Sign in to follow this  
lds2

Vaccines and Mercury - My research on Safety

Recommended Posts

This is a place to keep my research regarding Vaccines/mercury.

Vaccines have long been something that I have studied as I have a son who is autistic but who also has had many"autoimmune" (and other) issues such as Inflammatory Bowel Disease, tourette's, seizures, etc.

For years the medical establishment claimed that there is no association between auto-immune disease and autism. But I have known that there is an auto-immune link as many parents report similar issues in their child/children as I have seen in mine.

Whether to give my son more vaccines has been a huge parenting decision for me and so I think this is probably the best place to put my research as I think other parents may be concerned with this issue also.

So the mercury and vaccines safety debate is something that I have folllowed and studied for many years now. I have even read articles from "experts" saying that mercury has been found to be good for you as data is manipulated to "prove" that it is harmless, even though it is one of the most damaging "neurotoxins" existing in the world.

In this most recent article you will notice that they talk of natural sources of mercury as well as that fish you eat can be contaminated with mercury. But they say nothing about vaccines, mercury/silver fillings or HF corn syrup which are also some of the major contributors to our "mercury load" of toxins in our bodies.

HF Corn Syrup article...

Almost half of tested samples of commercial high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) contained mercury.

http://blog.foodfacts.com/index.php/...tains-mercury/

Vaccine/mercury article...

This (flu shot) vaccine contains 25 micrograms of ethyl Mercury in one dose...The CDC believes that the average 110-pound woman is allowed to have 5 micrograms per day without adverse reactions. If she were to get a flu shot and have a tuna fish sandwich for lunch she would have just received 42 micrograms of Mercury, eight times the safe level...If you look at the MSDS for Thimerosal, it says, "Exposure to mercury in utero and in children can cause mild to severe mental retardation and mild to severe motor coordination impairment." Eli Lilly MSDS June 13, 1991.

Flu shot

When mercury poisoned, women exposed to mercury when pregnant actually do better than most others in the population because the mercury goes into the fetus and so causes little damage to the mother herself.

***

So here is a "blurb" from the article out this weekend...

A new large study of more than 2,000 US women found an association between mercury exposure and elevated levels of a thyroid antibody that is often higher in patients with autoimmune diseases, conditions in which immune system mistakes some part of the body as a pathogen and attacks its own cells...Previous findings had tied mercury to certain health problems including heart and nervous immune diseases particularly in women of childbearing age and young children.

Investment Watch Blog – 2012

Edited by lds2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to pull out my credentials on this topic.

I'm a biostatistician for one of the world's leading research hospitals. I'm very familiar with statistics in medicine and very good at critically reviewing medical research. I have a BA in math and an MS in statistics and there are few people on this forum as qualified as I am to comment on medical research.

I do not work for pharmaceuticals nor do I receive any income from sources that would create a conflict of interests for me.

With those credentials, I will adamantly defend the conclusion that there is no evidence of a link between vaccinations autism spectrum disorders. Time and time again, epidemiological research has demonstrated childhood vaccination to be safe and not to be a serious contributor to childhood disease.

Talking about mercury (specifically thimerosal) and childhood vaccinations is a moot point these days. Child dosed vaccines no longer contain thimerosal; they haven't since 2000. For adults, the flu shot is one of the few vaccinations in which it is still used.

I question your claim that the limit of safe exposure to mercury for women is 5 micograms per day. The CDC reports that the level of mercury associated with health problems is 5.8 micrograms/liter of whole blood. The human body carries between 5 to 6 liters of blood. For health problems to develop, a person would need to be exposed to enough mercury to raise the blood concentration above 5.8 micrograms/liter and sustain that level for a period of time. One time exposure to mercury will not necessarily cause mercury poisoning.

It is well known that lower concentrations of mercury can cause problems for a fetus, which is why women are encouraged not to eat seafood (which often has higher levels of mercury) and why flu shots for pregnant women don't contain thimerosal.

Associations between mercury and auto-immune diseases do not imply vaccines as the root cause. In fact, vaccinations are likely not a contributor. In adults, vaccinations occur infrequently enough that exposure isn't sustained long enough to create problems.

