Childhood Vaccinations – Necessary or Overkill? Sequal Thread

Oh, is that how it works with you people? One vaccine and anytime in the next year you get the sniffles or athlete's foot, and it's gotta be the mercury!

Then add this to your understanding.There is no mercury in the shots given to kids these days. Lay off the Evil Scientist Worldwide Conspiracy®, buz.It's ad hominem and Lindalou wore us out with that nonsense.Argue the evidence.And the evidence says:There is no mercury in the vaccines.No mercury = no "safety issue".

My answer: Yes.Mercury does not give you the flu, hay fever, but it might give you headaches.It is first and foremost a severe neurotoxin, and upon that can effect other organs. Im sure this isnt news, but to stress the point plenty of links can be suppied as to its potency. My personal favorite is the "...80 times the lethal does of dimethyl mercury was absorbed through her glove., she only recalled a few drops landing on her hand." Im sure playing with it through your fingers goes under "lucky," even though elemental mercury isnt as potant as some of it's compounds. As i understand it, thimerosal only releases mercury when it decomposes; not the case when its used in vaccines, not to any appreciable amount. Ironically, the wiki article also lists a small section... ... accepted that thimerosal may produce mercury when decomposing, but hell, the kid probobly gets more mercury from that salmon he/she had for lunch.Never had the option to have an amalgam, but as i understand it the choice between an amalgam and a composite filling is up to the patient, is it not?Edited by Damouse, : Spelling, sentence structure.

---

This statement is false.Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.

Mercury is toxic.Mercury is deadly. We have studied, and know intimately, the effects of mercury on the human body.Cognitive deficits, movement disorders, death, etc.Flu, hay fever, and the chilblains are not symptoms of mercury poisoning. This bears repeating.THERE IS NO MERCURY IN THE VACCINATIONS GIVEN TO CHILDREN.If you wish to discuss amalgams, take it to the appropriate thread.You should know better, buz.You're an admin.

Hell to the yeah.Lindalou got a filling.Two months later Lindalou got depressed.Guess what caused her clinical depression?

Is this a referance to an actual event that LL claims or just a general stab at her disposition?

---

This statement is false.Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.

Actual.I just did a search to find the original message, but Lindalou has used the word in 35 different posts.I'm too lazy to look thru all 35 to find it.

Which one; "clinical depression" or "filling"? 2 months sounds a little short for a bit of mercury....

---

This statement is false.Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.

Depression.I'm not sure if she used the word "clinical" and I'm not sure if she used the word "filling", "amalgam", or "I went to the dentist" and I am far too tired tonight to fiddle with search terms.And yes.2 months is way too short.And the mercury exposure is negligible.One can of tunafish dumps more methyl mercury into your system than the entire round of vaccinations you got as a child (assuming you're old enough to have gotten vax with thimerosal ... way back when vaccinations had mercury, I mean).

Ahh yes i was wondering why this points hadnt been made earlier. Isnt the effects of thimersol from childhood vacinations point moot if (in the US at least) thimersol has not been apart of vaccines for quite some time?What are we supposed to do? Find all the kids who were vaccinated and apologize? Edited by Damouse, : Damn dbcodes.

---

This statement is false.Yeah so i lurk more than i post, thats why my posts are so low for two year's worth of membership. So sue me.

Key word here is "extrapolate".Thimerosal contains ethyl mercury.Some loon (Wakefield) published a crappy paper in a respectable journal and the bloody rotten media runs with it.60 Minutes, Newsweek, ad nauseum.Vaccinations rates start to go thru the floor.Epidemics break out.Sure it's just one measles epidemic that sweeps an Indiana town here, an Austalian pertussis epidemic there ... ... suddenly you've got a situation on your hands.The FDA, the CDC, and the NIH can read the handwriting on the wall with the best of us.Despite the fact that the ethyl mercury in vaccinations has never been linked to adverse reactions ...Despite the fact that the ethyl mercury is injected intramuscularly and thus is not subject to digestion (one of the ways methyl mercury does its damage) ...Despite the fact that the exposure to ethyl mercury is miniscule ...Get it out of the vaccines NOW or we're gonna be in serious trouble! (said the FDA/CDC/NIH).And so out it came.And the antivax screeds and, therefore, the epidemics continue.God bless the interwebs and the Antivax Hysterics®.

quote:

---

When was the last time you heard of a Hep B vaccine shortage?

