Deliberating Over Kennedy’s Thimerosal Book

By Keith Kloor | July 20, 2014 8:41 am

Last September, Robert Kennedy Jr. and Mark Hyman received a letter from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). It pertained to a “report” that Kennedy, an environmental attorney and Hyman, a medical doctor,  had sent to federal health officials on the dangers of thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative once commonly used in pediatric vaccines in the United States, until the early 2000s. The ingredient is still used in some flu vaccines, which Kennedy and Hyman said was inadvisable. The Kennedy/Hyman report on thimerosal was a draft of the book they are publishing next week.

The letter (PDF) from HHS was signed by Bruce Gellin, the Director of the National Vaccine Program Office (NVPO). He explained why U.S. federal agencies would disregard Kennedy and Hyman’s advice:

The many federal partners involved in immunizations have closely followed and evaluated the scientific discussion on thimerosal and are well aware of the significant amount of information that has been generated in addressing this question. We have read your report and NVPO and the other agencies are intimately familiar with the complexity of the results and the science that frames your arguments. In addition to a thorough review of the evidence we sought the input of the independent Institute of Medicine on this issue. The conclusion of the scientific community is clear that thimerosal-containing vaccines are safe and effective and do not represent a public health risk.

kennedycover

Kennedy and Hyman don’t accept this conclusion. My cover story in today’s Washington Post magazine is a chronicle of Robert Kennedy Jr.’s relentless efforts to persuade the world at large that the scientific community is wrong on the thimerosal issue.

He’s pretty much failed. In the process, he’s hurt his reputation in the public advocacy world. As I was reporting this story, I learned some surprising things. One is that Kennedy doesn’t seem to care that he’s hurt his reputation. Oh sure, it bothers him, but not enough to abandon his crusade. When I met with him last year in his home, he was frank about how he’s exasperated his closest allies and associates. At one juncture in the interview, he shared his own frustration over their icy response to his then unpublished book:

Nobody wants to read this. Their advice is, ‘don’t wreck my career, don’t destroy my credibility, this is hurting me. My business partner said, ‘don’t do this, you’re going to destroy yourself financially. You’re making yourself radioactive.’

To which I asked Kennedy: “What do you tell your business partners and everybody else who tells you to give up?

Kennedy’s response:

I tell them, ‘if I die poor, then I go down fighting for what’s right.’

I don’t envision him or anyone in the Kennedy clan dying poor, but the sentiment struck me. He then mentioned this: “The team of researchers who worked with me on this [book] were top researchers. People who were cautious, like Mark [Hyman].”

That led to the second surprising thing I learned (later on), which was that two of these researchers were bona fide, mainstream science journalists. In fact, they had played a substantive, behind the scenes role in the book. (Due to the emotionally and politically charged politics of anything to do with vaccines, they requested anonymity.)  Not that this confers an automatic seal of approval on the book’s content (which should be judged on its merits alone), but it did make me go, Huh.

As for the book, I have now read it several times. The third and final surprising thing is that I wasn’t able to dismiss everything between the book’s covers as hogwash. No, I don’t think thimerosal is a contributing factor to autism or other neurodevelopmental disorders, as the book argues. Nor do I believe that thimerosal has been proven to be an unsafe vaccine preservative in trace amounts–even with repeated exposures–which is another argument in the book.

That said, there is a larger body of science on thimerosal/ethylmercury–such as toxicological and animal studies–that I was not aware of. This is laid out in the book. Do these studies add up enough to indict thimerosal as a dangerous vaccine ingredient for a potentially vulnerable subset of the population? That is a loaded question.

I’ve been promising to dive into the weeds on all this, but I want to be extra careful with how I discuss the book’s evidence and arguments. I know that there are many people who would prefer that Kennedy and his book be ignored. But that is not possible if he continues to stoke the controversial thimerosal fires.

So check back in a few days for a comprehensive review of the book.

  • Kevin Folta

    Interesting. I’m looking forward to the comprehensive analysis. IMHO Kennedy is running a campaign with thimerosal like Seneff does with glyphosate. You can go through the literature, and if you ignore the large number of studies that show no associations, you can find a few that show effects on cells in petri dishes or changes in specific neuronal receptor activity in rats at high doses. There are many suggestive reports that are cherry picked and misrepresented by anti-vaxers. The results are not conclusive or translatable, and typically never spawn new research. My guess is that this is the stuff the anonymous researchers will refer to.

    • http://blogs.discovermagazine.com Keith Kloor

      Kevin,

      Yeah, you have to sift through the junk science on this issue, just as you do with the GMOs.

      And speaking of Seneff and her whacky ideas, it should be noted that she was a speaker at this year’s Autism One conference:

      http://www.autismone.org/content/defining-autism-dr-stephanie-seneff-0

      • Kevin Folta

        Unbelievable.

      • CassandraofDelphi

        Keith, Seneff is not whacky, just like Kennedy is not anti science. The person who is whacky is who says that kids can tolerate 10,000 vaccines at ones. I wish you’d single those statements out.

        • http://blogs.discovermagazine.com Keith Kloor
          • CassandraofDelphi

            You have to judge her work for what it is, theories. She is pointing out the many possible connections.

          • http://blogs.discovermagazine.com Keith Kloor

            Oh, she believes them all and asserts them with confidence.

          • Boris Ogon

            You have to judge her work for what it is, theories. She is pointing out the many possible connections.

            If that’s what you call randomly tossing things into the “sulfur dunnit” slop-bucket, sure.

          • Kevin Folta

            Not even “theories”. Theories have a basis in evidence. She formulates a hypothesis, then satisfies it with confirmation bias, cherry picking and correlation. Not good science.

          • lilady R.N.

            More on Seneff, from Orac. She’s a member of the Geier-inspired Mercury Militia…and a VAERS dumpster diver:

            http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/11/20/dumpster-diving-in-the-vaers-database-again/

          • David Foster

            But Orac is the source of truth?

            You people are a joke.

          • JGC

            Actually, yes: Orac is a reliable source of information who provides evidentiary support for the statements he makes and the criticisms he offers.

        • Christopher Hickie

          Oh, that’s right. Would you care to try and refute the fact that a woman who received the equivalent of 10,000,000 doses of measles vaccine suffered no side effect and saw her cancer go into remission, as was thought would happen by the doctors who gave that amount of measles virus vaccine to her (http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/15/health/measles-cancer-remission/)?

          • CassandraofDelphi

            Haha. Good try Dr Hickie. That cannot be compared to babies or even adults receiving 10,000 doses of vaccines with adjuvants in them. But I’d be happy to view a demonstration if you volunteer.

          • lilady R.N.

            Actually, the comment by Dr. Offit about the 10,000 doses of vaccines was taken out of context.

            Dr. Offit was explaining that from the moment of birth an infant is exposed to millions of individual antigens (no, antigens are not all pathogens), each day, in the form of pollens, dust particles, etc., which stimulate an immune response:

            (Good grief. I’m getting tired of explaining elementary school level science to uneducated people)

            http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002224.htm

          • CassandraofDelphi

            No, Dr. Offit very specifically stated that infants could handle 10,000 vaccines.

            “A more practical way to determine the diversity of the immune response would be to estimate the number of vaccines to which a child could respond at one time…. each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10, 000 vaccines at any one time.”

            Offit, Paul et al. 2002. Addressing Parents’ Concerns: Do Multiple Vaccines Overwhelm or Weaken the Infant’s Immune System? Pediatrics. 2002 Jan;109(1):124-9. PMID:11773551

          • David Foster

            Offit’s claim was not taken out of context, he literally meant infants can withstand 10,000 vaccines at once.

            Here is the article (it is repeatedly referred to as a “study”, but it is an Op/Ed piece):

            http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/1/124.full

            Here is his statement (see link for more details and “context”):

            “…then each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10 000 vaccines at any one time (obtained by dividing
            107 B cells per mL by 103 epitopes per vaccine).”

            See? Simple math. You people keep trying to excuse what he said since he used the word “theoretical”, but if you read the article you can see that by “theoretical” he meant according to the mathematical model he had constructed.

          • JGC

            David, Dr Offit didn’t argue that a child can receive 10,000 vaccines simultaneoulsy.
            We all get that you really, really want him to have made such a statement instead of the one he actually did make–that the child’s immune system can handle 10,000 antigens without becoming overwhelmed–but that simply was not the case.

          • David Foster

            Look dillweed, I just quoted Offit himself earlier where he said “…then each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10 000 vaccines at any one time”.

            It’s pretty straightforward. Do you still not get it?

          • JGC

            Good luck with the whole name-calling thing–I hope it works for you on some juvenile level. Doesn’t bother me at all.
            You took one quote out of context from his statement to make it appear he was communicating something he was not, as has been pointed out to you repeatedly: it’s called quote-mining, Do you still not get that?
            But let’s assume that he did mean that a child could actually deal with 10,000 vaccinations rather than exposure to 10,000 antigens. Vaccine safety doesn’t derive from his or anyone else’s presumed authority or infallibility but from the large body of evidence attesting to their safety.
            Offit would have been wrong, but his being wrong wouldn’t demonstrate that vaccines are unsafe or ineffective, or that children’s immune systems could actually be overwhelmed by “too many too soon”, or that the preservatives, etc., in vaccine formulations are harmful at the level of exposures resulting from routine vaccination.
            So the appropriate response in that case could only be “Did you have a point?”

          • Matt Carey

            Here are three paragraphs where he made that statement. What’s wrong? The math? The assumptions? Are there studies that counter those he cited? What?

            “Studies on the diversity of antigen receptors indicate that the immune system has the capacity to respond to extremely large numbers of antigens. Current data suggest that the theoretical capacity determined by diversity of antibody variable gene regions would allow for as many as 10^9 to 10^11 different antibody specificities.38 But this prediction is limited by the number of circulating B cells and the likely redundancy of antibodies generated by an individual.

            A more practical way to determine the diversity of the immune response would be to estimate the number of vaccines to which a child could respond at one time. If we assume that 1) approximately 10 ng/mL of antibody is likely to be an effective concentration of antibody per epitope (an immunologically distinct region of a protein or polysaccharide),39 2) generation of 10 ng/mL requires approximately 10^3 B-cells per mL,39 3) a single B-cell clone takes about 1 week to reach the 10^3 progeny B-cells required to secrete 10 ng/mL of antibody39 (therefore, vaccine-epitope-specific immune responses found about 1 week after immunization can be generated initially from a single B-cell clone per mL), 4) each vaccine contains approximately 100 antigens and 10 epitopes per antigen (ie, 10^3 epitopes), and 5) approximately 107 B cells are present per mL of circulating blood,39 then each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10 000 vaccines at any one time (obtained by dividing 10^7 B cells per mL by 10^3 epitopes per vaccine).

            Of course, most vaccines contain far fewer than 100 antigens (for example, the hepatitis B, diphtheria, and tetanus vaccines each contain 1 antigen), so the estimated number of vaccines to which a child could respond is conservative. But using this estimate, we would predict that if 11 vaccines were given to infants at one time, then about 0.1% of the immune system would be “used up.””
            He is so very clearly discussing the body’s ability to respond to the immune challenge of the antigens in the vaccines that presenting it as actual vaccines.
            Do you think that people care about being called “dillweed” by ignorant people on the internet?

          • David Foster

            “then each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10 000 vaccines at any one time”

            What is so hard to understand here?? He used the word “vaccine”…he said an infant can respond to 10,000 vaccines at any one time.

            We are not taking what he said out of context, he was rather direct and said exactly what we claim he said.

          • Matt Carey

            It is, as you say, pretty straightforward.

            Here’s a more recent discussion on the History of Vaccines site

            http://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/video-do-vaccines-overwhelm-infant-immune-system

            “Our advisor Paul A. Offit, MD, has addressed this concern about “immune system overload” before. In a kind of thought experiment he worked out in a 2002 Pediatrics article, he estimated that a child’s immune system could theoretically respond to the antigens in 10,000 or more vaccines at once. He made clear this was a theoretical position based solely on immune cell potential. (Giving 10,000 vaccines at once would be harmful in many ways: just the amount of water in that number of vaccines would cause death.) Offit has since been taken to task for this statement on anti-vaccine sites like Age of Autism, where commentors often claim that he advocates that many shots at once, or by others volunteering to give him that many shots. (This Facebook page description reads “Dr Paul Offit … has stated that healthy infants can receive 10,000 vaccines at once. Shall we try this on him first?” In 2012, the anti-vaccine band the Refusers posted an April Fool’s fantasy about Offit receiving 10,000 vaccines, needing medical care, and recanting his pro-vaccine position.)”
            What’s so hard? Even if you can’t parse a medical journal article, this should clarify the statement for you.

          • Linda Tock

            “then each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10 000 vaccines at any one time (obtained by dividing
            107 B cells per mL by 103 epitopes per vaccine)”

            “The capacity to respond to” != the ability to withstand.

            The vaccine antigen provokes an immune response. The children are quite able to *respond* to 10,000 vaccines at once, because their systems can *respond* to that antigen load.

            Nowhere did Dr. Offit say they could withstand 10,000 vaccines nor suggest giving a child 10,000 vaccines.

            But, carry on with your cherry picking and quote mining attempts. They show just how desperate you are.

          • lilady R.N.

            The credulousness level of this particular group of posters is quite high, today.

          • ciaparker2

            Would you care to try to refute the fact that natural measles has cured tumors caused by Burkitt’s lymphoma (reported in The Lancet 1971) and also childhood nephrotic syndrome?

          • lilady R.N.

            How about producing some links to articles that are less than 43 years old Parker?

            Cripes, you are really deranged.

            Stop referring to your special needs child as “vaccine-damaged”. It is an abomination.

          • ciaparker2

            So you’re saying that natural measles has changed in nature in the last forty years? Are you saying that the before and after photos of the boy’s tumor, which disappeared while he was hospitalized for treatment of his tumor, which never took place when he caught measles in the hospital and it made his tumor disappear, are faked? That The Lancet forty years ago did not, in fact, publish scienitific articles, but primarily ones that relied on forged evidence? Are you saying that only articles published now, when pharma control of scientific articles it allows to be published and the media coverage of them, is nearly complete, may be allowed credence?

          • Mike Stevens

            You were the one who claimed measles had ‘evolved’ in recent years Parker….
            The implication being natural measles infection today would do diidley squat for lymphoma.

            You can’t even stop your lies from contradicting themselves, can you?

          • ciaparker2

            That wasn’t my implication, and, unless the hypothesis were tested (by trustworthy, competent scientists), cannot be assumed. It’s irrefutable that measles evolved to become much less dangerous than it was two hundred years ago, just the way diphtheria, scarlet fever, smallpox, and pertussis did. Better living condiitons did a lot, but natural evolution of the pathogens did the rest, so that all are much less dangerous than they used to be and most had become fairly mild, routine childhood diseases BEFORE the vaccines for them came out.
            You have no idea what natural measles would do for lymphoma. Dr. HIckie was the one who touted the benefits a hyperpotentized measles vaccine provides for certain conditions, but this would be, not because it was a vaccine per se, but because the measles virus has certain beneficial properties little explored.

          • JGC

            Uhh..did you have a point, cia?

            Burkitt’s lymphoma is a lymphoproliferative disorder (it accounts for 2.3% of all lymphoproliferative disorder diagnoses). Viral infection is a very common cause of lymphoproliferative disorders.

            If you’re worried about Burkitt’s lymphoma, you’ll want to be vaccinated to protect yourself from the viral infections that might trigger the disease. Certainly the fact that both natural and attenuated measles viruses may induce regression of Burkitt’s lymphoma doesn’t argue routine childhood vaccination is unsafe or without benefit.

          • ciaparker2

            Chris said that the hypervaccine could cure cancer. My point was that this was not because it was a measles vaccine, but because the measles virus often has very beneficial effects on priming the immune system. There is no replacement for a child’s getting measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox, no better eduction for his immune system than that. Quite unlike screwing it up with vaccines and provoking autism and autoimmune disease.

          • JGC

            No replacement? Nonsense-you’re speaking as if getting an infectious disease which conveys a significant risk of permanent disability or death was a GOOD thing.

            But I’m willing to consider your claim that “there is no better education for his immune system” than contracting a wild type measles infection. So…

            Citation needed: what evidence demonstrates that the benefits associated with contracting a wild type measles infection outweigh the known risks associated with the disease? Be specific.

          • Mike Stevens

            Told you before Parker.
            Measles acts like a temporary cell mediated immune deficiency kick.
            Hardly something to get into raptures about. Its like steroids on acid. But temporary.
            That’s why it briefly put a case of lymphoma and a case of nephritic syndrome into remission 40 years ago. Nowadays we have much much better therapeutic options and they work permanently too.
            Cut out the lies and misdirection.

          • ciaparker2

            So what happened to the boy cured of lymphoma by natural measles? Four months later he was said to be in total remission. Did he later relapse and die of it? Forty years is a long time, in most cases of such a long remission, it would no longer be considered a relapse into the original condition, but a new case of an old condition, probably arising from the same background factors as the first time.

        • Boris Ogon

          Seneff is not whacky

          Stephanie Seneff has explicitly (at her Autism One presentation) “predicted” an ASD prevalence of 1 in 2 by the year 2025. Show me the fit that gets you from here to there, and then explain why the prevalence won’t be 2 in 1 in short order.

        • First Officer

          Might be poorly worded but, given we develop in a sterile environment until we are born, newborns are immediately exposed to and begin ingesting and breathing untold thousands of species of viruses, bacteria and fungi, all of which the immune system makes some sort of response to. So, a few dozen more over the course of a year or two is really just a blip on the immune system’s radar. That’s what that statement is referring to.

          • David Foster

            Maybe a few dozen in the form of dirt, germs in the home, etc. But not injected directly into the infant’s body, not live viruses, not aluminum and mercury and formaldehyde.

          • First Officer

            Well if you didn’t, in most cases, inject it directly (as opposed to injecting it indirectly, i suppose) you could not maximize the exposure of the stimulant, be it live WEAKENED virus, protein, etc, to the immune system to provoke the desired response. No response, no immunity. Again, no toxicological effects ever observed from thimerosal or alluminum and the concentration of any formaldehyde in vaccines is about 10% of that found in the human body.

          • ciaparker2

            We never needed a hep-B vaccine for babies born to uninfected mothers. They don’t need maximum exposure of the stimulant, which has so often caused vaccine encephalitis, seizure disorders, and death in these precious newborns. The tens of thousands of children said to have gotten hep-B every year before the vaccine never existed in the world of reality, as the word “estimated” and “speculted” employed every other word in the bogus studies cooked up by Big Pharma to justify this vaccine proves. There were never more than 360 children between one and nine diagnosed with hep-B a year, not the purported tens of thousands, who even in pharma world are admitted, if they existed at all, to have had no symptoms until they were adults and were diagnosed with it, and since most of these adults were drug addicts or alcoholics, probably contracted the disease as adults in the usual ways.

          • Mike Stevens

            Lying again, Parker?
            The evidence pointing to 12-24 thousand of childhood infections with hep B has been exhaustively shown to you dozens of times.
            And these kids went on to be normal non drug using kids and not alcoholics, but developed chronic hep B,cirrhosis, liver failure and death…all because of hepB infection as an infant, which vaccines would have prevented.

          • ciaparker2

            I explicitly asked you to give me the studies you say prove this. It appears that your studies merely state that thousands of adults got it, mostly drug addicts, prostitutes, and alcoholics, and vaccine researchers tried to say it was LIKELY in their opinion t hat they got the hep-B infection as children, but, since they DID NOT HAVE ANY DISEASE SYMPTOMS as children, no one EVER realized it until they were grown.
            The only study I”m aware of that looked at children DIAGNOSED BY BLOOD TEST with hep-B, showed that fewer than 360 a year in the US were diagnosed between the ages of one and nine. Your TENS OF THOUSANDS A YEAR, bolstered by FREQUENT repetitions of the word “estimated,” would appear NOT to be supported by serological tests, because there were NEVER ANY PROBLEMS DURING CHILDHOOD.
            When we talk about rates of breast of lung cancer, do we litter reports with the word “estimated”? No, we don’t, because we want to know how many were actually diagnosed, and those figures are readily available.
            Do tell me. IF you have proof that there were 30,000 (or 40,000, or 15,000 a year) children getting hep-B (I’ve seen all “estimates,” because it really just depends on what the pharma reps think you’ll swallow), PLEASE provide it to me, and we’ll tell the CDC that we have documented evidence on which they should update their schizophrenic study, with tens of thousands cited at the top, and only 360 a year at the bottom.

          • ciaparker2

            Less than one percent of the total number of hep-B cases ever progresses to cirrhosis or liver cancer, again, usually among the drug addicts or alcoholics. Most recover within weeks or months, most without ever having had any symptoms, which makes the total number hard to estimate. Rather than disable or kill thousands of infants with the vaccine, it would be better to let the drug addicts and alcoholics bent on engagine in a louche lifestyle protect themselves with the vaccine. The fact that most failed to do so 25 years ago is still no reason to disable or kill so many innocent infants with this criminal vaccine.

          • JGC

            How many human lives does that 1% represent?

            Is there some rational reason we should not implement public health initiatives to prevent those cancers, when we’ve a demonstrably safe and effective means to do so?

            Is your position that the lives and health of that 1% are without value?

          • ciaparker2

            Not even 1%, but a fraction of 1%. Most of them would not have progressed to the point of cirrhosis or liver cancer if they had not compromised their liver health with their drug addiction or alcoholism. Since the vaccine has destroyed the lives of thousands with the autism, seizure disorders, and even death it often causes, I admit that I think the lives of babies born healthy to healthy mothers are deserving of greater consideration than those of addicted adults. See the testimony at the congressional safety hearing in May 1999 which found it was a very dangerous vaccine, never to be given with mercury, but the companies continued to sell the stores they already had, so that my infant was given the vaccine WITH mercury and WITHOUT permission a year later. See especially the testimony of MIchael Belkin (baby killed by it), Judy Converse (given without permisison, caused vaccine encephalitis and autism), and Patti White (school nurse who said the sudden flood of autistic kindergartners in Missouri in 1996 had been caused by the universal hep-B vax for newborns program which began in 1991).

          • JGC

            “Most of them would not have progressed to the point of cirrhosis or liver cancer if they had not compromised their liver health with their drug addiction or alcoholism.”
            Citation needed: provide evidence that the majority of people with chronic hep B infectious would not have developed cirrhosis or liver cancer if they were not addicted/alcoholic.

            “Since the vaccine has destroyed the lives of thousands with the autism, seizure disorders, and even death it often causes, I admit that I think the lives of babies born healthy to healthy mothers are deserving of greater consideration than those of addicted adults.”

            Citations needed: provide evidence that the hepatitis B vaccines has destroyed the lives of thousands, that it is causally associated with autism spectrum and seizure disorders, and that vaccination causes more deaths than it prevents.

            “See the testimony at the congressional safety hearing in May 1999 which found it was a very dangerous vaccine, never to be given with mercury, but the companies continued to sell the stores they already had, so that my infant was given the vaccine WITH mercury and WITHOUT permission a year later.”

            Identify the evidence, instead, that those giving testimony offered to support their claim.

            See especia lly the testimony of MIchael Belkin (baby killed by it)”

            How has it been factually established that the vaccine caused the child’s death? Be specific.

            “Judy Converse (given without permisison, caused vaccine encephalitis and autism”

            How has it been factually established that the vaccine caused the child’s autism? Be specific—and be aare that it has not been established that the vaccine caused the child’s encephalitis: in her testimony Ms. Converse states his symptom did not match the NVICP criteria for a table injury of encephalitis.

            “Patti White (school nurse who said the sudden flood of autistic kindergartners in Missouri in 1996 had been caused by the universal hep-B vax for newborns program which began in 1991”

            How has it been factually established that this ‘sudden flood’ was causally associated with the implementation of the hep B vaccination program in 1991? Be specific.

            I mean, these claims are founded on some basis other than a post hoc ergo procter hoc logical fallacy—right?

          • Mike Stevens

            No, her position is that 90% have no value
            “No big deal”, she calls it.

          • JGC

            “Rather than disable or kill thousands of infants with the vaccine, it would be better to let the drug addicts and alcoholics bent on engagine in a louche lifestyle protect themselves with the vaccine.”

            Citation needed, cia: your evidence that the hep B vaccine has disabled or killed thousands of infants would be…what, exactly? Be specific.

          • Mike Stevens

            But for infants, it is between 60 and 90% who get chronic liver disease, and half get liver failure or die.
            Why do you pretend otherwise, Parker?
            You are a pathological liar.

          • ciaparker2

            But pregnant women are routinely screened for hep-B during pregnancy, so they know ahead of time which babies (very few, because very few pregnant women have hep-B) will need treatment at birth. NEWBORNS BORN TO UNINFECTED MOTHERS DO NOT NEED THE VACCINE. How many newborn infants play with sharp objects with infected blood on them, and rub the blood into a wound or mucus membrane on themselves? .

          • Mike Stevens

            People kiss babies, siblings and family exchange all sorts of bodily fluids, playmates share suck toys, school friends do god knows what.
            All of that led to thousands of latent transmissions each year, until universal vaccination stopped it.

          • JGC

            False statements again—if you’d read my precious post you would perhaps have been aware of this.

            To remind you, in 1990 before the initiation of hep B vaccination programs there were 18,000 children under 10 with chronic hep B infections. Half of these were infected by their mothers during delivery (9,000 is not “very few”).
            Half of these—again, 9000 is not an insignificant number—were infected by other family members or by individuals they were not related to, and clearly despite not being born to infected mothers needed vaccination.

          • Mike Stevens

            Sigh……
            1. Confusing acute hep with chronic hep….nul points
            2. Confusing incidence and prevalence…..nul points
            3. Confusing symptomatic with asymptomatic….nul points
            4. Assuming estimates made with standard scientific and statistical methodology are “speculation”…. nul points
            5. Knowing sweet f all about the natural history of Hep B…..nul points

            Give it up Parker.

          • ciaparker2

            It is you who are doing the confusing. Are you saying that there were 30,000 children a year (or 15,000, or whatever) proven by blood testing DURING CHILDHOOD, to be positive for hep-B, whether with an acute or chronic infection? If so, please provide your reference, and it must meet the following criteria: a) proven by serological testing
            b) during childhood.

          • Mike Stevens

            We have been through this, dozens of times before……
            The calculation is based on sampling from the NHANES data sets of children, not based upon acute, symptomatic infection notifications (which miss 99% of infection episodes).

          • Mike Stevens

            Exactly. Not every child, but a representative sample.
            Look up the NHANES data set.

            Hint:
            If I sample kids in several carefully selected and representative schools in New York, and find one in 38 kids have autism, is it reasonable for me to assume that if my methodology is sound, there may be one in every 38 kids in New York with autism?
            Clue: I don’t have to test every child in the city, just an appropriate sample.

          • ciaparker2

            The problem though is that when they counted only the children who had actually been diagnosed with hep-B, the numbers were only less than one in ten thousand. These were NOT a random sampling, but, according to the CDC, ALL the children in the country who had actually been tested and found positive for hep-B. Every child who had symptoms of hep-B who wen to a doctor would have been tested, and, if positive, it would have been reported since it is a disease which it is mandatory to report when found. You have NO basis for saying that there were tens of thousands of children who had no symptoms, were never sick with it during childhood, but who you are certain had hep-B. It is equally plausible to say that some of these healthy, symptomless children grew up (without hep-B), did drugs and other louche practices, got hep-B, got symptoms, and were diagnosed at that time (as adults). Vaccine researchers conceived the whole scam to start giving this dangerous vaccine to every newborn in America. If you have no records of children with hep-B (or only one in ten thousand), then you have NO basis for saying that in reality tens of thousands of them were getting symptomless hep-B which was never recognized or diagnosed during childhood.

          • Mike Stevens

            The basis I have for saying the majority of children with chronic Hep B have no initial symptoms or signs they were infected is the fact that for 99% of infants who develop chronic Hepatitis B the infection is symptomless.
            There comes a point when you cannot continue to argue against reality and the medical evidence Cia, and you have gone way past that.

          • JGC

            Nonsense again cia parker. Before the introduction of routine hep B vaccination about 18,000 children were infected with hepatitis B virus by the time they were 10 years old. While half of the children infected before ten caught the virus from their mother during birth the other half caught the virus for another family member or someone else who came in contact with the child. Children are far less likely than adults to clear the infection: 95% of people who become infected as adults or older children will stage a full recovery and develop protective immunity to the virus compared to only 30% for younger children. 80% to 90% of all children under 5 which that acquire the infection will develop chronic hep B, placing them at greatly elevated risk of death from liver cancer or cirrhosis. Since routine Hep B vaccination was initiated the number of new infections per year has decreased 82%, with the greatest drop among children born since 1991 when vaccinating children was first recommended, resulting in significantly reduced numbers of deaths due to cancer or cirrhosis.

          • ciaparker2

            OK, JGC, Mike refuses to provide proof that 18,000 children a year were infected in the US before the vaccine. Why don’t you do it?
            The only study based on blood testing of real children found to have hep-B only showed fewer than 360 a year. I believe that the tens of thousands the vaccine companies used to start the universal hep-b vax for all newborns, whether born to infected mothers or not, was only arrived at retrospectively. Most of those with symptoms of hep-B severe enough to be noticed and diagnosed are drug addicts, prostitutes, and/or alchoholics. When many of these were diagnosed in adulthood, many denied that their unhealthy lifestyle could have been the source of their contagion (it’s transmitted like AIDS, through sharing of drug needles or unsafe sex), vaccine company researchers salivated and said it MUST have been that they got it as children, but, since they had NO SYMPTOMS OF ILLNESS, it was never suspected or diagnosed until they were adults.
            Ten years ago, there had been more adverse reaction reports filed with VAERS caused by this vaccine than by all the others put together, including autism, seizure disorders, and death. I believe that that position has now been usurped by the HPV vaccine.
            So, please provide a source based on REAL CHILDREN, not adults, DIAGNOSED BY BLOOD TESTING WITH HEP-B, to the tune of tens of thousands a year, in the years before 1991, when the vaccine began to be given routinely at birth and our present age of autism began at the same time. School nurse Patti White said in her congressional testimony in 1999 that she had been convinced that the flood of autistic Missouri kindergartners suddenly hitting Missouri public schools in 1996 was due to this vaccine program having been started in 1991.

          • JGC

            Cia, I believe you’re misreading Mike’s statement. According to the CDC, before the introduction of the vaccine there were 18,000 children infected with hep b in total—not 18,000 new infections in children every year. Since the introduction of routine hep b vaccination in 1991, I’ll note, the incidence of new infections has decreased over 80%.

            “Ten years ago, there had been more adverse reaction reports filed with VAERS caused by this vaccine than by all the others put together, including autism, seizure disorders, and death.”

            Reports of adverse consequences in VAERS in any number, however, are insufficient to establish causality. It’s a passive reporting system, with no system in place to prevent duplicate reports, which includes reports of deaths following vaccination from identifiable causes
            other than vaccination like
            like drownings, suicides, automobile accidents, and which famously included reports of vaccines turning children into the Incredible Hulk or Wonder Woman.

            While Patti White may have been convinced the” flood of autistic Missouri kindergartners suddenly hitting Missouri public schools in 1996 was due to this vaccine program”, thre’s no reason to accept her opinion as valid. You, Twyla, David Foster, Barbara Loe Fisher, etc. , after all, are demonstrably also convinced of a great many things regarding the safety of routine childhood vaccinations that simply aren’t true.

            So I’ll ask again: how has it been factually established that this ‘flood of autistic Missouri kindergartners was caused by the vaccine program?

          • ciaparker2

            JSC,
            OK, there were fewer than 360 children a year diagnosed with hep-B. The older the child, the more likely that they will recover within weeks or months, like 90% of those who get hep-B. If you want to add them up, those figures are for children 1-10. So that 3,600 total over a ten year spread, not 18,000.

          • Mike Stevens

            Your willful ignorance is becoming quite annoying now.