The anti-vaccine crusade is based on pseudo-science and is continually debunked by sound and credible research. It would be nice if the pseudo-science would go away so that we could spend the resources needed to debunk it on programs and research that might break new ground in medicine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except for the nasal spray I have never heard of a flu shot without thimerosal, if there is such a thing it would be news to me and I stay up on this kind of research. Even sick children are given flu shots with thimerosal at least at our health department last time I checked. Vaccines for pre-teens, teens and adults usually have the full amount of mercury in them which is a concern especially as they receive multiple "boosters," flu shots and VD vaccines.

One time exposure for those who can detoxify is not an a huge issue. But there is a segment of society who's body's are so compromised that they cannot detoxify toxins well, and for some at all. It is for these people, particularly the old, pregnant women and children that I am most concerned. I believe that my son fall's into this category and test results concur.

But our mercury burden doesn't come just from vaccines, it comes from our environment right now particularly volcanic ash, it comes from silver/mercury amalgams in mouths, in the air (from cremation) and eventually in our water, HF corn syrup, vaccinations, sea food, toxins released from manufacturers into the water and air, broken flourescent lightbulbs and flourescent lamps, coal and gold mines/refineries are particular polluters. "Other important human-generated sources include gold production, non-ferrous metal production, cement production, waste disposal, human crematoria, caustic soda production, pig iron and steel production, mercury production (mostly for batteries), and biomass burning. "Wiki

Research shows that when mercury is combined with other metals such as aluminum and some chemicals it can be much more toxic for our bodies than mercury alone. I believe we can all agree that we live in a toxic soup and we have no idea how the thousands of man-made chemicals as well as natural elements etc. found in nature combine to effect our health.

We will just have to disagree on the whole epidemiological research thing because when you follow the money particularly, you find many questionable practices, particularly with the researchers (and who they work for before and after their research and who funds it, etc.) and the statistical methods/data sets chosen, etc. etc. etc.

It is my belief that many of a whole generation of children have been damaged...but I don't believe it is just mercury that is the culprit, but it is one of them.

.

Edited by lds2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This is one topic that, as a mother and a citizen of the world, gets my blood boiling. I'll leave my opinion on the topic at this: correlation does not not not not not equal causation. Most of us with young children didn't have to live through times when these diseases ravaged, deformed, and even killed children. We can rest comfortably on our safe little laurels for now, but I fear a resurgence in diseases that have almost been eradicated if this anti-vax movement keeps momentum. It is irresponsible to our children and our community to refuse inoculations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread reminds me of when I used to argue with anti-mormon countercultists. Nobody ever budged a single inch in their beliefs, but the folks who lurked and watched the battle were able to decide for themselves which side had the better hand.

I know which side I stand on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've often wondered when some claim to have "done their research," are they believing one side of the research because that's what THEY want to believe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except for the nasal spray I have never heard of a flu shot without thimerosal, if there is such a thing it would be news to me and I stay up on this kind of research. Even sick children are given flu shots with thimerosal at least at our health department last time I checked. Vaccines for pre-teens, teens and adults usually have the full amount of mercury in them which is a concern especially as they receive multiple "boosters," flu shots and VD vaccines.

CDC - Seasonal Influenza (Flu) - Questions & Answers - Thimerosal and 2010-2011 Seasonal Flu Vaccines

And again, in order for it to be a problem, there would need to be enough injections to raise the blood concentration about 5.8 micrograms/liter for a sustained period of time. Instantaneous exposure is not the issue--prolonged exposure is.

One time exposure for those who can detoxify is not an a huge issue. But there is a segment of society who's body's are so compromised that they cannot detoxify toxins well, and for some at all. It is for these people, particularly the old, pregnant women and children that I am most concerned. I believe that my son fall's into this category and test results concur.

These are known risk groups for whom thimerosal-free vaccinations are made.

But our mercury burden doesn't come just from vaccines, it comes from our environment right now particularly volcanic ash, it comes from silver/mercury amalgams in mouths, in the air (from cremation) and eventually in our water, HF corn syrup, vaccinations, sea food, toxins released from manufacturers into the water and air, broken flourescent lightbulbs and flourescent lamps, coal and gold mines/refineries are particular polluters. "Other important human-generated sources include gold production, non-ferrous metal production, cement production, waste disposal, human crematoria, caustic soda production, pig iron and steel production, mercury production (mostly for batteries), and biomass burning. "Wiki

Yet, you chose to focus this thread on vaccines, as if they were the major culprit. Curious.