---

I'm glad you live in a perfect world where no mistakes ever happen.

quote:

---

It is a fact (as best as science can determine a fact) that thimerosal does NOT cause autism.

---

Already agreed with you that to date no connection has been found. You might try acknowledging points that have already been agreed on and remember it. What I was trying to get you to think about was the possibility that at one hour old a vaccine with all it contains (I know, not thimerosal) may be a trigger for a genetically susceptible child. As I've said many times before, we aren't all carbon copies.In Message 17, I provided links to the FDA tables concerning vaccines. I know that thimerosal isn't currently in the required vaccines for 6yrs and under.Boy when you get stuck in a rut, you get stuck.I understand the decisions made at the national level. They have to think of the greater good.If we don't want people to avoid vaccines, then options need to be available for the exceptions. Autism isn't the only issue. Remember, I'm not the all or nothing person.

quote:

---

The diagnosis rate of autism has remained steady (or slightly increased) since the removal of thimerosal from vaccines.

---

I'm not sure that we've actually seen good evidence either way on that one. At what point was there actually no thimerosal-containing vaccines in the hospitals? From what I've read they could use up their supplies with expirations to 2003.Like I was trying to say before you got into your mercury rut, there may be newborns whose bodies, due to genetics or the mother's lifestyle, may not deal well with vaccines. Children are getting more vaccines now than they did before. Maybe we need to start looking at the overall effects to the body, especially the susceptible.We also have to realize, that even though we may have played with mercury when we were younger, a lot has changed. The chemicals in our food have changed. The conditions today are not exactly the same as they were in the 1930's.I think genetic susceptibility could be an issue. How can you rule it out absolutely?

Another curious question dealing with evolution for you alone or people who can answer nicely. Again, not making an argument. Again I'm probably not saying this right.Since thimerosal has been used since 1930, is there any possibility that any humans have developed a different reaction to it (or even other preservatives) not necessarily allergic, but how the body deals with it internally? Something we can't see. Could that even be a possibility if we never change preservatives in vaccines?We know that the same medication doesn't always have the same results in everyone. Again, not allergic reactions.

I seems very unlikely. I can't see what the selective pressure there would be associated with it. If the side effects had a consistent frequency of associated lethality or sterility you might see something I suppose.There is quite probably enough metabolic variation in the population that people have a range of responses to various chemical factors, but in the absence of compelling evidence that there is any significant effect associated with Thimerosal it seems pointless to look for even subtler effects which might exist at very low frequencies in a population.I certainly see no reason to suppose such differences would be recent developments.In terms of looking for genetic links to susceptibility I can't see how you could identify any candidate genes on any basis other than genes already known to be associated with Autistic spectrum disorders, which still wouldn't show any link between thimerosal exposure and the development of Autistic symptoms.Perhaps if whole genome sequencing were cheap enough it would be possible to identify novel common genetic elements associated with Autism but it would require pretty extensive investigation of a variety of populations, some of which it might be very hard to isolate. Ideally you would have a control population, a population of unexposed autistic children and a population of exposed autistic children.That is a massive effort to go for to detect a theoretical unknown genetic effect so subtle that it doesn't seem to show up statistically in any of the studies done looking at Thimerosal as a causative factor. That of course supposes that the effect is genetic.TTFN,WK

WK answered your question far better than I ever could, so I'll reply by asking you a question:Since there's no scientific evidence for harmful effects from vaccines because we get the same kind of results one always gets for phenomena that don't exist, why are you so determined that there must be ill effects from vaccines?This question has been posed before, and your answer always returns to anecdotal or even quack data. You made an admirable effort with reference sources like PubMed, but the published papers supporting your view were either fatally flawed or may as well have appeared in the National Lampoon for all the credibility of the journals in which they appeared.Science cannot prove a negative. It can never be proven that vaccines never cause harm. But if there's a real effect it is so small or so subtle that it just isn't worth worrying about. One of the realities of modern medicine is that little attention is given to heath issues affecting only one out of a million people, which is the level we may be talking about here if there actually is an effect. If vaccines actually killed outright one out of a million kids, if they just keeled over and died right there in the doctor's office, would that justify withholding vaccines and returning to the era of epidemics and quarantines causing the deaths of far more children than just one out of a million?That's a rhetorical question, of course, since the answer is obvious, and that's why people are finding it so frustrating that some continue to pursue this issue. We have enough problems with real health issues without making up fake ones like killer vaccines. It's reminiscent of the silicon breast implant scare that drove Dow Corning into bankruptcy.--Percy