            When infants are infected with hep B, 90% of them become chronic carriers.
            When children are infected with hep B, 60% of them become carriers.
            It is 5% of adults who become carriers when they get acute hep B, remember?

            I have shown you the multiple publications and strands of evidence demonstrating this many times before – so why do you persist in lying is beyond me.

            Oh, I forgot, you are the person who claimed that you know more about Hepatitis B than the CDC, the WHO, and the AAP all put together, because you have “researched” it.
            You haven’t a clue what “research” is, and your arrogance is insufferable.

          • Boris Ogon

            OK, there were fewer than 360 children a year diagnosed with hep-B.

            It’s amazing. You have just had your hat handed to you with instructions pinned to it over here, and you just turn around and do the same thing someplace else.

            The fundamental dishonesty that substitutes for your being does not merit replies from anyone of good will or sound mind, Cynthia.

          • JGC

            Once again, from the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Vaccine Education Center:

            Before the hepatitis B vaccine, every year in the United States about 18,000 children were infected with hepatitis B virus by the time they were 10 years old. This statistic is especially important because people are much more likely to develop liver cancer or cirrhosis if they are infected early in life, rather than later in life (most people are infected with hepatitis B virus when they are adolescents and young adults).
            About 9,000 of the 18,000 children infected in the first 10 years of life caught the virus from their mother during birth. However, many young children didn’t catch the disease from their mother. They caught it from either another family member or someone else who came in contact with the child. Because hepatitis B can be transmitted by relatively casual contact with items contaminated with blood of an infected person, and because many people who are infected with hepatitis B virus don’t know that they have it, it is virtually impossible to be “careful enough” to avoid this infection…
            Every year in the United States about 3,000 people die soon after catching hepatitis B virus. In addition, every year about 10,000 people become chronically infected, putting them at high risk of developing the long-term consequences of hepatitis B virus infection: cirrhosis and liver cancer. In fact, with the exception of influenza virus, hepatitis B virus causes more severe disease and death in the United States than any other vaccine-preventable disease. On the other hand, the hepatitis B vaccine is an extremely rare cause of a severe allergic reaction called anaphylaxis. To date, no one has died from this reaction, but it is theoretically cause of severe disease and death in the United States, and the hepatitis B vaccine does not cause permanent damage or possible that this could occur.
            Because hepatitis B virus is a common death, the benefits of the hepatitis B vaccine clearly outweigh its risks.”

          • Mike Stevens

            One of the sources is here.
            http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00033405.htm
            Of course, irrational anti vaccine activists call it a conspiracy by pharma.

          • ciaparker2

            Wow, 18,000 a year now? Doesn’t Dorit only claim 13,000? it’s true that some shills go as high as 30,000 a year, but all of you are just pulling numbers out of your hat. Only fewer than 360 a year were diagnosed with hep-B by blood test. You’d like to say that your tens of thousands (why not go for broke and make it millions?) had no symptoms and were not sick until adulthood, when they were diagnosed with hep-B. But many of us believe that it’s much more likely that, since everyone admits it’s not spread by casual contact, but only by infected blood and body fluids, just like AIDS, that children aren’t likely to catch it. Women have been screened for hep-B during pregnancy for decades, and those who are positive have had their infants tested for hep-B for all of those decades. They would have shown up in the figures of diagnosed cases of hep-B. You are deploying a scare tactic to try to force people to take a dangerous vaccine to prevent a disease that children born to healthy mothers have close to zero chance of getting.

          • JGC

            ciaparker, I’m not a paid shill for anyone. The 18,000 children infected by age 10 figure is courtesy of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia’s Vaccine Education Center.

            ‘But many of us believe that it’s much more likely that, since everyone admits it’s not spread by casual contact, but only by infected blood and body fluids, just like AIDS, that children aren’t likely to catch it.”

            It’s been made more than clear on the basis of your posts that you and those ‘many like you’ believe a great many things regarding infectious diseases and the vaccines that protect against them that simply are not true.

            “You are deploying a scare tactic to try to force people to take a dangerous vaccine to prevent a disease that children born to healthy mothers have close to zero chance of getting.”

            Direct question, cia: what evidence demonstrates that the Hep B vaccine is “dangerous”–i.e., that the risks associated with being vaccinated against Hep B are greater than the risks associated with remaining vulnerable to hep B infection?
            Be specific–and remember it’s evidence I’m asking for, not repeated assertions of your believe this to be the case.

          • JGC

            Not a few dozens, David–tens of thousands. And yes,some exposures occur by a route equivalent to being ‘injected directly into the infant’s body”–any time they skin their knee for example.
            And they’re exposed to more aluminum and formaldehyde through dietary sources (or in the case of formaldehyde as the result of their own normal metabolic processes) thatn they could ever receive through routine vaccinations.
            As for mercury? No one is injecting infants with mercury. Perhaps with a vaccine incorporating thimerosal, but that isn’t the same thing

          • David Foster

            It IS the same thing. Thimerosal is almost 50% mercury by weight. Again, do you still not get it?

          • JGC

            Expressing thimerosal’s mercury content as a by weight percentage is meaningless, however and does not support the premise that at exposure levels acheivable by routine vaccination thimerosal is harmful.

          • JGC

            And more directly, no: thimerosal and mercury are not the same thing any more than table salt and chlorine are the same thing or water and hydrogen are the same thing.
            Do you still not get that?

          • ciaparker2

            As David says, thimerosal is half ethylmercury by weight, and etylmercury is just as dangerous as methylmercury, if not more so. Please read The Age of Autism (book) and Evidence of Harm for extensive citations to scientific studies and documentation on this.

          • Mike Stevens

            So not only doesn’t David get it, you don’t either.
            No surprises there then.

          • Matt Carey

            ” Please read The Age of Autism (book) and Evidence of Harm for extensive citations to scientific studies and documentation on this.”
            I did. They were a big part in convincing me that the vaccines -cause-autism idea has no substance

          • ciaparker2

            You are a well-known pro-vaccine commenter, and could be expected to say no less. Thousands of other people more concerned with our own and our children’s lives were extremely impressed by the impressively-documented evidence they brought on the extreme danger of mercury in vaccines (the book Age of Autism went into a lot of detail about mercury from other sources too, and it’s devastatingly dangerous however exposure to it takes place, whether in ointment or oral medicine to treat syphilis, calomel, teething powder, contaminated fish or grain, mercury-containing fungicides or in vaccines as a preservative. Or, apparently, as an adjuvant too).

          • JGC

            cia, please provide evidence demonstrating that ethyl mercury at levels of exposure achievable by routine vaccination exposes those vaccinated to ‘extreme danger”.

            Oh wait…that’s right. You don’t have any.

          • Mike Stevens

            You clearly haven’t the faintest idea what an adjuvant is.

          • Linda Tock

            What were the DOSES of mercury found in those fungicides?

            How do they compare to the few micrograms of thimerosal which is only found in the multidose flu vaccine?

            I’ll wait.

          • JGC

            “etylmercury is just as dangerous as methylmercury, if not more so.”

            This statement is false—so false that it would be appropriate to characterize it as a bald-faced lie.
            Ethyl mercury is much, much less toxic than methyl mercury, sufficiently so that studies demonstrate it is inappropriate to apply exposure limits identified for methyl mercury to ethyl mercury: read Pichichero and Burbacher.

          • Linda Tock

            ..and table salt is nearly 50% chlorine by weight, and chlorine gas is poisonous!

            Do you see how ludicrous it is to be discussing % by weight?

            Thimerosal is a compound. It has a different toxicological profile from elemental mercury and cannot be compared to elemental mercury.

            Learn some chemistry sometime.

          • JGC

            Oh, and you really think children are never exposures to live viruses? really?

          • ciaparker2

            And the ONLY way to get their immune systems to develop appropriately for a lifetime of service is for them to do combat with actual pathogens. The former universal childhoood diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, and pertussis, did exactly that. The vaccines cause the autoimmune diseases from an inappropriate stimulation of the Th-2 autoimmune response, rather than the natural strengthening of the Th-1 kill-the-invader response which is desired.

          • JGC

            Again: citations needed, demonstrating that contracting a wild type infection is the all-caps ONLY way a child may develop a functional immune system.

          • ciaparker2

            It’s necessary for children to be exposed to live viruses so that their Th-1 immune response develop properly.

          • JGC

            Citation needed: define ‘properly’, and provide evidence that routine childhood vaccination prevents a child’s Th-1 immune response from developing in that manner.

          • ciaparker2

            I have a lot to translate right now and can’t look it up at the moment. Why don’t you do it? It’s well-known that babies are born with a preference for a Th-2 autoimmune response, to keep their mothers’ bodies from rejecting them during pregnancy. The developmental task of the first two or three years is to strengthen the Th-1 response, which can only be done if the infant is exposed to relatively mild pathogens at the appropriate time. His mother’s antibodies will protect him to a considerable degree for between six months and a year through placental immunity and through breastfeeding for as long as it continues. Then his own immune system must take over the job, but it cannot do so very effectively without having had practice. In addition to the need for practice with the formerly universal childhood diseases, vaccines skew the immune response to a preference for Th-2 autoimmune responses, sensitizing the child’s immune system to react with alarm on encountering substances similar or identical to vaccine ingredients. The whole point of vaccines is to make the body alarmed at the sudden appearance in the blood of foreign and presumably dangerous substances. The fact that it often does so by developing asthma, eczema, respiratory or food allergies, GI disease, or diabetes, is because the vaccines did such a good job of alerting the body that the substances in question are alarming and foreign, and must be attacked and destroyed, even if they are really part of the body’s own systems.

          • JGC

            As you’re the one who made the claim it’s your responsibility to provide evidence to support it, not mine responsibility to go hunting for it if it exists. Notre also that until you provide meaningful definitions for “proper” versus “unproper” development there is no way for another to proceed.

            “The developmental task of the first two or three years is to strengthen the Th-1 response, which can only be done if the infant is exposed to relatively mild pathogens at the appropriate time.”
            What does a routine vaccination schedule do, if it isn’t to expose the system to mild antibodies at appropriate times? Natural exposure, by definition, will expose children instead to more virulent wild-type strains at random points in time that will differ from child to child.

            “His mother’s antibodies will protect him to a considerable degree for between six months and a year through placental immunity and through breastfeeding for as long as it continues.”
            Routine vaccination demonstrably provides far better protection: the situation you’re describing where protection is a function of maternal antibodies through placental immunity and breast-feeding is the after all the situation that was operative prior to routine vaccination programs, and which clearly wasn’t sufficient to prevent, for example, on average 4 million of cases of chicken pox every year resulting in 10’s of 1000’s hospitalizations and 100 to 150 deaths, or 80 plus percent of new hep b infections, etc..

          • Mike Stevens

            She’s “too busy” to provide evidence for her claims, and wants you to try!
            Good luck on that one….

          • JGC

            citations needed: provide a definition for “properly” as you’re using it here, and provide evidence that routine childhood vaccination prevents that “proper” development as well as evidence demonstrating “improper” development is associated with greater risk than is remaining vulnerable to infectious diseases.

          • Mike Stevens

            No David.
            Tens of thousands of different antigenic stimuli from hundreds of differing types of viruses and bacteria.
            And inhaled, ingested and injected (through microabrasions in skin and mucosae) from where they directly make their way into the systemiccirculation.
            Try again, please.

          • Linda Tock

            A few dozen?

            Ever swabbed the faucet in your home for bacteria?

            It’s more than a few dozen, sheesh.

            There is no vaccine on the childhood schedule (*flu vaccine from multidose vials excepted) which contains thimerosal anymore.

            Also, thimerosal is not elemental mercury. It’s a compound. Learn some chemistry.

            As far as formaldehyde – the baby has formaldehyde in it as soon as its cells start performing 1 carbon metabolism. Your average 2 month old has nearly 10,000 micrograms of formaldehyde in its body at any given point in time – all produced simply by living.

            You think that adding 100 micrograms from a vaccine is going to upset that apple cart? Doubtful.

          • ciaparker2

            Natural infections (except for tetanus and similar) are first processed by the filtering systems of the respiratory and digestive systems, killing many of the pathogens and trapping them from going further, and also alerting the rest of the immune system to prepare its forces for the incoming threat. Pathogens, dangerous chemicals, and foreign proteins from vaccines have never been on the radar of anyone’s immune system for the millions of years of our evolution, and they often not only do damage in their own right, but do damage when the immune system mounts an excessively vehement defense, i.e., encephalitis and/or autoimmune disease.

          • JGC

            “Pathogens, dangerous chemicals, and foreign proteins from vaccines have never been on the radar of anyone’s immune system for the millions of years of our evolution, and they often not only do damage in their own right, but do damage when the immune system mounts an excessively vehement defense, i.e., encephalitis and/or autoimmune disease.”

            Cia, we live in a world full of chemicals, foreign proteins and pathogens: the evolutionary development of our immune systems occurred in that environment. And yes, vaccination does cause adverse consequences such as encephalitis, but very rarely compared to natural infections by the diseases vaccines protect against. Consider MMR vaccines versus wild type measles infections: the wild type infection will cause encephalitis in one out of every one thousand cases while the vaccine causes encephalitis in one out of every one MILLION inoculations. That’s three orders of magnitude less frequently. Concerned about suffering encephalitis?
            Then you want to be vaccinated.

          • Mike Stevens

            Which is why 2 in 5 infants died in childhood from those same infections in the past, huh?

          • Linda Tock

            Yeah, that’s why 90% of unvaccinated people exposed to measles come down with them.. because their ‘natural systems’ defended them so well.

            Then there’s those lucky folks that get encephalitis from measles, SSPE, arthritis, deafness and a host of other issues.

            Doesn’t sound like their bodies ‘prepped’ enough.

            Compare that to the hordes of vaccinated people who AREN’T getting measles when exposed.

            Logic. You lack it.

        • Matt Carey

          Here’s a challenge. I’ve yet to see anyone even try to take it on.

          Paul Offit stated that an infant can respond to the antigens in 10,000 vaccines. That statement get’s misinterpreted by many, often claiming that an infant can be stuck with 10,000 needles, 10,000 doses of vaccine, 10,000×0.5ml, or 5 liters of liquid.

          All very scary. Here’s what he wrote. What’s your complaint about it? Did he make poor assumptions? A math error? What? Please, show your work.

          “Studies on the diversity of antigen receptors indicate that the immune system has the capacity to respond to extremely large numbers of antigens. Current data suggest that the theoretical capacity determined by diversity of antibody variable gene regions would allow for as many as 10^9 to 10^11 different antibody specificities.38 But this prediction is limited by the number of circulating B cells and the likely redundancy of antibodies generated by an individual.

          A more practical way to determine the diversity of the immune response would be to estimate the number of vaccines to which a child could respond at one time. If we assume that 1) approximately 10 ng/mL of antibody is likely to be an effective concentration of antibody per epitope (an immunologically distinct region of a protein or polysaccharide),39 2) generation of 10 ng/mL requires approximately 10^3 B-cells per mL,39 3) a single B-cell clone takes about 1 week to reach the 10^3 progeny B-cells required to secrete 10 ng/mL of antibody39 (therefore, vaccine-epitope-specific immune responses found about 1 week after immunization can be generated initially from a single B-cell clone per mL), 4) each vaccine contains approximately 100 antigens and 10 epitopes per antigen (ie, 103 epitopes), and 5) approximately 10^7 B cells are present per mL of circulating blood,39 then each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10 000 vaccines at any one time (obtained by dividing 10^7 B cells per mL by 10^3 epitopes per vaccine).”

          http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/1/124.full

          • CassandraofDelphi

            It takes a moron to suggest that infants can take 10,000 vaccines safely at once and even bigger one to defend it. That fact that you are on the IACC speaks volumes about the committee. Comparing antigens that babies are exposed to in the first weeks of life with vaccine antigens is wrong. Do you understand the concept of friendly bacteria? How about the microbiome? You have to live under the rock if you have not heard about this. Babies are exposed to friendly bacteria that is required to establish their own microbiome. These are not the same as vaccine antigens. This calculation also leaves out the very important fact that vaccines are made with adjuvants. The challenge is on you and Offit. Please, if you believe in the safety of taking 10,000 vaccines at once volunteer to demonstrate it and the discussion will stop once and for all.

        • Matt Carey

          Here’s a challenge. I’ve yet to see anyone even try to take it on.

          Paul Offit stated that an infant can respond to the antigens in 10,000 vaccines. That statement get’s misinterpreted by many, often claiming that an infant can be stuck with 10,000 needles, 10,000 doses of vaccine, 10,000×0.5ml, or 5 liters of liquid.

          All very scary. Here’s what he wrote. What’s your complaint about it? Did he make poor assumptions? A math error? What? Please, show your work.

          “Studies on the diversity of antigen receptors indicate that the immune system has the capacity to respond to extremely large numbers of antigens. Current data suggest that the theoretical capacity determined by diversity of antibody variable gene regions would allow for as many as 10^9 to 10^11 different antibody specificities.38 But this prediction is limited by the number of circulating B cells and the likely redundancy of antibodies generated by an individual.

          A more practical way to determine the diversity of the immune response would be to estimate the number of vaccines to which a child could respond at one time. If we assume that 1) approximately 10 ng/mL of antibody is likely to be an effective concentration of antibody per epitope (an immunologically distinct region of a protein or polysaccharide),39 2) generation of 10 ng/mL requires approximately 10^3 B-cells per mL,39 3) a single B-cell clone takes about 1 week to reach the 10^3 progeny B-cells required to secrete 10 ng/mL of antibody39 (therefore, vaccine-epitope-specific immune responses found about 1 week after immunization can be generated initially from a single B-cell clone per mL), 4) each vaccine contains approximately 100 antigens and 10 epitopes per antigen (ie, 103 epitopes), and 5) approximately 10^7 B cells are present per mL of circulating blood,39 then each infant would have the theoretical capacity to respond to about 10 000 vaccines at any one time (obtained by dividing 10^7 B cells per mL by 10^3 epitopes per vaccine).”

          http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/109/1/124.full

      • David Foster

        PLEASE do your homework before adding yourself to what is already a very low signal-to-noise discussion.

        http://www.safeminds.org/research/docs/Thimerosal%20Science%20Summary%20Dec%202012.pdf

        Also, consider the many criticisms of the supposed “body of evidence” showing that vaccines to not cause autism. You can start here:

        http://fourteenstudies.com

        Also consider the voluminous work of a retired pediatrician, Dr. Yazbak:

        http://yazbakarticles.wordpress.com/

        • JGC

          The listed articles at the safeminds link are insufficient to demonstrate a causal association between routine childhood vaccination (whether the vaccine formulations incorporate thimerosal or not) and autism spectrum disorders. They’re the usual collection of cherry-picked anti-vax articles: ones’ finding thimerosal exposure due to vaccines may exceed CDC or EPA exposure limits set for elemental or methyl mercury exposure, much more toxic forms of mercury with longer half-lives of elimination that the ethyl mercury thimerosal metabolizes to produce, one’s noting effects at much greater exposure levels than achievable as a consequence of vaccination (1 mg/kg in one study, where an 8 pound infant would achieve an exposure of 8.3 ng/mL-120 times lower—as the result of receiving a half-mL dose of a vaccine which incorporated thimerosal), etc.

          The “fourteen studies” criticisms similarly is an old anti-vax talking point without merit (see http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/welcome-back-my-friends-to-the-show-that-never-ends-part-ii-generation-rescue-attacks-14-studies/ for details).

          And Dr. Yazbak? Don’t even go there–he’s an apologist for child-abusers who will testify that the injuries associated with shaken baby syndrome could have been caused by routine vaccinations in the face of a total lack of any evidence that could be the case.

        • lilady R.N.

          You should be doing your homework before you post comments.

          “Also consider the voluminous work of a retired pediatrician, Dr. Yazbak”

          Do you mean this Dr. Yazbak, who is a hired gun who defends child batterers and child murderers?

          http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2012/10/05/using-the-lie-that-sbs-is-a-misdiagnosis-for-vaccine-injury/

          • David Foster

            Doing my homework?

            Like you did…consult The Google and pull up the first negative link you can find from one of the blogs you and your clones refer to constantly?

            I understand that this is all you do Li-nota-lady, it’s all I ever see you do. Make vindictive, personal attacks.

            And it’s a great strategy really, because then you can avoid the actual subject matter altogether.

            And continue to hide the fact that you don’t know what the hell you are talking about.

          • lilady R.N.

            Too bad that you have to resort to personal libelous attacks on other posters here.

            You’re damn straight, I’ll link to a blog which contains the facts about Dr. Yazbak with his history of defending child batterers and child murderers.

          • David Foster

            You call someone a defender of child murderers and then call someone else out for personal attacks?

            I will just let speak for itself.

            But again, do you have anything of substance to say about the subject matter being discussed here?

          • lilady R.N.

            All you ever need to know about the safety and efficacy of Thimerosal, right here at the FDA Biologicals website.

            http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228

            Do try to stay on topic and please refrain from linking to crank anti-vaccine, anti-science blogs

          • David Foster

            The FDA and CDC writeups on the safety record of thimerosal are both hogwash.

            The statement [from the FDA] suggests that before thimerosal was added to vaccines, Powell and Jamieson had shown that it was safe and effective. This is not exactly true because the FDA clearly states in the same document that Powell and Jamieson’s 1931 study “was not specifically designed to examine toxicity; 7 of 22 subjects were observed for only one day, the specific clinical assessments were not described, and no laboratory studies were reported.”

            How again is that everything I need to know about the safety and efficacy of thimerosal?

            Here is everything you don’t know about thimerosal:

            http://www.vaccinationnews.org/20110314ThimerosalContainingVaccines-I-InTheDarkYazbakFE

            http://inthesetimes.com/article/649/eli_lilly_and_thimerosal

            Your FDA writeup discusses “the long history of safety” of thimerosal and provides a link to a Bibliography. There was in fact no study about the safety and efficacy of thimerosal in vaccines.

            The FDA and CDC make it sound like the removal of thimerosal from most vaccines was simply to avoid controversy, in an abundance of caution. What really happened was that a law had been passed which actually required vaccine ingredients to be quantified and listed, and then they suddenly did the Math and realized that the recommended infant vaccine schedule included more mercury than the EPA had established as safe.

            You folks are losing this battle on vaccine safety each and every day. Are you sure you want to keep claiming that mercury is safe?

          • lilady R.N.

            You’ve already lost the battle and you lost your mind before that loss.

          • David Foster

            Again, no comment on the points I made, or the content of the links showing how deceptive the FDA’s and CDC’s statements are?

            You can’t win arguments by simply throwing links around, you have to actually understand the content.

            And if you are not willing to engage in debate, then why exactly are you posting?

          • sabelmouse

            pure shilling and spamming and maybe just expressing intrinsic nastiness.

          • lilady R.N.

            Mouse, what have you ever added to a discussion, aside from your up votes for crank posters?

          • sabelmouse

            i described your essence!

          • JGC

            “The FDA and CDC writeups on the safety record of thimerosal are both hogwash.”
            Prove it, then: provide credible evidence that at exposure levels achievable by routine vaccination thimerosal causes harm.

          • JGC

            David, Yazbak does testify in the defense of child abusers, including those whose abuse resulted in a child’s death, arguing that their injuries could have been caused by routine vaccination rather than abuse despite the fact that no evidence whatsoever exists to support that claim.
            Noting this isn’t a personal attack, just a statement of fact.
            Now with respect to offering anything of substance, can you provide any? Or is safemind’s list of articles, that do not support the premise that thimerosal at levels of exposure acheivable by routine vaccination is harmful, the best you can do?

          • David Foster

            Yazbak testifies in the defense of accused child abusers, there is a huge difference…you know…innocent until proven guilty. Everyone deserves a defense, or are you also against the Constitution?

            Your claim that there is no evidence to support the possibility that some injuries diagnosed as SBS could be a serious vaccine adverse reaction, is completely false.

            Your last question is a false choice, because you assume that the Safeminds list of studies (they are not articles) do not support the premise that thimerosal in vaccine doses is harmful.

            Just like everything else I have ever heard you say Mr JGC, that is wrong sir.

            Funny that you try to criticize me for providing a list of “articles”…they are in fact studies but that is beside the point…90% of what I see from you, The Dorit, Li-not-a-lady etc are just links to blogs written by other folks who won’t identify themselves.

          • JGC

            Yazbak testifies in defense of individuals who have demonstrably abused their children, and his testimony has no basis in scientific fact. He’s either deliberately offering false testimony on their behalf or is too incompetent to realize his testimony has no evidentiary support.
            In either case he is not a reliable source for information regarding vaccine safety.

            And as the foster parent of a 3 year old who’s suffered multiple disabling injuries due to being shaken, I’ll discuss that miserable excuse for a human being no further.

          • ciaparker2

            Not demonstrated to have been abused by their parents by having been shaken. Please read Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine-Induced Encephalitis, for descriptions of many cases in which the pathology reports were DEMONSTRABLY incompatible with the baby having been shaken. But of course pharma companies are promoting the prosecution of such cases in order to keep people from learning the truth about the frequency and severity of vaccine encephalitis for as long as possible. Of course you would prefer that all parents of babies who die from vaccine encephalitis be thrown into prison and throw away the key. Michael Belkin is one of many parents whose baby was killed by the hep-B vaccine (mine got encephalitis from it, but it “only” caused four days and nights of constant, inconsolable screaming from the pain of her swollen brain and autism from the brain damage). Belkin’s child was found on autopsy to have a swollen brain from vaccine encephalitis, but the vaccine company rep came and talked to the hospital, and they changed their tune and said it had NOT been encephalitis. The police investigated Belkin and his wife on suspicion of having caused Lyla’s death by shaking her.

          • Mike Stevens

            Link to this mythical autopsy report.
            I dare you.

          • ciaparker2

            You have not read Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine-Induced Encephalitis, by Dr. Harold Buttram, about how many innocent parents have been accused of shaking their babies and causing brain damage, when in reality the clinical indications are incompatible with having shaken them, and instead point to the brain damage having been done by the encephalitic vaccine reaction which has occurred so often, yet is so rarely recognized either by parents or by doctors. Dr. Yazbak is a kind, conscientious, extremely knowledgeable pediatrician who has testified to this effect for parents wrongfully accused of this crime, when the real crime is committed by vaccine companies desperate to keep the truth about the dangers of their vaccines from the public.

          • lilady R.N.

            Gee, I think I was beginning to miss your multiple anti-vaccine comments, Parker.

            I most certain have read Buttram’s and Yazbak’s legal briefs (you ought to try reading them, counsellor), which defend child batterers and murderers. Nice cottage industry they carved out for themselves as the hired guns for these evil defendants:

            http://encyclopediaantivaccinemovement.blogspot.com/2014/03/harold-e-buttram-md.html

          • ciaparker2

            So sorry, Lil, I’ve been swamped with translation work, as well as ESL work with my daughter. I’m really excited, we’re using the Cambridge Connect books to teach ESL to middle schoolers, and for the first time she’s starting to ask questions and seem interested in the world around her. We’re working on What do you do for a cold/flu/earache/headache, and she asked what aspirin was (which I told her to never take), and what a virus is. She didn’t understand that what do you do for, is asking what you do to treat it, rather than a description of the symptoms. Awful how vaccine encephalitis damages or even destroys the inbuilt grammar structures described by Chomsky. If you know what Finalizar CIP means, I would be grateful to you if you told me. I wrote to a friend in Mexico City to ask.
            But of course waking people up to the dangers of vaccines continues to be a priority in my life, which I must fit in when I can.

          • ciaparker2

            So

          • JGC

            The clincial evidence is in no way consistent with an encephalitic vaccine reaction: encephailitis does not cause broken ribs, fractured skulls, retinal hemoraging, etc.

          • ciaparker2

            And in most of the cases we are talking about, there were no broken ribs etc., only a child with brain damage caused by vaccine encephalitis, not from parental abuse.

          • Mike Stevens

            Apologist for baby killers now, are you?

          • ciaparker2

            Apologist for those who use vaccines as their proxy to kill babies?

          • JGC

            Who do you beleive is administering vaccines to children with the express intent of causing their death? Be specific.

          • JGC

            Provide evidence demonstrating that in” most of cases we are talking” about the child’s injuries were in fact caused by vaccine encephalitis and not from parental abuse.

            In fact, make providing proof for this abhorrent defense of child abusers a priority, cia.

          • Mike Stevens

            Are there no depths to which you will not stoop?
            How can you defend these child murderers and abusers?
            You are SICK.

          • ciaparker2

            How unusual, Lil. My reply just slid right off and disappeared, the way one did to DR last week. I’ll see if I can put this under Mike’s comment.

          • ciaparker2

            So sorry, Lil.

      • JH

        Well, Keith, if you listen to the right people and read the right work, just about any supposed scientific argument can seem rational for a second or two.

        I have zero scientific knowledge of the autism / vaccine issue. I don’t need any. It’s patently obvious that there is no significant relationship between vaccines and autism. While it’s possible that there may be some obscure impact – that can never be ruled out – it’s almost impossible that such an obvious relationship could be overlooked in today’s hypervigilant world. So, sure, Thimerosol or whatever it is may have some extremely small and obscure impact or there maybe some coincidental correlations out there. But beyond that, there ain’t nothin.

        • David Foster

          You should have stopped at “I have zero scientific knowledge of the autism / vaccine issue.”

          • JH

            Keep squinting at that data! :)

    • Twylaa

      Kevin, that is a totally biased, dismissive statement. There is a lot of research showing that very small amounts of mercury have toxic effects on nervous and immune systems.

      • Kevin Folta

        Yes, it is biased- by the peer-reviewed literature! But I’m not an expert in the whole set, while I do keep my eye on it regularly. Help a guy out. What are the three best reports that you feel demonstrate the association? Thanks.

        • CassandraofDelphi

          Kevin, help us out too and show us the controlled study that shows the safety of Thimerosal because the only “safety” study I am aware of is Eli Lilly’s study from the 20s where they gave Thimerosal to 22 patients with meningitis, all of whom died.

          • Kevin Folta

            Scoot over to PubMed. Punch in “thimerosal” and “safety”. There are many good reviews that cite primary research, both safety evaluations and post-hoc analyses. It is pretty easy to find, just have to know where to go. I hope this helps.

          • David Foster

            Interesting stuff.

            I suggest you start here:

            Methodological Issues and Evidence of Malfeasance in Research Purporting to Show Thimerosal in Vaccines Is Safe.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995277

            “There are over 165 studies that have focused on Thimerosal, an organic-mercury (Hg) based compound, used as a preservative in many childhood vaccines, and found it to be harmful. Of these, 16 were conducted to specifically examine the effects of Thimerosal on human infants or children with reported outcomes of death; acrodynia; poisoning; allergic reaction; malformations; auto-immune reaction; Well’s syndrome; developmental delay; and neurodevelopmental disorders, including tics, speech delay, language delay, attention deficit disorder, and autism. In contrast, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that Thimerosal is safe and there is “no relationship between [T]himerosal[-]containing vaccines and autism rates in children.” This is puzzling because, in a study conducted directly by CDC epidemiologists, a 7.6-fold increased risk of autism from exposure to Thimerosal during infancy was found. The CDC’s current stance that Thimerosal is safe and that there is no relationship between Thimerosal and autism is based on six specific published epidemiological studies coauthored and sponsored by the CDC. The purpose of this review is to examine these six publications and analyze possible reasons why their published outcomes are so different from the results of investigations by multiple independent research groups over the past 75+ years.”

            Then consider a few specific studies which address the problem of thimerosal safety in infants:

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24354891
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15764492
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170

            I do understand that for some of these the name Geier is going to cause you to want to summarily dismiss their findings because of the way they have been torched by our medical establishment, but I challenge you to evaluate their research scientifically. If you find any valid criticisms, either yours or from elsewhere, please share them with me.

