Get the flu shots! Anti-Vaccine propaganda debunked.

Dec 31, 2006
572
5
0
Swine Flu Vaccine Fearmongering

by Dr Harriet Hall, MD


Fear is a curious thing. It often bears no relation to the actual risk of what we fear. When swine flu first broke out in Mexico, people were understandably afraid. Travel was restricted, schools were closed, and so many people stayed home that the streets of Mexico City were empty. As the disease spread around the world, Egypt developed a paranoid fear of pigs and committed national pigicide. They ordered the slaughter of all 300,000 of their country’s innocent little porkers, ignoring the fact that the flu is spread person-to-person, not pig-to-person. Now that the disease has officially been labeled a pandemic, fears have switched from the real threat of the disease to an imagined danger from the vaccine.

Some people just plain hate the idea of vaccines — to the point that they are willing to spread old falsehoods, make up new lies, distort the results of studies, misrepresent statistics, and endanger our public health. There are websites like “Operation Fax to Stop the Vax” and even anti-swine-flu-vaccine rap videos. Press releases, e-mail campaigns, talk shows, and blogs are being used to stir up irrational fears. These people are irresponsible fearmongers. They are wrong, and they are dangerous.

Background

The 1918 flu. The flu epidemic of 1918 started as a mild disease in the spring, called the “3-day fever.” Most victims recovered in a few days; there were few deaths. Then in the fall, it turned into something far more severe. It was the same flu strain, but it had become more virulent. Some victims died within hours. Healthy young adults were as susceptible as children and the elderly. It affected remote villages as well as urban areas. It attacked 1/5 of the world’s population and killed 50 million people.

Wartime conditions may have favored the evolution of a more virulent strain. In peacetime, the sicker stay put and the mildly affected move around. In the trenches, the mildly affected stayed on duty and the sicker were sent on crowded trains to crowded field hospitals. Today, places with social upheaval might have similar effects favoring a virulent strain.

The 1976 swine flu. In February, 1976 a strain of H1N1 influenza similar to the 1918 strain killed a soldier at Fort Dix. Officials feared a pandemic and over-reacted. In actuality, the H1N1 strain was limited to the Fort Dix area and quickly died out, and another related strain only persisted until March. Nevertheless, a swine flu vaccine was developed and was given to 48,000,000 Americans, 22 percent of the population. The vaccination program was stopped in December after 532 cases of paralysis from Guillain-Barré syndrome were linked to the vaccine and 25 people died. It had been a false alarm, and more people died of the vaccine than of the disease. The risk of getting Guillain-Barré from the vaccine was approximately 1 in 100,000.

The 2009 swine flu. Between April 15 and July 24, 2009, there were 43,771 confirmed and probable cases of H1N1 influenza (“swine flu”) in the U.S. There were 5,011 hospitalizations and 302 deaths, 39 percent among those aged 25 to 49, in contrast to the usual flu where 90 percent of the deaths are in people over age 65. For comparison, the more common strains of flu have been killing around 36,000 people a year in the U.S. Swine flu has been declared a phase 6 pandemic by the World Health Organization: that is a measure of its spread, not of its severity.

What are the chances that the new swine flu will follow the course of the 1918 flu? We have no way of knowing. All we can do is hope for the best and prepare for the worst. In addition to the annual flu vaccine for the usual common strains, a specific vaccine for the H1N1 strain is being prepared and tested to see whether one or two shots will be needed to produce a satisfactory immune response. So we may be offered as many as three shots this year. Supplies will be limited, at least in the short run, so the CDC has announced these priorities:

* Pregnant women
* Household contacts and caregivers for children younger than 6 months of age
* Healthcare and emergency medical services personnel
* All people from 6 months through 24 years of age
* Persons aged 25 through 64 years who have health conditions associated with higher risk of medical complications from influenza.

What if it fizzles out like the swine flu of 1976? That’s already ruled out: the 1976 flu had fizzled by March; the new swine flu hasn’t shown any signs of fizzling yet. We will be monitoring numbers of cases and vaccine complications very carefully, assessing the risk/benefit ratio, and we’re not likely to repeat the mistakes of 1976.

The Lies and Distortions vs. the Facts

I can’t hope to address all the misinformation that is circulating, and even if I could, more new lies would come out by the time I finished writing. Here are some of the ones I have heard. A correspondent in the Netherlands forwarded me an alarmist e-mail that is circulating in Europe.

Claim: It alleges that only one person has died of swine flu in the UK, and it questions whether he really had flu. It tells us “you are slated for vaccination against a disease which poses no credible threat whatsoever.”


Fact:
As of August 27, the death toll in the UK was 66. As of Sept. 1, 2009, 2184 deaths had been reported worldwide. Most rational people would call that a credible threat.

Claim: Guillian-Barré Syndrome is a newly concocted name for a much more familiar condition: Polio.

Fact: Ridiculous! Polio is a distinct disease and its symptoms are very different from those of Guillain-Barré syndrome. A diagnosis of polio can be confirmed by finding the actual poliovirus particles in body secretions or cerebrospinal fluid. The last case of “wild polio” in the U.S. occurred in 1979. Polio has been eradicated in most countries; Guillain-Barré still occurs regularly in every country.

Claim: Guillain-Barré is still being caused by flu vaccines. A study based on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) found 54 cases of GBS reported after vaccination in the U.S. in 2004; 57 percent of these followed flu vaccines and the rest followed other vaccines.