Research shows that when mercury is combined with other metals such as aluminum and some chemicals it can be much more toxic for our bodies than mercury alone. I believe we can all agree that we live in a toxic soup and we have no idea how the thousands of man-made chemicals as well as natural elements etc. found in nature combine to effect our health.

You're right! We don't have any idea at all! Curiously, in this toxic soup we live in, humans are living longer than ever before and maintaining quality of life longer than ever before. Curse that toxic soup!

We will just have to disagree on the whole epidemiological research thing because when you follow the money particularly, you find many questionable practices, particularly with the researchers (and who they work for before and after their research and who funds it, etc.) and the statistical methods/data sets chosen, etc. etc. etc.

This is always the line thrown out by anti-vaccine quacks. Yet they put on their own blinders to the fact that the anti-vaccine researchers have at least as many conflicts of interest (if not more) that their counterparts. The money argument really comes down to this: "I don't like what the research says, and I don't want to believe it, so clearly they must have been bought out by big pharma." Those who have bought into this garbage-line-of-thought have been sold the worst kind of snake oil.

It is my belief that many of a whole generation of children have been damaged...but I don't believe it is just mercury that is the culprit, but it is one of them.

A whole generation of children have been damaged by freedom from measles, mumps, rubella, and polio. A whole generation of children have been damaged by the lowest infant and child mortality rates in the history of the earth. A whole generation of children have been exposed to risks because of mercury in vaccines, nevermind the fact that thimerosal has been removed from childhood vaccinations and the incidence of diseases though to be associated with thimerosal exposure is entirely unaffected.

Thimerosal is the scapegoat of parents who want something to blame because they can't come to terms with the fact that we don't know what causes some of these things. My heart goes out to them. They've been dealt a crappy hand and it's a rotten trick of nature. But clinging to bad science and discredited hypotheses will not help us get any closer to finding the actual cause.

Yes, there are many sources of mercury poisoning. It's absolutely absurd to focus on mercury in vaccinations when this source is carefully monitored, measured, regulated, and controlled. If you're worried about mercury poisoning, you are far better off taking on the larger and poorly controlled sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've often wondered when some claim to have "done their research," are they believing one side of the research because that's what THEY want to believe?

People find comfort in being able to give an explanation. Many people will prefer a false explanation to an unknown explanation; they would prefer to ignore evidence that contradicts that which gives them comfort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired oxidative-reduction activity, degeneration, and death in human neuronal and fetal cells induced by low-level exposure to thimerosal and other metal compounds

Abstract

Thimerosal (ethylmercurithiosalicylic acid), an ethylmercury (EtHg)-releasing compound (49.55% mercury (Hg)), was used in a range of medical products for more than 70 years. Of particular recent concern, routine administering of Thimerosal-containing biologics/childhood vaccines have become significant sources of Hg exposure for some fetuses/infants. This study was undertaken to investigate cellular damage among in vitro human neuronal (SH-SY-5Y neuroblastoma and 1321N1 astrocytoma) and fetal (nontransformed) model systems using cell vitality assays and microscope-based digital image capture techniques to assess potential damage induced by Thimerosal and other metal compounds (aluminum (Al) sulfate, lead (Pb)(II) acetate, methylmercury (MeHg) hydroxide, and mercury (Hg)(II) chloride) where the cation was reported to exert adverse effects on developing cells. Thimerosal-associated cellular damage was also evaluated for similarity to pathophysiological findings observed in patients diagnosed with autistic disorders (ADs). Thimerosal-induced cellular damage as evidenced by concentration- and time-dependent mitochondrial damage, reduced oxidative-reduction activity, cellular degeneration, and cell death in the in vitro human neuronal and fetal model systems studied. 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.