            I also need to ask you once again to take a close look at the studies collected by Safeminds:

            http://www.safeminds.org/research/docs/Thimerosal%20Science%20Summary%20Dec%202012.pdf

            Contrast this science with the following “handwaving” that we are so accustomed to seeing in articles and reviews which proclaim the safety of injecting one of the most toxic substances known to man into infants:

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15342856
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17928818
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24117921

            See, all you have to do is compute the “body burden” of mercury in an infant monkey and extrapolate that to a human infant, and whoila! Safety.

            If you want to be skeptical, I suggest you start with the studies that try to convince you that injecting thimerosal into an infant is safe.

          • Boris Ogon

            I suggest you start here

            In a “special issue” of BMRI in which the authors of the paper are also the editors of the “issue”? Let’s take a look at the history line:

            Received 15 February 2014; Accepted 12 May 2014; Published 4 June 2014

            Go take a look at the other two papers so far in the “issue.” You know what this lacks? A revised date. So it took Jyutika Mehta, who has published with the lot before, three months to “peer review” the paper and accept it without revision?

            Sorry, no, despite the farce of the press release (“a peer-reviewed journal”!), this is vanity publishing.

          • David Foster

            It is unfortunate that papers such as this have to be published in smaller and more esoteric journals, but this is simply because it is nearly impossible to publish a study that concludes that there are any vaccine safety issues in a mainstream journal, regardless how well the science is done. Meanwhile we see a steady stream of crap “studies” in these same journals repeatedly proclaiming the debate over vaccine safety over.

            Would you care to actually comment on the papers themselves?

          • Boris Ogon

            Would you care to actually comment on the papers themselves?

            In case you didn’t catch my drift, that’s your responsibility. I’ve already read this pay-to-play entry once, and it was deeply into quadrant IV of the “whelmed vs. page” plane.

            Have at it. I’m not going to go back through this retread for the sake of your just barfing it back up at the next opportunity.

          • Boris Ogon

            I would note explicitly, however, that you have evaded the obvious fraudulence of the history line.

          • Boris Ogon

            It is unfortunate that papers such as this have to be published in smaller and more esoteric journals….

            You’re evading the point, which is that this was vanity publishing. The only reason for the exercise was to give it a veneer of respectability.

            Would you care to actually comment on the papers themselves?

            I thought I had already gone with “you first,” as I’m not going to waste my time deconstructing something for the sake of its bouncing off of your forehead in a meaningless venue when you haven’t said anything intelligent about the content in the first place.

          • Krebiozen

            As a matter of fact the Eli Lilly studies were done in the 30s. The patients were terminal so they would have died anyway. The amount of thimerosal given was up to 1,800 milligrams (that’s 1.8 million micrograms) intravenously without noticeable ill effects. That’s 36,000 times as much thimerosal as there ever was in any vaccine.

            As Kevin has pointed out, there are many safety studies that demonstrate thimerosal’s safety. It was commonly used to preserve immunoglobulins given intravenously so people got doses of up to 1,800,000 micrograms. Compare the maximum 50 micrograms that used to be in vaccines,

          • David Foster

            “that used to be in vaccines”?

            Your ignorance precedes yourself.

          • Krebiozen

            Which vaccines still contain 50 micrograms? Who’s ignorant?

          • David Foster

            You said “Compare the maximum 50 micrograms that used to be in vaccines” which is not the same thing as saying “Compare the 50 micrograms that used to be in vaccines”.

            And you know it.

            You are not only ignorant, you are deceptive.

            Noted.

          • Krebiozen

            What is your point? As far as I am aware the largest dose of thimerosal from any single vaccine was 50 micrograms. How was my statement deceptive?

            My point is that even before thimerosal was removed from most vaccines the dose was far too low to be of any concern.

            You are picking on an irrelevant detail to distract from the fact that you are completely wrong about this.

          • ciaparker2

            Most injected flu vaccines (80%) still have 50 mcg thimerosal in each dose, which is 25mcg mercury . Those like everyone in my family who has a genetic predisposition to store it in our brains, if we get it every year, as is recommended, wind up with a huge amount in our brains, as my parents did, my father being paralyzed for the last three years of his life by a flu vaccine, and my mother wasting away and ultimately paralyzed with Alzheimer’s for the last fiftteen years of her life, having gotten yearly flu vaccines at the mall since the early ’80s. Many vaccines still have trace amounts which are still higher than the hazardous waste limit.

          • Mike Stevens

            But we know (thanks to information you told us) that your family doesn’t have any such “predisposition” to vaccine harm.
            The problem is a hereditary NRXN-1 gene deletion, a genetic defect that directly damages neuronal synapsing, causing autism.
            I do wish you would stop lying, Parker.

          • Krebiozen

            “Most injected flu vaccines (80%) still have 50 mcg thimerosal in each dose, which is 25mcg mercury.”

            Only multi-dose vials contain more than a trace of thimerosal per dose. I get a flu vaccine every year and I have never been given one from a multi-dose vial, nor any other vaccine come to that. In any case, over 60% of flu vaccines in the US this year are thimerosal free, as you can see here:
            http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaxsupply.htm

            “Those like everyone in my family who has a genetic predisposition to store it in our brains, if we get it every year, as is recommended, wind up with a huge amount in our brains,”

            On average each of us is exposed to at least 10 micrograms of mercury each and every day, in air water and food, and we retain at least 5 micrograms of that.
            http://ec.europa.eu/health/opinions/en/dental-amalgam/figtableboxes/table-1.htm
            That’s at least 1,800 micrograms we retain each year. An extra 25 micrograms of the less toxic ethylmercury once a year cannot possibly make any difference at all. I’m sorry your parents were unwell, but mercury from vaccines is not remotely plausible as a cause.

            “Many vaccines still have trace amounts which are still higher than the hazardous waste limit.”

            Comparing the concentration of mercury in a 0.5 ml vial to the legal limits for its concentration in millions of gallons of industrial waste is just silly. As you well know it is the quantity of mercury that is important, and the mercury from 2,000 flu shots only weighs as much as a single drop of water.

            By the way, the colloidal silver sold in health food stores should be classified as hazardous waste according to EPA regulations (greater than or equal to 5 ppm/5mg/L).

          • Linda Tock

            No, only multidose vials of influenza vaccine contain thimerosal. The single use syringes do not.

            No other vaccine has thimerosal in it – the last vaccine which had *trace* amounts was Tripedia, and it’s been off the market for years now.

            The current pediatric schedule (excepting multidose flu vaccines) does not have thimerosal in it.

          • David Foster

            More on the supposed Eli Lilly “safety” study of the 1930’s:

            http://www.vaccinationnews.org/20110314ThimerosalContainingVaccines-I-InTheDarkYazbakFE

            http://inthesetimes.com/article/649/eli_lilly_and_thimerosal

            The statement [that thimerosal has a long safety record] suggests that before thimerosal was added to vaccines, Powell and Jamieson had shown that it was safe and effective. This is not exactly true because the FDA clearly states in the same document that Powell and Jamieson’s 1931 study “was not specifically designed to examine toxicity; 7 of 22 subjects were observed for only one day, the specific clinical assessments were not described, and no laboratory studies were reported.”

          • Krebiozen

            Firstly, I am not suggesting that the study in question is the only evidence for thimerosal’s safety, or indeed that it is particularly useful evidence at all. I am simply exasperated by anti-vaccine activists pointing to it as evidence of thimerosal’s dangers with statements such as, “they gave Thimerosal to 22 patients with meningitis, all of whom died” (CassandraofDelphi above).

            They never point out that there was no effective treatment for meningitis at that time, that vast doses of thimerosal (up to 36,000 times as much as there ever was in any vaccine) were given intravenously as a last-ditch attempt to save these patients who were facing certain death. The only interesting thing about this really is that the doctors administering the thimerosal were surprised at how well-tolerated these large doses were. Pretending that this demonstrates thimerosal’s toxicity is simply dishonest.

            Secondly, Powell and Jamieson’s study was a review of thimerosal’s “a) general properties, (b) germicidal and inhibition properties, and (c) toxicity for animal tissues. Yazbak seems to think this was the study in which the thimerosal was given to the meningitis patients. It wasn’t, though it is cited in Powell and Jamieson’s review along with other experimental data, as you can see here:
            http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/13/1/296

            I agree that the safety data for thimerosal was not adequate by today’s standards when it was introduced in the 1930s. However, subsequent studies have demonstrated that it is safer than we previously thought, since it is actively excreted in the bile, does not accumulate in the body, and negligible amounts end up in the brain.

          • JGC

            David, I’m going to repeat the direct question I’ve asked you repeatedly that you’ve been studiously ignoring: Can you offer any evidence that at the levels of exposure achievable by routine childhood vaccination thimerosal cases harm?
            A simple yes or no would be appreciated, because if the answer’s no your entire argument ultimately reduces to “Oooh…mercury! Scary stuff!”

          • ciaparker2

            Yes or no? Have you read Kirby’s Evidence of Harm, hundreds of pages of evidence of many kinds that thimerosal in vaccines has caused immeasurable harm in countless thousands.

          • Mike Stevens

            Parker, how about letting people respond to questions they have been asked in this discussion, rather than spamming the comment thread with irrelevancies?

          • Matt Carey

            “Kevin, help us out too and show us the controlled study that shows the safety of Thimerosal”
            When it comes to autism, that would be the Price et al. study.

          • CassandraofDelphi

            Really? The paper that left out important information about prenatal exposures and elevated risk of autism with an OR over 8?

            Methodological Issues and Evidence of Malfeasance in Research Purporting to Show Thimerosal in Vaccines Is Safe. Hooker, B et al.
            Biomed Res. Int. 2014;2014:247218.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995277

      • Matt Carey

        “There is a lot of research showing that very small amounts of mercury have toxic effects on nervous and immune systems”
        No. There is research that very small amounts of mercury have toxic effects on very small samples of the nervous system.

        Saying “I put thimerosal in a dish and watched a cell die” is different from saying, “I put the same amount of thimerosal in an infant and turned him/her autistic”

    • CassandraofDelphi

      Kevin, you are wrong. It is actually the opposite. There are hundreds of peer reviewed papers showing the neurotoxic effects of mercury while the CDC, FDA rely on a few industry funded research to say that it is safe.

      • lilady R.N.

        How about producing just one of those hundreds of papers which you claim show “the neurotoxic effects of mercury”?

        Make certain it is the organomercury compound Thimerosal, in the specific amounts used in a dose of vaccine drawn up from a multi-dose vial of vaccine. Make certain that the testing is on humans, not mice…and not done in vitro.

        • CassandraofDelphi

          The translation of what you are saying is that show me the data but I am not going to accept a single one of them. I wonder why the EPA has a 2 ppb limit on mercury in drinking water but nurses like yourself routinely inject babies with 25-50,000 ppb in vaccines.

          • lilady R.N.

            I replied to your statement above about the hundreds of studies you claim which have been published about the deleterious effects of the organomercury compound Thimerosal.

            The ball is in your court to produce just one of those hundreds of studies.

            You’ve confused elemental Hg and methyl mercury with Thimerosal:

            Try reading this before you comment about a subject you know nothing about:

            http://www.clinicaladvisor.com/aap-supports-keeping-thimerosal-in-vaccines/article/272846/

          • CassandraofDelphi

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=mercury+and+neurotoxicity

            I did not confuse anything and you are certainly not a valid judge of what is considered acceptable science. You are also completely ignoring the fact that mercury compounds can easily convert from one form to another but it is no use to try to reason with someone who has an agenda.

          • lilady R.N.

            Ha, ha, ha. Which one of those many studies, none of which mention organic mercury, did you want us to read?

            I have no agenda and I’m wondering what your agenda might be.

          • Kevin Folta

            I’m in the same boat. I just want to discuss a few papers that supporters claim are definitive proof. It is the same kind of gish-gallop, cherry-picking nonsense that happens with indictment of glyphosate.

          • David Foster

            So Lilady demands a study involving a specific form of mercury *on human subjects*, and you want studies which are “definitive proof”.

            And you won’t accept any studies on mice right? Or any other animals?

            Do you folks ever really listen to yourselves??

          • JGC

            I’ll accept any studies on mice that looks at whole-organism effects following exposure to thimerosal at levels which do not exceed 8.3 ng/kg (the exposure an 8 lb newborn would receive as a consequence of receiving a half-ml dose of a vaccine which incorporated thimerosal as a preservative).
            Got any?

          • Linda Tock

            …so many studies – all irrelevant for thimerosal and vaccines.

            You claim that the compounds can easily convert from one form to the other – what’s the mechanism that causes said conversion, and at what rate?

          • JGC

            That 2 ppb limit for drinking water, cassandra–that would be for methyl, not ethyl, mercury wouldn’t it?
            You are aware that their tox profiles are radically different?

          • ciaparker2

            Please see this Canadian study, which found that little was known about how ethylmercury (in thimerosal) was metabolized in the human body, or even if it crossed the blood-brain barrier, which it has since been proven to do:

            http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/publicat/ccdr-rmtc/07vol33/acs-06/index-eng.php

          • JGC

            Cia, let me try one more time to make it clear what evidence is needed to support your position:

            Studies demonstrating that at levels of exposure achievable by routine vaccination thimerosal causes harm (or, more accurately, that the risk associated with thimerosal exposure exceed the risks associated with remaining vulnerable to the infectious diseases vaccines which incorporate it as a preservative prevent).

            Have you got any?

            If not, you’re no longer simply beating a dead horse—you’re flailing away at the empty air on a street corner where someone somehow might may have possibly said he’d heard someone once thought they might have seen a horse there, once upon a time.

          • ciaparker2

            She no longer does so, Cass, but has been retired for nearly a decade, but her patrons have evidently not provided enough for her to comfortably retire on.

          • Mike Stevens

            Think about the quantity of water babies take in every single day, and compare to the volume received in a vaccine every year, if that.
            Then the penny might drop.

          • Linda Tock

            Using a drinking water guideline for ‘mercury in drinking water’ and trying to justify it for vaccines is just stupid.

            Drinking water guidelines are for drinking water only.

            You don’t drink 64 ounces of thimerosal daily.

          • CassandraofDelphi

            What is stupid is to have no established limit for an organic mercury compound that is a known neurotoxin, and just keep injecting into human beings. Also, 99.9% of ingested mercury is eliminated while that cannot be said about injected mercury.

          • Linda Tock

            Ingested *elemental* mercury is not sorbed through the GI tract. Its vapor is readily sored through the linings of the lungs.

            Ingested organomercuric compounds like methylmercury are nearly 99% sorbed through the GI tract.

            Fixed that for you.

          • Linda Tock

            99.9% of ingested *elemental* mercury is not sorbed by the GI tract. Nearly 100% of the vapor emitted from that mercury is sorbed through the lungs and into the bloodstream.

            For organomercuric compounds like methylmercury, nearly 100% is sorbed through the GI tract to enter the bloodstream.

            Fixed that for you.

          • Linda Tock

            Again, only *elemental* mercury is poorly sorbed through the GI tract – however its vapor is nearly 100% sorbed through the lungs.

            For organomercuric compounds (like methylmercury, etc) nearly 100% is sorbed through the GI tract.

            So you’re still spouting nonsense.

          • Linda Tock

            99.9% of ingested *elemental* mercury is not taken up through our GI tract. The VAPOR, however, is nearly 100% sorbed through our lungs.

            For organomercuric compounds like methylmercury – nearly 100% is taken up by the GI tract. It’s also more bioaccumulative than ethylmercury.

            So you’re still wrong.

      • First Officer

        Mercury has many compounds and exists in elemental form. You can actually drink an ounce of elemental mercury without much ill effect but you get a measly one drop of dimethylmercury on your skin and you’re cooked. Mercury is used in Amalgam for cavities, with nary a problem. Just yelling mercury is meaningless. Each compound has it’s own toxicity and effects.

        • David Foster

          Wow. Really. Wow. Most ill-informed post I have ever seen. Ever.

          • First Officer

            Please point out where i am specifically incorrect in the above.

        • ciaparker2

          Many countries have banned mercury in dental fillings for this reason. The Andy Cutler, the chemist who designed the mercury chelation protocol used by thousands, did so because he was mercury poisoned by his dental work.

          • Mike Stevens

            Yes, and the brain damage is obvious….

    • David Foster

      A few Kevin?

      http://www.safeminds.org/research/docs/Thimerosal%20Science%20Summary%20Dec%202012.pdf

      Not all petri dishes and rats either.

      As for the “large number of studies that show no association”, are you familiar with the large number of counterarguments regarding those studies’ methods and conclusions, not to mention their conflicts of interest? My guess is you are not.

      When you are only familiar with one side of an issue, it makes it much easier to make up your mind doesn’t it?

      • Kevin Folta

        David, I’ve been through most of those at one time or another, and it is amazingly parallel to the mechanism used to twist science of glyphosate into a fear message. What’s your best evidence, the three papers that really convince you, 100% that there’s an association? I’m asking sincerely and am willing to consider anything. Don’t give me a shotgun activist document of abstracts. Give me specific papers, tell me the hypothesis tested and why the interpretations show associations between vaccination and autism. Thanks.

        • David Foster

          Kevin you just confessed earlier that you had not gone through much of the science in Kennedy’s book, and needed more time for analysis. The science in Kennedy’s book is mostly a small subset of the studies chronicled by Safeminds that I sent you.

          I’ll see if I can send a few links to the studies I think are particularly relevant, but to be perfectly honest you are sounding like you want me to do your job here. And besides, you’ve “been through most of these at one time or another” so it really shouldn’t be that much effort, right?Right?

          What is disappointing to me is that you are trying to sound like an open-minded journalist here, but then you turn around and characterize the science which supports the notion that mercury is toxic as a “twist” of science into a “fear message”.

          It sounds to me like you have already made up your mind, even while asking for help looking at the evidence. Doesn’t much sound like journalism to me.

          • Kevin Folta

            Sometimes the pot calls the kettle uninformed, but maybe needs to step back and check some basic facts. I’m not a journalist. I’m a scientist. I’m an editor of 3 journals, wrote over 70 peer reviewed manuscripts and review manuscripts for our planet’s best journals. It takes me minimal time to triage a claim based on published science.

            I don’t want you to do my job. You can’t do my job. It is clear that you can’t, and won’t, present your three most compelling arguments that present conclusive data connecting thimerosal to autism. You can’t, because they don’t exist.

            You’ve been fooled, but that’s okay. Just like the people that make claims about glyphosate, fluoride, chemtrails, etc., there are experts out there that can cherry-pick data, over-interpret a small study, or mis-represent the findings of something legitimate. It is okay- the field is tough, and the literature dense.

            So when a scientist makes a comment to dial down the fear mongering, or volunteers to discuss real data– don’t be difficult. Take advantage of the opportunity to pick the brain of someone that knows how to read the literature.

            And I’ve never made up my mind. Science is dynamic, I put new findings within the context of the field and go from there. If anyone has made up their minds it is those that have dug in to position that fights science and scientists and craves confirmation bias from celebrity authors instead.

          • David Foster

            So one minute you’re acting like an open-minded investigator, but now you are telling me that I have been fooled?

            You are disingenuous at best Kevin.

            And with all due respect, vaccine safety advocates such as myself have been doing your job for years.

            Even when you’ve been exposed to peer-reviewed scientific evidence supporting a link between thimerosal and autism, you continue to make comments that betray your true beliefs and they are pre-determined, even as you pretend to be open to the possibility of reconsidering your position.

          • JGC

            Citations needed: what peer-reviewed scientific evidence supports the existence of a causal association between thimerosal and autism spectrum disorders, david? Be specific.

      • Krebiozen

        I have looked through the Safe Minds list of evidence that supposedly shows that thimerosal in vaccines is dangerous. I see nothing convincing there that supports that claim.

        The evidence from babies given TCVs is that transient blood mercury concentrations of up to 23.6 micrograms per liter are seen (mostly much lower), with doses of up to 62.5 micrograms thimerosal per child. The CDC suggests that persistent blood mercury levels of over 10 micrograms per liter are cause for concern, not the transient levels seen after vaccination. In people who eat a lot of fish (‘Mercury Levels in High-End Consumers of Fish’ – 2002), we see average mercury levels “ranged from 2.0 to 89.5 μg/L”; these are persistent, not transient levels (they fall if the person stops eating a lot of fish). The lowest level of methylmercury in cord blood associated with neurological effects during pregnancy (when neurodevelopment is most vulnerable) is 58 micrograms per liter (see ‘Toxicological Effects of Methylmercury’ National Associated Press).

        I find it hard to feel concerned about these transient levels of the less-toxic ethylmercury in children when far higher levels of the more toxic methylmercury appear to be safe.

        Assuming a premature baby has a body weight of 2 kg (vaccines are not recommended if body weight is lower than this), this is a maximum dose of about 30 micrograms per kilogram. The evidence from animal studies cited by Safe Minds shows adverse effects after doses of thimerosal of up to 76.8 milligrams per kilogram (Gender‐Selective Toxicity Of Thimerosal – Branch 2008), that’s 76,800 micrograms per kilogram. In each of the several studies I have looked closely at, adverse effects only occurred at higher doses.

        For example, ‘Effects of intermittent, vaccination‐like scheme, thimerosal administration on rat development and behavior’ (Olczak 2008) in which doses of ” 0.040 mg/kg to 25 mg/kg” were given. This is a dose of 40 to 25,000 micrograms per kilogram, yet, “rats appeared to be quite resistant to overt neurotoxic effects of thimerosal at doses tested, although higher doses of this drug caused subtle changes on some behavioral measures”. Subtle changes after doses more than 800 times higher than those given to human babies?

        Another example, ‘Effects Of Postnatal Administration On Thimerosal On Rat Development And Behavior’ (Duszczyk 2008) used “0.040 mg/kg to 50 mg/kg in four equal doses on days 7–14 after birth”. This is a dose of between 40 and 50,000 micrograms per kilogram, yet, ” no dramatic behavioral impairments were observed at doses tested”.

        In vitro studies found effects on cells, often brain cells, of “nanomolar concentrations”. For example, ‘Thimerosal induces dna breaks, caspase‐3 activation, membrane damage, and Cell death in cultured human neurons and fibroblasts’ (Baskin 2003). According to Safe Minds this study found that, “thimerosal disrupts cell membranes, damages DNA and alters cell shape at concentrations only 4 times those expected from vaccines”.
        The study itself states that, ” thimerosal toxicity was observed at 2 microM […] and at a 1-microM level […]” (“microM” means micromoles per liter).

        To make sense of this we need to convert micromoles to micrograms. The molecular weight of thimerosal is 404.81 grams per mole, so each mole weighs 405 grams, and each micromole weighs 405 micrograms. This means the lowest concentration of thimerosal that showed toxicity in this study was at 405 micrograms per liter. Compare this to the maximum 23.6 micrograms per liter found in human babies after vaccination. I make this 17 times the maximum concentration seen after vaccination, not “4 times those expected from vaccines” as Safe Minds states.

        Another in vitro example, ‘Thimerosal induces micronuclei in the cytochalasin b block micronucleus test with human lymphocytes’ (Westphal 2003) found that “Toxicity and toxicity‐related elevation of micronuclei was seen at and above 0.6 µg/ml thimerosal”. To convert micrograms per ml to micrograms per liter we multiply by 1,000. So the minimum level causing toxicity to micronuclei was 600 micrograms per liter, which is 25 times higher than the maximum seen in children.

        If anything this collection of studies is reassuring about the safety of thimerosal, given the large gap between mercury levels seen in children after vaccination and the concentrations required to cause problems in animals or in vitro. I would happily accept a TCV or give one to my children.

        • David Foster

          Your entire premise rests on the concept of blood levels of mercury. I suggest you try again, you are really good at math but don’t seem to understand the very basics of mercury toxicity or metabolism. Especially with respect to ethyl vs methyl mercury. Check the latest research on this, you’re way off.

          • Krebiozen

            I spent over 20 years working in clinical biochemistry and toxicology, so I’m confident I understand the basics of toxicology and pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics.

            The “concept of blood levels of mercury” is well-established, and I do keep up with the latest research. This article http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40572-014-0014-z about the relative toxicity of ethyl and methymercury was published this year. It points out that:

            “Other organomercurials, such as ethylmercury, are metabolized to Hg
            2+ more rapidly (the longer the alkyl chain of the organic mercury compound, the more it behaves as inorganic Hg 2+ ), and therefore have different tissue accumulation. Similar to Hg 2+, the highest levels of ethylmercury are found in the kidney, with very little accumulating in neural tissues.”

            In other words ethylmercury, such as that from metabolism of thimerosal, behaves more like inorganic mercury than like methylmercury. It does not accumulate in the body like methylmercury as it is actively excreted in the gut.
            We can be assured from this that thimerosal is considerably less toxic than methylmercury.

            There is plenty of evidence that doses of methylmercury equivalent to those of ethylmercury derived from thimerosal in TCVs could not possibly affect neurodevelopment. I think we can conclude from this that thimerosal in TCVs is safe.

            I don’t understand why you and others waste your time on this red herring. There are much more interesting and promising avenues to explore in autism research.

        • ciaparker2

          I hope everyone who reads this will look for themselves at the evidence posted at Safe Minds, and not take the word of pharma supporters who assure them that mercury in vaccines and vaccines in general, are safe. They are not, but there are a LOT of vested interests riding on persuading people that they are.

          • Mike Stevens

            Did you even bother reading Krebs comment?
            He rips Safeminds so called “evidence” a new orifice.

          • Krebiozen

            I hope people do look at the evidence if they are in doubt. They will find, as I have, that the amount of mercury in vaccines is a tiny fraction of the amount that can cause neurodevelopmental (or any other) problems. They will find that the animal studies demonstrating the toxicity of thimerosal used doses hundreds or even thousands of times higher than is present in vaccines. They will find that the concentrations that cause adverse effects to brain cells in test tubes are far higher than those found in children after vaccination. They will find that in humans intravenous doses of thimerosal 36,000 times greater than the amount in a vaccine had no noticeable ill effects, and that animal studies found no ill effects at doses of up to 20,000 micrograms per kilogram, which is 800 times higher than the dose of thimerosal in a vaccine given to a 2 kilogram premature baby. That’s not even looking at the epidemiological evidence which has consistently found no ill effects of thimerosal in vaccines.

            I’m not a “Pharma supporter”, I don’t work for a drug company and never have. I have no “vested interests in this. I have spent most of my life working in clinical biochemistry, and had little interest in vaccination. I came to this debate from the other side, as I had an interest in alternative medicine, and came across people who told me that vaccines were dangerous. This surprised me and I spent several years looking very closely at the available evidence; it has told me very clearly that vaccines in general are very safe indeed. I doubt that any other human intervention has saved so many lives and prevented so much suffering with so few adverse effects.

            One of the first things I came across was an article by Russell Blaylock about thimerosal and its alleged dangers. After checking each “fact” and reference I found that he had often distorted the truth, in some cases he had things completely wrong, and in others he had misunderstood what he had read. His account of the Simpsonwood conference was a mass of inaccuracies and half-truths (I read the entire transcript).

            Since then I have consistently found that in general vaccine opponents are at best economical with the truth and at worst blatantly lie. I have lost count of the number of times I have politely explained that a statement someone has made is inaccurate, and supplied evidence to support what I said, only to find the same person making the same false statement weeks, months or years later. I have no doubt that I will see the claim (or at least implication) that thimerosal killed all the patients in the Eli Lilly trial again, no matter how many times I point out these were terminally ill meningitis patients in the 1930s when there was no effective treatment.

            It distresses me to see science abused like this, especially when the result is to reduce vaccine uptake which inevitably results in people, mostly children, suffering.

            In the UK in the early 80s, my son spent several weeks in the hospital as a result of whooping cough contracted during an outbreak caused by low vaccine intake due to a vaccine scare that turned out to be groundless. He was lucky, dozens of other children died.

            If people believe the nonsense spread by antivaccine zealots like Cia Parker we will soon see pneumonia, encephalitis and deaths from measles in the US. It has already happened in Europe, but it isn’t too late for America.

  • mem_somerville

    Ah. I remember now where I heard about Martha Herbert–it was at an event about science media where there was some chatter about an upcoming book (at the time, now over a year ago). I was similarly surprised to see a science journalist associated with that too.

    • Twylaa

      Dr. Martha Herbert’s bio:

      Dr. Martha Herbert is an Assistant Professor of Neurology at Harvard Medical School, a Pediatric Neurologist at the Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, and an affiliate of the Harvard-MIT-MGH Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, where she is director of the TRANSCEND Research Program (Treatment Research and Neuroscience Evaluation of Neurodevelopmental Disorders).

      Dr. Herbert earned her medical degree at the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. Prior to her medical training she obtained a doctoral degree at the University of California, Santa Cruz, studying evolution and development of learning processes in biology and culture in the History of Consciousness program, and then did postdoctoral work in the philosophy and history of science. She trained in pediatrics at Cornell University Medical Center and in neurology and child neurology at the Massachusetts General Hospital, where she has remained. She received the first Cure Autism Now Innovator Award and is now on the Scientific Advisory Committee of Autism Speaks. Her background in pediatric neurology, evolutionary biology and history of science has oriented her toward systems biology, brain connectivity and dynamism, and brain-body interrelationships.

      Her main research interests are in addressing autism as a “dynamic encephalopathy” (something that can change) rather than a “static encephalopathy” (something that is fixed for life) and in how environmental vulnerability affects brain and body health and function. Therefore she takes three approaches. 1) Taking a whole body systems approach to how autism emerges — or not — in infants at high risk for autism (because of having an older sibling on the spectrum); 2) developing a multi-modal brain imaging and biomarker approach to studying the interface between metabolic/immune disturbances and altered brain signaling which could (for many at least) be the “ground zero” of autism, and 3) applying these approaches to the systems biology of improvement and recovery in autism and in other situations where complex systems are multiply challenged.

      http://www.marthaherbert.org/biography/

      • Christopher Hickie

        Herbert’s a quack. She did her MD and PhD decades ago and has yet (and never will) make tenure. I’m sure Harvard would love any excuse to fire her for her whacko nut-job theories.

        • LZ

          The public can read about Dr. Herbert from her many accomplishments. Pediatrician Christopher Hickie is not visible to the public because he’s a good doctor or because of any career accomplishments, but because he spends his time posting vile ad hominem attacks on the internet. You shouldn’t be so quick to denigrate the careers of other physicians, “Dr.” Hickie, when you have nothing to show but venom.

    • Twylaa

      More on Dr. Herbert’s work:

      TRANSCEND Research Laboratory, Martha Herbert, MD, PhD
      Treatment Research and NeuroSCience Evaluation of Neurodevelopmental Disorders.
      http://www.massgeneral.org/research/researchlab.aspx?id=1260

  • Maurinemeleck

    Thank you Robert Kennedy for writing this book. It is so important to the hundreds of thousands in the autism community. Every 4 hours when a child is diagnosed with autism and government health officials and most doctors have no idea what is causing the epidemic or making these children so very sick, we will look to you for your hard work on our cause, along with others like Anne Dachel and Wayne Rohde for guidance, We know that autism is man-made, it is medical as opposed to a mental condition and we will find a cure.
    Maurine Meleck SC
    grandmother to 2 boys who suffered encephalopathy from their vaccinations.

    • Matt Carey

      Please stop acting like you speak for the autism communities. You don’t.
      Your group’s efforts to create and keep alive the idea of autism=vaccine injury has caused a great deal of harm. You always were a minority voice and your support is shrinking. Studies have shown that even among the autism parent community, the idea that vaccines cause autism is a minority opinion. No one seems to ask the autistics themselves. Your groups do not even pretend to represent autistics (zero autistic members, for example).
      I’m not sure how anyone could be involved in this community for so long and still divide mental conditions from medical conditions. Consider, for example, bipolar disorder.
      We do know that social factors–changes in how autism is defined and diagnosed, awareness among parents and other factors–have played a very large role in the “epidemic”. You are quite aware of these studies, yet you pretend they don’t exist. Denialism is a hallmark of the autism=vaccine injury community.

      • Twylaa

        Not sure why you brought up bipolar, but here is an interesting article by an anonymous blogger which links to quite a lot of study on the interrelationship between the immune system and nervous system, including in bipolar.