Fact: The VAERS is a voluntary reporting system that accepts all reports of symptoms or illnesses that occurred after vaccination. It even accepted a fraudulent report claiming that a man had been turned into The Hulk by his influenza vaccine. To find out whether the VAERS reports mean anything, it is necessary to compare the incidence of the condition in those vaccinated to the incidence in the unvaccinated. Guillain-Barré syndrome affects 1 to 4 of every 100,000 people around the world every year, and the increased risk from vaccines is currently estimated at no more than one in a million.

Claim: It usually takes several years to test a drug and show that it is safe, but the swine flu vaccine is going to be fast-tracked for quick approval.

Fact: A new flu vaccine has to be developed every year to respond to the new strains that are constantly evolving. Time does not allow for the same kind of testing we require for approval of a new pharmaceutical. Time is even shorter for the swine flu this year. We have a lot of experience in producing new flu vaccines every year, and there is no reason to suspect that this year’s batches will be any more dangerous than usual. Because of fast-tracking, we will be monitoring very closely for side effects. We have a choice between fast-tracking and being prepared for a serious outbreak, or being slow and cautious and totally unprepared.

Claim: 4,000 people were afflicted with Guillain-Barré Syndrome in 1976.

Fact: At least 1 in 100,000 people would have gotten Guillain-Barré syndrome anyway. The excess cases attributed to the vaccine were estimated at 532 (some sources say half of that number), and most of them recovered fully; 25 deaths were attributed to the vaccine.

There are several websites where writers with a bad track record for scientific credibility (like Joseph Mercola and Gary Null) advocate vaccine refusal. The Health Freedom movement wants the government to forget about trying to protect the public and give us the freedom to harm ourselves by using untested, disproven, useless, or even dangerous treatments.

Claim: Legislation allows for you to be isolated or quarantined or “incarcerated in relocation centers” if you refuse vaccination during a declared Pandemic Emergency. This is a violation of human rights and of the Constitution.

Fact: If you have active TB, the government has not only the power but the responsibility to require treatment or quarantine so you don’t sit next to me on the bus and cough in my face. If you contract Ebola virus, I sure hope you will be quarantined to reduce the death toll. Quarantine is legal, is mandated by legislation, and is accepted by international law. Sometimes the duty to protect most of the people in a society temporarily trumps a few individual human rights. The government is not going to require quarantine unless there is a serious threat that demands action.

Claim: People should be allowed to “self-shield.” For self-shielding you go home lock the doors and stay there. Then you can try to further protect yourself with nano-silver, homeopathic remedies, cold packs, vitamins, flavonoids, zinc, astaxanthin, magnesium, and other stuff.
 
Dec 31, 2006
572
5
0
Fact: A self-imposed quarantine is better than nothing, but I question whether it would be effective in practice. The suggested (untested) remedies might conceivably keep people entertained so they are more willing to stay home.

Claim: The CDC and the American Academy of Neurologists have asked neurologists to be vigilant in looking for cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome in people who have been vaccinated. This is an admission that they know the vaccine will be dangerous.

Fact: They clearly said1 “they do not expect the 2009 H1N1 vaccine to increase the risk for the autoimmune disease” but since this is a concern with any pandemic vaccine, they will be on the alert. This is a good thing. If the incidence starts rising, they will know it earlier and be able to react more quickly than they did in 1976.

Claim: The threat of Guillain-Barré is a reason to reject vaccines.

Fact: No one understands what causes Guillain-Barré syndrome, but it can develop after an infection, surgery or vaccination. It is possible that people who develop GBS after vaccination might also have developed GBS after natural exposure to the disease. One expert said2,

From both the societal and individual perspectives, the risk of GBS after a flu shot pales in comparison to the risk of serious adverse events if infected with the influenza virus: 60 to 70 cases of GBS vs. 20,000 deaths from influenza. Keeping things on the same scale, people over 65 years of age can choose from a risk of one case of GBS per million people or 10,000 cases of hospitalization and 1500 deaths due to influenza.

Claim: Joseph Mercola writes about “Squalene: The Swine Flu Vaccine’s Dirty Little Secret.” He has claimed that the vaccine adjuvant squalene is dangerous, that the Gulf War Syndrome was caused by the squalene in anthrax vaccines, that squalene is “good” or “bad depending on how it gets into your body: “Injection is an abnormal route of entry which incites your immune system to attack all the squalene in your body, not just the vaccine adjuvant.” And the only reason they put adjuvants in vaccines is to save money.

Fact: Squalene is found naturally in the human body. It is a precursor of cholesterol and other compounds necessary to human health. Squalene antibodies were found in Gulf War veterans; but the rate turned out to be no higher in those who had Gulf War Syndrome than in those who didn’t. Squalene antibodies were found at similar rates in people who had never been exposed to squalene in vaccines. The anthrax vaccine has been ruled out as a possible cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Anyway, it turns out there was no squalene in the anthrax vaccine!

American flu vaccines do not contain adjuvants, but maybe they should. Adjuvants enhance the body’s innate immune response to the antigens in vaccines, making vaccines more effective. And they allow for broader cross-reactivity against viral strains not included in the vaccine3. Mercola says adjuvants are added just to increase profits, but the pharmaceutical and health industries could make far more money treating patients in an epidemic than they could ever make trying to prevent one.

