Comments on: Vaccines Again

By: Gerald Smith

Gerald Smith — Tue, 13 May 2008 18:17:31 +0000

I think another point to add to this is the current American concept of living in a world of no risk/danger. Years ago, John Stossel did a show on risks in America. He asked some people in his audience: what if we developed a cheap and clean form of fuel, but it killed 2500 people a year, would that be acceptable. Most stated that even one death was unacceptable. Well, that fuel turned out to be Propane, which actually kills about 3000 people a year.
The fact that we attempt to live in an antiseptic world affects us in many other areas, too. Health care demands: should everyone be on their own (Libertarian view), should we provide basic care, or should everyone have Cadillac level health care provided, regardless of the cost?
People seeking perfect solutions from government is becoming a bigger issue, even though logic dictates that they will generally end up dissatisfied with the results, and perhaps even left worse off. Or they will continue in the attitude that government should provide perfect vaccines that do not harm anyone, and that the chicken in every pot tastes like prime rib.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Tue, 13 May 2008 05:10:26 +0000

There are quite a few studies now Howard. The evidence is overwhelming. It's been covered in most science magazines. If you want links to the papers the wiki appears to have links to most of them.

By: Howard

Howard — Tue, 13 May 2008 04:42:45 +0000

Clark,
It has been a few years since I looked into this issue but at that time one could not in good conscience assert that “No differences in the rate of problems occurred.” There were studies showing falling rates of autism following the removal of thiomersal. And, of course, a lot of money coming from the vaccine industry to counter these studies.

As the thiomersal was removed from childhood vaccinations the data became contaminated by new recommendations that children receive flu vaccinations which at that time also contained thiomersal.

Also, the question of dose is complicated by the increasing number of childhood vaccinations recommended say 10 years ago vs. when we were kids.

Yes, people are still crying “thiomersal” years after it’s become a moot point, because of a lack of trust. You may view them as ignorant or stupid, but in my view the vaccine industry with all their high priced talent was pretty stupid for allowing it to happen.

Vaccines are probably the single largest contributions to public health since sanitation. But people are people and the industry needs to learn to deal with it without winning.

Please point me to your impartial data.

By: Clark

Clark — Tue, 13 May 2008 01:44:31 +0000

As “E” said thiomersal was taken out of vaccines for children 9 years ago. No differences in the rate of problems occurred. That’s pretty overwhelming evidence that the mercury wasn’t the problem.

The problem is that people are still crying “thiomersal” years after it’s become a moot point.

As you said common people depend upon the government and scientists to keep them safe based upon best knowledge. Clearly they were. What isn’t clear is why they thought they weren’t. (Well, that’s a semi-rhetorical point sense a bunch of quacks and then media exposure created an unwarranted fear in people)

By: E

Mon, 12 May 2008 23:55:00 +0000

Howard, the tragic (to me) thing is that thimerosol is safe. It is not a form of mercury that is neurotoxic in the doses people are exposed to. It is a cheap, effective preservative that has been shown to be safe as a component of vaccines. Thimerosol was NOT removed from vaccines because of safety problems, it was removed because of public hysteria over autism. It has now been removed from vaccines for several years, resulting in increased cost of vaccines, no improved safety, no change in rates of autism, and no significant reasurrance of the public, who still are often fearful of vaccines.

By: Howard

Howard — Mon, 12 May 2008 22:03:52 +0000

Sure, we can debate “safe” doses for infants, but the truth is that no one really knows what a safe dose is because for very good reasons it is considered unethical to do drug trials on children and infants.

Common people are not chemists or doctors, they depend on the government and the medical community to keep them safe.

The reason there is still so much concern is that the industry failed to police itself and drug their feet about removing poison from it’s baby products. This raised skepticism to the point of a public outcry.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Mon, 12 May 2008 19:23:53 +0000

That doesn’t explain why there is still such concern. Mercury (in pretty small doses) was removed from vaccines but people are still acting like vaccines are the problem.

It’s not included in any vaccine I’m aware of outside of flu vaccines. (See this CDC page) Even with regards to the flu you can get vaccines without it.

Almost certainly you’re getting more mercury from your water supply than you are from the vaccine. And if you eat fish then you’re certainly getting far more.

By: Howard

Howard — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:42:35 +0000

Much of the vaccine debate began at a time when many childhood vaccines were made with a mercury based preservative called thimerosal. Thimerosal has since been eliminated from childhood vaccines in California but, last time I checked, it was still included in flu and other vaccines.

Mercury is a toxic heavy metal.

“Critical thinking” quickly results in the conclusion that toxic heavy metals should NOT be given to infants and small children if there are other alternatives.