        “The Interconnectedness of the Brain, Behavior, and
        Immunology…”
        http://passionlessdrone.wordpress.com/2011/05/12/the-interconnectedness-of-the-brain-behavior-and-immunology-and-the-difficult-to-overstate-flaccidity-of-the-correlation-is-not-causation-argument/

        There is a 40-fold increase of bipolar diagnoses in children. This cannot be written off as only due to better diagnosis. These children have major issues which could not be ignored, regardless of the label given.

        What could be provoking immune system abnormalities resulting in behavioral and neurological abnormalities? Surely not the number of vaccines received by this generation of children – unprecedented in human history – vaccines which are designed to provoke the immune system in unnatural ways such as with aluminum adjuvants?

        Again, I am not against vaccines. But I think we cannot keep adding more and more vaccines while disregarding the unintended consequences.

      • David Foster

        Oh my how the rhetoric ratchets up when the desperation grows. The idea that vaccines cause permanent disability and neurological disorders such as autism is constantly growing, and not just among the “autism community” but the public at large. The push back against our mass vaccination system is growing. And then you pretend that the epidemic is due to changing diagnosis and social factors, when each and every study done to assess this possibility points in the other direction.

        The types of changes you refer to would never result in an increase of the magnitude we have seen. Ever. And there is no such thing as a Genetic Epidemic, though you pretend this is a genetic issue because then you can distract attention from the conclusions that you know are coming.

    • lilady R.N.

      You definitely do not represent the autism community…in fact you and your pals at Age of Autism are pariahs within that community.

      What clever anti-vaccine shirt are you wearing today and what public event are you going to so that you can accost and annoy young parents with anti-vaccine message?

      • David Foster

        Lilay can you FOR ONCE just state your point, make your objection or whatever, without getting personal and nasty?

        I would hazard a guess that no one would want you representing them.

        Kinda ironic don’t ya think?

    • Christopher Hickie

      Yeah, I hope you wind up poor, broke and cast out, Kennedy. You deserve it for your ignorance of science and medicine.

      • lilady R.N.

        The reported $ 200,000 he paid for the research and editing of this book is chump change for Mr. Kennedy.

        The internet mags conservatively estimate his net worth at $ 10,000,000.

      • LZ

        This is a pediatrician speaking. Vindictive, violent, wishing the worst on anyone who dares to question his “science” and “medicine”. Disgusting.

  • lilady R.N.

    I’m disappointed Mr. Kloor; for some reason I thought that your book review of Kennedy’s book was going to appear today.

    Kennedy is in little danger of depleting his assets…supposedly the book and the declared (and anonymous) consultants and researchers only cost him $200,000 in total to bring it to the publishing stage. I believe Skyhouse Publishing which publishes all the dicey vaccine books for its stable of crank authors does not provide advance money.

    My best guess is that Kennedy gave that (rousing?) speech at the anti-vaccine conference last year and assumed that he could do some arm twisting in the halls of Congress. When that didn’t work out, he had to put together an investigative team to write about the same dreary stuff about Thimerosal.

    • http://blogs.discovermagazine.com Keith Kloor

      I’m sorry to disappoint you. It is coming. I had started writing a more traditional review, then decided to do it chapter by chapter. That takes longer and it’s the weekend and I have two children under 10. Check back in a few days.

      • lilady R.N.

        I’m not greatly disappointed Mr. Kloor and I understand completely that you wish to have your weekend days off to enjoy your children. :-)

  • Matt Carey

    Have the discussion of whether thimerosal is the best preservative for vaccines. That’s fine. Just stop using the autism communities as the hammer to attack vaccines. Mr. Kennedy feeds that community and that idea.

    The thimerosal causes autism hypothesis has been extremely damaging in our communities. It has diverted resources away from more fruitful areas of research. It has been used by some health practitioners (some doctors, some lay people) to promote “cures” which vary from useless to harmful. The doctors who practice chelation on autistic kids rarely if ever refer the children to specialists–medical toxicologists–which tells you a lot. Medical toxicologists don’t find these kids to be mercury intoxicated. The alternative medicine practitioners use “alternative” methods to diagnose mercury poisoning.

    Animal studies have indicated that chelating when there is no heavy metal poisoning *causes* harm. A clinical trial of chelation was called unethical and was cancelled.

    http://sfari.org/news-and-opinion/news/2008/experts-slam-nih-study-on-chelation-therapy

    Multiple studies have shown no increased autism risk from thimerosal containing vaccines. Price et al. is possibly the largest

    http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2010/09/13/peds.2010-0309.abstract

    The idea that autism is caused by thimerosal caught on when people saw that the number of children getting services for autism went up, apparently coincident with the increase in thimerosal exposure (it wasn’t http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22191468). They then claimed that autism and mercury poisoning were similar (they weren’t http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2009/04/10/omnibus-expert-patricia-rodier/ and http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2008/05/25/rodier-on-bernard-et-al-and-environmental-causes-of-autism/)
    Not only have studies such as Price et al. shown that the rise in autism prevalence had nothing to do with thimerosal containing vaccines, but the removal of thimerosal from the infant vaccine schedule was not followed by a decrease in autism prevalence. Without the “mercury epidemic” there is really no reason to believe in the idea that thimerosal causes autism.
    If the discussion moves to whether thimerosal should be replaced for other reasons, that’s fine. But given the damage the thimerosal-causes-autism hypothesis has caused plus the overwhelming evidence that mercury doesn’t increase autism risk, I would plead with Mr. Kennedy to leave our community out of his crusade.

    • Twylaa

      But sometimes thimerosal does indeed cause autism.

      • lilady R.N.

        “But sometimes thimerosal does indeed cause autism.”

        Prove it. Provide any case study where a child’s autism was determined to be caused by Thimerosal.

        PubMed is your friend, provide the PubMed citation or link directly to the study.

    • http://www.autisminvestigated.com/ Jake Crosby

      Price et al. found prenatal thimerosal exposure jacked up the risk of regressive autism 8-fold. (p. 195, 2 SD Unit Chg.)
      http://abtassociates.com/reports/Aut_Tech_Report_Vol1_090310.pdf

      Before he was federally indicted, Thorsen’s discussed how autism was declining after thimerosal’s removal in an email discussion he was involved in.
      http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/04/revisiting-denmark-more-rotten-than-ever.html

      Both these studies were discussed in Kennedy’s unpublished manuscript, but I don’t count on them being in his final, published book. http://www.autisminvestigated.com/kennedy-thimerosal-cover-up/

    • First Officer

      anti-vaxxers really don’t care about autism or whether a vaccine is more risky than the disease it’s preventing. Very many are against vaccines on principle. Against God’s will, if you will, or tools of the corporate complex, etc, etc.

    • David Foster

      “The idea that autism is caused by thimerosal caught on when people saw
      that the number of children getting services for autism went up,
      apparently coincident with the increase in thimerosal exposure.”

      You really expect people to believe that the increase in incidence of autism, from 1-in-10,000 to 1-in-60, happened because parents were seeking services for their otherwise healthy children? And this is more plausible than the fact that we have been injecting a known neurotoxin, indeed one of the most toxic substances known to man, into our infants repeatedly?

      And incidentally, just what precious research is being ignored so that we can waste our agencies’ time looking into vaccine safety issues? Genetic research?

      Why do we need this research at all? You just said yourself that the increase is due to changing diagnoses and the availability of services. Problem solved.

      Do your children have autism? Why do you think they are autistic? Why do you think such an easily recognizable condition as autism went undiagnosed until the 1940’s?

      • JGC

        First, recall that the increase is in the incidence of diagnoses of autism, david and it appears to be a function of multiple factors including broadened diagnostic criteria, diagnostic substitution, and increased surveillance, not just parents seeking a diagnosis that would provide services (although that is a contributor).

        “And this is more plausible than the fact that we have been injecting a known neurotoxin, indeed one of the most toxic substances known to man, into our infants repeatedly?”

        Yes, given
        1) Large scale epidemiologic studies have failed to find evidence of a causal association
        2) No toxic effects—neural or otherwise—have been observed at exposure levels achievable by routine vaccination
        3) Following removal of thimerosal from vaccine formulations the incidence of diagnoses of autism has not fallen back to levels seen prior to its use—in fact, it has continued to rise.

      • Krebiozen

        Thimerosal is not “one of the most toxic substances known to man”, this is a blatant lie. The LD50 for thimerosal in mice is 91,000 micrograms per kilogram (sticking with micrograms for consistency). There are many chemicals that are more toxic than thimerosal – even nicotine is considerably more toxic with an LD50 of 3,300 micrograms per kilogram in mice.

        In any case, it’s the dose relative to its toxicity that is important. A 2 kilogram baby given 50 micrograms of thimerosal is receiving about 1,000th of a lethal dose. By way of comparison, a cup of coffee contains about 100,000 micrograms of caffeine, which has an LD50 of 192,000 micrograms per kilogram. That means a 70 kilogram adult drinking a cup of coffee consumes only 134th of a lethal dose of caffeine.

        Why do anti-vaccine activists persist in repeating misinformation like this? Anyone would think they are unable to win the argument through honest means.

        • JGC

          “Why do anti-vaccine activists persist in repeating misinformation like this?”
          Because they’ve got nothing else to bring to the table–isn’t that obvious?

          • Krebiozen

            If they have nothing to bring to the table, why bring a claim that a few seconds Googling reveals as a lie? Do they really think fence-sitters are that dumb?

            By the way, the LD50 for Botulinum toxin is in the region of 0.001 micrograms per kilogram, making it 9 million times more toxic than thimerosal, yet cosmetic surgeons routinely inject the stuff into people’s faces! Run for the hills!

  • Matt Carey

    You note that the ghost writers who helped Mr. Kennedy have decided to remain anonymous. All well and good. It is worth noting that they were likely well paid. At the AutismOne conference (a place where the vaccines-cause-autism idea is heavily promoted), Mr. Kennedy noted that he paid $200k for “research”.

    It would be worth finding out if these mainstream science journalists wrote because they believed in the topic, or because they are being paid. Either way, I appreciate them helping to craft Mr. Kennedy’s rhetoric.
    At the same AutismOne talk, Mr. Kennedy discussed how he had recorded conversations with important people “admitting” that they were lying. Such accusations are, to this layman, libelous. If the released chapters of his book are accurate, Mr. Kennedy has not pursued this part of his story.
    Let’s take a look at his AutismOne claim: He says that he called staunch supporters of the safety of vaccines and, for some reason unexplained (and to me unexplainable) they just decided to tell him “Oh, that? We were lying”. Seriously? Mr. Kennedy owes some people apologies.

    • Twylaa

      You could speculate about the scientists’ motives, or you could read Mr. Kennedy’s book and the science he cites, and decide whether he is making valid points.

      In my experience, the vaccine defenders often respond to complex science with ad hominem attacks that really don’t address the science, like “Oh, you’re such an idiot!” or “Oh, you went to an anti-vaccine conference so you have no credibility!”

      BTW AutismOne is not an “anti-vaccine conference”. It is a gathering of people focussed on finding effective treatments for autism.

      • Boris Ogon

        You could speculate about the scientists’ motives, or you could read Mr. Kennedy’s book….

        Fortunately, @jacoblawrencecrosby:disqus is supplying a review copy that he obtained. Copyright, schmopyright, RFK Jr.’s a traitor.

      • JGC

        ‘Effective treatments’ like bleach enemas?

    • Christopher Hickie

      As far as I’m concerned, if Kennedy’s ghost writers don’t have the balls to put their name out their, then they don’t exist and he’s bullshitting us–which is on par with what his whole book will be–a steaming pile of fetid dog turd.

    • David Foster

      Note how Matt slyly can’t resist maligning Kennedy’s book by insinuating that he had “ghost writers”.

      Matt are you really this ignorant, or just trying to make a point out of nothing? There is a big difference between a ghost writer and a researcher. May authors use researchers to collect data for their work. And I would assume that most would even get paid for it.

      • Dorit Reiss

        Well, the book that Mr. Crosby linked to on his blog is in a word file written by someone who is not Mr. Kennedy. That would suggest ghost writers to me, too. We could be wrong.

        • Boris Ogon

          Is the issue here that the metadata has one Adam Hadhazy, freelance science writer, in the author field?

      • lilady R.N.

        The small blurb about Kennedy’s book on his publisher’s website, lists Kennedy as the “editor”…not the author.

        Care to explain that “editor” designation?

  • CassandraofDelphi

    A lot of “experts” said in the 50s that lead was safe. We now know that there is no safe limit for lead compounds in the developing brain. That is even more true about mercury. God bless Mr. Kennedy for taking on this fight! History will vindicate him.

    • Kevin Folta

      Like who? People have known of the dangers of lead and mercury for a long time- along with relevant thresholds of exposure. Who said lead is safe and in what context? Thanks.

      • CassandraofDelphi

        Kevin, Industry and industry payed experts have fought lead safe limits for a long time. Over the decades the considered safe limit for lead and mercury exposures have been steadily coming down. It is now the scientific consensus, that there is no safe limit for lead. It does not make sense to say that ethylmercury is safe when injected. The data is clear that there are neurotoxic effects at the microgram levels. FDA, CDC are covering their behinds relying on industry funded research.

        • lilady R.N.

          By your skewed reasoning there should have been an extremely high percentage of autistic adults and elderly autistic people prior to the mid 1970s when lead was removed from gasoline and from paint. The prevalence of autism, again by your reasoning, should have plummeted, since then. It has not.

          Young children are tested for elevated blood lead levels by their pediatricians. Local Health Departments are provided the results of those elevated blood levels.

          Oral chelating agents and IV chelating agents (for extremely elevated blood levels) are prescribed by medical doctors who are specialists in toxicology…not the alternative quack practitioners who credulous parents consult for bogus mercury toxicities.

          • CassandraofDelphi

            ??? Who said anything about lead and autism? Lead has had a profound effect on the IQ of generations of children.

          • lilady R.N.

            “??? Who said anything about lead and autism? Lead has had a profound effect on the IQ of generations of children.”

            Is someone using your ‘nym Cassandra? This is the garbled statement you put up

            “Kevin, Industry and industry payed experts have fought lead safe limits
            for a long time. Over the decades the considered safe limit for lead and
            mercury exposures have been steadily coming down. It is now the
            scientific consensus, that there is no safe limit for lead….”

          • David Foster

            Noone said that lead causes autism.

        • First Officer

          Thimerosal is not ethylmercury . It’s C9H9HgNaO2S while the latter is C2H5Hg+

          It’s like calling salt poisonous because it has chlorine in it like bleach.

          • CassandraofDelphi

            Where do pharma get you guys? It is a waste of money for sure. Thimerosal degrades to ethyl mercury, which is the active compound responsible for function and toxicity.

          • First Officer

            Nonetheless, no toxicological effects have been observed with levels found in vaccines (max seems to be 50ug per dose, most less or none).

            And you did say ethylmercury when injected, not thimerosal.

            http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228#thi

            Note: I do not work for Pharma, though i have less than 200 shares in one Pharma company.

          • Kevin Folta

            First officer, did someone just call us a shill for Big Pharma? Is that check in the mail too?

          • First Officer

            At this point. I just want my T-shirts !

          • David Foster

            You can joke around all you want Kevin, but does it even occur to you that what “First Officer” just said is complete and utter nonsense?

            Do you even care?

          • JGC

            And after metabolizing to ethyl mercury that ethyl mercury is rapidly cleared from the body, principally by fecal excretion.
            In infants following vaccination ethyl mercury has a half-life of less than 4 days and blood mercury levels return to pre-vaccination levels by 30 days after vaccination. (see Mercury Levels in Newborns and Infants After Receipt of Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines, Pichichero et al, Pediatrics Vol. 121 No. 2 February 1, 2008 pp. e208 -e214).

          • CassandraofDelphi

            Wrong! Ethylmrcury is cleared quickly from the blood but this paper and others do not show that it actually leaves the body. Ethylmercury is converted into inorganic mercury in the body that is then accumulates in the brain.

          • JGC

            Actually Pichichero does show ethyl mercury leaving the body: he monitored mercury concentrations in stool samples over time (what part of “principally by fecal excretion” did you miss?)

          • CassandraofDelphi

            Measuring the concentration of the stool sample is not the same as accounting for total in and total out amounts. Again this study does NOT account for retained ehtylmercury in the body.

          • JGC

            “Again this study does NOT account for retained ehtylmercury in the body.”
            Other studies have looked at total distribution of ethyl mercury following exposure–Burbacher et al for example (PMID:16079072) which found “Brain concentrations of total Hg were significantly lower by approximately 3-fold for the thimerosal-exposed monkeys when compared with the MeHg [monkeys].”
            Direct question, cassandra: do you have any actual evidence that thimerosal at exposure levels achievable by routine vaccination is harmful? Or does your entire argument ultimately take no form other than “Oooh, mercury! Scary stuff!”?

          • Boris Ogon

            Ethylmercury is converted into inorganic mercury in the body that is then accumulates in the brain.

            You have an extremely limited choice of nonconsensus pharmacodynamic “models” now that you’ve chosen this corner. Pick one.

        • Boris Ogon

          It is now the scientific consensus, that there is no safe limit for lead.

          Nope. Like most everything else, lead has a NOAEL.

        • Kevin Folta

          As I recall, it was a scientist that figured out the pervasive exposure to lead, and his findings would eventually get lead removed from paint and fuel and many other common products. We’re talking thimerosal here.

        • Dorit Reiss

          Please provide citations to these alleged claims of the safety of lead. By scientists.

    • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

      This is simply a lie. It’s like the lie that doctors generally promoted cigarettes, or that “science” claimed that cigarettes were safe.

      Kennedy is deluded. That’s all right, it happens to entitled rich people who haven’t had to ever work or study.

      • lilady R.N.

        You’ve got to know your audience, Skeptical Raptor.

        Kennedy was the featured speaker at the 2013 Autism One-Generation Rescue Conference. When he stated that “vaccine-induced autism is like a Nazi death camp”, he was not met with the derision he so richly deserved. The credulous parents in the audience refer to their autistic children as “stolen” and as “train wrecks”.

        What a colossal ego this Kennedy has to use his name and his connections in Congress to once again pitch his failed theory. When he was rebuffed, he quickly had to put together the book which he threatened to publish.

        Kennedy is an odious ego-driven poseur who is in a downward spiral. It couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

  • Twylaa

    There is debate over the toxicity of thimerosal. But there appears to be general agreement that it is toxic to discuss vaccine risks in public, including thimerosal risks. Please, please don’t chicken out. There are so many people saying, “Yes there are problems but we can’t talk about it,” whether due to career goals or concerns about communicable diseases.

    As the late Dr. Bernadine Healy (IOM member and former head of the NIH) said to CBS News, “There is a completely expressed concern that they don’t want to pursue a hypothesis because that hypothesis could be damaging to the public health community at large by scaring people. First of all, I think the public’s smarter than that. The public values vaccines. But more importantly, I don’t think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you’re afraid of what it might show.”
    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/leading-dr-vaccines-autism-worth-study/

    The vaccine program must not be like a totalitarian government or dogmatic religion. Good science and medicine involves raising questions and honestly addressing problems. Some people are being harmed by vaccines, especially some toddlers who are subjected to so many vaccines in a short time period and at such a young age. This is being handled with defensive denial. We need a much better understanding of mechanisms of injury, who is susceptible, how to prevent these injuries, what are the most effective treatments, what are the true risks and benefits of each vaccine for a give individual, what is the combined impact of the overall schedule. If the only response is a bit of number crunching and a declaration of “just a coincidence” our govt agencies and doctors will never learn. And more and more consumers will become alienated and lose faith in the vaccine program and mainstream medicine.

    • Dorit Reiss

      Many questions were raised in connection to vaccines. Vaccine safety is constantly studied, and real problems are front page news:
      1. Narcolepsy from H1N1 vaccines.
      2. Intussusception from rotavirus vaccines.
      3. The limits of the acellular pertussis vaccines.

      It’s certainly not an untouchable topic or something that is not seriously examined.
      What doesn’t make sense is to go back to a question that was answered by numerous studies in millions of children, in different countries, by different independent teams – a question where the answer was clear, consistent and reproducible (does thimerosal in vaccines cause autism or other neuropsychological harms) and treat it as if it’s not answered. When a question has been answered so clearly again and again, rejecting the answer is not skepticism, it’s denial.

      • JGC

        And it’s important to note that in the case of narcolepsy the increase in the incidence due to vaccination was 1 additional case in every 20,000 children.
        If vaccines really were causing an increase in autism sufficient to drive the increase we see in autism diagnoses—most recently put at 1 in 68—we’d have no trouble spotting the link.

        • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

          the three items that Dr. Reiss mentioned are extraordinarily rare, and it’s hard to see without a huge cohort study. In fact, the new rotavirus vaccines probably show no difference in intussusception rates than the general population.

          And in so many huge, large cohort studies, we just can’t find any difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.

          Vaccines are incredibly safe. Unless you like dumpster diving in VAERS, which only a select few “MPH” kids examine.

          • LZ

            Wow. Where do I begin? “Dumpster diving in VAERS, which only a select few “MPH” kids examine” LOL! You really ought to take those superior credentials of yours on the road and do some standup – you are hysterically funny! The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System is the system that our government has set up for vaccine injury reporting. Can’t you even TRY to hide your bias or do you think your intelligence is so superior that no one can see how idiotic you are?

            Second, you say studies show “probably” no difference in intussusception rates than the general population. I think you need to sue whoever it was you paid to educate you, because you should get your money back. Peer reviewed studies have definitely shown a statistically significant increased rate of intussusception among newer version rotavirus vaccinated infants. This is from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health:

            http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/cc-rota.htm

            “RotaTeq package insert updated to include updated information on intussusception. A Mini-Sentinel PRISM study, the largest study of intussusception after rotavirus vaccines to date, identified an increased risk of intussusception in the 21 day time period after the first dose of RotaTeq, with most cases occurring in the first 7 days after vaccination. No increased risk was found after the second or third doses. These findings translate into 1 to 1.5 additional cases of intussusception per 100,000 first doses of RotaTeq. RotaTeq Package Insert | FDA Safety Communication 6-13-13″

            I would encourage anyone wanting to know more to go to this link as there is also information about Kawasaki’s disease and the porcine virus that was (oops) found in the rotavirus vaccine. Of course, no one knows what that could mean for the population. There is also some information about contagiousness of vaccine recipients after administration of this live vaccine.

            You know, Skeptical Raptor, you’re pretty sloppy for a big shot.

          • JGC

            VAERS isn’t “the system”, but one part of a larger post-marketing surveillance system which incorporates both passive (VAERS) and active (such as Vaccine Safety Datalink) monitoring initiatives, and one that’s specifically designed to provide early warning of any hint of a problem-reported such that it is not possible to use VAERS reports to assess causality.
            This system is demonstrably capable of detecting adverse events that occur with incidence rates of 1 in 20,000 such as the intussusception associated with early rotavirus vaccines. If vaccines really were causing ASD’s with sufficient frequency to be driving increased autism diagnoses with a frequency of 1 in 68 (according to the latest CDC incidence estimate) there’d be no trouble detecting the association.

          • LZ

            Except that the majority of parents of children developing ASD post vaccination report that their childrens’ cases were never reported to VAERS. The government acknowledges that less than 1% of vaccine injuries are reported to VAERS. Most cases of vaccine injury are not acknowledged by physicians, let alone reported. The person administering the treatment, usually a pediatrician, typically does not want to admit to the parent that what he or she did caused harm. That’s what’s going on in the real world.

          • lilady R.N.

            Physician are required to report “Severe Adverse Events”, according to Federal statutes.

            Every Vaccination Information Statement” which is provided to parents/guardians before their children receive every vaccine has a huge notification in Bold Black print for parents to report Severe Adverse Events.

            Anti-vaccine blogs and websites encourage parents to report minor reactions to vaccines. Consequently, much of the VAERS database is contaminated with the non-reportable minor reactions…as well as the bogus reports of the onset of autism, following vaccinations.

          • LZ

            Only in vaccine fairy land do physicians report those “rare” severe adverse events. In the real world, when parents report that their child is having a reaction, they are either told that what is happening to the child is normal, or that it is a coincidence and has absolutely nothing to do with the vaccines. You know, like you keep saying, because in vaccine fairy land vaccines are safe and effective and couldn’t possibly cause a child any harm whatsoever.

          • JGC

            How have the parents established
            that what they believe to be a “vaccine injury” actually was a consequence of receiving the vaccine? Surely their belief must derive from something more than a “post hoc ergo procter hoc” logical fallacy?
            “You know, like you keep saying, because in vaccine fairy land vaccines are safe and effective and couldn’t possibly cause a child any harm whatsoever.”

            Straw man–no one has claimed vaccines could not possibly cause any adverse events whatsoever .

            What is being said (and is supported by a very large body of evidence) is that the adverse consequences associated with routine vaccination are well characterized; that the most frequent adverse events are both transient and minor (low grade fever, soreness at the site of injection, etc.), the serious adverse events are all but vanishingly rare (GBS, encephalopathy); that no evidence supports the premise that ASD’s are causally associated with vaccination; and finally that the risks associated vaccination are much, much smaller than the risks associated with remaining vulnerable to the infectious diseases they protect against.

          • Reality022

            I want to know where these malevolent MDs are stacking the bodies of the “Vaccine Executed”.

            You don’t happen to have a whistleblower who worked for a large clinic as the custodian and is ready to blow the conspiracy wide open when he reveals that the dumpster out back of most clinics have cadavers stacked like sardines, especially during the late summer and fall high volume flu vaccination period.

            I think I’m going to check out back of Walgreens when they are pushing the flu vaccine. There must be dozens of dead bodies the way the anti-vaccination culties talk about how common severe and dangerous reactions to vaccines occur.

            Readers should ask themselves if they’ve ever met anyone who legitimately was vaccine injured. Face to face. Not on an anti-vaccine liar’s website forum. Where are all these horribly injured and dead folks?

          • LZ

            This is the second direction that you’ve given “readers”. You wouldn’t be here to influence public opinion with propaganda, would you?

            If you want to know where all these horribly injured and dead folks are, look in the diagnoses that have increased dramatically since the vaccine program ramped up over the past 20-30 years. Check out the SIDS death rates, the rates of allergies, asthma, type 1 diabetes, oh and let’s not forget the 1 in 50 with autism, many of whom can’t speak, live in pain and will never be independent. Ask ANY experienced school teacher how the health and ability of the student population has changed over the course of his career and you’ll get an earful. And don’t forget that if you are fortunate enough to live to be 84, that you have about a 1 in 2 chance of getting there without Alzheimer’s. We always had old folks with dementia, but not 1/2 of them. Is that what yearly flu vaccines administered since the 70’s have done to the elderly population? Some think there’s a link. But of course, you won’t agree. If you want your yearly flu vaccine and if you want you and your children to have each and every vaccine developed, then have at it. But, understand, the science is not even close to being conclusive about the safety or efficacy for that matter, of vaccines.

          • Reality022

            No, I’m here to provide some accurate information and to laugh at the anti-vaccine liars and the farcical and idiotic tall-tales they tell that fall apart when anyone stops to consider what they observe in every day, non-internet, life.

            So the dead folks are “in the diagnoses”? Brilliant!
            Where are the bodies?
            Where are the injured and their families telling their friends the horror stories? Face-to-face, not some lying web kook who you really don’t know from Adam.

            Where are the real flesh and blood people telling you these horror stories? I know I’ve never hear a single one. Not one in many decades, and I’m sure 99.99% of the readers will concur that they’ve never heard of anything more than someone getting a mild fever and a sore arm.

            Where are all the injured and dead? The physical bodies – not lying reports on the web from anonymous strangers.

            The reader should ask themselves this. How many real, live, injured folks have you ever encountered?

            I’m betting – none. This doesn’t mean that very, very rarely someone does have a serious reaction to vaccines. Anaphylaxis is very serious, for example.
            But to listen to the anti-vaccination cultists you’d think that every other person who gets vaccinated promptly drops to the ground and starts pushing up the daisies.

            Where I work they provide a free flu clinic for the employees. I haven’t heard of or seen any increase in absenteeism or employee deaths. Everyone seems quite healthy and flu-free. The director of personnel is one of the promoters of this program as a benefit to the empoyees. If it was causing him nightmares and headaches due to absenteeism and empoyee deaths, he’s shut it down.

            It’s thing like this, in every day life, that put the lie to the idiotic stories from the anti-vaccine cultists.

            Think about it folks.
            Think about what you observe in real life.

          • LZ

            Here is NVIC’s International Memorial for Vaccine Victims:

            http://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Memorial.aspx

          • Reality022

            In case you are still illiterate let me spell it out for you –

            I’m asking the readers if they encounter these horror stories in face-to-face real life.

            The National anti-Vaccine Idiots Convention is run by the crazy cat lady who has no scientific, medical, or technical knowledge that would qualify her to speak on the subject.

            An internet list by a bunch of apparently ex-Marshall Applewhite devotees is of no use. It is a list by a bunch of cultists who blame everything from hangnails to drowning on vaccines.

            Nice try.

          • LZ

            I think you’re referring to the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), founded by Barbara Loe Fisher in 1982 after her son suffered a vaccine injury. It was Fishers advocacy to Congress that brought about the government’s monitoring of vaccine adverse events. I believe VAERS was developed because of her. From the NVIC website:

            “The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is a national charitable, non-profit educational organization founded in 1982. NVIC launched the vaccine safety and informed consent movement in America in the early 1980’s and is the oldest and largest consumer led organization advocating for the institution of vaccine safety and informed consent protections in the public health system.

            Our Mission
            The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is dedicated to the prevention of vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and to defending the informed consent ethic in medicine.

            As an independent clearinghouse for information on diseases and vaccines, NVIC does not advocate for or against the use of vaccines. We support the availability of all preventive health care options, including vaccines, and the right of consumers to make educated, voluntary health care choices.”

          • LZ

            And I know that your aren’t interested in what I’ve seen, but I wil tell you anyway in answer to your question to “the readers” that I have seen many vaccine injured children and adults.

          • JGC

            What injuries did these children and adults suffer, and how has it been factually established that those injuries were a result of being vaccinated? Be specific.

          • JGC

            How did Barbara Loe Fisher factually establish that the injury she believes her son suffered as the result of vaccination actually was caused by the vaccine? Be specific.

            It is on some basis other than a “post hoc ergo procter hoc” logical fallacy…isn’t it?

          • LZ

            This is how it usually goes…A parent takes a child in for a well child visit. The child is previously healthy, happy, wonderful. After the visit and the vaccines, the child is miserable, sick, withdraws, may seize, cry, have diarrhea or constipation, is a different child. Then what happens is one of two things. When reported to the doctor, the doctor either attributes the change to the treatment or the doctor denies that there is any connection. Either way, the parent is left with a sick child, and no matter what the doctor thinks, the doctor rarely reports anything to anyone. Some children will seem to recover, improve, until it’s time for their next well child visit and round of vaccines. Doctor number 2 will most certainly insist that the child receive all of them, on schedule. After the second round the parent witnesses another reaction, this time often more severe than the first. Oftentimes, this is when thousands of parents that tell this same story, parents who never met each other, will say that within a certain amount of time, months usually, sometimes years, that the child who reacted is diagnosed with autism. Sometimes they are diagnosed with diabetes or other autoimmune diseases. What is so striking about your logic, is that you seem to think it’s normal and expected for children at some point to become sick. The explanation is always, well, that’s when children would “normally” be diagnosed with X, it has nothing to do with the vaccines. I hate to break it to you, but normally children are healthy. And the fact that the most vaccinated population in the world, our children, are also the sickest, consume the most pharmaceuticals, suffer the most chronic illness and neurological disease, ought to raise large red flags. Forty years ago, before the insane increase in vaccination, our country’s children WERE the healthiest. What happened? Vaccines. And if it isn’t vaccines, then what is it and what is being done about it?

