Vaccination & epidemic

[Flint]

I apologize--I should have worded my post more carefully.
I take responsibility for the fact that its intent was unclear.

By the way, what "routine" means to me is something most like:

5. Computers.
a. a complete set of coded instructions directing a computer to perform a series of operations.
b. a series of operations performed by the computer.

:::ƒucks into thread:::

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Incorrect. There's no evidence thimerosol is dangerous, but removing it can make vaccines more dangerous, because less effective preservatives are used.

Incorrect. There is enough evidence that thimerosal is dangerous that the CDC readily admits that babies under 6 months should not get the flu vaccine, or should get a non-thimerosal dose. I happen to disagree with where they've drawn the line, but they've drawn it. And other preservatives are not in any way "less effective;" what they are is more expensive. Then of course there are several delivery methods that don't require preservatives at all.

This is kind of like your argument awhile back (in another thread, I think) that dried fruits had to be coated in sulfur dioxide in order to prevent them from growing mold. It simply isn't true. I currently have 5 different bags of various dried fruits that are not preserved in any way. I can't tell you how long they'd last without growing mold, but I generally take at least a few months to finish them. But they are more expensive.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Prefer evidence.

So do I. I wonder why they won't do double-blind studies with vaccinated and unvaccinated control groups?

Originally Posted by Undertoad

You have the intelligence, but not the education or background to determine if they do.

It doesn't take education or background to determine whether a study exists. "Honestly assessing" risk does not involve sitting in their offices and pondering the idea.

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Cut those numbers in half and we still have a good case. If you want to double or quadruple those numbers or more, tell people the flu vaccine will permanently fuck them up.

I thought you preferred evidence? There were studies linked earlier in this thread that showed that a decline in the number of flu vaccinations did not lead to an increase in the number of flu infections or deaths. Your entire argument is predicated on the idea that the flu vaccine actually does anything to stop the flu, and the evidence shows it doesn't do that. Just like Gardasil doesn't lower the rate of cervical cancer.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Incorrect. There is enough evidence that thimerosal is dangerous that the CDC readily admits that babies under 6 months should not get the flu vaccine, or should get a non-thimerosal dose.

Wikipedia: (bold mine of course)

The FDA noted that while the vaccination schedule at that time might have exceeded EPA standards for mercury exposure during the first 6 months of life, it did not exceed those of the FDA, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), or WHO. The FDA also noted difficulty interpreting toxicity of the ethylmercury in thiomersal because guidelines for mercury toxicity were based primarily on studies of methylmercury, a different mercury compound with different toxicologic properties. Despite the lack of convincing evidence of toxicity of thiomersal when used as a vaccine preservative, the USPHS and AAP determined that thiomersal should be removed from vaccines as a purely precautionary measure. This action was based on the precautionary principle, which assumes that there is no harm in exercising caution even if it later turns out to be unnecessary. The CDC and AAP reasoned that despite the lack of evidence of significant harm in the use of thiomersal in vaccines, the removal of this preservative would increase the public confidence in the safety of vaccines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thimerosal

Concerns based on extrapolations from methylmercury caused thiomersal to be removed from U.S. childhood vaccines, starting in 1999. Since then, it has been found that ethylmercury is cleared from the body and the brain significantly faster than methylmercury, so the late-1990s risk assessments turned out to be overly conservative. A 2008 study found that the half-life of blood mercury after vaccination averages 3.7 days for newborns and infants, much shorter than the 44 days for methylmercury.

Further detail:

To illustrate, researchers cite that infants in the 6-month-old group – who, in their lifetimes, had encountered more total ethyl mercury that any other group studied – still had the same pre-vaccination blood-mercury levels before their checkups as most 2-month-olds had before theirs. This suggests that, before each round of shots, the mercury has plenty of time to be cleared.

tl;dr: The ban was precautionary, not based on evidence of harm. Some of the considerations of harm were based on studies of the toxicology of methylmercury, even though the metabolite of Thimerosol is actually ethylmercury. Since the ban, ethylmercury has been found to be much less accumulative than methylmercury.