There is a large body of data demonstrating the safety of squalene. Flu vaccines containing MF59, a squalene-based adjuvant, have been used in Europe for 10 years, with 22,000,000 doses given; and no serious adverse events have occurred, only mild local reactions. The vaccine does not raise the incidence or titers of anti-squalene antibodies. The World Health Organization (WHO) considers it safe4.

Claim: Flu vaccines are not very effective and don’t protect everyone. The effectiveness is particularly low in the elderly.

Fact: This claim is true, but… In recent years, flu vaccines have been 75 percent effective in preventing hospitalizations for flu, and 75 percent is way better than nothing. No vaccine is 100 percent effective. Flu vaccine is particularly problematic because of the constantly mutating strains of the virus. Nevertheless, the benefits of vaccines are clear. It is true that the elderly are not as well protected by the vaccine (efficacy rates have been estimated at 50 percent or less): that’s why it’s so important for younger people to be vaccinated, reducing the prevalence of the disease in the population and thereby reducing the likelihood of the elderly being exposed. In other words, don’t just get the flu shot for yourself, get it for Grandma.

Claim:
Mercola says “Injecting organisms into your body to provoke immunity is contrary to nature.”

Fact:
Nature kills people. Doing something contrary to nature is what medicine is all about. It’s a good thing.

Claim: “The potential for a weaponized vaccine to be the vector for a weaponized flu cannot be discounted.”
Fact: Most far-fetched conspiracy theories are wrong. I have no trouble discounting this one. The potential may be there, but the likelihood is homeopathic.

Claim: People should make their own decisions about their health care.

Fact: One of the basic principles of medical ethics is autonomy: patients have the right to accept or reject any treatment. Modern doctors try to involve the patient in the decision-making process, but most people are ill-equipped to make health decisions on their own without getting information and guidance from a health care professional. In a recent survey5, 30 percent of Americans believed that there had been a case of smallpox in the United States in the past five years, and 63 percent thought there had been a case somewhere in the world in the past five years. They didn’t know that the last case in the U.S. occurred in 1949 and the last case in the world occurred in 1977 in Somalia; 25 percent thought it was likely that they would die if they got the smallpox vaccine (the actual risk of death from the vaccine is one per million). People who are uninformed and scientifically illiterate are not capable of making rational decisions about health matters.

Mercola’s advice for preventing flu: Eliminate sugar and processed foods from your diet, take a high quality source of animal-based omega 3 fats like Krill Oil, exercise, optimize your vitamin D levels, get plenty of sleep, deal with stress, and wash your hands.

Fact: Washing your hands is a good idea.

Mercola claims: “Vitamin D deficiency is the likely cause of seasonal flu viruses.”

Fact: Now really! Vitamin D deficiency in a human body can no more “cause a virus” than it could “cause a cat.” Perhaps he meant vitamin D deficiency could predispose a body to infection, and there is some research to suggest that it might. Some have claimed that taking vitamin D supplements will prevent the flu, but there is no evidence to support that.

Mercola’s claims and arguments were decisively eviscerated on Science-Based Medicine by Dr. Joseph Albietz6. Not only are Mercola’s assertions demonstrably false, but they reveal a profound misunderstanding of immunology. Unfortunately, he reaches a large audience of scientifically naïve people who believe his every word.

In response to Dr. Albietz’s article, there were some interesting comments from readers that further demonstrate the anti-vaccine mindset and the ability to distort information to promote a cause.

Claim: The government is going to mandate that everyone get the swine flu vaccine.

Fact:
No such proposal has been made. The government couldn’t do it even if it tried, because there won’t be enough doses to go around. That’s why they’ve issued recommendations prioritizing who should get the vaccine first.

Claim: George Bush signed an agreement that if a pandemic emergency arose and the President declared a national state of emergency, control of the government would be passed to the United Nations. Blue-helmeted UN soldiers would run our country and the Constitution would be suspended.

Fact: It was simply an agreement to facilitate international cooperation, to share information and enhance collaboration in the event of an emergency. It says nothing about the UN at all, much less about relinquishing sovereignty to the UN or any other organization. The actual agreement can be read online at www.spp.gov/pdf/nap_flu07.pdf

The same person pointed out that shots hurt and that alone should tell you something. “Yet you are willing to trust these people with your lives to make a vaccine that the Creator never intended the human body should need, and let them inject it into your body? You people are scary or insane!”

No, it is the anti-vaccine zealots who are scary. They are not insane, just self-deluded and misguided. I hope the swine flu won’t develop into a reprise of 1918; but if it does, the false information these people are spreading could be responsible for a great deal of death and suffering. Freedom of speech is a good thing, but this kind of fear-mongering is almost as bad as shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater.
 
Dec 31, 2006
572
5
0
Vaccines & Autism - A Deadly Manufactroversy

Vaccines & Autism
A Deadly Manufactroversy

by Harriet Hall, MD, “The SkepDoc”


During a question and answer session after a talk I recently gave, I was asked for my opinion about the vaccine/autism controversy. That was easy: my opinion is that there is no controversy. The evidence is in. The scientific community has reached a clear consensus that vaccines don’t cause autism. There is no controversy.