Taylor & Francis Online :: Mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired oxidative-reduction activity, degeneration, and death in human neuronal and fetal cells induced by low-level exposure to thimerosal and other metal compounds - Toxicological & Environment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just talked to my local health department and the Lead RN who has 6 years of education and 18 years of experience assured me she knows what she is talking about.

She said that the mercury free vaccines are only available at the health department for children under 3 for any vaccine.

That they don't get a lot of the mercury free vaccinations for flu (the nasal spray and the mercury free for children under three) and run out very quickly and they have been out of those vaccines for a long time.

The elderly, pregnant women and infants/children are given the '"multi-dose" flu vaccine and she doesn't know of any that are made without thimerosal. (She said to not worry though because thimerosal is not in any way related to the mercury we used to play with in thermometers and that it is as safe as eating tuna fish and won't hurt you.)

She had never heard of any special vaccines for pregnant women or the elderly with no thimerosal.

.

Edited by lds2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I've often wondered when some claim to have "done their research," are they believing one side of the research because that's what THEY want to believe?

I also wouldn't count reading articles from mothering.com or vaccinesareevil.com or onlysheepgivekidsshots.com or whatever anti-vax site "research". It's reading articles on the internet. Research would be looking at all the actual scientific studies that have been done and comparing them against what you know. Reading articles bent to your opinion written by who knows who on the internet isn't research. Asking one RN about packaging isn't research, it's asking leading questions. I'm going to have to stick with MoE here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that "modern medicine" likes to pat themselves on the back and take credit for the "eradication of disease" and our longer life-span due to vaccines (and antibiotics)...but this is a falsehood. These diseases had been declining, some for more than 50 years before vaccines were even starting to be used.

"The distinguished epidemiologist Thomas McKeown (1912-198 maintained that reductions in deaths associated with infectious diseases (air-, water-, and food-borne diseases) cannot have been brought about by medical advances, since such diseases were declining long before effective means were available to combat them."

Porter, Roy, "The Greatest Benefit to Mankind", Harper Collins Publishers, 1997, p. 426

An introductory statement from the 1937 disease statistics indicates that death rates from infectious diseases declined greatly in the early part of the century. These declines occurred well before the advent of vaccines to treat these conditions. If you go back to the statistics kept by the British Isles you can see the steep declines in disease during the late 1800s through the early 1900s also. "The trend in death rates for specific causes, over the past 20 or 30 years, may be characterized by two general statements. In the first place, there has been a great reduction in the death rates for infectious and preventable diseases; in the second place, there has been an increase in the rates for certain diseases characteristic of older ages. Greatest proportional rate decreases have taken place for such diseases as typhoid and parathyroid fever, which has declined from a rate of 23.5 in 1910 to 2.1 in 1937; and diphtheria, which declined from a rate of 21.4 in 1910 to 2.0 in 1937. ... The rate reductions for infectious and preventable diseases can be largely attributed to the development of modern public-health practice."

Vital Statistics of the United States 1937 Part I, U.S. Department of the Census, 1939, p. 11

"...The largest historical decrease in morbidity and mortality caused by infectious disease was experienced not with the modern antibiotic and vaccine era, but after the introduction of clean water and effective sewer systems."

"Zinc, diarrhea, and pneumonia (editorial)", The Journal of Pediatrics, December 1999, Vol. 135, No. 6, p. 663

Diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis vaccine arrived on the scene only after disease mortality rates already had been reduced significantly; measles, rubella, and polio vaccines did not become available until the middle of the 20th century, when most infant deaths were the result of other causes. The same holds true for sulfa drugs and antibiotics. Their contribution is unequivocal, but they did not affect mortality rates until the 1940s."

Greene, Velvl W., PhD, MPH, "Personal hygiene and life expectancy improvements since 1850: Historic and epidemiologic associations", American Journal of Infection Control (AJIC), August 2001, Vol. 29, No. 4, pp. 203-206

"There was a continuous decline [whooping cough deaths], equal in each sex, from 1937 onward. Vaccination, beginning on small scale in some places around 1948 and on a national scale in 1957, did not affect the rate of decline if it be assumed that one attack usually confers immunity, as in most major communicable diseases of childhood. ... The steady decline of whooping cough between 1930 and 1957 is predictive of a linear exponential decay characteristic of a general and progressive lessening in the volume and spread of infection among the susceptible population. With this pattern well established before 1957, there is no evidence that vaccination played a major role in the decline in incidence and mortality in the trend of events."