I thought you preferred evidence? There were studies linked earlier in this thread that showed that a decline in the number of flu vaccinations did not lead to an increase in the number of flu infections or deaths. Your entire argument is predicated on the idea that the flu vaccine actually does anything to stop the flu, and the evidence shows it doesn't do that.

http://www.cdc.gov/FLU/PROFESSIONALS...tivenessqa.htm



It's confusing, because the effectiveness varies from year to year as scientists to get the exact strain for that year. So a study of effectiveness should take into account overall effectiveness, not the effectiveness of one year. Overall:

Overall, in years when the vaccine and circulating viruses are well-matched, influenza vaccines can be expected to reduce laboratory-confirmed influenza by approximately 70% to 90% in healthy adults <65 years of age. Several studies have also found reductions in febrile illness, influenza-related work absenteeism, antibiotic use, and doctor visits.

In years when the vaccine strains are not well matched to circulating strains, vaccine effectiveness can be variably reduced. For example, in a study among persons 50-64 years during the 2003-04 season, when the vaccine strains were not optimally matched, inactivated influenza vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza was 60% among persons without high-risk conditions, and 48% among those with high risk conditions, but it was 90% against laboratory-confirmed influenza hospitalization (Herrera, et al Vaccine 2006). A study in children during the same year found vaccine effectiveness of about 50% against medically diagnosed influenza and pneumonia without laboratory confirmation (Ritzwoller, Pediatrics 2005). However, in some years when vaccine and circulating strains were not well-matched, no vaccine effectiveness can be demonstrated in some studies, even in healthy adults (Bridges, JAMA 2000). It is not possible in advance of the influenza season to predict how well the vaccine and circulating strains will be matched, and how that match may affect the degree of vaccine effectiveness.

[Undertoad]

http://www.anapsid.org/cnd/diffdx/mercurysources.html

As a sidebar, interesting: things other than vaccines that are preserved with Thimerosol:

Antitoxins (! - UT)
Cosmetics, including makeup removers, mascara, and eye moisturizers
Desensitizing solutions
Ear, eye, and nose drops
Eye ointments
Mercurochrome®
Merthiolate topical antiseptic
Soap-free cleaners
Some contact lens solutions
Topical medicated sprays
Topical medications
Tuberculin tests

Other sources of mercury:

Adhesives
Air conditioner filters
Amalgams (silver fillings)
Auto exhaust
Batteries
Bleached flour
Calomel (talc, body powders)
Cinnabar (used in jewelry)
Drinking water (tap and well), plumbing and piping
Fabric softeners
Felt
Floor waxes and polishes
Laxatives
Paint pigments and solvents
Pesticides
Processed foods
Vegetables and fruits exposed to pesticides
Wood preservatives

[Clodfobble]

Of course they called it a precautionary measure. Congress had already ordered them to do it, so they put up their hands and said, "Okay, if you insist." The book you ordered spent quite a few pages discussing studies on the relative dangers of both ethyl and methylmercury, why rely on Wikipedia?

To illustrate, researchers cite that infants in the 6-month-old group – who, in their lifetimes, had encountered more total ethyl mercury that any other group studied – still had the same pre-vaccination blood-mercury levels before their checkups as most 2-month-olds had before theirs. This suggests that, before each round of shots, the mercury has plenty of time to be cleared.

Part of the problem with mercury specifically is that it doesn't just float around in the blood, it gets picked up and stored in various cells in the body. There have been several studies with autistic kids who were given blood tests that showed negligible levels of mercury; then they were given chelation drugs and they peed very high levels that were completely unpredicted by the blood tests. In fact, one big connection that's just started to be explored this year is the fact that fungus can hold up to 70% of its weight as mercury, and there is a theory that one reason most autistic kids end up with severe yeast infections is that the body is deliberately allowing the fungus to fluorish because it captures the mercury rather than letting it lodge in the brain and elsewhere. No idea if that theory will pan out, but it's being studied. The fact remains that blood tests are not a reliable indicator of the total amount of mercury stored in the body.

And you are correct, there are trace amounts of mercury in all of those things listed, or at least some brands of them. Of course, we're also not injecting pesticides, fabric softeners, or batteries directly into an infant's bloodstream. And for older children who, for some reason, have demonstrably had their metabolic processes broken, relative lifetime exposure to those products has been directly correlated to the amount of mercury they pee out when given chelation drugs.