There is, however, a manufactroversy — a manufactured controversy — created by junk science, dishonest researchers, professional misconduct, outright fraud, lies, misrepresentations, irresponsible reporting, unfortunate media publicity, poor judgment, celebrities who think they are wiser than the whole of medical science, and a few maverick doctors who ought to know better. Thousands of parents have been frightened into rejecting or delaying immunizations for their children. The immunization rate has dropped, resulting in the return of endemic measles in the U.K. and various outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases in the U.S. children have died. Herd immunity has been lost. The public health consequences are serious and are likely to get worse before they get better — a load of unscientific nonsense has put us all at risk.

The story is appalling. It involves high drama, charismatic personalities, conspiracy theories, accusations, intimidation, and even death threats. It would make a good movie. It does make a good book: Dr. Paul Offit has explained what happened in Autism’s False Prophets: Bad Science, Risky Medicine, and the Search for a Cure.1 I can’t tell the whole story here, but I’ll try to cover the highlights as I understand them. I’ll include some new revelations that were not available to Offit when his book went to press. As I see it, there were 3 main stages to this fiasco:

1. the MMR scare,
2. the mercury/thimerosal scare, and
3. the vaccines-in-general scare.

The MMR Scare


In 1998 a British doctor named Andrew Wakefield published an article in the respected medical journal The Lancet2. He did intestinal biopsies via colonoscopy on 12 children with intestinal symptoms and developmental disorders, 10 of whom were autistic, and found a pattern of intestinal inflammation. The parents of 8 of the autistic children thought they had developed their autistic symptoms right after they got the MMR vaccine. The published paper stated clearly: “We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described. Virological studies are underway that may help to resolve this issue.”

Despite this disclaimer, Wakefield immediately held a press conference to say the MMR vaccine probably caused autism and to recommend stopping MMR injections. Instead, he recommended giving the 3 individual components separately at intervals of a year or more. The media exploded with warnings like “Ban Three-in-One Jab, Urge Doctors.” The components were not available as individual vaccines, so people simply stopped immunizing. The immunization rate in the U.K. dropped from 93% to 75% (and to 50% in the London area). Confirmed cases of measles in England and Wales rose from 56 in 1998 to 1348 in 2008; two children died. In one small hospital in Ireland, 100 children were admitted for pneumonia and brain swelling caused by measles and three of them died. So, 14 years after measles had been declared under control in the U.K. it was declared endemic again in 2008.

Wakefield’s data was later discredited (more about that later) but even if it had been right, it wouldn’t have been good science. To show that intestinal inflammation is linked to autism, you would have to compare the rate in autistic children to the rate in non-autistic children. Wakefield used no controls. To implicate the MMR vaccine, you would have to show that the rate of autism was greater in children who got the vaccine and verify that autism developed after the shot. Wakefield made no attempt to do that.

His thinking was fanciful and full of assumptions. He hypothesized that measles virus damaged the intestinal wall, that the bowel then leaked some unidentified protein, and that said protein went to the brain and somehow caused autism. There was no good rationale for separating and delaying the components, because if measles was the culprit, wouldn’t one expect it to cause the same harm when given individually? As one of his critics pointed out: “Single vaccines, spaced a year apart, clearly expose children to greater risk of infection, as well as additional distress and expense, and no evidence had been produced upon which to adopt such a policy.”

Wakefield had been involved in questionable research before. He published a study in 1993 where he allegedly found measles RNA in intestinal biopsies from patients with Crohn’s disease (an inflammatory bowel disease)3. He claimed that natural measles infections and measles vaccines were the cause of that disease. Others tried to replicate his findings and couldn’t. No one else could find measles RNA in Crohn’s patients; they determined that Crohn’s patients were no more likely to have had measles than other patients, and people who had had MMR vaccines were no more likely to develop Crohn’s. Wakefield had to admit he was wrong, and in 1998 he published another paper entitled “Measles RNA Is Not Detected in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.”4 In a related incident, at a national meeting he stated that Crohn’s patients had higher levels of measles antibody in their blood. An audience member said that was not true — he knew because he was the one who had personally done the blood tests Wakefield was referring to. Wakefield was forced to back down.

In 2002, Wakefield published another paper showing that measles RNA had been detected in intestinal biopsies of patients with bowel disease and developmental disorders.5 The tests were done at Unigenetics lab. Actually, Wakefield’s own lab had looked for measles RNA in the patients in the 1998 study. His research assistant, Nicholas Chadwick, later testified that he had been present in the operating room when intestinal biopsies and spinal fluid samples were obtained and had personally tested all the samples for RNA with a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. The results were all negative, and he testified that Wakefield knew the results were negative when he submitted his paper to The Lancet. Chadwick had asked that his name be taken off the paper. So the statement in the paper that “virologic studies were underway” was misleading. Virologic studies had already been done in Wakefield’s own lab and were negative. Wakefield was dissatisfied with those results and went to Unigenetics hoping for a different answer.

Soon Wakefield’s credibility started to dissolve. The Lancet retracted his paper. Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, described the original paper as “fatally flawed” and apologized for publishing it. Of Wakefield’s 12 co-authors, 10 issued a retraction:

We wish to make it clear that in this paper no causal link was established between (the) vaccine and autism, as the data were insufficient. However the possibility of such a link was raised, and consequent events have had major implications for public health. In view of this, we consider now is the appropriate time that we should together formally retract the interpretation placed upon these findings in the paper, according to precedent.