          • JGC

            So your answer is “Barbara Loe Fisher did not in fact attribute her child’s injury to vaccination on any basis other than a ‘post hoc ergo proctor hoc’ logical fallacy”. Thank you for making that clear.
            “And the fact that the most vaccinated population in the world, our children, are also the sickest, consume the most pharmaceuticals, suffer the most chronic illness and neurological disease, ought to raise large red flags.”
            Our children are uniformly ‘sicker’ than children living in any other nation–really? Sicker than children in South Africa, where 280,000 children under 14 have HIV? Citation needed.
            “Forty years ago, before the insane increase in vaccination, our country’s children WERE the healthiest.”
            Evidence that children in the US today are uniformly less healthy than children were in the 70’s? Citation needed.

          • Reality022

            ” And don’t forget that if you are fortunate enough to live to be 84,
            that you have about a 1 in 2 chance of getting there without
            Alzheimer’s.”

            Brilliant!

            I think you may have something here.
            You get your first vaccination the day you are born.
            The next thing you know 80 or 90 years have passed and you’re on your deathbed thanks to the Aluminutty NWO Reptilian Galactic Overlords poisoning you with vaccines.

            I know its true. I read it on the internet.

            Thank you, thank you, thank you.
            I’d like to thank Alex Jones, Kevin Trudeau, Klee Irwin, David Icke, Mike the DeRanger, and Doktor Merde-ola for “Waking me up!!!111!!!”.

          • LZ

            You need a history lesson. The first birthday vaccines were given in the 80’s to mothers known to have Hep B or with unknown Hep B status. The Hep B birthday shot started to be given to all women (unless they knew enough to say no) in the 1990’s. No one in their 80’s alive today got a vaccine at birth.

          • Reality022

            So, did you figure out you were wrong about shaking vaccines to redistribute the thimerosal?

            Did you figure out the AoA post is a sad, laughable, transparent lie?

            Can you tell me why the anti-vaccine cult constantly lies?

          • JGC

            And your evidence that routine childhood
            vaccination is responsible for the increase in SIDS deaths, diabetes, allergies, asthma, autism spectrum disorders, or Alzheimers at age 84 would be…what exactly, LZ?

            Oh…that’s right. You don’t have any.

          • JGC

            Even if every parent whose child was diagnosed with an ASD after vaccination reported the finding to VAERS the VAERS reports would not be evidence for a causal association—more evidence is needed, given that solely as a function of probability some children will be diagnosed in close proximity to receiving a childhood vaccination.
            That’s why epidemiologic studies on very large scales have been performed, to determine if there’s a statistically significant difference in incidence of diagnosis associated with differential vaccination status/history. No indication of a causal association has been seen in these studies.

            “The person administering the treatment, usually a pediatrician, typically does not want to admit to the parent that what he or she did caused harm.

            As the person administering the vaccination has no reason to believe that the vaccine they administered caused the child to develop an ASD in the first place—no evidence supporting a causal association has been found—there’s nothing they need to admit or deny.

            “That’s what’s going on in the real world.”
            You owe me an irony meter.

          • LZ

            You’re right. More evidence would be needed in order to determine exactly what transpired. But you know what? Parents of children with autism are very frustrated because for years they have been begging government researchers tasked with understanding and getting to the bottom of what is causing this epidemic, begging them to study their affected children. And they don’t. They haven’t. They won’t. They’d rather induce “autism” in mice than study children who actually have the disease or have been recently diagnosed. They could be doing blood work and comparing tests on these children. They don’t. There are a lot of people, myself included, who think the reason why they don’t is because they will uncover evidence about vaccination that they don’t want to find. You won’t find evidence if you don’t look for it in the first place or if you refuse to ask the right questions. You know, as the author of this article mentioned, they don’t want to become radioactive. But the good news is that there are independent researchers who are uncovering important clues, including the differences in the microbiome that I mentioned earlier, and that research implicates vaccines among other medical and environmental exposures in adversely affecting human biology.

          • JGC

            “Parents of children with autism are very frustrated because for years they have been begging government researchers tasked with understanding and getting to the bottom of what is causing this epidemic, begging them to study their affected children. And they don’t. They haven’t. “

            But the parents have been listened to, LZ. Possible causes of the ‘epidemic’ (i.e., the observed increase in the incidence of ASD diagnoses) have been investigated and in fact many have been identified (broadened diagnostic criteria, diagnostic substitution, improved surveillance, etc.) Studies carried out by multiple independent researchers and agencies operating in multiple nations over more than a decade have looked for causal associations between ASD’s and thimerosal in specific, with vaccination is general, or as a consequence of “too many too soon” (as addressed in DeStefano et al’s recent publication) etc.

            And investigations into the etiology of autism are ongoing as we speak, but to date no evidence of a causal association between routine childhood vaccination and autism spectrum disorders has been found. Aat this point it’s reasonable to predict that should all the contributing factors to autism spectrum disorders ever be successfully identified, vaccines will not be on the list.

            “But the good news is that there are independent researchers who are uncovering important clues, including the differences in the microbiome that I mentioned earlier, and that research implicates vaccines among other medical and environmental exposures in adversely affecting human biology.”

            If independent researchers are “uncovering important clues”, why have neither you nor David (nor anyway else) been able to point us to their evidence?

          • LZ

            Your assertion that the increase in ASD diagnoses have been identified as being attributable to “broadened diagnositc criteria, diagnostic substitution and improved surveillance” does not agree with the CDC’s official report of March 2014, “Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years – autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 sites, United States, 2010.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24670961

            that states:

            “Consistent with previous reports from the ADDM Network, findings from the 2010 surveillance year were marked by significant variations in ASD prevalence by geographic area, sex, race/ethnicity, and level of intellectual ability. The extent to which this variation might be attributable to diagnostic practices, underrecognition of ASD symptoms in some racial/ethnic groups, socioeconomic disparities in access to services, and regional differences in clinical or school-based practices that might influence the findings in this report is unclear.”

            It is a shame though, that in a country where pathogen contaminated cantelope can be traced overnight to the farm it came from and to every state and consumer that bought it, that the CDC is only capable of estimating autism cases in 11 “sites”, releasing 2010 data in 2014 of children who were 8 years old 4 years ago, with the following admission: “Because the ADDM Network sites do not provide a representative sample of the entire United States, the combined prevalence estimates presented in this report cannot be generalized to all children aged 8 years in the United States population.” That is pathetic, for a disease which they estimate affects 1 in 68 now 12 year old children. How long will we have to wait for them to give us an estimate of what is happening to children born now? These are the people claiming that thimerosol isn’t a problem, that vaccines are perfectly safe. And let’s not forget that these brilliant leaders dishing out health prevention mandates were recently caught leaving smallpox vaccine sitting around the office – in a cardboard box – for decades. I think it’s clear that Kennedy and Hyman aren’t the ones with credibility problems.

          • JGC

            I’m not claiming that those are the sole factors responsible for the observed increase in ASD diagnoses, just noting (accurately) that they’ve been shown to represent significant contributors–and that precisely zero evidence supports the premise that routine vaccination, with or without vaccines incorporating thimerosal, are contributory to any degree.

          • JGC

            I haven’t claimed that the observed increase in the diagnoses of ASD’s is solely a consequence of broadened diagnostic criteria, etc., LZ–only (accurately) that they are significant contributors and that there is no evidence that routine childhood vaccination (with or without vaccines that incorporate thimerosal) are contributory at all.

          • Twylaa

            1) Epidemiology alone cannot tease out or rule out causes, especially when multiple factors are involved.
            2) The most important epi study has not been done: a comparison of health outcomes in vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations.
            3) Much of the studies have been done by people with vested interests, using flawed methodology.

            Vaccines and Autism What do Epidemiological Studies Really Tell Us?
            http://www.safeminds.org/research/library/SafeMinds%20Epidemiological%20Rebuttal.pdf

            Thimerosal: Questions Asked, Few Answered
            http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/08/by-julie-obradovicpart-5-in-the-14-studies-seriesi-apologize-originally-this-was-going-to-be-another-nice-calmly-written-po.html

          • Twylaa

            Dr. Bernadine Healy, IOM member and former head of the NIH, said it well:

            According to Healy, when she began researching autism and vaccines she found credible published, peer-reviewed scientific studies that support the idea of an association. That seemed to counter what many of her colleagues had been saying for years. She dug a little deeper and was surprised to find that the government has not embarked upon some of the most basic research that could help answer the question of a link.

            The more she dug, she says, the more she came to believe the government and medical establishment were intentionally avoiding the question because they were afraid of the answer.

            Why? Healy says some in the government make the mistake of treating vaccines as an all-or-nothing proposition. The argument goes something like this: everybody gets vaccinated at the same time with the same vaccines or nobody will get vaccinated and long-gone deadly diseases will re-emerge. (When I asked about cases of brain damage resulting in autism that have been quietly compensated by the government in vaccine court over the years, one government official recently told me that “it’s still better overall to get vaccinated than not to get vaccinated.”)

            Healy says the argument need not be framed in those terms (vaccinate or don’t vaccinate). Instead, she says, we should vaccinate, but work to do it in the safest manner possible based on what we know and what we can find out.

            That’s what the parents of autistic children have told me as well. If we can screen children to see which ones might be more susceptible to vaccine side effects, and vaccinate them on a more personalized schedule that is safer for them, why wouldn’t we? If it’s safer for all children to have their vaccinations spread out, why wouldn’t we? Healy says it’s called “personalized medicine” and is being done in virtually all areas of medicine today with the exception of vaccines. Yet the government continues to frame the conversation in all-or-nothing, “one-size-fits-all” terms.

            Lastly, Healy says the government has a long way to go to even do basic research that could get at the heart of what she believes is an open question. For example: why in the past decade hasn’t the government compared the autism/ADD rate of unvaccinated children with that of vaccinated children? If the rate is the same, it tends to point away from vaccines. If the rate is markedly lower in unvaccinated children, it tends to point toward vaccines.

            The government has a dataset of unvaccinated children available. It has published more than one survey of parents of undervaccinated and unvaccinated children (to find out why the parents are choosing not to vaccinate). It would seem simple to use those same families to measure their rate of autism/ADD. Also, why hasn’t the government used vaccine court as a resource to ask the autism/vaccine question? There, nearly 5,000 families have self-selected as believing their children’s autism was caused by vaccines. Many have expressed willingness to let their children’s medical records be released and studied; but nobody in the government has been interested.

            http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-open-question-on-vaccines-and-autism/

            And yes, those almost 5,000 families had their cases turned down by the vaccine court, based on the court’s review of only three cases. The Hannah Poling case was conceded to avoid setting a precedent. How many of the thousands of other children had/have mitochondrial disorders? We will never know. Why doesn’t the govt study the children alleged to have vaccine-induced autism? Because the govt does not want to find proof of vaccine induced autism.

          • Twylaa

            The govt could also study the 1300 children with compensated cases for vaccine induced brain injuries. But the govt has no interest.

            More from Dr. Healy and CBS News:

            Healy goes on to say public health officials have intentionally avoided researching whether subsets of children are “susceptible” to vaccine side effects – afraid the answer will scare the public.

            “You’re saying that public health officials have turned their back on a viable area of research largely because they’re afraid of what might be found?” Attkissonasked.

            Healy said: “There is a completely expressed concern that they don’t want to pursue a hypothesis because that hypothesis could be damaging to the public health community at large by scaring people. “First of all,” Healy said, “I think the public’s smarter than that. The public values vaccines. But more importantly, I don’t think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you’re afraid of what it might show.”

            As an example, Healy points to the existing vaccine court claims.

            CBS News has learned the government has paid more than 1,300 brain injury claims in vaccine court since 1988, but is not studying those cases or tracking how many of them resulted in autism.

            The branch of the government that handles vaccine court told CBS News: “Some children who have been compensated for vaccine injuries…may ultimately end up with autism or autistic symptoms, but we do not track cases on this basis.”

            “What we’re seeing in the bulk of the population: vaccines are safe,” said Healy. “But there may be this susceptible group. The fact that there is concern, that you don’t want to know that susceptible group is a real disappointment to me. If you know that susceptible group, you can save those children. If you turn your back on the notion that there is a susceptible group… what can I say?”

            Government officials would not respond directly to Healy’s views… but reiterated, vaccines are safe.

            Like Healy, the Kings and the Meads support vaccination, but say it can be made safer.

            http://www.cbsnews.com/news/leading-dr-vaccines-autism-worth-study/

          • Twylaa

            Because the govt refused to study those 1300 children, a group of parents contacted as many of those children’s parents as they could find from public records. The result was this paper:

            Unanswered Questions from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: A Review of Compensated Cases of Vaccine-Induced Brain Injury
            http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol28/iss2/6/

            They found 83 cases of autism among the 250 families they were able to contact.

            For years parents (and some doctors and scientists) have been telling our govt agency folks that it is not enough to crunch numbers. We need study of those allegedly injured by vaccines, to better understand whether they were injured and if so how. What are the mechanisms of injury, who is susceptible, how do we even identify vaccine injuries? We don’t even have established ways to identify a vaccine injury, therefore most are said to be without proof. We can tell whether someone is infected with chicken pox, but inflammation of the brain is another matter.

            This was an issue in 2004 when the IOM did a cursory review on the autism vaccine link and said no proof. Parents beseeched the IOM to look at biological evidence, but the IOM only crunched numbers. Dr. Mary McCormick, who is still active in the vaccine world today, refused to look at hundreds of case reports showing the relationship between vaccinations and autism:

            Dr. Johnston: Barbara Loe Fisher [NVIC] could give you names. Mrs. Fisher said she had cases. I think she came up to say if you needed any cases to demonstrate the points, you could have them.

            Dr. McCormick: She was demonstrating causality. She was taken by your case series that you did-the Guillaume Barre (sic) and whatever, the tetanus. She was all ready to get you cases to prove causality.

            Dr. Wilson: Well, let’s see them.

            Dr. McCormick: Let’s not do that. Do you have a free weekend that you want to plod through them?

            ~~~

            It should also be noted that before performing this review, Dr. McCormick said that “we are not ever going to come down that [autism] is a true side effect”. These are some of the problems with research on the autism/vaccine link!

            http://www.putchildrenfirst.org/chapter6.html

          • Twylaa

            Then of course there’s Dr. Poul Thorsen, who the news media doesn’t talk about. Why was Emory (closely affiliated with the CDC) paying him a full time salary as professor in Atlanta Georgia, while he worked full time for Aarhus U in Denmark? Kind of a long commute. What work was he doing for Emory and why didn’t he tell Aarhus about his other job?

            Vaccine defenders like to say that his role in research was insignificant, but according to the U.S. Attorney’s office he was “principal investigator”. Although he was indicted for stealing over $1 million in grant money, he has not been extradited and remains a free man. After the indictment he even kept working for the CDC for a while. What the heck?

            Aarhus U statement
            http://www.rescuepost.com/files/thorsen-aarhus.pdf

            U.S. Attorney’s Office – Northern District of Georgia
            Autism Researcher Indicted For Stealing Grant Money
            Thorsen Allegedly Absconded With Over $1 Million
            http://www.justice.gov/usao/gan/press/2011/04-13-11.html

            Office of Inspector General, U.S. Dept of Health & Human Services Fugitive Profiles
            https://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/fugitives/profiles.asp

            Frantic: CDC’s Dr. Diane Simpson Travels the World to Find Dr. Poul Thorsen
            http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/frantic-cdcs-dr-diane-simpson-travels-the-world-to-find-dr-poul-thorsen.html

            Round 2: CDCs Poul Thorsen Lying in Plain Sight
            http://www.ageofautism.com/2013/09/round-2-cdcs-poul-thorsen-lying-in-plain-sight.html

            Poul Thorsen’s Mutating Resume
            http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/03/poul-thorsens-mutating-resume.html

            Poul Thorsen Called Industry “Scumbag” Scientist and Mercury Shill
            http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/12/poul-thorsen-called-industry-scumbag-scientist-and-mercury-shill.html

            “Danish Study” CDC Doctor who “Debunked” Autism Vaccines Link Indicted on Fraud
            http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/04/danish-study-cdc-doctor-who-debunked-autism-vaccines-link-indicted-on-fraud.html

          • Twylaa
          • Twylaa
          • JGC

            Twyla, re: Poul Thorsen: Whether Emory was paying him a salary or not the evidence presented in the studies he was a minor contributor to does not go away. The analysis of and conclusions derived from that evidence presented in those studies is not invalidated. Certainly none of the other evidence attesting to vaccine safety—all the studies that Thorsen was not associated with—remains in place.
            So, one has to ask: did you have a point? Or are you just trying to imply some kaind of “Vaccines aren’t safe because CONSPIRACY THREORY!” hand-waving?

          • JGC

            Why can’t epidemiology identify or rule out causes when multiple factors are involved, given a sufficiently large data set? I’ll remind you it’s been demonstrably capable of identifying adverse consequences associated with vaccines that occur with an incidence rate of 1 in several 10’s of thousand doses delivered. What exactly would prevent it from from detecting a causal association between vaccines and ASD’s, if this occurred with a sufficient incidence to drive the observed dramatic increase in ASD daignoses?

            A prospective epi study comparing vaxed versus un-vaxed populations cannot ethically be done: it would require deliberately leaving the un-vaccinated cohort vulnerable to serious infectious disease. Fortunately it isn;t necessary to conduct an unethical study to assess health outcomes as a function of vaccination status: retrospective studies can and have been done, at very large scale, finding no evidence of elevated risk associated with vaccination.

            “Much of the studies have been done by people with vested interests, using flawed methodology.”

            Which studies are you referring to, and what flaws in their methodology render their findings less than credible? Be specific. (Surely you’re not saying ALL studies supporting vaccine safety must be rejected.)

          • Twylaa

            I posted several comments here, but now they are gone!

          • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

            Ah, the outstanding science of package inserts. This leads me to a great quote from Sam Harris, another real scientist with a real degree:

            “Water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. What if someone says, “Well, that’s not how I choose to think about water.”? All we can do is appeal to scientific values. And if he doesn’t share those values, the conversation is over. If someone doesn’t value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove they should value it? If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?”

            You invent science. Having a discussion with you would be like talking to my cat, whose IQ is substantially above you and Mr. MPH braggart. LOL

  • http://www.autisminvestigated.com/ Jake Crosby

    I met Bruce Gellin, he couldn’t even pretend to be polite to me. I’m not surprised he used the “independent” IOM report as his fallback (a closed-door gathering of a handful of “experts” who don’t have to answer to FOIA requests unlike government agencies). But as Kennedy wrote in his “Deadly Immunity” article, the IOM chairwoman Marie McCormick said of autism before reading any studies that “we are not ever going to come down that it is a true side-effect” and that “CDC wants us to say these things are, well, pretty safe on a population basis”. And this “independent” panelist would go on to sit on NVAC, which advises Gellin’s office. http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/08/marie-mccormicks-iom-remarks-leave-a-bitter-taste.html

    Ironically, if Kennedy edits these quotes from his book he’ll be covering up the exact same incriminating information about IOM that Salon did when it pulled “Deadly Immunity” from its website.
    http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/03/was-robert-f-kennedy-jrs-deadly-immunity-retracted-from-salon-by-arthur-allens-wife-and-her-brother.html

    Even more ironic is that this past year, Kennedy held off on publishing his book to pressure HHS into purging all vaccines of thimerosal. Instead, Kennedy purged his book of its chapters on autism.

    • lilady R.N.

      Are you still quote mining from old reports, in order to make your case about the huge worldwide conspiracy, that exists only in your mind, Jake?

      You accuse, libel and slander respected scientists, researchers, doctors and real journalists. Every one of your posts on Age of Autism is the yellowest of yellow journalism.

      Since you decided to go rogue and turn on your handlers at Age of Autism, you have embarked on smear campaigns against the bloggers at that site.

      You have personally stalked those on your enemies list at public meetings, including Dr. Paul Offit, Dr. David Gorski, Dr. Fiona Godlee, Seth Mnookin and many others. You have also stalked people on their jobs, in an effort to have them fired and lose their livelihoods.

      We know for a fact that the mentor for your “culminating experience” at George Washington University which awarded you a MPH-Epidemiology degree last year, was the disgraced and discredited chemically-castrating and chelating former medical doctorm Mark Geier, who lost his medical licenses in every State because he medically abused autistic kids.

      What is the topic of your George Washington University, MPH-Epidemiology “culminating experience”?

      Which government databases did you and Mark Geier use for your study?

      Please provide the names of the Federal government officials and/or elected officials who provided access to those specific Government databases, for you and Mark Geier.

      You have a MPH-Epidemiologist degree…but you will never, IMO, be an epidemiologist.

      lilady, RN, BSc-Nursing, public health nurse clinician-epidemiologist (Retired)

    • David Foster

      Everyone please pay attention to what Jake just said here, it’s important!

      Those in charge of the the so-called IOM Vaccine Safety hearings were already predisposed to conclude in favor of the CDC that there are no vaccine safety issues, and we have this in their own words. Get it? They had their mandate before the hearings even started. Independent indeed.

      I attended one of these hearings, the one on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and vaccine safety in 2002. It was a joke:

      http://www.vaccinetruth.org/institute_of_medicine.htm

      • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

        Jake Crosby has no credentials to speak about science. And you’re referring us to a website that are simply liars who wouldn’t know a scientific fact if it walked up and gave them a kiss. So tiring to read this anti-scientific crap.

        • LZ

          Skeptical Raptor, Jake Crosby has no credentials to speak about science? He has a Masters in Public Health in Epidemiology and is working toward his PhD in Epidemiology. From his website:

          “Jake Crosby is editor of Autism Investigated. He is a 2011 graduate of Brandeis University with a Bachelor of Arts in both History and Health: Science, Society and Policy and a 2013 graduate of The George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services with a Master of Public Health in Epidemiology. He currently attends the University of Texas School of Public Health where he is studying for a Ph.D. in Epidemiology.”

          • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

            Yes, Jake brags about his “MPH” all the time. However, denying basic science like Germ theory, denying the vast wealth of evidence that vaccines (or thiomersal) have NO correlation or causation to autism, and pretending that his own knowledge trumps the scientific consensus without publishing one single paper that provides evidence that the scientific consensus is wrong (and even that would take years of discussion), Mr. Crosby is nothing but a charlatan.

            Shall I brag loudly about my credentials. Because they’re vastly superior to that dude’s pathetic science denialism.

            I’ve been reading the lies of the vaccine deniers for a long time. We all know precisely everything about Jake Crosby, and his brag worthy efforts.

          • LZ

            Thank you for the clarification and a good laugh.

          • JGC

            Whether Jake has credentials or does not isn’t relevant, is it? The fact that he has a MPH degree doesn’t lend his claims any authority: they must stand or fall on their own merit.

            When he can point to a body of evidence that exposure to thimerosal at levels achievable by routine vaccination is causally associated with autism spectrum disorders that’s sufficient to counter the existing body of evidence supporting instead the conclusion no such causal association exists he’ll be taken seriously—and not before.

          • LZ

            Except your “existing body of evidence” is in reality a large balloon that is about to pop.

          • JGC

            That existing body of evidence isn’t going away—the fact it does not support your predetermined and preferred conclusion cannot simply be ignored.
            If you can offer a similarly robust body of evidence to the contrary, demonstrating the existence of a causal association between vaccination and ASD’s, diabetes, etc., or that the preservatives and other ingredients in vaccine formulations are harmful at exposure levels achievable by routine vaccination you would have the beginning of an argument.

            So—got any?

          • lilady R.N.

            I already posted about Jake’s quack mentor for his Master’s thesis.

            Ask Jake about his maternal uncle Alex Cranberg who is a Regent of the U-Texas System and the influence Uncle Alex wielded to gain Jake’s admission.

            He’s a hypocritical stalking yellow journalist, who has communicated with the employers of science bloggers…in order to have them lose their livelihoods.

    • Dorit Reiss

      Note that recent IOM reports also rejected a connection between vaccines and autism – in 2011 and 2012, both committees carefully picked with no conflict of interests.

      Taking the IOM quotes out of context is not going to make the abundant evidence on this issue go away. Multiple studies, in multiple countries, looked at whether vaccines generally and thimeorsal specifically cause autism. No link was found. Thimerosal was removed; rates continue to go up. There’s no link there.

  • CassandraofDelphi

    “That said, there is a larger body of science on thimerosal/ethylmercury–such as toxicological and animal studies–that I was not aware of. This is laid out in the book. Do these studies add up enough to indict thimerosal as a dangerous vaccine ingredient for a potentially vulnerable subset of the population? That is a loaded question.”

    Keith, I would say this is the most important question that the government has failed to answer. All of the studies the government relies on are large epi studies showing no effect at the population level. Are Thimerosal preserved vaccines safe for the majority? Yes. Are they safe for everyone even with predisposed conditions? Absolutely not! I hope you and your editors will do justice to not only the book but to this important issue. The question of Thimerosal toxicity is not a scientific issue, the science is clear that it is toxic and should be avoided, it is a political and financial one.

    • CassandraofDelphi

      …and I might add legal question too. How long can vaccine manufacturers hide behind complete liability protection, while society pays the price for the failure of their products?

      • Boris Ogon

        How long can vaccine manufacturers hide behind complete liability protection, while society pays the price for the failure of their products?

        Would you like to offer a précis of how well state tort actions fared in the pre-NCVIA era?

        • CassandraofDelphi

          The fact that the system did not work properly in the pre-NCVIA era does not mean that the current system is better. Dr. Salk testified to Congress that liability protection would take away the incentive for manufacturers to create the safest product possible. He was completely right.

          • Boris Ogon

            This is a non-answer. Which would you prefer?

          • First Officer

            Or not produce them at all.

          • Boris Ogon

            Dr. Salk testified to Congress that liability protection would take away the incentive for manufacturers to create the safest product possible.

            I would idly note that this appears to be trying to buoy to the surface as an au courant pro-disease talking point John Stone’s running out of “fresh” material again.

            Also, my bigger concern about indemnity (or effective indemnity) for manufacturers, is not that people have no opportunity to be compensated but that there is little sanction on manufacturers to get it right and every incentive to foist defective products on a captive market – you can argue till you are blue in the face what is “avoidably” and what “unavoidaby” unsafe (to which the answer is entirely subjective), but “unsafe” is the operative reality.

          • Boris Ogon

            Of course, it is already well known who is “incentivized” by the state-tort system that you are weirdly dancing around as though “it” would somehow “work properly” if… well, you haven’t gotten to that yet.

    • Dorit Reiss

      Epidemiological studies can locate problems as rare as one in one hundred thousands. And these looked at millions of children. Autism is not rare. I’m not sure how you can claim they missed a connection like that.

      • Boris Ogon

        Epidemiological studies can locate problems as rare as one in one hundred thousands.

        This is an understatement. The attributable risk of GBS due to H1N1 vaccination has a fractional spread around 1 per million.

  • Katie Wright

    Keith, this is the last thing I would ever want to be involved with. I am 100% pro vaccine. Yet my son suffered horrific brain damage after a multi vaccination in 2003. I thought, “well he will be fine, mercury was removed from vaccines in 2001!” I called by pediatrician and she said that yes his shot did have mercury in because mercury was grandfathered until 2004!

    Well my son went from a vocabulary of 500 words to basically never speaking again. I am not suing anyone, I am “not looking for someone to blame,” but I am angry my son had mercury in his vaccines. It was insane to recklessly allow thimerasol in infant vaccines. It was 100% unnecessary and stupid in every imaginable way. I want vaccines, but this price was too high.

    Robert F Kennedy Jr. is incredibly courageous to take on this issue and tell the truth. He has everything to lose and nothing to gain.

    • Lawrence McNamara

      If this was truly the case, then you should have filed a claim in the Vaccine Court….

      • Katie Wright

        why bother? I don’t have the time and it would not have changed anything

        • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

          There is no “mercury” in vaccines.

        • lilady R.N.

          You didn’t file a claim on behalf of your autistic child, because there is no prior plausibility and no proof that your child’s autism was caused by any vaccine.

    • Dorit Reiss

      Since the evidence is that the tiny amounts of thimerosal in vaccines is in no way linked to brain damage, or autism, and since the evidence is more generally that vaccines do not cause autism, I would suggest you reconsider your explanation for your child’s problems. Luckily, we have a growing body of research on autism highlighting that it’s prenatal, with strong genetic components.

    • lilady R.N.

      I don’t know why you didn’t make a claim on behalf of your child before the Vaccine Court…perhaps you realize your claim for his autism would be dismissed for lack of evidence.

      Please don’t claim you are “100 % pro vaccine”, when your 99 posts as a columnist on Age of Autism are classic anti-science and anti-vaccine.

      http://www.ageofautism.com/katie-wright/

    • Matt Carey

      “I called by pediatrician and she said that yes his shot did have mercury in because mercury was grandfathered until 2004!”

      Any idea why your pediatrician lied to you?

      More to the point, why haven’t you checked on this statement? It’s absolutely false.

  • Flox Molder

    The science is settled. Autism is a fact.

  • ciaparker2

    Between Verstraeten’s original study, recently released to the public under the Freedom of Information Act, showing that the more mercury children received in vaccines, the higher the level of autism, and the Brick Township study, showing that when the level of mercury routine childhood vaccines was increased dramatically around 1990, that the autism rate in children went from 0 to 1% in just a few years, there is ample reason in only those to support vaccine mercury being largely to blame for the autism epidemic. Mark Noble’s studies showed that even concentrations as low as one nanomolecule per billion was enough to cause lethal effects, and he detailed several ways in which the mercury could cause autism. Boyd Haley, chemist at the U. of Kentucky for many years, has published work showing how vaccine mercury causes autism. It is not the only factor, vaccine encephalitis in itself can also cause autism and is listed on the package insert of most vaccines as a reported side effect. Many of the symptoms of autism are also symptoms of acute mercury toxicity: loss of, delayed, absent, or aberrant speech, loss of interest of failure to develop interest in social interaction, twirling in clrcles, hand and arm flapping, toe walking, lining things up, chronic severe GI problems, chronic severe sleep problems, have all manifested in many thousands of children shortly after receipt of mercury-containing vaccines, and many of these children, when tested, were revealed to have high levels of mercury, the only source of such high levels likely being the vaccines they received. The mercury given routinely in childhood vaccines for over a decade was cumulatively hundreds of times more than the presumed “safe” level, and that was the decade when autism rates in the US sprialed upward to unprecedented levels. Autism did not exist before vaccines; the rate after mercury was added to the diphtheria vaccine leveled off at three per ten thousand vaccinated children by the ’70s. Now the rate is one in 36 children, according to the U. of Minnesota study released last year. Although mercury has been largely removed from most vaccines, it is still present in most injected flu vaccines in the full amount, and, since 2004, it has been recommended that everyone get it every year, and twice in the first year. Before that it was contraindicated to give it at all to healthy children or pregnant women. The trace amounts of mercury still in many vaccines are still over the toxic waste limit and much over the limit for drinking water. It has always been said that ethylmercury is the “safe” kind, but that has been demonstrated not to be true at all, and is now considered by researchers to be just as dangerous as the methylmercury in fish. Some people are genetically programmed to excrete most of it within weeks, while others store it permanently in the brain.
    I would have like to read Kennedy’s new book, but when I saw yesterday that he had agreed to take out the chapter on vaccine mercury and autism, I cancelled my pre-order on Amazon. Autism caused by vaccine mercury as well as by vaccine encephalitis is the most important issue of our time, and although it is understandable that very influential pharma interests wish to silence this discussion, I am not. I reacted to a mercury-containing tetanus vaccine with both arms being paralyzed the same day, brachial plexus neuropathy, and MS, mother to a daughter who reacted to a mercury-containing hep-B vaccine given without permission the day of birth, who reacted to it with encephalitic screaming syndrome for four days and nights, later diagnosed with autism. After the congressional safety hearing on that vaccine in 1999, which found it should never be given with mercury, vaccine manufacturers said they’d take it out, but continued to sell the old ones under their expiration date, including to the hospital which gave it to my daughter in 2000 and ruined our lives.