Steward, Gordon T., "Vaccination Against Whooping-Cough Efficacy Versus Risks", The Lancet, January 29, 1977, pp. 234-237

"...In 1869 there were 716 deaths from typhus in London; by 1885 this had been reduced to 28; and at the beginning of the 20th century there was none. Similar declines could be given for other infectious diseases.

Tuberculosis began a remarkable disappearing act. Killing perhaps 500 out of every 100,000 Europeans in 1845, consumption slowly but continuously sank to 50 per 100,000 by 1950. Curative medicine played little part in that transition. The disappearance began before Koch discovered the tubercle bacillus.

By the time antibiotics entered the picture, TB in cities such as New York had fallen to eleventh place in the death lists. And the mortality graphs for most of Europe's fatal crowd diseases all dived before antibiotics had been marketed. Whooping cough killed 1400 children out of every million in 1850, but one hundred years later whooping deaths were less than 10 per million.

Scarlet fever behaved in the same way. Measles, typhus, pneumonia, dysentery and polio all share similar histories. Their retreat had a dramatic impact on the European population. By 1900 civilization had lost its biological population check: infectious disease.

After centuries of hostile encounters, humans and microbes found a new adjustment with little interference from drugs or vaccines. In some cases the microbe became less virulent (measles and diphtheria) or the human host more resistant (tuberculosis)."

Porter, Roy, "The Greatest Benefit to Mankind", Harper Collins Publishers, 1997, p. 427

Edited by lds2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You won't find MSM articles in our country like this...but for those looking for an honest debate...remember to follow the money and who benefits from it...

45 Reasons to Protect Infants from Vaccines

Jagannath Chatterjee

45 Reasons to Protect Infants from Vaccines >> Four Winds 10 - Truth Winds

Not all that he believes is true like in the US parents receive information on the harmful side-effects of vaccines before vaccines are given, etc. Still there are many points that are important to think about before injecting infants with multiple vaccines (I can't keep track of how many are given before the age of 5 anymore...but MANY.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To determine the value of flu vaccines to children, Tom Jefferson, MD, and colleagues at the Cochrane Collaboration looked at over a thousand studies. They selected 14 high-quality clinical trials in which vaccinated children had been compared with unvaccinated children. The combined results of these 14 trials were reported in The Lancet (2/26/05). Here's the conclusion: "We recorded no convincing evidence that vaccines can reduce mortality, [hospital] admissions, serious complications, and community transmission of influenza."... ...Though the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Prevention advises flu vaccines for babies 6-23 months because they tend to suffer more complications once they get the flu, no evidence supports the recommendation. The Cochrane reviewers found that vaccines had little effect on bronchitis, ear infections, and hospitalizations, compared with the babies given placebo vaccines. In short, the CDC recommendations are irresponsible given the fact that the only two studies that involved babies found no benefit and little is known about adverse effects of these vaccines for babies...

...Here is what Dr. Simonsen and colleagues found: --The number of flu-related deaths among elderly Americans increased steadily during the 33-year-period, despite the fact that their acceptance of flu vaccinations also steadily increased. For example, only 20% of all elderly Americans had a flu shot in 1980, compared with 65% in 2001. --...The increasing flu vaccine coverage after 1980, however, did not correlate with a decline in flu-related deaths. --The over-all death rate for people over 85 during flu seasons did not change over the 33-year-period...Because fewer than 10% of all winter deaths can be attributed to the flu in any year during this study's three-decade period, the authors conclude that vaccination's benefit to elderly people has been substantially overestimated.