Attempts to replicate Wakefield’s study all failed. Other studies showed that the detection of measles virus was no greater in autistics, that the rate of intestinal disease was no greater in autistics, that there was no correlation between MMR and autism onset, and that there was no correlation between MMR and autism, period.

In 2001 the Royal Free Hospital asked Wakefield to resign. In 2003, Brian Deer began an extensive investigation6 leading to an exposé in the The Sunday Times and on British television. In 2005 the General Medical Council (the British equivalent of state medical licensing boards in the U.S.) charged Wakefield with several counts of professional misconduct.

One disturbing revelation followed another. They discovered that two years before his study was published, Wakefield had been approached by a lawyer representing several families with autistic children. The lawyer specifically hired Wakefield to do research to find justification for a class action suit against MMR manufacturers. The children of the lawyer’s clients were referred to Wakefield for the study, and 11 of his 12 subjects were eventually litigants. Wakefield failed to disclose this conflict of interest. He also failed to disclose how the subjects were recruited for his study.

Wakefield was paid a total of nearly half a million pounds plus expenses by the lawyer. The payments were billed through a company of Wakefield’s wife. He never declared his source of funding until it was revealed by Brian Deer. Originally he had denied being paid at all. Even after he admitted it, he lied about the amount he was paid. Before the study was published, Wakefield had filed patents for his own separate measles vaccine, as well as other autism-related products. He failed to disclose this significant conflict of interest. Human research must be approved by the hospital’s ethics committee. Wakefield’s study was not approved. When confronted, Wakefield first claimed that it was approved, then claimed he didn’t need approval. Wakefield bought blood samples for his research from children (as young as 4) attending his son’s birthday party. He callously joked in public about them crying, fainting and vomiting. He paid the kids £5 each.

con't
 
Dec 31, 2006
572
5
0
The General Medical Council accused him of ordering invasive and potentially harmful studies (colonoscopies and spinal taps) without proper approval and contrary to the children’s clinical interests, when these diagnostic tests were not indicated by the children’s symptoms or medical history. One child suffered multiple bowel perforations during the colonoscopy. Several had problems with the anesthetic. Children were subjected to sedation for other non-indicated tests like MRIs. Brian Deer was able to access the medical records of Wakefield’s subjects. He found that several of them had evidence of autistic symptoms documented in their medical records before they got the MMR vaccine. The intestinal biopsies were originally reported as normal by hospital pathologists. They were reviewed, re-interpreted, and reported as abnormal in Wakefield’s paper.

All the reports of measles RNA in intestinal biopsies came from one lab, Unigenetics. Other labs tried to replicate their results and failed. An investigation revealed that:

* Unigenetics found measles RNA with a test that should only detect DNA.
* They failed to use proper controls.
* The lab was contaminated with DNA from an adjoining Plasmid Room.
* Duplicate samples that disagreed were reported as positive.
* Positive controls were occasionally negative and negative ones positive.
* The lab was never accredited.
* It refused to take part in a quality control program.
* When tested by an outside investigator, it failed to identify which coded samples contained measles virus.
* The investigator said “I do not believe that there is any measles virus in any of the cases they have looked at.”
* The lab is no longer in business.

So both Wakefield and his study have been completely discredited. He moved to the U.S. and is now working in an autism clinic. He has many followers who still believe he was right.

The Mercury/Thimerosal Scare

In 1998, U.S. legislation mandated measuring mercury in foods and drugs. The data came in slowly, and by 1999 the FDA had learned that infants could get as much as 187.5 mcg of mercury from the thimerosal in all their vaccines. They were concerned because mercury is toxic. Mercury poisoning caused the Minamata disaster in Japan; however, that was methylmercury and the mercury in vaccines was ethylmercury. The amount of mercury in vaccines was within recommended guidelines. EPA guidelines for permissible mercury exposure were based on methylmercury and were conservative — they were keyed to protect the most vulnerable patients, fetuses. There were no EPA guidelines for ethylmercury, but it was considered to be far less dangerous because it is eliminated more rapidly from the body.

Two mothers of autistic children published their own “research” saying that the symptoms of autism were identical to those of mercury poisoning.7 I don’t agree. You can look up the descriptions of mercury poisoning and autism and draw your own conclusions. I don’t see how anyone could confuse the two — their presentations are entirely different, with only a few symptoms that could be interpreted as similar.

Thimerosal is a preservative that allows vaccines to be sold in multi-dose vials. It contains ethylmercury. It was tested and found to be safe before it was added to vaccines. Animal studies showed no adverse effects. In 1929 in Indiana it was tested as a treatment in a meningitis outbreak — adults injected with 2 million mcg (10,000 times the total amount in all children’s vaccines) didn’t develop symptoms of mercury poisoning.

A study from the Seychelles showed that children getting high doses of methylmercury from fish did not develop neurologic symptoms. A study of children in the Faroes who were exposed in utero to whale meat highly contaminated with methylmercury showed subtle neurologic abnormalities (not autism), but a causal connection was not clear because the fish there were also contaminated with PCBs. The World Health Organization concluded:

The theoretical risk from exposure to thimerosal has to be balanced against the known high risk of having no preservative in vaccines. Therefore, WHO, UNICEF, the European Agency for Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMEA), and other key agencies continue to recommend the use of vaccines containing this preservative because of the proven benefit of vaccines in preventing death and disease and the lack of data indicating harm.​

In 1999 the U.S. removed thimerosal from vaccines. Why? The decision was not based on evidence but on one person’s opinion. Neal Halsey railroaded the committee and threatened to hold his own press conference if they didn’t do what he wanted. He meant well. His passion convinced the other committee members to invoke the precautionary principle — essentially bending over backwards to prevent any possible harm from a high total body burden of mercury from a combination of diet, environmental and vaccine sources. He didn’t even consider autism: he was only concerned about possible subtle neurologic damage.