    • JGC

      There is no ‘original’ versus revised Verstraeten study, cia: Verstraeten conducted a single two phase study. After the completion of the first phase, which looked only at raw numbers from a medical history database, an abstract was submitted to the CDC’s 1999 Epidemic Intelligence Service conference noting a suggestion of increased risk associated with vaccination. Upon completion of the second phase of the study however—where chart reviews were performed to confirm diagnoses—that suggestion of increased risk was shown to represent a false positive result.
      See http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2014/02/22/is-the-cdc-hiding-data-about-mercury-vaccines-and-autism/ for details

      • ciaparker2

        Wrong. The first one was sequestered because it showed so clearly that mercury causes autism. Simpsonwood cooked up a plan to dilute its significance, and carried it out. The original study was released under the FoI Act.

        http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/cdc-caught-hiding-data-showing-mercury-in-vaccines-linked-to-autism/

        “When the results of the Verstraeten study were first reported outside the CDC in 2005, there was no evidence that anyone but Dr. Verstraeten within the CDC had known of the very high 7.6-fold elevated relative risk of autism from exposure to Thimerosal during infancy. But now, clear evidence exists. A newly-acquired abstract from 1999 titled, “Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to Thimerosal containing vaccine in first month of life” required the approval of top CDC officials prior to its presentation at the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) conference. Thimerosal, which is 50% mercury by weight, was used in most childhood vaccines and in the RhoGAM® shot for pregnant women prior to the early 2000s.”

        • JGC

          cia, this is the third time you’ve posted this false claim to this thread–why do you continue to lie?

          There was no original versus revised study by verstraeten. there was no sequestration or other attempt to conceal the preliminary data. Interested lurkers can see http://www.forbes.com/sites/em… for details

          • JGC

            Finally, with respect to the Verstraeten study I’ll note
            The CDC didn’t conceal Verstraeten’s preliminary findings: they were instead reported in the EIS conference abstract at the end of Phase 1.
            Nor the results from analysis following completion of the study’s Phase 2, reported at Simpsonwood and demonstrating the initial appearance of an association constituted an erroneous false-positive.
            Nor in the results of an IOM review of all epidemiologic data extant (including Verstraeten’s) published or unpublished, reported in 2004 and which finally put the nail in the coffin for the “It’s the mercury in the vaccines!” anti-vax talking point.
            So exactly what results do you believe were ‘sequestered’, and at what point cia?

  • Kate Perry

    Google is paying 80$ per>>CLICK NEXT TAB FOR MORE INFO AND
    HELP

  • Lyn Redwood

    A huge thank-you to Robert Kennedy Jr. for continuing his efforts to have
    the mercury based thimerosal removed from all medical products, including
    vaccines currently administered to pregnant women, infants, and children each
    year during flu season. Although many may argue that thimerosal is not in any
    way linked to autism (personally I disagree) it is much harder to argue with
    the following:

    1. Lack of adequate safety studies prior to marketing thimerosal as a vaccine
    preservative.

    2. Thimerosal’s track record as a preservative documents toxicity and
    ineffectiveness.

    3. Mercury exposure resulting from thimerosal-containing vaccine administration
    results in mercury levels where adverse outcomes are documented to occur.

    4. Exposure to vaccine level thimerosal crosses the blood brain barrier and
    results in significant deposition of inorganic mercury in the brain.

    5. U.S. policy is falling behind other countries on this important health issue
    and is not in keeping with the Institute of Medicine’s 2001 recommendations.

    6. Not stating a preference for mercury-free vaccines reduces public confidence
    in the National Immunization Program.

    1. Lack of adequate safety studies prior to marketing thimerosal as a vaccine
    preservative:

    As part of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernization Act, an
    assessment of thimerosal use in vaccines was conducted from 1997 to 1999. The
    FDA investigation was unable to locate any clinical studies formally evaluating
    the use of thimerosal before its initial marketing in the 1930’s.(2) The only
    study found was from 1931 where thimerosal was administered to individuals suffering
    from meningitis. The study was not designed to specifically examine toxicity;
    no clinical assessments were described nor were laboratory studies reported.
    “Merthiolate was injected intravenously into 22 persons…these large doses did
    not produce any anaphylactoid or shock symptoms.” In the paper, the authors
    acknowledge the clinician who treated the meningitis patients was not convinced
    of its efficacy stating “beneficial effects of the drug were not definitely
    proven.”

    Industry scientists noted in 1930 that a “wide range of toxicity and

    injury tests should be done.”(3) There is no evidence that the

    scientists took their own advice and conducted studies to address these
    concerns. According to FDA’s own investigation, vaccine manufacturers were not
    required to evaluate thimerosal’s safety in animal studies prior to its
    introduction as a preservative in vaccines although federal regulations require
    formal submission of animal

    safety data for finished biological products, including active and inactive ingredients.
    (4)

    Therefore, the FDA never required the pharmaceutical

    industry to conduct extensive toxicological testing, the bedrock of

    pharmaceutical development, on thimerosal necessary to prove thimerosal was
    safe before it went on the market. They failed to require industry to conduct
    adequate testing to determine how

    thimerosal is metabolized and they failed to require that industry conduct
    studies to determine the maximum safe exposure level of thimerosal.

    2. Thimerosal’s track record as a preservative documents toxicity and
    ineffectiveness.

    Despite the fact that there were never proper studies done

    to evaluate the potential toxicity of thimerosal prior to marketing, there is
    ample evidence provided by federal agencies and independent scientists that
    spans the last 80 years which documents that thimerosal is not an effective or
    safe vaccine preservative. In a study published in the Journal of the American
    Medical Association in 1948 titled “The bacteriostatic and bactericidal actions
    of some mercurial compounds on hemolytic streptococci,” the authors vigorously
    argued that

    thimerosal was ineffective as a “disinfectant, germicide and antiseptic.” In
    the review of the literature in this paper, the authors cited eight studies
    from 1928, 1935, 1937, 1938, and 1944 all of which drew similar conclusions.(5)

    In 1975, the FDA convened a panel of experts which included

    the lead author of the 1948 paper cited above to evaluate mercury-containing
    over-the-counter (OTC) products. The panel issued its reports in 1980 and in
    1982. The FDA issued a report of the panel’s findings in the Federal Register
    where they concluded that “some mercury-containing preparations are not
    effective and others are not safe and effective for OTC topical antimicrobial
    use. (6) A bacteriostatic action that is capable of being reversed by contact
    with body fluids and other organic matter does not constitute an effective
    topical antimicrobial action…” Most of the literature reviewed addressed
    mercury’s lack of antibacterial properties. One study reviewed published in
    1970 titled, “Three thousand years of mercury. A plea for abandonment of a
    dangerous, unproven therapy,” addressed mercury’s lack of effectiveness
    regarding anti-fungal properties. (7)

    With respect to thimerosal in particular, the panel found evidence from 1950
    which concluded that “thimerosal was no better than water in

    protecting mice from potential fatal streptococcal infections.”(8)

    Additionally, citing a 1935 study, the panel reported that thimerosal was “35.3
    times more toxic for embryonic chick heart tissue than for Staphylococcus
    aureus.”(9) The panel concluded that “thimerosal was not safe for OTC topical
    use because of its potential for cell

    damage if applied to broken skin and its allergy potential. It is not effective
    as a topical antimicrobial because its bacteriostatic action can be reversed.”
    However, it wasn’t until 1998 that the FDA issued its final report banning the
    use of thimerosal in topical OTC products because they were not “safe and
    effective.”(10)

    There are also several recent reports of thimerosal’s failure as a
    preservative. Clusters of disease from Group A streptococcus infections were
    traced back to multi-dose vials of diphtheria toxoid, pertussis, and tetanus
    toxoid (DPT) vaccine which were contaminated after being opened. (11)
    Additionally, in 2004, a Chiron plant that manufactured Fluvirin was forced to
    close because its vaccine was contaminated with Serratia marcescens.(12) This
    vaccine used thimerosal as a preservative in its product. This plant closure
    created shortages in the vaccine supply and caused concern among

    providers and patients. In this case and many others, thimerosal failed to
    prevent bacterial growth.

    3. Mercury exposure resulting from thimerosal containing vaccine administration
    results in mercury levels where adverse outcomes are documented to occur.

    A 2002 study reported a mercury blood level in a 2-month-old

    infant of 20.55 nmol/L five days after the infant received a 37.5 mg dose of
    ethylmercury (the amount contained in one DTaP and one Hepatitis B
    vaccine).(13) Many infants, however, beginning in the early 1990’s and for the
    next decade, received a 62.5 mg dose of ethylmercury (adding in the Haemophilus
    influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine) at the 2-month well baby visit. A vaccine
    expert from the Johns Hopkins Institute for Vaccine Safety estimated that these
    infants may have experienced peak blood mercury levels of 48.3 nmol/L;(14)

    well above the presumed EPA safety threshold of 29.0 nmol/L. As a reference
    point, the CDC recently defined a toxic exposure to mercury in an adult as a
    blood mercury level of >10mg /L (50 nmol/L) — approximately the same blood
    level that some infants experienced at two months of age.(15)

    Additionally, a study published in Pediatrics in 2000 measured blood mercury
    levels in newborns administered the Hepatitis B vaccine,

    containing 12.5 mg ethyl mercury. The investigation documented elevated
    post-immunization concentrations relative to pre-immunization levels in all
    neonates studied. (16) Levels of blood mercury after exposure in low birth
    weight infants were 7.36 (± 4.99) mg/L. One infant was found to have developed
    a mercury level of 23.6 mg/L, thus meeting the CDC criteria as a case of
    chemical poisoning from mercury.

    Experts contend that there are “windows of vulnerability” which occur during
    neurological development and that specific types of developmental outcomes may
    have separate windows of vulnerability. (17) These critical periods of
    development have not been established and may be relatively short in duration.
    The fact that thimerosal from vaccines has been documented to raise blood
    mercury levels concentrations over known thresholds where developmental effects
    have been documented to occur during the first few months of life means that particular
    “windows of vulnerability” may have been breached. Even minor
    neurological impairment can have profound societal effects when amortized
    across the entire population and life span.(18)

    In addition, EPA recently revised an earlier report which doubled the estimate
    of the number of newborn children at risk for developing adverse neurological
    outcomes due to elevated mercury levels. This revision was in response to
    finding that mercury cord blood levels were approximately 70% higher than
    maternal levels at the time of delivery. These new findings estimate that 1 in
    every 6 infants is already at risk for neurological injury from mercury.(19)
    Adding additional mercury exposure from thimerosal only serves to further
    increase the risk of injury.

    4. Exposure to vaccine level thimerosal crosses the blood brain barrier and
    results in significant deposition of mercury in the brain.

    A 2005 study funded by the National Institutes of Health compared brain mercury
    levels in infant Macaca fascicularis primates exposed to: 1) injected
    ethylmercury (thimerosal) and 2) equal amounts of ingested methylmercury.(20)
    In this study, ethylmercury more rapidly converted to inorganic mercury in the
    brains of the primates which resulted in increasing levels of inorganic mercury.
    In fact, the primates exposed to ethylmercury retained at least twice as much
    inorganic mercury in their brains compared to the primates exposed to
    methylmercury. Specifically, the relative concentrations in monkeys with
    detectable levels of inorganic mercury were 16 ng/g in thimerosal-treated
    monkeys and 7 ng/g in the methylmercury-treated monkeys in which inorganic
    mercury levels were detectable. Inorganic mercury was below detectable levels
    in 8 out of 17 of the methylmercury-treated monkeys. Exposures to mercury
    during these critical periods of development disrupt the growth and migration
    of neurons, with the potential to cause irreversible damage to the central
    nervous system.

    Prior research into the effects of methylmercury in adult primates documents
    that inorganic mercury in the brain is deposited in

    microglial and astroglial cells more than other cells and that inorganic

    mercury becomes trapped in the brain, the estimated half-life is over 700 days
    and that inorganic mercury is the toxic agent responsible for pathological
    changes in microglial and astroglial cells.(21) This same study estimated that
    the half-life of inorganic mercury in the brain was over 700 days. Chronic
    microglial activation has been recognized as an important component of neuro-degenerative
    disease and

    neuro-inflammation and contributes to neuronal dysfunction and injury.(22)
    Microglial cells serve as the brain’s immune system, and chronic activation of
    this system leads to pathological consequences, specifically, neuro-inflammation.
    Autopsied brain tissue from autistic patients contains evidence of an active
    neuro-inflammatory process in the cerebral cortex, white matter and the
    cerebellum as well as marked activation of microglial and astroglial cells.
    (23)

    5. U.S. policy is falling behind on this important health issue and is not in
    keeping with the Institute of Medicine’s 2001 recommendations

    In the 1980’s, several Russian articles were published investigating the
    toxicity of medical and biological preparations including vaccines.
    Specifically, in 1983 Kravchenko concluded that the methods of quality control,
    including tests on animals, do not ensure the complete absence of toxicity in a
    final product and that the use of the “subcultures with the introduced
    preparation” makes it possible to determine the toxicity of both specific
    and nonspecific components

    of vaccines and sera from the number of dead and damaged cells. The toxic
    action of preparations kills and damages the cells at the site of injection,
    thus inducing the formation of autoantigens whose effect on the body can not be
    predicted. Thus “thimerosal, commonly used

    as preservative, has been found not only to render its primary toxic effect,
    but also capable of changing the properties of cells. This fact suggests that
    the use of thimerosal for the preservation of medical biological preparations,
    especially those intended for children, is inadmissible.”(24)

    In another Russian paper, merthiolate (thimerosal) in a concentration of
    1:10,000, contained in one dose of vaccine, was found to damage cells in
    subsequent 2-fold dilutions up to 1:128. It was found that all of the tested
    medical and biological preparations (MBP) containing this preservative have in
    common the ability to damage cells in titers up to 1:128. In contrast,
    anti-rabies and anti-influenza vaccines with no preservatives were found not to
    exhibit damaging or cytotoxic effects in titers not exceeding 1:2-1:4. They
    concluded that “merthiolate usage (thimerosal) for MBP preservation should be
    discontinued due to its high toxicity.”(25)

    In 1986, after performing an extensive survey of the literature on organic
    mercury compounds and their toxicity, a medical officer from the U.K.’s
    Department of Health and Social Security, remarked (in

    reference to the presence of thimerosal in multidose vaccines): “… it is now
    accepted that multidose injection preparations are undesirable and
    preservatives should not be present in unit-dose preparations.”(26) This review
    concluded with the recommendation that consideration should be given to
    replacing organic mercurial preservatives in medicinal products.

    Others have raised concerns about vaccinating pregnant women

    with thimerosal-containing products and vaccines including influenza.
    Specifically, in a 2001 article titled “Vaccines without thimerosal: why so
    necessary, why so long coming?” the author states that although very low
    concentrations of thimerosal in pharmacologic and biological products are
    relatively non-toxic, this is probably not the case for

    in utero exposures or those occurring during the first six months of life.(27)
    Additionally, a Dutch report cautioned that thimerosal-containing
    immunoglobulins should not be administered to pregnant

    travelers because exposure to ethylmercury may cause harm to the fetus.(28)
    Note that U.S. policy allows for thimerosal containing flu vaccines during any
    trimester of pregnancy.The UK also announced a ban on thimerosal containing
    vaccines, “Mercury will be banned from vaccines given to babies, the Department
    of Health said last night amid fears of links between the metal and autism.”
    (29)

    6. Not stating a preference for mercury-free vaccines reduces public confidence
    in the National Immunization Program.

    In the past when the CDC Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP)
    was queried with regard to stating a preference for thimerosal-free vaccines,
    objections were voiced by committee members that doing so might harm the
    credibility of the vaccine program. Actually I believe that just the opposite
    is true.

    According to a study conducted by the University of Michigan, safety concerns
    have increased among both parents and physicians.(30) In cooperation with the
    CDC, the researchers surveyed nearly 750 randomly selected pediatricians and
    family practitioners across the United States. They found that nearly 70
    percent of doctors said that parent worries have risen recently, and more than
    a third of the physicians reported their own concerns had also increased.
    Additionally, the increase in concern resulted in a decrease in vaccine uptake.
    More than 90 percent of pediatricians and 60 percent of family practitioners
    reported that at least one parent had refused to allow their child to receive a
    particular vaccine in the past year. And up to a third of family physicians and
    12 percent of pediatricians said they did not recommend particular vaccines to
    parents either routinely or occasionally. Many of the doctors themselves said
    the rotavirus and thimerosal issues had increased their own concern about
    vaccine safety, as well as that of parents.

    In an effort to understand why parents and physicians alike

    are concerned about thimerosal it is important to understand just how much
    mercury is in vaccines preserved with thimerosal. Thimerosal is typically added
    to vaccines at a concentration of 1:10,000 which is equivalent to 100,000 parts
    per billion (ppb). Because thimerosal is almost one-half mercury, the
    concentration of mercury in the vaccine vial is at 50,000 ppb. To put this in
    perspective, the EPA requires liquid waste which exceeds 200 ppb of mercury to
    be sent to a special hazardous waste landfill and according to the EPA,
    drinking water cannot exceed 2 ppb of mercury. Therefore, unused thimerosal
    preserved vaccines must be disposed of as a hazardous waste.

    In light of these facts, is it reasonable to expect consumers to feel confident
    that thimerosal-containing vaccines are safe and then readily accept them? The
    use of such a toxic substance when its efficacy is doubtful, its safety not
    documented, and its use results in brain accumulation of mercury is difficult
    to justify, especially when less hazardous and more effective substances exist
    that can be used to preserve vaccines.

    In summary, the introduction of thimerosal into vaccines appears to have been
    based on a single, uncontrolled and poorly reported human study in the late
    1920s. However, this sole human study was not a true

    safety study and produced a faulty foundation upon which to build a robust
    vaccine program in which infants would receive multiple doses of ethylmercury.
    Even today, 80 years after the introduction

    of thimerosal into infant vaccines we still do not have adequate safety data
    with regard to the toxicity of thimerosal to support its continued use in
    vaccines. As a preservative,thimerosal’s track record is dubious at best due to
    several episodes of contamination in addition to its known toxic properties.
    Levels of mercury documented in infants after

    exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines have reached levels classified by
    the CDC as mercury chemical poisoning.

    These same exposure levels in infant primates resulted in significant

    deposition of inorganic mercury in the brain. The fact that such a neurotoxic
    agent as mercury continues to be utilized in medicine only serves to further
    erode public confidence in our Federal agencies.

    Thank-you Robert Kennedy for your efforts to stop this dangerous and
    completely unnecessary practice.

    Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN

    SafeMinds

    References

    2. Ball LK, Ball R, Pratt RD. An assessment of

    thimerosal use in childhood vaccines Pediatrics. 2001;(107)5:1147-1153.

    3. Powell HM, Jamieson WA. Merthiolate as a

    germicide. Am J. Hyg. 1931;(13):296-310.

    4. Department of Health and Human Services. 21 Code of Federal Regulations:
    601.25.

    1985

    5. Morton HE, North LL, and Engley FB. The

    bacteriostatic and bactericidal actions of some mercurial compounds on
    hemolytic streptococci. JAMA. 1948;136(1):37-41.

    6. Federal Register, Department of Health and

    Human Services, Food and Drug Administration.. Mercury-Containing Drug Products
    for Topical Antimicrobial

    Over-the-Counter Human Use; Establishment of a Monograph. (January 5,
    1982);47(2):436-442. 47 FR 436 [Docket No. 75N-0183].

    7. Kahn G. Three thousand years of mercury. A

    plea for abandonment of a dangerous, unproven therapy. CUTIS; Cutaneous
    Medicine for the Practitioner. 1970;6:537-542.

    8. Engley FB. Evaluation of mercurial compounds as antiseptics. Annals of the
    New York Academy of Sciences. 1950;53:197-206.

    9. Salle AJ and Lazarus AS. A comparison of the

    resistance of bacteria and embryonic tissue to germicidal substances. I.
    Merthiolate. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine.
    1935;32:665-667.

    10. Federal Register, Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug
    Administration.. Status of Certain Additional Over-the-Counter Drug Category II
    and III Active Ingredients. (April 22,

    1998);63(77):19799-19802. 21 CFR Part 310 [Docket No. 75N-183F, 75N-183D, and
    80N-0280.

    11. Bernier RH, Frank JA Jr., Nolan TF Jr. Abscesses complicating DPT vaccination.
    American Journal of Diseases of Children. 1981;135:826-828.

    12. Smith S. Safety fears cut vaccine for flu.

    Priority urged for the aged, frail. Boston Globe. (October 6, 2004). Available
    at: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_science/articles/2004/10/06/safety_fears_cut_vaccine_for_flu?mode=PF.
    Accessed February 2, 2006.

    13. Pichichero ME, Cernichiari E, Lopreiato J and

    Treanor J. Mercury concentrations and metabolism in infants receiving vaccines
    containing thimerosal: a descriptive study. Lancet.

    2002;360:1737-41.

    14. Halsey N, Goldman L. Mercury in infants given vaccines containing
    thimerosal. Correspondence. Lancet. 2003;361(9358):698-699.

    15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Case definitions for

    chemical poisoning. MMWR. 2004;54 (No.RR-1):1-25.

    16. Stajich GV, Lopez GP, Harry SW, Sexson WR. Iatrogenic exposure to mercury
    after Hepatitis B vaccination in preterm infants. J.Pediatrics.

    2000;136 (5):679-81.

    17. National Academy of Sciences, Committee on

    the Toxicological Effects of Mercury, National Research Council. Toxicological
    Effects of Methylmercury. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000.

    18. Rice D, Barone S Jr. Critical periods of vulnerability for the developing
    nervous system: evidence from humans and animal models. Environ Health
    Perspect. 2000;108 Suppl 3:511-33.

    19. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. Methylmercury:

    Epidemiology Update, Presentation by Kathryn Mahaffey, PhD at the National
    Forum on Contaminants in Fish, San Diego, CA (January 25-28, 2004).

    20. Burbacher TM, Shen DD, Liberato N, Grant KS, Cernichiari E, and Clarkson T.
    Comparison of blood and brain mercury levels in infant monkeys exposed to
    methylmercury or vaccines containing thimerosal. Environmental Health
    Perspectives. 2005;113(8):1015-1021.

    21. Charleston J, Body R, Bolerder R, Mottet N, Vahter M, Burbacher T.

    Changes in the number of astrocytes and microglia in the thalamus of the monkey
    Macaca Fascicularis following long-term subclinical methylmercury exposure.
    Neurotoxicology. 1996;17:127-138.

    22. Streit WJ, Mrak RE, and Griffin WST. Microglia and neuroinflammation: a
    pathological perspective. J. Neuroinflammation. 2004;1(1):14.

    23. Vargas DL, Nascimbene C, Krishnan C, Zimmerman AW, Pardo CA. Neuroglial
    activation and neuroinflammation in the brain of patients with autism. Annals
    of Neurology. 2005;57(1):67-81.

    24. Kravchenko AT, Dzagurov SG, Chervonskaia GP.[Evaluation of the toxic action
    of prophylactic and therapeutic preparations on cell cultures. III. The
    detection of toxic properties in medical biological preparations by the degree
    of cell damage in the L132 continuous cell line]. Zh Mikrobiol Epidemiol
    Immunobiol. 1983;(3):87-92.

    25. Kravchenko AT, Dzagurov SG, Chervonskaia GP. Evaluation of the toxic action
    of prophylactic and therapeutic preparations on cell cultures. PAPER 3: The
    detection of toxic properties in medical biological preparations by the degree
    of cell damage in the L-132 continuous cell line. (USSR State Research
    Institute of Standardization and Control of Medical and Biological
    Pharmaceuticals, Ministry of Health, Moscow)

    26. Winship WA. Organic mercury compounds and their toxicity. Adv Drug React Ac
    Pois Rev. 1986;3:141-180.

    27. Van’t Veen A-J. Vaccines without thiomersal: why so

    necessary, why so long coming? Drugs. 2001;61(5): 565-72.

    28. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. Thiomersal in gammaglobulin for pregnant

    travelers may not be safe for the fetus. National

    Coordination Center for Travel Advisory, 1999, Sep 18; 142 (38):1934-5.

    29. Sturcke J. Mercury to be banned from baby vaccines.
    http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical /story.jsp?story=548828 August
    7, 2004.

    30. Freed GL, Clark SJ, Hibbs BF, and Santoli JM. Parental vaccine safety
    concerns. The experience of pediatricians and family

    physicians. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26(1):11-4.

    • lilady R.N.

      Nice Gish Gallop there. Did you happen to notice that all the Spam you posted, has already been discussed here?

    • Dorit Reiss

      Can you explain why the fact that many studies in children – comparing children that received thimerosal in vaccines to those that did not, including millions of children, and finding no different in outcome – do not show that the tiny amounts in vaccines are not an issue? You provide evidence that’s not really on point, but do not address these studies. To use one example, you provide general studies from the 1940s and the 1970s to claim that thimerosal is not effective – but they do not show it’s safe; and then you provide studies about a mercury ointment, that have nothing to do with vaccines. These aren’t really a good answer to the studies looking specifically at thimerosal in vaccines – studies which were done. They aren’t a good answer to the fact that autism rates, for example, are still going up after thimerosal was removed from most vaccines.

      It’s also a little hypocritical to claim that the continuing use of thimeorsal (which to remind you is now only used in multi-dose flu vaccines, and you can get flu vaccines in a thimerosal free formula) undermines public confidence when you are doing your best, while ignoring data that shows thimerosal in vaccines is not harmful, to undermine public confidence on this issues. If the public is told the truth – that studies from all around the world looked at children, and found no difference in outcome between those that got thimerosal and those that did not – why would it lose confidence? When people try to represent thimerosal in vaccines as a big danger, with no evidence and counter-evidence, complaining about loss of public confidence over that use is problematic.

      • Lyn Redwood

        If you read the 2001 IOM Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism
        which specifically looked at theconcerns regarding thimerosal published
        in 2001 you will see where the committee acknowledged that the
        hypothesis that thimerosal exposure might result in harm in a
        genetically sensitive population “cannot be excluded by epidemiological
        data from large population studies that do not show an association
        between a vaccine and an adverse outcome.” The committee admits that
        population-based studies would not
        be able to detect subpopulations that could be genetically more
        vulnerable to
        mercury at lower doses than normal. The majority of children without the
        genetic susceptibility would simply “dilute out” the minority of
        susceptible
        children. On page 61, the report states
        that “The committee recognizes that this line of reasoning as a theoretical
        explanation for the data presented in this report …” (i.e., their conclusion of
        no association).
        We also know from the history of Acrodynia or “PInk
        Disease” which resulted from the use of mercury in teething powders and
        diaper rinses that were widely used in the early 1900’s that
        approximately 1 out of every 500 children exposed would develop the
        disease.
        The other point is that thimerosal and several other
        mercury based products are not just in flu vaccines. According to the
        FDA there are over there are over 100 pharmaceutical products on the
        market which contain mercury
        http://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/legislation/federalfooddrugandcosmeticactfdcact/significantamendmentstothefdcact/fdama
        /ucm100218.htm These include ear and nose drops, nasal sprays, lotions, creams, etc.
        Mercury
        is also a cumulative neurotoxin that is especially dangerous during
        pregnancy. EPA estimates that approximately 1 in every 6 pregnant women
        may already have mercury levels that could cause neurological injury to
        their unborn child. FDA counsels women to avoid/limit seafood from
        fish known to have high levels of mercury but allows pregnant women to
        receive flu vaccines that contain 25 mcg of mercury to be directly
        injected during pregnancy. That just doesn’t make sense. What if that
        flu vaccine with mercury is given to a mother who already has high
        levels of mercury in their body from environmental exposures and the
        baby just happens to be more genetically susceptible to mercury
        toxicity.
        Its like playing Russian Roulette.
        The same IOM report
        that I cited earlier also made the recommendation in the executive
        summary that that “appropriate professional societies and government
        agencies review their policies on the non-vaccine biological and
        pharmaceutical products that contain thimerosal used in infants,
        children and pregnant women. The committee recommendation reflected
        concern about total mercury burden and the potential risk of certain
        NDDs (neurodevelopmental disorders). ” So lets get on with it and do
        everything we can to protect our children from unnecessary exposure to
        mercury from all sources.

        • Dorit Reiss

          Here is what the IOM study continues and says about the hypothesis of vaccines and autism after your first quote: “The committee recognizes this line of reasoning as a theoretical explanation for the data presented in this report but has found no corroborating data in the laboratory, in animals, or in humans linking vaccines or vaccine components to autism based on genetic susceptibility.”

          In other words, it’s a nice theory, but it has no support. None. No evidence behind it. What we do have is completely evidence going the other way: epidemiological studies that show no link; sibling studies that show no difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated children in rates of autism: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23045216

          And rising rates of autism as thimerosal is almost completely removed from childhood vaccines – including in states like California that give no thimerosal containing vaccines to children.

          The rate of autism cannot be explained by thimerosal – or by vaccines generally. All the evidence goes the other way.
          So let’s protect children and the public by stopping to promote a failed hypothesis and no longer scaring parents from protecting their children against dangerous diseases.

          • LZ

            Your argument that there is no evidence against vaccination which is based on an incomplete understanding, is flawed. If we knew all there was to know about how vaccines do and do not work and about the impact of vaccines on man’s inner and outer environment, then you might have a point. But the fact is, the science and our understanding is full of holes. The current science links disturbances in the human microbiome to a long list of modern diseases – disturbances caused by anything – food, medication (including vaccines and their preservatives ie thimerosol), pesticides and herbicides – that impact the numbers and type of bacteria, viruses, fungi and protozoa that live in and on us, that are crucial to our health. As only one example, individuals with autism have been shown to have a different type and number of gut flora. How did they get that way? Antibiotics? Vaccines? Preservatives in food? Pesticide or herbicide exposure? Some or all of the above? We are at the forefront of a new understanding. But make no mistake, vaccines have not been ruled out by any means as a destructive force leading to chronic disease. Your simplistic analysis and conclusions about vaccines are not based on a scientific view that considers the whole picture.

          • Dorit Reiss

            The argument above is in a specific context: there is no evidence that the thimerosal in vaccines is harmful.

            But your general point is still problematic. Do we know everything there is to know about vaccines? No. But incomplete knowledge is not the same as zero knowledge, and we know a lot about vaccines. For example, alleged problems they caused have been investigated – in every case. Scientists looked at whether vaccines cause autism, food allergies, asthma or SIDS. The answer in each case was a clear and reproducible no. Rejecting that data because of theoretical, unsupported concern means “let’s leave children exposed to real risks – the risks of the diseases – even though we have good data showing vaccines are safe because I can imagine reasons they might not be safe.”

            If you want to claim vaccines are unsafe, provide evidence, not theory. Because not vaccinating has costs: children can get dangerous diseases. Paying that cost because of hypotheticals – against the evidence vaccines are safe – doesn’t make sense.

          • LZ

            You are so predictable Dorit, side stepping my points and spewing the same garbage. The science you refer to has been done with one hand firmly over two closed eyes, then presented with the other hand behind the back with crossed fingers. I will remind you (again) of what the esteemed editor of the NEJM, Dr. Marcia Angell, said about the legitimacy of published peer reviewed research:

            “…Similar conflicts of interest and biases exist in virtually every field of medicine, particularly those that rely heavily on drugs or devices. It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”

            And now you will go into full Chicken Little mode, flailing, but the diseases!, the diseases!, we’ll all die of the diseases! and then you’ll pile on with your new scare tactic: you’ll be made to pay! I fully expect that now you will also do your naive best to attempt to discredit Dr. Angell. Go ahead. Keep spinning.

          • Dorit Reiss

            With all due respect to the editor’s opinion – and note, it’s an opinion, she provided no evidence for it – when you have studies from all over the world, done by different teams with different institutional affiliations and different sources of funding, collaborating the same result, dismissing all of them as the result of a grand conspiracy is simply unconvincing. That’s why replication is important: one study may be manipulated. When you find the same result again, and again, and again – as is true for the studies about vaccines and autism, allergies, SIDS – the claim of manipulation is no longer convincing.