Flu vaccines don't work for kids or the elderly | Center for Medical Consumers | Find Articles

Edited by lds2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired oxidative-reduction activity, degeneration, and death in human neuronal and fetal cells induced by low-level exposure to thimerosal and other metal compounds

Abstract

Thimerosal (ethylmercurithiosalicylic acid), an ethylmercury (EtHg)-releasing compound (49.55% mercury (Hg)), was used in a range of medical products for more than 70 years. Of particular recent concern, routine administering of Thimerosal-containing biologics/childhood vaccines have become significant sources of Hg exposure for some fetuses/infants. This study was undertaken to investigate cellular damage among in vitro human neuronal (SH-SY-5Y neuroblastoma and 1321N1 astrocytoma) and fetal (nontransformed) model systems using cell vitality assays and microscope-based digital image capture techniques to assess potential damage induced by Thimerosal and other metal compounds (aluminum (Al) sulfate, lead (Pb)(II) acetate, methylmercury (MeHg) hydroxide, and mercury (Hg)(II) chloride) where the cation was reported to exert adverse effects on developing cells. Thimerosal-associated cellular damage was also evaluated for similarity to pathophysiological findings observed in patients diagnosed with autistic disorders (ADs). Thimerosal-induced cellular damage as evidenced by concentration- and time-dependent mitochondrial damage, reduced oxidative-reduction activity, cellular degeneration, and cell death in the in vitro human neuronal and fetal model systems studied. 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.

Taylor & Francis Online :: Mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired oxidative-reduction activity, degeneration, and death in human neuronal and fetal cells induced by low-level exposure to thimerosal and other metal compounds - Toxicological & Environment

I don't understand the purpose of citing this article. It states the fetuses have a lower tolerance limit for mercury exposure. That was known well before 2009 and is why some of the recommendations for pregnant women to limit their exposure exist (as I've already discussed).

The findings of the study are entirely unsurprising. These findings might add to the greater picture of autism research considering that in 2009 and 2010, a link was established between mitochondrial disorders and autism, but that link had not yet been demonstrated to be causal. This study also falls well short of establishing causality between thimerosal-induced mitochondrial disorder and autism. When they authors say that the pathologies of the mitochondrial disorders are similar, it's most a qualitative comparison, not a rigorous statistically designed trial (yes, I read the article).

There is some promise in this line of research. It's still very new research and it will be another 10 years before solid conclusions can be made. But this article doesn't change what we've known for years--thimerosal for adults is not a danger; thimerosal for fetuses is wicked bad.

I just talked to my local health department and the Lead RN who has 6 years of education and 18 years of experience assured me she knows what she is talking about.

She said that the mercury free vaccines are only available at the health department for children under 3 for any vaccine.

That they don't get a lot of the mercury free vaccinations for flu (the nasal spray and the mercury free for children under three) and run out very quickly and they have been out of those vaccines for a long time.

The elderly, pregnant women and infants/children are given the '"multi-dose" flu vaccine and she doesn't know of any that are made without thimerosal. (She said to not worry though because thimerosal is not in any way related to the mercury we used to play with in thermometers and that it is as safe as eating tuna fish and won't hurt you.)

She had never heard of any special vaccines for pregnant women or the elderly with no thimerosal.

.

I can only share with you what the CDC has published. According to the CDC, thimerosal-free vaccinations are available. Whether or not a particular health care agency is providing them is another story. (Some facilities may not carry them because they cost more to produce, store, and transport; the lack of thimerosal makes them more susceptible to contamination).

CDC H1N1 Flu | 2009 H1N1 Influenza Shots and Pregnant Women: Questions and Answers for Patients

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before the measles vaccine became available in the mid-1960s, the disease caused an estimated 450 deaths and 4,000 cases of measles encephalitis annually, some 1,000 of which resulted in chronic disability. In the decade before the vaccination was introduced, an estimated 3 million to 4 million people were infected each year.

The disease was declared eliminated from the United States in 2000, but sporadic cases are imported from other countries. Some 20 million cases still occur globally, said Dr. Jane Seward, deputy director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases' division of viral diseases.

Some parents' refusal to vaccinate children seems to be behind the highest rate of measles cases reported since 1996, federal officials said Thursday.

Between Jan. 1 and July 31 of this year, 131 measles cases have been reported in the United States, many of them among children whose parents have philosophical or religious objections to the vaccine, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

At least 15 patients, including four children 15 months or younger, were hospitalized. No deaths have been reported.

By comparison, 55 cases of measles were reported in 2006, 66 in 2005, 37 in 2004, 56 in 2003 and 44 in 2002, for an average of about 64 per year.