They announced their decision in words guaranteed to confuse the public and create suspicion: “current levels of thimerosal will not hurt children, but reducing those levels will make safe vaccines even safer.” A 2007 editorial8 in The New England Journal of Medicine stated:

Although the precautionary principle assumes that there is no harm in exercising caution, the alarm caused by the removal of thimerosal from vaccines has been quite harmful. For instance, after the July 1999 announcement by the CDC and AAP, about 10 percent of hospitals suspended use of the hepatitis B vaccine for all newborns, regardless of their level of risk. [Because a thimerosal-free hepatitis B vaccine was not available.] One 3-month-old child born to a Michigan mother infected with hepatitis B virus died of overwhelming infection.​

It went on to point out:

The notion that thimerosal caused autism has given rise to a cottage industry of charlatans offering false hope, partly in the form of mercury-chelating agents. In August 2005, a 5-year-old autistic boy in suburban Pittsburgh died from an arrhythmia caused by the injection of the chelating agent EDTA. Although the notion that thimerosal causes autism has now been disproved by several excellent epidemiologic studies, about 10,000 autistic children in the United States receive mercury-chelating agents every year.​

A further insanity has been perpetrated by the father-and-son team of Mark and David Geier. They claimed that autistics have premature puberty and high testosterone levels (there is no evidence that this is true). They hypothesized that testosterone forms sheet-like complexes with mercury in the brain (there is no evidence that this is true), preventing mercury’s removal by chelation. Their solution? They administered the drug Lupron to lower testosterone levels to supposedly facilitate mercury excretion. The treatment amounts to chemical castration.

Lupron is sometimes ordered by the courts to chemically castrate sex offenders, and it is used to treat precocious puberty and certain other medical conditions. It is not a benign drug. It can interfere with normal development and puberty and can put children’s heart and bones and their future fertility at risk. The treatment involves painful daily injections and costs $5000 to $6000 a month. The Geiers use 10 times the recommended dose. The company that makes Lupron does not support its use for this purpose.

Like Wakefield, the Geiers have been accused of professional misconduct. They built their own lab in their basement and formed their own institute to conduct Lupron studies. Then they formed their own Institutional Review Board (IRB) to approve studies. IRBs are required by law and must follow strict guidelines to ensure that studies are ethical and to protect the rights of subjects. The IRB they formed was illegal. They packed the board with friends and relatives: every single member of this IRB was either one of the Geiers, an anti-thimerosal activist, a Geier associate, or a lawyer suing on behalf of “vaccine-injured” clients. One was the mother of a child who was a subject in the research. Even worse, they let the principal investigator sit as the chair of the IRB overseeing his own research protocols. Oh, and the IRB wasn’t even registered until 2 years after the research was done.

Mark Geier has made a career of testifying as an expert witness in autism cases. He has not impressed the judges. Here are a few of the judge’s comments:

* “Seriously intellectually dishonest”
* “ … not reliable or grounded in scientific methodology and procedure … his testimony is subjective belief and unsupported speculation.”
* “I cannot give his opinion any credence.”
* “ … a professional witness in areas for which he has no training, expertise, and experience.”

When thimerosal was removed from vaccines, there were no studies showing that it was harmful. After its removal, study after study showed that it was not harmful. But activist groups didn’t let the new evidence interfere with their beliefs.

Anti-vaccine groups have viciously attacked medical doctors and researchers for simply stating what the current scientific evidence shows. They accuse them of being shills for “Big Pharma” or covering up for government agencies, and they call them offensive names; but they don’t stop there. They threaten people who write about the scientific evidence, and they threaten their children. Dr. Offit, the author of Autism’s False Prophets, received a direct death threat that got the FBI involved. He had to use a bodyguard and cancel a book tour. One threatening phone call ominously demonstrated that the caller knew Offit’s children’s names, ages, and where they went to school. Another scientist who received threats was so afraid for her children’s safety that she vowed never to write anything about autism again. One anti-vaccine activist had the bad grace to accuse science blogger Orac of lying when he said he was mourning his mother-in-law’s death from cancer. She refused to believe he could be sorry his mother-in-law died because he’s not sorry about supporting vaccines that kill children.

There was no thimerosal in any vaccine except the flu vaccine after 2002. The “mercury militia” expected autism rates to drop, thereby proving the mercury connection. Autism rates rose. Instead of relinquishing their belief, they made implausible attempts to implicate new sources of atmospheric mercury, from cremations of bodies with mercury amalgam fillings or from pollution wafted across the Pacific from China.

con't
 
Dec 31, 2006
572
5
0
The Vaccines-In-General Scare

If the MMR scare can be attributed to Andrew Wakefield and the mercury scare to Neal Halsey, the next stage of hysteria is epitomized by Jenny McCarthy, actress and anti-vaccine activist extraordinaire.