            And even if the peer review process has problems, we don’t really have a good alternative. All you have to offer, to respond to decades of studies, thousands of studies, constantly showing that the benefits of vaccines far exceed there small risks, is conspiracy theories. If you can’t prove your case, and all that’s supporting you is conspiracy theories, sorry, you have no case.

          • LZ

            There is no conspiracy Dorit. This is how business is done. That’s all. Multinational corporations have a stranglehold on the message, on how science is done and on how science is funded. Any scientist or journalist deviating from the message or threatening to hurt the business, is punished, as Cochrane Review Peter Gotzsche points out, organized crime style. That isn’t a conspiracy. That is simply the reality. You want evidence? Look at all the “reviews” Kennedy’s book is getting ahead of its release, including the one that you and I are commenting on here. When are journalists so motivated to discredit and destroy an author before a book even comes out? When Pharma’s bottom line is threatened, that’s when. Let’s count the firestorm of articles slamming Kennedy this week. Oh, and isn’t it interesting that the attack is on Kennedy and not on his co-author, Mark Hyman, because, of course, Hyman is an MD. Kennedy, an environmental lawyer, is easier prey, or so they think.

          • Dorit Reiss

            There’s no conspiracy, but multinational corporations control all the science in the world? I would recommend looking up the term conspiracy.

            And seeing journalists criticizing Kennedy who in the past said inaccurate things about thimerosal and vaccines for apparently continuing to do so as another conspiracy is also telling. The critique of Kennedy is not out of the blue: it’s because he has a history of doing exactly what he appears to do here – uncritically accept and promote anti-vaccine claims, without considering the abundant science against him, without considering the harm he is causing to children’s health.

            Thimerosal has been removed from most childhood vaccines; there’s no evidence it was harmful, and plenty of evidence that it wasn’t. And still, Kennedy lends his name to promoting this debunked idea – and is willing to support conferences like Autism One, where dangerous, untested treatments like MMS are promoted for parents to use on their defenseless autistic children. I’d say the criticism is well earned.

          • LZ

            Kennedy is fighting for the truth. Thimerosol has never been shown to be safe in any amount and continues to be used in flu vaccines and in all multi-vial killed vaccines in “trace” amounts. A point that I presented to you earlier that you ignored, the impact on the microbiome is one area of investigation where ingested sterilants such as thimerosol are suspected to have an adverse effect on human biology with serious implications. No independent party checks to see just how much thimerosol is in any vaccine. We are left with the word of the manufacturers. Administration of vaccines requires shaking the vials in order to evenly distribute the mercury thimerosol so that the amount of thimerosol given in one dose does not exceed 25 mcg, or in the case of the viles with “trace” amounts, to make sure that the mercury thimerosol does not settle and is drawn up in higher percentage in one dose over another. There is no monitoring to make sure that this does not happen and it is unknown how much variance there is from dose to dose from the same vial as a result of preparation error. Not only has thimerosol not been proven to be safe, but thimerosol laced vaccines are being given to third world children where autism rates are now skyrocketing. Autism One does not promote dangerous treatments. Some in the medical community have the nerve to criticize anyone who dares to try to help those afflicted with this devastating disease, when they have absolutely nothing to offer in the way of prevention, treatment or cure.

          • Dorit Reiss

            A. Multiple large scale studies found no connection between thimerosal in vaccines and autism or other neuropsychological disorders. From all over the world. There just is no link there.

            B. Why do you think the tiny amounts of thimerosal in vaccines are not evenly distributed in the vial? What is your evidence for that claim?

            C. Chelation carries risk (remember the young child who died in 2005?). You may not consider giving bleach to children dangerous, but hopefully other would agree. And abusive, for that matter. http://www.thinkingautismguide.com/2013/01/mms-yes-it-is-bleach.html

            http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/bleaching-away-what-ails-you/

            Here is a discussion of the type of “treatments” promoted at Autism One: http://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2013/10/29/the-5-scariest-autism-treatments/

          • LZ

            Stop with the libelous claims, Dorit. 100,000 people a year are killed by properly prescribed pharmaceuticals in hospitals alone. We don’t hear you pointing that out. Your point – C – is about an extreme atypical case that was not done properly. Re MMS, I am not prepared to comment on that. But I will say that there are plenty of speakers at medical conferences who present questionable ideas and treatments that are not accepted. We don’t then decide that medical conferences aren’t worth having or that all presenters should be discredited by that one.

            Here is a reference to the importance of vigorously shaking some vaccine vials in order to ensure a uniform suspension: http://www.pharmacist.com/ask-experts-shake-rattle-or-roll-preparing-vaccines-administration

            Here is an AOA article about how thimerosol content can vary by draw: http://www.ageofautism.com/2013/06/shake-that-vial-flu-shot-thimerosal-content-can-vary-by-draw.html

          • Dorit Reiss

            A. I think you need to reexamine your definition of libel. You are misusing the term.

            B. Medical procedures are done when they have benefits. The untested, unsupported treatments promoted in Autism One have no demonstrable benefits – just risks. If the little autistic boy was not chelated, he would not have died, for example. And using bleach enemas, feeding children bleach, is abusive.

            C. The reference you used does not talk about thimerosal not evenly distributed, and does not talk about uniform suspension in relation to influenza multi-dose vials, the only ones that still contain thimerosal.

            D. The fact that an anti-vaccine blog speculates that thimerosal content can vary is hardly evidence of that fact. Do you have actual evidence?

          • LZ

            As an example:

            “Influenza Virus Vaccine (Trivalent, Types A and B) Afluria When using the multidose vial, shake the vial thoroughly before withdrawing each dose…”

            Influenza Virus Vaccine (Trivalent, Types A and B) Fluvirin by Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc. – Shake the syringe vigorously before administering the vaccine and shake the multidose vial preparation each time before withdrawing a dose of vaccine.”

            Why do you think it’s necessary to shake the vial and what do you think will be the result if the preparer does not shake or does not shake vigorously enough? Who is monitoring this? NO ONE.

          • Dorit Reiss

            My point is: for many of those vaccines, most of which do not have thimerosal, there is the instruction to shake hard – suggesting it has nothing to do with thimerosal. To remind you, the most important part of the vaccine is the active ingredient.

            As evidence that you need to shake because the thimerosal is an issue, this is, well, not evidence of that.

          • LZ

            It is evidence that if not shaken at all or vigorously enough, any of the ingredients can be delivered in the wrong dose, including thimerosol. Multi-dose vials of influenza vaccine will have thimerosol. Only single dose vials do not.

          • Reality022

            Absolutely wrong.

            Readers should note this is the level of technical knowledge the anti-vaccine cultists bring to the table. i.e. – none.

            They are no more knowledgeable about science and medicine than the crazy guy down the street who drools on himself.

            My cat knows more than these arrogant ignoramuses.

          • LZ

            You’re bringing a lot of “technical knowledge” to the table with your crazy drooling guy and cat analogies. Aren’t you impressive? LOL

          • Reality022

            Care to explain how a substance with a 1000000 ppm solubility needs shaking to keep 50 ppm in solution?
            Didn’t think so.
            Do you need to shake your coffee constantly to keep the sugar uniformly dissolved?

            Care to explain why your own cite doesn’t even mention the proposition you are promoting? Are you illiterate? It is a very common condition in the anti-vaccine cult.

            At what grade did you drop out of school? Did you ever get through Algebra? Did you ever take and pass high school biology?
            I doubt it.

          • suz norkan

            *My* cats perform on the pier, for the tourists here in Key West! ;)

            Your remarks aren’t only wrong. They’re rude and *pointless*, ‘cartoon persona’.

          • lilady R.N.

            Whatever are you blathering about?

            How many vaccines have you ever administered from a multi dose vial, from a single dose vial, from a preloaded single dose syringe?

          • Reality022

            You haven’t a clue.

            You’re 1st cite merely recommends shaking if the vaccine is in the form of a suspension. Do you know what a suspension is? Apparently not. They do not mention thimerosal, and for good reason.
            Thimerosal is very soluble in water. Very soluble. 1000000 micrograms per milliliter.
            That’s 500000 micrograms per 0.5 ml.
            That’s 20000x the concentration as was used in vaccines in the past before it was removed. Vaccines contained (and multi-dose flu still contains) 25 micrograms per 0.5 ml.

            Vaccines = 25 microgram per 0.5 ml.
            Thimerosal solubility = 500000 microgram per 0.5 ml.

            You are not shaking a vaccine to suspend or homogenize the thimerosal distribution any more than you need to shake a cup of coffee to suspend a teaspoon of sugar. It doesn’t fall out of solution. Little things like entropy, dipole moments, and van der Waals forces keep it dissolved just fine except in the bizarro anti-vaccine world.

            Your other cite to the hilarious post by some dimwit on Age of Autism is only for the credulous who will believe every lie told by the anti-vaccine liars. Go to your local university and ask the Chem. professor if aqueous thimerosal at 50 ppm would ever need shaking to keep it in susjpension.

            Be prepared to be laughed at.

            Can you think of what *is* in a vaccine that needs suspension because it isn’t completely soluble and is a very fine suspension?

            Think hard, genius.

            Hint: Antigens and adjuvants, but not thimerosal.

            Why do the anti-vaccinationists constantly lie?

          • JGC

            “Your point – C – is about an extreme atypical case that was not done properly.”
            Direct question, LZ: what evidence demonstrates that chelation, even if it’s “done properly”, is an effective treatment for autism spectrum disorders? Be specific.

          • lilady R.N.

            Nothing libelous there.

            You ought to stop quoting the bible during a discussion of vaccines.

          • ciaparker2

            Thomas Verstraeten’s original study showed a clear correlation between mercury-containing vaccines received and autism. Simpsonwood was held to try to figure out how to hide the truth of this study, and it was flooded with meaningless additional statistics from insurance records, and the original study was sequestered from public view, until it was released last year under the Freedom of Information Act.

          • Reality022

            The lying anti-vaccine cultists never, ever, stop lying.

            You brought this up yesterday and were answered by JGC just a few posts below.

            You and your band of delusional anti-vaccine cultists have brought this up hundreds of times and the answer is still the same…
            You are mistaken because you don’t know how science works and you are more than willing to misrepresent the information because you are dishonest as witnessed by this post of yours less than a day after you posted the same and were answered in this very comments section:
            http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2014/07/20/deliberating-kennedys-thimerosal-book/#comment-1497941631

            Why do the anti-vaccination cultists constantly lie?

          • Dorit Reiss

            The conspiracy theory around Simpsonwood is simply untrue. Verstraeten’s original study showed no link to autism, but did suggest a link to other neuropsychological problems. In Simpsonwood scientists pointed out methodological flaws. Here: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/06/11/a-myth-memorialized-aka-simpsonwood-reme-1/

          • JGC

            cia, I responded to this claim previously: there was no ‘original’ and revised Verstraeten study and there was no sequestering of results. There was instead a single two-phase study, with Verstraeten submitting an abstract detailing preliminary data after the completion of Phase I but before the completion of the entire study. The study did not find evidence for a causal association between vaccination and ASD’s.

            Why are you continuing to make this false statement?

          • ciaparker2

            The Andy Cutler mercury-chelation protocol is currently being used by thousands, and is safer than the IV chelation therapy. The death you referred to was because the therpist mistakenly infused the chelating agent too quickly, and I’m sure you’re aware how often mistakes like that happen in the prescription and administraton of any drug. The Andy Cutler mercury chelation protocol uses only minute dosages of ALA (an amino acid) and DMSA, both licensed by the FDA as effective in latching onto mercury in the body and escorting in out, to be excreted from the body. DMSA chelates it from body tissues, while ALA is one of the very few agents capable of crossing the blood-brain barrier and chelating it from the brain, where many people store it permanently after having had it injected into them as thimerosal in mercury-containing vaccines. I got details on the protocol from regarding caroline dot com, with access to many forums with those who are successfully using it to heal their children from autism or themselves from MS and other conditions caused by mercury poisoning.
            Alex Hinze (see Vaccine Epidemic) is one of the many who have been completely recovered from autism by mercury chelation (I think he had it by the standard IV route when he was in third grade), and he wrote a fluent, intelligent essay included in the anthology, recovered from autism once the mercury was out of his brain. Also see “Three Short Years” in the same book, on a woman whose two younger children, born after the vaccine epidemic started in 1990, both had severe autism and both of whom tested sky-high in mercury. Only her oldest, typical so had neither autism nor high mercury levels, having been born before the mercury-containing HIb and hep-B shots were added.

          • Dorit Reiss

            Since you mentioned the FDA, here is what it says about chelation and autism: http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm394757.htm
            “Chelation Therapies.” These products claim to cleanse the body of toxic chemicals and heavy metals by binding to them and “removing” them from circulation. They come in a number of forms, including sprays, suppositories, capsules, liquid drops and clay baths. FDA-approved chelating agents are approved for specific uses, such as the treatment of lead poisoning and iron overload, and are available by prescription only. FDA-approved prescription chelation therapy products should only be used under medical supervision. Chelating important minerals needed by the body can lead to serious and life-threatening outcomes.”
            In other words, chelation agents do nothing for autism, and carry risks. There’s no benefit to using them for children with autism – just risks. Like the little boy who died.

            As to the example you provide – to remind you, ASD is a developmental disorder. Some children advance on their own – regardless of the dangerous, irrelevant treatment adults impose on them.

          • JGC

            Let’s assume—for the sake of arguments—that this Cutler” protocol is in fact safer than the protocols which have resulted in the death of at least one child.
            That still leaves the most relevant question unanswered: What evidence demonstrates that chelation is an effective treatment for autism spectrum disorders?
            As always, be specific.

          • JGC

            “Your argument that there is no evidence against vaccination which is based on an incomplete understanding, is flawed.”
            If this is true, and there actually is credible scientific evidence against vaccination, why haven’t you offered any in support of your claims?

          • ciaparker2

            DR, that Kuwaik study you linked to examined a small number of children: 98 younger siblings of autistic children, 98 probands, and 65 controls. Some of them delayed or even declined one or more vaccines. It does not say if any of them remained completely unvaccinated, which it probably would have if they had been, as that is the million dollar question. Many children become autistic reacting to only one shot, and so, as always, the qustion comes back to why there has been NO STUDY comparing outcomes in vaxed and COMPLETELY UNVAXED children. The answer is obvious to all of us. My daughter reacted with encephalitis to the hep-B vaccine at birth, missed all her language milestones but was saying two words by 18 months. Both words were erased as soon as she got the DTaP booster then (vaccine encephalitis again), and she was diagnosed with autism two months later.

          • Dorit Reiss

            A. There actually is a study like that underway (and to remind you, the German KIGGS study also looked at that issue – rates of diseases in vaccinated v. unvaccinated – and the only difference it found was that unvaccinated children had higher rates of preventable diseases, a finding confirmed by others). http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2014/07/10/a-study-comparing-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-kids-is-coming-and-safeminds-is-concerned/. We do know what it would show: what all the other studies did – including Smith and Wood, 2010, and Destefano et al 2013, which looks at rates of vaccination: no difference.

            B. Your daughter was never diagnosed with encephalitis. The fact that long after the fact you decided her crying was encephalitis is not evidence of such a medical emergency. To remind you, inconsolable crying is its own vaccine side effect.

          • LZ

            To remind you, prolonged inconsolable crying is not normal and there is no evidence, anywhere, proving that it is not harmful short or long term.

          • LZ

            A diagnosis is not evidence either. Google “rate of medical misdiagnosis”.

          • Dorit Reiss

            As to the small study, you’re right that it’s small – but it’s very suggestive.

          • JGC

            Citation needed: provide evidence demonstrating that receiving a single vaccination has ever caused someone to develop an autism spectrum disorder. It’s important to recall simply receiving a diagnosis of autism at any time following vaccination (as you claim is the case with your daughter) is insufficient to establish causality—it’s simply embracing a “post hoc ergo procter hoc” logical fallacy.

          • ciaparker2

            My daughter reacted to the hep-B vax at birth, given without permission, with four days and nights of endless, inconsolable screaming, vaccine encephalitis. Classic beginning of encephalitic reactions to that vaccine at four to five days post-vax, she started screaming nearly four days after vax. DTaP booster at 18 months erased her only two words immediately, diagnosed with autism two months later. There are literally thousands of parents with stories almost identical to mine. Parents who ignore them and trust instead the word of those in the employ of pharma companies do so at their peril.

          • JGC

            Cia, I asked for evidence, not personal testimony in the form of an anecdotall account.

            But correct me if I’m wrong: Your child never received a diagnosis of vaccine induced encephalitis—you’ve arrived at that conclusion yourself on no basis other than her persistent crying—and your conclusion that the DTAP booster “erased her only two words immediately” or was causally associated with her being diagnosed as autistic two months later is founded on no basis other than a perceived “before then after” temporal association, i.e. the classic ‘post hoc ergo proctor hoc’ logical fallacy.
            Is that an accurate summation of your account?

            That thousands of other parents have similarly embraced that same logical fallacy is not evidence that any child has ever been made autistic as the result of vaccination—the plural of anecdote isn’t data.

            And finally, as I’ve pointed out before, no one has ignored those parents: their claims have been given all appropriate attention (and then some) with multiple very large studies by independent researchers and agencies in multiple nations being conducted to look for evidence of a causal association between vaccination and ASD’s. No such evidence supporting causality has been found to date.

          • lilady R.N.

            You are a proven liar, Parker.

            You claim your child had an “encephalitic cry” after receiving a hepatitis B vaccine…yet you never took your baby to a hospital emergency room to have her checked out for signs of encephalitis.

            What kind of negligent parent are you?

          • ciaparker2

            I didn’t know at the time that constant, inconsolable screaming was a symptom of vaccine encephalitis. They failed to give me the vaccine info sheet either before giving the shot at midnight without permission or afterwards, when I reacted with shock to the news that they had given it to her. The sheet may have included symptoms of vaccine encephalitis like screaming syndrome, or maybe it didn’t, I’ll never know. Colic was the only thing I could think of, which I knew was not serious. It was the only thing the pediatrician mentioned when my mother told him about it. He asked if it went on for over three hours a day and she said much, much more than that. He said nothing, except to say that one of his daughters had had colic, and it wasn’t a real syndrome anyway (physical). If he thought that because of his negligence in not telling the hospital I had said I didn’t want her to get the shot, my baby had reacted to it with encephalitis, he didn’t mention it. You are right, it was only much later when I DID read about screaming syndrome as a symptom of vaccine encephaltis, and I thought about holding my baby literally all night as she screamed, that I realized that it was what had caused her later-diagnosed autism. You know all this, I’ve told you innumerable times before.

        • Matt Carey

          “cannot be excluded by epidemiological data from large population studies that do not show an association between a vaccine and an adverse outcome.”

          One can always claim that there is a group too small to be picked up by epidemiology.

          But, epidemiology can demonstrate the risk factors for the general population. In specific, did thimerosal increase the risk of autism. It did not.

          Did thimerosal cause the increase in autism prevalence observed in the past 3 decades? It did not.

          I look forward to your organization making a clear statement accepting these facts.

    • JGC

      Lynn, do you have any actual evidence that exposure to thimerosal at levels achievable by routine vaccination causes harm?

      • Lyn Redwood

        There is evidence that infants who received TCVs developed blood levels of mercury after exposure
        where adverse outcomes are documented to occur.

        This is what I posted previously …

        A
        2002 study reported a mercury blood level in a 2-month-old infant of
        20.55 nmol/L five days after the infant received a 37.5 mg dose of
        ethylmercury (the amount contained in one DTaP and one Hepatitis B
        vaccine).(13)
        Many infants, however, beginning in the early 1990’s and for the next decade received a 62.5 mg
        dose of ethylmercury (adding in the Haemophilus
        influenzae type b (Hib) vaccine) at the 2-month well baby visit. A vaccine expert from the Johns Hopkins
        Institute
        for Vaccine Safety estimated that these infants may have experienced
        peak blood mercury levels of 48.3 nmol/L;(14) well above the presumed
        EPA safety threshold of 29.0 nmol/L. As a reference
        point, the CDC
        recently defined a toxic exposure to mercury in an adult as a blood
        mercury level of >10mg /L (50 nmol/L) — approximately the same blood
        level that some infants experienced at two months of age.(15)

        Additionally, a study published in Pediatrics in 2000
        measured
        blood mercury levels in newborns administered the Hepatitis B
        vaccine,containing 12.5 mg ethyl mercury. The investigation documented
        elevated post-immunization concentrations relative to
        pre-immunization
        levels in all neonates studied. 16 Levels of blood mercury after
        exposure in low birth weight infants were 7.36 (± 4.99) mg/L. One
        infant was found to have developed a mercury level of 23.6 mg/L, thus
        meeting the CDC criteria as a case of chemical poisoning from mercury.

        Experts contend that there are “windows of vulnerability” which occur
        during neurological development and that specific types of developmental
        outcomes may have separate windows of vulnerability. (17) These
        critical periods of development have not been established and may be
        relatively
        short in duration. The fact that thimerosal from vaccines has been
        documented to raise blood mercury levels concentrations over known
        thresholds
        where developmental effects have been documented to occur
        during the first few months of life means that particular “windows of
        vulnerability” may have been breeched. Even minor neurological
        impairment can have profound societal effects when amortized
        across the entire population and life span.(18)

        The other concern about mercury exposure from thimerosal injections is
        that they are given in bolus doses directly into the bloodstream and
        tissue which means it is 100% bioavailable unlike ingested mercury from
        seafood. Additionally, vaccine
        administration delivers intermittent bolus exposures, rather than small
        daily
        ones. A certain mercury dose given
        acutely may produce toxic effects, whereas the same dose distributed over a
        period of time may give no evidence of poisoning. (Koos and Longo, 1976).

        When
        FDA first investigated the mercury exposure levels from vaccines, they
        quickly realized that if you looked at the exposure levels from a daily
        dose perspective, no TCV would be below any of the Federal safety
        guidelines. For example, my son received three TCV vaccines in one day
        that added up to 62.5 mcg EtHg. The dose that is thought to be safe by
        EPA is 0.1mcg per kg per day. He weighed 5 KG which means his allowable
        exposure was only 0,5mcg. So for that day my son’s exposure level was
        125 times over EPA guidelines. That is why FDA averaged the exposure
        levels over 6 months back in 1999 so they could make it look as though
        the exposure levels were “tiny” and insignificant. This type of logic
        is the same as being able to take 2 tylenol a day every day for a month
        and have no adverse effects, but if you take 60 tylenol at once it will
        kill you.

        But back to your actual question, there is evidence
        from the early runs of the CDC Verstraten data before they altered the
        entrance criteria making it mandatory that the children enrolled in the
        study had received at least two polio vaccines the first year of life as
        a proxy for being fully vaccinated that resulted in some very
        significant findings between exposure the TCVs and a wide host of
        adverse neurological outcomes including ADD/ADHD, speech and language
        delays and neurodevelopmental delays in general, to name a few. Then
        when they added in the polio vaccine exclusion criteria they took away
        the control group of children that had very low to no TCV exposure which
        reduced the RR. See the link below for a full review of the VSD data
        by SafeMinds.
        http://www.safeminds.org/research/library/GenerationZeroPowerPoint.pdf

        • JGC

          So that’s a “No, I don’t have any evidence that exposure to thimerosal at levels achievable by vaccination is harmful—the best I can do is offer studies that found transient high blood concentrations following injection which did not result in adverse consequences”. Agreed?

          As for Verstraeten, see my response to Ciaparker above. All that happened was that the analysis of preliminary results from the first phase of a two phase study suggesting an association between vaccination and adverse developmental outcomes were found to represent a false positive following the completion of the second phase.

          • Lyn Redwood

            The children with elevated blood levels from these studies were not ever followed to look at their neurological development. We do know that the levels of mercury in their blood were at levels were we do see adverse neurological outcomes.
            Verstraeten (CDC) altered the entrance criteria for the study after they saw statistically significant results linking thimerosal to a host of adverse neurological conditions which is a breech of ethical research conduct. They removed the children with no exposure to vaccines (thimerosal) so in essence they were comparing children who all had been exposed to mercury. Like comparing lung cancer rates in a 2 verse 3 pack a day smokers, but not in non-smokers. These were not false positives and have nothing to do with a second phase of the study.
            I have a question, can you please provide evidence to justify injecting a known neurotoxin like mercury into a pregnant mother, infant or child when it is completely unnecessary? That is the real question at hand.

          • JGC

            “The children with elevated blood levels from these studies were not ever followed to look at their neurological development”

            In which case there’s no evidence which suggests that their neurological development was impacted by the transient spike in blood mercury concentrations–agreed?

            “We do know that the levels of mercury in their blood were at levels were we do see adverse neurological outcomes.”

            At levels where adverse effects were seen with methyl mercury exposure–not at levels where they’ve ever been observed following ethyl mercury exposure.

            “Verstraeten (CDC) altered the entrance criteria for the study after they
            saw statistically significant results linking thimerosal to a host of
            adverse neurological conditions which is a breech of ethical research
            conduct. ”

            No: Verstraeten completed the second phase of the planned two part study, which demonstrated the apparently significant results represented a false positive. Please take the time to visit the link I provided ciaparker the first time she mentioned Verstraeten for details.

            “I have a question, can you please provide evidence to justify injecting a
            known neurotoxin like mercury into a pregnant mother, infant or child
            when it is completely unnecessary?”

            I’d start with “Thimerosal-Containing Vaccines and Autism: A Review of Recent Epidemiologic Studies”, Hurley et al, J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther. 2010 Jul-Sep; 15(3): 173–181

            and

            “Prenatal and Infant Exposure to Thimerosal From Vaccines and Immunoglobulins and Risk of Autism”, Price et al, Pediatrics 2010 Oct;126(4):656-64

            Then I’d read through the citation list given in Hurley et al (although I recommend you not waste your time with the publication authored by the Geirs).

        • lilady R.N.

          Nice copy pasta there Lyn…but still no proof that the Thimerosal which was formerly contained in multi dose vials of vaccine, ever caused autism.

          Why don’t you accept your special needs child for the unique person he is?

          You’re an embarrassment to the autism and science communities and to the nursing profession.

    • lilady R.N.

      Lyn Redwood went with Robert Kennedy to meetings in Washington to push his book. Looks like you efforts were unsuccessful, Lyn.

      And…your nonsense about your child’s autism being caused by Rhogam shots you received during your pregnancy and shots he received in early childhood? False and dangerous.

      You’re an embarrassment to the nursing profession.

  • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

    why oh why are we allowing those in power to use the argument being used here … that themerosal (or anything : gmo, any toxin) has not been proven to be dangerous, therefore it is not dangerous

    that’s preposterous . our standard should be that anything to be consumed in any fashion, from food to pharmaceuticals, should have to be thoroughly PROVE SAFE … but, of course, that is not a very profitable method of selling chemicals …

    • Dorit Reiss

      When something is used for a reason – in this case, preventing contamination of vials, and has been used for years with no evidence of harm, if you want to argue it’s harmful, you should actually provide evidence.

      Scientists looked at thimerosal in vaccines and asked whether it is harmful. No evidence of harm was found. That’s the closest scientists can come to saying: “yes, in the tiny amounts in vaccines it’s safe” – if studies in children found that it did not badly affect them, I’d say anyone who wants to say it is harmful should provide evidence.

      • LZ

        As you have been told thousands of times by now, studies done to date have been biased and flawed.

        You know, if medicine didn’t couch so many “diagnoses” in the word “idiopathic” which is a fancy way of saying “of unknown cause”, especially when it comes to a majority of children who are now chronically ill while also highly vaccinated, it might be different.

        • Dorit Reiss

          Dismissing all scientific studies as “biased and flawed” speaks more to the speaker than the studies.

          Unlike pseudo-science, science speaks the truth. Which means that if the cause of something is unknown, that’s what it will say.

          • LZ

            “science speaks the truth” That is your religion. The science you hold up as infallible is neither conclusive nor adequate. The daily media pronouncements putting forth unedited press releases from vaccine industry stakeholders aiming to protect the vaccine industry instead of the public while using the fraudulent paternalistic authoritarianism of its rigged science, is the reality.

      • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

        there isn’t ‘no evidence of harm’ … there is plenty evidence that unexplained illness is increasing … we all don’t know every cause, but we do know that kids have gotten very ill, disabled, and dead soon after having been vaccinated

        we also know that pharmaceutical companies have been caught hiding the findings of studies which show problems and dangerous ‘side effects’

        • Dorit Reiss

          There is no evidence that the tiny amounts of thimerosal in vaccines caused harm to anyone. There is a lot of evidence against it.

          Nothing is 100% safe, and a biological can harm. The evidence is that serious harms from vaccines are extremely rare – and luckily, our information of that comes not just from pharmaceutical companies but from universities all over the world. Here is the most recent review:

          Margaret A. Maglione, et al., Safety of Vaccines Used for Routine Immunization of US Children: A Systematic Review, doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-1079 PEDIATRICS (2014).

          • LZ

            “luckily, our information of that comes not just from pharmaceutical companies but from universities all over the world”

            That’s a joke. Universities that are funded by and wouldn’t exist without Pharma.

          • Dorit Reiss

            Kindly provide credible evidence that universities in Japan, Poland, the U.k. Scandinavia And the U.S., to name some places where studies were done, are funded by pharma.

            Global conspiracy claims really don’t make all the evidence go away.

          • LZ

            There will come a time, Dorit, that will come in the blink of an eye, where you will have to answer for what you are doing now.

          • ciaparker2

            That time will come for all of them, Linda, but they will try to tell themselves that they were following an agenda supported by the accepted, albeit pharma-funded, science of the time.

          • LZ

            ‘I was just following orders’ is no excuse for obstructing justice and the truth, for rallying for the end of medical freedom and for the loss of the most basic of civil rights. Their time will come sooner than they think.

          • Matt Carey

            I’ve been hearing “the truth will out” and “those responsible will pay” for almost a decade.

            The truth on thimerosal and autism is out. It doesn’t increase autism risk.

          • ciaparker2

            Of course it does. And I guess you’ve seen that 33% of parents now believe that vaccines cause autism, up from 18% only three years ago, while 56% believe doctors are or may be lying about vaccine safety. What’s going to happen to you guys once we reach 90% recognizing not just that mercury causes autism and many other horrible conditions, but that vaccines can cause autism even without mercury? At the present rate it’s going to be within another ten years.

          • JGC

            “Of course it does.”

            And your evidence that routine vaccination is casually associated with autism, cia? Oh, that’s right…you don’t have any.

            “And I guess you’ve seen that 33% of parents now
            believe that vaccines cause autism, up from 18% only three years ago,
            while 56% believe doctors are or may be lying about vaccine safety.”that

            You might want to google “argument vox populi”. The fact that a lot of people believe something is true doesn’t argue that it IS true.

          • Matt Carey

            But that’s not a threat, nor bullying, is it?

            This is a discussion. If you are getting to the point of hatred and a desire for revenge, I would suggest you take a few steps back and look at yourself, not others.

          • LZ

            No revenge. No hatred. That was a statement about ethics and morality and about how wrongdoing will not go unpunished by the higher power that judges us all.

          • LZ

            In other words, I want to see Dorit and anyone else working so hard around the clock to obstruct acknowledgment of the obvious, proclaim to the Almighty that there wasn’t “credible scientific evidence”, while literally surrounded by millions of vaccine injured children and adults pleading to be heard and seen and helped, while the harmed were treated in this life as though they are invisible, inconsequential, “rare”. I can tell you with absolute certainty, they are not invisible to the Almighty. I look forward to that day.

          • lilady R.N.

            See…it is some garbage that you read in the bible and you are using as a threat.

            Probably the worst type of ignorant anti-vaxxer there is; using the bible and hiding behind religion. Shame.

          • LZ

            The Bible is garbage? So sorry if I gave mention to my faith. Seems like it had the effect on you of holding up a cross to Dracula. Did I offend your religion, LilShill? Your worship of Pharma’s corrupt “science”? Yes, you WILL have to answer for your lies, for your obstruction of justice and aid to those harmed and for your campaign to continue this insanity of harming innocents despite all reason.
            Pharma needs to send you on a permanent vacation. You may believe what you just said, but to say it for the purpose of gaining points for your employer, you are losing it.