Measles Cases Highest Since 1996 - US News and World Report

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you kidding me? Diseases declining has absolutely NOTHING to do with vaccines? NOTHING? Wow..

I would say that it had a lot more to do with new public health practices and God's plan for the 20th century than it had to do with vaccines. Seriously, these diseases were already on their way out. JMHO FWIW

You do know that only 3 influenzas are chosen to go into each years vaccine and that there are MANY constantly changing viruses out there each year. Seldom does the most devastating flus match up with the flus chosen. Also the flus chosen have been mutating for months on the other side of the planet before they come back to afflict us here and chances are that some are no longer even a match from 6-12 months ago.

Same thing goes for things like Guardasil...it only covers 3 of the dozens of strains and those strains have had a great deal of time to mutate since those strains were taken into the laboratory.

Viruses are known for their quick mutations, they are very unpredictable and yet we are told that the measles strains have not changed for something like 70 years. When the MMR failed they gave boosters...first in kindergarten, then preteens, and now college. We will keep receiving the same ancient strain of measles vaccine at every new outbreak throughout our lives. Can intelligent people believe that some viruses NEVER mutate? Guess so...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you kidding me? Diseases declining has absolutely NOTHING to do with vaccines? NOTHING? Wow..

It's actually quite true that diseases were well in decline before the introduction of vaccines. The introduction of hygienic standards was a boon to public health. Worldwide, infant and maternal mortality rates dropped sharply just by moving women off of the floor and onto tables and beds to deliver their children.

But those measures can only do so much. Hygiene can do a lot to prevent the transmission of disease, but it won't eradicate it. Eradication requires herd immunity, and herd immunity is only obtained through vaccination programs.

Some of lds2's links make claims that most people don't benefit from vaccination. They're right. Only one of four people who receive the flu shot will even be exposed to the flu. Some of them, with proper hygiene, wouldn't have contracted serious symptoms anyway. Of the rest, the majority will not contract the flu, and the virus won't gain enough strength in the population to cause much harm.

It's also important to note that vaccination programs aren't really about your convenience. We don't want healthy people to get the flu shot so that they dont' have to suffer with the flu. We don't really care if you get the flu. What we care about is that people with respiratory and heart problems don't get the flu, because for some of them, there's no coming back from it. The best way to guard at risk populations from getting the flu is herd immunity.

It's the same principle with childhood diseases. The vast majority of children who get vaccinations aren't ever going to be exposed to these diseases and likely wouldn't have contracted it anyway. But by vaccinating everyone, we prevent the disease from ever gathering enough strength to be a public health risk. It also protects little Timmy who has leukemia and can't receive the vaccine, nor can he be exposed to chicken pox without it threatening his life.

The other thing that anti-vaccine folks don't seem to understand is that herd immunity requires that more than 90% of your population be vaccinated. It works well enough if over 80% of the population is vaccinated. It gets shaky at 70%. If you only vaccinate 60% of your population, you may as well not vaccinate anyone. Yep, you read that right. You could vaccinate the majority of your population and it would be like you hadn't done anything at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that it had a lot more to do with new public health practices and God's plan for the 20th century than it had to do with vaccines. Seriously, these diseases were already on their way out. JMHO FWIW

You do know that only 3 influenzas are chosen to go into each years vaccine and that there are MANY constantly changing viruses out there each year. Seldom does the most devastating flus match up with the flus chosen. Also the flus chosen have been mutating for months on the other side of the planet before they come back to afflict us here and chances are that some are no longer even a match from 6-12 months ago.

Same thing goes for things like Guardasil...it only covers 3 of the dozens of strains and those strains have had a great deal of time to mutate since those strains were taken into the laboratory.

Viruses are known for their quick mutations, they are very unpredictable and yet we are told that the measles strains have not changed for something like 70 years. When the MMR failed they gave boosters...first in kindergarten, then preteens, and now college. We will keep receiving the same ancient strain of measles vaccine at every new outbreak throughout our lives. Can intelligent people believe that some viruses NEVER mutate? Guess so...