Jenny’s son Evan is autistic. At first she subscribed to the fanciful notion that she was an Indigo mother and Evan was a Crystal child. Indigos are “difficult” children who are alleged to possess special traits or abilities such as telepathy, empathy, and creativity, and are said to represent the next stage in human evolution. Many of them fit the diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Crystal children represent an even more advanced evolutionary step. They are “so sensitive, so vulnerable to the world around them, that they go inward, disconnect as best they can from even humans and do their best to survive in a world where they really don’t yet fit.” They are often diagnosed as autistic.

After a while McCarthy gave up on that fantasy and accepted that Evan was autistic. She became convinced that vaccines had caused his autism. She treated him with unproven dietary restrictions, anti-yeast treatments, and supplements, and claims to have cured him. She thinks her “Mommy instincts” are more valid than science. She says “My science is Evan, and he’s at home. That’s my science.” She realizes that withholding vaccines will lead to the deaths of children. As quoted by Time magazine:

I do believe sadly it’s going to take some diseases coming back to realize that we need to change and develop vaccines that are safe. If the vaccine companies are not listening to us, it’s their f___ing fault that the diseases are coming back. They’re making a product that’s s___. If you give us a safe vaccine, we’ll use it. It shouldn’t be polio versus autism.​

She and her partner Jim Carrey have spoken out at every opportunity on talk shows, on the Internet, and through books and public appearances. When someone questions Jenny’s beliefs her usual tactic is to try to shout them down. She is supported by maverick doctor Jay Gordon, who values listening to parents over science and who supports a delayed vaccine schedule not because of any evidence but just because he thinks it’s a good idea. On one talk show, a pregnant mother with several autistic children tried to tell Gordon that her child who had the worst autism was the one who had not been vaccinated. He not only refused to listen to what she was saying but tried to drown her out, loudly insisting she mustn’t vaccinate the new baby.

A member of Quackwatch’s “Healthfraud” online discussion list reported sitting next to Evan’s paternal grandmother at a dinner. Grandma said Evan’s symptoms of autism were evident before he was vaccinated, and he is not doing as well as Jenny says. Grandma is writing her own book — I look forward to its revelations.

Jenny and her cohorts claim they are not anti-vaccine, but they are certainly a good facsimile thereof. The goalposts keep moving. First it was the MMR vaccine, then it was thimerosal, then it was mercury from all sources, then it was other vaccine ingredients, then it was too many vaccines, then it was giving vaccines too early. They will not be satisfied until science can offer a 100% safe and a 100% effective vaccine proven to have no side effects of any kind even in a rare susceptible individual. That’s not going to happen in this universe.

The other vaccine ingredients that have been questioned include formaldehyde, aluminum, ether, anti-freeze, and human aborted fetal tissue. Scientists have explained over and over that these ingredients are either not present in vaccines or are harmless, but activists ignore the facts and keep making the same false claims. Formaldehyde is harmless in small amounts and is even produced naturally in the human body. Aluminum is an adjuvant used to increase the efficacy of vaccines, and is not harmful. Ether might be used in the manufacturing process but is not present in the vaccines. There is no ethylene glycol or even diethylene glycol in vaccines. (Anti-freeze is ethylene glycol.) And to obtain enough virus to make a vaccine, the virus must be grown in tissue cultures that were originally derived from monkey, chicken, or sometimes human fetal cells; but there is no human or animal tissue of any kind present in the vaccine itself. Apple trees grow in soil, but there is no soil in applesauce.

Some anti-vaccine websites perpetuate the myth that infectious diseases were already disappearing and that the vaccines had nothing to do with it. Those myths are easily dispelled by historical data. Vaccine critics ignore the large body of evidence from incidents around the world where as the vaccination rate dropped, the rate of disease rose; and when the vaccination rate rose again, the disease rate dropped. No one can seriously deny the effectiveness of vaccines. They are the most impressive accomplishment of modern medicine.

Giving up the known benefits of vaccines because of a vague hypothetical possibility of risk is a poor trade-off. We were able to eradicate smallpox, and we ought to be able to eradicate all the diseases that are spread solely by human-to-human contact. Once enough people have been vaccinated to eradicate the disease, no one will ever have to be vaccinated for that disease again. Smallpox is long gone; polio and measles are next on the list. Polio had been reduced to only 3 countries a few years ago. Then Nigeria stopped vaccinating due to rumors that the vaccines were an American plot to sterilize their children or give them AIDS. The polio rate soared and the disease broke out to several other countries, as far away as Malaysia.

When the rate of immunization reaches a certain level, the population is protected by what we call herd immunity. It means there are not enough susceptible people for the disease to keep spreading through a community. In many places the herd immunity has already been lost. It is only a matter of time before diseases break out again. One traveler from a country with polio could reintroduce the disease into the U.S. Lowered vaccination rates endanger even those who have been vaccinated, because the protection is not 100%. People who are immunosuppressed, chronically ill, or too young to have been vaccinated are also put at risk. Parents who choose to delay vaccination are prolonging their children’s period of risk. And they are endangering everyone else’s public health.

Scientists had been urged to “listen to the parents.” They did listen to the parents and then conducted research to test the parents’ hypotheses. There were various kinds of studies in different countries by different research groups. The results were consistent:

* 10 studies showed MMR doesn’t cause autism
* 6 studies showed thimerosal doesn’t cause autism
* 3 studies showed thimerosal doesn’t cause subtle neurological problems

Now it’s the parents who won’t listen to the scientists.