As has been mentioned time and again, these levels of heavy metals are apparently safe for the majority of the population, except for kids who for some reason can't seem to process them out. Until they can identify those newborns, or determine what is happening to them that breaks the cycle sometime in their infancy, they have no business using it as a preservative when there are other alternatives available.


As for your chart, you are correct, I misspoke: increasing vaccine rates (and well-matched vaccine strains) does reduce the overall number of infection cases. It does not reduce the overall number of deaths. So I will not take personal responsibility for hypothetically "quadrupling" the influenza death rate as you suggested.

[jinx]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Wikipedia: (bold mine of course)

Why did you leave this part out?

Thiomersal is very toxic by inhalation, ingestion, and in contact with skin (EC hazard symbol T+), with a danger of cumulative effects. It is also very toxic to aquatic organisms and may cause long-term adverse effects in aquatic environments (EC hazard symbol N).[8] In the body, it is metabolized or degraded to ethylmercury (C2H5Hg+) and thiosalicylate.[2]


Few studies of the toxicity of thiomersal in humans have been performed.

[jinx]

The ban was precautionary, not based on evidence of harm.

But here's some evidence

Thimerosal at low nanomolar (nM) concentrations induced significant cellular toxicity in human neuronal and fetal cells. Thimerosal-induced cytoxicity is similar to that observed in AD pathophysiologic studies. Thimerosal was found to be significantly more toxic than the other metal compounds examined. Future studies need to be conducted to evaluate additional mechanisms underlying Thimerosal-induced cellular damage and assess potential co-exposures to other compounds that may increase or decrease Thimerosal-mediated toxicity.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by jinx

Why did you leave this part out?

Cos we're not talking about thiomersal that's inhaled, ingested, and/or in contact with skin.

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by jinx

But here's some evidence

That's very strong. Fetuses should not be exposed to Thiomersal via the mother.

[Clodfobble]

Do you still trust the health organization that specifically recommends pregnant women get the seasonal flu shot with thimerosal, even moreso than the regular population?

[lumberjim]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

The numbers are available. Regular flu: 100,000 hospitalizations per year, about 35,000 deaths per year. I could not find a death attributed to the regular flu vaccine this year. H1N1 has about 13 deaths due to vaccine -- although one is from a motorcycle injury, so I'm not sure how that works.

i met a man a couple weeks ago whose wife was paralyzed by a flu vaccine. he was a plumber. regular dude.....he and his daughter were buying a car, and the trade was in his wife's name.....i had to have the salesman go over to their house to get the title signed by her because she couldn't come to us easily. in 1999, she got a flu shot. the next day, she was in the hospital.

she's not dead, so i guess she doesnt appear either...

have you ever met anyone whose friend or relative died of the flu?

i haven't

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Do you still trust the health organization that specifically recommends pregnant women get the seasonal flu shot with thimerosal, even moreso than the regular population?

Yes, that study is from this summer and requires additional confirming studies and peer review before it becomes science - but if I were pregnant, I wouldn't get the shot based on this preliminary stage of the evidence.

[Clodfobble]

What if you had a baby older than 6 months? Would you give your baby the flu shot, based on this preliminary stage of the evidence?

[Undertoad]

Probably. For one thing, it's a moot point because the only flu vaccine licensed for 6 months-23 months is thimerosal-free, and the CDC estimates there is enough thimerosal-free vaccine for every child aged 2-5. But age 2 sounds like a critical point:

Research suggests that healthy children under the age of 2 are more likely than older children and as likely as people over the age of 65 to be hospitalized with flu complications

-CDC

[skysidhe]

The influenza virus is constantly mutating and so the effectiveness rate for the flu vaccines is set at 40%.

That isn't a good percentage to convince me it is helpful or worth the risk of putting toxins in my body yearly.

When it is stated that what people die from are complications of pneumonia then I wonder why not just give people the pneumonia vaccine instead?

You only need one every ten years and protects from 23 strains of pneumonia. The 23 strains that cause the vast majority of influenza deaths.
I just wonder why the medical community doesn't push the one vaccine that actually targets the culprits that will kill.

Maybe off topic a little but it's a curious fact.

A couple of weeks ago I found a mercury calculator from the National Vaccine Information Center. It's interesting.

http://www.vaccine-tlc.org/calc.html