, we need to understand where the 53% came from - is it a sample of parents some kind - are all the blood records of parents of Autistic kids collated and reported anywhere? R Re: Rh-negative moms > I'm also RH negative. I wonder how common this is among mothers in general > though. My understanding is that Rh-negative blood is relatively rare -- or at least far less common in the general population than Rh-positive. Rh-negative is a recessive trait. My parents are both Rh-neg and they once told me how unusual it was for two spouses to be Rh-negative. Donna Responsibility for the content of this message lies strictly with the original author(s), and is not necessarily endorsed by or the opinion of the Research Institute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 26, 2004 Report Share Posted August 26, 2004 The thing I stumble on is that there have always been RH negative moms, but I feel that the incidence of immune disorders has suddenly jumped alarmingly in the last fifteen years.... Jane On Aug 26, 2004, at 6:30 AM, Marina Siddoway wrote: > I Googled the percentages of Rh neg. in the general population, and > came > up with 16%. So > if moms with Rh neg are 53% of the “autistic moms” population, that’s > compelling, don’t you think? > A very simplistic comment on a very complex issue, I know, but it still > is something to think > about, for me anyway, who suffer from insomnia now, too, as well as > CFS, > Rh negativity, so I > am up in the middle of the night trying to catch up on my emails! LOL > > Re: Rh-negative moms > > >> I'm also RH negative. I wonder how common this is among mothers in > general >> though. > > > My understanding is that Rh-negative blood is relatively rare -- or at > least far less common in the general population than Rh-positive. > Rh-negative is a recessive trait. My parents are both Rh-neg and they > once told me how unusual it was for two spouses to be Rh-negative. > > Donna > > > > > > Responsibility for the content of this message lies strictly with > the original author(s), and is not necessarily endorsed by or the > opinion of the Research Institute. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2004 Report Share Posted August 27, 2004 I think this is another example of how complex this disorder/syndrome, whatever you want to call it, is. There are subsets within subsets. The immune factor is huge, and probably the largest pieces of the picture, but I think there are other pieces to each child’s puzzle that cannot be discounted, such as the possible mercury issue with some of the kids. Maybe if the immune system were up and running well, they wouldn’t have the mercury problem at all, yet my daughter’s IgA, IgE, IgG testing looks good and only her IgM shows some slight problems, so why does she have high viral titers? Is this an IgM problem? It would be interesting to know just how many Rh neg. moms/women, and even men, have immune problems in general. Marina Re: Rh-negative moms > I'm also RH negative. I wonder how common this is among mothers in general > though. My understanding is that Rh-negative blood is relatively rare -- or at least far less common in the general population than Rh-positive. Rh-negative is a recessive trait. My parents are both Rh-neg and they once told me how unusual it was for two spouses to be Rh-negative. Donna Responsibility for the content of this message lies strictly with the original author(s), and is not necessarily endorsed by or the opinion of the Research Institute. ======EXTRANEOUS TEXT TRUNCATED========== Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.