Autistic children and their parents are being misled and victimized with useless, untested, disproven, expensive, time-consuming, and even dangerous treatments. Despite the evidence that mercury doesn’t cause autism, children are still being treated with IV chelation to remove mercury — at least one child has died as a result. Along with Lupron injections for chemical castration, children are being treated with secretin, restricted diets, supplements of all kinds, intravenous hydrogen peroxide, DAN (Defeat Autism Now) protocols, cranial manipulation, facilitated communication, and other nonsense. One family was strongly urged to take out a second mortgage on their home so they could buy a home hyperbaric oxygen chamber.

The real tragedy is that all this hoopla is diverting attention from research into effective treatments (usually behavioral) and into the real causes of autism (almost certainly genetic, with environmental triggers not ruled out).

An anti-anti-vaccine backlash is now afoot. Outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases are being reported. Scientists are speaking out. Blogs like Respectful Insolence and Science-Based Medicine have covered the subject in depth. The Chicago Tribune published an exposé of the Geiers.9 Even Reader’s Digest has contradicted Jenny. They said that vaccines save lives and do not cause autism and they stressed that the science is not on Jenny’s side. Let us hope that sanity will prevail before too many more children die from vaccine-preventable diseases. They are dying now. The Jenny McCarthy Body Count webpage is keeping track of the numbers.
 

blazejowski

Panty Connoisseur
Dec 20, 2004
3,959
196
63
You know, with that sig pic Isabelle could tell me anything, and I would just nod like an idiot.... ;):D
 

TheGuy

Banned
Jul 26, 2003
1,183
7
0
Vancouver
Due to the intimate contacts ;) we engage in, I believe all of us, especially the ladies, should consider getting the vaccines.

I think anybody who works extensively with the public (teachers, medical works, restaurant staff, etc.) should get the shots to minimize the flu generally being spread.

I think the whole Swine Flu thing is a big medical industry rip-off but clearly there are some benefits.

Immunization has minimized the spread of many minor and major illnesses. The Hype is, however, out of control with the swine flu.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adriana✿

CountDankula

Banned
Oct 23, 2009
4
0
0
If I wasn't such a big idiot, I might have something intelligent to post
 

CountDankula

Banned
Oct 23, 2009
4
0
0
I really have no life.
Sad as it may sound, I figure spending my time here is safer than letting me go outside.
 

CountDankula

Banned
Oct 23, 2009
4
0
0
Mod-1 can lick my balls.

He might consider it.. once you get out of the BC Regional Mental Health unit. Last we heard you were scheduled for release sometime after 2050.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CountDankula

Banned
Oct 23, 2009
4
0
0
Isabelle is absolutely CORRECT!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MrPeterNorth

Banned
Aug 12, 2006
897
7
0
I don't believe in the BS of this "flu". Nothing more than a way for drug companies to try and spruce up a failing economy. The CDC is a military/government run organization lest we forget.

And 30 years later no cure for HIV/AIDS still. Amazing really.
 

blazejowski

Panty Connoisseur
Dec 20, 2004
3,959
196
63
Derka derka derp derp derp....
Same old, same old, Silkywiliky....


The one on the right is the "entity" that controls Count Silky Dankula - the big pooner on the left!



"A tin foil hat is a piece of headgear made from one or more sheets of aluminium foil or similar material. Alternatively it may be a conventional hat lined with foil. Some people wear the hats in the belief that they act to shield the brain from such influences as electromagnetic fields, or against mind control and/or mind reading.

The concept of wearing a tin foil hat for protection from such threats has become a popular stereotype and term of derision; the phrase serves as a byword for paranoia and is associated with conspiracy theorists.

The reasons for their use include the supposed prevention of perceived harassment from governments, spies or paranormal beings. These draw on the stereotypical images of mind control operating by ESP or technological means, like microwave radiation. The effectiveness of tin foil hats is disputable; however, the belief in their necessity is popularly associated with paranoia or mental illness."
 

zaig

Active member
Nov 21, 2003
283
32
28
I would really like to thank Isabelle for contributing factual information on this issue.

There is just way too much mis-information out there and it can cause concern for many people. The choice has and will be yours regarding this vaccination. I don't see anyone running around with a vaccination needle wanting to inject people.

One of the biggest lies out there now regarding the shot is about the very sad story of the Washington Redskin cheerleader. While our thoughts and sympathy go out to her, her flu shot had nothing to do with her condition. Isabelle posting by a very reputable Dr. who specializes in that area has essentially stated her symptons have nothing to do with the Guillian-Barre syndrome. It doesn't dimish her plight, but spreading fear about this is what I think is reprehensable.

The other crazy claim that just keeps coming back is that of the Mercury (thermisol) in the shot. Well, if you believe that, don't eat any tuna fish sandwiches. It has more mercury in it than the shot.

Again, thank you Isabelle for a calm intelligent approach to this situation.
 

Thatotherguy

Active member
Jan 31, 2008
1,132
12
38
You just showed the level of denial your in. She was perfectly healthy and she gets a shot. Now she cant walk and barely talk. How fucking stupid are you?
Obviously he's smarter than you, because he understands that correlation does not imply causation. I know, I know, it's a far too complicated concept for you to grasp. Just ignore it with some hand-waving about everyone else being sheep.
 
Ashley Madison
Vancouver Escorts