It doesn't have to be the exact same strain. It only has to be similar enough that the antibodies recognize it and attack it effectively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and how many people did they say had died of flu previously and would die of the "swine flu" if not vaccinated a few years ago? Believe what you want to believe...

but most outbreaks of measles occur in "vaccinated" populations where there should be "herd immunity" according to MS Medicine. But they will blame those dirty unvaccinated people for any outbreak.

Have you seen the "no kissing" billboards in SLC advertising a new vaccine, indicating that you shouldn't kiss dirty people until they have been vaccinated and become "clean?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also wouldn't count reading articles from mothering.com or vaccinesareevil.com or onlysheepgivekidsshots.com or whatever anti-vax site "research". It's reading articles on the internet. Research would be looking at all the actual scientific studies that have been done and comparing them against what you know. Reading articles bent to your opinion written by who knows who on the internet isn't research. Asking one RN about packaging isn't research, it's asking leading questions. I'm going to have to stick with MoE here.

A wise decision, Eowyn.

I'll also add for the benefit of people who have participated in this thread so far--and this might sound condescending, but I don't mean anything personal by it (at least not to you, Eowyn)

I know more about this than you do.

I understand the research about this better than you do.

And with that I'm bowing out because I could lose my temper and start saying things that will likely get me banned if I stick around.

Edited by MarginOfError

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, and how many people did they say had died of flu previously and would die of the "swine flu" if not vaccinated a few years ago? Believe what you want to believe...

but most outbreaks of measles occur in "vaccinated" populations where there should be "herd immunity" according to MS Medicine. But they will blame those dirty unvaccinated people for any outbreak.

Have you seen the "no kissing" billboards in SLC advertising a new vaccine, indicating that you shouldn't kiss dirty people until they have been vaccinated and become "clean?"

You have no idea what you're talking about. Honestly lady, you don't.

Find any outbreak of measles in the US or Britain in the past 20 years. I'll show you that the outbreak started in the unvaccinated population and spread to the vaccinated population. The herd immunity you deride was broken by people who thought they were so brilliant to not be vaccinated. Their brilliance is nothing more than egocentric idiocy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet the multiple boosters still don't work for many when outbreaks occur...

The Truth About Vaccines - Nine Points Left Out By TIME article

By Louise Habakus

tinyurl.com/4fmbr9

...herd immunity, that is, the belief that a certain very high threshold of the population must be vaccinated or the disease(s) will return. This is assumed but has never been proven. Disease outbreaks occur in schools and other communities where 99%+ of the population has been vaccinated (New England Journal of Medicine, 3/87). Vaccine makers disclose that it is possible to get the disease from the vaccine. While the press and the government like to blame outbreaks on the unvaccinated, it is not possible to precisely prove this as both unvaccinated and vaccinated contract the disease. Disease transmission can occur through breast milk and through "viral shedding" from the nose and mouth of the recently vaccinated....

...At its heart, science is about observation. That government scientists are willing to so readily dismiss the first-hand observations of tens of thousands of parents who swear that they lost their children to autism just days and weeks after inoculations is irresponsible (and I am being kind). I am shocked that Time magazine did not reference Dr. Bernadine Healy's TV interview on 5/12/08 where she makes a break with her Institute of Medicine (IOM) colleagues and goes on record to say that we must study this further, we must understand what is happening with susceptible groups of children and she chides her colleagues by saying that we must never be afraid of what the truth will show. Dr. Healy is a Harvard-educated physician who did her residency at Johns Hopkins and is former head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and a current member of the IOM. Her credentials are impeccable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hannah Poling is the little autistic girl who was found to have been vaccine injured. When her case was decided the government said that her condition was caused by a mitochondrial disorder that is extremely rare...but that is not what researchers are finding...

65% Autistic Children Found To Have Mitochondrial Disorder

At an American Academy of Neurology meeting last Sunday it was revealed in a recent research paper, see below, that 65% of children with Autistic Spectrum Disorders assessed were found to have mitochondrial disorder (MtD) and so were always at risk of autism caused by one or more vaccines....

Sunday, April 13, 2008 2:45 PM

Platform Session: Integrated Neuroscience: Autism (2:00 PM-3:15 PM) Annual Meeting Annual American Academy of Neurology"

Yahoo! Groups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this