          • JGC

            The bible isn’t garbage -it’s an interesting and sometimes inspirational collation of a primitive religious tradition’s of faith–but it possesses no inherent authority and is no more likely to represent an accurate account of the existence of a god or gods or that god or gods’ nature, desire and relationship to man than are the Hindu veda’s, the Navajo oral tradition, the Tibetan book of the dead, or any other body of religious articles of faith human cultures have authored.

          • JGC

            Who are these millions of children and adults, and how has it been factually established that what you believe to be ‘vaccine injuries’ actually were caused by vaccines? Be specific.

          • ciaparker2

            Those of us aware of the devastation wrought in millions of lives around the world for a long time now by vaccine damage become very upset when we see you guys spending all your time dismissing and denying it. No reason to take our eyes off of you. I’m not sure where LZ’s comment about Judgment Day is, whether above or below, just saw it in my inbox, but I have also thought the same thing as she.

          • JGC

            And your evidence that vaccine damage has wrought devastation in millions of lives around the world for a long time would be…what, exactly?

            Oh, wait—you don’t have any.

          • lilady R.N.

            That sounds like a threat…or something that you read in the bible.

            How about staying on topic and stop threatening people?

      • ciaparker2

        I take it you haven’t read The Age of Autism (book) and Evidence of Harm?

        • Dorit Reiss

          I should have been clearer: credible scientific or medical evidence. Not the opinion of non-scientist antivaccine activist who are willing to use any non-credible evidence that supports their view and ignore counter evidence.

          Luckily for them, anyone can put anything in a book.

          • ciaparker2

            Except that both books describe in great detail and with extensive citations of scientific studies the points they make on the extreme dangers of mercury everywhere, but most commonly in the case of modern children, in vaccines. Of course if you do not even look at the books, you are unlikely to be aware of the studies of researchers like Burbacher, Mark Noble, and Boyd Haley on the dangers of mercury in vaccines, and how no other factor aligns so well with the physiological effects of vaccine mercury in autistic children. But of course it would be of no value to you to become aware of these dangers, but parents should be aware that it would be of crucial value to them in making the vaccine decision, or, if it’s too late, to become aware of the Cutler mercury chelation protocol.
            Beyond this, it is also important that parents be aware that vaccine encephalitis can cause autism even independent of vaccine mercury, and can be caused by any vaccine, as it is a function of the immune system response more than any specific ingredient. Parents may never feel that there is any “safe” vaccine, and must do a very careful risk/benefit anaysis before allowing their child to get any vaccine. Personally, I’d say to analyze tetanus and polio vaccines for the risk/benefits, polio only if it came back in the US. And there’s a LOT to be said in favor of rejecting both of them.

          • Dorit Reiss

            Burbacher concluded that ethyl mercury leaves the body much quicker than methyl mercury and that you cannot deduce from methyl mercury the right levels for ethyl mercury; kindly cite to any studies Haley did on vaccines, aside from his practical work in selling chelators (with no adequate testing and in violation of FDA regulations: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2014/07/22/is-boyd-haley-resurrecting-osr1-as-a-chelator/).

            Again: these books misuse evidence – as your examples show.

          • LZ

            Both books extensively reference credible scientific medical evidence.

          • JGC

            LZ, does either book present credible evidence that at levels of exposure achievable by routine vaccination thimerosal is harmful? That is after all the claim you’re trying to defend.

          • LZ

            Yes. You will find both books in your local library.

          • JGC

            That was a rhetorical question, LZ, meant to remind you what specific evidence you need to provide to support your position. I already know that neither book provides evidence demonstrating thimerosal causes harm at the the low levels of exposure which result from vaccination.
            In fact, the author of “Evidence of Harm”, David Kirby, agreed in conversation with Steve Novella that if the incidence of autism had not dropped significantly by 2007 following the removal of thimerosal in vaccines in 2002 his thesis would have been proven false. Incidence continued to rise.

          • LZ

            Old stock of thimerosol vaccines continued to be used through 2004, and our autism incidence stats are always in older kids, and then, as in the latest stats the CDC released, years old. The last stats released in 2014 were from eight year old children in 2010 (and then only at 11 centers where the CDC did estimates). 2010 minus eight years brings us back to 2002. Thimerosol vaccines were not recalled. They were phased out, so in 2002 were still widely in use. Furthermore, there are still flu vaccines, given yearly, that contain thimerosol, and the other vaccines that are said not to contain thimerosol, do have a trace, unless they are live vaccines (thimerosol as you know, would kill a live virus, so it is only used as a preservative in the manufacture of killed vaccines).

          • JGC

            “Old stock of thimerosol vaccines continued to be used through 2004,”

            What percentage of all routine childhood vaccinations given in the United States from the year 2002 to 2004 were performing using stocks containing thimerosal, by what rational argument is that a sufficiently large per centage to obscure a reduced incidence of atism diagnoses?

            “our autism incidence stats are always in older kids”

            The peak age for diagnosis of autism is 8 years. Thimerosal was removed in 2002. Even if we accept that use of older stocks until 2004 occurred to any significant degree we would still expect a dramatic reduction in the incidence of ASD’s beginning in 2012 at the latest–yet incidence has continued to rise.
            And it’s continued to rise in every nation that’s taken thimerosal out of formulations, not just in the US.
            “the other vaccines that are said not to contain thimerosol, do have a trace, unless they are live vaccines”
            So you’re doubling down on your unsupported claim, and now instead of arguing that at levels of exposure acheivable by routine vaccination thimerosal causes harm, you’re arguing that at levels too infinitesimal to be even be measured quantitatively it causes harm?
            Then allow me to amend my request for evidence to take the form “Please provide evidence that at levels of exposure too small to be measured accurately thimerosal causes harm”.

          • LZ

            Ok. First, in answer to, “What percentage of all routine childhood vaccinations given in the United States from the year 2002 to 2004 were performing using stocks containing thimerosal” – I have no idea. Do you? As far as I know, after declaring that thimerosol was to be removed from childhood vaccines (except the flu vaccine), the CDC/FDA allowed old stock to be used up and they did not make any attempt whatsoever to discover how much old stock existed. Independent reports from individual private physicians were that the stock had the potential to last years. “by what rational argument is that a sufficiently large percentage to obscure a reduced incidence of autism diagnoses.” You can’t argue what you don’t know. There could have been enough stock to last through several years without making a difference in what the children received. There could have been far fewer thimerosol laced vaccines given. As a result, some communities could have been affected more than others. But either way, at the same time, the CDC, in its infinite wisdom, recommended that pregnant woman and all children older than 6 months old start getting the yearly flu vaccine. Babies 6 months old were to get 2 doses in their first year. That’s on top of whatever they were exposed to in utero. It may not be a cut and dried dose response relationship either. As I believe the science does indicate, some individuals are more sensitive than others, and there are other sources of mercury exposure. So, if a woman who has eaten a lot of fish (mercury) and has a mouthful of amalgam fillings (mercury), and lives downstream of a coal plant (mercury), then when her baby is exposed to thimerosol (mercury) in utero and then to prevent the flu, that child may then have brain and other organ damage that is then diagnosed as autism. As for your last question “Please provide evidence that at levels of exposure too small to be measured…” I’m not sure that the levels are so small. These manufacturers do their own quality control. I don’t know of any objective party measuring the actual amount of thimerosol in vials and also in syringes as drawn up from multi-dose vials – another question that needs to be answered. Are preparers of these vaccines administering them correctly so that there isn’t more thimerosol in one dose as opposed to another?
            I know what you’re asking for is evidence. The truth is we need more of it. I’m looking forward to Kennedy and Hyman’s book to see what they present.

          • JGC

            “Ok. First, in answer to, “What percentage of all routine childhood vaccinations given in the United States from the year 2002 to 2004 were performing using stocks containing thimerosal” – I have no idea. Do you?”

            No, but I’m not the one arguing that the percentage could be high enough to obscure the significant reduction in the incidence of autism diagnoses following the removal of thimerosal in 2002 we would expect to see if thimerosal was contributing to that increase—you are.

            “ You can’t argue what you don’t know.”

            Yet here you are doing just that.

            “It may not be a cut and dried dose response relationship either. As I believe the science does indicate, some individuals are more sensitive than others, and there are other sources of mercury exposure.”

            Indeed there are—in fact, your exposure to mercury as a consequence of eating a tuna fish sandwich dwarfs the total exposure you could ever receive as the result of vaccinations incorporating thimerosal (and the mercury in tuna fish is in the much, much more toxic methyl mercury form).

            “So, if a woman who has eaten a lot of fish (mercury) and has a mouthful of amalgam fillings (mercury), and lives downstream of a coal plant (mercury), then when her baby is exposed to thimerosol (mercury) in utero and then to prevent the flu, that child may then have brain and other organ damage that is then diagnosed as autism.”

            Again: if the exposure due to vaccines were enough to push those sensitive individuals over some threshold resulting in neural developmental disorders, we would still have seen the incidence fall after removing thimerosal from vaccines.
            You can’t have it both ways: if thimerosal from vaccines were a signicant contributor to the increased incidence of autism diagnoses the incidence would decline upon it’s removal. If the incidence didn’t decline it cannot be a significant contributor.

            (I’ll also note that it’s inaccurate (and many autist believe insulting) to characterize autism as a form of brain damage: it’s the result of atypical neural development, not damage to a previously neurotypical brain.)

            “As for your last quest ion “Please provide evidence that at levels of exposure too small to be measured…” I’m not sure that the levels are so small.”

            But you described them yourself as “trace”, didn’t you?

            “Are preparers of these vaccines administering them correctly so that there isn’t more thimerosol in one dose as opposed to another?”

            How would it be possible to administer them improperly to achieve that effect, given thimerosal’s excellent solubility in acqueous solutions?

            “I know what you’re asking for is evidence. The truth is we need more of it.”

            Are you’re now admitting there isn’t enough evidence to support a claim that thimerosal in vaccines is causally associated with autism spectrum disorders? I don’t see any other way to interpret “we need more of it”.

            .

          • LZ

            The disorder (or not) that high functioning persons with autism characterize themselves as having has nothing to do with what they actually have. The official definition of autism is that they don’t know exactly what it is. Autism as a defect in neural development has not been proven and is too broad a brush to paint the entire spectrum – wouldn’t fit most cases. For instance, Eileen Nicole Simon, a PhD and mother of a son who suffered asphyxia at birth and was diagnosed with autism – his case was clearly the result of damage to his brain from that trauma. Other cases likely were caused by some insult to the brain, whether chemical exposure or vaccines and including thimerosol and/or synergistically alluminum aduvants in vaccines. Autism also in many cases comes with physical illness, including immune system and GI malfunction, mitochondrial disease and weakness.
            I’m not going to go round and round with you. Science is about asking and finding the answers to questions. It is not about closing the door to questions because you think you don’t already have enough evidence to ask questions and then basing reasoning on inadequate knowledge. This will be my last post here.

          • JGC

            “ The official definition of autism is that they don’t know exactly what it is.”

            That isn’t true: autism spectrum disorders are defined as a group of developmental disabilities characterized by persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction across multiple contexts and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities.

            “Autism as a defect in neural development has not been proven and is too broad a brush to paint the entire spectrum – wouldn’t fit most cases. “

            What cases wouldn’t it fit? be specific, and recall that autism doesn’t represent a single disorder but a spectrum of disorders—that “broad brush” is necessary to encapsulate them.

            “For instance, Eileen Nicole Simon, a PhD and mother of a son who suffered asphyxia at birth and was diagnosed with autism – his case was clearly the result of damage to his brain from that trauma.”

            Why clearly? How has it been established that the asphyxia caused her son to develop an autism spectrum disorder on some basis other than a post hoc ergo procter hoc logical fallacy? It isn’t uncommon for brain injuries from asphyxia, encephalopathy, etc., to result in the victim exhibiting autism-like symptoms thereafter, after all.

            “Other cases likely were caused by some insult to the brain, whether chemical exposure or vaccines and including thimerosal and/or synergistically aluminum aduvants in vaccines.”

            Back to square one—citation needed: provide evidence demonstrating that vaccines, with or without thimerosal or incorporating aluminum adjuvants, have ever been demonstrated to cause autism.

            “Autism also in many cases comes with phys ical illness, including immune system and GI malfunction, mitochondrial disease and weakness. “

            There are comorbidities, agreed. Mitochondrial disease, however, does not represnt a comorbidity of autism but a genetic disorder capable of conferring autism like symptoms of itself (especially should the person with a mitochondrial disorder develop encephalopathy as the result of vaccination (rarely) or infectious disease itself (much, much more likely).
            The fact that comorbidities exist doesn’t make autism brain damage or implicate vaccination in the development of ASD’s.

            “I’m not going to go round and round with you. Science is about asking and finding the answers to questions.”

            And it’s also about moving on to address new questions once the one you’re working on has been resolved to the extent the evidence allows until such time that evidence arises indicating a need to revise that answer.

            “It is not about closing the door to questions because you think you don’t already have enough evidence to ask questions and then basing reasoning on inadequate knowledge.”

            You “close doors” when there’s no longer any evidence suggesting there might be something in the room behind it–surely you don’t think we should still be investigating whether or not germs cause disease, or if there’s a biologic mechanism for inheritance?

            The possibility of a causal association between vaccination and autism spectrum disorders, between thimerosal exposure and ASD’s, between aluminum adjuvants and ASD’s, etc., has been investigated thoroughly by multiple independent researchers and agencies in multiple nations, without finding any evidence something might be lurking behind that particular door.
            It’s time to invest our available resources in finding new doors to open, where they might actually be productive.

            “This will be my last post here.”

            I’m sure we’ll speak again elsewhere.

          • LZ

            Your definition is a list of characteristics and symptoms. It does not in any way, shape or from describe pathophysiology.
            Dr. Simon’s son was diagnosed with autism.
            As I said, I am not going to go round and round with you. Enough.

          • JGC

            Whether it ‘defines pathophysiology’ or not, the “official definition” of autism is not “something that we don’t know exactly what it is” but is instead rather than the definition is not as you claimed “we don’t know what it is” is instead “a group of developmental disabilities characterized by persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction across multiple contexts and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities.”

            I get that you don’t LIKE that definition, that you would prefer ASD’s to be sufficiently ambiguously defined that one could entertain the possibility they represent a form of brain damage that could result from routine vaccination or exposure to thimerosal. That isn’t the case, and suggesting that autistic individuals are brain damaged is denigrating
            “Dr. Simon’s son was diagnosed with autism.”

            I haven’t disputed that he might have been. My question was how it had been demonstrated that the asphyxia he experienced at birth was a proximate cause of his autism, rather than an unrealted event (although one that might have exacerbated his symptoms).

          • JGC

            BTW, Dr. Simon, speaking on the causes of autism on the website “Autism Speaks” (http://blog.autismspeaks.org/2011/01/25/dawson-letter-to-the-new-york-times/), characterized it not a neural development disorder:

            “Autism is a neurological disorder that prevents normal development of language and social awareness. Brain systems that underlie language learning should be the target of research. Many genetic metabolic disorders appear to be the cause of some cases of autism. Toxic injury from substances like valproic acid (Depakote) or Thalidomide appear to be the cause of other cases, and prenatal infections like rubella can also lead to autism. The “common final pathway in the brain” is what must be looked for, vulnerable to injury by all of autism’s diverse etiologies.”

          • LZ

            Yes,”vulnerable
            to injury”, as in brain damage.

          • LZ

            And another point is that autism is a diagnosis that describes an illness that includes brain damage. There is more than one cause of autism and the symptoms that individuals with autism suffer from vary greatly. In a sense, it is a catch-all diagnosis. As you well know, there have been many children who have become autistic after the MMR (whether you believe there is a causal link or not) and the MMR of course, being a combination shot of 3 live viruses combined into one vaccination, does not contain thimerosol. There are several theories as to why the MMR injures some children. Some that I’ve heard: the 3 viruses given together, even though attenuated, overwhelm the immune system of some children, and the measles vaccine virus infects the gut, causing a chronic infection, severe intractable pain, diarrhea, constipation, and mental regression/decline (via the gut-brain axis) with behavioral problems and loss of speech. Measles vaccine virus has been isolated in the guts of autistic children (Wakefield was the first, duplicated by many others since). MMR injuries may be associated with recent antibiotic use – alteration of the gut flora or immune system may leave those children unable to cope with the 3 live virus vaccine. Since children typically get multiple vaccines in one day, it is hard to sort out cause and effect (and I firmly believe that Pharma likes it that way). Re thimerosol itself, there is no safe amount that one can inject into anyone. But people do normally vary genetically in their ability to cope with and excrete mercury (any kind) and that could explain why some children (and adults) are more sensitive than others. But even though there isn’t an obvious reaction that we can see, that doesn’t mean that there wasn’t an adverse biological response. Epidemiological studies are not good for detecting these genetic differences.

          • JGC

            “And another point is that autism is a diagnosis that describes an illness that includes brain damage. “

            Uhhh…no, it doesn’t. Autism isn’t a form of brain damage but a disorder of neural development.

            “There is more than one cause of autism and the symptoms that individuals with autism suffer from vary greatly.”

            I agree: did you have a point? Noting that their etiology is complex or that all autistic individuals do not present with identical symptoms doesn’t argue that thimerosal or vaccines are casually associated with ASD’s.

            “ As you well know, there have been many children who have become autistic after the MMR (whether you believe there is a causal link or not) and the MMR of course, being a combination shot of 3 live viruses combined into one vaccination, does not contain thimerosol. “

            Which is entirely to be expected simply on the basis of chance. You yourself note in another post that most autism diagnoses are made in older children (the peak age of diagnosis is 8) while the first does of MMR vaccine between 12 and 15 months and the second dose just prior to starting elelmentary school.

            “There are several theories as to why the MMR injures some children.”

            You’ve got the cart before the horse once again: until you can provide credible evidence that the MMR does cause the injuries you believe it causes theories about how it could do so are without utility.

            “Measles vaccine virus has been isolated in the guts of autistic children (Wakefield was the first, duplicated by many others since).“

            Citations needed.

            “Re thimerosol itself, there is no safe amount that one can inject into anyone.”

            Mutliple studies (e.g., Pichichero, Burbacher) falsify this claim.

            “But even though there isn’t an obvious reaction that we can see, that doesn’t mean that there wasn’t an adverse biological response.”

            If there is no evidence that an adverse biological response occurred, by what rational argument should we be concerned one did occur?

            “Epidemiological studies are not good for detecting these genetic differences.”

            No, but they’re excellent at detecting causal associations. Recall that in some studies (such as Hviid’s) the medical records of every child born over a period of about a decade were examined—that’s more than a large enough data-set to find evidence of a causal association between MMR and neuro development disorders if one existed, even if there were a genetic component predisposing some individuals to react adversely to the vaccine .

        • Matt Carey

          “I take it you haven’t read The Age of Autism (book) and Evidence of Harm?”

          Why would you do that? Checking the claims in these books–and more–are what convinced me that the vaccines-cause-autism movement have no solid scientific support.

    • Boris Ogon

      our standard should be that anything to be consumed in any fashion, from food to pharmaceuticals, should have to be thoroughly PROVE SAFE

      To whom? Here’s a softball: What are the dietary recommendations for gout? If you want to contend a Gaudian landscape, do it. A combination of full caps and ellipsis marks isn’t going to cut it.

      • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

        play word games all you want . what do ‘dietary recommendations for gout’ have to do with this?

        someone with gout would be looking those up, asking a knowledgeable person … meanwhile … pharmaceutical companies, with government ‘investors’ … are selling toxic crap that have been proven dangerous

        to whom? what a joke you are

        • Boris Ogon

          play word games all you want . what do ‘dietary recommendations for gout’ have to do with this?

          “Word games”? I’m not the one asserting that all food should have to “be thoroughly PROVE SAFE.”

          to whom? what a joke you are

          Are you also dissatisfied with the level of evidence regarding the safety of the English language?

          • suz norkan

            N or D? What’s your *poison* Borings? Big deal!

            For all upvoters…2 words… *glass houses*!

          • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

            is there such a thing as ‘the safety of the english language’ ??? is it possible for someone to alter the language, and, by doing so, make a profit by causing harm to a person’s health?

    • JGC

      The actual argument being made is that thimerosal at exposure levels achievable by routine vaccination has been shown to be safe, not that it hasn’t been shown to be dangerous.

      • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

        no, the actual argument is that it, and many other toxins on the market, haven’t been proven to be dangerous, even though many of them HAVE been proven to be dangerous

        do you know what’s in your food? do you know what’s in the ‘medications’ your ol’ mama takes? or that kids are given? have they been proven safe? no . they’ve been proven dangerous, yet are still on the market, while people languish in prisons for non-violent, victimless ‘crimes’

        • JGC

          “no, the actual argument is that it, and many other toxins on the market, haven’t been proven to be dangerous, even though many of them HAVE been proven to be dangerous”
          Thimerosal, at exposure levels achievable as a consequence of routine childhood vaccination, has been found to produce no toxic or otherwise harmful effects. What more evidence of it’s safety—that it is appropriate for use as a preservative in vaccine formulations—is reasonably needed?
          “do you know what’s in your food?”
          Yes: protein, carbohydrates, sugars, salts, etc.
          “ do you know what’s in the ‘medications’ your ol’ mama takes? or that kids are given?”
          Of course.
          “have they been proven safe?”
          If we’re talking about medications, yes: their therapeutic index, safety profile, and potential adverse events associated with them have been well characterized following extensive clinical testing and continues to be tracked post-marketing. Again: what more is reasonably needed?
          “no . they’ve been proven dangerous, yet are still on the market, while people languish in prisons for non-violent, victimless ‘crimes’”
          The medications my children are taking have not been proven to be dangerous.

          • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

            you’re wrong about pharmaceutical drugs . in fact, many companies not only cover up poor results from testing, but ruin the lives of those who attempt to out the dangers . also, the testing they do is often on poor people, who often engage in multiple drug tests simultaneously, effectively sabotaging the results

            your giving your kids medications that ‘have not been proven to be dangerous’ with no concern that they have not been prove to be safe

            gambling with your kids’ health and safety

          • JGC

            Your evidence that many pharmaceutical companiesnot only cover up poor results and ruin the lives of those who attempt to out the dangers would be…what, exactly? Be specific.

            Your evidence that poor people participating in mutlple drug tests simultaneously in sufficient numbers to abotage the results of Phase I, II and III clinical trials to any significant degree would be…what, exactly? Again, be as specific as possible.

            “your giving your kids medications that ‘have not been proven to be dangerous’ with no concern that they have not been prove to be safe”

            No, I’m not–and to date certainly you’vehave provided no evidence this is the case.
            In fact, given that you’re completely unaware of what medications my children are now receiving or previously may have received you’re completely unqualified to even suggest such a thing.

    • ciaparker2

      Can I comment?

      • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

        why are you asking me if you’re capable of commenting? how would i know?

      • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

        i don’t know, can you? why are you asking me to determine what you’re capable of?

        • ciaparker2

          That was just a test, a lot of my comments disappeared as soon as I hit Post, and I wanted to see if it would go up. Many of them were restored later, I guess after the editors confirmed the information in them. Sorry, it actually wasn’t addressed to you personally.

          • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

            i was wondering … and that happened to me as well

      • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

        Not really. You’ll just end up stalking someone here, as you’ve done elsewhere.

    • http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php Skeptical Raptor

      That’s the Argument from Ignorance. If you can’t prove A true, then it must be false. (Or if you can’t prove A false, then it must be true.) So please prove to me that there’s no teapot floating above the dark side of the moon.

      • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

        what are you saying? you seem to believe that if we cannot prove something dangerous, it is, therefore, safe . that’s preposterous . your example is a non sequitur . it means nothing

        big chemical companies have actually proven, over many decades, their willingness to outright lie, to suppress evidence of dangers of their products . if you don’t know this, go back to school . quit wasting my time

      • http://wiseoldsnail.org/ wiseoldsnail

        because, y’know, floating teapot has so much to do with a safe food supply

  • theodorealtmeier@sbcglobal.net

    If you consider something not as emotionally charged, like poison ivy for instance, there is a spectrum of allergic reaction. Some can roll in it, some require hospitalization, not all present with symptoms. With the constant increasing exposure to Mercury we all endure, the likelihood of hyperallergic reaction in a subset of the population seems probable.

    • Boris Ogon

      Before declaring it “probable,” it might help if you defined “hyperallergic reaction.” (Urushiol isn’t an IgE-mediated reaction, BTW.)

    • JGC

      What “constant increasing exposure to mercury we all endure” are you talking about? Citation needed.

  • Dorit Reiss

    Here is a powerful question to Mr. Kennedy: http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2014/07/22/robert-kennedy-where-did-you-go-wrong-and-im-not-talking-about-thimerosal/

    “AutismOne is a staunch supporter of failed ideas like thimerosal and MMR cause autism. AutismOne is also a place that promotes the ideas that one can cure autism by chemically castrating disabled children, or making disabled children drink bleach or take bleach enemas until they pass their intestinal mucosa (which are relabeled as worms) and more.
    ….
    While multiple outlets are taking turns pointing out that you have taken a very irresponsible stance on vaccines, I’ll just ask: Mr. Kennedy, did you spend anytime looking around AutismOne? If so–why the hell have you not come forward to distance yourself from the junk science that goes on there? Why the hell did you lend your family’s name to that operation? Your family basically built the special education system in our country. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development is named for a relative of yours. And you are loaning that name to a convention where the keynote speaker abuses autism parents? Have you sunk so low that you are lending your family’s credibility to Andrew Wakefield?”

  • LZ

    Mr. Kloor,

    While you admit that Kennedy and Hyman can’t be dismissed, you yourself also obviously don’t want to become radioactive by getting too close, so you carefully pad yourself in statements to safely align yourself with the book’s powerful targets. I doubt that your review will be comprehensive or honest. If today’s piece is predictive, it will show you either sitting high atop the fence or positioned stategically on the side where you will feel safe. No doubt we will not find you with Kennedy and Hyman. You’ll choose safety in numbers regardless of any science or facts or ethical consideration. I suggest that while you review the book after this sorry introduction, that you grow a pair.

  • LZ

    Mr. Kloor,

    Your claim that Kennedy has failed to “persuade the world at large that the scientific community is wrong on the thimerosal issue”, couldn’t be further from the truth. If the vaccine program wasn’t experiencing a crisis of confidence among not only the public, but of the professionals charged with promoting and administering these drugs, there would be no reason for the industry’s vigilant overt offensive. Vaccine damage is more visible than ever before. The only persons blinded to the reality are those who stand to lose from seeing it.

    • Matt Carey

      “Your claim that Kennedy has failed to “persuade the world at large that the scientific community is wrong on the thimerosal issue”, couldn’t be further from the truth.”

      In the autism community, it’s absolutely true. The idea that thimerosal causes autism has been abandoned by all but a very small group. I’ve spoken with researchers who flat out asked, “do parents still believe this?” That’s how far the scientific community has moved.

      • LZ

        Yeah, well, researchers that I talk to don’t understand how anyone could justify injecting known neurotoxins into people, let alone pregnant women, infants and children. It takes all kinds, I guess. As Gibson’s Law states, “For every PhD there is an equal and opposite PhD.”

  • LZ

    I just want to say one more thing to Mr. Kloor. Thank you for pointing out that Philip Landrigan did not support and join with Kennedy and Hyman in their quest to protect citizens and our most precious children from one of if not the greatest environmental hazard there is – mercury – injected directly into babies and children, which in a sane society would not only be unthinkable but would be a punishable crime. Instead, Landrigan showed incredible cowardice, choosing his own comfort and career over the children he is supposed to be fighting for. SHAME ON HIM.

  • LZ

    Mr. Kloor,

    Have you read the Simpsonwood transcripts? Here’s a link:http://skeptico.blogs.com/Simpsonwood_Transcript.pdf

    Provax fanatics will say that the research done since this private meeting in 2000 of the CDC vaccine industry stakeholders and MDs showed that thimerosol is safe, which is nonsense. But the inescapable truth is that the CDC and FDA only started to look at Thimerosol and aluminum in vaccines in 2000 when children were exposed to these compounds in vaccines for many decades prior. And importantly, note how clueless these participants were. These are the decision makers. These are the same people making public policy today. For decades before they had any studies, good or bad, they lied to the public saying that vaccines were tested for safety. Whether you believe the research done since that meeting or not, there is no doubt that they lied to the public. Is it any wonder that the educated have lost confidence in their recommendations? Read it carefully, please.

    • Matt Carey

      “Have you read the Simpsonwood transcripts? ”

      I remember when I first went online looking for information. Because of “Deadly Immunity” the autism parent boards were filled with all sorts of claims about the Simpsonwood meeting.

      What I found was far more mundane that it was portrayed.

      “Is it any wonder that the educated have lost confidence in their recommendations?”

      Really? Besides my Ph.D., I hold 4 other degrees. All in physics. I’ve spent a great deal of time exploring the claims of those who push the “autism is caused by vaccines” idea.

      And I don’t agree with you at all.

      • LZ

        The Simpsonwood transcripts clearly show an expert body that has not examined closely what it had recommended in the past and then, it shows them trying to cover their tracks.

        Re one strong possible scientific explanation for a connection between vaccination and autism see the Arkansas Children’s Hospital’s “1st International Symposium on the Microbiome in Health and Disease with a Special Focus on Autism” that took place on June 26th, 2014. I suggest you first see Presentation 3: The Human Gut Microbiota: Forgotten Organ, Important Ally (Dr. Emma Allen-Vercoe). All presentations are online here: http://www.microbiome-autism.com/ Dr. Allen-Vercoe is a part of the Human Microbiome Project.

        The gist is that the human microbiome is just now being studied and our realization of its significance is in its infancy. Many things can interfere with our microbiome. Vaccines are one of them, and vaccines have never been studied for their effect on the microbiome because the microbiome is just now beginning to be appreciated. This is one reason why I firmly believe that no one can say that vaccines are safe and effective. We really don’t know enough about our own biology to say such a thing and to give ever increasing amounts of vaccines to our children and our entire population is a mistake that has the potential to literally wipe us off the face of the earth.

        • lilady R.N.

          That’s the latest “conference” that is being touted by Age of Autism.

          You may not know about your own biology and see something mysterious/mystifying in the human microbiome. The microbiome is not mysterious if you have have a basic education in human physiology/human biology.

          • LZ

            Are you kidding? What an idiotic statement.

  • lilady R.N.

    I’ve the entire Simpsonwood Conference transcripts and there is “no there, there” for Mr. Kennedy to publish that dreadful paper and for him to now publish a book which alleges a big government conspiracy/coverup about Thimerosal.

    I know some of the attendees at the Simpsonwood Conference, including a world renowned expert on autism. I take personal affront at this, Kennedy’s latest vile, defamatory book, based on his unfounded “conspiracies”.

    I look forward to Mr. Kloor’s and other science journalist’s review of Kennedy’s book.

NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

Collide-a-Scape

Collide-a-Scape is a wide-ranging blog forum that explores issues at the nexus of science, culture and society.

About Keith Kloor

Keith Kloor is a NYC-based journalist, and an adjunct professor of journalism at New York University. His work has appeared in Slate, Science, Discover, and the Washington Post magazine, among other outlets. From 2000 to 2008, he was a senior editor at Audubon Magazine. In 2008-2009, he was a Fellow at the University of Colorado’s Center for Environmental Journalism, in Boulder, where he studied how a changing environment (including climate change) influenced prehistoric societies in the U.S. Southwest. He covers a wide range of topics, from conservation biology and biotechnology to urban planning and archaeology.

ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT
Collapse bottom bar
+

Login to your Account

X
E-mail address:
Password:
Remember me
Forgot your password?
No problem. Click here to have it e-mailed to you.

Not Registered Yet?

Register now for FREE. Registration only takes a few minutes to complete. Register now »